What do Prince Harry and Hamlet have in common? (Photo by Samir Hussein/Samir Hussein/WireImage)
![](https://unherd.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/giles-100x100.jpeg)
How do you feel about the palace hearing you speak your truth today?
“Your truth”. That phrase slipped off Oprah’s tongue with such ease during her interview with Meghan and Harry. But on this apparently simple construction hangs a question that has divided us with an explosion of animosity: how many truths can there be?
With the new world once again pitted against the old, I find myself reminded of the words of another Royal confidante, those of Polonius in Shakespeare’s Hamlet. “To thine own self be true,” he advised his son. This sentiment seems to encapsulate so much of what is philosophically at stake in this interview, with the Prince and the Princess expressing “their truth”, a truth that was as much a function of the need to be true to who they are, as it was a reference to objective reality.
Put aside for one moment the on-going debate about their claims concerning Royal racism, for it seems to me that there is a troubling tension between two meanings of truth going on here: being true to yourself, something we have come to call authenticity, and truth as an empirical statement of fact.
The former was largely conceived by Rousseau and is often known as “expressivism” — the idea that, as the philosopher Charles Taylor describes in his magisterial Sources of the Self, “the moral or spiritual order of things must come to us indexed to a personal vision.” And this is where we divide. For some their “personal vision” is a hallmark of truth; for others it is very much a reason to be suspicious of it.
Here, too, it’s worth returning to Hamlet — not least because it is impossible not to be struck by the parallels between its title character and Prince Harry. For Freud, Hamlet represented an archetypal example of the Oedipus complex: a kind of childhood compulsion where a son develops an unconscious sexual desire for his mother and a sense of rivalry with his father.
Joseph Schwartz, in his definitive history of psychoanalysis, Cassandra’s Daughter, sees this “sexualisation of the mother-son relationship” as “part of the dynamic of the Victorian patriarchal family”. He continues:
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“It is quite another to sit in front of millions of people, giving a half-interview, half-therapy session conducted by an unchallenging friend and neighbour, and for others to take this on face value. “
Spot on. Good article. It is this very thing that makes me incredibly uncomfortable. Therapy-by-TV is a hideous and dangerous thing.
My own children lost their mother at the age Harry and William lost theirs. Cancer, not car crash, but still a massive loss. They have (touch wood) maintained some sense of reality despite their father’s departure into alcoholism for a while.
This will all blow over soon and we will not care. The Twatterati will become bored and the rest of us will have had our perceptions of a ruinous American gold digger hardened.
Nice contribution – and agree fully that this disingenuous sideshow will be forgotten by the time pubs open – or if not – when last orders is called.
Please! Do respect their privacy . . .
Lol
This is going to end very badly… All they can do is keep selling more of themselves and upping the ante to keep the media interested because each pronouncement will draw less attention than the last. Strange that they complained about press intrusion then hawk the petty details of their lives to the highest bidder.
Strange, but hardly surprising – 90% of famous people tend to be like this. Press intrusion can mean actual harrassment, but usually it’s just a cover for people presenting the wrong kind of truth.
Wasn’t it around their spectacular environment hypocrisy that people started to get annoyed? Not so much “let them (plebs) eat cake”, more “let us stuff our faces with cake whilst lecturing the plebs on how bad cake is”.
brilliant
..’from the cabin of a private jet at 30,000ft.’
There’s a lot of that about. David Attenborough’s attitude appears to be that of a critic, with an added layer of judgmentalism: “I jet around the world so you don’t have to, and if you don’t have to jet around the world, you should jolly well stay at home (and cycle to work).”
Old Jane Goodall is the same, after a quick lecture to the plebs she was asked what she is doing about the problem, she answered (with a bit of pride thrown in) that she flies 365 days a year to spread the message.
Most over rated voice over artist of all time. Lets hear it for the camera operators and technicians
“The opposite of love is not hate but indifference . . . “
= lovelessness
We will all be tuning into Oprah again in 18 months time to see Meghan dish the dirt on Harry as divorce proceeding start. You do not need much imagination to work out what the allegations will be.
My thoughts exactly!
I watched their first ever TV press conference, it was in a garden somewhere.
Harry’s body language said “This isn’t going to last” in capital letters, as Megan twittered away.
ITV,ch4 The Grauniad still treat Meghans ”Falsehoods” as Truth!..Sigmund fraud
Well done all of you
Paultogarogers: Commiserations on your loss – and thank you for sharing your own story in a fashion that contrasts so markedly with the narcissistic self-indulgence of that interview.
‘Forgotten’ by this morning, thankfully, albeit, and sadly, for more sinister reasons.
Congratulations to all who have contributed these comments, starting with paultolgarogers and his perceptive, and (I suspect) prescient, analysis.
Well done on being there to bring up your lovely family without your, not doubt beloved, partner in life and while battling your own challenges. Be strong.
Oprah coined that “your truth” business. It keeps messy facts from crashing and burning a good tale. And think how many really entertaining stories you can tell if the facts don’t matter. We can all have our own truths!
The problem comes in rather quickly though as it has in this case with claim after claim made by Harry and Meghan being de-bunked. And they don’t have to answer for any of this because they were only telling “their truth”. It sounds like the Queen already knows the central claim about someone questioning Archie’s skin to be bogus. But she put it very nicely.
I do feel bad for Harry because I don’t think he had any ability to detect what was going on, whatsoever. While I think they should lose their titles, I sort of hope for his sake that they do not. Meghan doesn’t seem the type to stick around for an ex-royal and he has nothing else to peddle.
I can’t see Harry and Meghan sticking together for the long haul.
Personally, I think it is cruel to speculate on this openly. I don’t like this pair at all but I still hope for them that their relationship survives.
To be honest, for his sake, I hope it doesn’t. Although, if he hasn’t woken up from his sleep walk when she leaves, he will be devastated. Let’s hope the family will welcome home the prodigal son.
And then the highly-paid lawyers will pounce. Not to mention the tut-tutting Oprah.All over again.
Its a pity Oprah is American she would make a fine pantomine dame. Watch out Harry she’s behind you
You may be onto something – there are some superb banter images circulating showing the ex-Arsenal footballer Ian Wright in drag, that look exactly like Oprah.
Knowing “Wrighty’s” excellent sense of humour, he’ll appreciate it 🙂
No wonder American Politicians especially Democrats(revere No indepth questions from OW),Wouldn’t UK MPs, MSP love soap Oprah to ”Interview” them..Timmy mallett could be more incisive..
LOL!
She certainly looks like someone’s sister
If he initiates the divorce, rather than her, then it will be racism. Come to think of it, even if she initiates it, one of the grounds will probably still be racism.
He will never divorce her, it will have to be her initiating. But she has effectively cut him off from his family, which is what we are often told abusers do to their victims. She doesn’t have family relationships other than her mother and she doesn’t want him to have any either.
Very plausible
Spot on. He is plainly in an abusive relationship.
Divide and conquer. Classical really.
Haven’t you noticed that everything is racist today? It’s like gum stuck on your shoe only worse.
Agreed….ypu feel positively nervous around anyone who has any shade of skin that isnt white in case you make any sort of remark that could be misconstrued. Shoukdnt be like that.
When my two ‘mixed race’ (am I allowed to say that?)grandchildren were expected, our family excitedly and unashamedly awaited to receive with love whatever combinations of mix would manifest, and we’re not afraid to talk about it. I’m from a generation when the sex of a baby was not known until birth…. I don’t recall it being called ‘sexist’ for a family to ponder on the baby’s gender, or whose, nose, eye colour etc. either. … What a Shame
Don’t forget that if it’s not racist, it’s transphobic, anti-feminist or homophobic. The strange thing is that as soon as these ‘phobias’ had achieved their aims, which was some time ago and laws were changed to accommodate prejudice against these ‘isms’, and there was nothing left to fight for, each group simply upped their demands.
Particularly so in the case of Stonewall, who seem to be inventing and encouraging grievance, no doubt to keep them in jobs.
And one more world shattering interview
Having welcomed a prodigal son a couple of years ago I can tell you it is incredibly difficult. Those who stuck around and grew into thoughtful adults supporting aging parents find the whole process distressing as settled lives are messed up by the need to shift the family dynamics. The grandkids generously try to be supportive but discover that the Prodigal returner is still the same psychologically the age that they left but wants to be of the middle generation. Confusion!
What I can’t understand is why anyone would read the tabloids knowing that they will be written about, truthfully or not, but certainly sensationally. Am I going to return to this post to find out if I get any likes. No I’m not. I just wanted to be part of the conversation.
Has Jay Williams left Flipboard? Will the trolls follow. I’m not sure how to react.
Jay, as an older son, your reply moves me because I like to think I I understand a little of the pain behind it.
Whether H understands or not, the cruelty of his very public attack on his family will go very deep indeed.
It’s all very, very sad.
They will
The Family Would,but Public wont,he has stated at least 3x on Media tapes he hates the Uk,The Press and by My truth ”The Public?” However he has done good work Stopping poaching in Africa,maybe he will find fulfillment there?..
I hope it goes as wrong as possible, only then will they have a chance to learn what gopes around comes around.
He should leave for his own sanity, she will eventually eat him for breakfast. This is a woman remember who has been married before, was prepared to do whatever it takes to become famous, and had a fair few years acting in soaps! Note, she says she didn’t have the confidence to cope!
Also I would like to know if she had counselling when she arrived in Canada. Remember what the reason was that Harry had to get her out of the Uk! I have had many years of mental health circumstances as my father and others in my family suffered for a considerable time. Mental health issues do not disappear over night, it takes a long time with lots of support, medication and counselling, so I presume that was the first thing they did upon arrival in Canada!
Children complete the trap. It is very unlikely she will allow access to the children if he leaves. And she will spill the beans on every last bit of pillow talk. Hoist by his own wotsit. Incarceration without relief.
I agree with you in principle, but have to add that this pair should not have said any of these things ‘openly’; first, because of the damage it has done to Harry’s family and country, secondly, because it is a spectacular contradiction of a desire to live authentic private lives, and finally, surely NO ONE with a modicum of self-respect (and children) speaks of such matters to go on the record for evermore, available to millions, even billions, of people.
It’s also a downright contradiction of their professed desire to “bring more kindness and compassion into the world”. What a huge joke. I simply draw my own line at wishing the people I dislike and/or criticise ill. I didn’t like Trump at and thought it was his own fault he caught covid-19. But I wished him a speedy recovery all the same.
Nil chance of that. Literally nil. She’s too repulsive, and he’s too thick to avoid stepping on all the eggshells. It won’t last 5 years, and he’ll end up like Prince Andrew.
Yes agree. Plus any schadenfreude would be overshadowed by the inevitable accusation that the pressures of ongoing press intrusion caused the break-up. Then off we go again….
I think we all know that she’ll be off sooner or later, probably sooner. As the ever prescient and correct Mr Trump said of Harry with regard to Meghan:
“I wish him luck. He’ll need it’.
Trouble is Mr Trump has trouble grasping the concept of irony, what with three wives, and his current one being slightly less than enamoured of him!
Trump divorced his first and second wives. Neither wanted the divorce. So kind of different,
Although he has good relationships with his ex wives and his kids so that is slightly unfair. Also – if anyone knows about marriage breakdowns it’s him so he is speaking from experience!
Maybe, maybe not. But none of us on this website (I guess) know either of them from Adam, personally, so why do we feel obliged and indeed entitled to speculate about how long they will stay married? They’re not on our payroll any more.
The entire issue is that they have unremittingly criticised our entire nation ever since they quit. If they had done as they said they wanted, retired to a quiet life, I think most of the nation would have been disappointed but supportive. However, they started with the racist slurs as soon as their feet touched foreign soil and it ceased to be that they had chosen to leave and became that they had been driven out.
If someone repeatedly insults you, it is very difficult to stay silent or sympathetic.
I don’t feel they have insulted me at all – and I think I’m part of the nation. They’ve criticised the press, media and Royal Family. Not the entire nation.
Harry is ON Tape as having said he hates The Free Press and the UK…that is the Whole Nation
My Favourite Trumpism, Wit NOT his usual clomping statement,with Biden sticking his nose in Ulster,EU, Vaccinations &Trump organised upping the Rollout) Biden)he likes her(Meghan)Maybe she’ll be VP instead of NO delegates Kamala Harris?
Me too. It will end far worse for Harry. He has burnt bridges with his family and will never be quite forgiven. His former aristo and military type friends will think this woke stuff nonsense and he will end up in sort sort of well appointed twilight world. She will not want to stay married to some pathetic yes man husband and will dump him for a rich Hollywood type.
…….except to somewhere warm and sunny with 5* hotels.
“It sounds like the Queen already knows the central claim about someone questioning Archie’s skin to be bogus. But she put it very nicely.”
I thought the statement issued by Her Majesty was a masterpiece. But ‘very nicely’ will do just as well !
But likely it would be the best thing to ever happen to him
I agree with you about Harry – he seems to be permanently dazed, like a patient under a chemical cosh. But I wonder whether Meghan is any better really – she seems to be so completely absorbed in the values and conventions of a public, showbiz life that she is not fully in control of her actions, or at least unable to understand their impact in the normal world.
Meghan is undeniably the smarter of the two and it’s clear who is wearing the kilt as another thread said. But Harry seems happy to be led, it may be what he has always needed. His great uncle was the same, and Simpson wore the pants in that relationship as well. Some men are just happier that way. Harry seems very dependent on Meghan.
It seems to be a trend that the ‘other child’ goes off the rails compared to the one who gets to be king/queen. Are they merely trying to establish self-worth in circumstances where they are structurally unnecessary?
That’s an interesting insight – though it doesn’t work, of course, with Edward VIII and Mrs Simpson, as the former was the eldest son and did become king, though obviously not for very long.
Reason Wallis Simpson WAS dumped,was 1) She member of American nazi Party with tyler kent 2) MI5 were worried Secret cabinet papers Would fall into hitler’s hands. Especially after October 1937 Simpson-Edward V111 feted on visit by ALL top nazis
Wallis Simpson was unacceptable because she was a divorced woman, that’s why Edward had to abdicate if he wanted to marry her. Edward had his own connections and sympathies with n@zis even before Wallis.
Simpson, the Duchess of Windsor, was not a grade-B duchess extorting her in-laws..
I’d say she was pretty grade B and she lived off her in-laws from the day they got married.
And 2 ex husbands & possible Von Ribbentrop
Edward had the same sympathies. It was her divorced status that made her unacceptable as a queen.
Interestingly enough, some letters were found a few years ago written by her to a former lover. In them she complained how after all the excitement of obtaining a royal husband had died down, she soon found out he was dreadfully boring. However, since she’d been the one to tear him away from his family, she couldn’t bring herself to divorce him. She ended up living the rest of her life feeling completely unfilled.
I read Wallis Simpsons autobiography. She came across as a quite well educated intelligent woman ..and although she enjoyed being in the Royal social circle she knew how badly she would be received…it was Edward who pressured her into marriage. I think he found her sexually less threatening as I gather he had homosexual tendencies. Wallis was not the predator that Meghan is.
Cunning,Manipulative,Money grabbing,Exploiting Males for Canadian passport,soon dropped doesn’t equal smart ,Apart from ignoring her step family isn’t ”smart” vile..Modern being in Public Spotlight is dangerous ,Glad I live ”Quiet life”
Obviously not everyone would agree as to whether she is smart. There’s room for all opinions. Mine is that she is exceptionally smart.
Then she needs to get a grip!
She understands alright!
Does she realise that she’s not meant to be acting in this, her latest role?
Don’t feel bad for Harry. What Meghan has inflicted on her in-laws, he has inflicted on his family. There comes a point where “he’s deluded” no longer cuts it as an excuse.
I would only feel badly for him if Meghan cuts out if they lose their titles. Where would he go and what would he do? He has no skills, no occupation, no means of support other than family money.
Not stritctly true he does/did value Army camaraderie ,Set up Invictus Games ..He probably Would have been happier with chelsy,rather like Charles with Camilla?
I didn’t say he didn’t value anything. I said he has no skills and no occupation as well as no means of support other than family money. He clearly valued his military service. Just not as much as living in Montecito with Meghan. Chelsy didn’t provide the fuel he needed for victim status. Meghan does.
I think Meghan absolutely told her “truth” – she is a manipulative ambitious woman who played every card in the deck and played it with America’s answer to royalty Oprah who has launched the careers of many a truthteller such as Drs. Oz and Phil. The best part of the interview was her being ticked off because Archie isn’t a prince. I would be happy to be a Duchess with all of the perks that go with it.
I feel very sorry for Harry who obviously needs a woman like her in his life for whatever reason. I wish them well and hope we never have to hear from them again.
The real problem for me is that all of my aging friends are becoming more and more Woke. They fell for Meghan’s self pity party hook line and sinker leaving me with, another topic that I dare not bring up. So it is back to conversations about COVID and vaccine.
Yes, Meghan told her truth. It’s just a shame that it wasn’t the truth.
I’m with you..haven’t joined the woke brigade and have no intention of doing so now.
Meghan is an open book, and Harry has bought into her narrative.
Oprah and Meghan have just used each other to bolster their ever growing ego. I never liked Oprah and found her to be quite disingenuous, which suits her..let’s reel in all the stupid people, and pretend I’m genuinely interested in their plight, as I amass my billions. Meghan really wants that power and wealth over people…I think round one goes to Oprah though…Meghan was played completely, and Harry is like a rabbit in headlights.
Harry needs a different strong woman to put him right. The Duchess of Humbug isn’t good for him and he’ll figure that out the new woman enters his life.
He needed someone who could help him create a life for himself. His father didn’t do that and his mother wasn’t there to do that. Interestingly, neither was Oprah’s and yet she created quite a life for herself, didn’t she? But Harry doesn’t have the inner strength to do that plus it was always all about William. He needed a smart woman, one who knew how to bring out his good qualities rather than his petulance.
‘YOUTH’? They are middle aged. A bit of a Freudian slip on Oprah’s part, using behavior rather than a calendar to judge their age.
I detest hearing of them and hate to see the pages on them I have to scroll past – I find them repulsive! Please Unherd, less on these wan***s and more on the coming financial Armageddon.
Yes, I know they are not young. Although Harry is emotionally young if not young in actual age.
It is difficult to feel that Princess Diana ‘lavished affection’ on her sons, when most months of the year she was whizzing round the globe with the latest boyfriend.
That he was one of so many lovers can only have been humiliating for the two young princes, her children. Clearly they were not her chief object of interest and concern.
It is difficult to feel sorry about Harry and Meghan’s stipulated woes when they are two millionaires interviewed by a billionairess, all empathising teary-eyed with each other about their sufferings from racism (in the Sussexes’ case one remark made by one person, possibly not malignly) and neglect (i.e. everyone who was dancing attendance on them all the time failing to weep with them and counsel them and obtain psychotherapy for them when newspapers criticised them).
These terrible afflictions have been laid upon the lives of two people super-wealthy and ultra-privileged, who have not earned their fortunes and who do not need to worry about money nor even open doors or drive cars for themselves ever again (if they don’t want to), in a country where 40 millions have lately lost their jobs owing to the Covid Pandemic lockdowns.
So much about this pair of ‘victims’ is dishonest in a manner very characteristic of the Victimhood Culture.
The Duke and Duchess declare their need to be free from intrusive media coverage, desire a normal uninvaded family life; and accordingly go on TV to reveal their inmost family troubles to an audience of 100 million.
Harry says his chief concern is to avoid the same fate overtaking his wife which destroyed his mother. So he and his spouse give a highly inflammatory interview, effectually denouncing the Royal Family, on primetime television – which Princess Diana did and which caused her to be hounded by paparazzi for the rest of her days.
Meghan moans about Archie their son having no special title; but that is the fate of Princess Anne’s grandchildren (indeed of her children effectually); because it was decided a while ago by the Royal Family, very sensibly, to cut back on the number of titles in their midst which otherwise were going to proliferate absurdly as each generation married and gave birth. The United Kingdom has never had a culture, like (say) Poland’s, where multitudes are counts and countesses.
But then of course, what is the truth of this mere objective reality (something the Sussexes could have found out with a question or two at the start of their marriage) by comparison with the importance of THEIR truth?
I think their giving this interview is like bee-stings. They hurt the victims they sting (the British Royal Family), perhaps do those victims real damage; but it destroys the bees which inflicted them.
Not on board with the first 2 paragraphs of your comment but I am with the rest of it. The final paragraph in particular is excellent.
I concur with all of it.
I am absolutely on board with the first 2 paragraphs
As usual, the Babylon Bee hits the nail on the head:
“Meghan And Harry Request That Everyone Please Respect Their Privacy And Also Make Sure To Tune In To ‘Keeping Up With The Markles’“and
“Meghan Markle Inspires Millions Of Young Girls With Message That No Matter How Famous, Rich, And Powerful They Are, They Will Always Be Oppressed”
The best punishment for those two would be for the world to completely ignore them.
I adore the Bee!
and a big Dollar$ Devaluation?…
Meghan seems to simultaneously want us to believe she is a strong, empowered, independent woman and a poor little victim – but from everything I have observed and which was confirmed by this interview, she has a tendency to self-aggrandisement, she’s self-absorbed (the interview was almost wholly about her, Harry just came on at the end like a bag handler) and has zero capacity for resilience in the face of criticism. She said ‘death by a 1000 cuts’ – so nothing was particularly bad, she just couldn’t cope with the scrutiny that comes with being part of an ancient, world famous and taxpayer-accountable institution. She couldn’t cope with duty and it was clear she didn’t want to swap California sunshine and lattes with her friends for a windswept factory in Leeds or ribbon cutting at a school. The Queen is all about public service, Meghan would appear to be all about self-service with a virtue-signalling froth. And as someone who apparently did zero research beforehand about what she was getting into (I don’t believe that for a second), her ignorance is her own failing no-one else’s. I am AMAZED that being such a fragile little thing, she has lasted so long in the ruthless world of Hollywood. Or perhaps that’s just it – she has – and has become keenly aware of how well victimhood sells and is the key to her future income and fame. She is either the worst kind of narcissistic social climber or an idiot child. Either way, you have to congratulate her on how far she has managed to get and how completely and utterly she has swallowed Harry whole. Poor guy sees her as the Diana he CAN save and I see almost zero individuality in him now. Everything he says is in her voice. What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.
Great comment, Cheryl. Meghan is no naive ingenue – this is a woman who is whip-smart and canny and who realised that pain & suffering (real or imagined or ruthlessly exaggerated) is a hard currency that can be exchanged for money and power. It’s a more expensive and desirable commodity among the younger generations than duty and sacrificing yourself to/being part of something greater. God help us.
seconded
Excellent follow-up comment.
Qv Becky Sharp in Vanity Fair..
Brilliant comment, thank you.
Excellent analysis.
A stunning analysis Cheryl, can I post it on Facebook?
Excellent post!
I totally agree that Prince Harry is ‘damaged goods’, but MeGain isn’t exactly playing with a full deck either. He met her, was rather smitten, and this girl played it for all it was worth. She wasn’t very good in ‘Suits’ and basically her career was washed up (think of all the major roles she had after ‘Suits’), but when he hoved into view she saw an opportunity, as any girl would, and went for it.
If you listened to the interview the moans really didn’t amount to much and the whole thing was riddled with outright lies. For example the implication was that the Palace did nothing for them, and yet the Queen herself asked a very experienced member of staff, Samantha Cohen, to join their staff. I beleive she has described it as working for a pair of teenagers. The pair of them were simply impossible to deal with and expected everything on their own terms – neither of them would listen. And as time wore on the worse it got. It was a very toxic mixture: this damaged, resentful man combined with a failed actress on the make.
She was quick to play the ‘race card’ saying that the reason why Archie wasn’t a Prince was because of his colour, which is a complete and utter lie and if she doesn’t know this he certainly does. As to the racist remark I doubt it was made as such or intended as such. As she makes much of her race I would have thought hair, eye and the skin tone would have been natural remarks to make – ‘Oh he is not fair like his father, but has more your colour’. Maybe tactless, but not malicious, and that was Harry’s justification for calling a fellow cadet at Sandhurst ‘P*kki’. That was plainly racist, but he doesn’t see that. He is a oaf.
The portrait that emerges of these two is vastly different to the one they are busy trying to paint. And perhaps we should look at actions more than words. He obviously has very strained relations with his family, isolated from them as he is in California – easier to manipulate. He seems to have no one, as I hear he has dumped most of his old friends. She has no relationship with her father, who is not a well man. One has to wonder where is this much vaunted MeGain ‘kindness, compassion etc’ ?? She has no relationship with her half sister, whom she says she hasn’t seen in 20 years, but it is obvious she can’t count – it was 2013 dear which is less than 10. I think the half sister is wheelchair bound, so a little ‘compassion’, a little ‘kindness’ would probably go a long way. But I suppose there is no advantage in being so to such dregs.
I think all in all these two are toxic, narcissistic and just plain nasty. The Royal Family should keep them at a distance and certainly not welcome them back into the fold. In stock market terms they are undoubtedly a ‘sell’, and while there might be a bit of ‘dead cat bounce’ they are really a busted flush. Let us have done with them.
Well said
.
Agreed, other than the need for some spacing and paras.
.
There are five paragraphs. How many more do you want? Did anyone else find Andy Yorks’ comment difficult to read?
Nope.
Thanks, the best “summing-up” I’ve read on this…
Remember Chelsy: the girl who wouldn’t ? She saw the life they live and said “no thanks” It makes me wonder if that was why Harry was in so much of a hurry to marry Magan. And why, if it is true that he fell out with his brother who questioned the haste. Old saying “marry in haste, repent in leisure”
Wise.Words…I’m still Waiting in leisure..
Although see Craig Brown’s delicious dismemberment of the half sister’s book for another take on that particular relationship…
Quality. I agree 100%. Everyone I know would agree with your observations. They have zero comprehension of the damage caused- the diameter of the ripples (or waves) across the pond. What will Archie say when he gets to 18 yrs of age? When he questions why he has no relationship with any member of his family on either side? Will he turn and ask MM “what happened “? Harry should ditch her and save his soul – rejoin the Armed Forced, get involved with Invictus Games and old mates carry out some publid duties and regain the love and support of the GB people. She is a manipulative self-absorbed woman who will never be satisfied. Harry cannot win.
I find their choices difficult to understand, in that they are isolating themselves from past or future friends in the UK (and if he hasn’t dumped his friends, some of them may now be inclined to dump him), in exchange for friends in the states. Maybe she has good friends there, I don’t know, but given the kind of emotional language used by people like her and Winfrey (forever ‘sharing’ things with each other), how can you tell true friends from false? Or are they reconciled to playing the lead parts in their own drama from now on?
A precise and cogent analysis – and spot on.
I think a simple, post-modernist explanation makes more sense (both here and in the Piers Morgan affair this week).
Most of us (including Piers) subscribe to a thinking process which dates back to the Enlightenment. It is sometimes called ’empiricism’. You look at a phenomenon and try to explain it using evidence. In this case, many (older) people will ask the question: “if that was said about Archie’s skin, was it racist?” We’d then try to find evidence, for instance, balancing it with the counter-argument of how welcoming the royals and the British were to Meghan.
The post-modernists (Meghan, Harry, BBC, Alex Beresford, most young university-types…) subscribe to a quite different thinking process (paradigm?). They see the world as a series of power struggles with the disadvanated (mostly women and non-whites) as victims BY DEFINITION. (People may be unaware of their victimhood and need to be ‘educated’.)
So, when Meghan looks at her experience, her brain is programmed to interpret everything that happens through that filter. She has no choice (they all do it). Instead of facts and evidence, they focus on ‘lived experience’ and then present that as evidence (it’s a really cunning trick that many do not notice).
So, dear old Piers is under the illusion he is having a rational discussion with Alex based on the empirical traditions, while Alex is answering from the post-modern. Piers does not notice he is not in a conversation, that even to question the post-modern view is to be labvellel racist, sexist etc.
There is no solution till enough people notice what is happening, call it out and gather like-minded people.
The power struggle is always who owns the capital and who has the most authentic and legitimate-looking branding. That changes over time. Cigarette companies don’t tell people “smoking cures your asthma” any more. The monarchy no longer has divinely ordained right-to-rule from god. People wince when Prince Phillip asks if certain folk are still “chucking spears”. That doesn’t sell any more. Old news. Get with the program.
Harry & Meghan have completely outflanked the monarchy here, either way they win.
If they’re telling the truth, well then they’re vindicated.
If they’re lying, then the monarchy’s public image department can’t respond effectively and aren’t up to the job.
If Piers Morgan can’t even argue his way out of his situation, back up his opinions and and feels he has no option but to quit because he has the “the woke mob” cop-out, then he’s clearly an overrated idiot and doesn’t deserve his job.
The crumbling artifice of the monarchy isn’t fit enough to survive in the wild with big corporate beasts stalking around ready to devour their lunch.
Except that I and most of the people I know value the monarchy over the likes of Microsoft
What’s the monarchy ever done for us?
Stolen the land and then rented it back out.
Made sure you haven’t been topped by some mad presidente.
Peoples values are driven by their wallets, not a tenable connection to some quickly-disappearing national identity. The Royal family lives on inherited wealth and status, there’s nothing earned about it whatsoever. It’s anathema to modern capitalism.
What do people want? Modern software or a family that lives on public money and goes around waving in public?
Piers has been angling for a job on one of the upcoming “anti-woke” news channels for months. He’s just done an excellent job burnishing his credentials.
The fact that you interpret the world in terms of consumer preferences, which may themselves be dependent on no more than advertiser-crafted appearances (‘legitimate-looking branding’) says more about your value-system than it does about the issue.
I personally don’t actually care what happens to the monarchy, Netflix or Harry and Meghan, frankly. And it doesn’t actually matter what I think.
I’m just describing how the modern world works.
And how the monarchy has always worked actually. All the pomp and ceremony, castles and grand estates. The coats of arms and the regalia. The ostentatious displays of their deserved position. All propaganda. All corporate spin when you boil it down.
If you think the monarchy is somehow going to stay relevant, I’m not sure how you could justify that. Suppose it’s just painful for people to see this institution, a beacon of stability throughout their life that we’re fond of, being outmanoeuvred in the name of private gain.
Like the NHS. Or most of England, come to think of it…
Many moons ago, while studying philosophy, I remember learning that ‘People should not go from the particular to the general’
What I can’t understand is this great compulsion to go on air with millions watching to portray oneself as a victim (making sure one is very well dressed and made up first).
I suppose it makes them feel at one with the many true victims, and therefore at peace with oneself, and content with one’s miserable life.
“If Freud has taught us anything, it is that we may not always be the best judges of who we really are, let alone what really drives us. That is the very point of the unconscious; we are run by forces that we do not always properly understand, which are often repressed, working away in the background without us being fully aware of them.”
I don’t know about the Oedipus complex, but Harry is certainly driven by subconscious needs, imo.
I remember the image of him and his brother at their mother’s funeral. They looked like such sad, vulnerable little boys. Harry’s brother seems to have grown up into a somewhat bland but reasonably well-adjusted man. Not so Harry, imo. Whenever I see him I’m instantly reminded of that image of the sad little boy. Even though he is quite a robust man with a solid military career behind him, there’s an element of loss in his expression.
I have the strong sense that, deep in his subconscious where all the important stuff resides, there’s a lonely little boy desperately seeking a reassuring hug from his mother. Unfortunately, he’s looking in the wrong places to satisfy that need.
I agree. I also think being the spare was very hard on him. And Meghan certainly wasn’t going to play second fiddle to Kate Middleton.
It suggests a soaring ambition if one is not prepared to be second fiddle to a / the future Queen…
“soaring ambition” is a polite description of her apparent intentions
Understudies have been known to step up.
What about the next bit: “And it must follow, as the night the day
Thou canst not then be false to any man”?
You take the idea of being true to yourself as the idea of being authentic, in order to build your argument, but it also means not fooling yourself, being honest with yourself. It can only be interpreted as being authentic ‘who you really are’ if you ignore the rest of the quote.
“ Be honest with your self, do not attempt to deceive yourself in order to ease your guilty conscience, or make excuse for your ambition which you realise you have not the strength of character to live up to, in terms of doing your duty in return, then you cannot pretend you had a legal wedding three days before your public one, that your son would be a prince if he were white enough or that he would be entitled to security paid for by the general public.”
Freud has a lot to offer despite his lack of scientific credentials in the realm of human psychology. His ideas may seem strange to those uninitiated but once you start reading up you will realise that he is the only one who offers explanation for the irrational, bizarre, and unexpected behaviour. Thank you for bringing him back.
Carl Jung was more prescient,he also said ”Sigmund is like a Woman,he cries when he can’t get his own way!” now i’ll be accused of misogyny/..
Thank you for reminding us of the completion of this quotation, and for your reflections on it.
This has prompted me to a quick search on the internet, revealing a variety of interpretations that have arisen in succeeding generations.
Giles Fraser has pointed up a modern sense of ‘your truth’, ‘being authentically you’: the solipsistic universe-revolves-around-the-self that contemns both objective reality and consideration of others.
I had always understood the quotation as meaning something like ‘be true to your conscience’, which rests on an internalisation of the ethics of your community: unwavering awareness of one’s duty to others.
However, my search suggests that the original meaning of ‘true’ was ‘beneficial’, so the quotation begins with a meaning along the lines of ‘be sure always to act with regard to your own interests‘. It may flow from this that one avoids being a burden to others, but it does begin with Number One.
Where any of this leaves Harry and Meghan, I’m not sure.
“True” in that context makes most sense as meaning “faithful/honest”, as in a true as opposed to an untrue spouse (cf Othello, “your true and loyal wife.” … “Heaven doth know thou art false as hell.”) The fact that it’s set up in opposition to being “false to any man” suggests this reading rather than the “beneficial” one. Don’t deceive yourself, and you won’t deceive others. Where poor old Polonius reveals his unworldliness is in the certainty of “as night follows day”. Not deceiving yourself may be a necessary condition for not deceiving others, but it sure ain’t sufficient on its own — as Hamlet himself demonstrates.
In 5 years time we will be treated to the spectacle of a divorcee Price Harry climbing his own grandmothers balcony dressed as Batman and unfurling a Fathers4Justice banner in an attempt to see his own kids again.
I think Oprah should shoulder some personal responsibility for meddling in matters she is not able to understand. Is all the hurt and damage worth yet one more feather in her celebrity cap?
I can’t stand Oprah Winfrey, but any interviewer worth their salt would jump at the chance to get these two muppets to pontificate on their show. More exposure for Oprah means more fame and money, which in turn encourages more “celebrities” to take part in her highly un-interrogative interviews. I’d like to see them interviewed by Andrew Neill. This sycophantic interview doesn’t mean a great deal, and proves nothing. I’ll be amazed if any of the allegations made by Meghan are ever proved to be true.
Oprahhas sold ”Interview” to 70 countires making between $70-100 Million dollars,not bad .any wokes i’ll interview for that!
But we can wholly understand her motives. Those of Meghan, and especially Harry, escape me entirely.
The term “your truth” must have been coined by a very slick lawyer. They are the weasliest of weasel words. It gets the programme off the hook of libel, while allowing interviewer and interviewee to feely libel the target in a way that cannot be challenged. There are two things that really surprise me about all of this – the first is the way that so many people have readily and unquestioningly accepted Meghan and Harry’s ‘truths’ as self evident truth . Of course there are many who will believe it because they want to and those who’d believe anything anyway. Meghan knows how to press the right button – the R button – to get the shocked reaction. But for a mentally unstable (as she herself admits) fantasist with a record of public family argument to say what she has said is no surprise, it’s just so surprising that so many choose to unhesitatingly swallow it.
The second is more surprising in that Harry, immature and easily lead though he is, has so easily tossed aside any sense of duty – the duty that surely he must have learned in the Army and as a member of the Royal Family – supported and cosseted as he was. To come out and speak the way he did against his family, his country and the institution of monarchy is beyond comprehension or redemption. He must know there can be no way back.
Now the challenge these two have is while looking like thoroughly disloyal and feeble minded people, is how to continue to make money out of their only asset – ‘their truth’. Their ‘truth’ has a life, before people get bored with it and others’ truths, if they tell them, erode their credibility further. The only way to keep ‘their truth’ alive and continue to earn from it, it to release further stories, the more salacious the better.
Yes, the Army was a very happy time for Harry it would seem. It provided leadership and a raison d’etre. He was daft to allow Meghan to cut him off so completely…and I dont know how he will live with himself when he finally wakes up to what he has done to everything he has been brought up with.
Poor Mr Markle has just traded a second stringer role in the The Firm for a second stringer role in the Markle Mafia. Pity poor Harry hes always the bridesmaid, never the bride.
Sincerely, I think that the Freudian language is too convoluted in this case. Prince (so-called) Harry is a poodle, Meghan Markel’s poodle. They now extort the Royal Family in public. The next step is to extort them behind the curtain with the threat of even worse scandals. Megan Markle and her poodle are now melting the money from the estates of Princess Diana and the Queen Mother. Money in California melts fast in the air.
I didn’t watch “the interview” but have become very concerned and depressed about the whole situation where an individual viewpoint can be taken as a universal truth and hardly challenged. Thankyou for your valuable insights.
It is almost unavoidable for me not to think and try to rationalise what I have heard in reports and a couple of things keep repeating themselves to me….
The first is that with maturity you learn that it is often not what happens but your response to it that causes problems, especially if that response is influenced by what you expect or even want to believe. So it is easy to find racism in an innocent remark, or valid point of concern, if you do not take into account the character of the person in question and/or the context of the conversation.
The second is that when you get married you form a team with your spouse and work through things together. You do not expect your mother-in-law, or any other inlaw, to participate in your developing relationship…why was this lady (who must have extensive experience researching roles) using Google to find the words to the national anthem and seeking help to learn how to curtsy when she is married to a prince…does he not know? Did he go off on an extended absence and leave her all on her own? If there is to be criticism for her feeling alone and unsupported surely he must be first in line? I know the royal family is different but even if you compare it to marrying into a wealthy family, I still believe it is up to a husband and wife to support each other and find (and accept) their place in the family unit together. But maybe the surest way to keep a couple together is for them to unite against a common (perceived) enemy and this is as much about their own disfunctional relationship as anything else.
If anyone says ‘my truth’ I immediately take everything they say with a large pinch of salt. I never understimate the human capacity for self-delusion, aggrandisement or outright faleshood. Especially when it comes from a woke sleb using one of the latest buzz phrases. Hollywood is not known for churning out rational, well-balanced individuals or for attracting them.
Same, my eyes glaze over when I hear that phrase. Unfortunately, it’s used as a deflection of criticism on many college campuses.
Then, please tell us the Palace “other truth”.
Meghan seems to simultaneously want us to believe she is a strong, empowered, independent woman and a poor little victim – but from everything I have observed and which was confirmed by this interview, she has a tendency to self-aggrandisement, she’s self-absorbed (the interview was almost wholly about her, Harry just came on at the end like a bag handler) and has zero capacity for resilience in the face of criticism. She said ‘death by a 1000 cuts’ – so nothing was particularly bad, she just couldn’t cope with the scrutiny that comes with being part of an ancient, world famous and taxpayer-accountable institution. She couldn’t cope with duty and it was clear she didn’t want to swap California sunshine and lattes with her friends for a windswept factory in Leeds or ribbon cutting at a school. The Queen is all about public service, Meghan would appear to be all about self-service with a virtue-signalling froth. And as someone who apparently did zero research beforehand about what she was getting into (I don’t believe that for a second), her ignorance is her own failing no-one else’s. I am AMAZED that being such a fragile little thing, she has lasted so long in the ruthless world of Hollywood. Or perhaps that’s just it – she has – and has become keenly aware of how well victimhood sells and is the key to her future income and fame. She is either the worst kind of narcissistic social climber or an idiot child. Either way, you have to congratulate her on how far she has managed to get and how completely and utterly she has swallowed Harry whole. Poor guy sees her as the Diana he CAN save and I see almost zero individuality in him now. Everything he says is in her voice. What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.
There can be several sides to a story…different people experience/perceive things in different ways and THE truth must be found by listening to all of them and reflecting on it, calmly, rationally.
The way “your truth” is being bandied around in certain situations, however, makes me think that it also means “alternative facts like that awful Donald Trump spewed out but it’s OK when we do it because we’re the good people.”
Yes, there’s a link between “Trump’s truth” (aka ‘alternative facts’) and “Meghan and Harry’s truth”. Narcissism in both cases.
An interesting analysis, however I think it’s worth considering the whole concept of an incredibly privileged pair, trying to portray themselves as victims (and in some circles succeeding).
I listened to a brief commentary by JD Vance, author of the book “Hillbilly Elegy”, where he spoke a bit about the victimhood culture in the United States, but in particular how it is being used by the rich and powerful to make the concept of “noblesse oblige” sound like something from the past. One would think that it makes sense that to whom much is given, much is expected. And Meghan pays lip service to this with her talk of compassion, etc. But, once you portray yourself as victims, as they most definitely have, then you become someone who is “owed” things, rather than owing anything. And a society that allows this attitude to flourish among the powerful, this society will cease to be a functioning society ultimately.
I live next door to the United States, so it is easy to find examples of this thinking, among the political and the celebrity classes. I hope it is less prevalent in UK society.
I agree, this will not end well. My sympathies are with the British Royal family, but I can well imagine that they are a bit mystified how to deal with someone like Meghan.
They should ignore her, neither confirm nor disavow anything she says.
Everything I know about this couple (Harry & Meghan) I have learned against my free will.
This unhappy couple have sold their souls to the media and there is no escape. There can be no reconciliation where there is no trust. Every private conversation with the Queen will be sure as eggs sucked out of him by Oprah, therefore no confidences will be shared.
Yes, I’ve considered this too. If every utterance from any member of the royal family is to be filtered and recapitulated through the prism of “Meghan’s truth” in future, it makes it impossible for them to have any meaningful dialogue. It’s worse than that, insofar as the inevitable consequence of this – the cessation of meaningful contact between the royals on either side of the Atlantic will then be interpreted as a lack of support by Meghan. They have burned their boats, despite HMQ’s assertion that Harry will remain a much loved member of the royal family.
Unfortunately “their truth” is revealed to be what normal people call either “their lies”, “their mis-rememberings” or at best “their mistakes”. Also unless you are using Freud like Astrology to demonstrate an example of pseudo science there is really no need to mention him at all. I think the reason oprah/megan/harry didn’t wheel out the Lyotard/Foucault notion that “there is no such thing as truth” is simply because they couldn’t understand it. Plus literacy is waycist, innit? Holding a subjective ontological belief as true is fine in some areas of knowledge: Chelsea are the best football team, Led Zep the best rock band etc are examples. However, if you know the name and identity of the one true God be prepared to back that “truth” with force. The only thing we learned from the bilious interview is that meganharry are unemployable in the real world. Their cache in lala land, hollyweird etc is bankable for now but ephemeral. “You may be their pride and joy, but they’ll find another toy, then they’ll take away your crown [Don’t] pick me up on your way down.
What do Meghan and Trump have in common? Both seem to be in the world ,of ‘alternative facts’.
she came up with a great number of rather contrived and nasty innuendos . We havent been told exactly what the question or discussion with Harry was about! Did someone say ‘I wonder what skin colour he will be’ in much the same way as ‘I wonder if he will have ginger hair’. Or did someone say ‘my god I hope he isn’t dark skinned’. A total world,of difference but Megan’s rather pointed attempt suggest racism says a great deal about her .
I am not sure whether or not Fraser has hit the nail on the head but he is totally right to say there is something deeply worrying about the state of minds of ‘the happy couple ‘. Nothing in the interview seemed right. It just didn’t add up. The very fact that they had some desire to basically moan ‘it’s not fair’ on TV raises so many questions about what on Earth was going on in their disturbed minds
Interesting take considering that Oprah has had the “your truth” out bit for many years. But indeed let’s blame someone who has never used that phrase.
its Biden who lies &lives in dementia ‘Alternate Universe’ Trump main fault is,he didn’t stop Democrats Changing Vote regulations in 6 states
I find this such an interesting analysis. Thank you, Giles Fraser. I particularly like the phrase “conducted by an unchallenging friend.” All the reviews I’ve read so far have praised Oprah for her brilliant journalistic probing. But there were so very many questions not asked: especially “Do either of you take responsibility for any of this, and if so where do you think you might possibly be at fault? What could you have done differently?” Unlike many, I have not taken sides but am still weighing the implications of this whole, sad episode.
I thought Winfrey was a friend, until I read in the newspaper that when she was invited to the wedding, neither had ever met her. Is that so?
My amateur analysis is that the poor fool has not laid his original ghosts to rest and is under double duress from leaving behind two, maybe three, institutions, Family, Army and UK. Military service is not shrugged off so easily. Let’s face it, Beverley Hills isn’t a normal environment for a person of little artistic talent. I did see a video by a young mixed race UK lad pointing out he had loyalties to his white Mum too and rejected this pointless trending call from the Mother Ship of Africa. Mrs Windsor seems to have no such dilemmas.
“…leaving behind two, maybe three, institutions, Family, Army and UK.”
I can’t help but note the omission of “in favor of his wife and child.
It’s well known that no one can have their family of origin, their country and their career while simultaneously also having their spouse and child. It’s one or the other, right?
So the preference was that he should leave Meghan & Archie, eh?
You missed the sarcasm.
Yup, she stripped him of everything. His career, his country, his family. Nothing less was going to satisfy her. Well, she has him now. Best of luck.
Interesting, insightful article Giles, thank you.
When the mother of his child was in danger, he took heroic -stood up to the wrath of his world, as abundantly evident here- measures to save them. This is the very model of a Man. Giles and you folk are the ones in need of analysis.
An un-named solicitor always points out a sign to his clients:
There is my truth, your truth and THE truth!!
Being Royal must mess with your head a bit. How not to be a spoilt brat and keep reminding yourself you are not as special as everyone seems to think you are. Poor Harry he needed someone to help him keep his feet on the ground. Megan is not doing that. She seems to be stoking any problem she can within Harry’s mind and adding more. It is worrying.
I particularly agree with the last two paragraphs of the article. The lack of challenge in some of the media coverage is just awful. The Meghan and Harry ‘truth’ is accepted in all particulars. Piers Morgan gets sacked, in effect, for saying it was all lies. Maybe ‘all lies’ is an exaggeration. But nobody even gets questioned about it – at least not on programmes like Newsnight – when they imply that everything is true. The ‘objective truth’ is probably not at one end or the other, but I’d be pretty certain it’s rather nearer the Royal family/press end than the Meghan/Harry end.
It’s called the Narrative. Anyone who speaks against it faces social reprisals.
“Piers Morgan gets sacked, in effect, for saying it was all lies.”
Where did you get this? Didn’t he quit? I saw him get up and walk out. And then saying he’d fallen on his sword.
Did he give the facts that contradicted her “lies”?
He DID get dismissed you clown, he WAS told apologise to the New Pinup femme of Wokes for doubting ”her truth” .However as a multi millionaire, or wealthy Laurence Fox they can stand up to the Woke Media,Even Ricky gervais has avoided cancel Kultur because of his contacts &wealth
Which came first? the drama queen “OK, I’m out a here.” or the apology demand?
Drama Queen complained to iTV ,funny for someone who doesn’t read newspapers or TV she seems to be obssessed with Anyone who dares question ”Her Truth”?..
Megan was crestfallen and bitter when it dawned on her that she’d married the guy who was not in line for the throne and, therefore, her own offspring could not become princes and princesses. Her narcissistic obsession with being Lady Diana exploded in jealous vitriol towards Kate and she appealed to her sympathetic audience with the baseless claim that racism must be the root cause.
More likely some US lawyer said she had to use that phrase to avoid suggestions that it was THE truth and any risk of litigation!
…which is fine, but why not use “your point of view” instead?
Though it is a technique of the modern fascists to “re-meaning words”…
I think the use of the weasel words ‘your truth’ implies that it is the truth, without being liable when it it found to be not the truth, or not entirely the truth. It’s plainly dishonest – as it is intended to be. The use of the honest term – ‘your version of events’ would imply that there is an alternative narrative (which self evidently there is), but that is not the intention of the interview – which is to shock, damage and deceive.
Truth isn’t the issue here
Facts as always are what matter
Meghan was a very poor actor on screen, but she put on the best performance of her life. Racism, mental health etc. All the new sound bites. If she and her lap dog Harry wanted a quite life, then they should have given up their Royal titles and become ordinary citizens. Us Brits see this as a way of cashing in on at the expense of our Royal family. Our Queen leads from the front. Shame Harry has not learnt this and being lead by greed. A shameful episode in 2021. Let them hunker down quietly and let the media have a rest with important issues to publish. This is from a very saddened Brit.
We have a young couple, each wealthy in their own right, given a fabulous wedding, a fabulous home in which to live, more attention than anyone deserves, and from the look of it, great acceptance by the Royal Family for a foreigner from a very different culture and family.
And no, I do not believe a wealthy young woman in her mid Thirties who had survived the rough and tumble of Hollywood and been involved with mental health issues and campaigns,married to someone who also understood mental health issues, embraced by the power of the Royal Family could not have organised her own mental health support if needed. She could have had the best counselors in the world flown in to help her out in next to no time. It is ridiculous to believe she could not.
But it was not enough. Meghan ran back to the US where she had more control, with her feckless husband tagging along behind. And that was not enough.
They lived in other people’s homes, fabulously wealthy people for a bit and then bought their own massively expensive home and that was not enough. They said they wanted to be financially independent and they were not, although now they are. And that was not enough.
This spoiled, privileged, indulged young couple then decided to bully the Royal Family with an interview they knew would be seen around the world and which was clearly designed to demonise if not severely damage Harry’s family and the ancient institution which his family represents. For what gain?
The interview was pure bullying and small-minded punishment for her husband’s family, although, from all accounts, Meghan does not have much of a relationship with her own family either, her compliant mother perhaps an exception, for now.
What did Meghan gain but revenge for no doubt multiple ‘real’ or imagined slights which touched an overactive nerve? What did Harry gain, presuming he is mentally stable enough to know what he was doing? Well, he poisoned his relationship with his family, particularly his father and his brother and he chose to cause immense pain to his 94-year-old grandmother, as her 99-year-old husband lay seriously ill in hospital. To what end?
And Meghan chose this moment, despite being relatively recently pregnant, with, if accounts are true, another IVF baby where the chances of miscarriage are always greater, knowing that it would be highly controversial and possibly even devastating to her husband when, afterwards, he understood what they had done. Although no doubt, if she should lose the baby it is another flag of blame to wave at the Royal Family, that being the modus operandi.
This sad couple need to be set free from the Royal Family, with Titles and Harry’s succession removed, so they can be completely free to pursue the goal they claim as their right – total independence. And good luck to them.
E very good article and an original perspective on a subject that has been analysed to within an inch of its life. The incorporation of truth and reality into personalised contexts so as to provide credibility to them is one of the biggest challenges for us today. The process of detoxing brains into which this nonsense appears to mean something will take a long time.
Polonius was of course being mocked by Shakespeare for churning out a whole series of bits of hackneyed advice, of which “To thine own self be true” was just another example. Shakespeare was well aware of the elusive and fissile nature of personality – most of his plays are about that in one way or another.
Yes, he’s a comic figure, the blowhard counselor full of penny wisdom, …still plenty around today, no?
I almost can’t believe my lie ‘n eyes reading all this gratuitous vitriol (Giles Fraser inclusivo).
The subject of the interview was not Harry (who, btw, expressed an healthy attitude toward his family and domestic tragedy).
And Meghan’s issue was not racism. Oprah had to practically put the word in her mouth.
Raised in a mostly white family, in a middle-class ghetto, educated at an upper-class university, married and divorced, she was a mature 36 yr old with an independent professional competence. She wanted to fulfill her biological destiny, marriage and children. Racism was an old and no longer interesting fact with which she had long ago dealt with in the intimacy of her family. Her theme was that of a mother protecting her child.
Harry and his Royals were only her sideshow.
”Protecting her child” evidently involves ignoring the facts of how titles are awarded, (which surely would have been explained to her) and thereby enabling herself to lie and embroider the “racism” charge even more.
Her maturity is questionable, her veracity regarding just about every complaint, is even more questionable. Oprah did not have to put words in her mouth, Oprah was merely the vehicle willing to open the flood gates of resentment. Resentment that she, Markle, has to adopt a supporting role instead of the leading role she assumed she would have, combined with jealousy for the couple forever standing in her way.
I agree with your concluding sentence.
“…her veracity regarding just about every complaint, is even more questionable.”
Her complaints were: 1) exclusion of Archie (in prospect) from palace protection, and (2), refusal of medical care for her depression.
If these were lies, enlighten us to the conflicting facts.
Archies parents are not working royals. He wasn’t due taxpayer funded security. Neither were Meghan and Harry once they became non working royals. Look at the rest of the family, they do not all have taxpayer funded security. You have to be a working royal to get your security taxpayer funded and even some of those who are working royals only get it covered while actually working. Even some who are Princesses, like Princess Anne. Others pay for their own security, like Princess Beatrice and Eugenie. In fact, just like Meghan and Harry do now in the US. Surely that was possible for them in the UK as well?
Meghan has known all her life about doctors and medical care. She got care in the US all her life. She managed to get maternity care in the UK. Unless medical care is not subject to privacy laws in the UK, no one could have even known that she sought mental health care.
Her husband is closely aligned with all sorts of mental health services in the UK. Did he not know how to get help even after claiming that he sought mental health care himself? What a complete load of garbage. The two of them are trivializing mental health care.
They were working at this time.
If they expressed a wish to go part-time or out altogether, they would be forced to leave to escape being smothered by the Press. This I wouldn’t find at all implausible, especially since any American of substance would soon enough find all that Disneyworld shtick insupportable. But, for “the Firm” to then cut them cold seems pretty low grade stuff.
On her second point, depression, not your garden variety kind of medical problem. It’s not hard to visualize the scenario in the Palace PR Dept., especially given the other famous “unhappiness”, when pregnant Meghan begged to see a shrink. And Harry’s ribbon cutting and honoraria wouldn’t cover it at all. For me this too had the familiar ring of brutal Corporate truth.
No, while they were working they had security. But not once they decided not to work. You can’t go part-time, QEII made that clear, it’s in or out. They were not forced to leave, they chose to leave. She was always going to go back to CA.
Harry has sought mental healthcare himself. He surely knew how to do that, so no excuse. You don’t go to the PR dept for medical care. You go to a doctor, like she did for maternity care. I believe there’s a right to privacy in medical care in the UK. Perhaps you believe otherwise.
So, …the question of who’s lying hinges on the sequence? …to which the “skin tone” motif is unrelated?
Secondly, her assertion that The Firm had executive authority over her on psychiatric care is a lie? she could simply grab her keys and head to Harley St? and the tabloids would honor her right to privacy?
In sum, you’re saying her entire story was a fiction to escape HM’s prison back to Lalalandia? And all in the teeth of well- known facts to the contrary? like the CIA is presently arranging for Ms Maxwell?
Are there authoritative (non-tabloid, non-Piers Morgan type) answers to these?
Princess Diana had psychiatric treatment and therapy, as did Harry for many years (he told us, a few years ago) and both Harry and William established a charity Heads Together, to raise awareness of mental health issues. Harry could have called a doctor for Meghan any time; he had plenty of knowledge from his own experience as well as all the contacts he had through this charity.
When Meghan was pregnant she could easily have raised the issue of depression with the doctors she was seeing. No-one asks HR (the HR for their own staff!) about their mental health.
Ok. And finally, if Harry wasn’t available or responsive, could she have gone on her own w/o his or palace approval?
Firstly you clown…1) H&R departments (if firms still have them) are not specialists in ”mental problems” they hire&Fire. 2) Archie was excluded,because His Parents chose NOT to do ANY Civil duties..I am not a rabid Monarchist,but on this I support HM Queen ‘Funny’ reply ie ”You are lying”..
3)Harry is/was patron of several mental health charities ,does this mean she didn’t ask her husbands help or advice/..?
Well, thanks to you, Robin lad, I’ve at least learned one thing.
Though I still don’t know where the substantive truth lies on MM’s issues, her and Harry’s point re the unholy alliance between palace and pop corporate media is indubitably true. The palace always wins coz they have this horde of tabloid-heads on ready alert to slime any contrarian.
It not in Queens gift ‘Security’ is handled by Police Commissioner in London…they DId have security to Vancouver , then She dropped that idea in favour of LA life
As A fan of Richard111, Shakespeare told untruths also,but they were ”His truth”?..
I am saddened that the Queen in her final years has had to suffer the wrath of a jealous female who herself wants to be all powerful in her delusional world. One day when her looks have gone and she reflects on her past. I sincerely hope she sees herself as I see her. As a shallow individual who has not lived her life, but squandered her life, in a need for what for her, will prove the unattainable. While to view Harry as not the brightest penny in the draw and I suspect Fraud, would tell him to open his eyes again on the world, and this time look at what he has to others. Then come back and talk.
Well for someone who is proud of her ”black” origins why has she had her hair straightened,?possible nose job?…She has is will bring the Anger of ”The Whirligig of time bringing in its revenges!?”
Meghan would be lucky to be 1/16th African in ancestry and probably less than that. She looks like your average Italian but clearly likes to play the ‘black’ scenario for more attention even as she spends a fortune on getting rid of her African ‘looks.’
She also Seems to Not include her black mum,,at her LA home(Soon to be Santa barbera) after the Wedding?
‘Speaking your Truth ‘ was the currency of the Oprah interview. The only Truth anyone really has is saying “I feel hurt, abandoned, betrayed , afraid..” etc. No one has the right to question ,argue with or deny what you are feeling and it can only be a good thing for Society as a whole that people are able to feel free to do this. More than that becomes problematical. That is your only subjective Truth. Why you were made to feel like that could well be because you interpreted a situation in the wrong way, you perceived someone s actions towards you in a way that they didn t intend it to be interpreted. A thousand reasons why you were made to feel like that. That is where the discussion begins , why there is a point in talking things through with the other people involved. Of course, you can also be justified in having these feelings but it needs discussion. Preferably in private rather than in front of millions of strangers.
I always thought Larkin to be better thought out than Freud.
“They f#@k you up your mum and dad,
they may not mean to but they do,
they fill you with the faults they had,
and add some others just for you”
I did not watch the interview, so am either objective or disqualified from having a view. That said, my view is “who cares?” The importance of what the participants have to say is directly proportional to the amount of time, effort, and words the world showers on them.
That this nonsense was the lead story on radio, TV and press on the day that millions of schoolchildren went back to school for the first time in months is a disgrace.
A much simpler interpretation of their behaviour can be expressed in a dialect word used in the East Midlands. It is “mardy” and is most often used as “mardy kid” to admonish someone who is behaving like a spoiled brat by throwing a tantrum when they cannot get their own way.
Recollections may vary. Other versions of the “truth” are available, including what was quaintly called, in old-fashioned times, the “factual truth”.
Isn’t “the factual truth” racist and offensive or something now? Because truth is a tool of supremacist colonialism etc etc and George Floyd dying black is because of slavery and racist mathematics and stuff.
So agree. What is truth anyway? A group of people watching the same incident will each see, hear & take away something different from that experience. Even a balanced discussion afterwards may not reveal the ‘actual’ truth, if there is indeed such a thing. Truth is complex. It seems that much of what came out of that interview was based on emotion and no one knows the context of any of what they are reporting was said so is hardly objective.
It’s a shame they felt the need to air the family washing in public after citing their desire and need for ‘privacy’. Now they have done quite the opposite and have courted all this attention. Such inconsistency doesn’t bode well for their future together.
“Even a balanced discussion afterwards may not reveal the ‘actual’ truth, if there is indeed such a thing.”
Well, there is a truth as to why Archie did not get a title. There is also a truth as to why the couple’s security was withdrawn. There is also a truth as to whether the couple said they wanted to be financially independent and then whined that daddy Charles was no longer supporting them. There is a truth as to whether or not he is in fact still supporting them. These are factual matters, not matters of feelings.
OK. Let’s begin with the “refusal of protection for Archie.”
Okay, let’s begin there. Non working royals are not provided taxpayer funded security, even if they have titles. They pay for their own security just as Meghan and Harry do now in LA.
If memory serves they’d been 3 years on duty, and were still working contemporaneous with this issue. Oprah probed for the reason and Meghan very reluctantly disclosed the “skin color” issue. She also added that he was to be made an exception in this regard under the existing protocol. And Harry affirmed same later.
So these were all lies?
And they had taxpayer provided security when they were working. But not when they decided not to work. Lol, reluctantly? You can’t be that naive. Archie wasn’t an exception though. Of QEII’s 8 great grandchildren, only three have their security provided for them. So how is Archie an exception?
Harry also affirmed that he didn’t get his wife mental health care.
“You can’t be that naive.”
I am sorry. Until watching “The Crown” for Lockdown-tainment, I never found them worthy of interest. Then, thinking I’d likely switch off soon as the usual gender bromides, bathos, and gushing began, I watched the Oprah interview and was impressed by their absence in MM’s story and presentation. Oprah tried for it, but MM studiously resisted pandering to the Merkan audience, the pop-identitarian memes.
Then I encounter this tsunami of bile on here, and get shut for believe’n my lie’n eyes.
”The Crown” is Largely lies….
Security iS decided by Westminster Area police Commissioner,NOT HM Queen …Princess refused police protection for her children even after her 1974 Gunpoint kidnap failed attempt! She Wanted ‘Normal’ as possible outlook for them
The gossip is that neither of them actually had a direct relationship with the Truth spoken about the possible colour of their baby. In other words, it was gossip and hearsay which like all gossip is prone to additional fabrication.
Probably she was hurt after hearing this gossip via Harry. Her reaction to this gossip is the only thing that can be attributed as her truth.
In other words, what probably outraged her was her lessers making fun of her after months of making their life hell.
Charles is not Harry’s father it is pretty certain This is all about Meghan and her racist whinge. Oprah jumped on the bandwagon as Meghan knew she would. Harry is a sad pawn in Merkal’s nastiness. So please stop this psychobabble!
If he were mine I would insist on a DNA test and then assuming the expected result disown him and cut him off totally, solely on account of the way he has behaved. As Farage commented ‘absolutely despicable’.
I’m pretty sure that even if Charles weren’t Harry’s biological father, there are evidently strong filial bonds between them, so very much doubt Charles would entertain such an idea. Would also have the effect of reopening the Pandora’s box of his inadequate relationship with Diana, which he’d be loath to contemplate as the prospect of taking on the monarchy from HMQ approaches.
A very good article that nails several points that have both a universal reality and, for me, unusually strong echoes within my experience. Born in 1950, I was raised in a family that, in the 1980s, a friend described as “New Age before the New Age had even started.” It was an accurate observation; but it was not meant as a compliment.
It has long puzzled me that so many sayings of Polonius are treated as the greatest existential wisdom, for the larger context in Hamlet should urge caution. Rev. Fraser nails many of the reasons why we should treat him cautiously — but such caution seems beyond the scope of the dispositions he identifies in Harry, Meghan and Oprah. The opportunity to place oneself at the centre of all things is extraordinarily seductive, especially when it can be supported by such fine-sounding phrases, and seems to be justified by the peerless wisdom of Shakespeare.
Even when I was at junior school, I remember my mother giving me advice that prioritised the self over all other things; and that continued until, in my late 20s, I became a Christian. I have no wish to detail the damage this perspective — also held by earlier generations and by my own — caused. However, the consequences have born out the truth of Rev. Frazer’s conclusions in this article:
In a year or two, maybe much sooner, Harry will need to go on a professional and intense suicide watch. I pray to God I’m wrong but in my bones I fear this man’s life has suddenly taken a very horrific and fatal turn.
Harry was destroyed his life and he knows it.
I agree.
Yes, I agree. I have deep compassion for Harry who is clearly a very damaged young man and I also have compassion for Meghan, who, while manipulative, is also clearly damaged and dangerous with it.
Mostly I feel for their families, both of them, as they watch this slow-motion ‘train’ smash move inexorably onwards.
Meghan has worked hard to separate Harry from his family, his friends and his country and that is not an act of love, which, for the moment, he does not realise. Let us hope he never does and the two of them can make their marriage work and leave everyone else alone.
I can think of no higher compliment to Giles that I read with at least as much interest and anticipation the thoughts of a Socialist Vicar as I do those of any other writer, and with far more than most.
it’s a great reminder to me how important it is to expose ourselves to intelligent opinions rooted in different perspectives.
Who is the socialist vicar and where can I read him?
In the Guardian, under the byline “Giles Fraser”.
cheers. Never spotted him there.
Excellent piece, Giles. I thought Harry looked , tho, as if he realised that he had got in too deep. He was torn between justifying his position, and knowing how hurtful he was being. It must have been an agonising place to be and I thought it showed.
I agree. It was telling too that he wasn’t present at the interview for much of what Meghan said.
Global capitalism does not give two tiny tosses about ” …the constitutional foundations of this country.”
Whether or not they lied doesn’t matter. £75 million from Netflix and Spotify to signifantly improve their own standing and position is all that matters in this capitalist free-for-all we now live in.
Harry and Meghan have catapulted their own brand off the back of the British monarchy’s brand. If the stilted old institution can’t recognise their public image isn’t as fresh as it was, then they’re gonna get devoured by the global monoliths that buy and sell government institutions between meetings and golf games.
Absolutely agree. But what a toxic brand Harry and Meghan have created.
Most brands are toxic in some way or another. It’s investor confidence and what sways the most opinions that triumphs.
How are royal dynasties formed in the first place? They would do whatever it took to stay in power. But now the rules of engagement are very different. The monarchy are like startled deer in the headlights. The ground has shifted under them, and they cling on to the Queen’s image of stable dignified stately beneficence. That won’t last much longer. They’ve been exposed as starkly irrelevant in recent years. They need to go on an urgently needed serious PR drive.
We buy things every day that slowly kill us. Why? Because if that’s what you want you should be free to buy it. If an entity is not convincing enough to sell it then they will go out of business. Replaced by a new idea, a better product, a more efficient process.
This is how the world works.
Get with the program or become an extinct relic.
The reason I support Uk monarchy,is because the Alternative is WORSE, Amnesty int’l acknowledge Most countries with Presidents are dictatorships…true some royalty in certain Countries are corrupt,but that’d be racist wouldn’t it?
I understand these huge sums are only payable if they do enough to produce large audiences. The interview may have – although it did not produce the biggest audience for either station.
They will be paid for results.
Fair enough, Netflix aren’t Netflix just giving money away for nothing.
We should be encouraging Harry & Meghan for their entrepreneurial behaviour, striking out as independent business people, rather than sponging my tax money and getting paid no matter what.
Yes, let them compete for attention in the market. I’m all for their financial independence. It will do both of them good.
to thine own self be true was said by polonius, the pompous, trite, blowhard. the fact that it’s constantly cited with a straight face is revealing.
I did not watch the interview but a fair guide to how the monarchy operates in real life could be found by going to BBC I-Player and watching the recording of the Commonwealth service. If the royals are racist, they hide it very well. And yes they ARE privileged because they can see at first hand all the positive things going on to overcome the negative. And the service was inspiring in that respect.
We need to differentiate between what the Sussexes had to endure within their family, which is often what most families have to endure and grievances about the institution of the monarchy. The interview seems to be mostly about the former and therefore more like a soap opera. But yes, it is a tragedy.
I’m not sure Freud taught us anything except a vocabulary for his unprovable theories and speculative ideas. But yours is a great analysis of truth and authenticity. God help Harry.
I would say that Freud can also help us understand why Harry thought (I use the word advisedly) that Meghan would fit in with the firm. Perhaps his relationship and marriage was all driven by a sub-conscious desire to wreak havoc and thus enable (force) his exit…
In the wake of the sad murder in London the other day I listened to a radio programme about domestic abuse and male violence.
The ‘classic abusive relationship’ was described as one where a man selects a vulnerable woman and over a period of time separates her from her friends, colleagues and family by undermining these pre-existing relationships. Eventually she will be isolated from those who care about her and under complete coercive control of the abusive partner.
I doubt whether anyone on the programme would have seen the connection and wonder whether the fact that I would be concerned about any vulnerable person estranged from friends and family makes me a racist?
45% of Marriage Violence is perpetuated by Women,oh curses the old accusations of misogyny again..so beware harry?..only joking
I thought Harry came across as a victim of this controlling behavior as well. He wasn’t even there for a good part of the interview, what sort of controlling bs is that? Meghan began separating him from his friends, he had lifelong friends who were not even invited to their wedding while she invited Hollywood types she didn’t even know, including Oprah. How bizarre is that? And how did Harry let that happen? Could he not have said no we are including my lifelong friends? Then she had to get rid of the family, particularly Kate, who she seems to really hate. What is hate-able about Kate other than that she is ahead of Meghan in the pecking order?
It’s easy to dismiss the protagonists of the drama as the rich whinging to the rich about the rich…but within the theatrical event that forms the fabric of their lives with minor but enduring parts for their children, there is a world of conflict and sadness, not least in the lives of those who invest themselves in such staggering numbers into this highly choreographed drama. At the heart of the matter, is a fundamental understanding of the human person, for the actors and the audience. The question for all of us, are we born to serve others, with all the suffering and self sacrifice that this brings or is my own existence the focus of all attention and concern. The strange paradox is when we give ourselves away for others, we grow greater in joy and gratitude, but when we seek to serve our own interests and place ourselves at the centre of attention we diminish ourselves. A world in the grip of fear and uncertainty and unsure of its final destiny and purpose is easy prey to manipulation whether that is emotional , political or financial. When we welcome death as passage towards a greater and magnificent state of existence ….the spell of the sorcerer is broken…nothing then can disturb your peace…
Candidate for Private Eye Pseud’s Corner perhaps?
Or a philosophy discussion.
Nope, me neither.
One crucial element for Freud in his construction of the psychoanalytical technique was the problem of ‘transference’. The phenomenon that when the patient opened to his/her feelings intense emotions towards the analyst would develop. And, even, vice versa. The therapist had to guard against this danger. Not all did.
Freudian theory is out of fashion these days but his warnings about transference are very apt. In the setting of newly aroused memories and feelings the therapist is in a very powerful position and can steer his client in any direction. Because Freud is at present passe unscrupulous therapists have even more room to manoeuvre.
In the Harry, MM, Oprah situation what is the power dynamic? Harry is led- very willingly – by his Oedipal nose. Oprah and MM cash in financially and reputationaly. But who are the patients here?
I think that we, the viewers and the public, are the intended patients. It is our emotions that have been aroused in this performance. But we should avoid the seduction of involvement in this business. We are not confronted with genuine feelings, only with a power play.
The political aspects of the affair, its constitutional effects, its influence on foreign policy vis-a-vis the USA and (peripherally) the EU are the only serious matters here.
I have to disagree that it has any effect on foreign policy at the moment regarding the US. The last anti-British US administration was Barack Obama’s. Joe Biden wasn’t anti-British back then, but he is senile and probably could not even tell you the Queen’s name today. So I would not worry about anything between the US and UK. The media in the US will support the Markles but the media no longer reflects public opinion in the US. Should Kamala Harris have to take over for Joe, this may change as she may have a bit more angst over the imperialist past of the UK which was what Obama held against it.
I do hope so, Annette.
It’s rare for a US President not to like or respect the British.it’s rare even for left wing US politicians. I guess it’s like disliking or disrespecting the Japanese or the Germans based on the past. Some people can’t let go of the past and would like to hold a grudge against people today who did nothing to harm them. Sins of the father and all that nonsense.
I have 17 researched and proved ancestors who fought on the American side of the Revolutionary war (more than half of of whom died during the war) and almost as many who fought on the British side (less sure of who among them died during the war). I guess I have to hate everyone.
Reading this of your ancestors, Annette, does remind me how shallow and trivial this whole affair is.
My paternal grandmother came to Britain in the 19th century from Lodz (Poland). Years ago I read up on the history of the ghetto there (Judenrat by Isaiah Trunk). I came across a picture of Chaim Rumkowsky, leader of the Jewish Council. He was the very image of my grandmother.
That chapter of history and its moral dilemmas puts into perspective the little puddles we are playing in during this operetta.
Hopefully Uk will wake up and come from the east as China comes from the west to, er, liberate the US citizens and their constitution in the event of Harris or similar taking power. I think Harris would have the same problem as Corbyn had he taken power in UK – ultimately he’d end up relying on the armed forces and police to open fire on (mostly) unarmed civilians. I doubt that will happen.
From your comments, you sound keen on “unarmed civilians” trying to overthrow democratically elected leaders.
I don’t think so. The US survived less than adequate presidents in the past without them opening fire on citizens and it will again. I doubt the military would carry out such orders from Harris anyway. We had Carter we had Obama, we will have more incompetents as that’s just part of human existence. Joe would have been incompetent but instead he is senile. So we don’t know who is running things. Probably not Harris.
I do think it’s possible that we may see at some point, Chinese troops on peacekeeping missions in the EU in the event of another European genocide. I doubt Americans will want to donate more lives to another such cause. And it would take a military power to achieve this. There are not many choices.
US didn’t really get rid of uK until 1814…Then we went up to Canada..
But it was independent.
Sorry ”We burnt down Wwhite house’ but at least the new design was better?
His paternal Grandfather was tortured by the British Colonial authorities in Kenya.
Biden is not senile. In this debate on such an articulate article about truth -could you bring fact. Cheers.
Very well put. Certainly this debacle has raised a powerful storm of emotion in a large number of people…we all have hidden hurts which events like this bring to the surface. Most of us don’t air them on TV..and cant imagine doing so. I agree that it has been detrimental to the British image overseas….but on we go…chin up and carry on.
Thank goodness ‘the firm’ didn’t send her to a psychiatrist- can you imagine what she’d be saying about that now if they had!
In retrospect, this was a disaster waiting to happen. Take one American from a highly dysfunctional family and place her in
another highly dysfunctional family. Sit back and watch the fireworks, shaking your head as you do so at the sad inevitability of itall.
Are there any other kinds of family? This is as unexceptionable as that the Royals are racist, classist, and chauvinist. But MM seemed untroubled having to navigate these. Her express concern centered on her child.
When I think of Meghan, I think of Christopher Columbus who burnt the boats to deter a mutiny before heading forward. In this case the boats are all Harry’s, — his friends, job, family, All his support networks.
Meghan had already burnt through hers years ago but with far less sacrifice, just rungs in a ladder — utilities placed and collected from.
Telling, was the wedding guest list, No old time friends! Only her mother The rest of the family in tatters or making media deals for cash!…
Was that not an alarm bell to a family ethos?
Included guests in the wedding celebrities she had never met! George clooney, Oprah Winfrey— Hollow checkboxes completed for forward ambition. The wedding was a PR event of the most shallow kind — profit generation potential, yet another alarm bell!
Harry’s very poor education means now the only big earner is to be a perpetual victim. He hasn’t got the ability to get a green card and earn any other way. A dirty existence… a step down from prince, to be wheeled out when bills appear!…A few woke sentences mumbled contritely to a camera to be once again flush with the bills!…No-way a C grade actress would earn what she does now, but pimping a prince…or being photogenic and PC ah watch the money fly.
Connections are everything!
So here we are… Two champagne sipping jet-set eco / social justice warriors, millionaires that can still pull off victimhood!, One who wears blood diamonds, but who interestingly “shuns glamour”, wanted privacy but lives in hollywood. Where of course no media and paparazzi live…
I can only wonder with the contradictions, the wearing of glamorous blood diamonds but being socially aware.. I wonder where the boundary lies and how those personal “truths” are constructed. Now that would be interesting TV!… The same goes with staff, bullying vs human dignity and supposed humanitarian, I hope a full investigation is done and published!
But on with the show…predictably we have netflix, oprah, maybe a few more shows. But the variety and interest will not be ticketable for long. The same stale and meaningless lines of kumbaya, blame, eco guilt, none of which are adhered to by themselves it sours the Moët
The next money maker….
Maybe the children “not being royal titled” will become a dragged out saga. A c-grade drama…even though that was decided 100 years ago and nothing to do with racism.
Or some failed run for a political influence. I doubt career will ever eventuate…but it can be monetized even in failure! due to “systematic racism” or any other new buzz word and concept.
I dont think its long till there is an ex-prince on the market, under-educated and free to a good home. A limping pony. After all after a few hundred million in netflix sales why bother trying… money becomes rather bourgeoisie and tiresome when at that stage you can enjoy days in the sun off screen.
Harry’s loyalty to family is deplorable! A grandfather that fought Nazis of all things! A grandmother and great grandmother that served their people tirelessly – with bravery and Honour!
Personally, I’m glad Harry will never be king – even more so that they are both out of it altogether! (And yes, please, please strip all titles and funding of all kinds! As general public I wish to wash my hands of them, they certainly don’t meet my standards!)
Equipped only with victimhood while having all the advantages in life is the ingredients for a tragicomedy of the dare I say blackest kind! They are the face of opportunism over true character, loyalty, commitment, sacrifice and hard work! Things that brave everyday people do unfailingly through all adversity and instability puts them both to shame!
I feel for the Queen, Prince Philip, Charles, Kate and William who are exemplary in their commitment and example.
Noblesse oblige and loyalty to family and friends was not a lesson learnt, In this oprah farce. Its a foreign concept which hinders profit/freedom.
Roll on the curtain, cake is too good for them!
So now somebody’s opinion becomes somebody’s truth? When the only final opinion that might count is some kind of tribunal or court where it will be a judges opinion. Such trivia rules our lives these days.
And in anycase, then what? Over to you Boris Johnson, I’m not holding my breath though, he has no opinion on anything.
So glad to see that this has well and truly dropped out of the news today.
The worrying thing/take on all this – is that from that doddering old fool Biden ( An Irish Republican in his sympathies) to the idiots in the court of Winfrey – among the rich and most racist group in the US, they are all refighting the American war of Independence and we are back in 1776! Mind you it does expose the intellect of the average american – They love to be loved and are astounded to find out that this is far from the case almost all over the world
there are many Americans who think she’s not truthful, it seems to divide along party lines. i thought she was a fraud from the early VF interview where she stated that she really didn’t know who he was or very much about him and subsequently seeing a snapshot of her standing in front of Buckingham palace as a teenager. An estranged friend from youth said she was obsessed with Diana and various princess films.
Unless you’d like to be tarred with the racist brush Meghan just dragged all over your country, I suggest you not be so quick to expound uneducated views of Americans, including lumping them altogether.
NO ONE is fighting the Revolutionary War again. Meghan is the same person in the US she was in the UK. This is about HER, not about Americans or Brits.
Biden can no longer even remember Ireland, much less anything to do with political violence there. I do agree with you that rich elites in the US are the most likely to be racist.
if you’re doing thanking give it to Trump for the relighting.
I would imagine that Oprah invented the whole “My Truth” nonsense because it allows her to indulge her guests in salacious half truths, while avoiding potential legal action in the notoriously litigious USA.
If Freud has thought us anything it is the Freudian psychology is not science. It contains no provable scientific hypothesis. It should not even be used by kitchen sink psychologists.
True horror: Alice of Battenberg(mother of Prince Philip), Sigmund Freud; ovarian radiation and
psychoanalysispseudoscience‘My truth’ ? Harry contradicted Meghan in the interview. She claimed the skin tone conversation was specific to Archie, while she was pregnant. He told Ophra that it referred to potential kids and happened before they married.
This is a material difference in their versions of their truths.
When I think of Meghan, I think of Christopher Columbus who burnt the boats to deter a mutiny before heading forward. In this case the boats are all Harry’s, — his friends, job, family, All his support networks.
Meghan had already burnt through hers years ago but with far less sacrifice, just rungs in a ladder — utilities placed and collected from.
Telling, was the wedding guest list, No old time friends! Only her mother The rest of the family in tatters or making media deals for cash!…
Was that not an alarm bell to a family ethos?
Included guests in the wedding celebrities she had never met! George clooney, Oprah Winfrey— Hollow checkboxes completed for forward ambition. The wedding was a PR event of the most shallow kind — profit generation potential, yet another alarm bell!
Harry’s very poor education means now the only big earner is to be a perpetual victim. He hasn’t got the ability to get a green card and earn any other way. A dirty existence… a step down from prince, to be wheeled out when bills appear!…A few woke sentences mumbled contritely to a camera to be once again flush with the bills!…No-way a C grade actress would earn what she does now, but pimping a prince…or being photogenic and PC ah watch the money fly.
Connections are everything!
So here we are… Two champagne sipping jet-set eco / social justice warriors, millionaires that can still pull off victimhood!, One who wears blood diamonds, but who interestingly “shuns glamour”, wanted privacy but lives in hollywood. Where of course no media and paparazzi live…
I can only wonder with the contradictions, the wearing of glamorous blood diamonds but being socially aware.. I wonder where the boundary lies and how those personal “truths” are constructed. Now that would be interesting TV!… The same goes with staff, bullying vs human dignity and supposed humanitarian, I hope a full investigation is done and published!
But on with the show…predictably we have netflix, oprah, maybe a few more shows. But the variety and interest will not be ticketable for long. The same stale and meaningless lines of kumbaya, blame, eco guilt, none of which are adhered to by themselves it sours the Moët
The next money maker….
Maybe the children “not being royal titled” will become a dragged out saga. A c-grade drama…even though that was decided 100 years ago and nothing to do with racism.
Or some failed run for a political influence. I doubt career will ever eventuate…but it can be monetized even in failure! due to “systematic racism” or any other new buzz word and concept.
I dont think its long till there is an ex-prince on the market, under-educated and free to a good home. A limping pony. After all after a few hundred million in netflix sales why bother trying… money becomes rather bourgeoisie and tiresome when at that stage you can enjoy days in the sun off screen.
Harry’s loyalty to family is deplorable! A grandfather that fought Nazis of all things! A grandmother and great grandmother that served their people tirelessly – with bravery and Honour!
Personally, I’m glad Harry will never be king – even more so that they are both out of it altogether! (And yes, please, please strip all titles and funding of all kinds! As general public I wish to wash my hands of them, they certainly don’t meet my standards!)
Equipped only with victimhood while having all the advantages in life is the ingredients for a tragicomedy of the dare I say blackest kind! They are the face of opportunism over true character, loyalty, commitment, sacrifice and hard work! Things that brave everyday people do unfailingly through all adversity and instability puts them both to shame!
I feel for the Queen, Prince Philip, Charles, Kate and William who are exemplary in their commitment and example.
Noblesse oblige and loyalty to family and friends was not a lesson learnt, In this oprah farce. Its a foreign concept which hinders profit/freedom.
Roll on the curtain, cake is too good for them!
While Fraser, as a churchman, carefully avoids implying it, Meghan has fully inserted herself into Diana’s role of mother/lover within this Oedipal drama. Harry’s profound ambivalence towards his father has been widely commented upon elsewhere, just as Meghan’s encouragement of it serves to intensify the father/son Oedipal struggle.
Read at another level, it can be seen as a battle between chaos and order. Harry/Meghan represent chaotic rule- breaking and destruction of existing order. The House of Windsor embodies traditional values of duty, established order, rules and propriety. It’s interesting that Harry and Meghan explicitly exempt HRH and Prince Phillip from their criticisms. Harry/Meg are not attacking these turreted walls yet because public opinion would mobilise against the folly. But soon, the next generation of Windsors will inherit and if pushed hard enough could fall to the forces of chaos. Is it Meghan’s fantasy to seize the crown and become the queen that Diana never was to his King? That would complete the Oedipal story – King Harry married to Queen Diana/Meghan and begetting a new dynasty for evermore. Failing that, they can destroy the Windsor dynasty? Harry and Meghan’s Oedipal psychodrama has many episodes yet to run.
Giles Fraser is a Freudian nightmare.
An appropriate addendum to this article is a word from a member of the Commonwealth. > Meghan and Harry interview fallout: What happens now? – via Macleans.ca
https://www.macleans.ca/royalty/meghan-and-harry-interview-fallout-what-happens-now/
Donald Trump has done us no favours by convincing some that there is anything other than one “truth”. There is only one truth know often only to God. These so called truths are only individual perceptions of reality which should be treated as such!
Oprah had the “your truth” out long before Trump. In fact, it’s more of a liberal idea than anything, that there is no one truth only lived experience which means your truth can be anything. Had Trump spouted off about “his” truth I would agree.
So Trump’s narcissism and lies on Twitter were four years of “a liberal idea” ?
No.
Sadly yes – and I say that as a (classical) liberal. Not too long ago public opinion would come down hard on lies, but the very concept of “personal truth” have given liars of all stripe a license to peddle their wares unchallenged.
Garbage .Trump was found Not Guilty both times on Impeachment,Can We look forward to Biden revealing his Tax returns soon *&Hunters in Ukrainian business deals?
Trump gave Harry Warning!,You Plank ”I am Not a fan of hers,but Good luck to him,he’ll need it!”
I have to keep reading this article in order to try and get to grips with it. It is highly technical and some of it passes above my head. As a layman I like these articles and I like this one, as it tends to put into context the reasons behind the behaviour of these people, one a privileged man and the other a self obsessed ambitious, ruthless manipulator. I would be interested to get Giles’s views on Boris Johnson and his lieutenant Hancock
To discuss this pair at all is to condone them.
This reminds me of the following article:
Hamlet is Shakespeare’s greatest villain
Catherine Butler, The Conversation, 30th October 2020.
Great read, and nicely interwoven with Hamlet, which is a beyond brilliant piece of work.
This is an excellent and insightful piece.
Alas poor Harry; we knew him well.
Am I alone in wishing that the media would give this pair all the “privacy” they want? Publication of their self indulgent whinging only serves to stoke the fire.
What a shame we no longer wrap fish and chips in newspaper.
In his book, Harry spends mucho time complaining about photographers. Hamlet did not have this problem; nor did Shakespeare nor Freud.
During the age of George VI/Elizabeth (1937-2022) the world endured massive societal changes. One of the most significant changes was the burgeoning media, and the unprecedented impact of TV/WWW mass-visualization of contemporary issues, institutions, and the real human beings who populate those institutions.
The overexposed public imagery associated with the Windsor dynasty constitutes a civilizational phenomenon unprecedented in the history of the world. To say the least, it really got on Harry’s nerves. It seems that he wrote a book about it, perhaps as a way of saying, please try to understand.
Consider the rare and unsettling circumstances of the Charles/Diana divorce. . . and the surreal events that imposed her death in a French tunnel. . . We should never be surprised at the behaviour of a young prince
HamletSir Spare Harry, whose entire life saga has unfolded in the presence of a suspicious car-wreck and an army of constant cameras targeting a young Royal upon whose life and struggles the sun will never set.Alas, poor Harry, we know him too well.
It feels a tad anachronistic to trot out Freud. Nowadays, the ‘unconscious’ is explained as the workings of our emotional brain that functions in parallel to our rational brain, works exceedingly well but is not accessible to reason in a direct way. Nor does it work in tune with material reality. It is eminently feasible that the lad’s emotional brain laid down ‘thought’ patterns that are indeed his ‘truth’ and make his functioning in the reality of his family difficult. Everything else about him and his choice of mate is title-tattle,a factor of his need for attention and/or income or media exploitation.
With all the problems facing the world today it is sadly telling that anything to do with the royals gets so many so-called intellectual Brits to get their knickers in a knot. I cannot recall any topic triggering so many comments.
I personally did not watch or digest the interview as I probably, at 71 years, no longer regard the Royal Family as a significant symbol of Britain’s place on the world stage.
We simply no longer rule the waves and the Royal Family are no longer strictly important in the scheme of things, rather just a stuffy reminder of long gone imperialism and a expensive side show for tourists.
The constantly aired family fall outs are stuff for the media who need us to believe that the squabbling is more important than it really is and goodness knows what all those’Royal Correspondents do for a living!
I believed in the young couples desire to escape the nightmare thoughts of all that pomp and circumstance but what I don’t understand is the need to wash so much dirty linen on a world stage, after all there is nothing unique about bitter family fall outs, and in many respects family squabbling is a way of setting new boundaries for the newcomers, whilst us older members just become grumpy grandad in his garden whilst the young go off and change the world (again!!!)
Personally, I wish the two of them luck, those two rebellious adventurers who will change the Royal world forever or simply slip into oblivion.
Who knows and I’m not sure I care.
Harry’s great grandfather ascended to the throne on May 12, 1937, because his older brother chose to value love and liberty over royal authority and responsibility.
Now, in 2021,Harry’s father waits in the wings, in a world gone mad, a world that disdains the trappings of ancient authority.
Harry himself, and his bride, are caught up in a worldwide web of superfluous imagery and meaningless connectivity.
Their best option is to retire to the outback, cultivate authentic familial love for each other and for their emerging family.Get out of the rat race; eschew the media madness and enjoy the forbidden politically-incorrect fruit of love that shelters and enables the love of one man for one women, and the subsequent offspring thereof, be they royal or otherwise. To thine own family be true. The rest is merely sound and fury signifying nothing.
Alas, poor Harry, we wish to know him well, apart from the trappings of impotent royal authority.
Leave Harry and Meghan alone; let them enjoy their own obla-di-obla-da, because lala the life does continally go on! Pay no attention to that mean mister mustard journalist crouching over there in the Cloud as Birnum wood doth move against pud’n’tane. Ask me again and I’ll tell you the same.
More Inaccurate bilge.. EdwardV111 was booted out for his 1) Wifes membership of US Nazi Party 2) Edward V111 had several adulteries to embarrass the Royal Family,although uK Press did nOT disclose in 1930s ie Freda dudley-Ward, a friend of Wallis Simpson.etc…3) Edward V111 in 1940 he broadcast pro-nazi missive before ordered by Winston Churchill to get back to uk,or face sedetion
At least one good thing has come out of this… The vile piers Morgan is off our screens, although I’m sure it’s only temporary. I wonder if Emily maitliss could be convinced to give us an unfashionable opinion about St. Megan (blessed be her name)?
I think it’s a loss, how many media people are there left in Mainstream media who will really speak their minds?
Absolutely agree. I didn’t like Morgan much or Jeremy Clarkson, but rather respected Andrew Neil, all three of whom have been edged out by the principle broadcasters. Who among popular commentators is left to express disagreement with the preposterous claims of the trans community or the rigid orthodoxy of veganism or as it was in Morgan’s case to question if Megan Markle was telling the truth, whether “her own” or anyone else’s?
Nobody, that’s who.
Morgan ‘speaking his mind’ helped to push the nation into house arrest, and don’t forget this is the man who Faked pictures of British troops abusing iraqi prisoners, putting servicemens lives in danger.
He didn’t fake them, they were faked by others who fed them to the Mirror. It happens occasionally on all newspapers.
The few times I watched him, in the last few months, I thought him absolutely ghastly. He harangued his targets without mercy and with false passion, and never let them speak. The victim might as well have been a still photograph. It wasn’t even a worthwhile monologue, let alone intelligent discssion.
I therefore find it an odd feeling to find myself agreeing with what he said when he was pursued to his doorstep.
At least Morgan has done the RF the favour of switching the spotlight off them and onto him.
“Respect our privacy” but also respect our rights to tell the world what we want them to hear”. Racist attitudes in the Royals? Is that a shocking revelation? Not for most. Disrespect to Meghan? Probably. In the end, be careful what you wish for. Diana’s legacy is that her “truth” won out over any other and thus her story should be a warning to anyone not Kate Middleton who desires to marry in to this den of vipers and mediocrities. Save some pity for the Queen who is too smart and too kind to have to be in the middle of this at her age. Let her have some peace, It should also be possible to condemn the racism of the Royals, which to be fair only echoes the racism in the nation at large while not having much empathy for poor Harry and Ms. M. Go about your lives, the two of you, and do what you say you want, which is disconnect from the “family”. Stop complaining that your son is not a “Prince”: having your Royal cake and eating it is not an option.
Lots of things to think about in the article around the ‘my truth’ principle and the recommendation of therapy is always good to see.
However, all the Royals (and I mean all) are basically part of the celebrity industry. And while we might find it distasteful for them to live their lives and air their problems in public that’s what happens in the celebrity industry. Personally, I find it all rather cruel and unnecessary, whether the focus is on Britney, Meghan, Harry, or any of the people (disproportionately women) singled out for particular opprobrium.
The bit where I disagree with Giles is when he says: ‘None of this would matter so much were it not for the fact that the “truth” expressed to Oprah has the capacity to undermine one of the constitutional foundations of this country.’
That’s the bit where he goes from a discussion of the difficulty of knowing ourselves and the problems of being a celebrity into the realm of requiring that these two individuals don’t do this because it challenges authority and is a risk to the status quo. The problem isn’t the accusation of racism in a celebrity family it’s the accusation of racism in this particular celebrity family which is why they should keep quiet.
Isn’t he effectively saying they should be ‘cancelled’ to borrow the language of the anti-woke?
Very interesting comment. Since the author is not asking for them to be silenced the article can’t be read as a request to cancel.
Something I’ve learned from this article is that serious accusations like racism can only be made on a basis of objective fact, not feeling. In this era where racism *is* taken seriously, it’s important to who, when, and the exact words.
I’ve lived long enough for there to have been many occasions where I misinterpreted what others have said, or took things personally that were not meant as insults. And many occasions where I’ve unintentionally caused hurt…
What a wise observation!
Just my opinion here but I believe what Giles is trying to say is that the concept of “my truth” is one that does no good to anyone because as he puts it “the problem with “my truth” is not just that it can fail to describe objective reality, but — and this is crucial — that it may fail, just as much, to describe subjective reality too.” So an attempt to attack the monarchy for perceived not objective failings is a very dangerous situation.
If we take what they say to be the truth, it would change the way we view the royal family and the entire media. It would mean that they are actually are racists in hiding who don’t wish any outsider to succeed or in other words they’d be evil. And the consequences of this to British society as a whole could be very damaging. Hence why he says this matters, not because he wishes to protect some racists because they have value to society but instead I think because if you’re going to call out the monarchy for being racists then you’d better use the objective or real truth to make such claims instead of the idea of my truth.
That’s a most useful analysis, thank you.
I can see that and I fully accept the subjective/objective reality bit and how ‘my truth’ is often an unhelpful way to look at conflict in the public forum – although it can be useful in private to help gain understanding.
My point is that the Royal Family shouldn’t be treated any differently than any other celebrity family. In essence, I’m challenging the notion that the Royal Family deserves special protection by virtue of our ‘constitution’ (or inherited constitutional privilege or the divine right of Kings). They are no longer any different to other celebrity families such as the Kardashians or Beckhams. I don’t think the Royal Family behaves any better or worse, particularly, than other family but, probably more than any other family, their unique selling point as celebrities is ‘family’. The media treats them same way as other celebrity families, stirs up conflict, takes sides and makes money out of them and they in turn retain their wealth and comfortable lifestyles because of the attention they receive.
I don’t see it like that at all. Projections into the Royals are surely of a different order. There is something about the unconscious need to have something “to look up to” and well as “to do down” It seems to me that in the Royal Family, as a group of different human beings, each carries different aspects of those two opposites. Our media makes a brilliant job of weighting the seesaw: Princess Diana “up” Prince Charles “down” etc etc.
If you were to take a flip chart and draw stick figures and give them “likes” or “thumbs down” Both Diana and Charles in their own ways have done a lot of positive things. Both Harry and William have strengths and weaknesses. But I think in 2021 it the “Look at me! Look at me! people win the admiration and approbation. The “quietly get on with it” lot get the brickbats from the media because it sells better.
‘Projections into the Royals are surely of a different order.’
Why?
‘There is something about the unconscious need to have something “to look up to” and well as “to do down’
I can look up to lots of people I know personally and I can look up to people who I’m aware of through media, art, or entertainment or politics. There are also people I know personally or through media, art, entertainment or politics I don’t look up to, disagree with and sometimes wish they didn’t have the influence over others (or me) that they do. Why are the Royals special?
They’re not special, but they should be protected from specious accusations of racism, as too should all non-royal people. Regardless of someone’s position, I don’t like seeing people being needlessly torn apart by a vindictive media machine.
They can respond as can any other family but with the advantage of a media machine taxpayers pay for. Giles said they should be treated differently because they were Royal. That was the point I was addressing.
There are a number of problems with GF’s piece:
Indeed, with regard to the interview “my truth” is really only “my opinion”, the former is stated as fact to which no counter statement/argument is allowed
The amount of effort spent on this subject with many simply wishing to vent their spleen and exercise their own particular prejudice against one or other paticipant in this rather sad and in many ways inconsequential story, is the most depressing thing about it.
Get a life, or at least direct your efforts in a more constructive and purposful direction.
open your eyes …there is a war going on and this just happens to be the todays battleground so it is important people vent…
You obviously ”brain dead” to Cultural Marxism,, happening in Universities, ( Mother today being outlawed as sexist!!)the fact any criticism is Viewed as misogyny or ”Racist” is similar to 1950s mcCarthyism,(US Right wing hysteria)) or Gareth Jones being vilified for daring disclose the Truth about 10 million russians dying in 1933-35 famine..KGB murdered gareth Jones in 1935 in manchurian, Watch the 2020 film and see dangers of Woke bilge&hysteria ‘ ”Mr Jones”
Truth ,is a human conflict,because is changed according with our own convenience, but, for one moment, a sniff of a dog can get the object with eny other interference,,racism, is a odour,,British are racists, all ways show the “different”,colour, exterior looking, accent, or me,,Jewish,,,a taxi driver in Northampton was a sample,,in a journey said to me that Israel is not rigth to exist,,but a mentioned, I jewish, and do not agree,,the replay was characteristic, yes??you not looked like, The Firm are racists and do not accept nothing from outside.
And was this taxi driver English or from another ethnic group I suspect in Peterborough.