The essence of what happens is very basic. The King and Queen arrive at Parliament and the King gives a speech announcing what the government intends to do in the next year.
If that's all he did, easy peasy. But along with that goes all the overblown grandiosity that hardly anybody dares to question.
- The King and Queen travel to Parliament in a horse-drawn golden coach
- When they arrive, the national anthem is played and a gun salute is sounded in Green Park
- Sarah Clarke, the Black Rod, has to summon MPs to hear the speech
- The Serjeant at Arms leads the procession of MPs with a ceremonial mace
- The King and Queen wear ceremonial crowns and outfits
- Various other items of royal regalia like the Great Sword of State are used in the state opening
I can't imagine the King himself enjoys all this unnecessary baloney. Probably he gets back to the Palace and says to Camilla "Thank God that's over. All that theatrical rigmarole. Pass the gin, darling."
I long for some amusing glitch in the proceedings. Like the crown falling off the King's head or him having a coughing fit in mid-speech. But no such luck.
Pic: King Charles looks forward to his G and T
I don’t mind tradition, but I just can’t get past how awful he was to Diana. He just seems like an unpleasant person, all around.
ReplyDeleteBijoux: Oh, I never really followed all the Charles and Diana stuff. But they were clearly such an ill-matched couple I assumed the hidden agenda was simply to have some heirs to the throne.
DeleteAmericans (and others) must be quite bemused by the absurd pomp and ceremony of the British State Opening of Parliament
ReplyDeleteActually, we're too busy being bemused at the endless poo-flinging contest going on in our own House of Representatives.
Every day is gun salute day in this country. And we had to stop the Great Sword of State thing since the time Anthony Weiner was put in charge of it and misunderstood. However, the ceremonial mace is very popular in Washington DC -- it's just that we use it for spraying at muggers.
If Trump becomes president again he might try to introduce similar pomp and ceremony here, except it will be a horse-drawn golden toilet.
Seriously, the extra ceremony may be a eccentric, but I don't see any real harm in it unless it's exorbitantly expensive. It sounds like the monarchy itself -- it no longer serves any real purpose, but it's not worth the effort and controversy of getting rid of it.
It must be strange for Charles, though. There aren't many people who, when their parents die, inherit not only their money but also their job.
Infidel: It's hard to discover the cost of the state opening but I imagine it's several million at least, which could be put to much better use. But you're probably right, trying to get rid of it would cause an almighty fracas.
ReplyDeleteI like that every country is a little (or a lot) different. Makes the world that much more interesting.
ReplyDeleteColette: As a general rule, I agree. But a load of pompous rigmarole we could well do without?
DeleteOh, my. He looks so old. goes you would if you waited as many years as he did to inherit.
ReplyDeleteLinda
Linda: Yes, he must have wondered if he would die himself while he was waiting for the Queen to bow out.
DeleteThe Wee King. The crown looks heavier than him. I bet he has the divil of a headache once he takes it off.
ReplyDeleteXO
WWW
www: He must spend the whole ceremony worrying that his crown will topple. Or maybe it's glued on for the occasion?
DeleteMay the crown fall off some time or another and land on his toe. He was an over time pig concerning Diana. And his queen is little better.
ReplyDeleteJoanne: I never followed the Charles-Diana stuff very closely so I have no opinion on that. But he's certainly a huge hypocrite, declaring all his green credentials while travelling around the world in luxury transport.
DeleteThe problem with pared back ceremony is that when all the grandeur is stripped away, there's nothing left to signify the importance of the event.
ReplyDeleteI agree that gold carriages and so on feel excessive but a democratically elected parliament is something to celebrate
Kylie: Oh, I think the King's Speech is always seen as important, because it details what the government intends to do over the next year. But don't get me started on democracy.
DeleteNick, I will never understand how the British population stand on the streets to applaud such a ridiculous pomp. Charles looks awful and his wife not better , really what a stupid life they represent. And in Great Britain people have daily problems to afford their living costs and all this pomp involves enormous amounts of money. Quite disgusting in my eyes and nothing to do with tradition.
ReplyDeleteHannah
Historically it's complicated. And it's not just the Royals; what about the House of Lords? Even some of the Lords want it abolished as antiquated.
DeleteWatch a session in the Commons, say "Prime Minister's Question Time". It's comical. Even more interesting so as, on one hand the English are famed for their stiff upper lip, showing little emotion, yet they stage dramas and slanging matches, the Speaker of the House (where are you Bercow?) stoking fires whilst calming the water. England is not for nothing the land of Shakespeare.
Unlike you, Hannah, I look upon the Royal spectacle with bemusement. Not being English (though I have lived most my adult life in England) all the pomp and glory amount to a sort of spectator sport. And, sometimes, it's pure gold, like fairy tales: The Wedding and Diana's funeral. Yes, I sat through both televised events, spellbound, - a bit like a young child when being read fairy tales about frogs, wicked stepmothers, sleeping princesses. Enter the prince. Or the wolf in sheep's clothing.
As an aside: You can hardly hold it against Charles that he looks a bit worn round the edges. In three days' time he'll be 75. I would probably look vaguely crumpled too if I had to wait for the job I was groomed to do all my life, waiting for Mummy (who appeared unable to abdicate in favour of her son) to die.
U
I'm not a British citizen and would never waste my time in looking at those decadent persons. If you look at them like a child listening to fairy tales (listening to fairy tales requires a lot of inagination for the child), which is not the case when seeing the Royals with their heavy crown and walking like robots. . There are so many important issues in the world but of course if you are happy with it then enjoy..
DeleteHannah
Hannah, your reading [of my comment] needs to be a bit more nuanced. Your last sentence was unnecessary and mildly offensive. I cited two events (decades apart) that that I looked at in wonderment. Please don't deduce from that my take on the monarchy.
DeleteMay I also remind you that Nick brought up the subject of royalty's ceremonial pomp. That there are other, and far more important, "issues in the world" goes without saying. They aren't mutually exclusive.
U
I think this is Nick's blog , I answered his posting , ( you nade your comnent on mine...)so I will not enter in a non ending discussion with you.
DeleteHannah
Ursula: I wouldn't call the wedding and Diana's funeral a spectator sport, they were a lot more serious than that. I certainly wasn't spellbound myself, I register what is happening with the royal family and that's it - vaguely curious rather than spellbound.
DeleteHannah: Indeed, the antics of the royal family aren't fairy tales, they're a bizarre and outdated reality in the year 2023.
DeleteIt’s all a bit weird, all the pomp and circumstance.
ReplyDeleteWestminster is in need of some urgent building work - it’ll be interesting to see what happens when it has to shut up shop for repairs. Maybe it’ll be beyond saving.
Sx
Ms Scarlet: Parliament should be transferred to a cheaper more modest building and the Houses of Parliament sold off as a luxury hotel. The planned repairs will cost a fortune.
DeleteAnonymous Fly...if you are going to do ceremonial, do it properly. The coronation was a terrible mishmash...the State Opening of Parliament remains as it has been...reinforcing the notion that the country is ruled by the Crown in Parliament, and remembering the refusal of the Commons to allow the monarch to enter its chamber. The country wastes money enough on bogus charities, high speed rail lines, net zero nonsense and endless quangos and consultants doing the job civil servants are paid to do so the cost of this bit of ceremony is insignificant.
ReplyDeleteFly: Yes, the state opening is wee buns compared to the huge amounts wasted elsewhere. You could have added the billions spent on defective PPE equipment during the pandemic. It's a shame the monarch has so little say over government policy, as he's a raging leftie compared to the right-wingers who are in power.
DeleteMary says "I don't pay much attention to anything that goes on with any of them."
ReplyDeleteMary: Unfortunately we Brits can't help paying some attention to them, as the media give them such obsessive coverage.
DeleteBeatrice says "On our recent visit to London, albeit a short 3-day one, we did witness the changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace as a member of our small group wanted to see it, an item on her "bucket list" and as friends, we went along as well. It was admittedly a one-and-done experience and did seem like a lot of fuss just to have the guards change shifts, but then so does guards standing at the palace also seem a bit unnecessary. However, tradition is important to many."
ReplyDeleteBeatrice: I'm sure the Changing of the Guard ceremony is totally unnecessary and put on mainly for the tourists. A few blokes outside the Palace in Security tee shirts is all that's needed.
Delete