More News on Harry and Meghan

[Viviennemary]

Two little bits of news I read today. First the bells won't ring out at Westminster Abbey for Meghans birthday next month and she'll be devastated. No I don't think she'll even expect them to ring. And I had to smile at Bogart the dog was left behind in Canada because it didn't take to Harry. What else could she do. Hardly leave Harry behind. And it would have been a worry with a baby in the house too. She did the right thing here.

@ARoseInHarlem

The telling part, if true, is that they felt “used” by the institution for their popularity.

It implies that they think their popularity was theirs to use for their own benefit, first and foremost. Which implies that they think they are an entity separate from the RF, and that their popularity was intrinsic to them as individuals. That the RF owes them thanks lending them their inherent popularity. To believe the rest of it, they think the RF feels threatened by their popularity.

The were/are popular only because of their royalty. If Harry were a politician, an army general, an academic or plumber or accountant or whatever, and MM the actress she was, nobody would know about the wedding or care about them as a couple. They were photographed and followed because they were senior members of the RF. They owe their popularity to the RF, not the other way round. It was their job to put that popularity - lots of it garnered at the taxpayer’s expense around the time of their wedding - to the benefit of the RF (who apparently exist for the benefit of the people).

This is so basic a concept, you have to wonder if the claim is true.

Haven’t finished thread but have to comment as read this post - 100% agree. Very well out and really gets to heart of What I think the issue they had was.

Do we conclude Meghan didn't really know what her life would be like as a royal. If so I would find it easier to sympathise.

I think it would have been very difficult for Meghan to have any real idea what life as a member of the royal family would be like or more importantly what it would demand of her, as it would be for anyone who did not come from a life where they were close to the British RF or Aristocracy.

Even quite minor things such as, if HMQ is present you don't sit down while she is standing. If all are seated and HMQ stands, everyone must stand. If you are at a banquet, no one starts to eat until HMQ starts and when she is finished everyone pouts down their knives and forks. Archaic remnants of a thousand years of royal history. Stupid and irrelevant, possibly but it is the way things are done in the BRF.

How could she possibly have understood in advance just how complete and all powerful the hierarchy is.

Not deleted yet either!!! Yay!!!

Well yes but how often was she in the presence of the Queen? Rarely really. She didn’t live with her. They don’t have banquets together every day. It’s an etiquette that’s easily learnt - lots of guidance available too.

She really should have had briefings before engagement. I think she knew better and saw individual kudos.

KatherineParr4 Thank you very much for the share token. Very glad to have the chance to read the extract even though the writing style makes me feel a bit queasy Agree with the PP who referred to Diana and the Andrew Morton book and think their level of input was probably comparable, and their denials probably equally accurate.

Going back to Bogart the dumped dog.

I volunteer in dog rescue and when a dog doesn’t take to a new partner (sometimes they are wary of men), most owners with far less resources than this pampered pair, employ a behaviouralist to help things along.
They don’t rehome the ‘beloved’ dog.

7 years ago 2 of my rescue dogs didn’t take to me at first (they bonded with my bf), but I just thought that I’m going to love them and care for them, whatever their feelings were for me.

Within a few months this paid off and we were completely bonded. One sadly died last year but his sibling is my world. You have to persevere but it’s worth it.

My0My I don't disagree. I was just responding to the question as to whether she would know in advance. I actually think it was H's responsibility to make sure that M was aware of the pecking order and its implications. I think she thought it could all be changed. He should have known better.

The Irish flag is green, white and orange (not gold - in contrast to say the yellow of the German flag). The colours represent the green of the Irish countryside and nationalism, the orange of William of Orange and Protestantism and white the everlasting peace between them. Aspirational but hopeful!

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/meghan-hoped-kate-would-reach-out-to-her-thats-not-what-happened-3mc0d72ck

The Times has updated the front page story. Hopefully the link will work.

[quote IHeartSusanDey]@MrHatMancock I am so sorry but I have no idea what you are talking about. I have touched a nerve, obviously.[/quote]
Of course you haven't touched a nerve.

Don't be silly.

I think there is a difference between "the Royal Family the Institution" and "the Royal Family the family"

I agree with this. The Queen often appears with Charles, William and sometimes George to underline the succession as Charles and William are vital in that - the "institution" side of her role. However I'm sure she loves and values her other children/grandchildren just as much - the "family". Surely this was underlined by lending her dress and tiara to Beatrice last weekend? Yet Bea and the other grandchildren, who are less crucial to the succession, don't seem to whine about being badly treated.

Harry's not as important to the institution but he and his child have options for their lives that aren't open to William.

Right, so if Meghan and Harry didn't specifically cooperate with this book, but people close to them did, they should be able to work out from the anecdotes given pretty much who gave the quotes.

Bit like the People magazine fiasco really. So how come they're taking legal action regarding one, but not the other? Presumably they like the narrative that's being spun on this one.

The more I read ( much to DH’s despair!) the more I am convinced that M collaborated but not H. She is the one “ who gave up everything for the family “ and it is definitely being suggested in the bits I have read that this was all H’s idea to leave .

I believe both of them collaborated. The part apart Harry reading online comments & the details of the summit must surely have come from Harry. They both f*d up with this book. At least Omid & Caroline have made money from this situation, HaM are the biggest losers as I believe they have further burned their bridges with William and the rest of the RF.

With regard to the drone photos.. I agree that is wrong but surely they could have stopped that by publishing photos like Kate does? There would not be the same need for the paps to try to get photos if they were in charge of them

I know they say they want privacy for Archie but that didn’t stop them using him in the video for save the children - if they want privacy why did they do that?

If they do that then they can easily post a photo every few months or so to get the paps of their back (and this is because they are part of the RF and using their titles / courting publicity - obviously if they do want total privacy / stop using titles / finding then people will be happy to not hear from them)

I totally agree @ Whoknowswhatsgoingon Kate has played a blinder by taking the photos herself and releasing them at regular intervals .

Yes - clear, well-taken cheerful family photographs that show (cleverly) both what the public want to see and what W and K want to show them (us). A characteristically sensible move.

Right, so if Meghan and Harry didn't specifically cooperate with this book, but people close to them did, they should be able to work out from the anecdotes given pretty much who gave the quotes

It's a bit like working out where folk were sitting to find out who nicked the teaspoons isn't it?

Bit like the People magazine fiasco really. So how come they're taking legal action regarding one, but not the other? Presumably they like the narrative that's being spun on this one

They probably do like the narrative right now, but the book's reception is as yet largely unknown. Should it be poor or felt to reflect badly on them, a lawsuit will no doubt follow pretty sharpish, full of denials of their involvement

Thank you for the link to The Times although I didn’t read the full article as it was written in a much too saccharine style for me.

From some of the comments above, it’s giving me the impression the book is effectively saying H&M flounced because they didn’t feel they were considered important enough in a family that is all about hierarchy. Surely that is at odds with Harry saying he doesn’t want to be king (and I remember an interview where he said neither he nor William wanted to rule, so I do believe it)?

If H&M didn’t corroborate with the book then the authors are very presumptuous about how they knew about things like Harry’s stomach feelings when he read things.

Apparently the book repeats as true a story that had been in the papers previously, and that I had dismissed as not credible rubbish - that the Queen's failure to feature them prominently in a photo, or in footage, in her Christmas message last year was taken by them to be a calculated snub, and was a "final straw". I am genuinely astounded if that is true, and what it says about their attitude. The Queen pretty much mostly always uses her annual message to feature the continuity of her family line - her father, her mother, her heirs. Family events, like weddings and christening, are often celebrated, but she already had shown their wedding the year before, and couldn't show Archie's christening because it was private (and she wasn't there!). She has four children and eight children and I'm willing to bet other than Charles and William, they rarely feature.

@Serenster

Apparently the book repeats as true a story that had been in the papers previously, and that I had dismissed as not credible rubbish - that the Queen's failure to feature them prominently in a photo, or in footage, in her Christmas message last year was taken by them to be a calculated snub, and was a "final straw". I am genuinely astounded if that is true, and what it says about their attitude. The Queen pretty much mostly always uses her annual message to feature the continuity of her family line - her father, her mother, her heirs. Family events, like weddings and christening, are often celebrated, but she already had shown their wedding the year before, and couldn't show Archie's christening because it was private (and she wasn't there!). She has four children and eight children and I'm willing to bet other than Charles and William, they rarely feature.

Just looked it up and W, K & children as well as Charles & Camilla, parents, and PP were in background photos. Perhaps it was perceived by them as the new slimmed down monarchy and it excluded them or maybe they felt they were equally important and should be included. Perhaps HMQ really was sending them a message - has Harry typically been in background photos before?

I wouldn't necessarily feel that lends credibility to the claim, Serenster - it's just as likely that the authors scraped up all the stories they could find and flung 'em into the mix

As you say, HM features various RF members in her Christmas broadcasts and she'd already "done" H&M's wedding in 2018; if they really did get the hump over it being someone else's turn in 2019, they're more deluded than any of us thought

Commercial break: 15 stories on our heroes in the Mail and at least one Mumsnet thread lifted. They seem to have stopped quoting usernames. Has someone sued for breach of privacy????

@KrigerMalory

I believe both of them collaborated. The part apart Harry reading online comments & the details of the summit must surely have come from Harry. They both f*d up with this book. At least Omid & Caroline have made money from this situation, HaM are the biggest losers as I believe they have further burned their bridges with William and the rest of the RF.

Didn’t they threaten a ‘No holds barred’ book if they didn’t get what they wanted back at the beginning of this complete debacle? I’m sure I saw it reported it somewhere....... Quite honestly I just fervently wish they’d shut up and get in with their pared down life.

Blind Gossip ran that story about Kate not offering Meghan a lift years ago!

When all is said and done I think we may be shocked how many of their blinds regarding H&M were spot on.

I wonder who their insider is in the Sussex camp.