The royal treatment

Shades of opinion

Sir, – The more lathered Fintan O’Toole’s harangues from behind the safe double-glazing of a republic get, the more silly they become. In his vain attempts to knock spots off the absurdities of Britain’s traditions, or to inflict a hard wallop against the British Empire, he diminishes himself (“Monarchy is a bad habit. Up the Republic”, Opinion & Analysis, September 21st).

He claims not to be trying to drive a wedge between the Irish and their English neighbours. To achieve this, a period of silence from Fintan would be greatly appreciated.

As an Irish person living in England, opinion here is much more nuanced than some of your correspondents would have us believe. – Yours, etc,




Cambridgeshire, UK.

Sir, – From the wisdom of the child who saw the emperor for what he was, nude, and proclaimed it publicly, I cannot see an image of King Charles III without being distracted by his ear-to-ear band of neck hair.

Does his barber never ask if he can go after the fluff back there?

Or would that mean dragging the monarch kicking and screaming into the 21st century, in terms of grooming at least? – Yours, etc,



Co Galway.

Sir, – Mike Harris (Letters, September 21st) uses the words “imposed” and “oppressive” in describing his misery at the showing of the televised coverage of Queen Elizabeth’s funeral at Knock Airport.

Perhaps his request to have the televisions turned off or the channel changed was not acceded to was because it was felt that to do so would have been oppressive and prevented others from being among the estimated global viewing figure of around four billion. – Yours, etc,



Co Donegal.