§13 The Royal Wedding: An Early Gesture of ‘Glamocratic’ Diplomacy
Tags: History, The Spectator, Glamocracy, Royal Wedding

News began to circulate this week about the guest list for the marriage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle next month. With Teresa May, the Obamas and Donald Trump not making the cut, emphasis was made about who will not be attending the marriage rather than who will.

The decision (taken by The Royal Household) not to have political heads of state in attendance is not just a careful strategic move in a highly divisive political time, but the first diplomatic gesture from a ‘new type’ of royal couple. As Harry Mount pointed out in The Spectator late last year, the marriage of these two marks ‘a deep shift at the top end of British society’: ‘the aristocracy has given way to the glamocracy’ he declared … ‘[t]hese days, young royalty and aristocracy are increasingly mixing with, and marrying, international money, beauty and fame.’ Indeed. One cannot help but think the Obamas would have been invited if the wedding took place this time two years ago and there wasn’t the same risk of mass protest that there is if Trump was to step foot onto British soil.

The decision of who not to invite is a sign that this new ‘glamocracy’ is starting to explore its remit and spread its glamorous wings. The important thing, it seems, is that it doesn’t spread them too far, often, or flap them too vigorously. We Brits are a fickle bunch, especially when it comes to the one family we all keep in common (whatever our opinions on the legitimacy of the institution).

If anyone is likely to flap too hard, it is Miss Markle who is being scrutinized by the British public ever since they were introduced to her in the couple’s first shared interview following their engagement.

When Channel 4 Gogglebox’s resident hairdressers “Stephen and Christopher” heard that she was looking forward to visiting the Commonwealth as our future princess, they had the following exchange:*

Stephen: ‘”Oh, I’d like to go round the Commonwealth”, well don’t think we’re going to fucking pay for it! Bloody cheek! Yeah, I’d just like to have a cruise round the Commonwealth myself love, but I’ve got a business to run!

I’ve gone right off her. How pushy is she? Sit there and be a little bit demure and a bit quiet. Remember Katherine and Wills? Katherine spoke but she was very soft and kept it to a minimum.’

Christopher: She’s got too much of a voice. Give it time though, he’ll whip her into shape. You know what Americans are like, they like giving it a bit of that.

Stephen: I’ve gone off her … I reckon she’s trouble.

Between them, these two are as perceptive as Alex de Tocqueville in this brief armchair analysis. The Americans are, after all, said to be ‘shallower, freer with their money, friendlier, more uncertain of themselves and their values, and more demanding of approval than the Europeans.’** What is more, as A.N. Wilson put it to another Spectator writer last year, Markle has to make the British people comfortable ‘bowing or curtseying to her’. This is no small feat, and as this ‘new type’ of Royal couple are brought together in front of us on the 19thMay, they are glamocratic guinea pigs with no blueprint for how to conduct themselves in this highly turbulent time.

/Pete Watt

* Quoted in full due to copyright on the clip restricting viewing outside the UK https://twitter.com/Channel4/status/936706441762578432

** Riesman, David, Nathan Glazer, Reuel Denney, and Todd Gitlin. 1950. The Lonely Crowd: A Study of the Changing American Character. New Haven Conn.: Yale University Press., p. 19.