Charles and Diana

[Osipi]

Thank you much for that much needed correction on the point that Charles and Diana needed a common bond to cement a relationship. Their boys always have and always will be an indisputable area where Charles and Diana agreed on and focused their love and attention towards no matter what was going on between them as a couple.

 

[SLV]

After all this to and fro about dancing, to flirt or not flirt, who started what and who was worse than who, i have an urgent need to post a pic about C&D in simpler times with the two great loves of their lives
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/12/18/00/009965B300000190-3365107-image-a-10_1450399877433.jpg

just to have a different post before we go back to the other stuff

Excellent intermezzo.

 

[Denville]

After all this to and fro about dancing, to flirt or not flirt, who started what and who was worse than who, i have an urgent need to post a pic about C&D in simpler times with the two great loves of their lives
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/12/18/00/009965B300000190-3365107-image-a-10_1450399877433.jpg

just to have a different post before we go back to the other stuff

Children aren't enough to hold an unhappy marriage together. I dont thtink that the kids were that much of a bond after the first few years.

Onthe only person in the room. A skill not shared by her former husband in accounts I've read of him in social situations. JMO.

I've never heard of her being flirtatious until the very late 80s or beginning of the 90s. Stoires emerged then in the papers that she was dancing with other men and seeming to enjoy herself having fun with them, rather than with Charles. and by then the papers were increasingly sure that the marriage was on the rocks and gradually it became clear that it was and that Charles at least was playing away. So I dont know where this idea that she was fliritng with other men in front of Charles has come from. And by the late 80s no matter what way you slice it Charles was definitely involved sexually with Camilla. in Tina B's biography, she notes that soon after their 7th Wedding anniversary, Diana was leaving Highgrove to go back to London one Sunday night and then turned round iwht her detective and went back to find Cam's car was parked outside. So if Diana was by the late 80s being flirty with other men, by then the marriage was clealry all but over and Charles was emotionally and sexually committed to Camilla.

Queen Camilla you weaken your argument when you try to use the Hewitt rewrite of 1983 as fact.

Hewitts affair with Diana problaby started around 1986 when she had begun to get over her bulimia and had lost hope of her marriage being very happy. He has backdated it now because he is a slimy so and so who is not happy that he's made his money out of her, he needs a new spin on the original story, to get some attention.
I dont know if there was an affair with Manakee, but I think there was a close frendship which bothered Charles because he felt she was too close to a mere policeman and that she was confiding too much in him. She problaby saw BM as someone to talk to and share things with, when she felt so unhappy in her marriage in the early years, Im sure there was a sexual element and perhaps it was an affair but I dont know for sure. I dont really believe that Charles cared all that much about any of her extra marital relationships. I think he did perhaps feel left out at times if she was seeing younger friends, because it made him conscious of thte gaps between them and he realised that their marriage wasnt' working out and never would..
and he may have worried she was talking too much to someone "outside the royal circle" like BM.. but I dont believe he felt much normal jealousy. I think that within a few years, he did not care much what she was up to, and was releived that she had Hewitt because he hoped that it would keep her happy and provided she was discreet, if she was hapier she was less likely to show the world that she was miserable with him, and less likely to complain about his relationship with Camilla.

We all have our opinions, but the poor long suffering faultless Charles fable is no nearer the truth than the myth that Diana was a complete baby Saint who married a man who just wanted her as a brood mare.

I elovers in 1986.

He certainly wasn't a poor long suffering faultless creature. But I think he was bewildered by Diana and how she changed after their marraige. She had seemed to enjoy being with him, and liked his lifestyle and after marriage she was moody and miserable and clearly hated the country side of their life. But he certianly wasnt' faultless. I think he didn't meant to, but he thoguht of Camilla a lot, because he was increasingly unhappy wtih Diana. And he didnt understand her bulimia, but how could he? It wasn't well known at the time. I think that he soon realised the marriage was never going to work, and detached emotionally whereas Diana went on half hoping and being in love with him in her naive way..
But I would say that both of them turned ot other people, for the understanding they didnt' get from each other. He probalby phoned Camilla up, at times and she talked to Barry M. And I think that within a few years, he did feel that there was no hope at all that the marriage was going to succeed and he had Camilla still there, and willing to resume her affair with him...

 

[royal rob]

It's strange how there is no thread for Camillias past, when did she first cheat on her husband with Charles who else did she have affairs with ?? What did her friends think of it all ? Did she disagree with her family sometimes ? I would love to know more about her but it seems no one is talking.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[WreathOfLaurels]

It's strange how there is no thread for Camillias past, when did she first cheat on her husband with Charles who else did she have affairs with ?? What did her friends think of it all ? Did she disagree with her family sometimes ? I would love to know more about her but it seems no one is talking.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

I asked the same question on another thread and the simple answer is that there's a lot to hide and most of Camilla's friends have skeletons of their own they would like to keep well hidden. Put it this way, Camilla's poor reputation before she became duchess of Cornwall was not completely down to Diana's ravings and tabloid malice.

 

[royal rob]

I asked the same question on another thread and the simple answer is that there's a lot to hide and most of Camilla's friends have skeletons of their own they would like to keep well hidden. Put it this way, Camilla's poor reputation before she became duchess of Cornwall was not completely down to Diana's ravings and tabloid malice.

Well hopefully one day somebody talks. If she does become Queen it's weird that we know so little about her.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Roslyn]

Well hopefully one day somebody talks. If she does become Queen it's weird that we know so little about her.

We know quite a bit about her, we just don't know all the sordid details of her marriage and extra-marital relationship. We shouldn't know those things about Charles and Diana, either.

 

[WreathOfLaurels]

Oh we will probably find out one day - nobody has to talk per se, it will just take some creativity and perseverance, but there's no reason why someone could not knock out something decent if unauthorised - there's a desire for a camilla bio, there's cash to be had and nature hates vacuums...

 

[Roslyn]

Why do you suppose no-one's written one to date? There are enough people out there who seem to hate Camilla, and have for decades now, so why hasn't anyone already written something?

 

[WreathOfLaurels]

Why do you suppose no-one's written one to date? There are enough people out there who seem to hate Camilla, and have for decades now, so why hasn't anyone already written something?

there have been some (not very good) books on Camilla in the past, but most Royal authors are too scared of the wrath of big ears to do anything at the moment. Personally I'd wait until both are dead and then see what happens....

 

[Jacknch]

Let's now return to the topic of the thread. There are other threads in existence to discuss the Duchess of Cornwall.

 

[Queen Camilla]

And by the late 80s no matter what way you slice it Charles was definitely involved sexually with Camilla. in Tina B's biography, she notes that soon after their 7th Wedding anniversary, Diana was leaving Highgrove to go back to London one Sunday night and then turned round iwht her detective and went back to find Cam's car was parked outside.

Hewitts affair with Diana problaby started around 1986 when she had begun to get over her bulimia and had lost hope of her marriage being very happy. ..

1986 Hewitt
1988 Camilla 1981 plus 7 years =1988

Charles and Diana were sharing Highgrove.
Hewitt was spending weekends at Highgrove in the 1980s.

I've never heard of her being flirtatious until the very late 80s or beginning of the 90s. ..

She was flirting with the crew during the honeymoon. Charles wrote about Diana enjoying her time.
She danced with Sleep in 1985.
She danced with Travolta in 1986. (She asked to dance with him.)
She invited Philip Dunne to vacation with her and Charles in 1987.

All happened before 1988.

 

[Osipi]

She was flirting with the crew during the honeymoon. Charles wrote about Diana enjoying her time.
She danced with Sleep in 1985.
She danced with Travolta in 1986. (She asked to dance with him.)
She invited Philip Dunne to vacation with her and Charles in 1987.

Diana was so much more of an extrovert than Charles was. We can't really take what we see as flirtations or mingling with the crew or dancing with someone as an indication that Diana was doing anything other than enjoying herself. Diana seemed to be definitely a party hardy type of girl that enjoyed being out with people and doing things. Charles seems to me more like the type that would prefer to stay in with a good book or just a small, intimate gathering of friends over for dinner. There is nothing wrong with being either type of person except that it does make for clashes in a marriage. So many differences. City lights vs. Highland mists on the River Dee. Disney World and amusement parks vs. hunt parties and polo clubs. Shopping till you're dropping vs. pulling weeds.

There really is so much more to look at the marriage of Charles and Diana besides focusing on affairs and physical attractions and cheating and who done who wrong first. As I've stated before and I'll state again, there would have been no thoughts of anyone else in the marriage besides Charles and Diana if they could have found common ground and common interests and worked to build a good, solid friendship base to strengthen the marriage.

For their marriage to be successful, I think, both Charles and Diana would have to have done major adjustments to their personalities and their interests in life to be happy with each other. And when someone changes to appease someone else, it takes away the individuality of the person and causes misery in and of itself. This is why Charles had a shock coming to him when he found out what his future wife professed to "adore" before marriage turned out to be such a fallacy.

 

[Denville]

And Charles danced with other women.. On the occasional that Diana was dacnign with Philip Dunne he had spent most of the evening with Anna Wallace and Camilla.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Yes, I agree. They did have things in common. They both loved music. They both liked to eat healthily and get exercise. They both were interested in people and helping them. They both were witty and enjoyed humour. Plus, needless to say, they both loved their children.

In some ways, they seemed to have everything going for them. They didn't have to worry about getting the bills paid or having to save money for their children's education. They lived with every possible material comfort and convenience. Both had friends they could depend on.

Many couples have had good marriages with much less.

As I've stated before and I'll state again, there would have been no thoughts of anyone else in the marriage besides Charles and Diana if they could have found common ground and common interests and worked to build a good, solid friendship base to strengthen the marriage.

 

[WreathOfLaurels]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CN0MQOHpeYA

For a more irreverent (and rubbery) take on the war of the wales' - enjoy!

 

[Curryong]

Love it, Laurels. Very enjoyable!

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

1986 Hewitt
1988 Camilla 1981 plus 7 years =1988

Charles and Diana were sharing Highgrove.
Hewitt was spending weekends at Highgrove in the 1980s.


She was flirting with the crew during the honeymoon. Charles wrote about Diana enjoying her time.
She danced with Sleep in 1985.
She danced with Travolta in 1986. (She asked to dance with him.)
She invited Philip Dunne to vacation with her and Charles in 1987.

All happened before 1988.

None of those are flirtations or anything wrong on her part except the Phillip Dunn thing. I'm sorry but you seem to be grasping at straws to make Diana look bad. The Hewitt thing and her bringing him around her children is bad enough. If there was indeed a sexual relationship with Mannakee that is an additional bad thing she did. But dancing with John Travolta is nothing but a dance, and I believe it was a publicity stunt.

 

[Denville]

A bit ridiculous to blame Diana for dancing with a well known dancing star at a public event, on a foreign tour, accompanied by her husband. It is not a "publicity stunt", its the srot of thing that is expected when you go on a foreign tour that you join in the social events organised by the host country and if a well known dancer is there, you dance with him.
and the night that she's Accused of flirting and dancing with Philp Dunne, Charles had spent the night dancing and talking with his 2 ex girlfriends...

 

[Lady Nimue]

Both of them had their faults and their good points. Both of them made mistakes.

The leveling, making them both 'to blame': this is the 'diplomatic' compromise.

But for some, Diana can do no wrong and for some, Charles can do no wrong and Diana - even when she did soemthing as harmless as a dance with a ballet dancer - is always in the wrong. So if I feel that one or the other is being criticised unfairly, I think it is only right to point to the fact that the other partner in the marriage ALSO did wrong things and very often the very Same wrong things..

Yes and no. Diana was the one who made it all public. Diana was the one whose behavior was so overtly unusual for a Princess of Wales that she had to beat back the bad press coming her way with lurid accusations against Charles and the BRF. Hardly a level playing field. Anyone who casts an eye over the history sees pretty clearly who the instigator was of the whole public mess.

For me (and you may disagree) Diana always must be faulted for making her private life, her married life, a matter of public comment and record. Charles was always circumspect until pressed, and even then he never spoke ill of Diana, ever. That is not equal 'wrongness'.

 

[Curryong]

Yes, I agree with you that Diana's behaviour as Princess of Wales was 'unusual'. She was ill with an eating disorder. She also took a lover because her husband's heart had always been with another woman. Most Prinesses of Wales in the past, like Alexandra, just put up with their husband's infidelity and in some cases boorishness. Heaven forbid that they should do exactly the same as their spouses. Just suffer in silence, ladies!

When they did give as good as they got, like Caroline, the estranged wife of the Prince Regent, they were pilloried for it by Society. Naturally, because it's so important to keep everything hidden from the public view isn't it? Must behave nicey-nicey, as if everything in the garden is lovely, in case the public should suspect the truth.

 

[Denville]

well I dont agree with Diana's making the whole mess public, to be honest. I dont think she did herself any lasting good. SHe got out of thte RF, but i am not sure if her chances of finding a new man and a new life after that were very good and i think she was very stressed out by the whole fight. Charles didn't mind her having lovers provided she was discreet,and I think she would have been better to keep the marriage togehter and find some private happiness, as Charles did. However while he didn't "speak out" as much as Diana did, he didn't keep silent. he didn't HAVE to admit to an affair on TV or insinuate that he hadn't wanted to marry Diana and had been pushed into it. A dignified silence from him woudl have been much better.
Im afraid I really dont understand what Nimue means by this "She had to beat back the bad press coming her way with lurid accusations against Charles and the BRF."
What bad publicity was coming her way? Diana until the early 90s was the darling of the tabloids. Even when people and press got fed up with the War, and cooled, she sitll had a lot of support? So what is this bad publciitty? when was it "coming her way"? Was it before she did Morton? Or later?

 

[Roslyn]

Diana was so much more of an extrovert than Charles was. We can't really take what we see as flirtations or mingling with the crew or dancing with someone as an indication that Diana was doing anything other than enjoying herself. Diana seemed to be definitely a party hardy type of girl that enjoyed being out with people and doing things. Charles seems to me more like the type that would prefer to stay in with a good book or just a small, intimate gathering of friends over for dinner. There is nothing wrong with being either type of person except that it does make for clashes in a marriage. So many differences. City lights vs. Highland mists on the River Dee. Disney World and amusement parks vs. hunt parties and polo clubs. Shopping till you're dropping vs. pulling weeds.

There really is so much more to look at the marriage of Charles and Diana besides focusing on affairs and physical attractions and cheating and who done who wrong first. As I've stated before and I'll state again, there would have been no thoughts of anyone else in the marriage besides Charles and Diana if they could have found common ground and common interests and worked to build a good, solid friendship base to strengthen the marriage.

For their marriage to be successful, I think, both Charles and Diana would have to have done major adjustments to their personalities and their interests in life to be happy with each other. And when someone changes to appease someone else, it takes away the individuality of the person and causes misery in and of itself. This is why Charles had a shock coming to him when he found out what his future wife professed to "adore" before marriage turned out to be such a fallacy.

I totally agree. In my opinion the affairs were just a symptom, not the cause.

I believe that this marriage was doomed from the start. I do not think there was enough common ground between them to build the sort of solid relationship they needed in order for the marriage to last, or perhaps just not enough for these two particular people to be able to achieve that objective. I do not believe that forcing Charles to stay away from Camilla would have meant that he would have been happy with Diana, or indeed made him into a person that Diana would have been happy with.

 

[Lady Nimue]

Yes, I agree with you that Diana's behaviour as Princess of Wales was 'unusual'. She was ill with an eating disorder.

There, you have said it. Diana was ill.

Most Prinesses of Wales in the past, like Alexandra, just put up with their husband's infidelity and in some cases boorishness. Heaven forbid that they should do exactly the same as their spouses. Just suffer in silence, ladies!

When they did give as good as they got, like Caroline, the estranged wife of the Prince Regent, they were pilloried for it by Society. Naturally, because it's so important to keep everything hidden from the public view isn't it? Must behave nicey-nicey, as if everything in the garden is lovely, in case the public should suspect the truth.

I guess the question is: what part of a royal's life is public business? what part is private? If Diana (or anyone, even Catherine) was having problems in her marriage and Charles proved unyielding, she had options as a modern woman. She could have walked away, insisted on a separation, then divorce, gone back into private life. Assuming that her only option was to make a public spectacle is interesting but not persuasive. IMO.

 

[Curryong]

I've never denied that Diana had an eating disorder. That doesn't signify she was insane, however.

The Morton book came out in 1992, the Panorama interview in 1995. Diana and Charles married in 1981. That's more than a decade of maintaining silence. Diana hardly burst into print in 1982. She played a public role superbly as Princess of Wales for a decade, and produced two children. She wasn't making a spectacle of herself.

 

[Denville]

She could NOT have walked away or insisted on separation or divorce. The whole drama was based on the fact that it was increasingly obvious by the late 80s that the couple were mismatched and that they were unhappy but it was considered impossible for them to get a divorce. The only way they finally got a divorce was because the queen realised that the whole fight in the meidia was worse for the RF than a divorce and so she allowed it. IMO Charles wanted a divorce as much if not more than Di did, as time went on, but the queen was very reluctant to sanction. I think their only option was to make a fuss, on and on and on, and to leak stories to the media, to make the queen believe that they simply weren't able to live together and that if forced to, they were going to become a complete scandal.

I think that she was always his first love but he accepted that at first she didn't want to marry him, because she didn't want a public life and knew thtat because of her past, she wouldn't be acceptable. But she was always the person he turned to in times of need, and they clearly had a storng sexual bond. If he didn't love her, how come he insisted on marrying her as soon as he could, even when she wasn't very popular and he must have know that he could have won acceptance more easily for another woman as his second wife.

Yes, I agree. They did have things in common. They both loved music. They both liked to eat healthily and get exercise. They both were interested in people and helping them. They both were witty and enjoyed humour. Plus, needless to say, they both loved their children.

In some ways, they seemed to have everything going for them. They didn't have to worry about getting the bills paid or having to save money for their children's education. They lived with every possible material comfort and convenience. Both had friends they could depend on.

Many couples have had good marriages with much less.

well they loved their children but I don't think they agreed on how to bring them up. They boht liked music but not really the same kind. THey boht liked exercise but Di liked "townie" exercising like tennis and the gym while he liked country sports and horsey sports.

I've never denied that Diana had an eating disorder. That doesn't signify she was insane, however.

The Morton book came out in 1992, the Panorama interview in 1995. Diana and Charles married in 1981. going London Society.

Not insane but I think she did have problems over and above the eating disorder. I think she had severe depression at times and she didn't get much help for it, partly because she was reluctant to seek help. But she wasn't insane. if she had been, maybe she would have "gone public" I the first few years. I think that by 1990 or so, she was very unhappy and lonely. She had had James Hewitt but the affair had not lasted. But I think she didn't really know what she wanted to do, with doing the Morton book. Did she want a divorce? Or did she just want to hit out at the RF and tell Chas that she wanted him back or wanted him to give Cam up? But the book didn't result in a divorce or Charles coming back to her. So I think she got more depressed and paranoid and went a notch up in doing Bashir..

 

[Lady Nimue]

I've never denied that Diana had an eating disorder. That doesn't signify she was insane, however.

She had issues, serious issues. Read any comprehensive biography and it will be obvious that Diana had issues, not just personality quirks.

The Morton book came out in 1992, the Panorama interview in 1995. Diana and Charles married in 1981. That's more than a decade of maintaining silence. Diana hardly burst into print in 1982. She played a public role superbly as Princess of Wales for a decade, and produced two children. She wasn't making a spectacle of herself.

Here we will have to agree to disagree. There are joint interviews of Charles and Diana in 1985 (four years after the marriage) that make me squirm. Diana's disrespect towards Charles is very open and unpleasant. You can read newspaper articles hinting at problems in 1986, and openly discussing the 'separate ways' of the Wales marriage by 1987/88.

I think if you go back into this thread you will find the relevant information regarding why Diana thought up the Morton book (she was getting very bad press, she was far from being a 'superb' Princess of Wales).

She could NOT have walked away or insisted on separation or divorce. The whole drama was based on the fact that it was increasingly obvious by the late 80s that the couple were mismatched and that they were unhappy but it was considered impossible for them to get a divorce. The only way they finally got a divorce was because the queen realised that the whole fight in the meidia was worse for the RF than a divorce and so she allowed it.

The Queen realized with the Panorama Interview that Diana was seriously disconnected from reality. Charles had been requesting divorce proceedings to commence, and it was only with the Panorama Interview that the Queen finally saw that the route Charles was advocating was unavoidable. Diana had never asked the Queen for a divorce (as far as I know).

IMO Charles wanted a divorce as much if not more than Di did, as time went on, but the queen was very reluctant to sanction. I think their only option was to make a fuss, on and on and on, and to leak stories to the media, to make the queen believe that they simply weren't able to live together and that if forced to, they were going to become a complete scandal.

I think your timeline is off. Diana had never asked the Queen for a divorce. It was Charles who had made the request and been put off by the Queen.

It was Diana that was becoming the public scandal. Hewitt had gone public, and she then went public with it. She was the target of a police investigation regarding the stalking of a married man. The Panorama Interview (like the Morton book before it) was Diana's attempt to re-direct the public's gaze from what was proving exceptionally embarrassing press focus on her onto Charles (and the BRF). She succeeded (as she had with the Morton book). She never dreamed it would initiate divorce proceedings, quite the reverse. She felt it was not possible for Charles to divorce her (which made her reckless imo, she lost all perspective on exactly how, and from whom, she derived her status).

Not insane but I think she did have problems over and above the eating disorder. I think she had severe depression at times and she didn't get much help for it, partly because she was reluctant to seek help. But she wasn't insane.

Read a good biography of Diana. Diana was getting help. There were therapists. The BRF was addressing the situation. It's a far more complicated story than you seem to know.

I think she didn't really know what she wanted to do, with doing the Morton book.

She knew. The press was getting bad, perilously anti-Diana, in fact. Her counter-stroke was clever. Really consider what this 'helpless' woman did. How many would have that kind of savvy? Not many at all. Or the stomach for it? Few.

Did she want a divorce?

No. She had no intention of losing her status as Princess of Wales and future Queen.

Or did she just want to hit out at the RF and tell Chas that she wanted him back or wanted him to give Cam up? But the book didn't result in a divorce or Charles coming back to her. So I think she got more depressed and paranoid and went a notch up in doing Bashir..

What you're failing to recognize in all this is how bizarre Diana's attempt at 'communication' with her husband was. No one 'communicates' with their husband through tell-all books. No marriage recovers from that kind of betrayal. The Morton book got the press off her but it also got her the separation. The Panorama Interview got the press off her but it also got her the divorce, which she later expressed deep regret over (she said the Panorama Interview was a mistake). She was sent packing. She had gone too far. It's there for anyone to see, the timeline. Very sad for her. She left the Queen very little option.

 

[duchessrachel]

Here we will have to agree to disagree. There are joint interviews of Charles and Diana in 1985 (four years after the marriage) that make me squirm. Diana's disrespect towards Charles is very open and unpleasant. You can read newspaper articles hinting at problems in 1986, and openly discussing the 'separate ways' of the Wales marriage by 1987/88.

Are there any transcripts of those interviews? I followed them all through the 80's and 90's, but I don't remember when the cracks in their marriage first started to show.

 

[Lady Nimue]

Are there any transcripts of those interviews? I followed them all through the 80's and 90's, but I don't remember when the cracks in their marriage first started to show.

Go on YouTube. That's where I saw them. It's very much watching her manner. But overall (I admit) I never found Diana comfortable to watch. She had an unusual public affect imo.

 

[WreathOfLaurels]

Lady Nimue's comments tally closely to what was in the Tina Brown biography - Diana lost a lot of perspective of her place in the overall set up of the RF and her star power was too overpowering and threw the group dynamic out balance.

She also overlooked the basic fact that her husband was the future king and therefore not a man to anger or alienate. She may have been popular with the public but her social base was narrow and during the early years offended too many within her and Cs social circle - including Camilla who was not a woman to treat lightly or in an offhanded way.

Diana's delusions about her family's power, influence, and status I.e. That they were somehow superior to the RF was also a major factor in her behaviour becoming more arrogant and unbalanced, as well as causing a great deal of offence her in laws who are sensitive I the subject of their German heritage. The time of aristocratic grandees being able to run rival courts and influence the choice of King was long gone but somone failed to tell Diana this fact until it was too late.