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.

@Blossomtoes They are very good at it. The Royal Family have an estimated $28 billion fortune.

Do they now? According to the Times Rich List the Queen’s personal worth was around £350 million.

Exactly. We are fooled into thinking they are not that rich. There is plenty out there to illustrate that oh yes, they are.

And of course HMQ's money having been in Trust and living to a grand old age, and the rest going to Charles means she will pay NO inheritance tax, unlike us mere mortals.
That protects them immensely and just grows their wealth to beyond imaginable figures.

My five-year-old daughter came home from school one day and told me she'd got into trouble because I'd let her wear a disney princess hair clip instead of the regulation green (in my defence, it had green bits on it ...). All institutions care a lot about 'how does that look', from a very early age.

@Blossomtoes The Queen had $949 million in her private portfolio of properties. No idea why the Sunday Times came up with that amount.

Ahh, so you're suggesting the Crown estate actually belongs to the RF as a private asset. If that's the case they should probably stop handing most of the income to the government.

@Dobby123456 I think any institution caring about the kind of hair clip a 5 year old wears is a bit crazy.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/14/the-sovereigns-wealth-uk-royal-familys-finances-explained

This explains it quite nicely.

Even the Queen's stamp collection is worth £100M, so obviously she is/was not worth just £350M.

I could list it all, but it's in the article.

There’s a difference between personal worth and crown assets. The crown estate + duchy of Lancaster + duchy of Cornwall are worth £17 billion alone.

The majority of Rishi’s wealth is his wife’s - she is worth between £400-700 million due to her shares in the family company.

Handy.

This is a good article about the Royal Families wealth.

www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/09/13/royal-family-wealth-charles-inheritance/

I always remember.... they even own the land Tesco is built on in Milton Keynes. Don't ask me why I know that!
Also a horse farm in Kentucky and part of Park Avenue in NYC.

The tentacles reach far and wide....
(which is why I think Charles should be paying for his own Coronation given that other European Royal Houses do not have Coronations. Or, if we're paying, have a simple ceremony not costing £100million. So much for Charles slimming down)

Charles has never slimmed down his own life.

Yet when people say anything remotely negative about Kate in particular, people say ‘Oh but she looked happy /great at this or that public outing so what you are saying can’t possibly be true’. ….

Possibly because it’s accurate.

That includes the Crown Estate and the Duchies, none of which are personal wealth.

@Blossomtoes You have links above saying the Queen's stamp collection alone was worth £100 million.

Which is why I said: ⬆️

There’s a difference between personal worth and crown assets.

He was in his 20s or 30s though when he was offered the anti depressants. Don’t think it was for grief. Fgs no one has said he has BPD

@Eyerollcentral have you ever lost someone close to you? Particularly in traumatic circumstances. I don't mean a grandparent or elderly parent, I mean violent, out of order grief.

It is not something you get over, it is something you learn to live with. It can take decades to even begin that process, particularly in the case is something as extraordinary as the death of Diana.

Also, if you'd read the book you would know that one of his closest friends also died in a car accident a few years after Diana.

So yes, even if he was offered ADs 10 or 20 years later, it would still be grief related.

Untreated grief can turn into depression.

Antonio depressants are also used for conditions such as anxiety, OCD, & PTSD.

I am not sure why his being offered an AD is seen as bad. Mental health is not a character flaw.

I haven't finished the book yet but one thing that's painfully clear on almost every page is his unresolved grief and trauma over Diana, even now. And who could blame him?

I can’t understand why anyone would see an issue with an institution, whose main role is to patron good causes and shine a light on them, curating appointments made by its multiple representatives in order to prioritise the publicity received by said causes.

Royal patronage has been shown to have little to no effect on charitable income and in any case the royals 'work' hardest on their own charities hence around 76% of charities with a royal patron never seeing them darken the door from one year's end to the next.

If that's their 'main role' it's very much worth asking what's their point.

Seems a massive over reach to be honest. Not sure what your issue is with the man suffering from depression as opposed to grief

particularly in the case is something as extraordinary as the death of Diana.

Diana’s death wasn’t particularly extraordinary. Lots of people die in car crashes unfortunately - as you point out a friend did so a few years later.