I have to admit I do have a bit of Royal Wedding Fever. Just a touch really. Not that I’m a HUGE fan of the royal family or any royals in particular, but how often do you get to sit in the comfort of your own home and watch the pomp and circumstance of ANY wedding on your giant 55″ HD TV, unless you’ve got it on DVD?

My real reason for watching is of course THE DRESS. Oh, and don’t forget the shoes, accessories and jewels. I say ‘jewels’ because unlike most of us Kate will get to wear hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of diamonds and other gemstones, most likely lent to her from the royal collection. Maybe one of those items will be gifted to her from the Queen, as was Diana’s wedding day tiara in 1981.

I already have a sneaking suspicion that I will be disappointed by Kate’s dress. Royals through the decades do not have a very good track record of choosing wedding dresses that are all that spectacular, fabulous or glamorous, though all of the dresses have some aspect or detail that I like. I know because I’ve done some research on the subject out of curiosity.

Let’s take a look back through recent history…..

Princess Margaret, the Queen’s sister, wore a dress with a *very* modest neckline. The best thing about this dress is the shape of the skirt and the long train. The rest is all rather unglamorous! Ok, ok, so the tiara IS spectacular.


To prove the unglamorous point, check out Princess Anne’s dress!
That neckline is so high it looks like it’s choking her. Anne’s sleeves are interesting and the seaming on the bodice is unusual. But really, that neckline?

I must apologize, but the more I look at Diana’s wedding dress, the more I hate it.

Let me explain before any of you take offense. First, the dress style does absolutely nothing for her. It’s a shapeless mass of silk taffeta that wrinkled so badly in the carriage that it looked like it had been left in a pile on the floor for weeks before she put it on. She’s a tall woman but the massive poufed sleeves, neckline ruffle and plain stitched-in waistline overwhelm her and make her look shapeless like a stick. Am I wrong? I never really did understand why masses of people thought she was so glamourous. Ok, so I did like some of her evening dress choices over the years and she always got to wear fabulous jewels and tiaras, but mostly she dressed extremely conservatively and classic as was expected. I thought her personal style was rather boring and generic.

Sarah Ferguson finally chose a neckline that flirts with danger! though the dress itself is soooo 1986. Check out those flat bows on her shoulders hanging there like badly made epaulettes!

T169 006
I must admit I like the beading on Sarah’s dress, and the train is pretty fabulous. I must also give props on the fabric selection – quality Duchess Silk Satin is a beautiful choice.

Oh my God!! Is that cleavage on Sophie Rhys-Jones?? It does seem that the further away you are from the throne, the easier it is to be ‘daring’!!

I also must admit that I do like Sophie’s dress. It’s an homage to that classic Medieval style with an updated 20th century twist. It’s quite lovely, it suits her and is made to perfection. Would I have chosen something like that for my wedding? Maybe in my 20’s. There was, at the time, a surge in historical ‘recreations’ from British designers. I only know that because I used to read through the British bridal magazines.

Finally, a dress I can truly love. An Australian commoner, Mary married the Prince of Denmark in May 2004. Her dress was designed by Dane Uffe Frank and is quite lovely. Enough bling? No. But a gorgeous use of fabric and a lovely style line for Mary.

I guess great minds think alike. I wore my hair piled high with the veil brought over and tucked behind my ‘tiara’ too. I do think my veil was more spectacular but I guess I am a bit biased.

Only tomorrow will we finally see the long-awaited royal wedding dress for the possible future Queen of England. I do not hold high hopes. But, I could be wrong and she could surprise us all!