A great deal of people felt sorrow upon Queen Elizabeth II’s passing in 2022. She was adored by the public and the longest-reigning monarch in British history, having ruled for 70 years.
The late queen is now being honored with a monument that was recently unveiled, honoring her affection for her pet corgis!
The Queen’s new statue, together with her dogs
On Sunday, a 7-foot-tall bronze statue of Queen Elizabeth was unveiled in observance of the monarch’s 98th birthday.
In Oakham, England, the sculpture was made by artist Hywel Pratley and is situated close to the Oakham Library. It is Queen Elizabeth’s first ever permanent memorial.
Rutland City Council said that hundreds attended the unveiling. There was music from local school bands and bagpipers.
The most priceless feature of this new memorial is that the queen’s cherished Corgis pet is also depicted, immortalized in bronze by the monarch’s feet:
The city authority claims that local schoolchildren created the designs for the Corgi monuments.
In contrast to the many stern and imposing monuments of queens like Queen Victoria, Pratley stated he wanted the statue to portray the idea of Queen Elizabeth as “an almost motherly figure,” according to the New York Times.
During the unveiling, local dignitary Sarah Furness remarked, “What most of us remember about Queen Elizabeth is her warmth.” “We demonstrate Queen Elizabeth’s humanity by showcasing her affection for dogs.”
The statue’s creator claims that he intended it to be hospitable to onlookers. Pratley said, “We designed it with a bench you can sit on.” “And there’s a corgi you can pet, and I do believe that this will eventually become a selfie-encouraging statue.”
The Times reports that a number of Corgi owners brought their dogs to the unveiling, indicating that a large number of people have already visited the statue.
The history of Queen Elizabeth’s Corgis pet
For many years, the Queen’s corgis were an iconic aspect of her life and a solace during tough political and personal times. Fans all throughout the world were likewise pleased by the cute pets.
The first Corgi was acquired by the royal family in 1933 when Dookie, a dog owned by Elizabeth’s father and predecessor George VI (who was then the Duke of York), was brought home.
Dookie was reportedly extremely cantankerous, yet Elizabeth and him appeared to have a unique relationship.
Then, on her eighteenth birthday, the Queen received a Pembroke Welsh corgi of her own, named Susan.
Susan reportedly slipped under a rug in the royal carriage to disrupt the wedding of the Queen and her husband, Prince Philip, according to the BBC.
1959 saw Susan’s death at the age of almost fifteen. Her epitaph referred to her as “the faithful companion of the Queen,” and she was laid to rest at the royal estate of Sandringham House.
The Queen stated, “I had always feared losing her, but I am ever so thankful that her suffering was so mercifully brief.”
But Susan left quite the legacy; during the ensuing few decades, the Queen accumulated over thirty corgis, all descended from her original canine companion.
The Queen always had at least one corgi, and often had several at once, from 1933 until 2018. She traveled with the dogs in tow, and they resided in a designated “Corgi room” at Buckingham Palace with wicker beds. It is said that the Queen took care of them personally and baked them biscuits over the holiday season.
These canines undoubtedly received royal treatment and grew to represent the Queen throughout her life.
While Elizabeth valued the dogs greatly, Prince Philip apparently didn’t feel the same way. Like many others, she took great solace from the dogs, who served as a link to the simpler times in her early years due to their relationship with her late father and her upbringing.
According to Penny Junor, a royal biographer, “her corgis are hugely important to her.” Over time, they have become more intimate with her than any human has ever been. She has never been let down by the incredibly affectionate and devoted corgis.
It also makes sense that the Queen, who represents both Britain and the United Kingdom, would have a strong bond with a quintessential British dog. Wales, a member of the UK and a neighbor of England, is where corgis first originated. When corgis were adopted as royal dogs, the breed was rare in England; yet, the Queen had a major role in the globalization of the breed.
The Queen owned several “dorgis,” or corgis bred with daschshunds, in addition to purebred Pembroke Welsh Corgis.
When the corgis and dorgis appeared alongside Queen Elizabeth on the cover of Vanity Fair in 2016, they became well-known worldwide because to Annie Leibovitz’s photography. At the time, the dogs were Candy, Vulcan, Willow, and Holly.
A notable aspect of Queen Elizabeth’s reign and a significant aspect of her life were her corgis. Their inclusion in this first memorial statue of her seems so fitting.
Please tell this tale!
Jim Caviezel Takes a Stand: Refuses to Work with Robert De Niro
Unexpectedly, Jim Caviezel, an actor, made news when he openly declared that he would never collaborate with Oscar winner Robert De Niro. Widely known for his performance as Jesus Christ in Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ,” Caviezel has called De Niro a “wretched, ungodly man.” This audacious claim has spurred a spirited discussion over the viability of personal convictions and business partnerships in Hollywood.
Devoted to Christianity and renowned for his unshakable adherence to moral values, Caviezel has been transparent about his religious beliefs. These ingrained convictions have informed his choice to keep his distance from Robert De Niro. Although Caviezel did not elaborate on their falling out, it is obvious that his decision is the result of a disagreement with his values. The actor feels that there is a difference between De Niro’s public persona and his previous actions, and he wants to work on projects that are consistent with his own moral principles.
This incident calls into question how performers manage their own convictions in the politically charged and cooperative world of Hollywood. While diversity of thought and expression has always been respected in the profession, there are increasingly more examples of actors setting boundaries based on personal principles. Caviezel’s reluctance to collaborate with De Niro is indicative of a shifting society in which people are more willing to stand by their values, even if doing so puts them in danger of losing their jobs.
The entertainment business has seen firsthand how an actor’s public remarks may help or hurt their career. Although Caviezel’s refusal to work with De Niro might win him over to supporters who share his values and respect his dedication to his convictions, it also raises questions about possible negative effects on his future partnerships and how business people view him. Some people would proceed cautiously with such public pronouncements, and it’s still unclear how this incident will affect Caviezel’s professional path.
One of the key characteristics of Caviezel’s public presence has been his strong Christian faith. He gained notoriety as an actor willing to take on parts that align with his spiritual beliefs because to his depiction of Jesus Christ in “The Passion of the Christ.” The argument with De Niro highlights the difficulties actors encounter in trying to uphold their morality in a field notorious for its complexity and moral ambiguities.
Beyond the specific performers engaged, consideration of the larger ramifications for Hollywood and the entertainment business at large is prompted by Caviezel’s refusal to collaborate with De Niro. The continuous conflict between individual convictions and the collective process of filmmaking is brought to light by this incident. There may be a change in the dynamics of the industry if more actors choose to use their platforms to voice their ideals and stand up for causes that are important to them.
The topic of how personal beliefs and professional obligations intersect in Hollywood has gained attention as a result of Jim Caviezel’s resolute refusal to work with Robert De Niro on moral reasons. The narrow line that separates personal ethics from the communal spirit that characterizes filmmaking is brought to light by this incident. The conflict between Caviezel and De Niro highlights the difficulties and complications experienced by performers who work hard to be true to their values as the entertainment business strives to negotiate these intricacies.
Leave a Reply