When did your opinion of Diana change and why?

[zhontella]

Originally Posted by ysbel

So at what point did people realize the Panorama interview a mistake? Right after the interview or a little bit later?

I never saw it as a mistake. When is stating the truth a mistake?

http://home.comcast.net/~thissal/thisandthat2/ok.jpg

Bad Boy Charles should have paid more attention to the luxury of Diana.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by zhontella

I never saw it as a mistake. When is stating the truth a mistake?

Bad Boy Charles should have paid more attention to the luxury of Diana.

It is always a mistake if it is clear that it is not the truth. The over acting was hilarious to watch.
I don't understand your posting an old picture or your last comment. Diana was given luxuries most girls can't even imagine!

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by zhontella

I never saw it as a mistake. When is stating the truth a mistake?

http://home.comcast.net/~thissal/thisandthat2/ok.jpg

Bad Boy Charles should have paid more attention to the luxury of Diana.

What do you mean by "paid more attention" ? I'm a little confused there .

[COUNTESS]

The Panorama interview was foolish. She should never have exposed herself to that interview and never said in public what she might have thought in private. Charles was a CAD, just not a good looking one. He is spoiled, selfish and was a terrible husband to a woman he asked to marry him, when he knew he didn't love her or care much about her. He needed a brood mare and hoped to get just that. In fact, she was just a girl. Just a silly girl at that, with silly, romantic notions. That he was involved with a married woman, made him a cad, even without Diana.

[Madame Royale]

Penny Junor tells a tale

By what means did Penny expose this tale, Sam?

[BeatrixFan]

Her book; "Charles : Victim or Villain". There were more of a similar vein.

[Madame Royale]

Ahh, I see.. Thank you Mr...

[RoyallyRich]

I still love and respect the late Princess.Unfortunately over the years people have claimed that she was some sort of revolutionary out to destroy the Monarchy.That turned me off a great deal for a while.I beleived this a 100%.But 10 years after she passed, I have learned to appreciate,and remember the good times more and ignore the bad times when she seemed like a traitor to the Monarchy and the class into which she had been born.

[Chimene]

He is spoiled, selfish and was a terrible husband to a woman he asked to marry him, when he knew he didn't love her or care much about her.

It's true that Charles is to blame for not having enough personal courage to spot the charade. I don't think Diana can throw stone in the fidelity department because two wrongs don't make a right.

In fact, she was just a girl. Just a silly girl at that, with silly, romantic notions.

If she wanted to marry for love, she should have never agreed to an arrange marriage, because I cannot think of anything less romantic.

[COUNTESS]

You are right, Chimene, but, I think, she fooled herself into believing he loved her. Nineteen year olds are hardly good judges of anything. Two wrongs, certainly, don't make a right, but to whom should she have been faithful? He had his life, she made a very poor attempt at trying to attract him and then, I think, she was destroying herself in her anger. That is the real pity. She allowed her anger at him and the siutation she was in, to run her life. She probably justfied everything from that anger, which lead to a very sad ending. No one of us, has the right to judge how and what she felt when she made these foolish decisions.

[Madame Royale]

I don't think Diana can throw stone

The only stones being thrown come from those, totally uninvolved, who feel they have a right to take a side.

And, well it's quite impossible for Diana to throw stones and has been for the past 10 years...

[Chimene]

She asked to be judged by doing a book and an interview portraying herself as the innocent party. It's never black or white, and it's true she married really young, but you're not still young at 32? Anger is not a rational way to go about solving problems, which she had to learn the hard way.

I think everyone here has sympathy for her, I certainly do. Her troubled life was cut short and she left two young children. How could we not feel bad. But, this thread is simply an analysis of this question: when-did-your-opinion-diana-change-why?

Don't worry, no one can ever do anything to her now! May she rest in peace.

[Chimene]

Originally Posted by Madame Royale

[INDENT]The only stones being thrown come from those, totally uninvolved, who feel they have a right to take a side.

It was not meant to be and they were both wrong.

Originally Posted by Madame Royale

And, well it's quite impossible for Diana to throw stones and has been for the past 10 years...

You know what I mean. She was hurt by Charles' affair, as she should be. Yet she did the same and threw stones by blaming him for everything that was wrong in her life.

[COUNTESS]

You are right, Chimene, she did foolish things. From my prospective 32 is very young, also. Plus, by then she, as I said, let her anger determine her lifestyle, which was really a bad idea. And you are also right, life is not black and white, there are many shades of gray mixed in. That everyone here has sympathy for her, I do not know. And the question ...when did your opinion of Diana change... was a lead in for more negative comments, which I find at this point, 10 years after her death, to be stultifying.

[Madame Royale]

Well, personally, at the age of 32, I would hope that most would better appreciate the sanctity of marriage, and not enter such a union if one's feelings are not as they should be towards the proposed spouse.

It was an ill made match from day dot, and given the circumstance and enormity of the situation, I think both Charles and Diana were subject to the expectations of everyone around them and even those they did not know. Very early both surrendered their personal happiness for the contentment of others, I think.

and they were both wrong.

They were both scared I think. And yes, choices they made were often far from appealing and did little to aid the difficulty of the situation.

[jcbcode99]

They both were wrong, that is true, but I'm not sure I would call Charles spoiled, selfish, and terrible. I think that is unfair, especially since he had to deal with all the carefully manipulated negative press Diana kept throwing his way. Even though he admitted to having a relationship with Camilla, he always maintained the correct sense of decorum and propriety. I didn't see him out there giving interviews criticizing Diana's parenting skills. Also, are we forgetting that Charles carried on an affair with a woman he had known for years and years? Diana carried on numerous affairs in an attempt to validate herself as a person of worth and to get back at Charles. Neither was right and neither behaved as they should have, but I have to say that Diana was vengeful where Charles was not. True, she was young when she married Charles--and it wasn't a booming success from the get-go, but Charles has said over and over that there was a time when they were very much in love and happy--you can see it in photos after Harry was born-but it just didn't last because they were not a good match and Diana, frankly, just did not deal gracefully with the situation because of the way her life had played out. She had a troubled upbringing and didn't get enough attention; she read those ridiculous Barbara Cartland romance novels expecting that was how love would be (at 19 I think we all think that way) and then married THE prince of her dreams. She found out it wasn't that way at all, that dreams do not become reality, and was upset and reacted in the same way she reacted to things as a child--sulking, anger, manipulation, etc...--all things which we, as teenagers, were probably guilty of. But, she never really outgrew it and that is tragic.

[Chimene]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

Two wrongs, certainly, don't make a right, but to whom should she have been faithful?

She could have been true to herself. If the marriage was not working and she wanted to end it and live honestly, I would have applauded her, even admire her for it. However, I think she wanted to have it both ways, and as you know, the rest is history.

[Madame Royale]

However, I think she wanted to have it both ways...

As did her husband, if that's the case.

I, for the life of me, can't take sides...it's impossible and pointless. And I believe that if such statements are addressed to one, then surely the other should not elude the very same critique...

I fondly remember Diana and I genuinely like Charles. To think poorly of either person for the unhappy state of their marriage is no one's place, imo.

[Warren]

Originally Posted by Madame Royale

By what means did Penny expose this tale, Sam?

As Sam has answered that question, here's the relevant passage (pages 165-166):

"Another victim of Diana's erratic behaviour towards friends and staff was Victoria Mendham. She was the Princess's secretary for seven years, and was totally devoted to her... It was a measure of their friendship that Diana asked Victoria to go on holiday with her four years running. For the first two Diana paid the full cost. When they went to the Caribbean again at Easter 1996, Victoria assumed she was there as a guest once again. It was a great treat and all was going well until half way through the holiday when the Princess suddenly said 'Oh, Victoria, I've written a note...to make sure you get your share of the bill. I think it's about £5,000.'

Victoria telephoned the London office in floods of tears... The Prince [of Wales] paid.

Nine months later it happened again. This time Victoria said she could pay the airfare to the Caribbean but they had stayed at the K Club where beach-side villas cost £1,700 a night, and paying that kind of money was out of the question. When the Princess learnt that her husband had footed the previous bill she 'went through the roof' and Victoria was frozen out as others had been before her."

[Madame Royale]

Cheers for that, Warren.

That's certainly some unfortunate behaviour displayed by the late Princess of Wales.

I think it's proven that Diana had a temperament which was most fragile. I think, and spychological burden's aside, that she also became accustomed to wielding a certain influence over others desires to please.

She was as flawed as the next person and on occasion displayed a manipulative streak, though this does little to alter my strong belief that she was a beautiful woman who believed in the greater good of humanity and wanted to do what she could to help shape a better and brighter future for many.