Share Your Thoughts — Earn Rewards!

https://www.poetry.com/poem/109680/the-persecuted-spare%3A-harry%E2%80%99s-princely-legacy

Newest Oldest Popular

8 Comments

 

Email me new comments.Email updates

Publish

• 

  gmillianos

  Hi Karl, Nicely done! I like how you highlight the exploits of Prince Harry using quintet stanzas of traditional Japanese five-line poetic form.

  LikeReply2 hours ago
• 

  karlcfolkes

  Thank you, Ashlyn. Your body of poetry has collectively such an uplifting spiritual message. I also like your poetic moniker which is family- oriented and richly strengthening.

  LikeReply 13 hours ago
• 

  My3kiddosandme

  So thoughtful and brilliantly executed. I love how you touch on roles we are born into.

  LikeReply6 hours ago
• 

  CamilleRoseCastillo

  It appears that my comment got cut short. I included in my response that there's something else I find particularly interesting in your observation about the colonial British legacy. Having been raised within that history, you bring to this discussion a perspective that I don't share and therefore can't fully replicate, but it's precisely that history that makes the question of institutional power so fascinating .... once we begin tracing the connections among monarchy, empire, economics, colonialism, and inherited privilege, the conversation becomes considerably larger than Harry, Meghan, or even the House of Windsor, so perhaps we're actually asking two different, yet complementary questions. You're explaining how this enormous historical architecture came to exist and asking how we might reconcile the human beings living within it, and I'm asking if we are comfortable with this architecture, and if not, what we should change. You can probably guess that I'm still standing outside the courtroom door with a briefcase in hand. Lol. You are indeed the historian in this courtroom, and I'm the rather impertinent counsel who keeps asking "Yes, but who authorized this?" more »

  LikeReply22 hours ago
• 

  karlcfolkes

  Thank you for your extended commentary, Camille, and particularly for making your own observations about the institution of the British Royalty which hails all the way back to 1066 and the time of the Norman conquest of Great Britain under William the Conqueror, thus paving the way for the eventual institutionalization of the British (Germanic/AngloSaxon) royal houses, beginning with the House of the Plantagenets, followed by the House of Lancaster, then the Houses of York, the Tudors, the Stuarts, the Hanovers; and now the House of Windsor( formerly known as the House of Saxe-Koburg-Gotha (a name of Germanic origin) changed during the time of World War 1).
  
  Suffice it to say, this royal lineage of the Royal House of Windsor extends throughout Europe, as far East as the Soviet Union; and revealing one extended royal household (the Royal House of Europe), representing at its surface several languages, several nationalities and several cultures; yet revealing below its surface the unified DNA blood ties of royalties.
  
  As someone who grew up in the Caribbean under a colonial British legacy, this knowledge and information was required of all students. Clearly, it affords one a much deeper understanding of the hegemonic underpinnings of Imperial institutions throughout many nations of the world, all bound together by ancient economic principles and arrangements. To suggest therefore a newer and more democratic arrangement in one social system, is to equally recognize at the same time the underlying historical connections and contexts that bind all these systems together.
  
  The important point to make here, Camille, is that the institution of the British monarchy is not an isolated institution, but is intimately connected to the monarchical institutions throughout the world; including, upon much deeper analysis, the monarchical institution of the Royal line of the House of David; itself tied culturally and linguistically to other royal houses of the Levantine region of the Middle East that preceded its own monarchy.
  
  What you are suggesting would effectively call for the toppling of all institutions, as we know them today, especially royal houses that govern or serve as symbolic representatives of societies. more »

  LikeReply23 hours ago
  • 

    CamilleRoseCastillo

    Thank you, and I thoroughly enjoyed the historical context you've brought into the discussion, particularly your observation that the British monarchy can't really be understood in isolation from the broader web of European dynastic, imperial, economic, and cultural relationships that have evolved over centuries. But I should perhaps clarify something about my courtroom, as I wasn't suggesting that we topple every institution simply because it's old, nor was I advocating the wholesale dismantling of royal houses or social institutions. My instinct is somewhat more troublesome than that ...: I think institutions should be subject to interrogation precisely because they are institutions, and especially when they possess inherited power, wealth, authority, or influence. In fact, your historical account makes that interrogation even more compelling to me... if these institutions are products of conquest, dynastic inheritance, imperial arrangements, economic interests, and centuries of political evolution, then their longevity is evidence of their historical endurance, not necessarily proof of their moral legitimacy.
    I suppose that's where our approaches diverge. You seem inclined to look at the historical architecture and understand how all the pieces became interconnected. I want to walk into the architecture with a flashlight and start asking who built it, who benefited from it, who was excluded from it, who paid for it, and why certain rooms remain inaccessible to everyone else. And I certainly wouldn't advocate toppling all institutions. Some institutions are indispensable to civilization, but I don't believe any institution, monarchical, political, religious, economic, or otherwise, should be placed beyond scrutiny merely because it has survived for centuries, as institutions are human creations. Therefore, they're capable of being examined, challenged, reformed, and, when necessary, replaced. Perhaps my courtroom is therefore less an execution chamber than an accountability chamber.  more »

    LikeReply23 hours ago
• 

  CamilleRoseCastillo

  I found this a fascinating reflection on exile, forgiveness, family, and the peculiar burden of being born into a role rather than simply choosing an identity. Your use of the Prodigal Son is particularly fitting, because it frames Harry's story as one of estrangement, return, and the possibility of reconciliation. What I find most intriguing, though, is the tension at the heart of the poem: Harry is simultaneously a Prince and a pauper, extraordinarily privileged by birth, yet diminished by his position within the very institution that bestowed that privilege. That contradiction makes the notion of the Spare more complicated than it initially appears. I smiled at your hopeful conclusion that forgiveness and family unity may ultimately prevail, as knowing myself, I suspect I'd approach the matter rather differently.... where you see a Prodigal Son who needs to come home and a family that needs to heal, I'd very likely drag the monarchy itself into the courtroom and begin asking a rather inconvenient series of questions about the institution, inheritance, hierarchy, and the human beings it requires to live inside those roles. more »

  LikeReply1 day ago
• 

  CamilleRoseCastillo

  I found this a fascinating reflection on exile, forgiveness, family, and the peculiar burden of being born into a role rather than simply choosing an identity. Your use of the Prodigal Son is particularly fitting, because it frames Harry's story as one of estrangement, return, and the possibility of reconciliation. What I find most intriguing, though, is the tension at the heart of the poem: Harry is simultaneously a Prince and a pauper, extraordinarily privileged by birth, yet diminished by his position within the very institution that bestowed that privilege. That contradiction makes the notion of the Spare more complicated than it initially appears.
  
  I found myself smiling at your hopeful conclusion that forgiveness and family unity may ultimately prevail, because knowing myself, I suspect I'd approach the matter rather differently. ... where you see a Prodigal Son who needs to come home and a family that needs to heal, I'd very likely drag the monarchy itself into the courtroom and begin asking a rather inconvenient series of questions about the institution, inheritance, hierarchy, and the human beings it requires to live inside those roles. more »

  LikeReply1 day ago