1.
Discussion
3.1 Diana’s Fashion before Marriage
It seems that every single one of
Diana’s outfits was planned and thought out. She had in mind what she might be
communicating if she wore certain things. This is Semiotics as she wanted to
communicate herself using the way she dressed. Below are some examples of
Diana’s early experiences with choosing an outfit and the reaction of the media
to them. Although the intention was there, these early experiences didn’t
always turn out the way that Diana had planned and sometimes it was the media
ended up in control of how she was portrayed.
3.1.1 Nursery Outfit September 1980
Figure 1
- Nursery Outfit (Neel, 2011)
In the early days at the age of
19 Diana was very young and naïve. Her first picture was the infamous see
through Laura Ashley skirt. Photographers had deliberately put her in front of
the light, making her skirt see-through revealing her legs (Wackerl, 2012,
p.109). This was the first official photograph of her and the press had managed
to manipulate it for their own gain. It is said however, that even from this
first picture Diana was communicating her emotions through fashion as the skirt
was covered in a small heart print, and Diana was very much in love with Prince
Charles. Only one journalist mentioned
Diana’s choice of skirt the following day, ‘while the tabloid press descended
like vultures on Diana’s bare legs’ (Wackerl, 2012, p.109).
3.1.2 Engagement Outfit 24th February 1981
Figure 2
Engagement Outfit (Neel, 2011)
Diana’s next mistake was to be in
her choice of outfit for the official announcement of her engagement to Prince
Charles. She was still quite inexperienced at shopping for royal outfits and no
more would show that than this particular one. Diana had the idea to visit ‘Bellville
Sasoon’, Belinda Bellville and David Sasoon, who had made dresses for her
mother in the past. Diana visited their shop to have a look and find
inspiration. Diana knew that she wanted to wear blue to compliment her sapphire
engagement ring. Unfortunately for Diana and the designers, neither of them
were in the shop at the time and the shop assistant didn’t recognise her shy
young customer. The assistant didn’t think that Diana looked as if she could
afford her goods and gave an imposing approach, to which Diana walked out of
the shop and into another shop. She purchased a suit by Cojana. The suit had
‘A scalloped edge and an unbecoming, tight
belt. Its print blouse was tied in a large pussy-cat bow to one side, and the
skirt covered the knee over thick, patterned tights and flat shoes. Wearing a
no-nonsense wrist watch and holding a handbag, Diana looked plump and
uncomfortable.’ (Howell, 1998, p.25).
This was no outfit for a girl of
Diana’s age and it was clear that she needed proper advice and guidance, which
she had narrowly missed out on at Bellville Sasoon. Unknown to Diana at this
time, these early outfit disasters would only help her discover and learn that
the way she dressed would be so powerful. With this outfit Diana was experimenting
with fashion and had given thought to how she would look, trying to tie in with
her blue sapphire engagement ring. She
clearly missed the mark with the fashion, however it looks that her choice of
outfit colour was chosen to act as a symbol and projection to the media of her
engagement ring and what that stood for. This ties in with the fashion theory
of semiotics well. It seems that Diana was learning fast.
3.1.3 Black Taffeta
Dress 9th March 1981
Figure 3
Black Taffeta Dress (Neel, 2011)
Charles was 12 years Diana’s
senior and at her first royal engagement she wanted to ensure that she looked
grown up and sophisticated (Howell, 1998, p.30). Diana enlisted the help of
David and Elizabeth Emanuel. She had set her heart on a strapless black dress
that she had seen in the Emanuel’s studio (Modlinger, 1998, p.17). For a girl of
Diana’s age black was seen to be a very sophisticated colour (Howell, 1998,
p.30). Diana chose a pretty sample dress from the Emanuel’s studio but being a
sample dress and without anybody to suggest alterations to her, the dress
didn’t fit perfectly and definitely didn’t fit like a glove (Howell, 1998,
p.30).
Upon arriving at the event Diana
pitched forward to exit the limo and ‘the
press and photographers had a field day’ (Modlinger, 1998, p.16). Being a
strapless dress this moment revealed her cleavage and showed Diana in a
different light to how she had been seen previously. The end result was that
the dress was deemed to be too daring and the media covering event were fixated
on how revealing it was (Modlinger, 1998, p.17). Not only this, but also in
royal circles the colour black was seen in its traditional light, as the colour
of mourning. The infamous black taffeta dress was the first indication that
Diana would be departing from the royal routine and experimenting by making her
own striking and original fashion choices.
The black taffeta dress was an
attempt by Diana to appear sophisticated at the royal engagement. The thought
process behind the decision ties in with the fashion theory of semiotics
although Diana’s lack of understanding about how the colour black is perceived
in royal circles, and the attention that she received from the media for how
revealing the dress looked, meant that her message was lost.
3.2 Diana’s Married Years
3.2.1 Wedding Dress 29th July 1981
Figure 4
Wedding Dress (Neel, 2011)
For Diana one of the biggest
turning points was her marriage to Prince Charles. On the 29th of
July 1981 Diana emerged from a rather small carriage at St Pauls Cathedral. She
was wearing another creation of David and Elizabeth Emanuel. The wedding dress
had been kept a secret, no drawings had been made and it was sewn by a single
seamstress behind locked doors. The dress was:
‘Made of 45 feet of ivory silk taffeta, and
trimmed with antique Carrick-Ma-Cross lace. The 25-foot veil and train,
securely held by the ravishing Spencer diamond tiara, was hand sewn with ten
thousand mother-of-pearl sequins. With full sleeves, frills and bows it was
gathered into a voluminous, rustling crinoline that proved almost too large for
the confines of the carriage that took her to St Paul’s.’ (Howell,
1998, p.37).
The fashion theory of semiotics
plays a role in all traditional wedding dresses and Diana’s, although on a much
larger scale, was no different.
‘Any
bride in a white wedding dress, whether deliberately or not is sending out
pagan messages of virginity, dedication, sacrifice and promise. This exuberant,
Victorian-style dress was intended by Diana to signal a fairy-tale conclusion
to what, we later came to realize, was a barely satisfactory royal romance. The
dress ushered in the sentiment of all fairy tales that end with marriage to a
prince’… and they lived happily ever after’.’ (Howell, 1998, p.37).
This quote from Howell (1998) explains
how Diana wanted the wedding dress to be ‘fairy-tale’ in style as well as being
a traditional wedding dress. In Diana’s mind she thought that her choice of
dress would tell the world that she and Charles were there to stay, to live
happily ever after. The fact that Diana intended the dress to be like that in a
fairy-tale shows that she wanted the semiotics of the dress to go even further
than that which a traditional wedding dress already offers.
3.2.2 Diana’s Uncertainty, Charles’ Affair and Duchess of York
Figure 5
Diana with Prince William and Prince Harry (Neel, 2011)
Following Diana’s marriage to
Prince Charles they had two children, Prince William on the 21st June
1982 and Prince Harry on the 15th September 1984. In the following 3
years after Harry’s birth Diana went through a difficult time that seriously
knocked her confidence. Firstly, Charles admitted that he was in contact with
Camilla Parker-Bowles and he once said “Do
you seriously expect me to be the first Prince of Wales in British history not
to have a mistress?” (Howell, 1998, p.64). Secondly there was Diana’s new
sister-in-law, Prince Andrew’s wife Sarah Ferguson. ‘Fergie’, as she became
known, began to blossom and in turn Diana’s popularity began to decline,
further denting her confidence (Howell, 1998, p.64).
‘Suddenly everybody said “Oh isn’t Fergie
marvellous, a breath of fresh air. Thank god she’s more fun than Diana.” So
Diana was listening and reading every line. “I felt terribly insecure”.’
(Howell, 1998, p.64).
Although Diana was conscious of Fergie
and how she made her look she had other worries. Despite Diana’s youth, beauty
and charm Charles remained uninterested. In reaction to these two things,
Fergie, and her strained relationship with Charles, Diana began to ‘abandon caution’ (Howell, 1998, p.66), dress
up and be seen to have more fun. This was an attempt to change her image within
the royal family and the wider public, partly through semiotics.
3.2.3 Dressing for Attention
Traditionally a country girl, Diana
now lived in the middle of a London, a vibrant city with designer shops and many
parties (Howell, 1998, p.75). Whilst Diana was trying to recapture her husband’s
attention, and whilst he remained uninterested, it’s of no surprise that Diana became
noticed by other potential admirers.
The Princess met James Hewitt a
handsome young polo player and they had a full blown love affair conducted in
two phases from 1986-1987 and then from 1990-1991 (Howell, 1998, p.76). Diana
soon began to dress for Hewitt and it was the designers who worked with her
that started to pick up signals that would go unnoticed to others. ‘“There were these little messages!” Jasper
Conran recalls “There was a certain maturing. She became a woman rather than a
girl!”’ (Howell, 1998, p.76). Instead of her usual sensible flat Manolo
pumps that she had worn to ensure not being taller than Charles, she went to
Jimmy Choo for the latest 2½ inch heels (Howell, 1998, p.77). “Also when buying clothes for her private
wardrobe, along with her usual Highgrove blazers, sexy revealing dresses were
being added in.” (Howell, 1998, p.75). Here was a definite shift in Diana’s
dress. It went unnoticed in the public eye at first but she was close to a lot
of her designers and they were aware of the changes to her personal wardrobe
and what those changes probably represented.
During these short periods Diana
was not choosing her fashion in an attempt to convey messages and emotions to
the wider public through semiotics. She wasn’t trying to compete with Fergie or
win back Charles’ attention, but rather she was dressing for one individual and
that was James Hewitt.
3.2.4 King Fahd Outfit
24th March 1987
Figure 6
King Fahd Outfit (Neel, 2011)
Learning from every fashion
success and failure, Diana worked on her own way to communicate with the
public. “She found out the royal rules
the hard way” says David Sassoon, “Now
she began to break them” (Howell, 1998, p.77). Diana’s experiments were
bold and she sometimes attracted criticism as often it appeared that she went
too far in her desire to project herself in a memorable way. Over time the
princess’ fashion choices became more theatrical and were even said by some to
have gone beyond fashion and it seemed that the outfits were in fact more
similar to costumes (Howell, 1998, p.78). This assessment shows that at this
point in time Diana was fully aware of the power of her fashion choices in
helping to show herself in a way that she desired. This aligns with the fashion
theory of semiotics; however it looks that sometimes she didn’t execute it in a
very subtle way.
One example of an outfit that was
far from subtle was when Diana and Charles went to meet King Fahd on his
arrival at Gatwick airport. On this occasion Diana wore a ‘gold frogged suit like a drum majorette’s and the press wrote that she
looked like a cut-out from the cover of the Beatles’ ‘Sergeant Pepper’ album’
(Howell, 1998, p.79-80). With this particular outfit it would appear Diana had
started to over think her fashion choices so much that she had become too bold
and literal. People could certainly see why she wearing what she was but had it
become too much?
Stephen Jones, a young hat-maker,
studied Diana’s appearance carefully. Stephen said that
‘”as a
Milliner you’re aware that when someone puts a hat with an outfit it turns it
into a costume. It adds drama, status
and theatricality, and the person behaves a little differently. When I met the
Princess at Kensington Palace she was always interested in the effect – “How
will people see this? How will this be interpreted?”’ (Howell, 1998, p.80).
Jones’ interactions with Diana show
that she was aware of the impact that fashion accessories, such as hats, could
have in making the messages that she wanted to convey clearer.
3.2.5 Caring Dress
January & June 1988, April 1991
Figure 7
The Caring Dress (Lusher, 2008)
Another notable dress worn by
Diana was what she called her ‘caring dress’ (Lusher, 2008). This dress was
designed by David Sassoon who was one of her favourite designers and ‘who made more than 70 outfits for the
Princess’ (Lusher, 2008). Diana was criticised by the press as she was seen
wearing the caring dress a number of times. Unknown to them there was a good
reason Diana chose to wear this dress time and time again on visits to children
across the globe (Modlinger, 1998, p.48). The bright and colourful dress was often
reused by Diana on public visits to sick and suffering children because the
bright colours were appealing and made them at ease in her presence. You could
say that Diana had semiotics in mind when she chose this dress, not for the
sake of the press or public but for those children who she was going to meet. The
caring dress was seen in Nigeria, Brazil and at a London Aids Hospice after she
had first visited another hospital and had noticed its effect on children
(Lusher, 2008).
3.2.6 The Revenge Dress 29th June 1994
Figure 8
The Revenge Dress (Neel, 2011)
Designer Christina Stambolian was
the designer of perhaps the most talked about dress that Diana would ever wear
(Modlinger, 1998, p.108). The evening that Diana wore this outfit was in 1994 when
she attended a public engagement at the Serpentine gallery. Her and Charles
were already separated, but not yet divorced. On the very same evening Prince
Charles was being interviewed with James Dimbleby on Charles: The Private Man, The Public Face. In this interview
Charles affirmed his adultery with Camilla Parker-Bowles (Wackerl, 2012, p.106).
Diana was not scheduled to wear this particular dress that evening as she had bought
it a few years earlier but it was deemed to be not fitting for royal attire
(Modlinger, 1998, p.109). Diana had thought about how she wanted to be seen and
wanted to knock Charles off of the headlines and not to be a victim.
The dress was ‘a short black dress with a vee bodice in
silk jacquard, falling onto a chiffon skirt using Italian fabrics’
(Modlinger, 1998, p.109). ‘The Americans
christened it the ‘I’ll show you’ dress and the ‘Vengeance Dress’ ‘ (Howell,
1998, p.154). The British named it the ‘Revenge Dress’. ‘This was the devastating wisp of black chiffon with which Diana flipped
her husband clean off the front pages the morning after his damaging televised
interview.’ (Howell, 1998, p.154).
This is perhaps the best example of Princess Diana using fashion to convey
her emotions. She managed to convey exactly the message that she wanted to without
having to say a single word. Diana had years of practise with her fashion
choices but ‘Never before had a woman
selected her outfit with such tactical brilliance.’ (Wackerl, 2012, p.106).
3.3 After the Royal Family
On the 28th of August
1996 Diana and Charles divorced. Diana was free of her royal obligations and the
title ‘Her Royal Highness’ but remained the ‘Princess of Wales’ (Wackerl, 2012,
p.117). This transition from royal life had a noticeable impact on Diana’s
fashion choices from this point onwards. The press and public still took notice
of Diana despite parting from the royal family, as she was still popular with
the public and still the mother of William and Harry. David Sassoon observed
this too, he said
‘The
biggest transformation took place once the Princess got divorced – then she no
longer had to wear British designs, so she spread her wings, and opened the
wardrobe to Versace, Valentino and Dior.’ (Modlinger, 1998, p.126).
Diana herself said “from now on, I am going to own myself and be
true to myself. I no longer want to live someone else’s idea of what and who I
should be.” (Howell, 1998, p.184).
Free from the pressures of the
royal family, after her divorce Diana was able to come full circle in her
approach to fashion. Diana’s style became simple and chic, which shows her
becoming true to herself and perhaps represents the fact that her life was a
lot less complicated outside of the royal family.
3.3.1 The Auction 25th June 1997
On the 25th of June
1997 Diana held an auction at Christie’s in New York. The auction was of
Diana’s royal working wardrobe and included 79 lots. (Howell, 1998, p.200). It
would seem that the inspiration for the auction came from Prince William, Diana
noted in a letter dated June 1997. (Modlinger, 1998, p.138). There were 1,100
potential buyers that attended the auction in New York. The first lot to come
up for auction more than doubled its opening price, indicating that the event
was going to be more successful than indicted (Howell, 1998, p.200). In total
the auction raised £1,960,150, all of which along with proceeds of the
catalogue sales were donated to charities close to Diana’s heart, which
included AIDS and Cancer charities (Modlinger, 1998, p.138.)
This auction was symbolic for
Diana and sent a clear message to world as it was a defining moment in her
separation from the royal family. Many of the outfits at auction were used by
Diana during her time in the royal family as ways of communicating her
feelings, for example the ‘revenge dress’. Other outfits included those carefully
chosen to wear on state visits that were used to convey messages to the country
that she was visiting, for example messages of respect and recognition of
culture.
The auction came at a stage when Diana
was starting to enjoy the freedom in her life and this was noted by many people
close to her including designers such as Karl Lagerfeld who said “she had never looked so good, so
fashionable, as in the last six months. I think that she finally felt free …”
(Modlinger, 1998, p.138).
