The row over the wrongs and rights of the Phillips selling their wedding to Hello! magazine continues. But one interesting factor out of all the negative press is that Autumn's name, and Autumns alone is mentioned in connection with 'blame.'
As soon as the wedding had happened, and the discovery that selling out was not the best option Buckingham Palace Press Officers were already on the defensive implying that it was Autumn who was to blame. But surely Peter must of also agreed the sale, he appeared in the pictures too, so surely he should take the blame, or at least, his share of it.
Going back to 1990, when the Duke and Duchess of York invited Hello! into their new home at
Sunninghill ( it was done to fund the completion of the house which went way over budget) it was the Duchess who was blamed for being 'vulgar, vulgar, vulgar' and cheapening the Royal family by selling off intimate moments to a run of the mill society magazine. But Prince Andrew had agreed to it also and himself appeared in many of the pictures.
The notion of laying the blame of the 'non royal' of the couple is unfair
particularly when the decision is a joint one which benefits both members of the couple.
Since her death, I've noticed a change in the tide of public opinion opinion of Diana. In the immediate years after her death she was elevated to nearly saintly
status, but nowadays authors and scholars are happy to lay the blame of the failed marriage, not wholly at Diana's doorstep, but more so then they would of fifteen years ago.
It almost appears that to Royal
advisers and press officers, royalty can do no wrong. They cannot make a bad decision, they cannot take blame for any decisions that were made and went wrong. They are totally and utterly blameless.
So how must that feel for the woman being blamed? Autumn must be shattered by all of the negative press and I'm sure it's marred her honeymoon. But it must cut all the deeper when she reads that people who advise her husbands family are putting responsibility for the entire furore
squarely on her shoulders. If Peter is the man he seems to be he should publicly step up and take half the blame and insist it was not all his new wife's fault. It was a dreadful decision which I'm sure will hang over Autumns AND Peter's head for many years to come. It has taken what was a private event and ruined it. And as reported yesterday has put some of Peter's close relationship with his Wales cousins under considerable strain.
If Peter and Autumn could of looked into the future and saw the fuss made over the Hello! deal I'm sure they would of settled for a less lavish wedding. Or maybe, to avoid this kind of thing it may persuade HM to open up her purse and pay, or at least contribute, to the weddings of her immediate grandchildren.
In 1987, while touring Canada Sarah and Andrew, the then Duke and Duchess of York celebrated their first wedding
anniversary at a banquet. The Duke, who highly rates his own sense of humour (while seemingly lacking one!) made
several heavy handed jokes about his fairly new wife during a speech. Of course this was laughed off as a comedic moment. When it was his
wives turn she too joked with a member of the audience, saying she'd 'see him later' after he wolf whistled her. This was considered to be vulgar and out of place.
It does seem to be one rule for the royal and one rule for the commoner.
It will be interesting to see if Peter does defend his wife
publicly. He should to because when I brought my copy of Hello! it wasn't solely the bride I saw in the photographs.
