Mermaid1962
Majesty
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2007
- Messages
- 6,305
- City
- NearTheCoast
- Country
- Canada
Some people have trouble accepting that a human being ends up acting like a human being, whether discussing anyone in this all-too-human tragedy.
Charles had PLENTY of his own baggage brought to the table
Well Charles may not have used his sons to cover his affair, he certainly used any house any one of his friends or relatives would allow, as clearly delineated in their own words on tape.As we have previously discussed Camilla made regular briefings to the Sun's Stuart Higgins on "Charles' side". As we have previously discussed, Charles spent the night before the first wedding with Camilla, which to me is beyond the pale, and shows such a complete lack of good faith at the wedding in the mooring. Charles had PLENTY of his own baggage brought to the table.
More fiction from the Diana fanclub.
Stuart Higgins said Camilla DID NOT contact him and she rarely gave any information about anyone.
Charles was not with Camilla the night before his wedding.
(C&C had enough class not to sleep at KP and not to sleep together at Highgrove until after Diana's death.)
You make a lot of interesting points. I agree that they should have divorced much earlier. The Queen and Prince Philip kept pressuring them to work out their differences but it just wasn't possible at that point.I think one of the things that causes a bit of friction on this topic is the question of when people consider the marriage ended...
I have never seen any proof that Stephen Barry confirmed that Camilla spent the night with Charles before the wedding. This fact was certainly not in either of his books. Barry died in 1986, but that allegation wasn't made until 1992. So why did the person who supposedly heard it from Barry (I can't recall the name at this time) delay this revelation for six years? IIRC, this source also claimed to have tapes of Diana and Charles in their home. The tapes turned out to be hoaxes....The source for Charles and Camilla spending the night came from Stephen Barry, the POW personal Valet, one of the very few people to know with certainty exactly who spent the night in the princely bed, describing it as "Certainly incredibly daring, if not incredibly stupid".
Why did women who married into the royal family have to be declared virgins before they could marry?
Tina Brown...The Diana Chronicles.
I agree that Diana was young and when she decided to get married, but I don't agree that the onus was completely on Charles and the Royal Family. Diana had parents. After Charles proposed, Diana went to visit her mother. I think her mother (and father) should have talked to both of them about slowing down.
I think the Spencers were absolutely delighted with the prospect that their youngest daughter was going to succeed where her older sibling had failed. I doubt any of them would have said anything that might make Diana doubt the wisdom of marrying the future king.
You're most welcome to set me straight if I get one of the facts wrong. It has been a few years since I read all the books on the subject, and some details are getting a big fuzzy. When I said "Spencers" I was thinking father and maternal grandmother rather than mother, even though Baroness Fermoy was not a Spencer. I had in mind that Diana didn't really listen to her mother. Actually, I doubt she would have listened to any of them if they did counsel her against the quick marriage. She had her mind set on marrying Charles.
I have never seen any proof that Stephen Barry confirmed that Camilla spent the night with Charles before the wedding. This fact was certainly not in either of his book. Barry died in 1986, but that allegation wasn't made until 1992. So why did the person who supposedly heard it from Barry (I can't recall the name at this time) delay this revelation for six years? IIRC, this source also claimed to have tapes of Diana and Charles in their home. The tapes turned out to be hoaxes.
I think you are correct on that, but if Frances talked directly with Charles, it probably would have slowed the process down. It would certainly would have given him an out. I agree that Charles tried to evade responsibility for the marriage by blaming his own parents and the media pressure. He should have been stronger.
I completely agree. That he allowed Dimbleby to include criticisms of his parents was cruel to them. Most people, by the age of 40, are past blaming their parents for their problems. Charles came off as whiny in both the documentary and the book. He damaged his own reputation more than he hurt Diana's.
I think that Stephen Barry could be quite a mischief maker. One writer--sorry, I forget who--had the theory that Barry put the pictures of Camilla in Charles's diary and put out the C & C cufflinks for Charles to wear. Makes sense, because would Charles pick out his own cufflinks? Barry seemed to do everything; and in his first book, he says that the reason he resigned from the Prince's staff was that he was, in effect, redundant because Prince Charles was married. I think that Barry was threatened by the Prince having a wife.
I completely agree. That he allowed Dimbleby to include criticisms of his parents was cruel to them. Most people, by the age of 40, are past blaming their parents for their problems. Charles came off as whiny in both the documentary and the book. He damaged his own reputation more than he hurt Diana's.
Oh, I do believe Charles is whiny and hard work, but he has at least proven he can have a long term relationship.
I absolutely agree. It's one thing to blame your parents in your early 20's, but to blame them for an action you took when you were in your 30's is ridiculous--and to still be blaming them in your 40's is pathetic.
Charles has the advantage, because he has lived and can create an image for himself in these years. Diana cannot.
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.I don't think there has been much Diana bashing at all on here, if there is any bashing it has been directed much more at Charles then Diana....A failing of a marriage is always 50/50.
I think it was the only way, although imperfect, to assure the legitimacy of a royal heir before early pregnancy tests, DNA or psychological profiles (would that have helped - hmm).
Mette-Marit had a child from a previous relationship when she married Haakon, and it was allowed.
Yeah, but 20 years had passed between when Charles and Diana married and when Haakon and MM married. Opinions changed.
Yeah, but 20 years had passed between when Charles and Diana married and when Haakon and MM married. Opinions changed.
Charles was just as equally damaging to this marriage and embarrassed the Monarchy (which wasn't perfect in it's self) and caused a great deal of heartache and pain to others. He too made his mistakes and the Camillagate tapes were even worse than Diana's Squidgygate tapes.
Charles also cooperated with a book and admitted on national TV of his adultery. That was embarrassing just as Diana's interview was embarrassing. Charles also had his friends intimidate Diana and some even went on TV to publically criticize her.
Give a break with this one-sided attitude towards Charles & Diana's marriage.