Memories of Diana

[Kitty1224]

I don't know that Diana was universally loved, really. She had incredible charisma, and she was very successful in crafting an image that fascinated people, but fascination is not the same thing as love. I think some people were in love with the fantasy of Diana--a lot of people, actually. But again, fantasy is not the same as the real person, who was much more complex, and, in my opinion, much more interesting than the cardboard saint/fairy princess.

I also think that William, Kate, Harry and Meghan are working very hard to not be the fantasy figures that Diana became. Diana gave a up bits and pieces of her privacy to craft her image. William, Kate, and the Sussexes seem determined not to do that.

I see your point and agree with it but I would say she was loved as you saw the reaction with her death. The younger royals seem very unapproachable. I don't know if thats a good or bad thing. At least it seemed like Diana was approachable.

 

[Curryong]

I loved Diana and still do, Kitty, but Diana inhabited a different world to today. She could come home from an engagement, close the door of her KP apartment and apart from reading the newspapers and weekly magazines there was peace, perfect peace.

Today's younger royals face being photographed when out privately by ordinary people with IPhones, not paps, and how many people under sixty have those phones? Millions? Daily, hourly, minute by minute in today's world people discuss celebs and royals on Tumblr and Twitter. There are online comments in the tabloids, 24/7 news services. There are greater dangers for royals security wise today, when meeting the general public.

The younger royals have to preserve some bits of their private lives, some pieces of themselves, or they'd be eaten alive. Diana used to look at press stories about herself. Imagine today's royals doing that with the Internet! They wouldn't have time to sleep or eat! They are more unapproachable today (though IMO Harry for instance is still pretty casual and jokey) because they have to be.

 

[Ista]

I see your point and agree with it but I would say she was loved as you saw the reaction with her death. The younger royals seem very unapproachable. I don't know if thats a good or bad thing. At least it seemed like Diana was approachable.

I think our definitions of love are very different, then. I believe people "loved" who they imagined Diana was, or who they needed/wanted her to be. I also believe the outpouring of grief was sincere, because her death was such a tragedy, because she was such a young, familiar and charismatic figure, and because to have her life cut short in such a violent, senseless way was horrible and shocking. There was, perhaps, an element of hysteria to it, too.

I agree that the younger royals seem to like to preserve a little bit more distance, although they all do a good job connecting to the people they meet.

 

[Kitty1224]

I loved Diana and still do, Kitty, but Diana inhabited a different world to today. She could come home from an engagement, close the door of her KP apartment and apart from reading the newspapers and weekly magazines there was peace, perfect peace.

Today's younger royals face being photographed by ordinary people with IPhones, not paps, and how many people under sixty have those phones? Millions? Daily, hourly, minute by minute in today's world people discuss celebs and royals on Tumblr and Twitter. There are online comments in the tabloids, 24/7 news services. There are greater dangers for royals security wise today, when meeting the general public.

The younger royals have to preserve some bits of their private lives, some pieces of themselves, or they'd be eaten alive. Diana used to look at press stories about herself. Imagine today's royals doing that with the Internet! They wouldn't have time to sleep or eat! They are more unapproachable today (though IMO Harry for instance is still pretty casual and jokey) because they have to be.

I still believe they can still be approachable but still have their private lives. I think they have more private lives than we know.

I think our definitions of love are very different, then. I believe people "loved" who they imagined Diana was, or who they needed/wanted her to be. I also believe the outpouring of grief was sincere, because her death was such a tragedy, because she was such a young, familiar and charismatic figure, and because to have her life cut short in such a violent, senseless way was horrible and shocking. There was, perhaps, and element of hysteria to it, too.

I agree that the younger royals seem to like to preserve a little bit more distance, although they all do a good job connecting to the people they meet.

I disagree. I think all in all they liked Diana the one that's not in the outer surface.

 

[Ista]

I still believe they can still be approachable but still have their private lives. I think they have more private lives than we know.

Could you describe what you would like them to be more approachable?

 

[Kitty1224]

Could you describe what you would like them to be more approachable?

It seems in my opinion they seem distant. I don't know them personally so I can be very wrong, but even through photos they seem distant royals whereas with Diana with photos and videos it translates warmth and her being approachable. Just my opinion.

 

[Ista]

It seems in my opinion they seem distant. I don't know them personally so I can be very wrong, but even through photos they seem distant royals whereas with Diana with photos and videos it translates warmth and her being approachable. Just my opinion.

I understand, Diana did seem to have warmth that came through in photographs. I just wondered if there was something specific that you missed and would like to see her children doing.

 

[Kitty1224]

I understand, Diana did seem to have warmth that came through in photographs. I just wondered if there was something specific that you missed and would like to see her children doing.

You are right that Diana had the privileged where social media was not a thing and she can have peace behind the palace gates that the younger royals can not, but I think Diana was great at balancing both being a royal but also being very sincere and genuine with all types of people. Maybe its more of a gift she had where she can connect with anybody?

 

[Curryong]

Have you followed the younger royals closely at all, Kitty? Read any biographies on them?

It was said that Diana inherited an ability to connect with anyone, whoever they were in life, from her father Johnnie, who had that gift. IMO Harry has inherited that way with people from his mother.

 

[Kitty1224]

Have you followed the younger royals closely at all, Kitty? Read any biographies on them?

It was said that Diana inherited an ability to connect with anyone, whoever they were in life, from her father Johnnie, who had that gift. IMO Harry has inherited that way with people from his mother.

Yes I have and I think some people just have the ability and some don’t but you can always connect with people and not be distant.

 

[Osipi]

I understand what you're talking about, my friend. My dad was gifted with the ability to make everyone he met feel like his new best friend. Some say it was an Irish "gift of the gab" (he did kiss the Blarney Stone once too).

There's also those ancient Greeks that got things right when it came to love. They had different words for different kinds of love:

Eros, or sexual passion. ...
Philia, or deep friendship. ...
Ludus, or playful love. ...
Agape, or love for everyone. ...
Pragma, or longstanding love. ...
Philautia, or love of the self.

Diana's relationship with her public was unique. I think most people would identify their love for Diana such as they would "I love spinach". They enjoyed her, they took her to heart and identified with her as a human being. There was always a huge gulf though separating Diana from her public and that kind of a love, although it did sustain her, wasn't the love she desperately wanted and needed in her private life that she never had the chance to find. In this respect, Diana is frozen in time like a can of spinach with a perpetual shelf life with no expiration date.

I do see a lot of Diana's charisma in Harry. He's got that ability to make whomever he's meeting feel like his new best friend. Both of Diana's sons grew up knowing the craziness of the media that surrounded their mother and witnessed first hand the end result. Both sons are very protective of their wives and their families and the public profile that Diana reached will never again happen. No one wants it to happen. They have their royal roles that the public is allowed in on and their private lives that the public is excluded from for their own sanity.

 

[Kitty1224]

I understand what you're talking about, my friend. My dad was gifted with the ability to make everyone he met feel like his new best friend. Some say it was an Irish "gift of the gab" (he did kiss the Blarney Stone once too).

There's also those ancient Greeks that got things right when it came to love. They had different words for different kinds of love:

Eros, or sexual passion. ...
Philia, or deep friendship. ...
Ludus, or playful love. ...
Agape, or love for everyone. ...
Pragma, or longstanding love. ...
Philautia, or love of the self.

Diana's relationship with her public was unique. I think most people would identify their love for Diana such as they would "I love spinach". They enjoyed her, they took her to heart and identified with her as a human being. There was always a huge gulf though separating Diana from her public and that kind of a love, although it did sustain her, wasn't the love she desperately wanted and needed in her private life that she never had the chance to find. In this respect, Diana is frozen in time like a can of spinach with a perpetual shelf life with no expiration date.

I do see a lot of Diana's charisma in Harry. He's got that ability to make whomever he's meeting feel like his new best friend. Both of Diana's sons grew up knowing the craziness of the media that surrounded their mother and witnessed first hand the end result. Both sons are very protective of their wives and their families and the public profile that Diana reached will never again happen. No one wants it to happen. They have their royal roles that the public is allowed in on and their private lives that the public is excluded from for their own sanity.

Yeah so I don’t get why some say they need their private lives when in fact they do. They are also public figures so there should always be a balance. All I’m saying is Diana had warmth to her that no one in the royal family has and connected to everybody. It’s a gift.

 

[Denville]

Okay then tell me what and why she had the drawing power?

I don't know. she was attractive but I doubt that was the whole of it. She wasn't especially cleiver, she had warmth, and charm.. Its impossible to say what the quality was, but she did have something.

 

[Kitty1224]

I don't know. she was attractive but I doubt that was the whole of it. She wasn't especially cleiver, she had warmth, and charm.. Its impossible to say what the quality was, but she did have something.

Some people just have that something and we can’t pint point it. It’s like Audrey Hepburn. Stillnshe had warmth that the rest of the royals don’t have in my opinion.

 

[Denville]

Well of course the others didn't have it. Its a very rare quality.. I don't see it in Harry or William..
but it can be a dangerous quality. If she hadn't had that glamour that drew people to her, and made the camera love her, she might not have been chased by the photographers that night.. If she hadn't had that vulnerable quality that made people feel for her, she would not have been so popular...

 

[Kitty1224]

Well of course the others didn't have it. Its a very rare quality.. I don't see it in Harry or William..
but it can be a dangerous quality. If she hadn't had that glamour that drew people to her, and made the camera love her, she might not have been chased by the photographers that night.. If she hadn't had that vulnerable quality that made people feel for her, she would not have been so popular...

Well I’m not talking about her beauty I’m talking about her inner quality that shine through her. Her warmth and empathy.

 

[Denville]

Well if she hadn't been beautiful I dotn think the press would have gone after her so much….

 

[Ista]

Well of course the others didn't have it. Its a very rare quality.. I don't see it in Harry or William..
but it can be a dangerous quality. If she hadn't had that glamour that drew people to her, and made the camera love her, she might not have been chased by the photographers that night.. If she hadn't had that vulnerable quality that made people feel for her, she would not have been so popular...

It's a quality that reminds me a lot of Marilyn Monroe. Neither Marilyn nor Diana were actually beautiful, if you looked at their features, but they had some quality that made them seem beautiful, and the camera definitely loved them. There was also a vulnerability that was appealing, and drew the viewer in. And I agree with Denville that neither Harry or William have that same quality, although Harry, especially, has his own brand of charm.

 

[Denville]

I cant' see any great charm in Harry or William. They are OK, and Will was very good looking.. and very popular for a time with teeny girls.. but I think that neither of them has that special factor that she had.
I think that Diana's vulnerability was something that attracted people as well as her beauty.. but the boys have been luckier in that they have had a chance ot find real loving partners and boht have been determined to protect their private lives.. whereas Diana, being lonely and vulnerable.. tended to let the press and public into her life too much

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Well I’m not talking about her beauty I’m talking about her inner quality that shine through her. Her warmth and empathy.

Princess Diana had a warmth that made people see she could set aside the title of Princess and as a true lady of kindness respect their feelings.

 

[Kitty1224]

Princess Diana had a warmth that made people see she could set aside the title of Princess and as a true lady of kindness respect their feelings.

That’s something in my opinion is missing in the British monarchy.

 

[Elan]

Had there been children with Hewitt (daughters)...one wonders if a close approximation to Diana might have happened...though sheer speculation on my part.

 

[Curryong]

That ability to empathise and chat to people of whatever station in life was certainly lacking in Charles and in most other moembers of the Royal family, though apparently Katherine the Duchess of Kent was and is a very humble woman. It is a gift and and I agree Diana had it and her inlaws didn't.

I disagree though that her younger son doesn't have it. Anybody who spontaneously lays on the ground beside a paralysed woman on a stretcher, as Harry did on his Jubilee tour of the Pacific in order that the woman could see and speak to him, has plenty of his mother's spirit, IMO.

 

[Osipi]

Diana's capacity for empathy and caring was part of her since she was a little girl growing up taking care of Daddy. She just naturally fell into place when it came to sensing what another person needs and gave help willingly and openly where it was needed. As Kitty has said, its internal. Diana also recognized this trait in another woman who, to my knowledge, has never been recognized as being even close to being beautiful. Mother Teresa. It was said that Diana truly treasured the chance to meet Mother Teresa. I found it touching that both women went "Home" around the same time.

Diana's caring and empathy was, to me, her best quality and it endeared her to so many people around the globe. I do see it in Harry. Perhaps not as strong as it was in his mother but its there. With the rest of the royal family, I think they're better at keeping their emotions in check and wish to be seen for what they're doing rather than being seen emoting or gushing and having the attention focused on them primarily rather than what they're doing. In a way, Diana's strengths also played a negative role in that the world came to see the iconic Diana rather than Diana as a working member of the British Royal Family's "Firm". One cannot attribute Diana as actively being a team player.

All positive traits can have negative repercussions and so it goes with negative traits too. Diana, to me, never learned to balance her emotions.

 

[Kitty1224]

Diana's capacity for empathy and caring was part of her since she was a little girl growing up taking care of Daddy. She just naturally fell into place when it came to sensing what another person needs and gave help willingly and openly where it was needed. As Kitty has said, its internal. Diana also recognized this trait in another woman who, to my knowledge, has never been recognized as being even close to being beautiful. Mother Teresa. It was said that Diana truly treasured the chance to meet Mother Teresa. I found it touching that both women went "Home" around the same time.

Diana's caring and empathy was, to me, her best quality and it endeared her to so many people around the globe. I do see it in Harry. Perhaps not as strong as it was in his mother but its there. With the rest of the royal family, I think they're better at keeping their emotions in check and wish to be seen for what they're doing rather than being seen emoting or gushing and having the attention focused on them primarily rather than what they're doing. In a way, Diana's strengths also played a negative role in that the world came to see the iconic Diana rather than Diana as a working member of the British Royal Family's "Firm". One cannot attribute Diana as actively being a team player.

All positive traits can have negative repercussions and so it goes with negative traits too. Diana, to me, never learned to balance her emotions.

She connected with the people of the UK and all around the world and was empathetic and people gravitated towards that. There’s nothing bad about that. The rest of the royals could use some warmth in them well except Harry since he does have some of his mom warmth.

 

[Osipi]

We have to remember too that over the years, people were drawn to Diana solely to see just what she was going to do next. The War of the Wales captured the attention of a lot of people worldwide solely because of the high level drama taking place on a very high level stage involving high level public figures. The tabloids made a fortune on this.

Along with the good, you also have to take the bad and the ugly and there was a lot of all three surrounding the late Diana, Princess of Wales.

 

[Kitty1224]

We have to remember too that over the years, people were drawn to Diana solely to see just what she was going to do next. The War of the Wales captured the attention of a lot of people worldwide solely because of the high level drama taking place on a very high level stage involving high level public figures. The tabloids made a fortune on this.

Along with the good, you also have to take the bad and the ugly and there was a lot of all three surrounding the late Diana, Princess of Wales.

It’s like we have to fault her for the bad. We are all not perfect. I like to focus on the good sides of each person. William and Kate are great parents and role models but I wish they would connect with their people more and be approachable. Harry has his mother charisma and all but still the younger royals are all about privacy which they are allowed but there should be a balance. When you think about it, they do many things without the media and people knowing so they do have a lot of privacy. The monarchy is missing the warmth and light that was Diana in my opinion.

 

[Ista]

We have to remember too that over the years, people were drawn to Diana solely to see just what she was going to do next. The War of the Wales captured the attention of a lot of people worldwide solely because of the high level drama taking place on a very high level stage involving high level public figures. The tabloids made a fortune on this.

Along with the good, you also have to take the bad and the ugly and there was a lot of all three surrounding the late Diana, Princess of Wales.

I think these are excellent points. By the later stages of the Wales's marriage, it was a train wreck that people became addicted to watching. There hadn't been anything like it in British royal circles since the Prince Regent and Caroline of Brunswick. All those people buying copies of People, etc., were not just reading about Diana out of adoration, but because of the constant revelations, accusations, and drama.

Diana was a complex person. She had amazing warmth and charm, and did a lot to bring attention to the causes she supported. On a personal level, the record is much more mixed. She had some very close friends who were loyal to the end, but she also had a track record of dropping friends without notice or warning, and was reported to scream at and humiliate some of her servants. I think it's possible to admire and appreciate her for her good points without glossing over some of her more problematic traits.

 

[Denville]

It’s like we have to fault her for the bad. We are all not perfect. I like to focus on the good sides of each person. William and Kate are great parents and role models but I wish they would connect with their people more and be approachable. Harry has his mother charisma and all but still the younger royals are all about privacy which they are allowed but there should be a balance. When you think about it, they do many things without the media and people knowing so they do have a lot of privacy. The monarchy is missing the warmth and light that was Diana in my opinion.

I don't know. I think that the RF are back to moderately popular and don't want any more dazzlers who end up in a disaster. Diana's charm and pulling power was a plus, at first. But then she began to use it against her husband and the RF.. and it all ended in scandal and tragedy. I think that it is problaby better not to have someone with so much of that special quality.. as it can end in disaster. Will and Harry have a reasonable popularity, but they do their jobs and then retreat to their home life.. and if they are not mega popular, they are less likely to crash and burn...

 

[Osipi]

I don't know. I think that the RF are back to moderately popular and don't want any more dazzlers who end up in a disaster. Diana's charm and pulling power was a plus, at first. But then she began to use it against her husband and the RF.. and it all ended in scandal and tragedy. I think that it is problaby better not to have someone with so much of that special quality.. as it can end in disaster. Will and Harry have a reasonable popularity, but they do their jobs and then retreat to their home life.. and if they are not mega popular, they are less likely to crash and burn...

So much of Diana's public life was a one woman show and that's what the BRF is very careful these days to avoid. We saw it said when Philip retired that the Queen has "Team Windsor" behind her and that's how it should be.

Its never about being "popular" in and of themselves but working together as a team to do what the BRF does best and that is to serve the people and the monarchy. After the fiasco that was Diana, Princess of Wales, they've learned a thing or two.