The Harry and Meghan fuss

[journolud]

I think his opinion is worthwhile. If you read any of his books it's apparent he's no forelock tugger, and not averse to holding an unflatteringly honest mirror up to both the monarchy and Britain's colonial past. He's a fairly sharp analyst and if he's actually read the book and feels harry is a highly privileged young man having a whinge then it's a view worth considering.

It’s not as though we’re short of opinions on the subject…

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

It’s not as though we’re short of opinions on the subject…

Here's another. This time from those monarchist bastards at the guardian:

Spare by Prince Harry review – dry your eyes, mate

For all he may have suffered, and despite his clear love for his wife, the Duke of Sussex’s misfiring memoir is not only tone-deaf to his privilege but at times downright bizarre

www.theguardian.com

"What kind of person insists on an air-clearing meeting with their father on the day of his father’s funeral? A myopic, self-obsessed, non-empathic kind of person, I would say. Exactly the same kind of person, in fact, who would talk about reconciliation in the same breath as they publicly slag off their family."

 

[journolud]

Here's another. This time from those monarchist bastards at the guardian:

Spare by Prince Harry review – dry your eyes, mate

For all he may have suffered, and despite his clear love for his wife, the Duke of Sussex’s misfiring memoir is not only tone-deaf to his privilege but at times downright bizarre

www.theguardian.com

"What kind of person insists on an air-clearing meeting with their father on the day of his father’s funeral? A myopic, self-obsessed, non-empathic kind of person, I would say. Exactly the same kind of person, in fact, who would talk about reconciliation in the same breath as they publicly slag off their family."

Well, from Rachel Cooke at the Guardian. I've no axe to grind either way but I'm sure any of Harry and Meghan's advocates could find equally weighty reviews and opinions in their favour. Doesn't really add much to the debate nor likely to change anyone's opinion.

 

[domalino]

Here's another. This time from those monarchist bastards at the guardian:

Spare by Prince Harry review – dry your eyes, mate

For all he may have suffered, and despite his clear love for his wife, the Duke of Sussex’s misfiring memoir is not only tone-deaf to his privilege but at times downright bizarre

www.theguardian.com

"What kind of person insists on an air-clearing meeting with their father on the day of his father’s funeral? A myopic, self-obsessed, non-empathic kind of person, I would say. Exactly the same kind of person, in fact, who would talk about reconciliation in the same breath as they publicly slag off their family."

You know the Guardian do employ people who are establishment and pro monarchy?

For example this reviewer recently chose to review a biography of Camilla that got almost no press coverage.

Prior to that…4 columns on the queen’s death including Why monarchic rituals and grandeur are important, how the queen was a feminist (presumably a certain £12m gift wasn’t mentioned in this one). Then the same again on the jubilee. And a big positive review for the palace papers - a sanctioned pro-palace account of their recent problems “full of internal access”…

In between that she’s been writing columns about people fighting the good fight against cancel culture and wokeness.



I am shocked she didn’t like the book.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Well, from Rachel Cooke at the Guardian. I've no axe to grind either way but I'm sure any of Harry and Meghan's advocates could find equally weighty reviews and opinions in their favour. Doesn't really add much to the debate nor likely to change anyone's opinion.

Maybe she's a 'Harry and Meghan advocate' but just thinks his book is a bit crap. It does sound like it's a bit crap, but tbf a biography at his age as likely as shallow as those ones footballers do before they are even 30. I think there is probably a more interesting book to be written in another 30-40 years when he's sorted his head out.

 

[Kirkstall Blue]

Started reading Spare last night and it's obvious Harry has tremendous PTSD from his mother's death, hence the big axe to grind with the press which looks now to be his life purpose. It's obviously something not shared by his brother or dad hence the big disagreements and frustrations in how the press are dealt with.

A second one is you can tell how out of touch he is and certainly people of that class are. He puts across that he's just an average bloke, ex-army etc but he's very much someone from the upper classes.

There are anecdotes about public school for example, one where he tells how every lad in his boarding digs knew who was circumcised or not, another about them being bathed every night by school staff. It's talked of as though it's normal but it's a bit uncomfortable really and very, very weird.

Harrys children are not having a Palace upbringing every photo I’ve seen the four of them look very happy his children will not display the obvious problems that previous generations of royals have had.
They will have as normal a life as rich people can give their children

Harry’s PTSD has had therapy I would suggest the rest of the Royals need therapy more than Harry does he is aware of his needs but has Charles and William had any treatment because Diana’s death affected the whole country never mind Harry.


At least they are earning there own money we don’t have to fund them.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Maybe she's a 'Harry and Meghan advocate' but just thinks his book is a bit crap. It does sound like it's a bit crap, but tbf a biography at his age as likely as shallow as those ones footballers do before they are even 30. I think there is probably a more interesting book to be written in another 30-40 years when he's sorted his head out.

That would be an autobiography wouldn't it?

 

[journolud]

Maybe she's a 'Harry and Meghan advocate' but just thinks his book is a bit crap. It does sound like it's a bit crap, but tbf a biography at his age as likely as shallow as those ones footballers do before they are even 30. I think there is probably a more interesting book to be written in another 30-40 years when he's sorted his head out.

To be fair I think his book might have a bit more to hold the interest than the usual footballer/ celebrity/ famous for being famous ones. But you're right, more mature reflections in years to come will also be enlightening. Not that I would be reading them then or now, I'll just rely on our impartial press to highlight the best bits.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

That would be an autobiography wouldn't it?

If he can write, yes.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Here's another. This time from those monarchist bastards at the guardian:

Spare by Prince Harry review – dry your eyes, mate

For all he may have suffered, and despite his clear love for his wife, the Duke of Sussex’s misfiring memoir is not only tone-deaf to his privilege but at times downright bizarre

www.theguardian.com

"What kind of person insists on an air-clearing meeting with their father on the day of his father’s funeral? A myopic, self-obsessed, non-empathic kind of person, I would say. Exactly the same kind of person, in fact, who would talk about reconciliation in the same breath as they publicly slag off their family."

Personally if I want to come to a conclusion about how I feel about the content of a book is read or listen to it myself not rely somebody else doing it for me then giving me their verdict based upon any bias of their own they may hold