Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family

[poppy7]

"Meghan never considered giving birth at St. Mary's Hospital in London, where Kate delivered all three of her children," reads a report from People about the book's contents. Meghan wanted to deliver somewhere "more discreet," the book claims.

I low how it's "More Discreet". Kate likely had no choice because Prince William is the future King, so is George, and all his kids are direct heirs of William.

The Lindo Wing is the private section of a public hospital. The Portland is Uber private for the uber rich and has an underground tunnel to enter by to avoid attention. It's like the equivalentof giving birth in a six star hotel. Whereas the Lindo is just a bit more posh than state. Also the Lindo has private entrances. You never saw Kate entering bent over in labour. And they are royal. They got the best care anywhere. Portland is where Fergie had her kids and assorted billionaires and footballers. They bring you afternoon tea after you give birth. I would love to give birth there. Who wouldn't.

 

[Denville]

Yes you did, and it’s pretty obvious I meant Republican in the UK sense. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.

Sorry, but yes if people are left of centre in the UK they are usually in theory republicans. They might not be all that ready to campaign but they will usually say that "they don't really approve of a monarchy" or "they admire the queen but they hope the monarchy will come to an end."

 

[Denville]

The Lindo Wing is the private section of a public hospital. The Portland is Uber private for the uber rich and has an underground tunnel to enter by to avoid attention. It's like the equivalentof giving birth in a six star hotel. Whereas the Lindo is just a bit more posh than state. Also the Lindo has private entrances. You never saw Kate entering bent over in labour. And they are royal. They got the best care anywhere. Portland is where Fergie had her kids and assorted billionaires and footballers. They bring you afternoon tea after you give birth. I would love to give birth there. Who wouldn't.

yes but I would say Kate didn't consider "not doing the walk to show off the babies".. whereas Meg clearly wanted to avoid that. As the future Queens' she likely felt that while she might like to just go home... she would not baulk the tradition of showing off the children.....

 

[Denville]

I agree with the Louis and Charlotte will be treated very differently. They will be far more active imo in their roles.

what roles? Its more than likely that they will not be full time royals by the time William is king. Things wil have changed to the point where younger children only do a litlte royal work...

 

[poppy7]

yes but I would say Kate didn't consider "not doing the walk to show off the babies".. whereas Meg clearly wanted to avoid that. As the future Queens' she likely felt that while she might like to just go home... she would not baulk the tradition of showing off the children.....

Also. She could have avoided what she liked in the Lindo. There is a private entrance. The Portland has the underground entrance and is ridiculously luxurious. Living in Windsor they really should have used Frimley. Which again would have allowed privacy.

It was the luxury she wanted and you know so would I.

 

[Betsypaige]

Sorry, but yes if people are left of centre in the UK they are usually in theory republicans. They might not be all that ready to campaign but they will usually say that "they don't really approve of a monarchy" or "they admire the queen but they hope the monarchy will come to an end."

Oh, well, ok in the UK....but I’m guessing it’s different with Americans. It’s not our Institution, so I doubt many people care much if the UK rids itself of the monarchy. Hence, getting back to the original point, Meghan can still be a Democrat, liberal, left of center, whatever, while still not wanting to end it. Yet, she can still want to make real changes/modernize it/revolutionize the Monarchy from within....THAT is the point I was making as to why it would have been dangerous to allow Harry and M to have their own “court” ....

 

[Betsypaige]

what roles? Its more than likely that they will not be full time royals by the time William is king. Things wil have changed to the point where younger children only do a litlte royal work...

I seriously doubt that is the case, unless they are still very young....which, sadly, is possible. If they are adults while William is King, I expect Charlotte and Louis to be working Royals - their father will need them. Harry leaving was a Harry thing - this doesn’t mean that all of a sudden Royal children (especially of a future monarch) are going to be fleeing in droves.

 

[Denville]

Oh, well, ok in the UK....but I’m guessing it’s different with Americans. It’s not our Institution, so I doubt many people care much if the UK rids itself of the monarchy. Hence, getting back to the original point, Meghan can still be a Democrat, liberal, left of center, whatever, while still not wanting to end it. Yet, she can still want to make real changes/modernize it/revolutionize the Monarchy from within....THAT is the point I was making as to why it would have been dangerous to allow Harry and M to have their own “court” ....

Of course Americans dont care about the British monarchy unless it is their hobby to follow royals... In truth most UK people don't care one way or the other. Even if they are left of centre they're not really going to work for the end of the monarchy but they would say if asked that they would like to get rid of it..
Most people in the UK dont follow the monarchy, of those who do, they tend to be old fashioned and conservative and in favour of it.. the others tend to be "I dont really care I suppose they are cheaper than a president" Or they think "If it isn't broke, dont fix it."
For my part, I think that in theory perhaps Meghan would have liked to modernise the monarchy. A bit.... but her actions speak differently to me. She was curtsying away to Charles, she seemed happy enough to have a big royal wedding and to take on the role of a working royal... and while she might have wanted to make a few changes I increasingly think that she wasn't all that bothered...
She didn't say that the RF had stopped her from talking about controversial issues (If she did, i don't know of it), what she seems to be putting out as her complaints were that she had trouble over getting a tiara, the Grey Men didn't protect her from the press etc etc. Her issues were mainly personal..
In all honesty.. and i admit to a bias against her, I think that her attitude was , that she was fine with the monarchy, she might think it was a bit odd and quaint.. but she was not that bothered about it at first. Then she may have been reminded that there were restrictions but she didn't worry too much because she felt that she could get round them. And she wasn't on for dividing up Frogmore into workers' flats or the like...she just wanted to be seen doing the job, hopefully she did want to do a bit of good with her work.. but underneath it all, her eyes were on moving out. I think she felt that if things didn't work out, if she wasn't happy here, she would just leave with/wihout Harry and move back to America.. and that's what happened...

 

[Denville]

I seriously doubt that is the case, unless they are still very young....which, sadly, is possible. If they are adults while William is King, I expect Charlotte and Louis to be working Royals - their father will need them. Harry leaving was a Harry thing - this doesn’t mean that all of a sudden Royal children (especially of a future monarch) are going to be fleeing in droves.

I dont think they will. Perhaps one child will be designated a supporter royal.. but by the time Will is king and the kids are old enough to commit to work, I would say that like most European monarchies the RF will be restricted to the Monarch and partner and the heir and his or her partner. (and maybe if the monarch abdicates due to old age, he or she might do a little work).
Charles has wanted to slim things down, gradually, and he clearly envisaged the RF being smaller, his cousins would be retiring and his siblings would be getting older by the time Will was king.. and that Will and Harry and their wives would carry most of the work..
with the Commonwealth there was a role for both sons.. but its possible by the time that Will is King, the Commonwealth wont be the same and wont require a royal to cover it.. and the working BRF will be Will and Kate, with George and his partner.. Some other royals will possibly retain some charities but they will be helping out rather than doing them in the name of the monarch.
Harry's departure is to do with his issues yes but it has focused attention on the role of the "spare" and some will feel that a spare is an awkward person to plan for.. if he or she isn't absolutely devoted and loyal... Harry clearly does feel some resentment that he has been pulled into royal duties, given up his army career and yet he will never be king and as his brother's children get older, he will be less and less popular and noticed.
It may be that when G and Louis are young adults, L may feel he wants an ordinary career doing something he enjoys, he wont want to give that up to do a few years in teh army and then royal duties.. and to find himself getting less popular as years go by...

 

[Fem]

I dont think they will. Perhaps one child will be designated a supporter royal.. but by the time Will is king and the kids are old enough to commit to work, I would say that like most European monarchies the RF will be restricted to the Monarch and partner and the heir and his or her partner. (and maybe if the monarch abdicates due to old age, he or she might do a little work).
Charles has wanted to slim things down, gradually, and he clearly envisaged the RF being smaller, his cousins would be retiring and his siblings would be getting older by the time Will was king.. and that Will and Harry and their wives would carry most of the work..
with the Commonwealth there was a role for both sons.. but its possible by the time that Will is King, the Commonwealth wont be the same and wont require a royal to cover it.. and the working BRF will be Will and Kate, with George and his partner.. Some other royals will possibly retain some charities but they will be helping out rather than doing them in the name of the monarch.
Harry's departure is to do with his issues yes but it has focused attention on the role of the "spare" and some will feel that a spare is an awkward person to plan for.. if he or she isn't absolutely devoted and loyal... Harry clearly does feel some resentment that he has been pulled into royal duties, given up his army career and yet he will never be king and as his brother's children get older, he will be less and less popular and noticed.
It may be that when G and Louis are young adults, L may feel he wants an ordinary career doing something he enjoys, he wont want to give that up to do a few years in teh army and then royal duties.. and to find himself getting less popular as years go by...

And it might be that all three Cambridge children will be working royals and the number of engagements won't change much and they'll all be busy with being working royals. It's really hard to tell what's going to happen then, but what does it have to do with "Finding Freedom"?

 

[Denville]

Also. She could have avoided what she liked in the Lindo. There is a private entrance. The Portland has the underground entrance and is ridiculously luxurious. Living in Windsor they really should have used Frimley. Which again would have allowed privacy.

It was the luxury she wanted and you know so would I.

I agree that it seemed odd to put oneself through a dash to London, when there was a hospital nearer... Or they could have stayed iN London prior to the birth, had the baby in St Marys, or Portland and gone back to Windsor..
But they seemed to get a big bee in their bonnet about "not letting the press into" the whole birth. It was stupid IMO because the place of birth has got to appear on the birth cert so it was going to come out very soon..
I think that this was the beginning of their public escalating some kind fo war with the press and doing this big dance of making a fuss. If they had just had the kid, left the hospital privately and shown h im off a few days later, I think the press were already peeved enough to be annoyed with them but it wouldn't have looked like the 2 of them were LOOKING for reasons to fight with the press.

 

[Denville]

And it might be that all three Cambridge children will be working royals and the number of engagements won't change much and they'll all be busy with being working royals. It's really hard to tell what's going to happen then, but what does it have to do with "Finding Freedom"?

It has to do with the role of second sons/younger children. However Im happy to drop it. I was replyng to other posts...

 

[Betsypaige]

And it might be that all three Cambridge children will be working royals and the number of engagements won't change much and they'll all be busy with being working royals. It's really hard to tell what's going to happen then, but what does it have to do with "Finding Freedom"?

Well someone mentioned it previously, in relation to Harry leaving, so it does tangentially relate to the book.

 

[ACO]

Well I remember leading up to Archie's birth there were members of the press stationed at various hospitals surrounding Windsor. No one guessed they would be in London. But also Archie was a few days late, so maybe plans had changed. Either way she didn't want Lindo and that was fine. Just like Kate wanting Lindo was fine. I also doubt Kate was forced to do Lindo. I think it was 100% what she wanted.

 

[JessRulz]

Indeed, the matter of the Cambridge children's future or Archie's birth location is not on-topic here. Please move on as further posts not discussing the book will be removed.

 

[Betsypaige]

This could go in the Relationships thread, but I think it's relevant here as we've been discussing Harry and Meghan's relationships with his family vis a vis the book.

I think this is a very good point..... Charles didn't walk away, of course, but he pretty much defied his mother as she wanted him to end things with Camilla.

But while the Prince of Wales was forced by tradition to marry Diana in 1981 instead of his true love Camilla, causing him two decades of pain and anguish, Harry was able to seize on changing times to break free and run off to America with Meghan.

It is that brutal shared experience — and the death of the Princess of Wales — which perhaps means Charles has more understanding than any member of the Royal Family of Harry’s decision to walk away from Queen and country.

So, ultimately, Charles's love for his son is more important to him than his anger or hurt over the book. There have been multiple reports saying that he and Harry have been in regular contact, so I tend to think this article is stating the facts. It doesn't come as any surprise that Charles always has an open door for H and M because he would never turn his son away. I've always thought that their relationship would be fine - the real problems are between H/M and William and Kate.

Yet through it all, Charles has been a calm voice of reassurance to his son and daughter-in-law, despite royal sources saying Charles has been “disappointed and crushed” by Finding Freedom.

The Sun can reveal he has been in regular contact, providing emotional and financial support, with phone and video calls from Castle of Mey in Scotland — the Queen Mother’s former holiday home — to Harry in California.

A royal insider said: “They have a very strong and close father-and-son relationship. Many people have speculated that the book was the end for Harry and Meghan in Britain.

“Too many people were criticised and too many people attacked, including William and Kate.

“But the Prince of Wales has made it clear the door is always open.

“Since his move to Los Angeles they have been in regular contact. Charles is not an avid user of texts but there are video and phone calls.

“The book has never been a massive talking point between them and Charles is determined that it is not an obstacle.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12346243/prince-harry-charles-unbreakable-bond-royal-return/

 

[Alison H]

I'm not sure that Charles marrying Camilla, even in the '70s, was really on the cards. Camilla at that point didn't really want to be Princess of Wales, and she chose Andrew Parker Bowles whom she'd been seeing before she and Charles got to know each other. It's not as if Charles asked for permission to marry her and was told no, as far as anyone knows. But, yes, in the '90s he made it clear that he wasn't going to finish with Camilla.

 

[tommy100]

I think H&M are having a bit of a "brand identity" crisis.

They need to work out which road to take:

A) the jump on most current issue mode, where the couple have a comment on most issues as they come about. This gives them good media coverage as you are effectively jumping on existing PR and media coverage to give them more coverage and profile. The problem with this is you aren't talking about issues close to you just issues that come about so your message and "brand" is devalued as over time people get bored by it. A bit like the Primark of brands - ride the wave of current trends but be seen as a "lesser" brand.

or

B) focus on a few (one each maybe) messages and seek out ways to focus on these. Do a lot of behind scenes work so your knowledge of it is strong and you have met many of the key players. Seek out limited but strong outlets for your message at key points in the year. Be consistent with your messaging and where possible live up to the message your are "promoting" e.g travel as greenly as possibly (if eco travel is your message) so people are inspired by your actions to change their way of living /thinking because you are in part showing them it is possible. This would get you less media coverage as you are not jumping on every "trend" and current issue so don't get the free PR that brings but your message is stronger as its not devalued by the high number of issues you are talking about or the frequency with what you are talking about.

The sad thing is by leaving the RF the couple could have done option B much more easily as they could have made sure all their work was focussed around their chosen issues much more than is possible when in the RF as the RF are expected to cover a wide range of social issues and undertake foreign tours etc. I don't know how much they are paying Sunshine Sachs, and I'm not saying I'm an expert at all, but I think whatever they are paying them its too much for this rather cheap, reality tv start style PR programme they have put in place for a royal couple.

 

[Denville]

I'm not sure that Charles marrying Camilla, even in the '70s, was really on the cards. Camilla at that point didn't really want to be Princess of Wales, and she chose Andrew Parker Bowles whom she'd been seeing before she and Charles got to know each other. It's not as if Charles asked for permission to marry her and was told no, as far as anyone knows. But, yes, in the '90s he made it clear that he wasn't going to finish with Camilla.

No, I thnk he accepted back then that Camilla wasn't likely to be considered suitable as his wife, and also she was in love with Andrew...and while he did in the end put up a fight to be able to marry her it was only after a long wait and a lot of difficulty.. He stuck his job out, he put up with his family probably being cool on the idea of his marrying Camilla after her divorce. I dont see that he's all that like Harry... Harry has been able to sow his wild oats, to live with girlfriends who were serious, which C could not do, and to marry a divorced woman..

 

[Denville]

I think H&M are having a bit of a "brand identity" crisis.

They need to work out which road to take:

A) the jump on most current issue mode, where the couple have a comment on most issues as they come about. This gives them good media coverage as you are effectively jumping on existing PR and media coverage to give them more coverage and profile. The problem with this is you aren't talking about issues close to you just issues that come about so your message and "brand" is devalued as over time people get bored by it. A bit like the Primark of brands - ride the wave of current trends but be seen as a "lesser" brand.

or

B) focus on a few (one each maybe) messages and seek out ways to focus on these. Do a lot of behind scenes work so your knowledge of it is strong and you have met many of the key players. Seek out limited but strong outlets for your message at key points in the year. Be consistent with your messaging and where possible live up to the message your are "promoting" e.g travel as greenly as possibly (if eco travel is your message) so people are inspired by your actions to change their way of living /thinking because you are in part showing them it is possible. This would get you less media coverage as you are not jumping on every "trend" and current issue so don't get the free PR that brings but your message is stronger as its not devalued by the high number of issues you are talking about or the frequency with what you are talking about.

The sad thing is by leaving the RF the couple could have done option B much more easily as they could have made sure all their work was focussed around their chosen issues much more than is possible when in the RF as the RF are expected to cover a wide range of social issues and undertake foreign tours etc. I don't know how much they are paying Sunshine Sachs, and I'm not saying I'm an expert at all, but I think whatever they are paying them its too much for this rather cheap, reality tv start style PR programme they have put in place for a royal couple.

do they really car about the "issues" or is it the exposure they want? I think that yes they are trying to ride the coat tails of whatever comes up at a given time.. because they fear that if they don't get themselves seen "doing something" their "brand" will disappear...

 

[tommy100]

Thats the issue, just speaking out on current trends and issues so widely as they do makes it seem its just getting your face out there that is what they want so looks more about being seen than caring about the issue. I’m not saying they don’t, but that its how it is starting to come across because if the way their PR works.

I wonder if Sunshine Sachs had anything to do with the book? That would certainly be a way to say H&M haven’t contributed to the book but maybe have allowed their PR firm to and to help organise friends and insiders to contribute.

 

[Denville]

Thats the issue, just speaking out on current trends and issues so widely as they do makes it seem its just getting your face out there that is what they want so looks more about being seen than caring about the issue. I’m not saying they don’t, but that its how it is starting to come across because if the way their PR works.

I wonder if Sunshine Sachs had anything to do with the book? That would certainly be a way to say H&M haven’t contributed to the book but maybe have allowed their PR firm to and to help organise friends and insiders to contribute.

Im sure Omid and the other writer managed to get their info via staff and friends, and M and H (who had been in contact with him quite a bit in the past) were able to preserve a high minded "we didn't have anything to do with the book" attitude..
I dont know how much they care about these issues.. I think that Harry is genuinely into veterans issues and so on, and in spite of many faults I still feel a bit sorry for him and believe that he means well.. but with Meg while Im sure she also has some genuine interest I think it is well and truly secondary to making money and getting exposure...
I honestly can't decide how sincere she is as a person.. whether her abrupt departure was due to depression and a growng dislike of the UK and the RF or if it was all planned for a long time and was always a back up plan in her mind...
Can't help feeling that she may have entered the RF with the idea that she was delighted to be there and was willing to do the job.. but her attitude was that if it DIDNT work out well, there was nothing wrong with getting out, or getting out part time, earning a living, doing more "edgy" charity work, and doing a bit of Royal work in the times when she was back in the UK.
I tink that she'd regard it as ludicrous, the idea that "if you sign up for royal life, then you ARE signed up for life and that walking out is deserting your duty."
I suspect that on some level she saw it as being in a TV series, and that its possible to be signed up for a TV show and have breaks when they are not filming when you can go off and do a movie...

 

[Betsypaige]

No, I thnk he accepted back then that Camilla wasn't likely to be considered suitable as his wife, and also she was in love with Andrew...and while he did in the end put up a fight to be able to marry her it was only after a long wait and a lot of difficulty.. He stuck his job out, he put up with his family probably being cool on the idea of his marrying Camilla after her divorce. I dont see that he's all that like Harry... Harry has been able to sow his wild oats, to live with girlfriends who were serious, which C could not do, and to marry a divorced woman..

You’re taking the comparison too literally. The point of the article wasn’t to suggest that father and son have lived the same lives, but that Charles can identify with Harry because he couldn’t be with Camilla, for many reasons. Perhaps at times he even wished he could just up and leave with her, or even by himself, just so he could do what he wanted. Obviously I’m speculating here, but overall, it’s a good thing for their relationship if Charles can empathize with Harry, even if he is hurt at some of the things in the book.

 

[Denville]

You’re taking the comparison too literally. The point of the article wasn’t to suggest that father and son have lived the same lives, but that Charles can identify with Harry because he couldn’t be with Camilla, for many reasons. Perhaps at times he even wished he could just up and leave with her, or even by himself, just so he could do what he wanted. Obviously I’m speculating here, but overall, it’s a good thing for their relationship if Charles can empathize with Harry, even if he is hurt at some of the things in the book.

I don't know if he does. I think that he's not as dutiful as his mother, but he's still bound by duty.. in a way that seems alien to Harry
Of course he still loves Harry but I am sure he's annoyed at the way he's behaved. William is probably more annoyed and shows it more but I doubt if Charles is Ok with H's walk out or the manner of it.. or this book if he ahs anything to do with it.

 

[evolvingdoors]

You’re taking the comparison too literally. The point of the article wasn’t to suggest that father and son have lived the same lives, but that Charles can identify with Harry because he couldn’t be with Camilla, for many reasons. Perhaps at times he even wished he could just up and leave with her, or even by himself, just so he could do what he wanted. Obviously I’m speculating here, but overall, it’s a good thing for their relationship if Charles can empathize with Harry, even if he is hurt at some of the things in the book.

I truly don’t understand how that would be a thing...
No one stopped Harry from being with Meghan, quite the opposite, the family embraced her in ways they never did with other married in, despite what appears to be less than nicely behavior on her part.

 

[Mbruno]

I'm not sure that Charles marrying Camilla, even in the '70s, was really on the cards. Camilla at that point didn't really want to be Princess of Wales, and she chose Andrew Parker Bowles whom she'd been seeing before she and Charles got to know each other. It's not as if Charles asked for permission to marry her and was told no, as far as anyone knows. But, yes, in the '90s he made it clear that he wasn't going to finish with Camilla.

Exactly. Most biographers and observers agree that Charles was neither forbidden from marrying Camilla nor forced to marry Diana. It was Charles' own indecision and Camilla's decision to marry Andrew Parker Bowles that set them apart.

 

[Denville]

I truly don’t understand how that would be a thing...
No one stopped Harry from being with Meghan, quite the opposite, the family embraced her in ways they never did with other married in, despite what appears to be less than nicely behavior on her part.

True If Charles DOES think of comparisons, I suspect he might feel a bit peeved that he was barred from marrying the woman he loved because of her sexual past and he was expected to marry a suitable girl whom he didn't have much in common with. Harry's marriage to Meghan was Ok'ed with the RF, her past marriage was hardly mentoned..

 

[Queen Claude]

Charles was not barred from marrying Camilla. While Charles was drawn to Camilla, which did not escape the notice of others, the relationship had not progressed far enough for Charles to propose. Two key factors, Charles was due to be posted overseas and was not in a marrying mindset. And the second factor, which has has already been pointed out, Camilla had set her cap for Andrew Parker Bowles.

 

[miss whirley]

Charles was not barred from marrying Camilla. While Charles was drawn to Camilla, which did not escape the notice of others, the relationship had not progressed far enough for Charles to propose. Two key factors, Charles was due to be posted overseas and was not in a marrying mindset. And the second factor, which has has already been pointed out, Camilla had set her cap for Andrew Parker Bowles.

True. A better comparison for Camilla would be Cressida. Both had a blue-blood mother and middle class father. Both are friends of "that circle". Both had rebound relationships with Princes before marrying their dashing polo-playing exes who they were still carrying a torch for.

If they are comparing post-divorce Camila with Meghan, I don't really see a comparison there either. Charles and Camilla had a marathon 33 year on/off relationship before finally marrying. Where Harry and Meghan had a whirlwind relationship, barely over a year, and long distance, before getting engaged.

Harry and Meghan are more comparable to Andrew and Koo Stark. Both American actresses who had a long distance relationships with second son Princes.

 

[ACO]

True If Charles DOES think of comparisons, I suspect he might feel a bit peeved that he was barred from marrying the woman he loved because of her sexual past and he was expected to marry a suitable girl whom he didn't have much in common with. Harry's marriage to Meghan was Ok'ed with the RF, her past marriage was hardly mentoned..

Her past marriage was hardly mentioned? It was literally referenced in every article about her. "Divorced Meg" was basically her name. They made sure we always knew she was an older, mixed raced, divorced actress from LA. I don't think a day went by without that being said.