Fergie moves in with Andrew

[Bella]

I just think they're friends - nothing more honestly - and they feel comfortable enough with each other for him to ask her to stay at his house while hers is being repaired and for her to accept. I think we're reading far too much into their relationship. The chances of them ever getting back together officially are slim to none. If they're in a "friends with benefits" sort of thing (which I doubt) no one will ever really know. Divorced ppl can remain good friends. The day of my divorce my ex husband and I went from the courthouse to a steakhouse for dinner. If he ever needed a place to crash for awhile, he'd be more than welcome at my house and vice versa. I don't know why that's so hard to believe for Andrew and Sarah.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by marlene

Over the last few years I have often wondered if the divorce was really an elaborate ruse.The divorce satisfied the public's anger with fergie and it provided a way for the royal family to"save face" so to speak.The fact that neither has really moved on romantically from that point only really emphasizes the fact that they never stopped caring for each other and perhaps in an odd kind of way the divorce allowed them to maintain their relationship away from the press and public.I wouldn't be surprised if they remarried after the Queen dies.

After having read the Dimbleby-biography of Charles I'm convinced a lot of people will leave the Royal sphere once Charles is king - especially the older courtiers have treated the young Prince of Wales as if he was nobody special on being just the "heir" and not yet the souverain and this ignoring his wishes and the way he wanted to live his life and deal with his position. He reacted on becoming a keen businessman, thus making the duchy of Cornwall into a profitable enterprise that since then pays for his own "court". Dimbleby writes how hurt Charles was by the way the "grey men" treated people he liked, including his wife. Diana obviously did not understand his difficulties and was angry with him for the slights and the critiscm she received - okay, different thread. What striked me most on reading the book was how fearful of change these grey men appeared.

So it must have been much more difficult for Sarah and Andrew, when they had no money to be independant from the queen, the duke and their advisors. So when she couldn't take it anymore, they divorced but found that they still like to be together, but without the influence of the senior courtiers. And I bet king Charles will have a very different style of court, maybe one where his brother and his ex-wife can start anew within the RF.

[royaltywatcher]

Originally Posted by marlene

Over the last few years I have often wondered if the divorce was really an elaborate ruse.The divorce satisfied the public's anger with fergie and it provided a way for the royal family to"save face" so to speak.The fact that neither has really moved on romantically from that point only really emphasizes the fact that they never stopped caring for each other and perhaps in an odd kind of way the divorce allowed them to maintain their relationship away from the press and public.I wouldn't be surprised if they remarried after the Queen dies.

That is exactly (exactly!) what I think. Well said.

[Russophile]

Originally Posted by Bella

Divorced ppl can remain good friends. The day of my divorce my ex husband and I went from the courthouse to a steakhouse for dinner. If he ever needed a place to crash for awhile, he'd be more than welcome at my house and vice versa. I don't know why that's so hard to believe for Andrew and Sarah.

Unlike some people like ME who threw her ex-husbands wooden leg out the window, twice!

[AuroraB]

Originally Posted by Russophile

Unlike some people like ME who threw her ex-husbands wooden leg out the window, twice!

Inquiring minds what to now if you managed to hit any interesting targets. Much better than slicing undergarments!

[Russophile]

Originally Posted by AuroraB

Inquiring minds what to now if you managed to hit any interesting targets. Much better than slicing undergarments!

He was wearing it at the time, it just went out the window.

[bookschlep]

Moving into a spare suite in Royal Lodge is not like moving into the guest room at the back of a 3-bedroom ranch house. My guess is Sarah will see Andrew only when they schedule it. And I believe the girls also have rooms at both their parents' houses so they also need to stay with Andrew while the smoke clears.

[branchg]

Originally Posted by marlene

Over the last few years I have often wondered if the divorce was really an elaborate ruse.The divorce satisfied the public's anger with fergie and it provided a way for the royal family to"save face" so to speak.The fact that neither has really moved on romantically from that point only really emphasizes the fact that they never stopped caring for each other and perhaps in an odd kind of way the divorce allowed them to maintain their relationship away from the press and public.I wouldn't be surprised if they remarried after the Queen dies.

The divorce was inevitable at the time given Sarah's behavior, which was outrageous even by The Queen's tolerant standards. There was no way she could continue to be a member of the royal family while being photographed with other men half-naked. On top of that she had rung up a debt of $3 million with an extragavant lifestyle that would have made Marie Antoinette blush.

Since then, both Sarah and Andrew have quietly hinted they would have liked to try again once her debts were paid off and he had matured as a person. But Sarah also has made it clear she is not interested in being a member of the royal family again, particularly since she has a lucrative business in the U.S.

The Queen probably wouldn't have much objection to a remarriage, but I think Prince Philip and Prince Charles wouldn't stand for it.

[Madame Royale]

Prince Philip, I'd anticipate, but Charles? Like he'd have a right (moral or otherwise) to stand in their way if they so wished. He of all people...

But to be honest, I can't imagine charles having much of an issue with it, if it were to happen. It's always been my belief that Charles and Sarah got along relatively well, or so I've thought (?).

If there's anyone who'd think poorly of it, it would surely be the Princess Royal.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by Madame Royale

Prince Philip, I'd anticipate, but Charles? Like he'd have a right (moral or otherwise) to stand in their way if they so wished. He of all people...

Charles may well object to the marriage precisely because of the negative publicity he got with Camilla. He may well think that after his struggle to gain back people's respect, he and the Royal Family can not afford to allow Andrew to re-kindle a marriage that on the first go-around contributed to the fall in reputation of the Royal Family especially since Sarah has often said that she was not cut out to be a royal.

Although the way things are going between Charles and Andrew, it may be possible for Andrew to lose his title then I think Charles won't care who he marries. There's never been any love lost between the brothers and this was the case long before Sarah came on the scene.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by judith14011

"
No Ysbel - you didn't say it - I did. I'll say it again - Sarah is pursuing Andrew and believe she would remarry him in a minute if it was possible. She has often said that she regrets the divorce. As far as the RF is concerned - Sarah still uses her connection with them~ and her daughters, as her identity. Otherwise she would be just "Sarah Ferguson."


__________________

Thanks for explaining Judith. I'm sorry I don't see it though. To my eye, one of the is always around when the other seems to want them to be so they don't fit my definition of chasing each other. Why chase someone that you've already got?

For whatever reason, they haven't moved on and I must admit as much as I have a teenage crush on Andrew (still) I would respect him more if he just renounced his title and married Sarah.

That way they wouldn't affect the reputation of the Royal Family and they could still have a genuine life together rather than what they have now. I think their relationship is too unhealthy right now to make right but the ambiguous nature of their relationship now has got to be the worst of all possible worlds.

[rmay286]

Originally Posted by ysbel

Charles may well object to the marriage precisely because of the negative publicity he got with Camilla. He may well think that after his struggle to gain back people's respect, he and the Royal Family can not afford to allow Andrew to re-kindle a marriage that on the first go-around contributed to the fall in reputation of the Royal Family especially since Sarah has often said that she was not cut out to be a royal.

I know Sarah is different from Camilla in that she's been a member of the royal family before and it turned out badly, but I still think Charles would be awfully hypocritical to turn Andrew down if Andrew wanted to marry Sarah again. And it I think Charles would be in trouble if word of this leaked out to the media. Then again I don't know where public sentiment in Britain stands on Sarah, but I suspect that there would be a significant number of people who'd say "forgive and forget" or at least "If Charles and Camilla, two adulterers, are allowed to marry, why can't Andrew remarry Sarah even if she did cheat on him 20 years ago."

I don't think Charles would be in favour of a remarriage to Andrew and Sarah, being traditional-minded and concerned with the monarchy's reputation he actually might be strongly against it, but he wouldn't have very firm ground to stand on.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by rmay286

I don't think Charles would be in favour of a remarriage to Andrew and Sarah, being traditional-minded and concerned with the monarchy's reputation he actually might be strongly against it, but he wouldn't have very firm ground to stand on.

I believe Charles would listen to Camilla's advice but I have no idea what she would recommend.

[ysbel]

Well I think the difference between Sarah and Camilla is that despite what Camilla did privately with Charles while they were married to other people, Camilla seems to carry out her public role as the Princess of Wales with decorum and the professionalism that the Royal Family expects of their members.

Sarah, even before running into debt and having affairs with the Texan billionaire, never could learn the knack of acting in public with decorum and dignity no matter what and that is the minimum requirement that the Royal Family needs to bring someone in as a member.

I think you're right and Charles may well get murmurings of 'where the hell did HE get on his high horse after fooling arond on his wife' if he says no to a marriage between Andrew and Sarah but I think he and the Royal Family would get bigger howls of protests if as one of the first acts as Kings, Charles allowed Andrew and Sarah to re-marry.

Instead of hearing what a hypocrite he is, Charles could well be hearing. 'Oh god he's hopeless, first he marries his mistress then he allows his brother to marry that train wreck of a woman that dropped the Royal family's standards down so low as to how a Royal should behave in public. I could stomach Camilla even though I hate adulterers because she does put on a good face in public but Sarah is impossible as a royal. Charles is an idiot to let her back in.'

I don't think there are enough people that like Sarah and think that she would be a positive influence in a role with the Royal Family for Charles to be able to invite her back into the Royal Family without getting some pretty harsh criticism on how he's handling his responsiblities as monarch.

I think you're right, he's going to get criticism either way but I think criticism of being a hypocrite for not letting Sarah back in is probably the lesser of the two evils for Charles.

[Gaia]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

I more and more get the feeling that Andrew and Sarah are successful in ripping the RF and Britain off. He takes what he can as a prince while she uses her closeness to him and their daughters to make money from her connections.

I view the two this way also. The US has given Sarah a whole lot of attention and money based on the "Duchess" title and the royal connection.

As for polite society, I think Sarah moving in with Andrew is sticking a finger in the eye of the Duke and Queen. She is basically living off the taxpayer by moving in with Andrew and this feeds the media regarding the cost of the royal family.

[RubyPrincess168]

I see no problem with Sarah moving in with Andrew while her house is repaired, especially if she has rooms already set aside for her.
I'd like to think that they never stopped loving each other, even after the divorce, but I don't think Sarah wasn't cut out for the restraints of royal life. Andrew was away in the Navy for long periods of time at the beginning of their marriage, and I think Sarah wanted to go to work but the Queen wouldn't allow it. Boredom led to trouble.
As for Andrew and Sarah remarrying, I'd like to see it happen but I don't think it would be while QE2 and PP are alive. I think Charles and Anne would be hypocrites if they objected to the marriage. I could see A&S marrying in Scotland like Anne did to get around the whole Head of the Church issue. But what is the Chruch of England's position on ex-spouses who want to get remarried to each other? Surely they couldn't object to that since they don't recognize divorce to begin with.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

I more and more get the feeling that Andrew and Sarah are successful in ripping the RF and Britain off. He takes what he can as a prince while she uses her closeness to him and their daughters to make money from her connections.

Yes, I absolutely agree.

Originally Posted by ysbel

I don't think there are enough people that like Sarah and think that she would be a positive influence in a role with the Royal Family for Charles to be able to invite her back into the Royal Family without getting some pretty harsh criticism on how he's handling his responsiblities as monarch.

I think you're right, he's going to get criticism either way but I think criticism of being a hypocrite for not letting Sarah back in is probably the lesser of the two evils for Charles

I also agree with this. A lot of people don't see it as 'oh how sweet, they want to remarry'. They tend to view the couple as no hopers, they couldn't stay together once, so why would it be different now? Always the question of who is she sleeping with now.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by RubyPrincess168

I think Charles and Anne would be hypocrites if they objected to the marriage. I could see A&S marrying in Scotland like Anne did to get around the whole Head of the Church issue. But what is the Chruch of England's position on ex-spouses who want to get remarried to each other? Surely they couldn't object to that since they don't recognize divorce to begin with.

Oh yes, Charles and Anne would be terrible hypocrites to object to Andrew and Sarah re-marrying but as I said, it would be the lesser of the two evils.

With Andrew and Sarah, its not so much the Church of England objecting on moral grounds as it is the fact that Andrew is a member of the royal family and Sarah absolutely, positively cannot handle the responsibilities of a member of the Royal Family. She was not a good candidate for a royal before the debts and the affairs started and she shows no indication now that she has any more decorum or discretion than she had when people were complaining about her as a member of the Royal Family.

Women who marry into Royal Families are essentially applying for very high profile and very high paid jobs. If they don't have what it takes to carry out their responsibilities as a royal then it doesn't matter how much they are in love with each other. That's like saying the head of Raytheon corporation should hire his chief executives based on the fact that he likes them alot.

The Royal Family is a business and they need to be very careful to only allow those spouses who will enhance the overall business. Sarah doesn't enhance the profile and the repuation of the royal family and I think she never will. This is a showstopper for the Royal Family. I'm afraid the re-marriage is a no-go unless Andrew renounces his titles which he is not likely to do. Or unless Charles is a bigger fool than I thought.

[Russophile]

Oh wow Ysbel, that was well thought out and said!

[MARG]

Actually I disagree that remarriange is out of the question.

The realisation that the marriage was headed for stormy weather came as Sarah walked up the aisle, and some dreadfully snobish commentator commented that her dress (which I actually liked) was designed and cut to mininize her rather large curves, and that her hair was a rather unfortunate colour, unlike the Princess of Wales! Just as Charles was steady and Andrew was more commonly known as Randy Andy, so Diana epitomised perfection and Fergy was the ugly frump!

I defy any normal woman, not size 00, to remain confident in herself and not descend into a torment of trying to "fit in". Good heavens, if she didn't make enough mistakes herself, her red hair always seemed to be the final inditement. Totally unfair and completely bazaar!

Question: When Andrew and Sarah separated they, unlike very many ordinary let alone celebrity couples, kept it not just civil, but publicly amicable. In those circumstances I believe it must have been a nightmare with the press hounding them for the dirt on each other. Yet every question asked either of them about the other always had the same answer, "he/she is my best friend!

Question: How could Sarah be so sensible of the horrors of a celebrity divorce and the public fallout for Beatrice and Eugeny (sorry about the spelling) and, with Andrew's active particpation manage to pull off one of the most discreet (and amicable) celebrity divorce's ever? Conversely, she managed to supply such incredibley indiscreet photo's to ensure that the public and paparazzi criteria for divorce was more than satisfied?

A perfect "dry run" for another divorce perhaps? with the added bonus of rendering herself utterly beyond the pale, and therefore a lot less newsworthy.

Question: What's with those romantic 'anniversary" dinner's they have been spotted at over the years? They seem to be mo