Charles and Diana

[Denville]

I dont believe that it would have led to a republic, but that's rather OT. but I think it was maybe just possible that chas would have been pushed out, if the RF felt it was better to sacrifice him.
But Diana's popularity had taken a dip, there's no denying but that was because the story had had its very long run and now the public were bored and I think a little disgusted. So it was approaching a point where neither of them could have "played the papers" against each other...
I HOPE that given time, they would have gotten over this terrible low point in their relationship for the sake of their boys.

 

[Denville]

Diana was a private citizen in 1997, albeit the ex wife of the Prince of Wales. She was also the much-loved mother of two boys who adored her and she them. That, IMO, cannot be separated from her role as Princess of Wales.

I wonder whether Diana's sons would agree with you that her death ensured everyone in the BRF was better off without her (and that includes them, remember) because it finished 'the upheavals of the 1990's'.

the subject.

Diana could be hard to deal with, but IMO she had by 1997 worn out with fighting. She had achieved a positon as an "Ex princess" and a good financial settlement and she was still doing "royal work" in her landmines campaign.
I think that she'd reached a point where she still was angry, but she wasn't going to fight or seriously try to upstage the RF.
IF the press still wanted to photograph her, that was something that was going to happen, and I dont think she could help still being more charismatic than Charles was... I think the terms of her divorce stopped her from giving interviews about the marriage and she would have gradually gotten on with her life, as a private citizen, as the mother of the 2 princes and as Diana Princess of Wales, who still did charity work.
So I dont believe the RF had that much to worry about, and I hope that they didn't see her death as "a way of stopping her being a problem."
And I think that Charles at least HAS shown that he's learned something from his ex wife, since her death. I think he always loved the boys but he didn't perhaps spend as much time with them as he might have, and now he has tried since she died, to be there for them, to be a good father and to show them affection. And as he said to one of his aides, Diana showed him how to talk to children, to "get down to their level",
I would hope that while the marriage was a terrible mistake, he has still some affection for her...

When they were dating, did Prince Charles take Lady Diana to any of the places that she wanted to go to?

Where do you think she wanted to go?

 

[Osipi]

I dont believe that it would have led to a republic, but that's rather OT. but I think it was maybe just possible that chas would have been pushed out, if the RF felt it was better to sacrifice him.
But Diana's popularity had taken a dip, there's no denying but that was because the story had had its very long run and now the public were bored and I think a little disgusted. So it was approaching a point where neither of them could have "played the papers" against each other...
I HOPE that given time, they would have gotten over this terrible low point in their relationship for the sake of their boys.

To be honest, I think it would have been next to impossible to "push" Charles out of the line of succession. It would have taken a very long, very involved legal battle involving Parliament. It was total chaos when Edward VIII abdicated of his own free will and if you check the abdication thread, there's a lot of information on the back and forth of it all and the ins and outs.

The RF couldn't just decide to "sacrifice" Charles. It doesn't work that way. Charles is/was the legal and rightful heir to the throne. Public opinion plays no part in succession.

 

[Curryong]

Yes, the royal succession in the last few centuries has been sacrosanct. Look how unpopular the Prince Regent/King George IV was. The essayist Leigh Hunt went to prison for libelling him as 'a fat Adonis of forty' in response to all the cloying comments about his charm, good looks etc.

He and his estranged wife Caroline were virtually at war throughout most of their married life (a little like Charles and Diana) and she received an enormous amount of support from sectors of the populace (just like Diana). Sometimes Royal history does show up some remarkable parallels.

George couldn't have been more unpopular as Prince and King if he'd tried. He was criticised for his extravagance and treatment of his wife and daughter, (like Charles with Diana and the neglectful father accusations) and the press had a field day when he was Prince Regent.

Yet he was the eldest son of George III and there was no doubt that short of a revolution, he would succeed his father. Caroline made a scene outside the Abbey during the Coronation ceremony to which she was barred. At least Charles won't be faced with anything like that!

Caroline died soon after, and George completed a short and rather inglorious reign of ten years. People gritted their teeth, he wasn't really wanted, he didn't make a good monarch, but the succession laws were adhered to, to the letter.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

When they were dating, did Prince Charles take Lady Diana to any of the places that she wanted to go to?

They were dating in 1979 or so, that is almost 40 years ago. Apart from that who ever can give answer on your question? Who ever knows where Diana wanted to go and if they indeed went to the place she wanted to go?

Do we know that Catherine Middleton wanted to go to Lappland and that William said: "No, we go to Iceland"? It is complete speculation from our part.

 

[Curryong]

I don't think that Charles and Diana actually 'dated' in the sense that most people know it, (ie meeting up with friends at the local pub or dining at a favourite restaurant, catching a film on impulse at a nearby cinema, for example.)
They didn't have a long courtship and Charles was a busy man with a full schedule. Diana joined Charles and his friends on 'Britannia' at his invitation for several days in Cowes Week for the sailboat races. There was some waterskiing by both of them.
They danced at the Goodwood Ball, met at Balmoral where Diana was staying with her sister and brother in law. There was a formal picnic there which she enjoyed. They met up again at Balmoral in the September for the Braemar Games, and Diana again met Charles's group of friends including the Parker Bowles.
The couple went several times to Broadlands country house for weekends, where the Soames's were hosts, and to the Parker Bowles home in Wiltshire. They were seen, with others, at the horse races in Shropshire, and she attended Princess Margaret's fiftieth birthday in August, and also, (at Sandringham,) Charles's in November.

 

[Denville]

I don't think that Charles and Diana actually 'dated' in the sense that most people know it, (ie meeting up with friends at the local pub or dining at a favourite restaurant, catching a film on impulse at a nearby cinema, for example.)
They
The couple went several times to Broadlands country house for weekends, where the Soames's were hosts, and to the Parker Bowles home in Wiltshire. They were seen, with others, at the horse races in Shropshire, and she attended Princess Margaret's fiftieth birthday in August, and also, (at Sandringham,) Charles's in November.

It was an old fashioned courtship conducted "among people" more than 2 people on their own getting close to each other. And I think that Charles invited Diana inot his world, seeing how she got on with it, rather than its being a mutual exploration of each other's lives...

 

[Osipi]

Charles was very much a publicly known figure and it would have been next to impossible for him to say to Diana "What are you in the mood for" and get the reply of "A Big Mac" and they'd just hop on down to the local McD's and gaze into each other's eyes over burgers and colas like the rest of us have the freedom of doing. From the get go, security and away from the glare of the public were prime concerns.

As far as charity works and photo ops and involvement the both of them were doing in their public lives, if only one person had been reached or one issue addressed or even one opportunity presented, it was more than was there before.

 

[Denville]

Charles was very much a publicly known figure and it would have been next to impossible for him to say to Diana "What are you in the mood for" and get the reply of "A Big Mac" and they'd just hop on down to the local McD's and gaze into each other's eyes over burgers and colas like the rest of us have the freedom of doing. From the get go, security and away from the glare of the public were prime concerns.

As far as charity works and photo ops and involvement the both of them were doing in their public lives, if only one person had been reached or one issue addressed or even one opportunity presented, it was more than was there before.

True.. but it does seem to me to have been rather a case of Charles inviting Di to HIS circle.. which is fair enough up to a point, because of course she was going to have to live in that circle when they were married.. but it did seem a bit skewed towards what he wanted..I appreciate that he problably wasn't that into her gang of friends, but that might have been a warning sign to him that he and she didn't have much in common. That said, I've seen relationships work where the couple dont like each other's friends much, but in this case C and Di dont seem to have had much in common as a couple..
I dont want to go intot the charity work because it is not really about their relationship, but my feeling is that it isn't a competition.. They both did work that they cared about, one IMO wasn't better than the other at it...

 

[Curryong]

I agree. I think both of them tackled various causes, some controversial, others not so, to the best of their ability, and both made a difference.

As far as Charles and Diana's courtship was concerned I suppose we are talking about a very different era, 1980, 36 years ago now, can hardly believe it! Charles was an old fashioned sort of chap whose circle of friends was very important to him. Of course, people in that circle were in some cases decades older than Charles's potential bride. Diana also knew that the Balmoral and Sandringham lifestyle was vital to Charles.

Of course I know the reasons against it and the fact that Diana was so young and in awe of Charles, but what a difference a bit of candour might have made to the future lives of both of them.

For instance "Being alone to enjoy my books and nature is so important to me, you know." "I don't mind the countryside or an ordered way of life, darling, but since I began living in London I realise I love the city life more". "Of course your friends are interesting Charles, but my friends are very important to me too. I'd love you to meet them. ---- suggested a supper or lunch at her place. Please come and chat with a few of them."

If only. However, the romance would have petered out quite quickly, I feel, and there would then have been no marriage for us to discuss!

 

[Denville]

That just would not have happened..Diana problaby was not conscously acting.. I'm sure she wasn't.. but she had completely fooled herself. And Charles shut down any ideas that he might have had, that would make him realise the romance wasn't likely to work out.
I think that it was probably inevitable that they would marry.. He had reached an age where he knew it was his duty.. he liked Di, and I think that in spite of what she said, he was vey attracted to her.. So if his friends really did tell him they thought it wasn't a good match he didn't listen..
And I think that the format of the courtship did sort of invite a bit of "acting". Diana knew she was on show to his friends and the royals, so she put her best foot forward, knowing that she was being expected to show that she could get on in his world.. and she problably thought that she could, that she DID enjoy all the fresh air and the tramping out after deer...and she just didn't think that after the wedding, this WOULD be her leisure time mapped out for her, most of it in the country, with the RF, and that London would be for work and an occasional concert..
I dont think she let herself think that this meant that she was leaving behind being able to go to the movies, or walk down the London streets, and gab with her girlfriends, to a large extent...
I think that Charles tended to think that if he didn't take to Di's friends, (And I dont think he did) that wasn't a problem. He wasn't being a tyrannical husband, He just thought that she had a fair bit of leisure time.. she coudl still see her friends on her own, and he did not need to include them in his life...and I think that that would have worked out fine, except that Diana and he had litlte in common when they WERE alone. I think it is perfeclty possible to have a good relationship where you maybe DON'T much like your partner's friends, or he yours but when the 2 of you are alone together you have lots to talk about...

 

[MARG]

f course a know the reasons against it and the fact that Diana was so young and in awe of Charles, but what a difference a bit of candour might have made to the future lives of both of them.

For instance "Being alone to enjoy my books and nature is so important to me, you know." "I don't mind the countryside or an ordered way of life, darling, but since I began living in London I realise I love the city life more". "Of course your friends are interesting Charles, but my friends are very important to me too. I'd love you to meet them. ---- suggested a supper or lunch at her place. Please come and chat with a few of them."

If only. However, the romance would have petered out quite quickly, I feel, and there would then have been no marriage for us to discuss!

How do you know they did not speak about these things? Admittedly when they became engaged Diana did make much of enjoying the country life and after the marriage seemed allergic to it. But you are positing a theoretical possibility on how they could have improved their communication and by extension, their marriage by sheer dint of being more candid. How do you know they were not candid but did not like or accept what the other said. At one stage their communication was okay and then, like their marriage, it broke down. Gossip notwithstanding, we know nothing more about the intimate relationship Charles and Diana shared.

 

[Pranter]

I don't think their marriage ever really got good footing. Super fast courtship and we know Diana already had concerns about Camilla before she married him.

She's somewhat shy and lacking in confidence, immature....pregnant within 3 months (IIRC) of her marriage, dealing with all the hormones and being in this fishbowl. Living with a man for the first time, trying to adjust to that whole royal way of life and a husband who from all accounts has always tended to be very much about himself. On top of that you are worried he's still involved (at least emotionally at this point) with his former mistress.


Hardly a surprise it collapsed.


LaRae

 

[Dee Anna]

I suppose being worried about the other woman from the beginning wasn't the best way to start a life with an extremely high profile figure more than a decade older than you, especially when you were barely a member of the grown ups!

Engaged at 19, married at just turned 20 and a mother within a year - all under the eye of the camera lens and the RF officers.

It was called the fairytale wedding and realistically that was not short of the truth; it wasn't real. Not for Charles anyway and for Diana, I think she did believe it could happen, she just didn't have the wherewithall to deal with the reality that was Camilla.

 

[Denville]

Royals don't do a nine to five job that requires huge physical and mental effort. That is quite t
nvious of their Royal lot. They've also got to attract people to the causes and charities they represent, and crowds to observe their public engagements. It was this that Diana in particular was spectacularly good at, so good that she made it look easy. And it isn't.

I agree. I think for someone shy and quiet like Charles, or the queen its very difficult to be on show so much and to have to try and be charming and friendly...and to try and attract people to be interested in their causes and to give to their charities.
And I dont think ti was that easy for Diana either.. because I think that she was shy in one way.. because she was unsure of herself. But I think that more than Charles perhaps she realised how important the "charming people" was and worked at it. She looked pretty, she dressed up suitably, she wore clothes that were a nod to say the country she was visiting..
She knew that you have to make the big effort to look interested and smile and get on with people, to get them to like you..and take an interest in what you are promoting whether it be a charity or the RF as a whole or the UK...
So I think it is a terrible pity that she and Charles coudl not have worked together more, albeit of course they had to do separate work a lot of the time.. As she siad herself, she could do the smiling and hand shaking and he could do the serious speeches..and both are important as she knew..

 

[Denville]

I would say that we DO know rather more about their courtship than we do about other royal; pairs. Both of them have talked abt it, even if it was "he said" and "she said". ANd what emerges is that they were both very unsure..I think he had to nerve himself up, and she had to blidnd herself to a lot of the realites of royal life..

 

[Mermaid1962]

The argument could be made that we know too much.

 

[Denville]

Well as the saying goes there's his story, her story and the truth. And although I do think that we perhaps know too much I think that in one way it is good, because we know that royal marriages are no different to ordinary ones, and that people aren't perfect - and that they can get it badly wrong. So maybe that's good in that I think it brought about some changes in the RF, and how they get married- in hopes that they will have a better marital record in the next generation.
And I think that mostly reasonable royal watchers wont take either side wildly and uncritically and will realise that the truth is somewhere in between. Neithter of them IMO got things right, and neither of them was a monster of selfishness. They did their best, but it was a marriage that wasn't really meant to be, and I think they would have had to lower their expectations a lot, to accept it and make it work as things stood. and probably both of them would have been happier with other people, Charles certainly seems happy with Cam, and perhaps Di would have found love with someone else, had she lived..

But given the marriage that they had, I think that they TRIED to make it work and if they gave up too soon, well, they're only human.
And I feel that they might have been better to lower their expectations and try and stick it out, and do their best for the sake of the monarchy...and maybe they would have ended up friends...
But overall I think they both tried and it's not fair to demonise either of them..

 

[CyrilVladisla]

During their courtship did Lady Diana join Prince Charles aboard the royal yacht Britannia?

 

[Countessmeout]

Yes, he invited her on sailing weekends to Cowes

 

[Dman]

Pushed beyond endurance: Yes, Diana could be a difficult woman. But read this honest account by her loyal bodyguard of the true provocations she faced in her marriage and decide: how would YOU have coped?   | Daily Mail Online

 

[Iluvbertie]

I love stories like this that leave at a crucial point - by the time of the event described in this story Diana had been having her own affair for three years with James Hewitt - further evidence that she wanted things all her own way.

 

[Dman]

I love stories like this that leave at a crucial point - by the time of the event described in this story Diana had been having her own affair for three years with James Hewitt - further evidence that she wanted things all her own way.

I think she wanted it all to end. How can one do it when one was in too deep?

 

[MARG]

We can, as you say, 'think' we know what Diana was thinking, but we have no way of knowing.

At the time this was written, Hewitt had been her lover for three years and it is impossible to imagine that Charles was ignorant of that fact. That he could be cutting and cruel is not surprising, what is surprising is that the DM expect us to believe this drivel when it was written by a man who was also fully cognisant of Diana's infidelity but expected us to believe him because of who he was, a Police Inspector who wouldn't lie. Would he?

 

[Nico]

A biased article at its best : she was the victim, he was evil and the BRF even worse blah blah blah.... and was probably murdered at the end (see the comments).
Nothing new i'm afraid (sigh)
But wait a minute, of course we are in August ! The christmas period for all the Diana related books/articles/gossips/garbage. Just make a wish and Richard Kay will appear with a good story: how fun !
Next year will be worse though...

 

[Curryong]

Yes, Diana will have been dead for twenty years next year. Gone too soon, and I still think about her sometimes. Her sons might do something to mark the anniversary.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Wasn't it around this time (1989) that Diana had broken up with Hewitt and had taken up with James Gilbey? If she wasn't in a relationship of her own at that time, she might have been feeling more lonely than usual--hence the attempt to confront Camilla.

 

[Iluvbertie]

She dumped Hewitt when he returned from the Middle East in 1991.

She also was with Gilbey in 1989.

In other words she was having two affairs at the same time.

 

[Lee-Z]

So there wasn't much "Charles and Diana" left by then (re: title of this thread) or to paraphrase Laurel and Hardy "that's a nice mess they had gotten themselves into"

 

[Denville]

Ultimately Diana craved stability and for someone to love her forever, no matter what. Marrying the, 'only man in England who can never divorce me' seemed to be a good idea at the time.


LaRae

That's true, and I think, even more that Diana had no taste for country life. Certainly not at 19 or 20.