Readers respond to the publicity surrounding the release of Spare, and the future of the royal family
In her column (Are you siding with Harry or the palace? Either way, you fall into the royalist trap, 9 January), Polly Toynbee wrote: “The monarchy’s popularity has declined for years: more 18- to 24-year-olds would now prefer to have an elected head of state, while only 53% of 25- to 49-year-olds are in its favour.”
No mention was made of older folk, but I’ll soon be 84 and was more disappointed than I can express that Charles, in his maiden speech as king, didn’t do what I so hoped he would and announce that he would have the monarchy dissolved completely before his reign ended.
Its time as an institution of which England could be proud is over. The queen’s parents stood by the rest of us all through the second world war and they earned the right, along with their daughter, to our gratitude. I was born in Maidstone, Kent, in April 1939 and I never begrudged the queen her peaceful reign.
It’s over now. King Charles III should realise that he and his bickering family can never step into the space left by Queen Elizabeth II.
Margaret Gagie
London, Ontario, Canada
Polly Toynbee’s wonderful piece truly describes the state of affairs. She absolutely nailed it when she wrote that we foreigners might enjoy the royal sideshow just because it is funny and absurd and – thank God – happening somewhere else. It’s true that there are other monarchies in Europe – I lived in one – but those are low-key, sober and consist of only a handful of individuals often with regular jobs, with none of the outdated pomp and pageantry of the UK.
That said, the mass mourning for the late queen, which reminded me of the hysteria around the passing of Ayatollah Khomeini years ago, showed that the British public seem happy with the status quo where the monarchy is concerned.
Matilde Alessandra
New York City, US
Polly Toynbee must have been watching a different ITV interview from the one I saw. I heard none of the “inchoate rage” to which she refers, but rather an eloquent, articulate young man calmly explaining why he needed to speak out on behalf of himself and his wife. Toynbee’s anti-royalist agenda perhaps closed her ears to what was actually said.
Jennifer Jenkins
London
Prince Harry’s book will not bring down the monarchy. Although it has not had any meaningful power since the Act of Settlement more than 300 years ago, it justifies the inherited wealth and power of the aristocracy of the UK. History shows us the danger intrinsic in the power vacuum that has followed the overthrow of a monarch. A constitutional convention (perhaps based in Putney) could ensure a transition supported by the majority of citizens.
Michael Peel
London
Reading excerpts of Prince Harry’s book, Spare, I am reminded of the 1944 story from the US, retold later by the humorist James Thurber, about a children’s book club that sent a volume about penguins to a 10-year-old girl, enclosing a card seeking her opinion. She wrote: “This book gives me more information about penguins than I care to have.” The American diplomat Hugh Gibson called it the finest piece of literary criticism he had ever read.
John French
Brockweir, Gloucestershire
Siding with Prince Harry or the palace? I couldn’t care less.
Dr Frances Dawbarn
Lancaster