The Queen - THE Queen, i.e. the British one, not the Dutch - is 80 today. We've just seen the BBC World TV pictures of her birthday celebrations in London, Windsor and elsewhere. She looked pretty good, I thought, and seemed to be enjoying the day but what on earth was Prince Philip doing in that drab raincoat? I could have sworn it was the first time he'd had it on. It looked like it'd been folded up and still had creases down the sides (like a shirt when you first take it out of the package). Or do they IRON his raincoats to make him appear as though he's dressed in a cardboard box? I thought he looked every bit of his 80-plus years.
And Charles. Oh Charles. In one way, I have a lot of admiration for him. Over the years, he's said a lot of very sensible things that needed saying and that no-one else in public life dared to say. Like, for instance, pointing out that Britain's town centres have been blighted with corrugated iron megastores and supermarkets that are ugly from the outside or making out a case for more gentle forms of farming or offering to be the 'Defender of the Faiths' instead of defender of just one faith, Christianity, when he becomes king. (That went down well with the Church of England that he will head should he ever become king). WILL he ever be king? In England, we don't talk about the Queen abdicating. It's just not done. She's in it for life. But in Holland - where their monarchs ride bicycles, travel in buses and abdicate at sixty-something - it's a burning question... Anyway, I'm drifting. Back to His Royal Highness. He embarasses me - or rather, I feel embarassed for him when he makes a speech. He's so obviously uncomfortable, awkward. I've always thought that he's someone who, given the chance before conception, would have chosen to be anything other than the eldest son of the Queen of England. I've asked myself many times before what he must have done in a previous life to have found himself, by mistake, in the role of Prince Charles in this one. What are the gods punishing him for?
What was amazing about his speech today, though, was the level of detail he revealed about his childhood. (I seem to remember that some years ago, during the feuding with Diana - may she rest in peace, poor girl - he wrote a book in which he revealed what an abysmally lonely childhood he'd had). This was different. He talked today of how his 'dear Mama' (can't help thinking that was a bit forced) in the days preceeding her coronation in 1952, came in to say good night to him and his sister (Princess Anne), wearing the crown so that she could get used to the weight of it before the coronation. Now that's amusing. And he told us how, in the months following the coronation, Mummy and Daddy had gone on tour abroad for six months and how he'd tried to talk to his mother on the phone amidst a storm of crackles and pops (no, not Rice Crispies, just interference on the line). I found that touching, genuinely. And then there was a shot of him and sister Anne on board a ship going out to greet their parents after the tour.
It was nice that he made the gesture of going on TV to wish H.M. a happy birthday - and an uncountable number of happy returns - I just wish he'd do a bit more media training so he could appear more confident. There's so much uncertainty and doubt comes across. Come to think of it, why couldn't someone edit the recording before it goes out? Well, I presume someone did so maybe the original had even more of those awkward moments. Poor guy can't do anything right. When his life's over and we look back - those of us who're around then and still interested - we may realise that we missed appreciating him for all the good he's done in life. If you don't believe me, get hold of a book called 'The Radical Prince' by David Lorimer.
Meanwhile, I wish HM a happy birthday. She's currently celebrating at a party thrown by HRH.
No comments:
Post a Comment