Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg Philosophische Fakultät II Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik
Seminararbeit zum Aufbaumodul Angloamerikanische Kulturwissenschaft I: „Kings and Queens“ Semester: Dozent:
Wintersemester 2013/14 Dr. Therese-Marie Meyer
Mourning Princess Diana as a media-driven Unifying Ritual
von Elisa Streller Matr.-Nr. 210225688 7. Fachsemester B.A. Anglistik, Amerikanistik / Hispanistik,
[email protected]
Table of Contents
1 Introduction................................................................................................1 2 Diana as a Public Figure...........................................................................2 2.1 Diana becomes a Princess................................................................2 2.2 The “People's Princess”.....................................................................3 3 Mourning Diana.........................................................................................5 3.1 Mourning as Unifying Ritual...............................................................5 3.2 Mourners............................................................................................7 3.3 Media Coverage ................................................................................8 4 Conclusion...............................................................................................11 Bibliography...............................................................................................13 Selbstständigkeitserklärung......................................................................14
-2-
1 Introduction Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, née Spencer, the Princess of Wales, was a woman who caught the attention of many people all around the world. In the 1990's she was believed to be the most photographed woman on earth. She was referred to as “[fairy] tale princess, fashion leader, media manipulator, devoted mother, fun-loving girl, jilted lover, compassionate career, sad bulimic” (qtd. in Attwood 1999: 313). During her lifetime she developed from a seemingly shy young woman into a closely observed personality with a rather complex life story. The interest in her and her life was tremendous so that before and after her death a great amount of articles and books were published: Diana, Her True Story (Andrew Morton 1992), A Royal Duty (Paul Burrell 2004), Diana: The Untold Story (Kay Richard, Levy Geoffrey 1998) are only some of them which claim to tell the truth about her life. The media not only played a huge role in her life but kept its intense interest in Diana also after her tragic premature death in 1997. The news of her passing went all around the world and the media representations of Diana did not stop for weeks. Her funeral was one of the greatest royal ones and is often compared to the fairytale funeral in Snow White (cf. Taylor 2000: 13ff.). The ceremony had a large attendance in London and approximately two billions watched its television broadcast worldwide (cf. Steuten/Strasser 2009: 9). Diana's death brought together a huge amount of people, unifying them into a great mass. In this paper the impact the media had in turning Diana's funeral into a unifying ritual will be discussed. At first a short insight into Diana's biography is given to present her and examine why and how she gained so much popularity from the public. It is important to understand why so many people identified and sympathized with her because that is the base the media needed in order to access a big audience by choosing Diana as a main topic. Before presenting the media coverage of the Princess's death there will be explained how mourning can work as a unifying ritual. It will also be examined to which extend Diana's mourners were brought -1-
together. This will show in which way the media used Princess Diana's death as a means to create the impression of a unified nation and which results this media coverage had in the end.
2 Diana as a Public Figure When the future king marries a woman who would later become queen, it draws a lot of attention, especially in Great Britain where the monarchy is part of the national identity (cf. Watson 1997: 4). The following part shows how Diana Spencer entered the royal family and presents reasons of her nationwide and global popularity. 2.1
Diana becomes a Princess
Diana Spencer was the daughter of Earl Spencer and the Honourable Mrs. Shand Kydd, both of noble descent (cf. Taylor 2000: 5). At a very young age she was asked her hand in marriage by Prince Charles, whom she had known for a few years then. Since the day of their engagement Diana was center of attention for the media and was being followed by paparazzi throughout her life (ibid.). The day Diana was married to Prince Charles, on July 29 of 1981, was a national holiday, so everyone could watch and celebrate the couple's wedding (cf. Taylor 2000: 5). This marriage alone was an important event in the history of British Monarchy, because for a long time there had not been a Princess of Wales, the title Diana held after the wedding (cf. Taylor 2000:
1).
She
also
adopted
the
surname
Mountbatten-Windsor
(Steuten/Strasser 2009: 9). The couple was married in St Paul's Cathedral (cf. Starkey 2011: 493). Even though Diana was often called a “fairy tale princess” her life was full of struggles (cf. Attwood 1999: 316f.). As she said herself she was overwhelmed with all the new duties she had and did not know how to perform the tasks given to her because she supposedly did not get any help from the royal family (cf. Mountbatten-Windsor 1995). She -2-
“fortunately” gave birth to two boys and accomplished the task of bearing an heir to the British Monarchy (ibid.). After delivering her second son Prince Henry she suffered postnatal depression which made it impossible for her to fulfil her duties for a while (ibid.). As it is known, her husband Prince Charles “renewed his relationship with Camilla Parker-Bowles” in 1986 what drastically impaired the marriage of Diana and Charles (ibid.). A few years later the couple separated but continued to perform some tasks together as Prince and Princess of Wales (cf. Watson 1997: 5). In 1995, three years after their separation, they divorced (cf. Taylor 2000: 25). Which impact her struggles had on her popularity and why will be explained in the following. 2.2
The “People's Princess”
That Diana became such a popular royal celebrity was due to many reasons. As mentioned before, the status and title she had was one of the first causes which made her a person of public interest. Throughout her life many people sympathised with her because of the way “she had allegedly been treated by her husband and by her parents and her step-mother. This sympathy seems to had led to many people – women in particular – identifying with her” (Watson 1997: 6). One big crisis was generated by the book Diana: Her True Story by Edward Morton. Diana had allegedly helped to write this autobiographical piece in which Prince Charles is depicted as a bad husband, committing adultery and not helping his wife in crisis nor caring about her (cf. Taylor 2000: 27). Not responding to these accusations, disproving them or fighting back seemed like accepting them as true what made the public favour Diana's point of view rather than Charles's (ibid.). This put the Princess in a more popular position because people felt compassion for her or could find themselves in her. A further cause of identification with Diana was her openly depicted humanity. “[Her] faults and her weaknesses were recognized, in particular her depression, her suicide attempts, her capriciousness, her serial affairs” (ibid.) which did not undermine her popularity but showed her “as a royal -3-
with an avowedly 'common touch'” (Thomas 2008: 367). Another important fact of her growing popularity also was her empathy with other people. Charity work was essential to her and a mission she chose herself (cf. Watson 1997: 7). As she said herself she wanted to heal people and give them love (Mountbatten-Windsor 1995). She was called the “Queen of Hearts” (cf. Attwood 1999: 317). Effectively she really had an impact on other people's actions what is called the “Diana Effect”: there have been more donations to charity, less acts of crime and more friendly actions among the British people (cf. Attwood 1999: 318). Apart from that she was physically attractive, her fashion style and her appearance always demonstrated a certain glamorousness (ibid.). To summarize it “she was able to accomplish […] the 'supreme trick of identification in which the mass [saw her] not only as an ideal above them but simultaneously as one of them' (Bailey 1988: 119 … ). Through her 'royal' personhood she incorporated human failures, royal hopes and divine aspirations” (ibid.)
Especially in contrast to the so-called “traditional royals” Diana stood out because of her closeness to the “ordinary people” (cf. Thomas 2008: 367). One woman's commentary is quoted in Thomas's mass observation analysis which captures the sympathy for Diana and the created unity due to that feeling: In the end Diana was a 'people' person – if protocol got in the way she just went around it. To the traditional Royals that must be like trying to stop breathing. Perhaps that is why our grief is so intense – she really was our princess. [B2638] (Thomas 2008: 367)
This emotion shown by many fans of Diana can be explained by the relationship towards celebrities which had changed with the depiction of them in the media. The identification with a celebrity and getting informed about them via the media has the result of creating “intimacy at a distance” (Thomas 2008: 369) and can lead to a feeling of friendship towards the famous person who is not known by his or her supporter. This phenomenon is of course heightened by the way media constructs these personalities. Attwood lists several words that have been used to describe Diana: “'angel', 'heaven', 'soul', 'paradise' and 'grace' [… were] terms repeated in the media where she becomes a kind of modern saint or -4-
Christ figure” (1999: 318). And as Steuten and Strasser phrase it, Diana turned into a “goddess on earth” (cf. German: irdischer Gott) and became part of a cult, idolized by many (cf. 2009: 9f.).
3 Mourning Diana Princess Diana was closely monitored by the media since the day she got engaged to Prince Charles. First of all Diana was a person who appeared almost daily in the newspapers which made her visible to everyone and created a feeling of familiarity (cf. Thomas 2008: 369). The attention she got posthumously was immense. Here it will be explained how and why Diana was so popular and in which way the media constructed her personality before and after her death. Before elaborating on this topic the relation between identifying with a popular figure and the creation of a sense of unity shall be explored. 3.1
Mourning as Unifying Ritual
According to Durkheim a society or a nation has to have shared values which serve as a foundation and create a collective conscience (cf. Taylor 2000: 4). In the case of Britain the British Monarchy is a great constituent of the values and identity of the nation. As this is not a main topic that will be discussed in this paper, a fitting quote shall present a reason for that and hopefully explain why the monarchy and the royal family are so crucial to the values of the nation. In its deeper meaning for the British peoples [monarchy] is scarcely a system of government at all. It is their way of life. … The conception of monarchy as a way of life is not easy to explain to those who are unaccustomed to it. It can only be fully comprehended from within. … Elizabeth II … is Queen not because she governs England but because England would not be itself without her. (qtd. in Taylor 2000: 67).
Through representative events or rituals values are affirmed, for example by a coronation, a wedding (cf. Watson 1997) or even a funeral. Especially “[media] events involving royalty are often seen to be particularly
-5-
integrative social rituals” (Thomas 2008: 363) and also a means to regenerate these shared values. As Taylor explains, British or in general national values can be divided in two kinds: values of Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft. Gesellschaft here means “a social relationship between individuals based on duty to society or to an organization” (qtd. in 2000: 7). In contrast to that Gemeinschaft is a more emotional relationship “based on affection, kinship, or membership of a community, as within a family or group of friends” (Taylor 2000: 7). Not only the marriage of Prince Charles and Diana Spencer is regarded as a celebration of values of Gemeinschaft (cf. Ibid.), but especially the mourning of her passing which can be described as a “unifying and sacred civic ritual” (Thomas 2008: 363). The national and global public grief “crossed all sorts of boundaries of class, race, gender, age and political and intellectual inclination” (qtd. in ibid.). The fact that so many people were emotionally touched by her tragic death formed a sense of unity and togetherness among the mourners and created a feeling of equality and brotherhood (cf. Thomas 2008: 364). Historically mourning is a traditional group experience in many cultures. “Older social traditions required mourning behaviour in an extended group of people, a geographical and social community, regardless of the personal closeness of the group member to the deceased or the bereaved” (Thomas 2008: 369f.).
When being reminded of traditions in smaller towns or villages one can surely recall the coffin being carried through town followed by a big group of mourners who offered their condolences although not being related to the deceased. In modern Britain this behaviour has changed to a more private and concealed way which is one reason why the jointly mourning of Diana was so extraordinary (cf. Thomas 2008: 369). The media played a great part in legitimizing public mourning, a process which will be discussed in chapter 3.3. Aspects which provoke this change of habit and produced such a great number of public mourners will be presented hereafter.
-6-
3.2
Mourners
The funeral took place in Westminster Abbey on September 6, 1997 with a crowd of over one million people outside the church listening to the funeral service and in the streets of London (cf. Taylor 2000: 1, Steuten/Strasser 2009: 9). Approximately 32 million of the British population watched the funeral service broadcasted in the United Kingdom (cf. Turnock 2000: 1), not to mention the worldwide number of viewers which was estimated at two billions (cf. Steuten/Strasser 2009: 9). Many people attending the mourning ceremony were seen putting flowers on the hearse or waiting in a line to sign a condolence book (cf. Turnock 2000: 1). Tony Blair, Prime Minister at that time, held a moving speech after Diana's death that showed his deep respect and admiration for the Princess. According to Thomas his words influenced the subsequent representation in the media and “the popular reaction as one characterized by unity, emotionality and intense adulation for Diana” (2008: 363). Many people had already heard the shocking news about Diana's death in “the morning of 31 August 1997”: Diana had died in a car crash in Paris (Turnock 2000: 7). Great emotion, condolement, shock, disbelief and tears were part of the reactions of various individuals (cf. Turnock 2000: 7ff.). “The significance of this initial shock and disbelief is that it constitutes a spontaneous response to the news [… which] constitutes evidence of a disruption to normality” (Turnock 2000: 10),
because very emotional reaction like these would usually only happen if a person close to the mourner had passed away. Various factors led to the occurrence of these emotions. Thomas explains the effect that social surroundings have on expressing emotions. He says that “people will publicly conform to perceived social norms, tending to conceal views if they feel they are in a minority and to be more willing to express them if they consider their views dominant” (2008: 371).
That could be an explanation for the quick growth of mourners in number and the effect this dominant group had on the perception of the public in -7-
general. This phenomenon belongs to social sciences and occurs out of insecurity and not knowing how to behave in a social group in a certain moment. As Brennan phrases it “people received instruction by watching others, thereby learning to ‘feel’” (2001: 207). Another factor is of course connected to her popularity. As mentioned in chapter 2.2, Diana developed into a cult figure. That went as far as creating places of worship after her death. Shortly after her death a shrine was built in London's Harrods to give people the opportunity to worship and mourn the deceased Princess (cf. Steuten/Strasser 2009: 10f.). Years after her death admirers still put flowers near the Parisian tunnel where the accident happened which were later substituted by the “Flame of Liberty”, a monument for Princess Diana (cf. Steuten/Strasser 2009: 11). “Mourning for Diana became one of the great world events of the decade” (Taylor 2000: 29). Thomas also enlarges upon the psychological aspect of grieving especially in the case of mourning for a person not close to the mourner (see Thomas 2008: 368ff.). This phenomenon is of course closely linked to Diana's popularity, people identifying with her and thinking of her as “one of them” which gives them an imagined authority to grieve (ibid.). Another fact he includes is that a larger number of people also were annoyed by the mourners who did not know Diana personally and therefore were not considered to be in “real” mourning (cf. Thomas 2008: 370). At that point the assumption of not naturally appearing media-induced emotions arouse, what will be discussed in the following chapter. 3.3
Media Coverage
The first news of the tragic death were reported 5.15 a.m. on Sunday 31 August 1997 by the BBC. Later published newspapers, radio reports and television shows had the Princess's death as their main topic during the whole day (cf. Turnock 2000: 12f.). Facts about the car accident and Diana's personal life, the reaction of members of the royal family, the transport of Diana's body from Paris to London and tribute programmes to -8-
the Princess were shown. BBC1 did not have any other television programme from 5.15 a.m. in the morning until 12.30 a.m. of the following day (cf. Turnock 2000: 13f.). BBC1 was one of “four out of the five UK terrestrial channels” (Turnock 2000: 93) which heavily changed their schedules in order to show Diana's funeral. The TV was the most frequently used medium to inform oneself of the news of the day. As Turnock describes, people tend to switch on the television because “in a world dominated by the visual, as a medium involving moving images, sound and colour, television has more authority than radio” (2000: 11). For that reason television was the most influential medium to affect the viewer's perception that day and the weeks thereafter. Another reason to turn to the TV was to assure oneself that the news are true and to get more information although most people (80%) had already heard the news through the word-of-mouth (cf. Turnock 2000: 8, 12). Psycologically the television serves not only as verification of the shocking news, further information or provision of speculated explanations but also shows the huge importance of the incident, or in other words it implicitly creates the sensation of that importance (cf. Turnock 2000: 14). “An important person on television becomes important by virtue of their appearance on television” (Turnock 2000: 15). So the massive coverage of Diana's death had an important function in creating the importance that was then given to her by so many people. In those television broadcasts the viewer could see the huge crowd outside of Westminster Abbey who had come to participate in the funeral ceremony. The majority of the reports “focused extensively on a minority of mourners who were apparently hysterically upset” (Thomas 2008: 365) rather than on the people paying their respects to the passed away Princess with gravity and composure. Many newspapers used captivating headlines which created a sense of unity such as “the mood of the nation” or “the grief of the public” (Thomas 2008: 364), even though the emotions of the public could not be summarized that easily. As written in chapter 2.2 -9-
also the notion of describing Diana as the “people's princess” was emphasised and supported by the mass media. The popular newspaper The Sun wrote “She was royal but special … because she was one of us” (Thomas 2008: 367). These and other headlines and stories were opinionforming for the recipients and made it seem as if these were the thoughts of the majority. But academic analyses have shown that media reports on Diana's death have been biased and did not present the consumer with balanced news. “Opinion polls showed that at least 75 percent of people did not participate in the public mourning by placing flowers or signing books of condolences, and nearly 50 percent of the population did not watch the funeral” (Thomas 2008: 364).
This is contrastive to the way the media portrayed the mourning. On one hand the media did unify a certain group of people who were brought together by their shared grief on the other hand the coverage created a great distance to a part of the society which did not consider their grieving as appropriate. In Thomas's and Turnock's mass observation study it is obvious that many people had a very contrasting opinion to the one that was intensively portrayed by the media. In Thomas's survey he lists numerous impressions of people who could not identify themselves with Princess Diana nor had sympathy for her or her charity work (cf. 2008: 367f.). They described her as a privileged member of the elite, who was far from ordinary and lamented the disregard that was shown towards many other people doing charity work and were not praised for it in public (ibid.). Turnock adds that also more than 50% of the television viewers were not satisfied with the reports on Diana's death and often described it as “over-the-top” or felt that it was hypocritical (cf. 2000: 21). There were complains about the extensive reports during the first months after her death (Thomas 2008: 364). “While some found the events of the week following Diana's death moving, others were profoundly alienated and angered by the excessive, even 'hysterical' nature of the received public reaction” (Thomas 2008: 366).
Many were notably bothered by the fact that Diana's death determined the - 10 -
majority of the TV programmes so it was not possible to have “some kind of relief from the emotion-heavy broadcast output” (Turnock 2000: 21). Moreover the people who watched the funeral apparently belonged mostly to the middle-class of older age because those were the body of viewers of the channels which broadcasted it (cf. Turnock 2000: 91). This group is not a balanced representation of the UK (ibid.). Taken all together what happened there was the formation of a media event which not only dominated the television broadcasts and changed their schedules (cf. Turnock 2000: 93). As argued in Turnock such occasions constitute a celebration of shared values and […] events such as the princess's funeral in particular are designed to mitigate trauma, alleviate discontinuity and bring closure to periods of disruption (2000: 94)
He adds that these media events are “organised by agencies external to the broadcast institutions” (ibid.) and are made to overcome crises. According to Turnock the purpose of this is “to bring periods of dispute to a close, with a reintegration of fractious groups or a formal recognition of schism within the community” (2000: 95).
4 Conclusion As shown the media was of great significance in the portrayal of Diana's life and her funeral. It is hard to exactly point out and name the many processes led to the creation of this unifying ritual because it would require interdisciplinary knowledge which would not fit the dimension of this paper. Nevertheless the basic processes that led to the impact the media had in creating a unifying ritual were provided. By applying social and cultural methods it was shown how media-driven unifying rituals can come to happen. But there are various factors which had an impact on that or more precisely served as foundation which was necessary for this. First of all a funeral – besides of course mourning the deceased – always has the function of giving the bereaved time and space to gather and share their feelings to comfort each other. It was shown how in this particular instance - 11 -
mourners of great number came together and that their emotions were influenced by processes of social interaction. These processes escalated which led to a state of mourning that could be described as unnatural and exaggerated. Secondly Diana was a member of the royal family what gives any event including her a kind of national importance. The monarchy and therefore the royals are an identity-forming factor in the United Kingdom. In addition she was a very popular royal drawing even more attention. Due to Princess Diana's empathy and her ability to win people's hearts she crossed the boundaries of “them”, the royals, and “us”, the people, and became “one of us” and thereby a person with a story many people could relate to making their grief even greater. In this special case the funeral of a royal celebrity created a ceremonial mechanism of public grieving. The third factor certainly was the influence of the media which heightened this event to a great extent. It functioned like a catalyzer on the already existing processes and therefore controled them in great part. These days the influence of the media is a reoccuring topic that creates controversy. Many people watching or reading the news, conciously or uncounciously, regard it as some kind of truth-conveying medium. But one should always be aware that this can always only be a part of the truth and should question the processes that lead to a certain broadcast or headline. This paper shows only one example of how people can be influenced by the media as well as how prominent personalities can be used to form a media event – which can have a positive or negative face – that distracts the recipients from something else.
- 12 -
Bibliography Secondary Literature Starkey, David. Crown and Country: A History of England through the Monarchy. Reprint edition. London: HarperPress, 2011. Print. Steuten, Ulrich, and Hermann Strasser. “Lady Di - Die moderne Madonna.” Sozialwissenschaftlicher Fachinformationsdienst soFid Kultursoziologie und Kunstsoziologie 2009/1 (2009): 9–16. Print. Taylor, John A. Diana, Self-Interest, and British National Identity. Westport, Conn. [u.a.]: Praeger, 2000. Print. Turnock, Robert. Interpreting Diana: Television Audiences and the Death of a Princess. London: British Film Institute, 2000. Print. Other Sources Attwood, Feona. “Same Old Story? The Tale of Diana, Princess of Wales.” Journal of Gender Studies 8.3 (1999): 313–322. Taylor and Francis+NEJM. Web. (19 Mar. 2015) Brennan, Michael. “Towards a Sociology of (Public) Mourning?” Sociology 35.1 (2001): 205–212. CrossRef. Web. (31 Mar. 2015) McGuigan, Jim. “British Identity and ‘the People’s Princess’.” The Sociological Review 48.1 (2000): 1–18. Wiley Online Library. Web. (19 Mar. 2015) Mountbatten-Windsor, Diana. “The Panorama Interview by Matrin Bashir”. BBC (1995). Web. (03 Apr. 2015) Thomas, James. “From People Power to Mass Hysteria Media and Popular Reactions to the Death of Princess Diana.” International Journal of Cultural Studies 11.3 (2008): 362–376. ics.sagepub.com. Web. (19 Mar. 2015) Walter, Tony. “From Cathedral to Supermarket: Mourning, Silence and solidarity1.” The Sociological Review 49.4 (2001): 494–511. Wiley Online Library. Web. (31 Mar. 2015) Watson, C.W. “‘Born a Lady, Became a Princess, Died a Saint’: The Reaction to the Death of Diana, Princess of Wales.” Anthropology Today 13.6 (1997): 3–7. JSTOR. Web. (19 Mar. 2015) - 13 -
Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg Philosophische Fakultät II Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik
Selbstständigkeitserklärung
Hiermit versichere ich, dass ich die vorliegende Arbeit mit dem Titel
Mounring Princess Diana as a media-driven Unifying Ritual
selbstständig angefertigt habe und keine anderen als die angegebenen Quellen und Hilfsmittel benutzt habe. Alle Stellen, die wörtlich oder sinngemäß aus veröffentlichten oder nicht veröffentlichten Schriften oder Medien entnommen sind, sind als solche kenntlich gemacht.
Name, Vorname:
Streller, Elisa
Matrikelnummer:
210225688
Datum:
31.03.2015
Unterschrift:
_________________________________
