The official royal wedding tankards have gone on sale, the special postal stamps are ready for issue.
But the mugs fail to show the faces of the bride and groom. They portray instead two interlinked C's -- for Charles and Camilla.
The image is copied from a pair of gold cufflinks Camilla gave Charles more than 20 years ago -- and which he wore on his honeymoon with Princess Diana in 1981.
ILLUSTRATION: YU SHA
The special stamps, many Britons have vowed, will be stuck on envelopes upside down in protest at the civil wedding on April 8.
There is something odd about the spring wedding of Prince Charles, 56-year-old heir to the British throne, to his mistress of 34 years, Camilla Parker Bowles.
The quiet acknowledgement, indifference, teasing and hostility that has greeted the decision by Prince Charles to marry 57-year-old Parker Bowles, has become a barometer of the relationship between the monarchy and its subjects.
"The whole affair illustrates the disjointed relationship between the monarchy and the public in the 21st century", one royal observer said.
The blunders and compromises required to circumvent the intricacies of etiquette, religion and procedure for a royal marriage between two divorcees have caused some to dismiss it as a soap opera.
"The royal family still has a special religious and constitutional position, but it also stars in a kind of low comedy played out in the media to general amusement or outrage," one BBC commentator said.
The British public, known for its sense of fairness, has in its majority, given the couple its blessing.
The lack of obvious enthusiasm is rooted, perhaps understandably, in deep-seated affection for the late Princess Diana and the role Prince Charles' affair with Camilla played in the breakdown of her marriage to Charles nine years ago.
Comparisons are inevitably made, and on that score, Charles and Camilla have a distinct advantage.
"Second marriages, even royal ones, are never the same," commented the Wall Street Journal. In this case, and as far as comparisons go, the ages and looks of the protagonists tend to count against them.
Perhaps the most pressing question on the mind of Britons is what Charles sees in Camilla, and why he decided to take the plunge now.
For the timing there is no simple answer -- except, since the announcement was made on Feb. 10, Charles has appeared a greatly relieved and happier man.
Ever since Charles met Camilla Shand at a polo match at Windsor in 1970, the two have conducted a passionate affair.
They married other partners, enduring the ignominy of scandal and the humiliation of a clandestine relationship.
And yet, relations between the two families were always close.
Soon after Andrew Parker Bowles, a dashing courtier and commander of the Household Cavalry, married Camilla in 1973, he remarked about Charles: "His Royal Highness seems awfully fond of my wife."
A year later, Prince Charles was made the godfather of the Parker Bowles' first child, Tom. Now 30, Tom will be a witness at his mother's wedding to the prince.
Royal observers believe that Charles, perceived by many as weak, over-sensitive and eccentric, received from Camilla the love and affirmation of his personality that his parents, and the young Diana, had failed to convey.
"I do love you, I'm so proud of you," Camilla revealed on the infamous "Camillagate tapes" that also offered a glimpse of the couple's intimate sexual relationship.
"Your greatest achievement is to love me," replied Charles in the conversation that allegedly took place in December, 1989. The tapes were published in 1993.
In the seven-and-half years since the tragic death of Princess Diana in Paris, Camilla's influence over Charles has steadily, and quietly, grown.
Insiders report that Camilla, since she moved into her own apartment in Charles' London palace, Clarence House, two years ago, has increasingly become the power behind the throne.
Gradually, her looks and appearance, said by her most scathing critics to be resembling the "back end of a Bedford bus," are improving.
Like Diana before her, Camilla now has a range of her favorite designers at her beck and call.
The most intriguing question remains how the wedlock between Charles and Camilla will affect, in the longer term, the British monarchy, at home and in the 53 Commonwealth countries.
The British public have stated, in their overwhelming majority, that they do not wish Camilla to be called queen.
Taking account of these sensitivities, she will be known as "Princess Consort" when Charles accedes to the throne.
In reality, however, she will be "queen in all but name," as one leading politician put it.
For the time being, the nation is quietly hoping that Queen Elizabeth II, now 78 and in rude good health, will be at the helm long enough to keep the monarchy on a steady course.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US