Let’s face it , William and Kate’s Jamaican tour is a disaster. If this is the shape of things to come, one can only fear for the future of the monarchy itself.
You can see the chronicle of its death foretold in every moment from the Trench Town bongo-bashing to emeralds and apologies at the governor’s dinner in Kingston: the speeches are squirming, the dutiful set pieces are a cringe, the optics are bad.
White ultra-privileged royalty gamely watching the locals caper about and entertain them; later shaking the hands of Jamaicans corralled behind wire fencing? It’s all so last century. It’s all so over.
From 4,000 miles away, I am dying of embarrassment. For myself, for our country, for the Cambridges.
Since the Queen and Prince Philip made the same trip in 1953 — and even since their last visit in 2002 — everything has changed.
The world is a different place, while history itself is going through a boil wash of revisionism; one that finds the royals on the wrong side of the divide, down there at the bottom of the basket among the dirty laundry of colonialism and the stains of the past.
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge pose with a statue of Bob Marley during their trip to the Carribean
It’ll take a lot more to turn this around than Kate turning up in a yellow dress to honour the Jamaican flag, while praising teachers for teaching and rattling her locally made artisan bracelets.
It is not the fault of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. It is simply their misfortune to have crashed into senior overseas royal duties at a point in time when the sins of the past inform the stuttering trajectory of the future.
They have been shown much love by the people of Jamaica, but have also been the focus of independence protests.
Some officials have even been downright rude to them, making the couple feel awkward.
Indeed, if Kate’s glue-gun grin gets any more fixed, someone is going to have to chisel it off when she gets home.
Not everyone loves the Royal Family and it is easy to understand why many Jamaicans want to follow Barbados and become a republic, but I suspect that no one would have dared to be so openly discourteous had it been the Queen.
Respected even by many ardent republicans, she carries her 70 years of unimpeachable service around with her like a krypton shield against reproach.
However, all bets are off with this weaker, diluted new generation of royals who must accept that for many of their ‘subjects’ — eek! — the Commonwealth is not something to be celebrated, but is, in fact, a feudal yoke from which to escape.
Some Jamaican politicians are using the visit to make opportunistic claims for reparations over slavery. They have seized the moment and the mood — and I don’t even blame them.
At the official dinner on Wednesday night, Prince William responded with a rich roll of cuff and the full royal hand wring. Woe is him!
The duke and duchess visit Trench Town – the birthplace of reggae music in the heart of Kingston, capital of Jamaica
He expressed his ‘profound sorrow’ at ‘abhorrent’ slavery and echoed his father by saying it ‘stains’ British history.
How I wish one of them would add ‘but come on, we led the world in abolishing slavery — well over 30 years before the Americans did’.
We Brits honestly and sincerely did our bit to civilise the world as we ourselves became more civilised, and we continue to do so.
Accordingly, we accept that the wrongs done to us by the Vikings, the Romans, the Saxons and the Germans are confined to the savagery and ignorance of a different age, and now we move on together. But no. It’s all grovel, grovel, grovel instead.
Of course, the taint of racism that hangs over the Windsors does not help, the terrible smear left by the Sussexes — that pile of dung they dumped on the royal driveway — as they built their scented new lives in California.
How they must be tittering today, snug in their Montecito mansion, as the Jamaican mortification unfolds.
Perhaps not quite understanding that the same forces of reparation and atonement are one day coming for them and their precious titles, too. For here is the real problem.
Prince William expresses his ‘profound sorrow’ at ‘abhorrent’ slavery and echoes Charles saying it ‘stains’ British history in emotional speech to lavish dinner hosted by Jamaica’s Governor General
Prince William can be as heartrending and emotional as he wants when he talks about slavery, but he is going to be king one day — a system of belief that rests on the notion that his bloodline is superior to any other in the Commonwealth.
He is damned by his very existence, execrated by the status that gives him his voice and puts him at the centre of events in the first place.
He may have the best will in the world, but in the increasingly clamorous social and racial politics of today, he is as ridiculous and obsolete as a royal dodo. No doubt his words were sincere.
Yet they came from a prince who had the nerve to criticise the Baftas on their lack of diversity two years ago, although he still turned up in Jamaica this week with practically an all-white personal retinue and without a blush.
One can see the wisdom of the Queen never making contentious statements, of somehow staying above the fray of the cares of the day. See where the alternative gets you? Open to criticism yourself.
What this week showed is that the days of the big royal overseas visit are surely numbered.
The very idea that the Royal Family should sally forth, in all their finery and jewels, to faraway lands to meet people they expect to bow and curtsey to them, or pay homage at the very least, is an increasing absurdity.
The royals on the road? It is like a band going on a farewell tour to play their greatest hits, only to discover that no one is listening any more, that the fans are moving to a different drumbeat. It is not over yet, not quite.
However, this week we glimpsed the royal future post-Queen — and it is not looking bright.
Nazanin’s honour
Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe arrives for a press conference with her husband and daughter
Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe has come in for much opprobrium for criticising the UK government while failing to utter a word against the cruel Iranian regime that imprisoned her for six years.
But could that be because she is fighting for the freedom of the final hostages who are still being held captive in Iran? If so, her behaviour is honourable, not deplorable.
Meanwhile, her own family tensions are painfully obvious in every public statement and appearance together.
It is a reminder that there is always more than one victim in situations like this. It will take time for even the strongest relationship to recover from such a trauma.
Tennis star Ashleigh Barty has retired at 25 at the top of her game and her fame. Fans are understandably disappointed, but good for her.
She is doing what she wants to do, not conforming to the rhythms and rules of the international tennis circuit — a life that could see her circling the world, playing the same small pool of opponents over and over again.
Some professional players love it, while for others it saps the joy out of every game, set and match. Not to mention life itself.
Spare us celebs on warpath
Amanda Holden visited a refugee camp in Poland and is ‘really cross’ about the situation and the complicated paperwork those wishing to come to the UK must complete
Thank goodness for celebrities drawing our attention to the war in Ukraine. Were it not for their efforts, surely no one would have noticed it was even going on?
I am indebted to Amanda Holden who visited a refugee camp in Poland and is ‘really cross’ about the situation and the complicated paperwork those wishing to come to the UK must complete.
Madonna posted a clip of the Ukraine invasion, complete with a remixed clip of her song ‘Sorry’.
Meanwhile, Bono is so aghast he went and wrote a poem; while Cher’s tweet take is that the whole thing is engineered to ‘bring America to its knees’.
She also believes, according to her Twitter bio, that we should all Stand & B Counted or Sit & B Nothing. I got you, babe.
Don’t draw a veil over this
Stella Moris cuts a wedding cake outside the high-security Belmarsh prison
A momentary pang of sympathy for Stella Moris, photographed in her wedding dress outside jail before she married Julian Assange in Belmarsh.
It can’t be what any bride wants on her big day!
Even if she is wearing custom-made Vivienne Westwood with a rose in her cleavage.
Even if her jailbird groom and their children are in kilts and even if she charmingly requested that supporters should sponsor a park bench in the WikiLeaks founder’s name, rather than give the couple wedding gifts.
Then reality sets in. It’s just a pantomime, isn’t it?
Complete with costumes and confetti, all of it designed to put pressure on Priti Patel and win public sympathy for 50- year-old Assange’s fight against extradition.
Despite the curdled romance of the occasion, there is a reason why he is still in jail. So let’s not forget that, pretty veil or not.
The Astounding Possibility Of Greed In The Mind Of Someone Living Through A Pandemic. Damien Hirst is the artist who produced The Physical Impossibility Of Death In The Mind Of Someone Living — the famous artwork featuring a shark preserved in formaldehyde. He enjoyed a turnover of £18million during the two years of lockdown — but that did not stop the despicable millionaire claiming £1.3million in furlough payments for his staff. He’s a bit of a shark himself
Slap a ban on state intrusion
Smacking and slapping children has been outlawed in Wales, with people told to contact social services or police if they see a parent or carer meting out physical punishment.
What then? Are mums and dads going to be criminalised for giving their little perishers a smack for misbehaving?
The Labour-led Welsh government has called the move ‘historic’, but it might prove notable for all the wrong reasons.
The truth is that some parents will never smack their children, some will do it occasionally under duress and some are violent psychopaths.
There are already laws in place to curb the behaviour of the latter, so where does that leave everyone else? I note with alarm that in the U.S., the philosophy of ‘gentle parenting’ is gathering force.
In this movement, children are not only never chastised — physically or vocally — they are given choices instead of orders. In short, they are never told what to do.
For example, when getting the kids ready in the morning, gentle parents must never shout: ‘Put your shoes on, now!’ Instead, they must strive to understand why the little darling is not putting on his/ her shoes, and engage with the child’s inner life.
‘You don’t want to put your shoes on, because it’s more fun playing with Teddy?’ they have to say. Give me strength. Under those rules, no one would ever get out of the house.
My mother once dinged my brother on the bonce with a kettle, but to be fair it wasn’t full of boiling water and he probably deserved it. In those days, children were not the worshipped beings they are today. Are they any happier for it? It doesn’t seem so.
Now, they’re so emotionally fragile they are triggered by anything that displeases them. How you pass through life gives you the strength to be who you are.
No, I don’t think children should be smacked, but believe the choice should be left to the parents. Making it a law is an intrusion too far by the state into family life.