Harry & Meghan 14: The Reverse Harry - Restoring the Angevin Empire

[anjulibai]

When you are 16, a 19 year old is older in your mind. I'm don't think Harry referring to her as an older woman is insulting. 

And she is complainging about being outed, which is ridiculous, because he didn't out her, she outed herself. 

[Jackie3]

To a 16 year old high school sophomore, a 19-year old who's left HS is operating in another world entirely. Of course, she'd seem old.  You are scraping the bottom of the barrel if that's what you are using to criticize Harry.. 

Besides, Harry just called her an "older woman" and technically that's correct. If you interpreted it differently, that's really on you.

Edited February 7, 2023 by Coconut Flan
Removed content in wrong thread.

[WatchingTheTireFireBurn]

Shrug...final thought...

When I read the book and in the context of the whole, I think the inference Harry seemed to be making had a sort of disparaging tone and that she was one of many people he's discussing in the book who took advantage of him.

Most the book is him complaining about people who should have helped/protected him but did not and instead used/abused him.

In the small circle of people and time/place he referred to plus adding a horse ...uh...themed reference I think he unfairly outed her. This isn't a random guy vaguely mentioning hooking up.

This is a guy that we probably can put together a nearly daily timeline of his whole life using public information. And he knows that and provided those details . Knowing that paparazzi will go after every distant relative, coworker, purported friend of Meghan and offer to bribe them for juicy stories. Paid a neighbor to film Meghan backyard. And he's upset that Meghan and his kids are subjected to that level of scrutiny.

And yet he still provided information enough in this book that it seems not just likely to garner interes but a juicy mystery for paparazzi to "solve." He put a target on her back. Which is just not cool.

That she, knowing how rabid the press are about him, felt pressured to go public? I dont blame her. I can't imagine the pressure of that decision. 

 

 

[treehugger]

I mean, she kept it quiet for decades, and only came public with it after he wrote about her. If she was looking for publicity she would have told it sooner. It seems she’s lived a quiet life for a long time. I’m struggling to see why the animosity towards her. The press was looking hard enough for that woman that several  people had to issue statements that they were not that person. 

[TN-peach]

1 hour ago, treehugger said:

I mean, she kept it quiet for decades, and only came public with it after he wrote about her. If she was looking for publicity she would have told it sooner. It seems she’s lived a quiet life for a long time. I’m struggling to see why the animosity towards her. The press was looking hard enough for that woman that several  people had to issue statements that they were not that person. 

And you have Rupert Evert stating that he knows who it was.  We don't know how much longer it would have stayed secret.  Was it better to come out on her terms where she can control the timing of the interview or wait until the press can get her name and hound her when she is with her kids.

[Jackie3]

The talk about Harry's sexual encounter continues.

I love the shock over Harry's failure to make his partner "happy."  A 16-year old boy who is a bad lover? That's REALLY news.

Edited February 7, 2023 by Jackie3

[prayawaythefundie]

5 hours ago, WatchingTheTireFireBurn said:

When I read the book and in the context of the whole, I think the inference Harry seemed to be making had a sort of disparaging tone and that she was one of many people he's discussing in the book who took advantage of him.

I think that‘s why I assumed her to have been much older from reading the excerpt. A 30+ woman could have taken advantage of him but I have a hard time imagining that when she was still a (slightly older) teenager herself and working for his family. The latter would actually put her at risk of being taken advantage of.

[treehugger]

Now, to be fair, the way she described it was very much two drunken teenagers having a rather embarrassing shag in the field. It doesn't sound like she felt like it was anything other than that, so we can probably leave it at that.  

I feel for her a bit.  After reading her second interview it sounds like multiple people knew about it, and she just wanted to say it her way first.  

[Jackie3]

7 hours ago, treehugger said:

The press was looking hard enough for that woman that several  people had to issue statements that they were not that person. 

Why did they have to? 

[SoSoNosy]

My bookkeeper bought me the book today, "for Valentine's Day"; we both know it was because she wanted to read it and I made a good excuse.  I will read it pretty swiftly, I imagine.

 

[Jackie3]

3 hours ago, SoSoNosy said:

My bookkeeper bought me the book today, "for Valentine's Day"; we both know it was because she wanted to read it and I made a good excuse.  I will read it pretty swiftly, I imagine.

 

Why read a book by someone you dislike and disapprove of, just so you can dislike and disapprove of him some more? 

[Jackie3]

On 2/7/2023 at 8:03 AM, treehugger said:

I mean, she kept it quiet for decades, and only came public with it after he wrote about her. If she was looking for publicity she would have told it sooner. It seems she’s lived a quiet life for a long time. I’m struggling to see why the animosity towards her. The press was looking hard enough for that woman that several  people had to issue statements that they were not that person. 

No one would have believed her sooner. What proof would she have had? Anyone could say they shagged Prince Harry. She came forward now, when she could have remained anonymous

[TN-peach]

In not shocking news, The Daily Mail is reporting that someone has found from "The Tig" Meghan's blog a post about being rebel and not a Cinderella in a royal family and referring to pomp and circumstance surrounding William and Kate's wedding.  More proof that she knew more about the royal family that she said knew in the interviews. 

[Four is Enough]

I thought Meghan had to completely dismantle and take down the Tig before her marriage.

 

[treehugger]

The internet is forever. 

[louisa05]

1 hour ago, TN-peach said:

In not shocking news, The Daily Mail is reporting that someone has found from "The Tig" Meghan's blog a post about being rebel and not a Cinderella in a royal family and referring to pomp and circumstance surrounding William and Kate's wedding.  More proof that she knew more about the royal family that she said knew in the interviews. 

That one has been out there for years now. There's another with a photo of her holding up  one of those non-existent U.S. tabloids with Kate's photo on the cover. 

Edited February 15, 2023 by louisa05
clarity

[Jackie3]

2 hours ago, TN-peach said:

In not shocking news, The Daily Mail is reporting that someone has found from "The Tig" Meghan's blog a post about being rebel and not a Cinderella in a royal family and referring to pomp and circumstance surrounding William and Kate's wedding.  More proof that she knew more about the royal family that she said knew in the interviews. 

Of course she knew about the royal family. That's not proof of anything. Nearly everyone knows about the royal family.

Did she know what it feels like to have paparazzi chase you on the highway? Did she know what it was like to be trashed in the media? To have her every. move dissected negatively? That you are supposed to curtsey to this one but first to that one? That you address footmen one way, but courtiers another? 

I mean, do you know all that stuff? No can can know it all, till they. live there. I suspect even "royal experts" would have a ton to learn if they became a senior roya.

[viii]

5 hours ago, TN-peach said:

More proof that she knew more about the royal family that she said knew in the interviews. 

While I definitely think she did downplay how much she knew about the royal family, there is a massive difference between "knowing" and "experiencing". Every expectant parent is warned how little they'll sleep and yet nobody is actually prepared for the horror that is sleep deprivation. I personally give her a pass on this one. 

[Jackie3]

29 minutes ago, viii said:

While I definitely think she did downplay how much she knew about the royal family, there is a massive difference between "knowing" and "experiencing". Every expectant parent is warned how little they'll sleep and yet nobody is actually prepared for the horror that is sleep deprivation. I personally give her a pass on this one. 

Similarly, you can know a lot about kids, and enjoy  friends' children. But it's nothing like having a child and raising it. 

 

Edited February 15, 2023 by Jackie3

[just_ordinary]

20 hours ago, viii said:

While I definitely think she did downplay how much she knew about the royal family, there is a massive difference between "knowing" and "experiencing". Every expectant parent is warned how little they'll sleep and yet nobody is actually prepared for the horror that is sleep deprivation. I personally give her a pass on this one. 

I agree and disagree. I am sure she didn’t „know“ them as in how they are really like. But they purposefully made it sound as if she had absolutely no clue about the BRF whatsoever. 
I mean it looked really tone deaf. Not excessively googling them to build up an idea about them based on tabloid gossip is good, but not doing any research if completely stupid. 
Feeling the vow exchange on the backyard was actually more important and meaningful for their relationship than the big wedding is understandable but saying you were actually married three days prior is factually wrong. 
Either they can’t wrap their heads around the meaning of words and that people take you by those words or they do it on purpose. Either way it makes them unreliable narrators. Just say what you actually mean instead of have people guessing in your favour.

[Jackie3]

6 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

But they purposefully made it sound as if she had absolutely no clue about the BRF whatsoever. 

Here in the US, I know plenty of people who know almost nothing about the royals. They don't know how many children Elizabeth had, or the name of her husband. They know there's one bad royal (Andy) but couldn't tell you his name. They don't know whether it's George or Edward or William or Charles who succeed QE2.

Generally, these are people who are busy living their lives, with busy jobs, sick relatives to care for, community involvement, etc.

I really don't see why this is such a terrible crime. England is not such a powerhouse anymore, that their royal family is so important

Edited February 16, 2023 by Jackie3

[prayawaythefundie]

Generally, those Americans busy living their lives have no plans to marry into the BRF though. When you start dating a royal, that‘s the time you should start the research for your own good.

[DalmatianCat]

Last weekend my online library hold for Spare was available so I listened to it and put my review on Goodreads and decided to share it here as well in case it would be of interest. Feel free to read or skip depending on your own feelings about the book!
********

I’ve been a royal watcher/fan for decades in spite of being right between Harry and William in age…suffice it to say, I had odd hobbies as I grew up. Because of that, it was nice to hear from Prince Harry himself (I listened to the audiobook) instead of just reading books or articles from others. However, he alerts the reader early on that he is not the most reliable narrator because he there are lots of conversations, events, and other details about his life that he can’t remember well or at all. That’s fair, but it did beg the question as the book went on, what is an actual memory, what is an assumption that your grown-up self is assuming about your childhood self, and what is just re-imagining past events in a way you thought they should go or wanted them to go? Due to that, I jotted down notes as I listened about things that stood out to me and wished could have been answered in a Q&A with the author (or at least wished an editor had asked him to expound on more). Those notes are my “review”:

-Granted there’s a lot about British culture I don’t understand, but from my American perspective, some of Harry’s issues probably had less to do with his family being royal, and more to do with growing up in a boarding school were matrons take the place of your parents in providing nurture and help you bathe until you turn 13 (yes, 13!). Once again…I realize that’s normal for a certain social class in England, but from a middle-class American perspective, that right there made me wonder how hard/easy it is to develop healthy relationships later on in life.
-He claims he was labeled the naughty one in school, and wanted to be thought of as noble. He is, in fact, being “naughty” (sneaking out at night to drink, smoke, get high while a young teen). He records this without any sense of irony.
-he remembers that his mother didn’t like his nanny Tiggy (a well-recorded fact), but remembers always being thrilled when Tiggy was around and adoring her. He thinks he might have felt guilty about loving Tiggy, but doesn’t remember, but thinks he should have. I had to pause and wonder why he felt it necessary to dwell on how he can’t remember guilt instead of just cherishing a part of childhood that he remembers as bringing him joy. It’s an early example of how Harry sets himself up for self-sabotage.
-He also mentioned that since he needed a Fine Arts credit to graduate he had to be in a school production and was aggrieved that he was neither asked or consulted by the director about what part he would play and claims this is just one more example of a pitfall of being royal. At which point I just had to say, “duh…most high school theatre directors don’t let you choose your part. It’s a school play for crying out loud!”
—he credits his helicopter instructor with “teaching me a lesson most people don’t know…the truth is painful.” I don’t know…I feel like most people know that…
—His relationship with Chelsy Davy seemed like a bright spot in his life. I’ve wondered if she’ll end up being his Camilla and they’ll find their way back to each other again decades from now.
—The last third of the book is devoted to his and Meghan’s relationship and dominated by the negative press articles. They seem to just consume him, which made me wonder, why not just ignore the articles? Why seek them out? Why not forbid your staff from bringing any into the house, why not *not* google yourself, etc? Why constantly fight them? He says he “had” to keep asking Meghan questions to find out what was true…why? That’s never really answered. It almost made me wonder if she and Harry trauma bonded in the early days of their relationship leaking and never really got a sense of what they liked about each other as a couple without constantly fighting the press.
—He claims that if the palace had said one thing in defense of Meg at her first public outing it might have made a world of difference. He never says why he thinks that would be true or provides any insight to support that theory. I was wishing he would.
-Harry was a child of divorce whose parents (amicably at times and not-so-amicably at others) parented and later split custody. He went to live at boarding school at a young age. When he was with his father over summer break he’d come check on his sons in the evening before leaving for “adults-only dinner” and then he and William would be on their own for hours. In short, his family was never that close. There were weeks and months at a time when he wasn’t around his parents or his brother. How much of that was a royal thing, a divorce thing, and just extremely wealthy thing is hard to discern, but, the general gist is, they weren’t really all that close as people emotionally and often had physical distance separating them as well. For whatever reason, Harry seems to think his family should have been more warm and welcoming and close when he began dating Meg, but there’s no evidence that the family was ever all that close.
—how did Harry not know the rules about asking the monarch’s permission to marry if you’re one of the first six in line of succession? I’m not royal, it doesn’t apply to my life, and I knew that was a rule. It’s weird that he had time to read tabloids, but not gather any legitimate information that affected his life.
—William warned Harry that dating Meghan would come with host of difficulties and this was the beginning of their now infamous falling-out. What I found interesting was 
1) William was right 
2) why be offended if you know you’re in love and this is right for you? 
Most close friends (which Harry desperately wanted his family to be) would give the same advice. Also…the truth hurts (see above)
—At one point he mentions, “It was nice to remember the British press isn’t reality” and at that point I wanted to scream, “quit reading your own press!” It’s never a good idea. Most famous actors don’t. How has no one told Harry this? 
—in the chapters on the lead up to the wedding he says “we wanted to elope barefoot in Botswana. But we were expected to share this moment with other people, it wasn’t up to us.” Says who specifically? Who did you ask who said no? There was plenty of negative press about how much the wedding cost. Would someone have really nixed the idea of a simple wedding? And who did they ask who did?
-he also mentions that he thought it was overkill to need a police escort for the wedding tiara…umm…we’re talking about a piece a jewelry that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. Why does a police escort seem like overkill and the palace stalling? It seemed reasonable to me.
—more on tiara-gate: much has been made of who made who cry. Harry’s perspective is only Meghan cried. But how were Harry and Meghan supposed to know whether or not Kate cried? The whole book is his perspective only and he never mentions asking.
—it’s strange that he thinks it’s a huge invasion of trust/privacy for Meghan’s father to publish her letter, but doesn’t think anything of sharing Kate and Meghan’s texts. Once again, there’s no sense of irony as he complains about other people violating their privacy while he does the same.
—He claims they talked to Oprah because “we had to do something to make the attacks stop.” Still…why??? And why do you think that will work? Who knows? Certainly not Harry.
—Overall, Harry has not had the easiest road to travel. Some of it is just learning to play hand you’re dealt like everyone in life must. Some of it could have been avoided if he’d had either good sense or good advisors. Unfortunately, more often than not, it seems he had neither.

-it’s hard to unravel how much of Harry’s complaints are actually related to the paparazzi, being part of the royal family, having parents who weren’t that great at parenting combined with losing his mother in a traumatic way, and just never getting over being second-born. After reading Spare I read “The Boys” written by Ron and Clint Howard about their childhood in Hollywood and growing up with varying degrees of fame. The parallels and divergences were fascinating because they both followed two brothers, one who was significantly more famous than the other, was well-known, and easily recognized for a time, and a younger brother who was never quite as famous, got into more trouble as a teen, struggled with drugs as an adult, but the family bond always stayed strong, and eventually he overcame his struggles.

-Just a random thought as a relatively happy second born married to another relatively happy second born, who is raising a few middle children, maybe Harry should read “The Birth Order” book? You can be special and have a meaningful life no matter your position in the family. I’m not sure anyone has ever told him that (and Harry seems to really struggle to gain any type of perspective), but maybe he’d like to hear it.

[Coconut Flan]

I've read that Charles among many others tried to get Harry to quit reading the tabloids.  One point with that is that Harry not only read the tabs, but compulsively read the comments sections.  Huge mistake if you want a peaceful life.  At times he's seemed his own worst enemy and as you say has little to no sense of irony.  

Edited February 18, 2023 by Coconut Flan

[prayawaythefundie]

6 hours ago, Coconut Flan said:

I've read that Charles among many others tried to get Harry to quit reading the tabloids.  One point with that is that Harry not only read the tabs, but compulsively read the comments sections.  Huge mistake if you want a peaceful life.  At times he's seemed his own worst enemy and as you say has little to no sense of irony.  

If that‘s in his personality, it‘s really hard to stop even though he might know it‘s harmful to him. I get it. If I know people write or talk about me, I need to know. Even if i know they are being complete asses. I can‘t help it. I‘m so glad tabloids don‘t care about me.