Five years ago, Diana, Princess of Wales died in a car crash in Paris. On the anniversary of her death, Women's Editor Christen Pears asks whether we have begun to forget her.

SHE was the People's Princess, our Queen of Hearts, and we would never forget her. A sea of flowers, several feet deep, lay outside Kensington Palace for days, and men and women cried openly in the streets. Thousands of people lined the route of her funeral procession and millions more watched it on television.

But five years after the death of Princess Diana, her memorial still isn't built, Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles appear to be gaining public acceptance as a couple and the Royal Family, heavily criticised at the time of her death, is enjoying a resurgence in popularity.

Diana always had her detractors, those who believed her relaxed style and turbulent private life were damaging to the monarchy, but she also had legions of admirers. She was an intoxicating mix of hardworking royal, devoted mother and fashion icon and there is no doubt her death came as a huge shock, but previous anniversaries have passed relatively quietly. Are we in danger of forgetting her, or has the passage of time actually helped us to look at her life and achievements in a more sensible and reflective way?

Ardent royalist Anita Atkinson believes Diana's death was a personal tragedy but, despite large-scale public grieving, did nothing to change the Royal Family. Anita, who lives in Fir Tree, near Crook, has a record-breaking collection of royal memorabilia and, for the last 20 years, has given talks on the history of the Royal Family across the North-East.

She says: "It is awful for a young mother to be killed so tragically but I really don't think her death has made any difference in the long term. The monarchy has changed over the last five years but I think that is part of an ongoing process of modernisation. People attribute it to Diana's death but it is much more than that. The Queen knows the monarchy has to change but it is a long, slow process."

Anita actually doubts whether people were as moved by the events of August 31 as they appeared, attributing the hysteria that surrounded the princess' death to excessive media coverage.

"Diana was always in the public eye, always on the front pages, and I think the media had a lot to do with the hype surrounding her death. Everything got blown out of all proportion but it has died down since. There hasn't been the same sort of reaction on the anniversaries of her death. Her memorial hasn't been built. If people were so fervent about her, they would be rioting in the streets, demanding something to be done."

And, having delved into the archives, Anita believes Diana wasn't unique. She says there is always a similar reaction when a popular member of the Royal Family dies.

"When I give talks, I often read out an account of Prince Albert's funeral but leave out all references to him. I then ask people who they think it's about and they always say Diana. But there was a huge outpouring of public grief for Prince Albert and, more recently, the Queen Mother. Unlike Diana, she had had a long and full life so it wasn't a huge shock when she died but people mourned for her all the same."

The Queen Mother was from a different era and represented a more old-fashioned monarchy. It may be the case that her death will have more repercussions for the Royal Family and the way it operates than Diana's.

But while Anita questions the extent of Diana's influence, there are others who believe she had a huge impact on the monarchy and society in general.

She was the first royal superstar. The glamour that surrounded her ensured front page coverage for any of the causes she espoused, whether that was helping AIDS sufferers or landmine victims and even after her death, her charitable work has continued. By the end of this year, the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund will have pledged more than £50m in grants to help people in need.

Royal biographer Penny Junor says: "I think she put compassion on the agenda after the years of selfish, grasping Thatcherism. She hugged people, she sat on their beds, she took children in her arms - and it wasn't just for a photo opportunity. She had a real gift with people and left, I feel, a legacy of care. But I'm not sure that legacy of compassion and care has survived in today's society."

People are less emotional now, and that is good, Junor says. "The public reaction seems to be reaching normal levels for someone who has been dead five years. I think it was pretty extreme to begin with, there was extraordinary hysteria surrounding her death and her personality was blown out of all proportion, which was quite unhealthy.

"People are more calm and rational in their thoughts now. The passage of time has allowed for more open discussion and reflection about her."

Of course, it is only natural that, as time passes, memories of Diana and her work will begin to fade. But, like other 20th century icons, Marilyn Monroe and James Dean, she died young, and a mythology has already sprung up around her. It is not, however, without foundation.

Critics of the monarchy believe Diana did have a unique and lasting achievement - undermining the House of Windsor and forcing it to change.

Newcastle-based author and critic Beatrix Campbell explains: "Here was a young girl who had been nowhere and done nothing, who had no judgement, yet she shook the Royal Family rigid. She called Prince Charles to account and in doing so, she became someone who connected with other women.

"The establishment never understood - in fact, it was completely foxed by the fact that lots of people identified with her. She came from a broken home, she suffered with an eating disorder and her marriage broke down.

"What scared the establishment about this woman was her ability to find strength amongst other women who connected with her, and it was rather unsettling for them."

Campbell, author of Diana, Princess of Wales: How Sexual Politics Shook The Monarchy (The Women's Press, £8.99), believes that Diana's choice of causes to support also endeared her to the public.

"She chose people with AIDS, who were then pariahs of society, battered women, sufferers of eating disorders. They were things she was interested in, but they were also things that were quite radical at the time."

Diana's legacy was, she says, that she had a go, and people everywhere connect with that.

"What has been very clear in the five years since her death is that nobody can take away what those few years of turbulence meant and how they forced the Royal Family to change."