Real talk: the more I look at and evaluate Jonathan Yeo’s “blood-soaked” portrait of King Charles, the more I love it. I’m not pretending to be a professional art critic or anything, but I love the sub-genre of “discussions about artwork done with royals-as-subjects.” Yeo’s portrait of Charles is thought-provoking, evocative and it’s just a really interesting painting overall. The fact that Yeo actually captured Charles is the icing on the cake. Compare Yeo’s portrait to Hannah Uzor’s Tatler-commissioned portrait of the Princess of Wales, and Uzor’s is found wanting. It’s not striking, it doesn’t look like Kate, and the whole piece is so flat and lifeless.

Outrage and opinions followed the unveiling of Yeo’s portrait of the king. Charles’s name was trending on social media for days as everyone dissected the painting. Mainstream, international outlets got in on it too, everyone wanted to talk about Yeo’s portrait. It feels like Tatler is trying to force the same thing about Uzor’s portrait of Kate, only everyone just flatly hates it. The Telegraph’s art critic Alastair Sooke called Uzor’s piece “intolerably bad.” Some of his review:

Sorry, who is she meant to be? The Princess of Wales? You could have fooled me. Even by the standards of modern royal portraiture (and there have been many abominable likenesses of senior members of our royal family produced over the past century), Tatler’s new cover image – an “exclusive” portrait of the Princess of Wales by the British-Zambian artist Hannah Uzor – is egregiously, intolerably, jaw-hits-the-floor bad.

I’ve spent the past hour or so – time, incidentally, that I will never get back – scrutinising Uzor’s “likeness”, and, still, I cannot divine any flicker of resemblance between it and the woman it’s supposed to depict. At first, my editor thought it was meant to represent Meghan, Duchess of Sussex; its subject’s smirk made me think, initially, of Anne Robinson fronting The Weakest Link.

Has there been a flatter, more lifeless royal portrait in living memory? (It’s no surprise to learn that Uzor based her picture on video footage of, rather than personal sittings with, her subject.) Beneath a Lego-like helmet of unmodulated, monotonously brown “hair”, this Princess of Wales has as much charisma as a naff figurine atop a wedding cake.

She holds herself with the bored bearing of an air stewardess about to begin an in-flight safety demonstration – which is additionally awkward, given that this was a job once performed by Catherine’s mother (a fact that, in years gone by, reportedly attracted the ridicule of William’s snobbish friends).

Even her outfit (which she wore to the King’s first state banquet) appears stiff, with that rigid blue sash restricting her like a seatbelt. Her tiara doesn’t sparkle and those diamond-drop earrings fail to shine; towards the image’s bottom edge, her gown seems to disintegrate into streaks of brittle wax, like something desiccated and shrivelled worn by Miss Havisham.

[From The Telegraph]

The Miss Havisham reference is WILD, as is the air stewardess reference, OH MY GOD. Sooke really hates the bejesus out of this piece. Someone else who hated it? “Royal commentator” Michael Cole:

Discussing the portrait of The Princess of Wales which appeared on the latest edition of Tatler, Mr Cole told GBNews: “It’s dreadful, isn’t it? It’s as dreadful as Jonathan Yeo’s red portrait of the Red King was brilliant and wonderful.

“It is really a daub, a most dreadful daub. But what Tatler’s doing sticking it on the cover? I have no idea at all. I think she’s got the garter sash right. Everything else is wrong. Certainly the features, certainly the deportment: everything about it. I have no idea why on earth that would be put on the cover of such a long-established, well, it’s the Toff’s bible, isn’t it? Tatler. I don’t know what they’ll think of it at all, and I don’t think it’s helpful either, because at this moment, as we know, Kate, The Princess of Wales, is undergoing treatment for an unspecified cancer.

“To have a picture of her, which might have been done by that man who did The Scream, [Edvard] Munch. Mr Munch might have done this if he’d thought of doing a portrait of the Princess of Wales. Now I think it’s best forgotten. I think it’s one of those magazines you just want to turn it over and see the advert on the back page.”

[From GB News]

Some of you suggested something similar, which is that Tatler was being purposefully shady by commissioning this portrait and putting it on the cover. While that’s absolutely a possibility, am I the only one finding this hate for the piece a bit… dramatic and performative? While Uzor’s piece looks nothing like Kate, it’s also not unflattering, per se. It’s not like Uzor depicted Kate as slovenly or squatting down to take a dump. Uzor captured Kate’s authentic “flatness,” her dull two-dimensionality. Maybe that’s why the royalists hate it.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Tatler (@tatlermagazine)

General election? There’s only one debate in Britain right now: where do you stand on the new portrait of the Princess of Wales for the cover of Tatler?

Get the inside scoop in Tatler’s July 2024 issue, on sale 30 May. https://t.co/KZ0QuX1gRS pic.twitter.com/LQVZU0FNj2

— Tatler (@Tatlermagazine) May 23, 2024

Photos courtesy of Cover Images & Avalon Red. Cover courtesy of Tatler, portrait courtesy of Jonathan Yeo.

Tom Bower has been especially vocal lately, and he’s being used as a credible royal expert by many American and British outlets, even though it’s been clear for years that he’s a vile, racist, misogynistic, hateful old man. Recently, he was trying to revive the “bullying investigation” into the Duchess of Sussex and he was full of contempt for the Sussexes’ wildly successful Nigerian tour. Hilariously, Bower claimed that the Sussexes should have mentioned King Charles during their trip to Nigeria. What’s also funny is that Bower and his ilk are basically admitting that the Nigerian tour was a success and that the Sussexes have been more successful than many of them predicted. So now that’s the criticism – how dare Harry and Meghan rub our noses in their wins?? Poor William and Kate, having to contend with the Sussexes’ successes!

Kate Middleton and Prince William are ‘deeply upset’ with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry as they ‘go through tragedy’, claims a royal author. With the Princess of Wales, 42, out of action following the announcement that she is undergoing preventative treatment for cancer and King Charles, 75, only recently getting back into royal duties after his cancer diagnosis, royal expert Tom Bower recognised the ‘huge pressure’ on Prince William.

But not only this, the royal pro also claimed that this ‘pressure’ isn’t helped by how insensitive Prince Harry, 39, and Meghan Markle, 42, appear to be. As the Waleses deal with arguably the most difficult time of their lives, Tom Bower claimed that the Sussexes’ new ventures are ‘rubbing salt in the wound’ for Kate and Will.

Speaking exclusively to Woman, Tom shared why he believes William to be ‘furious’ with Harry, as he said: “Not only is there the pressure on William, but also the constant sniping from California. I’m sure he’s furious with Harry, he’s behaved appalling. Not only by the way he left England and exploited his royal connections but also his book – the things he said about the Waleses were so outrageous, rude, unfair and in my opinion, untrue. It’s a real struggle for the Waleses.”

After their recent trip to Nigeria, and the launch of Meghan’s new Instagram brand, American Riviera Orchard, Tom added: “One just always feels like there may be some sort of secret glee in Montecito. While they’re establishing this so-called brand Sussex, the family here is going through torment. After Charles’ diagnosis, Harry came over for half an hour and that’s it, he’s done nothing else. I can imagine that Kate and William are deeply upset by having the Sussexes’ brand operation rubbed in their face while they’re going through this tragedy.”

[From The Sun]

The Windsors: sink or swim.
H&M: Okay, we’ll swim to America.
The Windsors: You’ll never survive without us.
H&M: Here we are, surviving and thriving.
The Windsors: How dare you rub our noses in your successes, why aren’t you begging to come back?? That’s so rude!!
H&M: We can’t hear you over the sound of all of this winning.

Also: “Harry came over for half an hour and that’s it, he’s done nothing else.” I mean, he asked to see his father and the king lied and said he was too busy, so once again, what was supposed to happen? Harry and Meghan have a very special ability to just step back and make the entire royal institution – and their sycophants – make asses out of themselves, over and over again. I do think Bower is correct on one part of this, which is that William can’t handle the fact that his brother is thriving. It really is that simple.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

Tatler’s July issue features three covers – portraits of QEII, King Charles and the Princess of Wales. I wanted to talk about the Kate portrait, because this looks nothing like her. Tatler apparently commissioned Hannah Uzor to make a large-scale portrait of Kate, and Uzor pored over photos of Kate and based this portrait on Kate’s appearance at the state dinner for the South African president in 2022. It was one of Kate’s first big moments as Princess of Wales and she wore the Cambridge Lovers Knot Tiara, Diana’s Collingwood diamond-and-pearl earrings and a caped Jenny Packham gown. The photos of Kate weren’t bad, and the look was fine, if a bit uninspiring. Tatler wanted a portrait which would, as they write, celebrate “Britain’s royal star: the woman so many look to for strength, grace and dignity.”

Now, in a large-scale portrait commissioned by Tatler, Hannah Uzor depicts Kate in her newest role – The Princess of Wales.

‘She has really risen up to her role – she was born for this,’ says Uzor in our July cover story, adding that ‘she carries herself with such dignity, elegance and grace.’ The cover, crafted after the artist’s study of over 180,000 archival photographs, still manages to incorporate Kate’s personal passions; projects the public have witnessed the princess develop over many years. The green colour wash nods to her love of gardening, and its blue undertones to the time she spent rowing – a hobby that dates back to those years spent studying art at university.

Uzor – who was born Hannah Hasiciimbwe in Lusaka, Zambia and counts Toulouse Lautrec among her influences – has equally captured another side to Kate. ‘I sense with her the joy of motherhood,’ says the artist, who, like her subject, is a mother of three. More than ever, the image of the Princess sits between the dichotomies of royal portraiture, balancing the ceremonial and the sequestered. She gazes out of this month’s cover, eyes once again locked with the viewer: a princess, mother, wife and artist.

[From Tatler]

LMAO “The green colour wash nods to her love of gardening, and its blue undertones to the time she spent rowing.” Kate is a woman without passions but bless your heart for trying. And all of that for a portrait which looks vaguely like Minka Kelly. Also: this serves as a reminder that there really aren’t that many portraits of Kate. There’s the Paul Emsley one, there was one of Kate and William, and then there’s this mess. Well, at least it won’t go viral like King Charles’s brilliant portrait by Jonathan Yeo.

Cover courtesy of Tatler, additional photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Weird vibes this week, as there seems to be an effort to remind people of the Princess of Wales’s existence. Weirder still is that this reminder is coming after two months of absolute radio silence on Kate’s health, recovery and well-being. Everything about this “Kate Missington” issue in 2024 has really shown the world that when the royals WANT to shut down speculation and rumormongering about a royal woman, they can and do. There has been no media-led push to question any part of the palace narrative. Instead, the British media is openly colluding with whatever the palace wants. Well, this week, Kensington Palace briefed the press that Kate has been “the driving force” behind-the-scenes on some of the latest Early Years busywork. Add to that, Tatler commissioned a janky portrait of Kate and put that on the cover. So is Kate actually around and will anyone be able to credibly see her at any point this year? Richard Eden devoted his column to a Kate update:

Mixed signals: The Princess of Wales was described as the ‘driving force’ behind a major report this week that called on businesses to introduce more family-friendly ways of working. Yet a spokesman has been keen to stress that Catherine’s involvement should not be seen as an indication that she is returning to work. The princess’s many admirers could be forgiven a little confusion, perhaps, as the signals seem mixed – and will naturally wonder what’s really going on behind the scenes at Kensington Palace.

Kate’s friends say she won’t be back until the autumn: She has not undertaken any public engagements this year and friends I spoke to in the past few days suggest we might not see Catherine again until the autumn – and only then if she has recovered fully.

Everything has been put on hold: Indeed, other aspects of the work she shares with Prince William have been put on hold. Take, for example, the planned appointment of someone to run the Waleses’ household. I disclosed in my social diary, Eden Confidential, last September that William and Catherine planned to create a new role of Chief Executive Officer (CEO), who would be responsible for about 60 staff. The search for a CEO has now been suspended, however. As a palace spokesman explained: ‘With everything going on, the Royal Household’s focus is on the Princess’s recovery, so no appointment has been made.’

Big decisions have to wait: Although the prince and princess have often carried out separate engagements and pursued different interests, they are very much a team. Their charity is the Royal Foundation of The Prince and Princess of Wales, remember, and they have joint offices, working closely together. And, as the postponement of such a key appointment shows, big decisions must wait until Catherine is recovered.

No pressure: ‘No one wants to put any pressure on Catherine,’ a source tells me. ‘The only thing that matters at the moment is her getting better. She has been through an ordeal this year. What this means in practice is that big decisions, such as the appointment of new staff, can wait. It’s a reflection of Her Royal Highness’s importance to the future of the Monarchy that she has been given as much time as she needs.’

Kate can go missing for months because she’s not the king: ‘As Sovereign, His Majesty is in a very different position from the Princess of Wales,’ says the source. ‘There is no need for her to be seen while she’s recovering.’

[From The Daily Mail]

I fundamentally disagree with this: “His Majesty is in a very different position from the Princess of Wales.” Kate is the second-highest “ranking” woman in the monarchy and the future consort to the future king of England. She’s the daughter-in-law of the current king. There is a case to be made that British taxpayers are entitled to more information about Kate and her health. It’s just that the “case” is not being made by the media. But the point of Eden’s column was once again to shift the goalposts and halfway confirm that Kate will not be seen in June, July, August or probably even September. No Trooping the Colour for Kate, no Order of the Garter, no Wimbledon. Just months and months of no one seeing Kate. What will they say in October? How will they shift the goalposts then?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Wednesday afternoon/evening, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak finally announced the date for Britain’s general election. Everyone knew it was coming, but I’m not sure people realized that Sunak would set the date for Day 4 of the Wimbledon Championships. Sunak won’t stop until we get John McEnroe providing election updates from the ESPN booth, istg. Well, it’s been so long since Britain had a real general election, people sort of forgot that their “royal family” is supposed to not only remain apolitical, but the royals are supposed to stay quiet and mostly out of sight during an election cycle. Wouldn’t you know, suddenly the already-strained “working royals” have a perfect excuse to take a holiday for two months. Wouldn’t you know, July is when they usually start their summer holidays too. We won’t see most of the Windsors until September or October, right?

The Royal Family is postponing engagements “which may appear to divert attention or distract from the election campaign”, Buckingham Palace has announced. It comes after Rishi Sunak called a general election for 4 July.

A statement from the King and Queen said: “Following the Prime Minister’s statement this afternoon calling a general election, the royal family will – in accordance with normal procedure – postpone engagements that may appear to divert attention or distract from the election campaign. Their Majesties send their sincere apologies to any of those who may be affected as a result.”

The King and Queen’s D-Day 80th anniversary appearances in Portsmouth and Normandy in June are expected to go ahead as scheduled. However, the announcement will disrupt other events in the carefully planned forthcoming royal diaries.

The King could be set for the third prime minister of his reign. The prime minister revealed he spoke with the King earlier on Wednesday to inform him of his decision and the King had agreed to the request for the dissolution of Parliament.

[From Sky News]

Rebecca English did a series of tweets with information she was likely getting directly from Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace. I’ll summarize. Prince William won’t have any other events this week, and he’s already canceled an unannounced (“surprise”) event for today, Thursday. We can also safely say that no one will ask where the Princess of Wales is until July now, correct? English confirms that Charles, Camilla and William will still fly to Normandy for the D-Day anniversary, and it’s likely the Japanese state visit will also go ahead. They’re not saying for sure that Trooping the Colour and the Order of the Garter event will go ahead as planned, but it’s likely they will. Some of the Windsors might also come out for Royal Ascot in June as well. Gee, it sounds like much of the big events will still go ahead and only Huevo’s busy-work events are being canceled. Not sus at all!

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

King Charles grows more diabolical by the day, at least according to the nutjobs trying to defend him. I don’t even know what to call it, this whole month-long melodrama over Prince Harry’s three-day visit to the UK. Harry knew what he was doing when he issued his simple and gracious statement about how he would not see his father during his visit, because his father was too busy. Harry putting that out there, on the record, ruined Charles’s “snubbing Harry” plans in real time and set off a one-sided briefing war in which Charles and his courtiers have not been able to keep their stories straight from one day to the next. Currently, we’ve been told that Charles would have made time (MAYBE) for Harry, if only Harry agreed to put himself in a dangerous situation with no security. Now monarchist nutjob Ingrid Seward is crying about how King Charles is terribly hurt by Harry’s statements and Harry’s moves to keep himself safe. Seward is inadvertently painting Charles as particularly diabolical.

Prince Harry’s statement that his father was “too busy” to see him on his recent UK trip was “unnecessary and hurtful” for a tired King Charles, a royal expert has claimed. Harry is said to have turned down the [royal lodging] offer because it did not come with any security provision and instead stayed in a hotel. And according to royal expert and biographer Ingrid Seward, Harry’s previous statement was of benefit to nobody.

She told the Mirror: “Harry’s unpredictable behaviour is hurtful to his father. Even if he were too busy to see Harry – and that is quite possible – to issue an announcement to this effect is unnecessary and benefits no one. This is especially the case when his father is still undergoing cancer treatment and could well be very tired and emotionally fragile.”

“When Prince Harry turned down his father’s offer to stay at a royal residence during his three-day trip to London in May, it was a surprise to the royal household. The King was aware Harry had no UK base. He could not fail to be aware Harry was unduly anxious about security. But he was not aware that Harry would issue a statement saying his father was too busy to meet him. It was hurtful and even if true if they had been under the same roof a meeting might have been arranged.”

“The King is wary of his troublesome son. Whatever he does to try and help him is turned into a snub. Nothing is ever Harry’s fault. It is either the fault of the British Government, or the lack of security afforded him by the Metropolitan Police. They have offered him a ‘bespoke’ arrangement, assessing each visit individually. Not good enough for Harry. He had his own arrangement to stay at a luxury private hotel where the entrance and exit are hidden from peering eyes and cameras and even the hotel staff don’t know what VIP guests are staying.”

And now with security proving to be a major issue for Harry, Ingrid, editor-in-chief of Majesty Magazine, believes it could prevent Charles from fulfilling one long-held wish.

She added: “Harry and Meghan’s security fears could well be a stumbling block to any kind of reunion with the Royal Family. But no doubt they have been invited to Balmoral this summer. As the late Queen discovered, Scotland offers the only quality time a Monarch has to devote to family. It would be very sad if Charles was denied the pleasure of seeing his grandchildren just because of Harry’s unfounded security woes.”

[From The Daily Mirror]

I genuinely feel sick to my stomach at this public gaslighting – “Harry’s unfounded security woes” and “The King was aware Harry had no UK base. He could not fail to be aware Harry was unduly anxious about security.” Charles is the reason why Harry has no UK base, having evicted his son and grandchildren from their family home in the UK. Charles is also the reason why Harry’s royal protection is nonexistent in the UK, because Charles has never made those arrangements with RAVEC to ensure that the Sussexes are fully protected whenever they visit. Charles orchestrated Harry’s lack of safety and Harry’s homelessness in the UK, then blames Harry for not wanting to put himself in unsafe situations for a father who refused to schedule a meeting with him? Not only that, I’m deeply uncomfortable with the palace repeatedly briefing the media about Harry’s lodgings in the UK. The palace is maybe one week away from naming the hotel where Harry has stayed in his recent visits.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Here are some of Diane Kruger’s Cannes looks (she stars in The Shrouds). The pale blue dress is Jason Wu, the bright blue dress is Atelier Versace. [RCFA]
Pitbull loves that Netflix used his song in Bridgerton. [Just Jared]
Now Matthew Perry’s death is being investigated by the LAPD and DEA. Like, why didn’t they investigate it at the time? Damn. [Socialite Life]
Kevin Costner’s Horizon is apparently a dad movie. [LaineyGossip]
I also loved all of the B-plots in this season of Bridgerton. [Pajiba]
Demi Moore’s excellent polka dots. [Go Fug Yourself]
New music from the Brazilian underground. [Seriously OMG]
Ladies are always claiming to be CEO of something! [Starcasm]
Sean Combs’ ex Misa Hylton speaks about Cassie and Combs. [Hollywood Life]
Some of the dumbest people are in charge of the biggest companies. [Buzzfeed]

There’s a new Royalist column in the Daily Beast which I find incredibly curious. As we’ve seen throughout the month of May, the whole “King Charles would love to reconcile with Prince Harry” storyline is dead and buried. Charles threw a series of tantrums over Harry’s visit to the UK, refused to meet Harry, tried to put Harry in danger, and briefed about Harry for two solid weeks. Charles made it clear that he wants no part of the Sussexes and he does not want to see them whatsoever. Evicting the Sussexes from Frogmore Cottage was not a tempermental and temporary act of spite, it was part of a larger strategy to have the institution declare Harry persona non grata. The reaction to Charles’s latest moves have been gently criticized by the British media, which still wants to feed on the royal drama and wants nothing more than to have access to the Sussexes. Which might explain why Royalist is now claiming that of course Harry is open to reconciliation, as is King Charles, but it’s all to do with Prince William’s rage. Never forget that Charles is a dogsh-t father to both of his sons.

Talking to friends of the Windsors in recent days, it is notable that many of them, while sympathetic to the overarching Windsor complaint of broken trust and betrayal by Harry in his book, also suggest that the Windsors and their circle are now as exhausted as the Sussexes of the feud that has dominated the royal narrative for several years now.

As has been reported, it seems the major block in the way of reconciliation is coming from William. A friend of his told The Daily Beast: “Meeting with Harry is the last thing that William or Catherine want or need right now. It’s a fantasy. It’s not about apologies or who said what, it is about protecting his family. Kate is recovering from cancer, and they are avoiding stressful situations.”

A friend of Charles and Queen Camilla told The Daily Beast that the meeting between Harry and Charles after Charles was diagnosed with cancer earlier this year was a “significant step in the right direction,” but they added, “The idea that Harry and the kids are going to descend on Balmoral this summer is wishful thinking. It’s all just very sad.”

The general atmosphere is summed up in comments made by another friend of Charles and Camilla, who told The Daily Beast: “Everyone understands that William is absolutely furious with his brother, but ‘absolutely furious’ isn’t a deliverable plan for a king, which William will be, perhaps sooner than he had imagined. A king not speaking to his brother over an argument about a broken dog bowl, a costume party almost twenty years ago, or who said what about some lip gloss, will make William look petty and ridiculous.”

The friend added that Charles is “gently trying to lead by example,” adding, “A king should be magnanimous.”

The comments echo remarks made by the journalist Petronella Wyatt in the Telegraph last week who said that Charles would like to warm up relations with Harry but is being “prevented” from doing so because of William’s well-known animosity to his brother. A friend told The Daily Beast that there was some truth in the remarks, although they said that Harry’s abrasive remarks about Camila in his book were also to blame for some of the froideur between Harry and the king.

Calls for the royals and Harry to put the argument behind them were also made by the influential Daily Mail columnist Liz Jones, who urged Charles and William to “be the bigger men” and “welcome the firm’s biggest assets back into the fold.”

[From The Daily Beast]

It’s a neat trick from Buckingham Palace to pretend that they didn’t spend the entire month raging about Harry whilst simultaneously pivoting back to William’s incandescent rage about all things Sussex. “A king should be magnanimous” – someone tell that to Charles, who evicted his grandchildren from their family home in the UK. “A king not speaking to his brother over an argument about a broken dog bowl, a costume party almost twenty years ago, or who said what about some lip gloss, will make William look petty and ridiculous.” While I agree that William absolutely looks petty and ridiculous, the fight was not ABOUT a broken dog bowl, the broken dog bowl was the result of William assaulting his brother over Meghan. Until William stops seething with hatred and jealousy that Harry fell in love, got married and moved away from the toxic family, the fundamental problems will remain. “Petty and ridiculous” is the Windsor Brand, and William is just the petty and ridiculous apple from the petty and ridiculous Windsor tree.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Backgrid.

Last December, Prince William’s minions went on an especially tacky briefing spree about the Duke of Westminster’s upcoming June wedding. According to “royal sources,” Hugh Grosvenor (the Duke of Westminster) refused to invite the Sussexes to his wedding because he is “very conscious of royal sensitivities” and he hates the Sussexes because they bad-mouthed the Windsors. Except that it looks like Hugh actually did invite the Sussexes and Harry declined, but Harry and Hugh spoke and they’re fine. That hasn’t stopped William from trying to exploit Hugh’s wedding to further his grudge against Harry. Recently, we heard that William will be an usher at Hugh’s wedding, and somewhat hilariously, William will be the only royal there, as King Charles and Camilla are skipping Hugh’s wedding too. There’s also a little side-story about whether Prince George will attend too.

Among the guests is future King Prince William, 41, who will be performing the role of an usher during the ceremony. Hugh and William have long enjoyed a close friendship – with the Duke of Westminster named as Prince George’s godfather. So it is perhaps unsurprising that the Prince of Wales will take on a starring role in the nuptials.

Prince William, one of the Duke’s closest friends, is a confirmed attendee at the wedding in Chester in June 7. It was reported on Sunday that William will play a key role in the nuptials, and will act as an usher when guests file into Chester Cathedral.

Friends have suggested the Prince of Wales was first asked in December to be an usher at the wedding at Chester Cathedral next month. At one stage, he was even said to have been earmarked as a best man.

A well-informed source told The Mail on Sunday: ‘William was asked to have a prominent role in the wedding and that’s what triggered Harry to decline an invitation. Apparently he [Harry] was put out by the request when he thought it should have been him.’

When Prince William’s eldest son Prince George was born in 2013, Hugh Grosvenor, known to friends as ‘Huey’, was named godfather. The Mail on Sunday reported this weekend that, alongside his father, Prince George, the duke’s godson, is also set to play a prominent role in the wedding. When he was asked to be godfather to the future king in 2013, the Duke was the youngest of the seven godparents.

As the young prince, 10, takes a starring role in the wedding, it will come as he prepares to head to secondary school in September.

[From The Daily Mail]

Re: George’s attendance… it will be curious to see if George goes, because other sources are saying no, he won’t go because the wedding falls on a school day. So Hugh won’t have his royal godson (George) or royal godfather (the king) in attendance at his wedding. And not only that, but Prince William is making Hugh’s wedding all about William. William is loudly bragging that HE will have a “starring role” as an usher, and that his starring role is the reason why Harry declined to come. I guess no one has asked why William lied when he ran around telling everyone that Hugh didn’t even invite Harry. The lie was quickly changed to “Harry’s not coming because he won’t be the STAR, unlike William!” I’ve said this before, but this is not how you behave around someone else’s wedding, especially one of the richest men in the UK. William’s tacky, gauche behavior is being noted across the aristocracy, believe that.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Two weekends ago, Travis Kelce traveled to Paris to see Taylor Swift’s concerts, then they had a four-day minibreak in Como, Italy. They seemed to enjoy their time together, so much so that a source told Entertainment Tonight: “Taylor and Travis are doing amazing, and their loved ones see an engagement coming sooner than later. They make a great match and there’s no question about that.” For months now, there’s been engagement talk and talk about how Taylor knows Travis is The One. Of course, she also just released an album full of songs about Matt Healy, songs which she performs constantly in her concerts. So, a mixed bag of “signals.” As it turns out, maybe all of the engagement talk is coming from Taylor’s side, while Travis’s side is more like “slow your roll, snake fam.”

There are no engagement rings in Travis Kelce and Taylor Swift’s direct future, multiple sources tell Us Weekly.

“Travis has no plans on proposing to Taylor anytime soon,” one insider exclusively shares. “It’s not even on his radar. Marriage is something he takes very seriously and not something he would ever just jump into without giving it some careful consideration.”

The source tells Us that Kelce, 34, “cares very deeply” about Swift, 34, but when it comes to a proposal, “he’s just not there yet.”

Questions about the future of Swift and Kelce’s relationship continue to rise as online fan chatter and a separate report also fueled proposal speculation. The couple’s recent romantic vacation to Lake Como — in between Swift’s European Eras Tour dates — also added to the rumors.

[From Us Weekly]

I tend to believe that Taylor played these kinds of games with Joe Alwyn too, dropping hints and speculation about an engagement on the horizon, publicly applying pressure that she wanted to get married. And we know how that ended up. Granted, this is just my gossip vibe – it’s perfectly possible that Taylor isn’t ready or she doesn’t care about a proposal. But that ET story felt authorized from her team, and it also feels like Travis’s people are publicly pushing back on it.

Meanwhile, Page Six reported that Travis will rejoin Taylor during the Portugal leg of the Eras Tour. They also plan on flying to Monaco on Sunday for the Monaco Grand Prix. Sunday is also the start of the French Open, btw. In case you’re wondering where my focus will be starting May 26th. Rafa Nadal’s last Roland Garros!

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.