The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997)

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #841  
Old 05-05-2013, 08:54 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 4,617
BINGO Ish. As a child I very well remember my mom and her friends laughing and giggling over tabloid articles featuring Princess Margaret's marital battles with Lord Snowdon, her affair with Roddy Llewellyn cavorting on Mustique, her jet set escapades and eventually her divorce which was quite a shock when it happened.

She was a precursor to Diana who simply picked up where "Margo" left off...with a much wider audience this time around, imo.
__________________

__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena
Reply With Quote
  #842  
Old 05-06-2013, 06:39 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,960
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I am able to identify when - a time - when the nature of the royal family changed from a serious institution to a soap opera and that change took place when Diana entered.
What has hit me is the fact that it was the time and not so much Diana as the catalyst of the perception of the BRF. With the 90s came the birth of personal computers and cell phones readily available to the masses and this is the main cause of the change in how we look at the Royal Family. They didn't change. The world did. When Queen Juliana of the Netherlands abdicated in favor of Beatrix in 1980, there wasn't a TRF to have a world wide forum to discuss whether or not Elizabeth II would think of abdicating as she grew older. With Beatrix's, every little detail was instantaneous with social media and internet live coverage and extensive discussions in various threads here even on every aspect imaginable from finery to facial expressions and historical meanings to hairdos. With the information readily available to us at a touch of a keystroke, we have more information (for better or worse) than ever at our fingertips.

One thing remains a constant in the UK and that is its monarchy. It is rich in its heritage and its traditions and it is the glue that gives a sense of pride and continuity. Small changes have been made such as buses instead of carriages at royal weddings and we don't see so many tiaras and white tie events as we used to but the main core of pomp, circumstance and tradition remain down to some of even the ages old traditions of the Opening of Parliament.

I don't think that Elizabeth II will ever even think of the possibility of an abdication. Its just not a feasible option in any form for her. She's Queen until she draws her last breath. She's also very much aware (perhaps even more so than any one of us) of how the world is changing and that in itself would inspire her to try and hold onto and maintain the heritage she has given her entire life to serve.
__________________

__________________
“We live in a world where we have to hide to make love, while violence is practiced in broad daylight.”
~~~ John Lennon ~~~
Reply With Quote
  #843  
Old 05-07-2013, 05:02 PM
corazon's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: -In some dark place-, Argentina
Posts: 2,080
It's sad the earl spencer close althorp house to the public, there is a place where the pople can gie diana a flower, but diana things like the weddings drees will go the right hands, william and harry, they are man now and they can decided to do with they mother personal things not like she die and both are children.

I never can go th althorp because I have totally panic to the planes but WE know she don't is burried there, some day the true come out. diana body don't is in althorp!
__________________
Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.
As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".
-www.theroyalist.net-
Reply With Quote
  #844  
Old 05-07-2013, 05:40 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
100s of years from now people will be identifying her entry into the family as a turning point - that is what history does - it rakes over the coals for ever and she will be discussed for centuries to come.

It is people who haven't yet come to terms with the fact that she is an historic figure who have to realise that she is a fact of history that have to get over that fact and realise that she will be discussed and criticised forever and ever - no different to any other historic figure - which is what she is.
Historic figure?? Maybe, but only if you consider People magazine as a reference document. Diana will IMO be a footnote in the actual history books, ultimately no more important than the wife of George IV.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #845  
Old 05-07-2013, 05:47 PM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 842
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
Historic figure?? Maybe, but only if you consider People magazine as a reference document. Diana will IMO be a footnote in the actual history books, ultimately no more important than the wife of George IV.
Exactly..Diana will not be a "historic" figure..I actually think Iluvbertie used that term in a sarcastic sense, rather than to glorify her..
Aside from QETQM, Prince Philip and even "Queen Camilla"" will be more "historic" than Diana.
__________________
The only word I hate in the Royal Dictionary - ABDICATION
Reply With Quote
  #846  
Old 05-07-2013, 06:26 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 1,730
I can see Diana as a historic figure, a turning point, depending upon the the lives of her children and now her grandchildren. That is a person's legacy, their children. The majority of Harry and Will's lives are still to be mapped out, and of course the new baby. Will this be a good legacy, a bad legacy, or somewhere in between? What in Diana will they have inherited? Will there be a turning point in the monarchy, led by William, or his child, and how much of this comes down to Diana? Get back to be in about 40-60 years time, if I'm still around, and we will know better.

As for the idea that it was Diana who was the creator of the notion that monarchy is equated with celebrity, and some of it quite Kardashian like, I think that notion came about long before. It's the case of the public, press and palace trying to define the role of monarchy in the modern world.

After WWI, when a number of European monarchies fell, and we really entered the 20th century, the notion of Divine Right was dead. Just what was the purpose of monarchy. With the advent of new technologies, with the advent of a society far less rigid, formal and obsequious society, the idea that royals were mere celebrities was born.

The first royal celebrities were arguably the last Romanovs, who were still absolute monarchs. The family was beautiful and tragic, and they were also isolated much like the Japanese royals today. The photos of the four grand duchesses growing up were sought after. Their brutal deaths rendered them all the more tragic. It was their status as celebrity that gave way to pretenders such as Anna Anderson gaining worldwide attention.

After their deaths, the press turned to two royal figures as celebrity figures; the Prince of Wales (who is much like a 1920's and 30's Prince Harry), a dashing, playboy prince. The nation disapproved but loved to follow his antics. Then there was baby Elizabeth. It was her mother, the then Duchess of York, who in a very savvy way played the media by releasing little sanctioned tidbits about her life, sanctioned a little book about the Princess, sanctioned photos released to the media. It was all very canny of her, keeping interest in Elizabeth, and starting the first modern PR spin surrounding the royal family. Little did she know what she would one say unleash.

So I would say it was in fact the Queen Mother who first USED the press for PR. The rest that followed; Princess Margaret, Randy Andy and Koo Stark, etc, etc.

Princess Diana was the second royal to once again USE the media - but unlike the Queen Mother, she used it for her own self-preservation, not the preservation of the royals. She turned the media against the BRF, but she was certainly not the first royal to use the media, or to turn royalty into the notion of celebrity.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
Reply With Quote
  #847  
Old 05-07-2013, 06:37 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,523
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
Historic figure?? Maybe, but only if you consider People magazine as a reference document. Diana will IMO be a footnote in the actual history books, ultimately no more important than the wife of George IV.
The difference is that Diana's descendents will be sitting on the throne.

She most certainly will go down as an historic figure - loved and loathed in life and divisive in death - that is one reason why she will always be an historic figure.

Things changed because of her - for both good and bad - making her an historic figure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vkrish View Post
Exactly..Diana will not be a "historic" figure..I actually think Iluvbertie used that term in a sarcastic sense, rather than to glorify her..
Aside from QETQM, Prince Philip and even "Queen Camilla"" will be more "historic" than Diana.
Camilla will be the footnote as the wife of a King while Diana will be more front and centre as the mother of a king, the grandmother of a monarch etc.

You can think that I used the term in a sarcastic sense but as an history teacher that is never the way I use the term.

Historic figures are people who change the world and she did that - she changed the way the BRF operates and the way the people view the royal family - that makes her an historic figure.

There are many many biographies of her already and that number will increase as her life becomes more distant and more documents about her come out.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #848  
Old 05-07-2013, 06:40 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,501
Quote from Iluvbertie

100s of years from now people will be identifying her entry into the family as a turning point - that is what history does - it rakes over the coals for ever and she will be discussed for centuries to come.

I don't think it was her entry into the family but the Royal response to her death that will be seen as historical.

The Queen who could do wrong, who was (and still is) lauded for putting her duty first above everything, was deemed to have got it wrong. The first time she publically put her family first and she was castigated for it.

I think now, in calmer times, she is generally perceived to have got it right but the historical fact will be that she was made to change her stance due to direct public opinion.

And all because Diana died.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #849  
Old 05-07-2013, 07:19 PM
corazon's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: -In some dark place-, Argentina
Posts: 2,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The difference is that Diana's descendents will be sitting on the throne.

She most certainly will go down as an historic figure - loved and loathed in life and divisive in death - that is one reason why she will always be an historic figure.

Things changed because of her - for both good and bad - making her an historic figure.
I totaly agree with you in historic book un the future, if she don't figure for herhelf she will fugure that the mother of the king william V
__________________
Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.
As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".
-www.theroyalist.net-
Reply With Quote
  #850  
Old 05-07-2013, 07:23 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,261
Neither Camilla nor Diana is going to go down in history as a footnote.

One is the mother of a future king, the other the wife of one. Both have had a huge impact on the monarchy, the public, and the way the two interact. Neither one is going to go down in history as a mere footnote.

If you think as much, consider Wallis Simpson, Alice Keppel, Nell Gwyn, Anne Boleyn, Katherine Swynford, Eleanor of Aquitaine... Some of these were wives, some were mistresses, some had children with their royal significant others, others didn't, and others still were only rumoured to have done so... Some may not be mentioned in every history book on the me they loved, but none would be omitted from a biography, or simply relegated to a footnote. That's not how history works.

Like them or not, Diana is a historic figure and, when she passes, Camilla will be one as well.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #851  
Old 05-07-2013, 08:03 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 825
Most wives of kings have become footnotes. By that, I mean that most people would have to look up the name of the wife. For example, how many people could name the wife of George the IV off the top of their heads? Maybe many people on this board, but the vast majority would have to search the Internet for the answer.

Kings, Queens, and their offspring are known to their contemporaries and maybe one generation later. Unless they changed the course of history, they tend to recede in our memories because it's only natural that new personalities emerge and begin to take center stage.

I tend to think that Diana will be little more than a footnote. She will certainly be remembered for through William's lifetime, another 60 years or so. There will be some discussion as her children and grandchildren reach certain milestones, but it will lessen over time and she will gradually fade from our consciousness.

However, her ultimate place in history will depend on whether the British monarchy survives over the next 60 years or so. I expect the monarchy to continue, but if either Charles or William become the last King, Diana will figure prominently in history books. There will be a constant argument of how much damage, if any, she did to the monarchy. On the other hand, if William's child becomes monarch, it is unlikely the media or anyone else will continue to debate Diana's role in modern life because the world does move on.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #852  
Old 05-07-2013, 08:04 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,523
Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by iluvbertie
100s of years from now people will be identifying her entry into the family as a turning point - that is what history does - it rakes over the coals for ever and she will be discussed for centuries to come.
I don't think it was her entry into the family but the Royal response to her death that will be seen as historical...
I disagree - her entry was accompanied by the frenzy around the family that hadn't been there before. Her entry was clearly the event that changed the family and the way it worked.

Her death was significant for showing how easily the press can and did manipulate the public but they were only learning from the master manipulater in Diana herself.

Her legacy is divisive - some people see her as this wonderful saintlike figure while others see her as a disaster from day 1 and those opinions were around during her lifetime as well as after her death.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #853  
Old 05-07-2013, 08:46 PM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 7,000
The late Princess of Wales is and always will be an historic figure. That famous 1981 royal wedding, her beauty, fashion, her charity work and her tragic death has forever put Diana Frances Spencer/HRH Princess of Wales in our history books. Generations to come will know who Diana was.

The Duchess of Cornwall will always be an historic figure because the part she played in Charles & Diana's marriage and the fact she married Charles and will now probably be a future Queen. The controversy alone has put Camilla in our history books.
__________________
"If you are always trying to be normal you will never know how amazing you can be."

Dr. Maya Angelou
Reply With Quote
  #854  
Old 05-07-2013, 08:55 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,514
Diana will be the an historic figure, in that she is the grandmother of the newest entry to the royal succession, and the mother to a future king, really and a crowning persona in what royals should look like and have now copied her.

Camiila will be the queen to the king , who will reign for few years. A mistress who succeeded and who made queen, beyond the royal family "we are superior", nonsense. A travesty to all the "royal nonsense" that made them "better". She will, always, be his mistress. Which would not be a shame, but the family did that to others.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #855  
Old 05-07-2013, 09:23 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 2,635
Cudos to all of you in the recent posts about Diana's legacy. This has been a highly civil, well stated series of arguments about a speculative topic. This is why people contribute to or even simply visit without contributing to the Royal Forums.

Time of course will tell, but it's lovely to see you all dialoguing so constructively. Not that anyone appointed me to do this - I just like it when we play nice and I learn things.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #856  
Old 05-08-2013, 02:46 AM
Tiggersk8's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Evansville, Canada
Posts: 1,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
Historic figure?? Maybe, but only if you consider People magazine as a reference document. Diana will IMO be a footnote in the actual history books, ultimately no more important than the wife of George IV.
Tell that to the AIDS Community. Back when there was so much fear and terror over the AIDS Epidemic and so much misinformation out there, pictures of Diana shaking the hands of AIDS victims w/out wearing any gloves? That did more for AIDS Awareness than any Awareness Campaign or Educational Effort had ever done to that point. The same w/Leprosy during some of their East Asian Tours where she was once again seen shaking hands w/Leprosy victims w/out gloves on and once again, did more for Awareness and Education than anything to that point.

Tell that to the Disabled Community. Diana was the first major Royal to take on the "supposedly" unpopular causes, such as the Mentally Disabled to name just one. She also fought for integration both in and outside the Schools between Disabled and Able bodied Children w/the various Patronages she took on that were and still are fighting that battle and brought badly needed exposure to the issue like never before.

And try telling that to me!! I met her back in 1991 during her final visit to Canada. When she and Charles arrived on the level of Science North that I was on, I had been placed beside two people in Wheelchairs in order to hope we'd at the very least have a good view of TRHs coming onto the exhibit level we were all on. When she and Charles walked off the spiral ramp that's the access way to the various exhibit floors, we literally had a crowd right in front of us and blocking whatever view we did have.

Diana saw what had happened too. She headed straight for us and instead of meeting those that had rudely blocked our clear view, said in a pleasant tone to them "Excuse me please?" and w/the crowd performing a Human version of the Parting of the Red Sea, she headed straight for us to chat w/before anyone else on that part of Science North that day.

At the time I was still dealing w/all I went through during my years of Hell School as the first Legally Blind/Visually Impaired Student while in my final year there and little did I know it then, but five months later I would be starting two years on Kidney Dialysis and two Transplants as well. One of the few things that helped me on some of the worst days I used to say I would never wish on anyone, were the memories of that very special day when Princess Diana met *me*!!

So if all you think Diana's place in History is, is as a Tabloid Diva and nothing more, that's your opinion. The truth OTOH is not even close!!

BTW, the reason why I now say I used to say I would never wish what I have gone through in my life on anyone, is due to this. W/the direction this World of ours is headed down, where Compassion seems to be dying and rudeness more and more the Order of the Day and Things, perhaps if more people walked a few miles in mine or some of my friends' shoes and went through what I have to deal w/just shopping for Groceries for example, then maybe that would turn things around.

Perhaps it would, perhaps it wouldn't. I do know Diana made a difference not just w/me, not just the various Charities she worked w/, but she made a difference in this World of ours. I for one will be doing my best to keep her Memory and Legacy alive always.
__________________
Recycle Life ~ Be An Organ Donor!!
Recieved my Kidney Transplant on December 10th, 1993 and will be forever grateful to the family of my donor for the greatest earliest Christmas Present I've ever been given
Reply With Quote
  #857  
Old 05-08-2013, 03:19 AM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 842
I disagree with the assumption that Diana was responsible for the world accepting AIDS patients. That is the course of any disease in a society. First there is enormous stigma, then little resignation, followed by reluctant acceptance, after thorough education.. All this occurs over a turn of 10 years. AIDS was established in early 80s, and this cycle went through for a decade and by mid-90s, people were able to accept HIV patients anyway.
__________________
The only word I hate in the Royal Dictionary - ABDICATION
Reply With Quote
  #858  
Old 05-08-2013, 11:10 AM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
I have never heard of anyone making that assumption. But without the information and society being educated about the disease. And the awareness brought on by regular people and famous persons such as Magic Johnson, the Princess, Liz Taylor and many others we wouldn't be here today with the advancement of knowledge on the disease and the acceptance of those who have the virus.
__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
Reply With Quote
  #859  
Old 05-08-2013, 01:12 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiggersk8 View Post
Tell that to the AIDS Community...
Tell that to the Disabled Community...
And try telling that to me!!...
Thank you very much for sharing your personal memories of Princess Diana. It sounds like she was truly generous. I wish you the best.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #860  
Old 05-08-2013, 02:12 PM
corazon's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: -In some dark place-, Argentina
Posts: 2,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
Diana will be the an historic figure...
I totally agree with you!
__________________

__________________
Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.
As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".
-www.theroyalist.net-
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, legacy, memorial, 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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Left-handed or right-handed royals? Peggy Royal Life and Lifestyle 31 01-28-2013 11:07 AM
Diana's will msleiman Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 56 01-06-2008 07:22 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events dutch royal history engagement fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games olympics ottoman poland pom pregnancy president hollande prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess mabel princess margriet princess mary queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:19 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]