The Crown

 

The Crown

 Big decision; with the arrival of the last series of the above, on Netflix, I decided to Start Again and go back to the beginning of this highly popular series, some of which I hadn’t seen anyway. I had certainly forgotten how excellent was the casting and acting; exemplary both. Beautiful costumes, gorgeous sets, timeless pageantry, a stellar cast, salacious stories, all made the earlier seasons of Netflix's The Crown appealing.[I am currently on Series 3.] I particularly like the mixture of royal personal drama and real life world events, and the principal idea of one set of actors to depict one decade or so of the monarch's life, does work well especially when on can stop oneself from comparing the actors in different series.

Claire Foy, the younger Elizabeth and 
Olivia Colman, the older Queen.

Is Helena Bonham-Carter a better Princess Margaret than ? Also, with no expertise in my spectator eyes and judgement, I had to banish queries/comments such as, “Surely ‘playing’ the Duke of Windsor is a bit of a waste of the talents of our leading actor, Derek Jacobi?”

The Duke of Edinburgh.
Matt Smith and Tobias Menzies

I also felt newly-sympathetic to the boy Charles whom one had always suspected had been sent away to, and kept at, Gordonstoun in Scotland despite its total unsuitability as a physically tough, experimental school and quasi home for a quiet, sensitive but famous child with no interests whatsoever in manly sports and rugged challenges. He did later say it had been hell for seven years and described the place as, “Colditz in kilts.” But he never publicly blamed his father for the seven year penal sentence during which the Duke of Edinburgh had vainly hoped would “make a man” out of Charles. It did remind me of a remark many, many years ago from a social worker in my family, that ‘had the Windsors been of a different social status, they would have certainly had to have had their own assigned social worker. ‘

Princess Margaret
played by
Helena Bonham-Carter and Vanessa Kirby

My interest in blogging about The Crown is not to supply an unnecessary review but rather because, as I have watched it, I have become increasingly aware of how very silly life at court, is. I haven’t really thought about the monarchy in any focussed way during my long life; I have judged and sympathised in a mildly disinterested way, with its contemporary victims, like Margaret and Peter Townsend; Charles as a boy at Gordonstoun; Diana at times, despite her own needy behaviour; and the Queen during the early marriage when rumours of inappropriate behaviour from Philip surfaced occasionally. But the Crown’s reconstruction of life at court has demonstrated the wholly outdated notion of deference [in a non-deferential age]; the army of red-uniformed footmen redolent, again, of a bygone age; the exaggerated notions of the huge importance of The Crown which has its own mysterious systems and time-honoured ways of Doing Things and Saying Things which bear no relationship whatsoever to the ways of doing and being of their subjects.

Jeremy Bentham 1748-1832
Moral philosopher; advocate for:
animal welfare; gay rights; universal
suffrage; prison reform.

While Aristotle believed monarchies were suitable for populations unable to govern for themselves and Machiavelli largely agreed, believing republics were innately able to be more flexible and adaptable than monarchies, I do find Jeremy Bentham’s view that the monarchy was an absurd institution which had established itself through force of custom, noting that, “almost all men are born under it, all men are used to it, few men are used to anything else; till of late years, nobody ever dispraised it.”

When one considers it, our Royalty:

1. Is chiefly unaccountable to the population which is why the utmost secrecy is observed in hiding unsuitable Royal behaviour or incidents;

2. Has a Head of State appointed on the hereditary principle which is undemocratic, unfair and elitist. Democratic elections are preferable.

3. Is expensive to maintain, with its many members; numerous and costly palaces; the traditional aristocratic standard of living; plus the costly and extensive Court system.

4. Still holds the Royal Prerogative which grants the Prime Minister powers to declare war or sign treaties without a vote in Parliament, the Privy Council [a body of advisers to the monarch] being able to enact legislation without a vote in Parliament.

The Privy Council of the first Elizabeth. 1602

Monarchy has existed in Britain since the Middle Ages except for the relatively brief interruption of the end of the Civil War and Cromwell’s Protectorate. After the fall of that republican government, particularly after the 1688 Glorious Revolution, a Constitutional Monarchy was established with Charles 11 which reduced calls for a republic though the idea re-surfaced publicly during both the American and French Revolutions.

Oliver Cromwell, 1599-1658
Lord Protector of the Commonwealth
Commonwealth lasted from 1649---1660.

Currently Kate and Will as they are affectionately known, would make excellent joint Presidents after the death of King Charles, effecting an effortless path to a republic from a long-established monarchy. Their eldest son would not follow them; there would be a Presidential election when anyone might stand. At least some of the palaces, carriages and cars could be sold off; the Court disbanded to be replaced by a more modest entourage. To effect this transition over a longish period, there would need to be a steering committee or group formed of a wide variety of people, not just of The Great and The Good. These suggestions need honing but we have the bones of a possible future structure here!!

Will and Kate with their family