When did your opinion of Diana change and why?

[cde]

Originally Posted by carewandroscoe

my opinion of princess diana has not changed. she is a direct descendant of john churchill, older sister arabella put out for buckingham, first duke of marleborough. diana spencer married beneath her social class.

Diana married beneath her social class? Really? Then why did the Spencer family want so desperately to marry into the RF? Something they wanted to do for a number of generations IIRC. Last time I looked a HRH Prince tops an Earl.

[andrew]

Originally Posted by rani

Whatever her actions,Diana was used. She was used to obtain an heir and spare. She was used by her husband,who really didn't want anyone but Camilla. She was used by Camilla who wouldn't let go. The entire royal family knew what was going on,and willingly sacrificed a young woman. Her subsequent actions were to carve a place for herself,and eventually when she lost an unwinnable battle,an attempt to maintain her place in her children's lives and a useful role for herself.

We all loved Diana because she has made the Fairy tale seem like a whole. There was the Prince there was the beautifull girl, the wedding, the two nice children and a 'happily ever after' would have fit this enumeration.
Unfortunately we are not living in a Fairy-tale nor do the Royals. What happened to Charles, Diana and Camilla was rather 'common'. Life can create far more worse situations than theirs.
Was Diana a victim? Well, certainly she was, but doesn't everyone of us consider him/herself a victim? It's a matter of the point of view.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by rani

Whatever her actions,Diana was used.

Being used does not exonerate from all. We are all used for this and that, that's nothing special. Diana had her own agenda - she was pretty willing to produce an heir and spare. She was pretty willing to be a princess - the only thing she didn't want was to become part of a real family, wife to a real husband instead of the prince of her dreams. She used the RF, the media and the whole world as her playground and she lost the game in the end. That's pretty sad for some, I can understand that. But she was not an innocent bystander taken into a foul game, she was very much the player there. And only history will tell if she was not at the source of the foul game at all.

The Rf had a lot to loose if they only used Diana. being part of a family "firm" has much to do with take, that's right. But you have to give as much as you take. But for Diana, what she was given was never enough, it was simply never enough. No wonder Charles turned to somebody who prefered giving to taking!

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by rani

Whatever her actions,Diana was used. She was used to obtain an heir and spare. She was used by her husband,who really didn't want anyone but Camilla. She was used by Camilla who wouldn't let go. The entire royal family knew what was going on,and willingly sacrificed a young woman. Her subsequent actions were to carve a place for herself,and eventually when she lost an unwinnable battle,an attempt to maintain her place in her children's lives and a useful role for herself.

I take it your opinion of Diana hasn't changed then. Your statement that Camilla wouldn't let go, is of course only your opinion!

Could it be that far from Diana being used, she was the one doing the using. After all she got fame and fortune out of the alliance.

[sirhon11234]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

No wonder Charles turned to somebody who prefered giving to taking!

That still doesen't excuse his affair with Camilla...

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

That still doesen't excuse his affair with Camilla...

Well, for me it was love, simply love. And I believe they tried to be as "good" as they could, but once you're entangled in a triangle with at least one vindictive partner there is not much to do to make it a clean operation. Charles and Camilla coped - somehow. Maybe they were not perfect but I believe that they did at least want to spare the kids.

[sirhon11234]

Alright, so you understand why they did it. But do you condone their affair?

[diamondBrg]

This Diana/Camilla/Charles situation is just not that complicated to me. It is not the first nor will it be the last time this has happened, including in the Royal Family.

Diana, to put it bluntly, was STUPID. She thought she could have it all, that this Prince on a white horse would "save" her from her big, bad, uggies dragons of life, he did not.

For some reason that still escapes me, this common girl thought she could take on the Royal Family IN THE UNITED KINGDOM of all places and win, obviously that was a mistake in judgment.

Diana thought being the mother of a future King would insulate her, another stupid assumption on her part. No matter what else, SHE WAS STILL AN IN LAW, NOT BLOOD. The same could be said for the late Queen Mother and the living Prince Philip. They MARRIED into that family, they were not BORN into it, BIG DIFFERENCE.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

Being used does not exonerate from all. We are all used for this and that, that's nothing special. Diana had her own agenda - she was pretty willing to produce an heir and spare. She was pretty willing to be a princess - the only thing she didn't want was to become part of a real family, wife to a real husband instead of the prince of her dreams. She used the RF, the media and the whole world as her playground and she lost the game in the end. That's pretty sad for some, I can understand that. But she was not an innocent bystander taken into a foul game, she was very much the player there. And only history will tell if she was not at the source of the foul game at all.

The Rf had a lot to loose if they only used Diana. being part of a family "firm" has much to do with take, that's right. But you have to give as much as you take. But for Diana, what she was given was never enough, it was simply never enough. No wonder Charles turned to somebody who prefered giving to taking!

As I do agree with most of your post Jo, I don't think Diana was actually "refusing" to be part of the family. The fact that the RF isn't an "average" family was already a factor to Diana's sadness and unwillingness to integrate the RF, I mean by that that she should have been aware it wouldn't be the best cure to her search of comfort. Her own family was torn apart ; she should have looked for someone who would have time for her and willing to build something without any conditions.

[diamondBrg]

Originally Posted by TheTruth

As I do agree with most of your post Jo, I don't think Diana was actually "refusing" to be part of the family. The fact that the RF isn't an "average" family was already a factor to Diana's sadness and unwillingness to integrate the RF, I mean by that that she should have been aware it wouldn't be the best cure to her search of comfort. Her own family was torn apart ; she should have looked for someone who would have time for her and willing to build something without any conditions.

Do you really believe there is such a thing, I assume you mean unconditional love? Most adults understand that outside love novels, there is no such thing, it is romantic nonsense.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

I take it your opinion of Diana hasn't changed then. Your statement that Camilla wouldn't let go, is of course only your opinion!

Could it be that far from Diana being used, she was the one doing the using. After all she got fame and fortune out of the alliance.

I agree but the fame and fortune will never give you happiness .

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by diamondBrg

Do you really believe there is such a thing, I assume you mean unconditional love? Most adults understand that outside love novels, there is no such thing, it is romantic nonsense.

No, what I meant was that she should have looked for someone who was like her : searching for the same thing.

[Roslyn]

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

Alright, so you understand why they did it. But do you condone their affair?

I can't speak for Jo, but I condone their affair. And I condone Diana's affair with Hewitt, too.

I think it was clear by 1986 that the marriage was over in all but name and that the parties were both desperately unhappy in a way that is probably impossible for us to comprehend. The situation is addressed in some detail by Dimbleby in Chapter 20 of his biography of Charles. At page 394 he writes: "Given the pressures to which they were both subjected by the demands of public life, theirs would have been an exceptionally testing partnership even if they had been able to stumble towards true companionship. However, the Princess's persistent and intense distress combined with his bafflement and exhaustion to make that modest ambition, which they both shared, impossible to realise. Thus, by 1986, their marriage had begun slowly to disintegrate in what were, for both of them, the most excruciating circumstances. That handful of their friends who knew and understood felt only compassion and pity for their shared predicament."

In November 1986 Charles wrote to a friend, "Frequently I feel nowadays that I'm in a kind of cage, pacing up and down in it and longing to be free. How awful incompatibility is, and how dreadfully destructive it can be for the players in this extraordinary drama. It has all the ingredients of a Greek tragedy....I fear I'm going to need a bit of help every now and then for which I feel rather ashamed. All I want to do is to help other people..."

Any other couple would have been able to separate and divorce without the world watching, but these two both thought they were stuck in this Hell for life. They both needed something the other couldn't provide. They both needed friends, and lovers. Charles turned to his old friends whom he had expelled at Diana's behest, and Camilla too. Diana turned to Hewitt for friendship and love. I don't hold the fact of their affairs against either of them.

[sirhon11234]

I can't speak for Jo, but I condone their affair. And I condone Diana's affair with Hewitt, too.

I think it was clear by 1986 that the marriage was over in all but name and that the parties were both desperately unhappy in a way that is probably impossible for us to comprehend. The situation is addressed in some detail by Dimbleby in Chapter 20 of his biography of Charles. At page 394 he writes: "Given the pressures to which they were both subjected by the demands of public life, theirs would have been an exceptionally testing partnership even if they had been able to stumble towards true companionship. However, the Princess's persistent and intense distress combined with his bafflement and exhaustion to make that modest ambition, which they both shared, impossible to realise. Thus, by 1986, their marriage had begun slowly to disintegrate in what were, for both of them, the most excruciating circumstances. That handful of their friends who knew and understood felt only compassion and pity for their shared predicament."

In November 1986 Charles wrote to a friend, "Frequently I feel nowadays that I'm in a kind of cage, pacing up and down in it and longing to be free. How awful incompatibility is, and how dreadfully destructive it can be for the players in this extraordinary drama. It has all the ingredients of a Greek tragedy....I fear I'm going to need a bit of help every now and then for which I feel rather ashamed. All I want to do is to help other people..."

Any other couple would have been able to separate and divorce without the world watching, but these two both thought they were stuck in this Hell for life. They both needed something the other couldn't provide. They both needed friends, and lovers. Charles turned to his old friends whom he had expelled at Diana's behest, and Camilla too. Diana turned to Hewitt for friendship and love. I don't hold the fact of their affairs against either of them.

I understand both Charles and Diana had affairs but I don't condone it.

Coming from parents whose marriage also disintergraded and turned to other people for comfort, I witnessed first hand how affairs could make a marriage much more worse. After seeing the failures of my own parent's marriage, C&D's marriage and also the romantic relationships of my friends; I have realized that there is no point in staying in a relationship that cannot work.

Life is too short to stay in a troubled relationship, a year after the divorce Diana lost her life thats sad. She wasted 15 years of her life in that marriage.
I of course respect your opinion very much Roslyn.

[BeatrixFan]

At the end of the day, human beings aren't designed to stay with one person. Even if it's just a look at attractive boy in the newspaper or a little daydream about that guy in the supermarket, we just aren't monogamous as a species and the sooner society drops al