The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1641  
Old 10-05-2007, 11:40 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 8,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondBrg View Post
"love triangle"? More like an octagon. Diana had more lovers while married to Prince Charles, according to numerous reports, than Carter has little liver pills.

Diana was mentally ill as well as bulimia. Diana threw her stepmother down a flight of stairs. Diana lied and slandered an unmarried woman in public by telling her how sorry she was about losing a baby and then settled a lawsuit over the matter.

I really don't think you can compare the actions and behaviors of Prince Charles and Diana at all.
Well, may be... you are right. She was just a disillusioned and deeply hurt woman, who did not master the highest art of sophistiacted revenge. It seems to me that Prince Charles and Duchess of Cornwall have become the quintessence of virtue, whereas Princess Diana is viewed as the evil incarnate.
__________________

  #1642  
Old 10-05-2007, 12:03 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dallas Fort Worth, United States
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina View Post
Well, may be... you are right. She was just a disillusioned and deeply hurt woman, who did not master the highest art of sophistiacted revenge. It seems to me that Prince Charles and Duchess of Cornwall have become the quintessence of virtue, whereas Princess Diana is viewed as the evil incarnate.
No, she was severely mentally ill and traumatized from a very neglected childhood and expected Prince Charles to make right everything that had gone wrong in her life. Had she not been blond, blue eyed and beautiful and titled, she most likely would have ended up in an Institution for the Mentally Ill. Instead her family and Prince Charles Grandmother manipulated him into a marriage with her.
__________________

  #1643  
Old 10-05-2007, 12:29 PM
Liz's Avatar
Liz Liz is offline
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondBrg View Post
Had she not been blond, blue eyed and beautiful and titled, she most likely would have ended up in an Institution for the Mentally Ill.
Exaggerate much?
  #1644  
Old 10-05-2007, 12:31 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dallas Fort Worth, United States
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liz View Post
Exaggerate much?
I don't think so at all.
  #1645  
Old 10-05-2007, 12:52 PM
jcbcode99's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richmond Area, United States
Posts: 1,979
Diana was the product of a very unhappy childhood and she had always dreamed of marrying a prince because in her mind, that was a rescue from her own reality. All children, even teens, have this fantasty. Let's not forget how old Diana was-she was barely out of that age of adolescent fantasy. And suddenly, there she was, living the fairytale--which is exactly what she wanted. She was a child when she got married, and she behaved as a child would--petutantly, selfishly, angrily, vengefully. Her behavior is probably nothing we haven't done at some point in our lives, if we're being fair. Diana never got to experience university--and that is when we all grow up, and she never had a career that helped to define who she was before she entered the Royal Family. Again, her age and inexperience created this situation.

I do think that she created an amazing public personna, but all the personal accounts we've heard of her indicated that she was a selfish person. I hate that, because had she not married so young that may not have happened to her. I also think she was a fantastic mother--but she confided too much in William--a parent should be a parent and a child a child. He didn't need to hear all that. The reason she felt she could trust no one was because she alienated so many people. Its sad that such a truly dynamic individual had these problems.
As for Charles, he will ascend to the throne and be a wonderful King. He has earned the right to be King. After all, if Henry VIII could still be king.......
Camilla will be Queen Consort and stand confidently by her man.
Until then, God Save the Queen!
__________________
Janet

"We make a living by what we do; we make a life by what we give" Winston Churchill
  #1646  
Old 10-05-2007, 12:53 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,377
I think the question of who was good and who was evil is rather irrelevant. Diana is dead and gone and she herself cannot affect the status of the monarchy any more but the question for the British people now is whether the British monarchy is worth saving.

Unless Charles dies before the Queen, he and Camilla are going to be the face of the future British monarchy and so the state and condition of the monarchy are going to be irretrievably tied up with the status and condition of Charles and Camilla. I know there is talk about Charles dying before the Queen but people shouldn't count on it to prevent Charles from ascending the throne.

If the British people care about the status of the British monarchy, at some point they have to care about the status and condition of Charles and Camilla - and William who comes after. Right now, the whole purpose of the monarchy is to protect the status of the Queen who is its figurehead; at some point, the focus needs to change to protect the status of Charles and Camilla since they are to follow in the Queen's footsteps.

If the British people don't care, then they can get rid of a 1000 year old tradition but once they do, they can't go back.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
  #1647  
Old 10-05-2007, 12:59 PM
Liz's Avatar
Liz Liz is offline
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcbcode99 View Post
As for Charles, he will ascend to the throne and be a wonderful King. He has earned the right to be King. After all, if Henry VIII could still be king.......
Camilla will be Queen Consort and stand confidently by her man.
Until then, God Save the Queen!
I agree..he deserves it and he will be a wonderful King.
  #1648  
Old 10-05-2007, 01:07 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
We had that upthread and in several others: acording to experts a civil marriage is valid for the future king. Edward VIII. had to go because he was politically involved with the British fascist and other right-winged movement and the government already feared Nazi- Germany and used this chance to get rid of a king who might have left the UK out in the cold when it came to Hitler. How right they were: at one point the Duke of Windsor accepted an offer by the Nazis to make him king and Wallis queen once they had conquered the UK!
He didn't. There's no evidence for this, and the statements that have been put about to that effect are not based on anything concrete. Since this is a flat accusation of high treason, it needs to be based on something a lot stronger than is actually out there. Some of the biographies dealing with this issue are fairly carefully worded to give an impression without actually saying anything outright, but I don't think any halfway authoritative biography has ever confirmed this.

Many politicians and right wingers were rather enamoured of Hitler and especially Mussolini early on, before the extent of Hitler's perfidy became common knowledge. George VI and Queen Elizabeth were strong supporters of Chamberlain's appeasement policy, as were many people who had lived through the First World War and didn't wish to have to experience a second one. Edward VIII was acting fairly standardly when he tried so hard to broker peace with Hitler.

I've read two volumes of Tommy Lascelles's memoirs, and it seems as though there were very grave doubts about Edward's fitness for kingship way back in the 1920s, and it also sounds as though one of the doubters was Edward himself. It may not have helped him that many of his advisors were loyal to his father rather than to him and some of the others were considered by the old guard to be rather unsound.

Edward did have Charles's habit of getting involved in political issues where a more prudent Prince of Wales and King might not have, and in both cases it seemed to be a matter of the Prince (and King, since some of this happened after Edward's accession) having more access to ordinary people than politicians tended to, and therefore seeing the human effects of some political decisions at first hand. As one example, it seems to be be fairly well accepted now that the Government had decided to just abandon the South Welsh miners to lives of unrelieved poverty rather than trying to do anything to help them when the mining industry hit hard times - possibly payback for the 1926 strike or something. And then Edward went to South Wales and shone a bright light on the human side of this policy so that the public could see what was actually happening. This sort of interference that makes the government look callous - something Charles is also rather good at - is bound not to be popular with the Establishment.

While it wouldn't on its own be a reason to try and get rid of a King, the combination of this long-held feeling that Edward wasn't suitable, that he surrounded himself with people who were untrustworthy (at least by Establishment standards), that he was out of control as far as his handlers were concerned, and that he wasn't a Good Christian Gentleman and wasn't wanting to marry a suitable woman did add up to enough of an incentive to not try very hard to find a solution where he could marry and continue to be King. I assume Charles was given assurances that the Church isn't going to suddenly decide to get up on its high horse about his coronation if he went ahead with his second wedding.
  #1649  
Old 10-05-2007, 01:12 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondBrg View Post
No, she was severely mentally ill and traumatized from a very neglected childhood and expected Prince Charles to make right everything that had gone wrong in her life. Had she not been blond, blue eyed and beautiful and titled, she most likely would have ended up in an Institution for the Mentally Ill. Instead her family and Prince Charles Grandmother manipulated him into a marriage with her.
I think it's overstating it to say she was severely mentally ill. She did have some problems as a result of her early experiences, and they weren't helped by her high-profile marriage to someone with whom she was fairly incompatible on a personal level. I think had she not been beautiful and famous, she'd have found it easier to control her problems and seek help; it's also very possible that she wouldn't have had the level of problems that she had.
  #1650  
Old 10-05-2007, 01:32 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina View Post
Well, may be... you are right. She was just a disillusioned and deeply hurt woman, who did not master the highest art of sophistiacted revenge.
So many excuses for Diana, so many blame for Charles.... Why doesn't that tell you something? It's so easy to sit back in your (probably cozy) computer chair and write that "Charles and Camilla reaped what they had sown" when you are not in the least involved, when you are just an outstander delighting on your own ability to pass judgments on people you'll never, ever meet.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #1651  
Old 10-05-2007, 01:38 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dallas Fort Worth, United States
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
I think it's overstating it to say she was severely mentally ill. She did have some problems as a result of her early experiences, and they weren't helped by her high-profile marriage to someone with whom she was fairly incompatible on a personal level. I think had she not been beautiful and famous, she'd have found it easier to control her problems and seek help; it's also very possible that she wouldn't have had the level of problems that she had.
There really is only one thing that has led me to that conclusion and it is the report(s) that she pushed her stepmother down a flight of stairs. She could have gravely injured her if not killed her in doing so. I think someone either has to be criminally inclined or severely mentally ill to do such a thing. I believe her bulimia and her self acknowledged emotional problems add to that.
  #1652  
Old 10-05-2007, 01:59 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 8,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel View Post
I think the question of who was good and who was evil is rather irrelevant. Diana is dead and gone and she herself cannot affect the status of the monarchy any more but the question for the British people now is whether the British monarchy is worth saving.

Unless Charles dies before the Queen, he and Camilla are going to be the face of the future British monarchy and so the state and condition of the monarchy are going to be irretrievably tied up with the status and condition of Charles and Camilla. I know there is talk about Charles dying before the Queen but people shouldn't count on it to prevent Charles from ascending the throne.

If the British people care about the status of the British monarchy, at some point they have to care about the status and condition of Charles and Camilla - and William who comes after. Right now, the whole purpose of the monarchy is to protect the status of the Queen who is its figurehead; at some point, the focus needs to change to protect the status of Charles and Camilla since they are to follow in the Queen's footsteps.

If the British people don't care, then they can get rid of a 1000 year old tradition but once they do, they can't go back.
I agree with you completely. Prince Charles will become a King, unless there is another Cromwell, who will aptly capitalize on external developments and persuade people into getting rid of the monarchy altogether.
  #1653  
Old 10-05-2007, 02:01 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 8,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondBrg View Post
No, she was severely mentally ill and traumatized from a very neglected childhood and expected Prince Charles to make right everything that had gone wrong in her life. Had she not been blond, blue eyed and beautiful and titled, she most likely would have ended up in an Institution for the Mentally Ill. Instead her family and Prince Charles Grandmother manipulated him into a marriage with her.
Although I admire your ability to make such bold assumptions, I would not go that far by presuming that Princess Diana would have ended up in the mental institution.
  #1654  
Old 10-05-2007, 02:12 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 8,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
So many excuses for Diana, so many blame for Charles.... Why doesn't that tell you something? It's so easy to sit back in your (probably cozy) computer chair and write that "Charles and Camilla reaped what they had sown" when you are not in the least involved, when you are just an outstander delighting on your own ability to pass judgments on people you'll never, ever meet.
I am nobody to judge Princess Diana, Prince Charles, Duchess of Cornwall, and other parties involved. It is just my personal observations. I have got my views as well as you have yours. Actually I do blame Princess Diana for poisoning her sons’ lives with acrimonious divorce, bad publicity, and somewhat cloudy and controversial legacy.
I am glad, if you are an insider that have got a right to pass the judgments in question.
  #1655  
Old 10-05-2007, 02:12 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dallas Fort Worth, United States
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina View Post
Although I admire your ability to make such bold assumptions, I would not go that far by presuming that Princess Diana would have ended up in the mental institution.
Allow me to repeat myself, as I don't think it is a bold assumption at all;

"There really is only one thing that has led me to that conclusion and it is the report(s) that she pushed her stepmother down a flight of stairs. She could have gravely injured her if not killed her in doing so. I think someone either has to be criminally inclined or severely mentally ill to do such a thing. I believe her bulimia and her self acknowledged emotional problems add to that."
  #1656  
Old 10-05-2007, 02:15 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina View Post
Although I admire your ability to make such bold assumptions, I would not go that far by presuming that Princess Diana would have ended up in the mental institution.
Why not? Two of the queen's Bowes Lyon-cousins ended up there. So the nobility obviously has no problem of taking proper care of their own - even if this includes care at a mental institution.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #1657  
Old 10-05-2007, 02:18 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 8,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
Why not? Two of the queen's Bowes Lyon-cousins ended up there. So the nobility obviously has no problem of taking proper care of their own - even if this includes care at a mental institution.
If you say so ... It is obvious that we are unable to understand each other's views.
  #1658  
Old 10-05-2007, 03:29 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,377
Ladies, help me please.

I'm having a hard time understanding how Diana's mental illness or lack of mental illness is going to affect whether Charles ascends the throne.

One could say that part of Charles and Camilla's lack of popularity and acceptance is because of the publicity campaign that Diana waged against them and because of her mental instability, Diana's truthfulness during the campaign can rightfully be questioned.

But I'm not getting that understanding from your comments. What impact exactly do you find that state of Diana's mental health (good or bad) had on Charles' ability to ascend the throne?
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
  #1659  
Old 10-05-2007, 03:35 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina View Post
I am nobody to judge Princess Diana, Prince Charles, Duchess of Cornwall, and other parties involved. It is just my personal observations. I have got my views as well as you have yours. Actually I do blame Princess Diana for poisoning her sons’ lives with acrimonious divorce, bad publicity, and somewhat cloudy and controversial legacy.
I am glad, if you are an insider that have got a right to pass the judgments in question.
The divorce was Charles' idea and Diana wasn't the only one who had bad publicity theres also their father.

And how does this pertain to Charles becoming King?
__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
  #1660  
Old 10-05-2007, 04:58 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,912
Actually, HM told the pair of them to divorce, none of which has anything to do with Charles becoming King!
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
prince charles, prince of wales


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Reign of Felipe VI: How Will Things Be Different? muriel King Felipe VI, Queen Letizia and Family 90 01-03-2017 06:30 PM
“The Lady Queen: the Notorious Reign of Joanna I, Queen of Naples, Jerusalem, and Sic An Ard Ri Royal Library 0 07-06-2014 07:27 PM
Is Victoria Ready to Reign? NotAPretender Crown Princess Victoria, Prince Daniel and Family 20 06-19-2011 07:05 AM
Elizabeth II: Oldest British Monarch (Dec 20 2007); 2nd Longest Reign (May 12 2011) WindsorIII Queen Elizabeth II 33 05-30-2011 07:40 AM




Popular Tags
america archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian baby names birth britain britannia british royal family camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house colorblindness commonwealth countries coronation customs daisy duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family life family tree fashion and style gemstones george vi gradenigo hello! henry viii highgrove hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs jack brooksbank japan jewellery kensington palace książ castle lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers medical monarchist movements monarchists mongolia mountbatten nara period pless politics portugal prince harry princess eugenie queen elizabeth ii queen louise royal ancestry royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon spanish royal family suthida taiwan thai royal family tradition united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:36 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×