194 thoughts on “William, Kate & Harry to attend Diana grave re-dedication”

1. I love how they use ‘The Princess’s birthday,’ as if she was at the time of her death. That annoys me.

   I think the whole thing is a ridiculous PR exercise for them and for Earl Spencer who is opening the gardens and such after renovations, using his sister as bait to get $$$. It wouldn’t be difficult to keep secret; they made this public for a reason.

   I doubt they’ll pay for the Archbishop but I assume he has much better things to do. What is a re-dedication service, anyway? I’ve never heard of one.

   1. I’ve only heard of re-dedications of graves for somewhat forgotten and neglected graves, like Diana’s supposedly was, but usually it’s many, many years later, and the re-dedications I know of were for entire cemeteries or sections of cemeteries, like WWI or Civil War veterans’ graves or something like that. I think sometimes they also might include a new headstone or type of physical marker.

      1. Why would Diana’s grave be neglected? Would W+H not have visited regularly and if neglected, done something about it? Can’t imagine their uncle would have stopped them.

         As for making private events public, can we look forward to all private holidays, visits to Middleton Manor and to friends made public too? This reeks of trying to squeeze more interest out of the 20th anniversary. These men can’t comprehend that their grief is personal to them alone and should be private. The public is already weary of them using the Diana card.

         1. Yes Jen, Diana grave is neglected. I saw the current photos of the grave and it is in an unfortunate state. Earl Spncer has to mantain it, not William and Harry. He is the owner of Althorp. I totally agree with Elli, Earl Spencer is using his sister as bait to get $$$. He had the audacity to criticize the RF during Diana mass at the Abbey, saying that the Windsors had treated his sister very badly when he himself refused to help Diana. He’s a hypocrite. And whay to hire the Archbishopof Canterbury? A priest would be enough. William and Harry want to be “normal” but it is in situations like this that it’s evident that they are not. How many of us could hire the Archbishop to conduct a service for our relatives?

            1. Hi Jamel, yes I realise it’s Charles Spencer’s role to maintain the vast Althorp property. My point was that if the sons visit her grave regularly they would surely NOT have left it go to ruin. They could have done some maintenance themselves at the site or paid someone to do so. Not all of Althorp, just the site where her grave is. Wouldn’t any of us do that to graves of loved ones? It presents a picture that W+H don’t visit the grave.

            2. Agreed, Jen. The boys had years to do something about the state of Diana’s grave. Could have actually contributed to the upkeep with their very own millions. Did they do that? No.

               I doubt they ever visited in later years. Now, it’s ever so convenient for their purposes- announcing the dedication, hauling the kids out. I wonder if this will count in the CC for them all.

            3. Hi Jen and Maven, the fact that the grave is in an unfortunate state makes me think that William and Harry don’t visit it regularly. How William said he and Harry don’t talk much about their mother. Earl Spencer now is “proud” of his sister but when she asked help from him he refused. I saw the documenary “Secrets of Althorp” and is a pure pr for the Earl. I ask myself how many times his other sisters visit Althorp. Diana really had not luck with the two Charles, her brother and her husband. I don’t think the Earl is close to William and Harry. After Diana death I saw Sarah and Jane with the boys many times, but nor the Earl. Of course, I may be wrong.

               “I doubt they ever visited in later years. Now, it’s ever so convenient for their purposes- announcing the dedication, hauling the kids out. I wonder if this will count in the CC for them all.” I totaly agree Maven. Pure Diana card again. I don’t doubt they feel pain for her death but now the world see Diana boys attending a private service at her “resting place” which was negleted all these years.

            4. And this is what leaves me cold to the point of ice with William and Harry vis-a-vis their bleating about Diana. They are hypocrites, as is Charles Spencer. To be honest, I’d say Charles has a deeper respect and affection for his former wife than these clods.

            5. That’s so unfortunate that her grave is neglected. I do not understand how it could be. It’s on her family estate run by his brother. I always thought he had a deep bond and relationship with his sister that surely he would maintain her resting place properly. I remember his speech at her funeral and how he was going to have a close relationship with the boys but I honestly always thought BC of his criticisms of the RF that they kept him away from the boys. Their looked like their was interaction with the Spencers at Will’s wedding, but who knows to what extent the relationship goes with their aunts, uncle, and cousins. Just a sad situation all around. I definitely feel like the sons and her brother use her memory and death for publicity/money/etc.

         2. The reason her grave is neglected is because of its location: on an island in the middle of a pond. It looks like the island was allowed to grow wild before Diana was buried there, and only a small area was cleared for her marker. I bet it is difficult putting a lawn mower, edger, and other tools on a boat and rowing to the island, although in one aerial photo there seems to be a floating bridge reaching it. If they had buried Diana in a cemetery her grave would be frequently tended to, and visited, and vandalized.

2. Like Ellie says above and Nic919 and others have already said on another post, I think that they are using the kids for PR here–Just using Diana’s death isn’t working to win over a critical public, so give the media a reason to link the popular George and Charlotte to their deceased granny and talk about how sad it is that they will never know her. Expand the princes’ pity party. Otherwise why publicize a private non-work event? Until Pippa’s wedding they never publicized private, personal events, never commented upon them even if they were public knowledge, so why now, and why especially announce the children are attending, unless it’s to garner more sympathy?

   Although because they’ve announced it, they can justify ordering extra security at public expense since a circus will now surround the entrance to Althorp.

   1. They are probably seeking publicity and sympathy because the BRF is doing nothing, since Diana is a former family member. They are now in the position to protect their mother which they could not do as children, as they have often said, and this is how they are doing it.

      1. The BRF is them. They did nothing in the past either. If they perversely think they are protecting her now then they’d better seek counselling and get their heads straight. If they wanted to protect her, they would establish and do good works in her name, not snivel.

         1. Oh man, do they need counselling! Plus someone to tell them to stop, just stop riding on the work and memory of their long-deceased mother. It’s been 20 years, time enough to get themselves into gear, take on her charities or at the very least, adopt her work ethic.

   2. This could have been kept private, but as already said, the announcement that little George and Charlotte will be a the dedication certainly moves it out of the private realm. People are fascinated with the kids and always want to see more and hear more about them. Aren’t they a bit young for such a ceremony?

      The thought that their beloved mother’s grave has been in disarray is so alarming. William and Harry are always so eager to use Diana, so why couldn’t her final resting place be kept up?. Do they ever visit it? And, what is wrong with Diana’s brother — who promised so much at her funeral? I find this whole situation very disturbing.

   3. Both entrances to Althrop are quite a walk to the grave (the back entrance is over a mile) and the internal security at Althrop is such that no rogue journalist would get in for a nosy. If this had never been announced no one would know I was happening.

      Also with regards to Meghan attending…..Charles Spencer took his girlfriend of the time to Diana’s burial. It wasn’t a fiancé or wife just a girlfriend. I wouldn’t be surprised one bit if Meghan is there but with Harry I think it would be a bit more significant. Nanny Maria possibly up at the house for any formal lunch that is put on to mind the children but not at the lake.

      As in understood it W & H had virtual carte blanche to attend Althrop whenever they pleased to visit the grave. I also heard it said that the day after William & Kate’s wedding when they disappeared in a helicopter they actually detoured to Althrop to take some of the wedding flowers to Diana’s grave. I don’t know how much truth there is it that story but I found it very moving.

      1. That is very moving and thoughtful. I really really hope it’s true.

         1. +1

         2. It brought a tear to my jaded, cynical eyes when I heard it.

            1. It was a lovely thought, but somehow, I doubt it. I guess I am just way too jaded. I hope, though, it might be true, because a part of me still holds out some warm thoughts toward William.

3. And of course Waity will be in a new dress for both and the taxpayer will foot the bill for all the travel ect – do they ever pay for anything themselves ?

   1. Food. Clothes? George’s school? I think their finances can be somewhat private, we don’t have to know what they buy on a daily basis. Knowing what they do NOT have to pay for by themselves seems enough to me.

      1. Charles pays ALL their expenses. All of it.

         W&K pay nothing.

         1. Taxpayers pay for most of it. When it is something they cannot sneak past the taxpayers via security or the Duchy? They guilt Charles into paying for it out of private funds. Ex. The $100,000 new tennis court at Anmer on HM’s private property.

      2. “Their” finances are all taxpayer money given to the RF and Charles’ income from the Duchy of Cornwall. They don’t have their own finances to use. Well, W&H have some but they won’t dare use it. Once something is noticed by the media to be private and therefore coming out of their own pockets, some “official” meeting is tacked on to turn it into work and thus paid for by the taxpayers.

   2. I wonder if the helicopter will be getting a workout.

      1. The taxpayer can provide a heli-pad for the school, surely?

      2. And, I wonder if Kate and Charlotte will be in matchy clothes? Hot pink would be in order, according to Kate’s set of rules on what is appropriate at somber sites.

         1. You can certainly bet on George being dressed in William’s old clothes or at least a lookalike of them.

         2. Either that or SWFing her late MiL- she does like to do that on occasion, and what better time?

4. Oh, and Kate’s in a BBC doc about Wimbledon, airing this Saturday. As far as I know, I think it’s an ‘interview’.

   1. I saw some quotes from it. She asked her OBGYN if she could go see Murray win Wimbledon when 8 months pregnant. Um, you can do anything pregnant, Kate… Right, she was on maternity leave, so couldn’t show up since it’s not ‘work’ like it is this year!

      1. Really Kate asked that? Is she that dumb and clueless? No wonder she needs so many nannies and her mom to help with her kids- Kate probably doesn’t know that you need to provide your offspring with food and water, just like other mammalian offspring- so that they grow.

      2. That quote is going to go down really well with pregnant workers. Most of whom work full time right up until baby arrives. But kate is helpless.

      3. *wincing* Their PR staff need to get serious and start prepping these guys for interviews. They have been making way too many gaffes. Being Diana’s sons and daughter-in-law will not protect them forever, especially once more 1980s and 1990s who were kids during the Diana-era become the main workers.

      4. Most women work until days before they birth unless it is a high risk pregnancy. Kate did not have a high risk pregnancy and sitting down at a tennis event isn’t physical work. Along with her fake HG with somehow only lasted during the first months when regular morning sickness happened, she somehow managed to attend other events without any issues. This is insulting to basically every other woman who has been pregnant. It is hard to say if she is that stupid or thought this was a funny anecdote. She wouldn’t even be sitting in the more exposed bleachers but in the Royal box. What a ding dong. Maybe she needs to just stop giving interviews because she sounds like an idiot.
         This girl is a present day Marie Antoinette and shows her privilege just as much as Harry and Will, who were surrounded by it from birth. Whatever benefit there was supposed to be with a “common” princess has never really existed.

         1. Kate is worse than Marie Antoinette. There is an element of sexism in the story of Marie Antoinette. Marie was the scapegoat of the French royal family. Her husband was the one who insisted on living the opulent life, and he showered her with gifts. Now Kate is different. I believe she is the one negatively influencing Will.

      5. I work in health care. A lot of patients ask questions that you would think would be common sense even if they are otherwise smart, productive people. That’s hardly unique to Kate. What’s more surprising to me is the doctor said no. Why? Was she considered high risk and either Wimbledon was deemed too far or she was on bed rest? Seems odd. I worked up until the day I delivered, as do most women. I would think you would be able to sit and watch tennis just fine.

         1. I don’t think the doctor said no. She didn’t say anything about it.

            What I do think happened is she was supposedly on maternity leave so she couldn’t work, ha ha, so she couldn’t show at Wimbledon and get slammed.

            But she would miss memorials and then go to Wimbledon the following year…

            1. According to the daily mail article about the interview, she is quoted as saying her doctor told her “definitely not” when she asked if she could go. Who knows if that’s true, but that what I was commenting on.

            2. Apparently only Kate is a special snowflake she can’t sit around at Wimbledon at 8 months pregnant. so ridiculous.

5. Poor George and Charlotte… I think that they, but especially Charlotte, are a bit too young for this. It is hard to understand grief at that age, especially if it is about a person you have never met. Harry and William willl obviously be very emontional and sad, maybe crying, and I don’t know if it would be a good idea to bring the kids to this event… just my two cents. I love that they are honouring Diana, but I am worried about George and Charlotte being thrown into something thex don’t understand yet. 🙁

   1. I have never seen William drop a tear. I think the word mummy was all I remember at the funeral. I think William is capable of crying but I have not seen it.

   2. I agree with other posters that there are better ways for William’s children to know and understand their paternal grandmother at such very tender ages. If the kids happen to be having a bad day – just because they can and do at that age – or have an insufficient grasp of death, it will create tensions for all present. There are unlimited opportunities for the children to visit the grave when older. I understand why the sons want the whole family there, but the personal nature of that wish is severely diminished by publicising what is ultimately a very private ceremony.

   3. I doubt that there will be an outpouring of grief after so long, unless someone has a catharsis. It will be solemn. The kids won’t understand. And at that age, there is no need to introduce the concept of death to them.

   4. I agree with you, M. The children are so young and this will be an emotional day for William and Harry. Maybe, Ma Middleton will come along to provide support. Or, Nanny Maria in her Nanny uniform. Oh, my gosh, I am getting so sick and tired of the young Royals.

   5. When your parents die young, having deceased grandparents is just part of your child’s context. My dad passed away when I was 20, long before my kids were born. And there are times that I get very emotional about it, particularly on the anniversary of his death, but I’ve never tried to hide that from them. And we visit the national cemetery that is close to us (he was Navy and so he’s buried in the national cemetery in San Francisco), and have gone to his grave. Part of that, for me, is that I want him to be real for them and hiding my grief from them would feel really disingenuous in that process to me. I think the kids will contextualise in the way that most do– they absorb what they are capable of understanding, and little by little, as the years go by, they understand more. My 11-year old obviously understands death now in a totally different way than when she was two and three. But even then it kind of made sense to her in what actually was a very sweet way.

      1. “When your parents die young, having deceased grandparents is just part of your child’s context.”

         Exactly!

6. And will Meghan be there with Harry?

   1. Will the Middleton’s?

      1. Jen I love you.

   2. @esther – I was wondering that too. My guess is yes, since this is a “private” event and Sparkles is supposedly in London now (I think). I also feel like, if I were Harry, this is an event I’d want my partner to come with, so I could have some emotional support.

      1. Etiquette wise, I wouldn’t bring a girlfriend. Only a fiance. This is a very solemn private family occasion. If he does or does not bring her, it’s a sign.

         1. Agree again Maven.

         2. If the reasons given for not having her attend Pippa’s entire wedding was that it would take attention away and that it would be tantamount to him putting a ring on it, I would imagine those same reasons would apply here and be magnified. But who knows, the PR fall out from his disastrous interview could make him act differently. Mummy, Meghan, AND Prince George and Princess Charlotte?! That’s the trifecta! No one would be talking about his tone deaf comments and ridiculous privilege! Then he could skip to Africa for months and reimerge just in time for Invictus, but not before he gets his birthday hunt on at his grandmother’s 1000s acre estate in Scotland, you know cuz he’s so normal!

   3. If Charles Spencer can have his 3rd wife there, I don’t see why Harry can’t have Meghan there. It is a private event so royal protocol doesn’t need to be followed. The decision will be down to H&M alone.

      I still marvel at the hypocrisy of Charles Spencer who saw it fit to publicly humiliate their father at their mother’s funeral, and yet he has proven to be much worse in his own personal life. I do wonder if Wills & Harry are still even close to the Spencer’s? None of them were invited to the christening of William’s children which I find strange.

      1. To be fair, wife and mother of his child is not the same as girlfriend. Though I will agree that since this is a private event it probably won’t be guided by royal protocol, and the decision is between Harry and Meghan alone.

         1. And sister is not the same as mother. If Harry wants to bring his girlfriend to this, he has every right too.

      2. All About Eve:

         Laura Fellowes is a godparent to Princess Charlotte. Laura is the daughter of Diana’s sister Jane Fellowes. Laura’s husband Nick Pettman also attended the wedding.

         So perhaps Will and Kate see more of the Spencers than we think. At least that part of the family.

7. I like that Kate is going to meet the staff etc. I always think the focus on the players (true for every sport or film event) is bit over the top. Give props to the people who keep the show running, often unpaid or with low wages. Wish she would make that a part of all her jobs, it would pay off PR wise in the long run.

   1. Given the stories of how she treats the staff behind the scenes? It might be nicer for the staff not to meet her.

8. Actual quote from Kate: About watching Wimbledon, “It inspires young people including myself….” I’m not sure if she was referring to when she was younger or even now. I mean, she’s still young but upon reading I was thinking it must mean kids and adolescents? Especially as it was followed up by getting her racket and being able to do what the tennis players. Perhaps it was a slip of the tongue. Anyway, Will and Kate were at MI6? I wonder did what they did there?

   1. The MI6 visit I’m guessing is to show their concern for security- their own. They are so important. Translate that into their concern for ‘privacy’, translated into non-accountability.

      1. Privacy = secrecy to William and the rest.

      2. Royals sometimes visit MI6 so I wouldn’t say it’s about W’s own paranoia or whatever and security.

   2. I think she meant that it inspired her in the past when she was a teenager to play tennis 🙂

9. The reason the Diana memorial service was published was supposedly because the news would leak anyhow. Ok, but why all the detail? Their PR could simply say that Althorpe would be closed to due a private family event. Giving details that Charlotte and George and the Archbishop would be there is just asking for press hanging about trying to get a car photo…

   I am glad Kate will be meeting staff at Wimbledon – I actually think this could be a good patronage for her as she does show an interest in tennis over many years, and I bet when she was younger she wished she could work as a ball girl or something over the week so she could meet the players. So, she may relate well to the kids this time. One thing I found really interesting in Harry’s interview write ups was that a staff member acknowledged openly that Kate and Will aren’t comfortable with kids at events. It confirms what we’ve long suspected, that she’s been sold as the children’s princess but it’s not a natural fit. I think sports and fitness are the best option for her to relate well to kids and come across as genuinely engaged and interested in what they say to her.

   1. I’m not sure the re-dedication would have gotten out: first, the Cambridge’s and Harry are adept at disappearing when they want to; second, it takes place on private family property. It got out because they issued a press release. This is about making a big thing of the 20th anniversary of their mother’s death, with more to come in addition to the interviews both sons have given.

      Harry said that Kate and William were neither passionate ror naturals with kids. It’s clear Kate likes watching elite sport and meeting elite sports people, and playing recreational tennis. I don’t see her championing sport charities; she’s more a gym rat wanting to be thin. But if it gets her doing something, okay.

      1. Charles Spencer easily could have issued a statement after the event, saying that the grave had been privately re-dedicated, family members had attended, etc., and thus avoided what is bound to be a media circus around Althorp at this “private” re-dedication. But no. That wouldn’t provoke the tears of sympathy like photos of sweet George and Charlotte being driven in procession to the grave of the dear granny they’ll never know.

10. Like others have said, the timing is strange and the fact that they made a private event public is more odd and on top of that, they’re bringing the kids, who are too young to know who she was let alone their connection with her, along for the ride. To me? This just sounds like a 3-ring circus. How much do you want to bet that Kate is going to wear a new dress and will be grinning like crazy?

    I have two friends from high school who’ve lost their father: one died due to a motorcycle accident on the 4th of July weekend and the other died due to prostate cancer. Both were in their 20s when their fathers passed away but are now happily married to their respective spouses and have wonderful families of their own. To me, the difference between them and William (and, in a way, Harry) is that they healed on their own, relying on other family members and faith to get through the early dark days and *not* their significant others nor that person’s family. That is not a shot at Charles and the RF. On the contrary, I believe they did the best they could under the circumstances. William allowed himself to be pulled into the Middleton family fold before he was fully healed and allowed them to do the work he should’ve done.

    Everyone and their cousin’s children’s best friend is trying to rewrite history regarding Diana, the BRF and her death and it’s both sad and disgusting.

    Kate’s going to Wimbledon? *says in deadpan and/or monotone voice* woo hoo.

    1. I don’t think it’s fair to compare people who lost their fathers in their 20s to people who lost their mother when they were 12 and 15 (I think that’s the ages). Everyone grieves and heals differently; I think that’s why they are on the mental health kick. The BRF didn’t handle the death properly so they are still dealing with it in their 30s.

       1. +1
          In your 20s, you are at a different stage mentally and emotionally than as a teenager when you are still a minor, a child who is dependant on your parents.

    2. I’m not sure how your friends have approached their parent’s deaths with their kids, but from the time mine were little they understood that Papa didn’t live on earth, but was still very much a part of my life, even though he died long before they were born, and would be in theirs. I couldn’t hide my grief at times like the anniversary of his death, and so seeing me emotional is a normal part of it for them. And my kids are different ages, so they each get it in their own way– my 11-year old contextualises it totally different than my sweet 3-year old. I obviously have no idea if William does this, but I talk about my dad all the time to my kids. So for us, while it would still be emotional, this would be just another day we’d get through together.

       1. Em,

          My friends’ kids (the ones old enough to comprehend) understand that grandpa is not physically here but watching them from above. Also, they celebrate his birthday with a family celebration and have framed photos scattered around the home. 🙂

11. There is a press release simply because Wills & Harry want the world to know. If they wanted to keep it private they would not have commented on it because this event wasn’t on anyone’s radar. The media will now be camped outside the gates at Althorp hoping for a glimpse of the family including George & Charlotte, and possibly a sighting Meghan. It will be like Pippa’s wedding all over again!

    The reasons for the press release might be to show the world that they are caring sons, or to change the narrative of recent bad press, or could be interpreted as a massive FU to the BRF.

    It would be interesting to see if any royals were invited. Prince Charles won’t be there as he will be in Canada with Camilla, which makes the timing somewhat convenient.

    1. “There is a press release simply because Wills & Harry want the world to know. If they wanted to keep it private they would not have commented on it because this event wasn’t on anyone’s radar.”

       +1

    2. I’ve been reading the comments here for a long time. First time commenting.

       While the timing may seem suspicious. It really isn’t. July 1 happens to be Diana’s birthday and July 1 is also Canada day, here in Canada. The Canadian version of July 4th. We have had numerous royals here on Canada day and this year is our 150th birthday. So while it may be handy for Charles and Camilla to not be in England it is understandable.

       1. It was also planned for months that Charles and Camilla would be at Canada day celebrations for the 150th. In fact it was mentioned when Will and Kate visited BC in September. So they definitely knew C and C wouldn’t be available.

    3. +2.

    4. “The reasons for the press release might be to show the world that they are caring sons, or to change the narrative of recent bad press, or could be interpreted as a massive FU to the BRF.”

       All of the above.

12. “Officials say they’ve made the private service public knowledge because it’s the 20th anniversary of Diana’s death and it would be difficult to keep it secret.”

    What a load of cobblers. It’s *not* a milestone. Barely anyone would remember or care. Besides, they’ve been yammering on about it for months and months. This remembrance is purely PR created from nothing.

    1. Yes Maven. Like All About Eve said before there is a press release simply because Wills & Harry want the world to know. Simple as that.

    2. It about playing the mummy card, again. And again. And again.

       1. +1

    3. And it would be easy to keep it secret. Aren’t they actually closing althorp for the day? No one would have known. What have they done in the yrs past? No one knows because they’ve never said peep about it,
       The fact that they released this now is for the pr. Same reason they mentioned the kids will be there, there’s been a lot of bad press recently about them, so hey let’s release all this “private” info and be sure to throw in that the kids will be there
       And all the we just want to be normal-not so much when you’re getting the Archbishop of Canterbury to do this for you.
       Bleh

       1. They’re closing Althorp for the day? Ok, now they really have no excuse. *Maybe* one cub reporter would have been stationed to see if they’d visit.

13. I’m a bit torn about this. On one hand, I absolutely think W+H announcing this private event was a way to get attention and postitive PR for the BRF. I feel kinda sickened by it. Their hypocrisy about crying for privacy and “normalicy” and then doing something like this…

    On the other hand, I am not against them bringing G+C and rededicating their mother’s grave. My mother died when I was young and neither my sister or I live close to her grave to do the upkeep. We took care of it whenever we were in town, but now we occasionally ask a local friend to go and clean things up. Does that mean we don’t love her? No. Also, I think children should be present and participate in family gathers – including ones that feature death and “not happy” feelings. I don’t think they should be sheltered. Things can be lovingly explained and showed to them and the sooner they learn that feelings and family are normal (that word again!) and not to be afraid or ashamed of, the better. It doesn’t have to be traumatic. Harry was just complaining about being made to walk behind his mother’s coffin in front of millions of people, so here is a way of them introducing the death of their grandmother in a more intimate setting.

    1. +1 On having kids at family events, even those that are about sad things. I think it must also be difficult to have to decide if things are to be public or private. It is very unfortunate that the press won’t just lay off for events like this.

       1. But Rose, the press hasn’t done anything. It was William and Harry who have issued a PR release about their private and personal event on Saturday. It was no-one’s business but theirs. It is they need to lay off seeking publicity by using their mother.

          1. +1

          2. I was just thinking about what I would do in their shoes. I wouldn’t have any problem with friends and family knowing about an event like that, but for them telling anyone is automatically making it public, as people talk- which automatically means that the press will likely be hounding them for car photos. So the choices are to not tell anyone or essentially invite the press. I get the angle that they are totally doing this for publicity, and I’m not saying that I disagree. I’m just wondering if it’s actually a tough decision, and could put them in them in between the proverbial rock and a hard place. Keeping it private might make it feel unnecessarily shameful- why keep this a secret? To avoid being seen as publicity seeking. Those choices seem unfair to me.

    2. LizB, I am sorry for your loss. So sad, I would think, to lose your mother. The fact that you hae asked a friend to maintain the grave at times shows how much you care. William and Harry are so wealthy, I am shocked that such care has not been made consistent for their beloved Mum’s graves. I do know that not everyone gets any comfort from visiting a grave site, however, the keeping up of the site, when you can so afford to do so, is something I think is very important.

       I also agree that little Charlotte and George will have not a clue as to what will be an emotional day for their dad and uncle. Why they are going to be there is just ridiculous. But, I said that already.

    3. I agree that children should see their parents feeling sad as well as happy, and that death and separation should be introduced to children lovingly and in intimate settings, but I still think there are better ways to do that with a four-year-old than at a grave. One of the most moving funerals I have ever been to had a children’s time at the front of the church during the service. The pastor read a wonderful story called Water Bugs and Dragonflies, which explains life transitions beautifully. Even as an adult, I was moved. Something along those lines would be age-appropriate for George, and not potentially as traumatic as a graveside service.

       1. People die. Graves exist. The living visit gravesites. I think hiding this from children is ridiculous. Children are not born with hang-ups or fear about death, they learn that from the adults around them.

    4. +1 I shared my feelings about my experience upthread so I won’t rehash but yes, this.

14. I agree with everyone who says that this is nothing more than a PR move, and a blatant one at that. They did this purely so people would know they are doing it. No one was speculating about this. It wasn’t on anyone’s radar. Now the press is going to be camped out trying to get pictures of people in cars. I’m actually surprised there hasn’t been an article about whether or not Meghan is going to go yet, creating a frenzy like pippa’s wedding. The much classier way to let people know if that was so important to them would be to announce it after the rededication took place. But then the trio wouldn’t get nearly as much attention and sympathy, which they seem to crave.

    1. Yes, it would be classy to announce the event occurred after it actually does.

       I wonder if the upkeep of the grave will be kept up in the future. Or, perhaps, more of a hoopla can be made on other “milestone” anniversaries of Diana’s passing?
       Diana was so beloved by many. Is their an outcry that her grave is in such poor condition?
       Not a way to remember her, if you ask me.

    2. Carter, I didn’t see your comment before saying almost the same thing in a reply above. Couldn’t agree more. A media frenzy has begun. Created by William and Harry. And why, when they continue to blame a media frenzy for their mother’s death and fault everyone else for forcing their initial grief to be public? They cry over their loss of privacy, even file suits over their loss of privacy, and here they are creating a frenzy where none was before. Such hypocrites.

15. Can I just make you all aware that the The Oval has always been ‘unkempt’ it was designed that way. To be wild and free spirited. The family did a lot with installing security sensors all over the island and the surrounding areas when Diana was first laid to rest. There is a small bridge, a sailing boat to take them across when the bridge is up and a memorial stone on the island that need upkeep but it was never planned nor ever has been a structured burial site in traditional terms. I understand the family know the exact spot HRH is buried on the island but it is not common knowledge. That said I don’t like it. Most of the island is shaded and it looks cold and lonely. For many years it has been rumoured that she was never actually buried there but secretly cremated and her ashes put in the family vault in Great Brington with her Daddy. I actually asked a member of the ground staff in Althrop about those rumours and she just rolled her eyes and said if they were true the family security bill for the island would be a lot smaller. Apparently some members of the public have dived into the lake and tried to swim across but no one has actually made it yet due to the speed of security’s reaction. Many people leave flowers at a monument in the grounds made by Althrop workers and periodically the flowers are collected up and taken to the island to lay on Diana’s grave which made me feel a whole lot better about taking my own flowers for her.

    Like you all I have many thoughts as to why this statement was released, most are not favourable to ‘the boys’ and I believe a lot of this is to wind up PoW & Camilla sentiment. I don’t know what it’s going on in the family at the moment at the papers are not saying or alluding to anything but my gut instinct is that there is a PoW V his sons internal fight about the direction of the work and the workload.

    Kate has been out and about today…..I’m sure KMR has it hand but so nearly close to a win today. As always the finer style details let her down.

    1. She’ll be opening a new exhibit hall at the NHM on the 13th. Hopefully more engagements crop up as well.

       Wouldn’t be surprised – if Charles wants some more help from W&H, they should be helping, stepping up and doing it; I’m sure it’s hard on Charles as he’s so busy, and Anne too, both past retirement age and Charles especially with all else he has going on. The man stays up til past midnight doing stuff, preparing, etcetera according to Catherine Mayer who wasn’t a big fan of him til she followed him to write her biography about him.

       I’m glad you were able to get flowers there.

       I think W&H both need some peace about their mother. Maybe all this verbal diarrhea is them trying to find it somehow and vindicate her. We know William wasn’t on best terms before she died.

       1. Althrop is stunning and as English Country House as it is possible to be. Sheep wondering around everywhere and the only noise you can hear as you walk thought the grounds is nature with the occasional train roaring past in the distance. But the island is just so wrong for her. It made me feel so sad to think of her alone, sheltered from the sun, in a remotish corner of the grounds. In death and her burial she was just isolated still further from everyone she loved being able to ‘visit’ her. Many of her dearest friends who were not liked by the Spencer’s have never even been allowed to her grave.

          1. That’s really sad. 🙁

             Charles giving his sister a middle finger in death as in life. I really despise that man.

          2. There was a documentary series on English country houses awhile ago and Althorp was one of them, and I had the same feeling about her grave. It just seemed so remote and sad for someone who clearly thrived on her involvement with others.

             Thank you for sharing all of that, too. You and Hera share so much context and details that I don’t know a lot of us would know any other way.

             1. I don’t think I’ll ever truly reconcile myself to it being her burial place because of how it makes me feel when I see it. It’s just not right. It’s not her but it is what it is and I do think it was done for the right reasons for those that remain to mourn and visit her, especially her boys. Undoubtedly they will get their privacy there.

                Thank you. It’s nice to add some colour to the facts. Xxx

          3. I agree. From everything I’ve read about Diana she would want to be among people.

    2. Thanks for this info, Mrs.BBV! I didn’t know any of that about Diana’s burial place.

       1. A pleasure…..I still have very mixed feelings about it as a resting place for her. Nice that she ‘returned to her family home’ but I don’t think that they chose the best place for her. Them maybe but not her. Xx

    3. I posted something similar above, because I hadn’t scrolled down to read your comment yet. The location of her grave is a testament to the suddenness of Diana’s death and the uncertainty of her status at the time of her death. She wasn’t in the BRF, so she couldn’t be buried with them. She was too popular to be buried in a regular cemetery like a normal person. She didn’t include burial instructions in her will, so this island burial was the best the Spencer’s could come up with on short notice. It was odd then, and is odd now.

       1. I was told she did specify in her will what she wanted and it was to be interred at Great Brington. Clearly not posssible logistically for the village and church which struggle with Althrop traffic anyway but it makes it even sadder that she didn’t even get what she wanted in death. But yes you are right sudden and quick decisions had to be made. Xx

    4. Thanks for your post, Mrs BBV; it colours the picture very nicely, filling in unknown details. It’s sad all round. I’m still left with the feeling that even more that family needs ongoing therapy. I wonder why (if true) there is a chasm between Charles and sons re, work direction? I thought they were all on the same page in that regard ie doing focused work on several projects rather than thousands of scattered obligations. The sons have been saying forever they want to/ plan to step up but it just doesn’t happen.

       1. Those “thousands of scattered obligations” are what has kept the BRF in business for over a century.

          1. I realise that, nota. It’s the ony way, as far as I can see, to understand the rhythm of different communities in the UK. If you like people, care about them and see the role as an honour, even if thrust upon you by fate, you’d enjoy it as well as be thankful.

             1. We all get it. Amazing that those who are supposed to work the job fail to understand it.

    5. To me, her remains being on the island is a good thing. The bridge isn’t.

       People diving in to the water to swim to the island? How incredibly inappropriate. Imagine how much worse it would be if she was buried somewhere accessible?

       The monument on the Estate grounds easily reached by the public is fine. People can leave their flowers there. Leave her actual remains in peace, away from all of that.

       Far better for her remains to be on that island, which might have had special meaning for her when she was alive. IMO better than having her grave mawkishly pawed over by people who never knew her personally. The public doesn’t own her, and at the very least, her remains should be left in peace.

       If you want to honor someone and their legacy? Work in the fields they promoted. Donate to their charities.

       1. Royalty always attracts nutters hence the pressure sensors all around the lake……they knew that some idiot would attempt it. The bridge is more a pontoon or mini drawbridge if you will. It’s there and can be used for carrying weight over the lake but the boat is tied up and moored for whenever it’s needed. It’s a rather lovely old fashioned rowing boat. There were also a beautiful pair of black swans on the lake too.

          One of the lesser known facts about the island and one of the reasons to be appalled by it as her grave is that it is the Spencer family pet cemetery. It upset me but practically I’m not really sure where else they could have buried her given the suddenness of decisions that had to be made. However the Diana Exhibition was beautiful and very, very tastefully done. Earl Spencer absolutely got that right. He kept the essence of the ‘English Country Estate’ and honoured her in a very personal way within that. For all the cries that he did it for the money I don’t know what he more he could have done but even what they sold in gift shop showed more respect than BP or Highgrove souvenirs and he personally signed off every item before it could be stocked.

          I would recommend a visit to the grounds and the house even though the exhibition has been dismantled because it has a real family feel about it.

          1. I didn’t realize the Diana exhibit is no longer at Althorp. Forgive me if it is explained elsewhere, but when and why was it dismantled?

             1. Bits and pieces are in the house and exhibition rooms. Some has been sent on worldwide tours and William & Harry have taken some of it back and some is in the KP exhibition that opened this Spring. Earl Spencer said circa 15 years and that was pretty much what he did but there was a huge market for it to be seen in US & Far East so parts of it do tour. The original exhibition at Althrop was four rooms. It’s now just two but elements of it are still there and viewable. Xx

             2. Thanks!

                So is Charles Spencer still benefiting financially from these bits and pieces that tour?

             3. Oops…I should have read further down before responding. Think my question has been answered =).

          2. That it is also the place of family pet burials doesn’t bother me. Those may have been the creatures who gave her the most comfort in her younger years.

             Her sons have made some things clear. They could have left Diana’s things at Althorp for a permanent exhibit. Basically they took them back from their uncle the second they were legally allowed to, once Harry turned 30.

             http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/diana/10276404/The-sun-goes-down-on-the-Althorp-shrine-to-Diana-Princess-of-Wales.html

             They’re trying to build a memorial to her in London, the third one by my count (fountain, play park). Perhaps they are doing that because they do not want people going to Althorp and handing money over to their slimy uncle anymore? “You want to honor our mother? Fine, honor her in the memorial we build in London” kind of thing.

             If they wanted their mother’s remains removed and reinterred elsewhere, they would have done it. They haven’t. To me that indicates they want her remains away from prying eyes.

             The public interest in their mother was part of what helped destroy (or helped her destroy) her life. They want her remains away from the public, where only family can be near them. I don’t have a problem with that.

             One of the smartest things W&H could do is befriend their cousin, Louis Spencer. They need the future heir on “their side”.

             1. You are joking…..Diana only liked her pet hamster. She hated her ponies after she broke her arm riding, she made Charles get rid of his dogs and she tortured Princess Michael’s cats. Being buried in pet cemetary is the last thing she would want and would give her no comfort whatsoever. For her class she was surprisingly unmoved by animals.

                They haven’t taken everything back……it’s touring around the world with the Althrop Diana exhibition. That’s what Earl Spencer did when he dismantled the Althrop exhibition……sent it on a world tour. Some of it went back but by no means all. Crucially the wedding dress which belongs to the boys is always touring with other pieces from the original exhibition.

             2. The planned memorial statue will be outside KP and like the Diana Garden there is no charge to see it as it will be in the public access part of the grounds. So I can’t see how that effects Althrop at all. Even though the Diana Exhibition has moved worldwide there are still pieces on show in a scaled back version of the original exhibition in Althrop. It’s just not the full monty if you will. There is certainly enough to justify visiting Althrop even though the lake area has been out of use for part of this season. And all other parts of the park and house remain free to walk around.

             3. If that is where her pet hamster is, then fine. She isn’t buried in a pet cemetery. She is buried on an island on her family’s Estate, which just so happens to also have pets buried on it too. Still not seeing the problem here. It is far preferable to me (and potentially to her children) that she’s away from the grasping public.

                Unforgivable? You think where she is buried is inappropriate. If her sons think her mortal remains would be better off elsewhere, they have every right to move her.

                It is my understanding that the majority of her belongings were taken back by W&H in 2013. Whatever exhibit was at Althorp or touring America (Mall of America, really? That’s appropriate?) are now made up of other things – but not the belongings that Charles Spencer was legally required to return to W&H in September 2013.

                150 objects he used to display have been taken back by W&H. They are not touring the world.
                http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/diana/11069069/What-will-Prince-Harry-and-Prince-William-inherit-from-Princess-Diana.html

                What does it have to do with Althorp? It means that W&H are trying to make a place to honor their mother that is away from their grasping uncle. Don’t visit Althorp, visit the statue at KP.

             4. Diana is buried in the Spencer Pet Cemetary…….all the Spencer animals were buried there before it became her grave. I’m not going deabte it with you any more than the the fact that William and Harry have allowed key pieces of Diana’s clothing that were exhibited in Althrop to be seen worldwide. Regardless of the relationship between Spencer and Windsors ultimately some of those pieces have been released to be exhibited around the world. I have seen them in various locations albeit from behind glass. Hubby went to the Diana Garden atKP for me a few weeks ago and was allowed in even though it was quite late so he could photograph it for me. It had only been finished for a few days when he went but the plan is for the garden to evolve up until September and link in with the KP exhibit dresses. When the garden is no longer Diana themed the statue will be there for people to leave their floral tributes as it’s more accessible than the trek to Althrop which also costs £18 whereas the garden and statue are free. They are not working in competition but are intended to make those that want to access the memory of the Princess more accessible to everyone.

             5. KMR I still haven’t sent you the photos of the Diana Memorial Garden that I promised as I was saving them for nearer the 20th Annivaerary. Given the recent statement from KP I think I should just send them to you and you decide a good time to put them up for your visitors to see. It’s absolutely beautiful but hubby did say it was the smell of the garden that got him……and the attention to detail.

             6. It is not a pet cemetery, it is an island at an Estate where they happened to bury pets. It was an island before, it will be an island after.

                Many of Diana’s dresses are privately owned thanks to her selling them. Doesn’t make them part of what was inherited by W&H, much of which they removed from public view as quickly as possible after they inherited them.

                We do not know that they (I assume you mean W&H vs. Earl Spencer) are not working in competition. What it speaks to is that plans are evolving to make the main Diana memorial be in London – away from Althorp.

                To me it speaks of two things

                1) W&H want the memorial to Diana and visits to honor her to be at KP not Althorp

                2) W&H want her burial place to remain private and out-of-reach of the general public. As it should be IMO.

             7. The Spencers call the island Pet Cemetery…..there you go. I heard it direct from one of their mouths. This is the reason exact reason why Paul Burrell and Lucia Flecha De Lima are on record as saying it was wholly inappropriate that she was buried there. But hey let’s go round and round in circles about this.

                I know which dresses are privately owned from the Christies sale and which were in the Althrop exhibition and therefore owned by William and Harry…..I have seen them enough times. I know that amongst others pieces the wedding dress and bridesmaids spares plus wedding shoes, garter, tiara, the Battle of Britain Catherine Walker Suit, the Versace red sequin evening dress are all owned by William and Harry and have never seen an auction room and yet tour exhibitions around the world in museums kept in glass cases under the ageis of the Althorp Exhibtion……even some of the mounting props, cards and fixtures have come from the Althrop exhibition. I think you’ll find it was the cheaper end of the Christies auction dresses bought by private buyers that were displayed in shopping malls and cinema foyers. Nothing the estate could do to stop that. I’m sure they weren’t happy about it either. These dresses are works of art and with historical value, and should be treated as such.

                Everything that is in the current KP exhibition has come out of the archives and some pieces are even from Diana’s honeymoon, engagement and early pregnancies, a velvet dress with a child’s handprint in it for example. William and Harry gave permission for the curators from Royal Palaces to show those pieces that haven’t seen the light of day for thirty five years because they want to share and celebrate part of something that gave people pleasure…….Diana’s Princess wardrobe. Some of those pieces are incredibly sentimental but they haven’t insisted they be kept hidden away and ultimately they belong to them as does everything of Diana’s

                If they were so opposed to Spencer having pieces at Althrop why haven’t they just exercised their right to have the lot removed? Because there was an awful lot more that one hundred and fifty exhibits at Althrop which essentially belong to them. The four exhibition rooms were enormous and filled with treasures from Diana’s birth to her death. Much of it still there to be viewed.

                They may not care for their Uncle but Harry especially is close to all his Spencer cousins and Diana,s sisters. Why would they spoil what remains of Diana at Althrop when their peer group will inherit Althrop? Did you not say this should be cultivating Spencer heirs or does it just mean destroying the exhibition whilst Charles Spencer is head of the family? The truth is they haven’t……Charles Spencer wanted to wind it down after 15 years and have his family home return to some assemblence of normality which coincided timewise with William and Harry taking legal ownership of their Mother’s possessions but to say they removed everything in some act of spite is just not true.

                They didn’t, they haven’t and in some respects they have mutually cooperated in showing possessions off for the good of Diana’s place in history.

             8. May I interject, as a neutral party, that I’ve never seen a photo of Diana’s grave. I guess I will never see it.

                I have now looked up the grave site and my goodness, I want to be buried there, with the animals. I would kill to be buried there with the ashes of all my kitties. It is an eloquent and serene spot. I would however, like to note, that Diana already has a temple, so, hey, boys, cult worship is a go. Yikes!

                It is sad, though, if she wanted to be buried elsewhere and that it didn’t happen. I hold out the hope that she really was. Fact is, the church may not have been able to bear the cost of the tourists, but with heads, together, Spencer and Windsor could have made it happen with their millions. But, no.

                This re-dedication seems about more than neglect. Perhaps not. My first thought as soon as I learned of it, considering the tiny bit of island, was that water was seeping in and her grave was flooded. It happened to my grandfather.

                Anyway, it’s all of a mess. Thanks to the boys and their meddling.

             9. W&H would have inherited the items that were in her will and in her possession at the time of her death. Anything else from her childhood that remained at Althorp was likely under the control (or thumb) of Charles Spencer.

                I don’t for one minute think Charles Spencer willingly wound-down the Diana spectacle because he wanted to. He had to because he was losing control of many of the belongings, as they reverted to W&H.

                The only heir that will matter is Louis, as he’ll inherit the Estate. If W&H want ongoing access to the Estate, he’s the one to cultivate. I don’t think W&H are trying to eliminate showcases of her belongings that honor her, such as exhibits at HRP at KP. I think they’re trying to eliminate Charles Spencer personally profiting off of it.

                Maven, I think the island looks like a very peaceful final resting spot as well.

             10. Well maybe if you actually saw it you might feel differently.

                 Charles Spencer made it very clear when he opened the exhibition that it was not to be forever. He has frequently said that he wanted to be able to bring his family back from South Africa to their home more often without the pressure that managing the exhibition brought to the estate and do what the estate was traditionally given to do. He could have turned it into a Graceland money spinner selling all kinds of tat but it has never been that. The house and grounds still open, parts of the exhibition still remain but it is no longer promoted as the Diana exhibition but as Althrop so he and his family can have their ‘open country house’ traditions back. He’s been very clear about that in the press, on the Althrop website and the books about the house that he’s written.

                 Maven I would love to be buried with my pets but then I prefer them to people. Diana did not, she actively disliked pets and as soon as she lived by herself she never had one. If you actually saw the grave site in relation to the estate you would realise it’s remoteness. It is very pretty in its wild, free way and as I have said countless times I understand why it was chosen and how it does afford the family privacy but it’s not her and it’s not what she wanted and her closest friends agree that it’s wrong for her. What the alternative could have been I don’t know but just because it might have suited us doesn’t make it right for her. I think it’s also wrong for people to labour under the misapprehension that it’s neglected, it isn’t. Large sums went into setting it up and protecting it from crackpots and loonies so it remains private and unviolated but it doesn’t make it anymore right for her than Harrods having that tacky memorial in their basement……done with the best intentions I’m sure but not right. Personally I am thrilled about the London memorial, its long overdue. With her contribution to public life she deserves something in the nation’s capital but it’s not mutually exclusive……Althrop will continue to open its doors with Diana, some of her possessions, her legacy and life featured just without promoting the full Diana Exhibition so there are choices for those that want to express themselves and how they choose to mourn her. I think that the choices cater for all budgets, all locations makes mourning her more inclusive for those that want to do it. Xx

             11. Maven:
                 Diana’s coffin would not flood. It is lined with lead.

             12. I can certainly see where you’re coming from, Mrs BBV. As you are heartfelt about Diana’s memory and I am not I won’t belabour the issue. I do appreciate the explanation. Thanks!

             13. Oh Maven you know what I’m like when my emotions are ruling my heart and not my head. ‘When she was good she was very, very good but when she was bad she was horrid’ would sum Diana up for me but I couldn’t help but love her, she was very loveable.

                 I had quite forgot about the lead lining. If I remember rightly the coffin weighed over one ton and the pall bearers boots were slipping all over the floor in the Abbey at the funeral. I must admit I am very keen to go back and see what has been done by the current Countess Spencer to refurbish it because aesthetically it was a picture perfect, piece of England. Xxx

          3. Here’s a picture that illustrates MrsBBV’s description of the island.
             ”June 29, 2017 at 10:23 am
             Can I just make you all aware that the The Oval has always been ‘unkempt’ it was designed that way.”

             ”June 29, 2017 at 2:48 pm
             The bridge is more a pontoon or mini drawbridge if you will.”
             https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DBdz-wxXUAAtMDB.jpg

             1. Thank you so much for that Grace. I really appreciate you taking the time to show that. Xx

             2. I hope the service on Saturday was a time for reflection by William and Harry. The best thing is that there has been not a peep from media or KP; private events should be kept private.

                Mrs BBV, I hope you can send those pictures of Diana’s garden soon. I only wish the internet could transmit the fragrance Mr BBV mentioned.

    6. I agree with your sentiment that there’s a battle brewing between Charles and his sons. I used to think it was just William but it’s been clear lately that Harry is following in line with William
       It actually just makes me like Charles more

       1. I know! I know they were encouraging everyone to open up with their Heads Together campaign, but really some things are better left behind closed doors. Work out your daddy issues in private with a family therapist. I’m beginning to think their mother’s legacy they are most concerned about continuing is her public battles with Charles.

          1. Charles is no saint but he’s not the devil reincarnated either so he needs to stop being treated as such.

             1. I pity him. He seems to have such ungrateful children those aim is to ruin his image and the family. He doesn’t deserve to be treated with such contempt and I’d say hatred from them. He did his best.

             2. I so agree with you, Elliana. Mature adults deal with their family issues in private. It is the height of irony that on the one hand they whine and weep publicly, in effect, trashing members of their family, while demanding private lives.

                I would even say that it is not normal to air your family issues lin public unless you are an adolescent. They have *no* idea what normal behaviour is. I can’t believe that Harry claims to have gotten counselling when this is what he ends up doing.

             3. Apart from anything else it’s vulgar, common and very classless to air one’s dirty laundry in British society. No wonder HMTQ wants all this soul searching in public to end. It might well sell papers but as you say Maven it’s not conducive to private living.

             4. “it’s vulgar, common and very classless to air one’s dirty laundry in British society.”

                Mrs BBV,

                I think that’s true for any society. It’s not healthy or normal. But perhaps with the old ‘stiff upper lip’, it’s doubly so :).

                Yes, I think it’s really crass.

                But studies in North America have shown that in this day and age , public confession, whether good or bad, confers all sorts of praise and acceptance from the public at large. Sentimentality matters, boundaries are evil. So, in common parlance now, the boys are ‘winning’.

             5. Charles made mistakes, everyone does. Only difference is his were broadcast all over the world and people were prejudiced against him so Diana’s role in the whole mess was largely ignored.

                What I don’t get is why W&H are so antagonistic now whereas before (like 10 years ago) they seemed fine with him. And it irks me how William is so ok with dragging him through the mud while still using his money to fund his wife’s expensive clothes.

    7. Thanks once again, Mrs. BBV, for great descriptive information.

       I am also grateful to whomever allowed the exhibit to tour (Re: your info farther down thread) as it allowed this royal fan and four friends to drive three hours to see the wedding dress.

       1. Oh I am so glad you got to see it in all it’s glory Fifi. The first time I saw it I was 11, the last time I was 40 and it never fails to move me. There is a wonderful book in print by the Emanuels about the diary of it’s construction…..well worth getting your hands on a copy if you haven’t already read it. Xx

          https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dress-Diana-David-Elizabeth-Emanuel/dp/1862057494/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1498778202&sr=8-1&keywords=David+and+Elizabeth+Emanuel

          1. That book is in my bookshelf, an amazing story. Seeing the dress, I was astounded by how long the train is, and how beautiful the embroidery, which you couldn’t see in video.

             1. To date I believe it is still the longest train in Royal history and the way it glistens under the lights, it’s almost as if the silk worms have just finished their work. I am so pleased you have the book……along with Testino’s photographic book for Christies these are my two favourites. Both encapsulate her princess appeal so beautifully. Xxx

16. Ugh, I’m so tired of the emotional forelock tugging 🙁 I agree with everyone else here, there was absolutely no reason to release this information to the public except to garner sympathy. W&K&H disappear all the time, no one would have noticed they were gone this weekend so they could have had complete privacy at the rededication ceremony but now the press will be lining the road for photos. I wonder if Poor Jason has it in for the royal trio and keeps suggesting PR that makes them look bad?

    And seriously they’re releasing a biography about Camilla this year?? Months before the anniversary of Diana’s death?? Who the hell runs their PR? and how much does this person hate Charles and Camilla?

    Imho, this is one of the best articles regarding the Harry’s interview and the younger royals in general.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4650620/Harry-careful-wish-for.html

    1. Penny Junor likes Charles a lot to the point of people calling her an apologist. I find her too sugary, and she wrote a sugary OTT biography of William as well and ‘the firm’ about how William is the monarchy’s savior blahblahblah PR stuff. Total fluff. I do like Charles and respect his work a lot but I find biographies like that ridiculous; trying to put Diana down to make Charles look better, and vice-versa with biographies about Diana. Biographies should be about humans with human faults and merits.

       1. I am interested in Camilla’s side of the story, although I too wish it were written more dispassionately. What I learned is that Camilla’s husband cheated first, she felt bad, and sought solace with an affair of her own. Diana did the same thing (several times), but she is excused because Charles cheated first. So is Camilla thusly excused? And yes, the timing of this book release is awful.

          1. I’ve always read it was Diana who actually cheated first though she knew Charles held a torch for Camilla. Who knows what is true and what is not.

             1. MrsBBV: i thoroughly enjoy the fact the character of Rupert Campbell Black in the Jilly Cooper novels is based on Andrew PB. Jilly Cooper finally admitted it.

                For those unfamiliar with Jilly Cooper, she’s a writer of sexy romcom novels usually based on horsey, country folk.

                Rupert Campbell Black is her most famous character. He pops up quite a bit in various novels and a shag em and leave em type who is irresistable to everyone, men, women, animals though he is beastly to horses.

             2. Oooh I thought he was Drew Benedict in Jilly’s Polo. Mind you they’re all bad ‘uns aren’t they? Xx

             3. I always find the fact that Camilla and Jilly are such good friends very comforting. It adds an even more normal edge to Camilla don’t you think? Tell me that you first read Riders when it was passed around your dorm at Boarding School? I got my entire sex education from Jilly Cooper’s Riders and Shirley Conran’s Lace. By the time my Mum sat me down to have ‘the conversation’ Jilly, Shirley and my dorm had already done her work for me. Xx

             4. You guys (err, gals, really, eh?) talking about the horsey stuff makes me wish I knew of those novels as a gal, I’d have loved them. I read so much and got my education from books too, haha, my mom was horrified!

             5. Ellie……there wasn’t much actually horse riding in them. It was all about sex in stables and whose bum looked better in jodhpurs. Xx

             6. Mrs BBV, Oooo, I read the ‘Riders’ and ‘Lace’ novels as well, decades ago. What I brought away from the Jilly novel is how I would have loved hanging out with Jilly. I got the feeling even way back then that they all are rather amoral (not my thing) but they would be great and very lively fun. Reminds me now of ‘Ab Fab’ a bit, but much more so veddy British and jolly.

             7. MrsBBV: My mother would never ever discuss sex with us. Ever. Never participated or even encouraged our dating life except when we had to attend official balls and only to make sure we were properly attired and not letting the side down..

                …..but there is something about being in an all girls boarding school and learning all your sex education from Jilly Cooper, all those 80s/ 90s bonkbuster novels and Jackie Collins.

                By the time i got to university i was absolutely gagging to get started. Ditto every boarding schooled girl i knew. It’s a cliche and a stereotype, but my goodness it’s true. All that late night chats and exchanges of information gleaned from these books with no outlet for them.

                Frankly what surprises me is that we didn’t experiment on each other.

                Though there was that spotty 3mth period in early teens when we hit puberty at together and suddenly everything was sexualised as in a reading of the bible during assembly drew uncontrollable titters from entire row because headmistress had said the word ‘ groan’ as she read Lazarus!!!

                Good times.

                Ps: i always see Camilla as a Jilly Cooper character too. Everything about her screams Jilly Cooper.

                And that laugh…….

                We once stalked her around tetbury when she was going around a village fete. She has a deliciously low throaty laugh. It’s mesmerising.

             8. I love Tetbury and Doughton and I can see exactly why they appealed to PoW, they are so quintessentially English. Xx

          2. Andrew Parker-Bowles shagged anything with a pulse and had cheated on Camilla even since they were dating but in those circles one doesn’t confuse sex and love and it’s mainly why Camilla stuck with him. But he really had the most appalling sexual reputation and seemed almost prouder that his wife was doing the same with PoW. But like all these relationships what seems like nothing more than an exchange in bodily fluids and loose living, it gets confused by a little thing called love. Camilla really doesn’t deserve half the accusations levelled at her because by comparison to the men of the piece and sometimes Diana she was a virtual nun. Sexy yes but not sexually active with impunity.

             1. These people just can’t keep their pants on.

             2. That makes me wonder, then: it often gets brought up that Will likely did have others who he slept with other than Kate. So we he just following that norm? Is that done in this generation as well?

             3. LOL- Too much time on their hands?

                Sounds like a terminal case of satyriasis. Imagine marrying someone who’s all about quantity. Like rabbits. I would wonder about the quality of this swordsman.He doesn’t sound like much of a catch to me.

             4. Em: William and Kate’s relationship started when William was with someone else.

                Every single one of William’s girlfriends has dropped him because he was cheating.

                Only Kate stayed. There have been a few kiss and tells and or hints of his cheating when with Kate.

                Every single break up, and those happened every year, involved a combination of William feeling claustraphobic as he would publicly tell anyone willing to listen, and his wanting to sow wild oats and or Isabella being free for a hot minute and therefore William hoping that she might succumb to his charms. She never did.

             5. Didn’t William have girls brought to his barracks at Sandhurst whilst dating Kate?

    2. Hi Queen Lauri. Yes, very measured article and given the tenor of the comments following on from it, spot on in the thinking of many. There were some very telling statements in KH’s piece, one in particular. While I agree with you about KP’s PR efforts, I think that the trio is running the game, hence, more hopeless than usual. They’re not bright people, but think they know it all – a recipe for disaster! It’s clear W+H are looking for revenge. This latest stunt is ridiculous; no-one would have known a thing had they not announced it to the world.

       1. I think the revenge is about 2 things: 1. revenge for Diana; 2. revenge for being expected to step up royal duties. I think it’s the latter that they have gone full tilt on- they are really pushing back through PR and acting out. If they destroy reputations other than theirs, then it’s a bonus. They are determined to usher in a new age of the Gilded Slacker and hence, this all consuming scorched earth policy.

          1. That’s Prince Gilded Slacker 1 and Prince Gilded Slacker 2 to you and me. Lots of empty rhetoric from both men but they just won’t. Could they be more anodyne with Heads Together, something they profess to be passionate about? What did they expect their future held, I wonder? Most of us have a career path (or several) but are guaranteed nothing. Yet they see nothing but dullness and restrictions where others would see opportunities. At what point are they cut loose?

          2. I agree, I think much of this public parade of self-pity has a lot to do with anger because of a recent interaction with the rest of the family, particularily their father. Probably called out on lack of work, ill-considered PR pronouncements, public dad dancing, etc. So this rumaging through their mother’s pitiable life is mostly revenge. I mainly blame William.

             1. It began with the pap walk (almost called it perp walk) at Christmas time. We all guessed there was something defiant and not quite right about that. Since then, the boys have escalated their tantrums.

                Well said, Fifi, especially this very eloquent observation:

                “So this rumaging through their mother’s pitiable life is mostly revenge”. I feel so sad reading this. They are willfully plundering her life and her death. To me it’s like digging up her corpse to win a bet, it’s so ugly.

17. I have not commented much these days because I have become a part of the team that is rapidly losing interest in William, Kate and Harry. All I see are three very immature people of limited intelligence who are reluctantly doing their jobs and it shows, because they are so bad at what they do.

    1. Boston, I wondered where you had gone. I too have lost interest. I enjoy some of the more insightful commenters and am in awe of KMR’s brilliance as a blogger. But I don’t care about these three people any more. Adieu and God bless to everyone on this blog.

       1. It would make me very sad if Adieu was a thing other that very temporary frustration. Xx

       2. I echo Mrs. BBV. I hope that both of you will be back here and there!

       3. I’d be sorry not to hear your thoughts, Indiana Joanna.

       4. Ah, bummer. Don’t ya’ll go! Your comments are an island of sanity in a Mickey Mouse world.

          I’ve shifted my focus to the war of the Windsors/ secondarily,Windsor/Midds. Lots of palace intrigue, infighting and jockeying. They are airing dirty laundry which sure beats Kate’s outfits. And once the queen is no longer here I think it will get very, very interesting. If they implode, it might weaken the monarchy. Good. Can’t wait. It’s time they were shown for who they truly are, in all their nasty glory. I’m still rocking with shock.

          1. I am going to still follow KMR because I think KMR does a great job on this blog and I learn so much here from all of you, but I may not post as much because I find W/K/H so lacking. How many times can I say I do not like Kate’s outfit, (especially because I think there are only 2-3 per year that are decent) her hair, her bad undergarments, her Kiki McBoring earrings, her lack of intelligence and intellectual curiosity etc…I feel like it brings out my negative side, if that makes sense. I guess as an American, to me they do not behave like Royals , they behave more like really wealthy and entitled trust fund kids who expect the world to fall at their feet and give thanks for their existence. The BRF needs to look to the Royals of Sweden and Spain and how they conduct themselves. It is not too late, but I fear that the Smug Threesome really have no desire to step up.

             1. I know what you mean. The bloom is off my royal rose as well. Though I must admit I’m still learning new things, like the fact that they are really and appallingly thick as a brick and that now that the shine is off, they are just as you say, trust fund kids. They are kids so dull and empty that they can kill your brain cells, believe me, LOL. I had no idea that people like that existed.

             2. I feel the same way, BostonBrahmin. We’ve been criticizing W&K for the same deficiencies for a long time. The only thing that has changed is that we are including Harry now. I too am losing interest.

    2. Me too…*sigh*

    3. You could always look to Victoria of Sweden, Letizia of Spain, Maxima of the Netherlands, etc. as some more interesting royal watching. They have plenty of their own foibles, but at least they know how to put their game faces on and get the job done.

    4. I agree but I feel if only the pro wkfaction out there (not just here but at large, I only really come here) comment they -as in wk, win. I don’t know if any of their team have found their way over here. A competent team would scour the web to what was being said pro and con wise but the key word competent doesn’t seem to exist in their lexicon or universe.
       So it’s a balance.
       So I comment away and KMR usually includes my fav swedes too =)

    5. Although it is sad to see you and the others go away, I understand your point. Best wishes to you. Come back anytime.

18. The whole thing is just obscene. And knowing Kate’s love of both theme dressing and copying Diana’s looks, it’s highly possible that this is going to be one tacky, awful affair. George will be dressed in a copy of one of daddy’s old outfits. Ugh.

    1. Speaking of Kate copying Diana, how about the outfit Diana wore to her father’s funeral?

       https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/ca/d4/44/cad444d9a003369fb5f9951350093b23.jpg

       1. She does love her buttons, after all.

       2. Oh Hera- that would be so creepy.

19. Read the anecdote about Camilla at the very bottom of this article. To me this sums up this lady, much maligned but I never ever forget why my favourite Royal engagement of the year is the children Christmas party at Clarence House that Camilla hosts.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4652314/How-Camilla-confident-flirty-adored-home.html

    1. A lovely anecdote, Mrs BBV. I wouldn’t call her act so much ‘loyal’ as very considerate, actually kind. One can learn how to be gracious from her. On the other hand perhaps in the upper crust it’s just plain mindless loyalty (don’t think so).

       I really like Camilla. I would hit a pub with her anytime. I don’t know her at all, I find, but the children’s Christmas party is also my favourite event. There is nothing fake in her behaviour or attitude. She is really there for them and serves them happily. I imagine she is fabulous with her grandchildren.

       I think she is much maligned as well. And it’s disturbing to think that The Boys are stirring up so much about Diana that a lot of the goodwill that Camilla has earned over the years may be in jeopardy because of their adolescent spite towards their father.

       1. That Christmas event is my favorite. Serving the kids, the parents can relax and have a lovely time and a drink and food, Camilla takes care of everything for them… It’s such a lovely thing to do–truly serving others.

20. You know, for the idea that this is too big a deal and hard to keep private, thus prompting an official announcement of a private event from KP – there are zero pictures or anything so far. If they had said nothing, there would be nothing in the news about it.

    They wanted the people to know this was happening. This was a deliberate release of information.

    1. +1 there was literally nothing else about this dedication except KPs statement. So why bother releasing a statement? If they hadn’t, literally no one would have known about it. Perhaps they wanted paps to try and get photos so that they could then yell about press intrusion again, but it didn’t work.

       1. “So why bother releasing a statement? If they hadn’t, literally no one would have known about it.”

          But they did want people to know about it. There’s still write-ups, just without current images. But it is another piece written about Diana’s death, pictures of W+H as kids, pulling at the heart strings, a reminder. William and Harry have had a campaign to keep their mother in the forefront during the 20th anniversary of her death.

          Whether photographers were thwarted as they camped out on approach by road, who knows. It’s odd that no outlets covered it. Perhaps the royals helicoptered in, with no way to be seen.

Comments are closed.