A New Diana?

[Denville]

It is not at all Likely,. Diana was unique. She had charm and beauty that isn't often seen in Royals or other people.

 

[Kitty1224]

It is not at all Likely,. Diana was unique. She had charm and beauty that isn't often seen in Royals or other people.

Well who would have thought anyone would surpass Princess Grace of Monaco but Diana did just that.

 

[Missjersey]

Lord I hope not.

 

[Countessmeout]

One thing was always clear to me. No matter what the problems were between Charles and Diana as people, one thing they both did well with was raising their sons. Both of them sincerely loved their boys and excelled in different ways of parenting them.

William and Harry got the best of both parents in this regard.

Agreed

For all their faults, and they BOTH certainly had plenty, they were and in Charles' case, are good parents. They both loved those boys and did their best to raise them. If you can find nothing else to compliment them on, that at least should be recognized.

I think in all the 'Charles the villain' narrative, unfortunately his roll as a father gets painted negatively. He may not have been a great husband, they both failed in that department, but father is another matter. Unfortunately some people just cant move past the marriage and see him in other roles. He cant be a good father.....because he was a bad husband. He cant be a good king.....because he was a bad husband. He cant be a good grandfather.... because he was a bad husband. And the press loves to play it up. See it in recent articles like 'Meghan helping to heal the long strife between Harry and his father' headlines.


I truly hope no one tries to live up to be Diana. Diana was a wonderful cover girl for causes, but she wasn't a good role model for a royal consort.

There is also the whole idea, that the good don't always die young, just when they die young they are preserved in such a way they seem so. They often become more Saintified with every passing year.

Its why I was glad Charlotte wasn't named Diana. The last thing any granddaughter of Diana needs, is to have that saintified image to try and live up to. Hard enough with her being the grandmother, without sharing the name as well.

I'd love to see another Anne in work ethic/commitment. I would love to see another Prince Philip or Camilla in constant support as a consort.

 

[Missjersey]

Great post Countessmeout!

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Hmm, I think the BRF standard is Sophie Wessex; she and Edward really turned the page on the disaster marriages of the 60's 70s and 80s. So I would say the BRF doesn't want another Diana but another Sophie.... And they surely don't want another Sarah.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

There will never be another Diana. People who wait for one remind me of Charlie Brown in the cartoon looking to the sky, eternally searching for the Great Pumpkin.

Another Diana is not needed. Period.

 

[Denville]

oh because Sophie was so wonderful. She had massive debts, she gave the fake Sheik interview. Edward's company followed Will around at Uni when the Press had agreed to leave him alone...

 

[Mermaid1962]

There will never be another Diana and there should never be another Diana. I say this as someone who was more sympathetic to Diana than some. Diana, the same as every human being, was unique and irreplaceable. So is Catherine and Meghan and every young woman who marries into the BRF. The best we can hope for is a woman of Diana's kindness and warmth but without her personal problems.

 

[wartenberg7]

There will never be another Diana. People who wait for one remind me of Charlie Brown in the cartoon looking to the sky, eternally searching for the Great Pumpkin.

Another Diana is not needed. Period.

Very well put! Everyone is unique and Diana positively had her share of good qualities! But who really wants to be a bulimic Borderline?! If she had not been the Prcss of Wales, I`m sure she nowaday´s would be undergoing psychiatric treatment in a clinic. Of course I feel deeply sorry she was cheated on by her husband! But she also used (many) men for her own purposes. I would even dare to ask, did the royal marriage break up because of Charles keeping on having a relationship with Camilla, or because she was seriously mentally ill, caused by an unhappy childhood? No blame, of course! Just a thought what cause led to personal unhappiness.
Returning to the actual topic of this thread: No, there wont be a second Diana in royal circles because nobody really would want that for herself!

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

There is no need to bring up Charles Camilla and Diana in this thread and why the marriage broke up.

And whatever mistakes Sophie has made is nothing compared to Diana and Sarah; and when she realized she couldn't maintain her career she gave it up to fully support the Queen. All admirable qualities in my book.

 

[Denville]

There is no need to bring up Charles Camilla and Diana in this thread and why the marriage broke up.

And whatever mistakes Sophie has made is nothing compared to Diana and Sarah; and when she realized she couldn't maintain her career she gave it up to fully support the Queen. All admirable qualities in my book.

Well I've read that courtiers think the queen should have put a stop to Sophie and Edwards inept business dealigns much sooner.. She had to give up, she was heavily in debt and had no choice but to give up her business get her debts paid off and settle to royal duties....

 

[MARG]

Bottom line, there will never be another Princess Diana, nor should there be. For good or ill she was the sum of the years of her life. Her life and nobody else can or should be measured by the years of her life.

I have always found people likening aspects of other royals to Diana more than a little morbid. Each of the new ladies married into the BRF has been held up and measured against Diana, as imperfect a woman as any other.

Not surprisingly no one has measured up. Each woman has been an attractive, if imperfect, woman whose major claim to fame has been a loving marriage (discounting acting fame), each an individual, unique royal wife. That's how it should be.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

It is silly to compare the wives of the BRF. They are unique individuals that bring their own unique strengths and flaws. I don't think either of Diana's sons would be happy with a wife like Diana--luckily they met women who suited them.

 

[Lady Nimue]

Each of the new ladies married into the BRF has been held up and measured against Diana, as imperfect a woman as any other. Not surprisingly no one has measured up.

Measured up to Diana? Please no. Every new lady that has married into the BRF has been leagues beyond Diana, in spades. Diana was a hot mess. A tragedy. Why would anyone want to aspire to that? A cautionary tale.

 

[QueenEmpath]

It is silly to compare the wives of the BRF. They are unique individuals that bring their own unique strengths and flaws. I don't think either of Diana's sons would be happy with a wife like Diana--luckily they met women who suited them.

Exactly, each royal bride is their own person. There's no need to be someone else's replica in order to prove others anything.

 

[royal rob]

People always compare new members of families not just royal families. How many women aren’t as good as their mother in law !!! Can’t cook as well , slimmer. Etc you name it the new girlfriend isn’t as pretty as his last one. It’s life. Happens in all families.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

Lady Diana Spencer was a 19-year-old going on 20 who was infatuated with Prince Charles and in love with the idea of love. She couldn't possibly have known what true love was like, nor what marrying into the royal family would ultimately be like. Reportedly, Diana and Charles were only with each other on twelve occasions prior to marrying. How could they possibly have known anything about each other? Apparently, no one in the royal family was thinking straight at the time. They were all thinking with impossibly old-fashioned minds, and they took a lot of things for granted!

Diana & Charles were completely unsuited in terms of their age difference, their interests in life, their personalities, their goals and their motivations. It's rather mind-boggling that everyone expected a young virginal teenager to simply marry a spineless, needy, lovelorn, sensitive prince, give birth to an heir and a spare and then put up meekly with a loveless marriage, while her husband cheated on her with the woman he should have had the courage and gumption to marry in the first place. I know it would have been difficult back then, but Charles should have laid down the law that if he couldn't marry Camilla, he would not marry anyone.

Perhaps it was fate though for Charles and Diana to endure their miserable marriage, just so their golden offspring could be born.

The two golden offspring weathered their griefs and traumas, and now they have with greater wisdom, honed through the fire of their parents' marriage debacle, met and married remarkable soulmates. There's no need to compare Kate and Meghan with each other, nor against the memory of Diana. All three of these gifted ladies are remarkable in their own individual and unique ways. The young, emotionally needy, unformed girl just out of her teens (and from a broken home) that Diana was when she married in 1981, can not be compared to the savvy, self-assured young women that Kate and Meghan had evolved into by the time of their respective marriages in 2011 and in 2018.

To boot, Duchess Kate and Duchess Meghan both have partners who love them, and they also have strong support systems which include full acceptance by the royal family. Diana actually had none of those valuable resources. It bears remembering that the crucible Diana endured is what has made possible the current solidity and strength of the modern royal family. Of course, the current state of affairs has also been made possible by the Queen's caring wisdom, resilience, adaptability, flexibility and tolerance.

 

[Lady Nimue]

To boot, Duchess Kate and Duchess Meghan both have partners who love them, and they also have strong support systems which include full acceptance by the royal family. Diana actually had none of those valuable resources.

According to Diana. It's all Diana's spin. Diana had tons of support. She would accept none of it. None of it. Not from Charles, not from her mother/family, from no one. From what I have read.

It bears remembering that the crucible Diana endured is what has made possible the current solidity and strength of the modern royal family.

I disagree here. What Diana 'endured' was self-inflicted. I don't think she even tried to be an agreeable family member. She certainly didn't try to be a 'good wife' imo. It seems to have been all about her rather than the needs of the family or Charles.

The 'current solidity and strength' of the family has everything to do with good marriages. Particularly disastrous was Charles' marriage, and then Andrew's, but Anne's first marriage dissolved without tabloid stories and screaming headlines. Same with Margaret's divorce. The family always presented as solid and strong imo. It was Diana that was the spanner in the works.

The crucible endured was something the royal family endured (particularly the Queen) because of Diana's behavior. Oddly enough the openness of the BRF that began with the Queen and that was carried on with Charles (and was carried to such disastrous extremes by Diana) continues with Charles. He remains open. A man of courage. ?

It is with William and Harry that the consequences of Diana have reached their logical conclusion: allow love to be the deciding factor in every marriage, to the point of allowing cohabitation. In fact, I think Diana was a cautionary tale for every royal family which is why we have seen the marriages we have seen in other royal families. There has been a real shift to making sure marriages are love matches rather than opportunists winning the brass ring because of 'breeding' and the 'right family.' [Yes, my bias is that Diana was very much an opportunist.]

What I do agree with is that the BRF have learned to 'manage' the PR a bit more closely (plus no one is telling tales). It helps that they have had (like with Sophie and now Meghan) in-marrying women that have some considerable understanding of PR in their own rights, as well as being agreeable and likable people (plus being the souls of discretion themselves).

But that the BRF is more 'solid' now than it was in Diana's day? Couldn't say. Diana was definitely the spoiler in that family's midst. When I watch the videos of Anne's children's christenings (for example) I see a pretty 'solid' extended family. No reason to believe otherwise, except for Diana (and Fergie).

Of course, the current state of affairs has also been made possible by the Queen's caring wisdom, resilience, adaptability, flexibility and tolerance.

It may be as you say but it is more to do with the final dispensing of arcane conditions for the in-marrying mate (by the Queen and the institution and maybe the public imo). Too late for Charles (how different it would have been had he been allowed to marry Lady Davina Sheffield: I really do think Diana's resemblance to the Lady Davina is no coincidence, though I view the Lady Davina as having been the far more sophisticated and mature beauty to Diana's 'girlishness').

 

[Denville]

LaDi
Perhaps it was fate though for Charles and Diana to endure their miserable marriage, just so their golden offspring could be born.

The
Tce.

what is so golden about William and Harry? I see nothing but 2 averagely OK princes....

 

[Lady Nimue]

Imagine if their mama was the impeccably beautiful Lady Davina Sheffield. And were raised in a happy marriage! 'Golden' might well apply. (BTW it is my view that the Lady Davina Sheffield would have caused as much, if not more, hysteria than did Diana. It was the times. Those times were ripe for that sort of thing).

However, we are nothing if not resilient as humans, regardless of what happens to us. William and Harry both seem to have done the best they could with a mixed bag by marrying well (for love). If anything, that is Diana's 'legacy' to her sons.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

what is so golden about William and Harry? I see nothing but 2 averagely OK princes....

Too true neither has done anything too remarkable. I still say Harry is in the lead with the Invictus Games. But for me Charles is much more impressive and has been for many decades.

As for marrying for love, I hate to throw a wrench in that theory but Andrew and Sarah married for love and it ended bad as well. I think there has to be a balance between "I love you" and "can I do this job".

 

[Denville]

Too true neither has done anything too remarkable. I still say Harry is in the lead with the Invictus Games. But for me Charles is much more impressive and has been for many decades.

As for marrying for love, I hate to throw a wrench in that theory but Andrew and Sarah married for love and it ended bad as well. I think there has to be a balance between "I love you" and "can I do this job".

True, I would rather have Charles than either of them...
Agree about the marrying for love. though Im not sure if it was a very solid sort of love between Andrew and Sarah. I think she was in love with him for a bit, and soon lost interest, the better she got to know him.. and of course regardless fo whether they were n love or not, she was a disaster...

 

[Marengo]

And on that note, let's return to the topic of this thread... The British RF can be discussed in detail in the British forum.

 

[princeofitaly]

I think only two women are very very popular around the world in this moment like Diana and the two are Duchess Meghan of Sussex and Duchess Kate of Cambridge, the two are the most popular princess/duchess/member of royal/princely family in this moment, but I think only Meghan Markle could be the new Diana.

 

[Somebody]

I think only two women are very very popular around the world in this moment like Diana and the two are Duchess Meghan of Sussex and Duchess Kate of Cambridge, the two are the most popular princess/duchess/member of royal/princely family in this moment, but I think only Meghan Markle could be the new Diana.

Which goes to show that it doesn't really matter who they are just that it is all about marrying the most senior British princes.

 

[Denville]

Which goes to show that it doesn't really matter who they are just that it is all about marrying the most senior British princes.

There are other royal women who have been seen as a a possible "new Diana"... but I dotn believe that any of them achieved her level of public attention. I certainly don't think that either Kate or Meghan are at anything like that level of "being admired."....

 

[Somebody]

There are other royal women who have been seen as a a possible "new Diana"... but I dotn believe that any of them achieved her level of public attention. I certainly don't think that either Kate or Meghan are at anything like that level of "being admired."....

Had Máxima married the future British king instead of the (future) Dutch king she might have had many more fans worldwide.

 

[JR76]

Had Máxima married the future British king instead of the (future) Dutch king she might have had many more fans worldwide.

I'm quite sure that the continental royals are grateful and pleased with not being as world famous as the Windsors. They only ones I can think of who reached the same level of recognition as Diana are Caroline and Stephanie of Monaco and none of them seemed happy about it.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I think only two women are very very popular around the world in this moment like Diana and the two are Duchess Meghan of Sussex and Duchess Kate of Cambridge, the two are the most popular princess/duchess/member of royal/princely family in this moment, but I think only Meghan Markle could be the new Diana.

I don't think either of them aspire to be the "new Diana." They tend to be very private, do not court the press or get chummy with reporters. The only media person I can think of that they have any closeness with may be Chris Jackson. There is a tendency to withdraw and tamp down any media hysteria by being fairly boring.
Even when Meghan had her blog in her former life, she shared limited personal information.

Diana grew to enjoy the adulation and press attention, only being upset when she couldn't control it. There is a reason she had Richard Kay on speed dial.