Sarah, Duchess of York Current Events 16: January-May 2011

[Jacknch]

My view is a general one and based on personal experience and I can quite see how some families are happy to invite ex family members to weddings. But clearly this is not the case for the royal family. I can't say the same for Diana because we don't know what her relationship would now be with the royal family.

It is obvious that the royal family do not consider Sarah as being a member of the family (even though she still has a connection through her children) and so is not automatically considered for invitation to royal family events. Do we know what other events she has attended since her divorce?

Can we be sure that Sarah would be comfortable sitting with the rest of the congregation while her daughters sit with the royal family? From a purely personal point of view, I would feel abit left out of things if I had to sit at the back of the church while my children sit at the front. If ex-wives and husbands were still considered memebrs of the royal family, there would eventually be no room to have them all sitting together as one united group!

It seems that although Andrew still loves his former wife, other members of the royal family might not.

With regard to Andrew's invitation, it could say "Andrew and Guest" but I doubt it. If he is allowed to bring a guest and he brought Sarah along, she would have to sit next to him (as guests fo guests usually do) and protocol would not allow this.

 

[Kataryn]

YIf one looks at it that way, then why wasn't Mark Philips invited? He's Anne's ex-husband?

Do we know that he isn't invited? Just kidding - but after all, Mark P. still lives at Anne's estate and was raising his kids together with Anne, he is a quiet and well mannered man who has his own merits and a job he can be proud of instead of being a hanger-on and always good for scandal. Thus, he is not of interest for the media as is Sarah.

And maybe that is the problem. It's known that Sarah's documentary for Oprah is not yet finished. I can imagine that this was a point against inviting Sarah as surely Oprah would have used TV-coverage of Sarah at the wedding in that docu to give it more life and Royal glamour. Perhaps that was a result William and Catherine did not want.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

If Sarah is not invited there is a simple reason for it: William doesnt want her to be there. What speaks volumes about the rift that must have been between his mother and her and, as a consequence, him. William is on good terms with his cousins, Fergies daughters and leaving their mother out would be an exclaimation mark, no doubt about that.

 

[sliver_bic]

See here I disagree. There's no proof that it has anything to do with his mother instead of Sarah being a lightning rod for controversy.

As for the Dailymail, it does have different writers and as such will pop the occasional pro-Fergie article out there. The article is an opinion piece complaining about inviting people like the Beckham's and not her. It makes a good point though frankly I don't think Sarah or the Beckham's should've been invited but that's just me.

 

[muriel]

See here I disagree. There's no proof that it has anything to do with his mother instead of Sarah being a lightning rod for controversy.

I agree, I don't think Sarah's exclusion haw anything to do with the supposed row between Sarah and Diana. If William had wanted her there, she woul dhave been invited.

The article is an opinion piece complaining about inviting people like the Beckham's and not her. It makes a good point though frankly I don't think Sarah or the Beckham's should've been invited but that's just me.

I suspect that if the Beckhams are invited, it will be because of the work that David did with William in relation to the world cup bid, and any other charitable projects they may have talked about.

 

[nascarlucy]

Sara Ferguson and Prince Andrew daughters are cousins to Prince Williams.They are his first cousins. This makes Sara Ferguson his aunt, even though it's not by blood. If there were no children involved, then I would say that she was his ex-aunt.

 

[Russophile]

I'm an ex-aunt and I'm not getting invited to diddly squat.
So some families operate differently.

 

[Zonk]

I'm an ex-aunt and I'm not getting invited to diddly squat.
So some families operate differently.

My father was invited to my cousins wedding. He is an ex uncle...and invited to my uncles wedding. My uncle happens to be the brother of my mother (his ex wife). Now make no mistake about it...my mother wasn't pleased..but it wasn't her day.

Sarah seemed to indicate that she wasn't expecting an invitation (maybe she is saying that to save face..who knows). She seems to be okay with it. Perhaps if the boys and Sarah had maintained a relationship thru the years after Diana's death it might have been different. Really...it kind of takes two (or at least one person to make an effort) to maintain a relationship. If she hasn't spoken to them since Diana died (I believe someone mentioned that)...how do we expect her to invite them? I don't think they should have gotten an invited her just because she is Beatrice and Eugenie's mother. Do they speak...do they exchange Christmas cards? Honestly, I would moreso expect to see Sarah at Zara's wedding based on an exchance they had years ago. I believe they were at an event and Zara seemed genuinely happy to see her. My father was invited because he has maintained a relationship with my mother's side of the family since the divorce. Will my mother be invited to anything on my fathers side? Probably not as she hasn't tried to maintain a relationship.

The point is...its William and Catherine's day and at the end of it...they can pretty much invite anyone they want to.

 

[Tiggersk8]

Just to answer a question someone posted...

AFAIK...The one Major Royal Occasion Sarah was invited to attend was The Queen Mum's Funeral and she did have to sit w/the rest of the congregation, while the girls were w/the Royal Family. Didn't seem to be a problem then, but Sarah also hadn't tried to sell access to Andrew, and in a way, to the Royal Family in general back then.

IMO that's the real reason there's no invite to the Wedding and I can't say I really blame anyone if that is, in truth, the reason. As much as I like Sarah, she really screwed things up w/that one.

 

[Kataryn]

If Andrew wanted her back in the Royal Fold and she wanted to have the duties as well as the privileges, they could always get married again. I doubt the queen would so something against it and what can she as the Supreme Governor of the Church of England do when Andrew and Sarah according to church law are still married? Or Andrew and the girls could boycott the wedding... He is old enough to make his own decisions even if his mother doesn't like it.

 

[NotAPretender]

Look -

There is exactly one person who is responsible for Sarah not being invited: Sarah.

She is the cause and the root.

All other decisions made flow from her, her actions, and that alone.

It's not some mythical and unproven "grudge" of the Princes - who on earth here has spoken to them lately to ask about that?

It's not Prince Phillip - why would he care if his son enjoys being embarassed? Repeatedly? Over decades?

It's not the Queen and it's not Charles - theirs is the response to the situation, not the situation's authoress.

Certainly, each and every person named above weighed in on this decision. And I think if any one of them had said "let's have the smelly girl over for the event," it would have been heard. But that's not what happened.

The handwringing and blameshifting is really absurd. Sarah is the author of her fate. And I think this puts final paid to the idea that she is some kind of "insider" amongst the Royals, enjoying huge (yet secret) coziness that will ultimately yield her great reward. It's such a disservice to herself that she seems to continue to shuffle the blame around, and that her adherents here and there do the same.

It's the death knell for the Sarah Brand, though; had she received an invite, she could have continued to peddle herself as the huge-yet-secret insider.

I - personally - think that the Palace was on the fence until the last possible minute. Do the positives outweigh the negatives of having her there? I think she once again had the opportunity to remain quietly behind-the-scenes but just couldn't help herself - flashing the cash in the Caribbean, grinning for photo ops behind Andrew a week later for skiing. She just does not know how to be discreet for any length of time. And she failed this, her last test.

Sarah has been told, by this action and in no uncertain terms, that the door is firmly closed. She may nurture her hopes and dreams of remarrying Andrew, just as several here are firmly convinced that as soon as they plant HM and HRH The DofE, then Andy will come swooping in to make it all better again. I think anyone who thinks that had better look at the line of people who chimed in on the decision from the Palace to exclude her: HM; Phillip; Charles the current heir; William, the future King. It's a solid wall of "no." Three generations of "no." The once and future monarchy.

I wish her peace. And I think this may, ultimately, give her freedom. The door is closed - time to find the window that opened as a result.

 

[sliver_bic]

If Andrew wanted her back in the Royal Fold and she wanted to have the duties as well as the privileges, they could always get married again. I doubt the queen would so something against it and what can she as the Supreme Governor of the Church of England do when Andrew and Sarah according to church law are still married? Or Andrew and the girls could boycott the wedding... He is old enough to make his own decisions even if his mother doesn't like it.

Boycott the wedding of the future monarch? I've never though it possible to commit suicide without dying but boycotting would be as close as you could get

Simply put, no matter how much they back her up, no matter how often they ignore her behavior, Andrew and the girls will never step over the line in such a fashion. The scandal that would cause, in Sarah's name of all things, would shake that family to the core.

Can you imagine those three being in the same room as William, let alone Phillip, if they did that? Even if they maintained the same public face there's simply no way anyone would believe that to be anything but a put on.

 

[ladongas]

Maybe she wasn't sent an invitation, because...

...it is understood that she is coming as Andrew's guest. The man is 51 years old, he is a fairly senior royal, and it seems unlikely that his guest (if that's the way the invitations are worded) will be rejected as unsuitable.

It seems harmless enough- I really doubt that the abbey will collapse if a sinner enters. (Actually it would prolly collapse if a person who hadn't sinned entered). By giving Andrew the option of bringing her, it would put the decision squarely on the one person who should be able to decide if he is offended by her presence.

I think that her behaviour at the wedding is less likely to be a problem than Kanye West's might be, assuming that he has actually been invited. "Yo, Archie Canterbury, Imma let you finish, but first I wanna say something."

 

[NotAPretender]

...I "Yo, Archie Canterbury, Imma let you finish, but first I wanna say something."

You completely owe me a computer screen. Iced tea spewed all over mine as I snorted in helpless laughter.

Welcome aboard, my new crush.

 

[Irish Eyes]

It's been reported by a few royal reporters on twitter today that Andrew wants to bring Sarah as his guest, but it's understood that she's reluctant to attend under those circumstances.
There was no mention in any of the reports whether her attending as Andrew's guest would be acceptable to other members of the royal family.

There are so many wedding stories that it's impossible to know what's fact and what's fiction.

 

[ladongas]

Who knows?

In my non-royal opinion, the courteous thing to do is to invite her. And if she is uncomfortable, then the courteous thing is for her to decline.
We will hope that she and all the other guests are well-behaved!

 

[charlottestreasures]

Cute picture of Sarah and William when he was little that was included in the
ones published that were just found in an attic.

 

[Iluvbertie]

If she hasn't been invited and Andrew has asked for her to be there it might be the trigger for a re-marriage - in much the same way that the seating at the van Custsum (sp) wedding was a trigger for Charles and Camilla.

If Andrew has made no indication that he wants her there then that is a different situation.

 

[rmay286]

It's been reported by a few royal reporters on twitter today that Andrew wants to bring Sarah as his guest, but it's understood that she's reluctant to attend under those circumstances.

Do you have a link to the Twitter stories? I find it hard to imagine this happening, but I'm curious...

NotaPretender--while your post makes sense as far as Sarah re-entering the royal family is concerned, I don't think she deliberately "flashed her cash" in the Caribbean. Her behaviour was inappropriate, but she wasn't deliberately getting photographed, either. And as for being photographed with Andrew and her daughters--well, that is the thing: they all went skiing together and they were all photographed. That happens when royals are out and about. I don't see how this is a deliberate bad move on Sarah's part, either.

From what I can see, Sarah has mostly kept well under the radar since May 2010--9 months ago. I doubt she's led such a private life since her marriage.

The other thing is that, sure, most members of the royal family are clearly not big supporters of Sarah. But ultimately, the question of a future remarriage between Andrew and Sarah comes down to two people: Andrew and Sarah. Not the Queen, not Charles, not William. For Andrew to remarry Sarah, he might very well have to separate himself from his family. But he does have a choice. The whole royal family can't prevent Andrew from remarrying Sarah if he decided he really wanted to.

 

[ladongas]

Not my quote

The Twitter bit was not from me. I think the quotes portion of Irish Eyes post was a little off. I believe that this part of the post is from Irish Eyes:

It's been reported by a few royal reporters on twitter today that Andrew wants to bring Sarah as his guest, but it's understood that she's reluctant to attend under those circumstances.
There was no mention in any of the reports whether her attending as Andrew's guest would be acceptable to other members of the royal family.

There are so many wedding stories that it's impossible to know what's fact and what's fiction.

 

[NotAPretender]

For Andrew to remarry Sarah, he might very well have to separate himself from his family. But he does have a choice. The whole royal family can't prevent Andrew from remarrying Sarah if he decided he really wanted to.

Exactly. And he hasn't, not in a decade and a half. I totally agree, rmay286. The endless leaping at "he's going to remarry her because he blinked his eyes three times at a press conference" is tiresome. He hasn't. If he wanted to make a stink about having her at this wedding, he could have. He could boycott it if he really wanted to make a point about her not being invited - but I bet my next paycheck that he won't.

This wedding is not some litmus test as to whether Andrew and Sarah will reunite. It's a celebration of the marriage of two young people who have little to no relationship with Sarah Ferguson.

However, no one is stopping anyone from their wild speculation as to this wedding being some sort of dramatic catalyst. Go on - set it up that way: "well, Andrew is just so mad about this that he's gonna marry Sarah any minute now....any minute now....right about....sure, he scratched his left ankle again, that means.....any time now....."

 

[KittyAtlanta]

I agree with most of what y'all are saying, but I do think it downright mean not to invite her.

 

[Mirabel]

It's been reported by a few royal reporters on twitter today that Andrew wants to bring Sarah as his guest...

I doubt this will happen.
I've heard that Andrew fought very hard to retain the "princess" title for his daughters; is it likely he'll go against his family to parade his ex at the wedding?

I think the skiing photos were his way of showing that he, at least, doesn't regard Sarah as a pariah. (Maybe the trip was even a consolation prize, because he must have known that she would not be invited).
BUT- I don't believe he will remarry her, ever.

 

[Irish Eyes]

I agree Mirabel, it's not going to happen. I don't think Andrew would even ask, not because he'd have a problem bringing her, but because he probably knows that Sarah wouldn't agree to go. Even is she did agree to go as his guest, he might feel it simply wouldn't be worth the attention, publicity and rumour it would cause.
Like you I don't think they will remarry, why would they when they can have the best of both worlds if that's what they want.
I'd like to think that Sarah thinks fondly of William and I'm sure she wishes the couple every happiness but I don't think she's in tears at missing the wedding. I think trips like the skiiing break is Andrew's way of showing his support, and maybe Andrew and the girls are all Sarah needs and she still gets to spend some happy family time with them.
Andrew and Sarah seem happy with their family unit (even if it's a set up that wouldn't work for most) and the girls have never really known or had their mother involved in the royal side of their lives. I think at this stage they have all accepted the situation and adjusted to make things work for them as a family.

 

[iceflower]

___________________


Sarah, Duchess of York and Princess Beatrice leaving Claridge's Hotel in London,
February 24, 2011.


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


** zimbio: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York, and Princess Beatrice leave Claridge's Hotel **

 

[Marika86]

Daily Mail article

Sarah Ferguson and Princess Beatrice rack up hefty dinner tab at Gordon Ramsay's Claridges | Mail Online

 

[Mirabel]

This sort of thing tends to be inflammatory and provoke comments such as "Why should we pay for the York girls? They do nothing etc. etc."

Though, to be fair, they (or at least Sarah) would be criticized no matter what, at this point!

 

[FergieFan]

This sort of thing tends to be inflammatory and provoke comments such as "Why should we pay for the York girls? They do nothing etc. etc."

Though, to be fair, they (or at least Sarah) would be criticized no matter what, at this point!

Inflammatory is right. More mean-spirited rubbish from the Mail. This assumption that the taxpayer is always footing the bill does annoy me. I'm sure Beatrice does indirectly get something from the taxpayer - well, she is 5th in line to the throne after all. If I am contributing a few pence towards her, that's fine by me. It seems ridiculous that Sarah and Beatrice can't go out and have a meal without being criticized. And saying that Beatrice doesn't work makes it sound as if she does nothing. She's taking a degree - let her get on with it.

As for the wedding - well, I think the 2 sides of the debate are more or less irreconcilable. Those of us who feel more positively towards Sarah feel she should have the benefit of the doubt - for Andrew's sake if for no other reason, as he clearly still cares for her. Others feel she's messed things up too seriously, or become too distant to the family, to be allowed back in the fold. I guess my reaction is perhaps mostly an emotional one - I care for Sarah, and don't like to think of her feeling excluded or marginalized, and I hope she won't take it too badly. But for all that, I still have to concede that it's up to William and Catherine who they invite, and that there are convincing arguments for her exclusion, if I look at it impartially (or at least try to!).

 

[muriel]

Daily Mail article

Sarah Ferguson and Princess Beatrice rack up hefty dinner tab at Gordon Ramsay's Claridges | Mail Online

Actually whilst I am perfectly aware that the York girls are not subsidised by the state (other than their security costs, which I do not resent), I do think they have been seen out at expensive restaurants rather a lot recently. This is just not what one wants to see in straightened economic times. Interestingly, you very rarely see any of the senior royals ever splash the cash like this. Is this just a case of Sarah eating her way through her daughters trust funds now?

 

[Kataryn]

Actually whilst I am perfectly aware that the York girls are not subsidised by the state (other than their security costs, which I do not resent), I do think they have been seen out at expensive restaurants rather a lot recently. This is just not what one wants to see in straightened economic times. Interestingly, you very rarely see any of the senior royals ever splash the cash like this. Is this just a case of Sarah eating her way through her daughters trust funds now?

I tend to believe it is a PR stunt by Sarah and Gordon Ramsey. He pays for the lunch and she brings her daughter and the Daily Mail reporters.
We're informed what lunch cost at the place, we see a delighted princess leave and read that other VIPs lunch there as well.. What more does Gordon Ramsey want? And Sarah? Does she really care what the media writes about her as long as it is more or less dignified (going to lunch with your daughter is hardly a scandal).

But poor Beatrice...