The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1741  
Old 03-23-2021, 08:46 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,089
You never know what's going on in someone's head, but Harry did genuinely seem happy and cheerful at one time [...] Charles and Diana's very bitter and public divorce, followed by Diana's tragic early death, would have been enough to mess anyone's head up, but he did seem to be doing OK back then.
__________________

  #1742  
Old 03-23-2021, 08:50 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: N/A, Bulgaria
Posts: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
You never know what's going on in someone's head, but Harry did genuinely seem happy and cheerful at one time [...] Charles and Diana's very bitter and public divorce, followed by Diana's tragic early death, would have been enough to mess anyone's head up, but he did seem to be doing OK back then.
That's because he didn't know he was trapped. [...]
__________________

  #1743  
Old 03-23-2021, 08:53 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
You never know what's going on in someone's head, but Harry did genuinely seem happy and cheerful at one time [...]

I don't know much about his personal life and I didn't follow him back then, but I think there is a difference between being genuinely happy and cheerful and being a youngster living the high life, which might be the case of Harry in his 20s.

[...]
  #1744  
Old 03-23-2021, 09:13 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 1,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
I think that's what most people assumed, that they had a private exchange of vows. Very nice - I hope it was a very special and romantic moment for the two of them. But that's not what she said. I don't imagine for a minute that she intended for it to cause a huge fuss with people questioning whether or not the Archbishop of Canterbury had acted illegally or unethically, but she should have stopped to consider that it might. Twisting things to make them sound more exciting or romantic or dramatic or whatever is all right when you're in the primary school playground, but not when you're doing an interview being watched by millions of people around the world.

And, once it became clear that the remark had caused problems, why not issue a statement clarifying what had happened, instead of just ignoring it?


Exactly. I’m willing to give Meghan the benefit of the doubt that she didn’t intend for this to cause a mess for the AOC. She probably didn’t think about it- but she should have. That is a consequence of lying though.

It really surprises me too that they didn’t bother to issue a statement clarifying this until AFTER it had been absolutely proved that they lied. She knew it was causing problems. It looks bad IMO. She could have saved a lot of headaches and just said- it was a private exchange of vows, but we were not legally married that day. Just admit it.

Why wait until you’re a proven liar? It looks much worse to wait to me. I mean- they had no problem clarifying at least about Harry’s grandparents, no problem spilling private family conversations after the interview, but they couldn’t clarify this?
  #1745  
Old 03-23-2021, 09:17 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: bedford, United States
Posts: 1,620
A popular young guy with money to burn to say the least and no real responsibility other than not totally embarrass himself or his family( fail on that) and beautiful girlfriend... it’s easy to ignore feelings of unease, unhappiness and sadness in the whirl of fun.

Now he has Money to earn, he is middle aged with seemingly no close friends of his own around with a high maintenance wife and son with another on the way though he still low key embarrassing himself with the inane things he says and does. He can’t hide from himself anymore or avoid his problems with distractions.
  #1746  
Old 03-23-2021, 09:25 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin9 View Post
Exactly. I’m willing to give Meghan the benefit of the doubt that she didn’t intend for this to cause a mess for the AOC. She probably didn’t think about it- but she should have. That is a consequence of lying though.

She will probably say she didn't lie, but rather simply misunderstood their personal exchange of vows for an actual marriage ceremony, which is really surprising, but I guess not impossible.

Her "misunderstanding" obviously caused an embarrassment for the Archbishop, but other misunderstandings may be more serious. For example, she may have misled many people, especially in America, into believing that the rules for the use of royal titles and styles in the United Kingdom include race-based criteria, which is not true and a serious accusation considering that those rules are part of British public law.

She may have also misled people into thinking that holding an HRH title is a necessary requirement for personal police protection in the UK, which again is not true. In fact, being an HRH is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition to get police protection in the UK.
  #1747  
Old 03-23-2021, 09:30 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin9 View Post
Exactly. I’m willing to give Meghan the benefit of the doubt that she didn’t intend for this to cause a mess for the AOC. She probably didn’t think about it- but she should have. That is a consequence of lying though.

It really surprises me too that they didn’t bother to issue a statement clarifying this until AFTER it had been absolutely proved that they lied. She knew it was causing problems. It looks bad IMO. She could have saved a lot of headaches and just said- it was a private exchange of vows, but we were not legally married that day. Just admit it.

Why wait until you’re a proven liar? It looks much worse to wait to me. I mean- they had no problem clarifying at least about Harry’s grandparents, no problem spilling private family conversations after the interview, but they couldn’t clarify this?
I think they were a bit wary about annoying the queen,. She IS the monarch after all and I think even Harry realised it looked bad if he said his grandmother was making racist remarks, so he pulled back.
but Meghan is less sensitive on how her remarks look. She probably didn't realise that it looked so arrogant and stupid.. to claim to have been privately married.. and that involving the Archbishop of Canterbury, an eminent churchman, wasn't a good look either. Probably took a little while before she came to realise that she had made herself look stupid and deceitful and rude and that she had to back down a bit.
And it was so dumb. There was some motivation behind the other false statements about Archie etc.. it was part of their plan to make the RF seem heartless and racist. But what was to be gained by saying "Oh nobody knows this but we got married a few days before our official wedding"....
  #1748  
Old 03-23-2021, 09:37 AM
cathy50's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Salta, Argentina
Posts: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
She will probably say she didn't lie, but rather simply misunderstood their personal exchange of vows for an actual marriage ceremony, which is really surprising, but I guess not impossible.

Her "misunderstanding" obviously caused an embarrassment for the Archbishop, but other misunderstandings may be more serious. For example, she may have misled many people, especially in America, into believing that the rules for the use of royal titles and styles in the United Kingdom include race-based criteria, which is not true and a serious accusation considering that those rules are part of British public law.

She may have also misled people into thinking that holding an HRH title is a necessary requirement for personal police protection in the UK, which again is not true. In fact, being an HRH is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition to get police protection in the UK.
I do 't think M. will say anything concerning her lies.
But is there any awareness about the points you listed?
Is anybody in the US really interested ? Is there a discussion about the aftermath of the interview? In Europe nobody really cares(except maybe the british royalists), but only h&m are feeding the tabloids once more LOL

Thanks.
  #1749  
Old 03-23-2021, 09:38 AM
Queen Ester's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
I am not so sure. You can't talk about all of Hollywood. I remember how easy it was for "His Highness Prince Frederick of Anhalt" to gain entrance into high up Hollywood circles and how he then married Zsa Zsa Gabor, making her the "Princess of Anhalt". That Frederick was not (!) a king's son but just a German of unsavoury reputation who had payed a penniless princess for adoption. He appears to have a nice character, though. Or at least nice manners. And he made his fortune in Hollywood!
Sorry, that was 50 years ago,. You can't compare it with today's climate. I just have a feeling that big businesses will be very careful with the Success, they don't need scandals of this scale and they don't want to lose their UK audience.
  #1750  
Old 03-23-2021, 09:40 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by cathy50 View Post
I do 't think M. will say anything concerning her lies.
But is there any awareness about the points you listed?
Is anybody in the US really interested ? Is there a discussion about the aftermath of the interview? In Europe nobody really cares(except maybe the british royalists), but only h&m are feeding the tabloids once more LOL

Thanks.
I think there has certianly been a lot of discussion on the American media, she accused the RF of heartlessness and racism.. two things that are pretty bad.. and since Oprah didn't challenge here, a lot of people may well beleive what she siad.
  #1751  
Old 03-23-2021, 09:46 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: N/A, Bulgaria
Posts: 210
Did Meghan personally call the man who really encountered difficulties because of her desire to play up to her audience and claim the additional romantics of "just for us"? I only found a snippet of their statement. Did they say they were sorry for inconveniencing the AoC, as it has emerged that now there are tons of pleas for weddings that vicars are not authorized to conduct? Did she call Justin Welby to apologize since she so loves personal touches?


Gayle? Hello? Anyone?
  #1752  
Old 03-23-2021, 09:49 AM
cathy50's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Salta, Argentina
Posts: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I think there has certianly been a lot of discussion on the American media, she accused the RF of heartlessness and racism.. two things that are pretty bad.. and since Oprah didn't challenge here, a lot of people may well beleive what she siad.
Well, maybe what I expected. so no real interest in the truth but a lot of fuss.
By the way I was surprised, did not know Oprah but if her style is so appreciated to the US audience I am no longer surprised they are called superficial.
Any serious Journalist or even boulevard journalist in Europe makes better interviews than what I saw from this Oprah. No questions, no deeper interest, just eyebrows rising..... cheap, very cheap indeed.
And considered the average american knowing very little about history or monarchy the whole mess is perfect.
But I hope the negative impact for the two is bigger than the interest in them and will hit back, at least anybody donating money should think twice.
  #1753  
Old 03-23-2021, 09:55 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moran View Post
Did Meghan personally call the man who really encountered difficulties because of her desire to play up to her audience and claim the additional romantics of "just for us"? I only found a snippet of their statement. Did they say they were sorry for inconveniencing the AoC, as it has emerged that now there are tons of pleas for weddings that vicars are not authorized to conduct? Did she call Justin Welby to apologize since she so loves personal touches?


Gayle? Hello? Anyone?
The statement was apparently made directly to the Daily Beast that Yukari linked to this morning. So all they said was the very brief snippet. No Gayle saying how sorry they were for the confusion or anything.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/marria...hey-told-oprah

I wonder if they've decided it was a mistake to have Gayle comment last week because it got them a lot less sympathy for sharing private conversations and still making themselves out to be the victims whilst winning a privacy claim themselves.
  #1754  
Old 03-23-2021, 09:57 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by cathy50 View Post
I do 't think M. will say anything concerning her lies.
But is there any awareness about the points you listed?
Is anybody in the US really interested ? Is there a discussion about the aftermath of the interview? In Europe nobody really cares(except maybe the british royalists), but only h&m are feeding the tabloids once more LOL

Thanks.



The general US public may not be interested, but the interview had an impact in the US as it was commented by media personalities, talk show hosts, newspaper columnists (including former presidential speechwriters), and even politicians/Members of Congress. Even the White House spokesperson was asked about it, although the matter was not addressed directly in the response. So it affected IMHO the image of the Royal Family or even of the United Kingdom in the US.


You have to keep in mind that the United States is a republic where, for example, the constitution guarantees a republican form of government to all the states and both the states and the federal government are barred from granting titles of nobility or knighthoods. Public officers are also barred from accepting those titles from foreign countries and naturalized citizens must renounce them upon naturalization.



On top of that, American kids are raised from childhood in US schools with this idea that US independence (what is called the American Revolution in the USA) was a just rebellion against a tyrannical King (George III). The nuances of the causes of the revolution, which BTW are spelled out far more clearly in the Declaration of Independence, are normally not properly discussed in public schools, and there is even less discussion on whether King George was personally at fault for the grievances of the colonists or, if the blame actually lay constitutionally with the British Parliament and the King's ministers.


In any case, what I am trying to say is that all of the above, plus the American "ideology" of meritocracy and equal opportunity (or at least the illusion thereof) make many Americans naturally suspicious of royalty and monarchy, and inclined to believe the worst about royals (the Americans who thought otherwise, i.e. the Loyalists, basically left after the Revolution to settle in Canada, which is still a monarchy, or were assimilated in the US).



It doesn't take too much then for Meghan to sound "credible" to Americans when she says for example that the BRF is "racist". Actually, even more so in this case, because Americans also tend to over-analyze social relations from the perspective of race compared to people in other multi-racial countries.
  #1755  
Old 03-23-2021, 10:00 AM
Queen Ester's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
Someone did suggest that maybe they could just adopt a symbol, as someone else once known as Prince did !
Sorry, lost you there, what symbol and which Prince?
  #1756  
Old 03-23-2021, 10:02 AM
HighGoalHighDreams's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Unspecified, United States
Posts: 469
We had moved on from the discussion of the interview as it related to the wedding, but since it has been brought back up with the release of this statement:

I recently relived through reading bits of the old threads, as I am fond of doing, several of the royal wedding threads. I stopped by for a bit of reading in a couple of the Sussex wedding threads.

I was struck with such feeling of sadness to be reminded of Meghan's words that "this wasn't our day" and it was a "spectacle" for "the world" because if you remember the feeling at the time, this is so dissonant to the feeling. Those live threads are filled, in a way none of the other royal wedding threads are, of how personal this day seemed to the couple: how Harry and Meghan seemed to be in a world of their own in their love for each other, how the selections of elements seemed so personal to them in a way never done before, how Harry seemed overwhelmed with loving nerves, how remarkable and poised Doria was as she held back tears for her daughter.

I am very saddened to think that amidst this joy and raw emotion, the couple did not feel that this was their day of celebration and union.
  #1757  
Old 03-23-2021, 10:07 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 4,974
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Ester View Post
Sorry, lost you there, what symbol and which Prince?
The late musical artist and songwriter Prince Rogers Nelson who went by his stage name "Prince" briefly used a symbol in lieu of his name.



Quote:
In the midst of a contractual dispute with Warner Bros in 1993, he changed his stage name to the unpronounceable symbol (known to fans as the "Love Symbol"), and was sometimes referred to as the Artist Formerly Known as Prince or simply the Artist


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_(musician)

That's the background for the joke about Prince Harry.
  #1758  
Old 03-23-2021, 10:08 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: bedford, United States
Posts: 1,620
No one forced them to have an extravaganza. They could easily have had an elegant yet cozy private wedding with just the closest family and friends like his cousins. So I can’t feel sorry for them in anyway.
  #1759  
Old 03-23-2021, 10:09 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighGoalHighDreams View Post
We had moved on from the discussion of the interview as it related to the wedding, but since it has been brought back up with the release of this statement:

I recently relived through reading bits of the old threads, as I am fond of doing, several of the royal wedding threads. I stopped by for a bit of reading in a couple of the Sussex wedding threads.

I was struck with such feeling of sadness to be reminded of Meghan's words that "this wasn't our day" and it was a "spectacle" for "the world" because if you remember the feeling at the time, this is so dissonant to the feeling. Those live threads are filled, in a way none of the other royal wedding threads are, of how personal this day seemed to the couple: how Harry and Meghan seemed to be in a world of their own in their love for each other, how the selections of elements seemed so personal to them in a way never done before, how Harry seemed overwhelmed with loving nerves, how remarkable and poised Doria was as she held back tears for her daughter.

I am very saddened to think that amidst this joy and raw emotion, the couple did not feel that this was their day of celebration and union.
They didn't give a tuppeny damn, what the public thought... at least Meg certianly didn't. I thoguht at the time that Harry at least looked rather desperate, clinigng to Meghan...
  #1760  
Old 03-23-2021, 10:12 AM
cathy50's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Salta, Argentina
Posts: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
The general US public may not be interested, but the interview had an impact in the US as it was commented by media personalities, talk show hosts, newspaper columnists (including former presidential speechwriters), and even politicians/Members of Congress. Even the White House spokesperson was asked about it, although the matter was not addressed directly in the response. So it affected IMHO the image of the Royal Family or even of the United Kingdom in the US.


You have to keep in mind that the United States is a republic where, for example, the constitution guarantees a republican form of government to all the states and both the states and the federal government are barred from granting titles of nobility or knighthoods. Public officers are also barred from accepting those titles from foreign countries and naturalized citizens must renounce them upon naturalization.



On top of that, American kids are raised from childhood in US schools with this idea that US independence (what is called the American Revolution in the USA) was a just rebellion against a tyrannical King (George III). The nuances of the causes of the revolution, which BTW are spelled out far more clearly in the Declaration of Independence, are normally not properly discussed in public schools, and there is even less discussion on whether King George was personally at fault for the grievances of the colonists or, if the blame actually lay constitutionally with the British Parliament and the King's ministers.


In any case, what I am trying to say is that all of the above, plus the American "ideology" of meritocracy and equal opportunity (or at least the illusion thereof) make many Americans naturally suspicious of royalty and monarchy, and inclined to believe the worst about royals (the Americans who thought otherwise, i.e. the Loyalists, basically left after the Revolution to settle in Canada, which is still a monarchy, or were assimilated in the US).



It doesn't take too much then for Meghan to sound "credible" to Americans when she says for example that the BRF is "racist". Actually, even more so in this case, because Americans also tend to overanalyze social relations from the perspective of race compared to people in other multi-racial countries.
Thank you, I know this aswell, but being in Europe at the moment I am not up to date with the us media coverage. So, the average american who watches it, has no interest in the truth but simply stucks to the lies Meghan&H spread, this is of course sad but if it is really tragig I don't know. After all it's only Us citizens, maybe the two hope to get donations for Archwell but the big money will not come from these people I think.
The two might come to some popularity just like other US phenomenals like the Kradashians who do what? LOL

I often wondered what this subtitle of the boom " the making of a modern royal family" was meant to relate to. The Sussex family who needs the royal background to attract some attention, because their own actions do not. Or if the author dreamt of the Sussex making the BRF a new modern "better" kind of royal family, yet their drama, lies and bitterness does not help anybody not even themselves.
Though being jot sure what all the change in society will bring in the future and to monarchies I hope the BRF will live out the Sussex couple and their breed.
__________________

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





Popular Tags
abu dhabi american american history anastasia anastasia once upon a time ancestry baby names baptism british british royal family british royals brownbitcoinqueen carolin china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing cpr dresses duke of sussex earl of snowdon family tree general news thread george vi gradenigo history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs imperial household interesting jacobite japan jewellery jewelry kids movie list of rulers luxembourg maxima meghan markle monarchy nepal nepalese royal family pless princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn princess eugenie princess laurentien princess of orange princess ribha queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen victoria resusci anne royal balls royal events royal family royal jewels royal spouse royalty royalty of taiwan royal wedding russian court dress spain sussex swedish queen thai royal family tradition unfinished portrait united states united states of america wedding gown welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:09 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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