New York Times (May 31, 2012)
Cheers and Jeers For Queen’s Jubilee
VIEW FROM EUROPE | By HARVEY MORRIS | May 31, 2012, 7:27 AM Comment
LONDON — Britain is gearing up for a monstrous excess of pomp and
over-indulgence this weekend to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee of Queen
Elizabeth II.
The 60th anniversary of her reign will be marked by traditional street
parties, a traditional flotilla of 1,000 boats and barges along
London’s River Thames, and traditional protests at which republicans
will grumble about the expense of it all.
Some sophisticates are affecting a “Jubilee? What Jubilee?”
indifference. But, with high streets and pubs plastered with Union
Jacks and bunting, and shops overflowing with Jubilee-branded goods,
the occasion is hard to ignore.
It is probably as much a tribute to the 86-year-old monarch as to the
institution she represents that the budget-busting Jubilee celebrations
have not provoked greater dissent.
One recent poll suggested a record 80 percent of Britons supported the
monarchy against only 13 percent who would prefer a republic.
Over a beer with three fellow grumpy old men in London’s recently
renamed “Royal” Borough of Greenwich (the first Queen Elizabeth was
born there), we looked back this week to the era when the present queen
came to the throne and pondered whether the monarchy would or should
survive.
All three friends are called Terry – even first names must have been in
short supply in the grim austerity at the end of World War II – and all
are ardent anti-monarchists. I took the chair as a constitutional
agnostic.
“I want to be a citizen, not a subject,” complained Terry A. “The
monarchy just ingrains the idea of inherited wealth and privilege,”
said Terry B., who nevertheless still treasures the miniature souvenir
Royal Coach he was given at the Coronation. “Our house was the only one
in the street that didn’t have a flag out on Coronation Day,” boasted
Terry C.
We recalled a “never-had-it-so-bad” era of rationing and bombing
wreckage when, crowded around the then rare, grainy black-and-white TV
sets, we were assured by hushed and deferential commentators that the
nation was embarking on a glorious new Elizabethan Age.
The country certainly became richer in the post-austerity boom. It also
lost an empire – and a good thing too, we all agreed. Politicians came
and went. Britain became more egalitarian but is perhaps now becoming
less so, as a new austerity imposed by a “posh boys” government hits
the have-nots hardest.
Which of us would have predicted, 60 years ago, that Queen Elizabeth
would still be presiding over it all – an ostensibly anachronistic
embodiment of past glories rather than of any identifiable future ones?
And will the institution for long survive her inevitable passing?
What would we have in her place? Other countries make do with
presidents, either executive or decorative depending on the prevailing
constitution. The latter are often past-their-peak politicians with
nothing to match the pomp and circumstance of the British crown.
At least the Queen pulls in the tourists, and these days we need the
money. And at least the Jubilee will give us an extra mid-summer break
to let our hair down.
The authorities have made emergency arrangements to cope with that
other age-old British tradition – excessive drinking – by laying on
mobile medical facilities to deal with a potential “surge in
alcohol-related incidents.”
The Terrys plan to go to a republican demonstration and, as long as
they avoid being arrested by traditional British bobbies, they will
then be coming along to the Jubilee party.
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
