by The Laird o’Thistle
April 29 2011

Simply put, I found the wedding of the new Duke and Duchess of Cambridge – a.k.a. the Earl and Countess of Strathearn – to be, mostly, “Brilliant!”And I’m not ashamed to say that I even teared up several times as I watched. So I thought I’d sit down immediately and send along a “special edition” column for this week, with a few “noticings” I had of the events of April 29, 2011, the eve (so we heard) of the feast day of St. Catherine of Sienna.

I started watching early on, to see the “who’s who” of arrivals at Westminster Abbey along with the “who’s wearing what” among the guests. Charlene Wittstock (Prince Albert of Monaco’s fiancée) gets my prize for the most elegant outfit, but only just edging out the bride’s mother, Carole Middleton. (Not having seen Sophie, the wife of Lord Frederick Windsor, on the day, I would belatedly put her at or near the top of the list.) Princess Beatrice, alas, had perhaps the oddest hat of the day. Among the men, I think the Pub owner from Bucklebury, in his gold vest and tie, was one of the most festively turned out.

Just watching the choreography of the vehicles from Buckingham Palace, the Goring Hotel, and Clarence House was amazing. I liked how they routed the official traffic across Horse Guards Parade. I assume that was done both for security and to minimize the disruption of London traffic. But it also provided a wonderful viewpoint. My one critique of the transport planning is that, if the royals are going to regularly use mini-buses for such occasions they should at least contract for unmarked ones. The company logos on the sides seemed just a bit tacky for a formal procession up the Mall.

As Prince William and Prince Harry drove out the gate of Clarence House it struck me that he left for his wedding from the same place his mother left for hers.

It was fun at one point to see some archive film of Prince William as a somewhat rambunctious little page (age 4) at the Abbey wedding of the Duke of York and Sarah Ferguson in 1986. My other memory of him at that wedding was the Queen dashing across the Buckingham Palace forecourt to catch him as he ran after the Yorks’ carriage when they left for their honeymoon.

I was glad to see the Duchess of Kent among the royals, and at the same time my heart went out to her. The poor woman seemed almost ghostly. Despite her recently broken rib the Countess of Wessex seemed in good form, and young Lady Louise Windsor did her parents proud as a bridesmaid.

The floral decoration of Westminster Abbey was spectacular. The use of the trees, and larger blooming shrubbery, fit the space and softened the harshness of the stone nave and chancel. I was particularly struck by the trailing greenery in the clerestory arches above the chancel, and on top of the altarpiece.

Catherine’s dress was breathtaking, and the comparisons to the wedding gown of the late Princess Grace seem apt. There were also similarities to Princess Margaret’s wedding dress. I ran and looked up the tiara that the Queen loaned Catherine. It was the “scroll tiara” that belonged to the late Queen Mother, dating from the 1920s. (My source on the preceding was Leslie Field’s book THE QUEEN’S JEWELS, published in 1987. Another report said it was made for the Queen Mum in 1936.) It was given to the Queen in 1944 and later loaned on occasion to Princess Margaret and Princess Anne. Given William’s warm memories of his great-grandmother, it was a particularly lovely touch and worked perfectly.

With all due respect to the traditions of the Church of England, I thought the chosen liturgy reeked of too many of the worst old hetero-patriarchal norms. I particularly cringed at the line about “as ye shall answer on the great and dreadful day of judgment” at the beginning, and at the section about the purpose of marriage being first and foremost procreation, closely followed by the right channeling of sexual “instincts and urges,” and only after all that for mutual love and support. There are more contemporary services, duly authorized, that could have been used instead.

The bride and groom impressed me with the deep connection between them, evident throughout the ceremony, and their earnestness. The fact that they wrote the prayer with which Bishop Chartres ended the homily was a great and wonderful surprise. At various points in the ceremony, William mixed his mother’s habits of downcast eyes and biting her lip with his father’s (and grandfather’s) tendency to work his jaw muscles. But when they looked at one another the love and joy was palpable.

While I absolutely love the hymn “Jerusalem” it did strike me as a bit ironic that it is best known to many around the world because of the movie CHARIOTS OF FIRE… which was produced by Dodi al Fayed. (The opening scenes of that movie also featured William and Catherine’s beloved St. Andrews… the running-on-the-beach scene having been filmed on the West Sands there.)

I thought the Queen and Prince Phillip both looked wonderful and VERY old. Although the cameras immediately cut away it seemed he – now just about seven weeks shy of his ninetieth birthday – was having difficulty getting into the coach that carried them back to Buckingham Palace after the ceremony. She increasingly shows facial expressions that remind me of her mother in the later years, and her shoulders are more and more rounded.

I was struck during the procession back to the palace by the way Catherine discretely bowed her head at points where William saluted (at the Cenotaph, etc.). Someone has clearly been carefully coaching her in such matters. One wonders if she was aware, amidst all the other hustle and bustle, of their first shared “royal salute” (the first few bars of the National Anthem) as they drove across the forecourt and through the central archway at Buckingham Palace.

As my own spouse noted, the first balcony kiss was the kind you see between two people who’ve been together for a long time.

In numerous ways, William and Catherine, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, impressed me on their wedding day as authentic heirs of the best aspects of the Windsor dynasty. They both came across as being unpretentious individuals, but also as mindful, respectful, and dutiful in the roles that are now theirs to play. They are a couple of this era, and I believe they truly are intent on adapting the monarchy appropriately to the times. But they are certainly NOT iconoclasts. (Neither was Princess Diana, though she was sometimes perceived to be.) The greater adaptability of the Windsors since the death of Diana and – equally importantly, in my opinion – of the Queen Mother works in their favor. Just as the Queen’s grandfather (George V) once regarded her as the hope of the future, so the Queen now views her beloved grandson in much the same light. And as that old king once rejoiced in his second son’s choice of Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon as his wife (“You’ll be damned lucky if she’ll have you!”), the Queen now seems similarly overjoyed at Prince William’s partnering with Catherine Middleton.

Something old, something new….

Yours aye,

– Ken Cuthbertson