For months now, we’ve been in the midst of The Summer of Diana, where every single person and media outlet wants to mark the 20th anniversary of Princess Diana’s death with questionable “never before released” interviews and various shady exclusives. Prince William and Prince Harry sat down for a series of specials about their mother. Harry did a stand-alone exclusive with Newsweek a few months back too, and the interview ended up being massively controversial for about a dozen different reasons. I was focused mostly on Harry’s whinging about his privilege, but he also said this about walking behind his mother’s casket in 1997: “My mother had just died, and I had to walk a long way behind her coffin, surrounded by thousands of people watching me while millions more did on television. I don’t think any child should be asked to do that, under any circumstances. I don’t think it would happen today.” Many assumed that Harry was criticizing his father for basically “forcing” him to walk behind Diana’s casket. But in a new special, Harry changes his mind about it.
In an interview for a new documentary, Diana: Seven Days, focusing on the events of the week following Diana’s death, Prince Harry says: “I think it was a group decision. Before I knew it, I found myself in a situation with a suit on and a black tie, a white shirt, I think, and I was part of it. Generally I don’t have an opinion on whether that was right or wrong. I am glad I was part of it. Looking back on it now, I am very glad I was part of it.”
The interview forms part of a new documentary that will be screened on Sunday in the U.K., ahead of the anniversary of Diana’s death on Aug. 31. Previews have been made available to the British media, and details of the interviews are plastered across most U.K. newspapers Wednesday.
Speaking about the controversial decision to have them walk behind the coffin, William says: “It wasn’t an easy decision and it was sort of a collective family decision to do that. It was one of the hardest things I have ever done. It was that balance between duty and family and that was what we had to do. I think the hardest thing was that walk. It was a very long, lonely walk.”
Harry reveals it was his father who came to the boys to break the news. He says: “One of the hardest things for a parent to have to do is to tell your children that your other parent has died. How you deal with that, I don’t know. But he was there for us, he was the one out of two left. And he tried to do his best to make sure we were protected and looked after. He was going through the same grieving process as well.”
William describes his confusion at the public’s open display of grief on the day of the funeral.
He says: “I couldn’t understand why everyone wanted to cry as loud as they did and show such emotion as they did when they didn’t really know our mother. Everyone was crying and wailing and wanting to touch us. It was very peculiar but obviously very touching. Again, I was 15 and Harry was 12, nothing can really describe it. It was very unusual. People wanted to grab us, to touch us. They were shouting, wailing, literally wailing at us, throwing flowers and yelling and sobbing and breaking down. They were fainting and collapsing.”Harry adds: “People were grabbing us and pulling us into their arms and stuff. I don’t blame anyone for that, of course I don’t. But it was those moments that were quite a shocking. People were screaming, people were crying, people’s hands were wet because of the tears they had just wiped away from their faces before shaking my hand. It was so unusual for people to see young boys like that not crying when everybody else was crying. What we were doing was being asked of us was verging on normal then, but now…. Looking at us then, we must have been in just this state of shock.”
I’ve re-watched some footage of the funeral over the years, and what’s striking to me as I get older is how none of the men/boys are touching each other as they walked behind Diana’s casket. Maybe that’s a very American view, but especially with Harry at the time – who was just shy of his 13th birthday and very small – it seemed like a moment where Charles or Philip should have physically comforted Harry and William with a hand on the shoulder or arm. Just some kind of physical contact, to let the boys know that they weren’t all alone, which was ironically something Diana always knew: that a comforting touch is powerful. As for the rest of it… I always felt like Harry and William would have regretted NOT walking behind her casket as they got older, so I’m glad that Harry acknowledges how he really feels now.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Honestly I think the boys WERE each others comfort. I find that sad that they seemed alone in their grief. I think that makes the grieving process harder
Not only being alone – but watching an entire nation go into embarrassing, garment-rending hysterics about a woman they’d never met, while having to publicly deal with their own grief AND be children.
It was so awful, how people felt they owned a piece of her, that they were entitled to grieve as though her loss truly was something being taken from them. It was sad, yes, but c’mon.
I agree. I never got it probably because I was a kid when she died. But I can’t imagine ever grieving in public and having to share that. I said the same thing about Billie who is having to grieve in public. The world lost two icons she lost her mother and grandmother. Cannot imagine
It was her choice to be people’s princess. And she was beloved as a woman who turned messy royal life into sth posivite. She is an icon of an era.
Her sons know that by now and they get a lot of free passes cos of her. Their father could have protect them.but he is useless.
In other news looks like H and MM will be engaged this year officially. As in the palace will annouce it.
Milla: don’t believe that report taken from a chef speculating.
He has experience to know that royal events are announced according to a set public timetable of royal events, and was thus speculating according to the known ones over the next 12months. December is a lowkey month for royal news so the chef speculated that it would be a good month for an engagement announcement which would work with a summer wedding schedule.
The DM has simply ran with his speculating as fact and thrown in advance warning of palace notice.
The media tend to work themselves up into these things with every royal girlfriend. Kate was supposedly definitely getting married in 2007 that commemorative engagement memorabilia appeared in shops, based on media frenzy. They broke up instead.
The Palace isn’t going to give anyone advance notice of any possible marriage engagements or dates they will be announced though it’s fun to speculate.
Specifically saying that the palace is expected to announce an engagement is a red herring that this latest report is not true.
I do not understand people and celebrity. Even here, some people are so invested in a celebrity they will never, ever meet, that they will argue with and mock actual responders here to defend them! And wailing? That is just odd. I can see being sad, feeling for the children, but I don’t remember ever crying over a dead person I don’t know.
And loving father – GRANNIE – cousins aunts TRF…ALL ptovided comfort security Love and care. Whiny willnot only became ungrateful and removed since becoming carol waity middletons hangers on climbering enablers to i am a prince.
How else could carol middleton mafia boss bag climb- if not by divide and conquer’ billnot from His family.
I think someone ddid put their hand on William’s or Harry’s shoulders. I can’t remember who did it (maybe it was Philip?). They’ve been replaying the coverage on those documentary specials and I could have sworn I saw a hand go on one of those boy’s shoulders. I’m not sure if it was at the beginning or end of the procession walk though. Still, I doubt Philip or Charles were cold with them.
I do tend to think the boys would have regretted not walking behind the casket. I do see it as a show of respect to do the walk for their mother, however public it was.
It was Charles. When the casket reached horseguards, as it passed through the archway/tunnel between horseguards and whitehall. As there were no crowds in there, little Harry seems overhwhelmed, and Charles reaches out and touches his shoulders. On the other side, Philip says something. Don’t remember if Charles Spencer reacted.
By the time they turn into whitehall and the waiting crowds, everyone is composed again.
I thought it was Philip who reached over and patted William’s back under the archway.
When I look at Harry and to a certain extent William, but mostly Harry, at that funeral my heart breaks for him still.
@bluhare I feel the same way looking at his picture. He looks miserable and lost.
I remember it being Philip. Apparently they thought it was out of view of the cameras.
I believe it was Philip who patted Harry on the back, as if to say well done, once they reached the archway. I was in the crowd when the boys walked behind the coffin and I had a very good view, but I admit it all felt quite voyeuristic the way in which we were all staring at these poor boys. I remember taking my young daughter with me and my brother in law couldn’t understand why I wanted to be at the funeral and tried to stop me going! I just felt I had to go and as the service was relayed over loud speakers the crowd felt very involved and we were able to sing the hymns too.
I also queued at St James Palace to sign the condolence register, I believe the register went to several volumes, and will in years to come be viewed as an historical document.
Diana’s brother Charles Spencer did put his arm around one or both of the boys at one point.
There are very sweet pictures of Charles holding Harry’s hand while they’re at the church by Balmoral looking at all the flowers and messages left right after Diana’s death. Harry definitely made a point of saying both his father and the Queen were incredibly supportive of he and William during this time.
I don’t think it’s fair to depict this as Harry changing his mind and revealing “how he *really* feels”. I’m sure his memories of that time are complicated. He can have both interpretations of the event. The negative interpretation of something extremely personal to him being the center of a media storm at such a young age and the positive interpretation of making it through that experience and saying goodbye to his mom.
It just feels like we’re disillusioned with Harry because of his recent statements that reveal his blindness towards his own privilege, but I don’t think he should be faulted for having feelings of resentment regarding the Diana funeral. It was probably the defining moment of his life so far, and I think some feelings of resentment in the course of that experience are really understandable.
That photo of Harry is heartbreaking.
These articles are trying to fix whatever damage the earlier outspoken comments did. I know I’ve been viewing the monarchy as not really worth supporting the families since William and Harry did earlier interviews.
I have a feeling the firm is behind this. I don’t like it. I understand it, but don’t like it.
Bingo. Also I think Philip must be quite ill.
Why do you say that? Is there new news that he is sick?
Yes, Carrie that photo is very sad but I like the way William is looking down at him to check that he was alright, he really looked like a lost soul. I remember I vowed to watch out for William and Harry like a mother for the sake of Diana, and I think they were many many women who pledged their mother love towards the boys at that point. Twenty years on, I feel no different and I hope that William and Harry still feel the warmth of these feelings from us.
I don’t know, it sounds like the funeral was full of people trying to grab at the boys. The adults probably were trying to give them some space. All those people crying sounds like it was very difficult for them to see. Perhaps the adults were just trying to provide them some stability. I don’t blame for that.
I watched “The Queen” the other day, and I think the Royal Family was right in thinking a private funeral would have been best. Those boys didn’t need to be exposed to all of that for the sake of the public. They were too young.
If the funeral itself was that difficult, maybe even traumatic, for the boys, it goes a long way to explain their desire to be “normal”. Who would want to deal with the public that much after going through something like that?
I watched the funeral in Hyde Park where screens had been set up for people to watch. The crowds lining the route were alternatively silent and wailing. I found the moments of silence more unnerving than the wailing because you could hear the soldiers’ boots scraping the tarmac as they walked. Ditto the horses clipclopping along, and the sound of the cartwheels scraping along.
Yes, those periods of time where it was little quiet were almost eerie. A friend remarked about a barking dog in one section where you could hear the sounds you mentioned.
I watched it on television here, and I agree. The silence was overwhelming, and it was one of the most awfully beautiful events I’ve ever seen.
I had something akin to an out of body experience when I went to view the flowers at KP. The sea of flowers had to be seen in person to be believed and I felt a strange sensation, as though I was about to float over the flowers.
Nothing in the same realm, but when my dad died,my mom,sister and I were composed and did not even cry in front of others. Our relatives, none of whom were there when he was ill, started wailing and acting up and I thought it was so overwrought and weird and was so upset, as if they expected us to comfort them. i can emphathise with their confusion about people’s behaviour.
Actually, Charles did turn to speak to Harry at least once. And creepy Charles Spencer awkwardly put his arm around Harry once.
I don’t know why people keep saying harry blamed Charles. Never once did he say that yet people seem to be linking that comment to Charles. These interviews were all done at the same time. And I think this one makes it clear they think the public was at fault. And I agree – the publics anger or grief or whatever you want to call it forced those boys into public when they probably had no idea where their heads were at. They demanded the royals return to London when they were protected and had space up in Scotland. The public wanted to see them and share their grief. Agree that they would have regretted not doing it. And Philip did comfort them. He was caught on camera doing it
I thought it might have been Philip. I couldn’t remember.
It would have taken the palace 2 minutes and 8-10 words, ‘we share your grief at this unimaginable tragedy’ to prevent a lot of anger from the general public. To know the palace was with them could have helped a lot of her subjects. I know why the palace didn’t and it makes sense now that I know, but at the time I was outraged at the queen’s seeming coldness towards all that grief. I didn’t want to or need to see the boys during that time, I completely understood why they were at Balmoral, but her handling of her subjects left a lot to be desired.
It was a failure of leadership. Not the first time she’s demonstrated her lack of leadership skills.
She’s feted now for the simple act of living so long, but when you look at her reign critically, there has been a remarkable catalogue of failures of leadership, and a determined hold onto her privilage that’s been particularly venal.
LAK
Spot on!
LAK and Lady D – you are both spot on with your comments. The queen is only popular now because of her advanced years. The qualities that people praise now such as being dutiful etc were heavily criticised during the 70s, 80s and 90s.
I don’t blame her for keeping William and Harry at Balmoral away from public scrutiny but issuing a statement saying that would have appeased most people except perhaps the hard-line Diana fanatics.
I think the Queen has a certain dignity to her in a role where it is impossible to please everyone. That’s why I hold some admiration for her.
I did always think it was a little weird that people expected her to be as “interesting” as Diana, but the Queen was so much older that I thought that expectation was a bit odd. Older people in general comport themselves differently.
I understand the differences in personalities and don’t, and didn’t, expect the Queen to act like Diana, BUT as Lady D said, all that was needed was a palace statement saying one line eg Lady D’s statement above, and entire hysteria would have been avoided.
Instead she allowed Tony Blair to cease the moment to play to the gallery and the media to whip the public into pitchfork frenzy.
When the palace did make any statements, it was only to point out protocol rather than any human feeling.
And the idea that she was looking out for her boys is a PR statement that was offered years after the fact. It’s been an outstandingly effective PR campaign to shift the conversation from she completely mishandled that week to she was looking out for the boys. And it sounds so plausible which is why most people have forgotten her screwup.
People should read Zoe Williams’ article in the Guardian today (not linking because links never work). It does a good job of capturing the mood at the time, and how bonkers it was.
Thanks I’m going to look for that. It’s vivid memory for me because of connection to deceased family member, my boss at the time was devastated, Tony Blair was nearly having kittens in anguish about all of it, and I was in shock. It’s vivid recall here which is weird as it’s been so long.
that card on the bouquet on the coffin simply saying one word, “Mummy” – broke my heart and makes me appreciate my parents every single day. Diana was many things to everyone but first and foremost, she would always be a mum
Also side note US just did a story about how Harry is popping the Q. Wonder how long they keep it under wraps
Imo end of the year. That would make sense.
I forget the details but according to one of the biographies, when they were momentarily out of sight, the adults did reach over and comfort the kids. They just didn’t do it in sight of the cameras.
I was a kid when Diana died and I remember asking my mother why people were upset Diana didn’t have privacy yet Harry and William were being made to talk to people and collect flowers instead of being given their privacy. It didn’t make sense to me then or now. That was a job for the adults, not the kids. I would have hated to be made to go out there and speak to people about my mother if she had just passed away.
I remember reading once that Prince Philip was very close to Harry when he was little. Before the funeral he told Harry that he thought he could only walk behind the casket if Harry walked with him and would Harry consider doing it so they could walk together. I always thought that was a kind gesture. Seems to be all but forgotten now – I haven’t heard either William or Harry mention it – which makes me kind of sad – either he’s forgotten it or it’s not suiting their current narrative.
I read that they are close and he is a favorite of Phillips. There are a lot of photos of them laughing together.
I know that part of the process of that walk was Philip promising the boys that he’d walk with them if they agreed to it. One of the reasons I don’t totally hate Philip (racist old wart that he is) are the stories and leaks that came out about him during the marriage and Diana’s death. And why I think Mohammed Fayed is an utter piece of crap. Say what you want about him, but Philip is/was a good grandfather to those boys and was surprisingly close with Diana and actually seemed to be legitimately concerned about her. Even that letter he wrote to Charles (that Charles took as an ultimatum, but I don’t think it was meant to be) seemed to show some true concern for Diana’s well-being, before she joined “The Firm.” A bunch of letters eventually leaked (ironically, I think some of them came out when Mohammed Fayed called for an inquest and all that crap to blame Philip for Diana and Dodi’s deaths) between him and Diana that showed him actually being really supportive of her, and Diana seeking him out for guidance and comfort. And all the information I’ve seen seems to indicate he was the same way with the boys. Apparently, when the idea of the boys walking behind the casket was pitched, he threw an absolute fit over it and told Blair’s people (who proposed it) to “f#ck off!” When the heat was turned up and things got more drastic, he went to William and Harry and told them that he would walk with them if they chose to walk. Basically, he hated the pressure they were under, tried to shield them from it (with swearing. Old person swearing. the best sort of swearing) and when he couldn’t, promised to brave it with them. Also, forgive me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t there a point during the procession where he reached out to the boys and comforted them?
Granted, after reading about Charles, I think Philip really crapped the bed with Charles’s childhood (that school, holy crap). But the man really, really did come through for his family during a crisis in the most compassionate way possible.
Because of Phillip’s affection for Diana, I was always puzzled by her claiming that the royal family didn’t like her or care for her.
The same with the Queen. There are many letter showing the Queen’s love and concern for Diana. So the idea that they were all against her is really unfair and a sign of Diana’s instability/immaturity.
For me, it really does come down to a lot of Diana’s illness. I actually relate to her a great deal in that way, especially when it comes to how she felt about her in-laws and what she said about them.
Her relationship with Philip certainly had its moments, especially when she was at the height of her PPD, and bulimia issues. Philip and most of the firm apparently thought she was a manipulative, spiteful brat. Given the fact that, as the RF, they have to deal with manipulative people pretty consistently, that’s an understandable impression. And the thing is, Diana WAS manipulative and spiteful. That’s true, but it’s not THE truth, of course. Mental illness (which Diana suffered from long before hooking up with Charles) makes you act in very regrettable ways (when I think about how I was before finding the right treatment, especially to my mother *shudders*). And a major facet of that is shame. Essentially, out of guilt and shame, you hide your problems and thus, evasion, manipulation, and lying becomes your normal. It becomes the only way you know how to function. And you are in smoke and mirrors mode even when your brain can’t think of a “reason” to act that way. And you become convinced that people hate you, too. Before I found the right treatment, I’d be convinced my best friends really hated me, despite the fact that they actively sought out my company, laughed at my jokes, listened to my problems and came to me with theirs. There was one friend I had that I was convinced hated me (I believed he only put up with me because the rest of our group did) and he totally didn’t. He never did anything that would make a well person think he didn’t like me. In fact, on TWO separate occasions he felt the need to sit me down and assure me that he loved me and that he truly valued our friendship. Even now, properly treated, my old smoke-and-mirrors mode still affects me. Not my behavior itself, but how I feel about it sometimes. Like, lying or fudging the truth was so “normal” for me (because I was constantly ashamed of and trying to hide my issues) that these days, being genuine, while my standard behavior, still gives me odd twinges. I’m serious. Literally, when I tell people things, whether it’s “I’ve gotten this far on my work” or “I have my shoes on”, I get this guilty feeling as if I’m lying. I’m not kidding, I will stand in front of a person with my shoes on, say, “I have my shoes on”, and I’ll feel weird. I’ve enjoyed good treatment for several years now, shed my smoke-and-mirrors mode a long time ago, and yet I still feel this way having normal, honest conversations. Diana WAS manipulative, because she literally couldn’t help herself. Not because she was a bad person, but her brain wouldn’t let her be anything else.
Once Philip realized what was actually happening, though, he (and the queen, apparently) did a total 180 and reached out to her big time. He, ironically, had a much gentler/more sensitive approach to Diana than his son. I believe Charles also wanted to help Diana, but the guy was so EMBARRASSINGLY BAD AT IT that it came off all wrong. He had good ideas and intentions, but he also really, really sucked at putting them into action. His approach was essentially, “You have a problem. Big problems, Diana. You need to see this doctor and take these pills, Diana, to fix what’s wrong with you. Have you tried homeopathy and/or meditation? Why haven’t you tried homeopathy and/or meditation? Look, Di, you literally have every source and type of help available to you. WHY AREN’T YOU TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THEM? WHAT’S WRONG WITH YOU? SEE THE DOCTORS, TAKE THE PILLS, FIX YOURSELF! DO YOU WANT TO BE MISERABLE?”
Meanwhile, letters were the traditional form of personal communication for them, and Philip would write Diana these long, kind, warm, sensitive, supportive letters that he’d sign “Pa.” She pretty consistently went to him for comfort and advice, and he never let her down with that, before, during, and (well) after the divorce. My theory is that it stems from being a soldier. Philip was in the midst of true combat and spent years around men with PTSD, and likely suffered from some form of it himself. One of the things about PTSD is that it’s often misdiagnosed as Borderline Personality Disorder, because of the behavior it can cause. “Pa” spent years around the shell-shocked, and they all depended on each other to stay alive. So he had true experience and understanding of issues like Diana’s.
Apparently, he was even somewhat sympathetic about the Panorama interview. He totally thought everyone was acting like an a-hole with the whole media circus. However, apparently, as far as he was concerned, it was Charles who had fired the first shots with his BBC interview special (the one where he admitted to his affair with Camilla), and that Diana was just more or less responding in kind. So while he disapproved of it all, he was a bit more understanding of Diana’s actions and he blamed a lot of it on his son.
I definitely believe Diana when she said that Philip told Charles that “If the marriage doesn’t work out after five years or so, have an affair.” While I think that’s true, once again, I don’t think it’s THE truth. I don’t think Philip had it in mind to be cruel or insensitive to Diana. But he was raised in a world where the way marriages worked was: couple stays together for enough time to produce an heir and a spare, and, after, if they didn’t feel fulfilled in their relationship, they both had discreet(ish) affairs. Divorce was Not. Done. But there was no point in being miserable. You can’t be truly happy with just your spouse? Then make your marriage into a social/business arrangement and seek other outlets to be happy. As long as there were no bastard kids, and it didn’t make the papers, do as you like. And that really was how it had been for literally centuries. Andrew Parker-Bowles had tons of affairs, always knew about Charles, was FRIENDS with Charles, and it was only once it all became public that he and Camilla (somewhat reluctantly, by some reports) split. That was just what he knew, and I doubt he meant any harm in it.
Diana, knowing Philip had given such advice, still went to him for marriage tips. After it became clear that such an arrangement would/could not work for her, she still asked him for help. And often his responses were reportedly along the lines of “Wow, I’m surprised you want my advice. I’ll help if I can, but my track record on counseling your marriage is… not great… But I’ll help if you want me to, and it’s sweet of you to ask.”
I think there was a point where Philip and the Firm genuinely didn’t like her, and, of course, at the height of the Diana vs RF “war”, Philip was going to side with his son. The rational part of Diana made her continue to reach out to man who Diana deep down knew to really love her and want the best for her. But while her best, most logical, healthiest part of her was working to get her to seek out the comfort and love of her “Pa”, all the time, the rest of her brain was going “REMEMBER HOW HE THOUGHT YOU WERE A SNEAKY, UNDER-HANDED BRAT FOR A WHILE? REMEMBER HOW HE’S BEEN SUPPORTING CHARLES THROUGHOUT THE DIVORCE? HE DIDN’T LIKE YOU BEFORE, HE DOESN’T LIKE YOU NOW. NONE OF THEM DO. NONE OF THEM EVER DID!” The illness will ALWAYS stress the worst things, block out the best. It will shout over your better nature. When Diana said that the RF didn’t like her, she was speaking of a time where, yes, the RF didn’t like her, because they didn’t know what was going on when she was at her worst. They truly didn’t like her, they thought she was a manipulative brat, because she acted manipulative and bratty, and they didn’t know WHY. And that’s all her own mind would let her think on. Especially during a time when Diana was feeling more alone than ever and, yes, even her “Pa” had to take Charles’s “side” in the whole circus. Thus making it harder for her to live according to the love and concern she was shown, because the source of that love and concern was currently supporting the man she was fighting.
WendyNerd: that is such a lovely comment and explanation, and we all know how i felt / feel about Diana.
I hope you continue to heal and have more better days.
I just wanted to add a note to your comment. Philip also looked after his mother in her later years. She was diagnosed with scizophrenia and locked away for most of his formative years. He practically raised himself despite his misfortune. In her later years until her death, his mother lived at BP with them. He also learnt sign language to communicate with her as she was born deaf though she was an expert lipreader.
@LAK Thank you! Despite what a racist, sexist lout Philip is, I have a soft spot for him and while I’m ready to drag him for his failures all day, a lot of the things said about him that aren’t true make me really upset. Part of that is cultural – his mother was a Righteous Gentile. She hid, protected, and saved Jews at the risk of her own life and those close to her. And my attitude toward the Khasidei (short for the official Hebrew honor Israel gives to the goyim who protected us during the Holocaust) is that they risked being treated as we were to protect us and our families, so in turn, we should feel protective of them and theirs (at least, theirs that aren’t Nazis). So, like the way people associate the BRF as Nazis because of Philip’s family infuriates me. His sisters were basically sold off to Germans by his monster of a father, but Philip fought Nazis and his Mother was khasidei. And David and Wallis’s own politics are not the fault of the modern royals. True Nazi’s shouldn’t be thrown around lightly (it undermines the severity of what they were and what they did, IMHO), and the khasidei are precious and they and theirs deserve to have those accomplishments celebrated, not tarnished. And, of course, there are all the ways he’s been smeared about his relationship with Diana (seriously, screw Mohammed Fayed so hard). Philip is a racist douche, but he’s always walked the walk when it comes to caring for the ill and disabled, 100%. He doesn’t just pay lip-service to it or only care about what aspects of these things affect him like SOME I might mention.
ITA with pretty much all of your commentary on Diana, and a lot of the terrible behavior on her part is actually is the reason I relate to her. Part of the whole thing with these issues is that you have to find the balance between responsibility and self-forgiveness, which is nearly impossible. Even if you are mentally ill, when you do awful things, you are doing them. And even if you can’t help yourself, you still have to take ownership of it. Just because something’s not your fault doesn’t mean it isn’t your responsibility to at least some extent. Even if your illness causes you to act like a spiteful, manipulative brat, you ARE STILL a spiteful, manipulative brat. And taking ownership of that is one of the most important steps in healing, in terms of recognizing and acting on your problem, figuring out how your problem works and how to fight it, and learning to move past your misdeeds and mistakes and forgive yourself. Granted, there are exceptions to this, but for how it affects your conscious behavior, yes, you don’t get to disown that. It often takes years and years to find the thing to get your head in shape, even with the best care and putting in all the effort you can, because what works for one person with a certain condition won’t work for another with the same problem. One of the things I find most tragic about her death (aside from the life lost and the pain it caused her loved ones) is that had she lived, she might have found the treatment she needed. Say what you want about Diana, she definitely affected how the world saw certain issues and brought attention to them, and I do believe that her concern over things like HIV/AIDS and land mines was genuine (and even if it wasn’t, I’ll still take an insincere expression of charity over a sincere expression of apathy any day). When she came out about her bulimia, it made people sit up, pay attention, and learn. If she had lived longer, and found the right Happy Pills or whatever, I believe she would have documented her journey, shared a lot of the revelations that come to people like us, and it could/would have been really momentous for mental health. Truly momentous. And it’s awful to think of how that never happened. For all of Diana’s issues, she was a powerhouse and her loss not only deprived her family, but it destroyed a lot of incredible potential. There were so many more things she might have done, and that was lost.
@Wendy
Thank you for taking your time to respond. Your take on Diana is exactly what I wanted to say but you said it so much better than I ever could in a million years. It is full of compassion but it also explains her destructive behavior. People are complex and she more than average.
It is brave to make yourself as vulnerable as you have but it is a story of your triumph and recovery. I have an idea about your struggle so I know it was not easy to get to where you are today. I wish you continued healing and wellness.
🙂
שָׁלוֹם עֲלֵיכֶם
Shalom aleikhem
Peace to you
WendyNerd: Thank you so much for educating me on this issue. I am a novice when it comes to mental health and it’s always informative, instructive and enlightening when people explain it as you have.
Being older than you, i grew up with a much different attitude to mental health. No nuance at all. Even with my history and therapy to come to terms with that history. It was very much the set recognised and everything else, the nuances were simply lumped into a ‘difficult’ category.
It’s interesting to realise my very different reactions to the diana interviews. 20yrs ago i was completely dismissive and simply viewed her as manipulative to the extreme and a difficult hysteric.
20yrs later, some therapy, lots of discussions about mental health in general and learning from you and others, and i have a very different view. Reading the Andrew Morton book again this summer, it struck me how mentally unwell she was. And she lays it out in the book. The panic, the anxiety, the general terrible feelings that possibly also pointed to chemical imbalance, the feelings of unworthiness yet also extreme neediness and need for attention. All of that before she met and wed Charles.
I tried chatting to a couple of friends about it, some agreed others thought i was merely parroting the royalist anti-Diana propaganda. The thing is, the propaganda wasn’t wrong in saying she was mentally unwell, BUT they were wrong to lump it into one vague category of ‘mental illness’ and then publicly bandy it about like she was Mr Rochester’s wife in the attic. They were wrong to publicly out her medical condition even if it was true. I can see why Diana would have been offended AND afraid that she would be carted off because that was the only we treated mental health then.
Now in terms of her behaviour, i tend to rail mostly against people who refuse to see her as human, who insist on her sainthood. And excuse all of her horrible behaviour on the grounds of a bad marriage. Railing against that image doesn’t mean i excuse Charles. I think he is a combination of extreme neediness and inability to look after others. A product of nature AND nurture. The 2 together were a terrible idea regardless of other factors in the marriage.
The difference i suppose is that people can’t forgive that Charles eventually found the right person to help his condition whilst Diana never found her person.
Also, regarding your last paragraph about Diana’s potential, i thought she was finally at peace during her final summer. She was radiant and glowed. My granny commented upon it with a prophetic tribal proverb along the lines that people are designed to be stressed most of the time and anyone who is contented and happy and radiant like she did will die soon afterwards.
Wendynerd I so appreciate you taking the time to help me understand and forgive myself. What a lovely essay!
I felt a lot of sympathy for the boys when Diana passed. All the media and public attention only made it worse for them. But it’s been 20 years since it happened and I really do not understand all the focus on it, now. There’ve been 19 commemoration of her passing so far, with the 20th in a few days. Why all these stories? For some people losing a parent is never easy and living with it can be a huge emotional ordeal. But I still don’t understand all this attention, after 20 years.
The People’s Princess captured the imagination of most of the world. She was unique.
I think it’s because she still sells and moves magazines. Stick her face on the cover, and sales probably go up. It’s hard to think of a star today that has that kind of ability to move a magazine. She’s a one-woman media industry (well, even though she’s dead).
It would have been interesting to see what her fame would have been like in the age of Instagram. From a mass media/journalism perspective, I think she makes for an interesting case study. How much of her own “it” factor was at play, and how much did living in a certain time and place affect the level of fame she had.
Because she had her own addiction to the media, and was proud of her PR skills, it sure would have been interesting to see if she would have given into having a Twitter account. Pretty much everyone, even the likable people, turn kind of annoying on Twitter. Would the same have happened to Diana?
I would have been also interested in seeing how JFK Jr would have handled the media in today’s age. Would he have had an Instagram account where he’d pose in states of undress to show how he had aged well?
In her own way, she was living in the age of social media.
There is a twitter account from a diana fan that was opened specifically to showcase the media her final month. The account is posting daily updates in the style of ‘this day in august 1997’. There are myriad post updates every single day taken from the corresponding day in august 1997.
Every newspaper had articles and new pictures about Diana every.single.day. ditto Diana adjacent articles.
I don’t think the owner thought there would be that many articles outside of the weeks Diana was on her yacht holidays with Dodi, paps in tow.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DianaDaybyDay
What the DM is currently doing is exactly how Diana was covered in the 80s and 90s, and with extra frenzy in her final summer due to the Dodi relationship.
Easy to say that Diana’s popularity was due to any factor other than herself! The Crown itself could not stop her! Go, Girl!! If she were so popular, without a twitter account – then perhaps there is magic in the reality of she who is called the “people’s princess”. Charles pouted about this, even tried to bring her down. What an ASS! Plain and simple.
Aside from her natural star quality (akin to that of Marilyn Monroe, Elvis, etc, the sort of star quality that lasts well, well after death), there’s the fact that Diana did bring about a huge change and transition to the BRF. And also greatly influenced a ton of other major issues, such as AIDS and Land Mines. The BRF in particular is/was such a huge, public, and old institution and she completely up-ended them to an extent that hasn’t been seen since the abdication. In many, many ways, Diana has determined the future of the monarchy in Britain and how it operates. And yes, she applied her star quality to influence a lot huge things that affect a lot of people. Many times, as with HIV/AIDS in the midst of crises. The continuing interest in her is not necessarily a good or bad thing, but it is understandable. Diana does, indeed, matter.
ITA. But there is a big “but” in my head as for the reasons she’s done all she’s done. I may be wrong but I think Diana self-styled herself as “queen of hearts” in the Panorama interview. She laughed when asked in those coaching interviews as for the reason why she was doing charity work – “I have nothing else to do” IIRC. Her huge star factor exponentially increased with her work when her marriage hit the rocks big time, understandably amid very sad circumstances. I for one used to be a huge fan of Lady Diana, but the more I heard her in interviews and got to know about the BRF and their treatment of her, I do not think she did charity out of pure altruism. Yes, she has enormous and undeniable merit for highlighting HIV, anti-personal mines and many other worthy causes for which she has received love and appreciation. I do not believe it was pure altruism. And the consequences of her spite against BRF are long lasting, even today.
ETA: Wills wanted that his future wife avoided the faith of Diana, and the British have a useless wife of the second-in-line with all the details that CBers know. Harry apparently is willing to marry an actress that even though has a steady career for some years, has appeared nearly naked on screen (from what I read around here). So carte blanche for the junior royals who live the high life with nearly no responsibility just for the fact that their mother and consequently themselves have suffered at the cold hands and hearts of the Establishment.
@SoulSPA. I agree that Diana wasn’t a perfect altruist and that all of her motives were perfect, but I was referring more to what she did than why she did it. And my position has always been that an insincere act of charity is preferable to a genuine display of apathy any day.
Well, watching all the programmes and reading the news stories has made me feel quite raw again, in fact I just could not bear to watch some of it because it was bringing it all back. I remember my feelings the night of the crash just like it was yesterday, and just weeks before her death I had a strong urge to write to her and beg her to ‘slow down’ as she seemed to be jetting about and hopping everywhere.
That picture of Harry in his too-big black suit, with his little fists clenched, looking so dazed and bewildered is a defining image. I think this is still the way a lot of people see him, which probably explains why his older female stans in particular are going ballistic at the thought of him with a grown-up, experienced woman, (as opposed to a young girl).
He had the saddest little face.
There were stories earlier this week (granted, one in the DM) that the Blair government was pressuring the royals to have W&H walk, not the royals putting pressure on W&H. Philip’s alleged response?
“F*** off. We are talking about two boys who have just lost their mother.”
Did they ever say why the Blair government was putting the pressure on William and Harry to walk?
Because the mawkish and opportunistic Blair wanted to be seen as heroic and statesmanlike and instrumental in giving the weeping and wailing people the circus that their queen was reluctant to do. The People’s Prime Minister, if you will.
I’m still surprised he didn’t manage to wedge himself in there, centre-stage, with a prince at either side of him, behind the coffin.
Blair understood the public mood at the time. The public were baying for blood. I remember it well. Blair had a 93% approval rating in a private poll that the Labour government commissioned that month (this is unheard of in UK politics). Blair was opportunistic, that’s true, but he was also between a rock and a hard place. The rock being the bloody crazy public and the hard place being the (slightly less crazy) royal family.
I don’t think the public was crazy. People in London being shown on the news were, the press was: they were whipping up a panic.
I don’t anyone at all who had felt strongly about it, then or now discussing in hindsight. I know my opinion was that it was ridiculous that the press were demanding the royal family be paraded in the streets.
Tony Blair is a republican and a player. Even back then the fakeness oozed off his public statement about her. Don’t forget he was the one who coined ‘The People’s Princess’, it was all playing into his hands. He doesn’t want a monarchy remember. I expect he got a lot more control over them by playing to the press.
Cherie’s the republican. Tony doesn’t care particularly, one way or another. He also understands the national character pretty well (he’s the only Labour leader to win an election since Harold Wilson in 1974). I agree that the press was whipping people up, but they were rabid, at least in London. And not just the Mirror, either; the Tory press was just as bad. Tony took advantage of the national mood, sure he did. But he didn’t cause it, and he advised the Queen to speak out long before she actually did.
Gawd. As much as I can sympathise with both Harry and William for what they went through at the time, I cannot wait for August to be over and the end of this tediously mawkish and overly sentimental media bombardment.
I get it-I think it’s just the fact that it’s the 20th anniversary of her death and the boys did that special hoping that they can put this issue ‘to bed’ now. However, overly sentimental you might think it is, I remember how shocked and sad everyone was (and I don’t live in the UK). The day of her funeral, the streets were very quiet-and I live in a major city. I think that was the day when people admitted that although they didn’t know her, they felt like they did and rightly or wrongly they were mourning what Wendy Williams calls ‘the friend in your head’.
This is something that would have made absolutely no sense to her two children because the public didn’t know her. However, because Diana did care about people, and lets face it, she did things that very few royals (if any) did, people cared about her and the public’s reaction to her death reflected that.
Hopefully after this year, things will get back to normal.
I know – blair was sickening then and remains so to this day – th man has no shame.
That picture of William looking down at him, looking so much like Diana, just tugs at my heart. I was only a few years younger than Harry when Diana died and it was difficult for me to grasp the spectacle of a nation in mourning. I watched it kind of in a daze. I can’t imagine how it would have been for them to be right there in spotlight, their move under scrutiny at their mom’s funeral.
As much as William and Harry love their mother, it doesn’t seem like they want to fulfill what their mother wanted for them. So I find that a little ironic.
It always seemed like Diana’s greatest wish was to have William become King, and yet he doesn’t want the job at all.
Because this is the summer of Diana, I’ve been reading the Daily Mail articles, and mostly what I come away with is that Camilla might be the craziest of them all. Crazier than the royal family, crazier than Charles, and crazier than Diana. She masks it well, since she never says anything publicly, but she seemed so territorial with a man who wasn’t her husband. I don’t understand that kind of thinking at all.
If all of these other people are considered to have a sickness of some sort, I wonder what Camilla has. Although Charles bears responsibility for his actions, it’ll never make sense to me why Camilla felt Charles was her territory, so to speak.
Whenever I read articles on the rest of them, I come away with sympathy with each figure (the Queen, Diana, Charles, etc. despite whatever entitlement issues each of them has/had). But Camilla always comes off the oddest of them all and I can’t figure her out. She may be hard-working now, but during the Diana years, yikes, what a weirdo. And I don’t get how Charles couldn’t see through some of her ways if he could see through Diana’s.
If I had ever met Camilla, I probably would have been prompted towards revenge too, probably because she seemed so annoying in questioning why Diana might have wanted to save her marriage, not simply because she was “the other woman.”
Huh? How in the world did you draw that conclusion about Camilla? I’ve read all those Daily Mail articles too and I don’t see that at all.
The article where it is stated that Camilla referred to Diana as a “f—— -itch” for daring to want her husband made me think Camilla was crazy in a different way from Diana. I think Diana had issues, but I think she also had a right to want to her marriage with Charles work. I don’t think Camilla was without her issues either, but because she never speaks publicly, we’ve come to think she’s normal. But after reading this article I came away thinking she wasn’t that normal….I did also come away with a negative impression of Camilla after reading the Tina Brown book as well. Camilla never comes out looking good in any of those biographies. In all of those biographies she’s referred to as thinking of Diana as a “mouse” who could be subdued, and thus good marriage material, which points to Camilla’s own equally manipulative tendencies. She’s adapted to her public role better than someone like Kate Middleton, but in her private life, I don’t really see how Camilla could be considered “nice” in any capacity. She seems just as wily as Diana…the only difference is that she used the wiliness to become sone kind of consort of Charles’s heart in order to gain revenge on her husband Andrew whereas Diana used her wiliness to get public sympathy to get revenge on Charles. Of course, I think Charles is kind of dumb for falling for Camilla, but I don’t think Camilla is any more normal than the rest of them…
Here’s the article:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4771286/The-night-Diana-tried-lure-Charles-away-Camilla.html
Bottom line is that Wm and Harry will have the last word about their mother. Too bad Charles and Camilla considered them mere children, all these years. Diana’s boy will be king – and her two children WILL HAVE THE LAST WORD about Camilla and Charles!
Elizabeth will die – so will Phillip, and Charles is an unlucky duckie,, born so.
Historians will have the last word on all of them.
Never assume, wolfpup. Who would have assumed that HM, PP, and Charles would outlive Diana?
Charles may go down as the most effective, active Prince of Wales in history. His eldest son, given his life-long hatred of the monarchy, may go down as the last king of England. The rest of the countries having peeled off after HM’s passing. Diana will be a footnote, one more wife or ex-wife on the family tree.
I hope he is so effective – the world needs that.. Personally I believe that the Wales’s children are just finding their way. Diana’s demise set them back, and it is her anger they are attempting to process. Assumptions are a tricky business…like gambling. We just have to wait and see, don’t we?
The wailing was embarrassing. I think the best comment I’ve read said that it was if people were trying to “out mourn” each other. I couldn’t have put it better.
Rewatching the funeral footage, I cringed at some of the footage of the crowds. What made me sad was the footage of the boys, and the card labelled “mummy”. That brought tears to my eyes again. Diana didn’t make me cry, it was seeing those two boys looking so desolate. Especially Harry.
It angers me just thinking of those young boys having to turn up to shake hands, and walk behind her coffin, just because of some weird fetishism that some people had for Di.
I noticed Charles in the LA newspapers rocking the waves in sunny CA. He was not nearly as handsome as the other boys on the beach. Charles was a dork – perhaps it was his background… For a teenager in 1965,
San Francisco, George Harrison, and hippies were far cooler than a fussy prince with big ears. Diana was a rock star. She actually changed the world not only for AIDS but with landmines. Perhaps Charles will prove himself – but I doubt he will ever reach the celebrity pinnacle that the mother of his children did. I am older and wiser – still, the princess was breathtaking. I think her boys will do well for themselves, in comparison to their father (when he was their age, he was fussy and finicky and all he wanted was his mother’s crown). Time will tell…and young George is certainly one to watch!
I think that William is stubborn and simply wants to re-invent the job description. History says that when you are the king, one may do such a thing. I don’t think that the Republicans will win this one. The crown seems embedded in all things British.
Yeah, William wants to reinvent the wheel.
I think he should be cloned, like Dolly the Sheep, and raised to be grateful and humbled by all he has in life. Losing your mummy is very hard when you’re a teenager. He has literally dined on Diana’s death for twenty years now, along with Henry. I’m sick of the Diana cult-like fans, who never met her or spoke to her. Public relations is what it is all about. And people who hate Camilla – get over it now. My late AMERICAN girlfriend, who lived in London with her husband and family, was literally stalked by Diana. People have no idea. No idea. My friend’s husband did not have an affair with Diana, and Diana could not get over “No.”. He left London early to escape.
Golden Ashley – wow! I confess that I will always love and admire the princess. Really,in this world of women showing every angle of their personal goods – I realize my feeling is based upon photographs and anecdotes. All is fair in love and war is how the Wales’s played the game. I repeat,wow about your friend. I believe that you know the truth about this.
😂I just figured out how to do paragraphs on this little machine (notebook) . I confess I have never used a cellphone. One might find me quaint, but I am not okay being expected to talk to anyone. I love my answering machine. This is fun. I even have the 😂!
Lak – I don,t know how to create all capitals in a row, so forgive me for not typing in your moniker properly. I did want to mention that I have a mink coat, purchased in a second hand shop and intended for comfort when no one was looking. My God, my landlady nearly had a cow when I wore it to her office on a very cold morning. She informed me that it was only acceptable to wear rabbit fur, that is, one must be able to consume the flesh of the animal, if you wore it’s skin. I live in Utah. I wish that people cared so much for the wild horses. The Queen doesn’t seem to mind about her comfy furs. Quite frankly, I don’t mind rich people. They exist.
Wolves love bunnies! Me too! I love stuffed animal bunnies, and now I am having too much fun!
wolfpup, my friend and her husband lived in London in the early 90’s. The husband had been relocated to London for a very nice position in a major international bank/investing institution. My girlfriend during this time went back to America with the kids, to visit family, and at a medical check-up, was diagnosed with a stage one cancer, curable almost by 100 percent. She flew back to London, her husband told her guess what! I met Diana at a party! The beginning of the end for them. My friend, after she and her husband had to leave London due to torment of my friend, moved back home. My friend was still harassed, and it is my belief, only, that she died of cancer due to the grief and horror she and her family endured from this “Saint.”
Oh dear, I am so sorry. Diana’s did not seem to notice or care that she could be torturing other women in the same way she felt betrayed. Personally, the main thing a woman must do to respect her girlfriends in to keep distance from her friend’s crush\lover.