The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1241  
Old 07-15-2015, 05:45 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,009
It's not really hearsay, because Prince Charles wrote a letter to one of his friends about how he was enjoying Van der Post novels while Diana went around talking to the sailors. It's quoted in the Dimbleby book.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacknch View Post
Well, I for one was not on the honeymoon with Charles and Diana and so have no idea what actually happened on it and can only go on hearsay.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1242  
Old 07-15-2015, 06:40 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
Does this thread really need to exist?


The War of the Wales' is long over: the couple in question divorced nearly 20 years ago, one of them has been dead for nearly 18 years, the other one has been happily married for over 10 years, the children of the first marriage seem to have adjusted well to the situation. There is really no new information coming through, just a rehashing of heresay, and any conjecture from books and articles.

I made this point a few days ago but there are posters who hate Diana and won't let a chance go by where they can make the hate known.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1243  
Old 07-15-2015, 08:13 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Indianapolis, United States
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
I made this point a few days ago but there are posters who hate Diana and won't let a chance go by where they can make the hate known.

Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
I enjoy reading about the Charles and Diana marriage and learning new bits of information. It puts Diana in perspective and really make clear what a incredible change she brought to the Royal Family and more importantly, how she managed to damage the monarchy to such a severe extent that, I think, it is in irreversible decline. One can see the bit by bit chipping away at the institution through this marriage. She never learned how to be a team player in either her personal relationship with her husband or as part of a larger organization.

It is too bad that you think that is hate.
Reply With Quote
  #1244  
Old 07-15-2015, 08:20 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binny2 View Post
I enjoy reading about the Charles and Diana marriage and learning new bits of information. It puts Diana in perspective and really make clear what a incredible change she brought to the Royal Family and more importantly, how she managed to damage the monarchy to such a severe extent that, I think, it is in irreversible decline. One can see the bit by bit chipping away at the institution through this marriage. She never learned how to be a team player in either her personal relationship with her husband or as part of a larger organization.



It is too bad that you think that is hate.

But there is nothing new and there never will be so what is the point of repeating the same over and over.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #1245  
Old 07-15-2015, 09:00 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Indianapolis, United States
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
But there is nothing new and there never will be so what is the point of repeating the same over and over.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
It's new to me. The passage of time, the world is moving further and further away from the media propaganda of the nineties. This will allow for better analysis of that period in history. As I wrote before, it will put the Diana time period in perspective and give more insights to the real person that was Diana and the disastrous response or non-response by the royal family.
Reply With Quote
  #1246  
Old 07-15-2015, 09:09 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,009
As the years go by, there's less interest in Diana. That's the way history works. I fondly remember the 'fairy tale years' of Charles and Diana, which in my memory lasted until 1987. That was the year of the Welsh Disaster visit, when the troubles in the marriage really came out in the open and it seemed everyone was commenting about how much time the Waleses had spent apart over that summer. The next year was Prince Charles's 40th birthday, and I remember a few biographies came out which were generally pretty devastating toward Diana in particular. That followed the summer of 1987, the first full year of the Fergie Phenomenon, and the time when Diana really broke out of her 'perfect princess' mode publicly. There was the time Sarah and Diana dressed up as policewomen and tried to crash Prince Andrew's stag night. There was the time Diana and Sarah pushed each other around at a skiing photo-call. The Princess and the Duchess infamously acted up at Royal Ascot. It was hard to believe that all this was actually happening when it happened, because that wasn't the way Diana presented herself in public. The times I really like to talk about are the early years, from 1980 until perhaps 1986--the time before everything seemed to start to crumble before our eyes. This is also the time that people don't remember unless they were born in the early 1970s or before--the time when there was still 'magic' in the aura around Charles and Diana. I know people who saw them on their tour of Atlantic Canada in 1983. People were enchanted.
Reply With Quote
  #1247  
Old 07-15-2015, 09:25 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
Does this thread really need to exist?


The War of the Wales' is long over: the couple in question divorced nearly 20 years ago, one of them has been dead for nearly 18 years, the other one has been happily married for over 10 years, the children of the first marriage seem to have adjusted well to the situation. There is really no new information coming through, just a rehashing of heresay, and any conjecture from books and articles.

This is history. What's more is that this marriage, it's decline, and the consequences are actually a hugely significant part of late 20th century British royal history. Having a thread on this is as significant as having a thread on the Duke and Duchess of Windsor and the abdication, or the Wives of Henry VIII, or the Princes in the Tower.

It might not be interesting to you and/or you might not want to be involved in such a discussion and that's your right. But provided those of us who want to have this discussion are doing so civilly why shouldn't this discussion continue to exist?
Reply With Quote
  #1248  
Old 07-15-2015, 09:25 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 2,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binny2 View Post
I enjoy reading about the Charles and Diana marriage and learning new bits of information. It puts Diana in perspective and really make clear what a incredible change she brought to the Royal Family and more importantly, how she managed to damage the monarchy to such a severe extent that, I think, it is in irreversible decline. One can see the bit by bit chipping away at the institution through this marriage. She never learned how to be a team player in either her personal relationship with her husband or as part of a larger organization.

It is too bad that you think that is hate.

The royal family were going through plenty of bad news in addition to the Wales' problems so perhaps Princess Diana just became the face of it. It may not have damaged the royal family as much as it shook it up. The Queen had to join the wider world and her family were not as elevated above the rest of the people as they may have liked. .... happens even in royal families.
Reply With Quote
  #1249  
Old 07-15-2015, 09:41 PM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 3,304
I've edited and deleted a few posts. Please remember that insulting comments about your fellow members are not permitted. We expect our members to treat each other with respect, even when you have a difference of opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #1250  
Old 07-15-2015, 09:47 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Hathaway View Post
So, Charles bored his bride to the point that she had to seek the company of the staff. A 32-year-old man, on his honeymoon with the most famous, sought after young woman in the world, wants to read rather than, oh, take a bubble bath together, feed each other grapes, cuddle, make love, etc. No, he wanted to read a book.


I don't think Charles necessarily "bored his bride to the point that she had to seek the company of staff" nor do I think Diana "abandoned" her husband by not wanting to read with him.

I haven't read the book or the letter(s) in which this story is recounted, so I can't comment on the exact circumstances of the event, beyond the fact that at some point in his honeymoon, Charles wanted to read, asked Diana if she wanted to join him, she declined and let him do so while finding another form of entertainment.

A few points:
1. Some people enjoy reading, some people don't. Neither one is necessarily right or wrong in their behaviour. What's more is that people who enjoy reading enjoy reading different things, and sometimes people who do like to read don't feel like reading.
2. A mature couple should not be expected to share every hobby, like, or dislike. What's more is that they should not be expected to spend every moment together, even if they're on their honeymoon.

Now not knowing the circumstances I don't want to nitpick things too much, but it seems to me that if Charles was insulted that Diana didn't want to read with him he should have grown up a bit. If he wanted to do something with Diana at that moment and she didn't want to do what he wanted, he could have easily suggested something else or asked her what she wanted to do. Likewise, if Diana wanted to do something with Charles at that moment she could have suggested something else.

I don't think it's a problem that at some point they weren't together on their honeymoon, or that Charles liked to read while Diana may not have (or may have preferred a different type of literature). I do see a problem in that Diana is typically described as having misrepresented her interests prior to her marriage. If she told Charles during the courtship how she loved reading Kant, then waited until after the wedding to tell him how she can't stand German philosophy then she misrepresented herself and tricked him.

In Diana's defense though, I don't think Charles was the only one being tricked during the courtship. Diana does seem to have portrayed herself as having been someone she wasn't, but Charles' intentions in the marriage were also misrepresented. I tend to believe that he went into the marriage intending on being a faithful husband, but I do think Diana was lead to believe that this was a fairy tale marriage - that Charles was her Prince Charming who would save her from her life - while Charles was viewing this as more of an arranged marriage - he was obligated to marry and Diana was the type of girl he had to marry. I don't believe Charles intentionally tricked Diana in this regards - I do think her family did so intentionally, and it's likely that people involved with the BRF did so as well - but she was tricked nonetheless - and she let herself be tricked, turning a blind eye to the signs that her reality was not what she thought. Despite that though, I think Charles should be held more accountable in this regards than Diana. Diana was practically a child, and he should have made it clear to her that theirs wasn't a love match or a fairy tale before marrying her.
Reply With Quote
  #1251  
Old 07-15-2015, 10:56 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Indianapolis, United States
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by grevinnan View Post
The royal family were going through plenty of bad news in addition to the Wales' problems so perhaps Princess Diana just became the face of it. It may not have damaged the royal family as much as it shook it up. The Queen had to join the wider world and her family were not as elevated above the rest of the people as they may have liked. .... happens even in royal families.
The problem with trying to make a royal figure more knowable and accessible on a human level is that it endangers the whole point of being royal. Royalty, on its on own terms, is supposed to be better, more noble, more graceful than an ordinary person. The Charles-Diana saga completely shattered that illusion.

Sure, all Britons know the rational truth that the individuals with royal titles are almost all of them ordinary people, but the British people were willing to subscribe to the notion of royalty for reasons of tradition and a desire for a sense of stability that comes with smooth continuity with their country' s history. Ideally, royalty means higher standards of propriety, decorum, decency and most of all dignity.

It's almost all gone. We know too much. Diana was the raging bull in a china shop. All the goodwill and trust of the people doggedly built up by the Queen has been frittered away step by step. The Prince of Wales' dedication to duty and his general unwillingness to play the media game against Diana tried to mitigate the damage done by the Diana philosophy, but it wasn't enough. The mystery has been pierced.
Reply With Quote
  #1252  
Old 07-15-2015, 11:09 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binny2 View Post
The problem with trying to make a royal figure more knowable and accessible on a human level is that it endangers the whole point of being royal. Royalty, on its on own terms, is supposed to be better, more noble, more graceful than an ordinary person. The Charles-Diana saga completely shattered that illusion.



Sure, all Britons know the rational truth that the individuals with royal titles are almost all of them ordinary people, but the British people were willing to subscribe to the notion of royalty for reasons of tradition and a desire for a sense of stability that comes with smooth continuity with their country' s history. Ideally, royalty means higher standards of propriety, decorum, decency and most of all dignity.



It's almost all gone. We know too much. Diana was the raging bull in a china shop. All the goodwill and trust of the people doggedly built up by the Queen has been frittered away step by step. The Prince of Wales' dedication to duty and his general unwillingness to play the media game against Diana tried to mitigate the damage done by the Diana philosophy, but it wasn't enough. The mystery has been pierced.

Oh dear what can I say !! Sadly nothing !!!!


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #1253  
Old 07-16-2015, 12:06 AM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 6,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binny2 View Post
The problem with trying to make a royal figure more knowable and accessible on a human level is that it endangers the whole point of being royal. Royalty, on its on own terms, is supposed to be better, more noble, more graceful than an ordinary person. The Charles-Diana saga completely shattered that illusion.

Sure, all Britons know the rational truth that the individuals with royal titles are almost all of them ordinary people, but the British people were willing to subscribe to the notion of royalty for reasons of tradition and a desire for a sense of stability that comes with smooth continuity with their country' s history. Ideally, royalty means higher standards of propriety, decorum, decency and most of all dignity.

It's almost all gone. We know too much. Diana was the raging bull in a china shop. All the goodwill and trust of the people doggedly built up by the Queen has been frittered away step by step. The Prince of Wales' dedication to duty and his general unwillingness to play the media game against Diana tried to mitigate the damage done by the Diana philosophy, but it wasn't enough. The mystery has been pierced.


Oh, the PoW, aided and abetted by his mistress and their friends, did indeed try to play the "media game" against his former wife. He simply was not as good at the game as she was. She made mincemeat out of all of them.

I do agree that whatever "mystery" the BRF had is a thing of the past but that's hardly all Diana's fault. An aging blowsy Princess Margaret cavorting on Mustique with her lovers in the late 70's certainly didn't seem better or more noble than the rest of us and neither did her Uncle David and his shady twice divorced wife in the 1930's.

In fact, none of the European RF's have any real mystery or magic anymore. It's simply a sign of the times.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena
Reply With Quote
  #1254  
Old 07-16-2015, 12:19 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
My point bringing up her behavior on her honeymoon shows she was not really in love with Charles.

She may have said she was in love with him but her actions say otherwise.
Reply With Quote
  #1255  
Old 07-16-2015, 12:25 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
My point bringing up her behavior on her honeymoon shows she was not really in love with Charles.

She may have said she was in love with him but her actions say otherwise.

Ha what about Charles his behavior showed he was not in love with her but I guess he gets a pass because he didn't know what "in love " means


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #1256  
Old 07-16-2015, 01:02 AM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 6,499
Exactly. Poor innocent misled little donkey Charles. Nothing to do but fly back to the comfort of his very married mistress.

I don't know what is so hard to accept about the fact that both Charles and Diana were-to some level-victims here. They should never have married but got caught up in a complex situation.

There was no real bad guy here.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena
Reply With Quote
  #1257  
Old 07-16-2015, 01:26 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
In Diana's defense though, I don't think Charles was the only one being tricked during the courtship. Diana does seem to have portrayed herself as having been someone she wasn't,
Quote:
but Charles' intentions in the marriage were also misrepresented.

Charles did not misrepresent his intentions.


I tend to believe that he went into the marriage intending on being a faithful husband,

Quote:
but I do think Diana was lead to believe that this was a fairy tale marriage - that Charles was her Prince Charming who would save her from her life -
No one led Diana into the marriage or led her to believe it was a fairy tale. Charles told her to take her time to decide. He told her that she was not just marrying a man but a position.

Quote:
while Charles was viewing this as more of an arranged marriage - he was obligated to marry and Diana was the type of girl he had to marry.

It was not an arranged marriage, Diana chased after Charles for years.
Charles was not obligated to marry Diana or a woman like her.

I don't believe Charles intentionally tricked Diana in this regards -
Quote:
I do think her family did so intentionally, and it's likely that people involved with the BRF did so as well - but she was tricked nonetheless -

No one tricked Diana.

Not her family nor anyone in the Royal Family. She chased after Charles. She used her family and her connections to get invitations to wherever he was. She wanted to marry Charles since she was 13. When Charles was dating her sister, Diana said she was better for Charles than Sarah. She got herself invited to Sandringham and a ski trip while he was with Sarah.

When he was dating Anna Wallace, Diana used nearly every member of her family and Amanda Knatchbull. (sp) to get her invited to events and the RF homes. She used her sisters, her brother-in-law Robert Fellowes, her grandmother.

Quote:
and she let herself be tricked, turning a blind eye to the signs that her reality was not what she thought.
No one tricked her.
Charles told her the reality of being married to him and her mother and grandmother tried to educate her about life as a wife and member of the royal family


Quote:
Despite that though, I think Charles should be held more accountable in this regards than Diana.
Diana should be held more accountable as she was the one who chased him. She was the one who lied. She was the one who was deceptive.

Quote:
Diana was practically a child, and he should have made it clear to her that theirs wasn't a love match or a fairy tale before marrying her.

Diana was not a child. She was not a little girl. She was not practically a child. She was an adult. She was a woman of the world. She had quit school at 16 and married at 20.

Diana was responsible for the failure of her marriage.
She is the one who rushed into marriage.
She is the one who chased Charles.
She is the one who wanted the title more than the man.
She is the one who was always interested in the media and not the man.


Reply With Quote
  #1258  
Old 07-16-2015, 01:42 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,907
Charles and Diana

In that whole rant I would have liked to see one IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #1259  
Old 07-16-2015, 02:05 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
Oh, the PoW, aided and abetted by his mistress and their friends, did indeed try to play the "media game" against his former wife.He simply was not as good at the game as she was. She made mincemeat out of all of them.

Poor innocent misled little donkey Charles. Nothing to do but fly back to the comfort of his very married mistress.

I don't know what is so hard to accept about the fact that both Charles and Diana were-to some level-victims here. They should never have married but got caught up in a complex situation.

There was no real bad guy here
No one aided and abetted the Prince of Wales. He behaved honorably while dealing with a backstabbing, hypocritical wife.

Diana was Barry Mannakee's very married mistress.
She was the mistress of many many many men.
(See the inquest transcript and her own words recorded in 1997.)

Diana and her supporters always tried to deflect blame to others.

In the tapes recorded in 1997 she suggest the RF is/was upset with her about her many affairs.

Diana never one to own up to her own problems/mistakes make the comment 'calling the pot black'.
Reply With Quote
  #1260  
Old 07-16-2015, 04:46 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 3,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
I haven't read the book or the letter(s) in which this story is recounted, so I can't comment on the exact circumstances of the event, beyond the fact that at some point in his honeymoon, Charles wanted to read, asked Diana if she wanted to join him, she declined and let him do so while finding another form of entertainment.

A few points:
1. Some people enjoy reading, some people don't. Neither one is necessarily right or wrong in their behaviour. What's more is that people who enjoy reading enjoy reading different things, and sometimes people who do like to read don't feel like reading.

Barbara Cartland once said that Diana never read any books except hers, which weren't good for her.

I did read that Charles would often suggest Diana read some books he wanted to discuss with her, but she always refused and seemed to resent the suggestion.

(Personally I don't understand people who don't enjoy reading; it's like saying you don't enjoy breathing!
Mark Twain once said that the man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read).
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, marriage, prince charles, prince of wales, princess diana


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 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
Charles and Diana Picture Thread Josefine Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 434 08-12-2015 06:00 PM
Charles and Diana: Visit to Italy - 1985 jun5 Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 57 09-02-2012 10:35 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch state visit e-mail elisabeth fashion poll free hosting grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction member watch monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess beatrice hats princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats prince sverre magnus queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden swedish royal family summer portraits 2016 the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:17 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises