Customer Reviews

After Diana: William, Harry, Charles, and the Royal House of Windsor

5 star:		(13)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

"After Diana," an engrossing retrospective portrait of Princess Di and an up-to-the moment portrait of her sons ("The Heir and The Spare"); The House of Windsor; Prince Charles and Di's successor, Camilla Parker Bowles, is another great read from Chris Andersen. I say this as an unabashed Andersen fan who also was enthralled by "The Day Diana Died" and "Diana's Boy's" and many of his other 27 books.

Andersen knows his subject inside out, a fact acknowledged by Scotland Yard, who consulted him during Operation Paget, their investigation of Di's death. In the ten years since the horrific crash in the Alma Tunnel in Paris, Andersen recounts the spellbinding evolution of the Royals--and the interconnects, and many disconnects--between them, their subjects, and the world at large.

The big issues are covered comprehensively: The Palace power struggles over the role of Camilla Parker Bowles; Prince Charles's peccadilloes and indiscretions; the randy life style of William and Harry; Williams's love of speed and Harry's risk-taking, and their gradual maturation; the role of the Men in Gray (the Palace apparatchik); along with fascinating speculation about MI5 and MI6, Britain's secret Service agencies that know every move the Royals make.

As counterpoint, Andersen provides intimate detail of this intriguing universe: The Palace hiring a P.R. firm to repair the tattered Royal image after their clumsy reaction to Diana's death; the Queen singing "The Star Spangled Banner" during a 9/11 Memorial at St. Paul's with tears welling up in her eyes when the choir sang "The Battle Hymn of the Republic"; Prince Charles--who always travels with a childhood Teddy Bear--telling his Mum that he refused to be the only Prince of Wales who didn't have a mistress; and much more.

Great stuff, great read with over 50 engaging pictures, virtually all of which were new to me.

I guess I'm a royal-watcher because I've read a lot over the years about Princess Diana and was thrilled to receive Christopher Andersen's book as a gift. I couldn't put it down. I learned so much I hadn't known before. Andersen manages to take you beyond the headlines into the royal residences for an upclose view of Diana, the princes, Prince Charles and the queen. A scrumptious read.

As a Diana-phile, I had hours of pleasure reading this book. The photos alone were worth the price of the book: the boys with their Windsor women in waiting -- Chelsea Davy & Kate Middleton -- of Charles with his other women, of Camilla at her best and worst. Nearly 10 years ago, I read Andersen's first book on the subject, "The Day Diana Died" and enjoyed the revelations. He hasn't disappointed with this new one.

I liked this book overall but what prevented me from giving it 5 stars was the tiresome old gossip about Hewitt being Harry's father. There is even "proof" in the illustrations with Harry making similar face as Hewitt (I make the same face sometimes too and I know I am not related to Hewitt or Harry). There is a picture of Diana making the same face--the author could have used that instead. Regardless of the author's rather earnest discussion of the reasons that it is possible Hewitt sired Harry, I see NO resemblance. Had the author put a pic of the young Prince Philip (Harry's granddad) next to Harry the resemblance would be startling certainly convincing readers that Prince Charles IS Harry's father. Plus, the turned up nose IS a Windsor and Spencer trait. The author should have also put up a pic of Harry and Charles as toddlers and there would also be proof positive. I don't understand some writers obsession with this. Plus the "proof" is laughable, Hewitt to make a buck goes on television to get hypnotized and comss up with this story of Harry possibly being his (hypnosis can be faked and I doubt Hewitt's credibility). Diana and Charles both told their biographers Harry was planned (Charles called it the breeding period). Why would Diana in her right mind go sleeping around when she and her husband were trying to conceive the second child both wanted. Diana herself indicated she still had hopes for the marriage when Harry was conceived with Charles and she was awaiting his birth. Anderson also says that there was no DNA test which contradicts the Seward/Simmons Diana book where it says there was a test and Harry is Charles' son. I think giving ANY space to this vicious gossip is wrong but Andersen keeps going back to it like we didn't notice it the first time. Harry is Charles' biological son. Case closed.

That being said, the rest of the book was OK. Though I wonder how Andersen got hold of the "pillow talk" conversations between Charles and Camilla. Until they publish their own diaries or give interviews, this is just speculation or hearsay.

The book is an honest warts and all account of Charles, Camilla, William, Harry and Queen Elizabeth II. The author paints William and Harry human like many young men today with a taste for nighclubbing and overindulging and writes how in various ways they are like their parents Charles and Diana. The author also revisits the past and tells again of the poignant story of Diana and her marital discord with Charles. The author also tells of how Charles cheated on Camilla and Diana with other women including Janet Jenkins and Kanga Tryon. Though the author tries to paint Charles as the Good Guy saving Diana's funeral, I found it hard to work up sympathy for him considering how he treated Diana while she wwas alive. According to another book, Charles had Camilla at a luncheon at St. James Palace when Diana was lying in state and some of the staff noted Harry wandering around looking rather lost. The author also doesn't mention how Diana's mother was bitterly disappointed that she couldn't bring back the body plus how the Queen never called in sympathy.

The love lives of William and Harry are chronicled and many details are given to their relationships with Kate Middleton and Chelsy Davy. The book stops at March 2007 before William-Kate breakup (are they back together as of June?) and Harry's being informed he couldn't serve in Iraq.

Their education and both attending Sandhurst are also described. The author writes about how Harry didn't know the details about World War II and dwells on the lack of education but just touches on how William apparently approved of Harry's costume choice (apparently William was just as clueless as his younger brother). Andersen does focus on the boys' charitable work and mentions how this continues their mother's work.

Andersen is quite candid about how Diana's memory is not always being kept well by the royal family with the Queen's own family members and ladies in waiting making sniping comments about the late Princess. He mentions how William protested Jephson's book because it was 'offensive' to his mother. In my opinion, it actually was more critical of Prince Charles, perhaps spurrping Charles and William to go out there and complain. I notice really venomous books about the late Princess get no commnt from the Palace.

Andersen also talks at length about Diana's death, the inquest, and oonspiracy theories. He quotes from Diana's letters where she writes that her husband wants t do away with her so he can remarry. He claims it was Tiggy Legge-Bourke that Diana thought Charles would marry and Diana allegedly thought Camilla would be targeted as well. I disagree. I doubt Charles would have even thought for a second about marrying Tiggy--his aim was to marry the non negotiable Camilla who in my opinion was quite safe from the men in gray.

I liked this book overall but I am irritated by yet another book with mention of Harry's being "sired" by Hewitt. This is gossip and hurful to Harry. The author writes how this gossip hurts Harry yet puts it out himself.Again Harry is Charles' case closed. To be fair, the author should have put in the illustrations the comparison shot of Philip and Harry and/or Charles and Harry shown at the same age (as toddlers).

This is a good book and well written, however I have only one problem with this book...in the biblography...Mr. Anderson states that he used "William's Princess: The Love Story that will Change the Royal Family Forever" as one of his sources.

If Mr. Anderson used this particular book, then he should double check the sources that particular author used for that book!

I have stated this once, and I'll say it again...only the future knows if Will and Kate get back together or if they meet and marry other people. If they do get back together...then certain elements of the press should leave the poor girl alone before she ends up like Princess Diana...dead after being chased by paperazzi.

I don't pay much attention to the frequent news bites of the princes etc., but was thrilled to read this reliable, fully fleshed out and carefully detailed up-date of the royal family by Christopher Andersen.

One can't help but imagine what would have happened if Diana had lived: would her boys have been so dedicated to her principles of kindness and sharing? Would Charles have been able to move on to marry Camilla? Diana undoubtedly would have remained an influence on English culture, but would she have remained the gold-standard of British style and beauty?

Ten years after her death, and Diana still commands our rapt attention. So many reasons for why that is are found in Mr. Andersen's excellent reporting of the characters and events in his newest book, as well as in The Day Diana Died and Diana's Boys. The Day Diana Died Diana's Boys: William and Harry and the Mother They Loved (What a great new gadget, Amazon!)

All three books give an amazing, contemporary, narrative and will serve future biographers well. I highly recommend owning, and reading, and holding onto all three.

I am offended by the new term "Diana fanatics" to describe people around the world who believe Diana was treated poorly by her royal husband and royal in-laws as well as courtiers. We merely suppport her and feel she was abused by a cold unfeeling royal system. Naturally any woman who exposed her husband as a cheat would be described as "mean or a trouble-maker" by her husband, her in-laws and the other woman.
In this book I sensed the author is padding the truth so as not to offend the royal family. Like many authors, the writer of this book went to great links to recognize that Diana, Princess of Wales was no longer a member of the royal family and that the Spencers were her next of kin.
Yet I am puzzled why no author to date has explained why Diana's ex-mother-in-law and ex-husband were the first to be notified!
Diana was not a member of the royal family any more so any excuse that protocol demanded the Queen to notified first does not wash.
If it was because of the boys, the decision was to let them sleep. And they were minors and had no say in the decisions concerning Diana body or anything else.
The proper adults to notify would have been Diana's brother, sisters or mother.
After all this, the Windors decided Diana being a commoner again was the Spencers' responsibilty and she did not deserve a public funeral.
There has always been too many inconsistancies surrounding Diana. She gets a bad rap for being inconsistant with her life but she cannot hold a candle to the media or the royal family.

A lot of stuff here, it's interesting to read but irritating in that Andersen never tells you where he got his information (there is a long list of books and people in the back of the book, and a lot of "anonymous" sources too.), you'll just have to guess. Most of what is here you'll have read in any number of the other books that Amazon and others sell.
I don't remember much now about how Andersen's earlier book "Diana's Boys" read but this one seems to spend a lot of time bad mouthing just about everyone but Diana. The most irritating element was the insistence on bringing up the Hewitt as Harry's father line, not very creditible and presented here too often.
Wait until the paperback comes out- it will be a better value for the money.

With all of the attention on Tina Brown's book (Diana Chronicles), I think a lot is being missed in this book. For instance, the fact that William and Harry could have a half brother because of an ongoing affair between their father and a Canadian secretary. Why isn't the media talking about THAT? All in all, a pretty good book--not a lot of new stuff for true Di fans, but worth the read.

This covers the events of the royal family from Diana's death onward, with a particular emphasis on how her two sons, Princes William and Harry, are coping with adolescence and early adulthood. It doesn't add up to a pretty picture. At times I feel sorry for them, because their mother's death combined with royal pressures constitute a lot of emotional baggage for anyone to overcome. Charles' hands-off parenting style is an additional liability. It's not surprising that their teens and twenties are filled with parties, frequent binge drinking, and promiscuity. Harry has been less responsible than William, but that may be attributed to the belief in some circles that his biological father was one of Diana's illicit lovers -- that would be quite a cross for anyone to bear.

Nonetheless, these two do live up to their reputation as the "Party Princes." Admittedly, it's unreasonable to expect them to be as straightlaced as their father or grandmother, the Queen, but they certainly do consume copious amounts of alcohol by any standard. There is definitely something wrong here. The fact that both brothers openly cheat on their long-term girlfriends (who accept this as the price of being a royal girlfriend) does not bode well for the future, either.

There's an awful lot here to shock even the most jaded reader: The Queen's hostility toward Camilla, the rumors of homosexuality, the ups and downs of the relationships among the senior royals. Prince Charles still goes to bed with a teddy bear at age 60(!). Prince William's bedroom as a university student was bugged by two different British police agencies. (Will his most intimate moments be aired, as occurred to his parents?) Overall, it is the circus that never stops. The most shocking incident was when Harry wore a Nazi army uniform to a costume party. Compounding the shock was the revelation that Harry made that costume choice because he was ignorant of history: He didn't know what a swastika was, and was clueless about Nazi atrocities. It's not clear if the future king, Prince William, has a better grasp of history, but the fact that both of them were educated together and chose Harry's costume together ought to be worrisome to Brits.