Princess Diana

[violetta]

Does anyone have a 'perfect' background and family life?  I don't believe so and there are many people from so-called dysfunctional family backgrounds who have made long and happy marriages. 

Patrick Jephson, Diana's former secretary, believes that if Camilla Parker-Bowles had kept away from Prince Charles once he had married Diana - meaning severed contact completely - the marriage would have had a good chance of succeeding, if not necessarily being a perfect match.  I'm inclined to agree with him as an admitted outsider to the whole thing!

Grace,  I DO agree with you that no one has an ideal family background.Diana was not the only one who suffered in her parents` house. We all (or at least most of us) suffer to a smaller or greated extent from our childhood and adollescence experiences. Sometimes we are able to overcome it, someties we badly need help. Every case is difffrent. Some people are not affected by the situation siilar do Diana `s and have healthy relationships with men. but some (diana including) suffer and are unable to function in a relationship. IMHO her instability and mood changing stemmed from her being too emotionally fragile and sensitive and feeling deeply. I know from my own and my friends` experience that it often happens. Then problems in a relationship are ineviitable. I know people who have experienced similar problems (myself including), and we blamed ourselves for everything. But this is not our fault. The psychological burden was too heavy for us but there is a remedy to thhhis situation. Had Diana and Charles turned for help to experts in thhis field their marriage would not have turned so sour probably. Even if case of her divorce, Diana could have formed healthier relation had she turned for help.
I know that many people are unaffected by abuse at home and divorce but some people are.I know people who just take care of the needs of their body (sleep, rest,relax, food, fun). They are the happiest creatures who haven`t experienced emotional sufferings! Diana was not one of them, Charles wasn`t a suitable partner for her. She wasn`t a suitable partner for him either under those circumstances.

And we should remeber that (in all probability) womwn who wanted to go tobed with charles weren`t as demanding as diana (i mean emotionally demanding, of course).   

[Grace]

The real answer is that noone knows but my gut feeling is that Diana was anything but emotionally stable.  As well thre would have been no shortage of married and unmarried women willing to bed Charles, so I think eventually a discrete or less than discrete affair would have begun.

If Diana had been that unstable, I think they would have noted it and she would have been considered unsuitable as Charles's bride, although it's well acknowledged none of the family, including her husband-to-be, knew her all that well.  Note the royal family rejected other possible brides for various reasons before Diana came on the scene.

I firmly believe as do a lot of people who knew Diana personally that she was driven to her emotional instability purely by being a modern young woman with modern expectations of married life who was subsequently cruelly rejected by the man she loved, together with having to cope with the ongoing expectation that she was just to put up and shut up.  What woman accepts that these days?    

[violetta]

I agree with you, Grace, that Charles and Diana hardly knew eeach other. They sort of dated but occassional meetings didn`t help them to get to know each other. As for emotional instability, it is not so clear.it`s not so black and white. she might have behaved normally almost all the time but when it e.g. came to her relations with charles her instability was revealed. and also her expectations were like those in case of every modern woman. but still i think that they were mismatched and would have experienced difficulties anyway. but camilla caused even further problems for their marriage

[Romanov_fan]

At least the Diana/ Charles disaster showed the royals that those kind of arranged, semi arranged marriages were no longer suitable in the modern era. Back in the day, Diana would have been like Alexandra and Charles like Edward VII, is my feeling.But in the modern era, that wasn't going to work, and the marriage collapsed, as it most likely would have, Camilla or no.They didn't know each other well, and Diana was so young and was in love, Charles was older and wiser true, but he felt forced to go along to some extent though I think he was going to make the best of it, and try.After all, he did not know her completely,and she didn't know what she was getting herself into.It was a recipe for disaster, and while a more compatible couple could have made it work ( marrying not knowing each other that well, semi arranged match) even in the modern era, ( George V and Mary of Teck was a arranged marriage, basically and it went great), Diana and Charles were just too different to make it work.

[violetta]

At least the Diana/ Charles disaster showed the royals that those kind of arranged, semi arranged marriages were no longer suitable in the modern era. Back in the day, Diana would have been like Alexandra and Charles like Edward VII, is my feeling.But in the modern era, that wasn't going to work, and the marriage collapsed, as it most likely would have, Camilla or no.They didn't know each other well, and Diana was so young and was in love, Charles was older and wiser true, but he felt forced to go along to some extent though I think he was going to make the best of it, and try.After all, he did not know her completely,and she didn't know what she was getting herself into.It was a recipe for disaster, and while a more compatible couple could have made it work ( marrying not knowing each other that well, semi arranged match) even in the modern era, ( George V and Mary of Teck was a arranged marriage, basically and it went great), Diana and Charles were just too different to make it work.
[/quo


that`s all true, imperial angel. diana`s youth and pressure on charles  didn`t contribuute to the success of their marriage. but i would still insist on the fact that they both were emotionally immature and had completely different needs. they weren`t able to give each other what they needed even if camilla didn`t exist.the point is  
that charles was emotionally insecure and needed a sort of emotional crutches. camilla was to provide such security. that fact that she was not a beauty didin`t matter.she offered much more than beauty.she offered total acceptance,love and never demanded anything.she firmly stood by him. diana was too young and insecure to offer love and total support