home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
No Fragments Archive 10: Diskmags
/
nf_archive_10.iso
/
MAGS
/
KELAUG
/
KELAUG11.MSA
/
TEXT_DIANA.WAL
/
TEXT_DIANA.WAL
Wrap
Text File
|
1998-09-22
|
7KB
|
136 lines
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M A S S H Y S T E R I A O R M Y T H I N T H E M A K I N G ?
the Diana Myth, a year on, by Bob Kell
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I think Bob might offend a few people with this article - and the same goes for
my response - but surely it's an unhealthy situation when you're not allowed to
express doubts about the largest outbreak of public hysteria since the anti-
German jingoism of WW1...
jfw
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I've just read one of the most ridiculous things that I've ever come across in a
newspaper. It's an article on how we as a country are still affected by the
death of Princess Diana. According to the article two thirds of the population
are still grieving over her death, and one in ten women have changed the way
they live their lives as a direct result of her death.
Now either people in England, or southern Scotland as we like to call it, must
either be reacting very differently to the death of the princess, or the survey
is just simply a load of cobblers.
Is it my imagination or has the memory of Diana turned into those lovely
recollections we all have of summers when we were wee, when every day was
glorious sunshine and it didn't rain for 47 years. Every single Easter consisted
of picnics in 85 degree heat, rolling hard boiled eggs down gently sloping
hillsides with never one rolling over a dog turd, and Dad never once booting you
up the Khyber for heaving eggs at your sister. Every Christmas day Santa brought
you everything you wanted. Your house was decorated with an 18 foot Douglas fir
with enough fairy lights to illuminate Hampden Park, and there was eight feet of
snow which lasted until May. Those were the days.
I can't help but think that a large proportion of the populace seem to look back
on the life and times of Princess Di with the same rosy glasses.
Let's face it. A young mum went out for an evening with her boyfriend and was
involved in a car accident that led to her death. It was a tragic event. But no
more tragic than thousands of other poor people who suffer similar fates. Why
then attach such incredible sentiment to a person who very few people, of the 65
million of us in the country, had ever met. Noel Gallagher was slated at the
time for wondering how many of the millions of sobbing funeral watchers would
actually take time out to visit their own granny's grave, and he was exactly
right.
If someone you have been close to for many years dies, especially suddenly, then
it affects you emotionally more than you will ever know until it happens to you.
How can anyone exhibit those same feelings to a person who they did not and
would not ever know personally. The person that we all saw as Diana was not her,
it was the person that she and her PR people wanted us to see. Anyone who has a
public life must also have a public face to show. The person that they really
are is only ever there for the people that they live with day in and day out.
She wasn't the most beautiful woman in the world, she wasn't the best mother in
the world, and she wasn't the loving, caring and compassionate woman that she
appeared to be 24 hours a day.
Give any reasonable looking woman a couple of thousand quid a week to spend on
herself and I'd guess that she would look pretty good. The best mothers in the
world are those who have to bring up kids either on their own or with very
little money, but still turn out children who are clean, well dressed, well fed,
well mannered and respectful. Kids who become young adults who have a pride in
who they are and where they come from. And a person of a genuinely loving and
caring nature would not fall out with their closest and oldest friends on a
petulant whim when they said or did something that just didn't suit the person,
as we know that Diana did.
So why is she so revered then?
I'm afraid that it's just the human failing of not wanting to let anything go
that we feel attached to. It's the Elvis, Bruce Lee, Jim Reeves, Marlyn
Monroe, Glenn Miller and Buddy Holly syndrome. If someone in the public eye
dies suddenly then the fans of that person flatly refuse to believe that they
could die, and that their own condensed relationship with that person has
ended. What they are attached to is their own image of the person and not the
person themselves.
I can't help but feel that there is a weakness in anyone who devotes such
feelings to a celebrity, that they will never know. We all condemn the 'stalker'
who is so obsessed by a fellow human being that they just cannot believe that
the person does not have the same feelings for them, but we also glorify those
amongst us who cannot see that the public face of a celebrity is not the person
themselves, and that any true feeling for a person can only be cultivated within
a one to one relationship.
By all means feel sorry for Princess Diana's untimely end, and have sympathy for
the people she knew and left behind. But reserve your true emotions for those of
your own friends and families who truly deserve them.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks for hitting it right on the nail Bob! I think the truth is that the
newspapers, rather the people, are setting the agenda there. Most opinion polls
are worded in such a way that they're guaranteed to produce the responses that
newspapers want. We're talking about Profit rather than Truth here... "Yes, she
was a Saint!" "Yes, she single-handedly defused every landmine in Kurdistan!"
"Yes, she succoured every starving child in Africa!" (When she wasn't changing
costumes for the cameras, that is.)
It's strange, isn't that, that most of the journalists who are peddling this
tosh were saying very different things in the week immediately before the
drunken car crash. Phrases such as "barking mad", "a victim of her own PR", and
"a laughing stock" (according to columnists in the Sunday Telegraph, Sunday
Mail and Sunday Independent on the day of her death) were replaced overnight by
the new dogma that no-one in the history of humankind had suffered more or had
shown as much compassion as HRH the Princess of Wales.
I know I'm not meant to say this, but shouldn't we save our respect for people
who 'do good by stealth' - without an eye on tomorrow's headlines - and reserve
our compassion for the people who don't have the opportunity, let alone the
desire, to parade their suffering on Panorama?
jfw: Stiff Upper Lip Mode.
~~~ eof ~~~