Sarah, Duchess of York Current Events 14: February-October 2009

[Iluvbertie]

Well, she's right about that. If she didn't do anything, she'd be accused of being a selfish socialite. If she tries to do something, she's accused of doing it wrong, having the wrong motives, not really meaning it, not understanding the issues, or whatever.

People who don't like a particular royal (or ex-royal) can always level those accusations. For some people, nothing Sarah does, short of dropping dead, will ever be worthy of a positive comment.

This is so right, unfortunately.

I am not fan of Sarah's but she does seem to want to do good and help others but maybe her methods aren't quite right. I do think her heart is in the right place however.

 

[Skydragon]

I'm not sure one can pretend to see clear behind someone's action, especially when trying to find motives (unless you are from Minority Report?!). Making publicity for a charity is a lot better than posing for a fragrance or whatever. At least, it brings attention to an important cause. Not sure people care if it also gives her some publicity.

She is not raising money for a known charity and there are many that aim to help youngsters that could have done with the help. She seems, from the variety of articles published, more concerned about walking around an estate with a bad reputation and being seen as THE one to bring about changes. The problem with that is the knife/gun wielding youths will not be interested in a rich bitch or a 'reformed' criminals attempts to make them change their ways.

People who don't like a particular royal (or ex-royal) can always level those accusations. For some people, nothing Sarah does, short of dropping dead, will ever be worthy of a positive comment.

And that is the sort of comment leveled at those who perhaps have a more realistic view, it is always so easy to say it is because Sarah may not be liked by a poster that her efforts to help are viewed in a poor light or could it be that in reality they are a poor idea!

For the record, I would not celebrate anyones death but my view of the person would not go into rose coloured mode either!

 

[Wisteria]

And that is the sort of comment leveled at those who perhaps have a more realistic view, it is always so easy to say it is because Sarah may not be liked by a poster that her efforts to help are viewed in a poor light or could it be that in reality they are a poor idea!

I agree that the easiest way to defend Sarah is to say that the people who criticize her don´t like her etc etc.
She may have a good heart but number one on her agenda as far as I have seen in her whole career as a royal duchess has been to further her own interests.
Perhaps her heart is good underneath, but she lacks common sense.
She puts her foot in it most of the time and if she thinks playing lady bountiful among the masses is going to make her popular I think she is wrong. Many society ladies have tried this and fallen flat on their faces.
She should join some well known organization if her real goal is just to make things better for the poor, if she really knows what "poor" is.

 

[TheTruth]

She is not raising money for a known charity and there are many that aim to help youngsters that could have done with the help. She seems, from the variety of articles published, more concerned about walking around an estate with a bad reputation and being seen as THE one to bring about changes. The problem with that is the knife/gun wielding youths will not be interested in a rich bitch or a 'reformed' criminals attempts to make them change their ways.

If people aren't happy about how she handles this, then maybe they should propose other solutions to deal with this problem. Sarah is at least doing something for them instead of looking for it to happen. It's always very easy to criticize when you sit and let it be but when it's time to take action, rare are those who dare.

 

[Wisteria]

If people aren't happy about how she handles this, then maybe they should propose other solutions to deal with this problem. Sarah is at least doing something for them instead of looking for it to happen. It's always very easy to criticize when you sit and let it be but when it's time to take action, rare are those who dare.

I notice that in posts above solutions were proposed, one being she should join an association which is already helping the poor in practical ways and not trying to think up schemes herself, people with more knowledge of these subjects have already set up many a charity that is actually working and producing practical results. As these people are not the ex-wives of royalty perhaps the photographers are not there to record these good deeds but they are being done you can be sure of that.

 

[rmay286]

I think that by making a TV show about this community rather than just joining an established organization and working behind the scenes (which is wonderful too, and I know and admire people who do this), Sarah raises more awareness about the issues than if she just volunteered privately. I'm not saying either way is right or wrong but that both can be good and useful. People living in Britain might laugh at this, but I honestly know a lot more about daily life (and problems!) in Britain from following the royal family, than I otherwise would. You hear about which charities they work for, which communities they've visited...

And that's just as someone who looks for information about the royal family. When Sarah makes a TV show, even those who don't usually read about the royals might watch just because of her name/past status. As an ex-royal, Sarah brings visibility to issues that others might not be able to. I don't really see anything wrong with that...it's just her way of addressing issues. I'm sure that she often goes in with her heart before her head, but at least she has compassion for some of the disadvantaged people in the world and is trying to help.

 

[Skydragon]

If people aren't happy about how she handles this, then maybe they should propose other solutions to deal with this problem. Sarah is at least doing something for them instead of looking for it to happen. It's always very easy to criticize when you sit and let it be but when it's time to take action, rare are those who dare.

There are many people who help without the headlines, they get off of their behinds, go and do. For Sarahs 4 more minutes of fame, there are hundreds of unsung, hardworking heroes, who do not seek constant praise. For all the work they do, the credit is taken by a 4 minute wonder, who even remembers who started the first AIDS charities?

People living in Britain might laugh at this, but I honestly know a lot more about daily life (and problems!) in Britain from following the royal family, than I otherwise would. You hear about which charities they work for, which communities they've visited...

The fact that you think you know about Britain and the British by watching the royals, is quite frankly scary.

And that's just as someone who looks for information about the royal family. When Sarah makes a TV show, even those who don't usually read about the royals might watch just because of her name/past status.

A great many people, IMO, have very little idea who Sarah Ferguson is and a great many who do know, exercise their finger by changing channel.

 

[MelinaB.]

How about the tabloids?Are they calling her names?Stereotypes about people like her are so common,I guess.

 

[rmay286]

The fact that you think you know about Britain and the British by watching the royals, is quite frankly scary.A great many people, IMO, have very little idea who Sarah Ferguson is and a great many who do know, exercise their finger by changing channel.

OK, I should have clarified. No, I haven't learned about Britain "just" by watching the royals, but when you click on links to articles in the Daily Mail, the Telegraph, etc., you read comments posted by people living in Britain and see links to other stories about Britain. You get a "feel" for how people think and behave there, even if it's just a selection of them and a biased media reporting. Even from reading people's opinions at this forum I get a sense of what monarchists in Britain believe. Sometimes I think you believe you speak for the "average" British person, and I'm sure you are very well-qualified to speak about your own country and the people there. But I've also found many opinions in other places where royalty is discussed that differ from yours. And that's what I've found interesting in reading this forum and the news articles posted here--getting a sense of the different perspectives that exist in England/Great Britain.

I might read a story about Prince Harry visiting some of his comrades who were wounded in Afghanistan, for example, and from the article and the comments I get a feel for the attitudes British people have towards the war. Royalty attracts interest especially in those who don't have a royal family on their home turf. I would have no clue that there was such a place called Wythenshawe or that those kind of conditions existed there if Sarah's name hadn't attracted my interest.

And TV programmes don't air unless the producers think there's an audience for them. Clearly, not everyone in Britain is changing the channel the minute they see Sarah on their screens, otherwise the producers of her first "reality show" last summer wouldn't have said, "We had favourable reaction and are going to do another program."

 

[jcbcode99]

I just watched that whole, Duchess for a Day segment and while I applaud the idea behind it (honoring someone for their work or accomplishments) I have to say, in my own opinion, that the format actually cheapens the honor. That whole cartoony "Duchess for a Day" intro with the crown and sceptor and royal music--is just horrible. It was horrible. Truly. Talk about self-exploitation--it was embarassing to watch.
The lady they honored, though, is amazing and I have nothing but respect for her.

 

[Skydragon]

OK, I should have clarified. No, I haven't learned about Britain "just" by watching the royals, but when you click on links to articles in the Daily Mail, the Telegraph, etc., you read comments posted by people living in Britain and see links to other stories about Britain. You get a "feel" for how people think and behave there, even if it's just a selection of them and a biased media reporting.

Britain is not full of the sort of thing that makes the paper, as I am sure you must realise, that would equate, IMO, to watching Jerry Springer and basing my opinion of all Americans on his 'guests'. The majority of people here do not ever make the papers nor do they comment on them.

Sometimes I think you believe you speak for the "average" British person, and I'm sure you are very well-qualified to speak about your own country and the people there. But I've also found many opinions in other places where royalty is discussed that differ from yours. And that's what I've found interesting in reading this forum and the news articles posted here--getting a sense of the different perspectives that exist in England/Great Britain.

It is always a mistake to think you know what another believes, I am English/Scottish as were my ancestors and I do come into contact with a great many ordinary British citizens, from all walks of life, but 'speaking for the 'average' British person would be a difficult thing to do for me. I have never been in employment, have never been in danger of losing my home, never lived on a council estate, I think it fair to say I have never lived the life of an ordinary British person, but neither has Sarah! If you are basing your view on reading 'other places where royalty is discussed', without personal knowledge, you have no way to ascertain where they live and whether their opinion is truly someone who lives in the country, they could be in Trinidad, Germany, Cyprus and you would never know. I too read other royalty forums and it is amazing the amount of posters from here who post under different names.

....... I would have no clue that there was such a place called Wythenshawe or that those kind of conditions existed there if Sarah's name hadn't attracted my interest.

And this will help the people on this estate how? Does it not hold them up as a less than wonderful example, far worse than any other estate. In fact it might not be the best place to live but it is pretty safe compared to some of the estates in Liverpool or any of the other well publicised 'bad' estates.

And TV programmes don't air unless the producers think there's an audience for them. Clearly, not everyone in Britain is changing the channel the minute they see Sarah on their screens, otherwise the producers of her first "reality show" last summer wouldn't have said, "We had favourable reaction and are going to do another program."

These are the gems from Sarah -

“Young people go out with their mobile telephones and their knives now. I’ve noticed a lot more violence, I’ve noticed bad language,” she reflects.

“Literally, you can’t get some young people to do joined up writing, let alone joined up sentences,” adds Prince Andrew’s ex-wife.

Go into any town centre and you will hear bad language and unless her programme is going to improve the education system of the country, I'm afraid it is not going to help with the 'joined up writing' either. She's noticed... how many town centres has she been into then?
Or how about

You can’t possibly help people if you don’t know what it’s like.

True but staying in a decent B&B is not going to give her any idea of what it is really like is it? In the same way that although I advise people who have various problems, they are probably not problems I have ever lived through myself, therefore how could I possibly know what 'it's like'?

Programme makers put a great many efforts into circulation and the viewing figures normally tell whether it was a popular programme but it doesn't really matter whether a UK audience is disinterested, they know they can sell it to the Americans!

 

[TheTruth]

There are many people who help without the headlines, they get off of their behinds, go and do. For Sarahs 4 more minutes of fame, there are hundreds of unsung, hardworking heroes, who do not seek constant praise. For all the work they do, the credit is taken by a 4 minute wonder, who even remembers who started the first AIDS charities?

People who work "in the dark" are very pleased when a public figure helps them obtaining attention. In your posts, it sounds like they are jealous of these famous people who are a great key to create a reaction. I doubt whoever works for a charity or a cause would have chosen this path to get a moment of fame. They don't want to have their name written everywhere. You don't do this because you want to see people yelling your name as if you were a rockstar. They work hand-in-hand and the more they have public attention, the better. If you mind that someone has all the fame but yet manages to give your charity a lot of money, then maybe you don't understand what it means to help without expecting anything back.

 

[iowabelle]

I just watched that whole, Duchess for a Day segment and while I applaud the idea behind it (honoring someone for their work or accomplishments) I have to say, in my own opinion, that the format actually cheapens the honor. That whole cartoony "Duchess for a Day" intro with the crown and sceptor and royal music--is just horrible. It was horrible. Truly. Talk about self-exploitation--it was embarassing to watch.
The lady they honored, though, is amazing and I have nothing but respect for her.

I'm in favor of honoring the workers, but I will admit The Today Show has gone over the edge, in favor of tabloid journalism rather than actual news. The morning news programs have become nothing more than an extension of Access Hollywood or Entertainment Tonight, in the U.S.

 

[Skydragon]

You don't do this because you want to see people yelling your name as if you were a rockstar. They work hand-in-hand and the more they have public attention, the better. back.

I think you have misunderstood what I am saying, but this is not unusual. Yes it is great when someone brings more attention to a charity, but let us not pretend that the 'personality' does anything else. The personality often does it for genuine belief and care about the cause, some do it for the applause it might bring them and I put Sarah into the latter. However you are talking about charities, once again this is not a charity we are talking about. Will it stop knife crime/thefts/bing drinking/ fear in the area, unlikely. If the woman Sarah 'helped' was charged with assault, the mother of the alleged bully became the bully, that in itself should ring alarm bells.

If you mind that someone has all the fame but yet manages to give your charity a lot of money, then maybe you don't understand what it means to help without expecting anything

I am presuming you are referring to the ubiquitous 'you' rather than making a personal judgement! Maybe a person has more of an idea of a personality jumping onto a bandwagon for a few minutes of fame at the expense of the very people they are supposed to be concerned about, but if Sarah thinks that calling them stupid is going to improve their behaviour, I would be amazed.

“Young people go out with their mobile telephones and their knives now. I’ve noticed a lot more violence, I’ve noticed bad language,” she reflects.

“Literally, you can’t get some young people to do joined up writing, let alone joined up sentences,” adds Prince Andrew’s ex-wife.

Things have changed but when was the last time Sarah was on the streets of a deprived area?

 

[Russophile]

Though Sarah is to be commended for trying to help, I agree with Wisteria who said she seems to "lack common sense". I can't help but think there are more efficient ways of going about cleaning up the community than what she is doing.

 

[Odette]

I have been away way too long and seem to be a bit fuzzy.
Is Sarah still having any royal/ex royal duties or she gets involved in these
projects as a private citizen?
I assume her connections to the royal family helped her and whatever she got
involved in. Is this still the case?

 

[Iluvbertie]

She does nothing officially as an ex-royal.

Everything she does now is as a private citizen but one with a high profile name due to her former marriage to the son of the British monarch and being the mother of the 5th and 6th in line to the British throne.

She has a name and she uses that name for both public good and personal gain - just like any other celebrity and the royals themselves who do a lot of charity stuff because they know that their position in life gives the charity publicity and newspace thus raising its profile.

I think she is trying to raise awareness of issues but her methods could have been better.

 

[Odette]

I suppose you hit the nail on the head.
Sarah has always managed (IMHO) to get publicity out of everything she
has been involved in.

 

[TheTruth]

I think you have misunderstood what I am saying, but this is not unusual. Yes it is great when someone brings more attention to a charity, but let us not pretend that the 'personality' does anything else. The personality often does it for genuine belief and care about the cause, some do it for the applause it might bring them and I put Sarah into the latter. However you are talking about charities, once again this is not a charity we are talking about. Will it stop knife crime/thefts/bing drinking/ fear in the area, unlikely. If the woman Sarah 'helped' was charged with assault, the mother of the alleged bully became the bully, that in itself should ring alarm bells.

You mentioned AIDS charities earlier so I assumed it also concerned charities in your mind. So I don't think I misunderstood your post: it's your opinion to put Sarah in the group that does it "for the applause" and that she somehow "outshines" the hard work people do everyday and all this for personal gratification and boosting her public image. I believe otherwise.

I am presuming you are referring to the ubiquitous 'you' rather than making a personal judgement!

Well, of course. I don't tend to judge people without knowing them...

 

[Elspeth]

And that is the sort of comment leveled at those who perhaps have a more realistic view, it is always so easy to say it is because Sarah may not be liked by a poster that her efforts to help are viewed in a poor light or could it be that in reality they are a poor idea!

Not when it's every single thing she always does. Or doesn't do. Or wears. Or says. Or anything. No.

If we get to the stage where she's criticised every time she shows her face and every time she doesn't, then we've gone beyond realistic, thoughtful, and constructive criticism. It isn't as though she spends her entire time beating up old ladies and torturing kittens, I could see the point of all this "oh she's such a disaster" if that was the case. She has a bunch of charities, she seems to be a genuinely kindly and concerned person, albeit one who engages in fairly major and fairly frequent lapses of judgement, and she's managed to get herself out of some of the problems she got herself into, which shows a certain degree of maturity. Yet every time she's mentioned, regardless of what she does, there's a group of people lining up to find fault. That isn't realistic and thoughtful criticism, it's a classic knee-jerk reaction.

 

[ada]

She does nothing officially as an ex-royal.

That's what bothers me - using her high profile name and connections to the royal family

 

[Iluvbertie]

That's what bothers me - using her high profile name and connections to the royal family

ALL celebrities use their names and she is no different.

She has to earn a living and has no real qualifications so all she has is a name so therefore that is all she has to use.

I have no problem with her using her name - Sarah Duchess of York - to promote causes she feels are important and earn a living. It is no different to anyone else using their name to earn a living e.g. sports stars who promote things because they are good at sport, she is using the only asset she has.

 

[rmay286]

She does nothing officially as an ex-royal.

Oh yes, I don't dispute that Sarah's methods could often be better. I think she is very idealistic and doesn't necessarily have a sense of what will work "on the ground." That being said, I don't think she does it just to get attention for herself...she's a passionate person who cares about a lot of different issues.

Sarah uses her name to bring attention to causes that she thinks need to be addressed and most of her causes seem to be genuinely worthwhile to me. I admired Sarah when she highlighted the problems in orphanages in Turkey/Romania (not necessarily for bringing her royal daughters into it), I admire her for highlighting the problems mothers face in undeveloped countries, and I admire her for calling attention to the problems in some British neighbourhoods. Even if thousands of people hear about these issues and don't react to them, the more people who hear about a problem somewhere, the more likely it is that more people will start contributing to these causes.

 

[Wisteria]

I'll go and live in a hole, says Fergie after phone-in battering over her latest documentary | Mail Online

I think this says quite a lot about how she is appreciated by the people she is proclaiming to help.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I'll go and live in a hole, says Fergie after phone-in battering over her latest documentary | Mail Online

I think this says quite a lot about how she is appreciated by the people she is proclaiming to help.

Unfortunately many people who are perceived as in need of help react the same way to anyone. That doesn't mean that they don't need help or that people shouldn't keep trying but it is disheartening for anyone involved.

 

[Skydragon]

This is from the article and was one of the points I was trying to make -

One caller from the area however accused her of ruining the estate's reputation and said many locals were angry that they had been portrayed in a negative light

I have not had time to find a link but Sky News ran a story on this last night apparently and those they spoke to on the estate condemned her patronising attempts and attitude, (so it would seem they can do joined up thinking).
--------------------
The Duchess of York has said she will "never make another documentary" in Britain after facing a string of criticism from listeners of a BBC Radio 5 live phone-in.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...ake-another-documentary-in-Britain-again.html

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/u...-fury-over-estate-documentary-86908-21598249/

 

[Russophile]

And then she opens her mouth and it's played out all over the tabloids.
I don't understand Sarah.

 

[Wisteria]

There are many ways of helping the less fortunate but if it is done clumsily it can cause them to feel humiliated. She doesn´t know the first thing about going without and I am sure the people who are really needy find her irritating. I am not needy, but I find her attempts at being another Mother Theresa very irritating indeed, good intentions or not.

 

[rmay286]

Unfortunately many people who are perceived as in need of help react the same way to anyone. That doesn't mean that they don't need help or that people shouldn't keep trying but it is disheartening for anyone involved.

That's very true. I understand why the people of Wythenshawe might feel the way they do, but I think directing the criticism at Sarah is mostly misdirected. (I'm not convinced a TV program and a community centre is the best way to approach these problems, but I do think Sarah had the best of intentions.)

If you watch the interview Sarah did with the BBC, she says she approached ITV about doing another reality show, but she didn't choose the community she was going to be working with...the producers did because they felt it was a particularly deprived community that would make a good show. The Daily Mail itself has been calling Wythenshawe "the crime-ridden Wythenshawe estate in Manchester - one of the most deprived communities in the UK." http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ergie-phone-battering-latest-documentary.html

The Manchester Evening News obtained interviews with some of the citizens:

"Local resident Steven Fielding claims: “All these people around, they’re committing crime after crime after crime and they’re still allowed back on the streets.

“Show me one area in south Manchester with community spirit – there’s none. Even your next door neighbours, nobody talks to you anymore. Everybody’s petrified.”

Fellow resident Marlene Entwhistle adds: “We’ve had people that have been stabbed, people that have been assaulted, robbed. It’s gone on for years.”

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/showbiz/s/1130866_the_duchess_on_the_estate

Some people believe the community is crime-ridden and needs help, others believe things aren't so bad and resent an "outsider" trying to help. No matter where you go everyone will have different experiences, but it's clear that Wythenshawe is not one of the finest communities around and if people object to that reality coming to light, so be it.

And resenting Sarah just because she comes from a privileged background seems just as classist to me as complaining about the poor and underprivileged being a drain on society. Prejudice goes two ways.

 

[iceflower]

Some pics from yesterday:

Sarah Ferguson at the Radio Two studios London, England,
August 14, 2009


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


And here are some pics of the GMTV show that was recorded:

** Pic 1 ** belga **