The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997)

Join The Royal Forums Today
View Poll Results: When did your opinion of Diana start to change and why?
Morton book (1990) 25 9.80%
War of the Waleses (starting 1990) 20 7.84%
Squidgygate (1992) 12 4.71%
Hewitt affair (1993) 17 6.67%
Charles' interview (1994) 5 1.96%
Panorama interview (1995) 43 16.86%
Phone calls to Oliver Hoare (1994) 14 5.49%
Dodi al-Fayed (1997) 23 9.02%
Other (please explain) 96 37.65%
Voters: 255. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #421  
Old 01-10-2008, 08:00 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 2,696
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.
__________________

__________________
  #422  
Old 01-10-2008, 10:18 PM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
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.


Quote:
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??!!
__________________

__________________
Chewsteraghi on Tumblr. Schmichaelira on Twitter. Tumblr aka obsessivechewsteraghidisorder. Be warned: I'm weird.
  #423  
Old 01-11-2008, 10:56 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Blackpool, United Kingdom
Posts: 87
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.
__________________
  #424  
Old 01-11-2008, 12:21 PM
TheTruth's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France
Posts: 2,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
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 ?
__________________

Please, help find a cure for ALS

Because it matters...
  #425  
Old 01-11-2008, 04:10 PM
iowabelle's Avatar
Royal Highness
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Des Moines, United States
Posts: 2,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by normalil View Post
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. )
__________________
  #426  
Old 01-11-2008, 04:13 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
Ivana Trump is still very popular but Marla Trump is somewhat forgotten.
__________________
"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
  #427  
Old 01-12-2008, 10:57 AM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by normalil View Post
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!
__________________
Chewsteraghi on Tumblr. Schmichaelira on Twitter. Tumblr aka obsessivechewsteraghidisorder. Be warned: I'm weird.
  #428  
Old 01-12-2008, 05:00 PM
Chimene's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 506
Quote:
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.
__________________
The need to be right is the sign of a vulgar mind. ~ Albert Camus
  #429  
Old 01-12-2008, 11:34 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 210
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."
__________________
  #430  
Old 01-12-2008, 11:52 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
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.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
  #431  
Old 01-13-2008, 12:01 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
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.
__________________
  #432  
Old 01-13-2008, 07:20 AM
tinkerbell1948's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Country SA, Australia
Posts: 149
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)
__________________
Tink
  #433  
Old 01-13-2008, 07:47 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel View Post
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.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #434  
Old 01-13-2008, 08:24 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by zhontella View Post
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.
__________________
  #435  
Old 01-13-2008, 08:55 AM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,402
^ I agree that the media image of Diana was severely declining at the time of her death. The thing is, however, after her death, her media image reached canonization. She became Saint Diana and remained so for a very long time. She might have remained so for the general public, who don't read squat about Diana (most people, beyond the TRF world, are just sucked in by the nauseating pictures) but for the Inquest, which to any reasonable person shows her to be all the things Jo of Palatine already stated above.
__________________
Chewsteraghi on Tumblr. Schmichaelira on Twitter. Tumblr aka obsessivechewsteraghidisorder. Be warned: I'm weird.
  #436  
Old 01-13-2008, 09:43 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Blackpool, United Kingdom
Posts: 87
Someone asked about the Diana Circle. Yes, it's a real organisation, founded here in UK, but with branches now world wide. A group of them spent Charles and Camilla's wedding day outside Kensington Palace, giving bitter and spiteful interviews to the press. I spent the wedding day on Windsor High Street with a banner which said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." A group of Diana fans carried one which said, "What will the children look like?" The police removed this one, but allowed me to keep mine. (I sound a bit crazy, but I'm not, honest!)
In addition, did anyone see "Coronation Street" the other night. (For overseas members, this is a terrible, addictive soap-opera!) There was an uncalled for comment about Camilla featured...
__________________
  #437  
Old 01-13-2008, 09:58 AM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
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.
You are all right about the news reports towards the end of her life but I did find this comment to express what I meant more than anything I did say.

I think that because so many people identified with Diana while she was alive, the Daily Mail and other magazines like People found a large and receptive audience for news that was generally favorable to Diana. But the same people who identified with Diana didn't want to hear not nice news about her and so the magazines didn't publish it or ridiculed anyone who said anything unfavorable towards Diana innocuous though it was.

I can see where there was a brief canonization of Diana after her death but honestly I think the shine began to wear off by a year after her death. Its interesting because a lot of people have expressed dismay at the pattern of why others want to speak ill of the dead but I think it is precisely because Diana was dead that for some people she was already history and that broke their ability to identify with her. It is as if the live Diana was such a powerful and charismatic magnet that her charisma made it hard for people to see her whole life and all of her relationships in perspective and make a judgment of her life.

But once she was dead, the immediate force of her charisma was gone and so people could first look beyond the charisma and started looking at her life as a whole. As with most people, I think they found some good things and some bad things.

This happens to other charismatic figures. The Kennedys have gotten their fair share of negative press once they died. Even the Queen Mother who was immensely popular while she was alive was recently called Britain's Marie Antoinette by the Daily Mail.

So for charismatic figures there is something that stops people from being critical when they are alive that ceases to protect them when they die.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
  #438  
Old 01-13-2008, 10:04 AM
TheTruth's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France
Posts: 2,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio View Post
^ I agree that the media image of Diana was severely declining at the time of her death. The thing is, however, after her death, her media image reached canonization. She became Saint Diana and remained so for a very long time. She might have remained so for the general public, who don't read squat about Diana (most people, beyond the TRF world, are just sucked in by the nauseating pictures) but for the Inquest, which to any reasonable person shows her to be all the things Jo of Palatine already stated above.
True. In fact, it shows how media can be so schizophrenic. They first adored her, then they despised her and when she died they eventually canonized her ... . If you fear that when someone tragically dies you might feel bad about it because you played with her image, you shouldn't say anything then. Just look what's happening with Britney Spears : she was the new princess of pop music and now, people see her as a bad mother, drug addict, etc. if she dies tomorrow, everyone will say :"Oh she was a remarkable singer and dancer, etc.". Does someone see sincerity here ?
__________________

Please, help find a cure for ALS

Because it matters...
  #439  
Old 01-13-2008, 10:24 AM
Chimene's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 506
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
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.
Unfortunately, it was the final act. What I found really sad about her life is somewhere in her was either a great stoic woman or a great feminist. She could have been a woman who sacrificed herself for duty, money and power or one who wanted to live with integrity and true happiness. She accomplished neither due to her psychological makeup, which I think is tragic.

Also, I'm beginning to think that people truly wanted believe in the fairytale, and for that reason, they are unable to let go of the "perfect Princess image". I say image because after all fairytales princesses are supposed to be pure, unlike what we know of Diana.

Here are some interesting questions (to me anyway)! What are the psychological ramifications for William as leader? What impact did the war of whales really have on him and his ability to lead one day? I'm not sure if is is the right place for these questions, but mods please remove as you wish.
__________________
The need to be right is the sign of a vulgar mind. ~ Albert Camus
  #440  
Old 01-13-2008, 10:34 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Blackpool, United Kingdom
Posts: 87
Interesting question Chimene, and one which i have often pondered. I think he will be well loved, simply because of who his mother was, and she is still so universally popular. I think he suffered as a child, being used as a pawn by his mother, but what effect this will have on his abilities of Kingship we will have to wait and see. I am sure that he is now old enough to follow the example of his father and grandmother, and not his mother.
__________________

__________________
Closed Thread

Tags
andrew morton, diana princess of wales, dodi fayed, james hewitt, jonathan dimbleby, oliver hoare, prince charles, prince of wales, princess diana, squidgygate


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
The Change of the Act of Succession - 1979 Constitution Change GrandDuchess Royal House of Sweden 276 06-30-2014 12:52 AM
What would you change? Lena Royal Chit Chat 20 06-23-2010 06:31 PM
Change of name of our community to TRF... Andy R Forum Announcements and Admin 2 08-29-2004 04:29 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit duchess of cambridge dutch royal history engagement fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games olympics ottoman poland pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess of asturias queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit the hague visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:28 AM.

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]