Ancient and Fraternal Order of Hucksters
Okay, now we get the fun part. We visit the Duchy itself. We see pictures of all the pretty little tincture bottles with their mediciney-looking droppers so that you can measure out the exactly precisely correct dosage of the dandelion-tinted water and not use either too much or too little which could be fatal or seriously discomfiting. We see that the tinctures are sold exclusively in selected Boots stores and in Waitrose, and we are suitably impressed. Then (well prepared for the erudition and profundity ahead) we are allowed to read what the Prince of Wales thinks.
HRH The Prince of Wales has always been an advocate of a requirement for fundamental reappraisal of the way we view health. He believes poor health does not exist in isolation, but is in fact a direct consequence of our lifestyles, cultures, communities and how we interact with our environments. He is passionate about adopting an integrated approach to health, as well as exploring how safe, proven complementary therapies can work in conjunction with mainstream medicine.
Has he indeed; does he indeed; is he indeed. So the fuck what? Who cares what ‘HRH the prince of Wales’ thinks? (Notice how we are instructed how to address him even on a website, as if there were some danger that the rabble might come rollicking up to him shouting ‘Hey Chuck love the tincture, dude!’ Notice the pomposity even as he plays the role of the carnival barker.) Who cares what HRH has always been an advocate of and what he believes about health and what he is passionate about? Does he know anything about the subject? Does he have any degrees in the subject? If he wanted to set up shop as a doctor or a pharmacist, would he be able to, or would he immediately be busted for practicing medicine without a license?
Honest to god, the conceit and self-importance of that little paragraph really takes the proverbial biscuit. The amateur dilettante HRH has a lot of crack-brained ‘opinions’ and ‘views’ and ‘beliefs’ about health and ‘therapies’ and medicine and he apparently thinks that his membership in the ‘royal family’ somehow converts his worthless opinions into medical expertise – by alchemy perhaps. He’s so deluded by royal conceit that he thinks he’s qualified to sell ‘tinctures’ to a gullible populace. It’s staggering.
Duchy Herbals Detox Tincture is made from extracts of Artichoke and Dandelion, cleansing and purifying herbs to help support the body’s natural elimination and detoxification processes, and help maintain healthy digestion. Duchy Herbals Detox Tincture can be taken as part of a regular detox program. Globe artichoke, which has the Latin name Cynara scolymus, is a thistle-like perennial plant originating from Africa.
And dandelion is that irritating yellow thing that is always turning up in your garden, and both of them are pretty much harmless, and that’s why we decided to use them to make a ‘detox’ ‘tincture,’ since we don’t much want to actually poison people and get sued, but we do want to pretend that we are giving them something in exchange for their ten pounds, so we picked a couple of harmless weeds, and put a few drops of each in some vats of water, and put the result into tiny little bottles with medicine droppers and called them a ‘tincture.’ It could have been floor dust and potato juice just as well, except then we couldn’t have called them ‘herbal.’
It doesn’t say a word about exactly what it is in the dandelions and the artichokes that cleanses and purifies, or exactly how they ‘help support the body’s natural elimination and detoxification processes’ and ‘help maintain healthy digestion.’ It really is the most blatant, shameless, brazen flim-flammery. And this guy is the future king! He’s a ridiculous posturing quack-embracing pompous patent nostrum salesman – and he’s the future king!
He and George W Bush should form some sort of club – Shameless Sons of Nepotism or something.
The Echina-Relief Tincture and the Hyperi-Lift Tincture could be harmful by keeping fools from seeking efficacious cures for the symptoms of influenza and mild depression/anxiety.
Mr. Windsor may be wrong about health but he is largely correct about city planning.
Well I just thought the vitriol was ineffective so far as I am concerned.. There are so many “folk” remedies which are in fact extremely effective — aloe vera for sunburn for example — that I get nervous when I hear tirades against non-western medicine. Don’t get me wrong: I just had an MRI and I am very thankful for the brilliance of Western medicine. But I just get nervous when I hear blanket diatribes against things like acupuncture and chiropractic. Yeah there is a lot of hype and BS about them but I think there may be some real value (though I personally have never had any benefit from chiropractic per se.) I have had “adjustments” done which worked when western drugs did not. So I like to keep an open mind and only criticize lack of rigor rather than the basic ideas. So criticize Charles’ operation for lack of rigor but please leave open the possibility that even the lowly dandelion might be of medicinal value.
As to his ideas on cities: you might want to look into them as he is in fact “correct” in the sense that at this time in human history there is an objectively better way and a worse way to build human settlements; and by-and-large Charles Windsor is on the right side i.e. new urbanism, compact and more dense walkable cities, public transit and not just cars etc etc. “Sustainability” to dumb it down. He has been quite perceptive on this subject of cities for at least 20 years. This page —
http://www.princes-foundation.org/
— may be helpful in giving you an idea of his thinking about the built environment. He goes a bit far for me in his emphasis on traditional architecture (as opposed to overall traditional city form) but basically he is right on.
Sure; but I don’t do ‘tirades against non-western medicine’ as such. It’s the altmed types who do the false dichotomy, by pretending there are two kinds of medicine, regular and ‘alternative.’ Medicine that works is just medicine, and ‘medicine’ that doesn’t work is not medicine. I don’t do ‘blanket diatribes against things like acupuncture and chiropractic’ – I do diatribes against the idea that there is a Special kind of medicine that can’t be tested and can’t be shown to work but is nevertheless somehow curative.
I’m not closing ‘the possibility that even the lowly dandelion might be of medicinal value’ – but the fact that the lowly dandelion might be of medicinal value which no one has discovered yet is not a reason to call it a ‘tincture’ and sell it at high prices claiming it helps ‘support the body’s natural elimination and detoxification processes’ and helps ‘maintain healthy digestion’ and that it ‘can be taken as part of a regular detox program.’ Anything might be of medicinal value, but that’s not a reason to sell anything and everything as actually having (vague) medicinal value now. I could decide that old elastic might have undiscovered medicinal value, but that wouldn’t be a good reason to start selling drops of it in water as a detox just on the basis of my wild surmise.
I heard a story that when Tony Blair first became Prime Minister he was reprimanded by Prince Charles for writing him a latter that began “Dear Charles”.
Quaite. Vulgar little man.
Ten pounds converts to about HK$100. For that money (and I expect the tincture would be rather more expensive here)I can choose from one month in the local gym, ten loaves of high fibre bread, four pounds of dried apricots or prunes, seven pounds of raisins, 20 pounds of cherry tomatoes, 40 heads of broccoli – also aids to elimination and health, and a whole lot more enjoyable than the tincture I suspect.
So adopting an integrated approach to health, I’d have to be massively stupid to buy HRH’s tincture.
And unlike the person you compared him to, George W Bush has actually DONE something ;-)
OB: Thanks for the tip. I was suffering from a certain colonic looseness the other day. Old elastic might be just the thing to tighten the situation up. I’ve got a length of it somewhere. Next time it happens, I’ll give it a go and swallow the lot.
In the mean time, I agree with David Sucher, in that if a cure works, it works, whether or not it can be explained on the basis of prevailing theory.
A true quack, on the other hand, sells stuff that works, if at all, solely by the placebo effect. The old snake oil salesmen were all excellent showmen as far as I can gather. In my youth I watched one or two in action at country shows. One as I remember was selling traditional ‘Goanna oil’ liniment. They could really work an audience. HRH beside them is a rank amateur.
Re goanna oil, see conversation at http://www2b.abc.net.au/science/k2/stn/archives/archive97/newposts/1847/topic1847644.shtm
I would not defend Charles against accusations of conceit or absurdity, but this all strikes me as coming on a bit strong. Unless I am wrong, the tincture in question can do no harm, so surely whether or not anyone wants to sell or buy it is really of no matter to anyone but them. There are plenty of other pseudy health products out there selling at luxury prices to people who struggle to find ways tpo empty their purses (if it was available on the NHS it would be another matter). And we should bear in mind that the profits from this go to charity, not personal gain, I think that makes a difference. This doesn’t mane that he shouldn’t be mocked, of course, but I think it should be kept in mid that while Charles is evidently a vain, petty and relatively unintelligent man who represents an anachronistic and ridiculous institution, he has used his office with an enormous amount of energy to achieve a huge amount of good. Compared to the rest of his confreres he is saintly, and compared to 99% of men of his wealth and position he is a paragon. Just saying, to put something on the other pan. I tend to think that if he just lounged around on yachts, went skiing and shook the occasional hand he would get a much better press (although I am not suggesting that that would be true of the B+W crowd).
Oh, and his contributuiion to architectural debate and practice has been superb.
JM, spot on. The point about Charlie is not to complain about how bad he is, but to remember how much worse he could be – Duke of Windsor, anyone?
I’m all for a republic, though. Except then we’d have a politician in charge…
Well, okay, it is a bit strong. I find it irritating, I admit – a Royal Personage flogging a very overpriced ‘tincture’ that does nothing in particular. But then that’s against the background of the fact that he also actively campaigns for ‘alternative’ treatments, which is not harmless. And the value of his attacks on modern architecture is at the very least debatable.
But as far as I know the Prince’s Trust does some good stuff, so it’s a fair cop.
“And the value of his attacks on modern architecture is at the very least debatable.”
Now there is a statement which interests me. Could you please elaborate?
The way I see it, his attacks have put issues about the built environment squarely before the public and have promoted excellent discussion. The architectural establishment in Britain (as well as the USA) has not served us well and should be questioned. I happen to think that Charles Windsor places too much emphasis on the value of traditional _architecture_ as opposed to the value of of traditional _city form._ (“City form” being the larger arrangements of blocks, lots, roads etc)
But overall I think that his statements — some of which I think are wise and some much less so — on the built environment have been terrific in promoting a very healthy debate.
To the extent that Windsor is able to draw attention to his opinions — on any subject — is entirely a reflection of his status as a “Prince” is a bit annoying and with some potential danger to the body politic. I have very mixed feelings about constitutional royals having any involvement in real issues and have long-wished that he would abdicate so as to be able to speak properly and freely as a Briton rather than a Royal.
That constitutional issue aside — and I agree that that is a BIG aside — Windsor has been wonderful in raising issues of the built environment (and healthy food.) I just wish he would let go of the golden albatross of the crown and speak as simply a rich aristocrat.
No?
I don’t know much about architecture, and never knew much about Prince Charles, except that he was immediate heir to the throne, made a bad arranged marriage, and then married for love. Descriptions of his home life, as told by his manservants, at least before Camilla, seem positively louche.
I certainly cannot think it appropriate that he should be selling (under the Duchy trade mark) hoax detox remedies, even if he is giving the money to his charitable foundation. Clearly HRH Charles is a bit flaky when it comes to questions of health, though his concern for health is not itself objectionable.
As to architecture, he seems, perhaps, quite by mistake, to have happened upon something, which his reflexively anti-modern stand rightly holds up to some question. Modern architecture of the last twenty-five years or so may be functional, but it does not, to use the prince’s words, very often help to lift our spirits, as most North American cities and towns, which do not benefit from the architecture of the past, can testify. The buildings which first come to my mind (in London) are the triple tower blocks directly to the NW of the parliament buildings (I think I’ve got my directions right). What a contrast of unique fancy and modern flummery!
At least one person thinks that HRH The Prince of Wales has what it takes in the architecture department. Nikos A. Salingaros, who teaches mathematics at the U of Texas at Austin, takes the prince’s lucubrations on modern architecture, as “more profound than most architectural statements of our time.”
As I say, I’m not an architect, so I stand aside, but it seems we do need to be fair to the man, pampered aristo or not, unless we have a guillotine waiting in the wings. Perhaps he should give up the crown. He’s still going to be rich, and people will still have to pay attention. But he still shouldn’t be dabbling in the occult curative powers of dandylions and other herbs, unless he is willing to support the claims with evidence.
Well even if Chos abdicated he would still be who (though not what) he is – he would still have vastly disproportionate clout. I think people who have clout that is irrelevant to what they’re talking about (so this applies to movie stars and relatives of presidents, too) should be very very careful about how they use it. Chos wrecked the firm that designed the addition to the National Gallery; even if you think the firm deserved to be wrecked for designing the addition (which is a fairly large claim), Chos would seem to be the wrong person to be able to do that single-handed. Impartial observers thought he acted terribly irresponsibly by giving that speech. (The wrecked architects of course think he did worse than that.)
So, no – I don’t want rich aristocrats (or movie stars or relatives of presidents) to have arbitrary fame-based clout that has nothing to do with any real expertise.
I cross-posted with Eric there; I was replying to David, not Eric. I’d still say the same thing though. I dislike some modern architecture – but I still don’t want royal dilettantes to be the ones who draw attention to the subject. I just don’t think Chos knows enough, or is careful enough, or is thoughtful enough. I think being royal has given him a hugely outsized impression of his own intelligence and wisdom.
Charles’ issue is not so much modern architecture as modern city planning. In fact my primary criticism of him is that he has not been able to distinguish between the two very clearly — which to judge from our discussion is by no means uncommon.
As to “wrecking” the firm which designed the add to the Nat Gallery it doesn’t look like they have done too badly at all.
“ABK
English architectural practice founded 1961 by Berlin-born Peter Ahrends (1933– ), London-born Richard Burton (1933– ), and Vienna-born Paul Koralek (1933– ) after they won first prize in the competition to design the Berkeley Library for Trinity College, Dublin (1960, built 1961–7). Other works include St Andrew’s College, Booterstown, Dublin (1968–72); the Arts Faculty Building, Trinity College, Dublin (1968–79); extensions to Keble College, Oxford (1972–80); Templeton College, Oxford (1969–96); Portsmouth Polytechnic Library (1975–80); the John Lewis Store, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey (1979–90); and the J. Sainsbury Supermarket, Canterbury, Kent (1982–4, with a roof suspended on cables from steel uprights). ABK received unwelcome publicity when its prize-winning (1982) project for the Hampton Extension to the National Gallery, London, was described by the Prince of Wales as a ‘carbuncle’, and the design was not realized. However, Hooke Park College, Dorset (1983–90), the Dover Heritage Centre, Kent (1988–91); the Whitworth Art Gallery Development Plan and Sculpture Court, Manchester (1991–5); Docklands Light Railway Beckton Extension and Poplar Bridge, London (1987–93); Techniquest Science Discovery Centre, Cardiff (1992–5); Selly Oak Colleges Learning Resource Centre, Birmingham (1995–7); W. H. Smith Headquarters Extension, Swindon, Wilts. (1994–6); the Waterford Visitor Centre, Ireland (1997–8); the Dublin Dental Hospital (1995–8); Loughborough University Business School and Economics Building, Leics. (1995–8); the British Embassy, Moscow (1993–2000); the Institute of Technology, Tralee, Co. Kerry (1996–2001); Blanchardstown Institute of Technology, Dublin (1998–2002); County Council Offices, Tullamore, Co. Offaly (1999–2002); and the Arts Building Extension, Trinity College, Dublin (2000–2), among other projects, demonstrate the firm’s resilience.”
Moreover, the issues of the built environment and global climate change (inextricably connected) are far too big and compelling for me to be terribly concerned that Charles may have been more than a constitutional monarch ( — and I don’t know that he has been. Even the Monarch can vote and has not given up all rights to free speech.? Charles has been talking about these issues for many years and has helped raise consciousness of good city planning. He is owed respect for that.
So I think you are far too hard on him. Of course maybe you are in the Diana camp. :)
I entirely agree that one can condemn Charles on dandelions but acknowledge him on buildings.
And in fact some of feng shui’s strictures are consistent with what is generally considered to be good design. (Yes there are real standards in design and it is not all a matter of “personal taste.”)
And really, OB, while you are “…not a bit convinced that he has helped to raise consciousness of good city planning,” you also by your own admission don’t know much about city planning, good or bad. (At least I think you have admitted that in the past.)
Please take it from someone (moi) who has been following urban issues for 40 years that Windsor has in fact done yeoman work in raising consciousness. I realize that it sticks in your craw to admit that he has done anything of value, and you are obviously not really going to take my word for it, but I hope you will have an open mind on the issue and take the matter under consideration.
You _are_ able to have an open mind when it comes to Charles? True?
Dave Mrs Thatcher cured me of all my republican leanings, the thought of that god awfull woman being our head of state made the Queen look a whole lot better?
Be warned, asking someone to have/keep an open mind is a 50ft. high flashing neon sign for having erred.
“As I say, I’m not an architect, so I stand aside”
Eric! Don’t step aside and leave it to the architects for god’s sake.
Ophelia is right that it is absurd that figures like Charles should have influence by dint of birth, but since he does have such influence and always will whether he wants it or not, I think it is worth noticing that he has used it, on balance, extremely positively. His contribution to the town planning debate has been practical as well as theoretical. Poundbury (often ridiculed in public by architects but rarely in a very informed critical way – less ridiculed behind closed doors)is a brilliant experiment in modern urbanism. Because it is not modernist does not mean that it is not modern architecture. It seems to me to have been completely successful, although, unlike most large scale high density urban extensions it is designed to work over a period of hundreds of years, not thirty or forty.
I share the reflexive annoyance at the dim face, the antiquated vowels, the air of self-pity combined with a massive sense of entitlement and the pseudo-intellectual nostaligia for a social order that would be hell for most of us but very satisfying for him, so I understand the ire. But compare him to his revolting sons, or the utter vacuity and self-serving vanity of his first wife and he doesn’t come across as quite so bad.
Eric, if you are even slightly interested in urbanism, you must read Jane Jacobs. She was an amateur too, but benefited from standing outside the professional cicle and could see clearly what the ‘expert’ planners utterly failed to see. She is very much in symapthy with the thoughts you express here and the new urbanism of Poundbury is too. Have a look at:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Death-American-Cities-Modern-Library/dp/0679600477/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236947579&sr=8-1
“some of feng shui’s strictures are consistent with what is generally considered to be good design.”
But as I said last time, that’s beside the point, because other of “feng shui’s strictures” are stark raving nonsense, and the other ones are available elsewhere, so a system of nonsense doesn’t get to borrow legitimacy by having some overlap with sense.
“some of feng shui’s strictures are consistent with what is generally considered to be good design.”
Some of Brain Gym’s strictures are consistent with drinking water and having a bit of a stretch.
Which is what OB said, but I have today had to explain yet again that I will not be entertaining this nonsense in my classroom so I just wanted to vent.
Ach, Don, having to keep fighting back this stuff – it’s an outrage!
Tell Ben Goldacre – I’m sure he’d be interested in the front line reports.
Hey, I told you I didn’t know. If Charles is into Feng Shui, then I’m outta here! I’m interested in urban renewal, but Feng Shui!? I mean, some of the Duchy products are just fine, but detox!? And his uninformed ramblings about GM! The man has to learn some judgement! (Probably too late now!) Good thing, when it comes to it, he’s will only be constitutional head of state, if he makes it, that is (if his grandmother is anything to go by, he’s got a long wait ahead of him). That means he gets to dress as an admiral, but doesn’t give him the right to make decisions at sea!
Asking someone to keep an open mind only suggests that the person being asked may know so little of a subject that it’s best to bow out of the discussion so as not to embarrass them.
Here’s an op-ed by Monbiot which repeats many of the intelligent things said in comments here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/mar/12/gm-prince-charles
One should be thankful for small mercies.
I followed David’s link to Monbiot, there to find another link to an excellent piece by Francis Wheen on the old Queen Mum, who it seems in her political views was somewhere to the right of Genghis Khan. (A shortcut to that: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/jul/19/queenmother.comment )
Prince Charles could be a lot worse.
He has also called recently for action on climate change. “The best projections tell us that we have less than 100 months to alter our behaviour before we risk catastrophic climate change,” he reportedly told an audience in Rio de Janeiro. He could have called for appeasement of vested interests the way his grandma privately urged all & sundry for it re Hitler.
Which will make the architectural discussion a bit passe. A classic like St Paul’s in London will be so affected by rising damp that the faithful, and the not so fathful alike, will need scuba gear to get around inside it. Likewise, Venice will become the inspiration for town planners.
It’s hard growing up when you’re old! I actually bought the Queen Mum story! What a horrid woman! (I just read the Guardian story.) Are we really sure about Charles? A man can talk and talk about global warming and be a villain!
David, I do know a little about city planning, actually, and I also do think about it a good deal – having lived in several cities, I have some opinions.
I think asking someone to keep an open mind often simply means not liking what the someone already thinks. Not always, but often. I will of course take new evidence and information about Chos into account, but I’m not going to ‘keep an open mind’ in the sense of not thinking he’s irresponsible and often harmful (barring new information).
Even if Chos is sensible on climate change, I don’t particularly want him pronouncing on the subject because he contaminates it via his overall anti-science ‘views.’
Sure Chos could be a lot worse, but he could also just shut up. He’s a royal, not a scientist, not a politician, not an architect.
Ha – I crossed with Eric. Well I’m sure about Charles! On current information at least. As far as I know at present, he is ill-informed and irresponsible and, on medical matters, dangerous. (As a human being he’s a spoiled egomaniac, which is not surprising, but it’s hardly grounds for admiration.)
Monbiot said it well:
“Because the prominence of the heir to the throne’s political views results solely from his inherited position, rather than from his persuasiveness or eloquence, his outspokenness looks to me like an abuse of power.”
Just so, and that applies when we agree with him as well as when we don’t. I would doubtless feel less strongly about it if I always agreed with him, but I would still never feel wholly pleased to have a mere royal as a prominent ally. I didn’t want Caroline Kennedy to walk into a senate seat, even though I assumed she was far more liberal than George Bush.
Charles faces the greatest leadership challenge ever for a British monarch, probably since the time of King Harold the Great: namely holding onto the job if and when it is passed to him by QE2, one way or another, particularly if he staill has that mobile phone.
The name Barack Obama suggests the Blackberry, which he had a fight to hang onto and that was that. Charles’ lack of discretion when calling his true love on the other hand generated a good month’s worth of copy for every tabloid in the world.
That happened 20 years ago, in 1989. The TV and radio signals carrying the information have well and truly left the solar system and are well past the 50 nearest stars. Four years ago they reached G 054-023. Inhabitants of planets in its orbit are probably still chuckling.
A man of truly cosmic significance.
http://www.cosmobrain.com/cosmobrain/res/nearstar.html
http://www.dialaphone.co.uk/blog/?p=1380
Heehee.
Of course the good news about the leadership challenge is that absolutely nothing is at stake. King Tincture (King Tampax to his friends) will be the whistle on the engine at most.