'Courtiers' by Valentine Low

[RandomPenguinHouse]

Extracts of this were being discussed on a previous thread ('The Times) which just finished.

I'm interested in buying this book, despite never having ever bought any other book about the Royal Family and never having watched The Crown.

I'm interested however in the archaic rituals of the Royal Court and how it works as an employer, and also how the courtiers advise.

Yes the excerpts were focused on Harry and Meghan but presumably that's just for clicks given the relevant timing, and that the book goes well beyond that.

Poignant that in the synopsis for it on The Foyles website it says:

The Queen, after a remarkable 70 years of service, is entering the final seasons of her reign without her husband Philip to guide her. Meanwhile, Charles seeks to define what his future as King will be, with his court wielding ever greater influence as he plans for his imminent accession.

www.foyles.co.uk/witem/biography/courtiers,valentine-low-9781472290908

Anyone else thinking of buying this?

We don't know the late Queen's cause of death - yet (George VI's death certificate was published, but I don't know how long after his demise that happened)

And it's of course perfectly possible to have both a longer term, intermittently debilitating condition (that you are expected to die with not die of) and also have an acute issue suddenly carrying you off.

For example - and this is just a hypothesis - she had covid in April, and there's quite a body of evidence to show elevated risk of stroke (in all age groups) for at least 6 months after infection (even if symptoms mild)

So I think it's perfectly possible that someone in the family could know about a putative chronic/slow-moving adverse diagnosis (possibly made/confirmed during the October 21 hospitalisation) but still be taken unawares if there was an additional acute issue

I don't have time now to read the 100+ posts that I've missed but I see a post quoted just above that I want to respond to.

I do not believe the stories of Tom Bower, Angela Levin, the Colin Campbell woman or indeed Valentine Low about Meghan because the sources they cite are always "anonymous" "palace sources".

As I said in the OP @MrsMaxDeWinter , I haven't read any other books about the royal family. Nor do I follow Lady Campbell, I only know her name from here.

However Valentine Low and this book is different IMO. And just not because its got both a specific (courtiers) and wider (all of them) remit, which interests me. He name checks so many people that even if many of his quotes are then anon, it's clear he's certain and his quotes can stand up in court should it get to that. Why set yourself up by saying Sarah Latham, Marnie somebody and Sam Cohen were core members of the 'Sussex Survivors Club' if not true? Because by naming them you're giving lawyers an easy access to people to ask if its true. If they say no, then there's potential libel suits by both the people named and H&M.

Personally I'm not really interested in Harry's book in a similar way I'm not interested in other books that have been written. However what does interest me is how specific in terms of details and facts it will be. It is naturally a different kettle of fish in that its opinion rather than reported accounts from a variety of sources.

This is a thread to discuss the book. All we know of the specific content in the book is what's in the excerpts published in The Times. The majority of that content focused on M&H. Of course anyone is welcome to join in and discuss but - and this is to everyone - that can be done without personal attacks or making snide comments about 'these threads' or 'posters like you', surely.

I think it is realistic to assume that anyone who reaches the age of 96 has cancer of some form that at best they are receiving palliative care for. Most at this age probably won't know they have it. I imagine with the level of care the Queen receives it would have been known.

It does sound though that something acute happened that they were not anticipating.

Yes Moss I absolutely believe something acute and unexpected happen.

This is a thread to discuss the book. All we know of the specific content in the book is what's in the excerpts published in The Times. The majority of that content focused on M&H. Of course anyone is welcome to join in and discuss but - and this is to everyone - that can be done without personal attacks or making snide comments about 'these threads' or 'posters like you', surely.

The thread may have been triggered by the book, but the posts are the same old recycled pattern of bash, bash, bash, and the drip, drip of poisonous speculation. There have been many, many threads bashing Meghan and this one fits right in with those.

There has been speculation about them divorcing, including a post that speculates that she will dump Harry for someone with "more money and clout". One poster has said she will "send rings through the post" a recycled slur that not even her former husband has confirmed.

I have even pushed back on a completely fabricated post that Meghan was ignored at Philip's funeral when Meghan wasn't even there.

Posters here have been talking with authority about how Harry is in a controlling relationship, he is unhappy in his marriage etc, the RF will welcome him when Meghan is off the scene etc. What on earth has that to do with the Courtiers book?

Posters on these threads are happy to seize on anything to bash Meghan. It's just an endless stream of bile.

@MrsMaxDeWinter

How do you feel about MM lying to the courts ? Or is that part of conspiracy too

stay safe Puzzledandpissedoff

Thank you, queenofarles The hurricane's hitting today, but as usual the media are making much more of it than there is. It's pretty lively out there but we're all alive so far!!

At least being stuck in the house gave me time to read through the links - a bit too light on named sources for my taste, but also noticeable that there's been no comment from those in a position to contradict (and as with Bower's book, no apparent impending lawsuit)

It occurs to me that two recent hatchet jobs could prrovide Harry with even more impetus to release his own; time will tell, but overall I really don't see this ending well

I have to say there is no one I can think of that I think is perfect and infallible in every way - not a celeb or a royal or in my family. If my DH says something stupid, and my best friend comments, if it was stupid, then I don’t display any defence of it much. Or my DC are being foul, I couldn’t agree more usually. Doesn’t mean they’re foul all the time.

So I’m always struck by the slavish devotion of a few who thrash at their keyboard to persuade us they think MM can do no wrong. I would have to be paid to write stuff like that about a stranger. She is not perfect. No one is.

Posters who can honestly perceive why the Sussexes have been criticised and admit they are either ignoring good advice or receiving bad, but support them anyway is fair enough.
the ones who say “but what about X! What about Y! LOOK OVER THERE!” are the ones I scroll by now as they’re not contributing anything balanced or of value to the discussion of very polarising public figures.

Hear Hear!!

People like this are inadvertently damaging MM reputation with their rigid polarised thinking and expression - because when it’s so jarring others shift perspective to create balance rather than in other a give and take discussions people move more intelligently towards the centre ground.

@DuchessOfPort you have hit the nail on the head. Is something weird about the slavish, almost robotic devotion. There are both good and bad points to everyone.

It is almost like paid PR daleks come to exterminate anything remotely negative

One aspect that I found interesting was how the household of Charles (then PoW) were also dealing with a demanding and sometimes mercurial boss. But in the main, he seems to have inspired loyalty, with senior staff staying a long time in their posts

The thread may have been triggered by the book, but the posts are the same old recycled pattern of bash, bash, bash, and the drip, drip of poisonous speculation. There have been many, many threads bashing Meghan and this one fits right in with those.

Your choice to view it that way @MrsMaxDeWinter No one can stop you doing that, clearly. But you might want to think about how your comments are their own poison, that you're dripping onto the thread.

There has been speculation about them divorcing, including a post that speculates that she will dump Harry for someone with "more money and clout".

So? Speculation about divorce happens to most royal and celebrity couples.
There's going to be the odd post with a take you don't agree with. It's a discussion board. FWIW, I don't think she'll 'dump' Harry for someone with more money and clout.

One poster has said she will "send rings through the post" a recycled slur that not even her former husband has confirmed.

Bit of a snide, unclassy comment, we've all made 'em (including you on this thread), but getting outraged about that is ridiculous. It's not a slur when it's a comment hat has been made for years pre Harry and has never been disproved. Her ex may have never confirmed it, but he hasn't denied it either. I heard that he apparently may be writing a book himself? I can't remember where I saw or heard that so don't know how true it is. But if it is, maybe we'll know about the postal rings once and for all.

I have even pushed back on a completely fabricated post that Meghan was ignored at Philip's funeral when Meghan wasn't even there.

By pushing back I presume you correcting the poster? Good for you. But you know, completely fabricated may mean someone mis-remembered or got confused rather than wilfully made it up. And the statement 'Meghan was ignored at Philip's funeral' reflects potentially badly on the people doing the ignoring, not Meghan, at least that's how I read it.

Posters here have been talking with authority about how Harry is in a controlling relationship, he is unhappy in his marriage etc, the RF will welcome him when Meghan is off the scene etc. What on earth has that to do with the Courtiers book?

Well the Courtiers book extracts revealed that Harry was scared Meghan was dumped him and he he felt pressured by her into making a statement, so I can see how the talk led from that even though I don't really believe it myself. Yes some of the convo doesn't directly relate to the Courtiers book, including the recent discussion about the timing of the Queen's death. That's MN threads specifically and discussion threads generally unfortunately

Please show me where someone said the RF will welcome him when Meghan is off the scene. I've skimmed back a bit, think I know the comment you mean, and they weren't saying that. You've twisted it.

Posters on these threads are happy to seize on anything to bash Meghan. It's just an endless stream of bile.

Now you're being out of order. It's clearly not an endless stream of bile. There's been a lot of measured discussion and talk about other people and events too.

And there is no 'these threads' don't be perjorative. If every thread that is related to Meghan and Harry includes negative discussion about them, well then that's hardly a surprise is it given the content that comes out about them, what they say themselves, and human nature being such that you are never going to get everyone liking the same people at the same time.

Criticise individual posts, not the entire thread.

I agree with what DFOD has said about this last year but The Queen was in apparently good health before Prince Philip died and H&Ms plans and priorities were set in place before that and may not have taken onto account that there was so little time left for the Queen.

And you know I don't think anyone here 'hates' either H&M - to me they are just fascinating and the drama that surrounds them is fascinating. I actually think they like the controversy because they actively fuel it with the interviews and media they do.

They could easily stop all of attention by becoming beige - a bit like the Wessexes. We don't gossip about them because they don't do or say anything gossip worthy. If Sophie suddenly did an interview with The Cut making underhand remarks about Anne we would gossip about that too.

Maybe we should have an alert system - like a safe word - some emojis

🚞♟🦆💩

Moss now I want Allison P Davis to do an interview with Sophie too

Let's not forget that it was Harry who had a direct comment about his family - not being able to work together - in The Cut interview.

I loved Suits, well before her relationship with Harry, and thought Meghan was absolutely stunning and gorgeous and loved how energetic and interested in the world she seemed as a person. I found it fascinating when she and Harry hooked up. They absolutely brought the glamour and a renewed interest in the RF for me.

I have been critical of some of Meghan's statements, particularly in The Cut interview as I discussed above.

However, there is no question that the tirade of hate against her is really really disturbing. Why is she the only member of the Royal Family who attracts this level of vitriol on Mumsnet? And don't say it is because of" bullying" or "lying in court" because this started long before that. I have explained before that back in 2017, when the engagement was announced and she was being discussed here, I actually wrote to Mumsnet to ask then to take a look at the many, many threads because I was disturbed by the racist undertones in the vitriolic attacks, and this is even BEFORE they were married.

I would love it if Meghan's critics could even just acknowledge that the media interest in this woman, and the level of hate that has come her way is completely over the top, and is an example of the kind of vitriol spewed against black women for daring to get "above themselves".

That yes she may have misfired on more than a few occasions, but the way she is now a punchbag, here and elsewhere is not justified by anything she may have done. Even the Queen's funeral ended up being about Meghan and Harry, every bloody day there was some Meghan story that was lapped up and dissected eagerly here.

The attention the Meghan bashers give her is completely disproportionate, particularly as so many of them are keen to say how irrelevant and unimportant she is.

That is very true.
The snippets are coming across as he works hard, bit of a workaholic, stresses about stuff has a rant and a rave at something then calm down.
But generally he can't be a bad person to work for.

I think that they throw open the debate to wider generic stuff to derail from discussion on this weeks evidence which is excruciating for them to engage with.

I would love it if Meghan's critics could even just acknowledge that the media interest in this woman, and the level of hate that has come her way is completely over the top, and is an example of the kind of vitriol spewed against black women for daring to get "above themselves".

I don't objectively qualify as a 'Meghan critic' but as the OP of this thread that's being maligned I'll say that I did exactly that ^ above on The Times thread.

I don't regard Meghan as 'black' per se as I go by how she regards herself: biracial. By her own words, she has even been viewed by some as 'white passing'. I think that a woman who had a much darker skin tone would unfortunately have had an even tougher time from some parts of the media and racists.

However it's also true that much of the media interest and interest generally is because Meghan is (a) American, (b) a former actress, (c) a former Instagram influencer. Those qualities absolutely made a huge difference to how much interest there was in her and the ability to create critical press. That would have happened even if she was white.

and thought Meghan was absolutely stunning and gorgeous and loved how energetic and interested in the world she seemed as a person. I found it fascinating when she and Harry hooked up. They absolutely brought the glamour and a renewed interest in the RF for me.

Me too. I know we shouldn’t compare them but tbh I thought she really showed Kate up when they did stuff all together. She was just so straight in there and could seemingly talk articulately off the cuff. I’m not really bothered about the future of the royal family but I thought she could really bring a modern side to it all.

Meghan isn't a one dimensional character though but a complex and - in my mind - interesting character.

Like many, I initially saw the smiley glamour and wanted happy endings. The racism in the press appalled me. As time has gone on though, it's obvious that both M & H have made mistakes and their whilst life might be extravagant and comfortable, it's no fairy tale.

It's no wonder the RF don't trust them not to leak anything they are told, but Meghan looked scared to me at the funeral and yes, I find it interesting to read what might have led to it. So judge me. The book is illustrative not only of how she treats staff but also how catastrophically mismatched her expectations were.

What would any of us say to her if we were her friends right now? We'd probably want to tell her to run for the hills whilst knowing she can't do that.

I should add that I've also seen posters on here who may qualify as 'Meghan critics' state that she undoubtedly received racist abuse.

To suggest no one on here agrees with that is demonstrably untrue.

Anyway, the excerpts from the book were damning of both Meghan and Harry, whilst also creating a fairly balanced picture. There were positive things said about both in the excerpts. But overall the book is about the courtiers, and it is absolutely irrefutable IMO that the courtiers working for Harry and Meghan had a tumultuous time, regardless of the exact reasons.

I have been accused of being Meghan, and now I am a PR Dalek. And@DFOD wants to create a secret code for when critical posts like mine show up.

So I am not allowed to have my own individual take on the matter, but must be told what to think?

Why is it so important that everyone agree to bash Meghan? Why do you make snide comments about posters who don't agree that Meghan is the Devil Incarnate? Rousette was pretty much harassed off a previous thread.

You seem to want to have a closed circle. Fine, have at it, but could I ask that if I or others start a thread that focuses on things we like about her, or that discusses her next Podcast without throwing stones, could I please ask that you leave us to it, and we, in turn will leave you to it.

Thanks.