From Lady Diana to Meghan Markle ---> the most unforgettable dresses in the history of royal weddings
Meghan Markle, like Kate Middleton, also changed her dress for the evening reception. And it didn't disappoint us at all
That of Prince Harry with Meghan Markle was the third of three royal weddings that will remain in the (contemporary) history of the English monarchy, after the royal wedding of Lady Diana to Prince Charles and that of Kate Middleton to Prince William. Each bride has been (and is, beyond time and glory) an icon of style and a historical pillar in the image of the English royal family, regardless of whether it is of noble blood or a commoner. And the wedding dress speaks for them.
Lady Diana's wedding dress, who married Prince Charles at the age of twenty on 29 July 1981, was a sartorial masterpiece made for her by London designers David and Elizabeth Emanuel (the two divorced in 1990, bad omen?). Kate Middleton's wedding dress, star of the royal wedding on April 29, 2011, was designed by Sarah Burton for Alexander McQueen. The designer spoke about it only three years later, declaring in an interview: "I have great respect for the intimate nature of that wonderful project as well as respect the friendship established while working on her wedding dress. I achieved what an instinctive, intelligent and creative young woman wanted for her one-of-a-kind dress. I was honored ”.
Finally, on May 19, 2018, 2 billion spectators witnessed Meghan Markle's arrival at St George's Chapel in her dress made by Birmingham-born designer Clare Waight Keller, currently the artistic director of the French fashion house Givenchy. Neither puff sleeves nor the 10 thousand pearls seen on Lady Diana's dress, not even the lace that distinguished Kate's dress: only a strong minimalism, a lot of essentiality as if to underline - as it should be - that the dress is secondary because all she wants is not a diva moment but simply her Harry. Not Prince Harry, just Harry. Of course there was the veil, she gave importance to the dress along with a five-meter train and the tiara on loan from Queen Elizabeth: the Queen Mary Diamond Bandeau tiara. The elegance of Meghan Markle's wedding dress in all its simplicity could not fail to remind us for a moment of the style of Audrey Hepburn who was - among other things - the muse of the Givenchy fashion house.
In the stylistic thriftiness of her Givenchy wedding dress, Meghan Markle could not fail to take into consideration a fundamental aspect: her Afro-American origins, now forever mixed with English blood. He did so while remaining silent but let the veil speak: the strictly hand-embroidered flowers represent the 53 countries of the Commonwealth while the California poppy is the official flower of the new Duchess of Sussex's home state.
The second dress worn by Meghan Markle for her wedding was no less important. After a first brunch reception held for the newlyweds by Queen Elizabeth, Harry and Meghan left Windsor Castle to head to the reception held for them by Prince Charles at Frogmore House. Meghan Markle, again in white, sported a Stella McCartney silk dress with Aquazzura shoes. Removed her veil and tiara, Prince Harry's wife was soon able to return to the hairstyle she likes most (created by hair-stylist George Northwood): the unkempt crop. But to give it a truly ethereal aspect was the sinuous movement created by the dress, whose softness we imagine just looking at it! Finally, on the ring finger of the right hand, a ring with an aquamarine stone previously belonging to Lady Diana: perhaps a wedding gift just received by Harry?
The dress is completely different from the change of look that Kate Middleton opted for in 2011: the Duchess of Cambridge completely let her hair down and wore a champagne-colored dress with a sweetheart neckline, made by Sarah Barton for Alexander McQueen and more formal (and princely!) than the sensual one chosen by Meghan. The very choice to show off her shoulders speaks volumes: Meghan Markle is not a princess like Lady Diana nor a young woman from a wealthy family like Kate Middleton. Meghan comes from the world of cinema, she has built her own success and this will not be the first nor the last time in which we will see her enhance - outside a religious context - her femininity. And, yes, precisely because she will not be the future queen of England, Meghan will be able to continue to do so, protocol (more or less) permitting.
