I have never really thought very highly of Charlie-boy. The impression I get is that he was pampered as a young child and then, when he had to go to Gordonstoun school, he was too much of a wimp to fit in.
He still comes across as a bit of a nutter. As Realspeed said earlier, the image of him is “dancing through a field of daffodils holding one in his mouth and talking to the flowers”! There is also the matter of doing the dirty behind Diana’s back and Camilla must take responsibilty for that too, of course.
After the Queen pops her clogs, I have a feeling that the monarchy will begin to die. Certainly with Charlie on the throne, I expect a distinct loss of public interest and support as there’s no way he can replace her in character and ability.
At his age, it can’t be too long before William takes over. Perhaps he’ll have more public support, but time will tell.
One thing I have noticed over the years is that people who cast Diana as the victim, the “wronged wife” and understood why she turned to other men for comfort (some of them were married too) and cast Camilla as the “marriage wrecker” seemed to ignore the fact that Camilla’s husband had many more affairs than Charles ever had.
Camilla was besotted with her husband, both before and after they married, but he was unfaithful before and after their marriage - there was a lot more than “three people” in Camilla’s marriage, which she put up with for years but she was vilified when she turned to Charles to escape from the heartbreak of her unfaithful husband.
Maybe they were all victims of making the wrong choices when they were young?
Talking of genes…aren’t they all distantly related anyway? I’m sure Charles & Di shared some cousin stuff - a few times removed, granted, but I don’t think he had much of a choice of…marriage material.
Diana and Charles were 16th cousins once removed.
They are both descendants of King Henry VII.
They are also said to be 7th cousins once removed through William Cavendish, the 3rd Duke of Devonshire.
Camilla’s great-grandmother was Prince Charles’s great-grandfather, King Edward VII’s mistress but they actually have another common connection. Their shared ancestry reportedly dates back to the 17th century via Henry Cavendish, 2nd Duke of Newcastle, making them ninth cousins once removed.
Those Cavendishes get about, don’t they?!
I guess if we go back far enough, we can all find some surprising connections.
I remember how surprised my brother was when I did a bit of digging into our family history and we discovered that his wife was a distant cousin of ours!
I am all in favour of her becoming queen if, as it appears, it will generate a lot of antipathy and maybe rock the whole sorry edifice. I may, after all, see a republic in my lifetime…hopefully.
I am with you on that one. Our problem is that it would involve changing the constitution which is not easy, then then there is the question is how would we select the replacement for the Governor General. Would it be by a popular vote or by the consent of Parliament as it is now? Challenging questions.
Just wondering because I have read more than once that the general ambivalence to C & C might not inspire as many people to visit, which could take a nick out of tourism revenues. That was a bit of a surprise, because what appeals me is the natural beauty, architecture, historical sights, and museum, not royal figures.
Maybe there is something to that six degrees of separation thing…
