First of all, I think too much has been made of her early childhood. Her brothers and sisters had the same childhood and were not affected in an outstanding way. Diana came into her marriage, and her role, I believe, absolutely healthy. What made Diana unique from the outset was, first, her personality. If she truly had an "Introverted Intuitive Feeling Perceiving Personality(INFP)", then she had the most rare of all the personality types. INFPs are only 1% of the entire population, and this includes both men and women. She would have been, and felt, "different" from an early age. She also would have been misunderstood, and her own immediate family may have felt she was somehow different from them as well.
Luckily for Diana, her personality was already one which enjoyed being with people and serving others. It wasn't difficult for her to bend to the needs of others. The problem was that she was strong-willed beneath it all, and at some point, the endless sacrifices didn't seem to square right with her, I think. She gave up so much of herself, and yet didn't get the support she felt she deserved. I think it was inevitable. She was set up to fall. At least, to fall from the pedestal she was put upon.
Diana was also an artist. She was not just an art "appreciator". What she actually became is not as important as what she wanted to do. If she wanted to be a ballerina, her dream was to be an artist. Part of her temperament was natural for the artistic and creative type. She was a humanitarian, but this is what she did for others, externally. Within, she was a true artist. What took away from this was the role of "princess". Princess will always trump "artist". At least, with others, it will. It overshadows who the person is, necessarily, because a "princess" is not simply a "job", it is used to describe the actual person. It would make the artist take a seat behind.
If you look at Diana's handwriting, it is not the writing of an airhead.
