On 14 September 1997, the Sunday Mirror announced: 鈥淎fter decades when the people of this country seemed to be losing their national identity, we have found one鈥t is about Diana and what she meant to our country鈥t is the new British spirit.鈥 Commentators spoke of a modern revolution, a renaissance, a better, more compassionate Britain; and most famously Tony Blair proclaimed Diana to be the 鈥淧eople鈥檚 Princess鈥 who would 鈥渞emain in our hearts and memories 鈥 for ever鈥. Here, Raka Shome, a media and communications scholar, uses 鈥淒iana鈥檚 iconicity鈥 to explore formations of whiteness in the late 20th and early 21st century. Her reasoning is that global media representations of Diana have been crucial to the construction of 鈥渁 larger neoliberal logic of national belonging鈥.
For Shome, the big question in 1997 was why 鈥渁 media narrative of a white heterosexual upper-class British woman was able to secure so many effective attachments of love and desire from people 鈥 white and not white, western and non-western鈥. Academic analysis has ignored the whiteness of the Diana phenomenon, she argues, and this is symptomatic of the continued exclusion of non-white women from global mythologising and narratives of universal adoration and love. It is an ongoing political process, she believes, because representations of Diana and other privileged white women are devices through which the ruling establishment performs the politics of a caring, compassionate Western cosmopolitanism. Cue Angelina Jolie, Mia Farrow and Madonna. Moreover, says Shome, this 鈥渘ational script of white femininity鈥 diminishes the space for the bodies of 鈥渘on-white, lesbian, non-western women鈥, kept invisible by the 鈥渞acialized, gendered, sexualized, classed and transnational circuits of power鈥. Some fascinating chapters explore these themes, many rooted in empire, and the book concludes with a critique of the 鈥渟piritual fix鈥 that elite white women offer up.
So am I now going to throw myself naked in front of the nearest Land Rover, wearing only copies of the Daily Mail while taking an ironic selfie? The answer is no. The ideological image of Diana that Shome presents is too selective. Diana was also understood as a rebel and anti-establishment, and iconic because of her embrace of Aids victims and closeness to gay men. Women all over the world saw a young woman trapped into marriage with an older, less attractive man who was unfaithful. She was perceived as sexually daring, continually having affairs with unsuitable white men, not just Muslim surgeons and playboys.
The younger generation of non-white women in Britain and the global South, or at least the ones I know, have moved on from the Noughties. Social media has fuelled a global fascination with women such as Beyonc茅, Kim Kardashian (whose butt, enhanced or not, 鈥渂roke the internet鈥) and the Lebanese lawyer Amal Clooney, next to whom the once-gorgeous George now looks less like a sex symbol and more like a tired old man. But a book on white femininity, power and the media that doesn鈥檛 contain the word 鈥渕isogyny鈥 in its index? What would Emmeline聽Pankhurst say?
Joanna Lewis is assistant professor in the department of international history, London School of Economics. She writes on the history of empire in Africa, masculinity and emotion.
Diana and Beyond: White Femininity, National Identity and Contemporary Media Culture
By Raka Shome
University of Illinois Press, 272pp, 拢66.00 and 拢20.99
ISBN 9780252038730, 080302 and 096686 (e-book)
Published 27 October 2015
POSTSCRIPT:
Print headline: This princess was beyond the pale
Register to continue
Why register?
- Registration is free and only takes a moment
- Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
- Sign up for our newsletter
Subscribe
Or subscribe for unlimited access to:
- Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
- Digital editions
- Digital access to 罢贬贰鈥檚 university and college rankings analysis
Already registered or a current subscriber?




