Last week, there was an engagement.
Kensington Palace announced that Prince Harry, 33, was officially engaged to actress and humanitarian, 36-year-old Meghan Markle.
The story – as was expected – has dominated the news cycle ever since. There was the proposal, where Prince Harry got down on one knee in their cosy cottage, while a chicken roasted in the oven. Then there were the first pictures of the engagement ring. Then the rule they broke during the photo shoot. Then the details of the wedding, set for Spring next year. Then the conspiracy theory behind why they’re marrying so soon. Then the images of Markle in a wedding dress. The list goes on.
LISTEN: Why we need to seriously reassess our excitement about the royal wedding. Post continues below.
And it is not difficult to see why.
The world watched on as a 12-year-old Harry stood at his mother’s funeral, gazing at nothing in particular, his expression a mixture of confusion and devastation. We warmed to her two sons, born into a royal family they would never be able to escape.
Markle, divorced, biracial, American, a feminist, an actress, is the anti-Princess; everything a royal should not be.
By all accounts, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are decent people. And are they not just celebrities – rich, beautiful and powerful, constituents of a class we have always harboured a unique fascination for?
Simply, no. No they are not.
And it must be said, that when we excitedly speculate about the venue, or the guests, or the best man, we are entirely missing the point.
Top Comments
God I love this! Thank you!
This article is rubbish. The royal family generate more money in taxation than they receive. Then, as others note, there's the boost to the UK economy through tourism. Prince William and Catherine's wedding was paid for by Prince Charles' income from his privately held Duchy of Cornwall, along with a contribution from the Middleton family. It's already been said that Prince Charles will be paying for the bulk of this wedding.
The undertone of this article is that we'd all be better off if we confiscated the wealth of the few for the benefit of the many. That worked so well in Zimbabwe, didn't it?