In addition to the the obsession of some people in the United States, there were many people analyzing and offering their opinions in columns and newscasts on why a nation which overturned British tyranny more than two hundred years ago currently believes that figurehead royals with lots of wealth and little real power are actually neat-o. Similarly, there was a strangely passionate debate on the lavishness of such a celebration in the midst of a local economy which presumably might have better things spend their money on.
As far as the first point, clearly Queen Elizabeth and the rest of the royal family are quite a departure from King George III. The Americans' affinity for Prince William and his bride to be is enhanced by the fact that he hasn't (nor will her) levy unfair taxes against us on our groceries or cereal or insist that we give quarter to British soldiers who happen to be in suburban New Jersey. The royals nowadays are cute and cuddly - they have moved away from the practice of executing people on their whim, including (much to Kate Middleton's relief) executing wives who fail to produce male heirs. They devote themselves to no-brainer non-controversial "we all agree that these are good things, let's hug each other!" causes, such as feeding children, stamping out famine and the elimination of land mines.
Americans seem to find the royals intriguing partially because we've romanticized the concept of a benevolent king and royal family who rules but does so in a way which doesn't alienate their subjects. There's probably a philosophical and theological point here, around how humans have a innate desire to be guarded, guided and yes, even ruled by a persons or persons who will note abuse that same power. Some look to the government, others look to family or other social structures. The Bible teaches us that God is the living and real Answer to that innate human longing. Unfortunately, we often substitute that longing with other things, and in some cases, we seek to grab that absolute power for ourselves.
In terms of the debate of whether such an exhibition of wealth and opulence is appropriate, I had a chance to hear a couple of commentators opine about this. Now granted, this was during the procession where William and Kate were being pulled by a horse and carriage and the camera panned to a bunch of cheering families with young girls. The commentator said something along the lines of, "This is why it's good and right to celebrate this event. Kids need to know that some fairy tales are real."
Part of me sort of scratched my head and thought, "What in the world does that mean?" Kate Middleton didn't become a Princess because she got a random visit from a fairy godmother. Yes, there is a royal family which has no political power and they live lives of celebrity. Is that's what exciting? To be famous and wealthy based on nothing except your lineage or your ability to charm someone within that lineage?
As I mentioned before, the wedding seemed like a live-action version of a Disney DVD. Like Disney, it's visual stunning and enjoyable to the senses. There's this aura of everything being right in the world and this innocence of goodness. On the other hand, like Disney, scratch beneath the surface and you see that you're in a world of make-believe - an artificial and synthetic approximation of greatness and majesty. At the end of the day, William and Kate are mere mortals like the rest of us, the ornaments mean very little.
I don't mean to rain on millions of girls' parades, including my own daughter. I appreciate that she really like to wear pink and wear a little tiara and play dress up and make believe. It's just that being a "real princess" often doesn't seem much more than that.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment