Princess Stephanie of Monaco Current Events Part 12

[iceflower]

Monaco, December 14th - Princess Stephanie hands out red cross
presents to residents of the Otto fundation.

** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** Pic 4 **

[michelle]

Originally Posted by iceflower

Monaco, December 14th - Princess Stephanie hands out red cross
presents to residents of the Otto fundation.

** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** Pic 4 **

Thanks ice, she looks good...I like the outfit and the hair.
And there're the glasses again...
........atop the head, cool Stephie ...

[iceflower]

You are most welcome, arual

Originally Posted by iceflower

Monaco, December 14th - Princess Stephanie hands out red cross
presents to residents of the Otto fundation.

** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** Pic 4 **

Here are two small additional pics from the event above

** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 **

[RADKER18]

Thanks Ice. Stephanie looks great and her outfit is Amazing .

[iceflower]

You are both most welcome I only wish we had some
better pics than these...Steph looked so lovely and once again
so much like her sister..

[michelle]

Originally Posted by iceflower

You are both most welcome I only wish we had some
better pics than these...Steph looked so lovely and once again
so much like her sister..

I thought so , too, Ice ... Caro and Steph look more and more alike... or maybe it's more like Steph taking on some of Caro's look... I don't know ...it's hard to explain...

[iceflower]

Princess Stephanie of Monaco awards diplomas to the
new graduating nurses, Monaco, December 19, 2008

** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** Pic 4 ** Pic 5 ** Pic 6 **
.
Here's an additional gallery - the first pic of it is very lovely:

Stéphanie de Monaco... diplômée !

[kiina]

Thank you iceflower, very nice pictures, as usual, whenever you post something. Stephanie seems very tall in these pictures, almost like a giant. But she is not at all that large a woman. She looks very nice and happy. I'm glad to see all these new photos of her and her family.

Originally Posted by iceflower

Princess Stephanie of Monaco awards diplomas to the
new graduating nurses, Monaco, December 19, 2008

** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** Pic 4 ** Pic 5 ** Pic 6 **
.
Here's an additional gallery - the first pic of it is very lovely:

Stéphanie de Monaco... diplômée !

[iloveroyals]

I was very disappointed with the Stephanie Vogue issue. I understand fashion magazines have an agenda, and I don't know how much input Stephanie had in the editing of the issue, but I felt there were a lot of things wrong with how they presented her. Whether she was manipulated or master-minded it (to the extent she could), she doesn't come across as I feel someone of her rank should.

So the issue was a nostalgic look on the eighties, with Stephanie as one of the icons. One problem I have with this premise is, number one, it is easy to be a rebel when you are a millionaire or billionaire. Things usually work out in the end for you. Stephanie is keen to emphasize how she likes to do things without the accoutrements of her status, as in "not wanting 4 bodyguards to accompany her" whenever she shops at the supermarket and so on, which is an unfortunate example given her history with bodyguards and other staff, including her father's. I find it disingenuous that she failed to mention the part her bank account and connections have played in her success or ability to cultivate and exploit for commercial purposes the rebel image.

Rebellion is glorified as the expression of one's individuality, flaunting society's expectations. Yet rebellion comes with a price. If it doesn't hurt you personally (and if you are protected by a thick cushion of money, you usually come out of it fine), it can hurt a lot of people around you and it can take a while to clean out the fallout. There was not a word about such side-effects of one individual's great show of rebellion, and I don't remember seeing the word responsibility. From the multiple biographies of the Monaco family, articles from the eighties and nineties and more genuine and emotionally aware interviews of Stephanie from the past, it is no secret that Stephanie has managed to hurt just about everybody who cared about her (including the principality of Monaco), and on the professional side has disappointed and betrayed many of her business partners and sponsors, letting them down big time, such as the famous New York party bash in her honor, where everybody who was anybody was invited and she was a no-show. (In interviews though, it's always somebody else's fault: an unfortunate Grimaldi trait, as Princess Caroline herself has done the same thing everytime something went wrong when she had to be a team member : see the Dakar fiasco and the ballets de Monte-Carlo early problems).

The other problem is the emphasis on image and appearance. She presents herself, and the magazine touts her as an avant-gardist well ahead of her time and an inspiration for the fashions of that era. Again, nothing about how her connections, including her mother's at the house of Dior might have helped launch such a fashion genius. Unfortunately, they also intimate that she has not changed, and much is made of her tatoos and piercings, as totems of her continuous rebellion against conventions. Big deal ! Now, Stephanie is a middle-aged woman whose highligted quotes in the magazine make her sound like she is barely out of adolescence. Here is a woman who has mothered three children (by 2 different fathers), has had numerous liaisons, but who claims that there are only three men in her life, her father, her brother, and her son; in other words, only blood ties. This is a case of arrested development, as one of the signs of maturing is being able to acquire and keep attachments outside of the immediate family. It's as if Stephanie lived in a cocoon where protection was key to emotional stability. I don't have a problem with that, but were I the princess, I'd like to come across for the world to see as being older than 22.

Finally, the pictures. What are they trying to show ? What I see is a woman who doesn't know how to pose, except for a few pictures, who looks hard and depressed. (At times, she looks like Jamie Lee Curtis, but that's a compliment).

I admire what Stephanie accomplishes in the principality, her continuous presence in and commitment to its social affairs, her causes, her loyalty to her brother. I admire her spirit and her spunk and her individuality. What I take exception to is how magazines slant characters and situations, obscuring background, glorifying excesses, and the implicit commentary on how more conservative princesses choose to fulfill their lives and obligations. But not to worry. Another Vogue issue will be all about classicism, and guess who will be on the cover and be called "redactrice" (editor)? Princess Caroline, of course. Suddenly, responsibility will be the way to go. Although, I am not holding my breath. Magazines sell subversion, not conformity.

[WordsUponTheWind]

If the main part of the magazine shows "stephanie on the 80th" than I agree that its a failed edition. Why do they always warm-up that old stories and old pictures again?
The intereseting part of her life in the past was that she spent it a bit different to other princess but now its about 20 years ago.
Maybe somehow she wanted to get out of her "royal cocoon" or did not know how to spend life because she is missing the danger of falling down to low society (like it can happen for anyone of us).
For an actual well aranged vogue mag. I would have expected professional pictures of her with actual dress she likes to wear for several occoaisons (like some TV snapshots which were posted in this forum) and some short stories about actual family relations and interests these days.
Now there is no difference between a normal high society bussines woman and Stephanie because her brother is ruling monaco, not she. So I also would be interested in her actual bussines tasks.

The style of the B&W photos remember me the pictures taken of Caroline by Lagerfeld. Sometimes its excellent to avoid colors for professional shots.

So, referring to iloveroyals comment, maybe its not that bad to miss this vogue edition.

[pruts]

Originally Posted by iloveroyals

I was very disappointed with the Stephanie Vogue issue. I understand fashion magazines have an agenda, and I don't know how much input Stephanie had in the editing of the issue, but I felt there were a lot of things wrong with how they presented her. Whether she was manipulated or master-minded it (to the extent she could), she doesn't come across as I feel someone of her rank should.(.....)

....Magazines sell subversion, not conformity.

Brilliantly said, as always! But also maybe a waste of energy and words. As anyone ever considered that Stephanie just simply is not an interesting person? As far as I am concerned, I have never read anything coming from her mouth that was in the least interesting, strikingly intelligent or refreshing. She neither is very good looking, rather the contrary. Remains only the fact that she is a 'princess' of Monaca. Point.

[iloveroyals]

Originally Posted by pruts

Brilliantly said, as always! But also maybe a waste of energy and words. As anyone ever considered that Stephanie just simply is not an interesting person? As far as I am concerned, I have never read anything coming from her mouth that was in the least interesting, strikingly intelligent or refreshing. She neither is very good looking, rather the contrary. Remains only the fact that she is a 'princess' of Monaca. Point.

Thanks, pruts, for the double-edged compliment, as always. Please, let me be the judge of how I expand my energy is a waste or not, as I would never presume to judge on how you expand yours. I am sure my style shows I did not labour for hours on how to express my point. I tend to be long-winded, that's a fault of mine. As for a waste of words, you are reading this thread and responding to it, right, so it can't be a complete waste, unless you only read and respond to belittle my efforts. Anyway, this thread is about Stephanie's current events and as such, any reaction can't be a waste. I appreciate TRF not censuring my response, as I come across a little harsh. Vogue of course would never have published my response.

I disagree with you as "never having read anything coming from her mouth that was in the least interesting, strikingly intelligent or refreshing". I have enjoyed some of her interviews (actually less stilted and tightly controlled than her sister's) and she has shown surprising sensitivity, touching vulnerability, unexpected insights, and a hip, refreshing way of expressing herself that is all her own.

My beef, so to speak, is with magazines and their use of celebrities to sell a message by using misinformation, distorted, incomplete, or total black-out information to glamorize what at best can be considered controversial lifestyle choices. Say, for someone who's not aware of Princess Stephanie's sulfurous past, the reader may think s/he's discovered a real gem. Not to make a pun, but that reader will be unaware of the jam Stephanie put a lot of people in, who had to pick up the pieces and take over the responsibilities she eschewed at the time. I resent, as a reader, being presented with an image that has been drained of its substance, as it impairs any judgment, any informed opinion I want to form on what I read. When I read that Princess Stephanie presents herself as both a one-woman trailblazer and a victim of life's unfairness (implicit in the quotes, especially about her love life), my antennas go up and I think: "Please, don't give us the poor little rich girl act. You've been smart enough in the past to acknowledge and pay homage to all the privileges you've been handed on a silver platter, including how you messed up. Don't let a magazine turn you into a vapid poseuse who lives off the "enfant terrible" image that is unbecoming both to your age and position in life. Show how you've grown up, and in more ways than token appearances at fund-raisers. This issue is too much about a warmed-up image that was never that real in the first place, there isn't enough heart, not enough reflectiveness and appropriate regrets for youthful errors in judgment. Take control, turn the image around, forget the eighties, they weren't your best decade. And stop that "creativity" mantra, the "I am the real heiress to Princess Grace's unique talent and charm", it only highlights how poorly you have done in comparison. It is now, in the 2000's that you are doing an admirable job, and that's what your focus (as the image you want to project, rich with real substance) should be on."

[pruts]

Originally Posted by iloveroyals

Thanks, pruts, for the double-edged compliment, as always....

First of all this: in no way did I intend to belittlle your efforts, I meant what I said, as I did before, about your comment: always a treat to read!

I was more generally speaking when I stated that for me Stephanie is not interesting or inspiring enough to make a lot of fuss about. In a way, but unwantingly from your part maybe, I read in your words, in between, a bit of the same feeling. That does not mean, however, that I find Stephanie unsympathetic or unappealing. She does have, indeed, a certain vulnerability and shyness, sweet and appealing qualities completing lacking in her sister. On the other hand, I see no special qualities, talents, gifts, charisma, beauty, that lift her above the average shop girl or waitress, whose choice in men and clothing she comes closest to and who are, ironically, not your average Vogue reader. The loyal Vogue reader, as I understood from reviews, did not value the Stephanie issue very much, because it was so empty, both from a fashion, as from a human point of view.

[iloveroyals]

Originally Posted by pruts

First of all this: in no way did I intend to belittlle your efforts, I meant what I said, as I did before, about your comment: always a treat to read!

I was more generally speaking when I stated that for me Stephanie is not interesting or inspiring enough to make a lot of fuss about. In a way, but unwantingly from your part maybe, I read in your words, in between, a bit of the same feeling. That does not mean, however, that I find Stephanie unsympathetic or unappealing. She does have, indeed, a certain vulnerability and shyness, sweet and appealing qualities completing lacking in her sister. On the other hand, I see no special qualities, talents, gifts, charisma, beauty, that lift her above the average shop girl or waitress, whose choice in men and clothing she comes closest to and who are, ironically, not your average Vogue reader. The loyal Vogue reader, as I understood from reviews, did not value the Stephanie issue very much, because it was so empty, both from a fashion, as from a human point of view.

Totally agree with you. I remember a quote in a magazine that said that while shampoo girls dream of being a princess, Princess Stephanie dreams of being a shampoo girl. (For what the quote is worth...)

Originally Posted by sebastian

From knowing Stephanie a little better ( I think, I guess, maybe ) than what you can find in this Vogue issue I have to agree with you but only on some things.
Taken the fact that Stephanie is/was supposed to be 'editor in chief' of this one I still belive that those who are in charge kind of always remain in charge.
I'm not sure if Stephanie wanted this issue to glorify her past but I think she feels quite comfortable with not getting her decisons thrown right back in her face. Maybe this is just a nice change of pace for her, if you know what I mean. She's been critizised over and over, sometimes with a reason, and here they take these same actions and decisons and make them look good.
She speaks about her tatoos and what they mean to her and why she thinks they're worth having, she lets us know she admires Kofi Anan, Nelson Mandela and especially her mother and her father. She mentions her love for her brother and sister and everything they mean to her. In that short interview she repeats things I already knew ... and there it is ... is it like that because she wants it to be this way or because th interviwer isn't smart enough to dig a little deeper?
I like these little tibits outside the actual interview: How she feels terrorized and impressed at the same time by Stanley Kubbick's "Shining", how she likes a good laugh with Louis de Funès, how she read 'The Prophet' again and again, how Sinatra, Grant, Peck and Moore where like her uncles, that she collects elephant figures and why, that she's a joker and likes to play with words so she often ends up in a situation where only she understands what she's talking about. ( Tha's how I know her) ... and here we are back with the pooint again: She doesn't speak about what she has done wrong, what made her grow, it's like she doesn't acknowledge it.
I understand she doesn't regret anything because she feels like regret's not worth while ... but when you read her there's not one word about anything she sucks at ( soory for the choice of words ) , anything she fails to do - something small, nothing big ... something not very important but still there like " I've had my licence for more than 20 years but I still don'tknow how to park my car properly' ( I know, weird example but still) .... but maybe a magazine is the best opprtunity to show all the glorious stuff about yourself...I only feel like there's so much more to Stephanie than what you find in there.
To close this comment ... let me say that I still love her way too much and I liked the isssue anyhow just because it's her on the cover !

Your post reminds me of the famous line in Edith Piaf's song :"Non, je ne regrette rien..." ("No, I regret nothing...")
Also, I am glad she emphasized her sense of humor in that Vogue issue. I remember all those earlier pictures where she and Ernst always seemed to share a good laugh. I suspect, from the way Ernst makes Caroline laugh, that he must be a good joker, and he and Stephanie must share a bond in a similar sense of humor perhaps.

[Lamyah]

Don't regret it, VP is much more of a fashion magazine than US Vogue with its trivial covers. I say, read it and make your own judgment.

Originally Posted by pruts

Brilliantly said, as always! But also maybe a waste of energy and words. As anyone ever considered that Stephanie just simply is not an interesting person? As far as I am concerned, I have never read anything coming from her mouth that was in the least interesting, strikingly intelligent or refreshing. She neither is very good looking, rather the contrary. Remains only the fact that she is a 'princess' of Monaca. Point.

perhaps you have a different perspective on the concept of 'interesting'. For I imagine, if you spend the time visiting a blog/thread about her, posting comments expressing your adamant 'uninterest', it begs the questions...if she bores you so much, why even bother reading about her?

What makes her fascinating is her life choices and charity commitment that makes her someone who stands outside of the usual robotic royal ladies of Europe. Afterall, she's been a beautiful wild princess that sold more tabloids in her hayday rivaling the likes of Princess Diana and Princess Grace.

For those of us who are Vogue Paris readers, the M&M photos were much more artistically interesting than Testino style. I enjoyed reading about her, to see her own personal growth after the crazy period in her past.

[sebastian]

From knowing Stephanie a little better ( I think, I guess, maybe ) than what you can find in this Vogue issue I have to agree with you but only on some things.
Taken the fact that Stephanie is/was supposed to be 'editor in chief' of this one I still belive that those who are in charge kind of always remain in charge.
I'm not sure if Stephanie wanted this issue to glorify her past but I think she feels quite comfortable with not getting her decisons thrown right back in her face. Maybe this is just a nice change of pace for her, if you know what I mean. She's been critizised over and over, sometimes with a reason, and here they take these same actions and decisons and make them look good.
She speaks about her tatoos and what they mean to her and why she thinks they're worth having, she lets us know she admires Kofi Anan, Nelson Mandela and especially her mother and her father. She mentions her love for her brother and sister and everything they mean to her. In that short interview she repeats things I already knew ... and there it is ... is it like that because she wants it to be this way or because th interviwer isn't smart enough to dig a little deeper?
I like these little tibits outside the actual interview: How she feels terrorized and impressed at the same time by Stanley Kubbick's "Shining", how she likes a good laugh with Louis de Funès, how she read 'The Prophet' again and again, how Sinatra, Grant, Peck and Moore where like her uncles, that she collects elephant figures and why, that she's a joker and likes to play with words so she often ends up in a situation where only she understands what she's talking about. ( Tha's how I know her) ... and here we are back with the pooint again: She doesn't speak about what she has done wrong, what made her grow, it's like she doesn't acknowledge it.
I understand she doesn't regret anything because she feels like regret's not worth while ... but when you read her there's not one word about anything she sucks at ( soory for the choice of words ) , anything she fails to do - something small, nothing big ... something not very important but still there like " I've had my licence for more than 20 years but I still don'tknow how to park my car properly' ( I know, weird example but still) .... but maybe a magazine is the best opprtunity to show all the glorious stuff about yourself...I only feel like there's so much more to Stephanie than what you find in there.
To close this comment ... let me say that I still love her way too much and I liked the isssue anyhow just because it's her on the cover !

[sebastian]

Originally Posted by iloveroyals

Your post reminds me of the famous line in Edith Piaf's song :"Non, je ne regrette rien..." ("No, I regret nothing...")
Also, I am glad she emphasized her sense of humor in that Vogue issue. I remember all those earlier pictures where she and Ernst always seemed to share a good laugh. I suspect, from the way Ernst makes Caroline laugh, that he must be a good joker, and he and Stephanie must share a bond in a similar sense of humor perhaps.

Yes, that's her ...
-> the Fashion Spot - View Single Post - Vogue Paris December 2008 / January 2009 : Stéphanie de Monaco by Mert & Marcus

[WordsUponTheWind]

... fits to michelle´s old post regarding "when she (and you) met stephanie" "
And hopefully someone will sell it on eBay or delcampe - seems to be the only way to get this issue here in southern austria.

( ... elephants ?? didnt she collect frog figures... )

And at least to point out one thing about Stephanie that makes her "special" compared to other "successors of rich or royals" - she has friends in all social class and does not cast out the "low levels" but also she knows how to present a princess face (things she has learnt from her mother ...)

[Glistening Seas]

Stephanie is probably and interesting person and quite intelligient

however, to some she might appear like not an interesting person; perhaps because she seems content to not be the center of attention to whatever/wherever she is attempting to do? It seems doubful it's becase she is not interesting or not intelligient.

I think her "people" skills seem quite apparant and easliy relates to others. Perhaps, there simply more to her persona than meets the eye. She is after all a fab mother, and heavily involved with her children and seems to prefer to keep a low profile about it. That too is simply normal. Any opinions on this?

[pruts]

Originally Posted by Glistening Seas

Stephanie is probably and interesting person and quite intelligient

however, to some she might appear like not an interesting person; perhaps because she seems content to not be the center of attention to whatever/wherever she is attempting to do? It seems doubful it's becase she is not interesting or not intelligient.

I think her "people" skills seem quite apparant and easliy relates to others. Perhaps, there simply more to her persona than meets the eye. She is after all a fab mother, and heavily involved with her children and seems to prefer to keep a low profile about it. That too is simply normal. Any opinions on this?

I have no doubts, whatsoever, that she is a fab mother and a perfectly nice woman, why should she not? But that hardly makes her interesting, does it? My point was that all this "guest-editor-of-Vogue" stuff is only commercially interesting for Vogue, but not for the reader.

Besides, if you visit other fora, e.g. fashion fora, the reviews of the Stephanie Vogue photographs and interview are devastating and not as nicely put as my friend Iloveroyals, who just refers to Stephanie as "shampoo girl".