Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

‘Courtiers’ 2

1000 replies

RandomPenguinHouse · 30/09/2022 11:30

The last thread filled up during a particularly chatty morning.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
27
HannaHanna · 30/09/2022 14:59

LondonWolf · 30/09/2022 14:49

I agree with this totally. Thomas Markle's latest wibblings about treating her like a princess and then previously saying things like 'it's time to take care of Daddy'

I have to admit that any sympathy I felt for the man shrivelled and died when he said that. In some ways I do sympathise with M, when it comes to her family - to be about to take such a huge leap into being known world wide while knowing your family just weren't up to how you wanted to present yourself must have given her some sleepless nights. That said I think she'd have done better to just brazen it out. It comes up repeatedly that one thing people struggle with is how false and contrived her behaviour and persona appears. If she'd just shrugged and smiled and invited them to the wedding I think people would have loved her for it or at least sympathised. We all have at least one or two excruciatingly awful family members.

There is no way I would have put myself in MMs shoes by getting involved with someone in the public eye. My family is not nearly as difficult, but it would be emotionally excruciating.

WinnieTheW0rm · 30/09/2022 15:19

Maireas · 30/09/2022 14:53

Well, maybe Harry was right when he said "we're the family she's never had".
Interestingly, according to Tom Bower, Trevor Engelson said the same thing about his family when he married Meghan.

I do remember thinking at that comment that hers must be really dire if his was an improvement!

Maireas · 30/09/2022 15:22

Winnie - 😂😂😂!

Croque · 30/09/2022 15:28

She apparently lied about owning a car in which it was impossible to get in via the front doors so she had to get in via the boot every time. Friends who recall riding with her said that she never did this a single time. Perhaps it was a lie to build up an image of having been 'happy and poor' in the past. The same way in which she lied about eating at a $5 salad bar for a rare treat when she was regularly dining at Musso & Frank. The little lies don't matter so much as standalones but they accumulate quickly into a whole fake persona which is being paraded about as authentic.

Serenster · 30/09/2022 15:31

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, as looking back the decision that none of the family was to be invited just turned into a bit of a Barbra Streisand effect scenario - they all came out of the woodwork loudly protesting about not being invited, the tabloid press realised there was story here and then every man and their dog knows about the extended Markle siblings and their grievances. Maybe it would have been better to grit her teeth, invite them, and keep them as far away from the cameras as possible? We will never know.

HannaHanna · 30/09/2022 15:42

Serenster · 30/09/2022 15:31

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, as looking back the decision that none of the family was to be invited just turned into a bit of a Barbra Streisand effect scenario - they all came out of the woodwork loudly protesting about not being invited, the tabloid press realised there was story here and then every man and their dog knows about the extended Markle siblings and their grievances. Maybe it would have been better to grit her teeth, invite them, and keep them as far away from the cameras as possible? We will never know.

No good choices in this situation. Serious empathy for her around dealing with it.

smileandjoy · 30/09/2022 15:45

@TheWheeledAvenger

Interesting! I think the account of Charles is plausible. Even if I was not already aware of his alleged temper and questionable treatment of others, eyebrows would certainly have been raised on observing his recent conduct involving the ink pot and that ‘bloody’ pen.

Of course, we’re not encouraged to analyse the behaviour of other royals – the focus must remain on MM. For as the Guardian journalist Martin Belam correctly concluded: “No one ever failed to sell books by writing disparagingly about the Duchess of Sussex.”

While on the subject of royal books, do you know much about Katie Nicholl’s title, The New Royals – Queen Elizabeth’s Legacy? I have never heard of the author, which is largely because I’m not an avid reader of this type of literature, so I have little opinion about her motivations and all else that should be questioned when reading third-party accounts. However I liked her take on the disastrous tour undertaken by William and Kate to the Bahamas, Jamaica, and Belize last March. I think she was spot on. She writes:

“Had Harry, who had been assigned a prominent role as a Commonwealth ambassador on the queen’s behalf, been on the tour with Meghan, the optics might have played out differently. Sadly, the significant role Harry and Meghan were expected to play in the life of the Commonwealth—their interracial marriage emblematic of equality, diversity, and unity—was lost when they left. The royal family is an institution based on white inherited privilege. Its future lies in the hands of three white men, and that is a fundamental problem in a diverse country such as Britain and across the countries of the Commonwealth too. Meghan played a huge part in relieving some of this tension; the loss of all she represents as a biracial woman in the royal family, as well as her energy and talent, has had a real impact.”

She also makes the claim that a source revealed to her that William and Kate felt they were being forced to “up their game” following their first joint public engagement with Harry and Meghan.

But who knows? I can understand them feeling that type of pressure if true. Meghan and Harry are a formidable couple with influence. They have great appeal across the Commonwealth and among young people.

HannaHanna · 30/09/2022 15:47

Croque · 30/09/2022 15:28

She apparently lied about owning a car in which it was impossible to get in via the front doors so she had to get in via the boot every time. Friends who recall riding with her said that she never did this a single time. Perhaps it was a lie to build up an image of having been 'happy and poor' in the past. The same way in which she lied about eating at a $5 salad bar for a rare treat when she was regularly dining at Musso & Frank. The little lies don't matter so much as standalones but they accumulate quickly into a whole fake persona which is being paraded about as authentic.

Where was this published? Just curious to read it.

Biden claimed he was arrested trying to see Mandela.

www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/25/bidens-ridiculous-claim-he-was-arrested-trying-see-mandela/

Also was quite loose with facts around his family.

www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/20/bidens-claim-that-his-great-grandpop-was-coal-miner/

Bigger stakes! Didn't slow him down a bit though. I don't think anyone really cares.

Serenster · 30/09/2022 15:50

No good choices in this situation. Serious empathy for her around dealing with it.

Oh, I completely agree.

Its future lies in the hands of three white men, and that is a fundamental problem in a diverse country such as Britain and across the countries of the Commonwealth too. Meghan played a huge part in relieving some of this tension; the loss of all she represents as a biracial woman in the royal family, as well as her energy and talent, has had a real impact.

The main problem I have with this analysis is that it is premised on the assumption that Meghan actually wanted to bring her energy and talent to representing the Royal Family and the Commonwealth, and therefore would do her best to represent equality, diversity and unity. As we have seen however, this wasn’t something she was particularly interested in doing at all. She in fact valued the opportunity to earn a private income more highly. So the analysis would work better I think if it was written to represent who Meghan actually was, rather than an imaginary Meghan.

EdithWeston · 30/09/2022 15:56

Bigger stakes! Didn't slow him down a bit though. I don't think anyone really cares

Yes, I think that's what they may have been counting on, and perhaps it's a good strategy in the US. Though of course you need to aim of a bit for Biden, as the need to avoid Trump again at all costs may well have been a factor in giving him an easy ride. I never felt he had much genuine personal support, rather that he was the one who could be supported to beat Trump

But the Sussexes also have a foot in the UK, and even though the British public does not seem to be their principle target audience, it's one that they ignore at their peril.

HannaHanna · 30/09/2022 15:57

@smileandjoy I asked about this once before but don't think anyone answered. Why do you think it would it matter if H&M were indeed more popular? Given that it could never change the fact that PW is next in line, why isn't positive press for any member of the RF good?

It seems like people, particularly on MN, have creating some kind of false equivalency between H&M and W&K. Like they are football teams to be cheered on. Who started this?

HannaHanna · 30/09/2022 16:01

EdithWeston · 30/09/2022 15:56

Bigger stakes! Didn't slow him down a bit though. I don't think anyone really cares

Yes, I think that's what they may have been counting on, and perhaps it's a good strategy in the US. Though of course you need to aim of a bit for Biden, as the need to avoid Trump again at all costs may well have been a factor in giving him an easy ride. I never felt he had much genuine personal support, rather that he was the one who could be supported to beat Trump

But the Sussexes also have a foot in the UK, and even though the British public does not seem to be their principle target audience, it's one that they ignore at their peril.

I suspect people just believe themselves after telling the same stories the same way for a long time. I think think some may not even realize they have morphed the story into something not quite accurate.

jeffgoldblum · 30/09/2022 16:04

@smileandjoy , you should know that the poster you linked to will not be back to reply, they are a previously banned poster and have been banned again! . Also most of what they spouted was completely disproven rubbish!

WinnieTheW0rm · 30/09/2022 16:08

Of course, we’re not encouraged to analyse the behaviour of other royals

Feel free - there's quite a bit in the extracts from 'Courtiers' about Charles.

He does seem to be (at best) tricky at times, but his senior staff seem loyal and stay a long time in post.

HannaHanna · 30/09/2022 16:17

No one encourages me to log into this forum and discuss any of this nonsense, either. I didn't know to expect it. Will have a word with my DH.

MarshaMelrose · 30/09/2022 16:21

I think the act of writing the letter would be a more important lesson for a child than the outcome.

I agreed with you over teachers encouraging children to take action but I don't agree with this. Just writing letters without any reward would soon become discouraging and abandoned . It's achievements, no matter how small, that give constant motivation to continue.

oakleaffy · 30/09/2022 16:28

WinnieTheW0rm · 30/09/2022 12:19

MM was blogging v positively about her father until v shortly before her engagement.

I've sometimes wondered what actually happened to have caused such a precipitate and decisive breach.

I wonder if Meghan was somehow worried that her Dad would let slip a different narrative to what Meghan had told Harry?
The family she never had
The Markle family are no more dysfunctional than the Royals, after all, but maybe Meghan was trying to keep Dad at arm’s length in case he told a different story?

oakleaffy · 30/09/2022 16:38

Maireas · 30/09/2022 14:53

Well, maybe Harry was right when he said "we're the family she's never had".
Interestingly, according to Tom Bower, Trevor Engelson said the same thing about his family when he married Meghan.

Is that proven?!
History may be repeating itself.

AbcMurders · 30/09/2022 16:38

Also didn’t she stop talking to her dad cos he was doing interviews with the press? Apple didn’t fall far and all that

DFOD · 30/09/2022 16:39

What do we know about MM early childhood?

Did Doria leave her - at what age and why?

Were her older siblings also brought up with her at that time and was their another stepmother eg TM girlfriend around?

Did Doria have another relationship?

Maireas · 30/09/2022 16:41

oakleaffy · 30/09/2022 16:38

Is that proven?!
History may be repeating itself.

Well, Harry definitely said it, and it was reported that Trevor said it. I'm not sure about the burden of proof.

RandomPenguinHouse · 30/09/2022 17:40

smileandjoy · 30/09/2022 15:45

@TheWheeledAvenger

Interesting! I think the account of Charles is plausible. Even if I was not already aware of his alleged temper and questionable treatment of others, eyebrows would certainly have been raised on observing his recent conduct involving the ink pot and that ‘bloody’ pen.

Of course, we’re not encouraged to analyse the behaviour of other royals – the focus must remain on MM. For as the Guardian journalist Martin Belam correctly concluded: “No one ever failed to sell books by writing disparagingly about the Duchess of Sussex.”

While on the subject of royal books, do you know much about Katie Nicholl’s title, The New Royals – Queen Elizabeth’s Legacy? I have never heard of the author, which is largely because I’m not an avid reader of this type of literature, so I have little opinion about her motivations and all else that should be questioned when reading third-party accounts. However I liked her take on the disastrous tour undertaken by William and Kate to the Bahamas, Jamaica, and Belize last March. I think she was spot on. She writes:

“Had Harry, who had been assigned a prominent role as a Commonwealth ambassador on the queen’s behalf, been on the tour with Meghan, the optics might have played out differently. Sadly, the significant role Harry and Meghan were expected to play in the life of the Commonwealth—their interracial marriage emblematic of equality, diversity, and unity—was lost when they left. The royal family is an institution based on white inherited privilege. Its future lies in the hands of three white men, and that is a fundamental problem in a diverse country such as Britain and across the countries of the Commonwealth too. Meghan played a huge part in relieving some of this tension; the loss of all she represents as a biracial woman in the royal family, as well as her energy and talent, has had a real impact.”

She also makes the claim that a source revealed to her that William and Kate felt they were being forced to “up their game” following their first joint public engagement with Harry and Meghan.

But who knows? I can understand them feeling that type of pressure if true. Meghan and Harry are a formidable couple with influence. They have great appeal across the Commonwealth and among young people.

Just in case you don’t know, you’re not going to get a response from TheWheeledAvenger because MNHQ banned her this morning apparently for being a previously banned poster.

As she’s banned, MNHQ clearly don’t think she was posting ‘in the spirit of the site’ so that undermines her points on the last thread. It was clear though she was talking some bollocks.

As for what you say here: I strongly suspect that William & Catherine were forced to raise their game due after their first joint appearance with Harry & Meghan. Meghan had/has a confidence, articulacy and interest in public speaking on stage that Catherine is unlikely to ever have to the same degree. Plus Harry and Meghan were more glamorous with her being an American actress.

OP posts:
Farmageddon · 30/09/2022 19:29

Its future lies in the hands of three white men, and that is a fundamental problem in a diverse country such as Britain and across the countries of the Commonwealth too.

Sorry, not sure who posted this originally but it really bugs me: we're not talking about the UN here, or political parties - it's a family who happened to have sons next in line all of whom are white. It's not something to just pick and choose.

They are also incredibly privileged and wealthy, how exactly does that represent the average member of the Commonwealth anyway? Are we really expecting them to shoehorn an overweight disabled lesbian in there or something just to show some diversity? So weird.

Like the people complaining that there won't be another Queen for many years - it's not a popularity contest, they are direct lineal descendants. It's not William or George's fault that they are not women.

Rant over.

Likewhatever · 30/09/2022 19:29

@smileandjoy Katie Nicholl is a royal commentator who regularly features on British television and in written media. If you like her style and perspective, you might find what she has to say about the Sussexes illuminating.

Jibbajabba1 · 30/09/2022 19:38

@Farmageddon
agree!

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread