Royal Insight Forum

QuoteThis is the moment the ­princess and the PI, two icons of the 1980s, shared an intimate ­waltz.

The night Diana took to the floor with ­Hollywood heart-throb Tom Selleck, who played Magnum PI in the hit TV series, was the same evening Di, then 24, captivated America by dancing with President Ronald Reagan and doing the twist with film star John Travolta.

Those famous photographs became ­public but this shot – and one of her with Clint Eastwood at the dinner in Washington – ­was never ­published.

Princess Diana unseen pictures of her dancing with Tom Selleck and Clint Eastwood - Mirror Online (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/princess-diana-unseen-pictures-dancing-2050617)

Cindy

Love these! Thank you, Cindy.  :hug:

You're welcome. :flower:  I wonder why they'd never been released before?

Cindy

I was thinking the same thing. Although, I like that they haven't. It gives us a little feeling of discovery. :) :flower: I loved Tom Selleck in Magnum despite the ridiculous shorts  :happy15: She seemed bored with him and more in conversation with Clint.

Clint also had a tighter grip.    :happy15:

Before he went soft in Madison County!  :happy15: :happy15: :happy15:

Quote from: Mike on July 14, 2013, 10:06:46 PM
Clint also had a tighter grip.    :happy15:   

Looks like she was trying to get away from him.  Maybe he told her to "make his day"! :lol:

Cindy

 :clap: :clap: :happy15: :clap: :clap:

New photographs show Princess of Wales dancing with Tom Selleck and Clint Eastwood at White House party | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2363867/New-photographs-Princess-Wales-dancing-Tom-Selleck-Clint-Eastwood-White-House-party.html)

Unveiled, Princess Diana's waltz with Tom Selleck | Royal | News | Daily Express (http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/414919/Unveiled-Princess-Diana-s-waltz-with-Tom-Selleck)

:princess: MANY NEW  PICTURES OF THE ICONIC NIGHT: :princess:
In attesa del Royal Baby, un omaggio a Lady D: la nonna che non ci sarà | Attualità (http://www.oggi.it/attualita/gallery/in-attesa-del-royal-baby-un-omaggio-a-lady-d-la-nonna-che-non-ci-sara/?pid=116305)

 :thankyou:

:welcome:
La princesse de Galles intimidée par Tom Selleck. La moustache sans doute. - Lady Diana son bal à la Maison Blanche - Gala (http://photo.gala.fr/lady-diana-son-bal-a-la-maison-blanche-2454)

Will be great if there were videos of this dances...  :happy: I only see the classic moment of her dance with Travolta in docs, with the others nothing  :no: The new pic of hers with Travolta is so CUTE! :blowkiss:
http://photo.gala.fr/media/cache/width_620px/upload/slideshow/lady-diana-son-bal-a-la-maison-blanche-2454/lady-di-et-john-travolta2-37305.jpg

---

Double post auto-merged: August 05, 2013, 04:02:49 PM

---

In attesa del Royal Baby, un omaggio a Lady D: la nonna che non ci sarà | Attualità (http://www.oggi.it/attualita/gallery/in-attesa-del-royal-baby-un-omaggio-a-lady-d-la-nonna-che-non-ci-sara/?pid=116305)

My favourite pics of link are:
http://static2.oggi.it/wp-content/blogs.dir/3/files/lady-diana-le-foto-inedite-della-nonna-piu-bella-del-mondo/0933-lapresse-foto-1607-197.jpg?v=1374068914
http://static2.oggi.it/wp-content/blogs.dir/3/files/lady-diana-le-foto-inedite-della-nonna-piu-bella-del-mondo/0936-lapresse-foto-1607-197.jpg?v=1374068916
http://static2.oggi.it/wp-content/blogs.dir/3/files/lady-diana-le-foto-inedite-della-nonna-piu-bella-del-mondo/0941-lapresse-foto-1607-197.jpg?v=1374068918
http://static2.oggi.it/wp-content/blogs.dir/3/files/lady-diana-le-foto-inedite-della-nonna-piu-bella-del-mondo/0938-lapresse-foto-1607-197.jpg?v=1374068917

[/b]What are your favourite pics?[/b]

The Arrival

Goodness - now that is my idea of a Princess!  Thanks, dianab  :hug:

:welcome: darling :hug:

Another video

What are the people chanting in the background?

I was living in the D.C. area at the time, and I remember seeing this on the news, but I can't make out the faces of the people on the side.  Probably members of Reagan's staff.  I wouldn't remember their names, anyway.

Cindy

It couldn't have been a demonstration... I don't think. But it was repeated over and over again.

Oh, sorry, I misread ... chanting?  They're chanting "[something] go home":

QuoteA small group of anti-British IRA supporters protested outside and there were a few slip-ups during the glamorous event.

BBC ON THIS DAY | 9 | 1985: America welcomes Charles and Diana (http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/9/newsid_4396000/4396846.stm)

People protest in the District all the time.  Unless it's a huge demonstration, no one takes much notice unless it holds up traffic.

Cindy

another video

I am loving these!  :thanks:

:welcome:

They are just lovely!  :hug: There is no one that can grab one's attention like that anymore. My friends and I were looking through some magazines yesterday and felt nostalgic for those days.

Was it hard for Princess Diana to share the spotlight with her sister-in-law, Sarah, Duchess of York?     
:nocomment: :nocomment: :blahblahblah: :blahblahblah: :blahblahblah: :annoyed2: :annoyed2: :annoyed2: :gaah: :gaah:

Here is a new thread to discuss the Royal Wedding. I mentioned Diana as Lady Diana in the title because she was not a Princess when she became engaged to the Prince of Wales.   

Would Westminster Abbey have worked as the location of Princess Diana's wedding?

^ Yes, of course it would. It's worked for every other Royal wedding.

I've never been totally sure about why St Paul's was chosen. The prevailing myth or tale is that Diana didn't want to marry in the same church where her parents had wed. I suspect that St Paul's being larger, was considered much more suitable for the all-out pageantry and spectacle that the first wedding of a Prince of Wales for nearly 120 years demanded. A large canvas indeed. The world's royalty, Commonwealth leaders, HOS etc had to be invited as well as notables from British politics, the arts, sciences etc. Even in those days there were apparently difficulties in raising enough police and service personnel to make it all work. However, it did, and it all looked magnificent.

if you go on youtube you can find the interview C&D gave shortly before the wedding (a fun watch both for the nostalgia, and the body language, demure posturing, etc of Diana, but at the same time she showed that fiery willfulness, giving him a playful jab about saying he was a tower of strength cause he was sitting there).

They actually had the makings of a well timed duo, you could see where Jephson would later say when they worked together ontour they were a world beating couple. Ah for what could have been....

But to answer your question, he mentions it was due to the acoustics and the number of guests were the reason as I recall. Now it could also be Diana had those feelings about the Abbey, but she didnt share them at that time.

It was bigger and more photogenic..and Charles wanted it..

@amabel I agree as the carriages drew up to the cathedral it was so magical seeing that majestic dome and for this wedding it was the best choice. Charles went to the trouble of picking all the music and it was just beautiful the sound was much clearer and Dame Kiri was awesome.

Wikipedia declared: "Charles and Diana selected St. Paul's because it offered more seating and permitted a longer procession through the streets of London."

Now its 36 years since the wedding, between all the sniping and countersniping, take a moment and remember what you were doing that day, how you felt, what you saw, and what we thought it would have been.  :flower:

I'd followed Diana in Aussie magazines and newspapers since the engagement announcement. I suppose, like lots of other people, I was glued to the TV. I was in Australia for once and my inlaws had relieve.. er kindly taken my two older children for a couple of days. We had a girlfriend of mine staying with us and we two were just transported to fairyland. That's mostly what I remember, the huge crowds roaring and cheering, the smallish coach transporting Diana, the wedding dress seemingly creased to the devil but then transformed by the Emmanuels at the church entry. The earl leaning on his daughter and looking quite ill actually.  I can remember all the royals looking extremely pleased, especially the Queen on the balcony afterwards. It's hard to think she was only 55 then. There was a sort of magical sheen or atmosphere about on that day, I think.We all felt it.

Prince Charles' two supporters were Prince Andrew and Prince Edward. However only Andrew rode with Charles in the 1902 State Landau to St. Paul's Cathedral. Edward rode with Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother in a separate carriage.

Mystery of the back-up that vanished, how her waist shrank five inches in six months and a secret message in her shoes: Diana's dress of the century
Diana and the dress of the century  | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4801020/Diana-dress-century.html)

Thanks for posting this @sara8150 and IMO it's one of the better written articles from the DM in a very long time. Great information regarding the team: designers, craftspeople, farmers etc...who created this memorable gown.

I give Diana immense credit for selecting a virtual unknown, the Emanuels, for making her wedding gown.

I think the combination of her keen sense of style and reading people made her confident they could pull it off, despite their lack of experience.

From the site that is dedicated to all royal fashion, this is the review and retrospect on Diana's wedding dress.

The Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor: Top 10 Best Royal Wedding Dresses: #7. Diana, Princess of Wales (http://orderofsplendor.blogspot.com/2010/06/top-10-best-royal-wedding-dresses-7.html)

This is the site owner's review of this dress from 1981 and she lists her reasons as to why it made her personal Top Ten list in 2010. 
:)

In 2012 the dress was ranked #16 on the list. The Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor: Readers' Top 10 Wedding Gowns: The Next Ones (http://orderofsplendor.blogspot.com/2012/11/readers-top-10-wedding-gowns-next-ones.html)

^The site owner wrote that: The 25 foot train was one of the main stars of the day. I totally agree. However, Diana Frances was herself superb!

Quote from: TLLK on August 27, 2017, 08:18:43 PM
From the site that is dedicated to all royal fashion, this is the review and retrospect on Diana's wedding dress.

The Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor: Top 10 Best Royal Wedding Dresses: #7. Diana, Princess of Wales (http://orderofsplendor.blogspot.com/2010/06/top-10-best-royal-wedding-dresses-7.html)

This is the site owner's review of this dress from 1981 and she lists her reasons as to why it made her personal Top Ten list in 2010. 
:)

In 2012 the dress was ranked #16 on the list. The Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor: Readers' Top 10 Wedding Gowns: The Next Ones (http://orderofsplendor.blogspot.com/2012/11/readers-top-10-wedding-gowns-next-ones.html)

I must read this. I like the dress very much, I have never thoguth that it was OTT, I'm always surprised how many people dislike it.  And even if it were downright ugly, I don't think it is nice ot rubbish someone's wedding dress as it is such a special thing for a bride.

Glad I was sitting down, were in agreement about something Diana  :lol:

Lady Diana mixed up Charles' names. He had so many names.   
Charles and Diana exchange vows - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCpE6UQQheY)

It will be 38 years that Prince Charles married Lady Diana. One nice thing about their wedding day was that there was no rain. 

Despite the marriage not working out, it was a beautiful ceremony that day. :happy:

It was literally awe inspiring and thrilling. I can never think of their marriage as a failure - they had two healthy children and were great parents. We see the results today, despite the tragedy of the breakup and her death. 

Yes, it was a wonderful and joyful day so many years ago now. The whole country went mad. It was lovely!

it was a beautiful ceremony. but it's sad no one of them was happy that day. as diana herself 'when we left the cathedral saw all those people so happy who thought we were happy'...

Quote from: LouisFerdinand on July 29, 2019, 01:16:14 AM
It will be 38 years that Prince Charles married Lady Diana. One nice thing about their wedding day was that there was no rain. 

:curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy:

it was a beautiful summer day. diana was born in a summer, married a future king in a summer, had her future king son in a summer and died in a summer

Yes I think that for all the glamour and pageantry, it has a bitter taste. The  2 of them were not happy. At best, at the time, they boht had severe doubts... and as time went on, it got so much worse...

Diana told Morton she had high hopes that day. And on the tapes told Morton "that's over" when she saw Camilla watching. Diana did say she loved Charles.

but she said that shortly befor the marriage, she wanted to pull out.. and it probably would have been a lot better if they had been able to call off the marriage..

She told all to Morton and she did indeed say she had high hopes on the wedding day. Charles sent her a note the night before reassuring her

Quote from: sandy on August 03, 2019, 12:56:15 PM
She told all to Morton and she did indeed say she had high hopes on the wedding day. Charles sent her a note the night before reassuring her

it would have probalby ebeen a lot better for her and Charles if they could have broken off the engagement..

I agree or that they should have dated for a longer period of time and not become engaged in the first place.

Quote from: TLLK on August 03, 2019, 05:18:05 PM
I agree or that they should have dated for a longer period of time and not become engaged in the first place.

but they did. I really can't feel "oh the wedding was so great".. when I know how much unhappiness it generated..It really was a difficult and sad marriage and had a lot of ramifcations -.  I know that if they had asked ht queen to end it, they simply would have been told they had to go ahead at the time.. but I think the Queen could not have foreseen the tragedy...

Charles talked about watching the wedding tape on their honeymoon with Diana. He did not seem miserable watching the replays and seeing what he missed seeing at the time. Princess Margaret said that she hoped Camilla would "give up" CHarles or words to that effect. The Queen was warned about Charles involvement with married Camilla ca. 1979. So I think the Queen may have ostriched about the ramifications of the wedding concerning Charles and Camilla's involvement.  Maybe the Queen had concerns but would push it to the back of her mind and not want to think about it. The Queen Mum wanted her grandson to get married and not have a crisis by being a bachelor involved with a married woman. CHarles should have quietly ended the relationship pre engagement if he thought he could not fully commit to the young woman.

Royals tied balloons to their tiaras at Princess Diana's pre-wedding party - Mirror Online (https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/royals-tied-balloons-tiaras-princess-18776936)

Princess Diana was only allowed to invite 100 people to Royal Wedding - Charles got 1,900 - Mirror Online (https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/princess-diana-only-allowed-invite-18777514)

Princess Diana's shocking weight loss meant wedding dress makers had to keep starting again - Mirror Online (https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/princess-dianas-shocking-weightloss-meant-18774468)

Prince Charles was 'furious' when secret stag do at gentleman's club didn't go to plan - Mirror Online (https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/prince-charles-furious-secret-stag-18774680)

I like Princess Diana's bridal bouquet.     
Princess Diana Wedding Bouquet - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G25V3GbQh7U)

The Glass Coach was not large enough to accomodate the 25 foot train. Bridesmaid India Hicks recalled "try as best as I could to dewrinkle the situation" as Lady Diana stepped out of the carriage to enter the cathedral.

Were some commentators shocked when Princess Diana insisted on taking the six-month-old Prince William on an extended tour of Australia and New Zealand?   
 

Only people who usually faint and clutch their pearls whenever someone in the public eye does something that's without precedent. Of course the Press whipped it up into a supposed controversy. However, most people thought it was much more natural than leaving their young child with nannies and grandparents for months while they were abroad, not to mention going to horse races in preference an only son's second birthday after returning from a holiday. . 

I don't think people were shocked, but perhaps a bit surprised because he was quite young and it was a long journey and it was a working tour where Diana would be very busy and not able to be with him a good bit of the time. But Di was so popular that they wanted her to be working in Australia, so it wasn't a case that she could have stayed home and let Charles do the tour...

Quote from: Curryong on December 30, 2020, 03:49:47 AM
Only people who usually faint and clutch their pearls whenever someone in the public eye does something that's without precedent. Of course the Press whipped it up into a supposed controversy. However, most people thought it was much more natural than leaving their young child with nannies and grandparents for months while they were abroad, not to mention going to horse races in preference an only son's second birthday after returning from a holiday. . 

I agree and honestly the press failed to consider that the precedent was set during an era when long haul travel was done by ship (weeks) and not jumbo jets (hours).  :notamused:

Upper adn middle class people also saw less of their children.. they were looked after by nannies, supervised by grandparents... sent to boarding school.  and some people did think that it was a long way to take a baby for the sake of a few weeks...
I dont think that Diana took her children on tours again after that first one..

Quote from: Amabel2 on December 30, 2020, 03:38:43 PM
Upper adn middle class people also saw less of their children.. they were looked after by nannies, supervised by grandparents... sent to boarding school.  and some people did think that it was a long way to take a baby for the sake of a few weeks...
I dont think that Diana took her children on tours again after that first one..

Geographically the Aus/NZ tour was the longest tour away from Britain that Charles and Diana undertook. And those who were shocked by it, and I genuinely didn't hear many moans about it at all, obviously had no children of their own or had forgotten how precious every memory is of their babies' first couple of years of life.

Things were changing in the 1980s. All that stoic stuff from the 1950s about parent-children relationships had long since gone and in fact the Queen held on to those concepts well into the 1960s when they were fast disappearing.

She was said to have stated about Diana that she couldn't understand her changing an appointment one day because the nanny was away and there was no one to look after William (this was before Harry was born.) She is supposed to have said 'There's always a housemaid around...' Well, in fact there weren't housemaids at KP and Diana liked looking after her own children.

And, although admittedly the later 1940s/1950s were certainly starchy decades, there were few young mothers even then who would have gone to the races in preference to their toddler son's birthday after not seeing him for weeks. I can't imagine the QM doing it for example, and Princess Alice, Philip's mother, was apparently horrified when she found there was no birthday party going on for young Prince Andrew in the nurseries at BP in the 1960s. Alice and the QM were certainly from the upperclasses and brought their children up in that way much earlier than the 1940s to '60s. Yet they were close and loving mothers to their children (Alice's illness in the 1930s and her necessary separation from Philip very much grieved her)  and as Lady Strathmore had been to her large family as well.

The QM was devastated to leave the infant Elizabeth on a long Empire tour in 1928, and both parents rushed to see her when they returned. She was upset to find that her daughter was wary of her for a little while after the return. There are no reports of the present Queen rushing back to the nursery after any of her trips anywhere, or being worried by her small children being formal with her, and one wonders actually whether there are regrets now about the emotional unavailability side of parenthood she often displayed. 

The truth is that the Queen has always been an undemonstrative and rather distant mother. There are many examples of this which have come to light over the years. Her remark about the housemaid shows an incredibly out of touch attitude. It's akin to the barrister who, in the Lady Chatterley's Lover obscenity case in around 1960, asked the jury (in all seriousness) 'Is this a book you would permit your wife or servants to read?' I mean, Pleeeze! In 1960 not 1860! Thank God those days have gone!

IMO part of Diana's legacy was that it was now considered to be appropriate to take your infant with you on a long haul trip.
I recall photos from 2004 when the new royal mothers and fathers: NL's W-A and Maxima and Norway's Haakon and Mette-Marit brought their  baby girls to Felipe and Letizia's wedding. The babies didn't attend the wedding or any pre-nuptial events but they were there. Queen Rania of Jordan would bring her babies along as well when she traveled on official business.

Obviously the Cambridges and Sussexes have brought George/ Charlotte and Archie on official tours/trips (Australia/NZ, Canada, Germany,  South Africa)  in part because they were invited as a family unit.

Did Prince Harry as a small child accompany his parents on an extended working tour?   

No, LF, mainly because the Aus/NZ trip when William was a baby was the longest extended trip far away that the couple undertook, as I said before. They went to other places of course, but they were, even Canada, relatively short trips compared to that one and just across the Atlantic. Australia is half a world away from Britain and even now (in normal times) is 24 hours away with stopovers for refuelling.

---

Double post auto-merged: December 30, 2020, 10:52:16 PM

---

Quote from: TLLK on December 30, 2020, 10:16:56 PM
IMO part of Diana's legacy was that it was now considered to be appropriate to take your infant with you on a long haul trip.
I recall photos from 2004 when the new royal mothers and fathers: NL's W-A and Maxima and Norway's Haakon and Mette-Marit brought their  baby girls to Felipe and Letizia's wedding. The babies didn't attend the wedding or any pre-nuptial events but they were there. Queen Rania of Jordan would bring her babies along as well when she traveled on official business.

Obviously the Cambridges and Sussexes have brought George/ Charlotte and Archie on official tours/trips (Australia/NZ, Canada, Germany,  South Africa)  in part because they were invited as a family unit.

Yes, exactly, TLLK, and the parents and children relationship is all the better for it. That distance between them, iwith nursery staff ruling the roost, in every country, has virtually gone.

Of course there are difficulties when the children are of school age, there is a difference between Queen regnants and consorts and of course how things were done seventy years ago is looked on with amazement and some horror now. I do realise that the Queen could hardly have the young Charles and Anne rattling around the Britannia for weeks on those lengthy tours, so it was inevitable that there would be separations. However, as I said, there is a matter of degrees.

Elizabeth was madly in love with Philip and earlier in her marriage, adored being with him on Malta and elsewhere. Its just a pity that it was so blindingly obvious in her children's upbringing that routine and order came first along with her husband and her children came a distant second to the way things had always been done. Even in the 1940s and earlier there were women who were mothers first and participated in their offsprings lives day by day. The Queen unfortunately is a rather emotionally repressed and undemonstrative person and has been like that all her life. It came out in her family life, and that's a shame.

The only time I recall school aged Wales brothers on tour with their parents was in 1991 when they visited Canada. Do you recall other family official visits @Curryong?

https://www.cbc.ca/archives/charles-diana-william-harry-visit-canada-ontario-1991-1.5316289

There is a short video clip in the CBC link with Diana, William and "Henry" on the Maid of the Mist.  :happy:

Quote from: TLLK on December 31, 2020, 09:31:16 PM
The only time I recall school aged Wales brothers on tour with their parents was in 1991 when they visited Canada.

That's right, but Canada isn't half a world away in terms of distance and I don't believe the Canada tour was an extremely long one either. Plus, obviously leaving school aged boys alone for a week or two when they are in boarding school most of the time anyway, is different to being apart from your first child when he was a baby. Most of Diana's engagements, after her separation from Charles anyway, were undertaken when her sons were at school or were with their father.

Miss Bartlett, the Head of the Work Room at the Royal School of Needlework contacted David and Elizabeth Emanuel. The school gave them a piece of royal lace that Queen Mary had given to the school. This lace formed the central bodice lace on Diana's dress.

This is the first time I had seen photographs of Princess Diana dancing with either Tom Selleck and Clint Eastwood.   
This must have been a special moment for Tom and Clint. How often does one dance with an English Princess?

Old stuff