I have to do a research project on it and im having trouble discovering some points.
2007-11-01 04:40:31 · 10 answers · asked by grjpbeatles2 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
It didn't. However it did show that the desire of the common man to live the life of the rich and aimless resulted in some pretty peculiar behaviour of photographers trying to feed the public's desire
2007-11-03 13:54:25 · answer #1 · answered by Sandy K 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Princess Diana was unique only because she married Prince Charles. If she had not done so she would have lived a normal life. However, that was not the case. Diana once married to Prince Charles offered the British Monarchy a great opportunity for a male heir to the throne in both Charles to become King and his possible offspring to be so as well. When Diana gave birth to both William and Harry this eventuality was assured (for the most part). Her introduction into the "Royal" line and actually producing offspring for the house of Windsor was a tremendous thing. She may have been pretty much a "commoner" but once married to the son of the queen and then producing "Son's and Heirs to the Throne".. she most undoubtedly secured her name in history forever. She was a great humanitarian and a pleasant person despite all the rumors and all the innuendo. The divorce did not and will not lessen her impact on the world or upon British society as her sons.. rightful heirs to the Throne of England STILL remain. No matter what, that will never change. Her other influences will fade away as time goes on.. but her mark made by her life will stand forever. Lady Diana albeit a princess at one time was human as we all are. Life as a Royal has its own tortures and limits despite what most people think. The world truly was better for her having been here, as briefly (being relative) as that was. She has two "Good" sons. They are remarkable young men, honorable young men at that. Their mother would be so proud if she could but see how they have grown and matured. Diana gave them so much love as only a mother could. Without a doubt she influenced them in how she and Charles raised them as children.
2016-05-26 21:44:53 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Photogenic Diana's life and death gave a boost to those journalists and photographers who earn their living publicizing people who are famous primarily for being famous. Jet setters, actors seeking fame, and deposed royalty have long fascinated the general public, but the Internet and the mass media helped to intensify this curiosity.
2007-11-03 12:47:02 · answer #3 · answered by Ellie Evans-Thyme 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, she was a very troubled public figure who had been in the limelight for around 30 years. She was a person who was perceived as a victim of Prince Charles' indifference and exploits with his mistress Camilla Parker Bowles. Diana was a loved and pitied figure, loved because of her devotion to improving the world (like ridding Cambodia of land mines), pitied because of her deep unhappiness, inability to find love (other than Dodi Fayed at the end) and terrible relationship with Charles and the Queen. And finally, her tragic death in France put the spotlight on the paparazzi and called into question its tactics when pursuing celebrities. There's no doubt it had alot to do with her death.
2007-11-01 04:52:08 · answer #4 · answered by abdiver12 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Princess Diana was loved by the people of the world since the announcement of her engagement to Prince Charles was made. Basically, they fell in love with her. She had aristocratic blood, but wasn't as snobish or as high maintenance as others of her class seemed to be. She was young, had the looks, had the man. After her marriage, she was thought to be the next queen which made even more people become aware of who she was. She helped people. That's what she wanted to do. She knew that she lived a very priveldged life and wanted to do her share in helping in the ways she could. People loved her williness to hold babies in foreign countries, to hug landmine victims and talk with them, to shake hands with people who had AIDS, to visit the homeless and down-troden, and to sit on the beds of patients dieing of cancer and try to make them smile. She had a great sense of humor, loved her kids, and she admitted that she was human. She admitted to faults and wrongdoings. She got down on the level of everyday people. Everyone felt sorry for her when they learnt that Chalres had been cheating.... and they felt even more sorry when she died under such horrible circumstances at just 36 years old. That's how Diana's death changed the world.... because she was someone who tried her best to do good, but in the end the worst happened to her. I think everyone felt a little guilty because they enjoyed looking at the photos taken of her... they enjoyed knowing what was going on in her life... and that intrusion is what lead to her death.
2007-11-01 14:48:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Maybe her death did nothing to change the world. Frankly, she did a number of charitable stuff in her life, other than that, she is no Mother Theresa.
2007-11-01 04:49:02 · answer #6 · answered by tj is cool 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It may not have changed the whole world, but it changed some peoples world.
I remember when she was leading the clean up of land mines.
She may have found other causes that would have changed the world for more people if she had not been killed.
2007-11-01 06:50:49 · answer #7 · answered by Rev. Deb 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It didn't. And I think it's time that we let that woman rest in peace!
2007-11-04 08:12:22 · answer #8 · answered by Marc Foster 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it cause some Arab kazillionaire to acuse the limeys of consiracy cause she was carrying the kazillionaire's grandson.
2007-11-01 08:09:48 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It didn't! She was a woman of questionable mental health and morals!
2007-11-01 04:56:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋