In an age of trolling and public shame-fests, it is as if you alone walk through the fires of social media unscathed. Even Mumsnet, the last bastion of purse-lipped matronly disapproval thinks you are (whisper it) pretty cool.
So much so, I'm reminded of Rowan Atkinson's comedy classic Blackadder; Miranda Richardson's Queenie wide-eyed and swooning at oversexed adventurer Lord Flashheart, who upon turning up to be best man at Edmund Blackadder's wedding, shouts "Woof" at the giggling courtiers and then swaggers off with the bride. Yet still the ladies love him and all the chaps want to be him.
It's a pastiche of course, but our humane response to Harry's heart-on-his-sleeve honesty and towsled self-confidence highlights an uncomfortable truth - our loyalty is no longer to the title but to the personality.
In an era when all authority is questioned, the Queen's popularity outstrips that of any elected politician because, aged 91, she has dedicated her life to public service and the nation's gratitude is unwavering. All but the most stubbornly intractable anti-monarchists would agree on that.
But a new monarch would mark a pivotal turning point. Britain's republican movement, Republic has already declared its intention to campaign for a referendum on the future of our royals. Given the contrarian mood that has gripped electorates from Gower to Wisconsin, the result is by no means a done deal, especially if the republican-inclined young are persuaded to take part.
Charles has a difficult relationship with just about everyone apart from his sainted wife, Camilla. Rightly or wrongly, most people have garnered the impression he is eccentric, crochety and fritters his days either writing spidery letters to government ministers or muttering to his house plants.
Is that a fair assessment of someone who founded The Prince's Trust, which provides invaluable opportunities to disadvantaged young people and a man who has tirelessly campaigned on environmental issues, championed organic farming and spoken out on the role of architecture in society?
No, it's not. But then, others could reply, is it fair that some people are born into gilded lives of hereditary privilege and wealth? Touche.
Prince Harry clearly overlooked his father (plus ca change) when he told the US Magazine Newsweek: "Is there any one of the Royal Family who wants to be king or queen? I don't think so, but we will carry out our duties at the right time."
That's how it should be on a personal level, but when you are part of any firm, especially The Firm, speaking at liberty like this is a risky business; it's why press secretaries were invented.
The effect of such openness could be an eroding public respect, regardless of the legitimacy of the remarks.
And respect, along with a certain awe, is what the monarchy rests on. The Queen, as Head of State, does not govern, she exercises a soft power and a global reach that cannot be so easily replicated.
It is clear that heart throb Harry and dad-dancer William are modern young men. When William hugged a bereaved wife from the Grenfell Tower disaster he felt unencumbered by protocol. Harry's people skills are legion.
But the more informal their behaviour, the harder it will be to shore up the image of the monarchy as an immutable, time-honoured institution, part of yet set apart from everyday life.
There is no harm in letting a little daylight in upon magic, but the full glare of the sun will fade the furnishings and undermine their uniqueness.
