Does blogging about Catherine make me a hypocrite?

Of all of the posts I've written What's the deal with Princess Angela? has provoked the most comment, both positive and negative. So it was really no surprise to receive another comment about that article. Which is as follows:

I have read your posts on Princess Angela and why you think that media coverage for her would be unwarranted. Now I have a real question about your comment, "Princess Angela may be the only black princess in a reigning European dynasty. She may be accomplished in many areas of her life. But I reiterate, marrying into the royal family is not an accomplishment. That alone does not make her newsworthy. I'd like to know what else she has done other than marry a Prince? Is that the way she should be defined? By who she's married to?" Okay fair enough, but with that said, Angela has started her own business, studied fashion, and worked in the fashion industry. So she has earned her keep in life. On the other hand keeping in mind your very own words, you're always posting on Kate Middleton, a woman who hasn't accomplished anything but married a royal herself. She hasn't had a career, or started her own business. She only worked part-time with her family's business to keep with William's schedule... Kate has done nothing but wait for a title and yet you cover her continuously because of who she married. Then you went on to say that Angela hasn't earned any attention or spotlight. I'm not arguing that she needs more media attention. The only thing I'm saying is that once I read that comment of yours I though you were being a bit hypocritical since you're always talking about Kate.

Upon reading this my first instinct was to vigorously defend myself. But I like to think I've evolved as a person enough to see these things more objectively. Because of that I started to wonder, could this person be right?

That article was written in 2008. Two years before Catherine Middleton became engaged to Prince William. Therefore, at the time, I could not have seen the parallel between Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge and Princess Angela of Liechtenstein. But I do agree that there are some similarities, especially in terms of being famous for who they married and little else. But I don't really feel that this is the full issue for the person who made the comment. It can't be just about both being famous for who they've married, can it? I'm waging a guess that it isn't.  So I'll ignore the 500 pound purple gorilla and focus on my alleged hypocrisy.

Looking at Angela on the surface, with her accomplishments having 'started her own business, studied fashion, and worked in the fashion industry' make her no different from any one else who has done so as well. She's not the first woman to do so and she won't be the last.

Now in comparison, Catherine has not had the same successful career. In fact it was one of the things people criticized her for. Waiting around for her prince to propose. In that respect she's no different from a lot of other twenty-something young women trying to find their way in the world. So now looking at both women from that perspective, neither one of them are terribly remarkable.

But yet I write more about one and little about the other. In fact, in my article it seems I'm diminishing one woman for the same thing that people laud the other for. It really isn't fair, now is it? In that respect yes that would be hypocritical.  Especially if that was the original point I had been trying to make.  In which case I would be totally disappointed in myself for not noticing it sooner. 

However in this instance I feel that my comments on Princess Angela have been taken out of context. I never said there was anything wrong with her marrying well. I said that shouldn't be the only thing she is defined by. That comment was related to people complaining about the lack of coverage about her. My point is that marrying well, in and of itself, does not sustain peoples interest for the media to cover them continuously. There needs to be something more than that for people to discuss her. Helpful examples: A DUI, a reality show, a torrid affair, or running off with someone from the circus. Those types of things. Because in the 21 years since their marriage, surely the novelty of a black woman marrying a white prince from a minor royal house has worn off, hasn't it?

Alternatively, a young woman marrying a prince from the highest profile royal family in the world is something people will discuss and blog about. And because of who she's married and the dysfunctional family she's married into, she's not likely to fade away. She too has married well. Despite have these similarities, you can't compare them at all. One is a future Queen and one isn't. If this person thinks that isn't a factor in why I write about Catherine more, well then she is kidding herself. It has everything to do with this and it's not hypocritical at all. It's realistic.

© Marilyn Braun 2011

Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.