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
 
  #1501  
Old 05-23-2015, 05:43 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by anbrida View Post
I think Diana was a very pure humanitarian, a natural giver of herself, and she could sacrifice a lot (she did sacrifice a lot) for other people, especially the most vulnerable people in the society. When she went out to help these people, she didn't seem to want anything back. And I don't see why people will loathe her and call her a mean-spirit person on this board.

And this is not just my opinion, because I have a full range of evidences to back up my claim here.
I don't believe anyone really loathes Diana but many have come to see that perhaps the face that Diana presented to the public was not the same Diana people experienced in her private life.

She was very human and like the rest of us, had her good points and her not so good points.
__________________

__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #1502  
Old 05-23-2015, 05:58 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by anbrida View Post
I think Diana was a very pure humanitarian, a natural giver of herself, and she could sacrifice a lot (she did sacrifice a lot) for other people, especially the most vulnerable people in the society. When she went out to help these people, she didn't seem to want anything back. [...]
Isn't that a perfectly normal role anyway for any royal lady in any monarchy? All royal ladies at present and in the past have given their efforts to charities, to good causes, they have co-established schools, hospitals, orphanages, social services, housing for the poor, etc. etc. In all monarchies, all over Europe. There was nothing new in what Diana did. All her predecessors did the same. And that was simply what was expected from them.

The most notable difference was that almost all royal ladies did their charitable works in relative anonimity while in Diana's case on a certain moment her "good causes" became a major force in the War of the Waleses, in the media-war, in the spin strategy and then it became: "Look, look at me! Look at me being like an angel for the poor, for the oppressed! Look at me, looking absolutely fabulous in my haute couture, while embracing a sick child..."

That has really put off a lot of people, the true personal commitment became blurred by the media spin of "Team Diana" and that was very damaging. On itself Diana did little different form all her predecessors and other royal ladies but it was the immense media-attention which made it looking like her doing something extraordinary, which was in fact simply the very normal role for any royal Princess.

__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1503  
Old 05-23-2015, 06:15 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Guangzhou, China
Posts: 367
Again, about private thing. That is really hard to tell. You see because it was private.

Take Diana and Duchess of York's relationship for example. People interpret that it was because some pairs of shoes, Diana cut out Sarah. However this is only people's INTERPRETATION, and very lame and simplistic. I seriously just don't believe it. It sounded too silly. There was not single one Diana's own word to back up this claim.

All we know is two events happened: Sarah complained Diana's shoes in her autobiography, and Diana cut out Sarah. Okay A and B events had happened, doesn't mean A must be the cause of B. There might be a lot of C,D,E,F,G events which we didn't know.

More examples, Paul Burrell claimed Diana went out with Dodi was to make Hasnat Khan jealousy. Absolutely rubbish. Tina Brown, claim it was because Charles's big birthday party to Camilla on July 17, which made Diana mad again. Another rubbish. However I knew a lot of people actually believe them.

There are too many interpretations about Diana's private life, but too little evidences to support them. That is my observation.






And
__________________
"Only a relative and fortunate few continue until the moment of death exploring the mystery of reality, ever enlarging and refining and redefining their understanding of the world and what is true..."
-- The Road Less Travelled
Reply With Quote
  #1504  
Old 05-23-2015, 06:37 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Guangzhou, China
Posts: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Isn't that a perfectly normal role anyway for any royal lady in any monarchy? All royal ladies at present and in the past have given their efforts to charities, to good causes, they have co-established schools, hospitals, orphanages, social services, housing for the poor, etc. etc. In all monarchies, all over Europe. There was nothing new in what Diana did. All her predecessors did the same. And that was simply what was expected from them.

The most notable difference was that almost all royal ladies did their charitable works in relative anonimity while in Diana's case on a certain moment her "good causes" became a major force in the War of the Waleses, in the media-war, in the spin strategy and then it became: "Look, look at me! Look at me being like an angel for the poor, for the oppressed! Look at me, looking absolutely fabulous in my haute couture, while embracing a sick child..."

That has really put off a lot of people, the true personal commitment became blurred by the media spin of "Team Diana" and that was very damaging. On itself Diana did little different form all her predecessors and other royal ladies but it was the immense media-attention which made it looking like her doing something extraordinary, which was in fact simply the very normal role for any royal Princess.

I don't see any royal member would throw themselves into something as controversial as landmine. And Aids was also a very controversial topic in 1987 when Diana first came out to support it. And Diana did a lot of private visit to sick patients which was not awared by the press at all. You might interpret her intention to pick up controversial issue is only to grab limelight, but according to her own words, she did that because these poor people were easy to be forgotten by the society, so she pick them up.

And about the media spin of Diana's commitment, actually, I think Diana's effort to help the mine victims was totally underrated and under-covered by the media. There were some overrated thing perhaps, but there were some underrated things also. That was quite fair.
__________________
"Only a relative and fortunate few continue until the moment of death exploring the mystery of reality, ever enlarging and refining and redefining their understanding of the world and what is true..."
-- The Road Less Travelled
Reply With Quote
  #1505  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:02 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by anbrida View Post
There are too many interpretations about Diana's private life, but too little evidences to support them. That is my observation.
There is some real solid evidence on her personal life and it was her that chose to make it very, very public. At the top ranks the Panorama interview.

Sorry but I agree with Duc_et_Pair in that, for the most part, Diana's charity work is what was expected of her. She did care and did a lot for the causes she worked with but in reality, that continues on today with Camilla, Kate, and Sophie.
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #1506  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:28 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by anbrida View Post
I don't see any royal member would throw themselves into something as controversial as landmine. And Aids was also a very controversial topic in 1987 when Diana first came out to support it. [...]
But there were always royal ladies or royal gentlemen being the first somewhere. In 1954 Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands made an official visit to South Africa, a country with strong Dutch links (the Afrikaans spoken there is a variant of Dutch language). Queen Juliana however boycotted this visit. She categorically refused to set any of her royal foot in South Africa as long as Apartheid existed. Was she the first royal to boycott? Who knows?

The one was the first on landmines, the other was the first against animal cruelty and again another was the first on fighting Apartheid. Queen Máxima (when Princess) jumped into the Amsterdam canals to "swim for life" (to raise money and improve awareness about ALS disease). Was she the first royal? Who knows. It is not that Diana is extra-ordinary because she was the first in something. One has to start somewhere...


Reply With Quote
  #1507  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:42 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,194
Queen Victoria as a Princess was vaccinated against smallpox - a major PR exercise as it made it acceptable for everyone else to be vaccinated - and now less than 200 years later the disease has been eradicate but when she was vaccinated there were questions about the safety and sense of that procedure.


Queen Elizabeth II visited a leper village in the 1950s.


Royals for ages have lead the way in this sort of thing. Diana didn't do anything that others hadn't done in the past - she was prominent with AIDs - sure but really only following a long tradition.


Earlier princesses and Queens' Consort had been involved in many issues and promoted many causes. Diana simply did what others had already been doing but she ensured that there was a lot of coverage e.g. Anne had been working very hard with Save the Children for a decade before Diana and yet she didn't use that charity to promote herself or even the cause but she has always been hands on - not for the photo opportunities but do make a real difference even after she has left the area.
Reply With Quote
  #1508  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:19 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
anbrida,

Duc_et_Pair is correct in regards to Diana's attitude towards her charity.

Infact, she had to cajoled, begged and forced into performing her royal duties even during the War of the Wales.

The real Diana can be gauged from several books including those written while she was alive. You can hear the real Diana on the Settelen tapes and the James Gilbey tapes.

I suggest you read these books as all except one was written while she was alive.

1981 Settling Down by James Whitaker
1983 Royal Service: My Twelve Years As Valet to Prince Charles by Stephen Barry
1985 Royal Secrets by Stephen Barry
1991 Diana In Private by Colin Campbell
1995 The Housekeeper's Diary: Charles and Diana Before the Breakup by Wendy Berry
2000 Shadows of a Princess by Patrick Jephson

Patrick Jephson was Diana's private secretary. He describes the real Diana and goes into great detail about her attitude toward her charities and royal duties. He quit in January 1996.

Diana had Oliver Everett, another private secretary, fired in 1983 because she felt she was overworked. (It would be laughable to describe Diana as overworked.)
Reply With Quote
  #1509  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:27 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,432
Yes, royals have been doing great things for other people for a longtime! Diana wasn't doing anything that different, but she did have some very special qualities that the people and media just took to. She was complex, but yet very giving and took the time to understand other peoples pain and other problems.

The media was very focused on Diana right from the very beginning. She used the media in her own ways, but she also used it to shed some light on the many causes that had no light. People just connected with her on a different level, and even the likes of Princess Michael of Kent recognized it.

I do find it very sad when others try to water down Diana's memory. There is no reason to do so. Diana was no angle, but she was a very special person to those who she met and didn't meet. The world didn't mourn a Demigod, but the world mourned a young woman who was a mother, humanitarian and who died very tragically.
__________________
"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
  #1510  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:00 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
There was not a single cause that Diana joined that was not already in the glaring spotlight.

The problem with her supporters is they attribute everything to Diana. They give her the credit when she infact deserves very little.

Rather than say it was nice of those who worked so hard and long on landmines to mention Diana in a speech even though she contributed very little and joined the caused at the very end, they spout the speech as proof of her great commitment to the cause and how the bill would not have passed without her.

Diana was not in anyway the catalyst for the change in attitudes towards AIDS or landmines.
Her supporter want to believe this because they may have only heard of these issues because of her but that does not mean she was infact the reason for the change.

These issues were already in the forefront long before Diana joined the cause.
Reply With Quote
  #1511  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:11 AM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 4,445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
There was not a single cause that Diana joined that was not already in the glaring spotlight.

The problem with her supporters is they attribute everything to Diana. They give her the credit when she infact deserves very little.
QC, you have a genius for presenting opinion as fact. I was alive back then, too, and my opinion differs. Neither of us is correct. It's just our opinions working.

And opinions stated as fact are rarely persuasive, IMHO.
__________________
A hero is someone who understands the responsibility that comes with his freedom.
Read more at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/au...bob_dylan.html
Reply With Quote
  #1512  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:23 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdmirerUS View Post
QC, you have a genius for presenting opinion as fact. I was alive back then, too, and my opinion differs. Neither of us is correct. It's just our opinions working.

And opinions stated as fact are rarely persuasive, IMHO.
Thank you, but what cause did Diana shine the spotlight on that did not already have the spotlight on it.
Reply With Quote
  #1513  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:35 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
There was not a single cause that Diana joined that was not already in the glaring spotlight.

The problem with her supporters is they attribute everything to Diana. They give her the credit when she infact deserves very little.

Rather than say it was nice of those who worked so hard and long on landmines to mention Diana in a speech even though she contributed very little and joined the caused at the very end, they spout the speech as proof of her great commitment to the cause and how the bill would not have passed without her.

Diana was not in anyway the catalyst for the change in attitudes towards AIDS or landmines.
Her supporter want to believe this because they may have only heard of these issues because of her but that does not mean she was infact the reason for the change.

These issues were already in the forefront long before Diana joined the cause.
There were several causes that were being highlighted, but Diana's royal status really brought some issues to many peoples attention all over the world. It's not about trying to attribute everything to Diana, that's just how it was.

Personally, I didn't know anything about landmines, leprosy or bulimia until Diana talked about it. Those issues were already known, but Diana brought it to my attention.
__________________
"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
  #1514  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:55 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,194
I didn't know Diana did anything with leprosy.


I knew that the Queen did in the 1950s when she toured somewhere in Africa.


Of course leprosy is talked about in the Bible so it was a well-known cause long before HM was seen with some lepers and that was before Diana was born.


What she did very well was take the credit for others work and manipulate both the press and the public into believing that she was the one who discovered the cause rather than acknowledge that others had been doing the work for years and she jumped on their work and took the credit.
Reply With Quote
  #1515  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:17 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I didn't know Diana did anything with leprosy.


I knew that the Queen did in the 1950s when she toured somewhere in Africa.


Of course leprosy is talked about in the Bible so it was a well-known cause long before HM was seen with some lepers and that was before Diana was born.


What she did very well was take the credit for others work and manipulate both the press and the public into believing that she was the one who discovered the cause rather than acknowledge that others had been doing the work for years and she jumped on their work and took the credit.
Diana didn't act like she discovered anything. She simply went about using her royal role to help further highlight the causes. Nobody was manipulated.

It's sad that there is this hunger to make Diana's memory out to be total garbage. This campaign has been going on for years now on the internet and it's just sad to see.

I loved when William and Harry put the Concert for Diana together. It was not only to remember her ten years on, but to remember that their mother was an humanitarian for countless causes and touched many peoples lives. There's nothing bad about that and it's totally unnecessary to want to tarnish her memory.
__________________
"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
  #1516  
Old 05-23-2015, 06:59 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,887
On this forum it is constant. The things that are said about her and lies are shocking. People seem to make it their life's work to rubbish her and her sons ( well Harry as least ) it's really sad that it still is allowed to happen


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #1517  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:27 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,385
Diana didn't start any work for a major cause - that is not a something for either criticism or denial IMO

Diana did lend her royal status and interest to promote important causes - that should be appreciated and should not be denied.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #1518  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:40 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post
Diana didn't start any work for a major cause - that is not a something for either criticism or denial IMO

Diana did lend her royal status and interest to promote important causes - that should be appreciated and should not be denied.
I agree, the hard work she put in as Princess of Wales and future Queen should be very much appreciated and not denied, watered down or tarnished.


Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
On this forum it is constant. The things that are said about her and lies are shocking. People seem to make it their life's work to rubbish her and her sons ( well Harry as least ) it's really sad that it still is allowed to happen
It is indeed sad, but her memory lives on through her children, grandchildren and her charities. No one can touch that!
__________________
"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
  #1519  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:53 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Guangzhou, China
Posts: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
anbrida,

Duc_et_Pair is correct in regards to Diana's attitude towards her charity.

Infact, she had to cajoled, begged and forced into performing her royal duties even during the War of the Wales.

The real Diana can be gauged from several books including those written while she was alive. You can hear the real Diana on the Settelen tapes and the James Gilbey tapes.

I suggest you read these books as all except one was written while she was alive.

1981 Settling Down by James Whitaker
1983 Royal Service: My Twelve Years As Valet to Prince Charles by Stephen Barry
1985 Royal Secrets by Stephen Barry
1991 Diana In Private by Colin Campbell
1995 The Housekeeper's Diary: Charles and Diana Before the Breakup by Wendy Berry
2000 Shadows of a Princess by Patrick Jephson

Patrick Jephson was Diana's private secretary. He describes the real Diana and goes into great detail about her attitude toward her charities and royal duties. He quit in January 1996.

Diana had Oliver Everett, another private secretary, fired in 1983 because she felt she was overworked. (It would be laughable to describe Diana as overworked.)
Biographer's opinion is still opinion. What Patrick Jephson said was only his then own opinion about Diana's attitude towards her charity work. And in fact nowadays Patrick Jephson seemed to have quite a different opinion about Diana's work. Here is his own words


Quote:
“Diana always wanted a girl, and she shared the joy of her colleagues and friends when their kids were born. Both my daughters were born when I was working with Princess Diana, and she more than once said how lucky I was to have girls. Both William and Harry have been very conscientious in keeping the story of their mother alive – most obviously through Kate’s engagement ring – and her influence continues, William and Harry frequently refer to her, and she is a continuing inspiration. I’m sure it will prove an inspiration to the young princess as she grows up and comes to terms with her own royal duties, because her late grandmother’s example would be very hard to beat. It can only be good for the standing of the royal family to find the Diana story continuing and the Diana name being honored, because she remains a figure of worldwide respect and affection. Politically, he was never going to call her by the first name Diana, but it had to be in there. It’s a nice way of saying you can’t airbrush my mother out of royal history, I’m sure there are some quarters of the family that wish it to be quiet, but William has led the field in making sure that his mother is still remembered. It was a poignant thing to do.”
--Patrick Jephson, Diana’s former private secretary
Actually I can quote a lot of other people's words to response you, but since you always mention Patrick Jephson, I think it is better to use his own words.
__________________
"Only a relative and fortunate few continue until the moment of death exploring the mystery of reality, ever enlarging and refining and redefining their understanding of the world and what is true..."
-- The Road Less Travelled
Reply With Quote
  #1520  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:29 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
It's interesting that whenever anbrida states something see post #1500), it is not just an opinion. But if anyone says anything to the contrary--even people who actually knew Diana--it's only an opinion.


We all have our opinions. As was stated before, no one can deny that Diana did charitable work and got a lot of publicity for her causes. However, it's going to create controversy when someone states that Diana was a pure humanitarian--which, is by nature an opinion. Only Diana knew her true motives.


There is a lot of evidence that Diana's motives for charity work were mixed--including the fact that she resigned from 100 of her charities and made few charitable appearances during the last few years of her life. I believe that she did want to help others, but she also liked the publicity--a lot.
__________________

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 biography 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 abdullah in australia king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander madeleine member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess madeleine princess marie princess marie fashion princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats 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 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 12:00 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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