Duke and Duchess of Sussex: Future Duties, Roles and Responsibilities

[ACO]

The Sussexes aren't the Cambridges or the Cornwalls. And honestly they didn't do things the same way either. I don't see how Meghan did too much too fast. She worked on two projects and focused on her patronage while doing engagements. Isn't that what she is suppose to do? If she did nothing people would attack her for that. Not her working is wrong too? She literally can't win.

As for her friends... they clearly privy to things we might not know. To claim racism has zero to do with it is just false as Archie was all of a few hours old when he was called a monkey. I mean...

Is all criticism that? Of course not. I think the private jet debate is actually a valid conversation but the over the top way it is being reported does lead some to think this is just another excuse to pile on...

But this shall blow over eventually when the next headline comes.

[Durham]

Originally Posted by Nico

I do think there's a mix : a reject from a part of the establishment seing a divorced actress joining the BRF, a reject from a part of the pro Brexit Britain seing a foreigner joining the BRF and a yes a reject from some seeing a bi racial woman joining the BRF.
But maybe in order to counterbalance those challenges, the Sussexes seem to try a bit too hard, and too fast, to be relevant, instead of calmly, discreetly but firmly establishing themselves as pillars of the BRF, Cambridges and Cornwall style.
I don't think it's easy and there's no tutorial to be a perfect royal. The only thing i know, and i see, is that their PR has been just chaotic lately. Maybe a return to fundamentals, the good'ol, a tad boring but understated engagements across the UK could help to fix the somewhat blurred image of the last few weeks...

I think your second & third paragraphs are spot on

Being a British royal is a marathon not a sprint & the focus should always be on supporting the crown. There is a lot to be said for being dull & dutiful

[Ista]

Originally Posted by Nico

I do think there's a mix : a reject from a part of the establishment seing a divorced actress joining the BRF, a reject from a part of the pro Brexit Britain seing a foreigner joining the BRF and a yes a reject from some seeing a bi racial woman joining the BRF.
But maybe in order to counterbalance those challenges, the Sussexes seem to try a bit too hard, and too fast, to be relevant, instead of calmly, discreetly but firmly establishing themselves as pillars of the BRF, Cambridges and Cornwall style.
I don't think it's easy and there's no tutorial to be a perfect royal. The only thing i know, and i see, is that their PR has been just chaotic lately. Maybe a return to fundamentals, the good'ol, a tad boring but understated engagements across the UK could help to fix the somewhat blurred image of the last few weeks...

I think this is the crux of it. There undoubtedly are other issues--the "-isms" that have been pointed out numerous times--but at this point all of those are swirling around and adding to the missteps that I believe the Sussexes have been taking from almost the very beginning. Those have mostly been small missteps, but they are adding up in a significant way.

[Durham]

Originally Posted by Madame Verseau

I like that Meghan came out with her Smart Works fashion line. She is not going to hide behind palace walls or curl up in a ball in a corner at Frogmore. And if she played demure duchess like some people think she should she would have been dragged for that. This is never complain never explain 2.0.

Her work with Smart Works is commendable. What she did for Vogue I think gets perilously close to political & this is a big no no for British royalty.

If by demure it's meant that she should focus on traditional non controversial areas then yes she should be demure. The Countess of Wessex or the Princess Royal are the correct role models to follow.

Visiting places of work, schools, opening bridges etc. Representing the crown in the most remote parts of the country. Meeting with people, giving them formal recognition for their efforts & making them feel valued. This is the bread & butter of royal life.

Being royal is not the same as being an actress or an activist. The British people are not interested in royals for who they are but for what they represent. British royals are not celebrities, they are the custodians of an institution that has been in existence for over a thousand years. They are just passing through. Even the present monarch herself, loved as she is, will be but a passing (if glorious) note in a long history.

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by Durham

Her work with Smart Works is commendable. What she did for Vogue I think gets perilously close to political & this is a big no no for British royalty.

If by demure it's meant that she should focus on traditional non controversial areas then yes she should be demure. The Countess of Wessex or the Princess Royal are the correct role models to follow.

Visiting places of work, schools, opening bridges etc. This is the bread & butter of royal life.

Being royal is not the same as being an actress or an activist. The British people are not interested in royals for who they are but for what they represent. British royals are not celebrities, they are the custodians of an institution that has been in existence for over a thousand years. They are just passing through. Even the present monarch herself, loved as she is, will be but a passing (if glorious) note in a long history.

Excellent post.

The situation has not been helped by friends making statements. The woman who was on the Vogue cover now calling everybody in the UK the R word isn't very good, Jessica has also made a reference to the R word.
Disagreeing with Meghans views or actions does not make people haters or the R word.

[Madame Verseau]

@Durham - Sophie and Anne are different women with their own style in carrying out their royal role. You can't turn Meghan into them. It will not be seen as authentic for her. A different approach to royal work does not make wrong. When there were moments of solemnity, Remembrance Day, Anzac Day etc I don't recall Meghan wildin' out at the church acting a complete fool. She conducted herself accordingly. Give her a chance and let her do the work of her patronages.

[ACO]

I think Meghan isn't that far off from The Countess of Wessex who recently was in NYC speaking about the rights of women. In fact she said something similar to Meghan in which... and I paraphrase -- that if a table is full of men than we as a woman should just pull up a seat anyways.

I actually would love for them to do something together in the future.

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by Madame Verseau

@Durham - Sophie and Anne are different women with their own style in carrying out their royal role. You can't turn Meghan into them. It will not be seen as authentic for her. A different approach to royal work does not make wrong. When there were moments of solemnity, Remembrance Day, Anzac Day etc I don't recall Meghan wildin' out at the church acting a complete fool. She conducted herself accordingly. Give her a chance and let her do the work of her patronages.

I don't think anybody wants Meghan to change, but the poster was suggesting that maybe it would have been better to take things at a slower pace. Let her find her feet within the royal family, it is different to the life she came from.

[MARG]

Originally Posted by Pranter

I think it's a mix of racism, classism and nationalism all mixed in.



LaRae

There is 'truth' there. Unvarnished, uncomfortable and unpalatable, but 'truth' nonetheless.

Originally Posted by Durham

Her work with Smart Works is commendable. What she did for Vogue I think gets perilously close to political & this is a big no no for British royalty.

If by demure it's meant that she should focus on traditional non controversial areas then yes she should be demure. The Countess of Wessex or the Princess Royal are the correct role models to follow.

There is nothing "nothing perilously" close to political in her guest-editing of Vogue. It wasn't political, full stop. I know we are more used to seeing our royals on the cover with a nice spread of photos and an article inside but Meghan had the opportunity to guest-edit the issue.

She was totally upfront about continuing her work to advance the cause of women so it is no surprise that the Vogue edition should reflect that. That is a big deal and since she had been working on it since January I think it is safe to say that the HM and her in-laws were well aware of what she was doing.

Since Sophie's children were both at school, her focus has widened to include engagement such as speaking at the Commission on the Status of Women at the UN.(see royal home page) The visit follows The Countess's announcement on International Women's Day that she would champion women’s full and meaningful participation in peace processes for women.

We have a responsibility to ensure that women have every opportunity to reach the highest levels of their profession and lead across political, economic and social spheres. In the societies we live in today, there is no excuse not to include women.

So we have Camilla, Sophie and Meghan all working on specifically avenues to raise the status of women.

Seems there's a whole bunch of radical royal Women! But that's what you get when an heir presumptive decides to tinker with engines and drive ambulances? Come to think of it, she has never stopped working to be relevant as a woman and a Queen and her royal style of diplomacy is, quite simply, matchless. I heard the then Crown Prince of Saudi was quite terrified during his tour of Balmoral!

I believe that HM is enjoying the women in her family and encourages and supports them to do what they can just as she did and does. Mehan is no exception and, contrary to many peoples opinion, IMO the Queen takes a personal interest in all of the work done by the women of her family and knows when to slam on the brakes.

[Countessmeout]

The job of royals is NOT to open bridges and tour hospitals. Yes its part, but not the Main part. The job is to support the economy and charities, aiding the country. All royals have their own causes, things which they are passionate about. The older generation yes they tend to be less controversial, as that is the time they grew up in.

But even then we have Charles with his green energy, and yes that has caused a great deal of controversy. And claims he was budding into politics.

We have Camilla who is taking on how victims of domestic abuse and rape are handled by the authorities.

We have Harry and the Cambridges (now Meghan) taking on the stigma of mental health awareness.

Heck Diana was applauded for breaking barriers and getting into things like AIDS and land mines.


If you look at the royals on the continent the royal women are involved with the UN, World Health Organization and other major groups. They are speaking at conferences and looking to make change. There is nothing that Meghan is doing that is ground breaking or earth shattering for a royal woman to be doing.


None of her choices for Vogue were political, well other then the one politician. But she wasnt chosen because she was a politician. They were chosen for their support of women, the LGBTQ community and the arts. All of these are topics that are already supported by the royals.

I actually think the reason that the Hub is not an official patronage is because of this absurd fear it would be seen as being too political. Having her take on a charity that is so focused on minority groups, at least as her first patronage. Instead its just her 'special project'.


Her clothing line is a fantastic initiative. Like the cook book she was involved in, I love when royals do something hands on and are not simply the face of the charity. I always thought that Kate the photographer should use her photographs to raise money for her charity work. I like Meghan does.

The amount of women who will get outfits donated to them for their interviews because of this is important. Sometimes that new outfit and a new hair cut is just the boost of confidence a woman needs to nail an interview.


Unfortunately it was too 'glamerous' of a charity initiative. For all those who thought some charity appearances may help quell the flight talk. The wolves are out, calling it an attempt to make her friend Misha richer, and that this is all flash and no substance.

[Madame Verseau]

@countessmeout. - let Meghan be Meghan and as long as she is not committing real crimes against the UK she should be fine

[Gawin]

One difference between Meghan and the other royal women is the fact that she was a vocal activist before her marriage. I could be wrong but I suppose some people may think (rightly or wrongly) she's using her new status as a royal to promote her "own agenda" rather than supporting the monarchy.

It's also much easier to criticize a royal whose beliefs are widely known than one who keeps a lower profile (look at Prince Charles compared to Prince Edward).

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by Pranter

I think it's a mix of racism, classism and nationalism all mixed in.

LaRae

And the fact that she's a successful woman in her own right who has been very vocal & confident about the causes she supports. For some people she checks off too many of the wrong boxes. For example, she challenges traditional views on the proper "place" for women & people of color, not to mention she's a nontraditional choice for a royal bride (a divorced, biracial American actress).

[Lola123]

Lurker but had to comment. Why people seem to zero in on MM? I think it's because her introduction as a biracial woman to the royal family was initially a joyous occasion for many people of color and other ethnic groups within the Commonwealth. As an American, I thought it was awesome! The expectations were high and people were excited.
Unfortunately and sadly, many folks, including myself, slowly noticed that Meghan (the person) was actually a terrible fit for the position. She is simply too immature, self-centered, indifferent to the English people and obviously using her royal platform to merch herself and her celebrity friends. A newbie to ANY job is expected to learn and lay low the first year. Most businesses hate when new employees try to take over and go rogue too soon without following the rules.

[MJudith]

What I really like about Meghan is that she works around big projects : the cookbook, editing vogue, the capsule collection... Things that you remember, you understand clearly what they are trying to gain by each action (renovating a kitchen, clothes for women...) just like Harry with Invictus and Sentebale. Her patronages are much more practical, material but there is always a short term finality to them that is exciting.

Like many royal watchers, I follow the royals first and then look a bit at their charities separately. H&M are very involved in promoting their charities and very outspoken. They manage to get their message across by always having a big, new project and not a flow of small, random visits to their charities.

Regarding the random visits to hospitals and bridge openings, every royal do this kind of work including H&M...

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Ista

I think this is the crux of it. There undoubtedly are other issues--the "-isms" that have been pointed out numerous times--but at this point all of those are swirling around and adding to the missteps that I believe the Sussexes have been taking from almost the very beginning. Those have mostly been small missteps, but they are adding up in a significant way.

I think you are right. There seem to be a series of missteps, that just seem to be adding to a much bigger perception issue. These missteps could emanate from any or a combination of:

> eagerness to do things differently from the rest of the BRF;
> not valuing the experience that Charles and William have;
> not having a competent and experienced team around them to help implement some of their ideas;
> genuine errors of judgement;
> listening to the wrong people; or
> not listening to the advice received from their team.

This can all be salvaged and the narrative can be turned around. There are plenty of members of the BRF can talk H&M through that if they want. Look no further than Philip, Charles, Camilla, Anne, Sophie, Catherine to name a few.

Originally Posted by Nico

But maybe in order to counterbalance those challenges, the Sussexes seem to try a bit too hard, and too fast, to be relevant, instead of calmly, discreetly but firmly establishing themselves as pillars of the BRF, Cambridges and Cornwall style.
I don't think it's easy and there's no tutorial to be a perfect royal. The only thing i know, and i see, is that their PR has been just chaotic lately. Maybe a return to fundamentals, the good'ol, a tad boring but understated engagements across the UK could help to fix the somewhat blurred image of the last few weeks...

I think you make some interesting points.

> I think it will be key for Harry and Meghan to focus the bulk of their public engagements around bread and butter issues that matter to British people on a day to day basis. In my view, this has to be the "core" of what they do, and that is what will help win the respect of the people on the ground.

> This is exactly how Anne and Sophie have gone about doing it.

> I am not suggesting the issues they support are those that Anne and Sophie supported, but those that are personal to H&M.

> The big, "headline" causes and activism can follow in time, but really need to be subsidiary to the core. That will mean a lot more Scunthorpe, Hull, Glasgow, Wolverhampton, Cardiff and Romford, rather than Sicily, Paris or New York.

[Lilyflo]

Originally Posted by muriel

> I think it will be key for Harry and Meghan to focus the bulk of their public engagements around bread and butter issues that matter to British people on a day to day basis. In my view, this has to be the "core" of what they do, and that is what will help win the respect of the people on the ground.

> This is exactly how Anne and Sophie have gone about doing it.

> I am not suggesting the issues they support are those that Anne and Sophie supported, but those that are personal to H&M.

> The big, "headline" causes and activism can follow in time, but really need to be subsidiary to the core. That will mean a lot more Scunthorpe, Hull, Glasgow, Wolverhampton, Cardiff and Romford, rather than Sicily, Paris or New York.

I agree entirely with this. I hope this winter provides lots of photos of them on grey/rainy days in British towns to balance out the sunshine pics overseas & glitzy events that will also be in their calendar. It might sound petty but image matters & theirs needs tweaking more towards the mundane & unglamorous.

[BaiSoSo]

Originally Posted by Lola123

Lurker but had to comment. Why people seem to zero in on MM? I think it's because her introduction as a biracial woman to the royal family was initially a joyous occasion for many people of color and other ethnic groups within the Commonwealth. As an American, I thought it was awesome! The expectations were high and people were excited.
Unfortunately and sadly, many folks, including myself, slowly noticed that Meghan (the person) was actually a terrible fit for the position. She is simply too immature, self-centered, indifferent to the English people and obviously using her royal platform to merch herself and her celebrity friends. A newbie to ANY job is expected to learn and lay low the first year. Most businesses hate when new employees try to take over and go rogue too soon without following the rules.

Wow where did you come up with all of the adjectives for Meghan... can you give examples of those behaviors because I honestly don't seem them?

She indifferent to the UK people? How so? She literally helped victims of Grenfell with a cookbook that has allowed their kitchen to stay open and serve the community 7 days a week and empowered the women to start additional services within the community. She has been and is currently working hard with the SmartWorks charity mentoring women, bringing attention to the work and working to secure more/better clothing options for those that needed. She has visited all of her patronages at least two times. Unlike some royals where the patronages had to admit they haven't sat down and spoke with the individual yet.

She has been on two tours that were very successful and during that time represented the UK and Queen wonderfully and is currently preparing for a 3rd.

In addition the Queen has given Harry and Meghan substantial responsibilities within the Commonwealth so they have that group to engage and promote as well.

Everyone who comes in contact with her and actually works with her has nothing but good things to say about her.

I don't get why people were expecting her to lay low (other than to have the option of calling her lazy). It was made clear before she got married that she would hit the ground running and it seems like that was the expectations of BP as well. She didn't go rogue the firm assigned her, her first official engagement three days after her marriage, the Queen was taking her on an engagement within weeks of her marriage and they sent her on a major tour within 6 months of said marriage. Why would the firm hold an 'employee' back when they know they have the ability to do the work and make a difference from the beginning?

Originally Posted by muriel

I think you are right. There seem to be a series of missteps, that just seem to be adding to a much bigger perception issue. These missteps could emanate from any or a combination of:

> eagerness to do things differently from the rest of the BRF;
> not valuing the experience that Charles and William have;
> not having a competent and experienced team around them to help implement some of their ideas;
> genuine errors of judgement;
> listening to the wrong people; or
> not listening to the advice received from their team.

This can all be salvaged and the narrative can be turned around. There are plenty of members of the BRF can talk H&M through that if they want. Look no further than Philip, Charles, Camilla, Anne, Sophie, Catherine to name a few.

What experience does William have that Harry doesn't have? Harry was the one partnering to create Sentable at 20 yrs of age? Harry was the one working to create Invictus games that has International impact. Harry played a major part in Heads Together. What prominent projects does William have? Hasn't Harry been working with Charles? Taking on some of his environmental concerns?

As for eagerness to do things differently....isn't the saying the BRF has survived this long because they have learned to adjust and change with the times. If they keep their heads in the sand and not change with the current times they will not succeed. Harry and Meghan know this.

How do you know they aren't listening to their team?

[Curryong]

Why would Harry need to be talked through or take instruction on how to conduct himself on public engagements by Kate? Harry was experienced in public engagements long before Kate joined the BRF. And has William really got so much more experience than Harry in such things?

I think not. Both brothers became full time royals at about the same time, and both were part time for several years. Harry's always been very engaged and interested when interacting with the public. He doesn't need instructions from his brother and sister in law!

[muriel]

Originally Posted by muriel

I think you are right. There seem to be a series of missteps, that just seem to be adding to a much bigger perception issue. These missteps could emanate from any or a combination of:

> eagerness to do things differently from the rest of the BRF;
> not valuing the experience that Charles and William have;
> not having a competent and experienced team around them to help implement some of their ideas;
> genuine errors of judgement;
> listening to the wrong people; or
> not listening to the advice received from their team.

This can all be salvaged and the narrative can be turned around. There are plenty of members of the BRF can talk H&M through that if they want. Look no further than Philip, Charles, Camilla, Anne, Sophie, Catherine to name a few.

Originally Posted by BaiSoSo

How do you know they aren't listening to their team?

I don't, and I did not say that they did not. I said it could be any or a combination of factors that could be causing the mis-steps.