Page 37 | 'Courtiers' by Valentine Low

RandomPenguinHouse · 2022-09-27T09:09:21+00:00

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.^ https://www.foyles.co.uk/witem/biography/courtiers,valentine-low-9781472290908 Anyone else thinking of buying this?

Cuck00soup · 30/09/2022 08:14

I find it fascinating that the contributions from those on Pacific Standard Time are so keen to repeat well worn allegations about other members of the RF whilst minimising the behaviour of H & M.

FWIW I'm fairly certain I wouldn't enjoy working for any of them, from Andrew's rants about his teddy bear collection to Charles' tantrum's (however short-lived), but I don't understand why people are denying that H&M treated their staff abominably.

Looking forward to reading the rest of the book.

oakleaffy · 30/09/2022 08:16

DuchessOfPort · 29/09/2022 22:21

Next Thursday.

this is a good article - I’m not a habitual Spectator reader but it made me laugh.

www.spectator.co.uk/article/inside-meghan-markle-s-hollywood-flop

@DuchessOfPort
The Spectator article is observant and truthful
Hits the nail on the head again and again.

Thank you so much for sharing/ linking.

Serenster · 30/09/2022 08:22

The staff were devastated and in tears when they left, and the Sussexes had had a teary farewell lunch for their staff.

On this point, because I have considerable experience of workplace bullying, people abusing their position are seldom vile to everybody (generally, that’s incredibly counter-productive, as if you have no loyal team members you tend to get found out very quickly!). Anyway, in teams with high turnovers what the bully often does is go on a complete charm offensive with a new joiner (“Oh, I am so glad I finally have you in my team! I am so pleased to have someone as good as you! We are going to do such great things together! You can’t imagine what I’ve had to put up with before now…!”) which lasts until the bully can assess whether the new joiner will be a victim or not. And then they tend to play favourites very heavily in their team, because that’s the easy way to make someone feel excluded. If you’re one of the favourites, everything is rosy.

I’m not saying this is what happened here, I’m just saying this is incredibly common to see in workplace bullying situations.

Also - people working in high pressure environments as the Palace obviously is (low pay, long hours etc) tend to pull together because a strong sense of loyalty to the job/mission/team is what gets you through the grind. People don’t give up highly paid private sector jobs to work at the palace for the money. They do it because they are very engaged with their roles, they get a thrill from being in the room where the things they see on the TV happen, where they get incredible access to movers and shakers across all sectors. So I am not remote surprised that staff who had worked very hard for Meghan and Harry and utterly believed in them as forces for good were devastated when they left. That doesn’t mean they didn’t also treat some staff horrendously.

(Also, they were about to be made redundant in many cases!)

oakleaffy · 30/09/2022 08:23

DFOD · 29/09/2022 22:41

Well if this is what happened then KC etc only have themselves to blame - as they rewarded bad behaviour by wasting time and negotiating.

With high conflict individuals you need to be very boundaried.

You give an instruction, a clear deadline and an immediate consequence. Less words. Just actions.

But it seems that has been the pattern of failing throughout - giving difficult characters too much credibility and rope - when in fact to manage them you should give them less slack not more.

It seems from the excerpts making H happy was their futile aim that was inadvertently allowing him to treat others in a shocking way. Like bad indulgent parenting.

Show quote history

The plane should have taken off, no fannying about with arguments, if time was of the essence.
One gets the feeling that Harry has been indulged and spoiled by Charles, certainly since Diana’s death.
Firmer boundaries would have been better for everyone.

DuchessOfPort · 30/09/2022 08:24

Serenster · 30/09/2022 08:11

Why do Valentine Low, Angela Levin, etc, have a greater right to sell stories about the Royal Family than people who have actually lived in that family? Do you honestly not see the hypocrisy? Others can make money off Harry and Meghan's lives, but they can't make money out of their own lives?

From a straightforward consideration of economics and legal rights, they do of course have the right to make money from whatever means are legally open to them.

We don’t live in a vacuum however, and so Harry and Meghan’s life in the Royal Family was all conducted in a context that would have been well understood by them. That, given the huge media interest in all aspects of the senior Royal lives, privacy and loyalty were highly valued. That they were trusted with a great deal of confidential and private information because they were members of a close family and were taken to understand that along with this trust came the responsibility to respect their family and keep that trust.

No-one has stopped them from saying anything, you’ll note - as Meghan famously just said - she hasn’t signed anything. She has her diary of her time in the Royal Family - she can say anything, she tells us. And they both know that the Palace is unlikely to get into an undignified wrangle with them because the Palace has its own image to consider. And they can rely - or thought they could rely - on the fact that the Palace staff were gagged and couldn’t refute their stories (though, as we now know, those NDAs aren’t quite as powerful as the couple may have expected).

Anywhere - where we get to is that Meghan and Harry have taken several opportunities to air the royal family’s internal goings on in public. And it’s also very likely those accounts have been embroidered, spun, and in some cases perhaps outright made up to support Meghan and Harry’s narrative. They have smeared private individuals by name, knowing they can’t fight back. They have inserted barbs into most of their media activities since leaving. And it seems they intend to ramp this up.

No-one is stopping them doing that, as I said. What they, or anyone else, doesn’t get to do however is insist that people don’t form their own opinions of their behaviour. Don’t judge them for selling out their family’s trust to secure their own financial future. Don’t form a poor opinion of them because they are abusing their position as formerly loved family members with access to everything and everyone to now use that position or their personal profit. Don’t think the Royal Family’s now freezing them out utterly is exactly the treatment their behaviour has made inevitable. Let’s face it, if the Palace had thought this was on the cards they would have been on the shortest of leashes from the very beginning.

So I don’t think their situation is remotely comparable to the external parties who pull together what they can from open source information, or those with inside knowledge who they hey can persuade to talk to them. They are not breaching any personal obligations themselves in doin so, unlike Meghan and Harry. They are not the ones demonstrating a serious lack of a moral compass.

beautifully articulated.

MrsMaxDeWinter · 30/09/2022 08:25

@Serenster

Thanks so much for the thoughtful and extremely well considered post. You have given me much to reflect on.

I think though that this applies to just about anyone who wants to talk about heir life in ways that may betray their parents sisters etc, and here is where H and M are in an invidious position. They were part of an institution, and they were also part of the family at the heart of that institution.

There are clearly things about that institution that just didn't work, either for them, or for those who have come before them. Charles for instance spoke with bitterness about how he was raised, and the school chosen for him. That was a decision made at the level of both the institution and the family. And of course we remember Diana's anger at both her husband and the courtiers.

The never complain and never explain mantra simply does not work, in all circumstances, particularly when someone is facing a barrage of untrue and malicious reporting that they believe is rooted in racism. H and M will have felt that both the family and the institution were not helpful would have been hurt deeply. And then seeing family members cosying up to Daily Mail and Angela Levin types would have been wounding.

I believe that H and M feel they need to speak out to counter the negative narrative. Of course, countering the narrative breaches family loyalty. But they likely feel that the family has not been that loyal to them. I think that Jason Knauf's role must have been particularly angering, especially as he is widely believed to be close to the person who leaked their plans to Dan Wootton at the Sun. To then see Jason promoted and rewarded would have sent them over the edge. From that perspective, while I agree that that some of the interviews have been unwise and shown poor judgement, I can understand the all too human instinct to explain themselves.

Readinginthesun · 30/09/2022 08:30

@Serenster i do appreciate and enjoy your balanced posts.

Someone up thread said they had read the book Courtiers. Can I ask where they obtained an advance copy ?

SilverLiningPlaybook · 30/09/2022 08:32

You can get it on Kindle

Maireas · 30/09/2022 08:35

@MrsMaxDeWinter - you make some valid points, but I do want to pick you up on the oft quoted "chimpanzee" (shudder) image.
This wasn't used by "journalists", nor even liked in the gutter press. It was an offensive social media post by Danny Baker, who quite rightly was vilified and lost his job.
I'm no fan of the tabloids, but can find no evidence that they used that "joke" to be offensive about the baby.

MrsMaxDeWinter · 30/09/2022 08:39

@Maireas thanks so much for the kind words, and yes, it was Danny Baker, and then it made the papers, but I was putting myself in the frame of mind of H and M who seem to have a siege mentality about the media: "if our baby is being mocked as a chimp, we may as well talk only to those we trust" etc. etc.

DuchessOfPort · 30/09/2022 08:40

The sad fact is - and I do genuinely think that the papers like the Mail are basically trolling the Sussexes - that if you stop providing the material for them, the novelty wears off.

So I can see from that it would be almost impossible to resist wanting to put your story (“your truth” to pinch an irritating phrase that seems to have worked its way into the vernacular of the less honest) but the more you do it, the more you feed the beast.

And that is why Camilla, Kate, Sophie and even Fergie are all just getting on with their lives with not too much trouble. Even bloody Andrew is!! Unbelievably he is just riding in the mornings, has the corgis and pottering around at home NOT being lambasted. Because he’s not allowed to say a word!The palace KNOWS that the most effective response is nothing at all. They probably just chunter away quietly to each other. Doesn’t make it right but it’s true.

SilverLiningPlaybook · 30/09/2022 08:41

RandomPenguinHouse · 30/09/2022 00:07

I said the same earlier in the thread. I suspect the book may not go too closely there for legal reasons.

Show quote history

Also presumably staff working for M and H didn’t cross paths that often with Andrew. Completely different households.

Ohnonevermind · 30/09/2022 08:42

This book has highlighted bullying behaviour by Meghan Markle.

The evidence that the households were split is pretty damning (I’ve had experience of this exact response) and the sheer volume of people in a relatively short time.

I’m sure the tears were turned on as she was the real victim of course. She’s

SilverLiningPlaybook · 30/09/2022 08:43

DuchessOfPort · 29/09/2022 22:21

Next Thursday.

this is a good article - I’m not a habitual Spectator reader but it made me laugh.

www.spectator.co.uk/article/inside-meghan-markle-s-hollywood-flop

Great article and absolutely spot on.

StormzyinaTCup · 30/09/2022 08:44

And they can rely - or thought they could rely - on the fact that the Palace staff were gagged and couldn’t refute their stories (though, as we now know, those NDAs aren’t quite as powerful as the couple may have expected).

Excellent post Serenster but this bit especially. They were banking on the 'never complain never explain' that has stood for many, many years. They can freely say what they like knowing the other party has no right to reply. Unfortunately, that has unravelled with the book and the Queens funeral and we are seeing a big 'oh shit' row back with the both PH book and possibly editing of the Netflix series. Of course they will say it's out of compassion for the Queen but I'm not buying that, it's all about damage limitation now for the couple who are trying to build a business model on compassion, charity and philanthropy. They have been focussed on themselves as the victims and going after what they think they are entitled to by fair means or foul with no regard for anyone else. They have now had a wake up call. It will be very interesting to see what develops next.

Maireas · 30/09/2022 08:44

Oh, I do see what you mean, @MrsMaxDeWinter , contextually. I think it was in The Cut interview that she said that the British press had referred to her child by the N word.
Again, no evidence, and it would certainly would have been shocking had it happened.
I think that saying that, and repeating the chimp story as more mainstream perhaps are the loci for their grievances. However, I think that these claims are so easily challenged (same with the school paps, or the Mandela story) that it just undermines credibility.

Gilmorehill · 30/09/2022 08:49

Serenster · 30/09/2022 08:11

Why do Valentine Low, Angela Levin, etc, have a greater right to sell stories about the Royal Family than people who have actually lived in that family? Do you honestly not see the hypocrisy? Others can make money off Harry and Meghan's lives, but they can't make money out of their own lives?

From a straightforward consideration of economics and legal rights, they do of course have the right to make money from whatever means are legally open to them.

We don’t live in a vacuum however, and so Harry and Meghan’s life in the Royal Family was all conducted in a context that would have been well understood by them. That, given the huge media interest in all aspects of the senior Royal lives, privacy and loyalty were highly valued. That they were trusted with a great deal of confidential and private information because they were members of a close family and were taken to understand that along with this trust came the responsibility to respect their family and keep that trust.

No-one has stopped them from saying anything, you’ll note - as Meghan famously just said - she hasn’t signed anything. She has her diary of her time in the Royal Family - she can say anything, she tells us. And they both know that the Palace is unlikely to get into an undignified wrangle with them because the Palace has its own image to consider. And they can rely - or thought they could rely - on the fact that the Palace staff were gagged and couldn’t refute their stories (though, as we now know, those NDAs aren’t quite as powerful as the couple may have expected).

Anywhere - where we get to is that Meghan and Harry have taken several opportunities to air the royal family’s internal goings on in public. And it’s also very likely those accounts have been embroidered, spun, and in some cases perhaps outright made up to support Meghan and Harry’s narrative. They have smeared private individuals by name, knowing they can’t fight back. They have inserted barbs into most of their media activities since leaving. And it seems they intend to ramp this up.

No-one is stopping them doing that, as I said. What they, or anyone else, doesn’t get to do however is insist that people don’t form their own opinions of their behaviour. Don’t judge them for selling out their family’s trust to secure their own financial future. Don’t form a poor opinion of them because they are abusing their position as formerly loved family members with access to everything and everyone to now use that position or their personal profit. Don’t think the Royal Family’s now freezing them out utterly is exactly the treatment their behaviour has made inevitable. Let’s face it, if the Palace had thought this was on the cards they would have been on the shortest of leashes from the very beginning.

So I don’t think their situation is remotely comparable to the external parties who pull together what they can from open source information, or those with inside knowledge who they hey can persuade to talk to them. They are not breaching any personal obligations themselves in doin so, unlike Meghan and Harry. They are not the ones demonstrating a serious lack of a moral compass.

Excellent post.

MissMarpleRocks · 30/09/2022 08:51

SilverLiningPlaybook · 30/09/2022 08:32

You can get it on Kindle

My kindle says it will be downloaded on 6th October.

I’m so looking forward to reading what the book says about Andrew.

More. Than. Anything.

MissMarpleRocks · 30/09/2022 08:51

Excellent & well articulated post @Serenster

Rapidtango · 30/09/2022 08:53

Also remembering that Harry and Megham purportedly moved to the US to escape hounding by media, but all they've done since their 'escape', is feed the media maw. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to act as they are doing and then complain of being vilified. And let's face it, without the Royal family connection, no-one would be interested in them AT ALL - they'd be Hazzer and Megs, a lot poorer financially, the neighbours from down the street - she's an actress and he's, well, not sure what he is - but he takes the kids to school and has a chat at the school gates.

oakleaffy · 30/09/2022 08:56

MarshaMelrose · 30/09/2022 03:37

(Charles) ripped the sink right out of the wall just to find it.

I find that very impressive, actually. I once dropped a contact lens down the drain and had to undo the u bend. I wouldn't have have had the strength to pull the sink away. There must be a lot of muscles going on under those well-cut suits. And he did it himself rather than instructing someone else. So, strong and self-reliant and thoughtful.

I too thought “ How on Earth could Charles have physically done that?
Presumably water would be spurting arterially all over the room as well, destroying the room-
Sinks usually are anchored heavily to the wall, especially in older properties that Charles frequents.

Assume the jewellery went down the plug hole, in which case a plumber would need to be called to dissect the U bend.

SilverLiningPlaybook · 30/09/2022 08:58

MissMarpleRocks · 30/09/2022 08:51

My kindle says it will be downloaded on 6th October.

I’m so looking forward to reading what the book says about Andrew.

More. Than. Anything.

Show quote history

Oh sorry. I had a quick look at one point and thought it was available now.

Maireas · 30/09/2022 09:00

@oakleaffy - sounds exaggerated to me. I'm sure he got irritated but they'll have people on call for emergency plumbing and jewellery related incidents.

MrsMaxDeWinter · 30/09/2022 09:00

DuchessOfPort · 30/09/2022 08:40

The sad fact is - and I do genuinely think that the papers like the Mail are basically trolling the Sussexes - that if you stop providing the material for them, the novelty wears off.

So I can see from that it would be almost impossible to resist wanting to put your story (“your truth” to pinch an irritating phrase that seems to have worked its way into the vernacular of the less honest) but the more you do it, the more you feed the beast.

And that is why Camilla, Kate, Sophie and even Fergie are all just getting on with their lives with not too much trouble. Even bloody Andrew is!! Unbelievably he is just riding in the mornings, has the corgis and pottering around at home NOT being lambasted. Because he’s not allowed to say a word!The palace KNOWS that the most effective response is nothing at all. They probably just chunter away quietly to each other. Doesn’t make it right but it’s true.

I agree with you that ignoring trolling often works, and has worked for other members of the family. But H and M have made it a mission to take on the media, "countering disinformation" is one of the things they sponsor in their philanthropy work. Their communication strategy appears to be threefold:

*Suing the papers where winning is guaranteed (so they sued over the privacy matter as there was an incontestable breach, or over the Harry ignored the military story which was demonstrably false) but they are not foolish enough to sue over books and stories based on "unnamed sources" eg Tom Bower's book.

*Speaking for themselves through their own statements and well placed interviews.

*Ignoring the more batshit elements, and simply countering these without directly countering them e.g, Meghan talking about her long friendship with Serena was much more effective than suing Bower for saying they were acquaintances.

I wish they would do more of the last than the first two. That said, even if they were to remain quiet for the rest of their lives, the tabloids are clearly out for blood. The Queen's funeral was a perfect example of how even when they maintained a low profile, the tabloids still put them front and centre, and then blamed the funeral for "making it about them"!

SilverLiningPlaybook · 30/09/2022 09:00

Serenster · 30/09/2022 08:22

The staff were devastated and in tears when they left, and the Sussexes had had a teary farewell lunch for their staff.

On this point, because I have considerable experience of workplace bullying, people abusing their position are seldom vile to everybody (generally, that’s incredibly counter-productive, as if you have no loyal team members you tend to get found out very quickly!). Anyway, in teams with high turnovers what the bully often does is go on a complete charm offensive with a new joiner (“Oh, I am so glad I finally have you in my team! I am so pleased to have someone as good as you! We are going to do such great things together! You can’t imagine what I’ve had to put up with before now…!”) which lasts until the bully can assess whether the new joiner will be a victim or not. And then they tend to play favourites very heavily in their team, because that’s the easy way to make someone feel excluded. If you’re one of the favourites, everything is rosy.

I’m not saying this is what happened here, I’m just saying this is incredibly common to see in workplace bullying situations.

Also - people working in high pressure environments as the Palace obviously is (low pay, long hours etc) tend to pull together because a strong sense of loyalty to the job/mission/team is what gets you through the grind. People don’t give up highly paid private sector jobs to work at the palace for the money. They do it because they are very engaged with their roles, they get a thrill from being in the room where the things they see on the TV happen, where they get incredible access to movers and shakers across all sectors. So I am not remote surprised that staff who had worked very hard for Meghan and Harry and utterly believed in them as forces for good were devastated when they left. That doesn’t mean they didn’t also treat some staff horrendously.

(Also, they were about to be made redundant in many cases!)

Brilliant post as usual @Serenster