Charles and Diana

[Curryong]

The point is though, surely, Denville, that the whole situation could have been avoided by Charles not mentioning who his mistress was in the Dimbleby interview and book. Charles blamed his Private Secretary Commander Aylard for that contremps, but surely there comes a time when you have to own your own decisions. He left Camilla PB in, to say the least, a very equivocal position by outing her and it was the end of her marriage, something she did not want.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

A good summary of the dilemma.



Have to agree with you 100%. If ever there was a cautionary tale regarding how important it is to choose one's marital partner judiciously, it is Charles choosing Diana. What a mistake!

What's interesting to consider is a might-have-been, which I don't think is realistic, but consider if it did occur: Charles never married. That would mean that it would be Edward's son who would be the next heir, not so? King James.

No, not accurate- it would be the Duke of York next in line-so it would be Queen Beatrice.

 

[Lady Nimue]

I don't know that it is fair to be so critical of Diana going after Charles--and she did. She was young and fooled herself into thinking she was in love. At the same time, Charles was not exactly blameless. I don't think that people should be required to give up using a gift from a former lover if they really like it. I don't understand why he would keep Camilla's photograph (if he did).

The reason that I tend to take Charles's side in the breakup is because Charles has acknowledged that he made mistakes and deeply regrets at least some of his behavior. Diana was a perpetual victim who never admitted that she could have done things differently too.

I also blame Diana for going public, without any consideration of how it would impact her sons. Please spare me the "Charles did an interview too." His interview was two years after the Morton book and he didn't criticize Diana during his interview. In his interview, Charles admitted that he had an affair, but didn't point out that Diana had affairs too.

Regardless, Diana wasn't an evil person. She was flawed and made mistakes but I don't think that she was deliberately trying to hurt Charles during their courtship--but he wasn't trying to hurt her either.

All nicely put, Royal Watcher. Your last point is key.

Diana, unfortunately, couldn't know how devastating an impact misleading Charles about her interests would be on the marriage's long term health. Indeed, how that deception would impact her own happiness in the marriage. She was not trying to hurt Charles, just make him feel comfortable with her (we can assume) to oil the wheels on the relationship moving forward. I can go with that.

By the same token, Charles was not trying to hurt Diana when he sent her books to read, when he tried to discuss intellectual topics. I can go with that, too.

 

[Denville]

The point is though, surely, Denville, that the whole situation could have been avoided by Charles not mentioning who his mistress was in the Dimbleby interview and book. Charles blamed his Private Secretary Commander Aylard for that contremps, but surely there comes a time when you have to own your own decisions. He left Camilla PB in, to say the least, a very equivocal position by outing her and it was the end of her marriage, something she did not want.

I agree that it was foolish of Charles to discuss his marriage in public and to out Cam as his mistress. and it did leave her in a difficult position with her husband, who had stayed iwht her out of loyalty.. now fed up and wanting out of the marriage.. but she was afraid of this happening because at the time, it seemed that it would NOT be possible for her to marry Charles. It was a bad decision, just as Diana's decision to do Morton and Bashir were bad decisions.

 

[Tsaritsa]

I agree that it was foolish of Charles to discuss his marriage in public and to out Cam as his mistress. and it did leave her in a difficult position with her husband, who had stayed iwht her out of loyalty.. now fed up and wanting out of the marriage.. but she was afraid of this happening because at the time, it seemed that it would NOT be possible for her to marry Charles. It was a bad decision, just as Diana's decision to do Morton and Bashir were bad decisions.

I think we can all probably empathize with an about to be divorced, middle aged woman. Her fears about an unknown and possibly less secure future on her own are understandable. However, it was the joint behaviours of the married couple which led to the break-up. Anyone who is part of an open marriage must surely know that there's always a risk that such behaviours could cause it to implode at any time. THEIR behaviours -over which they had choice- were never Diana's responsibility.

 

[Osipi]

I don't buy that it would have been an arranged marriage. Even if it was, arranged marriages are still the norm in many societies. Charles had been in love with Camilla, but that doesn't mean that he wouldn't eventually moved on. A marriage can be happy even if the parties aren't in love in the beginning. People who have good marriages share the same values with their partners. They also problem solve and learn to let things go. Neither Charles or Diana really did that--although I believe that Charles did try.

We have to look no further than Charles' mentor "Uncle Dickie" Lord Louis Mountbatten to see an example of an "aristocratic" marriage. Both Louis and his wife, Edwina, were married but happily had separate "private" lives.

It is understandable that should Charles and Amanda Knatchbull have married, they would have stayed together and perhaps followed the example of Louis and Edwina. Amanda, though, held out for a marriage totally based on a love match. Diana was a different kettle of fish.

 

[Tsaritsa]

We have to look no further than Charles' mentor "Uncle Dickie" Lord Louis Mountbatten to see an example of an "aristocratic" marriage. Both Louis and his wife, Edwina, were married but happily had separate "private" lives.

It is understandable that should Charles and Amanda Knatchbull have married, they would have stayed together and perhaps followed the example of Louis and Edwina. Amanda, though, held out for a marriage totally based on a love match. Diana was a different kettle of fish.

I wonder if the accepted norms of the time the Mountbattens wed are, perhaps, less accepted now? Charles, who appeared to revere "Uncle Dickie" may have believed it to be an acceptable way to conduct married life, whilst Amanda, being younger, felt differently. I wonder what would have been Diana's thoughts on such had the question been put to her? I wonder, too, what you mean by saying she was "a different kettle of fish"? Do you perhaps feel that Diana would have settled for less than a love match, or that she may have felt she loved him more than he loved her but thought she was capable of providing enough love for both of them?

 

[Osipi]

I wonder, too, what you mean by saying she was "a different kettle of fish"? Do you perhaps feel that Diana would have settled for less than a love match, or that she may have felt she loved him more than he loved her but thought she was capable of providing enough love for both of them?

Diana's mindset going into a marriage was the ideal "happily ever after" marriage for love and devotion to each other. I don't think she had a clue of anything to do with an "aristocratic" marriage. She was an aristocrat but witnessed a divorce rather than her parents having discreet private lives. She expected to marry for keeps. She also never witnessed her own parents being able to work as a partnership.

I definitely believe that Diana would have settled for nothing less than a love match. Even a "Cartland" romance love match.

 

[Tsaritsa]

Diana's mindset going into a marriage was the ideal "happily ever after" marriage for love and devotion to each other. I don't think she had a clue of anything to do with an "aristocratic" marriage. She was an aristocrat but witnessed a divorce rather than her parents having discreet private lives. She expected to marry for keeps. She also never witnessed her own parents being able to work as a partnership.

I definitely believe that Diana would have settled for nothing less than a love match. Even a "Cartland" romance love match.

Osipi, it sounds as if you share my own belief that she was convinced -or forced herself to be convinced- that this is what she had. Perhaps the media hype -and a surfeit of Barbara Cartland- contributed to her belief that she'd found "happy ever after"?

 

[Osipi]

Exactly. She had a romanticized vision of marriage rather than seeing marriage as a partnership of melding body, mind and soul that takes work and compromises and the "I don't like you too much right now" days.

 

[Tsaritsa]

Exactly. She had a romanticized vision of marriage rather than seeing marriage as a partnership of melding body, mind and soul that takes work and compromises and the "I don't like you too much right now" days.

Mmm. A big ask of any 19 year old, let alone one who -in the light of her parents' disastrous marriage- lost herself in Barbara Cartland's fantasy world of innocent virgins who found themselves crushed to the bosom of a tall, dark and handsome man who put right all the wrongs in their world. Those men were all to emotionally strong to have their own problems!!!!!

 

[loonytick]

I think the basic, underlying problem was that neither party really, truly thought through what the marriage would need to be on a day-to-day basis and whether they were truly compatible on that level. She because she had a totally unrealistic expectation of soulmates meeting each others' every emotional need, he because he seemed to have given up on the idea of his wife being his great love, so to speak, and also seemed to assume that with time any aristocratic woman would grow into having the default aristo interests, which would be enough to maintain a partnership whether or not a real love match developed.

If either one had been as thoughtful and clearheaded about evaluating the prospect of marriage as Amanda Knatchbull was when Charles proposed to her (again, without there seeming to be any real spark of chemistry beyond friendship), the disaster of the whole thing could have very easily been headed off. Because they were horribly, horribly suited for one another.

 

[Queen Claude]

If Charles and Diana would have settled into an open marriage, and actually they did, it would have hurt their reputations in the long-term, the sensibilities in the 1980s and 90s would not have tolerated that kind of arrangement. Diana cooperating with the Morton book, and in particular, crafting a story where she was the long-suffering victim of her faithless husband and his mistress was shady, reaaal shady, but it was brilliant too. Setting aside what it says about her character, "Thick as a Plank" Diana figured out that it was only a matter of time before the lid would be blown off the her and Charles' Happy Valley shenanigans, she also knew that the public would not look favorably on a couple whose day jobs often involved them working together as a team, and occasionally giving the public glimpses of their family lives, living double lives. So her response was to be pro-active and get "her true story" out to the public and make sure that she came out smelling like a rose, and if Charles, his lover, the BRF did not fare as well. then ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ .

 

[COUNTESS]

Diana married a man many years her senior and a "royal", whatever that means. It meant that she had a foolish expectation of how he would conduct himself. She was insecure and he added to it. He hade a woman he loved. Really loved. Diana was window dressing. But she took center stage and he didn't care to give up his primary status. They were both flowers, they needed to marry a gardener. Camilla is such. She mothers Charles. He needed that. She was part of the mess. The real pity is that the archaic, smug rules that pushed Charles into committing to a woman he didn't love, but fit the pedigree for his future children. She was a brood mare. But things have changed. Probably because of her. And in the end he lived to publicly redeem himself and she can never do that, as death leaves her without a platform.

 

[Gawin]

If they were incompatible, he should not have married her in the first place, as he did on his own free will. One doesn't marry another person on the hope that their potential "shared interests" might eventually "develop into love" (whatever love means). Marriage is not to be taken that lightly.

In the end, all the previous posts are a rehashed variation of the same usual anti-Diana theme: Charles could never have loved her because she was not right for him. Other more aggressive posters would go further and add "because she was mentally disturbed", or "because she was unfaithful herself".

The broader picture is that, for hundreds of years, women have put up with unfaithful husbands and felt guilty about it on the premise that, if their husbands were having extra-marital affairs, it was because they were not good enough wives to please their men. It is unfortunate that this PoV resurfaces again, from time to time, even in the 21st century.

Yes, it's refreshing that royal marriages no longer begin with a 30-year old prince leaving the comfort of his mistress's bed in search of an aristocratic virgin. It was absurd even in 1981.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Yes, it's refreshing that royal marriages no longer begin with a 30-year old prince leaving the comfort of his mistress's bed in search of an aristocratic virgin. It was absurd even in 1981.

Oh good lord not this ridiculousness again

 

[Denville]

Oh good lord not this ridiculousness again

well I suppose the old ideat that the royal bride had to be a virgin, and that suitable birth was ultra important was bound to be gone by now... however in these marriages, the idea was that whether they worked out on a personal level or not the marriage had to keep going. now once you open it to "marriage for love", IMO you also open it to "if it doesn't work out you just get a divorce and move on.."

 

[duchessrachel]

Exactly. She had a romanticized vision of marriage rather than seeing marriage as a partnership of melding body, mind and soul that takes work and compromises and the "I don't like you too much right now" days.

I think Diana also had some misconceptions even in her happily ever after view. In Sally Bedell Smith's book it talks about how Diana did not even want Charles to go on royal engagements that he had to do for his position. She wanted him to stay with her. Even on soap operas, people have to go to work. That book was an eye opener for me.

 

[Denville]

Bedell Smith's book is wildly biased against Diana....

 

[Osipi]

I found Bedell Smith's book was eye opening and one of the best books I ever invested in when it comes to Diana.

Bedell Smith didn't seek to deride or defame Diana but actually looked at her from an objective point of view and portrayed her as the human being she was. Warts and all. Its an in depth look at the characteristics that was Diana's makeup. She takes the same approach writing about Charles in "Prince Charles: The Passions and Paradoxes of an Improbable Life".

Both are excellent books IMO.

 

[Denville]

I certainly would not agree... I havent' read the Charles book because I was very much put off B Smith's style by her Diana book...

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Did Princess Diana feel trapped in her marriage to Prince Charles?

Did Diana feel bereft without Charles after the separation? He had been the focus of her life over eleven years.

How lonely do you think Lady Diana felt when she first became acquainted with Prince Charles?

Why would she feel lonely? DO you mean she felt lonely because of Charles not being the most attentive boyfriend or that she was lonely at the time they began their courtship....

Did Diana feel lonely because of Charles not being the most attentive boyfriend?

How lonely do you think Diana felt when she was the Princess of Wales?

Do you think that Diana as the Princess of Wales might not have been so lonely if her sisters Sarah and Jane could have visited her more often and had alone time with her?

Prince Charles and Princess Diana made an official visit to Paris, France. Would you say on this occasion Charles had been allowed to shine? He delivered speeches in French. Diana understood French but could not speak French.

In the spring of 1983 Prince Charles and Princess Diana visited Australia. They visited Canada the same year. The Princess was popular. A new word began to appear in the vocabulary of the media: "Di-mania".

Prince Charles and Princess Diana had made trips to the United States. Why did Charles refer to the United States as "Diana territory"?

Did Diana once remark she thought she could cope with royal life if she had the Prince alongside her?

 

[Osipi]

That, m'friend, has to be the understatement of the month when it comes to Charles and Diana's marriage. It wasn't long before the honeymoon was over and Diana realized just how the reality of being married to the Prince of Wales would structure her life from there on out.

I think there were a lot of emotions that played out on Diana's end. Disillusionment along with feeling trapped in the "gilded fishbowl" were very much in play.

 

[Kataryn]

Oh good lord not this ridiculousness again

LOL. that was my first thought too. But still I started reading...

 

[Queen Claude]

Diana was a moving target. She has said things along the lines of she did not want the separation in 1992 nor did she not want the divorce. But there were also stories about her and Fergie having a plan to jointly escape the Windsor fold.


My guess is that Diana felt trapped during those times when she was not getting her way and realized that no amount of scheming and tantruming would not work in her favor.

 

[Tsaritsa]

Did Princess Diana feel trapped in her marriage to Prince Charles?

Ha! Is the Pope catholic?

 

[Nice Nofret]

Ha! Is the Pope catholic?

?
the last one certainly was, about the current one, I'm not yet sure




- sorry I know - off topic, but couldn't resist

 

[Denville]

Diana was a moving target. She has said things along the lines of she did not want the separation in 1992 nor did she not want the divorce. But there were also stories about her and Fergie having a plan to jointly escape the Windsor fold.


My guess is that Diana felt trapped during those times when she was not getting her way and realized that no amount of scheming and tantruming would not work in her favor.

her feelings changed... I think she felt unhappy within the marriage and wished to be free, but when the divorce happened, she began to realise that she had spent all her adult life, virtually in the RF, and that outside, there was a difficult world that she had not learned to negotiate.. and that without the protection of the RF, she was going to be struggling. So she panicked and half wished that she could remain in the marriage...

 

[Osipi]

I agree. She was between a rock and hard place and had no clue how to live without the protection of being married into the RF or negotiate the waters without them. It was an alien world she had to negotiate without a port in storm to anchor her.

 

[Tsaritsa]

?
the last one certainly was, about the current one, I'm not yet sure




- sorry I know - off topic, but couldn't resist

Love it!!!