Tuesday 4 October 2022

UPDATED: Archetypes Returns & Several Gorgeous New Images from One Young World Events

In many ways, Harry and Meghan's whistle-stop tour of the UK and Germany feels like an eternity ago. The couple had initially planned to spend just under a week basing themselves at their Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage. The Duchess delivered a beautiful speech at the One Young World opening ceremony in Manchester, followed the next day by an enormously warm reception in Dusseldorf where they attended events celebrating the one year countdown to Invictus Games 2023. Then on the 8 September, quite out of the blue, the very sad (and I think from all I've read, unexpected) news Her late Majesty had fallen very ill and later passed away that afternoon occurred. There was a ripple felt across the nation -- none more so than among the Queen's family, who so dearly loved her. The Sussexes ultimately stayed in England at least ten days longer than planned to participate in several events honouring Her late Majesty before saying their final goodbyes at Her late Majesty's funeral on 19 September.

Back in California and back to Archie and Lili, they spent the official mourning period privately at their Montecito home having cleared their busy September diaries. Postponed and cancelled was a Variety cover for Meghan and attendance at Variety's Power of Women event where the Duchess was scheduled to join Hillary Clinton, Oprah Winfrey and Ava DuVernay. An appearance on the Jimmy Fallon Show to promote Archetypes was shelved, and a long-planned UN appearance in New York for both Harry and Meghan will have been rescheduled. As the Sussexes return to normality and continue with their plans, their trusted friend and immensely talented photographer, Misan Harriman, shared two gorgeous portraits from the One Young World summit in Manchester. I adored the vivid red Another Tomorrow ensemble Meghan wore on the night; it just pops sublimely in these portraits. The sleep ponytail and gold Oera earrings completed one of her best looks to date.

This was quite the photoshoot. Misan actually shared one more and later deleted it, but a number of eagle-eyed fans were fast.

We also saw the release of three images taken by Misan from the One Young World roundtable discussion the couple attended in Manchester before the opening ceremony.

Town & Country reports:

'Town & Country now understands that before the speech, both Meghan and Prince Harry took part in an intimate roundtable discussion focused on advancing gender equality and inclusion, which was moderated by the Irish writer and disability activist Sinéad Burke. The Sussexes and Burke were joined by eight delegates, who shared how their projects are impacting social change.

Swara Patel, whose work is focused on combatting the taboo surrounding menstruation, described the impacts of period poverty; Shilpa Yarlagadda, CEO of the ethically sourced jewelry company Shiffon Co., spoke on the importance of supporting women-led businesses; and Nhial Deng, the founder of Refugee Youth Peach Ambassadors and SheLeads Kakuma, detailed the needs of women living in refugee camps.

Other participants in the conversation included Senior Prosecutor at the Kiribati Office of the Attorney General Tabotabo Auatabu, founder of C Talent Keely Cat Wells, civil rights activist Isra Chaker, founder of the Empowerment Initiative for Rural Women and Girls-Zambia Ireen Chikatula, and football coach Nagin Ravand.'

Meghan was delighted to reunite with familiar faces, including moderator Sinead Burke. During Harry and Meghan's 2018 trip to Dublin, Sinead tweeted about reconnecting with her fellow OYW counsellor at a reception. "Oh my goodness. I had the great privilege and pleasure of speaking with Her Royal Highness, the Duchess of Sussex this evening about the importance and power of fashion and the opportunities we’ve both been afforded by One Young World."

A group photo from the discussion. The Duchess wore a Brandon Maxwell polo sweater.

A very sweet photo of Meghan hugging humanitarian and activist Isra Chaker rounds up the new photos. Isra told Harper's Bazaar: "Participating in the roundtable discussion focused on inclusion, immigrant rights, and gender equality with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex was an incredible experience. It was a privilege to have the opportunity to share my personal narrative and the advocacy work I do in support of migrant communities. I am grateful that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex create spaces like this one, to connect with activists, advocates, and leaders creating positive social impact and change."


On that note of normality, the fourth episode of Archetypes streams today. The conversation focused on 'The Demystification of Dragon Lady', and featured Meghan's conversations with comedian and activist Margaret Cho and journalist Lisa Ling.

Meghan opened with memories from her childhood:

'Growing up in Los Angeles, these are the types of foods I would eat: tamales, ghormeh sabzi, larb, matzo ball soup, adobo… along with your usual kid fare of chicken nuggets and fries and burgers and pizza. And the types of languages I would hear? Honestly, more than you can imagine. From Armenian to Farsi, Korean, Spanish, Hebrew… Los Angeles, despite how segregated it sometimes felt, was full of culture that you could see, feel, hear and taste on a daily basis.

The multitude of Asian cultures was a huge part of that for me. My weekends were spent in Little Tokyo, or having iced teas in Thai Town, or sitting with my friend Christina Wong and her parents at a local Chinese restaurant. I remember this so vividly and them teaching me why chow fun with dry noodles was so much better than chow fun with wet noodles. Now obviously I
had a real fixation with food (not much has changed there), but more than that, I had a real love of getting to know other cultures.

And part of that, my mom and I would often go to the Korean spa together. Now those of you who haven’t been to one before it’s a very humbling experience for a girl going through puberty because you enter a room with women from ages 9 to maybe 90 all walking around naked, and waiting to get a body scrub on one of the tables lined up in a row. All I wanted was a bathing suit but you’re not allowed by the way. And once I was over that adolescent embarrassment, my mom and I, we would go upstairs, we would sit in the room upstairs, having a steaming bowl of the most delicious noodles, and we’d look around at all of these other women. These beautiful Korean women who had embraced the generational tradition of the jimjilbang and shared it with one another.

Now that was a part of the Asian American culture that I knew. I hadn’t known all the stigmas and archetypes that so many women of Asian descent specifically had faced until many, many years later. Those terms, ideas, and stereotypes they just - they weren’t familiar to me. Like the ones we see in so many movies and throughout pop culture.'

Margaret Cho spoke openly about the portrayal of women of Asian descent in cinema as "this ancillary dark character in the side of like the shadows playing this evil, exotic force. We sort of have to take those roles if we want to work at all". On her own experiences, Margaret said: "Any time I assert myself, it's like I've got an attitude. I'm like, No, I don't have an attitude, I just want...I want chips! I mean, I don't know. It's almost as if, people sort of assume when women are asking for what they need, they're somehow a drain. And it's very different from when men ask for what they need. When men ask for the idea that, oh, he knows what he wants, he knows who he is.

"Well, I'm from San Francisco, and I grew up really kind of raised by television and raised by movies. But I never saw Asian people in them. And so I never felt visible. I never felt seen anywhere. And then later, I guess, I started to go into silent films, and I started to realize, Oh, this is actually like an archetype, this archetype of the Dragon Lady. And there was a silent film actress named Anna May Wong who was actually Chinese-American. She was born in Chinatown in Los Angeles, and she was the first Asian American movie star, at the dawn of film. And she couldn't get any roles in America. So she was in a film where she played sort of this caricature of an evil Dragon Lady."

Journalist Lisa Ling spoke to Meghan about her career and shared a heartbreaking story which exposed the racism and prejudice she faced: "While I was at Channel One, Rolling Stone magazine every year had an issue called The Hot List, and I was named Hot Reporter one year. And I mean that, it was so exciting for me. You know, I'm this, this like, country bumpkin kid from a suburb of Sacramento. And here I am. Rolling Stone has just named me Hot Reporter. And it was such a, it was such a moment for me and uh someone at my place of work cut out that article, drew slanted eyes over the eyes, wrote 'Yeah, right,' and then put it back in my mailbox. And when I retrieved that from my mailbox, it was like every kernel of excitement that I possessed just withered away. It was just, it was so devastating that someone that I would see every day in my place of work, where we're supposed to feel comfortable, just harbored those feelings about me and, and had the nerve to make it racial."

One of the most illuminating quotes from this episode came from Lisa's part when she told Meghan: "I think the, the, the amazing aspect of being an Asian-American, particularly being an American, is… we want to stick out. We don't want to be hammered down. And, and we can bring this rich history and this rich culture along with us. But we're empowered to be able to say what we want, whenever we want. And that's a really powerful thing."

I never had the opportunity to tell you all how much I enjoyed Meghan's conversation with Mindy Kaling. It was so deeply candid and spoke to so many of the complex feelings women grapple with and affirms an important message: families come in many different forms. It felt very much like a chat between two friends and I thought Meghan was incredibly relaxed and shared so many anecdotes and little insights from her own life. That's the beauty of Archetypes -- Meghan has the opportunity to convey her voice, on her own terms, and it very much reminds me of the Meghan I first learned about back in 2016.

Unusually Meghan didn't share the name of next weeks guest(s). We'll have to wait until next Tuesday to find out.

UPDATE: Lisa Ling shared a lovely photo from the day the podcast was recorded with her daughter and Meghan. Accompanying the image, Lisa wrote, "So enjoyed talking to Meghan Markle for her podcast Archetypes. She is such a bright and compelling conversationalist and I hope people take the time to get to know her beyond the often insidious headlines".


  1. I wish so much that the Queen was still with us, but am so glad to move from that sad period. I spent years growing up in NYC, and I share Meghan's experience of a bombardment of cultural sounds and sights and foods. It's so exciting to live that way. I think perhaps some people who grow up with a constant sameness dislike what is new to them. I'm amused at one of the "biographer's" statements that poor Harry only looks morose since leaving for LA with Meghan -- he looks pretty happy here! What to say about this post -- there is so much to enjoy, and frankly the blog comments are so thorough and insightful and enjoyable that I need nothing else. Thank you.

  2. Hurray for new Meghan content! The podcast was great as usual, I love that Meghan is using her platform to shine a light on topics that all women can connect on, while giving women of all backgrounds a chance to speak about what uniquely affects them. The photos that Misan released are gorgeous. Harry and Meghan especially look glowing and a little cheeky, there’s always a little twinkle in their eyes. I look forward to seeing them get back to business.

  3. Sheryl from BC Canada4 October 2022 at 21:29

    Again, I'm thrilled and awed by Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex's. podcast. She just keeps knocking it out of the park.

  4. Lovely photo of the royal couple. Looking forward to listening to the new Podcast.

  5. Philly here. (The platform won't recognize my URL when I try to post as I did before the various changes.)
    The RF lost much when they lost Meghan and Harry. Whether they will realize that or not in their blinkered perception of what a Monarchy is/should be, who know?

    That said, the Crown (the institution not the TV show) is responsible for much that is reprehensible. It's history of colonization and colonial rule all over the globe and most especially throughout what is (for now) the Commonwealth is not pretty. Her Majesty the late Queen is revered and lauded for many things that (quite rightfully) are due her as a person. She was unique and steadfast among many other laudable qualities.


    The wars and genocides and other injustices perpetrated historically as well as under the Crown throughout the Commonwealth during her reign should not go unremarked or be swept away on account of the force of her personality. Frankly, I couldn't see that sitting easily with Meghan or Harry, based as it was (still is) on inequitable balances of power for which they were once held up as the Queen's ambassadors. Too few people examine history thoroughly.

    I'm relieved that their obligations to the Crown are over.

    1. Dear Philly I agree completely that we need to examine history thoroughly and that the British Government has not been a great example of integrity and justice in the past. However most colonial powers including the US have that in common and during the late Queen's long reign things weren't too bad. I don't think you can blame her for any injustices committed by her government as she had no political power which would have enabled her to intervene.

    2. I agree. I don't see the appeal of being a member of the BRF anymore, especially since the Oprah interview. It's like working for a really big company that everyone says will elevate you but in reality is toxic with bad history.
      Really enjoyed this episode of Archetypes & glad to see H&M looking happy in the new pics. -op

    3. Your points are good ones, but they beg the question: “if ‘Megexit’ was about the couple’s distaste for what the Crown represents (as opposed to his or her personal discomfort with adaptation to the current requirements/norms of their roles in the modern day structure), why do they keep their Ducal titles?”

      Harry was born a Prince. It’s been part of his identity from the moment he was conceived. I can certainly understand there being no way for him to disengage from using his Prince title. But the Duke of Sussex title was a wedding present presumably granted with the understanding that the couple would be representing the BRF in some way.

      For Meghan, the entire concept of being a Royal came into play at whatever point she and Harry began to contemplate marriage. Such a relatively short portion of her life with this title.

      It just seems like moving on from the titles, at this stage in their lives and given the estranged nature of their relationships with other members of his family, would send a very clear message. As it is now, I’m befuddled as to why they keep these royal associations alive, other than (as a cynic might suggest) as a marketing value.

    4. I suspect that H&M keep those threads (titles) for the children's sake, which is something that USians I don't think really comprehend. Those titles aren't necessarily theirs, those titles are their family's (namely Archie's), and I don't think Harry would throw away that inheritance, especially to "make a statement."
      It's a shame that the BRF squandered their opportunity to show how to deal with the complexities of life with racism that most of the Commonwealth's residents face. They had a splendid moment to model for the world how one deals with critique on that topic and they absolutely flubbed it. Instead of the virtue of grace, they showcased the sin of pride: "Not this family"
      Wonder if the Commonwealth will declare H&M their heads instead of Chas or Wills? I suspect not, but it would be enlivening and certainly make a statement. It might have been what HRM originally intended (disperse the weight but keep it in the family), but that's all water under the bridge now.

    5. You're spot on, Philly.
      All we really know is what they have told us: they wanted the same arrangement (and privacy levels) of, say, the Duke of Kent and the Duke of Gloucester and their families. They wanted out of the cycle of "let's feed the tabloid press manufactured drama" and the Firm said "no," and so they left.
      Honestly, hazing is a crime in the US.
      What begs the question is that the UK subjects and palace aides decided it was enshrined as a rite of passage elsewhere.

    6. To Anonymous at 13.14 - it is unfair to say the royal family is toxic when you have only heard one side of the argument

    7. It depends on the tabloids which family members they publicise.- the further down the pecking order the more chance for privacy. But it is no guarantee of it. I remember Lady Helen Windsor was referred to as "melons" in her younger years. Sarah's boys are attracting some attention now and one has withdrawn from the social media because of it.

  6. I agree with you completely, Philly. You are right that the injustices perpetrated historically under the Crown could not have sat well with Harry and Meghan. They could seriously undermine the monarchy by speaking out on this subject, This, I suspect, is what really terrifies the Palace and why they wait in trepidation for Harry's memoir and each Archetype podcast -- not the fear that there will be some unflattering divulgences about Charles' failures as a father.

    That said, breaking free of the Crown is not just healthier for Harry and Meghan. Based on what they have accomplished so far on their own it has become clear that they can do so much more good outside the monarchy than in it.

  7. I cannot overstate the importance of Meghan passing up the mic to all these smart and accomplished fellow women of color on every single episode of this podcast show. This is the type of POC solidarity we need more of. United we will ultimately defeat this unbearable white patriarchy that's been king and has taken over our world for way too long.

  8. I, too, would find it very hard to be a member of the RF unless it was strictly "nonworking." Harry said in the Oprah interview that no one wants to be king, saying in a way to imply that his brother and father don't. And I understand that. No one says "Would you like to be the next monarch or shall we ask the next in line?" Harry said that he was not allowed to do the good projects; he was born to support his brother and be available for what was chosen for him. It's interesting that the other siblings (Peter/Zara, Beatrice/Eugenie, and presumably Edward's children) are close; they don't have a system that rules their life.

    1. Allison, I think because the other siblings are not an heir and the spare basis. Similar to George who is the heir and his siblings are the spares.

    2. Anon 16:40 You're exactly right -- one is forced into a path and the other is forced into a supporting path. People don't like to be forced.

  9. Susan in Florida5 October 2022 at 18:04

    Meghan is doing fabulous in these podcasts. History should include all things that went into making nations and empires. I want to learn all of it with injustices, wars and ugliness or it’s not true history. How can people change things otherwise?

  10. These photos are gorgeous she looks so good in red. thanks charlotte i too enjoyed her podcast with Kaling

  11. I am frankly blown away by the topics and guests of these podcasts -- I know she has assistance but I'm going to give her full credit. She's terribly smart and I consider these podcasts to be substantial accomplishments.

  12. these shots are gorgeous especially the one with her in red. i too loved her podcast with Kaling and it is always a pleasure to listen to lisa ling

  13. Charlotte, @AboutHerOFCL has the color portrait of Meghan and Harry as their photo of the day.

  14. As expected😇, Charlotte's thoughtful, informative and beautiful post plus the always amazing comments are the only place to get news of the Sussexes.I'm of two minds re: keeping the Sussex titles. At least for now, I see value in keeping the titles as a way of speaking out for their PsOVk from "within" the establishment at least in name. As is obvious from other European Royal families and Charles' long-standing wish to downsize, it seems Archie and Lili will not be styled as Prince and Princess, but will Harry feel it important for Archie to inherit the DoS title? Seems to me that by then it will be unnecessary, but I'm not a royal.

  15. Charlotte, do you consider to reestablish an e-mail notification like you did with the Catherine blog also with this one? It would be very helpful to keep up to date with Meghan's ventures. Anyway, thank you for providing a safe and respectful space for reading all about her important work and her interesting personality, it is always big fun.

  16. What a pleasure when I find myself here to inform me! Just as the observations of the various speakers are also very relevant and rich and that is why I really like Meghan: she is inspiring and directly or indirectly opens the debate, in her actions and her speeches, she encourages debate, we do not not bored...Thank you Charlotte

  17. I think the issue of titles has been a problem concerning H&M for some "fans." I felt when they first dated and then when they first left, they were just Harry and Meghan. I mean, really, isn't that what everyone is? A title or company position or fame is fleeting and does not add to your value as a human. If H&M were just interested in "retiring" to a quiet life to raise their children, then why would they want titles? But the titles add "magic," as Harry said. They have philanthropic goals, and those titles open doors. It's a sad truth, but titles sell. Could "just Harry" sell a book deal? I don't see why the children need titles EXCEPT that they are entitled to them now and I see little reason to take them away without their agreement. If Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie can have titles (parent is nonworking and not HRH), why not Archie and Lilibet? It's any reason "why" that is the issue. (And I hope Charles does not take away B&E's titles!)

    And it leads me to worry about the order of family members in ceremonies and seating. Sometimes it is based on working vs. nonworking. OK. Sometimes it's based on line of succession. OK. Sometimes it seems to be based on age, like when Anne comes before Edward and Andrew but then Andrew is after Edward, so it's an age/working hybrid! Sometimes it's a "who are the new king's children" order. When the Queen's grandchildren marched in to stand guard, I thought it should have been oldest first. They were participating as the Queen's grandchildren, nothing more, I thought. William and Harry should have followed Peter and Zara.

    And I saw selfies of H&M with the singer Paula Fuga. I wonder if a future podcast will address the general topic of Indigenous people, from Hawaii, Native Americans, Native Canadians, etc. I hope so -- this is a topic that still involves shameful actions and policies.

    Last topic: Why are portions of the funeral, which we have all seen, no longer "allowable" based on Palace wishes? How can the Palace delete video that is in the hands of the world? I don't know how that works.

    1. Hallo Allison, you are absolutely right. They are Harry and Meghan. And they would be doing the same things and there would be the same vileness with or without the sussex titles. This discussion is the usual noise and distraction from their great work! Gorgeous pictures by the way. Harry looks so at ease and content! I feel the big division at the moment worldwide is between acceptance of change and resistance to it. Both dynamics are important and creative. Yet at the moment they are struggling in a way that makes them toxic and dangerous. I wish especially Charles and William would have shown some courage and would have made Family unity more important than their individual image in Murdoch Media world. Courage is needed not only to promote „woke“ but also healthy conservatism.


    2. The question of titles is an excuse to punish Harry and Meghan. Titles does not make the person. The person makes the title meaningful or not. In Harry and Meghan case, titles are irrelevant. However, on what basis are you removing Harry and Meghan's titles because their work ethic is exemplary? Because they control the nature of the royal work. What about those royals that are 1/4 in and 3/4 out and still uses the HRH title? If you dig deeper and deeper, it is because the social police were not consulted and were not given the power to permit harry from marrying Meghan. She has ascended to a station that her haters know they could not attain, and it burns the dickens out of them as they stew in their bigotry and racism.

    3. I Like your comment. .its true


Welcome to Mad About Meghan! We do so look forward to reading your thoughts. Constructive, fair debate is always encouraged. Hateful, derogatory terms and insults are not welcome here. This space focuses on Harry and Meghan, not any other member of the Royal family. It's not the place to discuss politics either. Thank you for reading, we look forward to your comments :)