The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #401  
Old 09-04-2009, 06:04 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,427
Could we put this one to rest please rather than continue to repeat the same misinformation and inaccuracies time and time again, twelve years after the event.

If members' stated familiarity and experience of Church of Scotland services in Scotland are not considered credible enough, members are free to check out the Church of Scotland website and other relevant links.

thanks,
Warren
British Forums moderator
__________________

__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
  #402  
Old 07-16-2010, 12:04 AM
agogo's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: cŰte d'ocťan Pacifique, United States
Posts: 717
I thought that she reacted as any grandmother would. Even thought there had been a divorce, I am sure that QE was still fond of Diana. QE's reactions were human, normal. A member of her family, the mother of her grandsons had been suddenly killed. I imagine that QE was in shock, and her first thoughts were to care for William and Harry.
__________________

  #403  
Old 08-20-2010, 01:56 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess View Post
I thought at first that she didn't but looking back I think she was trying to do the best thing - look after her grandsons. Over her life one of the few things she's been criticized for was her hands-off approach to motherhood. When she tried to be a hands-on grandmother in the days following Diana's death she was roundly criticized for not looking after her subjects.
To be honest with you, I will start from the beginning. That way you will be able to have a better understanding of why the Queen acted in the way in which she did!

I think that the Queen was nice to Diana when Charles first met her. And that she thought that Diana would have made a nice Queen one day.

After the marriage and after the children came along Charles made no intentions on changing his adulteress ways. He still held his long relationship with Mrs. Camilla Parker-Bowles, which was noted and talked about in the Morton book. I think that Charles loved Diana, he wasn't in-love with her. And when you are in a relationship there is a MAJOR difference between the two.

I think that Diana was no saint either. She chose to fight fire with fire and have affairs of her own. As well as speak to the press about her marriage and that did a lot of things to tick the Queen off as well as other members of the royal family.

I think the Queen was sad when she first heard the death of Diana. But at that same time she was also very happy to have her gone. She was not a nice person to have dealt with on a daily basis. WE the people didn't see what went on behind closed doors. And what we don't know is, Diana might not have been the nice person the newspapers have made her out to be in life or in death. I think she did a lot of things that were not nice to the royal family. Diana was said to have been very nasty to some of the palace workers and the Queen and Prince of Wales's close advisors. Although these are just rumors.

When Diana died the first thing the Queen thought to do was to take the boys away so that they would be shielded from the press. Which I think was a good idea.

The bad part she did that I think was WRONG, was not issuing a statement. Rather the Queen thought that at be best if she kept her nose out of Princess Diana's tragedy since Diana was no longer a member of the BRF was a bad move. The public still considered the divorced Diana to be a royal. And the Queen should've made a statement and that would've itleast saved her some trouble.

Another thing that would've saved the Queen some trouble long before Diana died was the entire "revocation of royal title & style" during the divorce proceedings. I think that she was right to have taken the title of Princess of Wales away. But I think it would've been wise not to have stripped her of her style and leave her with NO style afterwords. That made the royal family look very bad. It made them look like they were mistreating the People's Princess. Which wasn't a good move for the Queen in the eye's of the people. I think Diana should have been accorded "Her Highness Diana, Princess of Wales". Instead of HRH being taken away and left with nothing. It would've made the Queen not look like the evil villain and would have also made the public accept Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall better TODAY. Think about it?

But in the long run I think the Queen did the right thing by going before live television and saying kind words. Although she might not have meant it. I think it DID help the situation and also helped the Queen's reputation.
__________________
  #404  
Old 08-20-2010, 02:19 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,710
The problem with giving her a title in her own right would be that she would keep in on remarriage and she would have had to also do the same for Sarah - can't treat one ex-daughter-on-law differently to the other.
She acted perfectly appropriately (and I wouldn't blame her one bit if, in the complete privacy of her own room and not within hearing or sight of the boys, she did a private dance for joy - not saying she did but just that I wouldn't blame her if she did).
__________________
  #405  
Old 08-20-2010, 02:23 AM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by wedmonds View Post
The bad part she did that I think was WRONG, was not issuing a statement. Rather the Queen thought that at be best if she kept her nose out of Princess Diana's tragedy since Diana was no longer a member of the BRF was a bad move. The public still considered the divorced Diana to be a royal. And the Queen should've made a statement and that would've itleast saved her some trouble.
She did issue a statement.

CNN - Princess Diana killed in Paris car crash - August 31, 1997

Quote:
Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Charles said in statements early Sunday that they were "deeply shocked and distressed by this terrible news."
__________________
TRF rules and FAQ
  #406  
Old 08-20-2010, 04:47 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by wedmonds View Post
To be honest with you, I will start from the beginning. That way you will be able to have a better understanding of why the Queen acted in the way in which she did!
You seem to be claiming that you know how exactly The Queen acted in those days, unless you were there with her I don't think you do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wedmonds View Post
After the marriage and after the children came along Charles made no intentions on changing his adulteress ways. He still held his long relationship with Mrs. Camilla Parker-Bowles, which was noted and talked about in the Morton book.
His adulteress ways, only existed after he was married, some years after his marriage to Diana. He can't be adulteress when he was not married to anyone. It was talked about in a book, hardly a reliable source of information.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wedmonds View Post
I think the Queen was sad when she first heard the death of Diana. But at that same time she was also very happy to have her gone. She was not a nice person to have dealt with on a daily basis.
How can you say that The Queen was happy to see the mother of her grand-children dead? That is a truely horrible thing to say.
Diana was not a nice person, because of the way she acted, she should have known what she needed to do when she joined The Firm, how she should have behaved, and she went against the rules which made her a "not nice" person.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wedmonds View Post
The bad part she did that I think was WRONG, was not issuing a statement. Rather the Queen thought that at be best if she kept her nose out of Princess Diana's tragedy since Diana was no longer a member of the BRF was a bad move. The public still considered the divorced Diana to be a royal. And the Queen should've made a statement and that would've itleast saved her some trouble.
As wbenson pointed out The Queen did release a statement, something IMO she shouldn't have done, she is The Queen yes but at the time of Diana's death she was being a grandmother and HM was acted how she thought she should, kept quiet and looked after her family. This had never happened before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wedmonds View Post
Another thing that would've saved the Queen some trouble long before Diana died was the entire "revocation of royal title & style" during the divorce proceedings. I think that she was right to have taken the title of Princess of Wales away. But I think it would've been wise not to have stripped her of her style and leave her with NO style afterwords. That made the royal family look very bad. It made them look like they were mistreating the People's Princess. Which wasn't a good move for the Queen in the eye's of the people. I think Diana should have been accorded "Her Highness Diana, Princess of Wales". Instead of HRH being taken away and left with nothing. It would've made the Queen not look like the evil villain and would have also made the public accept Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall better TODAY. Think about it?
First thing, Diana was not known as The People Princess until Tony Blair called her that after her death. The BRF were doing what was right, she was no longer a member of the royal family, so why should she be entitled to anything to do with the BRF. The Queen would have looked like an "evil villian" whatever she did, the public loved Diana and at this time hated the monarchy.
After Diana, anyone that married Charles, especially Camilla would not have been recieved well by the public. Giving Diana a "style" wouldn't have done anything to affect that IMO.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #407  
Old 08-20-2010, 05:56 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 4,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
First thing, Diana was not known as The People Princess until Tony Blair called her that after her death.
This brings up an interesting point for me.

I'm just wondering if perhaps Tony Blair coining the phrase "People's Princess" somehow added fuel to the fire at the time? I know a lot of people felt that Diana stating she wanted to be "Queen of people's hearts" in the Panorama interview was interpreted as a direct snub to the Queen. Perhaps if Tony Blair had gone another way (wasn't he freshly elected at PM at the time?) and from the beginning in his statements put the focus more on the BRF remaining in seclusion with the 2 young boys and asking the nation to please think of what they're going through, maybe a lot of this just might have been avoided? How things are spun when they happen does have a lot of effect on how things are perceived.
__________________
  #408  
Old 08-20-2010, 06:04 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,197
Tony became PM on 2nd May, Diana died 31st August but he had nothing to do over the summer so he was fairly new to the job.
Calling her the People's Princess, gave the country ammunition for the attack IMO. Yes she was supposedly called the Queen of Peoples Hearts but the phrase that most sticks out and is still used is the Peoples Princess.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #409  
Old 08-22-2010, 02:10 PM
rob2008's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 124
HM follows tradition and there was no precedent to follow. Therefore, she didnt know how to react. And give her break - her advisers are hopeless. HM is probably now more 'pragmatic'. her tribute to Diana at the Constitution Hill procession was magnficent (contrast Margaret's appalling lack of humanity, royal yes but also a reflection of the nation). However, we live in ridiculously sentimental and emotive times and HM's response would be much more decisive and non-controversial now.
__________________
  #410  
Old 08-22-2010, 03:00 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,281
You make a valid point, Osipi. I think that Tony Blair is as responsible as anyone for the anti-monarchist hysteria of that long week. The papers helped to blow it up as well with their "Where is our Queen?" headlines. I think that the press was doing whatever it could to move the attention away from their own responsibility, also.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Perhaps if Tony Blair had gone another way (wasn't he freshly elected at PM at the time?) and from the beginning in his statements put the focus more on the BRF remaining in seclusion with the 2 young boys and asking the nation to please think of what they're going through, maybe a lot of this just might have been avoided?
__________________
  #411  
Old 08-23-2010, 07:34 AM
Australian's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 2,152
In my opinion, the Queen of England didn't display any signs at all that she was a human being. She didn't show human emotions, she was a robot. Behind the scenes who knows? maybe she was mourning a lot in private but her countrymen never saw that.
__________________
  #412  
Old 08-23-2010, 08:08 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 4,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Australian View Post
In my opinion, the Queen of England didn't display any signs at all that she was a human being. She didn't show human emotions, she was a robot. Behind the scenes who knows? maybe she was mourning a lot in private but her countrymen never saw that.
I think HM was following protocol used for funerals. Reading your post reminded me of an excellent article we have posted on TRF. "Royal Death" by BeatrixFan. A couple of sentences popped out at me and I'd like to share them. I've also included the link to the article for easy reference.

"However rehearsed they may seem (and usually are), tributes from politicians are part and parcel of royal departure. Public tributes in the form of condolence books are a recent invention, as are tributes from the royal family, which seem to have become a must after the fury over the Queen's silence after the death of Diana."

"Itís a huge step up from the time when members of the royal family were not permitted to send flowers to the funerals of commoners (a rule the Queen broke when she sent a wreath to the funeral of Bobo McDonald) let alone attend or give a tribute on television or radio."

This is a very well written article and very informative.

Royal Death
__________________
  #413  
Old 08-23-2010, 08:28 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Australian View Post
In my opinion, the Queen of England didn't display any signs at all that she was a human being. She didn't show human emotions, she was a robot. Behind the scenes who knows? maybe she was mourning a lot in private but her countrymen never saw that.

Why should she have had to show any emotion in public? She had two grandsons who had just lost their mother. She needed to be strong for them and frankly the rest of the country was just plain selfish in expecting any grandmother to put anything before her grandsons. The public caused the death and then went ballistic when they weren't seen as the most important thing in the world but rather the family did what families do - put those in need first - William and Harry.

I thought, and still think, that the British public were disgraceful in the way they behaved that week and any member of that British public who carried on the way they did should be ashamed of themselves but the Queen was perfectly correct - her grandsons were all that mattered to her and that is as it should be.

Yes she is the Queen and when being a Queen she has always been rather robotic because that is the way she has been trained (and rightly so in my opinion - we don't need emotional people in those jobs but ones who can say and do the right thing and not get caught up in the emotions of the day - she was trained well by her parents in WWII). That week for the first and only time in her life she put her family first and people still criticise her for it.
__________________
  #414  
Old 08-24-2010, 06:33 AM
Australian's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 2,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post

I thought, and still think, that the British public were disgraceful in the way they behaved that week and any member of that British public who carried on the way they did should be ashamed of themselves but the Queen was perfectly correct - her grandsons were all that mattered to her and that is as it should be.
Really? I thought the British public just acted human!
__________________
  #415  
Old 08-25-2010, 04:44 PM
Russophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portland, United States
Posts: 4,077
I know this is a shock, but I agree with Bertie on this. HM had a job to do to get her family, and her country through their grief. She did. Beautifully.
__________________
"Not MGM, not the press, not anyone can tell me what to do."--Ava Gardner
  #416  
Old 09-01-2010, 02:53 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,281
I think that a disturbing thing about former Prime Minister Blair's memoirs is that he talks about his dealings with the Queen during that week after Diana's death. I always thought that these things are highly confidential. His statement that he "had to save the monarchy from itself" is repulsive.
__________________
  #417  
Old 09-01-2010, 04:01 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 4,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
I think that a disturbing thing about former Prime Minister Blair's memoirs is that he talks about his dealings with the Queen during that week after Diana's death. I always thought that these things are highly confidential. His statement that he "had to save the monarchy from itself" is repulsive.
I thought that was a pretty ego-blown statement to make too.

HM has had decades of different PMs running her government and not one of them presumed to "save" the monarchy. The more I think about this situation looking back, the more I am inclined to place more blame on Mr. Blair for creating a furor that didn't need to be. Fact is that Diana was the EX wife of the Prince of Wales and no longer royal. With feeding into the public this "People's Princess" line, he himself elevated her to a status of royalty she no longer possessed to the point that the public believed she should be treated on the same lines as if HM herself had passed on.

I think if we had seen a different PM at the time, it would have been handled much differently.
__________________
  #418  
Old 09-01-2010, 05:56 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,281
I believe so as well. Part of a Prime Minister's role is to be strong and show leadership when people are in a crisis, such as Winston Churchill during WWII. By helping to set up bad feelings with the nation about their Sovereign, Blair did the opposite.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I think if we had seen a different PM at the time, it would have been handled much differently.
__________________
  #419  
Old 09-01-2010, 07:37 PM
nascarlucy's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Florida Area, United States
Posts: 1,354
It's probably easy to go back to an event and say, "Well, I should have done this, or I should have done that or say this or that." Her death was such a shock to everyone.
__________________
  #420  
Old 09-01-2010, 07:52 PM
ClassicRoyal's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Vinton, United States
Posts: 22
Princess Diana's Loss was a wake up call

God Bless the Royals and their commitment to duty, but Princess Diana's death rocked their world. There was no precedent for what to do with a beloved former member of the royal family. The Queen had to change the status quo of silence and acting as if Diana no longer existed as she had during the year after the divorce. With the help of Prince Charles, who seemed to have heart enough to understand what needed to be done, the Queen and her family came up with an acceptable tribute. Prince Charles was visibly was upset and I respected that. I do wish that Princess Diana had not been alone when lying in state at Kensington and St. James Palace. The public would've appreciated the honor of walking by to pay their respects. I also think it would've shown compassion to have acknowledged her passing in their worship service at Balmoral for the sake of Princes William and Harry.
__________________

__________________
Classic Royal - Imagination is a wonderful thing because it allows me to visit the world of royalty with no strings attached! Fantasy is priceless in the costly world of reality.
Closed Thread

Tags
balmoral, buckingham palace, diana princess of wales, diana's death and funeral, elizabeth ii, queen elizabeth ii, tabloid press, tony blair


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Photos Of King Constantine and Queen Anne-Marie earlier days... Julia King Constantine and Queen Anne-Marie 241 03-09-2014 08:13 PM
Lady Jane Grey, Queen for 9 days (1537-1554) ysbel British Royal History 77 04-16-2011 11:25 AM
Run-up to the inquest into Diana's death wymanda Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 1117 10-03-2007 11:18 AM
New books marking the tenth anniversary of Diana's death Hendrik-Jan77 Royal Library 82 10-03-2007 11:12 AM




Popular Tags
belgium carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince daniel prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:03 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]