Image via Wikipedia

I loved The King’s Speech. It is a movie that shows the softer, human side of the monarchy. Colin Firth and Helena Bonham-Carter do an outstanding job in their respective roles as King George VI and Queen Elizabeth, an opinion reinforced by the numerous Oscar nods and BAFTA nominations.  Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II has also given her personal seal of approval after a private screening of the film.

The King’s Speech brings King George VI back to life again. He died so young (age 52) that generations of people grew up not knowing much about him. Now he returns to us in a glimpse of his world as “Bertie”, a simple man who transforms from a nervous prince into a noble king.

We all remember Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother. She waved graciously from underneath her wonderfully colorful hats, continually amazing us that she could still wear heels, even into her nineties. The Queen seemed infinite, the very embodiment of monarchy itself – continuity, elegance, and stability.

Elizabeth was also known for her steely resolve as Duchess of York and as a wartime queen. Bertie’s pain is evident as he struggles for words in both public and private life, and as the second son of a king, he is forced to constantly go against his grain and make speech after speech. Elizabeth is determined to help her husband overcome his impediment and shine a favorable light on the monarchy, and sets about finding a speech therapist.

The brilliant Geoffrey Rush shines as that therapist, an unconventional Australian named Lionel Logue. He was a boon to the shy Bertie. Both Elizabeth and Logue stood by him as he transitioned from Duke of York to King George VI and helped contain the worst of his anxieties in public speaking.

The Critics

It is a wonderfully told, historically accurate story. Some critics, like Christopher Hitchens, think otherwise. Hitchens has written a review of the movie in Slate.com to express his irritation.

Hitchens’ main point of contention seems to be that the film is glossing over facts such as the German appeasement and Winston Churchill’s initial support of Edward VIII. Hitchens is not incorrect, but The King’s Speech is not the movie in which to broach these topics.  Had this been a biographical movie on the entire life and reign of King George VI, then the absence of such facts would indeed be a major oversight. In the meantime, The King’s Speech is just that: it’s about the King’s speech.

Other historic events and facts can be dealt with in a bio-pic, for which we will probably not have long to wait. With successes like The Queen, The Young Victoria, and now The King’s Speech, royal life is a hot topic and is thankfully being presented in a responsible, serious manner.

God Save The King, and God Save The Queen!

An interesting “what if?” is presented by the Telegraph’s Neil Tweedie. What would have happened, he postulates, if London had fallen to the Nazis? Where would the Royal Family go if Hitler came knocking?

Had the mustached menace hopped from Calais into London, the King, Queen, and little Princesses would’ve been spirited away to Madresfield Court, inspiration for Brideshead Revisited.

Learning from the invasions of Norway and the Netherlands, the British government made plans to spread out across the countryside and continue the fight should London be captured by the Germans. Even the BBC was to be relocated should the Nazi invasion prove successful.

The Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret had already left London and were hidden away in Windsor Castle at the insistence of their parents. King George VI and Queen Elizabeth, however, remained steadfast in Buckingham Palace. Even when the Palace itself was felled by a bomb landing within the quadrangle, the royals kept calm and carried on.

“It makes me feel I can look the East End in the face,” said the Queen, referring to the damage wrought by Nazi air raids in the city.

Had those bombs overpowered the capitol or if the parachuted German airborne division loomed, Their Majesties would have been spirited out of harm’s way to Madresfield as a last resort.

Worcestershire Archaeology Service volunteer Mick Wilks says Madresfield was chosen specifically because “the house [...] was on the route to Liverpool”. If worse came to worse, the royals could set sail for Canada from the port city and live to see another day. But would London?

1947 ROYAL TOUR

The tradition began in 1932 with a Christmas radio broadcast by King George V. The queen’s grandfather was initially hesitant about using this new technology, but Sir John Reith, a founder of the BBC, reassured the king that it was reliable. Reith wanted the speech to inaugurate what was then “Empire Service”, now known as the BBC World Service.

King George V delivered the speech – written by poet Rudyard Kipling – from a small office at Sandringham, the Royal Family’s Norfolk estate. The King acknowledged the unity that this technology brought to the Empire: “I speak now from my home and from my heart to you all; to men and women so cut off by the snows, the desert, or the sea, that only voices out of the air can reach them.”

George’s eldest son, who became King Edward VIII, never delivered a Christmas speech. He abdicated in December 1936, just weeks before his first Christmas on the Throne.

George’s second son, who became King George VI, continued the tradition of royal Christmas broadcasts. The new king, affectionately known to his family as ‘Bertie’, made his first broadcast in December 1937. He thanked the public for their support during the first year of his reign.

It had been a tumultuous year. The extremely shy, quiet Bertie never thought that he would be king. Yet there he was, picking up where his elder brother left off as King-Emperor over a vast empire.

Bertie was fearful of having to deliver speeches, his stuttering often getting the better of him. Happily, with a lot of training over the years, the king became a calmer, more competent speaker whose stutter was greatly minimized.

The king gained much more confidence, which would be beneficial throughout the war years. His annual message of hope would be particularly poignant in the early months of the Second World War in 1939. It would be George’s most famous speech, made memorable by a poem which came at the end of the broadcast:

I feel that we may all find a message of encouragement in the lines which, in my closing words, I would like to say to you:

I said to the man who stood at the Gate of the Year,

“Give me a light that I may tread safely into the unknown.”

And he replied, “Go out into the darkness, and put your hand into the hand of God.

That shall be to you better than light, and safer than a known way.”

King George V had noted in the first Christmas message that the technology of radio was a powerful unifying force. It was a sentiment that would be carried into the reign of his granddaughter, Elizabeth II, who would embrace new mediums of communication via television and, eventually, the internet.

The Queen sat at the same desk and chair as her father and grandfather had used. People were awed by their lovely queen, and all across the globe they gathered around their televisions, as many still do today, and watched her speak to them.

Her hair is white now, and the lines of a lifetime of expression have gently creased her face, but Her Majesty’s message is still the same – peace and joy to all. Though not everyone is a Christian, Her Majesty extends the gentle kindness of her faith to all of her subjects equally.

Thank you to all for a wonderful year. See you in 2010!

King George VI led the nation through the Second World War with his winsome wife, Queen Elizabeth, and Prime Minister Winston Churchill. But as the war drew to a close, the king’s health began to fail. The formerly uninterested Duke of Windsor decided that he and his wife, Wallis, would take advantage of his brother’s illness and return to Britain to reign in his stead.

According to the Sunday Telegraph, Christopher Wilson, an acknowledged expert on the Royal family, has studied copies of the 1946 correspondence between Windsor friend Kenneth de Courcy and the Duke and Duchess. The plan formulated by de Courcy amounted to treason – the Duke would return from exile to reign in King George’s place, even though the Duke had already officially abdicated kingship a decade earlier. He would supplant the king’s daughter, Princess Elizabeth, the rightful heir.

To de Courcy, the ill George VI was similar to King George III during his years of madness – still technically king in name, but increasingly unable to reign. Shunting Princess Elizabeth aside could be explained away as merely keeping Lord Mountbatten from the throne. One letter explained it thus:

“I do not think it too much to say that if the Regency should be one primarily influenced by the Mountbattens [ie Lord Mountbatten and Prince Philip], the consequences for the [Windsor] Dynasty might be fatal… the Mountbattens, thoroughly well-informed of the situation, will do everything in their power to increase their influence…”

It was a plan for the Duke to become King Edward VIII once again, only this time it would be on his terms. Thankfully, such a scenario never occurred. Princess Elizabeth became Queen Elizabeth II upon the death of George VI on February 6, 1952. The Queen will celebrate 60 years on the throne in 2012.

Without your title and dynasty, you’re Victoria Beckham and you rely on the pages of Hello! magazine for your publicity. Some royals, unfortunately, don’t seem to mind that eventuality.

Princes William and Harry and their cousin Princess Beatrice seem content to live a socialite’s life with scads of money, but want none of the responsibility that comes with being royal. Hence Beatrice’s casual request, “Just call me plain Beatrice” when referred to as Her Royal Highness. God forbid you’re associated with an institution or idea that puts country before self…

Today, people are trashing tradition and putting their muddy boots up on the proverbial coffee table. They have no examples of how to behave, so now is the time for a young royal role model to step in. Serve your nation and re-establish the authority of monarchy by acting as a solid, dependable example that younger people can emulate. Make people rise to greater heights; don’t come down to suit laziness.

Returning to university, for instance, would be a good start.  William should be reading Economics or political science. His great-grandfather King George VI equated the institution of monarchy to a company, calling it ‘The Firm’. So what better way to prepare for your own role as king than to study business? Approach it as your own company and be passionate about it. Inspire your countrymen to do the same in their own lives.

That’s a big reason that a lot of the public is expecting a “closed” sign on the gates of the Palace after the death of the Queen. Younger members of the royal family drop their titles to seem “cool” and unaffected. They’re swept along in the tide of celebrity, where one can no longer distinguish Lindsey Lohan from Princess Eugenie. Knickers go amiss, drink flows freely, and paparazzi capture the tabloid shots that would even embarass a prostitute.

This new generation is so lackluster and careless, how do they expect the nation to care?

The answer: it won’t.

What will the United Kingdom do? Below, some of the top royals that the British Royal Family can look to for inspiration:

*The Netherlands’ Crown Princess Maxima was a former investment banker. She graduated with a degree in Economics from the Universidad Católica Argentina before working for large international companies in Finance in Argentina, New York and Europe.

*Queen Rania of Jordan has a degree in business from the American University in Cairo and has established scholarships in business studies. The queen’s idea is to educate Jordanians and help them to be independent as entrepreneurs.

* Crown Prince Felipe of Spain attended Autonomous University of Madrid, where he earned a degree in Law. He also completed several courses on economics. He completed his academic studies by obtaining a Master of Science in Foreign Service degree from Georgetown University.

This is all constructive criticism and, I hope, a wake-up call for the British Royal family. I feel it is very important that we discuss this sort of thing, because if the UK decides to get rid of the monarchy, it will fall in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and elsewhere.

Something of that magnitude has not happened since the war when monarchies fell across Europe due to invasion. Having it crumble due to lackluster performances and careless attitudes on the part of its members is a shattering thought. How embarrassing for the Western world…. Winston would spin in his grave.

You May Also Like:
Monarchy will never die. Here’s Why.

This year marks the 70th anniversary of “The Year of Three Kings” in 1936. So this coronation video is very poignant. King George VI and Queen Elizabeth retained King Edward VIII’s coronation date as their own.

The YouTube Video and MandysRoyalty’s Y3K page