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

[Dierna23]

...In the Duchess of Kent book, the author mentions that Katharine felt some of the same things that Diana felt in her marriage. No support from the BRF when she married into it, no compassion from the DoK when she was experiencing problems, the press heavy interest, etc.

Interesting. I noticed the similarities between Diana and the Duchess of Kent as well. From my subjective view on them I think they had a few things in common. They both seem/seemed quite sensitive for example.

I didn't choose my words correctly above. The Royal Family was never unpopular, however, when Diana appeared, interest in the Royal Family soared because many in the press considered a breath of fresh air to a family that had become rather boring. She was a fresh face and energy.

Agreed. As Zonk mentioned above I too think that any young/beautiful Princess, especially Crown Princess, attracts a lot of attention and interest from the media and people all over. Not to play Diana down, but I think this would've happened to nearly every young and halfway good looking woman in this position and I think this will happen with Kate Middleton also, if she will be William's wife some day. Off topic, sorry!

 

[Duchessmary]

The Queen had had enough after the disasterous "Panorama" interview and you can't blame her.

 

[Warren]

This thread is for the discussion of Diana's relationships with HM and other members of the Royal Family.
It is not the place to rehash the Charles, Diana & Camilla triangle; those posts have been removed.

Warren
British Forums moderator

 

[Mermaid1962]

True enough. The War of the Waleses was tearing the country apart; and, as the Sovereign, the Queen had to act.

The Queen had had enough after the disasterous "Panorama" interview and you can't blame her.

 

[agogo]

ipossible to know what her relations were with her in laws were really like.

 

[Lumutqueen]

ipossible to know what her relations were with her in laws were really like.

Yes but that is why we add our own opinions from what we see.

I think Diana always had a good relationship with her mother-in-law, Andrew and Edward. Not so much Anne and Phillip because they were two very similar people.

 

[muriel]

Yes but that is why we add our own opinions from what we see.

I think Diana always had a good relationship with her mother-in-law, Andrew and Edward. Not so much Anne and Phillip because they were two very similar people.

That all sounds very plausible.

 

[ghost_night554]

I never could quite understand what Lady Kennard meant when she said " no one would be able to understand what Princess Diana is about"at around 2:14 mark. In what sense could they not understand what she was about. Other than that some nice little facts in this video but how in the early years the Queen tried to help with the press intrusion:YouTube - Her Majesty The Queen and Princess Diana

 

[mhansen2]

3:07

“She (Diana) had some very good qualities. Otherwise, it must have been very difficult for the royal family to deal with the rest.”

What about a person’s ability to deal with the strict lifestyle and rigid formalities of the royal family? It can be difficult for a person who marries into it to deal with that. Lady Kennard doesn’t address that at all. She seems to assume it’s a person’s duty to adapt and if she can't she must be "damaged." It certainly can't be the royal family's fault - can it?

 

[Katrianna]

It can't be all the Royal Family's fault, as with marrying into any family, Royal or not, one learns to adapt to the new family, there may be one or two family members that may be difficult to get along with, but that's part of the learning and getting acquainted process. When marrying into a Royal Family, then there's also protocols to learn and it's an added stress.
The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh went out of their way to welcome Diana, I believe, and to ease her into the Royal life. Diana was on good terms with Andrew and Edward while Anne, a personality in her own right. Really, she was a prickly sister-in-law.
I have read on another forum that Diana and Fergie didn't really take their lesson from the Palace staff seriously at all. One senior Palace courtier resigned on the spot when Diana threw royal protocol books on the floor and stated she wasn't interested in learning it, while Fergie just didn't like being told what to do.
I have no idea if these anecdotes are true or not, but it does make some sense. It had to be frustrating for the newcomers to the Royal Family as well as for the Royals themselves who literally grew up Royal.
I do think it was a little puzzling that both Diana and Sarah stated they didn't know at all what they were getting into. Both young women grew up around the Royal Family as friends so they could have known more about the Royals than, say, myself who has never been around the aristocratic class, let alone the Royals.
I've also read that the Queen and Phillip had much empathy and sympathy for Diana during the War of the Wales until she gave the Panorama interview, then the family circled the wagons. I don't know if this is true or not either.

 

[Christo's Girl]

I don't think she and Anne had anything in common quite frankly, but apparently Diana admired how hard Anne worked, especially her involvement with Save the Children. She also raised two great kids that were supportive of their cousins.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Diana's attitude reminded me of people I know who always blame others for their problems. I don't doubt that the Windsors are an unusual family to marry into, because they're in a very unusual situation. Diana was so very young when she married, and possibly she hadn't yet learned how to get along with people who do things differently.

It can't be all the Royal Family's fault, as with marrying into any family, Royal or not, one learns to adapt to the new family, there may be one or two family members that may be difficult to get along with, but that's part of the learning and getting acquainted process. When marrying into a Royal Family, then there's also protocols to learn and it's an added stress.

 

[Zonk]

I agree Mermaid1962.

There was Diana's lack of maturity in dealing with certain situations. She truly had no clue what she had gotten herself into. And I think we would also agree that the Windsors were not that flexible with people marrying into their family. What I mean by that, is that they were like the Borg. People who married into the family had to assimilate to their way of life. And for some that is not ideal.

I think Sophie and Camilla have certainly benefited from the mistakes and the learning experiences of Sarah and Diana. In addition to them being just better suited for their mates. Let's not also forget that for whatever reason Mark didn't adapt as well.

I think people mistakenly think that when someone marries into a family...everyone get along with no issues. The two people who are married have the connection.The newly installed son/daughter has to forge their own relationships with their spouses family. Sometimes people are extremely lucky with their inlaws and they get along with them all. Some have favorites and some just tolerate them. Sometimes some people just don't mesh.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

I think it's sometimes harder to notice the differences between families when, from some perspectives, they are more similar than they are different (Royals and aristocratics are more alike than aristocrats are like working class or poor). Young people focus way more on the differences among individuals, thinking differences between upbringing and families will iron themselves out.

All I can say, is that you don't know your new in-law family until you've experienced it - especially if they are Royals. I daresay William knows far more about what it's like to hang out with the Middletons than Kate does about his family - and therein is part of the difficulty.

You don't know anything until you've experienced, and it's impossible to judge another person's suffering. I think it's ungracious and unfair to imply that Diana was simply playing the victim or whining. It was very different back then, and it was a difficult transition - and I see nothing in body language, expression or speech that indicated that Prince Charles had the concerns that Prince William brings to his marriage.

A person being taught will take the lesson well if it's taught properly, otherwise lots of normal people throw the books away or laugh at the lesson.

Diana was, what, 19 when she married?

 

[Katrianna]

She had just turned 20 at the time of her marriage.

 

[MARG]

She had just turned 20 at the time of her marriage.

Why is it that these days people talk about 20 year olds like they are prepubescent teenagers unable to reason, think or take responsibility for their own actions. Except in a court of law where they are tried as adults and can be imprisoned for life for their "choices". Diana was an adult and should be treated as such.

What a strange juxtaposition.

Diana: Incapable of being responsible for her own actions in relation to the things she did and said whilst engaged and then married into the BRF. Judged innocent by reason of youth.

Soldier: Killed in action. Judged a hero by his mates and hopefully, his country.

Murderer: Judged and found guilty by a jury of his peers and sentenced accordingly.

Each 20 years old. Each made significant life choices with far reaching consequences.

Makes you think doesn't it?

 

[Skippy]

There is a difference between calender adulthood and emotional adulthood.

 

[MARG]

There is a difference between calender adulthood and emotional adulthood.

But who decides? All are equal in the eyes of the law!

 

[Iluvbertie]

If emotional adulthood is a criteria for judging when a person is an adult then there is no way many people would be classed as adults until their 30s or 40s.

Diana was a adult, made adult decisions and lived with the consequences of those decisions - as we all do.

If she wasn't capable of making those decisions then she was let down by her family who supported her in making the decision to accept Charles' proposal. They presumably felt she was emotionally as well as legally adult enough to make a decision to get married.

 

[Skippy]

If emotional adulthood is a criteria for judging when a person is an adult then there is no way many people would be classed as adults until their 30s or 40s.

Diana was a adult, made adult decisions and lived with the consequences of those decisions - as we all do.

If she wasn't capable of making those decisions then she was let down by her family who supported her in making the decision to accept Charles' proposal. They presumably felt she was emotionally as well as legally adult enough to make a decision to get married.

I don't think they were preoccupied with those issues at all, as they should have - imo - but I think that is were a lot of the problems come from.
They were used to the royal circles so probably could not imagine that someone from their immediate family could not be suited to function there. AKA "we can and have always been able, so why can't she?".
And then, growing up near the royal circle is, imo, at least somewhat different from being part of the royal circle.

I think it was the age as well, back then things were not viewed in such a way.

 

[Nice Nofret]

Diana always reminds me a lot of my sister (same age) who is also always scapegoating everybody around her, for her misconceptions about how life works. The body language, not wanting to conform, etc.

When I look at the early interviews and pictures of their early years together, I'm sure they where happy enough and tried to make it work. But I fear with characters like hers it's difficult ... and I presume that also Charles has edges and difficult sides

The Queen knows full well, that it's not easy to be a royal - to do s.o. duty etc. so of course she cared for Diana, who was the daughter and granddaughter of a friend

 

[MRSJ]

The Queen knows full well, that it's not easy to be a royal - to do s.o. duty etc. so of course she cared for Diana, who was the daughter and granddaughter of a friend

Yes but don't forget the Queen knows nothing of what it's like to be a 'regular' person- I think there is a HUGE difference between being born and raised Royal and marrying in so they both have to try and understand each others POV as much as they're able, in this case I am not sure if either was able to fully grasp the others circumstances......

 

[Skippy]

Yes but don't forget the Queen knows nothing of what it's like to be a 'regular' person- I think there is a HUGE difference between being born and raised Royal and marrying in so they both have to try and understand each others POV as much as they're able, in this case I am not sure if either was able to fully grasp the others circumstances......

I totally agree with this.

 

[Zonk]

I believe there were a lot of issues at the core of the relationships.

First I don't think there should be a generalization about 19/20 year olds. There are people in that age group who are somewhat young and immature and there are others who are old and wise beyond their ages. How many of us know an indidvidual who appeared older and maturer than their age group (and contemporaries).

I think at 20, Diana was definitely past the legal age of consent to marry and probably mature enough to do so. But to marry a man of 32? Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of people who marry young and marry people older than them. But there has to be some common ground, interest, etc. And I don't believe that was the case for Charles and Diana.

I also think there is a huge difference on living on the fringes of royalty and being royal. Surely Diana witnessed her father and grandmother working for the Royals but watching your family at work is a lot different than doing the work.

In regards to her relationships with member of the BRF...I think the Diana loved and revered the Queen and the DoE. She definitely liked Princess Margaret and Lady Sarah Chatto among others. She certainly respected Princess Anne...they were just too different to be more than sister in laws.

I definitely think she didin't think about the consequences of her actions and how they would affect her relationship with the BRF. Margaret, Sarah, The Queen Mother (and others) certainly changed the scope of the relationship once the book came out and the interview began.

She failed to understand that by attacking Charles and the monarchy she was attacking them as well. I dont' think she realized that until it was too late.

Hindsight is 20/20.

 

[Skippy]

I believe there were a lot of issues at the core of the relationships.

First I don't think there should be a generalization about 19/20 year olds. There are people in that age group who are somewhat young and immature and there are others who are old and wise beyond their ages. How many of us know an indidvidual who appeared older and maturer than their age group (and contemporaries).

I think at 20, Diana was definitely past the legal age of consent to marry and probably mature enough to do so. But to marry a man of 32? Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of people who marry young and marry people older than them. But there has to be some common ground, interest, etc. And I don't believe that was the case for Charles and Diana.

I also think there is a huge difference on living on the fringes of royalty and being royal. Surely Diana witnessed her father and grandmother working for the Royals but watching your family at work is a lot different than doing the work.

In regards to her relationships with member of the BRF...I think the Diana loved and revered the Queen and the DoE. She adored Princess Margaret and Lady Sarah Chatto. She certainly respected Princess Anne...they were just too different to be more than sister in laws.

I definitely think she didin't think about the consequences of her actions and how they would affect her relationship with the BRF. Margaret, Sarah, The Queen Mother (and others) certainly changed the scope of the relationship once the book came out and the interview began.

She failed to understand that by attacking Charles and the monarchy she was attacking them as well. I dont' think she realized that until it was too late.

Hindsight is 20/20.

True, true... And the bold part is my opinion as well.

 

[Zonk]

I also forgot to add that by attacking the monarchy she was also attacking her children's legacy. I am pretty sure she didn't think about that.

 

[MRSJ]

I also forgot to add that by attacking the monarchy she was also attacking her children's legacy. I am pretty sure she didn't think about that.

Good point!

 

[Madame Royale]

I also forgot to add that by attacking the monarchy she was also attacking her children's legacy. I am pretty sure she didn't think about that.

I think Diana considered her childen to be her legacy, above all else, and that ultimately her influence would have in some way, reshaped the face of the monarchy and it's presence in society.

The modern day monarchy as she knew it, was not always going to last and it is for that reason that I don't believe she really considered her endeavours to be detremental to the legacy of her children as together, they could shape their own legacy, seperate to those of the current monarch and heir.

God knows that in most things Diana must have meant well. I wouldn't doubt that for a moment. But she was for many years a broken and emotionally isolated woman and ultimately her rational judgement through feeling she was alone in it all and that she suffered mental illness (depression, bulimia etc) wasn't always present when it would have best served her. In all things, I don't think it can be said that her actions truly reflected the women she was, but were representative of someone she could be as a result of what was going on at the time.

 

[1222]

I also forgot to add that by attacking the monarchy she was also attacking her children's legacy. I am pretty sure she didn't think about that.

I have to agree with that. I also think with Dianna's parents divorce, there was a lot of fighting and blaming each other,I think Diana copied her parents actions in her own marriage.

 

[Katrianna]

I agree that Diana was certainly of legal age to marry, but she was an immature 19-20 yr. old., she fell into the immature group instead of the mature young adults her age. What further hurt her was that her family was of no help to her at all. When Diana expressed doubts and second thoughts about marrying Charles, her sisters reportedly replied the "too late Dutch, your face is on the tea towels." Her family appeared more interested in getting an even greater social standing by marrying one of their own into the Royal Family and Charles was feeling the pressure from his family.
As to the Panorama interview, Diana was urged by her advisers and friends not to do it, but she didn't listen to anyone and rushed headlong into it. It was a huge mistake for her.