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

[Lilyflo]

I think the only reason they’ve got so much sympathy is that they’ve played the race card. Without it, every one of their grievances is petty and childlish. The only things that give them a platform is this idea that they are fighting a 1000 year old monarchy and the racism accusation.

As a white woman, I know I'm blind to a lot of racism but I could clearly see the blatant racism initially in the press. I don't think it's "playing the race card" to challenge this or to recount that a member of the BRF questioned what colour Archie's skin would be.

I also think there are many valid grievances against the press in the vicious and relentless way they covered Meghan's every word and move. It was the same for Camilla and Catherine but not as much crammed into a short time, which seemed to me like a toxic avalanche on Meghan.

There are plenty of things I've criticised Harry and Meghan for (and still do) but there's no doubt in my mind that they were subjected to appalling treatment by the UK press generally and the tabloids particularly. They retain my sympathy for that, despite my annoyance at their current behaviour.

 

[camelot23ca]

The story of the school matron, more than almost anything, shows what kind of person Harry truly is. To be so blind to your own intolerance towards certain people when you harp on it in others is simply unconscionable.

My deepest sympathy in all this goes to William. After slogging through these interviews, the book clip that Harry reads that got to me most was the one of William telling Harry that he loved him and wanted him to be happy. He swore it on their mother's life, which was a sacred phrase between the brothers.

I could feel William's anguish in those words. One of an older sibling who is desperate for his troubled little brother to come back into the fold, but Harry just casually dismisses it.

Unfortunately, with Harry estranged from his family and Meghan estranged from her father, the only parental influence they have in all of this to try to talk some sense into them is Doria. But if she is like many other protective mothers, she will firmly take H&M's side and support them if Meghan has relayed to her how much the BRF and British press has upset her to the point she contemplated suicide.

The story about the matron is the most upsetting one yet. Kids can be cruel, yes, and to me, it sounds like Harry wasn't a naturally compassionate child, and even more immature than your average twelve or thirteen year old boy. But most
people grow up, and either genuinely become more empathetic or at least learn to abide by the social norms that frown on gratuitously hurting other people. Harry seems mentally stuck at adolescence.

As for Doria, she may be totally on board with Harry and Meghan’s nonsense, or she may not agree with what they're doing but knows that if she challenges them too much she’ll find herself cut off just like so many other family members. I doubt she’d ever jeopardize her relationship with her grandchildren so I imagine she either agrees with everything or keeps her mouth shut so as not to rock the boat.

 

[Curbside]

Well, to be fair, the BRF (and my country as well) was in part founded on racism. Not many say the N-word, but they do accept racist tropes.

Meghan was portrayed as coming from a poverty-stricken background. She was portrayed as an Angry Black Woman. These tropes were portrayed by the media for financial gain.

WRT to the Oprah interview, recall that Meghan was never a part of the conversations (at least it doesn't appear to be the case). She did wonder why these discussion about skin color, the titles Archie would have, and security, were happening.

Here's an excerpt of the conversation with Oprah:

Meghan: That was relayed to me from Harry. Those were conversations that family had with him. And I think . . . 

Oprah: Whoa.

Meghan: It was really hard to be able to see those as compartmentalised conversations.

Oprah: Because they were concerned that if he were too brown, that that would be a problem? Are you saying that?

Meghan: I wasn’t able to follow up with why, but that — if that’s the assumption you’re making, I think that feels like a pretty safe one, which was really hard to understand, right? Especially when — look, I — the Commonwealth is a huge part of the monarchy, and I lived in Canada, which is a Commonwealth country, for seven years. But it wasn’t until Harry and I were together that we started to travel through the Commonwealth, I would say 60 per cent, 70 per cent of which is people of colour, right?

And here she discussed Archie possibly not getting the same title as the grandchild of the monarch:

Meghan: But the idea of our son not being safe, and also the idea of the first member of colour in this family not being titled in the same way that other grandchildren would be . . .  You know, the other piece of that conversation is, there’s a convention — I forget if it was George V or George VI convention — that when you’re the grandchild of the monarch, so when Harry’s dad becomes king, automatically Archie and our next baby would become prince or princess, or whatever they were going to be.

Oprah: So, for you, it’s about protection and safety, not so much as what the . . . what the title means to the world.

Meghan: That’s a huge piece of it, but, I mean, but . . . 

Oprah:  . . . and that having the title gives you the safety and protection?

Meghan: Yeah, but also it’s not their right to take it away.

Oprah: Yeah.

Meghan: Right? And so, I think even with that convention I’m talking about, while I was pregnant, they said they want to change the convention for Archie.

Oprah: Mmm.

Meghan: Well, why?

Oprah: Did you get an answer?

Meghan: No.

Oprah: You still don’t have an answer?

Meghan: No.

Telegraph, Times, The Independent, BBC, ITV are hardly tabloids. Yet all these publications or media have criticised them since they left or at least since the book.
I wonder how do you interpret the facts. I mean, for example, Harry speaking about William’s private parts. Or her clearing about 40 seats at Wimbledon. And so on.

I think the tabloid frenzy eventually spilled over to the more traditional media.

The other part of this is the "hate" social media accounts. One of the saddest parts of the docuseries was when Bot Sentinel traced the origins of the Twitter hate accounts and found several associated with Meghan's half sister. And Queen Camilla's official biographer is one of the main Twits re-tweeting the worst hate accounts.

 

[soapstar]

Oprah: Because they were concerned that if he were too brown, that that would be a problem? Are you saying that?

Meghan: I wasn’t able to follow up with why, but that — if that’s the assumption you’re making, I think that feels like a pretty safe one, which was really hard to understand, right?

And there it is. Meghan and Oprah are saying that the BRF would have a problem if Archie were too dark. Which is racism.

 

[Curbside]

And there it is. Meghan and Oprah are saying that the BRF would have a problem if Archie were too dark. Which is racism.

I read this as bias and fear of the unknown. I can see how many would interpret this as a overtly racist. I would say, I do not.

 

[hereditarytitles]

After reading all those comments I feel a bit exhausted and not really capable to contribute.

But, today I watched the interview with Harry and Tom Bradby on German TV, RTL and it was interesting for me to see him live talking. He is stressing that he loves his father and even his brother, forgetting how much pain he put on them writing this book.

But, what to me is really the essence of all his frustrations:

1) still has not gotten over the death of his mother
2) blaming the british press for literally everything,
3)blaming the "firm" for not commenting and putting things straight.("Never complain, never comment)

I saw a documentary , made by a French TV company, about the day that Diana died. It was completely different to Harry's views and much that was reported in the British tabloids.
It showed that that car drive to a different restaurant had not been necessary at all. They stayed at the Ritz and could have staid there eating at the hotel restaurant.
They knew there were loads of paparazzis outside, so why not avoid them and stay where they were safe?


Then Dodi decided to go somewhere else, knowing that the paparazzis would follow them and hired an absolutely drunken driver(who had a history af being an alcoholic and was not a chauffeur but a hotel manager of the Ritz) who caused the mess.

If that driver had been sober he could easily have driven them to another place in just keeping calm. Sure, the paparazzis were a pest, but why why did Dodi decide to go to another place? Quite unneccesary..

Now, that is something Harry should have gotten into, but he didn't. His focus was and still is concentrating on the press, especially on the British, which I admit are cruel.



In spite of everything evil and wrong he has been saying and writing, my impression is still that he is desperately unhappy and still wants "revenge" and cannot forgive.

The happy life he is having now with his own family in California is obviously not enough for him to calm down.

 

[tommy100]

IMO the "we never said the royal family were racist" is said in a rather smug way as if "Look, we've even figured out a come back for that with out overpaid PR staff". Amazing how when everyone was saying it was racist and wondering who it was they managed to leak via Gayle King that it wasn't the late Queen or Philip. If anything they could have used it to prove their point (as they are trying to do now) - loo how out of context you've taken what we said.

TBH above all that I find their hypocrisy hard to cope with:

Harry - won't stand for anyone talking ill of his wife
Harry - my father's wife is "dangerous" and a "villain"

Harry & Meghan - Thomas Markle betrayed us by selling pictures and stories to the media for money
Harry & Meghan - where do we sign for another tell all book?

Harry - my family worked with the media to discredit us
Meghan - yes your honour I admit I did work with the authors of Finding Freedom

Harry - the media are so horrendous and horrible
Harry - et me talk some more to give the media even more to write about

Harry - no one in the family shows compassion and respect for each other
Harry - let me just slag off my dead Great Aunt (and mother of my godmother) as cruel for no real reason other than because I can


and on and on...This is why no one believes a word they say....they'll turn it on its head the next time.

 

[lucien]

I read this as bias and fear of the unknown. I can see how many would interpret this as a overtly racist. I would say, I do not.

There was no racist inclination at all!!Never.Harry [.....]said so himself in IIRC an ITV interview as,oh boy,we wanna juice up the sales don´t we....,he said he and that woman never said there was racism involved..The media did,not them.....Oh but ofcourse dear...[.....]

Suppose he doesn´t even know what racism means let alone how it feels..
Nor do I,me is a white boy,but gay as a lark!Does that count too? IOW...I don´t give a fig about him and his Wallis Simpson II...Outcasts..

Oh.have to see after my soup...made some great fresh chicken soup!Anyone?...

 

[Ghost]

It’s so insidious it makes me sick. They start with the title, prince, for the baby, they are falsely linking it to security and the going to motivation - race.


Meghan: He wasn’t going to receive security. This went on for the last few months of our pregnancy, where I’m going, ‘Hold on a second’.

Oprah: That your son — and Harry, Prince Harry’s son was not going to receive security?

Meghan: That’s right, I know.

Oprah: How . . . but how does that work?

Meghan: How does that work? It’s like, ‘No, no, no. Look, because if he’s not going to be a prince, it’s like, OK, well, he needs to be safe, so we’re not saying don’t make him a prince or a princess — whatever it’s going to be . . .
‘But if you’re saying the title is what’s going to affect their protec-tion, we haven’t created this monster machine around us in terms of clickbait and tabloid fodder. You’ve allowed that to happen, which means our son needs to be safe’.

Oprah: So, how do they explain to you that your son, the grandson, the great-grandson of the Queen . . . 

Meghan: Mm-hmm.

Oprah:  . . . is not going to have . . . he wasn’t going to be a prince? How did they tell you that? And what reasons did they give? And then say, ‘And so, therefore, you’re not . . . you don’t need protection’.

Meghan: There’s no explanation.

Oprah: Hmm.

Meghan: There’s no version. I mean, that’s the other piece of that . . . 




(…..)
Oprah: You certainly must have had some conversations with Harry about it and have your own suspicions as to why they didn’t want to make Archie a prince. What are . . .  what are those thoughts? Why do you think that is? Do you think it’s because of his race?

Meghan: (Sighs)

Oprah: And I know that’s a loaded question, but . . . 

Meghan: But I can give you an honest answer. In those months when I was pregnant, all around this same time . . .  so we have in tandem the conversation of ‘He won’t be given security, he’s not going to be given a title’ and also concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.

Oprah: What?

Meghan: And . . . 

Oprah: Who . . . who is having that conversation with you? What?

Meghan: So . . . 

Oprah: There is a conversation . . . hold on. Hold up. Hold up. Stop right now.

Meghan: There were . . . there were several conversations about it.

Oprah: There’s a conversation with you . . ? 

Meghan: With Harry.

Oprah: About how dark your baby is going to be?

Meghan: Potentially, and what that would mean or look like.

Oprah: Whoo. And you’re not going to tell me who had the conversation?

Meghan: I think that would be very damaging to them.

Oprah: OK. So, how . . . how does one have that meeting?

 

[US Royal Watcher]

Clips of the interview are out, and I've read several of the leaked pages of the book. It's just repugnant that a grown man has a fixation on being so vindictive he uses his Montecito 'exile' as the launching ground for his grievances against his family on the other side of the world.

A mature man would have done this in private, face to face with his family. That's what is called here in the USA an intervention. Family and friends gather, all issues are discussed, and the expected outcome is to move on and let bygones be bygones.
...

I don't believe that he did this to be vindictive or to force the family to address his petty grievances. He did it for money.

They have no other possible way to earn enough money to support their lifestyle so he is trading in on his connections and her heritage. The problem for them is the law of diminishing returns.

I understand the ratings for the British ITV program were underwhelming. The 60 Minutes interview did slightly better 10.5 million viewers. But the average number of 60 Minutes viewers is 9.2 million, so about 1.3 million people specifically tuned into watch Prince Harry.

Approximately 12 million watched the Oprah interview. That 12 million probably includes 2 or 3 million that regularly watch 60 Minutes. I don't know how Netflix ratings work but my understanding is that their program was popular but didn't hit the ratings they expected.

The book is a best seller but we'll see if it hits the expected sales.

Edited to correct the ratings for the 60 Minutes interview, it had 10.5 million viewers not 10.1

 

[Nico]

I read this as bias and fear of the unknown. I can see how many would interpret this as a overtly racist. I would say, I do not.

But when a member of the BRF is wearing an antique piece of jewellery, well that's different :

Your own quote (12-10-2022)

"The blackamoor brooch and the examples of enslaved people depicted in servile situations were all racist. When you depict a people as caricatures that is racist"

But, of course "recollections may vary".

Very much like H&M, how cute is that.

 

[ppetrica]

I read this as bias and fear of the unknown. I can see how many would interpret this as a overtly racist. I would say, I do not.

What I resent H&M about their racism/bias claim is that they deliberately use it knowing that it's a hot potato currently and they can benefit from it. That kind of behavior is very dangerous, not for them but for the society in the years to come.

You see, I was born in a country that had a war (I was 9 when it started). When it was finally over, the majority of the country was heavily damaged, rebuilding started almost immediately and that was the birth of a large scale corruption. Apart from the people who fought in the war and lost their homes, every day more and more people managed to get papers about their veteran status or war victim status in order to get all sorts of benefits (give people benefits and they'll be your loyal voters). Real victims and veterans are drowned in the sea of fake ones. And now, almost 3 decades later, every time when a story comes out about a war veteran/victim who needs help or has difficulties, only few people react because nobody believes them anymore.
This situation isn't a racial issue, I'm aware of that, but this is what happens when false people are loud - the ones that have a problem are not being heard anymore.

 

[camelot23ca]

I don't believe that he did this to be vindictive or to force the family to address his petty grievances. He did it for money.

They have no other possible way to earn enough money to support their lifestyle so he is trading in on his connections and her heritage. The problem for them is the law of diminishing returns.

I understand the ratings for the British ITV program were underwhelming. The 60 Minutes interview did slightly better 10.1 million viewers. But the average number of 60 Minutes viewers is 9.2 million, so about 1.3 million people specifically tuned into watch Prince Harry.

Approximately 12 million watched the Oprah interview. That 12 million probably includes 2 or 3 million that regularly watch 60 Minutes. I don't know how Netflix ratings work but my understanding is that their program was popular but didn't hit the ratings they expected.

The book is a best seller but we'll see if it hits the expected sales.

I read that the ITV interview was beaten by the premier of the new season of Happy Valley. And I have to say that finding out that there's a new season of Happy Valley coming is by far the best thing I've learned because of Spare!

 

[US Royal Watcher]

Meghan flat out said that Archie’s skin color was discussed in relation to his security and title. That is the very definition of racism. And when Oprah asked if race played a role in Archie not having a title, Meghan agreed.

I agree with you about using the word “race card.” As a Black woman, I’ve had that word thrown at me when I’ve pointed out racist, or bigoted comments.

I understand that it is frustrating to have someone uses the term "race card" rather than engage in a real discussion but at the same time, as a white woman, it is frustrating to have someone either explicitly or implicitly charge "racism" with no foundation.

I wish we could all work harder at understanding other points of view rather than simply dismissing anyone who disagrees with us of having bad intentions or just being a bad person.

 

[tihkon2]

TBH above all that I find their hypocrisy hard to cope with:

Harry - won't stand for anyone talking ill of his wife
Harry - my father's wife is "dangerous" and a "villain"

Harry & Meghan - Thomas Markle betrayed us by selling pictures and stories to the media for money
Harry & Meghan - where do we sign for another tell all book?

Harry - my family worked with the media to discredit us
Meghan - yes your honour I admit I did work with the authors of Finding Freedom

Harry - the media are so horrendous and horrible
Harry - et me talk some more to give the media even more to write about

Harry - no one in the family shows compassion and respect for each other
Harry - let me just slag off my dead Great Aunt (and mother of my godmother) as cruel for no real reason other than because I can


and on and on...This is why no one believes a word they say....they'll turn it on its head the next time.

Exactly. Harry and Megan are the worst kind of hypocrites.

 

[TLLK]

Fine for him, but what of other people?
Chelsy Davy has a new husband and baby, and has always refused to discuss her relationship with Harry.

Wouldn't it have been nice if he'd offered her the same courtesy?

Or the teachers at Ludgrove especially the one that Prince Harry admits that he mocked to amuse his classmates because of her disability and her physical appearance. I'm hoping that he makes amends for that in his book.

 

[kimebear]

(…..)
Oprah: You certainly must have had some conversations with Harry about it and have your own suspicions as to why they didn’t want to make Archie a prince. What are . . .  what are those thoughts? Why do you think that is? Do you think it’s because of his race?

Meghan: (Sighs)

Oprah: And I know that’s a loaded question, but . . . 

Meghan: But I can give you an honest answer. In those months when I was pregnant, all around this same time . . .  so we have in tandem the conversation of ‘He won’t be given security, he’s not going to be given a title’ and also concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.

Oprah: What?

Meghan: And . . . 

Oprah: Who . . . who is having that conversation with you? What?

Meghan: So . . . 

Oprah: There is a conversation . . . hold on. Hold up. Hold up. Stop right now.

Meghan: There were . . . there were several conversations about it.

Oprah: There’s a conversation with you . . ? 

Meghan: With Harry.

Oprah: About how dark your baby is going to be?

Meghan: Potentially, and what that would mean or look like.

Oprah: Whoo. And you’re not going to tell me who had the conversation?

Meghan: I think that would be very damaging to them.

Oprah: OK. So, how . . . how does one have that meeting?

The title question for Harry's children is one that needs to be settled once and for all, IMO, because of this accusation that it was based on their race.

When Louise was born, BP made an announcement that she would be titled as the daughter of an Earl and not with her rightful title of Princess of Great Britain and it was said to be with the agreement of her parents. I've always questioned that it actually was Edward and Sophie's decision and not one that was forced upon them.

In the Oprah interview, Meghan is being very clear that it was the BRF who were not letting Archie use a title, and as he is still not addressed as Archie, Earl Dumbarton on the official monarchy website as opposed to James, who is James, Viscount Severn, there's an argument to be made there.

H&M have told a pile of lies, but they may be telling the truth in this case, since there's a potential precedent already set in this regard. Regardless of the turmoil taking place, BP needs to acknowledge, one way or the other, the official status of Harry's children and not let it keep dragging on like this. They either carry the titles which are their birthright, or it's acknowledged openly that they don't and a reason is given.


Edit: And when I say a reason is given, if it's blamed on H&M, then it needs to be acknowledged by them that the reason is true. Otherwise, it's suspect.

 

[moby]

I understand that it is frustrating to have someone uses the term "race card" rather than engage in a real discussion but at the same time, as a white woman, it is frustrating to have someone either explicitly or implicitly charge "racism" with no foundation.

I wish we could all work harder at understanding other points of view rather than simply dismissing anyone who disagrees with us of having bad intentions or just being a bad person.

As a brown person, I also get frustrated by the same thing. People should be able to call out bad behavior without being called racists. It’s so manipulative to use race when convenient, and as a shield against criticism. If anything it’s misogyny that the media is perpetrating with its treatment of Diana, Camilla, Catherine and Sarah. Then again, the media was also not particularly kind to Prince Philip at the start, and who knows how his treatment would have been like in the time of social media. Curious to see how Charlotte’s spouse will be treated, assuming she’ll get married or pick a male partner.

 

[Somebody]

The title question for Harry's children is one that needs to be settled once and for all, IMO, because of this accusation that it was based on their race.

When Louise was born, BP made an announcement that she would be titled as the daughter of an Earl and not with her rightful title of Princess of Great Britain and it was said to be with the agreement of her parents. I've always questioned that it actually was Edward and Sophie's decision and not one that was forced upon them.

In the Oprah interview, Meghan is being very clear that it was the BRF who were not letting Archie use a title, and as he is still not addressed as Archie, Earl Dumbarton on the official monarchy website as opposed to James, who is James, Viscount Severn, there's an argument to be made there.

H&M have told a pile of lies, but they may be telling the truth in this case, since there's a potential precedent already set in this regard. Regardless of the turmoil taking place, BP needs to acknowledge, one way or the other, the official status of Harry's children and not let it keep dragging on like this. They either carry the titles which are their birthright, or it's acknowledged openly that they don't and a reason is given.

Edit: And when I say a reason is given, if it's blamed on H&M, then it needs to be acknowledged by them that the reason is true. Otherwise, it's suspect.

You might want to read up on the title in the various title topics. Archie could have been Earl Dumbarton from birth (and Lilibet could have been Lady Lilibet), but his parents made it known that they wanted him to be known as Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor instead. He was not eligible to be a prince as he wasn't a grandchild in male-line of a monarch nor a child of the heir's heir.

Nonetheless, it would be helpful if Charles would at some point clarify their current status - as they remain known as master and miss (on the website) while they have moved on to be grandchildren of a monarch since he ascended the throne.

However, there is no reason at all to suspect it has anything to do with race. It could have something to do with changes over time in the use of titles within the royal family (Louise and James already being known by styles derived from their father's title as earl instead of by their birthright of prince/princess).

 

[Erin9]

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

And- here it is: A Newsweek article saying many things we’ve been talking about including:

noting that if the “RF is racist” narrative was incorrect, they had 2 years to fix it. And- one of their big complaints about the RF is that they won’t fix incorrect stories about them. Like the who made who cry story from the wedding.

Note: I think we all know which story was more serious. Also- if I never hear anyone talk about that crying story again- that would be great. It really wasn’t that huge of an issue until Meghan made it one imo. Now it gets regurgitated over and over again…..


I think it’s okay to post this.

https://archive.ph/2023.01.09-17234...racism-claim-could-shatter-reputation-1772172

 

[Heavs]

The title question for Harry's children is one that needs to be settled once and for all, IMO, because of this accusation that it was based on their race.

When Louise was born, BP made an announcement that she would be titled as the daughter of an Earl and not with her rightful title of Princess of Great Britain and it was said to be with the agreement of her parents. I've always questioned that it actually was Edward and Sophie's decision and not one that was forced upon them.

In the Oprah interview, Meghan is being very clear that it was the BRF who were not letting Archie use a title, and as he is still not addressed as Archie, Earl Dumbarton on the official monarchy website as opposed to James, who is James, Viscount Severn, there's an argument to be made there.

H&M have told a pile of lies, but they may be telling the truth in this case, since there's a potential precedent already set in this regard. Regardless of the turmoil taking place, BP needs to acknowledge, one way or the other, the official status of Harry's children and not let it keep dragging on like this. They either carry the titles which are their birthright, or it's acknowledged openly that they don't and a reason is given.


Edit: And when I say a reason is given, if it's blamed on H&M, then it needs to be acknowledged by them that the reason is true. Otherwise, it's suspect.

The BRF can't actually stop Harry and Meghan from using "Earl of Dumbarton" for Archie or theoretically "Lord Archie M-W". The only thing the Queen "did" was fail to issue LPs to make Archie a Prince when he was a great grandson, which is clearly something Harry and Meghan were upset about. The only reason she actually did with the little Cambridges is concerns over if George had been a girl and Charlotte a boy that their rank/titles would be nonsensical.

I would posit that after that they threw their toys out of the pram and said "if he's not going to be Prince Archie of Sussex then he's not using a dumb name like Earl of Dumbarton!" Based on their own words and actions.

I think Charles has acknowledged that Archie and Lili are not getting HRH Prince/ss titles... by not announcing it yet. It's really not an issue to anyone but Harry, Meghan, Sussex Squad and Royal Watchers.

 

[kimebear]

You might want to read up on the title in the various title topics. Archie could have been Earl Dumbarton from birth (and Lilibet could have been Lady Lilibet), but his PARENTS made it known that they wanted him to be known as Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor instead. He was not eligible to be a prince as he wasn't a grandchild in male-line of a monarch nor a child of the heir's heir.

I'm very aware that he wasn't entitled to be a prince from birth, thank you. I was also making the point that there had been precedent within the BRF for the PARENTS to claim they didn't want the title for their children. However, that claim clearly opposes what Meghan said in the Oprah interview later. That there had been conversations between the BRF and Harry about their children not being given titles. So someone is lying, and it's far past time to find out who that is.

I think Charles has acknowledged that Archie and Lili are not getting HRH Prince/ss titles... by not announcing it yet. It's really not an issue to anyone but Harry, Meghan, Sussex Squad and Royal Watchers.

But the thing is, Charles can't stop them from having the titles until he issues the LP saying so. It's automatic.

 

[Durham]

It would have been nice if Harry could have let the journalist who shouted at Prince William after the Oprah interview know that the rf weren’t actually racist. Maybe he was too busy enjoying his new life.

Good of him to cause so much upset to race relations in the UK. Maybe it made him feel influential.

They both maliciously smeared the British rf. Which is why it’s for the best all round that his reputation, at least in this country, is well & truly shot to pieces.

 

[Durham]

That there had been conversations between the BRF and Harry about their children not being given titles. So someone is lying, and it's far past time to find out who that is.

But the thing is, Charles can't stop them from having the titles until he issues the LP saying so. It's automatic.

There may well have been conversations but the problem could have been the reaction of H&M. They may have seen it as a slight rather than understand the context. It's well known that these sort of conversations had been happening long before MM joined the rf.

To be blunt I don't think H understood what he was told.

 

[sophie25]

I haven't read previous posts recently but I can't believe that Harry has suddenly said that he didn't call his family racist. He and his wife most certainly did and even Princess Michael and her brooch were brought into it. Tom Bradby was made to look foolish in that interview as almost every time he brought up something Harty has said in the book/Oprah Harry looked at him as if he had no idea what he was talking about.

 

[tihkon2]

Isn't it mentioned in Finding Freedom or one of their other innumerable ramblings that they didn't want to use the Dumbarton title because it has "Dumb" in it? Which is quite dumb...

 

[kimebear]

To be blunt I don't think H understood what he was told.

I'm not a fan of Harry at this point, but one would think he understood how things worked with titles in his own family, especially as his first cousins had already been put in the same situation as his future children would be. If he knew that his kids would be princes/princesses once Charles ascended the throne, why make the statement that it was a decision based on their race?

 

[Sun Lion]

Wow, never thought I would get to read the text messages between Kate and Meghan arguing over Charlotte’s bridesmaid dress.

This book is a goldmine for the media.

 

[Nico]

Tom Bradby was made to look foolish in that interview as almost every time he brought up something Harty has said in the book/Oprah Harry looked at him as if he had no idea what he was talking about.

That !

I've this feeling too. Like Harry of course didn't write it but didn't read it either.

 

[_Heather_]

Tom Bradby was made to look foolish in that interview as almost every time he brought up something Harty has said in the book/Oprah Harry looked at him as if he had no idea what he was talking about.

You're certainly not wrong about this. I have a feeling this is going to lead to lots of speculation about just how intense and recent Harry's drug usage has been, lots of commentary about Meghan driving that interview and how big her role might have been in the writing of the book, etc. Harry's reactions definitely make you want to ask him if he was sitting through the same interview we all watched or writing the passages we're all reading.