Princess Margaret (1930-2002) part 1: to May 2007 - Page 9

Skydragon · #**161** 09-24-2006, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonk

Goodness! Isn't anything sacred? Who is selling it...I don't believe that was stated in the article.

You know....you can go back and forth talking about how great its is to be royal (fabulous clothes, jewels, vacations, etc.) but I wouldn't do it for the world. People are constantly trying to make money off them! It must be very hard to trust people.

Sadly, it must be the people in charge of her estate who are selling. What should be remembered though, is that they have picked one title out of a number of books being sold.

An old saying always springs to mind when I hear of things like this:-

The superior man understands what is right
The inferior man understands what will sell.

Lady Marmalade · #**162** 09-25-2006, 05:57 PM

Short of the wonderful job she and the Earl of Snowdon did raising their children, Princess Margaret was a waste of money on the Civil List.

She had the nerve to send Sarah Ferguson a letter describing her horror about Sarah's actions?? Look at the pot calling the kettle black!

Obviously all those years of boozing made her forget the damage she did in her day to her reputation and the monarchy.

**Elspeth** · #**163** 09-25-2006, 06:04 PM

Let's hope Viscount Linley doesn't come across some of his mother's toenail clippings somewhere, or they'll be going under the auctioneer's hammer next. Good grief.

Bella · #**164** 09-25-2006, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth

Let's hope Viscount Linley doesn't come across some of his mother's toenail clippings somewhere, or they'll be going under the auctioneer's hammer next. Good grief.

Ha! Sad but true. I can't imagine selling off my mother's personal belongings in the way Margaret's children have done. It just seems so . . . invasive of her privacy.

BeatrixFan · #**165** 09-26-2006, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Princess Margaret was a waste of money on the Civil List

Oh I disagree totally. Margaret never ever shirked her duties. She was not only one of the busiest members of the Royal Family but her loyalty to the Queen was unconditional. When she visited somewhere, she made sure that she met everyone and spoke to everyone. The marriage and subsequent divorce made headlines but I hardly think she damaged the Monarchy. Again, the press are to blame. "Drunk Maggie" made a better headline than, "Princess Margaret opens Great Ormond Street Heart Unit". Margaret never ever spoke to the press about her family. She never broke the "third wall" and she hated those who went on to do that. It was betrayal. The press focussed on Mustique, the drinking etc but remember, she was not only a party Princess of the 60s, she was a hard-worker and a good member of our Royal Family.

Skydragon · #**166** 09-26-2006, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade

Obviously all those years of boozing made her forget the damage she did in her day to her reputation and the monarchy.

I have to agree. People tend to forget all the angst she caused.

Lady Marmalade · #**167** 09-26-2006, 11:19 AM

Its not that I dislike her, but rather she should never have been going around trying to show how moral and respectable she was compared to Sarah's actions.

I agree Sam, she did her duties and worked hard at them, but the blinding truth she refused to face was the damage she caused as well.

This was a complex woman on so many levels.

On one hand I feel sad for her that she was not able to marry Peter. And then find out a couple of years ago she could have and retained her title, civil list payments, etc. She basically got royally screwed, no pun intended.

On the other hand, her spoiled, arrogant manner and her inability to recognize there are consequences for one's actions, made her look vain and ignorant to the real world.

BeatrixFan · #**168** 09-26-2006, 11:29 AM

What Margaret did and what Sarah did were two totally different things though Nicole. Sarah gave interviews and gave away personal info, she allowed herself to be made a fool of and generally, she behaved like a little girl in a sweet shop. Margaret didnt really shake things up, the press just jumped on Margaret being the trendsetter that she was. If she went to a party and danced with Peter Sellers, "Princess dances with commoner" was the headline. But in reality, she didn't do anything majorly wrong, except do things for the first time. They were not bad things, they were just new things. And they were acceptable. She divorced. Outrageous for the time but it didn't damage the monarchy. It may have damaged her reputation but her good work made up for that - or it would have done if the press had reported it.

Margaret was a Princess in every sense of the word. She knew her position, she knew what it entitled her to and she used it and I'm glad she did. To me, she not only about glamour, but she was also about duty. She was a loving daughter and sister and when her family life let her down, she threw herself into charity work. When the press stopped reporting her good work and her family started treating her poorly, she escaped to Mustique. I just feel so sorry for Margaret. I thought she was wonderful and I still miss seeing her. She wasn't spoilt - she was a Princess and she didn't allow anyone to forget it, just as the Queen doesn't allow anyone to forget she's the Queen.

So we'll agree to disagree on this one darling. She stood up for the Queen, for the family and she said what most people were thinking. As far as I'm concerned, Margaret had guts. And she'd kill me for calling her Margaret.

Lady Marmalade · #**169** 09-26-2006, 05:53 PM

Don't you mean ma'am darling? :-)

BeatrixFan · #**170** 09-26-2006, 06:10 PM

HRH preferred, "Your Royal Highness" to "Ma'am". "Ma'am" was used for just any high ranking lady. She was a Princess.

Lady Marmalade · #**171** 09-27-2006, 01:12 PM

Heh heh...Tony had to call her that when they were on an official engagement together, correct?

BeatrixFan · #**172** 09-27-2006, 02:11 PM

lol - I doubt she had much to do with Mr B. According to Colin Graves's new book, "The Queen Mum and I", Princess Margaret and The Queen Mother "adored Mrs Thatcher and thought Tony Blair was spineless and weak".

Lady Marmalade · #**173** 09-27-2006, 03:19 PM

Sorry sweetie..my bad....I meant the Earl of Snowdon...not Blair.

BeatrixFan · #**174** 09-27-2006, 03:21 PM

Oh I see. Well, at least we got a nice dig in for Mr B anyway. The Earl of Snowdon - well, I'm afraid I'm not at all keen on him. Very odd chap indeed.

**iceflower** · #**175** 10-17-2006, 03:50 AM

taken by Cecil Beaton. Margaret, one of the great beauties of her generation:

(Cecil Beaton/Majesty)

HRH Mims · #**176** 10-17-2006, 06:12 AM

Oh Iceflower I love your Margarets photos!

especially that 1st one where Margaret has those beautiful gala fowns

Btw, I'm thankful to everyone, who posted potrait with tiara ♥

Lakshmi · #**177** 10-17-2006, 06:33 AM

Iceflower, thanx for great pics of Margaret. She was a real beauty. And those dresses, oh those times.

Bella · #**178** 10-17-2006, 10:55 AM

These pictures of Pss Margaret are fabulous, Iceflower! I've never seen either of them. I LOVE the gown in the left picture. Do you know the occasion for the sitting? She was indeed quite beautiful and glamourous in her day. It's almost tragic how sad her life seemed to be behind the beauty and glamour, though. Thanks ~ as always ~ for the great photos!!!

**iceflower** · #**179** 10-19-2006, 03:33 AM

It's always a pleasure, mims111, Lakshmi and Bella

I do not know the occasion for that sitting, Bella, in the mag it only says that she was 19 then, so it has not been a special birthday as I had thought at first.. I found one more pic from that, hope you like it as well

:

(Cecil Beaton/Majesty)