Will they or won’t they? I’m talking, of course, about whether or not Harry and Meghan will attend the King’s coronation in May. A statement from the couple suggests that, despite reports to the contrary, the couple have been invited: ‘I can confirm the Duke has recently received email correspondence from His Majesty’s office regarding the coronation,’ a spokesperson for the couple said. But it seems the Sussexes will be keeping Charles III on tenterhooks for now: ‘An immediate decision on whether the Duke and Duchess will attend will not be disclosed by us at this time,’ the spokesman added.
Britain has not been in such a state of apprehension for some time. In 1777, the resolution of Samuel Richardson’s novel Pamela – will the virtuous maiden Pamela Andrews retain her virtue and marry the wicked landowner Lord B? – was so keenly anticipated that, when Pamela triumphed, church bells across the country rang out.
There is something else that is troubling about this story: the odd inconsistency in Buckingham Palace’s messaging
Much the same situation is now upon us today, when it comes to the RSVP from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. It is all anyone can talk about: from the betting shops to the bookshops, from members’ clubs to nightclubs, the sole topic of conversation is: ‘will Harry and Meghan be there?’ I exaggerate, of course. But judging by the constant stream of stories about Harry and Meghan that continue to pop up in the press, it seems as if the duo intend to keep their family – and, by extension, the rest of the world – guessing as to their intentions. Is this really fair on Charles III as he prepares for the biggest day of his life?
It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that Harry and Meghan might be enjoying the power over the Royal Family that their ‘will they, won’t they’ activities are offering. Their irritatingly childish behaviour continues to attract column inches, and their decision either way will inevitably be front page news. However, it is also clear that King Charles sees their absence from the coronation ceremony as a greater threat than their attendance. While disagreeable members of the Royal Family have been barred from such events before – after abdicating as king, the former Edward VIII was not invited to either his brother George VI’s coronation, or his niece Elizabeth II’s – it would be all but unprecedented for the monarch’s son not to be present.
Whether or not Harry and Meghan do attend, there is something else that is troubling about this story: the odd inconsistency in Buckingham Palace’s messaging. Harry and Meghan’s eviction from Frogmore Cottage was inevitably seen as a reaction to his discourteous description of Queen Camilla as a ‘wicked stepmother’ in Spare; yet just days later, it was reported that they will be offered Prince Andrew’s old apartment in Buckingham Palace as their base when they visit Britain. Perhaps it is a take on the old adage to keep your friends close, your enemies closer and your disobedient family closest of all.
King Charles may want to embrace his prodigal son to his regal bosom and forgive him, but perhaps he also wishes to make it entirely clear that he is now boss – and that his word must be law. The problem is that Prince Harry, like all rebellious sons from Prince Hal onwards, is not interested in unquestioning obedience. His father’s desperation that his son attend the coronation has given Harry a bargaining chip.
We all remember the reports that Harry wants a grovelling apology for all of the wrongs done to him and his wife. Unless one is given – and it is by no means certain it will – then the church bells are unlikely to ring out to celebrate this particular happy ending any time soon.
Comments