Comments on "In Triumph's Wake" - Royal Mothers, Tragic Daughters, and the Price They Paid for Glory by Julia P. Gelardi
This author is described as an "independent historian." Although there are some very noticable lapses in this, her second book, such as; she describes one of these women as something like, "her hair turned gray", and later on, "turned white", both times apparently over night; Julia Gelardi's books seem to be much praised. The author's writing also seems to be overly dramatic at times; skipping over long peroids of time and linking separate events because they support her basic ideas of these mother-daughter relationships.
However Gelardi's fundamental method relies heavily on quotations from the writing of the 6 women{and others} in these histories. There are over 1100 of these quotations, and 18 of them are from near 100 words to almost 300 words.
In this way Julia Gelardi writes very instructive, persuavive, and moving accounts of the histories of Queen Isabella I of Castile, Empress Maria Theresa of Austria, and Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom, 3 of Europe's most important and influential reigning monarchs, and also their much less successful and less happy daughters; Catherine of Aragon, Marie Antoinette of France, and Empress Frederick{also Victoria} of Germany.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Experimental Blog #21
Comments on "Born to Rule" - Five Reigning Consorts, Granddaughters of Queen Victoria by Julia P. Gelardi
Since genuine aristocracy in the European form was prohibited in the American Constition adopted in 1788, it is, perhaps, not so common for Americans to know the truth, both good and bad, about monarchy and its government. Such as, for instance, how "royals" provide instruction, by their examples, on how the rest of their people should face and manage life's many common problems.
The histories of these 5 Queen Consorts of 5 European countries reveal what, supposedly, the "best" of Europeans can do or become when they are given the freedom and power of monarchs; which is far more, although not unlimited, than what the great majority of more common people ever experience.
Of these 5, the author's favorite seems to be Marie, the Queen Consort of Rumania, and that is easy to understand, just from reading the many quotations from Marie's many letters, books, and conversations. The Queen Consorts of Greece and Spain, Sophie and Victoria Eugenie, seem also to have been extraordinary people. Queen Consort Maud of Norway, although a very fine lady, didn't seem to have as much opportunity to reveal her potential in the smaller and more stable and democratic country of Norway.
In most contrast, the awful history and tragic death of Tsarina of Russia Alexandra has eventually become well known, but is it really easy to honestly imagine that somebody else could have done much better in her overwhelming circumstances?
Since genuine aristocracy in the European form was prohibited in the American Constition adopted in 1788, it is, perhaps, not so common for Americans to know the truth, both good and bad, about monarchy and its government. Such as, for instance, how "royals" provide instruction, by their examples, on how the rest of their people should face and manage life's many common problems.
The histories of these 5 Queen Consorts of 5 European countries reveal what, supposedly, the "best" of Europeans can do or become when they are given the freedom and power of monarchs; which is far more, although not unlimited, than what the great majority of more common people ever experience.
Of these 5, the author's favorite seems to be Marie, the Queen Consort of Rumania, and that is easy to understand, just from reading the many quotations from Marie's many letters, books, and conversations. The Queen Consorts of Greece and Spain, Sophie and Victoria Eugenie, seem also to have been extraordinary people. Queen Consort Maud of Norway, although a very fine lady, didn't seem to have as much opportunity to reveal her potential in the smaller and more stable and democratic country of Norway.
In most contrast, the awful history and tragic death of Tsarina of Russia Alexandra has eventually become well known, but is it really easy to honestly imagine that somebody else could have done much better in her overwhelming circumstances?
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Experimental Blog #20
Comments on 2 books
"Not Quite Paradise - An American Sojourn in Sri Lanka" by Adele Barker
It seems that the author arrived in Sri Lanka in October 2001 to be a teacher for about a year, and stayed until August 2002. Adele Barker gives a very good description of the long ongoing civil war between the mostly northern Tamil - Tigers minority, a Hindu Dravidian language speaking people; and the Sinhalese speaking{an Indo-European language} Buddhist majority. The Sinhalese dominate the government, and are centered primarily in the southern part of the island nation, Sri Lanka.
The author also mentions an earlier violent Marxist movement that was suppressed, or died out somehow, in the 1970s and 1980s.
The author returned to Sri Lanka in October 2005 and gives a very good report on the terrible tsunami that occurred on December 28, 2004 and its after affects. During this visit the author managed to go to the Tamil held territory in the north and reported on the violence still occurring there. She soon left Sri Lanka after that trip.
Adele Barker reports on the end of the civil war in May 2009, but I can't tell whether she had been back to the country or not.
"Fugitive Denim" - A Moving Story of People and Pants in the Borderless World of Global Trade by Rachel Louise Snyder
I have nothing to add to the content of the subtitle, "A <> Story of People <> in the Borderless World of Global Trade", except my usually silent complaints.
This author, Rachel Snyder, and others keep saying that we live, not in the modern era, but in the "post modern", or even, "post post-modern" era. The "Modern Era" is said to have ended in 1989, with the fall of the Berlin Wall, or 1991, with the collapse of the Soviet Union. It is also said that the "Modern Era" begins with the ideas of Karl Marx, and continues with the influences of his many followers, and others also influenced, although not Marxist followers.
Does this mean that this "Modern Era" began way back in 1848{I think} with the publication of "The Communist Manifesto"? Could this era really last for 141 to 143 years?
Finally it seems, that this "old Modern Era" should be renamed by historians, both liberal and conservative. Isn't it true that people always live in modern times, or in the modern era, by definition?
"Not Quite Paradise - An American Sojourn in Sri Lanka" by Adele Barker
It seems that the author arrived in Sri Lanka in October 2001 to be a teacher for about a year, and stayed until August 2002. Adele Barker gives a very good description of the long ongoing civil war between the mostly northern Tamil - Tigers minority, a Hindu Dravidian language speaking people; and the Sinhalese speaking{an Indo-European language} Buddhist majority. The Sinhalese dominate the government, and are centered primarily in the southern part of the island nation, Sri Lanka.
The author also mentions an earlier violent Marxist movement that was suppressed, or died out somehow, in the 1970s and 1980s.
The author returned to Sri Lanka in October 2005 and gives a very good report on the terrible tsunami that occurred on December 28, 2004 and its after affects. During this visit the author managed to go to the Tamil held territory in the north and reported on the violence still occurring there. She soon left Sri Lanka after that trip.
Adele Barker reports on the end of the civil war in May 2009, but I can't tell whether she had been back to the country or not.
"Fugitive Denim" - A Moving Story of People and Pants in the Borderless World of Global Trade by Rachel Louise Snyder
I have nothing to add to the content of the subtitle, "A <> Story of People <> in the Borderless World of Global Trade", except my usually silent complaints.
This author, Rachel Snyder, and others keep saying that we live, not in the modern era, but in the "post modern", or even, "post post-modern" era. The "Modern Era" is said to have ended in 1989, with the fall of the Berlin Wall, or 1991, with the collapse of the Soviet Union. It is also said that the "Modern Era" begins with the ideas of Karl Marx, and continues with the influences of his many followers, and others also influenced, although not Marxist followers.
Does this mean that this "Modern Era" began way back in 1848{I think} with the publication of "The Communist Manifesto"? Could this era really last for 141 to 143 years?
Finally it seems, that this "old Modern Era" should be renamed by historians, both liberal and conservative. Isn't it true that people always live in modern times, or in the modern era, by definition?
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Experimental Blog #19
Comments on the book "Little Mother of Russia - A Biography of Empress Marie Feodorovna" by Coryne Hall
What I most want to remember from this book is that this book is, as the title says, definitely a biography. Although the book is full of Russian and European 19th and 20th century history, the author, Coryne Hall, overwhelmingly writes about and consistently defends her subject, Marie Feodorovna. Of course, she honestly admits Marie Feodorovna's faults and errors.
I hope to understand and remember the history of Russia better, begining with the reign of Tsar Alexander II, who liberated the serfs, but was eventually assassinated by the terriorist organization that called itself "The People's Will". He was followed by Alexander III, Feodorovna's husband, making her the Empress, and Alexander III was followed by Nicholas II, Feodorovna's son.
Other things that I learned more about were: the Revolution of 1905, which was more widespread and violent than I had realized; and the intriguing and mysterious story of Gregory Efimovitch Rasputin. I am not quite sure if I acquired a much clearer understanding of the Bolshevik Revolution.
However, I learned about the flight of the now Dowager Empress and her very large household first to the Maryinski Palace in Kiev, and then to several places in the Crimea; where it seemed she was an on again off again prisoner of the Bolsheviks; and where, it seems, more than once she could have been executed, were it not for the circumstance that the Bolshevik groups were in considerable disagreement about what to do with her and all the other Romanovs.
In spite of the Dowager Empress's stubbornness, she finally agreed to exile, first in England, and then in Denmark{which was actually where she was from}.
There was also the interesting story of Anna Anderson, the fraudulent Anastasia, whose story and intrigues of everybody on all sides of the matter stirred up and divided the surviving Romanov family and many other people for many decades.
Finally, there was the immensely complicated background panorama of the long decline of aristocratic European society.
What I most want to remember from this book is that this book is, as the title says, definitely a biography. Although the book is full of Russian and European 19th and 20th century history, the author, Coryne Hall, overwhelmingly writes about and consistently defends her subject, Marie Feodorovna. Of course, she honestly admits Marie Feodorovna's faults and errors.
I hope to understand and remember the history of Russia better, begining with the reign of Tsar Alexander II, who liberated the serfs, but was eventually assassinated by the terriorist organization that called itself "The People's Will". He was followed by Alexander III, Feodorovna's husband, making her the Empress, and Alexander III was followed by Nicholas II, Feodorovna's son.
Other things that I learned more about were: the Revolution of 1905, which was more widespread and violent than I had realized; and the intriguing and mysterious story of Gregory Efimovitch Rasputin. I am not quite sure if I acquired a much clearer understanding of the Bolshevik Revolution.
However, I learned about the flight of the now Dowager Empress and her very large household first to the Maryinski Palace in Kiev, and then to several places in the Crimea; where it seemed she was an on again off again prisoner of the Bolsheviks; and where, it seems, more than once she could have been executed, were it not for the circumstance that the Bolshevik groups were in considerable disagreement about what to do with her and all the other Romanovs.
In spite of the Dowager Empress's stubbornness, she finally agreed to exile, first in England, and then in Denmark{which was actually where she was from}.
There was also the interesting story of Anna Anderson, the fraudulent Anastasia, whose story and intrigues of everybody on all sides of the matter stirred up and divided the surviving Romanov family and many other people for many decades.
Finally, there was the immensely complicated background panorama of the long decline of aristocratic European society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)