The Panorama Interview: November 20, 1995

[Jacknch]

I think this sums things up very well. I think Diana's instinct ruled here, Charles had done his interview and she wanted to do hers. The fact that she sought advice on it with several people is interesting - everyone told her not to do it, but all along she felt she wanted or had to do it.

Many people seek advice hoping that the advice given to them is in line with their own initial thoughts - when the advice is the opposite to what they would like it to be, well you go back to basics and forge ahead regardless.

 

[Roslyn]

I think that Diana was at her lowest point in 1995 and she was not thinking straight. By then her marriage had been over in all but name for several years, and she had had that four or five year affair with Hewitt, and she and Charles were separated, but she still hadn't come to terms with that fact and moved on and carved out a life for herself within the constraints of the job she had married into and the limitations it imposed.

I suppose that having to go about her duties in those five or so years after the rot had set in but when they still had to pretend in public would take a toll on any but the strongest individual. I think that by the time they separated in 1992 things should have been settling down somewhat, but they seemed to get worse for Diana. I think at the time of the separation they should both have had some intensive and serious counselling to help them be kind to each other, or at least civil, for both their sakes and especially for the sake of the children. Perhaps they did, but from what we read about Diana after that time, any counselling they had doesn't seem to have done her much good.

Diana seemed to have her own reality and it didn't match anyone else's. 1995 was the time she wrote that memo about thinking Charles wanted to get her out of the way so he could marry Tiggy. Tiggy, not Camilla. This was the year she confronted Tiggy at a Christmas party and told her she was sorry about the baby. This was the sort of thing that was in her mind when she did that Panorama interview. She wasn't thinking or acting rationally. I think she was in a very bad way and needed professional help but she didn't get it. Based on what I have read about her I believe she was dead set against taking advice if she didn't like it. So what could anyone do? You can't force someone to consult a psychologist if they are not willing to participate. Unless she was demonstrating behaviour that indicated she was a danger to herself or others there was nothing anyone could do to force her to seek help.

 

[Denville]

I think that Diana was at her lowest point in 1995 and she was not thinking straight. had doesn't seem to have done her much good.

her to seek help.

I think most of us are the same about advice,. We ask for it but we don't take it unless it is what we already want to do. Chas seems to have been the same bout his friends and Di. if they did speak up to him (I am not sure they really did), , he clearly ignored it because he was keen to marry and I think he was attracted to Di enough to make himself believe she was the ideal wife...
I agree though that by the early 90s Diana was in a worse state... that she was a bit out of it, psychologically. She did need serious counselling but she was in such a state of depression and perhaps paranoia that she was not I'd say able to profit from therapy... I think those years of isolation, of feeling miserable with C, having the affair with Hewitt which had ended badly and fearing that she could not trust him to keep quiet. And she must have feared that if stories of any other affairs got out, it might really damage her standing with the public... all of that, got to her and she was a bit crazy. I use the word loosely. I don’t think she was off her head but she was not rational a lot of the time. She said those stupid things to Tiggy, feared that C was going to get rid of her to marry Tiggy...
Yet -in a way WAS she so crazy? So many people she confided in DID let her down...
And it wasn’t going to be easy to start a new life... Who was going to marry the former Princess Of wales? How was she to go back to being Lady Di Spencer? The nicest man she met, Khan, loved her but not enough to marry her... She had I think fought to get out of the RF, but then found that it was a pretty scary cold place. She was now a problem to the RF, and they would not really rush to defend her if people treated her with less than respect...
That’s why I feel she would have been better to live with the situation, put up with Charles seeing Cam and just get on with her own life. She was a beautiful woman, she might have preferred a husband but I think she would have found admirers, and had she stuck to her own class, I’m sure she would have found men who would know how to be discreet, and not rat her out to the papers.
I think the fighting to get out of the RF did send her a bit crazy and the finding herself outside, was just as scary and I’m not sure she really knew how she was going to live her life, as a divorced princess…
In a way, outing Charles did HIM a favour, in the long run. He had his ladyfriend. He was happy with Cam and once the public got used to the idea (it did take time), he was still POW and was likely to be free in due course to marry the woman he loved… but Di had gone into an alien environment at 20, was tied to them forever in a way because of her boys, but had to learn to grow up, in public, but OUTSIDE that cage she had beene in all her adult life.

I am not sure when Di was seeing Susie Orbach but it was early 90s I think. but that was possibly for help with her eating issues... I think she needed a combination fo marriage guidance (to help with the split form Charles) and one ot one therapy for herself.. but I dont think she was getting it. According ot some staff she was seeing different people, crystal jugglers, astrologists etc etc, and that she was in effect seeing too many people who weren't qualified and who weren't really doing her any good..and that she would say to each one "Oh you made me feel so much better" but it woud not really be true and she's be seeing someone else or moving on to another "guru" before long. And in the 90s she had less to occupy herself..the boys were at school, her marriage was officially over, and she wasn't doing a full programme of work...so she had too much time ot be alone and get herself into a state...

 

[Dee Anna]

A marriage break up is terribly difficult for anyone not wanting it and especially with young children involved.

Add to the mix you're the most famous woman in the world, the one every photographer wants to snap off guard (worth a fortune) and your soon to be ex husband is going to be (unless fate steps in) the next King of England, complete with mistress! (didn't they almost all?)

And everytime you step outside the door a smile expected to be planted on your face; because you had the fairytale.

 

[Denville]

True Dee Anna. She had things that the average divorced single mum hasn't got but she also had pressures that they haven't got. And she was a fragile person, mentally. I think when things were OK with her, and she had support she got on OK and wasn't too wobbly, but as the stress in her life mounted and she had lost a lot of her support, she did crack a bit. And the RF and their minions were not really on her side once she wanted out of the family.. she cut back her work, and her staff, trying to be more independent, and to give herself more time to do soemthing she enjoyed, but in practice that made things wrorse.
She found it hard to go on with work, I think that as she lost her more professional helpers like Jephson etc, and relied more on the "friends and staff who were sychophanitc" like Burrell, she found it harder to find work she enjoyed and could cope with. and her sons were at school or visitng their father's family, so she was lonelier...

 

[Mermaid1962]

The Panorama interview was the turning point for me as well. Particularly during the second part of the interview, I was getting the sense that there was something "not right". I detected a certain amount of grandiose thinking on her part, which was confirmed for me when I heard the story that she thought she'd make a good contributor to the peace process in Northern Ireland because she "could sort them out."

I blamed Charles and Camilla and saw Diana as the saint although after her Panorama interview I thought Diana wasn't the innocent party anymore as she portrayed herself to be.

 

[Osipi]

To be absolutely honest, I really didn't even know about the Panorama interview until I read about it here years later. As I've said, my "keeping up with Diana" was gazing at the tabloid headlines at the supermarket checkout. Of course the tabloids were really doing a bang up job persecuting Charles for the most part.

Now that I'm familiar with the interview, I can clearly see where that was the straw that broke the camel's back and cemented the end of the marriage. It did seem overly narcissistic with the phrase "I want to be Queen of Hearts" and the idea that she was so great, as Mermaid pointed out, could sort out Northern Ireland.

 

[Denville]

what she actually said was "I would like to be a queen in peoples hearts," in response to a question as to whether she thougth she was likely to be queen of England. So it wasn't quite as grandiose, just a rather extravagant "Sloaney" upper class way of talking.
Of course Panorama was a step too far esp In saying that she felt Charles might not be great as King.. that's what drove the queen to insist on divorce.

 

[Leopoldine]

I find that Panorama interview difficult to watch. Diana, IMHO, comes off as whiney and unpleasant. I'd rather remember her as a buoyant and graceful do-gooder, even if it's a limited aspect of her personality.

 

[Osipi]

II watch the Panorama program as it happened ...(and I saw Charles's interview also). Honestly I have more sympathy to Diana (in some things) simply because I think it was badly done of him to ask him to marry her considering everything we know.


LaRae

I didn't really even follow Charles and Diana much during their marriage. Standing in line during the checkout at a grocery store a few times a week and glancing at the tabloid headlines were about the extent of it. As the Wales' marriage broke down more and more in the headlines, I was more sympathetic to Diana's side because it kind of mirrored what I was going through in the early 90s. I didn't know then what I know now. Actually, I knew very little and with this in mind, I can see where Denville's statement that people would take it as gospel truth is right on the money.

It was actually coming here to TRF and getting a broader sense of what both Diana and Charles are like as persons, I was able to discern the difference between tabloid reporting and more information through books and interviews became a way of giving a more broader view of what actually was. It was only then that I could stop seeing Charles as the odious villain and realize that the issues in the marriage went far deeper than just all the sleeping around. It also made me realize that Charles, in my eyes, went into the marriage with good intentions to make it work but the integration of Charles the man and Charles, The Prince of Wales were perhaps in disagreement with each other. Charles, the man knew his heart wasn't totally committed to this marriage but Charles, The Prince of Wales was being pressured to "do his duty" and at the time of the proposal may have figured "why not" and went ahead with it.

A lesson I learned is that no relationship is ever clear and precisely seen by outsiders looking in. People see things differently. People see things from their own points of view and from their own personal experiences and can identify with different aspects of a couple. It still remains that we'll never really know the gospel truths and the feelings and the emotions that both Charles and Diana experienced during their own turbulent relationship. One of the players in that marriage is dead. The other one has moved on with his life.

 

[Denville]

I find that Panorama interview difficult to watch. Diana, IMHO, comes off as whiney and unpleasant. I'd rather remember her as a buoyant and graceful do-gooder, even if it's a limited aspect of her personality.

it was a part of her, just as the unhappy, slightly paranoid side was also a part of her. She was a good worker for charity causes, she had a real sympathy for people in need and she did her best to help them. She also was a little crazy, at times...having lived under severe stress for many years. Both parts of her are real, and the one does not negate the other.
but I do fautlt her a bit, no matter how unhappy she was, for attacking Charles as she did. He did push "his side" of the story a bit, through is friends and directly himself in the Dimbleby book, but I don't think that he saw her through quite the same distorted lens as she saw him.. I think some of his friends DID label her as "really bonkers" in talking to the press...but I think he was reluctant to do so and did not attack her in quite the way she attacked him..
I think that most of us have known times in marriage when there are bad times and one may not see one's partner in a good light.. whether it gets to the point of divorce or not..but most of us don't write books or put out an attack on the partner, publicly...

 

[Leslie Mae]

it was a part of her, just as the unhappy, slightly paranoid side was also a part of her. She was a good worker for charity causes, she had a real sympathy for people in need and she did her best to help them. She also was a little crazy, at times...having lived under severe stress for many years. Both parts of her are real, and the one does not negate the other.
but I do fautlt her a bit, no matter how unhappy she was, for attacking Charles as she did. He did push "his side" of the story a bit, through is friends and directly himself in the Dimbleby book, but I don't think that he saw her through quite the same distorted lens as she saw him.. I think some of his friends DID label her as "really bonkers" in talking to the press...but I think he was reluctant to do so and did not attack her in quite the way she attacked him..
I think that most of us have known times in marriage when there are bad times and one may not see one's partner in a good light.. whether it gets to the point of divorce or not..but most of us don't write books or put out an attack on the partner, publicly...

Diana was a very young girl when she married Charles. He should have never even thought about marrying her in the first place. It was a marriage doomed from the start. Charles should have shown some balls and stood up to his bully daddy and married the woman he actually loved. I can't fault Diana for going "bonkers" because she was in a loveless marriage and under so much stress and everyone around her (her family, the queen, her ridiculous husband) expected her to buck up and take the abuse they meted out without question. It must have been horrible for her. I felt sorry for her then and I still do. I just cannot get over my dislike of Charles and Camilla. He was and is an arrogant, mean, unfeeling man and Camilla was a snake. Now, 20 years later, everybody is trying to change the story. I don't believe for a minute they had nothing to do with this Junor biography. They did and it was timed to make them both look good. It's making me stabby.

 

[Denville]

What abuse?

 

[aigulminimalist]

It's a pity that we will not see a full, "raw" interview

<<As reckless as Diana was, she always reined in her remarks concerning the Queen and the Queen Mother. It is ironic that during the television interview that proved to be her royal nemesis, only her response concerning the Queen Mother was cut from the hour-long chat. She would not be drawn into answering Martin Bashir’s questions about the Queen Mother’s role in orchestrating the marriage and the help, or lack of it, she gave when Diana first entered the Royal family. Hesitant about attacking, however obliquely, the supreme national treasure, Diana was opaque, merely saying that the Queen Mother had been “very busy and did not have much time to help”.
>>

Destroyed: the letters that fuelled a Royal feud - Telegraph

 

[Osipi]

Diana may have skirted around discussing the Queen and the Queen Mum with the Panorama interview but one thing hit me that really struck out at the Queen and the DoE is that the Panorama interview was aired on Nov. 20th which is their wedding anniversary. Planned? Can't say for sure on that one but it wouldn't surprise me one bit.

 

[Elan]

About the light hearted moment when Bashir pressed for the number of calls made to Oliver Hoare...somewhat trivial nonsense in the scheme of things back then. That said, the way she offered the denial, casting doubt on who made the calls, and her being a touch uncomfortable, was the 'most' entertaining and enjoyable part of the interview imo.

The reaction by the BRF - surely turned out to be a watershed moment..of egos bruised and a sense of betrayal deep enough that they would never allow themselves to see it as anything but a M-A-J-O-R breach of protocol.

For people that never met Diana, Bashir largely succeeded in capturing a side to her that we otherwise would not have seen. Is she melodramatic or creative at times, of course. Don't forget it was considered must-watch television when it aired. The public got to see a very personal side to her, that they otherwise would not have seen.

 

[Leopoldine]

About the light hearted moment when Bashir pressed for the number of calls made to Oliver Hoare...somewhat trivial nonsense in the scheme of things back then. That said, the way she offered the denial, casting doubt on who made the calls, and her being a touch uncomfortable, was the 'most' entertaining and enjoyable part of the interview imo.

The reaction by the BRF - surely turned out to be a watershed moment..of egos bruised and a sense of betrayal deep enough that they would never allow themselves to see it as anything but a M-A-J-O-R breach of protocal.

For people that never met Diana, Bashir largely succeeded in capturing a very personal side that we otherwise would not have seen. Is she melodramatic or creative at times, of course. Don't forget it was considered must-watch television when it aired. The public got to see a very personal side to her, that they otherwise would not have seen.

The heavy eye make-up with the "doe eyes" way of having her head down and looking up at Bashir was off-putting. As HM would say, it was a stunt.
I watched it when it aired, and I didn't think Diana looked attractive in the film. I was shocked.

The eye make-up was my number one focus at the time I watched it. I couldn't believe a woman would go on television with that ghoulish look. I wish I could say I was taking other, more meaningful aspects of the interview into account, but I wasn't. She looked bad.

 

[Elan]

I watched it when it aired, and I didn't think Diana looked attractive in the film. I was shocked.

The eye make-up was my number one focus at the time I watched it. I couldn't believe a woman would go on television with that ghoulish look. I wish I could say I was taking other, more meaningful aspects of the interview into account, but I wasn't. She looked bad.

Knowing the discussion would be more on the serious side, the idea of radiating sunshine with either body language or fashion, would not have served her well imo. This was also a different woman from the youthful one we saw years earlier. Tormented about events past and present, a subdued expression was apparent, as you highlight. When she did manage to laugh a little, a good deal of the charm seemed to return.

 

[Elan]

Wondering if others feel the interview is in some way underrated, as far as any positive attributes that have gone unrecognized. For ex.,

A) Engaging, she holds the audience in an entertaining way throughout

B) Unusual (new) Gothic mascara makeup

C) As far as romantic success, she was over the moon with Hasnat

D) The O. Hoare telephone stuff was offbeat and amusing

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Wondering if others feel the interview is in some way underrated, as far as any positive attributes that are unrecognized. For ex.,

A) Engaging, she holds the audience in an entertaining way throughout

B) Unusual (new) Gothic style mascara makeup

C) As far as romantic success, she was over the moon with Hasnat

D) The O. Hoare telephone stuff was altogether lol amusing

I don’t see anything amusing about the Hoare phone calls. If she hadn’t been the Princess of Wales she might have been criminally charged. There was nothing positive about this situation and illustrates how obsessive Diana could be.

 

[Osipi]

I have to admit that up until I joined TRF, I knew nothing about the Panorama interview. It was done at a time when my own life was in a very mixed up state in the marriage department much like Diana's was. I did eventually read the transcript of the interview but I've never really sat down and watched it in total (not sure if its even available with closed captioning which usually, for the most part, unreadable and unreliable on YouTube).

I just generally see it as a bad idea to air one's dirty laundry and intimate details in public. I can understand why that interview was the final straw that broke the camel's back too and was the final curtain on the marriage.

 

[Denville]

I haveI just generally see it as a bad idea to air one's dirty laundry and intimate details in public. I can understand why that interview was the final straw that broke the camel's back too and was the final curtain on the marriage.

No it wasn't a good idea. I did sympathtise with her more then, but her attempt to hit back at Charles who had ALSO confessed adultery on TV, did backfire. People did sympathise, but some people were horrified.. or thought that she was very misguided to do it.. and her wrods about Charles and the succession were what finally drove the queen to insist on a divorce, so it pushed Diana out of the RF forever...
But If it was wrong of Diana to admit her affair on TV, it must also be wrong of Charles to do the same.

 

[Osipi]

I think that should I have been involved in discussions like this back when the Panorama interview happened, I would have definitely empathized with Diana and felt her actions warranted because basically, I was going through a similar situation and with my emotions at the time, it took a lot of work to *not* act out as Diana did. I would have lived vicariously through her.

Basically, I think Charles said it all about the entire mess at the time. "They've turned us into a bloody soap opera". Then again, both parties contributed to making it a public soap opera themselves.

 

[Elan]

Let's not forget Bashir's role in shaping it to something eminently watchable. He's fine in places, and rough edged in others. Also interesting is the fact - how soon she expressed reservations to someone, after taping concluded. Bottom line however, is that her ability to engage people, involved a certain warmth and largely entertaining manner. That is what's misunderstood about the interview. If you focus solely on ettiquette then you are missing out, is what I'm saying.

 

[Kataryn]

I understood Charles' interview to be a try to save Camilla's reputation. To make clear that while he has a mistress, he did not have her from the beginning, as Diana claimed in the Morton-book but only started when his marriage had "irrevocably broken down".
While Diana accorded blame to him and did only take a little bit of responsibility of all the things that had gone wrong. So IMHO he did it for the love of his life, to acknowledge her and make it clear that she was innocent in this whole mess while Diana wanted revenge. Again, IMHO.

 

[Denville]

I think that should I have been involved in discussions like this ba
Basically, I think Charles said it all about the entire mess at the time. "They've turned us into a bloody soap opera". Then again, both parties contributed to making it a public soap opera themselves.

Well yes. I agree Diana started it, but I think she was hoping that by making a fuss, she might get permission to get a divorce.. so she did the book. THough later, she veered around I think on whether she wnated a divorce. (I sympathised because I liked her better than Charles, and I thought that she was doing the Morton book etc to push for a separation and tehn a divorce, so that she was free to live more happily than she had been doing... However I don't think that she was really planning so coolly.... she was very ambivalent).

But Charles added to the soap opera by going on TV and admitting adultery.. which drove Diana, I think to try and outdo him by a TV interview in which she admitted her affair with J Hewitt...
And her interview drove the queen to finally put her foot down and insist they end the marriage and there was probably some kind of non disclosure agreement - which effectively cooled down the War of the Waleses...

 

[Denville]

I understood Charles' interview to be a try to save Camilla's reputation. To make clear that while he has a mistress, he did not have her from the beginning, as Diana claimed in the Morton-book but only started when his marriage had "irrevocably broken down".
While Diana accorded blame to him and did only take a little bit of responsibility of all the things that had gone wrong. So IMHO he did it for the love of his life, to acknowledge her and make it clear that she was innocent in this whole mess while Diana wanted revenge. Again, IMHO.

How did it save Camilla's reputation? It was to divert blame form himself... if he wanted to save Camila, he would have refused to discuss his marriage or any other personal things like that. It was his outing of the affair with Camilla, that drove her husband to get a divorce...It worked out Ok for her in the end.. but I think at the time she was scared that she had now been definitively outed, her husband, who had been willing to protect her, had now left her alone.. and while Charlres mgitht WANT to marry her it wasn't certain that he would be able to...

And as I recall Diana said she took 50% responsibility for what went wrong.. which seems a fair bit to me.. hardly "Only a little bit".

 

[Osipi]

I'm still torn between thinking what Diana's motives were. On on hand, was she wanting to "bring Charles to heel" and wise him up to what he had at home and forced by royal decree of his mother to behave himself, honor Diana and give Camilla up and that is where his love and adoration belonged? Or, on the other hand, was Diana was actively trying to get out of the marriage and taking prisoners with her as she went? The old hell hath no fury as a woman scorned kind of thing.

When you think of the things that attracted Diana to Charles, one of them was the belief that he could never divorce her, it makes me wonder if she believed up until the time of the divorce that it could never actually happen and that, mentally for her, was made her act so recklessly.

 

[Lee-Z]

my opinion is that by that time she knew really well she could use the media and had a better public image than Charles, so imo she thought she could use this:

Bottom line however, is that her ability to engage people, involved a certain warmth and largely entertaining manner.

especially because she thought:

When you think of the things that attracted Diana to Charles, one of them was the belief that he could never divorce her, it makes me wonder if she believed up until the time of the divorce that it could never actually happen

which basically allow her to deal a blow with the interview to which she thought the RF could not react
It didn't turn out the way she had expected..

Mind you, i do blame Charles for his actions in that marriage (one that he probably shouldn't have entered)...but the Panorama interview was not a smart way to react.. it's a bit like Tessy of Luxemburg is behaving in social media at the moment during her divorce

all imo obviously

 

[Denville]

I think that might be true.. Its so hard to know what she was thinking.. but I think she sort of wanted out of the marriage, to be free to find someone who really loved her and to escape the prison of royal life. But perhaps she also was scared of moving out of Royal life. She ahd been in it for all her adult life.. knew little of the world as she had only been a young girl during her couple of years of Sloane ranger life.. and in truth didn't want to leave.. just wanted to establish some kind of position, within the RF but more independent.. (of course she could nto have that, but she may have believed she could.).
ANd yeah I think maybe because the war of Wales had gone on for a couple of years, and the queen seemed to be just ignoring it all and not taking any action.. and she thought that she could manoever into some kind of semi independent position.... and that the queen would never want them to actually divorce. But the queen while I think she DID try to ignore it and just let things rumble on till they went quiet.. finally DID reach a point where she realised she had to intervene and that the War could not go on.. That a divorce however unthinkable at first, was the only solution..