Farewell the last queen!

The Last Queen is because a monarchical mark like Elizabeth II might not be possible in the future. Neither in British royalty nor in any other part of the world. In the human family of any country, democracy or dictatorship or any system like religious, the human peak of unity like Elizabeth II is not possible. Elizabeth was born in the 20th century. She was a 20th century version of British heritage, the series of its gripping storyline, its characters, its characters, its brands. It was then that his family stories, character acting and plot became a hit not only in Britain, but he was a super hit around the world. Just like the worldwide popularity of the series “The Crown” produced by Netflix. Netflix redeemed its phenomenon with its series. This is not possible now in the future.

Therefore, the queue of those who paid tribute and the death of Queen Elizabeth II, and the five six hundred celebrities of the world arrived at the funeral, is proof that the farewell to the last queen of the monarchy . It has become a pastime among people to become a witness of the historic occasion. Say goodbye to the brand that has human memories of the royal journey. This monarchy, through which the hearts and minds of the people ruminate in the faces, tales and tales of the king and queen.

The case of memory chewing in the human mind is a strange one. Every civilization in the world sees the present and the future in the jug of history. Only then do those things, those styles appeal to the people, which create the thrill, the splendor, the grandeur and the wonder of history, the enthusiasm and enthusiasm.

It is not in the power of any royal family, of any Maharani or Maharaja to be so. The funeral is attended by members of the British royal family, some 12 grandchildren of the Queen, including King Charles, Queen consort Camilla, Ann, Andrew and Edward, members of the European-Japanese royal family, including great-grandchildren, and five hundred foreign heads of state and dignitaries. As well as from US President Joe Biden to many presidents, prime ministers and heads of state.

Think, who among all of these could hold a seventy-year-old ruler like Queen Elizabeth in the future? She considers that the 21st century and the future now belong to ephemeral entities. The days of decades of rule by dictators like Stalin, Mao, Ceauescu or the King of Saudi Arabia are over. Chinese President Xi Jinping may have woven the fabric of a president for life, but he also can’t imagine he’ll be the owner for as long as Mao Zedong. There had to be such a story. Neither democracy can keep anyone as prime minister for twenty-five years, nor in a one-party system any dictator or monarchy will keep a soap opera for the life of a Maharaja or Maharani.

As I mentioned earlier, London is the unofficial and undeclared capital of the world. The globalized village has the center of the changed earth. There is a fascinating history of the earth’s eight billion people, so obviously the way Elizabeth II performed her role as queen is the essence of her virtue. It has been at the center of world interest for seventy years with a natural and spontaneous gesture. For the British as matriarch, pride as power, then for the world the Queen!

Many have written extensively about what the queen did to make her so popular? A point of pride for the British and a point of admiration for the world? The narrators of Netflix’s ‘The Crown’ series are said to have created the script with a close understanding of the Queen’s reality. I believe that this series and the popular belief that it was an idol of responsibility and duty is futile. She did her duty to the end. He lived life for duty and not life for the enjoyment of the life of the splendor of the monarchy. Such conclusions make no sense. The pinnacle of power, the title, the glory automatically binds the powerful to a particular behavior. India-wide today, Daupadri Murmu is herself a living power figure at Rashtrapati Bhavan and 140 crore Indians in her sense the same duty, scholarship, gentleness and strength of a supreme commander, as former President Pratibha Patil understood. Man’s DNA has been intertwined in the unconscious for five thousand years to the glory of the chief and the authority of the clan. His heart and mind are great when it comes to storytelling, writing, filming, marketing and branding. Man was dazzled by the lightning of miracles even at the primitive stage. Had cheated. Even in the 21st century we are enchanted by wonders, witchcraft, splendor, glamor and all that when in front of WOW! What is the problem?

Therefore, the monarchy of the new millennium is also an enchanting thing. Despite this, because it spins very fast, it was then by accident that the Queen of England kept it alive for seventy years. This would not be possible for Britain’s new King Charles. Neither his son nor his grandson will be able to make such a fuss. No matter how well Bankingham Palace do their marketing, their magic is about to fade in the new times.

It is the story of a world that changes with changing times. Hollywood, Bollywood, Netflix etc make soap operas and big movies like “The Crown” to tell stories, but human behavior developed in real life is flat and absolute. Japan has a monarchy and the Japanese believe in it a lot, the same Arab countries have an Islamic monarchy, the Chinese Communist Party made Xi Jinping a god, Slavic tsarism made Putin and Hindus embodied Prime Minister Narendra Modi. But these are all transitory ephemeral characters of time. These characters, because human nature, the character of the citizens do not cook and leave a deep impression, so they will be characters who have gone down in history. All this in total, only Alexander time.

If you want, you can understand this thing with the example of King Charles, the new Maharaja of Great Britain. What will he be able to do in his behavior as a king, which will deeply mark the culture, the behavior, the life of character of the British? In the seventies, whatever the empress of decency, honesty and rites of character, or any impression of genuine conduct, made by the queen, her virtue became permanent in public. She was deeply respected from house to house by white Britons. She was not a divider in society. There was no face of fear and wickedness. There were no lies. She did not seek knowledge unnecessarily. Despite the magnificence of the palace, she did not show arrogance and pride. Despite the marketing-branding, it did not impose itself. Obviously, he set an example and marked his society, his politics and his public life.

The impression of King Charles like that is not possible. Nor is it possible for a king, queen or head of state in the world to be like that. In this way also the meaning of My Last Queen is profound.

Comments are closed.