July 20, 1992 12:00 PM

Once again correspondents sympathized with Princess Diana and her rocky marriage while blasting Prince Charles for placing his wile in a triangle with his “confidante,” Camilla Parker Bowles (PEOPLE, June 29).


It seems the major concern of palace insiders is whether the Prince of Wales can withstand the scandal of divorce, should he become King. Maybe they should be more concerned that the future head of the Church of England seems to be carrying on a public adulterous affair. The hypocrisy of the situation has apparently eluded the royals.


If Mrs. Parker Bowles truly cares about Charles as much as she claims, then why doesn’t she back off and let the Waleses work on their marriage without her advice or interference. Get a life of your own, Camilla!


It is quite apparent that Charles is not the sole cause of Diana’s problems. How could she expect an educated man with so many cultural interests to overlook her lack of education and culture? She knew exactly what she was getting when she married him. She was obviously seeking fame and fortune, and that is exactly what she got.

CAROL MIKESH, Northglen, Colo.

If the “Jerk Apparent,” Prince Charles, and his family thought any woman, let alone a girl barely 20, would be agreeable to and comfortable with a “confidante,” they should have had their crowns examined.

T. KANE, Chicago

Stop! Please stop! I truly thought that after reading the excerpts from Andrew Morton’s book, I knew everything I could or would ever want to know about Diana. Then I pick up my PEOPLE this week to find out there is actually more to know. Except that I don’t want or need to know any more. I feel sorry for her already; she has my sympathy. Leave her and me alone, please!

CHERYL D. McQUEEN, Hawthorne, Calif.


Call 1992 the Year of the Crybabies. I’m so tired of people with attitudes like Sister Souljah and Ice-T blaming everyone and everything around them for their own persecuted attitudes. Put Ice-T in a uniform on the street of any city with the following orders: (1) Uphold the law, whether you agree with it or not; (2) Protect the innocent, even though the law is designed to protect the criminal’s rights; (3) Protect stupid people from themselves, even though their life choices include murder, drugs and violence. Maybe then he would be rapping a different tune.

AMY PATZER, St. Joseph, Mich.

Why is it that when a rap singer writes a good antidrug song, the record producer claims it will have a positive effect on youth, and when they produce a violent negative song like Ice-T’s “Cop Killer,” they dismiss it as contributing to the “free expression of ideas” that will have a null effect on youth? As for Sister Souljah, she should be singing songs of praise to a government that made it possible for her, the child of a welfare family in the South Bronx, to attend Cornell and Rutgers universities. My children will be lucky if I can afford to send them to a community college on my policeman’s salary.

CHARLES FERRY, Wappingers Falls, N.Y.

Why is it wrong for Sister Souljah and Ice-T to express their feelings of anger and injustice in their music, but it’s OK for bigots like David Duke to run for office? These rappers are only telling about their frustration with the racism that they’ve encountered throughout their lives. You don’t have to agree with their views, but recognize that their anger is from being treated like second-class citizens in our society. Don’t try to censor and ignore Sister Souljah and Ice-T; listen and pay attention, and maybe you’ll learn something.



After I read the story about Amy Fisher, only one thought crossed my mind. What is wrong with her parents’ power of observation? Amy had a nice car and wore a beeper. She also had plenty of money to throw around. There must be something wrong with parents who do not notice these things and do not do something about them. Where were her parents while Amy was doing “below average” in school and selling her body at night?

WENDY CRUTCHER, Richland, Mich.


Please tell Brian Dennehy not to despair. As a longtime admirer, I don’t think he needs an onscreen sex life to be considered sexy. If he’s having trouble offscreen, I’ll gladly offer him a starring role.


I don’t care what your waistline is, Brian Dennehy, you can be the love interest in my life any old time!

PATSY R. McNAMARA, Center, Tex.

You May Like