The last word in victimhood: As the new version of Finding Freedom – complete with a barb at the Queen – finally hits the shelves, read RICHARD KAY’s stinging verdict on the Harry and Meghan book
For almost a quarter of a century, 팔월 31 has been a date of quiet reflection for the family and friends of 다이아나 공주 — but not this year.
어제, on the 24th anniversary of the princess’s tragic death in a Paris car crash, came the sound of a noisy intrusion from far away 캘리포니아.
It was the arrival in the bookshops of an updated version of the Harry and Meghan biography Finding Freedom. With it came a jarring reminder of how no issue in their supremely cossetted, opulent lives, however petty, can be allowed to rest, nor any criticism go unchallenged.
And while the couple themselves surely had no part in choosing this significant royal anniversary for its publication, the book will do nothing to erase the notion that they possess an outsize sense of victimhood.
The new chapter of the Harry and Meghan biography Finding Freedom arrived on 24th anniversary of Princess Diana’s death. 사진: Prince Harry and Meghan in March 2020
Only one new chapter to the book — styled here as an ‘epilogue’ — has been added, but its 25 pages are loaded with self-serving reflections on the controversies that have surrounded the couple in the year since the first version of the book hit the shelves.
Unauthorised it may be, but the biography does provide one valuable service: come what may the Duke and Duchess of Sussex must always have the last word.
Nowhere is this more clear-cut than in passages relating to the reaction from the Palace to the couple’s explosive TV interview with Oprah Winfrey in which they alleged a racist comment was made about the colour of their son Archie’s skin.
당시, in a thoughtful and positive response which also expressed concern for the couple, the Queen added the masterful qualification that ‘some recollections may vary’.
Even though almost six months have elapsed since the fall-out from the interview — and both sides are said to be attempting to build bridges — this is not allowed to go unopposed. Authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand write: ‘Those three words, “recollections may vary”, did not go unnoticed by the couple, who a close source said were “not surprised” that full ownership was not taken.’
Only one new chapter to the book – styled here as an ‘epilogue’ – has been added, but its 25 pages are loaded with self-serving reflections on the controversies that have surrounded the couple in the year since the first version of the book hit the shelves
In another thinly veiled aside at the Queen, the writers claim that the ‘unaddressed’ allegations ‘have continued to threaten the Royal Family’s image around the world’ and ‘could no doubt bring down the monarchy’.
As if to emphasise the point, Scobie and Durand claimed the couple considered naming the ‘royal racist’ but ultimately chose not to.
Intriguingly, broadcaster and columnist Jeremy Clarkson has offered an alternative view.
‘If my sources are correct,’ he wrote this weekend, ‘the real reason they didn’t name the person might have something to do with the fact that they are not actually a member of the Royal Family.’
Of the fact that Harry and Meghan, with their own self-indulgent whinging and attacks on the monarchy, might themselves be endangering the long-term well-being of the institution, there is not so much as a peep.
Through their lawyers, the couple have distanced themselves from Finding Freedom, insisting the writers ‘do not speak for our clients’. But every page of the epilogue drips with warmth for the Duke and Duchess, while rounding on their critics in and outside the Palace.
It included passages that gave Harry and Meghan’s reaction to the Palace’s response to the couple’s explosive TV interview with Oprah Winfrey (사진) in which they alleged a racist comment was made about the colour of their son Archie’s skin
Take the storm that flared up in the wake of claims that Meghan had faced an allegation that she had bullied staff, forcing out two palace assistants and undermining the confidence of a third.
Rather than deal with the allegations of the highly detailed complaint, the book dismisses it as a smear and quotes a figure in the couple’s circle saying that it ‘served as a reminder’ to the Sussexes that they had made the right decision to leave Britain.
Then there is the toxic matter of the family rift. The book describes how Harry and Prince Charles were only on ‘light speaking terms’ in the run-up to Prince Philip’s funeral at Windsor Castle in April.
Hardly surprising when you consider how, only a month earlier, he had suggested to Oprah that his father had cut him off financially.
Leafing through this new chapter and the preceding 300-plus syrupy pages, what emerges is how Harry has utterly changed from being the fun-loving Prince who dazzled the world with his charm — an ambassador who, with Meghan at his side, could have done so much for post-Brexit global Britain.
It is easy to imagine him and the Duchess now sitting in their Montecito mansion congratulating themselves on their status-defining interventions, from celebrating diversity to ending global poverty and saving the planet.
Publication of this new book may turn out to be timely, because it comes as those mission-statement pronouncements no longer receive the universal acclaim they once did. Many in Britain have tired of this feather-bedded couple’s griping, especially when it appears to include criticism of a much-loved 95-year-old monarch.
But elsewhere there is a growing sense of their dislocation from the real world.
Nothing illustrated that more than the statement about Afghanistan in which they said they had been left ‘speechless’ over developments, and proceeded to post a long-winded peroration about proving ‘our humanity’ while noting that ‘the world is exceptionally fragile right now’.
Worthy it may be, but even the most fanatically devoted of Harry’s fans must be longing for a glimpse of the old Harry, the one who exchanged good-natured banter with the Olympic runner Usain Bolt.
Then there is the toxic matter of the family rift. The book describes how Harry and Prince Charles were only on ‘light speaking terms’ in the run-up to Prince Philip’s funeral at Windsor Castle in April. 사진: Prince Charles and Prince Harry in April 2019
혹시, 그 어느 때보 다, the world would long to see the Harry who had such a natural, uncomplicated and empathetic relationship with servicemen and women helping those Afghan veterans who have been traumatised by the events of the past two weeks. How much more impressive that would be than some empty statement about feeling speechless.
And then there was that decision to take a private jet 750 miles in order to take part in a game of polo, albeit for charity.
Only three months ago Harry was telling a TV interviewer about climate change and his fears for the planet.
‘Kids growing up in today’s world, pretty depressing, 권리, depending on where you live; your home country is either on fire, it’s either underwater, houses or forests are being flattened,’그는 말했다.
But noble words require noble action. And even in America, where many of his actions have been applauded, he was accused of being an eco-hypocrite.
Once upon a time Harry was one of the royals who understood that, when it came to royalty, perception was crucial. Now it seems to matter less. It was hardly the first time claims of hypocrisy had been levelled at the couple. Remember those ‘blood money’ earrings Meghan wore on a royal tour to Fiji in 2018.
It was disclosed that they had been a gift from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who had been accused of ordering the brutal killing of reporter Jamal Khashoggi.
Finding Freedom draws attention to the fact that the Queen, Duchess of Cornwall and Princess Diana had all received jewels from the Saudi royal family.
It neglects to say that at the time no Saudi royal had been accused by the CIA of being behind the death and dismemberment of a prominent journalist.
Wisely, the Palace have decided not to respond publicly to the book’s claims. They may find that position much harder to maintain next year when Harry’s own memoirs — penned with a ghostwriter — are set to appear.
But by then the public appetite for this couple’s increasingly vacuous do-gooding deeds may have diminished even further.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are ‘making very little progress’ 왕실과 화해하면서, Finding Freedom author claims
공작과 서 섹스 공작부 인 는 '아주 약간의 진전을 보이고 있다.’ 왕실과 화해하면서, 자유를 찾아서의 저자는 다음과 같이 주장했습니다..
오 미드 스코비 – who penned the biography with Carolyn Durand and is releasing an updated version today, the 24th anniversary of Princess Diana’s death – said 해리 왕자, 37, and Meghan Markle, 40, were ‘desperate to get their story out there’ when they gave their explosive 오프라 윈프리 interview earlier this year.
Appearing on 좋은 아침 미국 오늘, Omid claimed the couple, who are currently living in their $14 million mansion in California, and the royal family both want all involved to take ‘accountability and ownership’ 균열에서의 역할을 위해.
그가 설명했다: ' 부부와 가까운 소식통과 왕족과 가까운 소식통에게 말할 때, 아주 약간의 진전이 이루어지고 있다는 느낌이 있습니다.’
한편 Scobie는 Oprah Winfrey 인터뷰 전에 고위 궁전 보좌관이 한 Meghan의 괴롭힘 행위에 대한 주장이 '복수'라고 제안했습니다.’ 공작과 공작 부인을 위한 회사에서’ 행위.
Sussexes는 '많은 부서진 사람들'을 남긴 혐의로 기소되었습니다.’ '자신의 행동으로 인해 상처받은 젊은 여성들과 함께’ 직원 중 한 명이 '완전히 파괴되었습니다.’ 시련으로.
스코비가 말했다: 나를 위해, 이것이 오프라 인터뷰가 나오기 직전에 우리가 본 기관의 일종의 복수라는 다른 결론에 도달하는 것은 불가능합니다.’
그는 덧붙였다: ‘One of the sources that we spoke to in the book said it was the classic “Oppo dump” which you see before a presidential election.
공작, 37, 서 섹스 공작부 인, 40, 는 '아주 약간의 진전을 보이고 있다.’ 왕실과 화해하면서, 자유를 찾아서의 저자는 다음과 같이 주장했습니다.
Omid said there had been ‘little progress’ in mending the rift between the Sussexes and the royal family, 그러나 추가: '하나, some feelings have subsided because time has done its things, so the door is very much open for those conversations to happen at some point.’
Meanwhile he said the couple had no intention of leaving the public eye in search of privacy, 드러내는: ‘It’s not that they want to disappear or not be seen. It’s simply that they want to choose what they keep private and what they share with the world.’
The Finding Freedom author said since stepping back from royal duty, the couple are now ‘thriving’, 첨가: ‘Fast forward to a life in the US where they are very much in control.
‘The Archewell legacy they’re building – this is the couple showing the world exactly what is important to them.’
오늘 굿모닝 아메리카에 출연, Omid Scobie claimed the couple, who are currently living in their $14 million mansion in California, ‘want everyone to take accountability’ 균열에서의 역할을 위해 (사진, 여왕, 찰스 왕자, 카밀라, Prince William and Kate Middleton at the Commonwealth Service in March 2020)
Meanwhile he also suggested the couple could go on to reveal more details about their relationship with members of the royal family like Prince Charles and William.
그는 말했다: ‘Now I think that when and if we hear more of their journey towards healing these family relations and the issues that they’ve faced, it’s going to be from them themselves.’
여왕은 올해 초 메건과 해리가 직원들을 괴롭혔다는 주장에 대해 전례 없는 조사를 시작했다. – 왕실 직원들 '흔들림'’ 불행한 기억으로’ '독성 기간'에 대해 제기되고 있다.’ 부부가 이주하기 전에.
서식스 공작 부인이 '감정적 학대'를 가했다는 황당한 주장’ 부하들에게 '그들을 몰아냈다.’ '매우’ ...에 관하여, 버킹엄 궁전은 말했다.
The whistleblower told The Times: ‘We will finally be able to tell the truth. It’s not going to be easy, but this is very welcome and long overdue. We don’t have to be silent any more’. Lawyers for the Sussexes have vehemently denied they have bullied or mistreated staff.
몇주 전에, a source claimed the Duchess of Cornwall is unlikely to ever forgive her stepson Prince Harry and Meghan for hurting Prince Charles after Megxit.
Prince Harry has addressed his relationship with his father in several interviews throughout the year – 지난 3월 오프라 윈프리(Oprah Winfrey)와의 폭탄 인터뷰에서 이에 대해 처음 공개한 후 자신이 '실망했다'고 주장했습니다.’ 찰스 왕세자.
Scobie penned the biography Finding Freedom with Carolyn Durand and is releasing an updated version today, the 24th anniversary of Princess Diana’s death (사진, on GMA today)
During the TV interview, Scobie suggested the couple could go on to reveal more details about their relationship with members of the royal family like Prince Charles and William
텔레그래프와의 대화, 왕실 전문가 카밀라 토미니(Camilla Tominey)는 카밀라와 가까운 소식통이 버킹엄 궁전이 해리 왕자와 메건 마클이 여전히 가족의 사랑을 받고 있다는 메시지를 전하고 있다고 전했다고 전했다., 콘월 공작 부인은 앞으로 나아가기 위해 고군분투할 것입니다..
또 다른 소식통은 찰스 왕세자가 해리 왕세자와의 불화설에 깊은 영향을 받았고 '정말 힘들었다'고 주장했다.’
한편 윌리엄 왕자와 해리는 거의 말을 하지 않았고 '믿을 수 없을 정도로 긴장된 상태'였다고 한다.’ 해리의 아내와 직원 대우 의혹에 대한 2년 간의 논쟁 끝에 관계, the couple’s decision to emigrate to America and the tonnes of ‘truth bombs’ Sussexes는 전 세계 수천만 명의 사람들이 시청하는 TV 인터뷰에서 떨어졌습니다..
Harry와 Meghan은 Royals에 의해 버려졌다고 생각합니다., 심지어 서식스 공작 부인이 런던에서 임신 중 외로움과 자살 충동을 느꼈을 때 Archie에 대한 인종 차별주의를 비난하고 도움을 요청하는 그들의 외침을 무시했습니다..
Harry와 Meghan 전기의 업데이트된 판은 또한 왕실과의 관계 상태에 대한 논쟁을 촉발할 가능성이 있는 일련의 다른 신선한 주장을 했습니다..
한편 윌리엄 왕자와 해리는 거의 말을 하지 않았고 '믿을 수 없을 정도로 긴장된 상태'였다고 한다.’ relationship after two years of rows (7 월에 함께 찍은 사진)
유출된 에필로그 버전은 부부가 아들에 대해 인종차별적 발언을 했다고 주장하는 왕족의 이름을 짓는 것을 고려했다고 주장했습니다., 아치; 일부 왕실은 '조용히 기뻐했다.’ 서식스 공작 부인은 필립 왕자의 장례식을 놓쳤고 윌리엄 왕자는 '분노했다.’ 오프라와의 인터뷰에 대해.
새 판은 또한 Sussexes가 '후회가 없다.’ 왕실의 역할을 그만두는 것에 대해 Meghan은 그녀의 폭발적인 오프라 인터뷰가 '카타르시스’ 그리고 '해방'.
Meghan은 Oprah Winfrey에게 익명의 왕가가 '걱정'을 표명했다고 말한 후 군주국을 위기에 빠뜨렸습니다.’ Archie가 태어나기 전 피부에 대해.
에필로그에 따르면 한 소식통은 저자 Omid Scobie와 Carolyn Durand에게 Sussexes가 가족 구성원의 이름을 짓는 것을 고려했지만 궁극적으로 그렇게 하지 않기로 결정했다고 말했습니다..
또한 'Sussexes에 가까운 출처’ 부부의 주장에 대한 왕실의 반응은 '긍정적이지 않다'.
The source told the authors that there had to be ‘some acknowledgment’ about what the Sussexes went through for there to be ‘progress’.
The criticism came after a carefully-worded statement from the Queen following the controversial Oprah interview, which expressed concern for the couple but insisted that ‘some recollections may vary’.