Camilla & Charles: How has your opinion changed since the wedding?

[Warren]

We are not arguing inference, or person A or person B or even person C. Resorting to tangents will not resolve the question of what precisely Dimbleby wrote.
We are trying to determine the veracity of an alleged quote from a published and readily available source. As easy as that sounds, the alleged quote remains unverified.

[Jo of Palatine]

I doubt Charles had realised how much he loved Camilla when he met Diana. I think they've been friends but he had always known that he must marry and that she couldn't be this bride, so he firmly let Camilla in his "friendship"-drawer. Then he met Diana, young and sweet Diana who was so determined to have him and who knew so much about his soft- and weaknesses from her sister Sarah. And Diana was there for him in just the right way when he was especially in need of understanding as he had just lost his uncle from a terrorist attack. I think he really believed to be in love with Diana but he didn't know her and when he found out how she really was, he found he couldn't love her romantically anymore. If Diana had been different, a more mature love could have grown between them, but as it was he was disappointed, helpless and though he cared, it was too much for him to cope with (which is one of his weaknesses, I believe). So when Diana claimed Charles would betray her with Camilla and it wasn't the truth then, Charles felt responsible for his wife's treatment of his old friend.

Yes, I believe Diana threw Charles and Camilla together with her constant bickering and accusations about them. And somehow I believe Charles gave up at one point and really turned to comfortable, friendly Camilla who was there for him. Like he said in a row to Diana: you know what? After you've accused me constantly I will do what you claim I have done all along. Call me at Camilla's!" He seems to be a man who can react like that when you believe the description in the Dimbleby-book.

Of course I don't know but I believe there is a possibility that it happened that way. It sounds more plausible to me than the story Diana used to tell.

And when I see Charles and Camilla together today, I think it was not the worst outcome. At least not for them.

[Jo of Palatine]

Dimbleby, page 280 hardcover edition:
"She was so obviously hapy and he seemed so attracted to her that his friends warmed to a prospective love match." And: "In private, he confided to one of his friends that though he did not yet love her, she was lovable and warm-hearted, and he was sure he could fall in love with her."

Dimbleby then goes on to describe how most people surrounding the prince thought Diana was the right choice except for Penny Romsey and Nicholas Soames. He explains the pressures the media and his own family put on the prince to decide for or against Diana and how this pressure made it impossible for him to really realise if he loved her or not. In fact, Charles detected in his father's ultimatum the "insinuation that he had callously exploited an innocent girl and that, by his hesitation, he was threatening to dishonour the family." Charles "felt ill used, but impotent".

From the book, page 283:
"In what he confessed was a "confused and anxious state of mind", the prince tried to reconcile himself to the inevitable, confiding to another of his friends, "it is just a matter of taking an unusual plunge into some rather unknown circumstances that inevitably disturbs me but I expect it will be the right thing in the end". (...) He added, "It all seems so ridiculous because I do very much want to do the right thing for this Country and my family - but I'm terrified sometimes of making a promise and then perhaps live to regret it."

And Dimbleby comments: Making every allowance for last-minute nerves, it was hardly the most auspicious frame of mind in which to offer his hand in marriage.

So Dimbleby never claims that Charles did not love Diana, he only explains that the circumstances made it impossible for Charles to decide to marry her out of his love for her. He simply wasn't given the time to see her often enough to get to know her good enough to base his decision on that knowledge and to start loving her for better or for worse.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by scooter

If Skydragon is correct, and the wheels came off the Wales marriage wagon about one year into it,

That should read in Skydragons opinion, I think..

[Russophile]

Like I said, he was prepared to do his duty.

[CaliforniaDreamin]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

But you're reading a lot into that statement. The reports we hear are flat assertions that somewhere in the biography, Charles told Dimbleby straight out "I never loved Diana." He didn't say that. I'm sure he wasn't deeply in love when they married, but Diana told several people that they'd loved each other (I think it was in one of the Ingrid Seward books, where she said Diana told her that she and Charles loved each other at some stages of their relationship), although I'm sure it wasn't the same sort of love he had for Camilla. That part of the book is very carefully worded with ifs and howevers and althoughs, and there aren't any direct quotes. Whoever took that passage and construed it as "Prince Charles told Dimbleby he never loved Diana" has been guilty of serious overstatement, even misrepresentation, because nowhere in the book is such a quote to be found.

I assume you are referring to me as the person "guilty of serious overstatement or misrepresentation". I admit that when I first made the statement about the infamous quote I worded it in a way that implied that I had read it directly from the Dimbleby book.That was an error and I apologize. But I DID read HE NEVER LOVED HER blaring accross the paqes of several tabloids, which I named-and was told very firmly that that wasn't enough because I didn't provide page numbers, quotes, etc.

It seems that based on excerpts from the Dimbleby book other people came to the conclusion that the POW never loved Diana. I personally do not believe that is the case but it is not surprising at all that someone reading the excerpts published here in this Forum would come to that conclusion-that he married her believing that he COULD come to love her and was never able to do so.

Also, I am confused about this "provide the link!" mandate...for example you yourself have countered with the story that Diana herself told several people that she and Charles were in love. But YOU didn't provide a source or a quote yourself other than to say that it was in an Ingrid Seward interview. For the record I remember reading somewhere that the late Princess told someone that too, but wasn't I chastised about making vague statements precisely like that one, because I didn't provide a link to back it up? So when is a link required and when it is not??

Thanks in advance.

[Elspeth]

Originally Posted by CaliforniaDreamin

I assume you are referring to me as the person "guilty of serious overstatement or misrepresentation".

No, actually I thought (possibly mistakenly, since I didn't check my copy of her book) that Tina Brown had construed that passage as "He told Dimbleby that he never loved Diana" and that other people were just picking up on that second-hand retelling of what was in the Dimbleby book. I was referring to Tina Brown, not you, when I said that. If you repeated something verbatim from a second-hand source which had overstated what was in the original, you aren't the one doing the overstating.

Also, I am confused about this "provide the link!" mandate...for example you yourself have countered with the story that Diana herself told several people that she and Charles were in love. But YOU didn't provide a source or a quote yourself other than to say that it was in an Ingrid Seward interview. For the record I remember reading somewhere that the late Princess told someone that too, but wasn't I chastised about making vague statements precisely like that one, because I didn't provide a link to back it up? So when is a link required and when it is not??

I'm on vacation this week and not able to check my books. If you remind me on Friday (feel free to drop me a PM), I'll go and see if I can find it. I'm pretty sure it was in a book (which should be findable) rather than a Majesty article (which might not be, since I don't keep all my back copies). It isn't so much a matter of always having to provide the backup information and links and so on every time you post something, but as Warren said a few posts back, if someone makes a factual statement based on a checkable source and is asked to provide the actual wording from the source or a link or other reference to the original statement, s/he should make every effort to do so. Otherwise we're in danger of just getting into the endless loop of "she said that!" "no she didn't!" "yes she DID!" "prove it!" "shan't! but she did say it!" "no she didn't...."

[MARG]

Are we ever going to get back on topic? The Charles, Diana, Camilla triangle, and who's to blame has been done to death.

[Elspeth]

Feel free to lead the way, MARG...

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by MARG

Are we ever going to get back on topic? The Charles, Diana, Camilla triangle, and who's to blame has been done to death.

Maybe we can agree that they were all victims of circumstances - Charles couldn't marry Camilla but was/felt forced to marry, Diana thought marriage was her best bet in her situation and married up with the hope of love, Camilla was married (and had married because of a similar reasoning as Diana) and couldn't change a thing about that. All three were trapped by the time and social position they inhabited and only when these circumstances changed or were changeable, the situation changed.


Now we're post 1996, 1997 and 2005: I see a late luck and happiness for two of those involved and may the third rest in peace.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

I see a late luck and happiness for two of those involved and may the third rest in peace.

Amen to that!

[Elspeth]

Originally Posted by CaliforniaDreamin

Also, I am confused about this "provide the link!" mandate...for example you yourself have countered with the story that Diana herself told several people that she and Charles were in love. But YOU didn't provide a source or a quote yourself other than to say that it was in an Ingrid Seward interview. For the record I remember reading somewhere that the late Princess told someone that too, but wasn't I chastised about making vague statements precisely like that one, because I didn't provide a link to back it up? So when is a link required and when it is not??

Thanks in advance.

Following up from my previous post, I'm back from vacation and here's the quote.

"The Queen and Di" by Ingrid Seward (hardback edition, 2000), page 6.

---It was Prince Philip's name, though, that drew the angriest response. 'I don't like the way he shouts at his staff and I always tell William he must never shout at people who can't answer back,' she told me, adding, 'the Windsor men have notoriously bad tempers.'
---She knew. She had been married to one for fifteen years. She had given herself a cue but she did not pick it up. Instead of the tirade I was half-expecting, she talked with wistful affection about the man who had been her husband. 'Charles absolutely loved me,' she said in a silvery voice which sounded as if it belonged to a little girl. 'It's very hurtful to our children when people say we didn't love each other.'
---She paused, shaking her head and giving me a sidelong glance to see how I was reacting. She continued: 'It was the people around us. They didn't give us a chance. The trouble with Charles is that he listens to the last person he spoke to.'

[Russophile]

Oh that's interesting in that it seems that Diana twisted the truth however she wanted to look at a certain time. But that's just me.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Russophile

Oh that's interesting in that it seems that Diana twisted the truth however she wanted to look at a certain time. But that's just me.

She was always allotting the blame to somebody else - but in the scenario Elspeth quoted I'd say she probably wasn't talking to him anymore, so others stepped in...

Hm, when you read the Dimbleby-book about Charles pre-wedding, then there is a Charles who has had his own mind but has been dutiful and acting on accepting his duty and following advice. Re the question of being a team that Diana mentioned in the Panorama-interview: Diana obviously saw her popularity as something she brought to the team of The Prince and Princess of Wales, because Charles, by his own account, was not so easy with people. But if I think of the way Dimbleby describes the advice Charles got from childhood from all sides, then for the advisors and Charles there could only be The Prince of Wales as heir to the throne and his supportive wife. So there was a conflict which could not be solved because Diana was two-faced and started at one point to upstage Charles in public due to their private problems, thus making him believe in his advisors.

While Camilla never tries to upstage him but is how the wife of the prince should be: supportive and concentrated on issues fitting for the wife of the heir (social, health, caring for injured soldiers). She never wanders off in political fields, but helps him to loosen up in public so he can make the points that are important to him. Plus he is older now, of course.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by CaliforniaDreamin

Also, I am confused about this "provide the link!" mandate...for example you yourself have countered with the story that Diana herself told several people that she and Charles were in love. But YOU didn't provide a source or a quote yourself other than to say that it was in an Ingrid Seward interview.

I don't have a great problem with the majority of the moderators not posting links, rarely are they trying to 'slant' an article to match their interpretation. No matter how much I may disagree with Warren, Elspeth, TheTruth etc, on the whole I trust their integrity.

Many posters (and I mean that generically) do tend to put 'I remember', 'I heard' or 'I read' and then it turns out that their memory is slightly skewed. I expect I am one of the main culprits in asking for a link or date. I prefer to read the article myself, many times someone has stated as fact an article that contains the words 'according to rumour' and they seem unable to 'see' that it is rumour not a fact.

Take the recent quote from the Diana Chronicles (I know different printings may be altered), but I can find no sentence or sentiment that matches what was stated on the 6 pages I have checked.

[LadyCat]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Many posters (and I mean that generically) do tend to put 'I remember', 'I heard' or 'I read' and then it turns out that their memory is slightly skewed.

Hmmmm must be pick on Cat day! I have to say I am guilty of this, and with alarming regularity. Hopefully one day I'll learn to check my facts before I post so I don't have quite so much egg on my face (at least it's supposed to be good for the complexion).

Cat

[Mermaid1962]

I use those terms because I don't want to be adamant about something that I don't have at hand at the moment. That's why I use "I remember" or "rumour was"...because I can't be absolutely definite all the time. If I were writing an article or a term paper, I'd list definite sources; but posts on a message board are usually made "on the fly."

Originally Posted by LadyCat

Hmmmm must be pick on Cat day! I have to say I am guilty of this, and with alarming regularity. Hopefully one day I'll learn to check my facts before I post so I don't have quite so much egg on my face (at least it's supposed to be good for the complexion).

Cat

[Russophile]

Originally Posted by LadyCat

Hmmmm must be pick on Cat day! I have to say I am guilty of this, and with alarming regularity. Hopefully one day I'll learn to check my facts before I post so I don't have quite so much egg on my face (at least it's supposed to be good for the complexion).

Cat

Really? Cuz I thought it was Pick On Russo day as Warren caught me in one of those very situations!