Welcome to our virtual tea party to celebrate the
125th anniversary of the National Trust. We have a special message of thanks
from our Director-General, Hilary McGrady and our president His Royal Highness,
The Prince of Wales, so why not settle down with a cup of tea and even a slice
of cake whilst you watch.
National Trust to make 1,200 staff redundant
Charity lost almost £200m after coronavirus lockdown
shut its houses, gardens, car parks, shops and cafes
The
Independent employs reporters around the world to bring you truly independent
journalism. To support us, please consider a contribution.
The
National Trust is planning to make 1,200 staff redundant as it looks to save
£100m in the wake of coronavirus.
The
conservation and heritage charity, which has 5.6 million members, said it had
lost almost £200m as a result of the Covid-19 crisis, which forced the closure
of all of its houses, gardens, car parks, shops and cafes, and put a stop to
holidays and events.
The trust
said it had already saved millions of pounds through furloughing staff, drawing
on reserves, borrowing and stopping or deferring projects, but still needs to
make savings to keep it sustainable in the long term.
It has
proposed £100m in annual savings, equivalent to almost a fifth of its yearly
expenditure, through changes to operations and cuts to staff and budgets.
Director
general Hilary McGrady said the organisation would continue to care for
historic sites, and tackle climate change, loss of wildlife and unequal access
to nature, beauty and history.
A quarter
of furloughed workers could be made redundant in September
Some 1,200
salaried staff face redundancy as part of £60m proposed pay savings – about 13
per cent of the 9,500-strong salaried workforce.
The move,
which comes after a decade which saw the National Trust nearly double in size,
would bring staffing levels back to what they were in 2016.
The plans
also include £8.8m savings by cutting the budget for hourly paid staff such as
seasonal workers by a third.
The
remaining £40m of savings will be made in areas such as travel, office costs
and IT spending, through reductions in marketing and print spending in favour
of digital communications, and by renegotiating contracts.
The trust
has already announced it is stopping or deferring £124m of projects this year.
The charity
said it is refocusing its efforts to protect cultural heritage, with limited
cuts to staff caring for houses, gardens and collections.
There will
be a shift from a “one-size-fits-all” approach to properties, with reviewed
opening hours at some places and in some cases running a pre-booked guided tour
system for visits.
The trust said
it would continue its ambition, announced in January, to step up action against
climate change, cutting emissions to net zero by 2030, planting millions trees
and creating green corridors for people and nature.
It plans to
restart the strategy in March next year, but Ms McGrady said the organisation
would have to be “flexible” in achieving it.
She said: “We are going through one of the biggest
crises in living memory.
“All
aspects of our home, work and school lives and our finances and communities
have been affected, and like so many other organisations the National Trust has
been hit very hard.
“The places
and things the National Trust cares for are needed now more than ever, as the
nation needs to recuperate and recover its spirit and wellbeing.
“It is
deeply upsetting to face losing colleagues and we are committed to supporting
all of those affected. Sadly, we have no other course of action left open.”
Mike
Clancy, general secretary of Prospect, the union for National Trust workers,
said the priority was minimising the number of redundancies, maximising
voluntary redundancy and getting as good a deal as possible for those who lose
their jobs.
He warned:
“At the moment there are no plans for National Trust to close whole properties,
but they are shutting ‘unprofitable’ shops and cafes and the worry is that it’s
only a matter of time.
“Once jobs
are lost and assets are closed it is very hard to recover them.
“Access to
our cultural heritage should be an essential part of society’s recovery from the
pandemic, and the government should be doing everything it can to protect it.”
He said
Prospect would be pushing ministers to ensure the rescue package announced for
arts, culture and heritage get to where it is needed in a timely manner.
Rugby Ralph
Lauren was an American clothing brand launched in 2004 under the management of
parent company Polo Ralph Lauren, the line has been retired. The brand
specialised in Preppy/Rugby inspired lifestyle apparel for male and female
clientele ages 16 through 25. Rugby also encompassed Rugby Food & Spirits,
a small café modeled after the brand and offering dining inspired by the Rugby
theme. Rugby merchandise was available at twelve stores throughout the United
States, as well as one in Covent Garden in London, UK. By August, 2008
merchandise was also available online at Rugby.com.
In November
2012, it was announced that Ralph Lauren would be ending the Rugby line by
February 2013. On February 5, the Rugby.com website was closed with only links
to Ralph Lauren.com remaining.
Rugby Ralph
Lauren was a concept created by luxury lifestyle apparel designer, Ralph
Lauren. The brand's first location opened at 342 Newbury Street in Boston,
Massachusetts on October 23, 2004. Rugby's lower price point and edgier styling
catered to a younger shopper than Lauren's other luxury clothing brands. Though
the company experimented with logos, most of the clothing either carried a
small embroidered rugby player, "R.L.F.C", or a skull and crossbones
motif. Similarly, the brand adopted its signature colours of yellow and navy
stripes on its shopping bags, tags and other promotional material.
The brand
consisted of a line of rugby shirts, polos, jackets, suits, dresses, outerwear
and accessories, all with a distressed or embellished flair, as well as RRL
signature Rugby Football shirts that could be customized by buying patches
in-store. Tying in with the brand name, the staple of the concept was the rugby
shirt. Originally, these rugby shirts were created in the school colors in the
college towns that the Rugby stores resided. Rugby also had a full book of
patches that customers could purchase to personalize their rugby shirt
in-store. Typically, there were also multiple luxury items in each line such as
leather jackets and blazers.
From
"Downton Abbey" creator and "Gosford Park" writer Julian
Fellowes. Based on true events, this 19th century drama follows two footballers
on opposite sides of a class divide who changed the game — and England — forever. The English
Game arrives on Netflix March 20.
The English
Game is a British historical sports drama television miniseries developed by
Julian Fellowes for Netflix about the origins of modern football in England.
The six-part series was released on 20 March 2020.
In April
2018, it was announced Downton Abbey creator Julian Fellowes would write and
executive produce his first Netflix series. Birgitte Stærmose and Tim Fywell
are directing, Rory Aitken, Eleanor Moran and Ben Pugh of 42 are executive
producing, and Ben Vanstone is co-executive producing.
The cast
was announced in May 2019 as production began in England, mostly in the North.
The first
season epilogue reads: "In 1885 the FA changed their rules to allow
professional players. An amateur team never won the FA Cup again. Arthur
Kinnaird became President of the FA, serving 33 years until his death in 1923.
Fergus Suter and Jimmy Love are recognised as pioneers of the modern game,
which now has over four billion fans across the world."
1 "Episode 1" Birgitte Stærmose Julian Fellowes, Tony Charles, Oliver Cotton & Ben
Vanstone 20 March 2020
Arthur
Kinnaird is captain and star player of the Old Etonians, an upper class
football team. Their opponents in the 1879 FA Cup Quarter finals are Darwen FC,
a working class factory team. James Walsh, the owner of Darwen FC and the
associated mill decides to secretly pay two Scottish players, Fergus
"Fergie" Suter and James "Jimmy" Love to join his team in a
bid to secure the FA Cup (which at the time is exclusively for amateurs). At
halftime the Old Etonians lead 5-1, however Darwen recover with a progressive
adjustment (spreading out their formation and focusing on passing) to draw 5
all. The Old Etonians, who also happen to be FA Board members, decide that
since extra time was not previously agreed to then the Quarterfinal will be
replayed instead. The mill has financial issues and townsfolk pitch in to help
pay for the trip. The replay is handily won by Old Etonians who focus more on
shutting down Suter and Love rather than playing their own game. Darwen FC are
greeted positively for their efforts by the town.
2 "Episode 2" Birgitte Stærmose Julian Fellowes & Ben Vanstone 20 March 2020
Suter meets
with Walsh and persuades him to change some football strategies. Stokes, a team
member, goes to Kinnaird’s bank to ask for a loan. Some Darwen mill workers
talk about strike as a result of a prior 5 per cent wage cut. The Cotton Guild
imposes another 10 per cent wage cut. Darwen workers walk out. The team refuses
to train or play in matches while on strike. Suter fails to persuade Walsh to
go against the guild. Workers go to the guild to demand a 5 per cent wage cut
and fewer hours to help fight the oversupply that has caused the price of goods
to fall. The guild refuses. Workers riot. Kinnaird is saved from the riot by
Stokes. Against Kinnaird’s wishes, Stokes goes in his place to warn Colonel
Jackson (the guild leader) that the mob is coming for him. Police show up and
arrest Stokes and kill his dog. Stokes is put on trial and sentenced to 15 years
in prison. Kinnaird testifies on behalf of Stokes and saves him from prison and
gives him his loan. Walsh agrees to the 5 per cent wage cut and to work five
days a week if the team plays their upcoming match. While waiting on the team
at the match, Suter is approached by the manager of Blackburn FC and is offered
£100 upfront and a £6 weekly wage increase. Suter turns him down as the team
arrive to play.
Suter goes
home to Glasgow to visit his poor family and drunken, abusive father who tries
to shame Suter for being paid to play. Kinnaird and his wife continue to mourn
the loss of her pregnancy six months earlier. Once back in Lancashire, Suter
meets with Cartwright, the Blackburn FC manager and accepts his offer but needs
a few days to make it right with Jimmy, Walsh and the Darwen team. After
practice with the Etonians, teammates talk about the “epidemic” of
working-class teams joining the Football Association. While the gentleman scoff
at the conditions of the working poor, Kinnaird comes to their defence. The
Darwen team are out celebrating Jimmy’s stag party. Mr. Walsh tells Suter that
he’s proud of his decision to bring Suter on to the team. Suter thanks him but
doesn’t mention the deal with Blackburn. Clearly drunk, Suter gets in a fight
with another Blackburn player recently hired from Partick when he compares
Suter to his drunken father. The following day, at the match between Darwen and
St Luke’s, Suter arrives late and plays terribly. Darwen lose 3-0 and are out
of the FA Cup. Suter storms off the pitch. At home, Suter tells Doris about the
deal with Blackburn and says that he will tell Jimmy after the wedding. Jimmy
practises his vows and Doris overhears. At the wedding, Jimmy tells all that he
finally feels like he has a home in Darwen. As Suter begins his best man’s
speech, he is interrupted by a teammate who reads a Blackburn ad about Suter
joining the team, shocking everyone.
4 "Episode 4" Tim Fywell Julian Fellowes & Sam Hoare 20 March 2020
At the
Darwen mill, Walsh shames Suter for his choice to leave. Suter tries to
persuade Jimmy to come with him. Jimmy refuses, saying that Darwen is his team
and his family now. Cartwright shows Suter the new facilities and stands. He
shows off new teammates, including Jack Hunter from Sheffield, and tells Suter
he is assembling a team of the best players north of Eton. Cartwright asks
Walsh for his discretion regarding Suter’s professionalism and offers him £100
for Blackburn to play Darwen the next week in an exhibition match. After being
seen talking familiarly with Mr Cartwright (with whom she previously had a
child), Martha is fired from her job at the Cotton Master’s club. Mr Cartwright
offers her money to help but Martha refuses, saying she needs to find her own
way. At the Blackburn v Druids match, Suter struggles to mesh with his new
teammates. Hunter is hailed the hero. Suter talks with Jimmy, who calls him a
Judas. Suter tells Jimmy that he is trying to get his family away from his
father. Suter again asks Jimmy to join Blackburn. Later, Jimmy stands up for
Suter against the Darwen team and tells them he is joining Blackburn. On the
way to the match between the Old Etonians and Preston, the Etonians discuss how
football is becoming a booming business and is no longer just a game. The FA
President complains that if it continues, only the richest teams will win and
is planning to watch the exhibition match between Darwen and Blackburn to find
evidence to expel them from the FA cup. The match between Darwen and Blackburn
is rough and Jimmy’s leg is badly broken by a tackle and the blood loss
threatens both his life and his leg.
5 "Episode 5" Tim Fywell Julian Fellowes & Geoff Bussetil 20 March 2020
Jimmy is
told he’ll never play football again. Cartwright tells the Blackburn team that
a portion of the match proceeds will go to help Jimmy’s recovery. Cartwright
asks Suter how Martha and her daughter are doing after her job loss. After
Cartwright tells his wife about the affair, she goes to Martha’s house and
offers to care for her daughter, Jenie. Martha refuses. Martha tells Suter
about Cartwright and Jenie. Martha goes back to talk with Mrs Cartwright and
apologises for the affair with her husband. Suter and Martha kiss. Tommy, the
player who hurt Jimmy, visits and to apologise. Suter arrives and tells Jimmy
the team will support him financially and they are struggling to replace him.
Later, Suter pushes Jimmy in a cart to the pub to cheer him up. Darwen
teammates start to reconcile with Suter. Stokes talks about his business
success making football kits. Doris asks after a job for Jimmy. Kinnaird has a
falling out with his friend over the true reason behind missing the
quarter-final match. After some tense discussions with his father about his
football career, Kinnaird uses his football contacts to help save a vital
investment. Kinnaird debates the merits of paying players with the Etonians.
The Lancashire teams band together to beat the elite teams. Mr. Walsh persuades
Tommy to join Blackburn to replace Jimmy. Cartwright offers Suter the
captainship (and a bonus) if they make it to the final. Mrs Cartwright offers
Martha a job at Brockshall and says she can bring Jenie. Two days later the FA
Board meets without Kinnaird and discuss expelling Darwen and Blackburn from
the cup.
6 "Episode 6" Tim Fywell Julian Fellowes & Ben Vanstone 20 March 2020
The FA
Board votes to expel Blackburn. Kinnaird is furious. Later Kinnaird has it out
with his friends about their betrayal.
Walsh, now
the head of the Lancashire FA holds a meeting to figure out how to fight the
ban. Suter offers to talk to Kinnaird. Walsh gives Suter a new suit so that he
will fit in with the elite. Suter discusses the merits of professional players.
Suter argues that the elites banning of professionals is not fair because they
are not working all day to put food on the table. They both agree they play for
the love of the game. At the Board meeting. Suter argues in favour of letting
Blackburn play. The Board stands by their decision to ban Blackburn from the
cup. Walsh tells him the Lancashire FA and most other county FAs will withdraw
from the FA cup and form a new association. Kinnaird would be the new
president. Kinnaird argues that the working-class teams will overwhelm the
elite teams unless they include the working class. Kinnaird persuades the Board
to let Blackburn play. At the match, the 1883 FA Club Final, the Etonians are
playing well but in a very physical way. The score is 0-0 at half-time. One of
the Etonian players is injured but they agree to keep playing anyway. Suter
scores with a header from Tommy’s pass. In the last moments of the match,
Kinnaird scores on a breakaway. The teams agree to extra time. Suter sits out a
player to make the match fair and gives the players a rousing pep talk. Suter
scores the winning goal. Suter lifts the cup to overwhelming cheers. In 1885,
the FA officially allows professional players and an amateur team never wins
the cup again. Kinnaird becomes the FA President and serves for 33 years until
his death in 1923.
The English Game's few charms lie in the background,
not centre stage
This article is more than 3 months old
Jonathan
Wilson
The latest series from Julian Fellowes starts badly
and barely improves but it is a reminder football has never stood still
You can see
how The English Game must have sounded in conception. It’s the birth of
football. It’s toffs against proles, the rivalry of one of the great
aristocrats of the early game, Lord Arthur Kinnaird, and the Glaswegian
stonemason who was the first great professional, Fergus Suter. It’s about an
idea going out into the world and being profoundly changed when it is taken up
by the masses.
But
Netflix’s new series comes nowhere near what it might have been, and is little
more than a mishmash of Downton Abbey stereotypes and trouble-at-mill cliches.
The toffs are habitually awful, the banks are always foreclosing, and the
proles, salt-of-the-earth brawlers and charmers that they are, can’t help
themselves but get everybody unhelpfully pregnant.
And the
football? From the moment a minute in when Craig Parkinson, as the self-made
mill-owner Walsh, tells Suter: “I’ve seen ’ow you play in Scotland. Your
passing game is the future of football,” you know that subtlety, or characters
who actually speak like real humans, isn’t what this is about. Still, for those
who last saw Parkinson as the AC-12 officer Cottan in Line of Duty, where the
plot revolved around the quest for the kingpin H and the implausible
possibility that as he took his final breath he tapped out the letter in morse
code, it’s something of a relief that here he eschews Hs altogether.
The English
Game does improve slightly after a truly dire opening episode, but the interest
really lies in themes that are glimpsed almost out of the corner of the eye,
shoved to the margins by the heavy-handed central narrative. Suter, for
instance, is offered a huge lump sum plus improved wages to leave Darwen and
join Blackburn Rovers, which he accepts because he needs the money to rescue
his mother and sister from his abusive father. Quite aside from the issue of
whether it’s legitimate, without any evidence, to portray an actual person,
albeit one who died more than a century ago, as a wife-beater, there’s a more
universal question. Why shouldn’t Suter take the better offer? Darwen had paid
to lure him from Partick and then they themselves were outbid: once
professionalism has been accepted, why should there be a perceived need to give
Suter an excuse for moving?
Other than
giving one of the principal characters a troubled backstory, what is gained by
blurring the central dilemma of professionalism, that without adequate checks
money will dominate – something all too apparent in the super-club era – and
that the transformation of the game into a job, while beneficial and necessary
in opening it up to all, also inevitably erodes to an extent the camaraderie
and athletic purity that are so central to the notion of sport as somehow
spiritually improving?
It’s a
thought that occurs now in discussions about a putative super-league. It’s easy
to rail against it, to anticipate the potential tedium of the same super-clubs
endlessly grappling with each other, to think of the social damage done to the
non-super-clubs cast into permanent semi-irrelevance by exclusion from the main
competition, to rage against the victory of capital over community, but there’s
always also a thought of how history will view the debate. After 10 or 20 years
of a super-league, and the brilliant football it would probably yield, would
those arguments come to seem as irrelevant as those that once doubted the
European club competitions, or British involvement in the World Cup, or, yes,
professionalism and the formation of a league?
In The
English Game, the toffs object to the working-class northern teams largely for
reasons of status. And perhaps that’s how it was: after all, even leaving overt
snobbism aside, it’s understandable that the university-educated teams who had
codified the game not two decades earlier (in January 1864, the Football
Association comprised eight south-eastern clubs plus Sheffield) would be
resistant to an entirely different group of people taking over their game,
particularly when they interpreted it in a very different way.
The
tactical exposition in The English Game is clunkingly preposterous, but it’s
not without substance: the passing game the northern teams came to favour (in
part because they were smaller than their better-fed public school counterparts
and so would have been seriously disadvantaged if they had no way of
manoeuvring the ball away from physical clashes) was very different to the
head-on charging practised by the game’s progenitors.
Although
the point is not made explicitly in the series, the reason Darwen had to travel
to London for their FA Cup quarter-final replay against Old Etonians in 1879 is
that it was stipulated that all games from the quarter-finals onwards had to be
played in London (the first match was not, as depicted in The English Game,
played at Eton, but at Kennington Oval) – a not unreasonable requirement when
most of the teams were based in the south-east. It’s notable that by the
following season the regulation had been lifted, suggesting at least some
flexibility on the part of the FA and a recognition that the geographic make-up
of the game was changing.
And it
would go on to change, spreading across the world. The English game became the
Austrian game, the Hungarian game, the Argentinian game and, particularly, the
Uruguayan game. It became everybody’s game, interpreted differently by every
culture that embraced it. And that in turn created difficulties – as
demonstrated in the tours made by British clubs to South America in the first
half of the 20th century, which often became fractious with mutual
misunderstanding, laying the ideological foundations for the controversy that
would, for instance, overwhelm the 1966 World Cup quarter-final between England
and Argentina. One of the fascinations of football is that it is simultaneously
intensely local and utterly globalised, with all the tensions that brings.
But don’t
expect to see any of that on Netflix, where the toffs drink claret and the
proles drink beer (or whisky if they’re Scottish and having a bad time), the
bank is forever foreclosing and an implausible number of goals are scored in
the few seconds after kick-off. It’s a tremendous opportunity missed.
The 19th
century saw the codification of the rules of football at several public
schools, with those of Rugby School (first published 1845) and Eton College
(first published 1847) being particularly influential, in addition to those of
Harrow, Winchester and Shrewsbury. The need for alumni of different public
schools to be able to play against each other resulted in several sets of
"compromise laws", often known as Cambridge rules, being drawn up at
the University of Cambridge between the 1830s and the 1860s.
In the
second half of the century, a culture of independent "football clubs"
began to thrive, particularly in London and Sheffield, with Sheffield Football
Club, founded in 1857, today being recognised as the world's oldest surviving
independent football club. The example of Sheffield F.C., which published its
first set of laws in 1859, soon led to a proliferation of clubs in and around
the city playing "Sheffield rules". Sheffield hosted the world's
first multi-team football tournament, the Youdan Cup, in 1867.
In general,
each football club, school or university tended to have its own rules, which
might differ on such fundamental questions as whether to follow the example of
Rugby School by allowing the ball to be carried, with players carrying the ball
being allowed to be "hacked" (kicked in the shins) by their
opponents. The desire of football clubs for a common code was the impetus
behind the foundation of the Football Association (FA) in 1863. Within the FA,
there was an acrimonious debate between the "hacking" and
"non-hacking" clubs. When the first meetings were held to discuss the
FA's laws of football, the "hackers" were in the ascendancy, but the
publication of the 1863 set of Cambridge rules (which forbade hacking) enabled
the "non-hackers" to prevail and the FA's first Laws of the Game,
published in December 1863, banned hacking and carrying the ball. The FA,
initially dominated by London-based clubs, saw its influence gradually spread
over the country by the success of FA Cup, first contested in the 1871–72
season.
Between
1863 and 1877, the FA and Sheffield rules co-existed, with each code at times
influencing the other. Several games were played between Sheffield and London
teams, using both sets of rules. After several disputes, the two codes were
unified in 1877 when the Sheffield Football Association voted to adopt the FA
laws, following the adoption of a compromise throw-in law by the FA. The
Sheffield rules had a major influence on how the modern game of football
developed. Among other things they introduced into the laws of the game are the
concepts of corners, and free kicks for fouls.
International
football began when teams representing England and Scotland met in a match at
Kennington Oval in south London on 5 March 1870. A total of five games were played
between the two teams to 21 February 1872 but they are not recognised as
official internationals by FIFA because the Scottish players were all
London-based and so not fully representative of Scotland as a nation.
The first
official international, Scotland v England, was played on 30 November 1872 at
Hamilton Crescent, the West of Scotland Cricket Club's ground in Partick,
Glasgow. It was a 0–0 draw watched by 4,000 spectators.[citation needed] On 8
March 1873, England's 4–2 win over Scotland at Kennington Oval was the
first-ever victory in international football.
The late
nineteenth century was dominated by the growing split between the amateur and
professional teams, which was roughly aligned along a North-South divide.
Northern clubs were keen to adopt professionalism as workers could not afford
to play on an amateur basis, while Southern clubs by the large part stuck by
traditional "Corinthian" values of amateurism. Eventually, in 1885
the FA legalized professionalism, and when Aston Villa director William
McGregor organised a meeting of representatives of England's leading clubs,
this led to the formation of the Football League in 1888. Preston North End
were inaugural winners in 1888–89, and were also the first club to complete the
double of both winning the league and the FA Cup. Aston Villa repeated
the feat in 1896–97.
Relations
between the Sussexes and Prince William and his wife, Kate, deteriorated so
much that by March the two couples were barely speaking, extracts from a book
on Prince Harry and Meghan claims.
Finding
Freedom, by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, claims the couples hardly spoke
during an engagement at the Commonwealth service at Westminster Abbey despite
not having seen each other since January amid the fallout of the Sussexes’
decision to step back from the royal family.
The book is
due to be published in August and is being serialised in the Times and Sunday
Times. Harry and his wife, Meghan, have said they were not interviewed for the
biography and did not make any contributions to it.
The authors
said the couple “liked being in control of their narrative” from the early days
of their marriage. Being told to operate under Buckingham Palace’s umbrella
after splitting their household from the Cambridges’ was “a big disappointment
to them”.
“As their
popularity had grown, so did Harry and Meghan’s difficulty in understanding why
so few inside the palace were looking out for their interests. They were a
major draw for the royal family.”
The authors
describe a culture of bitterness and resentment gradually growing between the
Sussexes and other members of the royal family.
Prince
Harry felt ‘unprotected’ by his family
Extracts
from the book say the Sussexes felt their complaints were not taken seriously
and believed other royal households were leaking stories about them to the
press.
“There were
just a handful of people working at the palace they could trust … A friend of
the couple’s referred to the old guard as ‘the vipers’. Meanwhile a frustrated
palace staffer described the Sussexes’ team as ‘the squeaky third wheel’ of the
palace.”
Harry and
Meghan arrive at Royal Albert Hall in London in March.
Harry and Meghan arrive at the Royal Albert
Hall in London in March. The book says Harry believed some of the old guard
‘simply didn’t like Meghan and would stop at nothing to make her life
difficult’.
The book is
also reported to say that Harry felt “unprotected” by his family and disparaged
within palace walls for being “too sensitive and outspoken”. He believed some
of the old guard “simply didn’t like Meghan and would stop at nothing to make
her life difficult”.
Scobie said
it was hard for Meghan as a mixed-race American to join the royal family. “That
was going to ruffle some feathers.”
The
Sussexes considered the extreme measure of breaking royal protocol to contact
his grandmother, the Queen, as tensions grew in the family. Harry spoke to his
father, Prince Charles, and the Queen about the need to change things before he
left for Canada for six weeks at the end of 2019.
The authors
write: “He felt at once used for their popularity, hounded by the press because
of the public’s fascination with this new breed of royal couple, and disparaged
back within the institution’s walls.”
While in
Canada the couple decided to step back as senior royals. The book claims Harry
attempted to set up a meeting with his grandmother at the start of January but
was told she was unavailable until the end of the month.
In the
extract published in the Times, the authors write that as the couple flew back
to the UK they “toyed with the idea of driving straight from the terminal to
see the Queen”.
But this
was abandoned because they decided it could have “ruffled feathers” and caused
them difficulty.
A website
designed to clarify Harry and Meghan’s future was “deeply upsetting” to members
of the royal family and “hurt the Queen”, the book claims, saying the couple
were forced to take action after a story broke that they were going to stay in
Canada permanently.
The book’s
authors write that a royal source denied leaking the story, instead blaming the
couple “because they were frustrated at the palace in the talks that were going
on … They wanted to force the decision, to break it open.”
The couple
deny this claim, the Times reports.
In Finding
Freedom a source said the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh were ‘devastated’ by
the Sussexes’ website.
On 8
January Harry and Meghan used their Instagram page to share the news of their
future plans and launched the website sussexroyal.com.
The website
took everyone by surprise, the authors write.
“Aides and
family members knew the couple wanted to step back, but the website, which laid
out the details of their half-in-half-out model as if it were a done deal, put
the Queen in a difficult position.”
Buckingham
Palace put out a short statement 15 minutes after the Sussexes made theirs, but
aides, including the Queen’s private secretary, were “furious”. And there was
significant reaction from fellow royals, with a source saying the Queen and the
Duke of Edinburgh were “devastated”.
A senior
member of the household was quoted in the book as saying: “The element of
surprise, the blindsiding of the Queen, for the other principals who are all
very mindful of this, rightfully, it was deeply unsettling.
“The family
is very private and bringing it into the public domain, when they were told not
to, hurt the Queen.
“It was
laying out what the Sussexes wanted in a statement without consulting with Her
Majesty first – and she’s the head of the institution.”
The book’s
authors write that the Queen told Harry his proposed arrangement would not
work, prompting him to search for solutions across several days of intense
meetings with top aides from all three royal households.
One aide
made a joke about Meghan launching a line of cosmetics, while another source is
quoted in the book as saying: “The biggest row was over money, because it
always is.”
In April
2019, Kensington Palace announced Harry was working with the US chat show queen
Oprah Winfrey on a mental health documentary series.
The couple
have promised that “everything they do will continue to uphold the values of
Her Majesty”.
As the excerpts
were published, a statement on behalf of Harry and Meghan said: “The Duke and
Duchess of Sussex were not interviewed and did not contribute to Finding
Freedom. This book is based on the authors’ own experiences as members of the
royal press corps and their own independent reporting.”
With
Reuters and the Press Association
Harry angry at William's 'snobbish' advice about
Meghan, book claims
Prince William said to have feared brother was
‘blindsided’ by lust in his haste to marry
Caroline
Davies
Sun 26 Jul
2020 12.00 BSTLast modified on Sun 26 Jul 2020 19.05 BST
The royal
rift that led to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex leaving Britain and stepping
back from royal duties began after Prince William feared his brother had been
“blindsided” by lust in his haste to marry Meghan Markle, a new book claims.
Harry was
offended by William’s advice to “take as much time as you need to get to know
this girl”, causing tension between the two that finally led to “Megxit” ,
according to the authors of Finding Freedom.
He was
allegedly angered by the words “this girl”, perceiving it as “snobbish” and
“condescending”.
The
Sussexes have distanced themselves from the book, by the royal correspondents
Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, with a spokesman for the Sussexes saying they
were not interviewed and did not contribute to Finding Freedom, which was
“based on the authors’ own experiences as members of the royal press corps and
their own independent reporting”.
In it, the
authors claim to chronicle the deteriorating relationships between the
Sussexes, senior royals, and the palace “old guard”. One senior royal is said
to have referred to Meghan as “Harry’s showgirl”, while another allegedly said:
“She comes with a lot of baggage.”
A senior
courtier is said to have remarked: “There’s just something about her I don’t
trust.” One frustrated palace staffer is said to have referred to Meghan as
“the squeaky third wheel” of the palace. The book claims the couple thought
there was only a handful of people at the palace they could trust, while a
friend of theirs referred to the old guard as “the vipers”.
In extracts
serialised in the Times and Sunday Times, the authors claim there was no actual
feud between Kate and Meghan, contrary to press reports, but that the two women
had nothing in common. Kate would reach out to Meghan, but “didn’t lose sleep”
over it when she did not respond, while Meghan was disappointed by Kate’s lack
of support, according to the book.
Rather, the
authors claim, the alleged rift between the two couples was due to a growing
coolness between Harry and William. By March, at the time of the Commonwealth
Day service at Westminster Abbey, the couples were said to be barely speaking.
Scobie told the Times Meghan had tried to make eye contact with Kate at the
service, but had been barely acknowledged. “To purposefully snub your
sister-in-law … I don’t think it left a great taste in the couple’s mouths.”
Harry and
Meghan’s decision to cut free grew out of Harry’s belief they were unprotected
by the institutions around the monarchy and derided by the old guard for being
too sensitive and outspoken, the book claims.
This
apparently led to their decision to move to Windsor. “He wanted to get away
from the goldfish bowl that was Kensington Palace,” the authors said. It is
also claimed they believed other royal households were leaking stories about
them to the press.
Once they
decamped to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor, thus splitting from the Cambridges at
Kensington Palace, it was apparently “a big disappointment” to them to be told
they must operate under Buckingham Palace’s umbrella. The authors wrote: “As
their popularity had grown, so did Harry and Meghan’s difficulty in
understanding why so few inside the palace were looking out for their
interests. They were a major draw for the royal family.”
Having
spent Christmas in Canada away from palace pressure, and formulated plans to
move there, they were unable to immediately see the Queen to discuss their
plans. Believing they were being blocked from seeing the monarch, they even
considered breaking protocol by springing a surprise visit by driving straight
to see her from the airport terminal after landing back in the UK, it was
claimed.
When they
made their “Megxit” announcement on a new website, Sussexroyal.com, aides
including the Queen’s private secretary were said to be furious, and the Queen
and Prince Philip apparently devastated.
Neither
Buckingham Palace nor Kensington Palace have commented.
Author of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's
biography Omid Scobie says even the Sussexes 'didn't expect things to turn out
the way they did' and promises book will be the definitive version' of their
lives
British journalist Omid Scobie discussd the release of
Harry and Meghan's bio
Says it feels nice to finally talk about the project
after'beavering away at quietly for two
years'
Admitted even the Sussexes didn't expect things to
turn out the way they did
Finding
Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family is set to be
released worldwide online on August 11
With
Reuters and the Press Association
By JESSICA
RACH FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED:
12:06 BST, 6 May 2020 | UPDATED: 14:42 BST, 8 May 2020
The author
of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's much-anticipated biography Omid Scobie has
admitted it feels nice to 'finally be able to talk about' the project he's been
'beavering away at quietly for two years'.
British
journalist Omid Scobie, who has accompanied Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan
Markle, 38, on a variety of royal tours, took to the podcast The Heir Pod to
discuss the release of the book.
Finding
Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family is set to be
released worldwide online on August 11, with the hard copy on sale from August
20 and was released to pre-order over the weekend.
And Omid
admitted that their tale has included twists and turns that 'even the Sussexes
didn't expect'.
Speaking
about finishing the biography, he said: 'It's been a long time in the making.
The last few weeks have been quite a challenge getting it all ready in time for
the deadline.
'It feels
nice to finally be able to talk about it after quietly beavering away on it for
a long time.'
He added:
'This project started about two years ago, and there have been twists and turns
that no one expected. This is something no one expected.
'I don't
even think Harry and Meghan, who by their own account struggled with the
realities of the situation, expected things to turn out the way they did.'
Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A
Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11, with
the hard copy on sale from August 20 and was released to pre-order over the
weekend
Explaining
that the biography gives a real inside account of their story, he said: 'I've
been on so many engagements and around them as much as possible, and spoken to
so many people in their lives, so no stone has been left unturned.
'I've seen
the couple remain faithful in their own beliefs and stand strong in the face of
adversities which have been publicly played out in the press, and I would like
to think this tells the definitive version of their lives together.'
British
journalist Omid Scobie, who has accompanied Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan
Markle, 38, on a variety of royal tours, took to the podcast The Heir Pod to
discuss the release of the book
British
journalist Omid Scobie, who has accompanied Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan
Markle, 38, on a variety of royal tours, took to the podcast The Heir Pod to
discuss the release of the book
Publishing
house Harper Collins, which owns Dey Street Books, the publisher of the
biography released a brief description of Meghan and Prince Harry's
collaboration with the two journalists.
The book's
description says that 'few know the true story of Harry and Meghan'.
It promises
to go 'beyond the headlines to reveal unknown details of Harry and Meghan's
life together, dispelling the many rumours and misconceptions that plague the
couple on both sides of the pond'.
It
continues: 'With unique access and written with the participation of those
closest to the couple, Finding Freedom is an honest, up-close, and disarming
portrait of a confident, influential, and forward-thinking couple who are
unafraid to break with tradition, determined to create a new path away from the
spotlight, and dedicated to building a humanitarian legacy that will make a
profound difference in the world.'
A
description of the biography on Amazon promises to offer an 'honest, up-close,
and disarming portrait' of the 'confident, influential, forward' Prince Harry ,
35, and Meghan Markle, 38 (seen on their wedding day in May 2018)+4
A
description of the biography on Amazon promises to offer an 'honest, up-close,
and disarming portrait' of the 'confident, influential, forward' Prince Harry ,
35, and Meghan Markle, 38 (seen on their wedding day in May 2018)
The cover
features a beaming Prince Harry and Meghan as they visited their namesake
county in October 2018 for the first time.
The Mail on Sunday were told that before
moving to North America, the Sussexes gave an interview to the book's authors,
both journalists.
One of
them, Omid Scobie, is thought to be close to Meghan and was one of the favoured
journalists given details of the couple's video call to the Queen last week in
which they wished her a happy 94th birthday.
Echoing
Princess Diana's secret involvement in the blockbuster biography, Diana: Her
True Story, when she encouraged her friends to speak to author Andrew Morton,
questions are being asked whether members of Meghan's inner circle were being
urged to help Scobie and his American co-author, Carolyn Durand.
The
320-page biography, due to be released in August, is expected to be a global
bestseller.
Harry and Meghan 'did not contribute' to new book
Finding Freedom
The Duke
and Duchess of Sussex have denied contributing to a new book about their life
in the Royal Family.
The book,
Finding Freedom - which is being serialised in the Times - has claimed the
Sussexes and Cambridges were barely speaking by March.
It also
says friends of Prince Harry and Meghan referred to some Palace officials as
"vipers".
A spokesman
for the Sussexes, who now live in California, said they had not been
interviewed for the book.
A statement
said: "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were not interviewed and did not
contribute to Finding Freedom.
"This
book is based on the authors' own experiences as members of the royal press
corps and their own independent reporting."
The book's
authors, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, describe a culture of increasing
tension between the Sussexes and other members of the Royal Family.
They say
the Sussexes felt their complaints were not taken seriously and believed other
royal households were leaking stories about them to the press.
"There
were just a handful of people working at the palace they could trust," the
authors write.
"A
friend of the couple's referred to the old guard as 'the vipers'.
"Meanwhile,
a frustrated palace staffer described the Sussexes' team as 'the squeaky third
wheel' of the palace."
The duke
and duchess are now based in Los Angeles, California, having stepped back as
senior royals earlier this year.
For their
last public appearance as working members of the Royal Family, they joined the
Queen and other senior royals at the Commonwealth Day service at Westminster
Abbey on 9 March.
They have
since begun their new life of personal independence in the US, pursuing charity
projects.
There are
some startling headlines accompanying the serialisation of Finding Freedom but
those in search of a smoking gun may be disappointed.
Reliable,
quotable sources are the hard currency of books about royalty. And Finding
Freedom is quite well sourced. The authors have leant heavily on contacts in
the different courts - Buckingham Palace for the Queen, Kensington Palace for
William and Kate, 'the Sussexes' for Harry and Meghan. And they have spoken to
at least one person, maybe more, who feels he or she can speak for, and at
times quote, Meghan herself, and at least one friend of Prince Harry who feels
he or she can do the same.
So some
flesh is put on the bones of a story that we know quite well but despite the
headlines there are no new properly sourced revelations in the book as
serialised so far. We knew that William and Harry's relationship was badly
damaged; Harry told ITN's Tom Bradby that in the interview he gave in late
2019. We knew that Meghan felt abandoned by the Palace; she went out of her way
to make that point to Bradby in the same programme.
We knew
that the Queen was upset by the couple's declaration of independence in January
this year - senior Palace sources told the BBC within hours of the couple's
statement. And we knew that Harry despises the media and some of its coverage
of Meghan; he has spoken openly and very clearly about how he feels.
So Finding
Freedom may be more rewarding for the rounded portrait it paints of a couple at
the centre of a terrible whirlwind than in any particular revelation about who
did what to whom, and when.
Earlier
this month, Meghan delivered a speech to a gender equality summit, while the
duke and duchess also spoke to young people about equal rights during the
Queen's Commonwealth Trust weekly video call.
Meanwhile,
the Sussexes have launched legal action in the US after drones were allegedly
used to take pictures of their infant son Archie.
The move
marked the latest example of the Sussexes actions against what they have
previously described as "invasive" tabloid media.
Meghan is
also suing the publisher of the Mail on Sunday and Mail Online for breach of
privacy and copyright infringement. The publisher denies her claims.
The Élysée
Palace (French: Palais de l'Élysée is the official residence of the President
of the French Republic. Completed in 1722, it was initially built for Louis
Henri de La Tour d'Auvergne. It was used as the office of the French President
for the first time in 1848. The current building contains the presidential
office and residency, as well as the meeting place of the Council of Ministers.
It is located near the Champs-Élysées in the 8th arrondissement of Paris, the
name Élysée deriving from Elysian Fields, the place of the blessed dead in
Greek mythology. Important foreign visitors are hosted at the nearby Hôtel de
Marigny, a palatial residence.
Hôtel
d'Évreux
The Count
of Évreux, by Hyacinthe Rigaud, circa 1720
The Hôtel
d'Évreux and its gardens circa 1737
The
architect Armand-Claude Molet possessed a property fronting on the road to
the village of Roule, west of Paris (now the Rue du Faubourg Saint-Honoré), and
backing onto royal property, the Grand Cours through the Champs-Élysées. He
sold this in 1718 to Louis Henri de La Tour d'Auvergne, Count of Évreux
(families: Dukes and Princes of Bouillon and Sedan: La Marck | von der Marck),
with the agreement that Mollet would construct an hôtel particulier for the
count, fronted by an entrance court and backed by a garden. The Hôtel d'Évreux
was finished and decorated by 1722, and though it has undergone many modifications
since, it remains a fine example of the French classical style. At the time of
his death in 1753, Évreux was the owner of one of the most widely admired
houses in Paris, and it was bought by King Louis XV as a residence for the
Marquise de Pompadour, his mistress. Opponents showed their distaste for the
regime by hanging signs on the gates that read: "Home of the King's
whore". After her death, it reverted to the crown.
In 1773, it
was purchased by Nicolas Beaujon, banker to the Court and one of the richest
men in France, who needed a suitably sumptuous "country house" (for
the city of Paris did not yet extend this far) to house his fabulous collection
of great masters paintings. To this end, he hired the architect Étienne-Louis
Boullée to make substantial alterations to the buildings (as well as design an
English-style garden). Soon on display there were such well-known masterpieces
as Holbein's The Ambassadors (now in the National Gallery in London), and Frans
Hals' Bohemian (now at the Louvre). His architectural alterations and art
galleries gave this residence international renown as "one of the premier
houses of Paris".
Royal and
Imperial Palace
The palace
and gardens were purchased from Beaujon by Bathilde d'Orléans, Duchess of
Bourbon in 1787 for 1,300,000 livres. It was the Duchess who named it the
Élysée. She also built a group of cottages in the gardens which she named the
Hameau de Chantilly, after the Hameau at her father-in-law's Château de
Chantilly. With the French Revolution, the Duchess fled the country and the
Élysée was confiscated. It was leased out. The gardens were used for eating,
drinking, and dancing, under the name Hameau de Chantilly; and the rooms became
gambling houses.
In 1803,
the Élysée was sold to Joachim Murat, and in 1808, to the Emperor, and it
became known as the Élysée-Napoléon. After the Battle of Waterloo, Napoléon
returned to the Élysée, signed his abdication there on 22 June 1815, and left
the Élysée on the 25th.
Russian
Cossacks camped at the Élysée when they occupied Paris in 1814. The property
was then returned to its previous owner, the Duchesse de Bourbon, who then sold
it to her royal cousin, Louis XVIII, in 1816.
Presidential
residence
Under the
provisional government of the Second Republic, it was called Élysée National
and was designated the official residence of the President of the Republic.
(The President also has the use of several other official residences, including
the Château de Rambouillet, forty-five kilometres southwest of Paris, and the
Fort de Brégançon near Marseille.)
In 1853,
following his coup d'état that ended the Second Republic, Napoléon III charged
the architect Joseph-Eugène Lacroix with renovations; meanwhile he moved to the
nearby Tuileries Palace, but kept the Élysée as a discreet place to meet his
mistresses, moving between the two palaces through a secret underground passage
that has since been demolished.[citation needed] Since Lacroix completed his
work in 1867, the essential look of the Palais de l'Élysée has remained the
same.
In 1873,
during the Third Republic, The Élysée became the official presidential
residence.
In 1899,
Félix Faure became the only French President to die in the palace.
In 1917, a
chimpanzee escaped from a nearby ménagerie, entered the palace and was said to
have tried to haul the wife of President Raymond Poincaré into a tree only to
be foiled by Élysée guards.President Paul Deschanel, who resigned in 1920 because
of mental illness, was said to have been so impressed by the chimpanzee's feat
that, to the alarm of his guests, he took to jumping into trees during state
receptions.
The Élysée
Palace was closed in June 1940, and remained empty during World War II. It was
reoccupied only in 1946 by Vincent Auriol, President of the provisional
government, then first President of the Fourth Republic from 1947 to 1954.
From 1959
to 1969, the Élysée was occupied by Charles de Gaulle, the first President of
the Fifth Republic. De Gaulle did not like its lack of privacy, and oversaw the
purchase of the luxurious Hôtel de Marigny to lodge foreign state officials in
visits to France, saying, "I do not like the idea of meeting kings walking
around my corridors in their pyjamas."
In the
1970s, President Georges Pompidou had some of the original rooms in the palace
redesigned by Pierre Paulin in the modern style, of which only the Salle à
Manger Paulin survives.
Socialist
President François Mitterrand, who governed from 1981 to 1995, is said to have
seldom used its private apartments, preferring the privacy of his own home on
the more bohemian Left Bank. A discreet flat in the nearby presidential annexe
Palais de l'Alma housed his mistress Anne Pingeot, mother of his illegitimate
daughter Mazarine Pingeot.
By
contrast, his successor Jacques Chirac lived throughout his two terms in office
(1995–2007) in the Élysée apartments with his wife Bernadette.
Chirac
increased the Palace's budget by 105% to 90 million euros per year, according
to the book L'argent caché de l'Élysée. One million euros per year is spent on
drinks alone for the guests invited to the Élysée Palace, 6.9 million euros per
year on bonuses for presidential staff and 6.1 million euros per year on the
145 extra employees Chirac hired after he was elected in 1995.
The Élysée
has gardens, in which presidents hosted parties on the afternoon of Bastille
Day until 2010. That year, then-President Nicolas Sarkozy decided to stop
organizing this event because of France's high debt and the economic crisis.
The heavily
guarded mansion and grounds are situated at 55 Rue du Faubourg Saint-Honoré at
its intersection with Avenue de Marigny [fr]. A monumental gate with four
iconic[clarification needed] columns, flanked by walls topped by a balustrade,
opens onto a large rounded courtyard. The majestic ceremonial courtyard imparts
a degree of grandeur to the house. The main residence is constructed in the
French classical style. An entrance vestibule is aligned with the ceremonial
courtyard and gardens. There is a long central building, a great — or State —
apartment divided in the middle by a large salon that opens into the garden.
This building also has a central three-storey section, and two single-floor
wings: the Appartement des Bains to the right, and the Petit Appartement
(private apartments) to the left. The French-style garden has a central path
aligned with the central building, patterned flowerbeds and alleys of chestnut
trees edged with hedgerows.
Ground
floor
Diagram of
the ground floor: 1/ Terrasse 2/ Salon d'argent 3/ Salle à Manger 4/
Bibliothèque 5/ Salon bleu 6/ Salon des Cartes 7/ Salle des fêtes 8/ Salon
Murat 9/ Salon des Aides de camps 10/ Salon des ambassadeurs 11/ Salon
Pompadour 12/ Salon des portraits 13/ Salon Cléopâtre 14/ Escalier Murat 15/
Vestibule d'honneur 16/ Salon des tapisseries 17/ Jardin d'hiver 18/ Salon
Napoléon III 19/ Cour d'honneur.
The
Vestibule d'Honneur (Hall of Honour) is the room which the main entrance to the
palace leads into. In this room the President of France meets visiting
officials, world leaders and spiritual leaders.
The Salon
d'Argent (Silver Room), in the east wing of the palace, was decorated by
Caroline Murat, wife of Joachim Murat and sister of Napoleon I. The room is so
called because of the silver coloured edges to the wall features, mantelpieces,
tables, sofas and armchairs, of which the last have swan sculptures at the
sides. Three notable historical events happened in this room. On 22 June 1815,
Napoleon formally signed his abdication warrant after losing the Battle of
Waterloo that year; on 2 December 1851 Louis Napoleon launched his coup d'état;
and in 1899, President Félix Faure met his mistress, Marguerite Steinheil.
The Salle à
Manger Paulin (Paulin Dining Room), named after its architect, Pierre Paulin,
is a complete contrast to most of the other rooms in the palace. It was
designed as a private dining room for President Georges Pompidou and his wife
Claude, and the interior and furniture date from the 1970s. The walls are made
of 22 polyester panels, the chairs have a single leg attached to a round base,
and the round table is made of glass. The room is lit by roof panels decorated
with glass balls and rods.
The Salon
des Portraits (Portrait Room) was used by the Emperor Napoleon III for portrait
medallions of the most important sovereigns of the time, replacing earlier
portraits of the Bonaparte family installed by Joachim Murat. The portraits are
of: Pope Pius IX, Emperor Franz Josef I of Austria-Hungary, Queen Victoria of
the United Kingdom, King Victor Emmanuel II of Italy, Tsar Nicholas I of
Russia, King Frederick William IV of Prussia, Queen Isabel II of Spain and King
William I of Württemberg. Previously a dining room, President Nicolas Sarkozy
used the room as his second office.
The Salle
des Fêtes (Hall of Festivities) dominates the west wing of the palace. It was
designed by Eugène Debressenne [fr] and opened on 10 May 1889 by the then
President, Sadi Carnot, to coincide with the Exposition Universelle that year.
The room has paintings on the ceiling called "La République sauvegarde la
Paix" (The Republic Safeguards Peace), painted by Guillaume Dubufe in
1894. There are also six Gobelins tapestries in the room, which is
predominantly laid out in red and gold decor. In 1984 President François
Mitterrand added ten windows to the room to let in more light. It is in this
room that all French Presidents are inaugurated, and where they host official
conferences and banquets.
The Jardins
d'Hiver (Winter Gardens) was built in 1883 as a greenhouse for growing plants.
Today it is no longer used for this purpose, being instead an extension of the
Salon des Fêtes, and used for official banquets. There is a Gobelins tapestry
on the wall, and three chandeliers hang from the ceiling.
The Salon
des Ambassadeurs
The Salon
Murat (Murat Room) is used every Wednesday by the President for meetings with
the Prime Minister and Cabinet of France, along with the Presidential Secretary
(known as the "Secretary-General of the Élysée"). It was also in this
room that Konrad Adenauer, Chancellor of Germany, signed the Treaty of the
Élysée in 1963.
The Salon
Cléopâtre (Cleopatra Room) gets its name from a Gobelins tapestry on the wall,
installed during the presidency of Sadi Carnot, which depicts Antony and
Cleopatra meeting at Tarsus. Also in the room is a portrait of Maria Amalia,
Duchess of Parma, painted by Alexandre Roslin.[6]
The Salon
des Ambassadeurs (Ambassadors' Room) is where the French President officially
receives ambassadors from abroad.
The Salon
Bleu (Blue Room) is used as the office of the First Lady of France.
The
Escalier Murat (Murat Staircase) is the main staircase in the palace, linking
the ground and first floors.
LE BARON NOIR
Baron Noir season
3: criticism of a France on the brink of chaos
Alexander
Janowiak March 2, 2020 - UPDATE: 06/05/2020 23:43
Season 3 of Baron
Noir allows Canal - to confirm its status as the best creator of original
French series, far ahead of Netflix. The political series showrunned by Eric
Benzekri and carried by a determined Kad Merad is not always at its best in
these eight new episodes, but plays very skilfully the real and the fictional
to deliver a captivating story about the French political and societal world.
POWER GAMES
With these first
two episodes, this season 3 of Baron Noir has set the bar high. Its
ultra-promising beginning and its multiple stakes with its political chessboard
in full reshaping (especially with the departure of some main characters like
that of Cyril Balsan embodied by the excellent Hugo Becker) heralded a rather
mind-blowing fight between the characters and innovative ideas about French
politics.
However, very
quickly, the series is forgotten a little and sadly leaves to tick a few
mandatory boxes to fully anchor itself in the French reality, even global. One
thinks of course the accusations of sexual harassment of which the German
Chancellor is accused of resigning and drowning Françallemagne's ambitious
plans alongside Dorendeu.
This choice is
not fundamentally a bad thing, as the subject has become major in the public
debate. On the other hand, its importance is so minor at the heart of the story
that its approach lacks finesse, accuracy and above all sincerity and resembles
above all a gadget allowing the narrative to advance and kill the (false) great
ambitions installed, more than a real plea or simple denunciation.
This kind of
narrative misdirections will happen a few times during season 3 (not for the
same reasons) and will then sometimes prevent the good performance of the story
or in any case, take away some form of spontaneity and naturalness.
That said, this
reversal of situation that happens very quickly (from the 3rd episode
therefore) will obviously move the lines for the President of the French
Republic embodied by the magnetic Anna Mouglalis. Amélie Dorendeu wants to do
everything to avoid replaying her place in universal suffrage. The series
therefore has fun with the French institutions and tries to reshape the
political and constitutional landscape of France. The ideas are innovative,
quite amazing and making his political proposals electoral strategies makes
every thought, vision and design exciting.
It must be said
that the series enjoys an audience of screenwriters even more rooted in French
political history. In addition to Eric Benzekri (former collaborator of
Jean-Luc Mélenchon or Julien Dray), we find Thomas Finkielkraut (son of Alain)
or Raphael Chevènement (son of Jean-Pierre). No wonder, then, that the series
manages to be so precise and plausible about what it portrays of institutions
and politics.
INTIMATE
CONVICTION OR AMBITION?
However, Baron
Noir knows that politics is not just a matter of ideas or convictions. To the
public, voters, politics and de facto figure of politics are a matter of
magnetism, charisma, charm or at least image in the broadest sense. In the age
of social media, everything is known and everything is important, and Eric
Benzekri's series meticulously describes it in season 3.
At the same time
that the Parisian municipal women experienced an unprecedented turnaround with
the abandonment of Benjamin Griveaux (LREM candidate) at the Paris mayoralty
following the dissemination of private sexual images, Baron Noir gained credit
for his ability to play the fate of his characters on their image with French
citizens. More than a war of ideas, politics has undeniably turned into a war
of image and pageantry, and as the series says: "The presidential election
has become a television series".
The
much-anticipated (and much recommended) appearance by President Dorendeu in the
fictional show Ambition Intime presented by Karine Le Marchand is a striking
example, demonstrating how politics is taking a major turn. A turning point
where it is ultimately no longer the proposals that convince only, but also the
pace and form. De facto, all moves are allowed.
In this right
line, Baron Noir takes the lead on the emergence of a new form of politics with
the exciting character of Christophe Mercier (incredible Frédéric Saurel): an
anti-system SVT professor candidate for the election to the draw, a kind of mix
between the Yellow Jacket Jérôme Rodriguez, the Italian populist Beppe Grillo
and the American President Donald Trump.
His arrival at
the forefront offers both a totally new vision of the French political
landscape and is part of a fiction not so far removed from reality. If Coluche
frightened the Mitterrand - Chirac - Giscard generation in the 1980s with the
announcement of his candidacy, the current politicians are equally concerned
about a so-called clown candidacy imbued with anti-system pujadism and able to
bring back an electorate usually absentee in the polls (one obviously thinks of
Remi Gaillard in Montpellier or the rumors of candidacy of the flagship tv host
Cyril Hanouna in the presidential election).
It is a way to
launch major topics on the current functioning of the political system while
providing a captivating account of the inner workings of elections, government
formations and presidential debates. Politicians (or rather politicians) play
excessively with their functions, statutes and powers to ensure their
privileges rather than those of their fellow citizens. The backlash could well
hit them sooner or later, harder and faster than they think, and plunge France
into chaos.
IN ORDER OF
BATTLE
By pushing the
cursor this far, Eric Benzekri's series fits into a completely new register
that gives it a real breadth. While it presented itself primarily as a drama in
season 1 and then a political thriller in its season 2, the series becomes
almost a dystopia in this season 3. In Baron
Noir, disparaître le politics
politique is simply
disappearing and degagism
is on the way. Everything
could shift to another
power that is angry
and determined: that
of the people, buried
and contained for
the time being, but for how much longer? temps
Largely
driven by the current movements
and they very real, the Yellow Jackets Jaunes
therefore, the story of
this season 3
perfectly examines the major political issues that
stand dressent before
France today and
tomorrow. In addition to
being a
precise reflection on the
idea of sur retrouver politics, but also
of politique politique
politics itself and the
exemplarity demanded and
flouted of the function,these ten
episodes take an
intelligent look at an outdated
left that fails to find a new lease of life, the rise
of extremes or
the almostirretrievable divide between
the elites and the mass, and the tipping point that is likely to take place soon
(aslap as a catalyst?).
catalyseur
Baron Noir thus
succeeds very well after a slightly disappointing season 2. tête d'un Ultra-ambitious,ambitieuse pre-screensy
and captivating, this
season 3 offers a lot
of tense moments
during its eight
episodes, despite an extremely
repulsive staging (circular
traveling, it turns
tourner your head after a while).
Moreover, même beyonddelà this lack
of visual audacity, while
the production had
eu the chance to tour within
the Élysée,we can also
blame a lot of narrative
and rhythmic choices. .
After all, this
season 3 takes time
to launch the
real subject of its plot
(almostpresque five episodes). More than a
series about Rickwaert,
always impeccably interpreted
by Kad Merad
(evenmême if seeing him
bellow and come out of the
metaphors with a toit head-to-head champ
wears a little
in the long run) or a
series on politics
politique and its
workings,Baron Noir has
become a
portrait of French society in
this season 3. Much attention to Rickwaert's fate and
political resurrection takes the depth out of the series.
Finally, this
season 3 suffers from time ellipses far too important. In eight episodes,
nearly two years elapse, including a full one in the last two episodes. The
rush of writing often spoils the power of certain situations, especially given
the number of twists and different paths that each character can take in just a
few minutes.
Thus, several
passages and key moments of the plot do not have time to live on screen and to
make the spectators feel any emotion. A careless choice of writing that the
series sometimes tries to conceal by playing the card of the novel especially
in its grand finale. Unfortunately, the intention remains very fabricated and
the conclusion of this season 3 is above all a cliffhanger/twist terribly easy
and opportunistic to permanently eject one of his characters. It remains to be
seen, however, what he will provoke deep within Rickwaert in the potential
season 4.
The three seasons
of Baron Noir are available in full on Canal -Series.
Baron Noir
saison 3 : critique d'une France au bord du chaos
Alexandre
Janowiak | 2 mars 2020 - MAJ : 06/05/2020 23:43
La saison 3
de Baron Noir permet à Canal + de confirmer son statut de meilleur créateur de
séries originales françaises, très loin devant Netflix. La série politique
showrunnée par Eric Benzekri et portée par un Kad Merad déterminé n'est pas
toujours à son top dans ces huit nouveaux épisodes, mais joue très habilement
du réel et du fictionnel pour livrer une histoire captivante sur le monde
politique et sociétal français.
JEUX DE POUVOIR
Avec ces deux
premiers épisodes, cette saison 3 de Baron Noir a mis la barre haut. Son début
ultra prometteur et ses enjeux multiples avec son échiquier politique en plein
remodelage (d'autant plus avec le départ de certains personnages principaux
comme celui de Cyril Balsan incarné par l'excellent Hugo Becker) annonçaient un
combat assez hallucinant entre les personnages et des idées novatrices sur la
politique française.
Pourtant, très
rapidement, la série s'oublie un peu et part tristement cocher quelques cases
obligatoires pour s'ancrer pleinement dans la réalité française, voire
mondiale. On pense évidemment aux accusations de harcèlements sexuels dont est
accusé le chancelier allemand, obligé de démissionner et noyant les projets
ambitieux de Françallemagne aux côtés de Dorendeu.
Ce choix
n'est pas foncièrement une mauvaise chose, tant le sujet est devenu majeur au
sein du débat public. En revanche, son importance est tellement mineure au
coeur du récit que son approche manque de finesse, de justesse et surtout de
sincérité et ressemble avant tout à un gadget permettant au récit d'avancer et
de tuer les (fausses) grandes ambitions installées, plus qu'à un véritable
plaidoyer ou simple dénonciation.
Ce genre
d'égarements narratifs arrivera à quelques reprises durant cette saison 3 (pas
pour les mêmes raisons) et empêchera alors parfois la bonne tenue de l'histoire
ou en tout cas, lui retirera une certaine forme de spontanéité et de naturel.
Cela dit, ce
retournement de situation qui arrive très vite (dès le 3e épisode donc) va
évidemment bouger les lignes pour la présidente de la République française
incarnée par la magnétique Anna Mouglalis. Amélie Dorendeu veut tout faire pour
éviter de rejouer sa place au suffrage universel. La série s'amuse donc avec
les institutions françaises et essaye de remodeler le paysage politique et
constitutionnel de la France. Les idées sont novatrices, assez étonnantes et faire
de ses propositions politiques des stratégies électorales rend chaque pensée,
vision et conception passionnantes.
Il faut dire que
la série jouit d'un parterre de scénaristes encore plus ancré dans l'histoire
politique française. Outre Eric Benzekri donc (ancien collaborateur de Jean-
Luc Mélenchon ou Julien Dray), on y retrouve Thomas Finkielkraut (fils d'Alain)
ou encore Raphael Chevènement (fils de Jean-Pierre). Pas étonnant donc que la
série réussisse à être aussi précise et vraisemblable sur ce qu'elle dépeint
des institutions et la politique.
INTIME
CONVICTION OU AMBITION ?
Pour
autant, Baron Noir sait que la politique n'est pas uniquement une affaire
d'idées ou de convictions. Auprès du public, des électeurs, la politique et de
facto la figure du politique sont une affaire de magnétisme, de charisme, de
charme ou en tout cas d'image au sens le plus large. À l'heure des réseaux
sociaux, tout se sait et tout a une importance, et la série d'Eric Benzekri le
décrit méticuleusement dans cette saison 3.
Au moment
même où les municipales Parisiennes ont connu un retournement sans précédent
avec l'abandon à la mairie de Paris de Benjamin Griveaux (candidat LREM) suite
à la diffusion d'images sexuelles privées, Baron Noir gagne en crédit grâce à
sa capacité à jouer le destin de ses personnages sur leur image auprès des
citoyens français. Plus qu'une guerre d'idées, la politique s'est
indéniablement transformée en une guerre d'image et d'apparat, et comme la
série le dit : "La présidentielle est devenue une série télévisée".
Le passage
très attendu (et tant recommandé par ses conseillers) de la présidente Dorendeu
dans l'émission fictive Ambition Intime présentée par Karine Le Marchand en est
un exemple frappant, démontrant à quel point la politique prend un tournant
majeur. Un tournant où ce n'est finalement plus les propositions qui convainquent
uniquement, mais aussi l'allure et la forme. De facto, tous les coups sont
permis.
Dans cette
droite lignée voire plus encore, Baron Noir prend les devants sur l'émergence
d'une nouvelle forme de politique avec le personnage passionnant de Christophe
Mercier (incroyable Frédéric Saurel) : un prof de SVT candidat anti-système
pour l'élection au tirage au sort, sorte de mélange entre le Gilet Jaune Jérôme
Rodriguez, le populiste italien Beppe Grillo et le président américain Donald
Trump.
Son arrivée
sur le devant de la scène offre à la fois une vision totalement inédite du
paysage politique français et s'inscrit dans une fiction pas si éloignée de la
réalité. Si Coluche a effrayé la génération Mitterrand - Chirac - Giscard dans
les années 80 avec l'annonce de sa candidature, les politiques actuels
s'inquiètent tout autant d'une candidature dite clown empreinte de poujadisme
anti-système et capable de rameuter un électorat habituellement absentéiste
dans les urnes (on pense évidemment à Remi Gaillard à Montpellier ou les
rumeurs de candidature de l'animateur phare de la télévision Cyril Hanouna à la
présidentielle 2022).
C'est le
moyen de lancer des sujets majeurs sur le fonctionnement actuel du système
politique tout en offrant un récit captivant sur les rouages des élections, des
formations gouvernementales et des débats présidentiels. Les politiques (ou
plutôt politiciens) jouent démesurément avec leurs fonctions, leurs statuts et
leurs pouvoirs pour assurer leurs privilèges plutôt que ceux de leurs
concitoyens. Le retour de bâton pourrait bien les frapper un jour ou l'autre,
plus durement et rapidement qu'ils ne le pensent, et plonger la France dans le
chaos.
EN ORDRE DE
BATAILLE
En poussant
le curseur aussi loin, la série de Eric Benzekri rentre dans un registre
totalement nouveau qui lui donne une véritable ampleur. Alors qu'elle se
présentait avant tout comme un drame dans sa saison 1 puis un thriller
politique dans sa saison 2, la série devient quasiment une dystopie dans cette
saison 3. Dans Baron Noir, la politique est tout simplement en passe de
disparaître et le dégagisme est en marche. Tout pourrait basculer vers un autre
pouvoir en rogne et déterminé : celui du peuple, enfoui et contenu pour le
moment, mais pour encore combien de temps ?
Largement poussée par les mouvements actuels et eux bien
réels, les Gilets Jaunes donc, l'histoire de cette saison 3 ausculte à
merveille les enjeux politiques majeurs qui se dressent devant la France
d'aujourd'hui et de demain. En plus d'être une réfléxion précise sur l'idée de
la politique, mais aussi du politique en lui-même et de l'exemplarité exigée et
bafouée de la fonction, ces dix épisodes portent un regard intelligent sur une
gauche dépassée qui n'arrive pas à retrouver un nouveau souffle, de la montée
des extrêmes ou encore de la fracture quasi-irrémédiable entre les élites et la
masse, et la bascule qui risque de s'opérer prochainement (une baffe comme
catalyseur ?).
Baron Noir
réussit donc très largement son retour après une saison 2 légèrement décevante.
Ultra-ambitieuse, précurseuse et captivante, cette saison 3 offre de
sacrés moments de tensions durant ses huit épisodes, malgré une mise en scène
extrêmement rébarbative (les travelings circulaires, ça fait tourner la tête au
bout d'un moment). D'ailleurs, au-delà de ce manque d'audace visuelle, alors
que la production a eu la chance de tourner au sein même de l'Élysée, on pourra
également reprocher énormément de choix narratifs et rythmiques.
Après tout, cette saison 3 met du temps à lancer le
véritable sujet de son intrigue (presque cinq épisodes). Plus qu'une série sur
Rickwaert, toujours impeccablement interprété par Kad Merad (même si le voir
beugler et sortir des métaphores à toit bout de champ use un peu à la longue)
ou une série sur la politique et ses rouages, Baron Noir est devenue un
portrait de la société française dans cette saison 3. S'attarder énormément sur le destin de Rickwaert
et sa résurrection politique ôte de la profondeur au propos de la série.
Enfin, cette
saison 3 subit des ellipses temporelles bien trop importantes. En huit
épisodes, près de deux années s'écoulent, dont une entière au sein des deux
derniers épisodes. La précipitation de l'écriture gâche souvent la puissance de
certaines situations, d'autant plus au vu du nombre de rebondissements et de
chemins différents que peut prendre chaque personnage en seulement quelques
minutes.
Ainsi, plusieurs
passages et moments clés de l'intrigue n'ont pas le temps de vivre à l'écran et
de faire ressentir une quelconque émotion aux spectateurs. Un choix d'écriture
négligeant que la série essaye de dissimuler parfois en jouant la carte du
romanesque notamment dans son grand final. Malheureusement, l'intention reste très
fabriquée et la conclusion de cette saison 3 est avant tout un cliffhanger/twist
terriblement facile et opportuniste pour éjecter définitivement un de ses
personnages. Reste à voir cependant ce qu'il provoquera au plus profond de
Rickwaert dans la potentielle saison 4.
Les trois
saisons de Baron Noir sont disponibles en intégralité sur Canal + Séries.
