Once, I abandoned
myself bathing nude in in the open air in a pristine mountain stream. That was at
night and was in the forest out of bounds for Paparazzi even if I had the tag
of the prince or any such royalty. But thankfully I'm just a mere commoner and
that helped me enjoy the time with a mug of beer in the stillness of the
jungle, with the moon throwing her luminance through the canopy of the trees.
I had my friend B, for company. This was a few years ago.
But well if
I had frolicked in the stream with a consort or even with my wife in the
prefect dressing I chose that day, could I fret, fume and cry foul if a paparazzi
or a clandestine acquaintance chose to shoot my revelry and splash it to the outside
world. Can I be offended and cry hoarse, allege intrusion into my or her
privacy if my consort or wife were to be pictured topless or more in public? By
demonstrating the will to be free of inhibitions in public will certainly
invite scrutiny and publicity, especially if the subject is elite and not a
commoner.
And by that
yard stick why must the house of Windsor be agonised, offended and sue the
French publication “Close” for publishing the would be Queen bathing topless in
the open air pool? The comfort of a closed bath is to avoid peeping toms and to
enjoy privacy. When one chooses to revel in an act that is generally done away
from glares then one must be prepared for a quantum of publicity as well. Don’t
you think so? What has the argument based on privacy has to do here?
It is indeed
pathetic that some members of the Royalty are hounded by hungry paparazzi and
columnist. It reminds me of the fascinating romantic film “Roman Holidays”. How
Princess Ann (Audrey Hepburn) vanishes from the watchful eyes of her attendants
and the prying media to see Rome as a commoner and unnoticed.
But the hullabaloo
the British Prince William and his wife Princess Kate created is perhaps less
understandable. She was photographed bathing topless in an upscale French Vila.
Perhaps now with the swirling furor the British Royalty fanned by crying wolf
and suing the French magazine, more of the world have come to know and seen the
fascinating picture , which would have not deserved a second glance like the
many topless sunbathers in European beaches or elsewhere.
14 comments:
Yeah why are they raging? Not because Kate was topless in an upscale Villa but because the editor chose not to ignore the pics. He is fired.
Human psychology - you do something to grab attention and then when you get it; you cry foul!
Yea, even I wondered why.... and there is one photo of her before marriage where she walks the ramp in a very revealing dress...
Bathing in the middle of the jungle at night is courageous! Reminds me of my trekking adventure during college days in Bangalore.
No, no one had a bath but we splashed water on our faces and on each other anytime we found a body of water... Refreshing memories!
What the hell.You first pose in the nude,you get clicked ,you complain,more and more want to see you more of you.
I expected a blog on Musings when I read about Kate Middleton's topless pic :)
Celebrities are not to be ever trusted, for they have a plan behind their every move. The more attention they get, the more they want it.
I think many of the public have double standards. As you rightfully say there has been such an outcry here in England about these photos (and before them the naked pictures of Prince Harry) being published and yet how many people have/will stop buying the very newspapers that publish such things.
All a bit of a storm in a teacup really, as my nana used to say 'todays newspapers are tomorrows fish and chip wrappers'.
more you complain more we will want to watch it.
forget it do not complain it and no one gonna watch it.
What about Prince harry in Vegas? The tabloids feed on the mass' hunger for any speck from the royal circles or any celebrity that comes their way. I personally feel that each individual has a right to some privacy and this should not be breached. Bathing topless, or having a relationship or dancing in the nude is their business and it in no way affects the life of the people who read about it, so why??
Where art thou? Miss your posts.
Here are my 2 cents:
This ie Queen's wicked & vile strategy. To make sure that such a furore is created that Kate will never ever dare to bare in an open roof top in future.
Looks like the definition of what is private and what is public is different for celebrities. And I think the public is too much into voyeurism - otherwise what explains this interest?
True, paparazzi must leave them alone. But public personalities like them, should also be realistic and take adequate care of themselves.
They know they are hounded, whether it is right or wrong. Knowing that, they should not have done what they did. This is not to defend the paparazzi. But I think, one shouldn't be foolish in such circumstances.
@ Insignia
What is wrong in photographing nudity , be it of the queen or the princess when they are willing to expose in public??
@ Happy Kiiten,
As Bindu said it is just a PRO stunt to gain coverage
@ NRI Girl
Ha , you know those moments when you throw trappings and conventions away....!
@ Bk Chowla,
Exactly my question too Sir.
@ Daniel,
Ha , !!!
@ rama,
Yes you bare right. The plans they craft are unique and amazing.
@ Petty Witter,
yes if Harry's nudity is not the issue to none why the semi nudity of the princess?
@ Sujata,
It dosent affect our life , but there is a plan behind posing in the nude.
@ Ramakarishan,
Yes perhaps you have a point there. The queen has vile plans. If one wants to discuss that there is plenty in the death of the princes Diana.
@ SM.
They want more to watch it. Perhaps the paparazzi gets paid by the Royalty!
@ meerasundarajan,
Voyeurism seems to be the fascination of celebrities.
@ Pradeep,
It was not foolishness. I guess it was staged managed.
Post a Comment