Diana's Legacy: What is left or what will be left?

[Mermaid1962]

The only hob-nobbing with celebrities I can see is the dinner with the British Film and Television people. One could say that they're supporting British business by being there. There's a polo match for charity and an evening at the British Consulate. All in all, not much different from what Royals did before Diana came along. I think that Diana deliberately fed the machine, which is something that I can't see William and Kate doing. Kate, unlike Diana, doesn't even look at the cameras much. She's also wearing clothing in public that she had years before her marriage. I don't see much in common between how Kate handles things and how Diana did.

William and Kate will find the same thing - especially with activities like the upcoming one in LA - very much the celebrity do - it is the event to be at this year for the LA celebs - why - because William and Kate will be there.

They are celebrities - that is what the modern royalty has become - thanks to Diana - and William and Kate simply won't be able to ignore the fact that that is their role for the rest of their lives - to feed the celebritiy mentality of the populace.

 

[Super Baroness]

I agree that a large part of Diana's legacy was turning the British Monarchy into celebrity territory. That is how the press portrays them, and a lot of people see the royals now as just pretty faces on the covers of magazines. I would hope that the Duke, and in particular, the Duchess, of Cambridge don't bow down to this definition in the years to come. Of course, the Kate-sightings of last week ignited a celebrity cover-story frenzy (all about her outfits, no substance). But I do like the fact that people are quick to denounce her clothing/style as "boring" - to me, it's a good thing when people (and most of all, royals!) are recognized and commented on for their actions rather than their exterior! Something, which I believe, is another part of Diana's legacy.

 

[Catherine J]

Quite a joke. Their faces plastered on every magazine and periodical. A rush for a trip to Canada and the States, where they will be photographed a million times. They are the poster children to keep the monarchy from falling into the cracks of old age and middle age indifference. An aged, but loved queen and a middle aged and frumpy heir and his, slighly tarnished wife. These two will be seen as much as possible, to make sure the monarchy holds the interest of the masses.

Oh yes, they will be (...seen as much as possible, to make sure the monarchy...). They *are* celebrities by any definition of the word.

They cannot control that. And we don't want them, too, really. It's good to be known and seen.

What they CAN control, and what I look forward to, is a dignified behavior inside of that celebrity. A responsible management of what they represent to which the attendant and unavoidable celebrity will be a benefit.

Celebrity has no moral value. It is a neutral state to which the celebrant's behavior provides the value of harm or benefit. Gandhi was a celebrity. Ted Bundy was a celebrity. I am simply saying that I believe William and Kate will use their celebrity beneficially and with dignity.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I still remember my surprise when the late Diana, Princess of Wales, as The Princess of Wales, carried on risque repartee with Dame Edna Everage while at an official function. I think that at times Diana forgot that she was representing the Queen and not herself. Then there was patting her updo and giving a nod to the photographers while going into a banquet (perhaps in the USA?). These things weren't dignified. I've been impressed by Catherine and William's dignity. They don't seem to be the types to do "stunts."

What they CAN control, and what I look forward to, is a dignified behavior inside of that celebrity. A responsible management of what they represent to which the attendant and unavoidable celebrity will be a benefit.

 

[olebabs]

Please, let's not blame the poor woman of the windsor castle fire in 1992 as well.
There is NOTHING wrong with bringing a little humor into a public function. Certainly not when Dame Edna is involved. But if that is the case in Britain, the DoE shouldn't be allowed outside the palace walls.

I think, and please do not eat me alive here, that people tend to judge Diana and other royals against Queen Elizabeth as a golden standard. Yes, HM has done a fantastic job, but she is from another generation all together and to me it does not make sense to demand the behavior of a 85 yo woman of a woman 30+. We can of course take advice and guidance, but no one can be expected to live another persons life.

As for the new duchess, she is still trying to find her way. Give her a year or two, and she will show more of herself. And you can bet that every stitch of clothing will be commented on

 

[Tsaritsa]

The only hob-nobbing with celebrities I can see is the dinner with the British Film and Television people. One could say that they're supporting British business by being there. There's a polo match for charity and an evening at the British Consulate. All in all, not much different from what Royals did before Diana came along. I think that Diana deliberately fed the machine, which is something that I can't see William and Kate doing. Kate, unlike Diana, doesn't even look at the cameras much. She's also wearing clothing in public that she had years before her marriage. I don't see much in common between how Kate handles things and how Diana did.

......And, please God, we will NEVER see that commonality or, I believe, some of the reasons for it. Diana was saying-screaming- "Look at me" mostly, I feel, to Charles who may have been suffering from selective deafness or wishing that the bride who was causing such a stir was Camilla. Also, Diana had no time, prenuptually, to amass a "Royal" wardrobe, she was, after all only 19 and their "courtship," such as it was, only weeks long. Initially I suspect, she allowed designers to dress her in clothes which was THEIR idea of what young, modern Royalty should wear and she hoped that Charles would approve. Katherine, on the other hand, has been with William for the best part of 10 years and part of his daily life for much of that time. She has no need to try to impress him, he IS impressed and she is confident in that. She is also 10 years older than Diana was and her husband is her own age which makes theirs a very different relationship from that of a naive girl and an older man who was emotionally committed to another woman.

 

[Kataryn]

One important legacy Diana left are her sons. The fact that William is not only a prince because his father is the heir of the British throne but he is charming and good-looking (he has the Windsor-looks but mixed with Diana's charme to a much better outcome) and he is Diana's son - all that gives William a personal draw for the üublic's interest. So he won't be outshinded that much by his beautiful wife but they will rather appear as an equally special couple. I recall that at one point people waiting for a Royal walkabout were disappointed when Diana took the other side of the street and they were left with Charles. I don't see this happen to William and Catherine - the people will be happy to have contact with each of them.

 

[camelot23ca]

The only hob-nobbing with celebrities I can see is the dinner with the British Film and Television people. One could say that they're supporting British business by being there. There's a polo match for charity and an evening at the British Consulate. All in all, not much different from what Royals did before Diana came along. I think that Diana deliberately fed the machine, which is something that I can't see William and Kate doing. Kate, unlike Diana, doesn't even look at the cameras much. She's also wearing clothing in public that she had years before her marriage. I don't see much in common between how Kate handles things and how Diana did.

More than anyone else, William had the dubious benefit of seeing how Diana's way of being royal worked for her in the end. William seems to have a more restrained personality than Diana, (and Charles for that matter), so maybe he would never have been tempted to blur the royalty/celebrity line, but I also can't help but think he learned a hard but valuable lesson early on in life just by watching what went on with his mother.

I know that many people think that there was something unique about Diana and that the sort of attention she got was inevitable but I've never bought that. Diana cooperated with and manipulated the media to an unprecedented extent and IMO it was that, combined with the the way she and Charles handled their marriage troubles, that set her apart from the kind of fame that, for example, William and Catherine enjoy today. The new Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are two of the best known people in the world now and they can use that recognition to do every bit as much good as Diana did with helping those in need. But at the end of the day they can do things like demand to be left alone in Anglesey and the press is forced to take them seriously because they know when William says "leave me alone" he means exactly that, not "leave me alone until next week when I'll call and let you know where I'll be having lunch so you can stop by and take a picture and I may or may not pretend to be upset." The only thing Diana gained by her 'extra' level of fame was a life of being hunted and no way to turn the clock back.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Jokes, yes; dirty jokes, no.

There is NOTHING wrong with bringing a little humor into a public function. Certainly not when Dame Edna is involved.

Yes, this is true. The only thing I remember Diana wearing in public from her pre-engagement wardrobe was the blue-patterned suit that she wore to her sister Sarah's wedding.

Also, Diana had no time, prenuptually, to amass a "Royal" wardrobe, she was, after all only 19 and their "courtship," such as it was, only weeks long.

 

[olebabs]

A part of her legacy could then be considered as the importance of introducing new members in a more thourough way, than she herself was.
That the princes have time to find love and for that love to mature.

And one must also remember, that much of the changes came about after she died. With this I mean, she might have been the platform, but she herself was not to blame for the way the people reacted to her death and the way they treated the RF in the days following. NO ONE saw that happening.

I think the way the RF presents itself today is very applaudable. I have nothing but respect for Her Majesty. She is a tough cookie.

 

[Tsaritsa]

I can't help wondering, if from the start Diana had believed she had the kind of support from Charles that he so obviously affords Camilla, would she have needed the adoration of camara and crowd. In fairness, both are drawn to pretty Princesses and it wasn't Diana's fault that she was one or that she was bounced into the public domain after an engagement of barely four months and a "courtship" of not much longer. Both Camilla and Katherine have been eased into public view over several years, partly, I suspect, because of Diana's experience and partly because their husbands are protective enough of them to say if necessary "leave us alone" and mean it. It also speaks of a unitedness which failed to exist between Charles and Diana, who at not yet 21, had been whisked out of obscurity to become girlfriend, fiancee, wife of The Prince of Wales, mother-to-be of his child and expected to do the full round of public duties ALL inside a year. I don't want to labour the point, but by comparison, I think Camilla and Katherine have both had an easier ride and if lessons have been learned a great legacy has been bestowed.

 

[olebabs]

Hear, hear Tsaritsa.

 

[Tsaritsa]

Good to know you see it the way I do, Olebabs.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I think that the need for adoration from the public came later on, as her marriage broke down. One writer--I can't remember who--has made the case that the camera represented her father's love. Johnnie Spencer showed his love to his children by photographing them, and the early pictures of Diana seem to reflect this.

I can't help wondering, if from the start Diana had believed she had the kind of support from Charles that he so obviously affords Camilla, would she have needed the adoration of camara and crowd.

Yes, I believe that this is true. I think that the older generation of noble women who married into the BRF--such as Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon and Lady Alice Montague-Douglas-Scott had a much greater degree of privacy while getting used to the limelight and were treated with more deference by the media. Although the media was fawning to the young Lady Diana and then the New Princess of Wales, it was also overwhelming due to the tabloid wars of the time and the 24-hour news cycle that was coming into play.

A part of her legacy could then be considered as the importance of introducing new members in a more thourough way, than she herself was.

 

[Mia_mae]

Good to know you see it the way I do, Olebabs.

I would join you both. Just one small correction. it's Catherine, not Katherine

I've seen some time ago a interview with Tina Brown, and there was one question about Diana's legacy. She put it like so many here, perhaps her biggest legacy was that her son was left to choose someone he loved, regardless of the social position.

 

[roseroyal]

I think I now have goosebumps, I never thought of that, but of course!

 

[Iluvbertie]

Yes, I believe that this is true. I think that the older generation of noble women who married into the BRF--such as Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon and Lady Alice Montague-Douglas-Scott had a much greater degree of privacy while getting used to the limelight and were treated with more deference by the media. Although the media was fawning to the young Lady Diana and then the New Princess of Wales, it was also overwhelming due to the tabloid wars of the time and the 24-hour news cycle that was coming into play.

Of course in the 1920s there wasn't the media coverage anyway but in addition both Lady Elizabeth and Lady Alice married younger sons not the heir. I wonder if they would have been given the same degree of leeway if they had married the Prince of Wales.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I think that there would have been much more coverage of any woman who married The Prince of Wales/Edward VIII, but as long as she was the "right type"--i.e. an aristocrat or a princess who wasn't associated with scandals--I don't think that the press would have given her a hard time.

Of course in the 1920s there wasn't the media coverage anyway but in addition both Lady Elizabeth and Lady Alice married younger sons not the heir. I wonder if they would have been given the same degree of leeway if they had married the Prince of Wales.

 

[olebabs]

Reading through this very long thread, it occured to me, how damaging an effect a childhood can have on a person. I you have no sensce of self worth, how can one ever learn to trust others. To think that people, she misguidedly opened her heart to, betrayed her after she died, well it is just plain wrong. I really hope she has found peace whereever she is.

 

[Mermaid1962]

So true. Had Diana had a stable, loving home life, she might have never thought of marrying Prince Charles; or she might have still married him and still be The Princess of Wales today. It's all a tragedy.

Reading through this very long thread, it occured to me, how damaging an effect a childhood can have on a person.

 

[sirhon11234]

Reading through this very long thread, it occured to me, how damaging an effect a childhood can have on a person. I you have no sensce of self worth, how can one ever learn to trust others. To think that people, she misguidedly opened her heart to, betrayed her after she died, well it is just plain wrong. I really hope she has found peace whereever she is.

Well the two people the Princess of Wales trusted the most still haven't betrayed her, and they are her sons.

 

[olebabs]

True Sirhon11234. If she has done nothing else right, she certainly helped those to along just fine

 

[Aliza]

So true. Had Diana had a stable, loving home life, she might have never thought of marrying Prince Charles; or she might have still married him and still be The Princess of Wales today. It's all a tragedy.

I agree with you completely. I realise Paul Burrell is not the most trustworthy source but I remember in his book he has the Princess saying that it was her lack of self-worth from her childhood on that had caused her marriage to go the way it did. She claimed that she had looked to Prince Charles for recognition and attention in order to boost her ego and when that kind of attention was not forthcoming, she felt rejected. If she had been older, she would have likely realised that self-esteem must come from a good relationship with yourself, or in other words, you have to love yourself before you can accept love from others.

According to Burrell, one of her favourite quotes was, "High self-esteem does not protect you, but it does allow you to entertain self-doubt without being devastated".

 

[olebabs]

A very true quote. Just so very sad that no one seemed to pick up on that, and helped her. On the other hand Í think that she and Charles was very much in the same position and therefore they could not help each other

 

[Aliza]

A very true quote. Just so very sad that no one seemed to pick up on that, and helped her. On the other hand Í think that she and Charles was very much in the same position and therefore they could not help each other

I think you hit the nail on the head, olebabs. In most successful marriages, one partner does more giving and the other more taking; the positions of giver and taker switch back and forth according to what life brings along around the couple. Neither Charles nor Diana had enough to give and both needed emotional propping up. It's no wonder the marriage went downhill so quickly.

I also think it's a shame that no one seemed able to help Diana, but (and this is strictly my own opinion) I don't think the Princess was an easy person to help, either. By her own words in the Morton book, she dismisses all the psychotherapists, psychologists and other help the BRF brought in to aid her in the transition to Princess of Wales when she started to falter. She claimed she only needed "time". I wonder how much of that denial on her part was due to the "shame" and "secrecy" that sufferers of bulimia feel about themselves and their eating disorder....

 

[olebabs]

Thank you Aliza. It is extremely difficult to help a person, who will not accept it.

From they way he reacted to her death, it seems to me that they had put the past behind them and found some sort of friendship. That is also a good legacy to leave behind. Forgiveness.

 

[roseroyal]

Referring to the post by Aliza-I feel as if I am going to get into hot water by saying this, but here is my opinion....
I believe that the majority of what Diana said in the Morton book was slanted truth by her, at the time in order to make Charles look bad.
I think that she must have realized and regretted this later.
Who knows what she would say if she were here now, and could reflect on that time in her life now? Perceptions of events in your life change the further away from them you are, and you have more maturity.
So I don't think we can read the Morton book as literal truth.

 

[olebabs]

I think you are correct, Roseroyal. We tend to do strange things when we are hurting, that we otherwise never would have.

 

[Aliza]

I agree with you, actually!
With the exception of parts that are not aimed at making Charles look bad and indeed make Diana look bad as in the subject I posted above. Diana refusing help for her traumatic transition to Princess of Wales after Charles and the rest of the BRF provided counsellors, psychoanalysts, psychologists, and more (!) makes Diana look bad, in my opinion, and does not slur Charles in any way. Much of what I posted is mentioned in Dimbleby's book that was the riposte to Morton, as well.

I agree wholeheartedly that Diana would have penned quite a different story in 1997 than she did in 1992. I do think her motive with the Morton book was to tell a very biased version of her side of the story. I also believe she came to regret co-operating with Morton, in the same way as she regretted doing Panorama. She acknowledged that she "lead from the heart", well, IMHO there were some occasions where her mind would have carried her to safer places than those where her heart sometimes lead her, particularly where Charles was concerned.

It is wonderful, though how Charles and Diana had come to be friends in the last year of her life. It gives them both great credit to have the ability to forgive each other for so many wounding blows.

 

[olebabs]

But then we are back to the fact, that had she had a more close relationship with her mother, Mrs. Shand-Kydd might have been able to advice her to continue the the therapy ang guided her through this difficult transistion. Look at the current CPss, they have had a thourough introduction and it still seems to be overwelming at times. All of them were a good 10 years older, when they entered the scene, so no wonder a 19 yo girl would find it daunting.