The only reason I know exactly where we were is because we faced a 8 hour drive to what was then home from Richmond (Yorkshire) after house hunting. Stop 1 was trying to find somewhere to buy a CD to listen to in the hire car we had...
My first task when I discovered when the funeral was was to move our next shopping trip to Calais forward a fortnight...
PS Popbitch has a very good Will Carling Princess Di story...
I found the month following genuinely bewildering. I really did not understand what was going on. I have never felt so completely out of touch in my own country.
Same here, I laughed at the North Koreans when Kim Il-Sung died, then a few years later we were doing the same.
You're not the only one. I still don't understand it.
And I've been trying for 20 years to understand it, and I still don't get it. It was very tragic but also embarrassingly hysterical and unBritish.
I hope it is a very long time away, but it will be interesting to see how the Great British public responds when Her Majesty passes away.
I wonder if there'll be a desire to give a Diana style response.
No, Diana was part Hollywood, part icon, part Princess, Kennedyesque who died at the peak of her youthful beauty.
The Queen dying will be like your Gran dying, just on a national scale and with more pomp and ceremony
You also have to distinguish between media hysteria and the average person.
In the canteen at my work (big 4 accountancy firm in Central London) nobody was any more concerned about Diana's death than any other random person having died in a car accident. Sorry to hear the news, sorry to hear two kids had lost their Mum - but it happens every day to someone so no more fuss than for any other death.
60 million people in the UK. A small percentage equals a lot of people and the media love hysteria.
Of course it is not the same as a death in the family but nonetheless the poll today confirming the vast majority of those alive at her death remember precisely where they were when they heard she died confirms her death was our Kennedy assassination
The difference is the Kennedy assassination had significance, Diana's death didn't.
Its easy to forget how she was already being marginalised.
The only reason I know exactly where we were is because we faced a 8 hour drive to what was then home from Richmond (Yorkshire) after house hunting. Stop 1 was trying to find somewhere to buy a CD to listen to in the hire car we had...
My first task when I discovered when the funeral was was to move our next shopping trip to Calais forward a fortnight...
PS Popbitch has a very good Will Carling Princess Di story...
I found the month following genuinely bewildering. I really did not understand what was going on. I have never felt so completely out of touch in my own country.
Same here, I laughed at the North Koreans when Kim Il-Sung died, then a few years later we were doing the same.
You're not the only one. I still don't understand it.
And I've been trying for 20 years to understand it, and I still don't get it. It was very tragic but also embarrassingly hysterical and unBritish.
I hope it is a very long time away, but it will be interesting to see how the Great British public responds when Her Majesty passes away.
I wonder if there'll be a desire to give a Diana style response.
No, Diana
You also have to distinguish between media hysteria and the average person.
In the .
Of course it is not the same as a death in the family but nonetheless the poll today confirming the vast majority of those alive at her death remember precisely where they were when they heard she died confirms her death was our Kennedy assassination
The difference is the Kennedy assassination had significance, Diana's death didn't.
Its easy to forget how she was already being marginalised.
It did whether you like it or not, it led the news all over the world for days and Hollywood stars, Royalty, politicians from across the globe came to her funeral. Not forgetting the work she did in tackling landmines and raising Aids awareness if the monarchy is to have a future in the UK it will almost certainly be down to Diana, she helped modernise it, make it more open and aware of the media age and less formal and stuffy, particularly through her sons. She was probably the most charismatic and well known figure this country has produced for half a century
I found the month following genuinely bewildering. I really did not understand what was going on. I have never felt so completely out of touch in my own country.
Same here, I laughed at the North Koreans when Kim Il-Sung died, then a few years later we were doing the same.
You're not the only one. I still don't understand it.
And I've been trying for 20 years to understand it, and I still don't get it. It was very tragic but also embarrassingly hysterical and unBritish.
I hope it is a very long time away, but it will be interesting to see how the Great British public responds when Her Majesty passes away.
I wonder if there'll be a desire to give a Diana style response.
No, Diana was part Hollywood, part icon, part Princess, Kennedyesque who died at the peak of her youthful beauty.
The Queen dying will be like your Gran dying, just on a national scale and with more pomp and ceremony
You also have to distinguish between media hysteria and the average person.
In the canteen at my work (big 4 accountancy firm in Central London) nobody was any more concerned about Diana's death than any other random person having died in a car accident. Sorry to hear the news, sorry to hear two kids had lost their Mum - but it happens every day to someone so no more fuss than for any other death.
60 million people in the UK. A small percentage equals a lot of people and the media love hysteria.
Of course it is not the same as a death in the family but nonetheless the poll today confirming the vast majority of those alive at her death remember precisely where they were when they heard she died confirms her death was our Kennedy assassination
I remember that day, but not because of Diana, but because it was the day I discovered I was pregnant with my third child. So a day of great happiness for me.
I've avoided all the anniversary bollocks on TV. What possible use can be served by rehashing it all? And if her sons want to talk about it, let them go to a therapist. Why this need for publicly exposing your feelings? Pain can sometimes be best endured in private.
Of course it is not the same as a death in the family but nonetheless the poll today confirming the vast majority of those alive at her death remember precisely where they were when they heard she died confirms her death was our Kennedy assassination
There were two particular factors which made her death more poignant to the public than would have been the case had it been a simple tragic accident involving a celebrity:
- The impression that the accident seemed to have been caused, at least in part, by the paparazzi hounding her;
- The horrendous callousness of the paparazzi photographing her as she lay dying.
I found the month following genuinely bewildering. I really did not understand what was going on. I have never felt so completely out of touch in my own country.
Same here, I laughed at the North Koreans when Kim Il-Sung died, then a few years later we were doing the same.
You're not the only one. I still don't understand it.
And I've been trying for 20 years to understand it, and I still don't get it. It was very tragic but also embarrassingly hysterical and unBritish.
I hope it is a very long time away, but it will be interesting to see how the Great British public responds when Her Majesty passes away.
I wonder if there'll be a desire to give a Diana style response.
No, Diana was part Hollywood, part icon, part Princess, Kennedyesque who died at the peak of her youthful beauty.
The Queen dying will be like your Gran dying, just on a national scale and with more pomp and ceremony
You also have to distinguish between media hysteria and the average person.
In the cantpeople in the UK. A small percentage equals a lot of people and the media love hysteria.
Of course it is not the same as a death our Kennedy assassination
I remember that day, but not because of Diana, but because it was the day I discovered I was pregnant with my third child. So a day of great happiness for me.
I've avoided all the anniversary bollocks on TV. What possible use can be served by rehashing it all? And if her sons want to talk about it, let them go to a therapist. Why this need for publicly exposing your feelings? Pain can sometimes be best endured in private.
Fifty years after the JFK assassination in 2013 Americans or more particularly the American media were still talking about it
Of course it is not the same as a death in the family but nonetheless the poll today confirming the vast majority of those alive at her death remember precisely where they were when they heard she died confirms her death was our Kennedy assassination
There were two particular factors which made her death more poignant to the public than would have been the case had it been a simple tragic accident involving a celebrity:
- The impression that the accident seemed to have been caused, at least in part, by the paparazzi hounding her;
- The horrendous callousness of the paparazzi photographing her as she lay dying.
The paparazzi certainly added to it yes, though of course they were also linked to the fact she was the most photographed woman in the world at the time
Of course it is not the same as a death in the family but nonetheless the poll today confirming the vast majority of those alive at her death remember precisely where they were when they heard she died confirms her death was our Kennedy assassination
There were two particular factors which made her death more poignant to the public than would have been the case had it been a simple tragic accident involving a celebrity:
- The impression that the accident seemed to have been caused, at least in part, by the paparazzi hounding her;
- The horrendous callousness of the paparazzi photographing her as she lay dying.
The paparazzi certainly added to it yes, though of course they were also linked to the fact she was the most photographed woman in the world at the time
I just watched a Diana documentary where one of the Princes describes an upsetting incident involving the paparazzi while their mother was driving them somewhere in what was clearly her private time with the boys. It really brought it home to me just how out of control the paparazzi had become around her following her divorce from Charles. Yes, she was circulation gold for the newspapers, but its now obvious that once she left the Royal family, she also lost any protection from the intrusion of the more unscrupulous paparazzi who would stop at nothing to try to get that money spinning photo.
I found the month following genuinely bewildering. I really did not understand what was going on. I have never felt so completely out of touch in my own country.
Same here, I laughed at the North Koreans when Kim Il-Sung died, then a few years later we were doing the same.
You're not the only one. I still don't understand it.
And I've been trying for 20 years to understand it, and I still don't get it. It was very tragic but also embarrassingly hysterical and unBritish.
I hope it is a very long time away, but it will be interesting to see how the Great British public responds when Her Majesty passes away.
I wonder if there'll be a desire to give a Diana style response.
No, Diana
You also have to distinguish between media hysteria and the average person.
In the .
Of course it is not the same as a death in the family but nonetheless the poll today confirming the vast majority of those alive at her death remember precisely where they were when they heard she died confirms her death was our Kennedy assassination
The difference is the Kennedy assassination had significance, Diana's death didn't.
Its easy to forget how she was already being marginalised.
It did whether you like it or not, it led the news all over the world for days and Hollywood stars, Royalty, politicians from across the globe came to her funeral. Not forgetting the work she did in tackling landmines and raising Aids awareness if the monarchy is to have a future in the UK it will almost certainly be down to Diana, she helped modernise it, make it more open and aware of the media age and less formal and stuffy, particularly through her sons. She was probably the most charismatic and well known figure this country has produced for half a century
The monarchy has always evolved with the times.
Kennedy's death had significance because if he had remained President history might have been different.
I don't see how Diana could have had any effect - she was already being marginalised into a slebby Sloane.
How many people here have thought of Diana since her death ?
Of course it is not the same as a death in the family but nonetheless the poll today confirming the vast majority of those alive at her death remember precisely where they were when they heard she died confirms her death was our Kennedy assassination
There were two particular factors which made her death more poignant to the public than would have been the case had it been a simple tragic accident involving a celebrity:
- The impression that the accident seemed to have been caused, at least in part, by the paparazzi hounding her;
- The horrendous callousness of the paparazzi photographing her as she lay dying.
The paparazzi certainly added to it yes, though of course they were also linked to the fact she was the most photographed woman in the world at the time
I just watched a Diana documentary where one of the Princes describes an upsetting incident involving the paparazzi while their mother was driving them somewhere in what was clearly her private time with the boys. It really brought it home to me just how out of control the paparazzi had become around her following her divorce from Charles. Yes, she was circulation gold for the newspapers, but its now obvious that once she left the Royal family, she also lost any protection from the intrusion of the more unscrupulous paparazzi who would stop at nothing to try to get that money spinning photo.
Wasn't she offered Royal protection even after the divorce? I had understood that she declined it. If so, a bloody stupid decision.
She struck me as friendless. All those celebrities at her funeral. Were they really her friends? People with real friends can find some level of privacy. What about her own family, including her brother with vast private estates, unwilling to give her shelter but all too willing to put the boot into the Royals? Diana was circulation gold in part because she provided them with good copy, as a result of her own decisions. She learnt too late that if she tried to use the press for her own ends they would use her too. It's one reason why I feel uneasy about the way her sons have opened up to the press now. Some things should remain private.
Of course it is not the same as a death in the family but nonetheless the poll today confirming the vast majority of those alive at her death remember precisely where they were when they heard she died confirms her death was our Kennedy assassination
There were two particular factors which made her death more poignant to the public than would have been the case had it been a simple tragic accident involving a celebrity:
- The impression that the accident seemed to have been caused, at least in part, by the paparazzi hounding her;
- The horrendous callousness of the paparazzi photographing her as she lay dying.
The paparazzi certainly added to it yes, though of course they were also linked to the fact she was the most photographed woman in the world at the time
I just watched a Diana documentary where one of the Princes describes an upsetting incident involving the paparazzi while their mother was driving them somewhere in what was clearly her private time with the boys. It really brought it home to me just how out of control the paparazzi had become around her following her divorce from Charles. Yes, she was circulation gold for the newspapers, but its now obvious that once she left the Royal family, she also lost any protection from the intrusion of the more unscrupulous paparazzi who would stop at nothing to try to get that money spinning photo.
Wasn't she offered Royal protection even after the divorce? I had understood that she declined it. If so, a bloody stupid decision.
She struck me as friendless. All those celebrities at her funeral. Were they really her friends? People with real friends can find some level of privacy. What about her own family, including her brother with vast private estates, unwilling to give her shelter but all too willing to put the boot into the Royals? Diana was circulation gold in part because she provided them with good copy, as a result of her own decisions. She learnt too late that if she tried to use the press for her own ends they would use her too. It's one reason why I feel uneasy about the way her sons have opened up to the press now. Some things should remain private.
Prince Harry bravely admitted that he did seek counselling to help him come to terms with his mother's death. Both Prince William and Prince Harry quite rightly want to protect their mother's memory in the face of such renewed media attention on this anniversary of her death.
I found the month following genuinely bewildering. I really did not understand what was going on. I have never felt so completely out of touch in my own country.
Same here, I laughed at the North Koreans when Kim Il-Sung died, then a few years later we were doing the same.
You're not the only one. I still don't understand it.
And I've been trying for 20 years to understand it, and I still don't get it. It was very tragic but also embarrassingly hysterical and unBritish.
I hope it is a very long time away, but it will be interesting to see how the Great British public responds when Her Majesty passes away.
I wonder if there'll be a desire to give a Diana style response.
No, Diana
You also have to distinguish between media hysteria and the average person.
In the .
Of course it is not the same as
The difference is the Kennedy assassination had significance, Diana's death didn't.
Its easy to forget how she was already being marginalised.
It did whether
The monarchy has always evolved with the times.
Kennedy's death had significance because if he had remained President history might have been different.
I don't see how Diana could have had any effect - she was already being marginalised into a slebby Sloane.
How many people here have thought of Diana since her death ?
Has it? Charles 1st ended up beheaded and replaced by Cromwell because he failed to evolve.
Kennedy's death did not have that much effect policy wise, if anything it was LBJ who pushed through the key civil rights legislation and 'Great Society' programme and as for Vietnam he would probably have been dragged further in in some way.
Like Diana his death had impact really because both had incredible charisma and were effectively icons for their country.
I worked at the Diana Fund for several months a few years ago so I certainly did, as did the many charities from those working with the homeless, those with Aids, to eliminate landmines and in the Arts who benefited from her work
Play suspended at The Oval and spectators told to go inside because someone has fired an arrow.
Saw a picture of one of the umpires holding it, looked like a crossbow bolt with a target practice head. To get the distance involved, from outside the ground to the wicket, probably from a hunting version cross bow. If it was a hunting arrow the head would have been a lot nastier (barbs), while a target practice head is easy to pull out to be reused quickly. (If it had been left in the ground, while every one else legged it back to the pavilion, the police would have been able to see which direction it was fired from, plus finger prints etc..)
Of course it is not the same as a death in the family but nonetheless the poll today confirming the vast majority of those alive at her death remember precisely where they were when they heard she died confirms her death was our Kennedy assassination
There were two particular factors which made her death more poignant to the public than would have been the case had it been a simple tragic accident involving a celebrity:
- The impression that the accident seemed to have been caused, at least in part, by the paparazzi hounding her;
- The horrendous callousness of the paparazzi photographing her as she lay dying.
The paparazzi certainly added to it yes, though of course they were also linked to the fact she was the most photographed woman in the world at the time
I just watched a Diana documentary where one of the Princes describes an upsetting incident involving the paparazzi while their mother was driving them somewhere in what was clearly her private time with the boys. It really brought it home to me just how out of control the paparazzi had become around her following her divorce from Charles. Yes, she was circulation gold for the newspapers, but its now obvious that once she left the Royal family, she also lost any protection from the intrusion of the more unscrupulous paparazzi who would stop at nothing to try to get that money spinning photo.
Yes, along with the hacking scandal the tabloids were never as strong again
I found the month following genuinely bewildering. I really did not understand what was going on. I have never felt so completely out of touch in my own country.
Same here, I laughed at the North Koreans when Kim Il-Sung died, then a few years later we were doing the same.
You're not the only one. I still don't understand it.
And I've been trying for 20 years to understand it, and I still don't get it. It was very tragic but also embarrassingly hysterical and unBritish.
I hope it is a very long time away, but it will be interesting to see how the Great British public responds when Her Majesty passes away.
I wonder if there'll be a desire to give a Diana style response.
No, Diana
You also have to distinguish between media hysteria and the average person.
In the .
Of course it is not the same as
The difference is the Kennedy assassination had significance, Diana's death didn't.
Its easy to forget how she was already being marginalised.
It did whether
The monarchy has always evolved with the times.
Kennedy's death had significance because if he had remained President history might have been different.
I don't see how Diana could have had any effect - she was already being marginalised into a slebby Sloane.
How many people here have thought of Diana since her death ?
Has it? Charles 1st ended up beheaded and replaced by Cromwell because he failed to evolve.
Kennedy's death did not have that much effect policy wise, if anything it was LBJ who pushed through the key civil rights legislation and 'Great Society' programme and as for Vietnam he would probably have been dragged further in in some way.
Like Diana his death had impact really because both had incredible charisma and were effectively icons for their country.
I worked at the Diana Fund for several months a few years ago so I certainly did, as did the many charities from those working with the homeless, those with Aids, to eliminate landmines and in the Arts who benefited from her work
So you're not an impartial judge of her importance and you're misjudging minority hysteria for real significance.
The Royal family is basically a show. It has to be - the public aren't going to want to continue funding it solely for whoever is the monarch to have a weekly meeting with the PM and undertake a few boring ceremonies each year.
If it's to be sustainable it has to be a show. And the participants have to keep the show going. All of the events around the anniversary of Diana's death are just part of that show.
If William and Harry wanted to remember her death privately they could have put out a statement saying there will be no public events and they won't be taking part in any TV programmes or doing any interviews etc etc. Very simple.
But no, they want there to be a show because they all depend on there being a show. So they put on a show.
A small part of the public lap it up and provide a vociferous audience so the show looks good.
Everyone else just quietly accepts it because it doesn't do any harm and it's far too much trouble to try and change it.
"New Dress" - Depeche Mode (from the 1986 album "Black Celebration")
Sex jibe husband murders wife Bomb blast victim fights for life Girl Thirteen attacked with knife
"Princess Di is wearing a new dress"
Jet airliner shot from sky Famine horror, millions die Earthquake terror figures rise
"Princess Di is wearing a new dress"
You can't change the world But you can change the facts And when you change the facts You change points of view If you change points of view You may change a vote And when you change a vote You may change the world
In black townships fires blaze Prospects better premier says Within sight are golden days
"Princess Di is wearing a new dress"
You can't change the world But you can change the facts And when you change the facts You change points of view If you change points of view You may change a vote And when you change a vote You may change the world
The Royal family is basically a show. It has to be - the public aren't going to want to continue funding it solely for whoever is the monarch to have a weekly meeting with the PM and undertake a few boring ceremonies each year.
If it's to be sustainable it has to be a show. And the participants have to keep the show going. All of the events around the anniversary of Diana's death are just part of that show.
If William and Harry wanted to remember her death privately they could have put out a statement saying there will be no public events and they won't be taking part in any TV programmes or doing any interviews etc etc. Very simple.
But no, they want there to be a show because they all depend on there being a show. So they put on a show.
A small part of the public lap it up and provide a vociferous audience so the show looks good.
Everyone else just quietly accepts it because it doesn't do any harm and it's far too much trouble to try and change it.
It was the country which made her death and the funeral a show 20 years ago, not the then establishment, that was a moment of history in itself
I found the month following genuinely bewildering. I really did not understand what was going on. I have never felt so completely out of touch in my own country.
Same here, I laughed at the North Koreans when Kim Il-Sung died, then a few years later we were doing the same.
You're not the only one. I still don't understand it.
And I've been trying for 20 years to understand it, and I still don't get it. It was very tragic but also embarrassingly hysterical and unBritish.
I hope it is a very long time away, but it will be interesting to see how the Great British public responds when Her Majesty passes away.
I wonder if there'll be a desire to give a Diana style response.
No, Diana
You also have to distinguish between media hysteria and the average person.
In the .
Of course it is not the same as
The difference is the Kennedy assassination had significance, Diana's death didn't.
Its easy to forget how she was already being marginalised.
It did whether
The monarchy has always evolved with the times.
Kennedy's death had significance because if he had remained President history might have been different.
I don't see how Diana could have had any effect - she was already being marginalised into a slebby Sloane.
How many people here have thought of Diana since her death ?
Has it? Charles 1st ended up beheaded and replaced by Cromwell because he failed to evolve.
Kennedy's death did not have that
So you're not an impartial judge of her importance and you're misjudging minority hysteria for real significance.
No, I am not being pompous for the sake of it and as for being 'minority hysteria', the polls don't lie, 51% want William to be the next King to only 22% for Charles.
The Royal family is basically a show. It has to be - the public aren't going to want to continue funding it solely for whoever is the monarch to have a weekly meeting with the PM and undertake a few boring ceremonies each year.
If it's to be sustainable it has to be a show. And the participants have to keep the show going. All of the events around the anniversary of Diana's death are just part of that show.
If William and Harry wanted to remember her death privately they could have put out a statement saying there will be no public events and they won't be taking part in any TV programmes or doing any interviews etc etc. Very simple.
But no, they want there to be a show because they all depend on there being a show. So they put on a show.
A small part of the public lap it up and provide a vociferous audience so the show looks good.
Everyone else just quietly accepts it because it doesn't do any harm and it's far too much trouble to try and change it.
It was the country which made her death and the funeral a show 20 years ago, not the then establishment, that was a moment of history in itself
MikeL is correct.
You are mistaking the small part of the public who provide the vociferous audience for the country as a whole.
The Royal family is basically a show. It has to be - the public aren't going to want to continue funding it solely for whoever is the monarch to have a weekly meeting with the PM and undertake a few boring ceremonies each year.
If it's to be sustainable it has to be a show. And the participants have to keep the show going. All of the events around the anniversary of Diana's death are just part of that show.
If William and Harry wanted to remember her death privately they could have put out a statement saying there will be no public events and they won't be taking part in any TV programmes or doing any interviews etc etc. Very simple.
But no, they want there to be a show because they all depend on there being a show. So they put on a show.
A small part of the public lap it up and provide a vociferous audience so the show looks good.
Everyone else just quietly accepts it because it doesn't do any harm and it's far too much trouble to try and change it.
It was the country which made her death and the funeral a show 20 years ago, not the then establishment, that was a moment of history in itself
MikeL is correct.
You are mistaking the small part of the public who provide the vociferous audience for the country as a whole.
Nope you are ignoring the evidence right in front of your nose, as that poll shows without Diana the monarchy would have likely been finished within a decade of the Queen's death, with Diana and through her sons it has a future in the 21st century
Play suspended at The Oval and spectators told to go inside because someone has fired an arrow.
Saw a picture of one of the umpires holding it, looked like a crossbow bolt with a target practice head. To get the distance involved, from outside the ground to the wicket, probably from a hunting version cross bow. If it was a hunting arrow the head would have been a lot nastier (barbs), while a target practice head is easy to pull out to be reused quickly. (If it had been left in the ground, while every one else legged it back to the pavilion, the police would have been able to see which direction it was fired from, plus finger prints etc..)
Given how long they spend searching everyone's bags these days at cricket matches, I'm amazed someone managed to get it into the ground.
The only reason I know exactly where we were is because we faced a 8 hour drive to what was then home from Richmond (Yorkshire) after house hunting. Stop 1 was trying to find somewhere to buy a CD to listen to in the hire car we had...
My first task when I discovered when the funeral was was to move our next shopping trip to Calais forward a fortnight...
PS Popbitch has a very good Will Carling Princess Di story...
I found the month following genuinely bewildering. I really did not understand what was going on. I have never felt so completely out of touch in my own country.
Same here, I laughed at the North Koreans when Kim Il-Sung died, then a few years later we were doing the same.
You're not the only one. I still don't understand it.
And I've been trying for 20 years to understand it, and I still don't get it. It was very tragic but also embarrassingly hysterical and unBritish.
EU officials heard a three-hour Powerpoint presentation with 23 slides, as the UK picked apart their workings on the Brexit bill. This was based on an 11-page document – which had very small typeface
The Royal family is basically a show. It has to be - the public aren't going to want to continue funding it solely for whoever is the monarch to have a weekly meeting with the PM and undertake a few boring ceremonies each year.
If it's to be sustainable it has to be a show. And the participants have to keep the show going. All of the events around the anniversary of Diana's death are just part of that show.
If William and Harry wanted to remember her death privately they could have put out a statement saying there will be no public events and they won't be taking part in any TV programmes or doing any interviews etc etc. Very simple.
But no, they want there to be a show because they all depend on there being a show. So they put on a show.
A small part of the public lap it up and provide a vociferous audience so the show looks good.
Everyone else just quietly accepts it because it doesn't do any harm and it's far too much trouble to try and change it.
It was the country which made her death and the funeral a show 20 years ago, not the then establishment, that was a moment of history in itself
MikeL is correct.
You are mistaking the small part of the public who provide the vociferous audience for the country as a whole.
Nope you are ignoring the evidence right in front of your nose, as that poll shows without Diana the monarchy would have likely been finished within a decade of the Queen's death, with Diana and through her sons it has a future in the 21st century
So why haven't monarchies finished in countries around the world ?
Comments
Its easy to forget how she was already being marginalised.
I've avoided all the anniversary bollocks on TV. What possible use can be served by rehashing it all? And if her sons want to talk about it, let them go to a therapist. Why this need for publicly exposing your feelings? Pain can sometimes be best endured in private.
- The impression that the accident seemed to have been caused, at least in part, by the paparazzi hounding her;
- The horrendous callousness of the paparazzi photographing her as she lay dying.
Fifty years after the JFK assassination in 2013 Americans or more particularly the American media were still talking about it
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/31/britain-home-35000-islamist-fanatics-country-europe-top-official/
I was in the "Dirty Shirt" wardroom on the USS Carl Vinson somewhere off the the coast of India. Shit, as they say, got very real very quickly.
Kennedy's death had significance because if he had remained President history might have been different.
I don't see how Diana could have had any effect - she was already being marginalised into a slebby Sloane.
How many people here have thought of Diana since her death ?
She struck me as friendless. All those celebrities at her funeral. Were they really her friends? People with real friends can find some level of privacy. What about her own family, including her brother with vast private estates, unwilling to give her shelter but all too willing to put the boot into the Royals? Diana was circulation gold in part because she provided them with good copy, as a result of her own decisions. She learnt too late that if she tried to use the press for her own ends they would use her too. It's one reason why I feel uneasy about the way her sons have opened up to the press now. Some things should remain private.
Kennedy's death did not have that much effect policy wise, if anything it was LBJ who pushed through the key civil rights legislation and 'Great Society' programme and as for Vietnam he would probably have been dragged further in in some way.
Like Diana his death had impact really because both had incredible charisma and were effectively icons for their country.
I worked at the Diana Fund for several months a few years ago so I certainly did, as did the many charities from those working with the homeless, those with Aids, to eliminate landmines and in the Arts who benefited from her work
If it's to be sustainable it has to be a show. And the participants have to keep the show going. All of the events around the anniversary of Diana's death are just part of that show.
If William and Harry wanted to remember her death privately they could have put out a statement saying there will be no public events and they won't be taking part in any TV programmes or doing any interviews etc etc. Very simple.
But no, they want there to be a show because they all depend on there being a show. So they put on a show.
A small part of the public lap it up and provide a vociferous audience so the show looks good.
Everyone else just quietly accepts it because it doesn't do any harm and it's far too much trouble to try and change it.
Sex jibe husband murders wife
Bomb blast victim fights for life
Girl Thirteen attacked with knife
"Princess Di is wearing a new dress"
Jet airliner shot from sky
Famine horror, millions die
Earthquake terror figures rise
"Princess Di is wearing a new dress"
You can't change the world
But you can change the facts
And when you change the facts
You change points of view
If you change points of view
You may change a vote
And when you change a vote
You may change the world
In black townships fires blaze
Prospects better premier says
Within sight are golden days
"Princess Di is wearing a new dress"
You can't change the world
But you can change the facts
And when you change the facts
You change points of view
If you change points of view
You may change a vote
And when you change a vote
You may change the world
"Princess Di is wearing a new dress"
Just ask yourself this simple question, do you think the monarchy would have had much of a future if the future heir to the throne was the offspring of Charles and Camilla rather than Charles and Diana?
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4226442/prince-william-charles-next-king-camilla-parker-bowles/
You are mistaking the small part of the public who provide the vociferous audience for the country as a whole.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Carl_Vinson
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sci.military.naval/b3MVUxXN64s
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/diana-and-the-empire-of-phoney-emotion/20266#.Wai8bUERWaN
https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/903205926550700033
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/31/eu-divorce-bills-to-citizens-rights-six-things-we-learned-about-brexit-this-week
Hope it leaks....
Or has Diana saved those monarchies as well.