Sarah's Interviews and Television Appearances

[Midwestern Mom]

Originally Posted by kakieanne

Thanks for the correction. That makes sense. Sarah probably wanted to make the trek to gain people's admiration...and I do admire her for that. I certainly couldn't do it.

I don't know...I know what she said the reason was but only Sarah knows what all the motivating factors were.

I think people are a little too hard on her myself. None of us here are perfect parents, perfect in our finances or perfect in our relationships (with kids or spouses)...I can't imagine having some of my mistakes put into print for millions of people to read about. Few people can stand that sort of scrutiny.

MM

[Irish Eyes]

Originally Posted by AristoCat

I do'nt know about you, but I would certainly buy it. I bet Sarah's personal life is quite colorful and as an ex-employee, chances are the writer has more than earned it. At least the ex-employee ended up doing something productive in their spare time while sitting in jail.

I'm not sure if you recall her story AristoCat, her name is Jane Andrews and she was convicted of manslaughter (it was her boyfriend that died).
I have to admit I would feel sorry for the man's family if she got publicity after coming out of prison. I can imagine life is hard for them without having to see her on TV etc. Just my thoughts.

[PrincessKaimi]

I couldn't help but think that Sarah's arctic trek was a metaphoric stand in for her other problems. Each step she took needed to be thought about, and often, contained hidden risks. She had to push through the uncomfortable parts and couldn't buy her way out of the situation.

She needs to learn to think before she steps and realize that her ordinary circumstances contain many hidden pitfalls.

[AristoCat]

I think people are a little too hard on her myself. None of us here are perfect parents, perfect in our finances or perfect in our relationships (with kids or spouses)...I can't imagine having some of my mistakes put into print for millions of people to read about. Few people can stand that sort of scrutiny

There are mistakes, but then there are moments of such crass stupidity that it borders on unforgivable. She put herself in this situation, always after getting herself out of it. She brought all of this on herself and she is the reason she is where she is now. What she did was borderline illegal and what she's done to her daughters is unforgivable. No excuses. Fergie is half a century years old, no small thing and she does not have the same excuses or same amount of time in her life to fix them up and start over. She brought a hueg amount of success into her life, and then squandered it. She crossed the line with that scandal and she has crossed it personally with her daughters being brought into this. This isn't a mistake, this is self destruction.

[Tyger]

Originally Posted by AristoCat

I personally think that Oprah wants to sink her claws into the princesses and gain a more substantial royal connection through them.

Well, I'm only commenting on this because its going to the character of someone I do not know personally, of course, but of whom I know a lot about - and have observed over a long stretch of years. This is not the only comment that seems to impugn Oprah's intentions and motives so I am commenting in general. I could see that perhaps from people's perspective who are avid royalty fans that this 'spin' would make sense - but its not the way most people see royalty, even British royalty. I post on TRF because I have an interest but for most people - in particular all my friends and all my work colleagues - royalty of any kind does not hit their radar.

I feel like I need to defend Oprah (and am glad to do it), though the scope of her life's work to date speaks for itself. This is a woman of considerable talent, integrity and intelligence - who is true to herself - a role model for every young woman, but especially for young girls of color. Most of her largesse takes place quietly. Her Oprah Winfrey Network (OWN) is a huge gamble - what hutzpah! Its only just mounted - and I notice she has done a remarkable documentary series on 'Lifers' in prison tending the sick and dying in the prison hospital. Oprah is attempting something remarkable - at a time when the 'Big Networks' - ABC, NBC, and CBS - no longer have investigative jounalism worth its name in their news departments and no longer mount documentaries. Oprah is stepping up to fill a void. Massive undertaking. So she'll have some fluff. She'll take some risks. She'll make some mistakes - but I hope she succeeds. I don't wish her failure at all.

Like her or not - she is a straight shooter - an African-American woman who has faced Jim Crow and vicious prejudice in her past - and unfortunately, continues to face it even at the pinnacle of her success. She has arrived on the other side of all that hate as a woman of compassion and joy - who among us could triumph like that under her conditions?

Its why Oprah truly resonated to Sarah - she even said it. Oprah truly does see Sarah's dilemma. I for sure see Sarah's dilemma - still in love with a man, who still 'surrounds' one? Is he letting her go? Its not about 'kicking her out' - no one deserves that, certainly not the mother of one's children - but I do think a family intervention would be beneficial. Sarah's in a tough place. Cannot every woman relate to her dilemma? I sure can. I agree with Oprah - what Oprah must have seen - that if Sarah could relax, could really come to an inner peace - which requires truth - could really mature - she has it in her - because she seems to want it so - to be a lively and engaging public personality, maybe in an interview show. I'd watch - at least initially. I don't think a docu-series is her format.

Back to Oprah - Oprah is her own 'royalty'. Like a Scorcese or Spielberg or Streisand (to use recognizeable names). Oprah does not have to go in search of connections - they seek her out. She has substantial friendships around the world and commands considerable respect as well as wields considerable power - wealth does that. She does not need to be 'connected' to the British royal family.

P.S. I am always puzzled at the free pass Diana seems to always have gotten with her use of her children to promote her public image (and her 'leaning' on her children, too, particularly William) - while Sarah is being faulted to the nth degree. These two women's strartlingly similar stories have begun to fascinate me.

[sirhon11234]

Originally Posted by AristoCat

All kids love their parents, they love them because they at first unquestioningly trust them and the hardest thing to find out and realize (and then accept) is that your own parents don't have your best interests at heart and have groomed you to be used. The reality is too horrible to face and they are likely trying to figure out themselves, much less Sarah.

Sadly not all do... I thinks its great that Eugenie and Beatrice always stand by their mother. They are very loyal to her, actually to both of their parents. I really do hope Fergie can rise above this. She's too old for this drama.

[Duke of Marmalade]

Sarah Ferguson: New TV series on Oprah Winfrey channel is embarrasingly emotional | Mail Online
This woman will continue to finding new lows, I have no doubt.

[Mermaid1962]

Well said, AristoCat. The situations that she gets herself into are truly destructive for all closely involved.

Originally Posted by AristoCat

This isn't a mistake, this is self destruction.

[AristoCat]

P.S. I am always puzzled at the free pass Diana seems to always get with her use of her children to promote her public image - while Sarah is being faulted to the nth degree. These two women's strartlingly similar stories - has begun to fascinate me.

Sarah has had more chances. Diana was banned from making a living, so while she got more money, she had that to live on for the rest of her life. Sarah made more than Diana got as a marriage settlement and she blew through it. Sarah then made more, but blew through it. Diana was also nineteen when she married, a kid who ended up married before she really lived life and culd have had a career.

[Mermaid1962]

People have been critical of Diana's use of her boys, including people in these forums. I think a difference is that Diana didn't expose the children to the press when they were very upset; and there was that time while skiing when she told the press to go away because they were bothering her children. I do agree that Diana used the children to "get back at" Prince Charles by portraying herself as the better parent. However, what Sarah did is worse IMO; because she invited the cameras in on situations when her daughters were very upset. I think that most mothers would want the cameras turned off in a situation like that, but--at least from what I've heard about the program--Sarah did nothing to shield her upset girls from being in the program.

Originally Posted by Tyger

P.S. I am always puzzled at the free pass Diana seems to always have gotten with her use of her children to promote her public image (and her 'leaning' on her children, too, particularly William) - while Sarah is being faulted to the nth degree.

[Tyger]

Originally Posted by AristoCat

Sarah has had more chances. Diana was banned from making a living, so while she got more money, she had that to live on for the rest of her life. Sarah made more than Diana got as a marriage settlement and she blew through it. Sarah then made more, but blew through it. Diana was also nineteen when she married, a kid who ended up married before she really lived life and culd have had a career.

I edited my post to read: I am always puzzled at the free pass Diana seems to always have gotten with her use of her children to promote her public image (and her 'leaning' on her children, too, particularly William) - while Sarah is being faulted to the nth degree. These two women's strartlingly similar stories have begun to fascinate me.

In regards my points - your comments don't enlighten me - but then, this is a thread-nap. The question stands, though. One of my theories is that it is the difference between the swan and the ugly duckling. In our culture, the image of beauty forgives all sins. Were Sarah truly stunning - thin - and knew how to smile into the camera - 'skills' Diana had - I don't think we'd be seeing such a massive negative towards her. Beauty is forgiven.

[AristoCat]

Well, that was a huge part of it really. Diana was so attractive that no matter how loony she behaved, she managed to get away with it because she wore a perfect frock. I'm not saying it's right, but it's how it was. Diana was also younger when she married Charles, plus the love triangle created a huge groundswell of sympathy.

[Tyger]

Originally Posted by AristoCat

Well, that was a huge part of it really. Diana was so attractive that no matter how loony she behaved, she managed to get away with it because she wore a perfect frock. I'm not saying it's right, but it's how it was. Diana was also younger when she married Charles, plus the love triangle created a huge groundswell of sympathy.

But there we are, another similarity.

All evidence is - even from Diana's family members and friends - is that she had trouble with truth-telling (the three-some idea was an extraordinarily canny piece of 'spin' that has no back-up - I am aware she is believed - but I would counter that she is believed because of the image - the young doe-eyed beauty bruised and betrayed, etc.) - even as she approached her 40's.

Sarah is the same - regarding her side-stepping admissions of blame - that lack of honesty - that lying. However, there is one difference - Sarah is not malicious. She may be self-destructive - she may be immature - she may be exasperating - but she is good-hearted. She said that about herself and I think its an accurate self-assessment. She has never spoken badly about anyone in the BRF. Never. In the midst of everything, she always has maintained a decorous silence - yet no one credits this. Diana dragged the BRF into the mud - Sarah has never spoken in any way except respectfully of anyone in the BRF. Why the difference in tolerance and recognition? Beauty - the image sold the pretense. The ugly duckling cannot be forgiven. The 'fat one' cannot be recognized as perhaps having behaved nobly in certain ways?

In fact, I think that was why Oprah and Dr Phil et al were willing to work with Sarah. Had she been otherwise - had she shown malevolence - I don't think they would have had anything to do with her. I say this based on what I know of the work of these individuals - and the caliber of people they associate themselves with. In 'Finding Sarah' she spoke about her own life - and that is okay - her life is hers to speak about - you may not like it, it may not interest you or me - but still, its her life. Never once was there a snippet or an anecdote or the smallest little bit of tittle-tattle about the BRF. In fact there were 'restrictions' - and we assume they were restrictions to protect her, but going by her past, she likely made sure the BRF were off-limits.

She made some mistakes with 'Finding Sarah'. I had an uncomfortable experience watching Beatrice's breakdown and watching Sarah continue - yes. As a mother I wouldn't have done that. Its a judgment call. However, this is an edited show. It may not have actually been quite as condensed as we ultimately saw it. The impression of what one sees and what actually took place in the RT moment can be very different. In fact, I suspect there was a time jump between two of the edits. Anyway, thus on such simple things do passions sometimes turn. People see what they see once its 'in the can'.

[Princess of Durham]

I guess my reaction to the above posts is: Diana made mistakes, Sarah has been totally outrageous and her behavior repetitive. Diana certainly had her moments but seemed to be coming out of all that whereas Sarah just keeps on keepin' on. I guess I see Diana's mistakes as really emotionally motivated and Sarah seems to be motivated by greed. Vulnerability, I think is more forgiven than greed.

That is not to deny the beauty aspect certainly.

[Duchess of Darwin]

Originally Posted by AristoCat

She's no mother, she just gave birth.

My thoughts entirely. A Mother, in the emotional sense, would never have let such despair on camera, and induced emotional reactions from her children. I'm probably going to get bashed for this, but purposely making Beatrice and Eugenie cry for the cameras is, IMHO, worse than the cash for access stunt. It was terrible of her to offer all those media outlets access to Andrew, but she couldn't make them accept it, and she didn't do it with popularity in mind (although it was hardly a commendable way for her to make money) She could, however, ensure that The Princesses' tears made the final cut, and she did, through sheer force in Beatrice's case, and seemingly false pretences in Eugenie's case. This really pushes the envolope.

[Kataryn]

Originally Posted by Tyger

The 'fat one' cannot be recognized as perhaps having behaved nobly in certain ways?

.

I doubt the posters in this particular thread have a problem with the fact that Sarah's not your average beauty. But I think a lot of us (as I have to include myself) have originally liked Sarah because she was in a way an "underdog" -not only compared to charismatic Diana but to the most dignified rest of the RF. She was seen as a vivid redhead with more temperament than common sense, who couldn't cope with living in the gilded cage, but a good person at heart.

For me, this image changed when I saw how she dealt with her daughters - and I mean that in both meanings of "deal".
I think on the one hand she sold them as her entry tickets to a world she didn't really belong to but wanted to and offering the company of British Royal princesses helped a lot. That the girls ended up in the company of drug users on yachts in the Mediterranean... what did this matter to a "mother" who had already taken her daughters on a love holiday with her lover while still married to their father?
OTOH I don't think she respected them as little individuals who have been put into her care to guide them to adulthood, but rather saw them as "her girls" - a possession to form and mould and manipulate into most loyal followers. I believe she knew exactly how hard it is to feel left alone by one's mother as had been her own fate and I wouldn't wonder if she used this knowledge to chain her daughters to her, so she still could use them as her ticket.

I personally believe (and please feel free to see it differently) that if it wasn't for the children's wish to keep hold of their mummy Sarah would have been forced to leave the Royal sphere completely. By refusing to buy a suitable home for the girls she forced herself into a closeness to Andrew who for their children's sake couldn't do anything but offereing to host her. And I think the RF accepted that because they had accepted as well that Diana still lived in KP. Plus Sarah was away so often on business, so when she stayed at Sunninghill or later at Royal Lodge, it was together with her daughters.

But that only worked as long as Sarah earned her own money and was not dependant on Andrew and the children were young enough to need their mother.
When that changed, IMHO Sarah pulled all the tricks to secure her position and the more desperate she got the more she manipulated the girls. Into making TV-docus with her (Turkey), into taking her out, into taking care of her in general. I'm not sure Andrew feels anything for her, maybe even doesn't like her for what she became, but first and foremost I believe that The Prince Andrew is an officer and a gentleman who won't let his daughters down. I really believe he loves his girls as much as Charles loves his sons and I think this is the point why Andrew gets his back-up from his family: because they love him and see how genuine is his love for Eugenie and Beatrice. I doubt Andrew could have managed to help Sarah clear her debts without the support of the queen and Charles - his staff after all works not only for him, but is employed by the Royal Household, so I guess the bosses have a little say in what these personae actually do for Andrew. And I believe they are willing to save Sarah, but I doubt it is she who wants it because the circumstances won't be to her liking. But maybe they are already negociating and the things that happen are just steps to convince Sarah that she actually likes a kind of quiet, discreet life? For she is ruined beyond redemption but is still very far away IMHO from realising that.

[Meadow]

Sarah has used her girls for years for photo opportunities. Diana you could see was showing the boys the way for their future roles. Sarah did it to get the attention have a look on youtube there are several videos of Sarah with the girls doing some sort of work for one of her own charities most of which no longer associate with her or her own that has collapsed with dark clouds over expenses etc. You can't compere Diana with Sarah because we don't know what might have happened with Diana she passed away when William was 14 and Harry only 12. They are both lovely young men and do there job well and both seem fine with their lives. Sarah also dragged the RF through the mud with her affairs, topless pictures, debt, and general over the top behaviour. I think one got more understanding because she was so young and had a husband who clearly was in love with someone else. Sarah is the one who cheated and stuffed everything up. Most of the RF didn't like her in the end so I'm not so sure how good hearted she is people with good hearts don't stiff their staff for thousands of pounds and do what she has done with the girls. It also bothers me when people have to tell you their good points if they are real others will see them and say it. Sarah has had too many chances and thrown them all away she is greedy and always has been and now I think she really has gone too far. If this series get's shown in the UK she will get even more of the press she claims to hate so much. It is easy to stop don't do stupid things! Sarah continues to fumble her way through life and shows no desire to stop. Oprah is a businesswoman and with Will and Kate's wedding having a link to the RF was a great idea at the time. She may feel something towards Sarah but I doubt it is a great friendship or else why make the snow trek comment? Oprah wanted everyone to know it was Sarah's idea. There is no way she is going to be allowed back into the family she needs to deal with it, live within her own means and let her daughters live their own lives without having to raise and financially support their mother.

[NotAPretender]

Originally Posted by Tyger

The question stands, though. One of my theories is that it is the difference between the swan and the ugly duckling. In our culture, the image of beauty forgives all sins. Were Sarah truly stunning - thin - and knew how to smile into the camera - 'skills' Diana had - I don't think we'd be seeing such a massive negative towards her. Beauty is forgiven.

Honestly? I always thought Sarah was far more physically attractive than Diana, even when she was chubby. Diana was lovely yet seemed airbrushed at all times. Sarah, especially in her first year of marriage to Andrew, simply radiated love and happiness, a joy in living life.

I dare say you would find many who would feel the same as I do, just as you would find many who would say Diana wiped the floor with Sarah on the issue of beauty. So I'm not going to buy into the "beauty versus beast" theory.

Originally Posted by Tyger

However, there is one difference - Sarah is not malicious. She may be self-destructive - she may be immature - she may be exasperating - but she is good-hearted.

She is highly, highly manipulative, and her many lies have all been to advance her own agenda. That's not being good-hearted. Not by a long shot. And the fact that she tiresomely parrots the self-expressed lie that she is "good-hearted" as an excuse for anything that she does, shows the malevolence behind the manipulation. She knows she is doing wrong. But she doesn't care.

Originally Posted by Tyger

However, this is an edited show. It may not have actually been quite as condensed as we ultimately saw it. The impression of what one sees and what actually took place in the RT moment can be very different. In fact, I suspect there was a time jump between two of the edits. Anyway, thus on such simple things do passions sometimes turn. People see what they see once its 'in the can'.

Ah, the "it's the edit whot done it!" scenarios. For it to be in the edit, it has to have been said and done. So I really dismiss this idea that the edit is responsible for this. That's like Sarah claiming that there was no suitcase of cash in the hotel suite during Cash for Access. Yes there was - she walked out with it!

I don't wish to threadjack beyond this.

[sirhon11234]

Originally Posted by Meadow

Sarah has used her girls for years for photo opportunities. Diana you could see was showing the boys the way for their future roles. Sarah did it to get the attention have a look on youtube there are several videos of Sarah with the girls doing some sort of work for one of her own charities most of which no longer associate with her or her own that has collapsed with dark clouds over expenses etc. You can't compere Diana with Sarah because we don't know what might have happened with Diana she passed away when William was 14 and Harry only 12. They are both lovely young men and do there job well and both seem fine with their lives. Sarah also dragged the RF through the mud with her affairs, topless pictures, debt, and general over the top behaviour. I think one got more understanding because she was so young and had a husband who clearly was in love with someone else. Sarah is the one who cheated and stuffed everything up. Most of the RF didn't like her in the end so I'm not so sure how good hearted she is people with good hearts don't stiff their staff for thousands of pounds and do what she has done with the girls. It also bothers me when people have to tell you their good points if they are real others will see them and say it. Sarah has had too many chances and thrown them all away she is greedy and always has been and now I think she really has gone too far. If this series get's shown in the UK she will get even more of the press she claims to hate so much. It is easy to stop don't do stupid things! Sarah continues to fumble her way through life and shows no desire to stop. Oprah is a businesswoman and with Will and Kate's wedding having a link to the RF was a great idea at the time. She may feel something towards Sarah but I doubt it is a great friendship or else why make the snow trek comment? Oprah wanted everyone to know it was Sarah's idea. There is no way she is going to be allowed back into the family she needs to deal with it, live within her own means and let her daughters live their own lives without having to raise and financially support their mother.

I agree with everything you've said. I've always found Sarah far luckier than Diana. She had a marriage that wasn't volatile, a husband who was in love with her, and she blew it away. She's had 15 years after her divorce to revitalize her image and mend old relationships, unlike Diana who had 1 year; and Sarah still managed to blow it up. It is hard to sympathize with Sarah at times when she's making mistakes fueled with greed. I still can't believe she allowed her daughters to be apart of her show. I think its futile to compare Sarah with Diana, their lives were similar and also different.
Anyway, getting back on topic of Sarah's interviews and Television Appearances which have nothing to do with the Princess.

[Zonk]

Yes, this thread is NOT about Diana...let's get back on topic with Sarah's Interviews and Television Appearances.