When did your opinion of Diana change and why?

[Helen Anna]

My opinion never changed.I was 12 when she was killed so i don't remember much.I guess she was a very heart warming person,great mother and i know that she was loved.Diana was beautiful,charming and extremely popular even after her death.
She made some wrong choices and people kept supporting her but at some point she believed that she could do anything she wanted and she proved to be ignorant.Lumutqueen i agree that she did use the press to her advantage.

 

[rob2008]

Diana was unfairly a victim of the Prince of Wales low standards of behaviour. Until the revelations about the affairs of the Wales hit the press, she always seemed a rather typical, superficial Royal whose prime aim is to dress to impress. It was apalling to learn about the terrible treatment she received from her husband. As heir to the throne he should have been able to - and should have known how to - conduct his secret affair discreetly and so as not to upset his wife. His carelessness demonstrates a lack of appreciation of how Royalty operates - public duty always always comes first. Coming from the upper class, Diana knew that our betters have a different and more 'liberal' view of private life. She was clearly a wife who was betrayed in a way that a Princess did not deserve. The key question now is: Will Charles cheat on his second wife and would that be considered acceptable? He cheated on his first wife and a leopard cannot change its spots.

Could we suddenly develop (in some revolutionary way) the same kind of sympathy for Camilla if Charles finds another mistress? I cannot imagine generating any sympathy for Camilla as the initial marriage breaker. However, I could not have imagined having any kind of sympathy for Diana before learning of her husband's infidelities.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Diana was unfairly a victim of the Prince of Wales low standards of behaviour. Until the revelations about the affairs of the Wales hit the press, she always seemed a rather typical, superficial Royal whose prime aim is to dress to impress. It was apalling to learn about the terrible treatment she received from her husband.

Sorry but you've taken a very "Diana side" to this story. If you choose to see both sides you could see that Charles only started his affair with Camilla, (only one woman not several like Diana did) after Diana cheated.

As heir to the throne he should have been able to - and should have known how to - conduct his secret affair discreetly and so as not to upset his wife. His carelessness demonstrates a lack of appreciation of how Royalty operates - public duty always always comes first. Coming from the upper class, Diana knew that our betters have a different and more 'liberal' view of private life. She was clearly a wife who was betrayed in a way that a Princess did not deserve. The key question now is: Will Charles cheat on his second wife and would that be considered acceptable? He cheated on his first wife and a leopard cannot change its spots.

Do you think Heir to thrones get taught how to keep their mistresses quiet? Do you assume they are handed a book Cheating 101? Diana had affairs as well, she didn't exactly do anything to hide them, in fact she probably made the most of it to get back at her husband.
Prince Charles was betrayed by his wife as well, Diana did not understand what it was the be wife of the Princess of Wales, she didn't know where her place once so when Charles fought back it was with good reason. Charles did everything to keep his public duty first, IMO.

IMO that isn't a key question, it's just something people are hoping to happen. If he cheated on Camilla people would feel sorry for her etc but not for long, more than likely people would say she got what she deserved. But tbh, Charles cheated on Diana with Camilla, who is he going to cheat on her with? Is there a third person in this marriage?

Could we suddenly develop (in some revolutionary way) the same kind of sympathy for Camilla if Charles finds another mistress? I cannot imagine generating any sympathy for Camilla as the initial marriage breaker. However, I could not have imagined having any kind of sympathy for Diana before learning of her husband's infidelities.

Some people will always hate Camilla, some people don't have any feelings for her, and some people accept the fact that Camilla makes the future King very happy. IMOP there won't be any sudden developement of sympathy for Camilla if Charles were ever to leave her.
And what about Diana's infedelities?

Also IMO Diana was the marriage breaker, because she didn't know her place as Princess of Wales.

 

[Helen Anna]

Charles didn't have low standards of behaviour.At the time he could only marry a virgin so Di was chosen.She was aware of the relationship Charles and Camilla had but she desperately desired to become Princess.She was always emotionally unstable,she started dating Hasnat Khan (she even expressed her desire to convert to Islam) and right after their separation she started dating Al-Fayed.She always needed a man's support and this isn't normal imo.

 

[Zonk]

Okay...unless you have sources from medical officials relating to Diana's mental health....let's cool the speculation.

Any questions should be directed to the British moderators and/or TRF administrators via PM.

Zonk
British Forums Moderator

 

[dianadebraga]

Sorry but you've taken a very "Diana side" to this story. If you choose to see both sides you could see that Charles only started his affair with Camilla, (only one woman not several like Diana did) after Diana cheated.

What are you talking about?
The relationship between Diana and James Hewitt started in 1986.

If you want believe Charles & Camilla only to be lovers again in 1986 ... they passed weekends together since 1983/84, right?

Everyone else knows their marriage ended after the birth of Harry, when Charles complained the son has red hair and was a boy.

PS. If you're talking about Barry Manakee, his widow and his colleagues denied any affair between him and Diana. Everyone else knew them says he was more an parternal/fraternal figure for Diana than anything.

Until Ingrid Seward in an edition of Majesty magazine denied or said that there was NO evidence to affirm they had a romantic/sexual relationship.

 

[sirhon11234]

Also IMO Diana was the marriage breaker, because she didn't know her place as Princess of Wales.

Oh please, it takes two people to ruin a marriage not just one. Both Charles and Diana made mistakes that costed them their marriage.
Both of them were wrong to break their wedding vows. I have never believed that Diana was an innocent victim in all of this, but she is responsible for half of the breakdown of the marriage the other half rest's on Charles' shoulders.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Like I said, not in my opinion it didn't.

 

[Cadiva]

Everyone else knows their marriage ended after the birth of Harry, when Charles complained the son has red hair and was a boy.

Urm which "everyone knows" would this be? It's speculation the same as anything else is.

 

[Iluvbertie]

What are you talking about?
The relationship between Diana and James Hewitt started in 1986.

If you want believe Charles & Camilla only to be lovers again in 1986 ... they passed weekends together since 1983/84, right?

Everyone else knows their marriage ended after the birth of Harry, when Charles complained the son has red hair and was a boy.

PS. If you're talking about Barry Manakee, his widow and his colleagues denied any affair between him and Diana. Everyone else knew them says he was more an parternal/fraternal figure for Diana than anything.

Until Ingrid Seward in an edition of Majesty magazine denied or said that there was NO evidence to affirm they had a romantic/sexual relationship.

About when Charles' affair with Camilla began, after the marriage, I will take Diana's words for my answer - 1986 (the Panorama interview), the same year she started cheating with Hewitt.

They both started cheating on each other in the same year, Charles kept the boys away from Camilla but Diana took the boys with her to see Hewitt and that were upstairs while his mother was downstairs with the boys - the Pasternak book has that story. A bit of double standards there - you can't have the boys meet Camilla but I will do the deed upstairs with them downstairs with my lover's mother.

Diana had some good points but they were very few in my opinion. I can usually list about two - charity work and dressing well. I am not convinced about her as a mother and see her more as a smotherer (like Alexandra without Alexandra grace or class).

 

[Helen Anna]

I believe she adored her boys and she had some kind of charisma (she certainly was graceful imo) but proved to be very irresponsible and ungrateful.
I don't think that Charles would ever cheat on Camilla but if that happened she wouldn't receive any sympathy at all.

 

[sirhon11234]

I agree as well, she loved and adored those boys. I remember back in 07 Will and Harry said they wished they had more time with her in an interview. And at the memorial service Harry did say she was the best mother in the world to him.

 

[nascarlucy]

I believe Princess Diana cheated on Prince Charles to get back at him. If he hasn't cheated on her, she would not have cheated on him. These were two people who probably should never have married in the first place. Since it would be very difficult to find a virgin in his age group or slightly younger (most of these women were either married, divorced, living with a man or had a relationship with a man), he had to find someone who was several years younger than him in order to fulfill that requirement. Forgot about whether they had common interests. A virgin who could physically have children was all that mattered. Everything else took a back sit.

 

[Anne83]

Diana is an Angel My opinion won't change For me she's like Odette A sweet Princess that tried hard to be happy next to Prince Daniel (Charles) and Camilla is Odile who stole her happiness The Queen is Von Rothbart without doubt because she always prefered Odile and not Odette It was like the conspiracy in the fairytale That's how I see it until now

 

[Blackadder]

Oh dear god. An Angel? Odette, Daniel, Odile, I think this comparison sucks immensely. In my opinion Diana was a wolf in sheeps clothing. But why am I commenting on this thread? I never liked her, I never will. So my opinion never changed.

 

[Anne83]

The comparison was a hit Haven't you heard of Graeme Murphy's version of Swan Lake ? It was based on Diana's and Charles' separation as well as on his relationship with Camilla

 

[Blackadder]

I have heard of it, dear. But perhaps your Diana angel was more Odile than Murphy and you think........

 

[Anne83]

Whatever.. I prefer the Barbie version of Swan Lake anyway

 

[Blackadder]

Good on you!

 

[Iluvbertie]

Diana was a wolf in sheeps clothing.

That's probably the best description of Diana I have ever read - and it is so true.

 

[sirhon11234]

That is a matter of opinion.

 

[Fashionista100]

That's probably the best description of Diana I have ever read - and it is so true.

Agreed. I used to be a huge supporter. Now I actually feel sorry for the house of Windsor. Charles may have been a cad, but she did harm to her sons future and lives for her own benefit. I also feel she used her children to garner media attention in her favor. I now believe Charles was a good father. Diana was the bad parent.

 

[Osipi]

Agreed. I used to be a huge supporter. Now I actually feel sorry for the house of Windsor. Charles may have been a cad, but she did harm to her sons future and lives for her own benefit. I also feel she used her children to garner media attention in her favor. I now believe Charles was a good father. Diana was the bad parent.

I don't think we can honestly say one was the good parent and the other a bad parent as I think both Diana and Charles cared and love/loved both of their boys very deeply. It was one spot in their troubled marriage where they DID pull together and support each other.. the rearing of their children.

Like millions of couples around the world, they had a marriage with problems which couldn't be resolved and mistakes were made by both parties.

 

[sirhon11234]

I agree! In all my years of reading books, articles ,and watching documentaries I have yet to hear and see someone who knew her say she was a bad mother they have said the exact opposite. Including her own children!
Are there any sources out there that proves Diana either physically or mentally abused and mistreated William and Harry? Diana did use her kids to make Charles look bad to the media which was very wrong imo but it is something that many divorcing couples do including my own parents. I do not see that as sufficent enough grounds for her being a bad mother.

 

[Warren]

I've been reading Katie Nicholl's "William and Harry" and she deals extensively with the the boys' parenting. According to the book, while there may have been occasions when Diana placed too much pressure on Prince William (eg, treating him as her "confidant") the one thing which comes through is that even when relations between Charles and Diana were at their most bitter, hostilities would cease when it came to their sons. Decisions were always shared and disagreements were few, and easily resolved. Considering the atmosphere when and after the marriage fell apart it's quite surprising to read how well the two of them worked together when it concerned the boys.

 

[georgiea]

In my readings on Diana, Princess of Wales stated the same info on the Wales' usually good relationship concerning their children. I think the only thing Princess Diana could not live with was another woman in the picture.

Also I read that Princess Diana did treat Prince William as a confidant. This reason I believe the prince is gun shy to marry.

 

[MARG]

Admittedly we are looking at the situation with 20/20 hindsight but for me any notion that Diana put her children first was forever shattered when having suceeded in her stated object of giving the "boys" a "normal" childhood, an aim Charles also shared, having seen William enrolled at Eton, out in the "real" world for the first time, she visited him and told him about the Panorama programme and left him alone, and open to to cruel nudges, winks etc, of a Boys Public School.

She calmly walks off and leaves him there alone to face the humiliation of "the whole ghastly mess". Boys are mean and cruel and with any luck grow out of it but he was exposed and she just went ahead and destroyed his world, and trashed his father and family to the whole world. Where was the loving protective mother then? She was too busy trying to convince the world that Charles was unfit to be King, I guess because she thought that anyone who didn't want her was undeserving.

 

[Hereditary Thane]

Leave the woman alone. Speaking ill of the dead (in these circumstances) is below the level of gutter journalism. Strange how it is mainly women who like to stick the boot it.

 

[Iluvbertie]

People discuss dead people all the times. We even have professionals that do it. We have Faculties at universities and schools that teach it. They are called Historians and Diana is just that now - an historical figure whose entire life will be dissected for the rest of recorded history - both her good points (few that there are) and bad points (which, in my opinion far outweight the good ones). We have to 'speak ill of the dead' a lot of the time in History in order to explain what happened and to analyse people's lives and impacts on history. Different historians will even disagree about things - just as we have seen here - different people have different views on a dead woman. We also have had discussions about Anne Boleyn and there are different opinions of her - another dead woman.

 

[Mermaid1962]

On the whole, I think that Diana was a good mother rather than a bad one. However, the incident that MARG mentioned is one that I do find bizarre. Given that she was The Princess of Wales at the time, surely she could have asked for a room in which to speak to William privately. However, given her alleged mental state at that time, a person could say that a photo opportunity portraying a mother who cared enough about her son to tell him about the interview (perhaps in contrast to an "aloof", "uncaring" father who didn't do the same about the Dimbleby program--at least not in public knowledge) was what she wanted.

In any case, both parents behaved badly in granting interviews and authorizing books about their private lives.