Well, my curiousity got the better of me . . .

[Orchid]

With all due respect ladies (and gents?), your all free to take this particular thread of discussion to PM but I'd ask that it not be pursued further on the boards. Thank you.

[Fabulous Fake]

Best laugh I've had in ages.
Thanks guys. :laugh:

[daibando]

As for translation I understand English perfectly well

I think what you understand, perfectly well, is American English. Real English apparently does not translate easily into that language, hence your problem with empty vessels.

Drezzle, the empty vessels I always prefer are those where I have removed the beer.

[Trudie]

Thanks daibando but My aunt is British born in I believe Manchester and so is my best friend who was born in Malvern. I get the translation.

[Cassidy]

You've been asked once already people, don't make us ask again please.

[drezzle]

It was indeed banned as was Kitty Kelley's The Royals. That meant that no bookseller could stock the book.
Not sure if the book is still 'blacklisted' here though.

Knowing your stance Mike, you will absolutely hate the book.
Don't say I didn't warn you. :laugh:

I amazes me a book (any book) could be banned in an entire country.  Who decided that in this case?

Another book I am very curious about is "Diana and the Paparazzi" by Mark Saunders and Glenn Harvey.  I'm sure the photos are intriguing, but after reading how they treated her, I'm not giving them a (insert F-bomb here) penny.

PS:  Thanks for the warning.    :)    I just scanned Penny Junor's "The Firm."  IMHO, Ms. Junor should change her first name to "Petty."  Still, I am trying to see opposing sides.  Thanks again.

Back on topic then -- which I think is about authors who were pro or con Diana, Charles or Camilla.  After a few years, Charles agreed to drop all charges against Wendy Berry, author of "The Housekeeper's Diary" and her book was unbanned in the UK.  Who knows, he might have even paid some of her legal fees after a few years -- or I remember reading something about him helping her but can't find it now. 

The reason Berry gave for writing the book was that she felt Prince Charles Dimbleby interview opened the way for a free for all. 

While it's true that both Charles and Diana were criticized in this book, and Berry had some good things to say about Diana, it was Diana's image that suffered far more than Charles in the writing of this book, so I'm not surprised that Charles would quite readily withdraw all his objections against it, while initially giving it lots of publicity by his "strenuous" objections to it.  It's been a long time since I read it, but what I remember most was how Charles was portrayed as kind but distant to staff and Diana was described as an hysterical bully. 

[sandy]

The story though that stuck in my mind was Diana's very much wanting  a tennis court and Charles' refusal to build one at Highgrove. Really stood out because obviously he didn't want Diana around. She did her tennis playing in London and it seems to me he didn't want her hanging around, by then this was Camilla's territory (she even changed the decor). I don't think Berry was particularly kind to Charles either. Charles didn't come across as "kind" in the book, at least that is my impression.

[drezzle]

There was that about the tennis court and then I don't think Diana wanted Charles to buy Highgrove in the first place since it was too close to Camilla and I think Charles bought it about the same time he became engaged to Diana.  Diana had another country home in mind far from where Camilla lived, but that idea didn't get any support from Charles.

Another part that made an impression on me is it seemed Diana was always talking to the retreating back of Charles.   One time Berry said how she was watching them walk outside when it was icy, and Diana fell flat, but Charles just kept on walking.  Then of course, who knows what Diana might have been saying to him. 

[Trudie]

Drezzle Highgrove was bought in 1980 before Charlie started seeing Diana. Diana had no say whatsoever in the purchase of the house she only oversaw the decorating after the Wedding. I remember reading that while Charlie was courting her and before the engagement he had asked Diana about decorating which she thought improper as they were dating and not engaged. But on to the tennis courts Diana did ask and was told no and it was then that she told Charlie that perhaps she should rethink her position as she worked hard from what I remember in the book that discussion took place on the stairs. Also if I remember Wendy Berry thought Charlie was being selfish. But she did make Diana out to be a bit of a Shrew and Fergie did not fare well in the book either.

[Fabulous Fake]

What's with all the Charlies?

His name is Charles and not even the gutter press in this country call him anything other than his name.
Also he is married to Camilla.

[Orchid]

I don't think it really matters whether he's referred to as Charlie or Charles or Camilla as Cams - so long as people understand who's being dicussed and it's not rude or defamatory it's not really a problem. Each to their own ;)

[drezzle]

Drezzle Highgrove was bought in 1980 before Charlie started seeing Diana. Diana had no say whatsoever in the purchase of the house she only oversaw the decorating after the Wedding.

Charles bought Highgrove in July 1980, the same month he started to woo Diana, and soon after he was given the boot by Amanda Knatchbull and Anna Wallace. 

Here's a photo of Amanda Knatchbull:  http://www.thepeerage.com/104247_001.jpg
She has that same mischievous twinkle that Diana did. 

It's good to read the authorized biographies of both Charles and Diana to get a first hand account.  Something I found enlightening in Morton's book was when Charles's skiing companions, Major Hugh Lindsay was killed, and Patti Palmer-Tomkinson had serious leg injuries following an avalanche, Charles wanted to continue his skiing vacation, and it was left to Diana to talk Charles out of his "inclination to return to the slopes the following day".............and to convince him that "it was their responsibility to return to Britain with Hugh's body.  It was, she argued, the least they could do for his wife Sarah", who was expecting their first child.  Sometimes I wonder if Charles III won't go down in history as Charlie the Idiot. 

[sandy]

Sarah Bradford wrote that about the time Charles purchased Highgrove Princess Michael was inerested in property nearby. Charles got upset and protested strongly against her purchase. It was speculated that he didn't want Princess Michael nosing into his motives for buying it and noticing that his mistress was close to Highgrove.

[Hale]

I was under the impression that when Charles purchased Highgrove it was Camilla who helped him decorate. 

Drezzle, that link to a pic of Amanda Knatchbull, she looks like a young Bette Davis.

[drezzle]

Hale, I think if Mountbatten hadn't been killed, Amanda Knatchbull would have married Charles.  I was going to say she would have been the next queen, but I don't think Charles is suited to marriage for most normal women -- it would have probably ended similarly.

[Hale]

Charles should have married Lady Jane Wellesley.  The problem was they were both young when they met.  But I do believe history would have been different if they had married.

[Trudie]

What's with all the Charlies?

His name is Charles and not even the gutter press in this country call him anything other than his name.
Also he is married to Camilla.

Lets just say I like Charlie and British shopkeepers at the time of Camillagate enjoyed ringing up a box of Charlies :lmao3: :lmao3:

[drezzle]

Charles should have married Lady Jane Wellesley.  The problem was they were both young when they met.  But I do believe history would have been different if they had married.

What makes you think she would have been different?  She never married last I heard.  She recently wrote a book about her family:
Lady Jane springs a surprise

 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1081059/Lady-Jane-springs-surprise.html

There are the usual thanks to fellow writers, diplomatic sources and old soldiers. But while even the Queen is personally thanked, there is no mention of her son, the Prince of Wales, who famously dated the Duke's daughter before marrying Lady Diana Spencer.

Yet what makes the omission all the more surprising is that among the list of names she thanks are four of the men who have shared the still-unmarried Lady Jane's life in the years since her romance with Charles ended.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/books/article-1087417/The-legacy-Iron-Duke-WELLINGTON-Jane-Wellesley.html

Another reference with a picture where she looks like Diana -- maybe that was the look for British aristocratic girls back then?

[Mike]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/books/article-1087417/The-legacy-Iron-Duke-WELLINGTON-Jane-Wellesley.html

Another reference with a picture where she looks like Diana -- maybe that was the look for British aristocratic girls back then?

Photo caption in the article:  "Lady Jane Wellesley with her dog Napoleon"    :haha:

Completely off topic, but . . . Did the famous Duke of Wellington really have a sister named Barbara as was mentioned in the fictional Hornblower series?

[Hale]

The reason I think that Charles should have married Lady Jane, is because I always felt even as a child Charles came across as a little old man.  Even in his teens and twenties he was to old for his age.  Lady Jane was the once who reminded him how young he was.  In various books written after their relationship it was said how they used to clown around with one and how much they had in common.  I always got the impression that LJW made Charles feel free.

But I guess they were both just to young at the time, and Charles had to do the various things like train with each branch of the forces etc.  Pity.

[Mike]

Well, my curiosity got the better of me again.  I bought "Diana and the Paparazzi" by Mark Saunders and Glenn Harvey and I wish I hadn't.  For those who have not seen it, the photos of Diana clearly angry and upset are disturbing, but this was her reality.  Once she dispensed with her police protection she was a sitting duck for the world's paparazzi who knew no boundaries; anything goes, literally anything for the money shot.

The attitudes the authors show in describing their stalking Diana, the active pursuit and the lying in wait are even more disturbing.  Still, in trying to better understand her and the life she lead, this book answers some questions as to why she sometimes acted the way she did.  I can't begin to imagine a life like that.

I never felt I would think this, much less say it, but perhaps being killed wasn't the worst thing that could have happened to her.  

[drezzle]

Mike, I've seen some of those stalking pictures and they are disturbing.  Diana was hunted.

Prince Edward said when Diana was killed that he was surprised it had not happened sooner -- without her PPO, she was a sitting duck.  But then without her HRH, she wasn't entitled to royal protection.  I'll bet 20 to 1 that the notoriously frugal RF encouraged her to retain her police protection, but at her own expense.  Then to save face, Diana being equally frugal, said she didn't want PPOs hanging around anyway. 

[Mike]

But then without her HRH, she wasn't entitled to royal protection. 

I thought she was entitled to it simply because she was Prince William's mother.  Maybe I got that wrong.

Thanks, drezzle.

[sandy]

The reason I think that Charles should have married Lady Jane, is because I always felt even as a child Charles came across as a little old man.  Even in his teens and twenties he was to old for his age.  Lady Jane was the once who reminded him how young he was.  In various books written after their relationship it was said how they used to clown around with one and how much they had in common.  I always got the impression that LJW made Charles feel free.

But I guess they were both just to young at the time, and Charles had to do the various things like train with each branch of the forces etc.  Pity.

I think Lady Jane was smart not to want to marry him. I read someplace she was the one who didn't want to be his wife and Princess of Wales. I think she is better off. WHo needs this sort of thing with CHarles and his mistresses. IN most cases, the women pulled the plug on the relationship with Charles. While they were fond of him they probably realized all the difficulties they would have with him as their husband. He chose a young naive girl of 19 who had stars in her eyes, courted her quickly so she wouldn't start to think there was something really wrong with the relationship and with him.

I think Charles needed a woman who would get everything spelled out pre engagement as to what was expected of her. The woman would want the $$$ and influence rather than love. Dutifully produce children and be around for ceremonies and turn a blind eye to his other activities.

[Trudie]

I remember that when asked about marriage to Charlie, Lady Jane famously said I've already got a title I do not need another. I think that like Diana Lady Jane knew her title and family were superior to the RF. Unlike Diana, Lady Jane was a bit older and not naive to the fact that Charlie only wanted the equivalent of a brood mare. I had also read that at the time He was described as a very charming male chauvinist.