“Hugs can do great amounts of good, especially for children.” – – – Diana, Princess of Wales
(This was another tough one to get started. I finally got “OF” and “FOR” first, then “DO” and “GOOD”. After that things fell into place. A great and positive quote, from a beautiful, positive person. Such a shame that she died so young. Be well and do good, friends.) — YUR
Image courtesy of Google
Unclerave's Wordy Weblog 
Princess Diana was a former kindergarten teacher and genuinely decent and sensitive person, who allowed herself to be enveloped by a den of self-serving elitist who have images to uphold, real or not.
Does anyone agree that Harry saw the “handwriting on the wall” and sensed some parts of the family about to do the same to his half-white/half-black wife and baby and knew it was time to make a graceful exit while it was still possible ?
I want to believe that the Queen is a decent person, but she clearly knows her first priority is protecting the family image and the “Crown”.
That means anyone is expendable when it becomes “necessary”, like her son Andrew and his association with Jeffrey Epstein and the growing scandal concerning under-age girls.
I like the Queen and admire her style, but she clearly knows her role:
The Crown comes first; everything else is “Expendable”.
I pretty much agree with everything you said, lwc. But, I do take issue with the choice of words: “allowed herself”. I think that she was so young and innocent that she could not have possibly envisioned what was to come. And, in a lot of ways, she entered a kind of perfect storm. Charles is neither handsome, nor charismatic. She was both beautiful and charming. Up until Diana, celebrity “reporting” was relatively civil, but because this young, beautiful and charming woman was now part of the very staid “royal family”, a kind of fascination grew, and eventually blew up into an obsession. I think you could almost call this the birth of the “Age of the Paparazzi”!
I respect that the Queen is doing her best to maintain the illusion of the “Crown” still being relevant. It’s an anachronism that likely would have died out in the 20th Century, had it not been for the Diana fascination pumping new life into it. I think, on some level, she knows that she could very well be the last of her kind. Britain will never embrace Charles and Camilla. William and Kate, and family, will hopefully represent a new breed of “royals”. But, I have very little faith that the institution will survive for much longer.
— YUR
I agree wit you, unc.
Diana was truly an “innocent abroad”.
Most royal marriages, especially heirs to the crown, are “arranged” by the families or their brokers, and getting a good match is not science.
From what I’ve read, Queen Victoria and Prince Albert loved each other right at the beginning. It’s unfortunate for her that she spent her last 40 years as a widow and probably missed him all of those years.
Whereas, Elizabeth and Charles will probably have each other until their ends… like George the Elder and Laura Bush.
Poor Diana was an outsider and probably didn’t suspect the pit of vipers, inside the family and outside, that would compete for her attention, or against her. Harry was old enough to remember what happened to his mother and didn’t want the same for his wife, another outsider.
Harry’s made the right choice. Get away from those people and let them backbite each other.
Personally, I like Queen Elizabeth… but, I wouldn’t want to live with her… not in that family.