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


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Which "emerald tiara\ necklace that Sophie has often worn" are you referring to?



I do not think it makes HM look bad at all, if she is willing to call a spade a spade!

Just a question? What "fake" emerald tiara is this? Why would Meg want a fake emerald tiara?
Re the queen, I think that she does take an interest in the jewels worn by members of the family, and while she would give the ladies a choice it would be within limits. More like "here are 4 or 5 ornaments that I think are suitable please pick one." If Meghan was wanting something that wasn't on offer, or that she didn't consider suitable I think the queen would "slap her down" but politely...
 
Last edited:
From the DM.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...d-emotional-palace-aide-scolded-necklace.html


Meghan Markle was left 'frustrated and emotional' after a palace aide scolded her for wearing necklace with the initials 'H' and 'M' before she and Prince Harry were engaged, source claims in tell-all new book


  • Duchess of Sussex sported £184 necklace with tiny H and M in December 2016
  • Was pictured wearing it while shopping in Toronto and smiled at the cameras
  • Source in bombshell new biography Finding Freedom claims Meghan was advised wearing such a necklace 'encouraged' new headlines about couple
  • After hanging up on call from aide, former actress felt 'frustrated and emotional'
If this is true, then she was lying when she said that the palace didn't protect or advise her.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Im really curious where Omid got his information from. he must have talked to aides and friends at least...
 
Im really curious where Omid got his information from. he must have talked to aides and friends at least...


I think they all (apart from that former Campbell-wife) could write a book about Meghan & Harry. But you need to have a point where the publisher and public will believe in the book. Scobie had that - and a collegue willing to do research, I think. So we don't get "H&M's story" but rather a sympathetic view on the things people say about them. Which are not all positive.
 
I think they all (apart from that former Campbell-wife) could write a book about Meghan & Harry. But you need to have a point where the publisher and public will believe in the book. Scobie had that - and a collegue willing to do research, I think. So we don't get "H&M's story" but rather a sympathetic view on the things people say about them. Which are not all positive.

Thing is, if this is the 'sympathetic view' (which i kinda agree it is), i wonder what impact this will have on H&M intended work and foundation. They are hoping to make a difference in the world, at least in their chosen causes (and i applaud them for it), and they will need a platform for that. Not a media or social media platform but a platform where they can get donations and sponsorships from large companies.
These companies might become hesitant on working with them if the 'sympathetic view' on the couple is that they are high-maintenance and quickly angered...

just my 2 cts

still waiting until the book comes out though...it still might give a more balanced view..
 
Good point. It's very hard to imagine someone like Michelle Obama or Amal Clooney being so undignified as to complain publicly about an argument over a piece of jewellery. Why would you want to work with the Sussexes' foundation when you could work with them instead?
 
From the DM.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...d-emotional-palace-aide-scolded-necklace.html


If this is true, then she was lying when she said that the palace didn't protect or advise her.

Meghan considers support or advice to be as such only when they allow her to do as she wants/doesn’t restrict her in any way/confirms her belief, etc.. She, like Harry, wants YES people around her; she doesn’t like rules or conventions, doesn’t like being told/advised what to do even if she asks for said advice. She only wants to hear what she wants to hear. Frankly, as much as she may love Harry, marrying into the Royal family was a lousy idea as it could never have worked.


I have to laugh at her smiling for the camera as noted above. She tipped off paparazzi apparently, also. So much for this intense need for privacy.
 
The photographer who took those images flat out said he wasn’t tipped off by Meghan. They were not set up. He did say that Meghan was friendly to him at the time and smiled (she smiled for the royal rota too— one thing they actually did praise her for). But eventually that too stopped.

People comparing her relationship with the media as a working actress vs as a royal is apples and oranges. Then again Meghan being an actress has always been something people seemed to judge her about...
 
Last edited:
I think they all (apart from that former Campbell-wife) could write a book about Meghan & Harry. But you need to have a point where the publisher and public will believe in the book. Scobie had that - and a collegue willing to do research, I think. So we don't get "H&M's story" but rather a sympathetic view on the things people say about them. Which are not all positive.

Er um of course not everyone will say positive things about them. Not everyone likes them. But Omid must have done research by talking to friends, staff, people who have met them in the course of their work.. He hardly made up the book wholly from his imagination. and as you've said, he is sympathetic to them..
I don't know why people seem to be claiming that this book is "not accurate" or that its virtually fiction. Surely if Omid is a friend of theirs and has had access to them and they have it seems spoken to him.. at times about things that happened and that they were unhappy about, he does not have to resort to a "totally made up" book.. ANd if he's not playing fair by them.. if he has revealed things that they wnated kept private, or IS reporting inaccurately, aren't they rather stupid to have trusted him, when they are generally wary about the press
 
Last edited:
So, apparently they didn't talk on-the-record for the book, nor off-the-record for thr book.
But they still could have talked to Scobie before the book plans started and he just used all that info for the book.
So, they could all be telling the truth.
 
From Newsweek..

It’s plausible if we assume that H and M advised the BRF of what was going to be in the book....Many reports have Harry and William speaking, and we know Harry and his father are as well, so...again, of the Sussexes didn’t blindside the family this time, it makes sense

However, friends of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex say the book was written six months ago and the family has been brought back together since.

Things are still not perfect, but "natural family moments" have helped to repair wounds, a friend told Newsweek.

....

"Also you've had things such as Charles' illness. So there have been moments that will inevitably have created natural family moments. It's very difficult to look at the book as an accurate depiction of what is going on at the moment."

https://www.newsweek.com/how-coronavirus-healed-prince-harry-meghan-markles-rift-royals-1520887


If the book was done 6 months ago, why does it include events that happened less than 6 months ago? Seems like backtracking PR spin from 'friends of the Duke and Duchess' to me.

Hopefully the hype will stop soon. The book will be released in a couple of weeks, so hopefully will be forgotten about by the end of August as all it seems to be doing is pouring gasoline on the flame. It seems as though H+M ranted to 'friends' about the situation and those friends felt that Scobie and Durrand would tell the world 'the truth' so that H+M would be seen as the victims.

Everyone involved needs to learn to stop ranting about family problems to friends as they seem to leak more than sieve.
 
I don't know if there is another which is worn really.

And if Eugenie wanted the emerald. Another one with emeralds would be vetoed.
Does anyone know how the tiara-picking works?
Does the bride get a catalogue with pictures of all the tiara's, or does the Queen make a selection and then the bride can choose from those?
 
I have to laugh at her smiling for the camera as noted above. She tipped off paparazzi apparently, also. So much for this intense need for privacy.


As an actress you simply need the paparazzi. Rarely does one become a star without media support. But as a Royal princess you don't need the media. But whatever you do, they'll be there and put their own slant on what you do.
So with the change in status came the change in need of the media.
 
Does anyone know how the tiara-picking works?
Does the bride get a catalogue with pictures of all the tiara's, or does the Queen make a selection and then the bride can choose from those?

According to what the papers said about Beatrice's wedding - and this may or may not be accurate - the way it works is that the Queen chooses the tiara ... but I would assume she picks a few and the bride gets a choice.
 
According to what the papers said about Beatrice's wedding - and this may or may not be accurate - the way it works is that the Queen chooses the tiara ... but I would assume she picks a few and the bride gets a choice.

She picks a few and thr bride chooses. But more likely Angela Kelly gets the dress pattern, the veil pattern and asks what the brides would like. Sorts out about 3 she thinks are suitable and okays that with the Queen. Then the bride comes to see them. Sent for cleaning, and they get it for a trial and the ceremony.

----

I think time and again what shows is how unable and/or unwilling Meghan was to adapt to the system. It doesn't matter that it does need modernising. She isn't the one to do it. She either had to learn to be a cog in the wheel or she wasn't going to fit. No one is reay to blame for that except for maybe Meghan herself who refused to even try. But she probably thought that it was killing her.

She didn't know what it is like. She thought she would have the platform she always wanted so people would listen to her. That isn't it. It is public servitude.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
She picks a few and thr bride chooses. But more likely Angela Kelly gets the dress pattern, the veil pattern and asks what the brides would like. Sorts out about 3 she thinks are suitable and okays that with the Queen. Then the bride comes to see them. Sent for cleaning, and they get it for a trial and the ceremony.

I think it also likely that the bride gets to have asks for and against. As in wants "something smaller," "something simple," "all white stones," "linear rather than floral," "Pearls if possible," or along those lines.
 
If the book was done 6 months ago, why does it include events that happened less than 6 months ago? Seems like backtracking PR spin from 'friends of the Duke and Duchess' to me.

Hopefully the hype will stop soon. The book will be released in a couple of weeks, so hopefully will be forgotten about by the end of August as all it seems to be doing is pouring gasoline on the flame. It seems as though H+M ranted to 'friends' about the situation and those friends felt that Scobie and Durrand would tell the world 'the truth' so that H+M would be seen as the victims.

Everyone involved needs to learn to stop ranting about family problems to friends as they seem to leak more than sieve.

People are entitled to "rant about family problems" to friends, we all have ups and downs and need to vent. What is NOT a good idea is to pass on these rants to press or authors. Meg and H's friends should not have passed this stuff on to Omid...adn some may feel they woudlnt have doen so without an OK from the primary couple.
 
He said they didn't interview or discuss it. I don't think he is lying but there are other ways.

exactly, remember Clinton saying he never had sex with Monica.
it's easy to find expressions to avoid problems, interpretations are free always.:lol:
 
I think it also likely that the bride gets to have asks for and against. As in wants "something smaller," "something simple," "all white stones," "linear rather than floral," "Pearls if possible," or along those lines.

Not sure. I think the queen and her dresser (though the queen isn't really into jewelry per se) both know a good deal about jewels and how to wear them and to match them up with gowns and veils.. and knowing what the bride is wearing they produce a choice of about 3...
If the bride has a really strong idea about something.. (some people are superstitious about emeralds for example) she might say "I really would prefer not to wear X" ... and the queen would take it into account.. All the same I get the feeling that the queen's rather firm on these issues..She doesn't give a large number of choices, and she probably feels that she and her dresser are experts in this field and what they say is the best way to go...
I dont think she's dictatorial in the sense of saying "here is this one tiara and you wear it" but she's not going to be "what would yo like to wear dear?"
 
S.

----

I think time and again what shows is how unable and/or unwilling Meghan was to adapt to the system. It doesn't matter that it does need modernising. She isn't the one to do it. She either had to learn to be a cog in the wheel or she wasn't going to fit. No one is reay to blame for that except for maybe Meghan herself who refused to even try. But she probably thought that it was killing her.


The institution has been modernized. The Queen doesn't live as her parents did and the British Court certainly is nothing like it was under her grandparents. Royalty everywhere, like the peerage, have been greatly slimmed down already. And the trend will only continue in the next reigns. No need for Meghan to jumpstart it.
 
I think time and again what shows is how unable and/or unwilling Meghan was to adapt to the system. It doesn't matter that it does need modernising. She isn't the one to do it. She either had to learn to be a cog in the wheel or she wasn't going to fit. No one is reay to blame for that except for maybe Meghan herself who refused to even try. But she probably thought that it was killing her.

She didn't know what it is like. She thought she would have the platform she always wanted so people would listen to her. That isn't it. It is public servitude.

I agree very much in what you say.
I think some forget that the RF is a business, too and everybody royal or not who marrying into a business run by family members will tell that the new one has to adapt, accept and slowly grow into what has proofed right for the majority if the family and the business being succesfull. This is the way it works, if you marry a farmer or a prince.
M. gave it no chance, she went too fast, wanted to change too many things and did not get the idea of serving the monarchy/people but putting herself first.
By the way I never saw the often described perfect and undependant frist class actress and humanitarian or fighter for women's rights, I think the media then put it much too positive about Meghan. What I saw was a woman twinkering way to much, unable to walk her heels, sometimes very unsafe but then rushing into her own sort of thing instead of taking advice, waiting and learning from others who do the job successfully.
Maybe she really thought her advanced age, "career" (whatever that means") and Harry's good reputation would push her to the top immediately, of course then not being conscious that this is not the idea of being a working royal.
And excuse me, but her artificial twinkering, looks , running to the frontline for photos and patting and mothering Harry as if he was a little child and not the experienced royal he should be, she thought she had a plan maybe but it went terribly wrong so far.
It is a while mess and will end in a tragedy, don't know which sort if but things like this never end positive.
And to come back to what I wrote about business run by family now they seem still not to have understood anything. Meghan ok, she was not royal and obviously not smart enough to get it, but Harry he should have gotten the basics, he was born into the business and now puts every little spit same level wether it is only business or family matters, but there is a distinction between the two.
nobody mentioned the subtitle : making a modern royal family
I wonder if the book tells how the two wish the future (not theirs, of course as they are out) and if they really think their way could give good example to other royal couples?
And again the point for me to either laugh or shake my head , thise two are really off limits but in a negative way.
 
:previous:

Well Harry too, if the book is to believed, doesn't really get the difference between the job and the family. He was upset that the other players in the break left the working out of details to their staff and didn't help them. But it was a work issue and they are definitely the ones to deal with it. To separate the family and the business.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We do want to remember that the purpose of the book is to make money for the authors and publisher. The tidbits that have been posted to encourage us to purchase the book is case in point. They are putting out controversial hints as lures. It took me a few minutes to remember this as I was in full anger over what what said about the POW. Nobody is perfect, but he has tried his best to support his children and their families. And that hs been obvious. I know Harry loves his father and appreciates what he has done from things he has said over the years. I'll read the book and then see if it is credible.
 
In my opinion, if there is any truth at all to the necklace story, it doesn’t reflect well on Meghan. If I were a mature woman and I received a call like that from my fiancé’s advisors, I would give it a moment’s consideration, talk to my fiancé and then decide to either take or ignore the advice (probably ignore). I wouldn’t allow myself to get in any way upset over it. If the incident went down as reported, and Meghan’s reactions were as reported, it shows either a tendency to over- dramatize or a remarkable lack of self-assurance. Don’t get me wrong, I think Meghan has been subjected to terrible treatment by the press, but these anecdotes about her relationships with courtiers (and by default the Queen) are not very flattering.
The photo journalist that took pics of her and her H+M merchandise has said interesting things about it

here
here
here
and
here
 
Last edited:
If the book was done 6 months ago, why does it include events that happened less than 6 months ago? Seems like backtracking PR spin from 'friends of the Duke and Duchess' to me.

Hopefully the hype will stop soon. The book will be released in a couple of weeks, so hopefully will be forgotten about by the end of August as all it seems to be doing is pouring gasoline on the flame. It seems as though H+M ranted to 'friends' about the situation and those friends felt that Scobie and Durrand would tell the world 'the truth' so that H+M would be seen as the victims.

Everyone involved needs to learn to stop ranting about family problems to friends as they seem to leak more than sieve.

I suppose they could have added material (like the Commonwealth service stuff), but that’s a good point.

I’m sure the friends did rant to the authors, but given H and M’s tendency to freeze out anyone for the slightest of “transgressions”, I seriously doubt they did so without having consent to do so...

We do want to remember that the purpose of the book is to make money for the authors and publisher. The tidbits that have been posted to encourage us to purchase the book is case in point. They are putting out controversial hints as lures. It took me a few minutes to remember this as I was in full anger over what what said about the POW. Nobody is perfect, but he has tried his best to support his children and their families. And that hs been obvious. I know Harry loves his father and appreciates what he has done from things he has said over the years. I'll read the book and then see if it is credible.

I know the book claims that Harry believes his papa care more about his public image than their relationship, but have there been any excerpts posted about that?

I’m sure that’s true about the sections that are being published, but the other stuff is probably about M and H’s own relationship; I don’t think there will be any fluffy, lovey stuff about his family.

I agree about Charles, and I think he’ll be more hurt than angry.....but I think he and Harry are fine. I hope they get a chance to really talk, in person...hopefully during Christmas

Kataryn

As an actress you simply need the paparazzi. Rarely does one become a star without media support. But as a Royal princess you don't need the media. But whatever you do, they'll be there and put their own slant on what you do.
So with the change in status came the change in need of the media.

That’s fair enough ..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
From the DM.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...d-emotional-palace-aide-scolded-necklace.html


If this is true, then she was lying when she said that the palace didn't protect or advise her.



If this is true, then she was lying when she said that the palace didn't protect or advise her.[/QUOTE]
Also, if true, it shows that Meghan was not prepared to alter her life to become a royal. Either Harry didn't prepare her, or she thought she knew better what it was all abaout. The fact is, marrying into a royal family means you have to adapt to the royal family, and not vice versa. Perhaps she just wasn't cut out to do that, being an independent, successful woman who was used to living life on her own terms. The sad part about this is that now Harry does not have his family, whom he loves and who lovehim. But on the other hand, he has Meghan, who he seems to be very happy with.
 
If Harry indeed beleives his father cares more about his PR image than their relationship Im not sure that he's feeling very kindly towards him at present. So I doubt if they are "fine". Charles may be more hurt than angry but I think he'd be superhuman not to be somewhat angry...
 
That may be true but this role also gets very tiring if you still have to babysit your adult brother in his mid 30s while you have to parent your actual children .
.

In theory, you are correct. In practice, those who have family members with emotional problems frequently continue to ‘babysit’ (your word, not mine) indefinitely, for reasons which include preventing self harm.

You never give up hoping your family member will become whole and independent; you do what you can in the meantime.

Not suggesting this William/Harry’s situation...
 
The claim about HM The Queen "slapping down Meghan Markel " , is still online on the Daily Fail , to the surprise of none of us on these Forum's . They may indeed have legal issues with HRH the Duchess , however to attempt to drag HM , and Angela Kelly down with them is appalling IMO .
 
https://people.com/royals/the-truth...ara-for-her-wedding-day-queen-elizabeth-role/


The Truth About Meghan Markle's Wedding Tiara and Queen Elizabeth's Role

The problem was “between Harry and Kelly”.

Thanks for the update nightsky.

I bet Ms Kelly would still rather not be in the book, even if there was no issue with Ms Markle directly.

The story about the tiara fiasco with the Queen as reported in People and then picked up elsewhere has been said to be false by Scobie. Scobie said on his twitter the statement picked up by the DM and goes on to relate "The book does NOT say this. It actually refutes this played out tale."

But go ahead and believe this tiara "story" is the "truth" if you want to. :rolleyes:

No, the Twitter account linked to in post #884 (@scobie) does not say that "the story ... as reported in People" was false. Just the opposite: It says that the story as reported in the Daily Mail's headline was false, but it implicitly endorses the story as reported in People.

First, Mr. Scobie tweeted a screencap of the Daily Mail's headline (which read: "Queen DID slap down Meghan Markle over her choice of wedding day tiara but duchess blames Her Majesty's dresser Angela Kelly for the bust-up, book reveals"), adding his comment: "The book does NOT say this. It actually refutes this played out tale".


Following that, he retweeted, without any comment, a link to the following People magazine story:

https://people.com/royals/the-truth...ara-for-her-wedding-day-queen-elizabeth-role/

The People story includes the following paragraph:

Several U.K. tabloids had previously reported that the Queen, 94, had rejected Meghan's first choice of tiara. Finding Freedom reports that in fact, there were no disagreements between Meghan and the Queen about her chosen tiara. Rather, the conflict existed between Harry and Kelly. (The hair trial, the book reports, ultimately went forward with no hesitation from the Queen.)​

Thus, Mr. Scobie is not claiming that the entire "conflict" story is false; he is claiming that reports of the Queen's involvement are false.

Sun Lion's post is thus accurately representing Mr. Scobie's claims.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom