Until fairly recently, I would

Until fairly recently, I would probably have been quite happy for the British monarchy to be abolished. The concept of an unelected, over-privileged, out-of-touch, hereditary lineage forming the constitutional basis of our state isn't something that fills me with a great deal of enthusiasm. However, I read a good article last month that made an interesting point: would any of the alternatives be any better?

Its (American?) author examined the notion that all cultures need to focus on something 'higher and better' and commented that the UK monarchy's traditional values of duty and respect provide a better role model than the out-of-proportion cult of celebrity currently worshipped in the USA. It also made the usual scaremongering references to President Blair (quite honestly, would anyone notice the difference?), though for me the prospect of President Thatcher would be infinitely more horrific.

The article springs to mind partly because of the current events surrounding the presidential election in France. At least if your monarchy misbehaves, you can have a revolution and chop its collective heads off. Harder to justify chopping your President's head off when you democratically elected him or her in the first place.

Maybe I'm following the cliché and becoming more conservative as I grow older (UK readers, very important: note the small 'c'), but I'm beginning to realise that there is one member of the royal family who actually makes me feel surreptitiously proud of the whole idea.

In the mid-1980s, Prince Charles was regularly vilified on satirical programmes such as Spitting Image for talking to plants (he claimed it helped them to grow better). He was also considered a crackpot for his ideas on artificial fertilizers representing a long-term danger to the environment. A decade or so later, the rest of the UK caught up with him as eco-consciousness grew and organic food became more mainstream.

In 1994, Charles caused a minor stir by announcing that when he becomes King, he aims to re-think the monarch's traditional role of 'Defender of The Faith' ('The Faith' being English Protestantism) and would prefer to be known simply as 'Defender of Faith' (i.e. an advocate of personal spiritual values). A small section of the middle-England Daily Mail readership choked on its tea and muffins and a much larger section of the populace simply thought "what?"

Now, eight years later, religious (in)tolerance is probably the single most high profile issue in the international arena. The appalling events of September 11 and the ongoing malaise in Israel and Palestine illustrate the very physical consequences of an inability to accommodate the intellectual possibility that another's view of the world may be as valid as one's own.

Prince Charles has just launched an initiative called Respect, a campaign that promotes religious harmony and tolerance. Yet again, he has demonstrated an uncanny knack for looking beyond the parochial British concerns with education, the health service, law & order and transport and hauling a more fundamental (if less tangible), long-term issue into the limelight.

Republicans will tell you that of course he can do this 'marginal' stuff, given his privileged lifestyle. Monarchists will tell you that of course he is concerned about these fundamental issues, he is our future king. Astrologers will tell you that of course he's a visionary with a spiritual bent, he's a Scorpio.

Whatever. I take a more pragmatic view: the guy has an interesting, valuable and mostly apolitical insight into modern culture. One day he will probably be our head of state. At the moment, in view of the current events in France, maybe that's not such an unattractive option.

Posted by Hg on Monday 29 April 2002 at 16:22.
Received 0 comments so far.

http://www.hydragenic.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hydragen/mt/mt-tb.cgi/230

The previous post was A tube poster featuring this.

The next post is More AA Gill for you,.

All original material on this site is © Hydragenic, 2002-2008. Extracts of other people's work are used for the purpose of criticism, review or news reporting, in line with the "fair dealing" (or "fair use") principle.