The topic is aligned with the last few books read about various royals of Europe, but in most other ways this is closer in spirit to an earlier work that had then shocked the west, "Holy Blood, Holy Grail", in that both works point at several inconsistencies and gaps in the official version of the story, and ask questions, and provide answers that alone make any sense out of the said gaps and inconsistencies.Both works took down huge and powerful ancient institutions, a peg or a notch and in fact the whole pedestal as well, albeit not quite into oblivion they deserve to be in.
Also of course, inevitably, this reminds one of the film JFK, although that was about a true story of Jim Garrison who alone prosecuted anyone in context of the murder, and lived on. Diana lacked a Garrison only in the sense no one quite succeeded in calling the bluff quite so openly and officially, although in another sense she had more than one knight who did come forth with facts and forced the officialdom to open inquests when they had no intention of doing so, and what's more, the jury at the British inquest delivered a verdict of "unlawful killing" after they were explicitly told they could not call it a murder, and further named the motorbike riders that had pretended to be paparazzi but were not, harassing the couple and causing the crash quite intentionally.
This work goes further than JFK in exploring the whole scenario as completely as known till date, which one must suppose JFK did do when it was made, or rather when Garrison prosecuted the case. More is known or found since, and put in context in a video on internet that runs about a couple of hours or longer, named "JFK to 9/11".
Somewhere along the way reading this book, one wonders if the monarchy as an institution has run long past its expiry date, especially in England, since this story has far more in common with the last Tudor to rule England - the male royal can do as he pleases, whether born royal or married one, but the women, especially the brides, must risk their lives if they do not please the royals at any point of their life. That Diana is mother to future king of England did not spare her life any more that it did that of Anne Boleyn, the mother of Queen Elizabeth I who was in effect the mother of the nation that England became, out of the small and harried one that she had inherited.
Further ironies of course have been obvious for a while. The much disapproving royalty of the day that never granted wife of Duke of Windsor a royal status and took it away from Diana, Princess of Wales, has post her death allowed her ex husband to marry a divorcee and retain his royal status, and if he is required to abdicate his succession as his great-uncle King Edward VII was before coronation, it is not yet known. Perhaps they are trying to make people accept it by playing low key, and people after all have little power in a nation where even in court one is required to swear allegiance to monarchy before swearing to truth.
As to the actual story of the crash, and the lies and discrepancies and intrigue surrounding Diana that ended in the fatal crash causing her death along with that of her then love, and the lies and the cover up that began immediately and went on in face of facts known to the contrary, all described and exposed in this work, it is horrifying and, needless to say, tremendously disgusting. One is horrified and disgusted enough when it happens to any bride, any woman, in any society, any nation. But the lie that is propagated in west making one expect west to be as civilised as west claims, makes this story all the more horrible, all the more disgusting one with the people who went along with the official lies, murder and cover up.
