Should Camilla attend the memorial service for Diana?

[Skydragon]

I'm not saying the contrary or blaming Camilla. It's just that blaming only Diana for having affairs with married men is easy. Those men weren't force to go with her, so the wives should think of why did they had this affair and don't take it all on the Princess don't you think ?

Anyways, I never said that all her sadness was caused by Camilla. Diana was sad in her marriage from the beggining, Camilla or not. Charles wasn't the guy for her. Camilla was just the surface, beneath it there was many more problems.

I am certainly not blaming everything on Diana, but you appear to be one of the few Diana 'fans' able to accept the concept that to embark on an affair takes two and that Camilla was not the main and only source of Diana's unhappiness.

 

[Skydragon]

The unfortunate thing about this whole service, is that a few members of the public have decided they have more right to forgive Camilla or not, than William or Harry.

Worse still, some members of the public have decided that Camilla asking for forgiveness from God during her wedding blessing (in front of the nation), isn't good enough, that they have more right to judge her than the God so many profess to believe in.

 

[TheTruth]

I am certainly not blaming everything on Diana, but you appear to be one of the few Diana 'fans' able to accept the concept that to embark on an affair takes two and that Camilla was not the main and only source of Diana's unhappiness.

Thank you, I'm glad you understood my thoughts . It's stupid for people to think this way for affairs in general but refusing to accept it on the one of Charles and Camilla. If Diana was sad in her marriage, it doesn't mean Charles was happy. IMO they made 'the good choice' by trying to find love, satisfaction, etc. with someone else when they realised that it would never be okay between them. I will never blame them for doing so. When you're deseperate, you don't want to stay this way so you go look for a person that understands you. It's human.

 

[sophie]

A Small Group

I thank Camilla should go because William and Harry want's her there. But i do think there will be a very small group who will be giving her a hard time.

 

[ysbel]

That's not entirely true, BF. The perception and reception of Camilla, for instance, may well have a profound impact on my life insofar as the Duchess' actions provide ammunition to those who are adamant that Australia will become a republic, as soon as possible. To this end, the press has been full of Diana for weeks now. It is my opinion that the Duchess suffers greatly, by inference.

I also think that the fact that we're here at all shows that we do care about the royal family and the issues which surround them. If Australia becomes a republic it will indeed have more than a zero impact on my life.

But are the Diana-Camilla wars the only factor in some Australian's desire for a republic? From my friends down under, I gather that the recent popularity of Princess Mary of Denmark, a native Australian, has done its fair share of downgrading the popularity of the BRF in Australia. Apparently when Mary and Fred first visited Australia as a couple, the BRF had a visit down there that got no attention from anybody. All the Australians wanted was Mary because unlike the BRF, Mary was considered one of them.

I think Mary's sheer popularity Down Under has emphasized even more that the British Royal Family as wonderful as they are, are not Australian and there's not a lot they can do about that.

 

[TheTruth]

But are the Diana-Camilla wars the only factor in some Australian's desire for a republic? From my friends down under, I gather that the recent popularity of Princess Mary of Denmark, a native Australian, has done its fair share of downgrading the popularity of the BRF in Australia. Apparently when Mary and Fred first visited Australia as a couple, the BRF had a visit down there that got no attention from anybody. All the Australians wanted was Mary because unlike the BRF, Mary was considered one of them.

I think Mary's sheer popularity Down Under has emphasized even more that the British Royal Family as wonderful as they are, are not Australian and there's not a lot they can do about that.

Austalia is where the 'Di-Mania' began and the Australians (and like the rest of the world after) were crazy about her. They won't become a republic because there's too much to loose. I know you can't replace Diana, but if someone could bring as joy as her in their country they will probably think twice before taking the decision of letting the RF go.

 

[Polly]

The second reason she should attend is to show some family unity and to show the public that maybe they should consider letting bygones be bygones. That this is the reality of the situation, she is Charles' wife now. I think that her attendance will show that Diana's kids have forgiven and accepted her (Camilla) and so should everyone else. I think that if she doesn't attend, it will just show that there is a division in the family and i dont think they want to show that.

Where I live, the press has been full of Diana nostalgia, i.e. print medium and television.

I have no difficulty whatsoever with 'letting bygones be bygones' - indeed, I endorse such a view.

The only person who will reap any acrimony at all from this whole trumped-up, tacky, PR exercise is the Duchess.

As unfortunate as I think it, there are great divisions in this allegedly highly dysfunctional family, and I think it woeful that Camilla will 'carry the can' as it were.

In my opinion, if there were any hope of Australians, generally, accepting Camilla as a future Queen, then they're being dashed. Her attendance at this religious and spiritual service may well prove to be 'the last straw'.

Camilla has more common sense than her husband, is my considered opinion.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Where I am in Australia - namely Sydney - there has been virtually no mention, in any media that I watch or read (the four main TV stations and the main papers printed here daily - SMH and Telegraph, plus the major Women's mags) of the service at all.

There is some mention in the two mags that I mentioned earlier of the upcoming anniversary of her death.

Even the concert received very little coverage in the mainstream media, although it was shown live. I know no one who watched it though - they were more interested in the football on that TV that night.

No one I know has heard anything about a service and very few knew about the concert. My friends range in age from teenagers to elderly people and all will vote for a republic next time around, regardless of the question, due to the fact that they think it is time for us to have our own Head of State and most admit to voting against it last time, due to the fact that they didn't like the question not the concept of a republic per se, which fits with many of the opinion polls - that it was the specific question that was lost and not the idea of being a republic that stopped the referendum getting up in 1999.

I suspect that when we have a change of government later this year it will be back on the agenda, even if it isn't mentioned during the election campaign (my local member is a Labor person through and through and he believes that it will come up in caucus within a couple of months of the election with the demand from the backbenchers for a plebiscite by the end of next year with the simple question 'Do you think Australia should be a republic?' If that gets the expected Yes vote then they will move forward with the type of republic. That is what should have happened in 1999 - find out if people actually want a republic and then what method they want to have for choosing the head of state and what powers that head of state will have).

Last week we did our annual 'referendum' vote with the Year 10 students as they have reached that part of the syllabus relating to the 1999 referendum and the vote among this group of 15 - 16 year olds was 96% in favour of a republic - up from 72% the first year we ran it in 2000. The 'postal vote' of their parents was at 94% up from 64% in 2000 and the official vote in the local electorates of 48 - 56% in favour (the students are drawn from five different electorates and we asked the electoral office for the official figures so we can see what is happening.)

 

[love_cc]

Let wait and see Camilla's presence in the service and how the service will be conducted. I doubt there will be many emotional outrages about her presence in the service. Camilla will be just there, sit and listen and join everyone else. She would keep slience and a low-key way to be present for her husband, for her step-sons, for royal family. That's all. After all Camilla is never interested in courting any attention. Even after her engagement was annouced, when the news of the Pope died, she attended the service with Charles but she knew her position.

 

[TheTruth]

Let wait and see Camilla's presence in the service and how the service will be conducted. I doubt there will be many emotional outrages about her presence in the service. Camilla will be just there, sit and listen and join everyone else. She would keep slience and a low-key way to be present for her husband, for her step-sons, for royal family. That's all. After all Camilla is never interested in courting any attention. Even after her engagement was annouced, when the news of the Pope died, she attended the service with Charles but she knew her position.

If they want to pay respect to Diana, they should concentrate on what PW and PH will be saying instead of staring at Camilla to see if she will do a mistake or whatever.

 

[Madame Royale]

Where I live, the press has been full of Diana nostalgia, i.e. print medium and television.

I can vouch for that also, Polly

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

In my opinion, if there were any hope of Australians, generally, accepting Camilla as a future Queen, then they're being dashed. Her attendance at this religious and spiritual service may well prove to be 'the last straw'.

Then you do not think it would be worse for Camilla not to attend? Don't you think she might suffer from backlash no matter what she does? I strongly believe she is damned if she goes, damned if she doesn't go, so maybe it's better to go because in this lesser-evil case, she will be doing what her family wishes.

 

[Martha]

It´s no making Camilla a problem. Camilla is a problem for the English Monarchy. That´s why Queen Elizabeth didn´t want the marriage to Charles.

 

[TheTruth]

It´s no making Camilla a problem. Camilla is a problem for the English Monarchy. That´s why Queen Elizabeth didn´t want the marriage to Charles.

Excuse me, I almost choked with my coffee reading this !
Could you elaborate please ? Why do you think Camilla is a problem to the English Monarchy ?
I've heard many times that Diana was a problem but I don't think she was really. And if Diana is not a problem then Camilla is certainly not either. She behaves well, does what she is told and never committed a wrong step in her duties.

 

[Thomas Parkman]

Well, dear people, I must disagree. Camilla is not the problem. People's hangups and expectations are the problem. We are dealing here with real flesh and blood people with passions emotions, greatness and mistakes etc like all the rest of us. Charles will not be the first to love a woman who is not his wife. Diana was not the first with personality issues of her own. It seems to me that if you must feed the Diana cult, with the great villaness Camilla maybe it might be time to have a celebration of what is positive, a service of mercy, pardon and peace in which all the conflicts are over and let people drop all the garbage. The past is past and it cannot be changed. All the press is doing is their ususal cheap tricks and tawdry pandering to the lowest common denominatior in order to sell copy, pictures or get the rating pumped up.

Surely Diana, Camilla, Charles, William, Harry and the Queen all deserve better than this from all of us. WE DESEVERVE BETTER THAN THIS TOO!!!!

Cheers.

 

[hibou]

First off, the problem lies within the Church of England and it's policy on divorce and remarriage and since the Queen is considered to be head of the Church of England therein lies the problem. Wallis Simpson was divorced and whether one liked her personally or not the issue was the divorce and King Edward VIII. That is why he had to abdicate so it's not a personal dislike of Camilla it was a constitutional issue regarding the marriage of Charles and Camilla.

Secondly the topic is the memorial service and Camilla's attendance. Let's face it she is damned if she does and damned if she doesn't. My initial thought was that if the boys truly wanted her there and she should attend as long as she was discreet about it. If it is Charles pushing the issue that is another matter entirely. JMO

 

[Lumutqueen]

She shouldn't but she is!

90% of people in england to not want Camilla to attend Diana's memorial service on the 31st of august. But as Prince Charles' wife she is duty bound to go and follow her husband and Prince William and Harry have asked camilla to come. But in my opnion she shouldn't go it's going to cause huge controversy a mean the women who was having an affair with charles while he was married going to his ex wife's memorial service come on!
anyway it's hardly a memorial service is it 700 people are going and that doesn't include some of the family members either.
Sarah, Duchess of York was invited but isn't attending now Prince Andrew is refusing to go in respect for his ex wife so that means Beatrice and Eugenie will probabley not attend.
People who are attending the memorial service are family, friends and above all statesmen from different countries but shouldn't a memorial service be a private affair?
just the boys and whoever are closest to them??

 

[bbb]

thank you thomas parkman!!! beautifully put. this tread has been going in circles for 30 pages "are we there yet" i wished pages ago it was over already. perhaps we could close at this point with the wonderful posts by thomas parkman and hibou and have a picture thread after the service. she's going, the princes want her there- period- end of paragraph.

 

[TheTruth]

thank you thomas parkman!!! beautifully put. this tread has been going in circles for 30 pages "are we there yet" i wished pages ago it was over already. perhaps we could close at this point with the wonderful posts by thomas parkman and hibou and have a picture thread after the service. she's going, the princes want her there- period- end of paragraph.

Well at least those discussions will end on August 31 (although I'm sure there could be a thread based on a question like : Did Camilla take the right decision by attending ? ). It's like the thread on Harry and Hewitt, the discussion will never end.

 

[milla Ca]

Excuse me, I almost choked with my coffee reading this !
Could you elaborate please ? Why do you think Camilla is a problem to the English Monarchy ?
I've heard many times that Diana was a problem but I don't think she was really. And if Diana is not a problem then Camilla is certainly not either. She behaves well, does what she is told and never committed a wrong step in her duties.

Thank you for this (and other) post (s), TheTruth!
I do not always share your opinion in this tread, but i always respect and like your post!
With people like you it´s nice to dicuss!

 

[Skydragon]

90% of people in england to not want Camilla to attend Diana's memorial service on the 31st of august.....

Do you have any evidence to back up your claim?

anyway it's hardly a memorial service is it 700 people are going and that doesn't include some of the family members either.

Since when is a memorial based on how many people are invited, (not that anyone knows exactly how many are going).

People who are attending the memorial service are family, friends and above all statesmen from different countries but shouldn't a memorial service be a private affair? just the boys and whoever are closest to them?

In fact people that Diana worked with, as patron for various charities are also invited, as are some friends, godchildren and family. This memorial service is a private affair, it is by invitation only and you can't get more private than that!

 

[TheTruth]

Thank you for this (and other) post (s), TheTruth!
I do not always share your opinion in this tread, but i always respect and like your post!
With people like you it´s nice to dicuss!

Lol thank you very much for that . I believe it's better to discuss than standing still on the side of someone that we don't know. I think BeatrixFan made that point in a previous post too. We don't need to fight to express what we think and there's no need to call ourselves 'Pro-Diana' or 'Pro-Camilla'. We appreciate more one of the 2 but we are adult enough to realize that nobody's white, nobody's black.

 

[Skydragon]

It´s no making Camilla a problem. Camilla is a problem for the English Monarchy. That´s why Queen Elizabeth didn´t want the marriage to Charles.

Based on what is your statement that Camilla is a problem for the English monarchy?
If HM had wanted to stop the wedding of Charles and Camilla, she could of course have done so, under British law!

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

If HM had wanted to stop the wedding of Charles and Camilla, she could of course have done so, under British law!

Indeed. I think the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh have been exemplary in their behavior, their patience, and their understanding. They have acted as they ought to principally as parents. Charles and Diana were terribly unhappy by the last years of their marriage, and they wanted divorce, and it was difficult to achieve (four years!) but it was done. Likewise, it was difficult for Prince Charles to be able to marry Camilla. If anyone in the family opposed it, I imagine it was the Queen Mother on her very high moral and religious standards. Prince Charles loving her so much, while she lived, he did not want to offend her or show her the disrespect of marrying against her personal wishes.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I can vouch for that also, Polly

Could you tell me what television stations have been running shows as I haven't come across any.

Which print media, besides the WW and NI, have anything as again I have come across none at all.

Even my couple of rapid Diana fans have been saying how they expected some coverage in the lead-up to the 10th anniversary and have been very disappointed that this far out there has been nothing besides the couple of things in the WW and NI.

Which states are doing things that aren't being done here in Sydney?

I wonder why some parts of the country are making an acknowledgement but we aren't.

 

[sirhon11234]

Well here in the U.S. the concert recieved alot of coverage and last week there was alot of coverage on the new Diana movie that appeared on TLC.
And the t.v. station Lifetime is going to show the murder of Princess Diana on Aug. 26. And on the 31st the channel WE will show Diana programs for the entire day.

 

[Duchess]

People of any real credible knowledge or sourcing?

Personally, I'd be very surprised if it were Diana who was unfaithful first.

at the risk of the mods getting impatient with the way this thread is going i'll ask you...are the peopl that are unwilling to forgive camilla for her infidelity, forgiving diana for hers? my thought is that camilla has asked for forgiveness and that perhaps going to this memorial may be her way of showing that she celebrates all the good things diana did in her life.

 

[hibou]

Indeed. I think the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh have been exemplary in their behavior, their patience, and their understanding. They have acted as they ought to principally as parents. Charles and Diana were terribly unhappy by the last years of their marriage, and they wanted divorce, and it was difficult to achieve (four years!) but it was done. Likewise, it was difficult for Prince Charles to be able to marry Camilla. If anyone in the family opposed it, I imagine it was the Queen Mother on her very high moral and religious standards. Prince Charles loving her so much, while she lived, he did not want to offend her or show her the disrespect of marrying against her personal wishes.

The Queen has always been know to but Duty and Country first. My understanding was that her concern on the marriage was constitutional. How would it affect the Monarchy's role and the role of the Monarchy as the head of the church of England and more importantly would Charles if he married Camilla be able to assume the throne (the ghost of Wallis Simpson and Edward the VIII) Once those issues were resolved, the engagement was announced.

The thread is about Camilla attending the memorial service. I said earlier that if the boys truly wanted her there she should attend as it would be their request. Not Charles, not the Queen, the boys. Diana was their Mother and if it's truly ok with them then we should also go with their wishes. JMO

 

[Elspeth]

People of any real credible knowledge or sourcing?

Personally, I'd be very surprised if it were Diana who was unfaithful first.

Well, does the question of Camilla's attendance really have much to do with whether Charles or Diana was the first to hop into bed with someone? Sounds as though the first Wales marriage was an unhappy experience for both of them pretty much from the start. Diana was sure Charles was still romantically involved with Camilla, although there's no firm information about whether he was or wasn't. It's probably true that he was still emotionally involved with her since they'd been close friends and lovers for so long. If Diana had been more confident and more mature, she might have been able to turn Charles's interest to herself more successfully, but she wasn't so she didn't, and it sounds as though she had precious little advice from family members who were older and should have been wiser. In the meantime, Charles had been fought over like a bone by the two dogs that were the Queen Mother and Lord Mountbatten, both of them seeming to want to be the one to influence him as he grew up and neither of them having much time for the other, and Charles's engagement to Diana was a victory for the Queen Mother. It was a hopeless mismatch from the start for a whole lot of reasons, and there was little likelihood that it was going to turn out happily ever after.

Given that disastrous set of initial conditions, why on earth does it matter which of them was the first one to commit adultery? The damage was done, to and by both of them (and by a bunch of other family members of theirs for whom there was a lot less excuse), years earlier.

 

[Madame Royale]

Could you tell me what television stations have been running shows as I haven't come across any.

Which print media, besides the WW and NI, have anything as again I have come across none at all.

Even my couple of rapid Diana fans have been saying how they expected some coverage in the lead-up to the 10th anniversary and have been very disappointed that this far out there has been nothing besides the couple of things in the WW and NI.

Which states are doing things that aren't being done here in Sydney?

I wonder why some parts of the country are making an acknowledgement but we aren't.

The Age, The Herald Sun, even the daily printed MX Magazine have all had articles and liftouts.

I believe there was or is to be a documentary on TV, though if it's already been on I haven't seen it. But of course Sydney would have, or shall, get it also.

Clearly more of a media medium, and certainly just because nothing of any real substance has been printed in Sydney, does not mean any other city or state shall not run with the anniversary. And it's to no massive length, though clearly more than what's being printed in Sydney.

at the risk of the mods getting impatient with the way this thread is going i'll ask you...are the peopl that are unwilling to forgive camilla for her infidelity, forgiving diana for hers? my thought is that camilla has asked for forgiveness and that perhaps going to this memorial may be her way of showing that she celebrates all the good things diana did in her life.

I, to be truthfull with you, cannot alter the narrow mindedness of those you are talking of, and have no ambition to do so so I don't particularly care who loath's Camilla and who loves Diana or who adores Camilla and who despises Diana...it's sad and naive behaviour and though I'm happy to participate in the conversation It's of no consequence to me if someone has such an unfulfilling life that they must make the marital and divorce issues of others their own 'fight' and 'conquest'.

Personally, if you were to go back and read through my posts (I'm certainly not telling you to do so ), then you would find that I, myself, stated that if Camilla were to attend then let it be to acknowledge and celebrate the many wonderful things Diana was able to do during her short life.