The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #141  
Old 07-31-2016, 06:21 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
When will the US actually sign the Treaty? It hasn't as yet according to my research.
I sent you a PM.

It's unfortunate that some people insist on crediting Diana for the treaty to ban landmines. It is not only inaccurate but does a great disservice to those who worked on this issue for decades, particularly the men who lost limbs and even their lives, trying to remove landmines. Diana raised money, which was used for demining and to help victims--which certainly saved some lives. However, the treaty would have been executed, with the same signatories, even if Diana had never gotten involved.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 07-31-2016, 07:26 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,307
Of course the Landmines issue was worked on by others before Diana became involved. No-one can deny that. However, especially in Britain, her championing of this cause brought it to the fore in the minds of the public. Decades later I can remember her visit to Angola through the photographs taken then. The Director General of the British Red Cross offered to be Diana's official escort in Angola when she asked if the Red Cross would sponsor and support her undertaking an overseas visit to raise awareness of the issue.

Just as today's royals work hard in the areas of mental health, HIV, wild life poaching and injured servicemen, this help is usually considered invaluable by workers in the field, and publicity and increased donations do make a difference.

Certainly, after Diana's death MPs considering the bill in the House of Commons during the final Reading and the last debates thought so. Robin Cook, the Foreign Secretary, and others paid tribute to her efforts.

Acknowledging that Diana did make a difference doesn't denigrate or minimise the devoted longterm work of others.

Landmines Bill passed as MPs pay tribute to Diana
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 07-31-2016, 08:06 PM
Dee Anna's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Here, Ireland
Posts: 313
This was something that touched her a lot - I doubt she set out to be seen as the major actor here - the photgraphs with the children tell their own tale. It was about awareness and she did what she could as a high profile person.
__________________
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken ..... Oscar Wilde
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 07-31-2016, 09:21 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Of course the Landmines issue was worked on by others before Diana became involved. No-one can deny that. However, especially in Britain, her championing of this cause brought it to the fore in the minds of the public. Decades later I can remember her visit to Angola through the photographs taken then. The Director General of the British Red Cross offered to be Diana's official escort in Angola when she asked if the Red Cross would sponsor and support her undertaking an overseas visit to raise awareness of the issue.

Just as today's royals work hard in the areas of mental health, HIV, wild life poaching and injured servicemen, this help is usually considered invaluable by workers in the field, and publicity and increased donations do make a difference.

Certainly, after Diana's death MPs considering the bill in the House of Commons during the final Reading and the last debates thought so. Robin Cook, the Foreign Secretary, and others paid tribute to her efforts.

Acknowledging that Diana did make a difference doesn't denigrate or minimise the devoted longterm work of others.

Landmines Bill passed as MPs pay tribute to Diana
The issue for me is that crediting Diana with the Ottawa Treaty is analogous to saying that she is responsible for the development of AIDS treatment drugs because she was photographed holding hands with AIDS patients. I agree that Diana made a difference in helping inform people about how AIDS was transmitted, but she is not responsible for developing treatments.

I'm sure that there were many politicians trying to associate themselves with Diana at that time. She is closely associated with it because her photo ops occurred a few months before her tragic death. Her other charity work at that time was not high profile. She died at the end of August, less than two weeks before the Oslo conference convened.

The fact is that Diana was a late comer to the campaign and had no substantive influence. Influencing governments involves more than PR and photo ops. The campaign met with various governmental officials all over the world. The campaign also gathered background data and facts, and it is not something that you can look up on the Internet. In fact, the campaign actually provided the information people now read online. It is also necessary to go into these areas in order to help determine how to best distribute anti-mine resources.

These meetings often required going into very dangerous areas--without the security Diana had. Some people were volunteers and others were paid very little. All of them were very dedicated. They were among the most remarkable people that I have ever met.

Giving Diana credit for their work is simply wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 07-31-2016, 11:16 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,307
Obviously the Landmines campaign is very near to your heart and you are, of course, knowledgable and interested, invested in it, USRW. Good on you!

However, no-one on this thread is saying that Diana was solely responsible for the Ottowa Treaty being signed, (or for developing anti-HIV drugs for that matter.)

What high profile Royal person does do those things? Does William go out into the African wilderness to search out wild life poachers and kill them, and does Harry design prosthetic limbs, even though he is devoted to the cause of wounded ex service personnel? Kate doesn't work in laboratories helping to develop drugs to combat mental illness and depression. Crown Princess Mary of Denmark doesn't visit every school in her country five days a week to make sure no bullying occurs.

Royals are used by agencies and charities in the ways they can be of most use and help. In most cases it's by being Patron of a particular organisation, attracting donors and gaining much needed publicity for the cause.

Some royals adopt certain causes very enthusiastically and strive to make a difference in the best way they possibly can. In that way they become identified with them. Look at Harry with the Invictus Games. He gains praise for his work and kudos, but that doesn't mean he goes home after each Games and thinks 'Well, that's sorted for all wounded and maimed ex servicemen and women, then!" Nor did Diana do that with the AIDS causes she adopted very keenly and promoted heavily during her lifetime.

Diana wasn't spared for long enough to try and promote the cause of Landmines any further. It's clear she was interested though. In the short period of her life we're discussing she tried to do her part as a Royal (or ex royal); in other words she was effective in bringing publicity and donations to the cause, which was all that was required of her in her position.

I lived in Britain and in a Commonwealth country at the time and I can speak to the fact that land mines were brought to Joe and Joanna Public's notice in those countries, due to Diana, in a way that a dozen worthy people droning on about the issue on TV or in newspaper articles would never have achieved. That's just the way things are as far as the general public is concerned.

No-one expected, or asked, that Diana spend months in Africa or Asia detecting land mines in the field till they were all gone. That would take thousands of people many lifetimes. However, before her premature death she did what she could and if she had lived I'm sure she would have continued.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 08-01-2016, 09:47 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,143
Noone is crediting her with the Ottawa treaty, but she did do a lot to bring the issue to the notice of the public. Why do people have to denigrate her because she didn't work full time blowing up mines? Yes, there aer people who do that and its very admirable of them.. IMO its admirable of Diana to take up an issue which was controversial, which got her sharp criticism, and to take the chances of walking across a minefield. I don't see why people cannot see that many people played a part in the charity, and they do differnet things...and what she did helped a lot.. it does not take away from the efforts of others, and I'm sure that Diana didn't want credit for "being brave" or whatever, she just did the job that she was good at, ie bringing media attention to the issue, and helping people by talking to them and telling them that their suffering was not forgotten and that people were wrokign to help them...
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 08-02-2016, 02:51 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,039
Exactly. That is what members of the Royal Family do. The only difference is that they don't stray into political areas, which is what Diana unintentionally did in appearing to go against British government policy. Of course, if a person wants to split hairs, she was no longer an HRH at that time and so technically not royal.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 08-02-2016, 04:57 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,143
well exactly. Of course the basics of the political side of it were nothing to do with diana; even if she'd wanted to, she could not have gotten involved in this.
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 08-05-2016, 03:25 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,143
It realy seem very sad to me that people feel they have to denigrate either Charles' work or Diana's. at their best they DID work together and complement each other, and I'm sure that they learned from each other, in a way. He said that she had shown him how to talk better to children, She had not known much about various issues when she marired him, and from him, she must have picked up some of the basics of learning about the background of a charity issue. IMO at first she was rather afraid of C's "learning" and being so "clever" and knowing about various issues, and was inclined to either find it boring or to shy away because she knew she didn't know much about it and was scared of hher ignorance being exposed.
Later on, I think she did realise that Charles as POW and she as Princess COULD make a bit of a difference on various social problems, and that to do that, she had to learn about the background a bit, she had to speak in public, and she tried her best to do that..
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 10-14-2016, 09:36 PM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 2,817
After the Her Royal Highness was removed from her, how soon did Diana, Princes of Wales, resign her patronage of some of her charities?
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 10-14-2016, 11:48 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,062
According to Wikipedia, Diana reduced her charity work drastically the day after her divorce - resigning from over 100 charities.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 10-15-2016, 01:26 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,307
According to Sally Bedell Smith's biography of Diana, she had made up her mind earlier to only maintain links with those charities that reflected her own emotional needs.

She kept six; the homeless charity Centrepoint, giving her a link to the dispossessed; the little known Leprosy Mission, the National AIDS Trust, which Diana felt had given her her first meaningful role in public life; the English National Ballet, because Diana loved ballet; the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Sick Children and the Royal Marsden Hospital, allowing her to help the sick and dying.

This move was not well done. Some charities Diana dropped only read about it in the Press, which was largely condemnatory. I think it was one of those impulsive decisions she sometimes made without thinking things out properly. Diana had never been a measured or very cautious person and in the last years of her life this trend continued its erratic way.

In fact in that last twelve months of life she didn't do very much for the six charities that remained. She became very caught up in the anti Land Mines campaign, gave some publicity to an Australian medical research facility Hasnet Khan had admired, and also some American charities supported by friends Katherine Graham, owner of the Washington Post, and the Harper's Bazaar editor Liz Tilberis.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 10-15-2016, 11:58 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,962
I think what was seen with Diana's charities post divorce was the changeover from royal to personal. She no longer had a "duty requirement" to work and support the "Firm" and with being outside of the "Firm", there wasn't the support and coverage of such events as it would relate to a "royal visit" as in personal security and sweeps of a venue or a bump up of the numbers in the Court Circular for her engagements. The public ate it up though no matter what she did.

She kept what was meaningful to her personally and perhaps she went about it the wrong way but that was just Diana's impulsive nature.
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 01-01-2017, 10:22 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,143
I think that seh was worn out, by hte last year or so of her life. ANd she didn't have the same support system that she had had as a full time royal. So she was left to the advice adn support of a few people who weren't professionals and whose advice was probalby not very good at times. And being tired and burnt out, I think she just did things as and when. I can understand that the charities she kept - who were staffed by committed professional people - may have felt annoyed at her on and off ways, but I think she coud not help herself.
When she was working for "The Firm", she had good professional helpers, advising her and making sure that she had everything she needed to do an engagement, and she had a respect for the queen and the RF at heart, and didn't want to let them down... so she turned up, usually even if she was ill or whatever, and her staff were good at their job and were able to do what was necessary to make the job go well...
but when she had cut back her staff, fallen out wtih some of them, and was dependent on friends and a few staff like Burrell, to suggest what she should do, in terms of work.. she was a bit lost.
So she made wrong choices, found it ahrd to commit etc.
Jephson I think it was said that he had found work for Diana to do, in the arts area etc but that when DI found that she had to commit to see these projects through to the end she got nervous and lsost interest. I think that her tiredness and depression made her fearful of a long term commitment...
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 01-01-2017, 07:09 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,039
I remember when that happened. It came as a shock at the time; and honestly, it looked like it was pay-back for not retaining the HRH. Diana said that it was because her charities deserved Royal patronage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
According to Wikipedia, Diana reduced her charity work drastically the day after her divorce - resigning from over 100 charities.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 01-02-2017, 04:55 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,143
I think that that was true, she wasn't an HRH, adn she wanted to scale back her large no of patronages, and leave them free to get a royal patron. but she kept charities taht were meaningful to her or that might not survive wthout her patronage. I think she intended to have just a few and be able to devote more time and attention to them, but it dind't work out that well, because she was worn out and not sure what she was doing. She was prone to be easily influenced by whatever caught her attention at the time, and I think she just wasn't able to commit and see a project through
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 01-02-2017, 03:14 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,039
Your comment makes a lot of sense to me, Denville. Diana was likely exhausted from all the upheaval, particularly during the last few years of being Princess of Wales. The sale of her evening dresses showed that she was going to make a clean break with the past, but I'm not entirely sure that she knew what her charitable endeavours would be once the divorce went through.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 01-02-2017, 04:38 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 3,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I think that that was true, she wasn't an HRH, adn she wanted to scale back her large no of patronages, and leave them free to get a royal patron. but she kept charities taht were meaningful to her or that might not survive wthout her patronage. I think she intended to have just a few and be able to devote more time and attention to them, but it dind't work out that well, because she was worn out and not sure what she was doing. She was prone to be easily influenced by whatever caught her attention at the time, and I think she just wasn't able to commit and see a project through
She kept only six patronages. Four of them certainly wouldn't have suffered without. The national ballet, national AIDS, Great Ormond and royal Marsden would have all been fine. Leprosy and centerpoint were possibly the only two that needed her publicity to carry on. It seems she simply hand picked the ones she felt closest to.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 01-02-2017, 04:50 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 3,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I think that that was true, she wasn't an HRH, adn she wanted to scale back her large no of patronages, and leave them free to get a royal patron. but she kept charities taht were meaningful to her or that might not survive wthout her patronage. I think she intended to have just a few and be able to devote more time and attention to them, but it dind't work out that well, because she was worn out and not sure what she was doing. She was prone to be easily influenced by whatever caught her attention at the time, and I think she just wasn't able to commit and see a project through
Excellent points Denville and I too agree that she was just overwhelmed and exhausted by the time the divorce was over. While the announcement that she was resigning was obviously a shock, I can understand her reaction. Now while some of her larger ones would have likely not needed a high profile royal patron, some would require one.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 01-04-2017, 05:42 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
She kept only six patronages. Four of them certainly wouldn't have suffered without. The national ballet, national AIDS, Great Ormond and royal Marsden would have all been fine. Leprosy and centerpoint were possibly the only two that needed her publicity to carry on. It seems she simply hand picked the ones she felt closest to.
I tink she did pick ones that were close to her heart, but I beleive she did hold on to a couple that it was felt might really need her patronage, and she chose the Ballet because she liked Ballet and she wanted something that was an enjoyable thing as well as jobs dealing with the less fortunate.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
anti-landmine, charities, diana princess of wales, landmine, patronages, princess diana


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 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





Popular Tags
ascot 2016 bavaria best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best jewels best outfit catherine middleton style christening of prince alexander countess of wessex's daytimewear coup d'etat crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion current events duchess of cambridge dutch state visit e-mail fashion poll fashion suggestions gothia cup greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king abdullah in new zealand king willem-alexander march 2016 member introduction monarchy new zealand norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament oscars picture of the week prince charles princess beatrice fashion princess madeleine princess marie princess marie style princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion 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 queen rania casual outfit queen rania current events queen rania daytime fashion queen rania fashion september 2016 sheikh hamdan bin mohammed state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden 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 08:09 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises