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

[BasiliskStare]

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.

I’m not making excuses for her as Diana herself came to regret the decision to take part but you can’t blame her for agreeing to it without examining the reasons why.

She was already having many discussions with a lawyer! But she felt that those forged documents were proof that the custody negotiations were not genuine and the intelligence services were going to undermine her case somehow.

So she felt she had to appeal to the public directly to shore up her case and keep her safe.

...and her sons were collateral damage.

In other words , she was paranoid before .
Whether he realised it or not,he echoed the smear campaign against Diana.

I think that could be rephrased as whether the smear campaign realised it or not, Diana’s immediate family themselves recognised that she had paranoid tendencies…

Maybe he'd witnessed her paranoia.
Maybe he realised she wasn't a saint.

Yes that’s a very good point about William unknowingly echoing the smear campaign against her.

He possibly could have been unconsciously influenced by his father’s camp too back then as children are?

And that period was rife with phone hacking and bugging too.

William didn't write that statement??

He was an adult at the time. More than capable to making his own statement.

Huge amount of gaslighting going on here.

Was Charles also cruel and thoughtless ?

He did such an interview first .

I’m interested to know why you are so invested in being nasty about a dead woman who was a porn in a game much larger and more powerful than herself?

Sadly, your post and others, are evidence that the strategic smear campaign against Diana worked, with posters happy to blame her for the Panorama interview while ignoring Bashir’s part in it!

Nasty.

Yes, the then Prince Charles also gave a nod to those awful books by Jonathan Dimbleby and Penny Junor in which he tried to make out he was the wronged party!

Mind-blowing really, so many years on, when we know what really transpired!

Are we supposed to ignore the evidence about Diana’s actual actions - the records of conversations she had a letters she wrote? What we know about her activities, her concerns and her personal relationships?

Diana was a woman with many extraordinary and admirable qualities, but taken as a whole, it is wrong to think of her as a saint. Her brother recognises that in his book.

How many times?

Not one person thinks she was a saint!

She didn’t either.

She had many, many character flaws and insecurities, but unlike the rest of the royals she was prepared to admit to them.

That was partly what made her so popular.

The only people calling her a saint now are her detractors!

One key aspect is always overlooked re the Bashir interview . Yes of course the deception was wrong and rightly exposed
But where is the reporting and balancing statement detailing the Windsor smears and leaks to tabloids going on for years before Diana gave her interview

The BBC are to blame but so was the smear campaign - the latter maybe more so as Diana was ready to talk anyway as a RESULT of the smear campaign - the media smears came first .

Yes, Jephson has referred to this directly in his book and interviews I recall.

He said that the smear campaign in the press made her far more susceptible to believing Bashir’s lies because she had already seen so many smears appear in the press about her from quite exalted sources ie friends of Charles.

I think Andrew Morton’s book would count as a smear also. It was called the War of the Wales for a reason…

pawn

Stating that those who push back on the Windsor narrative think Diana is a ‘saint’ is just an attempt to shut down debate .

It’s the same tactics as asking a republican poster to detail the new constitution.

The whole point about Diana is that she was not a saint and she acknowledged that . She was vulnerable .

If anything it’s the Windsors who try to paint themselves as faultless . And that’s what I am interested in opposing .

I assumed he wouldn’t have repeated the paranoia smear if he’d had a hand in writing it
But if you say so …

I think there were some things in the Morton book that were exaggerated but the divorce was very bitter and that is not unusual in those circumstances. Also the balance of power against Diana back then was immense, so if she was going to strike back, she had to land a direct punch as it were.

And let’s be fair, although Charles was a porn too in some ways in this entire charade, as far as the divorce went, he had the full power of the institution and the establishment behind him, whereas Diana was quite isolated.

Through that book, the public found out that Diana was justified in kicking back, when her fiancé and then husband had been in love with someone else, and possibly his valet (who cares?) for the entire time of his marriage. Before that point, the public didn’t really know about Camilla and had assumed it was unsubstantiated tittle tattle because we always gave the RF the benefit of the doubt and trusted their word.

It’s hard to describe how shocking the revelations were in the book about Camilla back then as we honestly believed “the script” and gave royalty the benefit of the doubt!

How times have changed … .

Ah god yes! Thanks for that! Your spelling correction was very kindly motivated I’m sure… 😁

Why do you admire Diana so much if you're a republican? She was very royal, enjoyed being royal and was a monarchist.

No. We're wondering why some people are claiming William is "permanently incandescent", when there is no evidence to support that.
Tangents about Diana's victimhood don't provide any evidence.

And let’s be fair, although Charles was a porn too in some ways in this entire charade

Pawn. As pointed out by pp. unless you are referring to whatever Charles and his valet are alleged to have got up to 🤔😆

Because being pro-Diana can be a very handy anti-Charles, anti-William and anti-monarchy stance, which is probably why it's being adopted - after all, they're alive to be attacked. Nothing said about Diana is going to affect her, after all. The people adopting it can hide behind the 'but we're just defending Diana's reputation from all those haters."

Defending Diana isn't the actual point, it's a handy smokescreen. The joke is it's all been said before, it's just a rehash of what everyone knows with some backstairs gossip from unknown sources thrown in as a bit of additional spite.

Diana is a thorn in their side . And always will be .

😆