The Royal Report for Sunday August 29, 2010 - A Tribute to Diana, Princess of Wales

August 31st will mark the 13th anniversary of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. On this episode a tribute to her life and legacy.

You can listen to the episode here

Publications mentioned

Hello! Canada No 185 30 August 2010

From My Royal Collection

Diana: The Portrait: Anniversary by Rosallind Coward

Resources used to research this episode

The Queen - DVD

Diana: A Celebration - Official Guidebook

Macleans magazine - Diana, her life and legacy Commemorative edition - September 1997

Macleans Magazine - Forever Diana - September 15, 1997

Newsweek - Farewell, Diana - September 15, 1997

Royalty Magaazine - September 1997

Majesty Magazine Commemorative Issue - September 1997

Time - Commeorative Issue September 15, 1997

Time - Special Report: Death of a Princess - September 8, 1997

Tune in to the next episode of The Royal Report on Sunday September 5, 2010 at 9:00PM EST (North America)

TThe topic will be: In a special one hour episode, an Interview with Jerramy Fine, author of the memoir, Someday My Prince Will Come: True Adventures of a Wannabe Princess
Listen to that episode for your chance to win a copy of her book.

© Marilyn Braun 2010

Royal Review - Diana Princess of Wales by Mario Testino

If you follow the life of Diana you've no doubt seen at least one photo from this, her last, photo session. Maybe you first saw them in the Vanity Fair issue, or you were lucky enough to see the exhibit at Kensington Palace. If, like me, you didn't then Diana: Princess of Wales by Mario Testino will make up for it.

I love royal books with pictures in them. To me, a photo can tell more fascinating stories than any rehashed royal anecdote. And I can spend hours looking at them and still discover something new, whether it'd be a rarely seen brooch, to a redesigned outfit, to Victorian royal photos that show relationships before they were destroyed by World War One. Sometimes words get in the way.

This book is not new. And I'd held out buying it, possibly because I didn't want to see the new Diana, whose face had taken on a hard and rather high maintenance look. But for some inexplicable reason I was compelled to buy it now. Although it isn't new, the photographs are still as fresh and revealing as they were 10 years ago. Their naturalness transending the normal dating effects of fashion and hairstyle trends.

In her life she was photographed by many of the worlds reknowed photographers: Snowdon Patrick Lichfield, Patrick Demarchier, Terrence Donovan, Jayne Fincher, Tim Graham, and she looked different in each one. But I'm at a loss to find, amongst any of their photos, ones as iconic as Mario Testino's session. And had this session been photographed by anyone else, I highly doubt they would have produced such compelling images. The photos were taken to support the sale of her dresses, two sessions, one with Snowdon for the catalogue, the other with Testino for Vanity Fair, and there is a marked difference. Diana looks stiff and uncomfortable in the Snowdon session. Indeed, when my husband saw some of the Snowdon photos he asked: "Is that really her?"

To Prince William and Prince Harry the Testino photos definately are. They personally chose photos from this session for the Concert for Diana programme and have said that the photos represent most accurately the mother they really knew. There can be no better endorsement than that.

© Marilyn Braun 2008

Question: Princess Diana's wedding bouquet

Do you happen to know how much Princess Diana's wedding bouquet weighed? My sister had an exact replica of her bouquet for her wedding. I was only 13 at the time but i recall it being extremely heavy.

Thank you for your question.

The wedding bouquet that Diana, Princess of Wales carried for her wedding in 1981 was made by Longmans Florists, who also designed and made the bouquet for the Queen when she married in 1947. The bouquet was a gift from the Worshipful Company of Gardeners.

The bouquet, 42" long and 15" wide, was of a cascading shower design similar to those from Edwardian times. It set a trend for wedding bouquets which up to that point at been comparably small. The designers of her wedding dress, David and Elizabeth Emanuel wanted Diana to have a large bouquet, as a small one would have obviously been dwarfed by the size of her dress. The flowers that comprised the bouquet were:

Gardenias
Stephanotis
Freesia
Odontoglossum Orchid (Royal Wedding)
Lily of the Valley
Earl Mountbatten Roses
Hedera (Ivy)
Tradescantia
Myrtle
Veronica (Hebe)

It's worth noting that it is a royal wedding tradition for a sprig of myrtle, from the bush grown from the original myrtle in Queen Victoria's wedding bouquet, to be included. The Earl of Mountbatten roses were a tribute to Prince Charles' "Uncle Dickie" Lord Louis Mountbatten, who had died in 1979. The yellow color of the rose incidentally inspired the bridesmaid dresses.

Three bouquets were made, one for the practice the night before the wedding, the second was delivered to St. James' Palace. The third was taken to Buckingham Palace on the day of the wedding and used for the formal photographs. As per royal wedding tradition, at least one of them would have been placed after the wedding on the tomb of the Unknown Warrior in Westminster Abbey.

Unfortunately, the Longman family sold their business a few years ago so there's no way to ask them about the specific weight. But according to the press release for the wedding bouquet: 'It is well balanced,and although heavier than most carried nowadays the distribution should not be too tiresome for the Bride.'

Whatever the weight, lets hope there was no bouquet toss; she could have seriously injured someone in the process!

Update: I was able to find out the information on the weight of the bouquet. It weighed approximately between 2-3 kilo's. Thank you to Yoko Hansen for providing this info!

© Marilyn Braun 2008

Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.

Bouquet Information Source:

A Dress for Diana by David Emanuel and Elizabeth Emanuel

Related article:

Royal Weddings

The Royal Report for Sunday June 29th, 2008: Is Diana the last of the great princesses?

Since Diana died in 1997 there has been a void in the world of royalty - that of a great princess. Many accomplished women have married into the royal family but none seem likely to make the same impact that Diana did. Is Diana the last of the great princesses? Has she set the bar too high for other royal brides?

You can listen to the podcast here.

Tune in live to the next Royal Report on Sunday July 6th, 2008 9:00PM EST (North America).

The topic will be: A recent report revealed that the British monarchy costs taxpayers 66 pence per year (or about $1.79 CDN). Less than the cost of an iPOD download or a cup of Starbucks coffee. Are they worth it? Would you sacrifice a cup of coffee to pay for them? What gives better value, a Starbucks coffee or the British Monarchy?

© Marilyn Braun 2008

The Royal Report for Sunday April 20, 2008 - A Salute to the Diana Inquest

The next Royal Report will be on Sunday April 27, 2008 at 9:00PM. The topic will be: Camilla, 3 years later. How is she adjusting as a member of the royal family?

Diana's mother love is nothing new

Diana was no saint.

There, I've said it. So why do people try to make her out to be? A recent Hello Magazine article her words of motherly 'wisdom' are being shared with the world: 'Rediscovered and published for the first time since her death - A Mother's poignant plea.' What will be rediscovered next? Diana's poignant words about fashion? global warming? men?

Let's see:

"Each step I take in my Manolo Blaknik's makes me one with the suffering of the world"

"Climate change starts with changing my hair products"

"Men can never understand giving birth"

Give it a break already.

I have several books about Diana, so I've probably read every variation on how wonderful she was. But when people try to put her on some sort of pedestal I get tired. No one is perfect, not even Diana. What can she possibly share with us about motherhood that is special, unique, gives mothers around the world guidance in raising their children? It's like those inspirational desk calendars or Chicken Soup for the Mother's soul - lip service wrapped in a saccharine, pink ribbon, chamomile tea, floral package.

"There are children who suffer in silence, holding on to their inner turmoil"

Zzz....*Yawn* Sorry, where was I? Aren't there organizations that recognize this already? Organizations that actually do something about this problem? Oh wait, yes, one of them comes to mind - it's called Save the Children! And guess who's working with them? Princess Anne. Will her poignant, less than photogenic, words of motherly wisdom be shared with us after her death?

I doubt it.

I admit, I have not read the Hello magazine article. Maybe doing so would tug at my heart strings and change my mind. Yes, knowing Diana's profound posthumous observations have made the world a better place. Or they could be on par with horrible teenage angst ridden poetry. Wince inducing and not worth revisiting.

No doubt someone will write a book or make a desk calendar about Diana's sayings; 365 days of paraphrased quotes. And it will provide inspiration to mother's everywhere. Or maybe it won't.

Either way, I'm not buying it.

© Marilyn Braun 2008

What's wrong with wanting to be a princess?

Y'know. Every so often someone writes an article* about the negative impact of little girls dressing up as princesses and it really sticks in my craw. So I've decided to write about it, even though questioning this topic might look like I'm missing some sort of important point while living in the dark ages waiting to be rescued.

I understand that the Princess myth doesn't fit into reality. Write about the princess themed merchandise that makes up a $4.4 billion dollar industry and the phrases 'women's oppression,' 'bad role model,' and 'pandemic' inevitably come up. The hidden dangers lurk everywhere waiting to ensnare little girls with tiaras, dresses, puzzles, books, and movies. Speaking of movies, the Disney company "shamelessly profits" by releasing yet another princess movie. The conspiracy to appeal to little girls of all nationalities and cultures is clearly apparent with Disney's new African American princess.

Today's informed parent should protect all of their children from ever stepping foot in a toy store lest they be accosted by a princess themed item that their daughter cannot obviously live without. Shield the eyes of your child. Take the moral high ground when you see Princess costumes in the street on Halloween. Tsk tsk, you say to yourself. If only those parents knew that they were perpetuating a myth, that it's unhealthy for little girls to dress up and pretend. Better to focus your efforts on moulding your child into your definition of success.

It's easy to use Diana or Princess Masako of Japan as a parable of how royalty doesn't live happily ever after. Or speculate on the downfall of royal marriages. Extreme examples only show the one side. Must we rewrite Cinderella, revealing the cold hard reality to our children? Isn't this why those stories end with 'And they lived happily ever after?' The story-tellers knew the reality way back then didn't they? Another conspiracy. But useful. When feminists run out of things to write, at least they've got the princess myth to complain about.

Sometimes I wonder whether we're not giving our children enough credit for being able to see past this fantasy. Children who once believed in Santa Claus are not scarred for life once they find out he isn't real. Must the desire to have the latest Princess barbie doll lead to the downfall of the women's movement? Is it really that important?

Obviously to some, it is. But do those same people analyse the impact on society when boys pretend to be knights in shining armour? Isn't that just as unrealistic? Maybe I'm biased because of my interest in royalty. Or the fact that as a little girl, I too wanted to be a princess. I eventually grew out of it because it was just a dream. Regardless of how unrealistic, I won't stop my daughter from dressing up like a princess, or playing make believe with the idea. Because there's nothing wrong with it.

© Marilyn Braun 2008

* This article was inspired by a posting on the World of Royalty Blog.

The Diana Inquest - Justice for whom?

The long awaited Diana inquest is underway. Jurors have been sworn in. Six women and five men charged with answering four questions: who died, when did they die, where they died and how they died. The answer to these questions should be rather obvious, at least the first three anyways. It's the last question that may prove... to be the most difficult to answer. Or should the conclusion that there was no conspiracy, will it be the most difficult for Mohammed Al Fayed to accept?

Mohammed Al Fayed has propagated many of the allegations that have led to this inquiry. The events of August 31st and the days leading up to it have created hundreds of questions and launched many a conspiracy theory. Al Fayed alleges that Dodi and Diana were about to announce their engagement, that she was pregnant with Dodi's child and that the royal family could not accept the fact that the future King of England would have an Egyptian Muslim step-father. Some people need battles in their lives and he may be one of them. He fought for this inquest in front of a jury. Railed against the system in order to get it. Now that it's here, what happens next?

Al Fayed says: "I want justice for my son."

What about justice for Diana? What about justice for Trevor Rees-Jones - the sole survivor, and whose life is irrevocably changed? It's interesting to note that only Mohammed Al Fayed is the only one seeking the truth and justice. Where are the Spencers? Where are Prince William and Prince Harry? Do they not deserve the truth? The Princes have publicly announced that they accept the findings of the Lord Stevens Report. Also known as The Operation Paget Report, its 871 pages considered each allegation put forth by Al Fayed. He accused the original French investigation findings as incomplete. In Operation Paget, the investigators interviewed 300 witnesses, some for the first time, and went through 600 exhibits. Using the latest technology, they also reconstructed the crash in great detail. Lord Stevens came to the conclusion that there was no conspiracy to murder Diana and Dodi. It's unlikely that she was pregnant. With no indications given to family and friends, it's unlikely that she was engaged or about to get engaged to Dodi. The conclusion was that their deaths were the result of a tragic accident. Isn't that thorough enough?

It would be easy to dismiss Al Fayed as a loose cannon. His allegations make it easy to ignore the fact that he's a father who has never recovered from the loss of his son. "Grief is the price we pay for love." said the Queen in response to the September 11th, 2001 attacks. Can he be blamed for wanting closure? It depends on whose terms its on. Should this inquest lead to the conclusion that the crash was an accident, will Al Fayed accept it and let Diana, Dodi and Henri Paul rest in peace? Somehow I doubt it.

And after all of this time, that would be the biggest injustice of all.


© Marilyn Braun 2007

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Royal Review - Diana, A Princess Remembered by Glenn Harvey

Aside from books that have yet to be released, or ones I've waited until they've ended up in the bargain bin, I can't say I've ever waited as long for a book as this one. Ordered in late July, I now have it in my hands today. Usually I'm impressed by the efficiency of..Amazon but in this case I was truly frustrated by the experience. However, don't let that stop you from purchasing this book!

The first thing I notice about this book is the shape of it - a horizontal rectangle. This presents an aesthetic dilemma as most of the royal books I own are not horizontal rectangles. So where do I place this so as not to disturb the careful visual alignment of books I've created? I'm conflicted, do I put it at the front of the shelf or at the end? Or do I put it on the shelf with smaller books, where it will stick out? Luckily the shape of the book will not affect my enjoyment of it or whether I will give it an unbiased view. The second thing I notice is a DVD which includes 'images set to a soundtrack.' with a '60 minute running time.' This more than makes up for the aesthetic dilemma. I am of course torn between watching this versus giving a deserving review of this book. So I have now decided to look at the book and revisit the DVD later.

Diana A Princess Remembered is filled with photos of Diana throughout her royal career. In that respect it really isn't much different from Diana: Portrait of a Princess by Jayne Fincher (also a horizontal rectangle). Covering official and private travels from 1985 to 1993 to Australia, Brazil, Canada, the Caribbean, Czechoslovakia, Egypt, France, Germany, Hungary, Hong Kong, Korea, Kuwait, India, Indonesia, Italy, Spain, Thailand, the USA and of course the UK. It has a similarity to Portraits of a Princess: Travels with Diana, by Patrick Jephson, which details her travels from an insiders perspective with the relevant photos.

My enjoyment of this book is somewhat marred by Glenn Harvey's reputation as a paparazzi who relentlessly pursued Diana, upsetting her on several occasions for his own cause. However those types of photos are not included in this book, allowing me to believe I have some integrity left after having bought it. Accompanying the book are anecdotes of his travels with Diana and the situations Harvey encountered in order to capture the moment.

The DVD is enjoyable and a pleasant surprise. The musical accompaniment starts sombre but becomes festive depending on the location of the photos. For instance, during her United States visits, the soundtrack section starts with music that belongs more on a game show, complete with wild audience applause. I started to wonder what music would be played in the Canadian part of the DVD - Oh Canada? Bird calls? Aboriginal drumbeats? Instead they decided to stick with acoustic guitar music; the type you'd hear at Starbucks.

If like me, you're on some sort of misguided mission to own every book ever written about Diana, then this book is for you. If not, then you might enjoy the book for what it is - photos of Diana in her royal element, relating to the people and making her extraordinary impact on the world.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

Click here to purchase Diana: A Princess Remembered

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Royal Profile - Catherine Walker

You may not be familiar with her name, however if you followed Diana's fashions, you have most definitely seen her work. A notable example would be the green polka dot dress Diana wore when she left the hospital after the birth of Prince William. Diana had many designers that she favored and for 16 years, Catherine Walker was one of them. So much so..that the dress Diana is buried in bears her label.

Catherine Marguerite Marie-Therese Baheux-Lefebvre was born on June 27th, 1945 in Pont de Briques, a village near Boulogne. She has two older siblings, sister Nicole, and brother Patrick. Her parents were divorced in 1949. Her mother moved the family to the Alps in September 1950 and in 1955 her mother remarried. During school holidays her time was divided between her mother's home in Lille and her father's home in Normandy.

She attended elementary school in Lille, run by nuns of the order Les Dames de St. Maur. She later attended school at a Dominican convent called St. Jeanne d'Arc, excelling in math, and Latin. At seventeen she went on to the University if Lille, studying philosophy. She finished her degree at the University in Aix-en-Provence and afterwards moved to London, with the eventual intention of moving to the United States. She found a job teaching French but went back to Lille for post-graduate studies in Aesthetics. After graduation, she took a job in the French Embassy Lecture Department, and later took over the Film Department at the French Institute.

In February 1967 she met a young lawyer, John Walker, a lawyer, and in June 1969 they were married in the town of Le Touquet. They settled in London and had two daughters, Naomi, born in May 1971, and Marianne, born in November 1972. In the summer of 1975, her husband died suddenly after a tragic accident. After his death, she sent her children to live with her mother in the Alps, while she stayed in Aix. She would move back to London, and through some friends she met her second husband, Said Ismael.

She was never formally taught dress design and started doing so as a form of therapy after becoming suddenly widowed. In 1976 she started her own business, designing children's clothes. Walking from door to door in Kings Road in Chelsea, she sold her designs from a basket. In 1977 she set up her own studio in a dilapidated house in Chelsea, eventually calling it The Chelsea Design Company.

In 1981 she moved away from designing children's clothing. Her first venture into adult clothing was designing maternity wear, which brought her to the attention of Diana, Princess of Wales. She would eventually discontinue designing maternity wear to focus on day, cocktail, and evening dresses. Throughout her career she has sought to elongate the body by lenthening the torso. In this she has been influenced by the work of British photographer John French and by the technique and spirit of traditional French couturiers such as Madeleine Vionnet.

In 1990 she was awarded Designer of the year for Couture and in 1991 Designer of the year for Glamour. She was diagnosed with breast cancer in April 1995. In 2002 her work was exhibited at the Victoria & Albert museum in an exhibit called 25 years of British Courturier: Catherine Walker. In 2003 she launched Catherine Walker Skincare. She continued to design fo rmembers of the royal family: Lady Gabriella Windsor, Viscountess Serena Linley (wife of David Linley), and Lady Helen Taylor.

Update: Catherine Walker died of breast cancer on September 23, 2010.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

Why I buy royal books I can't finish and my excuses for doing so

It must be a form of insanity. Buying books I can't finish. I can't remember the last time I actually read a book (that wasn't a childrens book) from cover to cover. Maybe having two small children will do that. Reading used to be a pleasure, now it's a luxury. I have piles of books on a variety of subjects - podcasting, writing, baking, child care, and royal books. Now normally I have no problem with reading royal books, but over time I've noticed that it's taken me much longer to get through some of them. Here are a few on my list:

Diana - by Sarah Bradford

I have been trying to read this book for at least 3 months. I'm not sure whether the library misses it or not, but I keep renewing it and renewing it in the hopes that I will be able to read it. It never happens. I'm beginning to think I should buy my own copy; just so that it can continue to sit amongst my pile of books without anyone missing it. Right now it's due back on the 27th, so hopefully I'll be able to read it before then. But probably not. One of the reasons that I would like to read this book, is mainly to be able to compare it to the next book on my list.

The Diana Chronicles - by Tina Brown

Unlike most Diana biographies, which I usually borrow from the library or wait until they come out on paperback, I bought this book, in hardcover, within a week of its release. There's been a lot of hype with this book and I would love to review it but I just can't seem to get around to doing it. By the time I actually do read it, it will no longer be noteworthy enough to discuss.

Five Gold Rings - A Royal Wedding Souvenir Album by Jane Roberts. The Royal Collection

I truly looked forward to receiving this book. I love royal weddings and this book, heavy on pictures than on text, is right up my alley. I do believe that pictures can tell their own stories, so one would think it would be easy to read this book. No such luck. Hopefully I will have read this book before their 65th or 70th wedding anniversary. Fingers crossed!

Diana Style by Colin McDowell

A recent acquisition, also heavy on pictures than on text. It must have too many words, otherwise why would it take so long to read it? I enjoy reading about Diana's fashion, or should I say, looking at pictures of her fashions. But that doesn't make for a very interesting review, now does it? In my defence, I only received this book on Monday.

Coronation by Roy Strong

Beyond royal weddings, I can't say that I have much interest in other types of royal ceremonies. This book however piqued my interest. Covering the Coronation ceremony from the 8th to the 21st Century, it is not a book you read in a week. So that's my excuse for this one!

If you've read any of these books and would like to tell me about them, feel free to have your say. If you don't have any of these books but would like to read them for me, you can order them by clicking on the book image.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Goodbye Diana?

Whenever any big royal event occurs, I always try to collect the newspapers reporting on them. With the 10th anniversary of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, there was no doubt in my mind that it would be a cover story, maybe a special insert included. So when I bought the newspapers for August 31st, I was truly surprised to see the event barely covered. One of the newspapers had a small article on the inside cover, another an editorial cartoon, but that's about it. Maybe, I thought, there will be something in the next day's papers. But, scanning the covers, there was nothing there either.

I'll be honest, this kind of bothered me. While recent royal events like Charles and Camilla's wedding or the Queen's 80th birthday, haven't necessarily dominated newspapers, this was Diana we were dealing with. Diana, the one whose face has sold a million covers. Diana, the subject of countless tell-alls and television specials of varying degrees of quality. What happened?

Maybe the constant email news alerts, where every second word seemed to be about Diana, had lulled me into a false sense that this would be a major story to everyone else. How could it not be? 10 years ago Diana's death had brought the world to a virtual stand-still. The coverage was unavoidable. If you'd claimed to have missed it all, you were either deaf, blind, or lying. It seemed as though it would never end. And until I read the papers on August 31st, 2007, it had never occurred to me that it would.

While coverage seems to have waned, I don't believe it will ever end. We will still see tell-alls, and when Prince William or Prince Harry marry, she will no doubt be discussed. But what do we do until then? Or what do I do until then? I like reading about her, even if I don't learn anything new. Even if she hasn't been up anything these days. For some reason I want to know, even if I don't necessarily understand why.

Has major coverage of Diana reached the end of the road? Or is this just the case with newspapers outside of the UK? Will I have to look at back-issues of People and Hello magazine to remember the glory days? Probably. I won't learn anything new either way, and it doesn't add to my collection, but it's better than nothing.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

This article was inspired by this post on the World of Royalty Blog.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Royal Report for August 26, 2007 - Diana's legacy - Does she have one?

Royal Profile: Edward John Spencer, 8th Earl Spencer

When Lady Diana Spencer married Prince Charles in 1981, the Spencer's - one of England's preeminent aristocratic families, moved into the spotlight. While he is probably best known as the father of Diana, Princess of Wales, Johnnie Spencer was also a gifted amateur photographer, filmaker and people person.

Edward John (Johnnie) was born January 24, 1924, at 24 Sussex Square, London, the son of Albert, the 7th Earl Spencer and Lady Cynthia Hamilton. He had an older sister, Anne (born 1920).

He attended school at Wellesly House in Kent, where he boarded from the age of eight. He was popular, excelled academically, was good at sports, in particular cricket. Like generations of Spencer's, his son and later his grandsons, Princes William and Harry, Johnnie went to Eton in 1937. He excelled at soldiering, and also like his royal grandsons, he was educated at the Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst. Around this time his talent for photography began to emerge, and during wartime he chronicled bomb damage with his Box Brownie.

After Eton he went into the Army, fighting in the Second World War. He was mentioned in dispatches for bravery, eventually gaining the rank of Captain in the Royal Scots Greys. After the war he served as ADC to Lord Norrie, Governor of South Australia, before becoming a courtier. He served King George VI and the Queen as an equerry, accompanying her on her tour of the Commonwealth in the early 1950s. He became a Member of the Royal Victorian Order in 1954.

He married The Honorable Frances Burke Roche on June 1, 1954. Their wedding was considered the social event of the year, attended by the Queen, the Queen Mother, and Princess Margaret. After their marriage, the couple settled at Park House and Johnnie studied at the Royal Agricultural College in Cirencester. They would have five children (one died in infancy) - Sarah (born 1955), Jane (born 1957), Diana (1961-1997) and Charles (born 1964), the present Earl Spencer. The couple were divorced in 1969, after Frances left Johnnie for Peter Shand Kydd. In the ensuing divorce, he won custody of his children.

He was passionate about photography, his wine cellar and people. As his eldest daughter Lady Sarah McCorquodale recalls:

"My father had an instinctive way with people...He was brilliant, and he stood in this wonderful shop at Althorp selling wine and he would come in and say, 'I've had a really good day today.' So we would say, 'Oh, have you sold lots of wine?' 'No' he'd reply, 'two divorces and a hysterectomy.' People would talk to him and he was gripped. He loved it.

He became the 8th Earl Spencer upon the death of his father in 1975 and the family moved to Althorp. He married his second wife, Raine, Countess of Dartmouth, the daughter of the romance novelist, Barbara Cartland, on July 14, 1976. In September 1978 he collapsed due to a stroke, but recovered sufficiently to walk Diana down the aisle at her 1981 wedding.

He was chairman of the National Association of Boy's Clubs and a member of Northampton Council for 29 years. In 1983 he wrote a book with Raine called The Spencer's on Spas.

Lord Spencer died on March 29th, 1992 of a heart attack, at Humana Hospital, Wellington, London, where he had been admitted for pneumonia on March 21st. He was cremated and buried at the traditional Spencer burial place, St. Mary's Church, Great Brighton, Northamptonshire.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Royal Report for August 19, 2007 - Should Camilla attend the Diana memorial?

Join me live for my show next week - August 26, 2007 5:00pm Pacific time (8:00pm Eastern time). My topic will be: Diana's legacy - Does she have one?

Note: I seem to be having some difficulties with the widget for the show. To listen to it, please select detach and the player should come up for you.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Should Camilla attend the Diana memorial?

Maybe asking this question falls under the category of a lost cause. After all, according to a recent poll 54% say that Camilla should not attend the Diana memorial. If you ask women - 61% think she should not attend, that it would be completely innapropriate. How can you ask such a question in the face of such overwhelming opposition?

Yes, it should be a no-brainer. Camilla, stay home! Don't come out of the palace until we approve of you. When you married Prince Charles, you obviously snuck under our radar. Well, you're married now, so we can't do anything about it. The cheers when you arrived drowned out our hisses and boos. Even if 39% of people feel that you've strengthened the monarchy by marrying Charles. Notice that 37% feel that you've weakened it - so don't get too comfortable. We're recruiting the 25% 'Don't know' contingent as we speak. They'll come to their senses and agree with us, eventually.

Our negative attitude towards out should rightly become a 'string which will alarm supporters.' This should keep you from the Diana memorial, and becoming Queen, even if it doesn't impact our lives in any way whether you do or not. We can complain when you wear the family jewels; zoom in on photographs comparing it to ones Diana wore. We may not barricade the street the service will be held on, but we can participate in polls which have no real relevance to reality. Polls which still ask questions like 'When the Queen abdicates...should the throne pass to Prince Charles or Prince William?' Are we part of the 71% of people who buy into that lost cause?

Even if you do end up attending, make sure you wear a suitably morose, remorseful expression. Whatever you do, don't smile or wave at the crowds. Remember, this isn't your show. If we're lucky, the service will be televised and we can keep tabs on you during the hymns. When the phone rings with a new poll asking us how you behaved, you may just improve your results if you shed a tear or two.

If you don't attend, we'll probably hold it against you too. How can you show us penitence hiding in your palace? Clearly this is a no-win situation for you. But whatever you do, don't wait for us to make up our minds. Trust us, even if our opinions about you change like the weather. Even if the poll caught us during a particularly anti-Camilla mood. Who knows how we'll feel tomorrow. On our way to the service we'll stop at the supermarket and buy eggs to throw at you. If she knew her memory was being hijacked by our antics, Diana would be proud of us.

Maybe the question shouldn't be whether you should attend, but whether this question has made us lose sight of that point.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Diana bashing - What's the point?

Is defending Camilla a lost cause?

I recently visited a message board that made a comment about my article The Camilla Non-issue, that said:

"it must be difficult defending lost causes, Marilyn?"

First off, I would just like to say that I welcome an open discussion of my articles from readers who don't hide behind the safety of a British royal message board. Especially when I'm addressed personally in the post.

After reading that, and posting a response, I started to think - is defending Camilla a lost cause? Shouldn't I just give up and go with all of the media reports that would have me believe that Camilla is evil, a home wrecker, and doesn't deserve happiness? I guess if I were someone who trusts the media to tell the truth, then maybe I should just spend my time living in the glory days of Charles and Diana's 1981 wedding when Camilla was described as a "trusted female confidante of Prince Charles".

At one point, if you'd asked me, say 10 years ago, about Camilla, I would have said that, while I don't hate her, she was a contributing factor in the break-up of Charles and Diana. I say contributing because each of the three parties had their own role to play in how the marriage ended. In hindsight, I haven't changed that opinion, but my view of Camilla as a person has evolved. If you'd asked me whether she would gain acceptance, I would have said, no way! To a degree, feeling this way, I felt I was extracting karmic revenge on behalf of Diana. When it was announced that Charles and Camilla were getting married, I thought I was hearing things. Even if they were meant to be together, I didn't think it was possible. I found myself being happy for them, and feeling as though I was betraying the memory of Diana by doing so. Media reports about the legal, constitutional, and religious issues of the situation made it seem as though, even if they were married, it wouldn't be legal. And that if it were legal, Charles couldn't be king. Ultimately these issues passed, only to be replaced by the non-issues in my recent article.

While I never expected myself to write positively about Camilla, the ultimate fact is, I don't know her. Does anyone really? And in order to be fair, I have to write about her in a balanced way. No one wants to hear about good/bad Camilla all the time. Not the saccharine reporting of quality royal magazines, nor the claw baring reporting of other publications. This blog is not in the same league but I can still do my part, if only for my own entertainment.

I don't believe in living in the past. I wish Charles and Diana could have had a happy ending, but they didn't. Maybe it was inevitable that they wouldn't. Today I can honestly say that I'm happy for Charles and Camilla. I didn't really have any pre-conceived notions but the fact that she's adapted so well to royal life is wonderful. For an outsider, it's not an easy thing to do.

Is defending Camilla a lost cause? No. That's my opinion. I would be interested in hearing other opinions though. Please feel free to have your say.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Royal Review: Diana, An Amazing Life

In my quest to buy anything Diana related, this will be my year. In the 10th anniversary of her death, a deluge of books, magazines and events will commemorate her life and call my name. This book is one of them.

It beckoned me, but I have complaints. The slick silver cover shows finger prints easily. For someone who collects these types of books, having to wipe it clean after every perusal is frustrating. I've almost given up in trying. My second complaint is that the spine and the introduction erroneously say 'Princess Diana'. While I understand that referring to her as 'Princess Diana' is shorthand for her real title, it's still wrong. For the record, her title during her marriage was HRH The Princess of Wales. After her divorce it was Diana, Princess of Wales.

This 192 page volume spans the 16 years of Diana's royal life from 1981 to her death in 1997. Celebrating her life in 42 covers - the most appearances of anyone before or since. While this may sound impressive, you really need to remember that People is a weekly magazine, not a monthly one. She made the cover sometimes only once a year and averaging no more than twice a year. In 1985 she appears 4 times. In 1989 she doesn't appear at all. In 1992, the year of the separation, she appears a whopping 7 times. Overall the editors of People may want to look at the archives of the monthly Majesty magazine before they brag about this record.

Like most of these books, it shows her evolution from a shy, kindergarten teacher to royal superstar, in a varying degree of photogenic photos and as the fairy tale ended, suitably morose ones. Each issue is presented in a two page synopsis of the main points. The happily ever after pronouncements, birth of Prince William, apocalyptic royal feuds, glamorous fashions, the strain Diana causes on Princes Charles and the birth of Prince Harry. All in the first 53 pages. Having covered all of the real or imagined inter-family conflicts, People then moves to analysing the marriage itself. In sensational headlines, People reports on the coping, moping, Diana's mental stability, her lonliness, their separate lives, and the heartbreak as the fairy-tale ends. Should we have any doubt about the situation, the cover of the November 30th, 1992 issue proclaims 'It's Over', before the December 9th, 1992 official announcement. But it doesn't end there. People reports on Diana's daring new life as a strong, independant woman, her lovers, the battle for her boys and 'Di-vorce!' Her 1997 death earns another two covers.

According to the introduction, 'the goal of this book isn't to analyze her life, but to re-create...something of what those 16 years felt like'. In my opinion, it has suceeded. I couldn't help but be swept up in the happy events, mesmerized by her glamour, and given pause by her tragic ending. While this book is no different from any other commemorative magazine about Diana, I recommend it for any collector.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

Click here to order Diana: An Amazing Life

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Royal Focus: The Spencer Family Tiara

Out of the almost 200 posts I've made on this blog, my article Jewels fit for a Queen is the most popular. In fact, anything on royal jewellery, particularly tiaras, seems to be a popular subject. Not a day goes by where someone doesn't find my site by searching for those terms.

Although worn by several Spencer women, this tiara is most associated with Diana, Princess of Wales. Worn most famously at her wedding in 1981 as her something borrowed. She also wore it all through her official life as a member of the royal family, for state banquets, openings of Parliament, and diplomatic receptions. Diana regarded this tiara as her 'spare', the other being the Lover's Knot Tiara, which she received as a wedding gift from the Queen.. Throughout the later part of her married life, she wore the Spencer tiara more often, taking pride in her Spencer heritage, and also because it wasn't as heavy as the Lover's Knot tiara.

Mounted in gold in the form of scrolling tulips and star shaped flowers, it is decorated with diamonds in silver settings. It has been reported that this tiara is a family heirloom from the eighteenth century, but this is a misconception. Instead, it is a composite of several elements. Of the entire tiara, only two elements at the end are old, and are said to have come from a tiara owned by Frances, Viscountess Montagu and left to Lady Sarah Spencer in 1875. The tiara is thought to have been made in 1767, but the style suggests the 1830s. The central element was a wedding gift from Lady Sarah Spencer to Cynthia, Viscountess Althorp (Diana's grandmother) in 1919. In the 20th century, it was remounted and four other elements were made to match it.

Along with Diana, some of the other brides to wear it on their wedding day include Diana's sister Lady Jane Fellowes in 1978, and Victoria Lockwood, the first wife of her brother Charles Spencer, in 1989.

© Marilyn Braun 2007


Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.