THE HOME LIFE OF OUR DEAR QUEEN

[Stanley]

THE HOME LIFE OF OUR DEAR QUEEN

28 March 2005

There wasn’t a lot on TV last night and I found myself watching a programme which is part of a series describing the queen’s life in ‘her castle’ at Windsor. It was made clear that this was her home and Buckingham Palace was ‘the office’.
I can remember the time when we knew virtually nothing about the domestic arrangements of royalty and personally think that this was a good thing. I knew they were living in the lap of luxury at the taxpayer’s expense but was quite happy not to have it shoved in my face. Nowadays there seems to be some sort of move to be more open and show us something of what happens inside the palaces. I suspect that this is an attempt to demonstrate what a busy and useful role royalty plays in the running of the country in the hope that we, the peasantry, will understand how vital this is.
I’ve got news for the spin meisters in the queen’s household, they are completely out of touch if they think that the Grumpy Old Men and Women amongst us are going to have any positive reactions to their disclosures. Watching this detailed description of excessive consumption simply confirmed my opinion that it is time we got rid of this anachronistic system.
The programme was very good and entirely honest. They showed us in great detail how preparations were made for a banquet for President Chirac of France to celebrate the anniversary of the Entente Cordiale. It totally ignored the fact that if we are going to take heed of history and tradition France was always the enemy. We have fought France more times than any other country and at this moment, if the government was asked who is working most actively against British interests in the EU it is France in general and President Chirac in particular.
They even showed us how a guest’s baggage was unpacked for them by a team of personal servants. Gems like ‘If the clothes are on plastic hangers they are changed to cloth covered ones’ tripped from the housekeeper’s lips. What really surprised me was the trouble they took to list which items were in which item of luggage so that when the maids re-packed them they were put back in the same cases. The other thing was that when re-packed, everything was wrapped in tissue paper. Now I may be a touchy old bugger but if someone did that to my luggage I would take it as a criticism of how I do my packing. Only a small point but I suspect that the Housekeeper’s stated aim that ‘When the guests leave they will go away and tell everyone how well they were looked after’ might not work in every case. Surely some will go away shaking their heads at the level of cosseting that they have been subjected to?
The laying of the table and the preparations for the meal were something else. I wonder how many people who sat down at the table knew which glass was for which wine? I suspect that most waited to see which glass the waiter filled up and watched the other guests to see what item of cutlery they were using. It looked like a game of one-upmanship to me.
I was once stood outside Chatsworth House looking at the gardens and a very hearty man dressed as though he owned 2000 acres in Norfolk observed how magnificent it was and how it made him think about the continuity of tradition that had preserved it for us. I told him that what it brought to my mind was the fact that they demolished a village to make room for it and the Devonshire’s life-style was supported by a lot of ordinary people coughing their lungs up in mines and mills all over the country. He was genuinely shocked and no doubt wrote me off as some crazed communist or worse. Problem is that I was telling him the truth. I couldn’t understand by what right a certain class of human beings could be comfortable with such levels of conspicuous consumption when all around them the less privileged were living terribly deprived lives.
Thoughts such as these were coursing through my mind as I watched the TV programme last night. It was made quite clear that as this was a state occasion the taxpayer was footing the bill and the thought occurred to me as to who had decided on the level of opulence. By the way, it included shipping the whole of the cast of Les Miserables up from London to give a performance on a specially constructed stage in the ‘music room’. It was actually in the Waterloo Room but they re-named it for the visit for obvious reasons.
One more thing occurred to me. This programme was made before the news of Chuck and Camshaft’s wedding was sprung on us. I wonder how closely this banquet for Chirac reflects the wedding reception that will take place there in 11 days? As you read this the preparations are under way, the guest lists have been drawn up and no doubt the chamber maids are practising their luggage handling skills. I find this all very depressing.
I’ve thought about this very carefully. I am not in the least envious, I would feel guilty participating in such excess. My overwhelming feeling is of sadness that we have in our society a sub-culture that sees nothing wrong in participating in the making of a programme like this in the mistaken belief that it is good public relations. Leave aside the fact that conspicuous consumption is part of their lives, to me what this demonstrates is that they have no conception what sort of lives ordinary people live and haven’t considered the effect that showing this will have on them. My mind goes back to the infamous ‘Who do they think they are...’ memorandum that was leaked from Charles’ office at Clarence House in which he railed against people who considered themselves qualified to better themselves.
The only saving grace in all this as far as I am concerned is that what we are looking at is an anachronism, it has passed its sell-by date and eventually common sense will prevail. When that day comes we will see the concept of monarchy fade from our lives and hopefully we will move into a new era with a constitution, separation of church and state and proper checks and balances to guard against situations such as this. I am all for knowledge of history and a proper regard for the heritage but when it comes to a completely spurious structure of ‘tradition’ which was largely manufactured by the 19th century monarchy to bolster their position, the sooner we do away with it the better.
28 March 2005