Millions
across Britain watched the coronation live on the BBC Television Service, and
many purchased or rented television sets for the event. The coronation of the
Queen was the first to be televised in full; the BBC's cameras had not been
allowed inside Westminster Abbey for her father's coronation in 1937, and had
covered only the procession outside. There had been considerable debate within
the British Cabinet on the subject, with Prime Minister Winston Churchill
against the idea; but, Elizabeth refused his advice on this matter and insisted
the event take place before television cameras, as well as those filming with
experimental 3D technology. The event was also filmed in colour, separately
from the BBC's black and white television broadcast, where an average of 17
people watched each small TV.
How Prince Philip courted the media, from the Queen’s
coronation to his infamous ‘gaffes’
The Duke of
Edinburgh was a central player in a key period for the British monarchy
Rather than
inviting condemnation, Philip’s ‘gaffes’ appeared to only increase his
popularity. An eyeroll, a wry chuckle, a ‘here he goes again’ (Photo: Yui Mok –
WPA Pool/Getty Images)
By Laura
Clancy
April 9,
2021 2:43 pm
“It will
democratise it, make them feel as though they share in it, understand it”, says
Matt Smith’s version of Prince Philip in The Crown, during a scene in which he
persuades the Queen (as played by Claire Foy) to allow her coronation to be
televised.
As a member
of the Coronation Executive Committee, Philip did indeed play a key role in
staging the coronation spectacle. We’ll never know if he actually said Matt
Smith’s words, but multiple royal biographers have claimed he did insist that
the coronation was televised, despite politicians and the palace having serious
reservations that live coverage might, in the words of nineteenth-century
political analyst Walter Bagehot, “let in daylight upon magic”.
It seems
impossible, now, to imagine a time when televising the coronation was even up
for debate, and indeed Harry and Meghan’s wedding demonstrated that the public
now expects a multi-media spectacular. But airing the coronation ceremony
turned out to be a formative moment in the vast technological developments
within media industries since the 1950s, which have transformed the way we
watch and interact with the royals.
According
to some sources, Philip was also key to the development of the infamous
documentary Royal Family in 1969, which looked like what we would now recognise
as reality television. Viewers were ‘treated’ to scenes of the royals enjoying
a barbecue, with the Queen chopping salad and Philip frying sausages.
The film
has since been redacted by Buckingham Palace and almost all footage removed
from public archives, allegedly because it was “too intimate”. But at the time
it was revolutionary – it showcased new fly-on-the-wall film-making techniques,
and three quarters of the British population tuned in.
While there
is no evidence (and it is, let’s face it, unlikely) that Philip had anything to
do with the creation of the official Royal Family Twitter or Instagram
accounts, he certainly seems to have been a central player in a key period of
reinvention of which these social media pages are part. In order to stay
relevant to a new generation of potential royalists, the monarchy had to move
with the times.
Of course,
given some of Philip’s more – shall we say – conservative viewpoints, it seems
incongruous to suggest he ‘moved with the times’. His infamous ‘gaffes’ – as
they have somewhat obsequiously been called – account for most of the media
reporting of him during his decades as the Queen’s consort. Many of these
‘gaffes’ recall an age past: the late 50s or 60s perhaps, when unchecked racism
was paired with a post-war conviction of British power and prestige.
It is
particularly significant to be talking about this in the age of Trump and
Brexit, when these sentiments made a comeback. But rather than inviting
condemnation, Philip’s ‘gaffes’ appeared to only increase his popularity. An
eyeroll, a wry chuckle, a ‘here he goes again’.
But
‘gaffes’ makes it appear like these comments are accidental; as though Philip
simply ‘couldn’t be controlled’. The monarchy is a global institution at the
heart of the British establishment – if it wanted to stop Philip making
offensive comments, it would have.
Philip’s
comments allowed the monarchy to appear authentic, as though it’s not entirely
staged and scripted. They made royal events – run to a strict schedule and
prepared to the minutest detail – look natural, informal. The ‘gaffes’ were as
much a key part of democratising the monarchy as televising the coronation was,
or as ‘Kate and Wills’ going on Radio 1 to discuss their favourite Netflix show
was. It’s all part of remaking a populist monarchy for the celebrity age.
Philip was
a central player in a key period for the British monarchy. The 20th century saw
it forced to adapt to new tools of media culture, and learn to use them for its
advantage. Whether successful like the coronation, or less so like Royal Family
or the even more controversial It’s a Royal Knockout (if you haven’t seen it,
prepare yourself), mass media has permanently altered our relationship to the
royals.
As the
monarchy continues to develop in the modern world, only time will tell how
these lessons for monarchical PR play out.
Laura
Clancy is a media academic at Lancaster University
No comments:
Post a Comment