This past week the media has focused unrelenting attention on the death of Princess Diana.

Any person who watches CNN or other news stations for any length of time is bombarded with coverage of accident details, funeral preparations and the mourning of the world.

Response to the tragedy has gone through several stages — initial shock and horror turning into anger toward the paparazzi.

The anger toward the paparazzi lessened slightly as people directed questioning into the real causes of the crash, like the speculated high speed and the alcohol-induced impairment of the driver.

Now, with one day until Diana’s funeral, the response is sorrow and grief.

Still, even in her death, we have an insatiable appetite for more news about her.

It is not a surprise that the passing of such a famous woman would receive so much news, but there is an irony in all of the coverage bestowed upon the late princess.

Our interest in Diana that makes her death newsworthy and thus creates the media frenzy is the very interest that drove the paparazzi and mainstream press to intrude on her life.

The constant flash of a camera during her sixteen years of public recognition frustrated and hurt her, perhaps even enough to make her escape the snapping lenses at all costs.

Why were we so interested in her private life?

If we did indeed love and respect her as much as the level of mourning suggests, why did we buy or read headlines flaunting her failures and troubles?

Why is it that her troubles and mistakes received more publicity than her triumphs and good deeds?

I’m not a royalist; in fact, I think the idea of the monarchy is outdated.

However, I did like Diana very much. I didn’t follow her life closely, but I did take notice of the causes she supported and I listened to her candid and sincere interview with the BBC.

She was a good person.

She didn’t have to embrace people suffering from horrible diseases.

She didn’t have to walk through fields of land mines.

She didn’t have to expose her two young boys to social issues.

But she did.

In her interview with the BBC, she said she did these things to “plant the seed” in her boys so that they would have the knowledge if they desired to use it.

“Knowledge is power,” she said.

Knowledge is power. I think she understood something other royals didn’t.

I think she understood royals need to relate to their people and that is where royal power comes from.

Perhaps that is why she got off her royal duff and did something to better the world instead of living a life of polo-playing and tea- sipping.

There is nothing left to say about Diana that hasn’t already been said by the pundits and reporters, the celebrities, the lawyers and the ordinary people mourning her loss.

Maybe our mourning will turn into the ultimate irony.

Maybe something good will become of this tragedy.

Maybe we will stop intruding into people’s private lives and accept their celebrity on their terms.

---

Jonquil Wegmann is a senior in community and regional planning from Bellevue.