In order to move forward, we need to understand that everyday people often mean different things when discussing the ‘same’ concept
By Tiina Heikkinen
Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons
For someone coming from outside of the United Kingdom, the concept of monarchy has always felt quite peculiar. This could have not been more the case than on the day of the Queen’s passing, a day which I happened to spend in England out of all the places. All of a sudden what appeared to be just another boring day turned into a bombardment of news of Her Majesty’s passing. As rehearsed, the ties of the news anchors were changed to black ones, all scheduled programmes on other TV channels came into a halt, and all you could hear from the radio was constant repetition of the news that marked an end of an era. The atmosphere was surreal.
In many other places – online and offline - the news of the Queen’s passing immediately sparked the discussion of Britain’s colonial legacy – an institution that the Royal Family in many ways symbolises for many. It also brought people to discuss important questions about the nature and necessity of monarchy in modern day Europe, especially in the face of the current cost-of-living crisis that is glooming over Europe.
While all of these discourses are necessary and important, on the day of the Queen’s passing I also learned about an additional reality that exists alongside this. It is a reality which is in no way even comparable to the wounds of colonialism, but rather one that often exists in worlds and symbols unaware of such wounds’ existence.
No matter how much I disagree with something, it does not change the fact that it exists. No matter how much I disagree with the fact that people who support the monarchy and mourn the Queen have not likely been educated on the everyday realities and legacies of colonialism, it does not change the fact that they grieve. Most importantly: many of them do not grieve the colonial institution. They grieve a symbol of consistency, one that has been there for all they remember. The Queen lived when they took their first steps, and she lived when they went on their first date at a local pub.
Many of them do not grieve the colonial institution. They grieve a symbol of consistency, one that has been there for all they remember
She lived when they would take the bus to go to work every day, and she lived when they would get together with their family for a bank holiday. She lived in every stamp, theatre name, coffee mug and two pence coin. Her curated image was one of calmness, warmth and reliability. And whether any of those things really existed in her, is secondary. All that matters is that for many this was the reality, the kind of consistency and reliability that brought a sense of safety. For them, the Queen symbolised a completely different reality to that of millions of people around the world; not always as just a person, but as a concept.
For them, the Queen symbolised a completely different reality to that of millions of people around the world; not always as just a person, but as a concept.
Understanding this, is crucially important when moving forward. I had to understand, that when I discuss monarchy and The Queen’s legacy, I might be doing so out of a completely different reality to that of many others. It is crucially important to realise that people are rarely educated on everything all at once, and then go and choose to believe in one narrative over others. We are all made by the things we are exposed to and used to. Moving forward, acknowledging this is now more important than ever.
It is only through extending our empathy to those different life worlds that we can really understand where people are coming from so that we can develop discourse where we are actually talking about the same things with the same language.
