Charlie and the Queen

Well, that was awkward, wasn’t it? I rarely write about the United Kingdom, but when I finally get around to it, the queen dies about six hours after I submit my column. Had I mentioned a word about the Queen? Thankfully, no. My usual irreverence was not directed at Her Majesty last week, nor will it be today.

In the ensuing days, I have watched and read about some of the preparations for the Queen’s elaborate funeral, but I find the ascendency of King Charles III far more interesting. While the Queen was making every effort to stay away from politics, at least visibly, Charles weighed in quite aggressively on the side of climate activists. It will be interesting to see how, or even if, he can distance himself from that rhetoric and assume the non-partisan tradition of that office.

I am also old enough to recall the Margaret Thatcher years when the necessity of a monarch in the 20th Century was openly called into question. As we were listening to “London Calling” and “God Save the Queen” on our side of the pond, the UK was going through some very tough years economically. Thatcher’s prescription to right the economy was slow and painful, and even though it eventually worked, confidence in Britain’s institutions was shaken. Eventually, the Tories recovered, but a glamorous young queen rescued the Monarchy much sooner. As difficult as Diana was, she was a great source of popularity to the Crown.

Since the Queen’s passing, I have corresponded with a couple of friends of mine, one of whom is a lifelong UK resident, and another who is a mere subject of the Commonwealth. Both were kind enough to share their personal perspectives, and neither told me what I had expected to hear.

My college buddy Al from Queensland, Australia wrote, “Many who you would expect to not care or have no sympathy, have shared condolences. I'm no Monarchist at all, but I felt for the old Lady who did a good job at a job she had no choice to take. Those who are frothing at the mouth about colonialism have found out their views are unpalatable. The idea that present-day Royals are responsible for stuff that happened a long time ago is not resonating.”

My ultra-distant cousin Lorraine from West Midlands, UK, took a less forgiving view. Referring to the royal succession, she wrote, “I think that Charlie shouldn't be king and it should have gone to one of his sons.” She then added, “I don't think he's set a very good example for the public or for his sons, and I think it's wrong that Camilla has the title Queen Consort.”

While the tabloid-style emphasis on the personal side of the royal family initially struck me as odd, I had to remind myself that the Royals are deliberately a-political. Once the politics are taken out of the picture, then family drama takes center stage. There really isn’t a great deal more.

Even independent-minded Al from Australia took a swipe at the Mountbatten-Windsor household saying, “Megan Markle is a key liability to any push towards a Republic. In fact, the way in which anti-monarchists have behaved the last 20 years will set back any moves for a Republic.”

Taken as a whole, those comments tell me that although many respect and mourn the Queen, “Charlie,” as Lorrain would call him, may have a tough road ahead. As Americans, where does that leave us? I am a big fan of our form of government, but I have always thought that having the legislative head of state and the ceremonial head of state as two separate entities was a smart move. I think it would allow government to function more efficiently, but of course, we had a chance to live within that system and passed. In spite of our differences, our countries do indeed share a special relationship and we will watch with great interest as King Charles III takes the reigns.

Personally, I’m still a huge fan of Queen Elizabeth’s Childrens’ Hour speech during World War II. No matter what we may think of the royal family, that dignified speech from a scared young princess ranks up there with Roosevelt’s “Fear Itself” speech, and Churchill’s famous pledge, “We shall fight on the beaches….” It’s a classic from a lady who turned out to be a classic in her own right. Ultimately, I’m confident that history will look favorably on the Queen, and that’s as good a measure as any.

Having said all of that, I couldn’t help but chuckle when a Scotland Yard Commissioner predicted that the Queen's funeral would be “the biggest policing challenge in British history.” No disrespect to the Queen or Scotland Yard intended, but they may have had a tougher time policing Boston in 1775.