Did the Queen act appropriately in the days following Diana's death?

[Iluvbertie]

I have always been totally disgusted with the reactions of the people who demanded that the Queen leave her grandsons, who had just lost their mother.

It wasn't as if these people really knew Diana but the boys did.

The Queen's actions were correct IMO - help her grandsons cope with their loss.

That is what I would expect any grandmother to do. This is very much the lesson that Diana taught - caring for family and not just duty. The fact that the Queen, for the first and only time in her life, put family before duty, is the real impact of Diana on the RF for me.

 

[wbenson]

I am fully aware that she was no longer a "member" of the Royal Family and the "moronic" crowds thought differently. It was also the "moronic" crowds that were starting to murmur about the need for a Queen who appeared uncaring and uninterested when the world was going crazy in an unprecedented outpouring of grief. You do not have to agree with this, but just look at the outcome. In the end the Queen, against her better judgment, did the best thing she could have done to assuage this feeling among the "moronic" crowds.

The world was not "going crazy with grief." The people who went crazy were, at best, a small percentage of the people who were very vocal.

 

[lilibet80]

The World Going Crazy with Grief

I am sorry but I must disagree with you. In the United States everyone was talking about it. All the talk shows were dealing with nothing else and hundreds of thousands of people were calling in to every television station that dealt with the subject as well as people in every country of the world lining up to sign memorial books. It was not a small percentage of people who were "going crazy" with grief. A billion people watched the funeral and a full length motion picture was made dealing with this subject.

 

[wbenson]

I am sorry but I must disagree with you. In the United States everyone was talking about it. All the talk shows were dealing with nothing else and hundreds of thousands of people were calling in to every television station that dealt with the subject as well as people in every country of the world lining up to sign memorial books. It was not a small percentage of people who were "going crazy" with grief. A billion people watched the funeral and a full length motion picture was made dealing with this subject.

"Everyone" was not talking about it. There was just a survey released where a majority of people did not feel affected, but those who did not felt like they were the minority.

Talk shows, television stations, and movies very rarely give an accurate portrayal of the world. The coverage given was perhaps the greatest tribute to Diana. The clockwork mouse she worked carefully to wind up was finally released unfettered.

A billion people, though a large amount, is still only 1/6 of the world. Even the day she died, more people (in the UK) watched Coronation Street than the news about her.

 

[Duchess]

That is what I would expect any grandmother to do. This is very much the lesson that Diana taught - caring for family and not just duty. The fact that the Queen, for the first and only time in her life, put family before duty, is the real impact of Diana on the RF for me.

now THIS is what i was looking for. you couldn't have put it any better. i think diana would be proud of the way the Queen and DoE helped the boys deal with what happened.

 

[Russophile]

I am sorry but I must disagree with you. In the United States everyone was talking about it. All the talk shows were dealing with nothing else and hundreds of thousands of people were calling in to every television station that dealt with the subject as well as people in every country of the world lining up to sign memorial books. It was not a small percentage of people who were "going crazy" with grief. A billion people watched the funeral and a full length motion picture was made dealing with this subject.

I agree. I stayed up PST to watch the whole thing. I just YouTubed it last night and caught what Her Majesty had said. She made an address to the population. That was unprecedented. She added everything and everyone that she could to help the family and the population deal with it. I felt she gave a fitting tribute.

 

[Skydragon]

I understand your positions fully. However, what the Royal Family did not understand was that to the public Diana was and will always be a member of the royal family. This could have been handled so easily if only someone had advised the Queen on the first day to make a statement right from Balmoral to the effect that they all join with the public in their grief over the loss of Diana and because of the boys they feel it best to stay at Balmoral to tend to them. It was the emptiness and lack of response that got the world upset. It was the wrong decision, but the Queen is entitled to put a foot wrong once in 50 years. Let us remember that she was not only in shock herself, she had her grandsons walking around like zombies and her son screaming out on the moors; not to mention having to deal with the Spencer family and their wrath.

No Diana was not a royal at the time of her death, she was an ex wife carrying on with a playboy. I am always amazed that some people want to put their imagined grief, before the genuine grief of the boys and people who actually knew the woman. How dare anyone dictate how someone should or should not react to a death.
There were no media people at Balmoral, there were no tell all stories coming from Scotland or statements released so where do you get your statement that 'her grandsons were walking about like zombies and her son screaming out on the moors'?

She did the right thing by looking after her grandchildren, she did the wrong thing by giving in to the bullying!

All the talk shows were dealing with nothing else and hundreds of thousands of people were calling in to every television station that dealt with the subject as well as people in every country of the world lining up to sign memorial books. It was not a small percentage of people who were "going crazy" with grief. A billion people watched the funeral and a full length motion picture was made dealing with this subject.

As the TV stations have all said, it was a slow news week and they had very little else to put on, they have also admitted that the public in the UK, who complained that it was overkill, were right. The figures released for people watching the funeral in the UK was just under half, (45%) I believe and a good amount of people at the funeral were either foreign visitors or people there so they could say they had been there. Some were on TV a short time ago saying it had been a bl**dy good knees up!

 

[Russophile]

She did the right thing by looking after her grandchildren, she did the wrong thing by giving in to the bullying!

And isn't it a shame that they did bully Her Majesty!

 

[Skydragon]

And isn't it a shame that they did bully Her Majesty!

Yes, yet another shameful episode in British history....

 

[lilibet80]

No Diana was not a royal at the time of her death, she was an ex wife carrying on with a playboy. I am always amazed that some people want to put their imagined grief, before the genuine grief of the boys and people who actually knew the woman. How dare anyone dictate how someone should or should not react to a death.
There were no media people at Balmoral, there were no tell all stories coming from Scotland or statements released so where do you get your statement that 'her grandsons were walking about like zombies and her son screaming out on the moors'?

She did the right thing by looking after her grandchildren, she did the wrong thing by giving in to the bullying!

As the TV stations have all said, it was a slow news week and they had very little else to put on, they have also admitted that the public in the UK, who complained that it was overkill, were right. The figures released for people watching the funeral in the UK was just under half, (45%) I believe and a good amount of people at the funeral were either foreign visitors or people there so they could say they had been there. Some were on TV a short time ago saying it had been a bl**dy good knees up!

I did not personally say that Diana was a member of the Royal Family at the time of her death. I am completely aware that she was not. However, to the public she was still seen as one of them as she was the mother of the future king.

 

[lilibet80]

Charles out on the moors

I did not personally say that Diana was a member of the Royal Family at the time of her death. I am completely aware that she was not. However, to the public she was still seen as one of them as she was the mother of the future king.

It was reported on the second day after Diana's death by someone who was working at Balmoral that Charles was seen and heard screaming out on the moors at Balmoral by one of the shepherds and that the children were very shocked. It was also reported later by one of the servants at Balmoral that the family were glued to the television convinced that this was the end of the monarchy. I have friends in England who called me in New York and told me that everyone was talking about it and were devastated, whether they believed Diana was in the wrong or not. It was an unspeakable tragedy that a woman of 36 with two young boys should have been taken in such a terrible way.

 

[BeatrixFan]

It was a tragedy but not unspeakable. These things happen all the time and just as make stars, we lose stars so it stands to reason that one should always remember that as easy as it is to become a star, it's easy for it all to end. There are hundreds of celebrities we could name who were taken all too soon but it isn't unspeakable tragedy - it's the human condition. The trouble is, just as happened with Marilyn Monroe, Carmen Miranda and James Dean, it's claimed that the world should mourn and so people who usually wouldn't give a damn, join in the wailing because they feel out of place if they don't. That's what we saw during the aftermath of Diana's death, it was the press holding a knife to the throat of anyone who wouldn't fall on the floor and wail in mock horror and I'd question just how genuine the feelings shown were on all sides.

 

[Elspeth]

Right, I've just deleted a couple of posts because this conversation was getting personal. Let's get back on topic, please.

Elspeth

British Royals moderator

 

[wbenson]

It was reported on the second day after Diana's death by someone who was working at Balmoral that Charles was seen and heard screaming out on the moors at Balmoral by one of the shepherds and that the children were very shocked. It was also reported later by one of the servants at Balmoral that the family were glued to the television convinced that this was the end of the monarchy. I have friends in England who called me in New York and told me that everyone was talking about it and were devastated, whether they believed Diana was in the wrong or not. It was an unspeakable tragedy that a woman of 36 with two young boys should have been taken in such a terrible way.

Again, "everyone" was not affected by it. Many people were, but just as many people didn't care one way or the other. On most other forums I'm a member of, there have been posts to the effect of "Must we do this again? It was annoying enough 10 years ago."

 

[Skydragon]

It was reported on the second day after Diana's death by someone who was working at Balmoral that Charles was seen and heard screaming out on the moors at Balmoral by one of the shepherds and that the children were very shocked.

I find that unlikely, although there are sheep at Balmoral, the chances of a shepherd being in the vicinity are remote. The estate covers over 50,000 acres and the sheep are nowhere near the castle.

It was also reported later by one of the servants at Balmoral that the family were glued to the television convinced that this was the end of the monarchy. I have friends in England who called me in New York and told me that everyone was talking about it and were devastated, whether they believed Diana was in the wrong or not. It was an unspeakable tragedy that a woman of 36 with two young boys should have been taken in such a terrible way.

Do you have a link to the statement from the servant?

Not everyone was devastated, a lot of people didn't take any notice of what Diana was up to and couldn't have told you where she was or anything else. A lot of people were talking about the excessive coverage of it, but if they said anything on the TV, they were hushed up.

It is always tragic when someone dies, what was worse about Diana's death, is that some of the public made an exhibition of themselves and treated her children and their family in such a disgraceful way!

 

[lilibet80]

Charles on the moors

There is no link to this. It was reported on both CNN and Fox news. I do not know if it is true, but it was reported.

 

[lilibet80]

No Diana was not a royal at the time of her death, she was an ex wife carrying on with a playboy. I am always amazed that some people want to put their imagined grief, before the genuine grief of the boys and people who actually knew the woman. How dare anyone dictate how someone should or should not react to a death.
There were no media people at Balmoral, there were no tell all stories coming from Scotland or statements released so where do you get your statement that 'her grandsons were walking about like zombies and her son screaming out on the moors'?

She did the right thing by looking after her grandchildren, she did the wrong thing by giving in to the bullying!

As the TV stations have all said, it was a slow news week and they had very little else to put on, they have also admitted that the public in the UK, who complained that it was overkill, were right. The figures released for people watching the funeral in the UK was just under half, (45%) I believe and a good amount of people at the funeral were either foreign visitors or people there so they could say they had been there. Some were on TV a short time ago saying it had been a bl**dy good knees up!

Perhaps it was different in America. Although it may have been a "slow news week" it was during the same week that Mother Theresa died. I was amazed that the coverage of Diana outshone Mother Theresa's death in coverage. However, I cannot speak for any other country, I only know what went on here. There was one channel that people were referring to as "The Diana Channel" because every time it was turned on there were pictures and commentary about Diana's death. It went on for over a month. I personally agreed with the Queen and her "take" on it. Most families would believe that an estranged ex-daughter in law would be claimed by her own family and that funeral arrangements would be made by them. The Queen's response was very natural and most people would have responded the same way.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Perhaps it was different in America. Although it may have been a "slow news week" it was during the same week that Mother Theresa died. I was amazed that the coverage of Diana outshone Mother Theresa's death in coverage. However, I cannot speak for any other country, I only know what went on here. There was one channel that people were referring to as "The Diana Channel" because every time it was turned on there were pictures and commentary about Diana's death. It went on for over a month. I personally agreed with the Queen and her "take" on it. Most families would believe that an estranged ex-daughter in law would be claimed by her own family and that funeral arrangements would be made by them. The Queen's response was very natural and most people would have responded the same way.

Mother Theresa died on 5th September 1997 - only two days before Diana's funeral and thus Diana's death had been the leading story for 5 days and the media had successfully manipulated the public to such a frenzy that to cover anything else would have been seen as disrespecting Diana and the media weren't about to loose the advantage they had gained that week in diverting public accusation against the paparazzi to blaming the RF for the death of Diana.

In Australia ALL our free-to-air networks except for the multicultural channel covered Diana's funeral live as none wanted to be seen as not being in sinc with the mood of the times. The multicultural channel had a show on about landmines. Interestingly it was the channel that covered Mother Theresa's funeral, which I found so very moving.

 

[Al_bina]

Just my personal opinion...

I do not think that the untimely death of Princess Diana severely undermined the already clouded image of the British Royal Family. If Her Majesty decided to concede to demands of certain parties involved in “the process of saving the monarchy” by organizing the state-level funeral for the Princess, she must have had her own reasons to do so. However, it would not surprise me much, if Prince Charles persuaded his mother into putting her subjects before her family.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I have always been totally disgusted with the reactions of the people who demanded that the Queen leave her grandsons, who had just lost their mother.

It wasn't as if these people really knew Diana but the boys did.

The Queen's actions were correct IMO - help her grandsons cope with their loss.

That is what I would expect any grandmother to do. This is very much the lesson that Diana taught - caring for family and not just duty. The fact that the Queen, for the first and only time in her life, put family before duty, is the real impact of Diana on the RF for me.

Where did the boys live then when they were in London? IIRC their home base was with their mother - so where yould they have stayed if the family had immediately returned to London? In lodgings not as familiar to them as the nursery at Balmoral where they had spent holidays since early childhood. So for me as a mother it makes sense that the RF tried to stablize the boys first in familiar surroundings before confronting them with the publics frenzy in London.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Where did the boys live then when they were in London? IIRC their home base was with their mother - so where yould they have stayed if the family had immediately returned to London? In lodgings not as familiar to them as the nursery at Balmoral where they had spent holidays since early childhood. So for me as a mother it makes sense that the RF tried to stablize the boys first in familiar surroundings before confronting them with the publics frenzy in London.

I find your post strange - my post is clearly saying that the RF acted correctly in staying at Balmoral.

You seem to by suggesting that that is not what I am saying.

When in London they stayed with their mother if it was her turn to have them or at St James Palace if they were with their father (as they did when they returned to London - they stayed in their own rooms at St James Palace - which was also their home).

They had decorated their own rooms at St James Palace when their father made that his London home and they would have been as familiar with that as with any other of their rooms. These boys, as they were then, had rooms in so many homes that none would really be that familiar to them in the way that most people would see their room as being. Most of us have only one home and threrefore only one room but these boys had rooms in at least six homes - Highgrove, Sandringham, Balmoral, Kensington Palace, St James Palace and of course, the place where they were spending about 80% of there time - school. Remember that they had been at boarding school since they were 8.

 

[TheTruth]

It was a tragedy but not unspeakable. These things happen all the time and just as make stars, we lose stars so it stands to reason that one should always remember that as easy as it is to become a star, it's easy for it all to end. There are hundreds of celebrities we could name who were taken all too soon but it isn't unspeakable tragedy - it's the human condition. The trouble is, just as happened with Marilyn Monroe, Carmen Miranda and James Dean, it's claimed that the world should mourn and so people who usually wouldn't give a damn, join in the wailing because they feel out of place if they don't. That's what we saw during the aftermath of Diana's death, it was the press holding a knife to the throat of anyone who wouldn't fall on the floor and wail in mock horror and I'd question just how genuine the feelings shown were on all sides.

Very well said BeatrixFan. The press indeed played a major role in the public reaction. Although, I believe some people 'fell on the floor' sincerely, not because it was planned. It was an horrible situation, like all the previous ones when some stars left too soon. The man who announced her death on TV was so stressed, he couldn't stop searching through his papers, moving his hands all over the desk ... His behaviour couldn't have been caused by the press because she had been dead for only a few minutes.

 

[Elspeth]

Mother Theresa died on 5th September 1997 - only two days before Diana's funeral and thus Diana's death had been the leading story for 5 days and the media had successfully manipulated the public to such a frenzy that to cover anything else would have been seen as disrespecting Diana and the media weren't about to loose the advantage they had gained that week in diverting public accusation against the paparazzi to blaming the RF for the death of Diana.

This is really interesting, that it'd also have happened in Australia where presumably the press didn't have anything to do with the events leading up to the crash. Do you tend to have intrusive press coverage of celebrities in Australia? (bearing in mind that Diana was really more of a celebrity than a royal at the time of her death)

 

[BeatrixFan]

I dont live there but I have cousins who do and they said that the Steve Irwin coverage was like the Diana coverage they saw when they lived here. It was very odd because I remember Germaine Greer saying that the criticism she recieved after criticising Steve Irwin was the same she'd have got had she criticised Diana here after her death.

 

[Onassis Line]

I think the RF were quite right to remain at Balmoral as long as they did, first and foremost the welfare of the boys was their only concern, aside from Charles liaising to bring Diana's body home.

What I did find deeply uncomfortable to watch was the boys, when they finally arrived at Buckingham Palace, moving among the crowds as they viewed the flowers, read the tributes and spoke to mourners. That's the only part that didn't sit right with me. But perhaps by that stage they were ready to interact with the public, albeit in a small way, how would we know we weren't there at Balmoral nor saw how they dealt with their grief.

I for one didn't expect the extent of emotion shown by people queuing to sign the condolence books, or lay flowers at the gates of BP, but I certainly didn't feel inclined to attend London and do the same. I remember being stunned by the news of her death, shocked at what a tragic accident it was, but got on with my life and work - unlike some of my colleagues who literally ground to a halt at the news and were affected for days, turning up for work with red eyes from crying.

 

[Duchess]

i was bit uneasy watching the boys too. at the time i thought they were a bit young to a) deal with the grief of losing their mother and b)meeting with the public at time when they probably would have preferred to be with their family.

 

[KelliB]

Did she behave appropriately? My oath she did. That the screaming masses put their own irrational need to see this family publicly mourn above the needs of those two boys (the welfare of which I'm sure the Queen and the rest of the Royal Family had upper most in their thoughts) was and is disgraceful.

 

[Roslyn]

Did she behave appropriately? My oath she did. That the screaming masses put their own irrational need to see this family publicly mourn above the needs of those two boys (the welfare of which I'm sure the Queen and the rest of the Royal Family had upper most in their thoughts) was and is disgraceful.

I agree.

And, like Duchess and Onassis Line, I was uncomfortable seeing William and Harry moving among the crowds. It seemed to me that they, too, had been pressed into service to help appease the crowds.

I remain astonished that the masses seem to have expected the RF to give more attention to their - what I considered to be very childish and selfish - needs, than to the boys who really had suffered great personal loss, and that the RF seems to have thought it appropriate for the boys to have to put on their "duty" face and go to work "cuddling" their grandmother's subjects.

But then perhaps the chasm between the Royals and me is wider than I can appreciate; perhaps their upbringing really does enable them, even as youngsters, to separate themselves into their personal and royal personas and for the royal persona to function in such a detached way.

 

[wbenson]

But then perhaps the chasm between the Royals and me is wider than I can appreciate; perhaps their upbringing really does enable them, even as youngsters, to separate themselves into their personal and royal personas and for the royal persona to function in such a detached way.

I think that, unfortunately, those are the kind of occasions that force them to learn how to detach their persona[SIZE=-1]e very quickly. I wouldn't think that there is any other way to learn that on such a scale. Yes, they are probably told how to act in public from a very young age, but I don't think that would prepare them for what they had to do.[/SIZE] As Harry said in his interview with Matt Lauer, they have their public faces and private emotions, but public faces are built during trying public events.

 

[pinkie40]

Perhaps if PM Blair hadn't immediately dubbed her the "People's Princess" and focused a bit more on the pain surely felt by the boys, then we, the mourning public, would have might had a bit more compassion to the Royal Family in a time for private emotions.

IMO, PM Blair set the tone for the mourning. His heartfelt blubbering allowed for the collective British stiff upper lip to quiver for awhile.

Remembering the precedent of mourning set for Lord Mountbatten (and yes, Prince Charles was in public tears), the Royals were allowed to grieve at their own pace. It was only the lower forms of the media (that wasn't present in 1979) that whipped a frenzy of Republicanism to rise to the surface to gasp around for a breath. Only no one even dared stepped in the footsteps of Cromwell that week to raise a revolution. After the ancient music of the funeral echoed in the crevices of the vast royal tomb of Westminster Abbey, I think all of us were reminded of the majesty and power of the Windsors to be masters of "spin control/survival"...and brought us all back to the reality of their ancient regime.

We forgot that week Diana had spent the previous year before her death, separating herself, her personal life and her causes from anything remotely royal. Her Majesty's courteous gesture of bowing her head to the coffin attoned for any low market tabloid criticisms of the behaviour of the RF,imo.

What is important is the royal family learned a lot about Diana and her fans all around the world...and the royals changed for the better because of this week.