British History, According to Meghan

The Sussexes’ documentary trades in a self-serving simplification of Britain’s imperial past.

By
31
Queen Elizabeth II, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex in London, 2018. (Photo by Max Mumby/Indigo/Getty Images)

I’ll confess to being a fan of the British monarchy. The Royals contribute something important, if intangible, to my country’s national life. But as I tuned in to Harry & Meghan, the recently released Netflix documentary, I also sympathized with the estranged Duke and Duchess of Sussex. The ghoulishness of the British press in general—and the cruelty and hysteria surrounding its treatment of Meghan in particular—is a source of national embarrassment.

Much of what the documentary covered is old news: the fairytale wedding; mounting pressure from palace and press; Meghan’s claustrophobia following chronic depression and a miscarriage; and fleeing to America. 

The problem is that while the Sussexes had a powerful story to tell on their own terms, they trade on a cynical retelling of Britain’s history to further the audience’s sympathies. And they’re not the first to do so. 

The third episode of Harry & Meghan opens with a history lesson. David Olusoga, a prominent black British historian, and Afua Hirsch, a Guardian journalist, walk viewers through the early history of the British empire—that is, the story of the slave trade. 

Create a free account
Access additional articles and newsletters for no cost, no credit card information needed. Continue ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
31
By
Comments (31)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    PGG645

    The problem with this couple is they seem very self-absorbed. As an American, I don’t see much of what the British press puts out, and I’m sure there was a lot of nasty, negative stuff written about her/them, but is that not par for the course for all members of the royal family? Some negative press, some positive press? Diana was praised, then criticized, as was Catherine, and of course Camilla.

    And I’m sure all the media people try to get the best stories on their particular royal, including Harry’s team. It’s a little hard to believe his claim that William’s team put out negative stories, or in this case a positive story on William to detract from some issue with Harry (or whatever), but Harry’s team never did that? Really?

    Some of their claims seem pretty ridiculous. Like Harry’s attempts to paint his wife as the second coming of Diana… she’s not. She could have been an asset to the monarchy but they were always going to be lower ranking thanWilliam and his wife, and William’s kids too. That’s a hierarchy for you. When Harry pointed to some example of Meghan “overshadowing” the Queen because her photo was on the cover, and claimed the family was so jealous, nah, don’t buy it. They were the shiny new toy, the Christmas puppy everyone is so excited about for a while, then the excitement dies down. It would have happened to them too and the family knew that. The sixth in line to the throne was never going to outshine anyone for long and it kind of seems to me that in the end, that was what, in part, drove Harry and Meghan to leave. Off to greener pastures. Fine. Just quit with the constant whining and “Once again, I really need to tell my story. Again. My truth. All of it. Except maybe for the parts that I hold back for another time.” We get it. You weren’t happy then, now you’re just thrilled to pieces. So act like it and move on.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Party-san

    What Meghan faced from the royal family was classism, not racism. Certainly the tabloid press and others offered a sizeable dose of racism as well, but the disdain from the royal family was for one of lower birth, from the colonies, irrespective of her race. In the UK, class is the social divider that race is in the US.

    Meghan, a mixed race woman raised in America, obviously sees everything through the lens of race because that is inevitably her world view. You can see that Harry understands the difference from the way he says things but classism is not a thing in America and so the American-written documentary here largely misses the point.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Rlritt

    I'm so sorry Mr. Rhodes had to watch what's sounds like the most boring and self centered documentary made by 2 people absolutely no one but their close friends and a few relatives care about.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Skinnygramps

    No one who wants to be a civil rights icon quits to Montecito when the going gets rough.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    The Stray Goose

    Who are these people? No idea.

    But let’s remember that no client or friend of Jeffrey Epstein’s has ever been prosecuted for all of the crimes committed on his private island.

    Lookin’ at you, Andrew…

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Rajeev

      Prince Andrew celebrates Christmas with the royal family and the British right-wing and tabloid outrage is minor compared to Harry & Meghan producing a Netflix special.

      And Jeremy Clarkson issued a non-apology “apology” and gets no repercussions. The fact that the royal family didn’t condemn the article shows it is and always has been broken morally.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        The Stray Goose

        Before you would have gotten push-back from the American right when the topic of ending the British Monarchy came up. You won't now. But, of course, the right wants a proper accounting of Epstein's crimes. So if they want that, the left is opposed to it.

        There has never been a proper accounting of the Panama Papers and Epstein's crimes. If you want to end conspiracy theories, both of these crimes need to be brought into the sunlight.

        Collapse
        1. Hikingguy

          What in the world makes you think "the Right" wants a proper accounting of Epstein's crimes? Do you think a party led by Donald Effing Trump cares one tiny bit about human trafficking and prostituting kids? It is to laugh. Remember Dennis Hastert? I do.

          Collapse
  6. Joy Lamentation

    “What does this imperial history have to do with the Los Angeles-born Meghan? One of her key claims is that the British press used her race against her. That seemed undeniably true of the often harsh coverage she received.”
    This sums up the issue right here. Though she didn’t JUST receive “harsh” coverage from the British press, she received RACIST coverage from the British press. When the powerful press uses race against someone, that is racist. Let’s say it. It seems like the rest of the article is splitting hairs. Goodness and righteousness would call us to oppose the racism flat out and leave zero room for its tolerance. The rest is nitpicking and a distraction from that urgent task at hand.
    In addition, calling the doc a “one-sided narrative of victimhood” when you clearly agree that there has been consistent racist coverage, is a strange take. Racist media coverage doesn’t just impact the subject of that racism. The impact is experienced far and wide.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Scarlette Tarte

      Agreed. The tabloid press in Britain is not like the tabloids here. Here, we see a few in the check out lines of the grocery store, and they hold little sway with the American public. Even TMZ on tv is not something most people tune in to in order to hear the news of the day.

      In Britain, however, the tabloids have enormous influence. And they did treat Meghan horribly. Coverage of the exact same things between Catherine and Meghan - while positive on Catherine, would always be negative on Meghan. There were outright lies told about her.

      I wish Diana would have been alive for Harry and Meghan's sake. She, master that she was at manipulating the British press, could have taught Meghan how to handle it. However, Harry and Meghan, I believe, just don't want to "handle" the press...they want to bring about change to how the press operates in England. For this they were always told "you can't change the press" by other members of the royal family. "Oh, you should not even try to take them on", seems to be the sentiment of The Firm.

      I, who was a teenager who got up way too early to watch the wedding of Diana and Charles, and saw how she was treated - who later traveled to England and saw first hand just how obnoxious the British press is...(you think our media is bad here?)totally come down on "team Harry" here.

      I believe everything they say. I believe members of the press office of William did leak stories negative to Harry to the British tabloid press. For various reasons, including competitiveness between offices. I think, indeed, the royal family should have taken them up on letting them be emissary's of the crown in Canada or South Africa. That was a very good idea on the part of the Sussexes. But that idea was nixed, and I believe racism played a part in that too.

      Britain is going thru some of what we are going thru here...an ageing and shrinking white population, especially in the rural areas, believing that they are seeing their power and greatness slip away, and blaming it on racial groups, leading to Brexit, mirrors some of our politics here.

      While I do prefer the royals in "never explain, never complain" mode, I certainly can see, with my own eyes, how horrible the press in Britain treated the first mixed race person in the family. They handled is very, very badly. And the family did not do any better.

      Meghan could have been a great asset for the royal family, a face that would have served for increasing populations of people of color to identify with. If they could identify with her, they could more identify with the royal family. She would have been a bulwark for preservation of the royal family in the future.

      But alas, they do lack the creativity needed it seems, to know what to do with originals. They bungled it with Diana as well.

      Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Earl King

    There is no comparison between Britain’s world conquest and claim of territories and America. An African potentate who bought captured black men broth to him by other black men then sold the slaves to the British and American slave traders. Approx. His some was captured and sold. His father recovered him and he was sent to England as a Prince. There he was brought in to the circle of the Monarchy and lead a very good life.

    12 million African slaves come from Atlantic slave trade. Apron, 480,000 were brought to America. The rest went to the Caribbean and South America. Brazil the largest with the largest slave population was the last country to give up slavery but not until 1888.
    As early as the 1600 there was an anti-slavery movement in the American North, specifically the Northeast States. Slavery was not permanent. Some states imposed terms. Salves could buy their way out of slavery. Slaves could own land and marry white women. By the late 1790’s slavery was pretty much gone in the Northeast. The experience of slaves in the North is very different than slavery in the South.


    I have often argued that reparations for slavery is not the reason for America to do something about the blight of poverty in the black community. Jim Crow is the reason for us to make the effort. Other minorities are making their way in American quite fine. It is a testament that there is more discrimination against Asians for being too smart and too hardworking that our colleges and Universities feel compelled to discriminate against them. Hispanics are doing fine climbing the ladder of success.

    The history of Britain is in “class” not race. Race has been the problem in America and its most pernicious has been the 100 year subjugation of black thru the use of Jim Crow. Ms. Markle seeks to use that history and make herself out to be a victim as justification the world should advance her career. Her quest for power. Unless you are a complete idiot we all know what joining the Monarchy would be like. Her problem is that people don’t like her. She appears to be a scheming self serving female. She grew up more privileged and became a C or B in celebrity in Hollywood. She is attractive which in America opens far ore doors than closes. Two whinny privilege souls that ask the rest of us to feel sorry for them. People used to love Harry, she has tarnished his image and has made her image even worse. There is nothing attractive about wealthy privileged people complaining because the Rolls need a paint job, the polo house needs a new roof and some people don’t like me. She choose the limelight, choose to marry a famous Prince. Millions of women have miscarriages and postpartum depression. I feel for her as it must be awful. It just doesn’t make her special.

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Deb4711

    I’m mystified that The Dispatch has seen fit to run two articles on this couple in one week, notwithstanding Stirewalt’ s assurance that he knows they’re really not worth the digital ink.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      CynthiaW

      The Dispatch's writers all seem to watch the same television programs all the time. Then they assume that normal people do the same thing.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Pat @ Tavi Hall

      As a woman, mother of sons, I'm mystified that now two men have written these columns without mentioning the obvious. I've spent a lifetime listening to other women and these in law dramas. Sometimes run by the mother-in-law, sometimes run by the daughter-in-law, sometimes by both. Certainly the press made this one worse, but it's the same very sad drama.

      Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Rajeev

    "Nothing like Jim Crow emerged in Britain or its colonies after slavery was abolished. Nor did the British dwell on slavery in the way southern Democrats did in the Reconstruction era."

    I think this is a little subjective statement that oversimplifies Britain's checkered past with racism. While it's certainly debatable as to the scope of events, I think you can argue that Britain had its own Jim Crow era post World War I. Caribbean black men were brought to fight the war and then were subsequently treated as second class citizens. The racism and violence faced by these men was a stain on the country. Add in the thousands brought in during the Windrush generation who were treated as illegal immigrants.

    I would argue that Britain has had many parallels racially during their history to the United States. They didn't formally outlaw racial discrimination till the Race Relations Act of 1965 but it allowed for some of the housing and employment discrimination to continue. The Bristol bus boycott was directly inspired by Rosa Parks.

    While Jim Crow was a horrific era in a sequence of horrific eras, it did lead to a robust Civil Rights movement that has changed the US for the better in ways that European countries haven't been able to replicate. Since European countries hadn't had a Civil War they weren't forced to deal with the issue of racism in such a direct way as the US had to.

    As for Princess Meghan, I am glad that she has exposed so much of the ridiculousness, discrimination and elitism of the monarchy. Even for the vulturous British tabloids, she has caused a reaction of negativity for nothing. Jeremy Clarkson said out loud the way so many right wing Americans and Europeans feel about Meghan Markle. It's the royal family who has made clowns of themselves from the beginning not Harry and Meghan.

    Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    CynthiaW

    I'm sorry for Harry and Meghan. I always though he was cute (in a Mom way, of course), and she is quite beautiful and elegant. Although I thought they were both kind of dingbats, I hoped they would be happy.

    Collapse
Load More