Harry and Camilla and Charles and Andrew: Some Questions

[MrsMaxDeWinter]

I am reading that Charles will not invite Harry to the coronation if he criticises Camilla in his upcoming memoir.

There is also commentary that Harry's memoir will be damaging to the Royal Family. Most of the commentary is around fear of what he will say about Camilla.

I am struggling to understand what Harry could say that is more damaging about Charles and Camilla than we already know. The admitted adultery, the divorce, the whole ghastly Tampongate leaks happened, and they are now King and Queen.

Andrew paid out millions to put out fire on a sex scandal involving a minor and Epstein.

And recently, a biography of Camilla by Angela Levin has, I am informed, a whole chapter that seems gratuitous as it is extremely critical of Harry. Angela Levin has suggested that friends of Camilla cooperated with her on the book with her knowledge.

So why is Harry allowed to be criticised in a book about Camilla that appears to have her blessing, but he is not allowed to be critical of Camilla in his own book?

Step parenting relationships are inherently fraught, as we see here all the time. it can't have been easy for a 12-year-old boy who lost his mother to grow up learning that his father was involved to another woman. He will have heard about his mother's own affairs but it is hard to judge someone who died, and was his mother.

Of course, he may have overcome his resentment of his stepmother by now, but why is he not allowed to talk about what he was feeling then, and perhaps his struggle to accept the situation?

And why is what Harry may say about Camilla a bigger thing, and more damaging, than what Andrew did?

I could be wrong but I'm sure I heard somewhere that Camilla was the one who asked about Archies skin colour?

It would be wonderful to have links you know. To back up these claims. Including the one asking about archies colour.

I would if I could remember where on earth I read it!

And why is what Harry may say about Camilla a bigger thing, and more damaging, than what Andrew did?

It isn't. But it is oh so convenient to have a scapegoat called Harry to cover up the disgusting behaviour of Andrew for decades and I'm not talking just Epstein.

How reliable these are I don't know...
Insider Edition

It would do everyone good to remember why the Queen was so successful. Never complain, never explain. There were many, many private issues and family problems throughout her reign and they were dealt with privately. I do blame The Crown for "dramatising" their lives, and whilst I thought the historical references to events in the 50s were dealt with brilliantly, I fear that as they get closer to the Internet age of misinformation, the writers will give themselves far too much leeway and scope for "exaggeration " which leads to the public believing that it's the truth. It so often isn't.

I wasn’t there when whomever it was commented on the Sussex baby’s skin tone.

I was at Pizza Express in Woking with my daughter — my alibi is rock solid. You’ll have to sweat this one out on your own.

@MyMumSaysALot

I was with you at Pizza Express so can confirm your alibi!

Tom Bower, who is believed to be the ultimate authority on these parts, wrote that Camilla is believed to have commented about the baby having a ginger Afro.

@MrsMaxDeWinter

Great to see you again. I trust Tom Bower about as much as I trust Piers Morgan — which is not at all. They’re both arseholes of the first order.

And recently, a biography of Camilla by Angela Levin has, I am informed, a whole chapter that seems gratuitous as it is extremely critical of Harry.

What does it say? Who of Camilla's friends had enough information on him that they could dish the dirt in a gratuitous way? Give us the goss.

H&M have already been damaging to the RF. I would bet a shilling to a box of oranges Harry will be invited to the coronation. Of course he will. It is his father. Whether he gets on famously with Camilla - different point but C&D's marriage wasn't exactly great so I think H should cut his father some slack .

@MarshaMelrose

Surely the name ”Angela Levin” should be enough to answer any question you may have. She talked to Harry once for 15 minutes and is now an authority on him. She also despises Meghan - for no reason other than just for kicks, as she’s never met her.
Why Camilla would choose Levin as her author is a puzzler.

Angela Levin is the most disgusting bigoted human being imaginable. When directly confronted with the lies she peddles in an interview, she flounced. A horrible person.
If Camilla agreed this book with her, she should be ashamed. Did she?

I wish I could give you "the goss", but alas,I have not read the book, only reviews.

Camilla has talked to the media about her motivation for writing the book as follows:

A royal biographer says she wrote a new book to show how Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Harry allegedly mistreated new Queen Consort Camilla.

“I decided that somehow I had to rebalance things,” Angela Levin said on the British talk show “Lorraine” on Friday of “Camilla,” which hit bookstores this week.

“One was ‘The Crown,’ which I felt had been really cruel to her, and the other was actually Prince Harry, who had said really nasty things about her, too.”

pagesix.com/2022/09/30/prince-harry-said-nasty-things-about-camilla-biographer/

From clips I have seen on Twitter, the author has said in interviews that she spoke to friends of Camilla, with her knowledge.

That said, even the most sympathetic papers have been unable to talk up a book that is more hagiography than biography. Amazon reviews have been scathing as well.

See The Times review. www.thetimes.co.uk/article/camilla-duchess-of-cornwall-by-angela-levin-review-hrqzhmp2h

Two paras that made me laugh:

Angela Levin tells us she plans to “bridge the gulf between Camilla’s public image and what she was really like” but I fear her effort verges on the hagiographical, and then tips over.

Levin, in a twist worthy of gothic fiction, claims Lady Fermoy was fully aware of “Diana’s emotional instability”, that Diana, little more than a child, was “naive, instinctive, spontaneous, needy and suffered from eating disorders”. Charles proposed in February 1981 and the huge royal wedding in St Paul’s Cathedral followed in the July. The marriage was no fairytale. Bride and groom were tragically incompatible, and Charles from the outset had to face his young wife’s “bulimia, self-mutilation, depression, acute anxiety and a fear of being abandoned”. Blimey.

Blimey indeed. Heh.

It is difficult to tell just how authorised this biography is because Angela is so evasive about that, she has said she spoke with friends of Camilla, and even with Camilla herself but won't say what was said.

This is what she said in an interview:

The Royal author joked about being asked by the Duchess of Cornwall if she was still working on her new Royal book. Ms Levin claimed that Camilla had said a lot of things to her. Ms Levin boasted about the Duchess jokingly saying she had to be nice to her, as she was writing her book. But Ms Levin pushed audiences to go and buy her book to find out more.

www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1621431/Angela-Levin-Camilla-Parker-Bowles-Duchess-Of-Cornwall-Book-Royal-Family-Jubilee-VN

But who knows, as she appears to be a fantasist. As you say, she spread a damaging rumour about Meghan on Twitter and when challenged by Vanessa Feltz, flounced off.

She also retweeted conspiracy theories about Meghan's pregnancy and Archie not existing.

Strange woman.

If Camilla really did give a nod to this book, even just through friends, it is not a good look for her.

Oops, MAJOR typo. My response to @MarshaMelrose says Camilla said, when I meant Angela said but I hope the context of the quote makes that clear.

Levin's modus operandi is to tweet slurs about M&H followed by a link to her book
Yuk

And sheesh what a mess - it wouldn’t kill her to look after herself, like maybe comb her hair once a week. It’s ironic that she’s throwing shade at Meghan when she’s that big of a mess.
I’m referring to the clip of film I saw from that interview she did when she got her back up when they questioned her over her attacking M&H. Lol

I could be wrong but I'm sure I heard somewhere that you ate a newborn kitten and had an affair with your father in law.

The main difference is direct authorship.

Also I think that speculation on omitting a direct relative from the Coronation is premature and the domain only of the scurrilous end of the internet.

You can "read somewhere" just about anything.

Difference with Andrew is that it's not just internet speculation that he's a sleaze bag.

😂😂😂

Leave it to the gossip columnists and those who want to put their noses in the disgusting trough of filth these people make up. If you haven’t anything better to do I feel sorry for you!

I'm not sure how anyone can comment on the content of a book when they've not actually read it. Of course, it's possible to read excerpts, I guess. Have excerpts been published? I read that Times review you attached. It mentions no chapter full of gratuitously nasty things about Harry. Just a story it terms 'cute' about a mock "full monty" show put on by William and Harry.

I've read lot of stuff on MN that, when I read the source text, wasn't anything like what was said. You yourself said that Larcombe was implying that the whole of Africa walked around barefoot and sat round campfires when it was clear in the article quoted that he as referring to pictures of Harry in which he was walking around barefoot and sitting round campfires!

@MrsMaxDeWinter

So why is Harry allowed to be criticised in a book about Camilla that appears to have her blessing, but he is not allowed to be critical of Camilla in his own book?

Can you not see the difference between

Book written by Harry
Book that appears to have Camilla's blessing?

You make many false assumptions in your post.

The woman Andrew allegedly had sex with was not a minor - she was over the age of consent.

It's been said by Harry that it wasn't Camilla who commented on skin colour.

Diana committed adultery before Charles did so the marriage was over by the time he took up with Camilla.

If you are going to pose questions try to get the facts right first, otherwise you look a bit ignorant.