The Heir, The Spare and the “Baby Brain” -The Prince Harry and Meghan show rumbles on…

Looking from outside, Harry and Meghan seem to be right for each other on a romantic level, but maybe not so much in terms of how they want to live their lives. I hope - for their children's sake and their own - that they can figure out a happy medium.

@once_upon there is one point you mention I agree that with. Harry is extraordinarily unlucky to look so incredibly like the man his mother had an affair with. Forget about the red hair, he looks at so many stages of his life like a carbon copy of James Hewitt.

I know that looking very carefully, in some pictures one can also find a level of resemblance with his grandfather. But nothing so compelling.
Harry's looks resemble some of his Spencer relatives, notably his aunt Lady Sarah McCorquodale and, as a child, her son George.
 
Thinking about the title thing further, this explains things nicely - https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64890702

However, these lines still makes me wonder:
Harry and Meghan are understood to want their children to decide for themselves whether or not to use their titles when they are older. The couple will not use the titles conversationally, the BBC understands, but Archie and Lilibet will be referred to as prince and princess in formal contexts.

Because what's already happening is that the media are referring to them by title in much the same fashion that it was (incorrectly) Princess Diana and always will be - so much for the kids having any choice.

Also interesting that when the children were born, they were not entitled to be called Prince and Princess. Archie was baptised two months after he was born, but Lilibet was christened nearly two years after she was born, after Charles ascended, thus making both her and her brother eligible for the titles.
 
However, these lines still makes me wonder:
Harry and Meghan are understood to want their children to decide for themselves whether or not to use their titles when they are older. The couple will not use the titles conversationally, the BBC understands, but Archie and Lilibet will be referred to as prince and princess in formal contexts.
Yeah, that's kind of a strange compromise. Edward and Sophie wanted their kids to decide, and though Lady Louise and the Earl of Wessex could have been styled princess and prince, their parents decided otherwise. Lady Louise doesn't seem in any hurry to change that.
 
The other side of this is that I don't know about Lady Louise or what the future holds for Lilibet, but I think when I was a little girl if I'd found out I could have been a princess and my parents had already said no, I'd have been VERY annoyed! :drama:
 
I think Harry thinks titles are super important because everyone he ever grew up with thinks titles are super important. Especially his mother -- Diana was very conscious of her aristocratic lineage. It can seem weird to people who don't have titles (which is 99.9% of us) but in their little orbit it is super important.
 
I was always surprised that anyone would question Harry's parentage based on his looks as to me he was obviously a Spencer, having seen photos of many of the Spencer clan. The Windsor traits are always so strong in most of the offspring that it seems unusual when a different family's traits predominate.
 
@once_upon there is one point you mention I agree that with. Harry is extraordinarily unlucky to look so incredibly like the man his mother had an affair with. Forget about the red hair, he looks at so many stages of his life like a carbon copy of James Hewitt.

I know that looking very carefully, in some pictures one can also find a level of resemblance with his grandfather. But nothing so compelling.

I expect the doubt did at some stage exist for real either in his head or in thar of the rest of the BRF and that would have had subconscious consequences.
I think Harry looks almost exactly like Charles, albeit better looking. The same close set eyes, the same nose, the same emerging bald spot. His red hair is, to me, the only thing that he has in common with James Hewitt. Diana's side of the family have red hair, including both sisters (when they were younger). I can understand when Harry was a child or teen that he would have been upset hearing terrible rumors and that it could play into insecurities even into adulthood. I hope this rumor is something Harry has been able to move past.
 
Royal custom dating back to the seventeenth century decrees the home secretary has to be present at the birth of those in line to the throne lest an imposter be smuggled in and babies switched. Not too sure if this is still practice but I think it likely they are 99.999 %, or whatever DNA guarantees, sure that Harry is the son of Charles.
 
Royal custom dating back to the seventeenth century decrees the home secretary has to be present at the birth of those in line to the throne lest an imposter be smuggled in and babies switched. Not too sure if this is still practice but I think it likely they are 99.999 %, or whatever DNA guarantees, sure that Harry is the son of Charles.
I think George VI put a stop to that practice.
 
There are so many conflicting elements with M&H. I wonder if the two of them ever had a real heart to heart conversation about what was important to them, what they really wanted from life both as individuals and as a couple before they got married. Or were they caught up in the romance, the excitement of a new relationship, the physical attraction...all those wonderful things we experience when we fall in love. I also wonder if that's why William spoke to Harry about slowing down the relationship. That the conversation wasn't about, "we don't like this person," but more about, "make sure this person really knows what they're getting themselves into before taking the relationship to the next level."

Marrying into the BRF seems to go against everything M stands for, so why do it knowing there would be a soul-crushing toll taken on her core beliefs. Being the impetus for positive change is fantastic in theory but trying to do that in an organization hundreds of years old, steeped in traditions (traditions that they seem to mostly like), not known for innovation or fast change and in a very public sphere, that's a lot to ask of ones self. I don't believe their plan all along was to cut and run from the BRF. I also don't think H&M gave it enough time working in the BRF. Of course, I say that not knowing the internal dynamics of the family, particularly with William and Kate, except for what was made public in Harry's book. I get that M was upset by the racist coverage from some of the British media. But M was not an ingenue and being American, divorced and bi-racial, there should have been an expectation on her part that there would be negative coverage by the British media about her and, yes, that some of it would be racist because there will always be a-holes in this world who spew hatred. I really wish H&M would have stuck it out longer and that the BRF would have more supportive, particularly with muzzling the media. Imagine, now five years after H&M's marriage, how different things might have been if they had stayed part of the BRF.

Their exit strategy from the BRF has been bizarre. H&M said they wanted to live a more quiet life. Living in Southern California, Mecca of the celebrity and publicity industrial complex; the Oprah interview; the Netflix series; the book and the constant media updates. How is any of that about leading a more quiet life? Even putting all that aside, the Hollywood road they are going down, with public appearances, photos and paparazzi, while putting money in their pockets, appears to be in the worst interests of Harry's mental health. How do they justify to each other and themselves living in the world of cognative dissonance they've created? I hope the future holds good things for them but I think some tough decisions need to be made about individual and mutual priorities, happiness and health.
 
Is Meghan actively using her title, or is just the media? Harry's book cover says written by Prince Harry, so is he continuing to use his titles outside of formal, BRF-related occasions?
Selling the book as Prince Harry may not have been his choice/may have been his publisher telling him that he will sell more books that way and/or a condition to sign him.
I can also see why Harry would continue to use his title because that is how he grew up. It's part of his identity. It is not part of Meghan's or the children's identity. Some of what I read gives me the impression that Meghan is the one who wants those titles in a "have the cake and eat it, too" kind of way. But that may simply be how the media paints her and it could be that Harry thinks it's who the kids are, so it's how they should be called. On the other hand, he does have a number of cousins whose parents want them to decide later and he sees how that's not a must. 🤷‍♀️

I think the titles are a perfect example of the impression I have, that Harry and Meghan may not have figured out what it is that they truly want. They wanted to get away from the confines of the RF (who can blame them?) but beyond that? Hopefully, they can find their way and hopefully, the media will let them!
 
H&M said they wanted to live a more quiet life. Living in Southern California, Mecca of the celebrity and publicity industrial complex; the Oprah interview; the Netflix series; the book and the constant media updates. How is any of that about leading a more quiet life?
Compared to being a working royal and doing multiple events/day every three-five days? I'd think so. Especially as the older royals will have to step down, and fewer younger ones coming up the ranks, and the choice is between doing more and having organizations without royal patronage.
 
Harry's looks resemble some of his Spencer relatives, notably his aunt Lady Sarah McCorquodale and, as a child, her son George.
There was a time in my life when I looked exactly like an Aunt by marriage looked at that age. Since she wasn't related to me genetically, it was just a coincidence. These things happen.

That said, I don't think Harry looks much like Hewett at all. They don't have the same nose at all. They don't have the same eyes. The shape of their faces isn't the same. They don't have the same teeth. They are both white men with red-ish hair and that's about it.
 
Is Meghan actively using her title, or is just the media? Harry's book cover says written by Prince Harry, so is he continuing to use his titles outside of formal, BRF-related occasions?
They both identify themselves by their titles - in their news releases and on the Archwell website, the Netflix documentary, their books and podcast, etc.
 
They had to secure the titles for the children now. With the coronation over, it’s unlikely Harry will attend any official royal event until the funeral of King Charles.

And so there’s unlikely to be any official royal connection again (at least I hope for Charles’ sake for 10 to 15 years or more.

By the time the children are adults they will be so far removed from the royal family and be so thoroughly American it would be downright bizarre to elect to start using British titles then.
 
Agree, but I'm still scratching my head at the decision to have their children be Prince and Princess. It's their right of course, but if Harry hated/still hates the whole thing, and it's certainly not without precedent, why put that kind of baggage on little kids? If they want the kids to have a "normal" childhood, sending them off to school with titles immediately sets them apart, even more so than being a celebrity's kid. Even if they never use them, it's out there in the world and there will be people - strangers and those who actually know them - who treat them differently because of it.
Harry and Meghan need titles (their own and their children’s) to stay relevant. Their hypocrisy is :rolleyes:.
 
They had to secure the titles for the children now. With the coronation over, it’s unlikely Harry will attend any official royal event until the funeral of King Charles.

And so there’s unlikely to be any official royal connection again (at least I hope for Charles’ sake for 10 to 15 years or more.

By the time the children are adults they will be so far removed from the royal family and be so thoroughly American it would be downright bizarre to elect to start using British titles then.
I don't think there's anything to "secure". The children are entitled to the titles, at the moment. Should Charles choose to take away titles from grandchildren in direct line to the throne like the Danish Royal Family did then they won't be, regardless of whether they use them now or not. And if there's no connection to the royal family as you describe then I think it will be bizarre to use them one way or another.

Additionally, I'm not sure that they're doing the children a favor with it. Yes, they can opt out later if they choose to but until then, the titles will always remind everyone of that close connection to the British Royal Family. Sure, the media won't forget but the titles won't allow anyone else to forget or be ignorant of it either.
 
They had to secure the titles for the children now. With the coronation over, it’s unlikely Harry will attend any official royal event until the funeral of King Charles.

And so there’s unlikely to be any official royal connection again (at least I hope for Charles’ sake for 10 to 15 years or more.

By the time the children are adults they will be so far removed from the royal family and be so thoroughly American it would be downright bizarre to elect to start using British titles then.
I hope that unofficially they will find an opportunity to communicate. For the sake of their own children. Archie and Lilibet have a lot of close relatives. I am sure that not only bad things are in their families.
 
I don't think any of Prince Harry's family need titles to remind anyone of who they are.

Prince Andrew, at least-- not sure.about their mother -- has pushed for his children to be front and center, which hasn't been true of Princess Anne and her husbands.
 
It seems pretty obvious to me that Harry and Meghan grabbed the titles while they were still entitled to them by birthright before Charles had a chance (if rumours are to be believed) to do what the Danish Royal family did. There was speculation last fall by "royal experts" when Charles became kind that Beatrice and Eugenie might lose their titles in his vision of a slimmed down monarchy.

In a way thwarting Charles lest he provoke another Oprah Part Two "my babies aren't titled because they are bi-racial". You don't hear much about that interview and accusation anymore when it comes to discussing their titles. ;)
 
I don't think any of Prince Harry's family need titles to remind anyone of who they are.
They don't need the titles to remind people who they are. They need them to keep the connection with the royal family so as to maximize their earning potential.

I could have sworn when Archie was born Harry said he and Meghan had decided to forego titles and let the children decide when they were old enough, like Princess Anne's kids.
 
Compared to being a working royal and doing multiple events/day every three-five days? I'd think so. Especially as the older royals will have to step down, and fewer younger ones coming up the ranks, and the choice is between doing more and having organizations without royal patronage.
Very good point. I honestly didn't think most of them made multiple appearances per day. I thought the plan would likely be that as the older members retire from duty, the youngers members would prioritize organizations they want to support and they would be forced to let other organizations go. I wonder if Charles will reconsider Beatrice and Eugenie becoming working members of the family, even part time. I'm also curious what will happen with Edward and Sophie's kids.

It will be interesting to see the working family members dynamics in the future. I'm not British but I can't imagine the British public being happy about paying the same to support a royal family that does less.
 
I could have sworn when Archie was born Harry said he and Meghan had decided to forego titles and let the children decide when they were old enough, like Princess Anne's kids.
I don't pay attention enough to know how that works. If they want to use them later, do they have to accept them now and just not use them or can the kids pick them up anytime they want to?

One of the problems with living your life in the public eye is that everything you've ever said is on record. Then, if you change your mind, your haters scream "Hypocrite!" And sometimes this happens even when you didn't say whatever it was people remember you saying.

In this case, according to this article in Town & Country, H&M never said they didn't want titles for their kids. People assumed this because they rejected the title of Earl of Dumbarton for Archie. I don't follow the BRF enough to know if this is an accurate or revisionist view of history. 🤷

 
I could have sworn when Archie was born Harry said he and Meghan had decided to forego titles and let the children decide when they were old enough, like Princess Anne's kids.
Princess Anne's kids were not entitled to royal titles, as they are not male-line grandchildren of a sovereign. They're not the children of a peer, so they don't get to be Lord and Lady, either. I believe it's Edward and Sophie who wanted their kids to decide how they'd like to be styled.
 
I could have sworn when Archie was born Harry said he and Meghan had decided to forego titles and let the children decide when they were old enough, like Princess Anne's kids.
I remember that, as well. Harry was able to read the writing on the wall and knew there would not be a position as working members of the royal family for his children, so he and Meghan thought it would be better if their children didn't have titles.
 
It is accurate that they rejected the title Earl of Dumbarton. Gossip at the time was they didn't like the name Dumbarton and thought he could be teased over it.

It is accurate that Archie could not be a prince until Charles became king.

I think you also just need to find a copy of that interview they did with Oprah to see that Meghan (and Harry?) very much expected the title and were upset that Archie was not going to be a prince when he was born. I put a question mark with Harry simply because I am not sure if he is just stupid and didn't understand how things worked or he did a shit job explaining royal life and protocol to his wife that she went and did an interview actually believing what she told the world ie.. they broke protocol to deny the her bi-racial child that title 🤷‍♀️
 
Princess Anne's kids were not entitled to royal titles, as they are not male-line grandchildren of a sovereign. They're not the children of a peer, so they don't get to be Lord and Lady, either. I believe it's Edward and Sophie who wanted their kids to decide how they'd like to be styled.
I'm sorry that's so effed up. I know it has now changed, but still ...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information