I seem to remember when Kate Middleton or “Waity Katie” as she was often called in the British tabloids, being described as a social climbing gold digger, a mere commoner with high, the very highest of social ambitions, who had and perhaps with the encouragement and help of her mother, long planned a devious plot to snare William into marriage.
Kate and her sister were even known in the posh circles and in the tabloids as the “wisteria sisters” - “highly decorative, terribly fragrant and with a ferocious ability to climb”.
Kate and William were said to have met while they were students at St Andrews and some said Kate had even chosen to go to school there in order to meet him as she had originally planned to attend another university but changed to St Andrews after learning William was attending. It’s been said that William saw his future bride wearing a skimpy and nearly see through outfit in a 2003 fashion show, something she did presumably to catch his eye, after which they started dating, lived together for a time with some other flat mates, then broke up. But some at the time speculated that even this breakup was part of her cunning plan all along to snare the Prince – as in that Beyonce song, “put a ring on it”.
During their first years of dating, their subsequent breakup and then getting back together and their official engagement and even into the early years of their marriage, the tabloids and the paparazzi were pretty vicious and merciless toward Kate, to the point that lawsuits were filed by both the “Firm” and the Middleton family. And when they were first married some claimed that along with being a gold digger and a social climber, she as the new Duchess, was an “ice princess”, “haughty”, “nasty to the staff”, “anorexic” and may not even be able to bare children supposedly because of it.
But Kate has turned out pretty well by pretty most accounts. She had some early missteps but now seems to be now much loved and a much respected Royal. She seemed to have learned what it takes to be a member of the “Firm” but giving birth to a healthy male heir and two spares, probably also helped along with her rather increasingly conservative fashion sense and her rather traditional charitable work and poise in public.
“I couldn’t stand the stifled, hidebound, constricted life and duties that centuries-old British royalty and “nobility” imposes on its members, despite all the material goodies that come with the job.”
The interesting thing about Diana is, that unlike Kate or Megan, she was born into the very highest upper echelons of British nobility, yet seemed to have no idea what she was getting into when she married Charles or how relentless and cruel the press and paparazzi would be and what her “duties” would acutely entail. And it seems that the “Firm” chose her as the best of the possible brides for Charles – noble, young, attractive, fertile, presumably able to bare many heirs, even though it was known to everyone with the possible exception of Diana, that Charles loved another woman – Camilla, the one to which he’s now married.
But Diana in my opinion was sheltered and very naive and even though she had hob knobbed with the royals all of her life, at the tender age of 20, she seemed to think that marrying a Prince would be something straight out of a fairytale. She learned as it’s been said that on her wedding night that Charles really didn’t love her, didn’t want to marry her if he’d had any choice in the matter and was communicating with Camila on their wedding night. She was allegedly crushed by this revelation and this began and sent her on a spiral of depression and of self-doubt and destructive behaviors.
I am somewhat reminded by your comment regarding the “the stifled, hidebound, constricted life and duties that centuries-old British royalty” of the unfinished novel by Edith Warton (one of my favorite American authors) - “The Buccaneers”. It takes place in the 1870s and tells the story of five wealthy and ambitious American girls, their guardians and the titled, landed but impoverished Englishmen who marry them as the girls participate in the London Season. It’s been said that it parallels to some degree Winston Churchill’s mother, a new moneyed American heiress who married an English nobleman - she for his title and he for her money and not in truth a happy love match. As the novel progresses, the plot follows Nan and her marriage to the Duke of Tintagel.
I remember the scene in the mini-series based on the novel, where young Nan after her marriage to the Duke who she naively sees as a charming and sensitive young man, her “prince”, comes home to the Duke’s estate and learns from his mother, of all of her responsibilities and duties and the very ridged customs and social constrictions that must be followed as his wife and as the new Duchess. That and she also later learns that her husband is cold toward her both emotionally and sexually (it takes a long time before the marriage is finally consummated and when it is, it is more a kin to rape) as he’s a homosexual and often cruel towards her and controlling when he is not completely distant.
As to Harry, he has seemed for a long time to buck royal tradition. When he trained in the military as a helicopter pilot, he was quite upset that he wasn’t at first deployed with the rest of his unit in Afghanistan out of concerns for his safety and later insisted that he should not be given any preferential treatment. And he seemed to be most comfortable when being a soldier and just a regular bloke and as I understand he didn’t even want to even give these sort of interviews in the war zone to the press but was force to as being part of his ”royal duties”.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6R4X7OeL3Mc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3z9pnTWcLY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYmlqan2Wjc
It’s been said that it was the “Firm” that told Harry that he had to end his deployment and career as a soldier and take on his “royal’ duties and his royal charitable obligations and appearances over his continued military service and including his “royal’ duty to get married and produce even more “royal’ offspring, even if they are way down on the succession line.
I have to wonder that f Harry had been left alone to follow his desire to not be treated as a “royal’ and allowed to continue to be a simple soldier, if his path or even his marriage choice might not have been different.
I also think that Harry was most effected by the death of his mother and how the tabloids and how the paparazzi hounded and treated her.
He was born into “royalty” but does that mean he has to keep this job he was born into if he chooses to take another road?
As to Markle, I don’t have a strong opinion on her one way or another. And like you and some others here and in the tabloids, I don’t get the hate for her.
Across the pond, some of that comes because she’s a Yank and not Royal born, some may even come because she’s mixed race. Here it seems to be a bit of both but why we Americans should care about the birth rights and lines of succession and the customs of the Royals, I don’t get.
Perhaps Markle is a social climbing scheming gold digger like some claimed Kate was.
Or it could be that they genuinely love each other and want a life out of the constant glare of the tabloids and living a more private life for them and for their son Archie, and to some degree working for a living, but they don’t have many options for doing that.
As to Harry, he has seemed for a long time to buck royal tradition.
Funny, so many people loved him for bucking tradition. He was a Royal who didn't want royal treatment. He fought alongside his fellow soldiers. And he got into mischief now and then.
I have to wonder that if Harry had been left alone to follow his desire to not be treated as a “royal’ and allowed to continue to be a simple soldier, if his path or even his marriage choice might not have been different.
Probably so, but he might've still encountered problems with the media. In his 30's, he wanted to settle down. He'd dated through the years, but his other girlfriends (reportedly) hated the media attention.
Of course, he bucked tradition again when he married Ms. Markle, a divorced American actress.
People say she wanted to be royalty. But, the two of them turned down a royal title for their baby son. Now they want to live outside the royal life. What they want to do is not so different from what some of Harry's cousins do. Interesting that, now, people are angry with Harry for not wanting the royal treatment.
P.S. Hope he'll still be involved with the Invictus Games.
Your informative, articulate and thoughtful post above is a great rundown of pertinent palace events prior to Harry and Meghan's courageous decision to step back from the age-old hidebound strictures imposed on royalty from the moment they were born.
Harry was not "born free" as we are. He was born into a pre-destined, pre-planned life imposed on him. He and his wife have decided they want to "live free" and be masters of their own destinies, as we Americans have the guaranteed and Constitutional right to do, thank God.
Evidently the Sussexes are prepared to endure the slings and arrows, the scorn and the outright hatred being heaped on them.
We'll see what they do with their lives....and I'm sure they'll continue to be scorned by the haters and the scandal-media for being themselves and for every single thing they do ( kinda like our President experiences every moment !).
I wish this couple and little Archie all the best. Harry is a military vet and war hero renowned for his non-stop charitable work, she's got a good American head on her shoulders. I'm sure they'll do their best to live a productive, giving and, hopefully, quiet life. God bless them in all their endeavors.
Leni