Ian Graham lays out a comprehensive plan for the royals and their residences. Plus letters from Christopher Lucas and Tony Orchard

Simon Jenkins offers some interesting thoughts on the style of the future monarchy when Prince William becomes king (As William moves to Forest Lodge, an era of pushbike royals beckons. Will that save the monarchy?, 21 August). A good start would be to repeal the Act of Supremacy that currently binds the sovereign to the role of supreme governor of the Church of England. The future monarch should be free to choose their own religion, this being more representative of multicultural Britain.

As constitutional monarchs, William and his wife should continue to set good examples to the nation of living worthwhile lives. There is also the representational role of head of state in entertaining visiting foreign dignitaries. These are very demanding roles that require a reasonable amount of downtime to live a normal family life away from intrusive media coverage. The sovereign needs some support from their immediate family, and it would be reasonable to offer royal status for up to four supporters and partners, who meet the required standards and are willing participants.

Many people would be willing to accommodate them, as they did with Ukrainians, writes Brenda Hall, plus a letter from Roger van Schaick

By housing asylum seekers in groups, the government makes them easy targets for the Farage-fuelled thugs (Editorial, 20 August). When Ukrainian refugees were brought to the UK, they were housed with host families and thus had a chance to lead something like a normal life here. Why not do the same with asylum seekers?

Not all of us are xenophobes, and many people with rooms available would be willing to accommodate a vulnerable person or family while their applications are processed. This would give them a chance to acclimatise to their new environment and allow them to be treated with dignity and compassion.
Brenda Hall
Bryn Saith Marchog, Denbighshire

Retirees are helping run food banks, libraries, and charity shops, stepping in where younger generations aren’t, say readers in response to an article by Phillip Inman

Phillip Inman’s got me bang to rights (Can a nation in crisis rely on the baby boomer generation to step up? I think the UK is about to find out, 21 August). Born in 1953, passed the 11-plus, joined the 8% who went to university and spent a lifetime in white-collar jobs that paid well enough for housing and pensions. Not all smooth sailing – four or five redundancies – but each came with a lump sum and a decent job soon after. And I was a basic rate taxpayer for all but a few years.

Now I’ve got assets far beyond my needs, and children who don’t need my money. But Inman misses why many of us hold on to what we have: we’ve seen decades of social care failure and want to ensure that we can afford the eye-watering costs ahead. The housing market doesn’t help – ageing households face an archaic property-exchange system. We tackled it when we had to, but there’s no urgency now. And the idea that the private sector will provide? Not when Guardian columns are full of service-charge horror stories. Why dive into shark-infested waters?

Michal Friedlander and Abigail Green are concerned that a current V&A Dundee exhibition erases the historic presence of Christians and Jews in the region

We were interested to see your gallery of pictures from the exhibition Thread Memory: Embroidery from Palestine at V&A Dundee (‘A symbol of Palestinian presence and identity’: the personal and political world of ‘tatreez’ – in pictures, 18 August), having visited the partner exhibit at V&A South Kensington.

The tatreez embroidery tradition should indeed be celebrated, but as scholars we are concerned by the failure to use historically correct language, and to recognise the diversity of cultures that existed in the area presented here simply as “Palestine”. Formally speaking, there was no such place in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when several of these objects were produced.

The season saw Marvel and DC attempting a superhero comeback, a rush of millennial nostalgia plays and surprise theatrical hits from streamers

Another post-pandemic summer is over and we have ourselves another reminder that Barbenheimer was a fluke with overall takings down again. With some early hits, such as Lilo & Stitch, some had expected this season’s blockbusters to take the industry to the magic $4bn mark (something only achieved once since 2019, thanks to Margot Robbie and Cillian Murphy), but that was not to be.

Box office was around $3.53bn, a gentle rise from last year, which suffered from a rocky start and ended up at $3.52bn. But what was behind that number and which films should have helped push it even higher?