Eulogy_Earl_Spencer

Eulogy by Earl Spencer: A Representation The eulogy by Earl Spencer (6th September 1997), while being written at a similar time as Geoffrey Robertson’s “Diana in the Dock: Does Privacy Matter'”, presents a starkly different version of Diana and her life. The eulogy was delivered at an intensely emotional time and to a very public audience, both in Britain and overseas, and powerfully represents his sister as an insecure person who felt a great sensitivity to the poor but was scandalously and cruelly treated by both the Royal Family and the paparazzi. Throughout, Earl Spencer litters his eulogy with highly emotive language which positions the audience to feel sympathetically towards Diana. He concludes by describing her as ‘unique’, ‘complex’, ‘extraordinary’ and ‘irreplaceable’, highlighting through this accumulation her utter beauty and wonderful nature. Earlier, he spoke of ‘cherishing’ his memories of her and of her ‘natural nobility’ while being ‘classless’. The apparent paradox is cleverly used to foreground her complexity, again encouraging responders to delve below any apparent superficial preconceptions of Diana to understand her genuine and very human self. He eloquently describes her as being the ‘very essence of compassion, of duty, of style, of beauty’, of having ‘boundless energy’ but being forced to endure ‘tearful despair’. His enormous respect is captured successfully in his tone which is consistently one of admiration. This focus on her humanity and her flaws is included deliberately by Spencer when he refers to her eating disorder and when he uses personal anecdotes about their childhood. She ‘mothered me as a baby and fought with me at school”. It is crucial in the context of the funeral that Spencer emphasises this very human side of Diana. In fact, he challenges any suggestion that she should be canonised and cleverly uses religious imagery while he argues that she does not need to be a saint and her memory does not need to be sanctified. Responders are invited, too, to participate in the event and to share his chance to farewell her. This is cleverly achieved as he shifts seamlessly between first, second and third person during the eulogy. He directs many of his comments using the second person directly to Diana - “The greatest gift was your intuition and it was a gift you used widely” - while also frequently using the plural first person to embrace the responders and encourage them to share his stated emotions. “We are all united in our desire to pay our respects”, “we are all chewed up with the sadness at the loss of (Diana)”. Most evocative, though, is when he states, “We will not allow them to suffer the anguish that used to drive you to tearful despair.” This inclusive pronoun clearly positions responders to side with him in his open defiance of the Royal family and their over emphasis on training their sense of duty and tradition. Furthermore, he blatantly pledges that ‘we, your blood family’ will continue to steer her sons in the same imaginative way that she had planned. This obvious juxtaposing of the two value systems invites responders to feel antagonistic towards the Royal family as no dissenting or moderating voice is heard at this time. He also encourages responders to be critical of the paparazzi. Most obviously, he uses an analogy to Diana, the goddess of hunting, ironically highlighting that it was Diana who became the ‘most hunted person of the modern age’, thus evoking enormous sympathy for Diana and anger at the photographers who chased her, hoping for a photo. In contrast to Geoffrey Robertson who represents Diana as self-seeking and superficial in her concern for the poor and ill, Earl Spencer powerfully asserts that she cared deeply for them. In emotive language, he addresses Diana, maintaining that she connected with her ‘constituency of the rejected’ because she, too, suffered. He lists the AIDS and HIV sufferers, the homeless, the lepers, the destruction of the landmines as important and genuine concerns for her. Earl Spencer has composed a powerful eulogy, one which effectively farewelled his beloved sister while the world looked on. He defends her integrity and her actions by acknowledging her humanity and compassion as well as by implying the difficulties she encountered, not only from the intrusive and ‘ever – present’ paparazzi but also from the restraints of her ‘bizarre-like life’ in the Royal family. He presents an emotional and very subjective representation and his apparent honesty about her life lends great credibility to his version of the truth.