Search results
INTRODUCTION British television has had a long, and not always happy, relationship with the Crown, but since Richard Cawston’s documentary The Royal Family (BBC, 1969) the Windsors have acknowledged the necessary evil of allowing the cameras in to record less formal aspects of their life and work. The Queen herself has since been the subject of three such observational
This book provides a detailed consideration of the history of racing in British culture and society, and explores the cultural world of racing during the interwar years. The book shows how racing gave pleasure even to the supposedly respectable middle classes and gave some working-class groups hope and consolation during economically difficult times. Regular attendance and increased spending on betting were found across class and generation, and women too were keen participants. Enjoyed by the royal family and controlled by the Jockey Club and National Hunt Committee, racing's visible emphasis on rank and status helped defend hierarchy and gentlemanly amateurism, and provided support for more conservative British attitudes. The mass media provided a cumulative cultural validation of racing, helping define national and regional identity, and encouraging the affluent consumption of sporting experience and a frank enjoyment of betting. The broader cultural approach of the first half of the book is followed by an exploration if the internal culture of racing itself.
public expects of her. Members of the royal family are in an entirely different situation. Their role is to symbolize the unity of a nation; to provide an element of continuity in a necessarily changing society. This is history, not The Archers , 1 and their affairs ought to be treated as such. 2 Thirty years
, entertainments and hospitality relating to visits from members of the royal family and other non-civic dignitaries, although on those infrequent occasions the set-up was very similar to the approach taken over mayoral Shows.3 The costs of the Shows fell to individual Company members, whose putative contribution was assessed: for example, in 1604 the highest rank of the Bachelors of the Haberdashers’ Company who were going to be ‘in foins’ (wearing pine-marten fur) paid a charge of £3 6s each, those wearing the more lowly ‘Budge’ (lambs’ wool) £2 10s, and the other members
Aries, Middleton had referred to James, albeit in parentheses, as ‘that ioy of honest hearts’ and as the king ‘that Vnites Kingdomes [and] who encloses / All in the Armes of Loue’ (sigs B2v–B3r). A rather more contingent form of goodwill towards the royal family and state policy is in evidence in 1623. As we have seen in relation to Himatia-Poleos, Chruso-thriambos and Metropolis coronata, Munday’s texts can also be seen to have contemporary political dimensions. However, if he did comment on the underlying moment of the 1618 Show – the execution of Ralegh taking
the monarchy – in paintings, prints, films, books, magazines, television programmes, on the Internet and so on. The public image of the monarchy is not consistent across the period being explored here, however, and it is worth noting that there was a waning of support for the contemporary royal family in the 1990s, not least because of how it was perceived to have treated Diana. Support waxed again in
or were studying for postgraduate qualifications. Four were not native to the UK, but all were living in the UK when they attended the events in question. The relatively international nature of the group reflects the demographic of the student body of my university, but is also indicative of the British royal family’s global appeal. Several respondents commented on the relatively high proportion of foreigners
Secretary, would soon become closely involved with the royal family, photographing their children in early 1854 and taking formal studies of the couple, including the well-known double portrait in court dress of 1854. Later that year, he left for the Crimea, apparently at the prompting of Prince Albert (if not the Queen herself) to photograph the war, in the hope that his record would counteract reports appearing in
was shown wearing their ‘£175 taupe Shola dress to meet the Obamas’. 4 The royal family is a central feature of Britain’s projected identity and a unique selling point of the national brand created to promote its exports. The relationship between the Windsors and the fashion industry can be seen in a number of British Fashion Council (BFC) initiatives. Following the death of Princess Diana in 1997, the
– action adventure, costume drama, the ‘biopic’ and melodrama – with which it is portrayed in fiction film? How do these understandings shift with the international production and consumption of such fictions? What connections are drawn between royal celebrity and movie stardom? How is the deference with which the British royal family has historically been portrayed in its national media affected by the greater informality of