Once again, Diana is proven right

Started by Duch_Luver_4ever, October 01, 2016, 06:18:05 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Duch_Luver_4ever

How fatherhood?s been the making of William: No wonder Palace insiders say that baby No 3?s already on the cards  | Daily Mail Online

So the royal tour in Canada has been a big success with the kids being there with W&K, and the press just takes it in stride like its always been done that way. But Diana bringing William in 83 to Oz and NZ was the first royal tour with the children coming.

While the tour as a whole was grueling, and they tried to pawn it off as a failure with the extra travel to the base where William was kept in central Oz, it was also the length of the tour in general that was to blame. But the appearances of William was a success and it was a real turning point for Diana and the RF's popularity and her jumping into her role. But it was a start and like anything new, lessons were learned that seem to have paid dividends today.

Also look at how William is with his children, remind you of anyone??? He's clearly his mothers son when it comes to caring for his kids, not at all like Cardboard Charlie.

I know he and Kate gets lots of grief for their number of engagements, but so far at least until any hidden cracks become evident, he seems to have learned from his parents example, and is balancing Family, Work and Royal Duties and refusing to compromise, yeah he could grind out engagements like Prince Philip, but do his kids want him to be as bad a father as he was too??? Cant do it all, and i applaud their uncompromising approach to it.

So we have more to thank Diana for, smooth royal tours with the kids, a loving father that is giving his kids a much better family life than previous royals have had. She saw the way of the future and its a shame she isnt given more thanks by the RF for it, the bill of what they owe her just keeps getting larger and larger.
"No other member of the Royal Family mattered that year, or I think for the next 17 years, it was just her." Arthur Edwards, The Sun Photographer, talking about Diana's impact.

TLLK

Lovely to see that William who as the elder child appears to have been more aware of his parents' marital difficulties, has developed the emotional maturity to be more relaxed and carefree with his children. I hope that this will continue throughout their childhood, adolescence and young adulthood.

In addition to thanking Diana for her obvious influence as a parent, I do believe that William and Harry's nannies and school staff at Ludgrove and Eton should be acknowledged. They provided a steadying influence and considerable support to the brothers throughout the years of the War of the Wales. The fact that William invited his old nannies to his 2011 wedding and attended one the nanny's funerals, tells me that he considered them as a major influence in his life. Also there were extended paternal/maternal family members who did try to model what a happy family life could be. And finally even Diana could acknowledge that her ex was a "good father" once the skirmishes had settled between she and Charles.

Duch_Luver_4ever

Yes its true that Diana didnt raise them alone, but its common for royals to feel warm for their nannies and other staff, even invite them to weddings and such (Diana did, and im betting Charles invited his nanny to the wedding) so thats not unusual. Im looking at what is the influence that has made William different from the traditional royal mold as stiff, stuffy fathers, and Diana has to be given the Lioness's share of the credit for that.

Diana has often spoke well of his parenting, when he was there. She had to fight to get him to take an active role in their lives when the kids were young. But he would often do things like go to an engagement when William had a broken skull and needed brain surgery, that called into question with the public his fathering.

Now he did come from the old royal traditions, and he had issues with his own fathers coldness, and maybe he tried with the poor caring tools the RF gave him as back then it was expected for domestic staff to do the nurturing.

But Diana was ahead of her time in both what children needed, and where the monarchy was going in terms of popularity and media being more important than stuffy tradition.

Kinda seems like her impact in raising her kids is trying to be diluted, even her critics had to concede that was wonderful with her kids and was teaching them valuable lessons for their future.
"No other member of the Royal Family mattered that year, or I think for the next 17 years, it was just her." Arthur Edwards, The Sun Photographer, talking about Diana's impact.

TLLK

#3
 The article certainly acknowledges Diana's impact on William as a parenting role model so I'm not sure how her impact is being "diluted" here. As most parents know it does ultimately "take a village to raise a child" so I believe that Diana would have definitely given credit where it was due.  Also it is very likely that the Middletons have influenced William's parenting style. Since the Cambridges were in-between homes when George was born they were staying with his in-laws for weeks after his birth. There he  had the opportunity to see real hands on care being given by family members which is very different from the way his royal and aristocratic peers were brought up The Windsors and Spencers both utilized nannies and governesses as it was the norm.
  There has been a shift in how royal child rearing has been undertaken for decades now. Then Crown Princess Michiko of Japan insisted upon nursing her own infants instead of having them reared by Imperial Household Agency staff. Queen Silvia of Sweden and  Queen Sonja of Norway like Diana preferred to play a larger role in their children's upbringing than had been previously expected. The royal spouses with a commoner background have certainly had an impact on how the newest generations of royal children are being raised in the 21st century.

Duch_Luver_4ever

I dont think its the article that attempts to dilute her credit for her at the time revolutionary way of raising royal children. Charles often thought it was silly she gave them pocket money and had them go out to shops to pay for and buy things like normal kids do, and when they would go to places like McDonalds and M&S, he would ask but why would you want to go there?

Im not claiming she did it all herself, but its not like the RF was thrilled about her approach either, I was just struck with the feeling seeing the pictures of how much Dianas imapct was responsible for it, how much she would have probably enjoyed seeing them, and that its time the RF re-thought how much of a benefit Diana was to them. She was a pioneer, but as they say pioneers often get shot full of arrows.
"No other member of the Royal Family mattered that year, or I think for the next 17 years, it was just her." Arthur Edwards, The Sun Photographer, talking about Diana's impact.

TLLK

^^^As with most things hindsight is 20-20, so upon further reflection Charles has come to realize that it was valuable for his kids to be exposed to life outside the "royal bubble"  and to discover how the citizens of the UK actually live their daily lives.  Charles and Anne in some ways had very different upbringings than Andrew and Edward who I understand were actually exposed a tad more  real life when they were young. By the time Andrew and Edward arrived, QEII and the DoE appeared to have a better work/home balance and seemed more relaxed with the younger children. Plus by then the nation had  moved past the worst of the post-WWII rebuilding and rationing and world was a different by the 1960's.                                                                                                                                                                                                     I've read that one thing that Diana did make her sons do on those trips to McDonalds was wait in line like everyone else to place their orders. The Gloucesters, Prince Michael Kent and Princess Anne had children who were close in age to William and Harry and it appears that they were also being brought up in a similar manner in which nannies were still a factor but there was a more relaxed attitude about moving outside the royal fold for some real life exposure. Learning to wait your turn is an excellent lesson that all people need to learn!  The Scandinavian royals have had a similar approach with their young ones too, so CP Haakon, Princess Martha  Louise, CP Victoria and her siblings were exposed to these outings as well back in the late 70's and early 80's.

Duch_Luver_4ever

Still for an heir and spare to the British throne, it was a big change and there were times she caught heat for it, so im glad she stuck to her guns. Usually the royals farther out from the crown can get away with a more "normal" life. Im getting the feeling this is just going to keep going back and forth so we'll have to agree to disagree on the subject.
"No other member of the Royal Family mattered that year, or I think for the next 17 years, it was just her." Arthur Edwards, The Sun Photographer, talking about Diana's impact.