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
 
  #1161  
Old 10-20-2014, 01:48 PM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The interest is already tied down. The times that only the name Diana on a cover or on a movie poster was enough to hit the bestsellers or blockbusters lists are behind us.
I certainly do not see big crowds at the Diana memorial fountains.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1162  
Old 10-20-2014, 01:55 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
I certainly do not see big crowds at the Diana memorial fountains.
The Diana movie with Naomi Watts was a flop even. For the youngsters of our time "Diana" is already history. It is possible that "Wallis" will remain more in the history books, since a King once abdicated for her, than "Diana" whom, in essence, will be a footnote as the first wife of Charles and the mother of the two Princes.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1163  
Old 10-20-2014, 04:42 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,004
I'm not sure that I agree with that assessment, Duc_et_Pair. I think she'll be remembered for the upheaval she caused the BRF in the 90's, even if not for her more positive attributes. She'll also be remembered for being the mother of royal line, even though she was never Queen Consort, and that makes her part of history.

This is true. It would take something of historical value to make the serious news now--like if she was secretly spying for the Russians or something.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The interest is already tied down. The times that only the name Diana on a cover or on a movie poster was enough to hit the bestsellers or blockbusters lists are behind us.
Reply With Quote
  #1164  
Old 10-20-2014, 06:03 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The Diana movie with Naomi Watts was a flop even. For the youngsters of our time "Diana" is already history. It is possible that "Wallis" will remain more in the history books, since a King once abdicated for her, than "Diana" whom, in essence, will be a footnote as the first wife of Charles and the mother of the two Princes.

The whole "Diana (or Camilla) will be a footnote in history books" statement always makes me cringe.

This is not how history books work. History books focus on a subject and discuss it. They tend not to relegate people into the footnotes unless they only played a very minor part in whatever the subject is, but even then they're more likely to not be mentioned at all than simply put into a footnote.

If a history book is written on the history of the British Crown, comparable to say David Starkey's Crown and Country or Mike Ashley's British Kings and Queens then many consorts will only have a brief note on them - Queen Anne's husband, Prince George of Denmark, for example, doesn't tend to make a big splash in such texts. This is because the overall role that the consorts played isn't necessarily a big one in regards to the historical narrative. George of Denmark didn't have a huge role in an overarching history of Britain. Some consorts, however, are rather noted because they did play a big role - Eleanor of Aquitaine, Elizabeth of York, Catherine of Aragon, Anne Boleyn, Wallis Simpson, etc. These consorts are focused on a lot in such history texts, and really it's very likely that both Diana and Camilla will receive a similar amount of focus as Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn. Their roles, their shared history, is one that changed the monarchy.

If a history book is written even more narrowly about Charles himself, then neither Diana nor Camilla will be in the footnotes. If it's about pop culture or major events the 80s or 90s, both women stand to be mentioned, especially Diana. There was an American program not too long ago called "The 90s: The Last Great Decade" that spent time focusing on both the divorce and Diana's death.

Historic figures aren't simply relegated to the footnotes. At least not outside of a high school textbook which deals with everything in such broad strokes that it's impossible to note relegate important things into the footnotes.
Reply With Quote
  #1165  
Old 10-20-2014, 06:18 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,419
Diana is an historical figure from the British royal family. She was a famous princess known all over the world and her personal assets historical as well.
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #1166  
Old 10-20-2014, 06:36 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,021
I doubt Diana will be relegated to a footnote. Almost anytime the Royals are mentioned on tv or in books (even biographies about the Queen etc) Diana has a good portion of print.

One cannot mention William and Harry without thinking of their mother.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #1167  
Old 10-20-2014, 06:37 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,331
We have seen with the exhibits for the summer openings for BP that the royal collection has a vast and varied amount of stuff. I would think that William and Harry would turn the stuff returned from Althorp over to the royal collection for preservation and part of a future display.

Diana's wedding dress maybe in special need of care since its being globe trotting the world for quite a while.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #1168  
Old 10-20-2014, 06:40 PM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
If William becomes King, then Diana will be remembered in much the same way as Queen Victoria's mother.
Reply With Quote
  #1169  
Old 10-20-2014, 07:41 PM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 3,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
I doubt Diana will be relegated to a footnote. Almost anytime the Royals are mentioned on tv or in books (even biographies about the Queen etc) Diana has a good portion of print.

One cannot mention William and Harry without thinking of their mother.


LaRae
Yep. Diana definitely won't be a footnote. Love her or hate her, it can't be denied that she made a big impact. Some of it through her charity work and some of it through her (and Charles') tabloid antics.

I would say the same for Camilla. I don't see her relegated to just a footnote.
Reply With Quote
  #1170  
Old 10-20-2014, 07:46 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 2,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
If William becomes King, then Diana will be remembered in much the same way as Queen Victoria's mother.
However I do believe that William and Harry were allowed to sleep in their own rooms and to walk downstairs by themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #1171  
Old 10-20-2014, 11:47 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,189
Is Queen Victoria's mother remembered by anyone besides historians of the earlier Victorian period? She wasn't much known by the public at the time, just as the rather reclusive foreign widow of one of King George III's sons, whose daughter had became Queen. She led a very quiet life in her old age, unlike the glamorous Diana who died while still young and beautiful in a very shocking and sudden way.

When the history of Elizabeth II is discussed and written about in the future Diana's role in the royal family will be more than a footnote. Certainly if Charles III has a notable reign and biographies are published, she will be discussed.
Reply With Quote
  #1172  
Old 10-21-2014, 12:24 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
Victoria died in 1901. A hundred years later very few people can name her mother.

A hundred years after William's death very few people will be able to name his mother.
Reply With Quote
  #1173  
Old 10-21-2014, 12:40 AM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 3,294
How many books have been written about Queen Victoria's mother though? Diana has graced thousands of magazine covers and had hundreds of books and articles written about her. I don't think you can compare the two.
Reply With Quote
  #1174  
Old 10-21-2014, 01:18 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
All these books and magazines are out of date and will no longer be available 100 years after William's death.

If William lives to be 80-90, a hundred year later will be 2162-2172. That is same as trying to locate a magazine or book printed in the 1850s or 1860s.

Today, in most libraries, you would rarely find a book printed prior to 1970. In 30 years, most books and magazine about Diana would have been destroyed.
Reply With Quote
  #1175  
Old 10-21-2014, 01:45 AM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 3,294
It's not about whether or not the magazine/books will be available in 100 years. I'm talking about the impact she made on the world (and the BRF). Diana's popularity was huge - even now magazines with her face sell. You can't compare her legacy to Queen Victoria's mom.
Reply With Quote
  #1176  
Old 10-21-2014, 02:35 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
Diana did not have an impact on the world.

She was known but that is not the same as having an impact.

She was popular.

Queen Victoria's mother was not crowned Queen. Diana was never crowned Queen.

Edward VII's mother was a Queen, Queen Victoria.
George V's mother was a Queen, Queen Alexandra.
Edward VIII's mother was Queen, Queen Mary.
George VI's mother was a Queen, Queen Mary.
Elizabeth II's mother was a Queen, Queen Elizabeth.
Charles III or George VII's aka current Prince of Wales' mother is Queen Elizabeth.
William's mother was never Queen.

Comparing Victoria's mother to William's mother is accurate.

Queen Victoria's mother has been dead 153 years. William's mother has been dead 17.

In 2150, William's mother would have been dead 153 years and her "popularity" and magazine covers from the 1980-1990s would not matter.
Reply With Quote
  #1177  
Old 10-21-2014, 02:42 AM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 3,294
We'll have to agree to disagree. I think Diana did have an impact and in no way think her legacy can be compared to Victoria's mother. I don't see Diana being a footnote.
Reply With Quote
  #1178  
Old 10-21-2014, 05:47 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
Diana did not have an impact on the world.

She was known but that is not the same as having an impact.

She was popular.

Queen Victoria's mother was not crowned Queen. Diana was never crowned Queen.

Edward VII's mother was a Queen, Queen Victoria.
George V's mother was a Queen, Queen Alexandra.
Edward VIII's mother was Queen, Queen Mary.
George VI's mother was a Queen, Queen Mary.
Elizabeth II's mother was a Queen, Queen Elizabeth.
Charles III or George VII's aka current Prince of Wales' mother is Queen Elizabeth.
William's mother was never Queen.

Comparing Victoria's mother to William's mother is accurate.

Queen Victoria's mother has been dead 153 years. William's mother has been dead 17.

In 2150, William's mother would have been dead 153 years and her "popularity" and magazine covers from the 1980-1990s would not matter.
No, it is not accurate to say that Diana is comparable to Queen Victoria's mother (whose name was also Victoria).

First of all, there is no individual in British history who is comparable to Diana. The closest consort would be, in my opinion, Catherine of Aragon, first wife of Henry VIII. There are many other consorts who had to deal with their husbands' cheating ways, and several others who were married to the heir but died before ever becoming Queen or whose husbands died without becoming King, but these circumstances don't necessarily mean that their situations were really comparable to Diana's.

The Duchess of Kent was never the wife of the heir. She was never particularly high up in the line of succession - at the time of Prince Edward, Duke of Kent's death he had 3 living elder brothers and his father was still alive. It was clear for a good long while that it was very likely that Victoria would be Queen, but it was never a given that the Duchess of Kent would be Queen. In comparison, Diana was from the moment she said "I do" until the moment her divorce went through the woman married to the heir apparent. In that regards, it makes her more comparable to someone like Joan of Kent or Augusta of Saxe-Gotha - two women were were married to the heir apparents (Edward, the Black Prince, and Frederick, Prince of Wales, respectively) than the Duchess of Kent.

That said, even assuming that the two women were of comparable situations and we should assume that in 100-150 years time Diana will be remembered the same as the Duchess of Kent now is, the Duchess of Kent has not been, as you keep on insisting, relegated to the footnotes of history. The fact that we're talking about her right now at all is proof that she's not simply a footnote. Does Joe Average know who she is? No, probably not. That means jack all. Joe Average probably can't name most of the consorts of British history, at least not beyond the really infamous ones like Anne Boleyn and Wallis Simpson - which, personally, I would argue that Diana is going to be remembered more on that kind of level, because her marriage was one of scandal. Just because Joe Average can't name a person of historic importance doesn't mean said person is relegated to the footnotes of history - it means that Joe Average doesn't know history.

I have a degree in history and have spent a lot of time studying Canadian history and the history of the English/British crown. I will be the first person to admit that I can't name every Prime Minister of Canada or every English/British consort. Does that mean that the ones I don't know are individuals who have been relegated to the footnotes of history? No. It means that I have a gap in my knowledge base - the fact that I can, in a couple of seconds, find on the internet a list of every PM or every English consort means that these people haven't been relegated to the footnotes of history.

Also, I really wonder what kind of libraries you're entering if they don't have books that are older than 30 years. First of all, even if they don't have books that were printed older than that, they'd still have newer prints of books that are older than 30 years. Second of all, while many public libraries may not have editions of books that were printed more than 30 years ago (although, again, they would have newer editions of books that were first printed more than 30 years ago) any university library is going to have books that are that old, if not older. Any university or museum or archive is going to have books and magazines that are older than this. Thirty years from now, any online database is going to have magazine and news articles that are older than 30 years - and I don't simply mean the search engines like Google, I mean actual academic databases. These books and articles aren't simply destroyed.
Reply With Quote
  #1179  
Old 10-21-2014, 06:33 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,189
There are points of similarity between the marriage of Diana and Charles and the Prince Regent and his wife Caroline of Brunswick. Not in terms of personality of course, but Caroline was as popular with the British public in her time as Diana was in hers. The Prince tried to divorce her, and she died shortly after George IV ascended the throne. The media maintained a huge interest in the couple's quarrels.

Is Caroline a footnote in history? Not as far as biographers of George IV are concerned.
Reply With Quote
  #1180  
Old 10-21-2014, 09:27 AM
KittyAtlanta's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 3,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
I don't think the interest will die down though. William & Harry may do something with the collections at some point in the future in memory of their mother. As we have seen with other royal historical artifacts.
Well, I'll have passed on by that time. I don't see a display of anything Diana until after Charles and Camilla are both gone. William may do something, but until he's in charge, I think not.
__________________

__________________
Yes, I said it. No, I won't apologize. Yes, I will say it again.
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 Or Right-Handed Royals? Peggy Royal Life and Lifestyle 49 02-03-2016 02:34 AM
The Legacy of Elizabeth II vkrish British Royals 21 12-18-2012 07:45 AM
Princess Grace's Legacy HMTLove23 Princely Family of Monaco 16 02-18-2011 06:15 AM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch state visit e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece haakon kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles prince oscar princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats princess stéphanie's daytime outfits queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style 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 royal 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 07:19 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises