This is great and I'm glad Sabrow wrote this (and did a respectable job, I'm always glad when you find someone who does their job well) and that you reported on it <3
the key point here is that according to the court news Gundling hadn't just lectured the Tobacco Parliament on ghosts not existing but that he had "professed atheism". And then the gang managed to frighten him with fake ghosts. This wasn't just a loss of face; in a system where FW had made Manly Courage such a big standard to achieve, it marked Gundling as a coward, and resulted in an instant loss of respect from FW.
This is very interesting, and I really appreciate this extra information about what would have made it quite so vicious. That atheism thing, like felis says! ...It sounds rather like Gundling just wasn't quite... good enough at dissimulating or disguising his unpopular opinions (like the atheism and the beer thing), in contrast perhaps to Morgenstern, and that turned on him in a really awful way, because FW.
(This version is even worse than the one from Morgenstern, because of the additional fireworks to upset the bears.)
OMG.
Freylingshausen's report contains nothing derogative about Gundling; he talks about him just as a scholar whom he has had a good conversation with. Sabrow constrasts this almost en famille picture with what happens in the same month when Gundling isn't a guest at a family meal but in the tobacco college where the other guests are all military: his wig is set on fire.
I JUST CAN'T EVEN. Poor Gundling, as always; in addition to being constantly humiliated and bullied (AND HIS WIG SET ON FIRE), it must have been a lot of whiplash to go from one to the other constantly. I imagine more mentally healthy people than him would have ended up insane by the end.
*nods* He never knew whether FW at any given point would want to torment him, would want actual advice, wanted to torment others through him or wanted others to torment Gundling. I wouldn't have been able to live like that for a week without snapping, that's for sure. Hey, remember how we jokeda bout Whodunits for Fritz long before Mildred wrote her story? How about a whodunit for FW? Everyone thinks it's either Fritz or SD, or (if the Clement affair is still on people's minds) foreign agents, but really, it's Gundling!
Oh, and Sabrow's book reminded me: in the famous painting of the Tobbacco Parliament (that shows Heinrich and Ferdinand coming in, and AW sitting among the adults) - you can see, on the other end of the table (i.e. opposite to the head where FW sits) a hare, who is meant to represent Gundling (the hare being the symbol of a fool and the symbol of a coward both).
How about a whodunit for FW? Everyone thinks it's either Fritz or SD, or (if the Clement affair is still on people's minds) foreign agents, but really, it's Gundling!
Sold!
Yeah, the hare in the tobacco parliament is immediately what I thought of when I saw the plaque. Poor Gundling.
Hang on, though, I just realised: the painting is from 1737, which means it can't be Gundling, it's Morgenstern. This said, maybe the painter did something like the painter who did a family portrait of Henry VIII with all his children (Mary, Edward, Elizabeth) and Jane Seymour though she was dead and had been since years when the painting was done? Depends on what FW asked for.
Right, rereading what you wrote, you said it represented Gundling specifically. I was thinking of it as a fool symbol. Good point about FW, though, and his quest to continue humiliating Gundling after death. It could go either way. Poor Gundling. AU where he offs FW!
Oh, you know that Agatha Christie book where the answer is *everyone* did it? We could come up with one like that for FW! (ETA: Deliberately not naming it or giving details in case someone hasn't read it.)
Can Hans Heinrich join, too? He has the impeccable loyal subject reputation and all those Prussian historians claiming he was okay with FW killing his son because law, but in the AU, that's just the cover while inwardly, he's lost his struggle to forgive.
And yes, I know which Christie book you mean. Everyone who doesn't, look away for my title suggestion for the AU is a spoiler:
Fritz SD Gundling Hans Heinrich (and stepmom--I haven't read the Christie in 20 years, but there's at least one married couple, right?) Potsdam Giant(s) Doris Ritter Rottembourg
Not G2, because while he'd love to, there's no way he'd keep it secret or would let go of the chance to do it mano a mano. Also, it occured to me that depending on how much of an AU we want to make it, there's the timing problem - Gundling dies in April 1731, at which point Doris Ritter is still locked up in Spandau. (And Fritz is in Küstrin.)
HOWEVER. Instead of Gundling, we could have his widow. Anne de Larrey lived until 1744, so in rl, she did have the pleasure of outlasting FW, and I like to think she cheered in 1740, too. And then I wondered what the ideal time and place would be. And who would be Poirot - i.e. the excentric foreigner who gets underestimated, solves the case yet because he understands the motive(s) doesn't present the true solution to the police. In order to have some suspense and make it believable that people like Fritz (the new King, after all!) and SD talk to this person instead of saying "begone, pleasant!", it would have to be someone whose testimony could not just be dismissed, should they uncover the truth. Someone of some social standing, in a word, which limits the choice severely. And it should be an occasion where there are a lot of people present in a limited space. This can't literally be a carriage, of course, and there are no trains. Are you guessing where I'm going with this?
....The time: 1732. The place: Fritz' engagement party to EC. Poirot: the visiting Duke of Lorraine, Franz Stephan, who technically is outranked by SD and Fritz, BUT since it's an open secret he's engaged to MT, it's also an open secret he's the Emperor's future son-in-law and likely the next Emperor himself. Also Fritz actually likes him. So it's believable that SD and Fritz would answer questions he asks (not truthfully at first, of course! but that they'd bother in the first place).
Doris Ritter spent two or three years in Spandau, I'm not sure which, but she could have been released on the occasion of the engagement party. She and Anne de Larrey could both be undercover as someone else - it's been many years since I read the book/saw a film version, but you're right about the husband and wife, but wasn't there also one who'd been the maid of the mother of the child and who had now a new identity? So anyway, no one pays much attention to maids and governesses, and I bet FW would have forgotten what Anne looked like since he probably didn't meet her often, if at all, and never met Doris Ritter.
Which reminds me: yet another possible murderer, or at least helper: Fräulein von Pannewitz! We could let the punching happen a year earlier.
(I thought of Voltaire as an alternate Poirot, but while he's certainly clever enough to solve the crime, and excentric enough, there's that power differential again!)
Hmm, yes, I was thinking of collecting everyone over the course of his reign in a semi-crackfic, but if we're trying to pin this down in time and make it a serious historical AU, then okay.
Is FS going to be okay with it, though? Because that's also a key plot point to the final resolution, as I recall. I feel like FW miiiight have an incentive to go..."No, ganging up on even your crazy abusive monarch is not okay."
Fräulein von Pannewitz! Yes, perfect!
but wasn't there also one who'd been the maid of the mother of the child and who had now a new identity?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Martin Sabrow's Gundling Biography: I
the key point here is that according to the court news Gundling hadn't just lectured the Tobacco Parliament on ghosts not existing but that he had "professed atheism". And then the gang managed to frighten him with fake ghosts. This wasn't just a loss of face; in a system where FW had made Manly Courage such a big standard to achieve, it marked Gundling as a coward, and resulted in an instant loss of respect from FW.
This is very interesting, and I really appreciate this extra information about what would have made it quite so vicious. That atheism thing, like
(This version is even worse than the one from Morgenstern, because of the additional fireworks to upset the bears.)
OMG.
Freylingshausen's report contains nothing derogative about Gundling; he talks about him just as a scholar whom he has had a good conversation with. Sabrow constrasts this almost en famille picture with what happens in the same month when Gundling isn't a guest at a family meal but in the tobacco college where the other guests are all military: his wig is set on fire.
I JUST CAN'T EVEN. Poor Gundling, as always; in addition to being constantly humiliated and bullied (AND HIS WIG SET ON FIRE), it must have been a lot of whiplash to go from one to the other constantly. I imagine more mentally healthy people than him would have ended up insane by the end.
Re: Martin Sabrow's Gundling Biography: I
Oh, and Sabrow's book reminded me: in the famous painting of the Tobbacco Parliament (that shows Heinrich and Ferdinand coming in, and AW sitting among the adults) - you can see, on the other end of the table (i.e. opposite to the head where FW sits) a hare, who is meant to represent Gundling (the hare being the symbol of a fool and the symbol of a coward both).
Re: Martin Sabrow's Gundling Biography: I
Sold!
Yeah, the hare in the tobacco parliament is immediately what I thought of when I saw the plaque. Poor Gundling.
Re: Martin Sabrow's Gundling Biography: I
Re: Martin Sabrow's Gundling Biography: I
Oh, you know that Agatha Christie book where the answer is *everyone* did it? We could come up with one like that for FW! (ETA: Deliberately not naming it or giving details in case someone hasn't read it.)
Re: Martin Sabrow's Gundling Biography: I
And yes, I know which Christie book you mean. Everyone who doesn't, look away for my title suggestion for the AU is a spoiler:
.
.
.
Murder in the East Prussia Express Carriage?
FW Whodunit
Fritz
SD
Gundling
Hans Heinrich (and stepmom--I haven't read the Christie in 20 years, but there's at least one married couple, right?)
Potsdam Giant(s)
Doris Ritter
Rottembourg
Continue!
Re: FW Whodunit
HOWEVER. Instead of Gundling, we could have his widow. Anne de Larrey lived until 1744, so in rl, she did have the pleasure of outlasting FW, and I like to think she cheered in 1740, too. And then I wondered what the ideal time and place would be. And who would be Poirot - i.e. the excentric foreigner who gets underestimated, solves the case yet because he understands the motive(s) doesn't present the true solution to the police. In order to have some suspense and make it believable that people like Fritz (the new King, after all!) and SD talk to this person instead of saying "begone, pleasant!", it would have to be someone whose testimony could not just be dismissed, should they uncover the truth. Someone of some social standing, in a word, which limits the choice severely. And it should be an occasion where there are a lot of people present in a limited space. This can't literally be a carriage, of course, and there are no trains. Are you guessing where I'm going with this?
....The time: 1732. The place: Fritz' engagement party to EC. Poirot: the visiting Duke of Lorraine, Franz Stephan, who technically is outranked by SD and Fritz, BUT since it's an open secret he's engaged to MT, it's also an open secret he's the Emperor's future son-in-law and likely the next Emperor himself. Also Fritz actually likes him. So it's believable that SD and Fritz would answer questions he asks (not truthfully at first, of course! but that they'd bother in the first place).
Doris Ritter spent two or three years in Spandau, I'm not sure which, but she could have been released on the occasion of the engagement party. She and Anne de Larrey could both be undercover as someone else - it's been many years since I read the book/saw a film version, but you're right about the husband and wife, but wasn't there also one who'd been the maid of the mother of the child and who had now a new identity? So anyway, no one pays much attention to maids and governesses, and I bet FW would have forgotten what Anne looked like since he probably didn't meet her often, if at all, and never met Doris Ritter.
Which reminds me: yet another possible murderer, or at least helper: Fräulein von Pannewitz! We could let the punching happen a year earlier.
(I thought of Voltaire as an alternate Poirot, but while he's certainly clever enough to solve the crime, and excentric enough, there's that power differential again!)
Re: FW Whodunit
Is FS going to be okay with it, though? Because that's also a key plot point to the final resolution, as I recall. I feel like FW miiiight have an incentive to go..."No, ganging up on even your crazy abusive monarch is not okay."
Fräulein von Pannewitz! Yes, perfect!
but wasn't there also one who'd been the maid of the mother of the child and who had now a new identity?
I vaguely recall something like this, yes.