Royal baby sets off buzz

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 08/05/2019 (2698 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

In the hierarchy of news headlines, “Woman has baby” does not usually supersede “Earth completely doomed: report.” And yet.

In a grim bit of symmetry, Monday’s arrival of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s baby boy dovetailed with the arrival of a truly damning United Nations report that concluded, among other alarming things, that one million plant and animal species are racing toward extinction because of humans.

You can guess which story led most of Britain’s newspapers Tuesday — although the Guardian, bless them, put the “humans have made hash of earth” story above the fold. Meanwhile, in America, CNN wondered out loud, “How black will the royal baby be?”

For many people, the royal baby fever sweeping the media on both sides of the Atlantic is already galling enough without the added horror of the UN report. Those people already question the public fascination with an exceedingly wealthy couple giving birth to a baby who happens to be seventh in line for the British throne.

Still, there’s no denying that an overwhelming number of people are excited about a baby they will never meet. The birth of a royal baby is a hotly anticipated cultural event for royal gawkers and monarchists alike, thirsty for scraps of information about the baby’s weight (seven pounds, three ounces), name (bets are on Alexander), title (Earl of Dumbarton, probably) and astrological sign (Taurus).

Some people also care about the royal baby because… it’s nice? It’s a joyful distraction, a little bit of comfort amid the constant wrack and ruin (did I mention all the species “racing toward extinction”?).

Perhaps the fascination with this baby is more about what babies, royal and otherwise, represent. Babies are possibilities. Babies are potential. Babies are the future. Also, if your heart didn’t grow three sizes watching deliriously happy new dad Prince Harry talk about how proud he was of his wife and then thank some horses, I don’t know what to tell you.

The intense interest in the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s baby, in particular, may also be amplified by the fact they’ve insisted upon a modicum of privacy.

In the weeks leading up to the arrival of Li’l Sussex, both duke and duchess expressed their desire to keep details of the birth to themselves and celebrate as a family, with photos to follow later — a reasonable decision that has led to much harrumphing from both the British press and royal fans. See, they are entitled to intimate details about Meghan’s pregnancy and child because, you know, tax dollars. We paid for your baby shower! You owe us your placenta!

Perhaps most sticky was the couple’s choice to forgo the royal tradition of posing on the steps of the Lindo Wing at St. Mary’s Hospital in London mere hours after the baby’s birth. Not like Kate Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge, who dutifully posed with all three of her royal babies, herself fully made up, in a dress and heels, with perfectly coiffed hair instead of doing what one should be doing seven hours after giving birth, which is sitting on a diaper stuffed with ice cubes.

Now, I can’t speak from personal experience, but I’ve heard enough about the horrors of pushing a human being from your nethers to understand why Meghan might want to skip standing in high heels while a bunch of photographers take a picture that will inevitably be called “bad for women” on the internet.

Really, though, Meghan and Harry should be applauded for enforcing a boundary, the first of many in their lifetimes as parents.

And so, the public will have to wait for a photo and a name.

Meantime, go read that UN report and perhaps reflect on the kind of world all the babies born on May 6, 2019, will inherit — and what they’ll have to do to fix it.

jen.zoratti@freepress.mb.ca

Twitter: @JenZoratti