Will Camilla ever be Queen of Hearts and reign alongside King Charles? Di don’t think so
WILL “Queen Camilla” ever have the public mandate to reign alongside King Charles?
After watching the film Diana, Our Mother — overseen by her sons William and Harry — it seems increasingly unlikely.
For in the princes’ hands it was, understandably, a wholly one-sided, unquestioning homage to the Queen of People’s Hearts, focusing only on her undoubted warmth as a mother, how she handled constant pressure from “the press”, and the admirable humanitarian work that dominated the final years of her life.
In less subjective hands, it might have mentioned her character flaws (let’s face it, we all have them), how the foreign paparazzi dogged her every step and not the more traditional “press” that she often willingly colluded with.
Or that, admirable though it was, her high-profile charity work also served the purpose of making her feel needed against the backdrop of a loveless marriage and, later on, garnered headlines that she knew would eclipse, and therefore annoy, her ex- husband.
But who could blame her?
As mitigated by some in Charles’s camp, he and Diana may well have been a mismatch from the start, but that’s really not the point.
Her sons’ film, screened on ITV on Monday, reminded us that she was a fundamentally decent person, beautiful on the inside and out, yet ultimately driven out of the protective environs of the Royal Family by her husband’s disinterest in her.
Perhaps they would have muddled on through the troubled early years and emerged the stronger for it, but the marriage was strangled at birth by the ghostly presence of a girlfriend past — one Camilla Parker Bowles. Or, as Diana later lamented, there were “three people” in it.
On their wedding day, Charles glanced across at Camilla as he walked up the aisle. On their honeymoon, he kept a photo of her in his diary. He wore cufflinks she’d given him, with their initials intertwined.
At times throughout the marriage, he would retreat to the bathroom to share long phone calls with her.
And she, in turn, was always there for him — an obsession that meant he never fully invested in his marriage.
Can you imagine having to deal with all that when, at just 19, you believed you had met your prince and were going to live happily ever after?
Little wonder Diana became mentally and physically ill.
If proof is needed that the general public loathe what they perceive to be shabby or underhand behaviour, then look no further than the unlikely setting of ITV2’s hugely popular Love Island, where the final included the Duchess of Cornwall’s namesake, 27-year-old Camilla Thurlow.
But there the similarities end.
For Love Island’s Camilla is a fragile, emotionally vulnerable soul, seemingly far younger than her years and, by her own admission, a hotbed of insecurities. Reminiscent of a young Lady Diana Spencer, perhaps?
And when a quivering Camilla gave her trusting heart to the lustful flibbertigibbet that was Jonny Mitchell, he swiftly dumped her for someone with longer legs.
But now? It’s “Jonny Who?”, while Camilla — alongside her model (in every sense of the word) chap Jamie Jewitt — made it to the final thanks to the votes of supportive viewers who felt she’d been hard done by.
So, yes, Charles and Camilla seem ideally suited, with a shared sense of humour, mutual interests, yada-yada-yada . . . and will no doubt live happily ever after. But getting the public’s unequivocal support as future King and Queen may prove trickier.
Camilla haunted Diana’s marriage, and now Diana’s angelic ghost is doing exactly the same to her nemesis.
MOST READ IN OPINION
— TONY and Cherie Blair just added a £5million office to their property portfolio – now worth around a staggering £38million.
Isn’t socialism marvellous?
Charlie case is big mess
GREAT Ormond Street Hospital maintained from the start that Charlie Gard’s brain damage was irreversible, rendering any potential treatment futile.
Then American professor Michio Hirano – who hadn’t met Charlie or even read his medical records – came forward to offer his “experimental” drugs that, he claimed, might help to improve the 11-month-old’s condition.
As we now know, this intervention resulted in further court hearings and, once Professor Hirano had been able to examine Charlie and his new scans, the painful conclusion by his parents Chris and Connie was that further muscle wastage meant the time had come to let him go.
In the meantime, GOSH staff have been receiving death threats from the usual merry-go-round of reactionary morons who know little or nothing of the subtleties of the case, and the world-famous hospital has now openly criticised Professor Hirano for giving Charlie’s parents false hope.
It’s an unholy mess that will no doubt result in both the medical and legal worlds reassessing how they handle such cases.
But in the middle of all this bureaucratic mud-slinging, let’s not forget there’s an ordinary couple who were one minute celebrating the birth of their first child, the next plunged into a heart-breaking nightmare, the pain of which is etched on their gaunt faces.
RIP Charlie. You may have had a short life but, boy, were you loved by your mummy and daddy.
Have it large, Col
COLEEN ROONEY has been forced to deny she’s pregnant after this photo apparently showed her sporting a “swollen belly”. In which case, a casual onlooker might surmise that yours truly is approximately seconds away from giving birth.
For what any self-respecting woman knows is that “prominentus abdomenus” is an, ahem, medical condition that has nothing to do with impregnation and everything to do with holiday-related excessive consumption.
Which, in my case, involves two croissants at breakfast (avec confiture, bien sur,) a club sandwich for lunch, a three-course dinner (avec fromage) and enough rosé wine to float a cruise liner. Bonnes vacances, everyone.
— RESEARCH has shown that the average Brit breaks the law 32 times a year.
This includes beeping your car horn in anger, using a fake name on the internet, not paying for a carrier bag at self-service and vacuuming between the hours of 6pm and 8am on weekdays.
Which is why, regarding the latter, I take absolutely no chances and don’t do it at all.
Stick to Jilly, silly
AFTER returning to Doncaster from her honeymoon in Turkey, mental health worker Faizah Shaheen was detained by counter-terrorism police.
Her “crime”? Spending the flight reading Syria Speaks: Art And Culture From The Frontline (no, me neither) a tome that cabin crew took to be a Syrian phrasebook, though no such language exists.
This undoubted over-reaction highlights the incendiary times we now live in, when recent attacks have perhaps forced rampant suspicion to over-ride common sense.
Naturally, Ms Shaheen is now taking legal action for discrimination. Sigh.
In the meantime, perhaps in future she should ditch the high-brow literature on flights and stick to the far more enjoyable Jilly Cooper.
— A DEVICE that interprets the bark of a dog is on the horizon.
But if you can’t wait, I want a s**t/walk/sleep/biscuit/tummy rub just about covers it.
Three Lionesses
WELL done to the England women’s cricket team for their victory in the World Cup.
My youngest daughter loves the game and has played at both club and county level.
Undoubtedly, support for women’s cricket is on the up, with some schools now offering it as an option and local clubs going from strength to strength.
But the sight of so many empty seats at Lord’s shows that even though this was the biggest match in the history of women’s cricket, there’s still some way to go before it matches the commercial success of the men’s game.
So there’s still work to be done . . . by the public.
Pushy for parity
“THE theory that women get paid less than men because they are not sufficiently pushy in the workplace is not true,” said a report on a study released last September.
It added: “Women are as likely as men to ask for a pay rise – but are less likely to get one,” and even quoted a professor who concluded that “having seen these findings, I think we have to accept that there is some element of pure discrimination against women”.
And where did I read this report? On the BBC News website.
Oh, the irony.