Get over it, Harry. Royals are not supposed to be happy.

Royals are the one kind of celebrity America doesn’t have.

We have every other kind: TikTokers, My Pillow guys, reality show chefs. But no queens, dukes, duchesses, prince consorts.

Which may explain why “Spare,” Prince Harry’s tell-all about – what, again? – the dirty doings of the British Royal family, is No. 1 on the Amazon bestseller list. Everybody in America is apparently reading it.

And if they aren’t reading (full disclosure: we haven’t, and possibly won’t), they are watching Prince Harry explain its finer points to Anderson Cooper. In particular, his complaints against the royal family – which range from the snubbing of wife Meghan Markle to physical violence from his brother, Prince William.

Why Americans are fascinated with royalty

All hot stuff. And all things, in his opinion, that should not be suffered in silence.

Is he right?

Possibly not. Possibly he has not grasped the whole reason Americans are fascinated with royalty. Despite the fact that we did our best, 247 years ago, to get rid of it.

What is the point of the royals? They’re a relic of another time, some would say. An emblem of imperialism, racism, classism and various other -isms, that costs British taxpayers more than $100 million a year.

Well, we will tell you the point of the royals. Though Harry, his late mother Diana, and other new-style Windsors might not like it.

The point of the royals is … to take it.

That’s what America has always liked about royalty. The fact that they have to pay. Schadenfreude!

Staring back at us: What if our reaction to Prince Harry and his book is more about us than him?

Here's the deal: The first duty is duty

Sure, you get to live in a palace, ride in a golden coach, eat off of golden plates, have servants wait on you hand and foot. But are you happy? Of course not. You can't go where you want to go. You can't love who you want to love.

Above all, you can't complain. Duty! For those of royal blood, the first duty is duty!

Thank you, Prince Harry: For having the courage to speak your truth

Officially, that era of the royal privilege was abolished in 1918. World War I had made the world safe for democracy. In Europe, the old empires broke apart. It was the age of the common man.

Then a strange thing happened. America, of all places, became obsessed with monarchy. Royal-watching became an American spectator sport. It has been, ever since.

From Hollywood came an endless stream of movies about the lives, loves and volcanic passions of the crowned and sceptered. “Three Weeks,” “The Swan,” “The Student Prince,” “His Hour,” “Love’s Blindness” and “The Merry Widow” were just some of them.

Mostly, the plots were the same. The young princess, or prince, is engaged to be married, for state reasons, to someone much older, with all the sex appeal of a dry sponge.

Then in a rare, unsupervised expedition to the outside world, they meet … him! Or her!

So follows a torrid affair. The forbidden lovers are seen smooching on tiger rugs and beds of roses (“Three Weeks”) or toasting their love, in beer, with other stout-hearted commoners (“The Student Prince”). But always, the ending is the same. Duty! Duty before all. The royal must renounce her secret love, waving sadly and returning to the palace where the Marquis de Liverspot awaits.

Braver Angels: Toxic polarization is poisoning American democracy. But we can save it.

These stories allowed American audiences to experience, vicariously, the wealth and privilege of royals. While at the same time reminding them that, in the end, it was much more fun to be an ordinary Joe who can choose his own date for a Saturday night.

Renunciation – in short – is key to the royal mystique. You can’t have what you want and have royal prerogatives. That’s why the abdication of King Edward VIII in 1936 was such great drama. He had to choose.

History: England has often fared better with queens on the throne. Will Elizabeth II be its last?

Even in 1956, when American actress Grace Kelly married Prince Rainier III of Monaco, part of the interest of the story was that she was giving up her own highly successful movie career in the name of duty.

“We queens – we can never do as our hearts dictate,” says a character in the 1919 silent film “The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari.”

Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store.

That’s what today’s royals don’t seem to understand.

Prince Charles had the crazy idea that he should have the woman he loved and be king of England. Absurd! Princess Diana seemed to think she shouldn’t have to suffer a loveless marriage. Preposterous!

And Harry? He has the nerve to believe that simply because he married a woman his family seems to have disapproved of for all the worst reasons (racism, snobbery) he shouldn’t have to endure the slights and snubs of what has to be the most elitist institution on earth.

But that – for us common people – is just the point of royalty. To remind us how much better we have it.

Jim Beckerman has been covering arts, entertainment and human interest stories for The Record since 1995. He is also a filmmaker, musician and playwright, co-author of the off-Broadway musical "The Most Ridiculous Thing You Ever Hoid" (New York Musical Theater Festival award winner) .

You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page, on Twitter @usatodayopinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter. To respond to a column, submit a comment to letters@usatoday.com.

This article originally appeared on NorthJersey.com: Prince Harry's book 'Spare' misses mark about royal family's happiness