The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #41  
Old 04-21-2019, 12:57 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 304
...It also remains to be interesting that in my opinion Kate and Meghan honestly don't seem to have any issues between them, but Harry hasn't been seen interacting with his brother at shared engagements since last November.
__________________

  #42  
Old 04-21-2019, 12:59 AM
Sunnystar's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Oregon, United States
Posts: 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloep View Post
It also remains to be interesting that Kate and Meghan don't seem to have any issues between them but Harry hasn't been seen interacting with his brother since last November.
Wasn't he just at the David Attenborough film premiere with Charles and William last month?
__________________

  #43  
Old 04-21-2019, 01:03 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunnystar View Post
Wasn't he just at the David Attenborough film premiere with Charles and William last month?
Yes, exactly and in my opinion, their lack of interaction was jarring in contrast to their past ways.


Something is clearly brewing behind KP's walls, I don't see how this is still undeniable. Even this very article just names entirely too many names for it to be completely fictitious...

Just to be clear, no I don't take this at face value. I am certain that Harry and his African American mixed race bride and their to be mixed race child won't be 'shipped of to Africa'. It is not possible for several reasons (for example, Meghan's citizenship application and Harry being Counsellors of State that requires him and spouse to live in the UK by law).
  #44  
Old 04-21-2019, 01:23 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,835
First of all, William is not the next King. He’s the future Prince of Wales and he and his wife is very popular. Harry and Meghan is also very popular and they all make up the new faces of the Monarchy.

The Queen is handing down lots of responsibility to the younger royals, so Harry and Meghan aren’t moving away to Africa. Now, they may do a tour and produce a project down there, but they’re not going to pack up and move so William can be satisfied.

The press is enjoying milking the rumor of a sour relationship between the two brothers. We can be made at them, but I think KP, CH and BP has handled all of this stuff wrong. The lack of effort to stop these rumors have helped the rumors gain a life of its own. They’ve allowed the narrative of the Royal Fab Four turn into the Royal Sour Four. None of this is good.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
  #45  
Old 04-21-2019, 01:46 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 10
All the commotion & concern from couriers about Harry's role seems excessive. Why can't he just focus on his patronages & projects like Princess Anne, Prince Andrew & Prince Edward? Harry's popularity should be seen as a positive for the firm and it shows that support for the monarchy is secure.
  #46  
Old 04-21-2019, 02:00 AM
muriel's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
What I was trying to say in my original post was we should go back to the way we posted before the advent of Meghan. Honest and comfortable, without fear or favour, disagreeing with some posts and totally endorsing others without OUR members reflecting the tension of 'outside", worrying if our post could be perceived as racism, sexism, trying to undermine Meghan, taking a swipe at Catherine.

Asking, no demanding, the source of a piece of information and utterly rejecting vague answers. We are better than that, or we used to be. Vegan? Oh please, rubbish from the net. Vegan paint? Good grief does it even exist? Non toxic and environmentally friendly, yes.

Is there a chance that we can just call it as we see it? Some of us have "known" each other for years just like Muriel knows I am unlikely to agree about where Meghan sourced her clothes being an issue and she is going to tell me why it is. We all have interactions like that, they are exactly what the seem. Can't we just continue to debate the issue without someone being over-sensitive?

Usually ugly stuff just oozes off the net. The fight of the Duchesses followed by the fight of the Dukes. We are too afraid to post it, laugh, demand a reputable source and call BS when none is forthcoming.
Very well put, and a thought I have expressed a view times before. The attraction of TRF was always a place where disparate views could be expressed and discussed in a respectful manner. We did not always agree, but we could agree to disagree in a civil and respectful manner. We increasingly have a situation here where contrarian views are really not appreciated, and some members often just do not bother posting as it does not seem worth the bother.
  #47  
Old 04-21-2019, 02:40 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Somewhere in, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,184
It makes no sense to "send" Harry and Meghan "somewhere in Africa", when they just moved to a newly renovated house, while Meghan is in the middle of applying a UK citizenship, and when clearly Meghan and Harry have long term plans with their UK and commonwealth patronages and charities. The Times article makes the courtiers sound and look really out of touch.
  #48  
Old 04-21-2019, 04:10 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
None of this rings true...are you guys really buying into this?


LaRae
I don't believe this story, but I do really like the idea. The Commonwealth is a huge part of the world, and it really should have long term representatives from the RF.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
Nope, but these palace officials havenít done much of anything to stop these terrible rumors from snowballing. Such a sad thing for a pregnant woman to have to go through.
If the palace tried to get every rumour, they be at their desks 24/7. It's impossible. When the palace does respond to rumours, the big ones, it makes the response more credible because they don't do it all the time.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #49  
Old 04-21-2019, 04:24 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,830
OK, I call BS on the article. Harry has worked hard to be seen as a serious worker. He has successfully carved out a place for himself and, trolls notwithstanding, Meghan has established herself as both a loving and supportive wife and a hard worker.

Their move to FC was always on the cards. Heavens, it was discussed as nauseum as to whether they would get Adelaide Cottage or York Cottage or . . . Then came the announcement that we all got it wrong and it was Frogmore Cottage, a forgotten historical gem. But we all expected a new home and KP was never part of that narrative.

The dialogue only changed with the DM and others insisting the wives were at each other throats.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
  #50  
Old 04-21-2019, 04:47 AM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 5,918
Roya Nikkhah is the reporter who wrote an article saying the Sussexes wanted their own household independent of Buckingham Palace and the Queen and Prince Charles put their foot down and told them no. She also wrote an article that kinda played into the whole "Duchess difficult" rumor. Nikkhah's reporting was dismissed/condemned by some royal watchers, so I'm actually surprised that this article about a Sussex move to Africa (and a rift with William) is being take at face value.
__________________
  #51  
Old 04-21-2019, 05:03 AM
Dalriada's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 372
Itís interesting that matters about the royal rift are now discussed openly in the broadsheets and its not just the tabloid press. Itís all reminiscent of the war of the Walesís back in the 1990s.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/a...rift-j3cft5d3d
  #52  
Old 04-21-2019, 05:20 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by soapstar View Post
Roya Nikkhah is the reporter who wrote an article saying the Sussexes wanted their own household independent of Buckingham Palace and the Queen and Prince Charles put their foot down and told them no. She also wrote an article that kinda played into the whole "Duchess difficult" rumor. Nikkhah's reporting was dismissed/condemned by some royal watchers, so I'm actually surprised that this article about a Sussex move to Africa (and a rift with William) is being take at face value.
I don't think many will take it at face value. That's not to say there isn't an underlying truth in there. Also, courtiers may have all sorts of plans that won't ever come to fruition for a variety of reasons. The question for me is what is the main problem that's driving it all? As I said earlier, I think it's the complex dynamics of Charles / William / Harry & their relative positions versus popularity.
  #53  
Old 04-21-2019, 05:49 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 8,908
Buckingham Palace is not denying a report that officials have discussed sending Harry and Meghan to Africa as a way of capitalising on their appeal to young people in the Commonwealth - and of putting further distance between them and the Cambridges.

Buckingham Palace: “Any future plans for The Duke and Duchess are speculative at this stage. No decisions have been taken about future roles.
“The Duke will continue to fulfil his role as Commonwealth Youth Ambassador.”

Richard Palmer Twitter
  #54  
Old 04-21-2019, 05:53 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Oxford, United Kingdom
Posts: 265
Iím not convinced. What if they want another child? Canít see that happening aboard.
  #55  
Old 04-21-2019, 06:04 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: zagreb, Croatia
Posts: 25
William and Kate might be less exciting than newlywed Harry and Meghan, but why are the royals expected to be flamboyant and interesting all the time?

Take a look at Queen Elizabeth. We love to praise her for her quiet dignity and bespoken composure, yet we expect the future king and heir to act like Big Brother contestants.

I have a feeling one can never satisfy people. Royals are not Hollywood stars, remember that.
  #56  
Old 04-21-2019, 06:13 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,765
I can see the idea being floated but it doesn't seem practical longterm just now with a newborn, a new house and their patronages etc in the UK. A long tour, a big presence on the world stage through the Commonwealth an important project maybe but not exile until Charles becomes King or something.

Although funny, I remember a few years ago before Megan people were wondering if Harry wanted to live in Africa and work with Sentebale and other charities permanently and would meet and marry a charity worker there.
  #57  
Old 04-21-2019, 06:15 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by solinka View Post
William and Kate might be less exciting than newlywed Harry and Meghan, but why are the royals expected to be flamboyant and interesting all the time?

Take a look at Queen Elizabeth. We love to praise her for her quiet dignity and bespoken composure, yet we expect the future king and heir to act like Big Brother contestants.

I have a feeling one can never satisfy people. Royals are not Hollywood stars, remember that.
well that's the problem. the second son is often able to be more popular because he has more freedom. Will is stuck with the dull duties, he's married with kids.. He is naturally anyway a rather quiet shy person and not an enthusiastic performer. Harry was always the "lively one"..and with a wife who has a background as an actress I think that they are both going to be the "glitzy" ones who can be more amusing and entertaining...
I don't think that clowning around comes naturally to William and if he tires to do it, it doesn't come off.
but back in the 80s when Charles and Di were very new and popular, there were calls for the queen to retire and let them take over.. they were young, attractive entertaining popular and she was a dull older woman who was out of touch...but she's still here!
  #58  
Old 04-21-2019, 06:21 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
I do believe that senior advisers at KP, BP and possibly CH have been viewing the Sussex phenomenon (both positive and negative) with concern since the wedding. There was perhaps a hope that with the splitting of the Households (which effectively shuffled Harry and Meghan off to BP,) that the emphasis and focus of the media would shift, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

I bet they wish it was back in the 1940s and Harry could be offered a GG role in Australia or Canada, leaving the limelight on the Cambridges in the UK. Impossible now!
I don’t think a position as GG in Australia or Canada is a realistic option. There has been a tradition since the 1950s of the GG of Canada being a Canadian citizen ( although not necessarily born in Canada like Adrienne Clarkson or MichaŽlle Jean). Reverting to a British Prince as GG wouldn’t be politically acceptable and, frankly, would only play into the hands of the republicans who would bring back the “foreign Head of State” issue, which BTW seems to be their only concrete argument against the monarchy.

I am not as knowledgeable about Australia as I am about Canada, but I suppose the same reasoning would apply to advise against offering Harry the GG position. In fact, it would be even more politically toxic in Australia than in Canada since republicanism is stronger in the former than in the latter.

On the other hand, I don’t see Harry and Meghan living permanently in a foreign country that is not a Commonwealth realm. There are plenty of Commonwealth countries in Africa, but they are all republics. Having Harry in Botswana or any other African republic could bring back talk of neocolonialism, which would also be politically and diplomatically unacceptable. So I think it won’t happen. Besides, inside the UK, it would look like an exile punishment for the Sussexes, reminiscent of David and Wallis. It doesn’t make any sense
  #59  
Old 04-21-2019, 06:42 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Glasgow, United Kingdom
Posts: 215
https://twitter.com/SkyRhiannon/stat...471376385?s=19
  #60  
Old 04-21-2019, 06:55 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
well that's the problem. the second son is often able to be more popular because he has more freedom. Will is stuck with the dull duties, he's married with kids.. He is naturally anyway a rather quiet shy person and not an enthusiastic performer. Harry was always the "lively one"..and with a wife who has a background as an actress I think that they are both going to be the "glitzy" ones who can be more amusing and entertaining...
Eh, the same was said of Andrew, once upon a time.
He was more popular than Charles, hard as it is to believe today.

And the Snowdens were once the glitzy ones...

Popularity is very fickle; it can turn sour in a heartbeat. What matters is position in the hierarchy, and William is the one who has it. The RF is well-aware of that.
__________________

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
Duchess of Sussex: Future Duties, Roles and Responsibilities soapstar The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 625 04-11-2019 05:02 AM




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 stťphanie 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 09:18 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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