The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > Royal Library
Click Here to Login

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #141  
Old 10-06-2020, 10:04 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claire View Post
I would still like to read the whole book - but I am starting to see the problem for Harry and yes - I don't think he had a choice in the matter. I am not saying that he was asked to leave, just that for his marriage and life all round it might be better - suppose only time will tell.

It really does seem that he noticed that he was always getting the short end of the stick, always getting the negative press when him and William were both doing the same thing. He saw the way the Palace treated Princess Margaret, Prince Andrew, Prince Edward and even the Kent's and Gloucester's - and decide that was not the life he wanted to lead. Edward tried to do the same, it didn't work. So he will pretty much will have to live by Charles and William's convenience, which might be a problem later for Edward and Andrew. So cant blame Harry for wanting to make money - however how much money does he need? And is there something else he can do that will allow him to make money or is the lifestyle needed for the security - it is a lot a variables.
Of course he had a choice in the matter. He and Meghan wanted to make money so that meant they had to either stay within the RF and work on the royal duties, or leave and fully choose a new life and support themselves. They chose the new life and supporting themselves. But they had a choice. If he didn't want to lead the life that other younger children of a monarch were leading then why did he undertake the role in the first place?
__________________

  #142  
Old 10-06-2020, 10:41 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,469
Nobody forced Harry to leave the Army. I understand that he didn't like the idea of a desk job, which was the next stage, but most of us have to undertake roles at work which we don't particularly enjoy. It was his choice to leave. And, having done so, he could have gone for something like the air ambulance job which William did for a while. Again, it was his choice not to do so.
__________________

  #143  
Old 10-06-2020, 10:44 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
Nobody forced Harry to leave the Army. I understand that he didn't like the idea of a desk job, which was the next stage, but most of us have to undertake roles at work which we don't particularly enjoy. It was his choice to leave. And, having done so, he could have gone for something like the air ambulance job which William did for a while. Again, it was his choice not to do so.
No, I think he would have had to go into royal duties in due course but he was expected to stay in the army another few years.. but he didn't like desk jobs so he gave up.
  #144  
Old 10-06-2020, 10:57 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Of course he had a choice in the matter. He and Meghan wanted to make money so that meant they had to either stay within the RF and work on the royal duties, or leave and fully choose a new life and support themselves. They chose the new life and supporting themselves. But they had a choice. If he didn't want to lead the life that other younger children of a monarch were leading then why did he undertake the role in the first place?
Why? Because maybe he had doubts about the Royal role in his twenties but decided to stay on because, as he once stated, because of loyalty to his grandmother. Those doubts may well have hardened and proliferated over the years.

Some people have three or four career changes and different changes of lifestyles in their lifetimes. Not everyone chooses a certain path in their early twenties and continues on the same road for the rest of their lives. And that includes those who feel pressure to stay in old and established family firms. If it doesn't feel a good fit any more then everyone has a right to choose a new destiny for themselves.
  #145  
Old 10-06-2020, 11:57 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
I agree that Charles tried his best.
At the very least, he didn't inflict the damage that Philip did, with his insistence that he knew best about his son's education, etc. Philip completely ignored Charles' feelings on Gordonstoun, and created a nightmare situation.

Surely he made some mistakes, but I believe he was sincerely concerned for his sons' happiness.
Yes, I agree with this. William will make mistakes with his children, too - heís only human, like his father. I do love Philip, and I have no doubt his intentions were good, but his attitude towards Charles was unfortunate. I think he had an image of what a man should be, and he tried to mold Charles in that image, but all it did was make his son unhappy. Charles clearly loves his father and they seem to have a pretty good relationship now (Iím guessing they agree to disagree on a lot of things, lol), so at some point he must have understood that, despite his flaws as a father, Philip loved him. I suspect William has come to that same conclusion ...

Your last point is really all that matters to me when it comes to Charles and his relationship with his sons. In one of the serializations linked above, there are excerpts showing that Diana wasnít a perfect mother either, that she made mistakes along the way. Heck, same goes for HM...
  #146  
Old 10-06-2020, 12:03 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Deleted post
  #147  
Old 10-06-2020, 12:20 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
I didnít see William dressing up as a Nazi....just as an example. How did Harry get the short end of the stick? He earned any bad press he got - and to be honest, he didnít get as much for the Nazi outfit incident as he should have. From what I can remember, the media loved him - he was the happy-go-lucky, free-spirited Royal who hung out with them and acted like a regular, guy. Iím not buying what Lacey is trying to sell.

I agree, I still remember in 2012 during that Las Vegas incident, the media and the people have many excuses for him and insisted that he was just being a lad and they think that it wasn't much a scandal.
  #148  
Old 10-06-2020, 12:44 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
That view that Harry has never grown up has been largely perpetrated by the British media, with journalists banging on for the last twenty three years about the 'boys walking behind their mother's coffin'. It was even repeated as recently as August. We don't know that is the view of the Queen, Charles or William at all. Harry would hardly have been given a senior role with the Queen's beloved Commonwealth if she had felt that her grandson had never matured.
I think this role was to try to position H&M as senior royals with a global royal perhaps naively thinking that with Harry's love of Africa and Meghan's mixed heritage this could be a winner for them but of course it turns out they were trying to square the circle as they weren't prepared to put in the hard work and appear to have treated the role as a platform for them and a soapbox - e.g. the Botswana interview.
  #149  
Old 10-06-2020, 01:02 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darius1 View Post
I think this role was to try to position H&M as senior royals with a global royal perhaps naively thinking that with Harry's love of Africa and Meghan's mixed heritage this could be a winner for them but of course it turns out they were trying to square the circle as they weren't prepared to put in the hard work and appear to have treated the role as a platform for them and a soapbox - e.g. the Botswana interview.
wwell unfortunately the queen was wrong, in allocating them an official role of this kind....
  #150  
Old 10-06-2020, 01:04 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,854
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
Nobody forced Harry to leave the Army. I understand that he didn't like the idea of a desk job, which was the next stage, but most of us have to undertake roles at work which we don't particularly enjoy. It was his choice to leave. And, having done so, he could have gone for something like the air ambulance job which William did for a while. Again, it was his choice not to do so.
True. Harry proclaimed to love the Army that it gave him structure, even in his fake Greta conversation he was talking very positively about what the Army did for him. So I can see why his family had every expectation that he would stay in the Army into his forties (like Andrew and the Navy). Then in the future during Charles' reign they would reevaluate his options. But Harry did a 180 on everyone and suddenly decided that everyday Army work was too boring for him.

Then they tried to make him a full time royal which he seemed interested in at the time. Then after a few years of that he wanted out. Anne, Andrew, and Edward led boring, dutiful lives. If he wanted that he would of stayed in the Army.

So now he's off blowing in the wind searching for excitement. Hopping from one early stage project to another, jumping on random bandwagon movements trying to get instant gratification. He life certainly has more drama and unrest which I think he desires. But I'm not sure the formula to any long term fulfillment can be found that way. For Meghan's sake hopefully he doesn't find any part of California life to be mundane because his past shows he will bail if it does.
  #151  
Old 10-06-2020, 01:09 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by miss whirley View Post
True. Harry proclaimed to love the Army that it gave him structure, even in his fake Greta conversation he was talking very positively about what the Army did for him. So I can see why his family had every expectation that he would stay in the Army into his forties (like Andrew and the Navy). Then in the future during Charles' reign they would reevaluate his options. But Harry did a 180 on everyone and suddenly decided that everyday Army work was too boring for him.

Then they tried to make him a full time royal which he seemed interested in at the time. Then after a few years of that he wanted out. Anne, Andrew, and Edward led boring, dutiful lives. If he wanted that he would of stayed in the Army.

So now he's off blowing in the wind searching for excitement. Hopping from one early stage project to another, jumping on random bandwagon movements trying to get instant gratification. He life certainly has more drama and unrest which I think he desires. But I'm not sure the formula to any long term fulfillment can be found that way. For Meghan's sake hopefully he doesn't find any part of California life to be mundane because his past shows he will bail if it does.
He does not really seem to be doing all that much, IMO.. Its Meghan who is actively getting into this new life. He's done a few Zooms for charity things and I think one bit where he was supporting Meghan in her advising poeple to register to vote.
  #152  
Old 10-06-2020, 01:42 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Midlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Why? Because maybe he had doubts about the Royal role in his twenties but decided to stay on because, as he once stated, because of loyalty to his grandmother. Those doubts may well have hardened and proliferated over the years.

Some people have three or four career changes and different changes of lifestyles in their lifetimes. Not everyone chooses a certain path in their early twenties and continues on the same road for the rest of their lives. And that includes those who feel pressure to stay in old and established family firms. If it doesn't feel a good fit any more then everyone has a right to choose a new destiny for themselves.
I think this is all fair comment.

Reading this & some of the previous comments maybe we need to give some serious thought to retiring the idea of a public royal family. A monarch & those in direct line is all we need, the rest could be private untitled citizens. Including spouses if necessary. A radical change but maybe one for the best. After all we don’t need a royal family to maintain the monarchy. They are after all just ordinary people born into extraordinary positions of great privilege who have no official constitutional role.

Maybe expecting people to lead particular sorts of lives because of an accident of birth is no longer fit for purpose. Clearly when royal individuals don’t want to play the game all sorts of upset is caused. That's certainly the case at the moment although people differ as to who is mostly to blame for this situation.
  #153  
Old 10-06-2020, 01:45 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
I think this is all fair comment.

Reading this & some of the previous comments maybe we need to give some serious thought to retiring the idea of a public royal family. A monarch & those in direct line is all we need, the rest can be private untitled citizens. Including spouses if necessary. A radical change but maybe one for the best. After all we donít need a royal family to maintain the monarchy. They are after all just ordinary people born into extraordinary positions of great privilege who have no official constitutional role.

Maybe expecting people to lead particular sorts of lives because of an accident of birth is no longer fit for purpose. Clearly when royal individuals donít want to play the game all sorts of upset is caused. That's certainly the case at the moment although people differ as to who is mostly to blame for this situation.
so why have a monarch and heir at all? Why not retire the whole lot?
  #154  
Old 10-06-2020, 01:48 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Midlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
so why have a monarch and heir at all? Why not retire the whole lot?
Because we are a monarchy. The monarch is part of the constitution.
  #155  
Old 10-06-2020, 01:54 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
Because we are a monarchy. The monarch is part of the constitution.
The problem was that the person wanted a foot in both camps, not that he wanted to leave.
  #156  
Old 10-06-2020, 01:54 PM
Empress Merel's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: -, Netherlands
Posts: 2,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
I think this is all fair comment.

Reading this & some of the previous comments maybe we need to give some serious thought to retiring the idea of a public royal family. A monarch & those in direct line is all we need, the rest could be private untitled citizens. Including spouses if necessary. A radical change but maybe one for the best. After all we don’t need a royal family to maintain the monarchy. They are after all just ordinary people born into extraordinary positions of great privilege who have no official constitutional role.

Maybe expecting people to lead particular sorts of lives because of an accident of birth is no longer fit for purpose. Clearly when royal individuals don’t want to play the game all sorts of upset is caused. That's certainly the case at the moment although people differ as to who is mostly to blame for this situation.
So basically an even more strict version of the way the Dutch do it? It would easily solve a lot of problems and goes directly in line with Charles's vision of downsizing.
  #157  
Old 10-06-2020, 01:56 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Midlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
The problem was that the person wanted a foot in both camps, not that he wanted to leave.
Well yes that's probably true but without a public role for the monarch's relatives such a drama wouldn't happen in the first place.
  #158  
Old 10-06-2020, 01:57 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
Because we are a monarchy. The monarch is part of the constitution.
There is no written constitution and in any case, there is no need to have a monarchy. What if Charles or William felt they wanted out of royal life? WHy shoudl anyone be stuck with the job if they dont want it?
  #159  
Old 10-06-2020, 01:58 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
Well yes that's probably true but without a public role for the monarch's relatives such a drama wouldn't happen in the first place.
The Drama happened because Harry and Meghan wanted to be half and half in and out of hte RF
  #160  
Old 10-06-2020, 02:05 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Midlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
There is no written constitution and in any case, there is no need to have a monarchy. What if Charles or William felt they wanted out of royal life? WHy shoudl anyone be stuck with the job if they dont want it?
Parliamentary bills need to have royal assent to become Acts of Parliament & law. The constitution exists unwritten or not & the monarch is essential to its smooth function.

The issue of the heirs is a separate question. I was speculating about the position of the monarch's relatives not in direct line.
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
duke of cambridge, duke of sussex, family life


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
Inside Monaco: Playground of the Rich sophie25 The Electronic Domain 15 06-22-2020 06:03 PM
"The Windsors: Inside the Royal Dynasty" eya The Electronic Domain 10 02-19-2020 11:26 PM
"The Monarchy Inside" (2010) - DR Documentary on Working Lives of Danish Royal Family Paty The Electronic Domain 184 06-19-2015 03:36 PM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian baby names biography birth britain britannia british royal family buckingham palace camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing clarence house colorblindness coronation daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii family life family tree gemstones george vi gradenigo hello! henry viii hereditary grand duchess stťphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume highgrove history hochberg hypothetical monarchs japan jewellery kensington palace książ castle list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchy mongolia mountbatten names nara period plantinum jubilee pless politics portugal prince charles of luxembourg prince harry princess eugenie queen louise royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon spanish royal family speech sussex suthida taiwan thai royal family united states united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:32 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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