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
 
  #821  
Old 04-07-2010, 02:19 PM
Anne-fan's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Posts: 52
Well as I was very young as well, when Diana died, I didn't really have a chance to get to like her. That's why my opinion actually never quite changed. Although my mother sometimes talked about the Royals, so I got some kind of impression and as I grew older the media of course often praised Di and critized Camilla. At the beginning of becoming a royalist, I liked Diana. And at some point I disliked Camilla. But this soon changed. And this change didn't come because of any of the reasons we can choose in this poll. I just didn't like her pictures. I know this sounds superficially, but that's my first reason to dislike her. She always seemed so unreal on her pictures and I can't stand all this self-pity. Then someone presented me with this Morton biography. After I read it and saw her interviews etc. it was quite sure why I don't like her. Her behaviour was anything but honorable, graceful or whatever. It was embaressing in my eyes. Alright she wanted to get divorced and she fought for it - Well, she any rights to do this. But it's just the way how she fought. And making other people responsible for her sorrows... well marriage problems are always caused by two. If you can't accept you're own faults then is this the only reason for which I will pity you.
__________________

__________________
  #822  
Old 05-30-2010, 09:25 AM
Elenath's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 336
As most people I thought the problems in Diana's and Charles' wedding were his fault and not hers. I think my view has become slightly more realistic since she died but it's still not negative towards Diana. I guess when people (who ever they are) get married they have dreams and a certain view of how that marriage should be. Diana being that young, probably had a different view than Charles, who only got married because he had to. Diana acted the way most people do when they are in an unhappy marriage (I should no, I worked at a divorce court) and that includes using the children against their spouse. I've also always had a distinct feeling Diana was very insecure and the royal family completely disregarded this. This may have stopped her emotional growth which would explain quite a lot. But these are all guesses since I have never met any of them and could be completely wrong...
__________________

__________________
  #823  
Old 05-31-2010, 08:07 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,271
Yes, I think that Diana was very, very insecure. I think that in her desire to be loved and accepted, she was attracted to people who made a fuss over her--and those same people had their own agendas, such as Andrew Morton, Peter Settleton, Martin Bashir, and therapists and psychics.

Depending on how insecure a person is, that person can find it almost impossible to accept real love when it's offered because they don't feel worthy of it. So they're always looking for love and yet making it difficult for people to love them because they're so needy.

People can want to help insecure people but develop "compassion burnout" after a point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elenath View Post
I've also always had a distinct feeling Diana was very insecure and the royal family completely disregarded this.
__________________
  #824  
Old 06-02-2010, 10:19 PM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,644
I really agreed Mermaid with your statement on Diana, Princess of Wales.
__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
  #825  
Old 06-04-2010, 12:44 AM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,271
Thank you, georgiea. I'm glad that it made sense to you.
__________________
  #826  
Old 07-16-2010, 01:51 AM
agogo's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: côte d'océan Pacifique, United States
Posts: 717
When she was alive, there was so much criticism and judgement directed towards her. After she died, everyone had such nice things to say about her. The press shapes a lot of public opinion about her.
  #827  
Old 07-16-2010, 05:47 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,189
I don't think that's true, after she divorced the Prince, the press changed their view of her. When she was married, all they wanted to do was take pictures of her and show her off.
She did use the press to her advantage a lot of the time.

Of course after she died the press were nice about her, on the surface, you can't really talk ill of a dead person, especially not the peoples princess.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #828  
Old 07-19-2010, 07:56 PM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,644
I think the press most of Diana, Princess of Wales marriage good to her. But after the separation and Diana getting rid of her bodyguards the press was after anything the could find especially her lovers.

When she died many books came out showing her unflattering light and some of it was true and some not. I think at the inquest some questions did not have to be brought up about Princess Diana and all her lovers and her menstruating cycle.

I really would love that Diana, Princess of Wales could rest in peace now.
__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
  #829  
Old 07-19-2010, 08:51 PM
nascarlucy's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Florida Area, United States
Posts: 1,354
I'm a year younger than Princess Diana. I watched the wedding and hoped that they would be happy together but they weren't. Fairy tale weddings only exist in fantasy world. I could see that although she had glamour and had things that others only dreamed about, it wasn't a happy life. If she was happy, she wouldn't have had all the difficulties she had. She was not really prepared for royal life. In the interview, what she said and didn't say made this evident. In the interview she was a very sad person who spoke of being lonely. You could see that in her expression.

A woman who was a virgin and someone who could physically bear children were the main requirement of the job. Compatibility and similiar interests took a back seat to this. Love also took a bad seat.

When Prince Charles married he was 32 years old. By your early 30's, how many virgins are there out in their late to mid 30's. Very few. Most women in the early 1980's between the age of 22-30 had been married at least once. Some were divorced, a lot of them had children. Many of them lived with a guy before marriage. This was true regardless of their social class or standing. The age group that you would find any of them would be 18-22 (Diana was 19 years old).

In this case, I didn't take sides. I felt sorry for both sides as no one in this situation came out on top and both I believe everyone was hurt in the process.
__________________
  #830  
Old 07-20-2010, 12:51 AM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,271
I was a year younger than Diana as well. I think that there was a lot of fondness between them but different expectations as to what this dynastic marriage was really all about. Had they not courted and married, I think that they probably would have enjoyed running into each other in social circles; they did seem to really enjoy each others' company at first.

My view of Diana changed after the Panorama interview. When I heard her own words coming out of her own mouth, especially during the second half of the interview, I realized that she wasn't who I thought she was.


Quote:
Originally Posted by nascarlucy View Post
In this case, I didn't take sides. I felt sorry for both sides as no one in this situation came out on top and both I believe everyone was hurt in the process.
__________________
  #831  
Old 07-20-2010, 02:35 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 4,163
Quote:
Originally Posted by nascarlucy View Post
A woman who was a virgin and someone who could physically bear children were the main requirement of the job. Compatibility and similiar interests took a back seat to this. Love also took a bad seat.
I remember watching the engagement video between Charles and Diana before the wedding and she was so starry eyed and blushing and he was saying "whatever love is." I really thought I must have heard something wrong but now it makes sense to me. As the Spencers were "close" to the throne, perhaps the BRF figured Diana knew the role and the Spencers figured they'd teach her?

You had a girl barely out of her teens with Charles photos on the wall and dreaming of a prince and happy ever after and man being pressured into marriage and the heir and the spare who'd rather stick with friends and read and be a farmer. Neither of them were at fault as they had no clue what they were getting into together. It seemed like a good idea at the time and might have worked if they could have somehow found common ground as friends first then worked into an engagement.. then marriage. We can go around about it till the cows come home but I can't put the failure on either one of them.

When did my opinion really change? It might sound crude but I voted others and the reason is that really reading about the last year and Khan and Dodi and Dodi's fiancee', it seemed to me more focus was Diana on Diana.
Struck me odd that reports just prior to her death was "wait till you see what I do next". I'm sure that's NOT what she intended but for me its that time period she just became Diana to me and not Princess of anything.

Here on TRF I've been lucky to get to know the Diana even more. She's done some really fantastic work in making the world aware of things that need to be known, just as Charles is still trying to do. I also see a lot of of her in her sons and how they remember her. I just hope that this is how history remembers them.
__________________
  #832  
Old 07-21-2010, 04:56 PM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
When did my opinion really change? It might sound crude but I voted others and the reason is that really reading about the last year and Khan and Dodi and Dodi's fiancee', it seemed to me more focus was Diana on Diana.
Struck me odd that reports just prior to her death was "wait till you see what I do next". I'm sure that's NOT what she intended but for me its that time period she just became Diana to me and not Princess of anything.
Osipi, sorry that you feel that way to the memory of Diana, Princess of Wales. I believe that Princess Diana (a former member of the BRF) if she had more time on earth would have reinvented herself and serve good causes for mankind. I think a person has to take account of their life and move forward. Unfortunately Diana was killed when she was taking account. Diana will always be the People's Princess to me and she didn't need HRH. I just wish she could have lived and help the world as she was doing with her landmines campaign.
__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
  #833  
Old 07-21-2010, 06:45 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 4,163
It was during that time period that I just no longer regarded her as "princess". She was well on her way to becoming her own person when the accident happened and I'm sure that had history been different, she would have found a happy niche in life and hopefully the love she was seeking. There was so much she yet wanted to do.
__________________
  #834  
Old 07-21-2010, 07:28 PM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,644
Osipi agreed!
__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
  #835  
Old 07-25-2010, 06:50 AM
Royalbooks's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Leuven, Belgium
Posts: 27
My opinion on Diana didn't really change. She is still one my favorite princesses. My opinion on the downfall of the marriage did change however. At first I blamed Charles first, later I blamed both. Now I blame the members of the household and friends of the couple for letting it escalate in such a media-war. I believe that from the moment that Diana and Charles started having problems, friends and members of the household choose sides. The fact that they leaked stories to press or did other things in order to help either Diana or Charles didn't help matters. It made Diana paranoid (my husband is doing this), and also Charles (he didn't thought she could play a game so nasty, and it destroyed the love he had for her). It also forced them to do stupid things: the Panorama interview (Diana) and the Dimbleby book (Charles, where Diana's state of mind was questioned for the first time). If their friends hadn't picked sides and didn't try to portray the other party as evil, but really tried to help the couple then the divorce wouldn't have turned so nasty. I really believe that later on, both Diana and Charles regretted what they did in that period. It was a hard period for both on them, and they were already on the nerves. Personell talking behind your back, friends leaking stories to the press,... it only made it worse.
__________________
  #836  
Old 07-25-2010, 09:10 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,271
I agree absolutely. Too many people were involved with the marriage, and I don't mean James Hewitt and Camilla Parker-Bowles. Even those of us who bought the papers and magazines that discussed the marriage are partly to blame, I think.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Royalbooks View Post
Personell talking behind your back, friends leaking stories to the press,... it only made it worse.
__________________
  #837  
Old 08-21-2010, 10:43 PM
Cadiva's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: near Leeds, United Kingdom
Posts: 24
I was 11 when she married Charles and I don't recall having much of an impression of her then other than she was quite shy and a lot younger than him. As I grew older though, I never bought into the victim persona she liked to present as if to completely irradicate any sense of blame from her own actions.
I think she was "used" in its loosest term, by the Royal Family as a breeding machine but I also firmly believe she was completely aware that it was a marriage of dynastic convenience for Charles and herself. I do not believe she didn't know about Camilla when she married Charles. Imho, it's impossible that she couldn't have known about it because it wasn't a secret within the higher echelons of society from later accounts, even if the British press at that time didn't make much of deal about it.

I think she was a credit for her charity work, but no more so than any other member of the Royal Family who performs lots of charitable engagments and I think she became a very shrewd media manipulator. I think she was a flawed human being like everyone else and I think her troubled childhood was totally to blame for it.

ETA: I was 27 when she died and, personally, I think the hysteria over her death was completely bizarre. I am afraid I simply cannot subscribe to this mass outpouring of grief, similar to that when Michael Jackson died, that is completely driven by the media until the "masses" are whipped into a frenzy. I thought it was incredibly sad that she had died at such a young age but that was it. I didn't feel compelled to wail and gnash my teeth and go out and lay flowers. Personally I think that's one of the more distasteful traditions we seem to have picked up in the media age.
__________________
*I am not a smurf*
  #838  
Old 08-21-2010, 11:08 PM
Humera's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Month Representative - Brunei, Malaysia & Dubai
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: , Canada
Posts: 6,759
Demonstrations of communal/mass grief is not a creation of the media, it goes back centuries. The media might highlight it, yes, but it wouldn't go so far as to say people's actions are shaped by it. It's just that with the ease of communication and travel it is possible for far larger numbers of people to mobilize. And if someone wants to go out and lay flowers then that's because they were touched or saddened by the event.
Like it or not Princess Diana did strike a chord with many people and they genuinely grieved for her. It wasn't a media frenzy that brought out millions of people to mourn her, unless of course all of them had nothing better to do during those weeks following her death.
  #839  
Old 08-22-2010, 01:08 AM
Elessar's Avatar
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Iowa, United States
Posts: 5
My opinion of Diana really crystalized when she died. It is one of those events that I will remember where I was and what I was doing for the rest of the my life.

Before that horrible event, Diana was just some Brit royal who was in the tabloids and that was as far as my knowledge went.

Afterwards, Diana became to me a tragic heroine as I learned more about her and her experience. Her marriage to HRH The Prince of Wales could not have come a worse time when (in America at least) we were on the verge of the age of 24/7 media coverage of anything and everything that might draw attention. Today, we have reality shows where people choose to go on TV and say, "look at me." But 30 or so years ago, none of them, particularly Diana, were ready for such constant scrutiny.
__________________
I am the last of the Númenoreans and the latest King of the Eldar Days; and to me has been given not only a span thrice that of Men of Middle-earth, but also the grace to go at my will, and give back the gift.
-Elessar Telcontar, 'The Lord of the Rings'
  #840  
Old 08-22-2010, 11:18 AM
Cadiva's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: near Leeds, United Kingdom
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humera View Post
Demonstrations of communal/mass grief is not a creation of the media, it goes back centuries. The media might highlight it, yes, but it wouldn't go so far as to say people's actions are shaped by it. It's just that with the ease of communication and travel it is possible for far larger numbers of people to mobilize. And if someone wants to go out and lay flowers then that's because they were touched or saddened by the event.
Like it or not Princess Diana did strike a chord with many people and they genuinely grieved for her. It wasn't a media frenzy that brought out millions of people to mourn her, unless of course all of them had nothing better to do during those weeks following her death.
I don't doubt there were people who went to lay flowers from a genuine sense of grief. I haven't heard of any other expressions of mass/communal grief in times past, perhaps you could enlighten me on those as I'd be really interested to read anything which proves it isn't a modern phenomenon.

I will have to disagree with you though on the effect of the media. They sold the "Diana Myth" that she and the followers around her projected. Not all the media were slavish Diana followers though but certainly the mass market tabloids knew a picture of Diana on the front cover would add thousands to their sales.
I think you only have to look at the rise in people (not directly related to the victims that is I mean) laying flowers at the sites of accidents or widely reported media incidents like recent murders of young children/mothers etc, to see this is a change in the way people express grief. The town of Wooten Basset's actions since the Iraq/Afghanistan conflicts are also in tune with this public displaying of grief which I do, personally, think is a modern phenomenon for people not directly related to the victims to be involved. I don't think there is anything odd with family and close friends wishing to visit the scene of an accident where a loved one has died. But the bloke from the corner shop who never spoke two words to the victims?
There was a very interesting programme on BBC2 a while back called In Loving Memory, which examined the phenomenon of roadside shrines and how they were being used by families to reclaim ownership of their dead loved ones. One of the "experts" involved in the programme is Gerri Excell, who has a website here - http://gerriexcell.webs.com/
__________________

__________________
*I am not a smurf*
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




Popular Tags
belgium brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven poland president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince daniel prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary queen fabiola queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:12 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]