While I have corrected agreed factual errors, I have not been inhibited from writing what I felt to be the truth about The Prince of Wales.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
The moment seemed right to me for a full and, if possible, authoritative portrait of the life and character of the Prince of Wales.
I was wrong to exaggerate in statements related to my experiences in the White House and the Royal Family. I am truly sorry for misleading people and misstating the facts.
Personally, speaking as a historian and a storyteller, when it comes to inaccuracy in historical fictioneering, I follow the Shakespeare principle: I'm willing to overlook gobs of mistaken detail if the poetic valence is basically correct.
I think novels are profoundly autobiographical. If writers deny that, they are lying. Or if it's really true, then I think it's a mistake.
I had no expectation that the Prince would offer me the unprecedented and unfettered access to the original and entirely untapped sources on which this biography is based.
A compelling story, even if factually inaccurate, can be more emotionally compelling than a dry recitation of the truth.
I am fascinated by the Royal Family because they are shrouded in mystique, and the Queen, and to a certain extent William, represent fabulous blank canvases. I find the Prince of Wales less fascinating because he spills the beans and we know too much about him.
William Shakespeare was a brilliant writer and he only wrote the truth. So, if I don't believe it, I have to work really hard to see what that truth is so that I do; that's the only way I can make it believable for the audience.
Prince Charles is an absolute Mountbatten. The real intelligence in the royal family comes through my parents to Prince Philip and the children.
I've made some great mistakes in my life, but, you know, they were honest mistakes.
No opposing quotes found.