Till date whatever we have known about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle has always been through the eyes of the British tabloids, royal blogs and analysts whether be it an iconic projection or mere defamation. But now something more added to our knowledge about the duo’s chemistry which challenges their relationship from an identical perspective of the Duke’s late mother. It states that the reason for the royal marriage has been Harry’s obsession with Diana’s stand, who reflects on her embedded qualities frequently.
Diana’s previous steward, Paul Burrell has reported that Harry fell for the Suits’ actress firstly due to her matching disposition with Diana’s. While the Closer magazine interviewed him, the valet disclosed the fact deliberately saying, “Harry went for and married Meghan because she’s like Diana. Both women who would always stand up for what they believe in and wouldn’t be pushovers.” Well, that indicates their ingenuousness in an explicit manner.
The underlying clash finds the opinion
But then, Paul contemplated that such resemblance doesn’t necessarily hint towards an amicable relationship between the two who said, “I think, possibly, they would have clashed”. Later on, he further expressed concerns on the issue uttering, “I imagine it would have been two strong, independent women with different views on things—it would have been a battle between Meghan’s way and Diana’s way.” Now, again you are shocked hearing about the stereotyped perceptual conflicts.
Perchance, one of the main differences between Meghan and Diana revolves around the reality that the Duchess has better control over the media while opting for a royal wedding as she has been the prior focus for the press since long time back.
Is the tussle between conspiracy and guilelessness?
Paul subsequently added, “I think the main difference between them is that Meghan has a game plan, whereas Diana was young and naïve. Diana did the book with Andrew Morton and courted the press over the years because she didn’t have a voice. And her strong-mindedness meant she cared and she felt the people of the country had a right to know what had gone on behind closed doors.”
In fact, who knows the actual truth?