Just finished 'Spare'...

[HerReputationMadeItDifficultToProceed]

… and I encourage anyone who’s even vaguely interested in this story to give it a read. Especially if what’s been leaked has made you at all angry, because I think in context everything makes a lot of sense.

I wasn’t a Harry and Meghan hater before reading this, but I wasn’t a fan girl either. Like many Brits, I find a lot of Americans- especially West Coast Americans- quite irritating and Meghan firmly falls into that camp for me. I’m sure she’s nice enough, but she’s very American and very perky and much like Wednesday Addams, I don’t do perky. However, I suspect that her intentions and generally good and that like most of us she’s got good and bad qualities. She’s clearly ambitious and I think that she probably initially dated Harry based on that ambition and on getting a platform, although I think that she genuinely loves him now.

The ghost writer has done a great job at capturing Harry’s personality I think; he comes across as introspective and thoughtful but funny and bright.

I think that Harry has a good soul; I think that he’s kind and has had a hard time of it growing up. I also think he’s a bit clueless and naive and has been in a bubble, but I think he acknowledges that and wants to understand and change. Undoubtedly losing his mother at the age he was had more of an outward impact on him than it had on William. He’s also been a victim of his dad’s wishywashy parenting. It sounds like- and looks like to me from my vantage point as a normal citizen who knows bugger all except what I’ve seen in the media- that Charles has been there for his kids to an extent, but not in a hands on or especially useful way. It also seems clear that Charles has always put Camilla first. From almost the moment Diana died it seems that he wanted, above everything else, to rehabilitate Camilla’s image so that they could marry. I think that he put that above being a father and the way Harry writes about their relationship makes that clear too.

I also think that it’s suited the palace to portray Harry as dimwitted and feckless to show William in a better light and that Harry has every right to be angry about that and not want to play that game anymore (and to call it out now). Especially as it’s obvious that the palace haven’t kept up their side of the bargain and protected Harry from the media in return.

I also think that the media have treated H and M poorly and it’s clearly the case that the palace has used them and news stories about them to divert from other newsworthy problems… certainly Prince Andrew, perhaps William’s affair/s. Is Harry overly jumpy about the media and the paparazzi in particular? Yes, of course. Who wouldn’t be with his background. But they’ve also obviously been hounded and harassed.

I do think that Harry is on a journey that he isn’t at the end of yet, but I think that he realises that too. I think that he was always going to leave the royal family and that Meghan didn’t cause what’s happened, she was just the catalyst for it. I think that he’s been scapegoated and an afterthought within his nuclear family and I don’t blame him for being angry. I think that he means well and is essentially good. And I don’t think that anyone who’s read the whole book would be able to disagree.

More than anything I think it’s clear that the British Royal Family is no longer fit for purpose; the way they live, bring up their children, pay their members for work and demand unrealistic levels of protocol and formality is no longer working in the 21st century. These people need purpose and lives beyond the crown and those on the edges of the heir shouldn’t have to live their lives in service of the their. Realistically H and M could have worked as royals and had private interests, the RF chose not to bend to help them live fulfilling lives because of its own, outdated reasons.

Guardian review - Spare by Prince Harry review – dry your eyes, mate

uk.yahoo.com/style/spare-prince-harry-review-dry-070006776.html

....
It’s now almost a week since Prince Harry’s memoir Spare was published and what thrillingly hectic days they’ve been: hard to pick a highlight. Amusing as it was to find Nicholas Witchell reporting for the BBC on the book’s release by filming the sole person queueing outside Waterstones’ London flagship to buy it, I think the sound of the ex-Sun hack Dan Wootton railing flatulently in the Daily Mail at Harry’s description of him as a “sad little man” just edged it for me (“no, YOU’RE the sad little man, Mister Prince!”). Meanwhile, in the US, Harry went on The Late Show With Stephen Colbert, where he performed a skit with some trumpets and Tom Hanks and spoke of his “frost-nipped todger” – said todger being, by the way, just one of dozens of be-nicknamed rude mechanicals who appear in his masterwork (others include his mates Badger, Skippy and Chimp; the venomous royal courtiers known as the Bee, the Wasp and the Fly; and Rehabber Kooks, AKA Rebekah Brooks, chief executive of Rupert Murdoch’s News UK).

It has to be said, however, that none of this coverage, barmy and excessively fixated, is even half so unlikely as Spare itself, a book that must rank as one of the most bizarre I’ve ever read. Yes, it is – at moments – very sad. There’s ongoing shame in it for tabloid journalism. But for a title written explicitly in the cause of securing sympathy and understanding for its so-called author, boy, does it misfire. It’s not only that Harry is so petulant: a man who thinks nothing, even now, of complaining about the bedroom he was allotted for his summer hols in Granny’s castle. With every page, his California makeover grows less convincing.

Where, for instance, did he leave his newfound feminism when he came to describe Pat, a matron at his prep school who was slightly disabled? (“Pat wasn’t hot,” he says. “Pat was cold.”) Does he really expect us to believe that, into his 20s, he didn’t know the word “Paki” was offensive? Since a certain fateful day when he and Meghan had a row while roasting a chicken and she threatened to dump him, he has had, he tells us, an awful lot of therapy and yet it seems to have done him no more good than the Elizabeth Arden cream he once applied to his tingling thing post-north pole. What kind of person insists on an air-clearing meeting with their father on the day of his father’s funeral? A myopic, self-obsessed, non-empathic kind of person, I would say. Exactly the same kind of person, in fact, who would talk about reconciliation in the same breath as they publicly slag off their family.
...

think I'll give it a miss

he has very few memories of her

thanks, that is very sad, no doubt he has awful guilt to be making that remark, awful guilt and loss of a distant mother.

Charles gets a lot of flak as a parent. Much of it deserved no doubt.

But his own childhood was unhappy. Philip wanted to toughen him up and set him to a boarding school Australia ( Timbertops iirc?). He didn't enjoy being 12,000 miles from his family.

Upon returning his mother greeted him with a handshake. As one does.
' Man hands on misery to man
It deepens like a coastal shelf'

dysfunctional family began in early childhood for all of them then
apart from the queen who was close to her own father as she wasnt heir to the throne in her early childhood

Which is, it itself, very telling. He was almost 13.

Everything? Even the stuff that has been conclusively demonstrated to be total fiction?

FrenchFancie, I'd agree with your summary pretty much.

Don't see much in the way of self reflection at all, just someone very much 'my way or the highway '. He seems to think he can speak for (and has more insight than) his father and brother.

I'm reading the Agassi book written with the same ghostwriter because I was interested in whether the style would be different. It's a very similar story - difficult childhood, difficult parent. Redemption via love of good woman. Drugs. Baldness........ Starting to think Moehringer has a 'type'.

Exactly. My father was of the generation that didn't show emotions. He taught me about the countryside and farming. Never once hugged or told me I was loved or that he was proud of me, when I turned into a wild child and got pregnant he didn't speak to me for 5 yea5s.

Has Harry forgotten about the time they spent riding. Sharing hunting and polo? Ist that the upper class version of learning to ride a bike?

Oh, you sucker.

Harry is an aggrieved vain man. Meghan is so convinced of her own importance and vanity that she'd float off the clouds with a beautific look on her face and seals singing. And of course South Africans and pilots would be dancing around in the streets at how magnificent they are at her 'service'.

Neither of them have any say in UK public anymore. They can get shot to shit with their greediness and artificial behaviour, if the monarchy exists it has to operate decently.

They are holding out grasping hands for money and attention

You really have no idea do you?

You have swallowed the 'never complain' line hook and sinker

The royals constantly feed the media their 'side' - it's what you no doubt lap up unquestionly in the MSM every day
'Royals' don't have the guts to tell their 'side' because that would mean dismantling the facade they have built over decades . They won't even make a statement to continue their 'story' because they must be seen to be above the little people .
Laughable in 2023 when no one but the elderly rely solely on MSM

Clearly many still fall for it or maybe know it's a facade but don't want the illusion shattered

@Teateaandmoretea

thanks for this, but surely if you’re going to go out in public and call out everyone else in the way they have, you surely have to be infallible yourself. The way they’re talking there shouldn’t be a middle ground. I think the RF know they’re not infallible and that’s why they’re staying quiet.

I have asked already but I’ve never had an answer, It would help if someone could explain the difference between ‘my truth’ and ‘anecdotal evidence’ and ‘lived experience’ and ‘experience’.

Google seems to think they’re one and the same but It seems to be a millennial term, used mostly by those in their late 30’s trying to justify their behaviour but it seems to be bandied around a lot in SM so a definition would be really helpful.

I have read a lot of your posts on many threads. It’s really sad that you talk like this when paired with your comments on the video upthread by Doug Stanhope. The guy has no concept of the soft power of the RF.

The fact that H&M are wielding such power right now is actually testament to the power the RF wield for it is far greater than that of H&M. If we put the hereditary nature of the monarchy to our side, Charles is head of state and therefore equal to Emmanuel Macron, Joe Biden et al. His power being ceremonial does not diminish his standing and we are not alone in having a figurehead.

Apart from the ceremonies they do this quietly. H&M want us to believe we hear from the RF all the time. I don’t believe we do. The RF aren’t even protecting themselves right now. They are saying nothing. Because that’s what the RF does. They neither defend themselves or give any information out about one another. Never explain. Never complain. They didn’t defend H&M back then. And then and they are t defending themselves now. That’s just how they work. Rightly or wrongly… And in some instances I think wrongly (such as racism). However I don’t think they deserve such a campaign against them because of this and Harry is now upping the anti against the silence. By staying silent, the RF are quietly proving to him that he has nothing to fear from them whilst he continues to rail against them. I find the whole thing incredibly sad.

H&M do indeed have great PR. They are also manipulating the people massively. We’ve heard and heard from them. We have not heard from the RF at all. Harry thinks we have because he thinks his family and especially Camilla briefed against him. She couldn’t have. She simply didn’t have the power to do so in the early days. The press would have had a field day with her back then and the risks far too great. The instance Harry cites she leaked when he was young has been disproven and he got up to a great many things, which have never surfaced in the press. If Camilla were the leak these would be known. People on drugs do not tend to be discreet.

I really struggle to understand how people can swallow what Harry is saying without looking at the context. The entire Netflix series was a bunch of innuendos. They implied much, left us hanging and confirmed nothing. We think they did because of the music, the picture / video footage and the staging. We were manipulated into thinking were told a great many things. Now many many things Harry have said can be disproven as well. This is both great PR and master manipulation. I am sure Harry believes what he’s saying despite all the inconsistencies and I don’t think he’s trying to manipulate us either. But I don’t think it is the RF, who are manipulating us here.

This is a private family squabble. A man, who is damaged by the loss of his mum and a woman, who joined the family, was so welcomed but just didn’t understand how the whole thing operates. The approach to how Meghan and the RF run their lives is the polar opposite and once she married into the family, a great many misunderstandings have ensued. By this I am not apportioning blame btw. This is my observation.

I've read it now and this very much reflects what the book demonstrates. I really don't understand why you have taken it so very much at face value, OP; I was constantly frustrated by the fact that Harry was so blatantly picking and choosing what he chooses to say about things like discussions with his family in order to suit his own agenda. Even when the other side of the picture is out there and well known, he doesn't even mention it.

Op did you read the same book as me? Harry very much came across as a spoilt brat who absolutely is never in the wrong, he also has huge persecution and inferiority complex's. It is very very easy to see where he has only told half the story and very obviously left out the bits that caused the person he is very clearly trying to make look bad who is having a go at him or saying something he doesn't like to behave as they are! For instance the bit about William pushing him over into the dog bowl, harry says william arrived there "piping hot" basically spoiling for a fight, he neglects to mention that he and William had a phone call just before this happened in which william tried to say what he needed to say and harry was abusive and put the phone down on his brother! Therefore william went round there already wound up and angry. He's what my children would call " a victim bully". He causes a situation, argument, fight etc and then acts all innocent and plays the victim.

.his family has sold him to the tabloids time and again

When?

Oh I though of extra points of irritation with Spare:

• him and William arguing over ‘who can have Africa’ as a cause. Very bad look in a post colonial era, and odd because there’s a lot to champion. Bit worried about the whole ‘white saviour’ thing going on.

• PH claims to have had no money and Meghan had to furnish the house on her credit card. Except he seems to have had plenty of cash to buy ‘a supermarket bag full of weed’ all to smoke in one night, flight to Botswana and the USA and wherever else whenever he felt like it - and had £23 million in savings from his mothers inheritance which was presumably invested and earning a nice little return.

there’s more, I’m sure, I just can’t remember it. He comes across as a total man child to be honest…

@Patineur
Seriously ?

Frankly if anyone believes the tosh that is in Spare, Harry’s BS, written up by a ghostwriter, you are extremely gullible. Yes it might be based on his experiences but the whole thing is quite obviously fictionalised through his own distorting lens. Isn’t it funny that the people who are doing their duty as a royal family are getting criticised while the bloke who is just simply making money by criticising them is getting lauded by gullible people who believe him. The book was just a money making a racket and was made sensational as possible with total disregard for truth. Fact after fact has been proved to be wrong as in the Oprah interview. But of course the great public want to believe they scandal and they will believe it. Frankly I will not insult my intelligence

No one should write a book like this, Royal or not.

Airing the most intimate details of your family, and their faults (in your opinion.)

For that reason I'd not read it.

Who really cares?

I've just read this review which puts everything in context.

Exactly.

This is what he says about his mother's parenting in Spare:

I mentioned Mummy’s experience with therapy, as I understood it. Didn’t help her. Might’ve made things worse, actually. So many people preyed on her, exploited her—including therapists.

We talked about Mummy’s parenting, how she could sometimes over-mother, then disappear for stretches. It seemed an important discussion, but also disloyal.

I'm not sure why it's hard for people to believe that both Charles and Diana were imperfect as parents. Given the childhoods each of them had, it's not surprising that each of them struggled in different ways but the book is quite clear that both Charles and Diana love their sons deeply.

@Mummyoflittledragon

Your last paragraph- ' a private family matter'
What bullshit
This is the whole problem . It is a state matter . They are a family when they want a few PR points ( wheel out the children) and the state when they want to shut down criticism .
It is not for for purpose and makes a mockery of democracy