Harry and Meghan: Relationship Musings

[AlowVera]

Originally Posted by Pranter

I don't think she will be re-branded ...can't imagine for what reason she would need to be.


LaRae

So true she does'nt need re-branding but they need to take control of the narrative. When there is a void, others like that non-sister step in and control the story.

[Alliec76]

Originally Posted by AlowVera

So true she does'nt need re-branding but they need to take control of the narrative. When there is a void, others like that non-sister step in and control the story.

I agree with controlling the narrative. That is something I think the BRF, in my humble opinion, from the other side of The Big Pond, has not always been very good at. They tend to let stories get away from them, and then have to play catch up.

[Osipi]

I see it more that the BRF does not play into the media whatsoever. The old adage "never complain, never explain" has worked for them for a very long time. Once they try to "harness" a story, it gives the media fodder to make whatever they want out of it. We saw this with Diana, Princess of Wales and her use of the media for her own purposes and how, at times, it turned against her.

The only thing that will come out of Kensington Palace (Harry's office) or Buckingham Palace (The Queen's office) or Clarence House (Charles' office) will be able to taken as fact as it comes directly from the official staff of the royal themselves. They only use statements when deemed necessary. That's why Harry's statement of a year ago had such an impact. If Harry's office had been playing cat and mouse with the media about things, it wouldn't have been taken as seriously as it was when Harry issued it. In the school of public relations, any statement from the official staff of the royals is like a statement from the principal of the school. You heed it.

The BRF or the "Firm" does not and will not ever use or play with or try and sway things by using the media. They don't have to.

[Countessmeout]

The idea of remaking her is ridiculous. Why? And in whose image?

The BRF is sensible. They know that there is never going to be any way to please everyone. And no matter what statements they make, they are going to get criticism. The press will spin their words to suit their purpose. They saw the fall back from the statement that Harry had made already.

So what image should they try and paint her as? The humanitarian? There will be those who say she is trying to be the next Diana. There will be those who accuse her, if she lands a role with a charity in the UK, of getting special treatment do to the royals.

She could be presented as the dutiful girlfriend who has given it up for love. But then she would be called duchess in waiting 2.0. That she is a gold digger and just waiting for a ring. And not in it for love.

This is the 21st century. Being an actress and humanitarian are nothing to blink at. Being a woman who has supported herself and made her own career are not things to gloss over. Its not like she was a playboy model and stripper.

[Mirabel]

I hope this isn't off-topic, but I asked in the future wedding thread and didn't get an answer.

Could Harry and Meghan marry on a regular bank holiday, for example the Spring Bank Holiday on May 28? That way they wouldn't cause more expense because they wouldn't need to have an extra day off.

Or must they marry on a special bank holiday, or else a weekend?

[wyevale]

Mirabel

There is no prohibition on marrying on Bank Holidays, so yes they could be married then.

[Curryong]

I think it would be nice if Harry and Meghan did marry in late May on the Bank Holiday, actually. In terms of traffic in inner London (should they choose WA) it would be more convenient than on a weekday or even a Saturday. In Windsor it will be even less of a problem.
The Cambridge baby number three will be here, and three year old Charlotte can be a more mature bridesmaid.

[Cocoasneeze]

I'm quite eager to see what the end of November and December brings from this couple. I'm thinking Meghan will quite quickly relocate to UK, they'll be seen out and about, and there will be an engagement announcement. But whatever it is they'll do, I cant wait to hear or see about it.

[MARG]

I would like to comment on the curious notion that Meghan Markle needed to be "rebranded" to ostensibly make her more acceptable to the people of the UK. What an odd notion.

Prince Harry seems totally in love with Meghan. That is the woman he met and developed a long-term relationship with. He met an animated, educated woman whose lifestyle choices obvious impressed him. Having met her he found she wasn't just an actress with a pretty face but a socially aware, articulate and active woman who spent a lot of her spare time in philanthropic or charity work.

She is also a self-proclaimed feminist who believes in equality, but there is no way that would make it necessary to be rebranded for UK usage. So what would inspire the notion that something about her needs to change? Nothing, that's what because if she has to change she is no longer the woman he fell in love with but a puppet.

The only thing I think Meghan needs is a helping hand in the world of royalty for the little things that matter to those she will meet and to enable her to confidently meet on equal terms. To maat o/tom ah toe types of things such as dining. But that's hardly an insurmountable problem.

Sooo . . . what else is left?

[hel]

Originally Posted by MARG

I would like to comment on the curious notion that Meghan Markle needed to be "rebranded" to ostensibly make her more acceptable to the people of the UK. What an odd notion.

Prince Harry seems totally in love with Meghan. That is the woman he met and developed a long-term relationship with. He met an animated, educated woman whose lifestyle choices obvious impressed him. Having met her he found she wasn't just an actress with a pretty face but a socially aware, articulate and active woman who spent a lot of her spare time in philanthropic or charity work.

She is also a self-proclaimed feminist who believes in equality, but there is no way that would make it necessary to be rebranded for UK usage. So what would inspire the notion that something about her needs to change? Nothing, that's what because if she has to change she is no longer the woman he fell in love with but a puppet.

The only thing I think Meghan needs is a helping hand in the world of royalty for the little things that matter to those she will meet and to enable her to confidently meet on equal terms. To maat o/tom ah toe types of things such as dining. But that's hardly an insurmountable problem.

Sooo . . . what else is left?

I don't think she needs to be rebranded. The hard things aren't forks or fashion or even to whom one curtseys. The hard things are "can I give up travelling for two months of wanderlust at a whim" or "can I be part of a system where Andrew is ahead of Anne in the line of succession" and "can I open my life to constant scrutiny, fair or not, that I cannot ever answer".

Regarding the culture difference that Meghan's already adapted to: before I moved to the US from Canada, a friend (who'd moved from the US to Canada years before) told me that, in some ways, it was a more difficult (not bigger) adjustment than moving from a clearly "foreign" culture. Because the two are so very similar on the surface that they lull you into a false sense that they're actually the same. Then you hit a difference and it's like a slap in the face. So I think that it's a mistake to dismiss Meghan's clear acclimation to Canada as not a big deal.

[American Observer7]

Word has it that it's William and Kate's 3rd baby that is preventing Harry from proposing or marrying Meghan? Totally ridiculous! First of all this is NOT their first kid, so the WOW factor that the excitement is not there. Secondly, Harry is grown and should not have to put his life on hold for his brother or his family. And finally because of who Meghan is and her background, they or she will always overshadow them. She's fresh, new and different. -American and Half Black. Meghan is an attention grabber!! That is just a fact.

[wyevale]

Meghan is an attention grabber!! That is just a fact.

In your head, perhaps. The REALITY is [if she marries Prince Harry] she will be the wife of the 5th/6th in line to the throne, and take her place behind the Monarch and her husband, behind the heir and his wife, behind the heirs heir and his wife.
She will be a of interest certainly, but since she is likely to be having Babies and mothering them [for the next 10 years] her opportunities to 'attention grab' will necessarily be limited. Her role will be 'supporting' NOT 'starring'. Something that as an Actress she will certainly understand.

[TLLK]

Her role will be 'supporting' NOT 'starring'

I so agree and it appears that all of those who have married into the BRF since 1990 have taken that role to heart. It seems to me that the palace is trying emphasize that the focus should be placed back upon supporting the monarch instead of being a "star."

[soapstar]

I've deleted the discussion about etiquette and dining habits in various countries, as well as the discussion about Meghan's diet and veganism. Let's keep this thread on-topic please.

[cepe]

Originally Posted by wyevale

In your head, perhaps. The REALITY is [if she marries Prince Harry] she will be the wife of the 5th/6th in line to the throne, and take her place behind the Monarch and her husband, behind the heir and his wife, behind the heirs heir and his wife.
She will be a of interest certainly, but since she is likely to be having Babies and mothering them [for the next 10 years] her opportunities to 'attention grab' will necessarily be limited. Her role will be 'supporting' NOT 'starring'. Something that as an Actress she will certainly understand.

I agree. I understand that Americans in particular will be excited and Us media will probably go into melt down and treat her like a mega celebrity.

But if she marries Harry, she will no longer be a celebrity but a member of the BRF and that comes with a sense of place, position and life long commitment.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by cepe

I agree. I understand that Americans in particular will be excited and Us media will probably go into melt down and treat her like a mega celebrity.

But if she marries Harry, she will no longer be a celebrity but a member of the BRF and that comes with a sense of place, position and life long commitment.

The US can go into meltdown as much as it wants to for all I care but with being a royal watcher, I've seen this relationship develop and got to know a little bit about the person that has captured Harry's interest. Unfortunately, we live in a world where people are stereotyped usually by one word as if that defined the all of who a person is.

I definitely see Meghan as a person that would take her place in the scheme of things seriously and totally. I don't think she'll be the type of person that will work *for* the Firm but will mesh in and work *with* the Firm to support it in any way she can. If anyone can cross the bridge between being a celebrity into being a royal, I think Meghan would be it.

[cepe]

Originally Posted by Osipi

The US can go into meltdown as much as it wants to for all I care but with being a royal watcher, I've seen this relationship develop and got to know a little bit about the person that has captured Harry's interest. Unfortunately, we live in a world where people are stereotyped usually by one word as if that defined the all of who a person is.

I definitely see Meghan as a person that would take her place in the scheme of things seriously and totally. I don't think she'll be the type of person that will work *for* the Firm but will mesh in and work *with* the Firm to support it in any way she can. If anyone can cross the bridge between being a celebrity into being a royal, I think Meghan would be it.

I wasn't commenting on Meghan but on the expectations of her "Fans".

[Osipi]

I think, in a way, so was I. If and when there is an engagement announcement, most people in the US will see Harry and Meghan as a celebrity love couple rather than how a royal watcher will perceive the upcoming nuptials. I'd even go as far as to say that even some British people will fall into the "fandom" angle.

We're lucky to be the royal watchers and know the differences between being a celebrity and a member of the British Royal Family and its "Firm".

[Denville]

Originally Posted by wyevale

She will be a of interest certainly, but since she is likely to be having Babies and mothering them [for the next 10 years] her opportunities to 'attention grab' will necessarily be limited. Her role will be 'supporting' NOT 'starring'. Something that as an Actress she will certainly understand.

I'm sure it will be dinned inot her.#
Though I don't see why she will be having babies for 10 years. how many is she going to have?

[AdmirerUS]

Originally Posted by Denville

I'm sure it will be dinned inot her.#
Though I don't see why she will be having babies for 10 years. how many is she going to have?

Three, no five, no several multiple births because she has a private contract to personally keep People magazine afloat.