Why Meghan needs a good dressing down
AFTER the global overdose on her glitzy wedding to Prince Harry, it seems it’s our turn to experience the Markle Sparkle in July when the new Duke and Duchess of Sussex arrive in the country on a one-night flying visit. As of yet, details of the royal visit are firmly under wraps but it seems likely that the self-confessed humanitarian, who likes to discuss – or as her detractors would have it, exaggerate – her philanthropy will expect the very best.
Her engagement dress, a lavish red carpet-style affair cost €63,000 while her glorious Givenchy wedding gown cost, depending on who you believe, something in the region of €230,000 to €285,000.
It’s a staggering bill for a woman who not only boasts a keen social conscience but grew up middle class and, like most young actresses, had to ruthlessly hustle for every break.
It’s too early to say whether Meghan will be a modernising force in the British royal family and live up to the electrifying diversity promised by her identity as a self-made, mixed-race and divorced American gal.
LIKE Fergie who was originally hailed as a breath of fresh air, she may find it impossible to fit in and devote herself to the pursuit of frivolity and extravagance rather than good works. Or she could be the perfect foil for Harry who, to his credit has broken the mould, setting up innovative charities such as the Invictus Games and taking as his bride a woman who, even a generation ago, would have been haughtily dismissed by his family as utterly unsuitable.
Perhaps it’s Meghan’s training that makes it appear that she’s always on stage but so far there are enough contradictions between her behaviour and the causes she espouses to raise niggling doubts about her sincerity.
She has joined a family that owes its rarified existence to a system of inherited privilege and wealth yet she talks about equal opportunities.
She says she is proud to be a feminist yet she has abandoned her career, her country and her independence to throw her lot in with an institution that has practically been preserved in aspic for centuries.
She was married for the first time in a Jewish service in accordance with her then-husband’s faith. For her second marriage she converted to the Church of England, to conform with her in-laws’ beliefs.
It’s likely that Meghan – raised by a yoga-loving mother and a dad who toiled in the film industry – was brought up as a Californian free spirit but she seems alarmingly ready to trade it in for the next thing.
Her wedding service in Windsor with its gospel singers and hum-dingering Episcopalian preacher seemed like a hopeful sign of an independent streak and her determination not to be subsumed completely into the homogeneity of the royal family.
Then it emerged it was Prince Charles who suggested the choir and the Archbishop of Canterbury who proposed the Most Reverend Michael Curry, so it was not after all Meghan who flew the flag of diversity.
SOMETIMES it seems that embracing right-on causes is just another act for Meghan. Ironically her sister-in-law Kate Middleton has never aired a political opinion in public but seems far less showy and more low key. The day after her wedding, Kate wore a Zara dress while the coat she wore to Harry’s wedding was recycled for several grand occasions.
When one’s role is primarily symbolic or decorative, wardrobe choices are one of the most powerful expressions of values at your disposal.
Perhaps in time Meghan will realise that a modest dress from the high street can be more becoming than a haute couture gown from Paris.