dailyO
Variety

Why the Queen could teach Indian royals a lesson on tolerance

Advertisement
Kaveree Bamzai
Kaveree BamzaiDec 10, 2017 | 21:00

Why the Queen could teach Indian royals a lesson on tolerance

All royals are pointless but some royals are more pointless than others. If there was any doubt about this self-evident truth, it has vanished after The Crown's season 2. While royals in India spent a considerable time over the last two months trying to ban a film they have not seen on a Rajput princess, who may or may not have existed, the English royal family is showing supreme stoicism in the face of The Crown's relentless, if respectful, exposes on the Windsors.

Advertisement

Just consider these: Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh's sister's Nazi connections; the Duke of Windsor's active attempts to broker peace with Adolf Hitler in exchange for peace and a return as King of England; Philip's possible involvement in the John Profumo scandal; and Antony Armstrong-Jones aka Lord Snowdon's rather racy sex life, which as one of the Queen's former secretaries says includes no fewer than three concurrent relationships apart from one with Princess Margaret and the Frys (husband and wife, ooh lala). All this shown in uncensored splendour without bans being issued and protests being staged.

crow690_121017075649.jpg

Compare this with the idea borrowed from legend and a poem that Alauddin Khilji was so obsessed with Padmini's beauty that he thought nothing of invading a kingdom to possess her. And compare the extreme reactions of the Rajputs to the stiff upper lip of the English when faced with Prince Philip's involvement in the notorious Thursday Club, whose members, especially his own equerry, had rather colourful extramarital affairs. Or even that the Kennedys (John F and Jackie come visiting) would take booster injections to help them face the public in their innumerable appearances.

It's all too delicious and all too distracting from the real point: that the Queen is shown as a flesh and blood character, who can be jealous of her sister Margaret, distant towards her son Charles and deeply suspicious, with reason, of her husband's friends. She is shown being humiliated by Jackie Kennedy (being called uncurious, unintelligent and unremarkable) but also ticking off her husband for constantly whingeing and whining. As for Princess Margaret, very little in popular culture has done justice to her. She is shown here clearly as a forerunner to Diana, someone who is born into royalty but longs to be free. Free to live and love, and yet as the Queen notes, keep her perks and privileges and her ranks. Diana existed because Margaret had gone before her.

Advertisement

thecrown690_121017075751.jpg

There's a lovely scene at the palace where the Queen has thrown a party for Margaret and Tony Armstrong Jones and Philip carps about how easily the family has accepted the latter into its fold when they had trouble with him, a true blue prince. But indeed Margaret had modern pretensions. And indeed we see the beginning of the paparazzi culture with Margaret, as she escapes from the back of Snowdon's gallery, followed by the collective flash of the pack's cameras. Snowdon marries her on the condition that she will never bore him, and she accepts on condition that he will never hurt her. Neither, like Charles and Diana, keep their word, having deeply unhappy relationships till they call it quits.

Incidentally, Jawaharlal Nehru makes an appearance in a reference by Lord Mountbatten. He is consoling the Queen telling her she married a wild spirit just like him, and how Edwina, his wife, was carrying on with Nehru "right under my nose". Ah! Maybe some member of the Nehru-Gandhi family can protest about that and ensure we show our silly ways to the world.

Advertisement

Last updated: December 13, 2017 | 17:54
IN THIS STORY
Please log in
I agree with DailyO's privacy policy