Duchess Kate, William & the kids have decamped to Anmer Hall for the summer

people royals

I feel like we should just take this in all week, all of these royal stories. Because there’s going to be a real royal drought this summer. Well, let me say this: we’re probably not going to be seeing much of Duchess Kate for the rest of the year. Just weeks before she gave birth, a “source” leaked to People Mag that Kate wanted to take a longer “maternity leave” this time around, as opposed to the couple of public appearances she did months after she gave birth to George. So, come June and July and August… we probably won’t have any new Kate stories or Kate photos.

Even now, there’s really not much going on post-baby. Princess Charlotte of Cambridge is here. Will, Kate and the kids spent Charlotte’s first days holed up at Kensington Palace. People Mag says they’ve “been enjoying nice, private family time.” A source says: “They are very settled, his job is set, they have their house, and the status quo hasn’t changed in the royal family at large. So they are looking forward to a period of calm.”

They did leave for Anmer Hall on Wednesday, surprising no one. The only surprise was that they waited this long to decamp to Anmer Hall. That’s where they’ll be for the rest of the year, if not the next few years. Unless William decides that he’s bored with being a pilot again. I’m assuming – from multiple reports before the birth – that Carole and Michael Middleton will probably be living with Will and Kate for much of the summer too. Which is a change from last time, when Kate and George stayed at her parents’ home for months after George’s birth. People Magazine also says that Kate “is not planning on adding any extra help.” Just the nanny, the housekeeper, the cook, the private hairstylist and her parents. And like a dozen other people too.

What else? People Mag has more quotes about Anmer Hall and how great it is: “It’s like a fancy farmhouse. It isn’t grandiose. But it’s a great, friendly family environment.” It isn’t grandiose… except for the £500,000 worth of landscaping, millions in renovations, including ripping out a perfectly beautiful new kitchen.

Oh, and William will be returning to work on June 1st. And by that I mean he restarts his training to eventually become an air ambulance pilot.

FFN_FlyUK_Royal_Baby_050215_51728603

Cover courtesy of People Magazine, additional photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

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

180 Responses to “Duchess Kate, William & the kids have decamped to Anmer Hall for the summer”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. aims says:

    The numbers on the remodeling is mind blowing to me. It’s so crazy. I hope Kate’s a great cook to justify those numbers.

    • Tough Cookie says:

      You mean you hope she HAS a great cook, right?

      • *North*Star* says:

        She apparently does not have a chef or cook. A recent article talked about that and a former chef to Diana spoke about it being either Kate or Carole that does the bulk of the cooking.

      • Olenna says:

        If she doesn’t employ a cook/chef, I wonder if she (or Carole) cooks for the staff as well.

      • MinnFinn says:

        North*Star – They can order all their meals, snacks, and pm tea from the BP kitchen when they stay at KP, so yes she does have a chef.

        And they did hire a FT baby nurse for at least the first 3 months. This according to BBC, Telegraph and Guardian.

      • Natalie says:

        Right, if I’m thinking about the same person North*Star mentioned, he did cook for her because he mentioned Kate asking him to make the sauces lighter. It’s like when they insisted they didn’t have household staff and it turned out they were just borrowing staff from Charles.

      • bluhare says:

        I thought they had the Italian cook — Fresolone or something like that. She’s the one who taught Kate to make risotto or something. Or is she gone now?

      • FLORC says:

        That Kate does not have a chef on her private staff or staff within her households does not mean it’s up to her or her mother to feed themselves or do any food preparing at all. Simply that they do not have a cook or chef that works only for them and is paid for by them.

        And it was noted a great many times in various articles that Kate indeed has meals prepared for her. Be it the Beef Wellington/Harry’s B-Day or the latest diet she’s on it notes Kate has a team of cooks ready to do as she asks.

      • hmmm says:

        @North Star

        Looking at years of pictures of her eternally perfectly manicured nails and soft smooth hands, I’m guessing she hasn’t seen the inside of a kitchen for years. She doesn’t even make the gilded loser his cheese on toast- Mommy does.

      • Cee says:

        If I were a Royal the first thing on my to-do list would be to employ a chef. My cooking is terrible and I doubt I’d be able to cook for children or husband. And what about the live-in staff? I don’t believe, even for a second, they don’t employ at least 3-5 maids, a butler/housekeeper, etc. My family house is much smaller than Amner and 2 maids could not do everything, let alone ONE.

      • *North*Star* says:

        It’s all in the *semantics* people!

        The Cambridges probably don’t have a chef, like Diana’s old chef asserts. However, I do recall ads of their’s looking for a housekeeper that would occasionally cooks (occasionally might need to have quotes around it). True of almost all the other positions they’ve hired for — they want people that do a bit of everything. So no, I’m guessing the housekeeper and such probably cook for the staff whereas Carole and/or Kate cook for the family (Kate loves to cook and do homemaker type activities).

        Even if they can and do get food from BP — that doesn’t qualify as a chef for the Cambridges’ as HM foots that bill. True if CH provided that option too. And hiring a chef on a case-by-case basis isn’t that different from anyone else.

        Remember that semantics drives a lot of things in this world. 😉

        Bluhare,
        Good question! I don’t know. Wasn’t the ‘story’ with that that HM was upset by all the non-Brits working for them? And I think she was their housekeeper….I think. But don’t quote me on it.

      • notasugarhere says:

        They had four staff when they lived in the four-bedroom house in Wales, including a cook and housekeeper. So you can believe the hints about them being “normal” and her doing all the cooking or…

      • Imo says:

        Kate enjoys cooking and is quite good at it, from several reliable sources. She and Carole do substantially more cooking than one would expect but they also most certainly have staff to prepare meals. You can say you don’t have a cook but that is not quite true if the maids or housekeepers also have cooking as part of their expected duties.

      • *North*Star* says:

        IMO,

        That’s exactly why I think it’s a matter of semantics. I’d bet the housekeeper (or someone else with a different job title) cooks a lot so while it doesn’t techically count. It still isn’t Kate doing it all.

        And I agree, there’s a lot of good reports that William & Kate love nothing more than her cooking dinners for the family.

      • LAK says:

        Bluhare/Florc: now that the baby reveal is done and dusted, is it safe to snark on the wiglet?

      • notasugarhere says:

        In 2014, Rachel Khoo said she took a two week basic cooking class with her at Leiths. Doesn’t sound like a master chef to me. This was the same time she was said to be taking flying lessons but still didn’t have time to do more royal engagements. Right.

      • FLORC says:

        LAK
        Quite safe. The poor wiglet Wagon has been idle for too long!
        And I think us Wiglet Watch members have been biting our tongues about that wiglet standing out in those pics for what seems like ages!
        Snark Away Lady LAK!

      • *North*Star* says:

        Most people aren’t ‘master chefs’ though. You can still learn a great deal (even cooks) at a basic cooking class.

        Case in point, the woman you mentioned IS an actual chef — so the class can’t be that basic.

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/10966570/Kate-Middletons-cooking-lessons-with-Rachel-Khoo.html

      • Imo says:

        Notasugar
        Taking a cooking class is a great way to pick up techniques and improve existing ones. That is hardly worth shading.

      • notasugarhere says:

        We’re told she was a great cook vs. we learn from an outsider that she was in a basic cooking class. A full-time, two week course so who was taking care of the baby? The nanny. Told she’s full-time SAHM so she cannot do engagements vs. she’s found in full-time cooking school and then taking flying lessons. Military wife in Wales vs. refused to participate with the military wives and caught in London three days a week.

        Things don’t always up the way their PR might want them to.

      • FLORC says:

        Imo
        I remember the top and legitimate criticism during that time was Kate’s pr was all about how busy she was. Lots of secret meetings with charities that knew little about said meetings. As the counter her PR put out little stories of what Kate does with her days. Flying lessons, horseback riding, and decorating were the top ones with the regular hill walking exercise and beauty routines. This was all stated officially in press releases.

        It would be 1 thing if Kate was finding free time for these riding/flying/cooking lessons between duties and paying for them out of pocket. This was not the case. And she never finished the riding, flying to my knowledge.
        Did she finish cooking? I remember stories maybe she left and was said to have taken up with a private chef on palace staff.

        Imagine this isn’t Kate. Just talking about a person who lives off of others while claiming unable to find time to work more than once a week. Though finds time to take these leisure classes is that defendable?

        Nota
        There were lots of conflicting reports during that time. It should be noted their PR management was a total nightmare that would comment immediately on every little thing that should have been ignored. Since then it was given an overhaul and has much improved. During that time I remember much blame was found to be more on the PR than W or K for many stories and how things were handled.

      • Imo says:

        FLORC
        Notasugar
        I clearly questioned notasugar’s snark about why a ‘master chef’ would need a basic cooking class. That is what struck me as unnecessary shade. Don’t use that as a chance to inform me about Kate’s idleness, PR spin and inconsistencies. I am fully aware of them. Not slamming Kate constantly does not make me a sugar/fan and I don’t need to be converted or convinced. Not every post here is a teaching moment.

      • *North*Star* says:

        Notasugarhere,

        Except she took this class pregnant with George. Google and read the links, any one of them will show you the dates. A *chef* took the class as well which calls into question how basic the class actually was. Again, go even to the one link I posted and you’ll see that for yourself.

        You bring up points and I’ll refute those exact points if I think they’re in error. I’m with IMO here — the Cambridges have plenty of detractors — no need to create false ones.

      • notasugarhere says:

        The articles about her taking the cooking class were published July 2014. PGTips arrived in July 2013. There was speculation at the time from some publications that because she missed some classes due to illness, she might be expecting again.

      • FLORC says:

        Imo
        Honest mistake. I didn’t realize you were referencing the “master chef” portion only. And often some need to be reminded of events. We all have those moments and it’s not meant to be an insult so please don’t take it that way unless someone makes it clear it is one. I do not mean to insult you or speak in a demeaning way. This seems to be getting a bit much when we jump right to that imo.

        Nota/NorthStar
        I thought the class was to go over some beginning techniques everyone needs refreshers on like egg cracking, but also intermediate skills.
        And for some reason wasn’t the chef somehow improperly reported? There was later some issue that got corrected, but wasn’t really covered.

      • bluhare says:

        It’s Antonella Fresolone and she was hired as housekeeper/cook and was giving Kate cooking lessons before she was pregnant with George.

      • Imo says:

        I actually love what they did to KP and think it was worth every penny. But the con was that they needed a comfortable, revamped, modernized base for their operations – royal duties. After it was done and paid for they basically moved to Anmer. The money could have been much better spent. Other structures are in need of upkeep. Or how about increasing the miserable wages of the people who work for the royals.

      • Olenna says:

        DM reports “a new housekeeper has been hired and will be trained by Kensington Palace’s Italian housekeeper Antonella Fresolene”. The new employee will probably serve as cook and housekeeper like Fresolene or Fresolene will move to Anmer, too. Either way, all of the full-time staff are not cooking for themselves, taking turns using that fabulous kitchen, and cleaning up after themselves.

    • New Yorker says:

      I live in New York surrounded by buildings that are being reconverted from apartment buildings to single family homes. People are spending tens of millions of dollars. What Will and Kate spent on Amner is chicken feed. And from the description, a lot of it sounds like it was necessary structural corrections. It’s old.

      • L says:

        The people spending “tens of millions of dollars” didn’t get those dollars from your taxes though.

      • Natalie says:

        It conflicts with their public image. Most of their bad pr comes from saying one thing and then being caught out doing something else. That and being lazy.

      • Citresse says:

        I read that KP reno was paid by taxpayers and Amner reno was funded by private funds. Is that untrue?

      • bluhare says:

        No it’s not untrue, Citresse. My understanding is that Anmer’s renovations didn’t come from public money because it’s privately owned. The only thing I can think of that could possibly have been billed to the public purse is the cost of protection officer accommodation. I think they converted a barn or stable or something for them.

      • FLORC says:

        Bluhare
        As we found from the Middleton renovations for security much can be renovated in the name of safety.

        New Yorker
        It is an old estate. That doesn’t mean heavy renovations haven’t already been done at great cost. Those renovations were not to the couples liking and all was redone along with the redirection of landscaping that is no small or even moderate task.

      • LAK says:

        Anmer reno was partially paid by taxpayers like the KP reno.

        Assuming they’ve finally finished renovating both places, we should have a final total in this year’s accounts.

      • Imo says:

        The overwhelming majority of Anmer reno was paid for by Charles. In that sense they can do as they please. It was the KP reno that was a con job.

      • Megan says:

        Restoring a Christopher Wren building is never a “con job.” KP is an important structure for its history and its architecture.

      • bluhare says:

        The con job isn’t referring to the building,

      • notasugarhere says:

        The reason asbestos abatement had to be done was because they torn down a bunch of interior walls and changed the internal structure of the historic building. If they had left the interior as it had been historically, the asbestos would have been untouched and therefore “safe”.

      • Imo says:

        Untouched asbestos is safe and should be left alone? On what planet?

      • notasugarhere says:

        imo, that is often the case in renovation. (I’m not talking free/unsealed asbestos attic insulation, etc.). As long as it is undisturbed and sealed, you can leave it where it is. For instance, you can put floating wood floors over existing 70s asbestos floor tile. If you rip up the asbestos tile to put down new flooring, however, you have to get the asbestos abatement people in to deal with your big mistake. If the asbestos was sealed in the walls of KP (like the inner part of the wallboard, etc.), as long as they didn’t tear down walls, it was okay.

      • bluhare says:

        On this planet, Imo. Yes, I know this first hand. We had an offer on a house with asbestos siding. It fell through, but not because of that. Anyway, I of course freaked out about the siding, and was told that if we did not touch the siding there was no problem with the asbestos. Not believing the realtor I researched it. It’s only when you disturb it that there is the problem.

  2. Cultish says:

    The only thing I think is sad is how he’s been brainwashed into basically living with the Middletons. It’s like he joined a cult. In those photos from the last trip to Mustique he really looked like the odd man out. Kind of sad sack. He needs to grow an pair and/or get some therapy for why he’s so dependent on them. Sad.

    • *North*Star* says:

      Except, William is the one that is orchestrating the Middletons being around so much. He’s apparently trying to recreate some of his favourite childhood memories.

      • Cultish says:

        Thus the suggestion he get some therapy.

      • Natalie says:

        I think William genuinely enjoys having the Middletons around but I would say Kate is the one who orchestrates having them involved. They’re her family after all.

      • Citresse says:

        William is directing the Middleton involvement? I thought William is counting the days until he can get away to join his aristo friends for a vacation.
        There is so much conflicting info.

      • Citresse says:

        I don’t think William or Kate direct anything re- the Middletons. I think Carole is the boss.

      • FLORC says:

        Citresse
        You’re not wrong with the conflicting info.
        Since we’re speculating.. I think there’s a lot more info suggesting William is treated like he’s made of gold and can do no wrong by the Middletons. They are there to pamper him when he wants and give him space when he wants. They tend to his wife when he’s gone for lengths of time. And unlike his own family they expect next to nothing from him. He in a way may have created his ideal life with out financial limits and expectations.
        And again… speculation 😉

      • Citresse says:

        FLORC
        If what you write is true re- the relationship between William and Kate’s parents, then they helped to create a monster. A lazy monster.

      • Imo says:

        Let’s pretend we’re not talking about a future king – why are we concern trolling a family that enjoys one another’s company? William is happy with the Middleton clan and that is that. After a miserable youth even a spoiled man-child deserves warmth, closeness and loyalty within his family circle. And the Middleton middle classification of William may horrify the faux posh among us but if Charles had done a better job this wouldn’t be happening.

      • Tammy says:

        Is it possible that he just enjoys their company without it being anything more? Or maybe he wants them around for his children because he wants some normalcy for them? Does everything he does have an ulterior motive? I am generally curious because I still don’t get the shade that is directed at him. Has he done anything illegal? Does he abuse women or animals? He’s lazy? Big deal. There are enough royals who are not lazy and by the time he’s King he will probably be a grandfather and public opinion will change.

        Nobody seemed to like Prince Charles until Princess Diana died. or Camilla. Now it’s a love fest for these two who cheated on both their spouses for decades with each other.

      • FLORC says:

        Imo
        Future King makes no difference here. It’s the public funds paying for a lifestyle so they can focus on charities and duties. Same criticism is given to any other royal of any other country and not simply the ones in close line to the throne.

        And no one is denying him the warmth of a family. Are we? I’m not.
        What would be better. A family that praises without consequences for poor behavior? Or a family that loves and raises children to have a balanced moral judgement and understanding of right, wrong, and social responsibility? We can be close to people in our life and get something we’ve felt we’ve not had. Sometimes though those people or that behavior holds us back. This is more discussing and not concern trolling.

        Many have a rough upbringing with much sadness and loss. As did Harry as well. Losing a parent and having a father who could have done better is not a good enough reason to be in your 30’s with a wife and 2 children, but still act like entitled to live out his dream of flying helicopters, but maintaining a princely lifestyle regarding perks and protection, but not put in the work.

        And it’s unfair to pin this all on Charles. There are many who had a hand in raising William more than Charles who didn’t teach William to be better.

        Speaking of Charles I think he and William are fine in the grand scheme (sp?). Charles covers many of his and Kate’s expenses. If they weren’t ok would the money be accepted? I’m doubtful on that. And a large argument in Charles’s terrible parenting was he was cold, distant, and not around. So, who raised William? Who was responsible for teaching him right and wrong? Who the the chief parental figure?

      • Imo says:

        FLORC
        You’re rehashing the same points without addressing mine. In what way did I connect William’s happiness with his in-laws with an excuse for his adult behavior? When did I say William should be allowed to shirk his duties because he is lucky enough to have great in-laws? I didn’t. And if he hated his family life/in-laws trust me he would be in even worse shape. Carole indulging William and cooking pot roast for him is somehow worse than Charles feeding stories about him and Harry to the press for PR? Really?
        I feel William’s parents are responsible for his unhappy childhood. Diana died and Charles certainly did not improve William’s life. At best he did no further harm because he could finally focus on Camilla. This is model parenting? Everyone knows William and Harry had a terrible time after Diana’s death and the world will not stop turning if Charles gets the blame he deserves.
        Lastly I am dying to know how the family is at fault when the child grows up to be spoiled in Kate’s case and the family is *not* to be blamed when the child grows up to be spoiled in William’s case?
        Some of you really think royal = better.

      • bluhare says:

        When I read here, Imo, I certainly don’t get the idea that royal is better. Not from the people here anyway. Maybe from the royals themselves, though.

      • Imo says:

        Bluhare
        But you are very moderate/balanced, imo. I see behavior called out here that is often excused in the royals. The double standards kill me.

      • bluhare says:

        Don’t understand your point, Imo — what double standard? We call out people for the same behavior others exhibit?

        Cluelessly yours,

      • Imo says:

        Bluhare
        The Middletons are not royal and they get called out on things royals get a pass for. Not everyone does it but there is a lot of classism in many of the comments.

      • bluhare says:

        In this case, as a future king, I do not think they are doing him any favors if, as reported, Carol mediates arguments and takes William’s side most of the time. They are enabling him.

        I take your point re “common” and the Middletons; I don’t care for it either, but I didn’t think that’s what we’re talking about here.

    • Betti says:

      Yes i agree he needs to grow a pair when it comes to her family as they are a bunch of enablers, who it seems encourages the distance he’s created from his own – Carole is the head of the Middleton Firm. His father and stepmother have a heavy public duty schedule – they take it seriously, unlike Willy who doesn’t want to be a royal. His wife and her family enable that to an extent and are prepared to drop everything for his every whim.

      As others have said when he falls in love for real, she and the rest of them will be kicked to the curb with those kids going to Charles.

    • wow says:

      He LIKES/LOVES his inlaws. Apparently he enjoys their company. There’s nothing wrong with that. Good for him and his family considering the turmoil he had to endure with his own parents. I understand a lot of people may not have the luxury of being close to their in-laws but it appears that is not the case with this couple.

  3. Pop says:

    Just watched the kitchen video and I can see why they redid it sorry……if i had the money I’d lose the wooden work surface, such a faff and I hate sinks on islands!

  4. taxi says:

    Kaiser, have you considered that tastes differ? Not everyone wants wood countertops, for many reasons. It doesn’t matter that the pre-existing kitchen once cost 38,000 pounds – I don’t think it’s special at all. Where I live (California) “good” kitchen remodels routinely cost upward of $100,000 & 200k isn’t unusual. A fancy kitchen was $50,000 twenty years ago.

    • Natalie says:

      But the whole point is it’s not supposed to be fancy or rather grandiose. Not very down-to-earth or frugal of William and Kate. Remember their pr stunt taking Ryan Air?

      • taxi says:

        It’s their kitchen. Neither you nor I will ever be in it so why does it matter, any more than all the other RF extravagances? If the taxpayers foot the bill & don’t like it, couldn’t Parliament tighten their allowances? They’ll spend as long as there is a monarchy & the funds are provided.

      • Natalie says:

        Why William and Kate shouldn’t pig out at the through and instead exercise self-control?

        Their public image is their bread and butter . If that image is a farce, that’s definitely something to be discussed. Nobody likes someone seeking unearned praise and right now a major pillar of their pr is being middle class and normal. Can’t run away from the job claiming to be too normal for it while demanding the privileges.

      • FLORC says:

        Taxi
        Like many goverments what might be financially smart and responsible isn’t always what happens. There’s much shady dealings between the 2 systems. Unless, there was a public uproar nothing will change.
        That makes me think back to BP burning and the Monarchy volunteering to pay taxes. Though, how much they volunteer is unknown I think. Simply a token gesture.

      • Natalie says:

        I forgot to mention -Aren’t the finances of Elizabeth, Charles and William now exempt from the Freedom of Information Act? How are the taxpayers even to know what is going on?

        If the Queen tries again to siphon money from a state poverty fund, it will now be kept private.

    • Lucky Charm says:

      When I bought my house, I intentionally bought one that did NOT have an updated kitchen, because I wanted to spend the money putting in what I wanted rather than paying more for a house that I was just going to rip that all out anyway. And that kitchen had been remodeled a few years previously anyway, I don’t think it had been a brand new kitchen they redid.

      • notasugarhere says:

        It was done by the professional, high-end kitchen designers who ran their business out of Anmer. The best of the best and only a couple of years old if that.

      • FLORC says:

        To add to Nota
        The couple was so proud of their kitchen at Anmer it was spotlighted on their website as the highest quality of skill and style you can expect from them and their business. They ran it out of the barn on the property.
        I can understand not liking the style, but it was top of the line appliances in there that got torn out and completely scrapped. Not even a donation.
        When my husband and I redid our kitchen we donated the appliances since they were in very good condition. We moved into the house and just didn’t like the style. Much like I think Kate. Only we didn’t toss everything.

        And the couple did give an interview saying how they hoped the Cambridges would enjoy their kitchen as they did.

      • Imo says:

        If the Yorks are off limits because they spend private money why do we care about Kate’s Anmer renovations? Beyond security upgrades who cares?

      • notasugarhere says:

        I personally find it wasteful to tear out a new, high-end £38,000 kitchen.

  5. Katydid20 says:

    Only makes you wonder how much longer people are going to want to have a monarchy if the heirs and future monarchs disappear and are never seen.

    • Pop says:

      Surely they’re allowed to enjoy their new child in peace for a while

      • Natalie says:

        What is the point of a nanny per child and a helicopter just for them, in addition to paying for their bodyguards if, say by August, they can’t even make one appearance a month? I do agree they should be left alone for the first few months.

      • notasugarhere says:

        You think they cannot enjoy parenthood and work a handful of hours per week for charity? Are they made out of spun glass?

    • jules says:

      Ironically it’s the lesser royals – lower down on the totem pole – that seem to work tirelessly and in exchange, get little or no credit or recognition. Anne, Sophie and even Camilla. Kate simply has to show up and if she smiles and wears clothes that appeal to the masses, she’s praised and revered. The bar is set so low for her it seems.

      • Imo says:

        This may be true but how does this come about? An article about Anne or Sophie’s charity visits are reported on but few people care. Stories about Kate sell. If Sophie visits a hospital people golf clap. If Kate wears a Jenny Packham gown to an event the story gets 200 comments.
        And when Kate does a charity event she is still ripped to shreds.the bar is low but this is what all of you have created.

      • FLORC says:

        Imo
        To be fair I know a lot of us go to other sites for proper and full royal coverage. Many of us reuse our handles.

        And the other part is when a job is done things run smoothly. When it’s not done there’s side eye. Goes for all other royals outside of GB on this site. Scandal? Big numbers. Business as usual? Golf clap.

      • Imo says:

        This 🙂
        Are there any other good rf sites you frequent?

      • bluhare says:

        LOL, FLORC. Some of us keep our same handles here too. 😀

      • FLORC says:

        Haha! Bluhare That’s how I find you! I’ve taken on the FLORC/Florc name on nearly every other thread. Though there’s another I keep to myself.
        And BTW. I remember you asking about Kitten Mittens. We aren’t close anymore. Distance. Still related though, obviously. Likely not returning here without the time to do so. I know you like her input!

        Imo
        Threads and blogs yes. The royal order of satorial splendor. Gin O’clock, and a few others are some light hearted ones. The rest tend to sway randomly. This is the only one I find has a better balance and less stubborn nature of posters. Others at times get mentioned here or I’ll see a name ffrom there and I might go off…. Usually the ones who make surrogate claims for royal babies….

      • Imo says:

        FLORC
        Thanks. Will check them out.

      • bluhare says:

        I ADORE Gin O’clock. I wish s/he would go back to blogging. I got the Reigning umbrella for Christmas gifts last year. My sister loved hers.

        I don’t usually comment there, but if you like some (sometimes a bit too) bitchy blogs about badly behaving royals throughout history, try Royal Foibles.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Just sticking my two cents in here. Kate Middleton Review is also good; the blogger is very fair and equitable and runs a good site.

      • FLORC says:

        Feeshalori
        Forgot about that one. Fair, yes.

        Bluhare
        I wish it was kept up too! Often the humor doesn’t translate, but they make it so funny and understandable.

      • portia says:

        I checked out KM Review and read the blogger’s take on the letter they issued to the press. In particular, I liked this quote:

        I realize that everyone wants and deserves privacy, but whenever I hear about anyone fighting so hard and getting so angry over their privacy my first thought is always “What are you hiding?”

    • wow says:

      Their monarchy will continue to go on and on and on. It would have ended by now, and certainly after Diana’s death, if enough people were that fed up with it to vote against it.

  6. Shelley says:

    *sigh* remember when Wills was such a cutie.

  7. MinnFinn says:

    BBC says that today Sandringham local police are distributing a memo (written by Wm’s London-based staff) to the locals and press that are hanging around that they expect privacy and they will litigate if someone takes long lens photos of them there.

    • Heinous paps says:

      It’s hideous the way the paparazzi stalk people. They basically killed Diana so I understand why they would bother Will. But here we are on a site that buys those photos. Yet another thing that governments should address but don’t because it’s all about big business.

      • LAK says:

        The paps did not kill Diana.

        The market for the pictures is what drives the paps, so don’t lay blame else where when you are on this site enjoying the fruits of their labour.

      • jaygee says:

        Let’s lay the blame for Diana at the actual proximate cause of her death, which was entirely preventable: drunk driving, and not wearing a seat belt.

      • bluhare says:

        Changing your name to fit your comments?

    • MinnFinn says:

      Some paps are heinous stalkers but not all. Free press is critical for sustaining a democracy and must be vigorously protected. More government regulation of press is the last thing the UK needs.

      Wm abhors the media but if it’s due to his mother’s death or Charles’ disdain for media, or some combination of reasons, we can only speculate.

      I hope Wm finds a way to let go of some of his disdain for media. He could have them eating out of his hand if that was his desire. It is foolish of him to reign them in with his litigious stick when it would be easier on him to use carrots. I believe Wm’s attitude toward media will only change for the better if he has a major paradigm shift about his birthright i.e. stops viewing his birthright as a loathsome burden and instead views it as a privilege to inherit immense global influence and opportunity to improve people’s lives.

      I’ve posted this before. The BRF has global media attention like no other royal family. I believe they could literally change the world for the better if they focused on a single cause. Cases in point are the Bill Gates foundation has eradicated Polio from India. Pres Jimmy Carter’s foundation is on target to eradicate Guinea worm in Africa.

      • FLORC says:

        MinnFinn
        Years ago the Gates Foundation/Bill Melinda went on NPR and said they had this goal to eradicate Polio from the world. It was thought to be noble, but too difficult and a fool’s errand of sorts. They’ve comes so far it’s incredible!

        And your comment is on point. Their podium is like no other. There should be that swell of pride and duty to drive them for beyond good image. All of them.

      • CynicalCeleste says:

        YES to everything MinnFinn said x 1000.

  8. Vava says:

    Well it sounds like a great summer ahead! Both for them and for me. 🙂

    • FLORC says:

      You got great plans Vava?

      • Vava says:

        I do! Not reading about the Cambridges, since they’ll be hiding!

        Also, I like warm weather a lot!

      • FLORC says:

        Just remember skin protection! I’m loving the wnoderful weather. Being active outside is a simple and underrated joy in life 😀

      • Vava says:

        Oh yes, always use sunscreen. And I just bought a very cute summer hat!

  9. jules says:

    Just the nanny, the housekeeper, the cook, the private hairstylist and her parents. And like a dozen other people too.

    LOL — So true!!

  10. Magnolia says:

    Snooze…wake me up when one of them starts working again or when Charlotte/George go crazy in Vegas ala Uncle Harry. Not sure which of those would come first at the rate we’re going.

  11. seesittellsit says:

    I do hope the poor dear gets a nice long rest from all the really hard, endless work she’s done over the last few years . . .

    • anne_000 says:

      I’m thinking that the running will be done mostly by the nannies or grandma.

    • MinnFinn says:

      Their FT nanny Maria and the 2+ 24X7 RPO’s assigned to George will also be running after George. Kate running after George is her choice and she can opt out as much as she likes and not worry about the quality of his secondary caregivers.

    • Citresse says:

      Think now of how hard working Diana was, esp during the eighties. She continued to keep up a full diary of engagements while doing much of the work on weekends at Highgrove raising William and Harry.
      I don’t think I ever read one story of her mother staying with her long term to help.

      • Imo says:

        If you had Diana’s mother you wouldn’t want her around all that much either. Had Francis been a better mother Diana would have had a heck of a better time of it and a healthier set of defense/coping mechanisms. I did feel sorry for Francis, however. But Kate is much more fortunate in the mom department.

      • Citresse says:

        Yeah Imo, on the day Princess Charlotte was born, I remarked to someone about how some people are born so fortunate. Kate is one of the fortunate. She has family, health, money and went on to have her own family, healthy children and more money. Some people have it all.

      • *North*Star* says:

        IMO,

        Frances was actually very involved with the William & Harry. Diana would go up to Scotland, where Frances lived, for some normalcy and the boys adored it too. All the Spencer girls would go on vacation in the early 90’s together, including Frances. The media and the Royals blamed Frances for ‘bolting’ but the truth is — Johnny was abusive, physically and emotionally. Her children (even though it wasn’t protrayed this way) as having a good-to-great relationship with Johnny and nothing to do with with her. Couldn’t be farther from the truth.

        Read the book by Ken Wharfe, he was the first to clue me in on the fact that Diana was much closer to her mother than what the general populace knows (not saying it wasn’t rocky at times). Whittaker and Bradford both debunk this myth as does a bio of Frances herself.

      • Imo says:

        Agree. I think attempts to label the Middleton closeness as wrong or codependent are ridiculous. Every child should have such a lovely upbringing. My only issue is the fact that Kate doesn’t seem compelled to use her good fortune to do for others. She is wasting so much opportunity. But being raised in a loving, close-knit family is something I refuse to criticize.

      • bluhare says:

        There used to be someone else who was big on that Ken Wharfe book. I may have to go read it.

      • FLORC says:

        *North*Star*
        How true. Frances had to leave and it tore her apart. When she tried to be with her daughters she was taken to court and dealt with such horrible laws and bias of the times because she was a woman and he was titled.
        Diana in turn nursed a great deal of anger over this and her step mother was the target.

        Imo
        My outlook on the Middleton dynamic changed with the treatment of Kate from William and how Carole supported Kate while she worked full time on making herself what he wanted instead of being what she wanted. She was lovely and fully of personality early on. We see sparks of that now, but only sparks imo.
        I stand firm a good mother would have said from the 1st cheating and break up he’s not worth your tears. By any other cheating, break/seperation/abandon or dismissed on vacation what mother still supports her daughter being with that kind of person?

        Great they vacation together and have family dinners and aren’t abusive to eachother. I just think a parent should want someone for their child that loves and respects them always. If they don’t they’re simply not worth your child’s time.

      • hmmm says:

        @FLORC

        I can see that Caroleian tradition passed down to Charlotte- how to make the most advantageous marriage.

      • Imo says:

        A girl in love or determined to have someone will not necessarily listen to their mother. When Kate and William were on good terms Carole and Michael were thrilled. When Kate and William were on a break up Carole and Michael urged Kate not to call or text him. On one break up they sent Kate on a ski holiday to take her mind off William. Apparently Kate spent the entire trip asking friends if she should call William or not call him.
        After the 2007 break up Carole and Michael told Kate to go out and party – to be young and happy and show William she wasn’t going to stay home and hide/cry. Over the years this has been twisted into Carole and Michael telling Kate to lose weight and flirt in night clubs to get William back.
        William said in an interview that he asked Kate to marry him before he asked Michael because he thought he would say no. When they wanted to tell Carole they were nervous about her reaction. According to biographers (not tabloids) Carole had firm conditions before she would give her blessing. She also insisted that Kate and future children would not be swallowed up in the royal machine. William consented and at least kept that promise.
        Carole and Michael borrowed money from Gary and used their company profits to make sure Kate could live the lavish, idle lifestyle necessary to run in William’s circles and I have my own issues with that but I get tired of the evil Carole stories.the truth is in the middle.

      • *North*Star* says:

        Bluhare,
        The Wharfe book is a must read. He’s very fair in his treatment of all parties and really humanises them.

        Whitaker’s book is equally divine. Whitaker isn’t as politically correct as a lot of books out there (Bradford for instance). But unlike some dual journalists/biographers (*cough* Junor *cough* Seward) he isn’t so pro-Diana that she walks on water. He’s fair and it shows.

        Also interesting, his comments about Earl Spencer had me amazed. He was angry at the establishment’s treatment of Frances while also looking the other way at Johnny’s horrible neglect of their children. According to Whitaker, it common common knowledge that Johnny was beating Frances. He stands up for Frances in a BIG way and shows how all four of their children adored their step-father and mother and detested their step-mother and fought with their father. Frances did the best she could under terrible circumstances. The kids knew it and responded. Charles’ second son, very tellingly is named Maurice, after Frances’ father. That’s a tribute to Frances as Maurice died shortly after her wedding to Johnny (Sarah met him as an infant I think).

        Frances’ bio is fairly good (biographer is a bit biased but not horribly so) and the author also wrote a book about Maurice (the VERY popular Lord Fermoy) and his decades long affair with an American women named Edith. That book is called Lilac Days and was really good!

      • FLORC says:

        Imo
        I remember the story of how William didn’t ask for Kate’s hand for that reason. That story though came with a slight conflict to other reports. Searching link. Might revert to cb archives fyi.

        And I agree. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle.
        Some references not covered.
        William’s birthday. Called Kate to join him. She packed for the whole trip. He spoke with her for an hour once she arrived and then dismissed her home.
        Post wedding. They continue early vacation in the falklands and Kate leaves without William. He stays another week and Kate appeared visibly upset during that time. And that ski vacation that had Kate wanting to call/not call. The Midds planned that out to suit William with accomidations for him. To not show…
        Simply on top of the open secret of how William had been, was, and could be. Not good. Now, I don’t think Carole was pushing Kate to marry a man who mistreated her. I do think there wasn’t the very best intent at the root of things.

        And Gary. It’s no secret to many and certainly not in south america his money is beyond dirty. Borrow is shifty, but also I doubt there was full return.

      • Imo says:

        FLORC
        William being afraid to ask the Middletons to marry Kate is not really questionable because it is from an interview he gave after the engagement. I’m not willing to call him an outright liar just to back up some opinions here. Lots of other things to side eye him for but he has always been too arrogant to be a liar. He’s known to be direct and brusque. We all know how he behaved while dating Kate. But there are reasons to question the narrative that Carole and Michael were willing to do anything to get Kate and William down the aisle. It doesn’t hold up under examination. Somehow William made promises or gained the Middleton’s complete trust and they now support him 100%.they have a royal in the family and they and Kate are set for life. But with Kate’s celebrity status in 2007 they would have cut their losses and happily moved on to a millionaire or aristocrat. William came crawling back. Doubt me but you would also have to doubt the well informed Richard Kay.

      • notasugarhere says:

        “Lots of other things to side eye him for but he has always been too arrogant to be a liar. He’s known to be direct and brusque.” imo, he lies all the time in actions. From the sneaky way they entered Sandringham the other day to the lies about the paraolympian commitment vs. topless vacation. William isn’t known for acting in an upright, open-book kind of way.

        In some matters, Richard Kay knows less about royals than many royal watchers.

      • FLORC says:

        Imo
        You’re crossing my words. I didn’t claim Carole would do anything to get Williama nd Kate down the aisle. I claimed the opposite. That carole might have motives and poor judgement on things, but she wasn’t the evil woman planing this wedding for years and banking on it.

        And I know Kay’s work. It’s not all without motivation for both sides. I’m challenging that things happened the way accounted in proper context. Nearly all stories have a spin to them for pr sake. This is no different. Even Kate’s push present from William during George. Months later we find out kate bought it herself and William not only dislikes jewelry shopping, but if he buys jewelry on a rare occasion it’s left to his staff in full.

  12. Natalie says:

    Lol, the ad in my sidebar is asking if I’ve “perfected the art of the vacation?”

    • FLORC says:

      Haha! I just get a bunch of ads showing things too good to be true that all are known internet scams.

  13. hmmm says:

    I can’t get over how she’s holding that kid in the pic where she’s touching her hair. Like an accessory.

    Anything coming from People mag or even their PR is vomit inducing. The concocted family fairy tale is so sentimental, plebeian and saccharine. I hope we don’t hear from their bootlickers for a very, very long time. Or from them.

    • The Original Mia says:

      Bravo!

    • CG says:

      Yeah, I don’t know anything about babies or kids but that baby’s head looks really unsupported in all these pics.

    • Citresse says:

      The hair touching, since it occurs so much, and of course we weren’t spared on baby day either, is, I suspect, a nervous tic.

      • hmmm says:

        Which suggests to me the bundle of joy is forgettable. If you’re all about your child, you wouldn’t have the nervous tic. It’s all vanity, IMO. Honestly, the kid looks like a prop, an afterthought; it’s all about her.

      • Citresse says:

        hmmm
        Diana did the same thing when she exited the hospital with William. She ran her fingers through her hair a couple times.
        Though, she hardly did it when compared to Kate unless it was terribly windy. And Diana wore hats much more than Kate so kinda hard to fiddle with hair when wearing a hat.
        Then Diana really had her hair chopped short. ( I didn’t like it). So, I suppose at that time she didn’t want to deal much with her hair.
        I liked Diana’s hair when it was longer. I thought she looked her best while pregnant with Harry.

      • bluhare says:

        I can’t go there, hmmm. She just had a baby, and had to go out there posing for photographs. Could be she was staged to do just that. Although she did have the baby’s hat on backwards, I just read today.

  14. chaine says:

    Why is it a “maternity leave”? For all intents and purposes, she is and has been a stay-at-home-mom. She’s not “on leave” from anything.

  15. bettyrose says:

    I get the nanny and household staff, but what does the private hairstylist do all day every day? Does Kate need her hair blown out more than once per day?

    • Imo says:

      She’s private in the sense that she will make house calls. Otherwise she has her own salon in London that she runs. She doesn’t live at Anmer or is there full time. She comes when needed at £300/hr.

      • bettyrose says:

        Ha! Well, that makes a little more sense but coming from London she must have some events she stays over for.

      • Imo says:

        Lol this is probably the case as well. For £300/hr she would have to do Lupo’s hair as well!

      • FLORC says:

        Much like Aniston’s hair stylist. They’re on call at crazy hours and will travel for you. You are priority and the pay reflects that.

        I hope the soft waves are the goto style with hair down. Such an improvement!

  16. Imo says:

    The conversation should be about their laziness and sense of entitlement not the luxury of their lifestyles. Does anyone think the other royals don’t live as lavishly? It’s not reported on because few people care about the other royals. And if the other royals are excused for their extravagance because they work harder then that proves that the taxpayers can be quieted with a bit of ribbon cutting and charity appearances. In America celebrities and the super wealthy raise hundreds of millions for charity but we don’t pay for their chauffeurs, mansions or security. It is only fair due to the shameless tax breaks they get and the undeserved wealth they enjoy.

    • LAK says:

      The conversation includes their lifestyle because *they’ve* made it part of the conversation. *they’ve* pointed out how down to earth and normal and non-extravagant they are. They go to extraordinary lengths to pretend they are not 1%-ers. It’s the ‘hook’ of their image.

      So when they accidentally show the true picture eg the 27staffers at a time they were supposedly not staffed or caught helicopter hoping by random public who didn’t realise it was them until they looked through their camera memory card weeks later……

      Everyone knows the rest of the family is extravagant, Charles in particular, but the rest of the family aren’t pretending to be 99% – ers.

      For what it is worth, we also skewer our millionaire politicians every time they play this game.

      • Deedee says:

        Exactly. How many headlines tout “Frugal Kate” when she wears a bespoke designer dress for the (gasp!) second time? Or she wears a TopShop dress while sporting thousands of dollars in accessories? So like us! And don’t get me started on the six hour salon visits and the weeks in Mustique.

      • bluhare says:

        I agree LAK. If they weren’t trying to get us to swallow how hands on they are, then it wouldn’t be an issue at all.

      • Imo says:

        I just feel it should be an issue regardless – for all of them. But just my opinion.

      • bluhare says:

        I don’t disagree, Imo, except the rest of them aren’t trying to get us to think they get stuck in and do the dishes every night either.

    • Imo says:

      LAK
      I get how the inconsistencies and false modesty fan the flames but the criticism predates the Cambridges and their silly games. The brf has long struggled with finding a balance between giving people the pomp and circumstance they expect without rubbing their extravagance in their faces. Royals like Charles and Anne have benefited from the fact that no one much cares about them enough to report on every little thing they do or buy.
      William and Kate are caught in an impossible media catch 22 – made worse by unfortunate personality/character deficiencies. I tend to question the situation as a whole. The royal for hire vibe is distasteful, imo. Open a treatment ward at a hospice and we’ll buy you a lifestyle. Help us raise €100,000 for leukemia research and we’ll buy you £101,000 worth of designer clothing. This helps the UK?

      • notasugarhere says:

        What has long been a theme here is, if they were working the amount of royal engagements two healthy 30-somethings SHOULD be working, there would be a lot less criticism.

        The criticism is based in large-part in them taking the highest level of royal perks (largest space in Kensington, Anmer) and NOT doing the equivalent amount of royal work.

        Yes, royals have ridiculous perks. Either work for them (HM, Philip, Charles, Anne, etc.) or get out.

      • FLORC says:

        Imo
        It’s very much a balance. The ratios of what they take to what they give is off by a large margin. And their PR only seems to highlight this making trips like a visit to DA set an event or shaking hands from your private jet to your car service an event. It seems off and gets attention it otherwise would not have.

        And absolutely others are bigger offenders. They give more though.
        Like Diana was a pro spender and shopper. She worked though and while the designer stuff was still mocked it wasn’t as bad as it could be.

        And to Kate. She’s doing herself a disservice not working. While her skills are rusty after a few engagements you see she’s improved quickly. After a stretch it’s back to the start. There could come a time she needs to be in better standing and must be seen working. Even if she only did a few events a month I bet her skills would be extremely better in presence, dressing, styling, and public speaking.

      • *North*Star* says:

        notasugarhere,

        Not true. Even when both Charles & Diana were pounding the pavements working a lot — the press happily raked them through the coals. Only HM & Philip, sorta squeak by, and then just barely. Should William & Kate work more? Absolutely. However working more isn’t a magic ticket to erase any criticism.

        FLORC,

        It’s so nice to see her get comfortable doing her duties. I really haven’t seen much of the ‘regression’ but I’d like to see more progress on her part.

        However, Diana, rightly or wrongly got a lot of criticism for her expensive habits. A lot. Time has softened the blow but she had it, really bad for years. Even when she was working her tail off.

      • bluhare says:

        Whose criticism predated the Cambridges and their games? Not sure what you’re getting at at all. Are you now talking global, or are you talking here?

      • notasugarhere says:

        NS, I never said the criticism would stop if they worked more. I typed, “there would be a lot less criticism.”

      • Imo says:

        Bluhare
        I meant the rf’s awareness of their image in the face of public criticism of their spending.

      • bluhare says:

        Thank you Imo. Understand your point, and it’s true there’s always been comment about the amount of money the royals “cost”/”take” — however you want to put it. Difference is until William (and maybe Harry?) no one claimed to be one of us wanting to do everything themselves. Yet they don’t, they still feed off the public teat, and the public is not getting their money’s worth, Imo of course.

      • LAK says:

        IMO: WK went out of their way to push what good 99% -ers they are despite their extraordinary circumstances. How they wouldn’t partake of the royal trough like the rest of the royals. It was and continues to be a very specific strategy to show how different they are when compared to everyone else.

        Since they’ve forced this comparison on the public via their PR strategy, it is legitimate to discuss it when we find that they are no better than the other royals and actually they are worse because they are seeking goodwill based upon a deliberate lie.

      • Imo says:

        Good points all but you’re preaching to the choir. I was just ruminating on the work/reward imbalance of the whole lot of them – brought painfully to light by the Cambridges lol.

      • bluhare says:

        Ruminating? You were arguing.

      • LAK says:

        What Bluhare said.

  17. perplexed says:

    Prince George’s little hands are so cute.

  18. jules says:

    Has anyone read “the letter”? The royals issued a letter to members of the press who were lurking around their estate:

    “Dear Sir/Madam,

    As you are aware, Anmer Hall is part of the Sandringham Estate, which is a private estate and whilst in residence, members of the Royal Family and their guests have a more than reasonable expectation of privacy.

    There have in the past been a number of intrusions into the privacy of the Royal Family, which in the main have been as a result of professional photographers using long distance lenses, not only to observe the Royal Family, but also to photograph them going about their activities on the Estate. Following warnings given to photographers and the photographic agencies involved, the position has greatly improved. However, we would remind you again of the position. The Sandringham Estate trusts that there will not be a need to take any further action other than bringing these points to your attention.
    With the above matters in mind, we would reiterate the clear request for acts of harassment and breaches of privacy to cease.

    Communications Secretary to TRH The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.”

    • FLORC says:

      I thought part of the renovations included adding large trees around the property and rerouting the driveway after it was thought to be too close to a church.. How there’s any view point to see anywhere near there shouldn’t be possible.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Sandringham is a private estate, but portions of it are publicly-accessible and you are allowed to photograph in some places (according to the Sandringham website). I do not know what access is like on roads throughout the estate, but many people live on houses scattered around the estate, right? Is there some kind of special pass that only allows locals on certain roads?

        There have been photos of Anmer published in places like DM since the move was announced. The photos include the scaffolding and roofing, so they were taken within the last two years. Those photographers were able to get onto the estate, take photographs, and publish those photographs without complaint, even if they weren’t supposed to do that. Maybe the difference was no members of the BRF were in the photos?

        This letter came from W&K not HM (owner of the estate) which is strange.

      • Citresse says:

        I’m surprised William didn’t order a twelve foot fence and moat constructed around Amner. Or wait, did he? 😉

    • jules says:

      I would assume members of the official press are duty bound and have to comply with certain regulations but what about John Q. Public and his cell phone? The regular media who received copies of this ominous letter may be shaking in their boots, but any action that the royals threaten to take isn’t really applicable to everyday people snapping photos and in some cases, posting on social media..

    • Citresse says:

      Letter was a bad idea.
      The more they complain, the more attention they draw to themselves and then you’ve got disturbed individuals who would view such a letter as a challenge.
      If they put in a reasonable amount of work and went about their daily lives without drama and endless vacations, then I seriously doubt harassment would be an issue.

      • Vava says:

        Very bad idea, indeed. It just fans the burning embers. Eventually, this will backfire on William in a big way.

  19. Jib says:

    William is in a dangerous dance with the media. The more of a jerk he is to them, the more they will dig up dirt on he and Kate and not hold it. What a dope. And really, is anyone with a brain surprised they have gone to their “regular house” and won’t be seen for months?? Do you think they know there is great resentment over the fact they take all of the perks, but do very little of the work???

    • Bermudagirl says:

      +1

    • FLORC says:

      This is an interesting topic. The Press Vs. The Heir.
      It’s been documented throughout history and a symbiotic relationship.
      I’m sure the press has dirt on William. I would imagine if they were to lash out at him in retaliation it would have happened one of the times he sued to have the freedoms of the press restricted. Here and there things do leak though and William does not take that easily.
      If anything the immediate backlash would be in snarky passive aggressive articles rather than glowing fluff.

      And they know. Their PR is on the offensive.

      • Vava says:

        William is just trying to cover up how little time he spends with his wife and children.

      • FLORC says:

        Vava
        Sadly, I agree. And what he does when away from his duties/family.
        He wants a life with absolute privacy. He should step aaside then.

      • Vava says:

        Think things are already beginning to unravel for them. The golden glow of the birth is over, the knives have come out in a subtle fashion.

        The press has dirt on somebody (William probably) and they are just waiting for the moment to expose it. The story of Carole Middleton moving in is something different than the average mother coming to help out after the birth of a baby. Carole is running the household and apparently her husband isn’t too thrilled about that. If the Daily Mail can be believed, that is. I think she’s there to be a buffer between William and Kate. This marriage is not the fairy tale romance from a Disney movie. I think William has his place of refuge somewhere and he will be found out eventually. But is Kate so helpless she can’t run her own household? I guess she is – even with a full staff.

      • FLORC says:

        Vava
        Interesting points. I our outside view of things and understanding of the press and their operations it tends to only point 1 way. The image isn’t accurate. Often it’s found to be contradicting to reality. So, it’s very much “what are you hiding?”
        And the whispers of Michael not pleased have been going for some time. That the DM is printing it says something not to be overlooked.
        I don’t think Kate is helpless, but that she’s been indulged to not have to mature. Why should she learn how to operate on her own when her mother will always be there?

        I’m all for women with children being close to their moms and getting that advice/help/support. When It seems like they’ve been around more than your husband and play a large role in your marriage it’s odd. And very strongly against the image their PR has been pushing.

  20. ickythump says:

    William is biting the hand that feeds him – what he forgets is that all press are not paps and would respect his wishes and have done in the past (left him alone the whole time he was at St Andrews while he was romancing Kate). What he forgets is that us ordinary British tax payers (aka his subjects) only get to see him and his family through the media – if hes never on royal duties when do we see him? If we dont see him and his family people begin to ask where are they, what are they doing and ultimately what are they for and why are we contributing to them? He’s playing a dangerous game. I dont think a few controlled photoshoots with Kate and the kids would be very taxing (pardon the pun) or do him any harm and would actually make people warm a bit more to him – he has ridden a long time on people’s goodwill and the memory of this mother – his PR peeps should take note.

  21. weegiewarrior says:

    Another thing u woud think william would realise is that if there arent any official pics then th price of a pap snap wil go up. They coud at least arrange some kind of deal with th british press. Just sayin – theyre not very savvy. Meanwhile in NZ Harry is engaging (literally) with evryone and evryone loves Harry – william coud learn a lot from his little bro.