This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/19/kate-middleton-royal-baby-mania

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Guess what? America does royal baby mania bigger and better Guess what? America does royal baby mania bigger and better
(2 months later)
You expect the British tabloids to carry breathless, witless, content-free rubbish on the (apparently) imminent arrival of the "Cambridge baby", and, by God, they don't disappoint: the Daily Mirror reveals that the as-yet-unmanifest sprog has been given a stroller rug made by the same Northumbrian woollen mill which–87 years ago–provided one for the Queen. Get out of here! The Daily Mail had the temerity to play polo "100 miles from pregnant Kate!" while the Sun managed to leer with "Kate could hurry baby with curry, weepy or nooky".

But will somebody explain why the American media is panting like wild dogs over what some genius has dubbed "the Great Kate Wait"? "Woman has baby" is not, strictly speaking, new, any more than "dog bites man". Now, if a woman has a litter of meerkats, that's page one. Nevertheless, a couple of hundred alleged journalists are now loitering in the indecent heat outside a London hospital, waiting for a pregnant lady to turn up and do her thing.		You expect the British tabloids to carry breathless, witless, content-free rubbish on the (apparently) imminent arrival of the "Cambridge baby", and, by God, they don't disappoint: the Daily Mirror reveals that the as-yet-unmanifest sprog has been given a stroller rug made by the same Northumbrian woollen mill which–87 years ago–provided one for the Queen. Get out of here! The Daily Mail had the temerity to play polo "100 miles from pregnant Kate!" while the Sun managed to leer with "Kate could hurry baby with curry, weepy or nooky".

But will somebody explain why the American media is panting like wild dogs over what some genius has dubbed "the Great Kate Wait"? "Woman has baby" is not, strictly speaking, new, any more than "dog bites man". Now, if a woman has a litter of meerkats, that's page one. Nevertheless, a couple of hundred alleged journalists are now loitering in the indecent heat outside a London hospital, waiting for a pregnant lady to turn up and do her thing.
The normally-sober National Public Radio has presented in depth explications of the kid's potential surnames (Cambridge? Mountbatten-Windsor? Saxe-Coburg-Gotha?), the 62-gun salute from the Tower, and an interview with Mail columnist Robert Hardman on the 2013 Succession to the Crown Act. Forbes, the business magazine, weighed in with one story on the Committee of Advertising Practice's guidelines on marketing the nipper's advent, complete with useful guide to which images of crowns do not infringe "the design of the Royal Crown" (pdf), and another wondering if the duchess would pass on her sense of style to her offspring. Philip Treacy baby bonnets? Stella McCartney babygros? The Washington Post, winner of 47 Pulitzer Prizes, broke the shocking inside story of human birth, quoting Janet Fyle, a "professional policy adviser" at the Royal College of Midwives:The normally-sober National Public Radio has presented in depth explications of the kid's potential surnames (Cambridge? Mountbatten-Windsor? Saxe-Coburg-Gotha?), the 62-gun salute from the Tower, and an interview with Mail columnist Robert Hardman on the 2013 Succession to the Crown Act. Forbes, the business magazine, weighed in with one story on the Committee of Advertising Practice's guidelines on marketing the nipper's advent, complete with useful guide to which images of crowns do not infringe "the design of the Royal Crown" (pdf), and another wondering if the duchess would pass on her sense of style to her offspring. Philip Treacy baby bonnets? Stella McCartney babygros? The Washington Post, winner of 47 Pulitzer Prizes, broke the shocking inside story of human birth, quoting Janet Fyle, a "professional policy adviser" at the Royal College of Midwives:
The baby will come when he or she is ready.The baby will come when he or she is ready.
American television networks report (if that is the word) on the scene outside St Mary's Hospital in London as if they're in Tahrir Square (it's hot! OMG!). Several have already parked their fluffier newsreaders in London to be on hand when the Blessed Event takes place. NBC put up royalbabyguess.com: if you predict the rugrat's name, gender, or weight they might say your name on breakfast television. Not to be outdone, ABC's very elaborate royal baby site (sponsored by Nestle) enlightens us on commemorative products such as "Royal Addition" cheddar cheese and offers what is probably the stupidest story in an exceptionally competitive field: "Royal Baby Will Never Know Diana." Right. Since she's, like, you know, dead?American television networks report (if that is the word) on the scene outside St Mary's Hospital in London as if they're in Tahrir Square (it's hot! OMG!). Several have already parked their fluffier newsreaders in London to be on hand when the Blessed Event takes place. NBC put up royalbabyguess.com: if you predict the rugrat's name, gender, or weight they might say your name on breakfast television. Not to be outdone, ABC's very elaborate royal baby site (sponsored by Nestle) enlightens us on commemorative products such as "Royal Addition" cheddar cheese and offers what is probably the stupidest story in an exceptionally competitive field: "Royal Baby Will Never Know Diana." Right. Since she's, like, you know, dead?
Almost two and half centuries since Americans threw off the yoke of George III, the monarch whose shortcomings were so thoroughly enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, we are still in psychic thrall to his kin:Almost two and half centuries since Americans threw off the yoke of George III, the monarch whose shortcomings were so thoroughly enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, we are still in psychic thrall to his kin:
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people … He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people … He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
Perhaps we regard them as untrashy Kardashians, celebrities from the Golden Age of fairy tales. Maybe they're like movie stars, but better behaved. I'd like to blame Disney, stuffing princesses in ball dresses down our throats since the budgie-voiced Snow White waltzed onto the scene in 1937. But that can't be the whole story. We clearly crave royalty; we yearn for splendour and try to create it by worshipping quarterbacks, eating up stories about what Michelle Obama wore yesterday and crowning teenaged girls in long white gloves Peanut Princess or Watermelon Queen with a diamante tiara. I don't know what it is about tiaras, people, but they're all over the internet.Perhaps we regard them as untrashy Kardashians, celebrities from the Golden Age of fairy tales. Maybe they're like movie stars, but better behaved. I'd like to blame Disney, stuffing princesses in ball dresses down our throats since the budgie-voiced Snow White waltzed onto the scene in 1937. But that can't be the whole story. We clearly crave royalty; we yearn for splendour and try to create it by worshipping quarterbacks, eating up stories about what Michelle Obama wore yesterday and crowning teenaged girls in long white gloves Peanut Princess or Watermelon Queen with a diamante tiara. I don't know what it is about tiaras, people, but they're all over the internet.
The US clings to this sustaining – and absurd, immature, self-aggrandising – notion of "American exceptionalism", insisting we're immune to what Walter Bagehot called (pdf) "the mystic reverence" for kings and queens. Our official position is Tom Paine's:The US clings to this sustaining – and absurd, immature, self-aggrandising – notion of "American exceptionalism", insisting we're immune to what Walter Bagehot called (pdf) "the mystic reverence" for kings and queens. Our official position is Tom Paine's:
There is something exceedingly ridiculous in the composition of Monarchy.There is something exceedingly ridiculous in the composition of Monarchy.
But much as I'd like that to be the case, here we are, acting for all the world like we never quite cut the emotional cord with Mummy Britain. We aren't as immune to history as we think. We're not immune to the power of myth, either. The birth of a future queen or king signifies the renewal of the nation, the return of spring, a fresh start, maybe even a commemorative postage stamp.But much as I'd like that to be the case, here we are, acting for all the world like we never quite cut the emotional cord with Mummy Britain. We aren't as immune to history as we think. We're not immune to the power of myth, either. The birth of a future queen or king signifies the renewal of the nation, the return of spring, a fresh start, maybe even a commemorative postage stamp.
Maybe the critter won't be a regular old, hollering, red-faced, pantpooping baby after all; maybe, as that astute and patriotic American pundit Stephen Colbert said, maybe Kate will give birth to "something magical" like a hobbit. Or a unicorn.Maybe the critter won't be a regular old, hollering, red-faced, pantpooping baby after all; maybe, as that astute and patriotic American pundit Stephen Colbert said, maybe Kate will give birth to "something magical" like a hobbit. Or a unicorn.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.