Charles and Diana

[Denville]

Osipi I really appreciate how you are able to see the positive when it comes to this couple's often analyzed relationship. ?


I believe that after Diana's death that Charles did believe that it was best to stick to the plan that he and Diana created for their boys' education. IMO that tells me that the couple were in agreement on that topic.

I think they were in general agreement... but not completely.

Diana and CHarles would have put up a united front as parents in all the events in their sons lives had she lived. Sandhurst graduations and so on. They did come together for William's confirmation in `1997.

Of course they were going to do things like Wills confirmation in public together.. They had to.

 

[TLLK]

I think they were in general agreement... but not completely.

On the topic of their sons' education I do believe that they were in agreement about the general path that they'd follow.
Charles didn't want his sons at Gourdonston and Diana was in favor of Eton, so they were enrolled at Eton.

For William his post-secondary path would be similar to his father's and that of the 20th century heirs to the throne which would include a university degree and later military service.



For Harry his post secondary path would have been the military as it was his long expressed desire to go into the army. As for university, they'd likely have waited to see if their son should an interest in attending one.

 

[Denville]

On the topic of their sons' education I do believe that they were in agreement about the general path that they'd follow.
Charles didn't want his sons at Gourdonston and Diana was in favor of Eton, so they were enrolled at Eton.

For William his post-secondary path would be similar to his father's and that of the 20th century heirs to the throne which would include a university degree and later military service.



For Harry his post secondary path would have been the military as it was his long expressed desire to go into the army. As for university, they'd likely have waited to see if their son should an interest in attending one.

in a general way.. but Diana thought that Harry would struggle at Eton.. so she might have been in favour of sending him to a less heavily academic school. And I think that in terms of general upbringing, while Charles did not want to be too disciplinary, he had been brought up in a strict old fashioned nursery, and maybe felt that the boys should not be let go their own way too much.

 

[TLLK]

When it came to their sons and their academic work and their interests, I believe that Charles and Diana were very much aware of their children's strengths and concerns based upon their own observations and the input they received from their sons' teachers over the years. If one of them required extra tutoring or an academic intervention, then they like any other student should receive that support.
After Diana's death, it was determined that Prince Harry should attend Ludgrove school for an additional year to prepare him for the Eton entrance exams. The additional year appeared to have given him the preparation that he required to pass the exam.



I am of the opinion that after Diana was killed, that Charles made the decision to honor her and have his sons continue on the path that he and their mother had determined for them.

 

[Ista]

Several posts discussing William and Harry's intelligence have been deleted as off topic. Any discussion of schooling should be directly related to the topic of this thread, which is Charles and Diana.

 

[Binny2]

The thing I never understood about Diana’s thinking was why did she claim she wanted to resurrect her relationship with Charles, but continued to have all sorts of affairs. No spouse would take it seriously. Was she just not bright and able to think rationally or was claiming to want Charles and fix her marriage just a lie to cover her own bad behavior. Either option reflects poorly on her.

 

[Binny2]

She had a severe inability to take responsibility. I think that if she had quit her affairs and did not try undercut Charles publicly and let him have access to his children, she could easily have outcompeted Camilla. With her stunning beauty and youth and officially being his wife, she had so many advantages. It is sad that their relationship did not work out.

 

[MARG]

By the time Panorama played publicly and Charles interview played there marriage was toast. HM pulled the plug. They had been legally separated for some time and ther relationship had been had been hauled through the gutter, there was nothing to salvage.

 

[Denville]

She had a severe inability to take responsibility. I think that if she had quit her affairs and did not try undercut Charles publicly and let him have access to his children, she could easily have outcompeted Camilla. With her stunning beauty and youth and officially being his wife, she had so many advantages. It is sad that their relationship did not work out.

when did she stop him having access to his children?? She couldn't "out compete" Camilla.. because he loved Camilla. If she had been older and wiser when they married, perhaps she would have won his love.. but it didn't happen... and after a couple of years it was too late... He loved Camilla, and din't care that his wife was younger and prettier...

 

[Lilyflo]

If Diana had conducted herself like the previous Princess of Wales, she'd still be alive. That's the stark and almost unbearable truth but a late C20th bride was unlikely to keep quiet and live like a nun in the absence of love and fidelity. However, as a modern Princess of Wales, if she'd had more emotional maturity, she could have stood her ground as chatelaine of Highgrove and not allowed Camilla to replace her as hostess there (or anywhere). It was Diana's vulnerability that enabled Charles (and his staff) to sideline her, undermine her and keep her in the dark about his plans and social engagements. A mentally stronger woman would not have allowed that to happen and Camilla would never have replaced her. I'm not blaming Diana for how things unfolded because at 19, she didn't have the knowledge or skills to tackle what she was about to face. She also didn't have the steel backbone required to endure marriage to a man deeply in love with another woman. Few would have those attributes but how much different the BRF would look now if she'd had them.

 

[Binny2]

when did she stop him having access to his children?? She couldn't "out compete" Camilla.. because he loved Camilla. If she had been older and wiser when they married, perhaps she would have won his love.. but it didn't happen... and after a couple of years it was too late... He loved Camilla, and din't care that his wife was younger and prettier...

Diana would make arrangements so that the children did not see their father. That was what ultimately decided Charles to seek a separation which would have led to the divorce inevitably.
I think Charles is essentially an honorable man and a religious man. He was committed to the marriage but Diana had serious mental issues. I think she made his life hell and he sought emotional sustenance elsewhere. She was too mentally unstable to be in a healthy relationship. It really isn’t Diana’s fault, but those were the cards she was dealt with. The intense spotlight and worldwide adulation damaged her.
Has anyone been following the Johnny Depp/Amber Heard trial? The similarities between the two couples are astonishing.

 

[Curryong]

Charles and Diana similar to Johnny Depp and Amber Heard!! What the... !!

And I don't happen to think that a man who stood at the altar vowing to love a (very young) woman and 'forsaking all others', while deeply in love and emotionally committed to another, is honourable at all, 'essentially' or otherwise. And that goes double when the other person is a married woman.

 

[Countessmeout]

There was nothing honorable about either of them. They both cheated on each other. Diana had her fair share of affairs during their marriage, she was no little holy saint in this whole affair.

I don't get why anyone would have wanted Diana to out-compete Camilla, and stand her ground as chatelaine. The marriage was miserable. Neither of them were happy. Neither of them were in love with each other. Diana isn't the poor scorned woman who died of a broken heart from Charles. She may have said she was in love with him when engaged but that was the infatuation of someone barely out of her teens with the dashing Prince Charming.

What we should wish is she had more common sense after separation. That she never got into a car with a driver who had been drinking. That she had been wearing a seat belt if she had gone in the car. Better yet that she had never been in France at the time to die and she was alive.

If people really love Diana as they claim, they shouldn't be picturing her as queen. They should be wanting her to have lived to have found real love again. To have her own happy ever after. Many people find their true love in their second marriage not in their first. That's why we often see even with commoners, that people who married way too young divorce their first spouse, and then end up having a long lasting second marriage.

Things would have been so much easier for Charles and Camilla was well. Most of the resentment is 'Sweet Saint Diana died so young, never had a chance to find love, while her evil ex husband has found happiness with his mistress'. If both Charles and Diana had lived, both went on to have love and their own happiness, the public hatred for Charles/Camilla would be far less then it is now.

One could hope, though it may be a stretch, that they would have been able to get together for their grandkids like we see with Anne and Mark. That with time and happiness on both fronts, that things would have settled.


But Diana as queen consort was never going to be a 'happy ever after' moment.

 

[Binny2]

Charles and Diana similar to Johnny Depp and Amanda Heard!! What the... !!



And I don't happen to think that a man who stood at the altar vowing to love a (very young) woman and 'forsaking all others', while deeply in love and emotionally committed to another, is honourable at all, 'essentially' or otherwise. And that goes double when the other person is a married woman.

I don’t buy that Camilla was the great love of his life. He was involved with Dale Tyron for many years. Camilla was one of many.

The tapes show the borderline behavior. I hate you, don’t leave me. The gaslighting and the lovebombing and the physical abuse. Diana would throw heavy objects at Charles when she was in rage. She would taunt him that he will be never be king. She worked hard to destroy him and she almost succeeded in overthrowing him from the line of succession.

 

[Curryong]

Charles wasn't bad at throwing objects when in a rage himself. There was a certain clock at Highgrove thrown by him on many occasions and repaired again and again with no one saying anything. When the couple stayed at Althorp a chair was damaged as well as a window. Charles again!

And then there is the well documented occasion when he was staying at a Duke's home and got into a temper about one of his cuff links disappearing down the plug hole of a sink. He pulled the washbasin from the wall while in a temper about it.

Charles behaved just as badly towards Diana as she to him and in some cases worse. At least Diana didn't stand at an altar while marrying and make vows that contradicted what was in her heart.

 

[Binny2]

Charles wasn't bad at throwing objects when in a rage himself. There was a certain clock at Highgrove thrown by him on many occasions and repaired again and again with no one saying anything. When the couple stayed at Althorp a chair was damaged as well as a window. Charles again!



And then there is the well documented occasion when he was staying at a Duke's home and got into a temper about one of his cuff links disappearing down the plug hole of a sink. He pulled the washbasin from the wall while in a temper about it.



Charles behaved just as badly towards Diana as she to him and in some cases worse. At least Diana didn't stand at an altar while marrying and make vows that contradicted what was in her heart.

What did Charles do towards Diana that was bad. Diana was lying when she said she was in love with him. She had only gone on 11 dates. She ignored the fact that he was only fond her. She was an ambitious woman. She knew deep in her heart that she marrying him for the title, the status, and riches. She sold herself to royal family in short. She was a grown woman when she made the decision. She owns it.

 

[Curryong]

Diana was 19 when she became engaged.
And how exactly do you know what was in Diana's heart or that she was lying when she stated that she was in love with Charles? Nothing in any bio, nothing that any person who knew them both at the time, has ever stated that Diana was never in love with Charles. Plenty about him being unsure of his feelings, of feeling like he was pressured into an engagement by his father, the Press and others, but nothing in the opposite direction.

I've known people who fell in love at first sight, married and stayed together for the rest of their lives. People can fall in love on the first date, the second or the 200th. It doesn't matter. It happens and it's well documented that it happens.

 

[Leopoldine]

What did Charles do towards Diana that was bad. Diana was lying when she said she was in love with him. She had only gone on 11 dates. She ignored the fact that he was only fond her. She was an ambitious woman. She knew deep in her heart that she marrying him for the title, the status, and riches. She sold herself to royal family in short. She was a grown woman when she made the decision. She owns it.

She was 19.

 

[Pranter]

Charles was much older and knew the score. She was 19 and fancied herself in love ..I mean come on, what woman in this group hasn't been at that point as a teen? Lord I am so glad I didn't marry who I thought I was in love with as a teen.

Charles needed a wife, the pressure was on, the letter from his father he took to mean (mistakenly or not) about getting on with it or cutting her loose, his friends mostly found her 'jolly' and fun ...they and he probably figured she was young enough to be molded into the sort of wife he needed as a PoW (she had no past to pop up even if media investigated)...her breeding was correct for that era of things. That doesn't mean he didn't care about her, I'm certain he cared for her...just not as he perhaps should of before marrying.

Frankly a more mature woman would of sent the ring back after the infamous interview when he saidf 'whatever love is/means' (I forget the exact wording). They both had doubts prior too but both felt compelled to go thru with it. If they had dated a year he'd of never proposed. Totally unsuitable for each other in interests and maturity.

They both said and did some horrible things to each other and made some very bad decisions to talk to book authors and do interviews about their marriage.

He lost his chance with Camilla years earlier by dallying about and Camilla was also in love with APB. Charles went to sea leaving the field clear for APB. A shame too because in retrospect she seems very perfect for him. All the negative drama of the 80's and 90's might of been avoided.


I have always held Charles more responsible for the situation (up to a point) due to her age and immaturity. I think he should of found his spine and said no one is going to push me into this ..unfortunately he didn't.

There's really nothing new out there ...we all pretty much know the history.


LaRae

 

[Sandy345]

Diana was 19 when she became engaged.
And how exactly do you know what was in Diana's heart or that she was lying when she stated that she was in love with Charles? Nothing in any bio, nothing that any person who knew them both at the time, has ever stated that Diana was never in love with Charles. Plenty about him being unsure of his feelings, of feeling like he was pressured into an engagement by his father, the Press and others, but nothing in the opposite direction.

I've known people who fell in love at first sight, married and stayed together for the rest of their lives. People can fall in love on the first date, the second or the 200th. It doesn't matter. It happens and it's well documented that it happens.

Diana was awestruck that this much older man was courting her. She really felt he loved her and I believe she loved him. Diana was a young woman just really on her own for a short time, sharing a flat. She was not worldly wise and she was much younger than Charles so did not travel in his circle.

Philip did not force Charles to marry, and he was right. If Charles did not love her he should have let her go. If he did not marry Diana, then he would have moved on to another aristo or young woman from a wealthy family it would not have been Camilla, since she already was married and divorce may have compromised Charles as being in line for the throne.

 

[Diotima]

I think she was looking for love and stability. She was deeply traumatized by her parents' acrimonious divorce and thought that by marrying the PoW nothing similar would happen to her. That's at least what I understand (and I do understand - my parents divorced and battled for years when I was a girl and it has left me with a deep seated fear of being left, being not good enough).

She also seems to have had a girlish ambition to marry a Prince, to marry the highest prize, but also the man who would give her a position where she could unfold her unique talent. I read somewhere that already as a girl she went to visit old and sick people and had rapport with them. She may have had an intuitive sense of being the right woman for the role she was marrying into. She had more than only the Spencer closeness to royalty - she had royal charisma of her own, and this charisma may have needed an outlet, like every real talent needs.

They were both under the illusion of being in love, and at the same time enchanted with what they saw in each other. There are pictures with a real glow from the start of the relationship.

That unfortunate remark "whatever being in love means" sounds ominous in retrospect but may simply have been said in embarrassment - no talks about feelings please. He may have felt that the question was too intrusive, too touchy-feely, and rebuked the interviewer - noticing only much later that he rebuked his bride-to-be with his remark, too. I may be totally wrong but that's my impression re-watching the interview. He may have wanted to make Diana laugh a bit because she was quite tense. I don't know and can't know.

There are always chains of misunderstandings when alienation sets in. What a pity. Their marriage may have worked, I don't believe it was doomed from the start. Charles would have needed more emotional maturity, more willingness to open up. Had he given Diana the unconditional love she craved...

If, if, if.

I'm a few years younger than her and remember my mother saying on the wedding day of Diana and Charles: you will grow up and grow old with her. She'll be the sign post of your generation like Grace Kelly was for me. When I saw Princess Grace I saw my own life, just a few years on.

This has connected me and probably many of my generation to her. Somehow, even after her death and even after recognizing how deeply troubled she was (and how in some of her interviews she molds her memories a bit), she has the power to reach out and evoke emotions.

For Charles, she was probably too much - he didn't expect her to be such a powerful presence with global appeal. I'm certain when he looks back he recognizes what he could have done better. Like we all do.

I like seeing him relaxed and happy with Camilla. I would have wished similar happiness for his ex-wife. She certainly would have deserved it. Had she remained alive, they'd probably all get along well nowadays, thanks to a healthy sense of humour in the persons concerned, and thanks to the shared bonds with the sons.

Sorry for the rant - just my thoughts, I have no way of knowing whether I'm right.

 

[Osipi]

At 19 years old, falling in love is all unicorns and rainbows and happily ever after and being with "the prince of your dreams" and carries with it those expectations that are supposed to last far into the marriage. In the courtship stage and the "really over the moon in love" stage, no one thinks about the clumps of hair left in the shower drain, dirty underwear and socks left all over the place or being woken up in the middle of the night with "the prince of your dreams" snorting in his sleep and drooling all over your favorite pillow cases that dear old Aunt Prudence took hours to make. Goofy in love doesn't figure in those "I love you but I really, really don't like you too much right now" days.

Charles and Diana were perfectly mismatched from the word go. Everything pointed to be perfect though. On paper. They went straight from declaring they were "madly in love" and magically attracted to each other into marriage and the everyday business called life. They never took the time to build a solid foundation called "being friends". That was supposed to happen over the years as they spent day in and day out living together warts and all.

Their relationship never actually matured at all. Both were too set in their ways and in their own expectations of what marriage was to be any different and hence, the marriage failed. It happens around the world. Everyday.

 

[Sandy345]

Marriage takes work. Charles never said he was "in love" with Diana let alone madly in love. I think Charles felt he could have the marriage on his terms. He needed heirs, but he was woefully out of touch --for one thing he wanted to play Henry Higgins and instruct his bride by giving her some of his favorite philosophy books to read on the honeymoon, notably Van Der Post. It was an odd honeymoon, after a brief time at Broadlands estate (where he already had trysts with Camilla and perhaps other girlfriends), they were on the Britannia surrounded by ship's workers, courtiers and officers, then she was right there with her in laws, when she was having morning sickness. It looked like the "ideal" honeymoon was later when the two had alone time on a Caribbean island. I don't agree the marriage had no chance, it did, but it took work and I think Charles wanted to have the same old life he had before. Diana was a young inexperienced woman, Mountbatten had told CHarles to marry a woman of no experience (Mountbatten wanted Charles to marry his granddaughter Amanda) and "instruct her" in the ways of lovemaking, after Charles spent years of making love with many women and sowing wild oats. This formula was not the ideal thing for any marriage.

 

[TLLK]

At 19 years old, falling in love is all unicorns and rainbows and happily ever after and being with "the prince of your dreams" and carries with it those expectations that are supposed to last far into the marriage. In the courtship stage and the "really over the moon in love" stage, no one thinks about the clumps of hair left in the shower drain, dirty underwear and socks left all over the place or being woken up in the middle of the night with "the prince of your dreams" snorting in his sleep and drooling all over your favorite pillow cases that dear old Aunt Prudence took hours to make. Goofy in love doesn't figure in those "I love you but I really, really don't like you too much right now" days.

Charles and Diana were perfectly mismatched from the word go. Everything pointed to be perfect though. On paper. They went straight from declaring they were "madly in love" and magically attracted to each other into marriage and the everyday business called life. They never took the time to build a solid foundation called "being friends". That was supposed to happen over the years as they spent day in and day out living together warts and all.

Their relationship never actually matured at all. Both were too set in their ways and in their own expectations of what marriage was to be any different and hence, the marriage failed. It happens around the world. Everyday.

Sadly I have to agree with you Osipi. While they did sound "perfect on paper," they were two very different personalities with little in common. If they'd spent more time together as a courting couple, perhaps they'd come to realize that they were not well suited to each other.

 

[Duchess_Watcher]

She did love him, why not? He was a Prince and courting her but she was used for heirs. His heart was always with Camila, but he needed heirs.

I do believe the story is so sad on Diana's end but her family should have been skeptical.

Charles clearly loved Camila but he did not abdicate lol.

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

At 19 years old, falling in love is all unicorns and rainbows and happily ever after and being with "the prince of your dreams" and carries with it those expectations that are supposed to last far into the marriage....

Charles and Diana were perfectly mismatched from the word go. Everything pointed to be perfect though. On paper. They went straight from declaring they were "madly in love" and magically attracted to each other into marriage and the everyday business called life. They never took the time to build a solid foundation called "being friends". That was supposed to happen over the years as they spent day in and day out living together warts and all.

Their relationship never actually matured at all. Both were too set in their ways and in their own expectations of what marriage was to be any different and hence, the marriage failed. It happens around the world. Everyday.

Opisi, you hit the nail on the head so many times in your post. The part which you stated they were perfectly mismatched is where the truth lies. You exactly described their relationship - mismatched.

I've just recently celebrated my 10th wedding anniversary and one thing I realised only on that day is that not only have we matured as two adults, but so did our relationship. Charles and Diana's didn't. Before my husband and I even started dating, we established such a strong friendship that was built over 18 months. Once we were a couple, we got married within 18 months. I knew him and I knew exactly who I was marrying.

Charles was an incredibly immature man at 32. Diana was simply naive and immature due to her age and lack of experience in the world. As you said Opisi - perfectly mismatched!

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Sadly I have to agree with you Osipi. While they did sound "perfect on paper," they were two very different personalities with little in common. If they'd spent more time together as a courting couple, perhaps they'd come to realize that they were not well suited to each other.

TLLK, I agree with you. Charles and Diana could have dated each other longer to get to know each other better.

 

[Denville]

It wouldn't have made the slightest difference. Charles was at an age where he knew he had to marry, and Diana wanted to get married and to Charles. She would have kept up the self belief that she was in love with him and that she liked all the things he liked.. and he would have not probed any deeper because he knew that the time had come for him to marry...
And truth was, it wasn't a perfect match on paper. There was an age gap, an experience gap.. and Diana was very young for her age... Charles was very old for his... they didn't, in truth, share many interests. it was only a perfect match in that she was young, attracitve and a well bred Protestant virgin

 

[Denville]

She did love him, why not? He was a Prince and courting her but she was used for heirs. His heart was always with Camila, but he needed heirs.

I do believe the story is so sad on Diana's end but her family should have been skeptical.

Charles clearly loved Camila but he did not abdicate lol.

He could not abdicate since he isnt King.. and I dont see why he should abdicate anyway....

 

[Sandy345]

Charles had to marry someone of no experience at that stage. Women his age were either married or had had serious relationships. He probably would have married Davina Sheffield had her ex not shown up and said they had lived together. If he or Diana had decided to break up, he would have looked for another much younger woman. He still would not have married Camilla IMO.