Off with its head

April 10th, 2007

When does an institution become more trouble than it’s worth? And when can you cut the head off of a body in order to save the rest of the body?

We just watched The Queen – the Oscar Award (Best Actress) winning movie about Queen Elizabeth II’s reaction and non-response to the death of Princess Diana. It’s really quite entertaining, if you’re into any aspect of anglophilic nature or British history.

One of the topics touched upon in the movie is the growing hostility towards the Crown. Simply put, it’s an outdated institution that costs the nation millions of dollars each year and gives nearly nothing but drama in return. It’s a position of privilege gained by nothing more than birthright. It’s a source of anti-nationalist views, obviously, and many wish it would just go away.

And usually, I would be with them. The constitutional monarchy model – which takes away complete control from the monarchy but still gives them a slight, puppet-head decision in governmental procedure – doesn’t really make sense in today’s democratic world. I should be against the monarchy. Throw them out on the street. Tell them to get a job. Stop feeding them so much money and letting them live in the lap of luxury.

But I can’t do that. Because I’m so in love with the history – the idea that these people are somehow descended from the monarchial greats – I can’t do much more than forgive the extravagance that has led to the monarchy being overpaid and under worked.

In The Queen, both sides are shown through Tony Blair’s character – a reform P.M. that, by the end of the movie, really feels a certain soft spot for Liz the Second. There’s a need to get rid of the monarchy, yes. But what would England lose?

For those of us on this side of the pond, we equate the royalty with England. And many on the home front probably feel the same way. It’s more than just a fictitiously slanted head of state – it’s part of the identity of England. It’s a huge part of its history, of its sensibility and of its allure. It’s the movie star effect – worthless in act but brilliant in action.

I don’t have the same perspective as most would have. I am watching all of this from afar, and for all I know there isn’t as much uproar to displace the Royal Family. I’m sure Tony from Other Men’s Flowers would have a much better view on the entire process.

But as someone who fell in love with country, who finds a great allure in knowing the current Queen, granddaughter of Victoria, is in some way directly connected to the Henrys, the Williams, Elizabeth I and all of the rest of the great names in English extravagance, I’d hate to see the monarchy go.

I hate the monarchy almost as much as I love it. And I think that’s a pretty common opinion to have.

It wouldn’t be so hard if they’d just do something to warrant sticking around.

—-

For an interesting take on putting the monarchy out on the street, read Sue Townsend’s The Queen and I – a book about the royal family living in dire straits after being thrown out of Buckingham Palace. It’s wickedly funny and, actually, kind of sad at times.


Issues Considered: Movies, Travel

7 Responses to “Off with its head”

  1. Tony says:

    Corey, you seem to be suggesting that I ought to contribute something on this, but at the moment I am feeling rather jaded and not up to composing an essay on the Future of the Monarchy.
    For what its worth, my own feeling, which I think is shared by a very high proportion of my compatriots, is that it would be unthinkable—and fairly pointless—to get rid of the Queen, God bless her and all who sail in her, but that when she goes the thought of Charles with his dotty ideas becoming king is very depressing.
    It’ll be sad for those North Americans who like the idea of the monarchy, but then will be a convenient time for us to to get rid of him and the rest of the appalling Windsors.
    Not, I hasten to add, with violence. Being robbed of some their unimaginable privileges will be hard for them to bear; I mean, having no-one to put toothpaste on his brush will be a cruel fate for Charles.

  2. I knew I could depend on you to give a little perspective from the right side of the Atlantic.

    I’ve heard that quite often, actually — let the Queen die off and let Charles sink the monarchy on his own. And I believe he’d be the man to do it. If Charles ascends, will there ever have been a less qualified “ruler?” Maybe Baby Ed 5?

  3. Tony says:

    A quick glance at the history of our monarchy will show that many of our sovereigns were totally unqualified to rule anybody: for a thousand years we have been accustomed to kings and queens who were mad, dissolute, evil, or just evil. Among that lot Charlie doesn’t really look all that bad, just arrogant and wet. But we don’t want him.

  4. Tony says:

    P.S. I meant to say “or simply stupid”. But anyway, you get the idea.

  5. kv says:

    I wonder if Charles likes to have water run over his toothbrush before the toothpaste is applied, or after the toothpaste is applied. Perhaps he doesn’t like any water on his toothbrush? HMMMM….

  6. Well, regardless of how successful the rulers are, they make for great movies. And for those of us over here, that’s all we care about. :)

  7. eric says:

    you know, it’s not really fair that she got an oscar for playing herself. they probably should have given it to someone else,knowing that fact.

Leave a Reply