(no subject)

[haptalaon]

For one thing, there is just the pure class politics of fiction routinely encouraging you to identify with aristocrats; like, by definition, one will never become an aristocrat - one either is or is not - it's not like identifying yourself with a billionaire,which is unlikely but still theoretically possible. There is no way to become a princess, except o guess by marrying a prince; and a quick glance at British royalty columns over the past 3 decades ought to put you right off.

Nontheless, so far we have the Darkling Prince (not a prince, people just call him that) and the King of the Forest (an ordinary elf who is destined to become the avatar of the earth through a secret ceremony). So it's like, neither of those things are actually monarchy - a hereditary system based on land ownership and patronage and a feudal network of inherited kingly magic that is passed down to nobles beneath you. What are these titles providing to the narrative, then; how does it impact the way we think about monarchy in real life, as well as ourselves when we identify ourselves with it, when we jump straight to prince or king for "a person who is very good at their specialism, and that others have recognised for their success, and consequently rewarded".

Comments

[earthspirits]

Interesting to consider. I see a lot of "billionaire romances" on line - absolutely do not understand the interest in these stories. I far prefer characters who have intriguing professions, rather than just being "royal"(or super monied). Unless, of course, it's a historical tale with characters based on real people, as I'm a history buff.