WreathOfLaurels
Courtier
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2016
- Messages
- 592
- City
- Wellington
- Country
- New Zealand
I dunno but the choice of reading material certainly did not help
She didn't upstage Charles with hairdoes, but she did put her hair up, when she was attending parliament with the queen which was seen as a blunder. Her upstaging Chrles took place later in the marriage when she had learned to play the media better. She scheduled appearances to clash with his, and take away from his press attention. She turned her head when he tried to kiss her. She was photographed with the kids when he was doing a dull engagement..
The books were mostly Jung and Laurens Van Der Post, which might be the least erotic reading material imaginable. If had brought something more stimulating, like D H Lawrence or Shirley Conran that would have been fine - he could have at least have brought some Freud.
Jeeze you can't have sex 24/7 for 5 weeks, eventually you have to talk to each other. I don't see this as Charles trying to educate her I see it as him wanting to share his interests with her.
No one said they should...however they could go do things together as well...it's always sounded to me like he was off doing whatever (reading etc) while she was socializing with the staff and service members on the boat (during that phase)...not a normal way to spend a honeymoon.
It does appear that during the Balmoral part of the honeymoon they spent time together around the estate.
LaRae
It was an odd honeymoon. I think they entertained some dignitaries on the royal yacht too. Although, going off reading and painting is what Charles do on his time off. Probably not what a young woman have in mind when on her honeymoon, lol.
No one said they should...however they could go do things together as well...it's always sounded to me like he was off doing whatever (reading etc) while she was socializing with the staff and service members on the boat (during that phase)...not a normal way to spend a honeymoon.
It does appear that during the Balmoral part of the honeymoon they spent time together around the estate.
LaRae
He was trying to do something with her; share his interests.with her and she could do the same. Reading and painting to Charles is interesting and is no different than a couple going on honeymoon in France going to a museum if that is what one of them finds interesting. Or some strange couples would like tongontonthe catacombs. Nothing is wrong with Charles wanting to read.
It was an odd honeymoon. I think they entertained some dignitaries on the royal yacht too. Although, going off reading and painting is what Charles do on his time off. Probably not what a young woman have in mind when on her honeymoon, lol.
That dastardly cradle snatcher actually expected her to be able to read. How dare he!Uh...I can't imagine an honeymoon where the groom and I discussed heavy stuff like Jung and I like 'heavy stuff for discusion'.....she was barely 20....and not exactly a scholar! I would of thought for a man in his early 30's having a attractive bride, traveling around, would have kept him engaged enough anyway.
LaRae
Jealousy? Mid-life crisis? Given to outrageous public utterances?Agreed, even William is proud of Catherine. To be fair Charles wasn't expecting Diana to become Princess Superstar when he married her and he was pleased initially with her popularity. The later jealousy was part of a broader mid-life crisis for Charles, as it was dawning on him that it was going to be a long time until he became king and was trying to make a role for himself in the meantime with his causes, but was receiving negative reactions for it. Tina Brown makes the point that Charles began to get more outrageous with his public utterances at this time (for example, the Monstrous Carbuncle speech) to compete against Diana in the press.
Nothing straw about it. I am merely sick of hearing Diana was barely/only 20. Twenty year olds at university study philosophy and many of or about that age discussed 'Life, the universe and everything'.Being able to read had nothing to do with what I'm talking about.....and she was barely 20. Stating a fact.
I don't know why you want to create strawmen.
LaRae
Nothing straw about it. I am merely sick of hearing Diana was barely/only 20. Twenty year olds at university study philosophy and many of or about that age discussed 'Life, the universe and everything'.
As to her being "not exactly a scholar", whatever else she was, Diana was not thick, poorly educated perhaps but a university degree is not a measure of a superior intellect, merely a superior education.
Charles was attempting to be provocative on purpose when he made speeches like the carbuncle speech,
Jeeze you can't have sex 24/7 for 5 weeks, eventually you have to talk to each other. I don't see this as Charles trying to educate her I see it as him wanting to share his interests with her.
well I think that he hoped they would read together and enjoy that, but Diana didn't enjoy the same books as he did, so it got very soon that he was reading and she was off chatting to the sailors.No one said they should...however they could go do things together as well...it's always sounded to me like he was off doing whatever (reading etc) while she was socializing with the staff and service members on the boat (during that phase)...not a normal way to spend a honeymoon.
It does appear that during the Balmoral part of the honeymoon they spent time together around the estate.
LaRae
How do you know? Some young women might have enjoyed it.. if they had shared their husbands interests.. unfortunately Diana did not really Share C's interests.Yeah and I realize it wasn't a 'normal' honeymoon (although William and Kate seemed to manage that) ..even so outside the meeting of dignitaries they could of had a more normal one doing things together.
I can attest to you that it would not of been what a young woman would of had in mind (the groom off reading and painting and writing letters) when she thought about honeymoons.
LaRae
^ Nor did Charles really accept hers. I don't know why Diana was supposed to mould herself or be moulded into sharing all Charles's private interests. (I'm not talking about their public life together.)
Yes, he was older and was Prince of Wales. Does that mean that it was mandatory for her to become interested in Jung and Van der Post (who incidentally was later unmasked as a fake. A bit like paedophile Jimmy Savile, another revolting person whose advice Charles sought. I have to say, these two say a lot about Charles's judgement.)
in the meantime, as I've said before, it was perfectly OK for Charles to ignore Diana's close friends (probably dismissed as lightweights! How did he know?) expecting her to adopt his friends as hers, (people in some cases thirty years her senior) show no interest in her liking for modern music, (he's the only person I've ever known who went to a Michael Jackson concert in suit and tie) and refuse her a tennis court at Highgrove because- because, because,- he wasn't interested in tennis and didn't want it himself.
Charles has always been old for his age while Diana was young for hers. He wanted a wife who would fit into his already well-ordered world, whether on Britannia or not.
It never seemed to Charles, from my reading about their courtship, that he expected his well-oiled life to change much in any way after marriage, except that he would have a partner who would fit in and they would eventually have children who would also fit in --- with him.
He's got that kind of wife now though.
Bottom line is though --Charles and Diana were chalk and cheese. Should never never have wed.
My point is that Diana was not a child nor was she stupid. She was 20 when she married but, like everyone else, she aged and yet it is as though she is preserved for eternity as a not too bright child bride.You might be sick of hearing it but she was only 20 and I am sick of hearing poor Charles she took the attention away from him. What a pathetic excuse for Charles disgusting behavior. So glad we have a Queen who is enjoying a long life. I'm over and out too much sadness in the world at the moment to dig over and over the same things all the time.