There are all kinds of weddings, and then there are royal weddings. Those selected few, who effectively dominate the public diaspora with their ostentatious wealth, glamour, religious nuptials, political clout and paparazzi. Often, drawing close attention of the masses to every single minute detail about their ceremony, rituals, its symbolisms and the unassumingly heterosexual bride and groom. Who happen to be a prince and a princess, straight out of our white washed, colonised fairy-tale land, complacently jumping into the patriarchal institution of marriage with a mandatory ‘happily, ever after’.
Several rosy pair of glasses were painted grey, on Sunday, May 19, the day when a “highly sought after, 33-year-old, eligible royal bachelor”, Prince Harry of Britain, tied the knot with an eligible, bi-racial, non-royal, 36-year-old divorcee, actress and a self proclaimed feminist, we all know as Meghan Markle. Amid several eyebrows raised for various reasons, Meghan definitely brought about symbolic, yet iconographic changes within the white royal wedding, by putting a unique spin on few of the rituals. From a strong black presence in a deeply white church, to hear a black bishop address the VIPs, and a black gospel choir mellifluously sing Stand by me was a historically romantic vision, within a nation, where the titular monarchy continues to be a deeply elitist, reactionary, patriarchal and white institution.
Meghan’s simple, yet modern and elegant sartorial choice of an ivory-silk wedding dress, by Clare Waight Keller of Givenchy, has been criticised for its “ill-fitting and not so dreamy, princessy feel”. However, it was her 16.5 feet long fine silk tulle veil, hand embroidered with flora representing 53 countries of the commonwealth, which gained a lot of praise and admiration. This arrogant representation of 53 countries of the commonwealth, beautifully woven into the hem of the royal bride’s veil, is a marker of the imperial past of Great Britain. Its political history of colonisation, disguised under the pretext of beauty, grace, aesthetics through conscious sartorial choices, and their ideological power relations.
Apart from bringing about symbolic changes in the wedding, several scholars have been speculating about the tight rope of royal restrictions, that Meghan shall be expected to gracefully tip toe on, as the Duchess of Sussex. From having to give up her career as an actress, which she struggled hard for, to shutting down her social media accounts, a strict no to autographs, dressing up ‘modestly’, and never stepping out without a panty hose being a few restrictions among several of them.
As a modern, self-made, influential woman, Meghan has all the privileges to make sound life choices, unlike millions of other women. This makes me wonder, how will she try and redefine, reclaim or subvert certain highly misogynistic norms, patriarchal conventions, colonial morality and imperial political structures, that she has chosen to willingly be a part of, by marrying Prince Harry and therefore stepping into ‘the firm”. However, I would like to believe that Meghan has a lot more to offer politically and otherwise, to the royal family, than it could possibly offer to the likes of Meghan.
The author is a PhD scholar at the Centre for Political Studies, JNU. Views are personal.
