When did your opinion of Diana change and why?


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

When did your opinion of Diana start to change and why?

  • Morton book (1990)

    Votes: 25 9.8%
  • War of the Waleses (starting 1990)

    Votes: 20 7.8%
  • Squidgygate (1992)

    Votes: 12 4.7%
  • Hewitt affair (1993)

    Votes: 17 6.7%
  • Charles' interview (1994)

    Votes: 5 2.0%
  • Panorama interview (1995)

    Votes: 43 16.9%
  • Phone calls to Oliver Hoare (1994)

    Votes: 14 5.5%
  • Dodi al-Fayed (1997)

    Votes: 23 9.0%
  • Other (please explain)

    Votes: 96 37.6%

  • Total voters
    255
Status
Not open for further replies.
Vita....very strongly disagree w/ you on example for Wills and Harry.....did you watch the wedding today at all? Diana was reflected in any and all of the bride and groom's actions and statements. Very much a reflection of Diana's influence; not Charles. How exactly would you have liked Diana to cope? The only reason William and Harry are as they are today is prescisely because she didn't choose a different path. She could have been a glamorpuss to the exclusions of all else but she would have none of that. And God bless her for it....her son is a King and statesman with the common touch because of her. She has changed the course of history whether you can see it this day or not. She is and will always be the people's princess not only to all of us but to her sons who cannot conceive a comfort or a replacement for her kindness and love.
 
The Morton book and Panorama interview started the change for me. First rules in a divorce if there are kids involved: don't make it harder for them, and don't criticize the other parent. I can't even imagine how William and Harry must have felt having all that mess splashed all over the press. It's hard enough for kids to cope with parents' divorce at all but it makes it a lot harder if one parent criticizes the other all the time.

I also think Diana showed very poor judgement in getting involved with the Fayed family. Mohammed al-Fayed has been refused British citizenship twice, and Dodi was basically a playboy, and also involved with somebody else when he met Diana.
 
I was seven when Diana died, and as a result the outpouring of grief was thing about her that I had paid any attention to. I became a complete Diana lover because of this. My belief in her perfection wanned as I learnt more about the soap opera. There was nothing I learnt that made me think "she was pathetic!", I just came to appreciate that she didn't glow, like the tears I saw as a seven year old, had me believe she did. She wasn't black hearted, but she just wasn't mentally healthy enough to handle the situation she found herself in :cry: The Royal Family were not malicious, but they were ill equipt to deal with Diana's emotional instability. They could have just accepted Camilla's sexual experience in the 70's, and they could have just let Charles and Diana get a divorce earlier on, before infidelty was resorted to, but what's done is done, and they've learnt from their mistakes, as the acceptence of the newly minted Duke and Duchess of Camebridge proves ;)

On the issue of charity, Diana was the first Royal to support AIDS patients, and campaign for the abolition of landmines, but all her other causes were ones that other Royals supported too. This is why the "People's Princess" tag annoys me. Does Princess Anne spend all her time at the spa? :mad: Diana genuinely cared, but her black and white thinking had her convinced that because the Royals had increasingly rocky relationships with her, their low key support of their charities indicated a lack of real compassion.

As for the things that The Royal Family were made to do after Diana's death, I used to feel that they were right to comply, given that it was what the general public wanted, but now I feel that they shouldn't have, not because Diana wasn't worthy of any tribute (if they had stopped William and Harry from going to the hypothetical private funeral, then there would be cause for outrage) but because they didn't want to do it. They wanted to stay at Balmoral and comfort the young Princes. I find it ironic that people were calling for more normality, yet insisting that The Queen organise a funeral for a Daughter in law who she had been on very bad terms with, rather than being a shoulder for her grief stricken Grandsons to cry on.

The answer I gave to the poll was "other". There was no moral event horizon for me, its just easy to start seeing things in a new light, when a figure is so complex.
 
Last edited:
The Queen organise a funeral for a Daughter in law who she had been on very bad terms with,

The Queen was not on bad terms with the Princess at the time of her death. After the divorce Diana's relationship with the Queen and Charles greatly improved.
 
:previous: Where is the evidence of this? If there is some, I'll take back the comment about Diana being on bad terms with The Queen. Regardless of how things were between the two Women, though, do you really think William and Harry wanted to be in front of the cameras, at that time?
 
I still like Diana eventhough I now know what a difficult person she could be.After Diana:Her True story came out,I was completely on her side,but as time went on and more and more information came out,I saw that Diana also bore equal culpability in the demise of her marriage. I thought it a huge mistake to give the Martin Bashir interview.Didn't Diana realize the damage that she was causing to the institution of monarchy,the institution she supported and hoped that her son William would serve well?
I wasn't too pleased with many choices that Diana made.She seemed to flit from one unsuitable man to another.Dodi Fayed,who was engaged at the time,was thrust upon Diana by publicity-power-seeking Mohamed al Fayed.Al Fayed was using Diana to gain social cachè;al Fayed was forever trying to gain entrance into the higher echelons of society,failing each time.He couldn't gain British citizenship because of some notorious political-business dealings he made in the past,so he first tired to buy his way into society.Then he used Diana.Diana should have seen through this man.I think that she was using him for privacy and protection,but this ploy failed because she was also alerting the press about her plans.
I was saddened by her untimely death and disgusted by Mohamed al Fayed's claims.
I was able to learn more about Diana after her death.There are so many well-written,well-researched biographies about her.I was able to see how Diana was manipulative and manipulated,calculating and naive,complex and fascinating.
I was able to see how jealousy effected Charles and Diana's marriage.Both were jealous of the other for different reasons.Charles was jealous because of the press attention Diana received and Diana was very upset by Camilla.If only these two were mature enough to have seen each other's needs,both being emotionally-needy people,maybe they could have made things work...then ,maybe not.
I was 38 when Diana died--not young,so I had been following her comings and goings since she entered the royal family.
EDIT:The Queen is of a different generation than Diana;duty is most important to her.Elizabeth II was also trained to keep her emotions in control.She didn't understand Diana at all.She tried to help,but she grew weary of all the varying emotions,felt helpless and couldn't deal with it. I don't think Elizabeth II hated Diana,but I know for certain that she did not like the very public way both Charles and Diana aired their marital difficulties in public.
At the time of her death,Diana and Charles were on good terms with each other;they were friendly again.Diana was invited to attend various family gatherings but she chose not to.As long as Charles and Diana were not fighting in public and endangering the stability of the monarchy,Diana was in good terms with the family.
 
Last edited:
How my opinion of Diana changed

Being of a similar age to Diana, and an ardent monarchist from way back, I gleaned most of my knowledge of Princess Diana from the "Royalty" magazines that I read. When my aunt gave the opinion that the Wales marriage didn't seem happy, a few years into the marriage, I was appalled. I couldn't imagine them (and most especially Charles) being so derelict in duty as to break up: It simply wasn't right, no matter what was really going on.

I was intoxicated with how beautiful Diana was, and believed that she was a genuinely wonderful person. The admitting of adultery, by them both, was horrendously shocking to me. It was heartbreaking. Then came the separation and divorce.

When the Princess was killed, I cried for days. When I first heard of the accident, and the fact that she was still alive, I prayed desperately for her soul. I believed (and still do) that the continuation of "affairs", with whomever, was seriously wrong.

So, in a nutshell, my opinion gradually changed with the years, and with my growing recognition of Diana as a normal, fallible human being. I am still angry that Charles didn't marry Camilla in the early days, thus preventing this extended tragedy.

Was Diana manipulative? Was she ego-tripping? Was she simply vulnerable? She was certainly young when she married, and probably had less help with coping with royal duties than she needed.

What was she really like? No way of knowing. If she were still alive, she'd be nearly 51. Would she have much more maturity and wisdom? Probably. Would she do things differently, in hindsight? Probably, yes. Most of us would, but none of us have the luxury of hindsight when we are actually making our mistakes.
 
:previous: Where is the evidence of this? If there is some, I'll take back the comment about Diana being on bad terms with The Queen. Regardless of how things were between the two Women, though, do you really think William and Harry wanted to be in front of the cameras, at that time?

You should read The Diana Chronicles by Tina Brown and Diana by Sarah Bradford, which describes Diana's relationship with the Queen and Charles as very civil. Also there is a thread in the Diana forum which discusses the subject of Diana's relationship with members of TBRF.
 
I have always been a HUGE fan of Diana, but my view of Diana was altered somewhat yesterday, while watching a re-run of the wedding of William and Kate. It occurred to me that Diana might not have made the best mother-in-law. There are many reports of Diana discussing too-adult things in her life with her young son, William. She was also reportedly massively insecure, needing constant reassurance. This aspect of her personality might make her the mother-in-law from h#ll who controls and manipulates and who competes with her daughter-in-law for her son's attention. She also certainly knew how to steal the spotlight, even upstaging the Queen with a simple change in hairstyle.

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.
 
I respectfully disagree. Diana loved her sons very much and would want them to be happy. She even told William that once he found his love to hold on to that person. Her friend Lana Marks was on CBS and commented that Diana would have adored Kate. Its rather mute to debate whether or not Diana would have liked Kate since Diana is no longer here. But what we do know is that Diana loved William and as his mother, she would want him to be happy. Catherine makes him happy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SusanRoberts, what a remarkably insightful observation.

I have to admit I had never considered that particular aspect but, with Diana being Diana and her on again off again relationship with the media, I cannot see that connection would ever have been severed, or her celebrity dimmed.

With the best will in the world that would still have been one hard act to follow.
 
I think Diana was, on the whole, far more healthy and vibrant than she is often made out to be. Away from the royal pressure, I think she would have continued to mature and acquire even more grace.

She was a delightful mother to watch, back when the royals were far more stiff than they are today, and her desire to allow her children a natural relationship with a mom who was there with them nearly every day was revolutionary at the time. Her knowledge of child development showed - and I'm not sure she had the perfect childhood, herself.

She obviously had a difficult time of it, as well. Before she died, her life seemed in fragments already. Hard to go up against the royal family regarding child rearing and child custody issues.

I think Kate realizes what a large hole was left in William's life, and she seems to have something of Diana's gentleness. Certainly, William's ability to smile, behave naturally in public, and genuinely touch and care for people seems to have come from Diana.
 
She wasn't with her kids 'nearly every day'. She, and Charles, sent them to boarding school aged 8. From then on the major influences of the way they turned out would be the teachers, other staff and children at the schools rather than the parents.

I love how people don't give any credit to Charles for the men they have become - because first off he had to agree with what Diana was doing as did the Queen, two he had to continue it after she died and three he has also put a huge amount of himself into them as well.

Diana was a good mother, especially in the early childhood years but Charles has been a good parent as well - especially in the difficult teenage years.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You should read The Diana Chronicles by Tina Brown and Diana by Sarah Bradford, which describes Diana's relationship with the Queen and Charles as very civil. Also there is a thread in the Diana forum which discusses the subject of Diana's relationship with members of TBRF.

Thanks. I'll give them a look. I still don't believe the state funeral was in the Princes' best interests, though.
 
She wasn't with her kids 'nearly every day'. She, and Charles, sent them to boarding school aged 8. From then on the major influences of the way they turned out would be the teachers, other staff and children at the schools rather than the parents.

I love how people don't give any credit to Charles for the men they have become - because first off he had to agree with what Diana was doing as did the Queen, two he had to continue it after she died and three he has also put a huge amount of himself into them as well.

Diana was a good mother, especially in the early childhood years but Charles has been a good parent as well - especially in the difficult teenage years.

Very true. They have alot of him in them.
 
Thanks. I'll give them a look. I still don't believe the state funeral was in the Princes' best interests, though.
Of course it wasn't! That was for the baying millions whipped into a frenzy by a media desperate to shift any shadow of blame.

It was so that all those millions of "dreadfully distraught and grieving" could have their pound of flesh, punish the entire BRF, have someone to blame, and to share intimately (aka try to muscle in on) the "Boys" grief.

If it all sounds sick, you're right, it was!
 
:previous: I know. The crowd wailing outside The Palace, were complete hypocrites. It was digraceful that they could call for blood, when The RF left Diana alone despite all her deluded words and actions, and don't get me started on the hateful diversion the media created :furious:

As for Earl Spencer, I can understand why he grieved for his Sister, but to attack The Royals like that was uncalled for. I can't even begin to imagine how they felt hearing him come up with these:

- "And beyond that, on behalf of your Mother and Sisters, I pledge that we, your blood family, will do all we can to continue the imaginative and loving way in which you were steering these two exceptional young Men, so that there souls are not completely immersed by duty and tradition, but can sing openly as you planned"

-"We fully respect the herritage into which they have been born and will always respect and encourage them in their royal role. But we, like you, recognise the need for them to experience as many different aspects of life as possible..."

He bought the progression away from the soap opera back years.

Sorry to :angry: but it really annoys me.
 
Last edited:
kudos to SusanRoberts, Iluvbertie, DuchessofDarwin, & Marg for insightful & intelligent comments

I too think it would have been difficult for Diana to fade into the background -- if she had wanted to do so
the press was too hyped about her
& I am not denying that she used & welcomed the press when it suited her

I always think of that photo taken shortly before she died ... she is sitting on the diving board of a yacht, looking forlorn, & there is a life ring in the water below her
totally staged
perhaps it was a message to her ex-boyfriend (the doctor) but it was just too overboard (pun!) for me

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 think that whatever William & Harry witnessed between their parents, they both know they were loved by both their parents

William has good marriages around him -- his grandparents, his father & step-mother, some of his aunts, uncles, cousins, & his in-laws

I wish him & Catherine the best
 
Vita....very strongly disagree w/ you on example for Wills and Harry.....did you watch the wedding today at all? Diana was reflected in any and all of the bride and groom's actions and statements. Very much a reflection of Diana's influence; not Charles. How exactly would you have liked Diana to cope? The only reason William and Harry are as they are today is prescisely because she didn't choose a different path. She could have been a glamorpuss to the exclusions of all else but she would have none of that. And God bless her for it....her son is a King and statesman with the common touch because of her. She has changed the course of history whether you can see it this day or not. She is and will always be the people's princess not only to all of us but to her sons who cannot conceive a comfort or a replacement for her kindness and love.

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.
 
Well said Vita.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Opinion of Diana

Diana was emotionally ill. Her grandmother was Lady-in-Waiting to the Queen Mother and advised the QM of Diana's issue prior to the wedding.

When I learned that Diana threw herself down the stairs, that was a red flag of how ill she was and my sympathies went to Charles.

A personality that is askew to that degree of self harm would be impossible to live with. They are emotional black holes; pulling everyone about them into their insatiable needs. That pattern repeated with Diana's future relationships and with her desperate enlisting her very young son as a confidante.

The intentional fall down the stairs for attention was the changing point for me. Fortunately, she has stellar sons whom she influenced in a most positive way.
 
I very much agree with you. I don't think Diana would have ever been truly happy had she lived (although I certainly wish she were here.) There is not a man alive who could ever have given her the attention that she craved and demanded.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well said Vita.

Thank you. I think motherhood and maturity have changed my opinion on a lot of things. I remember telling my mother (RIP) that I would never change my mind once it's made up. LOL. How foolish and arrogant we are in our youth!

I think I want my children to understand that actions can always be made justifiable, but that does not make them right. Diana's actions would be justifiable to any woman scorned, but in the end, it caused more harm than good and ultimately to herself and that of her children more than anyone else. I don't think she was a bad person or a bad mother. On the contrary. But good people make mistakes too.
 
. On the contrary. But good people make mistakes too.

That is something a lot of people tend to forget.:) The way we think at a certain age changes as we get older. I'm 21, so the way I viewe myself and the world around me, is much different from my view when I was 18. I do believe that had Diana lived, she would have realized or maybe she was realizing in those final days, that the person who could make her the most happiest was herself.
 
Last edited:
I hadn't heard before that Ruth Lady Fermoy told the QM about Diana's emotional trouble. Was this during the engagement period? I guess we'll never know whether or not the QM told Prince Charles.

Diana was emotionally ill. Her grandmother was Lady-in-Waiting to the Queen Mother and advised the QM of Diana's issue prior to the wedding.
 
Diana was emotionally ill. Her grandmother was Lady-in-Waiting to the Queen Mother and advised the QM of Diana's issue prior to the wedding.

When I learned that Diana threw herself down the stairs, that was a red flag of how ill she was and my sympathies went to Charles.

A personality that is askew to that degree of self harm would be impossible to live with. They are emotional black holes; pulling everyone about them into their insatiable needs. That pattern repeated with Diana's future relationships and with her desperate enlisting her very young son as a confidante.

The intentional fall down the stairs for attention was the changing point for me. Fortunately, she has stellar sons whom she influenced in a most positive way.

As the Daughter of a Psychologist, I can say that this is very much true. It must have been awful, not only for Charles, but the whole Royal Family. It wasn't Diana's fault she was that way, but this doesn't change the fact that The RF were not monsters. It's true that the marraige was a terrible idea in hindsight. Charles and Diana had a large age gap, hadn't known eachover for very long, and were two very different people, who were the products of two very different marraiges, but as I said before, The Royal Family have learnt from their mistakes.

As for the warning about Diana's mental state, it woludn't surprise me to learn that The Queen Mother had kept quiet. She didn't want any tragedy to unfold, but given that she was bought up in a different time, and given that she bore scars from the abdication crisis, she would have been unwilling to let Diana slip through the net. She might also have mistakingly believed that her Grandson could make everything better for Diana. I don't mean to bash The QM, but she did have an Edwardian mindset. This is only a theory, though. We'll never know, as Mermaid1962 said, but whatever happened has no doubt been acknowledged as a poor move.
 
Last edited:
At first, I fell into the Diana is perfect, Charles is a prat camp. When she died I was sad and thought that the world had lost this amazing angel.
Then at some point I was watching one of the unending specials about her and they were showing clips from the Panorama interview and I had the thought of "what an actress". After that I had a more open mind and began to reevaluate my impression of Diana. I think that the clincher for me though was when I saw an interview with a photographer who took that picture of Diana running towards her boys on the yacht and saw that there was a picture of Charles hugging his sons not one moment later.
It was then that I realized that Diana was a manipulative person. I know she had a rough life and that she and Charles were not a great match, though I think she knew that before she married him. But that does not make it acceptable for one person to vilify the other and that is what Diana did to Charles.
I now think that Charles is a great father, his boys so clearly love him. He obviously can have a successful marriage since he and Camilla are clearly happy. 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.
 
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.
 
"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.[/QUOTE]

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...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom