Low: King Charles is ill-tempered, dysfunctional & he ‘falls under people’s spell’

Valentine Low’s Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind the Crown was excerpted in the Times. Most of the excerpts – and most of the headlines from those excerpts – were about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and “bullying” and the organized and unhinged smears against M&H. I wondered idly if that’s what the whole f–king book was about. Nope – it turns out that Low did cover/transcribe what then-Prince Charles’s courtiers said about him. After reading all of those ridiculous statements from Kensington Palace’s courtiers, would it surprise you to hear that Charles’s call-at-any-hour, workhorse energy is spoken about a lot differently than Meghan’s work ethic?

Charles is a demanding boss. Working for him is not a nine-to-five job. This, according to one former member of his household, is because he is very demanding of himself. “He is never satisfied with himself, or what he has achieved. People around him had to work hard to keep up. He had enormous stamina.” Another said: “He was demanding in that he is always working. Seven days a week. Never stops. At any moment he may want to call you about something. Working on his boxes, on his ideas, on his papers. The pace is pretty intense.” The phone calls could come at any time, from after breakfast until 11 at night, even at Christmas. In contrast to the conviviality of his grandmother’s household, Charles’s office is suffused with a ferocious work ethic: he is a man with a mission.

Oh, Charles has a temper, wow! “He would drive people hard. He was full of ideas, always asking people to go and do things. The workload as private secretary would be immense. He had strong opinions. He also had a proper temper on him, which was quite fun. He would rarely direct it at the individual. It would be about something, and he would lose his temper. He would throw something. He would go from zero to 60 in a flash, and then back down again. Things would frustrate him, especially the media.”

Charles can’t keep staff either, how weird: In the space of about seven years, Charles had five different private secretaries. Promotion, preferment, who’s in, who’s out: no wonder Charles’s household has been compared to Wolf Hall.

Charles’s office is full of dysfunction: In her book on Prince Charles, Catherine Mayer quotes a businessman who helped to set up an event with the prince’s household and later spoke “with amazement” about the “glaring flaws” in its organisational structure. He got the impression that aides used to obstruct planning so they could tell the boss of problems, which they would then solve. “There was a lot of backstabbing,” he said. According to another insider, some courtiers, though loyal and able, are also cunning and “involve themselves in the dark arts of undermining other people”.

Charles goes outside the palace walls for advice, to disastrous results: Charles was not always a good judge of who should have his ear. Jimmy Savile, the broadcaster and charity fundraiser who, after his death, was revealed to have been a serial sexual abuser, wrote a handbook for Charles on how the royal family should deal with the media after big disasters. Charles passed on his tips to the Duke of Edinburgh, who in turn showed them to the Queen.

Charles falls under people’s spells: One of Charles’s former members of staff said the most pernicious effect of his outside advisers was the way they suggested that his usual team were not doing a good job. “The prince is quite susceptible to new voices who tell him, ‘They are stopping you doing what you want to do. They are holding you back, the suits.’ He loves it when someone says, ‘Oh, they have got it wrong, sir, listen to me. I can see it better; I am outside of this.’ The prince falls under people’s spell. That could then lead to real problems for individuals.”

[From The Times]

Low includes several stories of Charles bitching out various aides and keeping aides glued to their phones over weekends and holidays, awaiting his calls over non-urgent business. Low includes stories of Charles’s short temper and the real crisis of leadership and management within his dysfunctional office. It’s actually giving me a better sense of just how poorly Meghan was treated and how thoroughly she was scapegoated. As for Charles “falling under people’s spells” and, equally, being a terrible judge of character, welp, now he’s the king. It will only get a lot worse now.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

166 Responses to “Low: King Charles is ill-tempered, dysfunctional & he ‘falls under people’s spell’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Laura D says:

    /s But, but, but, Meghan!

    • ThatsNotOkay says:

      Clearly the staff thought, “Who does she think she is? The Prince of Wales? She’s just the sixth-in-line-to-the-throne’s degree wife. No way we’re lifting a finger for that American straight outta Compton.” And then they racismed to their hearts’ delight.

    • Ginni says:

      The real power is in Camilas hands who knows him very well, she know what to say and what to do to get out something from Charles, the King is gonna entertaining us for years.

  2. Moderatelywealthy says:

    “He was demanding in that he is always working. Seven days a week. Never stops. At any moment he may want to call you about something. Working on his boxes, on his ideas, on his papers. The pace is pretty intense.” The phone calls could come at any time, from after breakfast until 11 at night, even at Christmas. In contrast to the conviviality of his grandmother’s household, Charles’s office is suffused with a ferocious work ethic: he is a man with a mission.”

    Oh, i wonder when they will open a complaint about Chaz bullying ways and hire a third party firm to investigate the claims?

    Ah yeah, never! Chaz is not a biracial woman- got it!

    • equality says:

      Well, he did wait until “after breakfast” to be “genteel and civil”. But shouldn’t the clowns have been at work after breakfast? And his temper tantrums were “fun”.

    • Christine says:

      This really is grotesque. Chuck’s temper is described as “fun”, while Meghan’s strong worth ethic is described as a “narcissistic sociopath”.

      • Lux says:

        @Christine and pretty much everyone else, I can always leave it to you guys to say/point out exactly where the double-standards are, which are GLARING to me also. But when you go to a different website or even chat to people in person, there’s always a feeling of, “Wait, am I taking crazy pills or are you being willfully obtuse??” The RF is all about gaslighting and being mad at being caught, not at what has been done. The reportage is wild and we need a Charles vs Meghan headlines comparison just like the Khate and Meghan one.

      • Chuckles says:

        Once William gets in nothing will be done by him except the mandatory things and the skirt chasing. He will find time to make others miserable as well. Charles should be finding time to finally make Will and Keeny Khaate work but since he’s not, there’s nothing to see from the racist royals and his horse with a blonde wig on it. Prince Peddi needs to be kept busy with things other than chasing skirts, whatever interests him at the moment………..surely he will not want to be as productive as he should be for 20 million dollars per year.

    • Nic919 says:

      But did he send emails at 5 am? Because that is apparently a crime.

  3. Seraphina says:

    I’m sorry, but he is know to THROW things due to his temper????? WTF. Anyone else would be fired. It is not cute especially on a person who thinks and believes it’s his Devine right to rule. And THIS is yet another reason why hereditary rule – whether symbolic or not – must GO. Charles has a great deal of power – look at how miserable he made his late wife and his youngest son and daughter in law.

    • Eurydice says:

      Oh, but it was “quite fun.”

      • Seraphina says:

        I’m just left dumbfounded that these people still hold influence and power. In 2022 no less.

      • Ciotog says:

        In British-ese adding “quite” makes it sarcastic. If someone refers to another as “quite intelligent” or “quite attractive,” the “quite” actually means “not” or “barely.”

      • Christine says:

        It was SUPER fun, I’m sure! But the people who had to deal with the indignity of an early morning email from Meghan have truly suffered, so much so that they have revised HR policies, but they are super secret revisions, locked away in a vault…to protect Meghan. While King Charles throws things at people, while the onlookers chuckle fondly.

        Holy hell, does anyone on Salty Isle have an independent (from the monarchy) thought? They seriously think this is a good look!

        ETA: I get that his team of bumbling idiots are trying to turn the focus to Chuck’s work ethic, because it is all he has that is better than his heir’s public persona (and seriously, if there is a lower bar, I don’t know of it), but they had a royal with a true desire to make the world a better place, who then married his wife, who also wanted to make the world a better place, at zero cost to any taxpayer, anywhere.

        Nothing thrown at anyone, just competent adults focused on their purpose.

      • MrsTTempest says:

        @CIOTOG Yes, “quite fun” is sarcastic. It means “not at all fun”.

    • StellainNH says:

      Sounds like Bill inherited his temper from his dad.

      The lack of organization and dysfunction sounds awful. No wonder they couldn’t deal with a powerhouse like Meghan. She must have gotten exasperated with the whole place.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        QEII’s father was also known for having an explosive temper. It runs in the family it seems.

      • MeganC says:

        It’s time to break the cycle. William needs anger management therapy.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ MeganC, W needs all kinds of treatment but we can start with the anger issues first as they are the most prevalent.

      • Seraphina says:

        @MEGANC, can’t break a cycle when you see nothing wrong and are not capable of introspection.

      • aftershocks says:

        Yes @ArtHistorian, it’s well-known that Bertie (George VI) had a nervous temperament. He would fly into rages all the time, behind-the-scenes. Who knows whether or not it was connected to his frustrations with his stuttering difficulty? For all we know, George V and Edward VII could have been temperamental rage monsters too, in private. Certainly, a number of sources have revealed William’s behind-the-scenes ‘incandescent with rage’ behavior. And now, we know about Charles too. 😤

  4. Nanz says:

    His fall will be spectacular.

  5. Merricat says:

    Charlatan the Third’s reign looks to be short and dirty.

    • Seraphina says:

      From your lips to God’s ears.

    • Snuffles says:

      I read that as “third reich”.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Sounds much more accurate, actually. Doesn’t it??

      • insertnamehere says:

        no it doesn’t, actually. they are all objectively horrible people and obviously racist. but they have no real power and aren’t sticking people in gas chambers. so…no.

    • Kathryn says:

      (sorry for weird spacing, there was an ad blocking my view) I don’t believe George will ever be King. Cries to abolish the monarchy are growing now that QEII is gone and I think they’ll get louder as time passes and when William reigns. Combine that with what’s going to happen over the next 30 years (worsening climate change, lack of water, deepening inequality) and I think the monarchy will be swiftly abolished.

    • CocofromCanada says:

      He looks really rough!

  6. Selene says:

    I know that Valentine Low is a pos, but this is exactly how I imagine Charles to be. This is the other side of his humanitarian, forward thinking, environmentally enlightened ass.

  7. dawnchild says:

    What does he work at so ferociously? Acquiring bags of cash from questionable people?

    • caitlin says:

      I was wondering the same thing myself – where are the results of this work? I’ll wait…

      • BothSidesNow says:

        I too am curious…..where are these magnificent ideas that he was working feverishly for at a pace of seven days a week? I haven’t seen anything new from KC3, have any of you??

        And it’s not professional nor acceptable to be throwing things around at those that are your support staff.

        My gawd man, get some therapy and work on your anger issues. Take your Incandescent of Wailing with you, maybe you two could get a discount for two, perhaps?? You both need it, desperately!!

    • Sunday says:

      Right! Like precisely what is Charles working on? Even if he’s in charge of every single aspect of the management of all his various properties, even if he dots every single i and crosses each t regarding the Prince’s Trust, that’s still not enough to fill 7 days a week for *decades* ?? Reviewing and approving things, sure, but it’s not like Charles is out here actually crafting everything from security schematics to marketing campaigns, and after a few years establishing any business or managing a property you sort of get a basic operational outline down and can just focus on smaller new projects instead of pretending you’re reinventing the wheel every year.

      This workhorse persona just reminds me of giving a child a toy kitchen set and having them play with their plastic fruit while you cook dinner.

    • The Royals are Ghouls! says:

      The man-boy can’t even muster the stretch to move his own ink well!

      • caitlin says:

        Exactly!! The royals are all experts in delegating tasks and creating “work” for others. Kate is excelling at this.

  8. Amy Bee says:

    When is the bullying investigation against Charles going to be initiated?

    • Laura D says:

      I think it was (along with Andrew, William and a few others). However, because the main object of their focus was found to be innocent of all charges, we were told the report will never see the light of day. 😉

  9. Sonia says:

    Charles throwing things is totally cool and “fun” (??????????) but a non-white woman calling people a few times caused them to have a nervous breakdown? How very not racist as hell for sure.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Sonia, don’t forget PTSD……..

      I can’t believe I had to rehash that bit of dramatics. The entire bunch are all incompetent, along with whom they are serving as well.

  10. Denise says:

    So he’s a “man with the mission” and has a “ferocious work ethic” while Meghan is called a bully because of her work ethic. And then they’ll say they’re not racist.

    Also reading about Charles falling under people’s spell kinda explains how Camilla got her hooks in him. She always knew what to say and how to keep his interest while Diana wasn’t interested in playing those kinds of games

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Denise, the worst offense of Camilla was that Charles stop having sex with Diana as she had wanted to have a third child, preferably a girl as well.

      Camilla certainly wrapped him around her finger quite nicely, didn’t she? Well, he is hers now and she can deal with his temper tantrums and his incessant rages and his ill gotten gains as well.

  11. smegmoria says:

    “He had a proper temper on him, which was quite fun.”

    Yeah nah, Meghan would never be described as fun for wanting things to be the way she wants them.

  12. Scorpion says:

    It’s hilarious how when it’s a man doing something, it’s passion and driven but when it’s a woman, especially biracial, it’s diva like behaviour, bullying and demanding….

    Oh to be a mediocre white male🙃

  13. Amy Bee says:

    This really shows that the bullying accusations against Meghan were based on racism, misogyny, classism and xenophobia. The Palace has a lot to answer for.

    • Jp says:

      Yesss! The comment about how “we don’t speak to staff that way” when Meghan was asking about the ingredients in her wedding cake is ridiculous when you consider Charles was calling people over to literally pull things from his trash can. . It’s actually “we” speak to them like they are servants but “you” should know your place.

    • Gabby says:

      And did the queen say “we don’t speak to staff that way” to Andrew when he screamed at staff for lining up his teddy bears incorrectly?

  14. Tessa says:

    The housekeepers diary was banned in the UK because she recorded Charles temper tantrums imo

    • Seraphina says:

      Was the book ever published outside UK?? Would love to get my hands on it.

    • windyriver says:

      I got a used copy a couple of years ago via Amazon.

      Re: the bit about falling under people’s spells, @Tessa doesn’t she also talk about Charles confiding in and getting advice about his relationship with Diana from some old curmudgeon who worked on the estate?

      • Laura D says:

        The old curmudgeon isn’t the problem but Jimmy Saville was/is. It’s well documented that Charles often sought his advice. It came to me reading your post if Charles is also worried how Netflix portrays that “friendship?”

      • Tessa says:

        I think that was vanderpost

  15. Snuffles says:

    “He also had a proper temper on him, which was quite fun.”

    So, Charles being perpetually abusive is FUN!? But, Meghan being frustrated with incompetent employees means she’s a bully. Do these people not hear themselves?

    I think Charles’s core would is that neither parent had much respect for him. But, he also the Queen Mum and Uncle Dickie gassing him up, inflating his ego. But deep down he’s a fragile insecure man baby who would fall for anyone who stroked his ego.

    • dee(2) says:

      I’m waiting to see if we’ll see wall to wall coverage of this portion of the excerpt in all the media, including US ( looking at you Cosmo, Marie Claire, Elle, etc.) they way I did this weekend. The fact that someone could write specifics of someone’s behavior like this and describe it as fun, but Meghan’s the antichrist is infuriating.

      • Brassy Rebel says:

        I haven’t seen a word about Charles the Horrible in the US media even though my news feed all weekend was, Meghan, Meghan, Meghan! Part of this is the fact that Meghan draws clicks and who cares about Charles? Still, this is how Charles sails above it all as Meghan is demonized.

  16. Lizzie says:

    Yeah sure. Is William comforting the bullied staff? Where’s Jason and his email trying to put a stop to the bullying?

    • ArtHistorian says:

      There have been stories about William exploding on his staff – but the RR hurried to say that he always apologizes, so it is all good./s

  17. Tessa says:

    Charles is not a fun person by any stretch of the imagination the housekeeper observed Charles saying to Diana do you know who I am

  18. Blithe says:

    So, the reason the investigation of the complaints about Meghan’s so-called “bullying” of staff focused on HR procedures instead of directly on specific bullying complaints — which would have allowed Meghan to directly address the complaints and clear her name — is because of what a true investigation would have revealed about Charles? And William? And Andrew? And even Kate? SMH.
    Deeply miserable people create a deeply miserable work environment and continue to project their miserableness outward while the biographers take notes. I’m starting to understand why they maintain multiple large households.

    • equality says:

      An undercover reporter also outed Anne cursing out a staff member.

      • Blithe says:

        Now I’m wondering what Edward did during family dinners. Curse? Cower?

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Prince Edward also has a bad rep among the royal staff. The only ones who had a good rep were the Queen and Prince Philip. In fact, Philips was the favorite among royal staff (because he wasn’t a complete jerk).

    • Alexandria says:

      Edward unnecessarily put his hands over a black station staff who was respectfully keeping his distance from the Queen. And you can look at his stance during the walkabout after the Queen died. He was keeping a good distance away from the crowds as if he’s too good for them yikes.

  19. twoz says:

    Was it Phillip who said Charles bears the imprint of the last person who spoke to him?

  20. Emily says:

    It’s obvious to everyone that the courtiers and people working for the royal family are incompetent. And apparently purposefully so. They couldn’t even get pens right lol.

    Meghan expected the bare minimum, and was a “bully.”

  21. DARK says:

    To me this reads like a hit piece from a salty courtier. They are not praising Charles as much as praising themselves to have been able to cope with such a hard environment and demanding boss. And to bring up Jimmy Saville in connection to Charles… ouch!

  22. Becks1 says:

    this is something that I think most women can relate to – the man losing his temper is seen more as quirky, or “quite fun” even when he throws something, the woman wanting something corrected is an abusive terrifying bully.

    Meghan faced so much racism, xenophobia and sexism from the start there that it’s really surprising she lasted as long as she did.

    But seriously, how does Low write this stuff with a straight face and then write the passages about Meghan?

    • ArtHistorian says:

      “But seriously, how does Low write this stuff with a straight face and then write the passages about Meghan?” The answer is Racism.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Yes. Racism out of the gate. Meghan was also very well accomplished and came in with an abundance of her own philanthropic work to boot. Meghan had what the other married-ins wish they had but they don’t. They had intended to bring Meghan down from the beginning, full stop.

        Ah yes, it’s all fun when the men it that family act like the tyrants that they actually are, it’s all “quite fun”.

      • Elizabeth says:

        Racism, misogyny, xenophobia.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      Like the authority gap. The man gets vexed, he is strong, firm and authoritative. A woman gets vexed, she is angry, emotional and a bully.

  23. Midnight@theOasis says:

    Honest question here. How can Low not see the hypocrisy and contradictions in what he wrote about Charles versus Meghan? Yes, I understand racism blinds people, but this book went through reviews, etc. and this garbage is what was printed?

  24. ML says:

    Anything negative about Kensington Palace? If not, those are the main sources of this book.

  25. equality says:

    The courtiers “involve themselves in the dark arts of undermining other people”. No kidding.

  26. kyliegirl says:

    So let me get this straight, Charles can have a temper, throw things and be an ass to staff but is fun, per Anne’s 70th birthday doc she can be demanding and downright rude to staff but she is hardworking, Andrew can just be a total ass and destroy property and be weird with stuffies and he is just Andrew being Andrew, Kate and William, according to Jobsen yell and scream at each other in front of staff, William can get heated with staff and both never put a foot wrong, but the REAL problem is Meghan?!? Right then…

    • Aiglentine says:

      📽📽📽. People always tell on themselves.

    • Ex Firm Staffer says:

      Here’s something that’s now relevant! Years ago when I worked for those who frequented Charlie’s circle I overheard one Lord moan to another about C’s penchant for constantly changing favorites like this, “C’s like a cushion, he bares the impression of the last person who sat on him”
      Good to be able to get that out there! Don’t think that’s a breach of the Offical Secrets Act that all staff signed…

  27. Paulkid says:

    “He falls under people’s spells” . Preparation to throw his consort under the bus for Diana’s mistreatment?

    • BothSidesNow says:

      Will never happen. But I can bet you that many world leaders will be leery in meeting with Chuck Kung Un and his QC. Her lips flap the second someone isn’t within earshot. Too much gin and not enough statesmanship either.

      • Paulkid says:

        The queen was right to have deemed Camiller unsuitable from the start. I agree that world leaders and native cultures will never have faith in her attempts at diplomacy. She blew it.

  28. Over it says:

    Charles because he is a privilege white man is just a fun fun bully, Just don’t forget to duck when he throws things your way.
    Meghan, well she is black so she is clearly just a mean American bully.
    The fact that low and others like him can’t see the hypocrisy and racism in their views and writings about Meghan, will forever astound me. But I guess racism blinds you to see us blacks or people of color as anything other than people they can continue to other.

  29. MsIam says:

    I wish some enterprising reporter, maybe in the US would put these contradictions together but alas, I fear its a vain hope.

    • EveV says:

      Buzzfeed did put out the one article showing how differently Meghan and Kate were talked about in the press for doing basically the same things but I wish it would have been an ongoing column because there is so freaking much to work with!!

  30. windyriver says:

    The tantrums, and double standards and hypocrisy re Meghan aside, there’s one big thing I also don’t get. How can someone who’s such a hard worker – and we know from Harry this is true, he said in one of the docs that they had to crawl over boxes of papers in Charles’ office to get to his desk to say goodnight – how can this person even tolerate the lazy uselessness that is William, while at the same time first, holding back, and later persecuting, the son that is obviously following in his footsteps (excluding the sleazy BTS financing)?

    I get that it’s likely a toxic combination of cowardice (about dealing with Will’s shortcomings), jealousy, need for control, pettiness, “upholding the monarchy” and who knows what else, but boy, is KCIII a piece of work. (I get that racism was a factor once Meghan entered the picture, but we read in another article about how even before that Harry was being held back at KP because what he wanted to do was in essence overshadowing Will and Kate.).

    • BothSidesNow says:

      Because Harry is the spare. He isn’t supposed to out work, out shine, be more charismatic, sympathetic, hot, engaging, all while growing to not simply be the force that keeps his inept brother out of the spotlight.

      Harry has been dictated since birth to play second fiddle, to simply serve his brother for his entire life to Incandescent of Wailing. But Harry had already started to spread his wings in the early to mid 2012/3ish before he met Meghan. Harry had started IG, Sentebale as well as other endeavors which his big brother only tagged along on.

      Well, thanks to Incandescent of Wailing this is what they are left with. Losers. All of them.

    • windyriver says:

      Yes, I know that about being the spare, but still – for all the hard work that Charles has put in, how much he’s left his stamp in very positive ways on the position of POW – is he really happy to just let all that vanish? It’s been the major part of his life. I mean, as a parent, he could also choose to be proud of how his son Harry turned out, but that aside, isn’t he at all demoralized that Will is doing nothing to follow up what he’s done?

      Of course, the answer could also be, Charles wants his accomplishments as POW to stand alone, not be overshadowed by anything future generations accomplish. So on the one hand, he’s certainly got that wish with Will’s complete lack of work ethic and interests. And on the other hand, Harry’s escaped him, and will shine on his own regardless of anything Charles can do to try and change that.

      • Lizzie Bathory says:

        I think your second paragraph is exactly what’s going on. It’s perverse, but I think Charles would prefer to see his legacy destroyed than outshone. If William were as capable as Charles (or worse, better), Charles wouldn’t be special. Worse still is having the “spare” shine brighter than the King.

        It’s been rumored that William’s partying & drug use were worse than Harry’s, but nothing was done about it, nor were his laziness or temper addressed. In addition to not caring, I think it suits King Charles to have a weak, troubled heir as his foil.

  31. Alexandria says:

    What’s happening…how can anyone write with a straight face about his temper but call Meghan a bully? I cannot believe these “writers” are not aware of their bullshit. They can’t be stupid. They must be evil but they can’t be this stupid. I think they know but they want people to talk about the absurdity of it, and end up talking about the book on social media and maybe gain some traction in sales. Either that or there’s some weird curse on that island.

    • equality says:

      Not just a bully but a “narcissistic sociopath”. It’s nothing new though for white men to get a pass on being awful in business but a woman doing the exact same thing is called names. It’s hard to understand for those who aren’t xenophobic, racist and misogynistic. It’s why they praise Kate to the skies. She’s not ambitious or driven to work hard.

      • Alexandria says:

        Yeah but they cannot be this stupid right? Whatever they wrote cannot withstand critical scrutiny by a real journalist. I can only conclude they’re trolling and trying to bait. Good thing we can tear them apart here without making them viral.

      • equality says:

        They may be. The royal “experts” certainly come across as stupid and unhinged when they bring their act to TV.

      • Gabby says:

        @Alexandria, I laugh at your “they can’t be this stupid, right?” It’s generous of you. Now just stand back and watch them prove to you how stupid they are.

      • KLS says:

        Does anyone notice she weighs like 45 lbs now ?????

      • Elisabeth says:

        She’s skinny for sure and no role model for anybody!

      • Concern Fae says:

        @Alexandria – “ The truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand.”

    • QuiteContrary says:

      They’re not real journalists. They are not subject to any of the rules of real journalism, which limit the use of anonymous sources, require more than one source on any story, and set ethical standards.
      These royal “journalists” are to journalism what Fox is to news in the United States. They just make crap up — though Charles’ reputation as a rage monster is fairly well known.

  32. Vivica says:

    Tell me Peggy isn’t the media leak without telling me that Peggy isn’t the media link. Chuck, you better watch out, you in trouble…

    For real, what do you give it before KC3 kicks the bucket and Peggy becomes King? I can see him “moving things along” before 2024.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Vivica, I wouldn’t be surprised if KC3 doesn’t have a food taster at this time, or even before. He knows how vile, power hungry and vindictive his own son is, he’s a cut from the same cloth. KC3 had better watch his back…..

  33. Jais says:

    The part that stands out me is the businessman who was “amazed”at the dysfunction. Literally, that’s prob how Meghan felt when she first started there. The description of aides obstructing planning so they could fix things and take credit while undermining others. My god. What Meghan must have gone through.

    • The Hench says:

      Yeah, that is truly horrific – especially given it’s mainly public or charity money they’re burning through to do this stuff.

      “If you knew what I know”….I get the impression that what actually goes on behind the scenes is worse than even we Celebitches anticipate.

  34. sparrow says:

    C’s anger has been known about for years. They really are the most childish bunch of people, probably from all the familial inter marrying as well as the enabling environment of being thought of as higher beings. I am sure William has either learned anger from his father or it’s perhaps in his nature. Charles is the one her sent a valet back to England from Canada because he had forgotten to pack C’s favourite shoe horn for a royal tour. He is also the one who writes memos to his staff all the time for the most minor of issues, probably because he’d get seething angry otherwise….and yet Meghan is the angry one…

    • Fredegunda says:

      A long time ago, I read an account of the summer holiday reunions that the Euro royal families used to have with each other back in the late 19th/early 20th centuries. There’s also some very rare video footage of these meetings. They behave like literal children, zooming around in circles on bicycles, sticking their tongues out at each other, playing nasty practical jokes (sticking out your foot to trip the footman with the food tray and laughing yourself to pieces when he falls and the food goes splat?!), and generally acting like the most idiotic people in the world. Not surprised that the tradition continues.

  35. Peanut Butter says:

    How many bathrooms again?

  36. JCallas says:

    The courtiers felt working for a black American TV actress was beneath them. They don’t mind being bullied by Charles because he is a blood Royal,

  37. ABritGuest says:

    This is why I can’t take the bullying claims against Meghan seriously. It was a blatant smear. The palace staff didn’t want to work for Meghan but can put up with actual bullying behaviour from the fully white royals. Low downplays Charles’ behaviour either because of bias or because of the invisible contract.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ ABritGuest, I am actually surprised that KC3 hasn’t called Mr. Low for his aggressions that he is painting as it’s not in a very positive light, not even for a king yet alone a CFO of a 500 company.

      • Jais says:

        So now I’m wondering if we’ll get some excerpts about the Cambridges(sorry waleses) from Low’s book. Am curious to see how William fares. Have a feeling he will be portrayed better than both Charles and Meghan. Funny how that happens when a writer has deep sources at KP.

  38. Chantal says:

    @Merricat Love “Charlatan the Third”!
    Interesting yet very revealing tidbits! KP, is that you?
    First off WTF??? Good grief, what a “royal” cesspool. This sounds like a hit piece on then PC and of course on Meghan. Gotta sell this somehow so lets trash Meghan again while we’re at it. Damn, that woman is so strong to have survived this bs!
    It sounds like Chuck went outside the palace to get some things accomplished as well. Which some courtiers are still salty about. Apparently, azz kissing is the most favored credential for him to accept advice. Nice job reminding us about the Jimmy Saville connection.
    Throwing temper tantrums and hissy fits isn’t a good look on anyone, much less a grown ass man. And no amount of bs couched as flattery will change that. If the backstabbing and underhandedness of the courtiers was so obvious to an outside businessman, it does not bode well for his “reign” and is extremely troubling. And explains a lot! I don’t even think they had an actual HR dept before one was invented/created to cover their failure in helping Meghan.
    It’s also a message to the outside world about what to expect when engaging in any business with now KC3. This is how the weak ass, vindictive and very dim king to be ran the household/Firm for years, and he is very susceptible to flattery, manipulation and bags of cash. Also, there’s no such thing as confidentiality nor professionalism in the RF “business” model so be prepared for the BM to eagerly splash any gossip about your corporation as “news” across its front pages.

  39. A says:

    That last part about Charles being very easily taken in by people and falling under their spell is a very good analysis of his character, I think. More than anything, I think he believes people when they tell him that they only have the best intentions, when they really don’t. I do think he is the sort of person who only ever sees the good side of people, or looks for the best in people, then falls back aghast when the truth is revealed about them. He’s an idealist who struggles to confront the boring and kinda lame reality of the world he actually inhabits, and that extends to people as well.

    • Merricat says:

      Lol, please, Charles’ behavior is due to his idealism? He “only ever sees the good in people?” Too bad that idealism doesn’t extend to his own character.

      • A says:

        There is such a thing as being idealistic to a fault, right? So I’m not saying that to make Charles look good. I’m saying it bc it’s alarming that a 73 year old man has such poor discernment as a whole, especially when it comes to other human beings, to the point where he really can’t grasp why they’re bad people and that what they do is bad.

        He’s the sort of person who’d insist that someone isn’t bad, bc “they never behaved badly with ME, therefore they can’t be bad! It’s just that no one else understands them!” It’s naivete, mixed with a lack of empathy, as well as a life time spent just being completely insulated from the real world, to the extent where him and everyone else in his family really have no clue as to how the vast majority of the rest of the country lives.

        I don’t think I’m doing a good job of explaining what I’m trying to get at, but the idealism I’m getting at is not a positive thing. I guess maybe a better way to describe it would be willful ignorance.

    • Amy Too says:

      I don’t think he’s idealistic, so much as extremely susceptible to flattery, which is why he’s so easily taken in by people. He doesn’t get that people are using him for their own ends because he assumes that he, as an HRH Prince of Wales, and the monarchy as an institution, of which he was the heir apparent and now the head, are extremely very special. He seems to think that everyone else is also ready to revere him, and kiss his ring, and take him super duper seriously. So a little bit of flattery and pretended awe at meeting (gasp!) Prince Charles (swoon, faint) from someone who actually means something in the world, makes him immediately like them and assume that they are here to help him, to offer him the very best advice freely because he deserves it, because *everyone* just so desperately wants the monarchy to succeed and be popular and powerful. Especially if they’re telling him something like “oh Sir, these people you have around you aren’t nearly the best sort of people that you deserve. They’re not working nearly as hard as they should be, they’re making silly little mistakes,” etc, etc, because Charles absolutely believes that he’s super put upon. No one can live up to his great expectations because no one can really truly be worthy of serving the monarchy and serving (gasp!) Prince Charles (swoon, faint again). He alone is the hard working epitome of gentlemanly gentleman-ness (just by being Prince Charles, gasp swoon faint), and no one could possibly match his hardworking goodness. And if someone pretends to see that, he is of course going to like them and take their advice seriously.

    • Tessa says:

      Charles likes enablers and those that agree with him all the time imo

    • QuiteContrary says:

      Charles is a spoiled and not-all-that-bright prig who thinks he’s an expert on architecture because he lives in palaces and thinks he’s an environmentalist because his Aston Martin runs on wine.
      He’s not an idealist; he’s a narcissist.

  40. Gabby says:

    Make me vomit with that sloppy slouching manspreading photo in the throne chair. Is that a metaphor for his reign? Why should he be particular about having his shoelaces ironed if he is going to carry himself like that?

  41. Jensa says:

    I do think Charles is easily led and susceptible to flattery – neither of which make him a good king IMO. And he’s a weak man – angry, insecure, pompous. His will not be a glorious reign.
    As well as the appalling Jimmy Savile, one of Charles’ mentors as a young man was Laurens van der Post. He’s widely regarded as a bit of a fantasist, and he also got a 14-year-old pregnant when he was in his 40’s. Charles showed very poor judgment letting these people get anywhere near him.
    P.s. I wouldn’t read too much into the “quite fun” comment. It’s often used here (UK) to mean quite the opposite (e.g. “our bathroom flooded so that was quite fun”, “we all had food poisoning so that was quite fun”, etc.) – it’s kind of said though gritted teeth. That could be how it was said here.

    • Jaded says:

      Let us not forget his friendship with disgraced bishop Peter Ball who was convicted of molesting more than a dozen young men.

  42. Jaded says:

    His reign is going to be a hot mess, a dumpster fire inside a train wreck, a sh*tshow, use whatever metaphor you want but I’m here for it. The end is nigh.

    • Dilettante says:

      Me too! The best live action soap opera the British royal family have put on to date!

    • SpaceCadet says:

      Totally agree. Charles, after a lifetime of preparation, is not up to the job of head of state.

      “…He got the impression that aides used to obstruct planning so they could tell the boss of problems, which they would then solve. “There was a lot of backstabbing,” he said. According to another insider, some courtiers, though loyal and able, are also cunning and “involve themselves in the dark arts of undermining other people”.

      It sounds awful. Anyone who runs an office like that is a piece of work who shouldn’t be allowed to supervise people.

      Still think that Harry should wait a year before releasing his book. Right now people have sympathy for the BRF because of the platinum jubilee and then the Queen’s death, but those memories will fade soon enough. If Harry releases it in the next few months Charles etc. will still be able to play the victim. A year from now people will have had enough of King Charles trying to rule rather than reign over the UK and they will be much more open to the presumably devastating facts in Harry’s book.

  43. AnneL says:

    Charles is definitely getting a pass for a lot of behavior for which they endlessly smear Meghan and call her a sociopath, but I do think “quite fun” was meant sardonically. They’re trying to sort of laugh it off but also saying it kind of sucked to have the future monarch throw tantrums and objects. But stiff upper lip and all that.

    Again, I see the total hypocrisy in the coverage, I just don’t think “quite fun” is meant in a straight-up positive way.

    The part about Charles being susceptible makes perfect sense. Just look at the hold Camilla has had over him for decades. Almost any other man would have gotten over it, managed to make his marriage to a beautiful young woman who is the mother of his children, a model Princess of Wales and beloved by the people work somehow. But not Charles. He had to have the spotlight, and his “true love.”

  44. Jensa says:

    One thing that has surprised me a bit is how quickly the (UK) press have started to turn on Charles. I thought it would happen, but not so soon.
    I don’t think he will be loved. He may not even be respected. There are too many shadows over him.
    And it’s inconceivable that his funeral, whenever it happens, will be like the one we’ve just had.

  45. Dee says:

    In case you didn’t catch it, the statement about “falling under people’s spells” is about Meghan. Let me spill some tea now: Charles got along REALLY well with Meghan. REALLY, REALLY well.

    She came in and showed him a lot of ways his ideas about conservation, human rights etc were being actively stymied by the suits, as well as how Camilla often gives him out of touch advice, and the Cambridges spend too much and don’t work hard enough. Charles was all set to make some big changes, so the suits colluded with Camila and the Cambridges to smear and exile the Sussexes. Charles, being weak and unable to control Camilla’s excesses, did nothing. When this modern retelling of King Lear reaches it’s pathetic and inevitable conclusion, wake me up from my deep slumber.

  46. Well Wisher says:

    Where is the period of grace for the new king?
    There is only space for one golden goose, the one that spills the beans.
    Never explain, never complain look so good.

    The RF is not the only dysfunctional entity.
    He signed off on humiliating and possibly disinheriting his son and still it not quite enough.

    This is a mild reminder to King Charles 111 who is in charge.

  47. Nevia says:

    Oh, wow. Speaking from experience, I hate these workaholic types who need their staff/assistants/subordinates at their disposal twenty-four hours a day. While I do recognize that a good work ethic is admirable and essential, treating the people who work for you as human beings who need time off is equally important. Working for Charles seems like such a toxic, incredibly stressful job.

  48. K says:

    Why oh why didn’t they call him “dis-tempered”? I would have loved that. He reminds me of George the 3rd. Should have stayed Prince and kept on with his gardening etc

  49. Kim says:

    Charles sounds as though he needs Zoloft and therapy.

  50. SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

    So, this book has just taken all the stuff that applies to Charles (narcissism, sociopathy, entitlement, violent temper, bullying of staff, throwing things around in a tantrum) and applied it to Meghan, with no credibility whatsoever.

    At least they haven’t accused her of being easily manipulated by sex offenders and con artists through colossal vanity and stupidity, as is the case with Charles.

  51. Valerie says:

    Oh, you don’t say.

  52. Mel says:

    Wasn’t Megan deemed a sociopath for like, having standards? I don’t think she yelled and threw things but I guess that’s acceptable behavior for certain people…….

  53. clare says:

    But… her emails.

  54. blunt talker says:

    The poster JCallas stated it perfectly-King Charles can curse at, throw things, and berated his staff -oh that is just fun-he’s the king we have to put up with his behavior-Meghan is a POC, an actress, and no royal blood-we can treat her any kind of way-she is beneath us and we don’t have to do anything she says-pure evil and stuck on stupid-no wonder Harry and Meghan had such a hard time working as royals-the courtiers behind the scenes were working against them to make them look bad.-especially Meghan-these people are heathens with cruelty written across their asses.

  55. imsoblessed says:

    I’ll never read this book but do they EVER provide specific examples of what exactly they are working on until 11 p,m., 7 days a week? This sounds much worse than 5 a.m. e-mails, why is the word bully never used when describing King Tampon’s behavior?

  56. Tessa says:

    Charles was witnessed pulling out a sink at highbrow when he got angry

  57. sparrow says:

    Re falling under people’s spells. He has done this with regards to fake healers and their quackery, such as homeopathy. He even wrote to medical staff, from memory, urging them to consider natural remedies instead of standard cancer treatments. He was well known for writing letters to the government about his latest nonsense idea, so much so that there was a report put out saying now he is king he understands his role is to be less vocal and more neutral.

  58. one of the marys says:

    I’m shocked any of this made it to print. It’s not good. How does this writer expect to maintain access to the Royal family putting all this out there?

    • SnoodleDumpling says:

      As far as I’m aware everything that is excerpted here about Charles III was stuff already out there from other stories by other members of the Royal Rota.

      Honestly, Charles has been in the press on a near daily basis for the last 50 years, and at least half of it was negative (I am SUPER lowballing that estimate). There’s loads more nonsense that everyone has had plenty of time to forget about.

  59. Dillesca says:

    I am adding my comment after so many others have made more substantive comments here, but GAWD am I sick of this loosey goosey smoke-and-mirrors royal reporting.
    Case in point:
    “In contrast to the conviviality of his grandmother’s household, Charles’s office is suffused with a ferocious work ethic: he is a man with a mission.”
    Do they actually mean the Queen Mother here? (If so, why wouldn’t they say that?) Why would they use HER as the comparison instead of the Queen? (Did they actually mean the queen and just mess up?)