Letter: The Queen and duty
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.REGARDING Alexander Chancellor's perspicacious article ("Now the Queen is too matey", 27 September), the frenzy of mourning over Diana produced much irrational criticism of the Queen, who had carefully included her daughter-in-law in the Royal Family after her divorce and allowed her extensive grace-and-favour apartments in Kensington Palace.
Yet the Queen, supreme governor of the Church of England, was criticised for taking her family to a Sunday religious service immediately after the tragedy, while outcry at an empty flagstaff over Buckingham Palace showed an obsession with trivial etiquette often blamed on the Court.
The Queen always carried out far more public duties and acted as patron for very many more charities than the late Princess, whose genius for "modernity" was chiefly shown in making the most of photo opportunities: after all, royal men gave up wearing gloves to shake hands long before she was born.
JENNIFER MILLER
London, SW15
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments