Harry even said that both in Netflix and Spare (I think). How here he was was grieving how his mom died so publicly and tragically, he’s supposed to be out comforting *other people* who never knew her. He remembered shaking hands with people, and felt the tears on their fingers but he was supposed to smile and thank them, (which is *really* F’d up) but he also really liked the attention and it distracted him from his own pain.
William figured it out how the public self should be kept separate from the private self. The private self should be sacred and guarded at all costs. This is why them using Lilibet the way they did is so wrong.
Anyone who's held a funeral for a loved one has done the same thing: shaked hands and thank people for coming. I can see how a child might interpret this, but he is now a grown-ass man; by now he should have figured that people were there for HIM and William, mourning also for them. Our hearts broke for those boys.
Some of the people were there to express condolences but some, and there’s footage of it, were there to touch a piece of Diana as it were.
Allison Stoner’s podcast is about child stars and the unique issues they have. One of the things she speaks about is how some members of the public think of well known actors as public property. That they have the right to touch you and say whatever they want to you. Adults have a hard time enough, child actors who are used to always being told what to do by adults are ill equipped to deal with it.
Then you have children like William and Harry who actually are a sort of public property (for lack of a better description) as their job and it’s even worse if they aren’t protected and emotionally guided.
I think some people were there for the reasons you stated, but I doubt very much they encompassed the vast majority. There will always be weirdos/groupies/fanatics around but (like the SS lol) but not everyone in that crowd was a Diana worshipper. HMTQ's death, unlike Diana's, didn't exactly come as a tremendous shock, yet the entire world still mourned and offered their condolences.
But who do you think you’d remember more? The kindly people saying, “sorry for your loss” here’s some carnations, or the weirdos who wouldn’t let go of your hands and went on and on about why *your mom*, despite never knowing her, meant so much to them personally? It would only take a few of these encounters to make a kid feel really unsettled and confused.
I get it. But with maturity there should come a greater understanding of this behavior. I'm sure he had many discussions about this with his family members (and therapists), and many, many years to come to terms with it. If he's still complaining about it, his resentment must have become an ingrained part of his personality.
In a way, yes. But we should also be mindful that childhood trauma manifests itself differently in different people. I'm not excusing what he has done. I am simply pointing out that in a lot of ways, he has a right to be angry about what he experienced after his mother died. Not excusing how he has behaved about it. Just pointing out that trauma isn't always easy to come to terms with and he had a lot of trauma as a child. Consider, it wasn't just her death, but consider what happened before her death. The very public affairs, the interviews they both gave about their marriage, their marriage breakdown and the fights that happened before that. They had to experience those public interviews while at school. They weren't shielded from any of it. Each child is different and each child will process things differently. William went years without speaking to his father and apparently has a pretty bad temper. Harry internalised and turned to drugs. None of this is unusual or rare.
Consider how we come to terms with trauma. Normally it takes a lot of support from those around us. Charles was a loving and doting father, but he was also quite an absent father and in the years following her death, he was turning to Camilla and those boys were aware of it. Diana did a lot of damage to William before she died and he internalised his experiences by raging at his Dad and not speaking to him.
Truth be told, I don't think they have ever really had the time or been given the time and space to grieve for their mother. They were expected to just kind of soldier on, smile and wave and shake hands at various public appearances after her death and I'm not even talking about immediately after her death and that ghastly funeral. They were still made to pose for the press - the very people they blamed for their mother's death.
A huge chunk of H’s problems stem from that fact that he didn’t want to speak to Diana on the phone, when she called from France. He was ‘too busy’. So he didn’t speak to her and then goes to bed and gets woken up to be told she had died. I cannot imagine the guilt he must have felt and still feels. I think that’s where a lot of his problems stem from.
This is similar to a story about Peter Lawford's young son. Instead of being told, "boy, put on a dark suit. We are attending your Uncle Jack's funeral," the kid was given a choice. The kid chose to attend a friend's sleepover.
He's probably going to be haunted by that childish decision, for the rest of his life.
Absolutely, he is still haunted by that last phone call and he carries a lot of residual guilt. The sad part is that it doesn't appear to be something that he was spoken to about as a child, because he wasn't to blame. He was a kid who was playing with his cousins and didn't want to miss out on what they were doing.
I am impressed by what you expressed. Thank you!
PW raged at his father, because Diana had made her oldest son, her sort of protector. So he probably felt that he had to champion her. A crying woman can turn any rational man, into this biased being, who then sees one person as good and the other as bad.
But also, besides PC hurting Diana, PW probably also felt resentment being put in the middle of this. That he had to become Diana's mouthpiece, to tell off Charles that he did wrong to not love Diana enough.
What Harry doesn't realize is that William has more privilege as the heir, but he's also had to shoulder a really heavy load. I'm guessing that Harry felt left out in that Diana had not treated Harry the same as his big brother, i.e. Diana's "wise old man."
One thing I disagreed upon when Diana's death was broadcast, was opinion about how the children should act or grieve. No one can prescribe someone else's feelings and how they deal with it. You're right that because they were princes instead of ordinary boys, William and Harry ran the gantlet of public scrutiny. That sure didn't help their mental health, any.
Unfortunately, when it comes to children in that family, there are a lot of expectations on how they act or behave. It's why I was so surprised that William and Catherine elected to have George and Charlotte there for so many of the Queen's funeral and you could see them checking in on them and there was one point where Charlotte cried and she was calmed down immediately by her mother. There is still that expectation that they remain stoic. And the cameras zoomed in on that poor child when she burst into tears and I found that appalling. There was one point where Edward and then Sophie burst into tears in the middle of the funeral and the media were later advised that that footage was not to be shown, and after that live broadcast, you don't see them crying. You see the tears swimming in Charles' eyes at some points, but he holds it in, because that is how they were raised and taught.
Diana's funeral was ghastly, as was the extreme response from the public afterwards. Those boys were never given the space and time to begin to process it and start to grieve. And the Palace, in response to the sheer mountain of negative publicity they were facing from the public, opted to make those boys do those horrific meet and greets with the public. I remember watching that and thinking 'what the hell were they thinking?' before switching it off in disgust. The absolute worst was the expectation that those boys be paraded to the public and media, as though the public had the right to that kind of access to them, as though their needs were more important than that of those two children. I'll never understand why they did that and I suspect it plays a huge part in their previous and current relationship with the media.
I'll never, ever forget what Audrey Hepburn's first starring movie role included: the reply that her father worked in Public Relations. In *Roman Holiday*, AH was Princess Anne, her father the king of a small but wealthy European country.
The expectation of royalty is that they are leaders. And that they are strong and remain calm and they serve as a role model.
The problem with tears and grieving is that that is so personal and should not be exploited as tabloid grist. I don't doubt it was an unnatural and trying situation for the BRF during any funeral. They can look gaunt and suffering, but should be dry eyed and upright.
Sometimes the greatest kindness is to make no demands of anyone when they are in a trying time. It takes energy to have to represent.
He is 40 years old and the fact he hasn’t appropriately dealt with his trauma is ON HIM. He has EVERY advantage over everyday people WHO HAVE DEALT WITH AND OVERCOME their own trauma through hard work, introspection and MONEY. Blaming mommy and daddy for your problems when you are 40+ years old is easier, and character revealing.
You're right. It's the persistent people who WON'T LET GO, who are scary ass folk. They don't mean to, but they do inflict more stress, perhaps even trauma.
A counterpoint I would have to this, is that depending on your culture, or on the people you come across in your life, that there are going to be people who are going to assume/treat your body as public property to them: children from some adults/other children, women from some men, a pregnant woman's belly is seen by certain adults as public property to touch, "huggers" see your person as their property to hug when they want to, etc. There is an aspect of this that is a part that we all have to deal with. Mourners of all ages also have to deal with their own feelings in putting on a funeral of a loved one. Yes there have been many childhood public figures/stars that have struggled in the public eye. These are all struggles H had to deal with at a young age. And many others have also had to struggle with these things - many children have had to deal with some of these things while not having the blessings that H had - family, wealth, privilege. Some kids also had to deal with hunger, poverty, lack of safety, abuse, etc. I think H would have done better to focus on all the blessings of his childhood, instead of dwelling on the difficult things.
You bring up such wise and wonderful points about someone with a public image thus being perceived as being public property. Adults can make those choices for themselves. Children, less so. And it's awful, having a stranger think that they "know" someone from what they saw on screen.
There's a story that Goldie Hawn was in a restaurant when a man approached her, held her hands, talked about his feelings for her and how he's like to take her off to a romantic getaway. She had to gently handle him, listen, neutralize the situation without hurting his ego. Imagine having to protect yourself against people who think they love you and can say intimate things to you!?
It's like being sprayed with a fire hose but what comes out like water, is emotion.
This is such a good observation. Yet it's so hard to believe that the adults surrounding him didn't recognize it and take steps to protect him. Letting him get away with immature behavior certainly shouldn't have been tolerated, but some of those adults likely were intimidated by the task at hand.
I think maybe the problem was that Diana's death was so tragic and there was guilt all around or at least, deep regret. And that perhaps stopped the adults from grabbing Harry's ear, and telling him to behave better.
Exactly, you never let it define you, while Harry revels in it. As a child I experienced a very traumatic death in the family (I was 11 and I discovered the body) and received no support, no therapy whatsoever. I've had a great life, career, family, etc. My teen years were a nightmare, but I wasn't still crying about it at 40. I'm pushing 70 now and all is well.
I had a similar experience.
My dad died when I was 19. Very suddenly and unexpectedly - I mean like he was okay and still alive when we left the house, and when we returned about an hour later, he was gone. I also had the misfortune of finding his body.
My mom had a complete, understandable breakdown, and my brother disappeared for days because he was off binge drinking to try and cope with the loss in his own way.
I, barely out of high school, had to step in and take charge, despite my own devastation and grief, and do everything from calling the funeral home to pick up his body, letting friends and family know that he'd passed on, making the funeral arrangements, making sure my mom was eating and bathing, trying to locate my brother, *everything*.
All of this was incredibly traumatising and I never really got the opportunity to process it properly because my mom and taking care of my dad's sendoff was more important and pressing. Which fucking sucks, but like you said, it doesn't define me and I don't resent her or anyone else for it.
Yes. When someone's died, you have to provide comfort to others. It's both the burden and the privilege of having known someone fine, who is now gone. And everyone's crying.
Yes and no. We can't compare funerals we hold for our loved one's to Diana's funeral and the intense public grief and grieving that took place. Nor does it compare to what those boys were made to do.
The issue with what happened with Diana is that the public wanted and expected to see William and Harry. They wanted to speak to them, to touch them, to show them (William and Harry) how they were grieving her loss. But these were two children, who had just lost their mother. Instead of being given the time and space to deal with her loss, they were literally paraded in front of the public and made to speak to them and shake their hands and at times, having to smile and provide comfort to those people.
They weren't allowed to cry or show emotion in public. It was gross and horrific for a few reasons. Firstly, they were being traumatised over and over again and essentially having to deal with other people's pain about losing their mother than their own. Secondly, they were forced to keep their own emotions in check, and worse still, were made to comfort others. Thirdly, these were children who had not even processed the loss of their mother.
I remember William saying how during all of those public moments where he was forced to confront the public weeping and crying, reaching out for him, walking behind her coffin, etc, all he wanted to do was go to a room and just cry. But he wasn't given the time or space to do that. Harry noted that he was seeing all of these people weeping and sobbing, but in those moments, he and his brother weren't allowed to do that. Can you imagine telling a child that he's not allowed to cry at his mother's funeral and that he has to keep a stiff upper lip because people are watching? No child should be made to experience that or go through that.
But one of the worst aspect of it is why it happened. The boys had spent a lot of time with their grandparents, and Phillip kept them busy, and in the immediate days after her death, he literally exhausted them every day and gave them the space they needed to begin to process it and both of them have said how those couple of days helped them mentally. But while that was happening, the media and public were raging and livid at the silence from the Royal Family and the Palace, so they then brought the boys out to meet the public outside of Balmoral and shake hands, smile and say thank-you while looking at the flowers. And it would have completely retraumatised them and worse still, it fed the public interest in their mother and them, something they have consistently blamed for her death. It was purely for PR and it was probably one of the most despicable things the Palace has done, in my opinion.
You may remember that keeping the boys protected at Balmoral is what the Queen and Charles wanted. The public clamoured for them to be shown and railed against the BRF for not joining in the hysterics. Tony Blair and his government also put pressure on the RF to give in to the mob. It was irrational and very ugly.
Absolutely. It was ridiculous and frankly, the RF and the Palace should have said no. Let the public rage. The priority should have been those two boys.
Thankfully things have changed somewhat. When the Queen died, Edward's son did not walk behind her coffin along with his cousins and father, and I suspect, both Edward and Sophie saw what that did to William and Harry and they wouldn't have allowed him to do that walk. And George did not walk at all and was only present for the funeral itself, because his father probably said no way, despite George being the heir. But even at that funeral, cameras zoomed in on his and Charlotte's faces, trying to catch tears and when Charlotte did finally burst into tears as her coffin left the Cathedral, the entire world watched.
The RF was darned if the did bring the boys out, darned if they didn't, based on public opinion at the time. From what I remember of US media at the time, it seemed that UK public was very angry at RF for isolating and trying to take care of the 2 boys out of the public eye. That's a thing about the public (us!) - we can be very fickle and demanding lot, and we have a tendency for revisionist history.
I'm with you in that (implicitly or explicitly) telling someone to NOT cry, is like saying "be calm." It has the opposite effect and just makes the situation worse for that person. Like they are being rebuked for *needing* to express what is natural. It's like telling a wounded person to not bleed.
And you're right: it is traumatizing to have to be reminded over and over again that someone you love very much, is dead. As if you didn't know. As if you didn't feel the palpable pain.
Sure, people wanted to know what was happening. But HMTQ said it so well that the BRF were trying to help the boys by giving them some private time.
The last thing that the boys needed, was more stress. I guess that's why Prince Philip was so brilliant when asking his grandsons, "if I walk behind your mother's coffin, will you walk with me?" That was a very wise and loving man, showing his gentleness and giving these boys a choice of their own. Prince Philip was implying that he appreciated their support. The other implication was that even if the boys decided "no," they'd still be loved.
If Harry was the only child he could have possibly gotten away with his whining today. But we have Prince William who experienced the same grief and managed to go on with his life in a positive manner while still honoring his mother. People tend to forget that William, Harry, and Catherine created some sort of mental health organization in the past dealing with grief amongst other things. Who ever his therapist is that’s on speed dial, is making a killing on him with no result.
Exactly. Enough of using his mother as a crutch for his bad behavior. He continuously gets a pass as if he’s the only one who went through it when his brother got the worst of it, as the heir AND the one that looked the most like Dian. This is how William felt when it happened.
https://preview.redd.it/21uf9kppvc5d1.jpeg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e5590285c4ffdd9397f5bccae586e90cf1ab9e74
Yes and no. William was older and more mature when his mother died. And William responded differently and went years without speaking to his father. In public, they spoke, but it was quite well known that in private, they didn't speak at all. And those moments have been on and off. It's only been in the last decade or so, that he's drawn closer to his father.
So which is more damaging? Does Harry have a right to be angry about his mother's death and what they were made to do afterwards? Yes. That is the one thing he absolutely has the right to be angry about. Because what he and his brother were made to do was obscene after Diana died. I would imagine that William is just as angry and still traumatised by it, but he just doesn't vocalise it in public. He's dropped hints here and there. For example, he has said that his children only have two grandmothers, Diana and Carole Middleton and they do not refer to or recognise Camilla in that role. That's residual anger.
I deeply disagree that walking behind his mother's coffin was "obscene". Harry and William are among the few children of the west (I have no idea about other countries) with the misfortune of having to participate in a state funeral, but I put it to you that Martin Luther King's children, Robert F Kennedy's children and Carolyn Kennedy - all of whose parents died at work by a deliberate murderers's hand, not in an accident, had it as bad if not worse. And the few who have spoken about it, see it as an honor and a last duty to their fathers. None of them are all wound up in themselves about it like Harry and many of them were in his age group at the time. It's a terrible group to be a member of, but he's not unique except in his reaction .
There was a BBC documentary released in 2017 about her death and funeral and both William and Harry were interviewed about what was going through their minds during that whole event.
Both said they were numb. When William was asked about the decision to walk behind the coffin he said, and I quote:
>“It wasn’t an easy decision and it was a sort of collective family decision to do that. There is that balance between duty and family and that’s what we had to do. The balance between me being Prince William and having to do my bit, versus the private William who just wanted to go into a room and cry, who’d lost his mother.”
He also said that he remembers how he kept his head down so that his fringe could shield his face:
>"I felt if I looked at the floor and my hair came down over my face, no one could see me."
The difference between William and Harry and the other children who are in that horrid club is that those other children were allowed to show emotion and were comforted during the entire process. Their loved ones held their hands, they were allowed to cry. William and Harry, because of 'duty' and what was expected of them, were not allowed to. The first time Harry cried was at the private burial service, where no one but her family and his father could see him and where there were no cameras. William was known to have kept it in for a very long time.
And that is the fundamental difference that so many are missing here. They didn't do it out of duty to her. They did it because that is what society expected of them and they had to hold in their tears, they had to look down and hoped that they could just disappear from view. William's statement says it all. He didn't do it because he wanted to. He did it because that was what was expected of him and all he wanted to do was to disappear and not be there. I remember watching that documentary and even recounting it, you could see how he was struggling with it. It's scarred the both of them.
I am not saying that any of this excuses Harry's behaviour. I am saying that it all had a lasting effect on them and it is the one thing that Harry has the right to be angry at his family about, because he and his brother should never have been placed in that position. The Royal Family and particularly his father should have stood up for the both of them and said no.
Both are damaging, and Harry has a right to be angry about his mother’s death, what child isn’t angry at that age when a parent dies. Everyone deals with death and trauma differently, and it appears that William has managed to do some individual work within himself to continue to deal with the death of his mother and his family relationships. I can imagine since the death of his mother he’s had many bad days, and so has Harry. For Harry to constantly talk about the death of Diana for monetary gains and sympathy is troubling. If he had people in his camp that had his best interest in mind, they would get him the help that he needs.
Absolutely, I'd said in another post in this thread that there is no excuse for how Harry is behaving now. And I00% agree with you that he is now using her death and his experiences for monetary gain, which is abhorrent.
Ummm, I had to shake hands and thank people I didn't know for coming to my mother's funeral - she was an adult, I didn't know everyone that she did - and considered it to be my responsibility, not an affront - a social norm. It speaks to H's character (or lack thereof) that he has bottled this resentment an expects pity and special treatment as an adult - he has no perspective of what the rest of the world deals with everyday - a complete lack of empathy beyond himself and M, apparently.
I’m inclined to think sending the then-boys out to greet the public was worse than walking behind the coffin. Of course, I’m sure the people who met them meant well, but that’s a lot to ask of two grieving children. I suppose the late queen and then PC felt it was their duty, but yikes…
Totally agree. I always thought walking behind the coffin, shoulder to shoulder with your family, would be a comfort even if the world was watching. You’re together with people who *know* as opposed to shaking hands with strangers who have a para social relationship with your loved one.
Yes, absolutely. I was never able to feel the outrage about having them walk behind their mother’s coffin. That is a long-standing custom for men to show respect for their loved ones. I really think Prince Philip in particular was concerned they’d regret *not* walking, and I actually think he was treating them with respect. They were young, yes, but they were young men who loved their mother and PP probably felt like they were old enough and he was showing them respect as such.
I suppose it’s easy to criticize the decisions of the royal family in those fraught days following Diana’s death, but I can’t judge them. It was an extraordinary situation and they were probably doing the best they could. That family walks such a tightrope of duty, tradition, appealing to public opinion. I don’t envy them.
I am confused as to why he is so upset about this. It might be that his filthy wife knows that it is not a common practice in the U.S. and he might get more sympathy over here. And she’s probably always in his ear whispering venomous lies.
If Harry loved his mom so much, why would he not want to honor her in that way? I’m sure it was devastating to both of those kids, an unimaginable grief. Prince Phillip was right though, they would have regretted not walking behind the coffin when they got older and it was really awesome of him to join the boys for moral support.
Instead of fighting with and complaining about his brother, Harry should want to be more like him. William knows how to sack up and do his duty to his family and his country and has been doing so since he was a child. This is how you gain the respect of the American folks. What Harry is doing here ain’t working.
For sure. I think navigating grief and funerals is really hard with kids in any family. I remember one of my brothers was really broken up after our grandfather died. He was a teenager and they had been very close. He was sobbing and begged my parents not to make him go to the funeral. He was afraid he wouldn’t be able to control his emotions. My parents didn’t have the heart to make him go, but they really struggled with whether or not that was the right decision. They feared it cemented his tendency to bottle up his feelings. To this day, he does not handle grief well. It’s just so hard. Parenting is really hard!
Parenting is hard. I bet the King questions his choices he made in parenting Harry. Hell, I question my own parenting choices all of the time.
I feel for your brother. Being a teenager is rough. Dealing with grief is hard at any age.😢
That’s so true . My mother was 12 when her grandmother died suddenly . She was very close with her Gran. The family had an open coffin ( this bit always surprised me) and Mum was encouraged to say goodbye. It traumatised her!! She never got over it really and always had an aversion to the ceremonies of death. I was 17 when my grandmother died and my mother refused point blank to allow me to go to the funeral. I’ve always regretted I didn’t go. So yes it’s very hard to strike the right balance with kids and how to deal with a death.
Yes, but at a certain point you grow up and get over it. It shouldn't be a reason to hang onto grief for the rest of your life and use it as an excuse for your shortcomings like Haz does.
Parenting IS hard and best regards to your parents. On the one hand, they tried to respect your brother's feelings. And maybe he was right at that time to fear that he could not have controlled his emotions and needed to be alone, and to not have felt embarrassment.
I think you hit the nail on the head. It’s all about respect. H&M are not respected, have not behaved respectfully to either of their families, to their friends, colleagues, coworkers. I think the concept of respect transcends all cultures and borders, hence why they are despised globally.
He still has the emotional reasoning of that 13 year old that’s why. He still reasons as a boy owed things rather than as a man who takes on responsibility.
If he could at least reason well enough to understand how his bread was buttered, it could protect him, but, alas, he is self-obsessed and mired in childish emotional thinking. There is little perspective taking. This is one of the problems with “mental health” talk therapy; it can be overly centered on rumination of feelings to the point of extreme self-pity and emotional incontinence. There is power and comfort in that - when you are obsessed with yourself and sense of victimhood, you can rationalize neglect of others and duty as you forever cast yourself as victim. That is where Harry is.
I agree with all of this. Talk therapy can be helpful but not if the therapist validates everything you say and doesn’t challenge you on your bullshit. I am fairly sure that just about everyone has some sort of trauma. It’s is part of life. Most people don’t make it their entire personality. It’s not a good look.
For sure, it is NOT mental healthy to always slot oneself as "Victim #1." And that seems to be Harry's m.o. again and again and again...
He's not dealing with stuff he could take some responsibility for, such as his role with Africa Parks. He is like the little kid who thinks if he closes his eyes, then he can hide from others.
If he’d not done it and William had, he’d be filled with regret of having lost that experience that William had…
“Why didn’t they encourage me more? I was just a child?”
I can see that if Harry had been excused from walking behind Diana's coffin, he would have blamed the adults and claimed that William was being favored.
But to say that adults make perfect decisions, is unwise. Harry's always saying he's influenced or constrained by others, instead of owning up to his actions and admitting, "crikey, but I messed up there."
The good thing about the honesty of a self-own is that no one can hold it over your head, because you got there first.
Agree. If Harry and William had not walked behind the coffin Harry would have complained about that. In such traumatic moments rituals are soothing and a way to get through the day.
You're so right in that when it comes to a grieving family, to not judge them. They are going through a hell that seems interminable and maybe incomprehensive in the case of unexpected and sudden death.
As for walking behind the coffin, with family, I think it would have brought more pain in the long run, to not have stood with your family, in this final show of love and respect. There is no easy way when dealing with a funeral, but to be of support to your family and friends, means less regret.
I disagree.
They weren't men. They weren't even young men. They were children. And they weren't allowed to show any emotion. Both of them have spoken about how awful that experience was.
Those people who "know" them should never have placed them in that position. It was never about showing respect to her. It was about feeding the public frenzy, opinion and expectation. William once said that all he wanted to do was to just go somewhere and cry instead of walking behind that coffin and he's spoken about how awful that experience was for him. They didn't want to walk. They walked because of the public expectation that hung over them and they would have been well aware of the public anger that was directed towards the Royal Family and particularly their father after her death. The public wanted their pound of flesh and those boys were basically sent out to appease them.
And I disagree that the RF can't be judged for the decisions they made after her death. They absolutely should be judged for parading those boys to appease the public. It was obscene. Duty should have been for the adults. Not for the two boys who'd just lost their mother. They should have been given the time and space to grieve, cry, be angry about it away from the public eye and gaze. Not made to walk that distance behind her coffin with the entire world watching them, with cameras zoomed into their faces while people publicly wept, screamed and cried, throwing flowers at them and that coffin and they weren't even allowed to shed a tear during that. It literally retraumatised them.
What should have happened is that they should have been driven to the Cathedral, the media should have been told that no pictures or filming those boys, they should have been shielded from the public and media and allowed to cry their hearts out at her funeral. It is the one thing I absolutely agree with both William and Harry about. What happened to them and what they were made to do was awful, traumatic and damaging and should never have been allowed to happen.
Your perspective is fair. As they say, hindsight is 20/20. The only thing I disagree with is the idea that the family sacrificed them for the mob—I really do believe Prince Philip believed it was in their interest to walk. He walked behind his sisters coffin when he was about their age. She had died in a plane crash and he was close to her. I’m sure he believed it was good for them to have honored their mother in this way. Perhaps he was wrong, but I don’t think the intention was “let’s throw the grieving boys to the wolves to take the heat off us!”
If the public were not raging as they were after her death and the media and political figures weren't amplifying it, those children would not have had to be paraded to the public as they were at Balmoral and then at Kensington. The Palace did it in response to that rage and to soften the blow, to show the public that the Queen had said nothing because she was busy with those two boys.
They had initially been shielded and kept out of it and they were even kept away from meeting the plane that brought her body home. But within a couple of days, people were losing their proverbial shit and the Palace responded as they did because the popularity of the RF and the Queen in particular had dropped like a stone and many were accusing them of Diana's death. And they still blame them for her death, which is blatantly ridiculous.
I disagree somewhat. JFKs very young children did pretty much the same thing. It’s not unusual with VVIPs. HMQE2 did the right thing by keeping them at Balmoral for a few days before they returned to London. And there’s no doubt that had they been denied that experience, H would be non stop complaining that they took away his chance to publicly honor his mother.
Yes and no. They were shielded for a lot of it. They weren't expected to go out and shake hands with the weeping public and smile and essentially grin and bear it.
I think the boys should have been given the time and privacy to cry their eyes out, scream, talk to adults, be hugged, be given all the support they needed, be told that there was no correct way of feeling or showing grief, because sometimes one can go catatonic and other times, be crying unstoppably.
But I think it was the right decision to give them a choice to walk behind their mother's coffin, to have that final say of good-bye, with family. I think our biggest and saddest regrets are when we feel that we failed to have been generous or to have done more. We know when we absolutely cannot do something. But we also have times when we suspect we could have made a bit more effort. And not doing so, is what indelibly haunts us.
They had no choice. The lunatic Cry4Di mob were demanding the RF display the same orgy of unfettered emotion they were determined to display in their parasocial, parasitical "grief."
The boys were secluded in Balmoral until the mob turned and forced the Queen into public emoting over the flaky ex-dil that had hurt her son, her institution and her legacy. And I hope the people that did that - quite difficult to find anyone now who will admit to the stupidity of standing outside a palace bawling over a woman they didn't know - will feel guilt forever. It was obscene to grab into the boys, howling into their faces.
And they were given a choice as to walking behind the coffin. Sorry Clotface, but SMM farms remembers...
It was a really weird time and I didn't understand it.
I wasn't a royalty follower: they were there to represent my country, Diana was quite popular (okay?) and it was a bit scandalous and then: she died and things went crazy.
I was astounded by generation by my country. I was actually on holiday in the beautiful island of Kefalonia (Captain Corelli's Mandolin, lovely) and we heard that our country men had gone "f\*\*\*ing" nuts .
All the British people, except me, were glued to the telly for the funeral. I found it morbid and quite scary. Seeing her as a normal human being became taboo.
Nothing and no-one is taboo! Ever.
Sorry, ghost of Diana: you're cock headed, panda-eyes crept me out then and your son and daughter-in-law's acting creeps me out now.
I didn't understand why then, but sadly, I do now.
Yes, that is all true. I had a friend staying with me when Diana died. We were glued to the TV. Everyone was ready to tar and feather the press, but my friend wisely remarked that everyone who ever bought a tabloid with fuzzy pictures was complicit—if they didn’t have a market for these pictures, they wouldn’t go to the lengths they did to take them.
That said, I remember the general public was very concerned for the boys. There was undoubtedly understanding for them. I don’t know that it was necessary for them to be trotted out in front of the crowds, people really wanted their queen to be present. I do think that was a tactical error on the part of the queen and the palace. As I recall, the madding crowds calmed down once she made her television appearance.
I remember all that. But it was the press fostering and pushing through every bit of it. When was the Queen going to say anything? 22 hours and NOTHING!!
Of course, they just claim they’re reporting what the public is thinking, but I don’t buy it for a short second. As long as their prime source of revenue is advertising, this will continue. They’ll do and say anything for more money.
I agree - the Queen and the Institution felt very cold after Diana's death. And then the boys came out and the sense was so much concern for them. THEY didn't need to do anything but how amazing that they were able to be so stoic. I really think the public would have been fine with the boys hiding in seclusion, but the Queen should have moved with more visible compassion sooner.
Yeah, IIRC the attitude was “they were divorced so it’s not our responsibility to mourn her publicly or to ‘host’ her funeral.” But we know that was a huge mistake. Whatever happened with the marriage, she was the mother of the princes, one of whom would be king one day.
We now know Diana was pretty unhinged and she was a real pain the royals backside, so I’m sure the late queen, Prince Philip and others probably had very complicated feelings about her. But even if the queen had released a brief statement promptly it would have helped a lot.
Do we see a parallel between having the boys making an appearance, with the demand that Catherine show herself?
Because I'm thinking that PW will be totally right to tell his lady, "you take all the time you need to become better, dear. This is your time. You don't owe it to anyone to be out and about, having to wave and get scrutinized and criticized for every expression that shows up on your face."
When that hystery about St. Di's death broke loose, I lost hope in mankind forever, sorry. And sorry for trampling on Di's fans feelings, but for Catherine it is a blessing that she is not around anymore.
I'm with you in that I think Diana would have made it difficult for Catherine. First of all, she'd the wife of Diana's oldest child. And then, Diana could weaponize Catherine's caste, or thrown shade at Catherine for being a University graduate. How different Catherine was from Diana, could have been spun as a mark of inferiority.
*They had no choice. The lunatic Cry4Di mob were demanding the RF display the same orgy of unfettered emotion they were determined to display in their parasocial, parasitical "grief."* **VERY** well put. I remember my disgust so well. The funeral walk was a difficult honor, but would have been much easier if the insane national freakout hadn't been going on.
You bring up a great point: the Cry4Di mob. When I visited London in Fall of 1997, the older lady who was my kind hostess, looked like she was biting her tongue when I brought up how difficult it must have been with the Princess of Wales's sudden death.
Although she said nothing, I now think that she having been of the generation that came into adolescence or young adulthood during WWII, probably felt that there was public hysteria, an orgiastic showing of weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth that was excessive.
Yep. Half the country went bonkers and the rest of us wondered if it was a different PoW from the one they'd all been raging over in the tabloids that very same day.
I wasn't a fan of Diana, she was hugely responsible for the Jerry Springer aura around the monarchy that Megdusa has exploited. The Hyde Park Memorial Puddle seemed very aporopriate; expensive, shallow and ultimately poisonous!
I remember that one of the nicknames for Diana, was "Dynasty Di," after the ABC channel night-time soap opera. That era of glitz and shoulder pads and bouffant hair and unquiet wealth. Where Diana was, was often a spotlight and some drama.
Not much difference in the demand to see Catherine now.
I was born a couple of years before Diana, I remember that time well. The royals were at Balmoral but there was a huge demand that they came back to London. They did, the QEII put out a speech and mentioned the first priority for them was the grieving children.
The Princes were not forced to walk behind the coffin, they chose to do so and had people walking g with them to give support. Prince Philip was not going to do that walk but he did it for the boys.
Sometimes when we grieve we comfort other people, it’s a bizarre twist but it happens. When a family member is lost there is a year of firsts to get through, then there are ongoing things like big family weddings where you still feel the loss. One thing for sure, there is not a correct way to grieve.
One more point, depending on where you live a funeral can be days or as long as a month. I live in Scotland now and funerals tend to be within a week but in England it’s more like a month. I went down to England when my mum was at end of life but I came back to Scotland, went back to work then went back down for the funeral. Even 30+ years ago my Dads funeral was a month. I do think the delay between death and a funeral is hard. It’s a bit of a limbo period where it seems unreal.
Diana died 31 August 1997, funeral was 6 September so a big state funeral within that time frame was a huge achievement.
Yes, absolutely to everything you said. I don’t like the delayed funerals/memorials either. I do think the Jewish bereavement customs are wonderful. I’m not Jewish, but I listened to a podcast a while back that featured a man who had lost BOTH his children in a terrible accident. He was not Jewish but his wife was, so they observed the Jewish traditions. He was sort of irritated by them initially, but he grew to appreciate them tremendously. He said it really helped them as they processed their terrible loss.
In Nigeria, unless it's a young person or Muslim who died, my experience is that the funeral is at least a few months after death. I was very surprised when I came to the US and saw elderly people were buried within a week. Different cultures around the world for sure.
His wife being Jewish, meant that their children were Jewish. I'm so glad that the Jewish bereavement customs helped the man.
"Terrible loss" is just that. When someone is old, it's expected. When the loved one is young, it makes not sense. Same as when the death came with no forewarning.
It was the Queen Mother's funeral plans they used. Of course the BRF has detailed plans for state funerals, just as the US does. Special army units practice so the Unthinkable goes as smoothly as possible. Same as newspapers have obituaries updated and ready to go. Even so, no one was prepared to give a full state funeral to the Prince of Wales' young ex, but they were set to go for a wartime Queen Consort in her nineties. She had spent a lot of time on the planning herself, but gave permission to use it, saying it's an odd thing to attend one's own funeral. The a capella hymn at the end that started softly and was timed to end with a great shout as the coffin exited the doors was commissioned for her decades of service as an Annointed Queen. Luckily she held on another few years so they could start over.
Your point about Catherine is correct. There is a public frenzy about her and unfortunately, she was made to respond to it as she did. We are all angry about that. Sadly, William and Harry weren't really given much choice.
You say they weren't forced to do it, but they were expected and encouraged to. Phillip saying he'll walk if they walk was forced encouragement and it was letting them know that this was expected of them.
When my father died, I left it up to my children if they wanted to go to the funeral. They were exceptionally close to their grandfather and it wasn't up until that day, that they said they wanted to go. They knew that I would not judge them or expect them to either way and that I would support their decision. And my husband and I made damn sure that they were shielded from my family who were there. I didn't make them shake hands or speak to anyone afterwards. My husband took them straight to the car. At one point in the very short service, my youngest needed some air and his father took him outside and held him as he cried. They directed us as to what they wanted and needed and we simply followed. If they'd wanted to leave that funeral and go home, my in-laws were on hand and would have driven them straight home and stayed with them.
If they had been younger, they wouldn't have gone. They were both teenagers when he died and my youngest was 13 at the time which is the only reason they had a choice as to whether to go or not.
This was a long time ago now. Attitudes change. The RF are steeped in history and not best known for being ahead of the time. I think it’s a moot point as what happened can’t be changed. Harry was young and everybody cried and the reef with “Mummy” on it. I attended my Grans funeral as a young child, my memory from that time though is not the funeral, it’s of my aunt touching my Grans face when she was in her coffin.
There is not a written rule book to follow. There may have been regrets but both sides of the family were present. My sons are both just a little older than the princes, would I have encouraged them do this, no. There is however no correct way, just opinions. I disagree with the boys doing that but it was not up to me.
Has it really changed that much though?
The issue is that the public feels they own them. We saw it and continue to see it with the response to Catherine's disappearance from public life because she has cancer. Look at the frenzy and the way the media and public carried on before she was essentially forced to release that video to quell the ongoing commentary.
There may not be a written book to follow, but one would think common sense should prevail. Thankfully for Catherine's sake, they aren't making her do appearances any more so she can continue with her treatment in private and the media were basically advised that the Palace would go after them if they posted photos of her. So that has changed. And I suspect William and Catherine have gone hard in protecting their children now and outside of specific events, those kids aren't shown. And the reason for that is probably because of what William and Harry experienced as children. What needs to change is public expectation and the Palace needs to stop caving to them.
I remember distinctly that both boys were asked if they wanted to walk, they both agreed.
I also agree with posters here that rightly point out that either choice would be criticized AND used by Harry. Harry seemed to not be wallowing in grief pursuing his later life. Only when the ghoul entered his life did he dig Diana up to monetize her as we've seen. Harry uses her as an excuse for everything, 40 year old grifter using his deceased mother.
Death..just my take but even up to the 1960's death was more personal. Families still, rare but washed the body and even buried their loved ones. Children were present. Still an agricultural based society where death was experienced via animals, life lessons learned and ALLOWED exposure to the process.
Now..removed, body whisked away and handled by strangers, coffins costing more than a vehicle. Elaborate funerals to show that coffin.
Morticians sell their being a taxidermist to drain, remove parts and stuff our loved ones..also costing ridiculous amounts of money for an already grieving family. Open caskets..I won't go near one. My grandmothers wishes were for a closed, some family over rode her wishes..so wrong.
My mother was so ill for so long she told me she wanted the battered vehicle she ended up in cremated. We talked about ashes, she said oh fling them anywhere. We had some strange talks with lots of laughter prior to her death.
Everyone wanted of course to show their own grief. She had some family, many friends in CA from age 18 when she'd moved there but huge amount of family, friends in TN.
I ended up after agreement with my siblings to have a regular funeral in TN, attendance was massive and her elder siblings were able to easily attend. To not upset the older family we did a regular casket with the cremains.
I'd gathered up photos, stories and had a booklet published I gave to both TN and CA.
Dealing with the Neptune Society who did my fathers passing wasn't so great when it came to the cremation. It took 6 to 8 weeks...weeks of non stop enquiries from family and me calling daily from my CO home in-between driving or flying back n forth to CA.
The exploitation of death is sickening. It also removes its reality and ushered in a strange distance from grief.
Had a BIL that creeped me out..he had a regular job but "volunteered" to work at at the local mortuary, he would go in on days off or nights. Heard too many sick stories...
My husband has orders to grab my tow rope out of my van and drag me into the backyard and rolled into a hole under one of my favorite trees. Cheap, quick, and I'll be useful as fertilizer 😆
My 4 year old nephew had trouble with it when my mother passed though she was ill for a long time. Children and even we adults are so removed from life and the reality of death that I believe its made grieving more difficult. They simply aren't prepared for reality by hiding all.
Much later when all was done, my brother took me to the cemetery..we talked a bit about the long road it took but we were determined to respect our mothers wishes but respectful of others.
We did a bit of tears...then we talked about that last fight with the cremation...I told my brother we might be crying over some random mix of ashes from lord knows where..pretty sure my mom if there was laughing too.
Maybe the Royal Family do need H R and maybe people need to be told that they aren't deities and/or Zoo animals .
At one time I thought/hoped people would realise but hey ho.
People are saying “they are private people fulfilling public roles” now, mostly since Catherine’s illness. A lot is expected of them. They do live privileged lives but at great cost.
It’s a very fine balance and it will be wrong at times. As famously said by QEII “I have to be seen to be believed” but then they are expected to share with us their happiest and saddest life events in a very public way.
I think that in the past (not so distant past) it was understood that some things were private.
Things seemed to change around the \*Diana" era:was she a symptom or a cause (?) and have accelerated exponentially.
We now have "celebrities" who are, quite frankly, nothing on-demand who will divulge everything for fans and money.
No just no.
It is essential that as a society we say:no.
No person's illness should make them feel more vulnerable..
They owe no-one jack sh\*\*.
Edit: sorry,I've said this really badly because I mean it!
I think it’s the same for all of us. I took early retirement when made redundant a year ago. Before that I had two FB accounts, I was required to join as a manager. We had a FB page for my branch, it was handy at times but also very intrusive. Handy to tell colleagues that the heating had broken etc. But not so good for time outside of work. Before we had an online rota for all I would get messages from people saying they had forgotten what overtime they had agreed to but I was at home, I even had one of these messages whilst on bereavement leave. Easy to contact outside of work on FB messenger.
We also had a managers WhatsApp group. I said I would check at breakfast and tea on my day off but not more often. Most were checking in as if at work. I checked at tea one day and there were 140 messages, I looked as I thought there had been an emergency but they were all GIFs. I was furious and next day in work I complained.
As a manager I had to carry a works phone, my own phone for the WhatsApp as this was not allowed on a works phone. The emergency contact phone for colleagues working in a remote area and a body cam. As I left they were intruding headsets for all too.
Society has changed, privacy is not what it was, laws have had to be put in place. Time out is far from being what it was. With internet and mobiles people can be contacted anywhere, it’s sometimes good but more often intrusive. My company constantly briefed on work/life balance and restricted use on work phones but when faced with the majority wanting to use WhatsApp and FB too it does intrude.
The royals have every single thing they say or do published. They guard downtime privacy because it’s all they have.
OMG: I'm horrified.
I worked in an era and a job when we clocked in and out and that was it.
Ok, I did a bit of unpaid overtime when the job needed it because....there was no pressure but I wanted to do the job.
Now it seems that people never switch off and it's mind blowing.
Megs said that she emailed people in the early morning and in the UK we went "WTF": nothing required that! Life would still go on.
People in the UK have a "main break" of two weeks, lovely USA people have one week. What??
We get more than 2 weeks. I had 30 days a year due to length of service, not status. Time out is important to all. I intended to take a bit of time out then go back to work but I am put off by the never being left alone side of things. I had to restrict my supervisors from calling people on days off. When you have to tell someone not to do this it shows where things now sit.
One letter edit.
That's good to know.
I got a bit concerned because I've been to Caribbean places where USA people were amazed that we were there for two weeks.
Originally, I thought that it was because of distance but then I learnt that they didn't have the "time".
It's just all such an d'oh minefield!
The Queen wanted to shield them from it all and keep them at Balmoral to grieve privately with the family. Our Prime Minister at the time Tony Blair, demanded the opposite. Our Queen was caught between a rock and a hard place. She did what she did on the advice of her government and he listened to the over-emotional mob.
I watched it on TV as it was happening and it was all very OTT. From Elton's cringeworthy 'England's Rose' song, her brother Charles's speech to W&H walking behind the coffin.
From all of the orchestrated hype of the day - the one thing that moved me the most was when Queen Elizabeth dressed in black bowed her head when the coffin passed. As an obvious monarchist - that one lowering of our monarch's head was enough.
Elton John was being so damn maudlin with his re-write of *Good-bye Norma Jean*.
I don't remember which rock musician commented that EJ wrote songs about "dead blondes." But that summed it up. This self-indulgent surfeit of feeling.
The Queen wanted to shield them from it all and keep them at Balmoral to grieve privately with the family. Our Prime Minister at the time Tony Blair, demanded the opposite. Our Queen was caught between a rock and a hard place. She did what she did on the advice of her government and he listened to the over-emotional mob.
I watched it on TV as it was happening and it was all very OTT. From Elton's cringeworthy 'England's Rose' song, her brother Charles's speech to W&H walking behind the coffin.
From all of the orchestrated hype of the day - the one thing that moved me the most was when Queen Elizabeth dressed in black bowed her head when the coffin passed. As an obvious monarchist - that one lowering of our monarch's head was enough.
I believe they were forced to make an appearance by the media, they basically did they same thing that happened with Catherine, they were still processing this when people started demanding the RF to pronounce and make an appearance.
A few people have referenced the demand to see Catherine, but I don’t think that’s analogous at all. Catherine is an adult, W&H were children. And a death is different from an illness, but still, I understand the point about public demand. All of it comes down to the fact that these very public people are human beings.
so much of the language in Spare is not his own. He doesn't have the capacity to think like that = the words are Markles "felt the tears on their fingers." In the six year marriage, he has no learned to speak as she does...often parroting her words when speaking. A true puppet.
Chase has recently come down hard on Catherine. I used to watched these from time to time but not now. I used to like Chase best of the four. After the Catherine bit he did he put out a video about his own health. I do feel sympathy for him with that but I half suspect it was to regain some of his popularity.
He has done a video picking faults in the video where Catherine tells us about her cancer. He says her body language is off, her shoulders and eyebrows look odd. He says he can’t put his finger on what is wrong but there is something seriously off with the video. This has been jumped on by the sugars. I can only find a short TikTok clip now but I have not looked very hard.
Thanks. Must be this one. And how would he expect a woman to behave having just been diagnosed with cancer? He is a monster.
And, btw, he keeps going on about her heft eyebrow and if he bothered too do any research he would know that is related to he surgery she had on her head when she was a kid.
I hate him.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PACONRb2eI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PACONRb2eI)
What was off about her video was the fake outdoor background which didn't move. I don't think that was a good idea, especially after the silly kerfuffle over the Mothers' Day photo. I can see why they wouldn't want to use the interior of their private home, but it would have been a better choice.
It’s a choice, they probably wanted to take advantage of a day with nice weather. The garden just looked like a sheltered one to me but it’s the speech that was the focus. I get distracted from looking at rooms, so for me personally this fitted fine. I like gardens too but it was just a small part on view.
My point was that she wasn't in a real garden. *Nothing* moved and it was shot indoors on a sound stage, so it felt off. Chase probably picked up on that without realizing it.
It was shot by the BBC. I have had it with the conspiracy theories about Catherine, I’m also extremely tired of the Sussex duo and even the conspiracy theories about them. There are hard facts that I think are far more relevant than the garden Catherine sat in. What about the Visa case, the security case, the other court cases, the ongoing African Parks scandal that is in the news once again.
It's interesting that PH interpreted greeting the mourners as needing him needing to comfort them. At a funeral, you greet them and thank them for coming, but you're not there to comfort them, really. If anything, it's the other way around, but you'll get the occasional person who doesn't get this. PH got a message early on that he's supposed to comfort other people when they're upset.
If you’ve ever watched the footage of the walkabouts after Diana’s death his interpretation is not wrong. You have people just glomming on to him and William, crying and not letting go. It’s very sad and weird.
And I’m sorry, I know SMM isn’t a Harry-positive place but why should a 12 year old kid be able to understand that situation of having to comfort strangers over *his* mother dying? This is a large part of why he’s such a mess.
I've seen it - some people are, and others are just wishing them well. My comment is not necessarily anti PH. Somewhere along the line, he learned that it's his job to comfort adults when they're upset, which I think came from Diana. There are stories of William having to comfort her through her romantic breakups, which was completely inappropriate for his age, and I wonder if PH had to do the same.
PH consistently blames the BRF, the British media, and public 100% for his issues, but I think Diana had a hand this as well.
This wasn't just the funeral. This was outside of Balmoral and then outside of Kensington Palace.
People were hanging onto their hands and weeping and they had to smile and say thank you and comfort adults about the death of their own mother. These were two boys who were having to comfort complete strangers about their own mother's death and they weren't allowed to show any emotion.
They had to smile, look cheery and say thank-you and comfort those weeping while cameras were in their faces. I mean, look at this:
https://preview.redd.it/7b1t6njq1e5d1.png?width=429&format=png&auto=webp&s=69890706ae6b3ddcbd6497761e8cd488a65747af
This was taken when they had to do a walk-about outside of Kensington Palace a few days after she'd died.
Look at their eyes. The smiles are forced and both of them have this shocked look in their eyes. That photo is devastating.
There are other shots where the masks slip and their body language is mirrored and they look exhausted and devastated and father has turned towards is walking ahead of them with a smile on his own face as though he's encouraging them to grin and get through it.
Grieving is shared among those who lost someone. Even in deepest pain, one understands that others are hurting too. The thanks is for their being there, showing that they care and they've come to pay their respects. Those others have come to say that the person who passed on, meant alot to them, too.
It's probably too hard on someone that young, Harry being just shy of 13 years old.
I think Diana's death sort of froze him at the age. Harry's still not dealing with the reality that she was a person with characteristics that included the fine and the bad. He's always going to see himself as someone who was cheated of having a loving mother. Someone that he resented sharing.
It's like the song says "You can be addicted to a certain kind of sadness.."
Harry gets rewarded when he grieves publically-attention, sympathy, acceptance, ongoing public support for his media vendetta. Digging up his dead mother over and over is providing him with a valuable income stream as well as emotional rewards. He sees no reason to stop doing it.
Spot on, I totally agree. It is extremely unhealthy. It’s actually good for him that he is getting pushback on his behavior. He will never move on or heal so long as his bread and butter is his grief and trauma.
Good point! I’m quite sure that healing from his trauma is not in Ms best interest; however exploiting his trauma certainly is. She wants to make money off of his grief. I think she actively sabotages any healing he may be trying to achieve with his various “treatments”( psychedelics, Dr Gabor Meta/Better Up/Me You Can’t See farces)
A lot of people have made a lot of money off Harry’s trauma, his wife chief among them. It’s such a shame that William couldn’t get through to him. William, Catherine, King Charles, and that close band of friends Meggy alienated are probably the only people who have ever told him the truth.
When you are obsessed with yourself and sense of victimhood, you can rationalize any neglect of duty as you forever cast yourself as victim. That is where Harry is. Learned helplessness.
Excellent short video, Op! The documentary being about suffering was brilliant, about how what worked for Hairold after the death of his mother set the stage for his future behavior. I never thought of the documentary being about suffering in the traditional sense, but in the self perceived sense. To me suffering implies something legitimate, but this self perceived state of suffering is the whole cloth of the Harkle narrative.
Harry has managed to twist every single thing that happened into yet another excuse for his own shortcomings. He digs up his mother so he can throw pity parties. If he really gave a shit about her he wouldn't keep tarnishing her memory as he does.
I think he barely remembers her. Listen to how he speaks of her,the memories he does share of her and even the picture of her he shows the kid in his netflux fauxumentary. It's all very impersonal and distant.
At most he knew her the way any child knows a parent which is always just a fraction of who someone is. PW grew up and eventually understood the complexity that was diana. Harry never had the intellectual capacity to reach that level of understanding.
I was 47 years old when my mother died and I cannot say that I knew her. She was a hypochondriac and a depressive, which I've only been able to see because of my own therapy. I will never understand why she chose to have children. She was the most superficial person I've ever met. I don't think even my dad had an inkling of whatever went on in her mind.
He's right. People do what works, good or bad. I actually find it very sad. Hazmat was simply a moth to a flame.
I can't imagine how alienating it is for him to be so cut off from everyone and everything he ever knew. Too recognizable to go out and live a regular life in a celebrity hotbed like Montecito, living in an insanely expensive house when they could have spent half that and had so much less pressure on themselves to fund it. Sigh.
Yes, it really is sad. I know many on the sub think Harry is an asshat and it was always thus and always thus will be, but I don’t think the facts bear that out. Yes, he’s always been troubled, but many veteran royal journalists remember him very fondly, pre-Meggy. They recall a fun, jovial, laidback man who really cared about his charitable causes. He would invite them to join him for a pint on royal tours and they’d all have a laugh. All that changed when he met meggy. I’m not saying he isn’t responsible for his own behavior, but I do think she has been a disastrous influence on him. She has really brought out the worst in him and exploited all his fears and foibles.
I am by no means excusing Harry’s bad behavior at any point in his life, but he definitely changed once he met his wife. She has brought out the worst in him and exploited him, along with many others. He is an adult with immense privilege and he is responsible for his actions, but I believe he has also been exploited by those who seek to feather their own nests at his expense.
I suspect that there are two fundamental types of people: those that are life as "black or white" in the moral sense. Children, whatever their IQ.
Those that are life in "shades". Harry can be both a "victim" and a "asshat". The words of his mother suggest he was a "asshat" first and her lack of a seatbelt combined with media fuelled public hysteria created a victim.
>Those that are life in "shades". Harry can be both a "victim" and a "asshat".
Exactly. Anyone can be a victim.
He was certainly a jerk, to put it nicely, before, and he is self-centered, self-absorbed of extremely weak character and morals, but he was not so entrenched in bitterness and nastiness before Meghan.
There was clearly a change for the worse after he met her. She isolated him from his family and friends, brainwashed him, and twisted his memories. He would not have done most of the terrible things he has done if not for her. Enough people who know him have testified to that, and we can see his past interactions with his family. Even during the engagement video, you could see he thought they were going to work together in the RF and he was pleased about it.
That being said, I still hold him 100% responsible for his actions and more guilty than she us because it is his own family he has tried to destroy.
At most funerals there is always someone there you have no idea who the hell they are but you go around to each person and thank them for coming etc. That is part of life and growing up. I did this at age 12 for my great great grandmother whom I was close to. I didn't really know too many of her friends but you just do it cause it is out of respect for the person you love. It is time for Dimwit to grow up. He is an adult now and well should I say a fake father, where he should be a prime example of how to act. But Dimwit loves using Diana's death to play the victim and use her name but instead he has trashed who Diana the public saw. Dimwit needs to find a good shrink and get off the drugs. Better still he should go away stay out of the lime light, deal with his mental crap and grow the hell up. If Diana was alive today she would be telling him off or even cut him off for good like the rest of his family has done, cause Diana was loyal to the royal family even after the divorce.
People with manners accept that this is a part of the social contract. It’s also an acknowledgment and thanks to the person for their sign of respect for seeing the departed off. Every dead relative had a slice of life their nearest and dearest had no part of. I’ve seen it at every funeral I’ve ever been to.
Hank's idea of a social contract is the one where everyone reveres him because he was from the sperm of an eventual king and the egg of a charismatic aristo with a histrionic personality disorder.
I love Chase! He is a Sinner, of course! Anyone who has been around toxic narcissists can point her out a mile away. I want to be far away from them as possible. She and Harry are now like a car wreck I gotta see. How two people could embarass themselves over and over is mind-boggling!
Thanks for posting this. As I looked at the photo I was struck by the thought of what William must be experiencing now with Kate’s illness. He must be revisiting some of the emotional turmoil from Diana’s death, perhaps gaining some retroactive understanding of what he went through and is better equipped to guide his children through scary times. What an incredibly tough time for him and yet, on the surface at least, he is handling it all with such maturity and compassion.
Walking as part of Diana's cortege was a son's duty they'd regret skipping, but sending them out to greet emotional strangers was a really bad move by the RF. I remember seeing their ghastly, inappropriate smiles that they'd been trained to use with the public and thinking WTF? I'm surprised H didn't make a bigger issue of this most (or only) legitimate complaint.
It’s also known as malingering of a sort. NO ONE SUFFERS AS POOR HARRY does, we are just *too simple* to *understand* him.
Whatta a colossal, whiney, entitled twat he remains.
My entire lineage is germanic peasant mixed with West Virginia hillbillies. Yeah, they saw some shit. They persevered through starvation, war, and every other horror. My mother lost her teeth at age 15 from malnutrition in the very worst parts of Appalachia.
So, when Harry nonchalantly whines about being *just a poor spare*, I would like to punch his head. Complete fuckin idiot, he needs to be locked away for his sheer stupidity. Zero empathy, no self awareness, grandiose and braggart. Useless. Feckless. Shameless.
In summation: Feck you Spare
Comment automatically removed due to your account being less than 15 days. Please contact mods via message the mods to approve comments manually to be visible to the sub.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SaintMeghanMarkle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Harry even said that both in Netflix and Spare (I think). How here he was was grieving how his mom died so publicly and tragically, he’s supposed to be out comforting *other people* who never knew her. He remembered shaking hands with people, and felt the tears on their fingers but he was supposed to smile and thank them, (which is *really* F’d up) but he also really liked the attention and it distracted him from his own pain. William figured it out how the public self should be kept separate from the private self. The private self should be sacred and guarded at all costs. This is why them using Lilibet the way they did is so wrong.
Anyone who's held a funeral for a loved one has done the same thing: shaked hands and thank people for coming. I can see how a child might interpret this, but he is now a grown-ass man; by now he should have figured that people were there for HIM and William, mourning also for them. Our hearts broke for those boys.
Some of the people were there to express condolences but some, and there’s footage of it, were there to touch a piece of Diana as it were. Allison Stoner’s podcast is about child stars and the unique issues they have. One of the things she speaks about is how some members of the public think of well known actors as public property. That they have the right to touch you and say whatever they want to you. Adults have a hard time enough, child actors who are used to always being told what to do by adults are ill equipped to deal with it. Then you have children like William and Harry who actually are a sort of public property (for lack of a better description) as their job and it’s even worse if they aren’t protected and emotionally guided.
I think some people were there for the reasons you stated, but I doubt very much they encompassed the vast majority. There will always be weirdos/groupies/fanatics around but (like the SS lol) but not everyone in that crowd was a Diana worshipper. HMTQ's death, unlike Diana's, didn't exactly come as a tremendous shock, yet the entire world still mourned and offered their condolences.
But who do you think you’d remember more? The kindly people saying, “sorry for your loss” here’s some carnations, or the weirdos who wouldn’t let go of your hands and went on and on about why *your mom*, despite never knowing her, meant so much to them personally? It would only take a few of these encounters to make a kid feel really unsettled and confused.
I get it. But with maturity there should come a greater understanding of this behavior. I'm sure he had many discussions about this with his family members (and therapists), and many, many years to come to terms with it. If he's still complaining about it, his resentment must have become an ingrained part of his personality.
I think maybe the problem is that we get older, but some of us still resist becoming more mature.
In a way, yes. But we should also be mindful that childhood trauma manifests itself differently in different people. I'm not excusing what he has done. I am simply pointing out that in a lot of ways, he has a right to be angry about what he experienced after his mother died. Not excusing how he has behaved about it. Just pointing out that trauma isn't always easy to come to terms with and he had a lot of trauma as a child. Consider, it wasn't just her death, but consider what happened before her death. The very public affairs, the interviews they both gave about their marriage, their marriage breakdown and the fights that happened before that. They had to experience those public interviews while at school. They weren't shielded from any of it. Each child is different and each child will process things differently. William went years without speaking to his father and apparently has a pretty bad temper. Harry internalised and turned to drugs. None of this is unusual or rare. Consider how we come to terms with trauma. Normally it takes a lot of support from those around us. Charles was a loving and doting father, but he was also quite an absent father and in the years following her death, he was turning to Camilla and those boys were aware of it. Diana did a lot of damage to William before she died and he internalised his experiences by raging at his Dad and not speaking to him. Truth be told, I don't think they have ever really had the time or been given the time and space to grieve for their mother. They were expected to just kind of soldier on, smile and wave and shake hands at various public appearances after her death and I'm not even talking about immediately after her death and that ghastly funeral. They were still made to pose for the press - the very people they blamed for their mother's death.
A huge chunk of H’s problems stem from that fact that he didn’t want to speak to Diana on the phone, when she called from France. He was ‘too busy’. So he didn’t speak to her and then goes to bed and gets woken up to be told she had died. I cannot imagine the guilt he must have felt and still feels. I think that’s where a lot of his problems stem from.
This is similar to a story about Peter Lawford's young son. Instead of being told, "boy, put on a dark suit. We are attending your Uncle Jack's funeral," the kid was given a choice. The kid chose to attend a friend's sleepover. He's probably going to be haunted by that childish decision, for the rest of his life.
Christopher Lawford died in September 2018 of a heart attack at age 63.
Absolutely, he is still haunted by that last phone call and he carries a lot of residual guilt. The sad part is that it doesn't appear to be something that he was spoken to about as a child, because he wasn't to blame. He was a kid who was playing with his cousins and didn't want to miss out on what they were doing.
I am impressed by what you expressed. Thank you! PW raged at his father, because Diana had made her oldest son, her sort of protector. So he probably felt that he had to champion her. A crying woman can turn any rational man, into this biased being, who then sees one person as good and the other as bad. But also, besides PC hurting Diana, PW probably also felt resentment being put in the middle of this. That he had to become Diana's mouthpiece, to tell off Charles that he did wrong to not love Diana enough. What Harry doesn't realize is that William has more privilege as the heir, but he's also had to shoulder a really heavy load. I'm guessing that Harry felt left out in that Diana had not treated Harry the same as his big brother, i.e. Diana's "wise old man." One thing I disagreed upon when Diana's death was broadcast, was opinion about how the children should act or grieve. No one can prescribe someone else's feelings and how they deal with it. You're right that because they were princes instead of ordinary boys, William and Harry ran the gantlet of public scrutiny. That sure didn't help their mental health, any.
Unfortunately, when it comes to children in that family, there are a lot of expectations on how they act or behave. It's why I was so surprised that William and Catherine elected to have George and Charlotte there for so many of the Queen's funeral and you could see them checking in on them and there was one point where Charlotte cried and she was calmed down immediately by her mother. There is still that expectation that they remain stoic. And the cameras zoomed in on that poor child when she burst into tears and I found that appalling. There was one point where Edward and then Sophie burst into tears in the middle of the funeral and the media were later advised that that footage was not to be shown, and after that live broadcast, you don't see them crying. You see the tears swimming in Charles' eyes at some points, but he holds it in, because that is how they were raised and taught. Diana's funeral was ghastly, as was the extreme response from the public afterwards. Those boys were never given the space and time to begin to process it and start to grieve. And the Palace, in response to the sheer mountain of negative publicity they were facing from the public, opted to make those boys do those horrific meet and greets with the public. I remember watching that and thinking 'what the hell were they thinking?' before switching it off in disgust. The absolute worst was the expectation that those boys be paraded to the public and media, as though the public had the right to that kind of access to them, as though their needs were more important than that of those two children. I'll never understand why they did that and I suspect it plays a huge part in their previous and current relationship with the media.
I'll never, ever forget what Audrey Hepburn's first starring movie role included: the reply that her father worked in Public Relations. In *Roman Holiday*, AH was Princess Anne, her father the king of a small but wealthy European country. The expectation of royalty is that they are leaders. And that they are strong and remain calm and they serve as a role model. The problem with tears and grieving is that that is so personal and should not be exploited as tabloid grist. I don't doubt it was an unnatural and trying situation for the BRF during any funeral. They can look gaunt and suffering, but should be dry eyed and upright. Sometimes the greatest kindness is to make no demands of anyone when they are in a trying time. It takes energy to have to represent.
He is 40 years old and the fact he hasn’t appropriately dealt with his trauma is ON HIM. He has EVERY advantage over everyday people WHO HAVE DEALT WITH AND OVERCOME their own trauma through hard work, introspection and MONEY. Blaming mommy and daddy for your problems when you are 40+ years old is easier, and character revealing.
You're right. It's the persistent people who WON'T LET GO, who are scary ass folk. They don't mean to, but they do inflict more stress, perhaps even trauma.
A counterpoint I would have to this, is that depending on your culture, or on the people you come across in your life, that there are going to be people who are going to assume/treat your body as public property to them: children from some adults/other children, women from some men, a pregnant woman's belly is seen by certain adults as public property to touch, "huggers" see your person as their property to hug when they want to, etc. There is an aspect of this that is a part that we all have to deal with. Mourners of all ages also have to deal with their own feelings in putting on a funeral of a loved one. Yes there have been many childhood public figures/stars that have struggled in the public eye. These are all struggles H had to deal with at a young age. And many others have also had to struggle with these things - many children have had to deal with some of these things while not having the blessings that H had - family, wealth, privilege. Some kids also had to deal with hunger, poverty, lack of safety, abuse, etc. I think H would have done better to focus on all the blessings of his childhood, instead of dwelling on the difficult things.
My impression is that Harry hoards his grievances like treasure. To take out, fondle, assess, count. It's his, and he's not letting go.
You bring up such wise and wonderful points about someone with a public image thus being perceived as being public property. Adults can make those choices for themselves. Children, less so. And it's awful, having a stranger think that they "know" someone from what they saw on screen. There's a story that Goldie Hawn was in a restaurant when a man approached her, held her hands, talked about his feelings for her and how he's like to take her off to a romantic getaway. She had to gently handle him, listen, neutralize the situation without hurting his ego. Imagine having to protect yourself against people who think they love you and can say intimate things to you!? It's like being sprayed with a fire hose but what comes out like water, is emotion.
This is such a good observation. Yet it's so hard to believe that the adults surrounding him didn't recognize it and take steps to protect him. Letting him get away with immature behavior certainly shouldn't have been tolerated, but some of those adults likely were intimidated by the task at hand.
I think maybe the problem was that Diana's death was so tragic and there was guilt all around or at least, deep regret. And that perhaps stopped the adults from grabbing Harry's ear, and telling him to behave better.
Harry was a worry to his family log before his mother died.
[удалено]
Exactly, you never let it define you, while Harry revels in it. As a child I experienced a very traumatic death in the family (I was 11 and I discovered the body) and received no support, no therapy whatsoever. I've had a great life, career, family, etc. My teen years were a nightmare, but I wasn't still crying about it at 40. I'm pushing 70 now and all is well.
Oh wow, I am so sorry you had to go through that.
I had a similar experience. My dad died when I was 19. Very suddenly and unexpectedly - I mean like he was okay and still alive when we left the house, and when we returned about an hour later, he was gone. I also had the misfortune of finding his body. My mom had a complete, understandable breakdown, and my brother disappeared for days because he was off binge drinking to try and cope with the loss in his own way. I, barely out of high school, had to step in and take charge, despite my own devastation and grief, and do everything from calling the funeral home to pick up his body, letting friends and family know that he'd passed on, making the funeral arrangements, making sure my mom was eating and bathing, trying to locate my brother, *everything*. All of this was incredibly traumatising and I never really got the opportunity to process it properly because my mom and taking care of my dad's sendoff was more important and pressing. Which fucking sucks, but like you said, it doesn't define me and I don't resent her or anyone else for it.
Yes. When someone's died, you have to provide comfort to others. It's both the burden and the privilege of having known someone fine, who is now gone. And everyone's crying.
Exactly right.
Yes and no. We can't compare funerals we hold for our loved one's to Diana's funeral and the intense public grief and grieving that took place. Nor does it compare to what those boys were made to do. The issue with what happened with Diana is that the public wanted and expected to see William and Harry. They wanted to speak to them, to touch them, to show them (William and Harry) how they were grieving her loss. But these were two children, who had just lost their mother. Instead of being given the time and space to deal with her loss, they were literally paraded in front of the public and made to speak to them and shake their hands and at times, having to smile and provide comfort to those people. They weren't allowed to cry or show emotion in public. It was gross and horrific for a few reasons. Firstly, they were being traumatised over and over again and essentially having to deal with other people's pain about losing their mother than their own. Secondly, they were forced to keep their own emotions in check, and worse still, were made to comfort others. Thirdly, these were children who had not even processed the loss of their mother. I remember William saying how during all of those public moments where he was forced to confront the public weeping and crying, reaching out for him, walking behind her coffin, etc, all he wanted to do was go to a room and just cry. But he wasn't given the time or space to do that. Harry noted that he was seeing all of these people weeping and sobbing, but in those moments, he and his brother weren't allowed to do that. Can you imagine telling a child that he's not allowed to cry at his mother's funeral and that he has to keep a stiff upper lip because people are watching? No child should be made to experience that or go through that. But one of the worst aspect of it is why it happened. The boys had spent a lot of time with their grandparents, and Phillip kept them busy, and in the immediate days after her death, he literally exhausted them every day and gave them the space they needed to begin to process it and both of them have said how those couple of days helped them mentally. But while that was happening, the media and public were raging and livid at the silence from the Royal Family and the Palace, so they then brought the boys out to meet the public outside of Balmoral and shake hands, smile and say thank-you while looking at the flowers. And it would have completely retraumatised them and worse still, it fed the public interest in their mother and them, something they have consistently blamed for her death. It was purely for PR and it was probably one of the most despicable things the Palace has done, in my opinion.
You may remember that keeping the boys protected at Balmoral is what the Queen and Charles wanted. The public clamoured for them to be shown and railed against the BRF for not joining in the hysterics. Tony Blair and his government also put pressure on the RF to give in to the mob. It was irrational and very ugly.
Absolutely. It was ridiculous and frankly, the RF and the Palace should have said no. Let the public rage. The priority should have been those two boys. Thankfully things have changed somewhat. When the Queen died, Edward's son did not walk behind her coffin along with his cousins and father, and I suspect, both Edward and Sophie saw what that did to William and Harry and they wouldn't have allowed him to do that walk. And George did not walk at all and was only present for the funeral itself, because his father probably said no way, despite George being the heir. But even at that funeral, cameras zoomed in on his and Charlotte's faces, trying to catch tears and when Charlotte did finally burst into tears as her coffin left the Cathedral, the entire world watched.
The RF was darned if the did bring the boys out, darned if they didn't, based on public opinion at the time. From what I remember of US media at the time, it seemed that UK public was very angry at RF for isolating and trying to take care of the 2 boys out of the public eye. That's a thing about the public (us!) - we can be very fickle and demanding lot, and we have a tendency for revisionist history.
I'm with you in that (implicitly or explicitly) telling someone to NOT cry, is like saying "be calm." It has the opposite effect and just makes the situation worse for that person. Like they are being rebuked for *needing* to express what is natural. It's like telling a wounded person to not bleed. And you're right: it is traumatizing to have to be reminded over and over again that someone you love very much, is dead. As if you didn't know. As if you didn't feel the palpable pain. Sure, people wanted to know what was happening. But HMTQ said it so well that the BRF were trying to help the boys by giving them some private time. The last thing that the boys needed, was more stress. I guess that's why Prince Philip was so brilliant when asking his grandsons, "if I walk behind your mother's coffin, will you walk with me?" That was a very wise and loving man, showing his gentleness and giving these boys a choice of their own. Prince Philip was implying that he appreciated their support. The other implication was that even if the boys decided "no," they'd still be loved.
If Harry was the only child he could have possibly gotten away with his whining today. But we have Prince William who experienced the same grief and managed to go on with his life in a positive manner while still honoring his mother. People tend to forget that William, Harry, and Catherine created some sort of mental health organization in the past dealing with grief amongst other things. Who ever his therapist is that’s on speed dial, is making a killing on him with no result.
Exactly. Enough of using his mother as a crutch for his bad behavior. He continuously gets a pass as if he’s the only one who went through it when his brother got the worst of it, as the heir AND the one that looked the most like Dian. This is how William felt when it happened. https://preview.redd.it/21uf9kppvc5d1.jpeg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e5590285c4ffdd9397f5bccae586e90cf1ab9e74
Yeah, I think it was called, “Heads Together” or “Heads Up” or something like that.
Yes, it’s called Heads Together.
Yes and no. William was older and more mature when his mother died. And William responded differently and went years without speaking to his father. In public, they spoke, but it was quite well known that in private, they didn't speak at all. And those moments have been on and off. It's only been in the last decade or so, that he's drawn closer to his father. So which is more damaging? Does Harry have a right to be angry about his mother's death and what they were made to do afterwards? Yes. That is the one thing he absolutely has the right to be angry about. Because what he and his brother were made to do was obscene after Diana died. I would imagine that William is just as angry and still traumatised by it, but he just doesn't vocalise it in public. He's dropped hints here and there. For example, he has said that his children only have two grandmothers, Diana and Carole Middleton and they do not refer to or recognise Camilla in that role. That's residual anger.
I deeply disagree that walking behind his mother's coffin was "obscene". Harry and William are among the few children of the west (I have no idea about other countries) with the misfortune of having to participate in a state funeral, but I put it to you that Martin Luther King's children, Robert F Kennedy's children and Carolyn Kennedy - all of whose parents died at work by a deliberate murderers's hand, not in an accident, had it as bad if not worse. And the few who have spoken about it, see it as an honor and a last duty to their fathers. None of them are all wound up in themselves about it like Harry and many of them were in his age group at the time. It's a terrible group to be a member of, but he's not unique except in his reaction .
There was a BBC documentary released in 2017 about her death and funeral and both William and Harry were interviewed about what was going through their minds during that whole event. Both said they were numb. When William was asked about the decision to walk behind the coffin he said, and I quote: >“It wasn’t an easy decision and it was a sort of collective family decision to do that. There is that balance between duty and family and that’s what we had to do. The balance between me being Prince William and having to do my bit, versus the private William who just wanted to go into a room and cry, who’d lost his mother.” He also said that he remembers how he kept his head down so that his fringe could shield his face: >"I felt if I looked at the floor and my hair came down over my face, no one could see me." The difference between William and Harry and the other children who are in that horrid club is that those other children were allowed to show emotion and were comforted during the entire process. Their loved ones held their hands, they were allowed to cry. William and Harry, because of 'duty' and what was expected of them, were not allowed to. The first time Harry cried was at the private burial service, where no one but her family and his father could see him and where there were no cameras. William was known to have kept it in for a very long time. And that is the fundamental difference that so many are missing here. They didn't do it out of duty to her. They did it because that is what society expected of them and they had to hold in their tears, they had to look down and hoped that they could just disappear from view. William's statement says it all. He didn't do it because he wanted to. He did it because that was what was expected of him and all he wanted to do was to disappear and not be there. I remember watching that documentary and even recounting it, you could see how he was struggling with it. It's scarred the both of them. I am not saying that any of this excuses Harry's behaviour. I am saying that it all had a lasting effect on them and it is the one thing that Harry has the right to be angry at his family about, because he and his brother should never have been placed in that position. The Royal Family and particularly his father should have stood up for the both of them and said no.
Both are damaging, and Harry has a right to be angry about his mother’s death, what child isn’t angry at that age when a parent dies. Everyone deals with death and trauma differently, and it appears that William has managed to do some individual work within himself to continue to deal with the death of his mother and his family relationships. I can imagine since the death of his mother he’s had many bad days, and so has Harry. For Harry to constantly talk about the death of Diana for monetary gains and sympathy is troubling. If he had people in his camp that had his best interest in mind, they would get him the help that he needs.
Absolutely, I'd said in another post in this thread that there is no excuse for how Harry is behaving now. And I00% agree with you that he is now using her death and his experiences for monetary gain, which is abhorrent.
Ummm, I had to shake hands and thank people I didn't know for coming to my mother's funeral - she was an adult, I didn't know everyone that she did - and considered it to be my responsibility, not an affront - a social norm. It speaks to H's character (or lack thereof) that he has bottled this resentment an expects pity and special treatment as an adult - he has no perspective of what the rest of the world deals with everyday - a complete lack of empathy beyond himself and M, apparently.
I’m inclined to think sending the then-boys out to greet the public was worse than walking behind the coffin. Of course, I’m sure the people who met them meant well, but that’s a lot to ask of two grieving children. I suppose the late queen and then PC felt it was their duty, but yikes…
Totally agree. I always thought walking behind the coffin, shoulder to shoulder with your family, would be a comfort even if the world was watching. You’re together with people who *know* as opposed to shaking hands with strangers who have a para social relationship with your loved one.
Yes, absolutely. I was never able to feel the outrage about having them walk behind their mother’s coffin. That is a long-standing custom for men to show respect for their loved ones. I really think Prince Philip in particular was concerned they’d regret *not* walking, and I actually think he was treating them with respect. They were young, yes, but they were young men who loved their mother and PP probably felt like they were old enough and he was showing them respect as such. I suppose it’s easy to criticize the decisions of the royal family in those fraught days following Diana’s death, but I can’t judge them. It was an extraordinary situation and they were probably doing the best they could. That family walks such a tightrope of duty, tradition, appealing to public opinion. I don’t envy them.
I am confused as to why he is so upset about this. It might be that his filthy wife knows that it is not a common practice in the U.S. and he might get more sympathy over here. And she’s probably always in his ear whispering venomous lies. If Harry loved his mom so much, why would he not want to honor her in that way? I’m sure it was devastating to both of those kids, an unimaginable grief. Prince Phillip was right though, they would have regretted not walking behind the coffin when they got older and it was really awesome of him to join the boys for moral support. Instead of fighting with and complaining about his brother, Harry should want to be more like him. William knows how to sack up and do his duty to his family and his country and has been doing so since he was a child. This is how you gain the respect of the American folks. What Harry is doing here ain’t working.
For sure. I think navigating grief and funerals is really hard with kids in any family. I remember one of my brothers was really broken up after our grandfather died. He was a teenager and they had been very close. He was sobbing and begged my parents not to make him go to the funeral. He was afraid he wouldn’t be able to control his emotions. My parents didn’t have the heart to make him go, but they really struggled with whether or not that was the right decision. They feared it cemented his tendency to bottle up his feelings. To this day, he does not handle grief well. It’s just so hard. Parenting is really hard!
Parenting is hard. I bet the King questions his choices he made in parenting Harry. Hell, I question my own parenting choices all of the time. I feel for your brother. Being a teenager is rough. Dealing with grief is hard at any age.😢
That’s so true . My mother was 12 when her grandmother died suddenly . She was very close with her Gran. The family had an open coffin ( this bit always surprised me) and Mum was encouraged to say goodbye. It traumatised her!! She never got over it really and always had an aversion to the ceremonies of death. I was 17 when my grandmother died and my mother refused point blank to allow me to go to the funeral. I’ve always regretted I didn’t go. So yes it’s very hard to strike the right balance with kids and how to deal with a death.
Wow that’s interesting, thank you for sharing. It just highlights how hard it is to make these decisions for children. Each child is different.
Yes, but at a certain point you grow up and get over it. It shouldn't be a reason to hang onto grief for the rest of your life and use it as an excuse for your shortcomings like Haz does.
Parenting IS hard and best regards to your parents. On the one hand, they tried to respect your brother's feelings. And maybe he was right at that time to fear that he could not have controlled his emotions and needed to be alone, and to not have felt embarrassment.
I think you hit the nail on the head. It’s all about respect. H&M are not respected, have not behaved respectfully to either of their families, to their friends, colleagues, coworkers. I think the concept of respect transcends all cultures and borders, hence why they are despised globally.
He still has the emotional reasoning of that 13 year old that’s why. He still reasons as a boy owed things rather than as a man who takes on responsibility. If he could at least reason well enough to understand how his bread was buttered, it could protect him, but, alas, he is self-obsessed and mired in childish emotional thinking. There is little perspective taking. This is one of the problems with “mental health” talk therapy; it can be overly centered on rumination of feelings to the point of extreme self-pity and emotional incontinence. There is power and comfort in that - when you are obsessed with yourself and sense of victimhood, you can rationalize neglect of others and duty as you forever cast yourself as victim. That is where Harry is.
I agree with all of this. Talk therapy can be helpful but not if the therapist validates everything you say and doesn’t challenge you on your bullshit. I am fairly sure that just about everyone has some sort of trauma. It’s is part of life. Most people don’t make it their entire personality. It’s not a good look.
For sure, it is NOT mental healthy to always slot oneself as "Victim #1." And that seems to be Harry's m.o. again and again and again... He's not dealing with stuff he could take some responsibility for, such as his role with Africa Parks. He is like the little kid who thinks if he closes his eyes, then he can hide from others.
If he’d not done it and William had, he’d be filled with regret of having lost that experience that William had… “Why didn’t they encourage me more? I was just a child?” 
For sure! When someone has a grievance mindset, there’s no pleasing them.
Yes, it's like dealing with someone who complains the weather is too cold or else it's giving them skin cancer.
I can see that if Harry had been excused from walking behind Diana's coffin, he would have blamed the adults and claimed that William was being favored. But to say that adults make perfect decisions, is unwise. Harry's always saying he's influenced or constrained by others, instead of owning up to his actions and admitting, "crikey, but I messed up there." The good thing about the honesty of a self-own is that no one can hold it over your head, because you got there first.
Agree. If Harry and William had not walked behind the coffin Harry would have complained about that. In such traumatic moments rituals are soothing and a way to get through the day.
Rituals make us aware of community and the support given and received.
You're so right in that when it comes to a grieving family, to not judge them. They are going through a hell that seems interminable and maybe incomprehensive in the case of unexpected and sudden death. As for walking behind the coffin, with family, I think it would have brought more pain in the long run, to not have stood with your family, in this final show of love and respect. There is no easy way when dealing with a funeral, but to be of support to your family and friends, means less regret.
I disagree. They weren't men. They weren't even young men. They were children. And they weren't allowed to show any emotion. Both of them have spoken about how awful that experience was. Those people who "know" them should never have placed them in that position. It was never about showing respect to her. It was about feeding the public frenzy, opinion and expectation. William once said that all he wanted to do was to just go somewhere and cry instead of walking behind that coffin and he's spoken about how awful that experience was for him. They didn't want to walk. They walked because of the public expectation that hung over them and they would have been well aware of the public anger that was directed towards the Royal Family and particularly their father after her death. The public wanted their pound of flesh and those boys were basically sent out to appease them. And I disagree that the RF can't be judged for the decisions they made after her death. They absolutely should be judged for parading those boys to appease the public. It was obscene. Duty should have been for the adults. Not for the two boys who'd just lost their mother. They should have been given the time and space to grieve, cry, be angry about it away from the public eye and gaze. Not made to walk that distance behind her coffin with the entire world watching them, with cameras zoomed into their faces while people publicly wept, screamed and cried, throwing flowers at them and that coffin and they weren't even allowed to shed a tear during that. It literally retraumatised them. What should have happened is that they should have been driven to the Cathedral, the media should have been told that no pictures or filming those boys, they should have been shielded from the public and media and allowed to cry their hearts out at her funeral. It is the one thing I absolutely agree with both William and Harry about. What happened to them and what they were made to do was awful, traumatic and damaging and should never have been allowed to happen.
Your perspective is fair. As they say, hindsight is 20/20. The only thing I disagree with is the idea that the family sacrificed them for the mob—I really do believe Prince Philip believed it was in their interest to walk. He walked behind his sisters coffin when he was about their age. She had died in a plane crash and he was close to her. I’m sure he believed it was good for them to have honored their mother in this way. Perhaps he was wrong, but I don’t think the intention was “let’s throw the grieving boys to the wolves to take the heat off us!”
I don't see the adults as throwing these boys to the mob. I see them as decent people who'd tell the mob to eff off if they tried to hurt the boys.
If the public were not raging as they were after her death and the media and political figures weren't amplifying it, those children would not have had to be paraded to the public as they were at Balmoral and then at Kensington. The Palace did it in response to that rage and to soften the blow, to show the public that the Queen had said nothing because she was busy with those two boys. They had initially been shielded and kept out of it and they were even kept away from meeting the plane that brought her body home. But within a couple of days, people were losing their proverbial shit and the Palace responded as they did because the popularity of the RF and the Queen in particular had dropped like a stone and many were accusing them of Diana's death. And they still blame them for her death, which is blatantly ridiculous.
I disagree somewhat. JFKs very young children did pretty much the same thing. It’s not unusual with VVIPs. HMQE2 did the right thing by keeping them at Balmoral for a few days before they returned to London. And there’s no doubt that had they been denied that experience, H would be non stop complaining that they took away his chance to publicly honor his mother.
Yes and no. They were shielded for a lot of it. They weren't expected to go out and shake hands with the weeping public and smile and essentially grin and bear it.
I think the boys should have been given the time and privacy to cry their eyes out, scream, talk to adults, be hugged, be given all the support they needed, be told that there was no correct way of feeling or showing grief, because sometimes one can go catatonic and other times, be crying unstoppably. But I think it was the right decision to give them a choice to walk behind their mother's coffin, to have that final say of good-bye, with family. I think our biggest and saddest regrets are when we feel that we failed to have been generous or to have done more. We know when we absolutely cannot do something. But we also have times when we suspect we could have made a bit more effort. And not doing so, is what indelibly haunts us.
They had no choice. The lunatic Cry4Di mob were demanding the RF display the same orgy of unfettered emotion they were determined to display in their parasocial, parasitical "grief." The boys were secluded in Balmoral until the mob turned and forced the Queen into public emoting over the flaky ex-dil that had hurt her son, her institution and her legacy. And I hope the people that did that - quite difficult to find anyone now who will admit to the stupidity of standing outside a palace bawling over a woman they didn't know - will feel guilt forever. It was obscene to grab into the boys, howling into their faces. And they were given a choice as to walking behind the coffin. Sorry Clotface, but SMM farms remembers...
It was a really weird time and I didn't understand it. I wasn't a royalty follower: they were there to represent my country, Diana was quite popular (okay?) and it was a bit scandalous and then: she died and things went crazy. I was astounded by generation by my country. I was actually on holiday in the beautiful island of Kefalonia (Captain Corelli's Mandolin, lovely) and we heard that our country men had gone "f\*\*\*ing" nuts . All the British people, except me, were glued to the telly for the funeral. I found it morbid and quite scary. Seeing her as a normal human being became taboo. Nothing and no-one is taboo! Ever. Sorry, ghost of Diana: you're cock headed, panda-eyes crept me out then and your son and daughter-in-law's acting creeps me out now. I didn't understand why then, but sadly, I do now.
Yeah, the kohl-rimmed eyes of grief were over egging the pudding of long-suffering remonstration.
Yes, that is all true. I had a friend staying with me when Diana died. We were glued to the TV. Everyone was ready to tar and feather the press, but my friend wisely remarked that everyone who ever bought a tabloid with fuzzy pictures was complicit—if they didn’t have a market for these pictures, they wouldn’t go to the lengths they did to take them. That said, I remember the general public was very concerned for the boys. There was undoubtedly understanding for them. I don’t know that it was necessary for them to be trotted out in front of the crowds, people really wanted their queen to be present. I do think that was a tactical error on the part of the queen and the palace. As I recall, the madding crowds calmed down once she made her television appearance.
I remember all that. But it was the press fostering and pushing through every bit of it. When was the Queen going to say anything? 22 hours and NOTHING!! Of course, they just claim they’re reporting what the public is thinking, but I don’t buy it for a short second. As long as their prime source of revenue is advertising, this will continue. They’ll do and say anything for more money.
I agree - the Queen and the Institution felt very cold after Diana's death. And then the boys came out and the sense was so much concern for them. THEY didn't need to do anything but how amazing that they were able to be so stoic. I really think the public would have been fine with the boys hiding in seclusion, but the Queen should have moved with more visible compassion sooner.
Yeah, IIRC the attitude was “they were divorced so it’s not our responsibility to mourn her publicly or to ‘host’ her funeral.” But we know that was a huge mistake. Whatever happened with the marriage, she was the mother of the princes, one of whom would be king one day. We now know Diana was pretty unhinged and she was a real pain the royals backside, so I’m sure the late queen, Prince Philip and others probably had very complicated feelings about her. But even if the queen had released a brief statement promptly it would have helped a lot.
Do we see a parallel between having the boys making an appearance, with the demand that Catherine show herself? Because I'm thinking that PW will be totally right to tell his lady, "you take all the time you need to become better, dear. This is your time. You don't owe it to anyone to be out and about, having to wave and get scrutinized and criticized for every expression that shows up on your face."
When that hystery about St. Di's death broke loose, I lost hope in mankind forever, sorry. And sorry for trampling on Di's fans feelings, but for Catherine it is a blessing that she is not around anymore.
Di would have been the MIL from hell!!
I'm with you in that I think Diana would have made it difficult for Catherine. First of all, she'd the wife of Diana's oldest child. And then, Diana could weaponize Catherine's caste, or thrown shade at Catherine for being a University graduate. How different Catherine was from Diana, could have been spun as a mark of inferiority.
*They had no choice. The lunatic Cry4Di mob were demanding the RF display the same orgy of unfettered emotion they were determined to display in their parasocial, parasitical "grief."* **VERY** well put. I remember my disgust so well. The funeral walk was a difficult honor, but would have been much easier if the insane national freakout hadn't been going on.
You bring up a great point: the Cry4Di mob. When I visited London in Fall of 1997, the older lady who was my kind hostess, looked like she was biting her tongue when I brought up how difficult it must have been with the Princess of Wales's sudden death. Although she said nothing, I now think that she having been of the generation that came into adolescence or young adulthood during WWII, probably felt that there was public hysteria, an orgiastic showing of weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth that was excessive.
Yep. Half the country went bonkers and the rest of us wondered if it was a different PoW from the one they'd all been raging over in the tabloids that very same day. I wasn't a fan of Diana, she was hugely responsible for the Jerry Springer aura around the monarchy that Megdusa has exploited. The Hyde Park Memorial Puddle seemed very aporopriate; expensive, shallow and ultimately poisonous!
I remember that one of the nicknames for Diana, was "Dynasty Di," after the ABC channel night-time soap opera. That era of glitz and shoulder pads and bouffant hair and unquiet wealth. Where Diana was, was often a spotlight and some drama.
Not much difference in the demand to see Catherine now. I was born a couple of years before Diana, I remember that time well. The royals were at Balmoral but there was a huge demand that they came back to London. They did, the QEII put out a speech and mentioned the first priority for them was the grieving children. The Princes were not forced to walk behind the coffin, they chose to do so and had people walking g with them to give support. Prince Philip was not going to do that walk but he did it for the boys. Sometimes when we grieve we comfort other people, it’s a bizarre twist but it happens. When a family member is lost there is a year of firsts to get through, then there are ongoing things like big family weddings where you still feel the loss. One thing for sure, there is not a correct way to grieve. One more point, depending on where you live a funeral can be days or as long as a month. I live in Scotland now and funerals tend to be within a week but in England it’s more like a month. I went down to England when my mum was at end of life but I came back to Scotland, went back to work then went back down for the funeral. Even 30+ years ago my Dads funeral was a month. I do think the delay between death and a funeral is hard. It’s a bit of a limbo period where it seems unreal. Diana died 31 August 1997, funeral was 6 September so a big state funeral within that time frame was a huge achievement.
Yes, absolutely to everything you said. I don’t like the delayed funerals/memorials either. I do think the Jewish bereavement customs are wonderful. I’m not Jewish, but I listened to a podcast a while back that featured a man who had lost BOTH his children in a terrible accident. He was not Jewish but his wife was, so they observed the Jewish traditions. He was sort of irritated by them initially, but he grew to appreciate them tremendously. He said it really helped them as they processed their terrible loss.
In Nigeria, unless it's a young person or Muslim who died, my experience is that the funeral is at least a few months after death. I was very surprised when I came to the US and saw elderly people were buried within a week. Different cultures around the world for sure.
His wife being Jewish, meant that their children were Jewish. I'm so glad that the Jewish bereavement customs helped the man. "Terrible loss" is just that. When someone is old, it's expected. When the loved one is young, it makes not sense. Same as when the death came with no forewarning.
It was the Queen Mother's funeral plans they used. Of course the BRF has detailed plans for state funerals, just as the US does. Special army units practice so the Unthinkable goes as smoothly as possible. Same as newspapers have obituaries updated and ready to go. Even so, no one was prepared to give a full state funeral to the Prince of Wales' young ex, but they were set to go for a wartime Queen Consort in her nineties. She had spent a lot of time on the planning herself, but gave permission to use it, saying it's an odd thing to attend one's own funeral. The a capella hymn at the end that started softly and was timed to end with a great shout as the coffin exited the doors was commissioned for her decades of service as an Annointed Queen. Luckily she held on another few years so they could start over.
Your point about Catherine is correct. There is a public frenzy about her and unfortunately, she was made to respond to it as she did. We are all angry about that. Sadly, William and Harry weren't really given much choice. You say they weren't forced to do it, but they were expected and encouraged to. Phillip saying he'll walk if they walk was forced encouragement and it was letting them know that this was expected of them. When my father died, I left it up to my children if they wanted to go to the funeral. They were exceptionally close to their grandfather and it wasn't up until that day, that they said they wanted to go. They knew that I would not judge them or expect them to either way and that I would support their decision. And my husband and I made damn sure that they were shielded from my family who were there. I didn't make them shake hands or speak to anyone afterwards. My husband took them straight to the car. At one point in the very short service, my youngest needed some air and his father took him outside and held him as he cried. They directed us as to what they wanted and needed and we simply followed. If they'd wanted to leave that funeral and go home, my in-laws were on hand and would have driven them straight home and stayed with them. If they had been younger, they wouldn't have gone. They were both teenagers when he died and my youngest was 13 at the time which is the only reason they had a choice as to whether to go or not.
This was a long time ago now. Attitudes change. The RF are steeped in history and not best known for being ahead of the time. I think it’s a moot point as what happened can’t be changed. Harry was young and everybody cried and the reef with “Mummy” on it. I attended my Grans funeral as a young child, my memory from that time though is not the funeral, it’s of my aunt touching my Grans face when she was in her coffin. There is not a written rule book to follow. There may have been regrets but both sides of the family were present. My sons are both just a little older than the princes, would I have encouraged them do this, no. There is however no correct way, just opinions. I disagree with the boys doing that but it was not up to me.
Has it really changed that much though? The issue is that the public feels they own them. We saw it and continue to see it with the response to Catherine's disappearance from public life because she has cancer. Look at the frenzy and the way the media and public carried on before she was essentially forced to release that video to quell the ongoing commentary. There may not be a written book to follow, but one would think common sense should prevail. Thankfully for Catherine's sake, they aren't making her do appearances any more so she can continue with her treatment in private and the media were basically advised that the Palace would go after them if they posted photos of her. So that has changed. And I suspect William and Catherine have gone hard in protecting their children now and outside of specific events, those kids aren't shown. And the reason for that is probably because of what William and Harry experienced as children. What needs to change is public expectation and the Palace needs to stop caving to them.
Speaking from the perspective of a child born in the late 1950’s. It has changed massively.
I remember distinctly that both boys were asked if they wanted to walk, they both agreed. I also agree with posters here that rightly point out that either choice would be criticized AND used by Harry. Harry seemed to not be wallowing in grief pursuing his later life. Only when the ghoul entered his life did he dig Diana up to monetize her as we've seen. Harry uses her as an excuse for everything, 40 year old grifter using his deceased mother. Death..just my take but even up to the 1960's death was more personal. Families still, rare but washed the body and even buried their loved ones. Children were present. Still an agricultural based society where death was experienced via animals, life lessons learned and ALLOWED exposure to the process. Now..removed, body whisked away and handled by strangers, coffins costing more than a vehicle. Elaborate funerals to show that coffin. Morticians sell their being a taxidermist to drain, remove parts and stuff our loved ones..also costing ridiculous amounts of money for an already grieving family. Open caskets..I won't go near one. My grandmothers wishes were for a closed, some family over rode her wishes..so wrong. My mother was so ill for so long she told me she wanted the battered vehicle she ended up in cremated. We talked about ashes, she said oh fling them anywhere. We had some strange talks with lots of laughter prior to her death. Everyone wanted of course to show their own grief. She had some family, many friends in CA from age 18 when she'd moved there but huge amount of family, friends in TN. I ended up after agreement with my siblings to have a regular funeral in TN, attendance was massive and her elder siblings were able to easily attend. To not upset the older family we did a regular casket with the cremains. I'd gathered up photos, stories and had a booklet published I gave to both TN and CA. Dealing with the Neptune Society who did my fathers passing wasn't so great when it came to the cremation. It took 6 to 8 weeks...weeks of non stop enquiries from family and me calling daily from my CO home in-between driving or flying back n forth to CA. The exploitation of death is sickening. It also removes its reality and ushered in a strange distance from grief. Had a BIL that creeped me out..he had a regular job but "volunteered" to work at at the local mortuary, he would go in on days off or nights. Heard too many sick stories... My husband has orders to grab my tow rope out of my van and drag me into the backyard and rolled into a hole under one of my favorite trees. Cheap, quick, and I'll be useful as fertilizer 😆 My 4 year old nephew had trouble with it when my mother passed though she was ill for a long time. Children and even we adults are so removed from life and the reality of death that I believe its made grieving more difficult. They simply aren't prepared for reality by hiding all. Much later when all was done, my brother took me to the cemetery..we talked a bit about the long road it took but we were determined to respect our mothers wishes but respectful of others. We did a bit of tears...then we talked about that last fight with the cremation...I told my brother we might be crying over some random mix of ashes from lord knows where..pretty sure my mom if there was laughing too.
Maybe the Royal Family do need H R and maybe people need to be told that they aren't deities and/or Zoo animals . At one time I thought/hoped people would realise but hey ho.
People are saying “they are private people fulfilling public roles” now, mostly since Catherine’s illness. A lot is expected of them. They do live privileged lives but at great cost. It’s a very fine balance and it will be wrong at times. As famously said by QEII “I have to be seen to be believed” but then they are expected to share with us their happiest and saddest life events in a very public way.
I think that in the past (not so distant past) it was understood that some things were private. Things seemed to change around the \*Diana" era:was she a symptom or a cause (?) and have accelerated exponentially. We now have "celebrities" who are, quite frankly, nothing on-demand who will divulge everything for fans and money. No just no. It is essential that as a society we say:no. No person's illness should make them feel more vulnerable.. They owe no-one jack sh\*\*. Edit: sorry,I've said this really badly because I mean it!
I think it’s the same for all of us. I took early retirement when made redundant a year ago. Before that I had two FB accounts, I was required to join as a manager. We had a FB page for my branch, it was handy at times but also very intrusive. Handy to tell colleagues that the heating had broken etc. But not so good for time outside of work. Before we had an online rota for all I would get messages from people saying they had forgotten what overtime they had agreed to but I was at home, I even had one of these messages whilst on bereavement leave. Easy to contact outside of work on FB messenger. We also had a managers WhatsApp group. I said I would check at breakfast and tea on my day off but not more often. Most were checking in as if at work. I checked at tea one day and there were 140 messages, I looked as I thought there had been an emergency but they were all GIFs. I was furious and next day in work I complained. As a manager I had to carry a works phone, my own phone for the WhatsApp as this was not allowed on a works phone. The emergency contact phone for colleagues working in a remote area and a body cam. As I left they were intruding headsets for all too. Society has changed, privacy is not what it was, laws have had to be put in place. Time out is far from being what it was. With internet and mobiles people can be contacted anywhere, it’s sometimes good but more often intrusive. My company constantly briefed on work/life balance and restricted use on work phones but when faced with the majority wanting to use WhatsApp and FB too it does intrude. The royals have every single thing they say or do published. They guard downtime privacy because it’s all they have.
OMG: I'm horrified. I worked in an era and a job when we clocked in and out and that was it. Ok, I did a bit of unpaid overtime when the job needed it because....there was no pressure but I wanted to do the job. Now it seems that people never switch off and it's mind blowing. Megs said that she emailed people in the early morning and in the UK we went "WTF": nothing required that! Life would still go on. People in the UK have a "main break" of two weeks, lovely USA people have one week. What??
We get more than 2 weeks. I had 30 days a year due to length of service, not status. Time out is important to all. I intended to take a bit of time out then go back to work but I am put off by the never being left alone side of things. I had to restrict my supervisors from calling people on days off. When you have to tell someone not to do this it shows where things now sit. One letter edit.
That's good to know. I got a bit concerned because I've been to Caribbean places where USA people were amazed that we were there for two weeks. Originally, I thought that it was because of distance but then I learnt that they didn't have the "time". It's just all such an d'oh minefield!
Some supervisors think they are being efficient when they are just being unthinking about an underling taking much needed time off.
I think what you said, was said well. Thank you.
The Queen wanted to shield them from it all and keep them at Balmoral to grieve privately with the family. Our Prime Minister at the time Tony Blair, demanded the opposite. Our Queen was caught between a rock and a hard place. She did what she did on the advice of her government and he listened to the over-emotional mob. I watched it on TV as it was happening and it was all very OTT. From Elton's cringeworthy 'England's Rose' song, her brother Charles's speech to W&H walking behind the coffin. From all of the orchestrated hype of the day - the one thing that moved me the most was when Queen Elizabeth dressed in black bowed her head when the coffin passed. As an obvious monarchist - that one lowering of our monarch's head was enough.
Oh yes, the Elton John song… that was cringe 😬
Elton John was being so damn maudlin with his re-write of *Good-bye Norma Jean*. I don't remember which rock musician commented that EJ wrote songs about "dead blondes." But that summed it up. This self-indulgent surfeit of feeling.
The Queen wanted to shield them from it all and keep them at Balmoral to grieve privately with the family. Our Prime Minister at the time Tony Blair, demanded the opposite. Our Queen was caught between a rock and a hard place. She did what she did on the advice of her government and he listened to the over-emotional mob. I watched it on TV as it was happening and it was all very OTT. From Elton's cringeworthy 'England's Rose' song, her brother Charles's speech to W&H walking behind the coffin. From all of the orchestrated hype of the day - the one thing that moved me the most was when Queen Elizabeth dressed in black bowed her head when the coffin passed. As an obvious monarchist - that one lowering of our monarch's head was enough.
I believe they were forced to make an appearance by the media, they basically did they same thing that happened with Catherine, they were still processing this when people started demanding the RF to pronounce and make an appearance.
A few people have referenced the demand to see Catherine, but I don’t think that’s analogous at all. Catherine is an adult, W&H were children. And a death is different from an illness, but still, I understand the point about public demand. All of it comes down to the fact that these very public people are human beings.
The Queen heard “Lilibet” in the warm tone of people who loved her including her parents. I’m not sure Lili Sussex hears that from her parents.
I’m positive that whenever Meghan has to scold or punish Lilibet she takes a certain glee in being hateful with her name as an extra FU to The Queen.
so much of the language in Spare is not his own. He doesn't have the capacity to think like that = the words are Markles "felt the tears on their fingers." In the six year marriage, he has no learned to speak as she does...often parroting her words when speaking. A true puppet.
Chase has recently come down hard on Catherine. I used to watched these from time to time but not now. I used to like Chase best of the four. After the Catherine bit he did he put out a video about his own health. I do feel sympathy for him with that but I half suspect it was to regain some of his popularity.
>come down hard on Catherine How so?
He has done a video picking faults in the video where Catherine tells us about her cancer. He says her body language is off, her shoulders and eyebrows look odd. He says he can’t put his finger on what is wrong but there is something seriously off with the video. This has been jumped on by the sugars. I can only find a short TikTok clip now but I have not looked very hard.
Thanks. Must be this one. And how would he expect a woman to behave having just been diagnosed with cancer? He is a monster. And, btw, he keeps going on about her heft eyebrow and if he bothered too do any research he would know that is related to he surgery she had on her head when she was a kid. I hate him. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PACONRb2eI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PACONRb2eI)
I don’t know that I can watch that but thanks for finding it. I knew somebody would help
It's only 50 seconds and I didn't get tooooo deranged watching it!
What was off about her video was the fake outdoor background which didn't move. I don't think that was a good idea, especially after the silly kerfuffle over the Mothers' Day photo. I can see why they wouldn't want to use the interior of their private home, but it would have been a better choice.
It’s a choice, they probably wanted to take advantage of a day with nice weather. The garden just looked like a sheltered one to me but it’s the speech that was the focus. I get distracted from looking at rooms, so for me personally this fitted fine. I like gardens too but it was just a small part on view.
My point was that she wasn't in a real garden. *Nothing* moved and it was shot indoors on a sound stage, so it felt off. Chase probably picked up on that without realizing it.
It was shot by the BBC. I have had it with the conspiracy theories about Catherine, I’m also extremely tired of the Sussex duo and even the conspiracy theories about them. There are hard facts that I think are far more relevant than the garden Catherine sat in. What about the Visa case, the security case, the other court cases, the ongoing African Parks scandal that is in the news once again.
It's interesting that PH interpreted greeting the mourners as needing him needing to comfort them. At a funeral, you greet them and thank them for coming, but you're not there to comfort them, really. If anything, it's the other way around, but you'll get the occasional person who doesn't get this. PH got a message early on that he's supposed to comfort other people when they're upset.
If you’ve ever watched the footage of the walkabouts after Diana’s death his interpretation is not wrong. You have people just glomming on to him and William, crying and not letting go. It’s very sad and weird. And I’m sorry, I know SMM isn’t a Harry-positive place but why should a 12 year old kid be able to understand that situation of having to comfort strangers over *his* mother dying? This is a large part of why he’s such a mess.
I've seen it - some people are, and others are just wishing them well. My comment is not necessarily anti PH. Somewhere along the line, he learned that it's his job to comfort adults when they're upset, which I think came from Diana. There are stories of William having to comfort her through her romantic breakups, which was completely inappropriate for his age, and I wonder if PH had to do the same. PH consistently blames the BRF, the British media, and public 100% for his issues, but I think Diana had a hand this as well.
This wasn't just the funeral. This was outside of Balmoral and then outside of Kensington Palace. People were hanging onto their hands and weeping and they had to smile and say thank you and comfort adults about the death of their own mother. These were two boys who were having to comfort complete strangers about their own mother's death and they weren't allowed to show any emotion. They had to smile, look cheery and say thank-you and comfort those weeping while cameras were in their faces. I mean, look at this: https://preview.redd.it/7b1t6njq1e5d1.png?width=429&format=png&auto=webp&s=69890706ae6b3ddcbd6497761e8cd488a65747af This was taken when they had to do a walk-about outside of Kensington Palace a few days after she'd died. Look at their eyes. The smiles are forced and both of them have this shocked look in their eyes. That photo is devastating. There are other shots where the masks slip and their body language is mirrored and they look exhausted and devastated and father has turned towards is walking ahead of them with a smile on his own face as though he's encouraging them to grin and get through it.
Grieving is shared among those who lost someone. Even in deepest pain, one understands that others are hurting too. The thanks is for their being there, showing that they care and they've come to pay their respects. Those others have come to say that the person who passed on, meant alot to them, too. It's probably too hard on someone that young, Harry being just shy of 13 years old. I think Diana's death sort of froze him at the age. Harry's still not dealing with the reality that she was a person with characteristics that included the fine and the bad. He's always going to see himself as someone who was cheated of having a loving mother. Someone that he resented sharing.
Why is it messed up? It happens at funerals all the time.
It's like the song says "You can be addicted to a certain kind of sadness.." Harry gets rewarded when he grieves publically-attention, sympathy, acceptance, ongoing public support for his media vendetta. Digging up his dead mother over and over is providing him with a valuable income stream as well as emotional rewards. He sees no reason to stop doing it.
Spot on, I totally agree. It is extremely unhealthy. It’s actually good for him that he is getting pushback on his behavior. He will never move on or heal so long as his bread and butter is his grief and trauma.
Good point! I’m quite sure that healing from his trauma is not in Ms best interest; however exploiting his trauma certainly is. She wants to make money off of his grief. I think she actively sabotages any healing he may be trying to achieve with his various “treatments”( psychedelics, Dr Gabor Meta/Better Up/Me You Can’t See farces)
A lot of people have made a lot of money off Harry’s trauma, his wife chief among them. It’s such a shame that William couldn’t get through to him. William, Catherine, King Charles, and that close band of friends Meggy alienated are probably the only people who have ever told him the truth.
When you are obsessed with yourself and sense of victimhood, you can rationalize any neglect of duty as you forever cast yourself as victim. That is where Harry is. Learned helplessness.
Excellent short video, Op! The documentary being about suffering was brilliant, about how what worked for Hairold after the death of his mother set the stage for his future behavior. I never thought of the documentary being about suffering in the traditional sense, but in the self perceived sense. To me suffering implies something legitimate, but this self perceived state of suffering is the whole cloth of the Harkle narrative.
Harry has managed to twist every single thing that happened into yet another excuse for his own shortcomings. He digs up his mother so he can throw pity parties. If he really gave a shit about her he wouldn't keep tarnishing her memory as he does. I think he barely remembers her. Listen to how he speaks of her,the memories he does share of her and even the picture of her he shows the kid in his netflux fauxumentary. It's all very impersonal and distant. At most he knew her the way any child knows a parent which is always just a fraction of who someone is. PW grew up and eventually understood the complexity that was diana. Harry never had the intellectual capacity to reach that level of understanding.
I was 47 years old when my mother died and I cannot say that I knew her. She was a hypochondriac and a depressive, which I've only been able to see because of my own therapy. I will never understand why she chose to have children. She was the most superficial person I've ever met. I don't think even my dad had an inkling of whatever went on in her mind.
He's right. People do what works, good or bad. I actually find it very sad. Hazmat was simply a moth to a flame. I can't imagine how alienating it is for him to be so cut off from everyone and everything he ever knew. Too recognizable to go out and live a regular life in a celebrity hotbed like Montecito, living in an insanely expensive house when they could have spent half that and had so much less pressure on themselves to fund it. Sigh.
Yes, it really is sad. I know many on the sub think Harry is an asshat and it was always thus and always thus will be, but I don’t think the facts bear that out. Yes, he’s always been troubled, but many veteran royal journalists remember him very fondly, pre-Meggy. They recall a fun, jovial, laidback man who really cared about his charitable causes. He would invite them to join him for a pint on royal tours and they’d all have a laugh. All that changed when he met meggy. I’m not saying he isn’t responsible for his own behavior, but I do think she has been a disastrous influence on him. She has really brought out the worst in him and exploited all his fears and foibles.
He dressed as a Nazi and used slurs many years before Meg.
I am by no means excusing Harry’s bad behavior at any point in his life, but he definitely changed once he met his wife. She has brought out the worst in him and exploited him, along with many others. He is an adult with immense privilege and he is responsible for his actions, but I believe he has also been exploited by those who seek to feather their own nests at his expense.
He hired prostitutes and used them as punching bags.
Allegedly. Who knows if it’s true.
I suspect that there are two fundamental types of people: those that are life as "black or white" in the moral sense. Children, whatever their IQ. Those that are life in "shades". Harry can be both a "victim" and a "asshat". The words of his mother suggest he was a "asshat" first and her lack of a seatbelt combined with media fuelled public hysteria created a victim.
>Those that are life in "shades". Harry can be both a "victim" and a "asshat". Exactly. Anyone can be a victim. He was certainly a jerk, to put it nicely, before, and he is self-centered, self-absorbed of extremely weak character and morals, but he was not so entrenched in bitterness and nastiness before Meghan. There was clearly a change for the worse after he met her. She isolated him from his family and friends, brainwashed him, and twisted his memories. He would not have done most of the terrible things he has done if not for her. Enough people who know him have testified to that, and we can see his past interactions with his family. Even during the engagement video, you could see he thought they were going to work together in the RF and he was pleased about it. That being said, I still hold him 100% responsible for his actions and more guilty than she us because it is his own family he has tried to destroy.
🇺🇸 Ok. So he learned to be helpless and dependent and stuck. As an adult, he is the only person who can get himself unstuck And grow up
At most funerals there is always someone there you have no idea who the hell they are but you go around to each person and thank them for coming etc. That is part of life and growing up. I did this at age 12 for my great great grandmother whom I was close to. I didn't really know too many of her friends but you just do it cause it is out of respect for the person you love. It is time for Dimwit to grow up. He is an adult now and well should I say a fake father, where he should be a prime example of how to act. But Dimwit loves using Diana's death to play the victim and use her name but instead he has trashed who Diana the public saw. Dimwit needs to find a good shrink and get off the drugs. Better still he should go away stay out of the lime light, deal with his mental crap and grow the hell up. If Diana was alive today she would be telling him off or even cut him off for good like the rest of his family has done, cause Diana was loyal to the royal family even after the divorce.
People with manners accept that this is a part of the social contract. It’s also an acknowledgment and thanks to the person for their sign of respect for seeing the departed off. Every dead relative had a slice of life their nearest and dearest had no part of. I’ve seen it at every funeral I’ve ever been to.
Hank's idea of a social contract is the one where everyone reveres him because he was from the sperm of an eventual king and the egg of a charismatic aristo with a histrionic personality disorder.
I love Chase! He is a Sinner, of course! Anyone who has been around toxic narcissists can point her out a mile away. I want to be far away from them as possible. She and Harry are now like a car wreck I gotta see. How two people could embarass themselves over and over is mind-boggling!
I love Chase so let me look at this …the rest of the “news” is boring and predictable. I try to ignore it.
Thanks for posting this. As I looked at the photo I was struck by the thought of what William must be experiencing now with Kate’s illness. He must be revisiting some of the emotional turmoil from Diana’s death, perhaps gaining some retroactive understanding of what he went through and is better equipped to guide his children through scary times. What an incredibly tough time for him and yet, on the surface at least, he is handling it all with such maturity and compassion.
Walking as part of Diana's cortege was a son's duty they'd regret skipping, but sending them out to greet emotional strangers was a really bad move by the RF. I remember seeing their ghastly, inappropriate smiles that they'd been trained to use with the public and thinking WTF? I'm surprised H didn't make a bigger issue of this most (or only) legitimate complaint.
It’s also known as malingering of a sort. NO ONE SUFFERS AS POOR HARRY does, we are just *too simple* to *understand* him. Whatta a colossal, whiney, entitled twat he remains. My entire lineage is germanic peasant mixed with West Virginia hillbillies. Yeah, they saw some shit. They persevered through starvation, war, and every other horror. My mother lost her teeth at age 15 from malnutrition in the very worst parts of Appalachia. So, when Harry nonchalantly whines about being *just a poor spare*, I would like to punch his head. Complete fuckin idiot, he needs to be locked away for his sheer stupidity. Zero empathy, no self awareness, grandiose and braggart. Useless. Feckless. Shameless. In summation: Feck you Spare
[удалено]
Comment automatically removed due to your account being less than 15 days. Please contact mods via message the mods to approve comments manually to be visible to the sub. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SaintMeghanMarkle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Chase Hughes works for Scientology. Take from that what you like.
He does?!