The series "The Crown", which deals with the life of the Queen of Britain and her family, can be considered a work of entertainment, and for the millions of people who watched it on the Netflix platform, it was nothing but a fun series, but things were different for Queen Elizabeth II and her people.

In an article published by the British Telegraph newspaper, writer Simon Hever conveyed the opinion of one of the screenwriters about the first two seasons of the series, which were good examples at the level of the art of storytelling, but since this drama is based on real events rooted in living memory, and depicts people in a chain Life and still prominent in public life, then one must take into account some additional details.

When you look at some of the polls that indicate that many young people believe that Margaret Thatcher led this country during World War II, you will understand why some people want to film entertainment series such as "The Crown" and create dialogues and scenarios according to their whims, the viewer may think that what This series presents him as an accurate embodiment of history, but the truth is the opposite, and it seems that a small minority cares about the issue of history turning into a farce.

The new season of The Crown has been described as "convincing" due to the two new characters: Lady Diana Spencer, who would later become Princess of Wales, and Margaret Thatcher.

And while the Prince of Wales deserves the controversy surrounding him over his behavior towards his young bride, Thatcher’s treatment was even more disturbing, with Gillian Anderson playing Thatcher but her performance was far from perfect, unlike Emma Corinne who played Princess of Wales.

The drama includes the incident of Michael Fagan storming Buckingham Palace and entering the Queen's bedroom, yet Fagan's story is used as a weapon against Thatcher, as he is portrayed as a victim of her economic policies.

Inspired by imagination

Much of the series’s script was fictional, and it is not surprising that sources close to the royal family released their statements on the front pages of the media to express the family’s anger toward the series.

The writer of the series, Peter Morgan, was not able to know the details of the conversations that were taking place between Thatcher and the Queen, or any of the other private conversations that were filmed.

Some were simply preposterous, as was the case in the dialogue that took place between the Duke of Edinburgh and the Prince of Wales shortly before Lord Mountbatten's funeral.

Some of the conversations were frustrating, such as the conversations between the Prince of Wales and his then-wife, and between him and his mistress, yet we cannot allow the creation of the book to be hampered by simple considerations such as the stability of the British constitution and the accuracy of the British public's perception of it.

A New Yorker drama critic wrote that this series "describes how the British empire collapsed," and opens the door for anyone looking for a way to criticize Britain.

The writer pointed out that Queen Elizabeth, the late mother, appears to be based on a satirical version of herself, while Princess Margaret was known for her good reputation, but if she was as aggressive as her character played by Helena Bonham Carter, that will still be a matter for discussion, but since she is not on Alive, it cannot defend itself now.

However, the Duke of Edinburgh will undoubtedly be shocked when he watches the impersonator shoot birds in the summer, which reveals a blanket disregard for the most realistic details in the entire series, causing a wave of ridicule among all those familiar with it. Real subject.

Mark Thatcher was lost in the desert 10 weeks before the attempted invasion of South Georgia, not during it, and the Cabinet headed by Thatcher did not address her or each other by their Christian names, but by their official titles.

The series also reveals that the Prime Minister and the Queen did not know before Thatcher assumed her office, when in reality the two had met on official occasions since Thatcher was minister in the Cabinet for 4 years and leader of the opposition loyal to Her Majesty for another 4 years.

Nor would the Queen have asked a court official whether there was "good or bad news" about the Australian elections, because she does not favor any party in politics in any of the kingdom's states.

Wrong data

The series included many other false data intended to distort the history of the Conservative Party, such as stating that Michael Fagan's deputy was Richard Hastings, when in fact it was John Grant, a Labor MP who joined the Social Democratic Party in 1981.

There is also an implicit indication that Thatcher's opposition to the sanctions imposed on South Africa was due to her son's business interests there, and not because she did not want an economically destroyed nation to bequeathed to the majority black rulers.

The punishments episode included footage of the Queen asking Thatcher to sign a Commonwealth Statement on the subject.

In contrast, the Queen, who was fully aware of what was in the Constitution in her early years as Queen, would not have done such a thing. There is no doubt that the Queen’s view of the Commonwealth was more positive than Thatcher’s view, but she realizes that as a constitutional queen, no. She can only act on the advice of her prime minister.

The writer mentioned that Thatcher and the Queen were walking around the room together during her 80th birthday party in 2005, and her happiness in being there reveals the truth about the relationship that Thatcher has more than what this fictional series might reveal.

Due to the shortcomings in teaching history in this country, and the scarcity of British history teaching anywhere else in the world, many will watch this series and confuse fiction with reality, which will affect people's opinion about the constitutional settlement within this country and the way of government.

Details like this may not be a concern for the makers of this TV series, but they do matter to the British people.