Diana, 20 years on.

First topic message reminder :

Its the 20th anniversary of Princess Diana's death today.
The papers, TV, and internet have been running stories about her for the last coupleof weeks, culminating in todays vigils around the country to remember the 'Peoples princess'.

Do you approve of all the publicity this woman still generates....or are you sick and tired of hearing about her and believe she should be forgotten about, or at least left alone to rest in peace?

I don't really like that song either. It's a bit OTT and just gave Elton John even more attention.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Jules wrote:

Let me explain how.

KK and her 4 sisters got rich & famous via a reality show about their home lives. The genius business brain of their mum made them all millionaires  from an early age (teenage onwards).  That is how it all started.

They all have lucrative contracts with top firms too, and regular deals with glossy magazines.  Some have their own personal cosmetic and designer companies. Additionally they all marry or date SERIOUSLY wealthy sports stars and musicians.  


Britons  are equally obsessed with reality shows and we throw huge mountains of cash at talentless reality stars.  TOWIE, Geordie Shore,  Jungle celebs,  Goggle box, CBBC etc etc etc. These Z-listers made millions and they are all  'famous for being famous.'


So, Tommy ... now you know!  No mystery really.  

I'm not obsessed with reality shows. I can't understand what people see in them. I must admit that a lot of Brits do seem to like them though.

Or so we are told... although the overwhelming vast majority of people I know, can't stand them!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I'm not obsessed with reality shows. I can't understand what people see in them. I must admit that a lot of Brits do seem to like them though.

Or so we are told... although the overwhelming vast majority of people I know, can't stand them!

I know people who like them, mostly women.

Neither can I, its cheap Tele imo.

I think Your Song would've been better, or one written for her.

I think like you Rags, Elton just wanted his day in the limelight. She was more friendlier with George Micheal than him.

magica wrote:

Syl wrote:Anyway, for the ones who saw through all the lies about her throughout her marriage, after her marriage, and then after her death, here's a lovely tribute, sung by Elton John, to a lovely lady.

Not all lies. I hate this song, so bloody condescending.

I know you love her Syl, but we don't all idolize like you, although, as I said, I liked her.  She was good but I'm sick to death of the papers banging on about her, especially since before she died, the Sun was slagging her off rotten.

I don't idolise anyone Mags....I liked her, and as a woman I sympathised and could see how badly she was treated.
You don't have to read about her if you don't want to...and surely no one with any taste reads the Sun anyway.

Syl wrote:

magica wrote:

Not all lies. I hate this song, so bloody condescending.

I know you love her Syl, but we don't all idolize like you, although, as I said, I liked her.  She was good but I'm sick to death of the papers banging on about her, especially since before she died, the Sun was slagging her off rotten.

I don't idolise anyone Mags....I liked her, and as a woman I sympathised and could see how badly she was treated.
You don't have to read about her if you don't want to...and surely no one with any taste reads the Sun anyway.

I don't read the Sun ner, I think all papers lie or twist the truth

You have pm, if you check

Thank you SYL. I read the Sun, and so does my Wife and Daughter, I told them someone said they have no taste, -----------They said a rude word.

nicko wrote:Thank you SYL. I read the Sun, and so does my Wife and Daughter,  I told them someone said they have no taste, -----------They said a rude word.  

Was it "boobs"?

nicko wrote:Thank you SYL. I read the Sun, and so does my Wife and Daughter,  I told them someone said they have no taste, -----------They said a rude word.  

Well they do have some taste Nicko....they could have been reading the Mail.

nicko wrote:Thank you SYL. I read the Sun, and so does my Wife and Daughter,  I told them someone said they have no taste, -----------They said a rude word.  

Bet it was damn and blast.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Jules wrote:

Let me explain how.

KK and her 4 sisters got rich & famous via a reality show about their home lives. The genius business brain of their mum made them all millionaires  from an early age (teenage onwards).  That is how it all started.

They all have lucrative contracts with top firms too, and regular deals with glossy magazines.  Some have their own personal cosmetic and designer companies. Additionally they all marry or date SERIOUSLY wealthy sports stars and musicians.  


Britons  are equally obsessed with reality shows and we throw huge mountains of cash at talentless reality stars.  TOWIE, Geordie Shore,  Jungle celebs,  Goggle box, CBBC etc etc etc. These Z-listers made millions and they are all  'famous for being famous.'


So, Tommy ... now you know!  No mystery really.  

I'm not obsessed with reality shows. I can't understand what people see in them. I must admit that a lot of Brits do seem to like them though.

I cannot believe I generalised like that.   I tell people off for generalising then I go and do the same thing. It was an error  --- I omitted the word 'SOME'.


Should have written:  SOME Britons are equally obsessed.
Personally I NEVER watch big brother or any of these reality shows, either. Stopped watching them many years ago.


I also mistakenly wrote 'CBBC' for 'CBB'  ..... deffo Freudian!    

Diana's informal, relaxed style brought a breath of fresh air to the stuffy RF.  She was the first royal to forego gloves - and she was not afraid to shake anyone's hand (skin to skin) no matter what disease they suffered from.

The Royals wearing gloves thing? That was more from an era where gloves were part of your outfit, like the hat.

Yes so they didn't dirty their hands shaking with the peasants, as we were back in the day. But all the royals apart from the queen never did or have worn gloves tbh.

magica wrote:Yes so they didn't dirty their hands shaking with the peasants, as we were back in the day. But all the royals apart from the queen never did or have worn gloves tbh.

The Royal women ALL wore gloves from way back. Queen mum. Margaret. Anne. Just like they all wear hats. It completes the ensemble. And there are dozens of photos of the Queen not wearing gloves and shaking hands with the public. And when did you last see Prince Philip wearing gloves. He never has and never does, yet he shakes hands with everyone. So the 'they won't shake hands with the peasants' jibe just isn't true.

When the young royals visited her grave they cut such sad figures in the pouring rain. My God, it's sad enough visiting graves in good weather.

HoratioTarr wrote:

magica wrote:Yes so they didn't dirty their hands shaking with the peasants, as we were back in the day. But all the royals apart from the queen never did or have worn gloves tbh.

The Royal women ALL wore gloves from way back.  Queen mum.  Margaret.  Anne.  Just like they all wear hats.   It completes the ensemble.    And there are dozens of photos of the Queen not wearing gloves and shaking hands with the public.   And when did you last see Prince Philip wearing gloves.   He never has and never does, yet he shakes hands with everyone.   So the 'they won't shake hands with the peasants' jibe just isn't true.  

I said as we were back in the day we were all known as peasants. 100, 200 years ago and so on. The royalty then didn't shake hands, if they did they wore gloves. That's what I'm saying.

I don't think you will find many photos even today where the queen is not wearing gloves when shaking hands with the general public.
Her lady in waiting carries 3 or 4 spare pairs in her bag when the queen is meeting and greeting, to replace the ones that have gotten soiled shaking the peasants hands.  

Syl wrote:I don't think you will find many photos even today where the queen is not wearing gloves when shaking hands with the general public.
Her lady in waiting carries 3 or 4 spare pairs in her bag when the queen is meeting and greeting, to replace the ones that have gotten soiled shaking the peasants hands.  

There's quite a few if you Google it.

To be honest, if I were shaking and touching hands of the dozens of the public, I'd wear gloves too.   I can catch about 8 colds a year due to what I do for a living and that's just with private clients.   Sounds like common sense to me.  

Here's a piece from Maj's glove maker.

When you think of Queen Elizabeth II, you probably have a very distinct outfit in your mind: colored suit, hat, handbag, and of course a pair of gloves that help her make the most regal of waves.

Cornelia James glove makers have been in charge of the royal gloves since the founder made gloves for Queen Elizabeth II’s honeymoon in 1947. Genevieve James, creative director and daughter of the founder, says the Queen wears gloves for a few reasons. Not only would an outfit with a hat and handbag look utterly unfinished without gloves, but they protect her hands from dirt and damage when shaking hands all day. But that doesn’t mean she comes home with a pair of grimy gloves. “I imagine she always has two or three pairs in her handbag to spare,” says James. By the way, you’ll never guess the real reason Queen Elizabeth carries a purse or why she wears bright outfits all the time.

The Queen will also get the gloves washed and repaired rather than tossing each £110 ($140) pair out as soon as they see any damage. “I think the royal family wants to be seen as being economical, not wasting money on things like that,” says James. “She’ll wear her gloves for 40 years and will pull some out from a long time ago.” Instead of buying a new pair every week, the Queen usually makes a big order of, say, three dozen pairs, then won’t go back the rest of the year.

Queen Elizabeth II typically wears the gloves from the Francesca or (fittingly) Regina collection, with the length custom-made. Her gloves stretch five inches from the base of the thumb up the arm. “When you’re the queen and you’re shaking hands, you don’t really want to show your arms,” says James. “The glove goes a bit under her [sleeve], so you don’t actually see any arm.” Each pair takes about 45 minutes to an hour to make, she says.

For years, the Queen’s classic gloves have been made of brushed cotton. Recently, though, she requested something a bit lighter, so James found Swiss cotton jersey from a factory in Switzerland. “I ordered 70 meters, which is a lot of gloves, but it’s the queen,” James says.

Queen Elizabeth II isn’t James’ only royal client. Princess Anne comes to Cornelia James, and James says her mom was responsible for getting Princess Diana into gloves. “Princess Diana never wore gloves for a long time, and my mother noticed she bit her nails,” says James. “She said she should wear gloves. The next day we got a call from the palace … and Diana asked for gloves.” Check out more fashion tips to steal from Princess Diana.

Cornelia James Ltd. has also made gloves for Kate Middleton. The Duchess of Cambridge is a fan of merino wool gloves with a bow from the Imogen collection—the same ones Taylor Swift wore in her “Blank Space” music video. Some of James’ other famous clients include Rihanna, Madonna, and the Harry Potter, Downton Abbey, and Mama Mia casts.

Oh I don't blame her, just pointing out earlier that one of the ways Diana was different to stuffy Royal protocol is that she seldom wore gloves, yet touched lepers, aids sufferers, and homeless people alike with bare hands....which made her very endearing to the public.

Syl wrote:Oh I don't blame her, just pointing out earlier that one of the ways Diana was different to stuffy Royal protocol is that she seldom wore gloves, yet touched lepers, aids sufferers, and homeless people alike with bare hands....which made her very endearing to the public.

She was good at that. I think she genuinely had compassion, but I also believe she was highly manipulative.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Syl wrote:Oh I don't blame her, just pointing out earlier that one of the ways Diana was different to stuffy Royal protocol is that she seldom wore gloves, yet touched lepers, aids sufferers, and homeless people alike with bare hands....which made her very endearing to the public.

She was good at that.   I think she genuinely had compassion, but I also believe she was highly manipulative.  

I think she had to be in order to survive inside that horribly uncaring family.

I also think she paved the way for others who joined after she did.
.
For one her sons have some of her spirit and thankfully are not as wet as Charles obviously was.
Two....they learned from their mistakes and seem not to rule Kate (and Harrys wife when he marries) with the same strictness that Diana was confined to.