Are Duchess Kate’s jewelry choices really all that remarkable or noteworthy?

wenn21597366

For the most part, Duchess Kate’s jewelry choices depress me. It’s not that Kate’s jewelry style is bad or anything. It’s actually not bad at all. She mostly wears simple, small pieces. She rarely goes for anything garish or bold. She favors small drop earrings, buried under a mountain of hair, plus Diana’s sapphire ring, which Kate still flashes at every opportunity as if to say, “Waitying paid off, I GOT THE RING.” So, as I said, her jewelry isn’t so much bad as it is disappointing for all of us wanting some serious jewelry p0rn. The one time she tried to wear a major royal collection necklace, she hid it behind too much hair. If I have to pinpoint one problem with Kate’s jewelry, it’s that she wears it like a normal person, not a princess/duchess would. It’s like she doesn’t realize that we actually want to see great jewelry worn well.

This year, she’s added a new item to her accessories: a watch reportedly given to her by William. William has reportedly gifted her with several pairs of drop earrings from Kiki McDonough throughout the years as well, although there’s some good news/bad news. Good news: William “gets” Kate’s style (simple, small pieces). Bad news: he’s not spending crazy money are great pieces. Anyway, People Mag has a new interview with Kiki McDonough about Kate’s jewelry.

In between organizing Prince George’s first birthday party and keeping up with her royal duties in London, Scotland and Belgium over the last few weeks, the Duchess of Cambridge has also been busy planning her wardrobe for Malta in September — her first solo trip abroad on behalf of the Queen.

While we don’t know which dresses will earn a rewear or what bespoke pieces she’ll bring along on her trip (commemorating the 50th anniversary of the country’s independence) we can be sure she’ll pack at least one piece from her favorite jewelry designer, Kiki McDonough, in her travel case.

“Catherine is as chic when dressed down as she is at formal engagements,” McDonough tells PEOPLE of her A-list client. “My jewelry is designed to be worn every day and she does this beautifully.”

McDonough’s not overstating her case. In the last week alone, Kate has worn two of her favorite Kiki McDonough designs — the Kiki Classic green amethyst and diamond cushion drop earrings (seen at the Tower of London art installation she attended) as well as the Kiki Classic citrine pear drop earrings. With eight pieces total in Kate’s collection so far, McDonough’s designs could be on track to having their own place at the Tower of London crown jewels exhibit one day.

Kate has been wearing the British brand, known for its vibrant gemstones and unusual color combinations, for many years — as has her sister Pippa Middleton who often pops into the Sloane Square store to make purchases for herself. “Pippa has a great eye for design,” reveals McDonough (adds her spokesperson: “She picks really cool pieces”).

But it’s another famous McDonough fan that has the most poignant connection to Kate: her mother-in-law, the late Princess Diana. “I designed a pair of earrings for the Princess of Wales to meet Barbara Bush in the USA,” McDonough says with pride.

[From People]

Ass-kissy, of course. Most people who want to have their stuff worn by Kate tend to rave about her style, like she’s the second coming. I like Kiki’s earrings on Kate, but let’s not pretend that this is the most exciting jewelry p0rn in the world, you know?

Also… considering Kate (over)reliance on shades of blue, it’s a little bit surprising that she doesn’t try to “match” her jewels with her clothes more often. I would expect MOAR sapphires and blue topazes and aquamarines, but my unofficial count, she only has two pairs of blue earrings. One is the sapphire-and-diamond set that matches her ring, which I believe also belonged to Diana. The other is pair of diamond and aquamarine (I think) drop earrings which she literally wears with every pale blue ensemble. Anyway, I had a lot of fun picking out jewelry photos for Kate. You’d be surprised at the sheer volume of photos which are useless for jewelry-watchers because of Kate’s hair.

wenn21511704

wenn21300805

wenn21463607

Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

195 Responses to “Are Duchess Kate’s jewelry choices really all that remarkable or noteworthy?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Anguishedcorn says:

    So. Much. Makeup.

    I can’t focus on anything else because it’s all I see.

    • Dany says:

      She applies the same amounts of makeup as Conchita Wurst. The difference is Conchita applies it (especially the eyeliner) professionell.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      The eyeliner on the bottom looks so harsh on her! For some completely stupid reason, it makes me sad. Let your magic feather (eyeliner) go, darling! Your face can fly on its own!

      • Chris says:

        Pippa’s even worse with the eyeliner overload…
        Though one assumes Wills is happy enough with it, since blokes do make their feelings about farding known much more than their opinions about clothes…….Diana was heavy-handed too, maybe it says something to him we are deaf to.
        Tis like the old criticisms of Camilla’s hairstyle, when that look is the look she sported when Charles first loved her…..(and I’m getting carried away here.)

      • FLORC says:

        Chris
        I think you’re a bit off here. The time periods you’re citing for Diana and Camilla are not the styles of today. The 80′s were shoulderpads and thick eyeshadow to say the least.
        And Kate’s makeup is scaled back for our viewing. Did Diana also favor theatre grade makeup application outside of the 80′s glam?
        And hair styles? They come back around, but imo not because someone else prefers it. Because the person sporting it favors the style.

      • Chris says:

        Florc:
        I made my point very badly….I meant to underline (ha) that very thing, that quite anachronistic styles might be favoured for sentimental reasons. (Diana: I meant eyeliner, she didn’t go ‘full trowel’ with the rest)
        However, it’s far more likely that I’m more than a bit off, as you say. ;)

    • Algernon says:

      I am always shocked to be reminded that Kate is my age, because she always looks so much older. The makeup does not do her any favors. That harsh, hard black eyeliner is so aging. I think she’s very pretty, but she doesn’t do herself favors with her makeup.

      • FLORC says:

        I’m with you. She actually has a pretty face. Sure it’s damaged with cigarettes, sun, etc… but it’s not horrible. The heavy makeup and harsh strokes do her no favors. People often forget about aging naturally. The sooner you start to fight it the more unnatural it looks as time progresses. My opinion anyways.

    • I don’t really have a problem with the amount of makeup, so much as the application. the EYELINER NEEDS TO GO. It’s too harsh. It’s like she is using a colour by numbers chart. APPLY BLUSH HERE. DRAW LINE HERE.

      No.

    • John Wayne Lives says:

      Yeah this chick is gonna age badly. Or should i say, IS aging badly. But..she’s a princess, so.. age away lol

  2. Suze says:

    I like the drop earrings, but I agree, they aren’t wildly exciting. Or even visible.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Right. I mean, I’d be thrilled if someone gave me some Kiki McDonough earrings, but she is capable of so much more. It’s very disappointing.

    • angelique says:

      Why doesn’t she ever wear jewelry that symbolizes, oh, her country, Cambridge, QEII. She seems to choose generic pieces that anyone could wear.

      • Pippa m says:

        Freeloaders middlekardashions ma corella and all get pieces.

        If this is what Waity spent a decade of to PW to spend shoppress spend -means ma corella PR brag of party tat worth is a ploy!!)

        Classy commoners are way ahead of workless Waity royal nonstyle. Nothing for archives value of rogyal display.

      • sophietta says:

        It would be appropriate for her to wear big stones….she IS a princess after all! Perhaps Kate is still coming to terms with her role or lacks the confidence to wear showier pieces….such a shame as the queen of Spain also wears tailored clothes but pulls off very glam jewellery……

      • notasugarhere says:

        I think Letizia’s weakness is earrings, followed by shoes. Her clothing is often modestly-priced, but you’ll find her wearing many different pairs of sparkly earrings.

      • Francis says:

        Kate the DUCHESS married to the heir to the heir has a long wait and doesn’t have that much of a choice,IMO she gets what she is allowed and given. She’s a Duchess, Sarah was duchess of York and didn’t get the jewels Diana got , although I think Sarah did better than Kate as far as jewels in some ways,early in the marriage, because Sarah got her own tiara but that was because unlike Kate , Sarah Duchess of a york was not married to their heir in line who would one day have full access to the high level jewels used as Queen Consort.
        Still for now Kate is married to the second inline to the throne, she’s not married to the immediate heir and her jewels reflect that.
        Kate is not a Queen like Letizia, Kate is not the next Consort like Princess Mary.
        Camilla is the next Queen consort and the big jewels will get worn by her and Charles will see to that. He will control what goes in and out of that vault. For now Kate is getting the jewels William and the Palace feels she should get. She’s not the next Consort as Diana was.
        I don’t like many of her Items they look like a step above Claire’s jewels sometimes, even though I know they are quite expensive, they are just so blah.
        I think also William does not like Kate adorned heavily in glitter jewels.
        He once brought her back a wooden stick bracelet as a gift from some trip. Mama Carole was said to be horrified, but they all had to pretend how wonderful his gift was. hahaha. :)
        That says it all.

        Even Sophie married to the Queens third son, Prince Edward, has three tiaras two with matching suites, necklaces, earrings ,bracelet and the Queen lets her use gorgeous royal jewels for European trips, but I must say Sophie Countess of Wessex has earned it.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I agree…I like the earrings, I would wear them, but I am not royalty. But as Kaiser said, the public enjoys seeing those who can afford to wear crazy jewelry, who have events to go to where crazy jewelry would be appropriate, indulge in that crazy jewelry! Live it up so we can vicariously live through you, Kate!

  3. Abbott says:

    Holy pre-teen Jesus. Does a NASCAR pit crew put her make up on for her?

  4. Mrs. Darcy says:

    Her style aesthetic really is so middle aged. I know the Duchess job has fashion limitations, but I think she could find a way to be much more modern with things like shoes and jewellery. Or maybe they’d look weird with the stuff she wears? I dunno. It’s a waste of breath to mention the eyeliner at this point, isn’t it?

    • Abbott says:

      So I take it you don’t want to sign my White House petition to discontinue her eyeliner? And by “discontinue” I mean take all of her liquid liner, tie it to a rocket, and launch it into the galaxy.

      • Mrs. Darcy says:

        I will sign that in a heartbeat! The black eyeliner drives me nuts, because I have almost the same eyecolour as her and it is so ageing unless you smudge it out/wear it at night in a darkened room somewhere. I have never worn black eyeliner in the light of day, it’s godawful in those harsh lines on her. Maybe we should chip together and mail her some brown or even purple liner – so much more flattering on green eyes, esp as I don’t think she will ever give up the under eyeliner altogether, it’s her beauty crutch. She’s younger than me but her makeup is so 1984 it’s ridiculous.

      • LizLemonGotMarried says:

        I want to sign! I have green (blue mixed) eyes too, and usually wear copper or plum liner on the top and nothing on the bottom. If she would just brush a bit of brown mascara on her bottom lashes, it would give her a little definition at the bottom without the GIANT BLACK LINE THAT IS THE ONLY THING I CAN SEE WHEN I LOOK AT HER FACE. It completely disrupts her otherwise pretty face with two weird slashes. Look how pretty she looks laughing and looking down, when you can’t see the liner.

        The longer this goes on, the more I think it’s the one thing she really controls… I will wear my eyeliner however I want, and damn the popular opinion. Let them use mascara or fill in the waterline! I will rebel, in my own way…
        Yeah, right. Too much personality there.

    • HappyMom says:

      As a “middle aged” person I take exception to that. Her jewelry choices are boring.

    • HH says:

      It’s so true. My issues with Kate have a lot to do with the press treatment of her. I feel like the world is constantly celebrating someone so…. UNREMARKABLE…. in EVERY way (so far). Come to think of it, the most interesting things about her are the pieces that we can’t solve: Did she really stalk William? How did the family really make that money? Does she have her own friends? What’s the deal with the skirts blowing up? The list could go on…

      • Blake says:

        I’m so glad you wrote that! I feel the exact same way! Unremarkable in every way. And the fact that she had zero ambition to do anything else with her life but to marry William and just be a pretty cardboard cut out.

      • wolfpup says:

        Her look is so typical – what most of us could afford and wear ourselves…kind of “going to church” jewelry. Her stated position of “being like everyone else” looks middle-class to me, when she has access to design beautiful pieces, like the princess before her. It’s like she doesn’t know any better. I don’t think that she hardly looks like a princess, except for the smug look that she and William often display. Oh, and that she gets to do whatever she wants; being special, quiet snowflake, who delivers kings for the people.

      • HH says:

        She is “special” because of her relationship, and that’s not something we should forget or applaud. Aside from the social media wh0ring, Kate is no better than the Hollywood or Sports wives out there. Women who take too much pride in being great by association rather than parlaying their status/oppty into something meaningful.

      • notasugarhere says:

        No matter who William married, that woman would have been treated this way by the press and idolized by tween/teens/twentysomethings. It has nothing to do with her as an individual, but merely the idea of a “princess” and the wife of Diana’s golden boy.

        The press attention and glorifying of William has nothing to do with anything he has done himself, it is reflected glory from the idea of Diana (not who she was as a person, but the idea/mythology of her). All of this attention is focused on two bland and unremarkable people (W&K), but the press is desperate to spin a fairytale and sell papers.

      • AM says:

        Cressida generally dressed like a homeless person and still made the papers regularly. William could have married anyone and expected this kind of coverage.

  5. GiGi says:

    Her jewelry is fine. But that’s the problem. It’s just meh. She wears the same pieces regardless of her attire. I’ve seen those KiKi earrings with jeans and formal wear alike. Boring.

    The Queen and Camilla are doused in jewels on the regular – Kate should be, too. Aside from her wedding, has the woman even come close to a tiara?

  6. Chris says:

    I always hated that ginormous engagement ring….no disrespect to Chazza or Diana, but it looks so naff, imo.
    When Kate and himself got engaged I felt for her…..bang went the chance of getting a really chic diamond, and there she was lumbered with that huge sapphire. Good job she likes blue.

    • Mrs. Darcy says:

      I wish she’d wear something more subtle/just her wedding ring. It’s a nice gesture from William but I don’t see why she has to wear the clunky thing all the time, it’s like a museum piece & makes all her other jewellery have to be old fashioned/fancy to go with it.

      • Chris says:

        Exactly so. I have an angry bee in my bonnet re engagement rings so am no expert in tradition, but you can quit wearing them once married can’t you? (Or deconstruct it and make a few interesting pieces featuring individual stones!)
        But as you say, it influences the rest of the vibe entirely, with its Laura Ashley/Past Times thang. (Not that I can see her wearing Angelna’s gold spike cuff…….)

    • ArtHistorian says:

      Correct me if I’m wrong, but I read somewhere that Charles had Garrad send a selection of rings for Diana to chose (he didn’t present her with something he had picked out himself) and she apparently chose the biggest ring in a fit of pique. I don’t know if this story is true because I really don’t much about Diana/Charles before the whole ugly media war and the divorce.

      • Chris says:

        Gosh, hadn’t heard that, but if so, how painfully it exposes the nature of the alliance even before the vows, and the certainty of unhappiness. (Mind you, that style of ring was perhaps very appealing to Diana then, very Sloaney.)

      • LAK says:

        AH/Chris: The story is true, with a few corrections.

        He sent her the Garrards catalogue, she chose the biggest one in the range as a sort of ‘aren’t I naughty?’ glee rather than pique. Small and tasteful was probably the expectation, but she went the other way.

        Here is the kicker, if you had £28K and a copy of that same catalogue, which was widely available to the public even after the engagement, you too could have purchased the very same ring.

        So in a way, this ring uniquely belongs to Diana because Charles didn’t put any thought into it, and she selected it herself. very unromantic if you ask me.

        Now Fergie’ s ring on the other hand is truly romantic even though the marriage failed. Andrew had some input into the design (though it ended up looking like Diana’s ring), and insisted the central stone match her red hair which he claimed to adore.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        I have always though that that story is just so sad – he couldn’t even bother to pick out a ring for her, which really was one honking big red warning light! (she would have recognized that if she had been older and more world-wise). I really think that their marriage set-up was rather cruel – for both of them, but mostly for Diana because she was so young and inexperienced and no one in her family seemed to have her best interest at heart.

      • Chris says:

        LAK : and if you have £28 and an Argos catalogue, you can still Get The Look!
        Sorry, just being naughty.
        Pretty depressing tale, though schoolgirly glee rather than pique makes it easier on the old mind.
        Edit: AH absolutely agree, her own family were culpable in that sacrifice too.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I think Andrew had originally picked an emerald, but 1) it was flawed as many emeralds are and 2) Fergie wanted a ruby to match her hair (despite it being considered unlucky as an engagement stone in some circles).

        IMO Edward did a nice blingy job on Sophie’s engagement ring design, even though the pearl wedding jewelry he designed is awful. Sophie’s ring is similar to HM’s design from Philip, right? Sophie loses when it comes to wedding jewelry and tiara, but she wins with the engagement ring.

      • LAK says:

        Chris: true story….. I was in Argos the other day, buying cheap electronics when a guy bought a ring from the Elizabeth Duke Jewellery section, told the cashier it was to be an engagement ring…….!!!!! His poor fiance (no pun intended!!)

        Notasugarhere: Andrew picked out the ruby for the hair, not Fergie. Fergie had no input at all, but you are right about rubies being unlucky for the BRF. And so it proved.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I thought I’d read that the emerald had a flaw, so Andrew designed a brand new ring with a ruby (which was what she wanted). Aha, found it. I have no idea if Menkes had access to facts though, or if she based this on rumor. The Palace did not collaborate on this publication so her sources are not from the inside. The press painted Fergie as trouble early on, so I can see this story being made up to make her look bad.

        articles(dot)chicagotribune(dot)com/1989-12-13/entertainment/8903170736_1_royal-jewels-suzy-menkes-isaac-mizrahi

        “It was Fergie – Sarah Ferguson – ‘tough, strong-minded and artistic’ – who had ‘politely rejected’ her fiance’s (Prince Andrew’s) choice of a cabochon emerald ring. Menkes writes: ‘Firstly she did not care for emeralds and had set her heart on a ruby; secondly, the emerald was flawed.’ Her decision (‘I’ve got red hair, too’) threw things at the castle into a tizzy but Andrew whipped out a sketch of a ring and Fergie got her wish – an oval ruby surrounded by a cluster of 10 drop diamonds.”

      • ArtHistorian says:

        I didn’t now that rubies were considered unlucky for engagement rings, how interesting! Though it is not that common to use coloured stones in engagement rings – however, it seems that it has become a bit of a trend with royalty (after a bit of research, I present my findings below):

        CP Marys’ engagment rings sports two rubies flanking a larger diamond – the Danish colours, and it matches the diamond-ruby parure: http://ringspotters.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Mary-Donaldson-Engagement-Ring.png

        Wallis Simpson got a massive emerald engagement ring from her duke: http://www.pinterest.com/pin/472807660853007092/

        Queen Margrethe got a rather interesting ring with two large diamonds made by van Cleef and Arpels:
        http://www.pinterest.com/pin/472807660853007082/

        Princess Soraya of Iran got a giant diamond (22 carats): http://www.pinterest.com/pin/472807660853007079/

        Prince Albert has given Charlene some amazing jewelry, but the engagement ring is unfortunate (a pear shape diamond). http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BVqB9nRH760/UR2ZmERMr1I/AAAAAAAAUQA/85a9Lgt4DwA/s1600/_Charlene.jpg

        Another unfortunate one is Princess Marie’s with ruby, diamond and sapphire to evoke the tricolore of her homeland (and set in gold): http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_L7JC05D4BC0/TCQvWcRdarI/AAAAAAAAAXg/_UYM6eDlXU8/s1600/Engagement+Ring.jpg

        Maxima got one with a yellow-orange diamond flanked by white diamonds: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KSTHpQ3Tptk/UTlP6l55qaI/AAAAAAAAVLg/7d80Hq-20L8/s1600/_Maxima.jpg

      • Chris says:

        LAK
        Oh gawd…..but there again, what with Ratner admitting it’s all tat anyway, what’s a guy to do? She won’t shut up till she has a blasted ring to flash at her mates, and the more monstrous the ring the more pride she shows off!
        Grrrr….you may not have detected my intense dislike of the ring thing. (As if) It’s one area of male/female relations in which I feel really bad for the guys and ashamed of my sisters.
        I’ll just skuttle off now and be bitter and twisted. ;) .

      • LAK says:

        Notasugarhere: a little birdy who knows Fergie rather well told me the engagement story. I’ve never heard of an emerald being rejected in the first place, BUT!! Revisionist history and all that, who knows if my little bird was telling the truth or sticking to the ‘official’ line.

      • notasugarhere says:

        @LAK. That’s why I’m thinking Menkes may have made it up, or heard it from an anti-Fergie source. That book was published in 1989, and Fergie was called “Duchess DoLittle” “Freeloading Fergie” and “Her Royal Idleness” starting late 1988 – early 1989. The emerald story could easily be part of a smear campaign from that time.

  7. Penelope says:

    Good God, that eyeliner. STOP IT, KATE. NOW.

  8. fatty says:

    I dont hate her or anything, but she looks old, she looks to be bout 40-45 in the pictures above

  9. Becks says:

    Her jewelry is very basic. Nothing exciting.
    I wish she would step it up and wear interesting pieces. I absolutely love jewelry.To me, it is wearable art. If I had all that wealth, I would have such an amazing collection of baubles. Ahhh, if only…

  10. Sarah says:

    For god’s sake, you’d think someone in her circle would have the guts to let her know that when she wears major bling with her hair down like that, she runs the risk of looking like someone out of a Frederick’s of Hollywood catalogue.

  11. BeckyR says:

    I think she would get a huge amount of criticism is she decked herself in massive diamonds and pearls. Her choices are just that: hers. I like understated jewelry. William doesn’t need to spring for big jewelry presents. He and Harry inherited all of Diana’s jewelry, less what the Queen lent her. Charles inherited all of the Queen Mother’s jewelry. Camilla’s big engagement ring was formerly worn by his grandmother who is probably spinning in her grave.

    • wolfpup says:

      But what’s wrong in looking like a princess? I think that hiding away on a country estate is more disturbing.

      She obviously has not been around a lot of people in that class, who do wear it. It can be an acquired thing. Kate Middleton just seems to be her mother’s daughter, and her college mate’s wife. And she is happy, doing nothing more than following instruction.

    • FLORC says:

      I don’t think the criticism would be like opening the flood gates if she wore more for formal events. If she dripped in diamonds for a casual outing then maybe. Her choices for those formal events are often repeats of pieces that weren’t good the 1st time around. And when she got that stunning diamond necklace on loan from the Queen it was covered by hair.
      We’re not picky. We just want some jewelry pr0n from time to time.

    • MinnFinn says:

      See my comment above about recycling a handful of gowns but pairing them with jewels from HM’s vault. Nothing to criticize about that imho.

      • Chris says:

        Yes indeed Minnfinn
        I’ve not really thought much about this, but I find I really am keen to see fabulous gems worn, appropriate occasion a given of course. With Arthistorian’s words about jewellery as art in mind, one can rake up lots of enthusiasm for the royals’ giving us this access to the magnificent items they hold in trust, by wearing the ruddy stuff! Easier than arranging exhibitions of vulnerable artworks anyway.
        Still, I think Kate is feeling her way into this still, and for now I think Camilla is an excellent example of confidence with lavish gems….,they only work when worn with insouciance as much as pleasure.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Yep.

        I can’t help but think of the photo of CP Mary wearing the iconic diamond-ruby parure the day before her wedding. She looked lovely but she also had this slight “deer-in-the-headlights”-look. It was the first time she wore jewelry of that caliber and this particular set was very strongly associated with late Queen Ingrid, who was a very elegant lady. A complete contrast to the present day where she has become comfortable enough with the parure to make her own adjustments and play around with it.

  12. lower-case deb says:

    i’m glad to see she’s wearing her hair up more often now.

    if i am a jewelry designer, i would never (or make it last priority) to give her earrings. it’s anyone’s guess whether it will be seen, especially if she’s on her hairdown days. (the picture that Kaiser linked–that is a HUGE necklace, and it’s almost invisible!)

    i also remember one time (during the Remembrance day?) her hair completely obscures her brooch, making it as if she’s not wearing it, and you only catch imperfect glimpses of it.

    my bet would be give: bracelets, or rings. they have a better chance to be seen.

  13. Jem says:

    She only seems to want us to look at her thong-covered butt

  14. Jaded says:

    OK that eyeliner is reaching Cleopatra proportions. You know you can take the girl out of Essex but you can’t take the Essex out of the girl. Not that she’s a true Essex girl, she’s from West Berkshire, but there’s a certain cheapness to her that even bespoke dresses and custom jewelry just can’t eradicate. Any 32 year old woman married to the man who will be king who continues to wear skin-tight jeggings, mile-high wedges, dresses that fly up with every puff of wind, not to mention the fake and bake tan and long out-of-control hair, just screams unprofessional and “I-don’t-really-give-a-damn-cuz-I-snagged-William”.

  15. Ginger says:

    I like Kate but I have to agree that her fashion choices and her styling makes her look a lot older than she really is. I am 45 and know that the less harsh makeup you can wear day to day makes one look younger. She should look dewy and fresh and glowing. Instead she looks sun damaged and flat to me. I think she’s due for a fashion reboot.

  16. Irishserra says:

    I realize that her eyeliner is tattooed on, but is there a way she can mute it with some concealer? This is a genuine question, as I don’t wear eyeliner, nor have I any tattoos. I’m just wondering if it’s feasible to do so?

  17. Ciria says:

    Nope. She accesorizes in a pretty understated but elegant, simple way.

    I can’t wait for her to bust out the crown jewels. I still remember those pics of Diana wearing one of the Queen’s blinged-out necklaces as a headband. Love it.

  18. FLORC says:

    Her jewelry choices are bland. Personally i’m a diamonds, white gold, and pearls girl, but that’s because it’s what I have. She has a vault! And access to items we’ve only seen in books and magazines they’re so amazing. And when she had a chance to wear those super amazing stones what happened? Her hair got fluffed up and covered the majority of the diamonds.

    So, even if she merely wants to wear only simple items and ones she prefers that’s fine. But she has to learn to not cover them up and pair them well with outfits.

    Now Camilla and the Queen. Those ladies know how to wear jewels!

  19. Lee says:

    All I’m going to say, is that if she consistently wore expensive jewelry, and ESPECIALLY if this site detected a trend of William purchasing expensive jewelry on a regular basis, you’d be the first to jump on the opportunity to chastise them, and shame them for spending too much money on extravagance. The criticism is getting old to be perfectly honest. The least you could do is remain consistent with what you want from them.

    • Miss Bennett says:

      Lee, no one here has any objections to Kate wearing family jewelry. After all, it’s bought and paid for isn’t it? As for the jewelry that William bought, none of it seems to be terribly expensive. What people are complaining about is that she has access to some of the most beautiful pieces of jewelry in the world and she isn’t taking advantage of it and her hair covers up what little she does wear.

    • FLORC says:

      Lee
      We’re not even attacking her and we’re being accused of it.
      The main point that’s beng missed is she’s had jewels on loan to her and doesn’t showcase them. When the Queen opens her vault to you and you cover it with hair. IT’s not the best action to take. And we’re likely not pulling out out torches and pitchforks for her wearing better jewels when appropriate.

    • notasugarhere says:

      The pieces she wears are ridiculously expensive for how uninspired they are. She has three small, round, diamond pendants – about $3000 each. That charm necklace is around $15,000. Let’s not forget the $88,000 Olympic diamond necklace which was stated by the Palace to be hers, not a loaner.

      I think she isn’t wearing more historic jewelry for the simple reason that HM doesn’t want her wearing it. Kate Middleton does not have access to the royal vault, HM controls it with two iron fists.

      • Francis says:

        +10000 notsugarhere Exactly true, IMO

        Kate simply doesn’t have a choice. The Queen is not opening the vault for her.

      • YankLynn says:

        I have had the passing thought that maybe she just doesn’t like that kind of stuff. I mean there’s a lot of what I’d call “old lady” brooches and massive tiered necklaces — yes, of exquisite jewels but that style wouldn’t be everyone’s taste. And also I think its aging – fine for Camilla a lot of that. Now and then we see her with a simpler brooch of the Queen’s, right ? Like on the overseas trips, something meaningful to the country visited.

        But yes I’d like to see her with more modern statement pieces when her outfit begged for it and she has had many. The tiny charms on a chain stuff is very casual to my eye and I agree with other posters, an awful lot like stuff we all wear. And often totally wrong for the dress or coat she has on. I have said before that I think she needs a stylist – who she would listen to – who would talk to her about the makeup, hair length, accessorizing etc. Her mother and sister dress and make up in a similar style to hers, so I assume they are her go-to “how does this look” people.

      • Vava says:

        agree with your post, notasugarhere.

  20. Blake says:

    I never thought she is particularly stylish. She doesn’t dress with any personality. She’s very safe and conservative. She dresses like she’s afraid of bad comments so she stays in the right lane. Her hair, while lush, is too heavy. Some layers need to be added to lighten it up. And I agree with a previous poster, the hair, makeup and jeggings are all very 1988.

    • FLORC says:

      Conservative until it’s not. She dresses extremes without adding her own flare. Unless her own flare is the flash. And she has since removed some extensions from her hair. It was insanely thick over a year ago. She’s since changed stylist and her mane became noticably thinner and more natural.

      And if she paid atention to the negative press (which we’re told she doesn’t pay it any attention, ever) we’d see her finding a better wardrobe balance, taking on more steady work, and fewer spending, vacation scandals.

      Personally, her university days style was awesome. And not talking about the short skirt days, but the healthy weight and boho/comfy chic days. She looked great, comfy, and still put together.

      • wolfpup says:

        FLORC, I agree with you on Kate’s University days; she seemed self-confident and self-assured, that is, she had a personality. I wonder where that “Kate” is. She is looking like a wuss to me. What goes on in that royal establishment?

      • Vava says:

        yeah, That University Kate was a different person than we see in public today. I think William is behind the transformation.

      • FLORC says:

        Vava/wolfpup
        William very much has shown us he has a type. In the 2006/07 break up we see Kate changing everything. Weight loss, behavior, styling, and how she filled her day to appear busy and over him.

        I was such a fan of her style and she seemed like a different, more relatable person. Or at least someoneyou feel for and doesnt seem cold and dull living for another.

        IMO and as the story went Kate made herself 2nd to what William prefered. Not the palace wants of her. Only William.
        And think about it. She put a career on hold for her entire 20′s hanging around a man for security. On top of him publicly cheating on you. It was said even Kate said William’s behavior made her look cheap. And it was no secret William’s circle thought of Kate as a joke. If you put so much time into that and saw it slipping away wouldn’t you change too?

        Every so often we see that Kate come out for a sporting event. Not really elsewhere.

  21. Ann says:

    Whether boring jewelry is to her taste or not, I think it’s rather shrewd of her to not be blinging it out like crazy. She’s already attacked constantly by critics who think she’s a lazy good for nothing who lives off the taxpayer’s dime – can you imagine the outrage if she was constantly bedecked in opulent jewels? Particularly if they were new jewels purchased especially for her. And if she is reluctant to borrow extravagant jewelry from the Queen’s collection or even any jewels from Diana’s collection that are available to her, I think that’s understandable. If my MIL or GMIL were very wealthy and let me have the pick of their jewelry boxes for special occasions, I would never pick the most showy pieces. My tastes do run to statement pieces, but even if I did want to wear the biggest and brightest diamonds, I would borrow the simpler, less striking pieces, especially if I were in the early years of my marriage. I wouldn’t be surprised if she started to wear more interesting jewelry as she gets older.

    • Algernon says:

      This. I don’t think she can win this particular debate. Camilla gets made fun of all the time because she wears so much jewelry (“Duchess of Diamonds”), and I think Kate is trying to avoid that. They have their reputation as the “normal royals”, and if she went around in a lot of jewelry, it wouldn’t mesh with her recycling garments, etc. Even her hair and makeup, neither of which I like or think flatter her particularly well, are probably about keeping up the illusion that she’s low-key. Oh, she wears her hair the same and her makeup the same, she must be low maintenance. I’m not saying that’s *true* (it probably isn’t), but I think it’s all part and parcel of maintaining an image as the low-key, normal royals.

      • may23 says:

        Not unless these women wear borrowed pieces that belong to the Crown. It’s perfectly ok to do that.

      • FLORC says:

        I think people are putting too much into this than Kate ever will. She wears what she’s given. If she doesn’t She and her family won’t get those freeby gifts they do now.
        And it’s known Charles loves his ladies in jewels. That’s why Camilla wears so much. For charles.

      • LAK says:

        Actually, Camilla’s jewellery is worn for Charles who seems to enjoy her decked out in jewellery.

        Personally, I find it very entertaining that boring ol’ Charles has a ‘woman decked in jewels’ fetish. *Who knew???!!!!

        *actually we probably knew seeing that Diana was always blinged out, but she wore a lot of Spencer/royal vaults jewels so it was harder to pin point where the jewellery was coming from, but in Camilla’s case, the jewellery is coming via Charles as it all seems to have been via QM and we all know how much Charles adored his QM – actually, i’ve just made myself sick at that thought……exit stage left!

      • Chris says:

        LAK
        It’s ok, that’s one theory about Charles that won’t hold water!
        It *is* (imo) enchanting to observe this delight in Camilla, in his desire to weigh her down with jewels for all the occasions missed in the past.
        He may be a staid old thing, but there’s a streak of the Peter Wimsey of ‘Gaudy Night’ there too, and look how Harriet Vane went up in flames!

      • Ann says:

        I think we also should keep in mind that she is (was?) a commoner, and although she grew up privileged, it’s not likely that was around people that wore the kind of serious jewelry that members of the royal family have access to, or frequented events where that type of jewelry was worn. I know that if I were in her position, I would feel very self conscious adorning myself with that kind of bling and it would probably be a good while before I felt comfortable borrowing significant pieces from the royal collection. Like I said above, if my in laws were super wealthy and encouraged me to borrow whatever caught my fancy from their personal jewelry collections, I probably couldn’t bring myself to pick the super stunning WOW pieces – at least, not before I felt more established within the family. It could be just a simple PR choice for her (not wanting people to criticize her for wearing gobs of diamonds they way they do Camilla), or she could really be not yet comfortable with wearing millions of pounds worth of jewels worn by centuries of queens and princesses before her (understandable). Or she could have super boring taste in jewelry!

      • AM says:

        I think it tends to be mostly just simply taste. But as pointed out, much of Camilla’s jewelry comes from the QM. We don’t know how much HM would have loaned to her had Charles not had that stockpile.

      • Chameleon says:

        Serious jewelry = status symbol.

        I think that Charles wants Camilla to look like his beloved wife and like a Queen (in the making) and the jewels cement her status.
        I don’t quite get why Prince William would not want that for Kate. ???

      • ArtHistorian says:

        because he doesn’t want to king…?

  22. may23 says:

    Does anyone else get a sense that William is not the most generous of men? I mean Kiki’s earring are sweet, but I hear William is a millionaire, is he not? I think Kate doesn’t really have her own preference and just goes along with whatever he likes or thinks best.

    • hannah says:

      or she’s not a jewelry person .

      • wolfpup says:

        She wears the Cartier watch that Willy gave her almost every time we see her, even with evening clothes, where I don’t think a watch belongs, unless encrusted with jewels like a bracelet …no matter the label, or how much it cost. To me, her choices only reflect that she does not know how to wear jewelry, other than how we commoner do on Sundays. Even her clothes remind me simply of someone going to church. She needs a stylist (that is not her mother). I am surprised that she had no help (?) in styling that fabulous diamond necklace of the Queen’s.

      • Vava says:

        @ wolfpup, I completely agree that the Cartier watch is out-of-place with evening clothes. It’s a casual watch and looks really strange with black tie attire.

        I get the sense that Kate thinks her style choices are better than what any professional stylist could give. She’s wrong about that!

  23. Algernon says:

    When I saw the tiara she chose for her wedding, I knew she would be a jewelry disappointment. I’ve never had expectations of her in that department, given that choice.

  24. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    There is NOTHING about this woman that is remarkable or noteworthy. Especially her sense of fashion, which seems to be similar to Barbara Bush, Sr. circa 1995.

  25. Wallamalooo says:

    Not really but then again does anybody’s? It’s just jewellry.

  26. The Original Mia says:

    Her jewelry is boring but expensive. The 3 charms she wears totaled $20K. $20K for 3 charms. That ugly Olympic ring necklace she wore during the London Games was a hefty $42K (I think). Her watch is Cartier.

    • LAK says:

      The Olympic ring thingy was £49K = approx $80K.

      All those necklaces she wears are eye wateringly expensive. Several times over any other jewellery she wears.

      I think, with exception of the Olympic ring, as they are tiny and unobtrusive, people don’t realise how much she spends (or is gifted) on them.

      • AM says:

        Same with the shoes. Because she always has plain ones on, there’s no comment on the price of her Jimmy Choos…and there’s one other expensive brand she wears, but I can’t think of it right now. When it comes to her clothing, the press falls over themselves to announce she’s in High Street, but tends to be much quieter when she’s in something designer or bespoke.

      • Vava says:

        Those charm necklaces are way overpriced, IMO.

        And although her shoes are expensive, they are pretty boring. She obviously doesn’t really care much about accessories.

    • Chameleon says:

      It is astonishing how much money one can spend on boring bad taste. She spends a sh**load of money on boring bling like a nouveau riche. Never any statement pieces but just smally smally thing-ys.
      Jewels are supposed to make her look interesting and royal so that whoever she visits feels blessed.
      Just somehow she doesn’t get it. Either she purposefully tries to appear “modest” and “simple” or she has a serious problem with anything concerning style and taste.

      Queen E has a magnificient jewelry collection so why does Plain Jane Kate not borrow some pieces now and then? Maybe the Queen won’t give her any?

      • Jocelyn says:

        I think that it could be apart of the normal people schtick that they have been running through the mud for the past 3 years. I don’t why anybody would expect them or even want them to be like “normal people” anyway. They’re royal and I wouldn’t exactly expect them to dress or try to appear middle class. That’s just incredibly boring and part of the reason I find the two of them to be so dull. The take expensive vacations all the time and have even more expensive renovations done to a palace. Then they decide to move into another one so the renovations were pointless. But on the other hand, they flake out on charity work and try to bring to the public that they’re so normal! I do want to mention that I think I wouldn’t mind William & Kate in real life. It’s their flaky ways and press that I have a problem with.

      • wolfpup says:

        Maybe William and Kate promised each other (before they were married), that they would never change.

  27. Kori says:

    Kate’s engagement ring did indeed belong to Diana–it was her engagement ring. The pair of diamond & sapphire earrings she recently wore also apparently belonged to Diana. Diana didn’t leave a huge amount of jewelry behind–some of her most famous pieces (like the Cambridge Lover’s Knot which I SO hope comes out again eventually–especially given the name) and the Spencer Tiara were returned to the Queen and her brother respectively. Pieces she was given on State tours were, by policy, turned over to the Royal Collection. She would have foreign gifts given personally and any jewelry given to her by Charles or bequeathed to her by her father. William had apparently selected a watch (Rolex?) and Harry the engagement ring but then, upon his request, Harry gave the ring to William for Kate. (Or so the story goes) Hopefully, in return, Harry got the watch.

    Sarah Ferguson basically had one tiara–a gift from Queen Elizabeth. She wore this to all her ‘tiara’ events. Sophie Wessex has 2 aquamarine ones–one is made from aquamarines reportedly belonging to Prince Philip’s late mother Princess Alice of Greece but no one actually knows much of its provenance. It has a huge aquamarine which is really lovely. The other aquamarine tiara belongs to the Queen and I don’t know if it’s a loaner or a gift. It’s from the Queen’s collection and is made up of diamonds and Brazilian aquamarines. She has her diamond tiara (which she wore at her wedding and other events for years until the first aquamarine tiara emerged) and has borrowed a ‘button’ one in the past. Camilla has worn the Boucheron tiara of the Queen Mother and the Delhi Durbar tiara of Queen Mary–and not seen since Queen Mary’s death. And Camilla is the wife of the heir to the throne. So all of the Queen’s daughters-in-law basically had few tiaras (Diana–2, both loaners; Sarah–one; Sophie–4 but it took a number of years and they attend the most ‘tiara’ events; Camilla–2) at their disposal, especially for the first number of years.

    Sophie had to work her way up to more than the diamond & button tiara (both pretty small and plain) and Kate probably will as well–especially as they, hopefully, take over more formal duties from the Wessexes. The Queen is really the only one who breaks out tiaras in England any more. Most of the tiara events have been foreign weddings–they still bring out the bling for those.

    So we’ll probably have to wait awhile for Kate. She had the Cartier Halo tiara (which belonged to the Queen Mother) for her wedding and then was briefly seen at her only other tiara event so far–a formal banquet at which no interior photos were released. That was the Papyrus tiara. It was mostly associated with Margaret and was thought to belong to her. Either the royal family bought it back upon Margaret’s death or it was always a ‘loaner’.

    Kate has worn one of the Queen’s humungous diamond necklaces (and didn’t pick the right dress IMO to show it off) and that’s been her only other significant piece of serious royal bling. The Queen is a master at the brooch (as is Camilla who has a very eclectic collection–courtesy of her own family, Charles and some very historic pieces) and this is where I wish Kate would bust out. I mean, the Queen will wear a simple outfit with *bam* a huge honking brooch–usually a diamond and always historic. Tiaras need special events but brooches can be worn almost everywhere. That, and earrings, of which the Queen is also a master. The royals don’t wear a lot of rings as a rule–apart from the engagement ring.

    Now maybe they don’t want to be seen buying a bunch of jewelry but there has got to be a huge amount that could be borrowed. The Queen has proved in past years to be a bit stingy with the loans but she’s been opening the vaults more and more over the last decade. If they wanted to have some really significant pieces, without the bad PR of buying a bunch of new jewelry, the royal vault is the place to go. There are apparently hundreds of unset stones and items that could be reset to make new pieces or modernize old ones. (That was also a favorite of Queen Mary who took the family emeralds and made some of the present Queen’s favorite pieces.)

    • Jocelyn says:

      I just looked up the Cambridge Lover’s Knot that you mentioned. It looks amazing! That’s interesting about the tiaras. I never knew tiaras were for special events only.

      • LAK says:

        HM tends to keep tiaras out of sight for many years after they’ve been returned to her from whomever she’s loaned them to. Kate’s Halo tiara was last seen in the 70s on Anne.

        Her policy appears to be life long loaners which are then put to the back of the tiara cupboard on their return. So in that respect, I doubt we shall see the Cambridge Lovers knot tiara any time soon. I think some people thought Kate would receive it on her wedding day after the announcement of the Ducal title William was to receive. A nice tie in, so to speak.

        For Harry’s bride, there is a veritable smorgasbord of tiaras that haven’t been seen since the 60s so it will be interesting…….

      • ArtHistorian says:

        I love drop pearls tiaras – and there are a few around besides the Cambridge Lover’s Knot.

        The Perle Poire tiara of the Danish RF – one of their really big gun tiaras. Some pictures and its history: http://orderofsplendor.blogspot.dk/2013/06/tiara-thursday-pearl-poire-tiara.html

        Another beautiful example is the Bavarian Lover’s Knot http://www.pinterest.com/pin/472807660852680858/

      • Kori says:

        It’s surprising how few events the tiaras get busted out for–and it’s usually a state affair or event that the senior royals are at. Even the weddings–no one save Kate wore a tiara that day. Same for other modern British royal weddings. The continental royal families bring out the tiaras far more frequently. And all their weddings have the guests in tiaras–even when a junior royal weds like Madeleine of Sweden.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Regarding weddings and tiaras:

        Protocol is that at an afternoon wedding the female guests wear gala dresses and tiaras (if they have one). The European RFs generally do afternoon weddings – with all the glitz and glam involved.

        The BRF usually hold weddings early in the day, which require daydresses and hats. (The only exception that I’ve heard of is Edward’s and Sophie’s wedding).

        With European royal weddings are generally rather glamorous affairs with where the women whip out the coutoure gowns and the serious bling whereas the British royal weddings brings us pastel daydresses, coats, hats and/or other odd headgear disguised as hats.

      • AM says:

        I remember hearing in the commentary for Edward and Sophie’s wedding that it was considered bad luck in the BRF to not be married by nightfall (and Edward and Sophie pushed it close). Edward and Sophie requested evening gowns but no tiaras or hats. The QM refused, as she would not be seen in public before 6pm without a hat.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Also according to Civil law and COE dictates, marriages must take place between 8am and 6pm to be legal. HM wore a giant purple feathered headdress to make up for the no-hat-but-no-tiara request.

  28. Megan says:

    If I had access to the Crown Jewels you would have to pry them off of me.

  29. Chris says:

    I am completely jaw-on-floor in amazement and admiration at the encyclopaedic knowledge here. I have most definitely picked up a new interest today: the royal jewellery collection….(and not only the British ones, thanks to Arthistorian for that)
    What a delightful and fascinating topic, and more interesting than many of the personalities involved.

  30. Jocelyn says:

    The only time that I’ve ever really liked her jewelry was when she wore that blue Jenny Packham (right?) dress. The jewelry looked amazing but her hair was slightly distracting. I usually like the “sausage curls” but when she wears dresses she needs to pull it back. Her earrings aren’t that great and her hair is long enough that it hides them. She doesn’t really wear many necklaces and Kate doesn’t seen to like bracelets either expect for a few choice charm bracelets. I have also never really liked her engagement ring. I know that the reason William gave it to her was because it was his mother’s which seems nice but I don’t like it at all. The jewel is way too big for me. I think Kate would have looked nice with a garnet stone ring (her birthday is in January so that would be her birthstone too) especially if it was small.

  31. AnotherDirtyMartini says:

    I love her pearl earrings. Classy. Nothing wrong w/her delicate necklace either.
    I swear someone at this site hates Kate so much that you just rag on everything she does. You KNOW if she was sporting huge gemstones, everyone would be screaming about how superficial she is, blah blah blah.

  32. Chris says:

    Good morning (just) LAK, ArtH and all In this timezone!
    I’ve replaced my quotidian silver stud earrings with tiny diamonds today. Royal Fabulosity website awaits as soon as I get cats & chores in order.
    Tally ho! Have a splendid weekend, ladies.

    • ArtHistorian says:

      Diamonds always make the day a little brighter! :-)
      I’ll come into a lovely diamond ring some day (hopefully not in a long time). it is a family heirloom that has been passed from mother to daughter (or in one case daughter-in-law) for 4 generations. It is a lovely Edwardian design – oldfashioned, but you really don’t reset an important heirloom.

  33. Francis says:

    Ok this is the drift I got from someone in Brit press pack.
    Kate is getting take-away jewels for now. Nothing the Palace worries about losing. Jewels she can take away with her in case things go sour and a possible divorce happens BUT After possibly a 9 or 10 yr period in the marriage, we may see more substantial things come her way, but for now all the new jewels bought are things in case of divorce, she can keep and that don’t matter to the palace . ( Unless it’s something borrowed ,which goes right back in the Royal vault anyway)
    Another point made was that William likes her unadorned ,he was miserable that night she wore the Tiara to the big even at the Palace with the Queen. They were arguing before they got out of the car. William does not really want her in full Princess mode and prefers Kate as she is.
    William does not like I her adorned with a lot of heavy jewels so unless it’s absolutely necessary for a dinner , we may not see her even in Tiaras much,until years and years downtheroad.

    • notasugarhere says:

      The first part of this theory fits with other pieces – BRF protecting itself against another divorce from Day 1. Charles paying for interior decorating and her clothing, Anmer being where they are allowed to live but it still belongs to HM. If nothing belongs to William, she cannot take half of it in a divorce. He could choose to buy her expensive pieces out of his inheritance, but we’ve all heard how skinflint he is.

      I don’t buy the second half. I think it is far more likely that William is a miserable, temperamental sod who does not want any reminders of his royal role. He doesn’t want to attend a state dinner, so he’s going to be bitchy about the whole thing, no matter what KM wears. It isn’t about preferring her simple and unadorned, it is about resenting his role in this world and the trappings that go with it – tiaras and jewelry for his wife included.

      A popular theory why he settled for her – because an aristocrat could fit into the BRF world and remind him of his duty to country. He picked someone completely unsuited to the role because he doesn’t want the role.

      • Francis says:

        That makes perfect sense. Yes. I can see him being a miserable bear in the car because basically he really didn’t want to do it anyway.

        I will always believe he chose Kate because she would not work to understand what was required and she would never push him or herself in their royal roles.

      • AM says:

        As I said on Thursday, I truly believe this was a mistake on his part. What he wanted vs what he needed.

        But it’s still amazing to me that she seemingly has no drive to work for her country. To not want to get out there and contribute as a way of saying thank you for paying for my wedding, thank you for the reception you gave my child on his birth, thank you for paying to provide him with a day nursery and a night nursery, neither of which it turns out he’ll actually even be using. I can see William just expecting these things, but her? And I know, I know, she can’t work more than him. But it truly doesn’t seem like she wants to, either.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Well, she has never really worked a real job, so she has no experience of how to carve out a meaningful role place within the royal machine.

      • wolfpup says:

        Good insight, notasugarhere. Theories perhaps, but I think there is real truth there.

        AM, I think you’re right about not seeing any gratitude (except to her royal and family members). She seems young, in that she’s so clingy. It’s hard to criticize her for that – but I am hoping (still), that she’ll become a real woman.

    • Jaded says:

      There’s a repetitious pattern to the way she dresses and bejewels herself and I think it’s all William’s preference. We know Waity is a doormat for him and only wants to do what pleases him. So he likes the slightly cheap, long-haired, over-made-up look that she’s become famous for. He also likes the skin-tight jeggings/mile high wedges look as well as the flimsy little dresses with the potential for an upskirt moment. He really seems to want her to show off her skinny, toned body as much as possible and not let her present herself in a mature, more professional, “royal” look. I think he wants to keep her as his little pet, forever 21, and between the two of them they will deliberately cling to that look and lifestyle because neither of them seem to take their positions with any kind of seriousness or dedication AT ALL. They will avoid the responsibilities that come with their positions in the BRF for as long as possible and continue with their rather immature, self-involved existence for the foreseeable future.

      In other words, William is a lazy git who likes a kind of sporty/trampy look in an adoring, complacent wife who will be whatever he wants her to be.

  34. Vava says:

    Since her hair is her thing, I think she should concentrate on bracelets and rings. Earrings and necklaces get lost in that mop.

    The diamond bracelet that Charles gave her is great and I like that she wears it with some frequency.

  35. Fue McCormick says:

    Nothing about this woman is remarkable or noteworthy …

  36. xoxokaligrl says:

    Eh… I am really not a fan of Kate or her style.. I think she has been looking very harsh since she married into the family…

  37. Katie says:

    I rarely disagree with posts but I do have to say that as much criticism as the Cambridges receive for their laziness and spending, I am pretty sure austentatious jewelry would be another bone of contention should William gift it to her and she choose to wear it.