Americans have a somewhat complicated view of monarchies, generally, and the British one in particular. It’s not unlike the fascination with a bad car crash or train wreck. Aside from that, I think I can speak for Americans generally when I say we simply do not get why the fuck it’s still a thing. The Crown has helped me understand why, if only a little bit.
The signal moments were:
When young Elizabeth II’s tutor was explaining the English Constitution – the Dignified and the Efficient. Having recently begun studying the mathematics of geodesics (and the underlying field of “tensegrities”, the analogs were astonishing. The monarchy then is like the trees to which the cord is tied, with the actual government being the cord and the poles.
The US government is instead a “tensegrity” — there is no need for trees – the structure is in a state of equalibrium, the cords and struts bound together in a self-sufficient system.
When she was crowned, the whole notion that the monarch represents the divine living among and influencing mortals. (Poppycock, of course, but it explains the theistic dimension of monarchy a little better.)
Queen Mary’s monologue to Elizabeth II’s about how the monarch MUST do nothing, that it is the very “act” of doing nothing that establishes and maintains the stability of not only the monarchy but the government and the country as a whole.
Yes, it’s fictionalized history — highly-fictionalized at times. (E.g. the story arch wherein QE2 is at odds with Thatcher.) However, if one is at all familiar with the factual bases that are woven into these stories, it helps disentangle the sensational from the real, in a more dignified and efficient way.