Apparently, Britain’s Channel 5 made a documentary called Kate: Our Queen In Waiting. I have not seen the mess and I would assume it only aired in the UK. I hope they eventually run out of titles for all of these Kate-centric documentaries until they eventually just have to name documentaries sh-t like Kate’s Keen Wait To Be Kween and The Future Future Queen, Maybe. In this doc, there were various royal commentators talking a lot of revisionist history sh-t about Kate, Meghan, Kate’s Waity years and more. Emily Andrews, Katie Nicholl and Victoria Murphy all contributed and I guess it’s worth discussing some of this:
Emily Andrews on how Kate tried to “help” Meghan: ‘Kate did try as much as possible as she entered the royal fray. She said, “If you want me to put you in touch with any fashion designers that I know of course I can.” Katie Nicholl: ‘Kate of course then invited Meghan to Wimbledon with her, they went to the polo together,’ royal journalist Katie Nicholl said.
Why did it take Kate years to “carve out a role” in the royal family: It took years for the Duchess of Cambridge to carve her own royal role, and with the support of her husband, she spent years studying what was expected of a Queen-in-waiting before stepping up to the plate with confidence. ‘Kate has taken a very long time to concretise her role within the royal family,’ Bidisha said.
Andrews on Kate’s vagueness: ‘I think perhaps in the past, there had not been much to say about what the Duchess of Cambridge stood for,’ Emily Andrews added. ‘The flip side of her being very cautious, not wanting to kind of rush into anything, has meant that some people have questioned “Well, who is she, what does she stand for, what is she doing?”’
Katie Nicholl on Kate’s research: ‘When Kate married into the royal family, she made a point of really doing her research. She wasn’t at all afraid to go across Buckingham Palace and speak to courtiers and advisors and to get their advice. She didn’t want to make mistakes and if that meant being accused of being “Waity Katie” again, all over again, she very much wouldn’t mind.’
Victoria Murphy agrees that there was an effort to not put Kate out there for years: ‘It would have been easy to jump in from the beginning when the interest was sky high and to take on lots of things, and put her out there in many different ways. But actually, what William and Kate did was that they wanted to build up very gradually for her to take time to grow in confidence, to grow in understanding, and for her to really build gradually a profile on the world’s stage.’
True or false? “It would have been easy to jump in from the beginning when the interest was sky high and to take on lots of things.” Would it have been “easy” to, say, hit the ground running and actually get to work quickly after a decade-long wait for the ring? Is “easy” the right word? I think it would have been easier on everyone if Kate had strengths, interests, hobbies and passions outside of “getting the ring” and “taking vacations” and “making William happy.” She willingly went into the family as a blank slate. A very lazy blank slate. That was why Kate had her back up as soon as Meghan entered the picture. Here was Meghan, who loved to work, who was passionate and had so many interests and talents. And Kate suddenly realized how dull and useless she had been for years.
Personally, I think it’s hilarious that there’s all of this commentary devoted to how Kate is so regal and future-queeny because… she’s lazy as hell and she didn’t do much of anything (work-wise) for the first seven years of her marriage. Royal commentators should try “pulling a Kate” and just phoning it in or declaring that they will eventually be keen about Kate at some point.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid and KensingtonRoyal social media.
