A New Diana?

[Denville]

True but its possible that a royal family might hope for a "Diana wthout the faults", ie a charming beautiful special bride who would raise the RF's profile and attract the public.. but hopefully without making te mistakes Di made

 

[Osipi]

From what I've seen with the marriages that have occurred after Diana, it seems like the Family accepts each person that marries into the family as they are with their own strengths and abilities to make a contribution.

With all the eyes that have been on William and Kate over the years, I think Kate has been kind of like what we could call the AntiDiana. Through no fault of her own, with being thrust in the limelight, she has in her own way become a sensation with the right parameters to go the Diana route but chooses to strive not to. Her and William are a team. They support each other and are not self seeking individuals. That's why they work so well together.

 

[Curryong]

Of course Diana can't be copied or replaced as a person.

As a world-wide phenomenon that time has passed too. Diana became famous in a world in which magazines, the print media and TV and films ruled. Women bought weekly magazines as a matter of course in the 1980's in a way that would be incomprehensible to young women today.

I note that this thread began years before William's marriage. I think the British press were hoping, after William's marriage to Kate, that she would be a new Diana and that newspapers and magazines would fly off the shelves as they had done nearly thirty years before.

It didn't happen because of the impact of the personal Diana, whom the camera loved, a combination of, in the beginning, the innocence of a twenty year old, melded with warmth, glamour, charisma and a then new informality with the public that just wouldn't be able to be replicated today.

People didn't have Twitter then, didn't have cell phones, didn't have forums or blogs. Any attempt at a 'new Diana' in 2016 would bring thousands of people discussing hair, new clothing, (inevitably some would hate it all) whether she looked bloated or pregnant, whether she had had work done or was going to have work done, her complexion, spots?, whether her photographs were too photoshopped, lovers, where she was seen shopping yesterday, where she went for lunch with friends today. And celebrities of world fame wattage today are faced with the kind of criticism, sarcasm and on-line bullying on their Facebook pages that Diana never dreamed of.

If Diana thought her life was unsupportable at times because of critical articles and paps and press following her in the 1990's, any new Diana would crack up under the pressure in 2016 and onwards.

 

[WreathOfLaurels]

I don't think we will be seeing something like the "Diana phenomenon" again. It was the product of the pre Internet/social media age where print media and television still dominated - this means that there's now some greater control over media presentation than there was in the past along with greater critisim of the paparazzi - ironically Diana's death was a big factor in this. The other difference was that obsession with celebrity in the late 1980s and 1990s was more intensely focused on a smaller group of individuals instead of the wider diffusion we have today, again thanks in no small part to the Internet. The other main reason is that no modern RF is going to let somone who was clearly troubled and unwell in retrospect marry into the family and certainly not so young - Diana's glamour and looks got us interested but it was her character flaws and later intrigues that kept us all hooked to this whole tadwry mess

 

[WreathOfLaurels]

True but its possible that a royal family might hope for a "Diana wthout the faults", ie a charming beautiful special bride who would raise the RF's profile and attract the public.. but hopefully without making te mistakes Di made

A Diana without faults would be what the fanfic authors would call a Purity Sue - too good to be true and too hard to take seriously - you need some flaws, it makes you human and helps throw your good traits and good works into relif.

Nobody is perfect and those who try to be come off as cold and false - it's very off putting. Just being the best self you can be is better as it's more authentic and let's people know that you're still human

 

[Denville]

Unfortunately Diana's faults were of a kind that negated a lot of the good side. She had charm and warmth and made people love her.. but she was lacking in "stick to it iveness" which meant that she got emotional and upset and walked out on a lot of the good things she did. She was friendly but befreinded the wrong people. I think that it might be possible to have a royal wife who had warmth and openness without the volatility. I agree that RFs are problaby now more careful and don't want a very young girl whose character is not yet developed, marrying into them in case she turns out very different to what she was like a teenager.

 

[lucien]

True but its possible that a royal family might hope for a "Diana wthout the faults", ie a charming beautiful special bride who would raise the RF's profile and attract the public.. but hopefully without making te mistakes Di made

Oh gawd...I hope NOT!One was enough.

 

[Curryong]

Oh come on Lucien. Someone beautiful, charming as well as intelligent, dynamic, eager, funny, energetic in the BRF. Doesn't that remind you of a certain European Queen?
Maxima! Gosh, I wish she was a British Royal. Like Diana she draws all eyes to her, and as Denville says, she 'raises the profile and attracts the public'. That's what's needed!

 

[Lee-Z]

...and like with Diana, Maxima is by some also said to "overshadow" the born royals in the family...
In other words, you can never please everybody

 

[SLV]

...and like with Diana, Maxima is by some also said to "overshadow" the born royals in the family...
In other words, you can never please everybody

True, but contrary to Prince Charles, our King is not bothered by it and (I think) even enjoys it.

 

[Skippy]

I think so too but I also think Máxima has taken a somewhat more subdued attitude since her husband became King. And that is not a bad thing at all, since -for me- Willem-Alexander is lacking what I want to see in a King (and what his mother and daughter do have).

 

[Marty91charmed]

The won't ever be a new Diana, ever: The age, that charm, that certain manipulation, the way of acting towards and from the media, the dynamics, the wat the BRF was at the time. These are just some of the points that made Diana who she was. So I don't see any chance at all.

 

[Denville]

Oh come on Lucien. Someone beautiful, charming as well as intelligent, dynamic, eager, funny, energetic in the BRF. Doesn't that remind you of a certain European Queen?
Maxima! Gosh, I wish she was a British Royal. Like Diana she draws all eyes to her, and as Denville says, she 'raises the profile and attracts the public'. That's what's needed!

Does she? I wouldn't know her or the dutch monarchs from hollywoods latest.

 

[Curryong]

Well, the BRF are the most well-known Royal family in English-speaking countries, and that's fair enough I suppose. However Maxima is well-known and popular in continental Europe I think, including the Netherlands, of course. I think she's delightful, but then I like extrovert royals, bubbly and enthusiastic.

 

[EllieCat]

Well, the BRF are the most well-known Royal family in English-speaking countries, and that's fair enough I suppose. However Maxima is well-known and popular in continental Europe I think, including the Netherlands, of course.

We know her here, too in NZ! However, since I'm half Dutch (though born in NZ) I do know a lot of Dutch immigrants, and of course they know their Royal Family. I think Maxima is lovely, but she does not have the publicity Diana had. I don't think there will ever be another Diana; it was the time, it was her youth and beauty, it was before we found out what she was truly like (both her virtues and her flaws) and in the 80s that sort of thing was just taken at face value, and she did have a fantastic face! It was a different age; the Royal Family were perceived differently, there was not the negative and downright nasty reporting that there is now. I don't think we need to know everything about the Royals, but half of what is printed today is made up so we probably don't! Kate, though lovely and I'm sure a really nice person, who is trying so hard IMO, just doesn't have the charisma Diana had.

 

[Curryong]

Yes, Diana did have charisma by the bucketload and warmth and good looks. But you're right. The time when she was a Royal superstar has well and truly gone and it's not coming back.

 

[TLLK]

We know her here, too in NZ! However, since I'm half Dutch (though born in NZ) I do know a lot of Dutch immigrants, and of course they know their Royal Family. I think Maxima is lovely, but she does not have the publicity Diana had. I don't think there will ever be another Diana; it was the time, it was her youth and beauty, it was before we found out what she was truly like (both her virtues and her flaws) and in the 80s that sort of thing was just taken at face value, and she did have a fantastic face! It was a different age; the Royal Family were perceived differently, there was not the negative and downright nasty reporting that there is now. I don't think we need to know everything about the Royals, but half of what is printed today is made up so we probably don't! Kate, though lovely and I'm sure a really nice person, who is trying so hard IMO, just doesn't have the charisma Diana had.

I agree that the era in which a royal superstar would receive publicity and attention like Diana has ended. To be honest I do believe that sort of media attention was starting to fade prior to her death and will not likely return for the reasons that you have stated.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

There is only one Diana, one Mathilde, one Mary, one Maxima, one Rania etc.
I've got troubles comparising the CP these days to Diana. It's unfair to them and to Diana. She was a person on her own just like the others are a person on their own.
Just because Empress ''Sisi'' Elisabeth is my favourite royal all time does not mean I want or have to search the new Sisi in Maxima just because she is going to be the future queen of my country. It's not fair.

And you can all wonder yourself; Do they even want to be labelled as the new Diana?
I wouldn't.

Any royal lady who is labeled as the new Diana may subconsciously wonder how thoroughly she is being scrutinized and compared to the original Diana.

 

[Dman]

There will never be another Diana. She was one of a kind. Everyone else will be themselves.

 

[Denville]

Well, the BRF are the most well-known Royal family in English-speaking countries, and that's fair enough I suppose. However Maxima is well-known and popular in continental Europe I think, including the Netherlands, of course. I think she's delightful, but then I like extrovert royals, bubbly and enthusiastic.

Not a fan, really.. of the bicycling monarchies. of course Royal life becomes more "ordinary" as time goes on. THat's bound to happen and it is good. we don't want them living in castles all the time and never doing any work etc but I think that the continental monarchies overdid the "simplification" and I always wonder how sincere it is.
But I felt that Diana, if she'd been more intelligent would have been great at simplifying the Brit monarchy without losing a touch of dignity and "mystery" and grandeur. (After all if they are just the same as us, or as celebs what's the poit of them at all?)
I think she had an instincitive knowledge of how to do that, and if Say Charles had been more modern minded, he could have supplied the intellectual side of "how to go into the 21st Century without completely taking the monarchys' glamourous side away. and she could have done the "human" side fo it.
But I don't think she was extrovert really. I think that she was rather shy, and not very social, but she did care about people and she did find satisfaction in dealing with them in her royal duties. But it was something she had to work at a bit, she didn't come across to me as very bouncy or outgoing, just warm and approachbale. I'm not really keen on extroverts...

 

[Denville]

I fade prior to her death and will not likely return for the reasons that you have stated.

I'm not sure. I think she was special because she was herself..(Perhaps the social conditions of her time helped to make her well known but even so, I think ti was mostly to do with her own personality).

Very few people Do have that charisma. Maybe they only come along in royal life once In a hundred years or so. Fergie had a touch of it, but she was way too flawed... Diana was flawed too, of course, (not the way F was) and in the end she sort of walked out fo the royal life..
But I think that if she had lost some of the popularity, it was due to the War of the Waleses. yes we wanted to see her, and have stories abt her, but when they increasingly became about an ugly divorce, people did go off the story...
SO I agree that I don't think there will be another Diana because Dianas don't come along that often.

 

[Curryong]

I think Diana was certainly unique and won't be replaced. I agree that the gilt started coming off the gingerbread with regard to Diana's image during the War of the Wales and continued after the edgy divorce negotiations. Diana mis-stepped I think, by jettisoning all those charities she was involved in because 'of the loss of her Royal status...'

The Press had begun to snarl at Diana in those last months of her life in a way that had never happened to her before. (Not that Charles's PR was much better. It remained in the doldrums for years.) And I don't know whether the British Press didn't like middle eastern playboys or not, but they really went on the attack at the time of the romance with Dodi.

Then her death changed everything and we got St Di. As Laurels said in an earlier post, there isn't that level of media concentration on royals or celebrities any more, or on the minutiae of their lives. It's much more diffuse nowadays.

 

[Jacknch]

There have been plenty of charismatic people marrying into other royal families since the early 2000's - one of two have exceptionally charismatic personalities that with vibrancy they naturally project, allowing them to become extremely popular and loved in their own countries and to those beyond who follow those particular royal families.

However, in terms of there being "another Diana", we would be looking for anyone who is sufficiently well known enough to be reported upon globally on practically a daily basis - as yet this hasn't happened in over 20 years.

 

[Curryong]

No, there hasn't and I don't expect there will be. However, the BRF has captured the English-speaking market and interest, I would suggest. How much coverage do the Belgian or Netherlands royal families get in British and US newspapers for example? Monaco perhaps is a bit of an exception because of the Princess Grace legacy..

Queen Letizia gets a little more and of course is heavily covered in Spain and Latin America. However, Leti, fashionable and lovely though she is, (I do admire her) doesn't quite have that indefinable quality that would make a new Royal superstar.

And again there is the language barrier making a difference. It does seem to me that for the sake of US media alone, if a charismatic new Royal arose in, say, a generation's time, she would have to come from the ranks of the BRF. Sorry if this sounds Anglo-centric.

 

[Jacknch]

I tend to agree, Curryong - the whole idea would be almost completely dependent upon the whims of the media and how much coverage around the world such a new royal would get in order to promote and, in some senses, define or create the "Diana effect".

So for me, it has less to do with personality, charisma, allure and looks of which I think all of the royals have to one degree or another and all to do with the media.

On several occasions in the past, royal brides in Europe have been described as "a new Diana" or "x country's own version of Diana" and then nothing is ever heard of again.

 

[Lee-Z]

Ofcourse Diana had many facets, so the question "new Diana" is a bit complicated to answer f.i. with regards to "good causes" there are many princesses who do similar but maybe with less media coverage in anglo-orientated countries

However... in a media world dominated by Kardashians, Celebrity Big Brother (in many varieties) and WAG's... would any RF even *want* to have the level of media exposure now that Diana had then?
I can just picture QEII's "we're not amused" face while i'm writing that

As were on an english speaking forum i agree that non of the other european RF's would have that level of exposure in the anglo world; potentially P.Charlene of Monaco could have been in the position to "score" exposure like that, but I don't think that is something she aspires

 

[Denville]

I Then her death changed everything and we got St Di. As Laurels said in an earlier post there isn't that level of media concentration on one or celebrities any more, or on the minutiae of their lives. It's much more diffuse nowadays.

I know this post is not really in the right thread but I'l put it here? I think that Diana was losing popularity partly becauase her LONG period of great popularity had begun to run to an end.. It happens, even for charismatic wonderful public figures that the press get bored iwht always loving them.. etc.. and get more ciritical. Things change.
BUT apart from that I think it was mostly the war of the Waleses thtat made her lose popularity. She acted more erratically, she was involved in affairs with more than one man, with married men. She was chasing O Hoare with phone calls. I don't think that the press hated her for going with Dodi, but he was at best a lightweight playboy and he also had bad baggage in the shape of MAF. And while she was going to give up her charties, once she wasn't an HRH, she did it in the wrong way. She looked like she was throwing them over and sulking.. she should have done it by giving them time to find new patrons..AND more importantly when she said she was going to concentrate on 6 charities, she should have been seen doing that, working hard for her chosen ones and learning more about them. But her work was fitful. So I think all of that began to make the public cooler on her, less sympathetic.. and the Press followed that feeling..
I was a big fan but the endless sniping of the war of Waleses, a bitter divorce, does not look good, and one began to get tired of it and feel a distaste for her and Charles for going on with it.. It was time to come to an end, but I think it only did when the queen said "divorce and say no more to the papers"..

 

[Dman]

Diana's death changed a lot of things. I'm not sure any royal nor the media want that again.

I was just watching her new bio on the REELZ Channel and Diana lived through a crazy time of Dynasty and a new celebrity era. I think it was even too much for her to handle.

 

[Mirabel]

I was just watching her new bio on the REELZ Channel and Diana lived through a crazy time of Dynasty and a new celebrity era. I think it was even too much for her to handle.

I agree.
Diana was beloved by the public for years, beautiful and very much imitated.
But I think she was very unhappy in her life.

The men she chose were awful, imo. And very few of her relationships (including friends and family) seemed to run smoothly.

I felt she was spiralling down, as Robert Lacey said. I always thought she'd end up like her mother.

 

[Suzzanah]

Diana was one of a kind. Do not wish her life on anyone. Her death was tragic. Let each Royal forge ahead like the stars that only they can be. And besides,brunettes have more fun we know!