Charles and Queen predicted to stay silent on 25th Diana anniversary

[antelopevalley]

I know Diana was Charles ex, but she was the mother of his two sons. Surely they could just issue a joint bland statement acknowledging her untimely death and the impact on William and Harry?
To pretend it is not even happening would be pretty crass.

"Incredibly, however, the royal family has no plans to formally commemorate the 25th anniversary of the death of Princess Diana on Wednesday next week—illustrating, some would say, just how threatened they still are by her, even in death.
While her sons are widely expected to issue, at a minimum, online tributes, Prince Charles, who conducted an affair with his second wife, Camilla Parker Bowles, both before and throughout much of his marriage to Diana, which Diana publicly blamed for the collapse of their relationship, is likely to maintain radio silence."

www.thedailybeast.com/queen-elizabeth-and-prince-charles-have-no-plans-to-mark-25th-anniversary-of-princess-dianas-death

Not necessary for anyone other than her sons to make a public comment and only if they want to. I don’t feel we are owed a statement and I would expect, like most families, they will be acknowledging and reflecting privately in whatever way they choose. I certainly wouldn’t be handwringing if there is radio silence, that’s just odd.

Why should the queen or charles issue a statement?

There are PR people who can do this well.

What on earth is the point?

Reminds me how in the news at the time, the Royal Family attended church as usual with William and Harry, and the sermon did not refer to Diana's death. When other churches up and down the country talked about her death in the sermon.
The Senior RF members want her forgotten.

i really dont think Charles needs to mention her death nor the Queen.

I would find it very odd indeed if they made a statement now about something that happened 25 years ago.

Frankly I didn't get all the hysteria at the time of her death and found it rather over the top. People crying for someone they didn't even know and had never met. Their ideas of what she was like were totally based on what they had seen in the media.
What happened to Diana was sad and awful for her sons but I really fail to see why her ex-husband and ex-MIL should be making any comment on it 25 years on.

@antelopevalley if my mum had died that morning I don't think I would have wanted her to be part of the sermon at the Church I was attending. She was the boys mum, to other congregations she was Princess Diana

even prince harry has said how he couldnt understand how people were cryign so much over his mum, who they had never met!

The Senior RF members want her forgotten.

If my exH had died 25 years ago, I don't think my parents would ever spare him a thought. And I have never understood the obsession with someone who, although she did some things for charity, wasn't particularly good, or talented or special. Just like the rest of us.

Let the poor woman Rest In Peace.

I dont really understand death anniversaries, of course remember the person if you were close to them but it doesn't need to be an occasion I don't think.

They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. In their shoes, I would have asked William
what he wanted and abided by his wishes.

I think that saying nothing is better tbh. Any public statement would attract the trolls and conspiracy theorists insisting that they murdered her.

Everyone has moved on. It was 25 years ago. They can mark it privately if they like. Not sure it needs a public acknowledgment.

I agree, @Toddlerteaplease - let her rest, and let it rest.

Then he can acknowledge it. It doesn't mean the palace has to.

Fucks sake they had lost their mother they needed to grieve privately not a public bloodletting they don't owe you public tears and howling grief its the royal family not towie

@Seemslikeaniceday I read an article by someone who's son died suddenly on the same day and she said similar. And how difficult it was with her friends and family in bits over Diana, and her grief almost didn't matter.

@toomuchlaundry I disagree. The vicar should have made some small acknowledgement to the sons losing their mother.

@feellikeanalien I certainly did not feel hysterical at the time or cry. But it was noticeable that amongst those people I knew who were really upset were lots of divorced women (divorce then still clearly favoured the man and there was still stigma), and people who had lost a parent and never really grieved. I remember one man crying who said that he did not know why he was crying as he had not cried when his own mother died the year before. There was still the remnants of the stiff upper lip around and her death almost gave some people permission to cry in a way they had not been able to before.

There was though a palpable public feeling of shock. Even amongst critics of Diana, there was shock.

Harry and William should never have had to walk behind their mother's coffin. The Royal Family decided that and it was wrong and a lot of public disquiet about it before the funeral.

But although there had been a lot of public unhappiness with the Royal Family, a lot of that dissipated as soon as the Queen appeared to look at the flowers. The Queen was viewed as uncaring as she wanted to stick rigidly to protocol and only public opinion changed that. So under the protocol, there was to be no lowering of the flag at the palace, a private funeral without any procession, and nothing from the Royal Family except a brief statement. She was not Royal so under protocol her death was to be treated no differently to any famous person's death who was not a Royal.

Jesus what a load of old shite. Why should they issue a public statement? Who cares? It matters to her kids and they will mark it.

Well, duh, the churches up and down the country didn’t have the personal connection to her death that the attendees at church at Balmoral had. Many members of the congregation at Craithie Kirk, including her sons, would doubtless have found any mention of her extremely difficult. It was literally just hours after they had heard the news of her death.

Diana still has a lengthy entry on the Royal family website, but the way.

www.royal.uk/diana-princess-wales

The Queen Mother and Margaret were not tragic deaths, and were long expected. Their children were all adults with their own families.

Today happens to be the 50th anniversary of the tragic death of Prince William of Gloucester at age 30 in a plane crash. He was fourth in line to the throne when born, but following the birth of the Queen’s children had dropped to ninth at the time of his death.

The Royal family have never publicly commemorated his early death, despite the fact it must also have been a tragic loss - Prince Charles was very close to him, and it has been suggested that Prince William was named in tribute to him.

YABU.

Bluntly, it's a private family anniversary and how they choose to acknowledge it is no concern of the general public.

Thanks for that link, I had not read it before. Someone needs to proofread before posting though entries to their website though.

I think if Charles and Camilla said anything they'd get ripped to bits. They are in a no win situation.

I have never even heard of him.
Googling I see he was a paternal cousin of the Queen, so was always destined to be a minor Royal.