The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #21  
Old 05-31-2015, 07:32 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: pinner, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,444
More claptrap for the absurdly credulous American public... [the one that a has a majority believing they have been abducted by aliens, and that evolution is a fantasy]. No doubt many millions of half-wits will lap it up !
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-31-2015, 04:05 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 2,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
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!)
__________________

__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-31-2015, 05:15 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,872
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
Oh dear, it's awful to watch. 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.

BTW I am again confronted with the images of the young Diana and stymied as to why she so captivated everyone. I will never understand it. There is nothing compelling regarding who I see in the video footage. I'm sure one had to have been there, and in a way I was, of course, but she never seemed interesting to me when I saw her in pictures when I was a little girl. Even now what I see is someone very puzzling and self-absorbed. I know a great deal more about her now, of course, so I understand why she was uncomfortable to watch. But that's hindsight.

Anyway, if one wants a rundown on the Diana Mythos, this is the 50 minutes you need to carve out of your life to watch. It's all there.

So I was right, from the 2 mins I watched it just seemed like Diana spin. Poor virginal sacrificial lamb being a victim of the evil husband, his evil mistress and evil family. I thought everybody had grown out of that pack of lies.
I do think Diana in the 80s was very pretty, especially when she is surrounded by people who look like Charles, Anne, Sarah Ferguson or are old like Elizabeth, Phillip, and Margaret, it really was like a rose blooming in the middle of a desert. But in the late 80's I feel she lost her appeal and wasn't as beautiful, but still compatible her to those around her she was still the standout. Plus the media loved her because she played to them and me great headlines even before she started working with them. Someone once theorized if Diana would be such a hit outside of the 80s with its Dynasry/Dallas mentality.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-31-2015, 05:39 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 13,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
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.

To this day, I have never seen a photo of her that came anywhere near doing her justice. That is not to say they weren't perfect images of her, they were, but they were one dimensional. Without her presence and energy, she would have been just another pretty face.

The media snapped what they saw and sold her as a fairytale princess. A cynical world ate it up. Magic!
I met an older teacher once, who had met Diana here in the States. I asked about his meeting with Diana. He said, he will never forget how tall she was and her beautiful piercing eyes.

Diana was a beautiful and very athletic young woman. I'm reminded of her when I see William and Harry, but also anytime her sisters appear in public.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-31-2015, 05:44 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,229
Maybe for some, but not for all. I wasn't a watcher of the high-glam evening dramas, but Diana had huge appeal to me. My own opinion is that most girls grow up with all kinds of fairytales in their heads as children, and Diana appeared to fit that archtype. She appeared to be a beautiful, kind young woman destined to live a happy, protected life. She appeared to be a throw-back to a past, supposedly more romantic time. Given the press and television coverage, which I think contributed a great deal to the whole 'fairytale' atmosphere around the courtship, engagement, and wedding, we had no hint of the rich and contradictory character beneath the image.

The 'soap opera' aspect didn't really begin until--at least in my memory--there was a big deal made over Princess Anne not attending Prince Harry's christening. Anne and Diana were made out to be rivals and at logger-heads, and talk about the relationships within the family really took off after that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Someone once theorized if Diana would be such a hit outside of the 80s with its Dynasry/Dallas mentality.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-31-2015, 06:24 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 2,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
So I was right, from the 2 mins I watched it just seemed like Diana spin. Poor virginal sacrificial lamb being a victim of the evil husband, his evil mistress and evil family. I thought everybody had grown out of that pack of lies.
Exactly what it was, now that you say it. A time warp. This could have been produced 20 years ago. It also blurred the lines between the facts, and even totally ignored the facts as we know them now (hence my time warp comment).

It appeared to be trying to establish a formal rivalry between the Queen and Diana, significantly painting the Queen as 'emotionally distant', never 'touching' her subjects (reference to gloves?). It tried to make out that the royal family could not deal with Diana's 'open emotional nature', yet we now know that the Queen (via Charles) arranged for Diana to see therapists throughout the 1980's. (Diana never cooperated with that). The BRF hardly had their heads in the sand regarding Diana's difficulties.

What does need to be said is that at the end of the show, in the last 10 minutes or so, relevant points were made (as well as interesting video shown of Diana's public lack of emotional control): one, that the flag is never flown half mast at BP, and when it was, that it was the Union Jack was explained (never heard of all that); and two, that the Queen's nod to the casket was a gesture the Queen makes at every funeral, and that it is a nod to 'death' not the person (I had never heard that).

Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
I do think Diana in the 80s was very pretty, especially when she is surrounded by people who look like Charles, Anne, Sarah Ferguson or are old like Elizabeth, Phillip, and Margaret, it really was like a rose blooming in the middle of a desert. But in the late 80's I feel she lost her appeal and wasn't as beautiful, but still compatible her to those around her she was still the standout.
Here I will disagree. I think Princess Anne in her younger days (everyone ages) was quite striking. Princess Margaret was always beautiful, and even into age (until she really began to age) comments were universal about the impact of her violet eyes.

The 'rose in the middle of the desert' is unfair to people who were simply aging, like Philip. You are effectively valuing youth over age. But that's our culture, not so?

Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Plus the media loved her because she played to them and me great headlines even before she started working with them. Someone once theorized if Diana would be such a hit outside of the 80s with its Dynasry/Dallas mentality.
Interesting point about Dynasty/Dallas. My mother loved those shows. It's a pertinent point. I don't think Diana would survive these days. I don't think she was surviving then, though. It was just a matter of time until the tide of public opinion would have turned on her imo, especially as she aged, and either married badly or kept with a string of lovers. Fame is fickle.

In all my reading, it's clear that every aggressive PR move Diana made was calculated to throw off bad press. She was wildly successful with her gambits, except for the last one, the Panorama Interview, which cost her the marriage and the HRH, and so much more that is generally never mentioned. Namely, from the Panorama Interview forwards all social doors were closed to Diana (even her brother closed the door on her which makes his rant at her funeral all the more despicable imo).

It's such a sad story. It really is. Tragic. "If only...." she had handled herself with more grace under pressure, and abided by the 'rules of her class' regarding arranged marriages (which I've no doubt her marriage was). But it was not to be. She allowed her popularity to go to her head and it destroyed her life. Sad.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-31-2015, 06:37 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 2,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
Maybe for some, but not for all. I wasn't a watcher of the high-glam evening dramas, but Diana had huge appeal to me. My own opinion is that most girls grow up with all kinds of fairytales in their heads as children, and Diana appeared to fit that archetype. She appeared to be a beautiful, kind young woman destined to live a happy, protected life. She appeared to be a throw-back to a past, supposedly more romantic time. Given the press and television coverage, which I think contributed a great deal to the whole 'fairytale' atmosphere around the courtship, engagement, and wedding, we had no hint of the rich and contradictory character beneath the image.
This goes along with my own thinking when trying to unravel this mystery of her appeal. I think the housekeeper, Mrs Barry, was alluding to that throw-back to an aristocratic archetype in how she spoke of Diana's impact. She felt she was in the presence of a 'high-born' aristocrat and she was honored to serve her, even when it was more hellish than heavenly.

Just an aside: I personally think Diana threw away Charles. She could have easily competed with any other woman in Charles' head (if that was what was happening). It seems very sad but what is never grasped is that Diana may have not wanted to make-it-up with Charles. She may have liked that he was engaged elsewhere and that she was free to have her own lovers. It was only when the press caught wind of the life-style of the Princess of Wales (because, unlike Charles, she was not discreet) and were about to blow-the-whistle on her (Squidgy-Tapes helped), that she set to work on the Morton book and decided to throw Camilla under the bus to save her own reputation. It's all pretty seamy when you really look at it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
The 'soap opera' aspect didn't really begin until--at least in my memory--there was a big deal made over Princess Anne not attending Prince Harry's christening. Anne and Diana were made out to be rivals and at logger-heads, and talk about the relationships within the family really took off after that.
I hadn't heard this. Interesting.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-31-2015, 06:38 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 13,202


Diana's interview alone wasn't the cause of her divorce and lost of her title HRH. It was her and Charles's antics that did them in. In reality, she and Charles were looking for some sort of clarity in their marriage and relationship. They wished things had been different, but they knew they they were headed for a divorce.

I think Diana tried to handle things carefully. Her emotional state over her marriage did get the best of her. With all that pressure, most people would have made lots of mistakes too. In the end, I don't think Diana destroyed herself. She was about to embark on a new beginning, but her summer trip to Paris did her in.

I'm not sure it's right to be upset with Diana over not being able to put up with her husband love for another woman.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-31-2015, 07:00 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 2,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
Diana's interview alone wasn't the cause of her divorce and lost of her title HRH. It was her and Charles's antics that did them in. In reality, she and Charles were looking for some sort of clarity in their marriage and relationship. They wished things had been different, but they knew they they were headed for a divorce.
This is a slightly different 'take' on events than I have come away with. Charles had asked his mother for permission to divorce a few months before the Panorama Interview, but was denied.

It's unclear what Charles' 'antics' would have been at this point that would have caused a divorce. It appears his mother The Queen did not think anything Charles was doing warranted granting her son his wish for a divorce.

The Panorama Interview was another matter. Remember that the impetus for Diana undertaking the Panorama Interview was twofold (she always had a PR gambit when she did these things): to address (and confess) the adultery with James Hewitt, and to 'explain away' the fact that she was avoiding police action against her for stalking another man via harassing phone calls. Diana simply did not understand that she needed to stop talking to the press.

When the Panorama Interview occurred, the Queen immediately began the process of divorce by writing a letter to Diana and calling both Charles and Diana in to discuss divorce. Within a short few weeks Diana was headed to divorce court, whereas before Panorama the Queen was staying that action, insisting that Charles work with the situation.

(It is widely thought that the divorce was precipitated by Diana's expressions of doubt in the interview that Charles was ready for the 'top job' and calling herself the queen of people's hearts. While those two factoids may have been the cherry-on-top, it's my opinion that the issues confronting the Queen at that moment were far more global. (I don't think she's that petty). Diana was simply not understanding that there were rules to this royal game, and breaching those rules could mean a republic. It was with that interview that the Queen was persuaded that Diana needed to be excluded for the protection of the monarchy. JMO).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
I think Diana tried to handle things carefully.
Not if you go by the video of her at that time, shown in this television show, in fact (but one has to persist to the last 30 minutes to get those bits). She was behaving atrociously for the cameras. She knew full-well what she was doing, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
Her emotional state over her marriage did get the best of her. With all that pressure, most people would have made lots of mistakes too.
I don't think she cared one fig for her marriage at that point. She was too busy having love affairs and putting the press off her scent. That was the pressure she was under, not the marriage. Claiming it was the marriage was her PR gambit to get the public's attention off the fact that the Princess of Wales was sleeping with (lots of) other men, to the point of even stalking them. She succeeded.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
In the end, I don't think Diana destroyed herself. She was about to embark on a new beginning, but her summer trip to Paris did her in.
Well, we can disagree here. She had a pretty good life as HRH, married to Charles. It was what she had wanted. it was why she went so far as to lie to Charles about liking blood sports and loving the country life. She won the Prince. Then she threw it all away. We know she wasn't happy about that in the end. She told a friend as much. She cried about it in public. She was not happy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
I'm not sure it's right to be upset with Diana over not being able to put up with her husband love for another woman.
But she had a pretty significant love for another man across years. You seem to be ignoring that Diana was not in love with Charles. She likely never was. (or she went in-and-out of love with him as it suited her). She married the title, not the man imo. She loved the lifestyle. In the end, she missed it.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-31-2015, 07:37 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 13,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
This is a slightly different 'take' on events than I have come away with. Charles had asked his mother for permission to divorce a few months before the Panorama Interview, but was denied.

It's unclear what Charles' 'antics' would have been at this point that would have caused a divorce. It appears his mother The Queen did not think anything Charles was doing warranted granting her son his wish for a divorce.

The Panorama Interview was another matter. Remember that the impetus for Diana undertaking the Panorama Interview was twofold (she always had a PR gambit when she did these things): to address (and confess) the adultery with James Hewitt, and to 'explain away' the fact that she was avoiding police action against her for stalking another man via harassing phone calls. Diana simply did not understand that she needed to stop talking to the press.

When the Panorama Interview occurred, the Queen immediately began the process of divorce by writing a letter to Diana and calling both Charles and Diana in to discuss the divorce with her. Within a short few weeks Diana was headed to divorce court, whereas before Panorama the Queen was staying that action, insisting that Charles work with the situation.

(It is widely thought that the divorce was precipitated by Diana's expressions of doubt in the interview that Charles was ready for the 'top job' and calling herself the queen of people's hearts. While those two factoids may have been the cherry-on-top, it's my opinion that the issues confronting the Queen at that moment were far more global. (I don't think she's that petty). Diana was simply not understanding that there were rules to this royal game, and breaching those rules could mean a republic. It was with that interview that the Queen was persuaded that Diana needed to be excluded for the protection of the monarchy. JMO).



Not if you go by the video of her at that time, shown in this television show, in fact (but one has to persist to the last 30 minutes to get those bits). She was behaving atrociously for the cameras. She knew full-well what she was doing, too.



I don't think she cared one fig for her marriage at that point. She was too busy having love affairs and putting the press off her scent.



Well, we can disagree here. She had a pretty good life as HRH, married to Charles. It was what she had wanted. it was why she went so far as to lie to Charles about liking blood sports and loving the country life. She won the Prince. Then she there it all away. I know she wasn't happy about that in the end. She told a friend as much. She cried in public.



But she had a pretty significant love for another man across years. You seem to be ignoring that Diana was not in love with Charles. She likely never was. She married the title, not the man.
Everything Charles and Diana did over time is what lead to The Queen writing to her son and daughter-in-law about divorcing. It all was too much to bear and the media was having a ball with the Waleses drama.

Diana did actually love the country. She grew up on the Sandringham Estate and Althorp and enjoyed the freedom countrylife had to to offer. She did not care for blood sports though. She tried her hand on shooting, but it wasn't for her. Which is okay for some members of the family, it's not a sport for everyone and they understand that. Diana also loved spending time at Sandringham during Christmas and often visited her former childhood home, Park House, and took long walks on the estate.

The Queen knew Diana since she was a baby. She was very good friends with Diana's father and of course knew the Spencer's very well. Like many mother-in-laws and daughter-in-law relationships, The Queen and Diana had their moments, but they loved and respected each other very much.

Charles and Diana did love each other and that love helped produce William and Harry. They just couldn't make their marriage work and they had tons of pressure on them. It's sad of course, but this happens to many families, just not with the entire world on their shoulders.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 05-31-2015, 07:55 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 2,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
Everything Charles and Diana did over time is what lead to The Queen writing to her son and daughter-in-law about divorcing. It all was too much to bear and the media was having a ball with the Waleses drama.
And you know that how? The facts are The Queen refused Charles' requests for a divorce until the Panorama Interview. It was only then that she finally relented.

Also, the media was having a field day with the the antics of the Princess of Wales, not with Charles. He was not in the headlines at that time. Have you read my full post? Please go back and read my post because I fleshed it out a bit more. Diana was subject to police action due to the stalking of a man via harassing phone calls. She was also admitting, not only adultery with another man, but being in-love with another man.

What were the antics of Charles?

I have a hunch the narrative for you must include Charles being complicit in the 'antics'. Diana must not be at fault. That's my hunch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
Diana did actually love the country. She grew up on the Sandringham Estate and Althorp and enjoyed the freedom countrylife had to to offer.
We can only go by what she did. Fact is, she told Charles she loved Balmoral before they were married. She evinced pleasure in the country pursuits and family life up at Balmoral, but once married she quickly made it clear that she hated Balmoral. This is what took place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
She did not care for blood sports though.
But another example where she pretended otherwise before the engagement, and only after the marriage made an issue of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
The Queen knew Diana since she was a baby. She was very good friends with Diana's father and of course knew the Spencer's very well. Like many mother-in-laws and daughter-in-law relationships, The Queen and Diana had their moments, but they loved and respected each other very much.
This is all reasonably accurate, which is why the television show's statements to the contrary, attempting to create a competition between the two women, is false. In fact, The Queen was so cognizant of Diana's troubles that while every other family member (including her heir) must make an appointment to see her, Diana was allowed to drop in at any time she felt the need. The Queen made herself absolutely available to Diana. This was not in the television show.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-31-2015, 08:24 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 13,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
And you know that how? The facts are The Queen refused Charles' requests for a divorce until the Panorama Interview. It was only then that she finally relented.

Also, the media was having a field day with the the antics of the Princess of Wales, not with Charles. He was not in the headlines at that time. Have you read my full post? Please go back and read my post because I fleshed it out a bit more. Diana was subject to police action due to the stalking of a man via harassing phone calls. She was also admitting, not only adultery with another man, but being in-love with another man.

What were the antics of Charles?

I have a hunch the narrative for you must include Charles being complicit in the 'antics'. Diana must not be at fault. That's my hunch.



We can only go by what she did. Fact is, she told Charles she loved Balmoral before they were married. She evinced pleasure in the country pursuits and family life up at Balmoral, but once married she quickly made it clear that she hated Balmoral. This is what took place.



But another example where she pretended otherwise before the engagement, and only after the marriage made an issue of it.



This is all reasonably accurate, which is why the television show's statements to the contrary, attempting to create a competition between the two women, is false. In fact, The Queen was so cognizant of Diana's troubles that while every other family member (including her heir) must make an appointment to see her, Diana was allowed to drop in at any time she felt the need. The Queen made herself absolutely available to Diana. This was not in the television show.
I'm not going to go much further into the Waleses drama, because this isn't the right forum to do so. As I stated, both Charles and Diana brought down their marriage and the years of drama is what lead to their divorce.

Yes, Diana did like countrylife and I'm sure she was taken by the beauty of Balmoral. She just didn't like the shooting sports much. She went on shoots with Charles and she herself took part, but it turned out not to be her thing. I'm sure Charles fully understood that. It's not a lie. One can love countrylife without taking a liking to the sport of shooting.

Diana had a pretty good relationship with her mother-in-law, father-in-law and even her grandmother-in-law. There are letters that show their affection for each other as well. Their relationships wasn't all that and a bag of chips though. There were difficult times too. The support was there, but Diana need other support too. Princess Michael of Kent can tell it better than I or many others can.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-31-2015, 08:40 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,872
Lady Nimue, you are misunderstanding what I am trying to say, Diana was in no way the best looking member of the family. Princess Margaret was 10x more stunning and looked like perfection some Hollywood producer created out of thin air. George VI is the best looking man in the family imo, and I know people apparently found Philip an attractive young man. My point is that by the time Diana came along all those people were 50 or above and to the masses they wouldn't be able to compete with the young, pink cheeked blonde Diana. Yes her youth is what appealed to so many and is perhaps part of the reason people started to be more interested in her as opposed to Charles. I am not saying that it is right, but I do think her age difference between those around her as well as her face made her stand out more. At the time of the 80s there was no one in the family who could compete with her. But if Princess Margaret circa the 1950s were in a room with her, there would be no competition.

I also don't know if agree that Diana didon't love Charles. I don't think she necessarily married his title and wealTh, I think she was an immature little girl who fell in love with a dream (the stupid Prince Charming crap) and similarly Charles fell in love with an image not the real person. They didn't spend enough time together to really delve under the surface. It is like when we first date a guy and the first months we love everything they do and every sport they watch....then the honeymoon period ends and reality comes back to all parties; Diana and Charles didn't wake to reality until it was too late.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-31-2015, 08:45 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 13,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Lady Nimue, you are misunderstanding what I am trying to say, Diana was in no way the best looking member of the family. Princess Margaret was 10x more stunning and looked like perfection some Hollywood producer created out of thin air. George VI is the best looking man in the family imo, and I know people apparently found Philip an attractive young man. My point is that by the time Diana came along all those people were 50 or above and to the masses they wouldn't be able to compete with the young, pink cheeked blonde Diana. Yes her youth is what appealed to so many and is perhaps part of the reason people started to be more interested in her as opposed to Charles. I am not saying that it is right, but I do think her age difference between those around her as well as her face made her stand out more. At the time of the 80s there was no one in the family who could compete with her. But if Princess Margaret circa the 1950s were in a room with her, there would be no competition.
There's no doubt that Princess Margaret was a true beauty in her youth. I would even include Her Majesty too.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-31-2015, 10:49 PM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
My point is that by the time Diana came along all those people were 50 or above and to the masses they wouldn't be able to compete with the young, pink cheeked blonde Diana. Yes her youth is what appealed to so many and is perhaps part of the reason people started to be more interested in her as opposed to Charles. I am not saying that it is right, but I do think her age difference between those around her as well as her face made her stand out more. At the time of the 80s there was no one in the family who could compete with her.

I also don't know if agree that Diana didon't love Charles. I don't think she necessarily married his title and wealTh, I think she was an immature little girl who fell in love with a dream (the stupid Prince Charming crap) and similarly Charles fell in love with an image not the real person. They didn't spend enough time together to really delve under the surface. It is like when we first date a guy and the first months we love everything they do and every sport they watch....then the honeymoon period ends and reality comes back to all parties; Diana and Charles didn't wake to reality until it was too late.
The press was on Diana's side long before the engagement because she and her family were already talking to the press.

Suggested reading: Colin Campbell's book Diana in Private.

Colin goes into detail on Diana's and her family tactics to ensnare Charles.

Diana used everyone to make her POW, including the press, her sisters, mother, grandmother, uncle, brother-in-law, Sarah Armstrong Jones, Amanda Knatchbull, etc.

Diana was not a little girl. She was a woman who stalked her prey, played with it and tried to kill it before she tossed it aside, only to try to grab it back when someone else revived Charles.

The RF could not compete with Diana not because she was beautiful, which she was not, but because she was using the press and they were not. She and her family were media savvy.

Bleached blonde.


Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 05-31-2015, 11:03 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,229
Here's an article from People about the Harry Christening Debacle.

A Windsor War - Feuds, Prince Harry, Princess Anne, Princess Diana : People.com

It was such a big deal that Charles and Diana were asked about it during their pre-American-1985-tour interview, and Anne was asked about it during an interview in Australia. Up to that point, the relationships between Diana and other members of the BRF really weren't an issue, at least not that I recall.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
I hadn't heard this. Interesting.
Re the Queen's ordering Charles and Diana to divorce. I think that it was definitely in response to the Panorama interview. Public opinion in the UK was divided between those who were pro-Charles and those who were pro-Diana. It was affecting the nation. I think that the Queen had to do something to stop the tit-for-tat actions, and the Panorama interview was the last straw. For Diana to publicly suggest that Prince Charles wasn't up to being King and that William should take his place was truly beyond the Pale.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 06-01-2015, 12:35 AM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 2,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
The press was on Diana's side long before the engagement because she and her family were already talking to the press.

Suggested reading: Colin Campbell's book Diana in private.

Colin goes into detail on Diana's and her family tactics to ensnare Charles.
I have ordered Colin's book this evening. You have me intrigued.

As for the talking, I have been aware that when all those pictures were being taken of Diana walking to her car and to her apartment in the very early days, she was apparently actually talking to the photographers before and after the photos, to the point of sitting in their cars, talking to them, with them being charmed by her. This got them on her side and they rallied to her 'cause' as a result. Imagine were that to happen today? I've read that in only one location. Is that accurate from what you know, Queen Camilla?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
Diana used everyone to make her POW, including the press, her sisters, mother, grandmother, uncle, brother-in-law, Sarah Armstrong Jones, Amanda Knatchbull, etc.
I've read about Diana's presence in Amanda Knatchbull's life when Amanda was still with Charles. Also, that Diana was present for lots of what was going on around Charles before she was a 'viable' contender as his wife. This idea that Diana was 'innocent' and had no knowledge of Charles' circle has always seemed 'odd'. I even read that Diana was present when 'Whiplash' Wallace walked out on Charles during the dance, which means she would have seen Charles and Camilla dancing. Only one source for that so don't know if accurate. Is it?

I have always felt that Diana's choice of Camilla to throw under the bus was calculating. She knew that the friendship was sufficiently well known by that point that any accusation could stick. In a way, Camilla was an easy target.

In the television show it does get mentioned that after Diana targeted Camilla openly, the Queen was directly seen with Camilla a few days later. The show speculates whether that was just a coincidence, or a conscious show of support, but I had never heard that factoid before. It's an interesting one. Fast forward to the second marriage and one has to doubt that Camilla would ever have been allowed into the royal family had she really been a home-wrecker. More a wronged friend, I have thought.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
Diana was not a little girl. She was a woman who stalked her prey, played with it and tried to kill it before she tossed it aside, only to try to grab it back when someone else revived Charles.
Interesting view. Haven't heard it spoken in exactly those terms. I could see such being true, though. There is so much in Diana's spin (basically the Morton book) that doesn't ring true to human nature, that is: regarding human nature in general, and to her own nature (Diana's nature).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
The RF could not compete with Diana not because she was beautiful, which she was not, but because she was using the press and they were not. She and her family were media savvy.
She definitely was using the press. I have always been impressed (not in a good way) with how adept she was with the press. She had the instincts of a Publicity Agent. She was fearless. (Where did she get that?) The Morton book, for example, the sheer moxie of it, belies innocence. Where did she get that idea? On her own? Perhaps a journalist friend? And the choice incidents, how perfectly they all resonated to the public's sensibilities. It's like someone wrote the script for her. She couldn't have gotten it better had she been a Phd in PR tactics. That Morton book is a standout.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
Bleached blonde.
Was she? After all this time, I never considered that.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 06-01-2015, 01:02 AM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 2,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
Here's an article from People about the Harry Christening Debacle.

A Windsor War - Feuds, Prince Harry, Princess Anne, Princess Diana : People.com

It was such a big deal that Charles and Diana were asked about it during their pre-American-1985-tour interview, and Anne was asked about it during an interview in Australia. Up to that point, the relationships between Diana and other members of the BRF really weren't an issue, at least not that I recall.
Thank you, Moonmaiden, it's a fascinating article.

This bit of text struck me (the article is written in January of 1985):
Quote:
"Undeniably, Diana has shown a new assertiveness of late by giving her first speech without Charles by her side at the launching of the liner Royal Princess and by making her first appearance in uniform as patron of the British Red Cross Youth. Yet the 23-year-old princess is a gadfly compared to Anne, the hardest working of all the Windsor children. She represented the Crown at 201 events last year, compared to 93 for Charles and 51 for Diana. One Palace insider was quoted as saying: "Anne works very hard and sees her sister-in-law picking up the glory. She's sick to the back teeth with it all."
I find the event count remarkable given what I see being done these days by the Queen and Anne and Charles, etc.. Anne did 201 events in 1984, whereas now she does around 500. I must get over to the event thread one of these days and start asking some questions.

Then there's this:
Quote:
"In one important way, however, Diana and Anne are very much alike: They both have iron wills. Anne rules Gatcombe Park, the sprawling estate her mother bought as a wedding gift. Diana's purview is nearby Highgrove, where her household staff has dubbed her "the Boss" and where she has earned a reputation for changing her mind. So far, however, Diana has remained firm in her unwillingness to reach out to her sister-in-law, a 10-minute drive away, and vice versa: The two families rarely socialize."
Some observations: that Diana was no push-over in her marriage; that she ruled the roost at Highgrove; and that it was being reported that the two families did not socialize as of 1984. Regarding the last, Mrs Barry (The Housekeeper) arrived at Highgrove in 1984/85 (I think, if my memory serves me) and she describes the marriage as already in a state of decline/breakdown. (She mentions the visits of James Hewitt btw). But what she also does mention is the fact that Anne visited her brother, and that Anne's children were regular playmates, showing up at Highgrove at will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
Re the Queen's ordering Charles and Diana to divorce. I think that it was definitely in response to the Panorama interview. Public opinion in the UK was divided between those who were pro-Charles and those who were pro-Diana. It was affecting the nation. I think that the Queen had to do something to stop the tit-for-tat actions, and the Panorama interview was the last straw. For Diana to publicly suggest that Prince Charles wasn't up to being King and that William should take his place was truly beyond the Pale.
Thank you for the insights. In all I have read, the Panorama Interview was what broke the camel's back. Even Diana was keenly aware of that fact. So much so that somewhere just before her death she expressed regret to a friend about having done it. Even Diana had come to realize that she had gone too far. She lost everything that had mattered to her. She thought she was invincible for some reason. She had always been able to manipulate/use the press to her advantage. It backfired that time. She didn't realize what a razor edge she had been walking with the Queen.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 06-01-2015, 01:54 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 13,202


Just sad. May God rest her soul.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 06-01-2015, 04:21 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,470
[QUOTE=Queen Camilla;1785067]The press was on Diana's side long before the engagement because she and her family were already talking to the press.

Suggested reading: Colin Campbell's book Diana in Private.

Colin goes into detail on Diana's and her family tactics to ensnare Charles.

Diana used everyone to make her POW, including the press, her sisters, mother, grandmother, uncle, brother-in-law, Sarah Armstrong Jones, Amanda Knatchbull, etc.

Diana was not a little girl. She was a woman who stalked her prey, played with it and tried to kill it before she tossed it aside, only to try to grab it back when someone else revived Charles.

The RF could not compete with Diana not because she was beautiful, which she was not, but because she was using the press and they were not. She and her family were media savvy.

Bleached blonde.


[/

You always go just too far really uncalled for.
And I wouldn't read anything by Colin cambell there is so much to do in this world that is fun and helpful to spend your days reading book after book about Diana


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


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
Secrets of Westminster (2014) PBS documentary CyrilVladisla The Electronic Domain 0 10-03-2014 07:36 PM
"Secrets of Althorp – The Spencers" - PBS Programme July 2013 Dman The Electronic Domain 21 07-08-2013 11:17 PM
Program of the Abdication of Queen Beatrix and Inauguration of King Willem-Alexander Princess Robijn Dutch Royals 4 03-19-2013 06:41 AM
"Secrets of Highclere Castle" January 2013 PBS US Program Dman The Electronic Domain 4 01-07-2013 11:50 PM
Program "Place Royale" rchainho Royal Family of Belgium 4 12-05-2005 01:33 PM




Popular Tags
aristocracy austria beatrice borromeo best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess victoria current events denmark duchess of calabria english books fashion poll general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein monarchy news november 2016 october 2016 parliament picture of the week prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince nicholas prince oscar princess claire of luxembourg princess elisabeth princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess mary current events princess of asturias princess sofia princess sofia's daytime fashion princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen silvia state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family victoria video games



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:04 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises