I don't know if the monarchy has changed much in the 35 years in between so it must have been me. I haven't decked the house out in bunting or bought anything with a Union Jack on it but I haven't been 'anti' either. The Republican case seems to be in retreat, similar to the anti-Stratfordian case in Shakespeare Studies. It seemed to have a case but gradually that case seems to have evaporated and its adherents now are apparently those die-hard stalwarts who never give up and would play chess for 30 more moves in an obvously lost position just for the sake of it.
I haven't become a cavalier and many of my objections to so-called leftist thought are on the grounds that I find myself too 'left' for them, that I find them mean-spirited, envious and grasping. As was explained in the recent TV series on the 1970's, Dominic Sandbrook saw Arthur Scargill as 'Thatcherite', simply out for what he could get. So many things that said they wanted equality- be they feminism or Black Power- really believed in the superiority of their 'minority'. This really came to a head for me when my now monk friend tried to tell me that the Catholic Church was a persecuted minority. I know, I know, it's a complicated game.
But, for me, being left wing was supposed to be about making the world a nicer place. I know there's no such thing as 'fair'. But despising people for what you perceive them to have that you don't is materialistic and I'm not sure that having stuff is ever going to be the point. The point is that if you have enough, you should give to others, not try to get more. And many of those descrying the privileged position of the Queen are also those striking to preserve their privileged pension rights in the hope that they can retire early to a life of leisure while the Queen has to endure the underwhelming prospect of standing to watch a long procession of very ordinary boatage float past her in the rain at the age of 86.
David Mitchell in The Observer gets as close to being right as possible by being engaged to Vicky Coren. No, not that. My mind was wandering for a moment. By asking what the Republicans would replace the monarchy with,
Personally, I don't mind the monarchy. I know a lot of people do, but I just don't. I know it's old-fashioned, illogical, pantomimic and unjust. But it's also unimportant, entertaining and, crucially, already there. Not liking the institution is not a good enough reason for getting rid of it. You've got to have a reasonable expectation that the republican alternative – probably some sort of presidency cooked up by contemporary politicians (and you know who they are) – would be an improvement. I say better the devil you know. Particularly when it isn't a devil but a smiling old woman, albeit with a colossal sense of entitlement.
If the human race has decided beyond all possible going back on the decision to divide itself along national, racial and religious lines, many of them with built-in motivations to go to war, then the country seems to need a titular chairperson. The recent examples that our democracy has offered us, in Thatcher, Major, Blair, Brown and Cameron have not been quite as terrifying as the C20th provided other countries with but they do still look a bit cheap and nasty compared to Elizabeth II.
It might seem a good thing that she lives and works at her appointment for as long as she can to keep the heir to the throne out of the job for as long as possible but there's an in-built flaw in that plan whereby Charles the Next has every right to expect to live as long as his parents did and so it's only a delaying tactic.
But, all that besides, you get a free pop concert- the likes of which the likes of Hawkwind used to champion in the long-haired early 70's, one in which Elizabeth reportedly asked that Cliff be involved in so that she might feel only middle-aged rather than old compared to many of the performers; no Republican I know ever objects to an extra Bank Holiday; she likes horse racing and gin; she doesn't regard her position as a privilege but as a duty and you couldn't do it.
Yesterday's pageant of boats was a long-drawn-out damp squib as far as I could see (partly but not entirely the weather's fault) and no amount of professional commentary could disguise that. My biggest concern was Kate Middleton's waistline. I don't know if we are so used to seeing fat people these days that a healthy figure is starting to look unusual but I think she could use a nice bag of chips once or twice a week. We've seen thin princesses before and it didn't end happily that time.
But the Republican argument, like the anti-Shakespeare argument and the variety of leftist political groups in 1977 that I went to, and at University, seem to have their own little private discontent to themselves. When the left in the late 70's was divided into the Tribune Group, the SWP, Vanessa's Worker's Revolutionary Party, the Communist Party of Great Britain and all, they preferred to argue among themselves rather than attack Thatcherism together. Let's see what they've got if they can agree that they have anything.
The recent BBC programme on Cavaliers and Roundheads had so many themes to it that it was hard to find one's place in it but I'm still a Roundhead as far as I can tell. Those who remember me batting will think I was cavalier but not really. I find myself on balance to be darkly moralistic, especially on behalf of others, and potentially Cromwellian with Cavalier tendencies on the distaff side (a taste for Handel, mainly).
I think I might have things in common with the Queen. I think she might secretly be a bit of a Roundhead, too. I think it's the Republican cause, so pumped up own its righteousness, that needs to consider whether it isn't becoming a bit too cavalier.
