Moir: No one predicted that the royals would flop so hard after QEII’s death

Last week, a new exhibition opened up at Buckingham Palace. Ahead of what would have been Queen Elizabeth II’s 100th birthday, curators put together an exhibition of the late queen’s frocks, bags and hats. Apparently, the exhibition is already a huge success and tickets are being sold at a steady clip. So what’s the problem? The exhibition is another reminder that the magic of the monarchy died with QEII. The left-behinds are dull, lazy, compromised, incandescent with rage and consumed with the charismatic royals who live in California. That’s not me saying this – it’s Jan Moir, the Daily Mail columnist. From her column, “Who would have imagined things would get so bad – and so sour – for the Royals so soon after we lost the Queen?” LMAO.

This week, on the eve of what would have been her centenary, a huge exhibition of the late Queen’s fashion opens at Buckingham Palace – and already looks to be a blockbuster.

‘We’re selling 60 tickets every 15 minutes. And that’s before all the publicity starts,’ a palace steward told me on Thursday morning at the Press preview. Crammed with more than 300 exhibits, including accessories and jewels alongside the outfits, Queen Elizabeth II: Her Life In Style has already sold out for this month. It runs until October in the King’s Gallery, but if you want to go, don’t hang about.

I have to say, the demand is cheering; a mark of the esteem and affection in which the late Queen is still held. In the future, would loyal subjects queue around the block to see Queen Camilla’s box pleats and Country Casuals specials, to gaze through glass at the dark coat she wore when leaving The Ritz with the then Prince Charles in 1999, their first demi-official public appearance together? Somehow, I doubt it.

In contrast, here is Queen Elizabeth’s fascinating, dutiful life measured out in tweeds and silks, in ermine and umbrellas… The suits, the coat dresses, the ritzy gowns with their lush beading and embroidery which formed the glory of her global tourdrobe, plus the public-facing outfits she wore to see her own family get married or buried or crowned. Look at this precision tailoring in which she armed herself to worship and to mourn. Just gasping, even if the exhibition is both wonderful and oddly sad.

After all, the Queen was 96 when she died, a good innings by any account. Yet once upon a time she attended Ascot and state banquets in these fluttering, vibrant outfits, she welcomed presidents, knighted the deserving, accepted bouquets, fell in love with a handsome sailor. Now they are just clothes hanging on faceless mannequins, ghosts in the gallery, empty shells on the lonely beach of decease.

It has been nearly four years since the Queen died – and I can’t be alone in thinking that her passing still leaves a painful void at the heart of British public life. There was always a feeling that after HM had gone to the great palace in the sky, the Royal Family would never be quite the same again, but who could have imagined things would get so bad, so sour, so soon?

Hecklers shouting at King Charles and Prince William in the streets. Her favourite son, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, utterly disgraced, exiled in Norfolk, while his fungicidal ex-wife Fergie the Bogeywoman is hiding under a rock somewhere. Not to mention Beatrice and Eugenie, fighting against the tide, but slowly being engulfed by this sulphurous scandal.

Meanwhile, in America, an increasingly desperate Duke and Duchess of Sussex continue to traduce the monarchy by making terrible television shows, embarking on fake royal tours and offering themselves up for sale.

Dear God. In a way, I’m glad our former monarch did not live to see any of this. It would have killed her.

[From The Daily Mail]

Personally, I think ALL of the royalists knew this back in 2022. It’s just been a slow-motion cope ever since, trying to convince everyone that people really like Queen Side Chick or that a bald demon is the most popular royal ever. In fact, I still believe that the so-called “modern monarchy” was as good as dead when they couldn’t figure out a way to accept and include a woman of color. They couldn’t modernize that far, and they’ve been reeling from the fallout ever since. Anyway, I’m always happy to see the Daily Mail acknowledge that William and Charles’s crowds are sparse and that they keep getting heckled. Something I keep thinking about is… why did people stop throwing eggs at Charles? For several months after he became king, eggs were being thrown at him with some regularity. Why did they stop??

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

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

67 Responses to “Moir: No one predicted that the royals would flop so hard after QEII’s death”

  1. Tessa says:

    M o i r just has to slam the sussexes
    No mention of how scooter is lazy and grabbing estates. And how badly the sussexes are treated. The sussexes are not desperate

  2. The Queen knew the monarchy would flop after she died ! She knew she left a weak son and his incompetent heir in charge and she knew they would f**k it up royally!! She knew her favorite son was a pedo which would add to the chaos!!

    • Debbie says:

      Moir conveniently forgot about Charles’ suitcases full of cash, and Kate’s adventures in photography on that fateful Mother’s Day. Or that thug going on a reality tv show. But sure, all of a sudden, they wish to count the Sussexes as “family” to the queen to be included in this story.

    • Lucky Charm says:

      @Susan Collins, Maybe that’s why she insisted on no half-in/half-out for the Sussexes, because she knew what a shitshow it was going to be after she was gone and wanted them far away from the fallout.

  3. Tessa says:

    M o I r it should be reminded that the queen was actively protecting Andrew and paid off the lawsuit against him. She also brought fergie back into the fold. She did not put scooter in His place and allowed his ousting the sussexes. She allowed the bad things to happen

  4. SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

    Eggs got expensive.

    • Liane says:

      This. Not wasting perfectly good food on the royals.

    • CatGotMyTongue says:

      Fair point. Perhaps rotten tomatoes would be cheaper.

      I do think the signs are very effective. In the states the No Kings protesters also wear yellow.

      “Nobody could predict” hahaha.

      Lots of us here did IIRC. I’m always curious about what they will be up to next!

    • Kittenmom says:

      Yes. And also since charles was being treated for *real* cancer, people probably thought they’d ease up on the more physical forms of dissent. The signs work just as well.

    • Red Snapper says:

      People got arrested for the egg throwing because it’s assault. That’s probably why it stopped.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      “eggs were being thrown at him with some regularity. Why did they stop??”

      Protesters came to the conclusion that KCIII and Peggington are not worth the price of a dozen rotten eggs.

    • Kaaaaz says:

      Indeed. As a wise man would say, IN THIS ECONOMY who can afford to throw essential grocery items away.

      Plus, WTF does describing Ferg as “fungicidal” mean?
      Does she kill mold with her presence? 🤔

    • Kaaaaz says:

      Indeed. As a wise man would say, IN THIS ECONOMY who can afford to throw essential grocery items away.

      Plus, WTF does describing Ferg as “fungicidal” mean?
      Does she kill mold with her presence? 🤔

      • Mayp says:

        @kaaaaaz, I was wondering the same thing! 😜😄🤣

      • IdlesAtCranky says:

        “Fungicidal Fergie” —
        Where She Walks,
        Mushrooms Wither

        … maybe she’s known in inner press circles for needing treatment for toenail fungus? Given her toe history that would be mildly funny, I guess?

    • Siri says:

      I don’t think it helps them get their message across to people they want to support their cause by throwing eggs at an elderly man with cancer. Protesting and staying on their necks in comment sections will do more to help their cause grow than doing something that can possibly gain the royal family sympathy.

      • Bqm says:

        I think it’s a combo. Why risk arrest (and the bad pr of pelting an old man with cancer) when you can show up with bright signs and your voice and get attention? It’s just smart strategy.

  5. JayBlue says:

    The royal family has been on the downswing for decades, especially following Diana’s death. I was 7/8 at the time, and I still remember the outrage at the queen refusing to come home from her holiday or whatever until Tony Blair stepped in. I can’t say I remember the royals ever making a headline for a good reason, outside of marriage/kids, either.

    The queen dying wasn’t the final straw or anything, but I think it made a lot of people realise how useless she actually was in affecting change or making an actual difference to anyone but herself. Here in scotland, she’s pretty universally hated, along with the rest of them. She would lobby parliament personally to get around laws she didn’t like in scotland, particularly regarding her precious blood sports. She treated the whole country like a holiday home where she could do what she wanted. Royal reporters need to remember that Britain isn’t just England, and the rest of us have opinions too. Not my king, indeed.

    • Gloriana says:

      Thanks for sharing your clear-eyed perspective. She wasn’t some sweet hold lady who put country first. She put herself first and thought she and her family were above the laws common mortals had to follow. Just because she went out and did something during WW2, doesn’t mean she was a saint.

  6. Amy Bee says:

    I think people stopped throwing eggs at Charles because those who did it were getting arrested by the police. The press freak out about Harry leaving and their failure to recover ever since was an indication that press knew that popularity of the Royal Family was going to fade after the Queen died.

  7. Jan says:

    Poor lazy eye Moir, Meghan and Harry have to earn their living.
    The BM are pissed that the Sussexes don’t care what they say or do, and continue to live their lives to the fullest.
    They are always trying to look down on people earning an honest living, while they’re going through people’s garbage to earn theirs.

  8. anotherlily says:

    The egg throwing stopped because it is a criminal offence. A few people were arrested. Most were given an official police warning but at least one , Patrick Thelwell , was prosecuted.

    The anti- monarchy group who organise protests are careful to keep within the law.

  9. Eurydice says:

    A funny description of Sarah, but she’s a fungus, not fungicidal. If she were a fungicide, Royal Lodge would have been cleaned out long ago.

    • sunniside up says:

      Love it.

      • Brassy Rebel says:

        Yes. Where was the editor? The fungus “is hiding under a rock somewhere”. ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

    • Mightymolly says:

      I choked on that description and rushed to see if it meant something else in British. 🤦‍♀️

    • bisynaptic says:

      Yeah, I was confused by that one.

    • SarahCS says:

      Fungus the Bogeyman is a children’s character.

      • IdlesAtCranky says:

        Ohhh, that’s the connection, thank you SarahCS!

        “Fungus the Bogeyman is a 1977 children’s picture book by Raymond Briggs that follows a day in the life of a working-class Bogeyman who lives underground with other foul creatures, detailing the mundane and disgusting aspects of his job scaring humans…”

        I bet when MoreGarbage wrote “fungicidal ex-wife Fergie the Bogeywoman is hiding under a rock somewhere” what she meant to say is that Fergie is fungus-esque or fungus-ish, and either she just got it wrong (since she’s not very bright) or AutoCarrot did her dirty.

        Either way it’s a little funny that she couldn’t even get her insult straight.

        Better theory than my first idea that it was some weird reference to toenail fungus, anyway.

  10. Avonlea says:

    I still can’t believe the royals completely wiffed Covid. That would have been the perfect opportunity to remind people why they continue to exist- to bolster the nation. Queen Elizabeth gained popularity during ww2 for going out and doing something. William would have had to be slightly less lazy and think about others, so no go.

  11. Tessa says:

    Another bad move by that family was censoring of the Bashir interview by scooter and scooter calling diana,paranoid. And the queen was around when Meghan was allowed to be trashed. The queen never bothered to put a,stop to it.

  12. Eliza says:

    Best word to describe the left behind’s is abhorrent.

  13. Monika says:

    This is a very nostalgic and romanticised view of QEII reign. QEII built the foundation the Monarchy is standing on now and it is crumbling because QEII did not tackle necessary issues such as Andrew and his involvement with Epstein. She did not reign in Charles’ and Willi’s leaking stories about Harry and Meghan to the press, feeding them to the wolves. QEII did also not address legacy issues such as slavery and colonialism. QEII is one of the reason that the Monarchy is in peril right now.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      Excellent point, Monika. I’m bewildered why anyone would be scooping up tickets to see her old dresses, handbags, and gloves. Do they want to make sure she’s dead?

      • Monika says:

        Thanks for the laugh Brassy Rebel.

      • Eurydice says:

        I’m not a fan of Elizabeth, but I’d try to go if I were in London. Fashion and its history interests me. The Royal Collection Trust website has a lot of photos and background information – that should save me the cost of a trip.

    • Hypocrisy says:

      Exactly what I was going to post, but worded better.. acting like the Queen didn’t know exactly what was happening in regards to the hate campaign against the Sussex’s being used as cover for her son(s) raping children and women while trading state secrets is ridiculous she paid VRG off so his treasonous crimes wouldn’t come out.. none of them cared about the sex trafficking part Epstein was a welcomed friend just like Jimmy Savile was.. she was given a lot of undeserved grace during her lifetime, it needs to stop now that she is dead and her messy family is still being publicly funded and still running a hate campaign against the Sussex’s ever time AMW has a new Epstein photo or email released or whenever Peggy has a rage tantrum.

  14. Lorelei says:

    I hate that we can’t even fully enjoy these well-deserved stories without every writer always feeling the need to get in a dig at the Sussexes. I know it’s because their names alone will draw more clicks than all of the left-behinds put together, but it’s so frustrating that there can never just be a negative story about these people on their own.

  15. CJW says:

    All of this aside, I really want to see this exhibition. Because she was Queen for so long, the fashion spans of one woman for almost a century would be fascinating to see.

    • mighytmolly says:

      There was recently an exhibit of the Tudors clothing and jewelry traveling the country. I saw that, and it was fascinating. I would see this if it were in my town, but I wouldn’t waste precious vacation days in London seeing this.

  16. KimmyChoo says:

    Apres moi, le deluge.

  17. Jane says:

    She was queen for 70 years. That covers 17.5 presidencies. Since Truman. She made some massive errors and grew into her role and still made errors. I don’t think she was evil.

  18. Lucy says:

    The phrase “Queen went to the great palace in the sky,” sent me. I’m still giggling. Sounds like they’re talking about a corgi, not a person.

    • Debbie says:

      It’s funny you should say that phrase about a “palace in the sky”, it stood out to me as well. I thought how sad that she would envision heaven as a place where there would be class divisions like “royals” and “subjects.” That’s reason number 45 why I think they will never voluntarily get rid of the monarchy, because even when they dream of the Windsors, these people curtsy. They love to take orders.

  19. Lady Digby says:

    I also noticed that she omitted criticising Will for failing to step up since he became PoW after the late Queen died in 2022. He ‘s dabbled since 2016 for 10 whole years since he supposedly became a Full-time royal?! He’s averaged between 100 to 200 events a year no where near the 500 standard. The quality and quantity aren’t there. He isn’t taking ANY of it seriously and yet we have an expensive crisis manager spinning his unbothered indifference to substance as quiet faith and duty!! Yes the taxpayer is paying for the crisis manager, RR and bots to pretend that him being disdainful about doing any work in return for his life of luxury, is fine and dandy. It isn’t and especially now when UK population is under pressure to work hard until extended retirement age, value for money has to be considered. Wilbur won’t get away with shirking when he inherits!

    • Tessa says:

      The queen should never have allowed scooter to postpone full time royal work by allowing him the so called work as air ambulance co pilot in helicopter. He had photo ops and skipped shifts it was a travesty

  20. TN Democrat says:

    Everyone knew by the 90s/early 2000s that the monarchy wouldn’t last long after Elizabeth left his mortal coil. She never updated her style after the 60s and leaned into the dowdy matron look for a reason. Thanks for pointing out how unpopular the left behinds are though, Jan. The “not my king” poster perfectly photographed through the windows of the gold carriage opposite both Charles and Camilla should win awards. That is truly a perfect pic.

  21. Beverley says:

    I realize that there are people who are a-okay with the fact that Betty never lifted a finger to stop the racial abuse piled onto Meghan and also on Harry for daring to love her. She did nothing when Charles pulled the Sussexes’ security, endangering H&M AND her great grandson Archie. These facts alone makes it obvious to me that the late queen was indeed evil. Bigots and racists should never be celebrated.

  22. Lady Digby says:

    Yes @Tessa why didn’t the Queen insist he live up to the role properly? Nobody starts great you have to work hard and upskill learning languages and gain experiences incrementally. Did grandparents father expect Wilbur to drift without course correction and then snap out of it and immediately become proficient when he became King? I suspect the RF and courtiers and RR dread him becoming King because they know he hasn’t the right stuff to stabilise the throne let alone be a transitional monarch ready to cope with 21 century!!

  23. MY3CENTS says:

    I think she was popular because she grew onto her role as a young woman when there was very little scrutiny and the press was basically on her side.
    People got used to her because she was a constant. She was not exceptional in any way, she was just always there.
    If the same young woman had to come into her role at this day and age she would not be so popular or adored.

  24. MsKrisTalk says:

    Everyone knew. Even the flops knew that they were going to flop.

    • Lady Digby says:

      I think we all thought Chuck would live as long as his parents and we’d only get Wilbur when he was sixty. No one imagined or wanted the dumpster fire of Wilbur the Unsteady and Totally Unsteady becoming king within the next few years!!

  25. maisie says:

    Eggs have become too expensive to waste them on pathetic William and his dogsh-t father. (to take a phrase from your own words)

  26. monlette says:

    Oh please. Everyone with any sense saw this coming. Philip and Elizabeth saw it coming, which is probably why they lived as long as they did.

  27. CSC says:

    Umm…Diana would have been the one to save the Monarchy. But Charles needed to treat her with respect, support and care. He definitely did not. Just imagine how different things would be if he had.

  28. KC2 says:

    “while his fungicidal ex-wife Fergie the Bogeywoman is hiding under a rock somewhere.”

    Best line.

  29. Nic919 says:

    There were a few times they could have set up a future after Elizabeth. The first was Diana. The second was Harry and Meghan. Jealousy prevented that from happening.

    William doesn’t have his mother’s charisma and is so jealous of his brother that he spends his time trying to find new ways to attack him.
    He is also too lazy to do the work. In his desire to push out his more popular brother, he failed to understand the shield Harry provided was going to be removed and expose William even more.

    Neither Charles and William have the charisma. Charles was always going to be the interim, but the real issue is that William is no better than Charles and looks to be even worse.

    • windyriver says:

      I’ve also thoughCharles was fortunate enough to have a second chance to salvage things with Harry and Meghan, but having learned nothing from the experiences with Diana, he blew it a second time.

      Disagree about Charles not having charisma though. I think he’s shown himself to be very personable, and Harry inherited his charm from both parents. Charles is also a hard worker with significant accomplishments during his time as POW; cultured, with a wide range of interests. He had the potential to be a much respected monarch, if he hadn’t jettisoned integrity a long time ago, and also could have gotten out of the way of his own jealousy.

      Will, who does no work, has no significant accomplishments, whose only interests appear to be football and drinking, and who has the personality of a wet blanket, shares the same lack of integrity with Charles, but is otherwise worse on every measure.

  30. BeanieBean says:

    I dunno, I think it’s a bit too soon after TQs death to have such an exhibit. Are they that desperate for good will? Need more money for the reno at Buck House?

  31. QuiteContrary says:

    Even if there were palaces in the sky, which wouldn’t comport with my idea of heaven, I wouldn’t be so sure Lizzie went north.

    She was part of an imperialist, colonizing, thieving system and used her wealth to shield her son from accountability for criminal abuse. And she sought to hide her unearned wealth instead of using it for the public good. She cared more about her horses than people.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment