Harry and Meghan: Relationship Musings

[Curryong]

The 'No Westminster Abbey option' is some assumption of the Daily Fail's. In fact it directly contradicts what an Abbey spokesman said only weeks ago, ie that there is no bar to divorcees and Roman Catholics marrying there.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

^That makes perfect sense. There was previously a post saying, that they won't announce their engagement until after the Cambridge baby is born, and to me, I don't get why, THAT didn't make any sense.

Didn't Westminster Abbey give out a statement, that they could marry there? A quick Google search brings up a Daily Fail article from 17 May, 2017 stating this. Hilarious, how DF can't keep up and manage get anything right.

 

[Yashal]

St George's Chapel is a really beautiful place and it's full of history. Many royals got married there, inlcuding most of Queen Victoria's children and the future Gustav VI Adolf of Sweden! I really wouldn't mind it being the set of yet another royal wedding.

 

[wyevale]

Does it not occur to people that the Prince may prefer to marry in a place not associated with the Funeral of his Mother ?

 

[Curryong]

I suppose one could say the same about William, yet he did so. Both sons have attended ceremonies at the Abbey countless times since their mother's death.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

Well, quite a lot is going on in the media and in this thread after the Meghan VF cover story hit. I'm still trying to catch up with as much that's worth catching up with. ?

Here are some very interesting recent takes, especially from Camilla Tominey:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...s-Kensington-Palace-Vanity-Fair-interview/amp

The Tominey article is obviously well-sourced from Palace insiders in order to set the record straight about the VF interview: Meghan did not say much about the relationship despite the fact that VF highlighted her comments regarding Harry who she never mentioned by name. Apparently, the actual content of the interview was 80% about her career, including her acting work on Suits, as well as her humanitarian work with the U.N., which VF fairly glossed over in order to obsess over M&H's relationship. I would have thought that Meghan would have had pre-publication approval, but most magazines do not tend to offer that to people they profile. Tominey says that it's believed Meghan did not see the text prior to the article's publication and she had nothing to do with the cliche headline either (which is not a surprise).

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry: How times have changed for forbidden royal loves | Royal | News | Express.co.uk

The above is nothing new, just another take on pearl-clutching about the 'divorce' issue when what they are really hinting at is something else when they say "times have changed for forbidden royal loves." IMO, it certainly is a good thing that times have changed so that people's lives don't have to be ruined by being forced not to marry someone they are deeply in love with.

Meghan's minimal make-up for the VF shoot was done by Diana's former make-up artist, Mary Greenwell. Here's an old article on the work Greenwell did for the Princess of Wales:
https://www.bustle.com/articles/354...reenwell-shares-the-late-icons-beauty-secrets

 

[Curryong]

Ah, the old blue eyeliner, I remember it so well. Not that I've ever worn much makeup. And I think Meghan's natural look, freckles and all, looked fabulous.

 

[wyevale]

Yes, but they are individuals, who may differ in this respect. William was older at the time of the funeral, and his life will necessarily be more bound up with the Abbey.. not least his own Coronation !

 

[Mbruno]

I simply assume that H&M would want Kate to be there on their wedding day. If it's to close to the due date, she might not be able to attend. If they were really unlucky, William wouldn't be there either (if the child is born the same day).

Wasn't Prince Nicolas of Sweden born only a few days after CP's and Sofia's wedding ? Princess Madeleine attended the wedding ceremony though.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

Here's an interesting upbeat take by Angela Mollard of the Daily Telegraph.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/re...r/news-story/e842fdc2340bb71bcdb5a8b2b1d90070

However, I wonder whether Mollard's comment that Harry "fell for Meghan last June as she told him about her trip to Rwanda campaigning for clean water" is an insider-sourced revelation, or just a fanciful speculation. I'm also confused by the quote in VF attributed to Meghan that indicates she and Harry 'met in July and dated quietly for about six months.' If it was six months that they dated quietly, they would have met in May, based on the math.

Mollard's 'fairytale destroyer' characterization is interesting, especially contrasted with an earlier post here observing that the VF styling and photographs suggest a new age 'Cinderella' with a twist (though I think 'destroyer' is a bit excessive choice of words). Whichever way those of goodwill look at the relationship, it's definitely a fresh and exciting romance that diverges from ho-hum run-of-the-mill. Like Meghan, I think everyone enjoys a delightful and engaging love story, especially between two attractive, grounded, charming and caring young people.

Mollard:
"The modern monarchy has to stand for something other than castles and crowns — something Markle appears to appreciate more than most. As she has said: 'Who you are as a person will only be amplified once you are ‘famous’ so if you had a good heart, then I would imagine you’ll have the same good heart but the means to do even more with it.'"

 

[MaiaMia_53]

I'm sure that given Kate's having problems wit her pregnancies they will schedule the wedding either well before or well after her due date. I doubt if she would want to be there if she is 8 1/2 months gone...

If they don't announce an engagement by early December 2017, then perhaps an announcement will come in January or February 2018, with a wedding to follow in either June or mid-July 2018, which would mark the second anniversary of their relationship.

This timing would seem to work out for Kate having given birth by the time of a scheduled summer wedding.

And then possibly Meghan might have her first baby by May or June of 2019 (at the age of 37). After an engagement is announced and a wedding date set, probably the bookies will begin taking bets on M&H pregnancy news.

 

[Sister Morphine]

Does it not occur to people that the Prince may prefer to marry in a place not associated with the Funeral of his Mother ?

Well, William and Catherine were married there, and when William becomes King, he will be crowned there, and when he dies, his funeral will be there...that's what Westminster Abbey is. It's the site of most, if not all, of the landmark moments in the British Royal Family; weddings, coronations, and funerals. What's more, Harry has been in Westminster Abbey numerous times since his mother's funeral, and if the idea of being there was so distasteful to him because of that, he'd never step foot in the place.

When he gets married, it'll be at Westminster. I mean, he could always go with St. Paul's, but I can't imagine he'd have a larger, grander wedding than his brother.

 

[Pranter]

Yes, this seems accurate to me.

Yeah Kate and William were privately engaged for several weeks prior to the announcement.

Kate even talked about not saying anything to her mother because she wasn't sure if her dad had said anything to her about William asking her dad for permission.


LaRae

 

[Pranter]

Wasn't Prince Nicolas of Sweden born only a few days after CP's and Sofia's wedding ? Princess Madeleine attended the wedding ceremony though.

Yep...she was hugely pregnant at their wedding...baby right after.


LaRae

 

[Cocoasneeze]

There seems to be a shift in the UK tabloids, and many talking about IG and Meghan and Harry doing their first official appearance there. I'm thinking they got their bone.

 

[Pranter]

I think several of us here beat their prediction about the I.G. and Meghan being there...we'll see if we were right or not.


LaRae

 

[Emme]

I’m really feeling an engagement announcement is imminent... like within weeks. I also feel they will wed before the arrival of Baby Cambridge 3.

 

[royal rob]

I'm not sure Meghan will be at the games It would take the attention away from the athletes and with cameras everywhere I think they will wait for a different time.

 

[jacqui24]

There seems to be a shift in the UK tabloids, and many talking about IG and Meghan and Harry doing their first official appearance there. I'm thinking they got their bone.

Camilla Tominey said they refused to rule it out. I'm wondering if all the press got the same debrief and that's how they ran with it?

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Camilla Tominey said they refused to rule it out. I'm wondering if all the press got the same debrief and that's how they ran with it?

A palace insider also said Meghan "was always free to do as she liked" re: attending the Invictus Games.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I'm not sure Meghan will be at the games It would take the attention away from the athletes and with cameras everywhere I think they will wait for a different time.

I think she will attend something but the event will be chosen carefully for the reasons you've mentioned. At least the Games should get lots of coverage with photographers around hoping to get shots of Harry and Meghan.

 

[jacqui24]

A palace insider also said Meghan "was always free to do as she liked" re: attending the Invictus Games.

Right, which says to me they didn't rule it out. But not quite like how the others presented it. It probably is a fluid situation at this point.

 

[jacqui24]

Yes, but they are individuals, who may differ in this respect. William was older at the time of the funeral, and his life will necessarily be more bound up with the Abbey.. not least his own Coronation !

Considering how Harry talked about she had the best seat in the house at William's wedding, I think that's unlikely. Plus, they've been there many times before.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I think some of the shift in attitude of the press is deciding they'd better not continue the negative press of the probable future Duchess of XYZ. The VF article was a definite signal they recognized.

 

[Pranter]

Considering how Harry talked about she had the best seat in the house at William's wedding, I think that's unlikely. Plus, they've been there many times before.

There's something to that...he might want to marry the same place William did...due to their mother.


LaRae

 

[Abbigail]

I’m really feeling an engagement announcement is imminent... like within weeks. I also feel they will wed before the arrival of Baby Cambridge 3.

I really doubt such an announcement comes before Meghan is done filming, though I guess I wouldn't be shocked. But I still see November/December as the best, most likely time for an annoucement. Very interesting to me that the press are basically talking about it now as a matter of when and not if. Indeed, that was the most interesting "revelation" in Camilla Tominey's article...that even people in the Palace are expecting a wedding next year.

Also interesting, re: Tominey's piece, is the dismissal of the idea that BP and the Queen were unaware of and unhappy about Meghan's interview and cover shoot. That directly contradicts what the Daily Fail was trying to sell, not that I ever bought it myself because...well, it's the Daily Fail.

There seems to be a shift in the UK tabloids, and many talking about IG and Meghan and Harry doing their first official appearance there. I'm thinking they got their bone.

I think so too. Notable that this is the one thing in Roya Nikkhah's article that's stated as fact.

Right, which says to me they didn't rule it out. But not quite like how the others presented it. It probably is a fluid situation at this point.

With only two weeks to go, I really think they already know one way or the other. I don't think this is a situation where they can just decide a few days before that Meghan will attend. At most, I think they may still be working out all the details, when, where and how Meghan will be involved, etc.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

There will be additional security matters to iron out too, right?

 

[Osipi]

To me, it would make sense to announce the engagement before the Christmas holidays. What better time to introduce Meghan to the entire family than the celebrations at Sandringham?

Of course, as a royal fiancee, she wouldn't be invited to attend the "family only" events such as the Christmas Eve dinner and the walk to the church, but like the Middletons, could complete a happy house party over at Amner Hall.

It also makes sense, to me, that Meghan will appear with Harry at the Invictus Games. Once their married, I can see both of them being very active in promoting the Games in Sydney 2018. In fact, I predict we'd see this couple working as a team for a lot of causes. Some Harry's. Some Meghan's. Also, add a fourth team player to promote mental health issues.

I think this relationship is more two people coming together to walk the path of life together than two people coming together and maintaining individual interests. The way the relationship has gone so far, it shows me that these two people can be together yet maintain individuality. The "identikit" idea of a royal Duchess has been that the wife stands behind her husband where as the "modern" idea is promoting that they'll walk side by side together but never overshadowing the other.

No matter how it goes from here on out. It think its a win/win situation for the BRF as a whole. I think also that Charles is going to be over the moon to have someone that is knowledgeable about the arts. As I said in another thread, Charles, himself, is president or patron of over 20 performing arts organizations and I think perhaps there is a very good chance that Meghan will find a niche there somewhere that she can be enthused about along with making a practical use of her professional acting career to advise and encourage others working along that same path.

Just an odd note too about where they marry. Its my understanding too that in "the eyes of God" and the church, if a person has never been married in church, "in the eyes of God", they've never been married according to religious beliefs and church tenets. That's why some royal couples have had both civil and religious weddings. With Charles and Camilla, it was a civil ceremony and a blessing in the CoE to make it legit in the CoE.

The cooler weather is beginning to make it feel like fall and all the Meghan and Harry rumors about make it feel like category 4 hurricane Irma is hitting the rumor mills, its time to sit back, snuggle up with a warm blanket and a hot pot of tea and watch what develops. We're living in interesting times to say the least. ?

 

[Mirabel]

When does the Queen return from Balmoral?

I think they'd wait to make any announcements until she is back in London.

 

[hel]

When does the Queen return from Balmoral?

I think they'd wait to make any announcements until she is back in London.

Just looking at the last three years of the Court Circular, the Queen has arrived back to London from Balmoral on the following dates:

2016 - 4 Oct
2015 - 7 Oct
2014 - 7 Oct

Barring an emergency, I can't see any reason to expect that HM will be back from Balmoral before the first week of October.

I'm with those who believe that no announcement will come before Meghan's filming commitments to Suits are complete. With that said, I'm not wholly convinced she'll be in all of the back 6 episodes.