Diana's Relationships with The Queen and Other Members of the Royal Family

[HistoryGirl]

But this isn't another culture, it's the British. The photographers weren't following her for the fun of it, they were following because her pictures were worth so much money precisely because of the public interest in her.

Memorials and funerals are two different things. Two grown men having a memorial a decade after the death to celebrate their mother is not, in my opinion, comparable to two boys having to collect themselves days after their mother had tragically passed and parade around for the public and cameras just so strangers could say that they "shared in their grief."

I think the context of the Queen refusing to endorse a public funeral is always painted as her not thinking that Diana was deserving of one or that the RF hated her so much that they didn't want her celebrated. In my opinion, the Queen was actually trying to first respect the wishes of the Spencers to have a private funeral, and then to put the well-being of the boys first and foremost; two boys that disliked and continue to dislike public scrutiny into their private lives at the best of times, much less a sudden death like that.

 

[Countessmeout]

I agree. Could have been handled like a celebrity, which at the point of her death Diana was more, than a royal. Celebrities often have a private funeral, and a public memorial service.

I think Earl Spencer had it right. I think a private funeral where the boys and others who actually knew her, could mourn would have been proper. They could have invited friends and other people, just not the media circus it was. They kept the boys at Balmoral at first to give them privacy to grieve and then thrust them into that funeral. The funeral should have been kept private.

A concert like the 10 year, or some other kind of memorial could have been held after for the public. And the boys could have chosen for themselves whether to attend that

 

[Denville]

I don't think so. I think the queen just didn't want to have any part in Diana's funeral because she was NOT pleased with Diana, and only just (One hopes) felt a little grief at her death. I don't think she cared what the Spencers or the boys wanted (she sent the boys out to speak to the crowds which I'd say is much worse than taking part in a public funeral which IS part of royal life).. she just wanted the whole thing to go away and was forced to say a few kind words about Diana by public pressure.
But the Spencers were OK with a public funeral, they did not want one as such but could see that people were saddened by Diana's death and they felt that the public SHOULD have a part in saying goodbye to her. IN fact I believe that Charles Spencer DIDNT feel that his nephews should have to walk in the funeral procession but the RF wanted them to do so..So while they did want Diana's funeral to be one tat the public could take a part in, they did feel that the boys walking in it was an ordeal for them and it was the RF who pushed for this to happen. WIll didn't want to go, but Philip told him he would regret it if he didnt',
and I think that that's true.. I think that later, Will would feel that in walking he was showing his mother the final respect of accompanying her on her last journey..

 

[HistoryGirl]

I agree. Could have been handled like a celebrity, which at the point of her death Diana was more, than a royal. Celebrities often have a private funeral, and a public memorial service.

I think Earl Spencer had it right. I think a private funeral where the boys and others who actually knew her, could mourn would have been proper. They could have invited friends and other people, just not the media circus it was. They kept the boys at Balmoral at first to give them privacy to grieve and then thrust them into that funeral. The funeral should have been kept private.

A concert like the 10 year, or some other kind of memorial could have been held after for the public. And the boys could have chosen for themselves whether to attend that

Totally. Just thinking about how people think that they own public figures just because they read about them in the papers is disturbing. A circus is exactly how I would describe it; with the boys and their tears as the main attraction. I honestly don't know how they did it. I could not have retained my composure as an adult much less a child.

 

[Denville]

I certainly didn't see it as a circus, and I did not pay much attention to the boys, or notice their tears. In fact as I recall the cameras were off them in the church so that they COULD cry privately..
I watched the funeral and went to see the hearse pass on its way to Althrop because I wanted ot see the service and to say goodbye to her...

 

[HistoryGirl]

That's fine. It's just my opinion that it was completely unnecessary and more about everyone else than Diana's family. Obviously, most people disagree with me and it's certainly their prerogative to do so.

 

[Iluvbertie]

It was outright bullying by the public and the press - none of whom actually cared about the two boys who had just lost their mother. They should have been the only concerns for everyone but no - the public felt that their grief was as important or even more important that that of the two boys who called her 'mummy'.

I will never forget that week and how disgusted I felt at the behaviour of the British public and press. Diana's fans, that week, displayed all her worst qualities - nastiness, bulllying, selfishness etc - rather than her best qualities - compassion, love for her sons, etc.

 

[Denville]

Where was this nastiness and bullying? people were shocked and grieved. she was a public figure, not a celebrity but a former member of the RF, and I would have thought that her boys would be wanting her to be buried with some kind of special honour and recognition of her position as Princess. I think the queen SHOULD have made a speech earlier, and shown a certain respect for her former daughter in law, but she didn't because she wasnt' grieved and she was clearly just cross that her holiday had been interrupted. If she was such a loving grandma, why did she send the 2 young boys out to speak to the crowds? if the crowds were being so awful (I thought they were just tryring to show that they had cared for Diana and that they sympathised with the children) why did the queen let them go out there>?

 

[HistoryGirl]

the public felt that their grief was as important or even more important that that of the two boys who called her 'mummy'.

This is what really kind of gets me. I know that they all felt like they "knew" her but unless you were a friend or family, quite frankly, you didn't. Whatever grief the British public felt, multiply that by infinity and that's how W and H must have felt. It seems it became more about "who can we blame for this" than about Diana and the sadness that her family and friends felt. It's like a person telling a friend that they are sick because they are in need of support and then the friend makes it about them and they're the ones that wind up needing to be consoled instead of the other way around.

 

[Curryong]

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the public funeral for Diana, I was mingling in the crowds in London that day and in the days leading up to it so I'll give you my impressions. Whatever may be thought of their grief today, years later, at the time there was genuine anguish and sorrow among the people I saw. Heartbreak, despair even. It wasn't mass hysteria at all.

Diana had an incredibly strong connection to people all over the world when she was alive, and it remained at her death. Whatever the royal family did, they did to placate the sorrowing masses and to help aussage the underlying resentment people genuinely felt, about the way she was treated by her ex husband and by the BRF.

The boys agreed to march. We can argue till kingdom come about why it was felt they had to but the fact is they did. (I've read that alternative arrangements were in place in case they didn't want to appear at the last minute.)

I've said before that there was a very strange atmosphere among the crowds that day and apparently a strong police presence was present in the side streets in case the mood turned ugly. I don't think there was huge resentment against the Queen. I never heard too many people utter republican sentiments or anything, but there was widespread resentment towards Charles.

The Royal family learned from the experience of Diana's death. Rightly or wrongly, public opinion can't be ignored.

 

[HistoryGirl]

I can certainly agree with the last statement. Each and every day I see that the masses must be appeased, with little regard for logic or any other sense.

 

[Curryong]

When people are driven by emotion, yes, logic and everyday commonsense do go out the window sometimes. That doesn't mean that what they feel (and felt at Diana's funeral) is any less real, though.

 

[soapstar]

This thread is not about Diana's funeral. Let's please get back on topic.

 

[HistoryGirl]

That's exactly right and relating it back to the topic, that's why the whole Diana legacy conversation or events including her is so difficult to have with people that lived through it. Many times they take any critique or opinion personally as if you've cursed a family member. I think it'll be a much more fruitful and objective discussion many decades or even centuries from now as historical distance will limit emotional connection because while feelings are most certainly real in every occasion, it doesn't mean they are always appropriate or helpful to the given situation.

I mean it becomes about camps. Are you on the side of the royal family or Diana's. With polarizing figures it's always difficult to gauge what is true and what is false. Anyhow having to do with her relationships, especially when it comes to the BRF, always gets to a defensive place. I don't even remember how the tangent originally started, but back on topic, I think it makes perfect sense that when she openly criticized the monarchy is the moment where she became persona non grata with most if not all family members. It's logical. They may not all like each other and certainly do not agree with each other's choices, but they do seem to close ranks against outsiders quite quickly.

I'm not sure that the Queen hated her or that she was not sorry she died. However, from the Queen's perspective, it would be difficult to pretend that everything was fine and dandy when it clearly was not. I've always gotten the impression--even when I don't agree with her decisions-- that the Queen feels a strong sense of duty towards her position and is protective over it. Diana undermined the monarchy with her comments, I'm not sure what other reaction the BRF was supposed to have other than to cut her off. She criticized them and didn't very much come across as someone that wanted to remain involved with them.

I am glad though that her and Charles were at least cordial for the sake of the boys. That was important.

 

[Queen Camilla]

I'm not sure that the Queen hated her or that she was not sorry she died. However, from the Queen's perspective, it would be difficult to pretend that everything was fine and dandy when it clearly was not. I've always gotten the impression--even when I don't agree with her decisions-- that the Queen feels a strong sense of duty towards her position and is protective over it. Diana undermined the monarchy with her comments, I'm not sure what other reaction the BRF was supposed to have other than to cut her off. She criticized them and didn't very much come across as someone that wanted to remain involved with them.

I am glad though that her and Charles were at least cordial for the sake of the boys. That was important.

IMO, when C&D privately separated in 1986/1987 her relationship with BRF also changed.

The Queen is all about rules and schedules.
There are numerous accounts of Diana staying behind in London and not joining the BRF at Balmoral and when she did join the family she would not join them in the after dinner gatherings. She also stopped joining the women for after dinner coffee during the Christmas holiday. These types of stories go back to 1986.

Diana may have come across to the family as someone that did not want to remain involved with them as early as the mid to late 1980s.

Diana was not a horse person and her relationship with various members of the BRF that were horse centric were probably only cordial and never close.

IMO, I think that just before she died, she probably had a better relationship with Charles than almost any other person in the BRF other than her sons.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Personally, it's never been an either/or question for me. There are some who are very pro Charles and Camilla and think that Diana was Evil Incarnate, and there are those who see Diana as the helpless victim of nefarious plots by the Big Bad Establishment/Palace. I find both extreme positions rather annoying.

I mean it becomes about camps. Are you on the side of the royal family or Diana's.

 

[Denville]

Personally, it's never been an either/or question for me. There are some who are very pro Charles and Camilla and think that Diana was Evil Incarnate, and there are those who see Diana as the helpless victim of nefarious plots by the Big Bad Establishment/Palace. I find both extreme positions rather annoying.

Certainly true. I was much more on Diana's side years ago and was hostile to Charles. But over time, I have changed, since I feel that Diana was a wonderful person in many ways but she was immature, she was damaged, and she was at times just as selfish as her husband. I can't see that one or the other was worse and I feel sorry for both of them that they ended up in such an unhappy marriage. I feel that the RF didn't always give Diana sympathy and over the funeral, I feel the queen was at fault.. but overall I tend to understand their point of view, that Diana HAD refused wilfuly to fit in with them, had used the press against them and while I think she'd tired to make her marriage work, it was fitful... So I can see that her depature from the family was probalby the best thing for them in many ways, and that Charles is happier with Camilla..

 

[HistoryGirl]

Personally, it's never been an either/or question for me. There are some who are very pro Charles and Camilla and think that Diana was Evil Incarnate, and there are those who see Diana as the helpless victim of nefarious plots by the Big Bad Establishment/Palace. I find both extreme positions rather annoying.

Well neither extreme is correct and it annoys me too. But it's the perceived personal connection that draws out the defensive nature from both sides.

To me, everyone was petty and ridiculous at some point in the debacle...like we have all made mistakes in stressful situations. It's not who deserves the blame to me, more trying to understand the situation.

The Queen and other members of the family, in my opinion, did not provide Diana with much support. And it's not an attack, I understand why they didn't. Because that's not how they were raised. Reading and hearing about their lives, it seems like they were pretty much told to suck it up when things weren't going well. I mean Philip lost both his parents, he and the Queen endured a world war, bombings, rationing, stressing about whether your country would be invaded by Nazis and you would be killed. Prince Charles and his siblings had to grow up with their parents being distant or sometimes not around at all. They all had gone through hard times and it must have been frustrating to have Diana complain about life at Balmoral or protocol with the Queen. Even though to her these were legitimate concerns, to them it must have seemed ridiculous.

Though they may not have understood her, I think they should have tried to accomodate her concerns somewhat. And who knows, maybe they did try and she just wanted everything her way. However, the Queen being much more lenient with Kate's entry into the family by allowing her to remain close to her own family during the holidays and helping her navigate through her first few years with the RF tells me that the Queen recognizes that it is better sometimes to have a form of compromise when it comes to transitioning between the life brides used to have and the new one they must accept.

It's difficult with a marriage because family members are put in an awkward position where they want to sympathize with the aggrieved party, but also remain loyal to their family member. Though mistakes were made during the marriage, and perhaps taking Charles' side may have been wrong. In my opinion, Diana crossed a different line when she went on TV to discuss their problems. That wasn't just a hit against Charles, that was an attack on the entire family whether she meant it as such or not. She may not have wanted to hurt the monarchy, but quite frankly, what else did she expect would happen when she told the public their dirty little secrets.

She may have been working through her own emotions and I can understand that. However, once Diana took such a public stand and damaged the position of the BRF --something that the Queen and the rest of the family had dedicated their lives to promoting-- I can't see how a relationship with the family could have been maintained.

 

[Denville]

I think that overall the RF were goig to sympathise with Charles. I think that after the first few years, or even sooner, disillusion with Diana among the RF set in. I think they felt she was "oh so charming" in public and loved by the people who only saw her at engagemetns, but that she was a lot different in private. And as time went on, I think that even if they disapproved of Charles' affair, their attitude was the old fashioned one that if a royal marriage wasn't working, you just kept it quiet and kept up a frornt in public. And if you had an affair, on the side, keep it discreet. ANd gradually I think they became afraid that Diana wasn't going to abide by that sort of unspoken bargain while Charles was willng to keep things going, and quietly see his other woman. I think that the queen did give her some support, she was willing to listen to Diana crying about her problems, at times, and she felt that she had been given support and advice on how to do the job in public, but there were limits. She couldn't make Di's marriage work and she just wanted her daughter in law and son to get on with things and do their job...

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

But this isn't another culture, it's the British. The photographers weren't following her for the fun of it, they were following because her pictures were worth so much money precisely because of the public interest in her.

Memorials and funerals are two different things. Two grown men having a memorial a decade after the death to celebrate their mother is not, in my opinion, comparable to two boys having to collect themselves days after their mother had tragically passed and parade around for the public and cameras just so strangers could say that they "shared in their grief."

I think the context of the Queen refusing to endorse a public funeral is always painted as her not thinking that Diana was deserving of one or that the RF hated her so much that they didn't want her celebrated. In my opinion, the Queen was actually trying to first respect the wishes of the Spencers to have a private funeral, and then to put the well-being of the boys first and foremost; two boys that disliked and continue to dislike public scrutiny into their private lives at the best of times, much less a sudden death like that.

I agree, at the time I thought the Queen was forced to do the right thing against her will, but I was young and dumb then and caught up in media spin. Now as an adult I see that all she was doing was putting the family first and the public group of hysterical strangers second. William and Harry shouldn't have had to parade in front of the masses shaking hands with fake smiles on their faces; Harry didn't even try to smile. And what was the point? So a bunch of nobody's could say they share their grief? No they didn't that was their mother, they needed their loved ones embrace not to be used to make the public feel better.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Didn't Diana have bad relations with her own family? She cut them off stopped talking to them, felt abandoned by her mother, pushed her step .other down the stairs, wasn't talking to one or all of her siblings at the time of her death? Diana had bad relationships with a lot of people; the RF not wanting to associate with her isn't entirely their fault. Diana seems to need 100% of her relations whether friend family or lover, that is something most people cannot give to another.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Yes, you're right. She was capable of a great deal of love, but she required a lot in return. She was very good with "the people" and loved by them because she didn't have in-depth relationships with them. Even those she met with whom she had correspondence didn't live with her day-to-day. I think that "the public" brought out the best in her and fulfilled something inside her.

 

[Denville]

Yes, you're right. She was capable of a great deal of love, but she required a lot in return. She was very good with "the people" and loved by them because she didn't have in-depth relationships with them. Even those she met with whom she had correspondence didn't live with her day-to-day. I think that "the public" brought out the best in her and fulfilled something inside her.

Perhaps that is true, that she was a bit of a "street angel and a house devil", but it doesn't make her a bad person. I think she had problems, emotional ones that made her needy with her own close friends, but her kinder better side showed up in her dealings with the public. People DID recieve help and kindness from her, and that was real.. and they were grateful. Perhaps she was nicer with them because she COULD be helpful to them and not be the one who was unhappy and in need of help..
friends have said that she would sometimes fall out wtih tehm and cut them off, but then if they were in need of help she'd come back and be very kind and helfpul... ROsa Monkton said this about I think when she lost a baby.. that Diana who had had a row with her, called up and came around to help and was wonderful...
Perhps she felt very useless and unworthy and it was only when she was able to do something for people that she felt worthwhile..

 

[Mermaid1962]

Quite possibly. I know a fair number of people who are "givers". If they aren't actively helping, they get depressed.

Perhps she felt very useless and unworthy and it was only when she was able to do something for people that she felt worthwhile..

 

[Denville]

Her brother did say that she had deep feelings of inadequacy and unworthiness so that would fit in wit her having a low opinon of herself so perhaps she only felt good when she was able to do something to help people, whether it was a friend with a child with problems, or an ordinary women with a sick child.. and the part of her that wanted to help people was very real

 

[Jacknch]

Further posts that have nothing to do wth Diana's relationship wth the Queena nd other members of the Royal Family will be deleted without notice. Please stay on topic.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Perhaps she was just good with people who only required a little bit from her. A hug, a touch, a photo op; but from those who needed a regular relationship that required more time and energy and exchanges she just couldn't do it. We know Diana brought Hewitt things but what else did she do for him, did she listen to his fears about Desert Storm etc.?
As for her relationship with the RF, about Margaret; has anyone heard that when she heard that Diana was dead and she had to return from vacation that she responded "even dead she's causing problems"? I don't know where I heard that from.

 

[Curryong]

Diana did have relationships, close friendships with people that lasted for years, her ex flat mates for instance. Diana's relationship with several members of the Royal family was changed and inevitably clouded by the breakup of her marriage to their son, brother, nephew, cousin, and that also coloured their memories of her. Blood will out, and most families will close ranks against an outsider if one of their own is unhappy. Just because they're Royal doesn't mean the BRF was somehow different.

 

[Denville]

I think you can't deny though that there were other friendships of hers that didn't last long.. or rather that she fell out with many of her "own friends". But I wont say more about that here because that's not the subject.
I think that (while a lot of what you say is true) Im not sure she was very close to younger royals in her early married life. I think she did befriend them, but i get the feeling she was always rather lonely among them because she didn't really fit in that well. I think she did try, and got on OK with them but one of her staff said that she siad wistfully that Fergie had more fun friends than she had, and I think one reason for her trying to get Sarah F into the family was to have a chum of her own age, who was not a born royal...

 

[Mermaid1962]

A quote like that was also attributed to the Queen Mother.

As for her relationship with the RF, about Margaret; has anyone heard that when she heard that Diana was dead and she had to return from vacation that she responded "even dead she's causing problems"? I don't know where I heard that from.