Short Take: The Princess’ Pain

It’s understandable that Prince Harry is less than thrilled with his future at the Firm, given that his job was to be a spare, and even that job is no longer needed. So he, with his Duchess of Sussex, decided to take their own path of progressive manifest destiny. Whatevs.

True to the intense attention the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have attracted since their marriage in May 2018, the press was quickly filled with stories about their finances and prospects, and about how the queen, the prince’s grandmother, would handle the defection. A few articles actually showed sympathy for a couple trapped in a gilded cage that exposed them to constant scrutiny — and, in the duchess’s case, virulent racism.

On the one hand, there are a few benefits to being royals, like money, title, adoration. But the gilded cage analogy is a good one, particularly for Princess Di’s second boy, who’s struggled with where exactly he fits into the scheme of monarchical stability in a former empire in turmoil.

But for Meghan, it’s “virulent racism“?

From the very first headline about her being “(almost) straight outta Compton” and having “exotic” DNA, the racist treatment of Meghan has been impossible to ignore. Princess Michael of Kent wore an overtly racist brooch in the duchess’s company. A BBC host compared the couple’s newborn baby to a chimpanzee. Then there was the sublimely ludicrous suggestion that Meghan’s avocado consumption is responsible for mass murder, while her charity cookbook was portrayed as somehow helping terrorists.

Shredding royals has been a mainstay of the Brit tabloids for decades, but in the list ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous, what’s really heartbreaking is that Meghan was forced to endure Princess Michael of Kent’s “overtly racist brooch.”

Not that I’m a fan of Princess Michael of Kent, daughter of a Nazi SS officer, before marrying well, but this is a magnificent brooch, and one that would likely be found in the jewelry box of every royal, not to mention wealthy fashionista, because it’s magnificent.

The brooch appears to be nearly two inches in length and includes an antiquated depiction of a black figure that many contend exoticizes people of color. Blackamoor art often appeared in European furniture and jewelry between the 13th and 15th centuries, either depicting black individuals as subservient or as members of royalty.

As might be clear, this brooch wasn’t depicting a black individual as subservient.

The use of the blackamoor aesthetic came up in 2012 when Dolce and Gabbana came under fire for using it in their brand’s spring 2013 runway presentation. According to the Guardian, one of their models wore a pair of blackamoor earrings.

Now you can hate on Princess Michael all you want, but this wasn’t just about her as D&G came under fire for it as well. But [TRIGGER WARNING: ANTIQUE JEWELRY MENTION AHEAD] the blackamoor brooch was a magnificent work of art. The mastery reflected in such a fine brooch deserves better than it “exoticizes people of color.” In 14th Century Europe, black people were exotic, and in a good way. But regardless, blaming a masterful brooch for being racist, and hereinafter good only for melting down or wearing on one’s Klan robe, is bizarre.

Whether Harry and Meghan’s decision to go rogue was, as the New York Times contends, a partial reaction to Brit racism, is unclear. Certainly marrying a prince isn’t a particularly racist experience for an American woman, even if the nastier tabloid stories said mean things about her being biracial. But if there is room in their litany of horrible for a blackamoor brooch, then the Times really hasn’t made its claim, and has needlessly besmirched a fabulous piece of art for no good reason.

As suffering racism goes, it may be harder to do while a duchess than a commoner, although there are probably a few biracial American women who would be willing to take Meghan’s place. But leave the brooch out of it, and don’t cancel fabulous antique jewelry because it’s not the sort of thing a master would craft 700 years later. The Duchess of Sussex may well suffer the pain of her position, but not because of a beautiful brooch.

18 thoughts on “Short Take: The Princess’ Pain

  1. Erik H.

    The brooch itself is not (and cannot be) racist; it lacks the requisite privilege and power.

    Wearing it to her wedding was a dick move, though, and the woman who wore it is probably racist.

    Reply
      1. Black Bellamy

        I can’t speak to her racism, but definitely a dick move. Let’s see, I have all this royal jewelry, all these pins and brooches and and little knick-nacks and stuff. Hmmm….going to go with this one. The black one.

        Reply
        1. SHG Post author

          Or if one wasn’t at all racist and never gave any thought to it because one doesn’t see the world that way. Not everyone selects their brooch by asking the question, “is this racist?”

          Reply
          1. Cynthia

            Its NOT about Race, AT ALL. That card is soooooooo over used and nefarious. Its about M’s, blatant disrespect for the monar hy and only what SHE wants!! RACE HAS ZERO, ZERO, ZERO TO DO WITH IT!!!!!!
            Fed up with people always going backwards to The Race Card.

            Reply
            1. Bernie

              I agree. It is all about Meghan. She claims to not liking the spotlight, but find rways to be always at the forefront making headlines. Poor Harry. The young lady was not comfortable with your lifestyle, but you still went ahead to marry her, and the both of you are now disrespecting your grandmother and family. Shame on the both of you.

        2. Bernie

          I am a black woman and sees it the other way. Maybe that was a subtle way of saying welcome to the family, you have my support. We seem to always look at the worst in people than the best.

          Reply
  2. Mark Brooks

    Mr. Greenfield, the actual meaning of the term “racist” seems to have been forgotten (or hi-jacked like the word “gay” now meaning “male homosexual” and “vagina” now meaning “vulva”). I had always understood “racist” to mean “one who believes that their race is superior to another race”.

    Frankly it is long past the “sublime to the ridiculous” with the brooch incident and other such incidents. My message to the “woke” is this from Bob Marley, “Emancipate yourself from mental slavery”.

    Regards
    Mark Brooks
    St. Elizabeth
    Jamaica

    Reply
    1. PJ

      Having never tried to reply with a video, here’s my best shot

      [You did good, but next time, try it without the add’l code.]

      Reply
    2. SHG Post author

      I remember, Judge, back when the definition was framed on the intent of the “perp.” Now it’s the sensitivity of, well, anyone else, making it no definition at all.

      Reply
  3. Curtis

    Off topic but am I the only one who keeps being surprised to learn people are black? I see pictures of biracial people like Markle and don’t think about their race. Once I am told they are black I see it but I never think about it until others mention it.

    Reply
    1. SHG Post author

      Woke people of a certain age were taught to not give a damn about a person’s skin color. That, I’m told, is now the racist perspective, and woke people must take obsessive notice of skin color. Go figure.

      Reply
      1. Lee Keller King

        The question that comes to my mind is “what makes a person black?” Are we back to the Jim Crow definition that “one drop of black blood” makes one black? MLK must be spinning in his grave.

        Reply
  4. B. McLeod

    Across the pond, as here, what the brooch is or is not is irrelevant. The important point is that it can be interpreted as offensive by one faction or another of the would-be word and thought police. Exactly backwards of centuries-old common law principles that favor inoffensive meanings when possible, the fanatics of today are bent on finding offensive meanings whenever possible. It is the only way they can feel needed.

    Reply
  5. Fubar

    A few articles actually showed sympathy for a couple trapped in a gilded cage that exposed them to constant scrutiny …

    A gilded cage long commemorated, sometimes better than other times.

    Ed Sanders’ musical effort, setting William Blake’s earliest surviving poem, likely composed at age 13, in American Country and Western style:

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are subject to editing or deletion if I deem them inappropriate for any reason or no reason. Hyperlinks are not permitted in comments and will be deleted. References to Nazis/Hitler will not be tolerated. I allow anonymous comments, but will not tolerate attacks unless you use your real name. Anyone using the phrase "ad hominem" incorrectly will be ridiculed. If you use ALL CAPS for emphasis, I will assume you wear a tin foil hat and treat you accordingly. I expect civility from you, but that does not mean I will respond in kind. This is my home and I make the rules. If you don't like my rules, then don't comment. Spam is absolutely prohibited, and you will be permanently banned.