Duchess Kate & Prince William planning a November vacation in Mustique

wenn22722611

Just be aware of something over the next week: the UK press is pretty pissed off about the letter the Cambridges sent out to media outlets about photographing Prince George. But instead of engaging with Prince William and Duchess Kate’s hypocrisies directly, many UK outlets are doing some hilariously passive-aggressive stories. This one is an obvious one – I knew as soon as I saw Kate’s slightly crazy look in Portsmouth a few weeks ago that Kate felt like she was due for a vacation. And lo and behold, the Cambridges are planning a lovely Mustique getaway… in November! However will they cope until then? And why isn’t Michael Middleton going with them?

Princess Charlotte is preparing for her first-ever holiday – but this is no mere trip to the seaside. Instead, she will be flying in the lap of luxury to the exclusive private island of Mustique to stay at the £13,000-a-week Aurora House. The Duchess of Cambridge, her sister Pippa and their mother Carole have organised the trip, although the ‘Middleton men’ – Kate’s father Michael and her brother James – are yet to confirm if they will also be on the holiday, which is scheduled for November.

After the recent bad weather put paid to Kate’s plans to entertain friends in the huge garden at Anmer Hall, the couple’s newly refurbished home in Norfolk, she is said to be desperate to lap up some sunshine. Charlotte will be six months in November. When Prince George was the same age, William and Kate escaped to the Maldives to enjoy a week alone, leaving their son with the Middletons.

But a source said: ‘This time it’s too much to leave both children with her parents so William and Kate are taking the kids with them – and bringing Carole with them, too. They are really looking forward to a proper break.’

The holiday will see William taking time off from his new job with the East Anglian Air Ambulance and Kate taking a break from her Royal duties. Her last official engagement was in May but she is said to have more planned in the autumn.

[From The Daily Mail]

The tone on this is everything. “Taking a break from her royal duties” combined with “taking time off from his new job” combined with “They are really looking forward to a proper break…” It’s all pretty amazing. Their whole life is a holiday and what bugs me is that it’s almost like they don’t realize it. They’re play-acting this idea of just being a normal, middle-class family on the taxpayers’ dime, they rarely give back in any significant way, and they’re constantly whining about how they don’t get enough sun or get to go on more “proper” vacations. Woe are that Cambridges. So burdened! At least Kate will finally get to use her deep-sea diving skills. You have no idea how hard it was for her to achieve that vital skill to make her proper holidays more fun.

As for Michael Middleton’s absence… that’s very interesting, isn’t it? A few months ago, there were rumors that the Middletons’ marriage was under serious strain because A) Carole moved in with the Cambridges to best stage-manage their entire family life and B) Michael has issues with how Carole pushes herself into every situation involving Will and Kate.

FFN_Wimbledon_Celebs_PAA_070815_51793180

wenn22671533

Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

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

156 Responses to “Duchess Kate & Prince William planning a November vacation in Mustique”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Sixer says:

    This is your I’m Going To Troll Sixer With Royal Wankery Until She’s Frothing day, isn’t it, Kaiser?! You do realise it takes AGES to clean spattered froth off laptop screens, don’t you?

    • Kaiser says:

      You know what’s funny? Some UK tabloids are even going after poor James Middleton. That’s how angry the press is! I’ll probably have that story tomorrow.

      • Sixer says:

        Oh noes!

        (Not oh noes poor James and his low-rent marshmallows. Oh noes there will be TWO days of it. I’ll never survive. THINK OF MY CHILDREN.)

    • Suze says:

      Heh – I knew this one was coming because how on earth could Kaiser resist it? The story is a thing of pure beauty.

      So yeah, vacationing again. Not a surprise. I am looking for the tidbit in the story. Is it the possible absence of Michael and James Middleton? The men in the family aren’t showing a united front with Normal Bill, for sure.

      Evil Carol is saving the monarchy, though, so she should be present on vacations. I am beginning to love Evil Carol.

      • Sixer says:

        I think Evil Carol looks a bit like Anjelica Huston. If there is ever a biopic about How Evil Carol Saved The Windsors, I vote Anjelica in the lead. It would be like Royal Tenenbaums on crack, right?

      • Suze says:

        Evil Carol and Anjelica do share some of the same features.

        As for the movie, it would be a blockbuster. And I would be first in line to see it.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        I love Anjelica Houston! Some of the most hilarious parts of Smash was her character throwing Manhattens in the face of her obnoxious ex!

      • LAK says:

        Suze: I think the real story is the absence of the Middleton men, particularly Michael.

        The rest is eyeroll and what else is new?

        Sixer: in my version of a Carole biopic, she is played by Irene from Home and away AKA actress Lynne Granger. She’s a Carole Doppelganger.

      • anne_000 says:

        I think maybe it’s timing for James. Right now, because it’s been reported that his marshmallow co. is under $300k plus, it would have looked bad on him to admit that he’s going off to Mustique in November. I’m sure his employees and partners would not be happy to hear that.

      • Sixer says:

        LAK – both Granger and Huston have enough in the way of camp credentials to make a fully satisfying on screen Evil Carol. I could go with Granger!

      • notasugarhere says:

        Hasn’t James already shut 2 out of his 3 Uncle Gary-funded businesses? Has the last one gone down too. We wait with baited breath, Kaiser.

    • ncboudicca says:

      I’m calling for “Kaiser Trolling Sixer With Royal Wankery Until She’s Frothing Day” to be an international holiday.

  2. ladyg says:

    It’s an avalanche of Cambridge shade, and I LOVE it!

    • ncboudicca says:

      I know! I love the combination of “taking a break from her royal duties” with “hasn’t worked since May.”

      Even the most dull-witted reader must be able to read between the lines!

      • ArtHistorian says:

        The DM has had a lot of this type of articles since before Charlotte was born. They look complimentary but they are filled with back-handed compliments. It is an ingenious and sometimes elegant way of expressing criticism in a non-overt manner, usually because there are certain barriers to expressing outright, overt criticism.

        It is also a skillfull way of shaping public opinion. An outright attack might produce a public defense whereas this approach is more insidious because it subtly points out the unbalaced ration of play versus work when it comes to the Cambridges.

      • agnes says:

        At least, Kate will probably plan some more of those engagements in autumn… maybe… if it seems necessary…

      • Dena says:

        But it would have been absolutely delightful if the DM had gone just one teeny tiny step more to add . . . and that event was the birth of her own child.

      • TotallyBiased says:

        Dena–but in a VERY subtle way, they rather did point that out! “In November, Princess Charlotte will be six months old”–I’ve not been giving DM writers enough credit, methinks.

  3. Eleonor says:

    Carole Middleton and Kris Jenner should go for a brunch together.

  4. frisbee says:

    A ‘proper Vacation’ from what exactly? (joins Sixer in the ‘Spittle Sisterhood)

  5. Alexandra says:

    Because OF COURSE they need a vacation. After all, all that vacationing is making them tired, so they need a vacation to cure the vacation hangover. It’s a vicious circle. So does proper vacation mean 3 weeks instead of 2?

    • bluhare says:

      I think it means sunshine and at least a week away from their tedious humdrum existence. Poor things.

    • Sarah says:

      I’ve seen Labrador Retrievers with a better work ethic. At least they bring back the ball when you throw it. The Cambridges? Not so much.

    • Eleonor says:

      In the last 8 years I’ve moved 3 times and changed jobs, so haven’t done a proper vacation in 8 years…and I’ve been working…I’ve done some w-end here and there, but not a vacation. And I consider myself lucky because I’ve been working.
      That’s how us peasants do.

  6. Lila says:

    They represent their sophisticated welfare so poorly. At least lie to the British public and make them believe you work but these people don’t give a crap! It’s funny because Harry used to be labeled a party boy and presumably lazy and look at all the good things he’s accomplished! He’s done great work and yet his brother, who will be king can’t even work for a weeks without a “proper break”.

  7. Astrid says:

    I wasn’t sure where Mustique was so I looked it up on Wiki. Here’s what wiki says about their famous guests…hahahahaha

    “Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, who is second-in-line to the Throne of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and the Duchess of Cambridge vacation in Mustique often.”

    • Cricket says:

      I just watched a documentary? or some kind of program about the Man Who Owned Mustique on Netflix. It’s worth a watch for the insight and Princess Margaret appears as well. Wow, what a strange group. I’ll take my holiday/vacation elsewhere to avoid that lot (if attitudes are the same). It was filmed in 2000 I think.

      • Jaded says:

        I remember all the kerfuffle with Princess Margaret and her boy-toy Roddy Llewellyn vacationing in Mustique – much drinks, many fornications, party party party! The public was aghast! Margaret’s then-husband Lord Snowdon dubbed the island “Mustake”. Ahhh…good times, good times.

      • Citresse says:

        Don’t forget about Margaret and her gangster boyfriend. They were fond of Mustique too. And the gangster boyfriend (forget his name, he’s long gone deceased) makes Gary Goldsmith look like an angel.

      • Zombie Shortcake says:

        Ok that’s why the Middletons love it there; it’s just like Uncle Gary’s!

  8. Birdix says:

    Is this a shift that the public expects them to work for their position, like an American president or senator? Isn’t the point of being royalty that you don’t have to do anything? When did the shift happen?
    Apparently it’s a shift–as I was typing the earth literally moved (not too much! but enough for me to consider jumping under my desk).

    • Betsy says:

      They always did work – well, not these two – even though the work was of a different sort than the rest of us do.

    • Suze says:

      George V and Queen Mary set the work of noblesse oblige into motion. Monarchy in Great Britain had lost much of its authority and the royal family had to be seen doing something for the public good.

    • Sixer says:

      They’re supposed to fulfil a kind of super-charged First Lady role, plus a bit of constitutional flummery.

    • notasugarhere says:

      They have a massive website about themselves and what they’re supposed to do. My posts with web addresses always get blocked, but you can find it by searching for The Official Website of the British Monarchy. Most of the European royal houses have something similar and a few, like the Danes and Dutch, provide information in multiple languages.

  9. Betsy says:

    You know, I feel ill for the people who are actually in need of a vacation and these a**clowns fritter away months. MONTHS on vacation. The Royals have always been pampered poodles, but they had a sense of duty for it. I’m not British and don’t care if the Royals exist or not, but William and Kate are la-zy.

    • Bluebell says:

      Kate had a baby in May. The baby is what – three months old? In my book, that’s newborn. Kate shouldn’t have to work when she has a THREE MONTH OLD BABY. In any regular job in the UK she’d be on maternity leave for most likely six months, even up to a year. In fact, as you add on your holiday entitlement, many mums, if they can afford the last bit of maternity leave is unpaid, can be off for as long as thirteen months if they tack their holiday leave (which accrues while they’re on maternity) onto the end of their official maternity leave.

      • Jaded says:

        Bluebell, she doesn’t go to an office for 8-10 hours a day doing mindless yet taxing work for some wanker of a manager who yells and screams at you. She goes out for an hour or so, cuts a ribbon or shakes some hands or meets with some charity people, then goes back to her lavish and publicly funded environment complete with a multitude of staffers so she can exercise, get her hair done and shop.

        That is not work, it’s a cakewalk compared to what 99% of the rest of the working world does.

      • notasugarhere says:

        In any regular job in the UK, she would have been required to work 40 hours a week for a year before qualifying for maternity leave.

      • Sixer says:

        Plus, after the first 18 weeks at 90% of your normal pay, which usually includes 6 weeks before the birth, UK maternity leave pay is about £100 a week. So you know, a great many of the plebs can’t afford to take it all.

      • Sparkly says:

        Bluebell, I am so with you about maternity leave and new moms (and whole families) having the opportunity to properly ‘babymoon’ together…

        …but these people churn out money (while their countrymen’s work supports them, when it should be the other way around), and it almost completely revolves around redecorating, hair, and vacations. They have the opportunity to do so much good, and turning up to read to children for half a morning is a quarter’s worth of work that deserves another trip to Mustique? Showing up to take photo ops of the job you’re supposed to be doing? I’d have to agree that they’re pampered and lazy. This doesn’t seem to be baby bonding time so much as a disappointing pattern that now has the added strength of being a poor example to two children (one of whom is future monarch). They get less of a pass, imo.

      • anne_000 says:

        @ Bluebell

        What is ‘work’ for them? Showing up, smiling or looking solemn, shaking hands, pretend to be watching and listening, say a sentence or two, and be thanked repeatedly for showing up in the first place? Any speeches or transportation or scheduling or coordination work that has to be done is worked out by their office staff. All they have to do is get their bodies into the car, copter, plane, and then walk out.

        I can understand that parents should spend time bonding with their kids. But since we’ve already seen them out several times spending hours, even whole days, without their kids. they’ve proven to the public that they are capable of still being bonded to the kids without being with them 24/7.

        And if you’re worried about Kate’s mental and physical fragility because she gave birth back in May, then look at the news coverage of her times away from the kids. She seems strong and fit enough for a charity visit.

        Surely they can spend 45 minutes or less visiting a charity or making a video speech fundraising for their charities. 45 minutes is FAR LESS than that the self-indulging times they spend away from their kids.

      • Suze says:

        Sixer, that’s interesting about UK maternity leave. I didn’t know the pay was reduced after four months.

        Working stiffs – who probably need it the most since they have fewer resources for new baby daycare – probably can’t afford the entire year. But all you hear is that you can get a year off.

        I am starting to become a socialist.

      • Sixer says:

        Suze – What happens is this: the state pays back the employer for 18 weeks of maternity leave at 90% of the employees wages and up to the rest of a year at the reduced rate. It’s up to the employer and at the employer’s expense whether or not they top that up. And, as you can imagine, the plebbier you are or the lower the level of the job you do, the less likely the employer is to top it up.

        I call myself a left libertarian – too much central planning in socialism for me. But yes. If a single income does not support the average family, then someone has to step in with childcare and/or welfare spending. I like to think that this shouldn’t necessitate “big government” or central planning, but voluntary behaviour from the whole community – individuals, business and government. Children are our future, dontchaknow (well, our future taxpayers, anyway!)

      • Suze says:

        Sixer: Thank you for the clear and concise explanation. Whenever we are playing maternity leave wars on some blog (which the US always loses, shame on us) someone always throws out the “UK gets a year” comment. I am interested in how these leaves are funded and how companies administer them since all we hear around these parts is that extended leaves would break a company financially and structurally.

        What were we talking about again? Oh, yes, Cambridge vacays. Carry on.

      • bluhare says:

        PROPER vacays, Suze. Because having several months off in your country mansion with swimming pool and tennis court is not a real holiday.

      • Sixer says:

        PS: whatever happens vis a vis pay, the employer MUST give a woman the full year off if she wants it and MUST give her her job back at the end of it.

      • Jib says:

        Bluebell, I don’t know one woman in the US who can afford to take her unpaid maternity leave for a year. Not one. And I’m a teacher.

        My third child was 3 days old and I was at a job interview for a new teaching job. Two months later, I was working full time with 3 kids and a husband gone 4 nights a week as a firefighter. THIS is how 90% of the world lives, not moaning about the lack of sun and much needed vacation when you haven’t done an engagement since May. Please. My heart just aches for poor, overworked Kate, with her nany and night nurse and staff.
        I’m amazed anyone buys their PR.

      • notasugarhere says:

        bluhare, you know it isn’t a proper holiday if they are forced to look at the old tennis court blocking their view. Decision on that $100,000 build should come any day now.

      • LegalKatz says:

        Just to clarify the position regarding Statutory Maternity leave in the UK. Statutory Maternity Pay (SMP) is paid for up to 39 weeks.

        You get:
        90% of your average weekly earnings (before tax) for the first 6 weeks then;

        £139.58 or 90% of your average weekly earnings (whichever is lower) for the next 33 weeks.

        The remainder of the year is unfunded, but the employers must keep your job open. It’s not amazing, but it’s better than some countries. Public sector worker tend to a better deal.

      • Sixer says:

        Katz – I think what Suze was more interested in was who was paying for this, employer or state. And for the compulsory part, it’s mostly the state (92% or 103%) – https://www.gov.uk/recover-statutory-payments/reclaiming.

      • Kip says:

        Um, nannies.

      • Betsy says:

        Three months is most definitely not a newborn, that ceases to be the case at one month.

        Having had two children myself, I have to say that I was still a physical wreck many months after the birth, and after the second was born, I was pretty much good to go a week after delivery (except the engorgement – if ever I have a third, i hope to avoid the epi to see if that makes the difference it’s reputed to make). Three months out? You bet your bottom I could have been going to “work” one day a week for three hours. I fully support maternity leave, but Kate and William’s laziness predates anything to do with that.

  10. Vava says:

    Carol made a lot of money from those photos of her and Georgie at the beach, and so she’s using that to take the family to Mustique! LOLOL.

    It will be interesting to see if Michael M. goes along. THAT is the real story.

    • Cricket says:

      Just read a DM comment that said German TV was reporting the Middletons (Carole & Mike) have separated? Wwwwhhhaaattt? This can’t be true.

  11. Suze says:

    I’m moving in a different direction on this one since we know that they take lots of vacations. I just wish they’d go somewhere else for a change. It gets dull, this does! Does it always have to be Mustique? Does it always have to be a beach? How about the mountains for a change?

    • COSquared says:

      I don’t think they have the mental to think of somewhere else. Apparently, it’s basically pap-free, so you know folks can slip a holiday w/o the public knowing.

    • MinnFinn says:

      I understand their desire for beach vacations. If I lived in London or Norfolk County I would hate the climate and I would spend all of my time off at a sunny beach but I would mix it up. Mustique does not appeal to me at all.

    • notasugarhere says:

      They sneak away for skiing in Switzerland or France in March or April. Wonder if William is cheap-enough to mend fences with Andrew and Fergie so he can stay in their new chalet for free?

    • Ski bunny says:

      We go to our cottage every year. And Mexico in the winter. What’s wrong with that? Maybe they like it there!!!

      • Suze says:

        I go to my cottage every weekend, there’s nothing wrong with it. I’m sure they like Mustique. But they go there at least twice a year – there’s other beaches, if beach they must, and many other lovely places to relax.

        But certainly they can do whatever they want!!! It was just a sort of joke because I’m tired of hearing about Mustique.

  12. LAK says:

    Their entire life is Petit Trianon the poor darlings.

  13. Talie says:

    I would be stunned if Michael and Carole got divorced. The press would devour them both and it would be a mess.

    • frisbee says:

      I am a bad, bad person clearly, because i think it would be a highly entertaining, great big pulsating hot, mess 🙂

      • bluhare says:

        Stop it! You’ll get Sixer going again!!

        But I agree. I do not want to make fun of someone else’s misfortune but the stories if they divorce will be epic.

      • hmmm says:

        I’m salivating at the thought. I’ll sit beside you.

      • Sixer says:

        A tidal wave of froth. A veritable froth tsunami. A Middleton Extreme Weather Event.

      • Liberty says:

        No non nein nyet! I love these crazy couples as is!

        Plus I don’t want to read the tabs’ “Party in Pieces?” space-wasting headlines when I could be reading about Willy doing nature walks with Jecca and Mrs M taking PGTips for baby elephant rides while Chucks weeps frustrated grandpa tears.

      • frisbee says:

        I’ve just got to say, you are ALL REALLY on a roll today!

      • FLORC says:

        This whole thing! Sixer’s froth mania. LAK’s Petit Trainon on point comment. All of it! You ladies are nailing it all today! And I can’t add to perfection so i’ll just sit her laughing with tears!

    • Suze says:

      For all my Evil Carole joking, I do not want to see a decades long marriage collapse.

      But I have a grudging respect for Carole that isn’t really shared by many on this blog – which I understand. I just think she drove the Middleton engine forward during some lean years, and that she is doggedly determined that George be prepared for his royal role.

      • bluhare says:

        No, I’m listening, Suze. I don’t like the “we want to be better than you” stories about her, but I really like your point about Evil Carole saving the monarchy. I’m thinking on that one. And i do give her respect for working for what they have; that part I’m right with you on.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I don’t think being an attentive (and possibly over-engaged) grandmother means she’s saving the monarchy. Do you think she’s giving him lessons on the constitution?

        She’s always been the glue that kept W&K together. Now her biggest ambition will come true with PGTips. But she needs to realize that there won’t be a monarchy unless her daughter gets off her a$$. It is amazing that Carole seems to have only understood Diana the fashion and pap magnet, but the whole charity and work aspect has eluded her.

      • Olenna says:

        nota, you are absolutely right. Carole missed some key lessons during her Diana obsession. She does not have a firm grasp of royal life and the civil obligations that go with it because she’s been the watching it all from the outside, just like the rest of us. A few years sharing the lifestyle of her daughter and SIL do not prepare her for coaching and rearing a monarch.

      • bluhare says:

        If she’s keeping his parents from taking him and running off to a bolthole off the coast of Scotland to hide and be private citizens, nas, she’s doing her bit to save the monarchy. HER monarchy.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I’d say she’s saving/reserving her controlling place in it. In an institution that may not exist if W&K don’t get their act together. They have run off to a bolthole, only it is in Norfolk not Scotland. Oh, and sometimes it is in Mustique, The Maldives, or Switzerland.

  14. Citresse says:

    Next thing you know, they’ll set up a satellite office of KP in Mustique then find a way to have British Taxpayers cover one hundred percent of the cost including additional housing for visiting dignitaries. The Cambridge gravy train ride is a long haul.

  15. notasugarhere says:

    Was it ever pinned down when she got the diving certification? My thought was a quick Mustique trip before the yachting event. They look very tan.

    • Citresse says:

      They’ve looked very tan all summer. I was hoping they would be putting in some office work at least, but it doesn’t seem to be the case.

  16. Liberty says:

    imaginaryPrince W: I say, Old Thing, since we’ve been stuck here in the pile for days now, and I’ve quite bloody worked my arse to the mule bone rescuing all the clumsy Kevins for the last two weeks, do tell me your Mum’s got our vacay planned! Throne of St. Vincent and The Grenadines and all that ho, rack up massive work hours just raising a bottle there, eh, wot!

    Imaginary Duchess K: Oi, she has, hasn’t she? Mustique, oi, yes! And Pips has got her new professional-type cameras ordered too! This trip’s the only thing keepin’ me goin’, what wiv shovin’ out that great pink pukepot Carrie Charlotte and then going to the gym! An’ this ruddy borin’ hidin’ out now so the people hear about Uncle Gar’s danger-paps and feel terrible for us, so we can get Pips going as sole royal photog-girl, which leaves ME tryin’ to do all me shoppin’ online! Cor! It ain’t the same, even wiv the nannies and staff dressed as shopgals. But, look, durrr, lovely, I’ve found me some lovely new holiday bikinis, ‘aven’t I just, from Mode Du Bluhare! And these, by SixerSexySwim, ain’t they fine, look at this fringed pleather one! Oi, ‘ow shall I ‘ever last ‘til November! Can’t we have a mini-break! Just a small few days like five or ten, on a great Russian yacht docked in the French sea, wivvout the kiddies but wiv me mum and Pips and James and some spendin’ dosh? Pips and James say you can buy things on Russian yachts if you ask! Even your brother called me on me mobile and says I need a break, that I’m already up to forty-two hours work this year includin’ ‘ard labor wiv the spare, and he’s worried about me! You never worry about me!

    iPW: Well, it’s like this, wot, Old Thing – the Office says you’ll need a few pictures taken at places filled with sick sprogs or unhappy chavs, wot, before we go, eh? And
    then, they’re a bit concerned about James, eh, some French thing with the nanny we misplaced, eh, wot? So best we go under the porridge a bit right now, eh, wave at the little leper sprog for the lenses, eh, until November. More time to shop, wot, think of it, and I’ve a few loose end in Spain that need my attention, all this being here doing the old father at home bit, eh – no, don’t call your mum, ho! I just mean, eh, just throw in an hour or two more waving, wot, har, before November while the Office sorts out James and our nanny and your uncle and nice Mr Putin and –

    iDK: It ain’t fair! You sound just like me dad, and you know mum tossed him off the vacay for suggestin’ I needed to get me hands dirty wiv some soddin’ poors or the street sods will ‘ave me ‘ead and ‘arm the family business! Unfair! I mean, look at me ring! Me ring says: “yer on the holiday bus fer life now, pet!” don’t it! But where’s me nice holidays THIS year? Why, if you look at any airport it’s filled wiv people going on vacay as they please every day! My Miss Tara Reid goes anywhere she pleases, but look at me! I’ve never been so trapped, ‘ave I! I did as I liked before I was stuck wiv you, great borin’ old toad, sittin’ here watchin’ yer hair fall on the carpet, like that’s a life! And the great beefy tots, fairly drainin’ the energy from me body ain’t they, barely ‘ave time fer gym and the massage, do I! Gary George ate my best wedges Thursday last, I’ll ‘ave you know! I’ve ‘ad it! I want to be on a yacht! Yer brother says, if we was minor royals, we could be on vacay all the time like that old strumpet cousin of yours! We wouldn’t be used like this, all the day long, savin’ people, havin’ babies for the photogs to make dinner money, ‘aven’t we done our bit by July wot! That’s what ‘e says! So I want a pre-vacay practice vacay, with sunshine and shops, and I want it soon, or mum sends the pics to —

    iPW: — let me see what I c’n do! Now that you say it, it’s true, we’re being unfarily used while Pops and the Red Grunt, where are they? Saving animals, orphans, making money, all that rot? I am calling the Office now! How d’you feel about France? It’s just seconds from Spain, I can handle my other needy business matters at the same time!

    • Sixer says:

      Liberty – have you ever heard of Nigel Molesworth “the “goriller of 3b and curse of St Custard’s”?

      First appeared in Punch and went on to be the protagonist in a series of screamingly funny books. I think you would love him!

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Molesworth

      • Liberty says:

        @Sixer: oh my god!! Oh my god!!!!!!!! This is so cool, how have I never heard of this! I am going to see if I can order one today. I am literally quivering w gleeful anticipation. I love my Jeeves, but this!!! Thank you!!! Sending you a hug of bliss!!!! 🙂

      • Sixer says:

        I think there’s a spoof twitter for him somewhere. Hang on….

        http://twitter.com/reelmolesworth

        There you go. Sample tweet: “boys rush to clame they are being RADIKALISED at st custards thus to avoid havving to go on hols to beastly FRANCE with mater & pater hurah”

        Teehee.

        The books are hilarious, honestly.

      • Liberty says:

        Sixer, I am sitting here googling all this and it is amazing. I hadn’t found that twitter yet, thank you!! I just sent your links to a friend who does some mag cartoons, asking if he’s heard of it, probably has though he is in the States. I love love love a day that brings such unexpected treasure. Seriously, I can’t thank you enough. I am so happy!!! Hee.

      • Sixer says:

        Welcome! I expect you to start saying “chiz” as often as possible! I’ve still got a copy of How To Be Topp hanging about here somewhere.

      • Liberty says:

        Haha oh no perfection! “….a swiz or a swindle as any fule knoe.”

        Swots, snekes, and oiks!!! I am in word heaven.

      • frisbee says:

        Such a shame, Radio 4 did a brilliant version last year ‘ The Skool Days of Nigel Molesworth’ with Imelda Staunton, just looked it up and it’s on the site but not on I player sadly – still with a bit of luck they might repeat it! Hope they do she got his voice just right – for me anyway…

    • bluhare says:

      Liberty. Your plot line is amazing . . . you know how I love the continuity!!!

      Wave at the leper sprog . . . . I think that’s one of your best ever.

      • Liberty says:

        @bluhare, thank you!! the continuity is all for you! I happily accept the challenge. Trying!! 🙂

      • bluhare says:

        I confess to some real curiosity about how you’re going to weave James Middledashian back in, but I know you can!

    • Suze says:

      Leper sprog. Dear GOD.

  17. The Original Mia says:

    Every time I hear about poor Kate and how she needs a vacation from her life as a mother of 2, I want to rip the heads off of grasshoppers because really? REALLY? I own my own business. I haven’t had a vacation in 2 years. The closest I got was going away to a bowl game last December and it was just for a day and a half. Worked before I left. Saw a patient as I came back into town. These two and their sycophants are ridiculous. The only joy I get right now is the dragging that is going to take place in the media since William decided to throw a hissy fit. Drag them! Drag them!

    • Ski bunny says:

      How is that their fault? They were born privileged and you weren’t. Either was I. The wealthier are becoming more so and the rest of us are sinking into poverty. Look to who you vote for next time. That’s who you should be blaming. Governments who don’t give a shit about the people they represent. They squander our tax dollars and we end up with less in the way of tax relief healthcare and education.

      • anne_000 says:

        @ Ski bunny

        Being born privileged doesn’t mean they were born blind and deaf and without a brain.

        They know they’re expected to do royal duties (which is basically, smile or look solemn, shake hands, pretend to be listening and watching, say a sentence or two).

        But it’s their fault, because they CHOOSE not to give back of their time and interest in exchange for the taxpayers’ money they live off of and their titles.

        They could be spending their time fundraising for charities in order to help those less fortunate than themselves.

        They could be responding to criticisms of them being work-shy and carefree by doing something to help others, but instead their response is that they’re too busy trying to live a (upper) middle class life, which they think means a part-time hobby job and spending the rest of their time indulging themselves.

        So they do have to accept responsibility for their own actions.

        What gets me is that when William was asked about doing full-time royal work, he basically said that people are making up such a term or idea about what is expected of royals and that if any duties are to be done, grandma and grandpa can still keep on doing it.

      • Suze says:

        That’s the spirit! Vote them out!

        Wait.

      • The Original Mia says:

        Excuse me? I vote for the people who are trying to make income equality a real thing. I vote for progressives and liberals who think the corporations should be taxed fairly and not given tax break after tax break and allowed to dick over their employees while crying about having to pay them a fair living wage. And even if I were born privileged, which I was, compared to many others, I’d still think William & Kate are two of the laziest, entitled twits to come out of the royal family in 4 decades. They are incredibly tone deaf. Who in their right mind with the immense wealth they have would complain about working the equivalent of 60 hours a freaking year? Seriously, STFU, Lamebridges and work a real job and get back to me. I’m not some jellus hater. I’m sick and tired of the narrative that Kate is so overwhelmed with 2 small kids that she has to jet off to a tropical island to recharge herself. Walk a mile in the shoes of any of the real working moms out there and get back to me, Duchess.

      • Ski bunny says:

        I think Royalty is outdated personally but they are good ambassadors for England plus they do a lot of charity. William is donating his wage to a charity. Charles pays for them with earned income. That income supplies jobs for a lot of people. I could go on but overall England benefits from the royal family. Look at the Royal trust and the ambulance company William works at benefited greatly when he announced he was going to be employ d there. That’s how they acquired the extra helicopter. The charitable donations went waaay up. When the queen steps down you’ll see William and the others step up to the plate. Until then I’m not going to bitch about him wanting to be with his young family or take a vacation. It’s petty!

      • anne_000 says:

        @ Ski bunny

        Just existing doesn’t make them good ambassadors for England.

        They don’t do a lot of charity work. Iirc, even their combined royal duty credits don’t add up to more than one year’s worth of work done by a senior BRF member.

        Yes, William’s people said that he’ll be donating his salary. But after all this time of having said it, they’ve never told anybody which one. I guess they’re still deciding which charity would be able to handle the HUGE paycheck he’ll be getting working the estimated 2.5 days out of every 8 days?

        Charles pays them with income earned off of taxpayers. And W&K get money directly from the Sovereign Grant (aka taxpayers) too.

        Yes, W&K spend that money on lots of people to work for them as staff. Ok. I accept that.

        Yes, they gave the copter org. a big enough copter because William’s bodyguard needed a seat to sit in.

        Yes, the donations went up because someone had to pay for William’s salary.

        The Queen’s most likely not going to step down, because all reports say that she’ll never chose to abdicate.

        After the Queen dies, Charles is the next monarch. So William would still be able to use the excuse of ‘other pressing matters’ to shy away from doing ‘full-time royal duties’ which he recently said doesn’t really exist as an actual position except in the minds of the media.

        But as he recently said, that for the time being, his grandma and grandpa could still go on working, so there’s time enough for him to do other things, then if grandma dies but grandpa still goes on living, then maybe he’ll just say grandpa could keep on working while he himself goes off doing other things?

      • notasugarhere says:

        Donations didn’t pay for the helicopter and his salary was most likely donated by the Duchy. They stated it didn’t come from regular donations. The government paid for the copter after some pressure from William.

        His role is to raise money for everybody’s emergency services, not to play at being a helicopter co-pilot.

        Look for the article entitled Bees contribute more to British economy than royal family in the Telegraph. Fact, billions in lost revenue was due to the wedding. Official tourism figures that prove royals don’t bring in tourism revenue. Fact, HM tried to use a program intended for poor elderly Britons to pay the bills at Buckingham Palace. Fact, money dedicated for BP upkeep was illegally diverted. You’ll find these facts in places like The Telegraph, The Guardian, the official tourism department of the UK.

        What Royal trust? The Princes Trust? That’s all Prince Charles. The wildlife one that William founded to take credit for the work of all the other wildlife organizations who signed on? The Foundation of the three of them? If you look at their financial figures, they bring in and expend very little money. The majority of what the Foundation claimed as “good works” recently were all Harry’s work. WWTW, Sentebale, and Invictus.

      • Ski bunny says:

        ok lets get rid of the Royal family. Want to tell me where all of the people they employ are now going to work? They also pay their taxes so where is that tax revenue going to come from? As one person I pay very little in the way of supporting the Royal family. what I do pay is for their security personnel. If they were to lose their job now I’d be paying for their unemployment insurance premiums. You should really look up a credible source as to how much the royals really cost/benefit England. There’s so much misinformation published by those who want to abolish the royals. And I repeat I think in this day and age the idea of royalty is outdated but I have to admit overall we are in a more beneficial position with them as long as they change with the times. I do believe William and Kate will encourage that when it’s their turn.

      • bluhare says:

        Read “The Queen and I” by Sue Townsend. That was one funny book about what would happen if the Monarchy were abolished. It’s older — Charles and Diana were still married — but it doesn’t really matter.

      • notasugarhere says:

        $600 million annual is the latest figure for how much the royals COST. There would be no impact on tourism, since official tourism figures prove that none of the Top 20 tourist attractions in the UK are related to royals. More people visit Windsor LegoLand than visit Windsor Castle.

        Duchy of Cornwall and Duchy of Lancaster revenues would return to the government. The majority of people working and living there would keep working and living there, because the majority of what goes on there isn’t related to royals. The Duchy Original would continue to be run by the person running it now (Charles doesn’t run it personally). Prince Trust would be run by the group who runs is now (ie. not Charles personally).

        St. James Palace and Kensington revenues would return to the government. These revenues would increase dramatically because market rate rent would be charged for all these properties. Clarence House would probably be turned into government offices.

        Buckingham Palace would be turned into a combination hotel and museum, open 365 days a year. Security personnel would be turned into security personnel here. The People would be able to see all of the treasures they own that the Queen merely holds in trust for them (but they don’t get to see because they’re locked away). The people who work there now would keep working there, along with all of the additional co-workers they’ll need to run the hotel and museum. Same for Windsor.

        bluhare: I thought that was a great book. The author knew the personalities of the royals and played them out in a twisted but logical way. Great ending.

      • LAK says:

        Ski Bunny: if the tourist boards of Britain aren’t a credible source for you, I can sincerely say that you DO subscribe to the Clinton school of redefining things.

        And the papers quoted are actually quite supportive of Royalty, particularly the Telegraph. In as much as the guardian is a paper for the republican cause, their coverage is more about transparency than an outright call for removal of the royals.

        And as for the idea that royal employees will be left destitute, removing the royals from their perch doesn’t mean shutting down the state owned portfolios whether those are palaces, farmland, investments or art collections. All that stuff will still be available as will the employees hired to maintain it all. And perhaps they will be paid properly as opposed to currently receiving salaries that don’t reflect government recommended minimum wages (google recent threatened wage strike at Windsor castle)

      • Ski bunny says:

        Lak you need to read something other than what supports your dislike. For every article against the royals there’s one that supports them. Have an open mind. It might just be enlightening!!!!

      • bluhare says:

        Ski bunny, I think if you made your points without being (not quite sure of the word but I feel a tone from you) you might get somewhere. I don’t necessarily disagree with some of your points (although I think you have two unrelated issues in your original post in this string), but I find I really don’t want to agree with you. Hope that makes sense.

        I’m very proud to admit *I*, lowly bluhare, got LAK to concede a point once. I did it by outlining why I thought my point was more valid, and I will also admit that it was only once. But I did it! And I’ve got nas mad at me by asking her for links. LAK’s always nice to me, but she wants me to pretend I’m the Baroness and invite everyone to tea all the time. Suze and I bond over Cressida2 and the AllThruster clan. Sixer’s got me fired up about frothy things. Liberty’s got my undying love until the day I die. And I’ve got FLORC all confused by mixing my slang. The operative theme? Trying to have fun.

      • LAK says:

        Ski Bunny, the h8er argument has been done to death.

        Articles, positive and negative, propagate an agenda.

        And the royal family has been employing the dark arts of propaganda since they came into being. To accept their version unquestioningly is to let them get away with all sorts that harm their subjects eg those workers at Windsor on serf wages.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Mia, they really have no concept of normal, despite their longing for a “normal” life. If either of them was required to earn a living, they wouldn’t have the slightest idea what to do. He couldn’t even keep to a military schedule, and it was shown she didn’t do the photography work for her parents. The most she ever managed was 3 days a week for 9 months as a glorified coffee girl. When all of your privileges come from someone else’s hard work? I’d personally find that embarrassing.

      The media has been very kind and patient with them for years. Kept the facts about William under wraps. Hidden separate living arrangements and time spent apart. Held off on what they really know about the Middleton “wealth”. William brought this fight down on his own head.

    • Jib says:

      I’ve had to stop reading posts about them on a very good blog by two funny women because the level of idolatry and sycophancy by them and their readers is just disheartening and disgusting. They all scream, “My ovaries are going to burst,” whenever a picture of George is shown. Ugh. Really? Disgusting.

      • Suze says:

        I know what blog you are referring to and it’s true. I do think the blog owners are very talented, though, I just avoid their royal coverage. It’s pretty syrupy and they really have no idea of what royalty entails.

        Kaiser on the other hand is my homegirl on this stuff. She dives and finds the good stuff ; ).

  18. COSquared says:

    So… DK may finally have a tiara event in October(China has rung for tea). Any bets on her getting a RFO?. I’m guessing IF she attends she’ll be finally tiara’ring(?) with the order and sash. Done her duty now, hasn’t she?

    • notasugarhere says:

      Since her duty involves working for the monarch and the people, she hasn’t really done her duty has she? Despite popular opinion, these two were not required to reproduce.

      I’ll be surprised if she has an Order.

      • bluhare says:

        May not have been required, but very definitely expected.

      • COSquared says:

        Yes Bluhare. Expected by rags and fans but not seasoned royal watchers. I find the York case a tad peculiar because it’s well known HM got on better with Sarah than Diana. No RFO?. I think DK will get it not because of work but being Prince Normal’s wife who gave us G&C.

      • Suze says:

        I think the trouble in the York marriage was very obvious intra-family long before it hit the public eye and the Queen wisely held back on the order because of it. Diana was a whirling dervish of activity back in the day and the Queen could hardly withhold an order from her. It would have been churlish.

        She will toss one at Kate eventually.

      • bluhare says:

        I was talking about reproducing not orders. If orders are for work done on behalf of HM, she’s got a ways to go. Although she’ll probably get one for appearance sake so she can wear and sash and pin something on it.

      • notasugarhere says:

        She can get a sash and still not get a Royal Family Order. HM’s personal RFO is worn on the left shoulder, but I think sashes are usually left shoulder to right hip. KM could be given a starter sash like Royal Victorian Order but not a personal RFO.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Got that backwards. Royal Victorian Order sash is right shoulder to left hip.

    • Liberty says:

      It the queen has a sense of humor, and I think she must, I hope she tosses Kitty an add-a-diamond tiara, requiring her to show the receipt for thirty hours’ solid charity work for every single rock she seeks to fill the prongs.

      And meanwhile, they have Kitty pose in the bristly empty tinny metal hat for the paps anyway, while junior is forced to do an actual demo-rescue of his beloved from the pap knob for the paying crowd, all of whom have been given free entrance and a ripe tomato.

      • bluhare says:

        That will turn it into a minimalist modern head piece that HRH The Duchess of Cambridge chose instead of wearing one with blood diamonds and everything, because frugal Kate is a shopper extraordinaire as well as international philanthropist.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I don’t need diamonds. I’d happily run off with the Steel Cut Tiara from Sweden.

      • LAK says:

        She’ll hide the tiara in her hair like she did the last two occasions she wore them. Ditto every single time she’s had decent jewellery on.

        I suppose their presence will ensure that we’ll have plenty of pictures of the occasion which means jewellery pron from the other attending guests….

      • COSquared says:

        I’ll be on WigletWatch. I’m not sure we’ll actually see much beneath all that weave. Anyways, the Steel Cut Tiara should be melted into a gardening utensil or something other than a tiara.

      • Suze says:

        Liberty, sometimes your comments make me guffaw out loud so loudly I swear the neighbors can hear.

        An “Add a Diamond” tiara. Bwah.

        You really need to write a satirical book. Poor Sue Townsend has died, there’s a niche opened up.

      • notasugarhere says:

        CoSquared, I might have to whip you with a wet wiglet for thinking that. It is odd but striking, especially when Victoria goes full Josephine when wearing it with that taupe Elie Saab.

      • Liberty says:

        Oh!!! the steel-cut!! I lurrrrrve the steel-cut that Victoria wore! .

        So no — ok, THIS one would have no intricacy, no fine work. Just lots of big empty prongs bits and…and…gobs of blue wax balls where the diamonds are to go!

        Maybe she will wear the tiara as Lorelei did in Loos’s original Gentlemen Prefer Blondes — backwards, tied to the back of her head with a ribbon, but since she has no bob, right over her bangers’n’mash headful of extensions and curls.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Ah, you mean something like Queen Silvia of Sweden’s Nine Prong Tiara (aka “The Pronger”), despised by Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor. Kitty would get that but without the stones. Each of the 500+ diamonds in The Pronger would have to be earned through a royal engagement lasting a minimum of one hour.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        I have to agree with NOTA on the steel cut tiara- Victoria does know how to wear this odd Napoleonic beauty. She’s actually really got a head for wearing really tall tiaras that would make anyone else look ridiculous.

        The steel cut has slowly grown on me – not the least because it is such an unusual and interesting example of an early 19th century tiara. BTW, the Swedish RF also has a smaller steel cut tiara, which is more along the lines of a small bandeau tiara.
        https://tiarasandtrianon.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/other-steel-cut-tiara.jpg?w=584&h=426

      • Liberty says:

        Nota, yes, but gosh you are kind. I wanted thirty hours per stone, with a signed witness statement from a peasant confirming her effort (i.e. Waving, Sitting With Children, Speaking in Elderly Centers even from giant two-word cards, or Shearing a Sheep for Mothers for Woolies).

        However, thinking of the sterling lucidity of all your comments, yes, now i wonder if thirty hours of tasks may be too stern and daunting for our special Kitty. So, shall we stick to your one hour work requirement for minor stones. But, can we stay at say, ten hours for anything ten carats and up?

      • COSquared says:

        If we’re going to measure tiaras by work then the tiny Halo Scroll suits her fine. The Nine Prong Tiara is Cut Steel’s glamourous foreign cousin, IMO.

  19. Lucky Charm says:

    I don’t think the “Carole moved in with them” was blown out of proportion. Staying with them for a couple of weeks after the baby is born is a perfectly normal thing to do. After I had my son, my mother came and stayed with us for two weeks, helping watch the other kids and taking over running the household while I just had to take care of the baby. Even if we could have afforded a housekeeper, cook and nanny, that still wouldn’t have changed how helpful it was to have my mom there “in charge” of everything else so I didn’t have to.

  20. anne_000 says:

    They obviously need a break from the busy and stressful life they’ve chosen to have.

    – The suffering incurred having all your party-planning work go to naught when rain cancels out your big garden parties.
    – The sleepless nights worrying about having to do light work scheduled to be done some time in the future.
    – Long, tiring days spent at polo games, yachting visits, tennis games.
    – The backaches waiting to happen while joy-riding in a copter 2.5 days out of every 8 days just to earn a much needed paycheck.
    – The pains of being forced to socialize by attending weddings, doing pub crawls, and sitting at the kitchen table having people laugh at all your jokes and hanging on your every word.
    – Going through the emotional outrage of being able to see your tennis court and swimming pool from your estate’s windows.
    – The hardship of the one-on-one bonding you feel indebted to create with your kids whenever the nannies and your mother/MIL are not around.

    I don’t know how long they’re going to lounge around in Mustique, but I think they’re justified if they should decide to relax there at least a month or so.

    • COSquared says:

      What a taxing life! Such industriousness MUST be rewarded!

    • The Original Mia says:

      +1 They have it soooo hard. Sarcasm heavily implied.

    • Liberty says:

      Oh, anne_000, now that you’ve explained it so clearly, I have a knot in my throat, and am weeping a bit for their sad lot in life. One doesn’t realize the hell they endure until one adds it up like this!* Now, in thinking it over, I think the queen should allow them a full decade in Mustique, and force Harry to take over for his poor orphaned pap-stressed brother.

      *sarcasm, and I adore you.

  21. Maria A. says:

    Would someone explain to me the appeal of a boring place like Mustique?
    Seriously, someone?
    I’d so take Italy, or France or anyplace other than boring old Mustique.

  22. Miss Gloss says:

    Is it okay to confess that I really don’t care for these people? She seems like an opportunist and she also reminds me of an old sorority sister of mine who was the worst! And he seems spineless. Neither seem to really contribute much to society either. Disappointing.