The root of so much of the British royal psychodrama of the past decade is a series of boneheaded miscalculations from the royal establishment, not the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. The royal establishment has miscalculated Harry and Meghan at every stage, and we see the result of those miscalculations every single day. The British media’s 24-7 obsession with all things Sussex, the fact that the Prince and Princess of Wales stalk Harry and Meghan’s every move, the fact that the left-behinds simply cannot shake off or ignore the Sussexes. But let’s hear the Mail’s Amanda Platell try to put a royalist spin on this phenomenon.

After weeks of speculation and fervid anticipation that his wife and children were coming to the UK to meet his ‘Pa’, Prince Harry landed in London alone yesterday without Meghan, Archie or Lilibet. Over the weekend, more headlines beamed across the world about the ongoing Sussex saga and their rift with the Royal Family, this time over their security. Their ‘will-they-won’t-they?’ drama has become a delicious, must-watch cross between Downton Abbey and EastEnders.

Which makes me wonder where would the Royal Family be today, how significant would it be globally, without Harry and Meghan’s capricious manoeuvrings? Is it possible that, through this seemingly endless family drama, the Sussexes have, in a strange twist, become the unlikely saviours of the Royal Family? For all the relentless headlines, the feud has also made the monarchy feel unexpectedly relatable. At its heart is an ageing, cancer-stricken King Charles longing to see his grandchildren, and Queen Camilla by his side – a deeply human tragedy that has helped make the Firm feel more relevant in the modern age.

And not just in Britain. The ‘can’t-miss-an-episode’ Harry and Meghan soap opera – which began with Megxit, followed by that Oprah interview, then Harry’s bombshell memoir Spare and the couple’s Netflix documentary – has become compulsive viewing across the world. Painful as it is to admit, especially for a loyal monarchist like me, the British Royal Family – for all of their worthy OBE ceremonies and event openings – can, at times, be rather dull.

Yet Harry and Meghan have unwittingly dragged Britain’s sedate monarchy into the centre of the global spotlight. I mean, come on, think about it. How often do you see Europe’s other royal families dominating the headlines in any comparable way? The Grimaldis of Monaco? Liechtenstein’s princely family? Luxembourg’s House of Nassau?

Yet since the psychodrama started by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the House of Windsor has rarely been out of the news. For six years, the saga has provided an endless stream of interviews, documentaries and memoirs, turning Britain’s monarchy into the closest thing the world has to a real-life soap opera. It is an irresistible story of fractured family relationships and sibling rivalry, one that makes even the billionaire Beckham family’s highly publicised rift with their eldest son Brooklyn seem almost understated.

[From The Daily Mail]

Don’t yell at me, but Platell is right in a narrow way – the Sussexes’ exit completely changed the game and it all became a soap opera. She’s also right that the Sussexes are basically the only reason why anyone pays attention to the Windsors, and that H&M give the pale-and-stale crowd some cultural relevancy. But Platell is wrong about where sympathies lie, and whether these family dramas make the Windsors look “relatable.” The Windsors look like short-sighted, racist colonizers who have thrown a decade-long tantrum over a prince marrying a Black woman. And no, it’s not good news for the Windsors that people are only paying attention to them because Harry and Meghan escaped their abuse. But it’s an interesting look into the royalist’s mind.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.