Non queri, Non explicet
Never complain,
Never explain
“I am sorry
but we never comment on ‘The Crown,’” said Queen Elizabeth’s communications
secretary.
Should Netflix begin episodes of The Crown with a
disclaimer saying events have been dramatised?
Dickie Arbiter, the Queen’s former press secretary, is
the latest high profile voice to insist that the characters portrayed in the
fourth series are beyond recognition
by ANNABEL SAMPSON AND HOPE COKE
MONDAY 23
NOVEMBER 2020
The nation
is currently gripped by the fourth season of The Crown – a series which has
raised eyebrows for its often unflattering portrayal of Royal Family members.
While the dramatisation of the love triangle between Prince Charles, the
Duchess of Cornwall (then Camilla Parker Bowles) and the late Diana, Princess
of Wales has been criticised as ‘insensitive’ by those close to the story, it
is but one of the very many bones critics have had to pick with the accuracy of
the series.
Another
insider voiced their disapproval at the unreliable portrayal yesterday, that
being the former Buckingham Palace press secretary, Dickie Arbiter. Arbiter,
who worked for the Queen from 1988 until 2000, said the fourth series of the
drama was full of ‘wooden characters’ and depicts the Prince of Wales unfairly.
Mr Arbiter, 80, told Times Radio: ‘It’s not a documentary, it’s not history.
It’s a drama and it’s taken dramatic licence excessively and it’s made the
Prince of Wales a villain. He’s not a villain. He never has been a villain and
he [Peter Morgan, the screenwriter] has made Diana a victim . . . He’s
portrayed characters whom I don’t know. I spent 12 years at the palace, I knew
everybody there and these are not the people I knew.’
Arbiter was
a one-time fan of the series, he formerly praised Claire Foy who played the
role of the Queen in the first two series. He also thinks that Emma Corrin (who
plays the Princess of Wales) has done a good job of it. ‘She’s [Corrin]
obviously studied Diana — her mannerisms, her walk, her movements, and she does
a good job of it.’ It’s high praise given his summary of the other
performances. ‘The rest of them are just wooden characters. Olivia Colman as
the Queen — well she should give up the day job because quite frankly it is a
rotten portrayal. The Prince of Wales comes across as a wimp . . . and Margaret
Thatcher? Well, Gillian Anderson does a dreadful job of it.’
Netflix has
been criticised for the accuracy of the script, and there have even been calls
for episodes to begin with a disclaimer that events have been dramatised,
according to the Times.
Earl
Spencer, the brother of Diana, Princess of Wales revealed over the weekend that
he refused permission for Netflix to film The Crown at their family’s stately
home in Northamptonshire, Althorp. Speaking on Love Your Weekend with Alan
Titchmarsh he admitted to a feeling of ‘unease’ when watching the programme. He
said: ‘The Crown asked if they could film at Althorp and I said obviously not.
The worry for me is that people see a programme like that and they forget that
it is fiction. They assume, especially foreigners… I find Americans tell me
they have watched The Crown as if they have taken a history lesson. Well, they
haven't.'
Earl
Spencer did not detail exactly when he was approached by the makers of The
Crown, but several scenes in the first episodes of the new series are centred
around Charles and Diana’s first meeting, which the show – wrongly – suggests
took place at Althorp. These scenes were in fact filmed at Ragley Hall, a
country house located in Warwickshire.
Earl
Spencer told Mr Titchmarsh: ‘I feel it is my duty to stand up for her when I
can. She left me for instance as guardian of her sons, so I feel there was a
trust passed on. And we grew up together, you know if you grow up with somebody
they are still that person, it doesn't matter what happens to them later. So
yeah, I feel very passionately that I have a role to honour her memory.’
Another
representation that has come under scrutiny is that of the Queen’s mothering
skills. In episode four of the new season, ‘Favourites’, the Queen decides to
schedule a one-on-one lunch with each of her four children, by then all in
their late teens or adulthood. She asks an aide to do some research in advance
of the meetings in order to create a ‘short briefing document’ on their
respective interests and hobbies, adding: ‘One would hate to appear uninformed.
Or cold. Or remotely… remote.’
The
implication – that the monarch lacks a degree of maternal involvement in her
children’s lives (particularly that of Prince Charles) – has now been
explicitly stated by The Crown’s creator and writer, Peter Morgan. Defending
how the inter-familial relationships are portrayed on screen, he has speculated
that the Queen was a better mother to her two later children, Prince Andrew and
Prince Edward, than she was to Prince Charles and Princess Anne.
The Queen –
then Princess Elizabeth – was only 22 when she had Prince Charles in 1948. Her
father, King George VI, died in 1952, meaning Charles was just a four year old
when his mother acceded to the throne. Princess Anne, meanwhile, who was born
in 1950, was barely a toddler. To be a 25-year-old head of state would be a
daunting prospect for anyone, not to mention the additional pressures of having
young children. It was not until 10 years after Anne’s birth that the Queen had
Andrew, in 1960, and later Edward, in 1964 – by which time she was 12 years into
her reign.
Quoted in
the Times, Morgan states in a recent episode of the official The Crown podcast
that he was won over by the ‘two teams’ idea, when it was explained to him by
an unnamed royal historian. ‘When I heard that theory, it instantly chimed,’ he
says, adding that he felt it was ‘emotionally intuitive and plausible’ that the
young Queen may have found it hard to offer the love and attention her son
wanted. This proved a foundational tenet when it came to Morgan writing The
Crown, as he explains: ‘I thought it was a really smart observation, and made
the decision to go with that.’
Morgan
notes that he thought it likely that the monarch was ‘preoccupied with trying
to find her feet and do her job’, then was ‘much more ready to be a mother’ by
the time Andrew was born. He states: ‘She was much more relaxed as a mother
with the second team,’ going on to suggest that this seems to have been more
detrimental to Charles than Anne. He observes: ‘Anne probably didn’t need that
much mothering, based on what I see of her as a character… Charles,
unfortunately, needs a great deal of love… He needs a lot of love, and she was
probably unable to give it. His need for it, his demonstrative need for it,
might have made her ability… retreat even further.’
Morgan’s
latest comments come after the series faced criticism from those close to the
royals for its representation of the family. The first episode includes scenes
of Lord Mountbatten warning Charles against his affair with Camilla – shortly
before he is killed by an IRA bomb. These details in particular have ruffled
feathers, with detractors protesting that many scenes are completely
fabricated. The Crown’s writer and creator, however, has defended making up
parts of the historical drama.
The Times
reports that Morgan stated that while he imagined details of the last
conversations between Charles and Lord Mountbatten, he believes the sentiments
reflect what Mountbatten actually felt. Charles’s great uncle, played by
Charles Dance in the drama, criticises the heir apparent for his ongoing
relationship with Camilla, who was then married to Andrew Parker Bowles.
Charles (Josh O’Connor), retaliates in turn, calling Lord Mountbatten a
‘quisling’ and speculating about his own sexual licentiousness.
Lord
Mountbatten then writes a letter to his great nephew, criticising him for
courting ‘ruin and disappointment’ and entreating him to give up Camilla and
marry ‘some sweet and innocent well-tempered girl with no past’. The letter
only reaches Charles soon after he learns of his beloved great uncle’s
assasination. In reality, however, there’s no evidence that such a letter ever
existed. It is being seen as a particularly callous piece of writing
considering that Charles was extremely close to Mountbatten and deeply upset by
his death. The Times quotes royal commentators as criticising the ‘wild crude
distortions’ in the Netflix drama, adding that Charles has reportedly refused
to watch the series.
Morgan told
the official podcast for the series: ‘What we know is that Mountbatten was
really responsible for taking Charles to one side at precisely this point and
saying, “Look, you know, enough already with playing the field, it’s time you
got married and it’s time you provided an heir”... As the heir I think there
was some concern that he should settle down, marry the appropriate person and
get on with it. In my own head I thought that would have even greater impact on
Charles if it were to come post-mortem, as it were.’
He went on:
‘I think everything that’s in that letter which Mountbatten writes to Charles
is what I really believe, based on everything I’ve read and people I’ve spoken
to, that represents his view. We will never know if it was put into a letter,
and we will never know if Charles got that letter before or after Mountbatten’s
death, but in this particular drama, this is how I decided to deal with it.’
The Crown
is known for creating an authentic sense of time and place, thanks to an
extensive team of researchers and historical advisers and lavish sets and
costumes. Yet its producers have always been quick to stress that it is a
fictionalised interpretation of events, with many scenes in the drama being
created for entertainment purposes.
Where was
The Crown filmed?
The Mail on
Sunday previously reported that friends of the heir apparent – and senior
royals themselves – have been shocked by the new episodes, which they regard as
exploitative and inaccurate. One factor ruffling feathers is that the Duke and
Duchess of Sussex recently signed a production deal with Netflix. An ‘insider’
told the paper: ‘There are raised eyebrows about Harry taking millions from the
company that's behind all this… After all, where do much of Netflix’s profits
come from? The Crown.’
Royal
biographer Penny Junor is quoted in the Times as stating that it was likely
Charles would be ‘incredibly upset’ by the series. ‘It’s the most cruel and
unfair and horrible portrayal of almost all of them,’ she says, going on to
criticise creator Peter Morgan for having ‘invented stuff to make expensive and
very rich drama’.
The Mail on
Sunday also quotes one of Prince Charles’s friends as saying the series is
‘dragging up things that happened during very difficult times 25 or 30 years
ago without a thought for anyone’s feelings’. The source goes on: ‘That isn’t
right or fair, particularly when so many of the things being depicted don’t
represent the truth’. They add that Charles and Camilla are portrayed in a
‘very unflattering light’ without explaining that some scenes were invented for
entertainment, noting: ‘There is no sense of telling carefully nuanced stories
– it’s all very two-dimensional. This is trolling with a Hollywood budget. The
public shouldn’t be fooled into thinking this is an accurate portrayal of what
really happened.’
Another
Palace source accused Netflix of delving into painful details too soon,
stating: ‘These events are not the history of 100 or even 50 years ago. The
pain is still raw and not enough time has elapsed… Fiction becomes more
attractive than fact and to dramatise these painful events of marriage
breakdowns and children upset is very insensitive.’ It has been alleged that
the Duke of Cambridge is ‘none too pleased’ with the portrayal, feeling that
‘his parents are being exploited and presented in a false, simplistic way to
make money’.
Culture secretary to ask Netflix to play 'health warning' that The Crown is fictional
Oliver Dowden says younger viewers might take
historical drama’s portrayal as fact
Lanre
Bakare
@lanre_bakare
Sun 29 Nov
2020 13.31 GMT
The culture
secretary plans to write to Netflix and request a “health warning” is played
before The Crown so viewers are aware that the historical drama is a work of
fiction, he said in an intervention that prompted criticism.
Oliver
Dowden said that without the caveat younger viewers who did not live through
the events might “mistake fiction for fact” following complaints that the fourth
series of the drama had abused its artistic licence and fabricated events.
He told the
Mail on Sunday: “It’s a beautifully produced work of fiction, so as with other
TV productions, Netflix should be very clear at the beginning it is just that …
Without this, I fear a generation of viewers who did not live through these
events may mistake fiction for fact.”
At present
viewers are warned that the show contains nudity, sex, violence and suicide
references, and is suitable for viewers who are 15 and older.
The move
was derided by historians including Prof Kate Williams, who said it sounded
like a “distraction”. Alex von Tunzelmann, a historian who wrote the Reel
History column for the Guardian, wrote: “Netflix already tells people that The Crown
is fiction. It’s billed as a drama. Those people in it are actors. I know!
Blows your mind.”
The
historical drama’s fourth season, which focuses on the late 1970s and 80s with
the rise and fall of Margaret Thatcher, the Falklands conflict and Lady Diana
Spencer’s marriage to Prince Charles, has evoked much criticism.
Accusations
of inaccuracies in Peter Morgan’s production span from repeatedly showing the
Queen “wrongly dressed for trooping the colour” to disputes over Charles’
fishing technique.
But the
biggest bones of contention have been around the depiction of Charles’ marriage
to Diana. He is portrayed phoning Camilla Parker Bowles every day in the early
years of the marriage, and Diana is depicted as forcing plans for the couple’s
trip to Australia to be changed after throwing a tantrum.
Morgan has
previously spoken about meeting Prince Charles and being told by him that
scriptwriting is a hard job and that “it’s not what you leave in but what you
leave out that’s most important”.
“He’s one of
those characters for whom you have sympathy and criticism in equal measure, a
perhaps not uncommon attitude toward the monarchy in general,” Morgan told the
New York Times.
Sarah
Horsley, whose husband, Major Hugh Lindsay, died in an avalanche while on a
skiing trip with the prince, said she wrote to Morgan to ask for her husband’s
death not to be dramatised. She said the “royal family have to grin and bear”
the depiction of them in the avalanche episode, but for her it was “a very
private tragedy”.
Sunday’s
intervention is the latest from Dowden, who contacted the BBC to voice his
concerns that Rule, Britannia! might not be played at this year’s event.
In
September, he wrote to national museum directors saying “the government does
not support the removal of statues or other similar objects” after a debate
started about how to handle colonial-era artefacts and those with connections
to slavery.
The Crown
has also been praised for presenting the royal family as “real people”. Others
have pointed out that Charles’ and Diana’s infidelity and marital problems are
well recorded – including in interviews they both gave.
Netflix declined to comment, but a source said it had been widely reported that The Crown was a drama based on real-life events.
Helena Bonham Carter says The Crown should stress
to viewers it's a drama
Actor who plays Princess Margaret adds her voice to
calls for Netflix to add a disclaimer
Helena Bonham Carter’s comments came after criticisms
of The Crown’s historical accuracy. Composite: Netflix
Harry
Taylor
@harrytaylr
Tue 1 Dec
2020 00.09 GMT
Helena Bonham Carter has said The Crown has a “moral
responsibility” to tell viewers that it is a drama, rather than historical
fact, in the wake of calls for a “health warning” for people watching the
series.
The actor,
who played Princess Margaret in series three and four of the Netflix hit drama,
told an official podcast for the show that there was an important distinction
between “our version”, and the “real version”.
In the
podcast episode, which was released on Monday, Bonham Carter said: “It is
dramatised. I do feel very strongly, because I think we have a moral
responsibility to say, ‘Hang on guys, this is not … it’s not a drama-doc, we’re
making a drama.’ So they are two different entities.”
She called
the research by the show’s creator, Peter Morgan, “amazing”, adding: “That is
the proper documentary. That is amazing and then Peter switches things up and
juggles.”
Her views
came after criticisms of the show’s historical accuracy prompted the culture
secretary, Oliver Dowden, to say he planned to write to the streaming network
to request that a disclaimer was put up before the show was played, so viewers
would not misinterpret the portrayal as historical truth.
Dowden told
the Mail on Sunday: “It’s a beautifully produced work of fiction, so as with
other TV productions, Netflix should be very clear at the beginning it is just
that … Without this, I fear a generation of viewers who did not live through
these events may mistake fiction for fact.”
Accusations
of inaccuracies in Peter Morgan’s production span from repeatedly showing the
Queen “wrongly dressed for trooping the colour” to disputes over Prince
Charles’s fishing technique.
But the
biggest bones of contention have been about the depiction of Charles’s marriage
to Diana. He is portrayed phoning Camilla Parker Bowles every day in the early
years of the marriage, and Diana is depicted as forcing plans for the couple’s
trip to Australia to be changed after throwing a tantrum.
Currently
viewers are warned that the show contains nudity, sex, violence and suicide
references, and is suitable for viewers aged 15 and above.
Netflix has
been contacted for comment.
