Sarah's Interviews and Television Appearances

[Osipi]

Osipi, I have a tremendous respect for what you always say, but sometimes I wonder only if Sarah is first and foremost looking for a way to remain in the public eye, rather than specifically take on charitable causes for the sake of doing good. Indeed, in the final sentence of your post, you do seem to be entertaining just such a possibility yourself.

I don't just entertain the possibility, I'm beginning to see it emerge as an actual reality. As you pointed out with the alleged implication in a book of Sarah using her charity contacts in Ireland to her own advantage, with the latest appearance supposedly to draw attention to human trafficking, she is using such appearances not only to most likely receive financial recompense as a public speaker but also to keep herself in the public mainstream. I believe this is what is called a publicity stunt.

What we really need to do is watch and see if a pattern emerges with the aftermath of any appearances Sarah makes. With the human trafficking "stunt", it put her more in the forefront to be a interview once again. The fact that the cause was not even addressed from what I understand from what folks have said about her appearance with Rosie blatantly screams that it was a means to stroke her own ego and present to the public just how "needed" Sarah is for these causes.

Another factor goes right along with her maintaining and reminding others of her ties to her daughters, Andrew and the BRF. Is Sarah using charitable events and hoping the public will see them in the same light as, for example, the Princess Royal supporting and speaking for Save the Children? Is Sarah 25 years down the line creating her own brand of "royal engagements" which in turn would/could in her eyes present to the public and the BRF how much of an asset she could be? This would very much be manipulation and I think the key factor to look for (and one I do find totally missing) is sincerity.

Its not rocket science to figure out the difference between honest sincerity and dedication to a cause and a publicity stunt. Like a marriage of 72 days that netted the bridal couple quite a bit of green dollars, the public became aware that they were taken for a ride and still are eating up the details.

 

[rmay286]

I just want to make a quick point that manipulation and sincerity are sometimes not as far apart as they seem. I'm not sure how to explain this, but...for Sarah, I don't think there is that much difference between wanting everyone to notice her, and wanting to do good. Every human being wants to be needed and to make a difference in life, however big or small. I think Sarah just has a slightly twisted perception of reality, in which she thinks unless the media is paying attention to what she does, she isn't doing anything worthwhile. A lot of us "ordinary people" know that even if we work hard, we might have to wait a while before we see results. And sometimes, even if we've done our work well, no one praises us for it. That's okay, because sometimes the sense of doing a job well is reward in itself.

But I don't think Sarah has that normal conception of reality. She wants immediate gratification and praise for her work, and she doesn't have the patience to wait for results. So, I'm sure that Sarah is concerned about human trafficking and wishes she could help end it...but she'd rather make a single speech about human trafficking and make sure everyone knew she made that speech, than persistently devote her energy to that cause over a long period of time.

Also, I don't think Sarah just uses Beatrice and Eugenie as meal tickets. They seem well-adjusted and they seem to really love Sarah, so she must have done something right. I do think Sarah is confused about the boundaries between herself and her daughters...she seems to see them as extensions of herself, instead of distinct individuals in their own right.

 

[Russophile]

So much for moving on. Sarah could off corrected Rosie but hey then why would she be interviewed? So she hasn't moved to the US yet she needs a job well now that is out there too. Notice Sarah never said when I was a Royal or yes a lot was expected of me and I didn't do a good job. Rosie clearly has no idea about Sarah at all and if she is that gullable she must be a really bad interviewer. This really does show Sarah has no intentions of finding herself she wants everyone to still think she is a royal and treat her like one. You notice in England she never says stuff like this. One step forward, two steps back again.

Rosie is all for Rosie and having a good time. As is Sarah. Doesn't surprise me they snub their noses at the BRF for not inviting Sarah to the wedding. Neither has a CLUE how to act approriately in society so they form this sort of society to dish.

 

[sndral]

Just to clarify, Sarah did make one reference to learning in San Jose about children being sold into slavery in this country and said something along the lines of people not realizing that. It was towards the end when she was basicaly suggesting to Rosie that she could work for her as a roving ambassador/reporter and they could drive around the country with Blake and Eugenie in the back of the car fighting over DVDs(?) and either grant children's wishes or save children from slavery. Realize, I did take notes, but am not capable of taking dictation. It was a light, frilly, gossipy piece. The show itself started w/ Rosie telling jokes (a monologue) then some audience bits then 25 min.s or so w/ Sarah (2 or 3 commercials) the hot dog guys w/ Rosie and Sarah and then a dreadful female comediene (well, I'm sure she isn't dreadful personally - but her jokes were not very funny, IMO.)
Sarah was dressed in a black suit w/ skirt and white blouse, she looked more slender than she's looked in awhile. She was sporting a 'poof' (ala Snooki) w/ her hair down.
Ah, here's the link.
The Rosie Show: Sarah Ferguson - OWN TV

 

[Osipi]

Just to clarify, Sarah did make one reference to learning in San Jose about children being sold into slavery in this country and said something along the lines of people not realizing that. It was towards the end when she was basicaly suggesting to Rosie that she could work for her as a roving ambassador/reporter and they could drive around the country with Blake and Eugenie in the back of the car fighting over DVDs(?) and either grant children's wishes or save children from slavery. Realize, I did take notes, but am not capable of taking dictation. It was a light, frilly, gossipy piece.

Good gravy its the Thelma and Louise of charitable causes!!

 

[Mermaid1962]

I know that this sounds terribly, terribly cynical of me, but has anyone else noticed that the "cause" Sarah has aligned herself with (human trafficking) is a "hot" cause right now? There are fashions in "causes" just as there are in other things. At one time, many celebrities were involved with raising money for AIDS research. The selling and buying of pink items is a huge trend right now in raising money for breast cancer research. Raising money to find cures and fight injustice is an honourable thing, but not all diseases and/or causes are in the forefront all the time. Right now, human trafficking, sex slavery, and childhood sexual abuse are "front and center" in terms of what gets media attention. Is it just a little too convenient that Sarah got involved with the human trafficking cause just when she had lost her credibility and decided to spend more time in the USA?

 

[Princess of Durham]

No .... it's not terribly cynical of you.

 

[Diarist]

I agree - you are NOT cynical; I think the main problem that a lot of people have with Sarah is that when she was a member of the BRF she never seemed to be even remotely interested in charity - in any engagement she performed that had a charitable element, she often did little more than 'go through the motions'. She never seemed really 'hands on' or that interested - and indeed, the BRF had a battle to make her do engagments at all - she seemed quite lazy. Come to that, her family did not seem to have any connections with charities or charitable work, unlike a lot of British aristocratic and 'Society' families. Unlike Diana, Sarah also used to appear at Engagments with gloves on, prompting the Tatler to chide ' Sarah might be a touch common, but she does not like the commoners to touch' [a play on words as the word 'common' is another word for vulgar or uncouth].

Over the years, I have noticed that Sarah does associate herself with 'fashionable good causes' and is often being interviewed about these fashionable causes..... which is why it is not so hard to be cynical, I suppose. Someone must be setting up these interviews for her; I assume it is a publicist / PR company, who presumably will direct Sarah to 'go and focus on where the 'current attention' is.

I have now watched one of the Rosie clips [I had not heard of Rosie before this thread]. It's the part of the interview about the Hat. I am sorry, but it just does not ring true - Sarah talks about being on the phone at 8.30am 'to the make-up artist' about the hat, which Sarah says need the scissors taken to it. I cannot honestly believe that Sarah really had a conversation about taking the scissors to the hat. The hat was indeed farcical, but it was couture[ although it did its courture designer no credit] but you cannot take scissors to a couture hat - it is not like snipping off one feather too many from a cheap dollar store hat. Also, How did Sarah know what the hat looks like? It was too early for her to see the hat on tv - the princesses were getting ready. [Unless Sarah was using Skype in Thailand]. I'm sorry, but the whole of that part of the interview does NOT ring true.....

Just my thoughts, and not meant to offend,

Alex

 

[Kataryn]

I cannot honestly believe that Sarah really had a conversation about taking the scissors to the hat.

I don't believe that too. Didn't she say in the docu series that if she had know about the hat before the wedding (in the context: "If only I had been there"...) she would have made Beatrice change the hat? So these statements don't fit together.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Quite a contrast to the common royal practice of showing up to highlight a charity that often doesn't get attention!

Someone must be setting up these interviews for her; I assume it is a publicist / PR company, who presumably will direct Sarah to 'go and focus on where the 'current attention' is.

 

[ladongas]

One rule is "never wear shoes lighter than your skirt or your hose." I think that gleaming silver qualifies as lighter than black. The young Princess of Wales circa early '80s would wear evening slippers in gold or silver, but always with sheer hose and usually with a big skirt.

I think that if you look closely, you can see that the shoes are black; there appears to be a diamante buckle on them.

 

[Diarist]

Yes, Ladongas, you are quite right: I have subsequently seen a photograph of Sarah, and the shoes are indeed black, with a dimante buckle.

The trouble is that the buckle is absolutely enormous; not so much an elegant 'buckle as a finishing touch' but as a mightly, over the top 'accessory in its own right'.

As always, the devil is in the detail. Had Sarah [to coin a phrase from her recent interview] 'taken the scissors to the buckle'. the shoe, and hence the outfit, would have looked a lot more elegant. Also, I think that if you show 'that much flesh on top', you shouldn't really reveal all that leg with a side slit at the same time.

Just my thoughts,

Alex

 

[Lord_Royal]

I didn't find Sarah's appearance on The Rosie Show bad at all. It was all light, sunny, funny chit chat. Absolutely nothing serious.

Rosie O'Donnell knows nothing and cares nothing about royal protocol. Titles matter not to her, she's richer than most of the royals, what does she care. She's been friends with Sarah for at least 15 years and takes a "if you live in a glass house you shouldn't throw stones" approach to the Royal Family's stance on Sarah, she'll always take her side.

I do, however, think Sarah should quietly relax from the US media circuit. She's veering dangerously close to irrelevance as the next generation of royals is gaining steam.

What I would love for her is if she could forge a career as a writer of light hearted mystery books (think the Agatha Raisin series), something harmless which would give her the attention she enjoys and a little bit of cash, spend her time in the UK and on vacations at the generosity of friends and take better care of herself physically and emotionally, get some of her polo set glamour back. Change tracts Sarah, it's never to late to be who you might have been.

 

[MARG]

I can't actually find a reason anyone would bother to invite her onto a show to interview her. What is she going to talk about that is not vapid, thoughtless or uninformed? Even when she speaks of "her charities" she is not exactly brimming with information.

Sarah is already irrelevant. Harsh, I know but she just hasn't accepted it yet and doesn't understand that she is invited to be interviewed for the same reason as Paris Hilton or Kim Kardashian. They are famous for being famous. They have done nothing of note, not in business and not in charity, they just exist in an endless narcissistic bubble. I am surprised an interviewer hasn't asked her if she thinks she is past her "use by" date as they did Paris Hilton.

Sarah really does need to "get a life". A real one, not one that consists of endless rounds of interviews about nothing and attending an equally endless number of charity galas. In both cases people are more interested in what she wore and how she wore it, than the reason she attended in the first place.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Agreed. I think that if she really wants to do something for charity, she should do something besides going to glamorous events. If she were seen to do something where she really "got her hands dirty" and kept with it for a long time, perhaps she would realize that she had more to offer the world than being an ex-royal and the mother of two princesses.

Sarah really does need to "get a life". A real one, not one that consists of endless rounds of interviews about nothing and attending an equally endless number of charity galas. In both cases people are more interested in what she wore and how she wore it, than the reason she attended in the first place.

 

[sliver_bic]

Agreed. I think that if she really wants to do something for charity, she should do something besides going to glamorous events. If she were seen to do something where she really "got her hands dirty" and kept with it for a long time, perhaps she would realize that she had more to offer the world than being an ex-royal and the mother of two princesses.

We've gone over this God knows how many times? She might always be this way. Even worse, she's always been this way. The person who is always aware of the publicity regardless of what kind of work they're doing, even when it's charity.

I'm afraid that Sarah is very likely to remain the pathetic hanger on. That's a very nasty way of putting it but there's really no other way to say it.

She knows that there are enough uniformed people in the world, enough journalists looking for a quick story, enough celebrities looking for a little "royal shine" that she'll always have an outlet for her little fantasy world.

She'll still get the invites to those nice parties, still get the freebies, still be treated like she's someone of note when she's interviewed. It won't be the big things like Trooping the Color or Ascot but it'll be enough. Junkies don't need a high quality supply, they just need fix.

Andrew won't put her in her place and the girls, well I'm not sure if it's idol worship or just strong conditioning but I don't think the girls will shun their mother for anything short of complete betrayal. God save their husbands and/or children from Fergie at her worst.

 

[Lord_Royal]

We've gone over this God knows how many times? She might always be this way. Even worse, she's always been this way. The person who is always aware of the publicity regardless of what kind of work they're doing, even when it's charity.

I'm afraid that Sarah is very likely to remain the pathetic hanger on. That's a very nasty way of putting it but there's really no other way to say it.

She knows that there are enough uniformed people in the world, enough journalists looking for a quick story, enough celebrities looking for a little "royal shine" that she'll always have an outlet for her little fantasy world.

She'll still get the invites to those nice parties, still get the freebies, still be treated like she's someone of note when she's interviewed. It won't be the big things like Trooping the Color or Ascot but it'll be enough. Junkies don't need a high quality supply, they just need fix.

Andrew won't put her in her place and the girls, well I'm not sure if it's idol worship or just strong conditioning but I don't think the girls will shun their mother for anything short of complete betrayal. God save their husbands and/or children from Fergie at her worst.

While that's certainly a fair and accurate assessment of Sarah, given how she's made a spectacular disaster of herself for 25 years, I do think the Cash For Access Scandal has changed the dynamic for the better in terms of Andrew, Eugenie and Beatrice. They now see what they're really dealing with, exactly how weak and pliable Sarah really is, how desperate she can be.

What many see as idol worship from her daughters and being a cuckold from Andrew I see as them managing her. And that's what Sarah's needed all along, managing. Had Carolyn Cotterell lived, had Andrew been more present, had The Queen not been preoccupied with Diana and Charles, had someone in the Royal Family taken her under their wing and managed her I dare say Fergie would have turned out rather differently. Alas, it was not to be.

And so Andrew and the girls manage their mother, warts and all. They're doing an admirable job. If she does the odd interview or splashy charity gala it does no harm, they're not getting near the throne, I feel they have resigned themselves to life as it is.

 

[sliver_bic]

I'm not totally on board with that theory but going with it, I see a big problem. Eventually a person can't simply be managed, not when she doesn't have some serious issues. She isn't an invalid, she's a 50 year old woman who refuses to let go of the past, managing her only retards the growth of the people around her.

How will it be when the girls try to move on? Will she follow along, using their new families to stay in the spotlight? Will she throw a tantrum when she's not the center of attention? Or is Andrew destined to keep pressing the "reset" button on that red headed time bomb for the rest of his life? Managing her means that someone has to sacrifice their time because she's unable to help herself. When is enough enough?

 

[AristoCat]

When is enough enough?

I have to wonder about that myself. I think that Fergie has to be let go of and allowed to self destruct, if that is where she is headed. At hte moment the princesses should be surrounded by the best support system and given all the love and understanding that they can get if Fergie ends up destroying herself.

What many see as idol worship from her daughters and being a cuckold from Andrew I see as them managing her. And that's what Sarah's needed all along, managing. Had Carolyn Cotterell lived, had Andrew been more present, had The Queen not been preoccupied with Diana and Charles, had someone in the Royal Family taken her under their wing and managed her I dare say Fergie would have turned out rather differently. Alas, it was not to be.

Fergie knew the 'score' from the get go and had been in Court circles all her sorry life. She had all the tools before to make something of herself and had more than enough during her marriage and more than enough after. I don't think that anyone could have saved her from herself, but instead ended up in the same place. Note how no man really showed an interest in marrying her, before Andrew or after Andrew, despite being connected lineally to the RF forever. Men knew who Fergie was and knew she would be trouble and successful men do not want chaos or have to 'manage' a woman as troubled and chaotic as she is.

Her interviews are probably going ot be more of the same and more scandals will continue until she ends up so disgraced and such a part of the past that she will no longer be even bothered with by the lowest tabloid. She's getting older, more celebrities are up and coming, and there is no way that she is going to be bothered with within the next ten years or so. Soon her daughters will move on, her ex-husband will move on, and she will probably fall through the cracks and end up old, alone, and rejected. She brought this on herself and she's fifty now, so not too much of a chance of turning things around. What is a network going to interview her about?