When Did The "Celebrification" of Diana Begin?

[Denville]

No-one on the Diana threads has stated that Oliver Hoare or Carling have no right to be h


And why is Diana responsible for the loss, if any, of these men's reputations or for people criticising their role? As I've stated in my previous post, if a husband decides to commit adultery does he bear no responsibility?

And No, I realise it's never the right time, the right thread, the right anything to get to the nitty gritty of Camilla's motivations and part in the destruction of Diana and Charles's marriage. It's remarkable really.

I dont blame Camila for thte destruction of the marriage, i think it was a marriage that was definitely going to end in some kind of failure, but I do think "if Di's charity work does not "make up" for her affairs, what about Charles? Does HIS work as POW and his charities count as more important than his sexual follies?
if she was unfit for the RF and as Princess of wales because she had some affairs, what about him?
As for Carling and Hoare, they have been pretty much gentlemen in that they have refused to talk about Diana and Carling has denied any sexual involvment with her. I haven't seen anyone denigrating them.. and if people have clalled Hewitt " a cad", its becuase he is...

 

[Dee Anna]

In answer to the original question, it probably started from the outset!

This rather staid (dispite having it's own young members) Royal Family had a new and fresh member ..... barely out of her teens and already The Princess of Wales; less than a year after that, still only 20, mother to the 2nd in line to the throne!

She shook things up a bit and made the family more interesting to read about.

 

[Denville]

well the RF has takne in new members over the years. I think ti was something about Diana herself that made her a star, made her stand out from the rest and gradually overshadow the others. And of course there had been a long time since there had been a princess of Wales, ie a young new female who had come inot the RF from outside.. but had a high ranking in the Royal Hierarchy. And it had something to do with the times.. the 1980s were "big" and vulgar, the press had more and more power. Social deference to the RF was waning, but admiration of glitz and celebrity in the press and the public was growing. The newspaper editors of the 80s were engaged in circulaton wars, and they didn't care about upsetting the RF, in pusuite of a story.. they relished the idea that they had the power to shake up and anoy the RF.
And Diana too increasingly didn't care if she upset the RF.. so she was willing to collaborate to an extent...

 

[MARG]

When you think about it, it was the days of 'Dallas' and 'Dynasty' when everything was up front and in your face. The days of big hair, big jewels, big fashion, big money and big scandal.

I don't think we can easily dismiss Diana's charisma. While it drew people to her like a magnet, it also drew scandal rags in search of a big story. From the moment Diana was photographed with the sun shining through her skirt, she was cemented into their lenses as an ingénue in the BRF.

The royal wedding wasn't big, it was huge, and she appeared in big hair, big (or more importantly, real) jewels, in the biggest fashion statement of the decade. From that moment she became the most photographed woman in the world. A tribute to excess in style, fashion and jewellery and they quite forgot she was a real person and the BRF was a real family, not a syndicated TV show.

 

[COUNTESS]

It is easy, Diana came at a time when the RF was staid, and frumpy. And there she was a star. Lovely and got even more attractive. Very fashionable, which may not be the epitome a person's worth, is how woman are often judged. And she was not stuffy. She showed warmth and kindness, without gloves, so to speak. She showed affection and touched her children and hugged and kissed them. And, as she grew into the role, she became a physical knockout. She was the attraction. Catherine, can be the same, but not in the same position and not needy as Diana. There is no permanent mistress. Diana loved the camera and the camera loved her. Charles was needy, too. He could not stand in her shadow. And he did. What actually transpire between them as a couple, know one really knows. They grew apart for several reason, I think, one being they had nothing in common. Two Charles has headier interests and needed a mother. He got that in Camilla. She is not in front. And he got that back in Diana's days, too. Diana was foolish. Her affairs and such put her in a difficult light. She was not going to be Queen Alexandra, to his Edward VII. he was not going to invite Mrs. Keppel in.

 

[Denville]

I don't believe they grew apart because I don't believe they were ever really together. I don't realy understand all this Mrs Keppel stuff, but I think that Charles did want a wife who didn't overshadow him, but that's what a royal wife (or husband of a royal woman) is required to do, be the support act. If she is more dazzling than he is, she has to turn it down a bit. Diana didn't intend to overshadow him at first but her whole appeal was SO amazing that I think she could not help being more popular and it was hard for him to avoid being a b it jealous.
He also wanted a woman who shared his interests. Diana didn't do that and before long, she pretty much stopped trying or fooling herself. So Charles had the worst of botht worlds, a woman who was more adored than him in public, and who didn't give him any real companionship in thteir private life.
I think if they had gotten on in private, he would have adjusted to her being more publicly loved, but Diana didn't get on with him in private.
and in time, she began to use her star appeal to deliberately put him down...
I don't believe her affairs had anythng to do with the downfall of the marriage. I think by the time she started having lovers it was all over.

 

[Mermaid1962]

In my mind, the '80s and Diana are almost inseparable. It was a glitzy, aspirational decade, and she was its most famous face. The younger members of BRF had become so enmeshed in popular culture that they was seen as corresponding to characters in American soap operas. The situation begged for a plot with villains, vixens, and good girls and boys.

When you think about it, it was the days of 'Dallas' and 'Dynasty' when everything was up front and in your face. The days of big hair, big jewels, big fashion, big money and big scandal.

 

[Denville]

I think ti was a lot to do with the circulation wars of newspapers and the increasing power of the Meida, TV, papers etc. And the increasing lack of social deference and the papers beig willing to do anyting to get a story, and not caring if it annoyed the Palace

 

[Elan]

I don't believe they grew apart because I don't believe they were ever really together. I don't realy understand all this Mrs Keppel stuff, but I think that Charles did want a wife who didn't overshadow him, but that's what a royal wife (or husband of a royal woman) is required to do, be the support act. If she is more dazzling than he is, she has to turn it down a bit. Diana didn't intend to overshadow him at first but her whole appeal was SO amazing that I think she could not help being more popular and it was hard for him to avoid being a bit jealous.
He also wanted a woman who shared his interests. Diana didn't do that and before long, she pretty much stopped trying or fooling herself. So Charles had the worst of both worlds, a woman who was more adored than him in public, and who didn't give him any real companionship in their private life.
I think if they had gotten on in private, he would have adjusted to her being more publicly loved, but Diana didn't get on with him in private.
and in time, she began to use her star appeal to deliberately put him down...
I don't believe her affairs had anythng to do with the downfall of the marriage. I think by the time she started having lovers it was all over.

At the end of the day I can not quite see -- how her creating a level of hysteria in public in some way 'hurt' the marriage. Why to some degree it wouldn't be been seen as a rare, unusual, exciting thing, in terms of how much press it brought both parties and the entire monarchy ? If a fervor surrounding town appearances was reminiscent of what took place with the '64 Beatles, it could have been cause for high spirits and fun...rather than disillusionment perhaps.

At some late date she reflected on where she stood within the Royal family: "They have so misinterpreted me.." Suggesting she did not feel the world revolved around her, wasn't preoccupied with her 'place' in the hierarchy regardless of newspaper coverage or public adoration.

 

[Denville]

For one thing the RF aren't the Beatles and while they want a reasonable popularity, they are also hierarchical in how they think. Charles was meant to be the leader of the couple and Diana outshone him. Since their marriage was already shaky, his reaction to this was negative....

 

[Queen Claude]

I think that the celebrification of Diana started when she took the picture with the school children in the see through skirt. No that did not make her a phenomenon but that definitely put her on the map, and once the media and public sensed that she was "the one" then it grew, and of course took off once she became the Princess of Wales.

 

[jacqui24]

For one thing the RF aren't the Beatles and while they want a reasonable popularity, they are also hierarchical in how they think. Charles was meant to be the leader of the couple and Diana outshone him. Since their marriage was already shaky, his reaction to this was negative....

I think part of it is how Charles was raised. He has been the heir to the throne since he can remember and he has always been the focus of the attention. Now all of sudden, not only is Diana outshining him, but he’s getting bad reaction from people that’s on his side at walkabouts. That’s foreign to him. He was glad Diana was accepted and popular with the public at first, but over time, that grew old. I do think he’s learnt to deal with that much better in his older years as his sons eclipsed him in popularity. It has to do with self-confidence as well.

 

[Denville]

Well obviously he is a lot happier in his personal life, now, and problaby feels that it is inevitable that his 2 sons, being younger are going to attract more media attention and he's Ok with that because he has a happy marriage now. But his marriage to Diana was always shaky and his being sidelined by the Press for her, upset and annoyed him. And I think the RF as a whole were a little alarmed by Di-mania.. THey were used to a certain admiration.. but this was crazy adulation.. and while Di at first didn't actullaly DO anything to cause it, I would say that they like Charles, were not too happy that she took so much of the focus off them and off Charles.....

 

[Blog Real]

I think Diana has always been popular since the wedding. Of course, being young, beautiful and naive helped people to like her. Diana was only 19 when she married Charles.
Then BRF is the most well-known royal family in the world and Charles and Diana's wedding was broadcast on TV all over the world and that helped everyone to know Diana.
Then came the births of the children, the problems in the marriage, the divorce, all the news about her and her problems with Charles and BRF.
And people didn't like that Charles would have traded Diana for Camilla.
And of course her charity projects have further increased her popularity.
Diana died young, the whole world cried over her death and Diana became a myth.

 

[Sandy345]

I think that Diana became popular from the engagement on. she was a "natural" and the public took to her.

 

[Curryong]

Yes, I remember, even before the engagement, people being enchanted with the glimpses they got of Diana. There were remarks about her looking so fresh and pretty and young, and hopes that she might be the one Charles would propose to. The fact that she was an Earl’s daughter and therefore aristocratic also reminded people of the Queen Mother’s background.

It was a different time of course, a great deal of magazine coverage and no social media for a start! And there was more deference towards the royal family in general than now.

The ‘celebrification’ of Diana definitely began with the engagement though, and only increased with the fairytale wedding. There were huge crowds in Wales for their first tour together.

 

[Alison H]

There were a lot fewer "celebs" in the '80s than there are now. There was no reality TV. There were certainly no "influencers". The "footballers' wives" culture didn't really get going until the 1990s. There were plenty of actors and pop stars, but they didn't have the cachet of being a princess. Princess Margaret had been quite a celeb in the '60s, but there wasn't as much TV and magazine coverage then as there was in the '80s, and it wasn't as international. I think she was in the right place at the right time and it all seemed like a dream story, like Jackie Kennedy 20 years earlier. And she became part of a celeb world - you can't really imagine the Queen dancing with Wayne Sleep or John Travolta,

 

[Sandy345]

Princess Margaret did associate with the celebrities of her time. She liked to entertain and invited celebrities over. Margaret also got tons of attention in the fifties, the character in Roman Holiday played by Audrey Hepburn was allegedly based on Princess Margaret. Diana had liked to dance as a teen and enjoyed ballet so she'd be a natural to like to dance as Princess of Wales.

 

[Leopoldine]

I think ti was a lot to do with the circulation wars of newspapers and the increasing power of the Meida, TV, papers etc. And the increasing lack of social deference and the papers beig willing to do anyting to get a story, and not caring if it annoyed the Palace

I agree very much with this. More magazines means more paps.

The boom in celebrity gossip magazines coincided with certain aspects of Diana's life in the late 80's. She got involved with a sort of new breed of charity events that combined luxury branding, celebrity glitz, huge amounts of corporate sponsorship, media partnerships and very worthy causes. there was one gala that combined Tiffany, Diana and Aids charities.

Diana was also slyly competing with Charles and Fergie for good media attention and handled it all competently.

 

[Rayal]

For me it began with the fishing and mirror thingy.


My family is originally from Aberystwyth, Wales and I have family on both sides of the pond. So I went there on vacation three times and spent the day with my great uncle who had retired as the mayor of Aberystwyth. In his front room I started to sit down on the couch and he said, "Oh no, please sit in this chair." It was just a normal looking yellow chair and after I did he pointed at a picture on the wall and started smiling. It was of a young Prince Charles sitting in the same chair. So I look around the room and all the pictures are of Prince Charles and my uncle John Caleb. He was very proud of this as you can imagine.



He explained that in 1969, Prince Charles came and lived with him for a couple of months while he went to the University of Wales to learn the Welsh culture and language. This was a run up to his coronation later that year to be crowned the Prince of Wales.



So my uncle talked about him quite a bit. Explaining what type of person he was as he could see I was interested. In the end he did say some negative things about him, but I sort of just chuckled at them.



Once back in the states I traveled a lot and my family would always send me clippings about Prince Charles. Then my sister sent me pictures of him and his new girlfriend and clippings which included the story of her using the mirror which I found very amusing. Eventually I dropped ol' Charles and began following her, especially after they got married.



Growing up in Missouri and watching movies and tv including Disney every weekend, I developed a vision of what a princess would look like, and how she would act. So years later, after they were married, it dawned on me that she WAS a real princess. Beautiful, radiant, elegant, hundreds of words to describe her. I was fascinated.


It all changed again of course with the 'interviews' and the 'book' etc., but it was the understanding of how she really took to people and they to her as well. She cared, she was human, she held little babies, and children with limbs missing from landmines, aids patients, the elderly, the lepers, and the dying. Here is someone that is rare in my life and I'm not ashamed one bit to say that I admired her and yes, I was attracted to her in every way. Most men were.



I then ignored the yellow trash papers and their ridiculous made up stories so as to sucker people in to buy their trash. I knew of her mistakes, and of her childish side as she was young, and I was embarrassed for her as she reacted poorly in some cases. She was human though and that made her down to earth and that is why I really sympathized with her.



When she passed away my family and I were devastated and my mother and sister adored her and they cried for days over her tragic death. Here is a lady, a princess that we have never met, so it is a strange thing to feel passionate with grief, and very hard to explain. Its real though and so I just accept and go on.



If God had to choose one person to send back down for a life unfinished, I would hope it would be the 'Last English Rose'.

 

[Sandy345]

I don't believe they grew apart because I don't believe they were ever really together. I don't realy understand all this Mrs Keppel stuff, but I think that Charles did want a wife who didn't overshadow him, but that's what a royal wife (or husband of a royal woman) is required to do, be the support act. If she is more dazzling than he is, she has to turn it down a bit. Diana didn't intend to overshadow him at first but her whole appeal was SO amazing that I think she could not help being more popular and it was hard for him to avoid being a b it jealous.
He also wanted a woman who shared his interests. Diana didn't do that and before long, she pretty much stopped trying or fooling herself. So Charles had the worst of botht worlds, a woman who was more adored than him in public, and who didn't give him any real companionship in thteir private life.
I think if they had gotten on in private, he would have adjusted to her being more publicly loved, but Diana didn't get on with him in private.
and in time, she began to use her star appeal to deliberately put him down...
I don't believe her affairs had anythng to do with the downfall of the marriage. I think by the time she started having lovers it was all over.

I don't think any spouse should have to "tone it down" to please his or her spouse. Love I think wants both partners to excel and each be proud of the other. I think the jealousy issue was Charles' issue and he should have addressed that. Had Diana been jealous I'd have suggested the same thing. JFK famously said that he was the man who accompanied Jackie to Paris. He won praise for that comment.

When Diana started he first appearance with Charles in Wales she did not want to leave the car she was so nervous. But she went out and the public took to her, I think she was a natural.

I think it was over before Diana moved on. Charles according to various sources was "done" with Diana after she had the heir and spare. I think Diana gave up on the marriage in the late eighties. Allegedly she wanted to reconcile in 1989 but Charles said no.

Diana and CHarles DID indeed have interests in common. Both enjoyed skiing and went on ski holidays, they both liked water sports and swimming, and both enjoyed music. DIana loved classical music of Italian opera and the Ballet. She became good friends with Pavarotti and was patroness of the Royal Ballet Co. Diana religiously watched Charles play polo prior to the separation and went each year to Balmoral until the separation. The problem was that Charles preferred Camilla and also did not love Diana when he married her. He told this to his biographer in 1994 And it's all in the book The Prince of Wales.

I think Diana would have remarried but certainly not to Dodi, had she lived. I think she and Dr. Khan perhaps were not "over."

Aside from walking a few steps in back of ER II, Philip was allowed to be himself and he would not be one to tone it down.

 

[Kitty1224]

It has to be after her engagement.

 

[Elan]

Top Gun was released in theaters this summer. I was wondering if anyone recalls the original in '86, a fleeting scene with Val Kilmer and uncredited actress appears in it.. Hair style was pretty close.

Tom and Diana did know each other....is it possible ???

 

[Curryong]

That’s not Diana. Her nose in profile was more prominent than this actress’s. And Diana’s different hairstyles through the years were copied by many other young women.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

To put in perspective: the "celebrification" is nowhere so infected in society as in the UK. Good grief. The few times I have been in the UK, the amount of attention even the most irrelevant hiccup of a C-category "celebrity" gets in the "press"...

Maybe the "celebrification" indeed started with Lady Diana Spencer but most likely any other bride to the Prince of Wales would have caused the same phenomenon because the invasion of celebbies in media started with the rise of those wrecked Murdoch papers and that was in the same era as Diana.

 

[Denville]

what on earth would Diana be doing in a film?

 

[Elan]

what on earth would Diana be doing in a film?

Agree, but folks in the casting department were caught up enough with Diana, that it was no accident for them to cast an actress as close in features to this young lady. Curryong makes a good point, but other than that slight difference, would you say for sure it's not her ?

 

[Denville]

Agree, but folks in the casting department were caught up enough with Diana, that it was no accident for them to cast an actress as close in features to this young lady. Curryong makes a good point, but other than the nose less prominent, would you say for sure it's not her ?

what re you saying? Do you serious think that Diana during her married years,as a working princess, was secretly taking part in a film.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

To put in perspective: the "celebrification" is nowhere so infected in society as in the UK. Good grief. The few times I have been in the UK, the amount of attention even the most irrelevant hiccup of a C-category "celebrity" gets in the "press"...

Maybe the "celebrification" indeed started with Lady Diana Spencer but most likely any other bride to the Prince of Wales would have caused the same phenomenon because the invasion of celebbies in media started with the rise of those wrecked Murdoch papers and that was in the same era as Diana.

the Celebrity style definitely stayed with her and she relished it like life itself. I don’t think any other princess of Wales will have attention like Diana, but of course they will talked about.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

I don't think any spouse should have to "tone it down" to please his or her spouse. Love I think wants both partners to excel and each be proud of the other. I think the jealousy issue was Charles' issue and he should have addressed that. Had Diana been jealous I'd have suggested the same thing. JFK famously said that he was the man who accompanied Jackie to Paris. He won praise for that comment.

When Diana started he first appearance with Charles in Wales she did not want to leave the car she was so nervous. But she went out and the public took to her, I think she was a natural.

I think it was over before Diana moved on. Charles according to various sources was "done" with Diana after she had the heir and spare. I think Diana gave up on the marriage in the late eighties. Allegedly she wanted to reconcile in 1989 but Charles said no.

Diana and CHarles DID indeed have interests in common. Both enjoyed skiing and went on ski holidays, they both liked water sports and swimming, and both enjoyed music. DIana loved classical music of Italian opera and the Ballet. She became good friends with Pavarotti and was patroness of the Royal Ballet Co. Diana religiously watched Charles play polo prior to the separation and went each year to Balmoral until the separation. The problem was that Charles preferred Camilla and also did not love Diana when he married her. He told this to his biographer in 1994 And it's all in the book The Prince of Wales.

I think Diana would have remarried but certainly not to Dodi, had she lived. I think she and Dr. Khan perhaps were not "over."

Aside from walking a few steps in back of ER II, Philip was allowed to be himself and he would not be one to tone it down.

Royal consorts male or female endeavor to never overshadow their spouses, the Duke of Edinburgh for all his behavior never tried that and always walked several steps behind his spouse. Diana in the beginning unintentionally was the focus of the press because of her facial expressions and in their eyes a “good looking” woman, but over time started to use the press against the RF for the wrong reasons.