#2021 Sussex Divorce | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

jbaileyfansite · 2 years

Text

Jonathan Bailey interview with the Evening Standard (2021)

There are worse places to conduct an interview than a park, and at least it’s only drizzling.

The only problem is that people won’t leave Jonathan Bailey alone. Which is to be expected, of course: he’s in Bridgerton, the most-watched original Netflix series in its history, viewed on 82 million accounts in a month since it dropped on Christmas Day. Wait. Did I say people? I meant dogs. They snaffle at his heels and rub against his legs while the humans remain impervious. This is because, devoid of his mutton chops and tailcoat, the 32-year-old actor looks a world away from Viscount Anthony Bridgerton, brother of Daphne; lover of Sienna; friend and foe of Simon, Duke of Hastings.

Today he’s dressed in a nylon jacket and sporting very different hair. ‘Bit of a spoiler for season two — I’ve had a light perm,’ he smiles.

And even if Bailey had spent the past two months in full regency costume, fame would have eluded him until lockdown eased and the usual signifiers — being hassled in restaurants, endless selfie requests — were back on the table. Until then it lies in wait, preserved in aspic.

Having spent lockdown thus far on the East Sussex coast staying home like the rest of us, Bailey admits the disconnect is confusing. ‘I feel like I’m being gaslit on a global scale,’ he laughs. ‘Even today, just meeting and talking to actual people who have seen the show feels weird. To me and all the British cast, it feels like Nasa. Netflix launched this spaceship, and you get launched into space. It’s a brilliantly traumatic thing to experience. The launch only happens once, and then it’s about tethering yourself and working it out. I think that might take a while.

‘The isolation of lockdown has been incredibly hard for everyone, but the isolation of feeling like you can’t inhabit the experience that other people are experiencing around you, while being locked down and not being able to see your friends…’ he tails off. ‘Presumably all it will take to shake it off is a big dinner, or even just having a few pints and going out.’

With a slew of TV parts under his belt (Broadchurch, Crashing, Chewing Gum, W1A) and an Olivier award for his role as Jamie in Company (2018), Bailey isn’t exactly an ingénue. But Bridgerton is one of those rare TV programmes that has bestowed fame on a global scale.

Produced by Shonda Rhimes and adapted from the historical novels of Julia Quinn, Netflix’s genre-busting costume drama reached the top 10 in 189 countries, thanks to a sharp script, lavish costumes and racially diverse cast that saw actors of colour inhabit the highest echelons of 19th-century society in a way that had never been seen on screen before. That this high society is presided over by a black woman, Queen Charlotte (Golda Rosheuvel), might be diversity divorced from any historical context, but the alternative — another costume drama inhabited by white people — has never felt more wrong.

Bailey auditioned for the part in 2018 while appearing in Company, sending off a tape to Rhimes’s production company, Shondaland. ‘I got offered the job on my 31st birthday, 25 April 2019,’ he recalls. Filming started in July 2019 and ended in March 2020, narrowly avoiding any impact from the pandemic.

‘For me it feels like a lockdown anyway when I’m working, so it’s a long time since I can remember normal life.’ Has he been he a banana bread-baking stereotype over lockdowns? ‘I made more than banana bread,’ he laughs. ‘I started with banana bread but went on to cinnamon rolls, although they looked like turds — terrible. But I made amazing hot cross buns.’

The million dollar cliché: what did he learn about himself? ‘I feel more complicated than I thought I was,’ he says. ‘And then I’ve been affirmed by certain things. I did a lot of cycling between lockdowns, in Cornwall and around Italy last summer — pure recharge, pure perspective. Nature is so important. I know everyone’s saying that, and that some people can just keep going flat out, but I know I need to recharge. And I love a bath. I’ve had weeks where I’ve had a minimum of two a day.’ He suddenly looks horrified. ‘Actually, that’s awful. Don’t put that, ’cause it’s wasting water.’

Barely has ‘what did you miss the most?’ escaped from my lips and he exclaims, ‘Theatre! Not just theatre, but the possibility of theatre. But then, I’ve been watching really brilliant theatre creatives smashing it on TV instead.’ He points out that Bridgerton cast members Rosheuvel, Ruth Gemmell, Adjoa Andoh and Luke Thompson are all regulars on the stage. ‘We should be proud in Britain that there’s a massive crossover between theatre and TV. It’s not a semi-permeable membrane: it’s all one talent pool.’

Could the Government be doing more to support theatre? ‘Absolutely. It’s just the people who are making the decisions; if it had been someone who loves theatre, and understood the importance of it, this would never have happened. There are certain things in life where you go, “That’s a marker”, and the [2019] government campaign about Fatima having to retrain in cyber was one. That was a wound that will take a long time to heal. And the other marker of a moment is Ruth Sheen’s performance in It’s A Sin [the veteran actress had a cameo as a hospital visitor who took Keeley Hawes’ character to task in the final episode]. The last year hasn’t been about Christmas and Easter. It’s been about markers like those.’

Bailey has been described online as ‘openly gay’. I point out that no actors are ever described as ‘openly straight’, and he laughs. ‘I’d say I’m not openly gay. I’m just gay.’ Although he is wary of discussing his sexuality for the sake of it. ‘Then it becomes a commodity and a currency. I knew that I wanted to be visible about my sexuality, because in all the territories that Netflix goes out in, there might be a boy somewhere that goes, “Wait, what?” Which is what I didn’t have when I was young. All I know is that I’m happy to keep working really hard and if there are opportunities for representation, and to make that point, then that’s something I’ll always strive to do.’

Like just about everyone else, he loved It’s A Sin. ‘It was an incredible way to talk about an awful pandemic, and an absolute tragedy that so many people will be triggered by it. In Ruth Sheen’s character, you have a heterosexual woman who is mother to a gay son, challenging another mother. I found that rage incredible. The gay fantasy isn’t just hanging out in bars and meeting men. The gay fantasy is to have guardian angels of allyship.’

He’s hesitant to say whether he agrees with director Russell T Davies’ assertion that gay people should play gay roles. ‘It’s a big old conversation and one I’ve spoken to Russell about, and many other actors. But it’s really hard to give a sound bite to sum up.’

I tell him I don’t want a sound bite. ‘It’s about redressing the balance of access to roles. There just aren’t that many gay roles, so when straight actors go to take that space up, it’s eliminating the chance for other [gay actors].

‘We know there has been a history of needing to be closeted to succeed and be famous, especially in acting. And the idea of not being able to believe heterosexual relations and narrative, if you know one of the actors is gay… everyone should be able to play absolutely everything. But let’s blow away all the cobwebs, and one of the hang-ups and shadows of the past is that we need to be a lot more open to the idea of sexes playing different sides. There have been amazing performances by straight people playing gay and by gay people playing straight. It’s a moment to think about that, and I think Russell’s point was that there’s a vitality and a joy to It’s A Sin because he cast gay people in gay roles. That’s completely true. It’s not a bad thing to own your narrative.”

He is glad not to have received any flack for playing a straight role such as Viscount Anthony. ‘Bearing in mind the internet is a place where anyone can say anything, there hasn’t been anyone who’s had any animosity, or challenged it, so that’s good. Yes, I’m looking forward to gay actors playing gay parts, but for me it’s so important that everyone at home can see a bit of themselves on screen, to allow them to feel heard and seen, and also allow them to have aspirations.

‘Good actors can do anything, and there’ll be amazing writers who are willing to write for everyone. If there are people who don’t have access to creating their own TV shows or telling the stories they want to tell, then absolutely, everyone has to make space for them. That’s not just to do with gender or sexuality. It’s to do with race, religion and everything else.’ He pauses. ‘The idea that someone could read that and go, “God, that’s just a woke viewpoint,” I find really funny. It’s just basic sense, isn’t it?’

Another dog — this time a cockapoo — launches itself on Bailey mid-flow. ‘We have a family cockapoo. I looked after him in Lockdown 1,’ he says. ‘That was a real baptism of fire. He ate a sock. A full sock. It was a Muji sock. Stripy. And then it came up again three days later.’ What’s he called? ‘Benson, after the village I grew up in.’

His sounds an idyllic childhood. Brought up in Oxfordshire, he eschewed drama school for an Open University degree. Neither his parents nor three older sisters have anything to do with acting, but his interest was sparked as a child after watching a production of Oliver in the village hall. He joined the local drama club and also pootled around at the back of the class while one sister did ballet. ‘I wasn’t really invited, but I remember having Velcro trainers and just squeaking in the back and trying to do some pliés. I stopped dancing aged 12 because of the inevitable narrative — peer pressure. Ballet became a euphemism for something else.’

Was he the sort of kid who always got the lead in the school play? ‘I did play Jolly Roger in Jolly Roger,’ he smiles. ‘But then I was taken down a peg or two when I played a raindrop in Noah’s Ark. You win some, you lose some.’

With Bridgerton likely to run for many more seasons, and Viscount Anthony’s storyline taking centre stage in season two (now that sister Daphne is married off, the plot will focus on his own romantic life), Bailey’s newfound fame isn’t going to dissipate any time soon. He has mixed feelings. ‘You work and strive to be an actor and you can get better at it and enjoy it. But you can’t be good at fame or enjoy it. Some people do, some people don’t. It’s a different cocktail for everyone. There are suddenly opportunities available, which is brilliant, and I’m incredibly lucky. But then I realise this is when people say it’s about saying no, because what you say no to keeps you on the path.’

What also keeps him on the right path is the role itself. ‘Bridgerton is actually delivering on changing the bar, and the standard, of representation. Because of that, I’ve had amazing messages from people who have been able to talk about their sexuality, or people who have seen themselves or their children in the Duke of Hastings [storyline]. For me that’s the thing that’s always going to ground [the experience]. It’s a candyfloss juggernaut theme park ride — like multiple sensory overload.

‘So thank God for family. Thank God for friends.’

Source

#jonathan bailey #jonny bailey #interviews #interviews:2021 #evening standard interview 2021 #i just love this interview so much

30 notes · View notes

the-empress-7 · 2 years

Note

Truthfully I think we are building up to multiple major developments in February and March. And I do mean major, not just for the Harkles, but for the Monarchy itself.

Rumor tracking anon here again

Yeah, there are a lot of astrologists who see upheaval in Charles's charts too for the month of March. Have you looked at his charts too? Some of those astrologists seeing monarchy changes in March suggest that it's some kind of "triangulation" between Charles, Harry, and Meghan. Triangulation isn't the right word, hence the quotes. I don't know what the right word is but these astrologists are saying that Charles, Harry, and Meghan are in the middle of it. Which is why I suspect it's related to titles, lawsuits, or divorce.

Taking the Sussexes out of Charles's and the monarchy's upheaval, the most popular theories from these astrologists and their communities are: an abdication, a health crisis, or a scandal (related to cash for access or Andrew) involving Charles or Camilla. And if it is Camilla-related, possibly something also involving her son and his past drug use.

There are also several astrologists and tarot readers expecting news of a new little Wales to come in March and that's all I'll say about that.

There are people who are lot more qualified than me who have made some predictions, but even astrologers who aren't paying attention to the BRF have said that March will bring upheaval for leaders around the world. The good news is that we don't have to wait too long to see what happens.

PS: I will say this, whatever happens with Charles will be tied to Andrew and Charles' own financial decisions. We have already seen plot developments around both these topics since the Scorpio/Taurus eclipses started in November 2021.

18 notes · View notes

recentlyheardcom · 11 months

Text

A former teacher mounted a campaign of harassment against her neighbour as “revenge” after she was evicted from her beach hut over playing loud music, a court has heard.Michele Spicer, 60, had paid £15,000 for her beach hut in Goring-by-Sea, in West Sussex, following her divorce in 2020, a place she termed her “mermaid haven”, but she was evicted in 2021.Rows escalated after her neighbour accused her of playing loud music on her Mercedes radio near the huts.Spicer became convinced that one neighbour was plotting to evict her, a court heard. When the hut was taken away from her by the council, she launched a campaign of “revenge” against the neighbour which became so severe that the victim was forced to leave town and even change her job.London’s High Court heard that her behaviour led to an anti-harassment injunction but that Spicer “continued to harass and intimidate” the former neighbour.Judge Richard Pearce found her in contempt of court for breaching the injunction and gave Spicer a 24-week jail sentence suspended for two years, as well as having to pay her former neighbour’s legal costs, estimated at £53,000.Michele Spicer called her beach hut in Goring-by-Sea her 'mermaid heaven' - Champion NewsThe woman victim, who cannot be named after being granted anonymity by the judge, made 30 complaints to the police leading to two community protection orders being issued to Spicer, yet this appeared to have “no effect” the court heard last week.In July 2022, the neighbour felt she had “no choice but to seek an injunction to curb Ms Spicer’s harassment of her”, which barred the former teacher from the waterfront near her former hut as well as contacting her victim or “harassing or stalking her”.Despite the injunction, she “continued to harass and intimidate” the woman, the court heard, and she was charged with contempt of court.Spicer paid £15,000 for her beach hut in Goring-by-Sea, in West SussexThe court heard that Spicer had shown “little remorse” for the victim and seemed to “be motivated by a wish to punish the claimant and to put pressure on her, and to make her life difficult – even unbearable – because she did the unthinkable and complained about her anti-social behaviour”.The victim was forced to uproot her life and change jobs as a result of the harassment.Ruling, Judge Pearce said that despite being singled out by Spicer as a key figure in lodging complaints to the council, the victim had acted “entirely appropriately in seeking to challenge such anti-social behaviour”.The loss of her “pride and joy” beach hut had a devastating impact on Spicer, he added, prompting the revenge campaign which ultimately forced her victim to sell her house and even adopt a disguise while going shopping.Spicer claimed she had sparked her neighbours’ resentment due to her 'glamorous' looksIn earlier interviews, Spicer claimed she had sparked her neighbours’ resentment due to her “glamorous” looks and her Mercedes sports car. She claimed she had carried out modelling work in Spain.“I didn’t do anything wrong – but because I model and I have a nice car, they have a certain impression of me,” she said.Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month, then enjoy 1 year for just $9 with our US-exclusive offer.

0 notes

college-girl199328 · 2 years

Text

Prince Harry, who released his bombshell autobiography Spare, is facing the same future as his great-great uncle, the former monarch Edward VIII, a royal historian has claimed. Edward was dramatically sidelined by his brother George VI after he resigned in 1936, no longer hoping to continue in the role without his wife-to-be, the twice-divorced American Wallis Simpson. Harry's exit from the Windsor household was described as a "tragedy" by Andrew Lownie, who has penned several books on the royals and claims that Harry may now well face the same decline as his relative.

Harry hurled a wave of accusations at members of his family. Among its biggest shocks included allegations that he and William had a physical altercation. In addition, he enjoyed a problematic and cold relationship with his father, King Charles III's wife, Camilla, and Queen Consort.

It has left Harry even further away from his family, with the Duke of Sussex only seeing the royals. This is because he and his wife, Meghan Markle, opted to quit their senior royal duties and cross the pond to live in the US.

The drama unfolded three years ago, was described by Mr. Lownie, who wrote 2021's Traitor King: The Scandalous Exile of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, as a "tragedy" given the "initial promise" Harry showed as a member of the Royal Family.

Before their removal, Harry and Meghan were among, if not the most popular royals, regularly appearing near the top of opinion polls, beneath only Queen Elizabeth II.

Those same polls place the pair at the bottom, with a YouGov poll published on January 12 revealing that just 24 percent of Britons now think positively about Harry. This is despite 68 percent having a negative opinion of him. The poll even showed that the disgraced Duke Andrew had better popularity ratings than him.

Their move to the US, and subsequent removal of titles and patronages, like Harry's military titles, has seen comparisons to Edward VIII. Edward VIII was banished to France after quitting the throne in 1936.

So in love was he, Edward chose to leave his job to marry Ms. Simpson. This was because rules at the time dictated that a monarch, who by law was the Head of the Church of England, could not marry a divorcee. Like Simpson is divorced.

Speaking to Express.co.uk, Mr. Lownie claimed that, like Edward, Harry would be an exile from his country, shorn of his friends and existing in cafe society. Edward continued to write his memoir, A King's Story: The Memoirs of the Duke of Windsor, as did Ms. Simpson, titled, The heart has its reasons: the biographies of the Duchess of Windsor.

Other similarities between the two have often been cited. Among the most obvious is their respective popularity, with Edward once described by The New York Times as a "romantic and carefree Prince Charming blessed with the common touch" during his younger days.

The Times' reporter, Robert Alden, noted he had been a "king of high popularity," but the "abdication that caused a worldwide sensation visibly distressed his subjects."

Likewise, in his younger days, Harry was often photographed out and about on the London clubbing circuit, often with beautiful young women. While The Sun once described him as "Dirty Harry," other publications gave him the moniker of the "Playboy Prince."

Another similarity was their shared dislike of school. Edward's obituary in the New York Times in 1972 noted how the former king "did not excel academically… he proved more interested in his banjo than in his books".

He was also a keen dancer, and writing in his diary, he talked about enjoying a late night or two: "My dancing is improving. I got in at four [o'clock in the morning]. I have had not more than eight hours' sleep in the last 72 hours!" he proclaims in another."

Archive interviews with Harry are chillingly similar. In 2015, while at a South African youth centre in Cape Town, he said he "didn't enjoy school at all," adding: "When I was at school, I wanted to be the bad boy."

More recently, Express.co.uk unearthed an incredible letter from Edward to his mother, Queen Mary, on the day his abdication was made public. His decision brought his brother George, also known as Bertie, into the fold, cementing his status as king.

In a note to his mother, Edward described his feelings towards Ms. Simpson and how excited he was to marry her. "I told you again last night that I have known for two years that I cannot live without Wallis. This made my decision easier.".

0 notes

seaweedsoup · 2 years

Text

The Haunting of Prince Harry

Electrified by outrage—and elevated by a gifted ghostwriter—his blockbuster memoir “Spare” exposes more than Harry’s enemies.

By Rebecca Mead in The New Yorker

January 13, 2023

Balmoral Castle, in the Scottish Highlands, was Queen Elizabeth’s preferred resort among her several castles and palaces, and in the opening pages of “Spare” (Random House), the much anticipated, luridly leaked, and compellingly artful autobiography of Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, its environs are intimately described. We get the red-coated footman attending the heavy front door; the mackintoshes hanging on hooks; the cream-and-gold wallpaper; and the statue of Queen Victoria, to which Harry and his older brother, William, always bowed when passing. Beyond lay the castle’s fifty bedrooms—including the one known in the brothers’ childhood as the nursery, unequally divided into two. William occupied the larger half, with a double bed and a splendid view; Harry’s portion was more modest, with a bed frame too high for a child to scale, a mattress that sagged in the middle, and crisp bedding that was “pulled tight as a snare drum, so expertly smoothed that you could easily spot the century’s worth of patched holes and tears.”

It was in this bedroom, early in the morning of August 31, 1997, that Harry, aged twelve, was awakened by his father, Charles, then the Prince of Wales, with the terrible news that had already broken across the world: the princes’ mother, Princess Diana, from whom Charles had been divorced a year earlier and estranged long before that, had died in a car crash in Paris. “He was standing at the edge of the bed, looking down,” Harry writes of the moment in which he learned of the loss that would reshape his personality and determine the course of his life. He goes on to describe his father’s appearance with an unusual simile: “His white dressing gown made him seem like a ghost in a play.”

What ghost would that be, and what play? The big one, of course, bearing the name of that other brooding princely Aitch: Hamlet. Within the first few pages of “Spare,” Shakespeare’s play is alluded to more than once. There’s a jocular reference: “To beard or not to beard” is how Harry foreshadows a contentious family debate over whether he should be clean-shaven on his wedding day. And there’s an instance far graver: an account, in the prologue, of a fraught encounter between Harry, William, and Charles in April, 2021, a few hours after the funeral of the Duke of Edinburgh, the Queen’s husband and the Royal Family’s patriarch, at Windsor. The meeting had been called by Harry in the vain hope that he might get his obdurate parent and sibling, first and second in line to the throne, to see why he and his wife, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, had felt it necessary to flee Britain for North America, relinquishing their royal roles, if not their ducal titles. The three men met in Frogmore Gardens, on the Windsor estate, which includes the last resting place of many illustrious ancestors, and as they walked its gravel paths they talked with increasing tension about their apparently irreconcilable differences. They “were now smack in the middle of the Royal Burial Ground,” Harry writes, “more up to our ankles in bodies than Prince Hamlet.”

King Charles, as he became upon the death of Queen Elizabeth, in September, will not find much to like in “Spare,” which may offer the most thoroughgoing scything of treacherous royals and their scheming courtiers since the Prince of Denmark’s bloody swath through the halls of Elsinore. Queen Camilla, formerly “the Other Woman” in Charles and Diana’s unhappy marriage, is, Harry judges, “dangerous,” having “sacrificed me on her personal PR altar.” William’s wife, Kate, now the Princess of Wales, is haughty and cool, brushing off Meghan’s homeopathic remedies. William himself is domineering and insecure, with a wealth of other deficits: “his familiar scowl, which had always been his default in dealings with me; his alarming baldness, more advanced than my own; his famous resemblance to Mummy, which was fading with time.” Charles is, for the most part, more tenderly drawn. In “Spare,” the King is a figure of tragic pathos, whose frequently repeated term of endearment for Harry, “darling boy,” most often precedes an admission that there is nothing to be done—or, at least, nothing he can do—about the burden of their shared lot as members of the nation’s most important, most privileged, most scrutinized, most publicly dysfunctional family. “Please, boys—don’t make my final years a misery,” he pleads, in Harry’s account of the burial-ground showdown.

As painful as Charles must find the book’s revealing content, he might grudgingly approve of Harry’s Shakespearean flourishes in delivering it. Thirty-odd years ago, in giving the annual Shakespeare Birthday Lecture at the Swan Theatre in Stratford-Upon-Avon, the future monarch spoke of the eternal relevance of the playwright’s insights into human nature, citing, among other references, Hamlet’s monologue with the phrase “What a piece of work is a man!” Shakespeare, Charles told his audience, offers us “blunt reminders of the flaws in our own personalities, and of the mess which we so often make of our lives.” In “Spare,” Harry describes his father’s devotion to Shakespeare, paraphrasing Charles’s message about the Bard’s works in terms that seem to refer equally to that other pillar of British identity, the monarchy: “They’re our shared heritage, we should be cherishing them, safeguarding them, and instead we’re letting them die.”

Harry counts himself among “the Shakespeareless hordes,” bored and confused as a teen-ager when his father drags him to see performances of the Royal Shakespeare Company; disinclined to read much of anything, least of all the freighted works of Britain’s national author. (“Not really big on books,” he confesses to Meghan Markle when, on their second date, she tells him she’s having an “Eat, Pray, Love” summer, and he has no idea what she’s on about.) Harry at least gives a compelling excuse for his inability to discover what his father so valued, though it’s probably not one that he gave to his schoolmasters at Eton. “I tried to change,” he recalls. “I opened Hamlet. Hmm: Lonely prince, obsessed with dead parent, watches remaining parent fall in love with dead parent’s usurper . . . ? I slammed it shut. No, thank you.”

That passage indicates another spectral figure haunting the text of “Spare”—that of Harry’s ghostwriter, J. R. Moehringer. Harry, or his publishing house—which paid a reported twenty-million-dollar advance for the book—could not have chosen better. Moehringer is a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter turned memoirist and novelist, as well as the ghostwriter of, most notably, Andre Agassi’s thrillingly candid memoir, “Open.” In that book, published in 2009, a tennis ace once reviled for his denim shorts and flowing mullet revealed himself to be a troubled, tennis-hating neurotic with father issues and an unreliable hairpiece. When the title and the cover art of “Spare” were made public, late last year, the kinship between the two books—single-word title; closeup, set-jaw portrait—indicated that they were to be understood as fraternal works in the Moehringer œuvre. Moehringer has what is usually called a novelist’s eye for detail, effectively deployed in “Spare.” That patched, starched bed linen at Balmoral, emblazoned with E.R., the formal initials of the Queen, is, of course, a metaphor for the constricting, and quite possibly threadbare, fabric of the institution of monarchy itself.

Moehringer has also bestowed upon Harry the legacy that his father was unable to force on him: a felicitous familiarity with the British literary canon. The language of Shakespeare rings in his sentences. Those wanton journalists who publish falsehoods or half-truths? They treat the royals as insects: “What fun, to pluck their wings,” Harry writes, in an echo of “King Lear,” a play about the fragility of kingly authority. During his military training as a forward air controller, a role in which he guided the flights and firepower of pilots from an earthbound station, Harry describes the release of bombs as “spirits melting into air”—a phrase drawn from “The Tempest,” a play about a duke in exile across the water. Elevating flourishes like these give readers—perhaps British ones in particular—a shiver of recognition, as if the chords of “Jerusalem” were being struck on a church organ. But they also remind those readers of the necessary literary artifice at work in the enterprise of “Spare,” as Moehringer shapes Harry’s memories and obsessions, traumas and bugbears, into a coherent narrative: the peerless ghostwriter giving voice to the Shakespeareless prince.

Moehringer has fashioned the Duke of Sussex’s life story into a tight three-act drama, consisting of his occasionally wayward youth; his decade of military service, which included two tours of duty in Afghanistan; and his relationship with Meghan. Throughout, there are numerous bombshells, which—thanks to the o’er hasty publication of the book’s Spanish edition—did not so much melt into air as materialize into clickbait. These included the allegation that, in 1998, Camilla leaked word to a tabloid of her first meeting with Prince William—according to Harry, the opening sally in a campaign to secure marriage to Charles and a throne by his side. (Harry does not mention that, at the time, Camilla’s personal assistant took responsibility for the leak—she’d told her husband, a media executive, who’d told a friend, who’d told someone at the Sun, who’d printed it. Bloody journalists.) They also include less consequential but more titillating arcana, such as Harry’s account of losing his virginity, in a field behind a pub, to an unnamed older woman, who treated him “not unlike a young stallion. Quick ride, after which she’d smacked my rump and sent me off to graze.” The Daily Mail, Harry’s longtime media nemesis, had a field day with that revelation, door-stepping a now forty-four-year-old businesswoman to come up with the deathless headline “Horse-loving ex-model six years older than Harry, who once breathlessly revealed the Prince left her mouth numb with passionate kissing in a muddy field, refuses to discuss whether she is the keen horsewoman who took his virginity in a field.”

The leaks have done the book’s sales no harm, and neither have Harry’s pre-publication interviews on “Good Morning America” and “60 Minutes”; in the U.K., Harry did an hour-and-a-half-long special with Tom Bradby, the journalist to whom Meghan tearfully bemoaned, in the fall of 2019, that “not many people have asked if I’m O.K.” But “Spare” is worth reading not just for its headline-generating details but also for its narrative force, its voice, and its sometimes surprising wit. Harry describes his trepidation in telling his brother that he intended to propose to Meghan: William “predicted a host of difficulties I could expect if I hooked up with an ‘American actress,’ a phrase he always managed to make sound like ‘convicted felon’ ”—an observation so splendid that a reader can only hope it was actually Harry’s.

There is much in the book that people conversant with the contours of the Prince’s life, insofar as they have hitherto been reported, will find familiar. At the same time, Harry bursts any number of inaccurate reports, including a rumored flirtation with another convicted fel— sorry, American actress, Cameron Diaz: “I was never within fifty meters of Ms. Diaz, further proof that if you like reading pure bollocks then royal biographies are just your thing.” Not a few of the incidents Harry chooses to describe in detail are centered on images or stories already in the public domain, such as being beset by paparazzi when leaving night clubs—he explains that he started being ferried away in the trunk of his driver’s car so as to avoid lashing out at his pursuers—and being required to perform uncomfortable media interviews while serving in Afghanistan in exchange for the newspapers’ keeping shtum about his deployment, for security reasons. (An Australian publication blew the embargo, and Harry was swiftly extracted from the battlefield.)

Given that what Harry dredges up from his past are so often things that have been publicly documented, one wonders whether Moehringer was obliged to indulge Harry’s extended dilation upon media-inflicted wounds, through Zoom sessions that even sympathetic readers will find exhausting to contemplate. There is a certain amount of score-settling and record-straightening, which, though obviously important to the author, can be wearying to a reader, who may feel that if she has to read another word about those accursed bridesmaids’ dresses—of who said what to whom, and who caused whom to cry—she just might burst into tears herself. More significantly, though, there are broadsides against unforgivable intrusions committed by the press, including phone hacking. (Harry is still engaged in lawsuits against a number of British newspapers that allegedly intercepted his voice mails more than a dozen years ago.)

And then there are pages and pages devoted to Harry’s personal trials, which even the most dogged reporter on Fleet Street would not dare dream of uncovering. Chief among these is Harry’s struggle to overcome penile frostnip after a charitable Arctic excursion with a group of veterans, which ends up in a clandestine visit to a Harley Street doctor; he writes, “North Pole, I told him. I went to the North Pole and now my South Pole is on the fritz.” “On the fritz” is an Americanism that we can hope Harry picked up while guiding American pilots—he calls them Yanks—back to base in Afghanistan, rather than the exchange being the ingenious invention of his ghostwriter. Moehringer, on the whole, does a good job of conveying the laddish argot of a millennial British prince, who addresses his friends as “mate” and—repeatedly—calls his penis his “todger.”

Above all, “Spare” is worth reading for its potential historical import, which is likely to resonate, if not to the crack of doom, then well into the reign of King Charles III, and even into that of his successor. As was the case in 1992 with the publication of “Diana: Her True Story,” by Andrew Morton—to whom, it was revealed after her death, the Princess of Wales gave her full coöperation, herself the ghost behind the writer—“Spare” is an unprecedented exposure of the Royal Family from the most deeply embedded of informants. The Prince in exile does not hesitate to detail the pettiness, the vanity, and the inglorious urge toward self-preservation of those who are now the monarchy’s highest-ranking representatives.

It’s not clear that even now, having authored a book, Harry entirely understands what a book is; when challenged by Tom Bradby about his decision to reveal private conversations after having railed so forcefully about the invasive tactics of the press, Harry replied, “The level of planting and leaking from other members of the family means that in my mind they have written countless books—certainly, millions of words have been dedicated to trying to trash my wife and myself to the point of where I had to leave my country.” Pity the poor ghostwriter who has to hear his craft compared to the spewing verbiage of the media churn—by its commissioning subject, no less. (Man, what a piece of work.) Remarkably, Prince Harry has suggested that he sees the book as an invitation to reconciliation, addressed to his father and brother—a way of speaking to them publicly when all his efforts to address them privately have failed to persuade. “Spare” is, you might say, Prince Harry’s “Mousetrap”—a literary device intended to catch the conscience of the King, and the King after him.

If so, the ruse seems about as likely to end well for Harry as Hamlet’s play-within-a-play efforts did for him. Moehringer, at least, knows this, even if Harry may hope that his own royal plot will swerve unexpectedly from implacable tragedy to restitutive melodrama. In a soaring coda, Moehringer has the Prince once again reflecting on the royal dead, describing the family he belongs to as nothing less than a death cult. “We christened and crowned, graduated and married, passed out and passed over our beloveds’ bones. Windsor Castle itself was a tomb, the walls filled with ancestors,” Harry writes. It’s a powerful motif: the Prince—shattered in childhood by his mother’s death, his every step determined by the inescapable legacy of the countless royal dead—as an unwilling Hamlet pushed, rather than leaping, into the grave.

Recalling the meeting with his father and brother in the Frogmore burial ground with which the book began, Harry invokes the most famous soliloquy from the play of Shakespeare’s that he says he once slammed shut: “Why were we here, lurking along the edge of that ‘undiscover’d country, from whose bourn no traveller returns?’ ” Then comes a final, lovely, true, and utterly poetry-puncturing observation: “Though maybe that’s a more apt description of America.” In moving to the paradisaical climes of California, Harry has been spared a life he had no use for, which had no real use for him. The unlettered Prince has gained in life what Hamlet achieved only in death: his own story shaped on his own terms, thanks to the intervention of a skillful Horatio. You might almost call it Harry’s crowning achievement. ♦

Published in the print edition of the

January 23, 2023, issue, with the headline “The Royal Me.”

Rebecca Mead

is a staff writer at The New Yorker. Her most recent book is “Home/Land.”

0 notes

xtruss · 2 years

Text

Books: The Haunting of Prince Harry! Electrified By Outrage—and Elevated By a Gifted Ghostwriter—His Blockbuster Memoir “Spare” Exposes More Than Harry’s Enemies.

— January 23, 2023 Issue | By Rebecca Mead | January 13, 2023 | The New Yorker

The Prince has suggested that he sees his book as an appeal for reconciliation, addressed to his father and brother. Photograph from Max Mumby/Indigo/Getty Images

— Published in the print edition of the January 23, 2023, Issue, with the headline “The Royal Me.”

0 notes

sasa-chans-random-history · 2 years

Text

January 08

[871] Battle of Ashdown: Ethelred I of Wessex and his brother Alfred the Great beat invading Danish army.

[1297] Monaco gains its independence.

[1310] The Great Frost: In London the Thames River froze so thickly bonfires were lit on it.

[1499] King Louis XII of France after papal divorce marries Anne, Duchess of Brittany to keep duchy for the crown.

[1806] Lewis and Clark find the skeleton of 105' blue whale in Oregon.

[1811] US Vice President John C. Calhoun (28) weds Floride Bonneau (19).

[1835] President Andrew Jackson achieves his goal of entirely paying off the United States' national debt. It was the only time in U.S. history that the national debt stood at zero, and it precipitated one of the worst financial crises in American history.

[1930] Belgium Princess Marie-Jose weds Italy's Crown Prince Umberto.

[1948] Queen Wilhelmina of Netherlands signs death sentence against Ans van Dijk for treason.

[1959] A triumphant Fidel Castro enters Havana, having deposed the American-backed regime of General Fulgencio Batista.

[1961] The French vote for Algerian independence from French rule in the wake of seven years of guerrilla war.

[1963] At the National Gallery of Art in Washington D.C., Leonardo da Vinci's masterpiece, the Mona Lisa, is exhibited for the first time in America.

[1978] Harvey Milk becomes the 1st openly gay person elected to public office in California.

[1998] Comedian and actress Roseanne Barr files for divorce from 3rd husband Ben Thomas.

[2001] The identities of 2 boys who murdered a toddler in 1993 will be kept secret, the High Court rules.

[2018] Puerto Rican singer and actor Ricky Martin (46) reveals he has wed Syrian-Swedish painter Jwan Yosef (33).

[2020] Duke and Duchess of Sussex announce they are stepping back as "senior" royals, will work towards becoming financially independent.

[2021] Twitter bans US President Donald Trump permanently "due to the risk of further incitement of violence".

0 notes

snifflesthemouse · 3 years

Text

This morning, I read an article titled “I went undercover in the sinister world of Meghan Markle hate accounts" posted to Refinery 29. The title gives the impression of a journalist disguising one’s self as a “Meghan Markle hater” for the sake of getting to the bottom of something. However, the content of the article is nothing like its title.

Before I go further, let me stress the importance of perspective. My post isn’t an attack on the article’s author. I’ve never even heard of the author before now, and I’ve no right or reason to attack a perfect stranger because I vehemently disagree with the content of their work. Making assumptions about someone solely on what they write is lazy and sloppy in my opinion. I may be lazy and sloppy, but a hypocrite I try not to be. Therefore, go forward remembering my issues are with content, not creator.

The article starts out explaining the origins of the term “Megxit”. It continues with other hashtags, conspiracy theories, and so on. The article even mentions various media platforms “attacking" the Duchess, as well as crude posts witnessed by the author.

Then the name dropping begins. First with Murky Meg, then Sue Blackhurst, then According2Taz, then Skippyv20 on Tumblr, then Yankee Wally. Eventually, names of Royal Rota journalists are dropped. Then people like Angela Levin and Omid Scobie get mentioned, with interviews from the latter. Instead of an undercover sting, we get a “Who’s Who" of Megxit, a few anonymous Sussex Squad quotations, and Omid trying his best to be fair.

What this article accomplishes is very little when it comes to objectivity. The title is a misconception, and the content essentially paints targets on the backs of the people the author carelessly considers “Meghan Markle Haters". The article reduces anyone who disagrees with Meghan’s behavior as racist, misogynist, conspiracy theorist nutters. So, not only is the content of the article sloppy and lazy, it also lacks originality. We’ve all heard this sad song-and-dance number a million times.

I guess at face value, it becomes very easy, effortless really, for outsiders looking in to reduce an entire group of people with similar views to the basic stereotypes as old as time. It takes very little thought, consideration, or critical analysis, to assume things because they seem to correlate. But correlation is not causation. Just because some people opposing of Meghan Markle’s behavior happen to be racist doesn’t mean every single opposing person is also racist. Again, lazy and sloppy.

Just like assuming every single Meghan Markle fan is also vegan, anti-monarchy, feminist, woke warriors is downright sloppy and lazy. This author has personally interacted with and found common ground with Sussex Squad people many times. Some even became social media friends. They believe what they do, and I believe what I do. We do not agree with most things regarding Harry and Meghan, but we do agree to disagree and be civil.

So, contrary to the article, not all people “hate" Meghan Markle just because they detest her behavior. It’s important to remember extremes exist for all spectrums. Every topic, especially those politicized or made popular by media platforms, have extremes. There is no denying the fact that there are people who hate Meghan Markle because of her ethnicity. Those extremists who hate Meghan for her ethnicity ironically do not discriminate, though. If they hate her for her ethnicity, they hate ALL people of that same ethnicity.

On the flip side of this coin, is the other extreme. The face is the same on each side because the face represents extremism. There is no denying the fact that there are extremists who see anyone opposing Meghan as racists. Extremists who, by default, view every issue in the world through the lens of racism. While racism is a serious problem that deserves no place in society, assuming racism is the root cause of every conflict is also lazy and sloppy. And the same could be said that these extremists do not discriminate, either. If they see race as the only issue for why people “hate" Meghan Markle, they see race as the only issue for most everything.

The problem with both extremes is when everything and everyone is reduced to racial identity, racism only continues to exist. A racist using skin color as a disqualifier perpetuates racism. Assuming racism is the only reason behind disdain for someone only perpetuates racism. Focusing on race or racism allows no room for content of character.

Especially when people defend Meghan Markle being the victim of racism with a racist rule. When opposing critics say “I didn’t even know she was Black" or suggest her physical features, her Hollywood CV, or past involvement with Black causes were nonexistent before she became a duchess or stepped down from being a working royal, the extremists on the other side often resort to the One Drop Rule.

Which means their defense for calling Meghan Markle “haters" racists, even though they might have never knew she was mixed race, is a form of racism. The One Drop Rule was borne from the Reconstruction Era post-Civil War. The “rule" essentially said anyone who appeared to have Black features were considered Black.

The One Drop Rule was the precursor and eventual backbone to Jim Crow Laws of the South. It was used to oppress and segregate Americans based on physical appearance. Considering most people who never heard of Meghan before Harry came along were ignorant to her mixed heritage, it seems grossly negligent to assume race is the real issue. How can one be racist toward Meghan when they didn’t know she was mixed race? This author wasn’t aware of Meghan’s ethnicity prior to it being pointed out (by her and Harry. Repeatedly.), mainly because this author didn’t care.

Like so many, when I first saw Meghan and Harry together for the engagement interview, I was more excited about a fellow American joining the Royal Family. After learning she was biracial, well it was even better. It represented change and progress. Does that mean I saw the Royal Family as racists beforehand? No. It means I saw them as exactly the opposite. Had they been racist, she’d not be a duchess. Her being American and divorced was more a shock to me than being mixed.

The point of all this is there are extremists on every spectrum. For a journalist to say they went undercover, when in fact they did not, to expose the true motives behind Meghan Markle “haters", only to find they did very little to really understand the other side was disappointing. Not surprising, just disappointing. This could’ve been an excellent opportunity for someone to take the reigns and make bridges between two very passionate factions. Instead it became nothing more than a hit piece.

The article fails to acknowledge the possibility – no, the probability – that most people who object to Meghan Markle do so because of how she behaves. The article only considers one possibility behind this “hate". And by calling the objections “hate", the article in turn defines all criticisms as hate speech. Again, unoriginal, sloppy, and lazy.

So here we have it, yet another article grouping and stereotyping anyone who disapproves of Meghan and Harry as racist haters. Yet again, another article name dropping people “deemed racist haters", essentially painting even bigger targets on the backs of those people. Like they didn’t already have enough hate mail. Yet again, another sloppy, lazy, article that never digs below the surface to understand why instead of assuming it.

This isn’t new, it’s just another slop drop from the sensationalism machine that has replaced fair, legitimate journalism. It would be different if there weren’t so many questions surrounding the births. It would be different if Meghan Markle actually lived by the example she so vehemently preaches. It would be different if Meghan Markle would make amends with her own family before telling the world how they should treat people. It would be different if Meghan Markle were a strong woman instead of claiming to be one.

But it’s not different. She hasn’t spoken to her father since two days before her wedding three years ago. She denies the family connections that existed before her fame. She ghosts people once they are no longer of benefit. She preaches equality and universal service while using her title every chance given. She and her husband criticize the “family she never had" while naming their second child after that family’s Matriarch. All of those are behaviors that incite strong emotional responses. Behaviors. And behavior has no racial identity.

A final note… hypocrisy is the main reason people have issues with anything. When one group of people tells another group to stop attacking a public figure, while using assumptions as their crusade call, it’s hypocrisy. One cannot say “if you can’t take the heat, then shut up!” to another without being a hypocrite. When that happens, don’t be surprised when the same exact thing is said back. If Meghan or her fans can’t take the criticism, they shouldn’t participate in it. We all have the right to choose. Just like if I couldn’t handle the criticism, I’d not be writing this.

Life is not fair. The world is a dark, cruel place. When we expect the world to bend to the will of a few, we are setting ourselves above the majority. A strong woman would know this. A strong woman fighting for others would also know that the only person responsible for how one feels is one’s self. External feedback isn’t responsible for internal turmoil. Internal feedback is. That is all.

REFERENCE:

Amoako, A. (2021 June 11). I went undercover in the sinister world of Meghan Markle hate accounts. Refinery29. Retrieved from: https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/2021/06/10518195/megxit-meghan-markle-anti-fandom

#murky meg #megxit #yankeewally #prince harry #according2taz

199 notes · View notes

go-scottishgal14 · 3 years

Text

from Taki’s magazine...

The End Game

Bruce Antonio Laue

March 09, 2021

The wedding was marvelous, the weather superb. Crowds ten deep along the mall to Windsor Castle. An American bride for the warrior-prince. The pubs rang out with cheers “To the Royal Couple”!

A breath of fresh air; the Brits are always up for a breath of fresh air. They gave us the Rolling Stones, the Beatles, and the miniskirt, for heaven’s sake. And here she was, young, beautiful, American, an actress, Catholic, divorced, and biracial. Perfect. What could possibly go wrong? Meghan Markle was about to enter a life of luxury, glamour, and deference the likes of which few people can imagine, let alone aspire to, a life she craved but did not understand. The latest fashions, the finest entertainments, the love of a besotted young man who, with a little encouragement, might mimic the career of his kinsman, Lord Louis Mountbatten of Burma. All this, and at so little cost to the bride.

In exchange for all this, the British people expected her to try to stay awake while visiting the gluten-free gumball factory as the plant manager explains how the little suckers are produced. At times a plaque must be unveiled on the side of a post office, hospital, college, railway station, or army barracks. Occasionally little school children need to be patted on the head, no problem; the Duchess likes children, or so she says. And then there are the trips, lots and lots of trips; to Fiji, Lesotho, Tonga, Tuvalu, and many more places that Her Highness has never heard of, and there will be gifts and dinners and more gifts and more little heads to be patted. And then there are men standing in straight lines all wearing the same funny suits, carrying rifles because they have sworn to defend you and your family with their lives, if need be. All you have to do is walk past them down the line and smile. When you have a child, people will cheer and artillery will sound and bells will ring and there will be happiness everywhere. That’s it, that’s all that’s expected.

“To refuse to do your duty is a selfish impulse the British cannot understand.”

And it was unsurvivable. Unsurvivable.

There were some early clues; the toothless smile at the Trooping of the Colour (it was almost a smirk). The reticence in allowing photos of her newborn son Archie to be published. The move to Canada—well, all right, grandmother’s profile is on every coin so we’re not really that far away. But then California, bumming off friends or business contacts. Then Megxit—an act so shocking that it was easily compared to the 1936 abdication crisis. To refuse to do your duty is a selfish impulse the British cannot understand. It goes against their basic concepts of personal identity; it is akin to cowardice. Your duty is something you knew was expected of you when you were born to a specific role in society or took an oath to uphold certain principles or values. To dishonor them is to dishonor yourself. It is a way of thinking Meghan Markle cannot grasp.

And then the interview, complete with background music. Oprah, to her credit, said it was “your truth,” not “the truth.” Markle’s ridiculous contention that her son would not receive security protection or that he would not be provided a princely title is for an American audience not familiar with the workings of royal etiquette. Harry could have bestowed his subsidiary title of Baron Dumbarton on his infant son immediately but refused in an act of petty narcissism rare in British society. His whining about money, as if fully expecting his countrymen to finance his lifestyle after he objected to carrying out his royal role. And he spouted a lie that he thought the public might consider—that his father and brother were “trapped” in their roles, that their duty was thrust upon them as it was on him, that some devious entity had hijacked their true life paths. What garbage. It was a disingenuous ploy to escape the contempt merited by his failure of character.

In its totality, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex engaged in an act of pure selfishness that bespoke a lack of respect for their family, their country, and the service they had pledged to perform.

One can envision the reaction of the millions of women living in tiny houses or “council housing” trying to lovingly make them into homes for their families, clipping the 99-cent coupon for the roast beast Sunday feast, their mouths agape at the sheer nerve. One can only imagine the murmured comments at the Cavalry and Guards Club or White’s or the Victory Service, as everyone stood around the television in the library sipping single malts; “Well, no more balcony time for them,” “I’ll be damned,” “I wouldn’t have believed it if you had told me.” The pubs must have been silent, pints quietly poured as the Duchess described her awful royal existence from the garden of a nameless estate in the warm sunshine of California as people in London, Cardiff, Aberdeen, and Belfast continue to die from a pandemic in the cold, damp air of a British spring.

Prince Henry Mountbatten-Windsor, Duke of Sussex, seems consigned by his wife or by choice to a life of poolside parties, discussing the finer points of child rearing with his good friends Kanye and Wendy Williams, sipping pinot grigio while passing the appetizers to Fergie (the rapper, not his aunt), discussing the plight of the Ndebele with Lily Cole, and “making shapes” on the dance floor with the rest of the Beverly Hills bric-a-brac. It makes the life of his great-great uncle, the Duke of Windsor, and his wife from Baltimore look absolutely disciplined by comparison.

In Henry V the Bard has the King proclaim outside the walls of Harfleur, “The game’s afoot!” But in Prince Harry’s case, one might be forgiven to suspect that the game has ended.

185 notes · View notes

brf-rumortrackinganon · 5 months

Note

“And anyway, just to sum all this up with anon’s original post about Monaco: I am fully expecting the BRF to give the Sussexes the Monaco treatment if there’s ever a divorce. All the footage will be scrubbed. All the articles will be sanitized, if not scrubbed outright.” Color me intrigued! Two questions: 1) what do YOU think happened with Charlene? I’ve vaguely followed but hearing about the tears has got my interest piqued. 2) what articles would be scrubbed? Positive or negative?

My theory about the Monaco wedding is that I think Charlene found out Albert wasn't so totally forthcoming about his past relationships, how many children he had, and how involved he planned to remain in their lives. My feeling is that she was spun a fairy tale of "you can fix him" and learned it was all lies just before the wedding.

I do think there's some truth she tried to leave shortly before the wedding but was somehow stopped, and I think she did have her passports taken, as some of the gossip that has leaked out claim, so I do feel like she's trapped in a terrible situation. (And part of me wonders if perhaps Meghan co-opted this narrative from Charlene as her own with her claims to Oprah that the BRF took her passports and kept her from leaving. There was quite a bit of gossip about Charlene's situation that Meghan would have been familiar with, even if only in a pop culture context.)

I'm not sure that I fully believe Monaco's claim in 2021 that Charlene suffered an ENT infection and required such a significant recovery that she couldn't travel; my suspicions are that it possibly was also a mental health crisis. I must admit, I was completely expecting a divorce narrative to emerge from that - or, if not divorce then a separation where Charlene is in South Africa, Albert remains in Monaco, and the children go back and forth. And perhaps Charlene's long stay in Souh Africa following her ENT infection/surgery was an attempt to negotiate terms of the separation but when it became clear that Albert was not going to let go of the kids, she had no choice but to come back and I think they now have an agreement in place where he lets her do her own thing as long as she shows up the handful of times each year that they need to play happy families.

Anyway, as for scrubbing the Sussex coverage - my theory is I think everything will go. The positive stories will be spun into attack pieces villainizing Meghan. The negative stories will be sanitized to be sympathetic to Harry. I think the BRF will try to take down all the "official" videos from accounts like their own official social media, the BBC, etc. - similar to how they pulled down footage from The Queen's funeral or the 1969 documentary - and make it archival on request only. It's going to be subtle, though. It's not going to be an overnight transformation; I think we'd see some of the older stories about Meghan misbehaving coming back up in a "see, the rot was always there" campaign feeding into a larger overhaul...kind of like a reverse Operation PB.

Of course, the caveat is that this is only under a King Charles, since Charles wants to rehabilitate Harry in whatever way he can to have him come home. If it happened under a King William, I think we can still expect the attack pieces on Meghan, but I doubt we'd see any effort to clean up Harry's side of the mess.

#ask #brf #monaco royal family #theories

28 notes · View notes

the-empress-7 · 3 years

Note

I was thinking about Meghan's "rise" to fame and had a pretty big lightbulb. If you actually look at her entire relationship history since Trevor, you can see clearly how she trades men for status to get fame and attention, and it begs the question of "who comes after the BRF?"

2004 - 2012, the Trevor years when she desperately wanted red carpet Hollywood fame and attention thru Trevor's producer connections.

2012 - 2014, the WAG months when Meghan was separated from Trevor and first living in Toronto. She was rumored to have left Trevor for Michael Del Zotto (then of the NY Rangers) and other rumors said she was popular amongst Toronto Maple Leaf players. In this era, she had Hollywood attention via Suits but was desperate for the money and deals that came with being linked to pro athletes (including a friendship with Serena Williams).

2014 - 2016, the Cory years when Meghan was rising to the top of Toronto society thru her affiliations with Soho, JM, Marcus, Lainey, and Cory. She had (some) Hollywood attention with Suits, society's attention with Soho, Toronto's attention with Cory, and endorsements/money/deals with her blog. But she still had to work when she really just wanted to coast thru life spending other people's money.

2016 - 2021, the Harry years when Meghan was royal-adjacent with connections to literally the Who's Who of the entire world and relatives who could bend the press to her will. Now Meghan had everything she wanted: red carpet fame and attention, pop culture exposure and inclusion, access to and control of society, and a jetsetting lifestyle funded by someone else's money with the added bonus of international glory.

But as I asked earlier, where does Meghan go from here? There's no status higher than the global elite, which the BRF is. There's no one with more connections or access than the BRF. There's no one with more fame than the BRF. There's no one with a bigger press operation working for them than the BRF. There's no one with more protection than the BRF.

She could try the American political system, but her recent fiascos (the Biden endorsement in 2020 via GOTV commercial, non-invite to Obama's birthday, paid parental leave lobbying) slammed, barred, and sealed that door shut. And I believe Meghan knows this. I think she knows there's nowhere for her to go but down and she's becoming all the more desperate to keep this royal-adjacent namebrand status. Desperate people cling to status quo more than anything, and that new article saying that she doesn't use unnamed sources anymore reeks of desperation more than it does a preemptive warning shot in a new PR battle with the palace.

So I think she's going to hang onto Harry for as long as she can, and probably for the rest of her life. Even if the Sussexes divorce, Meghan will always insert herself into royal matters, the same way Sarah Ferguson has. She may never return to Britain, but that doesn't matter anymore. Not when there's a global media industry fueled by pay-for-play editorials, articles, and photographs.

So because she has nowhere to go that's higher than the BRF, Meghan will always be around them. She may get pushed to the side like Kents, Gloucesters, and Fergie are but she'll always be there. As long as Archie and Lili are there, she's going to ingratiate herself on that balcony and in their media coverage. Eventually she won't matter, but I think that's 20-30 years off. The only way Meghan will get bumped out of royal coverage is probably when Archie and Lili are the status equivalent to George's children as the current Ogilvy grandchildren are to William.

Why do you think she secured the bag by having a baby right away? Those children mean she gets to stay in the orbit of the BRF for the rest of her life. Like you said, there is no way to go any higher than the BRF.

48 notes · View notes

college-girl199328 · 2 years

Text

Why Princess Eugenie is the Royal family’s last link to Prince Harry

It’s the week before Christmas, and people around Britain are wondering warily whether any family grievances will play out at the dinner table. Add to this a global media spotlight, a gripping Netflix documentary, and the future of the British monarchy, and the result is explosive, to say the least.

Relations between the two royal brothers have now broken down to the point where there is no question of Harry and Meghan celebrating Christmas anywhere within the same time zone as Sandringham. But spare a thought for Princess Eugenie, who has found herself caught out as what was once a reasonable middle ground transforms into no man’s land. Prince Harry and Princess Eugenie are cousins who have always been allies. "Out of all the Queen's grandchildren, Harry and Eugenie have one of the most natural connections," Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand wrote in the Sussex biography Finding Freedom.

Yes, there is a six-year age gap, but there is also a natural kinship there; both have diligent older siblings, both are the products of divorce; both were regulars on the London party scene in the late 2000s and early 2010s. Their subsequent relationships drew them closer together. Eugenie was friends with Harry’s first love, Chelsy Davy, and allegedly introduced him to another ex-girlfriend, Cressida Bonas; Eugenie’s now-husband Jack Brooksbank was close to Harry, and his job in alcohol promotion meant he could sneak the royals through the back doors of London clubs such as Mahiki and Boujis.

This group friendship extended to Meghan Markle. Eugenie was one of the first members of the family to spend time with her, and in the Netflix documentary, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex speak about the party they attended the night before their relationship went public; the accompanying images show them with Eugenie and Jack in fancy dress.

Meghan said, "Well if it's going to come out tomorrow, let's go and have fun tonight!" She added: "His cousin Eugenie and her boyfriend of the time, Jack, and my friend Marcus were there too. "It was so great." "Just for silly fun." This bond must have felt entirely natural until Harry and Meghan decided to split with the institution. At first, the world assumed that close family relations could continue even after the couple stepped back from active service. However, their explosive Oprah interview in March 2021 quickly put an end to that, and it was at this point that most members of the family were probably rethinking their relationship with the once-popular prince.

Eugenie remained an exception. In an Instagram story last August, she wished Meghan a happy birthday and committed to 40 minutes of community service for Meghan’s 40x40 mentoring project; earlier this year, the princess was pictured at the Super Bowl with Harry, and in the Harry & Meghan docuseries, she is shown playing on the beach with Archie.

Many women will recognize the role of peacekeeper that Eugenie has taken on, but her loyalty to the couple also leaves her in an undeniably difficult situation now that the dust has well and truly settled. One would think that family members encouraged her to maintain contact with the California-based prince, but the accusations leveled by the couple in their Netflix documentary and Harry's memoir, which will be published on January 10, mean that there is no way to reconcile for the foreseeable future.

As a result, a go-between is useless, and Eugenie's role as a peacekeeper may seem like a betrayal to some. Ultimately, when a battle is this fraught, you have to choose which side to stand on, and hovering in the middle rarely wins you many friends. Perhaps it is no coincidence that at Thursday’s Christmas carol concert at Westminster Abbey, organized by the Princess of Wales, Eugenie was one of the few royals not wearing a burgundy-hued coat, a color some have speculated was chosen as a sign of unity. For now, Eugenie appears to be spending Christmas at Sandringham with Jack and August, their baby son, as the family comes together for their first festive holiday without the late Queen Elizabeth II. For the sake of everyone’s yuletide cheer, Eugenie should probably ensure any communication with her cousin is made in the privacy of her bedroom.

0 notes

inevitably-johnlocked · 4 years

Text

30 FAVE BOOKMARKS of 2020

Happy New Year’s Eve-Eve, everyone!!

And welcome to the Last Fic Rec Wednesday of 2020! No one asked for this at all, but I enjoy making unprompted lists for everyone, and I’ve been doing this list since January 2020 :P

I’ve read some FANTASTIC fics this year, and now seems like a good time as any to share with y’all some of those amazing fics I’ve added to List of Love! I had to even whittle it down today to get it to 25 – the number I like as a “top xx” thing, so I am very disheartened that a lot of my bookmarks this year didn’t make the list :( It’s been a long time since I’ve done a “last XX bookmarked fics” list, maybe I’ll do one of those soon.

First off let’s start with 5 honourable mentions of Other Fandom fics, because I spent a lot of my summer indulging in my renewed Rimmster ship so I have a few amazing RD fics y’all should read LOL

FIVE OTHER-FANDOM HONOURABLE MENTIONS

Réveillon by Big_Edies_Sun_Hat (T, 6,431 w., 3 Ch. || GOOD OMENS || Christmas Eve, Angst, Fluff, Emotional Hurt/Comfort, Pre-Relationship, Established Relationship, International Travel, Moments in Time, Historical / Biblical Interpretation) – After a gloomy history with Christmas, Aziraphale shows Crowley how he has learned to seek out the good in it by traveling around the world on Christmas Eve. Highlights include: the Annunciation; potholes; international teleportation; peace and hope; arson; Lupe gets a doll of her very own.

Out With It by Clipped_Ionian_Vowels (T, 10,255 w., 1 Ch. || RED DWARF || Post-Ace, Reclaimed Slurs, Getting Together, Sexuality, Coming Out) – Rimmer finally comes home, hangs up the wig and decides to set the crew 'straight' about one thing; he's not. And neither, it transpires, is Lister.

Standards by Kahvi & Roadsterguy (E, 11,725 w., 2 Ch. || RED DWARF || Hard Light Rimmer, Bickering, Humour, First Time, Over-Protective Kryten, Cranky Rimmer, Exploring Derelicts, Arguing Leads to Awkward Flirting, Showering Together, Intense Orgasms) – Yet another supply raid on a derelict leads Rimmer and Lister to an argument, which in turn leads to... something that's still fairly close to an argument. You get lonely in space, but you do have standards.

speed limits (and how to break them) by darcylindbergh (E, 13,750 w., 4 Ch. || GOOD OMENS || POV Crowley, UST/URT, Mutual Pining, Romance, First Kiss/Time, Crowley’s Anxiety, Gift Giving, Humour, Touching, Awkwardness, Love Confessions, Sussex, Fantasies Become Real, Marriage Proposal, Sensuality, Bottom Crowley) – There is a trick people do with a mint candy and a bottle of cola which results in a small eruption, and something very like it, for much higher stakes than a laugh in a car park, is about to take place in Aziraphale’s back room. Or: what happens when you finally unscrew the cap on a six thousand years of repression, and drop in Valentine’s Day.

Hand in Glove by lizardkid (T, 14,223 w., 1 Ch. || RED DWARF || Post-S9, Internalized Homophobia, Repression, Hurt/Comfort, Lister Whump, Worried Rimmer, Ableist Language, Cuddling) – Lister is mortally wounded in an accident. Rimmer is forced to reassess everything.

------------------

AND NOW: The reason y’all are here! Please know I love EVERYTHING I’ve read and bookmarked, just these ones have really stuck with me and I’ve already re-read a few of these, so yeah, please do enjoy.

Please note that these fics aren’t all necessarily NEW fics for 2020, more like they were new to ME, and ergo, I bookmarked and started reccing them this year! There are a few newer fics, though, so yeah, apologies if you were expecting only new things.

Hope you all have a good New Year’s Day, and I hope this list makes the long weekend a great one until my FIRST Fic Rec Sunday of 2021! I might do two on Sunday just to celebrate the new year, hahah. <3 Love you all!

TOP 25 JOHNLOCK BOOKMARKS OF 2020

SEE ALSO:

Top 20 Bookmarks of 2018

Top 25 Bookmarks of 2019

The Imminent Danger of a Tumblr-Night by Loveismyrevolution (T, 2,135 w., 1 Ch. || Tumblr Fics, Friends to Lovers, Sherlock is Out of His Depth, Humour, Fluff, Pining Sherlock, Military Kink, POV Sherlock) – Sherlock gets into trouble when he pretends to know all about John's favourite social media site - tumblr. To save face he seeks help from one of the bloggers and gains more answers than he had aimed for.

Living Musical by VeeTheRee (G, 4,149 w. 1 Ch. || Est. Rel., Tooth-Rotting Fluff, Domestic Fluff, Hobbies, Summer, Song Fic, POV Sherlock, Painting, Play Fighting, Soft Sherlock, Dancing, Love Declarations, Hair Petting, Promise of Forever) – A one-shot of John and Sherlock being domestic during summer. There is paint, fluff, and music from Imagine Dragons, namely from the album 'Speak To Me', specific song in this one-shot is 'Living Musical'. Part 1 of the Happy Fluffy Johnlock Time series

Stranded by BeautifulFiction (T, 5,798 w., 1 Ch. || First Kiss, Communication / Relationship Discussion, Pining Sherlock, Sherlock POV, BAMF John, Doctor John, Case Fic, Drinking, Huddling For Warmth, Friends to More) – When stranded on a derelict barge at high tide, John and Sherlock reconsider their friendship.

Bridges by sussexbound (M, 6,602 w., 1 Ch || Post-TLD / S4 Fix It, Love Confessions, Mending Relationships, Moving Back In, Pining Sherlock, POV Sherlock, Past Abuse, Shaving) – The silence between them is deafening, interrupted only by the hum of the traffic outside, and the soft click-clunk of the plastic cups Rosie is playing with on the floor beside them. It is the first time they have been alone together, since Sherlock’s birthday. It’s only been two days, but it feels huge, important, like there is a precarious bridge stretched out before them both that they need to at least attempt to traverse.

To be loved by Strange_johnlock (E, 12,436 w., 8 Ch. || Post S3, Established Relationship, First Person POV Sherlock, Pet Names, Soft Sherlock, Mild ADHD, Protective John, Captain Watson, Body Appreciation, Bottomlock, Rough Sex, Travelling for Holidays, Introspection, Sherlock Loves John So Much It Hurts) – John is so deeply integrated into the work, both as my conductor of light, and as a great shot with a vicious right hook who tackles men -and women- no matter their size all in my defense. He protects me with all he can without question, and this loyalty is surely more than I deserve. Or: Sherlock is counting his blessings.

On The Fence by BeautifulFiction (T, 13,770 w., 1 Ch. || Fencing, Case Fic, First Kiss, Insecure John, Pining John, Hug, Greg Finds Out) – The murder of the King's College fencing champion leads to revelations about Sherlock's past. Will it be the point that tips them from friends to lovers, or will they remain on the fence?

The Invocation of Saint Margaret by Ewebie (E, 15,831 w., 1 Ch. || POV John, Crossing Timelines, Light Angst, Fluff, Series 3 John / Series 1 Sherlock, The Matchbox, Mushy Romance, First Time, Bisexual John, Pining John, Bottomlock, Love Confessions, Sensuality, Emotional Love Making, Snippets of Time) – When Sherlock Holmes opens the matchbox from The Sign of Three and John finds himself years in the past, back to that first dinner at Angelo's with a much younger Sherlock Holmes. Is he dreaming?

Permanent Fixture by vitruvianwatson (E, 18,836 w., 9 Ch || Post-S4, Parentlock, Slow Build, Friends to Lovers, They’re Good Parents, Blushing Sherlock, First Kiss/Time, Explicit Consent, Sexual Content, Emotional Hurt/Comfort, Mutual Pining, Big Feelings, Crying, First Kiss, Fluff, Anxious Sherlock, Inexperienced Sherlock, Emotional Communication, Love Confessions) – Now, as Rosie sat curled up against Sherlock’s side, John watched and wondered exactly how he had ended up here. Domesticity had never suited him before, not at any point in his life. His disastrous marriage had been proof of that. But somehow, here in the warmth and safety of 221B Baker Street, here with Sherlock Holmes reading medical jargon to his daughter, Sherlock’s bony feet nudging against his leg, John couldn’t imagine anyplace that would make him happier.

Division by MrsNoggin (E, 19,542 w., 11 Ch. || Coffee Shop AU || First Kiss/Time, Fluff, Barista Sherlock, Clingy Sherlock, POV John, John’s Limp, Bed Sharing, Fluff, Sleepy Cuddles, Sensuality, Touching, Virgin Sherlock, Insecure John) – John likes mysteries. And every morning he dips into the local independent coffee bar with his newspaper and ponders another... one Sherlock Holmes.

Out of the Woods by SilentAuror (E, 20,471 w., 1 Ch. || Post S4, Romance, Slow Burn, Flirting, Drunk Sex, Practical Jokes, POV Sherlock, Bottomlock, Possessive John, Pining Sherlock, Frustrated Wanking, Frottage, Hand Jobs, Blow Jobs, First Kiss/Time, Virgin Sherlock, Love Confessions, Soft Sherlock, Dancing, Bum Appreciation, Hanging out with the Yard) – Sherlock is fairly certain that John has taken to flirting with him of late, but can't be entirely certain of it. At least, not until a case takes them into a forest, along with Lestrade's team and something happens that will change everything about their lives...

Inscrutable to the Last by DiscordantWords (M, 48,842 w., 6 Ch. || Post-TRF, Alternate S3, John’s Blog/S3 is a Story By John, Divorce, Marital Difficulties, John is a Mess, Emotional Reunion, Implied/Referenced Suicide, Grief / Mourning, Pining John, First Kiss, Adorably Clueless Sherlock, Nostalgia, Love Confessions, Eventual Happy Ending) – He wasn't Sherlock, he couldn't work miracles. All he'd ever been able to do was write about them.

Anchor Point by trickybonmot (E, 49,856 w., 80 Ch. || Truman Show AU || Psychological Drama, Suspense, Slow Burn, Dark Characters / Fic, Alternating First/Third Person, Protective John, Anxious/Worried Sherlock, Tender Moments, Love Confessions, Hand/Blow Jobs, Cuddling, Jealous John, First Kiss/Time) – The world tunes in nightly for Sherlock, the ultimate in reality TV: Sherlock Holmes, a real person with a legendary name, unknowingly lives out his life in a staged setting contrived by his brother. Things get complicated when a retired army doctor joins the show to play the part of Sherlock's closest friend. This fic borrows its concept from the 1998 film, the Truman Show. However, you don't need to have any knowledge of the movie to enjoy this story.

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse by SilentAuror (E, 50,635 w., 1 Ch. || Post-S4/S4 Divergence, Case Fic, For a Case / Reverse Fake-Relationship, Conferences, Marriage Equality, Travelling / New York, Pride, Homophobia, Bottomlock, Marriage Proposal, John POV, Sexuality, Love Confessions, Emotional Love Making, Public Hand Jobs, Blow Jobs, Passionate Kissing, Needy/Clingy Sherlock, Virgin Sherlock, Touching / Hand Holding, Bed Sharing, Little Spoon Sherlock, Intense Orgasms) – John and Sherlock go to New York to attend a conference run by the National Defence of Traditional Marriage Coalition in order to investigate the potential bombing of the annual Manhattan Pride parade. As the conference unfolds, John finds himself repulsed by the toxic ideology being presented, which becomes relevent to his own unacknowledged issues and his friendship with Sherlock...

A Goose Quill Dipped in Venom by Polyphony (M, 52,748 w., 16 Ch. || Celebrity John AU || Alternate First Meeting, TV Host John, Supermodel Mary, Character Death, Mystery, Romance, Case Fic, First Kiss/Time, Meddling Mycroft, Drug Abuse, Doctor John, PDA, Deductions, POV Sherlock, Toplock, Sexual Tension, Angry/Rough Sex, Hopeful Ending, Asperger’s Sherlock) – Sherlock Holmes, consulting detective, is called in to a very ordinary although brutal murder. Something is badly out of tune with the whole scenario and Sherlock finds himself becoming more and more obsessed with the crime - and also with the victim.

Points by lifeonmars (E, 53,791 w., 42 Ch. || PODFIC AVAILABLE || HLV Rewrite / Canon Divergence, Married Life, Pregnancy / Baby Watson, Drinking to Cope, Boxing / Fisticuffs, Clueless John, Angst, Minor Medical Drama, Tattoos, Christmas, First Kiss/Time, Eventual Happy Ending, Love Confessions, Doctor John, Sexuality Crisis, Slow Burn, Case Fic, Drugging, Blow/Hand Job, Emotional Love Making, Parenthood, Passage of Time) – What if His Last Vow never happened? This fic picks up a few months after John and Mary's wedding, in an alternate universe where Magnussen doesn't exist, but Mary is still pregnant. Life continues -- just in a different direction. And slowly, Sherlock and John find their way to each other.

Isosceles by SilentAuror (E, 56,609 w., 7 Ch. || Post-S4, POV John, Original Male Character / Sherlock Dates Another Man, Love Triangle, Jealous John, Virgin Sherlock, Sexual Coaching, Angst, Romance, Domesticity, Unrequited Feelings, Miscommunication, First Kiss/Time, For a Case, Friends With Benefits, Bottomlock, Love Confessions, Spooning) – After solving a case for a major celebrity, Sherlock gets himself asked out. When John asks, he discovers that Sherlock has no intention of going, at least not until John agrees to coach him through whatever he might need to know for his date...

Lunar Landscapes by J_Baillier (M, 57,046 w., 21 Ch. || PODFIC AVAILABLE || S3/TAB Fix-It, Slow Burn Angst, Drama, Hurt/Comfort, Confessions, Drugs, Pain, Medical, Injury, Sherlock Whump, Mental Health Issues, Panic Attacks, Romance, Secrets, Tragedy, Trauma, BAMF John, Doctor!John, Drug Addict Sherlock, Injured Sherlock, Grieving John, Idiots In Love, Protective John, POV John Watson, PTSD Sherlock, Sherlock is a Mess, Medical Realism) – An accident forces John to face the fact that Sherlock's downward spiral had started long before his flight to exile even left the tarmac.

Gold Rush by ShirleyCarlton (E, 71,783 w., 17 Ch. || Post S3 / No Mary, Friends to Lovers, Mentions of Past Sexual Abuse, First Kiss, Case Fic, Slow Burn, Alternating POV, Switchlock, Angst with Happy Ending, Marriage Proposal, Implied/Referenced Child Abuse, Abduction, Anxious/Insecure Sherlock, Miscommunication, Emotional Lovemaking) – John has divorced Mary and pops round to 221B one evening to find Sherlock in the middle of a case. As Sherlock tries to find the identity of a young woman’s stalker, John realises he can no longer deny his feelings for Sherlock – which then, to their befuddlement, turn out to be mutual. Shy kisses and tentative embraces ensue. But will Sherlock be able to cast off a shadow from his past that he thinks might prevent John from wanting to stay?

Repairing the Broken Things by BakerTumblings (M, 75,252 w., 15 Ch. || S4 Compliant, Angst, Hurt/Comfort, Medical Trauma, Hospitals, Big Brother Mycroft, Misunderstandings, Realizations, Severe Accident, John Whump, Pneumonia, Medical Procedures, Bed Sharing, First Time, Healing, Happy Ending) – "I'm calling today to notify you that there's been an accident."

Thermocline by J_Baillier (M, 83,557 w., 14 Ch. || Scuba Diving AU || Adventure, Angst, Hurt/Comfort, Marine Archaeology, Asexual Sherlock, Horny John, Relationship Drama, Technical/Scuba/Wreck Diving, Slow Burn, Underwater / Medical Peril, Doctor John, Hurt Sherlock, Anxious Sherlock, John POV, Protective John, Body Appreciation) – John "Five Oceans" Watson — technical dive instructor, dive accident analyst and weapon of mass seduction — meets recluse professor of maritime archaeology Holmes. As they head out to a remote archipelago off the coast of Guatemala to study and film its shipwrecks for a documentary, will sparks fly or fizzle out?

Kintsukuroi by sussexbound (E, 91,823 w., 20 Ch. || S4 Compliant / Post-TLD, Grief / Mourning, PTSD, Internalized Homophobia, Therapy, Past Abuse, Alcohol Abuse, Nightmares, Emotional Hurt/Comfort, Depression, Anxiety, Bed Sharing, Love Confessions, Cuddling, Suicidal Ideation, Masturbation, Minor Character Death, Sexting, Frottage, Inexperienced Sherlock, Rimming / Anal / BJ’s, Emotional Turmoil, Finding Each Other) – “I love you.” Sherlock sees the words hit John with almost physical force. He reels back a little, jaw twitching and eyes filling. “I love you,” he repeats, a little softer, a little more gentle, as earnest as he possibly can. Because they’ve been teetering on the brink of this thing for years, and it had become painfully obvious over the last few months that they were at a tipping point. This had to happen. Now it has. Now they can see where they end up. The tears in John’s eyes spill over, and he wipes at them angrily. “Do you even know what that means?”

The Summer Boy by khorazir (T, 94,706 w., 6 Ch. || Post S3/Post TAB/Alternate S4, Friends to Lovers, Asexual Sherlock, POV Sherlock, Flashbacks, Bullying, 1980′s Kid Sherlock, Emotional Hurt/Comfort, Inexperienced Sherlock, Grief/Mourning, Pining Sherlock, Case Fic, Sherlock’s Past, Awkward Conversations, Anxious Sherlock) – About half a year after the fateful events at Appledore, Sherlock and John embark on a private case in Sussex. For Sherlock, it’s a journey into his past, bringing up memories both happy and sad that he has locked away for almost thirty years. For John, it means coming to terms with the present – and a potential future with Sherlock. Part 1 of the The Summer Boy series

Northwest Passage by Kryptaria (E, 95,157 w., 27 Ch. || PODFIC AVAILABLE || Canadian AU || BAMF!John, Canadian John, PTSD, Anal / Oral Sex, Rimming, Emotional Hurt / Comfort, Drug Rehab, Falling in Love, Pining Sherlock, Love Confessions, Sherlock’s Violin, Panic Attacks, Switching, Anxious / Protective Sherlock, Hugs for Comfort, Suicide Mentions, Healing Each Other) – Seven years ago, Captain John Watson of the Canadian Forces Medical Service withdrew from society, seeking a simple, isolated life in the distant northern wilderness of Canada. Though he survives from one day to the next, he doesn't truly live until someone from his dark past calls in a favor and turns his world upside-down with the introduction of Sherlock Holmes." Part 1 of Tales from the Northwest

The Bang and the Clatter by earlgreytea68 (M, 137,049 w. || PODFIC AVAILABLE || Baseball AU || Slow Burn / Dev. Rel., Possessive/Obsessive Sherlock, Jealous Sherlock, Mutual Pining, Body Appreciation, Depression, Closeted Sexuality, Family, Sherlock’s Mind Palace, Ogling Each Other, Anxious Sherlock, Panic Attack, Drunkenness, Talk of Forever, Big Feelings™) – Sherlock Holmes is a pitcher and John Watson is a catcher. No, no, no, it's a baseball AU. Part 1 of Baseball

Against the Rest of the World by SilentAuror (E, 151,714 w., 20 Ch. || PODFIC AVAILABLE || Post-TRF, Hiatus Fic, POV First Person Sherlock, Present Tense, First Kiss/Time, Big Brother Mycroft, Escaping from Capture, Soft Sherlock, Toplock, Insecurity, Infidelity, Travelling, Introspection, Pining Sherlock, Depression, Fantasies, Yearning for the Past, PTSD Sherlock, Suicidal Ideation) – Sherlock has been away from London for nine hundred and twelve days and counting, and has no idea what sort of reception to expect when he finally returns.

#johnlock fic recs #long post #my fic recs #fic rec wednesday #fave fics #red dwarf fic recs #good omens fic recs

190 notes · View notes

mia-soufi2018 · 3 years

Text

I Went Undercover In The Sinister World Of Meghan Markle Hate Accounts

AIDA AMOAKO

JUNE 11, 2021 7:00 AM

In November 2020, "Megxit", describing the exit of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle from the royal family, was named a word of the year by Collins Dictionary. The Sun popularised the term but it actually predates the couple’s departure by years. It existed as a hashtag on Twitter as early as 2018 where it was used by people who disliked Meghan – the first Black woman to join Britain’s monarchy – and did not want her to be part of the royal family, and were calling for her to leave.

The earliest use of the tag (in a tweet that is still visible, at least) in reference to Meghan Markle is from shortly after the engagement announcement in November 2017, and is merely a pun on Brexit. It’s not until the month of the wedding, May 2018, that it appears multiple times as a pejorative towards the future duchess. Twitter account ProphetSpeaks posts an image of Meghan, captioned: "The Brits need a vote before a terrible mistake is made - #MEGXIT is trending." But the hashtag really picked up from late September to October 2018. Two key events took place at this time: the couple's tour of Australia and the Pacific Islands, and the announcement of Meghan’s first pregnancy.

From there, things go into overdrive. #CharlatanDuchess also appears in October 2018 with misogynistic tweets, photoshopped images and poorly faked texts which hypersexualise Meghan. One user calls her "Duchess of Sex". Another tweets: "Putting a crown on a whore does not make it royalty." The hashtags and negative gossip converge with the increasingly negative press coverage and by the end of 2018, something has changed irrevocably. Public opinion and press coverage have soured so much that just seven months after the wedding, one Sky News report asks: "Have we fallen out of love with the Duchess of Sussex?"

Since then, there has been a constant stream of tweets, Tumblr and Quora posts and YouTube videos expressing varying levels of disdain for Meghan, from the nitpicky to the racist and threatening. While some of it has come from the mainstream (writer Julie Burchill this week revealed she had been sacked by The Telegraph for her racist tweets about Harry and Meghan’s second child, Lilibet), there remains an intense and insular group which peddles hatred online. Meghan has been given nicknames galore: "Nutmeg", "Maggot", "Murkle", "Me-Me", "Smeg", "Yacht girl" and "Me-gain" (the latter revealed in Tatler to have been used by palace aides). Before January 2020, Megxit referred simply to a desire for Meghan to leave and functioned as a way for like-minded individuals to find each other on social media.

Now that Meghan and Harry have actually gone, the meaning of Megxit has evolved for some to mean, variously, wanting the couple to divorce, a total disappearance from public life or, for the most extreme accounts, her death. I’m calling these kinds of accounts "anti-Meghan accounts", "Megxiteers" and Meghan "anti-fans". What’s an anti-fan? If fans mainly engage with a "text" – say a TV show or a book – in a celebratory manner, then anti-fans engage mainly in a negative way, expressing dislike or hatred.

As with other fandoms, some accounts have achieved prominence. Murky Meg, a channel offering mostly negative commentary and gossip about Harry and Meghan’s life, has over 100k followers and subscribers on YouTube and Twitter combined. The account has also tweeted that Meghan did not give birth to son Archie and instead used the services of a surrogate. I reached out to Murky Meg who, after an off-the-record back-and-forth, stopped responding.

Anti-Meghan content also includes tarot, psychic readings and speculative news-analysis. Body language and personality analysis videos made by apparent professionals have been co-opted to bolster Meghan anti-fans’ claims. Sue Blackhurst, a British social psychologist with 36k subscribers on her eponymous YouTube channel, began making videos about the royals to grow her confidence coaching channel. After posting her first video looking at narcissistic traits she saw in Meghan, Blackhurst "woke up the next morning to 10,000 views," she tells me in a Zoom call. "I’d hit on something." Blackhurst’s audience is mostly American women aged 50 to 65, who respond not just with thanks for affirming their suspicions about Meghan but with their own experiences with narcissism. Blackhurst’s psychology credentials and relatively restrained tone have made her videos a go-to resource for many Meghan anti-fans. When I ask her why she recommends channels like Murky Meg and According2Taz, another prominent pregnancy truther, she calls both accounts "fantastic" and says that while she doesn’t "disagree with anything those accounts are saying at all," she tries to be less direct to avoid strong negative pushback. "It’s almost like he’s becoming brainwashed," Blackhurst says of Harry. She also doubts Meghan's first pregnancy, citing photographs and video footage of Meghan bending while wearing heels, an apparently false bump and "too much secrecy surrounding the birth".

Harry and Meghan’s first child, Archie, was born on 6th May 2019 in the UK. The flagship conspiracy theory of the Meghan anti-fans claims that Meghan was never pregnant and instead wore a "moonbump" (a fake pregnancy belly), and that Archie was born via a surrogate. In a now-deleted tweet, one user, who claims to be a retired midwife, says: "She had a fake bump, it regularly moved, hilarious, she is batshit barmy." Other theories include Archie being a doll, as promoted by well-known anti-Meghan Tumblr account skippyv20. Meghan’s not the first woman in the public eye to be subjected to online commenters casting doubt on her pregnancy. The same happened to Beyoncé and Meghan’s friend Serena Williams. In 2020, Atlantic journalist Kaitlin Tiffany spoke to a Tumblr user who believes that Sophie Hunter, Benedict Cumberbatch’s wife, didn’t give birth to the couple's children.

Maria Pramaggiore is a professor of media studies at Maynooth University in Ireland. She co-wrote a paper which explores, among other tensions, Meghan’s supposed "illegitimate pregnancy" and what might lie behind that theory. For Pramaggiore, the traditional "justified" public scrutiny of royal pregnancies has coincided with the modern scrutiny of the celebrity body. "Kate Middleton had been paired previously with a foil in terms of the good pregnancy and the bad pregnancy in 2013 with Kim Kardashian, where Kate was termed 'the Waif' and Kim 'the Whale'," Pramaggiore tells me over Zoom. She’s referring to a You magazine cover titled: "The Battle of the Bumps". Pramaggiore sees this moment as a precursor of what was to come. "The template had been set prior to Meghan: we already have an acceptable, demure, domesticated, white, pregnant body anticipating motherhood."

According to this template, then, Meghan's pregnancy signalled the wrong way to do pregnancy. But then the narrative went one step further, suggesting she wasn’t pregnant at all. "Classy dress, pregnancy glow, extra weight all over versus fake pregnancy," tweeted According2Taz in January 2019, comparing photos of Kate and Meghan during their pregnancies.

Notions of race are also at play in discussions of Meghan’s motherhood. A narrative persists that Meghan is not only unmaternal but actively endangers Archie. For Pramaggiore, this is "a longstanding trope for Black women, certainly in the United States." On Twitter, an account posts a cartoon featuring a heavily pregnant Meghan with bones through her hair, a syringe in her arm and four dark-skinned children, the gun-toting one seemingly based on Marlon Wayans’ character from the 1996 film Don’t Be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in the Hood. Pramaggiore also sees this narrative of child endangerment in the press coverage surrounding the presence of lily of the valley (a plant which can be toxic if ingested) in both Meghan and Kate’s wedding flowers. A Daily Express headline about Meghan’s flowers suggests she could have put Princess Charlotte at risk.

For the anti-fans, this "fake pregnancy" is their Watergate. "The truth always comes out in the end, no matter how hard anyone tries to hide it," reads the bio of one account. "I just want to warn you all, I’m on a rampage to expose the moonbump treachery!!" says another in a now-deleted tweet which tags royal reporters, prominent Meghan critics such as Piers Morgan, and the official royal family accounts. "On the most fundamental level, if you don't see the child emerge from the woman's body, you don't know where it came from," says Pramaggiore about the possible reasoning behind the theories. "The question is, is it really a royal heir? Is it really related to the Windsor line? How can you be sure? It sort of adds to that fundamental kind of anxiety."

The anxiety is that Meghan is "getting away" with something. It’s a common thread in the obsessive, conspiracy theory-laden narratives around women linked to beloved famous men, like Sophie Hunter and, more recently, Keanu Reeves’ partner, Alexandra Grant. Delegitimising Meghan's pregnancy means that her child – referred to by one Megxiteer as a "genetically mixed up freak" – is potentially not in the line of succession. The elimination of the "threat" Meghan poses to the monarchy is the biggest motivation behind Meghan anti-fan activity and might explain why more extreme accounts buy into conspiracy theories.

A now-suspended account belonging to a user who went by the name Cozza2u explicitly endorsed these ideas in its bio, which read: "Megain should be tried for defection...extortion...slander to name a few…" Studies into belief in conspiracy theories point to contributing factors like low self-esteem, the desire for certainty and control, and feelings of powerlessness. But recent studies also connect a belief in conspiracies to narcissism and bolstered confidence in systems when they are under threat. Here, the system is the British monarchy and the threat is a mixed-race foreigner; for Meghan anti-fans, conspiracy theories which confirm her maliciousness might bolster the view that the British monarchy, by contrast, is beyond reproach.

Dr Agneta Fischer, a social psychologist and professor in emotions and affective processes at the University of Amsterdam, explains that hatred can be a communal activity. "If you're part of a group who hates another group, the expression of hate also means a social bond between your in-group members," she says over Zoom. Fischer and her colleagues write about "emotivational goals" – essentially, what the people who hate are seeking – which, often, is the elimination of their hate object. That can take many forms but Fischer also notes that "sometimes just sharing your hate is already some sort of venting. Sharing your hate with your own in-group is already sort of satisfying."

Similarly, Dr Bertha Chin, a social media and communication lecturer at Swinburne University of Technology and the author of "When Hated Characters Talk Back: Twitter, Hate and Fan/Celebrity Interactions" in the book Anti-Fandom: Dislike and Hate in the Digital Age, says of the Megxit hashtag on Twitter: "I knew it was bad, but I didn’t realise it was that bad [...] If you want to look at it from an anti-fandom perspective, it’s that new character who's come into the narrative and is changing the narrative of the original show." The motivation behind anti-fandom isn’t simply hate; they’re gate-keepers. As Chin puts it: "They love the thing so much that they don't want anything to spoil it."

For some of the accounts, an intense love of the monarchy fuels their anti-fandom. Wanting Megxit, longing for the days when Harry played gooseberry to Wills and Kate, could be compared to liking a TV series before a new showrunner took over. Anti-fans tag the official royal Twitter accounts with their grievances in the same way that Star Wars fans tag Rian Johnson. Their activities – petitioning (for the removal of titles), boycotting companies that work with Harry and Meghan, organised hate-watching and review bombing – mirror media anti-fan behaviour. Blind items are their fan fiction. Photoshopped nudes are their fan art. But as experts on anti-fandom also write, anti-fandom shouldn’t be seen as a cover for what is at its core: obsessive online hatred.

If the Meghan anti-fans and sympathetic Duke and Duchess of Cambridge fans stand on one side, the pro-Harry-and-Meghan group known as the "Sussex Squad" stands on the other. "Squaddies” are fiercely protective of Meghan and Harry, seeing themselves as the only line of defence against waves of criticism and bigotry. In general, their online behaviour aligns more closely with traditional fandom, although the behaviour of some accounts has crossed over into abuse often aimed at journalists for perceived bias – particularly racial bias – against Meghan. Curiously, the Squad seems more aware of itself as an internet fan group, referring to the "Mugxiters" (as they call them) as "anti-fans", sharing links on parasocial relationships and the psychology of trolling while Megxiteers attempt to diagnose Meghan with narcissistic personality disorder.

In 2019, Sky investigated the trolling of Meghan on social media, calling the abuse directed towards her “unprecedented” and highlighting the kinds of accounts making these comments. Of the anti-Meghan accounts I approached while writing this piece (not including Murky Meg), one declined to be interviewed and another did not respond to a request for comment. Two Tumblr accounts which blog about both Meghan and Kate and a pro-Sussex Twitter user, however, did agree to talk.

Johanna, a young American woman, tells me over Zoom that her interest in the royal family increased when Harry and Meghan married: "I'm a Black person so it was cool to me to see a biracial person marry into the royal family." Johanna describes royal fandom as "divided". She feels that the anti-Meghan blogs have more of a place among Cambridge fans because while "there are some Cambridge fans who try to distance themselves ... some Cambridge fans actively try to absorb them into the fandom." Interactions with such accounts can be frustrating. "Oftentimes I feel like the media misinformation has gone so far that even if you tried to correct it, or even if you prove them wrong, they’re still not going to listen to you."

Alice*, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of receiving death threats, also became invested when Harry and Meghan got engaged. "I thought it was super cool that an American actress was going to be a member of the royal family," she says over Tumblr. But after the wedding she "went down a rabbit hole and it was the worst. I saw posts saying that Meghan was a social climber. One post said that Meghan was obsessed with Diana and Kate and that she wanted to marry William but she settled for Harry. The most egregious posts were about Archie."

Charlie*, who runs a pro-Sussex Twitter account and spoke to me on condition of anonymity for fear of professional repercussions, was wary of speaking to me at all, anticipating a false equivalency being drawn between them and the Megxiteers. "The unifying ethos of the two groups are extremely different," Charlie tells me over email. "The Sussex Squad is a group united by their admiration for Harry and Meghan and inspired by their cause-driven work. Megxit is a racist hate group spewing racial slurs, misogyny and conspiracy theories across social media in the hope of driving Meghan out of the royal family."

Charlie is also frustrated by the insistence of some royal reporters that the racist abuse only appears online, feeling it ignores the media’s role. "It was [the media's] stories pitting Meghan and Kate against each other and suggesting that Meghan was perpetually breaking protocol that created this antagonistic rivalry," they say. Johanna, Charlie and, interestingly enough, Meghan anti-fans like Accordingt2Taz’s comments about the media point to the warped relationship between journalists on the royal beat and fans/anti-fans.

I spoke to BuzzFeed News reporter Ellie Hall, whose article comparing headlines about Meghan and Kate went viral. She tells me over Zoom that she interacts with royal watchers on Twitter because she feels "too many reporters live in a bubble of their own making" but admits that she has found it harder these past few years. "It has gotten increasingly more toxic," she says. Hall saw the criticism become personal attacks..

"Until I started writing about Meghan, I didn't get these emails criticising my work and criticising truth," says Hall. Similar to both US and UK politics, when it comes to royal stuff, people fundamentally do not believe the truth: "Meghan was pregnant. That is a fact. People disagree on that fact like she's faking her pregnancy." Hall recalls receiving an email referring to Meghan as a "half breed American mediocre actress". "Every time I publish something about Meghan, I get emails that make me sick to my stomach," she says.

Of the Royal Rota, a group of UK tabloid and broadsheet journalists who cover the royal family, Hall says: "They get far worse abuse than I do for the things that they write and Meghan fans can be nasty too."” Hall recalls Meghan fans calling Camilla Tominey, an associate editor at The Telegraph who writes about the royals, "Camel Toe". Tominey recently wrote for the paper about the abuse she’s received online as a royal reporter. Harper’s Bazaar's royal editor, Omid Scobie, is a particular target, says Hall: "He gets it worse than everybody and he is a person of colour." I reached out to several royal reporters, some Rota, some not. One declined to be interviewed, citing the abuse they had received online. The others did not respond in time.

Hall suggests there is a particular facet of the "media ecosystem" which has created the tense relationship: the reliance on anonymous sources. "This is a beat built on anonymous sources and if readers don’t trust reporters to be impartial, then they are not going to trust that these reporters have done their due diligence on all of these stories."

I ask Hall about royal reporters who follow and retweet anti-Meghan troll accounts. She (a little unconvincingly, I have to say) partially blames these reporters' lack of Twitter proficiency but also understands that things like this contribute to that mistrust. "If a royal reporter retweets rational criticism from an account that is wildly anti-Meghan and believes Meghan is faking her pregnancy, people who like Meghan will see that as a sign of bias on this reporter’s part."

Omid Scobie, who has been covering the royals for over a decade and is currently the royal editor at Harper’s Bazaar US, says that "the world of royal watching was somewhat simplistic" before 2017. Significantly, Meghan’s arrival on the scene coincided with the rise of Donald Trump. "We saw Trump become president, we saw conspiracy theory becoming part of the mainstream news agenda in the US and in the UK," he tells me in a phone call. "So this ability to go online and start conspiracy theories was becoming very normal." It was around this time that Scobie became aware of anti-Meghan Tumblr blogs and of a sudden increase in interest in himself. A recent anonymous Tumblr post (caption: "Bashir down...Scobie next!!") features a GIF of a man in a chicken suit flapping his wings while he is shot at point-blank range by another man smoking a cigar. For all intents and purposes, this is a tacit death threat which incites violence against a journalist.

"At the same time, the tabloids in the UK got more fierce with their coverage of the Sussexes," Scobie adds. "That negative coverage can sometimes enable more aggressive, sometimes violent and hateful conversation underneath these stories, with 20-30,000 comments in what is a largely unregulated forum." For Scobie, the situation is connected to the state of the media, both journalistic and social. "It's a whole economy of hate," he says, "but Meghan has very much been a victim of that. She has been the poster child for, if you talk shit about someone, if you spread false information, if you push the line as close to racism or sexism as you can, you will be rewarded for it through likes, retweets, column inches, air time."

Scobie sees an "unhealthy relationship" between certain members of the royal press and anti-fan accounts. He names royal commentator and Prince Harry biographer Angela Levin, who has "tweeted or retweeted bizarre and fictional conspiracy theories about whether Meghan's baby bump was real or not, whether Archie was via surrogate, or whether Meghan and Harry are secretly separated." Levin has retweeted anti-Meghan accounts and pregnancy truther Yankee Wally. "Her reward is a social media engagement boost from hundreds of accounts dedicated to spreading hate," says Scobie. "Her acknowledgement of these anti-fan conspiracies enables an entire group of people online to carry on doing the toxic things they do." Levin responded via email to a request for comment with "No comment".

Gossip is also an integral part of this media ecosystem. Elaine Lui is the founder of LaineyGossip.com and a TV host on CTV’s eTalk and The Social in Canada. She tells me over Zoom: "I do think that any gossip conversation exposes our value system. So in terms of royal gossip, I think that the royal family in particular is definitely a gateway for all of us to interrogate systems, institutions, cultural values and social norms."

When Harry and Meghan began dating, Lui initially saw a lot of excitement. "But very quickly it started to turn, especially when I started to write about all the shitty headlines that were coming out of the British tabloids." Some of the engagement which Lui, who chooses to use the term "Sussexit", receives is more extreme. "There is one [person] in particular who emails me a minimum five or six times a day to shit on Harry and Meghan, and particularly Meghan, with links to YouTube videos of what they've just watched." What do they want? Lui isn’t sure. "But I do know that there is definitely a frustration in the tone of those emails: 'Why don’t you get it, Lainey?'"

The abuse doesn't just come from the anti-Meghan faction. "I have been attacked by the Sussex Squad as well," she tells me. "I do think though that if the primary purpose of the Sussex Squad is to defend Harry and Meghan, that's great. [Harry and Meghan] have been unfairly targeted. But I would caution against using the same tactics of bullying and ugliness that are already out there and fighting evil with evil."

So where do we go from here? It’s been over a year since Harry and Meghan stepped down from royal duties but the negativity still runs at fever pitch. Professor Fischer states that trust is the "first prerequisite of not hating someone anymore". The Meghan anti-fandom would need to be convinced that the duchess’ perceived motives are no longer threatening. "There has to be a radical, disruptive event in order to restore things," she says. For some, that event cannot be anything less than Meghan’s divorce, humiliation and penury. And they don’t have to look too far to find media commentators suggesting that a reconciliation (for anti-fans, a restoration of the old way of things) could only happen if Meghan is "out of the picture".

For Johanna, two things need to happen. "First, I believe that racism needs to be acknowledged," she says. Secondly, media coverage of the couple has to subside. Charlie also advocates for acknowledgement of the racism towards and uniquely poor treatment of Meghan, although not by the fandom but by the royal family. For Charlie, it would take an apology to the Sussexes, "accountability from the royal family' and a "truce" with the UK press. Hall doesn’t believe the vitriol towards Meghan will ever subside because of the "ownership" some feel over William and Harry. "I think that if [Harry] does divorce her and comes back, he will be forgiven," she says. "I don't think that there is any way that is possible for Meghan." Those who really dislike Meghan will never believe that Harry decided to leave the royal family of his own accord.

Like Hall, Lui isn’t too optimistic about a de-escalation. "Harry and Meghan are living their lives successfully," she says. "As long as Meghan and Harry are happy, those people are going to be pressed."

"I don't really know how one would even try and untangle that," says Scobie of the online toxicity, "if we don't have some kind of movement or effort from the very top, i.e. for YouTube to take accountability, for platforms like Tumblr and Twitter to actually put more effort into monitoring the communities that they allow to take space on their platforms."

Like Charlie, Scobie believes the royal family should intervene. "We haven't really seen much fightback from the palace itself," he tells me. He acknowledges Prince William’s anti-bullying initiatives and the Sussexes’ upcoming work building positive online communities but adds: "We’ve never actually heard the royal family address the online hatred, bullying and racism that has existed and grown to extreme levels in the past four years." In 2019, Kensington Palace did announce new social media guidelines in an attempt to limit the toxicity on their accounts, and revealed they had been in touch with social media firms for help, but their accounts continued (and continues today) to see abusive comments. It may have been the inadequacy of the response that led to Harry and Meghan feeling "let down" and "unprotected", as they revealed in the Oprah interview. Scobie calls for accountability from everybody: "members of the royal family, the institution itself, the social media companies, media organisations and individual journalists from myself to the Angela Levins of the world, and everyone in between."

A Twitter spokesperson told Refinery29: "Keeping Twitter safe is a top priority for us – abuse and harassment have no place on the service. We have clear rules in place that apply to everyone, everywhere that address threats of violence, abuse and harassment and hateful conduct and we take action when we identify accounts that violate these rules."

Refinery29 has contacted Tumblr for comment.

*Names have been changed to protect identities

38 notes · View notes

causeiwanttoandican · 4 years

Text

More...

The Times

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nothing-was-ever-good-enough-meghan-left-staff-shaking-with-fear-hb37gbvn8

‘Nothing was ever good enough . . . Meghan left staff shaking with fear’

Valentine LowFebruary 11 2021, 5.00pm GMT

The Duchess of Sussex has always prided herself on being a good boss. When she was in the American TV series Suits, she would sometimes buy the crew pizza. At Kensington Palace there was the occasion, recounted in the pages of People magazine in February 2019, when she paid for an ice-cream stand for staff. “They were remarking how it was the ‘best day of work ever’,” a friend said.

Some of those who worked for Meghan after she joined the royal family have less fond memories. Staff were bullied, according to sources, and some reduced to tears. One said they were humiliated by her on a number of occasions. According to the complaint revealed by The Times today, two PAs were driven from the household. The duchess denies any allegations of bullying.

The first sign that anything might be amiss came when a story appeared in a diary column in a national newspaper saying that Meghan’s personal assistant had left six months after the royal wedding. A week later the assistant was named in another paper as Melissa Touabti. “Meghan put a lot of demands on her and it ended up with her in tears,” a source was reported as saying.

Touabti was not the first member of staff to leave. Before her there was another PA, a young woman already employed by the palace. She did not stay long after Meghan arrived.

Both PAs signed non-disclosure agreements. There is no suggestion that Meghan tried to prevent them from speaking. Lawyers for the duke and duchess stated that she had no knowledge of the agreements and that they believed staff to be comfortable and happy.

In late 2017, after Harry and Meghan’s engagement was announced, a senior aide spoke to the couple about the difficulties caused by their treatment of staff. People needed to be treated well and with some understanding, even when they were not performing to their standards, they were told. Meghan is said to have replied: “It’s not my job to coddle people.”

There is no doubt that Meghan could be a demanding boss. There were a number of people, allegedly including Harry himself, who suggested that those early problems were partly to do with cultural differences in management style. As Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand put it in their book about the couple, Finding Freedom: “Americans can be much more direct, and that often doesn’t sit well in the much more refined institution of the monarchy.”

However, The Times has spoken to insiders who have argued that it was about more than just American straight-talking. The duchess could be sharp with those she felt were letting her down, sources claim. One former staff member said: “I had unpleasant experiences with her. I would definitely say humiliated.”

After Jason Knauf, the couple’s communications secretary, made his bullying complaint, another member of staff was worried about spending time with her the next day because she feared that Meghan was about to find out. “This is why I feel sick,” they said.

Another time there was a row about whether Meghan had been told that the media would be present at an event. When she rang the aide, they rang back but she did not pick up. “I feel terrified,” the source said. “I can’t stop shaking.”

Another source said: “There were a lot of broken people. Young women were broken by their behaviour.” The source described one member of staff as “completely destroyed”.

Even before the wedding, staff were feeling the strain. One told a colleague the couple were “outrageous bullies” and said they were considering resigning. The colleague replied: “That’s so dreadful. And they are bullies.”

The harsh treatment was not confined to junior staff. One source claimed that Samantha Cohen, the couple’s private secretary, had been bullied. Another said: “They treated her terribly. Nothing was ever good enough. It was, ‘She doesn’t understand, she’s failing.’” In fact, the source said, Cohen was “a saint” and the best organiser of royal tours they had known.

Lawyers for the duke and duchess said they remained close to Cohen and grateful for her support and dedication, acknowledging that she had come out of retirement to work closely with them at a busy time. They deny bullying her.

The Sussexes’ autumn tour in 2018, when they visited Australia, New Zealand, Fiji and Tonga, was stressful for staff, sources say. A senior adviser did his best to reassure them, saying: “You are dealing with a very difficult lady.”

The issue boils down to whether Meghan was a demanding boss with high standards, or a bully. Did her team fail her or did she ask the impossible?

In court papers for her successful privacy action against The Mail on Sunday, her lawyers said that when she was distressed by the negative stories in the media about her, her friends felt frustrated by the instruction from the palace communications team that they should respond “no comment” to allegations. That left her friends “rightly concerned for her welfare, specifically as she was pregnant, unprotected by the institution and prohibited from defending herself”, they said.

An alternative view, sources say, is that Meghan craved rejection from the moment she walked into Kensington Palace, and that nothing that anyone did would ever be good enough.

The palace knew that when Harry married a woman who was biracial, American and divorced, they had to go out of their way to make sure the marriage was a success: if it was not, the royal household and their supposedly hidebound ways would be blamed. “Everyone knew that the institution would be judged by her happiness,” a source said. “The mistake they made was thinking she wanted to be happy. She wanted to be rejected because she was obsessed with that narrative from day one.”

Lawyers for the duchess said this was entirely wrong. The duchess wished to fit in and be accepted and had left her life in North America to commit herself to her new role.

More than one source has expressed their view about her wanting to be a victim. One claimed: “She wanted to be the victim because then she could convince Harry that it was an unbearable experience and they had no choice but to move to America.” Lawyers for the duke and duchess denied this was true. Supporters of the couple have argued that Harry and Meghan were frustrated in their attempts to live their life in a different way.

Finding Freedom quoted a source close to the prince saying that “nothing could convince Harry that some of the old guard at the palace simply didn’t like Meghan and would stop at nothing to make her life difficult”. In her legal case against The Mail on Sunday, the duchess’s lawyers denied that the couple collaborated with the book.

One source claimed that most of the tensions in the household at the time concerned the Sussexes’ relations with the media. “The way I see it, their view of not getting institutional support was that they were not getting permission to blow up the institution’s relationships with the media.” Again, lawyers for the duke and duchess deny this.

One conversation confirmed to The Times seems to reveal how much the palace was prepared to go out of its way to help Meghan. Before the wedding, the couple had a meeting with a senior aide who told them that the palace was doing everything it could to help and there was no need to think she had to take on her role in a particular way, a source said. If she was passionate about the acting world, they could help her to think about finding a role within the film industry.

The source said: “The entire place, because of everything about her, and because of what Harry’s previous girlfriends had been through, was bending over backwards to make sure that every option was open.” They said Meghan thanked them, but said she had no wish to carry on acting. Instead she wanted to concentrate on her humanitarian and philanthropic work, and to support Harry as a member of the royal family.

That might have been that, except of course it wasn’t. Part of the problem, according to the source, was that everyone in the palace was so genteel and civil; too genteel and civil: “When someone decides not to be civil, they have no idea what to do. They were run over by her, and then run over by Harry. They had no idea what to do.”

The duchess issued a detailed statement last night stating that the allegations were a smear campaign and an attack on her character.

61 notes · View notes