It was as long ago as February 2018 that I had a bit of a rant about Princess Meghan - here`s the link to that post - https://snoppersays.blogspot.com/search?q=The+Brothers+Grimm. (Click on the link and scroll down to the second post that appears after this one.)

 That post was called `Not Quite Right` and I ended up by suggesting that, for all the usual hullabaloo that surrounds the royal family, there was `something not quite right` about the Meghan and Harry thing.   It was no more than a suspicion at the time, but here we are nearly a year and a half on and, if anything, my suspicions have been confirmed by the extraordinary news that Meggy is the guest editor of `Vogue` magazine and has produced a list of sixteen women whom she admires the most in today`s world.

Now I have vaguely heard of Vogue magazine but I confess that I have never even glanced at it and it has almost completely passed me by.  Not sure I`ve missed much as it seems to be a magazine devoted to high fashion, a dedicated follower of which I have never been and am not likely to become.   I guess it  has a limited audience, mainly among those who dwell in the rarefied atmosphere of haute couture and perhaps those who may be more than a little removed from the real world.  So maybe it`s not surprising that Meghan`s 16 worthies are largely unheard of, not to say irrelevant, to the rest of us.

So who are these `women?   Well, to be fair I have actually heard of two or three of them - Jane Fonda; actress, political activist,  model and fitness guru, still going strong at 81.  Then there is sixteen year old Swedish `climate change activist` Greta Thunberg who is responsible for sparking the school strikes across 112 countries to ram home the climate change mantra.  She has also addressed MPs in Parliament and is nominated for a Nobel Prize this year.   (I think that when I was 16 I was having a real good time, enjoying life and revelling in new experiences and I hate to think of the trouble I would have been in had I started school strikes and had the youthful arrogance  to make a global nuisance of myself.)     The third of the`women`I have heard of is one truly to admire - Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of that thoroughly admirable country New Zealand..  

As for the rest of them, there is a 19 year old who has risen from being a child refugee to a supermodel;  a rising star wanting to end racial prejudice; a DJ who is at war with fat shaming; a writer fighting gender injustice; another model who is also a mental health campaigner; a star of the royal ballet; a Somali who boxed to beat bullies; a catwalk legend caring for mothers; an apparent film star with a social conscience; someone who made fashion `more exclusive;` another actress who is an LGBT activist and a US sitcom actress  intent on encouraging voter turnout.

Now of course that panoply of worthiness is the kind that can only be found in the world which Meghan and her cronies inhabit and know about - all very vague which seems all very `Vogue.`  But if anything, it all confirms to me that almost anything connected with Megs somehow isn`t quite right.  

I wonder how long it will last.

.....but I`m not sure what it is.   It might be that, for the very first time, I find myself at least partly in agreement with Ann Widdecombe with whom, over the years, I have taken issue over such items as her MPs` expenses and her cringe inducing appearances in those bastions of civilised culture that are Strictly Come Dancing, Celebrity Big Brother and assorted pantomimes.

However, during a recent interview, she said she was `worried` about Meghan Markle, suggesting that the foreign, mixed race, divorced catholic who is allegedly brightening up our lives with her impending marriage to Prince Harry, is `trouble`due to her `background and attitude.`  Moreover, La Widdecombe has now questioned the wisdom of fast tracking Ms. Markle from Catholicism into the Church of England in order to overcome a matrimonial obstacle.

Ms. Widdecombe goes on, saying "Hang on a second, Archbishop of Canterbury - was Ms. Markle already planning to avail herself of these sacraments because she had been converted to such beliefs, or is this just a matter of form now that she is marrying a royal?  Surely that is a question that matters."   Writing in the Catholic Herald, she continues, "Had the Church taken into account the previous marriage and divorce?  But that just pales into insignificance beside the question of baptism and confirmation, both of which sacraments require commitment and belief.  Where is the evidence Miss Markle would have adopted such procedures had she not been about to marry a prince of the realm....a wedding is holy matrimony, not just a gigantic fancy dress parade."

So there we have it.  Now, it seems reasonable to ask the question as to why and how the sudden change from the Brothers Grimm to Hans Christian Anderson has occurred so quickly, so nice one Ann Widdecombe.   But today I see there is more Markle news.   She is reported to have secretly been `comforting` the survivors of the Grenfell fire disaster, which I am sure is indeed a great comfort to them.  But I wonder if, once again, yet another delicious irony has been overlooked as she dispenses her comfort dressed in a £1995 coat over a pair of £290 trousers.

Something is not quite right somewhere in all of this.