When we conjure up images of Marie Antoinette, it tends to be of great opulence. Lavish dresses, extravagant parties, and so on. Except, much of what was said about Marie Antoinette was not true.
Historically being a queen was a very difficult role. Many princesses had a limited formal education (being female). At a young age, they were sent to foreign courts, where the language, customs, and political landscape were unfamiliar. There, they were expected to marry a stranger, produce male heirs, and adapt quickly to their new position. At the same time, they had to win the respect of their husband, navigate the complexities of court life, and convince both the nobility and the wider population that they were worthy of their place! No wonder the 14 year old Marie Antoinette bought so many pretty clothes and gambled.
I recently rewatched Sofia Coppola's movie Marie Antoinette (2006). Coppola has a knack for deeply understanding and portraying young women. Her characters are essentially young women, regardless of the epoch or social standing.
I remember watching it the first time whe it came out and thinking: "Alright, interesting, she was young and naive and turned to shopping and clothes to deal with anxiety," but rewatching it now, there's so much more: specifically, how motherhood changed her. And she basically turned into a regular tradwife towards the end: living in the modest 'cottage' you mention, surrounded by her kids, and various animals.
Very much along the lines of this article, this is a story of a person born into very singular circumstances, but acting in a perfectly normal, human way. And *that* remains deeply universal.
We so often forget that propaganda wasn't invented by Stalin or the Nazis. Just look up how tall the Duke of Wellington was in today's measures and then do the same for Napoleon! I just finished reading Nancy Goldstone's "In the Shadow of the Empress: The Defiant Lives of Maria Theresa, Mother of Marie Antoinette, and Her Daughters." It retells much of Europe's history by looking at a number of powerful (and just as often powerless) women. It made me realize not just that their role isn't made visible very often, but also how much of popular history knowledge (or, at least, mine) comes from either English or French speaking perspectives.
The construction of the oppulent palace of Versailles while the people starved to death didn't really do her any favors in terms of public relations. Especially after her husband had funded the American revolution at significant cost to the treasury. Really though her influence at court was limited and her perspective skewed by her sheltered upbringing and inexperienced youth. I see Marie Antoinette as a tragic figure. I have seen a few documentaries about her. It's a sad story, even with all her wealth and privilege she was a something of a prisoner of her status as a royal woman.
I have your excellent book which I highly recommend. This post on Marie Antoinette is an excellent example of the ruthlessness employed to destroy others to further an agenda. It has been used against Donald Trump ever since he came down that escalator. It has occurred in every aspect of our society .
My goodness Kat- what a timely and insightful read to start the weekend. Take out Marie and enter in the name of any current controversial public figure or event and you see the same tactics being used today, as were used back then. I think of greater concern today are the echo chambers that people find themselves in. These hinder them from openly listening to arguments counter to their beliefs and they dismiss anything that runs counter to their beliefs as mis or dis information . You always are looking at all sides as you have done with the article on Marie, and with the subjects of your book, No Apologies. Great work Kat.
Should humanity attempt to deny what is basically our fundamentally evil nature, or should we accept it and adopt the faith of two millennia? Those who would cancel other people seem most determined to cancel the people who ask difficult questions or arrive at well considered—yet politically inconvenient—opinions.
I wrote a lot. Here’s another layer: I meant that we have entered a dystopian era in which rational debate and dissent are no longer allowed—cancel culture. I personally believe the Bible is true. Meanwhile the overall way COVID was handled globally was either a compliance test or the first systematic attempt of the globalists to depopulate the Earth. Believing that people are basically good is where I think we get into trouble. People are basically selfish. Altruism does exist, but it’s vanishingly rare. Hedonism seems to rule everyone (certainly those without the learned or reasoned beliefs and values to restrain it).
Terrific post! It’s interesting that Centuries have gone by and the lies have lived on about this woman. I have a copy of Stefan Zweig‘s biography of Marie Antoinette, which I understand is very good. My stack of unread books is very high! But I hope to get to it.
This was needed. All successful women go through this type of harassment by the public. If they are on “the wrong side of history” they are also victim blamed. Their entire lives are distorted. Thank you for recognizing that cancellation is not just some modern sensation. This is a wonderful piece of writing from you.
What a great example from history - and one that too few people know about. The French revolutionaries may have claimed lofty ideas, but terror, the guillotine and even genocide (in the Vendée) were their deeds.
One thing that Mantel's excellent trilogy did for me was completely change my look at Henry VIII. first wife, Catherine of Aragon. That woman was married to him for 20 years+ and (likely because of their genetic incompatibility such as Rh) endured numerous miscarriages and stillbirths. She was an excellent wife by all accounts and then suddenly a tribunal was set up by her husband to prove she was not a virgin on their wedding night. Talk about slander and public humiliation. When we covered this in school, none of this registered. But reading the Cromwell trilogy, (and, perhaps, more importantly, reading it as a woman about the same age she was), I could not get over what would it be like to go through that international public humiliation. Incredible stuff.
Historically being a queen was a very difficult role. Many princesses had a limited formal education (being female). At a young age, they were sent to foreign courts, where the language, customs, and political landscape were unfamiliar. There, they were expected to marry a stranger, produce male heirs, and adapt quickly to their new position. At the same time, they had to win the respect of their husband, navigate the complexities of court life, and convince both the nobility and the wider population that they were worthy of their place! No wonder the 14 year old Marie Antoinette bought so many pretty clothes and gambled.
I recently rewatched Sofia Coppola's movie Marie Antoinette (2006). Coppola has a knack for deeply understanding and portraying young women. Her characters are essentially young women, regardless of the epoch or social standing.
I remember watching it the first time whe it came out and thinking: "Alright, interesting, she was young and naive and turned to shopping and clothes to deal with anxiety," but rewatching it now, there's so much more: specifically, how motherhood changed her. And she basically turned into a regular tradwife towards the end: living in the modest 'cottage' you mention, surrounded by her kids, and various animals.
Very much along the lines of this article, this is a story of a person born into very singular circumstances, but acting in a perfectly normal, human way. And *that* remains deeply universal.
“Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.”
We so often forget that propaganda wasn't invented by Stalin or the Nazis. Just look up how tall the Duke of Wellington was in today's measures and then do the same for Napoleon! I just finished reading Nancy Goldstone's "In the Shadow of the Empress: The Defiant Lives of Maria Theresa, Mother of Marie Antoinette, and Her Daughters." It retells much of Europe's history by looking at a number of powerful (and just as often powerless) women. It made me realize not just that their role isn't made visible very often, but also how much of popular history knowledge (or, at least, mine) comes from either English or French speaking perspectives.
The construction of the oppulent palace of Versailles while the people starved to death didn't really do her any favors in terms of public relations. Especially after her husband had funded the American revolution at significant cost to the treasury. Really though her influence at court was limited and her perspective skewed by her sheltered upbringing and inexperienced youth. I see Marie Antoinette as a tragic figure. I have seen a few documentaries about her. It's a sad story, even with all her wealth and privilege she was a something of a prisoner of her status as a royal woman.
All they had to do was give the People food.
I have your excellent book which I highly recommend. This post on Marie Antoinette is an excellent example of the ruthlessness employed to destroy others to further an agenda. It has been used against Donald Trump ever since he came down that escalator. It has occurred in every aspect of our society .
My goodness Kat- what a timely and insightful read to start the weekend. Take out Marie and enter in the name of any current controversial public figure or event and you see the same tactics being used today, as were used back then. I think of greater concern today are the echo chambers that people find themselves in. These hinder them from openly listening to arguments counter to their beliefs and they dismiss anything that runs counter to their beliefs as mis or dis information . You always are looking at all sides as you have done with the article on Marie, and with the subjects of your book, No Apologies. Great work Kat.
Great post! I love that it uses a historical figure to illustrate how human behavior, unfortunately, doesn’t change.
But, we can try to be better
Should humanity attempt to deny what is basically our fundamentally evil nature, or should we accept it and adopt the faith of two millennia? Those who would cancel other people seem most determined to cancel the people who ask difficult questions or arrive at well considered—yet politically inconvenient—opinions.
Another jab anyone?
What do you mean?
BASED,
I wrote a lot. Here’s another layer: I meant that we have entered a dystopian era in which rational debate and dissent are no longer allowed—cancel culture. I personally believe the Bible is true. Meanwhile the overall way COVID was handled globally was either a compliance test or the first systematic attempt of the globalists to depopulate the Earth. Believing that people are basically good is where I think we get into trouble. People are basically selfish. Altruism does exist, but it’s vanishingly rare. Hedonism seems to rule everyone (certainly those without the learned or reasoned beliefs and values to restrain it).
Did that answer your question?
Terrific post! It’s interesting that Centuries have gone by and the lies have lived on about this woman. I have a copy of Stefan Zweig‘s biography of Marie Antoinette, which I understand is very good. My stack of unread books is very high! But I hope to get to it.
You are a phenomenal writer and laid this out so well, Katherine. A profound reminder of the harm “gossip” can do.
Well thought out with words skilled like magic...
Mary of Magdala is probably the most misunderstood women in the history of Christianity.
This was needed. All successful women go through this type of harassment by the public. If they are on “the wrong side of history” they are also victim blamed. Their entire lives are distorted. Thank you for recognizing that cancellation is not just some modern sensation. This is a wonderful piece of writing from you.
Interestingly it is more often women who gang up on successful women-both sides.
What a great example from history - and one that too few people know about. The French revolutionaries may have claimed lofty ideas, but terror, the guillotine and even genocide (in the Vendée) were their deeds.
I'm in the midst of reading Hilary Mantel's Cromwell trilogy, and I'm reminded by your post of the cancellation and execution of Anne Boleyn.
She's another figure I need to do a deep dive into!
One thing that Mantel's excellent trilogy did for me was completely change my look at Henry VIII. first wife, Catherine of Aragon. That woman was married to him for 20 years+ and (likely because of their genetic incompatibility such as Rh) endured numerous miscarriages and stillbirths. She was an excellent wife by all accounts and then suddenly a tribunal was set up by her husband to prove she was not a virgin on their wedding night. Talk about slander and public humiliation. When we covered this in school, none of this registered. But reading the Cromwell trilogy, (and, perhaps, more importantly, reading it as a woman about the same age she was), I could not get over what would it be like to go through that international public humiliation. Incredible stuff.
There's also the rumors spread that James II's son was stillborn and replaced with a different baby. Their goal: to keep a Catholic off the throne.