Queen Elizabeth - The Passing of an Era

 Amazing to think that Queen Elizabeth has really passed. She was already Queen for 2 years before I was born in 1954. So she has been a presence in the world for all of my life.

An amazing woman, from childhood to driving an Ambulance in the Second World War and marrying Prince Phillip in 1947, she really was unique. Her portrait is featured on the currency in 33 different countries, underscoring the breadth of the old British Empire, upon which the "Sun never set."

She surpassed Queen Victoria in years on the throne and was getting ready to become the longest reigning Monarch in history. Only Louis XIV of France, with a 72-year and 110-day reign from 1643 until 1715 surpasses her in that regard.

Interestingly, the Stone of Scone, also known as Jacob's Stone, is now in Scotland, having been moved there in 1997. It is currently displayed in Edinburgh. The Queen passed away in Balmoral, also in Scotland. Every reigning head of the British Empire has been installed while seated on the throne with that stone beneath it since about 1296.

She will be replaced by her eldest son Charles, the third to bear the name as King. But more importantly, she will be missed by most, if not all, of the world.

The Garden of Delight

 

Here is Mother Nature,
who works so hard unseen.
All the flowers, and all the world,
are products of her dreams.

She often gets no credit
for all that She provides.
The beauty that She creates
with no homage to Her pride.

Working hand in hand with God,
and against the clock of time.
The Mother of all that we enjoy,
and all things which are so fine.

She never signs what She creates,
giving all Her time for free.
Her work is never dated
and goes on eternally.

Her seasons are unnumbered
and in a race with Father Time.
She's always right on schedule,
and Her creations all Divine.

Changing Stars

As Arcturus in Bootes is descending,
and Spica in Virgo ascends. 
My heart's like a cup runneth over, 
the surprises for me never end.

One constellation is going,
as the next one arrives on the scene.
I've met them before, they're never a bore,
they burn with a light as they gleam.

The seasons are ready for changing,
you can tell by the stars in the sky.
To the ancients 'twas simple star gazing,
which filled up their hearts and their eyes.

Like a clock the earth keeps on moving,
it still spins, it still tilts and revolves,
and I find this truly amazing,
like a riddle that's never been solved.

They say it's mathematic equation,
but it needs no persuasion to me.
I only gaze up at the magic,
in these mystical stars that I see.

"Captured" (1933) with Leslie Howard and Douglas Fairbanks, Jr.

"Captured" starring Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., Leslie Howard, Margaret Lindsay, Paul Lukas and J. Carroll Naish may at first seem like an innocuous forerunner to later POW films, but it is much more. It is an exploration of both the captured and their keepers. It explores the duty to ones comrades as well as the duty to what both are fighting for in the first place. And the validity of it all.

The prisoners are French, British, Italian and American. At first they are held in inhumane circumstances and likely to die of starvation and disease. The ranking British officer is able to come to an agreement with the prison camp commander, guaranteeing more humane treatment for all the prisoners. To effect this agreement, he guarantees their obedience to the Commandants rules, which are not unreasonable.

Is brutality ever justified, or does some leniency result in a more ordered situation for both sides? And just how far should this cooperation extend? And, how far does personal vengeance go in the scheme of larger issues? All eternal, and still unanswered, questions in these modern times.

Although these things may seem obsolete in the modern era, the theme of the film is still valid. When other powers, with whom we have no personal quarrel,  are at war, how far should the common soldier go in his personal struggle to escape, and what are his obligations to his comrades who have been temporarily removed from the larger struggle by their captivity?

In this film, all of these themes are played out when a British prisoner of war becomes imprisoned alongside his best friend from home, unaware that while he was captured earlier, that same friend began an affair with his wife. When that friend then escapes, jeopardizing the other prisoners safety, he is also charged with criminal rape and murder of a local peasant woman. What then is the moral obligation of his friend, who is also the superior officer?

When the enemy calls for the British Command to return the escapee to face trial for war crimes. The question then arises as to whether any loyalties remain to unite these two friends in their common struggle, personal differences notwithstanding.

Is that struggle, in which they are only pawns, undermined by personal betrayal? And more importantly, at what point do personal differences between friends, and responsibilities to those under ones command, begin or end?

Are the actions of the senior officer in this instance motivated by personal revenge, a sense of right and wrong, or is he doing his duty to protect the many for the war crimes of one man?  

This film delivers on all these points, and with its pristine restoration, and a rousing finish, is well worth the viewing.