"It is not a state occasion ... it is a private wedding and the couple are entitled to invite whoever they want to it."
That's a quote from a St James Palace spokesman to the Sunday Telegraph, which wanted to know why Tony Blair wasn't invited.
Now, I don't blame them for not wanting Blair. But they (the couple, Buckingham Palace, the Foreign Office) can't have it both ways.
If they can invite whomever they want, why did they want to invite the crown prince of Bahrein, the ambassadors of Zimbabwe, Syria, North Korea, not to mention an assortment of other torturers and dictators?
The fact is, this is a state occasion. And these invitees are therefore wholly appropriate. By bringing together Elton John and those who, in their own country, would have him put to death for his sexual proclivities, this "ordinary couple" who wanted an "ordinary wedding" is reminding us of the essential nature of today's monarchy.
It can pretend all it wants. It can dress up the ceremony with the Beckhams, and Guy Ritchie, and Tara someone, and the Butcher of Bucklebury, and all the rest. But it is an institution which relies for its continuing existence on the props provided by vested interests. Its traditions are those of anti-democratic authoritarianism.
Here's what worries me: what we are witnessing - well, not me because I'm not one of the estimated 2 billion people watching - is the reinvigoration of the monarchy in general and the Windsors in particular.
That's unfortunate, to say the least. For once, Martin Amis has it right: if we really care about the "ordinary couple" who "just want to live an ordinary life", the best wedding present we could give is ... a republic.
Today's listening: Shostakovich, The Execution of Stepan Razin.
That's a quote from a St James Palace spokesman to the Sunday Telegraph, which wanted to know why Tony Blair wasn't invited.
Now, I don't blame them for not wanting Blair. But they (the couple, Buckingham Palace, the Foreign Office) can't have it both ways.
If they can invite whomever they want, why did they want to invite the crown prince of Bahrein, the ambassadors of Zimbabwe, Syria, North Korea, not to mention an assortment of other torturers and dictators?
The fact is, this is a state occasion. And these invitees are therefore wholly appropriate. By bringing together Elton John and those who, in their own country, would have him put to death for his sexual proclivities, this "ordinary couple" who wanted an "ordinary wedding" is reminding us of the essential nature of today's monarchy.
It can pretend all it wants. It can dress up the ceremony with the Beckhams, and Guy Ritchie, and Tara someone, and the Butcher of Bucklebury, and all the rest. But it is an institution which relies for its continuing existence on the props provided by vested interests. Its traditions are those of anti-democratic authoritarianism.
Here's what worries me: what we are witnessing - well, not me because I'm not one of the estimated 2 billion people watching - is the reinvigoration of the monarchy in general and the Windsors in particular.
That's unfortunate, to say the least. For once, Martin Amis has it right: if we really care about the "ordinary couple" who "just want to live an ordinary life", the best wedding present we could give is ... a republic.
Today's listening: Shostakovich, The Execution of Stepan Razin.
RSS Feed