web analytics

In defense of the royals…

Nah, I’m not really into it. Don’t plan to watch tomorrow. Well, maybe the hilight reel.

But my Twitter stream is full of Yanqui sarcasm about the Royal Wedding and I have one invariable rule in life — find out what all the cool kids are doing, and do something else.

Truly, the Brits have an astonishing ability to pull off these huge aristocratic spectacles with military precision, mostly because they let the military handle them. It’s a holdover from the days of empire, I suppose.

Weddings, state funerals coronations…if you watch any of it tomorrow, think of the logistics of putting together all those soldiers and horses and antiquated whatnots and whoozits, and bringing it all off without a hitch.

I post this tonight in case it all goes horribly wrong tomorrow; you can show up back here to point and laugh.

It’s only fair.

sock it to me

Comments


Comment from Mitchell
Time: April 28, 2011, 10:24 pm

The intensity of interest in expressing one’s intensity of un-interest in the Royal Wedding on the internets seems to be increasing intensely.

It’s amazing how much people can care about not caring about something some other people can care about and they’re careful about making sure as many people as possible know how much they don’t care about that thing that you may or may not care about. And I want everybody to know that I don’t care for such people.

 


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: April 28, 2011, 11:00 pm

Heh. I saw you tweet that and meant to retweet, but hit the clear button instead.

I suck at Twitter.

 


Comment from porknbean
Time: April 28, 2011, 11:06 pm

Forget the wedding, lookit the little jackets on those knit dolls.

Btw, I love seeing pictures/stories of your chickens. You are a good momma hen, Mrs Badger-Weasel.

 


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: April 28, 2011, 11:46 pm

Aw, thanks, PnB. Personal anecdotery is supposed to be blog suicide, but I figure everybody loves chickens! Or, whatever — I’m going to post about them no matter what.

 


Comment from Uncle Monkey
Time: April 28, 2011, 11:56 pm

I like the little knit corgi’s.
Who’s a good little knit corgi? You are! You are!

I have to DVR the friggin’ wedding for the wife (I’m so sweet) and I just can’t for some reason see her sitting there for 8 or 10 hours watching the whole thing. But she will.

It’s only 8 or 10 hours, right?

 


Comment from Can’t hark my cry
Time: April 29, 2011, 1:23 am

I look at the little knit people and I shudder, but then I think “Wait! It could be worse! It could be stuffed kittens!”

What makes me sad is contemplating the question “Where will they go when the person who made them and loved them dies?” Unlike clay pipes they won’t last several centuries buried in dirt only to emerge virtually unscathed. . .

 


Comment from David Gillies
Time: April 29, 2011, 3:00 am

My mother and her next-door neighbour are going to be sitting on the sofa the whole day, scoffing smoked salmon, drinking champagne and cackling with delight at all the shenanigans. Jeez.

I’m not anti, just indifferent. Although I think William would make a much better fist of being King than his twattish father.

 


Comment from Oceania
Time: April 29, 2011, 5:49 am

I hear that your local muslims are planning to blow things up on the happy day?

 


Comment from Mike C.
Time: April 29, 2011, 8:16 am

Meanwhile, our government here in the US couldn’t arrange a blow job in a whorehouse…

 


Comment from Mike C.
Time: April 29, 2011, 8:20 am

OTOH, why do I keep imagining the prelate doing the ceremony saying “Wuv… Twu Wuv…”?

 


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: April 29, 2011, 9:52 am

On now!

 


Comment from Mark Matis
Time: April 29, 2011, 11:48 am

For Mike C.:
Actually, that is probably about all they COULD arrange. And have undoubtedly done so many times for some former occupants of the Oval Orifice.

 


Comment from Sven in Colorado
Time: April 29, 2011, 1:28 pm

Being a Verger in the Anglican tradition, I have an vested (word choice intended) interest in HOW the whole ceremony is staged. IMHO, the historic relevance is questionable. The sociological phenomenon that is the response from the British people never ceases to amaze me.

However, the pomp and ceremony and how its planned, timed and produced to create that peculiarly British royal ambiance and aura has always intrigued me.

 


Comment from porknbean
Time: April 29, 2011, 1:53 pm

I forgot about the wedding until just signing on the webbies.

William looks very dapper in his chosen uniform and Kate’s dress is simple and elegant. It is something I imagined her choosing. Not that I know anything about her, but going by her looks. I like her sister’s gown better.

*imagines chickens dressed for a wedding

 


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: April 29, 2011, 2:29 pm

It’s no accident, Sven. They’re really good at staging this stuff. This is a very British kind of thing (as opposed to Diana’s funeral, which was very un-British and hysterical).

I thought Middleton looked fantastic. The music was dreadful and modern, but it was otherwise a very tasteful bit of theater.

 


Comment from Uncle Monkey
Time: April 29, 2011, 4:24 pm

Hey, that was ok. At least with the DVR we could fast forward through some bits.

Q to those in the know: What’s wit da “back room” bit?

After the ceremony, they all shuffled behind the altar for a few minutes.

Is there a WC back there, or is that some other form of ceremony?

Like, maybe in the old days that’s when they’d do the consummation – just to make sure the bride was “intact” or the perhaps groom was going to be on the end of a pole in a few hours?

♫ And did those feeeeeeeeet…

 


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: April 29, 2011, 5:16 pm

Heh. No. They were signing the paperwork, in triplicate. We had to sign seven times, on account of I thought I’d need extra copies of the certificate for visa applications and such.

Say, they skipped this line: “It is given, that with delight and tenderness they may know each other in love, and, through the joy of their bodily union, may strengthen the union of their hearts and lives.”

That’s right; our CofE service included soft porn.

 


Comment from David Gillies
Time: April 29, 2011, 5:43 pm

William was dressed as a bloody Colonel! He’s 29, for God’s sake. I know he’s the heir apparent* but that seems a bit steep.

* although not so much hair apparent – baldness doesn’t run in the family – it sprints (rimshot)

 


Comment from Uncle Monkey
Time: April 29, 2011, 7:34 pm

Paperwork?
Well that takes all the mystery out of the thing.

@ D.Gillies
William is an honorary Colonel of the Irish Guard I believe. Flaunt it if ya got it I guess. Had to have something shinier on than the top of his head.

 


Comment from tammy
Time: April 29, 2011, 8:27 pm

Well, I’m just an auld softie, I reckon, because I watched every bit and loved it, though I didn’t care for Wils’ scarlet uni, not being a fan of red.

She was a lovely bride, but having got a good long look at her bro, I can see that she narrowly escaped being totally bizarre looking.

Neither the music nor the flowers impressed me over much, but all in all not bad. It was certainly a simple affair; take away the venue, and you really weren’t left with much.

Got a kick out of the runaway horse, and in fact all the horsey bits were probably my favorite. Quite regal and festive. The buses were absurd, BTW.

 


Comment from Nina from GCP
Time: April 29, 2011, 8:55 pm

I didn’t watch, all I was really all that interested in was her gown, which was lovely and Grace Kelly-ish old-fashioned and classic. I wish them the best of luck for a long and happy marriage.

 


Comment from Sven in Colorado
Time: April 29, 2011, 9:36 pm

Stoatie,
I know ’tis no accident. The layer upon layer of historic ceremony that is uniquely British, with Vergers, Beadles, Sub-Deacons, Deacons, Priests and Bishops all being watched over by the Beefeaters and Palace Guard, Black Watch and all, is an incredible spectacle.

I find it a fascinating liturgical and palatial dance, based in an historic monarchy, which, with a few years here and there under Roundheads and Republicans, has outlasted all other governmental monarchies in Europe.

As a student, and not a very good one, of the Church of England’s history and its marriage to the Monarchy and therefore, the Political State of the British Empire, these massive demonstrations of what it means to have a monarch, might come across as overbearing, grandiose and pompous, disregarding the common Thatcher, Smith, Potter and Walker.

However, it comes across as belonging as much to the citizen as it does to the Royals. That, I do believe, is what blows me away. They “seem” approachable and real.

Unlike the current resident of our own White House, whose imperious shnozz seems to reside in some lofty cloud most of the time he is in a public venue, Charles and Diana’s boys seem to be real, more like their Grand Mum, the Queen, than they do their weird arse Poppa. That man comes across to me to be as mad as the hatter in Alice in Wonderland.

 


Comment from Nina from GCP
Time: April 29, 2011, 9:46 pm

The part that makes me laugh is that there was likely very little that WIlls and Kate actually got to decide for themselves. 🙂

 


Comment from Anonymous
Time: April 29, 2011, 9:57 pm

Say, they skipped this line: “It is given, that with delight and tenderness they may know each other in love, and, through the joy of their bodily union, may strengthen the union of their hearts and lives.”
They didn’t skip it; they used a more traditional version, more closely derived from the Prayer Book. The one you are quoting is insufferably sentimental – is it even still in print?
“…there was likely very little that WIlls and Kate actually got to decide for themselves.” Wrong. They were closely involved in the detailed planning.

 


Comment from Uncle Badger
Time: April 29, 2011, 10:00 pm

Looked at from inside the goldfish bowl, Sven, I’d say you have an extremely accurate view of it.

Our liberal ‘elite’ likes to sneer and titter, but the connection between the monarchy and the mass by-passes the bien pensants and seems as strong as ever.

It is quite a curious thing.

 


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: April 29, 2011, 10:06 pm

Lessee…according to the CofE website, under marriage service there’s The 1662 Solemnisation of Matrimony (from the Book of Common Prayer), The 1966 Solemnisation of Matrimony (Alternative Services, Series 1) and The 2001 Marriage Service (Common Worship: Services and Prayers for The Church of England). Needless to say, ours was the 2001 version.

Our vicar is a bit of a trendy. A true believer, but trendy.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to finish the brochure for the Rogation service (yes, really).

 


Comment from Sven in Colorado
Time: April 29, 2011, 10:32 pm

Uncle Badger,
I am a cradle (conservative) Episcopalian. My Grandmum served as secretary for two Diocesan Bishops. Her sis, my great aunt was a life long Church journalist, married to Dr. Allen DuPont Breck, Professor Emeritus of English History at Denver University and Diocesan Historian. And, my uncle is the retired Right Reverend William Carl Frey, first Bishop of Guatemala and Honduras, Bishop of Colorado, professor, author and down right sweet and humble man of God.

Perhaps that is why I have this understanding of the Anglican Church. How I survived it all without becoming a priest, and simply very happy to be a plain ol’ Verger is still a wonder to me at age 65.

My uncle Bill has told me time and time again: “Stephen, all I ever wanted to do was be a simple parish priest. Obviously, God had other plans!

S.Weasel – Rogation Sunday!!!!! oh my stars! That takes me back to the days before this new fangled prayer book we now use.

 


Comment from Nina from GCP
Time: April 29, 2011, 11:07 pm

That’s good to hear, anon…so much of those sorts of events is scripted by protocol and convention, I’m quite glad that they made it what they wanted it.

 


Comment from steve
Time: May 1, 2011, 8:57 pm

The OTHER Royal Wedding…

As only Iowa Hawk can do it…

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2011/04/london-wedding-unites-chav-ned-monarchies-.html

Weas….be sure to share this with your acquaintances in Old Blighty…

 


Comment from Oceania
Time: May 2, 2011, 2:42 am

I found it nice that they symbolically chose the same day as the Fuhrer and Eva Braun!!

Long live the, er, … Fourth Reich! 🙂

 

Write a comment

(as if I cared)

(yeah. I'm going to write)

(oooo! you have a website?)


Beware: more than one link in a comment is apt to earn you a trip to the spam filter, where you will remain -- cold, frightened and alone -- until I remember to clean the trap. But, hey, without Akismet, we'd be up to our asses in...well, ass porn, mostly.


<< carry me back to ol' virginny