Royal wedding keeps city glued to TV sets

Shoaib Mistry, 70, had followed the Prince Charles and Lady Diana wedding in the newspapers in 1981, and also saw Charles wed Camilla Parker Bowles live on television in 2005.

Shoaib Mistry, 70, had followed the Prince Charles and Lady Diana wedding in the newspapers in 1981, and also saw Charles wed Camilla Parker Bowles live on television in 2005.

HT Image

The Grant Road resident was just as eager about the Prince William and Kate Middleton’s grand wedding on Friday, and when it concluded, his verdict was clear.

“It was much better than Charles’ second wedding.”

Mistry was one among hundreds of voyeurs in the city who were glued to their TV sets as the most regal wedding of the decade unfolded in London’s royal corridor.

From the solemnisation of the marriage at Westminster Abbey to the much-awaited royal kiss in the Buckingham Palace balcony, it was the first opportunity for most city youth to watch a royal wedding.

“I watched it because my mother kept raving about the Charles-Diana wedding, and I had never seen something like that,” said Khushnam Wadia, 24, a Tardeo resident who was particularly interested in the bride’s Sarah Burton wedding dress.

“I didn’t think the gown was spectacular, but it was really fun listening to people on the news channel comment on it,” said Wadia, who also recorded the entire wedding for a friend who was caught up at work.

Architecture student Sonia Ram was among the small tribe of young women not interested in the bridal gown, but she found everything else about the wedding fascinating.

“I don’t believe monarchy fits in with today’s world. But the sheer magnitude of the royal wedding – the horse processions, the carriages and the fanatic masses – was truly a sight,” said Ram, 22, an Andheri resident who watched the wedding at home with his family.

“It’s always intriguing to see what the rich do with their money. Watching the event we realised that a wedding of this kind is just impossible for anyone to live up to,” he added.