• 
• 

Published on August 31, 2007

It hasbeen ten years since the world lost its "people's princess". Throughout this time, Diana's shadow has lingered in our collective consciousness.

The commemoration of the 10th anniversary of her death will surely bring back a sense of nostalgia, affection and perhaps a morbid curiosity that surrounded Diana since the day she became a member of the Windsor dynasty.

It is undeniable that Diana still reigns as a cultural icon. But the commemoration should not be construed as yet another attempt to remind ourselves of a true fairytale - the story of a shy princess, seen as a trapped bird in a cage, transforming herself into a confident woman whose new start in life was cut short by a tragic accident.

It is, however, more important to assess Diana's lasting legacy and remember the way she rejuvenated the face of a centuries-old royal institution.

In the period leading up to the commemoration of Diana's death, attention has mostly been paid to what the British tabloids would call "marketable stories" - such as the question as to whether Camilla Parker Bowles, the Duchess of Cornwall, now married to Prince Charles, should attend Diana's memorial service on August 31. The British tabloids also reviewed a series of new publications on Diana, most of which were perceived as old stories repackaged just in time for the commemoration.

The real significance should instead be placed upon Diana's philanthropic legacy. She skilfully employed her fame and media presence to her advantage, raising money for dozens of causes including treatment of and research into cancer, HIV/Aids and leprosy, and for the homeless. She was also closely associated with the International Red Cross Anti-Personnel Land Mines Campaign. Images of an elegant princess holding hands with with HIV/Aids patients and walking into a minefield in Angola effectively made Diana a global symbol of compassion.

The Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund was set up in 1997 with donations that came flooding in after her death. Jumana Farouky of "Time" reported that since 1997, the Fund has handed out $150 million in grants to more than 350 projects and organisations focusing on issues like palliative care in Africa and raising awareness of the problems facing young refugees.

Other charities work hard in order to secure financial support from governments and the public. "With Diana as its silent spokesperson, the Fund needs no introduction since everyone knew Diana and the causes she stood for," said the Fund's CEO, Astrid Bonfield. Diana's powerful image, reflected through her philanthropic endeavours, has to a large extent helped her legacy flourish over the passage of time.

Stephen Lee, director of Britain's Institute of Charity Fundraising Managers, asserted that Diana's overall effect on charity is probably more significant than any other person's in the 20th century. The commemoration of the 10th anniversary of her death should therefore be about further capturing the spirit of Diana's humanitarian work by concentrating on the disadvantaged and the marginalised. The Fund has so far proved its commitment to provide them with support, a voice, and an opportunity to realise their full potential.

Diana's title of the "people's princess" leads us to ponder the way she effectively remoulded the image of the monarchy, particularly in the British context. In Britain, the monarchical institution, despite being regarded with high esteem, is often subjected to harsh criticism. It has been accused of representing the pinnacle of the anachronistic class system in the country.

Emerging as a modern-day princess, Diana proffered a touch of ordinariness in the otherwise strictly conservative royal institution. Her philanthropic activities were actively exercised so as to reconnect the monarchy with its people. In contrast to the general opinion of the monarchy as a privileged class, Diana's people-centred missions were conceived to narrow the prevailing social and economic gap.

The legacy of Diana also reminds us that the whole consumer culture, from cosmetics to politics, is not right all the time. Something new is not always better. Yet, something that might seem unfashionable, like the monarchy, may retain a hold over the imagination of many of us. People continue to be drawn to the ceremonial nature of kings and queens. Beyond all the splendour, the monarchy more importantly provides a sense of history and continuity of a nation.

Diana's charitable activities testify through time that she was not merely a cultural symbol or an economic commodity, but a meaningful ideological force. Elsewhere in the world, as Diana demonstrated, monarchies have sought to change attitudes on important issues of the day. It recognises the necessity to co-exist with the modernity of the contemporary world.

The co-existential process is, however, arduous. Modernity is usually antagonistic toward tradition. Diana initially found it challenging to juxtapose her image of a princess with the requirements of modernity. Today, certain kingdoms are more successful than others in embracing modernity. The Thai kingdom exemplifies that the best of modernity actually builds on tradition. As Thailand has reinvented itself as a modern nation, the monarchy remains an indispensable component of its identity.

For Diana, the 10th anniversary of her departure should be about the commemoration of her life, instead of her death. It should also be celebrated with a powerful message left behind by Diana: the monarchy is not necessarily anachronistic, but can play a significant philanthropic part that serves to save countless lives and bring comfort to countless others.

Dr Pavin Chachavalpongpun

Dr Pavin Chachavalpongpun is an independent writer based in Singapore.