The media flap in response to Michelle Obama and the Queen of England exchanging an affectionate touch seems way out of place when compared to the very real issues of poverty, power, and peace that heads of state were gathered to pursue. Especially on this (US) side of the pond, many have wondered what the big deal is. In repeated blog entries and comments to articles about the "event", Americans have pointed out that the Queen is merely human like the rest of us, and deserves no special treatment that would rank her higher than Michelle Obama. US commentators have proudly declared that "we fought a war" to separate ourselves from that sort of protocol and made it clear that our democracy trumps the British monarchy. Not impressed with the folk wisdom of "when in Rome, do as the Romans do", US citizenry has, by and large, reacted with a total lack of understanding as to the significance of touching the Queen. A few folks suggested that a better course in international protocol was in order so that the world need not be offended by our American insistence on the casual, but they were a distinct minority. On the other (British) side of the pond, the reaction was very different. The physical contact between the Queen and Mrs. Obama was perceived as a breach of protocol. Various details were noted: Mrs. Obama did not curtsy; the Queen gave her a full handshake instead of the customary finger-tips only touch; there was a lateral embrace as the Queen and Mrs. Obama stood with their arms encircling one anothers' backs. None of this was without comment in the British press; clearly something of significance was perceived to have happened.
So, what's the big deal? From a Girardian perspective, a whole lot more than even the press has caught on to as yet. For openers, take a look at some of the titles the Queen holds: Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Head of State of the United Kingdom (and of 15 other Commonwealth realms). She is Head of the Armed Forces, Fount of Justice and Defender of the Faith. The last two or three ought to set our Girardian bells ringing. Any time we couple military and religious power, we are dealing in some way with major scapegoating dynamics that have been extremely well camouflaged. Both the military and the religious establishments have the power to direct violence toward a designated scapegoat with impunity. That is not exactly something that most of us want to cozy up with. Girard suggests that the office of king (queen in this instance as the sole reigning monarch) developed out of an original scapegoating and deification process in which the victim was not immediately executed. There are myths of kings who were selected to rule for a predetermined period of time, during which their word was law. At the end of their term they were hunted and executed. While this practice now lies in our mythic roots instead of current reality, the impact lives on. The office of king has it's roots in the dynamic of scapegoating. The primary way in which the king kept the community safe was by being sacrificed and absorbing the community violence and dis-ease. The crowd/community kept it's distance, fulfilling the desires of the soon-to-be victim to curry favor and purchase the peace the community needed to survive. Elaborate systems of courtesy evolved to make distinctions in rank and power evident. While we may currently think of such things as the curtsy as being designed to placate the over inflated ego of the powerful, they more likely were designed to protect the safety of the lower ranked person making the curtsy- a word which has it's root in the word courtesy. Deference signified distance from the (potential) victim, and thereby increased safety. The sort of personal touch exchanged between Michelle Obama and Queen Elizabeth would not often occur safely- EXCEPT between equals. And therein lies the rub for we modern people: we're not sure how to size up these two.
The Brits are pretty sure their Queen trumps the US First Lady. The US is pretty sure the Queen is just another human being, and therefore no better than anyone, including our First Lady. Note that even we enlightened citizens of democracy have named our Presidents wife the First Lady..... and we get pretty huffy if said First Lady is either slighted or steps out of line in her role. Culturally speaking, we still exhibit a need for hierarchy that embodies that ancient victimage mechanism. It's extremely well hidden, but thereby all the more real. The fact that British citizens are at odds with their own monarchy and how it serves the nation and yet still take umbrage at a too-familiar touch by Mrs. Obama, speaks volumes about the hidden power of the office of monarch. Not only are the citizens protesting the existence of the monarchy, they are also protesting anything that intrudes upon it and humanizes it. One could make the argument that as First Lady, Mrs. Obama is, if not the Queen's equal, at least close to her in rank and privilege, thus making the unusual touch one between almost equals. However, to do so would be to humanize/demote the Queen who rules over people, and to elevate Michelle Obama who serves as one of the people. Neither side of the pond is happy with that. We're each wedded to our own version of assigning power, privilege, and sacrifice.
To preach peace to this tempest in a teapot is to expose the roots of our expectations of each of these women and accept the responsibility for our perpetuation of systems of power. The outcry (on both sides) may well be a reflection of the influence of the gospel of Jesus- what the people saw in the affection between the Queen of England and the First Lady of the US was a glimpse of "love one another" that transcended cultural protocol. Carry on, ladies; carry on!
nancy hitt.
I've never heard of this guy before, but he sure as hell looks like Donny Osmond wtihout the moustache. With the moustache he does look a little like Mercury.I found sombody to love for the rest of my life; her name is Fiona and she isn't here with me right now, but I still keep BELIEVING that we will be in Memphis soon at Gracland; gotta believe! gotta have faith! To much bad news like Norway, Libya, Syria and shit like that; plus it will make up for all those lost years growing up in Toronto (Scarborough) wtihout love. Great to have it though (better late then never).\RainbwoRay
Posted by: Cedral | September 18, 2012 at 08:27 PM