Meghan and Harry 7: Recollections May Vary

[EmCatlyn]

7 minutes ago, WiseGirl said:

People magazine has an article saying...Harry "told" the family but was it like when they "told" the family their daughter's name.

https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-spoke-privately-with-royal-family-about-memoir/

Again, I suspect recollections will vary and to me this seems like an awful lot of burning bridges. Does he even want a relationship with his father and brother?

I think Harry and Meghan believe they were not well-treated by the royal family and that they are owed sympathy and apologies when the depth of their pain is revealed. Right after the Oprah interview, for example, there were comments about how no one in the family had “reached out” to Meghan after her revelations.

Harry honestly seems oblivious to the pain he is causing others and/or feels the pain is insignificant compared to what he suffered.?  He is so excited about the new discoveries he has made about himself and his life that he can’t stop sharing, especially when he is clearly rewarded for doing so by his new friends.

In a funny way, he is showing the opposite of what he is claiming.  Only someone who has known himself loved and valued all his life can be so assured that he will not be rejected completely in spite of what he is doing.

[Melbelle]

3 hours ago, QuiverFullofBooks said:

and Lili’s place in the royal succession hasn’t been added to the royal website yet because she hasn’t been baptized, and in theory she could be Catholic.

This doesn't seem to be correct, as both August Brooksbank and Lucas Tindall have been added to the line of succession on the official Royal Family website, while neither has been baptized yet.  Did the source elaborate on why they believed this to be true?  Perhaps H&M haven't officially acknowledged that they intend to baptize her as COE?  Although, that goes against all the articles claiming he told the family he wanted to come back for a baptism at Windsor.  

[EmCatlyn]

5 minutes ago, Melbelle said:

This doesn't seem to be correct, as both August Brooksbank and Lucas Tindall have been added to the line of succession on the official Royal Family website, while neither has been baptized yet.  Did the source elaborate on why they believed this to be true?  Perhaps H&M haven't officially acknowledged that they intend to baptize her as COE?  Although, that goes against all the articles claiming he told the family he wanted to come back for a baptism at Windsor.  

I wonder if the issue is citizenship.  When a citizen has a child abroad, there is paperwork /registration so the kid can have dual citizenship.  If they haven’t done the paperwork yet, there may be no “official” record of Lilibet in GB, and the baptism could be the next expectation of “official” record?
 

She wouldn’t have to be baptized CoE or even Anglican.  Any Protestant baptism which follows the liturgical formula is recognized. (Theoretically, Catholic baptism would be ok so long as kid wasn’t raised Catholic.)

[QuiverFullofBooks]

32 minutes ago, Melbelle said:

This doesn't seem to be correct, as both August Brooksbank and Lucas Tindall have been added to the line of succession on the official Royal Family website, while neither has been baptized yet.  Did the source elaborate on why they believed this to be true?  Perhaps H&M haven't officially acknowledged that they intend to baptize her as COE?  Although, that goes against all the articles claiming he told the family he wanted to come back for a baptism at Windsor.  

Good point. It's from the Daily Mail, hardly the most authoritative source, and the bit about how they heard is “it is understood that,” meaning that some employee, friend, or relative of the family leaked it to them. Hmmm. Maybe it’s a citizenship issue. Any chance that the queen really is mad about the name and the price of the Windsor christening and the place on the official list will be a name change?

[EmCatlyn]

This article in Town and Country  makes a good point that

Quote

The man who hated other people editing his life story now has the power—and responsibility—to do just that for whoever he decides should make an appearance in his book.

It is an interesting discussion about how even if people are careful about what they say to Harry now, family members are rightly nervous about what he may reveal and how this may hurt individuals — and the monarchy.

It is also significant that what this tell-all book is doing is giving Harry unprecedented power over his family.  He may be the “spare” who resented being forced to make sacrifices for the sake of the crown that would never sit on his head, but now he can reveal things that could potentially derail things for his father and brother.  

I wonder how much (if any) of his own “truth” he will be able to keep private for the sake of others.

 

[louisa05]

5 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

I read that the proceeds of the book will go to charity. NY Times, 7/19/21.

Of course, by building up the brand, they will profit in the long run.  In the short run, however, it seems to be more about Harry establishing his new identity.  

(Honestly, he reminds me of those young people who, after they go away to college, discover everything their parents did was wrong, become “new people” and can’t shut up about their enlightenment.  They usually outgrow it by the time they finish college at 21 or 22.  Harry is a little late for this.)

They’ll probably give it to their own charity. It’s based in Delaware which requires  them to only give away 5% to keep their status. And it’s also possible that they’ll only consider any royalties above the advance as profit. 

[just_ordinary]

9 hours ago, louisa05 said:

They’ll probably give it to their own charity. It’s based in Delaware which requires  them to only give away 5% to keep their status. And it’s also possible that they’ll only consider any royalties above the advance as profit. 

I don’t think they have settled setting up Archwell completely. Wasn’t their latest paperwork rejected once again and needs to be specified? They might call it charity but the paperwork stated something different. Or maybe I am confusing things. They sure do have a history of using one word but the facts are actually something different. 

@EmCatlyn I doubt it’s citizenship. Iirc you can be in the line of succession but not be a citizen. At least that was true in the past (George of Hannover for example). It could be a requirement if she would actually ascend to the throne. But let’s face it- extremely unlikely. I think BP just doesn’t care and will add her whenever York II is added.

I think it is completely out of the question that we see a crowning of Camilla. She will be Queen nonetheless, but I think Duchess of Lancaster as her title in use is a very good guess. Or maybe Charles will hold into the POW title a bit longer. 
 

@QuiverFullofBooks @viii it’s not a lot of information compared to the Swedish christenings but it’s the same amount we saw for the Cambridgelings, just without godparents and walkabout pictures. There are no pictures/clips or details of the ceremony itself in any case. And it’s still a lot more than what we saw for the Philipps and Tindall girls.

[Topaz]

If Camilla isn’t styled as Queen I expect they’ll do what was announced at the time of the marriage and call her Princess Consort. 
Technically she won’t be Duchess of Lancaster because the title merged with the crown in 1413. The monarchs have continued to be referred to as Dukes of Lancaster but it’s not technically correct, and Charles strikes me as the sort of person who would care about things like that.

[viii]

3 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

And it’s still a lot more than what we saw for the Philipps and Tindall girls.

So? It can’t be compared. Harry was a working senior Royal at the time of Archie’s christening. His was always going to be more covered than his cousins - look at his wedding alone compared to majority of his cousins. 

Harry and Meghan clearly have a lot of flaws but the christening is a beautiful example of privacy. The only thing we know is the date and the location. We were given a couple of photos that confirmed some guests but that was it. Way less coverage than Cambridge children but more coverage than other Windsor cousins. It suited Harry’s position (at the time) perfectly. 

[tabitha2]

Right. But now the situation has changed completely and irrevocably by their choice and Lilibet Diana should get the same Kind of Christening that her obscure royally adjacent 2nd cousins get : A private Queen less ceremony that any other minor royal baby gets. 

 

Edited July 21, 2021 by tabitha2

[nausicaa]

16 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

It is an interesting discussion about how even if people are careful about what they say to Harry now, family members are rightly nervous about what he may reveal and how this may hurt individuals — and the monarchy.

It is odd to me that some people still can't see this and castigate Harry's family for being reticent around him (not here, but definitely on Twitter). There's still lots of cheering Harry on for " telling his story" and booing anyone who doesn't supply him with all the inside scoop he (they) could want. 

I'm a total nobody so you aren't going to sell any articles about my dirt, and even so, if after we have a personal conversation you post all the details on your social media, that's the last open, personal conversation we're ever going to have. 

And if we have a personal conversation and you not only tell my business but misrepresent what I said (which I'm confident has happened several times in this)? I would be livid. 

[tabitha2]

He is Princess Saint Angel Diana’s baby boy and that’s all some people and the pop culture media will ever see. He and Meghan know  this and it’s their golden ticket. If people question you, go on TV moist eyed and talk about how traumatized! you are and what those big bad RACIST Royals did to her  they want  to do to my virtuous wife! My Baby is in constant danger!1!  I lost my only real parent and the only one who loved me and gave me a childhood and fun! Can you believe Those people made me go on their boring tours to see boring poor people?  How dare!  

And on and on and on…

 

[viii]

1 hour ago, tabitha2 said:

Right. But now the situation has changed completely and irrevocably by their choice and Lilibet Diana should get the same Kind of Christening that her obscure royally adjacent 2nd cousins get : A private Queen less ceremony that any other minor royal baby gets. 

 

Obviously; Lili’s christening was never the debate.   

[Seahorse Wrangler]

9 hours ago, Topaz said:

If Camilla isn’t styled as Queen I expect they’ll do what was announced at the time of the marriage and call her Princess Consort. 
Technically she won’t be Duchess of Lancaster because the title merged with the crown in 1413. The monarchs have continued to be referred to as Dukes of Lancaster but it’s not technically correct, and Charles strikes me as the sort of person who would care about things like that.

How about Duchess of Normandy?

[EmCatlyn]

10 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

I don’t think they have settled setting up Archwell completely. Wasn’t their latest paperwork rejected once again and needs to be specified? They might call it charity but the paperwork stated something different. Or maybe I am confusing things. They sure do have a history of using one word but the facts are actually something different. 

@EmCatlyn I doubt it’s citizenship. Iirc you can be in the line of succession but not be a citizen. At least that was true in the past (George of Hannover for example). It could be a requirement if she would actually ascend to the throne. But let’s face it- extremely unlikely. I think BP just doesn’t care and will add her whenever York II is added.

I think it is completely out of the question that we see a crowning of Camilla. She will be Queen nonetheless, but I think Duchess of Lancaster as her title in use is a very good guess. Or maybe Charles will hold into the POW title a bit longer. 
 

@QuiverFullofBooks @viii it’s not a lot of information compared to the Swedish christenings but it’s the same amount we saw for the Cambridgelings, just without godparents and walkabout pictures. There are no pictures/clips or details of the ceremony itself in any case. And it’s still a lot more than what we saw for the Philipps and Tindall girls.

I didn’t mean that she couldn’t be on the order of succession  list until it was confirmed she was a citizen.  I was speculating that there might not yet be an official record of her existence since there was no UK birth certificate, no baptismal certificate and the paperwork from the US (had not yet come through.  I know of a couple of cases of dual citizenship where the paperwork was complicated.  I would think it would be expedited for Harry’s child, but — who knows?

As for Camilla being crowned or not, I am sure that the crowning is what Charles wants but agree it would not be popular.  

As Prince Albert had no other title than Prince Consort, I don’t see a need for her to be a Duchess of Anything.  But if she needs to be a Duchess, Lancaster would work.

[Topaz]

18 minutes ago, Seahorse Wrangler said:

How about Duchess of Normandy?

Another way to annoy the EU - reclaim the lands the royals lost 100s of years ago. ????

I’m surprised it isn’t already officially announced. It’s right up the government’s street. 

(/s - kind of)
 

[EmCatlyn]

6 hours ago, nausicaa said:

It is odd to me that some people still can't see this and castigate Harry's family for being reticent around him (not here, but definitely on Twitter). There's still lots of cheering Harry on for " telling his story" and booing anyone who doesn't supply him with all the inside scoop he (they) could want. 

I'm a total nobody so you aren't going to sell any articles about my dirt, and even so, if after we have a personal conversation you post all the details on your social media, that's the last open, personal conversation we're ever going to have. 

And if we have a personal conversation and you not only tell my business but misrepresent what I said (which I'm confident has happened several times in this)? I would be livid. 

I couldn’t agree more.   Regardless of what your family has done, you owe them discretion.  Anything said within a friendship or family is said in an expectation of confidentiality.  The way Harry has been talking about his father and the rest of the family is just selfish and thoughtless.

Most of us will say something negative about our family here and there, but not if it is likely to get back to them or hurt them, unless we are totally self-centered and/or vindictive.

Harry has to know (unless he is even stupider than he seems) that what he is doing will hurt not only his father’s feelings but potentially the “brand” that his father has given his whole life to.  Charles may not be the perfect father, but he did his best. 

And while he and Meghan may be sore because William and Kate didn’t embrace Meghan and were cautious and critical around her, that’s just the way it often is with in-laws.  Competitiveness with siblings is one thing.  Throwing your supposedly beloved brother under the bus is another.

I keep thinking that Harry is behaving like an adolescent.  And I can’t blame William and the rest of the family for not wanting to discuss anything more private than the weather with him.

[just_ordinary]

On 7/21/2021 at 2:47 PM, viii said:

So? It can’t be compared. Harry was a working senior Royal at the time of Archie’s christening. His was always going to be more covered than his cousins - look at his wedding alone compared to majority of his cousins. 

Harry and Meghan clearly have a lot of flaws but the christening is a beautiful example of privacy. The only thing we know is the date and the location. We were given a couple of photos that confirmed some guests but that was it. Way less coverage than Cambridge children but more coverage than other Windsor cousins. It suited Harry’s position (at the time) perfectly. 

I was pointing out that Archie’s christening got almost the same public attention as the three Cambridge children because the OG poster said it was very private and had almost no coverage in comparison. I disagree with the “way less coverage” because I remember it very differently. Neither the BRF PR machine not the public put less effort in it. We know exactly the same amount of stuff, but the complete guest list and godparents names, the same amount of official photos for the Cambridges. You could actually even argue Archie got way more coverage because of the whole drama around godparents/walkabout yada yada. 
I will drop it here because I think we might just argue semantics? It was a tad more private but it didn’t get less attention or was a private event.

[louisa05]

9 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

I was pointing out that Archie’s christening got almost the same public attention as the three Cambridge children because the OG poster said it was very private and had almost no coverage in comparison. I disagree with the “way less coverage” because I remember it very differently. Neither the BRF PR machine not the public put less effort in it. We know exactly the same amount of stuff, but the complete guest list and godparents names, the same amount of official photos for the Cambridges. You could actually even argue Archie got way more coverage because of the whole drama around godparents/walkabout yada yada. 
I will drop it here because I think we might just argue semantics? It was a tad more private but it didn’t get less attention or was a private event.

The whole thing was another M&H WTF? episode. They made a fuss that it would all be very private. Then announced the time and place and released photos.  In that, it was just as “private” as any other royal christening. 

[Xanariel]

I think Camilla being Queen is very dependent on what the public mood is at the time. I think the safest bet is to go with what they previously declared and name her Princess Consort. But Charles is notoriously stubborn and sensitive about this kind of thing, so we'll have to see. 

As for Harry...it's tricky because I do think that he should have the right to speak out about his life and he's definitely entitled to expose the figure who spoke about Archie's skin colour if he wants (it would certainly better than the gross guessing game he previously framed it as). 

But of course his life was entwined with William and it does seem a wrench that William - so famously obsessive and controlling about his privacy after being used as a PR pawn in the War of the Wales - could end up having his private relationship with his brother sold off in a memoir. 

I think one potential issue is Harry's tendency to speak for others without consulting them. I remember when he declared that "no one actually wants to be King" and the Palace rushed to contradict him. At the time, the public reaction was quite derisive - a mix between "uh, have you met your father?" and "poor little royals, what a hard life!" 

But it seemed weird to me that Harry would say it when he's not in direct line for the throne and never has to worry about being king. Because either he was claiming stuff about Charles and William that wasn't true, which was bad enough. Of it was true, in which case he was running his mouth on some feelings that the people who actually were in that position had very firmly kept from the public, which seemed worse. If he's applying a similar attitude to this memoir, I could see things getting very messy. 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Xanariel

[EmCatlyn]

2 hours ago, Xanariel said:

I think Camilla being Queen is very dependent on what the public mood is at the time. I think the safest bet is to go with what they previously declared and name her Princess Consort. But Charles is notoriously stubborn and sensitive about this kind of thing, so we'll have to see. 

As for Harry...it's tricky because I do think that he should have the right to speak out about his life and he's definitely entitled to expose the figure who spoke about Archie's skin colour if he wants (it would certainly better than the gross guessing game he previously framed it as). 

But of course his life was entwined with William and it does seem a wrench that William - so famously obsessive and controlling about his privacy after being used as a PR pawn in the War of the Wales - could end up having his private relationship with his brother sold off in a memoir. 

I think one potential issue is Harry's tendency to speak for others without consulting them. I remember when he declared that "no one actually wants to be King" and the Palace rushed to contradict him. At the time, the public reaction was quite derisive - a mix between "uh, have you met your father?" and "poor little royals, what a hard life!" 

But it seemed weird to me that Harry would say it when he's not in direct line for the throne and never has to worry about being king. Because either he was claiming stuff about Charles and William that wasn't true, which was bad enough. Of it was true, in which case he was running his mouth on some feelings that the people who actually were in that position had very firmly kept from the public, which seemed worse. If he's applying a similar attitude to this memoir, I could see things getting very messy. 

I agree about how in revealing his life (which he has a perfect right to do) Harry will also reveal details about his brother’s life and how that just isn’t fair to his brother. Whether or not Harry believes his brother is “trapped,” he must know that his brother has not only accepted his “fate” to someday be king but is preparing his son, George, to follow in his footsteps.  It’s not ok to mess that up.  It is not respectful to his brother and father to make revelations that will hurt or embarrass them.

As far as revealing who made the comment about the baby possibly having dark skin, I hope he only does so if he can do it in a way that doesn’t hurt the person who made the comment.  And if the person was either Charles or William, I hope he says nothing.

To be fair to Harry, he wasn’t the one who revealed this.  It was Meghan.  And I kind of thought Harry was caught by surprise, in part because the question about skin color did not happen while Meghan was pregnant but before.  Meghan seems to have thrown it in for effect, because she knew that this would ring “racism” more loudly than anything else she could cite.

My impression was not that Harry wanted a guessing game but that Oprah, shrewd interviewer that she is, tried to get him to tell who it was by suggesting names.  For example, “That’s a shocking accusation.  I have to guess— was it Prince Phillip?” And then, when Harry says no, “It wasn’t the Queen, was it?”  At which point Harry and/or Meghan say it wasn’t the Queen but they will not say about anyone else.  So we can probably lay the “guessing game” at Oprah’s door. ?

I read somewhere that the book could be a good opportunity for Harry to make peace with his family by not revealing anything that would embarrass them. He can say all he wants about himself, but keep quiet about details that touch on other people’s lives. Somehow, I don’t see it happening that way.

[tabitha2]

All this peace and reconciliation talk is pie in the sky and without basis IMO as Harry just keeps doing the opposite and has been for a couple of years now. If and when he realizes his foolishness and wants to mend fences it’s going to be to little to late to matter. 

[EmCatlyn]

The Daily Mail reports that

Quote

Harry's deal is for FOUR books - and one won't be released until after The Queen has died: Duke oversaw bidding war of up to '$40m' and Meghan will write a 'wellness' book' as part of mega-deal.

We should take this with a grain of salt. (It’s the DM, after all.) However, the part about Meghan and a wellness book certainly sounds plausible.

Page Six reports,

Quote

But a spokesperson for the couple tells Page Six that contrary to those reports, there is only one memoir planned by Harry and it’s scheduled to be released in late 2022 as originally announced.

Sources add it’s “appalling” to tie anything to the Queen’s death, as the Mail reported one of Harry’s books would be.

I was struck by the wording of the denial, which says that “only one memoir is planned by Harry,” because nowhere did the DM article claim that there would be more than one memoir.  (The denial leaves open that other kinds of books are planned/contracted for.)

Although, given Harry’s record so far, nothing would surprise me, I think that concern about what terrible things Harry will be saying after his grandmother dies may well be misplaced.  It is possible that the allegedly planned book is something as innocent as, My Granny and Me: Prince Harry Remembers the Queen.  ??‍♀️

For what it’s worth, I am guessing that the “four book deal” at this point is aa deal for Harry’s memoir and Meghan’s wellness book and “options” on their next two books.  

[QuiverFullofBooks]

7 hours ago, Xanariel said:

I remember when he declared that "no one actually wants to be King" and the Palace rushed to contradict him. At the time, the public reaction was quite derisive - a mix between "uh, have you met your father?" and "poor little royals, what a hard life!" 

But it seemed weird to me that Harry would say it when he's not in direct line for the throne and never has to worry about being king. Because either he was claiming stuff about Charles and William that wasn't true, which was bad enough. Of it was true, in which case he was running his mouth on some feelings that the people who actually were in that position had very firmly kept from the public, which seemed worse. If he's applying a similar attitude to this memoir, I could see things getting very messy. 

My take on that is that Charles always claims he’s not looking forward to being king if he’s asked, because he doesn’t want people to think that he wants his mother to die. Harry, not being terribly bright, takes that at face value.

[just_ordinary]

I do think that Wiliam might have experienced and discussed with his brother a certain reluctance to become king someday. That would be completely normal. Being privileged is nice enough, but seeing how dysfunctional your family is, partly due to the institution, seeing how public and media have no bounds, how you as an individual are not really interesting but only the Prince, people using you to their advantage, always knowing that you are not free to choose or rather that you will disappoint to a certain point if you do… If it bothers him enough he can always step back. No one will put the crown on his head with force. He didn’t so I assume he is fine with this course of his life. 
Many children that are raised with the loose or not so loose idea to take over the family business experience reluctance or aversion at one point.

Wiliam might have really struggled with this future. But his brother seems to be oblivious that one cab work through those issues and be fine with it at one point. 

Edited July 24, 2021 by just_ordinary