Queen Mum is dead.
March 30, 2002 10:00 AM Subscribe
Queen Mum is dead. Gawd bless her. We all knew it was coming this year or next, now it has come.
yeah i work for the telegraph, this preperation has been going on - quite morbid really. Sincere condolences..
posted by monkeyJuice at 10:06 AM on March 30, 2002
posted by monkeyJuice at 10:06 AM on March 30, 2002
You don't know the half of it wsfinkel, those of us who cringed when Dina died have been dreading this time ever since. All news networks have obituaries on file for all kinds of people. The rumours have been circulating since the death of Diana about just what the BBC has planned for us when this finally arrived. Three days of black screens with sombre marching music...
It's sad and all, but I have to say my gut reaction was "thank God Bradford played on Thursday night". The traditional Easter sporting calender *may* yet end up in tatters.
posted by vbfg at 10:10 AM on March 30, 2002
It's sad and all, but I have to say my gut reaction was "thank God Bradford played on Thursday night". The traditional Easter sporting calender *may* yet end up in tatters.
posted by vbfg at 10:10 AM on March 30, 2002
All the major media outlets have pre-prepared obituaries for major figures - there'll be one ready to go for every world leader, many entertainment figures, and even some sports people.
Not a great Golden Jubilee Year for The Queen, what with Princess Margaret having died last month. With the death of possibly the last member of the family able to command almost universal respect in the country, and the last link to a time when royalty was seen as remote from the people, the whole institution of the Monarchy is going to look less and less relevant to the country at large.
Regardless of one's views about the rest of the family, she was a remarkable woman, and one who will be missed by a great many people.
posted by jonpollard at 10:12 AM on March 30, 2002
Not a great Golden Jubilee Year for The Queen, what with Princess Margaret having died last month. With the death of possibly the last member of the family able to command almost universal respect in the country, and the last link to a time when royalty was seen as remote from the people, the whole institution of the Monarchy is going to look less and less relevant to the country at large.
Regardless of one's views about the rest of the family, she was a remarkable woman, and one who will be missed by a great many people.
posted by jonpollard at 10:12 AM on March 30, 2002
(Thank Gawd I don't work for the Sundays.)
Actually, ITV dropped the ball on this. Announced it a few minutes late, during a programme about talented pets, and there's now a load of completely inane chatter from the ITN newsroom, nothing from the archive apparently ready to roll. In contrast, the BBC took it in its stride on both TV and radio: Peter Sissons in sombre mode.
posted by riviera at 10:15 AM on March 30, 2002
Actually, ITV dropped the ball on this. Announced it a few minutes late, during a programme about talented pets, and there's now a load of completely inane chatter from the ITN newsroom, nothing from the archive apparently ready to roll. In contrast, the BBC took it in its stride on both TV and radio: Peter Sissons in sombre mode.
posted by riviera at 10:15 AM on March 30, 2002
Good job we have the international news networks otherwise it'd be a long sickly week of 'Sincere condolences..' as those 101 years of luxury as a birthright come to an end.
posted by Kino at 10:16 AM on March 30, 2002
posted by Kino at 10:16 AM on March 30, 2002
jonpollard and others, help out an ignorant Yank -- what was so remarkable about her? No disrespect intended, I'm sure she was a lovely person, I just don't know anything about her importance to the U.K., other than as sort of a figurehead royal, which is kind of redundant anyway.
posted by luser at 10:18 AM on March 30, 2002
posted by luser at 10:18 AM on March 30, 2002
I saw a documentary about her, and it painted her as an extremely modern and spirited young lady. Her behaviour during the early part of the 20th century, and during World War II earned her an immense amount of popular support. I'm sure someone will jump in with some details.
posted by websavvy at 10:21 AM on March 30, 2002
posted by websavvy at 10:21 AM on March 30, 2002
Somewhat morbid, yeah, but completely understandable. It's standard policy for media to keep at least a decent obit on file for major public figures. Imagine the waste of news resources if you had to scramble to summarize someone's life in sufficient detail to satisfy the public. And God help you if you make a mistake.
Look at this week alone. In addition to the major international story in the Middle East, *three* entertainers (Dudley, Miltie and Billy) and a former head of government have died. Those pre-prepared obits and profiles have certainly been required this week.
Right now the CBC, CBC Newsworld and CBC Radio 1 are broadcasting audio and video documentaries that are the cumulation of weeks or months of work. I'm surprised to see CNN covering this live as extensively as they are: some live feeds from ITN, a few talking heads, and some phone-ins.
This coverage won't approach Diana-esque proportions, luckily.
posted by maudlin at 10:22 AM on March 30, 2002
Look at this week alone. In addition to the major international story in the Middle East, *three* entertainers (Dudley, Miltie and Billy) and a former head of government have died. Those pre-prepared obits and profiles have certainly been required this week.
Right now the CBC, CBC Newsworld and CBC Radio 1 are broadcasting audio and video documentaries that are the cumulation of weeks or months of work. I'm surprised to see CNN covering this live as extensively as they are: some live feeds from ITN, a few talking heads, and some phone-ins.
This coverage won't approach Diana-esque proportions, luckily.
posted by maudlin at 10:22 AM on March 30, 2002
In her place, I don't think I could stomach watching a 3rd world war, so maybe she punched out at the right moment.
IOW, 102 years of recent history is enuf to make anyone fold their hand.
posted by BentPenguin at 10:24 AM on March 30, 2002
IOW, 102 years of recent history is enuf to make anyone fold their hand.
posted by BentPenguin at 10:24 AM on March 30, 2002
Kino: Good job we have the international news networks
Good job we have the web and MeFi in particular. At least this thread should see a balance of views. For my two cents, I'd just like to register my astonishment at the 'almost universal respect' comment from jonpollard. The lower the age group, the less respect we have for the royals and the Queen Mum was by no means an exception.
posted by malross at 10:24 AM on March 30, 2002
Good job we have the web and MeFi in particular. At least this thread should see a balance of views. For my two cents, I'd just like to register my astonishment at the 'almost universal respect' comment from jonpollard. The lower the age group, the less respect we have for the royals and the Queen Mum was by no means an exception.
posted by malross at 10:24 AM on March 30, 2002
We can all now let out a collective moan when we hear "God Save the King."
posted by pjdoland at 10:25 AM on March 30, 2002
posted by pjdoland at 10:25 AM on March 30, 2002
What makes her 'special' in the eyes of people who were around at the time was their response to the bombing of London. It means as little to me as it does to you I'm afraid luser so I could be hopelessly wrong on this. Britain is a very different place now than it was even twenty years ago when it comes to royalty.
That's it AFAIK, other than the royal blood thing. That she was widely known to have views not entirely unsympathetic to those of the Nazis hasn't lessened any view of her. It's not her views, it's her not running away in the face of apparent defeat.
posted by vbfg at 10:28 AM on March 30, 2002
That's it AFAIK, other than the royal blood thing. That she was widely known to have views not entirely unsympathetic to those of the Nazis hasn't lessened any view of her. It's not her views, it's her not running away in the face of apparent defeat.
posted by vbfg at 10:28 AM on March 30, 2002
(And after a respectful 20 minute audio documentary on the CBC, Definitely Not the Opera has started up. Those of you who want to listen for the next few hours can go here).
posted by maudlin at 10:29 AM on March 30, 2002
posted by maudlin at 10:29 AM on March 30, 2002
Here is a googlecache of a profile on the Queen Mum. "This profile of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother appeared in the August 1999 issue of The Royal Report."
posted by bunnyfire at 10:31 AM on March 30, 2002
posted by bunnyfire at 10:31 AM on March 30, 2002
The official stuff from the royal site, which itself has gone into mourning mode. We should have suspected when she didn't make it to Cheltenham this year to watch the horses. And yeah, the general thing is that she helped re-establish the royals after the abdication, and matriarched them through the last 50 years. It's going to put a dampener on the jubilee celebrations, and the effect of that...
posted by riviera at 10:37 AM on March 30, 2002
posted by riviera at 10:37 AM on March 30, 2002
For a different perspective than the sycophancy that the mainstream UK media are bound to be wallowing in for the next few days, here's Guardian columnist Francis Wheen writing about the Queen Mother's hundredth birthday.
posted by normy at 10:38 AM on March 30, 2002
posted by normy at 10:38 AM on March 30, 2002
Luser - As much as anything, I'd say she was remarkable for having been as strong a character and so vibrant a figure to such a great age - yes, she could afford good doctors, but then, so could Princess Margaret.... I'm not saying that she's any more remarkable than anyone else who was out and about living a fairly active life until well in to her 90s - she just happens to be the one under discussion here.
A lot of those people who will miss her (and I'm not particularly one of them) would probably also point you towards the effectiveness of her role as a figurehead royal at a time when they weren't redundant. I live in London's docklands, which were heavily bombed during World War 2, and people here old enough to remember still talk about her role as a national treasure during those times.
Plus, there's a kind of mental thing that's hard to put into words about the way the royals were regarded at the time she was Queen. There was a respect, sustained by distance (or 'remoteness', depending on your perspective), that has been lost because of the faux-intimacy with the later generations caused by the tabloid worship of them for so long.
Does that help at all????
posted by jonpollard at 10:43 AM on March 30, 2002
A lot of those people who will miss her (and I'm not particularly one of them) would probably also point you towards the effectiveness of her role as a figurehead royal at a time when they weren't redundant. I live in London's docklands, which were heavily bombed during World War 2, and people here old enough to remember still talk about her role as a national treasure during those times.
Plus, there's a kind of mental thing that's hard to put into words about the way the royals were regarded at the time she was Queen. There was a respect, sustained by distance (or 'remoteness', depending on your perspective), that has been lost because of the faux-intimacy with the later generations caused by the tabloid worship of them for so long.
Does that help at all????
posted by jonpollard at 10:43 AM on March 30, 2002
Helps get rid of them i hope.
Good job we have the web and MeFi in particular. At least this thread should see a balance of views.
I'm not sure if it's a coincidence, or just my isp having one of its temporal brain hemorrhages, but the web feels to have slown down drastically in the past half hour. Any other UK users noticed?
posted by Kino at 10:50 AM on March 30, 2002
Good job we have the web and MeFi in particular. At least this thread should see a balance of views.
I'm not sure if it's a coincidence, or just my isp having one of its temporal brain hemorrhages, but the web feels to have slown down drastically in the past half hour. Any other UK users noticed?
posted by Kino at 10:50 AM on March 30, 2002
Somewhat morbid, yeah, but completely understandable. It's standard policy for media to keep at least a decent obit on file for major public figures. Imagine the waste of news resources if you had to scramble to summarize someone's life in sufficient detail to satisfy the public. And God help you if you make a mistake.
Which reminds me of the most glaring example of this I've seen yet: About a month back or so Dalton Camp, a fairly familiar political figure/columnist type died here in Toronto, and at the bottom of the obituary that showed up immediately after on the Globe & Mail website was a little blurb mentionning that the author of the obituary had himself died the previous year. Oh well.
posted by syscom at 10:54 AM on March 30, 2002
Which reminds me of the most glaring example of this I've seen yet: About a month back or so Dalton Camp, a fairly familiar political figure/columnist type died here in Toronto, and at the bottom of the obituary that showed up immediately after on the Globe & Mail website was a little blurb mentionning that the author of the obituary had himself died the previous year. Oh well.
posted by syscom at 10:54 AM on March 30, 2002
malross - maybe that's just me showing my age, or perhaps it's just relative compared to the rest of the royal shower. I certainly don't think that many people would have anything bad to say about her in general, and I'd certainly maintain that for a number of generations still around, she held a position of afection and, yes, admiration.
posted by jonpollard at 10:55 AM on March 30, 2002
posted by jonpollard at 10:55 AM on March 30, 2002
As always, the comments are delicious on the Guardian's message board.
posted by RJ Reynolds at 11:45 AM on March 30, 2002
posted by RJ Reynolds at 11:45 AM on March 30, 2002
As always, the comments are delicious on the Guardian's message board.
You have to be pretty sick to get off on the death of a 101-year-old woman. But then, they are Guardian readers...
posted by aaron at 12:21 PM on March 30, 2002
You have to be pretty sick to get off on the death of a 101-year-old woman. But then, they are Guardian readers...
posted by aaron at 12:21 PM on March 30, 2002
Oh yeah. Quite nasty. But hey, wait til you see Metafilter when Reagan dies. ;)
posted by RJ Reynolds at 12:27 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by RJ Reynolds at 12:27 PM on March 30, 2002
But hey, wait til you see Metafilter when Reagan dies. ;)
I fully believe that the hate will be so massive on that day that the only thing stopping MeFi from being completely overrun by a Free Republic mob is the fact that nobody can register as a new user without knowing the trick.
It'll probably also be the beginning of the end of MeFi as a place for political discussion. Either the infighting will be so massive that Matt bans it all, or everyone who isn't a diehard leftist will finally walk away in disgust for good.
posted by aaron at 12:32 PM on March 30, 2002
I fully believe that the hate will be so massive on that day that the only thing stopping MeFi from being completely overrun by a Free Republic mob is the fact that nobody can register as a new user without knowing the trick.
It'll probably also be the beginning of the end of MeFi as a place for political discussion. Either the infighting will be so massive that Matt bans it all, or everyone who isn't a diehard leftist will finally walk away in disgust for good.
posted by aaron at 12:32 PM on March 30, 2002
Actually, I think the hate will be massive across the nation and world. If it happens any time soon, it will be the straw that broke the camel's back when it comes to any sort of bipartisanship in Washington. It'll do to GOP-Democrat relations what 9/11 has done to US-International relations.
Oh well...it would certainly be a virtual guarantee of a GOP retake of the Senate if it were to happen in 2002, at least...
Farewell, Queen Mum.
posted by aaron at 12:36 PM on March 30, 2002
Oh well...it would certainly be a virtual guarantee of a GOP retake of the Senate if it were to happen in 2002, at least...
Farewell, Queen Mum.
posted by aaron at 12:36 PM on March 30, 2002
For years, media coverage in the UK has run stories about how all the channels were dreading the day she popped her clogs because they'd then have to do 10 weeks of continuous mourning with only sombre music played on all radio channels and unending tributes on TV.
At least now it's actually happened it turns out it's not quite as bad as that and even the BBC is putting out more non Queen Mum stuff on its other channels.
posted by kerplunk at 12:40 PM on March 30, 2002
At least now it's actually happened it turns out it's not quite as bad as that and even the BBC is putting out more non Queen Mum stuff on its other channels.
posted by kerplunk at 12:40 PM on March 30, 2002
The most headline-memorable thing about her life that Americans can understand is her comment during World War II when many families were fleeing with their children to the rural areas. They urged the Queen Mum, then Queen, to take Princess Margaret and Elizabeth and go. She supposedly said "They will never go without me, I will not leave the King, and the King will never leave." Instead, she stayed at the palace and learned to shoot a revolver.
In other words: In your FACE, Adolf.
Ordinary and royal Brits alike showed courage unparalleled during those dark days. God bless, Ma'am.
posted by GaelFC at 12:50 PM on March 30, 2002
In other words: In your FACE, Adolf.
Ordinary and royal Brits alike showed courage unparalleled during those dark days. God bless, Ma'am.
posted by GaelFC at 12:50 PM on March 30, 2002
riviera said: In contrast, the BBC took it in its stride on both TV and radio: Peter Sissons in sombre mode.
I think Peter Sissons wasn't doing such a hot job. The BBC newsroom seemed to be quite unprepared, and in the quite painful phone conversation with the Queen Mother's niece he was quite clearly making up the questions.. and she didn't seem to want to answer them anyway!
The guy reporting from Windsor was also rather dull, but at least there were a bunch of people in the background trying to get on TV ;-)
EuroNews, on the other hand, showed an interesting history of the Queen Mother's life almost instantly, and Sky News also put up a good show. Sadly the radio stations have gone into 'dirge mode'.. although Radio 3 has been playing bagpipe music.
posted by wackybrit at 12:50 PM on March 30, 2002
I think Peter Sissons wasn't doing such a hot job. The BBC newsroom seemed to be quite unprepared, and in the quite painful phone conversation with the Queen Mother's niece he was quite clearly making up the questions.. and she didn't seem to want to answer them anyway!
The guy reporting from Windsor was also rather dull, but at least there were a bunch of people in the background trying to get on TV ;-)
EuroNews, on the other hand, showed an interesting history of the Queen Mother's life almost instantly, and Sky News also put up a good show. Sadly the radio stations have gone into 'dirge mode'.. although Radio 3 has been playing bagpipe music.
posted by wackybrit at 12:50 PM on March 30, 2002
[kerplunk] For years, media coverage in the UK has run stories about how all the channels were dreading the day she popped her clogs ...
Dead right.
posted by malross at 1:13 PM on March 30, 2002
Dead right.
posted by malross at 1:13 PM on March 30, 2002
So, can Charles and Camilla marry now?
Just wondering.
And for my parent's generation, the Queen Mum really did hold a place in their hearts; this is certainly the end of the old style of the monarchy.
posted by jokeefe at 1:39 PM on March 30, 2002
Just wondering.
And for my parent's generation, the Queen Mum really did hold a place in their hearts; this is certainly the end of the old style of the monarchy.
posted by jokeefe at 1:39 PM on March 30, 2002
Somebody has to help me, usually on a Saturday night we have a choice on U.K radio between football chat or adult type music; Americana and such like. Tonight we have, wall to wall, the nation mourns the death of a nazi sympathising, overprivileged 102 year old, hagiography.
I need a decent online radio sation, before I open a vein. 6 music has joined in the general caterwauling.
posted by Fat Buddha at 1:39 PM on March 30, 2002
I need a decent online radio sation, before I open a vein. 6 music has joined in the general caterwauling.
posted by Fat Buddha at 1:39 PM on March 30, 2002
i volunteer to be the voice of TOTAL yankee ignorance.
i understand that she was Queen Elizabeth's mother.
but if she also was the Queen at one point, why did she stop being the Queen? Is it because she was not actual Windsor blood? And if she was Elizabeth, and Elizabeth of the Elizabethean era was Elizabeth, then why is the current Elizabeth called Elizabeth II and not Elizabeth III?
posted by milkman at 1:48 PM on March 30, 2002
i understand that she was Queen Elizabeth's mother.
but if she also was the Queen at one point, why did she stop being the Queen? Is it because she was not actual Windsor blood? And if she was Elizabeth, and Elizabeth of the Elizabethean era was Elizabeth, then why is the current Elizabeth called Elizabeth II and not Elizabeth III?
posted by milkman at 1:48 PM on March 30, 2002
She was only "Queen" because she was the King's wife, right? That is, not really any more the actual monarch than Prince Philip is today.
But what do I know, I'm American too.
posted by aaron at 2:15 PM on March 30, 2002
But what do I know, I'm American too.
posted by aaron at 2:15 PM on March 30, 2002
Talking of pre written obituaries, this one hits the spot.
posted by Fat Buddha at 2:23 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by Fat Buddha at 2:23 PM on March 30, 2002
Fat Buddha: Try London's XFM for your rock fix, or Kiss FM for your urban fix. They're avoiding the dirge fever, for now.
posted by wackybrit at 2:41 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by wackybrit at 2:41 PM on March 30, 2002
So, can Charles and Camilla marry now?
According to CNN, the nation's top news source for the social web of other nation's, that no, the Queen Mum is not holding them back, the Church of England is. However, it seems that in a few years the rules may chance and they will marry. I couldn't give a damn.
posted by geoff. at 2:46 PM on March 30, 2002
According to CNN, the nation's top news source for the social web of other nation's, that no, the Queen Mum is not holding them back, the Church of England is. However, it seems that in a few years the rules may chance and they will marry. I couldn't give a damn.
posted by geoff. at 2:46 PM on March 30, 2002
Thanks wackybrit, I love the internet.
posted by Fat Buddha at 3:11 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by Fat Buddha at 3:11 PM on March 30, 2002
I need a decent online radio sation, before I open a vein.
don't know how popular it is, but i happen to tune in lbc (london broadcast channel) talk radio (streaming audio) every chance i get. it's format is mostly call-in and chat, often silly, and sometimes views expressed is a bit british, but it's always entertaining.
posted by eatdonuts at 3:24 PM on March 30, 2002
don't know how popular it is, but i happen to tune in lbc (london broadcast channel) talk radio (streaming audio) every chance i get. it's format is mostly call-in and chat, often silly, and sometimes views expressed is a bit british, but it's always entertaining.
posted by eatdonuts at 3:24 PM on March 30, 2002
'actual monarch' monarch is singular yes. the Monarchy is ruled by a monarch. monarch is almost neutrul as it signifies the ONE ruler weither tis a king of queen. God rest HM. Hitler called her the most dangerous woman in europe (has that been said?) a compliment i would guess. she had life and spirit and more then made up for HMTQs' monarchal...reserve. She is QE II because she is the monarch. HM EB_L was not THE monarch, she was queen and queen mother amongst other numerous titles. Is it not that whenst the monarch dies, eldest child asends unless other factors are involved? I believe when QEII passes, she will be englands longest ruling monarch. (what, 15 or so years)
posted by clavdivs at 4:02 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by clavdivs at 4:02 PM on March 30, 2002
I just checked out the Guardian forum, and I'm a few posts deep, and there's nothing resembling people "getting off" on the death of a 102 year old woman. They aren't prostrated in grief, certainly, but the vast majority seem to be of the, "She was 102 years old, super wealthy and powerful by accident of birth, why is everyone making such a stink?" variety. Nothing, so far, as dramatic as what Aaron describes.
posted by Doug at 4:07 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by Doug at 4:07 PM on March 30, 2002
"101 years of luxury as a birthright come to an end."
"She was 102 years old, super wealthy and powerful by accident of birth"
I'm not so much amazed at people's ignorance on this subject, as the way that some seem to revel in their ignorance.
The Queen Mother was Duchess of York until Edward VIII abdicated to marry Mrs. Simpson. She was 36. She was part of the royal family by marriage, not birth.
posted by Catch at 4:31 PM on March 30, 2002
"She was 102 years old, super wealthy and powerful by accident of birth"
I'm not so much amazed at people's ignorance on this subject, as the way that some seem to revel in their ignorance.
The Queen Mother was Duchess of York until Edward VIII abdicated to marry Mrs. Simpson. She was 36. She was part of the royal family by marriage, not birth.
posted by Catch at 4:31 PM on March 30, 2002
king OR queen...sorry.(eeks, no, slinks out the door)
posted by clavdivs at 4:31 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by clavdivs at 4:31 PM on March 30, 2002
Nothing, so far...
Well, thanks at least for admitting you'd barely started reading them.
The very first post in there is "YES!" If that's not getting off, I don't know what is. Other posts: "why are all the yanks on here full of such pompous shit? ... The old bat didn't even like y'all. She was our Nazi bitch and we'll piss on her grave if we want to." "Bloody old witch." "Perhaps they could donate her to the human body exhibition in the east end." "A Hero in ww2? What? She spent the war as she spent all her life doind sod-all and drinking herself to death with gin. Hero!!!! ha!" "Oh I forgot say...glad she's gone. {looks around} Now who's next?" "Wouldn't it be so refreshing to see someone on TV saying that she was a miserable old bitch and that they won't miss her at all, rather the endless, endless, photocopied sentiments?" "How delightful... an old bat who continued to insist that Bomber Harris's fire-bombing tactics were correct and not a war crime... dead at long bloody last... oh, to be raising a glass in Dresden right now... "
Good enough?
posted by aaron at 4:34 PM on March 30, 2002
Well, thanks at least for admitting you'd barely started reading them.
The very first post in there is "YES!" If that's not getting off, I don't know what is. Other posts: "why are all the yanks on here full of such pompous shit? ... The old bat didn't even like y'all. She was our Nazi bitch and we'll piss on her grave if we want to." "Bloody old witch." "Perhaps they could donate her to the human body exhibition in the east end." "A Hero in ww2? What? She spent the war as she spent all her life doind sod-all and drinking herself to death with gin. Hero!!!! ha!" "Oh I forgot say...glad she's gone. {looks around} Now who's next?" "Wouldn't it be so refreshing to see someone on TV saying that she was a miserable old bitch and that they won't miss her at all, rather the endless, endless, photocopied sentiments?" "How delightful... an old bat who continued to insist that Bomber Harris's fire-bombing tactics were correct and not a war crime... dead at long bloody last... oh, to be raising a glass in Dresden right now... "
Good enough?
posted by aaron at 4:34 PM on March 30, 2002
Oh yes, and God Bless Her too. Seems they don't make 'em like that any more.
The whole Queen/ Queen Consort/ Prince Consort thing is explained quite well here. (Scroll down to second question).
posted by Catch at 4:42 PM on March 30, 2002
The whole Queen/ Queen Consort/ Prince Consort thing is explained quite well here. (Scroll down to second question).
posted by Catch at 4:42 PM on March 30, 2002
Dang....all this time I thought she was one of the most beloved of all the monarchy.
Learn something new every day.....
posted by bunnyfire at 5:34 PM on March 30, 2002
Learn something new every day.....
posted by bunnyfire at 5:34 PM on March 30, 2002
aaron, is any of the stuff you seem to find objectionable actually untrue?
posted by Fat Buddha at 5:49 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by Fat Buddha at 5:49 PM on March 30, 2002
I think we could probably cope with her being a gin-swilling, racehorsing old dear, aaron: in fact, I'm listening to an interview with her lady-in-waiting on the World Service, which is very not Guardian in its attitude to old imperial England, talking about how she convinced herself that Dubonnet was non-alcoholic. Her rep took a bashing, though, when Woodrow Wyatt's diaries came out after his death, recording how Queen Mum was an ardent Thatcherite who said that no Germans could be trusted, and that black African leaders in the Commonwealth didn't know what was good for them. In essence, she was the royal Alf Garnett. Now, I don't speak ill of the dead, but she represents everything about Old Britain, whether likeable or not.
posted by riviera at 5:52 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by riviera at 5:52 PM on March 30, 2002
Hey the Queen Mother was single-handedly responsible for imposing the American way of mixing Dry Martinis, i.e. very cold and very dry. Whenever she met an American the first thing she wanted to know as what proportions you used when mixing your Martinis. She was a very radical 12:1 athlete and it's said she got through seven or eight a day in the last seventy years of her life. Which is more or less when the modern Dry Martini was invented.
No "pink gins, "gin and its or even gin and tonic for her - only cool, American Dry Martinis. Imagine how revolutionary that was - and is - in stuffy, warm gin-swilling Buckingham Palace.
Can't get any more modern than that. So she hated Germans - hey, the British Royal Family is German. They're Saxe-Coburgs or something. They only changed their name to Windsor around the time of the Second World War. She herself was an English commoner.
How can you not approve of such a woman?
posted by MiguelCardoso at 6:39 PM on March 30, 2002
No "pink gins, "gin and its or even gin and tonic for her - only cool, American Dry Martinis. Imagine how revolutionary that was - and is - in stuffy, warm gin-swilling Buckingham Palace.
Can't get any more modern than that. So she hated Germans - hey, the British Royal Family is German. They're Saxe-Coburgs or something. They only changed their name to Windsor around the time of the Second World War. She herself was an English commoner.
How can you not approve of such a woman?
posted by MiguelCardoso at 6:39 PM on March 30, 2002
First world war, and she married in to the German family. She's a 'commoner'. For 'commoner' read she would have been entitled to stand for election in the House of Commons if she had wished. The House of Lords would have been barred to her because she didn't hold any kind of title to get in there.
posted by vbfg at 6:49 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by vbfg at 6:49 PM on March 30, 2002
The double post thread with my haiku in was deleted. I was quite pleased with that.
Nazi
in a
tiara.
There, preserved for posterity.
posted by vbfg at 6:50 PM on March 30, 2002
Nazi
in a
tiara.
There, preserved for posterity.
posted by vbfg at 6:50 PM on March 30, 2002
I believe she was Scottish by birth.
posted by fujikosmurf at 6:54 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by fujikosmurf at 6:54 PM on March 30, 2002
Catch: I must admit, I am ignorant of the British monarchy. I don't think I "revel" in this ignorance, but then, I'm not particularly ashamed of it, either. The monarchy is, of course, pretty silly, and pretty inconsequential.
And besides, your point is semantic. She came into power because of the luck of her husband's birth. I guess your point is she deserved the wealth and power because of her ability as....a wife? Come on.
Aaron: Those are a minority of the posts, or were when I read it. I think you're, oh gosh, Guardian Bashing. This is not as serious a sin as Bush Bashing, I know, but still..it's like saying Metafilter was getting off on the death of Douglas Adams because some people wrote rude things in his obit post.
posted by Doug at 7:02 PM on March 30, 2002
And besides, your point is semantic. She came into power because of the luck of her husband's birth. I guess your point is she deserved the wealth and power because of her ability as....a wife? Come on.
Aaron: Those are a minority of the posts, or were when I read it. I think you're, oh gosh, Guardian Bashing. This is not as serious a sin as Bush Bashing, I know, but still..it's like saying Metafilter was getting off on the death of Douglas Adams because some people wrote rude things in his obit post.
posted by Doug at 7:02 PM on March 30, 2002
PIKEMEN IN RESERVE.
(calls out lite horse)
watch em run mam'
"couldnt one have just called the beadle"
no mam' its the silver helmets, they seem to send them into a panic mam'
(puts on Tiara)
any ya'll get to have and hold the Kho-I-Noor...roll it around on yer knuckles for chuckles.
live over a hundred years
and have people bow?
posted by clavdivs at 7:27 PM on March 30, 2002
(calls out lite horse)
watch em run mam'
"couldnt one have just called the beadle"
no mam' its the silver helmets, they seem to send them into a panic mam'
(puts on Tiara)
any ya'll get to have and hold the Kho-I-Noor...roll it around on yer knuckles for chuckles.
live over a hundred years
and have people bow?
posted by clavdivs at 7:27 PM on March 30, 2002
Actually born in England, but her father inherited Glamis.
"I guess your point is she deserved the wealth and power because of her ability as....a wife? Come on.
Grow up, Doug. I haven't tried to make any point about wealth and power, or wifely abilities. You quite nicely prove my point that your self-confessed ignorance makes your point of view "pretty silly, and pretty inconsequential."
Punta!
posted by Catch at 7:28 PM on March 30, 2002
"I guess your point is she deserved the wealth and power because of her ability as....a wife? Come on.
Grow up, Doug. I haven't tried to make any point about wealth and power, or wifely abilities. You quite nicely prove my point that your self-confessed ignorance makes your point of view "pretty silly, and pretty inconsequential."
Punta!
posted by Catch at 7:28 PM on March 30, 2002
I'm sorry, what was my point? I was relating what I read in another sites forum. You, Catch, were the one to refer to me as "reveling in my ignorance" because I didn't know the Queen Mother married some fella, as opposed to having been born into the position. Interestingly enough, I also don't follow celebrity gossip, and I don't know who Liza Minnelli married, and only learned on Metafilter that Rosie O'donnell is gay. Some people would find my ignorance of these subjects shocking, and to them, I'd say, "Grow up."
posted by Doug at 8:53 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by Doug at 8:53 PM on March 30, 2002
Doug: My comment was that some seem to revel in their ignorance. It's amusing that you have identified so strongly with that group, to the point where you now believe I referred specifically to you!
...refer to me as "reveling in my ignorance"...
Where does that quotation come from?
It's not your ignorance that surprises me, it's that you feel the need to mouth off on subjects you haven't a clue about.
posted by Catch at 9:20 PM on March 30, 2002
...refer to me as "reveling in my ignorance"...
Where does that quotation come from?
It's not your ignorance that surprises me, it's that you feel the need to mouth off on subjects you haven't a clue about.
posted by Catch at 9:20 PM on March 30, 2002
I still don't get it. Who's the monarch of England now, who is the next one going to be, and who was it yesterday?
posted by bingo at 11:44 PM on March 30, 2002
posted by bingo at 11:44 PM on March 30, 2002
Who's the monarch of England now
Queen Elizabeth II.
who is the next one going to be
Charles, The Prince of Wales.
and who was it yesterday
Queen Elizabeth II.
posted by normy at 12:39 AM on March 31, 2002
Queen Elizabeth II.
who is the next one going to be
Charles, The Prince of Wales.
and who was it yesterday
Queen Elizabeth II.
posted by normy at 12:39 AM on March 31, 2002
who is the next one going to be
Charles, The Prince of Wales.
In his dreams..., Betty will out last him yet. Next one is King Will. Betcha.
posted by vbfg at 2:34 AM on March 31, 2002
Charles, The Prince of Wales.
In his dreams..., Betty will out last him yet. Next one is King Will. Betcha.
posted by vbfg at 2:34 AM on March 31, 2002
normy, but isn't it somehow against the rules for the current monarch to be dead? How did this sort of thing work when the monarchs were actually the political leaders of the country? Surely the person reigning could not be dead, and surely the modern rules of succession are more or adapted from those same rules, otherwise what validity would they have?
posted by bingo at 3:09 AM on March 31, 2002
posted by bingo at 3:09 AM on March 31, 2002
For fuck's sake. Obviously this isn't as obvious as it first looks. Kings are married to 'queens consort', and Queens to 'princes consort'. (It's a kind of chess precedence.) The Queen Mother was the queen consort of the last King, who was the current Queen's father. She actually invented the title 'Queen Mother' as a way to remain in public life after her husband's early death in 1952: previous widowed consorts, such as Queen Mary (George V's wife, after whom, the ship) had usually retired into the background.
It's like how President Bush's father is President Bush, but he's not actually President any more. And if you read Terry Pratchett, he says that monarchy is the only thing that travels faster than light, employing a special elemental particle to pass on the succession at an instant.
posted by riviera at 4:49 AM on March 31, 2002
It's like how President Bush's father is President Bush, but he's not actually President any more. And if you read Terry Pratchett, he says that monarchy is the only thing that travels faster than light, employing a special elemental particle to pass on the succession at an instant.
posted by riviera at 4:49 AM on March 31, 2002
normy, but isn't it somehow against the rules for the current monarch to be dead?
The current monarch is not dead. Just because 'Queen Elizabeth' has died, does not mean it's the current Queen Elizabeth II.
It's kinda like presidents.. if you heard 'President Bush has died' it could mean G W Bush's father. In this case Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother is the mother of Queen Elizabeth II.
posted by wackybrit at 9:06 AM on March 31, 2002
The current monarch is not dead. Just because 'Queen Elizabeth' has died, does not mean it's the current Queen Elizabeth II.
It's kinda like presidents.. if you heard 'President Bush has died' it could mean G W Bush's father. In this case Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother is the mother of Queen Elizabeth II.
posted by wackybrit at 9:06 AM on March 31, 2002
Sorry for doubling up, riviera, but I thought that your perfectly valid comments on consorts might confuse some ;-)
posted by wackybrit at 9:10 AM on March 31, 2002
posted by wackybrit at 9:10 AM on March 31, 2002
Where's all this nazi stuff coming from? Are people thinking of the appalling Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, who really were nazi sympathisers? Part of the reason the Queen Mum is held in high esteem is because she looked practically angelic next to those two.
posted by Summer at 10:58 AM on March 31, 2002
posted by Summer at 10:58 AM on March 31, 2002
No, Summer, people are thinking of the support for Chamberlain and appeasement in 1937-38, which is usually passed over by the profiles: he went straight from Munich to the balcony of Buck House. In contrast, the king and queen disliked Churchill intensely, because he'd been one of the strongest voices for abdication in '36. Frankly anything compared to Edward VIII, though, was positively angelic.
(Strange reading Nick Cohen's scathing prophecy of the planned media approach, published last August. And they did draw the lottery yesterday, though without any accusation of tastelessness. Yet.)
posted by riviera at 11:11 AM on March 31, 2002
(Strange reading Nick Cohen's scathing prophecy of the planned media approach, published last August. And they did draw the lottery yesterday, though without any accusation of tastelessness. Yet.)
posted by riviera at 11:11 AM on March 31, 2002
Appeasement is NOT supporting the nazis. I was no fan of the Queen Mum - far from having the common touch I think she kept the monarchy disasterously out of touch with the public - but saying that support for Chamberlain equals support for the nazis is equivalent to saying Chamberlain himself was a nazi sympathiser. Ridiculous. In fact, if she supported appeasement, she was in line with mainstream political thought at the time.
I'm already sick of the cliches though - 'enormous sense of fun', 'looked the East End in the face', 'common touch', 'lived life to the full' etc etc. How about 'kept the monarchy rigidly unchanging', 'ostracised her mentally fragile grand daughter-in-law' and 'gave her daughters very little education'.
posted by Summer at 2:09 PM on March 31, 2002
I'm already sick of the cliches though - 'enormous sense of fun', 'looked the East End in the face', 'common touch', 'lived life to the full' etc etc. How about 'kept the monarchy rigidly unchanging', 'ostracised her mentally fragile grand daughter-in-law' and 'gave her daughters very little education'.
posted by Summer at 2:09 PM on March 31, 2002
a note: if Charles dies before his Queen [his mother, Queen Elizabeth II], succession does not pass to his son [Prince William]; it passes to the next royal son in line, Prince Andrew.
fun with monarchies!
posted by Nyx at 11:32 PM on March 31, 2002
fun with monarchies!
posted by Nyx at 11:32 PM on March 31, 2002
Not the case, Nyx. That's why Charles had to get special permission from Brenda to fly back from Switzerland together with his sons. The prospect of a plane crash making Andrew heir is normally too much to contemplate.
posted by riviera at 6:25 AM on April 1, 2002
posted by riviera at 6:25 AM on April 1, 2002
riviera, I don't see John Goodman on that chart anywhere...
posted by bingo at 8:31 AM on April 1, 2002
posted by bingo at 8:31 AM on April 1, 2002
Summer, the 'nazi stuff' (small 'n') is coming from the biography of her by Woodrow Wyatt, her friend and confident for many years. Appeasement is an entirely seperate issue, though it certainly *was* an issue since parading Chamberlain on the balcony of Buckingham Palace after Munich is widely regarded as the most overtly political act by any *British* (rather than merely English or Scots) monarch.
posted by vbfg at 3:02 AM on April 3, 2002
posted by vbfg at 3:02 AM on April 3, 2002
« Older Yahoo | Battle of the Blurbs. Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
I am currently watching CNN which immediately launched a 10 minute reel about her life. It seems pretty morbid but CNN had the segment produced in preparation of her death.
posted by wsfinkel at 10:04 AM on March 30, 2002