Brooklyn Becham's wedding

I agree. But people got married a lot younger so left the family home sooner.

Vintagejazz

It's very young by today's norms though. I think people matured earlier a generation or so ago. Most people left school before they were eighteen and went straight to work. By the time they were 23 they had been supporting themselves and mixing with other adults for about 6 years. Even those who went to University seemed to be more independent than today's students.

Things have changed a lot. People stay in full time education much longer, settle into permanent jobs much later and stay in the family home until an older age.

People in their early to mid 20s are still considered to be very young nowadays.

Kate and William and Harry and Meghan are still thought of as 'young' parents and 'young' members of the Royal family even though they're all 40 or pushing 40. At that age the Queen was considered middle aged.

I think it is just our perception that has changed since people on average get married a bit older now.
Wasn't unusual for people to live at home right up until they married years ago, I dont think everyone was more independent back then either.

No. But I do agree that the senior McCartneys did all they could to give their children a “normal” upbringing. And admire them for it.

Fair comments about Stella McCartney, I also read that one of her tutors said she didn't really shine or stand out in her year group, I imagine the McCartney name propelled her brand, possibly she wouldn't even have a brand without her connections. You rarely get a famous offspring acknowledge they've had a massive leg up though.

You have to pay in advance to do the graduate show too, it's thousands

Hmm. I don’t suppose it did McCartney any harm to have Kate Moss, Naomi Campbell and Yasmin le Bon on the runway at her degree show. When it was suggested that she’d rather taken over the day that was so important to all the graduates, her comment was that these models would probably have done the same for any of her cohort if they’d just thought to ask them. It didn’t go down too well, apparently.

Beckham, on the other hand, got into the music business without the help of a family name and was more famous than her husband when they got together.

It really isn't that unusual to manage people in fashion or tailoring though. Patrick Grant has no formal training in tailoring or fashion for example, yet owned a tailors on Saville Row. I feel people are unfair to Victoria

I think the difference between Paul McCartney's family and the Beckhams, his daughters may be famous now, one through photography, like her mother. Stella is a well known fashion designer and graduated from Central St Marin's in London and whilst the McCartney name almost certainly helped elevate her to where she is now, she has at least credentials in that field. McCartney's children's growing up years were away from the limelight and they were educated in the state system.

Victoria Beckham is lauded as a fashion designer without any training, she allegedly has the ideas but I imagine has a gamut of people working for her who do the actual designing cutting and marketing. Maybe she shouldn't bother though, since it's inception her business has lost £56,000,000 DB has constantly dug into his coffers to prop it up and although she often tells her public how hard she works, working that hard to make such a colossal loss seems a bit pointless!

Vintagejazz

Yes but he made them do a lot of the leg work themselves.

what, even his cousins? I thought they were all just ij entertainment anyway?

Brooklyn doesn't seem to have inherited his father's talent or his mother's phenomenal drive.
He appears to be an ordinary average guy and there's nothing wrong with that.

But I do think he'd have been better off being encouraged to aspire towards something realistic and stand a bit more on his own two feet. Instead he's at risk of being made to look a bit foolish.

Yes but he made them do a lot of the leg work themselves.

Paul McCartney's extended family are all pretty famous

I can even understand actors whose kids go in to the profession...there is some skill and craft to acting. But nowadays it's simply....what will I be today? He tried photography with a book deal and it was slated. So now he did a bit of cooking in Lockdown and he is being titled a chef. I've cooked every day for 38 years, who does that make me on a par with Michel Roux? They sent one to work in a coffee shop for a week. So he got a grasp of real life...really!!! Even Royals go to uni and have to work at something and rub shoulders with plebs for a few years.

It wascever thus Margeo. Paul McCartney was unusual in making his kids do a lot of the door opening themselves.

3 million on a wedding won't dent the family coffers will it You wouldn't expect anything less really, would you? When lots of Joe and Jane Bloggs spend £40k these days.
I find it funny that Brooklyn has taken on the Peltz name. Wasn't Beckham enough of a door opener? What does bother me is the celeb kids nepotism. Why do they have to find a celeb spin money earner simply because they are who they are. Brooklyn is suddenly a chef. I thought chef's had to do time sweating in a hot kitchen for years learning their craft? The same as mum decided to become a fashion designer overnight, at least Stella McCartney paid her dues at design college and knows how to cut a pattern. And people fall for all the media hype. They have him cooking on a Vogue film....it's sickening...and people fall for it.

JaneJudge

I really don't think 27 is young to get married, 23 maybe but people have different expectations and maybe they are religious? maybe they want to start a family early on? who knows.

No 27 isn't unusually young. But 23 is nowadays, and males mature a bit later than females.

Good luck to them. I hope they have a long and happy marriage.

I really don't think 27 is young to get married, 23 maybe but people have different expectations and maybe they are religious? maybe they want to start a family early on? who knows.

Their children are just as normal naughty as the next kids at school though. And supportive dad. I'm saying no more.

I wouldn't speculate as to whether the marriage will go the distance or not, who knows it may well d, I don't think they are too young it depends on their level of maturity. I would merely reiterate that if the Beckhams had let their children have a normal and private childhood any failures wouldn't be highlighted in the way that they have been. Someone said up thread "they do their best to keep their children out of the spotlight" do they hell! it seems not a day goes by when something about Harper isn't uploaded, private stuff like her reading to herself, little cards and missives she sends to her parents all out there in the public domain. Leave the poor kid alone!

There are loads of highly paid actors who keep their private lives just that private especially when their children are involved, blurred out faces if they should be photographed. For example Daniel Craig and Rachel Weisz to name just one high profile couple, had a child a few years ago, is that child photographed, do we even know her name? No! because they like many others in their position they have far more sense than to let that child be exposed to the media and all that goes with that.

It's very young by today's norms though. I think people matured earlier a generation or so ago. Most people left school before they were eighteen and went straight to work. By the time they were 23 they had been supporting themselves and mixing with other adults for about 6 years. Even those who went to University seemed to be more independent than today's students.

Things have changed a lot. People stay in full time education much longer, settle into permanent jobs much later and stay in the family home until an older age.

People in their early to mid 20s are still considered to be very young nowadays.

Kate and William and Harry and Meghan are still thought of as 'young' parents and 'young' members of the Royal family even though they're all 40 or pushing 40. At that age the Queen was considered middle aged.

I'm not a fan of big weddings - but their money to spend as they wish.
Plenty of other people who spend a lot of money, relative to their income, on weddings.

Not getting the ' they are so young' comments - 23 and 27 is hardly teenagers.
My husband and I were 22 and 26 when we married 36 years ago
My parents were 20 and 23 and married for nearly 60 years.

Sick of hearing about it and anything to do with them.

Didn't it used to be thought very vulgar to flaunt your wealth or even to tell people what you had spent on things.Nothing puts me off people more than having everything price tagged ,We paid for our daughters wedding (s) and its nobody elses business what we spent .To behonest I'm not in the least interested in what anyone else spent on their family weddings ,its not a competition

We paid for our daughter’s wedding, and no, I’m not saying how much it cost because that’s our business, but we also gave quite generous amounts of money to both of our sons when they married. It’s normal even today for the bride’s parents to foot the bill, my parents did, we did, and apparently the bride’s parents in this case did too. As far as I’m concerned, I thought it was ostentatious in the extreme, but as Callistemon says, it offered work to many people.