Wednesday, May 02, 2007

you're not the queen of me

I watched "The Queen" today. I've never been a fan of royalty or of the Kennedy's, which some people consider American royalty. (I tend to see them more as a bunch of drunken bums involved in politics and little else.) But I did like Diana.
The movie was ok, but I wish that it had discussed Diana's life with the Royal Family more before her death. Beginning with her death left me with a lot of questions, mainly what did the Queen have against her? Kind of a *BIG* question if you ask me. Helen Mirren was uncanny in her portrayal of the no nonsense Queen. Charles was portrayed as a rather weak person, a bit of a mommy's boy ninny actually, but I was surprised at the depth of his emotions for Diana when he found out about her death. Or at least as they were portrayed in the movie.
In thinking back over all of that, I always saw Charles as cold and as detached as his mother. I felt Diana was a naive, innocent who was used to further the royal lineage. I think she had stars in her eyes and quickly came down to earth. But again, I never understood why the Royal Family hated her so much. I tend to wonder if it wasn't because she was easily loved and accepted by the public while they were not?

I *hate* the 'holier than thou' message sent by royalty. And it was strange that people were not allowed to show their back to the Queen. They had to back out of the room, which I found strange. I'm sure there's a reason for this, but I don't know what it is. I don't think I could courtesy or bow to another human being, though, especially not one as snobby as the Queen. I guess that's what makes her royalty...LOL.
One thing I really liked about the film was the mixing of "real" news footage with the faux news footage. Although it was a little weird seeing Diana being interviewed after all this time.
So then I put in an emergency email to Carol over at Shrink Wrapped Scream. Why? Because she lived in London. She promised to blog about this subject, and I'm gonna hold her feet to the fire by mentioning that here. LOL!
I was kind of hesitant to email her cuz it probably sends the message that I think all Londoners are royal fanatics, but that's not so. I just figured that living in the midst of it all would have given her a perspective "outsiders" wouldn't have.


Mushy said...

Good idea...have wondered that myself...can't wait.

Shrink wrapped scream said...

Well, bonny lass, I'm blogging as we speak - thanks for reminding me of another lifetime! Great post, and OF COURSE you're credited, I'd forgotton all about that old photo, and had to dig deep in to the wee small hours to find it! xx

*Goddess* said...

I'm not worried about getting credit for the post, I'm just interested in seeing what this was all about. Too damn bad I didn't ask you before I watched the movie...LOL. I really thought it dealt with more than just Di's death.

Anonymous said...

The movie picks up at her death and shows you the fallout and the progression the Queen let into the family firm. That's the real focus of the movie's storyline, not the characters themselves. Every person from the UK has a love/hate relationship with the royals whether they like it or not. That family is a huge part of their daily, historic and cultural existence, therefore there is a lot of complex feelings towards them in every UK person. That only stand to reason.

As for the back thing, I'm sure it's steeped in tradition somehow, like if you didn't back out, you could be backstabbed and killed or something like that. I'm fuzzy on the details, of course, but I'm sure it's something equally bizarre.

And it's only natural for Charles to have mixed emotions whether he likes it or not over Diana's death. She was the mother of his two sons, a longtime media advisary and a rockblock on his road to true love with Camilla. I could see him resenting her for being foisted upon him by his family. He didn't ask for his life any more than she asked to be treated like a commoner by her own chosen in-laws who selected her, not the other way around. They sought her out because of her pedigree. Once she accepted and married him, she essentially was trapped till they divorced. I'm spending almost two decades married to her would have been enough to make Charles both love and loathe her in the same breath for all she gave him and his family.


*Goddess* said...

Ooooo, ok, so they picked Diana. I was wondering because in the movie, at one point, Prince Phillip says, "You liked her enough to encourage the union," and that's why I wasn't sure if it was Charles who picked her to produce heirs or what was going on. How bizarre.

In your opinion, why did they end up hating her then, Stacey?

Anonymous said...

Actually, the late Queen Mum hand picked Diana based on her pedigree and social contact (IE she went to the right schools, knew the right people, and her father was well known to the family personally).

Well, there are several reasons they wouldn't like her:

1) mental instability which, in reality, was only immaturity manifesting itself in disillusionment once she got married and found out just how little freedoms she would have and that she was viewed an employee who was hired to produce cattle more than a woman worthy of being a suitable wife for Charles. She wanted and longed for that kind of love but ended up stuck in a loveless marriage arranged for her. Perhaps if her life had gone differently, and she chose her husband, she would still be alive?

2) being married into that life changed her, and not all for the better. she became bitter and manipulative, and she no longer trusted anyone or herself. she was on shaky ground throughout her life as a person. she was deemed as thick as a plank and weak, but I think she was underestimated at all corners. She was fighting back the whole time she was there, resisting everyone who told her how to live vs how she wanted to live which.

3) she ended up being better at the family business than they were. she brought far more glam, fame and glare by the media than anyone from the royals prefered or liked. it made them uneasy and resentful at times because she did overshadow them, and most of the time it was at her own doing. you might recall people stating she courted the press. this is true in many cases. I've seen sets of photos where she would be a boring polo match, and while Charles was playing, she sat on the hood of her car and hiked her skirt up for the paps to shoot. it was her way of relieving the stifling boredom of being a royal wife. and the more they told her not to do it, the more willful she became. she was somewhat stunted in her emotional growth to start with when she got married, so imgaine how screwed up she became inside once she found out what her life was really going to be like privately. she vented the only way she could at the time.

4) as the mother to the heir, she wasn't someone they could just push aside easily. when she divorced Charles, she demanded and was granted the continued use of the title Princess of Wales. that is unprecidented. she also demanded certain rights as a mother to rear her children certain ways (think new age where no one was allowed to yell or raise a hand to her boys ever) upfront and that frustrated the royals who have all been reared by stern nannies. Diana was also very hands on with the boys, very visible with them in public and also made a huge deal of dragging Charles thru the mud on that front more than on one occasion. Basically she took every opportunity she could to make him look and feel like shit because he never loved her. she took most of her vitrol out on him publicly. (IE the public interview where she told the world he cheated on her with Camilla for years before, during and after their marriage ended).

And those are but a few things I can think of off the top of my head. Remember, she was to be pitied as much as she was to be reviled for her stunted emotional self and manipulations. She was a woman child at best. Petulant and glamorous. Very much like Anna Nicole, without the drugs and personal lawyer holding her hair back as she puked all over expensive hotel furniture.


Shrink wrapped scream said...

Blimey! Stacey's written a whole post within a post here! (Should've gone to her in the first place, hon.) I enjoyed that, Stacey, it was bang on.

Just popped back to say I screwed up on that link (sorry), but think I've corrected it now, fingers x'd.

Seems you've started something here.. Oh, and I've answered that other question, too (I think). Catch you later. x

*Goddess* said...

Ok, SWS, I'll zip back over and read the post again.

Thanks for the insights, Stacey. I always had the feeling that she was trapped, and fighting tooth and nail anyway she knew how to retain some dignity and personality. I can't imagine that having the entire world know your husband had a mistress on the side was easy. Especially since Di was so young and beautiful, and Camilla was...not;) But I guess we can't help who we fall (and don't fall) in love with.

Thanks again, ladies!

Anonymous said...

One further note: it has been said by men who have dined at the same dinner party as both camilla and di on seperate occasions naturally that based on the conversation styles alone, they would fuck camilla ten times out of ten over di who had zero appeal for them.


*Goddess* said...

You're KIDDING, right?! Camilla seems so boring, but then again maybe Di was all caught up in feeling miserable and inhibited and hated. Who knows? But DANG.

Anonymous said...

Camilla has been described as a verbal fuck, someone who is as earthy as she is sensual. Why else would Charles be hooked on her for some many years without cheating on her with Diana?