![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Monarchy
Prince Harry comes out of a night club. The paparazzi mob him. He lunges at one and cuts the man's lip. Pictures are published showing a red-faced prince being restrained by his bodyguards. Oh dear!
He is driven away with his head buried in his hands.
The British monarchy has had its good times and its bad times. This is one of the worst. Ever since the death of Princess Di the family has been under close and hostile scrutiny.
This very bad patch follows a very good patch. From about 1890 to 1970 the royals were a national asset. Though practically powerless they embodied the national myth. Their strength as symbols depended upon the rest of us knowing very little about them as people. And this depended upon the media keeping us ill-informed or- in other words- failing to do its job.
When I was a kid the Queen was a woman in fancy dress with a porcelain complexion who appeared on biscuit tins. She was only marginally more real than the tooth fairy. The adults around me talked of her as if she and Jesus were closely related.
And now the media intrudes and the Royals are hunted like foxes. The Queen is a sour faced old lady with an inexplicable taste in hats. She has managed to preserve a little of her aloofness, but the rest of her family have been pitilessly exposed as dim, sulky, arrogant and out of touch. Charles is widely despised and hated for the way he treated his wife. Even those who don’t hate him think he’s a bit of a clown.
They’ve been told they must change- preferably by going down the Scandinavian route and exchanging the coaches and limousines for bicycles and bus passes. But they don’t and they won’t. There’s no very strong public appetite for getting rid of them, so the show seems set to limp on and on.
More yobbishness outside night-clubs, more tabloid exposes, more butlers’ tales.
More low-grade entertainment.
Who does it serve and what’s the point?
He is driven away with his head buried in his hands.
The British monarchy has had its good times and its bad times. This is one of the worst. Ever since the death of Princess Di the family has been under close and hostile scrutiny.
This very bad patch follows a very good patch. From about 1890 to 1970 the royals were a national asset. Though practically powerless they embodied the national myth. Their strength as symbols depended upon the rest of us knowing very little about them as people. And this depended upon the media keeping us ill-informed or- in other words- failing to do its job.
When I was a kid the Queen was a woman in fancy dress with a porcelain complexion who appeared on biscuit tins. She was only marginally more real than the tooth fairy. The adults around me talked of her as if she and Jesus were closely related.
And now the media intrudes and the Royals are hunted like foxes. The Queen is a sour faced old lady with an inexplicable taste in hats. She has managed to preserve a little of her aloofness, but the rest of her family have been pitilessly exposed as dim, sulky, arrogant and out of touch. Charles is widely despised and hated for the way he treated his wife. Even those who don’t hate him think he’s a bit of a clown.
They’ve been told they must change- preferably by going down the Scandinavian route and exchanging the coaches and limousines for bicycles and bus passes. But they don’t and they won’t. There’s no very strong public appetite for getting rid of them, so the show seems set to limp on and on.
More yobbishness outside night-clubs, more tabloid exposes, more butlers’ tales.
More low-grade entertainment.
Who does it serve and what’s the point?
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
And she was a star. I didn't like her style much, but she had the ability to razzle-dazzle a crowd- an ability that wasn't passed down to her daughter.
For one thing she knew how to smile.
Gosh, it's not that difficult- but the present Queen has been in the job for over fifty years and she still hasn't mastered it.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Charles insisted on initiating his sons into blood sports in spite of the opposition of their mother and the revulsion of the majority of British people.
no subject
no subject
But I understand he does a classy line in full-butter cookies.
I've lived with Charles all my life. He's a year or two older than me- so his life has paralleled mine, always lollopping a step or two ahead. There are times when I've felt sorry for him and times when I've admired him and times when I've hated him almost as much as you do.
Now I wish he'd just go away.
no subject
I remember when I was in Stockholm I was out clubbing with my ex-fiance when suddenly a girl about our age burst forth from a bar, fell flat on her face in the street before us and then vomited all over the sidewalk.
I was somewhat intoxicated and could not refrain from a very American exclamation of, "Ew! Oh my god! That is so disgusting! You almost got my shoe--yuck!" Magnus stood in place stunned as the girl looked up from the puddle. Slowly, he made some kind of an awkward bow and just then a mob of people rushed out of the establishment and took the girl away into a car.
"Do you know her?" I asked him.
"That was Princess Madeline." He replied.
And I was like, "whoops."
Of the two princess, Madeline is far the wilder. Victoria is considered a total bore and Prince Carl Philip is really without much merit other than a somewhat comely, if a little lost countenance.
I recall at one point there was a huge scandal about the inappropriate manner in which Queen Silvia always dressed. At one point, the fact that she bore her midrift made national headlines--outrageous! Not to mention the time king Gustaf mispelled his own name!
Royals always have something of a reputation no matter where you go!
no subject
The latest gossip about Harry (apart from the nighclub fracas) is that he was "helped" to pass his exams. A teacher is suing Eton for unfair dismissal and it came out in the wash that she had written most of Harry's course-work for him.
Monarchy only works when it keeps at a distance. There has to be magic- even though it's only conjuring tricks. Once we find out about the cheating at exams and the falling over drunk in the street the game's up.
Monarchy is incompatible with the modern media.
no subject
It's been asserted by this book's author that all teachers "revise" pupils' coursework. Blame league tables, coursework assessment instead of exams, and the fact that apparently you need an A-level even to get into Army school these days (though history of art will do). I think Harry is not so much a cheat, as the victim of a blackmailing bitch who's in cahoots with Max Clifford.
no subject
no subject
Beautifully said.
When a child, I went with my mother to see the movie of Elizabeth's recent coronation, and I thought she was so beautiful, and that the coronation was like being at church. It certainly made our noisy conventions and boring inauguration ceremonies seem shabby by comparison.
I wonder if the monarchy will last much longer? As you say, no one seems to be pushing hard to end it. But I understand that J.K. Rowling now has more money than the Queen.
My [uniformed and ignorant] guess is that the monarchy probably won't last another 100 years. But, then, neither may the Presidency.
no subject
I don't think they'll last a hundred years, but you never can tell. All it needs is a charismatic monarch to step into the breach and the institution will be safeguarded for several more generations. The monarchy was at a very low ebb (probably lower than it is today) at the beginning of the 19th century. George IV was hated and despised, William IV was a nonentity- and then along came Queen Victoria!
no subject
No, wait. Look what happened to Machiavelli.
no subject
Was it very horrid?
no subject
no subject
If Harry is now fair game for the red tops, then sauce for the goose, I reckon. Go Harry go! He'll never avenge his mother's death but I wish him joy in trying.
no subject
I don't see the paparazzi (frightful as they are) as guilty of Harry's mother's death. I think it was probably just an accident (though I have been known to toy with the idea that Charles dunnit.)
no subject
As for Charles, I haven't trusted him since the Barbara Walters(?) interview he did with Diana before their wedding. Walters asked him "Are you in love?" and he replied, "What is love?" I was all of seventeen or so, and had bought into the "fairy tale wedding" gloss with all my romantic soul, but in that moment I knew the marriage was not a good idea. And I always thought he was a cad and a coward for not either being ruthlessly honest (preferrably with Diana before they got in front of the cameras together) or a more gallant gentleman.
no subject
William may be the last hope of the monarchy. But he could be middle-aged or even elderly before he comes to the throne. What is needed is a complete overhaul of the system now.
no subject
no subject
I'm not altogether joking- and neither, I think, was GKC.
no subject