Advertisement

Unpopular opinion: Meghan and Harry can't have it both ways

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry pictured with baby Archie. Photo: Getty
Can Meghan and Harry have their cake and eat it too? Photo: Getty

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s position at the top-tier of the world’s most famous family has gifted them a life of near-unimaginable privilege.

From the duchess’ rumoured multi-million dollar wardrobe to their joint platform to evoke global change, life in the spotlight has provided the pair with a cushy existence - to say the least.

But even royals can’t have their cake and eat it too, and this gilded - and publicly-funded - existence comes with strings firmly attached.

The most obvious of these is the public’s avid interest in their family life, particularly following baby Archie Mountbatten-Windsor’s birth on May 6.

And sure, the couple have made an effort to distance themselves from some of the royal family’s more unpalatable traditions, but whether they like it or not, Their Royal Highnesses are just that: royal, and serve people who expect something in return.

Now, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have upset the very hand that feeds them - the public - after it was reported this week that Archie’s christening will buck tradition and be a completely private affair.

Instead, a single photographer will reportedly snap the iconic family and select pictures will then be realised at the discretion of the couple, well after the event has taken place.

This insistence for privacy follows news the ceremony will take place in the most secretive option possible - the Queen’s private chapel in the inner sanctum of Windsor Castle.

Only 25 guests - including Archie’s unannounced godparents - will be present at the ‘very intimate’ baptism of the seventh in line to the throne.

Little Archie's role in the royal family remains uncertain as his parents was him to be raised as a 'private citizen'.
Little Archie's role in the royal family remains uncertain as his parents was him to be raised as a 'private citizen'. Photo: Getty Images

Unsurprisingly, the move alienated large portions of the press - and by default the public - who believe they deserve at least some access to the family they help fund.

Longtime editor-in-chief of Majesty Magazine Ingrid Seward revealed the move left many royal watchers feeling a 'bit jaded' at the couple’s move.

“Why wouldn't they want the world to see their baby? I don't think it is any skin off their nose,” she told Daily Mail.

Adding: “[People] won't want an arty Instagram shot of Archie's foot three days later if it's left up to the couple themselves to take pictures and release them,” in reference to a shot posted the couple’s on social media.

Meanwhile, Duncan Larcombe, former Royal Editor at The Sun, announced on Good Morning Britain that their resistance had led the couple into another ‘PR disaster’.

“I don’t think [Harry] thinks these things through very well...He doesn’t think through the potential suggestion of hypocrisy,” he added.

Royal author Penny Juror agreed, telling The Times the pair are making a ‘mistake’ by shunning their legions of supporters.

"They can't have it both ways. Either they are totally private, pay for their own house and disappear out of view or play the game the way it is played,” she said.

Harry and Meghan’s lavish wedding last May saw British taxpayers foot a AU$54 million security bill.
Harry and Meghan’s lavish wedding last May saw British taxpayers foot a AU$54 million security bill. Photo: Getty Image

"Seeing Archie and his godparents arriving at the christening is what people are interested in."

These comments follow a friend of the couple telling the publication of the prince’s firm stance against allowing the public any access to his family.

"As Archie is not an HRH, [Harry] feels he has every right to strictly police his son's privacy,” they said.

While the seven-week-old may not yet be a prince, he is a primary member of the royal family, an institution which relies on the public’s support for survival.

But mounting acrimony towards the couple was compounded last week when it was revealed Britain’s taxpayers unknowingly footed the AU$4.5million bill to renovate the family’s private home, Frogmore Cottage.

This outcry was illustrated in a Good Morning Britain poll which asked whether the public payment was warranted, to which 87 per cent voted ‘no’.

In fairness, it must be noted that Harry and Meghan did spend an additional $500,000 of their own money on the fixtures and fittings at the ‘cottage’.

The backlash echoes criticism made before Archie’s birth when the couple requested an unprecedented level of secrecy, which The Sun called ‘a bad look’.

The renovation of Harry and Meghan's home, Frogmore Cottage was renovated largely at the expense of the taxpayer. Photo: Getty Images
The renovation of Harry and Meghan's home, Frogmore Cottage was renovated largely at the expense of the taxpayer. Photo: Getty Images

“The public has a right to know about the lives of those largely funded by their taxes. You can accept that, or be private citizens. Not both,” Britain’s most prominent tabloid, concluded.

Harry and Meghan’s lavish wedding last May saw British taxpayers foot a AU$54 million security bill, while the royals themselves paid for extras including a $100,000 wedding cake and Meghan’s reported half-million dollar dress.

Australians were hit with a similar tab in October when the couple’s tour cost us $410,000, with $237,000 spent on flights, accommodation and food alone.

Of course, the events we fund provide national jubilance and a cash injection into the local tourism economy, but when our hard earned dollars are going towards the royals’ exorbitant expenses, we should have the right to celebrate and enjoy their major milestones.

Prince Louis' christening last year took place behind closed doors at St James' Palace along with having selected media present. Photo: Getty
Prince Louis' christening last year took place behind closed doors at St James' Palace along with having selected media present. Photo: Getty

This balance appears to have been struck by Prince William and Kate Middleton who managed to shield their children from the media’s gaze while keeping the public up to date.

In fact, both Prince George and Prince Louis’ baptisms took place behind closed doors at the The Chapel Royal in St James’ Palace.

Here however, a Press Association photographer was present who quickly allowed the images to be quickly streamed across the Commonwealth.

Ultimately, the major difference between Archie and his elder cousins is their likelihood to ascend the throne and become the centre piece of The Firm.

But as the Cambridge children grow up and rightfully take command of the spotlight, Harry and Meghan’s offspring will be forced to faced a predicament that’s plagued royalty for centuries - one which involves cake.

Got a story tip or just want to get in touch? Email us at lifestyle.tips@verizonmedia.com

Want more lifestyle and celebrity news? Follow Yahoo Lifestyle on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

Or sign up to our daily newsletter here.