It did seem to approach mass hysteria. I think her appeal was that she was pretty, vulnerable and well… she was a Princess. A lot of people (mostly women) locked onto her trapped in an unhappy marriage story and her death was a bit of a shock.
Totally off topic, but I always thought you were older than that. (You’ve probably mentioned it before and I just missed it)
Hardly. I agree with Zebra’s post. She did an unbelievable amount of charity work and you could tell that it really meant a lot to her and to the countless people whose lives she touched.
I was in London the day of Dianas funeral and I couldn’t believe my eyes.
Thousands of people weeping and wailing and gnashing their teeth over a woman they didn’t bloody know.
I tell you this, the florists & cuddly toy makers were rubbing their hands, they must have made a fortune
I can’t explain the phenomenon, but I will say that despite having considered myself totally above the whole Royal Family thing and not interested at all, I was really surprisingly bummed when she died. I think she just seemed like a rather charming person, and that plus her celebrity caused a whole lot of people, apparently including me, to get a really silly crush on her.
Did she really do that much charity work? I know she did some stuff for AIDS awareness and her land mine program, but did she really do all that much with it? I don’t know any of the details.
It still does not explain the backlash against the Queen and royal family. What did the Queen do wrong? Do you have idea about that part?
I’m singling you out as you seem to be the closest poster so far to a Diana fan. If I was asking about Elvis or Selena I would rather hear it from one of their actual fans than just the observers.
Thank you ahead of time for sharing. I am really just trying to understand. Honestly, as I am sure you can tell, I always just dismissed the entire going on of the Royal Family. The only one I care about and thus respect is the Queen herself and that is actually for her war efforts as the Princess.
Jim
I found her intriguing, partly because she was just a couple of years younger than I was, she married someone older as I did although my first husband was only five years older than I was, and like me she had two sons. Plus I lived in Europe when she got married so I saw a lot of the hoopla in the press. She seemed to have the fairy tale life, which while I knew it didn’t exist just seemed so – I dunno – nice?
Then her marriage crashed right around when mine did, although I sure wasn’t a rich single mother!
Mostly when she died, I felt really bad for her sons. I’m sure I was projecting how I think mine might have felt had I died at that point in their lives.
I don’t get the hoopla now all these years later. I feel the same way about other notable dead people (Elvis, Marilyn, Anna Nicole etc).
I thought (and said) at the time that it was all thoroughly unhealthy - and un-English. “For Heaven’s sake, keep it all buttoned up”.
Hence the joke at the time that the white Fiat Punto was actually an Interflora van. 
My sister loved and loves her. When Diana & Charles got married oh so many years ago, she rousted me out fo bed to watch the ceremony with her because she didn’t want to watch it alone, and, when the royals got divorced, she was firmly on Di’s side. So, for 40something women, I’d say it’s because when they were young Diana embodied the Cinderella fantasy, and when they became adults Diana suffered travails they could relate to.
I personally just thought she was pretty.
Pretty, softhearted but naive virgin is set upon by cradle robbing toad-faced womanizing git. And then being cheated on by the same toad for what looks like a cross-dressing man.
Even before she was married I commented to a workmate that Diana was going to get emotionally shredded in that marriage.
Details of her charity work here and here.
As far as the queen, the royal family’s initial silence following Diana’s death led some to conclude the Queen was a cold fish with no compassion for Diana or those who grieved for her. She was a thought to be an insensitive old dinosaur, out of touch with her own subjects. The queen didn’t think a public acknowledgment was necessary - after all, Diana wasn’t technically a member of the royal family anymore (even though she was mother to the heirs to the throne). The royal family had also not forgotten Diana’s public criticism of them after the divorce.
The links don’t really say that much. As an example Pete Seeger has devoted a huge portion of his life to charitable work not just as a public figure waving the flag. Did she do a lot of high profile Photo Ops or really devote a lot of time? The second link seems to indicate she may have put some real time in, but it is not clear.
Thanks for the next part, it makes sense even if I couldn’t agree with the sentiment.
She was the perfect foil for the royal family. Where they were stuffy, she was fresh. Where they were stoic, she was emotional. Where they were wool and tweed, she was satin and sequins. Where they were ears and wrinkles, she was peaches and cream. Where they were boarding school, she was private school.
As Astro said, she had a vulnerability about her that made her sympathetic. She was not a commoner, but commoners related to her. Her husband’s lack of affection and downright disdain for her made people protective of her. Charles held the power except for public opinion, and the public was not going to allow him to take that from her. Like Elvis, she had so much but ultimately so little.
I recall hearing that she was one of the first celebrities to take up the AIDS crisis. Specifically, I believe that she was one of the first celebrities photographed holding a child who was suffering from AIDS. Recall that at that time, there were a LOT of rumors about how one could catch AIDS just from casual contact, or even from being in the same room with someone who was infected. I think that photograph, which was widely publicized, did much to convince the general public that AIDS was not spread through touching someone with the disease.
The amount of charity work she did was hardly “unbelievable.” She worked for a number of charities but, if I may be frank, that was essentially her damned job, and she seemed to have a lot of spare time. What else was she going to do? She certainly deserves credit for those things she did, but it was hardly extraordinary for a person of her privilege and position.
I’m vastly more impressed with someone like Audrey Hepburn, Paul Newman or, to take a recent example, Angelina Jolie, who nobody expects anything from and actually take time out from lucrative careers to dedicate time to charity.
She was really pretty. And she seemed like a pretty nice person. At least she smiled a lot and was actually photographed laughing. She also wore great clothes. And she was really pretty.
She used the press as much as was used by them but I think she started out with a huge advantage of sympathy simply because she was so young at the time of the marriage. I remember looking at pictures of them and thinking, 1. good thing he’s a prince because otherwise he’s just a rather goofy looking, stuffy older dude and 2. now those are two people you’d never look at and think they belong together. Maybe that’s just clearer in hindsight though.
I don’t give a whoop either way about royalty but would probably grant Diana edge winning points just for getting in way over her head, way too young. I’m not sure how anyone could prepare for that particular fishbowl/pressure cooker but she paid a hellish price for being rather silly at age 19.
I could also give a rats ass about royalty but I would laugh my ass off if Prince Charles got dumped by horse-face.
My wife was/is a Diana fan, and her death left Laura devastated - so much so that I stayed awake the entire night before the funeral making sure that all the coverage was being taped.
Part of it was her mother - the wedding of Diana and Charles was one of the last “big events” that Laura shared with her before her mother’s untimely death a few months later. By continuing to follow Diana, Laura kept alive something that she shared with her mom.
Laura also loved the fashions. Diana was always smartly dressed and rarely wore the same thing twice - being the most photographed woman in the world meant that people gave you their clothes to wear, and Diana felt it part of her “duty” to promote British designers. I’m sure that Laura has had almost every major photo compilation ever placed on the bargain bin shelf. 
And there’s what Skald said above: millions of women grew up with Diana and had many of the same problems with their marriages as they perceived Diana to have with hers… and they could relate. They could relate as blushing brides, as mothers, as wives.
All I remember is that Mother Therea died a few days later, before the funeral. And that was overshadowed.