Author Topic: Princess Diana  (Read 238067 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TampaBay

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4213
  • Being TampaBay is a Full Time Job.
    • View Profile
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #555 on: September 03, 2007, 06:24:56 AM »

As for Amanda Knatchbull, she perhaps was wise enough to intuit that there would always be women on the side for Charles and she was not prepared to be his broodmare/appropriate wife on that basis. That appears to be the reason Anna Wallace dumped him.


And her name is Camilla.

TampaBay
"Fashion is so rarely great art that if we cannot appreciate great trash, we should stop going to the mall.

Offline dmitri

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2018
    • View Profile
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #556 on: September 03, 2007, 07:16:43 AM »
Yes at the very least hardly the behaviour one would deem appropriate of an older man marrying a young woman let alone the heir to the throne of his Mother's many Realms. Is this the behaviour of somebody to be respected?

Offline pandora

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 71
  • Whatever you are, be a good one. Abraham Lincoln
    • View Profile
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #557 on: September 03, 2007, 07:21:01 AM »
Survival of a marriage is determined by the amount of love, trust, work and compromise both parties are willing to give to the relationship. As an outsider looking into this particular situation, I don't believe that these components were firmly set as a foundation for their marriage; i.e. Charles' continuation of his "friendship" with Camilla.  

Offline ChristineM

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 2882
    • View Profile
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #558 on: September 03, 2007, 03:38:50 PM »
Welcome to the Forum Pandora and for your shrewd assessment of the situation from its outset.

tsaria

Offline pandora

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 71
  • Whatever you are, be a good one. Abraham Lincoln
    • View Profile
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #559 on: September 03, 2007, 07:37:34 PM »
Thank you very much, Tsaria, for the welcome; I'm enjoying the Forum immensely.

...and as far as my opinion of the Wales' situation...twenty plus years of marriage has taught me more about relationships than all the psychology classes offered in college!

pandora

Offline dmitri

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2018
    • View Profile
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #560 on: September 04, 2007, 02:12:52 AM »
Welcome Pandora. Your words are very wise about marriage and the worth of psychology classes. So what do you make of the psychological profile of Charles and Camilla?

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #561 on: September 04, 2007, 12:49:40 PM »
Survival of a marriage is determined by the amount of love, trust, work and compromise both parties are willing to give to the relationship. As an outsider looking into this particular situation, I don't believe that these components were firmly set as a foundation for their marriage; i.e. Charles' continuation of his "friendship" with Camilla.  

Hence, as I said earlier, IMHO Camilla was a symptom, not the cause for the break up of the marriage... Had Charles been committed enough to the marriage, the presence of Camilla wouldn't have mattered. Therefore - coming back to the original question - no, I don't think the marriage would have survived, had there been no Camilla. I think there would have been other reasons the marriage would have fell apart.

Offline ChristineM

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 2882
    • View Profile
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #562 on: September 04, 2007, 04:14:51 PM »
With respect Helen, you seem either to be unaware of choose to ignore the fact that Camilla was central to the Prince of Wales' life for many years - in fact since Diana was approximately 12 years old.   Camilla was instrumental in scrutinising any prospective bride.   Neither had any plans to halt their relationship.   Camilla approved of Diana because - 'She's such a mouse'.   A reasonable way of interpreting that quote from Camilla is - 'she (Diana) will not rock the boat.'

Camilla was not the symptom.   According the moral code which I observe - Camilla and Charles were the disease - Diana was collateral.

You could be right there may have 'been other reasons the marriage would have fell (sic) apart', but a 'third person' in a marriage seems to me to be rather an overwhelming reason.

tsaria

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #563 on: September 04, 2007, 04:35:28 PM »
you seem either to be unaware of choose to ignore the fact that Camilla was central to the Prince of Wales' life for many years - in fact since Diana was approximately 12 years old.   Camilla was instrumental in scrutinising any prospective bride.   Neither had any plans to halt their relationship.   Camilla approved of Diana because - 'She's such a mouse'.   A reasonable way of interpreting that quote from Camilla is - 'she (Diana) will not rock the boat.'

No, I am very much aware of this, nor am I ignoring it... In fact, it only proves my point... This is precisely what I am talking about in reference to why this marriage was doomed to begin with. Charles wasn't even the one who chose  Diana for a wife, she was more or less chosen for him. Would he have chosen someone like her? Probably not, judging by what Camilla is like (which is obviously what he likes). It was an arranged marriage, for all intents and purposes (not that arranged marriages can't work under the right circumstances with the right people - they definitely can). Charles would not even say that he loved Diana for publicity's sakes. In his mind, this was all done for duty. In Diana's mind, it was a real romance... They didn't even see this basic fact the same way - they were not on the same page. So many differences between them, in addition to the fact that his mind was with someone else/somewhere else... But really, do you think that if it wasn't Camilla, it wouldn't have been someone else? You're right, Diana was definitely collateral, but not just because of Camilla.  I don't think Charles married Diana because he wanted to marry her specifically, I think he married her because he felt it was his "duty" to marry someone like her, and she was the "right" wife for him as the Prince of Wales. What a great start to a marriage... In contrast, Charles married Camilla because he wanted to, even though he knew that it would hurt his image as the Prince of Wales (certainly wouldn't help it). I am not saying this is good or bad, I am stating a fact. This is the difference between Charles' two marriages,.One was for "duty", the other because he wanted to do it. And guess which one has more chance of surviving?

Charles' and Diana's marriage was doomed from the start, and even if Camilla died or went away early on, this marriage was doomed anyway because theoretically (if we look at it from the perspective of why most people - not royals - get married these days) this marriage probably never should have been in the first place... They got married for the reasons royals do, but expected things from the marriage that "regular" people expect (at least Diana did). Well, it didn't exactly pan out. Let me put it this way: do you think that if Charles was not the Prince of Wales, would he ever have married Diana? I don't think so. 

Anyway, all this is my opinion, as is everything else posted here. We will never know the real answer, we can only speculate, so there will be no definite answer to your question, tsaria.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2007, 04:58:07 PM by Helen_A »

Offline pandora

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 71
  • Whatever you are, be a good one. Abraham Lincoln
    • View Profile
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #564 on: September 04, 2007, 05:40:37 PM »
dmitri - Many thanks to you, also, for the welcome. My "take" per se, on the psychological relationship between Charles & Camilla...I, personally, believe he sees Camilla as a "mother figure". She must provide him with that secure, maternal-bonding feeling that he was unable to feel with his mother, the Queen. (And obviously couldn't feel with Diana) I also see Camilla as the decision-maker in their relationship. She probably indulges his desires & whims without question or if she does pose a question, she makes him believe he came to the correct conclusion all on his own.

Offline ChristineM

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 2882
    • View Profile
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #565 on: September 05, 2007, 04:39:15 AM »
I agree Helen, the girl was well and truly duped by both her own grandmother and by Charles' grandmother.

This begs the question, in the year 1981 and aged 33 - what kind of human being was/is the Prince of Wales.   Has he no sensitivity at all apart from his own feelings and his own future?   I agree, for us it is impossible to think 'royal', but their being so out of touch is ultimately going to be their undoing.   The royal family exists to exemplify the better aspects of our society - not the worst.   Whether he realises it or not, the Prince of Wales is working hard to do the latter.   

The cruelty perpetrated on that innocent young girl, Diana Spencer, will haunt him for the rest of his life and probably will also have a direct influence on what lies in his future.   Whatever Diana was pushed into becoming - she has the advantage of remaining forever beautiful and caring - about the only advantage of dying you.   He has become a very old curmudgeon.   Old before his time, but there is a price to pay for everything.   Camilla might offer him the kind of 'mothering' and solace he seeks, but will she ever manage to sneak into the dark corners of his soul?

tsaria


Offline dmitri

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2018
    • View Profile
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #566 on: September 05, 2007, 06:26:42 AM »
yes she sounds like the champion manipulator of a very weak man Pandora ... thanks for your input

Offline Martyn

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7022
  • Martyn's Chips
    • View Profile
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #567 on: September 05, 2007, 07:50:31 AM »
I agree Helen, the girl was well and truly duped by both her own grandmother and by Charles' grandmother.

This begs the question, in the year 1981 and aged 33 - what kind of human being was/is the Prince of Wales.   Has he no sensitivity at all apart from his own feelings and his own future?   I agree, for us it is impossible to think 'royal', but their being so out of touch is ultimately going to be their undoing.   The royal family exists to exemplify the better aspects of our society - not the worst.   Whether he realises it or not, the Prince of Wales is working hard to do the latter. 
 


That's a difficult one.  Charles is a very complex man, who, I suspect, is very sensitive, both for himself and towards others.  However, your point about being royal and being out of touch is more to the point.  Of all the Queen's children, this accusation can be levelled at the Prince with the most justification, then and now.  It is quite possible that he feels that he has done his duty in the marriage department once, marrying the Princess and producing progeny, and that now he has earned the wife of his personal choice, as opposed to the one formerly dictated by custom, protocol and, let's not forget, his mistress.  I don't know that he exemplifies the worst aspects of our society, but it is difficult to admire him, despite some good intentions

The cruelty perpetrated on that innocent young girl, Diana Spencer, will haunt him for the rest of his life and probably will also have a direct influence on what lies in his future.   Whatever Diana was pushed into becoming - she has the advantage of remaining forever beautiful and caring - about the only advantage of dying you.   He has become a very old curmudgeon.   Old before his time, but there is a price to pay for everything.   Camilla might offer him the kind of 'mothering' and solace he seeks, but will she ever manage to sneak into the dark corners of his soul?

tsaria



I suspect that Camilla does know 'the dark corners', as you put it Tsaria.  She has known him for a very long time and they have been together longer than most couples are married these days - certainly longer than either of them were married!  If she doesn't know these 'dark corners', I suspect that she is likely to find them out, now that they are wed.

I simply cannot understand Helen's assertion that the Wales marriage was doomed even had there been no Camilla on the scene.  Diana was a young woman at the time of her marriage and could have developed any which way, given the right circumstances.  I suspect as well, that given time, she could even have provided the Prince with the kind of mother/nanny/courtesan input that he so clearly requires from a partner.  Diana was an amazingly compassionate woman, and quite far from the dunce that she herself and others have tried to make her out to be.  Her personal development in the time that she was Princess of Wales bears testimony to this; from a shy under-educated girl to a sophisticated, compassionate and passionate woman with ideas and opinions of how to make a difference in real terms.

My point is that Charles was never able to put the effort in because it was simply too easy for him to return to what was already on a plate; a woman whose sole purpose in life was to please him and make him feel good about himself.  If anything, he was too quick to write his wife off as the woman who could not make him happy and return to the one that he was convinced could do so.  If she had not been around, perhaps there might have been some inducement to finding some common ground and compromise in his marriage.........?
'For a galant spirit there can never be defeat'....Wallis Windsor

'The important things is not what they think of me, but what I think of them.'......QV

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #568 on: September 05, 2007, 08:22:51 AM »
I simply cannot understand Helen's assertion that the Wales marriage was doomed even had there been no Camilla on the scene.  Diana was a young woman at the time of her marriage and could have developed any which way, given the right circumstances.  I suspect as well, that given time, she could even have provided the Prince with the kind of mother/nanny/courtesan input that he so clearly requires from a partner.  Diana was an amazingly compassionate woman, and quite far from the dunce that she herself and others have tried to make her out to be.  Her personal development in the time that she was Princess of Wales bears testimony to this; from a shy under-educated girl to a sophisticated, compassionate and passionate woman with ideas and opinions of how to make a difference in real terms.

My point is that Charles was never able to put the effort in because it was simply too easy for him to return to what was already on a plate; a woman whose sole purpose in life was to please him and make him feel good about himself.  If anything, he was too quick to write his wife off as the woman who could not make him happy and return to the one that he was convinced could do so.  If she had not been around, perhaps there might have been some inducement to finding some common ground and compromise in his marriage.........?

Ok, let me try again... Maybe try to lay it out a little clearer. I am not trying to say the failure of the marriage was Diana's fault, something she did or didn't do. I am saying that it takes TWO people to make a marriage work, and even then it is incredibly hard. I am not denying that Charles did what he did and was what he was. Charles obviously had no intent of making it a "real" marriage, the way Diana did - at least in her young girl's mind. And Diana of course had no clue what she was in for. And this is precisely why I think the marriage was doomed to begin with. No matter what Diana would have done at this point, it probably wouldn't have mattered because the two of them were not on the same page as far as this marriage was concerned. The factors that had to be there in order to make a marriage work (in the sense that we are thinking of) simply were not there. Hence, the marriage was doomed from the start. It had little to do with Camilla, although of course the presence of Camilla only made things worse. You say that perhaps things may have changed later on for Charles and Diana, but there always comes a point of no return in a relationship, when you can't salvage it, and I think Charles and Diana had reached that point pretty quickly, Camilla or no... So whether Camilla was still in the picture or not, I doubt Diana would have gotten the chance to "become what Charles wanted her to become". In any case, why should she? Why couldn't she just be what she was and find someone who accepted her for that? Why can't we just accept that those two just weren't for each other and never could be (which I think was the case)?

I ask you again, would Charles have married Diana if he wasn't the Prince the Wales (even if there was no Camilla in the picture)? I think you would have to admit that the answer to that is "no". So if we start there, the rest is much easier to figure out...
« Last Edit: September 05, 2007, 08:49:59 AM by Helen_A »

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Had there been no 'Camilla' - would the Wales marriage have survived?
« Reply #569 on: September 05, 2007, 08:25:44 AM »
The cruelty perpetrated on that innocent young girl, Diana Spencer, will haunt him for the rest of his life and probably will also have a direct influence on what lies in his future. 

You may be right about that. We simply don't know what Charles thinks or feels about this entire situation in retrospect...