The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #41  
Old 08-31-2005, 08:35 PM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alicky
I think Diana liked and respected the Queen too, but she had a funny way of showing it. She may have dropped in on Her Highness after swims at Buckingham and addressed her as Mama, but she still waged major media battles against her and her "f****** family." She did not understand or approve of Queen's priority towards the throne, towards public stability. During the War of the Waleses the Queen tried to play it as neutrally as possible, but Diana saw this as aloofness and a conspiracy against her, seeing (and portraying) the Queen as part of the problem.
The term "F***ing Family" was said in a private conversation that was not meant for public consumption. We have no clue what The Queen, Charles, or the rest of the Royal Family have said in conversations that were never recorded.

However, we do know how Charles wishes to be re-incarnated!!!:p :p
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 08-31-2005, 08:45 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: , Canada
Posts: 3,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiaraprin
The term "F***ing Family" was said in a private conversation that was not meant for public consumption. We have no clue what The Queen, Charles, or the rest of the Royal Family have said in conversations that were never recorded.
I think that a lot of what was said by both Diana and Charles, as well as their associates, and leaked to the press were from private conversations and never intended for public consumption. But the fact is Diana said it and it's out there and it's forever part of what she's said and done in her lifetime, mixed in with the good things.

Comments like Charles wishing to be Camilla's tampon were never intended for public consumption either, but it's still very much a part of Charles and Camilla's story.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 08-31-2005, 08:50 PM
Panther2000's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
.

I think that by 1988 Diana and Charles were already on seriously bad terms, and I've often wondered if she wished he'd died in that avalanche so that she could play the grieving widow and then go on with her life with the boys. It seems to me that she might have smothered them a bit, since she seemed to be using them to get the love that she wasn't getting from Charles and his family, but who knows how things would have turned out.
I don't think so. Play the grieving widow. But, what is the difference than charles PLAYING the grieving widower.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 08-31-2005, 08:52 PM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panther2000
I don't think so. Play the grieving widow. But, what is the difference than charles PLAYING the grieving widower.
AMEN Panther!!!!!! Point well taken!! It would be hypocritical on either's part!!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 08-31-2005, 09:02 PM
Alicky's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 580
When has Charles played the grieving widower? I know he went to the funeral, but aside from that? I don't see how he's played to this.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 08-31-2005, 09:03 PM
Panther2000's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 131
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by tiaraprin
AMEN Panther!!!!!! Point well taken!! It would be hypocritical on either's part!!
That is how I see it. Diana Bashers I just don't get them. The woman is dead & not doing anything to anyone & people still feel the need to try to hurt her. In the Famous words of Smegol/gollum

What has she ever done to them. NOTHING.


I guess it would be more believeable if Charles & the royal family were seen crying( when they never showed any real emotions in public) meanwhile Everyone & their mother know that Diana never had a problem showing people how she feels.

I would believe diana tears over charles. Not a bash to charles. but he was brought up to suck it up & a stiff uppper lip.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 08-31-2005, 09:03 PM
Alicky's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiaraprin
The term "F***ing Family" was said in a private conversation that was not meant for public consumption.
But it's pretty obvious that she wasn't feeling a whole lotta love and respect at the moment lol! :) :p
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 08-31-2005, 09:09 PM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alicky
But it's pretty obvious that she wasn't feeling a whole lotta love and respect at the moment lol! :) :p
However, Diana did fall in love with her husband (as she understood love to be). Did Charles ever love her?? Words such as "whatever in love means" comes to mind. . . . .

At the very most, he had a passing affection for her.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 08-31-2005, 09:16 PM
Alicky's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 580
I think they both thought they loved each other, or thought that love would eventually grow, but they both obviously made a big mistake. They were so totally different, hardly knew each other, and had such different interests, personalities and lives.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 08-31-2005, 09:43 PM
Panther2000's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiaraprin
However, Diana did fall in love with her husband (as she understood love to be). Did Charles ever love her?? Words such as "whatever in love means" comes to mind. . . . .

At the very most, he had a passing affection for her.

HELLO, standing ovation for that one. She had no problem saying for feeling love( or what she may have thought what love was. She was after all not far removed from still being a child). I think that she believed in fairytales.

Frankly, I think that anyone marrying under the age of at least 25 now a days is asking for trouble. they have no time really to be on their own & to see the world for what it is.

But, I guess when you MUST HAVE A VIRGIN bride to have kids. Well, I guess a young unknowing is the way to go. I just gess that they did not think that, that bride would become more popular & LOVED world wide more than just about everyone ( except the Queen MUM) in the royal family who would learn stop taking it & fight back. I guess that is what some don't like. That she stopped being the door matt that everyone walked all over.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 08-31-2005, 09:51 PM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panther2000
HELLO, standing ovation for that one. She had no problem saying for feeling love( or what she may have thought what love was. She was after all not far removed from still being a child). I think that she believed in fairytales.

Frankly, I think that anyone marrying under the age of at least 25 now a days is asking for trouble. they have no time really to be on their own & to see the world for what it is.

But, I guess when you MUST HAVE A VIRGIN bride to have kids. Well, I guess a young unknowing is the way to go. I just gess that they did not think that, that bride would become more popular & LOVED world wide more than just about everyone ( except the Queen MUM) in the royal family who would learn stop taking it & fight back. I guess that is what some don't like. That she stopped being the door matt that everyone walked all over.
While I agree with you Panther, others are going to be angry at this post.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 08-31-2005, 10:31 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panther2000
I don't think so. Play the grieving widow. But, what is the difference than charles PLAYING the grieving widower.
The difference is that at the time of the skiing accident, Charles and Diana were at the stage where they were beginning to not be able to stand the sight of each other. Having him die in a tragic accident, leaving her alone to raise her boys as Spencers, would have been the answer to her prayers.

By the time of her death - in fact by the time of their divorce - they were getting along fairly well as friends. She said so herself to several people, who have reported it in their books and articles. Had Charles been the one who had died in 1997, she would probably have been genuinely sad. If he'd died in the avalanche, I'm very sure she wouldn't have been. At the time she died, they were both free to have relationships with other people, so the presence of the other ex-spouse wasn't that big a deal in that respect.

If anybody thinks she would have been genuinely distressed if he'd died in the avalanche, or that she'd have done anything other than to pretend to be terribly upset, I think they're being unrealistic. By 1997, they both had a somewhat different outlook and I think that if either of them had died, the other would have been sincerely sad.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 09-01-2005, 08:13 AM
Alicky's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 580
I agree. And she would have played (overplayed I'm sure) the role of the grieving widow to the tens.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 09-01-2005, 10:48 AM
una una is offline
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: london, United Kingdom
Posts: 76
I think Diana would have been glad to have Charles out of her way, so that she could step into his shoes. At the time of the separation, she is quoted as saying "I would hope that my husband would go off, go away with his lady, then leave me and the children to carry the Wales name through to the time that William ascends the throne."
In the panorama interview, she hinted at something similar when she doubted that Charles could adapt to the restrictions of being king, and she wished he might find peace of mind "and from that follows other things" (i.e. he might give up his place in the succession?). Simone Simmons has her fantasizing about being consort to her son.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 09-13-2005, 02:35 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 589
I think Diana loves Charles when they two got married but Charles did not.Charles thought he would try to love Diana/learn to love Diana for the sake of their marriage /monarchy. However Diana's love for Charles was not as deep as she thought or she was too young to understand what love means. The real Love means devotion, sacrifice and endurance. Therefore Diana was unable to sacrifice her life for Charles and she want her happiness first.She has an ideal Charles in her mind and the real Charles did not fit in. So she become angry and blamed Charles for everything. Anyway Charles should marry a more matured woman not a girl. A girl was not his type.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 09-13-2005, 04:25 PM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by una
In the panorama interview, she hinted at something similar when she doubted that Charles could adapt to the restrictions of being king, and she wished he might find peace of mind "and from that follows other things" (i.e. he might give up his place in the succession?). Simone Simmons has her fantasizing about being consort to her son.
I would not take as gospel what Simone Simmons says. She is just another in a long line of people profiting from Diana's death and legacy.

It is funny how people will look to the scandal mongers to prove their points about Diana being bad, then condemn those same sources when the criticize Charles.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 10-27-2005, 02:54 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panther2000
That


I guess it would be more believeable if Charles & the royal family were seen crying( when they never showed any real emotions in public) .
No one saw William or Harry crying, are you saying that because you did not see them cry, they didn't care.

The British are not normally prone to public displays of grief or emotion of any sort, most of us still believe in 'the stiff upper lip' What you saw at Kensington Palace was mass hysteria, whipped up by the media.

I believe Charles did grieve for Diana, the mother of his sons, as I believe that all the Royals grieved for the loss of a life.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 10-27-2005, 03:10 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Re:

Quote:
The British are not normally prone to public displays of grief or emotion of any sort, most of us still believe in 'the stiff upper lip' What you saw at Kensington Palace was mass hysteria, whipped up by the media.
The British usually exercise a little dignity. As you rightly say, it was mass hysteria and I see it as one of the darkest days in English life. What would Queen Mary have said? People shrieking and bawling when they didn't know the woman. No dignity, no self-control and a total lack of respect for manners, authority and tradition. Ridiculous.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 10-27-2005, 07:04 PM
Alicky's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiaraprin
It is funny how people will look to the scandal mongers to prove their points about Diana being bad, then condemn those same sources when the criticize Charles.
I got that impression before Simone ever wrote her book, and I don't think anyone is trying to say that Diana was a just plain "bad" person. Humans are pretty complex.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
People shrieking and bawling when they didn't know the woman. No dignity, no self-control and a total lack of respect for manners, authority and tradition. Ridiculous.
I have to agree. I used to think it was touching, but looking back I too think it seems rather hysterical and bizarre.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 10-28-2005, 07:00 AM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
The British usually exercise a little dignity. As you rightly say, it was mass hysteria and I see it as one of the darkest days in English life. What would Queen Mary have said? People shrieking and bawling when they didn't know the woman. No dignity, no self-control and a total lack of respect for manners, authority and tradition. Ridiculous.

Perhaps the British public really loved Diana so much that they let go of their "constraint". I think it demonstrates how beloved Diana was that everyone let the constraint slip. One cannot be an emotional robot at all times, especially if something touches one deeply.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, prince charles, prince of wales, princess diana


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
Reasons why you never want to be royal? bad_barbarella Royal Chit Chat 63 10-01-2011 12:48 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games olympics ottoman picture of the month poland pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess letizia princess madeleine princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:42 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]