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
 
  #461  
Old 06-22-2011, 04:41 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Los Angeles CA, United States
Posts: 1,074
I am so heartened by this discussion. Its good to see this being spoken about - and I agree very much with many of the previous posters.

I know this is hard for many fans of the Princess of Wales but that whole funeral of Diana was an embarrassment to watch - which I didn't watch as it happens, but as it is with news of this sort in our day one could not avoid seeing the image of the sea of flowers, see snippets of the funeral, and hear the vitriol in some of the interviews of the bystanders. Sadly, that was Diana's 'legacy' in the short term - and what a ghastly thing for her children to endure on top of grieving for their mother. To have such grief mingled with such an onslaught of hate.

I think the Queen did fine - handling something that was in so many ways inexplicable - she was true to who she is. In the end she maintained 'good form', maintained the polite veneer the British are famous for, or were famous for.

What remains as a striking impression of that time is the profound degree of rudeness directed at the Queen and the RF in general. Very ugly and very unpleasant to watch. In this Charles demonstrated that he is younger, understood more than the Queen about what was taking place and grasped what was needed. A good man.
__________________

__________________
  #462  
Old 06-22-2011, 05:06 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
I don't remember William and Harry being forced to walk behind Diana's coffin. I remember reading somewhere that Phillip asked William if he wanted to walk behind the coffin and William decided to do it. Those boys exhibited strength and courage walking behind their mother's cortege. It seemed like they wanted to be with her till the end of the funeral.
I never agreed with public's anger towards the Queen. The public should've picked up on the media trying to shift blame from themselves on to the BRF. I will not though criticize the public for mourning the loss of the Princess but they should have only mourned her and not disrespect the queen.
IMO had she addressed the nation earlier on from Balmoral things might have been different.
__________________

__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
  #463  
Old 06-22-2011, 05:17 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by fandesacs2003 View Post
Nobody said this. She was not obliged to be CONSTANTLY out! She could come back to London WITH the boys, address to the people 5 minutes, and return back home WITH the boys! Do not say that staying in holidays she was CONSTANTLY with the boys!

She made a statement from Balmoral on the day it happened. She couldn't have done any more in London anyway.

Whether she was constantly with the boys is irrelevant - it was in her home that they were staying when the news broke.

Why should the boys have been uprooted just to satisfy the baying mob?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
I don't remember William and Harry being forced to walk behind Diana's coffin. I remember reading somewhere that Phillip asked William if he wanted to walk behind the coffin and William decided to do it. Those boys exhibited strength and courage walking behind their mother's cortege. It seemed like they wanted to be with her till the end of the funeral.
I never agreed with public's anger towards the Queen. The public should've picked up on the media trying to shift blame from themselves on to the BRF. I will not though criticize the public for mourning the loss of the Princess but they should have only mourned her and not disrespect the queen.
IMO had she addressed the nation earlier on from Balmoral things might have been different.

She was also coming to terms with the death of a person she had known since she was a child - and probably grieving as well.

It was pure selfishness on the part of the public - and shows just how out of touch with what the royal family is the public had become. They were/are a family with feelings for each other but because of the way Diana presented them the public prefer to think that that isn't the case and see them as cardboard cutouts - without feelings or emotions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by olebabs View Post
Today the monarchs role is to be a uniting force, especially in a crisis. And to me it look like Britain was in a major crisis in the week following Dianas death. The boys were not orphaned, so the responsability of them was on Charles. Therefore I believe that had she given her tribute on the morning of Dianas death, she would have come across as a caring, loving grand mother and have expressed the need for privacy. Instead the came across as cold and insincere (This is my opinion) and forced against her will.


To do the speech then wouldn't have been possible as it had to be written, proof-read and even approved by the PM (the only speech the Queen can give without official approval is the Christmas message).

You don't write a proper speech in a few hours - they take a lot of time to compose and no doubt she also rehearsed it a number of times before delivering it.
__________________
  #464  
Old 06-22-2011, 05:32 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
I know she issued a statement as soon as the news broke; and as Diana died within the early hours I agree the Queen couldn't have done more.
But within a day or two after Diana's death, would it have been difficult for her PR advisors to organize an address to the nation from Balmoral?
I'm wondering if this was done, then the media wouldn't have had a leg to stand on to shift blame.
__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
  #465  
Old 06-22-2011, 05:35 PM
olebabs's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Århus, Denmark
Posts: 283
Agreed Sirhon11234.

I just re-read the Queens tribute to Diana and it is actually very touching. I still maintain that the circumstances under which it was delivered seemed forced and insincere. But to witness the way she was treated by the media was disgusting. I remember reading that the palace security feared for her life upon returning to London, based on the media publishings, but that turned out to be rubbish. None of the thousands of people treated her with nothing but respect.

Yes she made huge mistakes, but as far as I'm concerned she came out strengthend. And that commands my respect.

@Countess: I am rather certain, that Diana did not kill herself in order to stell the limelight. She was still a member of the royal family and therefore entitled to the same honours.
__________________
  #466  
Old 06-22-2011, 05:40 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
I know she issued a statement as soon as the news broke; and as Diana died within the early hours I agree the Queen couldn't have done more.
But within a day or two after Diana's death, would it have been difficult for her PR advisors to organize an address to the nation from Balmoral?
I'm wondering if this was done the media wouldn't have had a leg to stand on to shift blame.

It takes a lot of time to write and prepare a speech and why should she have done so?

She was perfectly correct in doing what Diana would have wanted the boys' family to do - look after them - it is what Diana would have done.

Some other poster mentioned that if it had been Charles who had died the situation would have been different - no one would have expected the Queen to make a public statement (which she didn't do when either her sister or mother died) but Diana would have been immediately with her sons to take care of them - Diana would have rejoiced in the way the royal family closed ranks to take care of the boys.

I remember when they did return to London and were looking at the flowers outside BP and someone in the crowd called out 'You take care of those boys now' and Philip - as only Philip could - replied 'What do you think we have been doing?' It also showed how the royal family felt about the calls for them to leave Balmoral to satisfy the baying mob who simply wanted to see them in sackcloth and ashes for a woman most of the public had never met rather than consider the feelings of those who actually knew and loved her personally.

Personally I was disgusted at the attitude of the public and the media - who simply wanted their pound of flesh. One word sums up the public that week - selfish.
__________________
  #467  
Old 06-22-2011, 05:58 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Los Angeles CA, United States
Posts: 1,074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
It was pure selfishness on the part of the public - and shows just how out of touch with what the royal family is the public had become. They were/are a family with feelings for each other but because of the way Diana presented them the public prefer to think that that isn't the case and see them as cardboard cutouts - without feelings or emotions.
Exactly. Why Diana's 'spin' gained such credibiiity still puzzles me - is there a thread that discusses this aspect? In an Anthropological/Sociological context, why did smears that Diana engaged in take hold in such a profound way? To the extent that (as someone mentioned 'the baying mob') people would participate in a 'lynching' of the RF without second thoughts.

The experience of the Queen must have been like the world turned upside down. Disorienting, to say the least.
__________________
  #468  
Old 06-22-2011, 08:03 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: indianapolis, United States
Posts: 213
i honesly thought the queen did a very nice job handling what had to be a horrible situation. Diana died tragicly. she had to comfort a county, a world, her family and friends and herself. that has to be unreal for anyone. when you have no time to process the death of someone you just react, as if on impulse.
__________________
  #469  
Old 06-22-2011, 08:21 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,272
Actually, the Queen has spent her whole life thinking of the UK and the Commonwealth. On this occasion, when she acted as a loving grandmother in an attempt to protect her grandsons from the publicity that would occur on their return to London, she was criticized needlessly. I don't think she's had much time to think of herself, honestly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
But the queen only thought of herself and protocol. Even Charles, knew the right thing to do and flew to Paris, aginst his mother's wishes.
Exactly. And because of the sentimentality of our world today, people equate being undemonstrative with not caring. In the past, not falling apart in public was evidence of inner strength. Now it's seen as evidence of not caring.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
They were/are a family with feelings for each other but because of the way Diana presented them the public prefer to think that that isn't the case and see them as cardboard cutouts - without feelings or emotions.
In all serious, I think that part of her appeal was her big blue eyes. Even when she was a mature woman, she had that child-like feature. Big eyes stir something protective in us, which is why we go "awww" when we see babies, small children, and infant animals. Maybe you could start a thread, Tyger. I'd certainly participate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyger View Post
Exactly. Why Diana's 'spin' gained such credibiiity still puzzles me - is there a thread that discusses this aspect?
__________________
  #470  
Old 06-22-2011, 08:42 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,534
Philip took them shooting. Touching way to help children get over the loss of their mother. They were all, except Charles, and even to him some degree, worried how they would look. They got bad advice, until Blair stepped in. It doesn't take much to exude warmth. Sorry, I am wrong., You have to have warmth. The "tribute", was insincere and forced. Their presence at the funeral was the same. There is a difference between sentimental and sensitive. They were neither. They didn't like her. That is okay. You have a right to your opinion. They didn't have to fall apart. They didn't. They don't have that capability. All they had to do was acknowledge an event of, at that time, shocking proportion. "Polite veneer", someone here wrote. Veneer, a cheap covering for inferior products. It costs very little to be warm if you can feel human compassion. These were the people who support her. Now, they have become to some a "mob". How distasteful.
__________________
  #471  
Old 06-22-2011, 08:47 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by fandesacs2003 View Post
She could come back to London WITH the boys, address to the people 5 minutes, and return back home WITH the boys! Do not say that staying in holidays she was CONSTANTLY with the boys!
Then she would have spent a lot of money, which she would have been criticized for. HM doesn't travel alone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
She opted for a private funeral, because once again Diana was stealing the stage and she wasn't royal any longer.
I expect that Earl Spencer, as head of the Spencer family, would have wanted a private funeral as well and wanted to mourn his sister with his remaining family and without the whole world looking on.
__________________
  #472  
Old 06-22-2011, 09:11 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
I expect that Earl Spencer, as head of the Spencer family, would have wanted a private funeral as well and wanted to mourn his sister with his remaining family and without the whole world looking on.
I don't know. He was angry and his eulogy was too biting, so I am not sure how he felt. She was a public figure. As I said, if Charlesd had died, the same type of funeral would have taken place, without the mourning. He was not popular, at that time. By the way, even though they were minors, they were her next of kin, not the Earl Spencer. I don't know if anyone consulted William. Yes, he was young, but not a baby.
__________________
  #473  
Old 06-22-2011, 09:56 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,696
Philip took them shooting as a way to keep things normal - something that people try to do when mourning - it helps. They were also doing something they enjoyed - yes the princes enjoy killing things - they often go shooting today remember.

The royals that I have meet - the Queen and Charles are extremely warm people - they just don't show it to all and sundry.

The people who were Diana's supporters were manipulated by the press to turn away from who was responsible for her death. The first responses by the public was to blame the press but that was quickly turned against the royal family - the alternative for the press was for the mob to turn on them. The press had one other alternative - that was to put the blame where it truly lies - with the very people who were so publicly crying in the streets and carrying on in such a distasteful manner - they were the ones that killed her but the press also knew if they did that then the public wouldn't buy their products any more - let's attack the family that Diana had come to despise and attempt to destroy. The press knew that the mob would turn on them so they turned their attention elsewhere - easy to do with mobs - it is how riots etc start - and there was that potential that week for that to happen.
__________________
  #474  
Old 06-25-2011, 05:29 AM
Catherine J's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Susanna Wynne View Post
This discussion makes me sick. Get over it, girls. Let Diana lie in peace, and give the Queen a break. I'd like to know how well anyone of us would have done in the same incredibly difficult circumstances.
Diana was the Princess of Wales and is the mother of the second in line to the throne. She has become a part of history, by her own choice, and does not get to "rest in peace" in the context you seem to mean it.

I am, however, inclined to give the Queen a break. That said, discussions of this nature are going to go on a lot longer than either you or I.
__________________
  #475  
Old 06-25-2011, 05:48 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 517
Quote:
Actually, the Queen has spent her whole life thinking of the UK and the Commonwealth. On this occasion, when she acted as a loving grandmother in an attempt to protect her grandsons from the publicity that would occur on their return to London, she was criticized needlessly. I don't think she's had much time to think of herself, honestly.
I thought about this, as well. The Queen in the past has been criticized for putting duty to the crown and the public above family concerns with her own children. Then when she put the wellbeing of her grandsons above the public's wishes after Diana's death she was criticized for that, as well.
IMO, many of the people, (and the media), criticizing The Queen in both of the above scenarios don't do so out of any real concern for the monarchy or members of the royal family but rather out of a sense of thwarted entertainment when The Queen and other members of the royal family refuse to act like puppets and put on a show.
The more time that passes, the more I personally think it's a good thing that QEII refused to become a part of the spasm of mass hysteria that surrounded Diana's death.
__________________
  #476  
Old 06-25-2011, 06:12 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,272
He would have been mourned, and publicly. People have a way of mourning more over the death of someone young (under 50 is "young" these days) and someone who's known. The people who benefited from Charles' charities or who met him and found him personable and friendly would have mourned him. The people who were expecting him to be their king one day would have mourned him. His sons, parents, and siblings would have been just as devastated by his death. "Popularity" comes and goes; but when someone dies, people often--even for just a little while--remember the good things about a person and let the difficulties and scandals rest. What is sometimes forgotten is that Diana's reputation was dropping before she died; but when she was killed so brutally and suddenly, all that was forgotten for awhile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
As I said, if Charlesd had died, the same type of funeral would have taken place, without the mourning.
__________________
  #477  
Old 06-25-2011, 06:37 PM
olebabs's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Århus, Denmark
Posts: 283
Well 36 is young. You said it yourself Mermaid1962, that popularity goes up and down. I think that had she had a chance to live, and her relationship with Charles had found a stable ground, they both would have been forgiven, that way Charles has been.
Of course Charles will be mourned, but hopefully he gets to go in his sleep and old man and therefore it will not be such a shock.
__________________
  #478  
Old 06-25-2011, 06:48 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,272
Just for clarification, olebabs, I was suggesting what the reaction would have been like had Charles been the one who died in the summer of 1997.


Quote:
Originally Posted by olebabs View Post
Well 36 is young...
Of course Charles will be mourned, but hopefully he gets to go in his sleep and old man and therefore it will not be such a shock.
__________________
  #479  
Old 06-25-2011, 06:54 PM
olebabs's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Århus, Denmark
Posts: 283
I know :-)
__________________
  #480  
Old 06-25-2011, 07:42 PM
Duchess of Darwin's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 215
I don't think it was fair that the wailing masses put The Queen and The Royal Family through all that vitriol. Diana harmed their name, and a public funeral was not in the Princes' best interests. That said, the flag, the speech, and the state funeral were needed in light of the campaign against The RF. The mob weren't going to calm down until they got their circus. The Royals did what as needed, and I have nothing but respect and sympathy for them. They kept face during an extremely difficult time.
__________________

__________________
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 brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia 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 pieter van vollenhoven poland president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince daniel prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen fabiola queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:59 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]