The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 10: August 2024 -


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
HenRach Dominion said:
Hey, I made that same exact point in an earlier post (that many people would deal with Prince Harry solely because he's part of the British Royal Family regardless of his relationship with them), but another poster stated that only HM The King and HRH The Prince of Wales were seen as special, and everyone else were seen as normal people (at least to the British public). Since they're British, I assumed that they would know more about their monarchy and how they're viewed a lot more than I, an American, would.
Click to expand...
Harrys role within the organisation was an important one, it would be really important just now as the second adult in line to the throne. He would be part of the inner circle, part of the conversation, a voice within the decision making. So IMO as the second son of the King he would be significant, but he did not want that. So now within the organisation he is an outsider, still the second son of the King, brother of the future King, uncle of the next in line ,nobody can ever take that away from him ,but with very little significance because he is out of the circle.
So I would suggest that people who appreciate the hierarchy know where Harry stands, others just like to mix with the title. It will still open doors for him but it is what he does once he walks through the door that counts. His departure has identified his weaknesses, unfortunately his strengths have been diminished without the back up of the palace.
 
HenRach Dominion said:
Thank you for clearing a lot of things up.

So the current monarch and maybe their direct heir are seen as significant, at least in Great Britain. Everyone else are just regular people who just so happen to be related to one or two people who are generally significant.

Harry's just a regular guy who happens to be the son of the King of the United Kingdom. Since he's neither the king himself nor his direct heir, how he carries himself and whom he associates with isn't reflective on anything beyond himself and his own causes since only HM The King's (and to a lesser extant, HRH The Prince of Wales) only really matter in the eyes of the British public.

So the people who claimed that Harry was only getting invited to things because of the BRF are incorrect, because that would imply a significance with regards to being a part of said family that doesn't exist. That argument could be made if he was his father (the king) or his brother (the heir), but he's neither. Harry, therefore, is being invited to places like Nigeria, Colombia, and the UN General Assembly for his own merits since no members of the BRF are significant outside of monarch and heir.

Also, as a normal guy, he's free to continue looking out for his, his family's, and his organizations' best interest without regards to institutions he wasn't a significant part of in the first place. He can also champion causes and people and political beliefs that he believes because doing so only reflects on him.

Thank you once again for the clarity. I often forget that the opinions within this forum are often not reflected in real life.
Click to expand...
Gosh, where to start?

Once again, it would be very difficult to find anyone in Britain who thinks that members of the rf are “special”. We don’t. No one mentioned significant. Significant is not “special”. This is not semantics either.

He was invited to Nigeria because of Invictus, to Columbia because their VP likes Netflix fluff. The UN? Because of Archewell? Isn’t that why he’s there? Come on now, it’s not because he’s special is it?

And the point still stands that you’d be hard pushed to find anyone who actually thinks the rf are “above all others”, That sort of sentiment would have sounded bizarre in the 1950’s, at the very height of what historians have called monarchy as the British Shintoism. Today the very idea is just preposterous & so unbelievably out of touch with contemporary Britain.

And again, there is an important historical context to all this. What the brf is, what it’s for, who matters within it is not static. It is evolving & changing. Any student of monarchy knows this, it is not a secret.

And to return the complement, thank you for reminding us all that understanding what a post actually means can sometime elude the best of us.
 
HenRach Dominion said:
Hey, I made that same exact point in an earlier post (that many people would deal with Prince Harry solely because he's part of the British Royal Family regardless of his relationship with them), but another poster stated that only HM The King and HRH The Prince of Wales were seen as special, and everyone else were seen as normal people (at least to the British public). Since they're British, I assumed that they would know more about their monarchy and how they're viewed a lot more than I, an American, would.
Click to expand...
I would suggest that it is some foreigners not Britons who see members of the rf as "special". And some of these are American.

Which is kind of ironic don't you think?
 
SirGyamfi1 said:
Many of the married-in royals have accomplishments prior to even marrying their spouses, and even if some of them were not married to their royal spouses some would still be remarkable people in whatever they pursue.
Click to expand...
I am sure Maxima would have had a great career in investment banking and that Mary Donaldson might have been successful in the career she would have chosen in Australia (advertising or whatever). But would they ever have been famous or made a significant impact on society? Honestly, I don't think so.

Camilla, on the other hand, left a blank space in the "Profession" field in her marriage certificate to Prince Charles as she obviously never had a profession herself. Neither did Sarah as far as I know. Kate might be working today with her parents, but, most likely, she would have married a banker or someone else who is upper middle-class and wealthy, and then become a full-time mom/housewife.

I don't dare to think what MM would be doing if she had not become a royal, but it suffices to say that she didn't quite have many accomplishments prior to getting married to CP Haakon. Daniel was a relatively successful businessman and would still be running his gyms today, but he would not be in any way noteworthy.

Ironically the only royal consorts I can think of (other than those who were born royal themselves like Queen Sofia) who were public figures and minor celebrities in their own right before getting married are Meghan, because she was a TV actress, and Letizia, because she was an award-winning journalist and a well-known TV news anchor in Spain.

Marrying into a reigning royal family, especially marrying a future king or queen, is, however, a unique experience. It is bigger than marrying into money or fame/celebrity.
 
Last edited:
Mbruno said:
I am sure Maxima would have had a great career in investment banking and that Mary Donaldson might have been successful in the career she would have chosen in Australia (advertising or whatever). But would they ever have been famous or made a significant impact on society? Honestly, I don't think so.

Camilla, on the other hand, left a blank space in the "Profession" field in her marriage certificate to Prince Charles as she obviously never had a profession herself. Neither did Sarah as far as I know. Kate might be working today with her parents, but, most likely, she would have married a banker or someone else who is upper middle-class and wealthy, and then become a full-time mom/housewife.

I don't dare to think what MM would be doing if she had not become a royal, but it suffices to say that she didn't quite have many accomplishments prior to getting married to CP Haakon. Daniel was a relatively successful businessman and would still be running his gyms today, but he would not be in any way noteworthy.

Ironically the only royal consorts I can think of (other than those who were born royal themselves like Queen Sofia) who were public figures and minor celebrities in their own right before getting married are Meghan, because she was a TV actress, and Letizia, because she was an award-winning journalist and a well-known TV news anchor in Spain.
Click to expand...
My point was that fame and adoring attention or to clap back at media should never be the motive to do well in anything. Also, even if you don’t get fame, you’ll be content with life. Maxima has her accomplishments, why should being famous be important? As does Mary. Camilla’s case was at a time when lots of upper class women weren’t encouraged at getting further education or considered important and she’s content with her life. She cares little for media attention or nastiness. Kate is at least educated and is content focusing on motherhood in spite being a working royal, not fame and adoration.

Meghan has had acting roles, but she would hardly be famous on the attention she gets now if she wasn’t married to Harry, she hardly had much work lined up after suits. Respect the position and privilege you have whether a born royal or not. The Gloucesters hardly get much attention, but they’re not fussed about attention.
 
Last edited:

Durham said:
I would suggest that it is some foreigners not Britons who see members of the rf as "special". And some of these are American.

Which is kind of ironic don't you think?
Click to expand...
I don't normally agree with the OP (and don't fully agree either in this case), but please allow me to defend all those clueless foreigners.

The British people may not see the royals as "special", but the royals are above everybody else in the country (even the prime minister) in the official order of precedence of the state (this is an objective fact). They are entitled to military honors (soldiers stand in attention at their sight and salute them. some of them even have flag days); many civilians still bow or cursty to them; they get police protection and are provided state transportation in official public events (the most senior royals get those 24/7, even in private functions); and many of them get to live in Crown Estate properties which are also protected 24/7. Royals are also in general celebrities who are covered extensively by the British press.

I suppose it is understandable that all of the above makes us foreigners see them as "special" in some sense. Maybe "special" is not the right word, but certainly they are not ordinary or common people.
 
Last edited:
Mbruno said:
I don't normally agree with the OP (and don't fully agree either in this case), but please allow me to defend all those clueless foreigners.

The British people may not see the royals as "special", but the royals are above everybody else in the country (even the prime minister) in the official order of precedence of the state (this is an objective fact). They are entitled to military honors (soldiers stand in attention at their sight and salute them. some of them even have flag days); many civilians still bow or cursty to them; they get police protection and are provided state transportation in official public events (the most senior royals get those 24/7, even in private functions); and many of them get to live in Crown Estate properties which are also protected 24/7. Royals are also in general celebrities who are covered extensively by the British press.

I suppose it is understandable that all of the above makes us foreigners see them as "special" in some sense. Maybe "special" is not the right word, but certainly they are not ordinary or common people.
Click to expand...
Peculiar as it appears, it can be simultaneously true that all of the above happens & yet the individuals involved are not thought of as “special”.

This really does make perfect sense to British people even if it doesn’t to outsiders. Honestly it really really does.

I guess we’re just an odd lot, with layers of enigmatic cultural baggage as intriguing to ethnographers as the practises of some newly discovered Amazon tribe. An old people with eccentricities marinated over the centuries.
 
www.dailymail.co.uk

BORIS JOHNSON: My 'manly pep talk' with Harry in bid to stop Megxit

Boris Johnson made an extraordinary last-ditch bid to persuade Prince Harry not to quit the UK. Mr Johnson's new book, Unleashed, will be serialised in the Daily Mail from Saturday.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk

Ex PM Boris Johnson reveals in the newly published political memoirs detailing his career that both BP and Downing St officials asked him (at practically the last minute) to change Harry’s mind about leaving royal duties.

Johnson states in these memoirs that it was a hopeless task.
 
Curryong said:
www.dailymail.co.uk

BORIS JOHNSON: My 'manly pep talk' with Harry in bid to stop Megxit

Boris Johnson made an extraordinary last-ditch bid to persuade Prince Harry not to quit the UK. Mr Johnson's new book, Unleashed, will be serialised in the Daily Mail from Saturday.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk

Ex PM Boris Johnson reveals in the newly published political memoirs detailing his career that both BP and Downing St officials asked him (at practically the last minute) to change Harry’s mind about leaving royal duties.

Johnson states in these memoirs that it was a hopeless task.
Click to expand...
Who exactly asked him to talk to Harry? I find it odd that "BP and Downing St officials" would be in a position to "make" the PM do anything as he said. Such a request would have to come from the Queen herself or, at least, from the Prince of Wales.
 
Curryong said:
Johnson doesn’t name them. However he himself said so and he’d hardly be lying about such a thing.

This revelation has ended up on the front page of several British newspapers including the broadsheet The Telegraph.
More from the BBC.

www.bbc.com

Newspaper headlines: Johnson's 'pep talk' with Harry and Treasury rethinks non-dom plan

Making a number of Friday's front pages is Boris Johnson's memoir, Unleashed, published next month.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
Click to expand...
Thank you for sharing. This is fascinating.
 
Yes, but not about this. A denial from BP or from Prince Harry himself about any meeting when his new book is being serialised would prove extremely embarrassing to Boris. And his publishers would for sure have asked for names of official sources and would have checked before publication.

And Sky News reported them meeting at the time.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like great fun. I’m sure they had a ball , and so will those members of the public who will tour Fallon’s ‘House’!
 
Curryong said:
A denial from BP or from Prince Harry himself about any meeting when his new book is being serialised would prove extremely embarrassing to Boris. And his publishers would for sure have asked for names of official sources and would have checked before publication.
Click to expand...
...if Johnson were capable of being extremely embarrassed or ashamed about anything; his entire career, both political- and non-, is filled with much more damaging episodes than having a conversation with the Duke of Sussex. I don’t think BJ is concerned about being embarrassed for anything and I doubt a minor and unproductive meeting with Harry was the greatest concern for his publishers. He has not earned a track record for being trustworthy, whatever he says or does, and any doubt his words immediately cast is his own fault.

He certainly didn’t give them any advice on being dignified or making a graceful exit.
 
Last edited:
This article contains video of PH in the Haunted House.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Prince Harry screamed and swore in bizarre Jimmy Fallon appearance

The Duke of Sussex was filmed screaming as he ventured through a haunted maze with Jimmy Fallon on his late-night talk show, following a week of high-profile appearances in New York.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk

Edit: just realised there is video on Iceflower’s link above! The video on the Mail article is longer and does has some extra bits, intro etc.
 
Last edited:
iceflower said:
The Duke of Sussex appeared on The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon yesterday, September 26, but wasn't interviewed:


** gettyimages gallery **

www.hellomagazine.com

Watch as Prince Harry screams his way through a haunted house with Jimmy Fallon

Prince Harry marked a TV first during surprise 'spooky' appearance on The Jimmy Fallon Show
www.hellomagazine.com www.hellomagazine.com
Click to expand...
I don’t understand. Either he wants to be perceived like a global powerhouse (because stateman cannot be applied), either a clown who swears. It’s not that statemen cannot be clowns or don’t swear, it’s only that they tend to not let it be in public.
 
Ghost said:
I don’t understand. Either he wants to be perceived like a global powerhouse (because stateman cannot be applied), either a clown who swears. It’s not that statemen cannot be clowns or don’t swear, it’s only that they tend to not let it be in public.
Click to expand...
I don’t think he knows what he wants TBH. IMO his priorities are rather confused to put it mildly.
 
Ghost said:
I don’t understand. Either he wants to be perceived like a global powerhouse (because stateman cannot be applied), either a clown who swears. It’s not that statemen cannot be clowns or don’t swear, it’s only that they tend to not let it be in public.
Click to expand...
Wellknown politicians, especially in the States, have often appeared on late night TV on shows like Jimmy Fallon’s. What about Saturday Night Live, where people like George Bush, Hillary Clinton and Al Gore appeared.

It’s only a bit of fun. after all. And royals who are still working appeared on ‘Its a Royal Knockout’. Presumably they weren’t confused at the time!
 
Last edited:
Curryong said:
Wellknown politicians, especially in the States, have often appeared on late night TV on shows like Jimmy Fallon’s. What about Saturday Night Live, where people like George Bush, Hillary Clinton and Al Gore appeared.

It’s only a bit of fun. after all. And royals who are still working appeared on ‘Its a Royal Knockout’. Presumably they weren’t confused at the time!
Click to expand...
Some of the family members who took part did it simply to support Edward and charities associated with the royals even if others found it vulgar. It was silly though. Edward wasn’t a working royal at that point and he wasn’t considered a serious high profile royal by the media. His credibility crumbled slowly and fell further after the production company failed. People in the media/film industry stopped taking him seriously after that. PR wise the royals in the 90s weren’t really media savvy at all. Also that was 37 years ago, no one talks about that mess anymore because it’s literally old news. Edward stopped film production and Sophie stopped her PR work more than a decade ago.
 
Last edited:
Curryong said:
Yes, but not about this. A denial from BP or from Prince Harry himself about any meeting when his new book is being serialised would prove extremely embarrassing to Boris. And his publishers would for sure have asked for names of official sources and would have checked before publication.

And Sky News reported them meeting at the
Click to expand...

Curryong said:
Wellknown politicians, especially in the States, have often appeared on late night TV on shows like Jimmy Fallon’s. What about Saturday Night Live, where people like George Bush, Hillary Clinton and Al Gore appeared.

It’s only a bit of fun. after all. And royals who are still working appeared on ‘Its a Royal Knockout’. Presumably they weren’t confused at the time!
Click to expand...
Maybe Harry should have learned from that. It really is old news.
 
Ghost said:
I don’t understand. Either he wants to be perceived like a global powerhouse (because stateman cannot be applied), either a clown who swears. It’s not that statemen cannot be clowns or don’t swear, it’s only that they tend to not let it be in public.
Click to expand...
He is just behaving as other Hollywood celebrities do. It is not unusual for a movie star to be invited to a UN conference on the protection of children ( a cause that many celebrities embrace/promote) and, then, be on a Late Night talk show on the next day.

That is Harry's world now.
 
Ghost said:
I don’t understand. Either he wants to be perceived like a global powerhouse (because stateman cannot be applied), either a clown who swears. It’s not that statemen cannot be clowns or don’t swear, it’s only that they tend to not let it be in public.
Click to expand...
Why the swearing? He must have known the video would go public, what was he thinking?
It was so crude, no class at all.
 
I’d say he is probably getting himself a tattoo. Plenty of people have them (especially males but younger females do as well) and Harry probably decided to join them. It’s not illegal and it’s doubtful that people will ever see it.

And no, no, no members of the royal family ever swear in front of others, not even the Queen!

https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/24005830/nine-times-royals-turned-air-blue-swearing-queen/#:~:text=But%20he's%20not%20the%20only,have%20turned%20the%20air%20blue%E2%80%A6
 
Last edited:
www.dailymail.co.uk

Prince Harry will visit Lesotho to support charity

The Duke of Sussex will travel to Lesotho early next month for a gathering of business leaders, philanthropists and local stakeholders, aimed at driving forward the work of his charity Sentebale.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk

Prince Harry will be visiting Lesotho in early October in support of his first charity Sentebale, it has just been announced. His first visit to the country was at 19, which inspired the foundation of Sentebale.

abcnews.go.com

Prince Harry’s Sentebale organization leading initiative to support youth in Africa

Prince Harry’s latest philanthropic move will gather world business leaders and philanthropists to work towards fostering prosperity in Southern African communities
abcnews.go.com abcnews.go.com
 
Last edited:
Curryong said:
I’d say he is probably getting himself a tattoo. Plenty of people have them (especially males but younger females do as well) and Harry probably decided to join them. It’s not illegal and it’s doubtful that people will ever see it.

And no, no, no members of the royal family ever swear in front of others, not even the Queen!

https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/24005830/nine-times-royals-turned-air-blue-swearing-queen/#:~:text=But%20he's%20not%20the%20only,have%20turned%20the%20air%20blue%E2%80%A6
Click to expand...
It is not unlikely that Harry already had other tattoos, Is there any record of his getting a tattoo before?

EDIT: As far as I understand, tattoos are allowed in the British Army as long as they can be fully covered when dressed (i.e., no tattoos for example on the forearm or the neck are allowed if I understand it correctly).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Marengo
  • Sticky
Princess Theodora of Greece and Matthew Kumar - 28 Sept. 2024
6 7 8
Replies
211
Views
26K
Moonmaiden23
Moonmaiden23
Marengo
Princess Märtha Louise of Norway and Durek Verrett: 31 August 2024
9 10 11
Replies
303
Views
41K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
Marengo
  • Locked
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 9: August 2023 - July 2024
103 104 105
Replies
3K
Views
504K
Ista
Ista
iceflower
Princely Family of Monaco: Current Events Part 11: November 2024 -
Replies
6
Views
805
iceflower
iceflower
iceflower
Louis, Pauline and Camille Current Events Part 7: November 2024 -
Replies
0
Views
445
iceflower
iceflower

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom