The Duchess of Cambridge: Will she become more popular than Diana?


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Toledo,

I'm quite familiar with the Lion in Winter. Its one of the top movies, though the speech you quoted didn't have such a profound effect.

I rather enjoyed the exchange between O'Toole and Katharine Hepburn.

Henry: Give me some peace.
Eleanor: Is it peace you want, how about eternal peace? Now, there's a thought.

The sad thing about Eleanor of Aquitaine is that she truly was an extraordinary woman and a legend in her own time, but few people today know who she is.

It really was a great movie.
 
I don't think that Kate will be more popular than Diana. I do think that Kate will become popular, but in her own way. Diana had spark and charm about her that people just love. I am not saying that Kate doesn't, but I just don't think that anyone will ever compare to Diana.
 
rhenae said:
I am not saying that Kate doesn't, but I just don't think that anyone will ever compare to Diana.

Thats exactly what this thread is doing, comparing them. If Kate and William get engaged, if they have the great big wedding, then Diana will truly be a thing of the past, as she already is for most people under 25.
 
At the present time, there's no reason for Kate to be more popular than her *possible* future husbands late mother.

If Kate and William do infact marry, they shall set their own "trend" (if one can call it that).

And, its most hard to "compete" with a lady who has since passed on. Diana's legacy and memory is ingrained in billions around the world. The late Princess of Wales made her mark, lived the life that was meant for her and left this world an icon of the 20th century.

Our generation(s) shall grow older, new one's shall step forward and to them, Kate will be what Diana was to many of us.

as she already is for most people under 25.

Not so...I am 20 and I still clearly remember Diana, as does everyone I know my age (and that's alot of people).


"MII"
 
Last edited:
Margrethe II said:
Not so...I am 20 and I still clearly remember Diana, as does everyone I know my age (and that's alot of people).
"MII"

What you remember can only be from the history books, you must have been around 5 when she married, 10 when they separated, 11 when she died. I would disagree that anyone of your age could clearly remember her, how many times did you meet for instance?
Most 25's and under, only 'remember' her as Williams mother, or from what they have been told or read, that's what happens. I too know a lot of 25's and under and that and the scandals she was involved in, is all they know about her.:eek:
Kate is the here and now, at the moment and nobody can compete with that.
 
Skydragon said:
What you remember can only be from the history books, you must have been around 5 when she married, 10 when they separated, 11 when she died. I would disagree that anyone of your age could clearly remember her, how many times did you meet for instance?
Most 25's and under, only 'remember' her as Williams mother, or from what they have been told or read, that's what happens. I too know a lot of 25's and under and that and the scandals she was involved in, is all they know about her.:eek:
Kate is the here and now, at the moment and nobody can compete with that.

I dont see any relevance to your comment "how many times did you meet for instance?"...what does this have to do with remembering the Princess?

Well, I remember what I remember and I am not going to be told otherwise, but thanks anyway :)

"MII"
 
Last edited:
Diana will never be the thing of the past no matter how big William and Kate's wedding will be. That is if they do get married. Diana's legacy will live on forever and she will continue to have a huge fan base no matter if people were young when she died or later on. Look at Marilyn Monroe and Elvis . They have a huge fan base of people who were not alive when they passed away. That will be the same for Diana.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Margrethe II said:
I dont see any relevance to your comment "how many times did you meet for instance?"...what does this have to do with remembering the Princess?
Well, I remember what I remember and I am not going to be told otherwise,

I notice you didn't correct the math. You wern't even born when she married, you were 4 when they separated, so it is all from books.

Kate is a living breathing vibrant young woman and is more relevent to most 20 year olds.
 
Skydragon said:
I notice you didn't correct the math. You wern't even born when she married, you were 4 when they separated, so it is all from books.

Kate is a living breathing vibrant young woman and is more relevent to most 20 year olds.

Why should I have to correct your miscalculation?.lol. :rolleyes:

I remember the separation years well, I grew up when they were separated...you really must stop insiting otherwise "sd" as you truely have no idea, but are merely assuming to know what I remember and what I don't.

Kate is more relevant, absolutely, but to a minority of people my age...Alas, we younger royal watchers have seemed to have dwindled over the past few decades...lets hope that with a possible new 'Wales set' looming on the horizon, that general interest shall re-ignite to what it was at the time of Charles & Diana's wedding :)

And no, I did not have the chance of meeting Princess Diana, but I have met HM the Queen ;)


"MII"
 
Last edited:
Margrethe II said:
I remember the separation years well, I grew up when they were separated...you really must stop insiting otherwise "sd" as you truely have no idea, but are merely assuming to know what I remember and what I don't.

I would just question the memories of a 9 year old child. I seem to have truly upset you over this but, you were only 10 or 11 when she died, so most of what you remember has to have been from books.
 
^ Sorry Margrethe II. I seriously know better than that. I didn't mean to offend anyone.
 
Skydragon said:
I would just question the memories of a 9 year old child. I seem to have truly upset you over this but, you were only 10 or 11 when she died, so most of what you remember has to have been from books.

No way :eek: not at all "sd", far from being upset...

You are just going to have to accept that I actually do remember many things from as early as the Wales's seperation. If you choose not to believe this, I shall loose no sleep over it, I assure you.lol.

Now, I suggest we get back on topic before we are reprimanded by the moderating or administrating authorities...let us keep our dignity :D

"MII"
 
Last edited:
Margrethe II said:
Now, I suggest we get back on topic before we are reprimanded by the moderating or administrating authorities...let us keep our dignity :D

Yes lets.

If you lose a child, it is not replaced by another, the replacement is not more or less popular than the child that has gone.

There will be people who are fans of Diana and there will be fans of Kate, some will be fans of both.
 
Last edited:
Skydragon said:
I hope she doesn't bring too much excitement to the royals, if indeed they do get married. Lets hope everyone has moved on from those days. We have Mary, Maxima, Letizia and all the other young royals now.:)

these other young royals that you talk about are virtually unknown in other parts of the world. they're not even reported on here so i for one hope that kate brings that spark of excitement back to the royals.
 
Laraib said:
Thank-you. Diana was and still is a legend. She just isn't a memory, she is a smell that still lingers on. Diana was a picture that didn't need a frame to be beautiful, Kate on the other hand can't be compared to any of it.:) ;)

a smell??? :rolleyes:
 
Skydragon said:
None of them are 'legends'.
Legendary means a famous person who exists only in legend.
Legend is a traditional story or myth.

i think you know what point is trying to be made.:mad:
 
Duchess said:
these other young royals that you talk about are virtually unknown in other parts of the world. they're not even reported on here so i for one hope that kate brings that spark of excitement back to the royals.

Yes, that's true. We hardly hear about the British royals here in Canada, let alone the royals from other countries. I would venture to guess that most Canadians have never heard of Mary, Maxima, Mathilde, etc. Do you even think many Canadians have heard of Kate?

I agree, Duchess, that it would be nice to have a bit of excitement back again. I think that the last years of the Queen's reign will be pretty calm & quiet. I also imagine the same for all of Charle's reign. So it would be nice if William and whomever he chooses to marry, could bring a fresh perspective on things. We just don't want too much excitement!!
 
Shynes said:
I highly doubt a women set to become a royal soon would buy their clothes at some regular shop right off the rack. Instead, I think, they'd probably privately consult with a designer to custom make a few pieces for them.

the suit diana wore to announce her engagement was right off the rack!
 
Skydragon said:
What you remember can only be from the history books, you must have been around 5 when she married, 10 when they separated, 11 when she died. I would disagree that anyone of your age could clearly remember her, how many times did you meet for instance?
Most 25's and under, only 'remember' her as Williams mother, or from what they have been told or read, that's what happens. I too know a lot of 25's and under and that and the scandals she was involved in, is all they know about her.:eek:
Kate is the here and now, at the moment and nobody can compete with that.

why would say that they can't possibly remember her clearly? of course they could remember her clearly? and why would you ask if they've met?
 
Squidgy said:
Yes, that's true. We hardly hear about the British royals here in Canada, let alone the royals from other countries. I would venture to guess that most Canadians have never heard of Mary, Maxima, Mathilde, etc. Do you even think many Canadians have heard of Kate?

I agree, Duchess, that it would be nice to have a bit of excitement back again. I think that the last years of the Queen's reign will be pretty calm & quiet. I also imagine the same for all of Charle's reign. So it would be nice if William and whomever he chooses to marry, could bring a fresh perspective on things. We just don't want too much excitement!!

what i meant was that other royal families are virtually unknown here but the british royals are reported on although much less since diana's death.
 
I think any of us are going to get our major impression of Diana, Kate, or any other royal primarily from the media and our impressions of them will vary depending on when we started watching.

I remember Charles' dating period in the seventies so Diana was already the 4th or 5th girl he was linked to.

One thing I do NOT wish for is some more excitement back in the BRF. They finally seem happy after a lot of years of hard times. Charles and Camilla are happy and doing well, Sophie and Edward were finally able to get married and have a child and Sophie just glows. The Queen and Prince Philip are finally able to enjoy their golden years without worrying about their children. Now if only Andrew could find someone nice to settle down with it would be perfect.

The excitement was great for the fans but hell for the family itself. I think they deserve a break.
 
ysbel said:
One thing I do NOT wish for is some more excitement back in the BRF ...
The excitement was great for the fans but hell for the family itself. I think they deserve a break.

Yes, that is true Ysbel. Your point is well taken.

However, I think we need the royal family to be a bit exciting for people, otherwise the risk is that people will become apathetic about the institution of monarchy. It's a very fine line though. We certainly don't wish to see what happened in the 80s & 90s be repeated.
 
Duchess said:
why would say that they can't possibly remember her clearly? of course they could remember her clearly? and why would you ask if they've met?
"You wern't even born when she married, you were 4 when they separated", is what you took the reply from. As I said in a later reply, I and a lot of people would question the 'memory' of such a young child and therefore the memories would probably not be first hand.
I asked if they had met because if not, it is all hearsay or from biased (either way) books, not from memory at all.
these other young royals that you talk about are virtually unknown in other parts of the world. they're not even reported on here.
Just because they are not reported in your part of the world, CP Mary is very popular in Australia for instance.
As for the other old post, none of them are legends, they are just dead celebrities.:mad:
As MII has already said, it is better to stay on topic, rather than refer back to posts of 22/02
 
ysbel said:
One thing I do NOT wish for is some more excitement back in the BRF. They finally seem happy after a lot of years of hard times. Charles and Camilla are happy and doing well, Sophie and Edward were finally able to get married and have a child and Sophie just glows. The Queen and Prince Philip are finally able to enjoy their golden years without worrying about their children. Now if only Andrew could find someone nice to settle down with it would be perfect.

The excitement was great for the fans but hell for the family itself. I think they deserve a break.

Very well said, ysbel, that is what a lot of people forget, the family that had to live through such traumatic times. Diana is out of it but, her sons and the rest of the people who were around at the time are still being made to suffer and it is, in my opinion a terrible thing to do to anyone, start comparing them to a dead person.

Kate is Kate and if she marries William, the best of luck to her and lets hope that she isn't hounded.
 
Squidgy said:
Yes, that is true Ysbel. Your point is well taken.

However, I think we need the royal family to be a bit exciting for people, otherwise the risk is that people will become apathetic about the institution of monarchy. It's a very fine line though. We certainly don't wish to see what happened in the 80s & 90s be repeated.

Good point, Squidgy, though I think excitement in general is a little problematic for the BRF. With other royal families, its not that much of a problem.

The Danes have a tradition of marrying outside of Denmark which is an easy way to keep the excitement and interest high without damaging the DRF. It's always fun to see how a foreign princess will adapt to the language and customs of her new country. I think the tradition of marrying foreigners has made the DRF more lenient and forgiving towards their in-laws; they knew right away the women would face challenges and had to make allowances for it. I was saddened to learn of the divorce of Joachim and Alexandra but they managed that with the minimum of pain for their children and their families.

But the British don't have the recent tradition of marrying outside of Britain. George V married Mary of Teck who spent a lot of time in England, George VI married Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, already a Brit, Elizabeth II married Prince Philip who had assumed a British passport and fought for Britain during the war, and Charles married Lady Diana, an English aristocrat. They tend to want to marry women who they think will fit the mold as much as possible before they marry and its possible that in doing so they underestimate the challenges that the women would have once they're in the royal family.

The last truly foreign Princess of Wales was Alexandra of Denmark and she definitely added some excitement and appeal to the family. I'm always charmed to read of the little family traditions that the BRF practice to this day which Alexandra brought to England.

Finally, to answer the question of this thread, I don't think any woman William marries is going to be as popular as Diana because William is already uncomfortable with press attention. He would naturally shy away from any woman who would attract the attention and excitement that Diana did. So I don't expect him to choose an exciting partner.
 
ysbel said:
He would naturally shy away from any woman who would attract the attention and excitement that Diana did. So I don't expect him to choose an exciting partner.

I don't think popularity will come into it, I think what everyone is really talking about is, will Kate be a celebrity like Di, and the answer to that is no, because she wouldn't want to be.
 
Skydragon said:
I don't think popularity will come into it, I think what everyone is really talking about is, will Kate be a celebrity like Di, and the answer to that is no, because she wouldn't want to be.

Point taken, skydragon. Someone could be as well liked as Diana but not attract the type of attention. I was talking about the celebrity and not the popularity per se.
 
Will Kate Middleton be as popular as Princess Diana? First she has to nab the prince....

Menarue
 
i think diana was such a powerful symbol. her patronages were strong, her noble backgound, her beauty and elegance, her charme and approachableness... were features that enhanced her public image and made it quite understandable that she obtained such a huge popularity. i don't know whether kate would be able to get the same attention and it's very much up to her and how she behaves, but i truly believe she has potential to match up diana's popularity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom