Duchess of Sussex Spills Some Tea

And Also: Talking about biracial "royalty," Kamala's Way is not a complete bio, but it is a good workmanlike volume by someone long an observer of California politics. It doesn't cover her personal life, especially growing up, that much. As noted in a C-SPAN interview with the author, one problem was that KH didn't personally take part. A basic thing we note is her dad (still alive) is basically absent in her life, while her mom (died of cancer about a decade ago) is a basic part of it along with her sister.

I thought the Lifetime film -- that even had the word in there (finding someone using that word without only using the first letter these days often gets the person who uses it in trouble) -- was rather well done. But, we are concerned about the greatly promoted Ophrah Winfrey interview of Meghan and Harry that aired last night. As the kids say, a lot of tea spilled. As to Harry, someone of Twitter used the term "ride or die" ("a colloquial expression of extreme loyalty to someone or something," originally often applied to black women) and that fit rather well. Ophrah "still has it" as interviewer though a couple times it was amusing when she was like "speaking for the public" or acting like "the press" was "them."

Meghan Markle is someone that previously was known to many from the USA show Suits and perhaps for her time as a young girl where she spoke against a gender stereotype in a commercial. But, as a biracial person, she had to deal with some race issues all her life in a specific way. She also was in two somewhat bland (one was better than the other) Hallmark movies which seemed to think she was white:

“I know that that’s not an intentional strategy,” he said. “Quite frankly, I don’t even think that Meghan’s background was a consideration when we were writing this story." Sure. The channel generally has white leads with people of color generally left to best friends and token supporting characters. So, I can see it not being directly intentional to her personally.

The two Hallmark films are pretty forgettable, which perhaps explains why this doesn't seem to get much attention. Anyway, the interview last night was about her time as a royal. Meghan seems to be out of central casting as a royal -- you can see her in a Hallmark Channel movie as an actress who falls for a royal, who is a somewhat ne'er-do-well younger brother who misses his mom (a photo of Princess Diana someone posted along side him did look very like him, though he has that red hair that came from somewhere ... apparently his grandfather).

People were either "I'm so going to watch" or "like why should I care about the royal family?" regarding the interview. The latter is somewhat understandable, but if taken too far was asinine, since the interview was not just celebrity gossip (still a fun thing) but had deeper issues. This sort of thing is why so many people respect her, including noting that her speaking out about needing help very well might save lives. Plus, again, just the basic story is so touching -- the love story itself is so touching. Yes, yes. She's a celebrity and all that. But, it's a hard heart not to be touched by it all, including Harry sticking by her through it all.

She had to deal with racism, not being respected by "the Firm" or "the Institution" and getting abusive press treatment. This was taken to extreme measures to such a degree it led to serious mental health issues for which the family refused to let her get support for. A darkly comic moment was her talking about going to "HR" to get assistance (unsuccessfully) since as an actress she had a union to protect her interests. A lot of hard feelings there by both and you know airing the dirty laundry probably won't go down well either. Meghan, not covered here, already had problems family-wise before, her (white) father causing various difficulties.

(There are a few books about their relationship including one I read that was sort of a dual biography of Meghan and Harry that was pretty good. Both had a bit of drama in their lives, let's say.)

It was a good interview, though it seemed like every ten minutes or so there was a commercial. I can see them selling a DVD with bonus footage, including Oprah on the morning show the next day (okay ... we don't know who ... but Harry said neither grandparent was involved in the "will the baby be too dark" conversation; the grandfather is someone you'd think might say something racist like that). The DVD can be put out after the summer, so we can get a look at the new baby (a girl -- perhaps named Veronica, to go with the "Archie"). Not sure about the few shots of the couple at their home, including with a rescue chicken. That seemed a bit silly.

ETA: Oprah at the start laid it out that there were no restrictions asked for regarding topics during the interview and -- contrary to various assumed -- it was not paid.  But, other than serving as a truth function, airing things out could have financial implications regarding their future endeavors.  

Some also don't have much sympathy for the duo as seen by the piece referenced here. As suggested, there is some truth there, but rather one-sided too. The two are celebrities and so forth, but the problems are not all feigned or something. Note too that first link, which compares it to a sort of "truth commission," but not quite so since it is not really an official unbiased platform.  It is a friendly rich person interviewing two other ones. 

Such is fair -- I have generally seen that things are rarely black/white, but the shades of gray often do have a leaning.