Battle of Brothers: William, Harry and the Inside Story of A Family in Tumult - Page 5

Betsypaige · #81 10-03-2020, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osipi

I think so too. I seem to recall another person that thoroughly reveled in being on stage and performing once upon a time in the past and to this day, still enjoys the performing arts immensely. That person would be The Prince of Wales.

That’s right ! I do think many actors were shy as kids, and went into acting because it allowed them to be other people, but I haven’t heard any actor discuss having identity issues...

I love that Charles is into the arts and is passing that love to his grandchildren !

poppy7 · #82 10-03-2020, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Betsypaige

Actors have identity issues? Because they enjoy being other people? I’m not going that far, certainly not making a blanket statement to that effect. I think it’s a reach to suggest Meghan did that, and complete speculation.

Course they do. Studies have shown, through brain imagery, that they completely loose the connection of who they actually are when they are working. But so may we all to a certain extent. We are the never the same person at work.

And Charles isn't perfect. And he certainly was not the perfect father. None of them is perfect.

Sandy345 · #83 10-03-2020, 05:22 PM

Megxit is not a really great or accurate name for it. It did involve both Harry and Meghan as a couple. Just my take on it. I have a sense that this situation was just allowed to get worse, with Harry and William not getting along. I think some interventions should have taken place to prevent something so extreme happening.The QM and Charles are the first and second in command, respectively.

Betsypaige · #84 10-03-2020, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poppy7

Course they do. Studies have shown, through brain imagery, that they completely loose the connection of who they actually are when they are working. But so may we all to a certain extent. We are the never the same person at work.

And Charles isn't perfect. And he certainly was not the perfect father. None of them is perfect.

Where did I ever say Charles was perfect ? Or a perfect father? But he sure had done the best he can under difficult circumstances, and I admire that he didn’t take the same tack with his boys that his father took with him. What’s your point?

poppy7 · #85 10-04-2020, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Betsypaige

Where did I ever say Charles was perfect ? Or a perfect father? But he sure had done the best he can under difficult circumstances, and I admire that he didn’t take the same tack with his boys that his father took with him. What’s your point?

He probably got some of this wrong. They all did

Osipi · #86 10-04-2020, 05:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poppy7

He probably got some of this wrong. They all did

Every parent does things wrong. I strongly advocate for a "how to" manual that guarantees perfect parenthood. It ain't been written yet that I know of. My kids made it to adulthood and that, in and of itself, takes a load off my mind.

Denville · #87 10-04-2020, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poppy7

Why not she is an actress and they have identity issues, to show the least. She may well have taken hints.

That's a bit of a wild statement, that actors (i presume you mean both male and female actors) have identity issues. I don't know of any scientific studies that state this...

Denville · #88 10-04-2020, 06:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Betsypaige

It is a criticism, and an unfair one given that Charles had just returned from overseas. Lacey is making it sound like Charles - and HM - avoided Harry on purpose to punish him, to put him in his place. I don’t believe that at all, especially of Charles. It’s one thing for him to be upset at his son’s behavior, another to act on that in a way that’s guaranteed to makes things difficult between them personally.

Its possible that Charles was hoping that whatever problems Harry was having, he would give his royal life with Meghan some time, and see if things improved and that things would settle down. He is a busy man and possilby hoped that Harry's problems were not so major that they needed immediate attention and that the possiblity that Harry and Meghan might decide to walk out never occured to him

Osipi · #89 10-04-2020, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denville

Its possible that Charles was hoping that whatever problems Harry was having, he would give his royal life with Meghan some time, and see if things improved and that things would settle down. He is a busy man and possilby hoped that Harry's problems were not so major that they needed immediate attention and that the possiblity that Harry and Meghan might decide to walk out never occured to him

Then, on the opposite side of the coin, with the closeness Charles has had with his second son, he could have sensed that Harry had has for a long time been in doubt about his "birth duty and responsibility" and from his own relationship growing up with the father he had, understood Harry's doubts and fears and discomfort with the way his life was. Charles could have instinctively known how his son felt and when Meghan came into the picture, it *seemed* like she would embrace his life of duty and responsibility to Crown and country and felt that all would be well.

If there is anyone that really *knew* Harry and his feelings and emotional state of mind, it would be Charles. He'd remember all the times he didn't agree with how *his* father wanted his life to be and saw the signs of Harry's discontent long before he met Meghan. Actually, I think right now, Charles is probably the strongest ally in Harry's corner.

Denville · #90 10-04-2020, 08:10 AM

I dont know what you mean by Charles' closeness to his son. I dont know of his having any especial closeness to Harry and I doubt if he knew "Instinctively" how Harry was feeling. I dont think he's a very intuitive man. If he did "know" of Harrys' concerns I wonder then that he didn't talk to him sooner. And given that Harry was marrying somoene outside the usual run of Royal wives, from a different country and culture and who had had a much more independent life than many royal brides, why would Charles be so sure that Meghan was going to embrace royal life and settle Harry down?

Betsypaige · #91 10-04-2020, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poppy7

He probably got some of this wrong. They all did

I still don’t understand your point about Charles....and if you’re referring here to Megxit, I still firmly believe that the BRF didn’t so anything wrong.

Betsypaige · #92 10-04-2020, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denville

Its possible that Charles was hoping that whatever problems Harry was having, he would give his royal life with Meghan some time, and see if things improved and that things would settle down. He is a busy man and possilby hoped that Harry's problems were not so major that they needed immediate attention and that the possiblity that Harry and Meghan might decide to walk out never occured to him

That’s sheer speculation. Lacey hasn’t proven - at least in these excerpts- that Charles (or HM) were deliberately avoiding Harry. I don’t buy for a moment that Charles would ever do that; his sons are everything to him. If he felt that Harry should give the situation more time, he would have told H. Lacey seems to be taking the most cynical, negative position when it comes to them because it seems he ultimately sympathizes with H and M.

Betsypaige · #93 10-04-2020, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osipi

Then, on the opposite side of the coin, with the closeness Charles has had with his second son, he could have sensed that Harry had has for a long time been in doubt about his "birth duty and responsibility" and from his own relationship growing up with the father he had, understood Harry's doubts and fears and discomfort with the way his life was. Charles could have instinctively known how his son felt and when Meghan came into the picture, it *seemed* like she would embrace his life of duty and responsibility to Crown and country and felt that all would be well.

If there is anyone that really *knew* Harry and his feelings and emotional state of mind, it would be Charles. He'd remember all the times he didn't agree with how *his* father wanted his life to be and saw the signs of Harry's discontent long before he met Meghan. Actually, I think right now, Charles is probably the strongest ally in Harry's corner.

I agree with this, especially your last point. Charles has never been in Harry’s position as “spare”, but he sure knows what it feels like to be odd man out. As much as he loves his father, I think much of what he’s done as a father has been a reaction against Philip’s attempts to mold him in his image of what a man should be. That’s why he’s given William and Harry so much freedom through. All throughout Megxit we’ve heard about how Charles was sympathetic to Harry’s feelings - and since it seems they’ve spoken regularly since H left, it doesn’t appear that their relationship has suffered much, if at all.

Robert Lacey, IMO, is indulging in way took much speculation...and he appears to be completely off base regarding Charles and William also. His reputation doesn’t cut him any slack with me.

Osipi · #94 10-04-2020, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denville

I dont know what you mean by Charles' closeness to his son. I dont know of his having any especial closeness to Harry and I doubt if he knew "Instinctively" how Harry was feeling. I dont think he's a very intuitive man. If he did "know" of Harrys' concerns I wonder then that he didn't talk to him sooner. And given that Harry was marrying somoene outside the usual run of Royal wives, from a different country and culture and who had had a much more independent life than many royal brides, why would Charles be so sure that Meghan was going to embrace royal life and settle Harry down?

Charles was a hands on parent from the beginning. That's one area both Charles and Diana agreed on. How they'd raise their sons. Sometimes a parent instinctively realizes traits in the child that reminds them of how they felt growing up.

We can't actually speculate on how the father/son relationship really is but its a known fact that Charles often didn't feel comfortable with his own father and his father's decisions on what was best for him. That, in and of itself, would give credence that he'd recognize the feelings that his son has exhibited instinctively but maybe not so much visibly and perhaps not really cognizant of it until it became a reality. Call it parental instinct and the pieces of the puzzle fit together over time.

Denville · #95 10-04-2020, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osipi

Charles was a hands on parent from the beginning. That's one area both Charles and Diana agreed on. How they'd raise their sons. Sometimes a parent instinctively realizes traits in the child that reminds them of how they felt growing up.

We can't actually speculate on how the father/son relationship really is but its a known fact that Charles often didn't feel comfortable with his own father and his father's decisions on what was best for him. That, in and of itself, would give credence that he'd recognize the feelings that his son has exhibited instinctively but maybe not so much visibly and perhaps not really cognizant of it until it became a reality. Call it parental instinct and the pieces of the puzzle fit together over time.

Charles was a hands on parent for a time. I think that during the years of being on bad terms with Diana, he was busy with his work and left the children more to her. When she died, they were in boarding school and Charles while trying to be a good parent, was still a busy man. He had trouble with Harry and to an extent with William and I think there was tension between him and the boys for a time, that they had issues with the problem of his marital behavior towards Diana and that they thought he was a bit of an old fuddy duddy. I don't think that Charles understood them all that well at all, and that he tended to be too indulgent towards them...and did not put his foot down as much as he should. So I doubt if he really understood that harry was getting more out of synch wtih royal life and duty and I doubt if he really envisaged that Harry would get so alienated that he would walk out.

Darius1 · #96 10-04-2020, 12:15 PM

Is it not possible that this book is in some way a vehicle to answer back to all the allegations of mistreatment of the Sussexes that have been flying around? William does appear in a more dutiful, King in waiting light. Robert Lacey is a respected historian and married to one of The Queen's Maids of Honour from the Coronation. I wouldn't be surprised if some at Court collaborated with him to get the real version of events across.

Betsypaige · #97 10-04-2020, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darius1

Is it not possible that this book is in some way a vehicle to answer back to all the allegations of mistreatment of the Sussexes that have been flying around? William does appear in a more dutiful, King in waiting light. Robert Lacey is a respected historian and married to one of The Queen's Maids of Honour from the Coronation. I wouldn't be surprised if some at Court collaborated with him to get the real version of events across.

Well like I said, this book was described as an “antidote” to FF, except I find this just as bad in its own way. Respected or not (and he has been one of my Royal go-tos for years), I have real issues with his interpretation of events and, frankly, some of his opinions.

Alison H · #98 10-04-2020, 04:02 PM

I think this has become a bit of a cliché - the "good" one and the "naughty" one. It sounds like something out of a fable, or a Bible story. The Queen was cast as the good one and Princess Margaret as the naughty one, as were George VI and the Duke of Windsor. Maybe arguably even the then Duke of York, the future George V, and the Duke of Clarence. Now it's William and Harry.

Betsypaige · #99 10-04-2020, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alison H

I think this has become a bit of a cliché - the "good" one and the "naughty" one. It sounds like something out of a fable, or a Bible story. The Queen was cast as the good one and Princess Margaret as the naughty one, as were George VI and the Duke of Windsor. Maybe arguably even the then Duke of York, the future George V, and the Duke of Clarence. Now it's William and Harry.

I really don’t agree that this is the case here (though I’m not even conceding the above examples, I won’t discuss that here as that’s off topic). Frankly, this book seems to me as if it’s personally sympathetic to Harry and Meghan while acknowledging their ridiculous handling of Megxit. At the same time, it seems quite harsh towards HM, Charles and William and, as Lacey has written opinion pieces since Megxit, it doesn’t surprise me. He seems harshest on William, even saying in one of the recent articles that it seems like his affection for Harry is based on his ability to control his younger brother. That’s related to W’s quote saying that he can no longer put his arm around Harry.

I’m kind of done with Lacey.

Denville · #**100** 10-04-2020, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alison H

I think this has become a bit of a cliché - the "good" one and the "naughty" one. It sounds like something out of a fable, or a Bible story. The Queen was cast as the good one and Princess Margaret as the naughty one, as were George VI and the Duke of Windsor. Maybe arguably even the then Duke of York, the future George V, and the Duke of Clarence. Now it's William and Harry.

As it happens, those examples were pretty true. The queen has her faults, but she wasn't a silly mess like Margo. George V was a reasonably good King. probably Eddy would have been an awful one. Ditto with George VI and the D of Windsor. Andrew and Charles.. well need I say more?