Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family

[Betsypaige]

I like the article, but I have to wonder how Charles doesn't rate a mention, lol.

In any case, I love the idea that the BRF is moving on, doing their thing, not letting the book send them into tizzies....

Yet as The Firm's major shareholders take stock of the fallout from the serialisation of "Finding Freedom", a sympathetic biography of Harry and Meghan seemingly written with their blessing (something the couple have denied), the mood in the gilt-edged corridors of royal power appears surprisingly relaxed.

Although there have been several conference calls among advisers over the weekend, the Queen, Prince Charles and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are understood to have barely registered a reaction to the much-hyped book by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, apparently viewing the already familiar "revelations" as yesterday's news.

Although the Royal brothers have remained in touch during the lockdown, insiders admit they are nowhere near as close as they used to be. It is unlikely William will be best pleased with the "Finding Freedom" suggestion that his innately shy wife was not welcoming enough towards Meghan, failing to "check in on her during the most difficult times with the press".

Friends point out the introverted Duchess's natural lack of effusiveness was never intended to appear cold and was largely down to her preoccupation with a newborn, a toddler and a son and heir just about to start primary school.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...und-freedom-harry-meghan-have-never-appeared/

 

[Marengo]

Thanks to those who clarified a comment that the duke of Sussex supposedly made, which was used in this thread. Now it is clear this comment comes from the mind of Lady Collin Campbell it is time to move on.

I have asked several times NOT to take the rich phantasy of LCC literally and to show some common sense. The author is known to be very unreliable. We should not pretend that her anecdotes actually happened. There is no reason to assume that they did.

Those who are interested in posting about the phantasies of Lady Colin Campbell can do so in the thread about her book.

Several posts about the book 'Royals at War' have been moved to the appropriate thread.

This thread is about 'Finding Freedom' by Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie. Please stay on topic.

 

[Denville]

At which point was William 'sneering' at Meghan? We've heard that he cautioned Harry to take his time to get to know her, which apparently annoyed Harry and caused him to think William was being a snob about it. That's far from 'sneering' at Meghan personally and if William was welcoming once Harry had committed, I don't see any reason at all to disbelieve that.

Harry interpreted it as sneering and being snobbish. I don't think he was, but thats how Harry saw it.. Then when they got engaged, he was saying basically that Will and Kate were all affectionate and friendly.. Now, in recent months since things have gone south, it seems that Harry's reverted to the original feeling that his family weren't friendly to his new girlfriend. I find Harry's swings around to be bewildering.. and hard to understand...

It seems to me that he isn't very good at interpreting things because he flies off teh handle emotionally... If the remark about "going slow" with Meghan was made, it was probably in terms of Will being worried that his younger brother was rushing things, that he didn't know Meg that well, that they could not see each other all that often, and that she was from a different land etc .. and that he should take his time.. But H chose to see it as Will being snobbish and not being willing to be fair to Meghan.. However when they got engaged, Harry had banished this thought because he wanted to tell the world that the RF really really loved his lady.. which probably wasn't true either.
I would guess that the RF who had met Meg were Ok with her, some probably liked her and they were willing to get to know her better and give her a fair chance. Maybe a few weren't all that keen but were polite. But then, Harry was in this state of being so happy that he was engaged that he wanted to see it as "they all adore her" and "she's so much happier with them than with her own family..." that he just HAD to go on about how much they all loved her...

 

[Sun Lion]

Thanks to those who clarified a comment that the duke of Sussex supposedly made, which was used in this thread. Now it is clear this comment comes from the mind of Lady Collin Campbell it is time to move on.

I have asked several times NOT to take the rich phantasy of LCC literally and to show some common sense. The author is known to be very unreliable. We should not pretend that her anecdotes actually happened. There is no reason to assume that they did.

Those who are interested in posting about the phantasies of Lady Colin Campbell can do so in the thread about her book.

Several posts about the book 'Royals at War' have been moved to the appropriate thread.

This thread is about 'Finding Freedom' by Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie. Please stay on topic.

No problem Marengo.

I don’t favour any book, source, reporter, media outlet etc. over any other, so my understanding of the Sussex situation is made up from many places.

Having said that, this book “Finding Freedom” has been the most interesting and the most informative for me. A real eye-opener.

And this thread has been a great place to explore this whole “Megxit” situation. I’ve really enjoyed so many views and perspectives since the excerpts came out, so thanks to all the posters who’ve shared their ideas.

 

[Alison H]

I think there's a worrying blurring between fact and fiction at the moment. I know that The Crown 's been generally respectful towards the Royals, but is it really OK to have a soap opera type drama about people who are still alive? The Mrs America series which is being shown in the UK at the moment is all about real people who were prominent in the 1970s, and those who are still alive, and the relatives of those who've died, have said that it's not accurate. Margaret Thatcher's family weren't happy with how she was portrayed in the Helen Mirren film. And The Plot Against America , which is also being shown here at the moment, is showing Charles Lindbergh as a pro-Nazi president in an alternative universe ... and I've an idea that someone wrote a similar story showing the Duke of Windsor as a pro-Nazi king in an alternative universe.


It's quite a worrying trend - these are real people, not characters in stories. Authors should not be making up scenes just because they sound dramatic in books.

 

[Denville]

I think there's a worrying blurring between fact and fiction at the moment. I know that The Crown 's been generally respectful towards the Royals, but is it really OK to have a soap opera type drama about people who are still alive? The Mrs America series which is being shown in the UK at the moment is all about real people who were prominent in the 1970s, and those who are still alive, and the relatives of those who've died, have said that it's not accurate. Margaret Thatcher's family weren't happy with how she was portrayed in the Helen Mirren film. And The Plot Against America , which is also being shown here at the moment, is showing Charles Lindbergh as a pro-Nazi president in an alternative universe ... and I've an idea that someone wrote a similar story showing the Duke of Windsor as a pro-Nazi king in an alternative universe.


It's quite a worrying trend - these are real people, not characters in stories. Authors should not be making up scenes just because they sound dramatic in books.

what is wrong with Alternative history? Its a genre, and people know that it is ALTERNATIVE and not what really happened. We know that Lindbegh didn't become preisdent... People should use historical fiction and dramatizations as a starting point, rather than as history...

 

[poppy7]

I didn't say that anyone made a statement. Tabloids printed numerous stories after Meghan joined the royals that staff at both BP and KP found her difficult to work for.

After extracts of Finding Freedom were published the tabloids that had published these previous stories of sneers about 'Duchess Difficult' and reports of pushiness and American ways and nicknames for her (leaks of which were printed at the time as coming from these KP/BP staff) went back to their sources in the Palaces and there were denials that the staff had done or said anything demeaning or wrong about Meghan. So someone is lying somewhere!

They didn't. And I think what is said is the truth. That she is culturally different and didn't want to town the line. They may not have called her those words. There is nothing there that hasn't been said before. The Sussexes were leaking.

 

[Denville]

I think you’re giving up too easily on William and Harry...and, honestly, they shouldn’t ever jump through those kinds of hoops to avoid each other. I realize that many siblings don’t get along and don’t have relationships with each other, but those are extreme cases. Charles is not going to just allow his sons to give up on their brotherhood like that. Of course he can’t force them to ever become close again, but he sure isn’t going to enable their disfunction...Harry will be in LA most of the time, so it won’t really matter.

I think a lot more siblings don't get on that well than you'd hope... (Im an only child).. and while there are families where they are very close and loving there are a lto that aren't. Just usually they tolerate each other when they have to and dont go public on it.
Also we dont really know where Harry may end up. He may stay in the US but if the marriage doesn't last, I'd say he'll come back at least part time to Engalnd.

 

[victor1319]

what is wrong with Alternative history? Its a genre, and people know that it is ALTERNATIVE and not what really happened. We know that Lindbegh didn't become preisdent... People should use historical fiction and dramatizations as a starting point, rather than as history...

Yeah, it is a genre - and perhaps, if in a certain way received by the audiance, it is also fake news - you know, "I've seen it on TV"...

I have once seen this actor on TV, long ago, who claimed, people are quite often hostile towards him, because since he was mainly playing rogue characters, they thought, he were a rogue in real life too.

On the other hand: In the Ukraine had this small comedian a tv-series, in which he played an honest, untouchable President - He is now President of Ukraine... ?

 

[Nice Nofret]

I can't help wondering, why so many people choose to take 'Finding Freedom' or the Fail as gospel; I fail yet to see where the book is more than an assamblage of stories we allready read in the gossip press.



Even as we know today that the Morton/Diana book was written with the help of Diana, still what it is IN the book is in large parts a twisted version of 'THE truth'. (Whatever TRUTH is ) Their are allways more than one way open to interpretation of what happend.


So, even IF the book IS written with the envolvement of the Sussex, it is still only
a) their version of what happend and b) their interpretation of what they choose to see in it (snubs, slights, rassism etc).


I'm giving you an example out of my world: here in Europe we do have much less racisme than you seem to have in the US, as we have another history - or non history with it. What we do have instead is a lot of class distincion (very strong in England for example). I'm very much a snob about poorly educated people, or people with a less broad mind, or less intelligent, or people not interested in a whole lot of things etc. I'm also very snobbish about showy people.


I had some problems at the start to understand why Meghan was/is considered 'black'. Same with people classed as 'Hispanic' .. we don't class them that way in Europ - they are just Europeans - form the Mediterranean zone. As we have Scandinaviens or middle Europeans. But nothing to do with their 'value' as such. 'Caucasian' is NOTHING we use - it's an american concept.



I don't understand why people in the states are prone to class mixed race persons as black, even when their are much more white then black in their heritage - as Meghan is.



I think Meghan, as a US-Person sees things through her 'rassist'-concept eyes, and sees slightes based on race, where are non at all.

 

[Curryong]

I think there is racism in Europe, it's just viewed quite differently to within the US (primarily because of the history of slavery in that country.)

Why is Meghan 'much more white than black' in your view? The history of her mother Doria's family stretches back to the Civil War period at least and as far as I know there were no inter-racial marriages during that time until Doria and Tom (a union which produced a child who was 50% white, 50% black in heritage.)

 

[Denville]

Of course there is racism in Europe.. and class distintiction..

 

[poppy7]

Of course there is racism in Europe.. and class distintiction..

Of course there is.

Presents differently. And this 'we are colour blind' is probably racist within itself.

There is a totally different attitude though than in the USA. And the language used by people of colour within the USA is not used in Europe.

But the ethnic make up is different. And most were not brought to the European countries as slaves.

 

[Denville]

I don't know. I always felt William was more like Philip in terms of his ability to forgive people. Even Fergie has admitted that William hasn't spoken to her since before Diana died, very similar to Philip's shunning of Fergie. I remember at his wedding in 2011, when he passed the Spencer section he exchanged greetings with his two aunts but blanked Earl Spencer.

So I wouldn't be surprised if he never spoke to Meghan again. Harry he might eventually have a casual relationship with, never again chummy, but they'll be able to converse when the circumstances bring them in the same room.

Just like Philip avoids Fergie, Harry and William can avoid each other for the most part. Go to Balmoral at different times, which should be easy as Harry seems to prefer vacationing overseas in August instead of Balmoral. Then at Christmas the Sussexes can stay at Sandringham House while the Cambridges are at Anmer. And the rest of the year, Harry will likely be in LA, so very easy to avoid each other there.

I dotn think that William will ever give up on his brother, but he may be in a bad mood right now.. He may well feel that he and Kate have been criticized by Meghan's supporters or by her herself and that the 2 of them have been left with a large burden of "having to do royal work", without the 2 people who were meant to carry part of the load for the next 30 or 40 years. He may well blame Meghan for it more than he blames Harry, she's not someone he has ever been close to and perhaps he didn't take to her..
It is possible that he feels angry with her for encouraging Harry to be difficult and to leave royal life.. and he's also somewhat angry with his brother for being "weak enough" as he may see it, to give in to her. but I don't think he will fall out completely with Harry unless Harry remains hostile or unfriendly to him.. But he may remain chilly with Meghan adn regard her as he probably does Fergie..

 

[Denville]

Of course there is.

Presents differently. And this 'we are colour blind' is probably racist within itself.

There is a totally different attitude though than in the USA. And the language used by people of colour within the USA is not used in Europe.

But the ethnic make up is different. And most were not brought to the European countries as slaves.

No but when people of colour from French, german British etc colonies came to live in France, Germany UK etc (mainly I think from the 1950s) there was tension, racism, and occasionally violence...

 

[Nice Nofret]

I didn't say, that there is NO racism in europe, but to a much lesser degree, and that our 'real problems' aren't racism but class distincions and such.


Dorias is obviously mixed - as she isn't very dark skined; And to me Meghan is more white than black; without nowing her mother I had her down as white, with some southern aspects .. could have been anything southern (spoken as a european). There are people from southern italy that are much darker skinned than her.


I'm living in a community / friends circle with people from everywhere - the distinction for me (and most people around me) is education, open mindedness and a certain way of live to be included. Nothing to do with race.


I once counted on an evening with 18 guests: we were from 13 diffrent countries and all parts of the earth.

 

[Lilyflo]

There's definitely racism in the UK. It's virtually all-white where I live and I've heard people say racist things. Some people in my extended family are racist (I can't even repeat some of things I've heard them say). My grandmother was terrified of black people and refused to be treated by a black doctor in hospital.

 

[Denville]

Of course there is, but if meghan moved back to america because of racism.. one has only to look at the tragic events in the last few months, to know that there's racism there too...

 

[Betsypaige]

I think a lot more siblings don't get on that well than you'd hope... (Im an only child).. and while there are families where they are very close and loving there are a lto that aren't. Just usually they tolerate each other when they have to and dont go public on it.
Also we dont really know where Harry may end up. He may stay in the US but if the marriage doesn't last, I'd say he'll come back at least part time to Engalnd.

Why do you think I said that many siblings don’t get along and, in fact, don’t talk? I know that! That doesn’t mean the majority are like that, and it doesn’t mean the family should give up and enable that kind of rift.

I didn't say, that there is NO racism in europe, but to a much lesser degree, and that our 'real problems' aren't racism but class distincions and such.


Dorias is obviously mixed - as she isn't very dark skined; And to me Meghan is more white than black; without nowing her mother I had her down as white, with some southern aspects .. could have been anything southern (spoken as a european). There are people from southern italy that are much darker skinned than her.


I'm living in a community / friends circle with people from everywhere - the distinction for me (and most people around me) is education, open mindedness and a certain way of live to be included. Nothing to do with race.


I once counted on an evening with 18 guests: we were from 13 diffrent countries and all parts of the earth.

This is the last time I say anything about race, because it has nothing to do with how I feel about Meghan, but...Doria being fairly light-skinned doesn’t mean she’s “mixed”.

 

[Curryong]

I didn't say, that there is NO racism in europe, but to a much lesser degree, and that our 'real problems' aren't racism but class distincions and such.


Dorias is obviously mixed - as she isn't very dark skined; And to me Meghan is more white than black; without nowing her mother I had her down as white, with some southern aspects .. could have been anything southern (spoken as a european). There are people from southern italy that are much darker skinned than her.


I'm living in a community / friends circle with people from everywhere - the distinction for me (and most people around me) is education, open mindedness and a certain way of live to be included. Nothing to do with race.


I once counted on an evening with 18 guests: we were from 13 diffrent countries and all parts of the earth.

Doria is not 'mixed', whatever that may mean, and the 'lightness of skin' does not mean a part white family history in her case. Photos have appeared in the Press of Doria's parents, grandparents, great-uncles etc from the extended family, and all are of African American heritage.

 

[Osipi]

Why do you think I said that many siblings don’t get along and, in fact, don’t talk? I know that! That doesn’t mean the majority are like that, and it doesn’t mean the family should give up and enable that kind of rift.

What I find funny is that here we sit, a whole lot of people from all over the place, discussing and forming opinions on the internal workings of relationships of a family we don't even know. Its like writing fantasy fiction.

Combine every little detail ever written in books, media and even our posts here and then redact any bit of information that doesn't come from a family member, themselves, that can be proven to be quoted verbatim and I think we'd find that 98.5% of that compilation would redacted.

The only people that really actually know what's going in within the family is the family, themselves.

 

[Denville]

What I find funny is that here we sit, a whole lot of people from all over the place, discussing and forming opinions on the internal workings of relationships of a family we don't even know. Its like writing fantasy fiction.

Combine every little detail ever written in books, media and even our posts here and then redact any bit of information that doesn't come from a family member, themselves, that can be proven to be quoted verbatim and I think we'd find that 98.5% of that compilation would redacted.

The only people that really actually know what's going in within the family is the family, themselves.

so ther'es no point in discussing them at all..

 

[Mirabel]

I think there is racism in Europe, it's just viewed quite differently to within the US (primarily because of the history of slavery in that country.)

I agree.
There's an equal amount of racism in Europe, imo.
It simply is not as overt.

 

[Osipi]

Sure there's room for discussion. Of the book. What is presented in the book and what you think about what is written.

To discuss what is and what is not going on as far as family relationships and who did what to whom and who snubbed who first and coming up with 12,342 reasons why a snub occurred is writing fantasy fiction. Its fun, its entertaining but its a far cry from "gospel truths".

As Charles once said "They've turned us into a bloody soap opera!". This is basically what is going on now. We're writing a soap opera script based on any tidbit of "information" that happens to hit the eyeballs regarding this couple.

I've no opinion on the book as I have not read it and do not plan to read it unless its a boring night and I get it for less than the price of a Starbuck's coffee. But that's just me.

 

[Denville]

Sure there's room for discussion. Of the book. What is presented in the book and what you think about what is written.

To discuss what is and what is not going on as far as family relationships and who did what to whom and who snubbed who first and coming up with 12,342 reasons why a snub occurred is writing fantasy fiction. Its fun, its entertaining but its a far cry from "gospel truths".

As Charles once said "They've turned us into a bloody soap opera!". This is basically what is going on now. We're writing a soap opera script based on any tidbit of "information" that happens to hit the eyeballs regarding this couple.

I've no opinion on the book as I have not read it and do not plan to read it unless its a boring night and I get it for less than the price of a Starbuck's coffee. But that's just me.

I think Charles turned himself into a "bloody soap opera". He and Diana both revealed a lot of stuff about their stormy and messy marriage, so they can hardly complain if the tabloid press made money out of it and exaggerated some details...
If the information in this book and others is just dismissed as "gossip" and "made up" and not accurate, then what's the point?

 

[Osipi]

I think Charles turned himself into a "bloody soap opera". He and Diana both revealed a lot of stuff about their stormy and messy marriage, so they can hardly complain if the tabloid press made money out of it and exaggerated some details...
If the information in this book and others is just dismissed as "gossip" and "made up" and not accurate, then what's the point?

This is a prime example. Mention a quote to emphasize a point I'm trying to make and all of a sudden its an opinion on Charles and Diana and their mess of decades ago. This creates a totally different tangent of discussion away from the topic of the thread. ?

The point is that information comes from all over the place. This book seems to be authored and published by two people that actually aren't "inner circle" to the Windsor family and their relationships. Unless proven that a family member related something to the authors that can be quoted verbatim, everything contained in the book is obtained from a "middle man" so to speak.

Ye olde "heard it from a friend that heard it from a friend" kind of information. Omid Scobie, one the authors of the recent slew of books, even is writing from his own personal perspective after closely following Harry and Meghan for most of their time together. He's still not "inner circle" enough to know intimate details he's actually witnessed.

No matter how many books are written, each one paints a different perspective and should be taken with a grain of sale unless you see the words "authorized biography" or its an autobiography written by the subject in their own words. (Actually the 2nd Morton book made itself more credible as Diana's "own words" were shown to point to content of the book.)

 

[RandyDrx]

Sure there's room for discussion. Of the book. What is presented in the book and what you think about what is written.

To discuss what is and what is not going on as far as family relationships and who did what to whom and who snubbed who first and coming up with 12,342 reasons why a snub occurred is writing fantasy fiction. Its fun, its entertaining but its a far cry from "gospel truths".

As Charles once said "They've turned us into a bloody soap opera!". This is basically what is going on now. We're writing a soap opera script based on any tidbit of "information" that happens to hit the eyeballs regarding this couple.

I've no opinion on the book as I have not read it and do not plan to read it unless its a boring night and I get it for less than the price of a Starbuck's coffee. But that's just me.

I might be wrong, but I think it was Prince Philip who said that.

 

[Denville]

This is a prime example. Mention a quote to emphasize a point I'm trying to make and all of a sudden its an opinion on Charles and Diana and their mess of decades ago. This creates a totally different tangent of discussion away from the topic of the thread. ?

The point is that information comes from all over the place. This book seems to be authored and published by two people that actually aren't "inner circle" to the Windsor family and their relationships. Unless proven that a family member related something to the authors that can be quoted verbatim, everything contained in the book is obtained from a "middle man" so to speak.

Ye olde "heard it from a friend that heard it from a friend" kind of information. Omid Scobie, one the authors of the recent slew of books, even is writing from his own personal perspective after closely following Harry and Meghan for most of their time together. He's still not "inner circle" enough to know intimate details he's actually witnessed.

No matter how many books are written, each one paints a different perspective and should be taken with a grain of sale unless you see the words "authorized biography" or its an autobiography written by the subject in their own words. (Actually the 2nd Morton book made itself more credible as Diana's "own words" were shown to point to content of the book.)

I made the point in another post that most info about the RF comes from the "gossipy press" rather than "heavy serious journalists. " Royals dont usually rate a serious biography until they are older...
I made the point that its not the press who made Charles into a soap opera but C himself and Diana... and that much of the stuff that was in the papers about them in the early days, about staff being pushed out, about rows and eventually about Affairs, was essentially true and not "made up".
But information does come from various sources indeed. Sometimes its leaks from royal staff, sometimes its from the royals' friends, occasionally it is directly from the Royals themselves. There are some "made up" stories but they are usually short fillers in a newspaper...
but this is a book written by someone who's followed Harry and is a supporter of his...
Omid has followed H and Meghan for a time. Perhaps he is guessing about how tehy felt about each other emotionally but is he likely to make up something about what the queen nd H were saying when they tucked into roast beef together?

 

[Sun Lion]

Now "People" magazine is publishing extracts of “Finding Freedom” for the American market.

Here is the cover - "Their Side of the Story".

https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...-is-strong-enough-to-weather-the-same-storms/

 

[US Royal Watcher]

I don't know. I always felt William was more like Philip in terms of his ability to forgive people. Even Fergie has admitted that William hasn't spoken to her since before Diana died, very similar to Philip's shunning of Fergie. I remember at his wedding in 2011, when he passed the Spencer section he exchanged greetings with his two aunts but blanked Earl Spencer.

So I wouldn't be surprised if he never spoke to Meghan again. Harry he might eventually have a casual relationship with, never again chummy, but they'll be able to converse when the circumstances bring them in the same room.

Just like Philip avoids Fergie, Harry and William can avoid each other for the most part. Go to Balmoral at different times, which should be easy as Harry seems to prefer vacationing overseas in August instead of Balmoral. Then at Christmas the Sussexes can stay at Sandringham House while the Cambridges are at Anmer. And the rest of the year, Harry will likely be in LA, so very easy to avoid each other there.

I agree that William seems able to hold a grudge, but his relationship with Harry is different than his relationship with either Fergie or his uncle. I admit that going to the media is probably one of the worst things that Harry could have done - which is why Harry did it (unfortunately), but William has been Harry's protector all their lives. I think he often dealt with the upheaval of the divorce and Diana's death by directing his love to and taking care of, Harry. William obviously felt that Harry needed him because Harry was younger and more vulnerable - and it is easier to forgive someone you perceive as more vulnerable.

Moreover, William is the one who convinced Harry to seek help for his mental illness (which I assume was depression and PTSD). Both he and Kate are very familiar with mental illness and understand that someone who suffers from mental illness tends to inappropriately act out. I have to believe that they will make allowances for Harry's behavior.

Fairly or not, William and the rest of the royal family are probably blaming Meghan more than Harry and I agree that William will probably never completely forgive or trust Meghan again. The couples will probably avoid each other as much as possible for a while but I believe that William and Harry (and likely Kate) will probably be able to repair their relationship.

It will be also easier to forgive if Harry demonstrates some contrition and I strongly suspect that if he doesn't regret the book now, he will soon. There is no way to pretend that cooperating with the book was an impulsive action - the cooperation took place over a period of time - but Harry was in a bad place. I think that Harry is sensitive enough to realize that he deeply hurt William and Kate (not to mention his father and the rest of the family) and, now that he's had his revenge, his love will take over and he will try and make amends.