Kate Middleton: Will she be more popular than Diana?

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by Amelia

Diana is a legend to those who were interested in her at the time but to the new generation who weren't born or were too young at the time to remember when she was almost always on the cover of daily newspapers, she is just the same as the Queen Mother or Princess Margaret, a deceased princess.

Well, I agree with the fact that the word 'legend' doesn't fit for everyone. I don't think it fits my definition anyway. However I disagree that younger generations will just see Diana as a deceased royal. I was 6 when she died and I still have more interest in Diana than in the Queen Mother for example. If you ask many people of my age or even younger who are interested in British Royals, many will say that Diana attracted their attention first and that it moved to a general royalty interest.

[Amelia]

If you ask many people of my age or even younger who are interested in British Royals, many will say that Diana attracted their attention first and that it moved to a general royalty interest

I actually don't think they would. Diana died over 11 years ago now, there is nothing new to attract the younger generation - she was know for her charity work and her style. Her charity work doesn't seem to have continued after she died, does the memorial fund still exist? Her style is dated and not going to appeal to a younger generation. If someone already has an interest in the Royal Family then sure I can see them being interested in finding out about Diana but the average person no, Diana created great interest in the Royal Family when she was alive but not now, there are too many living celebrities to interest people.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by Amelia

I actually don't think they would. Diana died over 11 years ago now, there is nothing new to attract the younger generation - she was know for her charity work and her style. Her charity work doesn't seem to have continued after she died, does the memorial fund still exist? Her style is dated and not going to appeal to a younger generation. If someone already has an interest in the Royal Family then sure I can see them being interested in finding out about Diana but the average person no, Diana created great interest in the Royal Family when she was alive but not now, there are too many living celebrities to interest people.

Yes, I believe you're right. Anyways, I don't know much people of my age who are interested in Royalty . I think the Fund still exists but it's in a dreadful state and managed by unorganized people who don't seem to know the expression "Public Relations".

[PrincessNatalie]

Originally Posted by Amelia

I actually don't think they would. Diana died over 11 years ago now, there is nothing new to attract the younger generation - she was know for her charity work and her style. Her charity work doesn't seem to have continued after she died, does the memorial fund still exist? Her style is dated and not going to appeal to a younger generation. If someone already has an interest in the Royal Family then sure I can see them being interested in finding out about Diana but the average person no, Diana created great interest in the Royal Family when she was alive but not now, there are too many living celebrities to interest people.

I agree, Diana appeals to people who were old enough to be interested in her. My mum loved Diana because they both got married in July 1981 and of similar age group, while i'm a bit indifferent to Diana because I was not into the royals when she died, and only became interested in William and Harry.

Most young people are into Posh spice or other celebs. I don't think that Kate would be more popular than Diana. I don't think that Kate has mass appeal to young people.

[Warren]

The focus of the discussion has swung to Diana's appeal and legacy. We need to get back to the subject of the thread.

thanks

[judith14011]

I hope that should Kate marry into the RF she will be more careful and private than Diana was. The "invasion" of the Wales marriage by the media, other people with personal agendas, etc. doomed the relationship and the marriage. I hope that Kate and William will learn from his parents past mistakes.

Re: popularity - Diana will always be Diana - fascinating to some and reviled by others. She is consigned to history now while Kate has her life ahead of her and can make of it what she wishes.

[CasiraghiTrio]

Originally Posted by georgiea

I think Kate Middleton will be in the news more than she wants. The press is waiting for their next cash maker.

Has anyone noticed how much Prince William is in the news more recently doing his engagements? Just think about what his wife will have to put up with.

But again, Diana, Princess of Wales told the public about her private life that I don't think Kate would ever think of doing if she became William's princess.
She will be loved and satified with Prince William.

I think William and Kate will keep their private lives private like they are doing right now.

I am inclined to strongly agree with you, and to hope it is an accurate prediction. I hope Kate does not experience a total freak out moment on marrying into the royal family, and go all psycho and stuff, which I think would totally happen to me........ which is exactly why I will never, ever marry into a royal family, even if I was in love, because that life would be, for me, the equivalent of a one-way ticket to a padded cell.

[iowabelle]

I think that once an engagement is announced that Kate will become more popular than she is currently. She would be the future face of the monarchy, and certainly more interesting to many people than Camilla (and she doesn't carry Camilla's baggage).

To be fair, Diana wasn't so fascinating or popular until Whitaker et al. annointed her the next PoW, and then Diana mania took over. All it really takes to become popular is the ring.

[blondie28]

Even if she does make into the firm she will never be as popular as Diana. I don't think she is as pretty, and Diana had that special touch even before she married Charles, I haven't seen anything like that from Kate.

[MARG]

Originally Posted by blondie28

. . . I haven't seen anything like that from Kate.

That's called media hype, and in the early days of the engagement all Diana had to do was lower her lashes, smile and the media were in rapture.

This is a new centuary. More media savvy, more "instant" access, more insatiable audience. So far Kate has largely managed it on her terms. Only time will tell.

[CaliforniaDreamin]

Where did the idea come from that the late Princess was from the middle class? The fact that she did a stint as a nanny and kindgergarten teacher? Diana Spencer, as someone pointed out, hailed from the Spencer-Churchill branch of the Dukes of Marlborough. They were and are one of the noblest families in Britain, with more Royal English blood than the Windsors-who are primarily German.

It was customary in the late 1970's and 80's for young ladies of Diana's generation to take a "light" job such as being a nanny till they married off to some titled or wealthy guy.

No I don't think Kate will be another Diana just like I don't think there will be another Princess Grace. Those were women who were born for and made for their particular era's. Grace from the 50's and 60's ideal of a perfect blonde ice princess with a perfect regal aura to rule over a fairy tale Prince and his principality. Diana was a young, virginal beauty who emerged from the wild and sexually permissive 70's as a throwback to another era. She seemed too good to be true because people had become so jaded. So the Shy Di phenomena was born.

Unless Miss Middleton is holding back some great secret appeal that she is waiting to unleash on an unsuspecting public, no. I don't see anything particularly remarkable or charismatic about her at all. She is well groomed and attractive and clever enough to date the Prince and keep her mouth shut about it.

She is also tough enough to hang in there.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by CaliforniaDreamin

They were and are one of the noblest families in Britain, with more Royal English blood than the Windsors-who are primarily German.

What do you mean by "English Royal blood"? I hear that argument so often that it wears me down. Do you mean Plantagenet and Tudor blood? That is: Royal blood pre 1600 as afterwards the Scottish Stuarts were the Royal family? "More Royal blood" can only mean: closer in time/generation to the next ancestor with "English Royal blood". For Charles as for all Hannoverans it was Margaret Tudor, the daughter of Anne of York (the Plantagenet-heiress) and Henry VII. Tudor. She was the senior sister of Henry VIII. and brought the Royal right of inheritance to Scotland - so she was the last of the "English Royal blood" before the Stuarts inherited.

If Diana could trace her lineage to Margaret Tudor, then only through the illegitimate line of the FitzRoy-bastards of Charles II. (line of the Dukes of Grafton) because the only other legitimate descendants with a more senior claim than the Windsors are catholic European nobles from Italy and Germany, descended from Henriette Anne Stuart of Orleans, Charles II.'s sister. I have yet to see any of those in Diana's lineage.

Or do you mean she was related to Mary Rose Tudor, Henry VIII.'s younger sister? In this case the Windsor-claim is more senior as they are descended from the older sister and thus more noble.

So please, try to convince me that the Spencers, namely Lady Diana Spencer had "more Royal English blood than the Windsors-who are primarily German."

But if you mean "more English noble blood", you're right, but then it's the Royal blood that makes for the precedence in the British society.

As an explanation why Diana claimed her family was more important than the Windosrs: she is descended from a lot of those members of parliament who created the Act of Settlement, banning the Catholic claimants of the Stuarts and calling in the protestant descendants of Elizabeth Stuart and her daughter electress Sophia. So Diana is descended from the king makers but not from the kings. From people who immediately bowed to the new king with the Stuart-grandmother when the Act came to pass in 1714 and who let the kings from the lineage of the House of Hannover/Windsor bestow their titles including that of Earl Spencer on them... More noble? I don't think so.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by blondie28

Even if she does make into the firm she will never be as popular as Diana. I don't think she is as pretty, and Diana had that special touch even before she married Charles, I haven't seen anything like that from Kate.

Lets hope she isn't, it was pandering to the media and the public that ultimately led to Diana's death. let's hope that all Catherine wants from this relationship is the love of William and isn't interested in becoming 'Miss popular'.

Before Diana married Charles, she was unheard of, a younger sister hoping for a good match. Without all the makeup, I don't think many people would have considered Diana 'pretty' either.

[muriel]

I think it is a difficult question to answer as to whether Kate will be more popular than Diana. In context, I believe we do live in vastly different times from when Diana first hit the headlines in the early 1980s. The monarchy "brand" has evolved in this time – having to re-invent itself after the troubles of the early-mid 1990. That said, a combination of the increased level of press intrusion and the modern media and the internet, the speed and quantum of news dissemination has increased substantially. The monarchy, having faltered initially, is a lot more PR savvy now, Clarence House in particular. They recognize the need (and the skills required) to manage the press pro-actively on an ongoing basis. In addition, they also recognize the need to train and gently “break-in” newer members of the family – compare the level of support offered to Camilla (and to some extent, Kate) relative to Diana.

I also think there is big difference in the circumstances between Diana and Kate. Firstly, Kate is much older than Diana was when her engagement to Charles was announced. Consequently, one would expect Kate to be a lot more savvy in her handling of the press. Secondly, Kate’s relationship with William is well developed, and has been tested over time. Having the ongoing support of a loving partner would mean that Kate, in addition to William, should be able to call upon Charles and the rest of the palace machinery to support her in her efforts. Thirdly, her life as a semi-royal in the lead up to the engagement would mean Kate will have direct experience of managing the press.

That said, the key factor that will determine the long term popularity (or not) of Kate is how she is perceived to be utilizing her position once she enters the royal family. If she works hard to support the Queen and other senior royals, she will win popular support. On the other hand, if she is seen as a clothes horse, or somebody who spends a lot of her time living a life of luxury or on holiday, she will struggle to be popular in the long run. Princess Anne is probably the best example for her to follow – a hard working, no nonsence girl whose public image improved considerably once she threw herself into pursuing her charity career. One of the key lessons to be learned from the whole Diana saga is that to be successful in her role in the long run, she will have to look beyond the headlines of the tabloid press the following day. If she understands these basic points, I can’t understand why she cannot be more popular than Diana in the long run.

[Menarue]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

What do you mean by "English Royal blood"?...

Perhaps it is because she is descended from Charles II by children of two different mistresses. That would make her definitely of Stuart descent.

[CasiraghiTrio]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

What do you mean by "English Royal blood"?

I don't know about Diana being "more important" than the Windsors or anyone else, but I have read that she (somehow, strangely) had the blood of each one of the wives of Henry VIII and also multiple counts of descent from Charles II, as you say in the illegitimate line. And I think it was James II who created the first earldom Spencer, no?

But in short, I don't agree with anyone's post here where the claim is that Diana was or was not "more royal" or "more noble" than the Windsors. Both families are quite noble by descent and it is useless to measure the precise amount of royalty, nobility, and commonality in either family. It's a total waste of time. They're both freaking royal and noble, so who the heck cares "how much"? It's so stupid.

[CaliforniaDreamin]

I only mentioned Diana's lineage because I saw a post here that asserted she was from the middle classes and "came from nowhere"...and I was simply trying to refute that. I had no intention of starting World War III or offending anyone. Could we just drop it now?? Cripes.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio

I don't know about Diana being "more important" than the Windsors or anyone else, but I have read that she (somehow, strangely) had the blood of each one of the wives of Henry VIII and also multiple counts of descent from Charles II, as you say in the illegitimate line. And I think it was James II who created the first earldom Spencer, no?

No, 1765, so one of the Hannoveran Georges.

[iowabelle]

Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio

I don't know about Diana being "more important" than the Windsors or anyone else, but I have read that she (somehow, strangely) had the blood of each one of the wives of Henry VIII and also multiple counts of descent from Charles II, as you say in the illegitimate line.

About descent from the wives of Henry VIII. As far as we know, there were no children by Anne of Cleves, Katherine Howard or Katherine Parr. As for Catherine of Aragon, there was only Mary, who died childless; Anne Boleyn, who left Elizabeth, also childless; and Jane Seymour, who left Edward VI, also childless. Whoever wrote that didn't know much about the wives. While it is possible that Diana might have been related to the English wives, I don't see how she possibly could have been related to Catherine of Aragon or Anne of Cleves.