^ not really. It's a kind of ass-backwards netherworld between respecting the dead and 'why leave notes? he's dead and doesn't care!' that you people all seem to live in. Sentiment is fine, but only in the manner of your choosing? Pfff!
And again, removing the possibility of non-destructive platitudes is just mean spirited uptight of her. I would piss into her breakfast if I could, but as it is I'll just have to enjoy the memories i have from my visit there.
Can't stress enough though, the permanent inscriptions/scratchings/paintings were inappropriate and dumb - there's a way to display a tribute without fucking someone's property. Kind of sick of the notion that it's an all or nothing deal, though. You people suck.
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Dr Magus wrote:[/b]
Mary may be the only one to have not written a book about Freddie but she was also the only one to have been given his mansion and his millions. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not. It certainly removed any financial incentive for writing such a book.
[/QUOTE]
So she's potentially as guilty as the people who cashed in because she didn't need to cash in?
Sound logic.
Enough speculation, please.
[/QUOTE]
All i've done is keep an open mind on Mary and her moral standing precisely BECAUSE i don't know the woman.
As has been pointed quite rightly by Yourvalentine, none of us know her and none of us knew Freddie.
I've bumped into both David Wigg and Mary Austin whilst at work in London .Wigg is a really friendly guy.
Unsure of the ethical difference between writing a book and sharing anecdotes in a documentary, anyway.
