X Close

Harry and Meghan’s moral exile The couple embodies the ethics of narcissism

The “Montecito perspective”(Netflix)


December 15, 2022   4 mins

Harry and Meghan divide opinion very much along the lines of whether one believes we have obligations beyond our control. I still remember a Christmas family row, me a stroppy teenager, that concluded with me insisting: “I didn’t ask to be born into this family.” No one ever does, of course. Which is why the putative obligations one has to one’s parents — “honour thy father and mother” in old money — cut against the grain of contemporary liberal choice-led values.

The history of how this idea of individual choice came to dominate our moral landscape is complex and interesting. What began as a worthy cry of individual freedom against exploitative elites — the state, the medieval church and so on — greatly exceeded its intended power, eventually becoming a weapon that could bend reality around the will of individual choice. These days, for example, I can be a woman simply if I choose to be one, irrespective of any biological givenness. Philosophically, this means there are no givens that human will cannot and should not be able to overcome. Truth requires a possessive pronoun, making it submissive to individual will: my truth. All that matters is the choosing. There is only one core moral situation and that is when I point to something and say: “I want it”. The paradigmatic setting for moral reflection has shifted from kneeling in the church pew to standing in the shopping aisle.

Capitalism inevitably plays an important part in this story. The soft Left critique is that capitalism is poor at redistribution and poor at cleaning up after itself — that it doesn’t price in its effects on the environment. On the plus side, it has lifted billions out of poverty and has liberated hitherto oppressed individuals from the restrictions of traditional moral values — the power of the “pink pound”, for instance. In this way, capitalism is a kind of solvent against the weight of tradition: the dollars in my pocket free me to be whoever I want to be, whatever I want to be. Dalit billionaire Rajesh Saraiya is no longer untouchable. How can we not cheer such liberation? My wallet says that I don’t have to abide by your values. For “choice first” liberals, this is all to be counted on the positive side of the register.

We could call this the “Montecito perspective”, but Marx explained it best: “All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned.” The Netflix Queen, luxuriating in her ghastly Californian mansion, is a surprising example of precisely what Marx described — her exaggerated bow to the monarch making a mockery of the respect that such a gesture is designed to articulate.

This is why the “Montecito perspective” contrasts so directly with the “Buckingham Palace perspective”, which is what makes the whole Harry/William drama so much more than a mimetic rivalry between siblings. They are archetypes of two fundamental and bitter political adversaries: very roughly, tradition and the ethics of the market, old world power and new world power, England and America. People will keep on making programmes about Harry and Meghan not because they are intrinsically worth watching, nor because they provide us with any new information about their perfectly ordinary romance, but rather because they reference a very primitive kind of disagreement about the nature of moral reality. Harry and Meghan are compelling in their own way because they are absolute true believers in the kind of moral vision they propound. In direct contrast, many believe that what they think of as being good is the very thing we now need saving from: an ethics indistinguishable from narcissism. The crack between us reaches down to the very bottom.

From the Palace perspective, we are born into a network of relations to which we are obligated from before we take breath. William would use words like “duty” and “service”, a crucial aspect of which is the belief that my life is not all-about-me. It’s not about my will or my having chosen something. Not even about my own personal happiness. I live in the service of something greater than myself. As today’s episodes reveal, while William was somewhere up the M1 opening yet another Community Centre or Homeless Project, Harry was in the departure lounge, giddily breathing into his mobile phone: “We are on the freedom flight.” Little wonder so many of us saw his abdication of responsibility as a betrayal of duty, to both his family and to his country — which, given the nature of the obligations he was born into, amount to the same thing.

Imagining a happy-ever-after Disneyfied version of royalty, Meghan can be forgiven for not having fully appreciated all of this. Monarchy is not glamour and power; it is bonded servitude — and servitude, as the Queen herself well knew, inspired by a king who divested himself of power to come among us as a baby, one who “emptied himself, taking the form of a servant” (Philippians 2). Harry had the perfect role model to appreciate all this in his grandmother. Unlike his wife, he should have known better. Was that shame on his face as he watched his fairy princess effect an apparently hilarious parody of the bow? If not, it should have been.

“No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation on another man,” wrote that patron saint of neoliberalism, Ayn Rand, in The Virtue of Selfishness. This amounts to much the same thing as: “I didn’t ask to be born into this family.” But we all come from somewhere, rooted in a place layered by generations of expectation. And the moral call of such expectations cannot be escaped from simply by relocating to California. There is no psychological tabula rasa to be found, even in the land of reinvention. You take your story with you, and especially so if you are a member of the Royal Family. Harry has not freed himself; he has chosen a very empty form of exile. He has sold his birthright to Netflix, and he has sold it far too cheap. All that Hollywood adulation and California sunshine will not be able to quell the emptiness within.

***

Order your copy of UnHerd’s first print edition here


Giles Fraser is a journalist, broadcaster and Vicar of St Anne’s, Kew.

giles_fraser

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
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

197 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jeremy Bray
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago

I think people might have been sympathetic to Harry finding the burden of obligation too heavy to bear and retiring to enjoy a private life. What is less forgivable is the attacks on his family to generate wealth to enable him to indulge his material and narcissistic desires.

Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

Quite. Their descent is pure Macbeth. Their betrayal – made worse by naked greed (monetising mendacious accusations of both family and nation) – is ugly for neither raycist royals nor us now raycist Brits can answer back. In the end it is about manners. This shrill couple pocket Netflix loot to spread venom about a family and a nation that welcomed Meghan in. Remember how Prince Phillip was dying when they began their lie for profit offensive? They represent and express a set of rotten values we have long been taught to despise – spoiled, narcissistic, accusatory, disloyal, unfair, hypocritical and serial mendacity.

Jacqueline Burns
Jacqueline Burns
1 year ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

I can answer back! They are both selfish individuals who only think of themselves & care not who they hurt in their pursuit of their own agenda. ie, the wishful greatness of them.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago

An interesting aspect of the Royal family is that they create a sort of ‘national community’ for the UK. They observe and honor national traditions and encourage the cohesiveness in their acknowledgment of good works. And it works on the whole. In this day and age when people yearn for a sense of belonging more than ever, the Royal family serves a much needed focus and service. It’s a shame Harry & Meghan didn’t see it that way. They can not and will not be able to create community for anyone as they are too selfish and inwardly focused. Their ‘country’ is themselves.

Kay Ong
Kay Ong
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

Yesterday l caught a glimpse of Meghan’s pantomime dame curtsey and the following gales of mocking laughter from her. I was personally offended. She is making a mockery of our country and our traditions built over 1,000 years of history from the days when a king led his men into battle to defend the realm, to the dedicated service of our late Queen to the benefit of many nations.
Harry had the grace to look rather uncomfortable at this performance and so he should. A bow or curtsey is a mark of respect and not in any way demeaning.
An old-fashioned word came to mind – guttersnipe.
Dictionary definition –
n. 1) A low-life classless buffoon who fancies him or herself above all others. 2) A person who feels that they can act on their own whims without regard to consequences to themselves or others. 3) One who thumbs their nose at polite society.
l sincerely hope the King and the Prince of Wales rise above all this and do not feed their publicity machine. It will soon fade without sustenance, just as Harry will be occasionally remembered as that chap who was once a prince of this realm.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Kay Ong

Believe me, those who know can assure you that ‘ Lower-Middleton” is not much better….

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
1 year ago

Who is that then? And what vague aspersions you make. What is Cate Middleton’s particular offence? This sounds simply like pure unadulterated snobbery and disdain on your part -‘Lower’. Of course there is always someone on here effectively by making the other side’s arguments for them!

Last edited 1 year ago by Andrew Fisher
Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

gopped the bait good n proper!!!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

ahhh… I actually know them… you, I imagine, do not.

Jacquie Watson
Jacquie Watson
1 year ago

Really? It’s just a shame that your opinion is not matched by thousands of other people, or some definitive facts. Just looking at the actions of both, it would appear that Catherine and William have the ability to do good works and not whine. It’s just a shame that they appear to be happy with their lot and just get on with it. Where harry and his wife cannot just get on with their lives, are permanently unhappy and blame the Royal Family and the Press for that, but have a permanent thread attached to the old job and still want the benefits while behaving like spoiled brats and collecting at their alter! Oh, and please don’t reply because I can see right through it!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Jacquie Watson

Dream on via The Daily Mail!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Jacquie Watson

Dream on via The Daily Mail!

Jacquie Watson
Jacquie Watson
1 year ago

Really? It’s just a shame that your opinion is not matched by thousands of other people, or some definitive facts. Just looking at the actions of both, it would appear that Catherine and William have the ability to do good works and not whine. It’s just a shame that they appear to be happy with their lot and just get on with it. Where harry and his wife cannot just get on with their lives, are permanently unhappy and blame the Royal Family and the Press for that, but have a permanent thread attached to the old job and still want the benefits while behaving like spoiled brats and collecting at their alter! Oh, and please don’t reply because I can see right through it!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

gopped the bait good n proper!!!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

ahhh… I actually know them… you, I imagine, do not.

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
1 year ago

Who is that then? And what vague aspersions you make. What is Cate Middleton’s particular offence? This sounds simply like pure unadulterated snobbery and disdain on your part -‘Lower’. Of course there is always someone on here effectively by making the other side’s arguments for them!

Last edited 1 year ago by Andrew Fisher
Mark Phillips
Mark Phillips
1 year ago
Reply to  Kay Ong

Demimondaine sprang to mine.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Phillips

Mark, are you alluding to the word prostitute?

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Phillips

Mark, are you alluding to the word prostitute?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Kay Ong

Believe me, those who know can assure you that ‘ Lower-Middleton” is not much better….

Mark Phillips
Mark Phillips
1 year ago
Reply to  Kay Ong

Demimondaine sprang to mine.

Walter Schwager
Walter Schwager
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

The Royal Family is only a symbol of national unity for those who take superficial media presentations for reality. King Charles as head of a church, really? Camilla as Queen Consort? All these people are descended from Germans and Greeks, even the name of the dynasty had to be changed. A ramshackle structure pumped up by Disneyland pomp and circumstance. I suspect the Queen refused to retire to delay Charles from becoming King. In the meantime the UK is the worst performing economy in the G7 and its poor are freezing in the dark and suffering from that Dickensian ailment, chilblains.

Vici C
Vici C
1 year ago

Such bitterness affects your judgement.

Ted Ditchburn
Ted Ditchburn
1 year ago
Reply to  Vici C

It is Harry and Meghan, and posters like this Walter who are old fashioned these days. Out of touch, reheating unappetising cliches that were stone cold well over 60 years ag0 about personal self-fulfilment, being on ‘a journey’ and for the Walters’ a sort of world view based on ‘Anyone Except Britain’.

Ted Ditchburn
Ted Ditchburn
1 year ago
Reply to  Vici C

It is Harry and Meghan, and posters like this Walter who are old fashioned these days. Out of touch, reheating unappetising cliches that were stone cold well over 60 years ag0 about personal self-fulfilment, being on ‘a journey’ and for the Walters’ a sort of world view based on ‘Anyone Except Britain’.

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
1 year ago

How naive as well as ignorant. You obviously didn’t take too much notice of the late Queen’s funeral. It was very clear that huge numbers of people had the greatest respect for her not only as an individual but as a symbol of the nation. That respect is entirely different from having a favourite film actor, for example, a difference that Meghan Markle for one, as the epitome of a ‘woke’ self centred modern person, who is at the same time motivated mainly by money, is probably incapable of understanding.

The Royal Family is descended from rather a large number of ancestors, as indeed we all are, if you think about it. That isn’t really the point. If enough people hold allegiance and respect for the monarchy, that is what counts. ‘You suspect’ – the Queen actually believed in her vows, terribly unfashionable isn’t it? – which is why she would only have abdicated in the most extreme circumstances, for example of poor health.

Britain has its problems, but overall had been a beneficent force in the world. And today almost every one of the best run European countries are constitutional monarchies. Ah, if ONLY we could have President Macron, or Biden or Trump as the head of state as well as government, all would be well!

Are you German by any chance? Your own modern state was – probably given its history – could ONLY have been – set up under the tutelage of the Americans and British. But I’m always dismayed at how many Germans I speak to fundamentally don’t seem to care much whether they are come under the Chinese as opposed to the American orbit. As long as they can sell stuff and posture about environmentalism etc. That seems to indicate a pretty skin deep attitude to human freedom and even their own nation, or even given China’s record, the environment itself.

But perhaps unfortunately it is the case that the British monarchy will be coming under more and more strain given the huge culture clash of cultures between those who have some respect for tradition and many metropolitan uber liberals who always think we can ‘remake the world anew’ in the sweet light of human reason with no difficulty at all. The experience of the Bolshevik Revolution, Maoism, Nazism ought to argue against that, but hey, we don’t need to learn anything from history do we?

Last edited 1 year ago by Andrew Fisher
Eryl Balazs
Eryl Balazs
1 year ago

yes agree – all this hate for one person MM is pathetic (‘narcissism’ being the most over and misused word of the current zeitgeist) and demeans us all. Of course the royal family and all it ‘traditions’ need to go and all our artefacts stolen from other countries need to go back to their rightful owners. Good for H & M may they yet bring down the monarchy and all who sail in it!

Jacquie Watson
Jacquie Watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Eryl Balazs

Of course, lets all celebrate her career of grifting, lies, and general mean mouthing, and his too. Becasue after all they have called out the Royal Family. Of course its never been done before, has it? The thing about Markle is her total lack of integrity, and only pushing the cause becasue she can and has benefited financially in a very big way. Yet it appears, charity did not begin at home, and she is yet to demonstrate how to do good in the world. Harry in the meantime is still trying to be better than Saint Diana, in his own head anyway.

Jacquie Watson
Jacquie Watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Eryl Balazs

Of course, lets all celebrate her career of grifting, lies, and general mean mouthing, and his too. Becasue after all they have called out the Royal Family. Of course its never been done before, has it? The thing about Markle is her total lack of integrity, and only pushing the cause becasue she can and has benefited financially in a very big way. Yet it appears, charity did not begin at home, and she is yet to demonstrate how to do good in the world. Harry in the meantime is still trying to be better than Saint Diana, in his own head anyway.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago

Correct Walter. I detect there is a sane man in you judging by the minuses you have received. Nice to know there are at least two of us who think along the same lines. It never ceases to amaze me how the truth stirs up hatred in others. The Royal Family pantomime will continue for some time to come yet. Why do the British people have to pay anything for them to survive? They are unbelievably rich. They should make their own way. Do they really need so many expensive gowns, houses, servants et cetera? I marvel at it.

Leejon 0
Leejon 0
1 year ago

Do presidents require anything less? So may start, being not quite ‘unbelievably’ rich, very few end that way… we pretend to deplore corruption, but we vote for it every time. We get what we deserve!

Jacquie Watson
Jacquie Watson
1 year ago

Actually Elizabeth Shannon, they pay their own way and some. They contribute an enormous amount of money to the economy. But lest not let facts get into the discussion. Did you know that the British can vote them out, anytime they like.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Jacquie Watson

and revenue from The Royal Estates

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Jacquie Watson

and revenue from The Royal Estates

Leejon 0
Leejon 0
1 year ago

Do presidents require anything less? So may start, being not quite ‘unbelievably’ rich, very few end that way… we pretend to deplore corruption, but we vote for it every time. We get what we deserve!

Jacquie Watson
Jacquie Watson
1 year ago

Actually Elizabeth Shannon, they pay their own way and some. They contribute an enormous amount of money to the economy. But lest not let facts get into the discussion. Did you know that the British can vote them out, anytime they like.

Vici C
Vici C
1 year ago

Such bitterness affects your judgement.

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
1 year ago

How naive as well as ignorant. You obviously didn’t take too much notice of the late Queen’s funeral. It was very clear that huge numbers of people had the greatest respect for her not only as an individual but as a symbol of the nation. That respect is entirely different from having a favourite film actor, for example, a difference that Meghan Markle for one, as the epitome of a ‘woke’ self centred modern person, who is at the same time motivated mainly by money, is probably incapable of understanding.

The Royal Family is descended from rather a large number of ancestors, as indeed we all are, if you think about it. That isn’t really the point. If enough people hold allegiance and respect for the monarchy, that is what counts. ‘You suspect’ – the Queen actually believed in her vows, terribly unfashionable isn’t it? – which is why she would only have abdicated in the most extreme circumstances, for example of poor health.

Britain has its problems, but overall had been a beneficent force in the world. And today almost every one of the best run European countries are constitutional monarchies. Ah, if ONLY we could have President Macron, or Biden or Trump as the head of state as well as government, all would be well!

Are you German by any chance? Your own modern state was – probably given its history – could ONLY have been – set up under the tutelage of the Americans and British. But I’m always dismayed at how many Germans I speak to fundamentally don’t seem to care much whether they are come under the Chinese as opposed to the American orbit. As long as they can sell stuff and posture about environmentalism etc. That seems to indicate a pretty skin deep attitude to human freedom and even their own nation, or even given China’s record, the environment itself.

But perhaps unfortunately it is the case that the British monarchy will be coming under more and more strain given the huge culture clash of cultures between those who have some respect for tradition and many metropolitan uber liberals who always think we can ‘remake the world anew’ in the sweet light of human reason with no difficulty at all. The experience of the Bolshevik Revolution, Maoism, Nazism ought to argue against that, but hey, we don’t need to learn anything from history do we?

Last edited 1 year ago by Andrew Fisher
Eryl Balazs
Eryl Balazs
1 year ago

yes agree – all this hate for one person MM is pathetic (‘narcissism’ being the most over and misused word of the current zeitgeist) and demeans us all. Of course the royal family and all it ‘traditions’ need to go and all our artefacts stolen from other countries need to go back to their rightful owners. Good for H & M may they yet bring down the monarchy and all who sail in it!

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago

Correct Walter. I detect there is a sane man in you judging by the minuses you have received. Nice to know there are at least two of us who think along the same lines. It never ceases to amaze me how the truth stirs up hatred in others. The Royal Family pantomime will continue for some time to come yet. Why do the British people have to pay anything for them to survive? They are unbelievably rich. They should make their own way. Do they really need so many expensive gowns, houses, servants et cetera? I marvel at it.

Kay Ong
Kay Ong
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

Yesterday l caught a glimpse of Meghan’s pantomime dame curtsey and the following gales of mocking laughter from her. I was personally offended. She is making a mockery of our country and our traditions built over 1,000 years of history from the days when a king led his men into battle to defend the realm, to the dedicated service of our late Queen to the benefit of many nations.
Harry had the grace to look rather uncomfortable at this performance and so he should. A bow or curtsey is a mark of respect and not in any way demeaning.
An old-fashioned word came to mind – guttersnipe.
Dictionary definition –
n. 1) A low-life classless buffoon who fancies him or herself above all others. 2) A person who feels that they can act on their own whims without regard to consequences to themselves or others. 3) One who thumbs their nose at polite society.
l sincerely hope the King and the Prince of Wales rise above all this and do not feed their publicity machine. It will soon fade without sustenance, just as Harry will be occasionally remembered as that chap who was once a prince of this realm.

Walter Schwager
Walter Schwager
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

The Royal Family is only a symbol of national unity for those who take superficial media presentations for reality. King Charles as head of a church, really? Camilla as Queen Consort? All these people are descended from Germans and Greeks, even the name of the dynasty had to be changed. A ramshackle structure pumped up by Disneyland pomp and circumstance. I suspect the Queen refused to retire to delay Charles from becoming King. In the meantime the UK is the worst performing economy in the G7 and its poor are freezing in the dark and suffering from that Dickensian ailment, chilblains.

Iris C
Iris C
1 year ago

Even their children have been hurt. They have been denied a relationship with their cousins, and all the other “royal” youngsters of their age.
.

Last edited 1 year ago by Iris C
elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago

Jacqueline, we are all, every single one of us, selfish individuals Who are they hurting?.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago

An interesting aspect of the Royal family is that they create a sort of ‘national community’ for the UK. They observe and honor national traditions and encourage the cohesiveness in their acknowledgment of good works. And it works on the whole. In this day and age when people yearn for a sense of belonging more than ever, the Royal family serves a much needed focus and service. It’s a shame Harry & Meghan didn’t see it that way. They can not and will not be able to create community for anyone as they are too selfish and inwardly focused. Their ‘country’ is themselves.

Iris C
Iris C
1 year ago

Even their children have been hurt. They have been denied a relationship with their cousins, and all the other “royal” youngsters of their age.
.

Last edited 1 year ago by Iris C
elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago

Jacqueline, we are all, every single one of us, selfish individuals Who are they hurting?.

Andrew Daws
Andrew Daws
1 year ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

how do you know he is lying?

Paddy Taylor
Paddy Taylor
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Daws

We don’t “know” he’s lying, in this instance. But between the pair of them they’ve been caught telling at least a dozen tales that have been shown to be lies.
At which point, it might be more sensible to suggest that the burden of proof now rests on those who imagine they might be telling the truth.

Paula G
Paula G
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Daws

Easy example in one: “I didn’t know Beyoncé knew who I was!” Forgetting that they had very publicly met in line at a function where H tried to get voiceover work for M, right in front of B. Doh! Stories often don’t match with these two.

Mark Phillips
Mark Phillips
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Daws

His lips were moving.

Paul Johnston
Paul Johnston
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Daws

His body language for one thing, coupled with our own recollection of events of only four or five years ago. HE knows he’s lying and it shows.

Ted Ditchburn
Ted Ditchburn
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Johnston

He lied about the facts around when his mother’s death was told to him, and how it was done, that has been well documented.
A bit like Nicola Sturgeon, whose another big *my truth* believer, you can search for benign excuses as to why he did this in each case as it emerges, but even then it casts doubt over other things he is saying.

Ted Ditchburn
Ted Ditchburn
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Johnston

He lied about the facts around when his mother’s death was told to him, and how it was done, that has been well documented.
A bit like Nicola Sturgeon, whose another big *my truth* believer, you can search for benign excuses as to why he did this in each case as it emerges, but even then it casts doubt over other things he is saying.

Paddy Taylor
Paddy Taylor
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Daws

We don’t “know” he’s lying, in this instance. But between the pair of them they’ve been caught telling at least a dozen tales that have been shown to be lies.
At which point, it might be more sensible to suggest that the burden of proof now rests on those who imagine they might be telling the truth.

Paula G
Paula G
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Daws

Easy example in one: “I didn’t know Beyoncé knew who I was!” Forgetting that they had very publicly met in line at a function where H tried to get voiceover work for M, right in front of B. Doh! Stories often don’t match with these two.

Mark Phillips
Mark Phillips
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Daws

His lips were moving.

Paul Johnston
Paul Johnston
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Daws

His body language for one thing, coupled with our own recollection of events of only four or five years ago. HE knows he’s lying and it shows.

Bret Larson
Bret Larson
1 year ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

But they are going to save the world with their decency!

Jacqueline Burns
Jacqueline Burns
1 year ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

I can answer back! They are both selfish individuals who only think of themselves & care not who they hurt in their pursuit of their own agenda. ie, the wishful greatness of them.

Andrew Daws
Andrew Daws
1 year ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

how do you know he is lying?

Bret Larson
Bret Larson
1 year ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

But they are going to save the world with their decency!

Paddy Taylor
Paddy Taylor
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

He’s not merely airing his family’s dirty laundry, he’s auctioning it off.
Never has the expression “he’d be willing to sell his grandmother to get ahead” been more appropriate – indeed Harry seems to have adopted it as a mantra.

Paula G
Paula G
1 year ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

They promised not to merch their royal connections. My goodness, Netflix made itself appear a very tawdry and cheap brand by associating with these two. How embarrassing for both couples (Netflix chairman and the Meghan Harrys) at Montecito galas.

Paula G
Paula G
1 year ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

They promised not to merch their royal connections. My goodness, Netflix made itself appear a very tawdry and cheap brand by associating with these two. How embarrassing for both couples (Netflix chairman and the Meghan Harrys) at Montecito galas.

Cassander Antipatru
Cassander Antipatru
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

True. If he’d just said “All the media focus on me and my wife is putting a strain on my marriage, so I’m going to step back from front-line royal duties for the forseeable future. I hope to start getting involved again later on, when the interest in us has calmed down a bit,” and then actually spent his time in quiet semi-retirement, I think most people would have been sympathetic.

Jacquie Watson
Jacquie Watson
1 year ago

He could even have had a conversation – you know when both people participate in person – with the Queen about it, and tried to negotiate works as you have said. Instead he and the wife made demands, and when they were not met, they pulled the pin and as he put it ‘FLED’ the country!! That’s hilarious! It was a giant dummy spit from an entitled twerp!

Jacquie Watson
Jacquie Watson
1 year ago

He could even have had a conversation – you know when both people participate in person – with the Queen about it, and tried to negotiate works as you have said. Instead he and the wife made demands, and when they were not met, they pulled the pin and as he put it ‘FLED’ the country!! That’s hilarious! It was a giant dummy spit from an entitled twerp!

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

It is a pity Philip is not around to arrange another accident

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago

Harry & Megan have ironically already destroyed themselves.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago

Harry & Megan have ironically already destroyed themselves.

David Jennings
David Jennings
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

Giles Fraser has written another excellent article. His comments shed light on something not discussed in article but plenty elsewhere: the question of H&M choosing a “private life”. While a Netflix series seems superficially to scream about the couple’s hypocrisy, maybe the “private life” sought by them is more accurately described by Giles Fraser as a life rejecting the “public” duties and obligations of living within a polis, a community, a family. One is reminded of the etymology of the word “idiot”-from the Greek idiotes, literally “private person” (as opposed to taking part in public affairs). The literal idiocy of their moral position is well set out in Fraser’s article.

Jacqueline Burns
Jacqueline Burns
1 year ago
Reply to  David Jennings

If they really wished to live privately, making a documentary series & ‘wailing about how wrong everyone was to us’ is NOT the way to do it!

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  David Jennings

When Harry met Megan it was like a ‘perfect storm’ of sorts. He was insecure, not terribly bright and vulnerable. She, by all indications, was needy in her own way – avaricious, narcissistic and yes, manipulative. When she latched onto him, it was over. She brought out the worst in him and he in all his insecurities let her do it. It’s a modern tragedy of sorts about human weakness and fallibility. The sad part is that these two now have to live in this little hole they made for themselves, far, far away from where they could have made a difference and perhaps even an impact on the world. They are very small people indeed.

Walter Schwager
Walter Schwager
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

What an utterly malicious comment! No wonder H&M are afraid of the press and English public opinion. No word about how the Royal Establishment shielded Edward after child sex and allows Charles and Camilla respectability after gross immorality and tampongate, and hides the fact that Kate’s mother targeted William in an unsavoury safari. And one racist lady in waiting probably hides many others, like cockroaches. Anybody who thinks of this family as Disneyland has not followed Diana’s fate and the Queen’s initial refusal to mourn her. H&M had ample reasons to leave the firm.

Jane Awdry
Jane Awdry
1 year ago

He could have left ‘the firm’ with more grace then. Instead he has behaved exactly in the manner that you describe the rest of them behaving. If we are to have it that members of the British monarchy are as flawed & fragile as the rest of us, then what is your point? Of course they are. And H&M embody that frailty in their own way. The only difference is that they have chosen a path that absolutely reveals their narcissism as well as their avarice. Sure, they must have good qualities too, but if they meant to set themselves above all the rest with this vulgar display of petty childishness, it isn’t doing the job.

Paddy Taylor
Paddy Taylor
1 year ago

This is satire I presume?

Bill Bailey
Bill Bailey
1 year ago

Except he hasn’t.

Mark Phillips
Mark Phillips
1 year ago

Your own malice is burning as brightly as a glow-worms fundament, while your ‘facts’are compete drivel. Edward did nothing with a ‘child’ and neither did Andrew. Would you mourn someone you may have disliked? Who said the Queen did not mourn? Just because she did not join in the emotional incontinence which followed the death does not mean no mourning took place. As for the rest of your vicious twaddle… well perhaps some therapy would lay to rest some of that bile.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Phillips

The fact that you have resorted to ad hominem and write emotional incontinence tells me that it might be you who is full of bile.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Phillips

The fact that you have resorted to ad hominem and write emotional incontinence tells me that it might be you who is full of bile.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago

Once again, spot on Walter. Keep writing, these people need to hear the truth – they live in a fairytale world.

Leejon 0
Leejon 0
1 year ago

The royal family are not shielded in any way, as long as they do their constitutional job and shut the f**k up. It was after all what they agreed to do when they got their jobs back after the civil war. They are officials not politicians, and much better liked for that.

Jane Awdry
Jane Awdry
1 year ago

He could have left ‘the firm’ with more grace then. Instead he has behaved exactly in the manner that you describe the rest of them behaving. If we are to have it that members of the British monarchy are as flawed & fragile as the rest of us, then what is your point? Of course they are. And H&M embody that frailty in their own way. The only difference is that they have chosen a path that absolutely reveals their narcissism as well as their avarice. Sure, they must have good qualities too, but if they meant to set themselves above all the rest with this vulgar display of petty childishness, it isn’t doing the job.

Paddy Taylor
Paddy Taylor
1 year ago

This is satire I presume?

Bill Bailey
Bill Bailey
1 year ago

Except he hasn’t.

Mark Phillips
Mark Phillips
1 year ago

Your own malice is burning as brightly as a glow-worms fundament, while your ‘facts’are compete drivel. Edward did nothing with a ‘child’ and neither did Andrew. Would you mourn someone you may have disliked? Who said the Queen did not mourn? Just because she did not join in the emotional incontinence which followed the death does not mean no mourning took place. As for the rest of your vicious twaddle… well perhaps some therapy would lay to rest some of that bile.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago

Once again, spot on Walter. Keep writing, these people need to hear the truth – they live in a fairytale world.

Leejon 0
Leejon 0
1 year ago

The royal family are not shielded in any way, as long as they do their constitutional job and shut the f**k up. It was after all what they agreed to do when they got their jobs back after the civil war. They are officials not politicians, and much better liked for that.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

Cathy, I take it that you know both Harry and Meghan intimately then? Otherwise how would you know these things?

Jacquie Watson
Jacquie Watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

Well said. There lack of positive actions of any sort is why people dislike them. They just ‘want’ not ‘do’.

Walter Schwager
Walter Schwager
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

What an utterly malicious comment! No wonder H&M are afraid of the press and English public opinion. No word about how the Royal Establishment shielded Edward after child sex and allows Charles and Camilla respectability after gross immorality and tampongate, and hides the fact that Kate’s mother targeted William in an unsavoury safari. And one racist lady in waiting probably hides many others, like cockroaches. Anybody who thinks of this family as Disneyland has not followed Diana’s fate and the Queen’s initial refusal to mourn her. H&M had ample reasons to leave the firm.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

Cathy, I take it that you know both Harry and Meghan intimately then? Otherwise how would you know these things?

Jacquie Watson
Jacquie Watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

Well said. There lack of positive actions of any sort is why people dislike them. They just ‘want’ not ‘do’.

Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
1 year ago
Reply to  David Jennings

I guess Meghan really never was part of a wider family community, which is often so essential for experiencing your first sense of belonging. From what I understand, she hardly saw her older half siblings, lived as a single child either with her mother or father. In the Netflix series her mother once talked about her own mother and sister. Where were they in Meghan’s life? It seems the whole part of her mother’s extended family was left out. Also where was her mother’s family at the wedding? It seems she chose mostly VIPs as “ersatz family”, just showing off her new royal connection. This should have already set off alarm bells that she would not be happy to live in the second row within the restraints of the Royal Family, dutifully opening community centres and schools. “Doing good” in the celebrity world often means going to glamorous award ceremonies, praising your existence as a feminist black woman and not the oh so grinding and extremely boring daily charity work without praise and often in anonymity

Bill Bailey
Bill Bailey
1 year ago

Perhaps she wanted to be the star, but Kate already had that role?

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago

Beauty is as beauty does.

Bill Bailey
Bill Bailey
1 year ago

Perhaps she wanted to be the star, but Kate already had that role?

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago

Beauty is as beauty does.

0 0
0 0
1 year ago
Reply to  David Jennings

Well, they are certainly living grand for private life. As they were leaving they received millions. How else could a C actress in a few low rent movies/series pay for mansion digs and all that travel? If stripped of royal ties, Harry certainly didn’t have money either, just another military worker. And yet, there they are living in luxury.
Outstanding choice – less work, more profit!

Jacqueline Burns
Jacqueline Burns
1 year ago
Reply to  David Jennings

If they really wished to live privately, making a documentary series & ‘wailing about how wrong everyone was to us’ is NOT the way to do it!

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  David Jennings

When Harry met Megan it was like a ‘perfect storm’ of sorts. He was insecure, not terribly bright and vulnerable. She, by all indications, was needy in her own way – avaricious, narcissistic and yes, manipulative. When she latched onto him, it was over. She brought out the worst in him and he in all his insecurities let her do it. It’s a modern tragedy of sorts about human weakness and fallibility. The sad part is that these two now have to live in this little hole they made for themselves, far, far away from where they could have made a difference and perhaps even an impact on the world. They are very small people indeed.

Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
1 year ago
Reply to  David Jennings

I guess Meghan really never was part of a wider family community, which is often so essential for experiencing your first sense of belonging. From what I understand, she hardly saw her older half siblings, lived as a single child either with her mother or father. In the Netflix series her mother once talked about her own mother and sister. Where were they in Meghan’s life? It seems the whole part of her mother’s extended family was left out. Also where was her mother’s family at the wedding? It seems she chose mostly VIPs as “ersatz family”, just showing off her new royal connection. This should have already set off alarm bells that she would not be happy to live in the second row within the restraints of the Royal Family, dutifully opening community centres and schools. “Doing good” in the celebrity world often means going to glamorous award ceremonies, praising your existence as a feminist black woman and not the oh so grinding and extremely boring daily charity work without praise and often in anonymity

0 0
0 0
1 year ago
Reply to  David Jennings

Well, they are certainly living grand for private life. As they were leaving they received millions. How else could a C actress in a few low rent movies/series pay for mansion digs and all that travel? If stripped of royal ties, Harry certainly didn’t have money either, just another military worker. And yet, there they are living in luxury.
Outstanding choice – less work, more profit!

pessimist extremus
pessimist extremus
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

“…  sympathetic to Harry finding the burden of obligation too heavy to bear and retiring to enjoy a private life” – absolutely. And going on with their charities and whatever. The weird peculiarity of these days seem to be total intolerance from individuals who demand tolerance, in the loudest forms possible. ‘Disrespect’ to, or should I put it ‘assumed disrespect’ to Meghan’s mixed race (btw, how is one even supposed to know that, if the person, any person, does not look coloured, if it’s ok to ask that?) heritage did not stop her mock the traditional ‘curtsy to the Queen’ (most ironically a clip with her doing that ‘nice and clean’ in the Suits has appeared).

pessimist extremus
pessimist extremus
1 year ago

Another example of weird attitudes would be the critics who claim President Zelensky had no respect for the White House, appearing in his traditional outfit (dapper, though). Thus displaying total disrespect to the fact he was representing a war-torn country, heavily destroyed by Putin’s dreams of brotherhood.

pessimist extremus
pessimist extremus
1 year ago

Another example of weird attitudes would be the critics who claim President Zelensky had no respect for the White House, appearing in his traditional outfit (dapper, though). Thus displaying total disrespect to the fact he was representing a war-torn country, heavily destroyed by Putin’s dreams of brotherhood.

Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

Quite. Their descent is pure Macbeth. Their betrayal – made worse by naked greed (monetising mendacious accusations of both family and nation) – is ugly for neither raycist royals nor us now raycist Brits can answer back. In the end it is about manners. This shrill couple pocket Netflix loot to spread venom about a family and a nation that welcomed Meghan in. Remember how Prince Phillip was dying when they began their lie for profit offensive? They represent and express a set of rotten values we have long been taught to despise – spoiled, narcissistic, accusatory, disloyal, unfair, hypocritical and serial mendacity.

Paddy Taylor
Paddy Taylor
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

He’s not merely airing his family’s dirty laundry, he’s auctioning it off.
Never has the expression “he’d be willing to sell his grandmother to get ahead” been more appropriate – indeed Harry seems to have adopted it as a mantra.

Cassander Antipatru
Cassander Antipatru
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

True. If he’d just said “All the media focus on me and my wife is putting a strain on my marriage, so I’m going to step back from front-line royal duties for the forseeable future. I hope to start getting involved again later on, when the interest in us has calmed down a bit,” and then actually spent his time in quiet semi-retirement, I think most people would have been sympathetic.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

It is a pity Philip is not around to arrange another accident

David Jennings
David Jennings
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

Giles Fraser has written another excellent article. His comments shed light on something not discussed in article but plenty elsewhere: the question of H&M choosing a “private life”. While a Netflix series seems superficially to scream about the couple’s hypocrisy, maybe the “private life” sought by them is more accurately described by Giles Fraser as a life rejecting the “public” duties and obligations of living within a polis, a community, a family. One is reminded of the etymology of the word “idiot”-from the Greek idiotes, literally “private person” (as opposed to taking part in public affairs). The literal idiocy of their moral position is well set out in Fraser’s article.

pessimist extremus
pessimist extremus
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

“…  sympathetic to Harry finding the burden of obligation too heavy to bear and retiring to enjoy a private life” – absolutely. And going on with their charities and whatever. The weird peculiarity of these days seem to be total intolerance from individuals who demand tolerance, in the loudest forms possible. ‘Disrespect’ to, or should I put it ‘assumed disrespect’ to Meghan’s mixed race (btw, how is one even supposed to know that, if the person, any person, does not look coloured, if it’s ok to ask that?) heritage did not stop her mock the traditional ‘curtsy to the Queen’ (most ironically a clip with her doing that ‘nice and clean’ in the Suits has appeared).

Jeremy Bray
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago

I think people might have been sympathetic to Harry finding the burden of obligation too heavy to bear and retiring to enjoy a private life. What is less forgivable is the attacks on his family to generate wealth to enable him to indulge his material and narcissistic desires.

Aldo Maccione
Aldo Maccione
1 year ago

We would forgive H&M’s adolescent and egoistical flight to “freedom” if they could spare us the “woe is me” narrative as well as the endless effort to break the very entity that gave them their wealth, platform, connections, etc.
That last point is the most grating. it feels like these vulture are hell bent on destroying the RF because “if we can’t have it (the trappings, the glory, the esteem,…), nobody should”.
My point is, only a small part of the public reproaches them their desertion of their royal engagements and responsibilities. What most cannot abide is the bitterness and venom towards it, in order to validate (in their eyes, through ours) their selfish choice.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Aldo Maccione

What I can’t stand is the constant attention seeking, hypocrisy and the pretence that they’ve got the wisdom and authority to lecture the rest of us on how to live our lives. And the nonsense and drivel they come out with.

Nancy G
Nancy G
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

And the lies.

Paula G
Paula G
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Wearing the “linked not ranked” bracelet given to her by Gloria Steinem, yet swanning around as a duchess. Praising all their flights as two lovers torn apart, while pleading to save the world from carbon emissions. Anyway, the Dem party rewards people like this, so these two are going to be around for ages.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Harry & Meghan come across as two adolescents. Everything’s emotional and very little seems rational. It’s rather cringey in that they are technically adults, being 37 and 41….

0 0
0 0
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

Indeed cringey! And that they will be teaching their children it’s good to follow in their footsteps.

0 0
0 0
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

Indeed cringey! And that they will be teaching their children it’s good to follow in their footsteps.

Nancy G
Nancy G
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

And the lies.

Paula G
Paula G
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Wearing the “linked not ranked” bracelet given to her by Gloria Steinem, yet swanning around as a duchess. Praising all their flights as two lovers torn apart, while pleading to save the world from carbon emissions. Anyway, the Dem party rewards people like this, so these two are going to be around for ages.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Harry & Meghan come across as two adolescents. Everything’s emotional and very little seems rational. It’s rather cringey in that they are technically adults, being 37 and 41….

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Aldo Maccione

Exactly.
Do we still have punishment for treason in uk?
I guess they chose physical banishment from the Kingdom, but something more should be done.
At least stripping them of their titles…

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew F

They absolutely should be stripped of any titles. What the hell are they for anyway?

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew F

They absolutely should be stripped of any titles. What the hell are they for anyway?

Bill Bailey
Bill Bailey
1 year ago
Reply to  Aldo Maccione

I wonder if they will attend the Coronation?

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Aldo Maccione

What I can’t stand is the constant attention seeking, hypocrisy and the pretence that they’ve got the wisdom and authority to lecture the rest of us on how to live our lives. And the nonsense and drivel they come out with.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Aldo Maccione

Exactly.
Do we still have punishment for treason in uk?
I guess they chose physical banishment from the Kingdom, but something more should be done.
At least stripping them of their titles…

Bill Bailey
Bill Bailey
1 year ago
Reply to  Aldo Maccione

I wonder if they will attend the Coronation?

Aldo Maccione
Aldo Maccione
1 year ago

We would forgive H&M’s adolescent and egoistical flight to “freedom” if they could spare us the “woe is me” narrative as well as the endless effort to break the very entity that gave them their wealth, platform, connections, etc.
That last point is the most grating. it feels like these vulture are hell bent on destroying the RF because “if we can’t have it (the trappings, the glory, the esteem,…), nobody should”.
My point is, only a small part of the public reproaches them their desertion of their royal engagements and responsibilities. What most cannot abide is the bitterness and venom towards it, in order to validate (in their eyes, through ours) their selfish choice.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

I would basically describe myself as a liberal who believes that individual choice governs (or can govern) most matters. There are certain objective truths that cannot be subject to individual choice (i.e. biological sex) and still other truths on which there may be different perspectives. With regard to the latter, one may fairly use the phrase “my truth” to mean “my side of the story” (although the Montecito pair use it to put forward a false narrative full of factual loopholes, then get out the victimhood card to try and stop anyone questioning it and throw a tantrum when people don’t buy into their “truth”).
I see the Harry vs. William face-off through the prism of individual choice. They were both born into a very strange and specific situation, but, essentially – either of them could have chosen to say “no thanks” to the duty which is pressed upon them by accident of birth.
And – because the lives of the Royals are so often symbolic of the lives of their subjects – it is this choice (full freedom vs. the binds of obligation) that millennials like myself find ourselves grappling with in a world where so much choice is on offer. Harry and William are simply acting it out on the royal stage. Do we:
a) shake off all societal/familial obligations to give ourselves over entirely to our own wishes and needs (the “Harry” option), or
b) understand the value of societal/familial obligations and choose to submit yourself to them (the “William” option).
Harry may be able to say on quite a superficial level that he is “free”, but it is my personal view that he will never be happy. Complete freedom, unmoored from “bonded servitude” requires a very strong personality to build a new identity independent of society/family and remain stable outside of those structures. Harry doesn’t have that strength himself – he relies on Meghan to provide it. Whether that it going to go well long term is something I won’t speculate on, and to be honest I don’t give two hoots. Harry is no longer part of the family, so why should I?
William cannot claim to be “free”, but he understands that the strictures imposed by societal/familial obligations provide structure and stability: a shared framework with common rituals and celebrations which glue a society together and give people an essential feeling of being part of something greater. That is a source of happiness.
The Harry option leads to a society which is no longer a society – it is a collection of isolated individuals who say they are free but many of them will be lonely and deeply unhappy – staring at their Smartphones in their own tiny flats, scrolling through social media thinking that this is “life” and my followers are real “friends”.
The William option might seem fusty and backwards, but it involves people coming together to celebrate, form bonds through carrying out shared rituals and being part of something larger. It involves a true “society”.
Everyone should be able to choose for themselves (but then stick with that choice, accept the consequences and don’t whinge forever).
I tend towards the William option. The Harry option is the way of danger.

Last edited 1 year ago by Katharine Eyre
Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

The bizarre thing is that Harry clearly doesn’t recognise that he’s “shaken off all societal/familial obligations to give ourselves over entirely to our own wishes and needs”. I think you’ve captured it perfectly. But Harry and Meghan seem to believe that everything they’re doing is for the benefit of society as a whole and that without their selfless leadership and guidance we’ll all be lost …
It also brings to mind David Goodheart’s “somewheres and anywheres”. Harry’s gone from being a somewhere like William, to ay anywhere. In my experience, most people move the other way as they grow older. Before I start an argument, this is not a blanket criticism of anywheres (I used to be one !).

Last edited 1 year ago by Peter B
Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

But Harry and Meghan seem to believe that everything they’re doing is for the benefit of society as a whole and that without their selfless leadership and guidance we’ll all be lost…
Narcissistic delusions of grandeur. It’s hard to watch, but somehow I’m incapable of looking away. In German, you have an excellent word for such situations: “Fremdschämen“. It’s a bit like cringing, but it involves you watching someone behave in such an insane way that you actually feel ashamed FOR them

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

That sounds like David Brent or Alan Partridge – I can hear Alan mispronouncing the word now ! Nothing amusing (or harmless) about the Harry and Meghan show though.

Paula G
Paula G
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

M surely did some embarrassing David Brent/ Dad dancing there! Who knew a woman could do Dad dancing?

Paula G
Paula G
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

M surely did some embarrassing David Brent/ Dad dancing there! Who knew a woman could do Dad dancing?

Charlie Dibsdale
Charlie Dibsdale
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

What a superb new word for English! It just fits the situation.

Claire Dunnage
Claire Dunnage
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Yes, but, unfortunately, they are winning awards for it.

Kate Heusser
Kate Heusser
1 year ago
Reply to  Claire Dunnage

Until the awards organisations realise how badly that devalues their prestige.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Claire Dunnage

…but look who’s giving out the recent award, a Kennedy, who has not done much with her own life, and was once married to the (accused) sexually inappropriate Governor of NY Cuomo. I had a brief interaction with her a few decades ago, very haughty herself and full of self-importance, not so different from Meghan herself.

Last edited 1 year ago by Cathy Carron
Kate Heusser
Kate Heusser
1 year ago
Reply to  Claire Dunnage

Until the awards organisations realise how badly that devalues their prestige.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Claire Dunnage

…but look who’s giving out the recent award, a Kennedy, who has not done much with her own life, and was once married to the (accused) sexually inappropriate Governor of NY Cuomo. I had a brief interaction with her a few decades ago, very haughty herself and full of self-importance, not so different from Meghan herself.

Last edited 1 year ago by Cathy Carron
Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

That sounds like David Brent or Alan Partridge – I can hear Alan mispronouncing the word now ! Nothing amusing (or harmless) about the Harry and Meghan show though.

Charlie Dibsdale
Charlie Dibsdale
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

What a superb new word for English! It just fits the situation.

Claire Dunnage
Claire Dunnage
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Yes, but, unfortunately, they are winning awards for it.

Kate Heusser
Kate Heusser
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Ha!
I should have read your comment before adding my own.

Last edited 1 year ago by Kate Heusser
Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Harry and Meghan in expounding that what they are doing is ‘for the greater good of society’ had to create a delusion of self-importance and grandeur as that’s the only way they could rationalize their new capitalist adventures.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Peter, the thing is, as far as I understand it, Harry can go back if he chooses.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

But Harry and Meghan seem to believe that everything they’re doing is for the benefit of society as a whole and that without their selfless leadership and guidance we’ll all be lost…
Narcissistic delusions of grandeur. It’s hard to watch, but somehow I’m incapable of looking away. In German, you have an excellent word for such situations: “Fremdschämen“. It’s a bit like cringing, but it involves you watching someone behave in such an insane way that you actually feel ashamed FOR them

Kate Heusser
Kate Heusser
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Ha!
I should have read your comment before adding my own.

Last edited 1 year ago by Kate Heusser
Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Harry and Meghan in expounding that what they are doing is ‘for the greater good of society’ had to create a delusion of self-importance and grandeur as that’s the only way they could rationalize their new capitalist adventures.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Peter, the thing is, as far as I understand it, Harry can go back if he chooses.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Wonderful analysis.

Sally Willcock
Sally Willcock
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Beautifully written, do you write professionally? I used to be able to rustle up a mean paragraph or two, but life’s stresses have more or less finished my brain off. However, I couldn’t have done this – the thoughts and comparisons – just perfect – thank you.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago
Reply to  Sally Willcock

No, not professionally. But I do write on the platform Medium for fun. Thanks for the compliment.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago
Reply to  Sally Willcock

No, not professionally. But I do write on the platform Medium for fun. Thanks for the compliment.

Kate Heusser
Kate Heusser
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

The ‘Somewheres’ v ‘Anywheres’ conflict neatly exemplified.

Jacquie Watson
Jacquie Watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

But harry didn’t shake it off, did he? He and his wife proceeded to throw very large stones, over and over again. Put themselves in the limelight, and then proceed to blame the press for anything and everything they blamed the RF for?? The behavior of quite mentally ill people OR self entitled dicks.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

The bizarre thing is that Harry clearly doesn’t recognise that he’s “shaken off all societal/familial obligations to give ourselves over entirely to our own wishes and needs”. I think you’ve captured it perfectly. But Harry and Meghan seem to believe that everything they’re doing is for the benefit of society as a whole and that without their selfless leadership and guidance we’ll all be lost …
It also brings to mind David Goodheart’s “somewheres and anywheres”. Harry’s gone from being a somewhere like William, to ay anywhere. In my experience, most people move the other way as they grow older. Before I start an argument, this is not a blanket criticism of anywheres (I used to be one !).

Last edited 1 year ago by Peter B
Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Wonderful analysis.

Sally Willcock
Sally Willcock
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Beautifully written, do you write professionally? I used to be able to rustle up a mean paragraph or two, but life’s stresses have more or less finished my brain off. However, I couldn’t have done this – the thoughts and comparisons – just perfect – thank you.

Kate Heusser
Kate Heusser
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

The ‘Somewheres’ v ‘Anywheres’ conflict neatly exemplified.

Jacquie Watson
Jacquie Watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

But harry didn’t shake it off, did he? He and his wife proceeded to throw very large stones, over and over again. Put themselves in the limelight, and then proceed to blame the press for anything and everything they blamed the RF for?? The behavior of quite mentally ill people OR self entitled dicks.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

I would basically describe myself as a liberal who believes that individual choice governs (or can govern) most matters. There are certain objective truths that cannot be subject to individual choice (i.e. biological sex) and still other truths on which there may be different perspectives. With regard to the latter, one may fairly use the phrase “my truth” to mean “my side of the story” (although the Montecito pair use it to put forward a false narrative full of factual loopholes, then get out the victimhood card to try and stop anyone questioning it and throw a tantrum when people don’t buy into their “truth”).
I see the Harry vs. William face-off through the prism of individual choice. They were both born into a very strange and specific situation, but, essentially – either of them could have chosen to say “no thanks” to the duty which is pressed upon them by accident of birth.
And – because the lives of the Royals are so often symbolic of the lives of their subjects – it is this choice (full freedom vs. the binds of obligation) that millennials like myself find ourselves grappling with in a world where so much choice is on offer. Harry and William are simply acting it out on the royal stage. Do we:
a) shake off all societal/familial obligations to give ourselves over entirely to our own wishes and needs (the “Harry” option), or
b) understand the value of societal/familial obligations and choose to submit yourself to them (the “William” option).
Harry may be able to say on quite a superficial level that he is “free”, but it is my personal view that he will never be happy. Complete freedom, unmoored from “bonded servitude” requires a very strong personality to build a new identity independent of society/family and remain stable outside of those structures. Harry doesn’t have that strength himself – he relies on Meghan to provide it. Whether that it going to go well long term is something I won’t speculate on, and to be honest I don’t give two hoots. Harry is no longer part of the family, so why should I?
William cannot claim to be “free”, but he understands that the strictures imposed by societal/familial obligations provide structure and stability: a shared framework with common rituals and celebrations which glue a society together and give people an essential feeling of being part of something greater. That is a source of happiness.
The Harry option leads to a society which is no longer a society – it is a collection of isolated individuals who say they are free but many of them will be lonely and deeply unhappy – staring at their Smartphones in their own tiny flats, scrolling through social media thinking that this is “life” and my followers are real “friends”.
The William option might seem fusty and backwards, but it involves people coming together to celebrate, form bonds through carrying out shared rituals and being part of something larger. It involves a true “society”.
Everyone should be able to choose for themselves (but then stick with that choice, accept the consequences and don’t whinge forever).
I tend towards the William option. The Harry option is the way of danger.

Last edited 1 year ago by Katharine Eyre
Andy O'Gorman
Andy O'Gorman
1 year ago

“Monarchy is not glamour and power; it is bonded servitude”
As his grandfather felt when his brother skipped town – he was a reluctant king; overcame his stuttering and did a sterling job.
Harry, like his uncle David are weaklings, controlled by their emotions.
Good article, but it will be the last I will read about these two ingrates.

Last edited 1 year ago by Andy O'Gorman
Trevor Evans
Trevor Evans
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy O'Gorman

Completely my view. This betrayal of one’s own family, attended by mockery of someone who was an influence for good in my and millions of other lives, has meant that I wish, in addition to not bowing to watch the Netflix “documentary”, to read no more about this vexed and vicious bauble.

John Solomon
John Solomon
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy O'Gorman

“Monarchy is not glamour and power; it is bonded servitude”
Utter tosh : anyone can leave. What they cannot do is leave the job and keep all the glamour and power – which is what the D of Windsor and the D of Sussex think they can do.

Trevor Evans
Trevor Evans
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy O'Gorman

Completely my view. This betrayal of one’s own family, attended by mockery of someone who was an influence for good in my and millions of other lives, has meant that I wish, in addition to not bowing to watch the Netflix “documentary”, to read no more about this vexed and vicious bauble.

John Solomon
John Solomon
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy O'Gorman

“Monarchy is not glamour and power; it is bonded servitude”
Utter tosh : anyone can leave. What they cannot do is leave the job and keep all the glamour and power – which is what the D of Windsor and the D of Sussex think they can do.

Andy O'Gorman
Andy O'Gorman
1 year ago

“Monarchy is not glamour and power; it is bonded servitude”
As his grandfather felt when his brother skipped town – he was a reluctant king; overcame his stuttering and did a sterling job.
Harry, like his uncle David are weaklings, controlled by their emotions.
Good article, but it will be the last I will read about these two ingrates.

Last edited 1 year ago by Andy O'Gorman
Richard Abbot
Richard Abbot
1 year ago

Is it really accurate to call them a couple, with the implication that they arrive at decisions together, equally? It seems pretty clear to me that Harry remains nothing more than a child, and that Meghan – his replacement mother – has found in him the perfect vehicle to pursue her quest for international fame. It is quite staggering to me how many people still cannot see this.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Abbot

She certainly seems as self-absorbed and narcissistic as his mother

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Abbot

She certainly seems as self-absorbed and narcissistic as his mother

Richard Abbot
Richard Abbot
1 year ago

Is it really accurate to call them a couple, with the implication that they arrive at decisions together, equally? It seems pretty clear to me that Harry remains nothing more than a child, and that Meghan – his replacement mother – has found in him the perfect vehicle to pursue her quest for international fame. It is quite staggering to me how many people still cannot see this.

Paddy Taylor
Paddy Taylor
1 year ago

BREAKING NEWS:
This just in – The Duke & Duchess of Sussex have filed a Gross Breach of Privacy suit against …. …. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.
The pair have embarked on a worldwide publicity tour to promote the fact that they just want some privacy, and have further amplified that point by releasing a 6 part documentary, bemoaning that every facet of their lives is being made known to the public.
In the much-publicised Netflix series we get to see the couple enjoying quiet, intimate moments together, …. accompanied by a photographer, cameraman, sound recordist, 3 lighting engineers, 4 production assistants, director, 2 assistant directors, producer, 2 make-up artists, 3 stylists, 4 nannies, 5 dog sitters and a fluffer.
The message they want to send is just how much they hate the intrusion into their lives – and to get that idea across we see Harry & Meghan touring US cities on an open-top bus, emblazoned with their names and images, bellowing at onlookers through loudhailers “Stop staring at us! We just want to be left alone – Hey, you there! Don’t ignore me, I said I just want some privacy.”
The Duke & Duchess of Sussex are claiming substantial damages for the harassment and emotional trauma they have brought on themselves. In order to meet the (likely to be eye-watering) costs of the case Harry & Meghan have announced they will sell the film rights to their story – (working title: Di Hard: With A Vengeance, or possibly Get Rich or Di Tryin’) just as long as their company, Archehole, produces it and Meghan gets to star in it.


Barry Stokes
Barry Stokes
1 year ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

Brilliant! Love Archehole.

Jeff Cunningham
Jeff Cunningham
1 year ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

Ha. That idea was distilled down into a Babylon Bee entry a few days ago of Elton John announcing the launch of his “Three Year Leaving Twitter Tour”.

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

A Fluffer, Sir, there may be Ladies present and not a few Gentlemen of a nervous disposition.

Paddy Taylor
Paddy Taylor
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Pingel

Tell any ladies present that the fluffer is just on call to plump up any throw-cushions that might appear in the back of shot.
As to the Gentlemen of a nervous disposition, they should be politely invited to Man-Up.
The rest of us know that the fluffer is on hand to ensure that Harry’s tumescent sense of self-entitlement is always ‘camera-ready’

Last edited 1 year ago by Paddy Taylor
Mark Phillips
Mark Phillips
1 year ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

I too misunderstood the term, ‘fluffer’. My excuse is that I was once of the ribald and licentious soldiery. My bad!

Mark Phillips
Mark Phillips
1 year ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

I too misunderstood the term, ‘fluffer’. My excuse is that I was once of the ribald and licentious soldiery. My bad!

Paddy Taylor
Paddy Taylor
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Pingel

Tell any ladies present that the fluffer is just on call to plump up any throw-cushions that might appear in the back of shot.
As to the Gentlemen of a nervous disposition, they should be politely invited to Man-Up.
The rest of us know that the fluffer is on hand to ensure that Harry’s tumescent sense of self-entitlement is always ‘camera-ready’

Last edited 1 year ago by Paddy Taylor
elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

Paddy, thank you. Now I get why everyone appears to detest them.

Barry Stokes
Barry Stokes
1 year ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

Brilliant! Love Archehole.

Jeff Cunningham
Jeff Cunningham
1 year ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

Ha. That idea was distilled down into a Babylon Bee entry a few days ago of Elton John announcing the launch of his “Three Year Leaving Twitter Tour”.

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

A Fluffer, Sir, there may be Ladies present and not a few Gentlemen of a nervous disposition.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

Paddy, thank you. Now I get why everyone appears to detest them.

Paddy Taylor
Paddy Taylor
1 year ago

BREAKING NEWS:
This just in – The Duke & Duchess of Sussex have filed a Gross Breach of Privacy suit against …. …. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.
The pair have embarked on a worldwide publicity tour to promote the fact that they just want some privacy, and have further amplified that point by releasing a 6 part documentary, bemoaning that every facet of their lives is being made known to the public.
In the much-publicised Netflix series we get to see the couple enjoying quiet, intimate moments together, …. accompanied by a photographer, cameraman, sound recordist, 3 lighting engineers, 4 production assistants, director, 2 assistant directors, producer, 2 make-up artists, 3 stylists, 4 nannies, 5 dog sitters and a fluffer.
The message they want to send is just how much they hate the intrusion into their lives – and to get that idea across we see Harry & Meghan touring US cities on an open-top bus, emblazoned with their names and images, bellowing at onlookers through loudhailers “Stop staring at us! We just want to be left alone – Hey, you there! Don’t ignore me, I said I just want some privacy.”
The Duke & Duchess of Sussex are claiming substantial damages for the harassment and emotional trauma they have brought on themselves. In order to meet the (likely to be eye-watering) costs of the case Harry & Meghan have announced they will sell the film rights to their story – (working title: Di Hard: With A Vengeance, or possibly Get Rich or Di Tryin’) just as long as their company, Archehole, produces it and Meghan gets to star in it.


Stephen Ryden-Lloyd
Stephen Ryden-Lloyd
1 year ago

They have become Edward VIII and Wallis, irrelevant social circuit feeders leaching on the status of his birth and forever seeking a ‘role’ that is no longer there because he abandoned it. Same story, retold in modern times with social media. We’ll have programmes about them for decades just as we did with Edward … but nothing will help them regain relevancy.

ml holton
ml holton
1 year ago

… They were never relevant. Harry was never going to be king.

ml holton
ml holton
1 year ago

… They were never relevant. Harry was never going to be king.

Stephen Ryden-Lloyd
Stephen Ryden-Lloyd
1 year ago

They have become Edward VIII and Wallis, irrelevant social circuit feeders leaching on the status of his birth and forever seeking a ‘role’ that is no longer there because he abandoned it. Same story, retold in modern times with social media. We’ll have programmes about them for decades just as we did with Edward … but nothing will help them regain relevancy.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

Frankly, that any former Officer in The Blues, could wilfully make such a sad and asinine fool and imbecile of himself voluntarily in public, is beyond breathtaking, let alone be blind to the fact that he portrays himself as some folorn lap dog to a woman of patently virulent self centred self publicity driven control: her lack of intellect, and intelligence is beyond incredible.

Jeff Cunningham
Jeff Cunningham
1 year ago

I haven’t been following all this very much (I know – amazing, right?). But Harry comes across as not being terribly bright.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

Old joke amongst Foot Guards…. ” Which brain do you pay most for, when requiring a brain transplant? A Cambridge don, a Goldman Sachs boss, or a Household Cavalry Officer? Answer: A Household Cavalry Officer as the brain comes totally unused”…..

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

Old joke amongst Foot Guards…. ” Which brain do you pay most for, when requiring a brain transplant? A Cambridge don, a Goldman Sachs boss, or a Household Cavalry Officer? Answer: A Household Cavalry Officer as the brain comes totally unused”…..

Jeff Cunningham
Jeff Cunningham
1 year ago

I haven’t been following all this very much (I know – amazing, right?). But Harry comes across as not being terribly bright.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

Frankly, that any former Officer in The Blues, could wilfully make such a sad and asinine fool and imbecile of himself voluntarily in public, is beyond breathtaking, let alone be blind to the fact that he portrays himself as some folorn lap dog to a woman of patently virulent self centred self publicity driven control: her lack of intellect, and intelligence is beyond incredible.

AC Harper
AC Harper
1 year ago

You could argue that social history has always been about the interaction between the individual and the collective. The major location of the collective might have been the family, the village, the local aristocracy, the Church, the Government, the tyrant and his machine – but the story of a good life involves some accommodation between what ‘I want’ and what ‘They want’.
Perhaps Harry has sold his birthright for a mess of pottage… or possibly a pot of message.

Paula G
Paula G
1 year ago
Reply to  AC Harper

M went to Catholic school, and Harry’s grandmother’s faith and duty should have been a great example to them both.
Crazy to remember M’spublic tears at the funeral, when she laughs and bows, mocking The Queen, so soon after her death. She mocked everything. They were like teenagers with their wedding, laughing at the sword. Tradition and duty have no meaning for them. Cashing in on wokeism means everything to them. Really sad and consumerist. They should be a warning to younger people.

Paula G
Paula G
1 year ago
Reply to  AC Harper

M went to Catholic school, and Harry’s grandmother’s faith and duty should have been a great example to them both.
Crazy to remember M’spublic tears at the funeral, when she laughs and bows, mocking The Queen, so soon after her death. She mocked everything. They were like teenagers with their wedding, laughing at the sword. Tradition and duty have no meaning for them. Cashing in on wokeism means everything to them. Really sad and consumerist. They should be a warning to younger people.

AC Harper
AC Harper
1 year ago

You could argue that social history has always been about the interaction between the individual and the collective. The major location of the collective might have been the family, the village, the local aristocracy, the Church, the Government, the tyrant and his machine – but the story of a good life involves some accommodation between what ‘I want’ and what ‘They want’.
Perhaps Harry has sold his birthright for a mess of pottage… or possibly a pot of message.

Martin Smith
Martin Smith
1 year ago

Very good Giles. If only yours could be the final word on the matter.

Martin Smith
Martin Smith
1 year ago

Very good Giles. If only yours could be the final word on the matter.

Douglas H
Douglas H
1 year ago

Thanks, interesting and well argued article.

The implication is that if Harry has completely rejected the moral/ethical foundation of modern royalty, and if he rejects the obligations of bring a royal, he should be completely stripped of its privileges and be recast as just a private citizen.

I wonder what his wife would make of that …

Douglas McNeish
Douglas McNeish
1 year ago
Reply to  Douglas H

Answer: a new Netflix series.

Douglas McNeish
Douglas McNeish
1 year ago
Reply to  Douglas H

Answer: a new Netflix series.

Douglas H
Douglas H
1 year ago

Thanks, interesting and well argued article.

The implication is that if Harry has completely rejected the moral/ethical foundation of modern royalty, and if he rejects the obligations of bring a royal, he should be completely stripped of its privileges and be recast as just a private citizen.

I wonder what his wife would make of that …

Hugh Bryant
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago

Why do so many writers insist on describing aspects of human nature which they find distasteful as ‘capitalism’? It’s a way of saying, sotto voce, ‘Yes, I’m human too – but I’m not like that’. Of course you are.
Genuine altruism is the very, very rare exception, not the rule, among human beings in all contexts except that of the immediate family.

Hugh Bryant
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago

Why do so many writers insist on describing aspects of human nature which they find distasteful as ‘capitalism’? It’s a way of saying, sotto voce, ‘Yes, I’m human too – but I’m not like that’. Of course you are.
Genuine altruism is the very, very rare exception, not the rule, among human beings in all contexts except that of the immediate family.

N Forster
N Forster
1 year ago

Confidence without wisdom is conceit.

N Forster
N Forster
1 year ago

Confidence without wisdom is conceit.

David C
David C
1 year ago

I foresee a disturbing nightmare(a Bridge over the Kwai/Alec Guiness moment) that will see H in a decade , his youth all but evaporated waking in a cold sweat with the realisation that his whole life has been little more than a destructive fools journey.
His Grandmother must have been so disappointed.Little wonder his brother screamed at him.

Last edited 1 year ago by David C
David C
David C
1 year ago

I foresee a disturbing nightmare(a Bridge over the Kwai/Alec Guiness moment) that will see H in a decade , his youth all but evaporated waking in a cold sweat with the realisation that his whole life has been little more than a destructive fools journey.
His Grandmother must have been so disappointed.Little wonder his brother screamed at him.

Last edited 1 year ago by David C
Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
1 year ago

This is an excellent piece of writing – perceptive, full of striking images and apt quotations. Quite the best thing I’ve read about this cartoon.

Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
1 year ago

This is an excellent piece of writing – perceptive, full of striking images and apt quotations. Quite the best thing I’ve read about this cartoon.

John Tumilty
John Tumilty
1 year ago

The saddest part is that anyone cares.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  John Tumilty

At the moment, the attention Harry & Meghan are getting is ‘trainwreck attention’…in short order, very few will care and over time they will be like Mrs. Simpson and her second (third?) husband, Edward. H&M will age in their Montecito mansion and no one will pay attention or care as they have stated their boring story and they will be boring forever more.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

Sadly, I have to disagree. The half-life of their story is far longer than any of us would have imagined. They appear to have at least three audiencies.
1) The media who have ever increasing amounts of space to fill. So the Daily Mail and Express purport to despise the couple, whilst still providing them with free publicity. No sign of this changing.
2) A tribe of true believers who will continue to follow them regardless. We don’t understand this and never will.
3) Those of us who despise this/find it tiresome/just wish it would all go away. But even a large proportion remain engaged. Our outraged reactions serve them by activating their base in group 2). That feels quite similar to the SNP’s attempts to rile the English into reacting. They don’t want you to like them – the more you don’t, the more they benefit – it keeps them in the news and “relevant”.

Jeff Cunningham
Jeff Cunningham
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

And maybe a fourth audience? I’m describing my occasional self here. Basically, I ran out of other articles to read on Unherd, TFP and a few other substacks I subscribe to and have read a couple Giles Fraser essays in the past that were at least interesting, so I clicked on a topic I normally steer clear of.

Bill Bailey
Bill Bailey
1 year ago

LOL – me too!

Bill Bailey
Bill Bailey
1 year ago

LOL – me too!

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

As a Canadian-born, U.S.-resident dual citizen, I agree that all this seems like much ado about little. But in visiting Canada during the week the Queen passed, I was astonished at how the news was dominated by that event–with almost no unrelated coverage–day after day, in a Commonwealth-former-colony across the sea.
The warmth of the attention is strongly influenced by Elizabeth’s general popularity and recent death, in a way that is somewhat comparable to the way the queen was criticised in the wake of Diana’s death.
But perhaps all those who defend, revile, or pretend to ignore Harry and Meghan can admit that there is real human interest in this family story, on top of the royal glitter, whether any of it truly matters outside of their palaces or not. And by present standards the defectors are still quite young. Perhaps they’ll become less self-absorbed in time?

Kate Heusser
Kate Heusser
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Agreed, Peter B.
There’s a fourth audience, too – the army of offence-takers and lawyers who are, no doubt, already raking through the coverage (especially, but not exclusively, the negative coverage) generated by the latest spewings of Hazbeen and Me-Again to discover who can (profitably) be sued.

Jeff Cunningham
Jeff Cunningham
1 year ago