A Useful Royal

The old man is not an ardent royalist. In today’s world the monarchy has become somewhat of an anachronism, with the British monarchy perhaps a little more so than the few remaining other royal traditions. At times I consider its “head of State” function in Canada nothing but a bothersome irritant. Yet until there is a broad consensus on adoption of a functional republican alternative here, the British monarchy is a stabilizing tradition and a useful irritant if you will. We should not encourage the inevitable divisions caused by any proposal to get rid of it.

Furthermore, the old man is not an admirer of the House of Windsor or members of its predecessor “Houses” who have occupied the British throne. I would give a pass, however, to the current occupant, Queen Elizabeth II, who served through much of the 20^th century, just a year older than the old man and a comfortable contemporary. Queen Victoria of the 19^th century British Empire was similarly untouchable. Of course, if one gave credence to rumour and fictional accounts, even these Queens sometimes succumbed to the ways of their male relations. For the rest, going back to the Richards, the Henrys, the Charles’s, the Georges and the Edwards and their families, what is there really to admire about their relationships with families, their aristocratic contemporaries and their subjects, during those reigns?

The current Queen’s offspring seem to have been especially vulnerable to the practice of the less than puritan royal foibles of some of their predecessors. Unfortunately for them the liberal social mores formerly discreetly reserved for the aristocracy have been widely adopted by the commons. With modern communication and constant media watchfulness, royal foibles, including all their dalliances, can no longer be discreet. Royals are now lumped in with all other political and entertainment celebrities and subject to hourly exposure to the whole world.

Charles, our current Prince of Wales and first heir to the British throne, in his long, long wait for ascendancy has exhibited those royal foibles in abundance. He seemed to be following in the tradition of Edward VII and Edward VIII, Charles’s most recent male predecessors in that office, who except for their aristocratic dalliances appear to me to have been rather useless and unimaginative royal functionaries. From my very casual observation of media hype, though likely misleading, both sons of Charles and Diana are following the same tradition.

Throughout all this celebrity media exposure, however, Prince Charles has exhibited a certain gravitas and serious interest in and concern for the human condition. I have a vague recollection of an incident many years ago now and before the unseemly exposure of his many romantic problems, when the Prince had the effrontery to express an opinion about the design trends of modern architecture and community planning. He was immediately severely criticized for being politically incorrect in expressing opinions that ought not to be permitted to members of the British monarchy as being interference in public policy matters. Professionals of the day sneered at his preference for more moderate design and preservation of traditional communities. I agreed with the Prince at the time and thought it a useful exercise of his princely office.

After all these years of adverse publicity about the Prince’s love life it seemed his ascendancy to the throne was questionable with speculation rampant that his son, Prince William, would be preferred. My niece, the retired teacher, whose intellectual and artistic curiosity and concern with public affairs exceeds mine, emails me the most fascinating stuff she finds or is sent by friends from the Internet. This time it was the Richard Dimbleby Lecture beautifully filmed at the Prince of Wales’ London residence, St. James’s Palace State Apartments. It can be found on the Prince of Wales’ official website, http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/speechesandarticles/ . The lecture was titled Facing the Future and after viewing the lengthy speech and the rapt audience of important people in the gorgeous gallery I was persuaded that here indeed was the man who should be King if the royal institution is to continue when the reign of Queen Elizabeth ends, personal foibles and romantic dalliances notwithstanding.

Charles is a man whose royal training and travels and broad experience of the world, whose obvious intelligence with an appropriately staid but sharp sense of humour and peculiarly British wit could lend a new dimension to the royal duty of providing mature and objective policy advice to the political ministers of state.

In “facing the future” Charles pointed out that in the last fifty years we seem to have lost that sense of balance that our forefathers instinctively understood that we must “work with the grain of Nature to maintain the balance between keeping the Earth’s natural capital and sustaining humanity on its renewable income.” He gave many examples of the destructiveness to ourselves caused by our endless pursuit of wealth as an end in itself and the need to re-examine our position as part of Nature than as masters of it, stating that the whole world is already living on its capital rather than the sustaining income its flora and fauna and other species would naturally provide.

In that address, the Prince provided many noteworthy and quotable criticisms and his possibly too optimistic remedies and I suggest readers go to the linked website to find out more.

Prince Charles really is, I think, a useful Royal!

- 30 -