Harry & Meghan: a serious attempt to set the record straight?
Critics are divided over the motive behind the latest revelations from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex
In recent days, the news has been “awash with stories of suffering and struggle”, said Michael Deacon in The Daily Telegraph. Children going to school hungry. Nurses using food banks. Pensioners deciding between heating and eating. Between all this, we have been seeing trailers for a Netflix documentary in which two multimillionaires who live in a mansion in California sob about how hard their lives are.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been complaining about their lot for three years. Last week, the first tranche of their six-part series – part of a $100m deal they struck with Netflix – finally aired, and Deacon wondered: did this couple, who “pride themselves above all else on their empathy and compassion”, pause to consider how their pity party might appear to the eight billion or so people in the world who are less fortunate than they are?
‘Hollow selfmythologising’
“‘What are we doing?’ the couple wonder more than once, as they reflect on their actions in this fever dream of self-aggrandisement,” said Jessie Thompson in The Independent. Harry and Meghan say they want to tell their story – a story they felt unable to tell before, but which they now “seem to tell professionally, for a living”.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
The first three episodes, released last week, focus on their early lives and courtship. It is mainly anodyne stuff: a “mix of melodramatically soundtracked, soft-focused photo montages, doeeyed soppiness and hollow selfmythologising”, plus a “relentless amount of intimate material”. This is a couple who seem to have a “pathological need” to document their lives. They have video diaries, and a photo for every moment; we are even treated to a clip of Meghan whispering down the phone to a friend, as Harry prepares to propose.
They have every right to reveal details of their lives on their terms, but it’s too much: we get it, you are a lovely couple, perfectly in love. Or, as Harry tells us, in one of several scenes that feel curiously unnatural, “This is a great love story, and the craziest thing is, I think it is just getting started.”
Those hoping for bombshells will be disappointed, said Alexander Larman in The Spectator. The first part of this “interminable” documentary goes over wearily familiar ground, as it contrasts life in stuffy Britain (largely seen in monochrome) with sunny California.
There are a few sideswipes at Harry’s family. King Charles may have been hurt by his son’s assertion that he was “brought up” in Africa. The Prince and Princess of Wales may have been irked by Harry’s claim that whereas he married for love, other royals have had to marry women who “fit the mould”. But there is no “full-frontal assault” on the family. Instead, we get an “earnest history lesson” (courtesy of David Olusoga, who offers context on racial issues), “self-consciously goofy romantic comedy, and a salutary reminder of how awful the British press is”.
‘Heroes of social justice’
If Harry seethes with rage, you can hardly blame him, said Ayesha Hazarika in The i newspaper. This is a man who spent his childhood in the glare of publicity; who was paraded for the cameras days after his mother had been killed fleeing the paparazzi. Of course he wanted to protect Meghan from the misery inflicted on Diana and other women who have married into the institution – especially when, on top of the usual meanspirited scrutiny, she had to contend with racism, unconscious and otherwise, including a torrent of filth online.
And when Harry talks about royal briefing wars, planted stories and “dirty tricks”, he is not wrong, said Rob Lownie on UnHerd. There is good evidence that other royal households were briefing against him and Meghan.
Sections of the right-wing press feasted on it, said Jim Waterson in The Guardian, because they found that their readers relished stories about the Sussexes. Now the couple’s documentary is driving more traffic to the very news outlets they condemn.
The liberal left went the other way, and decided the couple were “heroes of social justice”, said Ian Dunt in The i newspaper, which is equally absurd. Some of what they say makes no sense. For instance, Meghan claims she had no idea that she’d have to curtsey to the Queen (she says she thought it was a “joke”, then mocks the procedure). What kind of situation did she think she was entering when she opted to marry a prince?
She says she was given no preparation for royal life, said Jennie Bond in the Daily Mirror. If that is true (and royal insiders say it is not), Harry is partly to blame. He should have taken more time to explain to her, for instance, that in the Firm, there is a hierarchy – and that she’d have to conform to it, however stultifying that might be.
Harry was struggling with it himself, said Tanya Gold on UnHerd; and in Meghan, he found someone strong enough to take him away. But he is only half free, because he is still a prince, “with all the expectations” of a prince, and still relying on the “attention without merit” that his royal status bestows. He may have moved to California, but he has not travelled all that far.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
Band Aid 40: time to change the tune?
In the Spotlight Band Aid's massively popular 1984 hit raised around £8m for famine relief in Ethiopia and the charity has generated over £140m in total
By Rebekah Evans, The Week UK Published
-
Starmer vs the farmers: who will win?
Today's Big Question As farmers and rural groups descend on Westminster to protest at tax changes, parallels have been drawn with the miners' strike 40 years ago
By The Week UK Published
-
How secure are royal palaces?
The Explainer Royal family's safety is back in the spotlight after the latest security breach at Windsor
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK Published
-
Ed Park's 6 favorite works about self reflection and human connection
Feature The Pulitzer Prize finalist recommends works by Jason Rekulak, Gillian Linden, and more
By The Week US Published
-
6 fantastic homes in Columbus, Ohio
Feature Featuring a 1915 redbrick Victorian in German Village and a modern farmhouse in Woodland Park
By The Week Staff Published
-
Drawing the Italian Renaissance: a 'relentlessly impressive' exhibition
The Week Recommends Show at the King's Gallery features an 'enormous cache' of works by the likes of Leonardo, Michelangelo and Raphael
By The Week UK Published
-
Niall Williams shares his favourite books
The Week Recommends The Irish novelist chooses works by Charles Dickens, Seamus Heaney and Wendell Berry
By The Week UK Published
-
Patriot: Alexei Navalny's memoir is as 'compelling as it is painful'
The Week Recommends The anti-corruption campaigner's harrowing book was published posthumously after his death in a remote Arctic prison
By The Week UK Published
-
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button: a 'magical' show with 'an electrifying emotional charge'
The Week Recommends The 'vivacious' Fitzgerald adaptation has a 'shimmering, soaring' score
By The Week UK Published
-
Bird: Andrea Arnold's 'strange, beguiling and quietly moving' drama
The Week Recommends Barry Keoghan stars in 'fearless' film combining social and magical realism
By The Week UK Published
-
Kate Summerscale's 6 favorite true crime books about real murder cases
Feature The best-selling author recommends works by Helen Garner, Gwen Adshead, and more
By The Week US Published