Sign in to follow this  
papyrusbeetle

"The Crown" - disturbing family situation

12 posts in this topic

"The Crown" (a Netflix series) may not qualify as a movie in these boards, but it is a stunning production.

It is also very depressing, as we watch a person's life (Elizabeth) turn against them.

Beyond the trappings of Royalty and the governmental details, we see a woman who does not run her life, but whose life runs HER.

Plenty of Freudian background, as well as "birth-order" determinism going on here.

Elizabeth's dearest love was her Father, the King. Her nuclear family was very close and isolated.

She did not go to college, or ever live apart from that nuclear family.

She was the ELDEST, and the heir. There was no escape, was there?

There might have been, for a healthier personality.

An ISSUE in her life that no one mentions (and probably won't in the series "The Crown"), is the family drinking.
She is a CLASSIC eldest child of an alcoholic family---
perfect behavior, perfect everything to get approval from the drunks around her.
Queen Mary (her grandmother) was not above tossing down whiskey.
Her mother and father (Queen and King) really liked cocktails.
Later in her life, Princess Margaret drank-a LOT.
Elizabeth's mother (the Queen Mother) kept drinking throughout her long life (she died at 101.)
 
In fact EVERYONE in Queen Elizabeth's family could relax, except her, and she was classic un-recovered "al-anon", that is, STIFF AND PROPER.
The kingdom depended on her, and she had no one she could depend on.
She had no "boundaries", that is, whatever the Parliament or Cabinet demanded, she DID.
Because the last thing you're permitted in an alcoholic family is to:
1) say no
2) stand up for yourself.
 
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven’t watched The Crown but I do follow Queen Elizabeth as far as her public life is concerned. The UK has decided for now that they will have a monarch and Elizabeth is committed to her duty as that monarch. It seems like she’s tried to let her children live their lives out in the world more than she and previous generations of royals were allowed. They’ve accepted their lot in life and are well compensated for it. It’s just that we, the public, know everything they do so they are somewhat isolated. It appears Charles and his boys are very close to her and she leans on them a lot. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As fascinating as the whole Royal Family thing can get at times, I've often wondered at many American's obsession with England's Royal Family and why any of us here should really give a s**T.

Sepiatone

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sepiatone said:

As fascinating as the whole Royal Family thing can get at times, I've often wondered at many American's obsession with England's Royal Family and why any of us here should really give a s**T.

Sepiatone

As a Brit, this same thought has frequently occurred to me! The Royals are an integral part of British history & culture & through quirks of history have found a niche where they'll most likely continue to play a role. In the States, I think that they provide a kind of romantic glamour & backstory that folks in this relatively young country find attractive.

Plus it's probably considered classier to have an interest in the Royals than, say, the Kardashians... ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, limey said:

 

Plus it's probably considered classier to have an interest in the Royals than, say, the Kardashians... ;)

Well, ya got me there!  :P

I've wondered about those obsessions too, like the Jersey Shore bunch of nitwits, and the not-so-"real" trophy wives of who gives a sh*t where from and all that. 

I thank the good Lord or whichever "power that be" for the existence of retro TV stations, the still surviving radio, and my collection of old audio and video tapes, CDs and DVDs to help get me through the many nights of vapid programming by many stations. ;)

Sepiatone

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason that I find Queen Elizabeth fascinating has less to do with any romantic notion but more to do with the fact that she’s just always been on the world stage my entire life. She’s been through numerous prime ministers and met all the presidents except the current one. I find myself wondering how she feels about her place in history. Is she a deep thinker, or does she just go through the motions of what’s expected of her? She seems to try to keep up with the times but is part of an antiquated system. I don’t know how I’d feel if I was one of her “subjects” but I think I’d like to get to know her. I wonder if she’s ever had friends.  

I do love her jewelry though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just recently saw the rerun of an episode of "The Middle" in which Frankie Heck( Patricia Heaton), "Royal obsessed" , rents a big screen TV in order to watch the Royal Wedding( Prince William and Kate) and everything she planned went awry. One part that still kind of tickles me is when she mentions the SCONES she made special to go with the TEA she panned on drinking while watching the broadcast.  She then noticed her husband chewing on something and discovered he'd eaten all of them.  He tells her, "You're lucky I did.  They were all stale and dry."  And she shouts in exasperation, "They're BRITISH!  They're SUPPOSED to be stale and dry!" :D 

Sepiatone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What "The Crown" has forced me to do is to look at Elizabeth close up, and analyse her.

Have any of us done this, really?

Miserable as her situation is, (and perhaps the reason she is STILL hanging on to this "crown", years later) is that she might understand she doesn't want to subject anyone else in her family to it.

She's a prisoner of her own life. Fine for selling memorabilia and other "perks", but it's not good.

A lot of the reasoning for family resentments that determined the TENSION that existed seem pretty weird.

The DUKE OF WINDSOR (David) had done DECADES of "PR" for the throne, appearances, trips, etc.

He had (IMHO) done his duty, and when he wanted to lead a REAL life, with a REAL wife, he left.

Again and again, the family blames him for BURDENING the poor "Duke of York" with the job.

This insults the Duke of York, beloved as he is. He's not an invalid. He married happily and produced 2 children--he's fit enough to do that. Why can't he take the job of King?

The Duke of Windsor (David) had no heirs. Elizabeth would have been QUEEN no matter what.

It seems they were, IRL, dragging a lot of drama into a practical situation and CLINGING to it for decades.

The EMPIRE was over, anyway. They won WW2. Why all the ANGST.?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2018 at 4:50 AM, Sepiatone said:

As fascinating as the whole Royal Family thing can get at times, I've often wondered at many American's obsession with England's Royal Family and why any of us here should really give a s**T.

Sepiatone

They're like nephews/nieces. We get all the perks of pretending they're ours. But, when its time to pay for them or do for them, we send them back home !

Quote

Miserable as her situation is, (and perhaps the reason she is STILL hanging on to this "crown", years later) is that she might understand she doesn't want to subject anyone else in her family to it.

She's a prisoner of her own life. Fine for selling memorabilia and other "perks", but it's not good.

She could have stepped out the moment Charles turned 18. Anything after that is her own choice.

Quote

The DUKE OF WINDSOR (David) had done DECADES of "PR" for the throne, appearances, trips, etc.

He had (IMHO) done his duty, and when he wanted to lead a REAL life, with a REAL wife, he left.

Or maybe the fact he was pro nazi might have had something to do with it ? He was such a risk, he was sent to Jamaica during the war. Now, there's evidence that he might have been in a plot to regain the crown if the Germans had defeated England. His own father didn't want him on the throne. 

These people won the genetic lottery. If the queen is locked in a cage, surely its made of solid gold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, papyrusbeetle said:

What "The Crown" has forced me to do is to look at Elizabeth close up, and analyse her.

Have any of us done this, really?

I've not yet seen the series, but I'd be a bit wary of basing too much analysis on someone's situation, based on a dramatization designed to provide entertainment - it's not a documentary, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, GGGGerald said:

They're like nephews/nieces. We get all the perks of pretending they're ours. But, when its time to pay for them or do for them, we send them back home !

She could have stepped out the moment Charles turned 18. Anything after that is her own choice.

Or maybe the fact he was pro nazi might have had something to do with it ? He was such a risk, he was sent to Jamaica during the war. Now, there's evidence that he might have been in a plot to regain the crown if the Germans had defeated England. His own father didn't want him on the throne. 

These people won the genetic lottery. If the queen is locked in a cage, surely its made of solid gold.

The Duke of Windsor was lazy and sloppy in his affairs of State. Never wanted to be king and it showed. He was so laxidasical that  his own people thought about ways of getting rid of him.

I believe he used Wallis Warfield Simpson as an excuse just to get away from it all.  She was as shocked as anyone when she got stuck with him and no crown. Take a look at that odd wedding picture from France.

BTW-- They stuck him in Bermuda for the duration of the War.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, papyrusbeetle said:

What "The Crown" has forced me to do is to look at Elizabeth close up, and analyse her.

Have any of us done this, really?

Miserable as her situation is, (and perhaps the reason she is STILL hanging on to this "crown", years later) is that she might understand she doesn't want to subject anyone else in her family to it.

She's a prisoner of her own life. Fine for selling memorabilia and other "perks", but it's not good.

 

Miserable? I don't think so. She's probably the world's wealthiest woman -- and she's been on the stage for so long, she doesn't want to give it up. 

It's not as if she was Harry Truman with the affairs of state dumped in his lap after FDR's sudden death. She was prepared for this at a young age. And she's excelled at it. 

The only question I have about "The Crown" is whether the future episodes with Emmy winner Olivia Colman as Her Majesty will address the queen's near-assassination in New Zealand in October 1981. We just found out about that a few weeks ago.

I'd also like to see a dramatization of what may have been her finest hour -- when an intruder broke into Buckingham Palace in 1982 and entered her bedroom. According to the official story, she kept her composure and talked to the guy until her security detail showed up. I'd like to believe that that's the way it happened.

If you are unfamiliar with The Crown, it tells the story of the British Royal family, particularly the relationship between The Queen and Prince Phillip, from 1945 to the present day. As each season examines one decade, they have decided to replace the entire cast of the show every two seasons to make it look as authentic as possible.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us