Charles and Diana

[Mermaid1962]

This is why I'm curious to hear more from people who knew her as a school-girl, the people who lived in the dorm with her or people who knew her from around Althorp and Sandringham.

I've never read anything about her getting any kind of "help" with her anger and food issues when she was young.

But, in those days, therapy wasn't something that a person had done. I can't imagine anyone suggesting to an Earl that his daughter needed help handling her emotions or that she was vulnerable to serious problems.

Bulimia is a secretive disorder, also.

I'm curious, have any of you come across any indication that friends or family had suggested she seek help before she met Charles? She'd had problems with bulimia, her own sister had received treatment for that and anorexia nervosa, but was it recognized that Diana might also need treatment? There are so many red flags in stories of how she reacted to her parents' divorce that cry out (to my 21st century self) as signs that she needed mental health assistance from a young age. Her tantrums seem to mirror the lively fights that she and her brother are said to have witnessed between their parents. I've never read anything to suggest that anyone had sat her down to suggest she seek help as a child or at anytime, really, before she was engaged.

 

[Denville]

what "anger and food issues"? OK she had a temper, slapped her father, which I do think was bad of her.. but I don't know of any particular "anger" or food issues. According to herself she did "copy sarah" in bulimia or food restriction when younger but I dotn believe that, I think it was just her exaggerating things years later. pictutres of her don't show her as looking very thin and if she did make herself sick a time or 2 as a girl it cleary wasn't a big thing..
I don't know of any indication that she had any "issues" in her teens or in her couple of years in London as a single girl. and no the Upper class don't go round having therapy for every twitch.. (at least they didn't then). I think that she was stressed out by marriage and her public life, and that made her seek for control and try to look slim and pretty when the cameras were on her...

One her suspicions, her total hatred of another person and her mistrust of Charles.

This played a large part of why she didn't like the country or its activities. She probably would have felt so much more secure should she and Charles took up residence somewhere in Wales that was way far away from everything that Charles knew and loved. She would have been less afraid of someone or something taking Charles away from her.

Fear makes people do strange things sometimes.

how would that have worked out? I don't believe her dislike of the country had anything to do with her fears about Camilla. She didn't like the country because it bored her, and that made her fretful and restless and easily roused to anger. If she and C had gone to wales, he would have been lonely without his friends and neighbours, she would have been lonely with just a gloomy Charles, and the dreary wet countryside for a background. and Charles if he'd really wanted to, would stil have managed to keep in touch with Camilla...

 

[Osipi]

She may have liked the country a whole lot more if it had been a fact that when they were in residence in the country, she was assured of having Charles at her side all the time. I think that was her main complaint about those times is that she was too often left to her own devices while Charles was off pursuing the things he loved about the country. It was a place he could breathe at and if they could have breathed together, it might have been a whole lot different. If, for example, they both shared a love of exploring old historic ruins, the country would have had a purpose for both of them.

So many things point to the fact that Diana not only resented Charles the man but also his role as The Prince of Wales because of the time it demanded of him. Charles has always been a very active sort of a person as remarked once that this is a man that takes brisks walks to relax. Its no surprise that during the marriage, some of the happiest times were when the both of them were sharing the care of their sons as little ones. It was one area that bonded the two of them. Its just too sad that they never really found anything else to really bind them together.

As far as the bulimia, as was stated, its a very secretive type of a disorder that is easy to keep hidden. Diana, as been stated in quite a few places, was a perfectionist and everything had to be just so. It was the same with her body. The bulimia, the excessive exercise, the later colonic irrigation and diets showed that her body had to be perfect in her eyes too. What started the bulimia leading up to her wedding was reported as a tease by Charles when he put his arms around her and joked she was getting a little "chubby" around the waist. Many professionals state that those that obsess about their body actually find that its an area where they have "control" over it and sometimes point to a mental state where everything else is out of control.

The human being is a very complex thing and all the facets that made up Diana, Princess of Wales were complex. I don't think we can actually look at one facet and not put it in relation to other facets that made up her life.

 

[Denville]

I don't think she liked the country at all, she did nt enjoy any of the things one has to like in the country such as wlaking in the nice fresh (wet) air, gardening, country sports OR exploring historical ruins. I mean really Di and Charles clambering round old Roman forts together?? she wasn't into that. she liked urban life, shops, streets, people close by, going to movies etc. She wasn't into a life where you have to enjoy simple things and depend on your onw resources mentally because she desperately (as her phone habit showed) needed other people close by to take her mind away from herself. Diana didn't enjoy reading "seriously" or thinking quietly.. She did enjoy sports but not the sort that Charles enjoyed. She liked swimming, tennis goig to the gym, all things you can do in a town.
I agree that she was a bit jealous of charles' other occupations, which kept him busy and didnt' involved her..buit she COULD Have gone out waling , or shooting or watching him fish etc.. she just didn't LIKE that sort of thing. But she was bored and lonely if he went off doing that and she had no real resources of her own.
when she took the kids to Highgrove at weekends, when they were a bit older, she spent the time in her room calling her friends or I suppose watching TV or listening to music, while the children spent time iwht Charles.

 

[Osipi]

Absolutely correct Denville. She was never one that was comfortable in her own skin enough to be alone with herself. Solitude and Diana were like oil and vinegar. They just didn't mix. She definitely was a person that needed affirmation from others of what her own self esteem was. She fed on it and in many ways, the public adoration of Diana was her lifeblood sometimes. Perhaps this is why she froze people out so often. If they didn't reinforce the positive image of the Diana she wanted to be, they weren't needed. Its kind of sad in a way that Diana most likely was most uncomfortable with the one person she needed to be best friends with and that is the Diana she met in the mirror.

Perhaps that is a clue to why she never found a deep and satisfying love in her life. She never really learned how to love herself first.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Her father has been quoted as saying, "We were terrified of her." (Tina Brown, I think?) There's also the story of how she covered James Gilbey's car with eggs and flour when he stood her up on a date.

what "anger and food issues"? OK she had a temper, slapped her father, which I do think was bad of her.. but I don't know of any particular "anger" or food issues.

 

[Lady Nimue]

Her father has been quoted as saying, "We were terrified of her." (Tina Brown, I think?) There's also the story of how she covered James Gilbey's car with eggs and flour when he stood her up on a date.

And unfortunately there are many more such in the researched literature on Diana. Sally Bedell-Smith's bio on Diana is a difficult read because of the detail she provides regarding the every day realities of Diana's up-close-and-personal intimate persona. Hard book to get though, in fact. Not sure I succeeded.

 

[Denville]

Where?? I've never heard this and I don't think I believe it. Her father loved her, I can't imagine that (even if annoyed iwht her at times) he would criticise her to outsiders.

Absolutely correct Denville. She was never one that was comfortable in her own skin enough to be alone with herself. Solitude and Diana were like oil and vinegar. They just didn't mix. She definitely was a person that needed affirmation from others of what her own self esteem was. She fed on it and in many ways, the public adoration of Diana was her lifeblood sometimes. Perhaps this is why she froze people out so often. If they didn't reinforce the positive image of the Diana she wanted to be, they weren't needed. Its Perhaps that is a clue to why she never found a deep and satisfying love in her life. She never really learned how to love herself first.

wel I dont know that I blame her. I think she found it hard to be alone.. because she was increasingly unhappy. she needed people around her, and she was too much alone. when the boys were at school, and Charles had left her, she probably spent far too much time feeling miserable and lonely. But she certainly wasn't IMO someone who enjoyed the country or was likely to do so as a young woman. She wasn't into historical ruins, or country sports or walking in muddy fields. No reason really why she should be, except that as Charles' wife, he liked the country life and was bound to expect his wife to be part of it with him...

 

[Lady Nimue]

Where?? I've never heard this and I don't think I believe it. Her father loved her, I can't imagine that (even if annoyed iwht her at times) he would criticise her to outsiders.

Her father went so far as to express regret that he did not warn the RFF about Diana's negatives before the wedding. It's a pretty well-known fact, and that her grandmother expressed the same regrets. It's my view that their saying so the way they did was a form of apology to The Queen, because Diana was proving to be disastrous to the well-being of the monarchy, on all fronts. Very sad.

 

[Denville]

where did you read this? I have heard a vague not well soucrced story that her grandmother Fermoy felt bad that she hadn't told the RF about "Dianas' bad side". I have never heard this about her father and I hope he would not be so disloyal...

 

[Lady Nimue]

where did you read this? I have heard a vague not well soucrced story that her grandmother Fermoy felt bad that she hadn't told the RF about "Dianas' bad side". I have never heard this about her father and I hope he would not be so disloyal...

It's not about disloyalty. Diana's behavior was shaming the BRF pretty badly and by extension casting a bad light onto the Spencer family.

Start reading the literature on Diana. Read well-sourced material, like the one I mentioned (there are many, many others). The two quotes are there in nearly every biography I've read.

 

[duchessrachel]

Start reading the literature on Diana. Read well-sourced material, like the one I mentioned (there are many, many others). The two quotes are there in nearly every biography I've read.

Could you suggest some books on Diana in addition to the one you mentioned earlier? I am finally, after all the years it has been published, reading Andrew Morton's "Diana: Her True Story."

 

[Moonmaiden23]

where did you read this? I have heard a vague not well soucrced story that her grandmother Fermoy felt bad that she hadn't told the RF about "Dianas' bad side". I have never heard this about her father and I hope he would not be so disloyal...

Lord Spencer did indeed love his youngest daughter, some have posited that she was his favorite. Just because he was aware of his famous, beautiful child's dark side and spoke about it to others does not make him "disloyal" at all, imo.

It meant that he was perhaps worried, and honest enough to be open about it.

 

[Dman]

I hope everyone knows that there was nothing wrong with Diana outside of her personal Spencer family issues. She may not have been totally book smart, but she was a warm, caring, bright and talented young lady. Everyone who knew her as, Lady Diana Spencer, had nothing but very good things to say about her.

Diana was no danger to the royal family. She didn't want to destroy the institution -as many others have grown to think over the decades- and she wasn't damaged goods. She was a young 19 year old who married a man who she thought loved her enough to establish a happy and stable family life. Yes, she made some mistakes in her life, but she was a very good person and did good things as a senior royal and mother and wife.

I think the sad part of her life and death, people have have used her as a human and dead punching bag for so long that it has become a bad stain on her memory.

I kinda compare Diana to Hillary Clinton. Good and strong women that have been trashed for so long, that the trash becomes the truth that's well believed.

 

[HRHHermione]

I hope everyone knows that there was nothing wrong with Diana outside of her personal Spencer family issues. She may not have been totally book smart, but she was a warm, caring, bright and talented young lady. Everyone who knew her as, Lady Diana Spencer, had nothing but very good things to say about her.

Diana was no danger to the royal family. She didn't want to destroy the institution -as many others have grown to think over the decades- and she wasn't damaged goods. She was a young 19 year old who married a man who she thought loved her enough to establish a happy and stable family life. Yes, she made some mistakes in her life, but she was a very good person and did good things as a senior royal and mother and wife.

I think the sad part of her life and death, people have have used her as a human and dead punching bag for so long that it has become a bad stain on her memory.

I kinda compare Diana to Hillary Clinton. Good and strong women that have been trashed for so long, that the trash becomes the truth that's well believed.

I think there are some fairly good arguments to be made surrounding Diana and mental illness. I don't think that makes her bad or malicious or evil, but I do think her judgment was often questionable. (For example, choosing to do the Morton book without recognizing how difficult and painful it would be for her children)

I agree that criticism of her is not always measured or fair, but I do think some of it is legitimate.

 

[Dman]

I think there are some fairly good arguments to be made surrounding Diana and mental illness. I don't think that makes her bad or malicious or evil, but I do think her judgment was often questionable. (For example, choosing to do the Morton book without recognizing how difficult and painful it would be for her children)

I agree that criticism of her is not always measured or fair, but I do think some of it is legitimate.

Not making excuses for her, but Diana was in very bad place in her life and marriage when the Morton book came out. When the world gets dark, cold and lonely, the number one rock solid foundation you turn to is family. You turn to them for love, comfort, support and guidance. Diana didn't have that. She couldn't turn to her own family and she couldn't turn to her in-laws. Who do you turn to in order to vent your sadness, anger and disappointments? Diana was at a point where she could no longer a lie and wanted to let out all that's been depressed in her. No, the book wasn't a good idea, but a decision like that can happen when you're at a tipping point.

She cooperated with a damaging book and so did Charles.

We have the luxury to sit back and judge because we weren't in her shoes and didn't have to deal with the problems she was dealing with in those days. There's no telling any of us would've done in her place. When you feel trapped in a guilded cage with no way to turn, you can find yourself talking to strangers about your problems. You can be one step away from a sit down interview with the likes of Barbara Walters, Oprah or even Larry King.

Yes, Diana had struggles with mental health. it seems like no one really had the balls to reach out and help her. In those days it was considered scandalous for it to be known that the Princess of Wales and future Queen was seeking help for personal issues. Both her and Charles needed some help, but they failed to get it and those around them failed to help them.

I do feel like people have a habit of making it seem like Diana was just a screw up and who nearly brought down the Monarchy. None of this is true. She wasn't a screw up and she didn't nearly bring down the monarchy. These are lies that's been passed down over and over again.

 

[MARG]

what "anger and food issues"? OK she had a temper, slapped her father, which I do think was bad of her.. but I don't know of any particular "anger" or food issues"

Her anger issues were well known within her extended family and she quite cheerfully shared them in the Settelen tapes. Her Nanny-baiting was legendary, pins in governesses seats, missing clothes, throwing a newly engaged Nanny's engagement ring down the drain, these are nasty and spiteful things for a very young Diana to do. But, being the youngest means you are more adult/mature than if you are the oldest. Add to that, she was spoiled.

Yes, she slapped her father, pretty nasty that, but when you are 28 yrs old, pushing your stepmother down the stairs on your brother's wedding day and bragging that it gave her enormous satisfaction, is pretty dire and the level of malice is mindblowing. Worse, after her father's death when she was 30, she recounts how she and her brother shoved all Raine's possessions into rubbish bags and threw them down the stairs and out the front door. Oh yes, there were anger issues.

As to her bulimia, not all bulimics end up looking skeletal, but all the binging and purging causes great harm to your body. The faint whiff of vomit was referred to in one of the biographies (I cannot remember which, however, I am sure more than a few posters will) and mentioned Charles being cold and saying it was a waste of time going anywhere that included a meal as she was just going to purge later.

The above information was in the Settelen tapes.

 

[HRHHermione]

Not making excuses for her, but Diana was in very bad place in her life and marriage when the Morton book came out. When the world gets dark, cold and lonely, the number one rock solid foundation you turn to is family. You turn to them for love, comfort, support and guidance. Diana didn't have that. She couldn't turn to her own family and she couldn't turn to her in-laws. Who do you turn to in order to vent your sadness, anger and disappointments? Diana was at a point where she could no longer a lie and wanted to let out all that's been depressed in her. No, the book wasn't a good idea, but a decision like that can happen when you're at a tipping point.

That's very true- she was definitely in a dark place. However, in that dark place, she lashed out and made decisions that hurt her children. On a much smaller level- I've never had a lot of patience for people who choose to publicly bash their co-parent, because it's so damaging and bad for children. Doing that on a global stage is much, much worse.

Diana had many friends and could have absolutely created a heathy support network had she been making good decisions. She had access to mental health help. She didn't choose to go that route. It really was enormously destructive.

I admire some things about her, and think others are quite problematic. I don't think the presentation of her as a villain is good, but the presentation of her as near-perfect is also woefully inaccurate.

 

[Dman]

That's very true- she was definitely in a dark place. However, in that dark place, she lashed out and made decisions that hurt her children. On a much smaller level- I've never had a lot of patience for people who choose to publicly bash their co-parent, because it's so damaging and bad for children. Doing that on a global stage is much, much worse.

Diana had many friends and could have absolutely created a heathy support network had she been making good decisions. She had access to mental health help. She didn't choose to go that route. It really was enormously destructive.

I admire some things about her, and think others are quite problematic. I don't think the presentation of her as a villain is good, but the presentation of her as near-perfect is also woefully inaccurate.

Diana never set out to hurt the two boys she loved so much. Also, it's unfair to make it seem like Diana was the parent that hurt her children. What about Charles? Wasn't it hurtful for the children for him to sleep with another woman? How about that time he made their mother cry in the bathroom?

It's not helpful to make it seem like Diana was the only parent that made everything bad.

Also, I never seen or heard any evidence of William and Harry expressing that their mother hurt them.

 

[HRHHermione]

Diana never set out to hurt the two boys she loved so much. Also, it's unfair to make it seem like Diana was the parent that hurt her children. What about Charles? Wasn't it hurtful for the children for him to sleep with another woman? How about that time he made their mother cry in the bathroom?

It's not helpful to make it seem like Diana was the only parent that made everything bad.

Diana may not have set out to hurt them, but the fact that her actions were destructive and harmful are very hard to dispute. The story she told about Charles being disappointed when Harry was born? Who does that hurt? The salacious details of their parents' sex lives going public? Again, that hurt them. They were old enough to be aware of all those press battles as they happened- and Diana was undoubtedly the driver of the press. She was the one known for tipping off tabloids and talking to reporters. She's the one who chose to assist on a tell all book. She was also having affairs at the same time Charles was- facts which she left out of her own versions of what happened- and that was harmful and manipulative. She chose to do Panorama.


Again: I am not saying she is all bad or her legacy is. She was charismatic, self-deprecating, incredibly emotionally intelligent in her public life and fantastic at picking important and resonant charitable causes. There are many things I admire. But I think she, like all people, was quite complex. I think the mythology of her as just a vulnerable, wounded person who always tried to do the right things doesn't accurately describe her life.

 

[Dman]

Diana may not have set out to hurt them, but the fact that her actions were destructive and harmful are very hard to dispute. The story she told about Charles being disappointed when Harry was born? Who does that hurt? The salacious details of their parents' sex lives going public? Again, that hurt them. They were old enough to be aware of all those press battles as they happened- and Diana was undoubtedly the driver of the press. She was the one known for tipping off tabloids and talking to reporters. She's the one who chose to assist on a tell all book. She was also having affairs at the same time Charles was- facts which she left out of her own versions of what happened- and that was harmful and manipulative. She chose to do Panorama.

Again: I am not saying she is all bad or her legacy is. She was charismatic, self-deprecating, incredibly emotionally intelligent in her public life and fantastic at picking important and resonant charitable causes. There are many things I admire. But I think she, like all people, was quite complex. I think the mythology of her as just a vulnerable, wounded person who always tried to do the right things doesn't accurately describe her life.

I'm sure it was hurtful to the boys to see what their parents were going through, but it's massively unfair to make it seem like Diana alone was hurting her sons. Let's. Let's not try to forget that Charles too was doing some dirty work.

Diana never said that Charles was disappointed in Harry's birth.

Charles and his friends also cooperated with a book too.

We have to stop being overly concerned about who's embarrassing the royal family, and be more concerned about the royals as individuals. They don't have perfect lives. They have problems like the rest of us. Charles and Diana had some bad marital issues and it wasn't dealt with properly. None of them tried to hurt their children and none of them tried to bring down the Monarchy.

 

[HRHHermione]

I'm sure it was hurtful to the boys to see what their parents were going through, but it's massively unfair to make it seem like Diana alone was hurting her sons. Let's. Let's not try to forget that Charles too was doing some dirty work.

Diana never said that Charles was disappointed in Harry's birth.

Charles and his friends also cooperated with a book too.

We have to stop being overly concerned about who's embarrassing the royal family, and be more concerned about the royals as individuals. They don't have perfect lives. They have problems like the rest of us. Charles and Diana had some bad marital issues and it wasn't dealt with properly. None of them tried to hurt their children and none of them tried to bring down the Monarchy.

Again: Diana herself chose to participate in a tell-all book with a tabloid writer. Diana herself chose to give the infamous "three in our marriage" interview to Panorama, which deliberately misrepresented her own affairs in order to create a sympathetic media portrait. Diana chose to cultivate a relationship with Richard Kay and other members of the tabloid press and deliberately fed stories about her marriage to them.

And Diana most definitely said Charles was disappointed at Harry's birth- she commented to Andrew Morton that Charles was disappointed Harry was a boy and that he had ginger hair. It's in Diana: Her True Story.

Based on the timeline we know: Charles participated in damage control media mostly, including the Dimbleby book, as a reaction to the ongoing scandals playing out in the tabloid press. His natural instinct has never been to be overly cozy with the press.

She may not have wanted to bring down the monarchy, but she most certainly wanted very much to hurt Charles and clearly was not too concerned about the collateral damage to her children and to the family she married into. That is a real part of her biography and whitewashing it out of existence doesn't help anything.

Again: she was a complicated figure who made some tragically bad decisions along with some good ones.

 

[royal rob]

I hope everyone knows that there was nothing wrong with Diana outside of her personal Spencer family issues. She may not have been totally book smart, but she was a warm, caring, bright and talented young lady. Everyone who knew her as, Lady Diana Spencer, had nothing but very good things to say about her.

Diana was no danger to the royal family. She didn't want to destroy the institution -as many others have grown to think over the decades- and she wasn't damaged goods. She was a young 19 year old who married a man who she thought loved her enough to establish a happy and stable family life. Yes, she made some mistakes in her life, but she was a very good person and did good things as a senior royal and mother and wife.

I think the sad part of her life and death, people have have used her as a human and dead punching bag for so long that it has become a bad stain on her memory.

I kinda compare Diana to Hillary Clinton. Good and strong women that have been trashed for so long, that the trash becomes the truth that's well believed.

What a excellent post and I wish we could close the discussion now. How people can continue to post rubbish and talk about that dam countryside and if Diana liked it over and over and over is beyond me. This is great forum but would be 100% better if there was only one Diana thread and we didn't have a huge number that know everything that happened in the marriage without being there.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

Oh boy! I would let Diana's children speak for themselves. I think that both William and Harry are perfectly aware of their mother's and their father's limitations and weaknesses. What William and Harry seem to want are for people to honor, respect and remember the positives about their mother. She was a human being with a caring heart, above all, despite her character flaws and mistakes. William and Harry have said they remember most of all what a good mother Diana was to them. Who their mother was at her best, and all the happy, loving memories they share of her has obviously meant the world to both of them.

That stuff about what Diana and her brother did to their stepmother, Raine, begs the question about how Raine may have treated them. And the other thing is, How do you think you might have acted out as a child after your mother left your father for another man during the 1960s and it became a highly scandalous, highly publicized, lengthy public episode with a bitter custody battle and acrimonious divorce? Do you think you would later during puberty welcome your father's imperious and diva-like new wife with open arms?

I believe that the Heads Together campaign is partly an effort by Kate, William and Harry to honor Diana's memory. William and Harry are not only trying to heal their own emotional struggles they suffered in the wake of Diana's loss. I believe that they are also reaching out to everyone who, similar to their mother, have suffered emotional and mental traumas at an early age that were never adequately resolved.

It's not an anomaly that the emotional traumas of Diana's childhood affected her ability to develop and maintain a healthy adult relationship, especially when she had been given little to no support and encouragement in how to be prepared for such a high profile marriage at such a young age. Diana essentially lost her mother before she became a teenager. And btw, her mother was called all kinds of names in the press back then. That to me seems beyond traumatic, particularly when Diana and her siblings were likely expected to deal with it and get over it with the requisite British stiff upper lip.

Then for needy, daydreamy Diana at the age of 20 to blithely enter into what initially seemed to her to be a fairy tale marriage (sprung off the pages of her stepmother, Raine's--Barbara Cartland's Regency romances). Unfortunately, Diana was too naive to realize at first that she was chaining herself to an older, needy man who shared none of her interests, and who happened to have a long term busybody older married mistress on the side! Ye Gods.

 

[Dman]

Again: Diana herself chose to participate in a tell-all book with a tabloid writer. Diana herself chose to give the infamous "three in our marriage" interview to Panorama, which deliberately misrepresented her own affairs in order to create a sympathetic media portrait. Diana chose to cultivate a relationship with Richard Kay and other members of the tabloid press and deliberately fed stories about her marriage to them.

And Diana most definitely said Charles was disappointed at Harry's birth- she commented to Andrew Morton that Charles was disappointed Harry was a boy and that he had ginger hair. It's in Diana: Her True Story.

Based on the timeline we know: Charles participated in damage control media mostly, including the Dimbleby book, as a reaction to the ongoing scandals playing out in the tabloid press. His natural instinct has never been to be overly cozy with the press.

She may not have wanted to bring down the monarchy, but she most certainly wanted very much to hurt Charles and clearly was not too concerned about the collateral damage to her children and to the family she married into. That is a real part of her biography and whitewashing it out of existence doesn't help anything.

Again: she was a complicated figure who made some tragically bad decisions along with some good ones.

You'd be disappointed in your husband's silly reaction to your newborn son too. Nobody wants to hear your spouse groans about the baby being a boy and the color of the baby's hair. It's suppose to be a joyful event in a couples life.

Diana did confess about her affairs. The affairs that both Charles and Diana had wasn't something they wanted to happen, but was done out of being lonely and desperate for affection. It's not something they were proud of. They're human and humans sometimes do these things.

Charles pretty much threw his own parents under the bus in the Dimbleby book. Also, let's not forget that it's Charles that did an interview first. Confessed his adulterous affair with Camilla.

Diana wasn't married to herself. It takes two to help being down a marriage. Let's stop pretending that Diana was the one to blame for everything.

 

[Lady Nimue]

What a excellent post and I wish we could close the discussion now.

Why? If the discussion no longer interests you, just don't read the thread. Closing it down because you personally have had enough is a bit ott, don't you think?

How people can continue to post rubbish

No one thinks they are posting 'rubbish'. Please read carefully. The posts I see here, that are counter to your views in the matter, are very well reasoned and founded in facts.

and talk about that dam countryside and if Diana liked it over and over and over is beyond me.

That's clear. So why keep reading it all? I am puzzled. Why do that?

This is great forum but would be 100% better if there was only one Diana thread

Why? It's clear that there are people with different interests. Why should the discussion be narrowed because one person (or a few people) dislike a certain line of conversation? I'm wondering. Sincere questions as I don't understand the ready wish to shut down the expression of differing points of views. Doesn't sound free to me.

and we didn't have a huge number that know everything that happened in the marriage without being there.

The books are out there with plenty of quotes. Just as Diana effectively wrote the Morton book and that book doesn't seem to bother you, why should the other books that fill in the gaps be so bothersome? Doesn't seem to be a level playing field. JMO.

 

[HRHHermione]

You'd be disappointed in your husband's silly reaction to your newborn son too. Nobody wants to hear your spouse groans about the baby being a boy and the color of the baby's hair. It's suppose to be a joyful event in a couples life.

Diana did confess about her affairs. The affairs that both Charles and Diana had wasn't something they wanted to happen, but was done out of being lonely and desperate for affection. It's not something they were proud of. They're human and humans sometimes do these things.

Charles pretty much threw his own parents under the bus in the Dimbleby book. Also, let's not forget that it's Charles that did an interview first. Confessed his adulterous affair with Camilla.

Diana wasn't married to herself. It takes two to help being down a marriage. Let's stop pretending that Diana was the one to blame for everything.

Of course I would be sad if my husband reacted to my child that way. What I wouldn't do is ever tell that story in any format where the child was likely to hear of it because my hurt would be less important than protecting my child from that hurt. That's a story for therapists and confiding in best friends, not a story for public Facebook (or if you're famous, for tabloid reporters)

Again (and this will be the last time I state this because we're beginning to go in circles): I do not blame Diana for everything that happened in her marriage, nor do I deny the special gifts and talents she had. I do however, question many of the decisions she made during her marriage, specifically her long time habit of cooperating with tabloid reporters and focusing more on hurting her spouse than on preserving reasonably amicable terms for the good of her children. I think it's possible to maintain the perspective of her as a complicated public figure who made some very good decisions and some very bad ones.

 

[Osipi]

Could you suggest some books on Diana in addition to the one you mentioned earlier? I am finally, after all the years it has been published, reading Andrew Morton's "Diana: Her True Story."

As been mentioned in this thread, Sally Bedell Smith's "Diana in Search of Herself" is a pretty well researched book that primarily delves into the unique personality that was Diana, Princess of Wales. Its not an easy read and its taken me some time to read through it all. The book is totally devoted to Diana's psychological makeup and how she dealt with things. She was a very complex human being (as we all are)

I think what makes Diana so fascinating for so many people is with Charles and Diana being in the limelight so much going through an unhappy marriage and all the twists and turns and being played out on the world stage, that its hard not to find something about Diana that we realize mirrors our own selves.

The mistake that is made is that in reality, there was no "good" Diana and there was no "bad" Diana and no Charles camp and no Diana camp and no one at fault. If there were "sides", they were formed by people sitting in the peanut gallery watching the lives of these two people as if they were at a prize fight. Diana and Charles' story is not unique really as what they experienced happens to millions of people around the world. Theirs just happened to be played out very much in the public eye and the tragic end to that story has frozen it in time.

I, also, do tend to believe that Diana had many mental health issues and again, she's not unique in that respect. So did Charles. So did their families. So do we all have our issues to deal with.

 

[Lady Nimue]

You'd be disappointed in your husband's silly reaction to your newborn son too. Nobody wants to hear your spouse groans about the baby being a boy and the color of the baby's hair. It's suppose to be a joyful event in a couples life.

Please be aware that HRHHermione was simply supplying the context for an event another poster was questioning.

Diana did confess about her affairs.

No, she didn't. She only once admitted to an affair, after it had already gone public. That was the Hewitt affair in the Panorama interview. She never admitted to any other affairs. Please correct me on this if I am wrong.

The affairs that both Charles and Diana had wasn't something they wanted to happen, but was done out of being lonely and desperate for affection.

It's clear from what Charles said that he didn't want it to happen, but I never have read Diana express a similar view. I have never read a quote from Diana expressing regret about her string of affairs while married to Charles. Fact. Correct me if I am wrong on this.

I am someone who has a very outlier view of how Diana entered her royal marriage. She had seen aristocratic marriage close-up with her parents. She understood the 'rules of the game' as a daughter of her class and I think she was relying on those 'rules' (that is, she fully intended from the get-go to employ them herself). Diana defaulted to 'lonely and desperate for affection' pretty fast in the marriage: we're talking 2-3 years before she was looking to Manakee and others.

It's not something they were proud of. They're human and humans sometimes do these things.

How do we know what they felt? During the late 1980's one sees a distraught Charles in public, but a very happy, almost giddy, Diana. Her affair with Hewitt did not seem to be weighing her down with guilt. She brought her children to her assignations. That is not guilt. [BTW Charles never allowed his sons to see him with anyone else. Statements indicating that Charles subjected his sons to seeing their father with another woman is not borne out in any reading I have done. After the separation is another matter.]

Charles pretty much threw his own parents under the bus in the Dimbleby book.

This is a curious complaint often voiced. I am not sure what to make of it. Charles had been pretty well dissed by Diana at that point. His mention of his childhood is brief but he clearly crossed the line from The Queen to his mother. He has not been forgiven for that.

Also, let's not forget that it's Charles that did an interview first. Confessed his adulterous affair with Camilla.

The Morton book was Diana's first 'interview'. She began the cascade. And he never mentioned Camilla. He simply stated that both he and Diana had moved on from the marriage after they both had tried. That's it. People read into that Camilla's name but that's not anything Charles ever stated.

Diana wasn't married to herself. It takes two to help being down a marriage. Let's stop pretending that Diana was the one to blame for everything.

Diana was to blame for making it all public and pretty much a three-ring circus. Rather than handling her private life privately, she made it a public event. It was her choice. In that, as stated, she began the cascade.

 

[Dman]

Of course I would be sad if my husband reacted to my child that way. What I wouldn't do is ever tell that story in any format where the child was likely to hear of it because my hurt would be less important than protecting my child from that hurt. That's a story for therapists and confiding in best friends, not a story for public Facebook (or if you're famous, for tabloid reporters)

Again (and this will be the last time I state this because we're beginning to go in circles): I do not blame Diana for everything that happened in her marriage, nor do I deny the special gifts and talents she had. I do however, question many of the decisions she made during her marriage, specifically her long time habit of cooperating with tabloid reporters and focusing more on hurting her spouse than on preserving reasonably amicable terms for the good of her children. I think it's possible to maintain the perspective of her as a complicated public figure who made some very good decisions and some very bad ones.

I doubt Harry was hurt by that comment. It was comment Charles shouldn't have said in the first place though. Although you can't put much pass him after the infamous "whatever in love means" comment.

Both Charles and Diana hurt each other. They had a messy separation and divorce. None of it is ever pretty. Luckily, they were in good terms before her untimely passing. They started to put all those years of hurt behind them.

It really don't make much sense for us to continue to go on and on about the past drama. The Prince and Princess of Wales did share love and happiness with each other too. The good thing that came out out of all of it was William and Harry. Also, Charles and Diana made a very elegant couple back in the 80's and early 90's. Take a look back at those pictures and some videos you can find. They were fabulous and I think a bit more popular than the Cambridge's on the world stage. People couldn't get enough of Charles and Diana.