Charles and Diana


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
^^^^
Well lets face it, Diana did not have a good record of listening to anyone if they were telling her something she did not want to hear. That is why she turned to faithhealers, aromatherapists, butlers and anyone else who would tell her she was right and wonderful and the best. She dropped anyone who might dare tell her she was wrong.
 
Diana's mother seems to me to have been congenitally unable to give any valuable advice to her children.

She made a colossal mess of her own relationships, so i doubt she would have shown much insight into anyone elses. Also her 'credit' ,as regards her past behaviour [as a 'bolter'], deserting her young children, would not have inspired confidence in Diana, who seems to have sought marriage to the Prince believing that [with him] there could be no possiblity of a repeat of her parents catastrophic divorce.

Diana's feeings towards her mother were naturally very complex, and i doubt she'd have listened to her on the subject of what makes a secure & happy marriage.



Wyevale, she certainly didn't set Diana a good example, but I imagine that she herself had been edged into marriage with Johnnie Spencer by her pushy mother who took his side in the divorce. It mattered little that he may have been a wife beater, he was ARISTOCRACY. My feeling is that not only did Diana marry Charles because he was the one man who COULDN'T get divorced, he also had a family in which divorce didn't figure and unlike her own, appeared united.
 
To clarify, I agree that Diana wasn't likely to listen to anyone. I'm suggesting that one or both of Diana's parents should have talked to Charles or his parents after it became evident it was getting serious but before the proposal (November or December) and suggested that he wait until Diana be out of her teens before taking the relationship to the next level. That would have delayed the proposal by about four months. It may not have made a difference, but it would have been the right thing to do.
 
Yes that is what I am saying as well, even if Diana didn't drop kick people out of her life who didn't agree with her, she was still a teenager and not likely to listen. Francis should have gone to Charles or his parents with concerns. Was it just Francis or did others also see warning flags? Did her father just want her to marry a Prince? Was Francis the only one who saw the truth of what would happen?
 
Yes that is what I am saying as well, even if Diana didn't drop kick people out of her life who didn't agree with her, she was still a teenager and not likely to listen. Francis should have gone to Charles or his parents with concerns. Was it just Francis or did others also see warning flags? Did her father just want her to marry a Prince? Was Francis the only one who saw the truth of what would happen?





Apparently her Grandmother, Ruth, Lady Fremoy, great friend and confidente of the Queen Mother, was against the match, but you must also remember that this is the same Ruth, Lady Fermoy who went to court to say that her daughter Francis was an unfit mother because the left the man she accused of cruelty. There is a breed of person in England for whom these things are of no importance. What matters is being seen to do ones duty. The closer one is to the crown, the more important this becomes meaning that one doesn't walk out on a marrriage just because ones husband occasionally sees fit to administer punishment, one covers the bruises/black eyes and smiles.
 
Gordon Lightfoot's song "If You Could Read My Mind" is about the breakup of his first marriage. His eldest daughter Ingrid made him change the line "I'm just trying to understand the feelings that YOU lack" to "...the feelings that WE lack". She said "Wasn't it a two-way street, Daddy?" at which he replied "You know, you're right. I can't do anything about the record, but (comforting voice here) for the rest of my life, I promise you, I'll say the feelings that we lack." You could just see a twinkle in his eyes during the interview footage.

This really sums things up beautifully I think (and yes, I am a humungous Gordon Lightfoot fan).

During a turbulent marriage, both sides tend to look at and focus on the hurts and wrongs that are happening to them and taking into consideration what the other partner is feeling and going through never enters the picture.

In hindsight, one can look back honestly and see and recognize just how their own behavior attributed to a breakup. Thanks for sharing that story Sarah. I think its going to be a Gordon Lightfoot night over here. :flowers:
 
Yes that is what I am saying as well, even if Diana didn't drop kick people out of her life who didn't agree with her, she was still a teenager and not likely to listen. Francis should have gone to Charles or his parents with concerns. Was it just Francis or did others also see warning flags? Did her father just want her to marry a Prince? Was Francis the only one who saw the truth of what would happen?

This line of post has me wondering whether Charles approached Earl Spencer and asked for his daughter's hand in marriage before he asked Diana. If so, I wonder what Spencer said in reply. This was the opportunity to have that frank discussion and say, 'No, Sir, I recommend you don't ask her yet. She's very young and has lived a rather sheltered life. Give it a bit more time and get to know each other better first. Becoming your wife is a great privilege but also entails great responsibilities and it is important she is fully aware of what she is taking on and that the two of you are absolutely sure that marriage is right for you'. Or was it more, 'Yes, Sir. Of course Sir! She'll make you a fine wife.'
 
An incident springs to mind of the time not long before Diana was being courted by the PoW: James Gilbey forgot a date with her; in revenge, Diana and her friends covered his car in flour and eggs. This could be attributed to "youthful high spirits", but I can't think of myself or any of my friends taking that kind of revenge at that age. Other than this incident, we really don't know a lot about how Diana behaved privately as a young single woman. We know about how good she was with children and that she had very loyal friends, but that's about it. There was the incident of slapping her father after he married Raine, but she told that one herself.

I really don't think that Diana would have been truly happy with whoever her husband was, she was too insecure, too needy of the constant affirmation from others that she was THE BEST but at least with any other man her insecurities could have been played out in private, away from the public gaze.
 
An incident springs to mind of the time not long before Diana was being courted by the PoW: James Gilbey forgot a date with her; in revenge, Diana and her friends covered his car in flour and eggs. This could be attributed to "youthful high spirits", but I can't think of myself or any of my friends taking that kind of revenge at that age. Other than this incident, we really don't know a lot about how Diana behaved privately as a young single woman. We know about how good she was with children and that she had very loyal friends, but that's about it. There was the incident of slapping her father after he married Raine, but she told that one herself.

I haven't heard about the eggs and flour incident before but it brings to mind that it was reported once while they were courting, Charles didn't phone Diana when he said he would and she took the phone off the hook for a couple days I think. My memory is fuzzy on this.

From all that I've read over the years, Diana was not one you'd want to be on the wrong side of. If you were out, you were really out and sometimes it would happen for the slightest of reasons. I just don't think she had any kind of a gift for any kind of a sustainable relationship.
 
From what I've read, Frances wasn't respected within Establishment/Royal circles because she left her husband and was perceived as abandoning her children. I'm not sure whether she would have been been inclined to contact Buckingham Palace because of that. Although, later on, she enjoyed a good relationship with Charles and Diana and spent a fair amount of time at Highgrove with her grandchildren.

What matters is being seen to do ones duty. The closer one is to the crown, the more important this becomes meaning that one doesn't walk out on a marrriage just because ones husband occasionally sees fit to administer punishment, one covers the bruises/black eyes and smiles.
 
An incident springs to mind of the time not long before Diana was being courted by the PoW: James Gilbey forgot a date with her; in revenge, Diana and her friends covered his car in flour and eggs. This could be attributed to "youthful high spirits", but I can't think of myself or any of my friends taking that kind of revenge at that age. Other than this incident, we really don't know a lot about how Diana behaved privately as a young single woman. We know about how good she was with children and that she had very loyal friends, but that's about it. There was the incident of slapping her father after he married Raine, but she told that one herself.

I don't know how James reacted, but such behaviour would not have encouraged me or any other man I know to continue dating her. Her "youthful high spirits" speak to a strong sense of entitlement that never went away.
There is also the story about her pushing Raine down the stairs at Althrop. Is that now to be considered "youthful high spirits"? Is that how we excuse bad behaviour these days?
 
Diana was not one you'd want to be on the wrong side of. If you were out, you were really out and sometimes it would happen for the slightest of reasons. I just don't think she had any kind of a gift for any kind of a sustainable relationship.

Quite simply she was a 'bunnyboiler' through and through...
 
I'd not personally refer to those kinds of behaviours that way, no. It does seem to be a term used for bad behaviour among the aristocracy of a few decades ago, though.

There is also the story about her pushing Raine down the stairs at Althrop. Is that now to be considered "youthful high spirits"? Is that how we excuse bad behaviour these days?
 
An incident springs to mind of the time not long before Diana was being courted by the PoW: James Gilbey forgot a date with her; in revenge, Diana and her friends covered his car in flour and eggs. This could be attributed to "youthful high spirits", but I can't think of myself or any of my friends taking that kind of revenge at that age.

I regret to say I can recall having done something similar. But I was only about 15.
 
Last edited:
:previous: That's more understandable. There's a big difference between 15 and 18 or 19.:flowers:
 
:previous: That's more understandable. There's a big difference between 15 and 18 or 19.:flowers:

Yes, but Diana was very immature for her age, spoiled and daring. Her actions did not relate to her age.
 
Yes, but Diana was very immature for her age, spoiled and daring. Her actions did not relate to her age.

Which does make you wonder about Charles, actually. What was he actually looking for in a bride? What was it about Diana that appealed to him? He might have been 30 but he seems to have been more than a little naive himself.
 
I wonder why her employers didn't see that side of her? They have only good things to say about her--except for the dance teacher she worked for who thought, if I recall correctly--that she lacked dedication. She seemed to be highly capable in some areas and lacking in others. Prince Charles must have seen the areas she was good in: humour and empathy.

Yes, but Diana was very immature for her age, spoiled and daring. Her actions did not relate to her age.
 
Prince Charles must have seen the areas she was good in: humour and empathy.

Yes, I think you're right. I am reminded of how impressed he was with how compassionate she was with him over the death of his beloved uncle, Lord Mountbatten. She comforted him at a time he needed it, and that sort of kindness is going to leave an impression.
 
Last edited:
This line of post has me wondering whether Charles approached Earl Spencer and asked for his daughter's hand in marriage before he asked Diana. If so, I wonder what Spencer said in reply. This was the opportunity to have that frank discussion and say, 'No, Sir, I recommend you don't ask her yet. She's very young and has lived a rather sheltered life. Give it a bit more time and get to know each other better first. Becoming your wife is a great privilege but also entails great responsibilities and it is important she is fully aware of what she is taking on and that the two of you are absolutely sure that marriage is right for you'. Or was it more, 'Yes, Sir. Of course Sir! She'll make you a fine wife.'



Roslyn, I believe that he did ask Earl Spencer for her hand in marriage, one assumes, as a formality, however it must be remembered that the Spencers had been courtiers for generations, positions NOT acquired by going against their monarch's wishes. I will leave you to judge for yourself which of your two suggested responses he gave.
 
Which does make you wonder about Charles, actually. What was he actually looking for in a bride? What was it about Diana that appealed to him? He might have been 30 but he seems to have been more than a little naive himself.





I think part of the problem for Charles were the expectations, his own and others, of what a suitable wife should be. High on that list in 1980, was the requirement that she should be pure as undriven snow, a rapidly declining condition in women of his own age. His only option was to look for a girl young enough NOT to have had a "past" which for someone who had never been young, whose tastes had ever been those of a much older person was no easy task, not made easier by the fact that he probably didn't, for diverse reasons, WANT to marry, as much as had a DUTY to marry. I seem to recall that he said of their first meeting when she was 16 to his 29, he'd thought of her "what a jolly schoolgirl"!!!!! One suspects that in his mind she may never have been more than that.

You say you believe he was "more than a little naive." I think you're exactly right. It's more than possible that he thought, because of her youth, she could be molded/trained/groomed into the wife he thought she should be. He didn't allow for her being a girl who would become a woman with her own ideas and he DEFINITELY wasn't prepared for, and couldn't cope with, being relegated to second place in the marriage. I truly DON'T believe that Diana went out of her way to MAKE this happen, but thanks to the public and media thirst for more and more of the pretty young Princess who reached out to them, as opposed to her middle aged, staid husband, I think she began to realise the power she held, and used it.

It was no one's fault. It was a "mesalliance extroardinaire" of which the most that can be said is that it produced two fine, beautiful boys.
 
Roslyn, I believe that he did ask Earl Spencer for her hand in marriage, one assumes, as a formality, however it must be remembered that the Spencers had been courtiers for generations, positions NOT acquired by going against their monarch's wishes. I will leave you to judge for yourself which of your two suggested responses he gave.

Oh I have never had any doubt as to which would have been the more likely response. No way on earth was her father going to jeopardise the chance of marrying one of his girls off to Charles. He didn't have much time for females other than as "playmates", and I suspect he gave little thought to the parties' compatibility. I imagine he thought Charles would sort her out and that she'd tow the line. I only raised it because that would have been the perfect opportunity for the subject to have been raised. Diana was let down by her family.
 
I think part of the problem for Charles were the expectations, his own and others, of what a suitable wife should be...
I agree with you for the most part. Charles did want a woman without a past. He also wanted someone who enjoyed the country life, who was sophisticated and polished in social settings, would be able to meet with dignitaries and VIPs, and who would be a loving, hands on mother.

One thing they had in common was that Charles definitely wanted his children to have a different upbringing than his own, and Diana wanted her children to have a different upbringing than her own. I remember that during their courtship, Charles travelled to India (IIRC) and was asked how Diana would feel about the children living in poverty. His response indicated that he and Diana talked a lot about her views on children.

Charles and Diana agreed on how their children would be educated and that William and Harry would have as normal a childhood as possible. I'm sure there were disagreements when Charles thought Diana took normalcy to far or Diana felt Charles was putting too much emphasis on duty, but any two parents are going to have disagreements.

I also agree that Charles thought Diana could be molded into what he wanted for a wife. Andrew Morton said that his wedding gift to her was a stack of books. Charles thought Diana could read them and then they would discuss them. I thought it was sweet, but it was also his way of "educating" her. I think Diana tried but her heart wasn't in it. That isn't to say she was not intelligent, but I don't think she was interested in the types of intellectual discussions he wanted. That was a huge disappointment for him.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wonder why her employers didn't see that side of her? They have only good things to say about her--except for the dance teacher she worked for who thought, if I recall correctly--that she lacked dedication. She seemed to be highly capable in some areas and lacking in others. Prince Charles must have seen the areas she was good in: humour and empathy.


Don't forget her employers did not see that much of her. She worked at the Young England kindergarten only three afternoons a week; the young American boy she babysat was on a part-time basis as well.
Neither job asked much of her, so she had no trouble fulfilling expectations.
 
I wonder why her employers didn't see that side of her? They have only good things to say about her--except for the dance teacher she worked for who thought, if I recall correctly--that she lacked dedication. She seemed to be highly capable in some areas and lacking in others. Prince Charles must have seen the areas she was good in: humour and empathy.

And a VIRGIN - the barbaric hunt for virgin with a Title in the family for Charles. This at a time when ladies were glad to be rid of their chastity and experiment just as the young lords were.
The press seemed obsessed, and I think the family was as well. Today, we are appalled at other cultures where young women lose their value if they are not chaste. Yet the practice, at least for the heir, was in fine fettle for Diana to come on the scene less than 40 years ago.
Few good things came out of the union - but the one thing that did is that it stopped the virgin hunts.
 
Last edited:
Don't forget her employers did not see that much of her. She worked at the Young England kindergarten only three afternoons a week; the young American boy she babysat was on a part-time basis as well.
Neither job asked much of her, so she had no trouble fulfilling expectations.

It was also the type of work she did. Working with young children is challenging. You need patience, and Diana possessed that. Being a parent is difficult at every stage, but the newborn to 5 or 6 year old children are reasonably easy in some respects. Many times all they want is to be picked up and cuddled. Diana loved that.

Relationships with older children are more complicated. When I walked in the door when my kids were younger, they were so excited to see me. Nowadays, my dog is the only one who seems happy to see me when I come home and sometimes I wonder about him.

At one point, Diana tried to spark a reconciliation by offering to have another child. I think she may have thought she was offering Charles something he wanted, but it may have also been due to the fact that William and Harry were off at school and didn't need her in the same way that they needed her as babies. Some women are like that.
 
I think it shows something about Diana's personality and maturity that she thought having another child would help the situation and them. Isn't it said that you should need have children to save a marriage?
 
:previous:
If all those children, who had been conceived in the hope of saving failing marriages, suddenly weren't there, it would demonstrate just how frequently and universally the method is used.
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it shows something about Diana's personality and maturity that she thought having another child would help the situation and them. Isn't it said that you should need have children to save a marriage?

I know of someone that thought this also. Husband wants a divorce, she gets pregnant. He conceded to wait until the child was born and then they divorced. For me there is only one reason to stay in the marriage and that is because you want to stay married to that person. Its not a game of strategies and manipulations.

Diana was a manipulator to get things to be the way she wanted them to be. Its not a totally bad way to be but sometimes she used it negatively to enforce her will on others. She was the center of her world.
 
Back
Top Bottom