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

[TLLK]

Originally Posted by muriel

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.

Good points and sound advice IMHO.

[Ista]

Originally Posted by muriel

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.

These are all such good points, especially the first and last ones. With their Commonwealth roles, they are going to be doing plenty of internationally focussed engagements, so keeping the balance of their work, in the shorter term, on more local, more pertinent to the British public engagements makes a lot of sense. I also think it might be good idea to prioritize engagements that didn't involve celebrities for a while. Fair or not, I don't think the Sussexes involvement with their celebrity friends is helping much with perception right now.

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Ista

I also think it might be good idea to prioritize engagements that didn't involve celebrities for a while. Fair or not, I don't think the Sussexes involvement with their celebrity friends is helping much with perception right now.

I think that is right. I might go further. Various celebrities attempts to fight the criticism of H&M is actually turning out to be very counter-productive.

[Ista]

Originally Posted by muriel

I think that is right. I might go further. Various celebrities attempts to fight the criticism of H&M is actually turning out to be very counter-productive.

Agreed. And to extend it even more, if they must do things with celebrities, it might help if the celebrities were at least British, rather than American, which I think also plays in to the "othering."

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by Ista

Agreed. And to extend it even more, if they must do things with celebrities, it might help if the celebrities were at least British, rather than American, which I think also plays in to the "othering."

How many American celebrities have they done projects with aside from Harry & Oprah’s mental health documentary?

[Ista]

Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile

How many American celebrities have they done projects with aside from Harry & Oprah’s mental health documentary?

I wasn't necessarily referencing projects, although I think some nice, high profile projects with British celebrities, for a British audience would be a fantastic idea.

[BaiSoSo]

Originally Posted by Ista

I wasn't necessarily referencing projects, although I think some nice, high profile projects with British celebrities, for a British audience would be a fantastic idea.

If you weren't referencing projects what where you referring to? Elton John has spoken up and he is British.

As for projects Meghan is currently working on a high profile project for a British audience and working with Misha Nonoo who is British.

[Dman]

I think it’s nice some of their friends have come to their defense and set the record straight. Lord knows you wasn’t going to get Palace officials to do it.

Meanwhile, the Duchess of Sussex has been working hard on behalf of her charities and other projects while pregnant and on maternity leave. That’s amazing and I think people should be paying more attention to that than the outside noise.

[Countessmeout]

Originally Posted by 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).

The job of the royals is not simply to support the queen. The queen is a ceremonial head. The job of the royals is to support their causes, and the country they represent.

Its a shame that she is criticized for having causes before she was married. I would rather someone who actually cared about helping people before they joined the royal family, then someone who only does patronages because 'its the job'. Someone who actually did charity work long before meeting her royal husband, who shows that she has a genuine passion for the work and its not simply an obligation of her role.

Yes Prince Edward is lower profile but is that a good thing??? No. The point of a royal is to bring attention to the cause. Thats what brings money for the charity and brings awareness to the need. Being low profile helps no one.

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

The job of the royals is not simply to support the queen. The queen is a ceremonial head. The job of the royals is to support their causes, and the country they represent.

Its a shame that she is criticized for having causes before she was married. I would rather someone who actually cared about helping people before they joined the royal family, then someone who only does patronages because 'its the job'. Someone who actually did charity work long before meeting her royal husband, who shows that she has a genuine passion for the work and its not simply an obligation of her role.

Yes Prince Edward is lower profile but is that a good thing??? No. The point of a royal is to bring attention to the cause. Thats what brings money for the charity and brings awareness to the need. Being low profile helps no one.

#1 I never said the job of a royal was simply to support the queen.

#2 I never criticized Meghan for having causes before she was married.

#3 I never said being lower profile was a good thing. I very clearly stated it's easier to criticize someone who's beliefs are known and used Edward as an example.

[Lola123]

Well, OK, this is just my two-cents but I am suspicious of the depth of her involvement and interest in her previous charitable work before her marriage. In the US, charitable photo ops have become "trendy" for Hollywood types. I agree that she generates interest but is it in her charities or does she gradually make it all about her, her status and inevitably her popularity. The positive remarks here are very sensitive but it's a balancing act with both Meghan and Harry. As an American I want her to do us proud and not inflict hurt on your established institutions.

[Dman]

Originally Posted by Lola123

Well, OK, this is just my two-cents but I am suspicious of the depth of her involvement and interest in her previous charitable work before her marriage. In the US, charitable photo ops have become "trendy" for Hollywood types. I agree that she generates interest but is it in her charities or does she gradually make it all about her, her status and inevitably her popularity. The positive remarks here are very sensitive but it's a balancing act with both Meghan and Harry. As an American I want her to do us proud and not inflict hurt on your established institutions.

Perhaps you should read up about the Duchess of Sussex. You’ll learn that, Meghan, has been helping others since she was a little kid. She was taught to help others who are less fortunate and make a difference long before she was a tv star and a senior member of the royal family. Those who know her personally will tell you she’s far from self-centered.

I’m American as well, and, I can tell you, a great deal of us in America are extremely proud of HRH The Duchess of Sussex. Especially in the African American community.

[Durham]

As a relatively new member I have enjoyed reading all the contributions. It’s always healthy to read about opinions that can be very different to your own in a mutually respectful forum. Looking back at comments about my previous post I would like to add the following:

Vogue Article

This article was seen by many as being political. It was partisan in its support & promotion of some views on which there is not as yet a settled opinion. This lack of a consensus makes any intervention by a member of the royal family unwelcome by many in Britain.

Camilla & Sophie

What I like about this forum it that contributors inform me of things I did not previously know. Thank you to those who brought up the work of these two.
I have to respectfully say however that I don’t see an equivalence between the two & Meghan. From what I can gather Sophie attended the UN (& visited Lebanon) at the request of the UK government. None of what she said could be considered controversial. I think that there is in the UK a consensus on these issues around girls & women. Similarly with Camilla I can’t really see what she has said (or her support for WOW) as being remotely divisive.

What is the purpose of the Royal Family?

On the British Monarchy website underneath the title “The role of the Royal Family” there is what I suppose you could call some sort of mission statement:

“Members of the Royal Family support The Queen in her many State and national duties, as well as carrying out important work in the areas of public and charitable service, and helping to strengthen national unity and stability.”

A long description of what members of the family then do follows such as charities, the military, promoting economic & culture endeavour , Commonwealth tours etc.

It ends with:

“the Royal Family as a whole plays a role in strengthening national unity. Members of the Royal Family are able to recognise and participate in community and local events in every part of the UK, from the opening of new buildings to celebrations or acts of commemoration”

because, to paraphrase, the Queen can’t be everywhere at once.

What I take from this is that supporting the crown, service to country & duty are what family members are for.

Their private opinions are of no interest or importance & if expressed are often unwelcome.

[soapstar]

The thread is now reopened and a number of posts have been deleted. Please take the time to read (or reread) the rules for the Sussex threads. You can find the rules posted here.

A few key points:

Any posts that feature any of the below will be removed by a member of the moderating team:

• Insulting comments directed towards the royals, other posters, the Markles or members of the media
• Subtle - or not subtle - accusations of racism towards other posters or members of the media
• Off-topic remarks
• Aggressive tones
• Agenda-driven posts
• Bickering
• Repetitive and circular discussion

The media is now no longer a topic of discussion. All comments on royal reporters, journalists, media outlets, or any comments with the intention of making the media the topic of discussion instead of the content of the article will be removed immediately by the moderating team.

Any further posts that ignore the thread rules will be deleted.

Additionally, let’s move on from the constant comparisons between the Sussexes and other royals. Also if you wish to continue discussing what new roles and and responsiblities Meghan and Harry should take on, please take it to their Future Duties thread.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

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.

Good gracious! Why the heck is there such a disdain for the traditional royal woman... Meghan would do well to look to the successes within the establishment she has pledged her life too... the way she has gone about some things she comes off as too much a celebrity and not enough of a low ranking member of the RF.

I agree with other posters, the Sussexes should focus on their smaller charities and stop trying to influence controversial topics like the environment, gaming, and feminism.
As for the "r" word in the US it has become a trend to label any criticism as somehow being because of the "r" word.

[ACO]

Seems strange people want to rip away who she is to be some faux version of herself to please who they think she needs to be as a royal.

[tausi]

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.

I agree with everything you said! Royal family is a "firm". Like any company, there are goals and there is a leadership hierarchy. All other performers need to tie their work with overall goals and vision of leadership.

The way Harry/ Meghan manage their projects is seeking too much attention on them and not the cause

All above are my views.

[Countessmeout]

Originally Posted by tausi

I agree with everything you said! Royal family is a "firm". Like any company, there are goals and there is a leadership hierarchy. All other performers need to tie their work with overall goals and vision of leadership.

The way Harry/ Meghan manage their projects is seeking too much attention on them and not the cause.

All above are my views.

No. They all support the queen in her functions and then they have their own paths. Every royal gets to choose their own causes and passions. Every Royal has. There is no line to toe.

You're right it's a firm. Not a dictatorship. It's a business who all the different departments do their own job. And add something. It's not the queen and heir and the others fall in line like the shadows.

Harry like his uncles and aunt before him is a younger child. He does mot have a clear road ahead of him. He and his wife have to forge their own road.

As for the comments I have seen they need to stop thinking New York and think local.....huh. What causes don't affect and mean anything to British people.

Meghan's patronages

Education
Animal welfare
Employment
The arts (British)

All of these are important to the common people. And all are popular patronages with other royals.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Originally Posted by tausi

The way Harry/ Meghan manage their projects is seeking too much attention on them and not the cause.

.

That's how I would describe how they seem to be proceeding recently.

[princess phineas]

not to appear snarky about Harry and meghan....I wish them every happiness, specially that archie is now on the scene. HOWEVER....does it seem to anyone else that ...."they want their privacy"...and "archie will be raised privately"......but the British taxpayers are footing the bill? upkeep of homes, etc? this has been nagging at me for a month. since it isn't my money supporting the Royals, it doesn't matter. but still. it just LOOKS like ....they want all the benefits and still have all the privacy. I don't hold for them to be "on display" at all times. but a few pictures here and there...not trying to stir up drama, but interested in other's point of view here.