The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #3901  
Old 01-20-2020, 07:15 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Oakland, United States
Posts: 546
Quote:
keep seeing Harry's past interviews expressing his unease with his royal role as "evidence" against Meghan driving this decision. Frankly, however you see it-- that this was driven by Meghan, by Harry, or by a combination of the two-- I would think that Harry's comments from before he met Meghan would actually weigh in the other direction. For years, Harry was honest about how uneasy he was in his role, yet made no moves to step away from it. In fact, he spoke about how he could not step away from it because it was his duty to support his grandmother, then his father, then his brother. In other words, his own past words and actions show that he had every intention of overcoming his unease and sticking it out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I think he would have stayed but been rather unhappy a lot of the time.. if he had stayed single or married someone else. He had the loyalty to his Grandmother and father and brother.. He also had no real expeirence of life outside the RF.. so I think he would not have taken steps to go.. He might have complained a lot and taken long holidays in Africa to escape.. but he would have stuck out the job. But he has married someone who is from totally outside the RF and upper class life.. or even middle class Englsh life. She has givene him a new perspective that it might be possible to do the unthinkable and go. And Im sure that she was the one who said "We don't have to rely on your father etc for money.. we can go to America and make our own.. "!

You ladies are missing the point.
When Harry spoke about leaving the royal family it was always to a quiet camera free life in Africa. Never once did he spoke about becoming a Hollywood type influencer -philanthropist kissing ass and getting hands out from celebrities and other rich people, calling the paparazzi for fake pictures, and walking red carpets.. that is Meghan’s fantasy life, not Harry and he will hate that life because it will be similar to the life he had in the royal family, but he will no longer have his family and friends for support.

Also: they are very much gonna be living off Daddy money, so yea they’re “Financially independent” alright
__________________

  #3902  
Old 01-20-2020, 07:22 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 1,905
I reread the Sun story about Charles, William and Harry, and now it seems to me that there is a fundamental difference between the “feuds”. The brothers had a more personal breach, and it’s taken this long to be repaired. With father and son, it comes down to disagreements - this “lack of trust” is likely on Harry’s part, his being insecure about his position, believing that his pa (he wouldn’t blame his grandmother) might have been unfair about certain decisions, etc...Not that it will be easy, but I think it will be easier to bring father and son together again. What they really need to do is have a heart to heart talk...


Quote:
You ladies are missing the point.
When Harry spoke about leaving the royal family it was always to a quiet camera free life in Africa. Never once did he spoke about becoming a Hollywood type influencer -philanthropist kissing ass and getting hands out from celebrities and other rich people, calling the paparazzi for fake pictures, and walking red carpets.. that is Meghan’s fantasy life, not Harry and he will hate that life because it will be similar to the life he had in the royal family, but he will no longer have his family and friends for support.

Also: they are very much gonna be living off Daddy money, so yea they’re “Financially independent” alright
This! Harry a producer ? It has to be about creating vehicles for Meghan ...she wants her old life back, except a better version.

We shouldn’t forget about all the friends Harry has dropped .....I’m sorry, but these celebs and glad handlers are not his friends, they don’t know him intimately, don’t know the real man. He’s losing his brother, who he’s just gotten close to again, and his father, who he’s pushing away. No matter how much he loves his wife, she’s not a replacement for them.
__________________

  #3903  
Old 01-20-2020, 07:40 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by evolvingdoors View Post
You ladies are missing the point.
When Harry spoke about leaving the royal family it was always to a quiet camera free life in Africa. Never once did he spoke about becoming a Hollywood type influencer -philanthropist kissing ass and getting hands out from celebrities and other rich people, calling the paparazzi for fake pictures, and walking red carpets.. that is Meghan’s fantasy life, not Harry and he will hate that life because it will be similar to the life he had in the royal family, but he will no longer have his family and friends for support.

Also: they are very much gonna be living off Daddy money, so yea they’re “Financially independent” alright
I haven't really seen any indication that what you present is how its going to be. The "maintaining celebrity" lifestyle and Harry just doesn't seem to fit with Harry's characteristics. He's more of a camping out with the guys doing conservation work from what I gather.

I guess its going to boil down to "if you schmooze, you lose" kind of thing. I don't ever see them attaining that kind of popularity as they're probably going to be seen as "once upon a time" royalty turned celebrity without much to really back themselves up. Whereas they drew crowds and attention and support in their endeavors due to their royal status, being seen as "has been" isn't going to garner them the popularity they may think it will.

We'll see what happens. The die has already been cast and where they go from here on out is anybody's guess. I do wish them well.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #3904  
Old 01-20-2020, 07:47 AM
texankitcat's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 1,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
It might get reviewed sooner than that....A certain forum that is completely pro-Meghan is now awash in discussion that they are in the final stages of a deal with Netflix worth several hundreds of millions of dollars and Meghan plans to actively campaign with whoever runs against Trump in November...Hopefully this is just idle speculation or the agreement is going to be reviewed much sooner than a year
I heard that Meghan has said she will not live in the US as long as Trump is President, which is completely childish if it’s true. I don’t give a fig what her political beliefs are, she is still a Member of the Royal family which has a long standing relationship with the US to maintain no matter who is in office as the current POTUS. They don’t have to like or agree with that person or their policies but they do need to remain neutral. It would be unprecedented for a member of the British Royal Family (regardless of her US citizenship) to actively campaign against a sitting Head of State, making political statements and publicly endorsing and supporting any politician in a election cycle. For her to get involved with any political issue will be a huge issue for the BRF.

I have said it before and I stand by it. Meghan is going to be the BRF’s worst nightmare.
  #3905  
Old 01-20-2020, 07:54 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claire View Post
I found a few things on another forums that were the sticking pints that resulted in the Queen refusing the part time royal request. All of this is speculation.
1. The request to setup a separate office in North America - they would surely be needing a staff, it was unclear the autonomy of this office and its workings with the palace. There were adamant that there was no way to set up an independent body possibly creating a monarchy of Canada and USA.



Obviously there is already a monarchy of Canada, which shares with the UK the same physical person (Queen Elizabeth II) as head of state, but is legally separate from the UK monarchy. The Queen's chief representative in Canada is the Governor General who, in the words of King George VI in his Letters Patent of 1947 constituting tthe office of Governor General of Canada is " Commander-in-Chief in and over Canada" and is authorized and empowered "with the advice of Our Privy Council for Canada or of any members thereof or individually, as the case requires, to exercise all powers and authorities lawfully belonging to Us in respect of Canada". In addition, each province of Canada has a Lieutenant Governor , appointed by the Governor General in Council under the Great Seal of Canada, to represent the Queen in the province and exercise her powers and prerogatives pertaining thereto.


Therefore, the risk was not Harry and Meghan setting up a "monarchy of Canada", but rather setting up a "parallel court" that has no basis in the constitution of Canada and would conflict or compete with the properly constitutionally empowered agents of the Canadian monarchy, such as the Governor General, the Lieutenant Governors, the Queen's Privy Council for Canada, and so on so forth. That is why a "separate office" or "household" for TRH The Duke and Duchess of Sussex formally set up in Canada and funded by the British government would be completely unacceptable. It would have no grounding in the constitution of Canada and would be considered a violation of Canadian sovereignty unless it was deemed a UK diplomatic office, which it would be not, as it would be set up for different purposes.



A second contentious point is the use of titles inside Canada. As discussed in another forum, Canada has long held a position of opposing the awarding by the monarch of knighthoods, baronetcies or peerages to Canadian citizens. The historic origin of that policy was the fear that prime ministers of Canada could recommend such awards for personal political gain or,conversely, that such appointments could be made without proper consultation with the government of Canada undermining Canadian independence. Thus, Canada chose to exit the system of British and imperial honors (Canadian and British spelling 'honours') and set up its own system of national honors under the office of the Governor General with awards such as the Order of Canada for example.



As such, Canada has a Queen who, under the constitution, formally holds the Executive Power, is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, and is part of the Canadian Parliament, and whose powers are exercised in Canada by the Governor General. But Canada does not have a titled nobility or even a class of Knights. When members of the Royal Family visit, as they do often, they are accorded the treatment and dignity of Princes and recognized by their titles as successors to the Crown, but that is pretty much it. Having a resident Earl of xxx or Duke of xxx inside Canada conducting charitable work under that title as the Sussexes plan to do is problematic in the Canadian context as the editorial of The Globe and Mail quoted here on TRF discussed in great detail.



The USA of course is a different matter because, for starters, it is a republic under the US constitution and , whatever titles Harry and Meghan may hold, they have no legal standing in the US, nor Harry or Meghan have any power or authority under the United States or in any state of the Union.
  #3906  
Old 01-20-2020, 08:28 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 1,905
Quote:
I have said it before and I stand by it. Meghan is going to be the BRF’s worst nightmare.
More like Harry’s. I know she’s a member of the family, but this was a clean break. I’m honestly not worried about her damaging the BRF - if anything, Meghan imploding or simply looking bad may reflect well on the BRF in that the Queen and Charles (and William, I should add) insisted that the Sussexes couldn’t live half-in, half-out. They will have been proven right. Now, if Meghan turns into another Sarah Ferguson, and there are are marital issues and possible custody concerns, then I agree she’d be a nightmare...it would be the worst case scenario (and she probably would write a tell all book’
  #3907  
Old 01-20-2020, 08:29 AM
Helen.CH's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Chambery, France
Posts: 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by texankitcat View Post
I heard that Meghan has said she will not live in the US as long as Trump is President, which is completely childish if it’s true. I don’t give a fig what her political beliefs are, she is still a Member of the Royal family which has a long standing relationship with the US to maintain no matter who is in office as the current POTUS. They don’t have to like or agree with that person or their policies but they do need to remain neutral. It would be unprecedented for a member of the British Royal Family (regardless of her US citizenship) to actively campaign against a sitting Head of State, making political statements and publicly endorsing and supporting any politician in a election cycle. For her to get involved with any political issue will be a huge issue for the BRF.

I have said it before and I stand by it. Meghan is going to be the BRF’s worst nightmare.
Is there a reliable source for what you have heard? Meghan & Trump?
Or is it just another fantasy?
  #3908  
Old 01-20-2020, 08:31 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
I saw that in the DM...are they trying to go into producing tv shows and movies? Vehicles for Meghan? I doubt Charles is going to want to oversee what Harry is doing with the $ - in fact, it’s probably not a good idea as if he wants to be independent, he’s got to sink or swim on his own.
Charles might not, but I'm betting that William will!
It's all very well to view this as a loving father supporting his son, but...the Duchy money is earmarked for William!

Will he be okay with Harry getting the same amount, or even more, to go off and do whatever, while William must hold to the path he's been on since birth?
Somehow I think William might resent it.

(I'm sure someone will say Harry has his inheritance and a trust fund, but let's face it- that would last them maybe 5 years without an influx of cash from Charles. And, I think 5 years is about the same amount of time for them to "cash in" before newer celebrities push them out of the limelight.)

Really, if Harry's marriage doesn't work out, he might end with nothing.
  #3909  
Old 01-20-2020, 08:40 AM
Elenath's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helen.CH View Post
Is there a reliable source for what you have heard? Meghan & Trump?
Or is it just another fantasy?
I believe she gave her opinion about Trump before she and Harry married. I believe the comments were made in 2016 when she endorsed Hillary Clinton.

https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertain...-a-royal.html/

Celebrities are allowed to give their opinions on politics just like everyone else. They just have a bigger platform.
  #3910  
Old 01-20-2020, 08:42 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I haven't really seen any indication that what you present is how its going to be. The "maintaining celebrity" lifestyle and Harry just doesn't seem to fit with Harry's characteristics. He's more of a camping out with the guys doing conservation work from what I gather.

I guess its going to boil down to "if you schmooze, you lose" kind of thing. I don't ever see them attaining that kind of popularity as they're probably going to be seen as "once upon a time" royalty turned celebrity without much to really back themselves up. Whereas they drew crowds and attention and support in their endeavors due to their royal status, being seen as "has been" isn't going to garner them the popularity they may think it will.

We'll see what happens. The die has already been cast and where they go from here on out is anybody's guess. I do wish them well.
but that was Harry's fantasy of leaving the RF, pre Meghan.. going off to Africa and living away from the press and cities... Now, he has a wife with talents which involve boht acting and doing business.. and a child to provide for. He is going to have to make money.. Charles may not be willing to support him forever.. at least not to the tune of millions. If they are not willlng to lead a quiet life on the money they arelady have, they have to schmooze and make money. So Harry will have to learn to do it..
  #3911  
Old 01-20-2020, 08:43 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 1,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
Charles might not, but I'm betting that William will!
It's all very well to view this as a loving father supporting his son, but...the Duchy money is earmarked for William!

Will he be okay with Harry getting the same amount, or even more, to go off and do whatever, while William must hold to the path he's been on since birth?
Somehow I think William might resent it.

(I'm sure someone will say Harry has his inheritance and a trust fund, but let's face it- that would last them maybe 5 years without an influx of cash from Charles. And, I think 5 years is about the same amount of time for them to "cash in" before newer celebrities push them out of the limelight.)

Really, if Harry's marriage doesn't work out, he might end with nothing.
Well it seems as it Charles is going to review this in a year, that the funding now is essentially to allow Harry and Meghan to get a solid start in their new life.

The sibling rivalries and jealousies are enough to make my head spin; no wonder Charles has a hard time with his sons, lol.
  #3912  
Old 01-20-2020, 08:44 AM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
I have a request please- when people are multiquoting from multiple people in a post—please attribute each post to their original poster. There is a post above where I was quoted first- but there are two more quotes I did not write- two other posters did, but their names are not included. Thanks.
  #3913  
Old 01-20-2020, 08:45 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,696
Lets move on from speculating what Meghan's political views are or what she may or may not have said, done or will do.

As a general reminder, we do not encourage speculative or empty posts based upon, "I heard this", or "I read somewhere". Points of view or opinion should be based upon a reliable and/or verifiable source and a link to such source provided.

Further, where such link is provided, there is no need to copy the entire content of what it contains - indeed this may be a breach of copyright.
__________________
JACK
  #3914  
Old 01-20-2020, 09:00 AM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
Charles might not, but I'm betting that William will!
It's all very well to view this as a loving father supporting his son, but...the Duchy money is earmarked for William!

Will he be okay with Harry getting the same amount, or even more, to go off and do whatever, while William must hold to the path he's been on since birth?
Somehow I think William might resent it.

(I'm sure someone will say Harry has his inheritance and a trust fund, but let's face it- that would last them maybe 5 years without an influx of cash from Charles. And, I think 5 years is about the same amount of time for them to "cash in" before newer celebrities push them out of the limelight.)

Really, if Harry's marriage doesn't work out, he might end with nothing.
The Duchy of Cornwall money is earmarked for the Duke of Cornwall who at the moment is Prince Charles. The purpose of the Duchy is to provide personal income for the current Duke. As I see it, Charles is not violating any rules by using Duchy funds to support his (or his sons) follies, but Charles has redefined and professionalized his role as Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall and now there are opinions / perceptions about how the money should be used.
  #3915  
Old 01-20-2020, 09:48 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
but that was Harry's fantasy of leaving the RF, pre Meghan.. going off to Africa and living away from the press and cities... Now, he has a wife with talents which involve boht acting and doing business.. and a child to provide for. He is going to have to make money.. Charles may not be willing to support him forever.. at least not to the tune of millions. If they are not willlng to lead a quiet life on the money they arelady have, they have to schmooze and make money. So Harry will have to learn to do it..

I think it's OK if they want to become TV/movie producers. It is a legitimate private business and certainly better than selling merchandise under the royal label.



As long as they don't monetize their titles , I am fine with them earning their living, which they actually have to do anyway as Charles (and much less so William) will not be willing to support them forever. Archie, on the other hand, should concentrate on getting a good education and a professional career like any middle-class boy.
  #3916  
Old 01-20-2020, 09:59 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Oakland, United States
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
There was a mildly interesting opinion piece in the Telegraph today by Martin Townsend, who used to be the editor of OK! in the 1990's. It's a piece for subscribers but in it he points out some of the potential pitfalls of the Sussexes monetizing their celebrity, and also makes some suggestions as to how to avoid some of those pitfalls. Here's an excerpt:

--"In the world of celebrity media in particular, the word ‘exclusive’ comes at a high price - both to buyer and seller.

For the buyer it means being able to obtain something that no other magazine, newspaper, television company or website have had access to before.

For the seller - Harry and Meghan - it requires them having such stories to sell, but here is the rub: each time they deliver an exclusive a little bit of their mystique ebbs away, the bank of material they can draw on diminishes and the future market value of any exclusive falls. How many times could Harry and Meghan lift the lid on their relationship with William and Kate, even assuming they wanted to ? If Meghan ‘told all’ about how she might have been tormented by her father or pushed around by Royal lackeys, how often could she repeat those allegations without sounding bitter and washed-up ?"--

--"When I was Editor of OK! Magazine in the late 90s, the highest prices we paid were for stars photographed in their own homes and for exclusive access to their weddings and the birth of their children.

The prices for these exclusives ranged anywhere from between £20,000 to over a million, depending on the star’s celebrity status.

Will Harry and Meghan willingly let a magazine into any home they might share, particularly if photographs of Archie are part of the deal ?

Most of these exclusives are brokered on the basis of Worldwide rights, meaning that the buyer can ‘sell on’ the interview and pictures, globally. On this basis, and at current market rates, it might be possible for Harry and Meghan to secure at least £10 million for a single at-home and exclusive interview. But they’d have to be prepared to include the child they have been at great pains to protect, divulge some juicy Royal secrets, and not mind if the whole thing turned up in the Chinese equivalent of Take A Break next to an advert for incontinence pants."--

He also points out that such interviews would inevitably serve notice to paparazzi that it would be no holds barred from then out, and suggests that they might be wiser to forgo that kind of quick and easy money to establish a quieter and more selective lifestyle that might not reap such quick cash payouts, but have longer benefits.

As I said, an interesting read from someone whose bread and butter this stuff used to be.
Harry? No.
Meghan? I truly believe she has proven that for the right amount of money and fame she would do just anything! Including trading on her son privacy.- she is at the end of the day a true Hollywood type.
  #3917  
Old 01-20-2020, 10:38 AM
Elenath's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by evolvingdoors View Post
Harry? No.
Meghan? I truly believe she has proven that for the right amount of money and fame she would do just anything! Including trading on her son privacy.- she is at the end of the day a true Hollywood type.
Really? What has she done? So far they have been criticized for keeping Archie to themselves and now you criticize her for trading on his privacy?
  #3918  
Old 01-20-2020, 11:06 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elenath View Post
Really? What has she done? So far they have been criticized for keeping Archie to themselves and now you criticize her for trading on his privacy?
She will be in a very different position now that she and Harry need to eanr their own living...
  #3919  
Old 01-20-2020, 11:25 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
Piers Morgan in this piece reflects the current opinion of [I suspect] many millions of Brits -

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ars-Harry.html
  #3920  
Old 01-20-2020, 11:46 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 843
Piers Morgan's statements, to me, reflect his views and he shows himself to be nasty and relentlessly negative about Meghan and Harry.
I personally have not heard another person express the same strength of bitterness.
People are free to express their opinion but I think his views are the minority.
__________________

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
The Duke of Sussex and The Invictus Games: 2014 and 2016-2018, 2020 Dman The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 1150 09-06-2020 08:30 PM




Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abu dhabi american history anastasia once upon a time ancestry armstrong-jones baby names biography british royal family brownbitcoinqueen carolin cht cpr duchess of sussex duke of sussex earl of snowdon family tree games general news thread george vi gradenigo haakon vii hereditary grand duchess stéphanie history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs interesting introduction jewellery jewelry jumma kids movie list of rulers luxembourg mailing maxima monarchy mountbatten names nepal nepalese royal family pless prince harry princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn princess dita princess elizabeth princess eugenie princess laurentien princess of orange queen elizabeth ii queen louise queen maud resusci anne royal balls royal events royal family royal jewels royal spouse royalty royalty of taiwan royal wedding russian court dress spain stuart thai royal family videos von hofmannsthal wedding gown


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:24 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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