Why I'm not enthusiastic about Harry's Wedding

I'm a traditional royalist. Meaning a royal sympathizer who adheres to the royal customs that have been the ethos of European royalty down the ages. 

I've been a royal observer for 20 years now. And had spent more than half of my life delving on the intricate world of royals, familiarizing the royal protocol and decorum. I could trace the royal family tree of the current European royal houses without checking the books. 

Naturally, I built a unique emotion around this fascination and considered royals as above everyone else. Untouchables. Regal. Dutiful. High in the pedestal, worthy of adulation. I became a royalist during the time monarchies of Europe still upholding the prestige of the crown by keeping it away from the "outsiders". During the time they still considered marrying commoners as unthinkable. During the time they were trying their best to protect the royal court from intrigues and controversies. Because during those years royals were considered sublime, expected to keep their status untarnished.

They're different from ordinary human beings because they have a unique role in the society. They're the unifying symbols of their country and expected to behave in a royalty manner exemplified by the court of Queen Victoria and King Christian IX. And in such a way made them worthy to wear crowns and carry titles.

The Queen bestowed him the title of 

Duke of Sussex, a noble title which has not been used by any member of the British royal family since the Middle Ages 

But it's the 21st century. The modern world requires royals to make some adjustment to be more responsive to the call of times. I understand that. They need to function like any normal human beings, and get in touch with the common people. However, I don't see any reason for the royal court to undergo a major shake up, to the point of making themselves too common to the public. It doesn't make sense.  It threatens the existence of the monarchy.

But some of them went too far in lowering down the barrier between royals and commoners. Far too low that the royal court is already vulnerable to scandals and intrigues. This makes royals no different from ordinary people. So why they still wear crowns and carry titles when they are no longer upholding the dignity it represents? 

Most European royals went too far with their intention to get in touch with outsiders by taking commoners with no aristocratic background as spouses. This lifted the veil of secrecy that has been protecting the existence of the monarchy since the early times. 

Megan Markle is the first woman with African descent to marry a senior member of the British royal family 

This is the reason why I'm not enthusiastic with Harry's wedding. Too common. It lacks luster. The event further reduces the status of British royals to mere celebrities instead of untouchables in crown and scepter. In fact, marrying Markle yanks the very foundation of the British monarchy. A slap to the honor of the court that King George VI was trying to build after his older brother left the throne to marry a twice divorced commoner, who, just like Markle, an American.

The flow of the royal blood line is now disrupted and the royal court gets tainted with roots that cannot be traced from any royal family tree. Royal mystic ceases and no longer exemplifies charm. So why royalty still be allowed to exist when they're no longer different from the rest of us? If they can't uphold and protect the dignity and prestige of the crown then perhaps scrap the monarchy and switch to republic. 

In 1956, Queen Elizabeth II refused to attend the wedding of Prince Rainier of Monaco because he was marrying a commoner Hollywood star, Grace Kelly. The Queen was heard commenting "too many film stars". It was thought possible the Queen disliked being in the company of film stars. Ironically, more than six decades later, she would grant permission to her grandson to marry a woman from the field she detested. How unfortunate. 

The royal family has been known with their indifference towards film stars. When Prince Charles was still single, his uncle, Lord Mountbatten, and his father, Prince Philip made sure he would not get involve with celebrities. As future King of England Charles was expected to take an aristocratic wife. Prince Philip was even harder on his second son's love life. When Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, became enamoured with Koko Stark, an actress, the Duke of Edinburgh made sure the woman would be out of Andrew's life for good. 

Megan Markle is everything the royal family is despised. If the year is 1980. She is divorce, a film actress, an American, and has an African blood on her mother's side. Her inclusion to the royal family is deemed unthinkable. And Prince Harry would be mostly stripped of his royal title and inheritance. And would be ostracized from the British royal Court forever just like King Edward VIII.

However, 2018 is no longer 1980. The royals are now given the liberty to choose who they want to take as a spouse. But Prince Harry seems went too far with his choice. In 2016, when he started dating Ms. Markle, I thought it was only a temporary obsession and Ms. Markle, an inconceivable choice for a wife of a British prince so close to the throne, would be part of the statistics of Harry's love life. And because at that time I was hoping Harry would rekindle his romance with Cressie Bonas, an aristocrat whose mother, Lady Mary, was a direct descendant of King Charles II of England, just like Harry's mother, Diana. 

To my chagrin, their engagement was announced early this year. I was hoping for an opposition from the Duke of Edinburgh, a staunch protector of the royal custom,  or even the Queen who is not comfortable with the company of film stars. But Prince Philip is already old, at 96 he has done so much for the British monarchy, and already  tired expressing his opinion about inappropriateness and the correctness of royal decorum. Nothing was heard about the Duke of Edinburgh. Or even the Queen.

But did Harry was right in taking her as his wife? In papers, he didn't. Markle, just like Kate Middleton, is far from suitable as per royalty standard. Both of them didn't fill the bill of being appropriate choices to marry the most senior members of the British royal family. None of them born into the aristocracy. Though I understand that royals need to live a normal life. It doesn't warrant a full liberty of choices because they have a unique position in the establishment they belonged and have certain duties to fulfill. They just couldn't make mad decisions.

In 1940s, Prince Philip was reportedly in love with a society figure named Cobina Wright, but she was a commoner, and he knew by standard he couldn't marry a commoner. And because at that time, just like Prince Harry, he was sixth in line of succession to the throne (in Greece). He was molded to marry a fellow royal who would be Queen of England. In 1947, Elizabeth and Philip married. But they've a happy and successful marriage.

It only means marriages between the upper-class are not always lonely. And it is less than scandalous because royals are raised to a certain custom and protocol that only their circle understands. Any outsiders who joined the royal family often yieleded to pressure. Untutored with royal etiquette, they eventually brought disaster  to the very foundation of the royal myth that defines the survival of monarchies in the 20th century.

In 1996, the royal family triumphantly "expelled" out the scandal-prone Duchess of York from their exalted circle. The Duke of York's wife, known as Fergie, constantly hugged headlines with her misadventures, making the monarchy appeared more like a carnival than a dignified institution. Until the couple decided to divorce to spare the court from further humiliation.

Fast forward 2018, it looks like the royal family didn't learn a lesson. And recruited someone who is in the ranks of Fergie. Megan Markle came from a dysfunctional family and who seems not in good terms with her siblings. Before the royal wedding, her brother sent an open letter to Prince Harry pleading not to push through with the wedding. Stating that marrying his sister would be the biggest royal mistake. That  his sister is a pretentious bitch with a fake personality. And just wants to be another Diana. Harry of course didn't listen. Because to chicken out from the royal wedding is the biggest scandal that will hit the British establishment since Prince Charles resumed his love affair with Camilla while still married to Diana.

Peering on the controversial open letter of Megan's brother, it's easy to see where all this inappropriateness is heading. And this is further aggravated when her father was involved in a controversy that almost rocked the royal wedding preparations. Thomas Markle Sr. was involved in a shameful headline of staging photos for paparazzi. He arrived in London a week before the wedding and was scheduled to meet Prince Charles and the Queen. It was also  announced that he will walk his daughter down the aisle. 

The unfortunate event happened on May 12 when it was reported he conspired with a paparazzi to stage a fake paparazzi photo invading his privacy  to be sold to magazines. This was a big blow to the reputation of the Markles who have been creating headlines in the past weeks about their family row. The future bride was put in a very bad light. But the date has been set and none in recent memory that a royal prince cancelled a wedding. 

Megan's father disappeared in the background and the scheduled meeting with Harry's family didn't happen. The event threatened a potential scandal and for a while many have questioned the suitability of Megan Markle joining the very public life of the royal family. Will she not create a scandalous circumstance in the future granting her dysfunctional background? 

The mess created by Mr.Markle was cleaned out by the publicity machine of the palace. In part because it involves the British establishment. It was announced that Prince Charles will be the one to walk down the bride in the church, unheard for any wedding even for ordinary people. Where in the world did you ever hear that the father of the groom is the one escorting his future daughter-in-law down the church aisle? So unthinkable.

Now, even before the wedding, the royal family already gets a perfect view what potential scandal this outsider recruit is capable of. I could still hear the classic warning of Andrew Morton about British  royals marrying commoners, "Grafting commoners into the Hanoverian (the blood line of the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh) tree proved to be very disastrous".

The inclusion of Megan Markle into the royal family tore the last strand that binds the prestige of the crown and the class of the monarchy. No longer as exalted as before, they ceased to exist as royalty in the real sense of the word. They make themselves too accessible, losing their upper-class standard.

Though everyone seems enthralled that Ms. Markle opens up the possibility for every ordinary girl of becoming a duchess, it allows the royal court to appear too ordinary. No longer a revered institution they once possessed. This makes royals nothing but ordinary people reduced to merely society figures.  And no longer worthy of adulation.

Magic has gone. And the mystic of the British crown has thoroughly eroded. When he ascends the throne, Prince Charles will be the first British King ever to have a commoner family.

I haven't updated my ROYALS OF EUROPE blog, in part because I lost fascinations towards royals marrying commoners. Too ordinary to be adored.