Great drama – but not necessarily true
EVEN the most shameless composer of dramatic soap opera would have baulked at a story as spectacularly tragic as that of the heir to the throne and his bride, Lady Diana Spencer. From fairytale to horror movie in a few short years, it proves the adage that truth is, indeed, stranger and often more terrible than fiction.
So how could Netflix have failed to make it the centrepiece of series four of The Crown? If you are going to chronicle the ups and downs of Britain’s Royal Family you can hardly miss out the greatest roller coaster of them all, at least since the abdication crisis of the 1930s.
I must admit, I am hooked. I still watch TV series the old-fashioned way, week by week, so in our house we are up to episode three, when the marriage has already pretty much imploded, even before the knot has actually been tied.
But while the fabulous production values, the mostly top drawer acting and the imaginative direction all make this a must-watch television treat, I must admit to an uneasiness about the historical accuracy of what
I am seeing – and it is pretty clear I am not alone.
If this were terrible television, it would hardly matter. If it were satire we could watch it and understand clearly that we were being given a partial view to make a point.
But because, as drama, it oozes the quality you get when a multi-billion dollar US production company like Netflix takes on such material and because Netflix is the first choice of many younger viewers, who may not have followed the real Charles and Diana saga, lots of people have stepped up to say accuracy matters. Yet, for perfectly sensible dramatic purposes and because you need a point of view for an effective storyline, this is not a verifiable account of the relationship between the heir to the throne and his first and – as it turned out, second – wives.
As someone who lived through and wrote about the Charles and Diana story as it happened I have much more sympathy for the Prince of Wales than has so far been shown by the creators of The Crown. Others, however – my wife included – see it rather differently. She is a big supporter of the view taken by creator and writer Peter Morgan, who tells the story from the perspective of the tragic Lady-turned-Princess badly let down by both her husband and the Royal Family.
And that difference of perspective is the best defence you will get for why any complaints, mine included, about the failure of this drama as real history are largely pointless. Most people with any interest in the period will already have decided the version they prefer. It is why the Charles supporters in public life, like his biographer Penny Junor and friend Nicholas Soames, have been so critical of The Crown and why most who feel that Diana was so badly wronged from the start are broadly supportive of the view taken in the series.
While the arc of the story is well known, the personal details are not and probably won’t be until all those closely involved are dead. Even then, the trials and tribulations of a relationship – royal or not – are seldom noted down, at least not with any degree of independent rigour.
The Crown adds one more piece of material to the story of the Royal Family in the 20th century. Like contemporary newspaper reports, supposedly well-informed royal biographies and trashy kiss-and-tell exposes, it all goes into the mix and we take from it whatever we chose to help inform our view.
I doubt the Royal Family are watching it. I am pretty sure that Diana’s sons, William and Harry, are already hardened to whatever is written and said about their mother and will be giving this series a wide berth. As for the Prince of Wales, I get the impression that he has long ago come to terms with that period in his life and made peace with himself and his sons.
So rather than focus on the handwringing about an accurate portrayal of historical events, let’s turn to the views of angling enthusiast Dominic Witherow and his letter to the Times. Mr Witherow watched the episode in which Prince Charles goes salmon fishing, shortly before learning of the murder by the IRA of Lord Louis Mountbatten.
He wrote: “To imagine that any self-respecting fisherman would allow his line to touch down so catastrophically is bad enough but to then suggest that such a cast could possibly result in the landing of a fine salmon is tantamount to gross, almost criminal, negligence.”
Now that is something worth complaining about. Shame on you, Netflix.
‘The Crown adds one more piece of material to the story of the Royal Family‘