Charles and Diana

[COUNTESS]

The sad part is that they both needed love. They both were flowers, what they needed was one being a gardener. Diana never found that love and died too soon. Charles has found that with Camilla and that is great. I think Camilla is able to give him the warmth he never had in his family.

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

The sad part is that they both needed love. They both were flowers, what they needed was one being a gardener. Diana never found that love and died too soon. Charles has found that with Camilla and that is great. I think Camilla is able to give him the warmth he never had in his family.

In fact, Diana did find love. James Hewitt was a relatively long relationship (for Diana), longer even than her (intimate) relationship with her husband. Diana appears to have needed blind devotion and that she had in Hewitt. She had other loves, too, some of them enduring, but Diana had a different agenda than Charles, though saying that, I'm not sure what it was. She was a restless soul, for sure.

[Iluvbertie]

When did Charles mum pack her bags and leave her children ? Apart from royal tours

From the very beginning she would leave the children in the UK while she went and spent time with Philip in Malta.

There was at least one occasion when she returned from being overseas when she went straight to Sandringham while Charles was left in London with the nanny. It was a week or so before she went to see her young son.

That was before she became Queen.

[Nico]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

The sad part is that they both needed love. They both were flowers, what they needed was one being a gardener. Diana never found that love and died too soon. Charles has found that with Camilla and that is great. I think Camilla is able to give him the warmth he never had in his family.

Very wise words, thank you.
I think the same about Charles and Diana as a couple.

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by Lady Nimue

In fact, Diana did find love. James Hewitt was a relatively long relationship (for Diana), longer even than her (intimate) relationship with her husband. Diana appears to have needed blind devotion and that she had in Hewitt. She had other loves, too, some of them enduring, but Diana had a different agenda than Charles, though saying that, I'm not sure what it was. She was a restless soul, for sure.

She may have been infatuated with Hewitt, but I really doubt whether she truly loved him. (If she did, I'm sure it turned to repulsion later, when he lost no opportunity to cash in on the relationship).

And the fact that he sold her out every chance he got makes me question whether he ever genuinely loved her, either! If he did, he would never have betrayed her the way he did.

[TLLK]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

The sad part is that they both needed love. They both were flowers, what they needed was one being a gardener. Diana never found that love and died too soon. Charles has found that with Camilla and that is great. I think Camilla is able to give him the warmth he never had in his family.

This is the perfect choice of words to sum up both Charles and Diana as individuals and why IMO they were not going to last as a couple.

[Jacknch]

Something drew Charles and Diana together and I agree, they both had the need for being loved and supported. It makes me think that they recognised that in each other and that helped draw them together. Just a whole set of needs from each of them, from the practical to the emotional, and it all came together to a point where marriage seemed the right thing to do.
But as has been suggested, for the marriage to work out the long term, one of them was going to have to put aside what they needed and be the nurturer (or gardener as Countess mentioned) or be the strength that the marriage needed.

[Queen Claude]

Diana got Charles' attention when she told him he needed someone to look after him when she saw how devastated he was over Lord Mountbatten's death. Diana had a nurturing side to her as demonstrated by her job choices of being a nanny and kindergarten teacher. Also, even though her parents' divorce was painful, it seemed like the silver lining was that she liked being the woman of the house and taking care of her father and brother. What it boiled down to is that Diana also needed someone to look after her / take care of her, and neither she nor Charles was able to look after the other in a way that was needed.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

She may have been infatuated with Hewitt, but I really doubt whether she truly loved him. (If she did, I'm sure it turned to repulsion later, when he lost no opportunity to cash in on the relationship).

And the fact that he sold her out every chance he got makes me question whether he ever genuinely loved her, either! If he did, he would never have betrayed her the way he did.

What James has done is crude, but Diana mistreated him before he sold her out. She apparently got upset when he was stationed elsewhere and couldn't be at her beck and call. I wonder if she truly loved him if her love depended on if you were devoted to her or not.

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

She may have been infatuated with Hewitt, but I really doubt whether she truly loved him. (If she did, I'm sure it turned to repulsion later, when he lost no opportunity to cash in on the relationship).

In fact she told the world in a very famous interview that she 'adored' Hewitt. Her own words. She was (in her view) in love with him. So there you go.

As for your parenthetical observation, I am always (vaguely) surprised that people view the royals as having primary rights on their own royal lives. Others must stay subservient to that primacy. That's the 'social contract'. I'm reading a book on the British royals right now that actually explains that. I think one has to be British (or in some way 'buy-in' to the royals' social supremacy) to successfully navigate down this reasoning. JMO.

P.S. I also understand that royals and celebrity are not the same and that in many ways royals do need that social protection. Just to be clear, as i realized the way I originally phrased my post could mis-represent my view.

[Mermaid1962]

I don't think Diana realized the point to which her life would never be hers once she married into the Royal Family. She saw the 'perks', which of course included a husband who she thought could never divorce her. I don't think that Charles foresaw how much attention his new bride needed. When a person lives his life with everything and almost everyone at his beck and call, it's a harsh awakening to have a wife who needs you. Even the greatest love needs to do a certain amount of adjusting within marriage, because no-one is perfect.

[Lady Nimue]

In the book I am reading the thesis is presented that the effects of bulimia are pretty much across the board, once the body's chemistry starts to be messed with via the purging.

I had never considered that but do see the reasoning. It is sound. Over time, one of the serious side-effects of bulimia is a mental-emotional deconstruct, which Diana began to give evidence for some time into the engagement. Diana began the bulimia directly after the engagement photo-op (according to this book) so the time-line fits. The weepiness started, for example.

The book I'm reading also emphasizes how bright Diana really was, and that she came of a family that was smart (book-smart). For a variety of reasons Diana did not bother to gain any intellectual smarts, but the author emphasizes that she was quite bright. She was smart in innumerable ways all her life. The Morton book itself is proof of that. (Not all smart people make wise choices in life - but for Diana to have gotten that book done speaks for considerable smarts).

It does look like the bulimia may have been the tipping point. If only she could have gotten that in hand like her sister Sarah did, might have made all the difference.

In fact, apparently, when friends (even Charles) said something to Diana's sister Sarah about her bulimia, Sarah took the advice and acted upon recovery. When Charles tried to advise Diana, Diana's stubbornness asserted itself and she resisted being 'told what to do.' The side-effects of the bulimia took her negatives (that we all have) and magnified them. (Something that happens in menopause says my wise mother-in-law. )

[Queen Claude]

I recall Diana chaffing at the suggestion that her bulimia was the root cause of her personal and marital problems with her position being that the real blame was the lack of support she received and Charles' relationship with Camilla. I get her pushing back up to a point in order to put it on the table that her bulimia did not come about in a vacuum, but she did not seem to want to acknowledge that her bulimia and its byproducts were wreaking havoc on not just her, but those around her as well.

Diana did eventually overcome her bulimia, but by then it may have been too late when it came to her having some kind of functional relationship with Charles and others. I remember Bashir trying to get Diana to specify how long her bulimia lasted and she would not give a straight answer but admitted that it lasted over three years.

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by Queen Claude

I recall Diana chaffing at the suggestion that her bulimia was the root cause of her personal and marital problems with her position being that the real blame was the lack of support she received and Charles' relationship with Camilla. I get her pushing back up to a point in order to put it on the table that her bulimia did not come about in a vacuum, but she did not seem to want to acknowledge that her bulimia and its byproducts were wreaking havoc on not just her, but those around her as well.

Diana did eventually overcome her bulimia, but by then it may have been too late when it came to her having some kind of functional relationship with Charles and others. I remember Bashir trying to get Diana to specify how long her bulimia lasted and she would not give a straight answer but admitted that it lasted over three years.

Yes, I am coming to see that the bulimia, which on the face of it can seem so innocuous, really set things in motion. Without the bulimia, and the bodily chemistry changes it stimulated, she would have still been a human being with flaws, but those flaws would perhaps not have reached hysteria pitch. We know more now about body chemistry and how important the connections are between various functions. Sad that it could be something as 'simple' as that.

[Queen Camilla]

The bulima had nothing to do with her temper tantrums or her being stubborn.

All three existed prior to her marriage.

Diana had problems compromising. She wanted thing her way. She never took into account her husband's feeling or his wishes.

Charles gave Diana carte blanche in decorating both Highgrove and Kensington Palace.

Diana, however, failed to take into consideration her husband's position or his feelings. The rooms were completely girly. The interior decorator said he knew Diana's taste and style as he had decorated her flat.

She decorated the KP bathroom with caricatures of Charles but none of her.

Diana's problem in the marriage began because she continued to behave like a spoil brat.

At Balmoral she arrived for lunch after the Queen and with her headphones on listening to music.

The Queen asked Philip to intervene, Philip asked Charles and Charles begged Diana to behave. This was in the August/September 1981.

There are multiple incidents of Charles begging Diana to cooperate.

When they went skiing in 1983, Diana and Charles had agreed to pose for pictures in exchange for the photographers agreeing to leave them alone for the rest of their vacation.

When the time came, Diana refused and infront of all the photographers Charles was begging her to cooperate.

Camilla was not a factor in Diana's problems within her marriage.
Camilla came along after the breakup of the marriage.

Diana was the problem in her marriage. It was her failure to compromise.
Her failure to understand her actions resulted in a reaction.

Her behavior was the downfall of the marriage.

There are hundreds of time Charles and the RF tried but Diana failed to cooperate.

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by Queen Camilla

The bulima had nothing to do with her temper tantrums or her being stubborn. All three existed prior to her marriage.

That is clear regarding the tantrums and stubbornness. The bulimia helped. I haven't read that the bulimia was pre-engagement. Apparently she saw herself as 'pudgy' in the engagement pictures and began dieting then, quickly latching onto purging as an easy 'out' to counterbalance her healthy appetite.

Originally Posted by Queen Camilla

Diana had problems compromising. She wanted things her way. She never took into account her husband's feelings or his wishes.

That is clear from my reading. Charles would have been any other woman's dream in many ways. A very generous man. He brought a lot of cache to the marriage, of course. Her ingratitude was obvious to even me as a child/adolescent watching the videos. She pretty much ignored him.

Originally Posted by Queen Camilla

She decorated the KP bathroom with caricatures of Charles but none of her.

Haven't heard this, but it fits. Sadly. The penchant for ridicule of him was there very early on.

Originally Posted by Queen Camilla

Diana's problem in the marriage began because she continued to behave like a spoil brat.

She was spoilt, yes. That is generally accepted.

Originally Posted by Queen Camilla

At Balmoral she arrived for lunch after the Queen and with her headphones on listening to music. The Queen asked Philip to intervene, Philip asked Charles and Charles begged Diana to behave. This was in the August/September 1981. There are multiple incidents of Charles begging Diana to cooperate. When they went skiing in 1983, Diana and Charles had agreed to pose for pictures in exchange for the photographers agreeing to leave them alone for the rest of their vacation. When the time came, Diana refused and infront of all the photographers Charles was begging her to cooperate.

I hadn't heard the first anecdote nor seen the second. I would have been too young to notice. The first video I recall seeing left me with a very vivid impression. It was of Diana and Sarah pushing each other during a skiing photo-op, with Charles trying to calm them down. I was young but I recall that. I thought she was a strange person. (Remember I was a child but I knew enough to know you don't 'play' on skiis like that).

Behaving badly in private and in public. Yep. It fits.

Originally Posted by Queen Camilla

Camilla was not a factor in Diana's problems within her marriage. Camilla came along after the breakup of the marriage.

All the evidence indicates as much. I agree here. I have yet to find any credible source (other than out-of-thin-air gossip mags taking their cue from Diana) that places Camilla in the Wales' marriage orbit before 1987/88. Camilla and her family, as many of Charles' friends, were banished by Diana, and Charles complied.

Originally Posted by Queen Camilla

Diana was the problem in her marriage. It was her failure to compromise. Her failure to understand her actions resulted in a reaction. Her behavior was the downfall of the marriage. There are hundreds of time Charles and the RF tried but Diana failed to cooperate.

I have to agree. I see no other possible conclusion. Very sad.

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by Lady Nimue

In fact she told the world in a very famous interview that she 'adored' Hewitt. Her own words. She was (in her view) in love with him. So there you go.

Exactly! She said that in an interview.
I think it is just possible that she wished to excuse her own infidelity by saying she was overwhelmingly in love.

I realize that, as someone said, Diana had issues.
But I can't accept that she'd retain any loving feelings for a slimeball like Hewitt.
I just don't think she'd ever sink that low.

[Dman]

I posted that little picture clip, because people get so hyped up and fired up on what went so wrong in Charles and Diana's marriage, but somehow forget that these two did love each other and were very happy early on. I just think it's good to put some focus on what was good with them and not go on and on about all the bad stuff.

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

Exactly! She said that in an interview. I think it is just possible that she wished to excuse her own infidelity by saying she was overwhelmingly in love.

Yes, that is possible, and if so, demonstrates how smart she was. She understood PR in a way that suggests to me that she could have excelled in public relations as a career. She really had amazing instincts.

Originally Posted by Mirabel

I realize that, as someone said, Diana had issues. But I can't accept that she'd retain any loving feelings for a slimeball like Hewitt. I just don't think she'd ever sink that low.

Slimeball? Hewitt? How was he a slime ball? Pretty intense language for someone Diana 'adored' for good reason. He was devoted to her. Diana's response to that loyalty and devotion? A good hard kick to the curb without so much as an explanation. With that level of trauma, Hewitt still went to the bar to help support Diana regarding Harry's paternity. For years, he did that, even in the face of Diana's inexplicable cold-shoulder. You expect Hewitt to sail on without reaction? Good luck with that.

If you think Hewitt was a slimeball, then you have to accept that the same can be said of Diana, I'm sorry to say. In many ways Diana was worse. We can argue that at least Hewitt told the truth, perhaps a truth needed to set the historical record straight. Whereas Diana lied. Her betrayal was global and deep. She destroyed lives and families, on personal terms. Slimeball? Not my words. Diana sunk pretty low herself. I'm not sure Hewitt sank as far as Diana. Sound harsh? I'm only flipping back at Diana the invective directed at Hewitt.

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by Lady Nimue

Slimeball? Hewitt? How was he a slime ball? Pretty intense language for someone Diana 'adored' for good reason. He was devoted to her. Diana's response to that loyalty and devotion? A good hard kick to the curb without so much as an explanation. With that level of trauma, Hewitt still went to the bar to help support Diana regarding Harry's paternity. For years, he did that, even in the face of Diana's inexplicable cold-shoulder. You expect Hewitt to sail on without reaction? Good luck with that.

If you think Hewitt was a slimeball, then you have to accept that the same can be said of Diana, I'm sorry to say. In many ways Diana was worse. We can argue that at least Hewitt told the truth, perhaps a truth needed to set the historical record straight. Whereas Diana lied. Her betrayal was global and deep. She destroyed lives and families, on personal terms. Slimeball? Not my words. Diana sunk pretty low herself. I;m not sure Hewitt sunk as far as Diana.

I think he did.
He cashed in. In my eyes, that is what is inexcusable.

SUPPORTING HER OVER HARRY'S PATERNITY?
I don't see that at all. He's done nothing for years but toss out smarmy hints about Harry's paternity, regardless of the impact on Harry.

Have you overlooked that recent play? Or the sudden discovery that hypnosis revealed his affair began earlier than Diana said it did?To me Hewitt is the lowest of the low; frankly, the man makes my skin crawl. And I think Diana's feelings turned to repulsion because I can't imagine that any woman with an ounce of self-respect would react in any other way.