Fürstin Taxis
Serene Highness
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,324
- City
- Jupiter
- Country
- Germany
Agree, but knowing the Archbishop of Canterbury will say her name on Sunday when he christens Charlotte, is a sweet thought.
I just want to remember her and nothing more... I think too much has been said about her... and thinking at "what if" would happen it she still were here it is not use. R.I.P. That is enough IMO
I agree, Marty91charmed. Memories are what we have, and they are enough.
Indeed. I just feel uncomfortable when a human being who is not living any longer is discussed and analysed even after his/her death...
What I don't care for is what I call 'weird history', an obvious example of which is the ongoing conjecture about what shadowy force was behind Diana's death. The hysteria has died down quite a bit, but it still rears its ugly head on occasion. I'm so tired of it.
You and every logical person around. It is a sad fact that Diana will largely be remembered by her totally needless death and the mass hysteria that followed.What I don't care for is what I call 'weird history', an obvious example of which is the ongoing conjecture about what shadowy force was behind Diana's death. The hysteria has died down quite a bit, but it still rears its ugly head on occasion. I'm so tired of it.
So obviously you don't study or enjoy history because that is what History is - the study and analysis of people who were once living.
It is what I do for a living.
Diana is now a figure from history to be debated, argued over, analysed, discussed etc for the rest of time - as far as historians and students of History are concerned - like Churchill, Henry VIII, Hitler, Florence Nightingale, Nelson Mandela etc etc etc.
Marty91charmed, I think that what you expressed to your mother on Diana's death encapsulates a lot of the story. It's interesting to hear the reactions of those who were very young when Diana died and those who still wish to discuss their memories of her after all these years. My own feelings are confused, because I'm nostalgic about the Diana years in many ways, perhaps because she was only a year older than I. She and I matured as young women during the same years, although our lives obviously had such different paths. I had her on such a pedestal, which is always dangerous. I was worried about her during the 90s, as her life was falling apart and there was so much bad stuff coming out about her. So now, I tend to concentrate on the nostalgic part of it, although I do get annoyed when people make excuses for her bad behaviour. So these are parts of her legacy as it affects me: nostalgia, disappointment, and annoyance. Quite a package.
.. my mom almost worhsipped her and tried to make me think the same.....
That is dreadful that your mother tried to force her way of thinking on to her child.
Because she has always been define as a god/ perfect role model or as a very problematic/negative character... I believe it is those two opponent sides are her fascination and her true self was in between.. (eve though I think her good sides were those in the public display and that her natural behaviour was something impossible to detect...)..
I'd say that most of us here would agree with you. During 1980 and, I would say, up to after William was born, her image was faultless. The rumours of her problems didn't begin until 1982, when it was thought that she might have anorexia. Nigel Dempster was one of the first to report some of the rumours about her private behaviour. I believe it was he who described her as a 'monster.' Then things quieted down again, and I don't remember much more controversy until around 1985. By 1987, no holds were barred on the speculation about her and Charles's problems.
I'd say that most of us here would agree with you. During 1980 and, I would say, up to after William was born, her image was faultless. The rumours of her problems didn't begin until 1982, when it was thought that she might have anorexia. Nigel Dempster was one of the first to report some of the rumours about her private behaviour. I believe it was he who described her as a 'monster.' Then things quieted down again, and I don't remember much more controversy until around 1985. By 1987, no holds were barred on the speculation about her and Charles's problems.
Diana was under so much pressure, and she still went on her charity work with her whole heart. That is why I think she is a PURE humanitarian.
Diana was under so much pressure, and she still went on her charity work with her whole heart. That is why I think she is a PURE humanitarian.