[Unless otherwise noted, all the text on this site is written by Susan Brown, and copyrighted. All rights are reserved on all material, on all pages of this site. Usage by others, in terms of reprints, quotations, etc. must be credited to Susan Brown. ]

WILLS, AND PRINCESS DIANA'S EX-PRIVATE SECRETARY'S TELL-ALL BOOK by Susan Brown

On Friday, September 29, Prince William gave his first adult press conference. He thanked the press corps for their restraint, while he was attending Eton. Before he starts at St. Andrew's University in Scotland, he's taking his "gap" year off, to visit various countries. Next stop is Chile, in a remote part of Patagonia, to work with 110 other young volunteers on environment and community projects.
[ It seems that his previous plans, to enjoy his gap year, by playing polo in Argentina, and working with a theater company, just wasn't impressive enough. People had complained that it sounded too frivolous! ]
Wills had revealed that he'd already been on a survival course, with the British Army, in the jungles of Belize. [ Ah! Too bad he didn't decide upon the Australian outback! He might've thus given the "Survivor II" contestants a thrill! ]
William also made a point of criticizing the new book by Patrick Jephson: "Of course, Harry and I are quite upset about it--that our mother's trust has been betrayed, and even now she is still being exploited."
I think somebody should wise this kid up, fast. One of the reasons Jephson wrote the book, is because the salary and pension for Royal employees is so miserly. Talented people WILL work their hearts out for the Royals, because they're filled with awe and respect, and it is an honor. If the Royal neglects to treat that employee with enough consideration, or loses their respect, then watch out! It is like that with ANY employer/employee relationship that goes bad; but Royal dish is always welcome, and lucrative. It's hard to resist, especially because it is also of historical value. One who might balk at simply garnering a big payday in book sales might well write/tell all in the interest of historical perspective. After all, schoolchildren are taught about the Royals. The Monarch still has almost as much power as the American President ( able to start or end wars; able to sign or veto bills, etc. ). A book that explains, clarifies something about a Royal is valuable. And fortunately, freedom of speech IS allowed. Bad and mean as the press may be at times, we should worry if the day comes that opinion is able to be stifled, just because that person or their family has power! Such regimes are a hell to live in.
I will say that sometimes the Royals are irritating in their expectations that everyone who does for them should work for peanuts, and expect little or nothing in return. Charles and Diana were both irritating, so, when they decided to "freeze-out" her designers, the Emanuels, simply because they had the "audacity" to actually promote themselves and their business, after their success as her wedding gown designers! Big, damn, deal! Welcome to reality! ANY designer would! But Royal designers are supposed to be "discreet"? Why? Should they be like Samantha Shaw, Sophie Rhys-Jones' designer, whose design was copied and sold by knock-off artists? They also decided to punish some manufacturer for publicizing their expensive wedding gift of a new kitchen, by installing it in servants' quarters. They don't seem to understand that commerce works because manufacturers get endorsements, and people can promote their businesses. Or do they want to go back to the bad old days, of when Monarchs would start a war, in order to raid another's coffers to fill their own? Commerce and industry have freed us all from that.
I happen to love and respect the Royals, except when they act spoiled and bratty like this.
( Fact is, Prince Charles DOES seem to know this, while doing his own tours of factories; it's just when it comes home, that he reverts to this "Royal tribute" attitude. )
William, you want to allay future such revelations? Be sure to always treat your own employees right. That's always a good policy, no matter who you are, or what your business is.

And reguarding books about Diana: I'd rather see more books and discussion about her, than for her to disappear, as has been happening. Good or bad the books may be; but I find it far more offensive to close her in a box and forget her. Sometimes it seems that members of her own family would prefer that. It isn't all the fault of the Royals, that there hasn't been a memorial. The fussy Spencer family rejected a perfectly beautiful statue of Diana, that had been made by a woman, who'd hoped to install it in Kensington Gardens. The Spencers do not want any graven image of her, in fears that people will worship at it! They rejected yet another statue, and didn't like the fountain, either! Willam, I suspect, contrary to reports that he's 'standing up to the Windsors' and 'leading the way for a memorial,' in reality, would also prefer people to close the box, and put her away.
Well, people still want to pay their respects, and resent having no memorial.

And while we're on the subject of memorials, let's all pause for a horse-laugh at the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund, who stupidly sued the Franklin Mint, for making Diana dolls, plates, jewelry; accusing the Franklin Mint of keeping all proceeds for themselves! They're lucky the Mint didn't counter-sue for defamation of character! The Franklin Mint pledged to give DIRECTLY to Diana's favorite charities--as opposed to funneling it through the Memorial Fund, whose own take of the money is exorbitant; and the allocation of funds skimpy. And THEY call the Mint thieves! As it was, they were ordered to pay the Franklin Mint $2.3 million in court costs. Serves them right; but it doesn't serve the charities right, nor any of us who bought items approved by the greedy, stupid Fund, nor those who'd donated proceeds from their artistic or musical work. "Candle in the Wind," for instance, garnered $millions for the Fund, who threw it away on legal fees. ( Why didn't they settle with the Mint? ) The Elton John AIDS Foundation can boast of having one of the best ratios of funds-to-overhead--allocating 85-90% to the people it serves! [ rated the #3 best, according to Forbes ] I bet he and others feel ripped off and wasted.

Take a lesson, Diana Memorial Fund. They ARE appealing the decision--creating MORE legal fees! Suggestion: Fund, appeal directly to the Mint, and beg forgiveness, and release of obligation to pay, in the name of charity. Maybe The Franklin Mint will have the heart that you sorely lack. [ I will reserve further comment until I read the book, when I'll also review it. In the meantime, would someone be good enough to e-mail me the address and/or link to The Sunday Times of London? I want to read the serialization. Also, please send me address/link to The Sunday Telegraph, September 3, 2000, for Frances Shand Kydd's interview? Send to: QMitten@aol.com. Thank You. ]
COPYRIGHT ©2000 SUSAN BROWN
>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

FOLLOW-UP 10/8 by Susan Brown

Some of my readers have questioned why I criticize the Diana Memorial Fund so. I'll expand upon The Franklin Mint debacle:

Instead of wasting the incoming funds--contributed by Diana's loving public, in tribute to her-- they should've settled diplomatically with the Mint! They exaserbated the situation with their xenophobic, sneering attitude! They hated the vinyl versions of the doll, because they felt that it was "undignified" that the doll could be undressed--for wardrobe changes! ( Hello?! Jackie Kennedy's family isn't complaining about HER vinyl dress-up doll! And as a President's wife, she outranked Diana! ) And at $99, it wasn't a child's plaything, as sneering British papers reported. Both it, and the porcelain versions, at $199, were beautiful, quality dolls. I have bought 3 Franklin Mint dolls ( and saving up to buy the rest--unless someone wants to buy me one as a present! ), a delightful one from Iowa, and one Ashton Drake doll ( the face of which is MOST unattractive! The artist was an idiot! It's why I didn't buy more of THAT set! But Ashton Drake, a BRITISH company, didn't get castigated by the Fund. Of course, they'd worked with the Fund from day one. But their doll's face was UGLY! Why didn't the Fund complain about the indignity of THAT? ).

If you are a doll collector, you understand how it is, and do not take offense at a doll's possible nudity! The buying public respect and care for their expensive collector dolls--being more savvy than it was of years past, which has resulted in many early Barbies found naked--and often headless!--at garage sales! [ And I should point out that naked and headless as they are, an early, 1959 Barbie body can STILL sell for $150 or more! ]

[ I really doubt Diana would've complained about the Franklin Mint's doll, had she lived. Fact is, the Mint had planned for a doll collection well before she died, as they'd bought the white beaded "Elvis" gown at her auction in June 1997, with announced intentions of creating dolls, dishes, jewelry in tribute to her. She didn't complain THEN. Maybe she'd complain more about two of her dresses: one of which was denuded of it's pearl beads ( to remake into jewelry ); the other of which was cut up into souvenir sections ( sales of each went to the Fund, to approve for charities--or, as it turns out, to combat the Franklin Mint! ). Noted, it should be, that the Mint had applied for a patent bearing the prescient title "Diana, Forever a Princess" on August 8, 1997. It should also be noted that the Mint had produced Diana dolls and memorabilia during her lifetime, with no complaint. ]

I will tell you, I felt sick and offended at the Fund's spokeswoman's high-falutin voice and attitude, sneering at the American company's "undignified" doll! Too many Brits are encouraged to sneer so at us, and it's plenty foul. WE don't sneer so at THEM!
The lunatic Fund did nothing but insult the Mint, instead of rightfully crediting their dolls and memorabila with quality workmanship. Their complaint was that the Mint's promise to distribute the proceeds to charity "couldn't be proven, nor guaranteed," unless they, the Mighty Fund, oversaw it. In fact, they didn't hesitate to decry the Franklin Mint as "stealing from Diana's charities." Did they even check to be sure of their charge? It hadn't mattered to them--they wanted to be in control of all monies garnered by Diana's likeness. [ and what about checking THEM? Thankfully, the British public wised up early about the Fund's lunacy--though, sadly, cannot do anything but complain occasionally. Many, including founding Fund member, Paul Burrell--Diana's most trusted confidant ( who was ousted by the rest of the board, probably for making them look like pygmies, by comparison, in compassion and intelligence! ), complain. There is disappointment at his being asked to leave the Memorial Fund to which he had felt so committed.

"The Trustees decided it was the best thing at that time. They decided not to actively fund-raise in the future, and as I was the fund-raising manager, my job would be redundant.
"My take on it is that they wish to encourage corporate sponsorship in order to fund-raise rather than go to the general public. My feeling is that the fund is built on a foundation stone of emotion from the general public. It was formed by ordinary people in the street, old-age pensioners, scout troops sending in donations to create the fund. I believe that the Fund is answerable to those people who founded it."
His views certainly concur with many who have made donations, and the general feeling is that the Memorial Fund has become out of touch with public opinion.
"They should make their views known, but I'm afraid that's all they can do, because the fund is run by a chief executive and a board of trustees..." [ quoted from Royalty Magazine vol.16 #3, pg.38-44 ]
HOORAY, PAUL!
It's the Fund's turn to cry; for the public's lost confidence. Hopefully, this latest debacle will force a change of board members.
COPYRIGHT ©2000 SUSAN BROWN
>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
[ PLEASE SEE BELOW "ROYAL ARTICLES" LINK FOR MORE ARTICLES, PHOTOS, NEWS OF ANDREA, FREDDIE, WILLIAM, HARRY, HAAKON-MAGNUS ]

Rick and Darva, Celebrities, Soap Stars, Royals Gossip Message Board

FUN SITE--links to various sites for games, trivia, fansites, humour
BACK TO RICK AND DARVA GOSSIP/NEWS MAIN PAGE
SUSAN BROWN MAIN PAGE
SURVIVORS OF ABUSE, SEXUAL, BATTERY, ETC.
ROYALS LINKS SITE:-- links to various sites for articles, fansites, transcripts, interviews, speeches, news, etc.
Happy Birthday Wills! Messages for Wills
Brilliant message post musing on Prince William
Links Page for other articles On Rick and Darva
How YOU can be part of The Queen's Golden Jubilee!
Big Brother, Survivor, other Reality shows links!

CONTACT ME: RickandDarvaGossip@yahoo.com


Email: RickandDarvaGossip@yahoo.com

[ PRINCE WILLIAM CURSER ]