Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Discussion about Charles Spencer's book - Swan Song : Diana, my sister , Beautiful, Beloved, Hunted.

1000 replies

BasiliskStare · 18/09/2026 13:13

I know there is a thread about the theft of some pre publication editions of this book.
This thread is more by way of a book club discussion about the actual book , the text. Threads will go where they will , but my intention is this is more for me to give my opinion on the book and for others who read it or are interested in the book to join in. I have pre-ordered from Kindle (half price otherwise I may not have 😊) But is only available on September 22nd. So a holding place if you like.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
35
noonames · 24/09/2026 10:02

Also enjoying the “what about if KC3 were sitting GCSE English Language?” A much more entertaining bit of whataboutery than all the boring, repetitive mentions of AMW 👏👏

Ukisgaslit · 24/09/2026 10:02

Sure

And the same source was happy to lie in plain English when they thought they’d get away with it .

The statement was deflection .

noonames · 24/09/2026 10:03

Oh, back to AMW 😔🙄🥱

Ukisgaslit · 24/09/2026 10:04

smilesy · 24/09/2026 10:00

No they wouldn’t. The language marks would be for interpreting the meaning behind the language used and why the author has chosen those particular words. English language GCSE is anything but about the literal meaning of what is written and all about the writer’s intentions, both in the fiction and non fiction papers. You can and should, of course, acknowledge the writer’s bias. So this would apply to Spencer’s book as well as KC’s statement

Yes that’s the old B grade

The A would be for pointing out the deflection .

Ukisgaslit · 24/09/2026 10:06

And btw Smilesy - have you read any journalists or commentators on this ?

There is a consensus among them that the statement is NOT a denial. They present various reasons for this - fear of evidence being one .

Wewinnow · 24/09/2026 10:07

Ukisgaslit · 24/09/2026 10:04

Yes that’s the old B grade

The A would be for pointing out the deflection .

This

smilesy · 24/09/2026 10:09

Ukisgaslit · 24/09/2026 10:04

Yes that’s the old B grade

The A would be for pointing out the deflection .

Grades are not ABC anymore and haven’t been for some time. They are now numerical. And even before that, A was no longer the highest grade. Is it a while since you engaged with GCSE English?

quaintireneofrye · 24/09/2026 10:11

smilesy · 24/09/2026 10:09

Grades are not ABC anymore and haven’t been for some time. They are now numerical. And even before that, A was no longer the highest grade. Is it a while since you engaged with GCSE English?

Quite a long time, by the sound of it! Both with the specifications, marking requirements and grades!

simpsonthecat · 24/09/2026 10:11

Kirschcherries · 24/09/2026 09:58

I agree but Epstein is much wider than the RF. I am not saying AMW should not be prosecuted if there is sufficient evidence.

What I am saying is the RF are an easy target and a perfect distraction away for others who are far more culpable. US and UK institutions like the government, security services etc. all knew about Epstein. AMW and the RF taking the flack allows them to avoid questions.

I agree with this. Which is why they should NEVER have besmirched VG more or less calling her a liar because there was far more to this than just Andrew and her

But they were very happy to put out a factual statement denying her. Finally enough it's very hard to find that statement online now, I presume it has been whitewashed by the Palace
We know it. We saw it.
"It is emphatically denied that Andrew had anything to do with VG" was the bones of it.
The palace can emphatically deny when it suits them, none of this recollections may vary nonsense

bluegreygreen · 24/09/2026 10:12

If anyone listens to the When it hits the Fan podcast (deals with PR issues in the media for the week) this week deals with the King's statement.

It's on BBC Sounds for anyone interested.

simpsonthecat · 24/09/2026 10:13

noonames · 24/09/2026 10:03

Oh, back to AMW 😔🙄🥱

If I want to compare the sort of statements the palace are capable of putting out if they want to, and if that happens to involve AMW, I will continue to post!

Pipedreams607 · 24/09/2026 10:13

MrsFinkelstein · 24/09/2026 09:43

Diana herself made sterling attempts to trash her own reputation, lets be frank. Huge amount of retconning here.

I'm old enough to remember the affairs with multiple men, the public breaking up of Will & Julia Carling's marriage, the Met investigation into her harassing phone calls to Oliver Hoare's wife, her defamation of Tiggy Legge-Bourke, the very messy, public break up of Dodi Fayed's engagement. The endless summers on yachts, the public distress of her son's when they were used as paparazzi bait by her, the messages to journalists to attract attention on her and not Charles, the association with all Fayed. The advice to Blair to get better press by getting photographed with with sick children, ideally bald sick children.

Diana was absolutely not a Saint - she was a troubled, flawed, mercurial woman who had a huge capacity for kindness, matched with cruelty. Spencer's book could have been brilliant, but he seems to have decided to use his sister and her memory as a weapon to avenge any and all slights he has towards the RF, rather than a true character reveal.

Oh my goodness, all the old misogynistic tropes being laid out here.

No. Diana was not a saint. She was flawed, and refreshingly, unlike most members of the RF, she admitted it, She made that point herself many times. The only people calling her a saint now are people invested in pointing out she was not.

When you talk about the affairs with multiple men, I hope you mention the multiple affairs with married woman that Prince Charles had before his marriage? Otherwise that would be misogynistic would it not? Or is that behaviour excusable because of droit de seigneur?

Please remember too that our dear Queen Camilla also had a very long running affair with a married man even after children appeared on the scene and did not have the decency to remove herself from the situation.

Btw, he is long married and settled now, but back then, if you look at Will Carling’s love life at that time, it was complicated enough without Diana taking the blame for ruining it. Who was taking advantage of whom?

As for the Oliver Hoare nuisance calls, please read Patrick Jephson’s account of how a police report about it mysteriously went missing and please look at the timing of it, bang in the middle of the War of the Wales’s when Penny Junor and others were receiving negative briefings about Diana,

The Tiggy Legge Bourke incident came about I believe as a result of Martin Bashir’s fraudulent behaviour? I will have to check further on that but I know Bashir made up a lot of stuff about TLB and Charles Windsor having an affair.

And why is Diana getting the blame for Dodi’s behaviour? By the accounts of close friends like Rosa Monckton, Diana had no intention of marrying Dodi, I think she was intent on making Hasnat Khan jealous. Ironically given the circumstances, as she was very isolated at that time, she enjoyed the “protection” that she thought the Fayed family would give her, and that was her fatal error.

SeptemberRains · 24/09/2026 10:16

The RF is a basket case. Philip was a serial philanderer. Louis Mountbatten was a serial child rapist. Neither ever called to account.

Pipedreams607 · 24/09/2026 10:17

simpsonthecat · 24/09/2026 10:13

If I want to compare the sort of statements the palace are capable of putting out if they want to, and if that happens to involve AMW, I will continue to post!

Yes that is extremely pertinent to the thread as it proves that the Palace are quite willing to lie if suits their purposes.

smilesy · 24/09/2026 10:17

Ukisgaslit · 24/09/2026 10:06

And btw Smilesy - have you read any journalists or commentators on this ?

There is a consensus among them that the statement is NOT a denial. They present various reasons for this - fear of evidence being one .

We can all split hairs about the actual wording of the statement but most of us have sufficient command of the English language to understand what was meant here. A flat denial is pointless as both parties can probably not remember exactly what was said and may both have interpreted what was said differently. Words have meaning, but they also require context which we don’t have here. Of course journalists will say it wasn’t a denial, otherwise they close down the possibility of continuing a juicy story

noonames · 24/09/2026 10:18

simpsonthecat · 24/09/2026 10:13

If I want to compare the sort of statements the palace are capable of putting out if they want to, and if that happens to involve AMW, I will continue to post!

Post anything you like of course - I was just celebrating the inspired use of GCSE English Language instead of the usual AMW whataboutery.

Pipedreams607 · 24/09/2026 10:21

noonames · 24/09/2026 10:00

Well done splitting up such a long AI answer and reformatting a bit to One, Two, Three etc. Much better than just c+p.

Actually that all came out of my own bonce!

But please go ahead and deflect as usual!

Ukisgaslit · 24/09/2026 10:22

smilesy · 24/09/2026 10:09

Grades are not ABC anymore and haven’t been for some time. They are now numerical. And even before that, A was no longer the highest grade. Is it a while since you engaged with GCSE English?

Thats why I said the old grade

Ukisgaslit · 24/09/2026 10:22

smilesy · 24/09/2026 10:17

We can all split hairs about the actual wording of the statement but most of us have sufficient command of the English language to understand what was meant here. A flat denial is pointless as both parties can probably not remember exactly what was said and may both have interpreted what was said differently. Words have meaning, but they also require context which we don’t have here. Of course journalists will say it wasn’t a denial, otherwise they close down the possibility of continuing a juicy story

A flat denial was not pointless when they were lying about Virgina .

They could have issued a similar flowery statement then or better yet kept their mouth shut and stopped protecting Andrew and let the law take its course

They did not .
They were happy to lie in plain English

Pipedreams607 · 24/09/2026 10:24

smilesy · 24/09/2026 10:09

Grades are not ABC anymore and haven’t been for some time. They are now numerical. And even before that, A was no longer the highest grade. Is it a while since you engaged with GCSE English?

Derail.

Ukisgaslit · 24/09/2026 10:31

@simpsonthecat

You are right it IS hard to find the full statement - odd that isn’t it .

I did find it the other day:

"It is emphatically denied that The Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship with Virginia Roberts. Any claim to the contrary is false and without foundation”

False and without foundation.
No flowery language needed

My assumption is they fear being found in yet another public lie so have not denied what Charles Spencer reports

Hence the usual gaslighting . Yes that’s why I chose my username .
They been gaslighting the public for a very very long time .

gailforce1 · 24/09/2026 10:31

What is the title of the book by Penny Junor that people are referring to?
Did a library search and the only one I could find is Diana: Princess of Wales: a biography published in 1982

Ukisgaslit · 24/09/2026 10:33

SeptemberRains · 24/09/2026 10:16

The RF is a basket case. Philip was a serial philanderer. Louis Mountbatten was a serial child rapist. Neither ever called to account.

Sinister the lot of them in my opinion

smilesy · 24/09/2026 10:35

Pipedreams607 · 24/09/2026 10:24

Derail.

Get over yourself 😂😂

Baital · 24/09/2026 10:37

Piers Morgan has said outright that CS is lying about the tone of the conversation telling him not to come to the funeral. As it is an outright denial presumably you believe Piers Morgan?

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread