The Crown S2E5 “Marionettes”: How far can one individual go?
I chose this shot (page's cover) as the cover because it struck out to me. Elizabeth is reflected in a mirror while we get a full shot of Phillip. We learned from Season 1 that Phillip is a progressive person. He televised the coronation and was trying to modernize the monarchy. Elizabeth is still stuck in the past, holding onto the memories of the British Monarchy, yet still unsure of how to make it survive. This scene came on when she finally decided to air her Christmas Broadcast on television. The division here is drawn by the mirror. The two live in different worlds. Elizabeth in the light, for she is the Crown. Philip in darkness. But like Philip, the desire for modernization lurks in the shadow, inside each British constituent. But in the next shot, they were then placed in the same frame – Elizabeth now out of the mirror. They converged.
Spoiler: if you haven’t watched the Crown (Season 2), then there will be spoilers ahead!
Episode 5 of Season 2 covered an event in which the Queen was criticized by a journalist who pointed out that her speech was out of touch with the British people. The journalist was extremely good at handling public opinion and in no time, he changed the public opinion to his side.
While The Crown is not 100% true, it is based on real events. The journalist, Lord Altrincham, offered suggestions to the institution and the institution accepted many of it: start broadcasting on TV, open debutante ball to the public, meet the common people. Altrincham was unassuming and humble in front of the institution. Even though he has the support of the popular public, he does not use this against the Queen. That may have played a part in helping him get his goals across. When the Queen argued back against a point about traditionalism, Altrincham did not argue back. “These are merely suggestions,” he said.
Lord Altrincham, right
Bravery and humility helped him. It also helped the institution.
This morning, I listened to a podcast by Naval Ravikant, a VC in Silicon Valley. He believed that there are many kinds of luck. One is dumb luck where you just come across it and it does not relate to your skill in any way. On the other hand, there is luck that is generated by your skills and boldness. This luck is more like opportunity. Because you are brave to put yourself out there, people come to value your work when they come across it.
I thought how much these two things – Lord Altrincham and Naval’s luck – are related. Altrincham was bold and skillfully published his article. Because of that, he got an audience with the Queen, the head of state and institution. It was luck that was created by him.
The Queen’s first Christmas Broadcast in 1957
So in this aspect, he single handedly changed many aspects of a traditional institution and allowed it to survive until today. This made me reconsider how much an individual can potentially create impact in the world. Before, I thought that we are small specks of dust in the universe with no significance. This is still true. But if you are thinking more locally like whether in someone else’s life or even in your country, your work really does matter when opportunities arise. I guess the main takeaway from this is that I should just keep on producing things of high importance and quality. One day, luck might get a wind of it and take whatever I’ve produced off.
On a separate note, I thought the comment that the Queen Mother was very salient. She mourns how the monarchy slowly loses status and absolutism in the modern world. The question that naturally arises is how much tradition, a proxy of stability, be balanced with modernity, a proxy of adaptability. Being too traditional makes you fragile to change. A good quote in the show is that “before monarchies are the rule and republics are the exceptions. Now, republics are the rule and monarchies are the exceptions.” Change comes fast, and rules change fast. On the other hand, changing too quickly makes one confused about what one should have as a fundamental value. When making values, there are no founding principles to base it off. It’s easy to stick to the Buddhist cliche and say that the middle path is best. Maybe it really is.