The Late Princess Diana news thread 4: September 2006 - April 2007 - Page 2

BeatrixFan · #21 11-27-2006, 04:57 PM

No no, I didn't mean it that way. Personally, I don't see the need to mark the anniversary in this way but if it has to be marked, I really don't see how this concert could be seen as a good thing. It'll cost a fortune to put on whereas all they actually need do is invite representatives of charities and hand out large cheques which I'm sure the charities would prefer to a concert that we all know will be taken over by obssessives and could come across as tacky and insulting.

Skydragon · #22 11-27-2006, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

I don't think william and Harry are trying to make money off of their mother. They're just marking the anneiversary in a unique way.

Then there will be no charge for tickets and they will all be giving a personal donation to charity, I don't think so!

If people want to mark the anniversary, remove the drainage ditch!

sirhon11234 · #23 11-27-2006, 05:03 PM

Quote:

remove the drainage ditch!

They should remove the fountain since it has caused the tax payers millions of dollars for repair. And should be replaced with a more suitable memorial for the princess.

( Beatrixfan is that the duchess of windsor in your avatar)

BeatrixFan · #24 11-27-2006, 05:16 PM

(It is indeed).

I do wonder how many memorials are needed exactly. We already have the walk and numerous plaques. Poor old Queen Mary only has one plaque and not even a statue.

**Zonk** · #25 11-27-2006, 05:19 PM

Personally, I don't think they should celebrate her 46th birthday but rather her 50th...that would be nice touch. And if they could have corporate sponsors underwrite the costs of the concert...why shouldn't they? But it wouldn't be a bad idea to just make monetary donations to charities that have/had relationships with Diana and her sons.

rschoenfeldt · #26 11-27-2006, 05:48 PM

I was under the impression that the Princes wanted to acknowledge the 10th anniversary of Diana's death, not her 46th birthday. If they want to honor a birthday however, I agree that the 50th would be more appropriate.

I would be sadly disappointed if this concert goes through and the Princes don't attend for whatever reason. Not sure why this popped into my head, but it did.

Best Regards!

sirhon11234 · #27 11-27-2006, 05:51 PM

I'am sure wills and harry will attend since they're hosting the event.

Duchess · #28 11-27-2006, 05:54 PM

i was really surprised to hear about this too. it seems really odd although Diana did love music so it might be appropriate in that sense. anyway these guys can't seem to win...for years now people have been moaning that they haven't marked her death in a public way and now that they want to people are being rather critical of their choice. maybe the concert wasn't their idea??

Skydragon · #29 11-28-2006, 06:19 AM

Why am I cynical about this event, well, we only had the one paper reporting this 'event' and now it is on every news channel.

There has been no official announcement and I firmly believe that this is media driven and the princes would be damned if they don't now go ahead with something. A public declaration, to prove they loved their mother!

I have always been of the opinion, that they shouldn't have to boohoo in the street to prove anything. They probably don't need anniversary gatherings or concerts to remember her or prove that they loved her!

They more than anyone, know they miss her and grieve for her.

corazon · #30 11-28-2006, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonk

Personally, I don't think they should celebrate her 46th birthday but rather her 50th...that would be nice touch. And if they could have corporate sponsors underwrite the costs of the concert...why shouldn't they? But it wouldn't be a bad idea to just make monetary donations to charities that have/had relationships with Diana and her sons.

I think the event don't is for the diana 46 birthday, is for the 1 anniversary of her daeth, I think I not sure.

rosana · #31 11-29-2006, 07:17 PM

Did anyone buy Point de Vue this week??? Diana is on the cover. Maybe you can tell us what´s that of her "last love".

Panther2000 · #32 11-30-2006, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by corazon

Diana, Honored by TIME as one of the great Heroes

http://www.time.com/time/europe/hero2006/diana.html

Thanks for the article.

That was a great writeup. & It speaks the truth really. Just to remember the days before diana showed up. There was no emblishment there. It was in a sad state of affairs.

Nice to see something written nice about her

& not something from a Tell all book full of halftruths & out right lies( to make the author look good).

Skydragon · #33 11-30-2006, 02:18 PM

http://www.time.com/time/europe/hero2006/diana.html
"into a miserable land", he obviously didn't know anyone who lived here at that time!

In fact, it was a liberating celebration of a life that spoke for what Britons now wanted to be; not defined by cups of tea and stiff upper lips; not deferential; not condemned to live in a nation of perpetual, autumnal decline; not quiet; not old-fashioned; not dull; not sexless.

But somehow or other, Britons know, and are grateful.

This article is so funny, it was obviously not written by a Brit! Take a look at some of his other 'articles', how about.

How to deconstruct the strange case of Janet Jackson's breast
Why is fandom so important

sirhon11234 · #34 11-30-2006, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Princess Diana
Expected to keep quiet and fit in, she instead learned to speak out and became more potent a symbol than the royal house she joined

Thats exactly true.

Skydragon · #35 12-01-2006, 05:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

Thats exactly true.

You forgot the 'In your opinion', many people in the UK didn't and don't think so.

sassie · #36 12-01-2006, 08:19 AM

Quote:

In fact, it was a liberating celebration of a life that spoke for what Britons now wanted to be; not defined by cups of tea and stiff upper lips; not deferential; not condemned to live in a nation of perpetual, autumnal decline; not quiet; not old-fashioned; not dull; not sexless.

Is that meant to insinuate that, without Diana, the British people would never have evolved culturally since 1981?

Not to criticize the Princess, but that's hardly a realistic statement. Evolution is inevitable. This is akin to saying that without Jacqueline Kennedy, American culture would have remained in the 1950's.

JMO.

Skydragon · #37 12-01-2006, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sassie

Is that meant to insinuate that, without Diana, the British people would never have evolved culturally since 1981?

Not to criticize the Princess, but that's hardly a realistic statement. Evolution is inevitable. This is akin to saying that without Jacqueline Kennedy, American culture would have remained in the 1950's.

JMO.

Now we all know that some believe that the BRF did not exist before Diana

Quote:

not defined by stiff upper lips; not deferential;

This is still the way a lot of Brits would prefer to be defined! IMO.

Jo of Palatine · #38 12-01-2006, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon

http://www.time.com/time/europe/hero2006/diana.html
"into a miserable land", he obviously didn't know anyone who lived here at that time!

In fact, it was a liberating celebration of a life that spoke for what Britons now wanted to be; not defined by cups of tea and stiff upper lips; not deferential; not condemned to live in a nation of perpetual, autumnal decline; not quiet; not old-fashioned; not dull; not sexless.

But somehow or other, Britons know, and are grateful.

I doubt Britons wanted to become mentally slightly unstable ("not dull") cheaters on their husbands ("not sexless") who prefered joining their boyfriends on yachts in the Mediterranean (far, far away from "autumnal decline") and blabbing to the media ("not quiet") to doing their duties. If that is old-fashioned, I'd personally prefer to be old-fashioned, enjoy my cup of tea in front of the fire-place and keep my contenance even if confronted with the real world....