"Spare" memoir by the Duke of Sussex (2023)

[yukari]

I think it matters quite a lot when it claims to be a factual book. How can it be taken seriously when some things have been proven to be untrue?

Rupert Everett claims that he knows the identity of the mystery older woman in the loss of virginity/bottom spanking chapter, and that what Harry says is inaccurate, but I don't know how he can say that unless he was hiding behind a bush and watching.

My understanding is that the woman in question told Rupert Everett the details of her encounter with Prince Harry and that her story doesn't match Harry's. If that is the case, however, it is impossible to say whose version is the accurate one. From what I read though, Rupert Everett seems pretty sure that Harry's account of the facts is incorrect.

Well, the Sun run with the story for their front page; headline of "I Took Harry's Virginity" and photo of Sasha Walpole and Harry, so it seems we have name now ....

Seriously, I still can't fathom why he needs to flaunt his genitalia in this book. One might start to wonder whether he's a closeted exhibitionist.

 

[Asteria12]

He's certainly no gentleman. He could have found a way through his Highgrove network to warn her that their teenage fumble was going to appear. This book has, if anything, shown to me that there really isn't a lot to admire in Harry and that the Firm did an amazing job covering up his true personality.

 

[HRHHermione]

He's certainly no gentleman. He could have found a way through his Highgrove network to warn her that their teenage fumble was going to appear. This book has, if anything, shown to me that there really isn't a lot to admire in Harry and that the Firm did an amazing job covering up his true personality.

That’s what I come back to over and over as well. He was portrayed as a likable, sort of vulnerable but deeply compassionate lad who liked a good time. His press was generally glowing, even when he got up to things that were scandalous. They did some really excellent reputation management and PR on his behalf and he didn’t seem to know it or understand how he would be viewed without those efforts.

 

[Magnolia471]

Well, the Sun run with the story for their front page; headline of "I Took Harry's Virginity" and photo of Sasha Walpole and Harry, so it seems we have name now ....

Seriously, I still can't fathom why he needs to flaunt his genitalia in this book. One might start to wonder whether he's a closeted exhibitionist.

He addressed her in the book as an "older women"....And she was 19 years old at the time while he was 17. I think he pushed this narrative to exasperated his mommy issues. Because there is much age difference between him and Meghan.

 

[Curryong]

Well, Sacha is talking about it quite openly herself, and certainly doesn’t seem to be regretting it.

‘’We didn’t set out to do it and it wasn’t premeditated. He was young. We had been purely friends and it was a little bit naughty, in the sense that it shouldn’t have been happening.

“I remember I was wearing black trousers from New Look with a fitted black top and black leather boots, and a wide multi-coloured belt with a pattern on the back.

“When I went back to the pub, I didn’t have my belt.

“It wasn’t Prince Harry to me. It was Harry, my friend — and something that got a little bit out of control. It just so happened that he was a prince.

“Afterwards I did grab his bum and gave him a slap. It was with one hand. He had a lovely peachy bum — but he was young.”

He and she had had a few drinks at the pub after a recent ex boyfriend of hers had walked into the pub with a new girl. Harry didn’t name her in his book and may well have said she was older (inferring a lot older) in case the tabloids came nosing around as it seems they have. It was the Sun who unmasked this woman, not Harry.

 

[Asteria12]

She also said "It is his story, and he's entitled to write what he wants. He didn't name me but people who were there that night, or simply part of that social circle, would be able to work out it was me. Possibly, Harry could have thought about that before publishing. He could have found me if he had tried."


You can be a fan of Harry's and still agree that it was unfair of him to write this without at least warning his old friend!

 

[Denville]

I guess I’m not being clear, for which I apologize. I made a flippant comment to our fellow poster Curryong that Harry’s description of getting out of the car on the way home from church on the day of his mother’s death to look at flowers was yet another detailed description of an event that never happened (at least in the way he recalls).

I was poking sarcastic fun at the fact that, as he did throughout the book, Harry “recalled” an event in great detail in a way in which it simply did not happen. Harry did not pull over on the way home from church on the day his mother died to look at flowers, talk to the public, or hold Charles’ hand.

He is conflating the day she died with an event some days later, in which he, his brother, and father came out of Balmoral to greet the public and the famous image was taken of him, in what I’ve always thought was an endearing and heartbreaking manner, instinctively reaching for Charles’ hand.

The jab here is that Harry “recalls” in astounding detail and provides biting commentary and assigns blames for factual and historical events that simply did not happen the way he tells them.

I’ve since gone on to say that it makes one wonder what other events and conversations he is conflating or tweaking if he is doing so with events that are so well known and can be easily disproven.

Others obviously disagree with me, but I consider it a pretty big deal if the writer of an autobiography takes the liberty to move events around and ascribe them to other actors as he has done on several noteworthy occasions, yet asks the reader to take his word on events that happened behind closed doors. It’s all of course my opinion only.

well I think we all know that much of what Harry is saying in the book is not that accurate, that he either doesn't remember very clearly or he is lying about certain things. I don't think anyone would dispute that. but it wasn't clear in what you said, about the hand holding. It may not have been the day after Diana died but it did happen.. I thought that it was a couple of days after her death, but it did happen that the RF stopped and looked at the flowers and Harry put out his hand to take Charles's... so even if it wasn't a walkabout, it did happen and is recorded on film. THat was why I was surprised at your saying it did not happen. It did happen, just not on the day that Harry said.

 

[Denville]

He addressed her in the book as an "older women"....And she was 19 years old at the time while he was 17. I think he pushed this narrative to exasperated his mommy issues. Because there is much age difference between him and Meghan.

there is not "Much age difference" between him and Meghan? He is about 3 years younger than her, hardly anyting at all. and if this lady was 19 when Harry was 17, its hardly any age difference at all. Harldy enough to refer to mommy issues.

 

[Muhler]

Been a while since I visited this thread.

I see the topic is again-again the exploits of Harry's "little Harry."
That should delight him, it's a subject he is fond of talking about.

But come on. It's been revealed who took Harry's cherry, big deal.

The poor woman was probably already being pestered by the press so she might just as well come out.
Why shouldn't she? It's not that Harry has been shy about naming people, events and details. And short of posting pics and videos of "little Harry" (that may only be a matter of time) he has been very frank, so no consideration needed. - But let's see if Harry will be whining about this as well.

I honestly believe "little Harry" has more sense than Harry himself.

This has long since gone beyond embarrassing. Now it's going beyond the ridiculous - he is putting satirists and stand-uppers out of work, they can't compete with Harry!

In fact it's on the verge of going beyond the absurd as well:
I predict the good lady will be photographed pointing on a piece of land: This is where it happened! And they may use a stand-in with a peachy behind, she can slap for the benefit of us, the intrigued global audience.
Perhaps we will see reenactors recreating the scene? (I'm dead serious! Once the spot is revealed, we will soon see others... admire the scenery... there as well, from a horizontal perspective.)

- Wonder if we are going to hear juicy details about Harry's other... encounters?
The box has been opened. Harry opened it. He's eventually gonna regret that big time!

 

[Denville]

really, is there a need to go on about it? Harry had a sexual encounter, he wrote about it. It happens to just about everyone.. He sould have told her, that he was going to write about but not name names... but it isn't worth such a fuss.

 

[Meee]

I suspect that he wanted to impress people and an older woman, as a teenage boy, tends to be seen as something that would do that. If anything Harry’s the one being humiliated here - because this woman is closer in age to him than Meghan, and yet he described her as an older woman - despite Sasha having Harry publish details of their encounter without warning. Losing ones virginity is not the content you expect when you hear that someone is writing a memoir.

Being pedantic, both Sasha and Meghan are older than him, yet most people would simply say a few years. The way that Harry presented it as ‘Like many things that were wrong about it, it took place in a field’ (wording may be slightly out; I can’t check it as the book has been returned to the library) led the reader to think that the age gap was greater to the extent that people might have moral objections about it. Legally, at 16/17 he could have slept with someone two or three times his age and there would be nothing wrong with that, provided that the person was not defined in law to be in a position of trust over him - in which case the age of consent is 18. He was in law still a minor while she was an adult, but that was it.

I suspect that as with many things, he didn’t think too deeply and thought that no one would put the pieces together. But given his hatred of the press, he should have done - surely there was a risk of someone in that circle selling her name if she had remained silent?

 

[Denville]

to be fair to Harry, perhaps he thinks that a sexual encounter is a normal part of life and not something that is going to mean that the woman involved will be driven through the streets with a whip.

 

[muriel]

- Wonder if we are going to hear juicy details about Harry's other... encounters?
The box has been opened. Harry opened it. He's eventually gonna regret that big time!

That assumes Harry has the self awareness to regret anything!

 

[Denville]

That assumes Harry has the self awareness to regret anything!

I dont see why he should regret a bit of first time sex, and he is harldy oging to regret talking abuot his life and his family's life, since that is the way he is earning his living now.

 

[muriel]

I dont see why he should regret a bit of first time sex, and he is harldy oging to regret talking abuot his life and his family's life, since that is the way he is earning his living now.

My comment was in response to @Muhler's comment on whether, give Harry's revelations about having sex for the first time and the commentary that followed from the "older lady", other partners may come forward to talk about their experiences with Harry, and if Harry may come to regret that.

As you say, Harry's business model is based on revelations about his famous and constitutionally important family. I suspect he will continue to do so for the foreseeable future, as he seems to have little respect for family or relations. Perhaps one day, he may see the damage he is doing to his familial relationships.

 

[Muhler]

That assumes Harry has the self awareness to regret anything!

Oh he will.

Because any future tales of his exploits may not necessarily be flattering for him. - Or for "little Harry..."

 

[Denville]

seems to me that people are going on about his sex life a lot... yes probably some partners will come out of the woodwork, and perhaps they will tell unflattering stories, but it wont kill H

 

[Denville]

As you say, Harry's business model is based on revelations about his famous and constitutionally important family. I suspect he will continue to do so for the foreseeable future, as he seems to have little respect for family or relations. Perhaps one day, he may see the damage he is doing to his familial relationships.

I wouldn't put money on it. I think that he has always, by the sound of it, been unhappy with his family, I dont think it is just Meg pushing him to be unhappy. I think that he always had a peeve against William, for being older, and Diana's early death made him a bit crazier.. and Charles was then far too soft with him because he himself was busy, and because he probably felt that he could not be too hard on a boy that had lost his mother so tragically. I think Will was spoiled too but as the heir, he was also reminded, no doubt that he had to behave himself in public and over time he improved. Harry as the second son could get away a bit with being Harry the cheeky younger lad, and that became his image but it wasn't all that close to the truth. It wasn't just harmless fun but a pretty messed up nature on his part.
I dont know if Harry will ever get to thinking that he may have been unfair to his father and brother, or regret that he is now on bad terms with them. He has shown himself to be SO nasty and weird, that its hard to imaigine him maturing in years to come, or regretting losing his father and brother unless he finds himself completley alone

 

[TLLK]

She also said "It is his story, and he's entitled to write what he wants. He didn't name me but people who were there that night, or simply part of that social circle, would be able to work out it was me. Possibly, Harry could have thought about that before publishing. He could have found me if he had tried."


You can be a fan of Harry's and still agree that it was unfair of him to write this without at least warning his old friend!

I'm pretty sure that Prince Harry could have found a way to contact Sasha prior to the book's release and at least warn her that the episode was going to be shared in his memoir.

 

[Mirabel]

She also said "It is his story, and he's entitled to write what he wants. He didn't name me but people who were there that night, or simply part of that social circle, would be able to work out it was me. Possibly, Harry could have thought about that before publishing. He could have found me if he had tried."


You can be a fan of Harry's and still agree that it was unfair of him to write this without at least warning his old friend!

Exactly! She points out that she kept the secret for 21 years.
How unkind to drag her into this after such a long time, without even a word of warning?

But Harry's memoir shows no consideration for anyone else.

 

[Granada]

Harry The Cad, in my opinion. Sasha says friends from their set "back in the day" would have figured out it was her.

She came off in the Articles I have read, as a nice and well rounded person.....unlike Harry.
Personally, i hope Sasha makes a nice little profit off this. He after all opened the door on her privacy.

There has been rampart Media speculation for weeks over who this mystery "older" woman was. Elizabeth Hurley had to issue denials that it was her.

Again, as Harry had to have known, there would have been considerable interest in WHO, as he refers to ungraciously as the 'older woman' in the book, was.

I'm a woman and that term can hurt. It was a two year age difference. Meghan is 3 years older, would he ever refer to her as "older woman"... nope. Still thought that bringing that " episode " into the Book and all the details was strange anyway.

But so much revealed in Spare and the accompanying Interviews was strange, salacious TMI. Don't forget about his freezing "todger" and the circumcision "status" of both brothers revealed.
Why ? Or, his attempts at settling scores due to Harry's bitter, deep and raging "sibling rivalry" issues with William.

I'm still wondering how all the dust will settle over these controversies over the course of this year. Once the Coronation passes I wonder what the Sussex's next move will be ?

Probably, still challenging The Family-Firm in one way or another. With either slights or grievances recounted.

Along the lines of, We could NOT go to the Coronation because The Family refused to apologize to Us......OR....... We went and were sidelined and insulted.

I think here in the States, their complaints are wearing thin, quite rapidly too.

 

[Denville]

how does it hurt? She knows how old she is, and that she's only 2 yrs older than Harry. He may have done this to try to shield her identity.

 

[sophie25]

I've read the book and I believe most of what he says. There may be details that don't add up but he is recalling some stuff that is 30 plus years old so, of course, there will be inconsistencies here and there.

 

[Denville]

I've read the book and I believe most of what he says. There may be details that don't add up but he is recalling some stuff that is 30 plus years old so, of course, there will be inconsistencies here and there.

so you believe that he was nasty and mocked a disabled lady who worked in his school? That he believed his mother faked her death and that there had been no problem with her car driving too fast into the tunnel, with a drunk driver?
And that he hit his bodyguard - drank and drugged a lot..
and that he was in school when the queen Mother died, though he was actually away on holiday?
and that he says he did not say the RF were racists, though he accepted an award for anti racism.

 

[sophie25]

so you believe that he was nasty and mocked a disabled lady who worked in his school? That he believed his mother faked her death and that there had been no problem with her car driving too fast into the tunnel, with a drunk driver?
And that he hit his bodyguard - drank and drugged a lot..
and that he was in school when the queen Mother died, though he was actually away on holiday?
and that he says he did not say the RF were racists, though he accepted an award for anti racism.

Yes I do. He was a 12 year old child in denial that his Mother was dead and he also belonged to a dysfunctional family who couldn't support him so he turned to drugs and drink. If his account of his father breaking the news of Diana's death to him is accurate then I am utterly appalled. Imagine telling a child such news and then leaving them alone for ages. Unfortunately I do believe that Charles did exactly that.

 

[Ghost]

I don’t know where this “dysfunctional family” thing came first. At any given moment they appeared to be similar to their generation. It’s utterly sad that Charled and Diana divorced, but so did countless of other couples.
Even though I understand that not everything in the book must be exacting the facts that are in the public domain, the words “so called objective facts” are iritating.
And what is appalling for me it’s how egotistic everything in the book is. No consideration for other people’s feelings, everything related to his father and his brother interpreted in a malevolent way without any argument for that. Very navel gazing.
Also, a thing that I don’t understand (I’m about at the middle of the book) is what is the narrative. It was advertized as “the man I have become”, yet I don’t see any thread of the metamorphosys yet. Only snippets of his memories, without anything keeping the story together.
Another thing (until now) is how detached he seems to be from the charity interests he was claimomg to have at the time. Only passing mentions without much detail, like somethinh he’s not interested about.
Yes, I never liked him, I’ve always found him to be stupid and spoiled.

 

[Granada]

Sophie25, not to be contentious, but Harry said he believed for at least 10 years (or so ) that Diana was actually alive, in hiding, and had faked her OWN death.

That screams deep instability to me. Very deep.
Second I don't believe that Charles was purposefully heartless in breaking the news of Diana's death to Harry, and William either. I simply don't trust Harry's account. And unless William chooses to enlighten us, we never will.

"Imagine telling a child such news AND LEAVING THEM ALONE FOR AGES" ..... Huh ?
The Queen caught a lot of criticism because She, Philip and Charles wanted them to stay in Balmoral, WITH THEM. I believe they even had the then very close Peter Phillips come to stay with Harry and William too. Where they where safe from prying eyes, and even removed the tv's to limit them being upset by the never ending Media onslaught - coverage.

I'm sorry to respectfully disagree with you, but I take SO VERY much of what Harry says with a healthy dose of skepticism.

 

[sophie25]

Sophie25, not to be contentious, but Harry said he believed for at least 10 years (or so ) that Diana was actually alive, in hiding, and had faked her OWN death.

That screams deep instability to me. Very deep.
Second I don't believe that Charles was purposefully heartless in breaking the news of Diana's death to Harry, and William either. I simply don't trust Harry's account. And unless William chooses to enlighten us, we never will.

"Imagine telling a child such news AND LEARNING THEM ALONE FOR AGES" . Huh ?
The Queen caught a lot of criticism because She, Philip and Charles wanted them to stay in Balmoral, WITH THEM. I believe they even had the then very close Peter Phillips come to stay with Harry and William too. Where they where safe from prying eyes, and even removed the tv's to limit them being upset by the never ending Media onslaught - coverage.

I'm sorry to respectfully disagree with you, but I take SO VERY much of what Harry says with a healthy dose of skepticism.

I'm sorry but I can well believe that Charles did indeed break the news of Diana's death exactly as Harry described it. As far as dysfunction goes too then look no further than the Queen, not only leaving her children for months on end but then greeting her infant with a handshake upon her return as proof of that.

 

[Denville]

I'm sorry but I can well believe that Charles did indeed break the news of Diana's death exactly as Harry described it. As far as dysfunction goes too then look no further than the Queen, not only leaving her children for months on end but then greeting her infant with a handshake upon her return as proof of that.

She didn't leave her children for months on end because she was out partying, it was her job. And Charles was not an infant. As I recall he offered his hand to his mother - he was a shy child and children are often nervous with a parent when the parent has been away for a while, and they've got to get used to them again.

 

[KristehH]

I can believe that a child could tell himself that his mother had faked her own death, as a way of trying to cope with the grief--for a few weeks or months. But to go on believing it for ten years, going into adulthood, does seem delusional.

I do not believe anything Harry says about his father and brother. He has said and implied other things that are not true, and he is definitely angry and jealous and trying to portray them in the worst possible light. So I wouldn't believe events happen as Harry claims without some reliable corroborating evidence.