|
Post by donna on Oct 25, 2019 5:22:40 GMT -5
I think you are right agentf. The tabloids like to elevate people and then bring them down, just to have something to write about.
But they wouldn't exist if it weren't for the readers who love to love or hate someone from a safe distance, instead of looking inwards at their own lives with the risk of feeling disappointed or fear of hating themselves. There are the admirers need someone else to admire, since they feel they are not worthy themselves, and the grumpies with lots of internalised anger and shame, who hate themselves and love to see others coming down and feeling pain. Some sort of shame bashing. What do you think?
It is hard to find the thin line between not caring what is being written about you and risk appearing cold and unsympathetic like Kate and Charles, or being authentic, caring about people and trying to negotiate with the media, like Diana before and now Meghan and Harry.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Oct 25, 2019 9:59:22 GMT -5
That's the thing, isnt it, between natural curiosity, the need to idealize others in order to transcend, and then those who bait and exploit this outpouring? It is a fine line, and it's a fluid line at that. Apparently ITV countered last night with a Prince Charles doc, to detract a bit. Others say there's a generational divide between the under 35 who are pro Harry & Meghan sharing, and the over 35 who prefer a more stoic royal family. Kate has the benefit of being British, so she adapted better and understood the scope of things firsthand. Harry is experiencing everything at once - a breakneck romance, marital bliss, a baby - and he's infused with well meaning. He just has to be careful not to fall into the pitfall of Marklization. On the bright side, even these media dramas have a way of shifting the focus around and are short-lived. I think you are right agentf. The tabloids like to elevate people and then bring them down, just to have something to write about. But they wouldn't exist if it weren't for the readers who love to love or hate someone from a safe distance, instead of looking inwards at their own lives with the risk of feeling disappointed or fear of hating themselves. There are the admirers need someone else to admire, since they feel they are not worthy themselves, and the grumpies with lots of internalised anger and shame, who hate themselves and love to see others coming down and feeling pain. Some sort of shame bashing. What do you think? It is hard to find the thin line between not caring what is being written about you and risk appearing cold and unsympathetic like Kate and Charles, or being authentic, caring about people and trying to negotiate with the media, like Diana before and now Meghan and Harry.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Oct 27, 2019 19:06:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Oct 30, 2019 5:41:36 GMT -5
Now it's in the British parliament where female representatives have signed a motion of support against the colonial undertones the media employs towards Meghan. No doubt - since I don't read all the British media - that it's warranted to a degree.
My question is : why is the white f*ck--- @$$---- who sold her private letter to the media aka her dad, getting a free pass?!?! He's the emotional highjacker, the deadbeat for inviting millions into his inability to be a responsible father.
Never mind Oprah or Hillary Clinton, who are skirting this issue. Maybe they just want a break from Trump's racism at home. If these were colonial times indeed, the king or queen would haul Thomas Markle's behind to a donjon.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Nov 2, 2019 6:50:48 GMT -5
Well...Trump has commented. www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1198350/Meghan-Markle-news-struggle-Trump-Prince-Harry-bond-meeting-royal-latest-LBCIf it's an attempt at empathy by drawing parallels about how he feels about being victimized by the media, I don't know 🙄 If he truly cared, he would use his influence with Rupert Murdoch to settle this matter without further distress to Meghan. IMO however, another Meghan - McCain, would probably be a better shoulder for Prince Harry's wife. Meghan McCain has gone through the compounded grief of losing a father and losing the baby girl she was carrying back in July. 💔 The way I see it, the way to get past sadness and heartbreak is to shift your emotions to someone who needs support.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 9, 2020 5:42:43 GMT -5
Could these two slow down?! No doubt Canadians would love to see royals more often, but Harry is liable to walk into the same trap as his uncle after money, where he's going to end up herded into something with nefarious people behind it. I wouldn't want to be in QE2's shoes at the moment. Fatherhood doesn't mean you suddenly know everything though you may feel you want to take on the world. For crooks, it's then as lazy a game as catching fish that fly out of the water. While it's easy for her to work (and Harry will be the added value), but where's he going? The idea to earn his keep is great, but ask your dad about his side hustle packaging organic food or comsult with Kate's marketing family about niche markets, but unless you have a degree in high finance like some of the Swedish (or Norwegian?) royals who interned before taking this step, I'm just worried. I think Harry albeit meaning well, is liable to get recycled as the next sensational fodder. I just don't see him as the tag-on to Megan on TV, or the emasculated co-lifestyle blogger. As a royal, he has his mother's charity legacy where he's much appreciated internationally. He may not want to precipitate things and just take a prolonged paternity leave to help him decide. www.bbc.com/news/uk-51043220
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 12, 2020 11:47:26 GMT -5
I can't help thinking a Spencer should maybe be present tomorrow, rather than leave Harry on his own to become more isolated if made to feel at a disadvantage and having to make an emotional decision. The Earl Spencer took a vow at his sister's funeral and he's made subsequent conservative choices despite a lot of media glare. My thoughts about the man's style aside, but he or his other sisters can probably buffer whatever harsh realities may have to be faced. I just don't see backing Harry in a corner yielding good results. I don't see where else he would get counsel he would accept at the moment. His announcement was clumsy, coming from a place of frustation and a desire to assert himself - but NOT as a challenge to power, let's remember. No one wants to see a second hit to QE2's core. And not an innocent one at that.
. . .
{The more I think about it, the more I think neither Sussexes pushed the button on their social media. Much like the US army withdrawal from Iraq was a "draft", and Blackwater took out Suleimani. Just a hunch. Look at the web company and the Paris Israeli mobster's dad's company as well as the other company that pitched the couple free coffee, on the clients list. That's who would profit from Harry's "demotion" IMO. }
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 13, 2020 9:19:39 GMT -5
I'm glad the brothers responded to the ludicrous claim of bullying: www.bbc.com/news/uk-51086477Anyone who's watched the two their whole lives could never claim something so uncharacteristic. There's an opportunity here, I think, to put QE2's excellent soft diplomacy into practice by developing a training program for royals that can streamline them to a diplomatic career within a revived Commonwealth Office of the Foreign Office. I think it's better than becoming the lone token(s) of a budding celebrity culture machine that will ultimately limit them.
|
|
|
Post by mrszinck on Jan 13, 2020 11:40:21 GMT -5
Trust is broken forever - You no longer restore this as before. Sad. JMO.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 13, 2020 19:20:11 GMT -5
I don't know (shakes her head). On the one hand, this is too much about Harry & Meghan, and yet not enough about William. I mean, look at the level of mobilization behind the scenes in the months leading up, to the very eve of the couple's announcement. It's staggeringly "organized". It is in a way a campaign that seems to parallel the level of preparedness you'd imagine going into the launch of William's reign and it's pettily upstagey IMO. I maintain Harry & Meghan didn't post themselves their announcement. It was far too eager and in poor taste on the birthday of Kate. It's a coup d'éclat I can't imagine the couple's anger and frustration at the British media would even warrant. No. It's the work of sensationalist marketers. There's no doubt. And if you can let strangers orchestrate a rift behind your back, with your only sibling, you have to at least take a good look again before jumping with both feet. It's Trumpian in its vulgarity. If you can't reign in those people before joining them, how much will you control how they will use you to skewer your brother when he's king and you're the new designated weapon to undermine him? Harry will end up hating himself. It's one thing to do away with the shackles of being born royal but quite another to make people forget you're related. To sell stuff and tabloids, those people are not bound by the same code that will handicap William from fighting back because he won't want to hurt his brother. In that respect, it's not really a fair fight in the offing. . . . Unsurprisingly the marketer recently registered a new company called "Grandstand" 🙄 Trust is broken forever - You no longer restore this as before. Sad. JMO.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 14, 2020 9:30:37 GMT -5
It's clear that a Royal Diplomatic Corps "Agency", as an offshoot of the Foreign Office, is a logical way to funnel requests that could in the future encompass all popular royals. An agency that takes a percentage and tallies the security costs into the booking's bundle, and is able to vet the requests more properly, seems a better protection IMO. The royal then takes a fee and a commission goes to the British public treasury. Just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 16, 2020 9:55:55 GMT -5
A sympathetic article for Meghan: www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/15/meghan-markle-mail-on-sunday-courage-mediaMy unsollicited advice would be for Meghan to make a gesture and rejoin Harry in the UK, to bring him back to Canada. I think goodwill would flow, since QE2 has indulged them. Many would be watching to see if Meghan herself can be flexible. Plus, it would be selfless and show that she does endure for her husband as much as he's had to do acrobatics for the sake of their relationship this week. A thank you to her Grandmom-in-law would be thoughtful.
|
|
|
Post by donna on Jan 16, 2020 20:32:48 GMT -5
After seeing "The Crown" the queen has lost all my sympathy. I think she is just a horrible person and I quite understand Harry and Meghan not wanting to be a part of this phony, nasty, selfperserving institution anymore. Plus the tabloids in UK are the nastiest in the world. Princess what's her name, Madeleine of Sweden, moved to New york and then to London to live a normal life with their 2-3 children without any problems. Why is it so different for Harry and Meghan? I don't hear the UK moaning about cost of security for them, if they have any. The UK media is just overreacting and living under the illusion that people in the world actually care where Harry and family live. Nobody gives a hoot. Let him have a normal life if he wants it.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 17, 2020 16:55:41 GMT -5
I haven't seen The Crown, or do much royal gazing in general (shocking, I know). I think the role of queen will always fascinate and we'll hang whatever our perceptions are on it and that's the prism royals on the other side can't always control but would love to - but it's like Doppler. I'm currently reading different views, from a JdeM blogger with an interesting theory of having a resident royal at this particular time, to H&M's neighbour and author of You'll Never Hate Alone or something. He's less keen to have them but exemplifies why they or foreigners like himself chose Canada (it's not entirely flattering but funny nonetheless). Then you have the personal Daily Mail plea by a journalist who's known Harry, and then Meghan's sister completes all of that. It makes us look. If the new conditions for Megxit are what I'm hearing however, on Youtube, QE2 has got it covered. If anyone's going to exploit royalty, it should be them and not middle managers and hangers-on. The question is - and this finally dovetails in where I agree with you, Donna - is if Harry wanted anonymity, why in heaven did he pick a TV actress?? (By the way, Cressida is now getting critical acclaim for a movie role. Ironic.) Madeleine of Sweden was indeed who I was thinking of too, but she's done such a good job...I forgot about her!! (Not entirely true, she's gorgeous and lovely). There was Lady something who tweeted about yoga and taxes (as Meghan coincidentally went to pick up her yoga instructor)… and let me just chime in a bit with insight into a certain cookie-cutter mentality back in Canada and especially Toronto, that's absolutely unbearable and mind-numbing, and I totally get where she would get the dig. In the US, it would be considered Stepford-ish, though I think I've heard it called "muffy"? In Quebec, we would say "bouchee" as in plugged-in, (not bite-size). Anyway, for people who pride themselves on openness, they spend a lot of time telling other people how to live but when pried, substance is hard to find. Then they throw up the veil of being sensitive and intelligent dialogue gets highjacked. It's like a skit. After seeing "The Crown" the queen has lost all my sympathy. I think she is just a horrible person and I quite understand Harry and Meghan not wanting to be a part of this phony, nasty, selfperserving institution anymore. Plus the tabloids in UK are the nastiest in the world. Princess what's her name, Madeleine of Sweden, moved to New york and then to London to live a normal life with their 2-3 children without any problems. Why is it so different for Harry and Meghan? I don't hear the UK moaning about cost of security for them, if they have any. The UK media is just overreacting and living under the illusion that people in the world actually care where Harry and family live. Nobody gives a hoot. Let him have a normal life if he wants it.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 17, 2020 18:43:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by donna on Jan 18, 2020 22:57:40 GMT -5
I sooooo recommend you see The Crown. It is a fabulous show. Just try not to be annoyed by the queen's AWFUL persona. She has to be the most despicable person in the world, so cold and frigid to her own children and sister, just HORRIBLE and even more so because she has been "worshipped" by millions for decades. She may seem an old "fragile" lady now, but in her hayday she was heartless and cruel. Everyone else is fabulous and the historical accuracy is thrilling. The Crown is such an antidote to the glossy magazine covering of the royals, so I would recommend watching it for everyone. Really makes one view the royal institution in a new light. I wouldn't be surprised if Catherine is as cold and indifferent to other people's feelings as the old queen, hence she has thrived so marvelously in it. I haven't seen The Crown, or do much royal gazing in general (shocking, I know). I think the role of queen will always fascinate and we'll hang whatever our perceptions are on it and that's the prism royals on the other side can't always control but would love to - but it's like Doppler. I'm currently reading different views, from a JdeM blogger with an interesting theory of having a resident royal at this particular time, to H&M's neighbour and author of You'll Never Hate Alone or something. He's less keen to have them but exemplifies why they or foreigners like himself chose Canada (it's not entirely flattering but funny nonetheless). Then you have the personal Daily Mail plea by a journalist who's known Harry, and then Meghan's sister completes all of that. It makes us look. If the new conditions for Megxit are what I'm hearing however, on Youtube, QE2 has got it covered. If anyone's going to exploit royalty, it should be them and not middle managers and hangers-on. The question is - and this finally dovetails in where I agree with you, Donna - is if Harry wanted anonymity, why in heaven did he pick a TV actress?? (By the way, Cressida is now getting critical acclaim for a movie role. Ironic.) Madeleine of Sweden was indeed who I was thinking of too, but she's done such a good job...I forgot about her!! (Not entirely true, she's gorgeous and lovely). There was Lady something who tweeted about yoga and taxes (as Meghan coincidentally went to pick up her yoga instructor)… and let me just chime in a bit with insight into a certain cookie-cutter mentality back in Canada and especially Toronto, that's absolutely unbearable and mind-numbing, and I totally get where she would get the dig. In the US, it would be considered Stepford-ish, though I think I've heard it called "muffy"? In Quebec, we would say "bouchee" as in plugged-in, (not bite-size). Anyway, for people who pride themselves on openness, they spend a lot of time telling other people how to live but when pried, substance is hard to find. Then they throw up the veil of being sensitive and intelligent dialogue gets highjacked. It's like a skit. After seeing "The Crown" the queen has lost all my sympathy. I think she is just a horrible person and I quite understand Harry and Meghan not wanting to be a part of this phony, nasty, selfperserving institution anymore. Plus the tabloids in UK are the nastiest in the world. Princess what's her name, Madeleine of Sweden, moved to New york and then to London to live a normal life with their 2-3 children without any problems. Why is it so different for Harry and Meghan? I don't hear the UK moaning about cost of security for them, if they have any. The UK media is just overreacting and living under the illusion that people in the world actually care where Harry and family live. Nobody gives a hoot. Let him have a normal life if he wants it.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 19, 2020 7:31:30 GMT -5
Okay, I will. I looked up the episodes and little synopses online after you said that. I know people rave about it. Just one thing though, but straight off it's just suaoicious that EVERYONE is so nice, except her. No? Could it be a bit caricatured? Anyways, I'll watch some and find out. I did watch the story of the other Prince William, QE2's dashing Bond-esque pilot cousin. Otherwise, boom. Yesterday was not a particular day for euphoria. As much as I would love Harry to find himself, it's always with some emotion that you watch a fish come out of the water, even when standing from the other shore. It's just unnatural. I honestly don't think Harry knows what it is to be royal. That he got there by centuries of "tours in Afghanistan" (with the French alone). (I say it, void of any bitterness fyi). But if he feels so strongly, then maybe he was born different from his kin, and he has to follow his destiny. And on that, no doubt we all wish him well. I sooooo recommend you see The Crown. It is a fabulous show. Just try not to be annoyed by the queen's AWFUL persona. She has to be the most despicable person in the world, so cold and frigid to her own children and sister, just HORRIBLE and even more so because she has been "worshipped" by millions for decades. She may seem an old "fragile" lady now, but in her hayday she was heartless and cruel. Everyone else is fabulous and the historical accuracy is thrilling. The Crown is such an antidote to the glossy magazine covering of the royals, so I would recommend watching it for everyone. Really makes one view the royal institution in a new light. I wouldn't be surprised if Catherine is as cold and indifferent to other people's feelings as the old queen, hence she has thrived so marvelously [/quote]
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 20, 2020 5:23:30 GMT -5
Looks like it's time to let go. QE2 didn't entirely close the door. In a year, the terms can be revised but I think she told everyone how any more infiltrations were not going to gain an inch on her family again. I thought Andrew's appearance was cringeworthy by the way, at such a time, but better have him attend church than not see what he's up to and QE2 was in mama bear mode, so... Some reports have Harry & William smoothing their differences before Harry goes. I know of one prince who'd give the world to have his big brother back - cherish the one you have. It's not squabbles that should distance them. I thought Harry's speech posted on Instagram was heartfelt, albeit lacking in some humility. It's as though the "no public funds" was this formula he was adamant about, without recognizing he had underestimated just how much more (I don't want to say folly) his choice is in fact really going to cost others. I would have hammered less on that, but that's the soundbite that sells, isn't it? It's what people ultimately want to hear. I hope he uses the next year to have another child, and weighs his options. I love that Archie was thrilled at the sight of his first snow. It never loses its fascination every season. ❄
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 21, 2020 15:03:55 GMT -5
I was musing about how opportune at such crossroads for the United States, that a British prince should be on American soil. Maybe if Harry could set aside some time in his meditation for a prayer echoing his ancestors' capitulation to the masses - in peace, this time - then I'm happy to chime in with his prayer, from my coast. Somewhere in the fabric of the universe, it might just sew up a tear and bode well for the future of freedom as it would be coming from the last kings on this territory. It can't hurt. How about it Harry? I think it's not a coincidence.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 26, 2020 7:57:20 GMT -5
Trusting the lovebirds are enjoying the peace and quiet of Vancouver. A few things, mainly about the delay in trademarking brought on by opposition in Australia. Given the proximity in their new affairs with a sweatshop operator whose factory roof collapsed on his workers in Bengladesh (if memory serves), who no doubt would have a stake in producing their merchandising, taking time to think things over is not a bad idea. Especially since the man is on TV and mostly his profile - from dad of Paris mobster to boot - would get unduly elevated by the association with Harry. On the other hand, I'm sure he's something of a necessary gatekeeper to their marketing dreams (he has taken some brands more global such as perfume, and his second wife's designs) by virtue of membership with those MegaClubbers. In any event, such is the reality out there. The few lawsuits awaiting from the two North Americans who rushed to buy the name Sussex Royal will have for effect to somewhat handicap their endeavours from the start and rather than be an easy katching experience, it could be something of a regular court battle. This is often how some associations are predicated. It's like a slow takedown. I think a similar scenario can be inferred from the stockmarket entries of late. What by all accounts should be immediate success stories, once the reigns are handed over, suddenly all the "unforeseen" circumstances arise until the owner has just about enough and totally lets go. Plus ça change....
|
|