What is your opinion about Sarah, Duchess of York?

[princess olga]

Originally Posted by Laviollette

But Sarah didn't live up to the expected behavior, dignity, discretion or decorum of being a royal so why is protocol and addressing a royal properly suddenly so important to her? We know why. Because she holds on to her RF connections through Andrew and her daughters for dear life. She continues her social climbing that started when she married Andrew.

well, in all fairness to Sarah, she after all got the title of Duchess of York for life, didn't she. Correct me if that's wrong. If it isn't, she has all the right in the world to go and flaunt that stupid title, doesn't she.

[princess olga]

I have a question. Forgive my ignorance on this one, but I just to this day don't get why she racked up so many debts during her marriage. Didn't she get a reasonable allowance of some sort? What on the planet did she (over)spend it on?! Didn't she have everything she needed in Buckingham Palace where she and Andrew had a condo?! Again, how did she manage to reck up millions of debt? How much was it anyway? And what happened with her 'second financial crisis' some of you are alluding to? how come she got into trouble again? She doesn't have a gambling habit or anything of the sort, does she?

[Tzu An]

Originally Posted by princess olga

I have a question. Forgive my ignorance on this one, but I just to this day don't get why she racked up so many debts during her marriage. Didn't she get a reasonable allowance of some sort? What on the planet did she (over)spend it on?! Didn't she have everything she needed in Buckingham Palace where she and Andrew had a condo?! Again, how did she manage to reck up millions of debt? How much was it anyway? And what happened with her 'second financial crisis' some of you are alluding to? how come she got into trouble again? She doesn't have a gambling habit or anything of the sort, does she?

From what I've read, she's never been able to control her appetites. She just couldn't/can't control her whims and desires. Again, a case of no self dicipline. She had regular shopping sprees in New York, not to mention in London itself.

As for her recent behavior, yes, I think she should start acting her age, but I doubt she will. She's dragging her kids to parties that are somewhat unsafe due to the people there (rap artists, other such), etc. and can't seem to comprehend the fact that she's almost what, sixty? The reason I think the royals are justified in exiling Fergie is because of the sheer reckless disregard for what was expected of her. It isn't asking for too much for her to behave in a dignified manner and remain aware of what is expected and rising to the occasion.

As for residency, well, they had apartments at Buckingham Palace, then their home Southyork, plus other places I'm sure. The allowance was mainly for spending money I think, but Fergie wanted out of season foods, extravagent clothing and jewels, which were at times too expensive. Plus she shamelessly abused her position as Duchess of York, blatantly requesting designers to send her free clothes and shoes.

What burns me is that it is up to the younger generation to clean up the mess the older generation has made. Fergie and Diana cheapened the titles that were bestowed upon them at marriage and had lots of fun, but in the end their kids are the ones paying the tab. Please don't start about Charles, I'm tired of people acting as if he's the only one who caused all the problems. In the end I am not a Fergie fan.

[Bella]

Originally Posted by Tzu An

and can't seem to comprehend the fact that she's almost what, sixty?

She may look almost 60 (with all her nips and tucks) but she's not even 50 yet. Poor thing.

[Laviollette]

Originally Posted by Bella

I know this isn't the correct thread, but I just have to comment: Mary consistently looks on the verge of a nervous breakdown, IMO. Something is not entirely right there...

Princess Mary hardly looks like she is "on the verge of a nervous breakdown." She has restored my faith in princesses and the standards of behavior they should represent while still being a princess of the people. She has not cheapened her title in any way. She is insanely popular in Denmark. Now, back to Sarah.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by ysbel

skydragon, that could be because she has a living to get and it sells better than anything else. She did trade on her royal connections because that's basically how she got back on her feet. Her family and the royal family was pushing her to do so and quite rightly so. I don't think the Queen would have held back custody of the children but if Sarah had been truly destitute, the Queen would have naturally been concerned about the girls in Sarah's care.

Sarah's family wasn't well off, Andrew didn't have a large income and she had enormous debts. I think she could have found a more decorous and respectable way to pay off her debts but with the amounts she owed, it would have taken much much longer and one has to wonder how her daughters would have fared.

Many women are able to earn themselves a decent amount, without having to constantly remind people that they were married into such and such a family. I think what annoys me about her, apart from anything else, is her need to remind people, in the hope that they will treat her as something special, which of course she is not. Neither Sarah or the children were ever going to be destitute, Andrew still paid the girls upkeep and school fees and I didn't notice Sarah going without new clothing, makeup or food.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Tzu An

As for residency, well, they had apartments at Buckingham Palace, then their home Southyork, plus other places I'm sure. .

It's called Sunninghill and it's in Berkshire, it was of course nicknamed Southyork after the house in Dallas.

Here is a small article on her debts.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlConte...7/nduch27.html

[Elspeth]

As for her recent behavior, yes, I think she should start acting her age, but I doubt she will. She's dragging her kids to parties that are somewhat unsafe due to the people there (rap artists, other such), etc. and can't seem to comprehend the fact that she's almost what, sixty? The reason I think the royals are justified in exiling Fergie is because of the sheer reckless disregard for what was expected of her. It isn't asking for too much for her to behave in a dignified manner and remain aware of what is expected and rising to the occasion.

As for residency, well, they had apartments at Buckingham Palace, then their home Southyork, plus other places I'm sure. The allowance was mainly for spending money I think, but Fergie wanted out of season foods, extravagent clothing and jewels, which were at times too expensive. Plus she shamelessly abused her position as Duchess of York, blatantly requesting designers to send her free clothes and shoes.

I realise you don't like her, but there's no need to start playing fast and loose with facts. She was born in 1959, which means she's in her mid-forties, and her marital home is called Sunninghill Park, not Southyork, which is a media invention.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Many women are able to earn themselves a decent amount, without having to constantly remind people that they were married into such and such a family. I think what annoys me about her, apart from anything else, is her need to remind people, in the hope that they will treat her as something special, which of course she is not. Neither Sarah or the children were ever going to be destitute, Andrew still paid the girls upkeep and school fees and I didn't notice Sarah going without new clothing, makeup or food.

I'm afraid I could easily see Sarah ending up destitute after the Queen refused to bail her out the last time. The girls would have been taken care of but Sarah, I just don't see the Queen or her family helping her out if she didn't get her financial house in order.

Playing a little devil's advocate here, if I may, skydragon, I think perhaps, you are very knowledgeable about the royal family and behavior of the British upper classes but the area of commecial endorsement in America, is a totally different world with different forms of expected behavior.

Commercial endorsement a time-worn way for a public figure to get back on one's financial feet and yes, of course, one is expected to trade on connections, or to play up whatever reason the public would have to be interested. With Sarah it was her association with the royal family. Its probably why Weight Watchers hired her; I don't think they would have liked it if she had refused to let them use her royal associations in their campaign.

Again, playing a little devil's advocate, you may well think that Sarah is nothing special, but she's getting on David Letterman and getting on the cover of Ladies Home Journal so quite a few people must think she's special or these people and organizations wouldn't give her the time of day. These people are in a business and they are not going to put her on their cover or put them on their TV show if they don't think she will attract interest. Its true that Sarah would not get this attention without her connections to royalty, but in this world, people don't care.

Sarah is not royal any more and she lives in a different world now with different expectations. If she was too loud and boisterous to be a royal when she was a royal, I think it was a little unrealistic to expect her to tone it down when she was no longer royal. Actually I see Sarah as a better fit in her current line of work than she was when she was a royal. The prim and proper way, I fear, was never going to be Sarah's way. To be honest, in her current area of business, she has had success and she has lasted a lot longer than other celebrity spokespersons.

Perhaps, as a member of the British upper classes you are most annoyed with her for betraying her own people, the British upper class and betraying the strictures and morals that the class represents? I come from a class-based upbringing in the American South but no doubt, its quite different from yours. But Southerners too react with horror when they perceive that one of their own has betrayed them.

I hope you don't take offense, skydragon because with my background, I can totally understand your aversion to Sarah because part of me totally recoils to anything that is attention-seeking, loud, brazen, or (as the Germans would say) unvershaemt (shameless).

On the other hand, now that I'm in New York and working with people in sales, marketing, media, and public relations, I am beginning to see how the other side lives so to speak and it definitely lives under the equally-held belief that the world is so saturated with images, soundbites, news and information that unless a person is loud, unique and forceful, that person won't be seen. In other words, bad attention is better than no attention.

Its a curious (and to me a foreign) way of living but one of my dear friends definitely comes from this world. She has a heart of gold but she embarasses me every time we go out. She, like me, grew up in the socially conscious and very strict Southern society and while it didn't bother me, it just about killed her and she couldn't wait to get out of it. It wasn't until I met her that I realized that there were some people whose personality was so big that a refined and conservative environment would kill them.

[Princess BellyFlop]

Originally Posted by ysbel

Playing a little devil's advocate here, if I may, skydragon, I think perhaps, you are very knowledgeable about the royal family and behavior of the British upper classes but the area of commecial endorsement in America, is a totally different world with different forms of expected behavior.

Perhaps, as a member of the British upper classes you are most annoyed with her for betraying her own people, the British upper class and betraying the strictures and morals that the class represents? I come from a class-based upbringing in the American South but no doubt, its quite different from yours. But Southerners too react with horror when they perceive that one of their own has betrayed them.

I certainly understand that the area of commercial endorsement in America is a totally different world with different forms of expected behavior. A also understand that a member of the BRF SHOULD NOT display those kind of behavior.

No need to be a member of the British upper class to be annoyed by Sarah's activities. I'm just a middle-class Canadian and I'm upset to watch her degrade the royal family of my country.

[Elspeth]

She isn't a member of the Royal Family any more, though.

[servingsophie]

Originally Posted by ysbel

Again, playing a little devil's advocate, you may well think that Sarah is nothing special, but she's getting on David Letterman and getting on the cover of Ladies Home Journal...

Thank you Ysbel! At last someone who shows some common sense and sensitivity to the argument!

[Skydragon]

Sorry ysbel, destitute to me speaks of the unfortunate souls who cannot even afford a bedsit, (a room in a house that is the bedroom and living room, sharing a bathroom and kitchen with several others), who cannot afford food, clothes, botox or anything else. This was never going to happen to Sarah, she may have had to suffer the indignity of 'cutting down' but, she would never have been destitute. The royal family or her own family would, IMO, have helped her out with accomodation and a small allowance, but she would have been expected to work at paying everyone she owed. The times I have heard someone say they have absolutely no money, only to find that is because the balance in their current account has fallen below £15,000 and they may have to take some money from their saving accounts!

I don't have any problem with her working. We all know of 'celebrities' and their commercial ventures and endorsements and we all except that. Just using the title DoY would have got her work, it's her perception that she has to remind people of who she was and what she once had. Her need to introduce herself as the DoY rather than Sarah. You can always spot a faded or failing star when they have to remind you of what they actually did.

I don't think people especially think she is something special, they want her in the hope that she will let slip some little snippet, a piece of gossip, something she has heard from her daughters. That by associating themselves with her, it will bring them kudos. If she was 'special' surely she wouldn't need to keep reminding people of her 'royal' past.

I am in some ways 'old fashioned', I listen to the quiet person, who holds your attention with that indefinable something, I buy from the person with a quiet, but absolute confidence in the product they are selling. Unique, yes, loud and aggressive, no.

There are people who do not thrive in a refined and conservative society, so why did Sarah marry into one of the most conservative institutions in the UK.

[sashajones]

I always thought that Sarah was some what a free spirit, full of fun, and one that really enjoyed life. Yes, she may have fallen from grace, but she is human. I kinda like her.

[Australian]

Originally Posted by sashajones

I always thought that Sarah was some what a free spirit, full of fun, and one that really enjoyed life. Yes, she may have fallen from grace, but she is human. I kinda like her.

I agree with you. I like her too, ok, she has made mistakes but who hasn't? It must be very hard to be a member of the Royal Family. I like the fact that she was always true to herself and did not change her 'out there' personality just to please the family. What you saw was what you got and I liked it.

Although, I don't like the idea of her encouraging her daughters to attend parties hosted by P Diddy etc. I love parties, don't get me wrong, its just that those sort of parties are not the sort of parties I thought parents would encourage their kids to attend.

But apart from that, it's thumbs up for Sarah from me

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Australian

Although, I don't like the idea of her encouraging her daughters to attend parties hosted by P Diddy etc. I love parties, don't get me wrong, its just that those sort of parties are not the sort of parties I thought parents would encourage their kids to attend.

Oh, I love parties and I think the girls should be encouraged to go out and enjoy themselves at parties suitable for their age, but not with their mother. What is suitable for a woman of her age to attend, is not normally suitable for her daughters!

[Alexandria]