Bridgerton actress Adjoa Andoh once remarked that the Buckingham Palace balcony looked “terribly white”, a comment made live as millions watched the coronation unfold. Some people rushed to condemn her, yet the institution she described matched the image on display. The monarchy remains almost entirely white today, and the one biracial working royal, Meghan Sussex, no longer stands on that balcony. Despite this truth, Andoh accepted an MBE from Prince William. Her critics ask why someone who saw the problem so clearly would endorse the system that produced it. Her supporters argue the award recognises her craft, not the monarchy. The debate shows how honours often blur moral clarity, especially when they come from an institution that avoids scrutiny and resists change.
The Honours System And The Illusion Of Progress
The MBE carries the weight of an imperial past that shaped modern Britain. Yasmin Alibhai Brown has written about this system for decades and returned her own honour because it conflicted with her principles. She argued that accepting recognition from a hierarchy built on inherited privilege strengthens the very structure it claims to celebrate. Her point stands when we examine how honours work today. They give the appearance of inclusion while keeping power in the same narrow space.
Andoh named that space during the coronation. Her words unsettled viewers because she observed what countless commentators avoided. Yet the image she described remains unchanged. The royal family holds all its public power through birth, not merit, and its visual story still speaks to exclusion. Accepting an MBE from this institution creates a tension that cannot be brushed aside. It gives the palace a moment of harmony without addressing the truth she highlighted. Honours offer prestige, but they also shield the monarchy from criticism by drawing well-regarded figures back toward the centre.
A Sharp Observation Softened By Ceremony
Andoh’s comment about the balcony produced one of the most honest reactions to the coronation broadcast. She saw the contrast between the diverse congregation in the Abbey and the balcony that followed. Her observation sparked a wave of hostility, yet it aligned with Britain’s own data on representation. The monarchy has not reflected the country for generations. It did not protect Meghan Sussex, from sustained press and public hostility. It did not challenge the narratives that targeted her. This gap feels even sharper when the monarch serves as head of a Commonwealth made up largely of Black and brown people.
Against this backdrop, Andoh’s decision to accept the MBE reshapes the moment. The palace gains a photo of cordial exchange. Newspapers gain a story that suggests reconciliation. The public sees a critic who now stands beside the heir to the throne. Meanwhile, none of the structural issues she named have changed.
Columnist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown has long argued that the honours system works to blunt criticism. She returned her own MBE after recognising that acceptance gave the monarchy a veneer of inclusivity without shifting its unequal foundations. Her view is simple: the moment a critic accepts the palace’s embrace, the institution gains more than the individual.
Why Diversity Narratives Fall Apart Without Meghan Sussex
Modern pop culture commentary often turns to the fantasy of Netflix’s Queen Charlotte as Britain’s first biracial royal. Historians do not support this claim, yet it spreads because it comforts audiences who want a diverse monarchy without confronting real events. Meghan Sussex was the first biracial working royal. Her treatment showed how limited the institution’s capacity for inclusion remains. She faced hostility from sections of the British press that tracked her every gesture and worked their way into her white relatives’ lives for access and advantage. Senior royal figures allowed this pattern to continue.
These facts form the context in which Andoh accepted her MBE. Her own remark about the balcony rang true because the monarchy did not protect the one woman whose presence challenged its image. No narrative of progress stands without this reality. When a respected Black actress accepts a royal honour, it is seen by some as a gesture that softens public memory. It is used to present the monarchy as open when it has not shown evidence of change. Celebrating an actor’s achievement is welcome. Using that celebration to gloss over structural exclusion is not.
Related Stories
Final Thoughts
Adjoa Andoh has earned admiration for her work, yet the meaning of her MBE cannot be separated from the institution offering it. Honours have symbolic power, and symbols shape public understanding of inclusion. Yasmin Alibhai Brown warned that accepting these awards often strengthens a system that resists accountability. The monarchy remains the same institution Andoh described in 2023. It lost the only biracial working royal and offered no defence against the forces that drove her away. That is why her acceptance unsettles those who valued her earlier candour. The image of diversity cannot replace the substance of it. An honour may flatter the recipient, but it cannot disguise the fact that the balcony remains as she first saw it.
Discover more from Feminegra
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It’s a shame that such a talented and highly esteemed actress as Andoh is so obsessed with skin color. Most people have moved on from the outdated old fashioned whining about whiteness. Please join us in the 21st century and celebrate well deserved accomplishments and successes without hating other cultures.
Britain had race riots just over a year ago, and a party whose platform is division and racism is gaining popularity. Also, Andoh is half white, with an English mother. It is absolutely her right to call out her own culture.
Expressing hatred for any culture is beneath the dignity of any esteemed actress no matter what her skin color is.
As a no-longer royalist Brit I have never been more ashamed of the monarchy than when, at the time of Archie’s birth, under the headline ‘ royal baby leaves hospital.’ the BBC showed a photograph of a well-dressed man and woman leaving a building holding hands with a chimpanzee, comically wearing a bowler hat and jacket.
To the everlasting disgrace of the royal family, they did not comment on such an outrageous insult to the monarch’s grandchild and daughter-in-law being clearly a slur against bi-racial Meghan. Why?
The history of the transatlantic British slave trade with the Americas is deeply tied to the profiteering from forcibly transported millions of suffering Africans between the 16th and 19th centuries. Nearly two million deaths at sea were recorded with corpses, and often living souls, thrown overboard (sometimes to make the drinking water go further) to the sharks that hungrily and knowingly followed the ships.
The British monarchy has profited hugely from this transatlantic slave trade and a significant part of its’ wealth can be traced back to this evil trade in human life.. It is accused of continued racism to this day not helped by a disclosure that Kate Middleton and King Charles were the two who expressed concern that Archie would be colored and, horror upon horror,would sully the pure white House of Windsor.
The granting of awards and honorifics is simply used as a tool to manipulate those like Adjoa Andoh who can be of benefit through influence or donating to the royal foundations.
That is why you are right to say it is why her acceptance of her MBE unsettles those who valued her earlier candour and what now appears as duplicitous.
For her to return her MBE, upon further contemplation, would help to restore principled support for equality for all humanl, irrespective of their skin colour.
The BBC NEVER published ANY kind of racist photos after the birth of a Sussex child and to accuse them of such is libel and criminal. Making false statements does nothing to promote peace and harmony but instead fuels hatred and unnecessary vitriol. Some people sadly thrive on building walls and barriers while the BRF and the BBC focus on building bridges and good will.
Individuals from the global majority accepting these trinkets lose their integrity.
Arguably suffering from an identity crisis or successfully brainwashed. The common and misguided belief is that they have arrived and been accepted by those they consider inherently superior or in other words “the great and the good”.
In reality these individuals are viewed as useful for PR imagery, but expendable tools to be used as and when required by an institution which robustly undermines equality, diversity and social inclusion.
Self worth and identity is not evidenced by the acceptance of a trinket but needs a major reset of the mind.