"Revenge" by Tom Bower (2022)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
The book won't be positive to Meghan. But will it be fair? Tina's Briwn was fair to her. But it does qppear there is a lot to criticise about how H and M conducted themselves. But that can still be a fair evaluation.
 
Posts accusing the Duchess and/ or the author of lying have been removed. This thread has now been re-opened.

Questions or remarked about this matter can be discussed via PM.
 
Last edited:
Queen Claude said:
Is anyone else having problems accessing the Archive articles? I used to be able to access the articles for for the past few months it takes me to a site that wants me to purchase cloud storage and/or a domain name, the url is domflow. it /store/ cloudhosting - I added the spaces because I don't want anyone to click the link in case it is malware.

I have tried this on three browsers (Firefox, Edge and Chrome) with the same result.
Click to expand...

They look to be behind the paywall again Queen Claude.

Apple iBooks have a free sample of the first three chapters and preface, though these cover the Duchess’s early years, which for me are of less interest.

I’m not technical and don’t know if you need an Apple device, (my tablet is Apple so I was able to read the sample chapters.)

If you want to try these portions, I just typed Apple iBooks revenge by tom bower into Google, then opened the first response that showed up.

I clicked on the area that said sample, I think it said I needed to have the iBooks app as it wasn’t on my tablet.

Just clicked in that, free app for me, the little blue circle went round and then I flipped the page with the book details away and was in.

About a hundred pages.

People are posting on social media that copies have been delivered, even here in Australia, so there may be official reviews, or reports now in various newspapers.

ACO said:
Sam Kasher has a letter in the Times today pushing back against Bower's interview.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYBS5a6WQAw-qlV?format=jpg&name=large
Click to expand...


Newsweek is carrying a report of Tom Bower’s response to Sam Kashner, here’s the link -

https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-biography-revenge-dispute-tom-bower-1726292
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I haven't read the book and don't intend reading it, but I gather from some of the reports that it claims that Meghan wanted to be on the 2013 series of Strictly Come Dancing, in order to boost her profile in the UK, and was actually offered an audition but turned it down because it clashed with the filming for Suits.

I find that very hard to believe. OK, the people on Strictly aren't A-listers, but they're usually familiar names, and very few people in the UK had even heard of Suits before Meghan began dating Prince Harry. I've never seen the programme so I'm not criticising it, just making the point that it wasn't well known. But, who knows, maybe it's true?
 
There is nothing really new - just the same stuff but with more clarity and authority. SO it just reinforces what was already said by others.
 
I think he says that HC didn’t write back to her in 1992, not that she didn’t show support for the (future) Duchess of Sussex. Serena allegedly said she’s just an aquintance, a photo doesn’t mean good friends. Is it alright, as a fiancee, to berate your future husband’s friends for their point of view, their lifestyle, their opinions? And so on.
I am only at the page 77 out of 541 so I hold any opinion on the book, but I don’t rebute everything. Certain things can be interpreted according to everyone’s sympathies.
 
Last edited:
Didn't Serena host the baby shower in New York? Or was that just what the press said?

If Harry's friends were saying something objectionable, then I suppose it was OK to have a go at them, although most people wouldn't have the confidence to berate a new partner's friends when meeting them for the first time. I do get the impression that some of Harry and William's friends can be a bit much, based on the numerous reports of things like them making fun of the Middletons for saying "toilet" rather than "loo". But I can see that having a go at people you'd only just met wouldn't have gone down very well.

It's hard to judge any of this without actually being there and knowing exactly what went on.
 
The baby shower was much later. The alleged “just an aquintance” was at the time of the VF interview.
 
I do understand their fear of bullying and agree that it is an unfortunate title for theses purposes. However, if she had done any research she would have known that Harry being given the secondary title of Earl of Dumbarton would mean that their eldest son would normally be using that title - just like Harry's cousin James is known by his father's secondary title Viscount Severn (and several of Harry's second cousins are known by the secondary title of their fathers who are royal dukes as well). So, the time to be 'outraged' would have been when the QUEEN awarded Harry that title.
 
It's just stupid. Harry would've known they could ask the Queen for any other subsidiary title, and she would have given it. It's not like she's a martinet about these things.

Excuses, excuses.
 
Bower himself admitted yesterday that he didn?t speak to any people who were friends of Meghan?s or who supported her. He stated it was because they refused to see him. So he was left with people who dislike her and have an axe to grind. And in spite of his hints before publication quite obviously Meghan?s ex boyfriend Corey and ex husband refused to speak to him about her either. Good for them.

Bower himself deeply dislikes Meghan. He has been taking potshots at her in interviews for over years. And when asked why his book would be unbiased due to never speaking to those who liked her he dodged the question and made the excuse that he didn?t put stuff in his book that couldn?t be proven. That doesn?t prove non-bias at all. And in fact his entire book is a ha*te piece against a woman he has never met and never spoken to. To say the least, not impressive for a serious author. He said today that he hoped his book would diminish the Sussexes. What a noble cause!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11036943/Camilla-asked-Meghan-Harrys-son-Ginger-Afro.html

Presenter Ben Shephard asked how the story could be an unbiased account if the author had interviewed people who dislike the Duchess of Sussex.
Bower responded: 'Because I sifted through, I never put in stuff that isn't true and can't be checked.'
The presenters said: 'We should add that she has not commented on the claims in the book.'
 
Last edited:
Alison H said:
I haven't read the book and don't intend reading it, but I gather from some of the reports that it claims that Meghan wanted to be on the 2013 series of Strictly Come Dancing, in order to boost her profile in the UK, and was actually offered an audition but turned it down because it clashed with the filming for Suits.

I find that very hard to believe. OK, the people on Strictly aren't A-listers, but they're usually familiar names, and very few people in the UK had even heard of Suits before Meghan began dating Prince Harry. I've never seen the programme so I'm not criticising it, just making the point that it wasn't well known. But, who knows, maybe it's true?
Click to expand...

I had heard of it. People I know watched it. I caught a few clips which mainly centred on getting hot and steamy in an office and dismissed it as Trashy.

I have started listening to it. So far he is fair…I mean she comes across at times as a pain in the behind and an extremeLy determined and ruthless person but I am at the beginning and I think she has just gotten divorced. He has obviously talked to her Dad. But there is no denial that she was professional, well liked and empathic to people.

Curryong said:
Bower himself admitted yesterday that he didn?t speak to any people who were friends of Meghan?s or who supported her. He stated it was because they refused to see him. So he was left with people who dislike her and have an axe to grind. And in spite of his hints before publication quite obviously Meghan?s ex boyfriend Corey and ex husband refused to speak to him about her either. Good for them.

Bower himself deeply dislikes Meghan. He has been taking potshots at her in interviews for over years. And when asked why his book would be unbiased due to never speaking to those who liked her he dodged the question and made the excuse that he didn?t put stuff in his book that couldn?t be proven. That doesn?t prove non-bias at all. And in fact his entire book is a ha*te piece against a woman he has never met and never spoken to. To say the least, not impressive for a serious author. He said today that he hoped his book would diminish the Sussexes. What a noble cause!
Click to expand...

There is a Lot of positives about Meghan. I can’t see him being harsh on her yet. Difficult at times and very ambitious but lots of positives so far.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I’m skimming through the book … not a disciplined reader anymore, if ever … and will just post some small points of things that caught my eye.

* American friends visited Meghan at Nottingham Cottage and found she had no-one to prepare meals … she felt she wasn’t being treated as a Royal. (This surprises me, I really thought the members of the family only cooked if they wanted to, not because they had to.)

* Meghan’s father did not win $750,000 US dollars in the California State Lottery. Meghan’s half-brother invented the story in order to be paid by a journalist.

* They couple met when Meghan, hired to wear Ralph Lauren clothing during Wimbledon, asked Violet von Westenholz, Ralph Lauren’s publicist who was a childhood playmate of Harry, to arrange a blind date.

* First husband Trevor gave a speech, the night before their wedding, saying he pledged to give Meghan “the family home she never has had”. (Just like Harry did a few years later of course.)

* Kate’s family we’re rudely snubbed by “several women in the court” … (the Royal court) … until William demanded they behave better. ( This is shocking to me, what happened to plain old good manners from anyone, towards anyone else you encounter in life.)

* There is an error - describing the photo session for the engagement at Kensington Palace’s sunken garden, but saying Meghan was wearing the expensive Ralph&Russo tulle gown she wore for the photos taken at Frogmore House.

* For a time Meghan’s father’s address in Mexico was not know to the media, then her half-brother sold it to a journalist.

* Before being married the couple spent the New Year at Chateau d’Autet, David Linley’s South of France property where William and Catherine had been photographed unawares.

* The couple wanted to replace Jason Knauf, (before the birth of Archie.)

Endless detail in the book. No new revelations or bombshells that I’ve seen. A lot of filling in the gaps of the information that has come out in the public eye over the last few years.

Meghan comes across as acting consistently.

Whether forgoing Royal life, not staying in a hotel she wanted after seeing a caged parrot there, refusing a tea served in a tankard instead of a cup and saucer, rejecting the idea to include how to be sexually attractive in a book based on her Tig blog, she seems to have her own standards and if others do not meet them, is prepared to not bend and fit in. A strong belief in herself at all times I suppose.

An interesting book.
 
Last edited:
Got the book as an ebook via an internet library you can access via Tor and an alias-email but don't have to, you can use it anonymously, too. (Just saying, link per PM, I'm a member for a year now and haven't found any leaks or trys ro take advantage yet).



I checked the contents but seeing what the author has "investigated" as topics of books before and what Ipersonally seem to "feel" about what happened at court on being both a supporter of the late Diana, Prince Charles but especially Camilla Cornwall I don't think the author bothered much to look for the "truth" (whatever that is and the question asked should be: can there be one truth?) when it comes to write sensationalistic resumes.



IMHO Harry and Meghan are better off where they are now, William, Catherine, Charles and Camilla where they are and once "media people" stay out of their relationships, we'll see them getting closer again. Hopefully!



So if you want to read the book you can contact me, but I don't advice it.
 
This seems to contradict previous stories: not a friend set it up but Meghan asked a professional contact to set up a blind date (which in her case wasn't blind) with Harry.

They couple met when Meghan, hired to wear Ralph Lauren clothing during Wimbledon, asked Violet von Westenholz, Ralph Lauren’s publicist who was a childhood playmate of Harry, to arrange a blind date.
Click to expand...
 
I thought I remembered reading that it was Misha Nonoo who set them up?
 
Curryong said:
It’s been known for ages that it was Violet who set Harry and Meghan up on a date. Violet’s father has been a friend of Prince Charles for years and Violet was a skiing companion of Princes William and Harry when they were teenagers. Meghan and Violet became close during Wimbledon in 2017.

https://www.vogue.com.au/celebrity/...e/news-story/dc8616773325e361482b3d2e46015b5e
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link.

They met in 2016 - so if they got close at Wimbledon in 2017, she was still a professional contact at the time she set up the 'blind date'. I also wonder what 'getting close' at a tennis event even means. I guess it meant that they had a good time during the event because of a professional connection. I guess being close is open for interpretation...
 
But Violet was also close to Harry and had been for years. Her boyfriend Archie had been at Eton with Harry. I think there’s a danger of reading too closely into what Bowers says about how Harry and Meghan began dating. He wasn’t there and we don't know how exactly it was set up. I can’t imagine Violet giving Bowers a blow by blow account for his book. As far as I know she’s never spoken of it.

I remember the papers being full of rumours of Harry dating this girl and that after the Cressida Bonas romance ended and it could well have been Prince Harry who asked Violet if she knew anyone he might like in the summer of 2016, and she may have mentioned Meghan and set up a blind date.
 
Last edited:
Curryong said:
But Violet was also close to Harry and had been for years. Her boyfriend Archie had been at Eton with Harry. I think there’s a danger of reading too closely into what Bowers says about how Harry and Meghan began dating. He wasn’t there and we don't know how exactly it was set up. I can’t imagine Violet giving Bowers a blow by blow account for his book. As far as I know she’s never spoken of it.

I remember the papers being full of rumours of Harry dating this girl and that after the Cressida Bonas romance ended and it could well have been Prince Harry who asked Violet if she knew anyone he might like in the summer of 2016, and she may have mentioned Meghan and set up a blind date.
Click to expand...


I read the "Acknowledgments" of the book and what hints very strongly at me is the fact that he had someone else research most of the book and that it's based on talks with British journalists, mostly those who work for tabloids or media like The Telegraph, which are not known to have reported fairly about Meghan in the past. So this book in my eyes is "Revenge" of the British media for all Meghan and Harry have done to stop them. So not worth to discuss things here as I doubt the author has any internal look into H&M's life so far.
 
Sun Lion said:
“Hell no … no son of mine is going to be called dumb.”
Click to expand...

I find that ridiculously childish. Did she object to being called the Duchess of Sussex because it includes the word "sex"? You can make fun of any name if you try.
 
Last edited:
Alisa said:
Not interested in reading the book. The author has knives out for the couple as stated at the link below where he says he hopes his book "hastens" their downfall. This view alone tells me that he has an agenda and that the book was not written objectively

https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-mar...er-hopes-book-brings-downfall-revenge-1726205
Click to expand...
OMG. How can any reasonable person begin to believe the author is fair and unbiased when he makes such vicious sniping comment, It's almost like it personal hate. In fact, how can anyone take him seriously as an actual author when he never interviewed the subjects nor any of their friends and acquaintances. As to the fact that much of the "research" was carried out by others, it seems he just 'phoned it in' so to speak. Journalists have been fired for that very thing.
Curryong said:
But Violet was also close to Harry and had been for years. Her boyfriend Archie had been at Eton with Harry. I think there’s a danger of reading too closely into what Bowers says about how Harry and Meghan began dating. He wasn’t there and we don't know how exactly it was set up. I can’t imagine Violet giving Bowers a blow by blow account for his book. As far as I know she’s never spoken of it.

I remember the papers being full of rumours of Harry dating this girl and that after the Cressida Bonas romance ended and it could well have been Prince Harry who asked Violet if she knew anyone he might like in the summer of 2016, and she may have mentioned Meghan and set up a blind date.
Click to expand...
Whilst I can imagine some of Harry's old Etonian friends making snobbish, insular and even insulting things to Harry, there is no way I am going to believe they told Bower.

It's a funny thing in life, I can fall out with my sisters, but God help the sniper that has the nerve to insult one of them to me. That's my family and my prerogative,
and family and long-time friends are sacrosanct even if I don't think they deserve it.
 
Last edited:
I read the book, read some bits a few times. It doesn't set out to be a "bombshell" but to, at times almost forensically, examine the actions taken, explain what is true, what isn't and why things happened as they did.

A lot of what Bower writes certainly makes sense and does explain things. Whether it is all true, well like any book I imagine the author feels assured they've checked as much as they can and believes it to be true. Some bits I'm sure will turn out not to be.

If anyone comes of looking bad, maybe it is because people don't like the real reasons actions were taken.

Few stand out bits for me:

*they tried to arrange exclusive CBS access to the Queen's first meeting with Archie after his birth

*there are a lot of people who say Meghan acted forcefully at times and couldn't get along with those who didn't agree with her or were no use to her. This comes up again and again from the many different jobs / roles Meghan has had. This doesn't mean she is a bully but IMO it shows she has a problem dealing with people.

*It sheds light on just how much Meghan used the media right up (and the books claims beyond) her engagement and marriage to Harry

*I don't think others in the RF other than HM come across particularly well so I don't think it is pushing one side over another

*I don't think Bower necessarily is anti-Meghan, he uses the book to explain why things were done and it actually made me understand her better

*An element of the books view points being anti Harry and Meghan is self inflicted - Bower says friends of H&M were banned from speaking to him. That always leads to a slightly one sided view. Simon Cowell spoke to Bower when he did a biography on him for that reason - to allow him to deny any untrue stories so they didn't go into the final book.

*I think the books does show the marriage(in the sense of a royal marriage staying part of the BRF) was never going to go well. Meghan showed little interest in British life and in learning about how the BRF works. She came along at a time when Harry was low due to his changing role in the RF, mental health issues and family relations. Someone else with a hugely different view point to Meghan may have been able to reconcile Harry with his future role, his position and his family - for Meghan it actually worked better for her to big all of those things up. Balancing it all was never going to work.
 
Last edited:
Marengo said:
I read in my newspaper that the book/Tom Bower points to the Duchess of Cornwall as the person who asked the question about Archie's background. According to Bower the Duchess had joked if the child would get a ginger afro.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/nati...d-if-archie-would-have-ginger-afro/ar-AAZPUfe
Click to expand...

IF Camilla said that, I don't blame Meghan for being put off by it. It was rude period and not a bit funny imo.

I wonder did the same amount of racial "joking around" take place when one of the Gloucester daughters wed a Maori?:cool:

As far as racial characteristics go, the Sussex children don't look a bit different than any of the other of the Queen's great grandchildren except for their red hair.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Sun Lion
"Courtiers, The Hidden Power Behind The Crown" by Valentine Low (2022)
9 10 11
Replies
325
Views
50K
Somebody
Somebody
Y
"A Royal Life" by HRH The Duke of Kent and Hugo Vickers (2022)
Replies
1
Views
1K
Somebody
Somebody
M
Laws of the House of Grimaldi
Replies
3
Views
534
Tatiana Maria
T
H
Prince and Princess of Wales Visit to Boston for Earthshot, 30 Nov - 2 Dec 2022
2 3
Replies
62
Views
7K
tausi
T
J
"Rebel Prince: The Power, Passion and Defiance of Prince Charles" by Tom Bower (2018)
2 3 4
Replies
103
Views
14K
Leopoldine
Leopoldine

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom