Blue. Green. I'm thinking about installing a vote-counter. I swear....
I had always thought blue. Looks like it in pictures. And other reliable (we assume) sources are saying so. But there is also info that may very well be valid...saying they're hazel.
We cannot even be sure of this damn child's eye color! How the fuck can we be sure of anything else?
We have pictures looking very strongly like blue. (You tell me -- is the (presumably Patrick Demarchelier) picture on the front page of Princes in Pictures colorized or not to produce that bright blue? Many of Demarchelier's pictures are done in black and white.) My standard sources give it as blue. There are also sources out there that have good evidence that they are hazel. What do we do?
Analysis is nothing without information. What at all can we be sure of?
And some of those photos do indeed look green. You can see it. You really can.
What are we to do?
Don't assume anything. Go with "looks blue" or "looks green." Or "can't tell." Be aware that there may be problems with information. Know exactly where the info came from.
Or don't use it at all.
Be sure. Or don't include the info in your evaluation.
And eye color is important. People react differently to blue-eyed people vs. hazel-eyed people. They treat them differently. So it's important to know what a person actually has before you evaluate people's reactions.
F'r instance: Write down every stereotype about blond-haired, blue-eyed people you can.
Even cameramen react differently, I'm willing to betcha, in the wake of The Diana Phenomenon.
He seems to get some of that "blue-eyed" response. Why? People have read the media and assume they're blue? (The #1 vote.)
People assume he has Diana's genes?
Or what? How the hell do we know?