cahn | 18th-Century Characters, Including Frederick the Great, Discussion Post 34

And including Emperor Joseph II!

from Derek Beales: Joseph II, Volume 2: Against the World, 1780 - 1790:

Joseph's alleged comment to Mozart about the Entführung, "Too many notes", has been taken as evidence of his ignorance. But he probably said something like, "Too beautiful for our ears, and monstrous many notes." It is always necessary to bear in mind, when appraising the emperor's remarks, his peculiar brand of humor or sarcasm. He was usually getting at someone. And he did not use the royal "we". The ears in question were those of the Viennese audience, whom he was mocking for their limited appreciation of Mozart's elaborate music.

(though not gonna lie, I think it is a LOT of notes)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

cahn

who also fights the forces of darkness

I am delighted by this! I was confused at the beginning but then thanks to your feeding me Alan Cumming I knew who it was before even getting to the translation project :D

OMG oldest is such a bad role model about having sex with the wrong people!

Heh. Also, Now he's sick, but I'm refusing to see him aaaaaaaagh!

Why can't everyone else around me be more chill? Instead, my wife refuses to employ my girlfriend, my girlfriend won't budge and accept another office

LOL I THINK I SEE YOUR PROBLEM

my brother is set on a course to piss off everyone (he WILL go on his travels again)

Heeeeee!

Oh James (II) :PP YTA!

From:

selenak

Alan Cumming in conjunction with Doctor Who: making the King James I + witches connection easier, clearly. :)

The amazing thing remains to see that Charles (II) was able to see quite clearly James would not be able to remain in power for long (and according to more than one sources, even accurately predicted four years), and yet fought like hell to ensure his succession. I mean, in my mind, I get it - if he'd let Parliament dictate an alternate Protestant candidate (be it Monmouth, William of Orange or someone else), he'd have given up on the entire princple of monarchy, plus he and James had shared the entire civil war (as kids and young men) and then exile experience with each other. But it's still deeply ironic. Another thing is, too: Charles would have had as much reason to have his marriage with Catherine of Braganza annulled as Henry VIII ever did with Katherine of Aragon, if not more so (since they didn't even have a surviving daughter), and had ample proof he could have children. And the marriage had been a royal style arranged one, not a love match. It's also very doubtful either Catherine or Portugal on her behalf would have fought against such an act. Andn yet he didn't divorce her. I'm tempted to go with the take the majority of fiction I'm familiar with offers - he wasn't a good husband in the sense of being faithful to her (obviously), but he was a loyal friend.

From:

luzula

I'm tempted to go with the take the majority of fiction I'm familiar with offers

Any particular recs? *curious*

From:

selenak

re: Charles II? Well, George Bernhard Shaw's play In Good King Charles' Golden Days should be online (since out of copyright) and is witty and highly readable, as per Shaw's want. (The plot, such as it is: Charles wants to visit Isaac Newton (out of scientific interest) under a pseudonym but has the bad lack that various people in his entourage assume that's just an excuse for some other thing and show up in pursuit to catch him at it (and/or petition him for something), so poor Sir Isaac, who only wants to get on with his work, is in short order playing unwilling host not just to Charles but also two of his mistresses (Barbara Villiers, Louise de Keroualle and Nell Gwynn), brother James, Sir Godfrey Knell the painter and George Fox the Quacker.

Then there's The King's Touch by Jude Morgan, the Monmouth pov novel which I recced to

cahn a few months ago, which I thought does a great job keeping the ambiguities (since the narrator pov is affectonate but by no means uncritical for obvious reasons). While I haven't read it for decades, there's also, of course, Forever Amber, in which Charles is one of the supporting characters though the heroine's liason with him is actually short lived and not love on either side (it's a rags to riches tale of a Restoration anti heroine with a wide, sprawling ensemble, and a very entertaining trashy bodice ripper. On the more literary and much shorter side, there's Restoration by Rose Tremain, with Charles again as a supporting character (a somewhat darker take on him, though in the end not a villainous one).

TV wise, there's the miniseries Charles II: The Passion and the Power with Rufus Sewell in the title role, Rupert Graves as Buckingham and Helen McCrory as the definite Barbara Villiers, of which there is a British and an American version. The American one is called "Charles II: The Last King" instead and I hear it's severaly cut, with a lot of politics apparantly deemed not interesting in enough for the US viewer, which is idiotic, so try to get the British original. Anyway, Sewell does a great job, and Diana Rigg as Henrietta Maria in the first episode does a brilliant, chilly turn in her scenes with Charles as she refuses to see her dying son Henry.

From:

luzula

Thanks for the recs! : )

From:

cahn

I'll second the rec for The King's Touch, which I loved, which (per

selenak) does a good job with the history, and which I thought did a great job of showing how everyone was complicated ~~except for Philippe, duc d'Orleans, who is just awful~~. (I keep meaning to write it up at least a little, and I keep getting distracted!)

selenak has a review here. (The other Jude Morgan book she reviews in that post, Passion, also sounds amazing and I mean to pick it up as soon as I dig myself out of the current RL-plus-commited-to-various-media hole.)

Unfortunately, it's out of print so idk how easy it would be for you to get a copy -- it's fairly easily available used in the US but idk about where you are. I could maybe send you mine?

From:

luzula

Thanks for seconding the rec, and for the offer! But no need, I can definitely order second-hand books from Sweden. : )

From:

cahn

Hee, of course -- I had been thinking that we've had some snafus with overseas (even if that sea is only the English Channel) book ordering, but of course those problems have been mail-oriented and aren't going to be much different whether it's a business or a person doing the mailing :) *facepalm*

From:

luzula

I did order a rare book of Jacobite memoirs for *mumblety* dollars from the US awhile ago, and it took an unconscionably long time to arrive, even though I paid for expedited shipping. Presumably due to those logistical snafus. But shipping from the UK to Sweden has been fine, though more expensive because of customs (due to Brexit...).

From:

cahn

...how did I not know Shaw had written a play about Charles II? Well, Shaw is certainly one of my holes and I should rectify this :)

From:

selenak

you did know, because I quoted from this play to you. This passage about John Churchill, future Duke of Marlborough:

CHARLES: (...) I sometimes wonder whether Jack Churchill has any military stuff in him.

JAMES. What! That henpecked booby! I suppose you know that he got his start in life as your Barbara's kept man?

CHARLES. I know that the poor lad risked breaking his bones by jumping out of Barbara's window when she was seducing him and I came along unexpectedly. I have always liked him for that.

JAMES. It was worth his while. She gave him five thousand pounds for it.

CHARLES. Yes: I had to find the money. I was tremendously flattered when I heard of it. I had no idea that Barbara put so high a price on my belief in her faithfulness, in which, by the way, I did not believe. Poor Barbara was never alone with a pretty fellow for five minutes without finding out how much of a man he was. I threw Churchill in her way purposely to keep her in good humor. What struck me most in the affair was that Jack bought an annuity with the money instead of squandering it as any other man of his age would have done. That was a sign of solid ability. He may be henpecked: what married man is not? But he is no booby.

JAMES. Meanness. Pure meanness. The Churchills never had a penny to bless themselves with.

(The play is here.)

From:

cahn

Oh riiiight! I remember the passage, but I don't think I knew very much about all these people then, so I totally forgot. Thanks for reminding me :)

From:

cahn

*nods* I definitely got the feeling from The King's Touch that a) he was loyal and once you had his loyalty he wasn't going to repudiate you (applying to both James and Catherine of Braganza), and b) he really did not like people telling him what to do (get rid of James and Catherine, lol) and would slither out of it when possible. (He reminds me a bit of Howl in Howl's Moving Castle, if you've read that :) )