I am laughing at media hounds’ stumbling over the new British king’s title. They keep stumbling on the word “Prince” and forgetting that Charles is now “King Charles III.”
I am faced with another dilemma. Given that I am not a royal subject and, therefore, am not constrained by mandatory formality when referencing the royal family, I tend to de-formalize the family members.
Andrew occasionally becomes Andy; Edward becomes Eddie; Ann becomes Annie.
And, yes, Charles becomes Chuck in my conversations about the royals.
But that was when Chuck was merely a prince. Now he’s king, man. The head of state. The ruler over the world’s unquestioned most well-known monarchy.
Dare I call him “King Chuck”? I think I’ll stick to the formality that the man’s title bestows him.