Princess Diana

[dmitri]

I think you are quite right Robert. I doubt we will see the same level of mourning when Charles and Camilla pass away at all. I think Camilla will probably have a quiet private funeral in St.George's Chapel like other minor members of the royal family. As for Charles if, and I say if, he becomes King, well he will have a different sort of funeral although I can hardly imagine people lining the streets in the numbers that occurred for the late Queen Mother or will no doubt occur when the current Queen has to leave and join her maker. Let us hope that does not occur for a very long time indeed. I for one know that many people will be greatly upset when it does.

[Salamander]

Things can't have been too bad between Charles and Diana. After all they had two children. That doesn't happen unless there is some sort of mutual attraction. If Camilla had kept away and not behaved in an appalling manner, there is a lot to be said that this couple could have made a go of it. Certainly Diana wouldn't have ended up dead in a car crash without her husband. Camilla does have a lot of responsibility in the break up of the marriage. No decent woman would have done what she did. It is hardly normal to sleep with somebody else's husband when you are married yourself. It shows a sign of a lack of self respect if nothing else.

Hmm, such a pity that Diana herself falls into this category, regarding Mrs Oliver Hoare.

There are still plenty of people in the UK and the Commonwealth who look at more than just Charles' failed first marriage to take the measure of our future king.  There is so much more to him and his work that has garnered the respect of a large section of the public. 

To answer the original question posed, no, I don't think that the marriage would have survived at all, as they were too fundamentally different.   Personally I don't think Diana or Charles were suited for that marriage - he should have found someone closer to his age and she shouldn't have set her cap at trying to trounce her eldest sister and "win the prize". 

[ChristineM]

Salamander - do you really believe that Diana would have embarked on that mad way of life had she not been deeply hurt?   She struck back.   I do not like the way she struck back, but she knew how much her husband's infidelity had wounded her, and naively, stupidly, whatever, decided it was pay-back time.

I don't for a moment believe that Diana was, by nature, promiscuous.   She was driven to it.   She tried to hurt as much as she was hurting, probably in the false hope that Charles would be jealous and return to her.   Also she had witnessed how Charles had managed to win Camilla back from her husband.   Don't forget she was a young, very lonely woman.   She was desperate for companionship and for love.

tsaria

[dmitri]

Yes it is quite extraordinary to accuse Diana of being a bed hopper before she had even contemplated the matter. Charles and Camilla were at it very early on. I guess some would have preferred Diana to have remained a Nun while her husband and his mistress rubbed their adultery into her face. 

[Martyn]

I'm rather taken with the idea that had there been no Camilla, there would have been no Diana..... Of course there wouldn't.  Simply a shame for Camilla that the carefully vetted 'mouse' should turn into 'the mouse that roared'!

It's quite possible that had a more sophisticated woman been selected for the wife of the heir, one from the top-drawer background required, and with the knowledge of how the world works in that rarefied stratosphere of society, the marriage might have stood some sort of chance.  Chances are as well that this might have dislodged the maitresse-en-titre and perhaps have resulted in a mature and worthy matrimonial partnership.

However the cynicism displayed by virtually everyone involved in marrying him off (except Diana) ensured that this marriage was doomed from the start.  Despite her pedigree, she had no more knowledge of the world than one of the heroines in the novels of that peddlar of pernicious nonsense Barbara Cartland, novels which Diana devoured and bought into with tragic consequences.  Diana's 'pure' state was perhaps also a factor in the demise of this marriage; a more worldly girl might perhaps have had a better understanding of men and their minds, although it must be added that Charles, with his curious need for a wife who combines all the attributes of mother, grandmother nanny and whore, is perhaps the type of man whose mind may never be fathomed. 

I wonder, with all this talk of how essental Camilla was/is to his happiness, now he has the object of his heart's desire, whether she still does please him just as much, or whether the appeal of the unattainable has vanished now that she is legitmately and legally his partner?

At any rate, as imperial angel suggests, it has all come right for Charles and Camilla, or has it?  Camilla, it has been suggested, was much happier existing in the shadows as mistress, enjoying the best of both worlds, with none of the responsibility of being a member of the RF and the glare of public scrutiny that accompanies this.  She had a good thing going and one cannot help but wonder whether she longs for the good old days of forbidden fruit etc.......

Let's hope that the Prince and his wife are able to enjoy the fact that they are finally united, but let's not buy into the fairytale notion of the star-crossed lovers united at last.  What they had going all those years was no simple romance, but a selfish messy and rather cynical arrangement that caused a lot of grief all round.

Still, if the Wales marriage hadn't collapsed, perhaps the Princess might not have been able to achieve all that she did, so perhaps that, and the fact that Charles and Camilla are now wed, are positives that come out of a negative.  I can't help wondering just how Charles and Diana would be getting on now, had she lived, and just where Camilla might be.........

[CHRISinUSA]

I wonder, with all this talk of how essental Camilla was/is to his happiness, now he has the object of his heart's desire, whether she still does please him just as much, or whether the appeal of the unattainable has vanished now that she is legitmately and legally his partner?

By all visible evidence, the answer to that would be "yes".  Charles and Camilla appear attentive and loving toward each other, and eminently well suited in every photograph and video I've seen of them during their marriage.

Despite that, I agree with earlier posters - Camilla got the raw end of this deal.  She didn't set out to the Princess of Wales, or a future Queen.  She seems, at her core, a simple country woman who would have been totally content living out her golden years as a comfortably well-off divorcee, enjoying her children and grandchildren, her horses and dogs, and whatever other interests she has.

Now her life has turned into overseeing multiple houses / staffs, endless dress and hat fittings, preparing for and undertaking engagements, and trying to keep a rather difficult husband happy and supported.  She has to deal with spin doctors and PR people, unflattering press stories, and in-laws that are probably more than the usual handful.  She knows she is mildly villified by some quarters,  outright hated by others.

I'm surprised she keeps her sanity, and beyond impressed that she seems so at ease with people during public outings!  If I were in her shoes, I'd be one gin-and-tonic away from a repeat of the Nepal royal palace massacre!

[NAAOTMA]

The "arrangement" of Charles and Camilla being morphed by the Prince's spinmasters into "eternal love" adds insult to injury. There is a saying here in America: "Please don't pee on my leg and tell me it is raining."

Camilla in her public engagements needs to pack away GreatGreatGranny Keppel's love tokens from Bertie. Enough already. She can wear them in private to her heart's content. Keppel mistress loot being worn in public as any ever present reminder that both greatgreatgranny and greatgreatgrandaughter's primary claims to fame are as royal mistresses is tawdry. If this racy connection is still giving Camilla and Charles a thrill as they drink their cocoa in front of the fire, they are to be pitied rather than catered and curtsied to by us mere mortals. Do they ever have a pang of guilt about the innocent young girl they used without a backward glance? Do they ever wonder for an instant what might have been if they had consigned their fling to history on July 29th, 1981? I sincerely doubt it. Charles lives in a giant bubble of selfjustification and Camilla's primary duty appears to be keeping him company in it.

Like Martyn, I wonder where Charles and Diana would be today if she had not died in Paris. And I wonder what the marriage of the Prince of Wales would have been minus the Camilla factor.

[ChristineM]

Wow Martyn - you are on form.

Your speculation about the status of Charles and Diana's relationship today is interesting.

Tina Brown wrote that when Charles first learned Diana had been injured in a car crash, he immediately announced he would look after her.   He had some idea that she might have suffered head/brain injury and she would require help.   Of course events overtook that possibility and this gut reaction of Charles was never required, but, if Tina Brown can be believed - and I have no reason not to - this expression of care and concern is worthy of some thought.    Where that would have left Camilla - for one.

tsaria

[ChristineM]

NAAOTMA - seems you and I posted simultaneously.

Charles and Camilla's spin doctors have obviously advocated this course of action - thwarted love and now bluebirds twittering in a cloudless sky.    It seems they are daft enough to go along with it.   Mark you, neither of them could be regarded as great thinkers.   NAAOTMA's observations about their kicks with the Keppel bounty is descriptive, witty, but also very sad - because of its ring truth.

Didn't you know NAAOTMA, The Prince of Wails lives on Planet Charles... alongside Camilla with endless servants and toadies.   I cannot be denied, he has done some great work - the Prince's Trust being the major objective in his life.   In between these onerous foreign tours, he does have substantial amounts of time available.   The Prince's Trust is supported by captains of industry, bankers, politicians - 'great and good' of the land purely because of its royal credentials.   Charles might turn up at meetings - the Trust is now broken down into various areas of interest.   But when it comes to work - real work - don't for a moment imagine Charles is getting his hands grubby - unless in the gardens at Highgrove, this is done by an army of personnel.

His other areas of work are interesting too.   Duchy Originals - excellent, expensive, making a killing for The Duchy of Cornwall.   In the year 2000 (7 years ago), the Duchy of  Cornwall was worth £398 million and showed an annual profit of £6.9 million.   OK so Charles is now paying tax on this income, but he has the best accountants in the land and every loophole will be thoroughly exploited.   He is frequently accused of tax avoidance.   (In the UK tax avoidance is legal:  tax evasion is a crime).   However, in the year 2004, Prince Charles annual income had grown by 27% on the preceding year to £13.2.   The figure for last year, I cannot track down, but it now can't be far short of £20,000,000 per annum.

Then there is the social living experiment at Poundbury - but that's another story.

Even with all that, I wouldn't be in Camilla expensive calf leather shoes for 'all the tea in China', Chris.

tsaria

[NAAOTMA]

Tsaria, for years I have put myself in a trance state in terms of Charles muttering "but he does do some good" over and over again...he even prunes his own trees at Highgrove (wearing beautifullly cut white pants and a perfectly ironed shirt, unliike any other serious gardener I have ever met in my life)...but I can no longer put myself in that trance state...blame it all on those books by Sarah and Tina!!! And now you burst my little Windsor bubble even further with those Duchy of Cornwall biscuit and jam revenue tales! I must slink off to my own cup of cocoa whilst I comtemplate Queen Alexandra, Queen Mary and the Queen Mother spinning in their respective tombs while C&C look have their long, cozy autumn holiday at Birkhall and search the auction cataloques for more Keppel/Bertie baubles.

[dmitri]

Yes these two are a disaster waiting to happen. It's sad when a couple 20 years younger than The Queen and Prince Philip appear to be far more ancient and completely out of touch than the monarch and her consort. It is obvious C&C do not care one iota for the every day struggles of the vast majority of the British people.

[Salamander]

Salamander - do you really believe that Diana would have embarked on that mad way of life had she not been deeply hurt?   She struck back.   I do not like the way she struck back, but she knew how much her husband's infidelity had wounded her, and naively, stupidly, whatever, decided it was pay-back time.

I don't for a moment believe that Diana was, by nature, promiscuous.   She was driven to it.   She tried to hurt as much as she was hurting, probably in the false hope that Charles would be jealous and return to her.   Also she had witnessed how Charles had managed to win Camilla back from her husband.   Don't forget she was a young, very lonely woman.   She was desperate for companionship and for love.

tsaria

You are suggesting that because Diana was apparently "driven" to chase another married man, was desperate for love and companionship, that it was okay and somehow understandable for her to completely ignore the presence of Mrs Hoare?  I picked up on the comment made by Dimitri that "No decent woman would have done what she did. It is hardly normal to sleep with somebody else's husband when you are married yourself...".  That comment in itself can also apply to Diana, who wasn't being very decent when she ignored the fact that Mr Hoare was already married and pursued him in order to assuage her own loneliness.    And what of the fiancee of Dodi al Fayed?  She may not have been aware of this woman at first, but she might have found out fairly quickly from her friends in America.  If some are to be believed, her fling with Dodi was designed to make Hasnet Khan jealous, but would Dodi's fiancee have been considered or was Diana only focussing on her own objective?  I think its a shame that her selfish actions in her pursuit for love or to get back at Charles et al are swept aside because she was considered to have been badly treated by the Prince and his mistress.  She did some good in her all-too-short life, but she also caused pain and heartbreak for others too, and this should also be acknowledged.

May I pose another variation to the original question?  Given that many believe that Charles and Diana were too different in age and outlook to be suited, do you think that had there been no Camilla would the marriage had lasted once Diana got bored with her fuddy-duddy husband and started to notice the handsome young men dancing around her?  Being locked into a marriage with a man she may come to have realised she didn't love deeply, would the marriage had survived if she had succumbed to their attentions?  Once again, would the young lady's actions be excused because after all, she was young and beautiful and her husband was older and less handsome and less exciting?  It all seems a bit ageist and sexist to me, but then, we humans are usually more easily swayed by youth and beauty....

[dmitri]

You miss the point completely. It was Charles who started the moves to destroy his own marriage by becoming involved with Camilla. It was not Diana. That seems fine for you for him to do this to destroy his marriage. I very much doubt Diana would have ever looked elsewhere if Charles had not strayed. As for the men became involved with Diana it takes two to tango and none of this happened until AFTER Charles decided to break his wedding vows with his former mistress. There is absolutely no evidence of Diana straying before Charles decided to, none whatsoever.

[Salamander]

Dmitri, you don't know me from a bar of soap, yet you presume to suggest that I think it was "fine for him to do this".  If the entagled affairs of heart for Charles and Diana were so clear cut as you suggest,  then I most certainly would not think it fine, but as it is, nobody but they know exactly what happened in their marriage and who strayed (either mentally or physically) first.  Granted, there are a lot of people making money off Diana and Charles by making suggestions in the guise of facts via books and articles, but this isn't irrefutable and neutral evidence that Diana was driven into the arms of others by Camilla's presence in Charles' life. 

You also seem to have missed my point completely, that suggesting someone wasn't being decent by sleeping with another whilst still married is wrong regardless of whether their own partner had strayed first.

[Mari]

do you really believe that Diana would have embarked on that mad way of life had she not been deeply hurt?   She struck back.   I do not like the way she struck back, but she knew how much her husband's infidelity had wounded her, and naively, stupidly, whatever, decided it was pay-back time.

I don't for a moment believe that Diana was, by nature, promiscuous.   She was driven to it.   She tried to hurt as much as she was hurting, probably in the false hope that Charles would be jealous and return to her.   Also she had witnessed how Charles had managed to win Camilla back from her husband.   Don't forget she was a young, very lonely woman.   She was desperate for companionship and for love.

tsaria

I agree with you totally Tsaria! ........      As to not knowing who strayed first in the Marriage the facts came out at the time way before the Brown book.   Charles wore cuff links that had been given to him by Camilla down the aisle according to a Documentary in the mid-1980's! Tsaria has said "She didn't like the way She struck back"
and neither do I but I understand ... Diana fought for that Marriage  before She gave up. She tried pleasing Charles, She tried polishing herself, changing her Clothes...going more blonde, getting advice from his Mother QEII, dieting, She tried going to Polo Matches, becoming more like Fergie after Charles made the comment "why couldn't she be more like that"(roll throwing phase) and then she tried going Public all... before She tried making him jealous.... In her own words "She said she didn't give up until the birth of Harry and Charles came to the Hospital looked down at Harry and made some disparaging remark about his Hair." Then and only then did She look for love in another person...mind She still tried even later to reconconcile with him and have another Child.  And What did Charles do...he went down the aisle in love with another Woman, he stuttered over the words what love meant, he was critical and cruel about her weight, her headphones in the Palace, made a thoughtlessly insensitive remark about the birth of the second Child, and informed Diana that "he would not be the only Prince of Wales without a Mistress." That is from one of the set of tapes....and obviously had another arrangement because he visited Diana only once every three weeks! I don't think these two Cases are anywhere near the same!