Spare Isn’t About Prince Harry- It’s About Us.

When I was a kid, I forced my family and teachers to refer to me as a princess. So, it's surprising to admit this- I have never had an interest in the royal family. But as the poster child for parasocial relationships with celebrities and an avid memoir enthusiast, you KNOW I had to get my hands on Spare to see what all the fuss was about. 

This review is going to be virtually spoiler free and really more of a personal reaction and commentary rather than review. As long as you already have general knowledge of Harry's personal life, struggles with his family, and subsequent distancing from royal duties, nothing mentioned here will be a spoiler.

Coming in at just over 400 pages, Harry doesn't even meet Meghan until almost page 300; the majority of the book is about his life before her. It begins with the death of his mother when he was 11 years old and details his struggles in boarding school and his decision to join the military.

His training and two Afghanistan tours were some of the most interesting sections, for me personally. There's a delicate cognitive balance between opposing the war, denouncing the violence and atrocities committed against civilians while also fully supporting the soldiers who now bear the mental and physical scars of the war. Both truths can stand at the same time. 

The main thread throughout the whole book was Harry’s contempt for our vulturistic media culture, his struggles with constantly being in the media spotlight since childhood, and the rift it caused between him and his family. There was not one spat, argument or fight between him and his family, particularly his brother and father, that was not about the media– either articles being spun, taken out of context, flat out fabricated, and even deliberately leaked by family members— or concerns about perception and how their actions would be viewed by the media and thus the public. 

Another point Harry wants to make clear– the ‘Heir vs. Spare’ narrative is not about him desiring more power or higher status. He is not upset that Will and Kate are given royal preference over him, he is upset that the status of the monarchy is given preference stead of integrity, decency, and truth. (Maybe it's the American in me or maybe stunted emotional maturity has led me to completely disregard/have no respect for authority figures, but I shared Harry’s frustration in being commanded to unquestioningly ‘follow orders from your (future) king’).

His plight with the label of ‘spare’ did not come across as whiny, greedy, or ungrateful, but rather normal animosity when one sibling is clearly favored over the other, an experience that a lot of us could sympathize with and feels familiar. Except instead of simply competing for, say, the favor of a parent, at stake is the favor of a monarchy, a country, multiple nations. Being on the short end of the favorite stick would sting in any family or circle. When it's on the scale of the world, it must burn. 

Harry accomplishes the goal he set out to achieve with this book- I sympathize with him and Meghan. Does it paint them in a favorable light? Obviously. But I don't see that as deceptive trickery but rather the normal way humans tend to view their own lives and actions. In each of our memoirs, we would see ourselves as the heroes. But even knowing this account is biased towards the stars of the show I still completely believe it.

That is to say, I believe Harry believes it. His anger and paranoia did not seem exaggerated or fabricated, I believe he really did feel unnecessarily targeted by the public and abandoned by his family. Is this the full, true complete story? Of course not. That would be impossible. This is Harry's story because that's the only story he is capable of telling. 

When critics declare Harry a hypocrite for vilifying the media and fleeing from the spotlight to now “come crawling back”, they are missing one crucial aspect: consent. This is one of the points he is trying to make- our dehumanization of celebrities and public persons encourages and excuses the exploitation and proliferation of their personal lives.

Deep down, we realize it's a nonconsensual, one-sided take, take, and more take. So when a public figure has the audacity to now freely, on their own accord, give us something on their own terms, it makes us uncomfortable to confront the fact that we are takers, exploiters. To soothe our guilt over our exploitation of celebrities, we justify their misery as ‘the price they pay’ for their fame and fortune. But Harry is the perfect example of why that reasoning is flawed– he literally did not ask to be born into royalty and did not give permission (as a child, afterall!) to be the object of the public's desire.

We love to talk about celebrities, but we hate to have to listen to them, especially when what they have to say is about us. And what Harry has to say about us is not flattering.

Because ultimately, Spare isn't about Prince Harry, it's about us– our obsession with celebrities, addiction to the consumption of their private lives, and insatiable hunger for drama and scandal. His gripes are not just about our invasion of their privacy. It's also about the type of content we demand. It would be bad enough to be constantly stalked and scrutinized by hordes of people even when the photos and articles posted are positive and flattering. But to be relentlessly hounded and then have the published content be negative, vile, racist, violent? That's even worse. Let's be honest with ourselves, we love the drama. We don't want to read about BFFs Kate and Meghan having a fun, uneventful brunch. Boring. We want to read about the petty arguments, the scandalous he-said-she-said. That's what Harry wants us to recognize and admit– our harmless entertainment is not so harmless. 

Now, it wouldn't be a celebrity memoir without including my favorite song of all time which is Rich People With Insane Privilege and Power Trying To Make Themselves Seem Normal. Harry's Three Horsemen of the Normal Apocalypse are 1) he buys clothes from TJ Maxx 2) he grocery shops at Whole Foods 3) he flys British airways. Cute and endearing, Haz, but any and all true normies know you're not Regular until you've spent at least 2 of your birthdays at Olive Garden and you order the Tour of Italy appetizer platter.

(I kid, I kid) but it does beg the question, why are celebrities so desperate to prove they're just like us? Maybe it's in the hopes that visible, concrete proof of their shared humanity will remind us that perhaps they also share the invisible, emotional aspects of humanity as well- grief, hurt, shame, embarrassment, fear.

That's the classic story of celebrities and the public–us desperately trying to be like them, them desperately trying to prove they're still just like us.

But what if they didn't have to be? What if they weren't Target-clearance-aisle-enthusiasts? What if (and I can't believe I'm saying this) they did have (gasp) money, and power, and status, and fame and what if that still didn't mean they deserve to be stalked, put on display for our viewing pleasure, constantly scrutinized, or receive hate and threats? Call me a celebrity apologist or even a class traitor, but I agree with Haz. 

While the tone was that of Harry and Meghan’s victimization and suffering (justifiably. It was after all his memoir). Those who critique his recounting as one sided- (again, what else to be expected, it's his story and all he has to offer is his one side)- most notably are picking up on the lack of a certain flavoring we are required to bring ourselves: perspective. Any one of the antagonists- from Will, Kate, and staff members, the paps and journalists, even the poachers in Africa- could most certainly write their own tell-all memoir detailing past and current traumas, unique personal struggles, and broader social pressures that influence their actions and decisions. 

Harry mistook his family and staff's indifference to his suffering and reluctance to help as complicit instead of what it really was- enslavement. How wonderful it would be if we lived in a world where we got to freely make our own choices and decisions without influence from outside entities or persons that hold power over us. Unfortunately we live in the real world where individual choice is an illusion. Are paparazzi  “relentless and heartless” or are they caught in the cycle of hustle culture where the blind pursuit of profit is valued above all else? Are journalists “disgusting, scum of the earth” or does constant competition and ‘dog eat dog’ workplace conditions encourage a scrapy, ‘every man for themselves’ mentality? Were Will and Kate “unsympathetic and complicit” or are they most likely also dealing with immense pressure, frustrated with their own public and personal struggles, but paralyzed and unable to see a way out?

I don’t excuse anyone's actions, Harry and Meghan clearly suffered severe, dangerous lack of privacy and blatant racism; I merely seek to point out it is easier to hate the players instead of hating the game. Especially since the players hate the game (and probably themselves), too. Blaming callous actions as a result of individual personal failings instead of recognizing that our actions operate under the constraints and demands of broader cultural powers only allows these societal systems to continue further.

But then again, demanding Harry give this grace to the very people who consistently withheld it from him kind of seems like the whole point he is trying to make.

So then who are we supposed to hate? Who is Harry supposed to blame? Where to accurately place gripes when such injustice and malaise continues to be done? When we live in a society built on the exploitation of others, when our only respite from our own misery is to prey on the misery of others, how can we then turn around and ask each other to instead choose morality and compassion when everything about our society screams for immorality and apathy? 

Who among us is willing to exile themselves and cast a mirror back at the rest of us to say “look at what you are, see what you've done to me”? Who even has a mirror big enough to encompass the breadth and depth of our animosity? It will probably take someone willing to bare all and leave nothing to spare. It will probably take, say, a prince.