Peter Oborne's reprimand of Prince Harry, for giving the Royal Assent to Tailhook again partying heartily, inadvertently grasps the consequences of mocking tradition and celebrating transgressiveness.
The nation accepts and admires the monarchy perhaps more today than at any time in its history. And that is because the Queen has understood the meaning of service and the personal sacrifices that involves. She has always put her country before her self-interest, never complained, always done the right thing. There has never been a breath of scandal or reproach. The values that she subscribes to are old-fashioned and easy to mock. But people respect and treasure them, perhaps far more than they understand. Without those values, the existence of a Royal family and the life of privilege its members appear to lead are without merit.
The kicker is in the next paragraph.
[The prince] is not a minor celebrity, a pop star or footballer, who has been given licence by society to behave disgracefully. He belongs to an institution that stands for certain forms of behaviour, and cannot survive if its members flout them.
There's no reason spectators have to buy tickets to watch people whose private behavior is of the kind that keeps a lot of poor people poor. Thus the bad behavior of athletes and celebrities, which might be because entertainment is the last manifestation of Thirteenth Generation crude, might soon pass, particularly if spectators stop underwriting the decadent in their decadence.

In the States, unfortunately, the British royals are simply entertainers, not heads of state, nor, despite joint training maneuvers with the U.S. military, officers and gentlemen.
Indeed, the Prince belongs to two such institutions: he is an officer in the British Army, and as such is expected to observe its own code of ethics. That this, too, was broken during this trip to Las Vegas is no coincidence. The Army is another institution that requires discipline, restraint, forbearance and sacrifice.
The prince might be third in line for the throne, but he still reports to the chain of command. Apparently in the British Army, "interview without coffee" is the equivalent of railroading's "called on the carpet".  And Mr Oborne appears to endorse the idea of a monarchy, expressing fears that Britain's republicans will have yet another disturbing Fact to be Submitted to a Candid World.
This world of celebrities is a shallow one, where nothing persists. And while the Royal family does indeed bear comparison in certain ways with the entertainment industry, as monarchists have always understood, ultimately it is based on an enduring moral, religious and social framework.

It is perhaps expecting a little too much of Prince Harry that he understand the intellectual and historical basis for the British monarchy in all its richness and wisdom. But there is nothing to stop him taking a sideways glance at his uncle. Prince Andrew, it should never be forgotten, is a war hero who risked his life flying helicopters during the Falklands War. Yet few would hold him up these days as an example of how a member of the Royal family should conduct themselves.
In making the reference to "example" Mr Oborne is endorsing the idea of standards of behavior, something that has been deconstructed so as to make possible the degraded condition in which trash entertainment makes the money and provides the content for the tabloids.

No comments: