Charles And Camilla

[poliphilo]

The heir to the throne marries his long-term lover in a registry office. The ceremony has been pushed back a day to make way for the funeral of the Pope. The population at large is more interested in the outcome of the Grand National horse race.

It's not exactly a hole in the corner job, but it's a far cry from the pomp of the last royal wedding.

We English had our revolution in the mid 1600s. Afterwards we brought the royal family back, but on the understanding that there'd be no more of that Divine Right of Kings nonsense. Monarchs from Charles II through to William IV were servants of their public, not particularly feted, but key elements in a cobbled together Constitution. When they were dull or ridiculous (as some of them were) they got laughed at.

This changed at the end of the 19th century. Britain was now an Empire and needed a glorious figure-head. Traditions and ceremonies were invented to elevate the monarchy and for the next 100 years or so the kings and queens- most of them spectacularly dull as people- were accorded a quasi divine status and respect. It became bad form to laugh at them. This was the golden age. These people had no power to speak of, but they were very ornamental. They couldn't fly, but their tail feathers were gorgeous.

The coronation of Elizabeth II was the high spot. Fittingly, symbolically, it coincided with the "British" conquest of Everest (by a Sherpa and a New Zealander.) Then began the decline. Britain no longer had an Empire and the imperial trappings were looking increasingly irrelevant and silly. Respect and deference seeped away. The media began to treat the royals the way they treated other celebs. Then came the scandal of Charles and Di....

There is lingering respect for the old Queen, there is a feverish excitement surrounding the boy-band glamour of the young princes, but the wedding of Charles and Camilla is a sure sign of the way things are going. We care less and less and, while it's unlikely that we will ever axe the monarchy (once is enough), we are now going to let it fizzle and fade. It will return to what it was before Disraeli reinvented Victoria as Empress of India and maybe, not so very long from now, we'll be seeing the royals riding their bicycles down the Mall.

That is, if we can be bothered to turn our heads and look.

Comments

[arielstarshadow.livejournal.com]

On a silly note, it didn't help that Camilla wore grass on her head. For the record, I didn't watch any of the festivities (I was busy alternating writing with laying in bed), but I kept getting to see the pictures every time I got online.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I missed the grass- how charming!

I didn't watch. I find Charles embarrassing.

[jackiejj.livejournal.com]

I watched--mostly for the Hats.

A CNN American commentator said to a British commentator: "Those women are wearing sticks on their hats!"

She said, "It's the beginning of the season here, and this is what the women are wearing!"

Then he said, "I guess this sounds very American and crass, but do any of these people work for a living?"

She said, laughing lightly, "Oh, yes: Camilla's daughter [Lynn?] is a curator of an art museum [I think she said], and her son [?] is a writer--just wrote a book of cookery. Camilla was a--I guess you would say a 'housewife' when she was married. Of course, she inherited..."

--

I enjoyed seeing the inside of that beautiful chapel, and thinking about the oddness of it all: women with sticks in their hats curtseying as Princess Anne walked by, and all sitting in the place where Henry VIII was buried and Charles I, who got beheaded...

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I find it irritating- all the bowing and curtseying. Why should we give these people respect? And I start having dark thoughts about guillotines.

[idahoswede.livejournal.com]

You may just end up along the lines of the Scandinavian royals, such as they are, with the bikes and flats of their own downtown and there are worse things that could happen, certainly. I thought she was dressed in a very understated style, most appropriate not only for a divorcee who's a little long in the tooth anyway, but considering they've been having it off for the past 35 years, it was very tasteful, unlike the crushed giant meringue that passed for a wedding dress at his first marriage.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I think I could cope with a Scandanavian-style monarchy. I accept the need for a head of state and a modestly-scaled, bicycling monarch might well be preferable to having some over-the-hill politician (Lady Thatcher for instance) installed as titular president.

[idahoswede.livejournal.com]

Of course how sad for the tabloids, but then again, if you had the nobs on bikes but kept the British sense of shock and horror, there would still be lots to talk about. Our crown princess has a commoner boyfriend, it's very obvious they are more than "just friends" and nobody really gives a hoot, except that she might actually MARRY him and we'd have a King Daniel and THAT nobody cares for. But as long as they're just ka-noodling, it's okay.

[ibid.livejournal.com]

In some ways I think we had our revolution too early. It happened before the more egalitarian zeitgeist of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and therefore did very little, people still accepted a monarchical way of doing things. the French revolution was far more influential, partly -I believe - because of the time in which it took place. France is still only just recovering wheras our system has remained basically static since 1700.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Well, I'm a great admirer of the French Revolution, but I think we may have saved ourselves a lot of trouble by getting ours in sooner.

[ibid.livejournal.com]

Although the fact it was so early mean that now we are stuck with a system which might have been revolutionary at the time but is now no longer

[besideserato.livejournal.com]

I just cannot stop marveling at the way you word yourself--your journal is really one of the better reads on my list.

Though I missed the wedding (and don't foresee doing any media perusing on the topic), I am pleased for Camilla and Charles. All I can say is: it's about time!

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Thanks.

If only Charles had been man enough to defy his family and insist on Camilla first time round!

[saskia139.livejournal.com]

Yes, I can't help thinking that so much misery could have been prevented, for so many people, if this wedding had happened thirty-odd years ago. Simply on a personal level, I find myself rather happy for them, and sad for Diana at the same time. On a political level--well, you've got the royals, and we've got Dubya. *makes unhappy face*

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Camilla was apparently involved in selecting and grooming Diana for marriage to Charles. There's a cold-bloodedness about these people that makes it hard to warm to them. Their crimes against common decency have been horrendous.

[saskia139.livejournal.com]

Boy, that *is* unpleasant. I think the simple fact is, dynastic monarchy does *not* match up well with Christian views of monogamy--or even with common decency and ethical behavior.

[besideserato.livejournal.com]

Now that would be news!

[halfmoon-mollie.livejournal.com]

Oh my goodness, NPR has been all over the story. According to them the wedding was attended by a "throng" of well wishers. Civil ceremony first then blessed by the Archbishop of Canterbury (who, to me, has always seemed like a mythical figure, a Very Important Person). I sort of giggled at Camilla taking her vow, all that stuff about keeping only unto him and hearing her say "That is my intention and with the help of God..."

Charles may be embarassing- but you know, everyone deserves to have some happiness. I hope this brings him his. And the unfortunate Camilla, who will forever be compared to the sprightly (and savvy) Diana.

I've never quite figured out exactly *what* the royals do or are to your government. And I've always wondered why Canada ALSO celebrates the Royals when they are an independent country.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

The Archbishop of Canterbury is a funny little Welshman with a beard who writes poetry and talks in riddles.

The Queen is also Queen of Australia, New Zealand and a number of smaller places that used to be part of the Empire. The Australians keep threatening to depose her, but haven't quite got round to it yet.

[airstrip.livejournal.com]

I have an inherent dislike of monarchies. I can understand how the English monarchy was essential in the 17th century, because the world system wouldn't have given proper respect to elected heads of state and the presence of monarchists, but wonder if it could have been done with an elected king of some sort who might rule for life.

Almost like the Pope, who's corpse is more important than the heir to the throne's wedding.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

We nearly got a King Oliver. And after Oliver died we nearly got a Cromwellian dynasty. Fortunately/unfortunately, Richard Cromwell was a retiring chap with no taste for affairs of state. He retired to lead the life of a country gentleman and was heard from no more.