Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Royal Bodies

Some have taken offence at Hilary Mantel's "attack" on the monarchy. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n04/hilary-mantel/royal-bodies
Personally, I think "attack" is the wrong word to describe an article that is in fact exceedingly thought-provoking and of course full of the author's customary brilliance, and the offence has mostly been taken by the tabloid press and popular media whose heartless, brutal cynicism she lays bare so effectively.

The serious question that she poses, but does not attempt to answer, is: does a modern, enlightened population such as Britain really need a monarchy? As someone who grew up in the law-abiding, forelock-tugging Britain of the 1950s, I never thought I would come to write these words, and even now I'm not sure that I would answer "no". Perhaps we do indeed still need an institution that obliges us to act in the ridiculous way so marvellously described by Hilary Mantel. And if we got rid of it, what if anything would we replace it with?

1 comment:

  1. Anonymous1:52 pm

    It was no attack.
    It was a very well thought-out piece, and the insult I think has been concocted by the tabloid press.
    I'm no longer sure where I stand on the matter of the future of the Monarchy, though like you am even more unsure of the alternatives. So for the moment will keep a firm hold on nurse .....

    There was an interesting programme last night about royalty in Britain and how the institution as a whole has been shaped by health. In fact the programme itself was poor, to put it mildly, but it was thought-provoking. The forlock-tugging as we know it really only dates back to Queen Victoria, and very likely if I had been a subject of George 1V I would be all in favour of a Republic - with a sideways remembrance in the direction of Oliver Cromwell.

    ReplyDelete

A Few Late Chrysanthedads

No one person's experience of dementia is quite the same as another's, but the account given below, within the confines of a shortis...