Diana's riding lessons - 1984
zeronic
--
best wishes etc,
Zeronic zeronic AT uk2 DOT net
"This is a great quotation!" (Anon.)
B.B.
"zeronic" <go....@sig.for.email> wrote in message
news:3F3152AD...@sig.for.email...
> Anyone know who was giving Diana riding lessons before or during 1984?
Neil F.!
B.B.
zeronic
I was hoping for a rather more serious answer......
banana
<go....@sig.for.email> writes
>Anyone know who was giving Diana riding lessons before or during 1984?
Dunno. Not James Hewitt, who started in November 1986.
--
banana "You know what I hate the most about you Rowntree? The way
you give Coca-Cola to your scum, your best teddy-bear to
Oxfam, then expect us to lick your cold frigid fingers for the
rest of your cold frigid life." (Mick Travis, 'If...', 1968)
zeronic
>
> In article <3F3152AD...@sig.for.email>, zeronic
> <go....@sig.for.email> writes
>
> >Anyone know who was giving Diana riding lessons before or during 1984?
>
> Dunno. Not James Hewitt, who started in November 1986.
>
According to Hewitt's book:
----
Then I asked her: ‘Are you keen on riding?’
Her smile disappeared and she shuddered. ‘I’m terrified of horses. I
fell off a pony and broke my arm when I was a child and I’ve been a bag
of nerves ever since. I’m not sure I ever want to ride again.’
<snip>
I decided that we would begin in the indoor riding school so that I
could assess what sort of a rider she was. She had said she was dreadful
but I was later to discover it was her habit to say she was ‘dreadful’
at everything — except swimming and dancing. She had clearly ridden
before so we didn’t have to start from basics. But she hadn’t been on a
horse for many years and was more than a little nervous.
-------
So if this was 1986 - how come she hadn't been on a horse for "many
years" when she had started learning again in about 1983 according to
some other book published in 1984. One of them is wrong..... what do you
make of it?
banana
<go....@sig.for.email> writes
What does the other book say? Might the 1986 date be wrong, maybe chosen
so as to mesh with a date (itself false) for the 'recommencement' of the
'Prince' Charles/Camilla Parker-Bowles relationship? 'Princes' William
and Harry were born Jun 1982 and Sep 1984. Or the 1984 book might be
using 'riding' as a euphemism? :-)
zeronic
It says:
"Although an early fall discouraged the Princess from riding she has
started to learn again so that she can share more fully in one of her
husband's main interests. With the Queen to instruct her the Princess
will no doubt regain her confidence...." (1984)
Whereas Hewitt says:
"But she hadn't been on a horse for many years and was more than a
little nervous." (1986)
Of course the first book might just have been repeating a bit of palace
spin which may have been put out at the time to give the impression of a
happy marriage etc.
BTW, on another subject - I'm told someone on rumormillnews made a brief
reference to Tony Blair's fathers royal connection.....
banana
<go....@sig.for.email> writes
>banana wrote:
>>
>> In article <3F325E13...@sig.for.email>, zeronic
>> <go....@sig.for.email> writes
>>
>> >banana wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In article <3F3152AD...@sig.for.email>, zeronic
>> >> <go....@sig.for.email> writes
>> >>
>> >> >Anyone know who was giving Diana riding lessons before or during 1984?
>> >>
>> >> Dunno. Not James Hewitt, who started in November 1986.
>>
>> >According to Hewitt's book:
>> >
>> >----
>> >Then I asked her: ‘Are you keen on riding?’
>> >
>> >Her smile disappeared and she shuddered. ‘I’m terrified of horses. I
>> >fell off a pony and broke my arm when I was a child and I’ve been a bag
>> >of nerves ever since. I’m not sure I ever want to ride again.’
>> >
>> ><snip>
>> >
>> >I decided that we would begin in the indoor riding school so that I
>> >could assess what sort of a rider she was. She had said she was dreadful
>> >but I was later to discover it was her habit to say she was ‘dreadful’
>> >at everything — except swimming and dancing. She had clearly ridden
>> >before so we didn’t have to start from basics. But she hadn’t been on a
>> >horse for many years and was more than a little nervous.
Dunno what's with the strange characters...
>> >-------
>> >
>> >So if this was 1986 - how come she hadn't been on a horse for "many
>> >years" when she had started learning again in about 1983 according to
>> >some other book published in 1984. One of them is wrong..... what do you
>> >make of it?
>>
>> What does the other book say? Might the 1986 date be wrong, maybe chosen
>> so as to mesh with a date (itself false) for the 'recommencement' of the
>> 'Prince' Charles/Camilla Parker-Bowles relationship? 'Princes' William
>> and Harry were born Jun 1982 and Sep 1984. Or the 1984 book might be
>> using 'riding' as a euphemism? :-)
>
>It says:
>
> "Although an early fall discouraged the Princess from riding she has
>started to learn again so that she can share more fully in one of her
>husband's main interests. With the Queen to instruct her the Princess
>will no doubt regain her confidence...." (1984)
What book is this? I wonder if this could be a coded reference to
extra-marital affairs?
>Whereas Hewitt says:
>
> "But she hadn't been on a horse for many years and was more than a
>little nervous." (1986)
>
>Of course the first book might just have been repeating a bit of palace
>spin which may have been put out at the time to give the impression of a
>happy marriage etc.
>
>BTW, on another subject - I'm told someone on rumormillnews made a brief
>reference to Tony Blair's fathers royal connection.....
Thanks for this...
zeronic
> >> >I decided that we would begin in the indoor riding school so that I
> >> >could assess what sort of a rider she was. She had said she was dreadful
> >> >but I was later to discover it was her habit to say she was ‘dreadful’
> >> >at everything — except swimming and dancing. She had clearly ridden
> >> >before so we didn’t have to start from basics. But she hadn’t been on a
> >> >horse for many years and was more than a little nervous.
>
> Dunno what's with the strange characters...
Perhaps it's sensitive content that's been through filter somewhere! ;-)
> >It says:
> >
> > "Although an early fall discouraged the Princess from riding she has
> >started to learn again so that she can share more fully in one of her
> >husband's main interests. With the Queen to instruct her the Princess
> >will no doubt regain her confidence...." (1984)
>
> What book is this? I wonder if this could be a coded reference to
> extra-marital affairs?
It's "Prince Charles & Princess Diana - Portrait of a Family" by Michele
Brown (it says she started her career as a journalist with the BBC,
where she covered royal occasions both ceremonial and informal).
I don't think there's any coded references in the book - if anything
it's the sort of book which would appear to avoid that type of thing. It
seems to have been published in 1980, 1981 and then revised in 1984. I
get the impression it was originally written as a biography of Charles
and then had a bit about Diana tacked on later. It's not so much a
'portrait of a family' as a 'portrait of Prince Charles - oh, and btw
he's got married so we better include some stuff about the wife and
child as well'!
zeronic
> >BTW, on another subject - I'm told someone on rumormillnews made a brief
> >reference to Tony Blair's fathers royal connection.....
>
> Thanks for this...
Sorry, apparently that's incorrect - I misunderstood something.
zeronic
>
>
> It says:
>
> "Although an early fall discouraged the Princess from riding she has
> started to learn again so that she can share more fully in one of her
> husband's main interests. With the Queen to instruct her the Princess
> will no doubt regain her confidence...." (1984)
>
> Whereas Hewitt says:
>
> "But she hadn't been on a horse for many years and was more than a
> little nervous." (1986)
>
> Of course the first book might just have been repeating a bit of palace
> spin which may have been put out at the time to give the impression of a
> happy marriage etc.
Aha! Maybe the book was telling the truth....
http://www.time.com/time/daily/special/diana/readingroom/8191/2_28.html
FEBRUARY 28, 1983
<snip>
Diana was supposed to be there taking riding lessons (family tradition
suggests that a Windsor Queen should be able to ride, but the Princess,
who fell from a horse when she was small, has no love for the sport).
Carraro's information was accurate. After dodging hordes of amateur
cameramen and the police, and being scared silly by the Queen's pack of
search dogs as he hid with two other cameramen in bushes near the
Sandringham riding fields, he clicked off $1,500 worth of shots of
Diana, the Queen and Charles on horseback. "Charles saw us, and he was
fuming," Carraro recalled happily. "We ran like hell. There are a lot of
fast moves in this business."
<snip>
Tommy
"zeronic" <go....@sig.for.email> wrote in message
No one has mentioned riding a bike at which she excelled. In fact in Palace
circles she was affectionately known as " Di The Bike."
Tommy
---------------------------
>