Would you tell the Queen of England to take off her crown for a photo?

[CTyankee]

That's what renowned American photographer Annie Liebowitz said to Queen Elizabeth while doing a photo shoot, according to a segment on Good Morning America today. http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=4360004&page=1.

Liebowitz said that the crown made the royal robe Elizabeth was wearing "too dressy." The Queen gave her a royal "look" and said "What d'you think THIS is?" pointing to her robe. Liebowitz pressed a bit again and the Queen didn't budge. Liebowitz finished the shoot with the crown intact.

Altho the story in the link doesn't provide this segment it will be on 20/20 tonight, so you can see it then. Quite funny, really. Almost like something from Saturday Night Live!

[av8rdave]

1. No, but I would tell her to cover up a little if she was going to fly Southwest

[Beausoir]

15. OMG.

:rofl:

[Deja Q]

63. Her crown? She's wearing a wig? Has a detachable head? What?

:wow:

[SacredCow]

2. Only if there was a chance I could try it on.....

:hide:

[Pacifist Patriot]

3. Sure! If I'm the photographer and I have an artistic vision of what I want to capture.

I'm not going to insist on it, but I don't see the harm in asking anything.

[BuddhaGirl]

22. I agree

there's no harm in it. Why is this even a story? :yawn:

[CTyankee]

25. I dunno. The Queen was just doing her "queen thing" which includes the

tiara. You know, the whole package. I just think Liebowitz forgot who she was talking to. The whole scenario just struck me as funny...

[Pacifist Patriot]

31. It's probably the egalitarian in me.

I'm not impressed by royalty be it hereditary or enthroned by Hollywood. Asking the queen to remove the crown would be no different than asking George Clooney to remove his pants. Both would turn me down, but it doesn't hurt anyone to ask. Insistence is where you get into trouble. :evilgrin:

[CTyankee]

32. To me, it was IRONY. Asking the queen to take off her crown =

asking the queen to give up being queen. You know, symbolism...but I didn't take it seriously! I can only wonder what the queen's staff was thinking at that moment!

[Pacifist Patriot]

33. Oh I know what you meant. I think that's what I find so funny about it.

Both sides being utterly clueless as to the other's point of view.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

4. yes i would if she wanted to do a photoshoot.

say you wanted the queen to appear as a person and not the queen its a reasonable request

[northzax]

6. not to the Queen

she isn't a 'person' she's the Queen. and that difference is important. I don't believe she would ever sit for a formal portrait without the trappings, it wouldn't be 'proper' and since 'proper' is the only reason for her existence...

[La Lioness Priyanka]

7. i guess, my point was annie had a right to ask her, she had a right to be a pompous queen

blah blah

[mondo joe]

9. Exactly. The photographer had the right to ask, the queen had the right to say no.

I don't see the issue.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

10. i dont like the british monarchs. thats my issue

:)

[mondo joe]

11. I'm not fond ofthem myself. But even if I were, I hope I'd realize the photo shoot is

a job, and the photographer is providing a service. She's not some lowly wench who's supposed to grovel. She just did her job. And the Queen, arguably, just did hers too.

[muriel_volestrangler]

13. Liebowitz had asked for the robes - the showiest the Queen has

The 'Order of the Garter' ones. The Queen was in a bit of a bad mood because it takes 15 minutes to get into the things, and needs someone to carry the train of the robes around, and taking off the crown would have meant recombing her hair, and she was in danger of running late for something else. It does seem a bit silly to go for the plushest formal robes, and then say the 'crown' (more of a tiara, really) is too much.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

14. artistic license. i am sure liebowitz has a good reason. maybe something looked off

or probably just looked very boring, like every other pic she had

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. Here's a link with a photo

http://littledynamo.blogspot.com/2007/09/lucifers-crown.html

(lower down in that blog)

(Note the bit about "The Queen is then shown walking angrily from the drawing room" was a big fuss at the time - the preview of the programme, for he BBC, apparently showed her angrily walking out, where in reality she had angrily walked in - because she knew she was running late).

[Shakespeare]

17. That's what left me shaking my head when I saw the video of it this morning.

I like Liebowitz mostly, but she has some misses now and then. Asking the queen to go to the trouble of putting on her most ornate garb and then saying "yeah, I think the crown should go..." :eyes:

Annie, Annie, Annie.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

18. i guess i just liked that she treated the queen like she would any other subject

[Shakespeare]

19. I thought it was rude, queen or not.

And I thought the queen showed admirable restraint, as well.

[IntravenousDemilo]

41. And in return, Her Majesty did the same. n/m

[CTyankee]

28. It was a formal photo in Buckingham Palace.

What was wrong was that Liebowitz was calling into question the taste of the Queen's "presentation" which probably has to do with lots of history and protocols. Liebowitz was treating her tiara as a fashion accessory, rather than the royal "standard issue" outfit that she dresses in on formal occasions, such as opening Parliament.

[edbermac]

5. Annie, that's what they made Photoshop for.

Just click on the clone stamp and airbrush the crown out.

[DS1]

8. Americans

Christ almighty.

[CTyankee]

29. Well, don't get bent!

I thought the irony was funny as hell. "Liz, honey, the robe's fabulous but the crown thing is really over the top...":rofl:

[terrya]

12. That's probably the 1) rudest 2) most idiotic thing I've seen today.

And good for Her Majesty. Sometimes, we Americans can come off as the rudest louts.

[Gormy Cuss]

23. It does show either a lack of knowledge or considerable chutzpah.

Not sure which, but we Americans aren't known for observing foreign protocols after all.

[Connonym]

40. I think it's the Queen who comes off as rude

it's not like some random stranger on the street came up to her and asked her to pose for a picture w/o her crown. If she wasn't willing to trust Liebowitz's artistic vision then she should have just hired a trained monkey to take her picture. At the very least she could have been polite about declining. Certainly she has the right to say no to something that makes her uncomfortable but she has no right to be rude or act like it's out of line for an artist to be artistic. Sheesh. I fucking hate the whole concept of royalty.

[CTyankee]

45. This episode just illustrates how crazy the whole thing is with the royalty.

They are willing to pose in their regalia but chafe at being asked to remove their symbol of power as if it is some prop on a movie set.

That's why I found this segment to be so delightfully funny. The Queen was all Monty Python and Liebowitz was all SNL. It gave me a laugh all day long!

[DS1]

49. It's part of a 'uniform'

just like Marines can only wear their covers *hats* indoors IF they are 'under-arms' and in a duty role. Otherwise the covers are supposed to come off immediately. There's even a specific way to carry them, which is often overlooked but the indoors cover rule is not.

[SOteric]

47. I don't see it that way.

If the tiara was nothing but a fashion accessory, then sure, Liebowitz has every right to ask her to remove it in accordance with an artistic vision. But the British crown jewels are the trappings of power, the symbol of a British monarchy. If she's posing as "Good Ol' Bess in a pretty dress," then maybe the crown is unnecessary. If she's posing in a formal gown as the monarch of Great Britain, then she's pretty well compelled to wear the damned crown no matter what people think of a monarchy in the U.K. or their 'sense of fashion.'

[MorningGlow]

20. Maybe she can't

Maybe it's an implant. :shrug: It would explain the ugly hats--to cover it up sometimes...

[CottonBear]

21. It's not a crown or regal circlet, it's the Girls of Great Britain tiara, inherited from Queen Mary,...

QEII's grandmother.

IMHO, the most beautiful of her many tiaras, most of which have been hidden away in the vaults for decades, some for over a century. She typically wears the Russian Fringe Tiara, the Aquamarine tiara, the Burmese Ruby tiara and the Girls of Great Britain tiara for formal events. These jewels are her personal possessions.

She wears the crown and regal circlet (part of the crown jewels) for events like the opening of parliament and other state occasions.

[CTyankee]

30. I assumed that the crown jewels are forever in a vault and that

what she wears out are good fakes. It's incredible to me that they would take a chance with these priceless pieces of jewelry and history. But maybe I'm just being paranoid and I've been seeing too many heist movies...:rofl:

[CottonBear]

34. Nope, she wears the real thing all the time! The Crown Jewels are in the Tower of London

and her personal jewels (VAST royal collection) is in special secure vaults at her various palaces and castles.

She has lent many peices to her duaghters-in-law. For example, The Duchess of Cornwall (Camilla) has been able to wear the late Queen Mothers two most spectacular tiaras (Dehli Dhurbar and Boucheron) and many brooches, necklaces and earrings.

The Queen's jewlery collection is just huge and really, really beautiful!

[sarge43]

35. The crown jewels or coronation regelia is kept in the Tower of London

and are on public display, albeit carefully guarded. The jewelry she wears is the real deal; we don't do costume. The St Edward's Crown or Crown of England is worn only once at the monarch's coronation. When all the bells and whistles are called for, such as the Opening of Parliament, she wears the Imperial State Crown. I don't recognize the diadem she has on in the ABC picture. She may have dug around under the sofa cushions for some sparklies and had a new one made which may be why she didn't want to remove it.

[CottonBear]

36. It's the Girls of Great Britain Tiara inherited from Queen Mary. n/t

[sarge43]

37. Love that name - snerk. n/t

[noonwitch]

24. Only if we're on this side of the pond

She's the queen of nothing, here.

[LeftyFingerPop]

26. No, but I would tell her to stop doing this...

[underpants]

27. I thought Fawn Liebowitz died in a kiln explosion

:shrug:

[LaurenG]

38. Yes, if I was trying to photograph her without reference to her

crown.

The Queen is a person just like the rest of us and she probably realizes that she is only a "symbol" now. Queens with Crowns are so last century anyway! :rofl:

[trof]

39. I might have asked her to 'dis-robe'.

:rofl:

[IntravenousDemilo]

42. No, I wouldn't "tell" the Queen to do anything. That sort of thing is just NOT done. n/m

[Darth_Kitten]

44. I'd tell her to repeal the Act of Settlement........

that she and her ancestors have benefitted from for hundreds of years.....

but that's just me.

[NNadir]

48. Why not?

Her family has been sponging off the public for years, centuries actually.

Why can't people ask her to do something besides worship Corgies?

[IntravenousDemilo]

57. Because she's my Queen. n/m

[Darth_Kitten]

43. She's not a real Queen anyways......

;)

[Forkboy]

46. Tell her? I'd make her! What is she, like 90 pounds?

I can take her any day if she argues.

[NoPasaran]

52. Don't taze me, commoner!

[triguy46]

50. No. I told my wife to leave her tiara on tonight. What's the big deal?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

51. Yes, because royalty is a bullshit concept in 2008.

[triguy46]

53. And our election of presidents has been so successful...

:woohoo:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

54. That's a little different.

[triguy46]

55. Deep breath, think blue. I did post a smilie. This is the lounge after all. All is fair.

[mondo joe]

61. Absolutely. An inherited title doesn't make one any more or less immune from being asked a simple

question than it does anyone else.

For god's sake, if you want Annie Liebovitz let her be Annie Liebovitz.

[Fox Mulder]

56. Absolutely not.

She's the Queen of England, for cryin' out loud.

[Robeson]

58. If Annie Liebowitz requested it, then yes, I think she should have taken it off....

...if for no other reason than to try and show that the "royals" are in touch with the 21st century. Liebowitz is, in her own right, a cultural icon. The Queen could have shown herself to be human, by trying to be a real person in a photograph, instead of another postcard pic of the royals.

[The Animator]

59. Hey W, could you move out of the way?

I'd like a decent picture of the President.. Now look right here Al!

[City of Mills]

60. I remember wearing a crown in Burger King

When I was a kid, my parents couldn't get that crown off of my head either!

[Rabrrrrrr]

62. It's rude to ask that, unless one will replace it with Wegman's dog.

The Queen HAS to have something on her head. It's not proper to go without covering.

So if you ask her to remove the tiara or crown or whatever, you have to have something ready to replace it with so her head can still be covered.

A Wegman dog is the only proper substitute.