"The Diana Chronicles" by Tina Brown (2007)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Elspeth said:
You honestly don't believe that his being the Prince of Wales had anything to do with it?
Click to expand...
It put a great many off a friendship with him, IMO. Charles seems happiest with people who are comfortable with him, not the lick spittles who want to be friends with him because of who he is or what being associated with him can get them. I think he is very clever at weeding them out, that is why so few of his or Camilla's friends have ever spoken out.

He apparently has a wicked sense of humour and that attracts women.
 
Duchess said:
i think charles is attracted to women that are independant, strong and decisive. camilla appears to be the kind of woman that can stand on her own and is definitely not needy while diana always needed someone to protect her. while that may be attractive to a lot men, i don't think it's something that charles was looking for in a woman. it's not all that different from wallis spencer...at first she just wanted to be friends with the prince and was a strong figure in his life. the allure of being friends with a prince can be intoxicating for a lot of people i'm sure but it takes a strong woman to maintain her best qualities when the going gets rough and i think both camilla and wallis were the best examples of this.
Click to expand...

I guess probably it was because Windsors men have similar characters in general and they are quite used to strong woman who can support him during their life. Sorry, I don't put Camilla and Wallis together. I find Camilla has a similar natural character with Queen Mother instead. I think it is a very natural thing for Charles and Camilla becoming best friends. It is not an ambition but a natural course between they two. I am quite convinced Charles and Camilla are rare examples of soulmates destined to be together for life. Charles and Camilla are just different sides of a coin. I do think Camilla was born for Prince Charles and it was a great pity that he did not have much chance to marry her at the first place.
 
Last edited:
I picked up this at the airport five weeks back when I was going on holiday - and only started reading it on the plane back yesterday. I have to agree with the poster (can't recall who at the moment... sorry) who mentioned that it was strange that a book about the a very photographed woman, should have no photographs. As someone who doesn't own every book about Diana in existence, it might have been nice to have some illustrations with the text. Especially when it seems that Brown has been looking at childhood pictures of Diana on the last page of the chapter "A slide show" p. 21. (Speaking of p. 21, I also find the comment about how in America a Kennedy would be sleeping with the nannies if they were as pretty as these, unnecessary in a biography about a non-Kennedy.)

At the moment, I'm not overly impressed.
 
ysbel said:
Hi Polly,

I hope your jury duty is short so you can come back and join us. :flowers: When you get a chance, would you mind sharing which reviews you are referring to?

Perhaps you included them in an earlier post but if you did, I'm afraid they got lost in the Sturm und Drang of the thread's discussion.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Apologies again for the delay.

I was particularly thinking of Simon Schama, among many, viz -

"With "The Diana Chronicles" the story of the world's favorite tragic princess at last leaves the realm of soap opera. Nothing comes close to Tina Brown's book for its tight grip on the dark human comedy that was Diana's life and death. Brown knows the ritual dances, the shouts and whispers of the tribes of Britain -- the Sloanes, the paparazzi, the aristos, and the cocktail lounge lizards -- better than anyone who has ever written this story, but she also has a perfect ear for the way ordinary people responded to the doomed Princess. The result is a compulsively page-turning trip to the poisoned place where class met glamour and the result was catastrophe. At last we have a book that measures up to its subject -- not just the wide-eyed, long-legged, good-hearted, muddle-headed woman at its center -- but the endlessly fascinating peculiarity of Britain itself."
– Simon Schama, University Professor, the Department of Art History and Archaeology, Columbia University and author of "Rough Crossings: Britain, the Slaves and the American Revolution," "A History of Britain" and "Citizens: A Chronicle"

"Tina Brown has produced a delightfully smart and insightful book that captures both the personal tale of Princess Diana as well as the astonishing cultural phenomenon that she became. Nobody has a better feel for both aspects than Tina. With great reporting and savvy judgments, she weaves a compelling human drama into a rich social history."
– Walter Isaacson, president of the Aspen Institute and author of "Einstein: His Life and Universe"
 
Thanks for your answer Polly. :flowers: These quotes make me indeed interested in reading Brown's book. Unfortunately I'm afraid I have to wait a bit longer.
 
I am almost finished reading the Diana chronicles and I must admit I went into it with a great deal of skepticism. I find that Tina Brown has been pretty even handed in her approach and does not seem to spare anyone nor side with anyone. I came away with a much clearer picture of what happened. It is a very sad story all around. JMO
 
That is worrying, that anyone would believe they have a clearer picture after reading this book. Many of the facts Brown presents are just recycled unsourced items from other people's books and magazine articles, (she even gives the Mail as a source). :cool:

As ever, it can only be someone else's idea of what they think may have happened in the relationship.
 
Skydragon said:
That is worrying, that anyone would believe they have a clearer picture after reading this book. Many of the facts Brown presents are just recycled unsourced items from other people's books and magazine articles, (she even gives the Mail as a source). :cool:

As ever, it can only be someone else's idea of what they think may have happened in the relationship.
Click to expand...

I beg your pardon? Do you have the facts? You personally know all the players to comment as such. While I am not an avid follower, I remember many of the events. I have a much clearer picture of why things unfolded they way they did. It took three for this mess to happen and three were portrayed in the book. Some of the missteps were well published as they happened and I'm not referring to the tabloid fodder nor proposed scenarios but those unnamed sources.

There are times when perfectly normal people put into the wrong relationship do stupid things, and I'm not just referring to Diana but all three of them. It took three and putting all the events into one book helps the timeline. I'm not concerned with unnamed sources in the book just the main events and I do remember them. If everything is so wrong why don't you write a book and straighten the facts out. It would be a good thing to do, so that those of us who are not so avid follows understand what really happened. JMO
 
hibou said:
I beg your pardon? Do you have the facts? You personally know all the players to comment as such. While I am not an avid follower, I remember many of the events. I have a much clearer picture of why things unfolded they way they did. It took three for this mess to happen and three were portrayed in the book. Some of the missteps were well published as they happened and I'm not referring to the tabloid fodder nor proposed scenarios but those unnamed sources.
Click to expand...

I still haven't read it because I'm waiting for a second-hand copy (been buying too many books recently!), but I think it took a lot more than three for the mess to happen if you put it in context. However, if Tina Brown is going through the timeline and not sparing any of the principals when it comes to apportioning responsibility for things, she may have come closer than some of the biographers, who have been too narrowly focused and thoroughly biased one way or the other.
 
hibou said:
I beg your pardon? Do you have the facts? You personally know all the players to comment as such.
Click to expand...
The only people who could possibly have all the facts, have never spoken. Diana gave her distorted version to Morton, some of which Brown disputes, but apart from that no one else has spoken. Charles hasn't spoken, Camilla hasn't spoken, Charles' friends haven't spoken, Camillas friends haven't spoken, HM etc, etc. So if all these key players have never spoken to Brown or the press, I am puzzled as to how the picture becomes clearer.

As with any book or article, without statements from all sides involved, it can only be someone else's idea of what they think may have happened in the relationship. Their interpretation, good or bad, that is still, all it is.
 
Last edited:
Skydragon said:
The only people who could possibly have all the facts, have never spoken. Diana gave her distorted version to Morton, some of which Brown disputes, but apart from that no one else has spoken. Charles hasn't spoken, Camilla hasn't spoken, Charles' friends haven't spoken, Camillas friends haven't spoken, HM etc, etc. So if all these key players have never spoken to Brown or the press, I am puzzled as to how the picture becomes clearer.

As with any book or article, without statements from all sides involved, it can only be someone else's idea of what they think may have happened in the relationship. Their interpretation, good or bad, that is still, all it is.
Click to expand...

I see where you are coming from. No I don't put a grain of salt in the who was supposed to have said what to whom. I'm looking at it from a further away. She lays out the time frame of events so that one can follow the escalation of the dissolution of the relationship. I have a keener sense of the PR wars that were waged on both sides. Both Charles and Diana gave interviews in which both were advised against doing them for example. It was a high profile divorce with both sides putting out their side -attacks and counter attacks. Camilla is actually the only one that has not spoken publicly. There was a lot of damage done with the boys caught in the middle as is the case in a divorce. A lot of people made money off of this mess. Charles should never have published his book-bio (not that he didn't deserve to have one done it was the timing of it's publication) when he did as it looked like a response to the Morton book. Depending on which side one comes down on and I am neutral I can see where people can get upset. It was sadly and all to public divorce. I wish the boys well. They were really the ones that got the brunt of it no matter which side anyone is on. JMO
 
Skydragon said:
Thank you for your reply, I can now also 'see where you are coming from'. :flowers:
Click to expand...

Your welcome. I like to discuss biographies and I am usually careful which authors I choose as some are more into "dirt" rather than getting at the heart of the personality. I think it will be a very long long time (if ever) that the real facts all come out. I just feel sorry for the boys.
 
i'm reading it now and will say that it's refreshing that brown doesn't take sides...everyone's an equal target and she doen't play favorites. not sure how reliable her information is but it's nice to read a book that isn't sympathetic to one side or the other.
 
georgiea said:
I think Diana looks very much like Cynthia Spencer, her grandmother. The only resemblance to Jemima is her thick hair, color of hair and nose. Jemima looks a lot like her mother, Annebelle. But Diana looks like her sister Jane and her mother Francis. Diana had her mother's hair and nose.

I really think Diana is a true Spencer looking at her grandmother Spencer portrait. She also had a special bond with Cynthia Spencer-I wish her grandmother would have lived longer to help guide Diana. Diana is REALLY a Spencer in looks and personality. This NEW BOOK IS TRASH!!!!:wacko:
Click to expand...

Glad I didn't buy it, then. No wonder it was marked down!
 
Olishka said:
Glad I didn't buy it, then. No wonder it was marked down!
Click to expand...

Well in a book there's always something to take and something to leave (I'm talking of biography books). A reading is never useless although I agree that some can make you believe the contrary :rolleyes:
 
Blog of The Diana Chronicles :
The Diana Chronicles, the Life and Death of Princess Diana, by Tina Brown - Salon

"Is Paris Hilton the Princess Diana of today?" Aside from the blond hair there is no one on the planet more unlike Diana than Paris .
Click to expand...

I think we agree on that Mrs. Brown .
"Intensely well researched and an unputdownable read, Tina Brown's extraordinary book parts the brocaded velvet, lifts the expensive net curtains and allows us an unprecedented look at the world and the mind of the most famous person on the planet. It is a tragi-comedy, a soap opera, a social commentary a historical document and a psychological examination, written by a superb investigative journalist."
– Helen Mirren, Academy Award®-winning actress
Click to expand...

Even the 'Queen-of-Stephen Frears' made a review :D
 
Last edited:
I just completed Ms. Brown's book and have to say it is one of the best reads of Diana I have ever gone through. I agree with some above, she is not only meticulous in her research and desire to get EVERY detail absolutely correct, but she is very fair to all sides showing the "warts and all" look to each person mentioned, including Diana herself.

I found it to be a very fair documentation, and it illustrates there are journalists and authors out there who do strive to tell the truth, and not their own peverse version of it.
 
It would have been a worthwhile read if Brown had done a little more research, rather than read and copy other peoples books. If her desire was to get every detail correct, it is a great pity she wrote what she expected people wanted to hear about the aristocrats and royals, rather than what is likely.

The only facts that seem to be available from this book are the facts that are readily available anywhere, with many rumours now passed off as fact, because they have been published before.

Perhaps the differences in the perception of this book, is as we have discussed before, it is a book written for an american market, by an americanised woman. :rolleyes:
 
There were to me many new insights written here that I have not read anywhere else. True, she does quote previously written books by other authors, but there was plenty of fresh detail anew and also, for once, a step by step review of previously read and heard detail from years past.

I also think it is one of the few books written which shows them all not as saints, but flawed humans, equal in her descriptive applications written to give us and understanding of why and how their behavior is played out over the years.
 
I'm reading it right now and I think it summarizes well all the 'notions' about or related to Diana that have been published over the past 10 years. It gives the impression of a serious research based on many steps which took some time and some perseverance. I believe it wasn't easy every day to get this interview or that information. It must have been quite a job.
 
i've just finished the book (yes it took me a while but i was picking away at it) and i have to say that i was really impressed. i thought she gave a fair and balanced representation of all the parties that played a major role in diana's life. i thought it would just be another book that painted the whole story either pro or anti but i liked it and plan to read it again.
 
I've just ordered it on internet!!! I can't wait to receive it and read it!!!
 
hibou said:
Your welcome. I like to discuss biographies and I am usually careful which authors I choose as some are more into "dirt" rather than getting at the heart of the personality. I think it will be a very long long time (if ever) that the real facts all come out. I just feel sorry for the boys.
Click to expand...

I don't think the average person can grasp the life and lifestyles, mores and life ambitions of a member of the British aristocracy. They tend to have deeply ingrained patterns of behavior that the "average Joe or Jane" would find a bit strange. To inherit is something totally different than to merit.

I think it will be the boys who will somehow make the facts known....They will be concerned for their children having to bear the burdens of the secrets.....
 
Last edited:
Skydragon said:
It would have been a worthwhile read if Brown had done a little more research, rather than read and copy other peoples books. If her desire was to get every detail correct, it is a great pity she wrote what she expected people wanted to hear about the aristocrats and royals, rather than what is likely.

The only facts that seem to be available from this book are the facts that are readily available anywhere, with many rumours now passed off as fact, because they have been published before.

Perhaps the differences in the perception of this book, is as we have discussed before, it is a book written for an american market, by an americanised woman. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I've just read this comment.

Really, what more research could Brown have done? Explicit examples, please. She did well enough, in my opinion.

Also, just what do you mean by the comment that 'it is a book written for an American market, by an Americanised woman'?

What, precisely, does this mean?

Are Americans, ipso facto, inherently, more dumb, or more gullible, or less knowledgeable than the rest of us?

That's never been my experience. Why! I've known and still know some really clever, well-educated and informed Americans.
 
pinkie40 said:
I think it will be the boys who will somehow make the facts known....They will be concerned for their children having to bear the burdens of the secrets.....
Click to expand...

While this is possible, I doubt that this knowledge would be presented to the general public by them. I'm not sure what you mean by "the burdens of the secrets", but I'm of the opinion that if there are facts that they think should be made known, those facts will be privately communicated to their children.
 
Brown's book is indeed a good book but a very "personal" one IMO. The author gives totally her perspective of Diana, not always the one that someone could have if you presented them the facts in an objective way. I realised Brown took alot from Sarah Bradford's biography which I find far more balanced but Tina judged those facts and gave her opinion on them. It's a nice, very well research book but if you want to make your own opinion about Diana without being influenced, Bradford's is the best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ysbel
  • Locked
  • Poll
Was someone feeding Diana false information?
2
Replies
41
Views
7K
Skydragon
Skydragon
Warren
The Memorial Service: August 31, 2007
10 11 12
Replies
331
Views
96K
Denville
D
BeatrixFan
  • Locked
The Royal Family and the Media
28 29 30
Replies
896
Views
137K
soapstar
soapstar

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom