Applebaum is being disingenuous to suggest that Diana didn't change the way Britons see themselves, or that they tired of Blair's emotionalism. Reality TV and the out-of-character hysteria for just-retired tennis player Tim Henman both reflect a post-Diana ability for emotional vomiting that wasn't always so obvious. As for Blair, he stayed in power for ten years, and left office with a much higher approval rating (in spite of Iraq) than Thatcher after a similarly long period in office. Of course Gordon Brown is currently more popular; he'been power less than six months. At this stage in Blair's premiership he was among the most popular prime minister's in British history. Come on, Anne -- you're capable of better journalism than this shoddy think piece.

I agree with Toby that Applebaum was unfair to Prime Minister Tony Blair, and thereby unethical. I totally agreee with her that Diana was nowhere near the person her publicity puffery claimed.

Even when she attempted to appear generous and caring by visiting AIDS children in Africa, it came after photos showing her nude on a beach (Brighton?) with another man, while still married to Prince Charles.

Such jaunts as the AIDS trip ring hollow as mere photo ops to boost a sagging public image.

History will find the Princess pretty much a floozie.

She was a media creation, in the earlier mold of Anna Nicole Smith and Paris Hilton.

It takes an awful lot of courage for a woman, any woman to go on National TV, let alone a shy timid Diana and state how another woman was in the middle of her marriage, how she was treated by one of most " feared " women in Briton.

I don't agree with several things that took place over her life or her death for that matter but I give Princess Diana thumbs up for her courage in facing the media and telling the whole truth, she could very well have lied and said it was all Charles, she stood strong, swallowed hard and stated she had as well been wrong within her marriage. She gave up many things just to get her life back.

In the end she was not only a mother, a wife, a Princess, she was human and she tried in the last years to get out the word of some most important issues and " HELP " others as best she could.
The walk through that landmine field took courage, guts and strength. I don't see many others with her kind of attitude now days. We all live in a world now where we spit on help and demand what we think we are entitled to.

She was someone of some importance in life and in death. Who knows what the country would be like today had she lived, she was truly on the edge of changing things. The point is who are we to sit and judge another ? Judge yourself before you ever try to judge another.

Who cares how people celebrate her life or death for that matter, she was an important person in this life and deserves our respect NO MATTER how or what another feels or thinks.
She deserves this simply because she was human as are all the rest of us and you would want nothing less for yourself then respect so lets give that to her as well even in death she is still someone that deserves it.

Who cares what or who did wrong ?? Respect, thats what it's all about now days..... Everyone deserves it no matter what they do or don't do.

Its like trying to understand the death of a famous rockstar.......all people "want" to remember is the so-called "good" things Diana did. I can recall a handfull of rockstars, celebs, sport stars and singers doing alot of the same stuff she was shown doing. They also gave millions away to charitys......ironicly that money they gave away was tax deductible and the time they spent doing charity work seemed to all ironicly tie into a rather overblown public image NOT honest good deeds apon their own free will. The people's princess ??? ....I think not. When diana passed she nolonger hend the title "princess" do to her divorce but do to her image thats how people chose to remember her. A person here stated that with the loss of Diana , Britan felt they also lost their Future. What future ???? she at the time was nothing more then a figurehead doing public showings and ambassadorship from time to time whenever she felt up to the task or when sober enough to present the right "diana" image to her public. There was NOTHING special about Diana as a public figure and NOTHING special about Diana as a person outside of her media created image that sets her apart from anyone else that could and have done the same thing she did. Britan does not have many immortal icons so they had to creat Diana. I do admit that as a person that also lost a mother at a young age is a hard thing to overcome.....but it obviously did not take Britan or her family long to get over her. Just take notice and how the very same people ( not all ) that viewed Diana as a saint now view her as a passing fad that most missunderstood. If people really took a good look at who Diana really was then they would NOT see her in the same light they now do. In conclusion, three things can discribe Diana VERY well adultress, creative dissever and last but not least drama queen.

lol....the mine fields. You can't be that nieve can you ????.

First off, they never would have placed Diana in a dangerous situation such as that unless they felt she was safe in some way..... Take for example current president G.W. Bush touring " ground zero " when NYC was attacked. Bush stated that it was very dangerous for him to be there even then. Oddly enough he also had an army of security detail and they also did an extensive sweep of the area Bush was going to tour before he even got there. Take a minute to really think about this. Do you really think they would have placed their largest icon/ public figure in serious danger without pertection of some sort ??? ( the correct answer to this is NO )

As for Applebaum's assessment of Brown, I thought "dour" was just a way of saying Scottish.

This narrative is a new one -- you little neocon Nazis kvetching about Diana's bleeding heart, eh? Guess, as per that Viking witch, Coulter, we are all "faggots" like Edwards and Diana, not nearly Nazi enough for the job our elite has cut out for us, eh? You have to be a brain dead, brutal, xenophobic, paranoid religious fanatic to do the jobs the Gestappo did, I suppose.

The value of the anniversary of Diana's "death", In any case, reminds me that I could not imagine this "war on terror" with Diana married to Dodie Al Fayed? Now wouldn't that have been a great difficulty for the "war on terror" types, covering the Princes of England on holiday with their blended family?

Okay, disclaimer here: I'm not British. So I don't really know if Diana did or didn't change the way Britons see themselves. But to me, this article had a "you, too?" feeling about it. Diana seemed like a very nice lady, and certainly a good mother. But she also had personality problems, like being needy. I'm not trying to diss her, or speak ill of the dead. I liked her, personally (although I never met her, of course.) But I thought these "tributes to her legacy" were a bit excessive. May she finally rest in peace...and let's move on.

I do not agree with Ms. Applebaum's assessment of Diana's legacy. I think she had enough time with and more than enough love for her two boys to imbue them with values above and beyond the haughty "royal family's" sense of duty first and above all. I am sorry to see William (future King) to be somewhat staid and more serious and I fear this is the influence of those in the Palace, but I still think he has enough of his mother's love of life and her "human-ness" in him to really change things in Britain when he is trul;y in a position to do so. I think he and his very bright brother Harry showed a lot of strength recently in not inviting certain people to the memorial who had been very close to Diana -- but who, after her death, decided to betray her and profit from writing books about their lives with her. That put them in their place. I loved it!!

If nothing else (and there were many things she did truly do to change things and have a lasting effect) she changed the gene pool and that certainly needed changing!! We cannot know what it was like for her to live within that fishbowl and how she learned to live with it (and to manipulate it as does the Palace).

Aside from breaking away from the horrible view of "stiff upper lip" and all that - that most of the world thinks of when they think of Britons, she will always be remembered for her beauty and her style amidst a sear of dour, dowdy, gray, and downright unattractive (read ugly - both inside and out) people. And that's the least of her legacy. She is STILL the mother of a future King of England and he won't let the world forget that - of that I am certain. In closing, I am amazed 10 years later to find there are still so many who are jealous of Diana and couch it in such odd ways as articles such as this. The crack about the former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, requires no comment; he was a popular and powerful leader for a new Britain. The new one - what is his name again? (another gray faceless dour Brit) just sends the country back in time. So sorry for you all.

I disagree with Applebaum. Actually, it's all been said before, how Diana will "fade from memory" and how Camilla is so "discreet," etc. I think those who aren't enthusiastic about the late Princess like to think she will disappear and fade away. If this had been true, the public and some media columnists would not have complained about Camilla accepting the invitation to the Memorial Service. Obviously, many still remember the role the allegedly "discreet" Camilla played in the breakup of the Wales' marriage. "Discreet" Camilla whom Applebaum obviously admires for her "discretion" was said to leak "her side" of the story to the Sun and via letters and phonecalls to Charles she undermined his marriage to Diana. Many people don't see Diana as this "troublemaker" who upset the poor royals. The problem rested with Charles who from the get go got jealous of his wife, even when she was a very shy and immature 19 year old. He also couldn't let go of his longtime mistress. One reason that Diana is never going to go away is that people see how this lovely woman was driven away by Charles and Camilla. Diana would have made a great Queen and now Camilla being a future Queen consort is thought unthinkable by some. Diana's charity work and charisma also cannot be ignored. Despite the attempt at airbrushing her out, DIana';s memory won't go away.

I think Diana's Death was horrible, but can we give it a rest.........She is gone and there is Nothing we can do about it. I think we all have a time we are going to die, regardless of what we did or didn't do to change the outcome. Remember her beauty and Character..................let the rest go.

She was a pain in the ass. Never happy liked to complain, both of her sons are stupid, why Charles married her I will never know. As far as Doody is concerned no great loss either never worked a day in his life. As far as Blair was concerned he followed this idiot in Washington into Iraq. I think the Queen-Mom, her husband and Winston Churchill are rolling in their graves. She lived 37 years in luxury, I will not live 37 years after I retire.

Move on and forget it.....

Charles married her because he sowed his wild oats for too many years and all the women his own age were married so his mistress helped pick out Diana for him to give him heirs. Charles is the biggest complainer in the royal family, always whining and blaming others. Read his authorized biography and Dimbleby also called the Catalog of Whines or Woe is Me.

Not to beat a dead horse, but on the topic of her monumentous work in eradicating landmines: my college professor (Dr. Kenneth Rutherford, Missouri State University) was an instrumental proponent in drafting and passing the Landmine Ban Treaty at the U.N. As a personal victim to a landmine attack in Sudan, he accompanied Diana on her tour. All in all, Dr. Rutherford spent the better half of a week with Princess Diana. He owns one of her last handwritten letters (a "thank you" note, currently on loan to the Royal Family).

When I pressed him for his honest opinion of the Princess, he didn't even hesitate to label her "a spoiled brat." He understood the necessity of having her present from a publicity standpoint, but mentioned the frustration of having to appease her every silly request. He recalled one particular event in a restaurant, where he dined along side her and two local advisors. When she had finished eating, Diana got up and left the restaurant, as though she were completely unaware that she had to pay for the food she had consumed. It would seem that basic Economics 101 (the exchange of money for a good or service) was a foreign language to Diana. Dr. Rutherford chipped in with the other gentlemen to fit the bill.

Mayhaps she spent too long removed from the world to understand the realities we "commoners" face.