The pursuit of historical truth in cinematic portrayal is a constant balancing act between telling a compelling story and paying homage to the facts. Sometimes, a dash of fiction can enhance the narrative, lending it depth and intrigue. One television drama that constantly grapples with this dichotomy is Netflix's hit series, The Crown.
Due to its portrayal of the British royal family and events surrounding their reign, the series has sparked numerous debates about its authenticity. For those wondering about The Crown's historical accuracy, the reality is a mixed bag of well-researched facts and creative liberties.
The Crown isn't just a story of wealthy eccentricity and royal etiquette. Instead, it deftly walks us through the consequential moments of modern British history, connecting the personal dramas of the monarchy with the larger sociopolitical climate. However, the distinction between 'The Crown' vs real life events can often be blurred, leading to misconceptions, debates, and even controversy. So, how accurate is The Crown to history? Let's dissect and delve into some key episodes.
The Story Behind The Crown: Artistic License or Historical Fidelity?
As viewers, we often take what we see on screen to be the absolute truth. But in 'The Crown', like any dramatic narrative, time compression, fictional dialogues, and an amplified drama can often deviate from the historical path. While some scenarios are depicted with meticulous veracity, others use composite characters, imagined interactions, or speculate on controversial incidents. This amalgam of fact and fiction can make for gripping television but may lead the audiences to misconstrue fiction as historical fact.
The Crown and Its Graze with Reality
The creators and producers of The Crown do not shy away from declaring that while the series is based on actual events, it also involves considerable dramatization. Peter Morgan, the creator of the series, has himself said that the drama is 'an act of creative imagination' with a 'constant push-pull' between historical accuracy and fictional license.
The Crown vs Real-Life Events: Strikes and Misses
A comprehensive comparison of The Crown and the actual royal timeline would require royal expertise and, quite frankly, an enormous amount of time. However, it's worth noting some of the instances where the series has veered away from factual accuracy for dramatic effect or simply overlooked integral aspects of royal history.
Truth Behind the Crown's Historical Events
The perception of the Netflix series "The Crown" is often skewed due to its ingenious mix of facts and fiction. While the producers acknowledged their artistic liberties, the series is grounded on real historical incidents, some of which have been controversially depicted.
The legitimacy of Prince Philip's title had been a contentious issue since his betrothal began. The Crown's early episodes highlighted Queen Elizabeth II's struggle to grant her husband his due rights. The reality, however, differed significantly.
In actuality, Prince Philip was made Duke of Edinburgh before their wedding and was later conferred the titles of Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich, a few hours before the wedding ceremony itself. The Queen only made him a Prince of the United Kingdom after a decade of their marriage, respecting the period he had served in Her Majesty's naval service.
The Crown implies that this delay in being named a Prince upset Philip, but there's little historical evidence to support this speculative portrayal.
The 'Profumo Affair': More Than A Political Scandal
The third season unpacked the riveting 'Profumo Affair'—a political scandal that led to a tremendous public outcry in 1963. The series depicts the scandal was heightened due to the involvement of Princess Margaret's husband, Antony Armstrong-Jones, a claim that bears little scrutiny.
Honestly, Armstrong-Jones, or Lord Snowdon as he was known, had been portrayed by the media at the time as a womanizer, which was the only trait resonating with his character in The Crown. But his involvement in the Profumo Affair was never substantiated by any newspaper or official testimony of the time. On the contrary, Lord Snowdon was a renowned photographer who kept his professional and personal life distinctly separate, contradicting the flamboyant on-screen image.
Deep Dive Into Queen Elizabeth's Relationships
The Netflix series further explores Queen Elizabeth's relationships with various Prime Ministers.
One of the most embellished representations was of Queen Elizabeth's connection with Prime Minister Harold Wilson, as the show insinuated that the Queen favored Wilson over other Prime Ministers. While it is historically accurate that Queen Elizabeth II had a good rapport with Wilson, there is scant evidence to suggest any preferential shift in monarchial norms.
The series also dramatizes the Queen's relationship with Winston Churchill. In reality, while the Queen is known to have looked up to Churchill with a high level of respect and trust, the depiction of their semi-paternal bond may be overstated.
Regardless of these narrative embellishments, it cannot be denied that The Crown has generated an unprecedented level of international interest in the British royal family's history. And while it is crucial to remember that not every "reel" incident has its roots in reality, the show most certainly has opened up a universe of intrigue and interest in royal history for its millions of viewers across the globe.