General News about the Sussex Family, Part Three: August-September 2020

[JR76]

My sentiments exactly. The average American could care less what a "duchess" is. This was shown in years past with the penchant to call Diana, Princess of Wales (or The Princess of Wales) "Princess Diana". No matter how many times Diana corrected people on this, it never took.

Princess Diana was used all over the world. Not just in the USA.

 

[Denville]

And didn't even have to go the mile. Watched a programme about Princess Grace. Basically did the same thing. Married for eternal fame. She saw it out though. But the programme did say they thought Grace never loved Rainier. I think Meghan does have warmer feelings for Harry.

Hmm, I think that Grace married Rainer to escape acting.. though she did find that she would later miss it. She wasn't in love with him but she grew to love him...and she fulfilled her part of the bargain.. she did the Princess work, and while she could not return to acting found her own ways to express herself artistically.
Meghan...well, she got a LOT from marrying Harry... so who's to say what her feelings for him are? IM sure she would say she's in love with him.. but IMO he is in love iwth her in dependent way that isn't very healthy. And Meghan didn't even stick out the bargain for a year... And it seems like she's getting the most from this split with teh RF as well.. She has wealth, title the possiblity of a business career (Covid permitting) and possibly a political career as well... whereas H has given up his family, his home, his country and does not seem to be doing very much. I wonder if he will feel that being aide to his wife isn't quite what he wanted, esp in a strange country...

 

[Denville]

Harry got his title because he married, just like the other princes got theirs, too. Even divorce does not mean you have to give up your title. You need not be a working Royal to have one, being a Royal is enough. So why should his title be taken only because he lives now in the US? Her Majesty lived in Malta as a young wife and kept her title as well.

er um, the queen lived n Malta for a few months, at a time before her father died. When he got sicker and then died, she knew she would have to give up living a relatively private life and that Philip would have to give up his naval career...

 

[Denville]

Yes, she did. Now she has to keep the man and behave in a way Americans will find fitting for a "Royal duchess". That's a heavy enough burden, don't you think?

How do AMericans expect a "royal duchess " to behave??? THere's no role for a royal duchess in the US. All she has to do, is keep Hary. for the rest, she can do as she pleases. She has great wealth and a social position if she chooses to occupy it. Where is the burden

 

[poppy7]

Princess Diana was used all over the world. Not just in the USA.

I don't know. She was always referred to as Lady Di when people referred to her. Princess of Wales in connection with her husband. And strangely enough after her divorce and when she died as Princess Di. Almost like Lady Di was a younger persons title. But all through 80's and early 90's she was Lady Di.

Kate is still always referred to as Kate Middleton in the UK. Duchess of Cambridge when on events and with husband.

Meghan and Harry didn't really have a lot of time being the Sussexes. So it is always really Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. Doesn't really matter what the press say.

Fergie was often the Duchess of York though...nearly always. But then there is another famous Fergie in the UK.

 

[Denville]

I don't know. She was always referred to as Lady Di when people referred to her. Princess of Wales in connection with her husband. And strangely enough after her divorce and when she died as Princess Di. Almost like Lady Di was a younger persons title. But all through 80's and early 90's she was Lady Di.

Kate is still always referred to as Kate Middleton in the UK. Duchess of Cambridge when on events and with husband.

Meghan and Harry didn't really have a lot of time being the Sussexes. So it is always really Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. Doesn't really matter what the press say.

Fergie was often the Duchess of York though...nearly always. But then there is another famous Fergie in the UK.

yes the papers in the UK and foreign countries frequently referred to Diana as "Princess Di" or "Lady Di" even after her marriage. papers get titles wrong, its not that big a deal. But Americans who are interested in royalty will probably know Meghan is the Duchess of Sussex and its clear that this and her royal marriage have given her fame and a chance to talk about political issues that she never had before..

 

[AC21091968]

According to The Sun (I do take it as a pinch of salt), a new book, Left Out: The Inside Story of Labour under Corbyn, revealed that Harry and Meghan sent a personal letter of thanks to Jeremy Corbyn and his wife, Laura Alvarez. Both couples met at the Commonwealth Service. Jeremy and Laura allegedly gave them 'a book of verse by the 17th-century Mexican poet Juana Inés de la Cruz, “a nun whose willingness to attack the hypocrisies of the colonial classes had made her a target for establishment hate.”'.

Link to the Sun article: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12478271/jeremy-corbyn-meghan-markle-prince-harry-book-poetry-megxit/

Like I said earlier, I do think this is just a publicity piece for the book Left Out: The Inside Story of Labour Under Corbyn by Gabriel Pogrund and Patrick Maguire, due to release in 3rd September. But naturally, other opinion writers from political publications have picked it up.

The Spectator, not surprisingly very negative towards Harry and Meghan. It is behind a paywall, you can only read the first paragraph. This is a right-leaning, mostly pro-monarchy magazine: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/when-corbyn-met-meghan

Spiked, where the writer Tom Slater (also Deputy Editor) is a republican (anti-monarchy), centrist and a free-speech activist: https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/08/24/of-course-corbyn-sided-with-meghan/

Since the conversation is private, I don't think this is "muddling with politics", but more like emotional support, similar to Diana and Tony Blair relationship, based on Tony Blair's autobiography.

Sorry for having to quote my own post. For those who are wondering on the politicians that also attended the Commonwealth service, based on the photographs.

Boris Johnson (Prime Minister) and his fiancee Carrie Symonds
Dominic Raab (Foreign Secretary and First Secretary of State)
Priti Patel (Home Secretary)
Jacob Rees-Mogg (Leader of the House of Commons and Lord President of Council)
Woody Johnson (US Ambassador)

I don't think Harry & Meghan were going to have a close relationship with either of these politicians (not sure about Woody Johnson), given that they have opposing political views to them, especially with Patel and Rees-Mogg. And also at that time, the government was trying to stay away from discussing issues on the Royal Family.

 

[Sun Lion]

Coming from Mr Scobie, I believe it.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be spending considerable time back in the UK next year ... all being well with Covid.

The un-veiling of the Diana statue in the sunken garden at Kensington Palace on the birthday of his mother will be attended by Prince Harry.

Even attending the Trooping of the Colour.

I really did not expect to see Harry and Meghan leaving the US and their new life.

But, if it is coming from Omid, well I think if he is saying it, he is the one with the inside track on all things Sussex.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Harry-spend-extended-period-time-UK-year.html

 

[AC21091968]

Coming from Mr Scobie, I believe it.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be spending considerable time back in the UK next year ... all being well with Covid.

The un-veiling of the Diana statue in the sunken garden at Kensington Palace on the birthday of his mother will be attended by Prince Harry.

Even attending the Trooping of the Colour.

I really did not expect to see Harry and Meghan leaving the US and their new life.

But, if it is coming from Omid, well I think if he is saying it, he is the one with the inside track on all things Sussex.

From Meghan's interview with Gloria Steinem, I think there is little chance of her coming back to the UK. Harry yes, for possibly Trooping of the Colour and unveiling of Diana statue. Even if Meghan does come back, I think she is not going to get a warm welcome, unless the public mood change.

At this point, I don't really trust Omid Scobie's prediction, given that he is quite new to Royal Reporting and bias towards Harry and Meghan.

 

[Denville]

Why would they come back? They've bought a house in the US, Meghan is obviously dabbling in US politics, if they comes back to the UK, there will be issues about whether they are wanted, whether they can work as royals and if they do, they will have to give up all this political stuff

 

[poppy7]

yes the papers in the UK and foreign countries frequently referred to Diana as "Princess Di" or "Lady Di" even after her marriage. papers get titles wrong, its not that big a deal. But Americans who are interested in royalty will probably know Meghan is the Duchess of Sussex and its clear that this and her royal marriage have given her fame and a chance to talk about political issues that she never had before..

The only wrong one was Princess Di. She was Lady Di. And I was saying independent of the press. People in the street largely referred to her as Lady Di. But close to her death it became Princess Di.

Nobody calls Kate Middleton the Duchess of Cambridge.

And apart from in public matters I don't see Meghan ever being called anything else. Duchess of Sussex is her legal name at the moment.

 

[Denville]

From Meghan's interview with Gloria Steinem, I think there is little chance of her coming back to the UK. Harry yes, for possibly Trooping of the Colour and unveiling of Diana statue. Even if Meghan does come back, I think she is not going to get a warm welcome, unless the public mood change.

At this point, I don't really trust Omid Scobie's prediction, given that he is quite new to Royal Reporting and bias towards Harry and Meghan.

Agree. Omid honestly does not seem to be doing a very good job as PR for them though Im sure he's trying to be. It seems that this book which was meant to give praise to them and admiration to their reasons for leaving royal work, has not worked out that well for them.. People who have read it, seem to come away with a more unfavorable opinion of them. Maybe he thinks that saying they will be back n the UK for a long visit, is going to look good, ie they have not abandoned royal life or duties completely etc.. but I think it will only irritate people who have been thinking "Good, they didn't wnat to be in the UK, they left, so let them stay away".

 

[Heavs]

It's possible although from Trooping to Diana's birthday is only a about 3 weeks so it's not necessarily an extended period of time. If true it would give them a chance to see his family and check in with their patronages.

The cynic in me wonders if they think Trooping would be a good way to "top up" their royal image with all the pageantry and pomp and circumstance - before heading back to the US to talk about how glad they are they're free independent spirits. And personally I could do without the media going crazy over body language and what it all means. It's also a bit like Princess Madeleine turning up for the Nobel festivities. However many extended family members who otherwise live normal lives do/have appeared on the balcony in the past. Although I can see them using Covid as a way to cut that down.

That being said we don't know if the traditional ceremonies will be able to go ahead next year either. And it suits Omid to predict that they will continue to do "royal" events. More for him to talk about.

 

[Denville]

The only wrong one was Princess Di. She was Lady Di. And I was saying independent of the press. People in the street largely referred to her as Lady Di. But close to her death it became Princess Di.

Nobody calls Kate Middleton the Duchess of Cambridge.

And apart from in public matters I don't see Meghan ever being called anything else. Duchess of Sussex is her legal name at the moment.

She wasn't' "Lady Di". Before her marriage she was Lady Diana Spencer, after it she was the Princess of Wales. After the Divorce she was Diana Princess of wales. But people did refer to her IMO generally as Di or Diana.. Agree Meg was not Duchess of Sussex in the UK long enough for people to become accustomed to the title...but she uses it in these little talks to give her a leg up. Had she not been Duchess of Sussex, she would never gt an interview wth Gloria Steinem

It's possible although from Trooping to Diana's birthday is only a about 3 weeks so it's not necessarily an extended period of time. If true it would give them a chance to see his family and check in with their patronages.

The cynic in me wonders if they think Trooping would be a good way to "top up" their royal image with all the pageantry and pomp and circumstance - before heading back to the US to talk about how glad they are they're free independent spirits. And personally I could do without the media going crazy over body language and what it all means. It's also a bit like Princess Madeleine turning up for the Nobel festivities. However many extended family members who otherwise live normal lives do/have appeared on the balcony in the past. Although I can see them using Covid as a way to cut that down.

That being said we don't know if the traditional ceremonies will be able to go ahead next year either. And it suits Omid to predict that they will continue to do "royal" events. More for him to talk about.

I think that yes he's trying to say "Oh they still care about the UK and the RF and their charities" so because of that they will come back for soem weeks etc. But I agree, I think if they do, its for PR reasons. They may have been a bit concerned that the last appearance in March didn't go well wth the coolness with Will and Kate and want to buff up tehir image.

 

[evolvingdoors]

Hmm, I think that Grace married Rainer to escape acting.. though she did find that she would later miss it. She wasn't in love with him but she grew to love him...and she fulfilled her part of the bargain.. she did the Princess work, and while she could not return to acting found her own ways to express herself artistically.
Meghan...well, she got a LOT from marrying Harry... so who's to say what her feelings for him are? IM sure she would say she's in love with him.. but IMO he is in love iwth her in dependent way that isn't very healthy. And Meghan didn't even stick out the bargain for a year... And it seems like she's getting the most from this split with teh RF as well.. She has wealth, title the possiblity of a business career (Covid permitting) and possibly a political career as well... whereas H has given up his family, his home, his country and does not seem to be doing very much. I wonder if he will feel that being aide to his wife isn't quite what he wanted, esp in a strange country...

I don't think the issue will be about being her "aide" but more about her:
a) indirectly attacking his family and his homeland, and being hypocritical about her use of her title while talking about being "linked not ranked" and talking politics.

b) not following up on the quiet and private life she likely promised him he will get by them stepping down.

 

[Denville]

I don't think the issue will be about being her "aide" but more about her:
a) indirectly attacking his family and his homeland, and being hypocritical about her use of her title while talking about being "linked not ranked" and talking politics.

b) not following up on the quiet and private life she likely promised him he will get by them stepping down.

Its hard to say. I think at present Harry's not aware of the hypocrisy (Hes probably rather similar himself in that respect IN that he doesn't really realise that he gets listened to because he's a Prince and not because of anything he says.) and right now he may not notice or may not mind the "digs" she makes at the RF and his homeland.
Possibly he is Ok with things at present. HE is not doing all that much, it seems to be mostly her and he may be quite happy with playing with Archie and letting Meg do the talking, right now. Besides, they have to make money and surely he must realise that that will involve publicity and a "not so private life"....Unless they intend for her to set up the business or do the Public speaking or whatever and he'll stay home and do a bit of work on line.

 

[Mbruno]

According to The Sun (I do take it as a pinch of salt), a new book, Left Out: The Inside Story of Labour under Corbyn, revealed that Harry and Meghan sent a personal letter of thanks to Jeremy Corbyn and his wife, Laura Alvarez. Both couples met at the Commonwealth Service. Jeremy and Laura allegedly gave them 'a book of verse by the 17th-century Mexican poet Juana Inés de la Cruz, “a nun whose willingness to attack the hypocrisies of the colonial classes had made her a target for establishment hate.”'.

Link to the Sun article: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12478271/jeremy-corbyn-meghan-markle-prince-harry-book-poetry-megxit/

Like I said earlier, I do think this is just a publicity piece for the book Left Out: The Inside Story of Labour Under Corbyn by Gabriel Pogrund and Patrick Maguire, due to release in 3rd September. But naturally, other opinion writers from political publications have picked it up.

The Spectator, not surprisingly very negative towards Harry and Meghan. It is behind a paywall, you can only read the first paragraph. This is a right-leaning, mostly pro-monarchy magazine: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/when-corbyn-met-meghan

Spiked, where the writer Tom Slater (also Deputy Editor) is a republican (anti-monarchy), centrist and a free-speech activist: https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/08/24/of-course-corbyn-sided-with-meghan/

Since the conversation is private, I don't think this is "muddling with politics", but more like emotional support, similar to Diana and Tony Blair relationship, based on Tony Blair's autobiography.

While I am pretty sure that Meghan might share some of Mr Corbyn's political opinions, sending someone a letter to thank for a gift (in this case, a book) is just a polite response.

 

[AC21091968]

While I am pretty sure that Meghan might share some of Mr Corbyn's political opinions, sending someone a letter to thank for a gift (in this case, a book) is just a polite response.

I agree. If this event is true, which will be confirm when the book Left Out: The Inside Story of Labour Under Corbyn is published, I don't think there is going to be massive outrage, given that the talks were private.

And unlike Finding Freedom, the authors are experienced political commentators, who have won prizes in journalism. I would definitely trust Gabriel Pogrund (Whitehall Correspondent for The Sunday Times) and Patrick Maguire (political reporter for The Times in Westminster, previously worked for New Statesman and Observer) more than Omid Scobie's royal reporting.

 

[Mbruno]

Hmm, I think that Grace married Rainer to escape acting.. though she did find that she would later miss it. She wasn't in love with him but she grew to love him...and she fulfilled her part of the bargain.. she did the Princess work, and while she could not return to acting found her own ways to express herself artistically.
Meghan...well, she got a LOT from marrying Harry... so who's to say what her feelings for him are? IM sure she would say she's in love with him.. but IMO he is in love iwth her in dependent way that isn't very healthy. And Meghan didn't even stick out the bargain for a year... And it seems like she's getting the most from this split with teh RF as well.. She has wealth, title the possiblity of a business career (Covid permitting) and possibly a political career as well... whereas H has given up his family, his home, his country and does not seem to be doing very much. I wonder if he will feel that being aide to his wife isn't quite what he wanted, esp in a strange country...

Grace's case is different from Meghan's though. Grace married the Sovereign Prince, so there was no way out of the bargain other than divorce or Rainier abdicating (the Sovereign Prince cannot simply "quit" his job and go live in California). Similarly, there is no way out for Maxima, Mary Donaldson or Charlene other than those I mentioned above.

There are, however, other royal women who are (or were) in a similar position as Meghan's, i.e. a foreign woman married to a prince in collateral line. Some of them did get out, e.g. Alexandra Manley, but Meghan, as far as I know, is the first to get out and keep her prince at the same time (getting the prince out with her), which is quite an achievement.

So, yes, I am inclined to agree Meghan got all she wanted from that marriage without any of the duties and restrictions that come with being a royal wife.

 

[AC21091968]

Grace's case is different from Meghan's though. Grace married the Sovereign Prince, so there was no way out of the bargain other than divorce or Rainier abdicating (the Sovereign Prince cannot simply "quit" his job and go live in California). Similarly, there is no way out for Maxima, Mary Donaldson or Charlene other than those I mentioned above.

There are, however, other royal women who are (or were) in a similar position as Meghan's, i.e. a foreign woman married to a prince in collateral line. Some of them did get out, e.g. Alexandra Manley, but Meghan, as far as I know, is the first to get out and keep her prince at the same time (getting the prince out with her), which is quite an achievement.

So, yes, I am inclined to agree Meghan got all she wanted from that marriage without any of the duties and restrictions that come with being a royal wife.

I agree with you. This is why I was quite sceptical when Harry and Meghan got engaged. One of the reason is that their relationship was very rushed, especially when they are in different countries. The other reason is that Meghan seem to be unable to keep her political and controversial opinions to herself, which is the one of the most important part of being in the royal family.

I was hoping to be proven wrong and hope that she understand the restrictions and duties as a royal family member, but it did not happen.

Have she became a British citizen or even permanent resident by living in the UK long enough, it would have tested her endurance with the press (to the extreme) and whether or not she wants to be part of the royal family by serving the nation.

Going back to Mary Donaldson, I have heard (according to her Wikipedia page) that she has gave up her Australian citizenship, but given Danish citizenship upon marriage. She was previously dual citizen of Australia and the United Kingdom.

I am not suggesting that Meghan should have give up her American citizenship nor be given UK citizenship upon marriage, given that she is not married to the direct heir. What I do think is that Meghan should be living in the UK long enough to understand the British culture and fully comprehend the roles of the royal family. Although she has been taught on royal protocol, but I do not think she has fully grasp it. Perhaps she should have been given the same training as for the future monarch's consort, but then again Meghan could be too headstrong, have the attitude "my way or the highway" or wanting to breaking traditions. IMO, No matter how much training, Meghan appears to be not "playing the game" or following the rules.

I don't think Harry is not blameless either, given that he has previously mentioned "wanting to leave the royal family for a private life" (I am just paraphrasing). He is not really a stickler for tradition and probably rebel himself.

 

[Mirabel]

The cynic in me wonders if they think Trooping would be a good way to "top up" their royal image with all the pageantry and pomp and circumstance - before heading back to the US to talk about how glad they are they're free independent spirits.

I guess I am equally cynical.
Trooping seems to be one of the fun events that everyone enjoys and wants to participate in.

They might be happy to do something like that while avoiding the mundane boring engagements. But I feel the public will be aware of this, and it won't enhance their image at all.

 

[cathy50]

I don't want to start boring discussions concerning titles, but will it make a difference if another Sussex baby will be born in Uk (maybe next summer) or in the US?
short answers appreciated, thanks.

 

[Nice Nofret]

No, no diffrence

 

[Eskimo]

Coming from Mr Scobie, I believe it.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be spending considerable time back in the UK next year ... all being well with Covid.

The un-veiling of the Diana statue in the sunken garden at Kensington Palace on the birthday of his mother will be attended by Prince Harry.

Even attending the Trooping of the Colour.

I really did not expect to see Harry and Meghan leaving the US and their new life.

But, if it is coming from Omid, well I think if he is saying it, he is the one with the inside track on all things Sussex.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Harry-spend-extended-period-time-UK-year.html

Scobie is trying to sell his book but they might do this. They need to "revive" their brand by reminding people that they are Royal and Harry is Diana's son. Although with Meghan's latest actions, I think there is a slightly better chance that we will see Camilla's children and grandchildren on the balcony for Trooping than Meghan.

 

[acdc1]

I don't want to start boring discussions concerning titles, but will it make a difference if another Sussex baby will be born in Uk (maybe next summer) or in the US?
short answers appreciated, thanks.

No, I’m assuming any future children will be “X Mountbatten-Windsor,” just like Archie, no matter what country they are born in.

 

[duchessrachel]

Why would they come back? They've bought a house in the US, Meghan is obviously dabbling in US politics, if they comes back to the UK, there will be issues about whether they are wanted, whether they can work as royals and if they do, they will have to give up all this political stuff

I agree. I thought that H&M were told they could not be half in and half out of the royal family. I understand that Invictus and the unveiling of the statue do not have anything to with being half in, but Scobie said there were several engagements spanning through the spring and summer. That sounds like half in to me, depending on what the engagements are. I do wonder what their reception will be like. I will be shocked if Meghan goes with Harry to the UK.

 

[acdc1]

Scobie is trying to sell his book but they might do this. They need to "revive" their brand by reminding people that they are Royal and Harry is Diana's son. Although with Meghan's latest actions, I think there is a slightly better chance that we will see Camilla's children and grandchildren on the balcony for Trooping than Meghan.

They’ve really backed themselves into a corner with this one. It’s going to be a strange and awkward situation no matter what they do. If they both show up, it’s going to be uncomfortable after all of the passive-aggressive comments that the Sussexes (really Meghan) have made about the Royal Family and the U.K. (remarks about “royal” not being owned by the family, dragging the names of family members into the court battle against the press, the comments to Gloria Steinem about “it’s so good to be home for so many reasons, the disparaging portrayal of W&K in the Scobie book). But if they don’t show, or Harry shows without Meghan, it’s also not going to look good. I wouldn’t be surprised if she has a very good reason not to come back to the U.K. by this time next year... maybe another pregnancy Or a newborn where she doesn’t want to travel, citing conditioned COVID concerns, etc.

 

[Eskimo]

I agree. I thought that H&M were told they could not be half in and half out of the royal family. I understand that Invictus and the unveiling of the statue do not have anything to with being half in, but Scobie said there were several engagements spanning through the spring and summer. That sounds like half in to me, depending on what the engagements are. I do wonder what their reception will be like. I will be shocked if Meghan goes with Harry to the UK.

Wouldn’t it just be like them to thump their noses at this. They’ll line up a series of appearances that have nothing to do with the BRF and play “Royal” at these events. This will give the impression that they’re beloved working members of the family. It’s not like their target audience (US) is going to know any better.

 

[Somebody]

Which is why it would be best imho if during the review the decision is made to relieve them from ALL royal patronages. If they wouldn't live their lives based on them being private royals it might have worked but not in this way.

 

[Denville]

Which is why it would be best imho if during the review the decision is made to relieve them from ALL royal patronages. If they wouldn't live their lives based on them being private royals it might have worked but not in this way.

Tehy dont have any royal patronages any more. They retained some charities but they are not doing them as representatives of the queen. but its possible that yes they will be persauded to give up their UK charities in 2021....