Saturday, November 6, 2010

King of Sweden in the News

This week the Swedish monarchy has rather dominated the news and it was certainly not the visit of Crown Princess Victoria and Prince Daniel to Finland or Prince Carl Philip handing out grants that everyone was talking about. No, the issue was a new biography, just released, on HM King Carl XVI Gustaf and, suffice it to say, it paints a rather unflattering portrait of the King of Sweden at the very least. Basically the book related stories that have long been whispered about regarding the King, extramarital affairs, associations with unsavory characters, trips to establishments of low moral fiber (to put it as nicely as possible) as well as stressing that the King is simply rather un-intelligent and that he did not want to be king; hence the title, “King Carl XVI Gustaf - The Reluctant Monarch”. If the republicans in Sweden having been becoming more noticeable lately this is certainly not going help in keeping them on the fringe. Surprisingly, compared to most monarchies, the royal court said the King would read the book and comment on it, which he has to some extent. His Majesty neither confessed to nor denied anything but did admit that some of it was true. Some of the accusations have been disproved but it seems the adultery allegations were factual. Beyond that the King simply appealed for the press to let the past remain in the past and give the Royal Family their privacy. Judging by how quickly the book has been selling that does not seem likely.

11 comments:

  1. Republicans might have a field day with this if the wedding wasn't enough.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The King certainly needs a good plebeian haircut, eh?

    -- Mack

    ReplyDelete
  3. These types of books are troubling and while it can be used to attack the Monarchy, it should be noted that Republican Leaders get these sorts of books too. Obama has numerous times about him, not all flattering, such as the Obama Nation by Jerome Corsi, and Bush had his own fair share of text written to detract from him.

    So, while this is a First for Sweden, its not really new and is just more of the same Tabloidal garbage we're all use to by now.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Unfortunately, I don't think the moral standards in Swedish society in general are that high in regard to a number of the matters mentioned. It seems a little hypocritical to single out the royal family for such attacks, when one often hears of the "end of marriage in Scandinavia," and so forth.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sadly true. My initial reaction as to the effect of such a book was that it might not particularly hurt the monarchy because of the reasons you mention (as well as the fact that this is nothing really new) but it certainly doesn't help.

    ReplyDelete
  6. First of all his Majesty did not confirm any of the rumours, so your summary that ". Some of the accusations have been disproved but it seems the adultery allegations were factual." is not true. Nor did he confirm anything, all he said was more or less that the past is the past. There has been rumoures and allegations for quite some time (there always is concerning royals and other celebrities).

    Secondly, the main author of this book is known for her "sensational style" only 3-4 years ago she publiched a book which media loved as well. This time she claimed that most of the Swedish government, ministers etc went to a brothel in Sweden and used under-aged girls. There she presented several "good witnesses", which "sadly" could not appear when trials commenced. One girl did appear, and claimed that former Swedish PM Torbjörn Fälldin had visited her on a specifik date. Immiedetly Fälldin could show holiday photos of him on another continent that same day with his family, travel-tickets and other memoriblia from this trip.

    This is nothing more then sensational gossip. some may be true, of course, but if it is true or not is not something the authors cares about, they want to earn cash.

    Furthermore, a recent poll shows that a very large majority (even more than those whom are confessed monarchists) are against this type of litterature, they beleive even a monarch deserves privacy. (they compared results with the parties as well, so interesting to know could be that the former "peasant party" and "Christ-democrats" are most royalist. And another poll was done concerning if this damages the monarchy, if monarchy looses support. The answer was a clear no.

    ReplyDelete
  7. He did not deny anything and when questioned about the allegations he said, "it happened in the past" -so some things were true by his own admission. I hope the public rejects this sort of stuff but the book did sell out very quickly which is not a good sign. It is also nothing new, most people, when asked, say that the tabloids are terrible but then they still buy them which is how they stay in business. Just like people say they dislike negative political ads but they are still run because they work.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It does sound like he was admitting to *something*, provided he was quoted accurately, that is.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's an unfortunate bias that when there is a bad/philandering/allegedly philandering Monarch this is taken as an argument for republicanism - but when there's a bad/philandering/allegedly philandering president (a far more frequent occurance by my reckoning) this is never cited as an argument for Monarchy.

    ReplyDelete
  10. No he did not say that it happend in the past. What he exactly said was "Vi vänder på ett blad, ungefär som ni gör i era tidningar, och ser framåt i stället. Och vad jag förstått, enligt boken, är det här situationer långt, långt tillbaka i tiden. Vi ser framåt. Det ska bli fint"

    Roughly translated, From my understanding the situations in the book occured a long time ago. We look forward". We turn a page in the book. So no, there is nothing in his speech whatsoever that says that anything is true. Im in Sweden, i read theese headlines and have read his speech in original language. He does not say that it Happend in the past, but refers to that the things the book brings up is supposed to have happend a long time ago, and he chooses to look forward. That is not an admission of guilt, rather that this is so far back in time that there is no need to dwell in what did or did not happend.

    People buy trash-litterature like this for many reasons. I beleive it was some author whom wrote this type of "stories" whom said "People want to be taken away from their gray dull lives. Before they travelled into the stories of Grim and others, today they go to the gossip collums".

    ReplyDelete
  11. Well what was "it" that happened in the past then? If I accused you of robbing a bank would you say, "That's not true, it's a damn lie!" or would you say, "That was yesterday, it's not important now"? Moreover others have talked about some of these things happening for years. If your peace of mind rests on the king being as pure as the wind driven snow you're going to have alot of media to ignore.

    To the Moderate Jacobite, it is unfortunate, but as alluded to earlier, it still depends on the society one is coming from. President Clinton did get into considerable trouble over his affair (not with the whole population certainly) but the President of France would not cause the same uproar because society doesn't think such things are that important. The King of Sweden does have an advantage in that regard as modern Sweden simply does not recognize traditional values to large extent.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...