The Crown: A Strange Phenomenon

[Music] the crown a TV show that has captivated viewers around the world for many years now has finally come to its end now that the dust has already settled and we as viewers have already said our farewells it can be commonly agreed that the crown is indeed a phenomenon One of a Kind series that is actually really singular in its existence While others might cite reasons for it being of high quality well produced and carefully crafted I would not exactly use the same foundation for this argument the crown is a phenomenon for me partly for reasons others might list but also for another reason entirely it is a phenomenon because it is viewed backwards you see this notion has WRA settled inside my head for quite a while now for a singular reason one word in particular that is disclaimer if you have at least somewhat kept up with the discourse around the later seasons of the show you might have an inkling as to where this discussion is headed the word has come up again and again in connection to the crown there are people who have pondered should there be a disclaimer before the crown warning its viewers that what they are about to see is fiction the Creator behind the show Peter Morgan was really confident in the answer to this dilemma when Judy Dench and John Major came out to criticize the show before season 5 came out with the former calling for a disclaimer Morgan essentially called them silly gooses for thinking that when season 6 came around a top researcher on the crown did not skip a beat and went to Hollywood Reporter to defend the crown against its critics the researcher proceeded to state that she doesn't think it's been misleading in the slightest and that the show never pitched itself as a documentary she also said that he added clarification by net flicks under the fifth season's trailer that it was indeed a fictional dramatization was unnecessary she thinks that the audience is smarter than this I tend to agree with the sentiments given by the researcher to an extent it is relatively easy to dismiss criticisms such as those given by D and major under a certain light they can be seen as serving real life institution who have made no secret of the fact that they do not view the crown favorably for the sake of this video it is not the words of these aforementioned critics that I am concerned by it is not even that relevant what exact they said what were B they used and how insulting they were towards the crown what is concerning to me is the response from the team behind the crown this might be perceived as a controversial take but I believe they are not being entirely truthful to the matter at hand at least that is what I tend to think after now having seen the show in its completion I do not think the confidence they assert in these responses is warranted the response would entirely be valid under very specific circumstances if their show was actually regarded and actually operated as being a fictional show again this is certainly a hot take but the crown does not behave as if it was fictional the discourse is not focused on the usual things it would be focused on if it was a fictional show of course this is not due to the fault of the crown the crown of course cannot completely control the discourse that might arise around it but at times the writing itself does not warrant this distinction there is a fertile ground for a real honest discussion about the crown to be had because what if these calls actually have some Merit again I am not calling for a disclaimer but I do not find myself completely disagreeing with the claim that the show can be seen as blurring the lines between fact and fiction what if the crown is not as masterful in its presentation as the creatives behind it wanted to seem which is precisely why it is productive to begin viewing the show as if it was fictional isn't that what the Creator himself is calling for us to do to apply the same standards every other show would be subjected to because it competes in the same categories as other shows in award seasons and it is mentioned in the same breath as other often times fictional shows yet the whole ordeal surrounding the Varity of the crown that comes into discussion over and over again it is such a masterful distraction from the problems as well as good features that the show might actually have so let us dive into the phenomenon that is the crown now perhaps this is the perfect time for me to explain my own disposition towards the crown I am young enough to have zero recollection of the events depicted in the crown I don't really have my own experiences of these events at all that could in any way shape my own perception as to how they are depicted in the crown obviously I am more or less informed about them after the fact I am also not from Britain therefore I am even farther removed from what the crown is depicting to put it bluntly I have zero skin in the game besides being a regular member of the audience I believe that this does grant me an interesting perspective on the show and it brings me to this realization the crown whether it intends to or not can be seen as blurring the lines between fact and fiction returning back to what was expressed by Peter Morgan about how silly it is to call for these disclaimers there was one thought in particular that would visit me from time to time sure it seemingly is easy to dismiss these criticisms but it would be equally as easy to just slap a disclaimer on there wouldn't it I wondered why they would just not do it to shut down the critiques but instead are digging in their heels so much partly on principle obviously but I cannot help but think and this is obviously a speculation on my part now which is purely made as a thought experiment and should not be taken too seriously what if they don't want the viewers to believe that this is the case it is rather obvious that the crown has a certain expectation of the viewer for the viewer to know the context for the viewer to know this or that and for the viewer to be invested in these characters because of the added context from real life the crown is interesting in a sense that it never really had to create much incentive to watch the show it did not have to generate a level of value that other shows would need to because the appeal was already there so why would the crown not want to capitalize on all of this on this sort of enigma of what is true and what is not but I invite you to put those sentiments away to one side now and to flip our perspectives to consider the crown in different terms the crown first and foremost is a historical drama its narrative is rooted in fact but it is allowed to and certainly does stray away from fact to facilitate drama to facilitate a narrative it invents where it needs to and it omits what it wants to you can view it in another way you may imagine the history it Roots itself in as Source material and the crown itself as an adaptation and thus various facts that the show establishes in its version become Cannon World building the historical events become plot the space and time where it all occurs become setting of course narratives found in history do not lend themselves to the usual narrative structures employed in current media for a clean adaptation process in order to fit into these structures the writers have to invent to Pivot all of that is expected but this sort of view once again requires you to separate the source material from the adaptation and adapt cannot rely on the source material to carry its weight it absolutely has to be able to stand on its own in terms of Storytelling but how does the crown accomplish the separation and adaptation or rather if I would dare to ask does it accomplish a separation at all I will begin with the most minuscule simplest example it comes from the third season episode 8 titled dangling man the queen upon meeting with the ailen Duke of Windsor tells him that this we've had our disagreements but you've always remained my favorite uncle fairly innocuous even innocent line even if it is innocent we still have to think of it critically because this line implies the existence of other uncles and may I ask where are those uncles the show never provides any comparison or contrast in Elizabeth's relationships with the imaginary other uncles I can already hear people elbowing their way forward to say well actually because yes Prince Henry Elizabeth's unle does appear in scenes here and there but what I want you to do is to rely on what is presented in the show and in the show he is only named Henry we used to say that about Henry didn't we dear what and the show never bothers to point out that he is an uncle to the audience and neither does it display in-depth the relationship between Elizabeth and her other Uncle to Warren Queen remark in the first place you can make an argument that she sees Lord mount baton as an uncle and technically he is is through marriage as he is an uncle to Phillip the queen can also be seen referring to him as an uncle an uncle and a guide to me and he is presented as fulfilling that role but mostly to Philip and Charles he isn't even presented in the same ballpark as Uncle David in regards to Elizabeth so there isn't even anything there to compare or substantiate the claim by Elizabeth again this is a completely harmless example it doesn't really change much in the grander scale but it is a part of a pattern that the crown has now I want you to think about how you would come to acquire this knowledge on this matter either you would dive into Wikipedia or you would know this from general knowledge both of these options point to one thing the Crown's inability to stand on its own and relying on Real History to fill in gaps that should not even be there but if we consider it as truly fictional and separate from Source material this would show the Crown's writing as deficient it brings up this notion of favorite uncle in the context of no other uncles another examp example a slightly more considerable one can be observed in the first episode of the third season titled olding the whole episode hinges upon the sort of fear that the Queen Elizabeth has about her new prime minister Harold Wilson the episode sprinkles in mentions of the Prime Minister being a Soviet spy yes whilst on a trade mission to Moscow KGB got him nonsense I know then the queen has the opportunity to meet Wilson for the first time in a private audience their first conversation includes this bit did you ever imagine you'd be prime minister goodness no how could you have done Mr gateskill was still such a young man he was no one could possibly have foreseen his death no so sudden yes the mention of this specific piece of information is presumably used in order to contribute to this image of the queen being distrustful towards the new prime minister but when we once again treat it as a separate entity and being fictitious we can see that the crown does not even in any way establish the this in its own Cannon the alleged poisoning of hu Gates kill is not ever explained or even mentioned outside of the episode and it is never even clarified who the person is again who is Hu gateskill although I suppose it is sort of implied who he is but a sheer fact that the crown pulls this out of nowhere without providing any proper context and then expect it to work as substance to the suspicion that Elizabeth has is simply not how it should have been done it would have been even easier to Simply omit this line entirely this once again is a deficiency on behalf of of the crown this would not fly in any other TV show and before you say that you should know this or you can Google this and call me a dum dum this is exactly my point that the show's creators tell you that it is fictional and should not be taken for fact yet it doesn't do enough due diligence to properly separate itself from the facts it is outrageous to think that you would need to refer to real facts in order to understand certain elements of the crown such as this if any other show didn't care to explain things it says this would be titled as bad writing and the notion of you having to do a additional reading into the source material would be titled and rightfully so as ridiculous the crown wants to have it both ways to be absolved of the duties of explaining required elements yet' be able to say that it's separate from reality but again these two examples are still comparatively minuscule they do not break anything that much but there are those that are much more glaring let us turn our eyes to the fourth episode of the fourth season which is titled favorites the episode focuses on the topic of favorite children we see Margaret Thatcher en chambles over the fact that her own favorite child has gone missing and my favorite Mark has gone missing this allows for the queen to reflect on the relationship between her and her own children Prince Philip poses this little hook and your favorite is I don't know and thus the episode seeks to unravel this little self-contained mystery it is a fun premise and it does land on a conclusion we see the queen have meetings with her four children and eventually Prince Philip points out that that's for Andrew your favorite now on its own this is a nice self-contained episode but what you need to remember is that while Charles and an have already been introduced this episode actually marks the first time in the entire series that we actually see the queen interact with either Andrew or Edward her other two children so it comes as rather hilarious that the show lands on this conclusion after a single proper interaction between Andrew and the queen a single interaction obviously this conclusion comes from the fact that it is heavily speculated to be the case in real life but the show makes very little case for this to actually be true within the show to add to this that one interaction doesn't even really warrant this conclusion not to say that the interactions with other children make a stronger case it's just that prince Andrew is shown to say some really questionable things look that in the 1920s follows a impressionable new bile 17-year-old girl cool 17 I'm not sure I want to know more it just does not feel like it warrants the title of a favorite that one single interaction does show her to like his jokes I suppose we as much as break wind it's a matter of national oh stop but I hope you can see how this is insufficient storytelling now there is an excuse that could be said to try and combat a writing imperfection such as this that the crown didn't have enough time to cover this in more depth and that it is nice it covered at least a bit of it at all but this is a sort of mentality that I would ardently disagree with you see this would disregard the show's requirement to well actually make sense on its own historical dramas are supposed to be rooted in fact yes and that is what this episode tries to do but historical dramas do have to still add substance to it otherwise what is the point of it why would you want to watch a high budget reenactment of what you can just read online without it actually providing any additional value this is a way in which the discourse around the crown is backwards words viewers seem to be grateful that something is included at all but again let me ask you why why are you grateful yeah the show might be strapped for screen time but it doesn't absolve the crown from needing to put in the work no one really forced the crown to be structured like this to only cover things in a very fleeting manner instead of taking its time like any other show would a similar kind of pattern can be observed in season 5 the first episode attempts to establish a parallel between the queen and the Royal yach britania the queen explains that the connection between me and the yacht is very much deeper than a mode of Transport or even a home from the design of the hull the smallest piece of China she is a floating seagoing expression of me this will not even be about the fact that this whole ordeal is executed without any subtlety what makes this portrayal troubled to me is the fact that the queen really says this out of nowhere before this episode the only time we see the queen on the boat is when she's arguing with her husband about his alleged infidelity and I would assume that this was not the moment when she fell madly in love with this boat let us be quite clear about this nothing useful can be achieved by sanctions really it was my understanding they would devastate the South African government well they would devastate us too and then the show drops this notion entirely for the next eight episodes until it decides it becomes relevant again when the bo is then decommissioned we get to see the sad Queen walk around the premises of The Yacht for one last time which is a bit hilarious considering that this is probably her third time visiting the boat throughout the entire show this whole ordeal has no real foundation in the show itself this only happens because the queen was said to enjoy the boat a lot and was emotional when it was decommissioned the show however wants you to rely on this fact yet does no work whatsoever into actually substantiating this claim you can probably hop onto the internet and do additional research to find out why exactly this was the case but my particular gripe here is that you should not need to do that it should only be a bonus to be able to find out more not a necessity in order to justify what was said in the show this would not even be a point of contention that I would discuss now but it does become contentious when you realize that the show uses theat and the Queen's connection for two episodes and to book end an entire season all of the examples mentioned so far are used in context to build up specific arguments arguments that pertain to certain emotional beats I have no issue with the crown not explaining in depth what Princess Margaret was referencing here when she mispronounced the name of Vidal SU does he have a name The Stylist I want to say Victor kab no that's not quite right um Videl baboon neither do I have an issue of the show name dropping oh no no no I know who that one is that stor P I am not calling for the crown to explain every little thing but I am calling for the show to establish and explain things that are supposed to shape some of the emotion behind what is being shown or said and frankly I do not believe I am wrong in asking that under normal circumstances these instances would quickly be called telling and not showing and would quickly be discarded as examples of bad writing again to varying degrees you can be forgiving of these misdoings but this issue also extends to larger events not just these relatively smaller moments and another thing you can sometimes sense in the crown is that the story doesn't always come first hitting historical points at times does and that is a rather flawed way of portraying a historical drama on screen some events I believe are just not done Justice overall from The Narrative standpoint that at least you see the crown does have a tendency to Simply summarize some of the events this again leads to a question why would you want to watch a high budget reenactment of people just telling you what is already known but one event in particular doesn't even get that much due diligence now the very first episode of the fourth season titled gold stick opens in quite a dramatic fashion so many sacrifices have been made but we are still ignored there thus set up an interesting episode but you see the whole story line with the IR a or the Irish Republican Army from a narrative standpoint is pretty pointless let's think of this episode in terms of what happens in it and nothing else we see the dramatic introduction we get Charles meet Diana we get the new prime minister being elected then everyone goes into little hunts and such and then Lord mount Batten gets assassinated then the Prime Minister threatens to deal with the IRA we then get another dramatic sequence of voiceovers and archival footage and then we get to see everyone sad then Charles meets up with Diana and that is the end now that I think about the entire episode is just really not great this is the case for a few reasons one barely anything is explained about the IRA they are skimmed over for no apparent reason presumably either leaving the viewers to fill in the gaps themselves or to additionally research but there is another perspective that you can consider from the treatment that the IRA received they do not even seem to be that important to the plot yes it is shown that they are responsible for the assassination but the fact that they are responsible brings absolutely no consequences on the plot on the characters or on anything the crown does include some of the rethoric but it does not even really substantiate as to why it is important that it was the IRA that assassinated him none of the characters from the royal family remark that it was them that did it which again leads me to say that it could have literally been anyone doing it and it would not have any real significance their involvement is portrayed as that insignificant now on Purely narrative terms this would raise a question why are they even included if they are treated as relevant if their actions were trivialized to this extent why even show these montages this can be answered by the simple fact that it happened in history so they included it you may once again argue that he didn't have the time but once again this is an extremely weak argument you don't have the time then make the time the same can be said about the death of Winston Churchill his inclusion back in the first episode of season 3 from a narrative standpoint brings no real influence to the plot it is treated very matter of factly and is shown as a background event more than anything under normal circumstances You could argue that this inclusion wasn't even necessary as it has no real value but you can somewhat let it slide since it is the death of a character that used to be quite important to plot once he certainly received far more grace than for instance Princess Alice the mother of Prince Phillip her death was summarized in a single sentence my mother died recently but returning to the IRA they were just summarized and made peripheral and really poorly summarized at that this might also be due to social cultural factors in real life but that again is a very poor reason not to properly represent this part of history and certainly cannot excuse poor writing same sort of treatment is given to other events as well for instance the Falklands War wasn't given the proper screen time it would have required it is shown as happening but it again is in the periphery and summarized more than anything it does not really affect anything either the queen provides no commentary on the matter it does not really touch the royal family in any way and the only effect it has on the overall plot is that Thatcher gets to be triumphant but then all of that becomes Irrelevant in the subsequent episodes same is the case with whatever is happening with Tony Flair now this is probably the worst offender of them all I watched the crown and I had no idea what they were even referencing season 6 made criminally low effort to even portray it as relevant to anything it influenced nothing and explained very little again through the lens of just regular narrative rules these inclusions and treatments just beg the question why on Earth are they even included this is not the first time that the crown excludes entire events it is certainly capable of skipping parts that it could not work into the narrative for this you would need to look no further than the entire premier ship of John Major the crown ignores so much about him as a person and his Premiership that in the light of facts a certain scene can be seen as comedic speaking of happy marriages congratulations are in order your wedding anniversary this weekend yes you and Mrs major 24 years this year we must all be doing something right which really shows that the crown fails to sufficiently breathe life into some of these events and move them past these summaries which sometimes happen to be worse than what you would simply find on Wikipedia which leads us back to the same point to make sense of these events displayed you sometimes need to refer back to the source material to read up on History this is how the show fails to stand on its own in both adapting these events in a narrative sense and explaining them from the World building and Canon perspective and you needed to look far at good examples of things done properly such as these events the crown itself has previously shown to be perfectly capable of executing this task the suet crisis for example was done really really well back in seasons 1 and two it certainly didn't leave gaping questions and its explanations and didn't make you question its inclusion sure you could have read up on it later on but it was perfectly capable of adapting it in a manner which didn't require you to have external knowledge to make sense of it all what all of this boils down to is that I believe it would be unfair to other shows to give this much grace towards the crown that it has been given does make sense as to why people view the show and think oh I am sad they didn't include this but I am glad that they included this we have the benefit of knowing for how long the crown is is intended to run and the knowledge as to what happens in the period it intends to adapt but this mentality is not a feature it is a downside the crown is indeed naughty documentary and there is no reason as to why people should view it as such you should not be grateful that it covered this or that event or be wowed by the way they managed to slip in singular scenes of the queen with her children you should be critical of how they Implement these aspects and not simply be happy by the fact that they do there's another way in which the show blurs the line between fiction and reality it seems as though the show is is not engaged in a monologue but rather a dialogue by this I refer to the influence that the discourse outside of the show has on the show itself you can see it with for instance how the crown portrays the IRA you have to remember that the show is made by the British therefore it is their perception through which we are seeing the events depicted in the show from what it seems one could argue that Ira are too tumultuous of a subject to have been included properly in the show this I think is an interesting point of debate where is the show supposed to draw the line after all it Finds Its plots in real life in real history involving real people and real places now it is not really secret that the show sways heavily in favor of the royal family or should I say specifically the queen that is probably partly because of her reputation in real life in the real world the crown was always selective in how it portrayed its characters which obviously indicates a bias but the last two seasons made this painfully obvious they're rather uneven when compared to the rest of the seasons and I believe that it is partly due to outside influences again I think that the show engages in any dialogue with the discourse outside of it the previous considerations are partly the reason why because the show Once Again expects you to have a perception of the events it covers expects you to sometimes have the additional knowledge to the events that it depicts but there are other things that could potentially support this thesis Peter Morgan has commented on the contentious topic of the supposed Diana's ghost in an article published by the variety He has expressed that he did not intend for it to be a supernatural presence which is fair and fine he has also said that it was her continuing to live vividly in the minds of those she has left behind and I suppose that's what inspired me to find a unique way of presenting her she deserved special treatment narratively now you could say that here he's solely referring to her loved ones completely could be the case but the fact that she deserved special treatment I think points to the show's awareness of the effect the real Diana had the show also does something that quite frankly I have no idea a what for it opts to show Diana not laid in a coffin yet do shown dead on the screen almost all of the other deceased Royals have been shown as corpses yet Diana is not I would say that it is a weird choice to do this now and do something different for Dodie in the same episode if you consider this you can sense the perception of the public bleeding into the show it is something that Morgan himself even acknowledges in the same article he says that everyone in Britain whether they acknowledge it or not has that level of sensitivity and attachment to this family which is why it is an absolute mindfield for dramatists to explore I feel as though the crown tries to take an approach of bringing a Different Light to events it covers bringing in a bit of depth to them with that logic what it feels the fifth season in particular is at times trying to do is a balancing act but noty Balancing Act within the show itself but rather with the discourse that exists outside of it think about it what is Princess Diana known for the most her charity yet the crown doesn't include any of it in any meaningful fashion because people already know about it instead it tries to show that here Charles did it too what do we know about Diana what a good mother she was regarded as and what do we get we get to see her not as that good of mother it is the same as Charles and Diana's wedding back in season 4 because allegedly everyone had already seen it everyone remembers it and there was no need Charles and Camila were also vilified in real life yet we get coverage that consistently paints them as victims of circumstance and their love story is shown as one of persevering ing Against All Odds this sort of philosophy bleeds over into season 6 somewhat too episode 4 focuses on the aftermath of Diana's death the episode CHS us to lead up to the speech of the queen before that Charles tells her this what do people want from me attention and love but the show actually neglects to show any of this this could be for a couple of reasons one because the crown assumes that you already know what went down so it does not feel the need to show any of it and waste its precious time time choosing to once again tell instead of show and reason number two which is speculated yet does seem likely is because Peter Morgan has already covered this in a movie that was released in 2006 now I will admit that I do not agree with this reasoning at all because why should the crown commit one of the writing sins in moments that would really benefit from showing the most just because the writer wrote it about it once before that's ridiculous whichever one it is both reasons are not enough to justify this treatment from the crown Morgan also commented on the fact that he changed the ending of the crown after the passing of Queen Elizabeth II again this displays a receptiveness to the discourse around the show itself as well as its subjects this is yet another way the show fails to separate itself from the real family from the Real History this is due to the fact that the crown depicts events that are so close for the events to be experienced by the audience Peter Morgan has emphasized a 20-year rule of separation between events of the crown and the present day stating that he would not cross this line this exists so that the remembrance of these events would be already settled by the time the crown decides to cover them but if the last two seasons suddenly cave to the outside pressure and perception one must askas then why create a crown in the first place the way it is this was always bound to happen was it not it must be acknowledged that in the latter Seasons the crown really dulled out and began pulling its punches in the depictions of some of these characters dep suddenly disappeared as if the crown tried to tow the invisible line of public perception the crown is such an interesting phenomenon it is undoubtedly entangled Le to fact whether it fails to do so itself or due to what it covers while also it tries to pose as fiction yet as you may have noticed this discussion is not yet over there are still some literary matters to be discussed in regards to the [Music] crown the crown exists in an interesting place it depicts individuals that are known all around the world it is only natural that people approach the crown with their own perceptions and their own opinions in this way it is quite phenomenal because these pre-established Notions serve as a distraction in this way the crown has had the benefit of deflecting a lot of criticisms that other TV shows would have experienced it is almost as if it is somehow exempt from criticism that falls anything outside of historical accuracy or how the crown depicts who yet not a lot of people actually pay that much attention in this discourse to the quality of the show itself not the costumes or the scenery or the cinematography or the soundtrack but the actual writing it is as if the show is treated in some special way but again allow me to pose you a question why should it be to me the crown is a show like any other I do not have a personal relationship to any of these topics presented my view is not obfuscated by whatever preconceived notions others might be holding close to their hearts again the idea that one has to be informed externally to be able to evaluate the crown is ridiculous other TV shows do not have the same luxury so why should the crown be granted it let us turn our attention to more literary matters now that the crown has run its course I have come to yet another conclusion the crown is in a lot of ways fractured in its storytelling and here I am not even referring to the cast changes every two seasons it is a part of it yes neither am I necessarily referring to its episode structuring which can also be seen as part of the issue there are many more flaws within the writing if I was to boil them down it would be that in the crown reality is what it wants it to be at any given moment it shapes reality however it suits The Narrative whenever it wants it also breaks rules of Storytelling whenever it likes we have already partly discusted but there is still some territory to be touched upon most of the time it fits and honestly it could have gotten away with it too if it wasn't for the latest two seasons they sort of brought a lot of the show's worst patterns to light which can also be traced to previous Seasons as well to understand the extent of these issues we must first discuss the focus of the crown so what is the crown about there are two ways of answering this one is more practical and literary and other is more elevated more romanticized we will discuss both in due time and we shall start with the former the last two seasons have seemingly thrown a wrench into the whole ordeal before I think it was a very clear-cut definition the crown told the story of Queen Elizabeth and her Reign and it made sense as it stands Elizabeth is at the top of the food chain within the hierarchy that is the monarchy she is the most important character to follow because in a way she has the most Sway in the grand scheme of things and she is effectively the face of the institution she affects others the most and others affect her as well if it is not necessarily her decisions that cause drama it is the decisions of others that bring drama into her life as it all starts and ends with her there's also the matter of the Prime Minister and the Downing Street of it all the Affairs of prime ministers would have their own story lines and their own designated screen time they had their role to play Within the crown as the prime ministers would also discuss various topics with the Queen the prime ministers would also change over time with only the queen remaining a constant and that was what she was for the majority of the crown the constant that would always be there the constant to which the story always returned to she as Prince Philip himself explains the only person that matters she's the oxygen we all breathe the essence of all our duty it was almost a dogma of the crown you also cannot deny the alert of potentially hearing what the queen had to say for her Prime Ministers of the events that that were happening during the time what was she thinking what was her role in this or that it is during season 4 that the first signs of alarm could be seen the screen time was slowly being taken up by Princess Diana not inherently an illogical or bad thing but it was really alarming to see season 4 and not with a shot of the queen as it was the tradition but with the shot of Princess Diana when season 5 came it almost felt like a betrayal the crown steered right away from what made the crown the crown suddenly it was held bent on proving to us how the queen was now tired and by popular opinion incapable of ruling we had a prime minister who was not involved in the politics the actual job of the Prime Minister but rather in the personal matters of the Queen's family it is really hard to say what exactly the creatives behind the crown were thinking would happen when they made this sleep but it never made sense to steer away from what made the crown the crown not that there wasn't any effort to bring any sense into the situation and there is certainly a logic to it all the queen is getting older the Prince of Wales is getting impatient to take over and therefore is trying to do more the crown tries to move down one step of the overall hierarchy to emphasize that the times are changing things are moving with Charles I can see the vision but then they also suddenly Chum over to William and decide that there is a necessity for us to see his life as well while it is cute on paper to display the prospects of the future of the crown and the monarchy to display the line of succession it certainly isn't cute in terms of Storytelling yes the show is called the crown and not Queen Elizabeth but it would be disingenuous to say that the show isn't actually about her if you don't believe me let us rewind back to season 1 for this I want to refer to the concept of precedent there were a few episodes that had another Monarch that was not Elizabeth but the attention was still kept to Elizabeth the first two episodes are just that Elizabeth's father is King s but what does the crown choose to focus on first her wedding then her accession to the throne the crown even if the sample size is minuscule does set up the sort of precedent if you have any more doubts allow me to refer to the ending of episode one where her own father explains to Philip this she is the job she is the essence of your duty which is the same exact notion that Philip himself repeats right before things go wrong in the finale of season 4 she's the oxygen we all breathe the essence of all our duty it is something that I am not simply making up it wasn't just revealed to me in a dream the show made a point of it over and over again that she is at the center not anyone else her without her at the center anymore it makes sense as to why for instance the focus has shifted away from the prime ministers without her audiences with them there is no connection between the plots of the show and politics this comes as ironic considering that the origins of the crown can be traced back to the audience a play that focuses on the Queen's relationship with her prime ministers even if the audiences take place they are mostly about Charles and Diana because oh yes there is also the Dian of it all I would love to know as to why we had to see the backstory of Prince Princess Diana Summers fling's dad was it absolutely necessary to see how the hotel where Princess Diana stayed last was acquired there was a brief moment in the show's history where it was initially planned to be six seasons but was downscaled to five then it was extended back to six and the explanation for it was provided by the creator of the show Peter Morgan he said that as we started to discuss the story lines of Series 5 it soon became clear that in order to do justice to the richness and complexity of the story we should go back to the original PL and do six seasons to be clear Series 6 will not bring us any closer to present day it will simply enable us to cover the same period in Greater detail and by richness he apparently meant giving obscene amounts of time to and I cannot emphasize this enough Princess Diana Summer fling's father or to the two photographers that received an unnecessarily long introduction in the second episode of sixth season or the married couples although they do have a nice purpose within the plot that were shown for extended scenes in the ninth episode of season 5 I tend to agree with the sentiment that the crown could have certainly covered things in more detail but it put the focus in some wrong places in the process that is not to say that the episodes of the crown focused on Diana were entirely bad I found them enjoyable but it simply isn't what I tuned in for neither did I want to see William or Kate which the show suddenly began pushing extremely hard for no apparent reason but it really does come off as weird when for instance actually important events such as the winds or Fire or the divorces of the Queen's children did not even receive that much attention as they should have I would argue that the entire episode of an's horribilis was just weird summary of what happened and the bad summary at that and also William and Kate where exactly is the complexity am I missing something they had the most watered down basic love story in the history of the crown the crown always had a place for stories that at first would seem distant from the queen but it would still come back to her but he never compromise the stories that deserve the spotlight in the process the lack of the queen and the Politics as he Focus has made the show as a whole and even stilted and you have to remember that this is the last two seasons that we are talking about that is about the third of the whole show but the show always had a bit of a crook in its storytelling for this let us discuss mixed messages I would like to return to the idea of the crown warping reality according to whim it starts with the smallest of examples in the first few seasons in fact I remember first watching the finale of season 1 it really was a Perfect finale to a very good season it continued to play on the conflict between the two elizabeths Elizabeth the queen and Elizabeth Windsor one of the last notes on which it ends is this whole argument with Philip over him being sent away the crown makes this Grand Point of it too with philli expressing his anger towards the queen just betray up as a favor the episode ends and the season concludes as well now this may have come because I have binged the show when it had more than one season out but what stuck out to me was that in the next episode we suddenly have philli and the Queen on good terms remarkably great even sure there was a flash forward with them fighting but in the normal chronology we go from them having this dramatized argument about Philip fighting against being sent away only to be followed up by him then happily remarking on all of the locations he would be visiting from there we s to Port Victoria then on to columia new guini in Australia saying that actually now I've made the decision I'm rather looking forward to it this is a jump that can be somewhat tolerated once but it really does come off as disingenuous for the show to make a whole ordeal about it for drama points and not to follow up on it properly a similar pattern is followed between seasons 4 and 5 at the end of season 4 we have both Charles and Diana ready to get away from one another a good chunk of the episode is literally about them being up in arms at each other fighting Diana even says this to Prince philli near the end and if he if this family can't give me the love and security that I feel I deserve then then I believe I have no option but to break away officially and find it myself the episode ends in quite a dramatic fashion with us the audience seeing Diana Walking The Halls on her own then joining the Christmas family photograph on the sidelines now let's Sidetrack for a bit there is a little Quirk that the crown has that I always enjoyed it names its episodes after things that are either said or appear in the show now episode 10 of season 4 is titled War I always like to figure out why episodes are named the way they are or wait for the name to be Dr dropped by one of the characters you might say that this word was dropped by none other than Margaret Thatcher during her private audience with the queen what we are on the brink of War this might be as well the case but I speculate that this naming came from a different place now sometimes there are scripts published from the crown online that is the case with this episode and it is interesting the terms which are used to describe the ending of season 4 to quote the script provided by deadline Diana defiantly looks up Her Mind Is Made Up she's going to war this might not be what is translated on the screen at the last moment but it does reflect the overall Arc that Diana had over the episode so now here comes the first episode of season 5 it immediately starts off with Diana and Charles planning a holiday as if none of those arguments and the shouting and the trying to go to war ever happened I mean look at them give them some of the old magic well come on then let's blow them away again really dising of the crown to play up these aspects for cheap dramatic points and just proceed to move on without any explanation or connection between these two status quos whatsoever these two examples can be ignored if you want to I know certainly that I can ignore them they are not detrimental and shouldn't force you to drop the crown but there are bigger examples as well that are part of a similar pattern there is one example in particular that I am surprised isn't really discussed more that is the show's treatment of the Duke of Windsor now to recap this is the person that as per show abdicated the throne for love other characters also fling a lot of stuff at him for causing an entire crisis and that his abdication contributed to the death of Elizabeth's father but that isn't the only thing that he did the sixth episode of the second season focuses on quite some damning information concerning the Duke of Windsor at first we get an ominous flashback with the characters remarking we all suspected it these papers must never see the light of day what is written here brings a great is shame upon this family the episode keeps up an Intrigue before finally revealing the truth the Duke told the German government that resolve in the United Kingdom in the face of the German aerial bombardment was weakening and it continued bombing that is the continued Slaughter of his fellow countrymen and former subjects would I quote soon make Britain ready for peace to bring the gravity of the situation home the Queen provides this iconic piece of dialogue to the Duke there is no possibility of my forgiving you the question is how on Earth can you forgive yourself it even takes this sweet time to display real photos of the events discussed to give you the evidence that this is in fact true to leave no doubt in your mind with what we are dealing with here now imagine my surprise when episode 8 of the third season comes around this episode shows Prince Charles visiting the Duke the crown really takes its time to establish the parallels between the Duke and the prince and then the music swells and we get this grandiose presentation from Charles let me confess that I do recognize myself in you yes what a king you would have made in a Kinder world what a king we were denied I'm not exactly sure what the IR rationale was here did they actually think that we would ignore what was stated before it is a bit weird to say the least for Charles to be saying that the Duke would have made a good King when this man and I am emphasizing this as per the crown was said to when a German aircraft crashed in Belgium carrying Hitler's entire military plan for the invasion of France the Duke wasted no time in letting his Nazi friends know that Allied Forces had indeed recovered this Priceless information which gave Germany time to change its plans so which one actually is it was he a bad person or a good person the crown doesn't know that's for sure Charles comparing himself to this man is just not as big of a flex as the Crown thinks it is and here we have once again the crown just coming up with stuff that is for dramatic purposes and it just comes off as this flip-floppy mess just because they want to have a cool monologue right at the end you could argue that this is a way to establish a balance and say that a person can be complicated but this right here is not Balan this is just changing your view just because it suits your narrative in regards to mixed messages perhaps the biggest victim at the hands of the writing of the show is none other than the Queen Elizabeth herself the last two season really did a number on her character might as well call her an entirely different person really the first episode of The Fifth Season makes a huge show out of the fact that the queen is suddenly getting old about how unfit she is to rule and how out of touch she has become one of the arguments made for this is her reaction to the topic of the royal yacht we get a scene of the queen with her prime minister at the time John Major discussing the matter of refurbishing the yacht John Major keeps pointing out this it's just with the Royal yacht being perceived as something of a luxury there is a danger the palace could be seen to be asking for too much we're in the midst of a global recession each penny of public spending is closely scrutinized the Queen's response to it all is really ton deaf she says this I hope we can agree that as Sovereign I have made very few requests let alone demands in return for the service I have given this country perhaps the reason I've held back is in the hope that when I actually do people don't just take it seriously L they do as I ask without question this is done so that the episode and the show can continue to harp on the fact that Charles is this Progressive man and the queen is this old outof touch woman who has to be kicked to the curb it is quite hilarious when you remember what she had said in previous Seasons I want you to take a look at the fifth episode of Season 4 here we have the queen as well as her prime minister Margaret Thatcher the episode focused on Michael Fagen showing his struggles that he then directly communicated to the queen then when thater blabbered on and on about her political stance the queen came to the defense of the common folk stating this if people like Mr Fagan are struggling do we not have a collective duty to help them what of our moral economy she then disagreed so much with Thatcher's policies that we had an entire episode of how she broke her constitutional duty to remain silent on political matters that's how these sources so close to the queen describe me prime minister that I lack compassion my government has done irretrievable death damage to the country's social fabric this is how much she was portrayed to be for the people and this all happened just a few episodes before season 5's Premiere we can also look at season 3 during the tenure of Edward Heath there were minor strikes on which the queen is shown to express a view in line with what she has expressed with thater and one does wonder if we have failed to understand the scale of the Minor's anger indeed if we have failed to understand them as people so to see the queen who has preached about moral economy to straight out ignore the fact that her country was facing recession just because she wanted a fancy boat to be fixed is ridiculous the show does this once again because it suits their narrative at a given time then we have The Stance about the queen that the show proposes in episode 6 of the fifth season this episode decides to put the queen in contrast to a younger woman it plays on insecurities of the queen and it's not a bad episode per se but they make an interesting implication about her character Prince Philip alludes to her being incurious through the episode Hair blood saliva didn't you ask no why not aren't you curious not even a little bit which ultimately results in this conversation I'm more energetic more Restless more Curious your desire for calm for stability for silence not to question not to probe not to provoke interrogate has sometimes left me lonely this conversation I feel like is really unfair towards the character of Elizabeth that we have seen through the seasons it isn't even consistent with what Elizabeth was before the fifth season the seventh episode of the first season tackles this topic of her intelligence it comes to this conclusion you were drill for years in the final points of our constitution you know it better than me better than all of us you have the only education that matters first this shows that she isn't just some dum dum like Philip seems to imply and also doesn't hurt trying to get to know more display that she is curious we see throughout the show that she doesn't avoid to question or to probe her prime ministers when needed that she is indeed curious that she is involved why for example does this scene exist then have you decided on your first cabinet I have it may surprise you to learn that I enjoy predicting ministerial comings and goings would you like to hear my predictions for yours quite different how I imagined more interested and informed and here she is proving Herold Wilson on his policies what will you do about the balance of payments will you devalue no ma'am she was so curious and so questioning that she caused an entire crisis in the eighth episode of the fourth season of which Philip even seemed proud to himself we even had her yell at Charles over his marriage she was so willing to question and provoke this could be excused if there was a character Arc in place to set up the shift and personality but the crown instead goes from point A to point B without a journey it chooses what the show needs to maximize the drama at a given moment but the inconsistencies do not really end there there is another thing that bothered me for quite some time that is the eth episode of the second season the episode titled Dear Mrs Kennedy focuses on the queen encountering Jacqueline Kennedy here they try to establish the fact that Elizabeth is a bit insecure that she is supposedly not as Charming as Jackie she becomes insecure because people all around her keep buzzing about the first lady and one of those people is Prince Phillip now within the context of the episode I guess it is in inent enough everyone is doing it so it doesn't really stick out I suppose everyone's enchantment with the first lady is exaggerated for Dramatics either way but when you remember the wider context of the Season Elizabeth's reaction to Philip's reaction is rather strange now the first three seasons of the season have their own mini Arc and result in them having a bit of a confrontation in the Royal yacht it was about Philip's alleged infidelity that the show implies but never out the right States through these three episodes we get to see Elizabeth find the picture of another woman in Philip stuff a picture that she apparently keeps as we find out later on this all culminates with Prince Philip getting a bit of a promotion to keep him calm then in episode 10 we get to see Philip being implicated for infidelity again and this is an important word here implicated this implication this rumor was enough to set off a reaction at Elizabeth the sheer fact that her sister said a man in a picture in a newspaper was similar to Phillip was enough to trigger her there's something Filip in the in the shoulders the Prime Minister has asked to see you ma'am as a matter of urgency episode 8 sits right between these two occurrences between Elizabeth seemingly having resolved this issue with Phillip and this implication so it comes off as weird that we have Philip being so outwardly pining over the first lady and we do not even get the hint of these types of emotions from Elizabeth he even has a nice laugh with the first lady right in front of her face he doesn't let go of the first lady and the show musters enough Dramatics only to point out that Elizabeth feels inferior to her because of charm once again the show drops and picks up things as it pleases to create drama while completely disregarding things that happen in other episodes I have said before that the structure of the crown resembles that of an anthology but it is not it never was it always was a series while episodic still series if it was any other show these things would have another name simply bad writing then there is a small matter of striking a balance the trouble with balance comes from two characters in particular Prince Charles and Princess Diana these two people getting turned into characters was always going to be a contentious territory to say the least knowing the prolificity of their story out there but I do feel that the crown failed to establish a good balance in these depictions now season 4 I think was going in the right direction what I particularly liked was that it didn't really paint anyone in the best and no one in the worst light for instance Diana while seemingly portrayed in an innocent light does have a deeper layer within there are little hints and clues that there is something deeper going on that Diana is less innocent that one might think that little look after she tells Philip that no I love a good watering mucker the better I'm a country girl at heart this scene then plays rather nicely with what she tells Camila later on what about hunting wonder if I can help it more tell really Charles is given a similar treatment there is complexity in his actions towards Diana he is portrayed as longing for another woman yet is forced into a marriage but there is at least one moment in time where he expresses concern for Diana I can see how unhappy you are how them you've become of course that still leads to irreconcilable differences between them but it isn't entirely black and white season 5 however really does away with it all and I think it really treats Diana in barely it puts an insane amount of effort in portraying her as unlikable as possible where Charles is given an entire episode where he can show off how good he is the episode I have in mind in particular is episode 5 titled the way ahead it focuses on Prince Charles phone call getting leaked but it overall lands on how great Charles is he might be as mad as everyone thinks but he's not as weak as everyone thinks not only does he have what it takes for the job in some ways he's already begun now I find it rather disingenuous that the crown chooses to focus on Charles's charitable Endeavors while neglecting to focus on Dias in the same manner the crown for some reason never gives a speech for Di to give to the masses to express her points and her charitable Endeavors are just a backdrop I mean she kind of is giving a speech but do you know what happens by anti personal landmines and does the queen know about your new boyfriend it gets interrupted with more Diana slander while Charles on the other hand gets to tell a bunch of commoners how he relates to them in their hardships of being judged well as it happens I do understand a little bit about what it is to be criticized and judged I mean I know your phone call got leaked but this comparison is so obscenely a stretch that it almost perfectly shows just how much they want to elevate Charles now the royal family as a whole is known to dabble in charity Charles is in no way exclusive to this in this way Diana isn't either one of my own gripes is that the show sort of neglects to mention why Diana's Endeavors were special and why she garnered so much attention in the first place the causes that she shows were not the ones that the royal family would choose she was different in this way because she did things differently but that again is barely remarked upon Charles instead gets his speech about how he is empowering young people Diana on the other hand is repeatedly shown to just cause displeasure to other people over and over again first it is implied she doesn't really have real friends then it is implied that she was paranoid then it is implied that she is a bad mother because because even the mention of her nearby Prince William just pushes him out of the room I mean really she gets a lot of criticism throughout the fifth season and is portrayed as some sort of EV deviant Charles gets a lot of criticism throughout the fifth season but he is portrayed as misunderstood and mistreated Charles is portrayed as the considerate one when he comes to Diana to talk about their marriage and Diana is portrayed as the one who is trying to ruin poor Charles Season 6 is sort of okay on this but then also backtracks on a lot of the stuff in season 5 after her death even still the Crown's inability at times to remain on his St at different times is noty balance it is indecisiveness there is also a little ghost in the room that we have to discuss once again let us discuss deviation the element of Diana showing up to Charles and the queen post her death has raised a lot of discussion as we have already established yes it is not a ghost it is an expression of grief I understand that completely but I am still an ardent disagre agreement with its use in the crown all of it really boils down to the fact that the crown is simply not the type of show to use this type of device to portray anything I am not blocking this out of thin air it is simply not the precedent that the crown TV show itself has set up there have been deaths of great magnitude in the crown the first one takes place in the very second episode of the show in fact we see the king pass away but we never see a physical manifestation of grief show up to any other characters Elizabeth doesn't get to talk to her father to express her love for him neither do any of the others this also doesn't happen to any of the other characters when a death occurs the crown simply doesn't do that or at least it mostly never dead there is actually an instance of something similar happening within the crown something to that Accord does happen in the ninth episode of the second season young Phillip upon finding out about the death of his sister does get to experience walking through an imaginary plane crash this can be seen as done in a similar vein but at least here it is a child we are talking about I do not necessarily agree with this type of display on the crown though I do for instance agree with the past iterations of the queen appearing in the last episode that I am fine with whatever yet the crown always had a grounded approach to how it portrayed topics the stylistic deviation is really unnecessary and just tacky there are other deviations present in the later seasons of the crown as well for instance we now have dream sequences to display the Queen's anxiety again for reasons unknown another instance of deviations is the overall ignorance towards the Royal protocol I would argue that one of the elements within the crown that brought the most grandiosity to the show was all of these specific rules as how people were supposed to interact it set a certain seriousness a solemn mood the queen would always maintain a distance between herself and her prime ministers yet now is displayed sitting on the same couch as John Major the prime ministers would walk up to her while she waited in the room yet now she was waiting by the door people were required to curtsy before the queen even her own relatives her own children yet now she was seen walking up to William without any Decor whatsoever there could be an interesting argument made here that the protocol is melting away those restrictions being alleviated is all part of what we will come to discuss soon the institution modernizing having a bit of an arc if you may evolving and changing but without this decorum and without these restraints these rituals it really just doesn't feel like the crown it just feels like a regular so Opera about a rich family there is a very specific reason why this video so far is the way it is if it seems too harsh it might be but I want you to remember that there is IR rationale the creatives harp on the fact that this is fiction and I am advocating for it to be treated as such and I am simply doing what they are telling me to do the show is also evaluated with the same Awards as other shows it competes with other shows in same categories yet it is consumed vastly different from everything else that is part of the reason why it is phenomenal but it's still begs the question how is it that it manages to come out Above It All Above these critiques above such [Music] scrutiny we have already discussed that the show can be perceived as engaging in a dialogue and I do think it does also by appealing to human emotion the preconceived notions that a viewer might have about these subjects that are being depicted this is not something particularly groundbreaking after all this is a drama that we are talking about and the Creator himself has from time to time said that the aim of the show was to humanize these people to show them in a different light but the crown at times has a certain charm about it that simply draws you in and while we spent a great deal discussing how the crown from an analytical point of view fails as a regular TV show we must also recognize that the crown succeeds it is popular for a reason where the crown succeeds mostly in regards to riding is in setting up a particular mood that makes you feel something because if the show manages to make you immersed in any particular atmosphere or mood you are much more keen on simply not being too attentive to flaws it might have for this we must discuss one term in particular that is creative license creative license is regarded as deviation from fact and form for artistic purposes the crown employs this license quite a lot in order to facilitate the story that they are attempting to tell that is not to say that the crown always does so successfully the latter two seasons are a proof of that but when it does it does so rather beautifully to express this creativity and to elicit the most emotion the crown employs quite an interesting structure there are two sides of the coin to the structure that a crown uses during a single episode it usually opts to focus on one larger notable event or occurrence it hyper fixates on one single storyline that usually gets resolved within the episode and is not really carried over further on one hand it certainly can lead to problems we have already discussed some of them such as some elements being brought up without any proper setup and certain things being dropped from from an episode and only brought up at the show's convenience the sort of structure certainly doesn't lend itself to a fluid telling of his story The Crown would rather prioritize facilitating a standalone episode rather than a grander overall Arc but you can see the utility in such a structure first I think there is a certain charm in being able to enjoy an episode of the crown without necessarily having to burden yourself with watching all of the episodes sure it would be nice to watch all of them but you do not necessarily have to as all of the elements are usually introduced in the episode itself season 3 for instance used to be the lowest regarded season before the latest two came out but I must admit that it is by far my favorite I particularly like being able to Simply jump into an episode and be completely engulfed by it no strings attached practically all episodes of That season work a standalone episodes and I really like that about it I even find myself rewatching episodes from that particular season the most and second the show uses creative license in order to facilitate the sort of a structure really efficiently most of the time I always particularly admire the show's capability to elicit the most emotion and dramatic effect take for instance the fifth episode of the third season titled coup it is based upon an alleged plot between cesil King and Lord mount baton to overthrow the government at the time while the show focuses a great deal on the coup itself it also manages to portray something deeper about Lord mbat and himself we see him be let go of his duties at first and see him struggle with his new position and they always particularly liked this thematic Choice especially how it concludes at the end of the episode I'm sure you find it near impossible to do nothing but you still have a huge role to play in this family it uses something that might be rooted in fact to tell us something about the character something rather human same goes for instance with episode 7 of the same season titled moondust it choses to focus its story line on the first landing of the moon but it also shows us Philip being fascinated by this particular event yet we also have a storyline of Robin Woods what particularly charms me about this episode is that it uses these two story lines quite effectively to tell a small self-contained Arc about Phillip how he goes from first idolizing these men who have accomplished a great feat and minimizing Robin Woods and his cause to doing the exact opposite having ridiculed you for what you and these poor blocked lost souls we're trying to achieve here in St George's house I now find myself full of respect and admiration it is not too dissimilar to for instance an episode in the first season the episode 8 titled pride and joy depicts the Two Sisters Princess Margaret and Queen Elizabeth as they carry out Royal Engagement to quite different results it is the interplay of these two story lines that the show uses to arrive at a certain conclusion it's a cruel truth to it isn't it there are two sisters so close and age that the more one becomes one thing the more the other necessarily becomes the opposite the crown was always had its best when it did exactly this it utilized its plots to deliver these Revelations about the characters to Great dramatic effect because as the creatives have said it really is not supposed to be a documentary a stale retelling and it also must be said if it wasn't for this type of a structure for this format of Standalone structuring of these episodes I am not sure it would have worked as well as it did because truly the episodes of the crown when working at maximum efficiency really know how to use its screen time throughout an episode to draw you in again it hyper fixates on a particular story line on a particular character but that in this light can be seen as a benefit the show fully transports you into that particular storyline into a particular mindset it doesn't focus on anything that is not exactly relevant in order to maximize the dramatic effect perhaps this is why the audience was never a skin on noticing any writing flaws because this structuring was so effective and managed to elicit that emotion and connection between the characters and the people watching through the sheer skill of writing it really keeps you in and I really do think that in this way you are much more willing to forgive whatever FL claws or wrinkles the writing might have I believe that season six further proves just how skillfully done the first four seasons were because it is not like the sixth season didn't attempt to present the story in a similar way here we have the sixth episode of the last season this episode attempts to do an interplay between two people the queen and Tony Blair it attempts to start at a point where the queen is insecure about Blair becoming more popular than her at the end concluding that I think I've come to realize there's no such thing as two Royal if you're doing it do it properly and unapologetically this I would say is perfectly in line with the philosophy that the previous Seasons used to construct this episodes the problem this episode in particular has is that firstly it severely lacks foundation and hinges on the fact that Tony Blair is seen as very popular but we only saw him a few times throughout the season and none of those times actually showed us why or how he was popular I suppose he did give a speech that was perceived as popular but nothing else really builds up upon this point secondly it really just makes the plot strange the queen goes to the Prime Minister for advice which he proceeds to give and then somehow it tries to say that how dare he give this advice and that he's wrong I mean what else everyone expected from the man who was known to be a great modernizer but I digress it is instances such as these that make you appreciate the previous Seasons just a bit more not to mention the other ways that the show manages to tug at your heartstrings what comes to mind first is the subtle parallelism between two scenes in particular the scene where Diana first meets Charles and the scene where Charles comes to talk to D after their divorce is finalized the way Diana similarly to her younger self observes Charles from afar as gentle music plays I'm Sarah's youngc sister by the way please don't tell her you saw me I'll get into terrible [Music] trouble is honestly quite effective and touching there are other examples too when Diana first goes out with Charles and then receives an invitation from Dodie and you can see how similarly she reacts with similar musical motives being used as well your all highness or how Elizabeth's father and her uncle both in similar ways are shown to struggle with their health of which Echoes you can see in the eyes of both Margaret and Elizabeth in this Scene It is these little things that the crown does these little callbacks that only amplify the emotional impact of certain scenes and most often too great dramatic effects when the show strikes it really does strike hard and efficiently when it wants to it knows exactly how to play with your emotions to get you invested and when the show manages to do that any FL you might notice becomes trivial because the sheer atmosphere the sheer height of emotion the Sheer Elegance of the crown sweeps you off your feet after all of these considerations there is still one question to answer I have mentioned before that there are two ways of explaining what the crown is one that is more practical and literary and the other that is more elevated more romanticized we all know what the show depicts and focuses on in those practical terms but really what actually is the [Music] crown at its very core the story of the crown is one of survival from the very first episodes as Princess Elizabeth upon the death of her father the king is thrust into the role of the queen she is told that the crown must win must always win this is exactly the axis upon which rests the entirety of the show the ultimate goal of survival of sustaining their way of life is reflected in practically every move each of the characters have to make particularly the queen herself the very first time the new Queen and her family run into this conflict happens right after the passing of her her father in the third episode of the first season the episode depicts Queen Elizabeth as well as Prince Phillip settling into their new roles the cause of conflict during this episode is something that is rather mundane something that you or I could run into the two primary concerns are the last name that the family would assume and also where the family would reside at first we see both the queen and Prince Philip being on the same foot on this matter both the queen and the prince agree that their family name should be Mount baton and that he should live in clarence's house instead of the Buckingham Palace both of these issues are quite mundane and quite human but the show displays that while at their core these concerns are simple they become complicated once they unfold in the context that these people find themselves in I would say this to the show's cleverness that he chose to tackle such a conflict first you see what the young couple wants happens to be the exact opposite of what they are supposed to want throughout the episode we see their own desires in conflict with what is perceived as necessary various people of different backgrounds come to discuss these matters with the young Queen the show does not neglect to display another necessary layer to this whole equation that is the place of interpersonal relationships within these matters you see Elizabeth wants certain things to be a certain way because that is what would please her husband numerous times we see her reaffirm her husband on these matters and at the end of the episode these matters do get concluded the last conversation on this topic between Elizabeth and Philip perfectly encapsulates what we have just discussed they'd rather we didn't keep the name it's none of their business you and my wife taking taking my name as the law it's the custom not the law a custom practice so universally it might as well be the law you can't do this am I to be the only man in the country whose wife and children don't take his name the name has to be Windsor for stability there's more clarence's house our home what about it we have to give it up the home of the Sovereign of the United Kingdom is Buckingham Palace I thought you hated that place I do then why go along with it because that's the overwhelming advice but that's the point Elizabeth it's just advice it doesn't mean that you have to act on it when it comes from the government you do kind of marriage is this what kind of family this is one of the first conflicts that a new Queen has to face in her new role and while it is small in scale it is perfectly reflective of what the crown will try to tackle over and over again in this way the theme of survival is overarching ever present within the crown and it affects every facet of the show The conflict between humanity and Duty in order to survive is what fuels the drama of the crown and to exemplify this the crown uses various tools from its Arsenal and this is where parallels and deviations come in the crown having the benefit of stretching over 610 episode Seasons covers a long period of time there is a notion that the crown itself points out that permeates a lot of areas that the show covers it comes from a conversation that the queen has with her mother sister and daughter about Princess Diana Diana will give up her struggles give up her fight and bend as they all do and if she doesn't Bend what then she will break in this particular instance it is in reference to character but I believe the same can be applied to the whole institution of the monarchy itself as it is displayed in the crown as we have established the crown at its core is a story of survival and how else something can survive if not adapt to its changing circumstances it is within this prolonged period which the crown depicts that we see multiple times the institution having to conform over and over again in order to survive it bends whether or not it wants or intends to in order not to break apart to keep up with the standards of the ever evolving world around them because it is often the external pressure in the crown that causes change in monarchy the most obvious example comes in the fifth episode of the second season titled marionet to summarize this episode shows the queen give a speech and it causes considerable outrage a man by the name of Lord altringham then criticizes the queen for the toned deaf speech and this triggers the queen to meet the man and listen to what he has to say the conversation brings up the notion of changing evolving in order to keep the institution alive because I dare offer an opinion I must be trying to burn the temple down on the contrary I'm trying to make sure it survives it's not so much what I'd have you change just an acknowledgement that it has changed what everything open up ma'am loow the draw bridge let people get to know you and the institution does exactly that it adapts in order to survive and throughout the moving decades we see this Motif repeated over and over of the monarchy facing pressure to change its ways and it eventually budging in order to keep itself afloat the reason why we are discussing this now is because in some ways you can see the stories that unfold Through The Changing Times as Echoes of one another at times even somewhat parallel yet different one of the stories that can be seen as having parallels is that of Princess Margaret and Princess Anne the story of Princess Margaret as displayed on the crown is one of a tragedy throughout the first few seasons Margaret is shown to be in love with a man by the name of Peter townend a divers SE whose wife is still alive this comes in conflict with the teachings and the dogma of the Church of England the Church of which her sister Queen Elizabeth happens to be the head of this is why she is repeatedly being denied the marriage to the man that she loves it conflicts with the tradition and the precedent the already established rules yet a generation later the same rules to a similar situation are not applied this is not exactly a parallel that I am pointing out for the first time it is a parallel that the crown emphasizes through Margaret herself how is it different Anne is a royal princess with no Prospect of exceeding to the throne as was I Commander Lawrence is a palace aquery marrying scandalously above his station Peter was a palace aquery hoping to marry scandalously above his Anne and Commander Lawrence are in love Peter and I were in love in both cases one one party is a divorce see the situation is identical in every way except for the outcome another parallel that is established by the crown itself is between characters of Prince Charles and the Duke of Windsor both men ASP the crown fell deeply in love with women who were out of their reach as per rules of their times yet the outcome of these two romances is different Prince Charles was able to wet Camila eventually even if he had to experience a whole lot of obstacles while remaining The Heir while the Duke of Windsor caused the whole abdication crisis and lived in Exile there is a layer of turmoil and tragedy Within These parallels and differences within them we have seen how these rigid rules have strained relationships and bonds between people in the system and now these conflicts are almost rendered obsolete there's a sense of unfairness too as the younger Generations do not have to suffer like those before them this can be seen within the stories of Charles and William Charles was taken away from his university studies in order to serve the institution and perform his duty he was also forced and I want to emphasize this as indicated in the crown into a marriage with someone he did not love William on the other hand had the liberty of studying at the University on his own terms to find love on his own terms in a way since this is a story of survival it is also a story of growth it seems like the institution itself just like a character of sorts goes through a bit of an arc and evolves growing from its mistakes Prince Charles while discussing it has described the crown as the crown is not a static thing resting Forever on one head it is moving alive in those terms it is only fitting for the show to be constructed in this way yet still the crown story can also be seen as cyclical the crown still reminds you that these people have their own predicaments however modernized the institution might become due to the positions they find themselves in the crown establishes an interesting parallel between the stories of Elizabeth and Margaret William and Harry it is striking just how similarly Margaret and Harry regard their own position in contrast with Elizabeth and William next to you will always be evil fitess lost less a thing so it's willly gold star Harry Black Sheep will he Saint Harry sinner will he solid Harry lost and just how similar the struggles of Despair to the air are described with me it's just what people [Music] want up oh that's Harry wells's job if one is the queen must be the source of honor and all that is good the other necessarily becomes the focus of the most creative malice the crown showcases people that are seemingly like you and me made of flesh and blood so human yet they exist trapped within the system Tied by the invisible chains prisoners within the grand story that is the crown or that is how the crown would probably prefer for you to see it as this elevated piece of art that is only one of the perspectives you may take upon viewing the show The Crown is a phenomenon but it is not above scrutiny reasonable analytical scrutiny we may return back to what the team behind the show has expressed in essence what he have said of the show that it is fictional and naughty documentary is technically true but I do not think that the standards that come with these Stags are being considered that is not to say that it is a bad show it is not again it is popular for a reason could it have done things better yes but that does not mean that you cannot enjoy it at its worst it is still entertaining at its best it is incredible I myself remain somewhat conflicted I see its flaws but I still find the show endearing it still draws me in I suppose that is the beauty of it you can have complex feelings about it and still find it enjoyable to some level yet now that the show has concluded and that the show is behind us it is time to say goodbye goodbye to the phenomenon that is the crown [Music]

Channel: Andrew Reviews

Views: 42,624

Keywords:

Id: Lc7NaOYQCrs

Length: 82min 3sec (4923 seconds)

Published: Sat Feb 24 2024