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
 
  #981  
Old 08-07-2013, 04:17 PM
Dman's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,636
I think the idea is to not compare them to Diana so much but I must say that they handle the comparisons well...from what I see.

I think William & Harry had always known that they would live in their parents shadows but I also think they knew the same would happen with Catherine. Now that her engagement ring was once Diana's. I think she handles it well too.

I don't think it's fair to use Diana's personal life to put down Camilla though. I think those years of hurt and pain is over and I think Diana is in a place where love and forgiveness reigns. I think the Camilla put down is old and tired, although her past will follow her for the rest of her life and into history. I also think it causes people turn on Diana's memory too. That's not a good thing and unfair.
__________________

__________________
"The truth, I think, is always fair even if it hurts. But misrepresentation, is to me, injustice. It isn't fair, so therefore it is not digestible."

The Honourable Frances Shand Kydd
Reply With Quote
  #982  
Old 08-07-2013, 04:39 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Williamsville, United States
Posts: 218
Nice retrospective video, Dman. Does anyone wonder why no one is trying to take pictures of Camilla with a long lensed camera, running after her, and upsetting her? How many of you posters think she will be remembered 16 years after her death? At least Diana has children she left behind, one of whom will be King of Great Britain one day. He is the greatest of her legacies? What will be 'Ga Ga Grammy Cammy's'?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #983  
Old 08-07-2013, 04:50 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,262
^^^^
The fact that she is still being talked about 16 years after her death does not mean that everyone is talking about her in a positive light. If the best that one can say about her legacy is that she gave birth to 2 children well I cannot say that is much of a legacy. Even a couple of randy teenagers can pull that one off without much thought.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #984  
Old 08-07-2013, 04:51 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 695
Unlike Diana, Camilla didn't aspire to be the Princess of Wales or the Queen. She would have been happy even if Charles had not been the Prince of Wales. Camilla's legacy is her own children and with her friends. Diana wanted the legacy and she got it, but I'm not sure it was worth it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #985  
Old 08-07-2013, 05:03 PM
Dman's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,636
I think Diana did what she had to do as Princess of Wales. I think Camilla wanted the job but Charles more. She got what she wanted but with an interesting past.
__________________
"The truth, I think, is always fair even if it hurts. But misrepresentation, is to me, injustice. It isn't fair, so therefore it is not digestible."

The Honourable Frances Shand Kydd
Reply With Quote
  #986  
Old 08-07-2013, 06:43 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 2,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
As always, it depends on what is meant by Diana's legacy is fading. Many of the people making comparisons to Diana are over the age of 30, and most are in the 50+ category. There is no question that putting Diana on the cover will sell newspapers and magazines to people over the age of 30. But I don't see Diana on the cover of magazines targeted to teenagers.

We'll see how well the movie does. I'm not impressed by the trailer. Unless it gets really good reviews (Naomi Watts is a wonderful actress) I probably won't see it in the theaters. My daughter is not talking about that movie. If she goes, it will only be because of her interest in William and Harry.
As I see it, we are at a stage where Diana is moving from being a person most people remember and about whom they have strong feelings in respect of her life and her marriage and divorce, to being a historical figure. As a historical figure she has a permanent place in the Royal Family as the mother and grandmother, etc., of future monarchs, but she is also a historical figure whose life after she came to Charles' attention was the subject of much media and public attention and has been recorded in great detail by contemporary observers. With the passing of time her life will be examined and written about by historians with the distance and objectivity one expects from their perspective, but the more biased (and therefore more interesting in many ways) contemporary accounts, and these films, will still exist in the public realm.

She certainly had a interesting life for a Royal, and I would expect younger people who have an active curiosity and some interest in history to take an interest in her and see the movie, and also "The Queen". The 1978 mini series "Edward and Mrs Simpson" provides a glimpse into the lives of those two controversial figures from history for those of us who were not alive at that time. "The King's Speech" is in the same category, and I'm sure there are many others. I consider that anything that gives historical figures a personality and enables us to relate to them as human beings rather than just names on a piece of paper is a good thing. Of course it is necessary to apply commonsense and filters and realise that not everything in these dramatisations is fact, but they are still useful tools and in my opinion anything that inspires young people to seek more information about the events of history is a good thing. Far too many of them don't seem to care a hoot about anything that happened before they were born.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #987  
Old 08-07-2013, 08:47 PM
sthreats's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: midwest, United States
Posts: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexey 1904 View Post
Nice retrospective video, Dman. Does anyone wonder why no one is trying to take pictures of Camilla with a long lensed camera, running after her, and upsetting her? How many of you posters think she will be remembered 16 years after her death? At least Diana has children she left behind, one of whom will be King of Great Britain one day. He is the greatest of her legacies? What will be 'Ga Ga Grammy Cammy's'?
I'm not sure what Camilla has to do with Diana's legacy. Diana has a multi faceted legacy most of it positive. Camilla's existence does not take away from Diana. And putting Camilla down doesn't build Diana up.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #988  
Old 08-07-2013, 08:53 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 695
Diana will have a place in history. If the monarchy survives, she will be noted as a mother of a King and the first woman to divorce a Prince of Wales. If the monarchy doesn't survive, most historians will assign much of the blame or credit to Diana and Charles.

Regarding the question of how younger people view Diana, I'm not sure the film will have much influence. From what I've read, it focuses more on Diana's relationship with Hasnat Khan rather than her relationship with the monarchy. If that's true, Diana, William and Harry may be more sympathetic but since the three of them are already very popular, I don't see that it will make a difference.

I am a little concerned that to the extent the royal family is featured, the film will focus on Diana's point of view, which I don't think was completely accurate. The royal family probably will not be portrayed as out-and-out villains, but the palace is probably not looking forward to the release.

I'm also concerned that the portrayal of Prince Charles will be similar to that in "The Queen." I have a friend who strongly believes that Charles wanted to deflect public anger toward his mother because he was afraid he would be physically attacked.
.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #989  
Old 08-07-2013, 08:53 PM
Dman's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,636
That's one thing I don't believe in doing, building one person up by putting the other down. I see people doing this to Diana and Camilla. I don't think it's fair or appropriate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
I am a little concerned that to the extent the royal family is featured, the film will focus on Diana's point of view, which I don't think was completely accurate. The royal family probably will not be portrayed as out-and-out villains, but the palace is probably not looking forward to the release.

I'm also concerned that the portrayal of Prince Charles will be similar to that in "The Queen." I have a friend who strongly believes that Charles wanted to deflect public anger toward his mother because he was afraid he would be physically attacked.
I'm not sure the palace cares much about the film. Although, I'm thinking palace staff my go see the film.

I think there's was a major lack of understanding on the public's part on why The Queen and royal family stayed at Balmoral after Diana's horrible passing. I think past palace official have admitted that they could've handled the PR side of things differently. I don't think the media and the public knew that The Queen and family stayed at Balmoral to help comfort William & Harry. I think the media and public got the wrong impression that The Queen and family didn't care about what happened to Diana in Paris and it caused outrage. With hard feelings about the divorce, the public took things the wrong way, IMO.
__________________
"The truth, I think, is always fair even if it hurts. But misrepresentation, is to me, injustice. It isn't fair, so therefore it is not digestible."

The Honourable Frances Shand Kydd
Reply With Quote
  #990  
Old 08-07-2013, 09:39 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
...We'll see how well the movie does. I'm not impressed by the trailer. Unless it gets really good reviews (Naomi Watts is a wonderful actress) I probably won't see it in the theaters...
I think you are all right. I had forgotten about the movie, but it's one my girlfriends and I would get together and go see on one of those delicious girls' nights out - we were all in early teens when Diana came on the scene and basically grew up, came of age, and matured during her lifetime.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
Reply With Quote
  #991  
Old 08-07-2013, 09:59 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,325
Diana is the only one of the royal clan who is remembered by my own children or most of my students (and I have about 700-800 per year and have a chance to ask them about their cultural knowledge). I am living in America. We're either a significant part of the world's population or not - you decide.

Kate and William are recognizable to many Americans as well. But Diana's image is nameable and recognizable by far more (own research, California, Oregon, Arizona, New Mexico - obviously not a random sample, but still significant).

Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
...I'm also concerned that the portrayal of Prince Charles will be similar to that in "The Queen." I have a friend who strongly believes that Charles wanted to deflect public anger toward his mother because he was afraid he would be physically attacked.
This is a fascinating and deeper analysis of opinion outside England. I suspect that Americans are not the only ones who might want to see it this way. I don't think people necessarily blame Charles, btw, it's more complicated than that. But it certainly seemed (to many people I know in the western U.S.) that Charles did indeed try to deflect anger toward a larger entity - like the Crown (whether or not he feared being personally attacked).

Since the actual attack on their car, a couple of years ago, Charles and Camilla have not seemed to appear quite so frequently going out and about like regular people. Must be a drag.

Of course, I'm certain of correction if I'm wrong about their life going out and about.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #992  
Old 08-07-2013, 10:47 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,320
Her legacy is simply, 2 sons who love her and now a grandchild, who may resemble her or her family and I am sure be told of her. You don't need a lot more.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #993  
Old 08-07-2013, 10:50 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
I don't think the media and the public knew that The Queen and family stayed at Balmoral to help comfort William & Harry. I think the media and public got the wrong impression that The Queen and family didn't care about what happened to Diana in Paris and it caused outrage. With hard feelings about the divorce, the public took things the wrong way, IMO.

The media knew why The Queen etc stayed at Balmoral but in the immediate aftermath of Diana's death - the first couple of hours or so - the people were actually turning on the media leaving the media having to choose which group to paint as the villains - the Diana fans, the media or the royal family. The obvious group were the royal family because the media needed the money from the public.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #994  
Old 08-07-2013, 10:58 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,841
The media were the ones who got to spin it too. When you have to chose between being mad at yourself for supporting the media, the present media who's providing a scapegoat, or the royals themselves who were the scapegoat people tend to go with the scapegoat.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #995  
Old 08-08-2013, 02:53 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexey 1904 View Post
Nice retrospective video, Dman. Does anyone wonder why no one is trying to take pictures of Camilla with a long lensed camera, running after her, and upsetting her? How many of you posters think she will be remembered 16 years after her death? At least Diana has children she left behind, one of whom will be King of Great Britain one day. He is the greatest of her legacies? What will be 'Ga Ga Grammy Cammy's'?
William will be King because of who his father is not because of Diana, No matter who Charles had married his eldest son would have been King assuming the monarchy survives that long. That's not Diana's legacy, it's his.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #996  
Old 08-08-2013, 03:21 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 2,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by VictoriaB View Post
William will be King because of who his father is not because of Diana, No matter who Charles had married his eldest son would have been King assuming the monarchy survives that long. That's not Diana's legacy, it's his.
William might be king because of who his father is, but that father was not capable of asexual reproduction. He needed a woman to be the mother of his children, and Diana was the woman he chose, and her genetic material flows through William's veins and will flow through the veins of future monarchs. That is her legacy as much as Charles'.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #997  
Old 08-08-2013, 04:35 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 292
I agree that William & Harry are Diana's legacy but not their royal status. That comes from Charles.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #998  
Old 08-08-2013, 04:49 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 2,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by VictoriaB View Post
I agree that William & Harry are Diana's legacy but not their royal status. That comes from Charles.
On this issue we appear to be ad idem.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #999  
Old 08-08-2013, 06:28 AM
Nico's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 1,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
Her legacy is simply, 2 sons who love her and now a grandchild, who may resemble her or her family and I am sure be told of her. You don't need a lot more.
Amen to that...
Speaking about "genetic material" seems a little bit far fetched though. I know some people are simply terrified at the idea of Diana being forgotten but bringing the "blood in their veins" into that is a little bit ridiculous.
She was their mother and will be forever in their mind and their heart, they don't need to expose a perpetual grief on their faces to reassure the masses about the state of the legacy of the late Princess.
Cherishing the memory of their mother is maybe one of the few intimate things they are able to do without the indecent scrutiny of the media and the so called "fans".
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1000  
Old 08-08-2013, 07:37 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 695
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
The media were the ones who got to spin it too. When you have to chose between being mad at yourself for supporting the media, the present media who's providing a scapegoat, or the royals themselves who were the scapegoat people tend to go with the scapegoat.
I agree with both Ish and Iluvbertie regarding the actual events. My original comment was referring to the way Charles was portrayed in the movie "The Queen." In the movie, one of the advisors to Tony Blair stated that Charles was afraid that some of Diana's fans would turn violent, so he was trying to deflect their anger towards the Queen to protect himself. It was absolutely ludicrous, but I know at least one person who is convinced that this fictional scene was based on fact.

The Diana movie will probably not be that bad, but since it is from Diana's point of view (or the point of view of her friends), I suspect it will show Diana courageously standing up to the cold, out-of-touch and uncaring royal family. In particular, Charles will probably be portrayed as weak, selfish, and jealous of his ex-wife. Unfortunately, a lot of people who see it will believe this was the reality. Perhaps I'll be pleasantly surprised.

It is unfortunate that for all her efforts to be seen as a humanitarian and healer, many people will remember Diana's anger, bitterness, and vindictiveness for the royal family. There is no question that Diana "won" the battle for public affection and Charles's reputation was hurt more than Diana's. But her memory has not survive unscathed. Many Diana fans will never forgive Prince Charles but, similarly, many supporters of the royal family will never forgive Diana.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, legacy, memorial, princess diana


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 19 (2 members and 17 guests)
Loop9, Mirabel
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 10:07 AM
Diana's will msleiman Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 56 01-06-2008 06:22 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth birthday bourbon-parma camilla charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria danish royals dutch royal history engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hohenzollern infanta elena king abdullah king abdullah ii king albert ii king carl xvi gustav king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander picture thread pom pregnancy prince albert prince albert ii prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince frederik prince henrik prince joachim prince maurits princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess haya princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess maxima queen elizabeth ii queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia state visit wedding willem-alexander william


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

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV 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 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:10 PM.

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]