Total Pageviews

Saturday, 11 January 2020

Stiff Upper Lip, Cause for RUIN?

It wasn't that long ago when I was in the men's locker room, feeling heavy-hearted with a sullen face to show for it as I was getting ready for the gym. A team of other guys was also there, preparing, so I believe, for their five-a-side. But these were not young athletes making up the team but a group of older, middle-aged men. And two or three of them were in a discussion about a McDonald's beefburger bun, with one of the men complaining about how the top half of the bun crumbling (or something similar happening to it) making the bun more difficult or awkward to eat.

One suggestion came from his companion:
Why not ask them to stick the burger between two bottoms?

I broke into a grin as my spirits were suddenly lifted. As I made my way out of the locker room for the gym, I gestured a thank you to the stranger, my anticipation of collecting an injury halfway through a workout having dissipated.

Thank goodness this kind of saucy British humour hasn't yet sunk to the seafloor, at least not entirely, having been close to drowning by the tsunami of political correctness. The locker room was the ideal environment where Prince Harry would have felt at home. The ambiguous meaning of the two bottoms would have sent this Jack-the-Lad Royal guffawing in amusement.

Prince Harry after winning a polo match.

As a Christian believer, I find nothing offensive about such humour. It has no swear words and it's free of smut. This gag, for example, was on the exact level of those saucy postcards which were so abundant at every British seaside resort, bringing laughter not only to the buyer and recipient alike but also to brighten the day for any postal worker who earned his living shifting through the mail daily.

Indeed, what has happened to those postcards? I haven't seen them for years. Alongside that, I wish you were here of holiday free spirit which was often written at the back of those postcards to assure the recipient that the sender really was having a good time. The change in Harry's personality since he married Meghan seems to be a reflection of this dying British humour which was once a hallmark of the nation.

And so the Media brings Harry and Meghan to the centre of attention within the last few days. And I read The Daily Mail columnist Piers Morgan's vitriol demonisation of Harry's mixed-race wife, blaming her for the couple's decision to go out alone without first discussing such a move with the Queen and the rest of her family. So cutting was Morgan's criticism of Meghan that even Lord Sugar of the BBC programme The Apprentice had asked him whether his lambasting is really his racist attitude disguised as moral criticism and royalist fervour.

And that's the truth which must be faced. Alongside the humour which we Brits are so renowned for, among those from the Far Right, racism isn't that far below the surface. Of course, the racist murder of Stephen Lawrence way back in April 1993 will never be forgotten but remains indelible within our minds for the rest of our lives, along with the "institutional racism" within the Metropolitan Police which blocked the killers from having the book thrown at them. And more recently at football matches, "monkey noises" made by spectators at black players have brought distress on the pitch, with one match close to midplay abandonment.

And reading some of The Daily Mail's comment forums to do with Meghan Markle, I have seen racial bias aimed at her. Therefore it comes as no surprise when Piers Morgan's vitriol is aimed at her rather than him if racial bias has anything to do with his attitude.

But here I want to put everything in perspective. Yes, I feel sorry for the Queen. I believe her specific order not to go public until all is agreed should have been honoured. What a shock to hear such news for the first time via television. It goes to show that we are all people, including all members of the Royal Family, with thoughts and emotions. And of no surprise, as that's how God made us, with the ability to feel, regardless of the British stiff upper lip culture Britain is renowned for. 

Another reason for feeling sorry for the Queen. She could be under public pressure to slim down the Royal Family to only those members who are direct heirs to the Throne, that is, by mother-to-son, father-to-son, etc, without involving uncles or aunts. Or, in other words: Elizabeth - Charles - William - George in line for the throne, but omitting Harry, Andrew, and Edward and their children. As such, Archie, Harry's son, will also be excluded. The Queen may have been reluctant to do this, but still felt that it was her duty to listen to the nation's opinion. Harry and Meghan might have gotten the hint earlier last year, not long after their wedding. If such a hint was dropped, then it comes with little surprise that Meghan in particular wishes for her husband and herself to go independent.

A "slimmed down" Royalty? By national demand?


Talking about the stiff upper lip dominating Buckingham Palace, I have three books in my possession and in the past year, I have read them all. One is Chavs by Owen Jones, the second, Stiff Upper Lip by Alexander Renton, and the third is Posh Boys - How English Public Schools Ruin Britain, by Robert Verkaik (emphasis his.) While Jones concentrates on the demeanour of the working class by the shutting down of heavy industry, especially during Margaret Thatcher's reign in Parliament during the 1980s, the other two authors concentrate on the Public School system. Renton himself was a boarder in both Ashdown Preparatory and Eton College before taking on the post of Journalist for The Independent and The London Evening Standard newspapers.

Renton uses his own experiences to highlight the beatings, fagging (obeying the demeaning orders of an older pupil), cold baths, vile food, paedophile teachers, along with hypocrisy and cronyism which, although loved by some of the alumni, to most other students, including the author himself, can all add up to psychological damage. In turn, Verkaik concentrates on the history of the Public School system, emphasising that its origins were to give an education to the poor and ignorant without payment of a high fee - before such schools were taken over by the rich and the aristocratic as one way to set themselves apart from the lower classes through payment of astronomical fees. He then stresses how one from a Public School is paid a higher income and enjoy greater privileges in employment and social standing than one from a State Comprehensive - even if they have identical jobs.

As statistic go, only 7% of the British population attended Public School. Yet despite this number, this dominates all male members of the Royal Family. Prince Philip attended Gordonstoun School in Scotland, along with his three sons, Prince Charles, Prince Andrew and Prince Edward. When Prince William was born, it was decided that a break with tradition was due, and both William and Harry attended Eton College instead. It is said that both Edward and Harry were struggling students, with Edward needed some outside help to achieve his exam passes. That means any genuinely bright student attending a comprehensive would have out-performed these two Royals.

A student from a comprehensive may have four A*Levels, another student from a Public School may leave with just three A Levels but it will always be the public school student who will be given preference at Oxbridge and enjoy greater perks at work as well as landing plummier jobs such as starring in an acting career. Yet when I read the biography of Prince Charles' early life more than twenty years ago, I was astounded by the sheer misery he had experienced at Gordonstoun, particularly on his homesickness and the constant want for his mother's love. Instead, she was engaged in duties abroad as a Royal as well as elsewhere in the UK and he felt he was dumped to get him off their backs.

After reading Renton's book, Stiff Upper Lip, I became convinced that Charles' misery at Gordonstoun was the bedrock for his shaky marriage with Princess Diana, even if reading his biography may have lent a hint as well. He could not stomach her emotional mother-like attitude, especially towards Third World indigenous children suffering hunger and the effects of war. She was loved by the British public to a greater degree than her emotionally-crippled husband. In turn, she was longing for her husband to open up and allow his emotion of love to flow towards her. But it could never have happened. Gordonstoun made sure of that.

And that, I believe, is the kind of stifling atmosphere Meghan Markle found herself confined to. As an American, this stiff upper lip culture of Buckingham Palace was too much for her. So indeed, unlike Piers Morgan's scathing words thrown at her, I tend to feel more sympathetic. But furthermore, I'm sad for the two of them. I would hate to see their HRH title stripped from them, also no longer receiving grants from Prince Charles and the loss of other benefits as Royals. Also, I pity the Queen too, especially after going through so soon with her favourite son Andrew, who was involved in a friendship with a rich paedophile, and that also for the need to "slim down" the Firm, apparently, by public demand. For someone who is in her nineties and with an ailing husband to look after, such sources of stress aren't called for.

Personally, I wish God's blessing for all members of the Firm, Harry and Meghan included. And the only true source of blessing is to know Jesus Christ personally as Saviour. Although my good friend Andrew Milnthorpe has reminded me before now that the Queen has genuine faith in Christ, and I accept this as true, I do wonder whether the rest of her family share this faith. The Public School-enforced emotional restraint among all members making this so frustratingly unsure! However, I have doubts whether Meghan is saved and I question Harry too. If they aren't and neither is Charles, this goes to show that the stiff upper lip is a blockage preventing the Gospel being spread, even among family members. Furthermore, if Renton's testimony is to be believed and Verkaik's knowledge of the system is to be taken as true, then the Public School is very unlikely to be a hotbed for successful Christian conversion. Rather, it stands in the way.

Prince Charles with his father at Gordonstoun


And by thinking of all this, I do ask myself whether people can see Christ living in me. I have been a believer for nearly half a century, yet I have a brother who, until lately, has been a sworn atheist, after feeling delusional about the Roman Catholic Church in which he grew up. At present, he is more of an agnostic than atheist yet he does respect my faith. My two nieces also have respect for my faith but had so far not converted them, although my younger niece and I went to the Kerith Centre for morning Sunday service more than once. Although one or two might have crossed over the line as a result of my testimony, I long that people could see Christ in me more clearly.

This whole shenanigan within the Firm brings a shameful epoch in British history but I cannot say that the British Public School system is free from blame. 

1 comment:

  1. Dear Frank,
    Praise the Lord that there is hope for all to trust Christ and thereby know eternal life, regardless of their family tradition, upbringing, or schooling. Christ said that He came not to bring peace, but a sword, which I believe refers to the division often seen in families when some members trust Christ and others reject Him. We can and should continue to pray for and witness to our unsaved loved ones, and we shall be rewarded for it. But ultimately, salvation is the work of the Holy Spirit. We are to be judged not on how successful we were in "bringing people to the Lord," but rather on our faithfulness in telling others about Him.
    Thanks as always for the great blog post. God bless,
    Laurie

    ReplyDelete