Royal imbecilities

IT WAS 1947. It was a glorious summer here and the British royal family were criss-crossing South Africa in a special train, greeting their "subjects". I was not to be left out as thousands of schoolchildren greeted the heir to the throne, Elizabeth, at Greyville racecourse.

Despite innumerable practice sessions I managed to curtsey instead of bowing. That may have been a solecism but nonetheless it was a proud day for all of us.

Quite why a family who lived thousands of miles away should have that effect wasn't clear to a 13-year-old, though at the time I was as royalist as anyone. I was aware of the extent to which the British monarchy had a hold on the imagination of white SA, including Afrikaners. As for English speakers, their enthusiasm knew no bounds: it was their royal family they were effusively greeting.

My interest grew apace during the tour and I collected all kinds of memorabilia, from tea cosies to beer mugs. I cut out photos of the tour and pasted them into my scrapbook. (Somewhat more understandably, in England my wife-to-be was also cutting out newspaper reports of the same royal visit and pasting them into her scrapbook.)

That stood me in good stead when I realised the orgy of uncritical publicity around this family didn't lose its effectiveness even when faced by the opposition of Dr Verwoerd's Die Transvaler and the criticism "at home" in England, barely two years after the end of the Second World War, confronted by the worst winter in living memory.

It was a golden summer in SA while it lasted. However, within a few months everything turned to dust for the prime minister, General Jan Smuts, who lost the all-white election of 1948 to the nationalist Afrikaner party, thus illustrating race was more important than monarchical fervour.

Those and other thoughts came to mind the other day when a young couple were married in London. There was a vast amount of hoo-hah and uncritical coverage of every step this couple – William and Katherine – were to take. According to the London Daily Mail, they "are taking upon themselves no less a thing than the future preservation of the monarchy and it is just possible that with good humour – and with masses of middle-class determination – the pair of them will pull it off".

For the Mail, it was a sporting contest that Mr and Mrs William Windsor might pull off.

For others, who refused to accept the thumbsuck figures of the billion viewers of the wedding ceremony, something more was required as the British monarch is also head of the Commonwealth, which entails a degree of recognition by us in SA.

The 13-year-old at Greyville racecourse over the fullness of time became a human rights lawyer for whom the precepts of our Bill of Rights have universal application. So the succession to the throne became a matter of importance: not major importance, perhaps, with all our other problems of poverty and racial prejudice, but certainly significant. Under British legislation – as the monarch is head of the Church of England – no non-subscribing person can succeed to the throne, which violates the anti-religious discrimination clause of SA's constitution.

Second, succession to the throne is governed by legislation passed during the heyday of male supremacy. The first-born male succeeds to the throne – even when he has an older sister. Scandinavian countries have changed their laws to make the succession gender-neutral, but not the Commonwealth countries, which abide by the old medieval prescription.

Our press suspended all evaluation or assessment, apart from some minor speculation as to how Queen Elizabeth's cash-strapped subjects might view such a vast expenditure on the wedding of two people. Military uniforms worn with decorations not earned either by deed or examination were praised for their colour, even though they resembled Ruritanian outfits.

A Cape Town daily, on its front page, ran a report as to the betting on whether Kate Middleton would get a kiss on the cheek or on the lips when the couple appeared on the balcony of Buckingham Palace; and we were told other bets were placed on whether the groom's brother would be too drunk to finish his speech.

Only sycophants perpetrate such imbecilities. My son is right: I must be a republican everywhere – except in the United States!