Will you be watching the Royal Wedding?

**imagine** · 04-30-2011, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by pollypurebred39

I ended up watching far more of it then I thought I would. I found myself wishing them a happy lifelong marriage, full of laughter and children. It made me smile the entire day.

My DH who is the biggest romantic in the world did not share my new found enthusiasm. He was annoyed by all the money spent for this wedding (tax payers dollars, from already strained tax payers) Especially given the economic plight, but I think he would have only seen a small church wedding with a cake reception, family only fitting.

I overlooked the expenditure and became enthralled by the royalty of it all. It was every princess Walt Disney movie I ever seen, and I felt like I was 7 again.

I loved every minute of it.

I think they tried to keep costs down to be considerate of the economy. It terms of Royal weddings it seemed scaled down to me.

Shorter wedding train, borrowed tiara, modest flowers. Her Jewelry ( minus the engagement and wedding band ) were a gift from her parents. Prince William even skipped a wedding band.

Even her Engagement ring was an already paid for Heirloom instead of a new for her ring.

A recap of the wedding said she chose to do her own make up and hair for her wedding.

**pollypurebred39** · 04-30-2011, 12:53 PM

Yes, I know.

My DH thought it was not scaled down enough.

**imagine** · 04-30-2011, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by pollypurebred39

Yes, I know.

My DH thought it was not scaled down enough.

I guess he doesn't understand that if they had just a small family wedding it would have let down to so many British taxpayers.

They would have been seen as snobbish.

Ironic huh?

**pollypurebred39** · 04-30-2011, 01:25 PM

Ahh well...and there's the catch. I suppose it was the 2 receptions & 2 wedding dresses that threw it over the cliff for my DH. Obviously since I'm not a British taxpayer it does not effect me, I was happy to enjoy the nuptials on tv.

**Ali Lee** · 04-30-2011, 01:47 PM

I saw her reception gown..thot it was prettier than the wedding dress...

**imagine** · 04-30-2011, 02:43 PM

Originally Posted by pollypurebred39

Ahh well...and there's the catch. I suppose it was the 2 receptions & 2 wedding dresses that threw it over the cliff for my DH. Obviously since I'm not a British taxpayer it does not effect me, I was happy to enjoy the nuptials on tv.

I did not see that part 2 of each?

I guess he didn 't grow up with a neighbor that had a week of wedding festivities.

My parents were invited to only the wedding day activities. It was a breakfast brunch( bridal women only), then a groom lunch (men only) with golf after words, then a dinner and then black tie wedding and a reception with cake and dessert , then a dance, then cocktails ( adults only) after the bride and groom left. ( each invitation told of the propitiate attire to wear) My mom would of had to have three outfits to just attend all the festivities.

Remember my parents were just neighbors. I think they decided to attend just the wedding.

**monkeywrangler71** · 04-30-2011, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by pollypurebred39

Ahh well...and there's the catch. I suppose it was the 2 receptions & 2 wedding dresses that threw it over the cliff for my DH. Obviously since I'm not a British taxpayer it does not effect me, I was happy to enjoy the nuptials on tv.

The taxpayers are only responsible for the cost of the elevated security in the city. The wedding itself would be privately funded by the family.

Only the Queen and the Prince of Wales are supported by the government, although "supported" is kind of a funny way to look at it considering that the government makes significantly more from the crown estate every year than they actually pay out to the royal family (they traded use of their land in exchange for an annual 'salary' in 1760 - a deal which now heavily favours the taxpayers).

**pollypurebred39** · 04-30-2011, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by imagine

I did not see that part 2 of each?

I guess he didn 't grow up with a neighbor that had a week of wedding festivities.

My parents were invited to only the wedding day activities. It was a breakfast brunch( bridal women only), then a groom lunch (men only) with golf after words, then a dinner and then black tie wedding and a reception with cake and dessert , then a dance, then cocktails ( adults only) after the bride and groom left. ( each invitation told of the propitiate attire to wear) My mom would of had to have three outfits to just attend all the festivities.

Remember my parents were just neighbors. I think they decided to attend just the wedding.

LOL no he didn't.

That's a lot of celebrating

**pollypurebred39** · 04-30-2011, 03:13 PM

Originally Posted by monkeywrangler71

The taxpayers are only responsible for the cost of the elevated security in the city. The wedding itself would be privately funded by the family.

Only the Queen and the Prince of Wales are supported by the government, although "supported" is kind of a funny way to look at it considering that the government makes significantly more from the crown estate every year than they actually pay out to the royal family (they traded use of their land in exchange for an annual 'salary' in 1760 - a deal which now heavily favours the taxpayers).

Very interesting. Hmmmm.....I think we could use a few royals in the States.

**imagine** · 04-30-2011, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by pollypurebred39

LOL no he didn't.

That's a lot of celebrating

Their next daughter Eloped. They insisted she have a few receptions.

I guess she didn't want such a big to do.

**pollypurebred39** · 04-30-2011, 05:35 PM

Interesting. I wonder if it's common there to have more then one reception?

**imagine** · 04-30-2011, 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by pollypurebred39

Interesting. I wonder if it's common there to have more then one reception?

That would be interesting to know.

I just had a thought some might consider me having two receptions.

I had the cake and punch reception for everyone at the church after the wedding. Then we went to my parents house where I changed out of my wedding gown and into another dress (Hubby changed out of his tux) and we have a dinner with close family and out of town guests. My dad actually knocked out the guest room to have the living room/dinning room big enough. He also had the house interior repainted and purchased new carpet and kitchen flooring. But I think that was my wedding reception was just the excuse to do the remodeling.

I also noticed that the royal couple was to attend the Queen's breakfast reception.
My Mil and SIL greeted all the family for breakfast in the hotel lobby after their wedding ,every one including the the newlywed couple stayed in one hotel. Those that were in town and didn't stay at the hotel showed up anyway.

**britbunny** · 05-01-2011, 04:47 AM

Originally Posted by monkeywrangler71

The taxpayers are only responsible for the cost of the elevated security in the city. The wedding itself would be privately funded by the family.

Only the Queen and the Prince of Wales are supported by the government, although "supported" is kind of a funny way to look at it considering that the government makes significantly more from the crown estate every year than they actually pay out to the royal family (they traded use of their land in exchange for an annual 'salary' in 1760 - a deal which now heavily favours the taxpayers).

That's not true, the Civil List has been reduced recently but it's not just Queenie and Charles that receive our money.

The bill for policing cost £20 million. The cost from the public purse for the wedding was around £48 million.