The Crown on Netflix and Monarchy on my mind

I have binge-watched The Crown season 3 on Netflix. I admit I finished the whole season 2 days, not on 1 sit binge-watch!

First of all, I really like the season. I found this season better in terms of photography, script, and acting compared to the first two seasons. However, I could not find any reasonable excuse for how The Queen and Princess Margaret have brown eyes suddenly :) This disturbed me a lot as if a fly had dropped my champagne glass but I focused on the champagne part.

During the season (this is also a valid point for the first 2 seasons), we see the main events during her reign and how she handles the events together with her prime ministers. Natural disasters, economic crises, diplomatic tensions, and Royal Family-press relations construct the main theme for the season. The season also reflects the reality that the Labour Party, who is in power in the late 60s, provides leverage for anti-monarchists to express their opinions considering leftist/socialist movements, vibes around the world.

This I think a recurring theme for the British Monarchy. During WWI, They have changed their German surname, Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to Windsor. Therefore by changing it, while they were fighting against Germans, they managed to avoid confusion, cracked noises among the public which can question their Britishness and legitimacy. During the 60s, the economic crisis highlighted the Royal Family’s expenses. Abolishing monarchy again was the question. Season 3 has an episode about it which is very well documented.

The Crown Season3 Trailer- Scene for funeral The Duke of Windsor[/caption]

Not only external threats for the extinction of Royal Family do exist as mentioned above but also internal dynamics between siblings are very well observed and documented in almost every era. It was quite astonishing for me during one of the episodes “Windsor children” were described as only one of them is calm, responsible and the other one as fury, stubborn. The dialogue has ended up like that “But The Crown knows whom to go” or something like that.

Edward and George, Elizabeth and Margaret were the ones that have watched on The Crown. When we came today, literally today, William vs Harry and Charles vs Andrew are on British newspapers. The successor and the followers resemble this line from The Crown very well. Charles would like to re-define the numbers of Royal Family members and modernize it. This was exactly the thing Andrew is opposed to. The rift between William and Harry is publicly discussed by Harry and Meghan, widely concerned by the public and newspapers. Therefore I think, the monarchy is still facing these rifts.

Source for photo: https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/media/2019/11/prince-andrews-newsnight-interview-perfect-example-how-not-manage-scandal[/caption]

Not to mention yesterday Prince Andrew stepped down from his royal duties due to the Epstein scandal. Prince Andrew defined his friendship with this sex offender as ok and does not show any sympathy or apologetic behavior for the victims of him. After his car-crash interview, a Liberal MP Chuka Umunna summarizes perfectly how people feel about the monarchy and what Prince Andrew should do. I think people in Buckhingam listen and consider carefully loosing sponsors.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYtbdOI7QT8

Chuka says, Monarchy symbolizes stability for British people, he is right when thinking about they are dealing with Brexit for months, changing governments and going to an election. When these instabilities occur, people rely on monarchy and queen and they trust it.

Then I understand the function of monarchy, I mean constitutional monarchy, a figure, an institution that allows chosen ones to comfort, create another way when they stuck without intervening. However, it still triggers the question, “what if The Crown goes to the wrong person?”, “How can we secure the “suitable” Windsor or any royal family child to be chosen for The Crown?”.