Isn’t life too short and family life too valuable to let the disease of schism and bitterness destroy living relationships? Burying the hatchet, not in each other, and forgiveness and change may be the only medicine to bridge divides.
Netflix series and Prince Harry’s book “Spare”, laying bare the life complaints of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and normally private details of their relationship with the British Royal family have triggered an inevitable, and presumably intended, storm of media coverage. That coverage, perhaps not in the plan, includes waves of criticism, and the British media has largely denounced Harry and Meghan’s focus on themselves, perceived self-pity, a victim culture, blaming others for every woe and disclosing private interchanges. On the one hand the Sussexes express a desire for privacy, seem to hate most of the British press and blame them for much of their suffering, and on the other hand they have renounced royal duties having emigrated to California, and they make their living by monetising his royal heritage through media deals such as with Netflix and Random House, publishers, and through TV interviews such as with Oprah Winfrey. Publicity is their living. This is at best confusing. But are the judgements about Harry and Meghan fair?
They declare an ambition to change the press, but is part of that ambition involving destruction of the Royal Family? Harry declares a wish to get back together with his family, although it seems he may require compensation and accountability as a condition of reconciliation. His story is a volume of contradictions. He also has his supporters. But who, outside the direct family members involved in any breakdowns, really knows the true facts? And there may be mitigating factors such as mental anguish with which those affected cannot come to terms. Also, there may be influences at work, such as so-called advisers and third parties, whose vested interests are the gravy train which depends on the Royal family rift being maintained. Outsiders perhaps should be slow to make absolute judgements.
Who will be the real losers long-term from the displays of mental and emotional anguish and damaging disclosures?
Family schisms are not new, but rather common in varying degrees affecting many ordinary as well as privileged families. Is there not usually an element of fault on all sides, with destructive accusations over who should bear most blame? Pride often prevents rapid reconciliation, as heels dig in. Memories of events do not always match up, especially when combined with emotional turmoil. Reasons and reactions to circumstances are perhaps not always black and white, but relationship difficulties may be shades of grey.
In the Royal case, the public divisions are the more difficult as the Royal family is perhaps the most photographed and written about family in the world. However, often the biggest losers from family breakdowns are not the adult protagonists but the children. Will the children of Harry and Meghan, and of Prince William and Catherine, eventually be the biggest losers out of this debacle? The Royal family and their behaviours always have the opportunity of setting a standard, being role models, for other people worldwide: likewise, their poor examples and their failures are magnified. Is it perhaps often the answer to family divides that each has to forgive the other, absolutely, and stop counting the points for and against? Is it that forgiveness that can make everybody winners? With it, there may have to come change and who knows, except themselves, what that change involves. Would it not perhaps include Harry and Meghan ceasing to make money out of Royal heritage, unless they re-join and resume royal duties? Only they can decide and make the necessary commitments, not the media and the commentators who have no end of suggestions. Forgiveness and reconciliation would set an example for all family disputes, and perhaps is the only way to avoid the damage to the real potential losers, who are the next generation of British Royalty and the British public.
