|
Post by Ibelieveinfairytales on Oct 31, 2009 23:15:12 GMT
Should we stop talking about Kate Middleton?
|
|
|
Post by Cinderella on Nov 1, 2009 0:58:00 GMT
I say no. We have to talk about something, so why not Kate?
|
|
|
Post by thtregoddess2011 on Jan 20, 2012 7:04:50 GMT
Yes. there are plenty of other royals to discuss.
|
|
urbane
Member of the Court
Posts: 16
|
Post by urbane on Jan 10, 2013 16:23:39 GMT
The dear woman is now Mrs. William Windsor or more properly HRH Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. Stop calling her by her maiden name. Journals all do it not because they are ignorant (which is debatable) but to save space on newspapers and mags. Also, with all the wars, bad weather, beheadings etc. going on in the World right now, it sure is a pleasure for me to lighten my day by reading about this lovely lady.
|
|
|
Post by Cinderella on Feb 6, 2013 21:43:55 GMT
I personally don't think it's so wrong to call her by her maiden name. Think of Jane Seymour, Anne Boleyn, Wallis Simpson -- we still call them by their maiden names (or previous married name, in the case of Wallis). Going further back, we remember "Catherine of Braganza," "Matilda of Flanders" etc., not just "Queen Catherine," or "Matilda of England," or whatever. Using their original names helps differentiate one Queen Catherine or Queen Anne from another, acknowledges each woman's individual identity, and is convenient as titles change over time (Kate probably won't be Duchess of Cambridge all her life). So, while it's proper to use her current title, I don't think it's wrong to say "Kate Middleton." That's how she'll be remembered in history books.
|
|
|
Post by Ibelieveinfairytales on Feb 7, 2013 14:39:01 GMT
The dear woman is now Mrs. William Windsor or more properly HRH Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. Stop calling her by her maiden name. Journals all do it not because they are ignorant (which is debatable) but to save space on newspapers and mags. To be fair, this question was posed a few years before the engagement, hence using her maiden name here. I personally don't think it's so wrong to call her by her maiden name. Think of Jane Seymour, Anne Boleyn, Wallis Simpson -- we still call them by their maiden names (or previous married name, in the case of Wallis). Going further back, we remember "Catherine of Braganza," "Matilda of Flanders" etc., not just "Queen Catherine," or "Matilda of England," or whatever. Using their original names helps differentiate one Queen Catherine or Queen Anne from another, acknowledges each woman's individual identity, and is convenient as titles change over time (Kate probably won't be Duchess of Cambridge all her life). So, while it's proper to use her current title, I don't think it's wrong to say "Kate Middleton." That's how she'll be remembered in history books. Agree, although because of this sometimes I have a hard time thinking of Anne Boleyn as a Queen! Thought I read somewhere that the media continued to use 'Kate Middleton' because of search engine optimization. Proper or not, people are more likely to search for her using Kate Middleton instead of Catherine Cambridge or HRH Duchess of Cambridge. Is there any truth to that?
|
|
|
Post by Cinderella on Feb 7, 2013 21:23:31 GMT
Yes, certainly! Even non-royal watchers know who Kate Middleton is, but many would have trouble remembering Duchess of Cambridge (and it doesn't help that Camilla's title, Duchess of Cornwall, sounds similar). That is the reason I try to use "Kate Middleton" at least once on any page where she's mentioned.
|
|