Charles did something unplanned in Prague and had childish joy, recalls Forejt
Former castle recorder Jindřich Forejt believes that the new king of Great Britain, Prince Charles, now officially Charles III. he has all the prerequisites to become a good ruler. He has been preparing for the new role for decades and has become the longest-waiting for the British throne in history. “Prince Charles has a unique chance to capitalize on his and create his own guardrails to suit him. Of course, on the assumption that he will ever be able to suppress part of what is Charles’s and give priority to what is the king’s,” he says in an interview with the Echo24 newspaper.
How many times have you met Queen Elizabeth II? and how many times with prince charles?
I’ll admit that I’ve never counted until now. When I was asked about it today, I came up with the fact that I met the Queen ten times, but as for the personal meeting during which we spoke, it was three times. I certainly met the prince four times in Britain and then during his last visit to Prague in April 2010. At that time I accompanied both him and his wife during the entire three-day visit.
Can you mention something that stuck with you about those meetings?
I have experienced both in similar and not quite similar situations. For example, the last time Prince Charles was here, of course there were weeks of discussion about what would be on his agenda, which places he would visit, which places his wife would visit, and which places they would visit together. It was agreed that he would arrive on Saturday and stay until Tuesday. On Sunday, at his request, he was scheduled to attend the Anglican service in Prague 1. At the time, it seemed strange to me that the prince’s personal bodyguard was not there, because otherwise he accompanied him every step of the way. However, the service went on, and when we went out, the secretary to the Prince of Wales, and today the King’s secretary, asked me if I could go to the Prince, that there was something to discuss. So I went, and in the carriage the prince told me that he would like to take a walk.
It was Sunday, the beginning of April, the weather was all kinds. I did not understand what I meant, and the prince said that we would drive a little way and that I would get off there. So I told the hapless cops. Meanwhile the duchess had left. We reached the Faculty of Law. I saw a bodyguard on the embankment and understood that he had set out long before us to walk a route we knew nothing about yet. And now it has come. Bodyguards, police officers and then Prince Charles himself jumped out of the convoy of about twelve cars, he headed to his bodyguard, they said a few words to each other, and then we were off. We all still had suits and festive shoes from that church. From Náměstí Curieových we went to Rudolfinum, from there to Charles Baths, to the National Theatre, back to Kříženecké náměstí, then through Old Town Square to Prašná brána, then back to the river and across Charles Bridge to Malá Strana to St. Nicholas’ Church, Nerudova Street to Prague Castle, then to Strahov and down to Kampa again. The walk lasted about an hour and three quarters. It was actually a fast run because the prince walks very fast. It was clear that Prince Charles was enjoying the moment. Maybe you could tell we were nervous because the police didn’t know where we were going, but that’s exactly him. In essence, he may have had a childish joy in doing something unplanned, because his whole life is heralded. It was an experience for us as well, believe me, after almost two hours I had a hard time even walking home.
What task now faces the new British king?
Monarchy as a system has many advantages. One of them is that people can prepare for years, as in the case of Prince Charles, for the heir to the throne to take the crown and the government. Sometimes it takes less time than the current king had to wait. After all, by the time he celebrates his 74th birthday in a few weeks, most of his peers are already resting, while he is just starting what he has been preparing for all his life.
Do you think this is an advantage?
It’s an advantage because people know him. They saw how he gradually matured, how he matured, they know many things about him. It even creates an illusory impression that they know him very well as someone close to them, because his face and opinions are known, his style of acting is known.
But at the same time, according to some surveys, they are not among the most popular members of the family.
I don’t know if this is relevant information. What do you measure it by? Prince Charles has been very publicly active as the Prince of Wales, perhaps more so than he will be as a monarch who is more restrained in his speech and expression of opinion. I think Prince Charles has one huge recommendation, he doesn’t need 100 days of advocacy, as we say when we have a new government. He had been preparing for this moment for a long decade. During that time he had gained so much experience and experienced so many things that no school or course could have given him.
But wasn’t his mother superior in that she ascended the throne at the age of 25, as a queen with a completely clean slate?
Not at all. Queen Elizabeth regretted, I’d say more than half of her reign, that she didn’t have a chance to learn. She had no chance to work with her father as an adult heir to the throne. As a child she had seen him work with state documents, but when you are a monarch, you are in an exclusive club where there are not many members. The Prince of Wales is in a unique position as a king because he should have been gathering experience for years and he has been doing it. As a mother of two young children, Elizabeth was faced with an extremely complex task, for which she was only partially prepared. She resisted, but it cost her a lot of effort. This is Karl’s advantage.
And what must the new king do to be successful?
A monarch can be successful if he can suppress himself a little. Not in the fact that he should perform less or more flamboyantly, but in the fact that he can suppress the natural desire, will and desire to express his opinion. They have to assess whether he is speaking as Charles the person, as King Charles or as the personification of the United Kingdom. They are completely different roles.
The prevailing consensus is that these are the things that the late Queen Elizabeth II. they did very well.
Yes, she proved to be an excellent queen. We also have to say that her government went through different stages of changes in society and the issues it had to face. We live in a completely different time than the 1950s or 1970s, so even a monarch is exposed to different social and political situations to which he can or must respond.
And how do you think Charles III will handle that task?
Of course, he also had the opportunity to observe the changes in society, during his youth and adolescence, from different angles and as a participant. I think he has a very good analytical mind and is very perceptive. I think that preparation time can turn out to be very beneficial and very beneficial because it gives him what is absolutely phenomenal and hard to come by, and that’s the experience.
So we can’t talk about the “weakening of the crown”, as has already been said in the media?
The British monarchy is known for being a very adaptable system. She can, even if sometimes only at a critical moment, clearly recognize what is wanted of her, and she can adapt in such a way that she does not lose any of what makes her attractive.
In other words: One may think that the monarchy in Britain is outdated, ossified and rusted. On the contrary, flexible, highly mobile, mobile and – perhaps surprisingly for some, adaptable. We are not soothsayers and we do not divine from coffee grounds. The position of the monarch is to some extent given by customs, but it also shapes the personality of the monarch to a large extent. Prince Charles has a unique chance to capitalize on his experience and create a ruler to suit him. Provided, of course, that he would ever be able to suppress some of Charles’s in favor of the King’s.
People have recently been able to get a picture of the royal family and the complex relationships within thanks to the popular Netflix series The Crown.
I criticized the series. Because it has a large audience, the creators keep going further and further and get new and new parts. This is a problem in my eyes, because with the timeline of those stories we are approaching our present, and this is a time about which we not only have our own memories, but also our own opinion. And those opinions will not be the same and will be subjective. This is a confrontation that we should avoid because we cannot judge objectively what happened five years ago. It can be done by someone over time. The story of the series begins in the 40s, which is a history that is far away for most of us. That was interesting and informative. But if these are stories from the 90s, and if I’m informed correctly, then the next series will go even closer to us, so I think it’s not good anymore.
So far, the last series that viewers could see tells the story of the “unhappy marriage” of Prince Charles and Princess Diana.
That’s the time where I think the series should have naturally stopped because we know the story. We know him from the newspapers, but that doesn’t mean we know him well. We know one interpretation of it. But I appreciate that Peter Morgan wrote a great script that shows, in detail, that he had excellent sources of insider information.
Do you think that the series could have changed the view of the royal family?
It’s about how you perceive the individual parts of several series. If you see them as a whole as a development series that also moves in time and in the character of the character, then it is something that can give you a lot. If you perceive it separately, some stories may also seem strange to you – for example, the part that deals with the time when London was hit by a big smog, which is almost unknown in our country, although it cost several human lives. But the story wasn’t about smog, it was about the relationship between Winston Churchill and the Queen. Anyone who wants to see it will understand. There are hidden attractions and Petr Morgan has proven to be a master of his field. I’m just sorry that he’s getting to a time when he should probably leave it to someone who will come after us.