0

I read the following from the Vanity Fair:

Nearly a quarter century after Princess Diana famously sat on a bench now named after her, William and Kate re-enacted the prince’s late mother’s iconic image and took their places in front of the monument dedicated to love.

I understand that what the writer meant was 'Princess D's late image.' I am just not sure though if it sounds natural to say 'the prince's late mother's iconic image.': it seems a bit ambiguous to me.

Can anyone suggest an idea about it?

thegreentea
  • 355
  • 1
    What other interpretation do you find possible? – deadrat Apr 17 '16 at 06:04
  • 2
    Try The sixth sick sheik's sixth sheep's sick! – WS2 Apr 17 '16 at 08:00
  • The only ambiguity I can think of is that it sounds like it was a picture (of something) that Diana owned, rather than a picture of her. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Apr 17 '16 at 08:29
  • @deadrat If I didn't know who Princess Diana was, I could have been confused whether someone's dead mom's image or someone's mom's image of her late years they re-enacted. Is it a nonsense? – thegreentea Apr 17 '16 at 08:55
  • @JanusBahsJacquet Thank you!! I have not thought about it!! – thegreentea Apr 17 '16 at 08:57
  • @WS2 Yes, I should!! – thegreentea Apr 17 '16 at 08:58
  • The sentence could be better phrased as: 'Nearly a quarter century after Princess Diana famously sat on a bench now named after her, William and Kate re-created this iconic image of the prince's late mother by taking their places in front of the monument dedicated to love.' – Julie Carter Apr 19 '16 at 20:10

1 Answers1

3

Well, i don't see anything wrong with the sentence or the expression in general, but there is a lot of unnecessary repetition. They could have replaced 'the prince's late mother' with 'Princess Diana', and they could have removed iconic. But, it is not an intrinsically wrong statement. After all, they are a newspaper (or magazine). They'll do their best to get your attention by beefing up the language and using unnecessary repetition.

Shashaank V.
  • 42
  • 2
  • Thank you!! You are right, I think I felt it was a bit labored and complicated because of the repititions. – thegreentea Apr 17 '16 at 09:00
  • But that would not have underlined the fact that William was the son of Diana, who sat on the seat. And that symbolic fact was the critical point which the writer was trying to get across. – WS2 Apr 17 '16 at 15:51