LONDON ( Associated Press) – In public he always presents a united front, but Prince Harry has a very different story to tell about British royalty and the way it operates.
Harry’s explosive autobiography, with its damning allegations of a toxic relationship between the monarchy and the press, could accelerate the pace of change already underway within the House of Windsor following the death of Queen Elizabeth II.
Enrique’s portrayal of royals leaking adverse information about other family members in exchange for positive cover for himself is one of the more scandalous allegations posted this week in his book “Spare.” The prince specifically accused Camila, the wife of King Carlos III, of turning private conversations over to the media as she sought to rehabilitate her image after her long affair with Carlos when he was heir to the throne. Was.
Far from the unity presented to the public, the royal family and each other’s servants are portrayed as scheming rivals, at odds with each other as long as they or their boss look better in the public eye. Ready to stab in the back. The palace described by Henry resembles a modern version of the court of King Henry VIII, where courtiers vied for the emperor’s favor and some lost their heads.
The book gives an impression of a deeply dysfunctional British royal family, whose members are so concerned about the tabloids that they are forced to make deals with journalists, “The Family Firm: Monarchy, Mass Media and the British Public, 1932 says Ed Owens, author of -53” (The Family Firm: The Monarchy, the Mass Media and the British Public, 1932–53). And the public, when faced with this claim, may weigh the situation more carefully.
“I think some kind of reset is needed, and we need to think carefully about what monarchy is, what role it plays in society,” says Owens, a historian. “Because this idea: ‘We, the British taxpayer, pay and in return they perform’, is a really corrupt and failed equation.”
Heavily funded by taxpayers, the monarchy plays a largely ceremonial role in British society these days: they are the masters of soft power. However, its supporters argue that the institution still plays an important role, uniting the country behind shared history and traditions, in the grandeur of royal ceremonies and the opening of schools and hospitals, in the daily work of royals and in serving the nation. Respects people.
News coverage of the royal family typically falls into one of two categories: carefully arranged public presentations, or sometimes chaotic stories about the royals’ private lives based on anonymous sources, but a change may be coming.
The history of colonialism—so closely intertwined with that of the Taj—is being re-examined around the world. Protesters vandalized or vandalized statues in British cities, and internationally respected universities such as Oxford and Cambridge are changing their course offerings. It all comes down to one thing: An institution that was once a symbol of the British Empire now faces scrutiny like never before.
Charles, who became king after the death of Queen Elizabeth II in September, faces the challenge of modernizing Britain’s 1,000-year-old monarchy to ensure its survival. He has already said that he plans to reduce the number of royals and reduce the cost of the monarchy.
It should have happened long ago, perhaps, but it was delayed for one major reason: Isabel herself.
Personal affection for the Queen meant that the role of the monarchy was rarely debated in British society during her seven decades on the throne. Now that she’s gone, the royal family faces questions about its relevance in a modern, multicultural nation that looks very different from when Elizabeth ascended the throne in 1952.
In Isabel’s world—governed by the mantra “never complain, never explain”—the kind of personal revelation in Enrique’s book would have been unimaginable. describes her mental health difficulties following the 1997 car crash in which her mother, Princess Diana, died; recounts a physical altercation with his older brother, Prince William; reveals how he lost his virginity and describes using cocaine and cannabis.
“Spare” is the latest attempt by Harry and his wife Meghan to tell their story after leaving royal life and moving to California in 2020, arguing what they saw as racist treatment of Meghan and a lack of support Saw the palace.
In a ghostwritten autobiography, Harry, 38, claims Camilla liaised with the British press and exchanged information on her way to becoming Queen Consort, essentially providing the press with unfavorable stories about Harry and Meghan. in return for better coverage of himself.
The allegations are particularly sensitive because of Camilla’s role in the acrimonious breakdown of Carlos and Diana’s marriage. While Camilla was initially shunned by many members of the public, she has earned fans by undertaking a wide range of charitable activities, and Carlos is credited with helping to create an image that is less rigid and closer to Britain. With more modern.
Stephen Glover, a columnist for the Daily Mail, argued in his defense that Harry was very touchy.
“I dare say that some members of the royal family have fed stories to the press through their courtiers over the years, but it is absurd and naïve to speculate that this is part of a planned effort to destabilize Harry and Meghan.” Was part.”, wrote. “The royals are not puppets of the press, as – if they have any sense at all – they realize that they can be admired and admired too. Those who are wise enough to embrace both the rough and the smooth know.”
Unlike Elizabeth, however – who famously indicated that “some memories may differ” when faced with allegations of racism following Meghan’s interview with Oprah Winfrey in 2021 – Buckingham Palace met Charles’ rule with silence. responded to the first great crisis of
This has allowed Enrique to dominate headlines on both sides of the Atlantic, apparently being served tequila on late-night American TV shows and repeatedly talking about the House of Windsor’s filth.
Since this isn’t the first scandal to rock Buckingham Palace — among other high-profile events, Elizabeth’s uncle abdicated the throne to marry a divorced American — many of those who bought Harry’s book on Tuesday are sure The institute seemed to weather the storm.
James Bradley, 61, who bought a copy, said: “They just have to shut it down and stay royal.” “After the Queen’s death, the value of the royal family has never been higher in my life, and it’s just about to fade away. In six months we won’t be talking about it.”
But Steven Barnett, a professor of communications at the University of Westminster, imagines Harry’s revelation could force the palace to become more transparent, perhaps on the lines of other institutions such as the White House or the British prime minister’s office at 10 Downing Street. .
Barnett says, “They have done us a favor by exposing the nature of the collusion, the conspiratorial nature of the relationship between the royal family and the British press.” “He has to change the way he deals with the press. And that’s a good thing. It’s a good thing for the monarchy and it’s a good thing for British society.”