Luke M wrote:
do you think they'd have the same appeal without the royals in situ though, a lot of the american visitors for example whom i know are "in love" with the royals themselves and not just the history and the buildings (which i find personally more interesting from a historical/tourism point of view).
As an American, I'd say that it's closer to say that Americans are "fascinated by" not "in love with" the royals. (Even the romantics that really only have the Coronation or Charles & Di's wedding to relate to or pictures of Disney princesses in their heads.) Of course you're seeing tourists who are there and are caught up in their vacation high and blathering about it. But, Royalty - or rather the rejection of it - is essentially the foundation of who we perceive ourselves to be, and the idea of living, breathing, actual-royalty is kind of surreal to many of us. Like something from the distant past come forward in time. We can't quite wrap our heads around what they do, or if they are for real, or if the Brits actually take them seriously or not. And I don't mean that disrespectfully, it's just not something we relate to at all. The closest we get is thinking of certain American political families as being in the eschelan of elite that nears royalty (the Kennedys, the Kings, etc.). But even then we'd stone them if they tried to claim that status themselves.
I personally didn't go to the palaces OR think twice about seeing the "royals" when I was there. And, aside from noting the fact that William's getting married in a kind of "oh good for him" way, I am not the least interested. I did watch Charles & Di's wedding on television when I was 10, but it was kind of unavoidable even over here.
But then I wanted to be Boba Fet (star wars) when I was a little girl, so maybe I'm not the best gauge for the princess-y fascination thing.