The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #101  
Old 07-31-2010, 04:26 PM
Nico's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 1,304
This interview, or to be more exact this Oscar material comedy, was the event who deeply changed my opinion about Diana. It was cheap, nasty, totally tasteless, yet done by a very desperate and hangry woman but she was still at that time HRH the Princess of Wales and from a simply royal and dynastic point of view it was, and still imho, unforgivable.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 07-31-2010, 04:38 PM
nascarlucy's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Florida Area, United States
Posts: 1,329
The world today is a lot more open society than it was 30 or 40 years ago. People who have great wealth or were born into royalty have problems just like everyone else. It's only in recent times that some of these challenges or difficulites have become so public.

I knew when I watched that 1995 interview that there were individuals royal and non-royal who didn't like what was said and who would be upset by it. I could see heads rolling within the first couple of minutes of the interview. Sometimes when you feel that you have been wronged, this is how you get back at the person or persons who you feel wronged you. You tell anyone who will listen or you tell the world how you feel. Most people who feel that they have been wronged by those who are powerful would have thought twice before doing what Diana did. She really had nothing to lose because what could anyone do to her. It wasn't like she would be arrested and thrown into the Tower of London for granting the interview. Or taken to court and criminally charged with revealing royal secrets.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 07-31-2010, 04:58 PM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by spencerdiana1961 View Post
She was an open person,so she couldn't hide anymore inside...It's such a shame that they killed her...
That is true spencerdiana1961. Diana, Princess of Wales was an open person and wanted clarity on her separation. I believe she did this Panorama interview to gain that clarity from Prince Charles and Queen Elizabeth. Yes, she felt trapped and betrayed and the situation was wearing down her emotional and mental state. I thought when I saw the princess in this interview she was very emotional bordering on mental problems. I felt very sorry for her and spencerdiana1961 I can see why you think the BRF was killing her emotionally and mentally.
__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 07-31-2010, 06:15 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
This interview, or to be more exact this Oscar material comedy, was the event who deeply changed my opinion about Diana. It was cheap, nasty, totally tasteless, yet done by a very desperate and hangry woman but she was still at that time HRH the Princess of Wales and from a simply royal and dynastic point of view it was, and still imho, unforgivable.
I agree here. I don't believe that Diana really put any kind of thought into what she was doing granting this widely publicized interview. Yes, she was hurting and angry and that took form into lashing back at those she felt hurt her the most. She didn't account for the repercussions. Being separated from Charles at the time, I believe divorce was really the last thing she wanted and had hopes even of a reconciliation with her husband. Perhaps also she though that it would be a wake up call to BP. What she didn't think about was the effect this interview would have on her sons. William was reported very angry with her for doing this Panorama interview and wouldn't even talk to her.

The one good thing that did happen from this interview was that HM said "enough is enough" and the divorce proceedings started and the war was over. I don't believe that either the Queen or the BRF ever placed either Charles or Diana as the "villian" but just realized that the marriage was beyond repair. The Royal Family has a deep dislike to "airing dirty laundry in public" and the back and forth between Diana (the Morton book which Diana denied any involvement with, the Dimbleby book, the Panorama interview) was just not acceptable.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 07-31-2010, 07:21 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by spencerdiana1961 View Post
Everybody with their real opinions ! I THINK THAT DIANA WAS BRAVE REVEALING THE TRUTH TO THE PUBLIC ! I WILL FOREVER APPRECIATE THIS,so,just PLEASE,if you don't like this thread,keep your opinions for yourself,DON'T COMMENT IT !

I wasn't going to comment in this forum but I must take issue with this comment.

This is a public forum and we all have a right to comment in any forum on this board.

If you don't like hearing that people think Diana was less than perfect (and I think she was a shrew, a manipulative person, a liar, a traiter (after all she admitted adultery and as the wife of the heir to the throne that is treason for her and all her British lovers) then you shouldn't be here.

You have your rights to say you think she was brave and wonderful but I and others also have the right to challenge you and to comment here as well.

In addition, please don't shout - we get the message - Diana was wonderful in your opinion. Others will disagree so be prepared for that or choose a forum that only allows positive comments about Diana - and they do exist. This one argues, disagrees, agrees and discusses all aspects of her life, death and that of many other royals.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 07-31-2010, 07:32 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I agree here. I don't believe that Diana really put any kind of thought into what she was doing granting this widely publicized interview. Yes, she was hurting and angry and that took form into lashing back at those she felt hurt her the most. She didn't account for the repercussions. Being separated from Charles at the time, I believe divorce was really the last thing she wanted and had hopes even of a reconciliation with her husband. Perhaps also she though that it would be a wake up call to BP. What she didn't think about was the effect this interview would have on her sons. William was reported very angry with her for doing this Panorama interview and wouldn't even talk to her.

The one good thing that did happen from this interview was that HM said "enough is enough" and the divorce proceedings started and the war was over. I don't believe that either the Queen or the BRF ever placed either Charles or Diana as the "villian" but just realized that the marriage was beyond repair. The Royal Family has a deep dislike to "airing dirty laundry in public" and the back and forth between Diana (the Morton book which Diana denied any involvement with, the Dimbleby book, the Panorama interview) was just not acceptable.

Once the Morton book was out there was no chance of working things out with Charles. No half-man will have a woman back in his life who has washed the dirty linen in public as she did in 1992. Panorama just ended the process to inevitable divorce that she began with the Morton book.

I believe that she was either totally stupid without even a basic understanding of human nature or she truly wanted a divorce and was going to force the issue. The fact that she stated she didn't want a divorce just doesn't wash with me. She lied about other things and this one is the most obvious lie of all - any person wanting to save their marriage doesn't tell everyone that her husband is cheating on her and expect him to come crawling back, particularly when she leaves out the fact that she was cheating on him, at the same time. He would have known and thus would see her for what she was - a double-faced liar who couldn't be trusted.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 07-31-2010, 07:39 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by spencerdiana1961 View Post
please,no more bad comments,if you don't like it,keep your opinion by yourself,all the threads that are called ''diana-the princess of wales'' are for remembering her,not for offenses!!
Enough !!

On this forum the sections titled 'Diana, Princess of Wales' are not for 'remembering' her only but to discuss her and thus positive and negative opinions are made and arguments ensue here.

Some of us loathed that woman and have as much right to say so in a forum called Diana, Princess of Wales, as those who think she was a saint.

Anyone who wishes to challenge my negative opinion of her is free to do so and many have done so over the time I have been here.

I will challenge anyone who thinks she was brave - to do the Panorama interview - hardly. I would describe her as calculating, scheming and manipluating but not brave. She did it on the Queen's wedding anniversary - if that wasn't a direct snub to her monarch what else was it.

In earlier times she would have been charged with treason - for challenging the position of the monarch which her 'Queen of People's Hearts' comment did, for admitting adultery (strange how Charles never accused her of that but she accused him in 1992 but he gets vilified and she doesn't).

You are entitled to your opinion but so am I and others who will criticise Diana, say negative things about her and make it clear that there are many people who despised her for the harm she did the royal family.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 07-31-2010, 07:46 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
Both Charles and Diana were stupid to do these interviews. What did it get them absolutely nothing! Whenever I watch her interview I cringe, it was so sad. Here was a woman who was angry, bitter, vindictive, sad and hurt. This was not a proud moment for the princess. The interview has not changed my opinion of the Princess of Wales but it was the biggest PR mistake she made. This topic is so old I've said all I can about it.
__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 07-31-2010, 07:53 PM
gfg02's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: *******, Brazil
Posts: 1,411
I think what Diana did was not right, especially with the monarchy institution. But what she did, it was not worse than the interview that Prince Charles gave in 1994. He is the direct heir to the throne, so we never should have gotten that interview.
I wonder how the Queen felt devastated by these interviews, after decades of work, his successors make this one thing.
__________________
If you find someone you love in your life, then hang on to that love. - Diana, Princess of Wales
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 07-31-2010, 08:18 PM
Nico's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 1,304
Quote:
think what Diana did was not right, especially with the monarchy institution. But what she did, it was not worse than the interview that Prince Charles gave in 1994. He is the direct heir to the throne, so we never should have gotten that interview.
I wonder how the Queen felt devastated by these interviews, after decades of work, his successors make this one thing.
Never explain never complain. Charles 's interview was indeed a PR disaster as he was obviously ill advised . A big mistake and many people were less than pleased by it (including Camilla).
This interview was far more sincere than the Diana's one though. The man (cheated first btw) was struggling with an uncontrollable wife who chose to play it unexpectedly nasty. He had to react as the Heir to the Throne. To choose the TV (pandora) box was not, indeed, very wise...

It's a miracle that the Queen didn't die of apoplexy
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 07-31-2010, 08:19 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,160
A quick reminder that The Royal Forums is a discussion forum that is open to both positive and negative opinions. Of course, such opinions need to fit into the criteria set forth in The Royal Forum rules, which can be found here http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...ork&page=rules .

If you have any additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact any of the British moderators and/or TRF administrators.

Zonk
British Forums Moderator
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 07-31-2010, 08:25 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
The man (cheated first btw) was struggling with an uncontrollable wife who chose to play it unexpectedly nasty.

I assume that you mean that Charles cheated first. What is you evidence for this?

Both Charles and Diana were cheating on each other in 1986 and Diana admits that it was it was in 1986 that Charles started cheating with Camilla so can we be sure who was first?

I think he might have been but I am not sure that Diana mightn't have thought he was cheating and so started her affair with Hewitt before Charles. A lot of Diana's problems with Camilla were in her head for a long time so I wouldn't put it past her to have believed that Charles was sleeping with Camilla before he actually was and so she sought physical love elsewhere and then he decided to go all the way with Camilla.

Without having exact dates as to when each person actually started cheating we really won't ever know who was first.

Then there is the prospect that Hewitt is Harry's father (which I don't believe for a second) meaning that there is a suggestion that Diana was cheating 2 years before Charles (and I am dating Charles starting with Camilla by Diana's own words dating the start to 1986 (in the Panorama Interview actually) along with Charles' statement 'inevitably broken down'
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 07-31-2010, 08:38 PM
Nico's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 1,304
In my understanding Diana cheated first in 1985 with Barry Mannakee then David Waterhouse in 86... Charles, still close friend to Camila (and even closer during this rough period) crossed the bridge in 90/91 (when all was "inevitably broken"). At that time Di was indeed with Hewitt (after Gilbey in 89).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 07-31-2010, 11:51 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I think he might have been but I am not sure that Diana mightn't have thought he was cheating and so started her affair with Hewitt before Charles. A lot of Diana's problems with Camilla were in her head for a long time so I wouldn't put it past her to have believed that Charles was sleeping with Camilla before he actually was and so she sought physical love elsewhere and then he decided to go all the way with Camilla.
To be honest here, I don't think that infidelity was the main issue of Diana's paranoia with Camilla. When Diana and Charles first started really "courting", Diana realized that Camilla and Andrew Parker-Bowles were part and parcel of Charles' close circle of friends and everyone knew of Charles and Camilla's past dalliances. Her sister Sarah, I believe, dated Charles after Camilla married Andrew. Diana had to be aware of this.

What I think was really Diana's main concern and resulted in her paranoia about Camilla was the intimacy which Charles and Camilla had. The intimacy of friendship and companionship that C&C shared over love of common interest, the same circle of friends and a bonding of understanding each other. This is what I think Diana wished she could have formed with Charles.. the intimacy. And in a fairytale storybook way, perhaps she imagined that once married, he would direct all that onto her.

Who actually slept with someone else first is besides the point. The two of them never really bonded in a close friendship nor did the efforts made during the marriage take root. That's why the attacks in public format came about.

The Panorama interview was the proverbial "straw that broke the camel's back" so to speak. What is sad is that its been said that at the time of Diana's death, her and Charles actually were on the verge of a good, friendly relationship.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 07-31-2010, 11:58 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
To be honest here, I don't think that infidelity was the main issue of Diana's paranoia with Camilla. When Diana and Charles first started really "courting", Diana realized that Camilla and Andrew Parker-Bowles were part and parcel of Charles' close circle of friends and everyone knew of Charles and Camilla's past dalliances. Her sister Sarah, I believe, dated Charles after Camilla married Andrew. Diana had to be aware of this.

What I think was really Diana's main concern and resulted in her paranoia about Camilla was the intimacy which Charles and Camilla had. The intimacy of friendship and companionship that C&C shared over love of common interest, the same circle of friends and a bonding of understanding each other. This is what I think Diana wished she could have formed with Charles.. the intimacy. And in a fairytale storybook way, perhaps she imagined that once married, he would direct all that onto her.

Who actually slept with someone else first is besides the point. The two of them never really bonded in a close friendship nor did the efforts made during the marriage take root. That's why the attacks in public format came about.

The Panorama interview was the proverbial "straw that broke the camel's back" so to speak. What is sad is that its been said that at the time of Diana's death, her and Charles actually were on the verge of a good, friendly relationship.

You put into more words what I was saying - it was in Diana's head not in fact. She saw things and imagined more - she saw the friendship, the shared interests and because she couldn't or wouldn't join in she was on the outer and so let her imagination take over.

Being the step-granddaughter of Barbara Cartland where nothing happened until the wedding night and then everything was happy ever after filled her with dreams that weren't real and after the failure of her parents' marriage she had fanciful ideas of what marriage and love was all about but it was in her head and she made little or no effort to make her marriage work and Charles did little or nothing either.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 08-01-2010, 12:11 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,160
Well in that respect the blame or the failure of the marriage needs to be shared by more parties than Charles, Camilla and Diana. I am talking about their friends and family who didn't speak up.

As previously mentioned Charles and Diana were not a good fit. I think they had a good couple of years of marriage (good is probably stretching it how about manageable). The problem is they didn't have a good foundation that allowed them to weather the storms that were ahead.

Diana should be blamed because she was young and didn't have a good concept of what marrying an older man already set in his ways and royal to boot would be like. Diana was basically emotionally immature.

Charles for marrying a younger woman and assuming that because she lived on the fringes of royal life she knew what it was like. Charles was basically emotionally unavailable.

Camilla for betraying her wedding vows with Andrew and being available to Charles. Sorry, there is no justification for having an affair with a married man...and this idea of mine applies to Diana as well. You are not happy, get a divorce.

Their social circle (this includes friends and family) who should have better advised the two of them: the grandmothers (Elizabeth and Ruth) who were thinking of the wedding and not the marriage (its like the girl who is more concerned than planning the actual wedding day than working on the marriage); the Spencer sisters who should have advised Diana what married life is like and should have had conversations about her marrying such an older man. I blame them because I think they should have spoken up and I think at this point in Diana's life she was closer to her sisters than her friends. I am the oldest of four girls, and I share my concerns with my sisters if I think they are doing something harmful to them. Of course, its up to them to make the decision but they can't say I didn't share my concerns with them. ANd honestly, I would expect and do receive the same consideration from them. Zonk, what are you doing marrying that old man?! Charles should didn't have a also had a good friend or relative who said...what are you doing marrying this young girl? What do you have in common.

The sad thing is that if they had taken the time to know each other (not just the romance part thats fairly easy) they most likely would not have gotten married or they would have known what to expect. And it was a great lost...they could have been a good team. Say what you want about Diana but she was a hard worker and we all know that Charles is a hardworker. You have two hard workers, a beautiful young family, and a slight increase in the popularity of the BRF, and a modern King.....how could that be a bad idea?

I also think that a more mature Diana would have recognized that Charles was threatened by her popularity and worked to include him...maybe they work the line together instead of each of them taking a side....and more available Charles would have been like...everyone is here to see my wonderful wife. You want an example of that, look at WA from the Netherlands. Maxima is VERY popular and WA just looks at her (from my standpoint anyway) like Wow...I can't believe she is my wife. Isn't she great? In return, Maxima supports WA and everyone appears happy.

Instead we get two people who don't get it, and thinks everyone doesn't understand them and from my perspective, acted very selfishly. If you don't care about yourself or the British monarchy thats fine but darn it....think about your kids!
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 08-01-2010, 01:09 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
I also think that a more mature Diana would have recognized that Charles was threatened by her popularity and worked to include him...maybe they work the line together instead of each of them taking a side....and more available Charles would have been like...everyone is here to see my wonderful wife. You want an example of that, look at WA from the Netherlands. Maxima is VERY popular and WA just looks at her (from my standpoint anyway) like Wow...I can't believe she is my wife. Isn't she great? In return, Maxima supports WA and everyone appears happy.
Another great example is HM and the DoE. They compliment each other so well. And.. if you've not yet seen it.. check out our own gfg02's latest post The Queen and Duke of Edinburgh old and new picture thread. The smiles and looks between HM and the DoE are very telling and they span a lot of years. Ah for the lack of a second language... I can't read the comments but I can understand the looks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
Well in that respect the blame or the failure of the marriage needs to be shared by more parties than Charles, Camilla and Diana. I am talking about their friends and family who didn't speak up.
Then too there are the the few that did speak up that are to blame then too. Great Uncle "Dickie" Mountbatten was a great influence on Charles' life and I think when it came to getting married and doing his "duty" in regards to the heir and the spare, he was "lost at sea" without him. His father, the DoE reportedly had told him since the media was really pressing the issue with his relationship with Diana to "stop dithering and do something or let her go before her reputation is ruined" or something to that effect. He proposed to someone he barely knew.

Another good point about the War of the Waleses and the Panorama interview is that it was a turning point. (wherever there is a negative.... there's a positive if you choose to look for it) In the aftermath, I do think the Royal Family is more accessible to their public... the Queen just released photos on Flicker.. she uses 21st century technology and visits Google. We know the secret of the longevity of her breakfast cereal (tupperware). They all still maintain an aura of mystery as they believe they are not to be celebrated for who they are.. but are here to preserve and serve the people of the UK and Commonwealth nations. Both Diana and Charles, in their own way, have brought the people and their Royal family closer.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 08-01-2010, 01:19 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
Camilla for betraying her wedding vows with Andrew and being available to Charles. Sorry, there is no justification for having an affair with a married man...and this idea of mine applies to Diana as well. You are not happy, get a divorce
From what I've read over the years, theirs was a open marriage of sorts. They both had their interests on the side and accepted it. What brought about the divorce between Andrew and Camilla was actually when it was publicized and admitted by Charles that it was ongoing.

I agree with you though. I'm not upper crust society.. far from it but to me its just not possible to doubt a relationship you have and give full attention to another and work on both at the same time.

"Being in a relationship with two men at the same time is like playing frisbee and having two tossed at you at the same time. By the time you've decided which one to catch... you've missed both."
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 08-01-2010, 08:16 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,160
Osipi...I love your quote. I will keep my opinions about the triangle of Andrew, Camilla and Charles silent for now as it is off topic but they don't come off well either in my book. Open marriages?!

Yes, the Queen and the Duke are an excellent example! Phillip has basically been eclipsed by is wife since the day they married...he knows that she is the Top dog so to speak in the cameras, but the Queen allows him to rule the roost at home. But it is somewhat different, prior to his marriage Charles was and always was the focus of attention and now he wasn't if that makes sense.

For the record, if Dickie Mountbatten didn't die in 1979, I don't think Charles would have married Diana. I was having a conversation with someone and she stated that she think the competing influences of Dickie and the Queen Mum had a role in how Charles dealt with certain things like this marriage. Dickie wanted Charles to marry his granddaughter, Amanda (who wasn't keen on the idea) and the Elizabeth already thought that the Mountbatten had too much influence on the royals. It certainly would have been interesting to see who that turned out.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 08-01-2010, 11:17 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,738
Quote:
Osipi...I love your quote. I will keep my opinions about the triangle of Andrew, Camilla and Charles silent for now as it is off topic but they don't come off well either in my book. Open marriages?
Shhhsh about the quote. Actually its the first time I've put it out anywhere.. I was in the same situation that Diana was at the time. anyhow. open marriage... can't for the life remember who or where i heard it from. somewhere long ago on this board perhaps. that Andrew and Camilla had an open marriage.. meaning they were free to pursue other people in bed. It was also the lifestyle that Dickie and Edwina Mountbatten lived. I'm low class compared to the set that the royals live in. When you're angry.. you have hall sex.. that means making way in a very small corridor and just grumbling the usual obscenities as you pass each other. :0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
Yes, the Queen and the Duke are an excellent example! Phillip has basically been eclipsed by is wife since the day they married...he knows that she is the Top dog so to speak in the cameras, but the Queen allows him to rule the roost at home. But it is somewhat different, prior to his marriage Charles was and always was the focus of attention and now he wasn't if that makes sense.
She might be the Top Dog but knows and loves dogs that bark back. That's what Philip does. They are an unique couple that makes it work. They understand each other. For a long time Elizabeth was teased about starting out things with "my husband and I" She eventually dropped it.
As Philip put it best.. he's a pragmatist and his son is a romantic. In other words.. Philip saw Charles as a dreamer reaching for things that aren't practical.. As we've seen in our lifetime, the man that talks to plants and thinks of the earth as a living organism is perhaps right. They just think different. I do feel he was pressured into a marriage that he really didn't want to be in and the sad part is the girl he married had fairytale romantic dreams.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
For the record, if Dickie Mountbatten didn't die in 1979, I don't think Charles would have married Diana. I was having a conversation with someone and she stated that she think the competing influences of Dickie and the Queen Mum had a role in how Charles dealt with certain things like this marriage. Dickie wanted Charles to marry his granddaughter, Amanda (who wasn't keen on the idea) and the Elizabeth already thought that the Mountbatten had too much influence on the royals. It certainly would have been interesting to see who that turned out.
Charles, IMO, is a lot like his grandfather. Its not easy for him to speak what is on his mind.. but he's great at putting it on paper in words. Charles, as from what I read, did propose to Amanda Knatchbull and she said "no". He did what Uncle Dickie wanted but it wouldn't happen. Diana was laid out for him on a silver platter.. perfect virgin bride and of good stock.. the press got wind and he was cornered. I think before the wedding they'd only met 13 times? '

Its not rocket science to figure out where this marriage went wrong.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, interviews, martin bashir, panorama, princess diana


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
Prince Joachim and Alexandra Manley - 1995 pdas1201 Royal Weddings 83 05-12-2014 06:14 AM
Infanta Elena of Spain & Don Jaime de Marichalar 1995 Josefine Royal Weddings 79 04-11-2013 11:18 AM
The Princess Of Wales Visit To Japan In 1995 jun5 Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 52 10-19-2012 02:30 PM
King Abdullah on Star Trek: Voyager (1995) Humble King Abdullah and Queen Rania and Family 47 08-08-2011 08:55 PM
Prince William Interview - November 2004 sharon_rose Prince Harry and Prince William 11 06-08-2005 01:10 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth 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 fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hohenzollern infanta cristina infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince laurent prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess elisabeth princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marie princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen margrethe queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit wedding william


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 02:40 PM.

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]