Two royal lovebirds, seeking booty and plunder,
In Faerie Oprahland now make the scene —
Where ancient decorum is torn asunder,
Where woke outrage makes civil thought unclean.
From forth both pedigreed and bi-racial loins,
This pair of caste-crossed wokesters have their say
And, in the surge of ratings and coins,
Prove every dog will have its day.
Their three-hour display of PC whinging
And poor victimized Meghan’s smouldering rage
— Though it may produce a lot of cringing —
Is now the sordid subject of this page;
The which, if you with sharpest eye shall read,
What here you miss, your soul within shall heed.
They call him Harry. Could there be a more fitting name for this misguided, purposeless, carrot-topped, not-in-line-to-the-throne fool?
Harry the Fool fell hard for Meghan (the “h” is silent, as in Gandhi) the Shrew. A failed American actress who is years older and centuries more cunning than Harry, she shrewd her way into his foolish heart.
The person who holds that place in line to the throne that Harry does not, is older brother William. He would have been a bigger catch for the Shrew, but he was flawed because he was too wise and too already-caught.
William the Wise of Windsor being unavailable, the Shrew had to settle for little brother Harry the Fool. She consequently would never be a queen or wife to a king, but only the “Duchess of Sussex.” Life’s just not fair.
But the Shrew was willing to settle for Harry. He’s amusing and user-friendly. Besides, the Shrew wormed her way into the House of Windsor not to run it, but to ruin it.
An early act to that tragic end was to name her first child neither James nor George nor Alfred nor Phillip nor Henry, but…
… drum roll …
“Archie.” Not Archibald. Just Archie. Maybe she’ll name the next one “Jughead.”
Archie’s not in line to the throne, and so under the rules of the House he’ll never be called “Prince Archie.” The Shrew’s son will just be called something prosaic like “Duke Archie.” Life’s just not fair.
So the Shrew packed up Prince Harry the Fool and duke-to-be Archie the not-Prince and fled the country, taking nothing but about a zillion unearned dollars and world-wide fame. Like other penniless refugee families, except that this one was penni-ful, they came to America.
They had no friends, they had nowhere to live and, as usual, they had no jobs. Life’s just not fair.
But by scraping together a dozen of their millions and monetizing their worldwide fame, this brave couple were able to secure shelter and friends in the form of a $15 million dollar mansion and Hollywood celebrities. They even got a job, finally, but it lasted only a few hours.
It was a gig on Oprah. The Fool and the Shrew complained on daytime TV in front of millions that the House of Windsor is racist. They revealed that the British royal family is prejudiced against this clueless redheaded man married to an unappreciative white-looking biracial American woman upon whom the family gifted the title “Duchess.” Life’s just not fair.
A long-time British television news guy said he didn’t believe their racism story. For that, he got canceled. (He’ll be in good company once they cancel Shakespeare too.) Allegations of racism, like allegations of sexual harassment, are required to be believed unless the perpetrator is a Democrat. Because the British royal family are by definition monarchists, not Democrats, the family will lose.
The heads of that royal family are Harry’s indefatigable grandparents, the 94-year-old Queen and the 99-year-old Duke of Edinburgh. Between them, they’ve devoted a century and a half to serving the people of the British Commonwealth, a majority of whom are people of color. It’s a task she still performs.
The Duke has spent the last month in the hospital in the aftermath of open-heart surgery. One wonders if this very elderly couple witnessed from the Duke’s hospital bed the assault on themselves, their family, their people, their country and their culture by their privileged grandson and his American wife.
Hot on the heels of their TV extravaganza, the Shrew has leaked word that she wants to be a politician. We’re supposed to believe that it’s not because she craves the audience she never had as an actress but because she wants to help people.
Uh huh. Probably in the same way she’s been helping her husband’s grandparents.
As for that husband, Harry the Fool, he’ll never wear a crown. But maybe he can promote himself from British court jester to American First Lady.
For the sonnet prologue above, the Aspen beat gratefully acknowledges my neighbor, friend and beatnik Chad (“Bitter”) Klinger, a lifelong student and teacher of Western and comparative literature.
the Aspen beat 
Dr Beaton, I think this will be the first time I totally disagreed with you. Bottomline: The press killed Harry’s mother. What’s the legal term? Felony Murder. However, how do you prosecute a profession? Then because of his position, he had to talk to the profession that killed his mother, let the profession that killed his mother take pictures, etc. Then he got married to an actress, multi-racial, etc. and starting building a family; all in front of the profession that killed his mother. Then, according to Harry and his wife, his family said suck it up about the profession that killed his mother. If I don’t like a movie, I leave. Harry planted a bomb and remotely detonated it from a place where he is just another celebrity and arrest motorcyclists taking pictures for the profession that killed his mother. As a man, I applaud him.
The press did not kill Harry’s mother. In fact, “her” people had notified the press in advance as to where she and her BF would be and would be going that night. If you want to blame someone for Diana’s death, blame her own shrewd manipulation of the press and perhaps her chauffer.
seatbelts save lives .
… LOL and wow! So she got herself killed? Sure, the chauffer was involved and maybe they should have gotten better tinted mirrors or shades. So a bunch of motorcycles chasing the car were not culpable in any way? Double Wow! … but what we’re talking here is staring into a man’s soul and character and coming up with ideas that explain his behavior … IMHO, mine is a far sight better than yours and the good Doctor’s … it probably didn’t take much for a little boy, who was just informed his mother died, to start wrapping his head around the fact that the motorcycles were chasing her, etc. etc. … BTW: This man served his country in uniform and did two tours in Afghanistan (please, no denigration of his duty or I will get pissed) and then supports Wounded Warriors … that speaks to his character. … Obscure Quote from A Few Good Men: “Why do you like them so much?”, “Because they stand on a wall with a gun and say ‘nothing is going to hurt you tonight'”. … (mic drop)
Oh good grief.
I had occasion to observe the Princess and the Press on her state visit to Brazil in days of yore. She played them like fiddles. Both the Princess and the Press had a great time doing their respective dances. The Prince, not so much.
… What? So? … I still think my look into his soul and character is a heap better than the Doctor’s. A little boy started wrapping his head around his mother’s death and the motorcycles, etc. etc. … If he wants to be pissed and hold a grudge, who are we to say “Well, she played the press too.” or “Suck it up, it’s part of the job.” or whatever?
Meghan, without even a touch of irony, commented to Oprah (while gazing at her flock of chicken) “Oh, how I love to rescue.” This from a woman who has a father and sister who could use a bit of rescuing…Her sister Samantha, in a wheelchair, living on scraps and her elderly father who has suffered major heart attacks, have had their world turned upside down because Meghan has chosen to marry a prince. The Markle family is helpless and Meghan can only see that they are making her “look bad” because they aren’t ready for prime time. Her father, certainly not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination, managed to scrape the money together to send Meghan to Northwestern. He was also responsible for launching her show business career. For this, Meghan can only manage veiled contempt. I find Her and her carrot-top prince despicable.
Zigfan, I was told that the setting for the ‘appearance’ was either borrowed or rented. If that is true, I suppose the chickens came with the venue.
Oprah’s chickens may be akin to Oprah “giving away” all of those automobiles years ago.
First kudos to the writer of this article. It is a stitch. The Oprah interviewed opened my eyes two concepts I had rarely heard (except on TV) but never quite understood; namely, “low born” and “know your place.” Ahhh…I get it. Meghan M’s display of “victimhood” (emphasis on “the hood”), was best suited for a Geraldo episode (though I would love to have seen her try that act before Judge Judy). When Meghan opened her mouth, she displayed her low class to the world…a class that has nothing to do with race or wealth and everything to do with a her total lack of decorum and sophistication. Her basic whine is that she didn’t feel she “belonged” at the palace. Duh. The second thing I agreed with her is that she needs meds. The woman has problems. Harry is her puppet for now, but they won’t last; because they are two ticks and no dog. Eventually Markel will wear suk him dry until he finds somebody else to glue his poor lost self to. Then, she will become less important than Other has beens. But maybe she can follow in Fergie’s footsteps as a poster child for a weight loss program….after she goes on Oprah to “tell all” about Harry and have her last hurrah as a victim. 🙄🙄🙄🙄
The press did not kill Harry’s mother. In fact, “her” people had notified the press in advance as to where she and her BF would be and would be going that night. If you want to blame someone for Diana’s death, blame her own shrewd manipulation of the press and perhaps her chauffer.
Or… how about we blame the driver, who was driving impaired by too much alcohol?
… tell that to a little boy that was just informed of his mother’s death … “It was actually your mother’s fault and you are wrong for thinking otherwise. Suck it up.” … we are trying to explain his behavior and character.
How apt to address this absurd fiasco in Shakespearean cadence. Personally, I call them Meghon & Harriet Markle as befits their new status as woke Californicators. What a HORRIBLE existence they have to suffer up there in the hills of Montecito.
I’m a big fan of the Bard. Your friend the Bitter Clinger has quite the ear, and I really enjoyed the sonnet. I also enjoyed your take on the pathetic twosome.
Meghan Markle is a cautionary tale for young men. Marry a woke liberal woman, and you’ll turn from stud into a pathetic girlyman in less than two years.
Marry any hard core Progressive or Feminist (I know that is a redundancy) and you are condemned to a life of misery.
Seems that Meghan, is really the shrew.
Oh Harry, was she really, that good of a…..errr, you know what I mean.
Yeah, I know my comment is inappropriate, but I’ve seen similar happen many a time.
The malignant psychopathy on display in the Oprah shindig was remarkable, even for our jaded era. Meghan and Harry, or as I prefer to denominate them, Inanna and Tammuz (look them up, see what I mean) are the quintessential modern American couple; she, personifying the “Yass Slay Kween” persona and he, a former Alpha male who has degenerated into a poster boy for soy-beta-hood. God, I hate them all, including (especially?) Oprah, the ring mistress of the clown show.
I think you missed the part of the interview revealing that the next little Sussex will not be Jughead, but more likely Betty or Veronica. My money’s on “Veronica,” in honor of the dark-haired, jealous, scheming, vindictive vamp of Riverdale High. Not the kind of girl one brings home to Mother, at least not in 1955. But enough said.
We’re both right. As you pointed out, the next one will be a girl. But I maintain that the Shrew will still name the poor little girl “Jughead.”
Whatever it takes to poke the royal family in the eye, she will do, even if it means a life of misery for her own children.
Archie is a bizarre name to give a new born boy. Hard to take anyone with that name serious.
Watch, “Jughead” will then become a very fashionable female name — or, if not “female,” then strangely appropriate for whichever “gender,” of which there are dozens, that this child may exhibit or choose, or something. Misery can take many pathways in this Woke New World.
Given the cultural precedent, ‘Jughead’ will be pronounced ‘Youf-aide’.
SO we’ll said and the prose are very entertaining!
Very funny. She’s as white as Colin Kaepernick and Rachel Dolezal. My claim to be a Black Lesbian has greater legitimacy
Just to remind you, Rachel Dolezal IS white, all white, and, I’ve read, unemployed for the past six years since her unforgivable (?) cultural appropriation, designed perhaps to make her exotic and more employable in the lily-white Spokane and Coeur d’Alene area. As Glenn says, life just isn’t fair: “Lie-awatha” Liz Warren could get away with it, why couldn’t Rachel?
Will we ever tire of racial politics? As Glenn also said in a recent column, we appear to be growing stupider by the decade.
GB, BK, et al. most excellent work.
I would not call Meghan a failed actress since she had a job for several years on “Suits” (a cable TV show I never heard of) but the term “obscure” comes to mind.
So you liketh Bard parodies, bonniesomething. Heres one about the Bard doing the prollogue to Star Wars
Two Death Stars, both alike in lethality
In far Galaxia, where we play our screen
From aged Republic, break to new tyranny
Where darkened helm makes once charred flesh unseen
From forth the loins of this Vader foe
Two young siblings pledge their lives
Whose light-sabered, Yodaesque overthrows
Do, despite Hutt, end the Sithian strife
The fearful passage of this Fett marked quest
And the disturbiance in the Force foreseen
Which, but for Palpatine still distrest
Is the six film traffic of this screen
Which, if you for twenty years shall attend
What promist here, Jar Jar Binks may yet rend
Harry and Meghan are both total airheads but I don’t blame them for ditching Britland and royalness. What a vapid existence. I can kinda see how (some) women might like it since the clothes allowance is effectively infinite. So is the attention, and Meghan likes attention. LOTS of attention. Adoration is even better.
But down the line a problem will arise between fundamentals. Harry’s the sort who likes rugby and grab ass. He married Meghan because she likes being grabbed by the ass and that plus the kudos for marrying black roped the boy in. Sex and wokeness work for awhile with a randy young feller, but after awhile he begins to sense unmanliness in it all, the sex as manipulation and the woke stuff as whiny and cowardly.
Harry wants to be seen as a war hero, a fighting man, a bit of a roughneck. In time he’s going to tire of the girlish sucks-to-be-me drama and want to get back to more manly pursuits. That will clash head-on with Meghan’s carefully constructed tale of mistreatment and misfortune. She needs him on a tether, always right there, to support her act of vulnerability. Harry will be sensing that she’s about as vulnerable as a male rhino in rut.
Harry doesn’t know it yet, but he’s in line to be called racist by Meghan when he calls her on her bullshit. We’ll hear tales of beatings and a fearful, tearful wife clutching her babies in terror. None of this will be true – Harry’s not the kind to hit a girl – but they’re grist for Oprah’s mill. She will give them loud play because of their utility in the evil-white-man wars.
We’re seeing Peyton Place played out at the highest level by a C-lister. Sorta makes you wanna hurl, don’t it?
Royalty a vapid existence? Compared to Hollywood?
I don’t understand the European attachment to Royalty. Then again i don’t understand the American attachment to entertainment and sports figures.
At any rate, the senior members of the Royal family, including Charles, William and Kate, strive to meet the obligations assigned to them; and generally wear their privilege lightly. More so than our pseudo royalty.
As an American … I look at the English Monarchy with bemusement and mild derision.
In the late 18th century American colonists, who themselves were mostly Englishmen, opposed the then English Monarchy not with just words but with a call to arms. General George Washington didn’t defeat the British with choice words and platitudes. He shot them … with guns.
In the early 19th century the redcoats again tried their hand at reimposing a centralized top-down politburo-like Monarchy upon our young nation, the United States of America. Our Capitol was invaded and ransacked, the White House was burned while First Lady Dolly Madison saved many of artifacts of American heritage while her husband President James Madison managed the nation’s affairs while on the run.
Another American general rose up to defeat this new British invasion and occupation. Like General Washington, General Andrew Jackson didn’t rely on choice words and platitudes to defeat the British. He too shot them … with guns.
Since then, America has developed an amicable relationship with “Mother England.” We bailed them out in WWI and WWII, they have stood by us after the 9-11 Attacks.
Yet the Brits remain a rather curious and somewhat distant cousin. They are certainly entitled to their Monarchy and their heritage which for the most part seems to serve them well. Their Monarch and their democratically elected Parliament and Prime Minister largely acts in the general interests of their … subjects. So everyone there is more or less satisfied with their brand of political discourse and this is something that hey are entitled to.
Yet, I do not begrudge other nations of their monarchs either. Thailand has a King as do the countries of Jordan and Saudi Arabia. A few other countries have Sultans and/or other titles which signify some type of nobility. If these “nobles” govern in brutal and/or repressive ways, similar to King George III, then they should cover their assets because they too are liable to get shot … with guns.
I wonder what would have become of the French if instead of beheading their Monarchs in the late 18th century, King Louis instead put those Jacobins, all proto-fascists and proto-communists, to the guillotine instead and reformed his country to better serve the French people. Perhaps the French today would be less arrogant and duplicitous?
A side bar: I cannot understand why so many countries in Western Europe, like France, Belgium, etc, do not have their own versions of America’s 2nd Amendment. The people in these countries still retain a living memory of foreign occupation by a totalitarian force (i.e., the Nazis) and the importance of having an armed population for self-defense.
Now the self-exiled Meghan Markle and her husband, Mr. Meghan Markle, are on their victimhood USA tour while dissing the British Monarchy. The Opraldo’s of the MSM will guarantee them an audience of low information voters along with millions in bounty.
But of course the British Monarchy are out of touch … they are after all European blue-bloods sharing common ancestry to Germany’s Kaiser Wilhelm and Russian Czar Nicholas. There is no news flash here.
Should we criticize the King of Thailand or the King of Jordan because they do not exhibit nor display enough sensitivity and consideration for Western Civilization? We shouldn’t and we don’t. Because of course this would be nonsense.
Now there is speculation that Meghan Markle will run for US President. Meghan and her husband Mr. Meghan Markle will try to convert their victimhood USA tour into a campaign for political office. This too will be destined for a dead end, much like Kanye’s campaign. But they will generate lots of publicity and American dollars, not British pounds.
And while Archie will never wear a crown, the Markles should strongly consider naming their next born Jughead … at least Jughead ALWAYS wore a crown in the Archie Comics.
Meanwhile … the British Royal Family will trudge boringly along … and along.
God Save The … whatever.
Bravo, Mr. Beaton! Best I’ve read on this whole sorry affair.
And thanks for clearing up the Archie/Archibald thing…I wondered about that. How on earth is Archie a stand-alone name?! I guess we can be glad it wasn’t De’Archie…
Princess Pushy
Hi there Glenn, Thanks for putting me on your mailing list but please take me off. Nothing personal, I enjoy your writing. So many comments in your fan base, though, belong on a hot plate next to woke school administrators at today’s all you can eat nutzoid buffet, I’ll just have a beer instead.
On my way to the exit, I would say two things about that O,H,M interview:
1.I’m in the dark as to why any American, much less millions of them, would watch a billionaire talk victimhood with the upper class twits of the year, but since you watched it, what did you expect? Whatever bugged you, it’s your own fault. You could have been working in the shop, splitting wood, knitting, reading Shakespeare, anything.
2. Adults who make fun of children, or children’s names, because of what their parents do, are the scum of the earth. Shame on you.
2. Adults who make fun of children, or children’s names, because of what their parents do, are the scum of the earth. Shame on you.
A person’s perspective is their reality. How well that perspective squares with objective reality is a practical measure of their functional sanity. That you perceive anyone on this page was making fun of children is not square with objective reality.
She is right, you know. She is oppressed. Life is oppressive, and making Harry did not change that. Making Queen would not change that. She reminds me of Manthara in Ramayana. Envy is at the root of that entire drama.
Harry and Meghan keep reminding me of some other group, oh yeah, now I remember – The Kardashians! Meghan the woman who is so fragile she had considered suicide over not getting her way with the Royal Family, has now decided she will run for President! Come to think of it, Kim Kardashian would likely be a more stable figure to fill the Oval Office!