I wouldn’t wish to write a piece to be published here about the British Royal Family and their unending soap-operaesque lives, full of family drama and betrayal which in fact had become a popular TV show that I am yet to have glimpse of.
However, as the rest of the world, we are covered on all fronts, be it social media or so called serious news channels, and in the grip of the reality show “The Royal Highnesses”. The ambiguity of their status is a huge factor: is it a political one, a social one or a celebrity one? In fact, whether they are still a serious institution, or an entertainment piece just shy of the Kardashians is getting more vague by the day. Their at times overwhelming presence had already started to give off vibes of a carefully designed plan to prolong their overdue existence into the 21st century and the latest drama had simply been overdose.
After the Princess Diana controversy/scandal- when the validity of the centuries old institution had been called to question, they had gone through a series of make-overs to present themselves as useful, essential and more in line with the societal expectations. Princess Diana did inadvertently damage the royal family; not because of the infamous interview or her so-called minor deviations from tradition. She did so, by being unapologetically herself – caring, kind and in touch with the British people. The expectations from the Royal Family shifted dramatically. It was in her nature and if there were any fault, that would be on Prince Charles, his calculations of taking a wife, young and inexperienced, so that she would do “as told” and be quiet and industrious while he lived “in the pants of Camilla”-his words- were way off mark. She was dutiful, she was quiet, she followed the rules but she had such a natural and effortless presence, it was impossible for her not to shine, and she was way too sensitive to overlook her husband’s ungentlemanly behaviours.
Regardless, after her death, the royals cut their deal with the press to have a positive perception in exchange for front row seats in their major life events. This enabled them to be presented as dutiful, as the public expected, but with a cost: The details of their life became public material. It was not altogether bad during first decade of the new century but the boat had started to rock when an ill-willed B-grade actress aspired to become Royal and had secured the affections of Prince Harry, the child whom the world had watched walking behind his mother’s coffin, small, devastated and angry, many years ago. Having grown up without a mother presumably left a mark on him to be more vulnerable to such insincere advances. The wife though, after marriage, and a respectable amount of time, decided that leaving the duties but preserving the privileges would be much more sensible and effortless. It was when she couldn’t get that privilege though and lost her “Royal Highness” style along with financial support as the price for her freedom, she exploited every possible PR outlet to achieve her aims in the form of coercion against the family.
Things got ugly. They made their personal vendetta against their family public, willingly, on the infamous US TV show, and the world watched Prince Harry and the aspiring actress turned royal whine about the cruelty of the media, to the MEDIA herself.
Baseless accusations such as racism- a very hot topic in US now, such coincidence!- were directed against their own blood relative family- the subjects of which in UK and the Commonwealth include people from all colours, races and religions. They even went as far (or rather descended) as to complain about the staff and that resurfaced the hushed-up past complaints of the ever changing staff that had attended them, about the wife’s haughty and entitled plebeian behaviour enabled and defended by the husband.
The world watched as Prince Harry, inarguably a very wealthy man and never done a day’s work in his life then, and his unemployed ex-actress wife complain that their son was not given a title and they didn’t have any financial support for security, a.k.a. British taxpayer’s money, to enable their extravagant lifestyle in the US.
It was tragically funny, insensitive, ignorant and disrespectful that it has written itself as a disgraceful moment in the family’s centuries old history.
One of the complaints had stuck in my mind. The future Queen, Prince William’s wife Duchess of Cambridge Kate’s status had been quite seamlessly lowered by some carefully chosen words (SHE made ME cry, she came and apologised to ME etc.) as if a former revenge was taken by Duchess of Sussex Meghan- Prince Harry’s wife-, knowing Kate wasn’t going to be able to clear herself from the dirt she was thrown at. The original story the press covered was that Meghan had made Kate cry before the wedding and Meghan’s claim was that the family had not protected her and allowed the press to tell the story as she was in fault rather than Kate. The facts remain unknown except for the parties involved, but it was that moment where it was clear for everyone, that Prince Harry’s wife had no clue about the British Royal Family and how it functions. Here is my opinion about how it functions, and I’m not remotely related to them or were interested in them- until now.
The British royal family, pretty much like its counterparts is unequivocally a dysfunctional family. It is not a novelty, the world is full of such families. However, their particular situation stems from their inescapable destiny, and being a family institution having a common work to do together, while any error on their part is being carefully observed and used against them. In that regard, they are not at all different from a family with the bakery business living in a small village back in the day, or more contemporarily, let’s say, a mafia family! The famous example would be the family Corleone’s in the movie “the Godfather”.
The rules of this sort of a family are pretty much similar in effect:
- Protect the head of the family no matter what. ( the Godfather/the Queen. )
- Have a care for the hierarchy, eldest and male dominate. (Because men could have operated more easily unburdened by child care and had a more powerful image) , though the times are changing, albeit slowly.
- Protect the line of people to replace the Head. Hierarchy is based on this order – and their spouses, because it reflects on them- (Prince Charles, Prince William, Camilla, Kate, William’s children…)
- Stick to each other to survive. Betrayal = Abandonment. (Fredo/historical examples, i.e. Queen Mary of Scots)
- Blood relations rule, because outsiders cannot be trusted. Males have a chance to prove themselves useful and have an important role. ( Tom Hagen/Prince Phillip)
- Female outsiders don’t have much of a chance to outshine their husbands- Princess Diana being an exception.
- Outsiders can leave, at their own will, but the children stays in the family and can’t get out (Kay & Mary+Anthony/Princess Diana & William+Harry)
- Reputation & credibility is everything.
The family did not protect/interfere with the incident involving Meghan, simply because she is much less relevant to the throne and perception of the family business than the Queen, Charles, William, Harry, Kate/Camilla- in that or similar order. Who is right does not matter, the optics do, and remaining silent would have saved the optics. The chances of soft spoken Kate Middleton making the fierce actress cry would be far reach anyway and several witnesses beg to disagree- just to clear the air.
I got curious. The recommendation engine immediately sensed that, and brought up the engagement interview. Apart from the hand held hostage situation and the obvious indicators of Stockholm Syndrome in Prince Harry’s looks and answers, visible to everyone but himself, one excerpt of the conversation bewildered me. Where Meghan- soon to be wife of Prince Harry, and a high ranking member of the British Royal Family- talked about her surprise how the Queen of UK and the Commonwealth Realms and one of the most powerful people on Earth did not turn out to be like her sweet old granny. How she wanted to bond with her and take care of her like her own feeble grandmother, but instead she had to curtsey her upon their first meeting. Just to provide perspective, her namesake predecessor some couple of centuries ago, upon hearing such nonsense would have uttered “Off with her head” and she would be dead in a ditch, well, off with her head. Even though the Queen does not have the same role and status in the 21st century, she is still seen as a representation of the country’s past and as a unifying force amid turbulences that had marked the 20th century. She still has some power and the variety of some of her engagements have changed, enabling her to distribute them to the family members.
All in all, after watching the interview I did not know whether to laugh or cry at the amount of ignorance and presumption the Duchess possessed, and her indifference towards monarchy, considering she was about to be a subject of the Queen as well as take over an important role and one wonders where her baseless confidence stemmed from: keeping her ordinary unprivileged upbringing in mind, her imagination at best. Still, it would have been forgivable and understandable for anyone, and especially for people brought up outside of Asia , Europe and UK, centuries old institutions such as these might seem far away, irrelevant and ancient history, but the person about to take on Royal duties, along with a title should have known much better. I’m not either a supporter or an opponent as to whether the monarchy in UK should be kept, or kept as it is but in any case, it is up to the British public to decide. Until then, that’s how the cookie crumbles.
Finishing Thoughts
A couple of remarks make me uncomfortable about the latest events. One is the constant referral to the “emasculation of Prince Harry”. The term itself is sexist and the lack of female version is a direct indicator of discrimination. Yes, the wife rules, there’s no question about that and Prince Harry is being used and abused for her personal gains, completely casting a shadow over this right to exist and speak his mind- but- if the tables have turned, we wouldn’t be talking about such a concept and maybe just say “ Poor Princess Harriet, she’s being used by that awful man and she doesn’t even understand it.”
The second is very similar. Upon Prince Phillip’s passing away, everyone was commenting how the Queen was relying on Prince Phillip on every front and whether she will be able to continue her duties. Wasn’t it hard for late Prince Phillip to walk one step behind his wife, such sense of duty and sacrifice. The answer is 1. No, it won’t be, and 2. It shouldn’t have been. Or as hard as any queen that had to walk behind her husband the king for centuries, or the way it is not going to be hard for Camilla or Kate to do so. The introverted Queen has lived nearly for a century and were raised as ruler. Thanks to her, Prince Phillip had enjoyed a life of privilege – that he had lost many years ago when he was a child- and is simply lucky that she had chosen him to walk behind her all her life, even though he was not British by birth nor did he have (presumably) much of a prospect of his own.
If the royal family will upgrade their image and move into the next century, let it be about the gender equality and let it start at home.
Be First to Comment