Photomania
My little wordplay with Greek origins is prompted by the latest royal brouhaha, which was itself prompted by the Windsors’ proclivities for baring their privates. They make natural victims of the digitally-enhanced mass media. But both parties suffer from strains of photomania - albeit with somewhat different aims. Might I recommend the Windsors repair to Osborne for the hols and make use of the local facilities?
Categories: Chips on Shoulders, Photography, Techo stuff
Photo Winner
Congratulations to Christopher for
Chez Liz
Poetry Winner
Congratulations to Bilby for
Sunshine
The cozzie doesn’t really suit you Janus, if I may be so bold.
OZ
As I understand it, Kate was at a private establishment – she was not walking topless down Oxford Street or The Mall.
She, like anyone else, is entitled to expect to be able to bare her privates in private.
There is nothing wrong with baring one’s privates . I do hope, Janus, that I have misread your comment which seemed to me to infer that there was something reprehensible in baring one’s privates. Dare I admit that I have done so in the privacy of a ‘safe’ environment … Thank Heavens I’m not sufficiently famous for anyone to want to look at my ‘privates’!
I think that the Windsors should sue and make it quite clear that when they are out of the public eye public cameras have no right to photograph them – if they don’t even Osborne will not be secure from the photomania of intrusive paparazzi.
You’d enjoy The Cave, Boadicea, as I suspect would Kate. You can flaunt your bits around the pool to your heart’s content and a midnight skinny-dip under the stars is an absolute must as there’s nobody within 30 minutes walk of here. Well, apart from me and I promise faithfully not to peek – much.
OZ
Boadicea and OZ
Been there and have the bumper sticker.
Eh?
Osborne House is open to the public.
Hmmm! Naked sailing, eh? S’pose like most things it’s only kinky the first time.
OZ
Yeah. I’m here waiting for the gates to open. Wanna see the gardens and there’d better be some cake, biccies and a brew at the end.
OZ
So that’s what a bare boat charter is all about!
Boa, “I do hope, Janus, that I have misread your comment which seemed to me to infer that there was something reprehensible in baring one’s privates” Not at all! Backside has been known to show his, er, backside on occasion.
My suggestion is that since the media will do everything to get their pics, law or no law, it might pay the royals to expose themselves even more discreetly and discretely before the snappers do the exposures too.
I only wear it when I visit the Osbornes. It’s my Welsh wench look.
I’m absolutely in agreement with Boadicea on this issue, Janus. Everyone has a right to privacy, what you do in private is entirely your own concern, whoever you are.
Frankly, I’m rather more concerned about the security side of this latest incidents. What use are their protection officers? If some one could take a photograph, they could presumably have equally taken a rather more lethal shot.
I agree with Boadicea. She was topless in the privacy of a rented holiday house.
She was not in public, she was not anywhere that people could casually see her nunga-nungas
in their full glory. The photographer had to scale trees and use ultra-powerful photographic technology
to take the picture. That was an invasion of privacy. They should take this to the maximum extent allowed by law.
Araminta: agreed. It is quite disconcerting, isn’t it?
It’s most certainly a serious consideration, Christopher. I hope they take note.
Arrers, I agree too, but the practical solution includes being more careful! Maybe that’s what their ‘protectors’ should work on.