Thread: Goodbye England's rose, may you ever grow in our hearts Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=023189
Posted by Stoker (# 11939) on :
 
I was recently reflecting that this vomit inducing bout of musical sycophancy is actually the biggest selling single in the world (33 million sold).

So why is it never mentioned, played or discussed in public?

To me, the fact that it is so corny, sycophantic and self indulgent means it sums up the hideous display of "public grief" we saw at the time of Diana's death.

Perhaps it's like when you get really drunk and do something really offensive or embarrasing. Everyone can remember it, but no-one wants to mention it!
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stoker:
So why is it never mentioned, played or discussed in public?
Because it's shit.
 
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Stoker:
So why is it never mentioned, played or discussed in public?
Because it's shit.
(American "obviously I don't get it" moment)

So what, people download it, and then don't admit they like it?
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
Heard it played in a supermarket the other day. Luckily it's not on a lot now.

However, I must admit I've never ever really listened to the lyrics; I just find it a variation of the original 'Candle in the Wind', with slightly different tune and text. And it seems to me, that is all there is. [Biased]
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
So what, people download it, and then don't admit they like it?
Oh no, every one of those 33m sales was in the first few months after Diana died. It was being bought in vast numbers by a bunch of over-emotional sheeple who thought that having a copy in their houses somehow made them part of the event.
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
When I heard the news of Diana's death, Candle in the wind was the first song I thought of. In fact, if memory serves, I actually sat down at a piano and played it. Should I claim prior art?
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
You have always been a visionary, Euty. Or is that an audionary? [Smile]
 
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on :
 
I play it every day, sometimes twice.

AtB, Pyx_e
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
You have always been a visionary, Euty. Or is that an audionary? [Smile]
Extraudionary, please.
 
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
I play it every day, sometimes twice.

AtB, Pyx_e
See, I sense that you're being sarcastic, but at the same time I would really respect someone who admitted something like that, especially considering the fact that there is apparently some intrinsic popular shame in being moved by the song. Courage. Impressive.


This has nothing to do with my personal opinion-- I loved the original song, as a lovely homage to Marilyn Monroe, and always thought Diana deserved more than a retread. But to hell with me and my opinion-- if it touched someone, and helped them center themselves in a time of inarguable national grief, who the hell am I to turn up my nose?

[ 23. June 2012, 08:12: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
 
Posted by Mark Betts (# 17074) on :
 
Silly maudlin emotional rubbish - I was sad when she died, don't get me wrong, but this song seemed to reduce the whole occasion to ridicule.
 
Posted by Niteowl2 (# 15841) on :
 
When I heard the song I got the feeling that Elton John forgot until 5 minutes before the funeral that he was supposed to do a song to honor Diana. He really could have done much, much better than that sappy recycled reject.

[ 23. June 2012, 08:16: Message edited by: Niteowl2 ]
 
Posted by Think² (# 1984) on :
 
I thought it was an attempt to romanticise her death by tying it to the popular image of Marilyn Munroe (not that her actual death was romantic either). Raise her above the sleaze etc - and using a pre-existing tune gives instant familiarity.

I felt the public putting their emotional needs above those of the immediate family, especially the children, was unpleasant and thoughtless. Having the children walk behind their mother's coffin in front of millions was quasi-abusive frankly. But can you imagine the public reaction if they had announced a private funeral for the sake of the children ? (Perhaps with a public memorial service afterwards.) At that time I think there quite possibly would have been riots - the whole thing was insane.
 
Posted by George Spigot (# 253) on :
 
I never understood the mass grief that happened. It was very sad it happened of course but.....

I never met her. Only knew her from television and I suspect the same is true for 99.9% of the peep who stood weeping at the barriers. I don't get where the emotional connection for someone you don't know comes from. I was sadder when Dougles Adams died and that came from having read all his books.

As for the song in question I think this one is a lot better.

Elton John sings an emotional song.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
How wise, enlightened, kind, understanding ...
 
Posted by Clint Boggis (# 633) on :
 
Has someone died?
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stoker:

Perhaps it's like when you get really drunk and do something really offensive or embarrasing. Everyone can remember it, but no-one wants to mention it!
Um ... I had totally forgotten it 'till you mentioned it here! I was completely perplexed by the whole thing at the time, still am. I avoided it all by leaving the TV and radio off.
 
Posted by George Spigot (# 253) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
How wise, enlightened, kind, understanding ...
Well I certainly don't think of myself as wise. As my post states I admit it's something I don't understand and would be grateful if others could enlighten me.

Kind? Well I can see how it would be callous to mock people who are grieving for a lost friend or relative. I'm pointing out the fact that if I read about somebody dying in the newspaper. Someone I didn't know. I could certainly empathise with the family and friends and know that they must be feeling awful. But I couldn't grieve for the dead person myself because, again I didn't know them.

Until Diana's death I thought everyone felt the same way about this. The mass grief was a real eye opener to me and to this day I still don't understand it.

enlighten
 
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
I can't say I've ever heard Candle in the Wind called by the alternative title before. (I lead a sheltered life.)

How is it different to 'Fields of Gold' which many shipmates wanted to play at the death of Miss Molly?

I guess in times of grief, national or personal, you play whatever you find helpful at the time (my brother asked for 'Don't worry be happy' and 'Always look on the bright side of life / death' to be played at his funeral - although very cheesy, they both made us smile and laugh as well as feeling sad, so he chose well). And it doesn't really matter whether 5 million others or nobody else finds the same tune helpful.
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
All royalties of the song go to the Princess of Wales' Memorial fund so whatever the demerits of the song it has done some good. Fairly appropriate, too, in memory of someone who was involved in charity work.

Elton John was apparently a very good friend of Diana's, and he asked Taupin to write new words for the tune, and organized the production side of things for the release of it, as a money-making tribute for her charities. It's never been re-leased (according to Wikipedia), and Elton never plays it. According to Wiki he never shall unless requested by Diana's sons.

It was a song of the moment, which is maybe why there's no demand nowadays. No doubt there's also been a bit of sober reflection on the hysteria of that time, too. But I feel it has to be said that if people reacted in such an extraordinary way - which they did - in such numbers, something was going on, in those lives, even if not realistically connected with the death of an ex-royal, future king-mother, and then-girlfriend of a millionaire playboy.

I have to admit I personally felt it was rather cringe-worthy at the funeral; but I also realized that Elton John, as her friend, was doing not only what he had been asked to do and was able to do, but offering his own personal tribute. Compared to some choices of music I've heard and allowed at funerals, it compares pretty well.

Diana herself, quite possibly, would've been much happier with it than the superb Tavener 'Song for Athene', played in the service, or the Te Kanawa excerpt from Verdi's Requiem (I think?); neither of which could arguably be said to have reflected her own personal preferences in music.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
I just assumed at the time that the mass grief reflected something archetypal going on in people, maybe 'death of a princess', as in fairy tales, or the Cinderella theme, the unwanted wife, the damaged feminine, and so on.

But it would be quite difficult to actually ascertain this, although I suppose you could interview people.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I can't say I've ever heard Candle in the Wind called by the alternative title before. (I lead a sheltered life.)

How is it different to 'Fields of Gold' which many shipmates wanted to play at the death of Miss Molly?

Nobody ever considered turning a cheesy song into something worse for Miss Molly.
 
Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
When I heard the news of Diana's death, Candle in the wind was the first song I thought of. In fact, if memory serves, I actually sat down at a piano and played it. Should I claim prior art?
A person named Diana died and the first song that came to your mind begins, "Goodbye, Norma Jean?"
 
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
When I heard the news of Diana's death, Candle in the wind was the first song I thought of. In fact, if memory serves, I actually sat down at a piano and played it. Should I claim prior art?
A person named Diana died and the first song that came to your mind begins, "Goodbye, Norma Jean?"
Not to speak for Eutychus, but I think some of us can make the leap from the actual name used in the song, to "this is a song about an immensely popular famous woman who was adored from afar by many, and who died tragically young." I mean, there is a song called "Diana" so I suppose someone with a more literal turn of mind might have sat down to play that upon hearing of Diana's death, but which of the songs seems to you more appropriate to the occasion?
 
Posted by M. (# 3291) on :
 
I can remember when I heard that Elton John was to sing at the funeral, my first thought, with horror, was 'Oh no, he'll do 'Candle in the Wind''.

I was not a fan of the Princess of Wales at all and regarded all the emotion at the time as some sort of collective madness. Although I also recall the odd feeling of disbelief and strangeness when I first heard the news of her death, so perhaps I slightly shared in that madness, albeit briefly.

M.
 
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
I play it every day, sometimes twice.

AtB, Pyx_e
See, I sense that you're being sarcastic, but at the same time I would really respect someone who admitted something like that, especially considering the fact that there is apparently some intrinsic popular shame in being moved by the song. Courage. Impressive.


This has nothing to do with my personal opinion-- I loved the original song, as a lovely homage to Marilyn Monroe, and always thought Diana deserved more than a retread. But to hell with me and my opinion-- if it touched someone, and helped them center themselves in a time of inarguable national grief, who the hell am I to turn up my nose?
It's simpler than that. We used to have cats shit on the grass all the time. I tested various tunes and CitW was (and remains) the most effective/hated by cats about to have a shit.

Super sensative motion detectors pick up the puckering of a cats anus within 27 meters of my back door and the 6 hidden speakers blare it out.

Neighbours are getting a bit pissy mind.

Atb Pyx_e.

[ 23. June 2012, 15:01: Message edited by: Pyx_e ]
 
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
I find 'Who let the dogs out?' to be a much more effective deterrent.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
George me old Spigot, when she was killed my first reaction was a grim, head shaking 'an accident waiting to happen'. My wife and daughter reacted otherwise. Brit. understatement. So we eventually drove up to Althorp and my little girl picked some wild flowers and I insisted, against my wife's hesistancy, that we take them to the House and we did and the there was a massive collection of flowers already and the police were excellent. Still moved.

The mood had caught. Me. The way Beatrice Campbell wrote and broadcast on her, what Bishop Chartres said about her theology blowing him away. In an Indian restaurant later that week the waiter, from the subcontinent, was desperate to talk about it. I worked at Northampton University where the intranet traffic was unfettered that week and I responded as here to the unfeeling, modern, analytical, 'superior', bewildered response that my initial one is a subset of.

I was congratulated by my head of department, which amazed me. For saying what the little people all thought.

The waiter resonated strongly when I said that a chief of the tribe had died. A KING had died. A leader of the kin. One of us. It's all about projection of the idealized self (religion), transference even. Mystical. Tribal. Shamanistic.

You don't have to be Persian to be vastly moved by Xerxes Largo. I find it amazing that late modern people cannot make the transition to postmodern, to open up to all of this. To being anthropos. Man the animal.

Her life and death were Greek tragedy. The tide of flowers in Mall. It was noted on the day of her funeral that there was NO recorded crime in London. A very law abiding pastor friend was the M1 heading south as the cortege approached. EVERYBODY stopped and got out and waited and watched in silence. Apart the police who harrassed people who ALL ignored them. They gave up.

One of the reasons we ALL love Clive James is that he loves ALL of culture, high and low, which are inseperable and as in non-standard Englishes, to be RESPECTED.

Do you remember when the cortege started ? Only poor ONE woman lost control by crying out 'Diana!'. This was an AWESOME tribal spectacle. To not be moved by it takes an ... unworthy effort. Or something clinical is it work.

In the ... yeah, awesome series World At War a German socialist reflected how in one of the Nazi rallies, possibly Nuremberg, he was in the crowd and felt such eros - longing - to be part of it, whilst utterly rejecting it.

He was real.

Part of us had died and we mourned. Simple. Let's analyse all we want and can. And respect ourselves and our 'lesser' brothers and sisters too.

Poor rhetoric I'm sure.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Sorry, the flowers in the Mall - given away free by all the florists. I wore a mourning ribbon on my jacket lapel. School girls were impressed.

We are to mourn with the mourning are we not? Weep with those who weep. Pity those who can't ...
 
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by M.:
I was not a fan of the Princess of Wales at all and regarded all the emotion at the time as some sort of collective madness. Although I also recall the odd feeling of disbelief and strangeness when I first heard the news of her death, so perhaps I slightly shared in that madness, albeit briefly.
I wasn't a fan of Diana's either but think her death keyed into a number of archetypes. There was the death of the fairytale princess with the cold, indifferent husband; the glamorous, charitable princess who was the role model for young girls; one of a pair of star-crossed lovers, tragically killed before they could marry (well, who knows); the young mother of two boys; and probably more I haven't thought of. People may well have seen in it something they could relate to, but that something would have been different, depending on the person.
 
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on :
 
Or.......

We were as caught up in the culture of fame, sex and celebrity that reflects our oh too human desire or passion for idolatry that as the princess of who we had raised up on a stick to admire, covet and spit at died so a brief window on the hopelessness of our lives overcame us and we wailed that she had dared show us how utterly vacuous, fetid and broken our lives had become.

We did not greave her, we wailed because the utter truth of our lives were shown us. That we would happily leave our own parents in a puddle of piss without a visit for weeks on end but would throw flowers at a poor women’s body and get pissed and maudlin for days afterwards because papers we paid for hounded her.

So the gods of this world were, are and always will be.


AtB, Pyx_e

As for Diana, none of the above was about her, it was about us. May she rest in peace.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Another facet of the same jewel Pyx_e. Just a darker one that you bring to the party. We need to be kinder Pyx_e. To ourselves.
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
A person named Diana died and the first song that came to your mind begins, "Goodbye, Norma Jean?"
Well yes, for pretty much the reasons Chorister gives.
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
Not Chorister. Trudy. Some female host or other [Hot and Hormonal] (you can see why the jump from "Norma Jean" to "Diana" wasn't too challenging for me...)

[ 23. June 2012, 16:40: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
 
Posted by the giant cheeseburger (# 10942) on :
 
Since it was played in a church service by Elton John, can we please have this thread transferred to Dead Horses? [Snigger]
 
Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
When I heard the news of Diana's death, Candle in the wind was the first song I thought of. In fact, if memory serves, I actually sat down at a piano and played it. Should I claim prior art?
A person named Diana died and the first song that came to your mind begins, "Goodbye, Norma Jean?"
"Elton John has a thing for writing songs about dead blondes." - Keith Richards

link
 
Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
A person named Diana died and the first song that came to your mind begins, "Goodbye, Norma Jean?"
Well yes, for pretty much the reasons Chorister gives.
Like M, I assumed Elton John would play Candle in the Wind because Elton John was going to play at Diana's funeral. Taupin wrote new lyrics because the lyrics about Marilyn Monroe didn't really apply to Diana. Other than being blonde and famous the two women weren't really that much alike. Even the chorus which stayed unchanged in Goodbye England's Rose applies much more to Marilyn Monroe.

I suppose Bernie Taupin could have changed the words of Daniel to Diana. I'm always surprised at the number of people who remember the song Daniel because somebody named Daniel died. In the song, Daniel didn't die. He moved to Spain. It's right there in the first two lines, "Daniel is travelling tonight on a plane. I can see the red tail lights heading for Spain." I'm sure it's the, "Lord, I miss Daniel, oh I miss him so much," line that does it.

Don't even get me started on Levon...
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
? Steady, that's SACRED, wotchew mean ?
 
Posted by M. (# 3291) on :
 
I want to add that my mood changed very swiftly - by the next day - and I was completely unmoved by the funeral. I thought it was completely over the top and couldn't understand the emotion by then.

You have to be sorry that someone died in that way but for crying out loud.

M.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by M.:
I was not a fan of the Princess of Wales at all and regarded all the emotion at the time as some sort of collective madness. Although I also recall the odd feeling of disbelief and strangeness when I first heard the news of her death, so perhaps I slightly shared in that madness, albeit briefly.
I wasn't a fan of Diana's either but think her death keyed into a number of archetypes. There was the death of the fairytale princess with the cold, indifferent husband; the glamorous, charitable princess who was the role model for young girls; one of a pair of star-crossed lovers, tragically killed before they could marry (well, who knows); the young mother of two boys; and probably more I haven't thought of. People may well have seen in it something they could relate to, but that something would have been different, depending on the person.
Yes, I thought it was folk religion, possibly tied up with the damaged feminine, or damaged goddess figure. I went along to Kensington Palace to see the flowers, and it was an amazing spectacle, and I thought, very moving. Just the silence of the crowd, the carpet of flowers, the death of The Princess who had come to the tower in order to find life, but found death. Eerie.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
At least it was a nail in the coffin of the official Conservatives.
 
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Yes, I thought it was folk religion, possibly tied up with the damaged feminine, or damaged goddess figure. I went along to Kensington Palace to see the flowers, and it was an amazing spectacle, and I thought, very moving. Just the silence of the crowd, the carpet of flowers, the death of The Princess who had come to the tower in order to find life, but found death. Eerie.
Yes (sorry, I didn't see your earlier post). I went to Birmingham, and there were crowds of people standing around outside the cathedral in silence, just looking at the flowers that covered a large part of the lawn, and sad-eyed women in black coming to lay more.

quote:
Originally posted by M.:
I want to add that my mood changed very swiftly - by the next day - and I was completely unmoved by the funeral. I thought it was completely over the top and couldn't understand the emotion by then.
I was unmoved until I saw the two young princes walking behind the coffin. I was OK after that - but knew it had got well and truly out of hand when they had Books of Condolences everywhere you went, including by the checkouts in the supermarket.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Ah, but one thing that we can say about folk religion is that it is well and truly naff. So, when the aesthetes and the intellectuals turn their noses up at the vulgarity, we know (sometimes) that we are on to something vibrant. Not always true, mind you.

I see the parallel with popular culture - things like horror and sci-fi are vibrant, and used to attract disapproval, but now, by a normal process of cultural reversal, are trendy. So look for something else naff!

Well, folk Christianity is naff, isn't it? Touch the toe of St Peter in the cathedral.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Happy to be naff. Eric Sykes taught me that. I signed the book. Just once of course. We British (whether from Pakistan, Jamaica, Tanzania or the Irish Republic or an old mongrel like me) EXCEL at naff. Johnny foreign eat your heart out. With Coleman's. The Jubilee and its awful concert (apart from Tom Jones). The North European Monsoon.

Aye the boys behind the coffin, noblesse certainly obliged there.
 
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Ah, but one thing that we can say about folk religion is that it is well and truly naff. So, when the aesthetes and the intellectuals turn their noses up at the vulgarity, we know (sometimes) that we are on to something vibrant. Not always true, mind you.
There were cut-out coupons in the local paper too, that you could sign and send back which would be pasted into a book to be sent to the Palace.

I didn't mind that; what I thought was really senseless, and still do, is the custom that's sprung up of leaving teddy bears at accident sites along with the flowers. Flowers I can understand, and they're ephemeral, but soft toys? I remember seeing those around the railings of Kensington Palace and wondering why.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Come on Ariel. Reach in, reach back, reach down. They are an appalling sad mess six months later in the rain and should evoke NOTHING but our sympathy and blessing nonetheless and BECAUSE of that.
 
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:

As for Diana, none of the above was about her, it was about us. May she rest in peace.
Indeed. I remember Sue Townsend saying as much.

I'll add that I believe the issue of publically showing grief and unhappiness is not an easy one in Britain, and this was a time when it became OK to do so.

Group moods are very powerful. I remember going to sign the book of remembrance in Chester cathedral and feeling a bit emotional as I walked away from the book. Later I was to think that this was all over the top, but I got caught up in the group mood.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Aw, come on, teddy bears are JUST CUTE. And as the man said, when they are all wet and soggy in the rain, they are INCREDIBLY CUTE.

I have 50 in the back of my van, actually, a fiver each, or the whole lot for a century.
 
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
I can remember watching news footage from other countries over the years, showing scenes of great public emotion over 'the death of our great leader', and thinking 'It could never happen in Britain.' But that was in the days of the British stiff upper-lip - those days are gone. It was as if the whole country had gone on an Alpha Weekend....
 
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
I remember Sue Townsend saying as much.

And an article and thread on the Ship of Fools about it. One of the first I remember.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
It was a very strange time, and the song was mandated as The Song For Diana. It was quite a nice song beforehand, but the rework was not very good. However, as the Official Di Is Dead Song it had to be bought.

EJ would have done better, IMO, to have done "Song for Guy", which a) is a far better song, and one of his best and b) has very good words at the end - as most of it is an instrumental - when he sings "Life, is a temporary thing".

In general, when you look at some of the songs that have sold well, there is not always a correlation between the sales and the quality of the song. I mean "Shaddupayerface" sold well. Need I say any more?
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Think²:
Having the children walk behind their mother's coffin in front of millions was quasi-abusive frankly.
The story in the American press was that this was what William wanted to do, that he had quite a row with his father because it was thought unseemly for royals to walk. In the end, Charles relented and Phillip agreed to walk with them so that all the men of the family would be together. At least that's the version we heard.
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Think²:
I felt the public putting their emotional needs above those of the immediate family, especially the children, was unpleasant and thoughtless. Having the children walk behind their mother's coffin in front of millions was quasi-abusive frankly.
Isn't that what families usually do at funerals? I appreciate the point you're making about 'in front of millions' - but it's perfectly normal funeral practice, and usually a very important element for the mourners themselves that they walk with their deceased loved one. I presume the children would not have been compelled to do anything they weren't comfortable with, and they looked, under the circumstances, totally okay with it. I think it was right that did so, if that was what they wanted for themselves.
 
Posted by Ondergard (# 9324) on :
 
The night/day Diana died, my godson was being baptised in London, and we had to be up very early in Northamptonshire to get there on time.

My wife's sister was very ill at the time (she actually died a few months later) and that morning I jumped out of bed and straight into the shower. My wife burst into the shower room crying her eyes out, and saying "I don't believe it, she's died, she's died!"

I got out of the shower and said, "Who? Who's died?"

She responded, "Diana, the Princess of Wales!"

My immediate response, my gut response, and a response which was modified not a whit in the next few weeks was to say, "For fuck's sake! I thought it was someone important!"

That morning, I just got back into the shower and carried on getting ready for the important event of that day, standing Godfather to one of friend's sons.

The rest of the event just got resolutely switched off on radio and television as soon as the name was invoked.

I spent the day of the funeral on a splendidly empty golf course.

I could not then, and cannot now, understand the ridiculous hysteria. It was then and it is now totally ridiculous and obnoxious.

A young mother died in tragic circumstances because she failed to do up her seat belt and her paramour's driver was drunk. How sad. Now move on, it's none of our business.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
You speak for yourself. YOU move on.
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
I could never understand the obsession with Diana. To me she was a silly girl who had entered into an unsuitable marriage. She was just as culpable as Charles for all that transpired.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Really ? His adultery ? His altogether shabby treatment of her ? She only had herself to blame eh ? So do you.
 
Posted by PD (# 12436) on :
 
I am afraid my initial reaction was somewhat along the lines of "that's going to fuck up the cricket coverage." My sympathy level for Diana was about zero, had been for months, and Charles was not doing any better. The wave of hysteria that followed her death left me with a slight but immoveable feeling of disgust.

Elson John's song was about right, though, my whole family reacted to it by saying either 'turn that Crap off' or making fake retching noises.

PD
 
Posted by North East Quine (# 13049) on :
 
Originally posted by bib

quote:
To me she was a silly girl who had entered into an unsuitable marriage. She was just as culpable as Charles for all that transpired.
She was only a teenager when she got engaged, and only days past her twentieth birthday when she was married. William was born prior to her 21st birthday. Charles was 32 at the time of the engagement and marriage. The marriage may have been unsuitable, but to criticise a teenager for being silly, when surrounded by older and, one would hope, wiser people seems harsh.
 
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :
 
I think she may have been a silly girl but perhaps a better marriage might have helped her make something better of herself, instead of turning into a silly/ screwed-up (delete according to your degree of sympathy) woman. I should think that by the end it must have been a wretched business for all concerned.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
I could never understand the obsession with Diana. To me she was a silly girl who had entered into an unsuitable marriage. She was just as culpable as Charles for all that transpired.
Neither can be held responsible for the match. It was an arranged marriage. The heir had to have kin, and the search for the right kind of mildly blue-blooded virgin was getting nowhere. Diana ticked most of the boxes, including the important ones, and they were railroaded into it.
 
Posted by George Spigot (# 253) on :
 
I wonder if there's any crossover between people who didn't feel affected much and people who are not at all royalist and think that having a royal family is a bad ideal.
 
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :
 
I wouldn't call the marriage "arranged," simply because Prince Charles was being pressured to marry. He had freedom of choice and Diana herself could easily have backed away as many young women before her had done. Charles was actually dating her sister Sarah when Diana began going along to the group activities, after which he became interested in Diana. Throughout the courtship Diana expressed a love of the country and a passion for outdoor sports (not), so Charles had every reason to believe that they had shared interests.

I'm sure Diana wasn't the first eagar-to-please girl to pretend to care about her dates's interests and Charles wouldn't be the first man to become so focused on a pretty face that he didn't notice that there wasn't much behind it. (Diana tried and failed twice at her "O" levels.) I think they weren't well suited at all but I don't put all the blame on Charles simply because he was older. Not for nothing did one of Diana's teachers send home a note saying that Diana was, "The most manipulative girl I've ever known."

By the time Diana had had love affairs with James Hewitt and a few other men and Charles had resumed relations with Camilla they had learned that they had nothing at all in common.

What's too bad is that they couldn't have arranged a quiet divorce, concluding with a formal announcement to the press, but Diana herself made that impossible by telling her own side of things to Andrew Morton, meant for publication in the Times. It was at that time that I became firmly, "On Charles side." Not only was it against decent form to air one's dirty laundry in public that way but she knew Charles was not in a position where he could defend himself.
 
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
I wonder if there's any crossover between people who didn't feel affected much and people who are not at all royalist and think that having a royal family is a bad ideal.
I take the Samuelian position myself [Biased] and believe that I did so then as well. I think though that Diana was seen as a victim of the royal family and therefore I sympathised with her. Like with Fergie, she was seen as proof of the fucked-upness of the royal family and the monarchy per se.
 
Posted by Wood (# 7) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
sheeple
Like, really, Marv?

I mean, really?
 
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
I wonder if there's any crossover between people who didn't feel affected much and people who are not at all royalist and think that having a royal family is a bad ideal.
I take the Samuelian position myself [Biased] and believe that I did so then as well. I think though that Diana was seen as a victim of the royal family and therefore I sympathised with her. Like with Fergie, she was seen as proof of the fucked-upness of the royal family and the monarchy per se.
I'm just the opposite. I do love the Royal family and see Diana as someone who rebuffed all their attempts to help her and liked to enjoy the perks of being Princess of Wales without requiring much of herself in return. Example: Enjoying all the tax paid for jewels, clothing and cars, while failing to buy British.

My royalist feelings back Princess Anne who works hard for over 200 charities in a capacity that caused one charity head to remark that she would take one Anne over twenty Dianas any day.
While Diana was part of the family, both the Queen and Anne worked about three times the hours that Diana did but Diana won the "hearts of the people," and the title of "The Caring Princess," because she had the media savvy to call the press before each hospital visit and to pose charmingly for their cameras. Of course being so much prettier than Anne didn't hurt.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
But this is all so literalist. I think that people responded to a fairy-story, with an abandoned princess, a ruined goddess, a dying victim of cruel Ugly Relatives, and so on.

Myth.
 
Posted by Wood (# 7) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But this is all so literalist. I think that people responded to a fairy-story, with an abandoned princess, a ruined goddess, a dying victim of cruel Ugly Relatives, and so on.

Myth.
I think this is an exceptionally good point. People who did not really know what a fairy tale was suddenly grasped on this story and made it one, with all the undertones of blood and horror that true fairy tales have.

I wrote a few years ago a piece of fiction for a client that presented the idea of Diana deified as the Goddess of the Age, the representation of "self-serving grief and the madness of crowds".

At the time, it was true. Now, perhaps not so much.

[ 25. June 2012, 14:46: Message edited by: Wood ]
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
I wonder if there's any crossover between people who didn't feel affected much and people who are not at all royalist and think that having a royal family is a bad ideal.
I'm very much a royalist, and I thought the whole thing was completely ridiculous.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Ditto. I quite like the Royal Family on the whole but I never was a fan of Diana. I think many of those of us who thought it was absurd didn't like to say so because it looked like speaking ill of the dead.

I also am going to ask how much of the hysteria was manufactured by the Spencer family? (I don't have the answer to this.)

There was a definitely a desire to show Diana as the doting, perfect mother, and how would those poor boys cope now that their father was the sole surviving parent? Turns out that Charles has done an alright job AFAICT.

[Edited to make sense [Hot and Hormonal] ]

[ 25. June 2012, 15:10: Message edited by: la vie en rouge ]
 
Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
Originally posted by bib

quote:
To me she was a silly girl who had entered into an unsuitable marriage. She was just as culpable as Charles for all that transpired.
She was only a teenager when she got engaged, and only days past her twentieth birthday when she was married. William was born prior to her 21st birthday. Charles was 32 at the time of the engagement and marriage. The marriage may have been unsuitable, but to criticise a teenager for being silly, when surrounded by older and, one would hope, wiser people seems harsh.
From the original Candle in the Wind

quote:
They crawled out of the woodwork
And they whispered into your brain
They set you on the treadmill
And they made you change your name
Maybe, Eutychus and Trudy Scrumptious had a point.
 
Posted by windsofchange (# 13000) on :
 
quote:
Prince Philip Sleeping in the streets and pulling out their hair for someone they never knew. And they think we're mad!
quote:
HM Queen Elizabeth II Nowadays people want glamor and tears, the grand performance. I've never been good at that.
- (The Queen, 2006)

[ 25. June 2012, 15:38: Message edited by: windsofchange ]
 
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
EJ would have done better, IMO, to have done "Song for Guy", which a) is a far better song, and one of his best and b) has very good words at the end - as most of it is an instrumental - when he sings "Life, is a temporary thing".
EJ's "Goodbye, yellow brick road" album begins with a really quite good instrumental piece, "Funeral for a friend", seguing into "Love lies bleeding". Now, that would have been a good piece for the service, albeit not with a tempo or tact usually displayed at funerals.
 
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But this is all so literalist. I think that people responded to a fairy-story, with an abandoned princess, a ruined goddess, a dying victim of cruel Ugly Relatives, and so on.

Myth.
I love this, esp the Ugly Relatives. I'm reminded that the Diana cult didn't really get going until after the birth of William when she lost 30 pounds and started to look really chic in the clothes her fashion experts selected. Diana binged and vomited and was worshipped. Fergie binged and didn't vomit and was vilified.
 
Posted by art dunce (# 9258) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Think²:


I felt the public putting their emotional needs above those of the immediate family, especially the children, was unpleasant and thoughtless. Having the children walk behind their mother's coffin in front of millions was quasi-abusive frankly. But can you imagine the public reaction if they had announced a private funeral for the sake of the children ? (Perhaps with a public memorial service afterwards.) At that time I think there quite possibly would have been riots - the whole thing was insane.
My own mother died, after a long illness, in the same hour as Diana although her passing wasn't a blip on the radar in a small adobe house in rural New Mexico. Her funeral simple and small. Throughout the Diana outpouring I felt a kindship with those boys who are different from me in every possible way . I could only imagine how good it would feel that so many people loved and mourned your mother, that her passing wouldn't go unnoticed and that millions of people were praying for her and you in that dark hour. In my altered state the fact that the wole world seemed to be mourning at the same time as me was helpful in an odd way and I always look back at those times with a strange sense of gratitude for the connectedness I felt in a time when the situation could have led to isolation and self pity.
 
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But this is all so literalist. I think that people responded to a fairy-story, with an abandoned princess, a ruined goddess, a dying victim of cruel Ugly Relatives, and so on.

Myth.
I love this, esp the Ugly Relatives. I'm reminded that the Diana cult didn't really get going until after the birth of William when she lost 30 pounds ...
Boy, that sure is not how I remember it. I recall the obsessive adulation starting with the announcement of the engagement and continuing right through every agonizing minute of the wedding coverage. I was 16 at the time and photos of me from that summer show me and many of my friends wearing sadly misguided "Princess Di" style ruffled blouses -- those who were lucky could even manage the hairstyle.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by art dunce:
In my altered state the fact that the wole world seemed to be mourning at the same time as me was helpful in an odd way and I always look back at those times with a strange sense of gratitude for the connectedness I felt in a time when the situation could have led to isolation and self pity.
One of my parents died the same day as a well-known (and well-loved) person in the same city. I also felt that shared mourning and connectedness. Thank you for explaining this better that I could.
 
Posted by Amazing Grace (# 95) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But this is all so literalist. I think that people responded to a fairy-story, with an abandoned princess, a ruined goddess, a dying victim of cruel Ugly Relatives, and so on.

Myth.
I love this, esp the Ugly Relatives. I'm reminded that the Diana cult didn't really get going until after the birth of William when she lost 30 pounds ...
Boy, that sure is not how I remember it. I recall the obsessive adulation starting with the announcement of the engagement and continuing right through every agonizing minute of the wedding coverage. I was 16 at the time and photos of me from that summer show me and many of my friends wearing sadly misguided "Princess Di" style ruffled blouses -- those who were lucky could even manage the hairstyle.
Yep. That's how I remember it. It was Dianamania.

The abandoned princess/Ugly Relatives part only really got going a few years later, after the cracks (and the apparently carefully managed press) really started appearing.
 
Posted by North East Quine (# 13049) on :
 
My recollection is the same as Trudy. I, too, was 16 when she got engaged. There was a certain amount of bewilderment amongst my friends at school, all just three years younger than Diana - we had all been encouraged to work hard at school and given the strong message that teenage marriage was A Bad Thing; and then suddenly the papers were full of stories about how wonderful, how romantic, it was settling down in your teens. For me, there seemed to be a big disconnect between the world as I had understood it, and the world as it was now presented. Up to then, teenage marriage was something that happened to girls who got pregnant and "had" to get married, and who were held up as an Awful Warning. By the time I left school at 18, Diana had been engaged, married, pregnant, had had William. We schoolgirls were quite fascinated by the whole thing. Everything happened in such rapid succession that it was a constant topic of conversation. And yes, we all had the pie frilled blouses.
 
Posted by Gill H (# 68) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:

I suppose Bernie Taupin could have changed the words of Daniel to Diana. I'm always surprised at the number of people who remember the song Daniel because somebody named Daniel died. In the song, Daniel didn't die. He moved to Spain. It's right there in the first two lines, "Daniel is travelling tonight on a plane. I can see the red tail lights heading for Spain." I'm sure it's the, "Lord, I miss Daniel, oh I miss him so much," line that does it.
I'm off to start a new Heaven thread on meanings of songs - thanks.

As for the whole Diana thing, we were with friends the night before watching 'Evita' which had just come out on video. We commented on the scenes of hysterical mourning at Eva's death, and said we couldn't imagine such a thing happening in Britain.

Little did we know...

[ 26. June 2012, 05:39: Message edited by: Gill H ]
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But this is all so literalist. I think that people responded to a fairy-story, with an abandoned princess, a ruined goddess, a dying victim of cruel Ugly Relatives, and so on.

Myth.
I love this, esp the Ugly Relatives. I'm reminded that the Diana cult didn't really get going until after the birth of William when she lost 30 pounds and started to look really chic in the clothes her fashion experts selected. Diana binged and vomited and was worshipped. Fergie binged and didn't vomit and was vilified.
Yes, it's quite complicated, I suppose. The Fair Princess was shown as suffering, rejected for another woman, who can be shown as wicked, and contrasts with over-weight princesses, who were far too worldly (toe-sucking).

Then, there's the mascara in that famous interview; I think that swung it. With eyes like that, who would not want to love someone so doomed? Sex and death, innit?

It's like about 6 fairy-stories wrapped in one.

Ah, but who's next?
 
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Then, there's the mascara in that famous interview; I think that swung it. With eyes like that, who would not want to love someone so doomed? Sex and death, innit?
Not the sitting alone on that bench outside the Taj Mahal looking plaintively at the camera?

(I had no patience with that.)

The morning the news broke my mother phoned me, too upset to speak and just told me to watch the news on television before hanging up. My first reaction was "at last Diana'll be off the front pages". We'd had a surfeit of her in the weeks before - she was never out of the media. How wrong could I be.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Well, Western culture has probably tried to claim that the power of myth has been eroded, via rationality, science, the Reformation, secularism, and so on.

However, you could argue that all societies are saturated by myth, which is often fairly unconscious, and hence quite gripping. I mean, if we were conscious of them, they would not grip people.

Hence, the puzzlement by some rational people over the Diana myth or fairy-tale, since it operates at a different level from mundane reality.
 
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
I could never understand the obsession with Diana. To me she was a silly girl who had entered into an unsuitable marriage. She was just as culpable as Charles for all that transpired.
Neither can be held responsible for the match. It was an arranged marriage. The heir had to have kin, and the search for the right kind of mildly blue-blooded virgin was getting nowhere. Diana ticked most of the boxes, including the important ones, and they were railroaded into it.
Agreed. Ideally Charles would have married a plump German or Scandinavian princess and kept on (which he did) knocking off Camilla on the side, and Diana would have married some dull Midlands peer and, if she wished, knocked off (which she did) rugby players and polo players on the side.
 
Posted by George Spigot (# 253) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, Western culture has probably tried to claim that the power of myth has been eroded, via rationality science, the Reformation, secularism, and so on.

That's not a view I've ever heard from people extolling the virtues of western culture. In fact the sort of people famous for promoting "rationality" as you put it, often state that they are all too aware of how much power myth has.
 
Posted by Choirboy (# 9659) on :
 
Apart from the hysteria surrounding her death, all I knew of her was her remarkable compassion for people with AIDS at a time when our national leadership could not even bring themselves to utter the word. Her work there alone probably accomplished more good than I will in my lifetime.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, Western culture has probably tried to claim that the power of myth has been eroded, via rationality science, the Reformation, secularism, and so on.

That's not a view I've ever heard from people extolling the virtues of western culture. In fact the sort of people famous for promoting "rationality" as you put it, often state that they are all too aware of how much power myth has.
Off-topic really, but I suppose there have been mixed views of post-Enlightenment developments. Weber seems to have argued that society became 'rationalized', (leading to 'disenchantment'), whereas somebody like Jung argued that this was superficial, and that dark forces still lurked beneath!

But I think some people are shocked at a manifestation like the dying princess Diana fairy-tale, as it seems primitive. Well, we are!

On the other hand, I suppose Freud in turn decried Jung (eventually), and argued that there should be a shift towards rationality, and for example, that it was time to give up childish things like religion. Oh well, this discussion could go on and on.
 
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
I'm reminded that the Diana cult didn't really get going until after the birth of William when she lost 30 pounds ...
quote:
Boy, that sure is not how I remember it. I recall the obsessive adulation starting with the announcement of the engagement and continuing right through every agonizing minute of the wedding coverage. I was 16 at the time and photos of me from that summer show me and many of my friends wearing sadly misguided "Princess Di" style ruffled blouses -- those who were lucky could even manage the hairstyle.
Right. I was thinking of when she became a fashion icon like the supermodels and had forgotten about the general Diana-mania before the wedding. I hated that hairstyle. Throughout the wedding I kept thinking that her dress, the pageantry and the carriage would all look like something from 200 years ago, if she didn't have that sporty modern hair cut.
 
Posted by Think² (# 1984) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
Apart from the hysteria surrounding her death, all I knew of her was her remarkable compassion for people with AIDS at a time when our national leadership could not even bring themselves to utter the word. Her work there alone probably accomplished more good than I will in my lifetime.
To be fair, the don't die of ignorance campaign is one of the (very) few things I admire Thatcher for. The continent were much less upfront and had a much worse epidemic.
 
Posted by Bax (# 16572) on :
 
To quote Noel Coward:

"Strange how potent cheap music is"

Sometimes a piece of music that is "cheap" can catch the emotions. Often the most moving hymns are not great music either...
 
Posted by Morlader (# 16040) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Bax:
To quote Noel Coward:

"Strange how potent cheap music is"

Sometimes a piece of music that is "cheap" can catch the emotions. Often the most moving hymns are not great music either...
Or, perhaps: "Often hymns are not great music either ...." I won't go as far as substituting "Always" for "Often" but I thought about it! [Big Grin]

I agree with Noel C, though. And with your first sentence.
 
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Morlader:
Or, perhaps: "Often hymns are not great music either ...." I won't go as far as substituting "Always" for "Often" but I thought about it! [Big Grin] ...
I suppose it depends where you draw the line between 'great' and 'good'. Thinking about the kind of A&M / (N)EH hymns that I like, there are tunes by composers including, off the top of my head, Haydn, Handel, Mendelssohn, Vaughan Williams, and Sullivan. Some of those (tunes and composers) are better than others, but on the whole, I think there's really nothing there to complain about.

[ 28. June 2012, 16:17: Message edited by: Albertus ]
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0