I was fortunate enough to meet Charles and Diana when they toured NZ. One thing that really struck me was how amazing Diana was. Having seen the TV, watched the Wedding, loathed her dress, seen copious quantities of magazines with her face on the cover, if I thought much about her it was just that I thought her a pretty sort of English rose. But the reality was quite breathtaking.
Charles was walking behind her looking at her in sheer adoration and, to be honest, the men present seemed utterly riveted by her, the women not so much. She was one of those women that walk into a room and everyone stops talking. She was sheer charisma, and in those early days I doubt even she was even aware of it.
By the time I was a teenager I certainly saw the glamor she exuded. She dressed exceedingly well but there were so many reasons to find her unpleasant to watch. Some of those reasons come up in the television show, in fact. In the second half of the show they actually do show video of her sly looks, her smugness, her self-absorbed focus on her effect. (Some of the clips are chilling imo, especially the one they show just after the Morton book came out. Ouch! Nasty.) She was always calculating. It's there in the video. That is my teenage self speaking.
BTW the video focusses exclusively on Charles' 'betrayal'. Never once is it referenced that Diana was effectively 'sleeping around' herself from nearly the get-go of the marriage (3 to 5 years into a marriage is to me 'from the get-go'). The video seems to be peddling a very sanitized version of Diana. It's unclear what the purpose of the video really is, in fact. It is certainly no Diana I can make out from all that we know about her.
But in regards what you are saying above,
Marg, regarding Diana's charisma. I have read 'The Housekeeper's Diary', published in the mid-90's. Mrs Barry wrote the book to counter Diana's contention (at the time) that Charles wasn't a hands-on parent, nor a good parent. She wrote the book to set the record straight about Charles' parenting (very laudable) but there are a couple of factors that make the book intriguing.
Mrs Barry writes to set the record straight about Charles' parenting (she respected Charles) but of the two, she is clearly besotted with Diana, rather than Charles. In fact, she makes it clear that while both could have a temper, it was Charles who always apologized and made up for his outbursts (with servants) when they happened. The tales she tells of Diana's temper outbursts are harrowing. Diana in a temper tantrum could be extremely hurtful to those around her and she never apologized (according to Mrs Barry). Yet of the two Mrs Barry confesses to liking Diana better than Charles. Even though (she admits) Charles was the more fair employer! (P.S. I sometimes wonder who of her two children inherited Diana's temper - the 'Spencer temper'. Is it Harry?)
Anyway, Mrs Barry tells of her first meeting with Diana, when she got hired, and she explains that it was from that meeting that she was charmed. Through all the temper and nastiness, she maintained a preference for Diana. Curious, not so?
How she describes Diana, and Diana's effect, is very much along what you say,
Marg, though for Mrs Barry it went deeper. The best way I can describe how she described it was: Diana was the quintessential aristocrat, the charming, faultless beauty, with immaculate skin, impeccable dress and mannerly grace. Diana had all the physical and mannerly attributes that made 'looking up to' the aristocratic class, as a class, understandable. Such people 'deserve' to be 'looked up to' because they are different, 'better' than the average person.
The foregoing is just me and some of my thoughts as to why Diana so captured the imagination back then. I recalled Mrs Barry's book when you spoke about Diana's effect in person. She as well said that Diana was far more beautiful in person than any picture of her showed. (Princess Charlotte may luck out and have her grandmother's genes!)
Just awful. Camilla-Camilla-Camilla. All woven through. It's Diana's spin and her 'friends' spinning it all yet again for another go-round. It's using 'facts' that we know were never 'facts' to begin with. Where to begin? I'm at a loss.
I was fortunate enough to meet Charles and Diana when they toured NZ. One thing that really struck me was how amazing Diana was. Having seen the TV, watched the Wedding, loathed her dress, seen copious quantities of magazines with her face on the cover, if I thought much about her it was just that I thought her a pretty sort of English rose. But the reality was quite breathtaking. 
