Gawd bless 'er!! (and all who sail in her)

On British monarchy as a reflection of the state of Britain "You have no idea (maybe you do) how a posh English accent can turn a certain class of Americans (I hail from that class) weak at the knees. The admiration -- grudging or otherwise -- for everything from Britain's high culture to the monarchy and the manners and ritual of daily life in the English upper crust is (or at least was) palpable in so much of the US (it would have to be a major theme in any cultural history of the US -- anxiety of influence at a national level; Henry James vs. Mark Twain if you will)." - Sick Rose (https://www.boychat.org/messages/1638516.htm) I was going to say something in response to this when SR first posted it - something along the lines of "oh yes, of course we love our monarchy - us English love a good panto, especially around Christmas", but I thought this might not exactly be in keeping with the sentiment expressed. Maybe my problem is that I absolutely love Mark Twain, and have a substantial Twain section in my library, as (I think) must all boysexual men. As for Henry James, I've certainly read critics extol him as a genius, and "do in part believe it" (as Horatio says), but I've never been a huge enthusiast, except possibly for The Turn of the Screw. Still, SR's remark did lead me along a train of thought - do we in England have a somewhat less reverential attitude to our dear beloved monarch than "a certain class of Americans" peering from afar into the pissant swamp that is modern Britain? Yes, I must admit that I loved King Charles' coronation for its satisfyingly high pretty-English-boy quotient. Of course, the whole thing might have been improved in some ways. For example, as well as Camilla being crowned, I thought it would have been a nice touch to the ceremony if she had entered the chamber unshod, and then the Archbishop of Canterbury, after placing the crown on her head, could have produced from beneath his robes a pair of Diana's old shoes, and placed them on Camilla's feet - and then Camilla, whilst still sitting, could then stretch her feet out in front of her, stare at the shoes, and say: "oh look -- they fit!" I think that would have been a worthy addition to the ceremonies. (Don't get me wrong. I greatly prefer Camilla to Diana! I remember some interview when Diana was whining that on her wedding night Charles was less interested in the marital bed than in reading a volume of Laurens van der Post... I've been on Charles' side ever since.) And then again, there was that awful Welby idiot, positively screwing the crown on Charles' head. For God's sake, just stop! How many people in Britain have a truly reverential attitude to the monarch? Very difficult to tell, though I suppose some idea might be gained from the fact that a quarter of a million filed past the late Queen's coffin back in 2022. Still, for most of the population, I imagine the monarchy is just a source of moderate entertainment. The only problem is that its entertainment value has slid downhill of late. We've got that awful Prince Harry. Even the title of his ghost written book - Spare - was a wallowing in self-pity - oblivious to the fact that to be the "spare", i.e. to have all the wealth and privilege without any of the corresponding duties, would be an enviable position for the vast majority of the subjects over whom his father reigns. But the Ginger Whinger is only a symptom. The fact is that the Windsors are now a woke monarchy - and what on earth's the point of that? Charles has done his level best to distance himself from Andrew. And William has said publicly that he wants his coronation to be less about tradition and more "relevant". Oh dear. Let's face it, this is the dregs. Is it time to get shot of the monarchy? The problem is that the English republicans, even if they were more than a tiny corpuscle, cannot agree on what would replace it - a merely ceremonial head of state, or something more like the US President? The fact is that everyone knows that the British monarchy will go on and on, for no other reason than that it would be too much trouble to abolish it. Would I like to see the end of the monarchy? If instead of the King we could have President David Attenborough, then yes. Unfortunately, the prospect of President Keir Starmer is somewhat less appealing, as he goes about trying to make savings by taking money not from the wealthy but instead from the disabled (I kid you not). (Of course this just means he won't last beyond 2029. If Labour won't protect its working class base, then they will have no reason to remain loyal - and although they won't vote Tory, they will vote for Farage. Goodbye Labour.) I have to be honest, I have a certain nostalgia for the late Queen, now she's gone. She was just always there - including always there to make fun of - and one just imagined she'd always be around, on into the next century; by then, of course, as a brain in a vat, though still with the royal tiara sitting on top. Charles seems a decent enough chap, even if he spouts the Establishment nonsense of Russia's invasion being "unprovoked" (well, the King was hardly likely to be anti-Establishment, was he?). But the future? King William? I absolutely dread the thought - and even "a certain class of Americans" might struggle to go "weak at the knees" when, at the next coronation, Handel is ditched in favour of some (suitably PC) rapper.