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
 
  #781  
Old 07-29-2020, 09:22 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
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?

Unless Scobie was there and *saw* and *heard* the Queen and Harry over roast beef, its hearsay. That's why I say 98.5% of everything from books, to media, to our posts and opinions here is hearsay, maybe could be that, gossip, innuendo and pure speculation.

Its what happens when outsiders pretend to see inside when there's no windows to look through.
__________________

__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #782  
Old 07-29-2020, 09:27 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Sure there's room for discussion. Of the book. What is presented in the book and what you think about what is written.
I agree that none of us are on the inside and know the principals. We are all making assumptions based on what we have read and heard about the family and our observations of their limited public appearances. But I am not sure how we can discuss what we think about what is written, unless we can discuss our perceptions of the people the book is written about.
__________________

  #783  
Old 07-29-2020, 10:29 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
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...
Oh horrendous. Small Island. Brilliant book.

But I meant more the evolutionary history is different.

You just have to scratch the surface and a load come tumbling out.

But this isn't about racism.

Meghan is whatever she chooses to identify with.

As for other people talking about this being rumour.

Its final confirmation that everything we heard, from their point of view, is true. They were and are so leaky it is terminal.

Problem is no one likes them better as we can see that there are reasons these things happened.

Meghan just didn't understand what she was getting into.
  #784  
Old 07-29-2020, 10:31 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
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.


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.

Imake amends.
hmmmm, I would like to think that about Harry, but I can't help thinking he is not that sensitive.. unless he improves over time as he gets older. I suspect that at present he is still in an angry upset frame of mind and feels that he and Meg were "forced out" and that Will wasn't nice to him and that he and M should have been allowed to - well essentially to do what they wanted.. i.e. go half and half, do some royal work and spend time in the US making a living..
I dont think he's gotten out of that frame of mind as yet.
I think that yes William can be a tough guy, if his trust is abused, if he feels someone has not played fair with him or his loved ones, he will keep his distance.. and he probably felt that about Sarah F, that she had upset his mother, who held a grudge against her till her death..
I don't know about Charles S, but he may have issues with him over CS's speech at the funeral etc and felt it wasn't appropriate.
However Harry IS his brother. They love each other, and I think he will forgive him.. but he may not be there yet. And Yes I think that he may come to understand why Harry walked out and seems to be attacking him..but he will probably feel that Megh is more to blame. She's not his beloved blood relation she's someone he hardly knows so he is likely to feel that she is to blame for Harry getting all aggressive...
Maybe in time, he'll tolerate her.. esp if they DO come back to the UK.. but I dont think he'll ever quite trust her..
  #785  
Old 07-29-2020, 10:32 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Unless Scobie was there and *saw* and *heard* the Queen and Harry over roast beef, its hearsay. That's why I say 98.5% of everything from books, to media, to our posts and opinions here is hearsay, maybe could be that, gossip, innuendo and pure speculation.

Its what happens when outsiders pretend to see inside when there's no windows to look through.
Well they told him. This is classic Andrew Morten- Diana territory.
  #786  
Old 07-29-2020, 10:36 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,477
I dnt believe that Omid would make stuff up about the queen without some hint or insinuation as to what was said...

And I can remember people attacking Morton and saying he was making everything up and that he was totall wrong.. etc etc.. then it emerged that it was Diana who was his main source.
  #787  
Old 07-29-2020, 10:39 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,781
Perspectives of how one perceives the principles of the book is what discussion is all about. For example. Author writes "Meghan seems to prefer emeralds" and we relate how we think she does or she doesn't from what we know about her from following her fashion choices.

Presuming to know the mental state of the principles or their "inner motives" for doing this or that in relation to something the author writes is character assassination. We have *no* clue what their mental states are or their motives. Harry's been branded with all sorts of character flaws stemming from a conversation he supposedly had with his Granny. The conversation is "hearsay" and most likely never happened. If anything, it was a private conversation not for the public domain. It makes for good reading and brings in lotsa green dollars. But then again, the Daily Mail does too.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #788  
Old 07-29-2020, 11:20 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
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?

You appear as if both Charles and Diana were never talked and written about before they felt they had to present "their" side. Which is laughable!
And even as they talked and others wrote it down, all readers knew they would both not tell an absolute truth but their own side. Which left a lot of things open to interpretation.


If Harry and Meghan had a hand in this book, I hope they are content now. If not, they should think about how they made the book possibleor not and eventually sue the author.
We all should know that there is no real truth to be found, that Scobie and his co-author interpreted what was told to them by whoever and that even the people portrayed normally have no objective look at themselves.


Because there is nothing objective about the life and action of people when told by anyone, including themselves. And we should all be well aware of this before we go out and claim to have the right to judge people we never met nor will meet according to articles written in the media or books.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I dnt believe that Omid would make stuff up about the queen without some hint or insinuation as to what was said...

And I can remember people attacking Morton and saying he was making everything up and that he was totall wrong.. etc etc.. then it emerged that it was Diana who was his main source.

Yes. So he wrote Diana's book. Doesn't make it objective information.
  #789  
Old 07-29-2020, 11:24 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
Well they told him. This is classic Andrew Morten- Diana territory.
Who told him? Which third party was actually there and witnessed this "conversation"? A footman standing guard around the table? Did the Queen call Scobie with the "scoop" in revenge for her sassy mouthed grandson spouting off of her? (the nerve!!).

Or maybe, just maybe there really *is* a fly on the wall that is sentient.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #790  
Old 07-29-2020, 11:38 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
Yes. So he wrote Diana's book. Doesn't make it objective information.
No but it was sourced. It was DIANAs True story.. It may not have been accurate because it was waht she saw as the truth.. but it was from the Horses' mouth
  #791  
Old 07-29-2020, 11:44 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyDrx View Post
I might be wrong, but I think it was Prince Philip who said that.
I Googled, and couldnít find this quote, so....
  #792  
Old 07-29-2020, 11:50 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
I Googled, and couldnít find this quote, so....
I've never read it myself but possible Charles or Philip did say it... However Charles at least has been guilty of fighting his marital wars in teh papers.. so he can hardly complain too much....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Who told him? Which third party was actually there and witnessed this "conversation"? A footman standing guard around the table? Did the Queen call Scobie with the "scoop" in revenge for her sassy mouthed grandson spouting off of her? (the nerve!!).

Or maybe, just maybe there really *is* a fly on the wall that is sentient.
There are possibilities as to who told him... and he is well known to be a Harry supporter in the media...
  #793  
Old 07-29-2020, 11:52 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Lion View Post
Now "People" magazine is publishing extracts of ďFinding FreedomĒ for the American market.

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

https://people.com/royals/meghan-mar...e-same-storms/



Well according to Harry and Meghan they did not cooperate on this book. However if it's meant to be "their side of the story" from what I've read it makes Meghan and Harry look worse, not more sympathetic. So it was a mistake.
  #794  
Old 07-29-2020, 11:56 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I've never read it myself but possible Charles or Philip did say it... However Charles at least has been guilty of fighting his marital wars in teh papers.. so he can hardly complain too much....
It doesnít sound like Charles to me, it sounds more like Philip...but Iím wondering if itís a fake quote from The Crown.
  #795  
Old 07-29-2020, 12:04 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
No but it was sourced. It was DIANAs True story.. It may not have been accurate because it was waht she saw as the truth.. but it was from the Horses' mouth

Yes, but why do you care? Interest in history is about what really happened. And historians are trying to figure it out as close as they can get. But if you just accept the opinion of one person who was there to form the whole picture, you are not interested in history, you are interested in gossip to feed your own gut feeling. IMHO, of course.


Just wanted to add that when I write "you", it's not about you personally, it's about a general group. Sorry if it sounded unpolite.
  #796  
Old 07-29-2020, 12:05 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenMathilde View Post
Well according to Harry and Meghan they did not cooperate on this book. However if it's meant to be "their side of the story" from what I've read it makes Meghan and Harry look worse, not more sympathetic. So it was a mistake.
It seems to gibe with what they have said publicly in the past months.. or with earlier stories.. the one about Harry getting resentful because William suggested he take some time to get to know Meghan has been around for some time..
And Harry did sound resentful in January when he made that speech about how he had wanted to combine serving and stepping back form royal life.. and hadn't been allowed to...
Even if they didn't collaborate, it seems clear that this book is MEANT to be sympathetic and to show their point of view that they had been unfairly treated... (There's also Meg's stuff in her lawsuit about how the Palace did not protect her... which is I presume directly from her..)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
Yes, but why do you care? Interest in history is about what really happened. And historians are trying to figure it out as close as they can get. But if you just accept the opinion of one person who was there to form the whole picture, you are not interested in history, you are interested in gossip to feed your own gut feeling. IMHO, of course.
Why do I care? Because the truth is that while people attacked Morton and said that he was making the whole thing up and so on, the truth was, that he had had the story from Diana's lips. She was a primary source. of course her views were biased but it was the truth as she saw it and it WAS given by her directly to Andrew Morton.
  #797  
Old 07-29-2020, 12:15 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Who told him? Which third party was actually there and witnessed this "conversation"? A footman standing guard around the table? Did the Queen call Scobie with the "scoop" in revenge for her sassy mouthed grandson spouting off of her? (the nerve!!).

Or maybe, just maybe there really *is* a fly on the wall that is sentient.
Osipi, I honestly don't understand your point. Are you suggesting that the authors manufactured this particular encounter between the Queen and Harry. It is certainly plausible if you choose to believe that. I think there have been a lot of outright falsehoods written about the royal family in the past.

If it was manufactured, the royal family would be aware of that because the Queen and Harry would be able to tell Charles, William, and Kate that it didn't happen. The royal family generally doesn't issue denials and they rarely sue (Harry and Meghan have brought invasion of privacy type suits rather than libel suits).

On the other hand, if the story is truth (or close to it) it is also reasonable to believe that the source was Harry or someone close to him - no fly or footman needed. If it was a close friend, the question is whether or not Harry authorized the release of information.

No one here knows one way or another (if someone here does know for sure, I would love to know who), so I think everyone's opinion is valid and I find it very interesting to read other poster's thoughts.
  #798  
Old 07-29-2020, 12:22 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
No one here knows one way or another (if someone here does know for sure, I would love to know who), so I think everyone's opinion is valid and I find it very interesting to read other poster's thoughts.
The thing is, we don't know for a *fact* that anything that is out about the inner relationships workings of any of the BRF.

Its a whole lot of 4+2=42 and we all know 42 is the ultimate answer to life, the universe and everything. There's 2+2=4 facts woven in. We just have to discriminate between what is fact and what is assumed to be.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #799  
Old 07-29-2020, 12:28 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
Osipi, I honestly don't understand your point. Are you suggesting that the authors manufactured this particular encounter between the Queen and Harry. It is certainly plausible if you choose to believe that. I think there have been a lot of outright falsehoods written about the royal family in the past.

If it was manufactured, the royal family would be aware of that because the Queen and Harry would be able to tell Charles, William, and Kate that it didn't happen. The royal family generally doesn't issue denials and they rarely sue (Harry and Meghan have brought invasion of privacy type suits rather than libel suits).

On the other hand, if the story is truth (or close to it) it is also reasonable to believe that the source was Harry or someone close to him - no fly or footman needed. If it was a close friend, the question is whether or not Harry authorized the release of information.

No one here knows one way or another (if someone here does know for sure, I would love to know who), so I think everyone's opinion is valid and I find it very interesting to read other poster's thoughts.
The most likely explanation is the simplest: Harry and Meghan told the authors this. Itís the most believable and reasonable explanation as far as Iím concerned. I donít care about H and Mís denials - I believe they absolutely gave their consent to the book and certainly spoke to Omid directly. Heís their friend, so of course theyíve told him things that only they would know; theyíve been doing this all along. If they werenít, then why would Scooby keep emphasizing in his articles that he has his info directly from the sources? Itís the one thing that sets him apart from other media, at least as he sees it.
  #800  
Old 07-29-2020, 12:36 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
I Googled, and couldnít find this quote, so....

It's from The Wicked Wit of the Royal Family by Karen Dolby.


https://books.google.co.id/books?id=...opera!&f=false
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian british british royal family buckingham palace camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house commonwealth countries coronation crown jewels daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of sussex edward vii family tree genetics george vi gradenigo harry and meghan hello! highgrove history hochberg hypothetical monarchs japan japanese imperial family japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii king juan carlos książ castle liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers meghan markle monarchists monarchy mongolia names plantinum jubilee pless politics portugal prince harry queen elizabeth ii queen victoria royal ancestry solomon j solomon spanish royal family st edward sussex suthida thai royal family unfinished portrait united states united states of america welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:43 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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