Once again, Britons are being fêted for what we are good at.
Dame Helen Mirren’s Oscar for The Queen (note the Dame, it is a big part of this story) is further evidence of the UK’s fantastic reserves of outstanding acting and artistic talent.
I, for one, am prepared to put up with a lot of luvvie nonsense if this helps get the message through that the arts are a great British success story and need public and political support. Anyone heard from the arts minister lately?
But, this year, the news from Hollywood feels even more resonant. Yes, we do acting very well. But weren’t the Academy casting their votes not just for an actress, but for the subject of the film too, Elizabeth Windsor?
This Oscar helps define our national story as well as our artistic accomplishments. How ironic then that the film’s raw material — the massive popular reaction to the death of Diana, Princess of Wales — represents one of the darkest moments in the long history of the British monarchy.
And how very British of us to allow the film to turn the story of this very public crisis into a private, domestic and rehabilitating drama.
Whether intentionally or not, The Queen has helped push the monarchy back on to the short list of British institutions that are untouchable — at least while this particular monarch remains in charge. Her Majesty is reported, reasonably enough, to be ‘quietly pleased’.
The film’s success tells us some very important things about the state of Britain today.
Ten years can indeed be a long time in politics. Back in 1997, a fresh-faced Tony Blair spoke of the ‘people’s princess’ and struggled to gain control of and shape the public’s resentment at the royal family’s behaviour. Many leading Labour figures had recently questioned the Windsors’ role and status. There was said to be a strong core of republicans in the Cabinet.
For a few days at least, the Palace was in retreat. Hard to credit now, but for many people it felt almost like a revolutionary moment. The prime minister rescued the royal family by appearing to confront it.
Can we imagine Blair being willing or able to take on such a role today? No matter. There is no need. Even those who are firmly opposed to the monarchy accept there is nothing to be done, for now at least.
But we shouldn’t misread today’s apparent consensus and conclude that the monarchy is no longer influential in our national life.
As TV and other schedules are cleared for the tenth anniversary of Diana’s death later this year, and while the big royal news concerns Prince Harry serving in Iraq, many see the monarchy as all about show business and of no real consequence. Yes, we can admire the Queen and respect her sang-froid. But royals are symbolic, not real.
Commentators argue that the monarchy has become part of our celebrity and pop-star culture, slipping away from real constitutional significance. Even the state opening of Parliament, the day on which the Queen’s role as head of state is most obviously expressed, seems to be more about promoting tourism than good government.
But The Queen can help us to understand how we are seen and how we view ourselves. Symbols are very important, perhaps even more so in today’s world of global communication. We can celebrate Elizabeth’s new-found status.
But this look in the mirror tells us other things as well. For instance, it will confirm and underscore how Britain is viewed abroad. We are
half-modernised. No wonder we still have hereditary peers in the House of Lords when the hereditary principle decides our head of state.
It has also elevated the monarchy as one of the very few institutions, along with the armed services, that are both British and strong. As devolution starts to bite, London, Cardiff and Edinburgh draw further apart. There is a shortage of unifying ties, and the political class does not appear able to fill the gap.
And, third, a strengthened monarchy will inhibit still further a sense that significant reform of our constitution is needed. Where are the great plans for reviving local government?
The latest proposals for Lords’ reform are half-hearted, and even they look unlikely to succeed. And Britain still stands apart from serious engagement in the reform of the European Union’s institutions following the French and Dutch rejection of the constitution.
Of course, the Queen does not interfere in politics. Nor will her son, despite his strong views on the environment and business.
But, whether as symptom or cause, the standing of the monarchy reflects our society and, in turn, has an impact on it. At the moment, the politicians are down and the royals are up. A lot can change, and probably will when this reign eventually ends. But, for now at least, The Queen is winning all the prizes.
