The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1081  
Old 12-10-2018, 02:04 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by loonytick View Post
Except they didnít say that. It was reported that way, but itís not what they said. They said they *werenít willing* let their thoughts or emotions outóthatís not the same as saying no one tryed to get them to do so or offered them the help they needed. Iím pretty sure Harry specifically said he had therapy right away but was uncooperative. You can lead a horse to water but you canít make him drink; along the same lines, you can get a grieving teen access to mental health specialists but you canít make him participate in a meaningful way.

Itís quite telling that the thrust of their mental health campaign (which was the context for those interviews) isnít about making therapy available so much as it is encouraging people to put aside their fear of talking and access the already available therapeutic resources, because theyíre saying that they understand what it is to be too stubborn to participate but have also found that when you let down your guard things can get better. All that says to me that help *was* offered and they wish theyíd taken it from the start.
Ah, that makes sense. Hopefully now that someone has pointed out their original words, posters would stop taking it the wrong way.

And yes, totally agree about the issue of timing. Of course the media and others have to sensationalize it for a particular narrative they want to paint. I keep thinking back to all the fury over how dare Harry say it was his brother that encouraged him to seek help in his late twenties as thatís a slight at his father when Harry didnít mention anything about Charles. And him not mentioning Charles isnít a slight at Charles. It simply is his moment where the lightbulb went on.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1082  
Old 12-10-2018, 03:34 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,658
I thought this thread is about relationships between members of the British royal family, not the British royal family and the media, which thread is closed.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1083  
Old 12-10-2018, 07:21 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
I thought this thread is about relationships between members of the British royal family, not the British royal family and the media, which thread is closed.
In this instance, some posters have formed their thoughts about what the relationships between certain family members are from articles written after interviews.

The articles were not accurate based on what W&H actually said in the filmed interviews, calling into question the idea of a fractured or poor relationship between W&H and their father as described in the articles.

Little was said about the media as an entity. It was about the relationships between W&H and Charles.
Reply With Quote
  #1084  
Old 12-10-2018, 03:29 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 13,980
I think too that its wise to remember *why* those interviews happened. It was the time of W&H's mother's 20th anniversary of her death. They were being filmed to talk about their mother and the impact her death had on them. They weren't there to specifically talk about their father.

If I remember right, around the time of that anniversary, Charles himself was in Scotland. I believe he purposely removed himself at the time from the public eye so as to allow those that wished to remember Diana do so peacefully without his presence digging up old memories of what transpired in their marriage.

There was quite a bit of dredging up the negative and the blame game anyways. Andrew Morton released a 25th anniversary edition of his book on Diana that rocked the world in 1992.

The bottom line is that I believe, at this time, William and Harry were very, very careful to put the focus solely on their life with their mother. They weren't excluding their father but rather focusing primarily on their mother.

The media saw what they wanted to see anyways. They always do.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #1085  
Old 12-10-2018, 03:36 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
Agreed. I think it's awful that two boys can't remember one parent without it being seen as a diss to another parent. How would people like them to mention Diana during Charles' 70th birthday year? Does this mean they are dissing Diana? They've got two parents, and they should be able to honor both without being made to feel like they have to choose one parent over another.
Reply With Quote
  #1086  
Old 12-10-2018, 03:38 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 3,399
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
Agreed. I think it's awful that two boys can't remember one parent without it being seen as a diss to another parent. How would people like them to mention Diana during Charles' 70th birthday year? Does this mean they are dissing Diana? They've got two parents, and they should be able to honor both without being made to feel like they have to choose one parent over another.
Harry DID mention his mother in the interview about Charles.

Charles was not mentioned in the interview about Diana.

I don't think that means they love one more than the other but it was a noticeable difference.
Reply With Quote
  #1087  
Old 12-10-2018, 03:58 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I think too that its wise to remember *why* those interviews happened. It was the time of W&H's mother's 20th anniversary of her death. They were being filmed to talk about their mother and the impact her death had on them. They weren't there to specifically talk about their father.

If I remember right, around the time of that anniversary, Charles himself was in Scotland. I believe he purposely removed himself at the time from the public eye so as to allow those that wished to remember Diana do so peacefully without his presence digging up old memories of what transpired in their marriage.

There was quite a bit of dredging up the negative and the blame game anyways. Andrew Morton released a 25th anniversary edition of his book on Diana that rocked the world in 1992.

The bottom line is that I believe, at this time, William and Harry were very, very careful to put the focus solely on their life with their mother. They weren't excluding their father but rather focusing primarily on their mother.

The media saw what they wanted to see anyways. They always do.
Completely agree! It would be different if Charles and Diana were still in love and married when she died but they weren't (though I believe they were starting to get to a better place in their post marriage relationship with each other) so they can't sit there talking about all the times "dad did this or that". Better to just focus on Diana and their relationship and memories of her and I think Charles was respectful of that and stayed out of it. If they had talked all about Charles then the media would have had a fit digging up the worst of the "War of the Wales", so W&H choose to focus solely on Diana...and the media make a fuss about that!
Reply With Quote
  #1088  
Old 12-10-2018, 06:23 PM
Jacknch's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,375
Let's move on please, we discussed those interviews that William and Harry made ages ago.
__________________
JACK
Reply With Quote
  #1089  
Old 12-10-2018, 10:09 PM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 8,980
As we mature into adults our perspective on our lives changes and we see things through the eyes of an adult. The warmth of the relationship between Charles, Harry and Megan are beautiful to see. The gentle easy way Charles escorted Megan when he took her arm at the Quire and the look Harry and Charles share as her hands Meghan off speaks volumes about how they feel about each other. From my take, it seemed very comfortable and warm.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #1090  
Old 12-19-2018, 09:39 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 30
This article about the Duchesses was on the People website. No named sources, so take with a grain of salt. I took from it that there isnít some big feud, but that they are different, strong women with different roles. Also that the natural evolution of marriage changes family dynamics and each is finding their own place is the monarchy.

https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-kate-middleton-complex-relationship/
Reply With Quote
  #1091  
Old 12-21-2018, 04:05 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 13,980
Yesterday was a day spent reading more of "Our Queen" by Robert Hardman and in the segment I was reading, Andrew was quoted on questions asked of him about the family's dynamics. I found this part to be not only interesting but also informative. Its a great book and I recommend it.

"The constant issue is that there are more people speculating and trying to find out about our normality and reality than is sometimes healthy. The family life that we have had is as much of a family life as your family life. Its had its ups, its had its downs. Its had its good times, its bad times. That's the nature of the beast. And we make the most of family time that we can."
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #1092  
Old 12-21-2018, 04:07 AM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 5,286
Posts discussing the Markles, posts about the media and posts engaging in back and forth bickering have been deleted. Let’s stick to the topic and please remember to be respectful of one another.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1093  
Old 12-25-2018, 02:42 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,658
Cross-posting here from Lady Gabriella Windsor thread this comment and my response as it references royal family relationships:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
... does that mean [Meghan and Harry have] forgiven Princess Michael for her Blackamore broach, if they don't does it mean they haven't/baby Sussex rumours etc.
The brooch worn by Princess Michael last December is surely the furthest thing from any one's mind in the royal family, so I don't think anyone's forgiveness was needed or offered. Also, I have no idea what you are referencing regarding 'baby Sussex rumors.'

Meanwhile, the brooch is not connected to the name you have termed it to be. Princess Michael was wearing a Moretto Veneziano made by Nardi, in Venice. There is a widely overlooked informative and enlightening article (published in January 2018) that describes the historical and cultural significance of the brooch, which I will link in the British Royal Jewels of the Past thread.

Regarding speculation about how Kate & Meghan get on, this is one of the more balanced and reasonable articles I've read, which appears to be an attempt to tone down the more exaggerated nonsense in check:
https://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...1981b3def37fb9
Reply With Quote
  #1094  
Old 12-26-2018, 06:34 AM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,486
The Fail strikes again. Allegedly the queen and Charles ordered Kate and Meghan to put an end to their "feud"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...uce-Queen.html

As if two grown women were incapable of settling any differences, if there were any. Whoever is this palace "source", he/she did nothing but do damage to both women.
Reply With Quote
  #1095  
Old 12-26-2018, 06:38 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,537
Well no surprises....the DF and the tabloids have to come up with another "drama" story. It's what they do!
Reply With Quote
  #1096  
Old 12-26-2018, 07:09 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,292
SMH...really...


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #1097  
Old 12-26-2018, 09:49 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: many places, United States
Posts: 1,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
The Fail strikes again. Allegedly the queen and Charles ordered Kate and Meghan to put an end to their "feud"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...uce-Queen.html

As if two grown women were incapable of settling any differences, if there were any. Whoever is this palace "source", he/she did nothing but do damage to both women.
I truly do not believe for one minute that there is a palace source, just a jerk reporter and editor wanting to cause trouble and sell papers. Immoral people.
__________________
Forgiveness is the fragrance the violet shed on the heel that crushed it - Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
  #1098  
Old 12-26-2018, 11:02 AM
duchessrachel's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Birmingham, United States
Posts: 858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
The Fail strikes again. Allegedly the queen and Charles ordered Kate and Meghan to put an end to their "feud"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...uce-Queen.html

As if two grown women were incapable of settling any differences, if there were any. Whoever is this palace "source", he/she did nothing but do damage to both women.
I don't know if I even believe there is a palace source. I don't put it past the DM to outright lie.
Reply With Quote
  #1099  
Old 12-26-2018, 03:55 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 13,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
The Fail strikes again. Allegedly the queen and Charles ordered Kate and Meghan to put an end to their "feud"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...uce-Queen.html

As if two grown women were incapable of settling any differences, if there were any. Whoever is this palace "source", he/she did nothing but do damage to both women.
Actually the Fail achieved its goal. It got you to sit up and pay attention to it. They're not aiming for the royal ladies at all but to the people that eat this kind of thing up for breakfast and come back for more.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #1100  
Old 12-26-2018, 11:44 PM
Cathy-PA USA's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Harrisburg, United States
Posts: 28
Thoughts and opinions?

Now that articles are coming in about the Royals Christmas at Sandringham, i'm very interested in the assessments of members of this thread.

1) Camilla. Was she at Sandringham at all?
I have seen only one article that mentioned the arrival of the Prince of Wales this year, that article stated he arrived alone. No judgement to her. I would mostly definitely want to spend Christmas in the relaxed presence of children/grandchildren rather than with the Royals, myself.

2) Kate and Meghan seem to be doing quite well, from the video and pictures of the Christmas morning walk. Not BFFs, but quite cordial. Kate seemed very natural and at ease. Meghan a bit less so, more tense. That would be natural for someone still learning the traditions and how the holiday plays out.

3) Prince William and Prince Harry remained far apart with very little interaction Christmas morning. While Princess William seemed in normal form, Prince Harry did not seem his fun loving self, not much inclined to smile in the direction of Prince Charles or Prince William. It almost seems as if after always feeling comfortable, supported, accepted, and equal throughout his life a reality of being less, the constraints of the hierarchy inherent to this royal family is setting in a way that is not suiting well.

4) Interesting to see Prince Andrew so very assertively taking his place in the car with the Queen on return to the house. We also consistently see Prince Edward and family remaining physically closest and in company with the Queen throughout the year. These are places Phillip and Camilla have had the honor of before. Prince Andrew showed quite a "make way, make way, I'm coming through, I'm assigned to do this, and no wonder as I'm ever so important" feel, as he passes by everyone else to hightail it to the car.

5) What do the dynamics of spare brother heirs say?
Wondering if Prince Harry is now negotiating what Prince Edward has realistically managed, and Prince Andrew has been chaffed and somewhat resistant to accept for many years. Andrew is the first Prince of York who won't become King in three generations. The Queens two younger sons certainly have some choice Berkshire Crown Estate properties secured, fortunate timing for Prince Andrew in particular.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, princessanne, relationship, relationships, siblings


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Relationships between the Members of the Danish Royal Family jellybeans Royal House of Denmark 328 10-02-2019 12:07 PM
Relationships between Members of the Spanish Royal Family kil Royal Family of Spain 1497 02-20-2019 07:17 PM
Relationships between members of the Princely Family michelle Princely Family of Monaco 324 08-11-2018 02:22 AM
Relationships Between Members of the Swedish Royal Family Grandduchess24 Royal House of Sweden 56 11-02-2015 01:32 PM
Relationships between members of the Norwegian royal family. Dennism Royal House of Norway 78 11-22-2012 07:04 AM




Popular Tags
administrator alqasimi aristocracy armenia belgian belgian royal belgian royal family birthday celebration countess of snowdon crown prince hussein's future wife current events cypher cyprus danish history denmark duchess of cambridge duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex dutch history earl of wessex family search french royalty future wife of prince hussein germany hamdan bin mohammed harry head of the house henry v house of bernadotte house of grimaldi house of orange-nassau house of saxe-coburg and gotha king philippe letter lithuania lithuanian castles marriage mbs meghan markle mohammed vi monaco royal monarchist monarchy naples nelson mandela bay nobel prize official visit palaces potential areas prince charles prince harry princely family of monaco princess anne qe2 queen mathilde queen paola romanov family rumania shakespeare south korea spanish royal state visit swedish history swedish royal family united kingdom usa valois viscount severn windy city


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:29 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019
Jelsoft Enterprises
×