Different Facets of Diana

[Empress]

I still don't think an immature (not in the attitude sense, but the growth sense) child should have a gun, even for sporting purposes. Voting, drinking and military acceptance ages aside, these children simply do not have the maturity level to understand the ramifications of a gun, no matter how much training they are given. Children should be playing with toys, not a lethal weapon.

 

[Skydragon]

---snipped---You would be hard pressed to convince me that Diana was not a loving mother because she did not allow her sons to participate in certain sports.

You would find it hard to convince me also as I don't believe allowing or disallowing has any bearing on being a loving parent. Diana was terrified of horses, the further away you kept them the better, which would have made it hard for the boys playing Polo, but it was a passion of their fathers and for that reason alone, she should have come to an understanding, IMO. She was brought up around shooting, so I can't quite see the problem there, but I am not Diana.

We are also never going to come to a satisfactory understanding about the effects of the interview. As I have already admitted that it was not the best decision she had ever made, it does not lessen my opinion that she was a loving mother. She was not perfect. Neither am I, nor are you.

I too believe she loved the boys, but having been to boarding school, when the interview was aired, I wanted to get them and wrap them in cotton wool, away from the taunts. I don't know what it is about boarding school that makes some pupils so vicious!

 

[Skydragon]

I still don't think an immature (not in the attitude sense, but the growth sense) child should have a gun, even for sporting purposes. Voting, drinking and military acceptance ages aside, these children simply do not have the maturity level to understand the ramifications of a gun, no matter how much training they are given. Children should be playing with toys, not a lethal weapon.

We will, I hope, agree to disagree.

 

[kimebear]

....Diana was terrified of horses, the further away you kept them the better, which would have made it hard for the boys playing Polo, but it was a passion of their fathers and for that reason alone, she should have come to an understanding, IMO....I don't know what it is about boarding school that makes some pupils so vicious!

Ah, in a perfect world. I can sympathize with the problem though. I love horror movies, which my husband can't stand and he loves to ride motorcycles which scare me to death. It remains to be seen which of these, if either, our children will be allowed to enjoy early on. I don't know how parents can bear to send their children away to school in the first place. Don't get me wrong. I'm not passing judgment. Charles and Diana sent their sons away to school although, by their own admissions, neither particularly cared for it. Personally, I'm a homeschool advocate, so I'm the last to cast stones for education preferences.

 

[iowabelle]

I think that it's expected in Britain that people of "a certain standing" send the children to boarding school. That's where the children make early connections among their own peer group, which are useful later in their social and professional lives.

Of course, IMO this limits them from meeting other children from different backgrounds -- but I think most children's friends come from backgrounds similar to their own (hence, William and Harry are friends with the Van Cutsem children and not the children of "Joe the Plumber).

Of course, I'd prefer to keep my children at home, but then again I'm not a royal going on lengthy tours or a jetsetter.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Prince Charles greeted the Princes warmly on that occasion as well, but those particular pictures were never printed at the time. I don't think that Diana had that much control over the press that she had them not print the pictures of her husband greeting his sons.

Another point is that I don't think that Dodi and Diana were an "item" during the holiday with the children. That seemed to be much more a family holiday and not a romantic cruise.

 

[Skydragon]

I think that it's expected in Britain that people of "a certain standing" send the children to boarding school. That's where the children make early connections among their own peer group, which are useful later in their social and professional lives.

Of course, IMO this limits them from meeting other children from different backgrounds -- but I think most children's friends come from backgrounds similar to their own (hence, William and Harry are friends with the Van Cutsem children and not the children of "Joe the Plumber).

Of course, I'd prefer to keep my children at home, but then again I'm not a royal going on lengthy tours or a jetsetter.

Yes indeed, it is expected that they go to boarding school, not just for the connections, the teaching standards are higher and after school opportunities are better. Children who have been privately educated at recognised schools, are far more likely to get into the top universities.

It's a great pity that we can't go back to the children being taught at home, I remember crying my heart out on the way back from dropping them off. Heaven forbid that I embarrass them though!

 

[MARG]

You would be hard pressed to convince me that Diana was not a loving mother because she did not allow her sons to participate in certain sports.

No, you missed my point there. Few would dispute that Diana loved her children. It was just always on her terms.

Prior to her marriage Diana frequented the Polo "set" along with her peers but, after her marriage she seemed to become allergic to all things "country", especially polo. When the boys were old enough she was disinclined to "put herself out" to allow them to join their family and friends in such pursuits.

Prince Charles moved in that set, and so did members of their extended family so, to me it seems that the "country" image she projected was just that. And, having caught her man, she promptly opted out of those pursuits.

If she was indeed worried that they might be injured she would just have to have bitten the bullet like almost every other mum. Games have rules and that is how we learn our personal parameters. Much as we may want to wrap those we love in cotton wool, it is not in their best interests.

She did not have to watch if she didn't want to. Hells teeth, I provided my youngest brother with a small fortune in Hockey sticks which, as he was playing in the Senior Mens team at 14, often came off the field as kindling. Not surprisingly I was sometimes I little less than enthusiastic about being a spectator. But, that did not make his mother and female relatives any the less supportive of him in the sport in which he learned to excel.

 

[TheTruth]

Yes indeed, it is expected that they go to boarding school, not just for the connections, the teaching standards are higher and after school opportunities are better. Children who have been privately educated at recognised schools, are far more likely to get into the top universities.

Is boarding school still the only way to get a top degree? I thought 'normal' schools, where you go there the day and back home at night, were getting almost as good. Can someone explain me what is the difference between public and private schools in the UK? I've searched and both of them are defined as schools for which you must pay fees.

 

[kimebear]

We'll have to agree to disagree MARG. Not all parents are willing to "suck it up" when it comes to allowing their children to do things that they, themselves, are scared of.

As far as leaving the polo scene after marriage, it could just boil down to her being married and becoming her own person. For all we know, she never liked polo and outdoor sports. She attended because she was expected to, because that is what young ladies of her station did. Once given the liberty of deciding for herself, maybe she just didn't want to be around the horses and guns anymore and didn't want her children around them either.

I could play devil's advocate until I am blue in the face, but in the end, if one is inclined to see her in a negative light, that's all there is to it.

 

[Skydragon]

Is boarding school still the only way to get a top degree? I thought 'normal' schools, where you go there the day and back home at night, were getting almost as good. Can someone explain me what is the difference between public and private schools in the UK? I've searched and both of them are defined as schools for which you must pay fees.

Public Schools tend to be places like Eton, Cheltenham, Marlborough and Ampleforth, these are seen as prestigious fee paying schools. They tend to have some history to them.

Private schools, which are again fee paying, can be set up by anybody.

Oxford, Cambridge and the top universities are more likely to take from public schools and many employers will favour degrees from these places. Many if not all of the top civil service jobs, are given to men and women who have studied there, with the major preference being given to those who came through the public school route. The 'Old boys club' is alive and well!

 

[Empress]

In the USA when you refer to public schools, it is meant that the schools are government funded and children go for free (apart from the city/state/federal taxes they pay).

Private schools are tuition based, meaning fee paying.

 

[muriel]

To add to what Skydragon has just said about schools, in addition to the fee paying schools, the "normal" or "state schools" are the local schools that are funded by the state, and where the vast majority of people in the UK send their children.

 

[TheTruth]

Thanks for the info.
In France, we mostly have 'normal' schools, for which you don't need to pay for. However, there's also what we call 'private' schools that are for the majority religious schools where religion is more or less alluded at during scholarship. You have to pay for these. The level is completely the same, on the contrary to what is said by people; sometimes, public schools have got even better degrees than private ones.

 

[Madame Royale]

As far as leaving the polo scene after marriage, it could just boil down to her being married and becoming her own person. For all we know, she never liked polo and outdoor sports. She attended because she was expected to, because that is what young ladies of her station did. Once given the liberty of deciding for herself, maybe she just didn't want to be around the horses and guns anymore and didn't want her children around them either.

I'd further endeavour to suggest that Diana's absence from polo in the latter years would/could have been influenced by the fact that a good many people from within Charles' and the RF circle attended aswell. Now, why on earth would have she wished to attend when her estranged husbands 'set' were out and about? Quite simply, she wouldn't and not many women in such an unfortunate position would, imo.

The Windsors and polo go together like wine and cheese. Add to the mix their friends and you have yourself an accompaniment of 'crackers' too boot!

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Some perhaps, but by no means all. It is one thing to be teased because your parents have/are divorcing, as you say it is the norm but to have your mother appear on the BBC to inform the world how awful everyone was, must have been absolutely humiliating. I can't imagine the terrible distress that must have caused them.

Especially as she was saying that Charles should not be the next king but William! Because of the way he was raised by her, no less. Just what kind of ammunition this gives to kids, willing to plague William. On the return from the weekend at home: "What kind of lesson did you learn this time about being king, William?" Or just "Mummy's boy - do what she wants and she'll make you king", or if he claimed someting had been told to him by Charles: "Why should we be interested in what your father thinks when he is not fit to be king"? Stuff like that. Severe ammunition against William, IMHO.

 

[Elspeth]

In the USA when you refer to public schools, it is meant that the schools are government funded and children go for free (apart from the city/state/federal taxes they pay).

Private schools are tuition based, meaning fee paying.

Public schools in England started out as public but we're talking hundreds of years ago. Nowadays the public schools are the most prestigious of the private schools.

Skydragon is right that Oxford and Cambridge draw disproportionately from the public schools and some of the other fee-paying schools (private schools). I went to a state grammar school (the British equivalent of a US public school) and we were told at the beginning of our A-level course that we shouldn't bother to try and get into Oxford or Cambridge because nobody from our school ever did, regardless of how good their exam results were. In the meantime, people with less good results from the local private school would get into Oxford and Cambridge at the rate of about half a dozen a year.

Once you get to university, the degree you get depends on how well you do there, not on which school you came from; however, the school you came from does have some bearing on which universities you can go to in the first place. A lot of people will tell you that it has nothing to do with the "old boys' network" but just with merit, but I have to say that that wasn't my experience, after seeing a highly talented musician in my year at school, with excellent O-level and A-level results and several years as a member of the National Youth Orchestra, being turned down flat by both Oxford and Cambridge without even an interview.

 

[Elspeth]

Could we please lose these personal digs against other posters? It's getting to be like a minefield in here. With the best will in the world, we can't get inside Diana's head, or Camilla's head, or William's head, so a lot of these declarations about how they feel are just our suppositions and common sense talking - which is fair enough, but it's not the same as fact.

 

[TheTruth]

In the meantime, people with less good results from the local private school would get into Oxford and Cambridge at the rate of about half a dozen a year.

Talking about the price of excellency!
We have these kind of schools here too but now, they are getting forced by the Government to allow kids from difficult backgrounds in. After a secondary school diploma, most of the schools are free - except if you want to go in a private university.

 

[Mermaid1962]

This is my opinion exactly, Elspeth. We can surmise or guess, but it's better to preface those statements with a "Perhaps" or "I think" rather than stating things as a bold fact.

With the best will in the world, we can't get inside Diana's head, or Camilla's head, or William's head, .

 

[Skydragon]

Once you get to university, the degree you get depends on how well you do there, not on which school you came from; however, the school you came from does have some bearing on which universities you can go to in the first place. A lot of people will tell you that it has nothing to do with the "old boys' network" but just with merit, but I have to say that that wasn't my experience, after seeing a highly talented musician in my year at school, with excellent O-level and A-level results and several years as a member of the National Youth Orchestra, being turned down flat by both Oxford and Cambridge without even an interview.

Take 4 youngsters, with the same First Class Honours Degree, all applying for Two positions at the same company or civil service. Two have degrees' awarded by Oxbridge, Two have degrees' awarded by a less prestigious university - the Two who went to Oxbridge will get the jobs, regardless of the others ability, because most firms/services still see/judge you on what university you received your degree from. If you went to any of the pestigious universities, the chances are you were educated at one of the public (top old fee paying) schools.

 

[Roslyn]

I didn't know that about Oxford and Cambridge, and I'm disappointed.

In our system entrance to university is based on merit alone. If a student from a very humble background attending a public (in the true sense) school in a depressed socio-economic area works hard enough and gets top scores he/she can get into the most desirable courses at the university of his her choice. I suppose some employers will always still favour applicants from their own sort of background, but, subject to personal habits and general demeanour (e.g. wear appropriate clothes, use appropriate language, don't be over-familiar with the interviewer and don't spit into the pot plants) merit is generally what counts here in a job interview.

 

[Madame Royale]

merit is generally what counts here in a job interview.

And I'm so very glade of it...

 

[MARG]

We'll have to agree to disagree MARG. Not I could play devil's advocate until I am blue in the face, but in the end, if one is inclined to see her in a negative light, that's all there is to it.

That's why this thread is called "Differenct Facets of Diana". . . . it is bound to expose our different "takes" on said facets as well. And that is not a bad thing because if everyone agreed with everyone else these threads would all be about a page and a half long!

 

[kimebear]

It would get awfully quiet around here. Especially for us Britain mods!

 

[Pixilated]

I remember the day she died.It was on the radio and a day later someone brought in a magazine devoted to her, must have been People.I didn't know much about her, I was quite young.But as I got older I read a lot about her.She seems to have been such a caring,loving, special person who unfortunately was greatly misunderstood and targeted by the media.I wish life could have been longer and happier for her.

 

[georgiea]

I think Diana, Princess of Wales said something like this - that her actions came from her heart and that would get her in trouble. So this is the facet - SHE IS ALL HEART - that I remember about her.

 

[Russophile]

I just remember her being so beautiful and stylish. The woman couldn't go WRONG. No matter what the tabloids had said (the "What were you thinking??" on a questionable outfit) she always looked great.

 

[MARG]

I just remember her being so beautiful and stylish. The woman couldn't go WRONG. No matter what the tabloids had said (the "What were you thinking??" on a questionable outfit) she always looked great.

Insofar as fashion is concerned she was a near as perfect as you could get.

If you look at some of the clothes she wore in the 80's you cringe until you look at your own pics from that era and realise how ghastly the whole decade was . . . with a (very) few exceptions, lets call them the "Diana Effect". . . . . she was the perfect clotheshorse.

The British fashion industry struck gold when she arrived on the scene and she dictated a lot of fashion and style trends which were slavishly followed by other fashion houses.

 

[needlove]

When I was about 4 years old, I asked my mother whether this princess I saw on television was real. Before then, I never realised that princes and princesses existed, I thought they were fantasy. And there there was, this real live princess, Princess Diana [she was HRH at the time]. I was captivated by her, I thought she was so beautiful. I guess she reminded me of my own mother; tall, slim, blonde, Sloaney style, same accent etc.

I went to a CofE school, Diana and the rest of the royal family naturally came up in conversation a lot. I have vivid memories of her being on the cover of Hello and The Times, especially when I was learning to read. I remember watching all those Newsround stories about her taking the boys to Thorpe Park, the divorce, her losing her HRH styling. She was most defiantly my hero, I remember thinking that I wanted to look like her.

My mother watched the Panorama interview when it was broadcast. I was 5 going on 6 at the time, acutely aware of what she was saying. I was sat on the floor, still in my school uniform; we'd been out, my mother let me stay up late. I just remember thinking why was the door open during the interview.

In August 1997, we were holidaying in Majorca. I remember asking my step brother where Diana was, he just pointed north. I was most defiantly aware of the hype surrounding her and Dodi. The night we came home was the night she died. We were flying over Paris when it happened (obviously we didn't see anything). I woke at 6am, put the TV on and found out what happened. I was frozen with shock; my hero was dead. I didn't believe it. I ran upstairs to my mum and told her, she didn't believe me at first.

As I grew older, whenever people said her name I would just be overcome with melancholy. I can't really explain it. I've read the Andrew Morton book, every time I read them I cried. I couldn't believe what actually happened to her in her life. Like everyone else I saw parallels between her life and mine, the unstable family life, bulimia etc. The more I've learnt about her the more respect I have.