Scan barcode
sasinshort's review against another edition
4.0
9th grade: enchanted by the colors and sounds of the trailer for Sofia Coppola's Marie Antoinette film, I find myself highly interested in the Austrian-born French queen. I hear this book is one of the best, and used by Coppola herself, and getting all the fancy mentions. Plus, bonus, my library has it. So I take it out, lug it around, fondly nickname it the Big Ass Marie Antoinette Biography. And then I fall in love with Marie A, and talk about her constantly, and when the movie comes around I know all the details they leave out and bother my friend with them in the theater and cry at tragic parts that are glossed over.
I still have such a fondness for Marie Antoinette.
I still have such a fondness for Marie Antoinette.
persikan_05's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
emotional
hopeful
informative
reflective
sad
medium-paced
5.0
smashton12's review against another edition
5.0
Before reading this book, I really knew very little about Marie Antoinette and her life. This book was fascinating, heartbreaking, infuriating and a little like watching a train wreck. I would highly recommend to anyone who is interested in learning more about the ill-fated life of Marie Antoinette and the tulmultuous atmosphere of France during that time.
hbraith's review against another edition
slow-paced
3.0
This was really detailed and clearly well researched. Unfortunately, I’m not 20-hours-of-audio interested in Marie Antoinette or the French Revolution. I once thought I was, that’s how I ended up buying two copies with different covers and not realizing it for years. Then after all that, I couldn’t convince myself to read it, and ended up listening to the audio book.
The audio book was not very well done. It was very old, so much so that it still had the “end of disc 1” statements throughout. So I think it was just a different time when it came to audiobooks.
Ultimately, I think both the book and audiobook would have benefitted from a less dry writing (and narration) style.
The audio book was not very well done. It was very old, so much so that it still had the “end of disc 1” statements throughout. So I think it was just a different time when it came to audiobooks.
Ultimately, I think both the book and audiobook would have benefitted from a less dry writing (and narration) style.
sjgrodsky's review against another edition
4.0
One broad critique: I sure could have used some background on the French Revolution: how bad was France as opposed to other monarchies? Was executing the royal family really necessary? I think the broad consensus is that democratization needed to be done (we can agree on that) but that the reign of terror was mob rule and a bad thing. (Agreed, but I am just a tad more critical.)
Anyway:
1
—
First, I see that Marie was not entirely the luxury-loving airhead so commonly portrayed. She liked physical comforts (who does not?) but most of her efforts were to escape the stifling formality of Versailles for her own establishment, Petit Trianon. The stupid formality of the French court is hard to believe. In one scene, Marie stands naked while her ladies argue over whose privilege it is to place the royal underclothes on the royal butt.
2
—
It turns out the “let them eat cake” phrase famously attributed to Marie was first attributed to another royal a century earlier. It didn’t happen.
And yet though this authoritative biography shows the falsehood of that phrase, the damage has been done. It’s like the blood libel commonly attributed to we who are Jewish. No, we don’t kill Christian children to use their blood for matzo. But I can deny that all I like, there are still millions who learned the blood libel as children and who will never unlearn this canard.
3
—
As illustrated above, Marie had to endure endless game playing and jealousy. She probably found it a huge waste of time. She’s said to be short tempered at times. Who would not be?
4
—
Fraser does a good job of conveying the atmosphere of the French court. She tells us that visitors to Versailles remarked that it was not very clean. I suppose that is no surprise when you learn that cats were everywhere and lap dogs were treasured. But heck, couldn’t you have created a much sought-after court position called “Governeur de la merde de la chien de la reine”?
Well, maybe you couldn’t scam a noble into shoveling shit. But if you had thousands of servants, couldn’t a few have been deputized to do so? Fraser, in another of her revealing descriptions, tells us that a dinner for eight required 25 servants.
You have to conclude that cleanliness wasn’t valued.
Indeed, healthy habits don’t appear to be part of life at Versailles. Another custom that shocked this 21st centurite was that the newborn dauphin was paraded around the court so all could see that a boy had been born.
I suppose he was naked too, so the crowds could get a good look at the royal baby’s penis. Fraser doesn’t tell us if the crowds touched the newborn with their dirty hands or if he was only exposed to their germ-laden breath. But when I learned, a few pages later, that the child’s health was “delicate” I could only roll my eyes. Well, duh.
5
—
What of Marie and the French people? So far, I’ve learned that there was a healthy trade in scurrilous stories about Marie and other nobility: that Marie had lesbian lovers, for example. It’s analogous to the gossip magazines and web sites retailing SHOCKING news about this or that starlet. People love to think that they are poor but honest, in contrast to the rich but dissolute.
Seems like the constant background noise celebrities have to endure. But there’s a long path from background noise to execution.
6
—
But despite the gossip-mongering, which appears to be a predictable feature of any tiered society, I haven’t yet learned anything that explains why Marie was guillotined. The only indication is that some people (notably, the Marquis de La Fayette) returned from the American Revolution with the news of a democratic experiment.
7
—
Sort-of news to me: in school, American children are taught that Europeans (such as the above mentioned Marquis) joined the American Revolution because they were inspired by the courageous experiment in democracy. Umm. It appears that the French worked on the principle that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. And that, since the French lost Quebec to the British, they, the French, would be happy to see the British lose territory.
8
—
Amazing true fact that Fraser records, mentioned here so I don’t forget: the French court had been practicing birth control since at least the 1600s. Louis XV used condoms.
We can only speculate on how well they worked.
9
—
Finally: If you are looking for more good reasons to shove Thomas Jefferson off his (IMHO) undeserved pedestal, you will find them here: he complains, for example, that Republican sentiments were “ruining the gaiety and insouciance of French society.” Fraser quotes these breathtakingly arrogant words: “The tender breasts of ladies were not formed for political convulsion,” said Jefferson, complaining that women were wandering from “the true field of their own influence into politics.”
Guess Jefferson really did mean “men” when he wrote that “all men are created equal.” But of course, he really didn’t mean that either, hypocrite that he was.
Anyway:
1
—
First, I see that Marie was not entirely the luxury-loving airhead so commonly portrayed. She liked physical comforts (who does not?) but most of her efforts were to escape the stifling formality of Versailles for her own establishment, Petit Trianon. The stupid formality of the French court is hard to believe. In one scene, Marie stands naked while her ladies argue over whose privilege it is to place the royal underclothes on the royal butt.
2
—
It turns out the “let them eat cake” phrase famously attributed to Marie was first attributed to another royal a century earlier. It didn’t happen.
And yet though this authoritative biography shows the falsehood of that phrase, the damage has been done. It’s like the blood libel commonly attributed to we who are Jewish. No, we don’t kill Christian children to use their blood for matzo. But I can deny that all I like, there are still millions who learned the blood libel as children and who will never unlearn this canard.
3
—
As illustrated above, Marie had to endure endless game playing and jealousy. She probably found it a huge waste of time. She’s said to be short tempered at times. Who would not be?
4
—
Fraser does a good job of conveying the atmosphere of the French court. She tells us that visitors to Versailles remarked that it was not very clean. I suppose that is no surprise when you learn that cats were everywhere and lap dogs were treasured. But heck, couldn’t you have created a much sought-after court position called “Governeur de la merde de la chien de la reine”?
Well, maybe you couldn’t scam a noble into shoveling shit. But if you had thousands of servants, couldn’t a few have been deputized to do so? Fraser, in another of her revealing descriptions, tells us that a dinner for eight required 25 servants.
You have to conclude that cleanliness wasn’t valued.
Indeed, healthy habits don’t appear to be part of life at Versailles. Another custom that shocked this 21st centurite was that the newborn dauphin was paraded around the court so all could see that a boy had been born.
I suppose he was naked too, so the crowds could get a good look at the royal baby’s penis. Fraser doesn’t tell us if the crowds touched the newborn with their dirty hands or if he was only exposed to their germ-laden breath. But when I learned, a few pages later, that the child’s health was “delicate” I could only roll my eyes. Well, duh.
5
—
What of Marie and the French people? So far, I’ve learned that there was a healthy trade in scurrilous stories about Marie and other nobility: that Marie had lesbian lovers, for example. It’s analogous to the gossip magazines and web sites retailing SHOCKING news about this or that starlet. People love to think that they are poor but honest, in contrast to the rich but dissolute.
Seems like the constant background noise celebrities have to endure. But there’s a long path from background noise to execution.
6
—
But despite the gossip-mongering, which appears to be a predictable feature of any tiered society, I haven’t yet learned anything that explains why Marie was guillotined. The only indication is that some people (notably, the Marquis de La Fayette) returned from the American Revolution with the news of a democratic experiment.
7
—
Sort-of news to me: in school, American children are taught that Europeans (such as the above mentioned Marquis) joined the American Revolution because they were inspired by the courageous experiment in democracy. Umm. It appears that the French worked on the principle that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. And that, since the French lost Quebec to the British, they, the French, would be happy to see the British lose territory.
8
—
Amazing true fact that Fraser records, mentioned here so I don’t forget: the French court had been practicing birth control since at least the 1600s. Louis XV used condoms.
We can only speculate on how well they worked.
9
—
Finally: If you are looking for more good reasons to shove Thomas Jefferson off his (IMHO) undeserved pedestal, you will find them here: he complains, for example, that Republican sentiments were “ruining the gaiety and insouciance of French society.” Fraser quotes these breathtakingly arrogant words: “The tender breasts of ladies were not formed for political convulsion,” said Jefferson, complaining that women were wandering from “the true field of their own influence into politics.”
Guess Jefferson really did mean “men” when he wrote that “all men are created equal.” But of course, he really didn’t mean that either, hypocrite that he was.
donnaadouglas's review against another edition
2.0
Not hugely interesting - I decided about half way through that I didn't like the subject of this book, then I struggled to finish it from that point on (but finish it I did!)
It was well-written and well-researched, I'm just not that into 18th century French aristocracy. The chapters that detailed the storming of the Bastille were, however, more to my liking.
It was well-written and well-researched, I'm just not that into 18th century French aristocracy. The chapters that detailed the storming of the Bastille were, however, more to my liking.
cathyatratedreads's review against another edition
2.0
We read this for a book club meeting and I read about two-thirds, which was about all I could really manage. It just got bogged down in lots and lots of details. I am guessing I'm just not a Philippa Gregory fan. I can't get into her style. But it was definitely very thorough and informative. Explained a lot. It just wasn't engaging for me.