Preparations for the 10th Anniversary Concert and Memorial Service

[corazon]

the fountain was open for the queen, i think is a official tribute

[lord_rankin]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

So to celebrate her means to celebrate a woman who did her best to abolish the monarchy and who would want that?

Do you really think that Diana, whatever her faults, would have wanted to abolish her children's birthright? I seriously doubt that she stayed home at nights plotting to make Britain a republic While some of her actions were extremely ill conceived (The Panorama interview). I think IMO that those episodes of judgement were the result of a troubled emotional state not a resolute determination to bring about the monarchy's downfall.
Whatever anyones opinions of Diana maybe I think in the long run we have to concede that she did an amazing job in raising her boys and that is what I believe we should focus on and celebrate in the the 10th anniversary of her death. Her legacy should and does carry on with them, not the constant rehashing of her faults and missteps.

[Skydragon]

Queen unveils new Diana fountain - 6 July 2004

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3866863.stm

Known by many in the UK as the drainage ditch.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by lord_rankin

Do you really think that Diana, whatever her faults, would have wanted to abolish her children's birthright? I seriously doubt that she stayed home at nights plotting to make Britain a republic .

Of course, not lord rankin. Her friends said many times during her lifetime that she did not want to destroy her children's (especially William's) inheritance. What I believe happened is that Diana mistakenly thought she alone knew what was best for the monarchy and only she could lead it forward.

During Diana's tenure as Princess of Wales, reporters like Richard Kay continually disparaged the rest of the Royal Family as cold, out of touch, unfeeling, cruel, insensitive, inhuman and showed Diana as an example of how the Royal Family should be, open, hugging, spontaneous, someone who gives sound bites, candid photos and candid interviews. Now you may find it interesting that Richard Kay was one of Diana's closest friends. If Diana, as I suspect, mistakenly thought she was the saviour of the British monarchy it was because people like Richard Kay told her that over and over while she was trying to sort out some pretty difficult situations within the Royal Family. Is it any wonder that she did as she did? Its totally understandable given the people around her but whatever her reasons for doing so the effects on the monarchy were the same.

Now lord rankin, you mention that her legacy should not focus on her faults and her missteps. I totally agree, but just to focus on the hugging Diana who visited an AIDS hospital or the proud mum hugging her sons doesn't do justice to her legacy either.

Diana's legacy, in my mind, is of a woman who dared to care and dared to show that she cared. It is also a legacy of a woman who in her own pain lashed out at the monarchy and in her pain hurt those who had never hurt her while also doing incalculable damage to herself. Yes, its a conflicted legacy, not all bad and not all good but I think that is a by-product of the modern media age. In fact to talk about Diana's legacy without talking about the current practice of the press to pry into every single private detail of a public figure's life (especially royal life) is to ignore what is possibly Diana's biggest legacy. If people are focusing on the unpleasant private facts of Diana's life, they are following Diana's lead who herself focused on many private embarassing details of her life and released these details in interviews and books. And the general public is not only doing it with Diana's life but every new royal princess and celebrity that comes to light. After Diana, we treat celebrities much differently than before and we treat royals much much differently than before. Before Diana, the press was interested in the royal family but still deferential; the press now looks on Diana's future daughter-in-law Kate Middleton as a piece of hot copy. Even Diana's death is a permanent monument to the insatiable nature of this press coverage and its tragic consequences.

I think it was a byproduct of her need to get close to people. She wanted to hug, she wanted to break down the barriers, she wanted to disclose her private thoughts and feelings to show that she was just like you and me and this willingness to be open had a special captivating charm. But the openness had a drawback. It was dangerous for herself and for others around her.

That is why I believe her legacy as a whole was conflicted. And so when we're talking about a monument to celebrate someone's life, it is normal to reflect on that person's entire legacy not just one part or another.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by ysbel

she wanted to disclose her private thoughts and feelings to show that she was just like you and me.

Very good piece, IMO.

The trouble was, that Diana, with her upbringing and background of wealth and self indulgence, could never be like Miss or Mrs average. The media, because they were encouraged, no longer have respect for anyone.

[Elspeth]

I think it was a case of things feeding off each other. The press was already getting out of control - whether Princess Margaret's antics had made them less deferential, whether Prince Charles's ongoing search for a bride had got their competitive instincts raging, whether Rupert Murdoch was just encouraging a different outlook altogether, or whether it was a sign of the less deferential times that followed the 1960s - and Diana and the press eventually brought out the worst in each other. The scenario ysbel describes, with the way Richard Kay and his friends were doing their reporting, is very self-serving toward the press, who were no doubt encouraging Diana in her celebrity ways because it made their lives easier as much as anything else. I doubt she even had any idea she was playing right into their hands.

We can always speculate what might have happened if she'd been less insecure and Charles hadn't had another woman he really wanted to be with, but the actual situation was fraught with weaknesses, and the press are experts at exploiting weakness when they find it.

[Skydragon]

Diana knew exactly what she was doing with the press, it was only when she had used them and tried to discard them, that she suddenly realised that they were out of control and were no longer playing her game. IMO.

Elspeth said "We can always speculate what might have happened if she'd been less insecure and Charles hadn't had another woman he really wanted to be with"
In the end you have to take responsibility for your own actions.

I hope the concert works out for the boys, but I still think it is a waste of time and money and inappropriate.

[Little_star]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

I just think it is a little 'rich' the way those not from the UK and therefore not taxpayers, inform us that if needs be, we should pay!

As one fellow taxpayer, I have no objections to this concert whatsoever. Even if we end up paying some of the costs. Having asked around none of my friends or family have a problem with it either. So I definitely disagree with your previous assertion that most people are opposed to this concert. There are far bigger wastes of taxpayers money in this country.

As for the matter of inconvenience to Londoners, I don't see anybody complining about Party in the Park which is an annual event.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Little_star

Having asked around none of my friends or family have a problem with it either. So I definitely disagree with your previous assertion that most people are opposed to this concert.
As for the matter of inconvenience to Londoners, I don't see anybody complining about Party in the Park which is an annual event.

What a great pity it is then that you, your family and your friends are not able to divert all of your taxes to pay towards any extra expenses, instead of where our tax is supposed to go. There will always be occasions where people will not be happy at the 'possible prospect' of misuse of public funds. I believe I said 'a lot of people', not most, as you misquote.

Quite a few people complain about the cost of security, clean up, extra crime etc, at these events and also the demo's that people hold. But then I expect you have to spend at least some time living in London to appreciate that!

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Diana knew exactly what she was doing with the press, it was only when she had used them and tried to discard them, that she suddenly realised that they were out of control and were no longer playing her game. IMO.

In that case, I would humbly submit that Diana did not know exactly as she was doing or else she would have been able to discard them. The whole art of managing a public image is pretty complex. A large part is influencing the media at certain times so that the person gets less press coverage not more.

I think if a taxpayer thinks of Diana as a person worthy to be commemorated, they would probably not mind the taxpayer's money being spent. If a taxpayer thinks of Diana as a person not worthy to be commemorated, they would mind the money being spent.

For myself, I think its great that William and Harry want to honor their mother and I think now that they're adults and settling in their careers, and Charles and Camilla are doing fine, now is a good time for the young men to bring some closure to their tumultuous family history and acknowledge both their parents, Charles and Diana, as they have done so with their stepmother and grandparents. Its possible that William and Harry can inspire some healing in the family by showing they accept and love all their family whether or not different parts of the family can accept each other.

I still have reservations about holding Diana up as someone that little girls should try to be like but I think enough time has passed by, that people see the mistakes she made and even if they admire Diana, they would not necessarily extol others to do exactly as Diana did.

I think rather than seeing the event as just a memorial to Diana herself to the exclusion of everything else, it is more helpful to see it as an event that can give the Royal Family a great deal of healing and closure to a difficult time in all of their lives and can actually be a cornerstone that makes the family even stronger.

After all the success of the monarchy is not about any one person but about the institution and the family that for generations has carried it forward. Anything that makes the family stronger can only help the monarchy.

[sassie]

Originally Posted by ysbel

In that case, I would humbly submit that Diana did not know exactly as she was doing or else she would have been able to discard them. The whole art of managing a public image is pretty complex. A large part is influencing the media at certain times so that the person gets less press coverage not more.

This is true. I think Diana had been told so many times that she was a whiz at media relations that she failed to see that she actually wasn't, and that she was, to the press, just a tool to sell newspapers. For all her touted 'sophistication', Diana never grasped the true cynicism of the press.

[Elspeth]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

What a great pity it is then that you, your family and your friends are not able to divert all of your taxes to pay towards any extra expenses, instead of where our tax is supposed to go. There will always be occasions where people will not be happy at the 'possible prospect' of misuse of public funds. I believe I said 'a lot of people', not most, as you misquote.

Quite a few people complain about the cost of security, clean up, extra crime etc, at these events and also the demo's that people hold. But then I expect you have to spend at least some time living in London to appreciate that!

Everybody can point to something they don't want their taxes to be used for - there are a few things I'd like to have my tax money protected from, I can tell you - but it doesn't work that way. I think we've got the message that you don't want your tax money used for security and expenses suprrounding large events if they happen to be events you don't find important. Other people don't want their tax money used to finance things which they don't find important; in some of those cases, they include royal weddings and funerals and the royal family in general.

As long as the use of the tax money isn't actually illegal, it comes down to personal opinions about its best use. I think we've all throroughly got the message that you don't think this is a good use of taxpayer money. Other British citizens and residents think it is. As I said a few days ago, we're going round in circles here. Could we all agree to disagree on this subject and just move on?

[Little_star]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Quite a few people complain about the cost of security, clean up, extra crime etc, at these events and also the demo's that people hold. But then I expect you have to spend at least some time living in London to appreciate that!

Well if you choose to live in the capital then you have to expect the good with the bad. That includes protests, major events and demonstrations.

Moreover, I might not live in London but I spend plenty of time there visiting friends and family and have done all my life. Kindly don't presume that I have no idea of what the city is like.

[sara1981]

Elton Absolutely thrilled about Diana concert plans
http://www.hellomagazine.com/music/2...on-john-diana/

[Lady Marmalade]

I hope the concert and memorial service go off without a hitch and both of these young men can finally get the closer they need.

No one in this situation was innocent of anything. If these young men want to honor their mother this way then good for them. What a wonderful tribute to this lady to have ths concert and service to recognize and show love and respect to her.

It is going to happen next year so I guess everyone should get used to the idea. If you choose not to watch on your telly then that is your decision.

[Avalon]

The taxpayer argument has been rehashed for so many times that there is no need for it anymore. We have already gathered that British people have different views when it comes to using the taxpayers’ money. Consider this issue to be off limits.

Also making personal remarks about other members lowers the level of the discussion and is ALWAYS off limits in the threads.

Thank you for co-operation,
British Moderators Team