Diana's Legacy: What is left or what will be left?

[Roslyn]

I took it to mean that Scooter perceives that some people here absolutely despise Diana and her memory and would be likely to want to burn an effigy of her.

 

[sirhon11234]

Oh well that's unfortunate.

 

[iowabelle]

But to burn her in effigy is pretty extreme. You certainly don't see that kind of behavior in the U.S. very often, so I am wondering what she did that inspired that kind of passion in these people. (I think you're more likely to hear someone say she was just a celebrity or a parasite not worthy of consideration--like some other celebs.)

 

[Skydragon]

You should be greatful that some people dont burn her in effigy here

Who are you suggesting that would be? I have done an extensive search since reading this comment and can find nobody and nothing to suggest that is the case!

But to burn her in effigy is pretty extreme. You certainly don't see that kind of behavior in the U.S. very often, so I am wondering what she did that inspired that kind of passion in these people. (I think you're more likely to hear someone say she was just a celebrity or a parasite not worthy of consideration--like some other celebs.)

It is not the sort of thing one see's here either!

 

[TheTruth]

You should be greatful that some people dont burn her in effigy here. :-(

I don't think I understand what you're saying.
There's nothing to burn. Just people sharing their opinion on her… unless being in a dictatorship, people have the right to express different views on things (how boring otherwise!).
If this year there aren't many news on Diana, it's a pretty good sign that people have gone on with the living, of their will to place life before death. Doesn't mean they forget about her and that's at least the peace her sons have been yearning for. Isn't what people who like her, admire her were waiting for for such a long time?

 

[iowabelle]

Scooter, I wasn't trying to be disrespectful of your thought, but I was genuinely interested in what you had to say. So I hope you feel free to explain more to us.

I know my feelings for Diana go beyond what is "normal"... even my best friend says, when I launch into a royal family/Diana story "and this means what to me??" Probably not much. But I'm still hooked.

 

[scooter]

My point is that there seems to be a very vocal group here that has absolutely zero positive to say about the late Princess on any and all subjects and only wonderful things to say about her former husband and his second wife on any and all subjects who will fight to the death before they 'admit' anything the slightest bit nice about Diana, period. At the very least there seems to be a wholesale whitewashing of history by some members, IMHO. I have also noticed that this group will gang up and personally bash anyone who disagrees, myself included. There was a new poster a few weeks ago who was attacked and told to 'get a life' on their very first post for suggesting that Charles is a bit hypocritical on the whole 'green'/private plane aspect. I've had many pms from members who have thrown their hands up and walked off, exhausted from debating the 'do you have a personal statement from the Palace otherwise nothing else is the truth' argument. Some people seem to hover over the Charles and Camilla threads to defend them to the death, no matter their bad behavior...and over Diana's threads to bash her and her defenders at all times. I must confess I sometimes find this argument so exasperating that I leave this site and dont come back for long periods, which is sad because except for that aspect I quite enjoy this forum.

 

[sirhon11234]

You have a point Scooter, the War of the Waleses continues through some of the fans.

 

[MARG]

For the most part I think that the "War of the Wales's" is done and dusted. The thing that seems to irritate me the most is that Princess Diana is "frozen" in the Panorama documetary, forever a victim? or made out to be both a victim and a martyr, some sort of "Pity" godess. Eternally broken-hearted, eternally a lost child.

She is not and was not, any more so than each of us is "victimised" by our own life choices.

By the time of her death Diana and Charles had lived and grown and, I think, become better people than they were, before and during the breakup. Neither of them had been stirling in their behavior at times but I think they both got over themselves and decided to call a truce for their children.

It wasn't perfect, but it was life. Continuing to castigate the surviving ex spouse does nothing to edify Diana's life. It diminishes it, forever calling people to "take sides" like spiteful children and continue to play out the "tragedy" for all time.

She got over it . . . . so should we! That is why noone made a big deal about a wedding anniversary for a marriage broken long before her death.

Many have postulated the theory that Hassnet Khan was the love of her life. By freezing her in time we deny the vital life she lived. And that is the whole point, she was divorced not dead. But for many it is as if she died way back then, which necessitated a total denial of the vibrant life she led until her untimely actual death.

Diana deserves to be remebered for who she was, not for being the lead player in an annual "Pity Party"!

 

[Skydragon]

My point is that there seems to be a very vocal group here that has absolutely zero positive to say about the late Princess on any and all subjects

And this backs up your dramatic statement of 'burning her in effigy' how? All iowabelle said was there did not appear to be any mention of the 1981 wedding, unlike previous years and other posters gave their opinions as to why that might be.

As on any thread, and as has been shown dozens of times, if a statement has been made by a poster as fact, then it should be possible to back it up with a source. Most of the links that many posters have been kind enough to provide, state in the article, (if you read past the headline), that such and such is based on gossip or the ubiquitous unnamed source/close friend. It is, to me, not acceptable, to state (as an example) that a particular person said or did this, when in fact it is something taken from a book written by someone else, who also was probably not there. Had such a statement been phrased "I read in ???s book that A said this and my interpretation or opinion is that this was spin put out by so and so on their behalf" ... that would be entirely different. Very few posters on here can state with any certainty that this or that happened, because very few posters were actually there or have anything other than third/fourth/fifth hand interpretations of an event, since they have only read about it in a book by someone putting their interpretation on events they have been told about.

Although I am not a moderator, I would suggest you continue to complain by PM to a moderator of your concerns, IMO, it ruins a nice discussion to read personal gripes aired in the threads!

 

[Warren]

Some people seem to hover over the Charles and Camilla threads to defend them to the death, no matter their bad behavior...and over Diana's threads to bash her and her defenders at all times.

The problem with this analysis scooter is that it is so over-stated and exaggerated as to be ridiculous.
I have been a Moderator of the British Forums for exactly four years now and an Administrator for three. I can assure you the overall atmosphere, level of politeness, member attitude, and degree of insight, knowledge and understanding shown by members in the Diana threads has vastly improved over this period.
Your claim that "some people...bash [Diana] and her defenders at all times" is so at odds with reality as to be absurd.

 

[sirhon11234]

Diana deserves to be remebered for who she was, not for being the lead player in an annual "Pity Party"!

I agree, the Princess deserves to be rembered for who she was as does everyone.

 

[NotAPretender]

There is a lot of Diana which has become a legacy, the most significant of which is her two sons. They appear to be, as they grow and mature, balancing the human side against the royal side. Harry has had many more bumps than has William - but her enduring legacy will be, most significantly, those two men.

Secondarily, her work on land mines continues to have strong positive impact, particularly in Africa. One of my friends is a doctor with the WHO and has first-hand knowledge of the devastation caused by land mines. She has said to me that Diana's image and legacy continue to be "currency" in the efforts to clear the land mines' destructive influence.

On the shallower side, her dedication to British fashion and her personal appearance in such confections put several British designers back in the "win" column; it's unlikely that women who purchase haute couture would flock to a designer or dressline as worn on a woman with a less comely appearance.

The individuals who were personally touched in her life, such as her many godchildren, will have private memories that will remain untainted by the naysayers who have decided that her life must be considered as a zero-sum game within the Royal family.

And to be perfectly blunt about something, one legacy of the end of her life is the necessity of seatbelts! Any time one of my passengers demurs on wearing one, I turn around and say "Paris? Tunnel? Diana? Put on the &^%* belt!"

 

[TheTruth]

The problem with this analysis scooter is that it is so over-stated and exaggerated as to be ridiculous.
I have been a Moderator of the British Forums for exactly four years now and an Administrator for three. I can assure you the overall atmosphere, level of politeness, member attitude, and degree of insight, knowledge and understanding shown by members in the Diana threads has vastly improved over this period.
Your claim that "some people...bash [Diana] and her defenders at all times" is so at odds with reality as to be absurd.

Warren made it very clear and thorough. This place had many difficult hours, the atmosphere back then was terrible and didn't allow everyone to feel "at home", so to speak. I'm sure older members would be glad to tell you about it.
Our work as Moderators was most of the time trying to cool things down and stop fights to go any further. Fortunately, today, this activity has become quite rarer and I don't see many people around here, complaining so harshly as you do.

 

[Iluvbertie]

And to be perfectly blunt about something, one legacy of the end of her life is the necessity of seatbelts! Any time one of my passengers demurs on wearing one, I turn around and say "Paris? Tunnel? Diana? Put on the &^%* belt!"

I had to drive a couple of friends to the airport this afternoon and they didn't put their seatbelts on.

I made the comments above and was greeted with stares and a 'please explain'. I did so and they replied 'but you aren't drunk, we aren't being chased by paparazzi, you can handle this car, we aren't going to be telling you to do things that are stupid and you won't be going over the speed limit so your point doesn't make sense'.

They did put on their seatbelts (because it is the law in Australia to wear one where fitted at all times) but they simply, at first didn't understand the cryptic nature of your comment and then shot it down very quickly.

It lead to a discussion on her legacy and the general consensus was - her sons and and and .... they couldn't really think of anything else that has changed in the world because of her.

 

[Madame Royale]

Ask those who's lives were changed by the causes of which she was patron, and I'm sure they'd give you a well qualified answer as to what kind of legacy Diana, Princess of Wales has left. Though but one person, the exposure she brought to the table resulting in further research and funding has I'm sure changed the lives of a good many people.

Even if it were but one person who's life she helped better, that's still quite the legacy to leave, imo.

 

[Roslyn]

Oh dear! Iluvbertie, I'm very sad your friends are that way about seat belts, and don't "get" the lesson from Diana's death.

You might be sober and driving sensibly and well, but what if some loon comes across the median strip and drives at you on your side of the road at 100 kph, or your brakes fail, or for some other reason there is a high speed crash.

I was speaking to an ambulance officer only yesterday afternoon about some of the car accidents he's had to attend. He was telling me about the first one, back in the days before seat belts were compulsory....

 

[Warren]

OK, the temporary diversion involving claims of innocent members being attacked by Diana-bashers has been removed.

The last occasion this thread required moderator intervention was six months ago.

° ° °

• Members who prefer to participate in a volatile and combatative environment are advised to find another forum more suited to their posting style.
​

​

• Claims of victimhood and complaints about the moderation of the British Forums may be addressed to me by PM.

• One of the parties who has been stated to be "bashing Diana defenders at all times" has not posted at TRF for two months.

• Any further attempts to derail this thread from the stated topic by deliberate inflammatory and wildly exaggerated claims will be dealt with accordingly.

• Normal transmission will now be resumed.

Thanks for everybody's cooperation in ensuring the thread returns to it's previous trouble-free state.
​

Warren
British Forums moderator

 

[sirhon11234]

And to be perfectly blunt about something, one legacy of the end of her life is the necessity of seatbelts! Any time one of my passengers demurs on wearing one, I turn around and say "Paris? Tunnel? Diana? Put on the &^%* belt!"

I always remind my friends when we go into a car and they don't put on their seatbelt what happened to Diana because she didn't wear one.There is this belief that if one sits in the backseat he or she doesen't have to wear a seatbelt. And my friends made the same remark and I told them that the Princess was in the backseat and still sustained injuries
that killed her. My friends immediately put on their seatbelts when I was done with my speech.

Even if you are in a car and the driver is sober and there aren't any photographers chasing after you, that doesen't mean your not going to get into an accident and shouldn't wear your seatbelt.

Madame Royal Even if it were but one person who's life she helped better, that's still quite the legacy to leave, imo.

You are very right Madame Royal.

 

[NotAPretender]

Well said, MadameRoyal and sirhon112234; one life made better is a remarkable achievement. Ralph Waldo Emerson had a wonderful saying about it; I'll look for it.

Seatbelts, I always thought, go without saying. TRF endlessly surprises me, I must say!

I do know that among my circle, reminding is rarely required but when it is, the memory of the tunnel crash is enough. Not to be insulting, but my friends are probably a bit older and have a longer life memory as well as body of experience, and remember the tunnel crash. The manner of Diana's death has hardly become the "Obscure British History Category" on Jeopardy!, along with the names of Edward VII's godparents.

So if even one person buckles up when reminded that the only survivor of the crash is the only one who wore a belt, well then, there is yet another positive legacy.

 

[sirhon11234]

A few days old
Celebrating Di Day

Latest news from Cambridge & Cambridgeshire. Cambridge sports, Cambridge jobs & Cambridge business - Celebrating Di Day

PEOPLE in Cambridge are packing a community centre today to remember the day it was opened by Princess Diana.
The Princess of Wales performed the opening ceremony of Cherry Hinton Village Centre on August 1, 1989.
To celebrate the anniversary, a special open day is being held today.
Mr Woodhouse said: “Someone reminded me that Princess Diana was coming to Cambridge to open the children’s hospice at Milton, and suggested we should write to her to see if she would do the village centre as well. To our surprise, she agreed.”

 

[Grace Angel]

The best days to remember in connnection with Diana are her birthday, and sadly, the date of her death. There's really no purpose to remembering the day of her wedding, I think even had she lived the press would have moved on from remembering the date of her wedding so much eventually.

 

[sirhon11234]

Princess Diana's Death: Anniversary Brings French Health Care Into Focus - ABC News

 

[maryshawn]

The article on the French health care system was very interesting. The provision of health care services in many countries have been undergoing increasing scrutiny and it's going to be interesting to see how it all turns out. Having worked in health care for a number of years, I agree every situation, every individual poses a unique set of issues. Would Natasha Richardson have survived, for instance, if the ambulance had insisted she go to hospital for head scans or if there had been a flight service to more quickly get her to the nearest trauma center? And, of course, would Princess Diana have lived had she gotten to a trauma center in minutes, rather than hours? What quality of life would she have had even if that had happened?

After years of reading books and articles about Diana and the tragic events of August 31, 1997, I tend to believe her injuries were so grave there would be no way of saving her. It was a horrid, unfortunate accident.

As for her legacy, I think time has healed a lot of wounds. I've actually been moving and going through books and articles from the days of the courtship with Prince Charles and I think the Princess' legacy is what she would most likely have wanted--her sons, Princes William and Harry, making a successful transition into healthy, accomplished young men. As a mother, I know that would be my wish, that my daughter would turn out well. Her flaws--and I even hesitate using that word--were of the understandably human variety--some jealousy, game playing, romances with some less than savory men. What I think of when I remember her, however, is how many people who said she touched their lives in memorable ways--friends and strangers alike. She was an inherently good person who tried to live a meaningful life, raise children with good values, and she wanted what most of us want--love, security, fun and friends, and a sense of being needed. I am grateful she walked among us for as long as she did. She was glamorous, interesting, and, as a contemporary age-wise, a role model in many ways. I will always remember her fondly and believe much of the world will, too.

 

[sirhon11234]

Princess Diana Remembered 12 Years Later: See Her Most Stylish Moments (PHOTOS)

 

[Skydragon]

The lives of Queen Elizabeth, the late Queen Mother, and Diana, Princess of Wales, reflected a differing understanding of the Royal role, says Simon Heffer

The gulf between a Princess and a Queen - Telegraph

 

[lillas]

Princess Diana Remembered 12 Years Later: See Her Most Stylish Moments (PHOTOS)

Beautifull photos... thanks for posting .

 

[Mermaid1962]

I found this statement reflecting some of my own thoughts about people's view of Diana and her death.

"Yet that is, I suppose, the encapsulation of what had changed in our national temper between 1952 and 1997. The generation that lived through the Blitz – as Queen Elizabeth did – got up out of the ruins, mourned their dead quietly and with dignity, and simply carried on. Perhaps Dr Williams would reflect – and he is more qualified to do so than I am – that the reaction to the late Princess's death was that to be expected of a secular society, or at least of one far more secularised than it had been half a century earlier. Society struggles to believe in a God it cannot see in these times. A god, or goddess, that can not only be seen, but is also role model, catwalk model, media personality and celebrity is not merely tangible, but far more credible. Sadly for those who believed in her, she was also mortal."

The lives of Queen Elizabeth, the late Queen Mother, and Diana, Princess of Wales, reflected a differing understanding of the Royal role, says Simon Heffer

The gulf between a Princess and a Queen - Telegraph

 

[sirhon11234]

With respect, Mr Heffer, it doesn�t matter whether or not you liked any and all of those ladies clutching whatever flowers they had purchased, what matters is that they were openly displaying their emotion at the tragic loss of someone who was held in much higher esteem than most if not all of the rest of the Windsor family and, perhaps, they were even displaying their disgust at what Charles Windsor had been up to.

The difference between Princess Diana and the Queen Mother is one of era, age and indifference; the Queen Mother was born in the first year of the 20th century when women had not yet attained the vote and 101 when she died in her own bed in the second year of the 21st century and for the most part, appeared indifferent to the ordinary masses to whom she would occasionally wave a hand whereas Princess Diana was born at the beginning of a much more liberal attitude to life and only 36 when she was unlawfully killed in Paris but was wont to make a great deal of effort to meet and greet people around the world. In other words, the latter was in touch and the former was completely out of touch.

I agree with this commmentator's sentiments.

 

[Skydragon]

At least be fair and quote both sides, not just that of a conspiracy theorist.

The adulation she received in life and death was on a par with that for Michael Jackson and there really is no basis for comparison with the Queen Mum.

I share Mr Heffer's views on the death of Princess Diana. While I was shocked and saddened by the news, nothing prepared me for the unaccountable, obscene, and frankly risible public display of cheap sentimentality which followed.

Diana was an unmitigated disaster - she viewed herself as a celebrity or a movie star might and acted accordingly. Public exposure and media attention was everything. It was better to be noticed for bad behaviour than not to be noticed at all.

There are many, many, more comments agreeing with or opposed.