LONDON – Prince Harry and Meghan’s interview with Oprah Winfrey saw the royal brand undergo a powerful transatlantic beating, but it remains to be seen how much damage it will cause.
Although the British monarch has a very limited direct power for centuries, the institution’s status as a symbolic figurehead – uniting the nation at home and projecting influence abroad – perhaps remains the strongest argument for its continued existence in the 21st century.
Harry and Meghan’s portrayal of royalty as deeply out of reach, indifferent to mental health and unsympathetic – and even an accomplice – to the racism they say took them out of the country can seriously undermine that argument not only in the UK, but in the United States and other former colonies of Great Britain.
“Go back 100 years, and the royal family probably would have hoped that one of the justifications for their existence was that they should represent the best of British life,” said author and royal historian Sarah Gristwood. “It has become very difficult to believe in the past few decades. And this interview certainly does not help.”
Queen Elizabeth II’s response did not specifically address any of the couple’s claims, but said she was “sad” to learn how challenging her life had been.
The reaction did not seem to diminish the shock and anger provoked by the interview in Britain, where the #abolishthemonarchy hashtag trend on Twitter. Still, the reaction has varied, with much criticism directed at Harry and Meghan. And there are few signs that the monarchy will fall while the queen, 94, reigns.
Instead, “the greatest damage to the monarchy is in what it did to its international reputation, particularly with regard to Prince Charles’ future,” said Gristwood.
Charles, 72, Harry’s father and heir to the throne, is much less popular than the queen and antimonarchists believe that his coronation will lead to a change in public opinion. During the interview, Harry hardly helped with his case, saying he felt “disappointed” and claiming that his brother, Prince William, 38, and his father were “stuck in the system”.
Internationally, even the most diplomatic responses have been revealing, going well beyond the usual reverential tone when discussing royalty.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki said it took “courage” for Meghan to talk about her mental health – notable because the American, a former television actress, claimed that the palace refused to help when she told them who was having suicidal thoughts.
Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics
Tennis player Serena Williams lamented the “pain and cruelty” to which her friend Meghan was subjected. And filmmaker Michael Moore tweeted that “the kingdom that brought slaves here 400 years ago has its current racism exposed in all its brutality”.
In general, the Americans who watched the interview were much more sympathetic than the British towards Harry and Meghan, said researcher YouGov. People in the United States are twice as likely to be on the Sussex side than Buckingham Palace, and most believe the race played a role in treating Meghan for royalty, he said.
Although the United States abandoned the monarchy in 1776, today Americans are by far the most lucrative market for tourism in the United Kingdom. In 2019, Americans spent more than $ 4 billion in Britain, more than the next three nationalities combined, according to Visit Britain, a state-funded agency.
The issue is hotly debated, but supporters say royalty is a big part of that draw. The real brand is based not only on weddings, crown jewels and castles, but also on shows like “The Crown” on Netflix and “Royal Warrants” that adorn brands like Burberry clothing, Johnnie Walker whiskey and Bentley automobiles.
It is also no stranger to crises, such as the death of Princess Diana in 1997 and continuing questions about Prince Andrew’s relationship with the wealthy financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who died of suicide while in custody in 2019.
But what made Harry and Meghan’s interview exceptionally damaging, according to some observers, was that it did not focus on individuals, but rather painted a damning picture of the institution itself.
“Meghan was the crown’s greatest opportunity for change, regeneration and reconciliation in a new era,” said American poet Amanda Gorman tweeted.
Shock waves are also being felt in other former colonies in Britain, 15 of which have kept the queen as head of state. In Australia and Canada, the debate has revived over whether it is time to move on.
“Our head of state must be an Australian citizen, he must be one of us, not the queen or king of the United Kingdom,” former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
There has been consternation among the British Commonwealth countries in the Caribbean, where Barbados already planned to remove the queen and become a republic last year.
“Meghan says people were talking about how dark her son’s skin would be. And she has a much lighter skin than most of us,” said Jamaican newscaster Dionne Jackson Miller tweeted. “Could this be a turning point?”
Ultimately, it may take some time to assess the ramifications.
“It is serious and can damage the reputation of royalty,” according to David McClure, an expert in real finance and author of “The Queen’s True Worth”. “But, in my opinion, it may well go over, we will have to wait and see.”
History suggests that memories may be short. A few months after the outrage that followed Diana’s death, the queen and Prince Philip celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary, which “was a big love party again,” according to Gristwood. “It is therefore surprising how quickly the affection for the monarchy can recover.”