Charles and Diana

[Osipi]

You were pretty much on the right track posting in the Princess Diana Ancestry and Family thread. This thread is for focusing on the marriage of Charles and Diana and discussions relate to that. The moderators like us to keep on topic and that keeps the thread from going off on all kinds of tangents.

I could have sworn there was a Spencer ancestry thread in the Royal Genealogy section of TRF but I couldn't find it. My eyes are playing tricks on me today methinks. There's a lot more about royal geneaology in this subforum of the board.

Royal Genealogy - The Royal Forums

Maybe you can find what I've missed.

 

[Denville]

Here's a quick question:

I was telling my mom about some of the royal houses Diana is related to. That caused my mom to say "So it (Charles & Diana's marriage) was a setup!"
I'm slowly starting to think it really WAS a setup. Because Charles could have wanted a woman who had a more impressive bloodline than he did.
Thoughts?

thoughts???? why on earth would he want that? He's the future King.. she wasn't royal...

 

[Ish]

This is a very interesting discussion!
Also, is there any ancestry talk in this "Charles & Diana" thread? If so, can anyone post links to it? I've tried finding even something, but can't find anything.

Not in this thread, no. There's plenty in the genealogy threads though.

Here's a quick question:

I was telling my mom about some of the royal houses Diana is related to. That caused my mom to say "So it (Charles & Diana's marriage) was a setup!"
I'm slowly starting to think it really WAS a setup. Because Charles could have wanted a woman who had a more impressive bloodline than he did.
Thoughts?

Diana did not have a more impressive bloodline than Charles. That's a myth.

Diana was from the British aristocracy and a good family, that's what made her attractive as a potential royal spouse. She came from the right background.

 

[Denville]

Obviously Ish. She wasn't royal. But she was upper class and of the rank and cirlcle that socialised with the RF and were considered suitable as marriage partners once the BRF stopped its practice of marrying (usually)German royals.

. That said although not a complete setup it has been said that their respective grandmothers were pulling a few strings to get the pair together.

not true. Noone "pulled strings..."

 

[Mermaid1962]

I think that Diana was infatuated with Prince Charles and thought that she loved him and could be a good wife. My impression of Prince Charles from the interviews he gave during their engagement was that he was happy to be marrying her and had found the "right" person to be Princess of Wales. I don't think that either of them went into marriage expecting to have to compromise on things and deal with disappointments.

 

[Denville]

well yes of course she was. its ridiculous to suggest that she was planning on marryng him and having affairs on the side or that she expected him to do the same. She was clearly naïve abouot such matters, even if not as horrified by the concept of affiars as some seem to be.
And while I think she really wanted to marry him, she was not hellbent on doing so to the point of lying or doing anyting she could in the sort of brutal way that some seem to think of her.
I think if she and he had courted for longer, they would still have married because both of them had a strong desire to find a partner, and wed.. he because he had turned 30 and was at the age where he had to commit and find a wife... and she because she had been brought up to marry well and she was not likely to wish for any career other than that of wife and mother. She was young, not very clever, not educated and had no prospects other than doing a little job as a nanny, and seeing her friends.. and she was'nt going to buck the idea that was still prominent among her class that girls should marry well and as early as reasonably possible. And he wanted to marry because he knew that it was time, that if he waited much longer there would be a huge age gap between him and his bride and that as Philip put it, there wouldn't be anyone left.

 

[Jacknch]

Please note that several posts have been removed as they are off-topic. The Charles/Diana/Camilla triangle is not up for discussion. Please note that posts relating to the Panorama interview have been moved to the http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f38/the-panorama-interview-november-20-1995-a-15636.html thread. Posts relating to Diana's ancestry can be made here: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f38/the-panorama-interview-november-20-1995-a-15636.html
Please note the topic of the thread before posting so as to avoid de-railing the discussion.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I now disagree with that. I think Diana was determined to land Charles, and if it took longer, she would have maintained the necessary pretenses to please him. Maybe Charles would have seen the disjunct with a longer courtship. We'll never know.

I have begun to have a radical view of how these two entered the marriage. And it's not flattering to Diana. Keeping in mind that the Diana 'spin' (in the Morton book), that has held such sway in the popular imagination, was intended to deflect attention away from her (by then) numerous dalliances with other men, not to mention the long-standing affair with James Hewitt, I question whether Diana actually did enter the marriage intending to stay 'true' to Charles.

This is something that has just occurred to me as I considered how rapidly into the marriage Diana engaged in serious flirtation. I think (in her immature way) she thought of herself as untouchable (protected by the respect in which the BRF was held) and beyond consequences. She only ever showed distress in public after she was 'caught' or was suffering the consequences of her actions (Morton book - separation; Hewitt revelation and police action regarding phone calls - Panorama interview).

JMO of course but the whole thing makes no sense unless one factors in Diana possibly not being as devoted to monogamy herself. After all, that is what she saw modeled by her parents, and likely all around her growing up. And when one looks at them both through the 80's it is never Diana who looks disquieted. She always looks radiantly happy. It's Charles who looks like he is disillusioned.

IMO flirtations do not equal planning on having an affair. IMO Diana had so many men in her closet because she got married so young and for her this was her dating. Charles had already done all his dating and knew who he wanted to settle with, Diana had yet to find hers. Being a flirtatious girl isn't a bad thing, Diana always craved attention, too much IMO. I don't necessarily buy the evil Diana setting out to ensnare Charles; I think she fooled herself into thinking they could work out. And both Diana and Charles tried to stick it out in their marriage, or that's what I think.

 

[Lady Nimue]

IMO flirtations do not equal planning on having an affair. IMO Diana had so many men in her closet because she got married so young and for her this was her dating.

Yes, it was.

Charles had already done all his dating and knew who he wanted to settle with, Diana had yet to find hers.

You don't know that. That's the single fiction that is the fuel that gasses up the whole marriage scenario train as endlessly repeated, from leaving the station to arrival.

Key to the whole thing is believing (not knowing for a fact) that Charles was set on someone from the moment he walked down the aisle. We have no evidence of that except what Diana spun in later years (to 'explain' and deflect from her own numerous adulteries by then). Given Diana's penchant for lying, her say-so is not convincing in my book.

Being a flirtatious girl isn't a bad thing, Diana always craved attention, too much IMO.

Would you say the same if it were Charles who was seriously flirtatious? If he was wouldn't that have hurt Diana? Just wondering if the same applies to him. Is Charles to have different sensibilities as well? Having a wife that not just flirts but seriously foments infatuations? How do you think he felt about that? What might have been his reaction?

BTW she wasn't a 'girl', she was a young woman, just married.

I don't necessarily buy the evil Diana setting out to ensnare Charles;

Who said she was 'evil'? Why does that word get said so often? Everyone lies a bit here and there but Diana lied to Charles when they were dating about a couple of significant items (by her own admission). You don't find that concerning? That she misled the man into thinking they had compatible lifestyle interests?

I think she fooled herself into thinking they could work out.

Fooled is perhaps the operative word but for another reason. More likely, she fooled herself into thinking she would control the situation, that once she was Charles' wife she would be free to dictate. (The bulimia is a symptom of the controlling). She was able to do so to a remarkable degree for a few years as it was. Charles' eventual resistance to being endlessly controlled gets characterized as his 'being spoiled'.

And both Diana and Charles tried to stick it out in their marriage, or that's what I think.

The marriage was destined to be an aristocratic arrangement and that's what it would have been had it not been for Rupert Murdock and aggressive sniffing-out tabloids and tapes (those tapes have never been explained, 'who' arranged those tapes? Maggie?)

They would have 'stuck it out' had not Diana's behavior become so aggressively worse and worse by the year, likely aggravated, not by Charles btw, but the genuinely disconcerting impossible-to-identify 'who' surveilling royalty at that time. Remember she was stalking a married man by the time of the panorama interview, her behavior had become extreme. The police were involved. The marriage would definitely had been 'stuck out' because divorce wasn't an option. But Diana forced that hand by her own wild behavior, yet in this I would offer a unique perspective rarely (if ever) suggested: that Diana wound up unwittingly 'working' hand-in-glove for the unknown parties wanting to bring down the monarchy. Just an idea. I have always been fascinated by the tapes released of Diana and Charles. Those tapes are key to the whole thing.

Anyone else have a clear bead on the timeline of the tapes and the Morton book?

 

[AristoCat]

Given her stalking and other various antics, if she had not been titled and attractive and rich, she would have had a long criminal record and ended up committed for her own safety and that of others. As for her relationship with her kids, parading her various lovers and her emotional issues she placed on William's shoulders she would have lost visitation rights. I get fed up with how every rotten thing Diana did to people was excused on so many grounds by so many people. Frankly after her divorce she could have really pulled it together, but chose to make even bigger messes and caused a lot of pain to a lot of people.

Even her vaunted love affair with Dodi was in fact built on a breakup; supposedly Dodi was engaged to a former model Kelly Fischer, but few people like to remember that.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Diana's tape was recorded New Year's Eve in 1989 and became news in August of 1992. Charles' tape was recorded on December 18th of the same month and was published in January 1993.

The release of the "Squidgygate" tape looks as though it was a response to Morton's book, certainly, although the part about Diana's fear of becoming pregnant wasn't released until just before her tour of Nepal in March 1993. I just found an article suggesting that this second release might have had to do with an election in Australia! More of Princess Di's Alleged Phone Tape Played - latimes

These tapes, plus the Morton book, the Dimbleby book and interview, and Diana's Panorama interview were gifts to those who would have liked to see the demise of the monarchy.

Whenever there's a visit to Canada by members of the Royal Family, the media always manages to find people who are against the visit for various reasons. The events of the early 90s are, in my view, the same things writ large. The desire to "put things out in the open"/"set the record straight" might have come from Charles and Diana, but I think that these things were used to weaken the idea of the monarchy. There was so much more at stake here here than the breakdown of a marriage.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Lady Nimue I did not state that Charles walked down the aisle intended on settling with Camilla. I said that by the time they both started affairs Charles had already dated any women and he didn't need to go through the gambit again, he only wanted an affair with one woman. As opposed to Diana who had no real boyfriend before Charles and so was just starting her dating life in the mid to late 80s.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Given her stalking and other various antics, if she had not been titled and attractive and rich, she would have had a long criminal record and ended up committed for her own safety and that of others. As for her relationship with her kids, parading her various lovers and her emotional issues she placed on William's shoulders she would have lost visitation rights. I get fed up with how every rotten thing Diana did to people was excused on so many grounds by so many people. Frankly after her divorce she could have really pulled it together, but chose to make even bigger messes and caused a lot of pain to a lot of people.

Even her vaunted love affair with Dodi was in fact built on a breakup; supposedly Dodi was engaged to a former model Kelly Fischer, but few people like to remember that.

Just to clarify I am in no way excusing Diana's behavior. I am as hard on her as anybody and I get irritated by those who paint her as a constant victim of everything. I just was pointing out that being a flirt doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing and it is not indicative of Diana going into her marriage intending to cheat.
As for her other behavior, mostly the lying, it is clearly a bad thing and its nobody's fault but her own.

 

[Osipi]

Just to clarify I am in no way excusing Diana's behavior. I am as hard on her as anybody and I get irritated by those who paint her as a constant victim of everything. I just was pointing out that being a flirt doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing and it is not indicative of Diana going into her marriage intending to cheat.
As for her other behavior, mostly the lying, it is clearly a bad thing and its nobody's fault but her own.

When I really stop to think about it, the person that really did a job of painting Diana as a victim was Diana herself. Everything that went wrong had someone else to blame for it.

A lot of people have a flirtatious nature (both men and women) and its no indication that their relationships and/or their marriages are unhappy ones or that they expect the flirtations to lead to something else. Unfortunately, I've never been any good at flirting but I do admire those that are at ease with it. It does make a person feel at ease if its done in casual niceness without sounding like its a pick up line. Diana was good at breaking the ice with people she didn't know and this is where perhaps her flirtations fit in. They were harmless.

 

[Dee Anna]

Botttom line, they just weren't suited and did not love each other in the real meaning of the word. Apparently.

They had two sons over a couple of years, Diana loved Charles, Charles loved Camilla.

 

[Osipi]

I'd like to alter that a wee bit to read "Diana was in love with the idea of being in love with Charles". When she married, I think she was the one that should have said "whatever in love means."

 

[Queen Claude]

I would alter it to "Diana was in love with the idea of being in love with the Prince of Wales and heir to the throne."

 

[Jacknch]

Please note that posts relating to Camilla's attendance at Charles and Diana's wedding, subsequent speculation and responses have been deleted - please see Mod note posted yesterday.

 

[Lady Nimue]

One thing that remained consistent though from the early years is that even today, Charles, Camilla, Anne and Andrew Parker-Bowles remain close friends and are often seen with each other. Those friendships have survived all the ups and downs and the twists and turns of life.

For me, this is something that shows relationships between these people went a lot deeper than just bed hopping and sordid affairs and drama as you'd expect to see on some reality show. In some respects, it makes it easier for me to understand just how close knit Charles' inner circle of friends were and to a newly wed young bride, finding a niche where she belonged in it was a huge, daunting prospect and she mostly could have felt like an outsider looking in.

I know that even I would find it uncomfortable to be married to someone who had an already existing close circle of friends that I found not only totally different from myself but one my husband felt very at home with. It helps me to understand why Di had a huge "me vs. them" attitude when it came to Charles' free time and his friends.

She had far more than a jealous streak. It's not for nothing it's called 'the green-eyed monster.' The real problem exists when jealousy is seen as 'justified' and 'normal', rather than the defect it is that needs transforming.

Had she been a bit more clear-eyed (and centered in herself) she would have understood that Charles would have been as loyal and devoted to her as to any of his friends (and then some as his wife and the mother of his children). We are forever seeing him and that relationship through the imperfect gauze of Diana's imperfect expectations and skewed experience. Treating it as 'truth' when it was never that really.

 

[Osipi]

I agree with you m'friend. It would be a good topic to move to one of Diana's thread if we want to continue with it though as this thread doesn't include Diana's relationship with Charles.

My point was to establish just how close in the earlier years those friendships formed in Charles' circle and remained that way to this day. Kind of like a continuing cast of characters.

 

[COUNTESS]

She had far more than a jealous streak. It's not for nothing it's called 'the green-eyed monster.' The real problem exists when jealousy is seen as 'justified' and 'normal', rather than the defect it is that needs transforming.

Had she been a bit more clear-eyed (and centered in herself) she would have understood that Charles would have been as loyal and devoted to her as to any of his friends (and then some as his wife and the mother of his children). We are forever seeing him and that relationship through the imperfect gauze of Diana's imperfect expectations and skewed experience. Treating it as 'truth' when it was never that really.

Her imperfect expectations? Expecting a husband to love her and not have a mistress, he really loved. What a fool Diana was. And he would have been as devoted to her as to any of his friends???? Green eyed monster. Again, she was a fool to marry him. He was a cad to marry her. And a spineless twit not to say Camilla was not negotiable. That he loved Camilla is quite acceptable. That he expected a wife to understand that is sheer insanity. At least, by those of us who foolishly married for love and expected to be returned. Charles is and was a spoiled, over worshiped figure, who worried about himself first. He needed a mother, he said so and got one.

 

[Dman]

Her imperfect expectations? Expecting a husband to love her and not have a mistress, he really loved. What a fool Diana was. And he would have been as devoted to her as to any of his friends???? Green eyed monster. Again, she was a fool to marry him. He was a cad to marry her. And a spineless twit not to say Camilla was not negotiable. That he loved Camilla is quite acceptable. That he expected a wife to understand that is sheer insanity. At least, by those of us who foolishly married for love and expected to be returned. Charles is and was a spoiled, over worshiped figure, who worried about himself first. He needed a mother, he said so and got one.

It's beyond disturbing for anyone to come down hard on Diana because her husband couldn't let another married woman go. It's like getting mad at a wife for daring to get upset that her husband is getting busy with another woman in her own house. None of it makes sense.

Then again, many now see Diana as just a thorn in the side of a couples very successful love story.

 

[royal rob]

Her imperfect expectations? Expecting a husband to love her and not have a mistress, he really loved. What a fool Diana was. And he would have been as devoted to her as to any of his friends???? Green eyed monster. Again, she was a fool to marry him. He was a cad to marry her. And a spineless twit not to say Camilla was not negotiable. That he loved Camilla is quite acceptable. That he expected a wife to understand that is sheer insanity. At least, by those of us who foolishly married for love and expected to be returned. Charles is and was a spoiled, over worshiped figure, who worried about himself first. He needed a mother, he said so and got one.

Thank you, thank you, thank you
you have said what I've always wanted too say but haven't had the courage
[emoji253]

 

[Curryong]

Yes, Countess. Perfect!

 

[Lady Nimue]

Her imperfect expectations? Expecting a husband to love her and not have a mistress, he really loved. What a fool Diana was. And he would have been as devoted to her as to any of his friends???? Green eyed monster. Again, she was a fool to marry him. He was a cad to marry her. And a spineless twit not to say Camilla was not negotiable. That he loved Camilla is quite acceptable. That he expected a wife to understand that is sheer insanity. At least, by those of us who foolishly married for love and expected to be returned. Charles is and was a spoiled, over worshiped figure, who worried about himself first. He needed a mother, he said so and got one.

We are a long ways off topic. Maybe a moderator could move all these posts to the correct thread?

You misread what i was saying and I'm not sure my trying to untangle the misreading is a worthwhile endeavor at this point. Only to say, Diana had all the cards (even Camilla told her that) and she blew it.

You are convinced that he entered the marriage in ill-faith because that's what Diana told you he did and you believe her, so there is really nothing much to say. As long as that is your context, as long as you see Charles as 'a cad' and the evil perpetrator of a deception, every rationale will flow from that supposition. There's really no discussion.

I do agree that Diana should not have married The Prince of Wales. The public would have been saved a lot of drama had she just refrained from satisfying her ambition to snag him. Not so?

 

[Curryong]

And Charles was just a piece of putty in her hands? HE proposed to HER, not the other way around! Plus, one of those two people was in love when they stood at the altar. And that one was not Charles, at least not with the very young woman he was to marry. And he himself said so to Dimbleby.

 

[Iluvbertie]

And Charles was just a piece of putty in her hands? HE proposed to HER, not the other way around! Plus, one of those two people was in love when they stood at the altar. And that one was not Charles, at least not with the very young woman he was to marry.

If Diana was 'in love' with Charles why did she want to call off the wedding, why was she looking around the church?

She was 'in love' with being a Princess - not Charles the man but an image.

They didn't even know each other.

Sorry but this was an arranged marriage and both wanted out but were pushed into by their families.

If they had been any ordinary couple they would never have married as neither loved the other.

 

[Curryong]

Diana was in love with Charles, wished to marry him (and I for one wish the marriage had never gone ahead) but became increasingly perturbed by never getting a clear answer about his feelings for Camilla during the engagement. (Junor herself says this.)

Diana did become increasingly nervous about how Charles really felt as the engagement went on and she wished to withdraw. I don't believe however that this was an arranged marriage in any way, (the Queen, according to Dimbleby didn't express any opinion yea or nay as to whether he should marry Diana) though they certainly didn't know each other very well.

 

[Queen Claude]

And Charles was just a piece of putty in her hands? HE proposed to HER, not the other way around! Plus, one of those two people was in love when they stood at the altar. And that one was not Charles, at least not with the very young woman he was to marry. And he himself said so to Dimbleby.

And he basically said so to Diana when he proposed to her, according to Diana herself, and also to the public during the engagement interview.

According to Diana when she cried when saw Charles off to Australia it was because of she was in turmoil regarding Charles not being over Camilla. That was in March and IMO in enough time to call off the wedding.

Yes Charles proposed to Diana but he did not propose to her because he was in love with her nor did he lead her to believe that was why he proposed to her. If Diana wanted a marriage where both parties were in love with each other she had ample information that was not the case with Charles, nevertheless she accepted his proposal.

P.S.
I actually think that Diana was in love with Charles' position and not Charles himself.

 

[Denville]

And he basically said so to Diana when he proposed to her, according to Diana herself, and also to the public during the engagement interview.

According to Diana when she cried when saw Charles off to Australia it was because of she was in turmoil regarding Charles not being over Camilla. That was in March and IMO in enough time to call off the wedding.

P.S.
I actually think that Diana was in love with Charles' position and not Charles himself.

yes well you're wrong there. She was In love with him.. in a chldish way. and if it was after the engagement was announced there was no way that Charles or Di cold have called off the wedding.
and while yes Diana seems ot have said that Charles said something like "whatever love means" at the proposal I don't believe he did. I don't believe he was "gushing" over her, but I don't believe that he made it clear at the proposal, that he didn't love her...