promotion image of download ymail app
Promoted
Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Society & CultureRoyalty · 8 years ago

Is Prince Harry now the Princess Margaret of his generation?

Missteps and scandals involving both royals have been widely reported in the media. Is Prince Harry now the "black sheep" of the Royal Family as Princess Margaret was during her time?

Update:

Jack Howard: I'm fully aware that Prince Harry's name is Henry; I refer to him as Harry because he's better known as Harry instead of Henry

9 Answers

Relevance
  • Lili
    Lv 7
    8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    The media always seem to need to draw things in black and white, so they probably see him as a male Princess Margaret.

    I think that's probably too simplistic a characterization, but there's some truth to it. William, as the heir, has become increasingly boring. He's not as attractive as he was, he's off the market now that he's married, he's settling down to old fogeyhood at a young age.

    But there's Harry to provide entertainment, and he's not settling down yet. Maybe he never will, maybe he'll never really find a comfortable niche for himself and will continue to be tabloid fodder. It's a little early to say. It would be a shame if he ended up as unhappy and rudderless as Margaret.

    If he finds a good woman, someone who can become a wife and with whom he can enjoy a solid marriage, he won't follow in Margaret's footsteps. If he doesn't -- who knows?

    Edit: Jack Howard, it is not just the media who call him Harry. It was his parents who decided at his birth that he should be called that. His relatives do not call him "Henry".

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 8 years ago

    I consider this a very generalized comparison, but I will reply none-the-less:

    No, I don't think Harry is the Margaret of his generation, for the reason that he has shown a far more stronger character than the late Princess indicated during her early "wild" years.

    Princess Margaret was rebellious and often breaking the protocol, however when the time came for a giant leap (e.g. to marry the man she loved), she chose to be obedient and settle, rather than sacrifice anything and run for it. On the contrary, Harry has indicated that he would not stop at anything, in order to do as he wished. He is already financially independent, thanks to his inheritance by his mother, and so whether he is royal or not does not affect his expectations for his well-being.

    Also, Princess Margaret REALLY cared about public opinion and her royal status - as she is many time quoted criticizing others in that aspect. Harry's, on the other hand, shows that he really doesn't give a S***

    And I respect and like him a lot for this ...

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    In as much as both are/were 'the spare', there could well be a connection in terms of thinking they can get away with virtually anything. Much as I do have some sympathy with anybody in that position. However, unlike in Princess Margaret's era, Harry must know he has more to contend with - like mobile phones, for starters. Idiot!

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • weary
    Lv 4
    3 years ago

    at the same time as i'm staggered on the examine of the previous answerer, this does not bypass lower back far sufficient. The Spencer line is unquestionably usual, because of the fact of Winston (Spencer) Churchill to descend from 3 human beings on the Mayflower, Richard Warren, Joseph cook dinner, and cook dinner's father. this does not coach because of the fact the lineage given in basic terms is going lower back to the previous due 1700s. You needed Elizabeth I, who's extra advantageous than one hundred fifty years in the previous. in fact, at the same time as the Tudor dynasty ended with E I, the Stuarts who succeeded her have been appropriate, and the present royals are descended from a grand daughter of Charles I, the 0.33 Stuart king. for that reason there is a few distant familial connection between E I and E II's little ones.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Uh huh. And Prince Andrew was, of the last generation.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Its an interesting thought.He probably is ? His name is Henry btw.Its just the media that calls him Harry.He is constantly being told he is not a full part of the Royal family.That might lose him confidence ?

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 8 years ago

    Yes indeed he is, dear Ed, but sadly without the highly impressive bosom.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    I really do not like the name Harry. Makes me think of a sasquatch

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 8 years ago

    even worse

    he is the best chance for a republic in Britain

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.