Skip to main content

Romance in the AIR - Expectations and Then there is Reality

 I read somewhere an observation of parallels of Harry and his mother - of how they both appeared to become bored after they no longer had their official duties.  And how they seemed adrift as to what to do next with themself.

I started thinking then of how Diana (probably) had certain expectations of what love, marriage would be (maybe he loves me, only me and not her, happy ever after and who knows but perhaps that marriage is all sweetness, light, happy and joy like in a romance novel) ... which leads to expectations of what marriage might have been for Harry's wife.  Or even Harry.

Oh boy. 

I don't recall marriage comments but do remember how he talked and wrote about how he wanted for his kids to be able to grow up with their cousins, second cousins in what sounds like how he grew up playing with family, doing the annual this and that with family (minus his parents not getting along).  A vestige of his childhood he wanted to repeat, pass on as important to his kids.  

So ... what marriage appears to be is an unknown except possible what might or might not have been said to his past girlfriends or the woman he married.  Nor any idea of what his mother had said, either directly or implied, about marriage in general to him.  What is interesting is that, allegedly, he and his brother were sorta kinda tolerant with the idea of Camilla being around but not married to their father.  Besides his book, I don't remember other sources but they could be out there.

And, Diana was able to work a really nice settlement post divorce from Charles.  One, that I remember reading somewhere, that his mother, The Queen, had to fund as he did not have sufficient capital to pay off immediately.   Andrew's wife did not fare as well but one might come to the conclusion that getting divorced from a (senior) BRF member is not a big deal, the women walk away with lots of money and retain some status/stay in the public eye.  Their life goes on with parties, pictures in the magazines and so on.

Knowing that he was handled well (closely) by the palace plus young, he probably was not the most informed  resource of how that all played out with the adults or court protocol for dress (other than his uniform, medals), rules other than be behind higher ranking people and other specific details about his family and how they function.  We know he didn't have a good sense of how the money worked as he really got upset when his father tried to explain that things would change once he became king, William would get the Duchy money and Harry would no longer have any right to a cent of it.  We don't know if any similar conversations with his father were attempted.  Truth be told, many families do not talk about money with their kids.  Or talk about how to save, make good investment decisions or plan for expenses.  At any rate, it was a rude awakening.


Her - well we have some information that she didn't feel a need to tap into the various helpful people offered to answer questions or adjust to a new and very different life with very different rules and how to avoid mistakes with  many people watching/ commenting when a mistake was made.  Nah, she had him as a resource allegedly.

She definitely had way more experience at long term intimate relationships that Diana didn't before either married in.  

What she didn't have, but Diana did, was the knowledge of the UK, primogeniture, British history, an existing relationship with the Royal family and general knowledge of how things worked within the family.  Both women pushed back at help adjusting.  I can remember reading of someone's career left in tatters as they were to help educate Diana about some things she didn't know and pretty much refused.

I suspect a larger factor (for greater adjustment) was Diana also knew the rank of the person she was marrying as how it would impact her.  And who she was not getting married to.  But mainly how marriage would impact her future.  That part, I think, she went in with her eyes open.

So ... I think that when I think about why Harry's wife had difficulties.  If you didn't grow up seeing various members of the BRF ribbon cutting, invitations to one of the garden parties, tours overseas as an endless meet and greets (grind or not) but perhaps you did see the Crown Jewels (flashy and well protected), the various mentions in more PR based magazines then you miss the fundamental reason why they were doing all this (not reported in various USA PR magazines) in the first place  - as Service to Her Majesty.  

If you grow up being told, as many are in the US, that you can become anything you want to be, then you aren't going to understand primogeniture.  You might think that stupid at best and clearly outdated and more at worst (not female equality).  And that it isn't something one can change because you don't like it or it isn't in your understanding of how other parts of the world work.  To even know about it, as much of British royal and court history is not part of the American revolution, culture, you would have to make an effort to learn what it was all about.  (basically you have to get past Henry VIII having the authority to order heads off as the monarchy does what it wants to, the jewelry, fancy dress balls and get into the nitty gritty of how the UK political scene has evolved since Queen Victoria and before her).

And the US is kind of funny about rank.  Ranks of grades is one thing you hear and hear about as a kid but most are not exposed to rank as status until they start into their first real job and they see who gets what in their office compared to someone else based on specific job title.  We don't have family status titles like Duke, Duchess.  The closest might be titles of elected officials (which can change the next election so temporary) or the C titles of a corporation if you have that kind of job.  I don't recall that she had a lot of corporate type jobs so that would be another type of exposure she didn't get which might have helped her understand rank within the family she was about to marry into.  And, how she fit into it.  There could be some flexibility within the family but the adjusting would always be mainly by the one entering it.    

You need more than just the movie 84 Charing Cross Road to learn about rationing post war or visiting the crown jewels in the museum once to learn about what their meaning and role in the history/future of the country.  

However, if you did grow up reading and seeing Diana in the same magazines as this movie star at an opening, that pr story of rock star on the road as one of Diana at this party, that event, socializing with this pop star, that concert, fancy fancy dresses, you might think of that British royal life is about being famous, parties and not as primarily in service to the Queen.   And, Diana did drop her patronages and the world did not stop turning.  One might then remember that and think that (for someone at that status level) you can be famous, life is lots of parties, concerts, meeting famous people, ie do the parts of royal life that you like and toss out the rest and  ...  it doesn't matter in the end if you leave.  You still wind up with all the fun stuff you had with them  before you left.  And, if you've been very successful at getting what you wanted in life, there would not be a lot of reason to think that this new life could or would be any different than the past experiences for getting what you want.

Learning/adjusting to a new life in a different country than you grew up in (ie a new culture) is a big deal.  It has different rules - from grammar to etiquette, different slang or meanings even if it is technically the same words and sentence structure.  All of that before you add in marrying into the BRF. Even those who grew up "local" to the BRF culture still had some adjustment to the new way of life in addition to adjusting to marriage.  

Romantic expectations not living up to the reality.  A lot of marriages everywhere flounder on that.  Same is true about money.  Reality can be a rough adjustment.


Comments

abbyh said…
Guidelines for this blog is as follows:

-Keep discussions on the Sussexes. Politics must be strictly related to their involvement. Off topic subjects are permissible but should be limited and are subject to the discretion of Mods.
-Be civil and courteous in discussions.
-Posters who are disruptive will not have their posts posted.
-Anonymous or unknown posts are not allowed.
-We know that some of this is not family friendly. It can be a fine line sometimes on the topics such as sex and sexuality. Try to lean towards family friendly (thanks).
-Profanity has not traditionally been a problem, so let's keep it that way.
-We never encourage vindictive or other harmful actions.
-Please try to keep the conspiracy theories down.
-Do not discuss the blog, blog history, or other posters.
-No personal attacks both direct and indirect.
-Please de-escalate "fights" by dropping the subject. (please drop us a message that someone is treading on your last nerve so we can be aware that this is a problem).
-Please remember that the focus of the blog is on others, not any individuals posting here. So if your name is not attached to something posted, please begin with the idea that what is written is not likely to be directed at you if it upsets you.
-Posts which may be deemed too many flat statements/too provocative or mean spirited may not posted on the blog.
-Remember that not every one who reads the posts is happy about what is posted here. Please do not give out personal information. Be safe.
-Your privacy matters.
-Remember that certain sites require prior approval for reuse such as Harry Markle. Please respect their request on how to handle it. Links to share is a great alternative.


Mods do their best to ensure the guidelines are met. However, lapses happen because moderating this blog is a 24/7 responsibility and we all have jobs and families (and laundry) to care for. If you see overlooked issues, please feel free to message us so we can address them.

Thank you again for all your patience and support.

Moderation is still on.
The baroness wanted to have fame, money and jewels when she married. She did not want the work for she is a very lazy person and her boast of being very big in the details in everything she does is a just her normal bragging as her wickless candles prove. Her extremely vulgar wedding showed to the world what she wanted.

I don't believe Harry ever understood anything about the royalty or his family. His behaviour after he left Britain proves it. He just lived his life without ever stressing his pea brain with anything except drinking and filling his nose with cocaine.

What he wanted was the idea of a happy marriage as he thought William had without understanding what made his brother's marriage a success. (Two grown up adults ready to work together with respect towards each other AND LOVE.) Harry was not ready to be adult and he probably will never be. His idea of love had everything to do with his sexual pleasure and nothing else.

PS I find it interesting that the women (not ladies, the women) in Daily Mail are quite capable to write prince Andrew's name as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor only after a few days and are quite incapable to write Catherine's name as The Duchess of Cambridge/The Princess of Wales after 15 years of marriage?

I mean Andrew's name has 25 letters and Catherine's only 18? (note very heavy sarcasm)

Maneki Neko said…
Thank you, @abbyh. This is a good summary of how * must have viewed being in the BRF, especially if she read about Diana meeting rock stars, going to parties etc. Not being British, not knowing about British history and culture, not and the general working of the BRF certainly didn't help. Diana came from an aristocratic background and moved in royal circles before her marriage so it was easier for her, although she wasn't the meek, docile bride Charles expected. * even less.
As far as romance is concerned, when a journalist told Charles and Diana they looked very much in love, to which Diana replied 'yes, absolutely ', Charles famously replied 'Whatever 'in love' love means'. Not exactly reassuring. Harry might have been in love, but I doubt * was. Harry was a means to an end.
abbyh said…
I was thinking of the difference between reality and what one thinks/hopes the future might be ... and then ... why reality was just so so different.

Generational pattern.

And then there is the whole romance novel genre which is easily available in many first world countries which is all about the happy ending.

All of that flying into the brick wall of the BRF (and how things very slowly change - never mind how Charles was in love with someone he was told he could not marry - grateful he was more into following destiny, protocol than a second Mayerling).

Girl with a Hat said…
Marrying for love is a rather new concept, especially for the upper classes and royalty. More practical concerns were always prioritized like political alliances, social standing, money, etc.
That`s not to say there weren`t exceptions, for example, Elizabeth and Philip.

Popular posts from this blog

Cliff Hanger

Deadlines for responses have passed.  Will they show?  Won't they show?   And, rumors of demands for money to cross hands to make appearances (new level of pay to play). Such drama.  You would think this was a soap opera where every episode ends with a crazy cliff hanger story plot to drive the next installment.  Sadly, I don't expect it to change any time soon either.  No.  For them, there appears to be way too much energy left in the will they, won't they to end it now even though everyone else is pretty much tired of it.  Hardly something one can point to and claim that they are trying to reconcile with those who feel distressed about what was printed. Just noticed something: remember that talk of trying to reach out and reconcile after the book, etc.?  It seems to have drifted away, hasn't it?  Hmm.  Interesting.  I wonder if that is recognized as a total lost cause or just delayed into the summer (or fall) campaign (c...

Here comes Trevor

If you're a Beatles fan, you'll know that in the fifty years since the group went its separate ways, almost everyone involved with them has sold his or her story. Only one major figure has not: Jane Asher , who was Paul McCartney's girlfriend for five years during the heyday of the group, and accompanied him on the famous trip to India in 1968. An actress, Jane went on to become a TV personality and famous cake-baker. She has never spoken about her time with McCartney and dislikes being asked. Until recently, the Sussex saga had included a similar figure: Trevor Engelson, Meghan Markle's ex-husband.  Trevor has never spoken about Meg. But he has done well for himself: he married a wealthy woman , continues to work as a producer , and seems to have a loyal (and multi-racial!) circle of friends , unlike some people we know.  He appeared to have excused himself from the whole soggy mess.  Until yesterday, when he was papped. Driving his black Porsch...

Adventures in Starting a Business

I admit, I made a mistake.  I thought it was a vision board, not a mood board at first.  On some levels being a mood board and not a business plan may actually show more window dressing and even less planning and thought for the business. The photo(s) of the board drew a lot of criticism of too forced looking to be real and similar.  And that is true.  It is, I suspect, that influencer look influencing how the just so perfectly curated look that influencers spend a lot of time and effort - to look effortlessly.  Most small business offices I have been in never looked curated.  Messy was more like it.  I have worked in offices with positive, uplifting posters (which no one really talked about - they filled blank wall space). But in the real world of business, there is nothing technically wrong with nice positive affirmations.  We can all use some positive pep talk.  But it isn't a business plan.     Yeah, making positive stateme...