The Hilary Mantel and Royal family furore

[dweomeroflight]

Has anyone else heard about Booker prize winner, Hilary Mantel's, controversial speech on Royal Bodies, presented for the London Review of Books? I saw it yesterday in my twitter feed and clicked on it out of interest. As someone coming to it as a cultural historian, as a writer and as someone who comes from a country that has little love left for

Comments

[a_phoenixdragon]

Not far off at all, though I found her questioning of monarchy a little less subtle than most people do - it was between every line, really.

A very thought-provoking article but (at times), poorly worded. Very well thought out, but I can see how it would cause outrage, really.

*HUGS*

[dweomeroflight]

What parts did you find poorly worded out of interest? I thought that some of her linkages were dodgy but the wording had 100% clarity for me. I thought her argument was pretty straightforward to be honest. It's all a bit puzzling for this Australian.

I mean, come on, if it's the Kate section that everyone got upset about, you have to ask yourselves why? Every word Mantel wrote is true. Kate does seem that way. 'Seem' being the key word. Whether or not she is, is an entirely seperate issue. Mantel is talking about the 'public' Kate, not the 'private' one. She is talking about the myth, not the person. The distinction is important and yet so many people seem to miss the point.

Why does it cause outrage? Because the UK doesn't like to have their Royal myth questioned, just as Australians hate their National story myth to be questioned. But just because we hate to question it, doesn't mean that we shouldn't.

[a_phoenixdragon]

Ohh, she was straight-forward and where as some people found her subtle, I found her words a hammer. Questioning is all good, I'm a big believer in questioning. And she made a fair number of very good points. But her gleeful distain for monarchy bled through every paragraph. It wasn't so much WHAT she said, was how she said it. She never laid out in so many words her dislike of the royals (and her intense, predatory delight in finding their weaknesses), but it is very much there. A neutral party would have been better suited to writing this article, but alas, we did not get such. That's where the true subtlety lies - her borderline need to see them crash and burn, while studiously distancing herself from her own feelings on paper

[dweomeroflight]

But see that kind of reaction says more about how you and others feel about people talking about the monarchy, then it does about Mantel. I didn't find it gleeful. I found it insightful and sad. You couldn't pay me to be a Royal. Not after Diana and to a lesser extent Royal's like Prince Harry and Beatrice. And what on earth is wrong with pointing out weaknesses. They aren't untouchable just by dint of being Royal. A neutral party? Nobody is neutral on this earth. Mantel wrote a very long, academic speech for the London Review of Books and she was asked to talk about her work- her work on Royal Bodies in her fiction is well known. Out of anyone, she was highly qualified to discuss such an issue. Just because her opinion is I'm no Royalist doesn't make her opinion invalid

[a_phoenixdragon]

Actually, I think the monarchy is a beautiful, yet outdated idea. They either need to revamp themselves and their ideals, or phase out. Thank being said, I'm not a European or British citizen and my views on monarchy may be skewed, which is a fair point. But they are like any other celebrity, the only draw back being, they have HISTORY of celebrity. Just because we have worldwide, instant access and more cameras and more tech and more information, doesn't change the basic facts. Celebrity has always been hard - and how each individual chooses to handle their own celebrity is very much up to that individual

[dweomeroflight]

Let's agree to disagree on this one. At this point, we are both going to generate more heat than light

[dweomeroflight]

Ps: Opinions are never neutral. Not ever. That is why they are called opinions.

Pps: Mantel wasn't shit stirring. She was discussing the image of Royalty that the public and the media and indeed the royal family demand from a feminist perspective. Just because a number of people take her argument out of context doesn't make her argument unclear. It makes people's inability to grasp an academic argument more apparent.

[a_phoenixdragon]

But journalism and observational pieces SHOULD be. Journalism went to hell when people started telling us what they thought. Not the facts as they are

[dweomeroflight]

When people claim Mantel was saying something that she clearly wasn't, yes I will judge them. When people claim that it was a viscious diatribe when it clearly wasn't, then yes I will judge them. When people claim she was having an uncalled for dig, then yes I will judge them. When people claim it wasn't a feminist look at the public perception of the Royals, when Mantel pretty clearly states it as being so, then yes I will judge them

[a_phoenixdragon]

LOL!! Do like what Pullman has to say - and really dialogue is the whole point in these things. How does it make you feel - tell me. Does it make you happy? Angry? Either way, you cannot stop me from doing it, though I am interested in what you have to say about it...good points there. A wise man.

And yes, everyone should have a voice. That voice should be heard. And though reality and the world is rather shocking in itself, a shake up now and again doesn't hurt. Making people stop to think NEVER hurts.

Mmmm...tis the text I tell you! The text! I guess I had better do the same *bows and smiles* And touche. To easy to get offended or rattled with these discussions. That's why I usually prefer to discuss things face to face. Seeing someone's body language and facial expressions lends to the debate for me and gives me information I can't get through the written word.

Saying that, I probably would have appreciated her speech more!

*hugs*

Agree to disagree it is...*laughs*

[dweomeroflight]

I fucking love Pullman- his speech on public libraries is the best thing ever! Also his debates on Lewis and also Christianity. Always one to read :)

But that's the thing. It may well be the text's tone but Mantel had every right to use that tone. That's freedom of speech. That's what shakes things up. Then again, that means I have to extend you the same curtesy in allowing you to express your problems with her tone. Unfortunately, most people aren't taking issue with the tone. They are blatantly misconstruing what even you concede is a slegehammer obvious argument.

[a_phoenixdragon]

I love his books. I love that quote. And I love how edgey his thoughts processes are. Hardly shocking to me - more refreshing! I would love to see links to those debates. Lewis was in his genre, though took a different tack on how he wrote about religion, fairytales and world-view

[a_phoenixdragon]

I think I can do that, lol!! Differences of opinion make the world go 'round - but also can start the most horrid arguments! Then again, everyone has their own filter and world-view

[dweomeroflight]

Exactly! Besides I like my lj friends :)

Ironically the things you write about the frontman is exactly what Mantel was on about. Kate could be a second Diana. So far she is toeing the so called 'Firm' line. For me, this is rather disappointing but who knows yet- early days and all.

Lots of others got her argument- just read The Guardian and The Observor comments rather than The Daily Fail and The Sun. Mind you, Mantel's speech was also never intended for anyone but academic types. Just because the tabloids had a slow newsday doesn't change that.

Mantel isn't a Royalist and yet they ARE how she makes her livelihood

This is of course very true and thanks for reminding me. However, to be fair to Mantel she does acknowledge this ironic fascination in her actual speech.

[a_phoenixdragon]

*Grins* We all try to be awesome in our own ways.

True, but that bit (in my eyes) was lost in her own observations. Still wanting to see what Kate will do (as will be reported by my friends from around the world). So far, I know she's married to William and pregnant. That's about it.

Mmmm...good point. Newspapers will take about anything nowadays and run with it. And I do kinda feel bad for Mantel now that I think about it. A speech got turned into controversy that everyone has something to say about.

I do remember that, lol! Found that actually amusing and rather tongue in cheek. One of the few highlights of that piece.

[dweomeroflight]

I found some parts of the speech to be beautifully worded. I have had a story idea for aeons about the cult of personality and it might be helpful down the track for ideas.

As for Kate, the fact that all you know is that she is married to Will and pregnant says it all.

Edit to explain: doesn't say anything about you, but about what we know of the real Kate.