Re: Princess Diana - Part 2

[Grace]

My point is not about who did what (but I'd love to know what more Diana was supposed to have achieved during her time as the wife of Charles?), but the CONSTANT highlighting over and over again on this thread of her mistakes and character flaws.  How many of you could undergo such scrutiny of your lives and come out squeaky clean?

As to Ashdean's post about Diana's death "saving" "the family, especially her sons" a great deal of "embarrassment", have these sons had lives of virtue in comparison to that of their late mother?  Not many are deluded about Harry's lifestyle and William was jetting off on holidays with his girlfriend and living with her before they were engaged, so I'd like to know how is that different from what Diana was supposedly doing?  Seems like double standards to me!  It's just possible SHE may have experienced some embarrassment by some of the things THEY have done if she was still living...as for Charles...don't get me started!  

[blessOTMA]

here here, Grace.

[aleksandr pavlovich]

here here, Grace.

On the assumption that the repetitive words just used above, indicate enthusiastic agreement with a foregoing comment, then the correct usage/spelling is "Hear, hear !"  It comes from the wording "Hear him !  Hear him !", and I am constantly surprised to observe that it is SO often seen used incorrectly (UNLESS it is the case wherein one is vigorously indicating a specific physical location, usually accompanied with gesturing, and meaning "at this place.").   Regards,      AP.

[Kalafrana]

I really don't see that admitting to being quite unable to see what it was about Diana that charmed so many people (and clearly still does) qualifies as character assassination.

I'll ask the question again. Apart from looking glamorous and wearing her heart on her sleeve, what did she do that was different and 'better' than anything other members of the Royal Family had already done or were doing?

Ann

[TampaBay]

I really don't see that admitting to being quite unable to see what it was about Diana that charmed so many people (and clearly still does) qualifies as character assassination.

I'll ask the question again. Apart from looking glamorous and wearing her heart on her sleeve, what did she do that was different and 'better' than anything other members of the Royal Family had already done or were doing?

Ann

She had the "It" quality.  I never saw her in person but I know people who did see her in person and two that actually met her.  The two that met her said she had the ability to make you feel she was there to see you and that she really cared about whatever she or you were talking about.

TampaBay

[Kalafrana]

Tampa Bay

Thanks

Ann

[CountessKate]

She had the "It" quality.  I never saw her in person but I know people who did see her in person and two that actually met her.  The two that met her said she had the ability to make you feel she was there to see you and that she really cared about whatever she or you were talking about.

I think that's absolutely right.  I didn't see the Queen Mother but most people who saw or met her suggested she had this star quality, as did Edward VIII, and the royal family does need an injection of 'it' from time to time.  I saw both Princess Diana and Princess Anne quite close to when they visited my places of work in the early '90s and while with Princess Anne there was a mild frisson because she was well known and a celebrity, for want of a better word, with Princess Diana there was an incredible fizz and excitement.  With Princess Anne, while there was nothing wrong with her interest or her demeanour, somehow you got the impression she was making the visit because this was her job.  With Diana, you felt she was making the visit because she really wanted to learn more about what we were doing and she was thrilled we were all working in this exciting area. 

[Kalafrana]

Countess Kate

What area did you work in?

I only saw Diana once, a few months after she and Charles married, and then from a distance through a car window, so cannot comment on her charisma (which she does seem to have had, even though I don't understand it).

But being charismatic doesn't of itself make someone admirable. To cite an extreme case, Hitler clearly had an ability to inspire people to follow him!

Ann

[Alixz]

Right after the marriage, I saw Diana (not in person, of course) as a deer (or doe) in the headlights.  She never looked secure or comfortable as Kate does.

Then the interview with the black smudged eye makeup to make her look like a waif who had been crushed under the pressure of being a part of the Royal Family.

Then that black tight "hooker style" dress when she emerged from her cocoon to show Charles just what he had lost.

Then the all too revealing shots of her and Dodie on the yacht and we know that her sons were often with her.  Was is a good mother who flaunted her lovers in front of her sons?

I do think that a lot of the "bad behavior" that we saw in Harry came from his mother's bad examples.  He was so young when she died.

And, yes, Charles also engaged in "bad behavior", but for different reasons.  He wasn't out to prove to anything to the world because he had already begun the Prince's Trust.  He had his place in history set for him and some of the mistakes his parents made in not allowing him to marry the woman that he loved caused the problems that he and Diana inherited.

But good or bad, both princes love their mother and cherish her memory.  Otherwise William wouldn't have given Kate that cursed sapphire ring.  I don't think I could have accepted and worn that horrible symbol of that failed marriage.  Kate has spunk and panache.  Also, she must love William a great deal.

[CountessKate]

Countess Kate
What area did you work in?
I only saw Diana once, a few months after she and Charles married, and then from a distance through a car window, so cannot comment on her charisma (which she does seem to have had, even though I don't understand it).
But being charismatic doesn't of itself make someone admirable. To cite an extreme case, Hitler clearly had an ability to inspire people to follow him!
Ann

I worked in medical research administration.  The visits were of Princess Anne to the Dunn Human Nutrition Unit of which she is the patron, and of Princess Diana to the Medical Research Council's Head Office in London to learn more about the scientific aspects of AIDS.  
Of course you are right that charisma is not necessarily admirable in itself, but only when directed towards the right ends (although even Hitler enacted excellent legislation relating to animal welfare - though I certainly wouldn't push that as a comparison!). I'm not a Diana adorer by any means, and there are many areas where she seems to have been very self-destructive, and she could certainly be very difficult, but in the area of AIDS she did a tremendous amount of good; it was a personally-driven crusade of hers, and I doubt whether any other member of the royal family would have had the right touch (both literally and metaphorically) to have obtained the results she did.  If you want somewhere where Diana showed the value of charismatic leadership, Ann, I would suggest that it took someone like her to help cut through at least some of the real horror and disgust that AIDS sufferers met with in the early days of the disease, but seeing a beautiful princess actually touching a sufferer and showing compassion spoke much louder than words in changing people's opinions, achieved in a way that was then rather novel for a member of the royal family.

[TampaBay]

She had the "It" quality.  I never saw her in person but I know people who did see her in person and two that actually met her.  The two that met her said she had the ability to make you feel she was there to see you and that she really cared about whatever she or you were talking about.

I think that's absolutely right.  I didn't see the Queen Mother but most people who saw or met her suggested she had this star quality, as did Edward VIII, and the royal family does need an injection of 'it' from time to time.  I saw both Princess Diana and Princess Anne quite close to when they visited my places of work in the early '90s and while with Princess Anne there was a mild frisson because she was well known and a celebrity, for want of a better word, with Princess Diana there was an incredible fizz and excitement.  With Princess Anne, while there was nothing wrong with her interest or her demeanour, somehow you got the impression she was making the visit because this was her job.  With Diana, you felt she was making the visit because she really wanted to learn more about what we were doing and she was thrilled we were all working in this exciting area. 

CK,

Funny you should metion the Queen Mum because one of the people I know who met Diana also meet the Queen Mum during WWII and this person said they had the exact same quality.  The quality to make you feel as if they had come to whatever gathering or "shindig" for the purpose of specifically seeing  you. 

It also my understanding that both the Queen Mum and Diana never forgot a face or the place they last saw that face and 90% of the time remembered you name. 

For what it is worth, this same ability with faces, places and names is also attributed to Bill Clinton.

TampaBay

[Alixz]

Bill Clinton - yet another with charisma but indulged in a lot of "bad behavior"  :-)

Perhaps we just like the bad boy/bad girl image that we can't indulge in ourselves. Excepting the Queen Mum as I don't ever remember anyone saying that she indulged in any bad behavior except perhaps with her opinions and cutting remarks.

[ashdean]

As to Ashdean's post about Diana's death "saving" "the family, especially her sons" a great deal of "embarrassment", have these sons had lives of virtue in comparison to that of their late mother?  Not many are deluded about Harry's lifestyle and William was jetting off on holidays with his girlfriend and living with her before they were engaged, so I'd like to know how is that different from what Diana was supposedly doing?  Seems like double standards to me!  It's just possible SHE may have experienced some embarrassment by some of the things THEY have done if she was still living...as for Charles...don't get me started!  

I have expressed a opinion which I stand...as I respect your opinion. Diana/s sons are no more saints than any of us but then Diana wanted to be a saint "a Queen of Hearts"...What I do sa say is (and I have said it before) that Diana was entitled to a life....but a modicum of circumspection would have not gone amiss especially as she knew the position her sons were in.....but her behaviour was a symptom of the turmoil she was in and had been in scince childhood....Diana was a Jekyll and Hyde character...sadly the Hyde side was gaining the upper hand in the last phase of her life.

[Selencia]

I used to be entirely on Diana's side until I read more into the situation. All the stories that were Diana's view point have been taken as gospel with no consideration for the other persons view. I don't think there is a highlighting of Diana's faults anymore than there are of Charles', its just usually people constantly pick pick pick at Charles and his love for Camilla and leave Diana as the victim ignoring that she had numerous affairs and some of them with married men. It has taken awhile for me to realize that Charles is actually a very intelligent, admirable person who is worthy of being a King despite his disastrous marriage. There is no indication that Charles is anything like Bill Clinton, my dear president despite being good at his job is a serial womanizer who was accused of sexual harassment and took advantage of a young naive intern. Charles for all we know had an affair with one woman whom he loved for decades and eventually made his wife.

[Grace]

If you follow up the threads on both Charles and Diana and their relationship/marriage on this forum, you'll see there has been a great deal of criticism and a great deal of support for both parties, certainly not just for Diana but I would say there is probably still more public support out there for Diana, possibly influenced by her tragic early death than there is for the union of Charles and Camilla but support for them seems to be growing also.

And Monica Lewinski a young, naive intern?!!!!  Doubt that!  It doesn't take a man long (seconds probably!) to realise when a woman is "available" and I'm sure that was the case here.  The number of women throwing themselves at Bill Clinton before and during his presidency is supposedly legendary!