Prince Harry on whether any royal really wants to be king: ‘I don’t think so’

harry newsweek

Prince Harry covers the international edition of the current issue of Newsweek. It’s not a soft-focus profile of him – he actually sat down for an in-depth conversation, and he allowed Newsweek to follow him around for a few days as he did work with wounded-warrior charities, kids’ charities and the like. The Newsweek piece also quotes from unnamed royal courtiers who end up throwing a bit of shade on William and Kate. But the most notable quote comes from Harry, when he’s talking about the future of the monarchy. You can read the full piece here. Some highlights:

His mother’s funeral: “My mother had just died, and I had to walk a long way behind her coffin, surrounded by thousands of people watching me while millions more did on television. I don’t think any child should be asked to do that, under any circumstances. I don’t think it would happen today.”

The ordinary life: “My mother took a huge part in showing me an ordinary life, including taking me and my brother to see homeless people. Thank goodness I’m not completely cut off from reality. People would be amazed by the ordinary life William and I live. I do my own shopping. Sometimes, when I come away from the meat counter in my local supermarket, I worry someone will snap me with their phone. But I am determined to have a relatively normal life, and if I am lucky enough to have children, they can have one too. Even if I was king, I would do my own shopping.”

When will Harry & Megan marry?? One person close to the prince says Harry is not rushing to “get things done”—royal-speak for proposing. “They obviously get on very well and have a lot in common, but they have not known each other that long. They need to find out if they can have an ordinary relationship within a very unusual setting. I don’t think anything will happen until the end of the year.”

The future of the monarchy versus being an ordinary bloke: “It’s a tricky balancing act. We don’t want to dilute the magic….The British public and the whole world need institutions like it.”

The modern monarchy: One of the many things Harry is eager to “get on with” is an overhaul of the British monarchy—he, William and Kate appear determined to drag it into the 21st century. “The monarchy is a force for good and we want to carry on the positive atmosphere that the queen has achieved for over 60 years, but we won’t be trying to fill her boots. We are involved in modernizing the British monarchy. We are not doing this for ourselves but for the greater good of the people…. Is there any one of the royal family who wants to be king or queen? I don’t think so, but we will carry out our duties at the right time.”

“More focused” charity work: Until last year, the queen was patron of more than 600 charities, and the royal family supported 3,000. By the time William becomes king, those numbers will have plummeted, but a source close to Harry insists this is not due to laziness. “They want instead to concentrate on specific charities that they research thoroughly first and then get involved in on a regular basis. The one thing they don’t want is to be seen as a group of celebrities.” Harry seconds that. “We use our time wisely,” he says. “We don’t want to turn up, shake hands but not get involved… The queen has been fantastic in letting us choose. She tells us to take our time and really think things through.”

William, Kate & Harry. There was no filling the hole left by Diana’s death, and Harry seemed to be growing up without someone emotionally available he could lean on. Kate has helped fill some of that gap. When she and William got engaged, Harry called her the big sister he never had. He often pops into their apartment at Kensington Palace, where she cooks him a meal—roast chicken is reportedly a particular favorite. Harry and William have very different personalities. “Emotionally, they are very unalike,” a royal insider says. “Harry wears his heart on his sleeve. William is introverted and reclusive. They are bonded together by the unique position they are in and the experience of losing their mother very young. But they don’t live in each other’s pockets, and while William was at university, they didn’t see much of each other at all.” Another member of Harry’s inner circle further delineates the differences between the two princes: “William was more successful academically, but when it comes to dealing with people, Harry knocks the spots off both him and Kate, especially with children. Harry is passionate about them and is a natural, which neither William nor Kate are.”

[From Newsweek]

Here’s the thing: if William had the audacity to say “Is there any one of the royal family who wants to be king or queen? I don’t think so, but we will carry out our duties at the right time,” everyone would be in full revolt, justifiably so. So why is it different when Harry says it? My take: it’s not different. It’s equally appalling. Both Harry and William are men in their 30s, with sense and education, and if they’re both going to position themselves as reluctant – some would say “petulant” – royals, then what’s the f–king point of any of this? They should just abdicate and be done with it. I’m so disappointed that Harry seems to have bought into William’s normalcy fetish too – while it’s true that Harry lives a more “ordinary” life, he’s still a bloody prince who lives behind palace walls.

UK Team launch for Invictus Games Toronto 2017

Photos courtesy of WENN, cover courtesy of Newsweek.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

365 Responses to “Prince Harry on whether any royal really wants to be king: ‘I don’t think so’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. ArchieGoodwin says:

    I’m not sure Harry really was any different, just that he hid it better and people wanted to like him more. He’s better with people, with kids, and people see what they want to see.

      • Megan says:

        Being the monarch of the British Commonwealth is one of the most privileged positions in the world. Suggesting neither he nor William want the job is the most impolitic and ungrateful thing he has ever said.

      • bluhare says:


      • RoyalSparkle says:

        Any royal with such comments ‘making peace with the world’, is gravely ridiculous! This is not humble, hardworking Prince Harry, he never was self absorbed – like lazy Throne Idle Bill middleton.

        Potential King Henry was set up at pip PR mess of a wedding – being around those middletons – and convinced lazy petulant bill (cat) middleton deserved secret, private entitled lives at AH forest, with staff, millions of Duchy taxpayers funds luxuries lifestyle for all carole the hangers siblings and partners to have..

        Harry should stay close to his father POW. Media savvy Meghan must be shocked. And Di whining continues …he need to follow HM and get on with his duties and stop – he and whiny were well taken care of with luxuries, loved by POW HM RF. Now carol and waity turning lazy bill with the poor Di card.

    • LAK says:

      His interviews when he was in the army were so much better. They were pragmatic and humble. None of this ‘I’m a Prince’ who bestows magic on the plebs and ‘normal’ life BS.

      I remember his response to the normalcy question used to be that normal was a relative term which depended on a person’s circumstances.

      I feel his retirement from the army has left him with no counterbalance to the privileged side of his life and in the process he is absorbing William’s ideas unchecked.

      • Elaine says:

        Good point. Harry needs Army.

        I dislike the way he dismisses decades of valuable Royal work as ‘turning up and shaking hands’. That’s William-Speak for you’ll-get-one-picture-a-year-and-like-it -peasants

        How else are you supposed to cover a country of MILLIONS of people -you can’t focus on one or two things and think that’s going to cover it. Or think the press attention will make people feel connected to you.

        United Pencil Pushers of Devon need you to visit once every two years. The Butcher’s alliance of West Deptford appreciate your ‘showing up and shaking hands’.

        Imitate the Queen and you can’t go wrong. F*** this ‘modern’ b.s. F*** it I say!!

        I’m also feeling like he and Meghan have cooled. Does anyone else get that feeling? Have we lost out almost Princess Megs?!

      • Nessa nessa says:

        His interviews in the army annoyed the shit out of me & made me want to punch him in the mouth. “Killing is like a video game”? The racist names and stuff…hard pass. Prince Harry is ignorant as hell & this was just another taste of it. But like I said it didn’t annoy me as much as he usually do. What I will say is he & maybe will need someone that truly been struggling & found their way up to tell them “no, no one want to hear this”. Cause even though I get what he is saying & agree no one want to hear you whine or boast about shopping for own groceries. Or cutting down work even if it may be a good thing or reason. Especially with what has been happening in his own backyard.

        Also he need to understand certain words should not be said. It can be misconstrued as ignorant & arrogant & entitled.

      • LAK says:

        Elaine: i partially grew up in Dorset and whilst you jest about the names of those organisations, that is it in a nutshell. This is a royalist county and it’s not because of some grand, once in a lifetime-with-American-sponsorship-and-celebs-and-
        Cameras-MSM reporting charity opportunity that makes it so.

        Nessa: ‘killing is like a video game’ is a media lie. He never said those words or even alluded to them. That was a classic media made lie at a time when Harry’s media narrative was still about portraying him as the wastrel party prince.

        If you have the time, that documentary is still up on the British army website and you can view it for yourself.

        At the beginning, the VO talks about what all the apache pilots do in their downtime whilst on base awaiting a call out. VO says they play video games. Cue shots of several men, including Harry playing video game. One of the men says that Harry is very good at video games.

        Later, whilst showing off his apache helicopter, he describes the apache controls stick as being fashioned very similarly to a video game console. He shows the reporter how it fits into his hand.

        Then they discuss the cover he provides to the ground troops in the helicopter when called out. No one uses the words ‘killing’, ‘Taliban’ at any point in the video, and no one links what they do to video games beyond saying they are one of the ways the soldiers use their downtime.

        Somehow all that was summarised as ‘ Killing is like a videogame’ by the media and reported as if he actually said those words.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I think he thrives on structure, and without external structure set on him, he cannot seem to create his own. The forsaking of the bread-and-butter engagements would do more to destroy support of the monarchy than petulance IMO. Want to live in your Palace, cost 600 million a year, and only support a handful of big charities? The everyday people who support you will stop supporting you.

        If Charles can do a few big things (Prince’s Trust, Dumfries House) plus 500+ engagements a year? His sons (and their spouses) should do no less. Don’t like the job? Quit. As someone on BBC said (surprisingly) this morning, “No one is holding a gun to his head”.

      • Good points, LAK except it does Harry no favors to place his poor choices and shortcomings on the brother. Despite having vastly different personalities Harry and William have the same character. How is this even a surprise?

      • LAK says:

        Erin Lee Daniels: He may have shared those ideas all along, but the strong impression over those army years were that these were William’s voiced or implied views and ideas whilst Harry only parroted them after spending time with William.

      • bluhare says:

        Elaine/LAK: I agree. I don’t know if I’ve ranted about this here, but those “turn up and handshake” appointments are what keep them relatable. My mother still remembers when Princess Alexandra came to open a bridge in her hometown. And I remember walking with her (my mom not Alexandra!) to watch the Queen drive by when she was in Edinburgh. Those things stay with people, and while it may be just turning up and handshaking to them, they are making lifetime memories for those who see them there.

      • PrincessK says:

        I am wondering what is going on in the relationship. Rumours that he is in Toronto, but on the other hand Ascot would have been the perfect opportunity for her to be a guest in the Royal Enclosure, anyway two days to go it may still happen.

      • Sarah says:

        He doesn’t work. He does a few weeks of charity work a year and, what? 80 or 90 events for the RF. He is a brat. A petulant brat.
        I don’t even know if Meghan is still in the picture, kind of seems like she isn’t, but this should be more evidence that she should RUN!!!!!

    • Sarah says:

      Amen!!!! Harry gets all sorts of kudos here and elsewhere, but he is almost as lazy and entitled as William. He just has more charisma.
      A man in his early 30s, has no job, does 90 royalty events a year, a few weeks of charity work. Oh, dear, he must be frazzled to the bone!
      And a more “focused” royal approach?? That means fewer events. But you can bet they won’t give up any of their money and perks. They really believe the uterus they came from is different, don’t they??
      If I were British, I would be done with these younger members of the family. What a waste they are. Sad!

    • Kate says:

      I am sure the Queen felt the same way when she was young. I don’t see that there is anything wrong with saying you’re not hungry to be the king. It’s not something they’ve chosen, and that’s a fact.

  2. Amy says:

    I don’t know. To me it seems like bringing the monarchy into the 21st century includes breaking down the walls between royal and “ordinary”, which would mean choosing to live a more regular life (such as it is). Kate and Wills seem to fetishize it and show off or revel in their “normal” while making it very abnormal (baby clothes come to mind). Where as Harry, to me, seems like a guy being honest, and wanting to do some good, while still having his feet on the ground. Or maybe that’s my crush talking.

    • KitKat says:

      But royals are supposed to be “special”, not “ordinary”. Why should people keep funding their lifestyle when they’re just like you and me?

      • Addie says:

        Trouble is, they are far more ordinary than people choose to recognize. There is nothing special about them – that’s the irony. And no, monarchy is not needed in this world. Let’s admire people based on merit not inherited position.

      • KitKat says:

        I agree, a monarchy is not needed in the 21st century.

      • Ramona says:

        Their lifestyle should certainly be paired down but the British public do need to keep paying for certain things. The symbolism of an abdicated Prince unable to find a job or pay bills would be terrible for a nations self image. We all know the sun has set on the empire but my God that would be terrible for country morale. Secondly, we live in the age of Al Queda and Isis and homegrown terror and who knows what other threats. An abdicated Prince with no State security would be a sitting duck and why? Because he was born in to the wrong family. Whatever you think of these boys they remain two of Britains most high value terror targets whether they remain in the line of succession or not.

      • dodgy says:

        @kitkat – preach

        They say that you should never let daylight in on two things; magic and the monarchy. William and Harry are pretty much undermining their own places, tbh. We should just Rexit and be done with it, I guess. But stop Brexit.

      • Tan says:

        @ Ramona: but if these royals abdicate and royalty is abolished, they will just be some very rich citizens. All the princely states were officially dissolved in India in the 70s. There are ample of nawabs and princes who are active in politics and acting . Some are vain enough to still refer to themselves as princes but most of them afford their own security and are not important enough to be targeted.

        Once it is over, the glamour goes away in 10/15 years

      • Anitas says:

        @KitKat – I think it’s down to accountability, for me at least. It’s more infuriating having to buy into the narrative that they’re somehow “special” when really they’ve just had the fortune to be born to a family enjoying privileges granted by the public. Knowing that, I wouldn’t mind them living off taxpayers money, even if it is a far more luxurious lifestyle than I can afford for example, if they were held accountable to how they actually contribute to society. The privilege of being a royal should come with a job description. If Kate for example doesn’t meet the requirements of a certain number of hours working in public service per year, then she can’t be addressed as the Duchess and can’t have her expenses paid by public money. I would find that acceptable. Alright, you can have the privilege to be born or married into a certain status, but you have to work to keep it.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I don’t think they’re supposed to be “special”, they’re supposed to do a special job especially well. That job does not require them to live in multiple luxury homes and spend $200,000 a year on new clothes. They need to be well-educated, dedicated, hard-working, and secured because they are targets. The trappings of royalty? Leave that for the ceremonial visits as part of the job, but the 1 percenter lifestyle they lead in private is by no means necessary. As Anitas writes, there needs to be accountability and consequences if they fail to meet work targets or expectations.

    • Lookit says:

      Would they be giving the money back? Or paying taxes on Buckingham Palace then?

    • PrincessK says:

      Not too good to break down too many barriers between being royal and ordinary, royalty needs an element of mystique to exist.

    • tigerlily says:

      I think we can lay the blame for the “normal” & “ordinary” fetish at Diana’s feet. She was far from either of those things but insisted on taking the boys to McDonalds, Disneyland etc. I think she gave them delusions that they could be normal/ordinary. Diana was an entitled(and titled!) woman who grew up going to private boarding schools, had nannies rather than her mother caring for her and her siblings, her father was a wealthy aristocrat, her grandmother was the Queen Mum’s lady in waiting. Not normal or ordinary.

      As far as Harry’s comment about no one wants to be King. Well, the current Queen’s father was appalled when his brother abdicated leaving him to take the throne. Many believe the stress shortened his life. When he became King and it was apparent that Princess Elizabeth would one day be Queen, a very young Princess Margaret said to her: “Poor you.” So I can’t shade Harry for being honest.

    • Aurelia says:

      They need to be figure head royals off the state payroll like some euro royal houses.

  3. guest says:

    He shouldn’t have done this interview, the comments on the Internet are brutal.

    • LAK says:

      I agree.

      I normally defend him, and i’m horrified by this interview.

      So many points to unpack, none in his favour.

      • ZIZABET says:

        I was also disappointed by the interview.

        I think Harry is as spoilt as William is. But just like his mom was, he was able to show the public what they wanted to see and hear. But his true self is gradually seeping through, I believe

      • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

        ITA – i actually had to check which Prince was being interview, this has Williams awful attitude all over it. Sad that it seems that Twit and Twat are rubbing off on him.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I agree, LAK. Doesn’t look good for the royal team.

      • Christin says:

        Just my humble American cousin opinion, but he sounds like a have cake and eat it, too’ attitude. Let me keep the perks, but be ‘normal’.

        But is it completely surprising that he isn’t the polar opposite of his brother after all? I’m a bit surprised until thinking about the years of shaping they shared.

      • ickythump says:

        I am horrified by this interview – the ingratitude is appalling – think he’s taking Whiny Bills lead here and they’re more alike than they are admitting. Prince Charles must be livid/hurt/appalled as well as he didn’t even merit a mention……god, talk about shooting yourself in the foot. HM has indulged them for far too long “letting them take their own time” to decide what they can be arsed doing has been a huge mistake. Never mind modernising the monarchy they’ll be killing it stone dead if they carry on like this.

      • CynicalAnn says:

        Yes-ugh. What a mistake this interview was. I’m also struck by how both William and Harry leave their father out whenever they’re discussing the monarchy, the Queen’s service, what they would like their paths to be.

      • LAK says:

        Christin: Some things were the same in their upbringing, but many things were not. The heir vs spare upbringing is a real thing. The difference in personality and how they react to things. The completely divergent approach to life after William went to St Andrews.

        It’s only now, 2yrs after leaving the army is he showing a similar attitude as William.

        Perhaps it was always there and only now has he gained the confidence to let it all hang out despite not having heir protection like William. Perhaps he feels the public goodwill he has earned innoculates him against incurring public censure.

        Either way, it’s not good.

        CynicalAnn: me too.

      • PrincessK says:

        Why are you horrified at him? You should be horrified at the media who have taken his comments totally out of context, knowing that most people cannot be bothered to read the FULL interview. What he said was quite innocuous IMO. He was just stating the blind obvious, none of them want to be King, it is something thrust upon them by birth and they have to deal with it.

      • LAK says:

        PrincessK: i read entire interview long before it became a DM clickbait headline.

        There are numerous wrong notes in it and if i were his PR agent would have removed them before publishing.

        There are ways to say what he said without giving strong impression of ingratitude, resentment, petulance and entitlement. With a side order of doing us a favour in carrying out the few duties he (and WK) does.

        Especially in a week where events have put a spotlight on the inequalities of his neighbourhood.

    • Pandy says:

      Yes, I agree. So step down and earn your living like a non royal. You’ll really love to shop when you’re on a budget.

      • I’ve come here way late in the day but must post a comment here I just can’t not say something about his absurdity.I shop for myself is this almost 33 year olds definition of being normal..Kiss the public Love and adoration bye.You sound as daft as your brother

    • minx says:

      Yes, don’t know why Harry gets a pass. To me he’s only marginally better than William, in both looks and personality.

  4. Indira says:

    Well maybe it’s time to abolish the monarchy if no one wants to be king or queen. Oh right, won’t happen because they still want to live like kings and queens.

    • INeedANap says:

      It’s time to abolish the monarchy because the idea that someone born into a role by “Divine Providence” is best suited for running anything is preposterous, classist nonsense that hasn’t been needed since the Middle Ages.

      But I’m an American and I find the entire concept offensive.

      • Royalsparkle says:

        After king Charles. King Edward and Cpnsort Sophie family maybe the better (uninterrupted by age) way to head. By passi g whi y bill.

        Harry seem to be sent to make bill look goid and take up for his entitled laxy lifestyle. But bad mouthing their wealthy luxurious status is not the way. Convinced tbis interview is to build up lazy whiny billy and cat middleton lpetulance. Just as ge is hanging with HM to have her goidwill pass to lazy bill middleton. Harry hardwork charities is being sacrificed to build up laxy bill. As if we are so unintelligent.

      • Clare says:

        Roaylsparkle – do you really think Andrew would let the title go to Edward? NOT A CHANCE. That creep is worse than all the other combined.

      • Addie says:

        It’s offensive to anyone who thinks.

      • VSK says:

        INeedANap- you said it perfectly. I am Canadian and see ZERO need in monarchy.

      • Luca76 says:

        Totally agree it’s an awful tradition but it’s not my business because it’s not my country,
        I find them entertaining only for the gossip.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I’m losing enthusiasm for Sophie. She’s been solid for a decade, but there has been a change in the last few years. She’s seen the writing on the wall, that she and her husband will be thrown out soon. She’s been playing up to W&K and engaging in the negative behavior with them (Remembrance Day, laughing at William’s offensive Wimbledon joke). I think she’s jockeying for position, trying to convince W&K to convince Charles to keep her and Edward on the payroll.

      • Nota,
        Good call. Do you think Charles has influenced Edward and Sophie so they know which side their bread is buttered on?

      • notasugarhere says:

        I don’t know if Charles has influenced them in any way, other than getting the message out there that he and his line will be it. I don’t see how he can remove Andrew without also removing Edward and Sophie, although God help him if he tries to get rid of Anne against her will. Unless he figures a way around it. If W&K lean on him to keep E&S, it could happen.

        If the rumored plan is true? Edward and Sophie’s life at Bagshot might be coming to an end. They have the lease through 2048, but they have to keep paying the rent. If HM is subsidizing them through either the Sovereign Grant or her personal funds? If Charles pulls those funds, they’re out. I expect Edward to get a big personal inheritance when HM and PP pass, but not necessarily big enough to waste on renting Bagshot out of their own pockets for another 30 years.

        If W, K, and H don’t want to do the bread-and-butter? I can see Edward and Sophie making a play for those engagements, as the last remaining “old guard” at the time. To ease the transition from lots of local engagements to apparently none. That would see them through to retirement still supported by the taxpayers.

      • Nota
        All plausible points. Well said.

      • BeamMeUpScottie says:

        @Nota, very good points.
        The organisational politics with these folks and the jockeying for power and influence is fascinating to watch.

      • PrincessK says:

        I also think that Sophie is trying a bit too hard lately, I was wondering why but now this discussion has enlightened me. She has been working awfully hard doing all the royal engagements the senior royal’s would find too mundane or dreary. Poor girl she is working hard to make sure her family stay out in front once the Queen goes. The House of Windsor is indeed a house of intrigue.

      • RoyalSparkle says:

        Nota – You have a point –
        Countess Sophie seem to be a… kissing a lot to whiny and waity recently or before. But we all know nothing is set in stone.

        There was no Reply button at most comments – I also agree Prince Andrew would object, but he seem to get along with the young Edward. Republic after King Charles.

        It’s a sickening thought of whiny bill getting his middleton hands on the Duchy – other wealth of the RF.

      • Sophie is reputedly very close to TQ. She and Edward, after a rocky start, have always been hard working and lowkey. Perhaps she is stepping up now to help lighten the load for TQ, and getting closer to Whiny and Waity in order to gently nudge them in the direction of more work. Leading by example, especially as Will and Kate undoubtedly consider TQ old and out of date, and their relationship with Charles doesn’t appear any better. Sophie and Edward, while 20 years older, are nearer to Will’s generation and might be able to influence him. I do not believe Sophie or Edward want to be King and Queen Consort, but have a strong sense of duty and loyalty to the Crown. Or perhaps they are, unlike the younger generation of Royals, aware of their good fortune in life and the responsibilities that go with that, and behave accordingly.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I think Sophie knows that she is HM’s favorite but has no place in Charles’s heart or in his future plans. She needs to act now to ensure herself and her husband jobs in the future, hence cozying up to W&K.

    • annabanana says:

      Exactly they should just all abdicate or just abolish the monarchy. They are acting like it’s such a burden without mentioning what they gain from it. They need for the monarchy to continue because they will be nothing without it and considering their lifestyle they will have nothing in a short span of time.

      • Addie says:

        They would need to live on their huge personal wealth and manage accordingly. You know, like everyone else. There is no need for British taxpayers to subside them further. The Empire is no more, Commonwealth countries will peel off after the Queen dies. The monarchy may be a symbol of past glories but it’s now an expensive anachronism. The sad truth is that the BRF is kept to the point of never being able to afford the lifestyle lavished on them by the public and also unable (by lack of resilience and ability) to stand on their own, much like birds whose wings have been clipped. Look at William, for example: an average student at Eton, a poor student at university (barely attended, drunk and shagging Kate), couldn’t cut it in the RAF, didn’t complete the bespoke Cambridge course, got bored with the co-pilot work.

      • Elaine says:

        Yes, why do they always act as if they are the ONLY ONES IN THE WORLD who have to wake up early and do stuff?!

        Earth to Billionaire Princes, everyone has a role in life. Putting on a suit and shaking the hands of someone who bows and scraps before you, pathetically grateful for your attention is not a burden. Stop acting as if it is.

        And no. You get no points for buying food and being afraid someone takes a picture of you while doing so. Oh the horror! Will no one think of the children?!!

        Stop giving interviews.
        Just. Stop.

      • CynicalCeleste says:

        Au contraire, please boys, please keep doing the interviews. The public deserves to know the people to whom they grant the world’s greatest privileges and ‘soft power’.

        Now he will need to cue the royal engagement…. 3, 2, 1…. and like sheep, we will herd back into the effing magical fairytale of beauty and riches and forget these words ever happened. Peoples prefer inertia.

      • PrincessK says:

        @Addie, that comment is a bit unfair, most university students get drunk and shag. It is often the first taste of adult freedom being at university.

  5. perplexed says:

    I thought he sounded annoying here. First time I’ve thought that.

    Why are royals giving interviews? They always flunk when they do. Even Camilla, who I thought was smart enough to keep silent, sounded irritating a few weeks ago when she gave an interview.

    • LAK says:

      Perplexed: Me too vis a vis annoying and entitled and I am a Prince.

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      I don’t see how they could give an interview and not have it come off sounding odd because the reality is they have done nothing to deserve their status but be born or marry into that particular status. And yet it’s “great to be king” so they buy into it as any of us probably would because how do you turn down the perks, especially when you’re told from birth they are your right?

      Very strange. As an American and as a Canadian, I just don’t see what purpose they serve. Even actors work for their celebrity status. I enjoy learning about the royal lifestyle, houses, jewels etc. but don’t for a minute think it means anything other than they are rich people being rich.

      • LAK says:

        Harry has given interviews in the past that managed not to come off as humble with the privilege. This one came off as privilege with no humble.

      • RoyalSparkle says:

        Set up!!!

        BP CH must approved such interviews/questions and answers ….this was part of the plan building whiny petulant lazy Throne Idle bill middleton to look good – Prince Harry was used.

        Sounds nothing like him. How could he have these poor us/me complaints with Invictus Games in mind and on the horizon….no!

        I have no sympathy – heck, make them live in the likes of that rotten burning mess of tower – decent medical, income. People love and appreciate Prince Harry – I see no reason for his comments (he is guarded from the inordinary – attack); whiny bill kat is another story.

  6. ls_boston says:

    You know Prince Charles said that same thing back in ~1970 or so right?

    I don’t think it is appalling and I can see their point. They live in a fishbowl and perhaps it got tiresome.

    • Snowflake says:

      Yeah, it must get tiring, never knowing who you can trust. Anything you do, someone might be sneaking pictures. Constant camera in your face. Not being able to do anything without people watching you. When in public, knowing you always have to be on your best behavior. I can see how it would get old. But he knows it’s his duty. And so, he’ll do it. I don’t there’s anything wrong with what he said. Maybe it sounds ungrateful, but everyone complains about their job.

    • Merritt says:

      Prince Charles had the luck to say it prior to internet comments over-analyzing every single thing he said.

    • LAK says:

      Charles said the same thing, but in a way that created the woe is me narrative around him. He was pilloried for years about it until he started to show a different attitude or employ better PR.

      • Maria says:

        LAK, I don’t know if you read Sally Bedell’s latest book on Charles, it doesn’t show him in a very good light. The whining about his life, his position, his future etc is unending. Thankfully he is much better now.

      • LAK says:

        Maria, i haven’t read it, but my friend did. She says Charles comes across very badly even where she’s defending his choices.

        That said, i grew up thinking of him as that woe is me Prince. There just seemed to be an air of melancholy and ennui all the time.

    • CynicalCeleste says:

      What’s extremely tiresome is the trope that shopping for groceries makes one normal.
      And heaven forbid one of the royal subjects should try to snap a photo while he’s trying to be ordinary.

      • perplexed says:

        Yeah, the groceries comment was funny.

      • Elaine says:

        If he *really* wants to be normal while shopping for groceries, he needs to put everything he wants into his shopping cart. Count up his money.

        Then put half of it back.

        Cause he can’t afford it.

        Those 8 pound artisanal cherries at Whole Foods don’t pay for themselves. Unless your Mother is named Carole Middleton and taught you how to marry up, and use taxpayer money to pay for your exotic fruit, you. can’t. have. them.

        That’s real.

      • Aren says:

        @Elaine, you’re so right.
        When on the supermarket, I do keep counting money while I’m still on the aisle, just to make sure I have enough.

      • Lady D says:

        Cherries are currently $8 per pound Canadian, which in British money is 4.77 pounds per pound. I can’t believe my laptop doesn’t have the pound symbol.

      • bluhare says:

        £ is alt-0163 on my computer if that helps, Lady D.

        Haha, and I keep tabs on my bill while I’m shopping too!

      • PrincessK says:

        Oh please! This is so unkind. Harry and other members of the RF will never experience what it is to be ‘normal’ and maybe doing a bit of personal shopping (with a bodyguard in tow) is the closest he can get to what he feels is normal, don’t mock him for that. The truth is he will never know what normal is and we should not ridicule him for trying. I remember Diana saying how elated she felt whenever she was able to walk along a pavement (sidewalk). Conversely, we will never know what it is like to be them, therefore we are not really in good positions to throw judgements.

    • WeAreAllMadeofStars says:

      I know. He gives an honest interview and people complain. Get a grip, people, and find something else to focus on.

      • perplexed says:

        I don’t think royals should really give interviews about themselves. Otherwise, they’re too much like the rest of us.

        Has a royal ever come across as likeable after talking about themselves? I can’t think of one. Charles and Diana both sounded annoying after they talked about themselves in their interviews. Harry’s interview is no different. Camilla sounded annoying a few weeks ago too when she said how hard it was for her during that time she was accused of having an affair. Any time I’ve seen Fergie complain about not being invited to Will’s wedding, she sounds annoying. Honestly, royals and interviews never go well.

        And people have a right complain about the royals when they’re being annoying since nothing they have is really earned.

      • notasugarhere says:

        CP Victoria of Sweden just gave an interview for her 40th and it was pretty good. Not earth shaking but good.

      • perplexed says:

        I should amend that to ask: has a British royal ever sounded good during an interview when talking about themselves? It usually goes awry.

      • WeAreAllMadeofStars says:

        So you’re coming from the British perspective of effectively wanting the royals to maintain an air of movie star mystique. I think you’d be better served by piercing the veil of illusion and seeing what and who it is that you’re really supporting, and understanding what their lives are really like and what they’re really like as individuals. Only then can the country decide whether the concept of royalty is worth supporting into the future, and for how long. Informed decisions are always best.

      • suze says:

        Well, I read the whole thing and I wonder how honest he was trying to be. It sounded as if he was trying to be rather detached, and the effect just didn’t work. Rather than coming off as thoughtful, the effect was rather off putting.

        And honestly, that writer did him no favors. It was written like a Tiger Beat fangirl interview.

    • Anitas says:

      I would never want to be in that position tbh, regardless of the luxuries they’re surrounded with. But if you go on about duty and hardships, at least acknowledge the privileges and be thankful for them.

      • BeamMeUpScottie says:

        Actully he went on to say as much in the piece, but that sentiment has gottem lost in the more eyecathing parts of the interview.

      • Nessa nessa says:

        He did….he literally said he had to get his head out his ass & listen to people about this & understood his privilege. And how fired up he is to use his privilege to help people. That’s why I said the overall interview didn’t leave me thinking “he is so ungrateful”. Though I knew people would focus on that little part.

    • hannah says:

      A fishbowl and never being able to choose your own destiny . Imagine , what if William for example had wanted to become a doctor , would he have been able to ?

      • LAK says:

        I’m sure he would have been allowed because look at his desire to fly helicopters. So far no one is stopping him.

      • RoyalSparkle says:

        I agree!

        Whiny enjoys his status, entitlement privileges much more than the rest. He seem somewhat annoyed impatient with HM visiting the fire victims.

        In uni, didn’t he use his father power to ban the media -reporting about him. He could have become a royal surgeon anything, had he wanted – and was smart enough, but he cant even select a decent bride – finish his Agriculture Duchy related courses due to laziness and entitlement.

        Diana lives on … in her bashing of the RF/ Monarchy. Most other EU Royals show respect appreciate their status and the marry in seem always aware of the grandeur they are blessed with. Not the BRs (except Princess Bea and Eugenie I feel would love appreciate a bit of the status and do well with it like PR Anne).

  7. Odell says:

    I think it’s quite obvious that William doesn’t want to be king. He often looks uninterested and like he wants to be somewhere else.

    • Ramona says:

      Nobody (except maybe Chuck who has something to prove to his emotionally unavailable parents) wants it. Who would, honestly?

    • Mamunia says:

      William makes it so obvious that he doesn’t want to be king, it’s appalling. Reading the comments section in the Daily Mail makes it equally obvious people are unhappy. They may just get there wish.

  8. Clare says:

    I know people around here love Harry – but as someone who pays for his lifestyle (please don’t start about them having their own wealth – where did it come from? Who still pays for upkeep of their palaces? Their security? Travel? Come on.), I find his comments incredibly offensive.

    Don’t want to be royal? Think royal duties are sucha pain? Think being royal compromises your ability to have a ‘normal’ life? Abdicate. Give up your title. Walk away. Get a *real* job – not one which equals putting on a nice suit and shaking some hands, but a REAL job, like a nurse, a teacher, a firefighter. Then come talk to me about the sacrifices your little flowers have to make.

    No you brats don’t get to have a ‘normal’ life. Either suck it up, or walk away.

    I’m, getting really sick of this ‘oh poor me’ routine from both these brothers. Ungrateful, entitled brats.

    • JustBitchy says:

      Clare, thanks. I was always a Harry apologist. Now I am not.

    • Mata says:

      Exactly the way I feel about it. They really don’t seem to grasp how much they’re compensated for those pesky royal duties.

    • Cynical says:


      Do they ever worry about having enough money for mortgage/rent? For groceries? For bills?

      Do they ever have to plan their vacations for a measly two weeks in a year, because that’s the only time off they get? Do they ever have to worry about what kind of vacation they can afford and sometimes just take staycations where they spend time cleaning/organizing their lives because there aren’t servants to do it for them?!

      No, I didn’t bloody think so. SHUT UP, you sound spoiled and out of touch.

      Also, “my mom kept us normal, even taking us to see homeless people” – are you even serious?! Like they’re zoo animals, and not human beings who have hardships you can’t even fathom!

      Sorry Harry, stop talking. Your privilege is showing.

      • Dlo says:

        @cynical 👏👏👏👏👏 all valid points I so agree

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        One of these times where the Queen’s mantra “never Complain, never Explain”, would be well applied. Harry, take a lesson from your Gran. We’re glad you’re dealing w/ your issues and finally acting like somewhat of a grownup. Now get on with it.

        Like everyone says, no one is tying any of them to the post. There are enough in the line of the British succession that everyone in the Queen’s immediate family, Charles excepted, wanted to walk away from this circus, there is nothing legally holding them back – nothing that a trip to a lawyer, and probably some little speech, couldn’t fix.

        He wants normal, he can GET normal. But what he really wants is not to BE normal, but to play at being normal. That right there is the disconnect.

        He wants credit for being like the mundanes, without actually being one -and flaunting that! I mean, remember the drinking days? How many people go out and spend six figures in one night’s spree? This is supposed to be accepted as reaching out? It’s an insult.

    • dodgy says:

      @Clare – same, same. If they are so hell bent on being normal, walk away.

    • Maria says:

      Clare, agree. Shades of uncle David who at least abdicated.

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        Yeah, but even David was forced out. He was just like these two – wanted the trappings of Royalty and privilege, but did not want to really work for it. Parliament was up in arms because he was such an unforgivably lazy dilettante.

    • Cee says:

      Yup. They’re out of touch and they don’t even know it. Their PR team needs to go because this interview was NEVER going to be a good idea.

      Also – perhaps they should give up some of their perks and be given money and time off according to how much money they raise and how many real hours they work.

      • SoulSPA says:

        @Cee ITA. I would add: evaluate the impact of their actions. It’s easy to say that a charity event they participated at raised a certain sum of money. But the hours they worked? How many hours would have Chutney “work” in terms of thinking and deciding what to wear, the time to make her (mostly) bad make up and hair, all the expensive travel (I hear they travel by helicopter too), etc. I don’t believe it takes 40 hours to prepare their participation to an event. They have teams of dozens people involved.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Diana’s life wasn’t everyday either, but was itself steeped in privilege which they don’t seem to understand. Yes, her parents divorced and she had an unhappy childhood. It was still a lifestyle of hunting, country houses, and finishing school in Switzerland.

      • SoulSPA says:

        And with all the money and privilege, why not spend some on therapy to help them solve their issues, become resilient and set an example for others in more unfortunate situations? And do real work. I can’t help thinking of people that suffer and still have to go on and work to pay the bills. Some with no support whatsoever.

    • Snowflake says:

      Everybody complains about their job, right? I know I do. Think about the fishbowl existence they have to live. At some point, you prob wish you could be anonymous for a moment, not always have someone watching you live your life. And judging. It’s a duty they have to do, I don’t think any of us would want to do it. I would rather be poor and have a private life.

      • suze says:

        I don’t complain about my job to the people who pay me because I need my job and I don’t make stupid mistakes like that.

        Harry should be careful with his words.

    • Sarah says:

      I agree. The veil is off of Harry. I started to think he was a petulant brat when he complained about the media and Meghan, and then when he acted like a two year old at that wedding in Jamaica, supposedly cause paps were there. He seems like a real jerk. Just like his brother.

      And, yes, @snowflake, they don’t have privacy when out, but they have big estates and castles and private islands they can fly to to avoid the peasants. They are able to buy plenty of privacy.

  9. Royalsparkle says:

    This article suggest, Harry is covering explaining whiny billy petulance to his role never mind the millions of Duchy tax payers finds into supporting, bill waity and his family of 4 plus middletons family siblings partners hanger ons.

  10. Olga says:

    “People would be amazed by the ordinary life William and I live.” – Sure, Harry *eyeroll* … what planet are you from?

    • Anne says:

      I have a ordinary live and you know what Harry, I don’t travel to Africa, Norway, Jamaica, I don’t have so long work-breaks, and endless vacation, I don’t have millions on my bank account, privet jets, nice house.
      Don’t make my laught Harry

    • SoulSPA says:

      You made me laugh!! LOL. They are delusional. All that privilege and most likely expensive education have not helped them (I include Bill and Chutney) think and be critical. I must admit that I used to like Harry when comparing him to his brother, but I have changed my mind. He’s as insensitive and insincere and arrogant like Willies. The difference being that Harry shows a bit more interest and does a little bit more. And no, being on two tours is not a big deal when thinking of the thousands of young men and women who serve in the forces, do not benefit from specific intel protection and who may not receive mental and other medical care support once they end their tours. And I agree also with a previous comment about not having to make this interview. Comments are indeed brutal.

    • Maria says:

      Problem is, they have no clue as to what ordinary is.

      • Citresse says:

        No, they will never understand ordinary.

      • CynicalAnn says:

        Right. And is that their fault? No. How would they know anything different? You would think he would have learned from the bad PR his brother gets not to complain. Either suck it up or abdicate.

      • CynicalCeleste says:

        A lack of self-awareness is their fault.

      • RoyalSparkle says:

        Going to fast food – riding water slides – and the likes. Vacations Di showed them – Im beginning to feel Di did more damage to these 30 somethings than at first thought.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I don’t think they live an ordinary life, but within that they do ordinary things which some find surprising. There are probably people who are amazed at the idea that any royals do anything everyday.

      Stories of Fergie living in BP, ordered to keep the curtains shut for tourist photos, never getting a hot meal because food had to be walked a mile from the kitchen (she wasn’t allowed in) to their apartment. Diana’s stories about how she had to stop being in the Highgrove kitchen with staff because it made the staff uncomfortable. If that is what you are used to from the BRF, then stories of Harry shopping out of the bargain ready made lunch meals bin at Waitrose might be surprising.

      Joachim of Denmark has always seemed one of the most “snooty” royals out there, and I do think he is. As a result of the strange gift of a huge farm to him when he was a kid, he’s now independently wealthy since he sold the farm. Turns out, they don’t have a nanny for their two young kids. They schedule their work so one of them is home, or they hire a baby sitter.

      • suze says:

        Then he should say, “I do some ordinary things.”

        Precision in words is important.

        Joachim seems like a bit of an ass but he does seem happy with his second marriage, so I believe he wouldn’t have an issue hanging out with the kids while Marie is out and about.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I agree with that. Am pointing out there remain grownups who think royals run around in tiaras all day and are supposed to dress like fashion models, etc. Those types are amazed at the idea of everyday things being done by royals.

    • PrincessK says:

      Harry and other members of the RF will never experience what it is to be ‘normal’ The truth is he will never know what normal is and we should not ridicule him for trying. We will never know what it is like to be them, therefore we are not really in good positions to throw judgements.

      • Sarah says:

        When you are paying someone to do work, and they don’t, and they complain, those that pay the bills have every right to judge and even fire them.
        If their life is so burdensome, they should walk away with only the money Diana left them. Nothing from the govt. That won’t last too long with the way they live!! Polo, trips to Norway and Jamaica, Range Rovers, security.
        Good luck, Harry and Wills.

  11. SoulSPA says:

    I do not want to seem insensitive to Harry’s and Willies’ pain regarding their sad family circumstances. But I wish the conversation around the loss of Diana stopped. IMHO they milk it all they can to gain sympathy and there is A LOT they should do in order for me to change my opinion. Harry too seems insincere about his “ordinary life”. He’s got no ordinary life but unlike other offspring of rich families, he’s got a title. That means duty to serve. He’s not doing enough. So stop talking and trying to relate to us the people. No one believes you.

    • Harla Jodet says:

      Oh thank goodness, I thought I was the only one who’s had enough of the conversations about the loss of Diana, thanks SoulSPA. I’m not in any way insensitive but yes, her boys seem to reference her when they are trying to gain sympathy or explain why they don’t do much even with the few charities they have.

      • SoulSPA says:

        Thanks for your nice commentm Harla Jodet.

      • Ramona says:

        When has he ever brought up the fact that being made to walk for ten minutes behind his dead mother in full view of the worlds cameras and thousands of people was cruel? These guys have actually been very restrained on discussing their trauma and their ahole of a father. If they werent they would address every subsequent publication and “documentary” with stories clearly fed through their dad and his courtiers to justify his mistress/wife by attacking their dead mother. What kind of father asks his kids to walk behind their dead mothers coffin in the most televised moment of a decade??? Oh right, the type who then eliminates conversation on grief so that his already beleagured sons end up with no outlets until they begin to professionally address it in their adulhood.

        When William started hanging with the Middletons, I knew it was because they provide an emotional foundation that he never got his from his father and the royal family. And going by this article Harry gravitates towards Kate for the same reason. Whatever Charles accomplishes in his short reign, he FAILED as a father. If I seem angry, its because I watched that entire funeral day in 1997 and even though my kids were a little older, I imagined in that circumstance and I saw red. I lost all respect for their grandmother and the little I had left for their father that day. What a cold disgusting family. I wouldnt let that lot near George and Charlotte either.

      • LAK says:

        Ramona: on the point about walking behind the coffin….it wasn’t as cut and dried as that. It was put to them as an option, not as a fait accompli. Only when Philip offered to walk with them as support did the boys finally say yes.

        History is being rewritten on this point, even by Harry, when there are many people who worked behind the scenes who confirm this point.

        Ps: that doesn’t mean that i agree with the boys walking behind the coffin, and especially seeing little Harry breakdown when they were walking through the horseguards archway, but this wasn’t a decision forced on the boys.

      • Sharon Lea says:

        I believe this is the first and only time Harry (or William for that matter) has ever spoken on walking behind his mother’s casket. Many people at the time thought it was cruel. He was probably asked specifically about that day for the interview.

      • perplexed says:

        I thought it was Prince Philip that asked them to walk behind the coffin (although as pointed above, it looks like they were given an option, not an order).

        I tend to put the blame more on the public than the royals for the public nature of that funeral. I think the royals would have been fine with a private funeral. But the public was demanding some kind of public spectacle. Had there not been a public funeral, everyone would have blamed the royals for being cruel to her memory and not showing her due respect. The public wanted something akin to a state funeral for Diana, and, well, state funerals are exposed. The alternative could have been to have a private funeral, but the consequence of that might have been dismissive of how important she was on a a state level.

        I suppose I will come off as dismissive of Harry, but his mother wasn’t an ordinary lady. I know he was a child when he had to publicly grieve, but the public nature of a state funeral is not unprecedented. Jackie Kennedy had to walk behind her husband’s coffin in front of the whole world after her husband was assassinated. Different things are expected of people in their position. Jackie had her 3 year old son salute his dad’s coffin. I know he couldn’t have been fully aware of what’s going on, but to some degree Caroline must have been aware, and those kids went through a worse trauma with having to live their lives knowing tape is out there of their dad being shot.

        Funerals, both public and private, have a sense of ritual attached to them. So I think Harry actually would have regretted it if he hadn’t walked behind the coffin. Do I think he absolutely HAD to do it? No. But funerals are kind of weird in general, and there are things you are expected to do as a marker of respect to the dead. If I were him, I’d be more upset that my uncle hi-jacked the funeral to put the spotlight on himself (especially when he didn’t do anything to help her out when she was alive).

        I also don’t know why he thinks things would be different today. The media landscape has gotten 100 times worse.

      • Luca76 says:

        ‘It wasn’t a decision forced on the children’
        Are you kidding me?
        They were kids. They just lost their mother. They were asked several times by the authority figures in their life to put themselves in an awful situation at the most vulnerable point in their lives. They shouldn’t have been asked. It shouldn’t have happened.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Let’s not leave Charles Spencer out of the Guilty, Table for Many party. Refused to support Diana in life and wouldn’t let her live at Althorp after the divorce; played the grieving younger brother “supporting her” after her death, from games around the funeral to profiting off her legacy.

        Early reports were he was insisting on walking behind her coffin solo, no members of the royal family allowed. I wouldn’t put it past him to have tried to get his nephews to walk with him and without any other members of the royal family. There was also the early story that Harry thought they should walk, so William eventually agreed as well.

      • Ramona says:

        Harry, the person who lived it says he was “made” to do it and I believe him over Chucks PR. But even taking the massaged narrative, its still unconscionable that a family would ok that spectacle. This “option” should never ever ever have been presented to those children. Period. Ever! Children dont have the mind to understand that choice and certainly not while grieving their mum. Children are also eager to please and a domineering grandfather signalling that he would do it if they did makes it all worse. What the f-is wrong with those people? A good father would have dismissed the subject off hand, regardless of who raised it, he was their sole remaining guardian. He should have been on guard. He failed his children.

        And is one of the commenters really comparing a grown woman walking behind her husbands coffin with a 12 year old doing the same? Ritual my ass. No child should have the worst day of their life displayed for public spectacle. Are people completely devoid of empathy? Imean I know their father and his family are stone cold robots but actual human beings here should not need to have this explained. Pretend that was your child.

      • Citresse says:

        I was surprised any of them agreed to walk behind Diana’s casket. I mean firstly Charles was actually frightened and had concerns of being assassinated. Diana’s brother wasn’t exactly close to the BRF, the boys were traumatized, and Philip wasn’t impressed by Diana’s behaviour that summer of 97. It was quite remarkable the funeral turned out as grand as it did considering the Queen felt otherwise ie- she really felt it should have been a private Spencer funeral.

      • LAK says:

        Ramona: i’m not quoting Charles PR on this point. There were other people there who worked with the family and or the funeral.

        How Charles PR sold the situation to the public is separate to what was happening behind the scenes.

      • perplexed says:

        “And is one of the commenters really comparing a grown woman walking behind her husbands coffin with a 12 year old doing the same? Ritual my ass.”

        Yes, I did. Because what I’m saying is that a televised state funeral is not unprecedented. That was my point. (My point isn’t that an 11 year old should be expected to handle things as well as a 31 year old, but rather that Diana’s funeral was not unprecedented in terms of spectacle). Diana’s funeral was the not first live funeral televised to the world. Most likely, it won’t be the last (for reasons that are completely unclear to me and will probably remain unclear to me even after it’s been explained to me 100 times, Celine Dion’s husband had a state funeral and that thing was televised all over the place with her kids in tow. I don’t get it, because I don’t consider her husband to have been something magical to the public, but there it is.).

        Also, although Jackie Kennedy was grown, her husband was ASSASSINATED. What she (and her children) went through is something that is exceptionally rare – rarer than what William and Harry had to go through. Yet she was expected to keep the country together and hold it together for everyone. And her children, who were much younger than Harry and William, were expected to take part in the spectacle. Do I think they should have go through that public nature of grief? No, but I also do think that if you want to consider yourself “important” to the world and would most likely want a state funeral conveying your sense of how important you were in life, then most likely strange things are going to be asked of your kids on that day.

        State funerals are ritualistic, yes. Even private ones are to some degree. Why else do we have pall-bearers? Is any of that really necessary? Not really, but it’s part of the ritualistic function of a funeral. A casket could easily be wheeled out instead, but you have people perform certain roles because it’s part of the ritual of what goes on that day. Funerals and weddings wouldn’t exist if they didn’t serve some ritualistic purpose. And state funerals take that sense of ritual to another level. Diana could have had a private funeral, but the purpose of her funeral being elevated to a state level was to express how important she was to her country. And, honestly, I think she would have expected a state funeral for herself. There’s no way I think Diana, master of symbolism and public courting, would have wanted a private funeral for herself. She wanted to be seen as royal, so I think she would have wanted a funeral that expressed some connection to her level of “importance” in “society.” (I also think she would have been mad at her brother for playing out some kind of psychodrama on the world stage instead of keeping the focus on her.)

        I also have admitted that I am being outright dismissive of Harry on this point, so I don’t expect anyone to actually think I’m being anything but.

      • perplexed says:

        To clarify, I don’t think Diana’s funeral was officially referred to as a state funeral, but I think the public expected the funeral ceremony to hit that level in terms of pomp and pageantry because of her connection to the public and royal life. In hindsight, maybe everybody regrets that that was what was given, but at the time, that’s what everybody, especially the public, wanted for her to convey that, you know, she wasn’t a “nobody.”

        At the time, people expected the flags to go down for her as if she were the prime minister.

      • I’m with Luca. You don’t ask someone to do something several times if their first answer was yes. The spin on this makes me shake my head. There are sources that make it clear that the boys were coerced and wheedled into that death walk. Liz, Phil and Charles were 100% convinced that there would be mass riots and mob chaos. According to one unofficial royal author Charles wrote just-in-case last letters to his children and Camilla. Those young boys were trotted out like lambs to appease and emotionally distract the crowds because yeah, adorable. This was also reportedly the last straw for Diana’s family. They were horrified about this and it fueled the famous Spencer eulogy tirade.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Erin Lee, Charles Spencer was no innocent in any of this. His original plans included himself and possibly her sons as the martyr behind the coffin, no royals allowed. He was all about the show of support, not support itself, and had no problem using Diana or her sons for his own personal gain. Started way back when he got a paid job as a commentator for Andrew and Sarah’s wedding – trading on his sister’s royal connections.

        perplexed, that is how I saw a lot of it. It was the public baying for blood over Diana’s death that resulted in many of the events, including her sons walking behind her coffin. HM was criticized for keeping them out of sight at Balmoral, when it is likely she was protecting them from the public that was demanding a public show of grief.

      • Luca76 says:

        @perplexed it’s an interesting comparison between the JFK funeral and Diana’s. I’d say the biggest difference for the kids was that Jackie O was extremely involved in her kids lives so there weren’t out there on their own whereas Will and Harry had a clod for a father who was more concerned about himself and his image than anything. So I do believe that she was a support system for them throughout the ceremony.
        Age might be a factor also. I think younger kids are sometimes less affected than adolescents when having to do something so public for the basic reason that they don’t fully understand what’s going on.

      • perplexed says:

        I actually think Charles has been a good (enough) father, given the unusual circumstances of his upbringing and position. I think he was on par with Diana when it came to parenting. He may have been a sucky husband, but I’ve never thought of him as being terrible as a parent. I think he and Diana were kind of the same at parenting actually. She was more showy with emotion for the cameras, but I don’t think there was a strong difference between the two in terms of how they parented.

        I also think the royals wanted to shield them, but the public demanded the kids come out of seclusion. I think the public bears some of the blame for gawking at those kids, and I also think some of the public reaction to Diana’s death was also guided by how she actually lived her life. She was not living her life privately at that time, even though she was no longer royal (whether that was because she wanted to make that doctor jealous or Charles jealous, I have no idea, but she wasn’t being unobtrusive at all although for the first time in her life she had the unique opportunity to be so).

        I do think Charles cares how he’s perceived, but I also think Diana did too so on that score I also think they’re both even.

        The only person who seems above media tactics is the Queen (or maybe she hides it better, which, heck, even I can respect the latter. Fool me, I don’t care, if we’re stuck with you).

        Diana did once say she wanted her kids to handle the media like JFK Jr, and I guess they’re both massively failing. People said JFK JR was dumb, but he seems brilliant next to Harry and William (to bring up another Kennedy comparison again).

      • I don’t agree at all that the public was baying for blood. These were people who were in shock and grueving over the sudden death of a public figure that was beloved by them. They only asked that their queen step up and mourn with them. She instead stayed tucked away at Balmoral making one ignorant decision after another, protecting herself and her selfish, tone deaf Firm. Charles actually defied her several times in his efforts to do the right tning by his late ex-wife, despite everything, and he earned a lot of respect for me in the immediate aftermath. Not so much later of course but when it counted he didn’t shy away from his duty to the boys’ mother. The queen behaved dispucably, imo.

      • LAK says:

        Erin Lee Daniels: the public absolutely were. I remember actually holding my breath when the Queen walked out to look at the flowers left at the gates. The mood was that ugly.

        The media had absolutely whipped the public into pitchfork frenzy sans pitchforks. The longer they were publicly absent, not commenting in any way, the uglier the mood in London. Especially when BP kept saying that it was about protovol and Diana was an ex-royal who didn’t deserve royal protocol.

        Only after the family showed themselves, and *especially* after the boys were also shown did the mood calm down. And even then, she had to give a very public address about a woman she didn’t care for *at that point* to show that she cared.

        The QM’s long gestating funeral plans quickly adapted to fit the almost state funeral for Diana instead of the private funeral the family had indicated they wanted.

        Those boys walking behind that coffin saved the family in so far as the public mood shifted completely.

      • LAK
        Ceding your point this is what the RF brought on themselves and those boys should never have been trotted out there like appeasements. The queen and company used them and I find it grotesque and inhumane.

      • LAK says:

        Erin: on that we agree.

      • LAK
        Can you expound on nota’s comments about Spencer? He’s always been an entitled cad but weren’t there whispers that he physically abused his first wife? The boys are friendly with their Fellowes cousins but do they grt along with Kitty Spencer?

      • LAK says:

        I have no time for Charles Spencer. He is a vile man with a difficult temperament and a hypocrite with regards Diana, having no problem using her to enrich himself before and after death yet refusing to help her when she asked and gojng as far as briefing against her to the media. He was mentally cruel to all his wives and ex-fiance. I can only hope his current wife is made of sterner stuff.

      • Lady D says:

        nota, I wasn’t “demanding a public show of grief.” I was looking for acknowledgement of a beloved human being involved in a tragedy. I realize the queen was with the boys at Balmoral, but in that week it would have taken the palace 2 minutes and approximately 10 words to acknowledge what happened, e.g. The palace shares your sorrow over this unimaginable tragedy. The grey men could have handled that. Her country, every commonwealth country and most of the world loved Diana, and were waiting for something from the palace. It seemed so cold. I now understand why she didn’t do that. She wasn’t royal anymore, so it wasn’t seen as a royal matter.
        It is also the only time I have ever seen the queen make a misstep. She is always on point with convention and tradition. It’s a bit of a relief to see she can be human too.

      • PrincessK says:

        I was in the crowd when the two boys were walking behind their mother’s coffin, and believe me the focus of the crowd was on the boys, it must have been terrible. We were throwing down flowers and taking pictures, it must have been terrible for them and I remember telling someone in the crowd how guilty I felt for wanting to take a photo, they replied well everyone else is and so it won’t matter if you do. The experience these boys had losing their mother must be almost unprecedented and if they can’t speak about it publicly 20 years later when will they?? I was one of the thousands clicking my camera knowing full well the pain it must have been inflicting on these boys, I feel guilt every time I look at the pictures and Harry’s comments confirm he has been terribly scarred by the experience of walking behind his mother’s coffin at such a young age.

      • Craven says:

        I know there are some hardcore Charles stans here but you cannot rewrite the boys own words. They have said they werent allowed to deal with their grief as children and they paid for it with their mental health in their adult years. Both of them have said it. Even in the Newsweek article, its noted that Harry says nothing of his father and Camilla even though he spoke of all other immediate family members including the queen. William pointedly keeps his children away from him. His own wife lives in a different house because he doesnt want her grand children around him. And finally he did not grow the balls to say no to exploiting his childrens grief to repair the monarchys tattered image. This is the very definition of a bad father, no amount of stanning and PRing will ever change this simple fact.

      • LAK says:

        Craven: No one is rewriting the boys’ grief or even downplaying it. We are discussing one particular event, who was responsible and whether they were ordered to do it or not. And believe it or not, said event had witnesses outside of the 2 boys. Those people talked. They confirm what happened.

        We are all in agreement that it was a bad choice and shouldn’t have been done, but we the public were as much complicit as the royals themselves because there was a strong desire to see the boys or perhaps that was the media frenzy that created that desire. Either way, same end result. The boys were paraded, crowd was sated. Inflammed public anger subsided.

        It wouldn’t be the last time they saved the royal family’s bacon, and on the other occassions, blame can squarely be placed at Charles’s feet.

      • Llamas says:

        I don’t know how much truth there was to the movie, but “The Queen” depicts how the public demanded a public funeral and that it was the QM’s funeral plans that were used. I do not think it was how you are saying Ramona.

      • Sarah says:

        I remember all of this, as I was born the same year as Diana.
        I thought the whole spectacle was absurd. Mother Teresa died right after, with 1/10 of the attention given to Diana, who was a loose cannon at that point. A beautiful, wounded loose cannon, but really out of control. The Queen didn’t make a public spectacle about the death, and the public went wild. The RF supposedly thought they might be overthrown over this.
        Those boys saved the RF, the same family Harry is whining about now. And yes, it was tough. Ugly for them. But my husband was a NYC firefighter on 9/11, and many families went through the same public spectacle without the benefit of great wealth and privilege. So Harry needs to stop whining, for pete’s sake. And if he can’t, for his own sake he needs to get a good therapist who teaches him how to move on. Cause he sounds horrible in this interview.

    • hannah says:

      She was their mother , they are allowed to talk all they want about her . Also , the 20th anniversary of her death is coming up this year and you just know that every tabloid and media outlet will have some Diana piece lined up to capitalize on it . So the media is all allowed to use Diana for a profit but her own kids are supposed to shut up about her ?

    • wolfpup says:

      The public was sated with the parade of the boys and Wm keeps his children away from Charles.

      • Mathilde says:

        Well, Charles’s childhood wasn’t the easiest either whoever you wish to blame for that. Rather a dysfunctional family I’d say in general, with ugly patterns running through generations, some of them brought on by public scrutiny – or demand – I’m sure. It’s good that it’s being discussed!

  12. Addie says:

    These two middle-aged men are such drop kicks. They have the capacity to be conduits for so much good. Instead, they drag their heels and whinge that they can’t live the lives of their 1%er friends. There is absolutely no point to them. As soon as Harry opens his mouth the entitlement just drips out. Just like his brother. Either step up or step away. And stop using your bloody mother all the time to get sympathy.

      • Pumpkin Pie says:

        Addie, I agree w/ everything you say except for “having the capacity…”. They have a platform and in theory, the potential to do much good, but no, not the capacity, because it involves brains, willingness, and dedication which they don’t demonstrate at any point.

    • Tourmaline says:

      Good point that they are comparing themselves as “normal” with an eye to their Hooray Henry Friends, Oliver van Strawberries and the Viscount Skislope, not with everyday Britons. I think it burns them that they can’t be strictly rich freewheeling toffs and have to show up for occasional state occasions and the like. See: William avoiding the Commonwealth service this year for a ski vacay.

      And I would not be surprised if Kate and Will look at Pippa and her new husband with jealousy because they have all the glamour and money and none of the duty. Because duty is just not where it is at for this particular royal bunch.

      • wolfpup says:

        Human brains are not constructed so they feel better than other brains in a given day. Substance, such as wealth, is boring to the wealthy, who cannot spend all of their money. Human brains process up and down in the same way. If WM and Harry cannot process their wealth – – - might I ask, Do We have gratitude for central air???

        Truly, they are just like us – they are not happier. Fine surroundings do not = happiness, although I would have gratitude for the beauty of it, like all humans who have a look.

        The poor are more prone to stress depression and disease because the immune systems shut down. I can’t even imagine the horrors that the majority of planetary beings face.

        This is the best reason to share the wealth and to question who creates it. The Royals are not in the woods picking berries for jam, that is for sure.

        GREEDY is another story, that I do not understand at this point.

  13. Kaykay says:

    I genuinely don’t get it. Why not just reduce the monarchy down to that of European royals? I’d actually be impressed if one of them came out and said: we need to reduce the royal family. We need to reduce how much they cost. We need a European system. I’d be so fucking impressed.

    But they just keep complaining.

    • Cynical says:

      I’m pretty sure that’s Charles’ plan for when he’s King. I think he’s even planning on the Royals not using Buckingham Palace anymore? I thought I read that

      • LAK says:

        Sadly, whilst he is planning to slim down the royals in numbers, there is no equivalent discussion about cutting the funding.

        Infact, last year, Charles looked into getting the duchy of Cornwall transferred to his private ownership and when he turned down, made some noises about the crown estates for same purpose.

        People don’t realise that the Crown estate pays for public services. That extra 10% carved out of it to refurbish BP, despite a 60yr annual grant for maintenance that we are pretending didn’t happen, is a cut from public spending.

      • Sharon Lea says:

        LAK – was Charles trying to get the Duchy transferred into his private ownership? I Googled it, but don’t see anything at the moment. He voluntarily pays tax, but isn’t it less than the going rate for others?

      • Elaine says:

        @LAK you can’t say that often enough or loud enough. The Crown estates pay for PUBLIC services.

        Republicans need to be cleverer and more sneaky. Were I Graham Smith, head of ‘Republic’, I would start a years long campaign to have the Crown Estates renamed. Using the word ‘Crown’ confuses people, making them think the Royals own this revenue.

        They do not.

        Rename ‘The Crown Estates’ and boom, half your problem solved, right there.

        Its called ‘Royal Mail’ but I assure you, the Queen is not in the Post office, handing you stamps for your letters.

        Its called ‘The Crown Prosecutors’, but let me warn you, the Queen is not your solicitor. Don’t call her to draft your Pre-nup, cause she won’t do it.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Decreasing the costs by 2/3 is never discussed along with decreasing the staff by that, is it? Now we have half the remaining staff not wanting to do the majority of the type of work that has kept the family firm in business for so long. Information about the founding of the Duchy, and some key information about the monarchy overall, disappeared from the official websites in recent years. Out of sight, out of mind.

        Charles is going after the Crown Estate, trying to get that named his personal property. In exchange for that, he offered to give up the Sovereign Grant. He’d come out a personal billionaire, but people might just fall for it.

        The rumors of him wanting to turn BP into a museum and get rid of Balmoral? The Balmoral move would probably net him millions in tax write offs. But no, he doesn’t get to stay in Clarence House once he is king. They have to get everybody in 1-2 properties, and get taxpayer funded security away from the extra ones (Clarence House, SJP).

        I’d like to see the books ripped open to see how much taxpayer money is spent on Balmoral and Sandringham. The BRF are given government housing, they should live in it. If they choose to live on private property much of the time, every penny of those expenses and security for those properties should come out of their own pockets. I’d also like a cap for security expenses during private time. Go above the cap, comes out of their own deep pockets.

      • LAK says:

        Elaine: i’m adding ‘ Royal Mail’ to my list of services in our daily lives with monarchical terms that do not translate into real life Windsor ownership. 😊

      • LAK says:

        Sharon Lee: it was part of a parliamentary debate on royal funding. Will look through the parliamentary website and post the right links. The online articles that mentioned it have been removed.

        ….but i leave you with this little gem that i found just now:

        This article obviously didn’t get traction like the one about Charles receiving the contents of any estate in his duchy of Cornwall if there is no traceable heirs. That got people’s backs up and he quickly released a statement he gave the proceeds to charity.

      • Joannie says:

        Nota, Sandringham is privately owned by the queen. All the costs associated are paid personally by her.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Show me the receipts, that’s what I’m asking. Proof, open proof published annually, that all royal protection and staff on private properties is paid for by the royals privately. Because that is what I’m saying. They are given public housing associated with their job. If they choose to spend time elsewhere, at private properties like Sandringham and Balmoral? All costs of that, including all staff, security staff, and physical security upgrades, must be paid privately.

        A million in taxpayer money was spent at the Middleton’s private home. It was published that the Wales farmhouse had a million dollar security door, until freedom of information requests about how much more money was spent on it were shut down and blamed on “security concerns”. They choose to live outside of government property? Then they have to pay every cent of security for those private properties privately.

      • Mathilde says:

        The Middletons can hardly live in Buckinghan Palace. If they did there would be a godawful ruckus!

        And it is pretty reasonable that Kate spends some time with her parents every now and then. If security is deemed necessary it is because of her position, not because she is their daughter. So pretty reasonable I think that the don’t pay!

    • CynicalCeleste says:

      How do items such as the mining rights and the crown estates/personal property not make international news? Not that the Telegraph doesn’t reach a global audience, but does it end there? Seems shocking and undemocratic for a G7 country .

      • LAK says:

        Every so often, the telegraph or the times or the guardian will publish a tiny article that sheds light on the royal finances or investment portfolios, but it rarely gets traction unless the more tabloidy DM publishes it.

  14. Prince says:

    I think it’s time for a new PR team. All they do is whining and telling other people how horrible their lives are etc.

    • Skylark says:

      No, let them continue to expose their whiny, entitled, self-serving ways. With any luck, it will generate enough irritation/outrage to make even their most ardent supporters reassess their value, once the queen is gone.

      And major LOL at Harry’s “We don’t want to dilute the magic….The British public and the whole world need institutions like it.” We don’t, we really don’t.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        The British public could use safe public housing, freely available medical care, support for higher education, and more cops on the beat.

  15. Talie says:

    If either one of them truly had to live a “normal” life for even a week, they would really be having panic attacks. Recognizing privilege, even things on a smaller scale like skin color and gender, is hard enough for people to get a grip on…let alone someone who has grown up in a palace.

  16. QueenB says:

    To be fair whats he going to say? “All of us cant wait until the old hag bites the dust?”

    • Ashamed 2 b a Fl girl says:

      hahahahaha…HA! I’m sitting here alone in my house laughing my ass off. Thank you!

    • LAK says:

      Charles handles that question better. He says that getting the top job means his mother is dead and therefore not something he actively looks forward to (paraphrasing).

      Of course it took him until this past decade to formulate this answer because he used to whine about the wait.

      Diana, though meaning to wound in her Panorama interview, gave him a better answer ie that the top job was hard and he was better as POW.

      • notasugarhere says:

        BASHIR: But you would know him better than most people. Do you think he would wish to be King?

        DIANA: There was always conflict on that subject with him when we discussed it, and I understood that conflict, because it’s a very demanding role, being Prince of Wales, but it’s an equally more demanding role being King. And being Prince of Wales produces more freedom now, and being King would be a little bit more suffocating. And because I know the character I would think that the top job, as I call it, would bring enormous limitations to him, and I don’t know whether he could adapt to that.

        I always thought Diana’s answer was a good one. It was a good answer until she stuck in the knife and twisted with the next answers in the interview.

      • wolfpup says:

        Yet, we are so f-ing human and twist a knife that has been twisted in our own.

        The story of Sunday school is that Jesus says that we should forgive before that happens. Great story! I don’t know if I would want to be that good, in fact, I am not that good – perhaps I belong in hell. Not really – hell is an evil dream that belongs to not one of us!

        The magic that exists is life without resentment, and thrives, possibly with time, consideration, and love – that is, what we have to give to one another.

        Diana was able to see the essence of the love that we have for one another.

    • Sharon Lea says:

      So true. And to LAK’s point, Prince Albert used to say what Charles did until his father, Prince Rainier passed too.

      • Nessa nessa says:

        And he got just as much shit too if documentaries are to be believed. He wasn’t exactly liked….with reason. *insert sideeye*

    • BeamMeUpScottie says:


  17. sarri says:

    So PH is actually just like whiney PW – got it.

  18. amy says:

    Sometimes I have the feeling William and Harry are trying to destroy the British monarchy.. don’t know.

    • Megan says:

      I agree – all the do is whine.

    • Nessa nessa says:

      They aren’t…every person in the immediate royal family have done the whole “let them see humbled & normal we are”. Even the Queen…it just never works full term. It will blow over and their status as royal or special as royal will kick in again.

    • CynicalAnn says:

      Because I think even they realize how antiquated it is. What is the point in this day and age?

  19. Idky says:

    Disappointed in this interview from PH. He is starting to complain a lot about things.

  20. Nessa nessa says:

    I don’t know, I’m American and I read the whole thing. My take away from the interview was “no we don’t hope to be in a place of privilege but we will use it to do good”. He goes on to talk about how fired up he was to being in his role. I didn’t get ungrateful and I don’t see it for Prince Harry. He seems ignorant as hell but I got it. Though I also knew the press would run with that same quote & be pissed. Regardless of the intent, the timing of that line in particular was bad. Maybe if this was out say earlier this year the vibe may be…I don’t know different.

    I feel like they do too much to connect with the public and be “I’m just like you….I’m not perfect” that it yeah. They still haven’t found that balance of magic & “ordinary”. I did roll my eyes reading it but surprisingly not as much as I used to. Cause PH been saying I want to be normal since he was a teen. It’s different now because he is grown. And it never works out well long term when the royals play “normal”. It didn’t when Queen E & Prince Phillip did that tv special in the 70′s. It didn’t work when their kids had that game special in the 80′s. It didn’t when Princess Di/Prince Charles gave candid interviews about their martial business…if he (& will) keep pushing it, it won’t with these “candid” interviews.

    • Sharon Lea says:

      Nessa, yes, you hit all the points in the past decades where the UK royals kept trying ‘normalize’ and they came off looking foolish (Its a Royal Knockout) or the film in the 70s + Diana’s honesty – the public just wanted more information, more access. This royal house needs to copy the Nordic royals if they want to be normal.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Norway is on okay ground, but Sweden is increasingly in trouble. The strip-club loving king, the questionable spouse of CP, the king handing out unnecessary titles like candy. Plus Victoria has a blind spot when it comes to the idea of Republicanism, which may be their downfall.

    • suze says:

      The timing of this interview is atrocious, but Harry couldn’t help that. However, I think he needs better advisors because he comes off as generally clueless. I think he was trying to convey through this series of interviews that although privileged, he wanted to connect with people one on one and use his position to continue some of his mother’s legacy.

      However, between the poorly written (entirely the writer’s fault) article and the editing, plus some rather unwise soundbites, the entire piece comes off tone deaf and entirely privileged.

      “People would be surprised at how ordinary William and I are” should have been, “When we can, we try to do everyday things, like shop and cook supper.”

      “We don’t want to shake hands….” should have been “…we want to connect on a modern level, and still retain the personal touch.”

  21. Kaz says:

    What a huge mistake to do this interview. Naive and ill-advised. What was he thinking? Not much apparently. Poor me, poor us. Throwing shade at his family for being made to participate in his mother’s funeral, which was a long time ago. So they don’t want to follow the Queen and support lots of charities, but modernize the Monarchy and do it their way. Do they realise the HUGE amount of good that the Queen and co have done for so many worthy causes? The publicity and attention drawn to those hundreds of causes has helped them raise lots of money and the good works continue. They want to concentrate on a few causes closer to their hearts – does he realise the only thing they do is bring public attention to causes. They are hardly hands on psychologists, counsellors or teachers for gods sake. This interview is so annoying. Entitled, wealthy young man with so many opportunities to do so much good and it’s whine, whine, whine.

  22. Tan says:

    So wait
    None or modern royals want to be king and queen but will condescend to it because us mango folks need such institution to get on?

    What year is it? 1517?

    Like R U Fucking kidding me?

    We all know such opulent treasure and ample perks, even trust fund brats don’t have it this easy and even though you loathe doing anything other than spending money and lazying about and occasionally do some token charities, this is the easiest way to go ahead given the lack of brains or education

    If the monarchy is abolished, back taxes are calculated and these people are turned out on their back, they don’t have the skill set to make a living as a bus boy.

  23. OSTONE says:

    I have a very good feeling that when QEII passes, the monarchy is going to struggle. She is a person who understood her position of duty for her country above all else, never complained. However, her grandchildren and their spouses are petulant, spoiled and believe more of what the country can do for them, versus what they can do for their country. If they hate royal life so much, renounce your titles or convert to Catholicism and be done with it, but nah they want their cake and eat it too.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I think the monarchy is in for big changes when she passes, even if all her kids and grandkids were models of duty and dedication. Once HM is gone, many nations that have held off Republican movements out of respect for her won’t hold them off anymore.

    • What's Inside says:

      The Queen was raised in another age. Can you imagine her saying to Queen Mary, I want to be ordinary? Eh, don’t think so.

      • LAK says:

        Queen Mary who once told reluctant, complaining royal family member, ‘ You are a member of the BRF. We are never tired, and we love hospitals!’

      • notasugarhere says:

        Another of my favorites from Mary of Teck, who wasn’t opposed to slapping down over-privileged royals.

        Lord Chamberlain to Princess Elizabeth: “Good morning, little lady.”

        Princess Elizabeth replied haughtily, “I am not a little lady. I’m Princess Elizabeth.”

        Queen Mary to the Lord Chamberlain: “This is Princess Elizabeth who hopes one day to be a lady.”

      • wolfpup says:

        How awful to grow up in the haughty family described

      • kaiko says:

        @nota—LOVE that story/quote about QM and PE. Reminds of a simple yet effective phrase I heard countless times from my mother growing up: Pretty is as pretty does.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I don’t think they’re being haughty; they’re calling out members of the family who fail to recognize their privilege. Especially good grandmother moment from Mary of Teck because Princess Elizabeth was acting like a brat.

  24. Megan says:

    They don’t want the responsibility of being royal, but they’re happy to carry on living the lavish lifestyle. Sorry – you can’t have both.

    If Harry and William want to go ahead and live in West Bromwich in a 2-bed semi working in an office 9-5 during the week, they can. But they’d get pretty sick of it after a week or two!

    • Nessa nessa says:

      That’s not what he said….at all. He said no one strives to be king or queen but they take the responsibility & the causes & power to do good seriously. Again I don’t even like Harry but that’s all he was saying.

      • slowsnow says:

        That’s what I thought at first but then re-reading it it does sound fishy. I wondered if he unconsciously went to that place where he knows people like him better than William and others at some point speculated about his dad ever being king. So all of them, at some point had to think “what if?” and no one, in his right mind would want it.
        But the monarchs should not go about saying it’s a huge responsability that no sane human would desire. It’s the least they can do as the representatives of this tremendous archaic system that gives you such power just from being born. He was callous and careless in that affirmation. Same thing with the supermarket thing and the idea of normality. It is so stupid. My son’s girlfriend is incredibly poor and I am careful around her not to say anything that might hurt her. He is is in the same position but on a stupendously gigantic scale. He’s dumb, sorry. They all are.

      • BeamMeUpScottie says:

        @Nessa nessa, funny you should say that. ITA – I saw a tweet on the Newsweek cover and read the Newsweek article twice before the newspaper headline reviews last night and I got the exact same understanding as you

        But the Fail’s front page banner headline (under a ‘Fake Stories blah blah’ ticker (irony!!!) ) literally stopped me in my tracks as I would never have summed up the entire interview that way. I knew from then that all hell was going to break loose once the story was covered more widely. I like Harry most of the time, so I kinda feel a bit sorry for him.

      • Nessa nessa says:

        @BeamMeUpScottie exactly….I read the whole thing before the public took that line & ran with it. Again I don’t like him but they really ran with that. He even says here: “didn’t want to be in the position I was in, but I eventually pulled my head out of the sand, started listening to people and decided to use my role for good.”

        I feel maybe the words never should have been used in that way but the gist of it was “I’m ready to take on my responsibilities but I will find a balance. I’m energized and ready to help my country”. That’s it….oh well…

      • perplexed says:

        He’s not that articulate in this interview. His wording was bad. And assuming that the WORLD needs the monarchy despite the fact that no one in his family really wants the job was an odd juxtaposition. Maybe Britain wants the monarchy, but to suggest that the world needs it sounded bizarre to me.

        He made it sound like the royals are doing the world a favour. He might have intended something else, but he also left the other implication in as well.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Always important to read things in context. He doesn’t come across well though, and even with allowances, there were things said that shouldn’t have been. The move to leave the Army without a strong exit plan was a huge mistake. He needs structure.

      • SoulSPA says:

        He also talked about taking duties at the right time. When is the right time? The time is now. But Willies says he wants to be there for his children growing up and that he’ll do more when he becomes king. In who knows how many years. Should the monarchy be abolished by then, he would have spent all his life in privilege without doing much. And Harry and Meghan making private tours of museums. The time to do things right is now. Later might be too late.

      • PrincessK says:

        Thank heavens some people here can see sense and are not easily swept away by the click bait headlines. Journalist always pounce on one line and then put it out of context to make a different meaning. Harry was just stating the plain obvious, the media can be awful at times and people fall blindly for these things.

  25. Craven says:

    Hahahahaa. As many times as I have been yelled at here for stating the obvious, it looks like even the beloved one agrees with me 100%. As I have said many times, the only way that institution will survive my generation is change. Showing up to already well loved charity fundraisers to be praised for an hour, shake hands for five minutes and give a speech stating the obvious in your dullest voice is not work. It does not justify the money they get by half, so we can cut the “qweenie deserves it because work pretense”. Plus other countries have no royalty but still raise money for charity! The monarchy will go but it will be a gradual thing. Lets get on the business of phasing them out. We can agree to sustain some level of lifestyle without turning human beings into toys for our amusement. Let them live their lives and turn up once a year for some State function. If someone tells me they cant hack the burden placed on them by their birth, I review my expectations. Thats what compassion is. The end.

    Do everyone a favour and phase out this nonsense. And good for Will and Harry for rejecting that ridiculous self importance the older members have. Language like “duty” belongs to real heroes like our soldiers not to royals attending a ribbon cutting at a flower show.

  26. Bettyrose says:

    I feel like we’re not sufficiently parsing the last couple of lines: “passionate..which William and Kate are not.” Was this statement specifically about children and children’s causes? Either way, ouch, but especially harsh/telling given that children are the one thing they’ve put effort into looking passionate about.

    I’m not a Harry apologist, but as gossip goes he’s sexier and says more interesting things. But of the interview excerpts offered here, there’s not one word of it that could be used to justify the monarchy.

    • Addie says:

      Re. children: “… Harry is passionate about them and is a natural, which neither William nor Kate are.”
      I read that as William and Kate not passionate about children nor natural with them.

      • Harla Jodet says:

        I agree Addie and I really wish they’d quit pushing the whole Kate and children’s charities narrative, she’s not natural around them and it shows. No, I’m not criticizing her, I’m not a natural with children either despite having 2 and 2 grandchildren so I get it but I don’t actively seek out working with children either. I really wish she would get more involved with charities where she really could make a difference instead of the ones she does have and rarely visits.

      • Bettyrose says:

        That’s how I read it too, but in this context – a magazine profile of Harry – it’s incredibly harsh to go after their main claim to work. How does that not set the stage for public divisiveness between them all?

  27. slowsnow says:

    My 2 cents: No, QEII is not more savvy than these guys, she’s from a different era where rich people were secluded, separate and did not talk about their lives – the psychology was one of representation and decorum – and she went through war. Still she was not very good in the 80′s or Diana’s death, amongst many other unsavoury moments. Please stop mythologizing her.
    Also, in the interview where PH talked about depression after his mum died he sounded awkward and privildged. Him saying he is normal means “normal” like the “regular” very wealthy people who live in Chelsea or Kensington (the good bit). Him saying he goes to the supermarket is for his own good because in the era of social media, a very nice and lively London city, no one wants to be locked up in a castle. It makes him look selfish, not regular like us folks.
    If my kids had had the upbringing these people did, they’d be like them. The only redeeming thing they have and that made them THINK at some point was their mother’s death.

    • Nessa nessa says:

      That tv special the queen did in the 70′s of how “normal” they are I think is what set the tone. Also the tv appearances prince Phillip did in the past prior. She was just smart enough to step back.

    • notasugarhere says:

      HM was keeping two grieving children out of the limelight and was pilloried for it. It was the thoroughly unexpected public behavior around Diana that ended up with, honestly, the public calling for William and Harry to be trotted out to be seen publicly grieving with the rest of the royals.

  28. LAK says:

    Well, he also states plainly that after HM and Charles, those 3000 public engagements will be pared down to very few indeed (paraphrasing)

    1. When you put that statement in context of their current work record, it is revealing about why they do very few engagements compared to other members. This is a strategy that will bear fruit in the long term. They will endure workshy label if in the long term they phase out all the engagements.

    2. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the social contract between them and the public because it’s not all about charity. The ribbon cutting is the single most important reason they cement their position with the public. If he (and they) think it’s unimportant, they wouldn’t show up for military services, anniversaries etc. Then again, William was dad dancing at the last one so that is what the future looks like.

    3. If they follow through on point 1 and 2, the public will Rexit them. And it will be brutal for them coz all that privilege will drain away immediately – see every self important public figure that has taken the public for granted.

    On a different note, when did he start believing his own press? Monarchy is magic? And he (and his family) are the only ones that can deliver it? 🤔

    • Maria F. says:

      i totally agree. ‘Concentrating on a few’ basically means working less. There is no other way to see that.

      There is no such thing as a modern monarchy. The citizens expect their Royal families to be visible, they expect a bit of pomp and circumstance, gossip about outfits and babies. If you do not have that, you might as well employ a politician like the German president. They are purely representative, receive foreign dignataries etc., but cost way less, as you only have to provide for one person and not all the hangers on.

      And it’s not like Harry and William just discovered a few years ago that they have to succeed the Queen and their father. They have had 30 plus years to get their head around or choose a different path in life.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I should have read further down before commenting. LAK’s points exactly.

    • CynicalCeleste says:

      The only tangible goal he seems to articulate well is his dream of grocery shopping for the rest of his life. Aim higher toff! The part about doing his own shopping, even if he becomes king, seems like a strange notion for the fifth in line to put out there.

      • graymatters says:

        I agree. And doing one’s own shopping, especially in lieu of more traditionally “royal” work, is a sure-fire way to eradicate both the magic and the mystery of monarchy.

  29. perplexed says:

    I thought he sounded somewhat dismissive of what the Queen has achieved. What does modernizing the monarchy even mean? Doing less work? I don’t get it. The Queen carries on so many engagements per year and let all over kids get divorced. What more can she do (given the kind of position she was born with)?

    Plus, I’m pretty sure the Queen uses less light bulbs than any of the younger royals do.

  30. Connell says:

    The republicans in GB had a response to Harry’s interview: “Don’t feel you need to continue. Pack your bags and get out”. Something like that. Harry is entitled to his feelings and opinions, however I do not agree with him speaking for everyone in the RF. What a time this is for GB. Terrorism is rapidly escalating, and May is a weak leader. France? Macron wants lawmakers to pass a permanent police state, police may enter houses at any time, by-passing judges. No riots, protests, rallies allowed. A controlled press. A Totalitarian government is forming, a type of dictatorship. About Harry: Perhaps he was told he could not marry Meghan, and is so disgusted, he is venting like this. My thoughts: Harry should take his money, marry Meghan, and live happily somewhere else. Sorry if this was already covered.

    • Nessa nessa says:

      Why do you think this is about Meghan. Or that he even at that point to wanting to marry her now. They even stated in the same interview by an insider nothing will happen now. And if at all it will be later this year. Why do the British press rush these relationships? Have it even been a year? I doubt it….

      The whole article painting a picture of a man ready to make his mark & take on his role as prince more seriously. But just his way….

    • Aurelia says:

      The One World Order is no conspiracy I’m afraid. We are moving into Marshall law soon. The whole world is about to be “reorganized” and it won’t be pretty.

  31. Sage says:

    Nah, harry, Kate and Billy love it. All the privileges, money, celebrity. They just want it all on their own terms.
    Their modernized monarchy is doing things how they see fit.

    • Addie says:

      Which is nothing much when all is said and done. They live in a complete fantasy world if they think people will pay for that.

    • SoulSPA says:

      ITA. And once that the senior RF members are gone, the juniors will have their playground to do what they please. I would like to think that there is a bit of accountability these days, but it seems that the juniors still do what they like. I do not have any hope left that they’ll do something meaningful. They could be the end of monarchy.

  32. Maria says:

    I liked the part where he says he does his own grocery shopping. Sure, Harry. We believe you, wink, wink. And he often pops by Willy and Waity’s flat, er, mansion at KP, and she cooks him a meal. The fact that they are hardly ever there and prefer the country pile wasn’t mentioned. As far as being a mother substitute, the woman can’t even mother herself! She still needs Carole to help her with raising kids, and to live her life.
    I wonder if Meghan is rethinking this thing. I mean, it looks good on paper, but the reality might be quite different.

    • BeamMeUpScottie says:

      Not sure about the weekly shopping but he has been seen on occasion picking up stuff at one of the better known supermarkets in kensington and chelsea.

    • suze says:

      Markle is a smart and savvy operator, and I say that as an outright compliment. The royal family needs her, or someone like her, in their midst.

      Frankly, she has also lived a “normal” life. I think she might have Harry’s ear on the matter and be able to counsel him on what that might actually be.

      • Sarah says:

        Well, if Markle has been counseling him on what a normal life is, he sure as heck hasn’t been listening to her. She needs to try again.

  33. perplexed says:

    Maybe he should use Meghan Markle’s PR team instead. I think they would have crafted better answers for him.

    • Nessa nessa says:

      Or Meghan herself….I feel like her international affairs degree & her work in the US embassy/UN would have helped him phrase what he said better. Make him sound less ignorant in saying the same thing. Lol

      • perplexed says:

        Very true!

      • Jo says:

        What degree? She did an internship at the UN and left for a man. She’s just feeding his sense of entitlement. The two should bugger off together but everyone knows she just loves the title.

      • BeamMeUpScottie says:

        @Nessa nessa, So true.

        Pre her Harry days, i saw an interview she did where the interviewer tried to get her comments on how certain M/E countries addressed the rights of women. Her response was intelligent, informed and considered – and en par with the best I have heard from seasoned diplomats . That’s when I thought – whoa! Now, this is a thinking actress! :-)

      • BeamMeUpScottie says:

        Er… No. Please. Facts are important.
        Whatever one may feel about MM (and we all have our views, some good, some bad) – she does have a double major degree in theatre and international relations from Northwestern Univeristy (an ivy league unversity). Fact.

        And as far as I know from the UN her work with them is as an ”ambassdor/advocate’. So no internship there. Her internship was at one of the US Embassies in South America.

      • Nessa nessa says:

        @Jo she has a double major/degree in theater/international affairs. She interned in the US Embassy for northwestern. She initially going to go into politics/international affairs but she didn’t pass her foreign affairs exam the 1st time. Went home & fell into acting and pursued that. UN women came to her after an article she wrote on the Tig to being an ambassador. She didn’t leave it for a man. She got involved in world vision and as far as I know still is apart of that organization.

      • Devereaux says:

        Um, @BeamMeUpScottie, Facts are important. NorthWestern is a very good university. It is not an IVY League University. No.

      • Nessa nessa says:

        @BeamMeUpScottie you mean her Larry King interview? Yeah that was a smart answer she gave. Also that interview gave me the vibe that when suits ended she might take a step back from acting and go into something utilizing her international affairs degree. She seemed though grateful emotionally not into it and more into her mission in Rwanda. Who knows…

      • BeamMeUpScottie says:

        @Deveraux, @Ash, Point well taken on the ivy league rating not being applicable to NW. I understood it was. So my mistake. Thanks for clearing that up.

        @Nessa, nessa, yes that interview. You know, one can always read things the wrong way, but I kinda felt that her head has been in a whole different space (i.e. less acting and looking for a more meaningful path for her future since 2014/2015 when she started speaking out at OneWorld, then World Vision, UN et al ).

        Now? What a drama!

      • Nessa nessa says:

        @BEAMMEUPSCOTTIE yeah you could tell it too? Man I don’t think when she was considering taking on a more public role in foreign affairs she meant this. lol But if she is happy & can handle it after a while…sure girl do you. And teach PH how to do interviews…he stay sounding ignorant at some point in them. Lol

      • BeamMeUpScottie says:

        Nope! Not THIS foreign affairs. lol
        And the worst thing is, this a particularly bad week for this kind of sel-indulgence.
        Oh well! Shit happens!

      • Sarah says:

        Just living an ordinary life, as a middle class person in America would be better qualifications for Meghan to help him with his PR than whoever he has. What a debacle this is!!

      • Llamas says:

        Northwestern is not an Ivy League. I love right by it. It’s a really really good school but it’s not called an Ivy League.

    • Ash says:

      I graduated from Northwestern and while it’s a highly regarded university, it’s not one of the Ivies.

      • Nessa nessa says:

        Yeah it’s a top school, top 20 in the world in some rankings. But it’s not an Ivy League school lol

  34. lala says:

    The part where he says the Monarchy is a force for good…it’s like he has never heard of the horrors of colonialism. ffs.

  35. Jo says:

    I used to love Harry a couple of years ago. How embarrassing. He’s better at PR than his brother (or was) but he’s just as spoilt. Do all rich English people moan constantly or is it just the royals? Harry is incredibly entitled and it’s showing more and more. When he loses his looks (which, can we admit he’s not cute?) and what’s left of his charisma people will turn. He’s another Andrew. Shame he had such potential.

    • Anitas says:

      People have been saying that Will and Kate regularly throw Harry under the bus or tag along to his popularity, but I think Harry’s been profiting off being compared to them. As long as the two of them act as stupidly as they do, which is often hard to top, Harry will be praised as the awesome prince in contrast, even with minimal effort.

      • Jo says:

        If Wills or Kate did half the rubbish Harry does they’d be slaughtered in the media. Harry gets a free pass for doing what exactly? He does less than them, runs around with c-list PR hungry actresses and models, and says ridiculous crap to the press.

      • Llamas says:


        They’re all lazy but Harry does do more work than WK. it’s just not counted.

  36. Jessica says:

    At this rate Denmark is the oldest European monarchy and will be the last remaining European monarchy. If the UK monarchy falls then so will a lot others. Spain & Belgium are on super thin ice and I believe one of those will fall and then possibly UK before I die.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I think Belgium is on thinner ice than Spain. At least Felipe and Letizia weren’t caught (and photographed by their own security?) hanging out at a spa during-and-after terror attacks on their country. W-A and Max in the Netherlands are popular, but they’ve made huge mistakes around vacation properties that cost a lot of goodwill. Sweden doesn’t seem to recognize the trouble they’re in, Norway seems pretty solid.

      • tigerlily says:

        I wonder if Norway not being a monarchy for as long as other countries and the fact that their current monarchy isn’t one that is “chosen by birth”. After the dissolution of Norway’s union with Sweden, Prince Carl of Denmark was elected by Norway to be their King. He had to win the respect & affection of the people of Norway and perhaps this is passed down to current Royal Family of Norway? That they were elected and they could be tossed? Just a thought…..

      • notasugarhere says:

        Sweden has a similar history. Picked a non-royal French general from Napoleon’s army to be their king.

  37. Mamunia says:

    This interview was ill advised. I’ve never been a fan of Charles, especially after the way he treated Diana, but he does his job. He did 530 engagements last year. The ironic thing about William & Harry’s whining is that we already sympathized with them before they went so public with their issues. Now, people are quickly loosing sympathy.

  38. Jess says:

    In his defence pretty much all young royals across Europe has said they do not want it at some point.

  39. JeanGenie says:

    Canadians pay millions of dollars for those stupid royal visits, and get nothing in return. Oh wait, we have the honour of having the Queen’s face on our money… HARD PASS.

  40. Anitas says:

    Just a thought regarding Diana’s funeral – I too thought it was insensitive they were made to walk behind their dead mother’s coffin with millions watching them. It felt wrong and intrusive to watch it. I know, protocol etc, but they were children. Their father, grandmother and others failed them there.

    • Pumpkin Pie says:

      Imo children should not attend funerals full stop. A funeral can be very traumatic and the memory stays forever.

  41. Sixer says:


    That is all. Because I still don’t have the wherewithal to make any temperate comments about anything at all pertaining to Britain. Sorry. Normal snark with some humour attached service will resume at some point. Unsure quite when that will be.

    • CynicalCeleste says:

      Non-temperate comments will be duly accepted…

      • Sixer says:

        Well, bless Kaiser. She let the foul-mouthed comment through. I shan’t try her patience – if only from solidarity since my own patience with my country is so sorely tested at the moment.

        Here is an attempt at something temperate:

        Harry can be royal. Or he can be normal like his mates – which is still so uber-privileged as to be abnormal to the rest of we peons. The choice is, always was, and always will be, his own. He can step away if he wants to.

        I hope he does.

        Gradually, this will happen. Her Maj will die. Chuck will take over. Perhaps Normal Bill or perhaps Harry will say no thanks. Over time, William or George or other lesser royals than Harry will say no thanks and choose a private, not a public, life. And slowly we will reach the point that everyone agrees it’s getting silly and it’s time we moved to a republic.

        This is a GOOD thing. This is the British way of democracy by attrition. We don’t generally go in for sudden or violent upheavals (I don’t count Brexit as the population is so poorly informed by its media and political class that it had no idea it would be the upheaval it will prove to be) – we just wait until an institution is so desiccated that it dies all by itself.

        Blimey. Temperate. I’ve surprised myself.

      • CynicalCeleste says:

        Sixer, I hope you are right.

        Resigning a royal position with all its privileges and endless stream of public money, along with the self-inflicted guilt over not stepping up to the ‘duty’ which has been beaten into their heads since birth, and the shade they would receive from the elders of their family…. all this would require a huge strength of character, backbone and cajones. I’m not convinced these limp bastards have it in them.

      • Pumpkin Pie says:

        Sixer, do you really believe Mother Middleton will allow Bill to ruin Katie Dolittle’s opportunity to become Queen Consort? Bill will not say no.

      • tigerlily says:

        Sixer: not sure any of them would or could walk away. That was Princess Margaret’s choice if she wanted to marry the man that she loved and even for him she couldn’t stomach giving it all up. Not sure if she wouldn’t been able to keep her title or not….and to be sure it was a different time.

    • porcupette says:

      yup on wheels

    • porcupette says:

      Near a hundred of his NEIGHBORS just burnt or poisoned to death by cyanide fumes. Poor Pitiful Pearl Prince: just shut up

    • Suze says:

      I love you

    • Sarah says:

      I’m sorry for all of your country’s troubles, Sixer. And I am sorry you have to have such wankers as “royalty.”
      Sending good will over to all of you British.

  42. Saskia says:

    The Queen stands as an example of what the monarchy can be. Royalty is there to serve the people but the modern way of serving self first stands in the way of the younger royals stepping up. That is why we see the whining ‘woe is me’ thing instead of an active, uncomplaining interest in self-sacrifice for the greater good, duty, obligation, etc. Their mother wanted them to do all things royal in addition to being humble and personable. Would she be proud of their current approach? Should we feel sorry for adult men who refuse to grow up and get with the program?

    • Nessa nessa says:

      The Queens example is based on many yrs of experience. She made some bad moves in her time as well… underestimated the public’s support & made decisions the public may not like. Maybe this kind of “backlash” will help PH in the future of what not to say & how to say it. He have always been ignorant & ill worded but he had his youth & army status to protect him. I get that he is saying he want work in the causes he does & not just be a face. But like honey that’s what tax payers are paying you for…to be a face…in part.

      • Elaine says:

        Exactly. I think the young Royals are confused. Like they think between vacations in Mustique and Northern Light spotting in Norway, they’ve been trained as Clinical Psychologists and Mental Health counselors.

        They haven’t.

        Just turn up. Don’t flash your arse. And smile for the pretty camera like a good monkey, uh, Royal. Like a good Royal.

        Say cheese!

  43. ickythump says:

    The reaction to Diana’s death marked a turning point in this country. The great unwashed British public demanded a starring role in the grief of the nation – letting the Queen look after two little boys who had just lost their mother in Balmoral wasn’t an option – Blair was complicit in telling the Queen she had to bring them to London for people to be satisfied and I assume she saw that as her duty, so I don’t blame the BRF for the boys having to walk behind the coffin. Cool Brittania demanded no less.

  44. Wow says:

    I feel it’s the public who basically created all of this pomp and prestige associated with Royals. We buy the papers,click on the links and some even uphold them to a higher level than their own. In reality, they are just humans without financial stress. That’s basically it. I don’t have a problem with what Harry said, nor would I have cared ifWilliam had said it. We only observe their lives, but for anyone else to become King/Queen, one of their loved ones would have to die.

    And as for Kate, to me, some people seem to only want to see Kate out more only so that they can critique her shoes, clothes and hair.

  45. PettyRiperton says:

    “it wasn’t as cut and dry” Really you were there when they was told to walk behind their mother’s casket? Because he was.
    The royal family aren’t a family it’s a business. They are very cold hearted if they could behead people like they were allowed too back in the day they would.

    I think they should stop whining about their lives. You never had to try accomplish anything in your life. School, military career etc. you was going to pass or get bumped up regardless.
    You have the nerve sit there b*tch about being rich. When there are people homeless, mothers can barely feed their kids GTFOH

    • LAK says:

      My comment was clarifying that it wasn’t a decision that was solely thought up, suggested, brought up by Charles as the original commentor was saying nor was it presented as a fait accompli.

      And for the record, many people were involved in it. Including the PM’s office, Spencers and the royal family.

      It doesn’t excuse the horror of it, which i felt at the time as did original commentor, but it wasn’t a cut and dried decision by Charles nor was it solely made.

    • Suze says:

      Who is advising the young Windsors? Even Harrys normal good ear for PR has deserted him here.

      This whole interview is ill timed and poorly conceived.

      I am also a little tired of the grocery shopping and roast chicken anecdotes.

  46. Joannie says:

    After reading the majority of the comments I feel most on here are anti monarchy. You are taking his words and putting a negative connotation on them to fit in with your agenda. I dont think thats fair. Im admittedly a monarchist but feel I’m enough of a critical thinker to take what he says at face value. I dont see where he’s whining. He’s being honest. I do believe he and William want to do good. They have the platform and they will use it. They just have to figure what works best. The world more now than ever needs stability. The Royal Family represents tradition and stability among other things that gives its citizens a sense of belonging and should give them pride. My dad put on a uniform and risked his life for his country so that we have the freedoms that we do. Ask yourself why so many immigrated there.

    • Jo says:

      Give me a break. My dad also put on a uniform and risked his life and that was for his fellow ordinary person, not some pompous warbler who lives in a palace and loves to whine. Now is not the time to be moaning about your life given the terrorist attacks and the apartment fire. We don’t need their “tradition and stability” since tradition and stability seems to mean doing nothing and whining to William and Harry. Pass.

      • Joannie says:

        That’s not what he’s doing. And he’s not responsible for the fire or terrorist attacks.

      • Sorry, no dignity in that says:

        He is responsible for not doing nor saying anything about inflammable cladding and the ongoing “war on terror” which produces both more terrorists and more terror attacks.

        Basically alltogether he isn’t doing much at all and that can be hold against him, too.

      • Mathilde says:

        He’s not allowed to say anything like that. If you want that changed then do something about constitutional monarchy. Or it’s just as much whining as the next person.

    • Aren says:

      ” Ask yourself why so many immigrated there. ”
      Because so many saw their countries and lives destroyed by endless foreign invasions?

      • Joannie says:

        True! But they could have gone somewhere else. Why there?

      • Aren says:

        There are millions of immigrants and refugees scattered all over the world. Europe actually has some of the lowest amounts.

      • Sorry, no dignity in that says:

        Well, Europe destroyed a lot of those countries from where both terrorists and refugees now leave to go to Europe. Sadly, Europe can’t connect the dots between European actions like “war on terror” / economic wars and the resulting terrorists / terror attacks / refugees.

    • Natalie S says:

      A sense of pride and stability is not derived from a family of state subsidized wealthy people partying on yachts, in Mustique, and the Swiss Alps.

      • Joannie says:

        Perhaps you should do a more in depth study of what it is they actually do and the tangible benefits incurred.

      • Natalie S says:

        You think it would be self-evident with all the good they’re doing, right? Apparently we need to research it.

      • Mathilde says:

        Most worthwhile subjects require some research. It’s not meant to be just soundbites!

    • Tan says:

      Because somewhere was There. A large part of the world was part of British empire. and they basically drained thoee countries dry.

  47. perplexed says:

    If I were Diana, I would have been upset that Elton John re-wrote that song originally intended for Marilyn Monroe for my funeral. Seriously, I would have expected a new song for my dead self, darnit! I mean, if you’re going to go all public with everything, give me a new song!

  48. perplexed says:

    Since he’s way down the line of succession now that Charlotte and George are here now, I don’t even get why he’s bothering to answer the question of who wants to be King. Everybody else before him in line would have to die off before he could get the throne, so I actually think the answer he gave was irrelevant in his case. Unlike William but more like Prince Andrew, he could theoretically walk away from it all if he wants…I think? Are William and Harry going to think as a pair when it comes time for William to reign? Andrew doesn’t seem to have any say in what Charles does. His answer is even more weird when I really think about, given where he stands in line to the throne.

    Now I want Kate to pop out a third kid just to push Harry further down the line. I guess I’m feeling vindictive today.

    • Kitty says:

      They don’t have to die. A vote in all parliaments in the Commonwealth country can literally make someone who isn’t born to be a monarch a monarch.

  49. CynicalCeleste says:

    Every member of the BRF is bred to believe they were born with a heavy burden of duty on their shoulders. This generation is interpreting that duty as to mean showing up for a few minutes or an hour, nodding in sympathy, garnering as many photos as possible with babies and puppies, and generally fueling the ‘magic’, before falling into their chauffeur driven fleet of land rovers, exhausted and relieved for the painful displays of humanity to be done for the day / week / month.

    Someone who well understands their spoiled personalities has advised them that they can ‘modernize’ the monarchy by targeting a limited number of charities and ‘doing more’, being ‘meaningul’, choosing quality over quantity. It’s all a load of rationalizing malarky but it clearly fits with a long term game plan to avoid the lifestyle of TQ, live more like their aristo friends, and avoid giving up royal perks or triggering the guilt/drama over resigning royal roles.

    Is this the first generation of BRF to be raised on Disney movies and the Magic Kingdom? Who is filling their heads with ideas of this benevolent magic they provide?

    • Tourmaline says:

      I think you are 100% on here with the long-term game plan. “We do less work than previous generations of royals…..but see here, our work is so meaningful, so thoughtful! We are so KEEN, you know!”

      Would love to hear that previous generation’s (Edward, Sophie, Andrew, ANNE!, Camilla, Charles, not to mention the various Gloucesters and Kents) opinion on this new paradigm that they were just “turning up, shaking hands, and not getting involved” for all those years. What an insult.

      • weegiewarrior says:

        Yes -what a bloody cheek – hel be getting a clip round th earhole from some of th elder royals – yea him n wills n kate r going to attend less but it will mean more? Absolute bollocks…

      • Aren says:

        It was a really horrible thing to say. For the royals who went to the events, and for the people who welcomed them.

    • Sorry, no dignity in that says:

      Quality pr over quantity of work. Sounds like the younger Royals are advised by some MBA-bimbo with additional pr qualifications.
      Such an approach might work for acting celebrities or sports celebrities who earn their money with their hard work and do some charity on the side. But for Royals charity is their MAIN work and not some disposable neglectable duty.

  50. Hunterca says:

    The problem is that PH and PW base their version of “normal” on what they perceive, what they see. They can be exposed to “ordinary” people all day, day in and day out, but until they are experiencing first-hand “ordinary” struggles, they will never, ever, EVER have an understanding of what it’s like to be a regular ol’ Joe. And that just is never going to happen unless and until they are stripped of fortune, which doesn’t seem likely. I think PH sounds less whiny and more NOT self aware. Bad move, doing this interview.

    • Nessa nessa says:

      This….he sounds ignorant. I’m hoping someone that knows those struggles really put things into perspective for him.

    • Mathilde says:

      Well, it goes the other way round as well. We will never, ever, ever understand… and so forth!

  51. Wren says:

    I have always liked Harry, but this is now at an end. What a spoiled, overpriviledged ungrateful cretin. He thinks he is ” normal?” He has no clue. He may go to a grocery store once in awhile, but I am sure he is accompanied by security and doesn’t need to restrict what he buys for lack of money. And God forbid one of the unwashed masses who pay for his lifestyle snap a picture of him when he is in a public place. Horrors!

    As for showing up and shaking hands, that is his ONLY job. He does not need to say anything intelligent, or even speak. Just show up for an hour or so, smile, shake hands, look like you are interested, then go home and spend the other 23 hours in the day doing whatever you want. If he doesn’t like a job like that, I would take it.

    As an American, I have never understood the royal family thing. I like and admire the Queen for her years of service and her work ethic as a leader. But the rest of them…the only thing interesting about royalty would be the pomp and the pageantry. If that is. It going to happen, what makes them any different from anyone else that they should be revered and subsidized? They are not attractive, or smart, or apparently even likeable. So, what do they have to justify their existence at taxpayer expense except the ” mystery” and the pagentry. If they don’t want that, abdicate. Simple.

    • Skylark says:

      @Wren – “They are not attractive, or smart, or apparently even likeable.”

      I don’t care about their attractiveness, or likeability even, but the lack of smartness of both brothers is incredibly offensive.

      All that privileged education at their disposal – where they could have done and been anything they set their minds to – utterly wasted, and screamingly evident, every time they open their public dunce mouths.

      I doubt either of them would currently pass an A-level English exam.

  52. Skylark says:

    Be interesting to see how Harry responds to the backlash. What will he pull out of his bag of tricks to change the (I’m sure, totally unexpected because unthinking, entitled privilege) narrative? I hope it’s not something shiny….


    • Nessa nessa says:

      Lord no….he better not propose because of this. Lol

      Nah…he needs to just roll up his sleeves and volunteer for a few hours in helping the victims of the fire.

  53. Cerys says:

    Oh dear, just when people thought Harry had matured and was embracing his royal duties more, he comes out with this.
    He and Whiny seem to be more similar in outlook than most people thought. Harry has been able to hide it more because he comes across as more caring and interested in people.
    The queen and Charles have pandered to these 2 self-indulgent princelings for too long. If they want normality, then they can stand aside and live a life of luxury on the money they inherited from their late mother. No more funding from the tax payer. Diana, despite all her personal problems, never shirked from her duties and I think she would be appalled at the attitude of her 2 boys.
    However, I do agree with his comments about no child having to walk behind their mother’s coffin in such a public manner. I thought it was terrible and insensitive at the time.

    • Sorry, no dignity in that says:

      I think both Harry and William milked their mother’s death both within and outside of the Royal Family.
      They got a soft-touch upbringing after Diana’s death because they used their mother’s death to kick some Royal shins. Especially William did that.
      And the press went easy on them because of Diana’s death. just look how gentle the press handles the Dolittle’s lazyness. And Harry’s, too.

  54. perplexed says:

    The problem with this interview is that he comes across as though he’s doing us a favour by doing his duty. Any famous person, whether you’re Michael Jackson’s kid or truly royal like Prince Charles’s kid, sounds annoying when they imply that.

  55. Elaine says:

    Wait, did I miss something or did Harry actually muse out loud about the possibility of his being KING?!

    Isn’t that impossible?

    Isn’t that a treasonable offense, even speculating about it?

    This tells me that he has heard all of the (mostly internet) talk about a possible King Ginger and how great that would be.

    And he’s thinking ’bout it.

    So far his plans as Possible-King Ginger are to:
    -Do his own shopping
    -Remind of how lucky we are to have a personal shoppin’ King.

    So very King. Much normal.

  56. Jeesie says:

    I’ve met Prince Philip in a work capacity on a few occasions, and he was always deeply involved and knowledgable about what were some of his lowest profile and lowest priority patronages. Also met Charles, and while he didn’t come in having done quite as much research as his father, he was genuinely curious and committed to learning more about what, again, were very low profile causes.

    The younger royals just don’t want to put the work in. So they pretend they’re special for concentrating on a couple of areas, when actually they’re just too lazy and dim to manage concentrating on many areas like their elders did. It’s ridiculous.

  57. BeamMeUpScottie says:

    Interesting view from the Daily Telegraph:

    A bit surprised that the comments are much more sympathetic than most other papers too… lol

    • Addie says:

      Well, it’s a Tory rag so not too surprising its readership will rally round the monarchy.

    • Sorry, no dignity in that says:

      Comments in newspapers are usually manipulated. They delete the ones they deem unfit to support their agenda.

  58. suze says:

    Oy vey. I read this and thought: I get what he is trying to do but it will go over like a lead balloon. And it has. Completely tone deaf and really, really bad timing.

    There is a populist rage engulfing the Western world, dude. Get some good advice before you go out again and talk about your normal life and how you are really ready to start royaling, some five years after you left your last full time job.

    • Aren says:

      I agree so much. The UK has a lot of issues to deal with, and he’s talking about his privileged self and how much he hates the idea of having to give something back.
      He should be addressing people’s concerns, his statements should be reassuring, but it’s like he’s completely clueless about the present, and that there might not even be a monarchy to ‘modernize’ in the future.

      • Nessa nessa says:

        I wonder when this interview took place? Was it months ago or what?

      • Sorry, no dignity in that says:

        Speaking cynically, you wonder how much Harry would to live and work in a “normal life” like us, eh!!!!

    • kibbles says:

      Agreed. I’m on board the populist train as well. This just shows how sheltered the Royals are from everyday life and concerns of regular people. Diana was sheltered too but she was quite good at PR and came across as the people’s princess with her philanthropic work. Harry, Kate, and William are not as PR savvy. In addition, we are living in different times where news travels fast via internet and people are angry with widening inequality with the cost of college tuition, housing prices, etc. Rich people cannot get away with a lot of things that they could before. They are under intense scrutiny and their words will be picked apart to expose them for the spoiled snobs that they are. A bit surprised that Harry would mess up like this but the truth always comes out eventually.

  59. Kitty says:

    The monarchy is in trouble once The Queen passes.

  60. Ravine says:

    I’m Harry cares about his charity work, and he seems like a nice enough person, but he needs to have a good hard listen to Pulp’s “Common People,” as many times as necessary, because he sounds exactly like the oblivious rich girl in that song. (Interestingly, playing at grocery shopping is how the I’m-normal charade starts for her, too.) He doesn’t get that “normal life” is defined by uncertainty. Normal people can’t rely on publicly-funded mansions, government-appointed security, a job that is still considered essential even in the deepest recession AND millions of pounds in private wealth should the first three things evaporate. We are vulnerable to external conditions. He isn’t, and never will be.

  61. Scout says:

    It sounds like Harry benefited from being the spare instead of the heir, hence his more laid back personality. I know William and Kate don’t even do a 1/10th of their duties but being the heir to the thrown would certainly make you more self-conscious and a bit more quiet because the entire world expects more from you. Harry sounds like an absolute twat, especially when it comes to them cutting patronages – so now those in need must jump through hoops to earn your support? Piss off.

  62. minx says:

    My sense is that William and Harry were indulged after their parents’ divorce, and indulged even more after Diana’s death. They’re both spoiled.

    • Elisa the I. says:

      ITA, and you can’t really blame their family for spoiling them after what happened. But – in addition to living in a RF-bubble – it makes them look even more out of touch compared to the rest of the bunch.
      I’m not surprised about this backlash, as IMO Harry and William always came across as spoiled brats.

  63. PrincessK says:

    Harry did not give the Newsweek interview for nothing, I hope whatever the ‘agreement’ was worth it. I am sure that Newsweek never saw this terrible backlash coming. I am sure that there were many things in the interview that were said and the monarchy thing is the only thing that is now being highlighted and taken out of context. I am quite sure Harry did not mean it to be interpreted in this way. Where is he? In Toronto??

    • PrincessK says:

      The ‘Meghan haters’ will be rubbing their little mitts with glee over this ‘negative’ Harry story now circulating everywhere.

  64. Carrie says:

    I’m so late to this nobody will care but I think something is up.

    I feel bad for the Queen after reading this. It’s disrespectful perhaps to her legacy and just…ugh. OTOH I’ve felt since the Heads Together push and Kate suddenly making more appearances that something is wrong in the family. Charles has been awfully quiet. There was that one interview with Camilla. After that, it’s been full on press with personal interviews and photos and videos with William, Kate, their kids, Harry. A few of the Queen. I’ve not seen or heard anything from Charles. Adding in all the talk of Diana and so openly I think something happened.

    Prince Phillip is ill, i’m worried the Queen and he may not be with us very long and some of this may be preparatory for that. I also wondered if plans are afoot to change the royal lifestyle substantially when the Queen is gone. Maybe Harry doing this is a test the waters thing for the public to weigh in. I can’t imagine he gave this interview without the Queen AND Charles’ advance approval.

    Finally, I wonder if there has been a falling out between the boys and Charles and Camilla. Because this is hard core or seems so and never any mention of Charles. Weird.

    Maybe they’re planning to not use Buckingham anymore and turn it entirely over to the public for revenue generation for public coffers after the Queen is gone. I mean, these people are not stupid and Harry saying all this is not without planning I think.

    • Sorry, no dignity in that says:

      I think Harry tried to express that the Royals don’t see themselves as autocrats any more. He kind of tries to say that the Royals think they aren’t ruling and they needn’t rule.

      But that backfired because basically he is saying that nobody really wants the job and its duties and responsibilities. In the “normal world” if you say you don’t want a job you won’t get it because people will suspect you of not putting in enough energy or not being competent.

      I am quite sure Harry doesn’t really want to work as hard as he would have to in “the normal world”. He doesn’t want duties and responsibilities. But he does want all the Royal perks. And that is impertinent.

      Harry just proves he has no idea what the “normal world” is like.
      Harry also proves that attending elite schools and elite military academies won’t even enable you to think as well as any undereducated employee who would never say “I don’t want the job”.
      Harry’s lack of education and his inability to express what he means/wants to say become apparent. It is hilarious.

      How comes that these people get millions for their lousy performance? Well, their lifestyle costs millions.

      • Carrie says:

        “Because basically he is saying”… no, no no. That is your interpretation of what he said.

        You’re quite sure he doesn’t want to work as hard….he was in active duty and all the training required prior to that position. I think the military is kind of the definition or one of the standards of hard work in the normal world.

        “Harry’s lack of education and his inability to express what he means/wants to say become apparent. It is hilarious.” … wow. That was harsh. He does quiet well speaking. Invictus, anyone? Relating to kids anyone? His fellow military people? He recently did an interview with CTV in Canada ahead of Invictus games in Toronto. His empathy and ability to vocalize and understand what his fellow military people were saying was rare talent on display.

        I see Prince Harry as being in a position of privilege and knowing it. When he spoke on this, I interpreted it and heard it as they are embarrassed to have a ruling position of royalty. Not that they don’t appreciate it, but that he’s trying to contribute to life on level of everyone else in the world who is not in privileged position.

    • Where'sMyTiara says:

      This is an interesting take. I had thought it supremely odd that Camilla should give an interview now, and in the manner that she did, with the “poor me I had to live in hiding it was terrible” business. Could that have been pushed for by Charles? Because she doesn’t seem the type to seek the spotlight, but someone was obviously very interested in countering the Diana narrative. I think that was a machination put together by Charles w/ the help of his courtiers.

      I think The Firm is probably walking on eggshells a bit as a whole this year. Phillip and Her Maj are holding their own for now, but Phillip’s been in hospital again, and Her Maj is at her weakest when Phillip, whom she’s always called her strength, isn’t at her side. Sadly I think when he finally goes, she won’t be long after him. They’re that sort of couple.

      It’s the 20th anniversary of Diana’s death this year. I do find it galling, however, that between the Charles/Camilla camp, and the William/Harry camp, no one can seem to mention or celebrate the life of Diana 20yrs on without making every interview ultimately about themselves. It’s unseemly.

  65. Janet says:

    Some just have to talk about Meghan also because im guessing some of y’all really missed bashing Meghan,its been a while. what does she have to do with this and why was her name even brought up in this conversation

  66. Blackbetty says:

    To William and Harry, if you hate being royal so much, you can always abdicate like your relative Edward did (to marry Wallis Simpson)!!!! Wondering what will happen in the future, after the Queen passes on. Here in Australia there is a growing Republican movement.

  67. Sorry, no dignity in that says:

    you don’t want the job? Then do resign.

    Any employee who publicly said he didn’t want the job gets told off or even fired.
    Any hairdresser or any waiter who says I don’t like / want my job won’t get tipped.

    • Carrie says:

      Empathy classes are all the rage in the normal world right now. Also helps to understand where there is and isn’t dignity.

  68. Claudia Remm says:

    Oh these Royals, how dare them to say, they don’t really want the job. Since “we” pay them, they have to do as they are told. Otherwise they get the boot.
    It must be fulfilling, to open bridges or whatever and cut ribbons, to be the head of state and have no power at all. To be under public scrutiny all the time and the public determines what is good and what is not, how they shall behave, what they shall wear, who they shall marry. Yes I see the similarity to a waiter and hairdresser. :D :D :D
    In hindsight, yes, the funeral of Diana was completely out of proportion. I agree to what Ramona said about it.

  69. Rae says:

    I’m a Harry fan, but there are points that I don’t agree with him here.

    I believe they need to keep up with the numbers that the seniors do, that’s their bread and butter. The royals need to earn their keep; they’re there to shake hands, bring attention to the smaller institutions they patronage, and to generally smile and wave.

    They don’t have enough power to invoke massive change by just supporting the odd charity. The seniors should be used as a benchmark, not to be dismissed.

    I hope his comments about “filling her boots” has been misunderstood. As in, he was saying no one wants to be jumping into her shoes because that’ll mean she’s dead. Rather than they don’t want to emulate her.

    So awfully timed and, I agree, tone deaf.