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


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
This probably shouldn't be in this thread but seeing as we are talking about Sarah.... I read a little report re Eugenie's birthday celebrations in Hello today, and they had the photos of the gang tearing around windsor park on the bikes. They also mentioned that a tandem bike had been hired for Sarah and Andrew to join in the fun, but they shrewdly avoided the photographers lenses when they were on it (I don't get to say it often enough so I'll say it again, Shrewd Fergie and Andy).
Now the Daily Mail missed that one, what they wouldn't give for a pic of their fav people on a tandem bike, they would have LOVED IT:lol:
If true I suppose it's one way of proving that they are still in tandem despite all that's happened recently.
 
According to Wikipedia:

The arms were granted to her father, Ronald Ferguson. She bears them on a lozenge.
The motto is ex adversis felicitas crescit (from adversity grows happiness).


Think I can help with this one [See the illustration in the very first post on this thread]

Coats of arms belong to individuals; Sarah did not acquire or inherit her Coat of Arms from her father Major Feguson and neither is there a Coat of Arms for a surname; many people with the same surname have quite different Coats of Arms.

For any person to have a right to a coat of arms they must either have had it granted to them or be descended in the legitimate MALE line from a person to whom arms were granted or confirmed in the past.


In the case of Sarah, shortly after her engagement, The College of Arms [a branch of the Royal Household] commenced work on her Coat of Arms, the process being started by the grant of a successful petition to the Earl Marshall. There are no fixed eligibility for the granting of Arms; instead matters such as qualifications and standing in public life are taken into account. Sarah's anticipated elevation to the Royal Family was obviously considered important enough to qualifiy her for the honour of the grant of her own coat of arms.

From memory, she wanted the incorporation of a little Bee because it she thought herself such a busy little bee.

One exciting little bit of information which I can reveal - and which more properly belongs on another thread -is that Catherine Middleton will shortly be granted her own Coat of Arms.

Alex
 
As to what people say about the restaurants, the holidays, the chauffeur driven car, etc etc... I think what people sometimes refuse to understand is that Sarah's lifestyle, as defined by her position and her expectations over the last 25 years or so, is inevitably going to be very different from ours. She is part of a social elite. That's natural, and that's not something she should be ashamed of, cowering away from the cameras, lest she should be judged by those who've no right to judge her.

Judge her on her charity work, her passion to help others, her books, her love for her daughters, not by some facile meaningless rubbish about what restaurants she goes to, or how often she goes on holiday!


It would be lovely if each of us were only judged by our best qualities, but it doesn't work like that. We're judged as a whole, good and bad.

As for being part of a special social elite, haven't the recent arguments been that she simply can't afford to remain part of that elite?
This is a woman who expects others to subsidize her lifestyle, and I do believe people have every right to judge her for that.
 
________________


Sarah, Duchess of York, attended the exclusive fashion fundraiser 'Suzanne
Rogers Presents Marchesa' at The Carlu on April 5, 2011 in Toronto, Canada.


** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** Pic 4 **
 
For all that sarah has been through.
I think she looks and is fabulous.
 
For all that sarah has been through.
I think she looks and is fabulous.

I totally agree, lwbohm. She looks absolutely beautiful in these photos - and so good to see her with a smile on her face, looking really vibrant and happy! Thanks for posting these, iceflower!
 
For some strange reason, that first picture reminds me of Princess Michael of Kent. Perhaps it's the tilt of the head and the smile.:)


________________Sarah, Duchess of York, attended the exclusive fashion fundraiser 'Suzanne
Rogers Presents Marchesa' at The Carlu on April 5, 2011 in Toronto, Canada.
** Pic 1 **
 
I totally agree, lwbohm. She looks absolutely beautiful in these photos - and so good to see her with a smile on her face, looking really vibrant and happy! Thanks for posting these, iceflower!

I have to agree with you FergieFan. Sarah got it spot on this time, hair up, makeup soft and natural and a simple, safe dress that suits her figure. She has had a nightmare year, and was probably under stress for the previous year and a half as her financial situation went into freefall.
I hope her happy, relaxed appearance indicates a new found peace of mind (with hopefully lessons learned and a few home truths confronted).
 
iceflower said:
________________

Sarah, Duchess of York, attended the exclusive fashion fundraiser 'Suzanne
Rogers Presents Marchesa' at The Carlu on April 5, 2011 in Toronto, Canada.

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

Oh she looks lovely this time! Flattering dress.....the blonde woman on the other hand looks tacky in comparasion -go Sarah!
 
I've always genuinely liked Sarah. I think whatever may have happened in the past I can say about 95% of the time her heart has been in the right place. I hope she can soon move forward and Andrew and her can continue to have a good relationship together and watch their daughters grow up.
 
Last edited:
I've always genuinely liked Sarah. I think whatever may have happened in the past I can say about 95% of the time her heart has been in the right place. I hope she can soon move forward and Andrew and continue to have a good relationship together and watch their daughters grow up.

I really hope for the best for her too. A friend of mine on FB just had this in her status and it reminded me so much of what has been Sarah's ups and down, I thought I'd pass it along.


"If you have made mistakes, even serious mistakes, you may have a fresh start any moment you choose, for this thing we call "failure" is not the falling down, but the staying down." ~Mary Pickford
 
LOVE that quote very Sarah indeed. I'd also like to add that the rumours of them under strain is VERY understandable. Sarah herself under immense pressure with her debts and then with Andrew getting in trouble and her being the midst of this of course it would put a strain on the relationship heck it'd put a strain on ANY relationship I just hope no matter what these two try to work things out and try to put things aside remember the good times they've had and just not only for the girls but for themselves continue to maintain their strong relationship they've always had because I truly love these two together and I love how together they've remained despite the divorce. There that's my two cents.
 
LOVE that quote very Sarah indeed. I'd also like to add that the rumours of them under strain is VERY understandable. Sarah herself under immense pressure with her debts and then with Andrew getting in trouble and her being the midst of this of course it would put a strain on the relationship heck it'd put a strain on ANY relationship I just hope no matter what these two try to work things out and try to put things aside remember the good times they've had and just not only for the girls but for themselves continue to maintain their strong relationship they've always had because I truly love these two together and I love how together they've remained despite the divorce. There that's my two cents.

Very wise words indeed, just the type of quote Sarah would love.

I very much agree with you re their relationship ghost_night.
I realise that some people are of the opinion that severing ties would be good for both of them, allowing Andrew to move on and forcing Sarah to grow up, face some home truths and deal with the same issues that have been troubling her since her early teens.
However, I think it would be sad for their friendship (any friendship) to end after 25 years. For what it's worth I don't for a minute think this will happen. I read in Hello that they had a great time celebrating Eugenie's birthday as a family, and the last two sets of photos Iceflower has posted, I think most people agree, are the nicest we have seen of Sarah in a very long time (not tired or stressed looking and certainly not the appearance of someone who has fallen out with their oldest friend).
I assume you are referring to Katie Nicholl's piece in the Daily Mail, it might be worth pointing out she was the journalist who reported Sarah was going to be invited to the Royal Wedding WRONG, she also had a piece last summer that Andrew was snubbing Sarah and not joining her in Spain on the family holiday, WRONG (he flew from Sardinia to join them in time for Beatrice's birthday). Sarah last comments in the London Standard newspapers were that they are a united front over everything that happened in the last few weeks, and I think she knows more about her own relationship than the daily mail. I'm sure Sarah's critics will think I'm an old romantic and that she can do no wrong, not necessarily true.
I just know I would hate to lose the person who has been closest to me for half a century.
 
Last edited:
It's really nice to see so many kind, caring, supportive comments about Sarah. I too love Osipi's quote - very wise, and, as people have said, just the kind of thing that Sarah herself would appreciate.

In terms of the rumours of the "strained relationship" between Sarah and Andrew - I'm with Irish Eyes here. The Mail prints so much mean-spirited rubbish about the Yorks (they really seem to have it in for the family!) that I'd be loathe to believe anything like that from them. I think Sarah and Andrew have such a close, special friendship, one that has survived so many ups and downs over the years - I believe it will continue to survive. I think Sarah, Andrew and the girls are a very close-knit, supportive family, who really look after each other. I admire that in the Yorks, and I can't see that changing.
 
Interesting article, Duke of Marmalade.

The most apposite comment was, to my mind, 'the gutter Murdoch press'. The proprietor of this world-wide empire is an avowed republican and has been anti-royal all of his life. There is nothing which his more scurrilous press won't print if it attacks the royal family, no matter how obliquely. I am continually surprised that some members of the public chose to believe a lot of the nonsense which is published.

Without making excuses for Sarah's alleged misdemeanours, bad judgement and flaws, they really do pale into insignificance when compared with the life and behaviour of poor Princess Margaret. The difference, of course, and the reason that the press was more circumspect about her,is that she was 'of the blood'. Sarah also had difficulties to surmount which others didn't: she was left almost entirely alone in her apartments in Buckingham Palace whilst Andrew was away - only two weeks after their wedding he was at sea again and in the first five years of their marriage they saw each other for only 40 days per year! Her life was dominated by 'the grey wind', those courtiers who expected royal 'blow ins' to behave in a certain way and were hidebound and old fashioned in their outlook and utterly uncompromising.

Just as it frustrates some on the periphery of the royal circle that Harry remains so emotionally attached to Chelsy,so does Andrew's loyalty to his ex-Duchess. It really should be apparent to all as to 'why'. Personally, if Harry does indeed eventually persuade Chelsy to marry him, I look forward to those interfering sticklers being put quite in their place by an intelligent, well-educated and fully independent young woman. She won't be so easily bounced or intimidated.

As I've said before, attacking Sarah (in the public interest - what rubbish!) is merely a backhanded way to humiliate Andrew. International non-British business interests do not like the immense prestige and standing which he has amongst the oil-rich nations and their rulers. It is interesting to note that Andrew's expenses in his duties (he receives no salary) are offset by the economic advantages and investments which Britain receives in return and are worth more 10,000% of the cost.
 
It is always so important to "consider the source." It was The Sunday Times, also owned by Murdoch, which serialized DIANA: HER TRUE STORY and really publicized and gave momentum to The War of the Waleses in 1992. That lead to the biggest Royal scandal since 1936, effectively ending a marriage and indirectly leading to the death of the mother of two young boys. I think that without Murdoch's paper taking the lead, Morton's book might not have sold quite so well. It was an opportunity to rub the monarchy's face in the dirt.:ermm:


The most apposite comment was, to my mind, 'the gutter Murdoch press'. The proprietor of this world-wide empire is an avowed republican and has been anti-royal all of his life. There is nothing which his more scurrilous press won't print if it attacks the royal family, no matter how obliquely.
 
Thanks for the article!
It appears to be a sensible journalistic piece written about Sarah, Duchess of York. Mr. Fraser is absolutely correct to observe that "the scarecrows" in the British royal family deflect attention from misdeeds of sainted members. The most surprising part is that the authour somewhat acknowledged an unfair treatment Princess Michael got from the mass media.
 
Last edited:
Glad she is apparently in fine form, but still think it best if she fades into a quiet life away from the public eye and especially that she stops talking to the press about her ex-husband, their relationship and their children.
With Sarah it seems one is always waiting for the other shoe to drop....what will she say next, what will she do next.
A quiet life in the country would probably be best for her and all concerned.
 
Glad she is apparently in fine form, but still think it best if she fades into a quiet life away from the public eye and especially that she stops talking to the press about her ex-husband, their relationship and their children.
With Sarah it seems one is always waiting for the other shoe to drop....what will she say next, what will she do next.
A quiet life in the country would probably be best for her and all concerned.

But that raises the issue as to what is she to do for money to live on and to even acquire the house in which to live.
 
But that raises the issue as to what is she to do for money to live on and to even acquire the house in which to live.

I guess we could found a charity between us with that aim and ask all people who are annoyed with her to contribute. Thus we could check how many people are really, seriously that angered by her....:whistling:

I for one would give 10 EUR in case she would really retire from public life when she gets enough money.....
 
Those who are 'annoyed' with the Duchess hold opinions predicated on the campaign of one section of the press, alone.

Missing from these low-brow articles is any acknowledgement of Sarah's long-term and continuing international charitable good works, for which she's received quite a few awards.

Why should she retire? She's doing some valuable work in the world for which she deserves great credit, and in those circles which matter, gets it.

She is not beyond criticism of course, but it should be tempered with fairness and actual knowledge and insight.
 
Missing from these low-brow articles is any acknowledgement of Sarah's long-term and continuing international charitable good works, for which she's received quite a few awards.

Okay, here goes...is it absolutely certain that Sarah Ferguson gets no remuneration for charity work?

No stipend, no funding, no expenses?

Because even for non-profits, considerable sums are ear-marked for "administration."
And I seem to remember criticism that one of her charities, at least, got a very small percentage of the funds raised.


(Before everyone jumps on me, this is a question, and not an attack!) :eek:
 
Okay, here goes...is it absolutely certain that Sarah Ferguson gets no remuneration for charity work?

No stipend, no funding, no expenses?

Because even for non-profits, considerable sums are ear-marked for "administration."
And I seem to remember criticism that one of her charities, at least, got a very small percentage of the funds raised.


(Before everyone jumps on me, this is a question, and not an attack!) :eek:

It would depend on what her role was within the charity. As a patron she would get no remuneration. If she has an administrative role than she would get paid. All the charities I have seen her name linked to have her listed as a Patron and thus receiving no payment for that role - the opposite in fact as Patrons are expected to assist the charity by giving money as well as raising it. Now how does she raise money for her charities - mainly through giving speeches etc for which she is paid but for that to work she must still be a public figure. I mean who would pay 200 pounds to here Joe Blow speak about poor children? However many people would pay 200 pounds to here Sarah, Duchess of York speak about those same children. After the expenses of the evening Sarah would get some money and the rest would go to the charity.
 
She has to earn a living somehow.
 
She has to earn a living somehow.

Depends on what kind of style she wants to live. If she lived quietly in the countryside, her divorce settlement should be enough with the odd earnings from books and other "quiet" occupations. Okay, that's not her style obviously, but thinking of the lots and lots of people who lost out money to her, she should really think about changing her lifestyle, at least for a time.
She could even live quietly in London with a little bit of help from others but she should really stop to be so flamboyant and "rich" in her way to live. That's pure scorn, she gives others the feeling she is sneering on them and even taunting them.
 
She has two daughters who are TRH. Is Sarah to live in a cottage with the two princesses and their attendants? Her divorce settlement was not that generous and it's been 15 years.
 
I agree. Her flamboyance isn't helping her image. How does she want to be seen? As a responsible, sensible woman who tries to help others and is a good mother to her daughters? Or as a woman who lives the high life without paying her bills in full? I don't think that people expect her to show up at public events in a nun's habit, but I do think that showing up at high-profile restaurants and so on shows a lack of common sense. Sarah has a lot of gifts that she could share with the world--her speaking talent, her writing abilities, the things she's discovered in world travels and during her time as a Royal Highness--but the impression that people have is of a good-time girl who doesn't care about the people she's let down.


She could even live quietly in London with a little bit of help from others but she should really stop to be so flamboyant and "rich" in her way to live.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom