When did your opinion of Diana change and why?

[Roslyn]

Welcome, Czarina and ellenw. It's nice to have two new posters expressing well-reasoned opinions.

Though there is potential for fireworks given the controversial nature of the subject of this thread, I think we all play quite well with each other.

[CasiraghiTrio]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

Well, no, but then nor would a lot of women. Mind you, some men might just reach for a bottle of vodka or a shotgun while others would shrug it off.

I think Skydragon might have been querying what sort of femininity you meant. You said you thought Camilla wasn't a beacon of feminine sensitivities, but I'm not sure what you mean, exactly. She's got a lot more self-control than Diana in that she can face considerable adversity without letting her emotions show, and that sort of temperament is more familiar to Charles because it's the way most of the women in his immediate family have been. However, Camilla does appear to have the sort of nurturing warmth to her which is also a fairly typical feminine trait.

Elspeth, you never cease to amaze me. The above quotation renders me nearly speechless. I could not have found a better way to describe my own impression of Camilla. The woman has been the object of scorn since the 80s, yet has never lost her cool.

***************

I am also confused with the reference to "feminine sensitivities" (from Czarina's post). I respect Czarina's posts very much (and welcome her to the forums!) But this reference baffles me. I don't understand what is meant by "feminine sensitivities." I think it is a very subjective idea and perhaps means something different for various women.

In one sense, Camilla typifies old-school femininity as a very traditional country-bred woman who puts family first. She is also a lover of fine gems, and that is very feminine, no?

Diana was also very feminine in her own ways: being emotional, for one, and for another, she had a very vulnerable feminine quality that translated in pictures. Perhaps Czarina meant to say that Camilla does not possess the same kind of vulnerable, emotional qualities that Diana's photographic essence portrayed. I believe Camilla can be very emotional (maybe even the private Camilla is vulnerable) when the situation calls for it, but I believe also that Camilla has command over her emotions, as Elspeth already said ("self-control"). I hesitate now......... I recall Camilla and William at the 2006 Cenotaph ceremony. Quite a somber occasion, calling for stern faces. Yet Camilla and William failed miserably at concealing their laughter over a private joke. They did it again at the diamond anniversary service. Well, everyone is allowed a slip here and there.... We shouldn't abuse Camilla too much for her occasional giggle fits, anymore than these arcane MSNBC reporters are chastising Hillary Clinton for having tears in her eyes! Bottom line: Who cares??!!

[normalil]

It's refreshing to read and discuss this subject, without abuse and arguments I must say. Also to see such support for Camilla, a dignified and regal lady I think, who understands what it means to be "royal."
Never a fan of Diana, I don't think that she will ever disappear from the media, simply because of her physical beauty. Had she looked like Mother Teresa of Calcutta, she would have been forgotten by now.
The level of anger and spite levelled agains Camilla by "The Diana Circle," an organisation here in England, shocked and quite scared me on Camilla and Charles's wedding day.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

TheTruth, you are so naughty, as if we ever fight!

You're right, we don't fight. In fact, it's much better to have different opinions otherwise we would get bored to always agree. Though, I can tell that with you I never get bored
----

IMO, Camilla is as feminine as Diana. Quite differently I have to say but they still shine with that same grace, that same "magic". If you ask men which one they like the most, I'm sure that some will say Diana but this choice will be made because of their ignorance and what tabloid pictures show (people who don't get interest in the whole story between Diana and Camilla will always make this conclusion : Camilla = evil ; Diana = angel. I had enough experiences that can actually prove that's unfortunately the truth ). No one can be more feminine than another since many agree that even men have a part of femininity so we should ask ourselves if perhaps Charles is more feminine than Camilla right ?

[iowabelle]

Originally Posted by normalil

Never a fan of Diana, I don't think that she will ever disappear from the media, simply because of her physical beauty. Had she looked like Mother Teresa of Calcutta, she would have been forgotten by now.

You're exactly right. I noticed that during the period between the two funerals of the ladies.

Speaking of comparisons between Camilla and Diana, I wonder how Diana would have reacted had she been pelted with baked goods at the local gas station. Hmmm.

Another thing that has crossed my brain... Diana never realized that her mystique grew because of her marriage into the royal family. Diana did not have that allure until Charles "discovered" her. Having left Charles and the RF it was inevitable that her allure to the public would wane. (This happens all the time in marriages that fail, where one partner has power and privilege and the other not so much -- such as Donald Trump and other high profile couples I can't remember; I'm so old the gray cells are crumbling. )

[sirhon11234]

Ivana Trump is still very popular but Marla Trump is somewhat forgotten.

[CasiraghiTrio]

Originally Posted by normalil

It's refreshing to read and discuss this subject, without abuse and arguments I must say. Also to see such support for Camilla, a dignified and regal lady I think, who understands what it means to be "royal."
Never a fan of Diana, I don't think that she will ever disappear from the media, simply because of her physical beauty. Had she looked like Mother Teresa of Calcutta, she would have been forgotten by now.
The level of anger and spite levelled agains Camilla by "The Diana Circle," an organisation here in England, shocked and quite scared me on Camilla and Charles's wedding day.

There is actually a real organization, with trademark and tax-status, called The Diana Circle? Scary!

[Chimene]

I don't think that she will ever disappear from the media, simply because of her physical beauty. Had she looked like Mother Teresa of Calcutta, she would have been forgotten by now.

Precisely. As Isbel so eloquently said, it's a pity she placed her trust in such shallow ground. And funny enough, surprise... surprise... we're talking about Rupert Murdoch again... Is there a part of this tragedy we did not cover?

I don't think I can say anything else that has not already been said brilliantly in this thread. I'm only sorry I miss all the fun. Hooray for the power of ideas and discussion as well as all participants.

[zhontella]

In Christopher Andersens book, "After Diana" (pro-Camilla all the way), he admits to what changed people's opinion about Diana after she died:

Excerpt: "Even more surprising was how quickly the pendulum of public opinion swung from adoration for Diana as a humanitarian and larger-than-life figure to contempt for the "unbalanced" and "spoiled" young woman who "did not know her place" as a member of the royal family. Having written extensively about the RF in 2 bestselling books and profiled Prince William for Vanity Fair, I already knew that this was no accident. The trashing of Diana's memory had less to do with the fickleness of the British public or a handful of memoir-scribbling disgruntled former servants than it did with a highly orchestrated plot to replace the most beloved woman in the realm with the most reviled woman in the realm -- and ultimately make Camilla queen."

[ysbel]

I would disagree with Christopher Anderson's assessment.

Charles and his office have never had the skill of public relations and I don't think they could have pulled off such a coup.

I do think the pendulum swung towards less favorable news about Diana after she died precisely because it was so hard for someone critical of Diana to get heard when she was alive. I heard some critical comments about Diana when she was alive and they sounded reasonable but they received the utmost contempt and scorn when she was alive.

There were a lot of people whom the world simply refused to hear when Diana was alive who finally got heard when she was dead.

[Elspeth]

From what I remember, people were beginning to be able to be critical about Diana in the months before her death because of all her holidaying, particularly with the Fayeds; after the revelation of the nuisance calls to Oliver Hoare and the way she was blamed for the breakup of Will Carling's marriage, her image was beginning to get rather tarnished. If I remember right, Private Eye or one of the other magazines had a story about how Diana's image was getting distinctly frayed round the edges but after her death she was canonised for a while. Then the tell-all books started to come out, and they began to paint a consistent picture of someone who wasn't perfect, and to show that Charles wasn't the villain of the piece with Diana as sweet innocent heroine but that the reality was more even-handed.

[tinkerbell1948]

I could never reconcile the "sweet Diana" /"bad Charles/Royal Family" picture that was painted in later years.

I think now they were ill matched from the start although I too was swept up in the fairytale/ thrilled for Charles/adored the wedding/cried with happiness the whole 9 yards. .and yes I was 32

I voted for the Panorama interview because for me that truly opened my eyes to how manipulative Diana could be....the black dress/black eyeliner/demure downcast face looking up through her eyelashes, calculated replies of the wronged wife..just............so........staged

I support Charles and Camilla and certainly don't think they were blameless through the whole affair (no pun intended) , for the times though and gosh only 27 years ago Charles was "required" to marry the virgin unblemished bride and produce the heir and the spare. If there was one good thing that came out of this whole mess it is that William is much more free to pursue his rmomance with Kate (but that's for another thread lol)

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by ysbel

I do think the pendulum swung towards less favorable news about Diana after she died precisely because it was so hard for someone critical of Diana to get heard when she was alive. I heard some critical comments about Diana when she was alive and they sounded reasonable but they received the utmost contempt and scorn when she was alive.

There were a lot of people whom the world simply refused to hear when Diana was alive who finally got heard when she was dead.

Plus this, I think: (from the inquest transcripts: Q: coroner, A: Richard Kay)
Q. Generally speaking, was the Daily Mail a newspaper that
4 was fairly supportive of her and her position?
5 A. It was. It found in Diana someone with whom our readers
6 identified and we were therefore quite supportive of
7 her.

End of quote.

Someone with whom the readers identified. I think the way she lived the last month of her life and the way she died made absolutely clear, that she was not someone with whom one could identify. As soon as the media realised that, their tune changed.

There had been a similar change after the first glitter had worn off the newly wed princess and Diana reacted to it by allowing the media to come closer to her, by allowing the media to turn her into a person people could identify with. Only after her death it turned out that she wasn't as approachable and as normal as she appeared to be. Another quote by Kay (same source) about the Diana-Simone Simmons relationship and the end of it:
Q. What, then, were Diana's views on this particular woman?
A. I think her relationship, in her view, had reached its
natural course and she no longer welcomed her interest
in her life.
Q.Did she express any other views that she had?
A. She just did not want to speak to her again.

End of quote.

Before we had heared that Diana used to phone Simmons for hours at night and suddenly, new phone number, no more interest, that was it. I think Diana through a behaviour like this, very regal indeed, had made herself quite some enemies and after her death she could not longer keep them in check with her charming personality.

Interestingly enough I doubt the RF was behind that move, they had done what they wanted right after the divorce, as Raine Spencer said at the inquest:

A. "I felt sorry for her [that is Diana]. I think she had
1 probably not realised that once she had divorced,
2 the Royal Family would shut her out. In addition to
3 this, her sister, Lady Jane Fellowes, had told her that
4 because of her husband's position, she could not see her
5 anymore and her brother Charles had withdrawn an offer
6 of a cottage on his estate because he did not want
7 the press intrusion that would result."

IMHO those who had come to know her simply waited after the divorce how her public image would turn out. Diana had made such terrible (and terribly stupid) mistakes while married, so one would have been right to wonder if it was possible for her to be more cautious in the future. But if she had been able to show that she could survive being just "Diana, princess of Wales" instead of HRH The Princess, I guess some doors would have opened up again. As it was, she made the mistake to trust Dodi and his driver and thus left the stage, leaving only her reputation - for the wolves.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by zhontella

In Christopher Andersens book, "After Diana" (pro-Camilla all the way), he admits to what changed people's opinion about Diana after she died:

Excerpt: "Even more surprising was how quickly the pendulum of public opinion swung from adoration for Diana as a humanitarian and larger-than-life figure to contempt for the "unbalanced" and "spoiled" young woman who "did not know her place" as a member of the royal family. Having written extensively about the RF in 2 bestselling books and profiled Prince William for Vanity Fair, I already knew that this was no accident.

Diana's popularity was already on the decrease in the UK, due to the amount of holidays she was taking and people's realisation that she was not 'just like them'. The early editions of all the papers had to be reset, because they all apparently carried derogatory articles about her. Had she lived, the media would have worked away at further discrediting her. One of the reasons, IMO, for the despicable display at KP after her death, was out of a sense of guilt, because they had encouraged the pursuit of her for a few pictures and because they had 'abandoned' her.