Kelly Clarkson has been changing her wedding plans around all over the place, but it happened — she got married in a Pinterest-perfect-looking wedding. She tweeted some wedding photos, adding,
I’m officially Mrs. Blackstock :) We got married yesterday at Blackberry Farms in TN, the most beautiful place ever!
Her gown is by Temperley and we know that because she tweeted,
Thnx Temperley 4 my beautiful dress! & thank you to my friend @JimVerraros & Maria Elena 4 the beautiful headpiece!
I have to say that honestly I don’t think she’s ever looked better. She looks absolutely beautiful.
It sounds like she’s got another major life event coming up, too…
Follow us on Twitter | Facebook
Kelly Clarkson and boyfriend Brandon Blackstock have been engaged for a while now, but with their crazy busy schedules, they hadn’t planned a wedding. Well, before Kelly gets her Christmas babies (fingers crossed!), they’ve got their marriage certificate and they’re finally ready to walk down the aisle.
From E! Online:
The singer and fiancé Brandon Blackstock obtained a marriage license on Tuesday, E! News has exclusively learned.
As required, the couple appeared in person to obtain the necessary document, signing their full names, Kelly Brianne Clarkson and Narvel Brandon Blackstock.
The document, which also lists their parents’ names, is good for 30 days from the date of issue, so…
Clarkson’s big day is happening soon—though it won’t be nearly as big as she and her fiancé, who has two children from a previous marriage first envisioned.
“OK, this is why it’s confusing,” she recently told E! News, clarifying why some have suspected that she and Blackstock were already hitched. “I’m not married yet, because we had a wedding planned, like a huge one—and we still have a wedding planned, but we’re not doing the big huge one.”
Hurrah! Happy wedding times to all!
Follow us on Twitter | Facebook
Kelly Clarkson and boyfriend Brandon Blackstock got engaged in December of last year, and while they’ve been too busy to actually get married and are just ~enjoying being engaged~, that hasn’t stopped Kelly from looking ahead to the future… which includes LOTS OF BABIES.
From Access Hollywood:
“We’re getting married soon – like really soon – and I already told him that when we’re past the wedding, I want a baby. I was like, ‘That’s my Christmas present that you can give me’.”
Oooh, so this story is a double hitter – we find out they’re getting married soon, too. Like, before the end of the year soon!
I hope she does get the baby she wants for Christmas because, well, babies can be cute (even though it really grosses me out to think of this guy “giving her a baby”, but that’s just semantics) and she wants one, so why not? Live it up! Maybe it’ll soften the blow of losing that Jane Austen ring.
Follow us on Twitter | Facebook
Over the summer, Kelly Clarkson won a bid for $228,000 for a ring belonging to Jane Austen. This did not please Britain, who wanted to keep the ring in Ms. Austen’s homeland. Ms. Clarkson was like, “Huh? No” or something and Britain was like, “We will find a way, Ms. Clarkson” and then resumed petting a long white fluffy cat on the head.
Well, they did find a way. Here’s the bragging, directly from Jane Austen(‘s House Museum website):
We are pleased to announce that our campaign to raise funds to purchase the gold and turquoise ring, once owned by Jane Austen, has been successful. Our offer to buy the ring from singer Kelly Clarkson has been accepted. …We would like to say a massive thank you to everyone who has donated to the appeal.
So really, it wasn’t Kelly Clarkson vs. Jane Austen but more like Kelly Clarkson vs. Britain or more like Kelly Clarkson vs. Jane Austen fanatics in Britain, but it’s more interesting to picture Clarkson and Austen duking it out.
I guess everyone’s happy!Follow us on Twitter | Facebook
Kelly Clarkson was probably too busy to attend the MTV Video Music Awards in Brooklyn on Sunday night, but she did make time to catch it on TV, and she wasn’t too pleased with what she saw. Between Lady GaGa‘s coke-fuelled mess of a “performance” to Miley Cyrus‘s exercise in cultural appropriation and pedophilia roleplay, the whole thing didn’t go over too well with the ‘Mr. Know-It-All’ singer.
Of course, you can’t shit these days without having someone share it on Twitter, so that’s where Kelly headed to share her thoughts about the state of the event:
When pressed by a fan to be nice, she replied:
Alright, listen. Pitchy? Totally into it. The vocals were all the fuck over the place and it was not a nice sonic experience. Cultural appropriation? Miley’s got you covered. Poor taste? Sure. But calling someone a “stripper” is implying that there’s something wrong with strippers and y’all know I’m not into slut shaming, whatever your personal feelings on sex/sexuality/public expression if it may be. Tone it down, Clarkson.
Of course, it wasn’t long before one of Miley’s “Smilers” – or rather, grown ass men who work in “the industry” and clearly will take a view of tits and ass however they can get it – jumped in to defend her and call Kelly names because she’s a big fat fatty (eyeroll):
Everyone just cool it. It’s not that serious.
Hang on to your hats, because I fucking love Christmas. Seriously, I start doing a countdown on, like, September 1. I love Christmas music and Christmas decorations and all the Christmas programs on TV and AHHHHH CHRISTMAS IS SO GOOD, GUYS. That’s why I’m glad Kelly Clarkson is putting out a Christmas album. I won’t buy it or even listen to it, probably, but the fact that it exists? I respect that. (I need to watch Zoolander.)
Here’s her tweets:
It’s called Wrapped in Red and is out October 29, in case you were wondering.
Kelly Clarkson paid roughly $228,000 for a ring formerly belonging to Jane Austen and then Britain basically forbid her from taking it out of the country on cultural grounds and in hopes that someone else (read: someone British) to pledge the same amount and cancel her bid out. Now, an anonymous donor has come forward and bid £100,000 (about $78,000 short of Kelly’s buying price) to keep it in the country and she might lose it for good. What? Ugh.
From Digital Spy:
Culture minister Ed Vaizey placed a temporary hold on the item, which will keep it on British soil until September 30. This can be extended to December 30 if a new buyer comes forward and intends to match Clarkson’s winning bid.
The government is said to be satisfied that the Hampshire-based Jane Austen’s House Museum has shown “serious expression of interest to buy the ring” after receiving the £100,000 donation.
It now has until the December date to raise £52,450 and ensure the ring stays in the UK.
The museum tried to win the 19th century item at the original auction but was outbid by Clarkson.
Vaizey said: “Jane Austen’s modest lifestyle and her early death mean that objects associated with her of any kind are extremely rare.
“So I hope that a UK buyer comes forward so this simple but elegant ring can be saved for the nation.”
Again, why the hell not put a stipulation on the initial auction saying that it’s only open to UK buyers? Why the hell does it even matter? These seem like pretty extreme lengths to go to for a single ring – especially considering there are much more important artifacts on the go.