Charles and Diana

[Mermaid1962]

I don't think Diana realized the point to which her life would never be hers once she married into the Royal Family. She saw the 'perks', which of course included a husband who she thought could never divorce her. I don't think that Charles foresaw how much attention his new bride needed. When a person lives his life with everything and almost everyone at his beck and call, it's a harsh awakening to have a wife who needs you. Even the greatest love needs to do a certain amount of adjusting within marriage, because no-one is perfect.

 

[Lady Nimue]

In the book I am reading the thesis is presented that the effects of bulimia are pretty much across the board, once the body's chemistry starts to be messed with via the purging.

I had never considered that but do see the reasoning. It is sound. Over time, one of the serious side-effects of bulimia is a mental-emotional deconstruct, which Diana began to give evidence for some time into the engagement. Diana began the bulimia directly after the engagement photo-op (according to this book) so the time-line fits. The weepiness started, for example.

The book I'm reading also emphasizes how bright Diana really was, and that she came of a family that was smart (book-smart). For a variety of reasons Diana did not bother to gain any intellectual smarts, but the author emphasizes that she was quite bright. She was smart in innumerable ways all her life. The Morton book itself is proof of that. (Not all smart people make wise choices in life - but for Diana to have gotten that book done speaks for considerable smarts).

It does look like the bulimia may have been the tipping point. If only she could have gotten that in hand like her sister Sarah did, might have made all the difference.

In fact, apparently, when friends (even Charles) said something to Diana's sister Sarah about her bulimia, Sarah took the advice and acted upon recovery. When Charles tried to advise Diana, Diana's stubbornness asserted itself and she resisted being 'told what to do.' The side-effects of the bulimia took her negatives (that we all have) and magnified them. (Something that happens in menopause says my wise mother-in-law. )

 

[Queen Claude]

I recall Diana chaffing at the suggestion that her bulimia was the root cause of her personal and marital problems with her position being that the real blame was the lack of support she received and Charles' relationship with Camilla. I get her pushing back up to a point in order to put it on the table that her bulimia did not come about in a vacuum, but she did not seem to want to acknowledge that her bulimia and its byproducts were wreaking havoc on not just her, but those around her as well.

Diana did eventually overcome her bulimia, but by then it may have been too late when it came to her having some kind of functional relationship with Charles and others. I remember Bashir trying to get Diana to specify how long her bulimia lasted and she would not give a straight answer but admitted that it lasted over three years.

 

[Lady Nimue]

I recall Diana chaffing at the suggestion that her bulimia was the root cause of her personal and marital problems with her position being that the real blame was the lack of support she received and Charles' relationship with Camilla. I get her pushing back up to a point in order to put it on the table that her bulimia did not come about in a vacuum, but she did not seem to want to acknowledge that her bulimia and its byproducts were wreaking havoc on not just her, but those around her as well.

Diana did eventually overcome her bulimia, but by then it may have been too late when it came to her having some kind of functional relationship with Charles and others. I remember Bashir trying to get Diana to specify how long her bulimia lasted and she would not give a straight answer but admitted that it lasted over three years.

Yes, I am coming to see that the bulimia, which on the face of it can seem so innocuous, really set things in motion. Without the bulimia, and the bodily chemistry changes it stimulated, she would have still been a human being with flaws, but those flaws would perhaps not have reached hysteria pitch. We know more now about body chemistry and how important the connections are between various functions. Sad that it could be something as 'simple' as that.

 

[Queen Camilla]

The bulima had nothing to do with her temper tantrums or her being stubborn.

All three existed prior to her marriage.

Diana had problems compromising. She wanted thing her way. She never took into account her husband's feeling or his wishes.

Charles gave Diana carte blanche in decorating both Highgrove and Kensington Palace.

Diana, however, failed to take into consideration her husband's position or his feelings. The rooms were completely girly. The interior decorator said he knew Diana's taste and style as he had decorated her flat.

She decorated the KP bathroom with caricatures of Charles but none of her.

Diana's problem in the marriage began because she continued to behave like a spoil brat.

At Balmoral she arrived for lunch after the Queen and with her headphones on listening to music.

The Queen asked Philip to intervene, Philip asked Charles and Charles begged Diana to behave. This was in the August/September 1981.

There are multiple incidents of Charles begging Diana to cooperate.

When they went skiing in 1983, Diana and Charles had agreed to pose for pictures in exchange for the photographers agreeing to leave them alone for the rest of their vacation.

When the time came, Diana refused and infront of all the photographers Charles was begging her to cooperate.

Camilla was not a factor in Diana's problems within her marriage.
Camilla came along after the breakup of the marriage.

Diana was the problem in her marriage. It was her failure to compromise.
Her failure to understand her actions resulted in a reaction.

Her behavior was the downfall of the marriage.

There are hundreds of time Charles and the RF tried but Diana failed to cooperate.

 

[Lady Nimue]

The bulima had nothing to do with her temper tantrums or her being stubborn. All three existed prior to her marriage.

That is clear regarding the tantrums and stubbornness. The bulimia helped. I haven't read that the bulimia was pre-engagement. Apparently she saw herself as 'pudgy' in the engagement pictures and began dieting then, quickly latching onto purging as an easy 'out' to counterbalance her healthy appetite.

Diana had problems compromising. She wanted things her way. She never took into account her husband's feelings or his wishes.

That is clear from my reading. Charles would have been any other woman's dream in many ways. A very generous man. He brought a lot of cache to the marriage, of course. Her ingratitude was obvious to even me as a child/adolescent watching the videos. She pretty much ignored him.

She decorated the KP bathroom with caricatures of Charles but none of her.

Haven't heard this, but it fits. Sadly. The penchant for ridicule of him was there very early on.

Diana's problem in the marriage began because she continued to behave like a spoil brat.

She was spoilt, yes. That is generally accepted.

At Balmoral she arrived for lunch after the Queen and with her headphones on listening to music. The Queen asked Philip to intervene, Philip asked Charles and Charles begged Diana to behave. This was in the August/September 1981. There are multiple incidents of Charles begging Diana to cooperate. When they went skiing in 1983, Diana and Charles had agreed to pose for pictures in exchange for the photographers agreeing to leave them alone for the rest of their vacation. When the time came, Diana refused and infront of all the photographers Charles was begging her to cooperate.

I hadn't heard the first anecdote nor seen the second. I would have been too young to notice. The first video I recall seeing left me with a very vivid impression. It was of Diana and Sarah pushing each other during a skiing photo-op, with Charles trying to calm them down. I was young but I recall that. I thought she was a strange person. (Remember I was a child but I knew enough to know you don't 'play' on skiis like that).

Behaving badly in private and in public. Yep. It fits.

Camilla was not a factor in Diana's problems within her marriage. Camilla came along after the breakup of the marriage.

All the evidence indicates as much. I agree here. I have yet to find any credible source (other than out-of-thin-air gossip mags taking their cue from Diana) that places Camilla in the Wales' marriage orbit before 1987/88. Camilla and her family, as many of Charles' friends, were banished by Diana, and Charles complied.

Diana was the problem in her marriage. It was her failure to compromise. Her failure to understand her actions resulted in a reaction. Her behavior was the downfall of the marriage. There are hundreds of time Charles and the RF tried but Diana failed to cooperate.

I have to agree. I see no other possible conclusion. Very sad.

 

[Mirabel]

In fact she told the world in a very famous interview that she 'adored' Hewitt. Her own words. She was (in her view) in love with him. So there you go.

Exactly! She said that in an interview.
I think it is just possible that she wished to excuse her own infidelity by saying she was overwhelmingly in love.

I realize that, as someone said, Diana had issues.
But I can't accept that she'd retain any loving feelings for a slimeball like Hewitt.
I just don't think she'd ever sink that low.

 

[Dman]

I posted that little picture clip, because people get so hyped up and fired up on what went so wrong in Charles and Diana's marriage, but somehow forget that these two did love each other and were very happy early on. I just think it's good to put some focus on what was good with them and not go on and on about all the bad stuff.

 

[Lady Nimue]

Exactly! She said that in an interview. I think it is just possible that she wished to excuse her own infidelity by saying she was overwhelmingly in love.

Yes, that is possible, and if so, demonstrates how smart she was. She understood PR in a way that suggests to me that she could have excelled in public relations as a career. She really had amazing instincts.

I realize that, as someone said, Diana had issues. But I can't accept that she'd retain any loving feelings for a slimeball like Hewitt. I just don't think she'd ever sink that low.

Slimeball? Hewitt? How was he a slime ball? Pretty intense language for someone Diana 'adored' for good reason. He was devoted to her. Diana's response to that loyalty and devotion? A good hard kick to the curb without so much as an explanation. With that level of trauma, Hewitt still went to the bar to help support Diana regarding Harry's paternity. For years, he did that, even in the face of Diana's inexplicable cold-shoulder. You expect Hewitt to sail on without reaction? Good luck with that.

If you think Hewitt was a slimeball, then you have to accept that the same can be said of Diana, I'm sorry to say. In many ways Diana was worse. We can argue that at least Hewitt told the truth, perhaps a truth needed to set the historical record straight. Whereas Diana lied. Her betrayal was global and deep. She destroyed lives and families, on personal terms. Slimeball? Not my words. Diana sunk pretty low herself. I'm not sure Hewitt sank as far as Diana. Sound harsh? I'm only flipping back at Diana the invective directed at Hewitt.

 

[Mirabel]

Slimeball? Hewitt? How was he a slime ball? Pretty intense language for someone Diana 'adored' for good reason. He was devoted to her. Diana's response to that loyalty and devotion? A good hard kick to the curb without so much as an explanation. With that level of trauma, Hewitt still went to the bar to help support Diana regarding Harry's paternity. For years, he did that, even in the face of Diana's inexplicable cold-shoulder. You expect Hewitt to sail on without reaction? Good luck with that.

If you think Hewitt was a slimeball, then you have to accept that the same can be said of Diana, I'm sorry to say. In many ways Diana was worse. We can argue that at least Hewitt told the truth, perhaps a truth needed to set the historical record straight. Whereas Diana lied. Her betrayal was global and deep. She destroyed lives and families, on personal terms. Slimeball? Not my words. Diana sunk pretty low herself. I;m not sure Hewitt sunk as far as Diana.

I think he did.
He cashed in. In my eyes, that is what is inexcusable.

SUPPORTING HER OVER HARRY'S PATERNITY?
I don't see that at all. He's done nothing for years but toss out smarmy hints about Harry's paternity, regardless of the impact on Harry.

Have you overlooked that recent play? Or the sudden discovery that hypnosis revealed his affair began earlier than Diana said it did?To me Hewitt is the lowest of the low; frankly, the man makes my skin crawl. And I think Diana's feelings turned to repulsion because I can't imagine that any woman with an ounce of self-respect would react in any other way.

 

[Frelinghighness]

As far as people trying to analyse Charles, Diana or anyone else they've never had contact with by public photos, videos, or books by people trying to Cash IN! It is kind of crazy. People see what they want to see and believe what they want to believe.

 

[COUNTESS]

The bulima had nothing to do with her temper tantrums or her being stubborn.

All three existed prior to her marriage.

Diana had problems compromising. She wanted thing her way. She never took into account her husband's feeling or his wishes.

Charles gave Diana carte blanche in decorating both Highgrove and Kensington Palace.

Diana, however, failed to take into consideration her husband's position or his feelings. The rooms were completely girly. The interior decorator said he knew Diana's taste and style as he had decorated her flat.

She decorated the KP bathroom with caricatures of Charles but none of her.

Diana's problem in the marriage began because she continued to behave like a spoil brat.

At Balmoral she arrived for lunch after the Queen and with her headphones on listening to music.

The Queen asked Philip to intervene, Philip asked Charles and Charles begged Diana to behave. This was in the August/September 1981.

There are multiple incidents of Charles begging Diana to cooperate.

When they went skiing in 1983, Diana and Charles had agreed to pose for pictures in exchange for the photographers agreeing to leave them alone for the rest of their vacation.

When the time came, Diana refused and infront of all the photographers Charles was begging her to cooperate.

Camilla was not a factor in Diana's problems within her marriage.
Camilla came along after the breakup of the marriage.

Diana was the problem in her marriage. It was her failure to compromise.
Her failure to understand her actions resulted in a reaction.

Her behavior was the downfall of the marriage.

There are hundreds of time Charles and the RF tried but Diana failed to cooperate.

Yes, Poor Charles was just a paragon of virtue. You have no idea how long or if he continued his relationship with Camilla, throughout. I, suspect, he did. Charles was not ready for someone to come into his life and grab the spotlight. Diana was a force of attention. Did she seek it. Yes, for the most part, but it gave the Royal Family life. A guy in a suit is never going to interest the masses. Jack Kennedy was wise when he said in Paris, that he was the man who accompanied Jackie Kennedy to Paris. She was the hit. Diana was the hit. Most women decorate their houses. You have no idea what all the rooms looked like. You just set out to bash Diana and with supposition and cheap innuendo you did.

 

[Queen Camilla]

Diana's own words when she described the fall down the stair incident while pregnant.
She said Charles said “you are always doing this to me”.

This stair incident was from December 1981/January1982.

Her dramatics and her tantrums had already grated on Charles' nerves.

Diana wanted to be the dominant person in the marriage. She wanted to control everyone around her.

She would order Charles around. There are several incidences where Diana would order Charles to get her sometime or do something.

It was never 'Darling would you be so kind as to bring me my shawl.' but "Go bring me my shawl!'

Charles would always do what she demanded but she would never say 'thank you'.

She would do this in front of the staff and the press.

 

[royal rob]

Why why why the same things just being said over and over. There is nothing new and there won't be anything new. But whatever floats your boat


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Dman]

Why why why the same things just being said over and over. There is nothing new and there won't be anything new. But whatever floats your boat


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

As I said in my previous comment, people get so passionate about what went wrong, they forget the good things that were there. The conversations can take a new turn if the focus was shifted to some good stuff.

 

[Lady Nimue]

I think he did. He cashed in.In my eyes, that is what is inexcusable.

He 'cashed in' on his own life. Where is the line between what 'belongs' to the 'other' and what belongs to 'me' who had the experience with the 'other' who happens to be well-known? This is a large question. It's not simple. (I do see a distinction between celebrity and royalty).

SUPPORTING HER OVER HARRY'S PATERNITY?
I don't see that at all. He's done nothing for years but toss out smarmy hints about Harry's paternity, regardless of the impact on Harry.

Apparently recently, but right through the 00's he was trotted out to make denials regarding that it was not possible for him to be Harry's father, and push back the persistent rumors that he was acquainted with Diana prior to 1985.

Have you overlooked that recent play? Or the sudden discovery that hypnosis revealed his affair began earlier than Diana said it did? To me Hewitt is the lowest of the low; frankly, the man makes my skin crawl. And I think Diana's feelings turned to repulsion because I can't imagine that any woman with an ounce of self-respect would react in any other way.

Don't know much about the recent play except that there was a line of dialog that indicated that Hewitt had met Diana earlier than he had always said/supported. One could argue that it was the story he had fallen in line with because it had to be that he wasn't in the picture when Harry was being conceived. That story protected Diana at least that far.

Know nothing about an hypnosis story. The idea that Hewitt was in the picture far earlier than both Diana and Hewitt had admitted publicly is suggested in various writings as far back as the 90's. Yet Hewitt has denied it. Why? To support Diana's story, perhaps? Or was it because that was the truth? It is obvious that Diana could not be seen to have 'muddied the waters' prior to Harry's conception. What triggered the change for Hewitt? Don't know. The real truth? His story? Definitely not money. That's minor imo. For his truth he gets vitriol. Unlikely he gets (impressive) money.

Anyway, I'm not Hewitt's apologist. I find him interesting in that he is the one man that Diana maintained a relationship with for a long time, even if we accept 1985 as the beginning of that relationship. For at least 6 years Diana maintained a remarkably intense and all-encompassing relationship with one man, with Hewitt, not her husband. That makes him a person of interest in my book.

As far as people trying to analyse Charles, Diana or anyone else they've never had contact with by public photos, videos, or books by people trying to Cash IN! It is kind of crazy. People see what they want to see and believe what they want to believe.

That's history for ya!

Yes, Poor Charles was just a paragon of virtue. You have no idea how long or if he continued his relationship with Camilla, throughout. I, suspect, he did.

There is absolutely no evidence that Charles did. The only source for that rumor is Diana. Interestingly, when one reads contemporary tell-alls, it is not Camilla's name that pops up as a potential 'confidante' for Charles. Yet with Diana's accusation, revisionist history inserts her everywhere now.

Charles was not ready for someone to come into his life and grab the spotlight. Diana was a force of attention. Did she seek it. Yes, for the most part, but it gave the Royal Family life. A guy in a suit is never going to interest the masses. Jack Kennedy was wise when he said in Paris, that he was the man who accompanied Jackie Kennedy to Paris. She was the hit. Diana was the hit. Most women decorate their houses. You have no idea what all the rooms looked like. You just set out to bash Diana and with supposition and cheap innuendo you did.

Here is the whole argument that Charles was jealous of Diana's popularity. It's a strong belief out there. I find it mainly with those who lived through that time as adults. It's harder to track down in the literature on the couple. It's usually mentioned as a given, but hard to pinpoint as a fact. I have decided that this is an 'urban legend' among the public from that time. As such, it's interesting in it's own right. I don't have much to say about it.

 

[Lady Nimue]

As I said in my previous comment, people get so passionate about what went wrong, they forget the good things that were there. The conversations can take a new turn if the focus was shifted to some good stuff.

Well, the truth seems to be, that Charles and Diana had a very good sex life (while it lasted). In Mrs Berry's 'The Housekeeper's Diary', she tells the anecdote of a servant coming in on the royal couple in the throes of sex. Sounded like they had a satisfactory relationship in that way (regardless of what Diana said later).

 

[Dman]

Well, the truth seems to be, that Charles and Diana had a very good sex life (while it lasted). In Mrs Berry's 'The Housekeeper's Diary', she tells the anecdote of a servant coming in on the royal couple in the throes of sex. Sounded like they had a satisfactory relationship in that way (regardless of what Diana said later).

I find it bad form to write about anyone's sex life, but then again, one have to get that "cookie" and that should stay private.

 

[Lady Nimue]

I find it bad form to write about anyone's sex life, but then again, one have to get that "cookie."

There's no winning on this. My compadre wanted the conversation to shift to some of the 'good stuff '.

I shifted the conversation.

 

[Dman]

There's no winning on this. My compadre wanted the conversation to shift to some of the 'good stuff '.

I shifted the conversation.

LOL, one can talk about the good stuff on Charles and Diana without getting to all that.

Serious though, the conversations should shift to the good things about their relationship, because there were some good times.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Yes. This is why I don't believe that Camilla was always Charles's 'one true love' nor he hers. She was foremost in Diana's thoughts, but that's the way an obsession works...a niggling worry or 'thought tic' that won't go away.

Interestingly, when one reads contemporary tell-alls, it is not Camilla's name that pops up as a potential 'confidante' for Charles. Yet with Diana's accusation, revisionist history inserts her everywhere now.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

I agree with much of what Lady Nimue, writes but I am not sure that Charles would be very many people's dream husband. I think he withdrew emotionally early in the marriage--which can be hard to deal with.

I don't think the first few years were happy. In fact, most sources agree that the first few years were quite rocky, although there were periods of calm. I think both of them sincerely tried to make the marriage work. I don't think Camilla was there from the beginning--as Lady Nimue pointed out, contemporary reports (fed by Diana) indicated that she was more concerned about Lady Kanga Tryon. On the other hand, I think Diana did make a sincere attempt to participate in activities that Charles enjoyed (watching his polo matches, etc...).

There were several reasons that it didn't work out but Diana's mental illness--and she was mentally ill--made it impossible for them to keep up appearances. Her condition apparently improved when she took anti-depressants, but the underlying issues impacted her throughout her life.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Hewitt is a slime ball and Diana is a selfish user, both of them had the intelligence of a care bear and a a hard time shutting up. I've learned to take anythi ng Diana said with a grain of salt; she lied, withheld information and tended to only tell the truth when forced of when it served her.

 

[Pranter]

Charles needed someone to mother him ...Diana needed someone to do the same...not a good combo.


LaRae

 

[COUNTESS]

Charles needed someone to mother him ...Diana needed someone to do the same...not a good combo.


LaRae

You are absolutely right. As I have said, they both were insecure and need nurturing that they never had.

 

[Osipi]

Yes. This is why I don't believe that Camilla was always Charles's 'one true love' nor he hers. She was foremost in Diana's thoughts, but that's the way an obsession works...a niggling worry or 'thought tic' that won't go away.

Before marrying Diana, Charles was very good and close friends with the Parker-Bowles family especially Camilla who was his go to best friend at the time I believe. This is what I think Diana felt threatened by as she didn't want anyone closer to Charles than herself and couldn't accept many of his circle. This is why on Diana's request, many friends went on the back burner. Once the marriage was really on the rocks beyond repair, it would make sense that Charles once again resumed contact with those near and dear to him.

 

[Lady Nimue]

Yes. This is why I don't believe that Camilla was always Charles's 'one true love' nor he hers. She was foremost in Diana's thoughts, but that's the way an obsession works...a niggling worry or 'thought tic' that won't go away.

Exactly so. That's what comes through loud-and-clear. Camilla married the man she wanted (Andrew Parker-Bowles) and proceeded with the life she wanted. Both Camilla and Andrew had dallied with the royal siblings (Charles and Anne) and remained good friends with both as part of the royal circle.

Charles pressed on throughout the 70's having 2 or 3 significant loves but regardless of those loves (it appears) he was preparing (as early as 1974) to marry Amanda Knatchbull, Lord Mountbattan's granddaughter, particularly as he approached his 30th birthday. This is not a state secret, you can read about it on Wikipedia, no less (see: Lady Amanda Ellingworth).

The death of Lord Mountbattan scrambled the plans, though Charles attempted to press on with what was already set in motion. As we all know, Amanda declined Charles' proposal. Contemporaries indicate that had the tragedy of Mountbattan's death not occurred, Amanda would very likely have accepted the arranged marriage and we would have seen a very different story unfold.

In sum, Charles and Camilla were on very different trajectories in the 1970's. Since Camilla really did re-surface as confidante to Charles in 1987/88, and most importantly, the phone tapes of Charles and Camilla had been published and proved the liaison, Diana had an easy choice: throw Camilla under the bus. It would be readily believed. Anyone other than Camilla would have been harder to 'sell' to the public, no matter the truth of the matter. IMO Diana latched onto Camilla because those phone tapes made it easy. Once Diana made the accusations (because it was so clear that in 'present time' it was true) people were willing to accept Diana's perfidious rendering of the past and the rumor was launched.

Can we wonder that Charles wanted out of the marriage?

 

[Spheno]

Andrew, not Peter

 

[Mermaid1962]

Unless Diana had some kind of foreknowledge that the tapes would be public, I don't think she'd have pegged Camilla publicly on that basis. Andrew Morton said that the most that could be legally said about Charles and Camilla in "Her True Story" was that they were close friends and that Camilla was Charles' 'confidant.' That book was serialized in the "Sunday Times" in June of 1992. The Charles and Camilla tape wasn't published until January 1993, in Australia's "New Idea" magazine. Other than this little point, I agree with the response you gave to my post. Diana and Dale Tryon seemed to have developed some kind of allegiance by the late 80s, and so there was no need to include her in the cast of "Her True Story."

IMO Diana latched onto Camilla because those phone tapes made it easy. Once Diana made the accusations (because it was so clear that in 'present time' it was true) people were willing to accept Diana's perfidious rendering of the past and the rumor was launched.

 

[Curryong]

Several people, including Princess Margaret, talked privately about the hold that Camilla Parker Bowles had on the Prince of Wales at the time of the royal wedding. Correspondents from the U.S. Over in London for the nuptials, picked up on the gossip though not one word of it was broadcast. Diana had an emotional intelligence. At the time leading up to her wedding she could sense, IMO, that Charles wasn't head over heels for her and was in fact still in thrall to another woman.