The world may be eagerly awaiting Princess Eugenie’s royal wedding to fiance Jack Brooksbank in just a few months time, but one newspaper columnist has sparked controversy after claiming she shouldn’t be having a lavish ceremony at all – before comparing her to the Queen’s corgis in a scathing blog.
Daily Mail writer Jan Moir launched the shock verbal attack on Fergie’s daughter on Tuesday, claiming while her and Jack make a lovely couple, she’s got the same “monstrous” hunger for glitz and royal glamour as her mother, Sarah Ferguson.
Moir believes it’s wrong for someone who is currently ninth in line to the throne to expect the same luxuries as Prince Harry and Meghan, who celebrated their own wedding in the same venue – St George’s Chapel in Windsor – a few months ago.
“Despite being ninth in line to the throne and about as constitutionally important as one of the Queen’s corgis, the 28-year old princess clearly has her heart set on a full-throttle, trumpet- tootling extravaganza, complete with all the royal trimmings,” she began her lengthy article.
Following in the footsteps of Harry and Meghan, Eugenie recently announced she and Jack will also invite members of the public to watch them exchange vows, before enjoying a carriage ride through town after the service.
“Very magnanimous of her, I’m sure. However, it does beg the question — who the hell does Princess Eugenie think she is?” Moir asked.
The writer went on to take aim at Eugenie’s royal duties, claiming she’s done nothing to distinguish herself or win public affection over the years, instead enjoying a host of celebrity-filled parties with her sister Beatrice, as well as making headlines for her outrageous fashion including huge hats and “teapot-shaped skirts”.
However, she was only warming up, as Moir then brought in Eugenie’s parents, the Duke and Duchess of York, who she claimed have continuously insisted both their daughters don’t enjoy any special privileges – when she believes is not true.
“Eugenie’s upcoming wedding plans strip away that we’re-so-normal facade even further, revealing a hunger for glitz and royal glamour that is every bit as monstrous as Mother Fergie’s,” she went on.
While Prince Harry was fifth in line to the throne when he first announced his engagement, and then sixth in line when he eventually married, Moir claimed he’s a separate case altogether – seen by the public as “the wounded little boy who lost his mother” and an inspirational figure. Then of course there’s his choice to marry a famous TV actress.
Moir insisted it would be “churlish” not to be happy for Eugenie and Jack, while mentioning their long and dedicated relationship, but slammed the huge ceremony for putting unnecessary pressure on London police.
Her article got a very mixed reaction from readers, and while some agreed with her controversial views, others pleaded for her to back off and leave them alone.
“I for one can’t wait for it!!” One wrote, while another added: “Shut up DM!!!! Eugenie is a Princess of the throne by birthright.”
However, another added: “Oh dear it will be embarrassing to watch the carriage having to rash throu[gh] the empty streets of Windsor,” and one wrote: “Cannot imagine any members of the general public wanting to go to the wedding!!! Come on peeps there is no such thing as a princess!!!!! We are in the 21st century!”