That royal wedding!

Would you believe that in the 21st Century a royal wedding that celebrates the monarchy could have the kind of impact it is apparently having!? It is suggested that 2 billion people will be watching the live coverage of the event. An estimated 8,000 TV and Radio journalists will be in England covering what they have dubbed the wedding of the century.{{more}}

The British Prime Minister David Cameron is encouraging people to have street parties, and there will be about 4,000 such street parties. Cameron’s rationalisation is that the wedding offers a chance for everyone to come together and celebrate the great things about the country. If this was only about the British it might be easy to accept it. This madness that involves the £32 million ring of Diana given to the bride to be by Prince William could be put down to the British being trapped in their own history. But the Americans will not be outdone, for the wedding will get as much coverage in that country. Already the major television and other media units have been highlighting the event that will take place on April 29. CNN, it is said, will put an additional 50 media persons in London to supplement those at its news Bureau there. The other American media establishments will of course be there in full glory.

The Americans, since their independence in 1776, have tried to undo everything British, including the language, and creating much confusion in the process. It appears to me that the one thing they regretted having to abandon was the monarchy. Well, not entirely! The monarchy was in a sense their bugbear and their independence was first of all about getting rid of it. But here is their dilemma. They love celebrities and the life of celebrities and the monarchy fits into this especially after something of a makeover by Princess Diana. So John F. Kennedy and Jacqueline Kennedy came nearest to what they wanted to see as an American counterpart to the monarchy. Had Obama not been black he and Michelle might even have fitted that bill.

The London Guardian in a recent piece made note of the Americans love of celebrities. As the article states: “The royals are, in some weird way, celebrities whose specialness is seemingly confirmed by their birth, even though, God knows, the antics of some of its members …should by now have done more than enough to overthrow that theory.” Expect London, therefore, to be taken over by thousands of American tourists eager to be part of the action and paying homage to the celebrity status they adore.

In the case of those of us from the Commonwealth the story isn’t very much different. We spout anti-colonial rhetoric but we love the monarchy and the kind of life that it embodies. We want to be part of that celebration and of that life. Some of us get a sense of fulfillment. Which Prime Minister’s wife would want to miss that? We shouldn’t blow hot and cold, however. The monarchy is or rather should be an anachronism in today’s world. We have perpetuated its life through what we call the Commonwealth which is supposed to bring together brothers and sisters from a past era, people who had at one time shared colonial values. Some of them, of course, still do. The Commonwealth is also said to have some validity by creating, they say, some kind of stability that might not otherwise have been there. It is all nonsense. Some of us had grown up in the days of Empire when we asked God to save the King or Queen. Many of us were rewarded on Empire Day with buns and ginger beer. We retain the monarch as our Head of State and we ensure that we maintain that bond also by clinging to the coat-tails of the Privy Council and handing out Imperial Awards.

At a time when the British economy is seriously challenged, the cost of hosting the wedding of the century will be a formidable one. Some will say of course that the Royal family is a tourism attraction, for I imagine every year millions of people would go to Britain to look at the changing of the Guard, to see Buckingham Palace and to try to get a glimpse of the Queen. That is a matter, of course, with which the British will have to deal. Maybe they get some psychic satisfaction from having the monarchy around and are prepared to make the necessary sacrifices to keep it going. The marriage of William and Kate will give it a new burst on life. The Queen is getting on in age and maybe they see some way down the road the Crown getting into the hands of younger ones who can better retain that celebrity status. British people overwhelmingly support the monarchy, even though some of them feel that there should be some reform of that entity.

St.Vincent and the Grenadines has been getting special mention, and there is more than a thought that the couple might want to spend part of their honeymoon in Mustique. Through Princess Margaret, a relationship with that island had been established. It is said, too, that the parents of the bride have visited the island on a number of occasions and that the couple have actually been there. They would have formed some acquaintances there, and a few personalities from the Island are expected to be there. Maybe there might even be a tourism bonus from this, housing the ultimate in celebrity status, son of the beloved Diana and his new bride.

Dr Adrian Fraser is a social commentator and historian.