Harry and Meghan: Relationship Musings - Page 87

AlowVera · #**1721** 10-04-2017, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pranter

Realistically if they announce in Dec/Jan maybe even Feb, they could marry in May/June easily.

LaRae

The Cambridges did Nov. April? so I think they could do December after the Queen and Phillips wedding anniversary celebrations are done.

Quote:

Originally Posted by scriptgirl

Not getting Meghan and Harry in the same frame for a pic has never been problem for any pubication. Back in the day, People spliced a pic together of Rob Lowe and Princess Stephanie when they were dating and now, due to IG, there are tons of pics of Meghan and Harry together. Not sure what People's issue is.

Meghan's mom will not have to worry about paying for outfits for the royal wedding or air travel as it will be taken care of. Also, she might get a part time residence in the UK to stay near Meghan.

But that Daily Mail article-did that reporter admit to stalking Meghan's mom and trying to talk to her?

Yes they have tried to talk to her multiple times with no luck.

Osipi · #**1722** 10-04-2017, 04:24 PM

I'd like to think that People magazine has a more credible reputation and will not print a cover article about this couple until they have their own sources and their own pictures to use. I'm sure there will be plenty in the future as Harry and Meghan come out more and more publicly with their relationship.

One thing I'm not worried about is Meghan's family being able to pull out all the stops for a royal wedding. They will be treated and honored and accepted just as the Middleton family was when it became apparent that Will and Kate would marry. I will avoid the Fail and tabloid articles as much now as I did back when the royal engagement was announced in 2010.

AlowVera · #**1723** 10-04-2017, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osipi

I'd like to think that People magazine has a more credible reputation and will not print a cover article about this couple until they have their own sources and their own pictures to use. I'm sure there will be plenty in the future as Harry and Meghan come out more and more publicly with their relationship.

One thing I'm not worried about is Meghan's family being able to pull out all the stops for a royal wedding. They will be treated and honored and accepted just as the Middleton family was when it became apparent that Will and Kate would marry. I will avoid the Fail and tabloid articles as much now as I did back when the royal engagement was announced in 2010.

People usually gives the cover to someone they speak directly to or have clearance to do so. It is one of the better celebrity rags and the stories comes from the horses mouth or authorized sources.

Abbigail · #**1724** 10-04-2017, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacqui24

I like Harry, but never quite followed the BRF closely. I remember hearing about Kate and then W&K's wedding years later, but that was probably the last time I paid attention. I started being a big fan of Meghan in mid-2006 after binge watching Suits on Amazon Prime and subsequently did some research on her. Imagine my surprise when I saw the report about her and Harry pop up in October.

Especially since they just seem to lead completely different lives in completely different places. I guess that's the moral of the story here is that you never know where or when you'd meet that person. I was skeptical on if that's true or not at first, but as soon as both sides went completely silent when asked for comments, I knew it was true. Then of course the onslaught of media frenzy and the rest is history.

Not to get too sappy, but I think this is what makes it that much more of a unique and romantic love story. These really were two people leading two different lives, probably never imagining that they would fall for someone like the other. This especially seems the case for Meghan. I go back to that interview she did where she was asked to choose between Harry and William and you could tell by her reaction that she just never even thought of either as a romantic possibility. I'm sure she thinks about every now and then and still can't quite believe that she's actually dating Prince Harry.

What I like most is that they definitely seems to have found each other at exactly the right time in their lives. If they had met even just a few years ago, we likely wouldn't be talking about them having any kind of romantic relationship. But they've both had other romances and have lived and learned enough to now know what they want out of life and who they want to share that life with. Yep, it just seems like a romance that was meant to be at exactly this moment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pranter

Realistically if they announce in Dec/Jan maybe even Feb, they could marry in May/June easily.

LaRae

I do wonder if the various events in June would affect the chances of them marrying in May/June? I could see an early May wedding, definitely. But June perhaps would be a little too busy for a royal wedding, particularly if they were to marry at WA.

Pranter · #**1725** 10-04-2017, 05:15 PM

I'm guessing the Abbey (or anywhere else they might marry) would be made available for them if at all possible.

Depending on when Kate has her baby...early May might be too early.

LaRae

Rudolph · #**1726** 10-04-2017, 05:15 PM

The gist of The Sunday Times story is H&M will wait until after the 5th in line to the throne is born.

A July wedding seems reasonable.

scriptgirl · #**1727** 10-04-2017, 05:26 PM

Is there a link to the Times story?

I wonder if People has backed off because US magazine has been at the forefront of the Merry (HarryMeghan) coverage. Lainey says basically that US mag was given info via the Palace.

I wonder if Harry calls Meghan "Rachel" or Meghan? Also, will she go by Meghan or Rachel when the marriage happens?

Abbigail · #**1728** 10-04-2017, 05:30 PM

I read the Sunday Times article. I'm not ready to take it as fact in terms of times or dates but July is reasonable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pranter

I'm guessing the Abbey (or anywhere else they might marry) would be made available for them if at all possible.

LaRae

Oh, I'm sure. Availability isn't really the issue though, Rather, June has about 3 other notable events so resources and/or prep time for a wedding may be a bit strained. I understand if early May isn't the best time for Kate. I was just saying it would be a more suitable time for a wedding than late May/June. If the wedding were to take place in July then I'm guessing they wouldn't announce an engagement until January, at the earliest.

Osipi · #**1729** 10-04-2017, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scriptgirl

I wonder if Harry calls Meghan "Rachel" or Meghan? Also, will she go by Meghan or Rachel when the marriage happens?

I fully expect that when these two take their vows, it will be Henry Charles Albert David taking Rachel Meghan Markle and vice versa. Other than that, I think they'll stick to the names they use now in their everyday life.

Abbigail · #**1730** 10-04-2017, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scriptgirl

Is there a link to the Times story?

I wonder if People has backed off because US magazine has been at the forefront of the Merry (HarryMeghan) coverage. Lainey says basically that US mag was given info via the Palace.

I wonder if Harry calls Meghan "Rachel" or Meghan? Also, will she go by Meghan or Rachel when the marriage happens?

I very much doubt that. I've found that most of its Harry and Meghan info is wrong more than it's right.

jacqui24 · #**1731** 10-04-2017, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scriptgirl

I wonder if Harry calls Meghan "Rachel" or Meghan? Also, will she go by Meghan or Rachel when the marriage happens?

I'm pretty sure Meghan's friends and family calls her Meghan, so I'm assuming Harry would call her Meghan as well. At the wedding, it'll be their full name, so Henry Charles Albert David and Rachel Meghan. Not sure about whether it'll be Meghan or Rachel that gets used after that in official capacities.

Pranter · #**1732** 10-04-2017, 05:44 PM

She will be treated the same as Harry....formal names will be used if his are used. If he's being called Prince Henry Duke of X ..she's going to be called Rachel the Duchess of X

LaRae

Countessmeout · #**1733** 10-04-2017, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacqui24

I'm pretty sure Meghan's friends and family calls her Meghan, so I'm assuming Harry would call her Meghan as well. At the wedding, it'll be their full name, so Henry Charles Albert David and Rachel Meghan. Not sure about whether it'll be Meghan or Rachel that gets used after that in official capacities.

In official capacity she will be HRH Duchess X. She wont be either first name.

The press clings to old ways for dear life. Kate will always be Kate (Princess Kate, Duchess Kate, Kate Middleton). Even when we hear William call her Catherine, its always Kate. Meghan will continue to be referred to as Meghan (Princess Meghan, Duchess Meghan, Meghan Markle likely).

jacqui24 · #**1734** 10-04-2017, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

In official capacity she will be HRH Duchess X. She wont be either first name.

The press clings to old ways for dear life. Kate will always be Kate (Princess Kate, Duchess Kate, Kate Middleton). Even when we hear William call her Catherine, its always Kate. Meghan will continue to be referred to as Meghan (Princess Meghan, Duchess Meghan, Meghan Markle likely).

I'm more wondering which letter will be used for her monogram and such. Whether it'll be R or M.

I mean Kate and Catherine aren't that different, a lot of people go by Kate or Katie or some variation if their first name is Catherine. But Meghan and Rachel are quite different.

scriptgirl · #**1735** 10-04-2017, 06:00 PM

Thanks for clearing up the name thing. Again is there a link to the times story?

Osipi · #**1736** 10-04-2017, 06:05 PM

I might be totally wrong but I think articles printed in the Times are usually behind a pay wall. That's why we don't see many Times articles linked here.

loonytick · #**1737** 10-04-2017, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abbigail

IAvailability isn't really the issue though, Rather, June has about 3 other notable events so resources and/or prep time for a wedding may be a bit strained.

Exactly.

There's a lot more to even the more restrained royal weddings than just the couple lining up a church and making sure friends and family can make it. There's a lot of staff involved in pulling these things off, staff who are also needed for the big, annual ceremonial events. If there's any kind of carriage-ride element involved (even if it isn't the full-scale procession from WA to BP) then there are rehearsals and possibly military units that must be able to prepare--units that are also involved in other events that involve substantial rehearsal time, like Trooping the Color, the Opening of Parliament, etc.

If things are scheduled too close to each other, something has to give. That's why the last Opening had to be downgraded in formality (adequate rehearsal wasn't possible with the timing of the speech up in the air for so long) and the Order of the Garter ceremony cancelled this year.

And if the decision is made to give Harry and his bride the full-on WA wedding with carriage procession, that involves major street closures. There's already other big-deal ceremonial stuff in June that affects traffic (with the ripple effect that the gridlock or limited access has on certain businesses, the cost of having extra police on-duty, etc.) It's just not responsible to do that to the city of London too many times in quick succession.

There are so many reasons why these things need to be scheduled carefully with a certain amount of separation between events.

Abbigail · #**1738** 10-04-2017, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scriptgirl

Thanks for clearing up the name thing. Again is there a link to the times story?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...-fix-g0n8ldd5w

You might have to register first but once you do, you get access to one or two articles a week for free.

miss whirley · #**1739** 10-04-2017, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudolph

The gist of The Sunday Times story is H&M will wait until after the 5th in line to the throne is born.

A July wedding seems reasonable.

July would be interesting. The Queen leaves for Balmoral in the latter part of the month, and before that in early/mid July baby Cambridge will have her/his Christening. That would be a very tight window for any July wedding. I guess Harry and Meghan could skip the Christening, Harry didn't go to Charlotte's so it probably wouldn't matter to him.

ROYAL NORWAY · #**1740** 10-04-2017, 07:00 PM

I have a subscription, and I often post Times articles in other threads about HM and stuff. Here's some of what royal correspondent Roya Nikkhah wrote in the article that Abbigail posted here:

Quote:

Markle’s first official appearances by Harry’s side this week, meticulously planned by Kensington Palace, have also been a clear statement by the prince that she will be part of his future. Markle, 36, currently lives and works in Toronto, where she stars in the television drama Suits. But with an engagement announcement anticipated, it is thought she may soon quit her role and relocate to London.

The couple are expected to marry next summer, after the birth of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s third child in the spring. Next year’s Invictus Games in Sydney could be the first overseas trip for Harry and Markle as a married couple.