Anorak

Anorak | Harry and Meghan and the modern myth of inclusivity

Harry and Meghan and the modern myth of inclusivity

by | 21st, May 2018

David Starkey is here to tell Sun readers that when Meghan Markle married Prince Harry the Royal Family modernised. Starkey tells us, and “it’s worth repeating”, that Megan is “mixed-race, American, of uncertain religion, an actress, divorced and with a sexual history”. She’s nothing like Kate Middleton, then, you know, and it’s barely worth repeating, who is a mixed-race Commoner, of uncertain religion, a part-time shop worker and with a sexual history”. Good wedding. Lovely do. But it wasn’t all that new and it wasn’t all that modern.

Undaunted by the repetition of past marriages that also spoke volumes about how modern the Family born to rule had become (yes, and to stop one of us uppity plebs having too much power) Starkey says that any “one” of the attributes on Meghan’s checklist “would have rendered her deeply doubtful as a royal bride”.

Jessica Bouton tells Mirror readers is was very… Well, see if you can guess: “Meghan’s gown was…a modern look for a modern duchess. And her story is a modern Cinderella.” Yeah. Modern. It was a “magical modern wedding,” says the Mail.

The Telegraph says the wedding was “modern”, and in it Britain “sees a mirror image of our times”. And you thought the royals’ job was to transcend the times, to add a divine-given thread of continuity beyond the grasp of prevailing trends, mores, lusts, thrusts and fashions. When did the royals get to be inclusive? When did we raise expectations of their capacity to do anything other than shoot, breed and ride?  If they are just as meaningless as the rest of us, do we all get a go at being one? If they’re just like us, what’s the point of them?



Posted: 21st, May 2018 | In: News, Royal Family Comment | TrackBack | Permalink