 |
How many jewels? Lots. But he won't wear it for long, it's impractically heavy. UPDATE: I was wrong about not wearing it for long. He kept it on for about a couple of hours. Perhaps he's done neck exercises. |
The tiny band of Tone Deaf faithfuls may have noticed I have ignored an event exciting the UK media and various groups of good-hearted people up and down the country. Reaching its climax today, Saturday May 6. When, predictably, it may rain
Attempts to find out whether this excitement has spread elsewhere (eg, the USA) suggest it hasn’t. That mowing the lawn has a higher priority.
I refer to the crowning of King Charles III.
When the late Queen Elizabeth II was crowned, over half a century ago, I was holidaying on a very small houseboat in Norfolk. Not only did it not have a TV it didn’t have a radio. As far as I can remember, I lolled. Today, when I’m finished here, I’m off to the supermarket to buy some zero-alcohol beer. Not to celebrate, of course, merely to wet my whistle.
Does this make me an anti-monarchist? Not really. I’m only anti- events that pose a threat. The monarchy bores me to distraction.
More particularly it emphasises how far Britain has slipped down the ladder of international importance. When a country has nothing much left to boast about it starts to look backwards. Talking reflectively about aged stuff.
When the crown is lowered on to Charlie’s head he’ll be sitting on the Stone of Scone, a chunk of rockery borrowed from Scotland. Scottish kings (and there haven’t been many of them for quite a while) used to sit on this stone to be crowned, so it’s old. And we’ll be invited to relish its oldness.
Typical.
Oil will anoint Charlie’s head. Messy, but it’s been done for yonks.
By all means study history. Venerating it is piffle.
Today I may watch an episode of The Simpsons. Sure, it’s old. But it’s witty.
It's not that I don't care, I do. I like all things British. I just don't find Charles and Camilla all that interesting. If it was William and Kate being crowned, I would have watched it. They seem like honorable people, not perfect, but so far they seem honorable. I can forgive an older brother punching his younger brother. That seems pretty normal to me. But adultery, then raising the status of the mistress to wife and queen? Including her grandchildren in the ritual while excluding some of his? Feeding stories to the press that puts your "red-headed stepson" in a bad light? That all creeps me out. But what do I care? He's not my King. Not my taxes paying for it all. I AM interested in the quiche, though.
ReplyDeleteDo you suppose there is still someone in line to be the King or Queen of Scotland? I bet there is, somewhere, someplace.
Colette: People don't have to be good to be interesting (think of Hitler and of Al Capone). Fact is, you show yourself to be admirably informed about this branch of the Windsors. Mind you, if you go further back down the line you'll discover that the social failings of this present lot are almost genteel compared with those who ruled during the Head-Chopping Era. Also torturing was quite in vogue then, though I understand this is making something of a comeback during the Oughties.
DeleteAs to your final point there is a movie you may have missed called The Last King of Scotland. As far as I remember it doesn't address your question directly, the allusion is ironic. However the central character is so terminally bad he becomes utterly fascinating. Feeding people to crocodiles, anyone? His real-life name is/was Idi Amin, brilliantly played by Forrest Whittaker
I have always endorsed the monarchy but I found this event (which I watched in full) faintly embarrassing, Disneyesque and Charles's clothing grotesque, like a getup in a not vey good historical film.
ReplyDeleteHowever that military marchpast (the biggest assembly of troops since the last coronation) was magnificent. Only someone who has marched in a large parade (me) could appreciate how they all could step off on the same foot at once on the one command. I believe the base drummers had radio mikes in their ears for coordination.
Avus: A modern acronym exactly describes the garb worn and the transportation used (especially that hideously ornate coach): OTT.
ReplyDeleteBut you're not the only one who has taken part in a large-scale military parade and I dare to say it was more harassing for me than it was for you. Remember the drill corporal's preliminary order: "Tallest on the right, shortest on the left - in two ranks, SIZE!" Oh, how I grew to hate that shouted command. At 6 ft 1½ in. I was the tallest person on the paradeground which meant that at some time I headed the column, depending on which direction it was marching. Thus most distant from the NCO managing the proceedings, thus most likely to fail to hear the order "About turn.", thus (with no one ahead to guide me) most likely to keep on going in the wrong direction. And thus face cookhouse duties morning, noon and night over the coming weekend.
Apart from overhearing Sir Bryn (see next post) I had various duties that kept me away from the Abbey ceremonies and only sat down when the marching to Bucks P. began. Leading to an exquisite moment which concerned you.
When one of the commentators said, "The RAF, they're so smart aren't they?" Repeating this sentiment by saying how the RAF marchers' white gloves made it easy to see how well co-ordinated they were. It's only a month or so since your "mind boggled" at the thought of the RAF being handed out rifles. Yes, you'll splutter, the commentators knew nothing about marching, missing the point completely: the marching on Saturday was intended to impress a public uneducated in minor military skills. As to more advanced skills, I'd like to have presented one of your squaddies with a 20-channel VHF transmitter/receiver (for airborne use) saying, "Problem with signal-to-noise. Fix it."
What really impressed me about the marching was when members of one of the bands (not always the most physically co-ordinated but try doing it carrying a tuba) had to negotiate a right-angle bend. Since the columns were six (possibly eight) men wide there was an enormous discrepancy in distance travelled by those nearest the corner from those furthest away. Raising an interesting technical point. As you say, keeping in step was (I think) electronically guided, so those "inner" bandsmen had to maintain in-step by shortening the distance they stepped. Quite tricky. No doubt, as a Brown Job, you were taught to do this while playing a trombone.
Your last para: Yes a right angled turn when marching in file ahead (about 15 men wide) was tricky. The ones on the inside of the turn marked time as they swivelled whilst the remainder of the file looked right or left (depending on direction of turn) out of the corner of the eye to keep in line with the adjacent partner. Inevitably the line could get out of kilter without practice and the drill sergeant delighted in noticing it.
ReplyDeleteFormation drilling seemed to be essential for good conduct and military discipline in the infantry brown jobs' National Service curriculum. However I think that the Royal Corps of Signals may have been able to fiddle with your VHF transmitter.
Headlines here in the USA summarized:
ReplyDelete“Click here for 3 minute Coronation highlights”
“William and Kate LATE for Coronation”
“Katy Perry couldn’t find her seat”
Hopefully the sequel can be titled “Revenge of the Ermines”
MikeM: I'll bet that those three minutes included commercial breaks, limited to a mere two given the solemnity of the occasion.
DeleteAvus: I fear we in the RAF regarded drill as an essentially risible exercise, paying lip service to an apocalyptic eventuality which saw us very reluctantly taking up arms as a last resort. One reason why we were so lousy at it, and why I was so surprised by the BBC commentator's unlikely remarks. At my training camp, Yatesbury, we had joint exercises with the Army; they invaded us and our officers played bridge in the NAAFI. Since we were easily "conquered " the Army went away and re-invaded. Several times in one evening.
ReplyDeleteBut never imagine the RAF was a soft touch in other ways. We were a technogical meritocracy. For eight months ( 8 am to 5 pm five days a week, plus Saturday. - the cumulative equivalent of three years at uni) we did hard science with maths plus applied technology. Took 27 exams where the minimum pass rate was 60%; fail and you were re-flighted three weeks. I was assessed, told I could do it, seriously doubted my ability but it turned out the RAF knew best.
True, we marched appallingly.
Avus: That should be "Saturday morning".
ReplyDeleteThe RAF Regiment's drill squad is pretty good. If you have never read T E Lawrence' "The Mint" in the unexpurgated version I can thoroughly recommend it. He writes of his basic training at Uxbridge in the late '20s. Its like seems to have carried on throughout National Service until that ended in 1962
ReplyDeleteany episode of The Simpson's would be better than watching an old guy and his old wife being crowned. I have zero interest in the British monarchy.
ReplyDeleteellen abbott: Couldn't you dislike them for something other than their age? I'm 87.
ReplyDeleteI don't dislike them for their age. I simply have no interest in them. And the use of 'old' was simply a descriptor. They are old. As am I.
Deleteellen abbott: Given the fact that you are clearly articulate (not least in your comment about relief/pleasure/contentment) and almost certainly received more formal education than I did, I hesitate to argue the toss. But the choice of a single adjective (used twice, as well) suggested that this was the dominant reason for your antipathy. Otherwise why include it? Not that I really mind. At 87 I don't have too many positive things to say about old age. Even on those sour occasions when I compare it with the alternative.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWe caught all the highlights and I did catch the balcony stuff live. It was very poignant for me as I had watched Elizabeth II coronation---live in black in white---screen only 1 foot wide, my nose pressed to the screen to see the boy prince, Charles who was my age. I do have hopes for his 'reign' as perhaps he can be a uniting influence in the UK.
ReplyDeleteBut, then if you believe in any of that Nostradamus whooey...he will have a rocky reign.
Congrats to all the 'extras' that stood in the gloomy rain for all the pomp and circumstance. From here, it looks like quite the Party!
Sandi: Things have changed in the USA since 1965 when I crossed the Atlantic westwards, parenthetically to see whether TV and the movies were telling the truth about your vast sub-continent (Latest update: they weren't.). My accent and my enormous vocabulary gave me a novelty value among people who'd - nominally - had much more extensive education than I had and I found myself paraded for conversation among families whom I would have designated as "middle class", had they been Brits. Imagine my surprise - and disappointment - when I found myself having to discuss the Royal Family with those who knew more about it than I did.
DeleteI wonder whether some of those citizens, or perhaps their descendants, are now voting for Trump. I suspect not, most were rather too comfortable.
VR and I and are octogenarians and both subject to the physical decay that goes with the territory. We did not party but then neither did anyone else on the 1700-household estate where we live. Which seems to suggest that the provinces - and nothing could be more provincial than Herefordshire - are now as willingly self-isolated as London. Where residents know the names of those who live in the detached houses to the left and to the right but no one else.
I have zero interest in the Monarchy too, but I do understand that many Brits are still enamored with their Royalty and supportive of it. My Mom was Welsh and most of her Family who still live in Wales could give Two shits about any of it... of coarse most Gaelic Nations and other Countries oppressed by Colonialism don't really have fondest of memories of what it all represents.
ReplyDeleteBohemian: Briefly, there is still a residue of feeling for the late Elizabeth II and Charles was well advised to take advantage of it while he could. But this could be the last gasp for the monarchy and we may see the UK eventually reduced to the "royals on bikes" status that currently obtains (I think) in Sweden and the Netherlands. Already two of the so-called Commonwealth countries in the Caribbean are talking about parting brass rags with us. More important, Australia is openly talking about becoming a republic. Actually Oz has been discussing this change for ages now but - as they say where I come from - "there's nowt so queer as folk". Three decades ago they held a referendum about breaking with the UK and those tough, awkwardly minded colonials voted to stay.
DeleteAs to Wales we moved to Herefordshire when we retired, twenty-five years ago, and we're only a few miles from the Welsh border. As the years have passed I've become more and more sympathetic towards the Welsh and we often take "a drive for the sheer pleasure of it" (when did you last do that?) in their beautiful country. Once, when coal was king, Wales had a reasonable economy. Now the pits are closed and the UK government has done very little to compensate. Allowing them to have their own parliament (Except it's only called "an assembly") but then denying them sufficient funds to run the country properly.
Charles and Camilla, Andrew and Harry, what a depressing bunch they are. The royals should all be scaled back and learn to live within their means. (The horses on parade were good though!)
ReplyDeleteGarden: True, we didn't vote them in. But look at the lot that were voted in. Makes you weep at the nation's collective IQ.
ReplyDelete