How Princess Diana Would Have Felt About Prince Harry's BBC Interview
A royal biographer is weighing in on how she thinks Princess Diana would have reacted to Prince Harry's May 2 BBC interview, which left King Charles 'frustrated and upset.'
The late Princess of Wales had an explosive BBC interview of her own in November 1995, nearly 30 years ago.
Ingrid Seward reflected on whether Diana had any regrets about that interview, which sent shockwaves around the world at the time it aired.A veteran royal biographer has weighed in on how she thinks the late Princess Diana would have reacted to her son Prince Harry's emotional BBC interview on May 2, where he said he had hopes for a reconciliation with his family and that he didn't know how much longer his father King Charles had to live.
Ingrid Seward told Hello! on the outlet's 'A Right Royal Podcast' that the former Princess of Wales would be 'proud' of the Duke of Sussex, telling the show that she imagines Diana would have told Harry, 'I'm glad you said what you thought.'
'I think she would, I'm guessing, that she might have been quite proud of him for speaking up and saying what he thought, because that's what she liked,' Seward said. 'She liked to say exactly what she thought and then deal with the consequences afterwards.'
Diana sent shockwaves of her own around the world after her bombshell 1995 Panorama interview—also on the BBC—where she delivered the famous line that there were three people in her marriage, so it was a bit crowded (referring to her husband Charles and his then-mistress, Camilla Parker Bowles).
'I saw her quite shortly after that [the interview airing], so obviously I asked her, and she said, 'No, I don't regret any of it,'' Seward said. 'She said, 'The only thing I felt a bit bad about was talking about James Hewitt.' She had said, if you remember, that she was in love with him, or had been in love with him, and she felt bad for [Prince] William and Harry saying that.'
'She, at that moment, thought it was a successful interview,' Seward added.
Harry's BBC interview earlier this month reportedly left Charles 'frustrated and upset,' and according to Hello!, Charles and William had only found out about the interview with 'very brief' notice.
'There was a very brief awareness-raising at the palace shortly before it broadcast,' Hello! royal editor Emily Nash said. 'What I understand is that there were, potentially, discussions that might have happened as a result of the case now having been concluded.'
She added of Harry's court case to restore his security in the U.K.—the impetus for the BBC interview after Harry's appeal was denied—that 'What was made clear all along is that the King didn't feel he could have these conversations with his son because it would put him in a really difficult, and potentially unconstitutional, situation. He couldn't be seen to intervene on his son's behalf or get involved in government matters—his son is suing His Majesty's government, you know. He needed to stay right out of this situation.'
'But once that had concluded, there was potentially a path to some kind of rapprochement, some kind of olive branch being offered,' Nash continued. 'And I get the sense that that was the mood music, but that really quickly got switched off once the interview landed.'
Read the original article on InStyle
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
2 hours ago
- UPI
'I Kissed a Girl' renewed for Season 2 at BBC
Dannii Minogue will return to host Season 2 of the LGBTQ+ dating reality series "I Kissed a Girl" on BBC Three and BBC iPlayer. Photo courtesy of BBC June 9 (UPI) -- I Kissed a Girl will return for a second season on BBC Three and BBC iPlayer. BBC announced in a press release Monday that it renewed the LGBTQ+ dating reality series for Season 2. The season is the second for I Kissed a Girl and the fourth in the I Kissed franchise. I Kissed a Girl features 10 women who are paired up and kiss during their first meeting. The couples then get to know each other and see if they want to pursue a relationship. Singer Dannii Minogue will return to host Season 2, with comedian Charley Marlowe to also return as narrator. "I Kissed a Girl was full of heart and groundbreaking for female representation on TV. The fans loved the fun, the passion and the drama. I can't wait for the return of the girls -- let's see what the heat of the Italian sun does for kisses and connections. It is sure to get sparks flying. I am ready to be cupid once again -- get ready for the Masseria Mania!" Minogue said in a statement. "I am beyond excited for the return of I Kissed a Girl and I can't wait to get back in that voice booth and narrate the masseria magic. The girls are returning to Italy to find love! And mumma Minogue back as cupid... What's not to love?" Marlowe added. Casting for Season 2 is now open.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Movie review: 'Materialists' incisively takes down big dating services
LOS ANGELES, June 9 (UPI) -- Materialists, in theaters June 16, is a scathing indictment of both Hollywood romances and the real-life industry that has sprouted around dating. Singles who have been preyed upon by such services will feel seen. In the film, Dakota Johnson stars as Lucy, a woman working for the fictional Adore matchmaking service. She is responsible for nine marriages but is determined to remain single herself. At one wedding, the groom's brother, Harry (Pedro Pascal), asks Lucy on a date, which she initially accepts to try and land him as a client. At that same wedding, she reconnects with her ex, John (Chris Evans), who is working as a waiter. Just watching Lucy work shows how she turns human beings into commodities. They are a collection of assets she can move around to set up on dates, thus keeping both clients on contract, or marry off to raise her success rate, improving her own business. And yet, she still objectively misjudges her clients. When introducing one potential match, she genuinely thought the man would be open to a 39-year-old businesswoman and that the woman would accept his height and receding hairline, let alone other clients who have minimum salary requirements for partners. Lucy expects her clients to be more open-minded, and yet she's selling them on the idea that their perfect match is out there, and that she'll find them. If she was realistic in her sales pitch, most clients would probably opt to keep dating on their own. This is an issue inherent with turning dating into business. When a customer is paying for a service, they do have a right to set some criteria for their purchase. Capitalism is ultimately incompatible with humanity. Yet matchmaking services have a high enough success rate to stay in business. Everyone seems to know someone who met their partner through a service like this. Materialists makes incisive observations about the seemingly petty reasons people really connect. There is some validity to them, however. One flashback shows John and Lucy arguing over whether to park at a $25 lot in New York. $25 is a significant amount for a struggling couple, so it compromises their other plans and then makes Lucy feel guilty for resenting how much hinges on the amount. Money would render that problem moot but it wouldn't address the root of the issue -- if a couple can't solve problems together, they're not very compatible. Even if Lucy finds a wealthy suitor like Harry appealing, other problems will arise and put their relationship to the test. So Lucy assigns people value based on their careers, their income and their looks because everyone is already doing it. She's just created a mathematical formula. Being this honest, warts and all, about people's romantic needs also contradicts the most popular Hollywood romances. Hollywood movies love to sell people on romantic destiny, such as Sleepless in Seattle or While You Were Sleeping. Another trope is platonic friends falling in love like in When Harry Met Sally or Reality Bites. Certainly friends can become more, but movies like that overlook the reasons the pair made a conscious decision not to start dating in the first place. Lucy does the math on herself too, which speaks to an internalized self-loathing that matchmaking services prey upon. Based on firsthand experience, a lot of them seem to expect that if you're paying to find a date you must be desperate enough to accept whoever they present to you. Materialists gets even more serious about the pitfalls of taking money to introduce strangers in an intimate setting. When Lucy misjudges one male client, she puts a female client in a precarious situation. This is the inevitable peril of such a business and Adore alludes to a legal department, which must exist for real-life services to address such risks. But, Lucy's math can't even get middle-aged men to accept dating 30-year-olds, so how can she really screen out possible abusers when abusers are deceptively capable of appearing safe? Lucy starts to see the flaws in the system and calls out some of her clients. She astutely points out that as a matchmaker, she is forced to deal with clients' racism, ageism, body shaming and other qualities to which even their therapists may not be privy. One issue with Lucy's math is that she only sees people's potential. What it doesn't show her is people's nature, and that is the foundation of relationships. Materialists is a cynical movie and yet one that desperately wants to have hope. The film, as with its heroine, is hard pressed to ignore the reality of human behavior. Writer-director Celine Song seems nonjudgmental about the people who run Adore and the people who pay for their services, assuming their intentions are sincere despite their blind spots. And what is the alternative, swiping profiles on apps? Ideally, the alternative should be being kind and friendly, spending time getting to know each other and not looking at phones. Alas, the difficulty of that created a void for businesses like Adore to fill. Song lets her actors perform long, uncut scenes of dialogue together, or listen to each other's monologues and react subtly. The roles let Johnson and Pascal let their guard down at times, and Evans' role is always vulnerable. Materialists is presumably a date movie but it is likelier to lead to arguments, hopefully constructive ones. For singles navigating the oppressive selling of relationship services, it is especially validating, and poignant for anyone trying to rationalize the intangibles of love. Fred Topel, who attended film school at Ithaca College, is a UPI entertainment writer based in Los Angeles. He has been a professional film critic since 1999, a Rotten Tomatoes critic since 2001, and a member of the Television Critics Association since 2012 and the Critics Choice Association since 2023. Read more of his work in Entertainment.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
This Unexpected Reason Might Connect Estranged Brothers Prince William and Prince Harry
One of the largest collections of Princess Diana's items is coming up for auction on June 26—and there's a good chance that her sons Prince William and Prince Harry will be tempted to bid on them, an expert said. There are over 300 items on the auction block, from the former Princess of Wales' dresses to shoes to handbags. The Prince of Wales and the Duke of Sussex even make it into the auction in the form of numerous holiday cards of Diana's family signed by the royal this month, over 300 items from the late Princess Diana's collection—everything from clothing to shoes to handbags to personal cards and letters—will go up for auction. The question has to be asked: will her sons Prince William and Prince Harry privately bid for any of their late mother's items? It's very possible, said Martin Nolan, executive director and co-founder of Julien's Auctions, which is putting on the sale on June 26 at 10 a.m. PST at The Peninsula Beverly Hills. Speaking on Hello!'s 'A Right Royal Podcast,' Nolan said, 'I would expect that they are tempted and expect that they do and expect they have representatives who buy on their behalf.' 'And that's understandable,' he added. 'I would, too.' Some of the items are deeply personal pieces from the former Princess of Wales' collection. 'You see the ski suit and the great photographs of them or the shoes that she wore when she went to the dinosaur exhibition at the Museum of Natural History here,' Nolan continued. 'You know, like all of those, they're memories for them. It's their mum. She's the most famous person in the world, but of course they would love to own some of these and preserve them for their own memories.' In total, there are 325 items in the auction, called Princess Diana's Style & A Royal Collection—including Diana's famous Lady Dior bag, her iconic Caring Dress designed by Bellville Sassoon, the hat she wore as she departed for her honeymoon with Prince Charles in 1981, and multiple handwritten notes. William and Harry even make it to the collection themselves in the form of a signed holiday card featuring a photo of the two with their parents from 1989 and a signed photograph of Diana with her two sons from 1990, among other photographs of the Wales family from yesteryear. Read the original article on InStyle
