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
 
  #101  
Old 07-18-2008, 07:53 PM
ghost_night554's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
It was like an extreme case of how people don't speak ill of a dead person during times of grief; except it wasn't just a family and their friends--it was people all over the world!
Ya, although I see no wrong in people to have shown her respect after her tragic death, I don't think it's good to be seen as a saint because as I said once the bad things not even bad things just mistakes you make come out people are taken back at such a thing. IMO just my personal beleif.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 07-18-2008, 07:56 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,131
Oh, no...I agree. When someone dies, it's a time for grieving if one was close to the person and showing respect (if possible) for the deceased and caring to the survivors.

Diana was far, far from a saint, even a secular one!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghost_night554 View Post
Ya, although I see no wrong in people to have shown her respect after her tragic death, I don't think it's good to be seen as a saint because as I said once the bad things not even bad things just mistakes you make come out people are taken back at such a thing. IMO just my personal beleif.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 07-18-2008, 08:14 PM
ghost_night554's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
Oh, no...I agree. When someone dies, it's a time for grieving if one was close to the person and showing respect (if possible) for the deceased and caring to the survivors.

Diana was far, far from a saint, even a secular one!
Exactly, I think she should be given respect and remembered for her good work over the years but as far as her personal life I think people should just stop trying to dig into it and find out more info.

{edited for consistency - Elspeth}
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 07-19-2008, 06:03 AM
Duchess's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: xx, Canada
Posts: 1,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
I agree with you, Duchess. Diana will always be remembered in some way, although people who were around to witness "The Diana Years" will remember her in a different way than those who read about her as a historical figure. For example, I can't understand the excitement about Prince Edward, the Prince of Wales who later became Edward VIII. He was idolized in his time; but for someone like me, born in the early 1960s, he was a former king who abdicated to marry a twice-divorced woman. It will be the same with Diana, I think. She'll be remembered with more balance than she is now. Perhaps, in a generation or two, Royal Watchers will be able to discuss her without getting into heated discussions. But now she's controversial, in part because people remember her for different things. For every person who remembers her acts of kindness (and the acts that were private until DIANA: THE PORTRAIT came out) and her abilities with people, there's a person who remembers her vindictiveness and her dishonesty.
exactly and you make a great point about her being remembered in a different way than she is now, more balanced.
__________________
Duchess
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 07-19-2008, 10:16 AM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
I think if Diana had not released the Morton book and the Panorama book, she would have left a legacy similar to the captivating, beautiful, unhappy, and slightly unbalanced Empress Sissi.

People are fascinated by charismatic and eccentric beauties and go on talking about them centuries after their death. Sissi still provokes quite a bit of interest with royalty watchers.

The only reason I can see that not happening is that we know a bit too much about the inner workings of Diana from the books, the interview, and all the inside information she fed to the tabloid press. There is almost no mystery left. Sissi did not have a press machine pouncing on her every word and Jackie Onassis who most personifies the glamour of the 20th century was incredibly private and did not give personal details. With Sissi and Jackie, there is still a bit of mystery left.

Charismatic and beautiful eccentrics are most enjoyably viewed at a distance because when they are viewed up close, their pain and suffering dominate people's impression of them. Jackie Onassis was one woman who I liked less the more I found out about her.

I'm always amazed to hear the life stories of people who have donated a good part of their lives to help others and find that they themselves had to go through immense personal problems which prompted them to reach out and help others. It is often surprising because to look at them, you never realize what personal problems they had to overcome. That is because they kept their problems in the background and focused on the good they wanted to do.

Diana in her later life probably wanted to leave that legacy but it was difficult because she put out all her problems for the world to see, and human nature being what it is, people are more fascinated by car wrecks they pass on the highway than the rebuilding of something worthwhile.

Its part of our nature, people are most fascinated by negative news and what is going wrong with the world, not what is going right with it. That's why I think that press agents warn their clients to be careful of revealing too many of their difficulties in public. The public can focus on them and bring them up long after the difficulties are gone.

I think if there is any confusion about Diana's legacy, it stems because she was not clear on what she wanted her legacy to be. She said she wanted to be 'Queen in people's hearts' but that statement can be interpreted in several different ways and its quite meaningless as an indicator of exactly what Diana wanted to do with her life to remain 'Queen in people's hearts'
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 07-19-2008, 12:32 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
I'm very unconvinced by the comparisons to Princess Anne, because, as a less senior royal I doubt Princess Anne's going to leave much of a legacy. We don't tend to hear about younger sons and daughters of royals unless they take the throne themselves or marry into foreign royalty or some prominent aristocratic family, and then we don't hear much. I'm sure she'll be remembered by royalty enthusiasts for her charity work and her Olympic participation, but I doubt many people in the future will have much idea that she even existed. I suppose that since the Queen has lived for so long, her children have been senior royals for longer than most, which might make a difference, but I remain to be convinced.

To me, the important difference between Diana and other high-profile royals who didn't become monarch or consort is that she existed in the age of saturation media coverage and she was a fascinating and photogenic meal ticket for some of these journalists and photographers. I think her legacy is going to depend on the staying power of this sort of journalism, to be honest. It's also going to depend on the sort of fact-based analysis in thoughtful biographies that probably won't be available for many years yet, because at the moment the emotional response is still the dominant one. It remains to be seen whether historians of the future can look back at the events of the last part of the 20th century and the early 21st century and give a clear-eyed account of how much of the changes going on in the monarchy really were precipitated (knowingly or otherwise) by Diana or if they were already ongoing and she either just caused them to speed up or just got the credit for them by association.

If it's really the case that Diana had a major role in the slimming down and the greater accessibility of the monarchy, then I think she's going to be remembered for that. If it's determined that she just happened to be around to take advantage of a process that was already under way, she's going to be more of a footnote in history. Other crown princesses who didn't make it to being Queen Consort don't tend to have left much of a legacy, despite being the mother of the next monarch (I'm thinking of Princess Augusta, who was the mother of George III, for example); I don't think people really tend to think of George III as being part of his mother's legacy as much as his father's and grandfather's, if they think in those terms at all. And I very much doubt that people other than royalty enthusiasts would even know who Princess Augusta was. The mass media will mean that Diana won't be consigned to such obscurity, but I'm not sure that her legacy will be as substantive as it might appear at the moment.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 07-19-2008, 12:46 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
I'm very unconvinced by the comparisons to Princess Anne, because, as a less senior royal I doubt Princess Anne's going to leave much of a legacy.
Anne was just a contemprary comparison to the effect beautiful or not so beautiful princesses have in public, even if they both do the same amount of jobs.

Quote:

To me, the important difference between Diana and other high-profile royals who didn't become monarch or consort is that she existed in the age of saturation media coverage and she was a fascinating and photogenic meal ticket for some of these journalists and photographers. I think her legacy is going to depend on the staying power of this sort of journalism, to be honest. It's also going to depend on the sort of fact-based analysis in thoughtful biographies that probably won't be available for many years yet, because at the moment the emotional response is still the dominant one. It remains to be seen whether historians of the future can look back at the events of the last part of the 20th century and the early 21st century and give a clear-eyed account of how much of the changes going on in the monarchy really were precipitated (knowingly or otherwise) by Diana or if they were already ongoing and she either just caused them to speed up or just got the credit for them by association.
Yes, it would be interesting to see, alas, one has to live to read these papers. But judging form the books already published by authors who have a right to be taken seriously judged by the amount of their research I'd say that her historic position is already in question and I have no idea how this could be changing once the loyal servants of the Crown open up their archives to later day historians. Please note: I'll take those accounts with a grain of salt as the winner writes history and in this specific case Diana did not win.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 07-19-2008, 12:50 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
Elspeth wasn't Princess Augusta despised by the British public at that time?
__________________
"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
  #109  
Old 07-19-2008, 01:59 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Well I was going to say that if Charles has troubles becoming King and William decides to step down because he doesn't want the job, that would spell the end of the British monarchy which despite the majority of people who say they don't care about the monarchy would be a major historical event.

I think if that happens, then historians, I believe, would point to Diana as the beginning of the end. I hope it doesn't happen but if the monarchy falls, I cannot see historians overlooking Diana's part.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 07-19-2008, 02:11 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 5,547
I do not think that Prince Charles is going to encounter a major opposition that would prevent him from ascending the throne. However, if such situation ever takes place, Prince William will become a King. There is no big tragedy...
__________________
"To watch the sun sink behind a flower clad hill.
To wander on in a huge forest without thought of return. To stand upon the shore and gaze after a boat that disappears behind distant islands. To contemplate the flight of wild geese seen and lost among the clouds.
And, subtle shadows of bamboo on bamboo." Zeami Motokiyo
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 07-19-2008, 02:25 PM
Monika_'s Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 190
I agree Al bina. Both parents instilled a sense of responsibility and destiny in William. And I suspect QE has played a wee bit of a role there too. :) As Diana herself asked, why would she have wanted to harm something that is her children's future? She simply wanted the monarchy to be more in tune with and relevant to the public. She was keenly aware of how important that is.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 07-19-2008, 02:36 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
I still see William as being at best ambivalent about his royal future and he still can't stand the attention. I suspect, although I hope I'm wrong, that if William encounters any real difficulties, he would throw off his position rather than stick it through.

The generation that is coming up doesn't have the sense of duty that the older generation has and that goes for William, Harry, Beatrice, Eugenie, etc.

Diana may not have wanted to harm the monarchy but people can harm things and people that they don't mean to all the time.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 07-19-2008, 02:48 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
Elspeth wasn't Princess Augusta despised by the British public at that time?
I think she was pretty unpopular because of her alleged affair with the Earl of Bute (it's interesting how many of the widowed mothers of monarchs and heirs to the throne seem to have taken unpopular lovers over the centuries). But I must admit that my main impression of her is that of a woman caught in a feud between her husband and his parents and all her work to make Kew Gardens what they are now.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 07-19-2008, 03:31 PM
jcbcode99's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richmond Area, United States
Posts: 1,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel View Post
I still see William as being at best ambivalent about his royal future and he still can't stand the attention. I suspect, although I hope I'm wrong, that if William encounters any real difficulties, he would throw off his position rather than stick it through.

The generation that is coming up doesn't have the sense of duty that the older generation has and that goes for William, Harry, Beatrice, Eugenie, etc.

Diana may not have wanted to harm the monarchy but people can harm things and people that they don't mean to all the time.
I don't know if William is ambivilant--I remember when he and Harry recently did the interview for the tenth anniversary of Diana's death--he made the comment along the lines of it not being a question of him becoming King because it was his duty. I think that right now he is simply being young--he won't be King anytime soon, his father has yet to ascend. When the time comes he will make a good King, but for now he is not even the Prince of Wales and has no real official duties. I personally would like to see him establish a charity or something similar to the Prince's Trust--or will he be in charge of that once Charles ascends and become King?
I do think it would be nice if William and Harry established an advocacy organization in memory of their mother for disadvanted persons (handicapped, disabled, AIDS patients, children, etc...) that way they can help all person with need.
__________________
Janet

"We make a living by what we do; we make a life by what we give" Winston Churchill
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 07-20-2008, 06:17 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcbcode99 View Post
I do think it would be nice if William and Harry established an advocacy organization in memory of their mother for disadvanted persons (handicapped, disabled, AIDS patients, children, etc...) that way they can help all person with need.
Most of the charities already have their chosen patrons. To organise another one just takes the attention and funds away from them. They don't tend to put charities for the disabled together under one roof. We seem to have charities that specialise in each specific disability.

IMO, it is time people stopped wanting William or Harry to do this or that in memory of their mother and allowed them to make their own names in whatever field they want.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 07-20-2008, 08:55 AM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 3,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
IMO, it is time people stopped wanting William or Harry to do this or that in memory of their mother and allowed them to make their own names in whatever field they want.
I'll second that. I don't quite "get" the notion that the that these two men only exist as reflections of their mother . The concept of control from the grave creeps me out.

If they do some good, kind or for charitable then it is because their mother made them in her own image and they are merely fulfilling their "programming" by their mother. Every charitable thing they do we hear "Diana would be so proud", etc. When they are laddish? Their Father didn't spend enough time with them, or teach them the how to behave properly.

They're her biological and genetic legacy. Everything else is just them. The sum of all their life's experience.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 07-21-2008, 07:28 AM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 3,895
When we are gone all that remains are the people who remember us. Nothing more.

In that great vaccuum, it seems that we are desperately looking around for something or someone to validate our existance, the trick is to remember the addage about when the job is finished you say either "look what I have done" or " look what they have achieved".

Do we remember her associated with a badly run foundation? A hospital? A particular charity? A playboy lover? A truely dispicable "rock"? Diana had a role to play in life, admitedly it was high profile and played out in the media.

Diana died as tragically as any other young woman of her age, at the hands of a drunk driver. 10 years down the track it's hard to admit that when you say "what is her legacy?" you have to think really hard. And, if that is true, then she really hasn't got a legacy. Yet!

Two sons, yes, but no legacy. Perhaps in another 10 years we will be more able to quantify what her legacy truely is.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 07-21-2008, 07:36 AM
TheTruth's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France
Posts: 2,682
I so agree MARG. 10 years is nothing, historically speaking. Perhaps in 50 years we'll really know what is left of her ; maybe there won't be much but her impact on the media is something, I believe, will be remembered since today it's still them who keep people thinking about Diana.
__________________

Please, help find a cure for ALS

Because it matters...
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 07-21-2008, 07:56 AM
Monika_'s Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 190
We could call it her legacy or we could call it her accomplishments, or another similar word. It doesn't really matter. Her work/impact is there for those who wish to see it and remember it. And yes, the negative stuff is there too. What people chose to focus on is another story. But to say there isn't a legacy is incorrect. Granted it may be more clearly defined as time goes by, but it's there.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 07-21-2008, 08:31 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: -, Ireland
Posts: 629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monika_ View Post
........ Her work/impact is there for those who wish to see it and remember it..........
Is her work and impact still really there in todays world for people to see? Would an average teenager in some part of the UK be able to look around them and say "this exists because of Diana" or "I have this opportunity because of Diana". The work that she did when alive will always be a credit to her and those who she came into contact with through that work will always remember her for it but as the years go by the average person forgets. There is no charity or organization in her name working today to create any sort of decent legacy, which should of been the purpose of the memorial fund.
__________________

__________________
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 10:07 AM
Diana's will msleiman Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 56 01-06-2008 06:22 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth bourbon-parma charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events dutch royal history fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman pom president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince laurent prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess elisabeth princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marie princess marilene princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit visit wedding 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 11:58 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]