February 9th was the 22nd anniversary of Princess Margaret’s death. While The Crown got many things wrong, they got the fundamentals correct about Margaret’s relationship with her sister. QEII and Margaret were exceptionally close and QEII was devastated when she lost her sister and her mother in 2002. Let’s also be clear that Margaret was supposed to be a mess. That’s how the institution preferred it, that Margaret was an agent of chaos, a one-woman soap opera, because it made QEII look better, dutiful, steady, etc. This was what was supposed to happen with Prince William and Harry – Harry was supposed to be a boozy mess, a lifelong f–kup, while William was the mature, steady, dutiful one. Funny how it didn’t work out that way. Anyway, for the death-anniversary, the Telegraph published this bizarre piece called “Unlike Harry, Margaret never saw herself as a “spare” and certainly never pitied herself.” Y’all, they are still not okay. Some highlights:
Royal rebel: A chain-smoker with a knack for withering put downs, Princess Margaret has become synonymous with a very specific brand of royal rebellion. Her morning routine, which comprised having breakfast in bed, listening to the radio for two hours and having a bath with a vodka cocktail, is the stuff of legend.
Overindulged: As the younger sibling, Margaret was often doted on, which might have been why she followed a less traditional path as an adult – because she knew she could get away with it. “She was certainly an indulged child and there’s no doubt this resulted in her rebellious nature later in life, when it was too late, and her character was already set,” explains Russell. “The Queen Mother regretted it later, and was embarrassed by her lateness and apparent rudeness. Once, during a trip to Paris, Margaret feigned the flu so she could avoid royal duties and instead go to the Dior showroom – the Queen Mother was mortified.”
Margaret was smarter than her sister: “She was much brighter than her sister and really suffered from the fact she didn’t have an education,” says royal biographer and author of The American Duchess, Anna Pasternak. “This meant she overindulged, but you feel that came from a sense of impotence. I think it was conceived as rebellion, but she was ahead of her time and thoroughly modern in her outlook. What seemed rebellious through the prism of the period doesn’t feel so today.”
Anne has benefited from Margaret’s trailblazing: The royals that came after her have no doubt gained from Margaret’s accidental trailblazing. “I think Princess Anne has benefitted the most from the path Margaret chose,” says Russell. “She could divorce and marry again and continue to be a happy, valued member of the senior working royal family. “Margaret was also first in that she made the decision that her children shouldn’t have a public life, which many have copied. And she certainly set the trend for Princes William and Harry to marry outside of the aristocracy.”
Margaret never saw herself as the spare: Prince Harry noted in his memoir Spare that he was surprised that he and his great-aunt hadn’t got on better, considering how similar some of their life experience was, but Margaret crucially never saw herself as a “spare” and certainly never pitied herself. “I think all families have ancestral patterns that repeat themselves,” shares Pasternak. “Whether Harry is emotionally intelligent enough to realise that some of his behaviour echoes that of his great aunt, I can’t say.”
So, the queen’s sister was smarter, more charismatic and more fun than the queen, but she was boxed in throughout her life and miserable in her romantic life and miserable in general, to the point where she abused alcohol throughout her adult life. That’s exactly what they wanted for Harry – they never wanted him to marry, and certainly not to his soulmate and someone he prioritized ahead of the institution. They wanted him forever single or miserable and divorced. They wanted him to be a mess so that the heir would look better in comparison. I wonder if they’ll ever get tired of using Harry’s dead relatives as a cudgel to berate Harry for leaving.
Photos courtesy of Anwar Hussein / Avalon, UPPA/Photoshot / Avalon, TALKING SPORT/Photoshot / Avalon.
No she just developed a raging alcohol problem in order to cope. But hey – at least she didn’t complain! These people are absurd.
Seriously! Someone who needs a “vodka martini” to start her day? Sure, soooooo doesn’t feel sorry for her lot in life.
This woman was miserable and angry. They are trying to rewrite history again.
Don’t you know that all happy , well-adjusted people down a cocktail before breakfast??? All Margaret had was her title, she had no purpose and she used that title to be rude, arrogant, spoiled and demanding. She drank herself to death, but please go on and tell us how happy she was.
Never pitied herself? That morning cocktail said otherwise.
Let’s not forget the current spare is a sex-trafficking pedophile who has done all sorts of despicable things to make money/maintain a wealthy lifestyle since he doesn’t get the heir’s share. And he whines all the time.
But yeah, Harry’s the problem for escaping this poisonous family tradition?!
Excellent points, DK! Of course, the RR skips over Andrew because the crime of paedophilia isn’t as abhorrent as Harry marrying a bi-racial, divorced American woman. To suggest that a dead princess two generations older than Harry was so much better/more/radical/etc, is really scraping the bottom of that vodka bottle. Princess Margaret’s behaviour suggests she was deeply unhappy, very depressed and completely enabled/disabled by the people around her. That Liz, she was some sister.
Right? She was a supremely unhappy woman who had severe substance abuse issues, and they wonder about Harry’s emotional intelligence?!! It always boils down to they suffered so that the heir could look better and Harry is wrong for being unwilling to do the same. If Margaret was smarter and more charming than her sister it’s a shame they wouldn’t let her shine, the lesson shouldn’t be so Harry should have done the same.
My thoughts exactly! I didn’t even read the article and I immediately thought, she just drank and smoked herself to death.
Exactly.. she drank and smoked herself to death because she wasn’t expected to amount to anything aside from sister to the queen. But she never complained – so admirable. F@ck them.
I never noticed the resemblance between her and Andrew until I saw this photo of QE2, Margaret and their mum. It’s uncanny
These people are crazy if they think Margaret was a GOOD example of what life should be for a royal.
What I find fascinating is that they reversed the Elizabeth/Margaret dynamic with William and Harry. William was coddled because of he was going to have to be the future King, while Harry got the tough love. So Harry came out OK and William is a mess.
William is the new Margaret, not Harry.
Yes! That makes sense, Concernfae!
In what world did Harry get tough love? I read his book, and he never had to take any kind of accountability with his family for anything. It was the press that banged on about him, but there was ni tough love for Will or Harry.
From what I’ve heard, that woman was a bitch on wheels.
I’m not sure “this person was a miserable alcoholic with no education or direction in life” is a great example of what someone should be. I am very confused by what this writer thinks they’re achieving here.
“a miserable alcoholic with no education or direction in life” sounds like the very definition of William. Catered to and coddled to the extreme he’s never had to reach for anything. Even his “scholastic achievements” seem dubious to the outsider. Were they even his?
William’s “scholastic achievements” are very dubious. We’ve all listened to him speak and he’s dumb as f*ck. Harry has been open about his disinterest in going to university/college. The funny/amazing thing is that he comes across being intelligent and is. It’s not a diss on him, but a diss on the BM/BRF that portrayed him that way. Harry actually listened and learned from his life experiences. TOB, not so much.
Princess Margaret never thought herself as the spare, she drank herself out of such thoughts. Is someone willing to explain the rubber fish wrapped around a biro meaning? It’s one thing I don’t understand.
Oh yes she smoked and drank herself to death. Not to mention all the young men that she had in tow later on in life. Her life became totally pointless and she was horrible to people who married into the family.
I hope to high heavens this isn’t a duplicated comment – I lost what I was typing. Just applauds to the late Lucian Freud for boo’ing the late Margaret at a society dinner many many years ago, at which she took it upon herself to sing some jazz standards. All the guests were clapping and encouraging, despite the fact it was apparently truly awful and all flat. Freud came into the room, booed her, she flounced off, and the whole party broke up in absolute fury. He ran off to Paris with one of the society girls. Funny that he painted her sister years later. Always makes me think about the levels of sycophancy she expected.
Ow! That sounds much like the humiliation Lee Radziwill went through when she and Capote tried to launch her acting career. She got awful reviews in a Philadelphia Story revival–and her turn as Laura in one of the TV remakes was universally booed. Funny–she and Jackie had similar problems as Margaret and Elizabeth in that they were set against each other from day one.
More than Andrew I bet Harry looked at Margaret and shuddered. Andrew is a dunce but Margaret was the smarter younger sibling. She was his mirror and warning of what he could become if he allowed the institution to stifle and destroy him for the crime of being better than the heir.
💯
He was certainly less than complementary when he directly and indirectly referred to her in his book. He definitely saw her life’s path as a warning to himself.
Um, wasn’t she a terrible person? I don’t think he looked at her and identified much.
The queen mother wouldn’t allow her to further her education, as Elizabeth wasn’t book-smart, and you can’t outshine the heir. Same BS as Harry and William. Couldn’t marry for love, neither. And she did basically drink and smoke herself to death.
Aside from drinking and smoking herself to an early grave, maybe she didn’t feel like a spare because in reality she never was one in any real way (and certainly not treated like one). Her father had no expectation of being king. Her dad ascended to the throne when she was 7, Elizabeth had Charles before Margaret became of age and Anne was born before Elizabeth’s coronation. But let’s not let the facts get in the way of a poorly written story.
Was coming to say this! Elizabeth was never supposed to come to the throne, so neither Princess was brought up with the education OR expectations placed on them until later. It’s why Elizabeth and Charles and William were so different (one reason anyway) imo, she wasn’t raised from birth to think God chose her and Margaret wasn’t taught from birth that her role is to support Elizabeth. So she didn’t feel like a spare because she wasn’t treated like one until much later in her development.
It’s interesting to me that even without being raised as a spare from birth, she and Andrew and Harry still followed similar patterns of behavior. Thankfully Harry was able to grow past the arrested development.
Margaret never felt like the spare because she was never treated like one.
Sure she was a broke, emotionally stunted, chain-smoking alcoholic, but at least she never complained. LOL.
Tell me you wanted Harry to be miserable and broken without telling me….
Miserable alcoholic was absolutely the plan for Harry. Lovable rogue, hopefully without the pedophilia but even then, they could keep it on the downlow.
Harry refused to be another Margaret. How ironic that a person can be shamed and shunned for making a success of his life instead of a failure. Margaret seemed like a miserable, frustrated person who made everyone around her miserable as well.
It’s the mark of a white supremacist to be entitled to mediocity AND to condemn anyone around them who dares to rise above that mediocrity. Your place in the hierarchy should determine your fate–not your ability, your passions, your gifts.
Seriously, if the advancement of society were contigent on the British royal family, the citizens of the UK would be living in mud huts. What have members of the royal family ever invented? discovered? How many of them even governed well–the governance was based on aides and advisors even before the constitutional monarchy. Their only job is to perpetuate themselves, not for any public good. The good ones provide continuity and an image of duty. The bad ones just consume and indulge themselves. Queen Elizabeth made duty to the realm her platform, and she fulfilled the role as she envisioned it. As far as I can tell, Charles’s only message is “It’s my turn, damn it.” Will-di Amin’s message is “I’m the heir damnit, I deserve things!” Everyone else be damned.
Perfectly said!
So their latest advice for Harry is “Be like Margaret!” Sure, be like your alcoholic, lazy, rude, and depressed great aunt. Remember how well we treated her?
LOl! Watched a documentary a while back. Her story is really sad and it was due to her being the Spare. She did not know what to do with herself. She had no job and could not marry the love of her life because he was a divorcee. Married a man who was bi and a rebel. She was caught with a man about 17 years her junior and ordered to divorce by the Queen. So not sure where they are going with this alternate reality of a story. She had a whole lot of issues as a Spare.
Wow, Margaret was miserable being stuck as her sisters lifelong shadow. She couldn’t have her own life as she wanted. She was a drunk, how do they think she got like that?
Margaret seemed to have a pretty sad life overall, so not sure she’s the best example of how “happy” a person can be when their sibling is the monarch.
But also, she was never treated as harry was by all accounts. Yes, she always came in second to her sister, but she and her mother were close, she was close to her sister, she was given a large living allowance, etc. She wasn’t shopping the sales at TK Maxx for clothes.
Y’all, if you want to know the truth about what these so-called journalists think about Margarette, please take a few minutes to watch some of the old documentaries that predates Meghan’s entry into that cult. Some of these very “journalist” who are now lying about Margarette appear in those docs. There, they call her a spoiled, rude, drunk. In one documentary, a gentleman who chauffeured her around for decades, said Margarete never once greeted him. She treated him like something less than a dog. Her butler talked about how, as part of her morning routine, he had to serve her a glass of alcohol before she got out of bed. Margarette’s philandering husband (he had a love child during their marriage) divorced her after she became embroiled in a sandal, when she was photographed on the isle of Mustique, bathing with a man 17-years younger than her. The latter part of her life was spent in and out of hospitals. At her final public appearance, Margarette was seen in a wheelchair, looking older than her nearly one-hundred-year-old mother. To echo Kaiser, this is the existence to envisioned for Harry. Fact is, Margarette did seek to leave to be with her then married boyfriend. She didn’t, because, unlike Harry, Margarette had no ability to earn a living outside that family. That’s the rub isn’t it? The fact that Harry is being way more successful than they had envision, is the real issue here.
But the whole situation begs the question, if Harry is as bad as these people say, why do they keep pining after him? Haven’t Harry and Meghan left the stage so the Walses can shine? Why aren’t they writing about how great Will and Kate are doing?
But honestly, I am so thankful for Meghan of America, riding in on her white horse to save the trapped prince from his awful, abusive family. The other spare wasn’t saved by anyone, and they let her rot.
Do they think that everyone over the age of 40 in the UK is unable to read and has dementia??? Let’s be honest here, Margaret was a lush, a miserable, wandering lush. She enjoyed the company of east end gangsters and was often see out partying with them. Then there was Roddy Llewelyn and their drug and booze filled parties in mystique!. Of course she viewed herself as the bloodthirsty spare. The minute her fathers died everything became about Elizabeth. Margaret was left to her grief and feelings of hopelessness. She had one real shot at something with Townshend and was told no. Just like they tried to tell Harry no, and when he wouldn’t accept no, they decided to make his life hell. The big difference is THIS spare escaped, and look at him thriving.
Here’s a story of two princesses who people called dumb, these comments prove they saw the Royals for exactly who they are, Margaret said “if they can’t control you, they control how others see you”, and Diana said “that which they can’t control they seek to destroy”, and here we are today with history repeating itself
😳🥺 Wow @Mary Pester! Thanks for sharing these apt individual, yet similar observations by Margaret and Diana. I had previously heard the quote by Diana, but I am less familiar with the quote by Margaret. How eerie and revealing in retrospect.
Fascinatingly, there are two married-in princesses, and one blood royal princess whose intelligent observations can be compared and transposed:
Princess Margaret:
“If they can’t control you, they control how others see you.”
Diana, Princess of Wales:
“That which they can’t control, they seek to destroy.”
Duchess Meghan, post-escaping the royal firm and thriving in her native Cali-land, reflected upon the wisdom of 20th-century post-WWII poet, Dinos Christianopoulos:
“What didn’t you do to bury me /
But you forgot, that I was a seed” 🌴🌴
I’m always tickled by these historic royals stories. They always name check Harry but I feel like it’s one of the only ways they can actually hint about William.
They do this with stories about Edward VIII, too. Because of Wallis Simpson, the reader is supposed to infer that Edward’s weaknesses are Harry’s. But they routinely detail Edward VIII’s vanity, diffidence, partying & unseriousness about his role. Here we have a Princess who was “overindulged” as a child in a way the family later regretted, who developed a severe substance abuse problem & shirked her duties. They’re not talking about Harry; he’s just the one they name.
Princess Margaret should have been a lesson to them on how NOT to treat the spare. She was desperately unhappy, and she certainly did indulge in self-pity. I’m also just about old enough to remember the Roddy Llewellyn business in the mid 70’s – it was a HUGE scandal at the time and regarded as a great embarrassment to QEII. And she was a colossal snob – she even regarded her own children as “lesser” because they were only half royal, unlike herself. (Craig Brown’s book about her has some jaw-dropping anecdotes about her behaviour).
She’s no example to anyone.
Wait. She thought less of her own kids for being half royal? Umm you chose their father. Beyond just being a disgusting one drop type of idea in the first place.
99 Glimpses of Princess Margaret was eye-opening. I recommend all these so-called royal reporters read it and refresh their memories about who Princess Margaret was.
That book was one of the better biographies I’ve read. The format was just refreshing and made for a quicker read IMO.
And yeah, she did not come off well in it, at all – but I thought you could tell he had pity for her.
The Queen financially supported both mother and sister till the end. Charles said there was no money to support the Sussex household and William had no intention of supporting them after QE passed. Big difference.
No self-pity? Are we talking about the same Princess Margaret?! She was miserable.
💯
Funny, they forget how Margaret’s “accidental trailblazing” also benefited Charles – he was also able to divorce and remarry.
I think being royal was more important to Margaret than anything- perhaps because she was not allowed to develop in any productive way. She chose being “the spare” over marrying the man she purported to love, although Margaret was not raised as a spare. Her parents loved and supported both daughters and it sounds like Margaret was always indulged, and Elizabeth was born dutiful by nature. Elizabeth was capable of doing her job as sovereign; she didn’t need Margaret to screw up to make her look good. From all accounts she was a nasty, miserable woman, but Elizabeth made sure she was able to live well and pretty well indulge herself. She certainly never evicted Margaret from her home and cut off her funding. Elizabeth took care of her family and children.
William seems not in the least up to the job, so and Harry had stopped being a screw up before he found Meghan. He had served in the army honorably, and established Sentabale and Invictus. He would not have been able to interest Meghan if he had not grown out of being the screw-up. And I doubt Harry was ever as big a screw-up they made him out to be.
Apparently, Harry talking about how he was neglected and abused by the Royal Family means that he pities himself and the fact that Margaret was an alcoholic had nothing to do with to do with her being trapped in the royal system…ok.
This is a woman who would butt her cigarette on dinner guests’ plates and flick ash on others. She was rude, selfish, had an overblown sense of entitlement, and loved putting people down. Furthermore, the story of her being forbidden to marry Peter Townsend by the BRF isn’t exactly true. TQ fought to allow her to marry Townsend, but because she was the Church’s supreme governor, Margaret would have had to renounce her succession rights and give up her royal allowance to marry a divorced man. She didn’t think she could live as a civilian so she announced her decision to break things off with him herself.
What an irony–she hated the system that stifled her, but ultimately felt she couldn’t live without it.
This part. People gloss over that she could have married him and the Queen actually did try to fight for her to but the compromise would have been giving up what Margaret valued most- being royal.(her allowance and her place in line).
Yes, Margaret felt like a “spare” and, yes, she complained about it:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6138505/amp/Princess-Margaret-wasnt-educated-Queen.html
The fact that they are holding up a raging alcoholic, chain smoking, miserable entitled snob as an example Harry should follow just boggles the mind. They literally know how sad and miserable her life was, but are like “at least she was loyal to the crown!”
Do these people not HEAR themselves!?
Loyalty to the crown is all they care about. They don’t really care about public service or family relationships or the country.
You can sexually assault a trafficked teen. You can be horrible and racist. You can drink yourself to an early death … but as long as you’re loyal to the crown, you’re golden.
1. Margaret was a raging alcoholic, it never fails to amaze me how the British media just fast forward through that fact, like it was aristocratic eccentricity to drink yourself into an early grave.
2. Highly, highly recommend the book “Ma’am Darling: 99 Glimpses of Princess Margaret.” Being raised royal is truly a human rights violation. It truly warped her— she is both a pitiful figure and a genuinely terrible person.
“…like it was aristocratic eccentricity to drink yourself into an early grave.”
Shoot, one gets the strong impression that that is a time-honored British tradition. If you look at Margaret’s media forerunners–the Bright Young People of the 1920s’–they were treated with equal amounts of affection for their drunken/druggie antics…and lambasted constantly. And 19th-century novels often have some poor aristocratic sod drinking him/herself to death because they are stifled.
I’ve read the King George VI used to say that “Elizabeth is my pride and Margaret is my joy.” I do not know if it is an accurate quotation, but it certainly seems to foreshadow their future personalities. Margaret was shattered by the loss of her marriage hopes to Peter Townshend. She could no longer remain a “joy” because of her bitterness which is completely comprehensible.
I think that the Windsors have a mix of genetic possibilities including scattered intelligence, artistic ability, music, sport, and that the further one gets away from the central family, the better one can indulge in passions. I’m thinking of the work of Lady Sarah Chatto, (art), the Duchess of Kent (music), and the really great connection of the Harewood family (from the previous Princess Royal–Princess Mary) to opera.
I think Lady Sarah inherited her artistic talent from her father.
@Equality, plenty of Windsor royals are and have been artistically gifted painters, etc., including Queen Victoria, Prince Charles, et al. Prince Harry is a good photographer. Sarah Chatto is a painter and her oldest son is a sculptor. Both Sarah and her brother, David (a skilled carpenter and furniture designer), inherited their artistic chops from both of their parents.
Princess Margaret was known to love the arts. As a child, she was praised for her sharp wit, and her brilliant skill for mimicry. Had Margaret’s upbringing been non-royal and less restrictive, she may have excelled as an actor. Her positive attributes clearly turned sour as she grew up to become unhappily trapped within the firm.
Yes, Margaret was an insufferable spoiled brat, an entitled snob, and an alcoholic, but those who keep claiming she had a fair and unobstructed choice to marry or not to marry Peter Townsend, are sadly fooled by the firm’s and by the British government’s continued attempts to rewrite history surrounding the star-crossed, yet genuine, love story between Margaret and Townsend. The rewriting has proceeded full force in recent years. The faulty reframing has ratcheted up in part because both protagonists are long dead and thus cannot correct the purposeful lies and intentionally misleading narratives and mischaracterizations that abound.
Actually, thinking about it, William is the male version of Margaret!?
Precisely.
Mary Pester, you’re right. I hadn’t even thought about it.
“She could divorce and marry again and continue to be a happy, valued member of the senior working royal family.” First I think Henry the VIII established that precedent. Second, it’s fine to be divorced as long as you aren’t American and divorced.
-Margaret (divorced)
-Anne (divorced)
-Andrew (divorced)
-Charles (divorced)
-Peter Phillips (divorced)
-Margaret’s son (divorced)
It’s fine to be divorced if you’re royal…and white.
#teamsussex
Queen Elizabeth, in collusion with the government, didn’t want Margaret to marry the love of her life, a divorced man (his wife had cheated on him). Elizabeth asked her to wait one year. Margaret was threatened with being disinherited (which I understand they could not have done). Margaret caved and did not marry the man she loved. He married someone else and she did, too. The government was so afraid because David abdicated for a divorced woman, I think. I always wonder if Margaret was such a rebel after all if she did not defy her sister the queen and the English government to do what she wanted. Maybe her later “rebellion” was just the anger, boredom and bitterness of quailing when she should have stood firm.
First of all, Peter Townsend was not divorced when Margaret started her affair with him. He was, on all count, a happily married man with two small children. Second, the idea that his wife cheated on him, was a lie concocted by the royal family to justify his leaving his family for Margaret, thereby dampening the scandal. Also, the royal family intervened in the divorce proceedings to make sure Townsend got custody of the children, to make their mother look like she was unfit– hence justifying Margaret’s behavior. Remember, in those days the mother usually got custody of the children in a divorce unless she was proved unfit. Townsends son, now grown up, discussed this in a documentary. The British royal family has a history of treating people’s lives as dispensable to suit their purpose. The story is similarly told about one of Edward VII’s mistresses being banished to an Asylum because her husband tried to have the then Prince of Wales testify in court to the affair.
(Intended as a response to a comment above, which appears to have disappeared)
Thank you for writing the truth about Townsend’s wife. He effectively abandoned her for Margaret but she was held to be the guilty party so that Townsend and Margaret would look better.
On a shallow note, the whole lot of them are really an unattractive bunch.
Margaret and Snowdon wanted titles for their children so he got a title. Anne and her first husband did not want the titles for their children.
Margaret selfishly thought Townsend would not remarry.he called and told her and she got upset over it.
Bravo Proud Mary.
Proud Mary, I think you responded to me and have done a deeper dive than I have in this bit of history. Very interesting. Thanks.
Yep Margaret was so happy with her life as a spare , she smoked and drank herself to death ,
‘She totally wasn’t a “spare”!’… as they go on to describe the life of a “spare”.
Also, some really retrogressive pedagogical thinking, on display, here.
Poor Margaret. She never had a chance.