When did your opinion of Diana change and why?

[tan_berry]

In that conversation posted by Jo of Palatine, Camilla sounds like a therapist. But I read an article on her in the Vanity Fair magazine that depicts her as a pleasant to be with person, a nice lady.

When someone wants from us that we are either a Fanatic or a Hater, that person is trying to triangulate us. I think Zhontella is very right, it is refreshing to read opinions that are not trying to triangulate us, that struggle for a point of view of justice.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I've heard that before -- in fact I know the game myself, it's one experienced lady seductress who tells the man exactly what he wants to hear.....etc. and it may or may not contain varying shades of truth. Poor dumb little Diana didn't stand a chance. So now why did Charles have a face of thunder with one nasty attitude in the last media observation of him?

Okay, that's your view on it according to your own way to "play the game". In my experience this is what love is all about - if you'd listen in on phone calls between my husband and me when he is away on business trips, you'd hear the same from us... maybe our game is different from yours but IMHO Charles' and Camilla's game is quite similar to ours....

As for the truth: I think after seeing Charles and Camilla for two years now, 18 years after this phone call and two years after he put "that ring" on her finger, I believe they still adore each other and she still tells him what he wants to hear.

While "poor dumb little" Diana could have done the same and still be his princess: be interested in his work, tell him that he is wonderful, talk him into sleep, miss him when he is gone and look forward to seeing him again - feel that and communicate that to your darling and he will be happy (at least my husband is and Charles does not seem to be unhappy either...)

I think that Diana did not much after she had married Charles to make him happy. Even that famous birthday "gift" of her dance at the Royal opera was something she must have known would annoy him but present her as a beautiful and talented lady in public. If she really had loved him she would have tried to understand the pressures of his life and gone about finding her own place there - even if it meant to wait for some months till he had more control over his appointments and could make time for her. Her marriage to him in terms of Royal pre-planning was rather sudden, so of course he was fully booked for the next months - including time he wanted to spent with his friends or playing polo or going hunting or visiting a gardening show. If it is true what has been written, that she thought he should cancel these plans in order to be with her, then she did not understand that much about men. Married men are normally pretty willing to take their bride with them to their private pursuits or present them to their friends. But they were obviously very different in what "fun" meant to them. And if Diana had not been impressed by his future crown so much, she would have seen that he was not the guy for her....

 

[Jo of Palatine]

In that conversation posted by Jo of Palatine, Camilla sounds like a therapist. But I read an article on her in the Vanity Fair magazine that depicts her as a pleasant to be with person, a nice lady.

Why the "but"? Most therapists are pleasant to be with and nice.... And I'm of the opinion that in a marriage husband and wife should try to help each other to feel good and to overcome problems, adapt to the realities of life and encourage each other to do things that are good for them, even if these things are not necessarily good for the other. Yes, that's what therapists do as well but why turn to somebody foreign for help if you can have that from a spouse or a friend?

Okay, at that time in their life Camilla did not need to spent her life with Charles, but obviously they are able to keep that good humour, friendship and mutual help in spite of the pressures of Royal life.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I liked and admired Diana from the very beginning, and that did not really ever change. BUT...I would not be telling the truth if I did not admit that their were revelations about her personality and character that disturbed me quite a bit. The nuisance calls to Oliver Hoare are a good example. Diana, who suffered so much in her marriage to Charles by having him cheat on her was quite willing to do this to another woman without a thought. Oliver Hoare had children, and this also did not seem to matter to her.

The nasty episode with Tiggy at the Christmas party("so sorry about the abortion!") not only shocked but disgusted me. Princess or not, I would have slapped Diana hard across the face if I had been Tiggy, and consequences be damned.

The very blatant lies about the Morton book and the way she later turned her back on the very people she encouraged to participate was just disgusting.
The Panorama interview didn't jolt me that much...at that point nothing that happened between the Waleses surprised me. But I thought Diana came off very badly

That being said....even though my my admiration for Diana had diminished somewhat at the time of her death, I still sympathized with her much more than I did Camilla Parker Bowles. Camilla was a much older, much more worldly and sophisticated woman. Once she made the decision NOT to marry Charles when she was single and she could have, she had no right to encourage and participate in adultery with him, therefore destroying a family and breaking the heart of a very confused and troubled young girl like Diana was when she married Charles.

 

[royalone3]

To me Diana was a very young ill prepared girl,to suddenly become The Princess of Wales.She seemed selfish and emonionally fragile,who,even with her charity work tried to make herself look good.Poor Diana she always made herself out to be the victim.

 

[ghost_night554]

That's what annoys me so - she was beautiful or at least fotogenic and thus she could behave as she wanted while finding followers. And she knew this and she used it to her advantage.

I personally feel though she didn't use it to her advantage but that's just my opinion of course your allowed to have your own

I do disagree with alot that's been said but obviously this is a discussion and people are allowed to have their own opinion

 

[lilytornado]

When I was very young I just didn't like Diana. (I actually liked neither Charles nor Camilla). I think the main reason is that I didn't like her haircut, etc. Normally I would have stayed neutral against her but all this admiration and all this fuss everywhere made me develop an antipathy. I was only a young child back than. When she died I still felt very sorry.
Later I came to like Charles, Camilla, Queen Elizabeth, etc but I still didn’t like Diana. Some nasty things I read about her didn’t make me change my opinion. But recently my opinions aren’t that strong anymore. I see that everybody is human and that she probably had some problems but other times she was probably really nice. Yes, some things in life are your own decisions but life is how it is and in the end only the good things really matter anyway.
I certainly still don’t really like her haircut, but I see now that it was the fashion of the time and wasn’t all THAT bad… (not that things like that matter anyway)

 

[pinkie40]

When Diana wore the "black sheep" sweater during her engagement told me a lot about her state of mind even as far back as that... Her continued fascination with fashion and upstaging her husband and his family thru her wardrobe told me everything I needed to know about her state of mind thru the years...I felt very sad for her not being a "team player" on Team Windsor. I still admire her very much for her charity work and the way she channelled her energy to the ill and "downtrodden"...She simply got too loud (for those she represented..even in the state of being divorced)when she became associated with AIDS and landmines....

I admire Diana for trying to retain her personality (flaws and all) within a family and a system that is highly regulated and based upon strict protocol... There were intolerable intention acts of sheer rudeness and spite which have been hard to forgive and forget...She was tacky, condescending and childish in situations with people who were not of her station. But we all are of that ourselves at times, I'm sure...

The last straw of me tolerating Diana's antics was going on vacation with the Al-Fayeds....I remember thinking how utterly stupid of her to allow her boys to be in such controversial company.

 

[Skydragon]

Yes, some things in life are your own decisions but life is how it is and in the end only the good things really matter anyway.

Surely it is not 'only the good things that really matter', that would be the same as saying 'he murdered 15 children, but he was wonderful to his mother', wouldn't it?

She was tacky, condescending and childish in situations with people who were not of her station

She could be 100 times worse to people from the same social class!

 

[lilytornado]

Surely it is not 'only the good things that really matter', that would be the same as saying 'he murdered 15 children, but he was wonderful to his mother', wouldn't it?

No of course, I didn't mean it like that, but I didn't really know how to put it. I mean everything matters, but go cannot dwell on the bad sides forever. I don't think Charles thinks everyday about Diana's horrible traits. I mean Diana did some bad things, but she didn't murder 15 children anyway, so in the end maybe you can see the bad things and the good things, and hopefully everybody involved was able to forgive in the end (for their own good).

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I don't think Charles thinks everyday about Diana's horrible traits.

Well, if anybody, then it must be him who is thinking about her horrible traits - at least I believe that he was the one who was mostly at the receiving end of her temper tantrums and of her spitting poison. I don't know what got on in their marriage in detail but the bits I know are enough to pity him from my heart. That's why I understand why he at a later point in their marriage could no longer see that he was married to an "attractive" woman - because if only the shell is attractive but the person within hurt you then all beauty of the body is without any meaning.

Yes, it's true - Diana did help charities to reach a broader public acknowledgement and for that I still applaud her. But I'm glad I never had to have contact with her on a social basis.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

Its not Princess Diana's fault that their are conspiracy theories surrounding her death, nor is she responsible for the inquest. The people who are responsible for this on-going Diana mania as you call it is the media and Muhammed Al Fayed.

Sure, I can buy the argument that the media persists the mania for profits, and Fayed goes on doing what he does because........ well, because somewhere in his lunatic rationalizations, it makes sense (to him) to do so.

At the same time, it's pretty much a given that Diana always wanted to stay in the center of things, and that she would just be tickled to smithereens (htf do you spell that) about attracting all this attention for another freaking decade postmortem. Remember how excited she was when she made the front page of The Times for the first time ever? Well hotdam, how happy she'd be now, the most famous, profit-generating ghost since Elvis?

 

[sirhon11234]

CasiraghiTrio so what your trying to say is that Diana would've been pleased to know that she is still in the papers becuase of her inquest? Why would she want the public and her sons to know all about the morbid details about her death and autopsy? Thats just ridiculous.

 

[ysbel]

Since this thread is about how opinions have changed about Diana over the years, I thought I'd share this early video from Elvis Costello that features a Charles and Diana lookalike.

YouTube - Elvis Costello - Everyday I Write the Book

This has to be from really early in their marriage but its interesting to see how differently people saw Charles and Diana in the beginning.

 

[BeatrixFan]

What's more interesting is that the Charles lookalike isn't one I've seen before. Usually they're Peter Hugo, Charles Haslett or Guy Ingle. I wonder who this chap is. I don't recognise the Diana either for that matter.

 

[sirhon11234]

I actually find the video quite funny. My favorite part is seeing the Charles look alike leaping through the hoop of fire.

 

[Skydragon]

No of course, I didn't mean it like that, but I didn't really know how to put it. I mean everything matters, but go cannot dwell on the bad sides forever. I don't think Charles thinks everyday about Diana's horrible traits. I mean Diana did some bad things, but she didn't murder 15 children anyway, so in the end maybe you can see the bad things and the good things, and hopefully everybody involved was able to forgive in the end (for their own good).

I suppose it depends on your own memories and whether that person was, to you, a nice person or a bitch. Some things are totally unforgivable!

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

I suppose it depends on your own memories and whether that person was, to you, a nice person or a bitch. Some things are totally unforgivable!

Rigidity is a dangerous trap, Sky. At some point, we have to let things go and be flexible. I think that is what lilytornado means to say, but forgive me, lily, if I'm perceiving your meaning the wrong way.

 

[lilytornado]

Rigidity is a dangerous trap, Sky. At some point, we have to let things go and be flexible. I think that is what lilytornado means to say, but forgive me, lily, if I'm perceiving your meaning the wrong way.

No, that is exactely what I mean. Like Camilla, I think when she wanted to go to the Diana memorial, I think it was because she wanted to leave the bad memories behind, and respect Diana as a person, even though she probably had very bad memories because of her. See, I think the ability to forgive is a good thing. That doesn't mean you have to forget, and if the memories are too bad you just might to distance yourself from a person, but I think things like hatred or revenge just mainly hurt yourself.
I hope if Diana would have been alive, she would have been able to do the same thing.

 

[Skydragon]

Rigidity is a dangerous trap, Sky. At some point, we have to let things go and be flexible. I think that is what lilytornado means to say, but forgive me, lily, if I'm perceiving your meaning the wrong way.

Sorry, I am not into unconditional, time after time forgiveness, there are only so many times one can 'forgive' a person. Even then one may 'forgive', but one should never forget!

 

[georgiea]

See, I think the ability to forgive is a good thing. That doesn't mean you have to forget, and if the memories are too bad you just might to distance yourself from a person, but I think things like hatred or revenge just mainly hurt yourself.

I think lilytornado only people that are mature can forgive. I truly believe what you have said to be the truth about forgiving a person and lovinging yourself. Princess Diana's son are at that point of mature forgiveness.

I hope if Diana would have been alive, she would have been able to do the same thing.

I think she would have forgiven eventually if she had found happiness in love and a good job role. What is tragic is that we will never really know what Princess Diana would have accomplished these last 10 years.

 

[jcbcode99]

Okay, that's your view on it according to your own way to "play the game". In my experience this is what love is all about - if you'd listen in on phone calls between my husband and me when he is away on business trips, you'd hear the same from us... maybe our game is different from yours but IMHO Charles' and Camilla's game is quite similar to ours....

As for the truth: I think after seeing Charles and Camilla for two years now, 18 years after this phone call and two years after he put "that ring" on her finger, I believe they still adore each other and she still tells him what he wants to hear.

While "poor dumb little" Diana could have done the same and still be his princess: be interested in his work, tell him that he is wonderful, talk him into sleep, miss him when he is gone and look forward to seeing him again - feel that and communicate that to your darling and he will be happy (at least my husband is and Charles does not seem to be unhappy either...)

I think that Diana did not much after she had married Charles to make him happy. Even that famous birthday "gift" of her dance at the Royal opera was something she must have known would annoy him but present her as a beautiful and talented lady in public. If she really had loved him she would have tried to understand the pressures of his life and gone about finding her own place there - even if it meant to wait for some months till he had more control over his appointments and could make time for her. Her marriage to him in terms of Royal pre-planning was rather sudden, so of course he was fully booked for the next months - including time he wanted to spent with his friends or playing polo or going hunting or visiting a gardening show. If it is true what has been written, that she thought he should cancel these plans in order to be with her, then she did not understand that much about men. Married men are normally pretty willing to take their bride with them to their private pursuits or present them to their friends. But they were obviously very different in what "fun" meant to them. And if Diana had not been impressed by his future crown so much, she would have seen that he was not the guy for her....

Jo---I LOVED your post. Truly--and I believe that it can apply to all married couples as the secret of success. Pay attention to your spouse, let him/her know you love and adore him, and don't be afraid to show it. Also, be understanding of his/her career and the demands of it. Diana was selfish about Charles and simply wanted all of his attention--just like she wanted all of her father's attention and hated Raine because of it. She liked attention, wanted to be the center--there's nothing wrong with that--we can all be like that--but we also need to understand that we can't be the center of attention all the time.

 

[zhontella]

Jo---I LOVED your post. Truly--and I believe that it can apply to all married couples as the secret of success. Pay attention to your spouse, let him/her know you love and adore him, and don't be afraid to show it. Also, be understanding of his/her career and the demands of it.

Yes I agree, Jo wrote a lovely post about how to treat ones spouse. I would also hope that Charles ~"paid attention to Diana, let her know she was loved and adored and wasn't afraid to show it. Also, hopefully he was understanding of her career (learning how to be a Princess of Wales) and the demands of it"~.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

She liked attention, wanted to be the center--there's nothing wrong with that--we can all be like that--but we also need to understand that we can't be the center of attention all the time.

Yeah, exactly. That was the trouble with Diana. She lacked balance and any sense of boundaries. It was all or nothing, and if she didn't get "all" then her sense of entitlement was betrayed. That's the major problem with people who don't love themselves -- they seek in others what they need to give to themselves. If you love yourself, you do not need to be validated by anyone. If you love yourself and you give love to others, love is what you get. Action and reaction. Law of attraction. I believe that Diana gave love to her boys, and that's why she received so much love from them. Look how Prince Harry put it, "She was the best mother in the world." Harry adored her, and she adored him. Diana thought she could "make" Charles love her if she made him jealous with all the media attention around her, or if she yelled at him enough, or slammed enough doors. But she was giving him anything but love. She gave him yelling, slamming, and spite. Why in the world would he respond to her with love? Naturally, he did not. No one would. If you think about it, it's physics. You don't get love from spite, nor from jealousy and anger. You only get love from love.

 

[Skydragon]

I think lilytornado only people that are mature can forgive. I truly believe what you have said to be the truth about forgiving a person and lovinging yourself. Princess Diana's son are at that point of mature forgiveness.

There are many things that cannot be forgiven and have no bearing on whether you 'love yourself' or not. Maturity has very little to do with it, many 4 years 'forgive' and many 144 year olds do not. I can't quite see James Bulgers parents standing up and saying we forgive his torturers, but then I think a lot of the belief in forgiveness comes from youngsters or those that have little to forgive!

For all we know William and Harry realised from an early age that their mother made the problems within the marriage, and therefore they found nothing to forgive.

EDITED....... That's the major problem with people who don't love themselves -- they seek in others what they need to give to themselves. If you love yourself, you do not need to be validated by anyone. If you love yourself and you give love to others, love is what you get.....EDITED.... Diana thought she could "make" Charles love her if she made him jealous with all the media attention around her, or if she yelled at him enough, or slammed enough doors. But she was giving him anything but love. She gave him yelling, slamming, and spite. Why in the world would he respond to her with love? Naturally, he did not. No one would. If you think about it, it's physics. You don't get love from spite, nor from jealousy and anger. You only get love from love.

The trouble with many people is that they 'love' themselves too much, far from needing 'validation' from others, they believe the other person has the problem, not them, they are after all perfect. Many men and women who are regularly beaten by their partners, despite the awful injuries, will return to their partner because 'they love him/her'. Many who live with control freaks, 'love' their partner. Men and women involved in this type of situation believe, absolutely that their partner also loves them, so no, you don't only get love from love.

That was Diana's problem, IMO, that is why she couldn't understand why the Royal Family didn't think she was the best thing since sliced bread! Her parents fought over her, her father 'won' her and gave in to her demands, to avoid a scene, the nannies were driven out (her father protected her, not them), the general public fell for the 'perfect princess' and when that crown started to slip, she was able to garner the sympathy vote from many with her portrayal of the 'victim'.

 

[TheTruth]

-SNIPPED- Her parents fought over her, her father 'won' her and gave in to her demands, to avoid a scene, the nannies were driven out (her father protected her, not them), the general public fell for the 'perfect princess' and when that crown started to slip, she was able to garner the sympathy vote from many with her portrayal of the 'victim'.

(my bolding)

I was wondering if someone else than me thinks that if her mother had 'won', Diana would have had a different behaviour ?

 

[Skydragon]

I was wondering if someone else than me think that if her mother had 'won', Diana would have had a different behaviour ?

Yes I also believe that if Frances had 'won' custody, Diana could have been a different person.

 

[Chimene]

I would also hope that Charles ~"paid attention to Diana, let her know she was loved and adored and wasn't afraid to show it. Also, hopefully he was understanding of her career (learning how to be a Princess of Wales) and the demands of it"~.

Charles had an ego backed by an institution with however many years of history. Diana could not have been PW without Charles, she failed to understand her role. If she wanted to be PW so badly, she should have remembered that Charles was her lifeline.

 

[TheTruth]

Yes I also believe that if Frances had 'won' custody, Diana could have been a different person.

IMO, the lack of a "female presence" (since her reationship with Raine was terrible, I can only think of her mother in that role) played a major part in her behaviour and personality. Apart from Babara Cartland's books and the vague memories of her parents living together, she didn't know what to expect of living a married life, having children, etc.
There's also her mother's personality. She seemed more strict with her children but not insensitive. If you look closely, it strikes me the difference between Sarah and Jane's behaviour compared to Charles and Diana's. I think the way they have been raised determines many aspects of their personality.

 

[diamondBrg]

Grandmother Fermoy or whatever her name is took care of that situation for Diana by testifying against her own daughter. That has got to be one of the most wicked, evil human beings I have read about in a long time. I hope her life was as miserable and painful for her as it appears to be from reading about her.

She was more concerned about the title "Earl" and her own connection to the RF than her own flesh and blood. Sickening to me.