Duchess Kate wears black McQueen for Remembrance Sunday: lovely?

wenn21907762

It’s nice when we get into Coat Season and Duchess Kate begins pulling out some of her fabulous coats that we’ve never seen. She recycles coats sometimes, but I don’t understand why. She probably has a good 100 to 200 coats or coatdresses, some of which she’s had for years and just never worn to public events. For yesterday’s Remembrance Sunday in Britain, Kate whipped out this particularly great Alexander McQueen coat in black. It retails for £1,625.00 – go here to see the full look. If you’ve got that kind of money to spend on a coat that will probably only be worn twice in three years, DO IT! This coat is really good. I’m all over those lapels. This is so much better than the balled/buttoned Matthew Williamson coat from Saturday.

You can see more photos from the Remembrance Sunday event here. I’m including some of the moving photos of The Queen, Prince Phillip and Prince William, all of whom were on the street to lay wreaths at the Cenotaph. Kate, Duchess Camilla and Sophie, the Countess of Wessex, were standing at the private box, above the Cenotaph. It looks like Sophie and Kate are wearing the same McQueen coat? And Camilla’s ruffles are a bit gaudy for such a solemn event. The Queen looked perfect though. The Queen is amazing. Everyone fell all over themselves talking about the Queen’s bravery for being on the ground considering all of the terrorism warnings.

As for Kate and William, they probably added yet another event to their grueling schedule!

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are to attend next week’s Royal Variety Performance, historically the most dreaded event on the royal calendar. Prince Charles dutifully relieved the Queen of the ordeal several years ago, but has now passed the baton. Who could blame him?

Still, I trust William fulfils his duties with better humour than on his trip to Malta in September, after he was drafted in at the last minute when his wife cancelled with morning sickness. Says my source: ‘William had wanted to go to his friend Charlie Gilkes’s wedding in Italy that weekend. He spent most of the trip in a strop.’

[From The Daily Mail]

“He spent most of the trip in a strop.” What is he, five? Who do you think is the fussier baby, Prince George or Prince William? My money is on William. And I think it’s very interesting that more and more this year, The Daily Mail’s “sources” have been calling him out for his temper tantrums and moodiness.

PS… The Queen’s coat was pretty fabulous too, right? I’m assuming it was made by her long-time dresser Angela Kelly. And I love how the Queen is wearing #AllThePoppies.

wenn21907591

wenn21907593

wenn21908454

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

239 Responses to “Duchess Kate wears black McQueen for Remembrance Sunday: lovely?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Mia V. says:

    I don’t wanna be rude, but Kate looks older than Camilla, this make-up is doing nothing for her. And as usual, the Queen looks amazing.

    • Jessica says:

      No. I don’t particularly like Kate either, but there is no way Kate looks older than Camilla. No offense to Camilla, but Kate doesn’t have as many wrinkles and her skin isn’t as saggy.

      • Mia V. says:

        Obviously she doesn’t have as many wrinkles and saggy skin, but in the eye area she looks way older.

    • Goats on the Roof says:

      Kate certainly isn’t aging well and her heavy makeup does her no favors, but it is a huge stretch to say she looks older than Camilla! I just don’t see it.

      • BengalCat2000 says:

        I rarely read anything about this family but I am surprised that Kate looks so much older than her years. I’m ten years her senior and look younger, but I wear little make-up. I’ve noticed over the years that I can’t pull off much without looking like a drag queen. I think Kate is quite pretty and the heavy eyeliner and thick powder erase any semblance of her youth and beauty.

      • Chammy says:

        Kate looks older than her years. She is trying hard to feign some interest in the ceremony.
        Camilla looks younger than her years. She looks like she is fun to be around.

      • Pippa Mids says:

        Goats on the roof
        +1 on these threads

        In addition, Waity’s body language speak. Vols, just how little she is of the RF. She seem all about herself and not a ounce of sincere service and duty- just another dress up appearance for another occassion; she ‘can’t wait to leave’.

        Even PGTips would seem more sincere.

      • may23 says:

        So what if she does? Really, all people age differently. So what? Is it her duty to look like a spring chicken?

      • mayamae says:

        @Pippa Mids, who said “In addition, Waity’s body language speak. Vols, just how little she is of the RF. She seem all about herself and not a ounce of sincere service and duty- just another dress up appearance for another occassion; she ‘can’t wait to leave’.”

        I think you’re seeing what you want to see. In the top pic, Kate is leaning toward Camilla and they appear to be laughing together. In the second pic, it looks like they’re still laughing, and although it looks like Camilla is about to fall over drunk, I think she probably leaned over toward Sophie. In the third pic, they all look equally solemn. They are standing equidistance apart. She is not standing on her own, rolling her eyes, impatiently looking at her watch. It’s fine if you want to come to those conclusions in other photo opps, but here it’s just silly.

        Much of the criticism of Kate well-deserved, but this is just silly.

      • Chammy says:

        I would say that it is a huge improvement that Kate isn’t grinning and laughing as she did some time before at this event.
        Kate doesn’t really look interested. It looks more like “I have to pull a serious face” and “I don’t smile too much”. It just doesn’t look like interest or empathy. Also she doesn’t inspire me with dignity or gratitude which I would expect as it is an event to commemorate fallen soldiers. I think the Royals’ attendence is supposed to elevate the event and point out the importance of the commemoration and the importance of these historic events. Kate just doesn’t do that for me.

        All three of them are somewhat toned down in comparison to that time they seemed to have a jolly bloody good time at Remembrance Day.

    • Charlotte says:

      I don’t think she looks Camilla-aged, but she definitely looks older than her years. The media at large will need to change their angle when addressing her soon as she does not look (nor is she) the ingenue any longer.

      • Chris2 says:

        The balcony pics are food for thought about ageing. Kate and Sophie are perfect examples of something I wish I’d known as a teenager….cheekbones don’t age, but great prettiness when young is often fleeting. Not that Kate looks at all bad, good lord no, but imo Sophie has the long-lasting beauty, that was possibly felt to be plainness when she was a girl, when looking like a young Kate was a more common goal. Now she’s reaping the benefits of her particular beauty. (I know I’m projecting here, but still….)
        And regarding the undeniably ageing Camilla, who might look bad to quite young women reared on fear of wrinkles, I think her original face is still there, she too has good bones structure.
        (Believe me, past a certain age we don’t even notice wrinkles, we somehow see through them, or character/affection erases them. I always cite Mick Jagger….. to me he’s still the Mick of the late 60s, and wrinkles do not register)

      • mayamae says:

        @Chris2, I think of Kate and Sophie in reverse of the roles you do. I think Kate was the one who had a very common girl-next-door look, while Sophie came to prominence being touted as the next Princess Diana due to their similarities.

      • Chris2 says:

        Mayamae
        You’re probably right….as I say, I’m doubtless projecting, (and just on the subject of ageing).
        Kate had the more doll-like, girly prettiness that I yearned for 45 years ago….whereas I resembled Sophie rather closely, in hindsight. I’ve noticed that some, once soft, pretty faces seem to collapse with age (like Paul McCartney?) and others are literally kept taut (like Sophie and moi!) due to sharper angles. (What I meant was, I wish I’d known I’d one day be grateful for them!)

    • Jules says:

      The Duchess of Doing Nothing looks hard and cold and rough.

      • Juliette says:

        Something about her face and the way her sense of style is developing makes me think of Wallis Windsor. Not even meant in a snarky way, Wallis had great clothes… but whippet thin, angular to the point of harsh, with clothes always tailored closely to emphasize the slim boyish hips: all style moves from Wallis’s playbook.

      • sarah says:

        @Jules
        she looks rough for her age.

      • Pippa Mids says:

        +1000
        With all the papering and doolittle such roughness in more ways than one.

        All waiting for doolittle age appropiate behaviour /wardrobe – as a wife, mother, member of the RF, and service/ duty to HM, GB and it’s people with all the free pampering, shopping and more shopping

        PC POW kept looking up – to check Waity activity

    • Hautie says:

      To me Kate looks tired and has a serious case of pregnancy face*. Which unfortunately… happens to many girls. Once the pregnancy is over… your face returns to normal.

      The worst case of pregnancy face I have seen for a high profile girl… Jennifer Lopez.

      (*Where you have a slight doughy look to your features. Or even worse… your nose gets huge. Mother Nature really does have a jacked up sense of humor, to torture a pregnant lady!)

    • Carrie says:

      Are we looking at the same pictures?

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Seriously. That has to be one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read on here. Camilla looks 110, for one, frowsy old thing. Kate may look older than her years, but to say she looks older than Camilla is just absurd.

      • lisa says:

        i know, i wont disagree that kate has made some choices that age her, but i think camilla looks as old as QEII

        love #allthepoppies

      • mayamae says:

        @Carrie, I thought the same. You know I’m going to have to stop frequenting these threads. I am no Kate apologist. Her lack of work ethic, flasher moments, and superficial lifestyle, are valid criticisms. These comments are so over the top they make me angry.

        @GNAT, sing it sister. I try not to criticize Camilla’s looks – that’s what she looks like and she’s somehow been very confident of her appearance. I guess you could typically call her “handsome” if you’re being generous, but she looks hideous here. She looks like she’s about to fall over drunk in the second picture, and she could easily pass as the queen’s mother.

      • Suze says:

        Kate looks a little older than her chronological age, but she does not look older than Camilla by any means. She looks a bit tired, probably due to the pregnancy, but overall I think she looks attractive and restrained. I like her hat.

        I don’t think Camilla is hideous and she doesn’t look remotely drunk. Good grief. I also like her hat.

        They are both well dressed for the event. They are keeping the focus on the proceedings and not turning it into a fashion show.

    • Jegede says:

      I actually think her pregnancy makes her look younger

    • Sullivan says:

      IMHO, Kate does not look older than Camilla.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I think KM looks the same age as Sophie, not Camilla. Sophie’s 49, Kate Middleton is 32.

      I think the coats are similar but not the same. Sophie’s has vertical seams in the bust, which can be seen around the edges of the lapels. Both McQueen, different fabric, seasons, and seaming.

      • Angelique says:

        Agree with you about Kate looking older than Sophie. Sophie has not spent monthly vacations at the beach. She doesn’t smoke and she hasn’t lived the hard life of a royal booty-call.

        I think the coats are virtually the same but Kate has moved the buttons on hers to accommodate her ever-expanding waistline. You can see the fabric pulling at the buttons. Sophie’s coat lies flat in front, as it should.

    • puffinlunde says:

      Throwing up for months on end does not do wonders for your complexion

      • tracking says:

        Neither does smoking or sunworshipping.

      • wiffie says:

        True. I’m pregnant and always find my skin looks a bit more tired, eyes more tired, dehydrated so my skin is more crepey with more fine lines, etc. Doesn’t help it’s winter so it’s drier anyway. After I start getting more sleep after the first several months of baby being here, I start to look a bit more supple again, but it’s a solid 2 years of not “glowing”. Not everyone ” glows “.

    • Stacey says:

      When a sentence starts with “but” smh

      32-year-old Kate in no way looks older than 76-year-old Camilla. Kate is pregnant and has been suffering from severe hyperemesis gravidarum.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Since Camilla was born in 1947, claiming that she’s 76 is surely an exaggeration or a tongue-in-cheek comment. Actually her age is the reverse, 67.

  2. Mrs. Wellen Melon says:

    Cut that hair. At least so it brushes the shoulders.

    • AntiSocialButterfly says:

      She would look great in a bob, especially one angled so the front is longer than the back. Whatever that style may be called.

      • Zimmer says:

        I think it’s called an elevated bob and I love that style too! I’ve never thought about it for Kate, but now I’ll have to consider it.

      • Goats on the Roof says:

        I think she should take a few inches off, but I’m not sure going that short would be a good look for her at all. She needs some length to soften her face.

      • wiffie says:

        Turn the dutchess into Kate gosselin?? That’s cruelty. No offense, it’s the mom-do that is already starting to look soooooo dated on most I see. Mr wiffie asked if there was a pact or contract that every Minnesota mom required that haircut. “Do they give it in labor and delivery?” Because it’s everywhere back in the Midwest when we visit, lol.

      • Lex says:

        Elevated bob?! No no it’s called the posh spice! Geez guys get it together

      • Hazel says:

        Used to be called the Sassoon (1960s), & the shingle (1930s)….

    • SamiHami says:

      Ugh…the elevated bob looks terrible on everyone. Kate’s hair is gorgeous…if anything, she should grow it longer. (full disclosure…I wear my hair very long and love it; I just don’t think women look good with short hair, except for Halle Berry. She’s beautiful even if she is batcrap crazy).

      • bluhare says:

        No it doesn’t. My hair does that style incredibly well and I got the most compliments ever when I got that hair cut. But I’m not famous, so maybe it doesn’t count. 🙂

      • Goats on the Roof says:

        Also not a fan of the elevated bob. I have yet to see one that I find flattering.

      • epiphany says:

        Agree, it’s hideous. It pushes all the hair into the face. Kate should stick with long hair – she just needs to style it.

      • emmie_a says:

        I totally disagree. An elevated bob looks great on a great majority of women.
        And for the person who thinks that horrible Kate Gosselin hairdo was an elevated bob — do you know what a bob is? It’s not a spiked mess.

      • Steph says:

        I think the elevated bob is more suited for petite cutesy women. I think Kate has gorgeous hair,she needs to do more stylish up dos and long styles that sweep her hair away from her face.

      • wiffie says:

        @emmiea i do know what a Bob is, yes. Before commenting, actually googled ELEVATED Bob to see what the hell that was and gasped in horror. It’s the Midwest mom do. Gosselin had the back on hers slightly higher up, but it’s the same damn cut. And it looked like ass in 2006 too. But to each her own.

      • Stephanie says:

        I think an elevated bob looks good on most women if their hair is naturally relatively straight (having to constantly straighten or wave curly hair will leave us with a fried mess way to quick). Someone said it’s for petite cutesy women but I disagree. Katie Holmes looked great with it. It elevated her to a woman while still looking sexy and fresh. Her and Kate have similar builds so I think Kate would look good with it.
        The problem I see with that is that it will be in her face. Many here have said that it’s very unprofessional that she is always touching her hair so this style would just add to it.

      • Jai says:

        I just did a search on Pinterest to make sure I knew which haircut was considered an elevated bob,. Yup, that’s what I call a Soccer Mom bob. Very few can pull it off and look sophisticated in my book. I too think Kate’s hair looks lovely, though I would like to see her try a few more up do’s as well. I’m not quite sure why she gets so much grief for her long hair, she’s 30 not 70.

  3. smee says:

    What a difference proper tailoring makes! Kate’s coat fits perfectly and Sophia’s loose fit totally hides the nice design of the same coat.

    • Hautie says:

      I don’t believe Sophia is wearing an actual McQueen coat. The material doesn’t look the same either. It looks to be a nice knock off to me.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Hautie•

        I agree, the material looks completely different but the lapels do look similar.

      • epiphany says:

        Ladyslippers,
        Are the British people aware that William is such a miserable pill? I realize the media coverage is designed to paint him in the best possible light, but I recall, as a child, that story after story of his parents’ marital problems were in the news in the U.S., despite the royals doing their best to sweep it under the rug. Is the situation with William in a similar vein, in that everyone in the UK knows the truth, but it’s not discussed by the media, or do the British people still think he’s a great guy?
        And I actually think the Queen has developed a tremendous charm as she’s gotten older.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •ephiphany•

        To be fair, he’s not always a pill. Honestly.

        And no, the British try really hard to frame their direct heirs/heiresses in the best light possible. So all William’s positive traits are stressed (he does have them) whilst his negative ones downplayed. There have been a few people willing to speak out (Google Richard Kay’s article from a few months ago. It appeared in the DM and it’s fantastic) but not many. And I do think it’s complicated by the fact that the BRF is unwilling to put their foot down when they need to — it IS a family business after all.

    • LAK says:

      They are wearing the same McQueen coat (based upon upper body view).

      The difference is that if you zoom into waist of Kate’s coat, you can see the remnants of the buttons she’s moved to accommodate her bump [bad tailor!!!]. Consequently, her coat appears to have bigger lapels instead of the tucked in lapels of the originally look ie Sophie’s coat.

      Zoom of Kate’s coat [thanks Royaldish.com]:

      http://i60.tinypic.com/2enc5km.jpg

      Sophie is also wearing a looser fit whereas Kate’s coat is skin tight.

      Note: McQueen make a version of this coat every winter in long and short lengths so it is possible they are wearing different coats bought in different seasons.

      However, as the lapels are the same, i’d wager that it is more likely that they are wearing the same coat from the same season. the only remaining question is which length they are wearing.

      PS: Kate and Sophie have taken to wearing McQueen lately. They have several items in different colours.

      • Megan says:

        HRHcountessofwessex says Sophie is wearing a shorter version in a shinier fabric.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •LAK•

        The material looks very different. Kate looks as if hers is a wool coat (colour is matte and ‘soft’ looking) wheras Sophie’s coat appears to be more woven, rain-coat like material that appears to be reflecting light. Wool doesn’t reflect light well but woven cotton can. That’s why I thought they were different coats because it appears to me they are made from different materials (and it never helps that Sophie is often overlooked).

      • LAK says:

        Thanks Megan.

        LS: I see the material difference, but it doesn’t take away from the fact that they are wearing the same coat. Sorry i’m a McQueen loonie. can spot their clothes a mile off.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •LAK•

        I’m not questioning the same design but the different materials for me make it a different coat.

        There’s a woman on Tumblr that also dabbled in the royal fandom — she too was a McQueen Loonie 😊 and taught me a lot! Can you post pics of both by chance? Thank you in advance. 😊☺️😊

      • notasugarhere says:

        I see vertical seams in the bust of Sophie’s coat, not in Kate Middleton’s. The seams are easier to see on Sophie’s because of the shiny fabric.

      • LAK says:

        Notasugar: you can’t see the seems on Kate’s coat due to the material and the fact that her lapels are covering the part where the seems are visible on Sophie’s coat. One can just about make out the bottom of the seem when you zoom in.

      • Ashley says:

        What Kate Wore says it is two different McQueen coats…

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Ashley•

        Thanks for the suggestion! I did look and they are essentially the same jacket — with a few tweaks.

        •LAK•

        Yup, I see it. I think the fact that Kate wears it too small and on Sophie it looks a touch too big plays into the jackets looking different. And, I like (more like LOVE) the version Kate is wearing. If I stop posting its because I’ve drowned in my own drool….

        *covets jacket*

      • Elizabeth R says:

        I’m just glad I’m not the only one debating the similarities / differences between the 2 coats! I quite like the slight sheen on the material of Sophie’s version, if only because it looks less likely to develop the little fuzz balls that seem to plague every wool-type coat I own.

        I’m also huge McQueen fan (Alexander-era anyway) and suspect I’ll be spending some time reviewing their archive now.

      • Olenna says:

        Some of you may enjoy this imaginative article from the Daily Fail:
        “The sartorial reinvention of Sophie: How the Countess of Wessex has become more stylish than ever (with a little help from Kate)”. The author claims Kate has professional help with her wardrobe, whereas Sophie does not.

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2828671/The-sartorial-reinvention-Countess-Wessex-Sophie-stylish-little-help-Kate.html#ixzz3IiOS3OLW

  4. Lilacflowers says:

    The Queen looks fabulous.. The Queen is fabulous.

    • Chris2 says:

      Lilacs
      I agree, what a dame. And Phil these days makes my heart ache…..he’s so (for him) frail but never lets us down at such occasions….he, like the Q, are inspiring when it comes to duty, imo….they’d be easily forgiven for taking more ease, for skipping a few appearances, but they never do. (I’ll never forget him and HMQ standing for many hours in the cold rain during the Jubilee Thames regatta thingy…..they wouldn’t sit down even for a moment, knowing we all wanted to gawk at them, but mainly out of respect for all the efforts put into the bash).
      It must have been incredibly hardgoing for those of his and HMQ’s age to keep a stiff upper lip yesterday, so very moving.
      And my beloved Camilla! I adored her outfit, she does this so well, and thought the ruffles quite as dignified/sober as those Harry had on his uniform.
      But jaysus weren’t the three ladies chilly about the neck? Brrr.

      • MinnFinn says:

        Chris2 – Thanks for the very poignant comments about QEII and Phil. There are good reasons for referring to their age group as the ‘greatest generation’. My next door neighbor is 88, and after visits with her I often think that age group could also be characterized as the ‘suck it up and do the right thing’ generation.

      • Chris2 says:

        Minn
        So true!
        My Ma, same age as HMQ, died not long ago, (all fine, she was very happy) and we’ve spent many jolly hours recalling her life and personality. But of course we didn’t know the young woman who lived through the Blitz, that huge chunk of life (just as it’s getting interesting!) under that appalling fear (and deprivation)…..but by heck it never ever came up! I’m damn sure if I’d been 18 or so then, I’d still be complaining about how it ruined my fun, no decent boys around etc etc.
        Yep, they are/were an extraordinary generation, and seeing Philip among those servicemen, with whom he truly has a noble bond, really chokes me. I hope we see him back again next year.

      • BooBooLaRue says:

        OMG I couldn’t agree more, I love talking to my 96 year old hospice patient — she is so cool and doesn’t even know it!

      • Elizabeth R says:

        Although late to this particular party / thread, I have to chime in to echo what you’ve all said re: The Queen & Prince Phillip. @Chris2, you’re not the only one
        touched by the significance and meaning of the events & what it must be like for Philip to stand out there in solidarity with the other service members.

        I’ve been so moved by this year’s commemorations of the centennial & this especially poignant Remembrance Day. I wish we had something more on the scale & significance of Remembrance Day in the US, Veterans Day just isn’t the same thing, and it feels like we’re missing something.

        The Telegraph had a good article about this year’s ceremony:
        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-one/11219546/Remembrance-Day-Silence-proves-more-powerful-than-terror.html

    • Megan says:

      Indeed! I love her poppy brooch.

    • Pippa Mids says:

      +1M

      HM is such role model! She is the best regal look for the past years RSunday.. And her 20s as Princess was an icon and style regalness and substance.

      Commenting on Waity seems we are always comparing the past appeance – flashing, too short, too common and lacking. As we sigh in relief – surely no style icon.

      DoC Countess has royal style.

  5. Dena says:

    Camillia looks like a fun, blowzy Madame with a bit of Victorian starch thrown in. Sophie looks like her daughter.

    I can’t / won’t comment on Kate’s clothes. I get it. It’s one of the few things (if only the thing) she brings to the public table, but I just can’t do it. Somehow, I feel it’s lowering to us all. If her clothes were incidental to what she does or says, then I’d comment. She’s so without substance & gives us nothing to comment on. I love clothes & fashion but with her it’s like we are reduced to trivialities.

    Anyway, I wonder if the whole coat dress “uniform” will change after the Queen dies. After all, it seems to me that it became her signature style sometime back and is an easy pattern to follow in order to avoid clothing-controversy when in her presence or at a shared event.

    PS: how many of u can say “NY here I come”? Cause I am sure Kate & staff are furiously shopping & packing.

    • AntiSocialButterfly says:

      ‘…a fun, blowzy madame…’

      This is perfect… one half cup of coffee in and I could only come up with “perpetual hot mess”.
      I guess you also more charitable, in addition to articulate, than I this morning!

      • Dena says:

        She is isn’t she? Big smile.

        I can’t figure out for the life of me whether she is simply a deep-chested woman (like myself) who she isn’t “corseted” correctly OR if she just wears loose, low-hanging bras. Her bust (I wanna say rack) just hangs loose and low in in about every picture I’ve seen of her. Hard to explain that, but in the outfit pictured and in my imagination, she looks like someone from a bygone era. For the sake of an example, let’s just call her Ms. Kitty–Ms. Kitty, who claims a fake English pedigree (aristocracy) and who has come to the American West and opened a cat house. Sophie, her uptight and repressed daughter, stands to inherit the business. Can’t you just see Camillia/Ms. Kitty, with her feathered hat, hanging out the window of a stagecoach, fluttering a hanky and going you-who to what looks to be the town’s sheriff.

        . . . or perhaps I’ve gotten carried away. Smile.

      • Chris2 says:

        Dena
        I love that story of the Wild West!
        Camilla’s always been very heavy-busted and low-slung…she was fairly droopy even when quite young, before her children, and those were days of possible bralessness (ouch) and horseriding. Maybe the kind of bra that would ‘lift and separate’ now feels too constricting? I meself think she looks a lot more, erm, pulled together than, say, ten years ago, so I imagine she has some pretty fancy and possibly Edwardian-style corset items in her boudoir!

      • bobslaw says:

        First thought when I saw her blouse/jacket was that it reminded me of Penny Husbands Bosworth from Bridget Jones in her “tarts and vicars” costume:

        http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsB/1596-25626.gif

      • bobslaw says:

        My first thought when I saw Camilla’s outfit was of Penny Husbands Bosworth and her “tarts and vicars” costume from Bridget Jones:

        http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsB/1596-25626.gif

      • Pippa Mids says:

        Dena

        Hot mess!’ let’s not go there for our sexy POW and his beloved DoC.

        Remember they just return from Tours this week in two countries- with approx 60 events and no months of vacation.

    • Megan says:

      Dena – this a gossip blog. Clothes/fashion are the stuff of gossip. We’re here to debate the gossip, not the big issues.

    • LadySlippers says:

      •Dena•

      My opinion? I think Kate chooses to model HM because it’s easier for her. As I stated below, I don’t think Kate is a big fan of fashion and often goes with safe choices and a coat dress is very safe. So I don’t think we’ll see a change in clothing anytime soon.

      • Dena says:

        LS:
        Thanks.

        And I think you are on to something. The coatdress is an easy pattern to follow. Kate doesn’t have any real work experience, so she can’t pull from her own experience of seeing the images of professional women who would have surrounded her (if she had worked in the types of fields calling for professional dress–that is) and she probably shouldn’t want to cause controversy (but does) where her clothes are concerned–especially when “working.”

        Re: your post below, speaking for myself, I think in part what I do find irksome about Kate is that she appears to be a subservient follower and/or easily accepts being told where to be (stay at your Mom’s house until I call you), what to do, and how to do it without any push-back. Some people may call that being a supportive spouse or person. I call it something else. To me, she always appears lifeless and/or stunted somehow (growth, development, experience). Big Willy comes across that way too–stunted.

        I have a couple of co-workers who remind me of Kate. They hide and are allowed to hide (behind husbands, friends, bosses, etc.). When I or anyone points it out, we are just “mean-girl-bitches.”

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Dena•

        To make matters worse — her PA Rebecca Deacon came over from Sentebale to work for Kate. And at least in the US, non-profits are not as professionally dressed, as say, someone from the government or a financial institution. And Kate worked for Jigsaw (fashion) and her parents — both of which have very different dress requirements than a conservative institution like a monarchy.

        The more I read about Kate, the more I see that she’s very family focused and willing to let William lead. Not bad things, it just leaves a lot of us underwhelmed after Diana. And now Camilla.

      • Dena says:

        But that’s just it . . . I don’t compare her to Diana. I’m willing to let Kate be Kate and to tell us who she is . . . but as you said . . .

        . . . the more I see that she’s very family focused and willing to let William lead . . .

        Somehow that ‘s very disappointing but shouldn’t be. U know?

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Dena•

        For better or worse (and it’s honestly both) Diana irrevocably changed the BRF. If Kate had married into The Family pre-Diana, her work numbers now are really on par with most Royals had before Diana. When Diana realised her marriage wasn’t what she thought it was going to be — she threw herself headlong into another relationship (with The Cad) and her charity work. She single handledly created the ‘competition’ we see today with the Royals (it was there but NOTHING like what it turned into). And upped the glamour of the institution. An example of number of engagements, even Anne had numbers in the 200’s in the early 80’s, now she clocks in at around 600. So honestly, you can’t escape Diana’s shadow.

        I’m on a quest to learn more about Kate. I’m very serious and there isn’t ANY snark in my statement. I want to see what makes Kate Kate. She’s probably a very nice person just not in the best place (ie BRF) to highlight her strengths.

      • MinnFinn says:

        LS – I hope you will share some links along the way as you research the real Kate.

      • Chris2 says:

        LadyS, Minn
        Good luck on your quest! (So Arthurian-sounding)
        I’ve a horrid feeling that, to quote whoever it was (Gertrude Stein?), “There is no ‘there’ there”. I hope that’s wrong though.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •MinnFinn•

        I find books to be better than websites — WAY more in depth.

    • bluhare says:

      Dena, will you marry me?

      • LAK says:

        wait, what happened to our marriage. are we in divorce court? *pouts in corner*

      • Chris2 says:

        Very sad news LAK
        If you are mentioned in tomorrow’s ‘divorce-fest’ in Grazia, we’ll know it ‘must’ be true.
        🙁

      • LAK says:

        Oh noes Chris2. The inlaws won’t be happy to find my name in that bastion of truth aka Grazia gazette. Must hold onto this marriage, ignore summons, obvious public flirtations la la di da.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •LAK•

        We can run off to an island paradise and ignore the real world! It’s worked for others, why not you? Besides, the Midwest is going to get Arctic temps this week, so I’m all for the sun. I MEAN helping you in your time of need. Yup. That’s it.

      • Dena says:

        Bluhare:

        If only you are willing to pay off my student loans!!!! I have one that I think is older than any child I would have had by this time. LOL.

      • LAK says:

        Ladyslippers: I hear Mustique is nice this time of year. Those nice people from Jigsaw (trade! Quelle Horror!) are having difficulty in their marriage so Hibiscus might be up for grabs soon.

      • bluhare says:

        We’ll all move to Utah, LAK. 🙂

  6. Abigail says:

    I guess this makes me a Kate-apologist, but I don’t fault her for her light work schedule. I think she does appearances she is told to do when she is told to do them. I don’t think she’s exactly gunning for a bigger role, but she would do it if she had to. I DO fault William for his/their light work schedule and general attitude. He doesn’t have any of the natural charm of his mother or brother — that’s not his fault. But his father and grandmother don’t have that natural charm either (which is why Diana outshone them all), and they still seem to work quite hard. If William is so ambivalent about royal life, he is free to abdicate. Otherwise, stop complaining and do your job. (It’s what everyone else in the world does.)

    • LadySlippers says:

      •Abigail•

      William leads — no question about that. And I agree, Kate follows and while I find it frustrating, it’s how their partnership works, and has from early on.

      As for abdication, only a Sovereign can do that. Anyone else needs a law put in place to remove themselves from the Line of Succession, so it’s not as easy as it looks. I for one, think a law should be in place for that purpose.

    • puffinlunde says:

      What do you mean abdicate? Only the monarch can abdicate. William is not even first in line to accede to the throne – his father has been “King in Waiting” for over 60 years – since Charles was 3 and is now 65. So William knows well that given his family’s longevity that he is unlikely to be King for another 25-35 years.

      It would not surprise me at all if William and Kate have been told to stay more in the background by his father who doesn’t want a younger royal to be more popular. It is clear from the Diana days that Charles dislikes competition for attention – Charles is also desperate to have Camilla accepted as Queen and it is clear that she is being placed in a larger role. A few years ago when William was doing more and very popular there was talk of skipping Charles – suddenly a lot of anti-William articles appeared – I wonder why?

      • notasugarhere says:

        For the millionth time W&K set their own schedules. Palace is on record stating it. Charles it NOT holding them back. If he was holding people back based on popularity, Harry would be permanently confined to a cement bunker in the Middle East.

        Charles NEEDS them to be popular. If they are popular, more people *may* be willing to have Charles as king for a short reign. If W&K are unpopular, the whole thing ends with HM’s death.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •puffinlunde•

        I’m going to have to strenuously agree with •notasugarhere•.

        The Monarchy NEEDS people to be popular in order to stay in business. NEEDS not wants. And QEII allows people enormous latitude to find their feet as a Royal. Other than a few mandatory engagements (like Trooping the Colour and Remembrance Day) — ALL
        British Royals create and follow their own schedule.

      • Megan says:

        The veracity of palace statements is always called into question on this site. If you don’t believe their statement about Kate having HG, why believe their statement that they set their own schedules?

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Megan•

        Great question!

        Because ‘the Royals set their own schedule’ and ‘HM giving a lot of latitude’ is backed up by numerous quotes made from various royal sources, over the decades. Essentially the PR statements are back up with named, quoted sources over a great length of time.

        Its a matter of finding support (in this case quotes) to verify the press statements that makes a huge difference.

      • notasugarhere says:

        It is also a direct statement on record to a reporter in response to a direct question (re. setting schedules) vs. Palace PR spin.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •notasugarhere•

        Not only that, virtually every book I’ve read on the BRF, whether on individual members or as a whole, states the members themselves are essentially self-employed. IF people choose to investigate — its repeated quite often.

      • LAK says:

        Megan: I add to Ladyslippers’s salute. That is indeed a great question.

        And back what Notasugar and she said ie every other senior courtier/interested or uninterested party, reporters, biographers and the royals themselves in documentaries about the workings of the Monarchy have reiterated the fact that they are self employed. Charles, Anne, Andrew, Harry are all on the most recent diamond jubilee documentary repeating this statement.

        In the case of the HG, a statement was put out initially, and a month out, the wording describing her condition had changed.

        Currently, despite that initial statement, every reporter is going out of their way to remark on how well and robust Kate looks in person and how there is no sign of illness.

        So in this case, Palace put out a statement, and have downgraded it as it’s not true.

        Sometimes they make a statement which is found to be a lie, but they don’t retract the original statement eg WK pulling out of Paralympics for RAF/Asian tour prep respectively only to be found vacationing in France!!!

      • Megan says:

        Is there anything more “on the record” than a public statement?

    • Ayyy says:

      ITA. I feel that if HM,PP or Chuck wanted WK to pull up their socks, they would’ve done so by now. Chuck has said that he wished he had more time with his mom and dad, I feel like he wants them to focus on family b4 duty at this point in time. When they become the Wales family of course more duties will expected from him.

      • ABKM says:

        I’m not sure I entirely buy that, but then I’m not convinced that W&K actually spend a lot of time with George. I might believe that the elder royals were holding the Cambridges back from working hard if either of the couple had ever shown an inclination for hard work before. Neither has, including Kate before their marriage, when she was a private citizen and free to set her own schedule. Given the track record of her siblings, it doesn’t look like the Middletons exactly instilled a strong work ethic in their kids.

  7. Nene says:

    It’s ok I guess.
    To be honest I find it difficult to distinguish her outfits from each other, they all look the same to me.
    This might come across as TMQ(too much question) but I want to know, is there a dress code for Kate, aside from being formal? Like she must always wear coats or coat-like dresses all the time. Isn’t there room for versatility in her fashion choices?
    Like say a well-tailored suit, dress pants and classy blouses, skirt suits, formal, well-made,fashionable gowns, etc

    • LadySlippers says:

      •Nene•

      Royal protocol for dress probably has guidelines (ie look professional and appropriate for each occasion you attend) to follow but makes allowances for personal taste. HM, Anne, Diana, Sarah, Sophie, Birgitte, Katie, Marie-Christine, and Alexandra all have very different preferences when it comes (came) to dress style. And it shows.

      I think Kate copies HM with the coat dress because it simplifies her choices. I know this has been debated, but I don’t think Kate really likes or understands fashion. She tolerates it because it’s required of her — nothing more, nothing less. Hence her ‘uniform’ that resembles HM.

    • MinnFinn says:

      BP palace website says “Today there is no official dress code.” http://www.royal.gov.uk/latestnewsanddiary/factfiles/40factsaboutbuckinghampalace.aspx

      But there does seem to be an unofficial code BRF members adhere to when they make official appearances. Brits correct my errors.
      1. Hosiery for certain types of events for BRF members. Also for guests at BP events. IIRC some celeb saying they were told (how or by whom IDK) to wear hosiery to a BP event. Also lots of media discussion about Kate wearing hosiery to all her official appearances in Canada.
      2. Closed toe shoes – again for certain events but I’m not sure what those are
      3. Hats for anything at a church plus specific other events
      4. No shorts for any official appearance – Eg Even in the Bahamas, Harry wore long track pants for his race with Bolt.

    • MinnFinn says:

      There’s also a detailed dress code for Royal Ascot even for those who aren’t sitting in the Royal Enclosure.
      http://www.ascot.co.uk/dress-code

  8. J-G says:

    I think Kate still looks tired. I wonder if she’s still having some rough patches with her pregnancy.

    • Nur says:

      Well, I still do at 16 weeks and I think we are quite close in timing. Some days I feel better and some days I wanna take a gun to my head or throw myself off the balcony to make the misery stop. She looks worse here than the day before. I dont know if its the make-up or if she is having a bad day but could be the latter.

    • FLORC says:

      She always looks like this. And by large her morning sickness is non-existent. That comes from many who report on the royals via reliable sources.
      No barfy.

      • Elise says:

        Wait! What?!? She hasn’t been vomiting? I thought she had HG or severe morning sickness and that is why she had to cancel and/or decrease her scheduled appearances.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Elise•

        The official line was yes, Kate had HG. However, many Royal watchers question that as Kate appears to have virtually no symptoms of HG. And mind you, the weight loss required of HG is very noticeable, as is the haggard appearance. So….who knows?

        (Most don’t question she might have had morning sickness but it appears as it’s just regular morning sickness not severe, life threatening HG. And concerning the hospitalisation required for George’s pregnancy, that’s likely due to Norovirus, which she was exposed to in her last engagement prior to being admitted. She was up and at ’em only three weeks later. Rare with HG, rare but not unheard of.)

      • Wren33 says:

        I find it harder to believe that the hospital and palace spokespeople are all lying about a very specific medical diagnosis, and announcing her pregnancies early as part of a PR game. Unless I see evidence that they are all lying, I would take their word over the word of a bunch of people who just think “she doesn’t look sick enough”.

      • Chris2 says:

        Wren
        Me too
        🙂

      • Red Snapper says:

        There’s been no confirmation by actual medical professionals about the HG diagnosis. The *media* called it HG last time, and KP just kept quiet. This time KP called it HG from the get go. No doctors have confirmed or denied. HG was a terrific excuse for Kate to get out of doing things she didn’t want to do, but still show up for the glamorous galas and red carpet events.

        The royal reporters are onto this with much shade. Rebecca English at the Fail started to call it “ante-natal sickness” weeks ago. Now when they talk about HG they phrase it so (if you read carefully) that it’s KP who’s calling it that, not them.

        It’s appalling. It’s an injustice to actual HG sufferers who don’t look the picture of health a few weeks later.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Wren33, it is her actions that do not back up the HG diagnosis, which has been gone over multiple times in these threads. First pregnancy: HG “diagnosis” coming 48 hours after she visited a school where novovirsus was rampant. Driving herself past multiple hospitals to the one where Tanna was waiting, when most HG suffers cannot be in a car without hurling much less driving the car. Multiple vacations. Second pregnancy: Gaining weight instead of losing 10% of her body weight. Okay to shop, not okay to work, etc.

        It is her actions, not the look of her face, that makes many people question the HG party line.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Wrenn33•
        •Chris2•

        Unfortunately the press offices for the various royals HAVE been known to…well lie. People were told for years that Diana and Charles were fine until they couldn’t lie to anyone anymore. Same with William’s obvious reluctance to take on full-time Royal duties. It IS boring (one valid excuse) but they keep sugar-coating the obvious — he doesn’t want to step up to the plate.

        I think that with Kate’s first pregnancy, the docs put out the possibility it was HG, and the palace ran with it. I don’t think anyone intentionally lied but it was awkward to backtrack once the official statement was made. And if you google the diagnostic criteria for HG, major weight loss is one of the things used to even diagnose it. •Florc• as a nurse has stated they now run tests but results can still be due to other reasons (Norovirus being one). How is anyone going to achieve major weight loss required for a diagnosis of HG within hours of throwing up?

        The hard part with the second pregnancy is she was sometimes seen out and about — again, not typical of people that need IV fluids, anti-nausea meds, and sometimes feeding tubes — just to maintain weight or keep the losses to a minimum.

        So it’s more than just a few people thinking she doesn’t look ‘sick enough’.

      • Chris2 says:

        This is already thrashed out most thoroughly so I can’t add anything, but one thing that stands out is the regular mention of ‘reliable sources’….. so often turning out to be that well-known purveyor of untruth, rush-to-judgement, and sulphurous discord, the Daily Fail. For that reason alone one holds one’s nose around many apparently ‘reliable’ reports. Their (the DM’s) intentions are tainted, imo.
        (Whatever the case is, if DofC is over the worst of it, whether minor or major sickness, then hooray.)

      • notasugarhere says:

        Chris2, trouble is, the Palace cannot control twitter and cell phones. Even when her RPOs try, the general public is often the ones catching her shopping and outing her online.

      • Chris2 says:

        LadyS
        Our posts crossed…Yes of course we know all about palace spin etc. (Jeez it was obvious, re C&D, right from the start, and I’d say the majority never take any notice of royal news anyway, fibs or obviously true.)
        Don’t wish to drag out an old discussion, just unwilling to be sold a dogmatic ‘fact’ from not exactly disinterested sources.
        But ….. 🙂 🙂 🙂

        Edit: Notasugar…..Lord I know! But still, though I’m far from a Kate fan, I’m not happy with this tupe of medical diagnosis. Shall zip it now!

      • Wren33 says:

        I am willing to believe that her PR people lie about things, but I just think there is a difference between shading something and lying about a specific medical diagnosis, which is a bit ballsy. I am in the childbearing phase of my life and hang out on boards with a variety of people who have or have had HG, and some of them are still working. Someone will go into the hospital for a day to get rehydrated, and then are back out again with a Zofram prescription. Sometimes they have to be readmitted for another day down the road, but they aren’t totally incapacitated for weeks on end, mostly because the people I know have other kids and need to be up and about taking care of them. You also can’t tell just be looking at a picture what someone’s weight or medical history is. I can entertain the fact that this is some vast spin, but there is certainly no real evidence beyond armchair diagnosis.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Chris2•

        Normally I’d be right there with you. Honestly. But what I know both personally and professionally doesn’t jive with her diagnoses for either pregnancy. And if I’m wrong — then I’m wrong. I’m not ‘wedded’ to my ideas and get there might be something we don’t know. Again, I totally understand I might be wrong but am comfortable enough with what I know to at least question the diagnosis.

      • Chris2 says:

        LadyS
        Thanks dahlink…..and I wasn’t lungeing at ‘you’ anyway, more yelling into the void, as it were. And as ever, your comments are fair-minded anyway.

      • LAK says:

        Wren33: this is the royal family we are talking about. Ballsy is their middle name. There have been numerous examples of the statements they put out not matching the reality for centuries. And yes, medical diagnosis too.

        Kate was admitted to the hospital mid morning, and by mid afternoon she’d been diagnosed with HG.

        Have you ever heard of Prince John? 5th son of George V? He was born with epilepsy and possibly autistic. Kept away from the public once his condition became problematic. To this day, few people beyond history Buffs and or Royal Loonies (probably the same thing) know about him.

        What about the monstrous lies about Wallis eg that she had learnt sexual tricks in Chinese brothels and that’s why she had David enthralled.

        Months of media black out regarding David and Wallis affair despite the rest of the world knowing about it.

        Nevermind the grand daddy of liars, Henry 8 who put it about that he wasn’t married to wife 1, wife 2 was an incestuous Harlot, wife 3 pure as the driven snow, he was tricked into Wife 4, OK he had just cause for wife 5, though given that she was an immature teenager he had no business going there, and wife 6 was only lucky she outlived him.

        Now, i’m not saying everything the Palace says is a lie, but they’ve been known to put out deflection statements and or outright lies to maintain an image.

        They rely on people believing everything they put out to be the truth.

      • Chris2 says:

        LAK…great post
        Never mind about the HG brouhaha on here…..but does anyone really pay much attention to Palace pronouncements? For the very reasons you cite, aren’t they largely dismissed if dealing with anything in any way contentious?
        (The dogs in the street knew about Charles and Di just by looking at them).
        What trips me up on here is the apparent assumption that most of Britain is agog for royal news snippets. I reckon the overwhelming, day to day attitude is one of apathy, flickering into degrees of interest for big bashes. Certainly my own family regard my comparatively undetailed interest as a dirty secret, akin to solitary drinking!
        Of course TV coverage shows millions lining the Thames/Mall/Balmoral lanes etc, of whom I’d be one….but we’ve a huge population, and I think most are very unbothered indeed.
        You’d know better than me, as I have my head in the sand, and anyway I’m just rambling, not proposing a diversion to the thread)
        🙂

      • LAK says:

        Chris2: unless there is ‘breaking news’ or some such headline on the evening news, most people don’t pay attention to Palace statements and even then, they assume it wouldn’t be ‘breaking news’ unless it was true.

        However, the Palace keeps a veritable stable of royal reporters employed and plants titbits in various papers on an ongoing basis such that an image begins to emerge. It’s somewhat Kardashian in that I bet neither you or I know what a Kardashian is nor have we watched a full episode of their show, but through continuous drip feed on information/headlines in tabloids like DM, we are very familiar with them. And they’ve managed to saturate the UK despite not being on a major channel or even having a visible presence here. So too the Palace and the image of the royals.

        I have so many friends who will swear blind that Kate is extremely hard working whilst holding down the fort at KP and is best chums with Brenda and loved by all. All because of stories planted in the papers that they skim read.

        When they take the time to pay attention, they are appalled. That 4hr Jubilee boat was an eye opener for a start. Lots of ‘….but I thought they loved her, why is everyone ignoring her? why is William so grumpy and sour faced….’

        As long as the public is apathetic and not paying attention, the Palace will continue to push the image it wants to push.

      • Chris2 says:

        LAK
        Thanks! Excellent point about the Kardashians; I don’t even have a TV but have formed opinions about them just as you outline.
        Also I shall never forget that you yourself warned me, pretty much on my first thread-foray here, that getting my royal gen from Hello was decidedly unsound! My feelings then were of enjoyment of the Cambridges….but months here have eliminated that (through very informed debates which have taught me a lot) and now I just skip over them, pretty much, and stick with my oldies.
        As you say, apathy is useful in its own way, and we’re a pretty unrevolutionary lot anyway.
        But truly I think social discourse is much less concerned with the monarchy than it was thirty years ago, as other topics have taken over. It just doesn’t get political-minded people as agitato as it used to.
        I’ve said before that I do sense a creeping shift towards a newly-wrought monarchy, with Charles, as its many benefits are acknowledged and the question of expense and equality weighed anew by a younger generation for whom 60s/70s radicalism is an alien notion. Hope so anyway!
        🙂

      • bluhare says:

        I always wondered what those Chinese brothel tricks were. 🙂

      • FLORC says:

        Elise/wren
        HG is a tricky thing here. I’ll keep it short since this has all been covered at length before.
        She might have been borderline or just over on a few test results needed for the diagnosis, but I doubt it was for long.

        I also have an image in my head of KP getting notified of Kate admitting herself into the hospital after a very long drive there. Passing atleast 2 hospitals only to enter in the building’s side entrance where Tanna was perched. Anyway, KP sound out the same time we did and maybe googled severe morning sickness getting HG as a result.
        The HG association came within an hour of Kate admitting herself and HG does not get diagnosed that fast.
        There’s chronic and acute. What she had was not acute since she was seen shopping, eating, happily out and about during her too sick to work time.

        It just doesn’t add up at all. Her weight gain and speedy recovery over a short period of time is tough to believe.
        I dont doubt she had morning sickness. That’s all though.

  9. Beatrice says:

    All I can see is a sea of buttons–Button Fest.

    Yes, the Queen looks fabulous!

  10. Talie says:

    Can you imagine if they actually reported all of the times William acted a fool? He’d be on an Ariana Grande level, I’m sure. May be time for TMZ to open up a London bureau.

    • India Andrews says:

      It would be so much fun to read about William’s actual behavior. We only have little hints of it like when he was photographed grabbing a girl’s breast in a nightclub photo.

  11. Goats on the Roof says:

    Is the number of poppies worn of some significance, or is it personal choice? I notice Camilla is wearing several as well.

    • Size Does Matter says:

      I was wondering the same. Are poppies tied to age or rank? Or maybe number of children?

    • LadySlippers says:

      Nope.

      The size of poppy, number of flowers, and choice of material are all strictly personal preference.

      • puffinlunde says:

        It looks as though Kate is wearing a ceramic poppy brooch – like the ones at The Tower of London whereas Camilla has made a bunch of the paper poppies secured with what looks like a regimental insignia. It is possible that Camilla chose 3 poppies to remember specific people who died in War – she came from a Military family

      • notasugarhere says:

        KM is wearing a pin given to her in AU/NZ, a reproduction Fabergé anemone flower which is NOT a poppy. Yes, Rebecca Deacon should have told her that. Maybe the person who gave it to her as a gift thought it was a poppy too. (Note the irony of it being Fabergé).

      • LadySlippers says:

        •notasugarhere•

        Have links by chance?

      • notasugarhere says:

        LS, the links are getting caught. It is on both Diana’s Jewels and What Kate Wore. If you search “Kate Middleton anemone pin” you’ll find it in the first handful of results.

      • Kori says:

        Camilla had 3 great-uncles who died in WW1. I don’t know if that relates at all though. Her grandfather only became Baron because of the deaths of his 3 older brothers in that conflict–very sad for the family.

      • LAK says:

        Notasugar: Faberge??!!!! LOL.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •notasugarhere•

        Speechless. I’m totally speechless. On any other day or event a symbol usually isn’t THAT important. But that’s not true for this — close but not quite just simply doesn’t cut it.

        Sorry, I know I’m harsh but I am a veteran’s daughter (father was in Vietnam), a veteran’s niece twice over (paternal uncle was navy while maternal aunt was national guard), a veteran’s sister, and most important a Navy spouse for 16 years (while married he went to Afghanistan). Yeah, this matters.

        (The Fabergé aspect is just too awesome for words!)

      • notasugarhere says:

        My nicer guess would be, the giver (a military wife) didn’t know it was an anemone despite the packaging stating it was part of the Fabergé Russian Imperial Crimson Anemone collection. KM wore it for ANZAC day the day after she received it. Maybe the giver told her it was a poppy, maybe she didn’t.

        Like the wrong national dress worn in the wrong country during another tour – this is why you’re supposed to listen to the courtiers. Let’s hope someone gets it straight next year.

      • Chris2 says:

        Wow Notasugar
        Don’t know how to feel re the anemone. Instinct recoils, like LadySlippers, as my beloved grandad fought in WW1.
        But surely to god the brooch was okayed by HMQ as acceptable, because of some aspect that met with approval, beyond similarity?
        If not, and Kate was solely responsible, then I do mark that down as a black mark indeed.
        (I know I’d not do it, it is a poppy or nothing)

      • notasugarhere says:

        HM doesn’t check Kate Middleton’s clothing, as much as the tabloids would have us believe otherwise. W&K were required to claim the brooch as a gift, and someone would have researched where it came from, the name, value etc. At some point during that, the fact that it is an anemone not a poppy would have been figured out and noted.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Chris2•

        Clothing isn’t ‘approved’ by anyone. HM and company assume you can conduct yourself appropriately and dress professionally. In the beginning, new spouses are taught protocol and such, but that’s done by courtiers, ladies-in-waiting and such.

        •notasugarhere• you are probably correct as it was from a medal recipient in Australia. However, Kate has the resources to know if it’s a poppy vs an anemone. And she probably wore it with the best intentions but. But. But. It’s not a poppy.

        It’s not a poppy.

        (Kudos to her for wearing a gift from a tour. Often those get locked in a drawer and forgotten).

  12. sigh((s)) says:

    At least this one doesn’t have nipple buttons. They all look nice.

  13. Tig says:

    I love the coat- as far as her looking “older”- remember, it’s a solemn occasion. Almost everyone looks younger/livlier when they are smiling- even the oldertrons!

  14. Zombie Shortcake says:

    Is she wearing white poppies?

  15. Tiffany says:

    OT- Why is Philip walking ahead of the Queen. I thought she lead and everyone follows.

    • LadySlippers says:

      •Tiffany•

      Good question. I thought it was the angle (could be) but it appears as if HM is giving him some side-eye. So can’t tell you! Lol

      • LAK says:

        He is and He isn’t. It’s the formation of where they’ll eventually stand to face the Cenotaph.

        They come out of a side entrance in perfect ranking formation, but Philip needs to walk slightly further than everyone so they all hit their marks at exactly the right moment behind HM.

        The 1st line behind HM in ranking formation is Philip, Charles, William and Edward [i think it was Edward not Andrew, can’t be bothered to google check]. behind them is DoK and other members of the royal family with military honours.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •LAK•

        Thank you! Knowing how meticulously these things are planned I figured there was some logical explanation. And you provided it. 😊

  16. LadyJane says:

    Kate is either smiling or pursing her lips. I think the pursed lips thing she does is what is making her look so old. She had resting ‘bitchface’. I think she might want to work on a pleasant expression that isn’t a smile, but isn’t a smug, tight-faced wince either. Just a suggestion to the royal facial expression advisors.

  17. Jaded says:

    At least she’s not grinning vapidly and twirling her hair like last year….

  18. Montréalaise says:

    Aw, poor little Wills was in a bad mood during the official visit to Malta because he had to go to work instead of going to the fun event he’d been looking forward to? He just doesn’t get it, does he? His parents, his grandparents and great-grandparents all have/had a tremendous sense of duty and work ethic (we won’t mention his great-great-uncle, the one who ran off with an American divorcée). He lives a life of tremendous unearned privilege, yet he sulks whenever he has to actually do something to show that he deserves that privilege. He and Kate are perfectly matched in that way.

  19. Eleonor says:

    I really like Camilla hats game!

  20. kri says:

    The sheer badassery of The Queen and Prince Phillip is amazing to behold. Kate looks 50, ffs. Who is doing her face?! Thank god for that coat, though. A masterpiece. If I had the money, I would have that coat. Dammit, my foundation game is way better, and I’m a peasant.

  21. neve says:

    would kill to know what Camilla is saying in that second picture- she looks like the witch from disney’s ‘Sword in the Stone’ hehe

  22. FingerBinger says:

    Camilla looks like she’s had a few drinks.

    • wolfpup says:

      No wonder she always looks pleasant and ready to laugh at a good joke.

    • LAK says:

      She probably has.

      Fun fact: the QM was so wedded to her drink that it’s estimated she was often sozzled when she appeared for her engagements in later life.

      It makes me giggle because people often commented on her lovely smile, expression and it is probably because she was sozzled!!!

    • mayamae says:

      I don’t think she was drunk, but I think she looks like it in the second pic. I said so upthread, and got slapped down for it.

      • bluhare says:

        I think she’s been sick; wasn’t it a sinus infection? Some of those antihistamine/decongestant things can make a person a bit woozy.

      • mayamae says:

        You’re probably right. She usually looks better than this. It could possibly be the black, some people can’t wear the colour in a flattering way.

  23. BooBooLaRue says:

    I for one have never understood a coat dress. Someone please explain why I would want to wear one?

    • Chris2 says:

      LAK territory….
      I dunno myself, I assume it’s a combination of a dress & coat in the same fabric and idiom, where the coat is a little shorter than the dress. For smart occasions, the coat staying on, like a jacket.

      • Dena says:

        Hi, BooBooLaRue:

        If you are stateside, think of a twinset sweater ala JC Penney. Like LS said, it’s easy, no fuss, versatile in a plain way, and professional. I just wonder if the preference for it will gradually fade when QEII passes on to her reward. Victoria of Sweden, and other “royal” women, have a much more modern look. So, I’m wondering if the women (Sophie’s age and downward) will continue to wear that type of ensemble.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Sometimes Victoria stuns in a good way (Napoleonic Elie Saab for the Nobels), sometimes in a very bad way (black dress that looks like a feathered lamp shade). She’s still one of my favorites though!

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Victoria’s taupe Elie Saab with the Napoleonic Steel Cut Tiara (which I generally don’t like) was a pure win! Vickan when she’s best. However, he sartorial choices have been questionable lately.

    • LadySlippers says:

      •BooBooLaRue•

      There are a number of reasons to wear a coat dress. One, you are layered enough to not need an overcoat. Two, often times its ‘easier’ because you don’t have to change if going in and outdoors. Three, you can easily remove coat dress to reveal another dress for a different look. Four, it’s usually professional looking. Five, it often has a fairly simple design which photographs well (HMs reasoning).

      Does that help? And I’ve probably missed quite a few reasons too.

  24. Stephanie says:

    Now this is an awesome coat. I generally find all the hats silly and pretentious but this one is great. Kinda looks like a pirate hat but in a fashionable way instead of costumey. I have no idea what she is.wearing below but from the waist up this look is a win in my book.

  25. Gingercrunch says:

    Kate’s HAT!!! That’s THE most bad-ass hat with a bow I’ve ever seen! Drool…

  26. maddelina says:

    Kate looks great! Camilla on the other hand appears somewhat tipsy.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Perhaps Camilla is tired from the 9-day, 50+ engagement tour of Columbia and Mexico? They returned Thursday or Friday from that heavy tour, and she wasn’t well during part of the time.

      • Chris2 says:

        NotaS
        Blimey, poor thing! I just spent a week being driven round a lovely country area, eating well and staying in lavish hotels, nothing at all to do…..and I’m knackered! Camilla’s a little older than me, but I would never have managed the Cenotaph on Sunday.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •notasugarhere•

        Considering it was a sinus issue in the last half of the tour — she might not be a ton better yet.

        Gotta give Camilla kudos for being such a trooper.

      • Dany says:

        exactly. And i have to say i never judged Camilla for her schedule. This woman married the heir at “old” age where it is hard to learn and start the royal work in front of all the cameras… especially with the global hate and the gigantic shadow of Diana.
        Camilla took on her new role, always seems nice and fulfills her duties without complaints. This woman is not young and fit. She looks her age (even older) and suffers from osteoporosis, but she still goes on these tours and does her job. That alone makes me like her.

        And i have to say Charles and Camilla´s tours are always full of engagements while William and Kate´s tours look like playdates.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Chris2, and how would you have done meeting the women who were sold into sex slavery, beaten, drugged, and raped from age 12 on?

        Yes, a lot of what they do is easy. Some is difficult. At least Camilla doesn’t shy away from the difficult things.

      • Chris2 says:

        NotaS
        Not sure if you misread my tone or if I’m misreading yours!
        But that’s exactly my point…. I’m exhausted after a week of idleness, compared to Camilla’s astoundingly full (and enotionally demanding) schedule, and still she doesn’t flag. I’m a crazed admirer of bith her and Chazza, they really give their all.
        I love her as a woman too: a smokin’ ‘, tipplin’, laughin’ broad, more concerned with living than with preserving youth.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Ah, Chris2, I’m lousy at recognizing sarcasm online.

      • Chris2 says:

        Notasugar
        Nooo! I wasn’t being sarcastic at all, I was sincere in saying ‘Poor thing’……I had the ‘tiring’ week of luxury, poor me; and Camilla had a downright gruelling tour with no letup at all…..I intended to highlight my own lack of backbone, not to slight Camilla.
        Sorry for sowing confusion. 🙂

      • ataylor says:

        @notasugarhere – They were in Colombia, South America. Not Columbia, WA.

    • India Andrews says:

      Totally. Camilla is a trooper. Kate would’ve bowed out of the event claiming exhaustion and Camilla is twice Kate’s age, so she doesn’t have Kate’s energy.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Camilla’s one of those royal ladies I’d love to lunch with. I have visions of her loaning me a tiara and we’d be sitting wearing the Durbar and Honeycomb tiaras sharing a drink as the tiaras become more lopsided on our heads depending on the alcohol consumption and the belly laughs. Seriously, I truly admire her for her grit and fortitude in the face of the court of public opinion. She basically rehabilitated her image through her hard work and determination, and she’s made Chazza a very happy man by the looks of their public appearances.

    • Dara says:

      @Chris2 – just had to add my admiration for Camilla. She entered into the family under what might have been very difficult/controversial circumstances and I think she’s been aces all the way. And you’re right – she’s an amazing broad, in the best sense of that word!

      Charles has really grown on me too, I found him tedious and a little out of touch some years ago but a lot of his ideas and ‘philosophies’ have made it into the mainstream. He was (I think) genuinely ahead of his time in a lot of ways.

      Now, who do I talk to about getting William to call ‘not it’ when his turn comes around (or even before that) so we can skip straight to Harry?

      • Chris2 says:

        Dara
        I always liked Charles (and Anne) right through almost 50 years of otherwise anti-royal sentiment. He was I guess ‘my’ prince, being less than ten yrs older than me, and Anne seemed very cool in the 60s!
        But truly, about Camilla and Charles, it shows what true love can bring about, doesn’t it? He’s a much better man for being so obviously happy at last, and surely Camilla, a jolly good egg, was greatly helped to grin and bear initial public frostiness, knowing Charles had so boldly declared her ‘non-negotiable’. Blimey, that’s the stuff!
        This thread made me realise that as long as HMQ and Charles remain in good Windsor health, I myself will not witness whether Wills takes the throne, or lets George-the-Bloke take over. Damnit, I hate to miss the drama!

  27. sarah says:

    Princess Simpleton looks old and tired.

  28. India Andrews says:

    Kate has worn that hat before. I kind of like it.

    Being American, we rarely ever wear hats. I wish we wore them more often.

    • Chris2 says:

      India
      That has never once occurred to me but it is true! The only US hat I have in my memory is Queen Aretha’s toque-with-giant- bow from President Obama’s inauguation. That was memorable alright.
      On the plus side this must mean that you are not subjected to battalions of mammies dressed as sofas, with micro-flying saucers with random wavy things attached, perched on their heads, for every wedding/Holy Communion/graduation.

      • Olenna says:

        @Chris2, I’m not trying to pick a fight; I just want to make you aware that in the U.S., the term “mammies” is a derogatory and extremely offensive term that was used in the South to describe black women who nursed and cared for white children. So, of course, it is not openly used anymore. Hope your use of it here has a different and more benign meaning, and is not a reflection of how you view Ms. Franklin or other black women in the U.S.

      • LAK says:

        Olenna: i am presuming to answer for Chris2, but she wasn’t referring to Black women. We don’t have that word association here, here being the UK.

        To be honest, the first time i heard that word, and still didn’t realise it was a thing, was when i watched GONE WITH THE WIND. And i always thought that mammie in GWTW was beloved like a family member, so i never saw the negative. what stood out for me was the characterisation ie the clothing and the language and the body language and facial expression. That i thought was the offense, not the name.

        I love that CB can teach all of us new things because i’ve learnt so much from it. sometimes i’m shocked at what i don’t know or never gave consideration.

      • Chris2 says:

        Olenna
        I do hope you see this….I could bite my hand off for an unintended offence.
        I was speaking in ‘Irish’ as it were…..where mammy is the common term (= Mom or Mum) and always has been. (That’s why I mentioned Holy Communion gatherings…. There are flocks of substantial ladies with bonkers teeny plates on their heads) I do sometimes forget that the majority here are in fact not close neighbours who understand our/UK idiom.
        I do know the old term as you cite it of course but it was so very far from my thought it never occurred to me. I hope that also exonerates me from insulting Aretha….the word would never come to mind in association with any black woman at all, still less a queen such Aretha. But over in the US I can see it could be read differently, so do accept sincere apologies.
        •LAK many thanks for the intercession x

      • Chris2 says:

        Olenna, LAK
        Should also have clarified why I was in ‘Irish mode’ in the first place…..tis that over there, the blight of dinky flying saucer hats is at its most absurd, to my eyes…..any excuse and they are employed. That’s why a vision of Irish ladies sprang to mind.
        I zip back and forth a lot between England and Ireland for my work, so my vocabulary is inevitably Hibernicised. I doubt LAK would refer to a crowd of proud mothers affectionately as ‘mammies’ as I would, but only because here in England, if it’s known at all, it’s among originally Irish folk.
        As she says, it’s good to learn things like this via CB, where others’ sensitivities are concerned, and I shan’t repeat the word in American company, so I’m grateful to you indeed.

      • Olenna says:

        @Chris and Lak, thanks for the clarification! I learned something, too! My great-grandmother, born and raised in Kentucky, used words and phrases that I later learned originated in Ireland and England. I recall my brothers being referred to as “idjits” sometimes. :-).

      • Chris2 says:

        Olenna
        That’s great. I wanted to say thanks too for the tone of your original comment….you didn’t just pile in with a blunt object to the head, as does happen here!
        • Another Irish word we can use happily is the wonderful ‘feck’ of course. In fact, some of us would be branded as extremely foul-mouthed if we didn’t routinely soften our curses to ‘that feckin eejit’, and actually said The Real Thing.
        🙂

      • Olenna says:

        Chris2, you’re welcome. I need to clean up my act with the F bomb, so I’m going to try “feck”. “Freakin” and “fracken” (Battlestar Galactica fan here) haven’t stuck with me AT ALL!

      • Feeshalori says:

        I also discovered here that “cow” is not meant as a derogatory term in Brit-speak as it would be in American usage. So you’re never too old to learn something new, that’s what I say.

        And I LOVE “feck” in all its derivatives, too.

      • Chris2 says:

        Feesh
        That’s interesting, because meself I’d consider ‘cow’ pretty rude. Not nasty, like ‘b*tch’, but definitely not a neutral term like ‘cheeky monkey’. Also from the animal kingdom there’s ‘mare’…..’she’s a dozy mare’…..not harsh, just a little soft tap.
        • I think it’s an age thing…..’cow’ was pretty damning and harsh when I was young, whereas now, with seemingly everyone using the ‘c’ word if they want to express any degree of displeasure, ‘cow’ is probably laughable. But it *is* derogatory, whatever the degree of force behind it.
        So it’s not suitable for polite conversation, should you find yourself at a vicarage garden party! 🙂

    • notasugarhere says:

      India, try a Baptist Church in the South on Easter Sunday. Hats galore!

  29. Lisa says:

    She looks so bored and out of it — how will she handle these events for the next 50 years or so?

    Any truth to the rumor they went to Mustique from Scotland with the Middlearths?

  30. anne_000 says:

    Awww… Poor babies. Their ‘charity’ made them go to a football game over the weekend and now they have to go to the theater? All in the name of charity? Oh OK. It’s hard helping other people.

  31. weegiewarrior says:

    I think camilla looks like a pearly queen – in that first pic it looks like she shoud hav a fag hanging out of her mouth! I think shes whats known as a game old bird – shoudve been a bit more staid for remembrance day.

    • Chris2 says:

      I thought the hat hinted at the busbee somehow….quite subdued as far as her titfers go, anyway.
      But can you imagine her, as a Pearly Queen at a Balmoral Christmas party, belting out a word-perfect ‘My Old Man’s a Dustman’ in her cut-glass accent? Even the corgis would grin.
      (Charles probably performs The Goons’
      ‘YingTong Song’ or Spike’s ‘I’m Walking Backwards for Christmas’, to much eye-rolling from sniffy footmen)

      • ickythump says:

        Hee hee! Wot a party that woud be- And old phil coud do his party piece – insulting evryone in th room with a rude song!! Id like an invite to that party!! Lol x

      • Chris2 says:

        Oh God Ickythump!
        Phil might let rip with some salty Navy ‘shanty’ like “On Board the Good Ship Venus.” I bet the Queen Mother used to get well into that kind of scene too.
        Tee hee, can Dame Helen make a new, riproaring ‘Christmas at Balmoral’ film? (It could have Bondgirl HMQ impersonating Helen as Prospero, for the Speech.)

      • bluhare says:

        You just reminded me of my dad, Chris2. He loved the Goons . . . and I’m Walking Backward to Christmas to prove that I love you!!

      • ickythump says:

        Wot a movie that would make – and we havent even mentioned Princess Margaret yet – by god she loved a party!! Who’d we get to play her part?? LOL!! xx

      • Chris2 says:

        Ickythump
        Maybe La Bonham-Carter as Margaret? She gives great ‘squiffy’. I’d like Stephen Fry as Sir Alan FitzTightly (Charles’ valet in Private Eyes ‘Heir of Sorrows’) to be the disapproving Jeevesian character, and Emma Thompson as anyone at all.
        O god this reminds me of the Comic Strip’s amazing 80s Arthur Scargill á la DH Lawrence movie, in which Scargill was played by Al Pacino (played by Ade Edmonson IIRC) ‘Meryl Streep’ sat in a corner doing something Method with an orange….Brilliant altogether.
        x

      • weegiewarrior says:

        Hah ha! Id thought about bonham-carter for old marg! Lol -I want eddie redmayne to play harry playing strip poker of course! X

  32. Miss Wilson says:

    I honestly don’t think Kate looks that old. I hate that people think that. I just don’t think she gets botox and fillers like every other celebrity so she looks “old” when in reality she just looks her age. Or maybe she does get botox normally, but stopped while she’s pregnant so everyone is like *gasp!* She looks old! I think she just looks weak and tired. My sister suffered from HG during two of her pregnancies as well and looked so tired like that all the time, just like frail and tired with bags under her eyes. So I actually feel sorry for her, I’m sure it’s actually really draining making all of those appearances when she probably just wants to go home and throw up then sleep.

  33. tarheel says:

    I always like to remind folks, many of whom don’t know, that Queen Elizabeth is a WWII vet. She was a Subaltern in the Women’s Auxiliary Territorial Service and trained as a driver and mechanic.

    Also, it’s Remembrance Day — Kate shouldn’t look lovely!

  34. Hazel says:

    Kate’s wearing her coat too tight. Still trying to do the ‘body con’ thing well into her pregnancy. And now I, too, can see that she had a button moved over, inexpertly–and the button still pulls!