The King Never Smiles: A Biography of Thailand's Bhumipol Adulyadej (review)

The King Never Smiles is the third book (to be banned) on the life of Thailand's King Bhumipol Adulyadej published by a non-Thai. The others are Rayne Kruger's The Devil's Discus and William Stevenson's The Revolutionary King. Written by a journalist who resided in the Kingdom for thirteen years, it is exceptionally well written and reflects a deep knowledge of Thai politics and history. Handley begins the story impressively by detailing the sacral ideology of Buddhist kingship, juxtaposed between the traditions of dhammaraja (king by virtue of the ten principles of a virtuous Buddhist king) and devaraja (a Brahmanic-oriented god-king). The setting commences with a coup against absolute monarchy in 1932, the abdication of King Rama VII, the attempted annihilation of Thai royalism, the suspicious death of his successor King Rama VIII and the accession to power of 18-year-old Bhumipol (Rama VIII's brother) in 1946. The monarchy was then at its lowest ebb and Thai democracy was finally beginning to flower.

Handley argues that amidst this situation, resolute royalists began a campaign to restore a strong Thai monarchy, an endeavour Bhumipol totally supported. The strategy involved promoting a King-centred ideology, as well as allying with military factions supportive of Thai monarchy. During the Cold War, Bhumipol viewed communism as inimical to the survival of the monarchy and he was instrumental in forging an anti-communist alliance with the United States in support of right-wing Thai governments. But according to Handley, Bhumipol did more than simply make the monarchy a major player in Thai politics. Rather, he eventually began selecting leaders, planning national development and directing military programmes. By 1976, nation and religion truly revolved around the King. The nation-state of Thailand, officially deemed a constitutional monarchy, had actually become a country where constitution was increasingly under the monarchy.

Handley usefully emphasizes Bhumipol's abhorrence for a full-fledged liberal democracy. As his uncles had taught him, it was most important to protect the monarchy above all other institutions. Bhumipol's low esteem for democracy led him to only reluctantly support constitutional reform or a diminished role for the military. Indeed, the king allied with pro-royalist military prime ministers and eventually installed one of these, Prem Tinsulanonda, as chairman of his Privy Council.

Though the book is a magnum opus, there are some flaws. While Handley uses a tremendous number of citations to support his arguments, there is still an incredible dearth of references in too many places. This deficiency compels readers to either take Handley at his word or doubt the veracity of some of his contentions. For example, in his chapter entitled Family Headaches, he describes Princess Sirindhorn as "neither brainy, disciplined, and energetic" while projecting "the image of an unmindful schoolgirl" (pp. 304–5). Princess Chulabhorn is meanwhile described as "melancholic", "haughty" and "petulant" (pp. 306, 395). Nowhere do we find citations for these assertions. Or is this Handley's own opinion? Handley's methodology here seems to be based on "reportedly" or "it is said" or what "knowledgeable Thais and diplomats say.…" But who is he to know the correct measurement of "knowledgeable?" So unless we assume that Handley knows the truth, we are left wondering whether The King Never Smiles is a quilt partly composed of rumour and innuendo.

Handley classifies his book as "an initial perspective from which other Thai specialists can work in the future" and "a case study" (p. x). Is it then academic in nature? Though trained as a journalist, Handley has dabbled in academic writing (e.g. Handley in Hewison, ed., Political Change in Thailand: Democracy and Participation, 1997, pp. 94–113). But for this book, is he wearing the hat of a journalist, an academic, or both? Handley states in the preface that "a lot of people helped me with my research, not always knowing the full aim of it" (p. xi...