British Monarchy Essay

To what extent is the Monarchy still relevant and influential in contemporary British society?

Over time, we have seen changes in the cultural, sociolinguistic and even political fields. Regarding this latter, that the perception we now have of a liberal and democratic society is much different from the one we used to have more than 150 years ago cannot be denied (Tyrrill, 2018). However, as Tyrrill (2018) suggests, a novelist, broadcaster and commentator on royal affairs, the perception of the monarchy has not changed as it remains as an empirical element within both politics and the British social life. It seems that while the world sees a decrease in the number of monarchs, a surge of admiration and fascination with the British royals and the monarchy continues to develop in the British territory (Gristwood, 2020). Thus, according to the survey carried out by The Guardian ICM Research (Glover, 2011), ‘Britain is a nation made up of moderate monarchists and reluctant republicans’ in where most of the inhabitants think the monarchy is still broadly relevant in contemporary British society. That is why we can claim that the monarchy is still important, but now we must ask ourselves the following question: to what extent is the Monarchy still relevant and influential in contemporary British society? In this essay, I will be arguing what has made the Monarchy as relevant as it is in currently Britain. Then, I will refer to the media as one of those factors that enhance the influence of the Monarchy in the country. And finally, I will concentrate on the Monarchy as a corporate heritage brand and what that means.

‘The British Crown represents the most celebrated of all constitutional monarchies and has […] provided a template for many other’ (Balmer, 2011: 527).

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place an order

Thanks to this ‘highly status’ the British monarchy does not go unnoticed. Furthermore, it seems that the royalty has a visual splendour and irrational appeal that project a ‘fairy-tale image’ and contribute to its continuing popularity (Parry in Olechnowicz et al., 2007). Balmer (2011) explores the claims that the British Crown has seen its splendour and its modern monarchy thanks to the metamorphosis it has experienced over the years. Thus, it has ‘metamorphosed’ from an elected institution to a high-profile supra-national institution where the monarch is the titular head of the Commonwealth. Although it should be noted that a key factor in achieving this modern monarchy took place during this process: the idea of a feminized monarchy. Thus, from that point on, women began to play a role within the political field, something unusual in time for British royal men (Campbell Orr in Olechnowicz et al., 2007). Moreover, if we move forward to the twentieth century, we can claim it was a crucial period since the monarchy became ‘the symbol and exponent of a particular set of public values’ (Williamson in Olechnowicz et al., 2007: 255), those latter promoted and respected by the public. Yet the monarchy's greatest function was to symbolize national and imperial unity, a function that is still applied today and accepted by people (Williamson, 2007). So, according to the poll conducted by The Guardian, 47% of respondents say it is a unifying national institution against 36% who think it a divisive one (Glover, 2011). However, this unity triggered a major social inequality and several conflicts to which the Crown had to adapt (Olechnowicz, 2007). Unfortunately, that did not happen until the death of Princess Diana and she also gave us royals better equipped (her sons, grandson and granddaughter) to have a successful 21st century (Gristwood, 2020). It has taken several changes to make the British monarchy as important as it is, but the influence of the media has given a major boost to its popularity.

‘The projection in the new mass media of radio, film, and television added only greater immediacy to the already enormous coverage of the monarchy in the existing mass media of print’ (Williamson in Olechnowicz et al., 2007: 225).

Since the early twentieth century, the monarchy became more vocal which means that the members of the royal family made more speeches and issued more messages (Williamson in Olechnowicz et al., 2007). Although Williamson (2007) stresses that monarchs rarely wrote their own speeches, royal pronouncements received large publicity through the media of the period such as radio broadcasts. Just as the radio was very important at the time, so was the television then. As Richards (2007) pointed out, the television has been the transformation of public royal events into soap opera as it shows the ups and downs, the joys and sorrows of the family. This makes people know about the British Royal Family and forms ‘a closer bond’ between them. Some clear examples of how much television is doing to keep the monarchy influential today are the funeral of Princess Diana in London, which had a global audience of two and half billion, or the wedding of Prince William to Catherine Middleton, which reached a very global TV audience (Balmer, 2011). This situation, nonetheless, has not always been this way as before the First World War, royal weddings were only private ceremonies and not valuable crowd-pleasers as they are today (Gristwood, 2020). Moreover, the monarchy remains influential in British society due to the intervention of the film industry and literature on the British monarchy. Thus, films such as The King’s Speech, The Queen or Queen and Country or many ‘recent’ studies related to the Crown such as Sir Roy Strong’s (2005) disquisition of British Coronations or Bradley’s (2002) consideration of the Crown’s spiritual dimension increased interest in the monarchy and give it popularity. The press has also influenced the increase of popularity of British monarchy due to its apparent hunger for Royal scandal (Wardle and West, 2004). The monarchy is still influential not simply because of ceremonies, speeches and so on but also because it is considered a corporate heritage brand.

Over time, the British monarchy has ended up being regarded as a corporate heritage brand with a prominent place because the brand has entered into common consciousness (Balmer, 2011).

According to the theory Mead suggests, a corporate heritage brand is linked to a ‘historic artefact’ which is also called the brand identity. To carry out the process of identity formation, it is essential the interaction of the present and the past (Mead in Hudson and Balmer, 2013). The British monarchy has undergone this process to become what it is now. In turn, it sees itself as being part of a mythical heritage that is based on – involving pasts that are partly or entirely fictitious – (Hudson and Balmer, 2013) thus, as Otnes and Maclaran claim (2015), the successful branding of the Royal Family is in part a product of Britain’s historic role in the world. As a result, the British Crown is seen as the most familiar and potent corporate heritage brand among all other British brands (Balmer, 2011). Balmer (2011) explores the claims that the reasons why corporate heritage brands are attractive are because they represent a ‘stable reference point in a changing world (2011: 528) and they are often linked to a place and a people, in that case, linked to Great Britain and the British. Account needs to be taken of the significant importance this new corporate heritage brand has in the ‘ordinary Britain’ as, furthermore, it has a strong impact within the culture. That is why it is more commonly identified as a central element to British culture which also influences tourism (Tyrrill, 2018). According to Otnes and Maclaran (2015), the Crown seeks to adopt new marketing techniques in order to promote the royal family and tourist experiences related to the monarchy and so this latter will continue to fascinate locals and visitors.

In conclusion, by analyzing the Monarchy within contemporary British society, we can pinpoint that it has been influential and relevant and still is today. There is still that fascination with the monarchy that existed in the past (Gristwood, 2020), and that it has managed to win over its audience. Thanks to the metamorphosis, as Balmer (2011) called it, which the monarchy has experienced over the years, mainly during the twentieth century, this latter has acquired a certain ‘high status’ that remains until today (Williamson in Olechnowicz et al., 2007). However, what significantly boosted the influence of the monarchy was the mass media, which helped to preserve a positive image of the monarchs performing their public duties and to humanize them by showing their social life to the public, which created closeness between the royalty and the inhabitants (Richards in Olechnowicz et al., 2007). Furthermore, today the British monarchy is not a simple monarchy as it is considered to be a corporate heritage brand that, despite its global influence, is very influential in British culture (Tyrrill, 2018). So, the cultural significance of the monarchy makes people be more attracted by the country, seen as a ‘glorious heritage centre’ (Otnes and Maclaran, 2015). While the monarchy also has its negative aspect (financial costs) (Tyrrill, 2018), people still choose to surrender to it since the survey conducted by The Guardian found that 63% think the country would be worse off without the crown (Glover, 2011). As for the future, people do not seem to know whether there will still be a monarchy, so we can wonder how secure then the future of the monarchy is.

References

1. Balmer, J. (2011). Corporate heritage brands and the precepts of corporate heritage brand management: Insights from the British Monarchy on the eve of the royal wedding of Prince William (April 2011) and Queen Elizabeth II's Diamond Jubilee (1952–2012). Journal of Brand Management, [online] 18(8), pp.517-544. Available at: https://www.palgrave.com/de/journal/41262 [Accessed 19 Jan. 2020].
2. Glover, J. (2011). Monarchy is still broadly relevant, Britons say. [online] the Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/apr/24/monarchy-still-relevant-say-britons [Accessed 20 Jan. 2020].
3. Gristwood, S. (2020). Retaining the royals: why has the British monarchy survived – and thrived?. [online] HistoryExtra. Available at: https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/retaining-the-royals-why-has-the-british-monarchy-survived-and-thrived/ [Accessed 20 Jan. 2020].
4. Hudson, B. T. and Balmer, J. M.T., (2013). Corporate heritage brands: Mead's theory of the past. In Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 18 Iss 3 pp. 347-361.
5. Olechnowicz, A (ed) 2007. The Monarchy and the British Nation, 1780 to the present Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
6. Otnes, C. and Maclaran, P. (2015). How the British Royal Family Became a Global Brand. [online] The Atlantic. Available at: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/10/british-royal-monarchy-queen-elizabeth/411388/ [Accessed 21 Jan. 2020].
7. Tyrrill, S. (2018). Is there a place for a monarchy in modern society?. [online] Blasting News. Available at: https://uk.blastingnews.com/opinion/2018/02/is-there-a-place-for-a-monarchy-in-modern-society-002362161.html [Accessed 20 Jan. 2020].
8. Wardle, C & West, E 2004. The Press as Agents of Nationalism in the Queen’s Golden Jubilee: How British Newspapers Celebrated a Media Event’ European. In: Journal of Communication 19.2 (2004): 195-214.