When did your opinion of Diana change and why?

[sirhon11234]

So that leads me to believe that Diana was more to blame for the failure of their marriage than she wanted the public to think.

It takes two to make a marriage work and it takes two to make a marriage fail. Both Charles and Diana share equal blame for the failure of their marriage. The sad truth is they both gave up.

 

[sirhon11234]

"The children should have had more stability, not a mom running around on yachts. I was particularly critinot going to be marrying merely for love, right?

She would have been happier (and still alive) had she developed a capacity for non-public relationships, and for a different kind of intimacy. It makes me terribly sad, still, that she didn't get a chance to do that (perhaps she would have, had she had more time as a divorcée.

I agree that she should not have been "running around".
However, your interesting comment that your ex husband was so interested in Diana, I have never heard of a man who was the LEAST bit interested in her...[/QUOTE]

I've come across a few (myself included) I'd say her beauty caught my interest first then her life story.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I was thinking the same thing while watching the wedding and found myself unsettled by the thought. Diana's death was unbearably sad for her sons, but they seem to have wonderful, loving memories of her to comfort them. Unless Diana had found great personal fulfillment in the years post-1997, I think that she would have been a very difficult mother-in-law. As it is, Kate can study the good things about Diana's time as Princess of Wales without having to deal with the reality of what she was like in her private life.

While certainly not wishing anyone dead, it is my opinion that William will have a more healthy marriage and that Kate will have a MUCH easier go of it by only having the memory of Diana around at every turn, rather than the real deal.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

I know several men who were/are interested in Diana, my own first husband is the one who got me into watching royals - he was fascinated by the pressure put on Charles, at that time, to choose off what American media were calling "The List," and the quest for a certified virgin.

I also think that assuming that Diana would have been a poor mother or mother-in-law had she lived, is a bit mean-spirited. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course, but some opinions say way more about the person opining than the person opined about.

I wonder, then, do people feel that the only reason William turned out to be such an apparently normal, nice, healthy young man is due to his father's input? If Diana would be a mother-in-law-from-hell, then she couldn't very well be a very loving mother. I believe she was a very loving mother (and that Charles, in his way, is a very loving father - and Camilla is a loving step-mother).

Loving parents accept the new family member into the family.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I know several men who were/are interested in Diana, my own first husband is the one who got me into watching royals - he was fascinated by the pressure put on Charles, at that time, to choose off what American media were calling "The List," and the quest for a certified virgin.

I also think that assuming that Diana would have been a poor mother or mother-in-law had she lived, is a bit mean-spirited. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course, but some opinions say way more about the person opining than the person opined about.

I wonder, then, do people feel that the only reason William turned out to be such an apparently normal, nice, healthy young man is due to his father's input? If Diana would be a mother-in-law-from-hell, then she couldn't very well be a very loving mother. I believe she was a very loving mother (and that Charles, in his way, is a very loving father - and Camilla is a loving step-mother).

Loving parents accept the new family member into the family.

I would describe Queen Alexandra as a loving mother but she was the mother-in-law from hell and I see Diana as much the same. To Diana her sons were her life to a large extent and I think she would have had a lot of trouble dealing with the fact that her sons loved someone else and the fact that the media would have another media darling - who would also end up with the position she wasn't going to have - Queen.

 

[katherine2001]

Please do not think that I do not love Diana, or seek to diminish the influence or major role she played in her children's lives. I have no doubt that she was and is still loved by the people of England and worldwide. I love Diana and as an American woman, I did not at all condemn her actions. I felt that she as completely justified. But Diana was not without her flaws which made her even more endearing to many. I was just like you, and you can click on my screen name for the proof of posts I made years ago defending Diana to the very core of my soul. I always felt she was in the right.

Diana did change the course of history but my point is that I no longer believe that all of her motives were pure or wholly based upon selflessness. I do believe that she did not want her children to be bought up in the old way which is why she worked hard to be a good mother and teach them about being human. But I also believe like any human being, she was also out to stick it to Charles and Co. no matter the cost. Katherine of Argon did not act as a glamourpuss. She fought for her rights until the bitter end, but she did so with grace and class and with the clarity that no matter what her scamp of a husband did, she owed it to God and country to maintain dignity for the crown. That is the revelation that I came to in my altered opinion.

I am only referring to her airing of the royal dirty laundry that she purposely would leak to press and the Martin Bashir interview. Whatever hell Diana chose to give Prince Charles and his family in private is her right. She was totally justified, IMO. However to air the business so publicly or help it be brought to light, I am afraid was not a very good example for her children. William and Harry are far more discreet and I am sorry but I give that to the Queen and the Prince.

Also, Diana's changing history was not simply because of her positives but the negatives between her and Charles. The Duke has waited this long to claim his bride in order to help prepare her the way his mother wasn't. To give her time to really decide whether this was the right life for her. He did the right thing. And God bless him for seeing the errors of his parents' ways and choosing to act accordingly.

I agree, Vita. I loved Diana, but like the rest of us, she was not perfect. She was an excellent mother in many ways, but due to the wounds of her own childhood, she made some mistakes--for instance, bringing William into the middle of her marital problems with Prince Charles. If you need to talk to someone about them, you find another adult, not one of your children, especially a young child as he was at the time.

I also agree about airing the dirty laundry in the marriage, and both she and Prince Charles made this mistake. Both of them revealed things about their marriage that I imagine were very hurtful and damaging to Prince William and Prince Harry. I think both of them wanted to get back at each other so badly that they didn't stop to think of what damage these revelations might do to the boys.

Diana was a wonderful woman in many ways, as Prince Charles is a wonderful man in many ways. However, there are good things and bad things about all of us. We should be careful about putting people up on pedestals, because you can miss knowing the person as the really interesting person that they really are.

I think both Prince William and Prince Harry have traits from both parents, and both parents should be proud of the boys that they raised. I think they did a wonderful job.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Charles is and was a good father. What you don't seem to understand is that he always had a mistress. To some that is not acceptable. Diana was one of those people. She, foolishly, by some standards, hoped to have a real husband. She got a philanderer, from the beginning. It is easy to viilfy a dead person. One of fragile hopes. The RF have standards that exclude them from the real world, where people take reponsibility. Yes, he and Camiila are happy. He should have married her, but he was manipulated by His Family and ruined another's life. Camilla was the other woman. How easily we forget.

So Diana was lying when she said that she and Charles were happy in the early years and that Charles went back to Camilla in 1986. Diana's version of events is 1986 and not earlier.

I always love people who know more than Diana about the state of her marriage.

 

[Kataryn]

If Diana had lived, I think she would have been able to accept help and love from her sons (and a bit from Charles as well). I seem all as craving to have a happy family life and that's what Camilla gives them. I believe a more mature and grown-up Diana would have been able to see that love means caring for the others more than for herself and as she was a really caring person, she IMHO would have been happy when she really got to feel that the others wanted her to be a part of the family.

She was striving so hard to be a good person and to overcome her own faults, so I think she would have been able to overcome old resentments and start anew with Charles and her sons. But when you are part of a family, you open up your arms to new members, so I think she would have received Catherine warmly and would have been fast in letting love grow between them.

 

[sirhon11234]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course, but some opinions say way more about the person opining than the person opined about.
QUOTE]

I agree, very insightful Kaimi.

 

[Mirabel]

sincerely, I wished she had found someone to spend her life with & could have lived happy years out of sight -- as much as possible being the mother of the princes
but part of me also wonders if she would have been happy without the attention of the press

I doubt she would; she loved the attention too much.

Diana craved attention, complete devotion from the people around her. When they failed to provide it (and such failure was inevitable) she dropped them and moved on.
Who were he friends, in the end? Just about every person who'd ever been close to her was said to be estranged at the time of her death: Elton John, Lady Jane, Sarah Ferguson, etc., etc.

I don't believe she would ever have been happy, but the divorce accelerated what became a downward spiral. (I've read that she truly did not want the divorce, but the Queen had had enough of the scandals and insisted they part).

It's sad she died so young, but I think if she'd lived, her life would be as sad and lonely as Princess Margaret's became.

 

[sirhon11234]

Who were he friends, in the end?

Luchia De Flecha, Lana Marks, Jemima Kahn, Lady Anabel Goldsmith, Rosa Monckton, Lady Elsa Bowker, and there were some others. At the time of death she and Elton John reconnected over their friend Gianni Versace's murder. And yes at the time she wasn't on the best of terms with her sister Jane and Sarah, Duches of York and her mother.
I believe most of her friends said there were times when Diana was difficult and needy but there were times when she was caring and kind but in there times of need she gave them a shoulder to cry on.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I doubt she would; she loved the attention too much.

Diana craved attention, complete devotion from the people around her. When they failed to provide it (and such failure was inevitable) she dropped them and moved on.
Who were he friends, in the end? Just about every person who'd ever been close to her was said to be estranged at the time of her death: Elton John, Lady Jane, Sarah Ferguson, etc., etc.

I don't believe she would ever have been happy, but the divorce accelerated what became a downward spiral. (I've read that she truly did not want the divorce, but the Queen had had enough of the scandals and insisted they part).

I have read this too but if that was the case then she should have kept her mouth shut and never washed her dirty linen in public. Once the Morton book was out there divorce was inevitable and anyone with half a brain would know that. She wanted divorce but on her terms and she wanted everyone to think that she didn't because then she could play the victim card that she did so well - in my opinion. That comment was just a further example of her manipulation of the people around her and the public in general and further evidence of the nasty side of her character.

It's sad she died so young, but I think if she'd lived, her life would be as sad and lonely as Princess Margaret's became.

Very true - by now she would be a very lonely figure and a figure pitied if not despised I think.

Even that summer the press were turning on her in many ways - even the week before there were headlines like 'How many holidays does one person need in a summer?' Some of the papers even had to ditch their planned headlines for the next day because they were again scathing of her - but in death they returned her to goddess like status - to divert attention from themselves and the public's culpability in the her death.

 

[sirhon11234]

Live is to short for her, but the story behind her is to long

Sadly life is very short in general.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Actually, I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt in most situations. I'm not one to make negative comments unless I feel particularly strongly about something. It's not so much that I'm "mean-spirited" as that I saw the way that Diana used the media to continually draw attention to herself to the detriment of other people and their reputations. She had a hard time keeping long-term friendships and was at various times on the outs with different members of her family. I took Diana's side vigorously during "the War of the Waleses," as a matter of fact; it's only since learning more about her private dealings with people--and with William--that I've changed my mind somewhat. I think that she would have found it very hard to step back from William's private life as he matured, and that includes his marriage.

I also think that assuming that Diana would have been a poor mother or mother-in-law had she lived, is a bit mean-spirited. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course, but some opinions say way more about the person opining than the person opined about.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Yes, I agree. Queen Alexandra is a good example of my opinion, except that I think that Alexandra was a more forgiving, more "grounded" person.

I would describe Queen Alexandra as a loving mother but she was the mother-in-law from hell and I see Diana as much the same.

 

[nascarlucy]

It's quite possible that no one William dated might have lived up to Princess Diana's standards. Some parents are like that. Unless they influence the relationship or try to play match maker, no one lives up to their standards. I don't know if Princess Diana would be this way (hard to say). If she was a reasonable person, she would get to know Kate and I believe that she would like her.

 

[Mirabel]

There were really a lot of parallels between Alexandra and Diana: both were beautiful and adored, both found it hard to accept that their husbands craved the company of another woman.

And both were adoring mothers, yet perhaps too doting for comfort?
The term smotherlove comes to mind.

 

[Duchess of Darwin]

I agree that Diana would have had a sad life if she had lived. She was too much of a paranoid black and white thinker to stay on good terms with anyone, and this would have been magnified by her constant need to be heard. I wouldn't rule out the possibility that she could have suicided. I shudder at the thought of saying anyone is the type to suicide (this isn't true at all) but she had alot of the warning signs (which I will say now, are not always there); self harm, emotional unpredictability, and a refusal to get help. She also had a need to make people feel ashamed of themselves. This is only a thought, though. We'll never really know.

On the issue of her hypothetical relationship with Catherine, I can't say she would have disliked Kate as a person, but she definately would have "warned" her against marrying into The Royal Family, which would have caused alot of friction. She might also have been willing for her Sons to give up their places in the line of succession, as their Royal roles increased. I know she had no problems with them being Princes, when her marraige was breaking down, or after it ended, but they were only young.

I'm sorry to be morbid, but having found out more about Diana, these hypothetical scenarios are simply what come to mind.

 

[nascarlucy]

Diana did the 1995 interview as a way to get back at those who she perceived as doing her wrong. Much of what she said was pretty much known (by that time most people knew that Prince Charles had cheated on her). She felt like she was second fiddle (which would not be surprising). There was nothing really in that interview that surprised me at all. At first I wondered if she wasn't going to reveal some bombshell something really shocking, but there was no smoking gun or bombshell.

I really felt sorry for her in a way. She went against the status quo which had been in effect for centuries. She had nothing to lose because what was going to happen to her. If someone in the royal family filed a criminal or civil complaint against her for what she said in that interview, they would look bad or look like they were persecuting her or trying to shut her up. Any legal or civil action that anyone took against her would make that person look bad.

She knew what she was doing and probably had thought about it before doing the interview. It doesn't seem that it was done on impulse although you might think so given that she looked like she had just come out of the gym or came back from taking a walk (the outfit and the lack of makeup on) made me think this when I first saw it.

 

[Mermaid1962]

She rehearsed and then stopped the tape when she wanted to change something. There's a documentary about the making of the interview and all the planning and secrecy that went into it. The interview was done in the evening, I believe, after she gave all her staff the night off. Her eyes were made-up to look very intense, I think; but she looked rather pale otherwise. Interesting that she was wearing the sort of outfit that lawyers encourage their clients to wear during divorce hearings: dark and modest.

She knew what she was doing and probably had thought about it before doing the interview. It doesn't seem that it was done on impulse although you might think so given that she looked like she had just come out of the gym or came back from taking a walk (the outfit and the lack of makeup on) made me think this when I first saw it.

 

[nascarlucy]

I don't know why Mermaid1962 but I thought it was early in the morning. It seemed like it was but it would make sense if you were doing it secretly not to have staff around who might tattle on you.

 

[Duchess of Darwin]

Panorama could definately be seen as a take that. Everything was known. Diana just needed to induce squirming from those she had fallen out with. She very easily saw herself as being done wrong, and Panorama was her way of getting even. It said "look at what an awful person you are" to those mentioned, and it made her feel that the public would all take her side.

 

[georgiea]

I have read the most current posts on Diana, Princess Of Wales.

I admire the public Diana and the private I feel sorry for. My opinion has matured since the princess' death. I love her with warts and all because her God given role on earth was raising her sons to be good role models for Great Britain. I truly believe in her short life she fulfilled that task. I am really amazed that alot of post emphasis the worst characteristics in Diana.

Because of her death we will never know if Princess Diana would have found a lasting love and start another family. She wanted a daughter. I think Diana (if she liked Catherine) would help her with her new role because she finally got a daughter. If Diana did not have a husband, Prince William would have to be there for her and it might be hard on Catherine. But again, Catherine seems so family orientated.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I believe as well that she fulfilled her purpose here on earth. While she was with us, her public work was absolutely superb. She brought attention to many causes and encouraged people to become more involved in helping others. And, along with many other posters on this board, I think that her greatest legacy is her children.

I love her with warts and all because her God given role on earth was raising her sons to be good role models for Great Britain. I truly believe in her short life she fufilled that task.

 

[Vita]

I agree, Vita. I loved Diana, but like the rest of us, she was not perfect. She was an excellent mother in many ways, but due to the wounds of her own childhood, she made some mistakes--for instance, bringing William into the middle of her marital problems with Prince Charles. If you need to talk to someone about them, you find another adult, not one of your children, especially a young child as he was at the time.

I also agree about airing the dirty laundry in the marriage, and both she and Prince Charles made this mistake. Both of them revealed things about their marriage that I imagine were very hurtful and damaging to Prince William and Prince Harry. I think both of them wanted to get back at each other so badly that they didn't stop to think of what damage these revelations might do to the boys.

Diana was a wonderful woman in many ways, as Prince Charles is a wonderful man in many ways. However, there are good things and bad things about all of us. We should be careful about putting people up on pedestals, because you can miss knowing the person as the really interesting person that they really are.

I think both Prince William and Prince Harry have traits from both parents, and both parents should be proud of the boys that they raised. I think they did a wonderful job.

Oh, I definitely agree on this. However, I think the difference between Charles speaking on things and Diana was that Charles never villified Diana in those inteviews. It would not have been the way he was raised. No matter what, Charles, unlike Diana, was born into this duty and his learned well from his mother about the things you say and the things that are best kept close to the vest. Even though he confessed to the cheating, looking back, I admire the fact that he didn't drag her name through the mud with all his flaws. This why I believe that while he was not perfect and he initially-along with Diana-did not think about how his actions would hurt the children, he did try to rectify it by not badmouthing their mom who they simply adored. In a lot of ways he let Diana make him the bad guy in order to keep the peace and also because that it how royalty does it, I believe.

You are dead on when you say the they have the good traits from both of their parents I truly believe that Diana is proud of Charles and her children.

 

[sirhon11234]

Oh, I definitely agree on this. However, I think the difference between Charles speaking on things and Diana was that Charles never villified Diana in those inteviews. It would not have been the way he was raised. No matter what, Charles, unlike Diana, was born into this duty and his learned well from his mother about the things you say and the things that are best kept close to the vest. Even though he confessed to the cheating, looking back, I admire the fact that he didn't drag her name through the mud with all his flaws. This why I believe that while he was not perfect and he initially-along with Diana-did not think about how his actions would hurt the children, he did try to rectify it by not badmouthing their mom who they simply adored. In a lot of ways he let Diana make him the bad guy in order to keep the peace and also because that it how royalty does it, I believe.

You are dead on when you say the they have the good traits from both of their parents I truly believe that Diana is proud of Charles and her children.

Your very right Charles never pubically spoke negatively about Diana. What I never understood about that war was why didn't their friends try to intervene and persuade them to stop for the sake of the kids. It was bad on both sides with Diana's camp trying to make Charles look like the villain and Charles' friends tried to make her look mentally unstable; it was just one big PR mess. I'm so happy that at the time of her death they both left the past in the past and became friends. Its very unfortunate that the Princess was killed just when the family was together again.

I think she is very much proud of Charles and her boys.

 

[Vita]

Your very right Charles never pubically spoke negatively about Diana. What I never understood about that war was why didn't their friends try to intervene and persuade them to stop for the sake of the kids. It was bad on both sides with Diana's camp trying to make Charles look like the villain and Charles' friends tried to make her look mentally unstable; it was just one big PR mess. I'm so happy that at the time of her death they both left the past in the past and became friends. Its very unfortunate that the Princess was killed just when the family was together again.

I think she is very much proud of Charles and her boys.

I think that this was just one of those things where the old generation does not understand how the new generation worked. Back then as children, even if you were privy to all the juciy stuff that was going on with the adults, you could carry no real opinion, and a lot of it was just heresay. But we live in a different time now. At this point, the internat was sweeping at least the Western world by storm, children of Wills generation (and I am iincluded in his) had way more access to information-be it flaose or accurate-than children of the past. And it would be all with just the click of a button. the older generation didn't think about how thiis type of infomation and back room dealings would get into the Harry and Willi's hands before anyone could blink. And their school chums would be able to access the most private details as well through the internet, as well as the paper.

So you see, and this how I have always felt about children and their relationship with adults in Western society, are given the false notion that they are important and loved just because they are children and belong to their parents. But that is not really true. Children are merely pawns in adult's games be they for positive or negative play. My mother used to confide in me all the time much in the way Diana would do with William. There are positives and negatives to that because it does put the child in a very sticky situation, but once again it's for benefit of the parnt. Perhaps, this is also at the crux of what changed my opinion about Diana as well from saint to tainted (albeit still revered by me in a very elevated way): If Charles was not going to be the one to think about the children, she should have at least put it more effort to take care of her actions!

The Bashir interview and the Squidgygate incident really disappointed me because these were both opportunes times for Diana to make things right in the midst of her pain. Especially with the interview. She could have been honest and come off as hurt without being manipulative or tearing down Charles. At least for the sake of the kids.

 

[sirhon11234]

I think that this was just one of those things where the old generation does not understand how the new generation worked. Back then as children, even if you were privy to all the juciy stuff that was going on with the adults, you could carry no real opinion, and a lot of it was just heresay. But we live in a different time now. At this point, the internat was sweeping at least the Western world by storm, children of Wills generation (and I am iincluded in his) had way more access to information-be it flaose or accurate-than children of the past. And it would be all with just the click of a button. the older generation didn't think about how thiis type of infomation and back room dealings would get into the Harry and Willi's hands before anyone could blink. And their school chums would be able to access the most private details as well through the internet, as well as the paper.

So you see, and this how I have always felt about children and their relationship with adults in Western society, are given the false notion that they are important and loved just because they are children and belong to their parents. But that is not really true. Children are merely pawns in adult's games be they for positive or negative play. My mother used to confide in me all the time much in the way Diana would do with William. There are positives and negatives to that because it does put the child in a very sticky situation, but once again it's for benefit of the parnt. Perhaps, this is also at the crux of what changed my opinion about Diana as well from saint to tainted (albeit still revered by me in a very elevated way): If Charles was not going to be the one to think about the children, she should have at least put it more effort to take care of her actions!

The Bashir interview and the Squidgygate incident really disappointed me because these were both opportunes times for Diana to make things right in the midst of her pain. Especially with the interview. She could have been honest and come off as hurt without being manipulative or tearing down Charles. At least for the sake of the kids.

Well Squidygate was a private conversation Diana had around 1989 that was taped unbeknownst to her. She was upset and venting to a friend.
I don't think its comparable to the Bashir interview. Just as one really can't compare camilliagate with Charles's Dimbleby interview.
The fact is what's done is done Charles and Diana moved on from it and regretted how it affected their children. And most of all William and Harry have moved from those times.

 

[HRHduchesskate]

I was not familiar with Diana when she was alive as I was too young, I recently watched her interview with Martin Bashir, As she explained going to William's school to explain the marital break up she told him 'When you find someone you love to hold on to it' It seemed very poignant and a reminder of how proud she would have been to be there. My personal opinion of Diana is that she was a wonderful mother and princess but she and Charles were desperately unsuited.

 

[Dymphna]

I was thinking the same thing while watching the wedding and found myself unsettled by the thought. Diana's death was unbearably sad for her sons, but they seem to have wonderful, loving memories of her to comfort them. Unless Diana had found great personal fulfillment in the years post-1997, I think that she would have been a very difficult mother-in-law. As it is, Kate can study the good things about Diana's time as Princess of Wales without having to deal with the reality of what she was like in her private life.

I also thought the same thing. The fact that the media would probably not have stopped hounding Diana would have had a great affect on Catherine, probably. I couldn't help but wonder if William would have proposed had Diana still been alive.