Brilliantly said, as always! But also maybe a waste of energy and words. As anyone ever considered that Stephanie just simply is not an interesting person? As far as I am concerned, I have never read anything coming from her mouth that was in the least interesting, strikingly intelligent or refreshing. She neither is very good looking, rather the contrary. Remains only the fact that she is a 'princess' of Monaca. Point.
Thanks, pruts, for the double-edged compliment, as always. Please, let me be the judge of how I expand my energy is a waste or not, as I would never presume to judge on how you expand yours. I am sure my style shows I did not labour for hours on how to express my point. I tend to be long-winded, that's a fault of mine. As for a waste of words, you are reading this thread and responding to it, right, so it can't be a complete waste, unless you only read and respond to belittle my efforts. Anyway, this thread is about Stephanie's current events and as such, any reaction can't be a waste. I appreciate TRF not censuring my response, as I come across a little harsh.
Vogue of course would never have published my response.
I disagree with you as "never having read anything coming from her mouth that was in the least interesting, strikingly intelligent or refreshing". I have enjoyed some of her interviews (actually less stilted and tightly controlled than her sister's) and she has shown surprising sensitivity, touching vulnerability, unexpected insights, and a hip, refreshing way of expressing herself that is all her own.
My beef, so to speak, is with magazines and their use of celebrities to sell a message by using misinformation, distorted, incomplete, or total black-out information to glamorize what at best can be considered controversial lifestyle choices. Say, for someone who's not aware of Princess Stephanie's sulfurous past, the reader may think s/he's discovered a real gem. Not to make a pun, but that reader will be unaware of the jam Stephanie put a lot of people in, who had to pick up the pieces and take over the responsibilities she eschewed at the time. I resent, as a reader, being presented with an image that has been drained of its substance, as it impairs any judgment, any informed opinion I want to form on what I read. When I read that Princess Stephanie presents herself as both a one-woman trailblazer and a victim of life's unfairness (implicit in the quotes, especially about her love life), my antennas go up and I think: "Please, don't give us the poor little rich girl act. You've been smart enough in the past to acknowledge and pay homage to all the privileges you've been handed on a silver platter, including how you messed up. Don't let a magazine turn you into a vapid poseuse who lives off the "enfant terrible" image that is unbecoming both to your age and position in life. Show how you've grown up, and in more ways than token appearances at fund-raisers. This issue is too much about a warmed-up image that was never that real in the first place, there isn't enough heart, not enough reflectiveness and appropriate regrets for youthful errors in judgment. Take control, turn the image around, forget the eighties, they weren't your best decade. And stop that "creativity" mantra, the "I am the real heiress to Princess Grace's unique talent and charm", it only highlights how poorly you have done in comparison. It is now, in the 2000's that you are doing an admirable job, and that's what your focus (as the image you want to project, rich with real substance) should be on."