The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #561  
Old 09-06-2013, 05:00 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 4,385
No balanced person worships Diana, or believes that she was an angel.

And no fair, reasonably intelligent person who has read the volumes of pro-con material believes her to be a diabolical figure whose contribution to Britain was purely negative.

Why must it be either/or...why must it be black and white?
.
__________________

__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena
Reply With Quote
  #562  
Old 09-06-2013, 05:06 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
No balanced person worships Diana, or believes that she was an angel.

I agree - but I also know that there are many unbalanced people out there because there are many who do worship her and believe that she was an angel.

Quote:
And no fair person who has read the volumes of pro-con material believes her to be a diabolical figure whose contribution to Britain was purely negative.

Why must it be either/or...why must it be black and white?

I agree - it doesn't have to be black and white.

She did some good - she did some bad.

Personally I believe she did more harm than good because she believed her own publicity rather than realise who she had married and what that meant.

There is nothing in the Lady Pamela Hicks comments that weren't reported in the early 80s by the way - that Diana refused to listen to those who were appointed to help her, that she refused to read the books with some guidance etc - reported in 1981 - before the wedding mind you.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #563  
Old 09-06-2013, 05:16 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,713
After rereading the article in VF yet again, I didn't see anywhere where it was stated that Charles was never at fault at all. She bluntly stated the effects of some of the behavior of Diana had on Charles. TBH, I think once the marriage was on its downward spiral, these ladies probably didn't see too much of Diana but could see the effects on Charles. They've stated their opinion of Diana when asked. Nothing wrong with that.

Claim bluntness on old age? I don't think so. If anything, perhaps the bluntness of opinion is a family trait? Puts me in mind of a certain 92 year old that is well renowned for his bluntness and "gaffes".
__________________
“We live in a world where we have to hide to make love, while violence is practiced in broad daylight.”
~~~ John Lennon ~~~
Reply With Quote
  #564  
Old 09-06-2013, 05:30 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
No balanced person worships Diana, or believes that she was an angel...
I'm going to both agree and disagree with you here.

I do think some balanced people hold Diana in a very high esteem - perhaps not worship, but still up there. I also think that some intelligent people do so as well.

I don't believe that people who are informed on the matter and have read the materials presenting both the Charles and the Diana sides see things as a black/white. However, I don't believe that the majority of people who have an opinion on this matter - regardless of how intelligent or balanced they are - have read materials from both sides prior to forming an opinion (or at all). There are some well balanced and intelligent people out there who have closed minds and aren't willing to change their opinions on the matter - and I mean in reference to both the Diana and Charles supporters.

That said, I do really agree with you. Diana was not this evil, diabolical figure whose contribution was purely negative. She also wasn't a saint whose contribution was purely positive. Some of what she contributed was negative, some of what she contributed was positive. The same can be said of Charles.
.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #565  
Old 09-06-2013, 05:45 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Regarding the Duchess of Devonshire, we should perhaps clear up a few facts.

The 2 letters I copied are from a book published awhile ago. The book has exerpts of about 5% of the more than 20,000 letters the 6 sisters wrote to each other, and has nothing to do with Diana other than she was amongst the many people that the 6 sisters met and wrote to each other about including others such as Hitler, Churchill, the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, President Kennedy, Harold MacMillian and Aly Khan as well as the Queen, the Queen Mother and other members of the BRF. They are pretty frank in their comments about everyone so Diana was not singled out. The Duchess merely made a comment to her sister about her personal experience with someone she actually knew.

I doubt when they were writing to each other they ever thought that an editor would want to compile their letters into book form. The Duchess certainly was not paid for expressing her views in her letter to her sister, nor were her letters part of some palace organized campaign to discredit the late princess.
.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #566  
Old 09-06-2013, 06:31 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Green Bay, United States
Posts: 508
This column is a good example of people deciding things without considering all angles. Most of the time, it seems as if they do not understand what they read. How awful to go through life with such narrow vision. Nothing is ever all good or all bad.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #567  
Old 09-06-2013, 06:54 PM
Frelinghighness's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New England, United States
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladongas View Post
Yes, the Mountbattens worked hard, but they had plenty of time for pleasure, too, as they left the rearing of their children to others, and of course, none of them had to work to make money.
Just because somebody leaves the rearing of the children to others (most accomplished men) and don't need to earn money, doesn't negate the fact that they may work very hard and accomplish a lot, like the Mountbattens. I'm so tired of this attitude.
HM left the child rearing to others and doesn't need to earn her living, but who could dispute that she doesn't and hasn't worked hard?
Unfortunately, just the "juicy" bits about the Mountbattens' early years, roaring 20's style is generally reported. Read a biography on either of them, I think you'd be surprised, and be able to take their daughter's remarks in a better context.
Also, I agree with a former poster that these remarks were heard in the 80's and another poster that her remark about charles' neediness was a bit of a swipe at him.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #568  
Old 09-06-2013, 09:03 PM
sthreats's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: midwest, United States
Posts: 311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
If that was the context in which Her Ladyship was quoted then yes, you are correct Ish, and I agree with you.

The DM and VF have chosen to play up those particular remarks because of the attention they are bound to receive.
You are right. The title of the VF article ends with 'flourished under Camilla ' but Camilla's name is not in the article.

I think these sisters speak their mind no matter what. Lady Patricia was interviewed by Brandeth for his book in 2006. When asked why P. Charles didn't marry Camilla when they were young she said ' it wouldn't have worked anyway she was a subject and one doesn't marry one's subjects.'
I found that very snobby and offensive but this is who they are.

Many older people think the failure of a marriage is mainly the woman's fault. And they clearly think they are superior to others. So of course in their view P. Diana should have been forever grateful and pliable. Also I haven't read anything that positive from the sisters about P. Charles.

I don't think this is something for everyone here to get upset with each other about.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #569  
Old 09-06-2013, 09:14 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,998
Quote:
I think these sisters speak their mind no matter what. Lady Patricia was interviewed by Brandeth for his book in 2006. When asked why P. Charles didn't marry Camilla when they were young she said ' it wouldn't have worked anyway she was a subject and one doesn't marry one's subjects.'
I found that very snobby and offensive but this is who they are.
Did she actually say that?

Now I want to know her opinion on Sarah, Mark, Tim, Sophie, and Catherine...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #570  
Old 09-06-2013, 09:18 PM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 6,320
Diana & Charles had their ups and downs and both did things without thinking sometimes. Their were a lot of hurt and pain on both sides. Although the events are pretty ancient now, I hold both Diana & Charles and Camilla accountable for the mess in the early 90's.
__________________
"If you are always trying to be normal you will never know how amazing you can be."

Dr. Maya Angelou
Reply With Quote
  #571  
Old 09-06-2013, 09:20 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 4,385
So do I, Ish!
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena
Reply With Quote
  #572  
Old 09-06-2013, 09:36 PM
sthreats's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: midwest, United States
Posts: 311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post

Did she actually say that?

Now I want to know her opinion on Sarah, Mark, Tim, Sophie, and Catherine...
Yes Gyles Brandeth book on Charles and Camilla
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #573  
Old 09-06-2013, 09:41 PM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,253
A number of posts have been edited and /or removed.

Maybe it's because of the closeness to the anniversary of Diana's death but whatever the reason, once again the discussion has veered off into the over-emotional and personal. The topic of the thread is "Different Facets of Diana". Who would have thought that observations by a Devonshire and a Mountbatten which relate directly to the topic could lead to so much angst. It's not as if the few sentences quoted are startling revelations which will lead to a re-writing of history, they merely confirm what is already on the record. Abusing them ("must have been paid", "senile") is an absurd over-reaction, while the personal cattiness thrown in by some members toward each other is ugly and unnecessary.

I am aware more than most of the sensitivities and tensions involved when discussions relating to Diana go beyond the anodyne, of the degree of emotional attachment and identification to the late Princess held by some, and of the need of others to act as public defenders. Nonetheless, a discussion of "Different Facets of Diana" will involve exactly that so could members who contribute to the thread please do so with a calm sense of perspective, keep to the topic, and take a step back before over-reacting or becoming personal.

Thanks for everyone's cooperation,

Warren
British Forums moderator
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #574  
Old 10-16-2013, 09:22 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: pinner, United Kingdom
Posts: 362
Quote:
(It seems strange now, because Diana's looks were greatly admired, but I remember a rather scathing comment by one of Charles' friends about Diana: Really, nothing special. If he hadn't married her, she'd have trouble getting a date.)
Diana's looks were greatly admired, after her marriage when she took a greater interest in her appearance, had access to the best designers, hairdressers and makeup artists.

Before then there was nothing to distinguish her from a thousand almost identikit 'Sloanes' [ i know because i dated several, and really they were all the same !]

Also she wasn't 'very bright'... and probably rather uninteresting to spend time with [once her limited repertoire of enthusiasms - pop music and pets was exhausted]

It is no surprise to me that such a timid 'mouse' had insufficient interest to hold the attention of a worldly man like the Prince of Wales.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #575  
Old 10-16-2013, 10:04 AM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 6,320
The late Princess of Wales wasn't a dumb person as some would like to paint her.
__________________
"If you are always trying to be normal you will never know how amazing you can be."

Dr. Maya Angelou
Reply With Quote
  #576  
Old 10-16-2013, 10:16 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: pinner, United Kingdom
Posts: 362
Her Qualifications weren't those of a particularly intelligent or studious individual...Doubtless she acquired knowledge & 'savvy' as she grew older, but nobody could possibly claim she was 'bright' !
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #577  
Old 10-16-2013, 10:47 AM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 6,320
She was a very bright person. She loved classical music and the opera and could play several of her favorite pieces on the piano. She was very athletic and excelled in swimming and running. She wanted to be a ballerina as a child and practiced up until the end of her life. Diana also loved looking after children and the elderly. When she was a kid, she volunteered at nursing homes and she later went on to work as a nanny.

No doubt that Charles was way more educated than Diana but he's also way more educated than his second wife too.
__________________
"If you are always trying to be normal you will never know how amazing you can be."

Dr. Maya Angelou
Reply With Quote
  #578  
Old 10-16-2013, 01:01 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: pinner, United Kingdom
Posts: 362
Quote:
She was a very bright person.
I suspect that 'Bright' [with reference to an individual] means something different in the United Kingdom and in The United States.

In my country [the UK] it means someone intelligent.. both 'brainy', and also emotionally intelligent. I'm afraid [ IMO ], liking classical music, playing a few tunes on the piano and helping old ladies across the road does NOT make one intelligent. I'm sorry but i don't consider Diana,Princess of Wales an intelligent person, in any way at all.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #579  
Old 10-16-2013, 01:50 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,121
There are many "bright", smart people who aren't academic. Diana was certainly quick-witted.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #580  
Old 10-16-2013, 01:59 PM
blauerengel's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 1,732
Being "bright" and being university-educated does not always have to go together, I know a lot of people who have great diplomas but lack what is usually called "common sense". Altough nowadays a lot of people tend do treat individuals with less formal education as if they were intellectually inferior, it is amusing because it is only revealing their own insecurities...

Queen Elizabeth II also did not receive a lot of formal education,but she is usually perceived as highly intelligent,disciplined and capable head of state.
__________________

__________________
Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it.
Avoiding danger in the long run is no safer than outright exposure.
Life is either a daring adventure,or nothing
. Helen Keller
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
bridesmaid, dance, diana princess of wales, pregnancy, princess diana, princess diana lady spencer, style


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
Why do you like Diana? juliamontague Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 222 12-21-2011 02:40 AM
New Diana Princess Maxima Royal Chit Chat 115 08-23-2009 08:45 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication 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 duchess of cambridge duchess of cambridge style fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta cristina infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander olympic games ottoman picture of the month pom pregnancy president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince laurent princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess haya princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit wedding william winter olympics 2014


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 10:23 AM.

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]