The Late Diana, Princess of Wales News Thread 3: September 2005-September 2006

[Saragli]

The Enquier is a trashy tabloid that will do anything to make drama. Diana is history. Just because one potrait is taken down doesnt mean the whole world is going to forget about her or C and C are working a conspiracy to erase her from history. It is the natural flow for Diana to start to fade a little. Thats what happens when you are no longer alive. She is a part of history.

 

[Elspeth]

the new is in others newspapars too, is from a month old.

Feel free to provide links.

 

[corazon]

The Enquier is a trashy tabloid that will do anything to make drama. Diana is history. Just because one potrait is taken down doesnt mean the whole world is going to forget about her or C and C are working a conspiracy to erase her from history. It is the natural flow for Diana to start to fade a little. Thats what happens when you are no longer alive. She is a part of history.

yeah, she is part of british history, like many another princess, kings and queens. she have her place in the british's history like every member of the royal family from the present and the past.

 

[corazon]

Feel free to provide links.

the BBC published this:
The National Portrait Gallery has been accused of airbrushing Princess Diana out of history after it removed all 41 portraits of her from its walls, reports the Scottish Sunday Express

the history not is new.

 

[ysbel]

The Bryan Organ portrait is not very good. I saw it when I went to the National Portrait Gallery in 1982. It was done during the engagement and showed Diana hunching over wearing blue jeans smack dab in the middle of the canvas. He did a portrait of Prince Charles around that time that is equally as cartoonish and bad.

The one really spectacular portrait of Diana is at Althorp and was painted by Nelson Shanks. I couldn't find a decent pic but this gives you an idea of what it looks like.

http://www.althorp.com/house-grounds/saloon.asp

I saw it on an exhibit in Philadelphia and the photos don't do justice to it. It just glows. Nelson Shanks was a teacher at my art school and he was a terrible teacher but a fantastic painter.

 

[Elspeth]

Corazon, that is a synopsis of an article containing an accusation - an article in a tabloid newspaper. It doesn't say who's making the accusation; the only thing I can find is a statement from the gallery saying that it's been removed for restoration.

Apparently people are concluding, on the basis of absolutely no evidence, that the pictures of Diana were removed from the National Portrait Gallery in order to pretend she never existed or to salve Prince Charles's guilty conscience or something. It would be very nice to back up these suppositions with something resembling facts.

 

[corazon]

Corazon, that is a synopsis of an article containing an accusation - an article in a tabloid newspaper. It doesn't say who's making the accusation; the only thing I can find is a statement from the gallery saying that it's been removed for restoration.

Apparently people are concluding, on the basis of absolutely no evidence, that the pictures of Diana were removed from the National Portrait Gallery in order to pretend she never existed or to salve Prince Charles's guilty conscience or something. It would be very nice to back up these suppositions with something resembling facts.

I don't lnow if the story of the gallery is true, I never acussed to prince charles or another person. the story not is new, was published in december 21. is old, not said nothing about this in the web page of the royal gallery.

 

[Queen Mary I]

Corazon, that is a synopsis of an article containing an accusation - an article in a tabloid newspaper. It doesn't say who's making the accusation; the only thing I can find is a statement from the gallery saying that it's been removed for restoration.

Apparently people are concluding, on the basis of absolutely no evidence, that the pictures of Diana were removed from the National Portrait Gallery in order to pretend she never existed or to salve Prince Charles's guilty conscience or something. It would be very nice to back up these suppositions with something resembling facts.

Well my sister-in-law is good enough for me as to the Portraits. You are right, she was told 'restoration' purposes. I think it only natural to suspect Royal sensibilities are being spared after the fiasco at yet another location of another Diana portrait removed ( and then placed back after the uproar) when Charles and Camilla were going to visit. I'll get back with the link. Here it is:

Artist demands return of Portrait - from the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_east/4693205.stm

If they needed to 'restore' Diana's portraits why wasn't it done sooner? Rather than AFTER C & C's nuptials? It's all suspect IMHO. I mean it's curious timing at best. They are certainly never going to admit that it was done for C & C.

 

[corazon]

Well my sister-in-law is good enough for me as to the Portraits. You are right, she was told 'restoration' purposes. think it only natural to suspect Royal sensibilities are being spared after the fiasco at yet another location of another Diana portrait removed ( and then placed back after the uproar) when Charles and Camilla were going to visit. I'll get back with the link. Here it is:

Artist demands return of Portrait - from the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_east/4693205.stm

the portrait in wales back to his place after the visit? I did not know that

 

[Queen Mary I]

The Enquier is a trashy tabloid that will do anything to make drama. Diana is history. Just because one potrait is taken down doesnt mean the whole world is going to forget about her or C and C are working a conspiracy to erase her from history. It is the natural flow for Diana to start to fade a little. Thats what happens when you are no longer alive. She is a part of history.

According to what I was told by visitors to the Gallery ALL 41 portraits have been removed. I won't be in England until September so I can't check it out for myself. Perhaps a poster here could check it out and confirm. But I stand by my sister-in-law's report.

 

[corazon]

The web site for the gallery says they have 41 different portaits of Diana. and it says one of her with William and Harry is currently on display, I try to find some confirmaion from the gallery's staff.

 

[Queen Mary I]

the portrait in wales back to his place after the visit? I did not know that

But of course it had nothing to do with C & C's visit. They needed to put up some scrolls or something in it's place. Right. And I'm the Queen Of Sheba.

 

[corazon]

But of course it had nothing to do with C & C's visit. They needed to put up some scrolls or something in it's place. Right. And I'm the Queen Of Sheba.

ha ha,

 

[Elspeth]

It's a shame when you get a situation where a city council decides to move a picture, apparently because they don't want to offend the prince, and the story morphs into criticisms of the prince for being easily offended. The decision there was the council's, not the prince's; I may be mistaken, but I rather doubt that Prince Charles would have turned round and walked out of the building just because it had Diana's picture in it.

If the National Portrait Gallery has taken down all of Diana's pictures - and the ones I looked at on the website all said "Not on display," it would be nice if someone from there would explain why they did it. Otherwise no doubt someone on a website somewhere will start speculating that someone at the Palace asked them to do it, and before we know where we are it'll be being reported as fact.

 

[Elspeth]

But of course it had nothing to do with C & C's visit. They needed to put up some scrolls or something in it's place. Right. And I'm the Queen Of Sheba.

And this decision was the council's decision, not Charles's, right?

 

[Queen Mary I]

The web site for the gallery says they have 41 different portaits of Diana. and it says one of her with William and Harry is currently on display, I try to find some confirmaion from the gallery's staff.

Having them and putting them up for display are two different things. But if they are to be believed the Portraits are being 'restored'. On another Forum a poster is saying the NPR was 'embarassed after being bombarded with emails protesting the removal of the late Princess' Portraits'. I have not been able to confirm the source for THAT information but I have emailed the NPR myself. I am still awaiting a response.

 

[Queen Mary I]

And this decision was the council's decision, not Charles's, right?

The councils. I will give them the benefit of the doubt. But I will still wonder. If it happens again what are we supposed to think Elspeth? Restoration again? Scrolls?

I don't think Prince Charles would want bad press like this-so I must say it would be like working against himself. Whatever one may think of her no one can deny the impact this young woman had on British history and her portrait deserves a place of honor at the NPR. At least one. I'm sure when Camilla's goes up it will be placed well away from hers.

 

[corazon]

It's a shame when you get a situation where a city council decides to move a picture, apparently because they don't want to offend the prince, and the story morphs into criticisms of the prince for being easily offended. The decision there was the council's, not the prince's; I may be mistaken, but I rather doubt that Prince Charles would have turned round and walked out of the building just because it had Diana's picture in it.

If the National Portrait Gallery has taken down all of Diana's pictures - and the ones I looked at on the website all said "Not on display," it would be nice if someone from there would explain why they did it. Otherwise no doubt someone on a website somewhere will start speculating that someone at the Palace asked them to do it, and before we know where we are it'll be being reported as fact.

you're right elspeth, but why charles can offend for see a picture of the woman who was her wife and continues being the mother of her children?
only was a portrait of the princess of wales in wales.

 

[corazon]

Whatever one may think of her no one can deny the impact this young woman had on British history and her portrait deserves a place of honor at the NPR. At least one.

absolutely I agree with you.

I have emailed the NPR myself. I am still awaiting a response.

me too!!!!!
I waiting for a answer.

 

[corazon]

confirmed, only a photo is still in display.
Prince Henry of Wales; Diana, Princess of Wales; Prince William of Wales
by Derry Moore, 12th Earl of Drogheda
Date: 1992
Medium: C-type colour print
Measurements: 14 in. x 17 3/4 in. (355 mm x 452 mm)
On display at the National Portrait Gallery

 

[selrahc4]

As someone pointed out earlier in this thread, not all portraits in the NPG collection can be on display at the same time. The collection is just too huge. I highly doubt that there were 41 portraits of Diana on display at the same time.

For example, the NPG cites 147 portraits of HM Queen Elizabeth II. However when you check their site for "portraits on display", you see 1 of her alone and 1 of her with others. Now, surely, no one thinks that 145 portraits of HM are being hidden so as not to offend/upstage anyone.

 

[Queen Mary I]

As someone pointed out earlier in this thread, not all portraits in the NPG collection can be on display at the same time. The collection is just too huge. I highly doubt that there were 41 portraits of Diana on display at the same time.

For example, the NPG cites 147 portraits of HM Queen Elizabeth II. However when you check their site for "portraits on display", you see 1 of her alone and 1 of her with others. Now, surely, no one thinks that 145 portraits of HM are being hidden so as not to offend/upstage anyone.

I agree but they were apparently taken down for 'restoration' and it seems there is only one now of Diana and her children-and it is just that the timing seems suspect. If the portraits never appear again then I am going to have to believe it was due to consideration for Royal sensibilities. I could be very wrong of course so I will give the NPR the benefit of the doubt.

edited for typos. :/

 

[Elspeth]

I think they only said that one was being restored; that one was the damaged one by Bryan Organ, which might need more frequent restoration since that idiot took a knife to it a while back. The others may have been removed for different reasons, although I don't know how many of them were actually hanging during her lifetime.

 

[Queen Mary I]

I think they only said that one was being restored; that one was the damaged one by Bryan Organ, which might need more frequent restoration since that idiot took a knife to it a while back. The others may have been removed for different reasons, although I don't know how many of them were actually hanging during her lifetime.

I hope the NPR answers my email. But if it is true they have been bombarded by emails it may be a while until they get to little insignificant me lol! I suppose I must give them the benefit of the doubt as well.

 

[corazon]

I wait for a answer to my my mail too.

 

[selrahc4]

I agree but they were apparently taken down for 'restoration' and it seems there is only one now of Diana and her children-and it is just that the timing seems suspect. If the portraits never appear again then I am going to have to believe it was due to consideration for Royal sensibilities. I could be very wrong of course so I will give the NPR the benefit of the doubt.

edited for typos. :/

Yes, but my point was about the implication that 41 portraits were "taken down" at the same time. I wonder if all 41 were ever "up" at the same time.

 

[Queen Mary I]

Yes, but my point was about the implication that 41 portraits were "taken down" at the same time. I wonder if all 41 were ever "up" at the same time.

No, I have read that they went 'disappearing' one by one.
[ed]

 

[Incas]

If the portrait were known to have been taken down, then they didn't just "disappear". A choice of word that made the whole thing more sinister. It's a big deal for so many pieces to go missing, no matter the subject.

 

[selrahc4]

No, I have read that they went 'disappearing' one by one.
[ed]

Over what period of time?

 

[Warren]

Paranoia is running rampant on this one.

As has been asked previously, were all 41 or whatever portraits of Diana on display at the one time? Were all 147 portraits of the Queen on display at the one time?
A painting comes down for maintenance/cleaning/restoration and immediately there are allegations of dark plots and conspiracies.

Time for a cup of tea?