Netflix, the Crown and a royal mythology

Netflix's 'The Crown’ may well blur the lines between fact and fiction, but this same slippage has long been a hallmark of royal strategy to keep their spot at the top of a classist hierarchy.

Image from Unsplash.

Culture secretary Oliver Dowden sparked controversy when he called on Netflix to display a “health warning” before showing “The Crown” to ensure viewers do not “mistake fiction for fact.” Critics, journalists and historians have penned a number of think-pieces arguing over the historical veracity of events in the series and whether it is obvious enough that it is not a documentary. Apparently, despite being billed as a drama and depicted by actors, this question is still open to debate. One key point that has so far slipped under the radar is the fact that the monarchy’s very existence in its modern state is built on blurring fact and fiction. It depends upon its own royal mythology, so why shouldn’t the people add to the story? 

In a recent example of royal fiction stated brazenly as fact, we are expected to believe that His Royal Highness, Prince Andrew, lost the ability to sweat after being shot at in the Falklands War and, perhaps even more jarring, that he dined at a Pizza Express in Woking. Going back a little further, the incredulous British public has reluctantly accepted that Prince Harry is not the son of the ruddy-faced, red-headed Major Hewitt (whose affair with Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, is depicted in “The Crown”), despite growing increasingly into his spitting image. Is it any wonder Harry has relinquished his title and escaped to America? I’m not sure which he has been luckiest to evade: the dour royal duties or the slightest possibility of inheriting Charles’ ears. 

There is, however, a darker side to the royals’ treatment of the truth. The monarchy has adapted since its days as the seat of absolute power and today justifies itself through a myth of political neutrality. Indeed, it sells itself to the public as ceremonial, a symbol of British values and heritage. However, this adaptation is not as radical as the royal family claims. 

The monarchy entrenches a hierarchical society, reinforcing the classist idea that some are born above others and that everyone should know their place. Centuries of aristocratic power has left its mark: over a third of English and Welsh land and over half of rural land belongs to just 36,000 aristocrats. Additionally, royal prerogative has been used politically in cases such as Australia’s 1975 constitutional crisis and when (albeit less directly) Boris Johnson twisted the monarchical element of the British political system towards his own ends for his 2019 prorogation of parliament – a move later deemed unlawful. 

The Prince of Wales has himself been embroiled in numerous political controversies. His “black spider memos” to Blair led the press to label him the “meddling prince”, and it was revealed that he held 36 secret meetings with ministers between 2010 and 2013, including seven with then Prime Minister David Cameron. He has been known to petition topics from “alternative” medicine to the Iraq war – hardly true to the myth of neutrality.

It seems, then, that there are conflicting fictions at play when creating the public image of the monarchy. Fiction and spin are concepts the royals are intimately familiar with, using their media platform to brush over scandal upon scandal, all the while posing as unobtrusive in the structuring of contemporary society. The slippage between fact and fiction only becomes a problem for the establishment when the stories conflict with the official line. It is only fair that the people should have the chance to weave their own stories into this royal mythology, especially when “The Crown” offers a far more salacious, sexy and entertaining series of events. 

Pi Opinion content does not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial team, Pi Media society, Students’ Union UCL or University College London. We aim to publish opinions from across the student body — if you read anything you would like to respond to, get in touch via email.