11/23/2010
Is there a royal engagement?
I thought I have seen it on the news but have gotten about it. It is good that the ST wrote such an emotional article about the engagement of Prince Andrew and his fiancée, a commoner. Sorry, forgotten her name. Thanks for the reminder. The engagement is about a real life prince and a soon to be real life princess. Oooh la la, fairy tale stuff! Now my mind is full of Robin Hood, King Richard and King Arthur.
And Yes, 1953, the coronation of Queen Elizabeth the second! And she came to Singapore as part of her Empire tour to let her subjects have the pleasure of seeing her, the new Queen, in person. And the loyal subjects of the Empire lined the streets of Singapore to wave flowers and the Union Jacks as the Queen passed by on her topless motorcade. It was fairy tale and fantasy came alive.
Now I think many Singaporean will wish that the Prince and Princess will pay a visit to this former colony for the citizens to go gaga over them. The former subjects would probably have passed away or mostly immobile. But not to worry, the new and younger citizens will be the most enthusiastic over this event and will definitely be out in full force to welcome them. They have not the privilege of seeing a real life royalty in their lives. And they will be in their best dresses, designer’s clothes, hats too, to match the occasion. We can relive our colonial heritage and lifestyle one more time, so glamorous and so intimate, as members of the Empire.
And those who have been knighted with an OBE or MBE can put on their medals and be invited to dine and dance with the Prince and Princess, at the Istana of course. Memories are made of these.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Hahaha, as always I love your sarcasm Mr Bean. The Singaporean's obsession with all things Western never ceases to amaze me. Truly mind-bogglingly dumb when you consider that most of the Western world post-GFC are economic basket cases. Morally, they were bankrupt a very long time ago. Someone please remind me again why the Singaporean is still worshipping them?
Aiyah, if you want to see subjects fawning over their monarchy, take a trip to Thailand.
Everywhere you go -- king's picture. Everyday in the paper -- royal family this, royal family that.
The Thais are the world's biggest royal arse-kisses - bar none.
> Now I think many Singaporean will wish that the Prince and Princess will pay a visit to this former colony for the citizens to go gaga over them. <
Absolutely. These are the people screaming for "demo-Crazy", and these are the people who vote.
god save the Lee! ;-)
At times like this when there are so many unpleasant things making people unhappy, it is better to invite the Prince and Princess here so that the people have something pleasant to look forward to. We can dress up the roads to be better than Christmas for a country wide party.
And I will run a course on how to conduct oneself in the presence of royalties, what to dress, what to say, how to do curtsey etc etc. Course fee for a 3 day course is $1000. Only aspiring royalties need to attend.
Hey! Everyone must have some pride of allegiance, be it to your ethnicity, parentage(gene),money, nation(motherland), ruler, lover and idol etc.
If nothing else, it shows that one is capable of patriotism, filial piety, fidelity, dedication and hardworking and more, all very positive traits.
You know? Even blind loyalty shows that one is virtuous to some extent albeit foolishly.
patriot
Yawn.
Lining up the streets to welcome the royals?
I better spend my time talking to the birds at the Jurong Bird Park.
The colonial days are best forgotten. Overcrowding, corruption, triads, discrimination et al.
Instead of a welcome, I think eggs will be a hot sale item on that day. But still, there are some oldies such as the retired hainanese cook boy and the malay driver still clinging to the vestige of the good ole days of empire.
The older generation I can understand. But the interest for royalties are from the not so young group, which I thought will be less likely to be impressed by medieval fairy tales.
redbean
Under the Brits, there was a lot more individual freedom and civil liberty.
Triads, corruption, discrimination etc... so what? You could also own guns.
If you have freedom, then you have the freedom to discriminate. "Corruption" is nothing more than a market arbitrage opportunity. If you don't have a state or a government, it is (technically) not possible to have "corruption" because there is no central authority.
Markets were so free then: just set up satay stall anywhere or get out your cart and sell "mobile mee pok", or lend money or buy-and-sell stuff...many of present day Singapore millionaire families started that way -- PRIVATE ENTERPRISE.
The PAP came in -- they brought in the GLCs. Now in the last 10-20 years the PAP has been calling for "more local entrepreneurship", where they are the ones who nearly killed it off.
Haha.........
me miss the good old days.
And i really mean the freedom of market as described by Matilah and the freeee water, hospitalisation, outpatient/maternity services, remember home visits by maternity staff anywhere one resided, even in offshore islets, Blakang Mati(Sentosa), Tekong, Ubin, Brani and all else???? Maternity clinics in every district for the infants, pregnant women??? Schools in every village, what else can one ask for?
They are all just fond memories now.
patriot
what I'm saying is that you cannot look myopically at the individual experience in society and culture.
The Brits were proud of their Jewel Of The Far East -- Singapore (Malaya and Hong Kong too). In fact, Singaporeans (and Hong Kongers) were treated "the best" in the sense that they were mostly "left alone". The laissez-faire ideas of Raffles lasted 150 years.
Meanwhile in India, Burma, Afghanistan, Egypt, Israel etc the Brits were giving the locals a royal screwing -- result: violent revolution.
Meanwhile in the Straits Settlements and Hong Kong: business as usual. do what you like, sell what you like, say what you like. Up to you. You are your own "regulator" -- if you piss people off, your problem.
You will also notice how CLOSE KNIT the communities were -- people looked after each other (or not) because they were left alone to choose for themselves. Families and extended families were tight -- taking the good and the bad with that dynamic.
Freedom is an all-encompassing idea. Over time it fosters solid institutions because those institutions grow out of individual choices -- most of which are "wrong", and over time are corrected (because individuals have to pay an expensive individual price not a cheap collective price) and ideas mature.
when you introduce collectivism,no one has to be responsible anymore. You can make bad decisions, and the collective will shoulder the risk for you. so "bad decisions" become very "cheap" to make, so cheap in fact that it kills off ambition to do good (requires effort) and encourages ambition to be "bad" (why worry? someone else will pay/ bail me out)
Is there nothing else to do than lining the streets to have a look at royalty? Heck, I have long lost all respect for some of the royal family members and their soap opera antics.
Please don't waste taxpayer's money.
Absolutely.
Andrew's mom: Slut. Slutty behaviour confirmed pre and post mortem.
Andrew's dad: Total liberal idiot, heir to the throne, embarrassment to the House Of Windsor.
Ordinarily parents and ancestors don't count for peasants. You make of your life what you will.
However when considering ROYALTY, because of your "special birth right", ancestry and linage are all that counts because with out that the myth of "divine royalty" cannot continue.
Our hospital was able to send midwives to the homes of new mothers and guide them about child births and child care, and for free.
How's that for service and care. Now everything is money, and you dig until pocket also got holes.
It's Prince William and Kate Middleton. Prince Andrew is his uncle.
Thanks for the update and correct names. Seldom read fairy tales, so not too sure how the story goes.
Post a Comment