The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2161  
Old 05-07-2021, 03:02 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
If the publishers felt that Meghan was a rotten writer, the book had no potential and would not sell, then it wouldn’t matter what title she had; whether a Queen or Empress, the publishers wouldn’t have signed her up. No publisher is going to shell out money on a book they feel won’t sell. A ‘name’ can only carry a product so far.
Poetry isn't really my thing, so I'm not expressing an opinion on the quality of the writing. But quality and profitability aren't inextricably linked, especially when the writer is someone famous. Plenty of people who love Meghan will buy the book because she wrote it, and plenty more will buy it to see what all the media fuss is about. Children's books have a pretty limited market, and those factors mean this one will sell more copies than most regardless of its quality.

I do think it's strange that someone too concerned with her son's privacy to release a real photo of him is willing to publish something she says is based on the emotional relationship between Harry and Archie. That's a very intimate thing to be putting out there for mass consumption. Assuming her concerns about privacy are sincere, I think it's likely that she at least considered publishing this under a pseudonym. Why that didn't happen is entirely speculation, but a publisher considering that question may have come to the same conclusions I did about the profitability of her name and title.
__________________

  #2162  
Old 05-07-2021, 03:04 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by EllieCat View Post
If this is an example of Meghan's writing, then I don't think Anne of Green Gables has anything to worry about
Is that what the book's like? It reads like the sort of thing a kid of Prince George's age would write!
__________________

  #2163  
Old 05-07-2021, 03:34 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
If the publishers felt that Meghan was a rotten writer, the book had no potential and would not sell, then it wouldn’t matter what title she had; whether a Queen or Empress, the publishers wouldn’t have signed her up. No publisher is going to shell out money on a book they feel won’t sell. A ‘name’ can only carry a product so far.
No I have to disagree with that, I'm not saying it's bad but she is being published because of who she's married to.
  #2164  
Old 05-07-2021, 03:43 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
No I have to disagree with that, I'm not saying it's bad but she is being published because of who she's married to.
So are lots of people, their books may sell Ok for a bit because of who they are, but they wont last long.
And as she and Harry explicitly walked out of hte RF, and "doing things the royal way", it seems a bit iffy to use her family title to sell a book like this.
  #2165  
Old 05-07-2021, 03:50 AM
Claire's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
So are lots of people, their books may sell Ok for a bit because of who they are, but they wont last long.
And as she and Harry explicitly walked out of hte RF, and "doing things the royal way", it seems a bit iffy to use her family title to sell a book like this.
Yep - it is a side swipe to complain about the institution and then not break way from the completely in regard to your name. And it is perhaps the simplest thing to do.

That been said - I have in my book shelf books written by HRH The Prince of Wales and HRH The Duke of Edinburgh. I also have a book by The Duchess of York (no HRH) and a book by HRH Princess Michael. And then Edward Windsor. So if there was a protocol here - it is all over the place. does it depend if the book is for charity ect I have no idea. So I really cant say Meghan did anything underhanded here.
  #2166  
Old 05-07-2021, 05:19 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,461
its not underhanded, it is hypocritical., None of the people you mention have vey publicly criticised the RF and then continued to use the titles that they got as members of the RF.
  #2167  
Old 05-07-2021, 06:01 AM
Archduchess Zelia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 2,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
If they want to hide him, why even bother posting his photo ? Either they want Archie to have complete privacy or they don’t...but if they do, then why write a book about him (in part) ? If they want to release a photo for their fans, it just seems odd that it (they, since they never show his face) is always with his back to the camera so no one can ever see him. If releasing a photo isn’t for their fans, why not just wish Archie a happy birthday with no photo ?
It's virtually no different than what Eugenie and Jack have been doing so far with August.
__________________
"Hope is like the sun. If you only believe it when you see it you'll never make it through the night."
Our Princess

  #2168  
Old 05-07-2021, 06:15 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,658
When it comes to the birthday photo on Archewell, all I saw was a artistic rendering of a boy and balloons that signify a birthday. I don't really see any ulterior motive behind it or that they're "hiding" Archie. It kind of reminded me of their wedding photo where we see the backs of the couple as they gaze at fireworks. So not a really big deal as I see it.

As far as the Queen taking steps now to limit the HRH Prince/ss titles, I think she's going to leave it up to Charles to do when his time comes. Whether or not Archie and his sister get the HRH or Prince/ss when Charles becomes king really shouldn't be a sticking point for the Sussexes. They were the ones that decided they no longer wanted to be involved in the "Firm" or the monarchy of the UK and they've moved to the USA. Their children will be raised as private citizens and I can't see the necessity of them having any kind of titles "just because" of who they are. If Charles decides to change things up, it won't have any kind of ulterior motives against the Sussexes but rather because of changes he deems necessary for the good of the "Firm" and the monarchy.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #2169  
Old 05-07-2021, 06:30 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
its not underhanded, it is hypocritical., None of the people you mention have vey publicly criticised the RF and then continued to use the titles that they got as members of the RF.
Yes, that's the problem. I don't see anything wrong with Princess Michael publishing a book as HRH Princess of Michael of Kent, for example. OK, her books - whilst they are actually very good - would probably not sell as well if they were written by Marie-Christine Bloggs, but you can say that about a lot of books. The difference between her and Meghan is that she has not publicly criticised the Royal Family, saying many things which were blatant lies designed purely to damage the Royal Family's reputation.

Olympic gold medallist Jessica Ennis Hill, Great British Bake Off winner Nadiya Hussain, comedian David Walliams, actor Channing Tatum and footballer Marcus Rashford, to name but a few, have all written children's books. Would the books have been published if they'd been written by Joe Bloggs? Almost certainly not. I haven't got a problem with Meghan doing the same, but I do object to her using her royal title after everything she's said about the Royal Family.
  #2170  
Old 05-07-2021, 06:34 AM
Lee-Z's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Heerlen, Netherlands
Posts: 3,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
No I have to disagree with that, I'm not saying it's bad but she is being published because of who she's married to.
Yep, but like it or not, that is the reality of celebs nowadays, they get attention, people want to hear about them, people buy their stuff and sponsor what they sponsor, just because they are famous faces.. otherwise we wouldn't have tv shows like 'housewives of xxx' or cookbooks written by tv presentors etc etc.

Celebrity sells.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
So are lots of people, their books may sell Ok for a bit because of who they are, but they wont last long.
And as she and Harry explicitly walked out of hte RF, and "doing things the royal way", it seems a bit iffy to use her family title to sell a book like this.
That is how several of us view it (i do too), but i'm pretty sure that H&M's 'Unique selling point' (USP) is that of 'Royals who do good and want to modernise the world, but are thwarted by the grey suits'.

That is what their celebrity is based on, so they are going to use it.
And no commercial organisation will say no to that.

It would take some serious level of crime before commerce ditches a celeb.
__________________
Wisdom begins in wonder - Socrates
  #2171  
Old 05-07-2021, 06:47 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Kopenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
I don't think they are hiding his hair. I think overall they just shielding his image as a whole as much as they can. Also they know how nasty people can be. All you have to do is read comments on any of the royal social media pages that posted birthday wishes to him today. Oy. I wouldn't be too thrilled to have his image dissected by the public either.

Anyways there have been private pictures of him seen. He has reddish brown hair. Not that it really matters.
it looked dark brown or black and curly in the video.
  #2172  
Old 05-07-2021, 07:17 AM
AC21091968's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,400
Judging by the recent image of Archie with balloons, I think Archie's hair colour is more likely to be brown or even auburn rather than red hair (like Harry and Beatrice whose hair were lighter when they were children). But then the colour changes over time as he gets older.
  #2173  
Old 05-07-2021, 07:18 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
I see.

It is worth adding that there is a difference between retroactive law and a law which takes effect for existing persons. For instance, if at some point after the accession of King Charles, he were to issue Letters Patent specifying that from the date of the Letters Patent, Archie would no longer be entitled to use the HRH, there would be no retroactivity. On the other hand, if King Charles were to issue Letters Patent declaring that Archie had never been entitled to use the HRH at any point in the past, such Letters Patent would be retroactive.

I don't see Charles issuing LPs that apply only to specific individuals, e.g. Archie. Any change to the existing rules will be of general application to a class of people probably.


If LPs were issued now limiting HRH to children of the heir as opposed to children of sons of a sovereign of the United Kingdom, would current HRHs who are in the latter category, but not in the former (for example Beatrice, Eugenie, the Duke of Gloucester, and the Queen's 3 Kent cousins) also lose their titles? Or would the LPs only apply to persons who became children of sons of a sovereign, but not of the heir, after the LPs were issued?
  #2174  
Old 05-07-2021, 07:28 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
If the publishers felt that Meghan was a rotten writer, the book had no potential and would not sell, then it wouldn’t matter what title she had; whether a Queen or Empress, the publishers wouldn’t have signed her up. No publisher is going to shell out money on a book they feel won’t sell. A ‘name’ can only carry a product so far.
Mediocre to badly written books sell all the time. From what I can tell, Meghan is not a good writer at all, and her publisher is absolutely counting on her name to sell this book....
  #2175  
Old 05-07-2021, 07:41 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Kopenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
Mediocre to badly written books sell all the time. From what I can tell, Meghan is not a good writer at all, and her publisher is absolutely counting on her name to sell this book....
Didn't another poster (maybe Claire, sorry if not you)) say the book has been offered to various publishers until being accepted?
This can mean the book is bad or Meghan did not want the deal, more money or... .


I don't know if its Charles wish or strategy but think it is wrong HM does not do something about the titles/HRH, should be done years ago and now there will be trouble ahead with H&M it's unfair to leave it to your heir to deal with it in his reign, but I've read a lot here and elsewhere saying HM puts her harmony above all instead of finding solutions.

By the way, IF the decision that no uniforms are to be worn for the funeral was to please Harry, c'mon how far will this go to happen? Harry must accept the consequences and if he was the only one to wear a suit it's due to his decisions, no one forced him to let duty go.
What's next Trooping the Colour without uniforms ? LOL I don't think Harry will be invited.
  #2176  
Old 05-07-2021, 08:33 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,120
As another poster so eloquently put , much better than me, if nothing is to change then there is no need to do anything.

If Charles wants to make changes for the future generations then he will.
  #2177  
Old 05-07-2021, 08:39 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,752
As for the title? We will just have to wait and see about Archie and his sister. My guess is nothing at the moment is in the works to change but obviously no one knows the future. I just think they need to be smart about it. There is really no need to wait if the long term plan is to remove it.
  #2178  
Old 05-07-2021, 09:32 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 757
Quote:
Originally Posted by valeas View Post
Didn't another poster (maybe Claire, sorry if not you)) say the book has been offered to various publishers until being accepted?
This can mean the book is bad or Meghan did not want the deal, more money or... .


I don't know if its Charles wish or strategy but think it is wrong HM does not do something about the titles/HRH, should be done years ago and now there will be trouble ahead with H&M it's unfair to leave it to your heir to deal with it in his reign, but I've read a lot here and elsewhere saying HM puts her harmony above all instead of finding solutions.

By the way, IF the decision that no uniforms are to be worn for the funeral was to please Harry, c'mon how far will this go to happen? Harry must accept the consequences and if he was the only one to wear a suit it's due to his decisions, no one forced him to let duty go.
What's next Trooping the Colour without uniforms ? LOL I don't think Harry will be invited.
From what I saw in the papers, it was Prince Andrew who wanted to dress as an Admiral. But all these are rumours because they were not announced or confirmed by the Palace.
  #2179  
Old 05-07-2021, 09:35 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 2,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
Is that what the book's like? It reads like the sort of thing a kid of Prince George's age would write!


That’s what I’m wondering. Is this reflective of the book as a whole?

Admittedly, poetry is not my favorite genre. But, if this is the quality of the poetry, I can’t say I’m impressed. It’s definitely not Shel Silverstein IMO, whose work is a classic.

Also- I thought this was a children’s book. That was my impression of how it seems to be marketed. If this is a sample of how the book reads as a whole - I don’t see this being a book a child would enjoy. It seems like a book for parents to me.
  #2180  
Old 05-07-2021, 10:55 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: İstanbul, Turkey
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Meghan doesn’t have a title. Harry was given one by his grandmother the Queen on his wedding day. By custom all wives married in the British Isles take their husbands styling and rank (if they want, and most do.)


Therefore the Duchess of Sussex is her legal name. Meghan Markle isn’t. It was the professional name she used as an actress. She hasn’t used it since she married. Nor would Meghan Mountbatten Windsor be strictly correct for a Duchess.


Meghan has every right to use her styling. If the couple using their titles in any of their endeavours was unacceptable to the Queen then she would have asked them not to (as she did with the HRHs) or moved to remove Harry’s Dukedom, difficult though that might be. She hasn’t.
Oh,i'm sorry. Let me try again. I'm sure she will make very good money off of her styling. And yes she could use her professional name after she thrashed the instituion and her husband's family. Family that got her worldwide fame and allowed her to publish this book. But Meghan Markle doesn't have the same power as Duchess of Sussex, does it?
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 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 3: March - April 2021 Jacknch Current Events Archive 2203 04-06-2021 12:08 PM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia baby names baptism britain british british royal family british royals brownbitcoinqueen camilla's family camilla parker bowles carolin china chinese clarence house colorblindness customs dresses dubai duchess of sussex duke of sussex earl of snowdon elizabeth ii general news thread george vi gradenigo harry and meghan hello! hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs japan jewellery kensington palace king edward vii lili mountbatten-windsor list of rulers luxembourg medical monarchy mountbatten names nepalese royal family pless prince harry princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn princess chulabhorn walailak princess dita princess eugenie princess laurentien princess of orange princess ribha queen consort queen elizabeth ii royal jewels royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon spanish royal family swedish queen thai royal family tradition uae customs united states wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:24 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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