The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1221  
Old 03-18-2021, 10:50 PM
Eskimo's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 539
Article about Meghan (and Diana) from The Atlantic, a well respected magazine



https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...ent=edit-promo
__________________

  #1222  
Old 03-18-2021, 11:00 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: N/A, Bulgaria
Posts: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
Article about Meghan (and Diana) from The Atlantic, a well respected magazine



https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...ent=edit-promo
I saw this article a few hour ago and I found it rather thought-provoking. Combined with the recent results for popularity in the US, it rather suprised me. I was left with the general impression that Harry and Meghan were far more liked in the US than these results show and this article reflects. I mean, the interview was so clearly aimed at their American audience.


As to Harry and Meghan's living arrangements - let's not forget that: 1) They weren't the heir couple, although even William and Catherine didn't get their KP apartment immediately; 2) Their marriage came after a series of failed marriages within the RF, which *might* have made the Queen more reluctant to straight out *hand* estates as wedding gifts; and 3) Harry and Meghan married shortly after their meeting and engagement which, in the terms of choosing and renovating a home base for them, might have proven problematic. Edward and Sophie did have a home immediately after their wedding, I believe, but they had lived together for years and I have no problem believing that something had been prepared for them without any rush because there was simply no reason. Theirs wasn't a whirlwind romance, it developed over time. With Harry and Meghan, the time might simply have not been enough.
__________________

  #1223  
Old 03-18-2021, 11:07 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,157
Harry and Meghan married about two years after they first met, which is about average for many couples. Harry had more or less made his mind up it was serious after several weeks and probably told his family. The RF knew the couple were unofficially engaged for weeks before the official announcement. And the last divorce among the working senior royals was quite some time ago, long before the Sussexes married.
  #1224  
Old 03-18-2021, 11:10 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,323
I could only read a short ways into it and had to close it out. I don't believe it was a fair article to either women. But that's just me. Usually I like things I've seen in The Atlantic.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #1225  
Old 03-18-2021, 11:20 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: N/A, Bulgaria
Posts: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Harry and Meghan married about two years after they first met, which is about average for many couples. Harry had more or less made his mind up it was serious after several weeks and probably told his family. The RF knew the couple were unofficially engaged for weeks before the official announcement. And the last divorce among the working senior royals was quite some time ago, long before the Sussexes married.
Meghan didn't even come to live in the UK until there were months before the wedding but whatever. I have another theory but you're going to dislike it even more than this one



Since there were a few stories that appeared in the tabloids and then were treated as true in Finding Freedom (although Scobie did his best to present Harry and Meghan stellarly in them), perhaps there was some truth in the rumours that they weren't pleased with a KP apartment (and given what I've seen of them, I have no doubt they expressed their feelings in a way that wouldn't sit well with me) and they demanded to live in the Windsor castle with the Queen.


I can see why they'd end up in Frogmore (which I, personally, find charming, excluding the closeness to a road. I suppose even this disadvantage could have been improved with proper security, though).
  #1226  
Old 03-18-2021, 11:25 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,157
I read that the Sussexes ASKED the Queen if it would be possible for them to have a flat adapted for them in the Castle. Not even the tabloids stated that either demanded it.

‘Trapped or not?’ A Constitutional expert weighs in on the difficulties of being a working royal.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/202...royals-trapped
  #1227  
Old 03-18-2021, 11:26 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 236
Didn't the Cambridges lived in a 4 bedroomed cottage in Anglesey during their first two years of marriage (including a few months after George was born)? I mean, considering that William worked at RAF Valley on the island as a helicopter rescue pilot, the majority of their time, they supposely spent it/lived in that cottage, right?
  #1228  
Old 03-18-2021, 11:41 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,157
It was announced in March 2013 that William would be leaving the RAF. He left in September 2013, while the apartment at KP was being readied for the family. They moved there in the October. I seem to remember Kate and George being with her parents in Bucks for a while after George’s birth, so I don’t think the Cambridges spent much time at Nott Cott at all.
  #1229  
Old 03-18-2021, 11:50 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
It was announced in March 2013 that William would be leaving the RAF. He left in September 2016, while the apartment at KP was being readied for the family. I seem to remember Kate and George being with her parents in Bucks for a while after George’s birth, so I don’t think the Cambridges spent much time at Nott Cott at all.
Nott Cott is the one in KP ground, right? Not the one in Anglesey, Wales. I remembered during the 5 Big Questions campaign Catherine mentioned about being alone with George while William was on RAF night shift. I assumed she meant when they're in Anglesey.
  #1230  
Old 03-18-2021, 11:51 PM
AC21091968's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by yukari View Post
Nott Cott is the one in KP ground, right? Not the one in Anglesey, Wales. I remembered during the 5 Big Questions campaign Catherine mentioned about being alone with George while William was on RAF night shift. I assumed she meant when they're in Anglesey.
Yes, Nottingham Cottage is at Kensington Palace ground
  #1231  
Old 03-19-2021, 12:09 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 5,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moran View Post
I saw this article a few hour ago and I found it rather thought-provoking. Combined with the recent results for popularity in the US, it rather suprised me. I was left with the general impression that Harry and Meghan were far more liked in the US than these results show and this article reflects. I mean, the interview was so clearly aimed at their American audience.


As to Harry and Meghan's living arrangements - let's not forget that: 1) They weren't the heir couple, although even William and Catherine didn't get their KP apartment immediately; 2) Their marriage came after a series of failed marriages within the RF, which *might* have made the Queen more reluctant to straight out *hand* estates as wedding gifts; and 3) Harry and Meghan married shortly after their meeting and engagement which, in the terms of choosing and renovating a home base for them, might have proven problematic. Edward and Sophie did have a home immediately after their wedding, I believe, but they had lived together for years and I have no problem believing that something had been prepared for them without any rush because there was simply no reason. Theirs wasn't a whirlwind romance, it developed over time. With Harry and Meghan, the time might simply have not been enough.

Moran-I believe that you've made some excellent points here in pointing out the Queen's "reluctance" when it came to granting residences (as well as the Family Order) to the newlyweds in the BRF post-Diana/Sarah years. She appears to be moving cautiously in these departments so Nottingham Cottage has definitely seen its share of bachelors and newlyweds enjoying it as a starter home.
  #1232  
Old 03-19-2021, 12:52 AM
rominet09's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: LIEGE, Belgium
Posts: 4,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
Article about Meghan (and Diana) from The Atlantic, a well respected magazine



https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...ent=edit-promo
So right and impressive !
  #1233  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:16 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
The tabloids have been vicious towards all of them at one time or another. Harry got years of mainly unquestioning, glowing press and Meghan’s coverage was initially almost ecstatic.

I do think as time went on Harry would have been treated unfairly in the press relative to William even if his behaviour had been exemplary. (snip interesting details - thank you for them!)

I wonder why this is that "the press" is taken as a natural force against the Royals of all countries. There are some which are more journalistically correct in their writing, albeit from a different point of view, like the Guardian or the Independant, but the other papers, tabloids or broadsheets are reacting like gutter press and I don't understand why people want to read these wars against the Royal family, if there is always only a bit of truth in the story and most is made-up to fill a narrative.



It makes me wonder, just saying.
  #1234  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:20 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
One thing that is a positive about the mansion in California is that should Harry and Meghan find they need time away from the children, they can just take a short trip to the other side of the house and order delivery from the kitchen, drink California wine and have a second honeymoon without being interrupted and return to the kids relaxed and refreshed.

I'd hate a house where it'd take 15 minutes to just find my way to the bedroom and 20 minutes to get to the kitchen. I'd definitely need me one of those Dukemobiles! (see Philip thread).

But these are quite fashionable in the US. I remember when I was a young girl I read that the producer Tory Spelling build a new house and the papers said (yes, I know!) that she needed for each member of the family 2000 sqms! And here we are considered well-off if we have a house for the family with 100 sqms each!
  #1235  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:41 AM
Sunnystar's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Oregon, United States
Posts: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
But these are quite fashionable in the US. I remember when I was a young girl I read that the producer Tory Spelling build a new house and the papers said (yes, I know!) that she needed for each member of the family 2000 sqms! And here we are considered well-off if we have a house for the family with 100 sqms each!
Tori Spelling is hardly the "average" Hollywood producer - her dad was Aaron Spelling and she grew up here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Manor_(Los_Angeles).

Granted, I will give you that house sizes in the US are quite a bit larger than most Europeans are used to. Even I, a single person with 2 cats, lives in a decent-sized, 2-bedroom apartment (one of which is a dedicated sewing/craft room).
  #1236  
Old 03-19-2021, 02:11 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moran View Post

I can see why they'd end up in Frogmore (which I, personally, find charming, excluding the closeness to a road. I suppose even this disadvantage could have been improved with proper security, though).

One should not forget that Frogmore Cottage, while being visible from a public road, is set back quite a bit. It is in a police protected private area and behind the house there is the entrance of one of the most beautiful parks in the vicinity, where even the queen comes over from the castle to take a walk. Ok, the graveyard is there as well! But many people live next to the graveyard wall in towns and villages alike. Master Archie in later years could have invited school friends to come and dig up "great-aunty Wallis" there for fun and normally no one would notice when it's not the time for the gardeners to prepare the grounds for a new season. I can absolutely see Eugenie to borrow the property when she came home with her baby boy as it is very convenient to her parents home of Royal Lodge.



I don't understand Harry when it comes to this and especially not Meghan. You must have known that when you marry a prince and get to live in a palace that these apartments are normally badly isolated and cold and clamy because they were build at a time when neither central heating, bathrooms nor electricity existed. So all modern amenities had to be build in later-on and I don't think the Royals of former times were as spoiled as American actresses. I recall when "Sisi" of Bavaria married emperor Franz Joseph I. of Austria-Hungary, he had redone her whole apartments after she was unhappy that there hadn't been renovations since Maria-Theresia and her mother-in-law thought that they are still fitting for a young empress! (Sisi was actually lucky, she could have ended up in the "emperor's apartment" from the renaissance...)
  #1237  
Old 03-19-2021, 02:44 AM
AC21091968's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
Article about Meghan (and Diana) from The Atlantic, a well respected magazine



https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...ent=edit-promo
Thank you Eskimo for sharing the link to The Atlantic article

It was very insightful and provided a great context/background in both Diana's and Meghan's situation. Despite the long article, I enjoyed reading it. It's also very interesting to read from a more left-leaning and US perspective in criticising Harry & Meghan. On most occasion, it was usually the right-leaning media that are critical of Meghan.
  #1238  
Old 03-19-2021, 03:43 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post


There was/is a huge difference between what a non working grandchild is going to be offered by the Queen versus a full time working royal grandchild.

Well Harry and Meghan expected to not be working royals AND be allowed to keep getting money and free security AND have his children be HRH prince/princesses. He said that on the interview and whined when it didn't happen.
  #1239  
Old 03-19-2021, 03:49 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
One should not forget that Frogmore Cottage, while being visible from a public road, is set back quite a bit. It is in a police protected private area and behind the house there is the entrance of one of the most beautiful parks in the vicinity, where even the queen comes over from the castle to take a walk. Ok, the graveyard is there as well! But many people live next to the graveyard wall in towns and villages alike. Master Archie in later years could have invited school friends to come and dig up "great-aunty Wallis" there for fun and normally no one would notice when it's not the time for the gardeners to prepare the grounds for a new season. I can absolutely see Eugenie to borrow the property when she came home with her baby boy as it is very convenient to her parents home of Royal Lodge.



I don't understand Harry when it comes to this and especially not Meghan. You must have known that when you marry a prince and get to live in a palace that these apartments are normally badly isolated and cold and clamy because they were build at a time when neither central heating, bathrooms nor electricity existed. So all modern amenities had to be build in later-on and I don't think the Royals of former times were as spoiled as American actresses. I recall when "Sisi" of Bavaria married emperor Franz Joseph I. of Austria-Hungary, he had redone her whole apartments after she was unhappy that there hadn't been renovations since Maria-Theresia and her mother-in-law thought that they are still fitting for a young empress! (Sisi was actually lucky, she could have ended up in the "emperor's apartment" from the renaissance...)
Meghan however did not ‘get to live in a Palace’, she and Harry were given former staff accommodation, and I don’t believe that any Royal from any dynasty living in the 21st century would wish to live as the Habsburgs or Romanovs did in the 1850s and ‘60s. So Meghan being an American actress is irrelevant.
  #1240  
Old 03-19-2021, 04:28 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
I wonder why this is that "the press" is taken as a natural force against the Royals of all countries. There are some which are more journalistically correct in their writing, albeit from a different point of view, like the Guardian or the Independant, but the other papers, tabloids or broadsheets are reacting like gutter press and I don't understand why people want to read these wars against the Royal family, if there is always only a bit of truth in the story and most is made-up to fill a narrative.


It makes me wonder, just saying.
It's not just the Royals. There's a general feeling that the press like to knock anyone who's successful/rich/glamorous. Top class sports players, pop stars, actors, etc, get nothing but grief. Andy Murray, the first British man to win Wimbledon for 77 years, was criticised for years for looking miserable, like he was supposed to have an inane grin on his face all through his matches. David Beckham was, rightly or wrongly, accused of having an affair with a woman called Rebecca Loos, who was even interviewed on TV as if she was a celeb, and his house was mocked and called "Beckingham Palace". Gary Barlow from Take That's spoken about the mental health problems he had after the press relentlessly made fun of his weight. I could go on and on, and without even starting on politicians. It's horrible, but it's not just aimed at the Royals.


The Rebecca Loos thing was horrendous. She got a one-on-one interview, not even as part of a regular talk show but a special one-off programme just for her, with Kay Burley, the reporter who later stood outside the hospital each time the Duchess of Cambridge was giving birth, all because she claimed she'd had an affair with a footballer, who had a wife and (at that time) three young children. How exactly was that a matter of public interest? The media can be awful, but it's not just with the Royals.
__________________

Closed Thread


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
The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 2: December 2020-March 2021 JessRulz Current Events Archive 874 03-07-2021 08:05 PM




Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes america baby names biography britain britannia british royal family buckingham palace camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing cpr daisy doge of venice dubai duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex earl of snowdon edward vii elizabeth ii emperor family life fashion and style george vi hello! hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume highgrove hypothetical monarchs jewellery jewelry king willem-alexander książ castle list of rulers mary: crown princess of denmark mountbatten names nepal nepalese royal family plantinum jubilee pless prince charles of luxembourg prince dimitri prince harry princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn princess dita princess eugenie princess laurentien queen louise queen mathilde queen maxima resusci anne royal ancestry royal court royal jewels royalty of taiwan russian court dress solomon j solomon speech suthida thailand thai royal family uae customs united states united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:01 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×