Therefore, Meghan Markle is so hated by the audience

One of Duchess Meghan Markle’s favorite jobs is to arrange the guest room on her land. Then she manufactures her own bath salt for her friends – with the secret ingredients Arnika oil, lavender and pink Himalayal salt – and complements with home -grown flowers to the bedside table, as well as packing peanut butter and truffle flavored popcorn in cellophane bags.

All this is presented during the first eight minutes of Markle’s new Netflix series « With Love, Meghan ». And so it continues, with one do-it-yourself tip after another, chores for a lifestyle that assumes that you have inexhaustible with time, and enough to sprinkle on every furniture surface.

The criticism of the series, and against Meghan Markle in particular, has not been waiting. On the film and TV site Internet Movie Database, the average rating has 2.7 out of 10.

DN’s Catia Hultquist called it « So boring and banal that it becomes entertaining, » while Aftonbladet’s Karolina Fjellborg summarized it Like « hopelessly dated, self-satisfied in a completely uneronic way, acute tone, and so sad that the Rolex watches stop. »

So the story of Meghan Markle has come to sound more and more.

At first looked different. When she married in the British royal house in May 2018, she arrived as a modern myth, an American actress with Hollywood gloss who cleared up in a dusty old monarchy. A janker at King Arthur’s court.

At the wedding, a passionate black bishop from Chicago held a 15 -minute sermon about the power of love in front of a gallery blue -blooded royal descendants with inherited rigid upper lips.

The television audience cheered on the healthy crossroads of feminism and diversity in Buckingham Palace’s corridors. The cultural clash and the upset of the conservative media seemed to only fertilize the couple’s popularity.

The special thing with Meghan Markle is that she generates strong feelings no matter what camp you belong to. This is stated by Sebastian Mattsson, reporter at Svensk Damtidning.

– If you are a royalist and traditionalist, you bother with her because she has from the beginning refused to compare with the royal label, or because it may seem like she wants to cope with herself rather than joining herself in the expected role as a violin to her prince.

But the criticism that has arisen against her lately, mainly because of her Netflix program, is largely not at all from the royal drugs, he says.

-It is directed from people who think that she only seems to be a world-wise, hyper-commercialized Beverly Hills wife who is obsessed with attention.

And so we have her impact on Prince Harry.

Long was he known as the black sheep of the royal family, or at least a gray -meed one; A messy guy who ate psychedelic fungi, went to a party in Nazi uniform, fought with paparazzi photographers and partyed naked in Las Vegas.

But after the meeting with Markle he got a Woke makeoversuddenly went on a pedicure, appeared barefoot at a billionaire meeting and talked about climate change.

The couple also announced that they planned to obtain « max two children » so as not to keep the planet’s resources.

Somewhere where the criticism began to be enhance.

– Maybe you can see her as a kind of royal Yoko Ono, who may be blamed for Harry’s break with the family.

I absolutely believe that she is judged according to other standards than, for example, Kate Middleton, who in itself was also mocked for her middle -class background

That’s what Aftonbladets says cultural writer Anna Andersson, as in a chronicle If Markle’s lifestyle series draws parallels to Marie Antoinette in Trianon, the little lust castle where the French queen used to play herd.

Andersson believes that if the responsibility for Harry’s distancing from her family is placed solely on Markle, that everything is about how she radicalized and Americanized him, then you do not have to think about the role of the other royal family in the whole.

For example, the claims that they should have been concerned about how dark complexion the couple’s children would get.

– I definitely think that she is judged according to other standards than, for example, Kate Middleton, who in itself has also been mocked for her middle -class background – maybe it is as simple as being always a little more careful with the throne follower and his family.

In any case, Meghan Markle’s brand trip went quickly.

It started to be called That she was a whimsical PR-Primadonna, a self-proclaimed martyr in exile with Netflix contracts and autobiographical gossip. A person who required intact privacy at the same time as her newly formed media company pumped out self -glorifying stories from a pipeline of magnificence. A person who gave up royal duties but at the same time enjoyed its status and privileges.

Anna Andersson believes that what provokes many is the feeling that Markle wants to both eat the cake and have it left; Both have attention and left in peace.

– Together with her husband, they have been very clear about how hard and stressful it has been with all the media coverage – and I absolutely believe them. But why does she do a series for Netflix, and also with a personal grant? Like « is itself » in front of the camera – but honestly does not appear to be particularly genuine.

The more media performances The harder the criticism has been formulated. The theatrical interview with Oprah Winfrey became a water divider, in the reviews of its own Netflix documentary « Harry & Meghan » they were called « The world’s tum been pair », while the podcast contract with Spotify caused one of the company’s managers to Open cold Duke couple for « fraudsters ».

And now: « With Love, Meghan ». With Slow Motion Cut Pictures on Coffee Beans, and a protagonist who cooks all the food in crispy strengthened white shirts and says « it’s not perfect, but it doesn’t have to be », while the camera shows a vegetable dish with sugar peas served freely in the ski (« they are like green beads »).

Despite trying to hip -safe program through comedian Mindy Kaling’s participation, the saws, as I said, have been about the deaf -deaf speech, something that Markle is often accused of.

Which is a bit ironic, since she so often made statements about social issues and mental ill health (in the Winfrey interview she tells about her suicidal thoughts, but must have been banned by the court to seek psychiatric help).

They have said both once and twice what they think of Harry’s family

It may be difficult Feeling empathy with people who are certainly exposed to racism and murder threats, but has unique resources to deal with it-bodyguard protection, retrospective interviews with the greatest celebrity of the TV world, revealing million-selling autobiographies.

They are neither insured nor fight for financial survival, but viewers are required sympathy for their situation. The couple wants to be human with their vulnerability, but their conditions are not generally valid. Rather, the risk is that, again, they appear to be reality.

Anna Andersson believes that both Meghan and Harry have seemed a little too cheerful to be two wealthy people living in a Mansion Under California’s sun.

– They have said both once and twice what they think of Harry’s family, why not just withdraw and devote themselves to what they think is fun and/or important?

But even when Markle does things that can be considered important, in community -supporting efforts, her philanthropy appears as naive; In the worst case, stupid.

Like when she In 2018, a British charity helped to make food packages for homeless sex workers. Then the Duchess wrote « Inspirational message » on the bananas: « Dream big dreams », « You are loved ».

Sebastian Mattsson believes that many are critical of Meghan Markle just because they would have wished for more of her potential as progressive power.

It started so well, as when she was a guest editor for Vogue but chose not to put herself on the cover but instead let it be adorned by inspirational women: Greta Thunberg, Trans activist Laverne Cox and the black photo model Adut Akech.

– Initially, Markle was a rather effective symbol of some kind of progressiveness. This could be seen immediately after the Oprah Winfrey interview, when she acted whistleblower about racism in the British monarchy. But since then, hers and Harry’s activism have become quite middle -milky and toothless. Meghan did not become as radical as some might have hoped.

Recently announced that « With Love, Meghan », after all, gets a second season on Netflix.

Sebastian Mattsson believes that Harry and Meghan misjudged how the audience would react to their self -production – the calculation certainly included that the Royalist audience would have the programs regardless, he says, but that the couple is probably surprised that the criticism comes just as strongly from other, in their eyes more enlightened.

– This is perhaps the first time they realize that their revolt against the crown is beginning to be considered a little passé, that they may be considered two privileged, sad celebrities in the crowd. I have a hard time seeing that Meghan’s program will be a long runner. I think Netflix is ​​rather starting to regret that they threw money on the couple when they were hottest.

Read more:

Catia Hultquist: « With Love, Meghan » is so boring and banal that it gets entertaining