Diana Symbolized A Nation’s Growth

Even as Americans have mourned the death of Princess Diana, it is difficult for people on this side of the Atlantic to truly comprehend the depth of anguish and torment her sudden departure has induced in Britain. Where America has saluted her beauty, her glamour, her kindness, her political and charitable campaigns, Britain all but ground to a halt in shock at the passing of a nationalicon.

For 16 years, Diana has been a permanent feature of British life; increasingly, however, she had come to represent something much more fundamental about the way the country viewed itself. Her recent personal growth reflected a shift in Britain’s collective sense of self-worth, and her violent death leaves a gaping and painful emptiness at the heart of the national psyche.

Britain is a nation with a long and proud history. That is something which causes many Americans to look on it fondly and attracts millions of tourists each year. And yet, for the first time, Britain is starting to free itself from the shackles of its past. There is a growing sense that, even as the sun has set on its empire, the country has dwelled on its former glories, wallowed in its wartime heroics and fallen behind as the rest of the world has moved on.

Accordingly, Britons have begun searching for a new identity. In May, voters in the country’s elections swept the ruling Conservatives out of office after 18 years. At a stroke, the country was no longer represented by the stiff, gray, John Major but by the young, vibrant, forward-looking Tony Blair.

Blair said he wanted Britain to be a “young country” again, reflecting the widespread yearning for nationwide resurrection and rebirth. The nation responded and, for the first time in many years, was genuinely starting to feel good about itself. In Blair, Britons had the youngest, hippest statesman in the West. The British economy, for so long in the doldrums, was booming. British movies and music, from “The English Patient” and “Trainspotting” to Oasis and the Spice Girls, were at the vanguard once more.

According to Rolling Stone’s latest “What’s Hot” issue, even talking like a Brit was suddenly chic. Thirty years after the Beatles, London was swinging again.

And, at the pinnacle of it all, there was Diana. After years of struggle, she was, it seemed, finally coming into her own. Like her country, she was jettisoning the baggage of her past, showing signs of feeling at ease with herself and carving out a new image on the world stage. She represented everything Britain wanted to see in itself, with one foot in the world of pomp and pageantry, another in the sphere of glamour and popular culture, and excelling in both.

Now, suddenly, she is gone, and Britain stands in shock and disbelief, trying to come to terms with its loss. It is no surprise that, as Britain woke to news of her death, it was Blair who set the tone for the mourning to follow. The elected symbol of the New Britain, he did not attempt to hide his distress as he anointed her the “people’s princess.” He, as much as anyone, surely felt her importance to his country.

In contrast, the way in which the Royal Family trooped into church, upper lips duly stiffened, served only to accentuate the distance that had grown between them and their subjects - a distance both reflected in, and prompted by, the life of Diana.

One American commentator opined that, when all the dust had settled, the British would again clasp the Royal Family to their bosoms, because royalty’s tradition and ceremony were too compelling for them to do otherwise. Such an analysis completely fails to understand the way in which Diana has changed the public perception of the monarchy forever.

Britons loved Diana precisely because she was the “anti-Royal” Royal. She was a part of that world, yet rejected it. She was a bridge between Britain’s glorious past and its young, exciting future. And, much as its perceived treatment of her drove the House of Windsor to previously unplumbed depths of unpopularity, so Diana remained its best hope of survival. Its fortunes ebbed and flowed with hers. She was the only one who could make it relevant, interesting and exciting. Without her, there is nothing.

Eventually, of course, the rest of the country will pick itself up and move on. It will continue to redefine itself, as it must if it is to continue to have any kind of role for itself. But it has lost an important and beloved companion in that process. Whatever direction Britain takes in the future, for a long time it will take that direction with a heavy heart and an overpowering sense that something is missing.

xxxx