A very interesting article. I knew that Victoria went into extended mourning when Albert died, but I never realized it went on so long or that her withdrawal from public life potentially endangered the monarchy.
I think the real value of this article, though, is that it addresses the question of how the UK–and, by implication, all Western nations–might come together again after the long interruption of normal life due to covid. Inevitably, that question requires the West to ask how it can come together in the face of so much hatred, by so many of its own citizens, of its history and accomplishments.
Much of the journalism and commentary on Unherd is directed to describing the phenomenon of ‘wokeism’, its origins and its excesses. That’s fine because first you have to understand a problem before you can address it. Hopefully, Unherd contributors will now turn more attention to how to fight back against these extreme beliefs and reestablish pride in our society and all the good it has done.
The author of this article suggests that perhaps a common enemy might bind the nation. That strategy is an old one but I’m not sure it will work today. There are plenty of potential enemies out there (China seems happy to assume that role) but still Western society prefers to tear at itself rather than look outward. I hope subsequent essays in this series will stimulate creative thinking by all of us.
The ‘West’ has been hating itself since 1918 when the compact between Ruler and Ruled was broken as a result of the catastrophe that was 1914-18.
The virus of Marxism was allowed to flourish and quickly infected the intellectual/ academic class with appalling results, producing a sort of top down marxist/socialist orthodoxy that was to be further exacerbated by 1939-45.
Oxbridge in the 50’s and 60’s was a veritable cesspit of pseudo marxist drivel, primarily because it was thought Intellectually and Socially ‘smart’ to espouse its cause, just as it had been in the 1920’s.
An UnHerd contributor recently mentioned that even the ‘sainted’ Michael Palin just couldn’t resist making pejorative remarks about the British Empire in one of his lauded TV Rail adventures.
This virus runs deep and I admire your determination to fight back, good luck
To me, ‘wokeism’ is like any generational change – there will always be an older generation looking back on the halcyon days of pre-woke, when everything seemed to be so free. I am in the older generation and find woke to be sad and silly but also interesting as a generational change. Like all such changes, parts will die out and parts will be incorporated into our society for the next 50 years. Some parts of woke are probably fair, other parts laughable.
I just finished reading Andrew Doyle’s new book on Free Speech – not a demanding read but well written. He makes the point that the older generation fought against the wave of realism and nudity in theatre and television by trying to ban things from public view – but the new generation won by insisting that its views were correct.
Bearing in mind that all statements can be seen differently by different people, I am angry that our primary school children are being taught to feel guilty about our history, but the other side is that we were happy at one time when German people were taught to feel guilty about WW2. We were also angry when Japan refused to feel guilty.
Viewing the woke movement as a generational change is an interesting perspective. My impression is it’s an ideology pushed by a very vocal minority, although it certainly finds support in many public institutions. I’m not even sure that the majority of young people truly buy into it or whether they just make the appropriate noises so they’re not accused of being racist or worse.
Andrew Doyle’s book sounds like it’s worth a read. Thanks.
Great Britain is a geographical statement – the name of the island that most of us live on. It’s interesting to see what the rest of the world describes us as in, for example, international sporting events. Most of the time it’s GB & NI, rather then UK.
Yeah, I noticed that the conclusions of the article didn’t really land. The author seemed to want to draw a parallel between how the monarchy reinvented itself, and stimulated a sense of national unity, after Victoria’s long absence from public life and how the UK can again come together after extended lockdown. I’m not sure the analogy is strong though and the notion of finding a common enemy seemed to come out of nowhere. I guess I read into the article what I wanted to see.
Geoffrey Simon Hicking
3 years ago
Edward VII was ok when he became king. Libidinous, yes, but he seems to have been quite good at diplomacy, and very popular when on tour. He may have liked his fun, but his heart was in the right place.
If only Harry had that sort of blood in him, rather than the “bow to Meghan” mentality he has now.
Michael Whittock
3 years ago
“Let us hope that the Queen can find a way to draw on the Victorian legacy of personal courage, and of moral leadership”
The Queen has shown plenty of both in her life. There are, of course different kinds of leadership. But I can’t think of many who have surpassed her in moral leadership. Maybe Nelson Mandela and Jimmy Carter come close but they were “here today,gone tomorrow” politicians. This time next year Elizabeth R will have been exercising her quiet but incredibly consistent moral leadership for 70 years.
Of course a leader needs followers and this country has chosen to ignore our Queen’s example to run after the way of selfishness. None more so than her own family as exemplified by the Oprah Winfrey interview.
To be sure no human being can transform a nation’s moral quality. Only a spiritual awakening of soul shattering proportions not seen in this country for over a 100 years will do that. Her Majesty nor I will live to see it but our grandchildren and great grandchildren will, pray God.
William Murphy
3 years ago
Many thanks for a fascinating article, Mary. Especially for displaying the value of humour in discussing a serious topic. I love the idea of the King of Italy being fed at a Windsor pub and trust that they gave him something better than microwaved lasagne. It shows how fragile apparently bombproof institutions often are.
For a taste of how a society can reach even worse states, I recommend watching “The republic of King Jesus” on YouTube. Professor Alec Ryrie is an excellent lecturer and recounts the chaos of England in a period to which Mary refers – the 1640s and 1650s when the King was executed and Cromwell reigned.
One factor in restoring the monarchy in 1660 was the spread of religious nuttery. If it was not bad enough having Cromwell and his hencemen ruling, you had the Levellers, the Diggers, the Seekers, the Ranters and, worst of all, the Quakers. How the Quakers were perceived as terrifying and subversive makes enthralling and hilarious viewing. Even the worst monarch could be viewed with nostalgic affection after this assortment of freaks had risen to prominence.
johnmckenna538
3 years ago
The man in a quandary here is Justin Welby . He the man who brought over an American Episcopalian Bishop to wow the audience at Meghan and Williams glitzy wedding ( apparently the Bishop was unknown to bride and groom) Meghan more fond of arch Secularist and Marxist Chomsky who’s book she had recommended to her Twitter fans in an earlier incarnation , than the good Lord . Welby of course on record for his devout admiration for the Queen and Monarchy at this point presumably in seventh heaven being a friend to both Queen and Princess . Then the Princess turns on the Monarchy scorned and vengeful seemingly intent on destroying in her words the ‘Firm ‘ . How does Justin react a discreet silence perhaps. ? That though is fraught with danger , if the Monarchy goes then the Anglican church becomes disestablished and the church and of course himself more or less finished in that the platform that gave them credibility indeed a platform of itself gone in the twinkling of an eye. My guess is he and his Bishops know where their bread is buttered and will in their usual expedient fashion act entirely out of the noble end of self-preservation by standing with the Monarchy .
Last edited 3 years ago by johnmckenna538
Laura Pritchard
3 years ago
Not really relevant to the thrust of the article but I’ve never thought before, I wonder how much Victoria’s extended grief was exacerbated by the perimenopause. For those not in the know, it can really send your emotions into the toilet and she’d have been about the right age. Not something much discussed in those days or in that household, I imagine.
Clay Trowbridge
3 years ago
I remember the day of Elizabeth II”s coronation, a cloudy day when her carriage was suddenly the distinct sunlit object; joyful color and light in a darker world around it.She has been steady in the years since, even as the world has been spinning into chaos as it attempts to rebuild Babylon. And just look at those trying to accomplish that goal!
A very interesting article. I knew that Victoria went into extended mourning when Albert died, but I never realized it went on so long or that her withdrawal from public life potentially endangered the monarchy.
I think the real value of this article, though, is that it addresses the question of how the UK–and, by implication, all Western nations–might come together again after the long interruption of normal life due to covid. Inevitably, that question requires the West to ask how it can come together in the face of so much hatred, by so many of its own citizens, of its history and accomplishments.
Much of the journalism and commentary on Unherd is directed to describing the phenomenon of ‘wokeism’, its origins and its excesses. That’s fine because first you have to understand a problem before you can address it. Hopefully, Unherd contributors will now turn more attention to how to fight back against these extreme beliefs and reestablish pride in our society and all the good it has done.
The author of this article suggests that perhaps a common enemy might bind the nation. That strategy is an old one but I’m not sure it will work today. There are plenty of potential enemies out there (China seems happy to assume that role) but still Western society prefers to tear at itself rather than look outward. I hope subsequent essays in this series will stimulate creative thinking by all of us.
The ‘West’ has been hating itself since 1918 when the compact between Ruler and Ruled was broken as a result of the catastrophe that was 1914-18.
The virus of Marxism was allowed to flourish and quickly infected the intellectual/ academic class with appalling results, producing a sort of top down marxist/socialist orthodoxy that was to be further exacerbated by 1939-45.
Oxbridge in the 50’s and 60’s was a veritable cesspit of pseudo marxist drivel, primarily because it was thought Intellectually and Socially ‘smart’ to espouse its cause, just as it had been in the 1920’s.
An UnHerd contributor recently mentioned that even the ‘sainted’ Michael Palin just couldn’t resist making pejorative remarks about the British Empire in one of his lauded TV Rail adventures.
This virus runs deep and I admire your determination to fight back, good luck
To me, ‘wokeism’ is like any generational change – there will always be an older generation looking back on the halcyon days of pre-woke, when everything seemed to be so free. I am in the older generation and find woke to be sad and silly but also interesting as a generational change. Like all such changes, parts will die out and parts will be incorporated into our society for the next 50 years. Some parts of woke are probably fair, other parts laughable.
I just finished reading Andrew Doyle’s new book on Free Speech – not a demanding read but well written. He makes the point that the older generation fought against the wave of realism and nudity in theatre and television by trying to ban things from public view – but the new generation won by insisting that its views were correct.
Bearing in mind that all statements can be seen differently by different people, I am angry that our primary school children are being taught to feel guilty about our history, but the other side is that we were happy at one time when German people were taught to feel guilty about WW2. We were also angry when Japan refused to feel guilty.
Viewing the woke movement as a generational change is an interesting perspective. My impression is it’s an ideology pushed by a very vocal minority, although it certainly finds support in many public institutions. I’m not even sure that the majority of young people truly buy into it or whether they just make the appropriate noises so they’re not accused of being racist or worse.
Andrew Doyle’s book sounds like it’s worth a read. Thanks.
I though it was just a loosely connected collection of stray anecdotes.
Indeed, interspersed with hints at the author’s real thoughts, e.g. “which showcased looted treasures from across Great Britain’s imperial holdings…”
That’s as far as I got before I stopped reading. Even that jibe was incorrect as this country has been the United Kingdom since 1801.
Yes, that annoyed me
Great Britain is a geographical statement – the name of the island that most of us live on. It’s interesting to see what the rest of the world describes us as in, for example, international sporting events. Most of the time it’s GB & NI, rather then UK.
Yeah, I noticed that the conclusions of the article didn’t really land. The author seemed to want to draw a parallel between how the monarchy reinvented itself, and stimulated a sense of national unity, after Victoria’s long absence from public life and how the UK can again come together after extended lockdown. I’m not sure the analogy is strong though and the notion of finding a common enemy seemed to come out of nowhere. I guess I read into the article what I wanted to see.
Edward VII was ok when he became king. Libidinous, yes, but he seems to have been quite good at diplomacy, and very popular when on tour. He may have liked his fun, but his heart was in the right place.
If only Harry had that sort of blood in him, rather than the “bow to Meghan” mentality he has now.
“Let us hope that the Queen can find a way to draw on the Victorian legacy of personal courage, and of moral leadership”
The Queen has shown plenty of both in her life. There are, of course different kinds of leadership. But I can’t think of many who have surpassed her in moral leadership. Maybe Nelson Mandela and Jimmy Carter come close but they were “here today,gone tomorrow” politicians. This time next year Elizabeth R will have been exercising her quiet but incredibly consistent moral leadership for 70 years.
Of course a leader needs followers and this country has chosen to ignore our Queen’s example to run after the way of selfishness. None more so than her own family as exemplified by the Oprah Winfrey interview.
To be sure no human being can transform a nation’s moral quality. Only a spiritual awakening of soul shattering proportions not seen in this country for over a 100 years will do that. Her Majesty nor I will live to see it but our grandchildren and great grandchildren will, pray God.
Many thanks for a fascinating article, Mary. Especially for displaying the value of humour in discussing a serious topic. I love the idea of the King of Italy being fed at a Windsor pub and trust that they gave him something better than microwaved lasagne. It shows how fragile apparently bombproof institutions often are.
For a taste of how a society can reach even worse states, I recommend watching “The republic of King Jesus” on YouTube. Professor Alec Ryrie is an excellent lecturer and recounts the chaos of England in a period to which Mary refers – the 1640s and 1650s when the King was executed and Cromwell reigned.
One factor in restoring the monarchy in 1660 was the spread of religious nuttery. If it was not bad enough having Cromwell and his hencemen ruling, you had the Levellers, the Diggers, the Seekers, the Ranters and, worst of all, the Quakers. How the Quakers were perceived as terrifying and subversive makes enthralling and hilarious viewing. Even the worst monarch could be viewed with nostalgic affection after this assortment of freaks had risen to prominence.
The man in a quandary here is Justin Welby . He the man who brought over an American Episcopalian Bishop to wow the audience at Meghan and Williams glitzy wedding ( apparently the Bishop was unknown to bride and groom) Meghan more fond of arch Secularist and Marxist Chomsky who’s book she had recommended to her Twitter fans in an earlier incarnation , than the good Lord . Welby of course on record for his devout admiration for the Queen and Monarchy at this point presumably in seventh heaven being a friend to both Queen and Princess . Then the Princess turns on the Monarchy scorned and vengeful seemingly intent on destroying in her words the ‘Firm ‘ . How does Justin react a discreet silence perhaps. ? That though is fraught with danger , if the Monarchy goes then the Anglican church becomes disestablished and the church and of course himself more or less finished in that the platform that gave them credibility indeed a platform of itself gone in the twinkling of an eye. My guess is he and his Bishops know where their bread is buttered and will in their usual expedient fashion act entirely out of the noble end of self-preservation by standing with the Monarchy .
Not really relevant to the thrust of the article but I’ve never thought before, I wonder how much Victoria’s extended grief was exacerbated by the perimenopause. For those not in the know, it can really send your emotions into the toilet and she’d have been about the right age. Not something much discussed in those days or in that household, I imagine.
I remember the day of Elizabeth II”s coronation, a cloudy day when her carriage was suddenly the distinct sunlit object; joyful color and light in a darker world around it.She has been steady in the years since, even as the world has been spinning into chaos as it attempts to rebuild Babylon. And just look at those trying to accomplish that goal!