The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #3321  
Old 08-10-2020, 04:10 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Bonn, Germany
Posts: 15
I think she was looking for love and stability. She was deeply traumatized by her parents' acrimonious divorce and thought that by marrying the PoW nothing similar would happen to her. That's at least what I understand (and I do understand - my parents divorced and battled for years when I was a girl and it has left me with a deep seated fear of being left, being not good enough).

She also seems to have had a girlish ambition to marry a Prince, to marry the highest prize, but also the man who would give her a position where she could unfold her unique talent. I read somewhere that already as a girl she went to visit old and sick people and had rapport with them. She may have had an intuitive sense of being the right woman for the role she was marrying into. She had more than only the Spencer closeness to royalty - she had royal charisma of her own, and this charisma may have needed an outlet, like every real talent needs.

They were both under the illusion of being in love, and at the same time enchanted with what they saw in each other. There are pictures with a real glow from the start of the relationship.

That unfortunate remark "whatever being in love means" sounds ominous in retrospect but may simply have been said in embarrassment - no talks about feelings please. He may have felt that the question was too intrusive, too touchy-feely, and rebuked the interviewer - noticing only much later that he rebuked his bride-to-be with his remark, too. I may be totally wrong but that's my impression re-watching the interview. He may have wanted to make Diana laugh a bit because she was quite tense. I don't know and can't know.

There are always chains of misunderstandings when alienation sets in. What a pity. Their marriage may have worked, I don't believe it was doomed from the start. Charles would have needed more emotional maturity, more willingness to open up. Had he given Diana the unconditional love she craved...

If, if, if.

I'm a few years younger than her and remember my mother saying on the wedding day of Diana and Charles: you will grow up and grow old with her. She'll be the sign post of your generation like Grace Kelly was for me. When I saw Princess Grace I saw my own life, just a few years on.

This has connected me and probably many of my generation to her. Somehow, even after her death and even after recognizing how deeply troubled she was (and how in some of her interviews she molds her memories a bit), she has the power to reach out and evoke emotions.

For Charles, she was probably too much - he didn't expect her to be such a powerful presence with global appeal. I'm certain when he looks back he recognizes what he could have done better. Like we all do.

I like seeing him relaxed and happy with Camilla. I would have wished similar happiness for his ex-wife. She certainly would have deserved it. Had she remained alive, they'd probably all get along well nowadays, thanks to a healthy sense of humour in the persons concerned, and thanks to the shared bonds with the sons.

Sorry for the rant - just my thoughts, I have no way of knowing whether I'm right.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3322  
Old 08-10-2020, 04:33 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,414
At 19 years old, falling in love is all unicorns and rainbows and happily ever after and being with "the prince of your dreams" and carries with it those expectations that are supposed to last far into the marriage. In the courtship stage and the "really over the moon in love" stage, no one thinks about the clumps of hair left in the shower drain, dirty underwear and socks left all over the place or being woken up in the middle of the night with "the prince of your dreams" snorting in his sleep and drooling all over your favorite pillow cases that dear old Aunt Prudence took hours to make. Goofy in love doesn't figure in those "I love you but I really, really don't like you too much right now" days.

Charles and Diana were perfectly mismatched from the word go. Everything pointed to be perfect though. On paper. They went straight from declaring they were "madly in love" and magically attracted to each other into marriage and the everyday business called life. They never took the time to build a solid foundation called "being friends". That was supposed to happen over the years as they spent day in and day out living together warts and all.

Their relationship never actually matured at all. Both were too set in their ways and in their own expectations of what marriage was to be any different and hence, the marriage failed. It happens around the world. Everyday.
__________________

__________________
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
  #3323  
Old 08-10-2020, 07:56 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Queens Village,, United States
Posts: 154
Marriage takes work. Charles never said he was "in love" with Diana let alone madly in love. I think Charles felt he could have the marriage on his terms. He needed heirs, but he was woefully out of touch --for one thing he wanted to play Henry Higgins and instruct his bride by giving her some of his favorite philosophy books to read on the honeymoon, notably Van Der Post. It was an odd honeymoon, after a brief time at Broadlands estate (where he already had trysts with Camilla and perhaps other girlfriends), they were on the Britannia surrounded by ship's workers, courtiers and officers, then she was right there with her in laws, when she was having morning sickness. It looked like the "ideal" honeymoon was later when the two had alone time on a Caribbean island. I don't agree the marriage had no chance, it did, but it took work and I think Charles wanted to have the same old life he had before. Diana was a young inexperienced woman, Mountbatten had told CHarles to marry a woman of no experience (Mountbatten wanted Charles to marry his granddaughter Amanda) and "instruct her" in the ways of lovemaking, after Charles spent years of making love with many women and sowing wild oats. This formula was not the ideal thing for any marriage.
Reply With Quote
  #3324  
Old 08-10-2020, 08:32 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 4,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
At 19 years old, falling in love is all unicorns and rainbows and happily ever after and being with "the prince of your dreams" and carries with it those expectations that are supposed to last far into the marriage. In the courtship stage and the "really over the moon in love" stage, no one thinks about the clumps of hair left in the shower drain, dirty underwear and socks left all over the place or being woken up in the middle of the night with "the prince of your dreams" snorting in his sleep and drooling all over your favorite pillow cases that dear old Aunt Prudence took hours to make. Goofy in love doesn't figure in those "I love you but I really, really don't like you too much right now" days.

Charles and Diana were perfectly mismatched from the word go. Everything pointed to be perfect though. On paper. They went straight from declaring they were "madly in love" and magically attracted to each other into marriage and the everyday business called life. They never took the time to build a solid foundation called "being friends". That was supposed to happen over the years as they spent day in and day out living together warts and all.

Their relationship never actually matured at all. Both were too set in their ways and in their own expectations of what marriage was to be any different and hence, the marriage failed. It happens around the world. Everyday.

Sadly I have to agree with you Osipi. While they did sound "perfect on paper," they were two very different personalities with little in common. If they'd spent more time together as a courting couple, perhaps they'd come to realize that they were not well suited to each other.
Reply With Quote
  #3325  
Old 08-10-2020, 09:10 PM
Duchess_Watcher's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 75
She did love him, why not? He was a Prince and courting her but she was used for heirs. His heart was always with Camila, but he needed heirs.

I do believe the story is so sad on Diana's end but her family should have been skeptical.

Charles clearly loved Camila but he did not abdicate lol.
Reply With Quote
  #3326  
Old 08-10-2020, 11:28 PM
CrownPrincessJava's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ,, Australia
Posts: 918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
At 19 years old, falling in love is all unicorns and rainbows and happily ever after and being with "the prince of your dreams" and carries with it those expectations that are supposed to last far into the marriage....

Charles and Diana were perfectly mismatched from the word go. Everything pointed to be perfect though. On paper. They went straight from declaring they were "madly in love" and magically attracted to each other into marriage and the everyday business called life. They never took the time to build a solid foundation called "being friends". That was supposed to happen over the years as they spent day in and day out living together warts and all.

Their relationship never actually matured at all
. Both were too set in their ways and in their own expectations of what marriage was to be any different and hence, the marriage failed. It happens around the world. Everyday.
Opisi, you hit the nail on the head so many times in your post. The part which you stated they were perfectly mismatched is where the truth lies. You exactly described their relationship - mismatched.

I've just recently celebrated my 10th wedding anniversary and one thing I realised only on that day is that not only have we matured as two adults, but so did our relationship. Charles and Diana's didn't. Before my husband and I even started dating, we established such a strong friendship that was built over 18 months. Once we were a couple, we got married within 18 months. I knew him and I knew exactly who I was marrying.

Charles was an incredibly immature man at 32. Diana was simply naive and immature due to her age and lack of experience in the world. As you said Opisi - perfectly mismatched!
Reply With Quote
  #3327  
Old 08-11-2020, 04:24 AM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 5,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by TLLK View Post
Sadly I have to agree with you Osipi. While they did sound "perfect on paper," they were two very different personalities with little in common. If they'd spent more time together as a courting couple, perhaps they'd come to realize that they were not well suited to each other.
TLLK, I agree with you. Charles and Diana could have dated each other longer to get to know each other better.
Reply With Quote
  #3328  
Old 08-11-2020, 04:48 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,909
It wouldn't have made the slightest difference. Charles was at an age where he knew he had to marry, and Diana wanted to get married and to Charles. She would have kept up the self belief that she was in love with him and that she liked all the things he liked.. and he would have not probed any deeper because he knew that the time had come for him to marry...
And truth was, it wasn't a perfect match on paper. There was an age gap, an experience gap.. and Diana was very young for her age... Charles was very old for his... they didn't, in truth, share many interests. it was only a perfect match in that she was young, attracitve and a well bred Protestant virgin
Reply With Quote
  #3329  
Old 08-11-2020, 05:38 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess_Watcher View Post
She did love him, why not? He was a Prince and courting her but she was used for heirs. His heart was always with Camila, but he needed heirs.

I do believe the story is so sad on Diana's end but her family should have been skeptical.

Charles clearly loved Camila but he did not abdicate lol.
He could not abdicate since he isnt King.. and I dont see why he should abdicate anyway....
Reply With Quote
  #3330  
Old 08-11-2020, 07:05 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Queens Village,, United States
Posts: 154
Charles had to marry someone of no experience at that stage. Women his age were either married or had had serious relationships. He probably would have married Davina Sheffield had her ex not shown up and said they had lived together. If he or Diana had decided to break up, he would have looked for another much younger woman. He still would not have married Camilla IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #3331  
Old 08-11-2020, 07:12 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,909
He coudl harldy marry Camilla as she was a married woman..
Reply With Quote
  #3332  
Old 08-11-2020, 07:23 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Queens Village,, United States
Posts: 154
He would not have forced a PB divorce. It would have been an option but extremely unlikely for him to have done so.
Reply With Quote
  #3333  
Old 08-11-2020, 07:27 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandy345 View Post
He would not have forced a PB divorce. It would have been an option but extremely unlikely for him to have done so.
Obviously. I don't know why anyone would think that he would "force a divorce."
Reply With Quote
  #3334  
Old 08-11-2020, 07:45 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Queens Village,, United States
Posts: 154
Back in the day, Edward VIII wanted to marry Wallis Simpson. The divorce went through between Wallis and her husband, when her husband took the blame in the courts. So that was how it was done back then.
Reply With Quote
  #3335  
Old 08-11-2020, 07:54 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandy345 View Post
Back in the day, Edward VIII wanted to marry Wallis Simpson. The divorce went through between Wallis and her husband, when her husband took the blame in the courts. So that was how it was done back then.
Yes but what that has to do with Charles I dont know. Divorce law in the 1970s was different to the 1930s.
Reply With Quote
  #3336  
Old 08-11-2020, 09:31 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 4,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Yes but what that has to do with Charles I dont know. Divorce law in the 1970s was different to the 1930s.

I agree Denville, I'm not sure why a divorce from the 1930's would be compared to one decades later after the laws had changed in the UK.


Quote:
TLLK, I agree with you. Charles and Diana could have dated each other longer to get to know each other better.
Thank you Cyril as had the pair gotten to know each other, I believe that they would have not chosen to marry.
Reply With Quote
  #3337  
Old 08-11-2020, 09:38 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 9,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandy345 View Post
Back in the day, Edward VIII wanted to marry Wallis Simpson. The divorce went through between Wallis and her husband, when her husband took the blame in the courts. So that was how it was done back then.
But there is a big difference between these two couples - Wallis and Ernest didn't have children, Camilla and Andrew had.

And it would be highly inappropriate for a future Head of the COE to destroy a family.
Reply With Quote
  #3338  
Old 08-11-2020, 10:17 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: The 6ix, Canada
Posts: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biri View Post
But there is a big difference between these two couples - Wallis and Ernest didn't have children, Camilla and Andrew had.

And it would be highly inappropriate for a future Head of the COE to destroy a family.
It was highly inappropriate for the current Head of the COE to destroy a marriage. Or to not go to church, for that matter. Edward VIII didn't seem to care.

That being said, I'm not sure divorce laws in the UK liberalized that much from the 1930s to the 1970s — they either still don't have or have only just gained no-fault divorce.

That being said, it was unthinkable for a Prince of Wales of the time to marry a divorcée, let alone one with children. So there is no reason Charles would ever have gotten involved in or instigated a Parker Bowles divorce. Next question.
Reply With Quote
  #3339  
Old 08-11-2020, 10:30 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prinsara View Post
It was highly inappropriate for the current Head of the COE to destroy a marriage. Or to not go to church, for that matter. Edward VIII didn't seem to care.

That being said, I'm not sure divorce laws in the UK liberalized that much from the 1930s to the 1970s — they either still don't have or have only just gained no-fault divorce.

That being said, it was unthinkable for a Prince of Wales of the time to marry a divorcée, let alone one with children. So there is no reason Charles would ever have gotten involved in or instigated a Parker Bowles divorce. Next question.
Yes they do.. from 1970 something, the grounds for divorce was the breakdown of the marriage. If a couple lived apart for 2 years and wanted a divorce by mutual consent, they could do so. If one party didn't want a divorce, but they had been living apart for 5 years, it was possible to divorce. Adultery in itself wasn't grounds for divorce, but it was if it caused the other party to feel that they could not overlook it and that the marriage was broken down...
The 1930s was quite different.. There weren't many grounds, adultery was one, but there was still quite a social stigma for a woman being divorced for adultery by her husband...
And yes in the 1970s it was considered impossible for the POW ot either marry a divorcee or to get divorced himself...
Reply With Quote
  #3340  
Old 08-11-2020, 11:07 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandy345 View Post
He would not have forced a PB divorce. It would have been an option but extremely unlikely for him to have done so.
Of course he wouldn't have "forced" a divorce. As it stood, after Camilla married APB, Charles remained close friends with the both of them and is even their oldest child's, Tom's, godfather. The Parker-Bowles were part of Charles' "set" until Diana forced that to change.

I'm just going to mention Charles and Camilla's relationship one more time as usually the subject throws the thread off but the one thing that didn't exist in Charles and Diana's marriage was the close, intimate, best friend relationship that carried C&C through the years.

I'm like CrownPincessJava and married my best friend the second time around and that is what has sustained us through the years. Marriage isn't all roses and romance but its being with the person that will hold your hair when you're sick, understand grumpy moods and know instinctively what is bothering you sometimes before you know yourself. They "get" you. Charles and Diana never "got" each other.
__________________

__________________
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
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abdication anastasia 2020 armstrong-jones bangladesh baptism biography bridal gown british brownbitcoinqueen canada carolin chittagong clarence house coronavirus cover-up dna dubai duke of sussex dutch royal family emperor fantasy movie general news thread george vi gustaf vi adolf heraldry hill history hochberg introduction jumma kent languages list of rulers luxembourg mail mary: crown princess of denmark nepalese royal family northern ireland norway history pless popularity prince charles prince constantijn princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn princess dita princess of orange queen consort queen mathilde queen maud royal court royal family royal jewels royal spouse royalty royalty of taiwan royal wedding royal wedding gown russian court dress settings startling new evidence stuart swedish queen thailand tips tracts united kingdom united states of america von hofmannsthal


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:14 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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