#House of Mountbatten Windsor | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

brf-rumortrackinganon · 9 months ago

Text

What a February

Well...what a great couple of days to be stuck in the office, amiright? (I work mostly from home but on occasion I have to go into the office and of course some nice little royal bombs get dropped when I can't be here.)

I've gotten some anons about what's happened but I won't be posting them (sorry, everyone!). Because so much has happened, I think it would just be confusing to rehash some of it, and other asks were also sent to Empress and Sassy (nothing wrong with that! They were doing answers in real-time and they've said pretty much the same things I'd have said).

So to recap recent events:

2/5/24: Buckingham Palace announced King Charles has cancer. Fortuntely it was caught early, Charles is doing/feeling well, he's beginning treatment immediately.

2/6/24: Harry catches a last-minute flight to London. Clarence House puts out a story "business as usual, nothing to worry about, King can still work and he is still working" (i.e., Harry go home).

2/7/24: Harry arrives in London. He goes directly to Charles, who is delaying travel to Sandringham to see him. Harry's PR says they met for an hour, Meghan wanted to say hello/wish him well via Facetime but Charles declined, and Harry went to BP for the evening. The Daily Mail tracked the comings and goings from Clarence House and realized the meeting lasted less than 15 minutes, from the time of Harry's convoy entering the grounds to Charles's helicopter leaving. It is further revealed that Harry spent the night in a hotel, William didn't return Harry's calls, Harry didn't want Camilla involved in the meeting, and none of Harry's "friends" offered to host him for the night. Also, William makes his first public engagements since mid-January when Kate's treatment began; Tom Cruise is there.

2/8/24: Harry flies home. He's papped at Heathrow entering the VVIP suite (as one does). Wait, Harry's not at home! He's in Las Vegas for the Super Bowl (or the Superb Owl) and makes a surprise appearance to present the Walter Payton NFL Man of the Year award. Sussex PR immediately begins telling everyone that Harry and Meghan will be attending the Super Bowl.

2/9/24: Lambrook School begins half-term break and the Wales family travels to Anmer Hall/Sandringham estate. Harry's appearance in Vegas gets picked up by the media.

2/10/24: Meghan's PR starts walking back their own rumors that they'll be in Vegas for the Super Bowl, citing the need to prepare for their Canada IG trip.

2/11/24: Super Bowl Sunday. No Harry and Meghan to be seen.

2/12/24: Meghan's PR reveals she spent the weekend cooking with Afghan immigrants in an Archewell initiative.

2/13/24: Harry and Meghan launch their newest rebranding effort with their new Sussex website with Meghan's coat of arms (rather than their joint coat of arms). Meghan announces a new podcast deal with someone no one has really heard of.

2/14/24: Harry and Meghan arrive in Vancouver for the "one year to 2025 Invictus Games." Meghan coordinates a photoshoot with outdoor activities; merches two outfits; and virtue-signals their "we're still royal" demands with Kate cosplay, a coat called Kensington, and a 'you can call us Sir/Ma'am' exchange caught on camera. In the evening they're papped going to a super-romantic Valentine's Day dinner date.

2/15/24: Day 2 of the Vancouver IG kickoff visit. They visit wheelchair basketball. Meghan gives her signature full-body contact-hugs. Sussex PR announce that the family has changed their surname to Sussex (from Mountbatten-Windsor) and this is the first time all family members have the same surname. Meghan also claps back at mounting criticism by saying "We will not be broken."

2/16/24: Day 3 of the Vancouver IG kickoff visit. Harry gives an interview to GMA's Will Reeve (son of the late Superman actor Christopher Reeve and his wife, Dana) in which he blabs about Charles's cancer and reiterates how much he loves his family, hinting that he's available to come back. Sussex PR also drops an article in the afternoon (with BP collaboration) announcing Harry and Meghan's plan to return with half in/half out; this is very clearly one of Charles's trial balloons from Clarence House.

(Today) 2/17/24: Backlash to the trial balloon is swift, so Clarence House backtracks immediately and does damage control. Kensington Palace announces that William will attend the 2024 BAFTAs tomorrow. Half-term break for Lambrook School ends on February 19th so the Waleses are traveling back to London/Windsor this weekend. And Hollywood has fought back by leaking about their Netflix deal, which contradicts a ton of Meghan's PR from 2020/2021.

Since some of you have asked for my thoughts, here you go. I am warning you now it's probably going to be my usual essay.

On the new website:

The new Sussex website is a problem. It conveys a legitimacy to the public that Harry and Meghan do not have, which The Queen and Edward Young made very sure was publicly known back in 2020. In particular, it's the use of Meghan's coat of arms, which signals palace support or endorsement. IMO, Buckingham needs to force them to take the coat of arms down.

I suspect they are using Meghan's coat of arms because a) Meghan believes it was personally awarded to her and is hers to use as she wants, whereas Harry's coat of arms probably comes with strings from the BRF and b) it's CYA if ever there's a divorce - if you look at it from a business standpoint, this is nothing more than Meghan branding the company with her name so she can prove ownership when they're splitting assets in a divorce, increasing her chances of getting the "company."

What about Archewell?

They're probably phasing out Archewell. It doesn't have the same visual connection to Harry and Meghan that Sussex does. I think they struggled so much with Archewell and were never able to get it off the ground in terms of a brand or an identity, in part due to the COVID-era launch. Sussex is a much stronger association for them and connects them more tightly to the royal identity. Archewell will probably be either their nonprofit arm or their content creator arm but it won't be as important going forward as it's been in the past.

Frankly, I would be surprised if Archewell v Sussex branding didn't come up in the brand analysis that WME did when Meghan first signed with them. We know they did a brand analysis because there was a ton of PR in August 2023 about Harry and Meghan becoming separate brands, which didn't work at all and they were back together as a "Sussex" brand in September 2023 with Dusseldorf Invictus Games. Seeing the success of "Team Sussex" in Dusseldorf definitely informed the website and the rebranding attempt.

What about the timing of all this?

They're taking advantage of the quietness from the royal family. They do this every year like clockwork when 1) the BRF is on summer holidays (July through early September) and 2) the BRF is on winter holidays (late December through early February). What is unusual about this timing is that it's taking place in mid-February and possibly well into March, which is a clear signal that it's the Sussexes taking advantage of Kate's absence to draw attention to themselves because Kate isn't there to steal their headlines.

And that it was a whole week of Sussex PR is not unusual either. It's their usual pattern when they have something big they want to promote and dominate the news with. It's cyclical at this point: first is a reminder of their royal status (Harry flying to Charles's bedside), then it's a reminder of their celebrity status (the Super Bowl appearance), then it's a big announcement (Sussex website), culminating in a set of public engagements/appearances (Invictus Games) with media attention. And to keep the attention coming, they drop breadcrumbs about the royal family to look like they're still "in," which buys them a few extra days of coverage because Charles falls for the bait every time.

The more interesting bit of timing in all of this is the Netflix article. Netflix wouldn't randomly give comments like this, so something must have happened behind the scenes for them to be pushed to this particular breaking point. I feel like perhaps the Sussexes may be trying to renegotiate their deals - maybe they asked for more money or maybe Meghan is trying to get more out of this 'Meet Me at the Lake' production than was agreed - and this is Netflix making it clear that it's over and done. I also have a niggling feeling that it might be connected to the upcoming film awards (BAFTA Film Awards tomorrow, Oscars on March 10th) - maybe they're trying to score tickets to parties using Netflix's name?

Are they really going to come back? Will Charles let them work again?

Analytically, the evidence points to 'no.' The trial balloon failed quickly faster than any other I've seen recently, which is and isn't surprising. It's surprising how quickly Charles backtracked since it had his implicit endorsement. It's not surprising that Charles pulled it down - he's as thin-skinned as Harry and Meghan both are when it comes to criticism.

But it's also more than just the trial balloon. It's everything else.

Charles wants them back on the family side. That's always been pretty clear. I think he waffles on having them back on the "work" side: on the one hand, the BRF needs the help since 10 of The Queen's 14 working royals are elderly (all 5 Kents, the 2 Gloucesters, Charles and Camilla, and Anne) and 2 of the remaining 4 are dealing with a signficant health issue and are temporarily out of commission - in the business sense, this is unsustainable and untenable succession planning. But on the other hand, no one wants Harry and Meghan back, for a litany of reasons including how much shit they've talked about the family (collectively and individually), the petty PR games they play for attention, and the Sussexes' general toxicity. And by 'no one,' I mean family members, courtiers/staff, others in the aristocracy (not getting invites to the Grosvenor wedding is a huge reflection of what "their kind" thinks of teh Sussexes), and the at-large general public.

Charles probably has entertained the idea of half in/half out now that he's in charge and the Sussexes are now lovebombing him (vs in 2020 when they were lovebombing The Queen) but his biggest opposition is public support - it took Charles 30 years and 4 significant deaths (Diana, Queen Mother, Philip, and her own forthcoming death) to get The Queen's support for Camilla to become 'Queen Camilla and, in turn, the public's support or the public's indifference.

Charles doesn't have that kind of time to get the institutional and public support to bring Harry back. He's got 10 years at best, which is now handicapped by a cancer diagnosis.

Beyond that, he doesn't even have Harry and Meghan's cooperation the same way he had Camilla's cooperation. Camilla cooperated with a 10-year wait to be liked well enough that no one would object to her marrying Charles. Camilla then cooperated with a further 17-year wait to be liked well enough that the institution would support her becoming Queen.

Can Harry and Meghan wait that long? No. They can't. They couldn't wait an extra year to get engaged. They couldn't wait to have their first child. They couldn't wait out the criticism from Fall 2018. They couldn't wait out the criticism from Summer 2019. Harry couldn't wait for the phone-hacking settlement. When they want something, they want it now. They buy completed projects and slap their branding on it vs. developing their own programs.

Can Harry and Meghan cooperate with anyone? No. They can't. They couldn't cooperate with William and Kate on the Royal Foundation. They couldn't cooperate with the courtiers for Archie's birth. They couldn't cooperate with the family on Megxit. They couldn't cooperate with the rota for tour coverage. They need to be totally and fully in control of absolutely everything. Their idea of cooperation is 'I tell you what to do, you do it.'

And because they're too impatient and because they refuse to cooperate, there's no way they'll support a 10-years long PR drive for Charles to rehabilitate their public image and get William's support. Heck, they can't even last a 3-month media rebrand. Charles knows that, which I suspect is why he may be trying to fast-track it but 1) when has fast-tracking something ever gone well for the BRF and 2) William is the linchpin holding it all together. Charles can't do anything without William's support. Yes, William is that powerful now - the public does pay attention to what he and Kate signal and the public would support them more than they would support Charles. Charles can't risk losing William's favor any more than he already has.

The third reason stopping Charles from taking Harry and Meghan back as working royals is Camilla and that Harry doesn't want her involved. He admitted it last week when he didn't contradict her leak about it. IMO, this reveals Harry's hand: he wants to position himself (or Meghan and himself) as Camilla's alternate, the way Charles often stood in as Philip's alternate. They want Camilla to retire so they can take her place in prestige, wealth, and attention. It's the only way they can "be better" than William and Kate, and they probably think it's how they can get "more" in the inheritance than William. Unfortunately for them, Camilla is Charles's line in the sand so no way will Charles let that happen after he spent 30 years getting Camilla to be able to sit next to him, and on top of all that, Camilla herself didn't wait 30 years to be Queen just for a pair of narcisstic glassbowl shitheads to usurp her at the last second.

That's the "working royal" side of it.

When you look at the "family" side of it, we know that Charles is more accepting of allowing the Sussexes back as family members, albeit with two strict rules:

No Meghan

No royal work

We know these are Charles's rules because it's already been communicated to us, most especially in the events around the Queen's funeral and his own coronation.

We also know these are Charles's' terms because Harry is publicly fighting against them this week, which suggests that these may have been reiterated (or relitgated, perhaps) during the <15-minute visit on February 7th.

"We all finally have the same surname for the first time as a family" and "maybe I'll become an American' is Harry's way of telling Charles and the courtiers that all four of them are a package deal and they all move together (like Archie's salt and pepper shakers). Meaning that if Charles wants Harry back, Charles must also take Meghan, Archie, and Lili too.

The Vancouver trip being such a royal rip-off is Harry's way of demanding royal work. His position is that he and Meghan must have the exact same lifestyle now that they had back in 2018: a palace residence, glamorous patronages, military honors, gushy praising media coverage, carriage processions, and equal precedence to the entire Wales family.

All this to illustrate that the dividing line is over the work aspect.

On one side is everyone saying "no, they can't work, they're just family." On the other side is Harry and Meghan saying "we're not just family, we're also working royals." And Charles is there smack in the middle saying "don't make my last years miserable" begging someone to give in. It's clear that Charles hopes it will be the institution (i.e. William) that gives in so he can fast-track the rehabilitation.

So no, I don't think Charles and the Sussexes will succeed in being part-time working royals. I think we'll see a lot of negotiating in the coming weeks and months (like Sussex demands for Trooping) and it may get loud and it may look frighteningly real, but that's only because William and Kate are on leave from work and their absence lets Harry and Meghan play offense. Once the Waleses are working again, or a new picture of Kate is released (I'm still hedging my bets for something celebrating Mother's Day next month), the Sussexes go back to playing on defense, and playing poorly.

We only need to worry if William, Kate, and Camilla appear to be changing their minds. They represent "the institution" to Charles, as well as public support (William) and establishment media (Camilla). William continues to tell everyone he isn't speaking to Harry. Kate's body language at the Windsor Walkabout keeps resurfacing. Camilla has leaked that Harry doesn't want to see her when he visits Charles and that she doesn't support the Sussexes coming back. There's nothing to worry about for now.

#brf #sussexes #clarence house antics #rumors #theories #waleses #in this essay i will

176 notes · View notes

thepastisalreadywritten · 8 months ago

Text

In words laden with affection and warmth, Prince Philip told the then Princess Elizabeth how he had fallen in love with her 'unreservedly.'

The letter, written in 1946 — a year before their wedding — was among several revealed in Philip Eade's 2011 book Young Prince Philip: His Turbulent Early Life.

The Duke of Edinburgh, who has died aged 99, told the Princess how falling in love with her so 'completely' had made his personal troubles and even those of the world 'seem small and petty.'

He also found it difficult to put his feelings into words, describing in another message after they had spent time together how he felt incapable of 'showing you the gratitude that I feel.'

And he told the Queen Mother in the year of her daughter's wedding to him how 'Lilibet was the only thing in this world, which is absolutely real to me.'

Love letters

Philip served in the Royal Navy during the Second World War and saw active service against German, Italian, and Japanese forces.

The Greek prince's early life was also marked by upheaval — he escaped his home country as a baby by being hidden in a makeshift cot made from an orange box.

So his words were filled with meaning when he told Princess Elizabeth in 1946 how his love for her made all his past struggle — and the horrors the world had just been through — seem trivial by comparison.

He wrote:

'To have been spared in the war and seen victory, to have been given the chance to rest and to re-adjust myself, to have fallen in love completely and unreservedly, makes all one's personal and even the world's troubles seem small and petty.'

Three years earlier, Philip had spent Christmas at Windsor Castle.

Princess Elizabeth was said to be animated in a way 'none of us had ever seen before,' her governess, Marion Crawford, wrote.

Writing to her after seeing her again in July, Philip wrote of the 'simple enjoyment of family pleasures and amusements and the feeling that I am welcome to share them.'

'I am afraid I am not capable of putting all this into the right words and I am certainly incapable of showing you the gratitude that I feel.'

The same year, he apologised for the 'monumental cheek' of turning up to Buckingham Palace uninvited.

'Yet however contrite I feel, there is always a small voice that keeps saying "Nothing ventured, nothing gained,"' he wrote.

'Well did I venture, and I gained a wonderful time.'

And in a letter to the Queen Mother two weeks after his wedding to Princess Elizabeth in November 1947, Philip expressed his vision for their time together.

He said:

'Lilibet is the only thing in this world, which is absolutely real to me, and my ambition is to wield the two of us into a new combined existence that will not only be able to withstand the shocks directed at us but will also have a positive existence for the good... Cherish Lilibet?'

'I wonder if that word is enough to express what is in me. Does one cherish one's sense of humour or one's musical ear or one's eyes?

'I am not sure, but I know that I thank God for them and so, very humbly, I thank God for Lilibet and us.'

Public speeches

The pair's wedding, attended by an array of foreign kings and queens, captured the public imagination in the austere post-war days of November 1947.

The newly-weds were called the Fairy Princess and Prince Charming.

After honeymooning at Broadlands, Hampshire, home of Lord Mountbatten, and at Birkhall on the Balmoral estate in Scotland, Princess Elizabeth and the Duke of Edinburgh stayed at Buckingham Palace until renovation of their new home, nearby Clarence House, was completed in 1949.

And in the years since then, both Philip and the Queen have spoken of each other with affection in public.

In a 1997 toast during the couple's 50th wedding anniversary, he said:

'I think the main lesson that we have learned is that tolerance is the one essential ingredient of any happy marriage.

It may not be quite so important when things are going well, but it is absolutely vital when the going gets difficult.

You can take it from me that the Queen has the quality of tolerance in abundance.'

She said on the same evening that Philip had been her 'strength and stay all these years.'

'I, and his whole family, and this and many other countries, owe him a debt greater than he would ever claim, or we shall ever know,' she added.

In 2002, at her Golden Jubilee Speech, the monarch said of her consort:

'The Duke of Edinburgh has made an invaluable contribution to my life over these past fifty years, as he has to so many charities and organisations with which he has been involved.'

And, during her Diamond Jubilee address to Parliament in 2012, the Queen said to her husband:

'During these years as your Queen, the support of my family has, across the generations, been beyond measure.

Prince Philip is, I believe, well-known for declining compliments of any kind. But throughout he has been a constant strength and guide.'

Private moments

Philip was there for the Queen when her father, King George VI, died in February 1952.

Only six days before her father's death, the then Princess and Philip had embarked on their tour of Australia via Kenya.

According to Eade in his book, Philip said of the days following the King's death that 'there were plenty of people telling me what not to do.'

He added:

'I had to try to support the Queen as best I could without getting in the way. The difficulty was to find things that might be useful.'

And according to an anecdote told by Queen Alexandra of Yugoslavia, Philip is said to have told the Queen when recalling their first meeting in 1934 that — 'you were so shy. I could not get a word out of you.'

Mischievous Philip is also said to have joked to his wife on the day of her coronation in 1953 — when she was wearing the 17th-century St Edward's Crown — 'where did you get that hat.'

Elizabeth II (21 April 1926 – 8 September 2022)

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (10 June 1921 – 9 April 2021)

#Prince Philip #Duke of Edinburgh #Queen Elizabeth II #Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother #British Royal Family #love letters #Fairy Princess #Prince Charming #Queen Alexandra of Yugoslavia #Philip Eade #Young Prince Philip: His Turbulent Early Life #in memoriam #in loving memory

76 notes · View notes

meraki-yao · 10 months ago

Text

This is random as fuck but I'm thinking about Henry's royal surname

So I happen to be a bit of nerd when it comes to British royalty, I literally don't have a reason for that except it's interesting to me

I actually really appreciated changing movie Henry's surname, until I found out they're real royal houses and started wondering about RWRB's history

In the book it was Mountchristen-Windsor, obviously modelled after irl royal family Mountbatten-Windsor, although Mountbatten was derived from the German Battenberg family from the Queen's husband, Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark, which is also an actual place in Germany. As far as I can tell Mountchristen is entirely fictional?

Book Henry mentioned having a Great Uncle who abdicated because he was a Nazi, which is irl Duke of Winsdor, Queen Elizabeth's uncle (although the reason he stated was for love), so I think? That the lineage was the same until at least that generation. But Queen Mary, Henry's grandmother said she's been serving the country for 47 years, and Princess Catherine, Henry's mother is 60 years old in 2020, born in 1960, approximately the same age as Prince Andrew, Queen E's third child. Henry was born in 1997, and Prince William was born in 1982. So the generational year gap changes there: for RWRB there's four generations, while irl there are five generations in 2020.

So a bit of math here, assuming that the Duke of Windsor's abdication is the same as the real world, which is 1936, so the lineage is the same up to 1936. The book takes place in 2020, so Queen Mary ascended to the throne in 1973, 37 years after the Duke of Windsor's abdication, a reasonable amount of years for one monarch's reign. So that monarch is where things went differently. As for how it went differently...yeah I don't fucking know my brain cells ran out.

But Movie Henry's royal family name is Hanover-Stuart, two actual houses of royalty: King James IV&I of M&G belongs to the House of Stuart (so what the fuck Nick another coincidental connection between your characters) with Anne, Queen of Britain being the last reigning monarch of the House of Stuart (after her death her cousin George of Hanover inherited the British Throne); Queen Victoria was the last reigning monarch of the House of Hanover (her children belonged to the house of her husband: the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, which was later renamed Windsor during WWI). In our world, the House of Stuart went extinct in 1807, while the House of Hanover still has living members in Europe, granted no longer in direct relations to the British monarchy

So what I'm wondering if for movie verse, where the history of the British royal family changes for Henry to have this different surname:

For Hanover, it's possible that for the universe, Queen Victoria's children still bore her name of Hanover and didn't change it during the war, so the rest of the lineup to Henry kept Hanover. But I cannot for the life of me imagine where would Stuart come from given that the line broke off there

... yeah I don't know what point I'm trying to make or what conclusion I drew, but I used up an hour going down this rabbit hole. If my dad knew I was doing math for this instead of doing my calculus homework he'd kill me but whatever

Also I bet neither Casey nor Matthew actually thought this deep about such a minor thing this is how bad my rwrb brainrot is if we don't get something soon I'm gonna go stir crazy

#rwrb #red white and royal blue #rwrb movie #nicholas galitzine #henry fox mountchristen windsor #henry hanover stuart fox #firstprince #rwrb thoughts #rwrb rambles #history #british history #what the fuck is wrong with me

54 notes · View notes

the-empress-7 · 10 months ago

Note

Edwards kids were the first to use Mountbatten-Windsor as surname. Harry never used it,nor Meghan, only the kids.

"Mountbatten-Windsor differs from the official name of the British royal family, which remains the House of Windsor. In accordance with law and custom in the English-speaking world, the surname Mountbatten-Windsor belongs to all male-line descendants of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, and is used by them if and when a surname is needed. In contrast, male-line descendants of King George V, the first monarch of the House of Windsor, use Windsor as their surname if and when a surname is needed."

The Harkles in effect have broken away from the family by disowning the Mountbatten Windsor surname.

18 notes · View notes

houseofbrat · 7 months ago

Text

Rebecca English's recent revelation:

And while, fortunately, the King appears to be responding well to treatment and is hopeful of taking up more forward-facing public duties in the near future, recent events will have been a stark reminder of what awaits the Wales’ in the not so distant future. It is why, although his appearances today were both welcome and heartfelt, we should not expect to see a wholesale return to royal duties for the prince. Instead, I understand, he is likely to undertake one or two public engagements each week - often on the same day in order to minimise time away from Kate and the children - as well as continuing with his usual behind-the-scenes work. He will, I am told, almost certainly take some sort of role around the 80th anniversary of the D-Day landings in June, as well as attending Trooping the Colour and the annual Order of the Garter service and, perhaps, one of the annual summer garden parties for worthy community heroes. And he will definitely continue to undertake investitures at Windsor Castle on behalf of the King over the coming weeks.

So the kids can be in school five days per week, but William can only do public engagements ONE DAY per week.

Somehow this wasn't a problem prior to William's recent four week break.

During the week of 18 to 24 February, William worked three days:

The BAFTAs on Sunday

The British Red Cross on Tuesday

An investiture at Windsor Castle on Wednesday

During the week of 25 February to 02 March, William worked two days but was originally scheduled to work three:

Missed King Constantine's memorial service due to "personal reasons" on Tuesday

Visited a synagogue on Thursday

Went to Wales for a few visits for St. David's Day

During the week of 10 to 16 March, William worked three days:

Commonwealth Service plus Earthshot function on Monday

Earthshot meeting behind closed doors at Windsor on Wednesday

A youth visit plus The Diana Awards' on Thursday

And yet, William is still being outworked by his father who HAS cancer and probably even The Duke of Kent.

Somehow, William was able to work three weeks with more than one day of public engagements per week prior to the kids' Easter break.

But now that not-rigorous schedule from February and March would be too much for delicate William, even though all his known children are in school FIVE DAYS per week.

And William also has his in-law to help out. They help out so much that William was able to go to a pub with his mother-in-law in Norfolk two weeks ago, when he was on vacation.

And let's not forget that nanny Maria is still around.

Just like the sudden need to do significant renovations at Adelaide Cottage, this goes beyond the fishy timeline about Kate's cancer and William's regular workshy-ness. It's pretty clear William is going into semi-hiding. This isn't about helping Kate; this is about avoiding the British general public. Because the general public is unpredictable and will say what they really think of you, when given the opportunity, to your face.

I guess that is what happened when William miscalculated on his pr machinations and realized his father wasn't going to move the big announcement back to suit William's needs. There's a reason why you make certain announcements on the anniversary of a happy day rather than a sad one.

Can't wait until Andrew permanently loses his favorite three little words. Along with Harry. Beatrice, Eugenie, Archie, and little Lilibet will all be losing a little bit more than that, as they will lose four words.

7 notes · View notes