Reasons for disliking Diana?

[branchg]

I don't like the way she manipulated the media to paint an inaccurate and totally irresponsible viewpoint of her marriage and the support she received from The Queen and Prince Philip of her role.

I am not excusing Charles and his behavior, but Diana needed to take some responsibility for her behavior as well. It takes two to make a relationship and two to make it fail.

 

[BeatrixFan]

One thing that I didn't like was when Camilla had her 50th birthday party and it was due to make the front page, Diana deliberately booked a trip with Dodi to St Tropez and invited journalists and paps so she'd end up on the front page and not Camilla. It was just bitchy in my eyes and it just showed that Diana always wanted to be the centre of attention.

 

[Zonk]

I don't like the way she manipulated the media to paint an inaccurate and totally irresponsible viewpoint of her marriage and the support she received from The Queen and Prince Philip of her role.

I am not excusing Charles and his behavior, but Diana needed to take some responsibility for her behavior as well. It takes two to make a relationship and two to make it fail.

I actually disagree with a portion of that statement...it does take two to make a relationship but it only takes one to make it fail. An admirer of Diana I will admit that at times in her marriage she was her worst enemy. Based upon what we know now Charles has always loved Camilla even while married to Diana. Please note that I am not even addressing the alleged Charles/Camilla affair early in the marriage. You can be unfaithful to someone without committing the act. If that is the case....than Charles was never really "in the marriage." I am not saying that Charles didn't have feelings for Diana but apparently not enough to work thru the rough patches of their marriage. And that goes for the both of them.

I must admit that I have been hesitant to read and post this thread...as it appears that we are going round and round in circles with no end in sight. There are always going to be those who feel that Diana was the victim, Camilla the agressor and vice versa. She has been dead for nine years, Camilla has married Charles why can't we all just move on? Mistakes were made by EVERYONE.

There seem to be many reasons why people like Camilla...but one word comes up many times: discretion. She has never spoken out aloud about her relationship with Charles. And I can respect that but I wonder it has more to do with the fact is she knew where she stood with Charles. She knew he loved her. She grew up with tons of security and never had to question on whether or not anyone loved her. For Diana..that doesn't seem to to be case. She always questioned Charles's love for her. Sometimes I wonder how different the remaining years would have been if she was confident in his love. Maybe she too would have been discreet.

 

[BeatrixFan]

She has been dead for nine years, Camilla has married Charles why can't we all just move on? Mistakes were made by EVERYONE.

Some people can't forgive. Princess Margaret never forgave Diana for betraying the Queen. I'm afraid I share Princess Margaret's view.

 

[Zonk]

Some people can't forgive. Princess Margaret never forgave Diana for betraying the Queen. I'm afraid I share Princess Margaret's view.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. As for Margaret..considering that she too had her love sacrificed for a Kingdom...I would think she would be a little more sympathetic to Diana.....but she was from a different time and therefore saw the world a lot differently.

But its certainly ironic that a lot of people like to use the quote "the Past is the past" as the theme for forgiving certain people and events but it only appears to be one sided.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Thats the thing, Margaret was very very sympathetic to Diana. They were good friends and Margaret was very good to Diana but then Diana betrayed the Queen and that was something Margaret could never tolerate or forgive and she never did. Remember, at Diana's funeral, Margaret's fury was quite evident and when it was suggested that a statue of Diana be put up outside Kensington Palace, Margaret went mad shouting, "I will not have that woman outside my window!". Margaret may have been older but she understood that Monarchy needs the loyalty of the people and the Queen needed unconditional support from her own family. When Diana bad mouthed the Queen, it was like betraying the whole family and to Margaret, it was unforgiveable. I didn't like Diana for a whole host of reasons but this is the main one. She treated our Queen like dirt and it was just wrong. Some things are forgivable - others are not.

 

[Little_star]

One thing that I didn't like was when Camilla had her 50th birthday party and it was due to make the front page, Diana deliberately booked a trip with Dodi to St Tropez and invited journalists and paps so she'd end up on the front page and not Camilla. It was just bitchy in my eyes and it just showed that Diana always wanted to be the centre of attention.

I think if Camilla had been the primary cause of my marriage break-up I'd do something like Diana. If that makes me bitchy then......

 

[Toledo]

So you dislike her for marrying young?

I'm not sure I can make sense of how anyone can dislike someone for marrying at a young age.

No offence intended Toledo

None taken!
I tried to think of an answer, my answer, to the thread's question.
Is not that I don't like her more than I think it was not a good choice to jump into such a public marriage right after her teens. This brought to mind another princess, Princess Fusterberg, whom I read in a recent Point de Vue she got married when she was fifteen years old!
But I like Diana. She is my one of my favorite tragic characters of the 20th century royalty.

 

[princess olga]

Not on your life. I feel that Diana was truly devoted to those charities and helped them because she loved helping others.

Not according to the new series in the Daily Mail, she wasn't. And that's even stated by people <whithin> those charities. You've clearly been drinking the Diana coolaid.
And by the way, let's keep my life out of this.

I also dislike her for marrying Charles so young because I felt she was totally and completely inexperienced and had no clue what she was getting into. I'm not saying that marrying young is always a bad thing...my parents married young and they're still going strong 34 years later, but for her......it just wasn't a good idea. Had they dated a few years, gotten to know each other a little better......I think the marriage might have fared a little better.

I'm with Roslyn totally on this one. Charles and Diana wouldn't have been married AT ALL. Not at all. They'd have discovered how differently they look at life and how both their needy personalities clashed. Again, they would have never married, period.

 

[Incas]

Not according to the new series in the Daily Mail, she wasn't. And that's even stated by people <whithin> those charities. You've clearly been drinking the Diana coolaid.

LOL! Diana coolaid...

 

[BeatrixFan]

I think if Camilla had been the primary cause of my marriage break-up I'd do something like Diana. If that makes me bitchy then......

Some would call it spiteful and for a woman who is claimed to be all sweetness and light, it isn't exactly a kind thing to do. Remember, Charles and Diana were divorced. Diana was as much to blame for the break-up of the marriage as Charles was. But Diana couldn't stand another woman having the attention she wanted. I'm sorry but it's obvious - Di was jealous and she used her media connections to do something that was just plain nasty. And how telling that she was happy to use the media when it suited her but when it didn't, she'd behave like a spoilt brat and throw her toys out of the pram.

 

[Sister Morphine]

Not according to the new series in the Daily Mail, she wasn't. And that's even stated by people <within> those charities. You've clearly been drinking the Diana koolaid.
And by the way, let's keep my life out of this.

I don't live in England, I don't read English papers, I don't know what series you're talking about. Furthermore, I don't drink *anyone's* Kool-Aid. And "not on your life" is an expression, it's not actually mentioning your life. Geez.

 

[princess olga]

I don't live in England, I don't read English papers, I don't know what series you're talking about.

you have access to the venerable world wide web, don't you?! you read English, don't you?! I don't live in England either, never have. I happen to live, like you, in what was to be, if the various reports are to be believed, Diana's new home-country-away-from-home, had she actually survived Henri Paul's driving: the good ol' US of A.
Doesn't necessarily mean that I only consume local media. With current technologies the way they are, accessible, cheap, not to mention <global>, why on the planet would I? Not on my life indeed. Geez.

 

[princess olga]

Some would call it spiteful and for a woman who is claimed to be all sweetness and light, it isn't exactly a kind thing to do. Remember, Charles and Diana were divorced. Diana was as much to blame for the break-up of the marriage as Charles was. But Diana couldn't stand another woman having the attention she wanted. I'm sorry but it's obvious - Di was jealous and she used her media connections to do something that was just plain nasty. And how telling that she was happy to use the media when it suited her but when it didn't, she'd behave like a spoilt brat and throw her toys out of the pram.

Very wise comment. So sad, but so true, in my view. I think there's a conundrum she couldn't deal with: having de facto, in effect, lost her job as Crown Princess. That's what happened as soon as she decided she wanted "out" of her alliance with Charles.

Granted, it was in many ways an unbearable situation for her: her husband didn't love her, took a mistress, an old flame to boot. But--there's a big but here. As much as this sounds inhumane, anti-feminist, etc. etc., I think in hindsight, the best possible thing Diana could have done, is, yep, sucking it up. And staying hitched to Charles. That way, she could have kept the job she loved: being the selfless, innocent princess, always in the limelight, to help lesser souls, natch.

Sure, she went 'free lance' after her divorce, but it was a de-motion of the position she'd had before. It's like this: You marry a Crown Prince? You gain a job: Crown Princess. You divorce the prince? Lose your job. Period. You can't do the same thing and be Princess, of Nothing and No One. Doesn't work. She didn't, in the end, win much by it. It was bad all around, not to mention isolating. She could have come out on top perhaps, had she behaved with more dignity. But the job she loved, she lost by gaining freedom from the RF. That was something she didn't seem to have calculated in, when she decided enough was enough. I wonder if she ever looked back and wished she'd stayed in the marriage, despite everything.

 

[Sister Morphine]

you have access to the venerable world wide web, don't you?! you read English, don't you?! I don't live in England either, never have. I happen to live, like you, in what was to be, if the various reports are to be believed, Diana's new home-country-away-from-home, had she actually survived Henri Paul's driving: the good ol' US of A.
Doesn't necessarily mean that I only consume local media. With current technologies the way they are, accessible, cheap, not to mention <global>, why on the planet would I? Not on my life indeed. Geez.

Just because I can, doesn't mean I need to. I could read papers from Hong Kong online, but if it doesn't impact my life, why would I bother? I like Princess Diana, but I don't follow every single solitary bit of news on her.....therefore I'd have no way of knowing this series of articles existed.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

That was something she didn't seem to have calculated in, when she decided enough was enough. I wonder if she ever looked back and wished she'd stayed in the marriage, despite everything.

From what I read in the books about Diana I got the impression that she had had a feeling of "fate" having a hand in her becoming Princess of Wales and when that marriage turned sour she hoped to be able to influence the public to pressure the queen and Charles that William, her son would be the next in line. Thus her position as mother of the future king would have been safe. I don't know if this is the truth but one could imagine that it was that way.

 

[Little_star]

Some would call it spiteful and for a woman who is claimed to be all sweetness and light, it isn't exactly a kind thing to do.

Having an affair with a married man isn't exactly kind either.

Remember, Charles and Diana were divorced. Diana was as much to blame for the break-up of the marriage as Charles was.

By the time the marriage had broken up they'd hurt each other equally. However I've always questioned whether they would have had such an acrimonious end if it hadn't been for Charles' affair.

But Diana couldn't stand another woman having the attention she wanted. I'm sorry but it's obvious - Di was jealous and she used her media connections to do something that was just plain nasty.

Jealous of what exactly? Whilst I don't deny that spite was probably the main motivation, I doubt jealousy had anything to do with it. Diana had everything going for her at that time, unlike Camilla.

And how telling that she was happy to use the media when it suited her but when it didn't, she'd behave like a spoilt brat and throw her toys out of the pram.

I don't find it particularly telling seeing as that's how the media game is played these days.

 

[Madame Royale]

None taken!
I tried to think of an answer, my answer, to the thread's question.
Is not that I don't like her more than I think it was not a good choice to jump into such a public marriage right after her teens. This brought to mind another princess, Princess Fusterberg, whom I read in a recent Point de Vue she got married when she was fifteen years old!
But I like Diana. She is my one of my favorite tragic characters of the 20th century royalty.

Thank you for your reply Toledo

Although I did not share in the Diana "hysteria" she did mean something special to me, I believe.

 

[wartenberg7]

Well, when I grew up I was a huge fan of Princess Diana. She even took a little of the place of The Queen whom I admired as long as I can think of.
But nowadays I see things in a more komplex way.
Some days ago I was in a bookstore where you can buy a new book from a former secretary, so called "Lady Clerk", in the household of Charles and Diana. Though she was fired because of being rude and outspoken against the Duchess of Cornwall, she had very critical things to say about the then Princess of Wales.
Of course I don´t know if this is really true, but she told about very disturbing incidents concerning Diana - I was a bit shocked and couldn´t really believe it!
She wrote, that Diana has hit her husband at his head with a bible while he was praying (before going to bed, I guess), attacking him with a knife before she cut herself, not to speak of the hoax-calls to Will Carling which led to his marriage breakdown.
The author said Diana was a woman who had a very free spirit concerning sexuality with a huge appetite for lots of men (not only those "known" to us by the press) and it was a very unfair thing only to connect the prince with adultery.
In another anecdote the author wrote that a colleague of hers, also employed at Kensington palace, was asked by the princess to join her
on a trip abroad, which she did. After that, Diana presented her with a bill of 6.000 pounds, which the empoyee couldn´t pay. Diana was furious to hell about that and only the intervention of the prince of Wales prevented
that empoyed "Lady clerk" to be totally broke...
The princess was not damned totally in that book, but the author showed her good and wonderful sides, which many people benefited from and loved her for, but also a very dark neurotic side of her personality, which made it sometimes very hard for people (also those close to her) to cope with.
The book´s author said that Diana only loved her title but not her husband (though she might have thought so in the beginning).
Please don´t believe that I think everything written therein is true, but there are some very interesting points included.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

By the time the marriage had broken up they'd hurt each other equally. However I've always questioned whether they would have had such an acrimonious end if it hadn't been for Charles' affair.

I don't like the Diana TV-interview where she presented herself as the victim of Charles and Camilla. So many people have told since that Diana was an awfully good actress if she wanted to and I believe this interview was an act.

While I have never had the impression that Charles was a good actor at all - when he told in his TV-interview that he has an affair, ye, but only after the marriage was already broken down inevitably, I believed him. It seems believable for me - to split up with a former love on marrying, but staying friends, then finding understanding with her when the marriage got into into a crisis and finally, when the marriage broke down, a return to the old love. Happens all the time. For me this is much more believable than the claims of a spoiled princess that her marriage broke down because of somebody else's bad machinations instead of searching for reasons at herself.

What Diana said is the the stuff you read in trashy love novels, but I found life works differently. There is no such thing as an innocent heroine, there is good and bad in anyone, anyone makes mistakes which lead sometimes to a terrible end. So for me Diana was acting the victim and that's the reason I don't like her as much as I did in the beginning.

 

[MARG]

I don't like the Diana TV-interview where she presented herself as the victim of Charles and Camilla. So many people have told since that Diana was an awfully good actress if she wanted to and I believe this interview was an act.

I particularly liked the judicious application of dark eye-shadow, eyeliner and mascara to achieve that "Haunted" look. Must have had lessons from the stage.

While I have never had the impression that Charles was a good actor at all - when he told in his TV-interview that he has an affair, ye, but only after the marriage was already broken down inevitably, I believed him. It seems believable for me - to split up with a former love on marrying, but staying friends, then finding understanding with her when the marriage got into into a crisis and finally, when the marriage broke down, a return to the old love. Happens all the time. For me this is much more believable than the claims of a spoiled princess that her marriage broke down because of somebody else's bad machinations instead of searching for reasons at herself.

I agree wholeheartedly. Whether we like it or not life is largely what we make it. And, as the saying goes, "life happens!"

What Diana said is the the stuff you read in trashy love novels, but I found life works differently. There is no such thing as an innocent heroine, there is good and bad in anyone, anyone makes mistakes which lead sometimes to a terrible end.

Her gushing heartfelt declarations that she loved her children above all else also rang false. You do not make history by being the first royal to send your child to public school, out into the bustle of (almost) real life and then, within weeks, publicly shame him in the eyes of his peers just to land the winning blow on Prime Time International television!

People who use their children as weapons in both marriage and divorce are despicable. Her two sons lives must have been a living nightmare waiting for the 'next salacious installment' of her never-ending public hate campaign against their father. (And teenage boys are not noted for their subtlety).

That Princes William and Harry have turned out as normal or dysfunctional as any other Brit, is a credit to both them and to their extended family.

 

[Little_star]

I don't like the Diana TV-interview where she presented herself as the victim of Charles and Camilla. So many people have told since that Diana was an awfully good actress if she wanted to and I believe this interview was an act.

While I have never had the impression that Charles was a good actor at all - when he told in his TV-interview that he has an affair, ye, but only after the marriage was already broken down inevitably, I believed him. It seems believable for me - to split up with a former love on marrying, but staying friends, then finding understanding with her when the marriage got into into a crisis and finally, when the marriage broke down, a return to the old love. Happens all the time. For me this is much more believable than the claims of a spoiled princess that her marriage broke down because of somebody else's bad machinations instead of searching for reasons at herself.

What Diana said is the the stuff you read in trashy love novels, but I found life works differently. There is no such thing as an innocent heroine, there is good and bad in anyone, anyone makes mistakes which lead sometimes to a terrible end. So for me Diana was acting the victim and that's the reason I don't like her as much as I did in the beginning.

You're entitled to believe what you want, it doesn't make it true though.

 

[Little_star]

I particularly liked the judicious application of dark eye-shadow, eyeliner and mascara to achieve that "Haunted" look. Must have had lessons from the stage.

I guess I must have had make-up lessons as well then, being a big fan of the smoky eyed look.

I agree wholeheartedly. Whether we like it or not life is largely what we make it. And, as the saying goes, "life happens!"

I think your husband having an affair is more than just a simple case of "Life happens".

Her gushing heartfelt declarations that she loved her children above all else also rang false. You do not make history by being the first royal to send your child to public school, out into the bustle of (almost) real life and then, within weeks, publicly shame him in the eyes of his peers just to land the winning blow on Prime Time International television!

I think it's one thing to dislike Diana but it's completly outrageous to suggest she didn't love her children. Even the Queen grudgingly admitted that she was devoted to her children.

People who use their children as weapons in both marriage and divorce are despicable. Her two sons lives must have been a living nightmare waiting for the 'next salacious installment' of her never-ending public hate campaign against their father. (And teenage boys are not noted for their subtlety).

From what I've seen both boys loved their mother dearly and there's nothing to suggest that she made their lives a "nightmare".

 

[Madame Royale]

I think it's one thing to dislike Diana but it's completly outrageous to suggest she didn't love her children. Even the Queen grudgingly admitted that she was devoted to her children.

I agree Little-Star although I do not think the Queen would have stated anything she did not feel or believe in (she is not an actress afterall) so I must disagree with the 'grudgingly' statement.

The comment to which you replied (indeed the whole post I thought) was fuelled with scorn, and that is really sad to see.

This is generally a good Forum with many good members but I have come to note during my short time here that it can also be a place of repugnance

Why some go out of their way to be like that I cannot understand.

And a good point made. HM the Queen is on record stating just how good a devoted and loving mother Diana was to her children and I would like to see anyone question the words of Elizabeth II.

 

[Zonk]

Madame Royale...how right you are!

While everyone is certainly entitled to dislike Diana...the venom that is used to talk about a woman who has been dead 9 years is amazing! And I would like to add..that this same type of venom is often used for Camilla for actions that happend during the same time period. Why can't people move on?

I must admit that sometimes it is hard to to visit the British threads...and since it was the British Royals who first captured my attention..that is a hard pill to swallow. Its like that movie Groundhog Day...we keep reliving the same events again OVER AND OVER AND OVER.

 

[Skydragon]

I'm with Jo and MARG here.

Many parents love their children, but sadly are not above using them or in Dianas case, not taking into account the humiliation and distress, her book and other actions would cause them.

Martin Bashir has himself said that the setting up of the interview took ages, as Diana wanted to be sure that the angle of the camera added to the tragic look.

Life does happen, good and bad and how we react shows our calibre.

 

[Warren]

The last exchange has been removed.

It looks like a good time for everyone to have a nice cup of tea and venture elsewhere in the Forums for a while.

thanks,
Warren
British Forums moderator