For Better and For Worse

Prince Charles' recent wedding to Camilla Parker-Bowles has generated reactions that range from outright disgust to banal indifference. Some consider it a mockery of two main institutions, whereas others regard it a testament to true love. Both groups have some merit, which partly explains the ambivalence surrounding this whole affair. If there was ever a sentimental scandal, this could be it.

There is enough here to intrigue anyone. Although Prince Charles is now wed to the woman he loves, it came after the failed marriages of both. Moreover, Camilla was Prince Charles' longtime mistress while his former wife Diana was still alive. (It doesn't help matters either that the public adores Diana.) Detractors highlight the dishonor and disloyalty, while supporters emphasize the struggle and perserverance. It seems at best a Pyrrhic victory.

Happy or Right

This is certainly not an ideal situation, yet many perceive it as though it needs to be. Those more inclined to focus on the romantic and the authentic embrace the couple. However, those more inclined to focus on the dignified and the honorable are unsettled about them. The initial question becomes whether they should be primarily happy or right.

At first, being happy would seem to be laudable here, since Prince Charles and Camilla appeared miserable without each other. Why would anyone argue against happiness, right? Yet something more is at stake here, including the dignity of the monarchy. The fact that it required betraying their prior commitments could demonstrate a misguided sense of entitlement and a major contempt for restraint. After all, happiness is not everything.

However, being faithful does carry definite risks. Was this road absolutely necessary for Prince Charles and Camilla? They only prolonged their agony by distracting themselves with others, which created more havoc and disappointment than was truly needed. Then again, Camilla's inherited role as a royal mistress had merely compensated for Prince Charles' unsatisfying relationship to Diana, and his apparent infidelity with Camilla only sabotaged her marriage. Nevertheless, following the right protocols only entrapped them both and caused more damage.

Divided Loyalties

The main losers here have been the former spouses, which were caught in the middle of this ongoing saga from the start. It has complicated their lives and cheated them out of a relatively secure arrangement. The lack of full devotion and involvement by Prince Charles and Camilla has contributed to a fair amount of wasted time and effort by their previous partners, instead of going somewhere else. This tended to hamper the progression of these relationships.

Yet this loss also applies to Prince Charles and Camilla, who were in unfortunate circumstances that repressed their fond desires for each other. Consequently, they reckoned with this frustration by maintaining their responsibilities while covertly cultivating their lives together. This strained their formal ties with their spouses until they broke apart. In some sense, this liberated them to start again, even though it intruded upon their first obligations.

Perhaps an appropriate analogy will demonstrate the intensity and complexity of their dilemma and the public unease. Suppose that Prince Charles and Camilla were really homosexual lovers that, due to the customs and culture of the day, encouraged them into marriages of convenience. They wanted a better deal, but that could disgrace their families and religions. On the one hand, there were obvious advantages in their current relationships, but it is somewhat unfulfilling. On the other hand, they could pursue a more satisfying alternative, yet it could have devastating consequences. How they choose is partly determined by their priorities. If they pick the latter option, it could be deemed either courageous or rebellious.

Plans vs. Persons

Trying to have it both ways in these situations only works for a while before unravelling. At some point, it just becomes an awkward compromise, as was the case with Prince Charles. The conflict then becomes a matter of what constitutes a suitable mate. By the royal and religious standards of the time before their marriages, Camilla was not considered particularly worthy for Prince Charles. As a result, they had to make other plans that definitely went awry later.

To some extent, some of the outrage toward Camilla stems from the fact that she descends from another royal mistress, which makes the present situation come across as rather indulgent. After all, mistresses traditionally were more for play and passion, not for purpose and propriety. Accomodating two individuals instead of one so that nothing is lost can seem quite greedy. Yet this is why some find Prince Charles and Camilla's wedding as resolving this predicament, since both are with the people they wanted in the format that suits them. They have it all now, don't they?

Some might argue that these imperfect circumstances does not justify a disruptive response. Prince Charles and Camilla's wedding appears to tarnish the elegant, stable and exclusive character of marriage itself to those that value it highly, tending to give the impression of being opportunistic. (They did have to circumvent the Church of England's guidelines in some way.) However, being dishonest and stifled by contrast does not evoke positive images either. This is comparable to gay people staying in heterosexual relationships for the sake of simplicity. It avoids one problem, but allows another to continue.

Second Time, Second Rate?

In marrying, Prince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles have allegedly achieved a sense of harmony. Blending their lives together officially after much delay resolves much of the frustration that has plagued them for years. While this has reduced much of the burden from the past, it has not smoothed out all the rough edges for many. It primarily stems from the inadequate means we have to capture real and vital connections. In essence, this royal marriage is only partly redeemable.