I Dont think that Hewitt really saw her as a possible wife...
and he certianly wasn't going to "make money honestly" when he could do it by selling someone out. (and Frances didn't lose access to her children, she lost custody...)
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I Dont think that Hewitt really saw her as a possible wife...
and he certianly wasn't going to "make money honestly" when he could do it by selling someone out. (and Frances didn't lose access to her children, she lost custody...)
I meant to say Frances lost much access to her children. She had wanted them with her and her second husband, in London for more time than the ruling. The father had primary custody, mainly due to Ruth Fermoy, Frances' mother, testifying against her.
She was an unfaithful and deserting wife, who often lost custody in the 1960s. Anyway I doubt if Diana was planning on marrying JH and he wasn't planning on marrying her. His motives were mainly ego stroking and the possibilty of making money out of their affair....
Osipi
Member - in Memoriam
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2008
- Messages
- 17,267
- City
- On the west side of North up from Back
- Country
- United States
I don't think any of us can really state with conviction what Hewitt felt or thought during that time. Same with Diana. Their motives, intentions and goals were their own and will remain that way.
Sadly though, this kind of situation happens to a lot of couples everywhere and in each case, it's unique to the people involved in them. One adage though I do think applies to Charles and Diana's marriage is "marry in haste, repent at leisure".
Sadly though, this kind of situation happens to a lot of couples everywhere and in each case, it's unique to the people involved in them. One adage though I do think applies to Charles and Diana's marriage is "marry in haste, repent at leisure".
Charles was limited at the time in his choice of bride. For instance, marrying a woman with "experience" was discouraged (as per the case of Davina Sheffield), marrying a divorcee (he could not have married divorced Camilla back then without some possible issues), and those close to his age had experience or were already married. He also was turned down by some of the women he pursued. Had Mountbatten been alive, perhaps he could have persuaded his granddaughter to marry Charles. Amanda and Charles had known each other for years. Diana filled the bill because she was inexperienced, attractive, and had some royal blood and was from a notable family in the UK. I think Charles since he knew he did not love Diana, should have moved on. His father only suggested he drop Diana if he was not interested, and his father was right.
Hewitt and Charles the cads
He should have listened to his father.
Hewitt was the type that kept getting worse and worse and must have been so humiliating to Diana. Charles and his affair with C was most humiliating for her. Yes she had her faults and the more she was humiliated the more she manipulated. A loss of innocence.
He should have listened to his father.
Hewitt was the type that kept getting worse and worse and must have been so humiliating to Diana. Charles and his affair with C was most humiliating for her. Yes she had her faults and the more she was humiliated the more she manipulated. A loss of innocence.
As Diana was over eighteen years of age, she was considered to be an adult according the the laws in the UK. She'd completed her education and had demonstrated that she was capable of living outside of her parents' homes. She'd taken her inheritance money, purchased her own flat and lived there with roommates.
Last edited:
Elan
Aristocracy
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 248
- City
- Sheridan
- Country
- United States
Mature in age is one thing, consistent adult behavior over a period of years is another. Not just Hewitt, whoever her partner might have been, had to be ready to adapt to a range of emotional shifts, when necessary. Postulate every bad trait being replaced with A+ exemplary of valor and discretion in Hewitt.. how long do you think before a weakness is found, highlighted, and the cycle renews once again.. Diana of course in the authoritative position to judge and rebuke for 'this' week's or next month's 'infraction'... and finally what man on a regular basis, whether it be Hewitt, Hasnat or ? would survive under that heavy hand, and scrutiny ?
Last edited:
Hallo girl
Heir Presumptive
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2007
- Messages
- 2,180
- City
- Scotland
- Country
- United Kingdom
Has anybody considered that the Spencer family i.e her parents, must take some responsibility for the ill fated marriage.
Having said that her mother did not look happy on the day of the wedding but her father was beaming,
They were quite happy for their daughter to be married to the Prince of Wales, I cannot believe they did not know about Camilla, her sisters mixed in the circles , are we expected to believe they knew nothing and let her walk in to a doomed marriage.
Having said that her mother did not look happy on the day of the wedding but her father was beaming,
They were quite happy for their daughter to be married to the Prince of Wales, I cannot believe they did not know about Camilla, her sisters mixed in the circles , are we expected to believe they knew nothing and let her walk in to a doomed marriage.
No doubt they were reassured by Diana’s love for her future groom and by the fact that apparently Charles had reassured her that he loved her.
I don’t know that Johnnie or Frances did know all the ins and outs of the Prince’s love life and his mistresses. The Earl had been desperately ill and had a long convalescence. After their marriage he and Raine, who was accused of being ‘a Bolter’, were ensconced away in the countryside at Althorp for a long time.
Similarly Frances, accused of the same thing years before, had spent many years away on the west coast of Scotland and in Australia. Would they be up with gossip about the POW?
We don’t know what Jane Fellowes knew about Camilla, but Sarah had been married for some time when her sister got engaged and living in the country. It’s possible both knew but thought that the affair with Camilla was over and both bride and groom were in love, nor guessed that Charles’s feelings for Camilla were as strong as they turned out to be.
I don’t know that Johnnie or Frances did know all the ins and outs of the Prince’s love life and his mistresses. The Earl had been desperately ill and had a long convalescence. After their marriage he and Raine, who was accused of being ‘a Bolter’, were ensconced away in the countryside at Althorp for a long time.
Similarly Frances, accused of the same thing years before, had spent many years away on the west coast of Scotland and in Australia. Would they be up with gossip about the POW?
We don’t know what Jane Fellowes knew about Camilla, but Sarah had been married for some time when her sister got engaged and living in the country. It’s possible both knew but thought that the affair with Camilla was over and both bride and groom were in love, nor guessed that Charles’s feelings for Camilla were as strong as they turned out to be.
Last edited:
When Sarah Spencer dated Charles it was about the time Camilla was pregnant with her second child. According to various biographies and Charles interview for the book by Dimbleby, Charles and Camilla got involved again after her second and last child with PB was born. Sarah Spencer was said to be more concerned about Dale Tryon who was involved with Charles when Camila was pregnant. Though Sarah did admit she did not love Charles. She was heartbroken over the Duke of Westminster breaking up with her and dated Charles soon after that. She ultimately married Raine Spencer's cousin and they are married to this day. So I doubt Sarah thought Camilla a threat when Diana dated Charles. Frances Shand Kydd and her second husband invited Diana to Australia while she "thought about" Charles proposal before the official announcement. She was more concerned that Charles did not call Diana that much. She told her biographer that she did not want to "interfere" though she had some misgivings.
Osipi
Member - in Memoriam
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2008
- Messages
- 17,267
- City
- On the west side of North up from Back
- Country
- United States
What we also have to remember is that during the time that Camilla was married to APB and Charles was "sowing his wild oats", it wouldn't have been unusual for Camilla and Andrew to be part and parcel of Charles' set and they would have interacted quite a bit and observers would not have though anything was odd or out of place. The friendship never ended between Charles and Camilla. Charles was even asked to be godfather to the Parker-Bowles' first born son, Tom.
Perhaps this friendship was something that Diana felt threatened by and hence, as been said in many places, Diana insisted that Charles desist from interacting with many of his friends. Diana never really fit into Charles' set. It would have been easy for Charles to then return to Camilla in a more romantic relationship with not many people being the wiser.
Long story made short though is that Charles had more of a solid foundation to base a marriage on with Camilla than he ever had with Diana.
Perhaps this friendship was something that Diana felt threatened by and hence, as been said in many places, Diana insisted that Charles desist from interacting with many of his friends. Diana never really fit into Charles' set. It would have been easy for Charles to then return to Camilla in a more romantic relationship with not many people being the wiser.
Long story made short though is that Charles had more of a solid foundation to base a marriage on with Camilla than he ever had with Diana.
Hallo girl
Heir Presumptive
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2007
- Messages
- 2,180
- City
- Scotland
- Country
- United Kingdom
I think that is an excellent summary, Diana was insecure with regards the friendship, which possibly tells us something about how sure she was in the marriage. How secure would any of us feel if our new husband retained a friendship with an ex.
This insecurity built up, and the rest is history as they say.
Charles and Camilla were more than friends...Anybody would be insecure. I think Diana hoped for the best but nothing changed, and she moved on and got involve with Hewitt late in 1986.. Charles did tell his biographer that he and Camilla became lovers again after the PB children were born. Interestingly, both Dale and Camilla, named Charles as godparent to one of their children. One of Dale's was named for Charles. Tom Parker Bowles had the middle name Charles.
Diana would have had a better "base" with Charles had Camilla not been around. I think for the sake of a marriage's success a man should not try to be friends with an ex he knows he cannot be "just friends with." Never works.
Last edited:
Elan
Aristocracy
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 248
- City
- Sheridan
- Country
- United States
Thread seems more like a foxhunt in ways. How many question where Hewitt's stature would be today had he carried himself in a stealth, or exemplary manner, never once issuing a word about the romance to a soul. He received next to no credit for lasting as long as he did, '86 - 91, an impressive feat in itself. To stay in Diana's good graces year after year, was no small feat.
It's admirable Diana could concede that being in a relationship with her was not going to be a beach holiday. Burrell's book if memory serves, "I'm trouble with a capital T.."
Last edited:
If Hewitt had conducted himself in an "exemplary manner" he would not be the person that he is. The affair would not have been known ot the public, at best there might have been a few rumours about it...
He didn't last in a relationship wiht her form 1986 to 91. They split up after a couple of years and then had a short relationshp again in 1991 when he went to the Gulf. It was hardly a long standing romance and Hewitt was the one who saw it as a money making romance.. and thereby broke it.
Elan
Aristocracy
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 248
- City
- Sheridan
- Country
- United States
As well documented as several of your points are, they seem in every case to be a search for the drastic failings of Hewitt.. which helps insulate, have little content spoken on the reality of what it was like being her beau in the first place. If she did comment, "I'm trouble with a capital T", it suggests she was aware of hardships a man might encounter while close to her, that anything said or done would entail a level of scrutiny that could rattle most men to their core. Also, to be as tight as she was to his family, visiting them in Devon, then in the Panorama interview attempt to downplay the revelations in Pasternak's book as 'fantasy', seemed less than genuine on her part.
Last edited:
Where did she say that the Pasternak book was Fantasy? I just recalled her saying that "she was very let down by Hewitt" no specifics about the book.
if Hewitt had kept his affair with her private, he would not have had any "level of scrutiny" and had he been a decent man, the scrutiny would not have turned up the things that it did turn up, his selling her out.
Of course it isn't easy having a relationship with such a famous and scrutinised woman, who was a member of the RF... so, if he felt it was all such a difficult thing, that there was too much "trouble with a capital T" he did have the option of telling her that he did not want to get involved.
Elan
Aristocracy
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 248
- City
- Sheridan
- Country
- United States
I believe it was after mentioning she adored him, and pressed for comment about the book from Bashir, she made the reference in this way, "Well first of all there was a lot of fantasy in that book.."
I haven't read the book but I think that it was written in a lush romantic style that sounded awful, and very probably there was a lot of fantasy in the book. If Hewitt was claiming to be madly passionately in love with her, that was pretty much fantasy on his part...but perhaps he does genuinely beleive that "being in love" means exploting the person you love for money....
Last edited:
Elan
Aristocracy
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 248
- City
- Sheridan
- Country
- United States
If a day should come you decide to read it, you may find the fantasy elements not as lush as the novels Diana grew up reading from Barbara Cartland. The objective (imo) would be to review with a fresh perspective, and not so much fueled by deep misgivings, or contempt for the subject matter.
Last edited:
Im not going to read it. It is a book that should never have been written....Its supposed to be a biography of Hewitt and Diana, in which case it shold not HAVE fantasy elements.
Diana and Hewitt had no future together, I doubt she'd want to risk having less access to William and Harry. I think Hewitt was not easy to live with in any case, he seemed to be "ambitious" in not a good way.
Last edited:
Elan
Aristocracy
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 248
- City
- Sheridan
- Country
- United States
Sandy, it sounds as if you may have read the book, which relatively few people here have done, or will talk about. Can you comment further on it ?
Last edited:
Osipi
Member - in Memoriam
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2008
- Messages
- 17,267
- City
- On the west side of North up from Back
- Country
- United States
I bought Hewitt's first book "Love and War" and couldn't make it past the first chapter. I don't even remember now if I still have the book or not.
Elan
Aristocracy
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 248
- City
- Sheridan
- Country
- United States
Pasternak impressed me. A question that might be asked is why those interested in Diana to this day, would choose to snub over material that presents a more intimate side of those years. In particular, the reader is rewarded to find what were long standing dark clouds, depression, and poor health lifting for the better, bulimia addressed by Hewitt, and vitality returning. Pasternak did an excellent job portraying that, in a way that common people could sense and experience.
Isn't that the reason it moved quickly from shelves when first released ?
Last edited:
Similar threads
