Spare Harry
Spare Harry
It is really hard to
ignore the drama from the House of Windsor, even if you wanted to. The typical conversation on the Harry palaver goes
thus: “What is Harry’s problem?”, “Why is Harry doing this?”, “He is an
entitled brat!”, “It’s all Meghan’s fault!” or “I don’t like Meghan!” Then I
ask, “Have you watched the Harry and Meghan Netflix documentary?” or “Have you
read Harry’s book? And the usual response is “No! Because I don’t care”, and I
retort, “You don’t care, but you care enough to form an opinion about Harry and
Meghan based on tabloids?” The epiphany the masses primarily know what they are
fed, and usually end up as ‘sheeple’ incapable of critical reasoning or
independent thought.
“The media's the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to
make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power.
Because they control the minds of the masses.” – Malcolm X
It would be
preposterous to form an opinion about an issue exclusively on a skewed narrative
peddled by the UK media. And due to my understanding of the media, I tend to
read between the lines. For example, the media propagandized the lie about
weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq, and the world is still dealing with
the consequences of Iraq’s invasion. So I am usually suspicious of any
information being disseminated. Whenever I notice a pattern of sustained and concerted
attacks by the media, I try to decipher whatever ‘lie’ is being propagated.
If
a false narrative was being mongered about a person, I reckon a
counter-narrative to portray the facts from a personal perspective is appropriate.
There was no way the UK media narrative on Harry could
have been countered from the UK, because the battle lines had already been
drawn with the UK
media. The best option was to launch from the US. It was a daring but requisite
move.
I can manage
being misunderstood; that I can live with, but being slandered is a travesty I
cannot condone. As someone who does not rely on hearsay, I watched the Harry
and Meghan Netflix documentary and read Harry’s book – Spare.
One of the concocted
UK media spins was that Harry was ‘boasting’ about his army tour in
Afghanistan. The propaganda obviously riled up some people from the affected
region and others. I presume the reason this piece of information, that has
been in the public domain for years, was suddenly being amplified by the UK media
is to stoke up tensions until some deluded extremist does something really
injudicious? Potentially making Harry a moving target! Anyway, Harry denied he ever
boasted and labeled the spin a ‘dangerous
lie’. Based on his account of events in Spare, it certainly was not a
boast. Harry admitted that Afghanistan was a “war of mistakes” with “enormous
collateral damage”. In dealing with his trauma and that of soldiers, he must
also edify himself about the trauma of the families of the expendables labeled
“collateral damage”. Whether historical – through the old empire, or recent –
through the army, invasions have long-lasting traumatic effects on the invaded.
One of the major reasons soldiers are suffering from trauma and post-traumatic
stress disorder (PTSD) is because of the realisation of being misinformed, and
numerous innocent lives have been permanently affected through the death and
destruction they inflicted. The irony is that some of those soldiers are accepting Islam
and becoming Muslims.
The Netflix documentary gave a deeper
insight into some critical societal issues – the history of the British Empire,
BLM, Brexit, immigration and dog whistle politics. One of the commendable
aspects was Harry’s admission about an “unconscious
bias”, and the need for those in denial to educate themselves about racism
and race relations. Harry and Meghan attended the Stephen Lawrence memorial to
mark the 25th anniversary of the horrific racially motivated murder
of Stephen Lawrence in 1993.
Following the 2017 Grenfell Tower fire
tragedy, Meghan volunteered to cook with some of the survivors at the Hubb Community Kitchen
of the Al Manaar mosque. The initiative culminated in the launch of the ‘Together’
cookbook to raise funds for the survivors of the Grenfell fire. Harry and
Meghan were making a connection with a larger demographic – a segment of
society that may have been critical of the atrocious past of the British Empire
and its legacy of colonialism and slavery. With the inclusion of Meghan, and
the cognisance of her Black ancestry, some people hoped the royal family was transforming to adapt to contemporary realities and
endear a new generation. Alas, that glimmer of hope was dashed sooner than you
could say Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor.
Some people may be wondering the reason for the volte-face,
and the answer is not too far-fetched. A good reference point is “never
outshine the master”. To put things in perspective, about 162
million people watched William and Kate’s wedding in 2011, whilst Harry and
Meghan’s wedding had an estimated 1.9 billion viewers in 2018. Harry and
Meghan had eclipsed William and Kate in popularity. At some point Harry and
Meghan were “wildly popular” and referred to as the “Superstars of the British family”, and polls showed
that Harry the “Royal rock star” was more popular than the Queen.
Harry and Meghan were on the front cover of the
TIME
Magazine’s 100 list; the world’s most influential people. They seemed to
bask in it at the time, though more fortuitous than deliberate. But, something
had to give. After all, William is next in line of succession to the throne and
Harry is just a spare. Harry stated he is not trying to “collapse the monarchy”
and wants to “save them from themselves”. Nonetheless, Harry had inadvertently
become a threat to the institution – a monarchy that is centuries old. The
symbiosis between the age-old institution and the Royal Rota is strategically
placed. Harry had to be checked and effectively made persona non grata. The cognitive dissonance by segments of the
British public is apparent, as I acknowledge the monarchy is highly venerated,
and linked to the pinnacle of aspiration.
In retrospect,
the matter was mismanaged, because the media’s plot may have made Harry even
more popular. Harry’s book sold 1.43
million copies on its first day, and became the fastest selling non-fiction
book of all time.
But this is not the first time the British
royal family had a hugely popular royal. Princess Diana adds an intricate level
of complexity to the whole saga. Diana was involved in various causes, and was
nicknamed the ‘people’s princess’. During an interview, Diana stated how “low” Prince Charles felt by being
eclipsed by her star power. However, Diana revealed that with her popularity
came “jealousy” and “a great deal of complicated situations”. Furthermore, it
has been alleged that 10 months before her car accident in Paris, Diana
informed her former butler about a plan for “an accident” in her
car, through “brake failure”, and a “serious head injury”. On August 31, 1997
Diana “the people’s princess” died in a car crash in Paris. There were reports
that a paparazzi car chase led to the accident. An estimated 2.5
billion people tuned in to watch Diana’s funeral in 1997, and was only
recently surpassed by the funeral of Queen Elizabeth II in 2022.
I still
remember the image of two boys – William and Harry, walking behind their mother’s
coffin, doleful yet solemn. In Harry I saw a boy wanting to grieve but trained
as part of royal duties to “show no emotion”. I was still grieving the death of
my Dad at the time, so I could relate to a certain extent, though I appreciated
their grief was gravely complex. I suspect behind that phlegmatic demeanour was
pent-up rage. That 12 year old boy is now a man, husband and father, who feels a
lot of things surrounding his mother’s death remain “unexplained”. For
instance, on a 2007 trip to Paris, Harry asked his assigned driver to drive
through the Pont de l’Alma tunnel where his mother died, at “sixty-five miles
per hour” – the exact speed of Diana’s car when it crashed inside the tunnel.
William’s
consolation is being heir whilst Harry’s is being the spare. In 2017, William
was critical of the ‘stiff
upper lip’ in the context of mental health, and Harry admitted that he
struggled with “panic attacks and anxiety” following the death of their mother
Diana. Harry may have been contemplating his exit strategy for a while, and Meghan’s
involvement was a convenient incentive or excuse. Regardless, he does have a right
to protect his family. It’s impossible to ignore the concerns of a family
member about ‘how
dark’ Archie’s skin colour could potentially be or his being caricatured as
a chimpanzee
leaving the hospital after birth. Certainly, trauma manifests in various ways, and
whilst this episode lasts, I hope it is without further tragedy. And on that
note, whatever your position is on the royal ruckus, just spare Harry.
© M.B.O
M.B.O Owolowo is the author of P.R.I.S.M: Primal Religious Instruction Serving Mankind
Comments
Post a Comment