Prince William and Catherine, Duke and Duchess of Cambridge

The arrangement of the veil and tiara (hovering) give this whole exhibit a very spooky feel, as many have pointed out.  Maybe more lighting and a manikin would have been a better way to go.

Lovely exibit, but a bit wierd with no head...
What's with the cake? It can't be real...yet it looks so very much so. How could they have made such a faithful replica cake anyways?
I love the close-up of the lace! Kate is always so poised...

Here's the BBC vid of the Queen pronouncing the display "horrible".  As the announcer says, "Oh, dear."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14257114

Listening to the Queen talking about the Faberge stuff is interesting too, although it's just a snippet.  

Notice that Kate is again wearing her trademark pantyhose.

I'll be spending next weekend in London and I'm definitely going to see it!  Somehow it's easier to tell people that I'm seeing Kate's wedding dress than saying I'm thrilled to see the Faberge stuff...

GDA, I think there are 3 or 4 of those cakes floating around.  One was chopped up and packaged as  wedding gifts, another is on tour  for fundraising. And yet another is on display at some culinary school.  No one on seems to eat these wedding cakes.
 And, in my book, the Faberge "stuff" is the better value for viewing.

It's being reported that W&K have moved into Nottingham Cottage within the Kensington Palace grounds. This cottage is directly opposite Diana's former home (and that of Princes William and Harry) of apartments 8 & 9. This is a temporary accommodation until something more spacious becomes available like Princess Margaret's former home apartment 1a.

But, this royal watcher would like them to move into Marlborough House down a few mansions from Clarence House on the Mall. It's high time that that important property come back into the Royal fold. Quite frankly they need it. If W&K can reclaim Princess Marget's old digs (Apt. 1a), then I'd love to see them do it with Marlborough House.

Hi,

I'd also like to see Marlborough House used by some member of the Royal Family - the Cambridges are a good choice...
However, The Queen gave the place to the Commonwealth Organization shortly after Queen mary died in 1953...
I wonder if she can just 'claw it back'  Personally, I'd say, "Go for it!!"....

Larry

It is a rather large establishment for a young, married couple.   In any case, it has  been re-purpossed, I think something smaller would suit them.

Quite so.  I think it unlikely Marlborough House will ever again be occupied by the royal family.  It's vastly larger than Clarence House, and after Queen Mary's death, it was deemed too costly to maintain for use by the Queen Mother. 

I'm a bit surprised to read that Princess Margaret's former apartment 1A at Kensington Paace is being considered.  The royal household had previously suggested their intent to phase out KP as an occupied royal residence after the current occupants depart.  On the other hand, those current residents (Glouchesters, Kents) won't likely leave for a decade or two, so the KP security cordon has to be kept at least that long.  I suppose that coincides with the period that the Cambridges would likely live there - until the present reign ends and they take over Clarence House.  Perhaps that's the timeframe the household is considering hanging on to KP.

Notice that Kate is again wearing her trademark pantyhose.

I am glad that Kate wears "panty hose".  There is nothing more unsightly than uncovered legs with a beautiful dress or skirt.  It is a finishing touch to an elegant ensemble.

Uncovered legs belong in shorts or a swimsuit.

If it hasn't been mentioned previously, William has given Kate his mother's sapphire and diamond earrings which match her / their engagement ring.  Kate wore them on the recent tour of North America and was widely photographed with them twinkling in the light.

Interestingly, Kate had them slightly altered.  Diana wore them as studs on her lobes, while Kate had them remade into a slight drop style which, frankly, I think the jewels even better.  A little motion lets the twinkling sapphires and diamonds truly shine.

Notice that Kate is again wearing her trademark pantyhose.

I am glad that Kate wears "panty hose".  There is nothing more unsightly than uncovered legs with a beautiful dress or skirt.  It is a finishing touch to an elegant ensemble.

Uncovered legs belong in shorts or a swimsuit.

I don't mind uncovered legs but I'm glad she's bringing these back in.  It's much classier.

Notice that Kate is again wearing her trademark pantyhose.

I am glad that Kate wears "panty hose".  There is nothing more unsightly than uncovered legs with a beautiful dress or skirt.  It is a finishing touch to an elegant ensemble.

Uncovered legs belong in shorts or a swimsuit.

I don't mind uncovered legs but I'm glad she's bringing these back in.  It's much classier.

not that any appearance of hers is any less elegant!

Notice that Kate is again wearing her trademark pantyhose.

I am glad that Kate wears "panty hose".  There is nothing more unsightly than uncovered legs with a beautiful dress or skirt.  It is a finishing touch to an elegant ensemble.

Uncovered legs belong in shorts or a swimsuit.

I think that's going a bit far. It's 2011 - there's nothing "unsightly" about a woman showing her (lower) legs.

Tights are an abomination! Hot, uncomfortable and make me itch!

A major reason why I always wear trousers.

Ann