JAN: When my 23-year old daughter told me that she fantasized about going to London to try to glimpse of the procession of the wedding of Kate Middleton to Prince William, it didn't surprise me. Although she is pre-med student who whizzes through through organic chemistry as if it's hardly a challenge, she spends a frightening amount of down time reading Perez Hilton and keeping up with the Kardashians.
But when my HUSBAND, a man who doesn't even know about the Kardashians or Perez Hilton, or whether or not Angelina has a baby bump, seriously suggested that we start planning a trip to London so that we could stand outside Westminster Abbey where Kate and William allegedly will wed, I almost choked.
"Are you serious?" I asked.
"I mean it." he answered.
"To stand on the street with the teeming masses?".
"This probably the only other wedding of a monarch we could experience in our lifetime," he replied.
Frankly, I think this may be the affect of all the TUDORS we'd recently watched together, but it got me thinking.
Although I certainly wish Kate and William well, and have some curiosity about the wedding dress she chooses, I have so little interest in the royal wedding that I probably won't even watch it on television. But clearly I'm in the minority. So my question is: Do you care?? And why?''
Why is the wedding of a potential monarch relevant in a post-feudal era? Is it just something positive for the world to focus on in the midst of economic upheaval? An aftermath of the Diana tragedy? Or is it the fairy tale element that most of us can't resist?
ROSEMARY: This one I really could care less about.
Let me get this straight - she parades around in a see-through dress to get the guy's attention? Wow. Regal.
I did stay up all night to watch the Diana/Charles nuptuals, but that was pre-internet, pre-24/7 celeb news when it could reasonably be considered a historic event and not "Oy..that dysfunctional family again?" (She says, rationalizing the decision.) Also watched the funeral.
But I've never seen the Kardashians, any housewives, any contestants or any bimbos from south Jersey. Right now...I'm watching Witness for the Prosecution. I'd rather watch an old classic.
JAN: I'm with you on that Ro. I watched a movie on Bravo last night (Donnie Brasco, one of my all time favorites) and I was blown away by the advertising of incredibly stupid reality shows -- hair salon makeovers? And everyone is always screaming at each other and losing their minds. Haven't I been trying to avoid these people most of my life?
HALLIE: Wouldn't you just love to get married in Westminster Abbey? It is THE most gorgeous church interior, and actually fairly intimate as those things go. I'll be fascinated by the dress, but otherwise not so much. The whole Diana thing soured me on the Royals.
ROBERTA: She paraded around in a see-through dress?? Boy, am I out of the loop! Diana was definitely a fairy-tale princess story, but Kate seems a little more modern and the story a lot less--glittery and mysterious. I mean the girl has been dating him for EIGHT years, what's sexy about that? I think I would much rathe
r have been there to witness Chelsea Clinton's wedding than this one. Though I will enjoy seeing the dress she chooses and the whole wedding scene. I'm with you Jan, not much interest at all in standing out in the streets of London, hoping for a glimpse of something!
JAN: I didn't know about Kate's see-through dress either, Roberta. But I don't want to knock them for dating eight years. Given how the fairytale romance between Charles and Diana turned out, I think the eight years is a good sign.
RO: She was modeling at a fashion show that she knew he was attending.
Okay, I get it...go for it. But hardly the fairy tale that we're all supposed to oooh and aaaah over. By the way, the dress may be for sale if anyone's interested in snagging another prince.
RHYS: writing very little as I just broke my wrist, but a royal wedding will give Britain's economy a real boost. At least she's smart even if she is a commoner. And I'm giving weekly royal gossips on my solo blog: http://www.rhysbowen.blogspot.com/
HANK: Oh, gee. I don't care. Not at all. Yes, the dress, okay, fine, love to see it. She really set her cap for him, and succeeded, so good for her. (I don't really like her hair, so there.) And that doesn't so much look like a dress as a see-through thing with a bathing suit underneath. (How many of us would be caught dead in it? Let's even say we could pull it off?)
Several years ago, say ten, I had this fantasy, which I really thought about for a week or so. How could you, I wondered, make someone who is absolutely NOT famous (hasn't ever done anything, seriously a nobody) into someone who IS famous? I had some ideas, and theorized that it COULD work. (Someday I'll tell all about the scheme.)
It would have worked. But who cares, now. It's what happens every day.
JAN: I think its interesting that nearly all of us are interested in the dress! So let's hear from everyone else out there? Do you care about the royal wedding -- even a bit? And why?
And come back tomorrow for True Crime Tuesday when I talk about bank robberers and the strange place they hold in my heart.