The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2501  
Old 07-02-2017, 03:05 AM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades CA, United States
Posts: 4,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Answer to Note: I have already pointed to some of Charles's many accomplishments on the Charles and the Freemasons thread when I wrote of his speeches on architecture, agriculture, alternative medicines etc. Surely I don't have to repeat myself here?
Okay. Understood.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
You inferred that what I was saying wasn't true when you asked for the source on Charles's petulance, which I gave. I do feel attacked, and I stand by my views.
On the former point I explained why I was questioning it, and did so at some length across several posts. Thank you for the sourcing. As I already said, and also said I understood (I do believe).

On the latter point, asking for clarity and/or a source is not an attack in any debate/discussion I am usually in. Not sure that my letting you know that i was not intending to attack, will carry any weight with you, as often we do cling to what we want to believe about someone, not so?

It's late here and this posting back-and-forth is pointless except perhaps as a model of the difficulties inherent in this topic of conversation. It's wearying. Off to bed am I. All's well, on a positive note.
__________________

__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #2502  
Old 07-02-2017, 04:42 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I know I've read several places where the times that it showed that Charles was displeased with the attention Diana garnered was obvious. I'd have to pull out all the books and find the incidents. I vaguely remember a quote that Charles made at one time that he needed two wives. One for each side of the street.

I don't think his displeasure with Diana's attention was anything that the waiting public would have grasped on in the beginning but I do believe that it was there and Charles was very unused to it. As I said earlier, there were also times when Charles beamed with pride watching Diana draw 'em all in like flies to honey.
for goodness sake that was a JOKE. if you see the video when he said it you see that he said it In a jokey way,...OK I think there were times when he was a bit upset by the fact that people rushed to see her and ignored hm but I think that is perfectly understandable. I think it was Diana who glossed it as "Charles hated her getting attention" and was horrible to her about it. I don't believe he was unkind to her about it, he may have bene unhappy.. but I don't believe he shouted at her afterwards abuot the fact that she was getting allt the attention.
And in the early days I tink he was very proud of her being so beautiful, and getting noticed.. There is a quote in Austrailia of his saying to a pressman "look at her, sin't she lovely, I'm so proud of her..."
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2503  
Old 07-02-2017, 04:53 AM
Dee Anna's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Here, Ireland
Posts: 599
Is he really? (Real question, I actually didn't know)

I'd have thought these men would have their own means of living by now, inheritance from their mother included.

Who knows what kind of a private relationship Harry and William have with their father, or Camilla. I do remember reading an article about when Camilla met them, or at least Willliam for the first time after her relationship with Charles was finally made official. It went well, but she did feel the need for a large G&T afterwards!

Charles remarrying following his failed marriage with their beloved (and lost) mother was always going to be something of a difficulty, that it would be their mother's nemesis - putting the tin hat on it comes to mind.

Regardless of when the physical relationship resumed, the emotional relationship between Charles and Camilla was always there, before Diana, during her marriage and very obviously after Diana. She knew it back then and that was the problem.

Harry and Wiliam know that, so, a bit of a bridge to build.

IMO, they did build it. Going only on body language alone, there is nothing to suggest a distance between Charles and his sons when seen in public. I suppose it could be argued there is nothing to suggest an especial closeness either! But they all do appear to get along. Which is about as much as can be said about the public persona of any fragmented family group.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I would say they have talked about her quite a bit over the years, long before now. However, he is their father and even if he is a bit prickly, I think that they love him and it is right that they take his feelings into account. he is paying for a lot of their lifestyle after all.
I've done it again!

Thinking I'm replying to the last post when it is actually only the last post on the page I'm on! Previous post in response to this one!
__________________
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken ..... Oscar Wilde
Reply With Quote
  #2504  
Old 07-02-2017, 04:59 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,399
In the Tina Brown book 'The Diana Chronicles' there is a chapter called 'The Upstage Problem' and another called 'Stardust' in which she refers to Diana's effect on the crowds who came to see her and Charles's reaction to it, including quotes from people who were there. It was an unconscious effect by Diana in the beginning, and she did not have the least intention of upstaging her husband. Nevertheless she did, and at times he was ungracious about it and felt ignored (by the crowds.)

Other men , like JFK and King Willem Alexander of the Netherlands have made a joke of the fact that crowds loved their wives and haven't felt aggrieved.
Reply With Quote
  #2505  
Old 07-02-2017, 05:05 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,660
yes at times he was bothered by it. Just because some men would not be bothered does not mean that every man (or woman) would not be bothered. Charles is an insecure shy man, its hard for him to overcome his shyness to do his job, but he has made himself do it.. and I can understand that he was at times unhappy that Diana was now getting crazy attention. I don't believe however he was shouting at her in private on the issue, just that it upset him. I know she didn't try to do it at first, she just was attractive to people, and could not help it. later she DID tryr to upstage him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dee Anna View Post
Is he really? (Real question, I actually didn't know)

I'd have thought these men would have their own means of living by now, inheritance from their mother included.

.

.
I'm not srue what you mean Dee Anna, but I think that if it is about Will Harry and their dad, it problaby is not quite "Charles and Diana", and maybe we should take it ot another thread? I Did say that Charles is paying for Will and Harry, is that what you mean?
Reply With Quote
  #2506  
Old 07-02-2017, 05:13 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,399
Neither I nor Sarah Bradford whom I quoted on this said that he was shouting at Diana. Bradford quoted a member of staff who spoke of 'petulance' and she (the author) wrote of Charles's resentment. The member of staff said that Diana didn't understand (when she was trying so hard on the first Aus/NZ tour) and that she became upset at his reaction.
Reply With Quote
  #2507  
Old 07-02-2017, 05:54 AM
Dee Anna's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Here, Ireland
Posts: 599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I'm not srue what you mean Dee Anna, but I think that if it is about Will Harry and their dad, it problaby is not quite "Charles and Diana", and maybe we should take it ot another thread? I Did say that Charles is paying for Will and Harry, is that what you mean?
Denville, see my previous last post. I've done it before (and probably will again!!), replied to not the last post. Hope that helps.
__________________
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken ..... Oscar Wilde
Reply With Quote
  #2508  
Old 07-02-2017, 08:02 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Neither I nor Sarah Bradford whom I quoted on this said that he was shouting at Diana. Bradford quoted a member of staff who spoke of 'petulance' and she (the author) wrote of Charles's resentment. The member of staff said that Diana didn't understand (when she was trying so hard on the first Aus/NZ tour) and that she became upset at his reaction.
yes he was upset and a bit petulant.. but it was understandable that he might react with some dismay. If he was shouting and yelling at her, I would fault him but I don't think he was. He was used to being the centre of attention, I think it is quite understandable that when he was left with people moaning and saying "Oh dear we've stood on the wrong side and only got HIM", he might be annoyed.
Reply With Quote
  #2509  
Old 07-02-2017, 01:21 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,331
I think too that in reacting to something Charles has said in the past, sometimes we take it out of context years later. One thing I've noticed about Charles over the years is that his sense of humor, at times, can be very self effacing. The quote about wives on both sides of the street is one. Another could be when Will and Kate got engaged and he was asked for his reaction. He quipped "Well, they've been practicing long enough".

To be honest with you all, I haven't read anything in this thread that reeks of denigrating one to glorifying the other. I think all of here have a genuine interest in not only both Charles and Diana, but also the tumultuous period that they both went through with their marriage. We read about it, we discuss it and we've extensively torn it apart, turned it upside down and dug into the various elements of their marriage like the most professional of anthropologists and archaeologists. Its what we do and what we find interesting.

In a marriage such as Charles and Diana's was, there are no blatant good guys and bad guys and to be honest, none of us know the whole story. Only the two involved in the actual marriage do and even those two people had different viewpoints on what was and contradicted each other.

Confucius once stated a curse that goes "May you live in interesting times". One thing for certain is that Diana and Charles' relationship from the get go has been quite interesting.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #2510  
Old 07-02-2017, 01:35 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,660
well he obviously mean that remark to be taken as a joke.. whether he was secretly upset and trying to conceal it by humour I don't know. (I wouldn't say he's particulary witty or funny myself),
I think he was unhappy, yes but I don't believe he was angry with Diana or really giving her a hard time.. Mabye a bit of sulking. I think that in Aus when they could be together with William, they were tolerably happy, but unfortuanately that was not the main part of their life.. They were on the Royal duty merrygoround and they had to do their job. And it did create some tension between them. Diana was at first afraid of the crowds, in Wales and had to be coaxed a bit. Charles flet upset when she was so very popular and he was being ignored. But most marriages have problems of adjustment in their early years, and I dont think that Charles was acting like a monster at this stage..
Reply With Quote
  #2511  
Old 07-02-2017, 02:06 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 1,071
I've had a relationship with someone like Diana (high strung drama queen) and basically I can't blame Charles for withdrawing from her. Thing is, that Diana was SO determined to be a miserable person some times that she clearly didn't WANT to be happy when she had the chance. When she talked about her sons being her 'men in her life' that was a huge red flag that she clearly wasn't at all healthy. I don't believe that she should be idealized or put on a pedestal by the public or any young person since she was someone who at some point didn't WANT to work to make her life better. It's also not right that she was excused when she was stalking that married man and screaming threats at the wives. Many keep making excuses for a lot of what she did and I did get disgusted with how she had the gall to openly BLAME Charles for the fact that royal life was a way of life where she had to make an effort and actually do things she didn't like or didn't want to and couldn't just shrug it all off.
Reply With Quote
  #2512  
Old 07-02-2017, 02:42 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,304
Yes, and it was the same during 1983's tour of Canada. They appeared to be a happy couple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
He certainly gave the impression of being positively smitten, if not besotted, by his wife on the NZ leg of the tour.
Just to clarify, the tour that I mentioned in my post re "Lady Di" was the tour that Charles made on his own in late March and April of 1981.
Reply With Quote
  #2513  
Old 07-02-2017, 02:46 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,331
I know where you're coming from. A lot of people, when faced with a relationship with high drama coming from the other person, finds it best not to feed into it and walk away which actually does no better as would feeding into a screaming match would be. Charles, I believe, is a man that doesn't handle confrontation well so he was really caught between a rock and a hard place when dealing with Diana's temperament.

What I find that is a blessing is these forums where all aspects of these people come into play. The good, the bad, the ugly and the warts and warps of them are looked at. There's no black and white or saints or sinners but real human beings with very human foibles and very human achievements. Its nice to be able to look at and piece together what could be termed as the whole picture. Of course, we'll never entirely finish this jigsaw puzzle.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #2514  
Old 07-02-2017, 02:47 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,091
Didn't they usually appear as a 'happy couple' until right at the end of things? The trip to Asia (Korea?) was where the gig was up.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #2515  
Old 07-02-2017, 02:51 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,304
The body language started telling in the mid-1980s IIRC. That trip to Wales in 1987 to visit flood victims was very chilly indeed.
Reply With Quote
  #2516  
Old 07-02-2017, 03:00 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades CA, United States
Posts: 4,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by AristoCat View Post
I've had a relationship with someone like Diana (high strung drama queen) and basically I can't blame Charles for withdrawing from her. Thing is, that Diana was SO determined to be a miserable person some times that she clearly didn't WANT to be happy when she had the chance. When she talked about her sons being her 'men in her life' that was a huge red flag that she clearly wasn't at all healthy. I don't believe that she should be idealized or put on a pedestal by the public or any young person since she was someone who at some point didn't WANT to work to make her life better. It's also not right that she was excused when she was stalking that married man and screaming threats at the wives. Many keep making excuses for a lot of what she did and I did get disgusted with how she had the gall to openly BLAME Charles for the fact that royal life was a way of life where she had to make an effort and actually do things she didn't like or didn't want to and couldn't just shrug it all off.
Well said. It's possible many of us have known a person(s) like Diana and that makes us sympathetic to Charles' dilemma. It's also probable that many have been in relationships where they were bitterly betrayed and that makes them sympathetic to Diana. I have often suspected the latter as the basic reason for the Diana adoration, given all the rationales given regarding the 'ol meanie Charles. Some projection there (maybe).

I particularly resonate to what you said about Diana's stalking and treatment of the wives of men she fancied. She was shameless. Totally working from a sense of entitlement imo. I think she let her whole royal position go to her head, and that started early in the game. She thought she was untouchable and the adoration of the crowd fed all that. (Have I ever seen that at work in people I have known!). Fame and public adulation really can warp a person's sense of reality, especially regarding themselves. It's a disastrous place to be inwardly.

But most curious is to see the disconnect between the public and private personas. It's almost as though the greater the adulation the greater the stress on the person's sense of self, and inevitably (it seems, though certainly not always) there emerges demons in the private life that I don't think would have been there quite so obviously otherwise. Just some thoughts.

Not sure what to make of Diana: haven't decided if she was someone warped by the status and adulation, or did she walk into the situation already tipsy? Can't decide. Might be a combination of both, of course.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #2517  
Old 07-02-2017, 03:14 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,331
I think that is the reason why I liked the Bedell Smith biography of Diana the most. It looked at Diana's life through a psychological viewpoint. How her psychological makeup played a big part in the person we all came to know as Shy Di then The Princess of Wales and then Diana, Princess of Wales.

It kind of explained the why she would do the things she did without denigrating her or putting her on a pedestal or giving her labels such as "egotistical" "victim" "lunatic" or any other appellation we can think of. Its a portrait of a troubled princess as the title denotes but if truth be told, there are aspects of all of us that can be deemed as troublesome.

I think it was the best insight I've had into Diana and will be one I reread often.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #2518  
Old 07-02-2017, 03:22 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
The body language started telling in the mid-1980s IIRC. That trip to Wales in 1987 to visit flood victims was very chilly indeed.
Ah...I don't even remember that...I went a few years not really paying a lot of attention to the BRF due to 'real life'.

Any specific pics?

LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #2519  
Old 07-02-2017, 04:22 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 1,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I know where you're coming from. A lot of people, when faced with a relationship with high drama coming from the other person, finds it best not to feed into it and walk away which actually does no better as would feeding into a screaming match would be. Charles, I believe, is a man that doesn't handle confrontation well so he was really caught between a rock and a hard place when dealing with Diana's temperament.

What I find that is a blessing is these forums where all aspects of these people come into play. The good, the bad, the ugly and the warts and warps of them are looked at. There's no black and white or saints or sinners but real human beings with very human foibles and very human achievements. Its nice to be able to look at and piece together what could be termed as the whole picture. Of course, we'll never entirely finish this jigsaw puzzle.
^I"m glad to share my experiences.

I believe that with someone like Diana, it was unfathomable that at some point in her life, people would go off and have lives of their own that wouldn't make her the center of all of it. She would in fact have spent much fo the rest of her life looking to be eternally glorious and eternally put-upon at the same time. She said that she was bulimic and a cutter and someone who threw tantrums and pulled stuff against people that should have landed her in a mental facility, not St. Paul's cathedral as a bride. Bulimia, self-cutting, alleged suicide attempts, the phone stalking, and then that worldwide temper tantrum via Panorama are all signs of someone with SERIOUS conditions. Just being bulimic can get a person committed and in my honest view, she should have been required to prove mental stability before being able to take her sons on trips. Any normal parent would have been denied unsupervised visitation. She never took any responsibility for her life and never blamed herself for one single mistake she made in her life.

The only reason she had problems in life were when she realized that she wasn't some special snowflake entitled to having Charles BE the solution to her problems and be the best of everything and be willing to give it up all the time all for her sake. She then messed with Hasnat and wanted him to quit his day to day life so he could be a world doctor and basically be all over the place where she was. Then Hoare and Carling, she had no excuse for any of that. Third, Dodi was practically engaged to someone else at the time, but she had no problems stealing the guy and got outraged that someone had the gall to call Dodi out on his jilting behavior. She kept getting surprised that she ran into men who weren't going to drop it all, all for her. She ended up in a car wreck since drama became the drug she was addicted to, not booze or drugs, but drama.
Reply With Quote
  #2520  
Old 07-02-2017, 04:54 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,331
What you point out is all too true and pretty much would be the way of things now in 2017. In the early 80s to the mid 90s, it still was the era of depending on "mother's little helpers" to get through psychological problems and of course the stigma was very much there that a mental issue was not something one wanted publicly known about. It was easily shoved under the carpet with the hopes that it would all "go away".

There was also quite a bit in Diana's makeup that was genuine. Her compassion, her ability to connect with people and her conviction of wanting to make a difference. She was loaded with natural charisma which drew people to her. Unfortunately at times, it was this ability that got skewered in her mental processes and I think she did become addicted to how the adulation of the masses made her feel.

Perhaps if there had been a campaign such as "Heads Together" in full force before Charles even met Diana, things may have worked out differently. I don't know. Perhaps Diana's mental issues and the rest of the family's "dysfunctional" issues paved the way for Heads Together. We don't know.
__________________

__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, marriage, 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
Charles and Diana Picture Thread Josefine Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 449 10-11-2019 12:46 AM
Charles and Diana: Visit to Italy - 1985 jun5 Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 57 09-02-2012 09:35 PM




Popular Tags
abu dhabi althorp american history anastasia anastasia once upon a time ancestry british royals chittagong countess of snowdon crown princess victoria diana princess of wales dutch dutch royals family tree future games haakon vii hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hill history house of glucksburg imperial household interesting intro israel jack brooksbank jacobite japan jewelry jumma kids movie king salman king willem-alexander list of rulers mailing maxima monaco history nepal nobel prize norwegian royal family prince charles prince charles of luxembourg princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn walailak princess elizabeth princess ribha pronunciation queen louise queen maxima royal balls royal events royal jewels royal wedding saudi arabia serbian royal family snowdon spain speech spencer family sweden taiwan thailand thai royal family tracts unsubscribe videos wedding gown wittelsbach


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:49 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×