That’s not the only way it might happen!
He should be Eric Trump’s buddy. Similar ages, both younger sons with dead moms. Both royalty /s
For those interested in his book but not so much that you actually want to spend money or read it, here’s a digested version from the Guardian. It seems to get to the real essence of it.
From
.
[more wedding stuff texted]
.
There’s more at the article.
See also the two princes in Sondheim’s Into the Woods who are much the same (and after the same three women, plus Rapunzel and, for good measure, the baker’s wife) - loving the chase but not the prize once won.
I’m off-topic but The Hero’s Guide to Saving Your Kingdom is (I thought) a pretty funny take on the Prince Charming stories. The Hero’s Guide to Saving Your Kingdom
You can download the kindle version free, which is what I did. Okay sorry, I’ll butt out again.
“Of all the manifestations of power, restraint is the most impressive.” (Thucydides)
Prince Harry on 60 Minutes — what’s his story? Good guy? Spoiled brat? What?
Useless inconsequential royal?
Sometimes the road back home to the Shire passes through Mount Doom.
We should have led with this.
Extremely strong sales of his autobiography:
Is that a quote from his book? Because it definitely sounds like the sort of overblown, melodramatic, self-centred analogy that the critics are making fun of.
Whatever Harry thinks he is doing, saving the world it is not.
Not that I’m aware of. It’s merely a paraphrase of what Sam Gamgee told himself in LotR.
I know it’s a silly question but by now shouldn’t Harry’s title be
“The Author Formerly Known As Prince”?
I don’t spend any time thinking about the British Royals. But I saw the interview on 60 Minutes.
I begrudgingly accept the Royals as a sop to tradition, historical wartime service, morale and tourism. I am pleased their political role is usually meaningless but some real leadership might have been handy during this Brexit debacle.
Royalty is a straitjacket where one accepts ridiculous privilege and wealth in return for duty, traditional roles, limited privacy and discretion. While difficult, my level of empathy is quite limited.
If it is true his family has failed to live up to the understood obligations, he has a right to state his views. If he has opted for fewer obligations and more freedom than probably cannot expect the full support of his family. I’m not planning on reading the book.
I suspect British tabloids are often unfair and difficult and that Harry is correct about microaggressive racism. However, it is hard to believe this greatly surprises him. He comes across to me as somewhat calculating and only slightly naive. It is slightly hard to reconcile the little I know about his military achievements with an apparent tendency to get misty eyed over tchotchkes. Everyone with siblings understands the dynamics sometimes at play. But I don’t want to be unfair, obviously there was a troubled past and the family dynamics are doubtless enormously dysfunction - they’d have to be, no?
It bothers me little if he wants to have his cake and eat it too, if this is indeed what is going on. Seems likeable enough, and no doubt many benefit from therapy, but maybe some more gravitas if he wants to be taken seriously? Or not. Not my circus. Not my monkeys.
He is still His Royal Highness Prince Henry Charles Albert David, the Duke of Sussex, Earl of Dumbarton, and Baron Kilkeel. The monarch didn’t remove any of his titles. He has just decided not to use the “His Royal Highness” part.
Yes—if ever there was a time for the “nuclear option,” that was it. But the queen chose not to fall on her sword to save the UK, and so confirmed that the position is really and truly ceremonial and thus optional.
Is it known how she actually felt about Brexit?
I don’t know that it is known, but I would assume that for something that important, you wouldn’t act on your feelings so much as you would on the evidence and expert advice, to which I presume she had access.