Keep up with the latest in fashion and more with our complimentary weekly Lifestyle Edit newsletter.
Stay ahead of the curve in both fashion and all aspects of lifestyle with our complimentary Lifestyle Edit newsletter delivered weekly.
The mystery surrounding the royals has become even more puzzling tonight due to a publishing mistake in a contentious new book. This mistake has called into question the identification of a supposed pair of “royal racists.”
The Dutch version of Omid Scobie’s book, Endgame, which reveals details about the royal family, was suddenly removed from stores due to its mention of high-ranking royals in a racism controversy related to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
There is increasing speculation that the controversial publishing incident, which revived a contentious dispute that shook the British royal family two years ago, may have been planned as a publicity stunt to increase book sales.
Scobie claims that the identification of the royals, one of whom was mentioned by name and the other referenced indirectly, was merely a case of “translation error” in his harsh criticism of the Windsors.
“I am limited to providing feedback on the English version of Endgame since I only wrote and edited it. This version does not mention the two people involved in the conversation. I am pleased to know that the mistake in the translation of the Dutch edition is being corrected,” he stated.
Some people who specialize in royalty are doubtful if it is feasible to incorrectly translate two names, as copies of a book in the Netherlands seem to reveal the identities of two royals who supposedly had worries about the skin tone of Meghan Markle’s unborn child, Archie.
Former BBC royal correspondent and royal commentator Michael Cole stated on GB News that if the mistake made by the Dutch publishers was unintentional, it is one thing. However, if it was a deliberate ploy to boost book sales, it is a different matter.
Accusing someone of racism is harmful. It is a simple accusation to make, but challenging to disprove because it requires proving a lack of racism. This allegation, whether towards a member of royalty or anyone else, is a destructive one to make.
According to Phil Dampier, a seasoned reporter who covers the royal family, it is difficult to accept that a translation error is to blame for this mistake. The Dutch publisher has not stated that this was the case, so it is puzzling how two names could be mistranslated.
According to Dutch journalist Rick Evers, who had reviewed the translated material, he informed Good Morning Britain host Richard Madeley that he was doubtful the names were mistakenly omitted in the translation, as Scobie had suggested. Evers added that it seemed like something had been intentionally removed from the English version.
“I find it hard to believe that it was simply a translation mistake,” he stated. “Upon review, we noticed that there were certain sections missing in the English version. Specifically, there were five sentences between the first and third sections that were absent in the English version. This suggests that something was accidentally deleted during the editing process for the book.”
According to him, the names were likely present in Scobie’s initial manuscript, but “legal representatives” recommended against including them in the final draft.
The Independent reached out to Scobie’s representatives for a statement.
In their highly publicized 2021 conversation with Oprah Winfrey, Harry and Meghan revealed that there had been discussions about the race of their first child, Archie.
During the months of my pregnancy, there were discussions about how our child may not receive security or a title, as well as concerns about the potential darkness of their skin at birth, according to her statements to Winfrey.
In his book Endgame, Scobie addresses the controversy of racism within the royal family following Meghan’s remarks. He reveals that two individuals from the royal family expressed “concerns” about Archie’s skin color, contrary to the initial belief that only one person was involved.
The author mentions that he knows who they are, but due to laws in the UK, he is unable to disclose their identities.
The source is the independent.co.uk.