Why are Americans so fascinated by the UK Royal Family?

[Nye Bevan]

Lead story on 1010 WINS (New York news radio).

All over the TV news.

Even on DU, quite the sprinkling of Royal Baby stories on the front page of GD. Will Pitt even started one.

Is it that we are all fascinated on a certain level by kings and queens, palaces and castles, princes and princesses?

[spin]

1. That is an excellent question. I suspect that most people really don't give a damn about the ...

royal baby. Hell, babies are born every day. This one has a slighter better chance of becoming a king or queen of England than the average Brit. No big deal.

I think the media loves to find any story with a chance of improving their ratings.

[S.A.M]

2. Right on!

Thank for expressing what I feel!

[life long demo]

53. Same here

[CTyankee]

3. well, I think it is of passing interest, esp. since the UK abandoned its sexist policy of royal

succession. On balance, it's a good thing; it certainly isn't bad.

There are some of us who aren't terribly interested in pictures of kitties and puppies, but I certainly understand that some people are deeply interested and that's OK with me.

On a lighter note, I recall when Prince Charles married that awful Camilla Parker Bowles, my little granddaughter was so excited to see a royal wedding. But she took one look at them and said, disgusted, "Oh, they're OLD!" and marched out of the room! We all got a huge laugh out of that...

[Nye Bevan]

4. I'm sure she was expecting them to look like Cinderella and Prince Charming.

The Disney versions.

[CTyankee]

9. of course.

You realize of course that the Pre-raphaelite school of art of the late 19th century was steeped in romanticizing all the prince/princess medieval past, particularly King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table. Altho not my favorite era of art, some of it is quite good, even if the subject is based a LOT on fantasy. Disney wasn't doing anything new...

[edbermac]

5. Why are Americans so fascinated by Kim Kardashian?

[Spazito]

8. + 1000! n/t

[theHandpuppet]

55. A lot of us AREN'T

I find the whole brood repulsive.

[JoePhilly]

6. I think its the hats.

Expect to see the baby in this ...

[MineralMan]

18. Don't they call those hats "strange attractors," or is

that a fractal math thing. I know there some name for them.

[HappyMe]

19. They're called 'fascinators'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascinator

[MineralMan]

22. Yah. I knew that. I was just playing word games.

I think that "Strange Attractors" would be a better name. They're certainly strange, and they're designed to attract attention to the wearer, I assume.

[Arugula Latte]

52. ...

[treestar]

57. The one on the right almost seems like a joke

Like the Princess is daring us to think it's for real!

[flamingdem]

70. It was a protest in fact

I forget the story but I guess Fergie wasn't invited so they showed up looking hideous!

[Dreamer Tatum]

7. Said a DUer, fascinated enough by a Briton to use one as an avatar. nt

[tsuki]

10. Americans are not, at least the ones I know.

But since all the news readers in the US now think they are celebrities, their stories now turn on the doings of celebrities. Pathetic.

[HipChick]

12. Any silver ballon that increases readership or folks tuning in..just another Ballon Boy moment

[MineralMan]

11. Because thoughtful people like you posted a thread on it?

I dunno...could that be it?

[Nye Bevan]

15. And moreover, respected DUers like yourself choose to contribute to those threads.

I think you're on to something.

[MineralMan]

17. But, you see, I don't care if people post threads on the baby.

I don't find it surprising. I don't think it's odd. I'm not personally very interested, and my local news radio station will announce the birth when it happens.

What I do find interesting and surprising, though, is that people waste time posting threads about other people posting threads. I find that I can, if I choose, simply not open threads that don't interest me. Your thread did interest me for the reason above, so I opened it. I commented in it, which I can also do, if it pleases me in some way. And now, I've wasted yet another 30 seconds of your time.

[Nye Bevan]

20. I never consider time spent on DU as time "wasted".

Especially when people find my threads interesting.

[AngryAmish]

13. It is in our nature (damn you evolution)

'tis a bit of seabeyond bait, but with apologies for the evo psych...

We are social animals. There are top dogs and followers. Followers look up to leaders and keep very close tabs on them to 1. make sure they are still good leaders and 2. suck up to them to make sure that one's own place in the group is intact or rises. This was important when there were packs of lions out there or other groups of humans who might kill you.

Likewise, the same argument could be made about most people around here are obsessed with the current first family (how many times has Michelle been on the cover of Vogue?) and the next leader.

I, for one hate hero worship. But Even I do it sometimes.

(Also, have you noticed all the Access Hollywood type shows. Celebrities fill the same headspace as royalty, rock stars, political leaders etc. High status, etc. But those celebrities that transgress are hammered for it - it is a betrayal. )

[laundry_queen]

60. I agree with what you have said.

There are some who don't give 2 shits about the royals, but love the first family in the same manner, or are obsessed with some random celebrity. There are very few people on this earth that aren't drawn to some kind of celebrity - whether it be religious, political, royal, Hollywood...I know people who think the royals are shit but are in love with David Suzuki (environmental activist scientist here in Canada), or who think Suzuki is a charlatan, and the royals waste money...but LOVE their hockey players and are thrilled to pay $100 to go to game. Or those who hate sports celebs but will wait in line for hours to see an author they love...it goes on and on. It's just human nature, imo.

[LittleBlue]

14. Same reason for interest in the Kardashians

People watch these useless celebrities as a form of escapism.

I actually feel bad for the child. He/she will have to wear a crown, forever reminded that his/her ancestors had real authority while the current monarch exists for no meaningful purpose other than to amuse the masses. I would abdicate before being humiliated like that.

[Lizzie Poppet]

16. "Golden ticks," as Doug Stanhope put it.

[MicaelS]

21. Because we don't have an "official" American Royal Family.

So we substitute the UK Royals, and also treat entertainers as pseudo-royalty.

[warrprayer]

23. the laws of power

and human nature change little if at all, no matter what the system.

[NCTraveler]

24. We have a direct and historical connection to them. It is fun for some people.

It is not all that important. Well, important enough for you to comment on.

[Rowdyboy]

25. A fondness for the memory of Diana, a love of history, but mostly a break from incessant BAD NEWS!

I'm sick of Snowden, sick of Zimmerman, sick of Boehner, sick of the economy and the potential loss of the senate and domestic spying and stand your ground.

This is a positive story, about attractive young people having a baby we'll all be reading about for the rest of our lives. The story will fade once the sex and name is announced but at least for now its a brief break from relentless, unceasing negativity.

[HappyMe]

26. I agree.

[RobinA]

27. Exactly This

There's so much bashing lately, it's gotten to be an ugly American hobby. I'm sure the Royal bashers will be out in full force for this one, but bashing a baby is so pathetic I think their numbers will be limited.

Attractive people, funny hats, middle-aged people who look middle-aged, interesting clothes, a scandal every now and then just to keep them human, lots of pomp and circumstance... It's a real life soap opera and they are better behaved than our celebrities with less plastic surgery.

Not a royal watcher, but looking forward to baby because he/she is a POSITIVE thing in this veil of tears.

[CTyankee]

35. In our own way, we do the same thing with our First Family.

I love seeing pics of Michelle and the girls. And Obama at basketball games or stopping in a bar for a beer or dropping by a diner and chatting with folks. Or Bo, the First Dog. I love stuff like that and love to find it here on DU! It's fun! (I remember thinking during the presidential campaign how awful it would be if Obama lost and they'd all have to move out of the White House. It made me terribly sad...).

[Logical]

37. BS n-t

[TDale313]

54. Yeah, that's a lot of it I think.

[Zorra]

28. Maybe because Wealth, Power, and Authority comprise the institutionalized Holy Trinity of

of the market constructed American value system?

"In Money, Power, and Authority We Trust"

[Glorfindel]

29. Personally, it's because I'm a Monarchist to the core

I'm also a social democrat and a semi-libertarian. I guess I'd vote Labour if I lived in the UK. I find the Royal Family much more interesting and worthwhile than cats, Kardashians, and breathless reports (complete with links!) on the latest outrageous bloviations by Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh. (Besides, I'm twice descended on my mother's side from King Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine.)

[Logical]

40. IMO the Kardashians and royal family are just as important. n-t

[Rowdyboy]

50. Can't think of anyone I'd rather been descended from....

Eleanor and Henry both were forces of nature-unfortunately they often found themselves at war. But what utterly fascinating people!

[pipi_k]

65. Henry II and

Eleanor of Aquitaine...

Did you find that out on Ancestry.com by any chance?

Last year I re-activated my membership that I had allowed to lapse for about four or five years just to see what new connections there might be.

Going back through one particular ancestor from England (the rest being from France), I found links to Henry and Eleanor also.

Then I examined the "information" more closely and found out that someone had somehow decided that a particular person was the offspring of a Bishop of the Church, who himself was related in some way to others (Dukes and Duchesses) who were descended from Henry and Eleanor, etc., etc., etc.

You really have to watch those things. I clicked on all the little "leaves" and had a whole neat family history that even went back to kings of Jerusalem, blah blah blah.

Yeah...impressive. But a crock of shit, basically. In my case, anyway.

I would be highly surprised to find even a drop of Royal blood in my line. My ancestors were regular farming people. Peasants, perhaps. Some of them were even pirates (who plied their trades in the seas off of St Malo, France)


All that is assuming, however, that I didn't get mistakenly switched in the hospital...

[Glorfindel]

68. No, I got it years ago from three of my great-aunts who were born in the 1870's & 80's

My mother's family always tended to obsess over genealogy - still do, for that matter.

[oldhippie]

30. I'll tell you why I am .....

Since I retired a few years ago I have been using my time filling in some holes in my educational background. I am (was) primarily an engineer, but morphed over to business and finance late in my career. But I had never studied art, music, history or philosophy, so I thought I would do some independent study in those areas.

It turned out I really enjoyed studying those subjects (not so much philosophy). I have learned a lot about music and art. But what I enjoy most is reading about European history and especially historical novels of Europe and Great Britain.

Kings were kings for a reason. It wasn't always by direct line of succession, but it did tend to run within "royal" families. But kings also had to be war leaders, politicians, judges, and philosophers. There were always a handful of families that could pull these things together and be the "leaders" of their societies. And they raised their offspring to succeed them, as many did during that time.

Reading about the histories and traits of the "royal" families leads one to compare and contrast with the "leaders" of today. Comparing their politics and philosophies is an interesting pastime.

That's why I like to observe the activities of the "Royals."

[Logical]

39. Hmmmm, I don't get it. n-t

[oldhippie]

43. I'm sorry ....

Reading about the histories and traits of the "royal" families leads one to compare and contrast with the "leaders" of today. Comparing their politics and philosophies is an interesting pastime.

What can I do to help you get it?

[Logical]

44. I don't think I will ever get it. n-t

[pipi_k]

66. I would say...

It's OK that you don't get it.

I too love reading about English history. My favorite period is the Tudor. I can't even count how many books I've read on Henry VIII and his wives.

Edward...Lady Jane Grey...Mary...and Elizabeth I

I find it all fascinating.


OTOH, I don't understand other peoples' fascination with Mathematics.

And golf. Tennis. Fashion. Quilting. Scrapbooking. Food. Movie Stars.

and lots more.

I think it's cool that not everybody likes the same stuff.

[Logical]

67. I have never seen 10 posts in one day about quilting. n-t

[William769]

31. It's what fairy tales are made of.

When I was little, I always wanted my knight in shining armor to save me.

[Mojorabbit]

32. In a sea of depressing news it is nice to have a joyful piece as a break. nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

33. I'm not. It's just a perverse form of our incessant celebrity worship.

[GreenStormCloud]

34. Good question. I sure don't give a damn about them. N/T

[Logical]

36. Why are Americans and DU members facinated by reality TV? n-t

[Nye Bevan]

38. I can't stand it. Except for Honey Boo Boo, of course (nt)

[cali]

41. beats me. maybe it's the connection to history

I'll admit to being fascinated by castles- the older the better. Ruins are great. I'll confess that I find Elizabeth R a totally fascinating figure as well as John of Gaunt, his father Edward III, the war of the roses and quite a bit more. The modern royals I find of no interest.

[Auggie]

42. Why is AMERICAN MEDIA so fascinated? They are, after all, editors of what we see.

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. It shows a surprisingly strong link to the country

There are, after all, several other royal families in the world, but the level of interest in the British/other Commonwealth one is in a league of its own.

[bravenak]

46. We're bored and depressed.

Babies make me happy.

[Savannahmann]

47. Let's be real for a minute

First, as a citizen of the world, I should be interested in the workings of other nations. If they are to respect me, I should respect them. If they are to respect our political idealism, then we must respect theirs. Unless you merely want a world where they are terrified our Carriers may show up off shore and bomb them into the stone age.

Second. The United Kingdom is one of our oldest allies. We should care because of the long history we share with this nation.

Third. The individuals in question are of at least above average moral quality. I doubt it is because of breeding, but because of the way they were raised.

Honesty time. Besides Joe Biden, how many Politicians have kids in the military? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beau_Biden

Even Beau is in the National Guard as a JAG officer. While William and Harry are serving line officers in high risk fields. For those who puff out some air and say that William is just flying rescue choppers. He's flying them among other areas, in the North Sea. Ask a pilot, the weather up there is variable. It ranges from Atrocious, to Horrible. The sea is only a few degrees above freezing, and if anything happens, William could well die before anyone would get there to help.

Harry served in Afghanistan, once in the Infantry, and again as an Attack Helicopter Pilot. Now let's skip all the nonsense about his womanizing and the asinine choice of wearing a NAZI Uniform to a costume party.

That's two out of two that are not only doing work to serve the people, but doing dangerous work to serve the United Kingdom.

Harry even came out and protected a Gay Soldier from a Homophobic attack. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-harry/10108456/Prince-Harry-saved-gay-soldier-from-homophobic-attack.html

So the least you can say is that those two are raised in such a way to believe in right, and wrong. The things that the people say is wrong, is that they were born to the wrong parents. Did either of them ask for that? Now, you might decry them for being born to the 1%, but if all the kids of the Political Class were as public service oriented, I think we would be much better off. Does anyone here seriously think that the kids of any of our Presidents will serve in the Military, especially in risky assignments? How about the kids of the Rich and Shameless?

Decry the 1% if you wish, but recognize that these two lads are at least living up to the responsibility that comes with the position, and that comes not from breeding. Certainly they have known all their lives that they were blessed by birth. But they have also known that there were certain expectations, and you can't claim that they have shirked that duty. Granted, like most young men, they have had their incidents of poor judgment. But at the same time, when push comes to shove, they at least stand up and do the right thing, especially if that right thing is unpopular.

[L0oniX]

48. Like flies to a bug zapper. n/t

[sufrommich]

49. It's not that anyone is fascinated with royal births,it's that

24 hour news channels have 24 hours to fill.If you spend all your time watching them,you'll get the impression that all minutia is incredibly important.

[Sanity Claws]

51. The elites in the media are into the UK Royal Family, not the average American

Please keep in mind the media is not of the American public and not for the American public. They are of and for the Powers that Be.

[Populist_Prole]

56. It's just "Oooh Shiney!" shit that keeps us from paying attention to the man behind the curtain.

The elites love it. That it's a bonanza for the media is just icing. Just an ancillary benefit though; The real payoff is not getting wise to the plutocrats.

[WinkyDink]

71. Some of us can actually pay attention to both. I'm more than cognizant of the elites, the

Illuminati, the Bilderburgers, the occultic London Olympics, etc.

But then I get told to take off my tin-foil hat.

[kestrel91316]

58. England is the land of our forefathers in many cases. It's just culturally interesting.

So hate me.

Oh, and I am descended from Henry VII, so that makes me especially evil.

[JHB]

59. Regis envy

[eShirl]

61. Because in an alternate universe it's still our royal family, too?

damned if I know

[Arugula Latte]

62. For that matter, why are Americans so fascinating with the stupid Super Bowl?

[ZombieHorde]

63. For me, a more interesting question is,

why do people believe that there is a Royal Family? What makes a family royal?

[FarCenter]

64. Without the Archbishop and the Prime Minister in the room, it may all be a fraud.

[WinkyDink]

69. I believe your last question is the answer. Personally, I have a very early memory of reading about

Richard Lionheart; I was either six or seven, and I've never "looked back," as it were. When the Beatles led the British Invasion of music, movies, and fashion, I fervently wished I were British (more than just having ancestors from Land's End). It has informed my entire life.

I've taught Brit Lit and visited the UK at least 10 times; I collect Wedgwood, Edward VIII memorabilia, Agatha Christie and "Lovejoy" books, and other sundry England-y objects.

I love the pageantry, which no other nation surpasses. I love the history, the popular culture, the architecture, the ancient monuments, castles, cathedrals, ....well, as the Bard once wrote:

This royal throne of kings, this sceptered isle,
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by Nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea
Which serves it in the office of a wall,
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands,
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.
-- Richard II, II, i, 40.