cahn

Last post, we had (among other things) Danish kings and their favorites; Louis XIV and Philippe d'Orléans; reviews of a very shippy book about Katte, a bad Jacobite novel, and a great book about clothing; a fic about Émilie du Châtelet and Voltaire; and a review of a set of entertaining Youtube history videos about Frederick the Great.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

cahn

I think I'll have more time to catch up tomorrow, but in the meantime:

AW: Charles I and Cromwell, seriously? "Dearest sister, I should hope that your cause is more just than that of Charles, and that you are far from the tyrannical frame of mind of Cromwell, who under the name of protector became one of the worst tyrants England ever had."

Go AW <3

On a very different note, behold this fanart depicting the first meeting between Fritz and Voltaire!

Heeee! Also I am unexpectedly having feelings about them again?!

But, you know, even when it's not a child talking about a parent, "evil advisors" is THE great psychological balm. That's why Liselotte has her hate on for Madame de Maintenon; if she blames her for all the stuff Louis XIV does wrong, she can excuse him. And let's not forget this even works when the power structure is in reverse, as with Fritz going from still bitching about AW in his letters to Wilhelmine and firing off ungracious letters to telling Catt only months later, once AW is dead, that he was angry just that one time and he would have totally reconciled with AW and AW with him if not for those evil advisors interfering between brothers and stopping AW from making up with him, because he needs to rewrite the immediate past into something he can live with, especially since he damn well knows the rest of the family is blaming him.

I mean, it was even in That Letter! From your writeup at

rheinsberg: "I am all the more crushed as I have always loved him tenderly, and I have always blamed all the trouble he has caused me on his weakness for bad advisors and his choleric temper which he could not always curb."

(The "bad advisors" were some of his best generals and Heinrich himself.)

OH FRITZ.

"Now wretch," said the furious queen, her eyes flashing fire, "thou shalt feel the full weight of my vengeance; thy limbs shall be broken on the wheel for having attempted to poison the crown prince: the proofs of thy guilt are now in thine hands."

Woooooow this is a great story! Poor Juliana.

So: Jacob did the language job, Wilhelm exchanged evil mothers for evil stepmothers and, while he was at it, also edited out stuff like Rapunzel's pregnancy as the giveaway for the sorceress. But the first edition did have all those evil mothers.

Not edited out, because apparently no one had a problem with it: the considerable violence. Hacked off limbs (Cinderella), being drowned in hot lead, dancing to your death in shoes of hot iron (Snow White) - that kind of thing survives all revisions. Until Disney.

This is fascinating, thank you! I found a copy of Grimm in middle school (until then, had mostly been exposed to the Disney versions, or at least less violent versions) and was fascinated by the hacked off heels and toes and dancing to death in shoes of hot iron, lol. Which I guess says something about how they survived revisions :)

aka the story covered in Alan Bennet's play The Madness of George III, which as a film got named "The Madness of King George" so American viewers would not get confused and wonder whether they'd missed parts I and II

I am totally WTFing at this, lol. My history is bad but it's not that bad!

One reason why Victoria left such a mark in the public consciousness is that she (and Albert) practically reinvented the monarchy and how people saw it, presenting an impeccably devoted married couple with adorable children instead of aged libertines screwing around.

This... makes so much sense! This is one of the things I love about you talking about history, btw, that you put together bits and pieces that I had some cultural awareness of (like, I definitely had some conceptions of English monarchs that fit into that picture, haha!) but wasn't able to synthesize like you can.

it has become our natural history museums that the memory of him has been most strongly attached.

I think it's cool when someone in the right place at the right time (and of course with money and/or luck) can really make a difference in this way. This reminded me of the Smithsonian museums in the US, without which I certainly would not have heard of Smithson!

If and when you and Mildred make it to Germany, and I get to show you Bamberg, we can do to the magnificent tomb of Henry and Kunigunde in our cathedral.

These were amazing pictures!!

BTW, I have just gotten to the point in the podcast where the Schleswig-Holstein question has been brought up for the first time! The podcaster asserts that he will make it so I can understand it without going mad. WE SHALL SEE.

From:

selenak

I mean, it was even in That Letter!

Yep. Hence why, wonderful Yuletide presents not withstanding, I don't think Heinrich would have killed Fritz in rl. If he didn't do it after that letter at their Dresden reunion, he just wouldn't. Mind you, Heinrich isn't immune to using the Evil Advisors excuse himself, only he phrases it a bit differently, when saying in old age that Kaphengst went to the dogs because of all the bad company.

Incidentally, re: his choleric temper - looking up Fritz quotes for the shipping manifesto(s), I was reminded again that as late as 1739, FW has a fall back into full "wretched son!" mode, and Wilhelmine evidently asked Fritz via letter what was up with rumors FW would try to change the succession somehow after all, for he writes her this about AW (not useable for the manifesto, just interesting and a bit heartbreaking by itself):

The news you are being told about my brother is not at all founded; it is a city noise, which owes its birth to the empty head of our coffee politicians. Reconciliation with England may have given rise to it; imagination invented the rest. My brother has the best character in the world, he has an excellent heart, a just mind, feelings of honor and is full of humanity; he has the will to do well, which gives me a lot of hope for him. His face conceals nothing, his eyes can not only spell; his manners are ingenuous rather than polite, and in all his maintenance there is a certain je ne sais quoi of embarrassment which does not warn in his favor, but which does not deceive those who prefer the solidity of merit to a brilliant facade. I love him very much, and I can only praise myself for the friendship and attachment he has for me. He does me all the little services he can do, and shows me on all occasions the feelings that are only found in real friends. You can count on what I write to you about him; I write without prevention and without envy what all those who know him particularly will have noticed in him.

I don't think he's lying, either subconsciously or consciously; the slightly patronizing fondness and faith in AW keeping faith with him (despite being Dad's fave) is very real. That's another part of the tragedy. At the same time, I also think AW having been FW's fave was eating at him, but it was buried so deeply it didn't erupt until much, much later.

This... makes so much sense! This is one of the things I love about you talking about history, btw, that you put together bits and pieces that I had some cultural awareness of (like, I definitely had some conceptions of English monarchs that fit into that picture, haha!) but wasn't able to synthesize like you can.

It has to be said that the Brits aren't the only case where the (surviving) monarchies had to reinvent themselves as embodying admirable middle class virtues in family life and marital fidelity.

(FW: I was a pioneer and tried to do this a century earlier!)

And of course there had been British monarchs who had a good relationship with their spouse before. But Charles I. after the death of Buckingham being a model husband to Henrietta Maria and seeing far more of their children than other royal fathers did did not work in his favour with the public, to put it mildly, given just about every other historical circumstance at that time. Victoria coming as a pretty young woman after a never seen anymore mad old King, his elderly increasingly heavy wannabe libertine son, and then the other actual libertine elderly son was refreshing per se, and while Albert was at first distrusted (another German! At this point the Brits really must have wondered whether their monarch would ever marry anyone local again), he won people over by all the social interest he showed, and of course he was young and good looking as well. And as long as the children were children and no one knew more about them than the first family daguerotypes getting into print, it really must have looked like they were a family right of the end (not the beginning!) of a Dickens novel.

It's not that the royals weren't venerated in earlier centuries when they had actual power. But I dare say even before Henry VIII started to make everyone pay for his lack of a legitimate son, nobody would have looked at him, or expected him to be, a role model in terms of marital fidelity or family life. He was supposed to be a good Father To His People and so forth, and yes, a good Christian, but those are different expectations.

BTW, I have just gotten to the point in the podcast where the Schleswig-Holstein question has been brought up for the first time! The podcaster asserts that he will make it so I can understand it without going mad. WE SHALL SEE.

LOL, okay. When I heard that, I also thought: Challenge accepted! :) I'm looking forward to your impressions of the Salians and many a road leading to Canossa.

From:

cahn

If he didn't do it after that letter at their Dresden reunion, he just wouldn't.

Ha. So, what about the AU where he did it then...? :)

It has to be said that the Brits aren't the only case where the (surviving) monarchies had to reinvent themselves as embodying admirable middle class virtues in family life and marital fidelity.

Ha! I didn't actually think so, but the British monarchs are the ones I know more about :)

And as long as the children were children and no one knew more about them than the first family daguerotypes getting into print, it really must have looked like they were a family right of the end (not the beginning!) of a Dickens novel.

Lol, I like your way with words! :D

But I dare say even before Henry VIII started to make everyone pay for his lack of a legitimate son, nobody would have looked at him, or expected him to be, a role model in terms of marital fidelity or family life.

This picture is just making me laugh.

Our car with the good audio finally got fixed so I am hoping to be able to retain a bit more from the podcast! But we'll see about that too -- sometimes I get really distracted. I should probably take Mildred's partner's advice and do it while crocheting (which makes it easier for me to hold my attention), but I just don't have the time right now.