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
 
  #1761  
Old 08-14-2020, 01:54 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
I believe both comments are attributed to members of staff (being overheard by other members of staff) not by senior members of the family. However, if you have other information from the book (as I haven't read it) please share the quote.

And Meghan 'feeling ignored' doesn't say much honestly given how easily they perceive something as a slight.
The book said senior royal called her Harry's showgirl.

Senior courtiers said they didn't trust her and that another staffer said Meghan was the squeaky wheel. Plus another staffer said she came with a lot of baggage.



LaRae
__________________

  #1762  
Old 08-14-2020, 02:04 PM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by yukari View Post
There's a thread in twitter concerning Vladimir tiara. It is said that the book mentioned about Diana wore Vladimir tiara (I haven't seen the excerpt, so whoever has the book please help to confirm whether it's in the book or not?). But basically, it's concluded by those twitter user that perhaps it's coming from one photoshopped picture of Diana wore one while in original photo she's actually wore Lover's Knot tiara.
Here is the link to the said thread:
https://twitter.com/isaguor/status/1294189099428061184

My point is, this Vladimir tiara debacle can be one of the indication of how "trusted" the information (or the sources) in this book can be. Who know if the two authors merely used Google (gathering old online "news" and gossips) and poured their imagination into the mix.
Yes it's in the book where the authors state that the Vladimir tiara was worn by Diana and HMQ, which I believe is incorrect (judging by all the genuine photos in the public domain). It's possible that Diana wore the Vladimir for a private royal event, which wasn't photographed but if that's true, the authors would have a source for that information that we don't know about. The authors could just be wrong of course. We have some tiara experts on the forum here who might be able to shed more light on this.
__________________

  #1763  
Old 08-14-2020, 02:13 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 6,661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
The book said senior royal called her Harry's showgirl.

Senior courtiers said they didn't trust her and that another staffer said Meghan was the squeaky wheel. Plus another staffer said she came with a lot of baggage.



LaRae
Thanks; so apparently the words 'show girl' were used by a family member but 'baggage' was not. What was the context of the show girl quote - in which situation was this comment uttered? Could you provide the full quote as that typically helps.
  #1764  
Old 08-14-2020, 02:14 PM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
I believe both comments are attributed to members of staff (being overheard by other members of staff) not by senior members of the family. However, if you have other information from the book (as I haven't read it) please share the quote.

Here's the quote from the book:
Quote:
When she first arrived in the prince's life, one senior royal referred to the American actress as "Harry's showgirl". Another told an aide, "She comes with a lot of baggage". And a high-ranking courtier was overheard telling a colleague, "There's just something about her I don't trust."
  #1765  
Old 08-14-2020, 02:22 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilyflo View Post
Here's the quote from the book:
You are correct, the showgirl and baggage comments are attributed to members of the Royal family. I'm surprised that anyone is surprised by this, the very nature of having a royal family means having a group of people who believe they are elevated above the general populace. I distinctly remember it being reported that Prince Edward referred to the tourists at Windsor Castle as 'the grockles'.
  #1766  
Old 08-14-2020, 02:24 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Daily update on book.

Description of Christmas at Sandringham. But a large part of that is what they wouldn't have experienced as they were at Amner.

Nothing about their time at Amner so far.

Refuted the gossip that Meghan stopped Harry going on the Boxing day hunt. They returned to London because ofnthr radio show he edited.

A lot on the brother and sister. And their increasing willingness to talk for money. To be honest I do feel for her here. Asking Jason and their team for money as part of her family. They were bemused.

A bit of talk about the communications team asking Meghan for any piece of sort about her life or anyone she thought would talk so they could be one step ahead of them. She obviously didn't.

The childhood friend Pritty was mentioned as selling her story. Someone who obviously sided with Trevor after they split. That is my emphasis.

Lots on clothes, labels, how perfect Meghan is as per usual.

Not much so far about the Dad oy they did support him. Jason was his contact person but he always said things were fine.

Oprah reached out to help Doria. Such a relief to Meghan. To be fair though, I dont remember that much interest in Doria. The book makes it sound like a siege.

When Thomas got rumpled for the set up photographs lots of talk of how Meghan loved him. And, if he was telling the truth and had nothing to do with it, how she would help him no end to sort it.

That is it so far.

Increasingly this is just her refuting everything that was ever said about her and constantly promoting hoe perfect she, and her aspirational life is.
  #1767  
Old 08-14-2020, 02:57 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
at times Im inclined to think that they did not really intend to stick the job out and that they trumped up reasons as to why they felt they couldn't stay.
Possibly.... they gave it less than 18 months before they started planning their departure, so that does speak to a half-hearted attempt to fit in..
  #1768  
Old 08-14-2020, 03:01 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilyflo View Post
I’m sure it’s in the book because it’s a very relevant piece of information for Prince Harry, who loves to go on safaris so of course he’d be pleased that when they’re far from any proper showers or loos, the woman he’s with has no problem using baby wipes instead of washing and taking a “bathroom break” in the woodlands and it shows another instance of Meghan “ticking all the right boxes” for Harry. I honestly don’t understand the problem people have with it. How can you be “grossed out” by knowing someone had to use the woods instead of a lavatory? How do you think the rest of the BRF manage when stalking deer far from a hunting lodge or riding out miles from the nearest loo? It’s most likely something they all have to do occasionally when enjoying outdoor pursuits. The Queen Mother definitely did as I mentioned in a previous post. They probably laugh about it too because like many British people who enjoy lavatory humour, the BRF aren't squeamish about mentioning them. I also don't recall a huge hoo-hah being made about royals and lavatories before. There have been several references to Diana’s lavatorial humour. I've read articles & books that have included snippets about Charles travelling with his own loo seat and Princess Anne buying him a leather one as an amusing Christmas present. We also know there are self-deprecating cartoons of Charles in the guest loos at Highgrove.

The funniest story for me about the BRF and loos is this one, which is in The Queen Mother’s official biography. After an extension was added to Birkhall “it was realised that no provision had been made for a downstairs gentleman’s lavatory” (so after its instalment) “Queen Elizabeth performed an opening ceremony in which the lavatory was filled with flowers from the garden and she declared it open by pulling the chain and saying ‘I name this Arthur’s Seat’.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur%27s_Seat
I imagine Meghan wouldn’t have agreed to go on safari if she were “squeamish” about these kinds of conditions..

I’m not grossed out about it at all. I just don’t want to read about it. I’m not sure why you find it so difficult to understand why this is the case...Different strokes for different folks.
  #1769  
Old 08-14-2020, 03:02 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
I have always seen it as her ambition having a different kilt and that in line with her family she agreed to put her eggs in the William basket knowing that having a full career would limit her availability. I always thought the 2007 break was an ultimatum talk: are we going to get married because if we are not I need to start building a life of my own. I always thought that getting back together was contingent on William promising that. She was 25 and probably felt she had given up enough and if it wasn't going to work she needed to get on with her life.

Her parents too legally threatened photographers upon the break. Which was the right way to do it.

Also per the book. I get thr feeling that Meghan may have used the decision to renew Suits for another year as a push for a proposal.

I don't think this is bad on either women. In fact it's what women do. And both women were in the back sit power wise regarding their relationship and what they were sacrificing because of it.
I think both couples met at somewhat inconvenient times in their lives.
I think I’ve posted before about how I wonder if things might have played out differently with Harry and Meghan if they’d met when she was 29 or 30, instead of 35 or 36, whatever it was. Suits was winding down and it was unlikely anything better career wise would come her way. And she wouldn’t be the first woman in her mid 30s who decided the next guy who came around was her soulmate and was married with a child within a year or two. Meghan’s guy just happened to come with a lot of bells and whistles.

As to Kate and William, well, they got together when they were barely out of their teens. I’m around their age and, thinking back, the majority of university couples I knew didn’t last long after graduation. And these were strong couples that I suspect would have wound up happily married if they’d met when they were in their late 20s. But I didn’t know many men or women who were anxious to get married in their early 20s and I can see why William may have been hesitant to settle down so early. Timing can be everything!
  #1770  
Old 08-14-2020, 03:06 PM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
You are correct, the showgirl and baggage comments are attributed to members of the Royal family. I'm surprised that anyone is surprised by this, the very nature of having a royal family means having a group of people who believe they are elevated above the general populace. I distinctly remember it being reported that Prince Edward referred to the tourists at Windsor Castle as 'the grockles'.
I agree with your post but to be fair, I live in coastal Devon and we call day trippers "grockles" here. Perhaps he picked up the word from his relative & good friend Lord Ivar Mountbatten who has lived in Devon for years. It's not exactly a complimentary word but it's not really associated with social superiority, it's more locals v visitors.
  #1771  
Old 08-14-2020, 03:07 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Also I forgot, Omid had appalling fact checking.

Diana died in 96. Tiggy left 97. Hard to take it seriously with those mistakes
  #1772  
Old 08-14-2020, 03:24 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Florida, United States
Posts: 226
She felt Andrew ignored her? Did he or did she perceive it that way? They look even worse, it would have been better to just say yes we spoke to Omid. Everyone knows they did or did through a 3rd party. They just look like liars.
  #1773  
Old 08-14-2020, 03:27 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Florida, United States
Posts: 226
I do think Prince Harry will be back[.......] I just don't think they are actually that compatible at all.
  #1774  
Old 08-14-2020, 03:33 PM
duchessrachel's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Birmingham, United States
Posts: 1,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
The short answer is no to both questions. If you are interested in an explanation, please ask me for one here: General Questions & Random Facts about the British Royal Family.
Thanks. I will check it out.
  #1775  
Old 08-14-2020, 03:35 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
Well it really was crass considering that the British 'grockles' anyway have been keeping his family going for decades via their taxes, mine included.
True but some of my family on the Isle of Wight are moaning both that the "grockles" aren't coming *and* that they are right now. The island depends on tourism, and they never talk about tourists using any other expression. It seems a lot of people who need tourists and taxpayers take pleasure in being ever so slightly disdainful about them, go figure.

It wouldn't be surprising that some of them might have been snobby or snarky about her or possibly ignored her at family events, hell it happens in non royal families all the time. That's quite rude and I don't blame her for being annoyed about it. However for me it also gets lumped in with the "that's it?" complaints. That's part of why you quit the way you did? I'm sure there were a lot of eyebrows raised about Kate and her coal mining ancestry and flight attendant self made parents at one point.
  #1776  
Old 08-14-2020, 03:51 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 10,773
I remember a story about Princess Anne being downright rude to Lady Diana during the Diana/Charles courtship/engagement.Diana fled the room in tears( of course).

Diana was 19 years old when this happened...NINETEEN. She had no college education. She had no established career or sophisticated and famous friends to advise her. And she sensed that the object of her infatuation was only lukewarm at best. Yet she hung in there and as she explained it in the Morton book..."I decided to swim rather than sink".

Let all of that sink in first before deciding whether late 30- something, worldly and accomplished adored-by-Harry Meghan Markle was justified in sulking that she felt snubbed by Prince Andrew (if she did).
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice". Martin Luther King Jr. 1929-1968
  #1777  
Old 08-14-2020, 03:59 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
I'm sure there were a lot of eyebrows raised about Kate and her coal mining ancestry and flight attendant self made parents at one point.
I don't know how true it was, but there was always a story that some of William's friends would say "doors to manual" (i.e. as flight attendants do) whenever Carol or Michael were near. And I'm sure comments were passed about Zara marrying a rugby player, and about Sophie's PR business, and plenty of other issues. They got over it, or ignored it.


I don't know exactly what Prince Andrew's supposed to have done or not done, but was he supposed to spend the whole evening talking to her? He probably just said hello and then went off to talk to someone else. That's not really a snub.
  #1778  
Old 08-14-2020, 04:02 PM
Helen.CH's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Chambery, France
Posts: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
True but some of my family on the Isle of Wight are moaning both that the "grockles" aren't coming *and* that they are right now. The island depends on tourism, and they never talk about tourists using any other expression. It seems a lot of people who need tourists and taxpayers take pleasure in being ever so slightly disdainful about them, go figure.

It wouldn't be surprising that some of them might have been snobby or snarky about her or possibly ignored her at family events, hell it happens in non royal families all the time. That's quite rude and I don't blame her for being annoyed about it. However for me it also gets lumped in with the "that's it?" complaints. That's part of why you quit the way you did? I'm sure there were a lot of eyebrows raised about Kate and her coal mining ancestry and flight attendant self made parents at one point.
exactly.
hoepefully the younger generation does better. except harry and his scandals the other grandchildren lived quite normal and scandalfree as far as I know. it is even more strange the way H. complains. I always felt W&H or B&E had gone through quite a lot with parents giving tampongates or toesucked mothers m
but Harry is now the only one to produce stuff his child/or future plural will be embarrassed of and things are now even worse as the www does not forget, cameras are everywhere aso. their behaviour, the book and what else is to come will one day be asked by his offsprings.
william has learned from the past and does things differently, H. just lives on without caring about consequences but pretending he does, it's ridiculous.
  #1779  
Old 08-14-2020, 04:08 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,533
Wouldn't you think Meghan would almost want to be snubbed by Andrew, I don't see the reason for the offence given whats happened to Andrew and his reputation since. Taking that out of it, it was at Christmas at Sandringham with the rest of the royal family so 20+ people, it wasn't like it was a small lunch with just the three of them.

I do find the book is full of relatively trivial issues, perceived slights etc. I haven't read anything yet that sounds so bad it would make you think of leaving your family firm. Without getting into it too much I do feel that this is almost like a laterly made up justification for their desire to leave and have it not look like it was entirely their choice and that they were "forced out". There is a lot of "no one spoke to them", "no one tried hard enough" etc, but equally it never really seems that H&M wet out of their way. Rather than ask to leave I think they could have asked for a rethink of their role, asking almost of the "summit" they got and asking for a different route and more certainty over their role and future. I just feel like they wanted to leave anyway and have found issues and reasons to fit the narrative that supports them doing so.
  #1780  
Old 08-14-2020, 04:21 PM
Helen.CH's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Chambery, France
Posts: 302
maybe the key to it all is: the family meghan never had.
a much nicer idea if the RF was simply too functional, loving and caring for Meghan who comes from a dysfunctional one or at least her bonds did not exist. maybe Meghan did not cope with all the attention, love and caring :-)
related to Muhler's "the devil's advocate" this is my last suggestion for today and a nice one, IMO. Good night
__________________

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 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 stéphanie 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 12:15 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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