|
|
|
#41
03-13-2006, 02:34 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
|
#42
03-13-2006, 04:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
In june 2005 Daniel talked to the french magazine VSD.
You can find the interview here ...it's in french, so sorry :o:) Among other things he says: " I don't want my children to have a bad image of their father and their mother.I think it is essential that they can be proud of their parents. Especially now that they are 11, 12, 13 years old and they understand everything... and people don't hesitate to tell them what they think about their family." He says that Rainier was very reserved and distant even with his family. Then he is asked if there was no family warmth in the Grimaldi Family... if Rainier wasn't a warm -hearted dad or granddad ....and he answers: " Not with Stephanie neither with his grandkids. He wasn't a granddad like others. He was a prince and he was very ill. I can't describe him really. It's impossible." -> So he really wants to tell us here that Rainier and Stephanie weren't close  . Hmmmm.. strange.......because in the next sentence when asked if the kids were touched by his death Daniel answers: " Yes, but they told me the most hurtful thing for them was to see their mother suffering" These two answers are contredictory: Why would Stephanie be suffering so much if she hasn't had the paternal love and warmth ( as Daniel said in the first answer) !!??Still there is one thing that make me wonder even more: He claims to be best friends with Steph ( and I don't even doubt they are close ) and she tells him all her secretes and if she has a problem it's him she turns to etc. I think then I just don't understand Steph's part in this story. In every interview she gave she told the world about how much love there is between her and her father, how close they are/were and how warm and full of understanding their relation was... Then comes Daniel and tells completely contredictory things, the plain and simple opposite ... and she doesn't react, goes on being his best friend, vacations with him etc. Okay, she wants the best for her kids ... understood...Louis and Pauline are clever kids... don't they see anything strange in all this? I can't see clear It just leaves me wondering, like Seb ...Worst thing is: We should know that we should mind our own business and go on caring about ourselves...guess the reason why we/ I still bother is that we/ I like Stephanie... and would love to understand... I think the truth can be found somewhere in the middle of all of this...not sure. Last edited by michelle; 03-13-2006 at 04:22 PM.
|
|
#43
03-13-2006, 10:33 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I read your comments and this is my take on all of this:
It sounds to me Daniel has a huge vendetta against members of the Grimaldi family. Did Prince Rainer strip him of his assets? Is Daniel struggling to regain his good standing and this is why he is so bitter? Maybe Stephanie is not the least concern how he feels and she just goes with the flow because he has the right to visit his children. Sometimes in situations like this silence is golden. Who is paying for these lavish vacations, Stephanie or Daniel? Do they share expenses on vacation with the children? Is Daniel paying Stephanie huge child support payments? Maybe Stephanie has already told Daniel how she feels about his crass remarks and the family feelings towards him will never change. This could be the reason why he throws these pity party interviews so that someone will listen and say, “Wow poor Daniel”. In my opinion, the Grimaldi family could care less about him because of his past behavior. So now he is on a mission to insult the family as much as possible. Truthfully, no one really cares what he says. As far as they are concern, he will always be a low rider. I truly do not think he is trying to brainwash his kids. If things got this bad, Stephanie knows how to yank his chain. Just remember, the Grimaldi family could do far worst to him than he could ever do to them. They are use to being lambasted by someone in the media and Daniel’s past behavior speaks for itself. We are fans of this family so hearing negative comments like this hurts us because we adore them. I would not be too concern about Daniel’s childish comments, it only makes him look foolish. This is my opinion... :)
|
|
#44
03-13-2006, 11:21 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Michelle, I think that if a daughter who is not close her dad loses her dad, she would feel terrible remorse for not having a better relationship. I mean, I think that a daughter would feel horrible about a father's death whether she was close to him or not, whether things were rosy or not. I am not saying Steph was not close to Rainier. I believe she must have been, but her obvious grief at the funeral was not the proof, because she would have been in tears, probably, no matter what.
__________________
Chewster Castle * Peace & blessings * “... in the same way that landscape painters station themselves in the valleys in order to draw mountains... so it’s necessary to be a prince to know thoroughly the nature of the people, and one of the populus to know the nature of princes.” Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince
|
|
#45
03-17-2006, 07:06 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I talked to some friend of mine who is spanish and who saw Daniel on that Sala Rosa - show as well. He said something that made me think, something that shows how to get to the bottom of the problem from a very different angle:
Daniel has to cope with one big problem, one big complication in his life. He has two children with the princess of Monaco. This is not Stephanie's fault. What I want to say is: having kids with Stephanie is a wonderful thing ( I would love it :p) from the very private point of view. She's a wonderful mother, a great woman ... the prob for Daniel is not her or her personality ... no the prob for him is her family, her status, the surrounding and environment Louis and Pauline grow up and are influenced by. It's not a problem for Steph, for everyone else or for the kids themselves - but for Daniel. The fact that the role Louis' and Pauline's family and environment play is so imortant and so big and the influence or the circumstances they are under play a huge role too and that makes it hard on Daniel. Meaning : His family will probably never have the same 'meaning' or influence in the kids lives (publically ...in private it may be different) - They are princely. They are a part of the Princely Family of Monaco - this takes away a lot of power from Daniel and his family. Normally children are always considered to be a part of their paternel family first ... or at least to a very huge extent. But here it is different - the public, the media, everybody counts Louis and Pauline among the Grimaldi and not among the Ducruets! So that must bother Daniel a lot. Which proud father would want to give away 'the most important role' in his kids lives?!? I think in private he plays a very important role for them and that's good. I realized that he doesn't make such a fuss about Michael's family, well that's maybe because publically everyone would say: Michael is a Ducruet - and about Louis, well, Louis is first of all the son of Princess Stephanie of Monaco ( in the public eye ) and then he's the son of Daniel. This must be bothering a Dad very much. I believe that must be why Daniel tries to keep up with doing things that make hime more recognized, more present, give him more influence regarding the public field. That may be as well why he shoots against the kids maternal family because he thinks that he can take reputation and influence from them in this way ( he can't that's for sure) but at least he can get more attention and show that he's there too and that it isn't only the princely family who decides how things will go for the kids. Well, from a fathers point of view I can understand this action soemhow (now) but still I think it make things difficult and unpleasant. I guess he'll carry on with it because he'll always feel neglected as a father in what concerns Louis and Pauline's role as princely children. I'd say he'd prefer the kids to be just avarage kids then he wouldn't have to fear the big influence behind the princely family. However they rae who they are and I think it's ok for them ... but difficult for him, that's why he'll always try to stay around publically as well ( as you can see in the attached pictures by Sipa)  Jean- Raymond chose another way which is easier for him and Camille ... he put trust first. :)
__________________
Last edited by sebastian; 03-17-2006 at 07:11 AM.
|
|
#46
03-17-2006, 07:42 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm sorry, but I agree only partially with your interpretation; I'm sure Daniel has a very big ego, and he said himself that he is very maschilist (does this word exist in English?), meaning that he believes in a strong separation of roles between men and women and that he likes women who stay at home for their husbands and kids while the man "earns a living", so I don't doubt he is bothered by Steph public role and predominance in the couple (maybe its cheap psychology, but I firmly believe one of the reasons of his loud betrayal was that he felt the need to reassure himself that HE was the man, and he "ruled" in his family; very common behaviour in couples where the woman is more successful or powerful than the man).
On the other hand I have the strong impression that he takes every opportunity to talk about the Grimaldis because that's what the public is interested in and he very much likes the spot light: when asked about Steph, his kids and her family he could very well say "no comment", many people do that, but then, noone would want to interview him anymore because let's face it, what is there so interesting to hear from Danny other than Princely family gossip? He's handsome and all, but other than that, not so interesting. So in my opinion, and I don't necesserely think to be right, he just takes advantage of the situation to take part in reality shows, to be interviewed, to find producers for his music and acting career. I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but after 10 years of hearing him talking always of the same things, the thing gets almost pathetic, and annoying. Kisses BTW, very nice pics!
|
|
#47
03-17-2006, 08:32 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
#48
04-08-2006, 11:13 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Daniel is here again:
http://www.aktuelle.de/aktuelle/cont...s.php?sid=2770 He would love to marry Steph again....but she would have to ask Albert for permission...and Caroline would put a veto ....but 76% of the frech would favour a re-mariage .... However...another interview where Daniel says how close they are...etc. + that Steph was forced to divorce him ..... ...this is strange because in his book he says explicitly that it was her decision to divorce and that she was not forced .... Last edited by michelle; 04-08-2006 at 11:19 AM.
|
|
#50
04-08-2006, 12:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
In the last two interviews he said she was not forced or induced to divorce him...and that they are close but would never remarry not to confuse the kids...I agree he is sort of pathethic now. Danny, there is just a certain amount of fame you can gain marrying a Princess!
BTW, does he really think (or want us to believe) that Caro can stop Steph from doing anything? Thanks for the article and translation Michelle.
|
|
#51
04-08-2006, 12:47 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
In the world there are three kinds of Princesses: Princesses by birth, Princesses by marriage, and the Princesses of Monaco. (Olghina di Robilant) Padania won the 2008 VIVA Wolrd Cup Please, have a look at the TRF rules and the FAQ before posting!
|
|
#52
04-08-2006, 03:51 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
^°Vote for the Picture of the Month for July 2008°^
°^And for your Favourite Royal Residence^°
|
|
#53
04-08-2006, 11:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Daniel Ducruet is a loser, plain and simple.
And Caroline, for what it's worth, better veto anything that would remotely suggest Steph and that man getting back together. This is what a loving and more mature sister should do. It may lead to some disagreement initially, but hopefully Steph would understand that her sister is just being more sensible and rational. Just like Ma Kelly doing all she could to stop her daughter Grace from marrying Oleg Cassini (and to think Oleg is worlds apart from this leech Ducruet). I hope Steph wouldn't even take this thing seriously that would elevate it to Albert's consideration. Hey Ducruet, just get a job. It would be a little (just a little) bit understandable if you are giving these reckless interviews for the money in order to pay for child support. But you're not, so just have some dignity and be a real man. Last edited by Mandy; 04-09-2006 at 12:35 AM. Reason: 1.Substituted "man" for profanity. 2. Removed profanity from last sentence.
|
|
#54
04-09-2006, 10:37 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
This is a little confusing for me ( sorry Steph )!
To get the thing straight: Stephanie's privat life is none of my business and so is Daniel's. Anyway it is clearly he himself ( Daniel) who raises the worlds interest in his privat life by talking to the press about it. If Stephanie doesn't want this interest she should tell him to stop talking about it first. I think it is beautiful if they have a good friendship ... there are too many divorced couples out there who make life for their kids like a trip to hell by fighting each other. It is just great that Daniel and Stephanie get along this way. I truely understand Louis ad Pauline's wish for their parents to come back together again....which kid wouldn't love it to be this way?! I understand Stephanie wants to keep this relation to Daniel, whatever it is like, in private .... She should tell him to keep it there too. Daniel knows very well that by talking about Stephanie and their relationship in public he provokes even more interest ... and thus confusion...because Steph doesn't talk....so it is not clear how she sees things. It's a joke if he talks about that stuff willingly and then five minutes later complains about the invasion of his privacy! You can always treat some people like stupid idiots....but I don't like to be treated that way! If he wants to keep his kids away from the limelight ( as he mentioned very often) then it would be better to care about his restaurant and get on wih his private life without talking about it to the public. As a private person Daniel is known as a very nice guy...very sympethatic ... and he indeed is! I believe Stephanie knows very well that taking Daniel back would mean a certain rift in her family. He just would not be presentable in many ways. Not because he's a bad guy ...no just because of many actions done. Not everything in this family is highly presantable...and I'm not going into details because I believe that every single thing I mean is just been human action, human behaviour, human whatever...just human. But where would Steph go with Daniel? To the bals and galas? National Day? I just don't see Stephanie getting married with him again ( because she privatly feels like it's right...and yeah...maybe this would even be a cute lovestory) and then attend Monaco's official functions alone ( having a husband) ... this scenario would be too strange.... even for me :p. As a private matter I may understand the feelings she might have for him.... but for her public role it wouldn't work.... I believe she knows that! I can't really imagine her wanting to live a double life .... However.....I'd like to say that I know that Stephanie would now tell me : " You know, this is none of your business! ... why do you care? Why do you bother to comment? " The answer is : Just because I care.... and you know that. ... ...Also just because I don't like to be confused about things, and there are some contredictory statements Daniel made ( I think my brother figured the same some time ago)... and as I already said, I don''t like to be treated like a stupid kid, whom you can sell any kind of *** considering there might be some who believe in it ... ...And finally ....just because I love you a lot' Last edited by michelle; 04-09-2006 at 12:03 PM.
|
