Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

MA "set up" in Necklace Affair: Lamotte & Planned attack on Queen

Expand Messages
  • Axel
    It is possible to read Memoir Justicatif de Madame Lamotte . The memoirs of Queen Marie Antoinette s greatest nemesis, Madame Jeanne Lamotte. In my next post
    Message 1 of 24 , Jul 1, 2007
      It is possible to read "Memoir Justicatif de Madame Lamotte". The
      memoirs of Queen Marie Antoinette's greatest nemesis, Madame Jeanne
      Lamotte. In my next post I will say more about Madame Lamotte - the
      self-styled Countess, adventuress and swindler and ... martyr and
      best-selling author.

      But as a prelude to that post, I want to respond to the fine post by
      George, who with Dorit and Lady of Healing Touch have engege in a
      lively discussion that I hope will continue and that others here will
      join.

      The question of this post is - how is it that not only we can today
      read these Memoirs but most importantly it was possible to read them
      in 1787 a year after the Necklace Affair?

      These Lamotte memoirs (more on them in next post) were entirely
      accusatory and extremely defamatory of Marie Antoinette -
      giving "proof" to the rumors that the Queen of France was a whore,
      lesbian and harlot, and now...the mastermind of the Necklace Affair.

      Yet how was it that such memoirs came about to become the tabloid
      sensation and greatest underground best seller in France in the last
      years before the 1789 Revolution and the runaway best seller when
      censorship ended in 1789?

      Lamotte was branded and condemned to prison for life in 1786.

      Yet, she was aided to escape within a year.
      She received refuge in nearby England.
      She wrote her memoirs but though she had no doubt had a hand in the
      forged letters of Marie Antoinette of France to Rohan - she had never
      before written for publication, much less circulation to France.

      Obviously, Lamotte had help. Alot of help. Skilled help in
      pamphleteering. High placed help.

      I have my issues with Nesta Webster but she talks about several
      different conspiracies to undermine Queen Marie Antoinette and with
      her the French monarchy, by **monarchists!**, BEFORE THE 1789
      REVOLUTION.

      The first is by the British government,
      The second and third were home grown - by the Orleanists - The Duke
      de Chatres, later the Duke of Orleans, but also the King's own
      brother Duke of Provence (later Louis XVIII) and the "Aunts",
      daughters of Louis XV who like Provence disliked the Austrian
      alliance and detested the vivacious Marie Antoinette as well as her
      supplanting them in partonage, favor and the like,
      Forth, by Frederick the Great, the Prussians who feared alliance
      between France and Austria and did what was possible to undermine
      that and the greastest symbol of Alliance.
      Webster mentions a 5th conspirator too that escapes me at this moment.

      When you think of all these groups out to get Marie Antoinette, it
      reminds me of the movie MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS.

      If you go to LINKS in this group, you can see a further description
      of this Nesta Webster book under

      Orleanist & Other Conspiracies against MA, part of Nesta Webster's
      detailed history
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/links
      It's a good description - but the link is to geocities and needs
      updating but i suspect this is still up on the internet somewhere.

      Lamotte had help to gain her freedom. She received safe haven in
      England. When her memoirs were ready so too were the channels to get
      her story to a ready readership.

      But Lamotte was not the beginning - it was part culination and also a
      spectacular part of an ongoing campaign to, as George says, set up
      Marie Antoinette - to bit by bit, year by year destroy the reputation
      of Marie Antoinette.

      That campaign was so effective that by 1791, when news of the royal
      family's flight reached Paris, a bust of Queen Marie Antoinette was
      taken from its pedestal tied to a horse and dragged of through the
      streets of France's capitol with the horseman proclaiming he just
      wished it was the real queen tied to and dragged through the streets
      of Paris, to the applause of appreciative Parisians.

      Chantel Thomas details a 20 year history of a hate campaign
      orchestrated against Marie Antoinette in her book WICKED QUEEN
      (translated from the 1989 French book LA REINE EN LES PAMPHLETS
      published in US by Zone Books). Thomas tells of a campaign begun not
      long after her arrival in France in 1770 until her death in 1793.
      Thomas translates several of the salacious pamphlets in her appendix.

      You can read of this campaign right here in the group, if you go to
      FILES in this group. A couple weeks ago I added an article I saw
      online about this.
      "Let em Eat Cake: Mythical Marie Antoinette" by Nancy L. Barker (1993
      article for Phi Alpha Theta
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/files

      You can read of this more, if you go to LINKS in this group.
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/links
      then look for

      Family Romance of the French Revolution by Lynn Hunt
      This link to significant portions of Lynn Hunt's book discusses the
      death of Louis XVI – the killing of the "father" of the French people
      under the monarchy, and the "Bad Mother", pp. 89-125, which discusses
      the character assassination and themn the killing of Queen Marie
      Antoinette.

      Yes, Marie Antoinette was set up. Though the Queen was entirely
      innocent in the Necklace Affair, we know today that this affair
      played right into the hands of those whose mission it was to destroy
      this woman. And destroy Her, they did.

      Axel


      --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, George Caffine
      <geocaffine@...> wrote:
      >
      > I'm sorry if you think I'm being insensitive. My point is she was
      set up, and not just by the named conspirators: The LaMottes were
      clearly greedy, Countess LaMotte also dangerously vindictive. Rohan
      seems to have been an
      > all-round dupe, greedy and a suck-up as well. But these players
      weren't the cause ot the Queen's disgrace.
      >
      > Marie Antoinette was no saint; a close examination of the rest of
      the saints would reveal clay feet all round; but she was an innocent
      victim in this affair. Marie Antoinette had good reasons for
      demanding Rohan's public trial, it had to be public for her to be
      exonerated, she could see that and her demand was no sign of hubris.
      Public, because any judgement in-camera would guarantee the Queen's
      condemnation; her condemnation despite the public trial proves that
      and more.
      >
      > So, at long last, my point. The nearly universal booing and ranting
      that resulted smacks of organization. I believe the revolution was
      considerably enriched by the Diamond Necklace Affair, but that
      enrichment was managed, it didn't occur by accident. The revolution
      was planned in back rooms somewhere, and the Necklace trial was used
      as a device. The conclusion that the Diamond Necklace Affair led to
      the revolution is what I challenge. That furor and reaction to the
      Queen was a snake lying in wait, sure and ready to strike. The attack
      on the monarchy had become inevitable, the purposefulness of the
      public reaction was too consistent, too fierce not to be stage-
      managed, as in the American movie Wag the Dog.
      >
      >
      > ----- Original Message ----
      > From: ladyofhealingtouch <MadameAntoine@...>
      > To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 11:25:03 PM
      > Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
      Affect
      >
      > Her image has nothing to do with what was said about the Necklace.
      > She did NOT want the necklace...I think we all know that by now.
      > What was said in this last message, is that things could have been
      > handled differently regarding this necklace, with Rohan. I believe
      > Antoinette was a wonderful, very intelligent woman, but all that
      was
      > being said here, is that if the whole affair, after knowing what
      > happened with Rohan, had been handled differently, then perhaps
      > things would not have escalated as they did...that is ALL that was
      > being said in this message. I still am working on her image...but
      > working on her image does not mean giving her sainthood... as
      > wonderful queen as she was. I think there are very few of us that
      > are ready for sainthood. I still have the high opinon of our queen
      > just as I always have and she was very understandably upset with
      > Rohan on this score. Any of us would have..that he would let
      himself
      > believe that horrible scheming woman so set to bring Antoinette
      down.
      > Forgiveness and compassion are always better used when we are
      angry,
      > even justifiably so.
      > blessing,
      > Patricia-- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com, George
      > Caffine <geocaffine@ ...> wrote:
      > >
      > > I'm totally confused, and I wonder how we're going to reform
      Marie
      > Antoinette's image. Are we saying she was at fault in the Diamond
      > Necklace fiasco? I don't understand how.
      > >
      > > If she let things stand without seeking a trial she would be
      found
      > guilty by the unrefuted charges. If she left Rohan out she would be
      > found guilty because a main player wasn't heard. We know she didn't
      > ask for or want the necklace, should she have paid for it anyway?
      If
      > a prostitute looked like the Queen does that mean the Queen was,
      > somehow, like the prostitute? If we, in another world separated by
      > two hundred years, can figure out that the Queen would never have
      > become involved in such an expensive purchase, then surely the
      people
      > on the scene could have figured it out; even Rohan the sycophant
      > could have figured it out.
      > >
      > > It would seem she'd be found guilty no matter what she did.
      Hubris
      > had nothing to do with it, she wasn't trying to advance herself or
      > her cause, she was trying to get out from under. She was bound to
      > fail; the liars, slanderers, and libelers were all over her, like
      > snakes too numerous and too fascinating to escape.
      > >
      > > "Trampled to death by geese," that was her fate long before the
      > blade fell. The revolution wasn't started by the Diamond Necklace
      > Affair, the proof it was already unavoidable was that the avalanche
      > of transparent lies were accepted as credible. "First the sentence
      > and then the verdict," that's the proper Queen of Hearts quote. The
      > only proper defense, after sentence has been pronounced and carried
      > out, is: we who KNOW the truth of Marie Antoinette should do all
      that
      > is in our power to change the mass public opinion of her.
      > >
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message ----
      > > From: ladyofhealingtouch <MadameAntoine@ ...>
      > > To: Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com
      > > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:45:18 PM
      > > Subject: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino Affect
      > >
      > > I have been studying up on this and just read the article that
      Axel
      > > wrote on "The Affair of the Diamond Necklace"
      > >
      > > Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
      > > Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest |
      Switch
      > format to Traditional
      > > Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
      Recent
      > Activity
      > > 3New Members
      > > 1New Files
      > > Visit Your Group
      > > SPONSORED LINKS
      > > Royalty free stock images
      > > Marie antoinette
      > > Royalty free images
      > > Yahoo! Search
      > > Find it faster
      > > with Yahoo!
      > > shortcuts.
      > > Yahoo! Movies
      > > Want a sneak peek?
      > > Check out new
      > > trailers and clips
      > > Yahoo! News
      > > Kevin Sites
      > > Get coverage of
      > > world crises..
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
      > ____________ __
      > > Need a vacation? Get great deals
      > > to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
      > > http://travel. yahoo.com/
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      ______________________________________________________________________
      ______________
      > Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
      > Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
      > http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html
      >
    • ladyofhealingtouch
      This is so very interesting, Axel. I didn t know about all this further information you have shared...but I can say I m not too surprised. Things like this
      Message 2 of 24 , Jul 1, 2007
        This is so very interesting, Axel. I didn't know about all this
        further information you have shared...but I can say I'm not too
        surprised. Things like this are done to "bring someone down" in
        politics today...why not back in Antoinette's time too and even
        before that. Thanks for sharing this...it makes me want to check all
        this information, the books you shared as well out, and see what else
        we can uncover.
        many thanks,
        Patricia--- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
        <Rand103242@...> wrote:
        >
        > It is possible to read "Memoir Justicatif de Madame Lamotte". The
        > memoirs of Queen Marie Antoinette's greatest nemesis, Madame Jeanne
        > Lamotte. In my next post I will say more about Madame Lamotte -
        the
        > self-styled Countess, adventuress and swindler and ... martyr and
        > best-selling author.
        >
        > But as a prelude to that post, I want to respond to the fine post
        by
        > George, who with Dorit and Lady of Healing Touch have engege in a
        > lively discussion that I hope will continue and that others here
        will
        > join.
        >
        > The question of this post is - how is it that not only we can today
        > read these Memoirs but most importantly it was possible to read
        them
        > in 1787 a year after the Necklace Affair?
        >
        > These Lamotte memoirs (more on them in next post) were entirely
        > accusatory and extremely defamatory of Marie Antoinette -
        > giving "proof" to the rumors that the Queen of France was a whore,
        > lesbian and harlot, and now...the mastermind of the Necklace Affair.
        >
        > Yet how was it that such memoirs came about to become the tabloid
        > sensation and greatest underground best seller in France in the
        last
        > years before the 1789 Revolution and the runaway best seller when
        > censorship ended in 1789?
        >
        > Lamotte was branded and condemned to prison for life in 1786.
        >
        > Yet, she was aided to escape within a year.
        > She received refuge in nearby England.
        > She wrote her memoirs but though she had no doubt had a hand in the
        > forged letters of Marie Antoinette of France to Rohan - she had
        never
        > before written for publication, much less circulation to France.
        >
        > Obviously, Lamotte had help. Alot of help. Skilled help in
        > pamphleteering. High placed help.
        >
        > I have my issues with Nesta Webster but she talks about several
        > different conspiracies to undermine Queen Marie Antoinette and with
        > her the French monarchy, by **monarchists!**, BEFORE THE 1789
        > REVOLUTION.
        >
        > The first is by the British government,
        > The second and third were home grown - by the Orleanists - The Duke
        > de Chatres, later the Duke of Orleans, but also the King's own
        > brother Duke of Provence (later Louis XVIII) and the "Aunts",
        > daughters of Louis XV who like Provence disliked the Austrian
        > alliance and detested the vivacious Marie Antoinette as well as her
        > supplanting them in partonage, favor and the like,
        > Forth, by Frederick the Great, the Prussians who feared alliance
        > between France and Austria and did what was possible to undermine
        > that and the greastest symbol of Alliance.
        > Webster mentions a 5th conspirator too that escapes me at this
        moment.
        >
        > When you think of all these groups out to get Marie Antoinette, it
        > reminds me of the movie MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS.
        >
        > If you go to LINKS in this group, you can see a further description
        > of this Nesta Webster book under
        >
        > Orleanist & Other Conspiracies against MA, part of Nesta Webster's
        > detailed history
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/links
        > It's a good description - but the link is to geocities and needs
        > updating but i suspect this is still up on the internet somewhere.
        >
        > Lamotte had help to gain her freedom. She received safe haven in
        > England. When her memoirs were ready so too were the channels to
        get
        > her story to a ready readership.
        >
        > But Lamotte was not the beginning - it was part culination and also
        a
        > spectacular part of an ongoing campaign to, as George says, set up
        > Marie Antoinette - to bit by bit, year by year destroy the
        reputation
        > of Marie Antoinette.
        >
        > That campaign was so effective that by 1791, when news of the royal
        > family's flight reached Paris, a bust of Queen Marie Antoinette was
        > taken from its pedestal tied to a horse and dragged of through the
        > streets of France's capitol with the horseman proclaiming he just
        > wished it was the real queen tied to and dragged through the
        streets
        > of Paris, to the applause of appreciative Parisians.
        >
        > Chantel Thomas details a 20 year history of a hate campaign
        > orchestrated against Marie Antoinette in her book WICKED QUEEN
        > (translated from the 1989 French book LA REINE EN LES PAMPHLETS
        > published in US by Zone Books). Thomas tells of a campaign begun
        not
        > long after her arrival in France in 1770 until her death in 1793.
        > Thomas translates several of the salacious pamphlets in her
        appendix.
        >
        > You can read of this campaign right here in the group, if you go to
        > FILES in this group. A couple weeks ago I added an article I saw
        > online about this.
        > "Let em Eat Cake: Mythical Marie Antoinette" by Nancy L. Barker
        (1993
        > article for Phi Alpha Theta
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/files
        >
        > You can read of this more, if you go to LINKS in this group.
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/links
        > then look for
        >
        > Family Romance of the French Revolution by Lynn Hunt
        > This link to significant portions of Lynn Hunt's book discusses the
        > death of Louis XVI – the killing of the "father" of the French
        people
        > under the monarchy, and the "Bad Mother", pp. 89-125, which
        discusses
        > the character assassination and themn the killing of Queen Marie
        > Antoinette.
        >
        > Yes, Marie Antoinette was set up. Though the Queen was entirely
        > innocent in the Necklace Affair, we know today that this affair
        > played right into the hands of those whose mission it was to
        destroy
        > this woman. And destroy Her, they did.
        >
        > Axel
        >
        >
        > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, George Caffine
        > <geocaffine@> wrote:
        > >
        > > I'm sorry if you think I'm being insensitive. My point is she was
        > set up, and not just by the named conspirators: The LaMottes were
        > clearly greedy, Countess LaMotte also dangerously vindictive. Rohan
        > seems to have been an
        > > all-round dupe, greedy and a suck-up as well. But these players
        > weren't the cause ot the Queen's disgrace.
        > >
        > > Marie Antoinette was no saint; a close examination of the rest of
        > the saints would reveal clay feet all round; but she was an
        innocent
        > victim in this affair. Marie Antoinette had good reasons for
        > demanding Rohan's public trial, it had to be public for her to be
        > exonerated, she could see that and her demand was no sign of
        hubris.
        > Public, because any judgement in-camera would guarantee the Queen's
        > condemnation; her condemnation despite the public trial proves that
        > and more.
        > >
        > > So, at long last, my point. The nearly universal booing and
        ranting
        > that resulted smacks of organization. I believe the revolution was
        > considerably enriched by the Diamond Necklace Affair, but that
        > enrichment was managed, it didn't occur by accident. The revolution
        > was planned in back rooms somewhere, and the Necklace trial was
        used
        > as a device. The conclusion that the Diamond Necklace Affair led to
        > the revolution is what I challenge. That furor and reaction to the
        > Queen was a snake lying in wait, sure and ready to strike. The
        attack
        > on the monarchy had become inevitable, the purposefulness of the
        > public reaction was too consistent, too fierce not to be stage-
        > managed, as in the American movie Wag the Dog.
        > >
        > >
        > > ----- Original Message ----
        > > From: ladyofhealingtouch <MadameAntoine@>
        > > To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
        > > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 11:25:03 PM
        > > Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
        > Affect
        > >
        > > Her image has nothing to do with what was said about the Necklace.
        > > She did NOT want the necklace...I think we all know that by now.
        > > What was said in this last message, is that things could have
        been
        > > handled differently regarding this necklace, with Rohan. I
        believe
        > > Antoinette was a wonderful, very intelligent woman, but all that
        > was
        > > being said here, is that if the whole affair, after knowing what
        > > happened with Rohan, had been handled differently, then perhaps
        > > things would not have escalated as they did...that is ALL that
        was
        > > being said in this message. I still am working on her image...but
        > > working on her image does not mean giving her sainthood... as
        > > wonderful queen as she was. I think there are very few of us that
        > > are ready for sainthood. I still have the high opinon of our
        queen
        > > just as I always have and she was very understandably upset with
        > > Rohan on this score. Any of us would have..that he would let
        > himself
        > > believe that horrible scheming woman so set to bring Antoinette
        > down.
        > > Forgiveness and compassion are always better used when we are
        > angry,
        > > even justifiably so.
        > > blessing,
        > > Patricia-- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
        George
        > > Caffine <geocaffine@ ...> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > I'm totally confused, and I wonder how we're going to reform
        > Marie
        > > Antoinette's image. Are we saying she was at fault in the Diamond
        > > Necklace fiasco? I don't understand how.
        > > >
        > > > If she let things stand without seeking a trial she would be
        > found
        > > guilty by the unrefuted charges. If she left Rohan out she would
        be
        > > found guilty because a main player wasn't heard. We know she
        didn't
        > > ask for or want the necklace, should she have paid for it anyway?
        > If
        > > a prostitute looked like the Queen does that mean the Queen was,
        > > somehow, like the prostitute? If we, in another world separated
        by
        > > two hundred years, can figure out that the Queen would never have
        > > become involved in such an expensive purchase, then surely the
        > people
        > > on the scene could have figured it out; even Rohan the sycophant
        > > could have figured it out.
        > > >
        > > > It would seem she'd be found guilty no matter what she did.
        > Hubris
        > > had nothing to do with it, she wasn't trying to advance herself
        or
        > > her cause, she was trying to get out from under. She was bound to
        > > fail; the liars, slanderers, and libelers were all over her, like
        > > snakes too numerous and too fascinating to escape.
        > > >
        > > > "Trampled to death by geese," that was her fate long before the
        > > blade fell. The revolution wasn't started by the Diamond Necklace
        > > Affair, the proof it was already unavoidable was that the
        avalanche
        > > of transparent lies were accepted as credible. "First the
        sentence
        > > and then the verdict," that's the proper Queen of Hearts quote.
        The
        > > only proper defense, after sentence has been pronounced and
        carried
        > > out, is: we who KNOW the truth of Marie Antoinette should do all
        > that
        > > is in our power to change the mass public opinion of her.
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > ----- Original Message ----
        > > > From: ladyofhealingtouch <MadameAntoine@ ...>
        > > > To: Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com
        > > > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:45:18 PM
        > > > Subject: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
        Affect
        > > >
        > > > I have been studying up on this and just read the article that
        > Axel
        > > > wrote on "The Affair of the Diamond Necklace"
        > > >
        > > > Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
        > > > Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest |
        > Switch
        > > format to Traditional
        > > > Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
        > Recent
        > > Activity
        > > > 3New Members
        > > > 1New Files
        > > > Visit Your Group
        > > > SPONSORED LINKS
        > > > Royalty free stock images
        > > > Marie antoinette
        > > > Royalty free images
        > > > Yahoo! Search
        > > > Find it faster
        > > > with Yahoo!
        > > > shortcuts.
        > > > Yahoo! Movies
        > > > Want a sneak peek?
        > > > Check out new
        > > > trailers and clips
        > > > Yahoo! News
        > > > Kevin Sites
        > > > Get coverage of
        > > > world crises..
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
        > > ____________ __
        > > > Need a vacation? Get great deals
        > > > to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
        > > > http://travel. yahoo.com/
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        ______________________________________________________________________
        > ______________
        > > Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
        > > Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
        > > http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html
        > >
        >
      • Axel
        Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof France, was MA a good politician? I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing world
        Message 3 of 24 , Jul 1, 2007
          Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof France,
          was MA a good politician?

          I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing world
          sentiment would be - are you outa your mind?
          Marie Antoinette was an awful queen. She was no politician. She had
          not a clue.

          However, perhaps it's the contrarian in me. I'm not so ready to
          dismiss the question. Obviously, Dorit's points are salient as they
          normally are *smiles* But I do think that George and Lady are on to
          something.

          Simon Schama put it quite cogently in the recent Grubin documentary
          on Marie Antoinette that aired on PBS last fall. The documentary
          more than any other film to date gives air to the campaign of
          vilification against Marie Antoinette with Chantal Thomas among the
          Talking Heads.

          Schama in that film mentions the recognition of public hatred of her
          after the Necklace Affair. That affair and especially the court's
          verdict and public approval of it were (along with her cool reception
          in Paris when she presented her second boy born in 1785), were a big
          time wake up call to Marie Antoinette.

          As Schama said, "Marie Antoinette had to grow up. She had to grow up
          very fast!"

          In the years before Revolution she worked as a politician to try to
          repair both her image and her monarchy - there was the Vigee LeBrun
          1787 portrait, the later 1788 portrait and other efforts of the Queen
          to improve her image, to cut and take more care to her expenses, to
          try to aid Louis in the governmental crisis of 1787-89, and to try to
          win favor with the French people, including favoring double
          representation of the 3rd estate, commoners in the Estates General
          called for May 1789.

          Then, as the Revolution took hold the Queen was ever the activist to
          attempt to stem the tide of Revolution. She was key to the outing of
          Necker in July 1789, the calling out of troops to protect Versailles
          in September 1789 and the flight to Varennes in June 1791. She
          conducted correpondence with Austrians and others for intervention,
          she was key to the Brunswick Manifesto.

          We can look at each of these and say - Yes, Marie Antoinette was a
          polician... she was also a walking disastor... everything she touched
          turned to ruin.

          But to this, I'd offer three comebacks.

          First, you have to consider the hand she was dealt. To some extent
          she was changing deck chairs on the Titanic. a) France was bankrupt.
          Much of that the rsult of 7 Years War she had nothing to do with and
          participation in the American Revolution which she opposed. b) She
          was hated as Queen - part from her own devices, but part also from
          the campaign against her and part too from her role as a strong woman
          and an Austrian foreigner.

          Second, you have to consider that she operated as a politician with a
          hand tied behind her back - she was Queen and not King and she had
          been bred to follow the king (despite that her mother acted
          differently). Thus, when several key crunch moments occured
          in 1789 - to leave Versailles, in 1791 - to cut their way free at
          Varennes, and in 1792 - to defend the Tuileries - it was Marie
          Antoinette who wore the pants in the family. She was a do-er and she
          was a fighter. It was the Queen who would make the key tactical move
          in 1789, and who would fight when fighting was needed in 1791 and
          1792. Her wimp, phlegmatic husband always shied from confrontation
          and she would not overrule him when he was decided on lethargy.

          Third, as said in my title above the Queen was tested by the infermo
          of Revolution. In baseball parlance, it's like bringing in your
          closer with the bases loaded in a tie or 1-run ball game and blaming
          him for the loss when the ball hit scores a run. Plus, I'd go
          further, blaiming your closer when the two winning runs are scored
          off an error by the center fielder. Marie Antoinette had almost no
          poliitcal role until 1787. Louis suffered a breakdown in nerves. She
          assumed the role because he needed her, and she rose to the occasion.
          But it was quite late in the ball game. She did what she could and
          as stated above - she still might have saved the game had Louis not
          made the three errors cited above.

          Forth, her role as queen and political actor that really began in
          1787 ended with the overthrow of the monarchy August 10, 1792. so,
          the true period of her poliitcal awakening and activity as she "grew
          up fast" and did her best to learn and act on the job was just 5
          years - and she did that under the glare of being for much of the
          time the effective head of state. Even more than a President, the
          King was absolute ruler.

          When US Presidents Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson
          had to grow up fast because the assassination of the US head of state
          suddenly brought these ceremonial (Vice President) men to power each
          were men more than 50 years old and each had been a politician for
          over 30 years before taking office as Vice President. In contrast,
          Marie Antoinette was just 30 years old, she had been a carefree
          ornament (fashion and etiquette showpiece for monarchy) and breeder
          (womb for the dauphin), and thus essentially zero training in
          political office. Now she had to bootstrap herself into being the
          head of state of France. Add to that she had to do so not only with
          a public that hated her but also at a time of enormous personal
          stress. Her cherished son whom she had so waited for and so adored
          was dying of TB despite all her efforts to save the little boy. He
          died on June 4, 1789 a month after the Estates General was called and
          month before the Fall of the Bastille.

          Fifth, I'd repeat the points made by George and Lady, that the life
          of Marie Antoinette was literally and figuratively cut short. She was
          indeed beheaded but her role as queen was cut short over a year
          earlier in August 1792. She had just 5 years for her political
          career. She was out of office at age 36 and beheaded at age 37. She
          surely paid the highest price for her failures. But thinking of
          George and Lady's points, one wonders, if she had not been cut off so
          young and after so short a time, what kind of politician she might
          have matured into.

          Sixth and last point, Pimprennelle is fond of saying to detractors
          READ HER LETTERS (reminds me of the 1884 Democratic slogan by
          Cleveland's supporters to answer Blain - Burn Burn Burn this letter!)
          There are published letters of Marie Antoinette - you can read her
          letters. If you, I believe you will discover the kind and generous
          human being Marie Antoinette was.

          But as to what kind of politician she might have been.... might have
          been had it not all ended so soon for her... READ THE TRANSCIPTS...
          read the transcripts of her trial - the grace, dignity, insight,
          adroitness of her answers. Richard Nixon saved his political life
          with the Checkers Speach. If you read Marie Antoinette's answers, I
          suggest you'll believe she could have been aquitted if the jury was
          not stacked against her. She unlike Nixon was not a Duke educated
          lawyer, she had no coaches, she had no chance to prepared, she was
          kept in a dungeon and purposely sleep deprived. Yet, she handled the
          trial for her life with brilliance.

          Hence, this Queen, this politician despite her failures had in my
          view the potential for greatness as a politician had she ever gotten
          the kind of second chances so many of the greats Lincoln, Churchill,
          DeGaulle, Roosevelt got in their political lives. After disaster at
          Gallipoli, with the India bill, with the abdication crisis and more,
          who in 1936 would have imagined Churchill back in power much less the
          svaior of his country revered for all time as the leader of Britain
          in their finest hour. Marie Antoinette never got her chance for
          vindication.

          Axel


          --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, George Caffine
          <geocaffine@...> wrote:

          Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino Affect
          >
          > This gets back to our discussion of monarchy versus democracy. A
          good leader is one who picks: good-hearted advisors, ones who give
          winning advice; and then taking the right advice when it's offered.
          Beyond the charisma, nothing more is needed. I always thought it was
          silly when they blamed Jimmy Carter for not rescuing the Iran
          hostages, as if he should have swung down from a helicopter, like
          Rambo or Batman.
          >
          > My belief that Marie Antoinette would have made a good Queen is
          based on sentiment, she never had a chance to prove it. Her poise and
          ability to win over the people was expressed, but the volume of hate
          and falling blade cut off any hope of success. Of course, I have to
          contrast that belief by agreeing she was prone to faux pas (sorry, I
          have to point out the joke: prone is lying flat, faux pas is false
          step; result: tripping and falling on her face) so her good
          intentions might have too often have led to faulty execution (sic).
          >
          > Sorry: I seem to be suffering from runaway silliness.
          >
          > ----- Original Message ----
          > From: doritmi <drub@...>
          > To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
          > Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:35:05 PM
          > Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
          Affect
          >
          > Ok, I have several time made long posts about why I do not think MA
          > was a wonderful queen. would those who think differently - as
          Kristin
          > did before - explain why you think she was a good queen as opposed
          to
          > being a "wonderful personality" or dying as a hero? I agree with
          Axel
          > she matured towards the end. she still, in my view, was not a good
          > politician. dying heroicly four years after the start of the battle,
          > losing all the steps on the way, is not the sign of a successful
          > politician or a tallented leader. I get why you'd call her tragic,
          > heroic, etc'. but in what way was she a wonderful queen?
          >
          > --- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
          > "ladyofhealingtouch " <MadameAntoine@ ...> wrote:
          > >
          > > Her image has nothing to do with what was said about the Necklace.
          > > She did NOT want the necklace...I think we all know that by now.
          > > What was said in this last message, is that things could have
          been
          > > handled differently regarding this necklace, with Rohan. I
          believe
          > > Antoinette was a wonderful, very intelligent woman, but all that
          was
          > > being said here, is that if the whole affair, after knowing what
          > > happened with Rohan, had been handled differently, then perhaps
          > > things would not have escalated as they did...that is ALL that
          was
          > > being said in this message. I still am working on her image...but
          > > working on her image does not mean giving her sainthood... as
          > > wonderful queen as she was. I think there are very few of us that
          > > are ready for sainthood. I still have the high opinon of our
          queen
          > > just as I always have and she was very understandably upset with
          > > Rohan on this score. Any of us would have..that he would let
          himself
          > > believe that horrible scheming woman so set to bring Antoinette
          down.
          > > Forgiveness and compassion are always better used when we are
          angry,
          > > even justifiably so.
          > > blessing,
          > > Patricia-- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
          George
          > > Caffine <geocaffine@ > wrote:
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          ______________________________________________________________________
          ______________
          > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative
          vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
          > http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
          >
        • George Caffine
          As Axel has pointed out, these recent messages are fascinating. I would like to make another point on this story: I believe the tarnishing of Marie
          Message 4 of 24 , Jul 1, 2007
            As Axel has pointed out, these recent messages are fascinating. I would like to make another point on this story:  I believe the tarnishing of Marie Antoinette's image has served, in large part, to prove women didn't belong in government. So many times I've come across people propping up their arguments on women's unsuitability by mentioning Marie Antoinette, and, in every case, not having to prove what she did wrong. The oddest part of that argument is that Marie Antoinette's mother was recognized as a great strategist.
             
            So Patricia may be serving a cause which is still important to all of us.
            ----- Original Message ----
            From: Axel <Rand103242@...>
            To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Sunday, July 1, 2007 12:12:22 PM
            Subject: Queen: handicapped policitian weaned in Inferno of Revolution

            Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof France,
            was MA a good politician?

            I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing world
            sentiment would be - are you outa your mind?
            Marie Antoinette was an awful queen. She was no politician. She had
            not a clue.

            However, perhaps it's the contrarian in me. I'm not so ready to
            dismiss the question. Obviously, Dorit's points are salient as they
            normally are *smiles* But I do think that George and Lady are on to
            something.

            Simon Schama put it quite cogently in the recent Grubin documentary
            on Marie Antoinette that aired on PBS last fall. The documentary
            more than any other film to date gives air to the campaign of
            vilification against Marie Antoinette with Chantal Thomas among the
            Talking Heads.

            Schama in that film mentions the recognition of public hatred of her
            after the Necklace Affair. That affair and especially the court's
            verdict and public approval of it were (along with her cool reception
            in Paris when she presented her second boy born in 1785), were a big
            time wake up call to Marie Antoinette.

            As Schama said, "Marie Antoinette had to grow up. She had to grow up
            very fast!"

            In the years before Revolution she worked as a politician to try to
            repair both her image and her monarchy - there was the Vigee LeBrun
            1787 portrait, the later 1788 portrait and other efforts of the Queen
            to improve her image, to cut and take more care to her expenses, to
            try to aid Louis in the governmental crisis of 1787-89, and to try to
            win favor with the French people, including favoring double
            representation of the 3rd estate, commoners in the Estates General
            called for May 1789.

            Then, as the Revolution took hold the Queen was ever the activist to
            attempt to stem the tide of Revolution. She was key to the outing of
            Necker in July 1789, the calling out of troops to protect Versailles
            in September 1789 and the flight to Varennes in June 1791. She
            conducted correpondence with Austrians and others for intervention,
            she was key to the Brunswick Manifesto.

            We can look at each of these and say - Yes, Marie Antoinette was a
            polician... she was also a walking disastor... everything she touched
            turned to ruin.

            But to this, I'd offer three comebacks.

            First, you have to consider the hand she was dealt. To some extent
            she was changing deck chairs on the Titanic. a) France was bankrupt.
            Much of that the rsult of 7 Years War she had nothing to do with and
            participation in the American Revolution which she opposed. b) She
            was hated as Queen - part from her own devices, but part also from
            the campaign against her and part too from her role as a strong woman
            and an Austrian foreigner.

            Second, you have to consider that she operated as a politician with a
            hand tied behind her back - she was Queen and not King and she had
            been bred to follow the king (despite that her mother acted
            differently) . Thus, when several key crunch moments occured
            in 1789 - to leave Versailles, in 1791 - to cut their way free at
            Varennes, and in 1792 - to defend the Tuileries - it was Marie
            Antoinette who wore the pants in the family. She was a do-er and she
            was a fighter. It was the Queen who would make the key tactical move
            in 1789, and who would fight when fighting was needed in 1791 and
            1792. Her wimp, phlegmatic husband always shied from confrontation
            and she would not overrule him when he was decided on lethargy.

            Third, as said in my title above the Queen was tested by the infermo
            of Revolution. In baseball parlance, it's like bringing in your
            closer with the bases loaded in a tie or 1-run ball game and blaming
            him for the loss when the ball hit scores a run. Plus, I'd go
            further, blaiming your closer when the two winning runs are scored
            off an error by the center fielder. Marie Antoinette had almost no
            poliitcal role until 1787. Louis suffered a breakdown in nerves. She
            assumed the role because he needed her, and she rose to the occasion.
            But it was quite late in the ball game. She did what she could and
            as stated above - she still might have saved the game had Louis not
            made the three errors cited above.

            Forth, her role as queen and political actor that really began in
            1787 ended with the overthrow of the monarchy August 10, 1792. so,
            the true period of her poliitcal awakening and activity as she "grew
            up fast" and did her best to learn and act on the job was just 5
            years - and she did that under the glare of being for much of the
            time the effective head of state. Even more than a President, the
            King was absolute ruler.

            When US Presidents Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson
            had to grow up fast because the assassination of the US head of state
            suddenly brought these ceremonial (Vice President) men to power each
            were men more than 50 years old and each had been a politician for
            over 30 years before taking office as Vice President. In contrast,
            Marie Antoinette was just 30 years old, she had been a carefree
            ornament (fashion and etiquette showpiece for monarchy) and breeder
            (womb for the dauphin), and thus essentially zero training in
            political office. Now she had to bootstrap herself into being the
            head of state of France. Add to that she had to do so not only with
            a public that hated her but also at a time of enormous personal
            stress. Her cherished son whom she had so waited for and so adored
            was dying of TB despite all her efforts to save the little boy. He
            died on June 4, 1789 a month after the Estates General was called and
            month before the Fall of the Bastille.

            Fifth, I'd repeat the points made by George and Lady, that the life
            of Marie Antoinette was literally and figuratively cut short. She was
            indeed beheaded but her role as queen was cut short over a year
            earlier in August 1792. She had just 5 years for her political
            career. She was out of office at age 36 and beheaded at age 37. She
            surely paid the highest price for her failures. But thinking of
            George and Lady's points, one wonders, if she had not been cut off so
            young and after so short a time, what kind of politician she might
            have matured into.

            Sixth and last point, Pimprennelle is fond of saying to detractors
            READ HER LETTERS (reminds me of the 1884 Democratic slogan by
            Cleveland's supporters to answer Blain - Burn Burn Burn this letter!)
            There are published letters of Marie Antoinette - you can read her
            letters. If you, I believe you will discover the kind and generous
            human being Marie Antoinette was.

            But as to what kind of politician she might have been.... might have
            been had it not all ended so soon for her... READ THE TRANSCIPTS.. .
            read the transcripts of her trial - the grace, dignity, insight,
            adroitness of her answers. Richard Nixon saved his political life
            with the Checkers Speach. If you read Marie Antoinette's answers, I
            suggest you'll believe she could have been aquitted if the jury was
            not stacked against her. She unlike Nixon was not a Duke educated
            lawyer, she had no coaches, she had no chance to prepared, she was
            kept in a dungeon and purposely sleep deprived. Yet, she handled the
            trial for her life with brilliance.

            Hence, this Queen, this politician despite her failures had in my
            view the potential for greatness as a politician had she ever gotten
            the kind of second chances so many of the greats Lincoln, Churchill,
            DeGaulle, Roosevelt got in their political lives. After disaster at
            Gallipoli, with the India bill, with the abdication crisis and more,
            who in 1936 would have imagined Churchill back in power much less the
            svaior of his country revered for all time as the leader of Britain
            in their finest hour. Marie Antoinette never got her chance for
            vindication.

            Axel


            --- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com, George Caffine
            <geocaffine@ ...> wrote:

            Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino Affect

            >
            > This gets back to our discussion of monarchy versus democracy. A
            good leader is one who picks: good-hearted advisors, ones who give
            winning advice; and then taking the right advice when it's offered.
            Beyond the charisma, nothing more is needed. I always thought it was
            silly when they blamed Jimmy Carter for not rescuing the Iran
            hostages, as if he should have swung down from a helicopter, like
            Rambo or Batman.
            >
            > My belief that Marie Antoinette would have made a good Queen is
            based on sentiment, she never had a chance to prove it. Her poise and
            ability to win over the people was expressed, but the volume of hate
            and falling blade cut off any hope of success. Of course, I have to
            contrast that belief by agreeing she was prone to faux pas (sorry, I
            have to point out the joke: prone is lying flat, faux pas is false
            step; result: tripping and falling on her face) so her good
            intentions might have too often have led to faulty execution (sic).
            >
            > Sorry: I seem to be suffering from runaway silliness.
            >
            > ----- Original Message ----
            > From: doritmi <drub@...>
            > To: Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com
            > Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:35:05 PM
            >
            Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
            Affect
            >
            > Ok, I have several time made long posts about why I do not think MA
            > was a wonderful queen. would those who think differently - as
            Kristin
            > did before - explain why you think she was a good queen as opposed
            to
            > being a "wonderful personality" or dying as a hero? I agree with
            Axel
            > she matured towards the end. she still, in my view, was not a good
            > politician. dying heroicly four years after the start of the battle,
            > losing all the steps on the way, is not the sign of a successful
            > politician or a tallented leader. I get why you'd call her tragic,
            > heroic, etc'. but in what way was she a wonderful queen?
            >
            > --- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
            > "ladyofhealingtouch " <MadameAntoine@ ...> wrote:
            > >
            > > Her image has nothing to do with what was said about the
            Necklace.
            > > She did NOT want the necklace...I think we all know that by now.
            > > What was said in this last message, is that things could have
            been
            > > handled differently regarding this necklace, with Rohan. I
            believe
            > > Antoinette was a wonderful, very intelligent woman, but all that
            was
            > > being said here, is that if the whole affair, after knowing what
            > > happened with Rohan, had been handled differently, then perhaps
            > > things would not have escalated as they did...that is ALL that
            was
            > > being said in this message. I still am working on her image...but
            > > working on her image does not mean giving her sainthood... as
            > > wonderful queen as she was. I think there are very few of us that
            > > are ready for sainthood. I still have the high opinon of our
            queen
            > > just as I always have and she was very understandably upset with
            > > Rohan on this score. Any of us would have..that he would let
            himself
            > > believe that horrible scheming woman so set to bring Antoinette
            down.
            > > Forgiveness and compassion are always better used when we are
            angry,
            > > even justifiably so.
            > > blessing,
            > > Patricia-- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
            George
            > > Caffine <geocaffine@ > wrote:
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
            ____________ __
            > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative
            vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
            > http://autos. yahoo.com/ green_center/
            >




            Got a little couch potato?
            Check out fun summer activities for kids.
          • ladyofhealingtouch
            Bravo, Axel!! What a fine speech defending Marie Antoinette! I think you covered everything with what you have said here. She didn t have much time to show
            Message 5 of 24 , Jul 1, 2007
              Bravo, Axel!! What a fine speech defending Marie Antoinette!
              I think you covered everything with what you have said here.
              She didn't have much time to show what she was made of..but what time
              she had...she performed impressively.
              blessings,
              Patricia--- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
              <Rand103242@...> wrote:
              >
              > Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof France,
              > was MA a good politician?
              >
              > I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing world
              > sentiment would be - are you outa your mind?
              > Marie Antoinette was an awful queen. She was no politician. She had
              > not a clue.
              >
              > However, perhaps it's the contrarian in me. I'm not so ready to
              > dismiss the question. Obviously, Dorit's points are salient as
              they
              > normally are *smiles* But I do think that George and Lady are on to
              > something.
              >
              > Simon Schama put it quite cogently in the recent Grubin documentary
              > on Marie Antoinette that aired on PBS last fall. The documentary
              > more than any other film to date gives air to the campaign of
              > vilification against Marie Antoinette with Chantal Thomas among the
              > Talking Heads.
              >
              > Schama in that film mentions the recognition of public hatred of
              her
              > after the Necklace Affair. That affair and especially the court's
              > verdict and public approval of it were (along with her cool
              reception
              > in Paris when she presented her second boy born in 1785), were a
              big
              > time wake up call to Marie Antoinette.
              >
              > As Schama said, "Marie Antoinette had to grow up. She had to grow
              up
              > very fast!"
              >
              > In the years before Revolution she worked as a politician to try to
              > repair both her image and her monarchy - there was the Vigee LeBrun
              > 1787 portrait, the later 1788 portrait and other efforts of the
              Queen
              > to improve her image, to cut and take more care to her expenses, to
              > try to aid Louis in the governmental crisis of 1787-89, and to try
              to
              > win favor with the French people, including favoring double
              > representation of the 3rd estate, commoners in the Estates General
              > called for May 1789.
              >
              > Then, as the Revolution took hold the Queen was ever the activist
              to
              > attempt to stem the tide of Revolution. She was key to the outing
              of
              > Necker in July 1789, the calling out of troops to protect
              Versailles
              > in September 1789 and the flight to Varennes in June 1791. She
              > conducted correpondence with Austrians and others for intervention,
              > she was key to the Brunswick Manifesto.
              >
              > We can look at each of these and say - Yes, Marie Antoinette was a
              > polician... she was also a walking disastor... everything she
              touched
              > turned to ruin.
              >
              > But to this, I'd offer three comebacks.
              >
              > First, you have to consider the hand she was dealt. To some extent
              > she was changing deck chairs on the Titanic. a) France was
              bankrupt.
              > Much of that the rsult of 7 Years War she had nothing to do with
              and
              > participation in the American Revolution which she opposed. b) She
              > was hated as Queen - part from her own devices, but part also from
              > the campaign against her and part too from her role as a strong
              woman
              > and an Austrian foreigner.
              >
              > Second, you have to consider that she operated as a politician with
              a
              > hand tied behind her back - she was Queen and not King and she had
              > been bred to follow the king (despite that her mother acted
              > differently). Thus, when several key crunch moments occured
              > in 1789 - to leave Versailles, in 1791 - to cut their way free at
              > Varennes, and in 1792 - to defend the Tuileries - it was Marie
              > Antoinette who wore the pants in the family. She was a do-er and
              she
              > was a fighter. It was the Queen who would make the key tactical
              move
              > in 1789, and who would fight when fighting was needed in 1791 and
              > 1792. Her wimp, phlegmatic husband always shied from confrontation
              > and she would not overrule him when he was decided on lethargy.
              >
              > Third, as said in my title above the Queen was tested by the
              infermo
              > of Revolution. In baseball parlance, it's like bringing in your
              > closer with the bases loaded in a tie or 1-run ball game and
              blaming
              > him for the loss when the ball hit scores a run. Plus, I'd go
              > further, blaiming your closer when the two winning runs are scored
              > off an error by the center fielder. Marie Antoinette had almost no
              > poliitcal role until 1787. Louis suffered a breakdown in nerves.
              She
              > assumed the role because he needed her, and she rose to the
              occasion.
              > But it was quite late in the ball game. She did what she could and
              > as stated above - she still might have saved the game had Louis not
              > made the three errors cited above.
              >
              > Forth, her role as queen and political actor that really began in
              > 1787 ended with the overthrow of the monarchy August 10, 1792. so,
              > the true period of her poliitcal awakening and activity as
              she "grew
              > up fast" and did her best to learn and act on the job was just 5
              > years - and she did that under the glare of being for much of the
              > time the effective head of state. Even more than a President, the
              > King was absolute ruler.
              >
              > When US Presidents Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson
              > had to grow up fast because the assassination of the US head of
              state
              > suddenly brought these ceremonial (Vice President) men to power
              each
              > were men more than 50 years old and each had been a politician for
              > over 30 years before taking office as Vice President. In contrast,
              > Marie Antoinette was just 30 years old, she had been a carefree
              > ornament (fashion and etiquette showpiece for monarchy) and breeder
              > (womb for the dauphin), and thus essentially zero training in
              > political office. Now she had to bootstrap herself into being the
              > head of state of France. Add to that she had to do so not only
              with
              > a public that hated her but also at a time of enormous personal
              > stress. Her cherished son whom she had so waited for and so adored
              > was dying of TB despite all her efforts to save the little boy. He
              > died on June 4, 1789 a month after the Estates General was called
              and
              > month before the Fall of the Bastille.
              >
              > Fifth, I'd repeat the points made by George and Lady, that the life
              > of Marie Antoinette was literally and figuratively cut short. She
              was
              > indeed beheaded but her role as queen was cut short over a year
              > earlier in August 1792. She had just 5 years for her political
              > career. She was out of office at age 36 and beheaded at age 37.
              She
              > surely paid the highest price for her failures. But thinking of
              > George and Lady's points, one wonders, if she had not been cut off
              so
              > young and after so short a time, what kind of politician she might
              > have matured into.
              >
              > Sixth and last point, Pimprennelle is fond of saying to detractors
              > READ HER LETTERS (reminds me of the 1884 Democratic slogan by
              > Cleveland's supporters to answer Blain - Burn Burn Burn this
              letter!)
              > There are published letters of Marie Antoinette - you can read her
              > letters. If you, I believe you will discover the kind and generous
              > human being Marie Antoinette was.
              >
              > But as to what kind of politician she might have been.... might
              have
              > been had it not all ended so soon for her... READ THE TRANSCIPTS...
              > read the transcripts of her trial - the grace, dignity, insight,
              > adroitness of her answers. Richard Nixon saved his political life
              > with the Checkers Speach. If you read Marie Antoinette's answers,
              I
              > suggest you'll believe she could have been aquitted if the jury was
              > not stacked against her. She unlike Nixon was not a Duke educated
              > lawyer, she had no coaches, she had no chance to prepared, she was
              > kept in a dungeon and purposely sleep deprived. Yet, she handled
              the
              > trial for her life with brilliance.
              >
              > Hence, this Queen, this politician despite her failures had in my
              > view the potential for greatness as a politician had she ever
              gotten
              > the kind of second chances so many of the greats Lincoln,
              Churchill,
              > DeGaulle, Roosevelt got in their political lives. After disaster
              at
              > Gallipoli, with the India bill, with the abdication crisis and
              more,
              > who in 1936 would have imagined Churchill back in power much less
              the
              > svaior of his country revered for all time as the leader of Britain
              > in their finest hour. Marie Antoinette never got her chance for
              > vindication.
              >
              > Axel
              >
              >
              > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, George Caffine
              > <geocaffine@> wrote:
              >
              > Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino Affect
              > >
              > > This gets back to our discussion of monarchy versus democracy. A
              > good leader is one who picks: good-hearted advisors, ones who give
              > winning advice; and then taking the right advice when it's offered.
              > Beyond the charisma, nothing more is needed. I always thought it
              was
              > silly when they blamed Jimmy Carter for not rescuing the Iran
              > hostages, as if he should have swung down from a helicopter, like
              > Rambo or Batman.
              > >
              > > My belief that Marie Antoinette would have made a good Queen is
              > based on sentiment, she never had a chance to prove it. Her poise
              and
              > ability to win over the people was expressed, but the volume of
              hate
              > and falling blade cut off any hope of success. Of course, I have to
              > contrast that belief by agreeing she was prone to faux pas (sorry,
              I
              > have to point out the joke: prone is lying flat, faux pas is false
              > step; result: tripping and falling on her face) so her good
              > intentions might have too often have led to faulty execution (sic).
              > >
              > > Sorry: I seem to be suffering from runaway silliness.
              > >
              > > ----- Original Message ----
              > > From: doritmi <drub@>
              > > To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
              > > Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:35:05 PM
              > > Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
              > Affect
              > >
              > > Ok, I have several time made long posts about why I do not think
              MA
              > > was a wonderful queen. would those who think differently - as
              > Kristin
              > > did before - explain why you think she was a good queen as
              opposed
              > to
              > > being a "wonderful personality" or dying as a hero? I agree with
              > Axel
              > > she matured towards the end. she still, in my view, was not a good
              > > politician. dying heroicly four years after the start of the
              battle,
              > > losing all the steps on the way, is not the sign of a successful
              > > politician or a tallented leader. I get why you'd call her tragic,
              > > heroic, etc'. but in what way was she a wonderful queen?
              > >
              > > --- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
              > > "ladyofhealingtouch " <MadameAntoine@ ...> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > Her image has nothing to do with what was said about the
              Necklace.
              > > > She did NOT want the necklace...I think we all know that by now.
              > > > What was said in this last message, is that things could have
              > been
              > > > handled differently regarding this necklace, with Rohan. I
              > believe
              > > > Antoinette was a wonderful, very intelligent woman, but all
              that
              > was
              > > > being said here, is that if the whole affair, after knowing
              what
              > > > happened with Rohan, had been handled differently, then perhaps
              > > > things would not have escalated as they did...that is ALL that
              > was
              > > > being said in this message. I still am working on her
              image...but
              > > > working on her image does not mean giving her sainthood... as
              > > > wonderful queen as she was. I think there are very few of us
              that
              > > > are ready for sainthood. I still have the high opinon of our
              > queen
              > > > just as I always have and she was very understandably upset
              with
              > > > Rohan on this score. Any of us would have..that he would let
              > himself
              > > > believe that horrible scheming woman so set to bring Antoinette
              > down.
              > > > Forgiveness and compassion are always better used when we are
              > angry,
              > > > even justifiably so.
              > > > blessing,
              > > > Patricia-- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
              > George
              > > > Caffine <geocaffine@ > wrote:
              > > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >
              ______________________________________________________________________
              > ______________
              > > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative
              > vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
              > > http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
              > >
              >
            • doritmi
              I understand what you re saying, but in the 18th century, people were considered and treated as grown up in a much younger age - and many princesses of the
              Message 6 of 24 , Jul 1, 2007
                I understand what you're saying, but in the 18th century, people were
                considered and treated as grown up in a much younger age - and many
                princesses of the same age or younger as MA showed much more maturity
                and better judgment.


                --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com,
                "ladyofhealingtouch" <MadameAntoine@...> wrote:
                >
                > It is true that she didn't get the chance to really show all her true
                > potential. Her life was cut off too quickly. How many of us looking
                > back at our own lives as we were in our 20's think we could have been
                > good rulers? Certainly not I. I was a good mother but I still felt
                > like a girl..and don't think I had the maturity to have been able to
                > be a good queen. Marie Antoinette in her 30's was starting to show
                > wisdom and she had an interest in politics then too, I think she
                > would have been a great help to Louis, but then...perhaps after all,
                > it was time for the monarchies to come to an end. We'll never know
                > what potential she had and can only speculate.--- In
                > Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, George Caffine
                > <geocaffine@> wrote:
                > >
                > > This gets back to our discussion of monarchy versus democracy. A
                > good leader is one who picks: good-hearted advisors, ones who give
                > winning advice; and then taking the right advice when it's offered.
                > Beyond the charisma, nothing more is needed. I always thought it was
                > silly when they blamed Jimmy Carter for not rescuing the Iran
                > hostages, as if he should have swung down from a helicopter, like
                > Rambo or Batman.
                > >
                > > My belief that Marie Antoinette would have made a good Queen is
                > based on sentiment, she never had a chance to prove it. Her poise and
                > ability to win over the people was expressed, but the volume of hate
                > and falling blade cut off any hope of success. Of course, I have to
                > contrast that belief by agreeing she was prone to faux pas (sorry, I
                > have to point out the joke: prone is lying flat, faux pas is false
                > step; result: tripping and falling on her face) so her good
                > intentions might have too often have led to faulty execution (sic).
                > >
                > > Sorry: I seem to be suffering from runaway silliness.
                > >
                > > ----- Original Message ----
                > > From: doritmi <drub@>
                > > To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
                > > Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:35:05 PM
                > > Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
                > Affect
                > >
                > > Ok, I have several time made long posts about why I do not think MA
                > > was a wonderful queen. would those who think differently - as
                > Kristin
                > > did before - explain why you think she was a good queen as opposed
                > to
                > > being a "wonderful personality" or dying as a hero? I agree with
                > Axel
                > > she matured towards the end. she still, in my view, was not a good
                > > politician. dying heroicly four years after the start of the battle,
                > > losing all the steps on the way, is not the sign of a successful
                > > politician or a tallented leader. I get why you'd call her tragic,
                > > heroic, etc'. but in what way was she a wonderful queen?
                > >
                > > --- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
                > > "ladyofhealingtouch " <MadameAntoine@ ...> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > Her image has nothing to do with what was said about the Necklace.
                > > > She did NOT want the necklace...I think we all know that by now.
                > > > What was said in this last message, is that things could have
                > been
                > > > handled differently regarding this necklace, with Rohan. I
                > believe
                > > > Antoinette was a wonderful, very intelligent woman, but all that
                > was
                > > > being said here, is that if the whole affair, after knowing what
                > > > happened with Rohan, had been handled differently, then perhaps
                > > > things would not have escalated as they did...that is ALL that
                > was
                > > > being said in this message. I still am working on her image...but
                > > > working on her image does not mean giving her sainthood... as
                > > > wonderful queen as she was. I think there are very few of us that
                > > > are ready for sainthood. I still have the high opinon of our
                > queen
                > > > just as I always have and she was very understandably upset with
                > > > Rohan on this score. Any of us would have..that he would let
                > himself
                > > > believe that horrible scheming woman so set to bring Antoinette
                > down.
                > > > Forgiveness and compassion are always better used when we are
                > angry,
                > > > even justifiably so.
                > > > blessing,
                > > > Patricia-- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
                > George
                > > > Caffine <geocaffine@ > wrote:
                > > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > ______________________________________________________________________
                > ______________
                > > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative
                > vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
                > > http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
                > >
                >
              • doritmi
                Dear Axel, I agree with most of what you said, but I did want to put these things in historical context. pamphlet wars did not start with MA and she was not
                Message 7 of 24 , Jul 1, 2007
                  Dear Axel,
                  I agree with most of what you said, but I did want to put these things
                  in historical context. pamphlet wars did not start with MA and she was
                  not the only victim. They were used throughout the 18th century (I
                  don't have evidence about before, but maybe before) by opposition to
                  royal government to defame those in power.
                  Pompadour and Du Barry were attacked just as much, if not more, than
                  MA. and the attacks on them were used to undermine and smear Louis XV
                  - in a way that most biographers of MA buy.
                  the people who attacked MA had a lot of practice.
                  The other point is about conspiracies: bad mouthing and libeling
                  someone you're angry at - rightly or wrongly - is not the same as
                  conspiring against them. pamphlets were, at the time, the weapon of
                  the weak, those impotent to fight in other ways. they became powerful
                  in the revolution; but the revolution was not anticipated by many of
                  the earlier pamphleteers against MA.
                  Again, I agree - La MOtte was part of a ongoing tradition. it's not a
                  big surprise, after being arrested and punished, she hated MA, and I
                  completely agree with you: it was the hands that guided her that were
                  the real menace, not she herself.

                  --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
                  <Rand103242@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > It is possible to read "Memoir Justicatif de Madame Lamotte". The
                  > memoirs of Queen Marie Antoinette's greatest nemesis, Madame Jeanne
                  > Lamotte. In my next post I will say more about Madame Lamotte - the
                  > self-styled Countess, adventuress and swindler and ... martyr and
                  > best-selling author.
                  >
                  > But as a prelude to that post, I want to respond to the fine post by
                  > George, who with Dorit and Lady of Healing Touch have engege in a
                  > lively discussion that I hope will continue and that others here will
                  > join.
                  >
                  > The question of this post is - how is it that not only we can today
                  > read these Memoirs but most importantly it was possible to read them
                  > in 1787 a year after the Necklace Affair?
                  >
                  > These Lamotte memoirs (more on them in next post) were entirely
                  > accusatory and extremely defamatory of Marie Antoinette -
                  > giving "proof" to the rumors that the Queen of France was a whore,
                  > lesbian and harlot, and now...the mastermind of the Necklace Affair.
                  >
                  > Yet how was it that such memoirs came about to become the tabloid
                  > sensation and greatest underground best seller in France in the last
                  > years before the 1789 Revolution and the runaway best seller when
                  > censorship ended in 1789?
                  >
                  > Lamotte was branded and condemned to prison for life in 1786.
                  >
                  > Yet, she was aided to escape within a year.
                  > She received refuge in nearby England.
                  > She wrote her memoirs but though she had no doubt had a hand in the
                  > forged letters of Marie Antoinette of France to Rohan - she had never
                  > before written for publication, much less circulation to France.
                  >
                  > Obviously, Lamotte had help. Alot of help. Skilled help in
                  > pamphleteering. High placed help.
                  >
                  > I have my issues with Nesta Webster but she talks about several
                  > different conspiracies to undermine Queen Marie Antoinette and with
                  > her the French monarchy, by **monarchists!**, BEFORE THE 1789
                  > REVOLUTION.
                  >
                  > The first is by the British government,
                  > The second and third were home grown - by the Orleanists - The Duke
                  > de Chatres, later the Duke of Orleans, but also the King's own
                  > brother Duke of Provence (later Louis XVIII) and the "Aunts",
                  > daughters of Louis XV who like Provence disliked the Austrian
                  > alliance and detested the vivacious Marie Antoinette as well as her
                  > supplanting them in partonage, favor and the like,
                  > Forth, by Frederick the Great, the Prussians who feared alliance
                  > between France and Austria and did what was possible to undermine
                  > that and the greastest symbol of Alliance.
                  > Webster mentions a 5th conspirator too that escapes me at this moment.
                  >
                  > When you think of all these groups out to get Marie Antoinette, it
                  > reminds me of the movie MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS.
                  >
                  > If you go to LINKS in this group, you can see a further description
                  > of this Nesta Webster book under
                  >
                  > Orleanist & Other Conspiracies against MA, part of Nesta Webster's
                  > detailed history
                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/links
                  > It's a good description - but the link is to geocities and needs
                  > updating but i suspect this is still up on the internet somewhere.
                  >
                  > Lamotte had help to gain her freedom. She received safe haven in
                  > England. When her memoirs were ready so too were the channels to get
                  > her story to a ready readership.
                  >
                  > But Lamotte was not the beginning - it was part culination and also a
                  > spectacular part of an ongoing campaign to, as George says, set up
                  > Marie Antoinette - to bit by bit, year by year destroy the reputation
                  > of Marie Antoinette.
                  >
                  > That campaign was so effective that by 1791, when news of the royal
                  > family's flight reached Paris, a bust of Queen Marie Antoinette was
                  > taken from its pedestal tied to a horse and dragged of through the
                  > streets of France's capitol with the horseman proclaiming he just
                  > wished it was the real queen tied to and dragged through the streets
                  > of Paris, to the applause of appreciative Parisians.
                  >
                  > Chantel Thomas details a 20 year history of a hate campaign
                  > orchestrated against Marie Antoinette in her book WICKED QUEEN
                  > (translated from the 1989 French book LA REINE EN LES PAMPHLETS
                  > published in US by Zone Books). Thomas tells of a campaign begun not
                  > long after her arrival in France in 1770 until her death in 1793.
                  > Thomas translates several of the salacious pamphlets in her appendix.
                  >
                  > You can read of this campaign right here in the group, if you go to
                  > FILES in this group. A couple weeks ago I added an article I saw
                  > online about this.
                  > "Let em Eat Cake: Mythical Marie Antoinette" by Nancy L. Barker (1993
                  > article for Phi Alpha Theta
                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/files
                  >
                  > You can read of this more, if you go to LINKS in this group.
                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/links
                  > then look for
                  >
                  > Family Romance of the French Revolution by Lynn Hunt
                  > This link to significant portions of Lynn Hunt's book discusses the
                  > death of Louis XVI � the killing of the "father" of the French people
                  > under the monarchy, and the "Bad Mother", pp. 89-125, which discusses
                  > the character assassination and themn the killing of Queen Marie
                  > Antoinette.
                  >
                  > Yes, Marie Antoinette was set up. Though the Queen was entirely
                  > innocent in the Necklace Affair, we know today that this affair
                  > played right into the hands of those whose mission it was to destroy
                  > this woman. And destroy Her, they did.
                  >
                  > Axel
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, George Caffine
                  > <geocaffine@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > I'm sorry if you think I'm being insensitive. My point is she was
                  > set up, and not just by the named conspirators: The LaMottes were
                  > clearly greedy, Countess LaMotte also dangerously vindictive. Rohan
                  > seems to have been an
                  > > all-round dupe, greedy and a suck-up as well. But these players
                  > weren't the cause ot the Queen's disgrace.
                  > >
                  > > Marie Antoinette was no saint; a close examination of the rest of
                  > the saints would reveal clay feet all round; but she was an innocent
                  > victim in this affair. Marie Antoinette had good reasons for
                  > demanding Rohan's public trial, it had to be public for her to be
                  > exonerated, she could see that and her demand was no sign of hubris.
                  > Public, because any judgement in-camera would guarantee the Queen's
                  > condemnation; her condemnation despite the public trial proves that
                  > and more.
                  > >
                  > > So, at long last, my point. The nearly universal booing and ranting
                  > that resulted smacks of organization. I believe the revolution was
                  > considerably enriched by the Diamond Necklace Affair, but that
                  > enrichment was managed, it didn't occur by accident. The revolution
                  > was planned in back rooms somewhere, and the Necklace trial was used
                  > as a device. The conclusion that the Diamond Necklace Affair led to
                  > the revolution is what I challenge. That furor and reaction to the
                  > Queen was a snake lying in wait, sure and ready to strike. The attack
                  > on the monarchy had become inevitable, the purposefulness of the
                  > public reaction was too consistent, too fierce not to be stage-
                  > managed, as in the American movie Wag the Dog.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > ----- Original Message ----
                  > > From: ladyofhealingtouch <MadameAntoine@>
                  > > To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
                  > > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 11:25:03 PM
                  > > Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
                  > Affect
                  > >
                  > > Her image has nothing to do with what was said about the Necklace.
                  > > She did NOT want the necklace...I think we all know that by now.
                  > > What was said in this last message, is that things could have been
                  > > handled differently regarding this necklace, with Rohan. I believe
                  > > Antoinette was a wonderful, very intelligent woman, but all that
                  > was
                  > > being said here, is that if the whole affair, after knowing what
                  > > happened with Rohan, had been handled differently, then perhaps
                  > > things would not have escalated as they did...that is ALL that was
                  > > being said in this message. I still am working on her image...but
                  > > working on her image does not mean giving her sainthood... as
                  > > wonderful queen as she was. I think there are very few of us that
                  > > are ready for sainthood. I still have the high opinon of our queen
                  > > just as I always have and she was very understandably upset with
                  > > Rohan on this score. Any of us would have..that he would let
                  > himself
                  > > believe that horrible scheming woman so set to bring Antoinette
                  > down.
                  > > Forgiveness and compassion are always better used when we are
                  > angry,
                  > > even justifiably so.
                  > > blessing,
                  > > Patricia-- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com, George
                  > > Caffine <geocaffine@ ...> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > I'm totally confused, and I wonder how we're going to reform
                  > Marie
                  > > Antoinette's image. Are we saying she was at fault in the Diamond
                  > > Necklace fiasco? I don't understand how.
                  > > >
                  > > > If she let things stand without seeking a trial she would be
                  > found
                  > > guilty by the unrefuted charges. If she left Rohan out she would be
                  > > found guilty because a main player wasn't heard. We know she didn't
                  > > ask for or want the necklace, should she have paid for it anyway?
                  > If
                  > > a prostitute looked like the Queen does that mean the Queen was,
                  > > somehow, like the prostitute? If we, in another world separated by
                  > > two hundred years, can figure out that the Queen would never have
                  > > become involved in such an expensive purchase, then surely the
                  > people
                  > > on the scene could have figured it out; even Rohan the sycophant
                  > > could have figured it out.
                  > > >
                  > > > It would seem she'd be found guilty no matter what she did.
                  > Hubris
                  > > had nothing to do with it, she wasn't trying to advance herself or
                  > > her cause, she was trying to get out from under. She was bound to
                  > > fail; the liars, slanderers, and libelers were all over her, like
                  > > snakes too numerous and too fascinating to escape.
                  > > >
                  > > > "Trampled to death by geese," that was her fate long before the
                  > > blade fell. The revolution wasn't started by the Diamond Necklace
                  > > Affair, the proof it was already unavoidable was that the avalanche
                  > > of transparent lies were accepted as credible. "First the sentence
                  > > and then the verdict," that's the proper Queen of Hearts quote. The
                  > > only proper defense, after sentence has been pronounced and carried
                  > > out, is: we who KNOW the truth of Marie Antoinette should do all
                  > that
                  > > is in our power to change the mass public opinion of her.
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > ----- Original Message ----
                  > > > From: ladyofhealingtouch <MadameAntoine@ ...>
                  > > > To: Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com
                  > > > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:45:18 PM
                  > > > Subject: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino Affect
                  > > >
                  > > > I have been studying up on this and just read the article that
                  > Axel
                  > > > wrote on "The Affair of the Diamond Necklace"
                  > > >
                  > > > Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
                  > > > Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest |
                  > Switch
                  > > format to Traditional
                  > > > Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
                  > Recent
                  > > Activity
                  > > > 3New Members
                  > > > 1New Files
                  > > > Visit Your Group
                  > > > SPONSORED LINKS
                  > > > Royalty free stock images
                  > > > Marie antoinette
                  > > > Royalty free images
                  > > > Yahoo! Search
                  > > > Find it faster
                  > > > with Yahoo!
                  > > > shortcuts.
                  > > > Yahoo! Movies
                  > > > Want a sneak peek?
                  > > > Check out new
                  > > > trailers and clips
                  > > > Yahoo! News
                  > > > Kevin Sites
                  > > > Get coverage of
                  > > > world crises..
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
                  > > ____________ __
                  > > > Need a vacation? Get great deals
                  > > > to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
                  > > > http://travel. yahoo.com/
                  > > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > ______________________________________________________________________
                  > ______________
                  > > Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
                  > > Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
                  > > http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html
                  > >
                  >
                • doritmi
                  Dear Axel, I agree with your point about the revolution testing MA. therefore, in my view, the assessment of her as queen should focus on her reign from
                  Message 8 of 24 , Jul 1, 2007
                    Dear Axel,
                    I agree with your point about the revolution testing MA. therefore, in
                    my view, the assessment of her as queen should focus on her reign from
                    17774-1789. to this, I'd like to say several things in response to our
                    comments:
                    a. as you point out, MA was a queen, not king. her role was very
                    clearly defined. the criticism of her can be put in two categories: i.
                    she tried to interfere in politics. ii. she did not fulfill the role
                    of queen of France. (and see previous posts for my discussion of what
                    that role was and how she didn't do it.
                    b. she was not dealt such a bad hand. yes, she had enemies in court
                    coming in. many others did. but she was very popular on her ascension.
                    she squandered much of that popularity.
                    c. being a wonderful person is not being a wonderful queen. I don't
                    care about MA's personal persona. as a political persona, she had a
                    lot lacking.

                    --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
                    <Rand103242@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof France,
                    > was MA a good politician?
                    >
                    > I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing world
                    > sentiment would be - are you outa your mind?
                    > Marie Antoinette was an awful queen. She was no politician. She had
                    > not a clue.
                    >
                    > However, perhaps it's the contrarian in me. I'm not so ready to
                    > dismiss the question. Obviously, Dorit's points are salient as they
                    > normally are *smiles* But I do think that George and Lady are on to
                    > something.
                    >
                    > Simon Schama put it quite cogently in the recent Grubin documentary
                    > on Marie Antoinette that aired on PBS last fall. The documentary
                    > more than any other film to date gives air to the campaign of
                    > vilification against Marie Antoinette with Chantal Thomas among the
                    > Talking Heads.
                    >
                    > Schama in that film mentions the recognition of public hatred of her
                    > after the Necklace Affair. That affair and especially the court's
                    > verdict and public approval of it were (along with her cool reception
                    > in Paris when she presented her second boy born in 1785), were a big
                    > time wake up call to Marie Antoinette.
                    >
                    > As Schama said, "Marie Antoinette had to grow up. She had to grow up
                    > very fast!"
                    >
                    > In the years before Revolution she worked as a politician to try to
                    > repair both her image and her monarchy - there was the Vigee LeBrun
                    > 1787 portrait, the later 1788 portrait and other efforts of the Queen
                    > to improve her image, to cut and take more care to her expenses, to
                    > try to aid Louis in the governmental crisis of 1787-89, and to try to
                    > win favor with the French people, including favoring double
                    > representation of the 3rd estate, commoners in the Estates General
                    > called for May 1789.
                    >
                    > Then, as the Revolution took hold the Queen was ever the activist to
                    > attempt to stem the tide of Revolution. She was key to the outing of
                    > Necker in July 1789, the calling out of troops to protect Versailles
                    > in September 1789 and the flight to Varennes in June 1791. She
                    > conducted correpondence with Austrians and others for intervention,
                    > she was key to the Brunswick Manifesto.
                    >
                    > We can look at each of these and say - Yes, Marie Antoinette was a
                    > polician... she was also a walking disastor... everything she touched
                    > turned to ruin.
                    >
                    > But to this, I'd offer three comebacks.
                    >
                    > First, you have to consider the hand she was dealt. To some extent
                    > she was changing deck chairs on the Titanic. a) France was bankrupt.
                    > Much of that the rsult of 7 Years War she had nothing to do with and
                    > participation in the American Revolution which she opposed. b) She
                    > was hated as Queen - part from her own devices, but part also from
                    > the campaign against her and part too from her role as a strong woman
                    > and an Austrian foreigner.
                    >
                    > Second, you have to consider that she operated as a politician with a
                    > hand tied behind her back - she was Queen and not King and she had
                    > been bred to follow the king (despite that her mother acted
                    > differently). Thus, when several key crunch moments occured
                    > in 1789 - to leave Versailles, in 1791 - to cut their way free at
                    > Varennes, and in 1792 - to defend the Tuileries - it was Marie
                    > Antoinette who wore the pants in the family. She was a do-er and she
                    > was a fighter. It was the Queen who would make the key tactical move
                    > in 1789, and who would fight when fighting was needed in 1791 and
                    > 1792. Her wimp, phlegmatic husband always shied from confrontation
                    > and she would not overrule him when he was decided on lethargy.
                    >
                    > Third, as said in my title above the Queen was tested by the infermo
                    > of Revolution. In baseball parlance, it's like bringing in your
                    > closer with the bases loaded in a tie or 1-run ball game and blaming
                    > him for the loss when the ball hit scores a run. Plus, I'd go
                    > further, blaiming your closer when the two winning runs are scored
                    > off an error by the center fielder. Marie Antoinette had almost no
                    > poliitcal role until 1787. Louis suffered a breakdown in nerves. She
                    > assumed the role because he needed her, and she rose to the occasion.
                    > But it was quite late in the ball game. She did what she could and
                    > as stated above - she still might have saved the game had Louis not
                    > made the three errors cited above.
                    >
                    > Forth, her role as queen and political actor that really began in
                    > 1787 ended with the overthrow of the monarchy August 10, 1792. so,
                    > the true period of her poliitcal awakening and activity as she "grew
                    > up fast" and did her best to learn and act on the job was just 5
                    > years - and she did that under the glare of being for much of the
                    > time the effective head of state. Even more than a President, the
                    > King was absolute ruler.
                    >
                    > When US Presidents Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson
                    > had to grow up fast because the assassination of the US head of state
                    > suddenly brought these ceremonial (Vice President) men to power each
                    > were men more than 50 years old and each had been a politician for
                    > over 30 years before taking office as Vice President. In contrast,
                    > Marie Antoinette was just 30 years old, she had been a carefree
                    > ornament (fashion and etiquette showpiece for monarchy) and breeder
                    > (womb for the dauphin), and thus essentially zero training in
                    > political office. Now she had to bootstrap herself into being the
                    > head of state of France. Add to that she had to do so not only with
                    > a public that hated her but also at a time of enormous personal
                    > stress. Her cherished son whom she had so waited for and so adored
                    > was dying of TB despite all her efforts to save the little boy. He
                    > died on June 4, 1789 a month after the Estates General was called and
                    > month before the Fall of the Bastille.
                    >
                    > Fifth, I'd repeat the points made by George and Lady, that the life
                    > of Marie Antoinette was literally and figuratively cut short. She was
                    > indeed beheaded but her role as queen was cut short over a year
                    > earlier in August 1792. She had just 5 years for her political
                    > career. She was out of office at age 36 and beheaded at age 37. She
                    > surely paid the highest price for her failures. But thinking of
                    > George and Lady's points, one wonders, if she had not been cut off so
                    > young and after so short a time, what kind of politician she might
                    > have matured into.
                    >
                    > Sixth and last point, Pimprennelle is fond of saying to detractors
                    > READ HER LETTERS (reminds me of the 1884 Democratic slogan by
                    > Cleveland's supporters to answer Blain - Burn Burn Burn this letter!)
                    > There are published letters of Marie Antoinette - you can read her
                    > letters. If you, I believe you will discover the kind and generous
                    > human being Marie Antoinette was.
                    >
                    > But as to what kind of politician she might have been.... might have
                    > been had it not all ended so soon for her... READ THE TRANSCIPTS...
                    > read the transcripts of her trial - the grace, dignity, insight,
                    > adroitness of her answers. Richard Nixon saved his political life
                    > with the Checkers Speach. If you read Marie Antoinette's answers, I
                    > suggest you'll believe she could have been aquitted if the jury was
                    > not stacked against her. She unlike Nixon was not a Duke educated
                    > lawyer, she had no coaches, she had no chance to prepared, she was
                    > kept in a dungeon and purposely sleep deprived. Yet, she handled the
                    > trial for her life with brilliance.
                    >
                    > Hence, this Queen, this politician despite her failures had in my
                    > view the potential for greatness as a politician had she ever gotten
                    > the kind of second chances so many of the greats Lincoln, Churchill,
                    > DeGaulle, Roosevelt got in their political lives. After disaster at
                    > Gallipoli, with the India bill, with the abdication crisis and more,
                    > who in 1936 would have imagined Churchill back in power much less the
                    > svaior of his country revered for all time as the leader of Britain
                    > in their finest hour. Marie Antoinette never got her chance for
                    > vindication.
                    >
                    > Axel
                    >
                    >
                    > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, George Caffine
                    > <geocaffine@> wrote:
                    >
                    > Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino Affect
                    > >
                    > > This gets back to our discussion of monarchy versus democracy. A
                    > good leader is one who picks: good-hearted advisors, ones who give
                    > winning advice; and then taking the right advice when it's offered.
                    > Beyond the charisma, nothing more is needed. I always thought it was
                    > silly when they blamed Jimmy Carter for not rescuing the Iran
                    > hostages, as if he should have swung down from a helicopter, like
                    > Rambo or Batman.
                    > >
                    > > My belief that Marie Antoinette would have made a good Queen is
                    > based on sentiment, she never had a chance to prove it. Her poise and
                    > ability to win over the people was expressed, but the volume of hate
                    > and falling blade cut off any hope of success. Of course, I have to
                    > contrast that belief by agreeing she was prone to faux pas (sorry, I
                    > have to point out the joke: prone is lying flat, faux pas is false
                    > step; result: tripping and falling on her face) so her good
                    > intentions might have too often have led to faulty execution (sic).
                    > >
                    > > Sorry: I seem to be suffering from runaway silliness.
                    > >
                    > > ----- Original Message ----
                    > > From: doritmi <drub@>
                    > > To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
                    > > Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:35:05 PM
                    > > Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
                    > Affect
                    > >
                    > > Ok, I have several time made long posts about why I do not think MA
                    > > was a wonderful queen. would those who think differently - as
                    > Kristin
                    > > did before - explain why you think she was a good queen as opposed
                    > to
                    > > being a "wonderful personality" or dying as a hero? I agree with
                    > Axel
                    > > she matured towards the end. she still, in my view, was not a good
                    > > politician. dying heroicly four years after the start of the battle,
                    > > losing all the steps on the way, is not the sign of a successful
                    > > politician or a tallented leader. I get why you'd call her tragic,
                    > > heroic, etc'. but in what way was she a wonderful queen?
                    > >
                    > > --- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
                    > > "ladyofhealingtouch " <MadameAntoine@ ...> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > Her image has nothing to do with what was said about the Necklace.
                    > > > She did NOT want the necklace...I think we all know that by now.
                    > > > What was said in this last message, is that things could have
                    > been
                    > > > handled differently regarding this necklace, with Rohan. I
                    > believe
                    > > > Antoinette was a wonderful, very intelligent woman, but all that
                    > was
                    > > > being said here, is that if the whole affair, after knowing what
                    > > > happened with Rohan, had been handled differently, then perhaps
                    > > > things would not have escalated as they did...that is ALL that
                    > was
                    > > > being said in this message. I still am working on her image...but
                    > > > working on her image does not mean giving her sainthood... as
                    > > > wonderful queen as she was. I think there are very few of us that
                    > > > are ready for sainthood. I still have the high opinon of our
                    > queen
                    > > > just as I always have and she was very understandably upset with
                    > > > Rohan on this score. Any of us would have..that he would let
                    > himself
                    > > > believe that horrible scheming woman so set to bring Antoinette
                    > down.
                    > > > Forgiveness and compassion are always better used when we are
                    > angry,
                    > > > even justifiably so.
                    > > > blessing,
                    > > > Patricia-- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
                    > George
                    > > > Caffine <geocaffine@ > wrote:
                    > > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > ______________________________________________________________________
                    > ______________
                    > > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative
                    > vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
                    > > http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
                    > >
                    >
                  • doritmi
                    I think it s a chicken and egg issue: you re right, MA was used as an example to keep women out of government (and it s a really nice point), but was also
                    Message 9 of 24 , Jul 1, 2007
                      I think it's a chicken and egg issue: you're right, MA was used as an
                      example to keep women out of government (and it's a really nice
                      point), but was also resented for interfering in government because
                      women in government were bad.
                      just to remind you, it wasn't just Maria Theresa - there were several
                      strong women rulers in the 18th century (e.g., Catherine the great).

                      --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, George Caffine
                      <geocaffine@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > As Axel has pointed out, these recent messages are fascinating. I
                      would like to make another point on this story: I believe the
                      tarnishing of Marie Antoinette's image has served, in large part, to
                      prove women didn't belong in government. So many times I've come
                      across people propping up their arguments on women's unsuitability by
                      mentioning Marie Antoinette, and, in every case, not having to prove
                      what she did wrong. The oddest part of that argument is that Marie
                      Antoinette's mother was recognized as a great strategist.
                      >
                      > So Patricia may be serving a cause which is still important to all
                      of us.
                      >
                      > ----- Original Message ----
                      > From: Axel <Rand103242@...>
                      > To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
                      > Sent: Sunday, July 1, 2007 12:12:22 PM
                      > Subject: Queen: handicapped policitian weaned in Inferno of Revolution
                      >
                      > Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof France,
                      > was MA a good politician?
                      >
                      > I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing world
                      > sentiment would be - are you outa your mind?
                      > Marie Antoinette was an awful queen. She was no politician. She had
                      > not a clue.
                      >
                      > However, perhaps it's the contrarian in me. I'm not so ready to
                      > dismiss the question. Obviously, Dorit's points are salient as they
                      > normally are *smiles* But I do think that George and Lady are on to
                      > something.
                      >
                      > Simon Schama put it quite cogently in the recent Grubin documentary
                      > on Marie Antoinette that aired on PBS last fall. The documentary
                      > more than any other film to date gives air to the campaign of
                      > vilification against Marie Antoinette with Chantal Thomas among the
                      > Talking Heads.
                      >
                      > Schama in that film mentions the recognition of public hatred of her
                      > after the Necklace Affair. That affair and especially the court's
                      > verdict and public approval of it were (along with her cool reception
                      > in Paris when she presented her second boy born in 1785), were a big
                      > time wake up call to Marie Antoinette.
                      >
                      > As Schama said, "Marie Antoinette had to grow up. She had to grow up
                      > very fast!"
                      >
                      > In the years before Revolution she worked as a politician to try to
                      > repair both her image and her monarchy - there was the Vigee LeBrun
                      > 1787 portrait, the later 1788 portrait and other efforts of the Queen
                      > to improve her image, to cut and take more care to her expenses, to
                      > try to aid Louis in the governmental crisis of 1787-89, and to try to
                      > win favor with the French people, including favoring double
                      > representation of the 3rd estate, commoners in the Estates General
                      > called for May 1789.
                      >
                      > Then, as the Revolution took hold the Queen was ever the activist to
                      > attempt to stem the tide of Revolution. She was key to the outing of
                      > Necker in July 1789, the calling out of troops to protect Versailles
                      > in September 1789 and the flight to Varennes in June 1791. She
                      > conducted correpondence with Austrians and others for intervention,
                      > she was key to the Brunswick Manifesto.
                      >
                      > We can look at each of these and say - Yes, Marie Antoinette was a
                      > polician... she was also a walking disastor... everything she touched
                      > turned to ruin.
                      >
                      > But to this, I'd offer three comebacks.
                      >
                      > First, you have to consider the hand she was dealt. To some extent
                      > she was changing deck chairs on the Titanic. a) France was bankrupt.
                      > Much of that the rsult of 7 Years War she had nothing to do with and
                      > participation in the American Revolution which she opposed. b) She
                      > was hated as Queen - part from her own devices, but part also from
                      > the campaign against her and part too from her role as a strong woman
                      > and an Austrian foreigner.
                      >
                      > Second, you have to consider that she operated as a politician with a
                      > hand tied behind her back - she was Queen and not King and she had
                      > been bred to follow the king (despite that her mother acted
                      > differently) . Thus, when several key crunch moments occured
                      > in 1789 - to leave Versailles, in 1791 - to cut their way free at
                      > Varennes, and in 1792 - to defend the Tuileries - it was Marie
                      > Antoinette who wore the pants in the family. She was a do-er and she
                      > was a fighter. It was the Queen who would make the key tactical move
                      > in 1789, and who would fight when fighting was needed in 1791 and
                      > 1792. Her wimp, phlegmatic husband always shied from confrontation
                      > and she would not overrule him when he was decided on lethargy.
                      >
                      > Third, as said in my title above the Queen was tested by the infermo
                      > of Revolution. In baseball parlance, it's like bringing in your
                      > closer with the bases loaded in a tie or 1-run ball game and blaming
                      > him for the loss when the ball hit scores a run. Plus, I'd go
                      > further, blaiming your closer when the two winning runs are scored
                      > off an error by the center fielder. Marie Antoinette had almost no
                      > poliitcal role until 1787. Louis suffered a breakdown in nerves. She
                      > assumed the role because he needed her, and she rose to the occasion.
                      > But it was quite late in the ball game. She did what she could and
                      > as stated above - she still might have saved the game had Louis not
                      > made the three errors cited above.
                      >
                      > Forth, her role as queen and political actor that really began in
                      > 1787 ended with the overthrow of the monarchy August 10, 1792. so,
                      > the true period of her poliitcal awakening and activity as she "grew
                      > up fast" and did her best to learn and act on the job was just 5
                      > years - and she did that under the glare of being for much of the
                      > time the effective head of state. Even more than a President, the
                      > King was absolute ruler.
                      >
                      > When US Presidents Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson
                      > had to grow up fast because the assassination of the US head of state
                      > suddenly brought these ceremonial (Vice President) men to power each
                      > were men more than 50 years old and each had been a politician for
                      > over 30 years before taking office as Vice President. In contrast,
                      > Marie Antoinette was just 30 years old, she had been a carefree
                      > ornament (fashion and etiquette showpiece for monarchy) and breeder
                      > (womb for the dauphin), and thus essentially zero training in
                      > political office. Now she had to bootstrap herself into being the
                      > head of state of France. Add to that she had to do so not only with
                      > a public that hated her but also at a time of enormous personal
                      > stress. Her cherished son whom she had so waited for and so adored
                      > was dying of TB despite all her efforts to save the little boy. He
                      > died on June 4, 1789 a month after the Estates General was called and
                      > month before the Fall of the Bastille.
                      >
                      > Fifth, I'd repeat the points made by George and Lady, that the life
                      > of Marie Antoinette was literally and figuratively cut short. She was
                      > indeed beheaded but her role as queen was cut short over a year
                      > earlier in August 1792. She had just 5 years for her political
                      > career. She was out of office at age 36 and beheaded at age 37. She
                      > surely paid the highest price for her failures. But thinking of
                      > George and Lady's points, one wonders, if she had not been cut off so
                      > young and after so short a time, what kind of politician she might
                      > have matured into.
                      >
                      > Sixth and last point, Pimprennelle is fond of saying to detractors
                      > READ HER LETTERS (reminds me of the 1884 Democratic slogan by
                      > Cleveland's supporters to answer Blain - Burn Burn Burn this letter!)
                      > There are published letters of Marie Antoinette - you can read her
                      > letters. If you, I believe you will discover the kind and generous
                      > human being Marie Antoinette was.
                      >
                      > But as to what kind of politician she might have been.... might have
                      > been had it not all ended so soon for her... READ THE TRANSCIPTS.. .
                      > read the transcripts of her trial - the grace, dignity, insight,
                      > adroitness of her answers. Richard Nixon saved his political life
                      > with the Checkers Speach. If you read Marie Antoinette's answers, I
                      > suggest you'll believe she could have been aquitted if the jury was
                      > not stacked against her. She unlike Nixon was not a Duke educated
                      > lawyer, she had no coaches, she had no chance to prepared, she was
                      > kept in a dungeon and purposely sleep deprived. Yet, she handled the
                      > trial for her life with brilliance.
                      >
                      > Hence, this Queen, this politician despite her failures had in my
                      > view the potential for greatness as a politician had she ever gotten
                      > the kind of second chances so many of the greats Lincoln, Churchill,
                      > DeGaulle, Roosevelt got in their political lives. After disaster at
                      > Gallipoli, with the India bill, with the abdication crisis and more,
                      > who in 1936 would have imagined Churchill back in power much less the
                      > svaior of his country revered for all time as the leader of Britain
                      > in their finest hour. Marie Antoinette never got her chance for
                      > vindication.
                      >
                      > Axel
                      >
                      >
                      > --- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com, George Caffine
                      > <geocaffine@ ...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino Affect
                      > >
                      > > This gets back to our discussion of monarchy versus democracy. A
                      > good leader is one who picks: good-hearted advisors, ones who give
                      > winning advice; and then taking the right advice when it's offered.
                      > Beyond the charisma, nothing more is needed. I always thought it was
                      > silly when they blamed Jimmy Carter for not rescuing the Iran
                      > hostages, as if he should have swung down from a helicopter, like
                      > Rambo or Batman.
                      > >
                      > > My belief that Marie Antoinette would have made a good Queen is
                      > based on sentiment, she never had a chance to prove it. Her poise and
                      > ability to win over the people was expressed, but the volume of hate
                      > and falling blade cut off any hope of success. Of course, I have to
                      > contrast that belief by agreeing she was prone to faux pas (sorry, I
                      > have to point out the joke: prone is lying flat, faux pas is false
                      > step; result: tripping and falling on her face) so her good
                      > intentions might have too often have led to faulty execution (sic).
                      > >
                      > > Sorry: I seem to be suffering from runaway silliness.
                      > >
                      > > ----- Original Message ----
                      > > From: doritmi <drub@>
                      > > To: Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com
                      > > Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:35:05 PM
                      > > Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
                      > Affect
                      > >
                      > > Ok, I have several time made long posts about why I do not think MA
                      > > was a wonderful queen. would those who think differently - as
                      > Kristin
                      > > did before - explain why you think she was a good queen as opposed
                      > to
                      > > being a "wonderful personality" or dying as a hero? I agree with
                      > Axel
                      > > she matured towards the end. she still, in my view, was not a good
                      > > politician. dying heroicly four years after the start of the battle,
                      > > losing all the steps on the way, is not the sign of a successful
                      > > politician or a tallented leader. I get why you'd call her tragic,
                      > > heroic, etc'. but in what way was she a wonderful queen?
                      > >
                      > > --- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
                      > > "ladyofhealingtouch " <MadameAntoine@ ...> wrote:
                      > > >
                      > > > Her image has nothing to do with what was said about the Necklace.
                      > > > She did NOT want the necklace...I think we all know that by now.
                      > > > What was said in this last message, is that things could have
                      > been
                      > > > handled differently regarding this necklace, with Rohan. I
                      > believe
                      > > > Antoinette was a wonderful, very intelligent woman, but all that
                      > was
                      > > > being said here, is that if the whole affair, after knowing what
                      > > > happened with Rohan, had been handled differently, then perhaps
                      > > > things would not have escalated as they did...that is ALL that
                      > was
                      > > > being said in this message. I still am working on her image...but
                      > > > working on her image does not mean giving her sainthood... as
                      > > > wonderful queen as she was. I think there are very few of us that
                      > > > are ready for sainthood. I still have the high opinon of our
                      > queen
                      > > > just as I always have and she was very understandably upset with
                      > > > Rohan on this score. Any of us would have..that he would let
                      > himself
                      > > > believe that horrible scheming woman so set to bring Antoinette
                      > down.
                      > > > Forgiveness and compassion are always better used when we are
                      > angry,
                      > > > even justifiably so.
                      > > > blessing,
                      > > > Patricia-- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
                      > George
                      > > > Caffine <geocaffine@ > wrote:
                      > > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
                      > ____________ __
                      > > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative
                      > vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
                      > > http://autos. yahoo.com/ green_center/
                      > >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      ____________________________________________________________________________________
                      > Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel
                      today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
                      >
                    • charlesdiago
                      Thank you, doritmi: I loved this post. Yes, MA s role was clearly defined: she chose to ignore it. And I loved the way you worded this: she squandered much
                      Message 10 of 24 , Jul 2, 2007
                        Thank you, doritmi:

                        I loved this post.

                        Yes, MA's role was clearly defined: she chose to ignore it.

                        And I loved the way you worded this: "she squandered much of that
                        popularity". Squandered it like easy credit.

                        But particularly your third point is relevant when discussing her
                        leadership abilities:

                        "c. being a wonderful person is not being a wonderful queen. I don't
                        care about MA's personal persona. as a political persona, she had a
                        lot lacking."

                        Charlotte Corday said it best when she said of Louis XVI:

                        "I believe him virtuous, but a weak king cannot be a good one; he
                        cannot check the misfortunes of his people."

                        Thank you for making these important points.



                        --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "doritmi"
                        <drub@...> wrote:

                        Re: Queen: handicapped policitian weaned in Inferno of Revolution
                        >
                        > Dear Axel,
                        > I agree with your point about the revolution testing MA. therefore,
                        in
                        > my view, the assessment of her as queen should focus on her reign
                        from
                        > 17774-1789. to this, I'd like to say several things in response to
                        our
                        > comments:
                        > a. as you point out, MA was a queen, not king. her role was very
                        > clearly defined. the criticism of her can be put in two categories:
                        i.
                        > she tried to interfere in politics. ii. she did not fulfill the role
                        > of queen of France. (and see previous posts for my discussion of
                        what
                        > that role was and how she didn't do it.
                        > b. she was not dealt such a bad hand. yes, she had enemies in court
                        > coming in. many others did. but she was very popular on her
                        ascension.
                        > she squandered much of that popularity.
                        > c. being a wonderful person is not being a wonderful queen. I don't
                        > care about MA's personal persona. as a political persona, she had a
                        > lot lacking.
                        >
                        > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
                        > <Rand103242@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof France,
                        > > was MA a good politician?
                        > >
                        > > I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing world
                        > > sentiment would be - are you outa your mind?
                        > > Marie Antoinette was an awful queen. She was no politician. She
                        had
                        > > not a clue.
                        > >
                        > > However, perhaps it's the contrarian in me. I'm not so ready to
                        > > dismiss the question. Obviously, Dorit's points are salient as
                        they
                        > > normally are *smiles* But I do think that George and Lady are on
                        to
                        > > something.
                        > >
                        > > Simon Schama put it quite cogently in the recent Grubin
                        documentary
                        > > on Marie Antoinette that aired on PBS last fall. The documentary
                        > > more than any other film to date gives air to the campaign of
                        > > vilification against Marie Antoinette with Chantal Thomas among
                        the
                        > > Talking Heads.
                        > >
                        > > Schama in that film mentions the recognition of public hatred of
                        her
                        > > after the Necklace Affair. That affair and especially the
                        court's
                        > > verdict and public approval of it were (along with her cool
                        reception
                        > > in Paris when she presented her second boy born in 1785), were a
                        big
                        > > time wake up call to Marie Antoinette.
                        > >
                        > > As Schama said, "Marie Antoinette had to grow up. She had to
                        grow up
                        > > very fast!"
                        > >
                        > > In the years before Revolution she worked as a politician to try
                        to
                        > > repair both her image and her monarchy - there was the Vigee
                        LeBrun
                        > > 1787 portrait, the later 1788 portrait and other efforts of the
                        Queen
                        > > to improve her image, to cut and take more care to her expenses,
                        to
                        > > try to aid Louis in the governmental crisis of 1787-89, and to
                        try to
                        > > win favor with the French people, including favoring double
                        > > representation of the 3rd estate, commoners in the Estates
                        General
                        > > called for May 1789.
                        > >
                        > > Then, as the Revolution took hold the Queen was ever the
                        activist to
                        > > attempt to stem the tide of Revolution. She was key to the
                        outing of
                        > > Necker in July 1789, the calling out of troops to protect
                        Versailles
                        > > in September 1789 and the flight to Varennes in June 1791. She
                        > > conducted correpondence with Austrians and others for
                        intervention,
                        > > she was key to the Brunswick Manifesto.
                        > >
                        > > We can look at each of these and say - Yes, Marie Antoinette was
                        a
                        > > polician... she was also a walking disastor... everything she
                        touched
                        > > turned to ruin.
                        > >
                        > > But to this, I'd offer three comebacks.
                        > >
                        > > First, you have to consider the hand she was dealt. To some
                        extent
                        > > she was changing deck chairs on the Titanic. a) France was
                        bankrupt.
                        > > Much of that the rsult of 7 Years War she had nothing to do with
                        and
                        > > participation in the American Revolution which she opposed. b)
                        She
                        > > was hated as Queen - part from her own devices, but part also
                        from
                        > > the campaign against her and part too from her role as a strong
                        woman
                        > > and an Austrian foreigner.
                        > >
                        > > Second, you have to consider that she operated as a politician
                        with a
                        > > hand tied behind her back - she was Queen and not King and she
                        had
                        > > been bred to follow the king (despite that her mother acted
                        > > differently). Thus, when several key crunch moments occured
                        > > in 1789 - to leave Versailles, in 1791 - to cut their way free at
                        > > Varennes, and in 1792 - to defend the Tuileries - it was Marie
                        > > Antoinette who wore the pants in the family. She was a do-er and
                        she
                        > > was a fighter. It was the Queen who would make the key tactical
                        move
                        > > in 1789, and who would fight when fighting was needed in 1791 and
                        > > 1792. Her wimp, phlegmatic husband always shied from
                        confrontation
                        > > and she would not overrule him when he was decided on lethargy.
                        > >
                        > > Third, as said in my title above the Queen was tested by the
                        infermo
                        > > of Revolution. In baseball parlance, it's like bringing in your
                        > > closer with the bases loaded in a tie or 1-run ball game and
                        blaming
                        > > him for the loss when the ball hit scores a run. Plus, I'd go
                        > > further, blaiming your closer when the two winning runs are
                        scored
                        > > off an error by the center fielder. Marie Antoinette had almost
                        no
                        > > poliitcal role until 1787. Louis suffered a breakdown in nerves.
                        She
                        > > assumed the role because he needed her, and she rose to the
                        occasion.
                        > > But it was quite late in the ball game. She did what she could
                        and
                        > > as stated above - she still might have saved the game had Louis
                        not
                        > > made the three errors cited above.
                        > >
                        > > Forth, her role as queen and political actor that really began
                        in
                        > > 1787 ended with the overthrow of the monarchy August 10, 1792.
                        so,
                        > > the true period of her poliitcal awakening and activity as
                        she "grew
                        > > up fast" and did her best to learn and act on the job was just 5
                        > > years - and she did that under the glare of being for much of the
                        > > time the effective head of state. Even more than a President,
                        the
                        > > King was absolute ruler.
                        > >
                        > > When US Presidents Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman and Lyndon
                        Johnson
                        > > had to grow up fast because the assassination of the US head of
                        state
                        > > suddenly brought these ceremonial (Vice President) men to power
                        each
                        > > were men more than 50 years old and each had been a politician
                        for
                        > > over 30 years before taking office as Vice President. In
                        contrast,
                        > > Marie Antoinette was just 30 years old, she had been a carefree
                        > > ornament (fashion and etiquette showpiece for monarchy) and
                        breeder
                        > > (womb for the dauphin), and thus essentially zero training in
                        > > political office. Now she had to bootstrap herself into being
                        the
                        > > head of state of France. Add to that she had to do so not only
                        with
                        > > a public that hated her but also at a time of enormous personal
                        > > stress. Her cherished son whom she had so waited for and so
                        adored
                        > > was dying of TB despite all her efforts to save the little boy.
                        He
                        > > died on June 4, 1789 a month after the Estates General was called
                        and
                        > > month before the Fall of the Bastille.
                        > >
                        > > Fifth, I'd repeat the points made by George and Lady, that the
                        life
                        > > of Marie Antoinette was literally and figuratively cut short. She
                        was
                        > > indeed beheaded but her role as queen was cut short over a year
                        > > earlier in August 1792. She had just 5 years for her political
                        > > career. She was out of office at age 36 and beheaded at age 37.
                        She
                        > > surely paid the highest price for her failures. But thinking of
                        > > George and Lady's points, one wonders, if she had not been cut
                        off so
                        > > young and after so short a time, what kind of politician she
                        might
                        > > have matured into.
                        > >
                        > > Sixth and last point, Pimprennelle is fond of saying to
                        detractors
                        > > READ HER LETTERS (reminds me of the 1884 Democratic slogan by
                        > > Cleveland's supporters to answer Blain - Burn Burn Burn this
                        letter!)
                        > > There are published letters of Marie Antoinette - you can read
                        her
                        > > letters. If you, I believe you will discover the kind and
                        generous
                        > > human being Marie Antoinette was.
                        > >
                        > > But as to what kind of politician she might have been.... might
                        have
                        > > been had it not all ended so soon for her... READ THE
                        TRANSCIPTS...
                        > > read the transcripts of her trial - the grace, dignity, insight,
                        > > adroitness of her answers. Richard Nixon saved his political
                        life
                        > > with the Checkers Speach. If you read Marie Antoinette's
                        answers, I
                        > > suggest you'll believe she could have been aquitted if the jury
                        was
                        > > not stacked against her. She unlike Nixon was not a Duke
                        educated
                        > > lawyer, she had no coaches, she had no chance to prepared, she
                        was
                        > > kept in a dungeon and purposely sleep deprived. Yet, she handled
                        the
                        > > trial for her life with brilliance.
                        > >
                        > > Hence, this Queen, this politician despite her failures had in my
                        > > view the potential for greatness as a politician had she ever
                        gotten
                        > > the kind of second chances so many of the greats Lincoln,
                        Churchill,
                        > > DeGaulle, Roosevelt got in their political lives. After disaster
                        at
                        > > Gallipoli, with the India bill, with the abdication crisis and
                        more,
                        > > who in 1936 would have imagined Churchill back in power much less
                        the
                        > > svaior of his country revered for all time as the leader of
                        Britain
                        > > in their finest hour. Marie Antoinette never got her chance for
                        > > vindication.
                        > >
                        > > Axel
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, George Caffine
                        > > <geocaffine@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino Affect
                        > > >
                        > > > This gets back to our discussion of monarchy versus democracy.
                        A
                        > > good leader is one who picks: good-hearted advisors, ones who
                        give
                        > > winning advice; and then taking the right advice when it's
                        offered.
                        > > Beyond the charisma, nothing more is needed. I always thought it
                        was
                        > > silly when they blamed Jimmy Carter for not rescuing the Iran
                        > > hostages, as if he should have swung down from a helicopter, like
                        > > Rambo or Batman.
                        > > >
                        > > > My belief that Marie Antoinette would have made a good Queen is
                        > > based on sentiment, she never had a chance to prove it. Her poise
                        and
                        > > ability to win over the people was expressed, but the volume of
                        hate
                        > > and falling blade cut off any hope of success. Of course, I have
                        to
                        > > contrast that belief by agreeing she was prone to faux pas
                        (sorry, I
                        > > have to point out the joke: prone is lying flat, faux pas is
                        false
                        > > step; result: tripping and falling on her face) so her good
                        > > intentions might have too often have led to faulty execution
                        (sic).
                        > > >
                        > > > Sorry: I seem to be suffering from runaway silliness.
                        > > >
                        > > > ----- Original Message ----
                        > > > From: doritmi <drub@>
                        > > > To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
                        > > > Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:35:05 PM
                        > > > Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
                        > > Affect
                        > > >
                        > > > Ok, I have several time made long posts about why I do not
                        think MA
                        > > > was a wonderful queen. would those who think differently - as
                        > > Kristin
                        > > > did before - explain why you think she was a good queen as
                        opposed
                        > > to
                        > > > being a "wonderful personality" or dying as a hero? I agree
                        with
                        > > Axel
                        > > > she matured towards the end. she still, in my view, was not a
                        good
                        > > > politician. dying heroicly four years after the start of the
                        battle,
                        > > > losing all the steps on the way, is not the sign of a successful
                        > > > politician or a tallented leader. I get why you'd call her
                        tragic,
                        > > > heroic, etc'. but in what way was she a wonderful queen?
                        > > >
                        > > > --- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
                        > > > "ladyofhealingtouch " <MadameAntoine@ ...> wrote:
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Her image has nothing to do with what was said about the
                        Necklace.
                        > > > > She did NOT want the necklace...I think we all know that by
                        now.
                        > > > > What was said in this last message, is that things could have
                        > > been
                        > > > > handled differently regarding this necklace, with Rohan. I
                        > > believe
                        > > > > Antoinette was a wonderful, very intelligent woman, but all
                        that
                        > > was
                        > > > > being said here, is that if the whole affair, after knowing
                        what
                        > > > > happened with Rohan, had been handled differently, then
                        perhaps
                        > > > > things would not have escalated as they did...that is ALL
                        that
                        > > was
                        > > > > being said in this message. I still am working on her
                        image...but
                        > > > > working on her image does not mean giving her sainthood... as
                        > > > > wonderful queen as she was. I think there are very few of us
                        that
                        > > > > are ready for sainthood. I still have the high opinon of our
                        > > queen
                        > > > > just as I always have and she was very understandably upset
                        with
                        > > > > Rohan on this score. Any of us would have..that he would let
                        > > himself
                        > > > > believe that horrible scheming woman so set to bring
                        Antoinette
                        > > down.
                        > > > > Forgiveness and compassion are always better used when we are
                        > > angry,
                        > > > > even justifiably so.
                        > > > > blessing,
                        > > > > Patricia-- In Images_of_Marie_ Antoinette@ yahoogroups. com,
                        > > George
                        > > > > Caffine <geocaffine@ > wrote:
                        > > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > >
                        ______________________________________________________________________
                        > > ______________
                        > > > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative
                        > > vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
                        > > > http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
                        > > >
                        > >
                        >
                      • Axel
                        The point is well made the Queen had a role and chose to ignore it. She ascended the throne in 1774. Yet, I talked about MA as politician beginning in 1787 - a
                        Message 11 of 24 , Jul 7, 2007
                          The point is well made the Queen had a role and chose to ignore it.
                          She ascended the throne in 1774. Yet, I talked about MA as politician
                          beginning in 1787 - a period when Louis had something of a nervous
                          breakdown and called upon Marie Antoinette for advice and help. It
                          was she who had the greatest role in Calonne's demise and in
                          succeeding ministers from 1787 to 1789 and then in influencing Louis
                          to resist revolution.

                          Can we separate the periods? To the French public, no. For them,
                          she was queen and had the role from 1774 until 1792 when she and
                          Louis were sent to prison.

                          However, knowing what we know and the French public largely did not I
                          still assert that the Queen despite her title was no politician for
                          the first 12 years, 1774 to 1786. She was queen but queen did not
                          mean politician - queen meant showpiece, womb, first lady, breeder.
                          French queens before her were generally the same in that quiet role -
                          not policians but show pieces.

                          Marie Antoinette's problem it seems to me was not that she was a bad
                          polician from 1774 to 1787 but that she did not accept or conform to
                          the expected role of Queen. She wanted a personal life at her Petit
                          Trianon and she also outshown the king in glamour. She was pretty,
                          vivacious set tongues gossiping, grabbed patronage - in short, she
                          had many of the attributes the French associated with tyhe mistresses
                          of Louis XV that the French generally disliked.

                          But MA was worese than a mistress and hated more for three reasons
                          1. She outshown the king
                          2. She was the handsome one, he was the faithful one - so the rumors
                          she cockolded him - the macho French people hated that
                          3. She was Austrian while the mistress French
                          4. She was queen - and thus had far more real power or was perceived
                          to have it than mistresses had.

                          Hence Marie Antoinette did squander her good will. Of course whether
                          she was mainly responsible for that or the forces arrayed against her
                          is an open question - but good will she had and good will was
                          squandered.

                          While I assert that when she actually got political power, she did
                          better than her critics assert, she was queen alot longer than 1785-
                          1792 and politician or not she be bore the brunt of the reputation
                          she got for those years.


                          Axel


                          --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "charlesdiago"
                          <charlesdiago@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Thank you, doritmi:
                          >
                          > I loved this post.
                          >
                          > Yes, MA's role was clearly defined: she chose to ignore it.
                          >
                          > And I loved the way you worded this: "she squandered much of that
                          > popularity". Squandered it like easy credit.
                          >
                          > But particularly your third point is relevant when discussing her
                          > leadership abilities:
                          >
                          > "c. being a wonderful person is not being a wonderful queen. I don't
                          > care about MA's personal persona. as a political persona, she had a
                          > lot lacking."
                          >
                          > Charlotte Corday said it best when she said of Louis XVI:
                          >
                          > "I believe him virtuous, but a weak king cannot be a good one; he
                          > cannot check the misfortunes of his people."
                          >
                          > Thank you for making these important points.
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "doritmi"
                          > <drub@> wrote:
                          >
                          > Re: Queen: handicapped policitian weaned in Inferno of Revolution
                          > >
                          > > Dear Axel,
                          > > I agree with your point about the revolution testing MA.
                          therefore,
                          > in
                          > > my view, the assessment of her as queen should focus on her reign
                          > from
                          > > 17774-1789. to this, I'd like to say several things in response to
                          > our
                          > > comments:
                          > > a. as you point out, MA was a queen, not king. her role was very
                          > > clearly defined. the criticism of her can be put in two
                          categories:
                          > i.
                          > > she tried to interfere in politics. ii. she did not fulfill the
                          role
                          > > of queen of France. (and see previous posts for my discussion of
                          > what
                          > > that role was and how she didn't do it.
                          > > b. she was not dealt such a bad hand. yes, she had enemies in
                          court
                          > > coming in. many others did. but she was very popular on her
                          > ascension.
                          > > she squandered much of that popularity.
                          > > c. being a wonderful person is not being a wonderful queen. I
                          don't
                          > > care about MA's personal persona. as a political persona, she had
                          a
                          > > lot lacking.
                          > >
                          > > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
                          > > <Rand103242@> wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > > Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof
                          France,
                          > > > was MA a good politician?
                          > > >
                          > > > I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing world
                          > > > sentiment would be - are you outa your mind?
                          > > > Marie Antoinette was an awful queen. She was no politician. She
                          > had
                          > > > not a clue.
                          > > >
                          > > > However, perhaps it's the contrarian in me. I'm not so ready to
                          > > > dismiss the question. Obviously, Dorit's points are salient as
                          > they
                          > > > normally are *smiles* But I do think that George and Lady are on
                          > to
                          > > > something.
                          > > >
                          > > > Simon Schama put it quite cogently in the recent Grubin
                          > documentary
                          > > > on Marie Antoinette that aired on PBS last fall. The
                          documentary
                          > > > more than any other film to date gives air to the campaign of
                          > > > vilification against Marie Antoinette with Chantal Thomas among
                          > the
                          > > > Talking Heads.
                          > > >
                          > > > Schama in that film mentions the recognition of public hatred of
                          > her
                          > > > after the Necklace Affair. That affair and especially the
                          > court's
                          > > > verdict and public approval of it were (along with her cool
                          > reception
                          > > > in Paris when she presented her second boy born in 1785), were a
                          > big
                          > > > time wake up call to Marie Antoinette.
                          > > >
                          > > > As Schama said, "Marie Antoinette had to grow up. She had to
                          > grow up
                          > > > very fast!"
                          > > >
                          > > > In the years before Revolution she worked as a politician to try
                          > to
                          > > > repair both her image and her monarchy - there was the Vigee
                          > LeBrun
                          > > > 1787 portrait, the later 1788 portrait and other efforts of the
                          > Queen
                          > > > to improve her image, to cut and take more care to her expenses,
                          > to
                          > > > try to aid Louis in the governmental crisis of 1787-89, and to
                          > try to
                          > > > win favor with the French people, including favoring double
                          > > > representation of the 3rd estate, commoners in the Estates
                          > General
                          > > > called for May 1789.
                          > > >
                          > > > Then, as the Revolution took hold the Queen was ever the
                          > activist to
                          > > > attempt to stem the tide of Revolution. She was key to the
                          > outing of
                          > > > Necker in July 1789, the calling out of troops to protect
                          > Versailles
                          > > > in September 1789 and the flight to Varennes in June 1791. She
                          > > > conducted correpondence with Austrians and others for
                          > intervention,
                          > > > she was key to the Brunswick Manifesto.
                          > > >
                          > > > We can look at each of these and say - Yes, Marie Antoinette was
                          > a
                          > > > polician... she was also a walking disastor... everything she
                          > touched
                          > > > turned to ruin.
                          > > >
                          > > > But to this, I'd offer three comebacks.
                          > > >
                          > > > First, you have to consider the hand she was dealt. To some
                          > extent
                          > > > she was changing deck chairs on the Titanic. a) France was
                          > bankrupt.
                          > > > Much of that the rsult of 7 Years War she had nothing to do with
                          > and
                          > > > participation in the American Revolution which she opposed. b)
                          > She
                          > > > was hated as Queen - part from her own devices, but part also
                          > from
                          > > > the campaign against her and part too from her role as a strong
                          > woman
                          > > > and an Austrian foreigner.
                          > > >
                          > > > Second, you have to consider that she operated as a politician
                          > with a
                          > > > hand tied behind her back - she was Queen and not King and she
                          > had
                          > > > been bred to follow the king (despite that her mother acted
                          > > > differently). Thus, when several key crunch moments occured
                          > > > in 1789 - to leave Versailles, in 1791 - to cut their way free
                          at
                          > > > Varennes, and in 1792 - to defend the Tuileries - it was Marie
                          > > > Antoinette who wore the pants in the family. She was a do-er
                          and
                          > she
                          > > > was a fighter. It was the Queen who would make the key tactical
                          > move
                          > > > in 1789, and who would fight when fighting was needed in 1791
                          and
                          > > > 1792. Her wimp, phlegmatic husband always shied from
                          > confrontation
                          > > > and she would not overrule him when he was decided on lethargy.
                          > > >
                          > > > Third, as said in my title above the Queen was tested by the
                          > infermo
                          > > > of Revolution. In baseball parlance, it's like bringing in your
                          > > > closer with the bases loaded in a tie or 1-run ball game and
                          > blaming
                          > > > him for the loss when the ball hit scores a run. Plus, I'd go
                          > > > further, blaiming your closer when the two winning runs are
                          > scored
                          > > > off an error by the center fielder. Marie Antoinette had almost
                          > no
                          > > > poliitcal role until 1787. Louis suffered a breakdown in nerves.
                          > She
                          > > > assumed the role because he needed her, and she rose to the
                          > occasion.
                          > > > But it was quite late in the ball game. She did what she could
                          > and
                          > > > as stated above - she still might have saved the game had Louis
                          > not
                          > > > made the three errors cited above.
                          > > >
                          > > > Forth, her role as queen and political actor that really began
                          > in
                          > > > 1787 ended with the overthrow of the monarchy August 10, 1792.
                          > so,
                          > > > the true period of her poliitcal awakening and activity as
                          > she "grew
                          > > > up fast" and did her best to learn and act on the job was just 5
                          > > > years - and she did that under the glare of being for much of
                          the
                          > > > time the effective head of state. Even more than a President,
                          > the
                          > > > King was absolute ruler.
                          > > >
                          > > > When US Presidents Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman and Lyndon
                          > Johnson
                          > > > had to grow up fast because the assassination of the US head of
                          > state
                          > > > suddenly brought these ceremonial (Vice President) men to power
                          > each
                          > > > were men more than 50 years old and each had been a politician
                          > for
                          > > > over 30 years before taking office as Vice President. In
                          > contrast,
                          > > > Marie Antoinette was just 30 years old, she had been a carefree
                          > > > ornament (fashion and etiquette showpiece for monarchy) and
                          > breeder
                          > > > (womb for the dauphin), and thus essentially zero training in
                          > > > political office. Now she had to bootstrap herself into being
                          > the
                          > > > head of state of France. Add to that she had to do so not only
                          > with
                          > > > a public that hated her but also at a time of enormous personal
                          > > > stress. Her cherished son whom she had so waited for and so
                          > adored
                          > > > was dying of TB despite all her efforts to save the little boy.
                          > He
                          > > > died on June 4, 1789 a month after the Estates General was
                          called
                          > and
                          > > > month before the Fall of the Bastille.
                          > > >
                          > > > Fifth, I'd repeat the points made by George and Lady, that the
                          > life
                          > > > of Marie Antoinette was literally and figuratively cut short.
                          She
                          > was
                          > > > indeed beheaded but her role as queen was cut short over a year
                          > > > earlier in August 1792. She had just 5 years for her political
                          > > > career. She was out of office at age 36 and beheaded at age 37.
                          > She
                          > > > surely paid the highest price for her failures. But thinking of
                          > > > George and Lady's points, one wonders, if she had not been cut
                          > off so
                          > > > young and after so short a time, what kind of politician she
                          > might
                          > > > have matured into.
                          > > >
                          > > > Sixth and last point, Pimprennelle is fond of saying to
                          > detractors
                          > > > READ HER LETTERS (reminds me of the 1884 Democratic slogan by
                          > > > Cleveland's supporters to answer Blain - Burn Burn Burn this
                          > letter!)
                          > > > There are published letters of Marie Antoinette - you can read
                          > her
                          > > > letters. If you, I believe you will discover the kind and
                          > generous
                          > > > human being Marie Antoinette was.
                          > > >
                          > > > But as to what kind of politician she might have been.... might
                          > have
                          > > > been had it not all ended so soon for her... READ THE
                          > TRANSCIPTS...
                          > > > read the transcripts of her trial - the grace, dignity, insight,
                          > > > adroitness of her answers. Richard Nixon saved his political
                          > life
                          > > > with the Checkers Speach. If you read Marie Antoinette's
                          > answers, I
                          > > > suggest you'll believe she could have been aquitted if the jury
                          > was
                          > > > not stacked against her. She unlike Nixon was not a Duke
                          > educated
                          > > > lawyer, she had no coaches, she had no chance to prepared, she
                          > was
                          > > > kept in a dungeon and purposely sleep deprived. Yet, she
                          handled
                          > the
                          > > > trial for her life with brilliance.
                          > > >
                          > > > Hence, this Queen, this politician despite her failures had in
                          my
                          > > > view the potential for greatness as a politician had she ever
                          > gotten
                          > > > the kind of second chances so many of the greats Lincoln,
                          > Churchill,
                          > > > DeGaulle, Roosevelt got in their political lives. After
                          disaster
                          > at
                          > > > Gallipoli, with the India bill, with the abdication crisis and
                          > more,
                          > > > who in 1936 would have imagined Churchill back in power much
                          less
                          > the
                          > > > svaior of his country revered for all time as the leader of
                          > Britain
                          > > > in their finest hour. Marie Antoinette never got her chance for
                          > > > vindication.
                          > > >
                          > > > Axel
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, George
                          Caffine
                          > > > <geocaffine@> wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > > Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino Affect
                          > > > >
                          > > > > This gets back to our discussion of monarchy versus democracy.
                          > A
                          > > > good leader is one who picks: good-hearted advisors, ones who
                          > give
                          > > > winning advice; and then taking the right advice when it's
                          > offered.
                          > > > Beyond the charisma, nothing more is needed. I always thought it
                          > was
                          > > > silly when they blamed Jimmy Carter for not rescuing the Iran
                          > > > hostages, as if he should have swung down from a helicopter,
                          like
                          > > > Rambo or Batman.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > My belief that Marie Antoinette would have made a good Queen
                          is
                          > > > based on sentiment, she never had a chance to prove it. Her
                          poise
                          > and
                          > > > ability to win over the people was expressed, but the volume of
                          > hate
                          > > > and falling blade cut off any hope of success. Of course, I have
                          > to
                          > > > contrast that belief by agreeing she was prone to faux pas
                          > (sorry, I
                          > > > have to point out the joke: prone is lying flat, faux pas is
                          > false
                          > > > step; result: tripping and falling on her face) so her good
                          > > > intentions might have too often have led to faulty execution
                          > (sic).
                          > > > >
                          > > > > Sorry: I seem to be suffering from runaway silliness.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > ----- Original Message ----
                          > > > > From: doritmi <drub@>
                          > > > > To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
                          > > > > Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:35:05 PM
                          > > > > Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
                          > > > Affect
                          > > > >
                          > > > > Ok, I have several time made long posts about why I do not
                          > think MA
                          > > > > was a wonderful queen. would those who think differently - as
                          > > > Kristin
                          > > > > did before - explain why you think she was a good queen as
                          > opposed
                          > > > to
                          > > > > being a "wonderful personality" or dying as a hero? I agree
                          > with
                          > > > Axel
                          > > > > she matured towards the end. she still, in my view, was not a
                          > good
                          > > > > politician. dying heroicly four years after the start of the
                          > battle,
                          > > > > losing all the steps on the way, is not the sign of a
                          successful
                          > > > > politician or a tallented leader. I get why you'd call her
                          > tragic,
                          > > > > heroic, etc'. but in what way was she a wonderful queen?

                          --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
                          <Rand103242@...> wrote:
                          >

                          RE: Queen: handicapped policitian weaned in Inferno of Revolution


                          Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof France,
                          was MA a good politician?

                          I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing world
                          sentiment would be - are you outa your mind?
                          Marie Antoinette was an awful queen. She was no politician. She had
                          not a clue.

                          However, perhaps it's the contrarian in me. I'm not so ready to
                          dismiss the question. Obviously, Dorit's points are salient as they
                          normally are *smiles* But I do think that George and Lady are on to
                          something.

                          Simon Schama put it quite cogently in the recent Grubin documentary
                          on Marie Antoinette that aired on PBS last fall. The documentary
                          more than any other film to date gives air to the campaign of
                          vilification against Marie Antoinette with Chantal Thomas among the
                          Talking Heads.

                          Schama in that film mentions the recognition of public hatred of her
                          after the Necklace Affair. That affair and especially the court's
                          verdict and public approval of it were (along with her cool reception
                          in Paris when she presented her second boy born in 1785), were a big
                          time wake up call to Marie Antoinette.

                          As Schama said, "Marie Antoinette had to grow up. She had to grow up
                          very fast!"

                          In the years before Revolution she worked as a politician to try to
                          repair both her image and her monarchy - there was the Vigee LeBrun
                          1787 portrait, the later 1788 portrait and other efforts of the Queen
                          to improve her image, to cut and take more care to her expenses, to
                          try to aid Louis in the governmental crisis of 1787-89, and to try to
                          win favor with the French people, including favoring double
                          representation of the 3rd estate, commoners in the Estates General
                          called for May 1789.

                          Then, as the Revolution took hold the Queen was ever the activist to
                          attempt to stem the tide of Revolution. She was key to the outing of
                          Necker in July 1789, the calling out of troops to protect Versailles
                          in September 1789 and the flight to Varennes in June 1791. She
                          conducted correpondence with Austrians and others for intervention,
                          she was key to the Brunswick Manifesto.

                          We can look at each of these and say - Yes, Marie Antoinette was a
                          polician... she was also a walking disastor... everything she touched
                          turned to ruin.

                          But to this, I'd offer three comebacks.

                          First, you have to consider the hand she was dealt. To some extent
                          she was changing deck chairs on the Titanic. a) France was bankrupt.
                          Much of that the rsult of 7 Years War she had nothing to do with and
                          participation in the American Revolution which she opposed. b) She
                          was hated as Queen - part from her own devices, but part also from
                          the campaign against her and part too from her role as a strong woman
                          and an Austrian foreigner.

                          Second, you have to consider that she operated as a politician with a
                          hand tied behind her back - she was Queen and not King and she had
                          been bred to follow the king (despite that her mother acted
                          differently). Thus, when several key crunch moments occured
                          in 1789 - to leave Versailles, in 1791 - to cut their way free at
                          Varennes, and in 1792 - to defend the Tuileries - it was Marie
                          Antoinette who wore the pants in the family. She was a do-er and she
                          was a fighter. It was the Queen who would make the key tactical move
                          in 1789, and who would fight when fighting was needed in 1791 and
                          1792. Her wimp, phlegmatic husband always shied from confrontation
                          and she would not overrule him when he was decided on lethargy.

                          Third, as said in my title above the Queen was tested by the infermo
                          of Revolution. In baseball parlance, it's like bringing in your
                          closer with the bases loaded in a tie or 1-run ball game and blaming
                          him for the loss when the ball hit scores a run. Plus, I'd go
                          further, blaiming your closer when the two winning runs are scored
                          off an error by the center fielder. Marie Antoinette had almost no
                          poliitcal role until 1787. Louis suffered a breakdown in nerves. She
                          assumed the role because he needed her, and she rose to the occasion.
                          But it was quite late in the ball game. She did what she could and
                          as stated above - she still might have saved the game had Louis not
                          made the three errors cited above.

                          Forth, her role as queen and political actor that really began in
                          1787 ended with the overthrow of the monarchy August 10, 1792. so,
                          the true period of her poliitcal awakening and activity as she "grew
                          up fast" and did her best to learn and act on the job was just 5
                          years - and she did that under the glare of being for much of the
                          time the effective head of state. Even more than a President, the
                          King was absolute ruler.

                          When US Presidents Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson
                          had to grow up fast because the assassination of the US head of state
                          suddenly brought these ceremonial (Vice President) men to power each
                          were men more than 50 years old and each had been a politician for
                          over 30 years before taking office as Vice President. In contrast,
                          Marie Antoinette was just 30 years old, she had been a carefree
                          ornament (fashion and etiquette showpiece for monarchy) and breeder
                          (womb for the dauphin), and thus essentially zero training in
                          political office. Now she had to bootstrap herself into being the
                          head of state of France. Add to that she had to do so not only with
                          a public that hated her but also at a time of enormous personal
                          stress. Her cherished son whom she had so waited for and so adored
                          was dying of TB despite all her efforts to save the little boy. He
                          died on June 4, 1789 a month after the Estates General was called and
                          month before the Fall of the Bastille.

                          Fifth, I'd repeat the points made by George and Lady, that the life
                          of Marie Antoinette was literally and figuratively cut short. She was
                          indeed beheaded but her role as queen was cut short over a year
                          earlier in August 1792. She had just 5 years for her political
                          career. She was out of office at age 36 and beheaded at age 37. She
                          surely paid the highest price for her failures. But thinking of
                          George and Lady's points, one wonders, if she had not been cut off so
                          young and after so short a time, what kind of politician she might
                          have matured into.

                          Sixth and last point, Pimprennelle is fond of saying to detractors
                          READ HER LETTERS (reminds me of the 1884 Democratic slogan by
                          Cleveland's supporters to answer Blain - Burn Burn Burn this letter!)
                          There are published letters of Marie Antoinette - you can read her
                          letters. If you, I believe you will discover the kind and generous
                          human being Marie Antoinette was.

                          But as to what kind of politician she might have been.... might have
                          been had it not all ended so soon for her... READ THE TRANSCIPTS...
                          read the transcripts of her trial - the grace, dignity, insight,
                          adroitness of her answers. Richard Nixon saved his political life
                          with the Checkers Speach. If you read Marie Antoinette's answers, I
                          suggest you'll believe she could have been aquitted if the jury was
                          not stacked against her. She unlike Nixon was not a Duke educated
                          lawyer, she had no coaches, she had no chance to prepared, she was
                          kept in a dungeon and purposely sleep deprived. Yet, she handled the
                          trial for her life with brilliance.

                          Hence, this Queen, this politician despite her failures had in my
                          view the potential for greatness as a politician had she ever gotten
                          the kind of second chances so many of the greats Lincoln, Churchill,
                          DeGaulle, Roosevelt got in their political lives. After disaster at
                          Gallipoli, with the India bill, with the abdication crisis and more,
                          who in 1936 would have imagined Churchill back in power much less the
                          svaior of his country revered for all time as the leader of Britain
                          in their finest hour. Marie Antoinette never got her chance for
                          vindication.

                          Axel
                        • George Caffine
                          I suppose Kristin Marie Wall is right when she says no one is changing their opinion. I think my opinion has grown barbs but its direction is unchanged. You
                          Message 12 of 24 , Jul 7, 2007
                            I suppose Kristin Marie Wall is right when she says no one is
                            changing their opinion. I think my opinion has grown barbs but its
                            direction is unchanged. You say she squandered her good will, that
                            she was supposed to be a womb and a breeder but failed at that. Total
                            nonsense, the evidence was unmistakeable that that failure was due to
                            her husband. She cuckolded her husband: nonsense, there is
                            absolutely no evidence of that. She squandered her good will: that
                            good will was disappearing long before 1774, when her husband failed
                            to impregnate her, when there was already serious talk of annulment
                            and returning her to Austria--specifically for that reason.

                            The cuckolding and scorn by the people were inventions of evil powers
                            out to overthrow the monarchy. With all her faults, Marie Antoinette
                            had almost nothing to do with the hatred that was arrayed against
                            her.

                            I feel bad, now that more facts are in, because the ridiculous lies
                            are still held as credible. Marie Antoinette was no saint, she had no
                            training as a politician, assuming such training ever existed, and an
                            honest evaluation of the person should be made by sweeping away the
                            bovine doo-doo.

                            --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
                            <Rand103242@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > The point is well made the Queen had a role and chose to ignore it.
                            > She ascended the throne in 1774. Yet, I talked about MA as
                            politician
                            > beginning in 1787 - a period when Louis had something of a nervous
                            > breakdown and called upon Marie Antoinette for advice and help. It
                            > was she who had the greatest role in Calonne's demise and in
                            > succeeding ministers from 1787 to 1789 and then in influencing
                            Louis
                            > to resist revolution.
                            >
                            > Can we separate the periods? To the French public, no. For them,
                            > she was queen and had the role from 1774 until 1792 when she and
                            > Louis were sent to prison.
                            >
                            > However, knowing what we know and the French public largely did not
                            I
                            > still assert that the Queen despite her title was no politician for
                            > the first 12 years, 1774 to 1786. She was queen but queen did not
                            > mean politician - queen meant showpiece, womb, first lady,
                            breeder.
                            > French queens before her were generally the same in that quiet
                            role -
                            > not policians but show pieces.
                            >
                            > Marie Antoinette's problem it seems to me was not that she was a
                            bad
                            > polician from 1774 to 1787 but that she did not accept or conform
                            to
                            > the expected role of Queen. She wanted a personal life at her
                            Petit
                            > Trianon and she also outshown the king in glamour. She was pretty,
                            > vivacious set tongues gossiping, grabbed patronage - in short, she
                            > had many of the attributes the French associated with tyhe
                            mistresses
                            > of Louis XV that the French generally disliked.
                            >
                            > But MA was worese than a mistress and hated more for three reasons
                            > 1. She outshown the king
                            > 2. She was the handsome one, he was the faithful one - so the
                            rumors
                            > she cockolded him - the macho French people hated that
                            > 3. She was Austrian while the mistress French
                            > 4. She was queen - and thus had far more real power or was
                            perceived
                            > to have it than mistresses had.
                            >
                            > Hence Marie Antoinette did squander her good will. Of course
                            whether
                            > she was mainly responsible for that or the forces arrayed against
                            her
                            > is an open question - but good will she had and good will was
                            > squandered.
                            >
                            > While I assert that when she actually got political power, she did
                            > better than her critics assert, she was queen alot longer than 1785-
                            > 1792 and politician or not she be bore the brunt of the reputation
                            > she got for those years.
                            >
                            >
                            > Axel
                            >
                            >
                            > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "charlesdiago"
                            > <charlesdiago@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > Thank you, doritmi:
                            > >
                            > > I loved this post.
                            > >
                            > > Yes, MA's role was clearly defined: she chose to ignore it.
                            > >
                            > > And I loved the way you worded this: "she squandered much of that
                            > > popularity". Squandered it like easy credit.
                            > >
                            > > But particularly your third point is relevant when discussing her
                            > > leadership abilities:
                            > >
                            > > "c. being a wonderful person is not being a wonderful queen. I
                            don't
                            > > care about MA's personal persona. as a political persona, she had
                            a
                            > > lot lacking."
                            > >
                            > > Charlotte Corday said it best when she said of Louis XVI:
                            > >
                            > > "I believe him virtuous, but a weak king cannot be a good one; he
                            > > cannot check the misfortunes of his people."
                            > >
                            > > Thank you for making these important points.
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "doritmi"
                            > > <drub@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > Re: Queen: handicapped policitian weaned in Inferno of Revolution
                            > > >
                            > > > Dear Axel,
                            > > > I agree with your point about the revolution testing MA.
                            > therefore,
                            > > in
                            > > > my view, the assessment of her as queen should focus on her
                            reign
                            > > from
                            > > > 17774-1789. to this, I'd like to say several things in response
                            to
                            > > our
                            > > > comments:
                            > > > a. as you point out, MA was a queen, not king. her role was very
                            > > > clearly defined. the criticism of her can be put in two
                            > categories:
                            > > i.
                            > > > she tried to interfere in politics. ii. she did not fulfill the
                            > role
                            > > > of queen of France. (and see previous posts for my discussion of
                            > > what
                            > > > that role was and how she didn't do it.
                            > > > b. she was not dealt such a bad hand. yes, she had enemies in
                            > court
                            > > > coming in. many others did. but she was very popular on her
                            > > ascension.
                            > > > she squandered much of that popularity.
                            > > > c. being a wonderful person is not being a wonderful queen. I
                            > don't
                            > > > care about MA's personal persona. as a political persona, she
                            had
                            > a
                            > > > lot lacking.
                            > > >
                            > > > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
                            > > > <Rand103242@> wrote:
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof
                            > France,
                            > > > > was MA a good politician?
                            > > > >
                            > > > > I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing
                            world
                            > > > > sentiment would be - are you outa your mind?
                            > > > > Marie Antoinette was an awful queen. She was no politician.
                            She
                            > > had
                            > > > > not a clue.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > However, perhaps it's the contrarian in me. I'm not so ready
                            to
                            > > > > dismiss the question. Obviously, Dorit's points are salient
                            as
                            > > they
                            > > > > normally are *smiles* But I do think that George and Lady are
                            on
                            > > to
                            > > > > something.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Simon Schama put it quite cogently in the recent Grubin
                            > > documentary
                            > > > > on Marie Antoinette that aired on PBS last fall. The
                            > documentary
                            > > > > more than any other film to date gives air to the campaign of
                            > > > > vilification against Marie Antoinette with Chantal Thomas
                            among
                            > > the
                            > > > > Talking Heads.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Schama in that film mentions the recognition of public hatred
                            of
                            > > her
                            > > > > after the Necklace Affair. That affair and especially the
                            > > court's
                            > > > > verdict and public approval of it were (along with her cool
                            > > reception
                            > > > > in Paris when she presented her second boy born in 1785),
                            were a
                            > > big
                            > > > > time wake up call to Marie Antoinette.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > As Schama said, "Marie Antoinette had to grow up. She had to
                            > > grow up
                            > > > > very fast!"
                            > > > >
                            > > > > In the years before Revolution she worked as a politician to
                            try
                            > > to
                            > > > > repair both her image and her monarchy - there was the Vigee
                            > > LeBrun
                            > > > > 1787 portrait, the later 1788 portrait and other efforts of
                            the
                            > > Queen
                            > > > > to improve her image, to cut and take more care to her
                            expenses,
                            > > to
                            > > > > try to aid Louis in the governmental crisis of 1787-89, and to
                            > > try to
                            > > > > win favor with the French people, including favoring double
                            > > > > representation of the 3rd estate, commoners in the Estates
                            > > General
                            > > > > called for May 1789.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Then, as the Revolution took hold the Queen was ever the
                            > > activist to
                            > > > > attempt to stem the tide of Revolution. She was key to the
                            > > outing of
                            > > > > Necker in July 1789, the calling out of troops to protect
                            > > Versailles
                            > > > > in September 1789 and the flight to Varennes in June 1791. She
                            > > > > conducted correpondence with Austrians and others for
                            > > intervention,
                            > > > > she was key to the Brunswick Manifesto.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > We can look at each of these and say - Yes, Marie Antoinette
                            was
                            > > a
                            > > > > polician... she was also a walking disastor... everything she
                            > > touched
                            > > > > turned to ruin.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > But to this, I'd offer three comebacks.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > First, you have to consider the hand she was dealt. To some
                            > > extent
                            > > > > she was changing deck chairs on the Titanic. a) France was
                            > > bankrupt.
                            > > > > Much of that the rsult of 7 Years War she had nothing to do
                            with
                            > > and
                            > > > > participation in the American Revolution which she opposed. b)
                            > > She
                            > > > > was hated as Queen - part from her own devices, but part also
                            > > from
                            > > > > the campaign against her and part too from her role as a
                            strong
                            > > woman
                            > > > > and an Austrian foreigner.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Second, you have to consider that she operated as a politician
                            > > with a
                            > > > > hand tied behind her back - she was Queen and not King and she
                            > > had
                            > > > > been bred to follow the king (despite that her mother acted
                            > > > > differently). Thus, when several key crunch moments occured
                            > > > > in 1789 - to leave Versailles, in 1791 - to cut their way
                            free
                            > at
                            > > > > Varennes, and in 1792 - to defend the Tuileries - it was Marie
                            > > > > Antoinette who wore the pants in the family. She was a do-er
                            > and
                            > > she
                            > > > > was a fighter. It was the Queen who would make the key
                            tactical
                            > > move
                            > > > > in 1789, and who would fight when fighting was needed in 1791
                            > and
                            > > > > 1792. Her wimp, phlegmatic husband always shied from
                            > > confrontation
                            > > > > and she would not overrule him when he was decided on
                            lethargy.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Third, as said in my title above the Queen was tested by the
                            > > infermo
                            > > > > of Revolution. In baseball parlance, it's like bringing in
                            your
                            > > > > closer with the bases loaded in a tie or 1-run ball game and
                            > > blaming
                            > > > > him for the loss when the ball hit scores a run. Plus, I'd go
                            > > > > further, blaiming your closer when the two winning runs are
                            > > scored
                            > > > > off an error by the center fielder. Marie Antoinette had
                            almost
                            > > no
                            > > > > poliitcal role until 1787. Louis suffered a breakdown in
                            nerves.
                            > > She
                            > > > > assumed the role because he needed her, and she rose to the
                            > > occasion.
                            > > > > But it was quite late in the ball game. She did what she
                            could
                            > > and
                            > > > > as stated above - she still might have saved the game had
                            Louis
                            > > not
                            > > > > made the three errors cited above.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Forth, her role as queen and political actor that really
                            began
                            > > in
                            > > > > 1787 ended with the overthrow of the monarchy August 10, 1792.
                            > > so,
                            > > > > the true period of her poliitcal awakening and activity as
                            > > she "grew
                            > > > > up fast" and did her best to learn and act on the job was
                            just 5
                            > > > > years - and she did that under the glare of being for much of
                            > the
                            > > > > time the effective head of state. Even more than a President,
                            > > the
                            > > > > King was absolute ruler.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > When US Presidents Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman and Lyndon
                            > > Johnson
                            > > > > had to grow up fast because the assassination of the US head
                            of
                            > > state
                            > > > > suddenly brought these ceremonial (Vice President) men to
                            power
                            > > each
                            > > > > were men more than 50 years old and each had been a politician
                            > > for
                            > > > > over 30 years before taking office as Vice President. In
                            > > contrast,
                            > > > > Marie Antoinette was just 30 years old, she had been a
                            carefree
                            > > > > ornament (fashion and etiquette showpiece for monarchy) and
                            > > breeder
                            > > > > (womb for the dauphin), and thus essentially zero training in
                            > > > > political office. Now she had to bootstrap herself into being
                            > > the
                            > > > > head of state of France. Add to that she had to do so not
                            only
                            > > with
                            > > > > a public that hated her but also at a time of enormous
                            personal
                            > > > > stress. Her cherished son whom she had so waited for and so
                            > > adored
                            > > > > was dying of TB despite all her efforts to save the little
                            boy.
                            > > He
                            > > > > died on June 4, 1789 a month after the Estates General was
                            > called
                            > > and
                            > > > > month before the Fall of the Bastille.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Fifth, I'd repeat the points made by George and Lady, that the
                            > > life
                            > > > > of Marie Antoinette was literally and figuratively cut short.
                            > She
                            > > was
                            > > > > indeed beheaded but her role as queen was cut short over a
                            year
                            > > > > earlier in August 1792. She had just 5 years for her
                            political
                            > > > > career. She was out of office at age 36 and beheaded at age
                            37.
                            > > She
                            > > > > surely paid the highest price for her failures. But thinking
                            of
                            > > > > George and Lady's points, one wonders, if she had not been cut
                            > > off so
                            > > > > young and after so short a time, what kind of politician she
                            > > might
                            > > > > have matured into.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Sixth and last point, Pimprennelle is fond of saying to
                            > > detractors
                            > > > > READ HER LETTERS (reminds me of the 1884 Democratic slogan by
                            > > > > Cleveland's supporters to answer Blain - Burn Burn Burn this
                            > > letter!)
                            > > > > There are published letters of Marie Antoinette - you can read
                            > > her
                            > > > > letters. If you, I believe you will discover the kind and
                            > > generous
                            > > > > human being Marie Antoinette was.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > But as to what kind of politician she might have been....
                            might
                            > > have
                            > > > > been had it not all ended so soon for her... READ THE
                            > > TRANSCIPTS...
                            > > > > read the transcripts of her trial - the grace, dignity,
                            insight,
                            > > > > adroitness of her answers. Richard Nixon saved his political
                            > > life
                            > > > > with the Checkers Speach. If you read Marie Antoinette's
                            > > answers, I
                            > > > > suggest you'll believe she could have been aquitted if the
                            jury
                            > > was
                            > > > > not stacked against her. She unlike Nixon was not a Duke
                            > > educated
                            > > > > lawyer, she had no coaches, she had no chance to prepared, she
                            > > was
                            > > > > kept in a dungeon and purposely sleep deprived. Yet, she
                            > handled
                            > > the
                            > > > > trial for her life with brilliance.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Hence, this Queen, this politician despite her failures had
                            in
                            > my
                            > > > > view the potential for greatness as a politician had she ever
                            > > gotten
                            > > > > the kind of second chances so many of the greats Lincoln,
                            > > Churchill,
                            > > > > DeGaulle, Roosevelt got in their political lives. After
                            > disaster
                            > > at
                            > > > > Gallipoli, with the India bill, with the abdication crisis and
                            > > more,
                            > > > > who in 1936 would have imagined Churchill back in power much
                            > less
                            > > the
                            > > > > svaior of his country revered for all time as the leader of
                            > > Britain
                            > > > > in their finest hour. Marie Antoinette never got her chance
                            for
                            > > > > vindication.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Axel
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, George
                            > Caffine
                            > > > > <geocaffine@> wrote:
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino Affect
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > This gets back to our discussion of monarchy versus
                            democracy.
                            > > A
                            > > > > good leader is one who picks: good-hearted advisors, ones who
                            > > give
                            > > > > winning advice; and then taking the right advice when it's
                            > > offered.
                            > > > > Beyond the charisma, nothing more is needed. I always thought
                            it
                            > > was
                            > > > > silly when they blamed Jimmy Carter for not rescuing the Iran
                            > > > > hostages, as if he should have swung down from a helicopter,
                            > like
                            > > > > Rambo or Batman.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > My belief that Marie Antoinette would have made a good
                            Queen
                            > is
                            > > > > based on sentiment, she never had a chance to prove it. Her
                            > poise
                            > > and
                            > > > > ability to win over the people was expressed, but the volume
                            of
                            > > hate
                            > > > > and falling blade cut off any hope of success. Of course, I
                            have
                            > > to
                            > > > > contrast that belief by agreeing she was prone to faux pas
                            > > (sorry, I
                            > > > > have to point out the joke: prone is lying flat, faux pas is
                            > > false
                            > > > > step; result: tripping and falling on her face) so her good
                            > > > > intentions might have too often have led to faulty execution
                            > > (sic).
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > Sorry: I seem to be suffering from runaway silliness.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > ----- Original Message ----
                            > > > > > From: doritmi <drub@>
                            > > > > > To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
                            > > > > > Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:35:05 PM
                            > > > > > Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the
                            Domino
                            > > > > Affect
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > Ok, I have several time made long posts about why I do not
                            > > think MA
                            > > > > > was a wonderful queen. would those who think differently -
                            as
                            > > > > Kristin
                            > > > > > did before - explain why you think she was a good queen as
                            > > opposed
                            > > > > to
                            > > > > > being a "wonderful personality" or dying as a hero? I agree
                            > > with
                            > > > > Axel
                            > > > > > she matured towards the end. she still, in my view, was not
                            a
                            > > good
                            > > > > > politician. dying heroicly four years after the start of the
                            > > battle,
                            > > > > > losing all the steps on the way, is not the sign of a
                            > successful
                            > > > > > politician or a tallented leader. I get why you'd call her
                            > > tragic,
                            > > > > > heroic, etc'. but in what way was she a wonderful queen?
                            >
                            > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
                            > <Rand103242@> wrote:
                            > >
                            >
                            > RE: Queen: handicapped policitian weaned in Inferno of Revolution
                            >
                            >
                            > Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof France,
                            > was MA a good politician?
                            >
                            > I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing world
                            > sentiment would be - are you outa your mind?
                            > Marie Antoinette was an awful queen. She was no politician. She had
                            > not a clue.
                            >
                            > However, perhaps it's the contrarian in me. I'm not so ready to
                            > dismiss the question. Obviously, Dorit's points are salient as they
                            > normally are *smiles* But I do think that George and Lady are on to
                            > something.
                            >
                            > Simon Schama put it quite cogently in the recent Grubin documentary
                            > on Marie Antoinette that aired on PBS last fall. The documentary
                            > more than any other film to date gives air to the campaign of
                            > vilification against Marie Antoinette with Chantal Thomas among the
                            > Talking Heads.
                            >
                            > Schama in that film mentions the recognition of public hatred of her
                            > after the Necklace Affair. That affair and especially the court's
                            > verdict and public approval of it were (along with her cool
                            reception
                            > in Paris when she presented her second boy born in 1785), were a big
                            > time wake up call to Marie Antoinette.
                            >
                            > As Schama said, "Marie Antoinette had to grow up. She had to grow up
                            > very fast!"
                            >
                            > In the years before Revolution she worked as a politician to try to
                            > repair both her image and her monarchy - there was the Vigee LeBrun
                            > 1787 portrait, the later 1788 portrait and other efforts of the
                            Queen
                            > to improve her image, to cut and take more care to her expenses, to
                            > try to aid Louis in the governmental crisis of 1787-89, and to try
                            to
                            > win favor with the French people, including favoring double
                            > representation of the 3rd estate, commoners in the Estates General
                            > called for May 1789.
                            >
                            > Then, as the Revolution took hold the Queen was ever the activist to
                            > attempt to stem the tide of Revolution. She was key to the outing of
                            > Necker in July 1789, the calling out of troops to protect Versailles
                            > in September 1789 and the flight to Varennes in June 1791. She
                            > conducted correpondence with Austrians and others for intervention,
                            > she was key to the Brunswick Manifesto.
                            >
                            > We can look at each of these and say - Yes, Marie Antoinette was a
                            > polician... she was also a walking disastor... everything she
                            touched
                            > turned to ruin.
                            >
                            > But to this, I'd offer three comebacks.
                            >
                            > First, you have to consider the hand she was dealt. To some extent
                            > she was changing deck chairs on the Titanic. a) France was bankrupt.
                            > Much of that the rsult of 7 Years War she had nothing to do with and
                            > participation in the American Revolution which she opposed. b) She
                            > was hated as Queen - part from her own devices, but part also from
                            > the campaign against her and part too from her role as a strong
                            woman
                            > and an Austrian foreigner.
                            >
                            > Second, you have to consider that she operated as a politician with
                            a
                            > hand tied behind her back - she was Queen and not King and she had
                            > been bred to follow the king (despite that her mother acted
                            > differently). Thus, when several key crunch moments occured
                            > in 1789 - to leave Versailles, in 1791 - to cut their way free at
                            > Varennes, and in 1792 - to defend the Tuileries - it was Marie
                            > Antoinette who wore the pants in the family. She was a do-er and she
                            > was a fighter. It was the Queen who would make the key tactical move
                            > in 1789, and who would fight when fighting was needed in 1791 and
                            > 1792. Her wimp, phlegmatic husband always shied from confrontation
                            > and she would not overrule him when he was decided on lethargy.
                            >
                            > Third, as said in my title above the Queen was tested by the infermo
                            > of Revolution. In baseball parlance, it's like bringing in your
                            > closer with the bases loaded in a tie or 1-run ball game and blaming
                            > him for the loss when the ball hit scores a run. Plus, I'd go
                            > further, blaiming your closer when the two winning runs are scored
                            > off an error by the center fielder. Marie Antoinette had almost no
                            > poliitcal role until 1787. Louis suffered a breakdown in nerves. She
                            > assumed the role because he needed her, and she rose to the
                            occasion.
                            > But it was quite late in the ball game. She did what she could and
                            > as stated above - she still might have saved the game had Louis not
                            > made the three errors cited above.
                            >
                            > Forth, her role as queen and political actor that really began in
                            > 1787 ended with the overthrow of the monarchy August 10, 1792. so,
                            > the true period of her poliitcal awakening and activity as she "grew
                            > up fast" and did her best to learn and act on the job was just 5
                            > years - and she did that under the glare of being for much of the
                            > time the effective head of state. Even more than a President, the
                            > King was absolute ruler.
                            >
                            > When US Presidents Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson
                            > had to grow up fast because the assassination of the US head of
                            state
                            > suddenly brought these ceremonial (Vice President) men to power each
                            > were men more than 50 years old and each had been a politician for
                            > over 30 years before taking office as Vice President. In contrast,
                            > Marie Antoinette was just 30 years old, she had been a carefree
                            > ornament (fashion and etiquette showpiece for monarchy) and breeder
                            > (womb for the dauphin), and thus essentially zero training in
                            > political office. Now she had to bootstrap herself into being the
                            > head of state of France. Add to that she had to do so not only with
                            > a public that hated her but also at a time of enormous personal
                            > stress. Her cherished son whom she had so waited for and so adored
                            > was dying of TB despite all her efforts to save the little boy. He
                            > died on June 4, 1789 a month after the Estates General was called
                            and
                            > month before the Fall of the Bastille.
                            >
                            > Fifth, I'd repeat the points made by George and Lady, that the life
                            > of Marie Antoinette was literally and figuratively cut short. She
                            was
                            > indeed beheaded but her role as queen was cut short over a year
                            > earlier in August 1792. She had just 5 years for her political
                            > career. She was out of office at age 36 and beheaded at age 37. She
                            > surely paid the highest price for her failures. But thinking of
                            > George and Lady's points, one wonders, if she had not been cut off
                            so
                            > young and after so short a time, what kind of politician she might
                            > have matured into.
                            >
                            > Sixth and last point, Pimprennelle is fond of saying to detractors
                            > READ HER LETTERS (reminds me of the 1884 Democratic slogan by
                            > Cleveland's supporters to answer Blain - Burn Burn Burn this
                            letter!)
                            > There are published letters of Marie Antoinette - you can read her
                            > letters. If you, I believe you will discover the kind and generous
                            > human being Marie Antoinette was.
                            >
                            > But as to what kind of politician she might have been.... might have
                            > been had it not all ended so soon for her... READ THE TRANSCIPTS...
                            > read the transcripts of her trial - the grace, dignity, insight,
                            > adroitness of her answers. Richard Nixon saved his political life
                            > with the Checkers Speach. If you read Marie Antoinette's answers, I
                            > suggest you'll believe she could have been aquitted if the jury was
                            > not stacked against her. She unlike Nixon was not a Duke educated
                            > lawyer, she had no coaches, she had no chance to prepared, she was
                            > kept in a dungeon and purposely sleep deprived. Yet, she handled the
                            > trial for her life with brilliance.
                            >
                            > Hence, this Queen, this politician despite her failures had in my
                            > view the potential for greatness as a politician had she ever gotten
                            > the kind of second chances so many of the greats Lincoln, Churchill,
                            > DeGaulle, Roosevelt got in their political lives. After disaster at
                            > Gallipoli, with the India bill, with the abdication crisis and more,
                            > who in 1936 would have imagined Churchill back in power much less
                            the
                            > svaior of his country revered for all time as the leader of Britain
                            > in their finest hour. Marie Antoinette never got her chance for
                            > vindication.
                            >
                            > Axel
                            >
                          • doritmi
                            1. Separating periods: the problem with such a division is that MA had a political role starting 1774. She had a representation role; she was supposed to hold
                            Message 13 of 24 , Jul 7, 2007
                              1. Separating periods:
                              the problem with such a division is that MA had a political role
                              starting 1774. She had a representation role; she was supposed to hold
                              court and without a mistress, she was expected to give patronage - and
                              she did.
                              Everyone expected her to play some political role.
                              in the French reality, she was a political persona since she arrived -
                              and her performance from 1787 was very constrained by the missed
                              opportunities of the previous 13 years, that led to such a terrible
                              image of her.
                              2. The Queen v. the Mistress: I agree with you - those were the
                              reasons that hurt her image, - and her fault, if any, was in not
                              building a positive image that could be used to counter the negative
                              ones. I'm not sure if it was worst than what was held against
                              Pompadour and Du Barry - both were really hated, and the libels
                              against both of them were horrific. but MA also had the misfortune of
                              coming in after a period where the prestige of the monarchy went
                              downhill - so it's "the straw that breaks the camel's back" problem...


                              --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
                              <Rand103242@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > The point is well made the Queen had a role and chose to ignore it.
                              > She ascended the throne in 1774. Yet, I talked about MA as politician
                              > beginning in 1787 - a period when Louis had something of a nervous
                              > breakdown and called upon Marie Antoinette for advice and help. It
                              > was she who had the greatest role in Calonne's demise and in
                              > succeeding ministers from 1787 to 1789 and then in influencing Louis
                              > to resist revolution.
                              >
                              > Can we separate the periods? To the French public, no. For them,
                              > she was queen and had the role from 1774 until 1792 when she and
                              > Louis were sent to prison.
                              >
                              > However, knowing what we know and the French public largely did not I
                              > still assert that the Queen despite her title was no politician for
                              > the first 12 years, 1774 to 1786. She was queen but queen did not
                              > mean politician - queen meant showpiece, womb, first lady, breeder.
                              > French queens before her were generally the same in that quiet role -
                              > not policians but show pieces.
                              >
                              > Marie Antoinette's problem it seems to me was not that she was a bad
                              > polician from 1774 to 1787 but that she did not accept or conform to
                              > the expected role of Queen. She wanted a personal life at her Petit
                              > Trianon and she also outshown the king in glamour. She was pretty,
                              > vivacious set tongues gossiping, grabbed patronage - in short, she
                              > had many of the attributes the French associated with tyhe mistresses
                              > of Louis XV that the French generally disliked.
                              >
                              > But MA was worese than a mistress and hated more for three reasons
                              > 1. She outshown the king
                              > 2. She was the handsome one, he was the faithful one - so the rumors
                              > she cockolded him - the macho French people hated that
                              > 3. She was Austrian while the mistress French
                              > 4. She was queen - and thus had far more real power or was perceived
                              > to have it than mistresses had.
                              >
                              > Hence Marie Antoinette did squander her good will. Of course whether
                              > she was mainly responsible for that or the forces arrayed against her
                              > is an open question - but good will she had and good will was
                              > squandered.
                              >
                              > While I assert that when she actually got political power, she did
                              > better than her critics assert, she was queen alot longer than 1785-
                              > 1792 and politician or not she be bore the brunt of the reputation
                              > she got for those years.
                              >
                              >
                              > Axel
                              >
                              >
                              > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "charlesdiago"
                              > <charlesdiago@> wrote:
                              > >
                              > > Thank you, doritmi:
                              > >
                              > > I loved this post.
                              > >
                              > > Yes, MA's role was clearly defined: she chose to ignore it.
                              > >
                              > > And I loved the way you worded this: "she squandered much of that
                              > > popularity". Squandered it like easy credit.
                              > >
                              > > But particularly your third point is relevant when discussing her
                              > > leadership abilities:
                              > >
                              > > "c. being a wonderful person is not being a wonderful queen. I don't
                              > > care about MA's personal persona. as a political persona, she had a
                              > > lot lacking."
                              > >
                              > > Charlotte Corday said it best when she said of Louis XVI:
                              > >
                              > > "I believe him virtuous, but a weak king cannot be a good one; he
                              > > cannot check the misfortunes of his people."
                              > >
                              > > Thank you for making these important points.
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "doritmi"
                              > > <drub@> wrote:
                              > >
                              > > Re: Queen: handicapped policitian weaned in Inferno of Revolution
                              > > >
                              > > > Dear Axel,
                              > > > I agree with your point about the revolution testing MA.
                              > therefore,
                              > > in
                              > > > my view, the assessment of her as queen should focus on her reign
                              > > from
                              > > > 17774-1789. to this, I'd like to say several things in response to
                              > > our
                              > > > comments:
                              > > > a. as you point out, MA was a queen, not king. her role was very
                              > > > clearly defined. the criticism of her can be put in two
                              > categories:
                              > > i.
                              > > > she tried to interfere in politics. ii. she did not fulfill the
                              > role
                              > > > of queen of France. (and see previous posts for my discussion of
                              > > what
                              > > > that role was and how she didn't do it.
                              > > > b. she was not dealt such a bad hand. yes, she had enemies in
                              > court
                              > > > coming in. many others did. but she was very popular on her
                              > > ascension.
                              > > > she squandered much of that popularity.
                              > > > c. being a wonderful person is not being a wonderful queen. I
                              > don't
                              > > > care about MA's personal persona. as a political persona, she had
                              > a
                              > > > lot lacking.
                              > > >
                              > > > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
                              > > > <Rand103242@> wrote:
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof
                              > France,
                              > > > > was MA a good politician?
                              > > > >
                              > > > > I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing world
                              > > > > sentiment would be - are you outa your mind?
                              > > > > Marie Antoinette was an awful queen. She was no politician. She
                              > > had
                              > > > > not a clue.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > However, perhaps it's the contrarian in me. I'm not so ready to
                              > > > > dismiss the question. Obviously, Dorit's points are salient as
                              > > they
                              > > > > normally are *smiles* But I do think that George and Lady are on
                              > > to
                              > > > > something.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Simon Schama put it quite cogently in the recent Grubin
                              > > documentary
                              > > > > on Marie Antoinette that aired on PBS last fall. The
                              > documentary
                              > > > > more than any other film to date gives air to the campaign of
                              > > > > vilification against Marie Antoinette with Chantal Thomas among
                              > > the
                              > > > > Talking Heads.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Schama in that film mentions the recognition of public hatred of
                              > > her
                              > > > > after the Necklace Affair. That affair and especially the
                              > > court's
                              > > > > verdict and public approval of it were (along with her cool
                              > > reception
                              > > > > in Paris when she presented her second boy born in 1785), were a
                              > > big
                              > > > > time wake up call to Marie Antoinette.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > As Schama said, "Marie Antoinette had to grow up. She had to
                              > > grow up
                              > > > > very fast!"
                              > > > >
                              > > > > In the years before Revolution she worked as a politician to try
                              > > to
                              > > > > repair both her image and her monarchy - there was the Vigee
                              > > LeBrun
                              > > > > 1787 portrait, the later 1788 portrait and other efforts of the
                              > > Queen
                              > > > > to improve her image, to cut and take more care to her expenses,
                              > > to
                              > > > > try to aid Louis in the governmental crisis of 1787-89, and to
                              > > try to
                              > > > > win favor with the French people, including favoring double
                              > > > > representation of the 3rd estate, commoners in the Estates
                              > > General
                              > > > > called for May 1789.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Then, as the Revolution took hold the Queen was ever the
                              > > activist to
                              > > > > attempt to stem the tide of Revolution. She was key to the
                              > > outing of
                              > > > > Necker in July 1789, the calling out of troops to protect
                              > > Versailles
                              > > > > in September 1789 and the flight to Varennes in June 1791. She
                              > > > > conducted correpondence with Austrians and others for
                              > > intervention,
                              > > > > she was key to the Brunswick Manifesto.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > We can look at each of these and say - Yes, Marie Antoinette was
                              > > a
                              > > > > polician... she was also a walking disastor... everything she
                              > > touched
                              > > > > turned to ruin.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > But to this, I'd offer three comebacks.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > First, you have to consider the hand she was dealt. To some
                              > > extent
                              > > > > she was changing deck chairs on the Titanic. a) France was
                              > > bankrupt.
                              > > > > Much of that the rsult of 7 Years War she had nothing to do with
                              > > and
                              > > > > participation in the American Revolution which she opposed. b)
                              > > She
                              > > > > was hated as Queen - part from her own devices, but part also
                              > > from
                              > > > > the campaign against her and part too from her role as a strong
                              > > woman
                              > > > > and an Austrian foreigner.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Second, you have to consider that she operated as a politician
                              > > with a
                              > > > > hand tied behind her back - she was Queen and not King and she
                              > > had
                              > > > > been bred to follow the king (despite that her mother acted
                              > > > > differently). Thus, when several key crunch moments occured
                              > > > > in 1789 - to leave Versailles, in 1791 - to cut their way free
                              > at
                              > > > > Varennes, and in 1792 - to defend the Tuileries - it was Marie
                              > > > > Antoinette who wore the pants in the family. She was a do-er
                              > and
                              > > she
                              > > > > was a fighter. It was the Queen who would make the key tactical
                              > > move
                              > > > > in 1789, and who would fight when fighting was needed in 1791
                              > and
                              > > > > 1792. Her wimp, phlegmatic husband always shied from
                              > > confrontation
                              > > > > and she would not overrule him when he was decided on lethargy.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Third, as said in my title above the Queen was tested by the
                              > > infermo
                              > > > > of Revolution. In baseball parlance, it's like bringing in your
                              > > > > closer with the bases loaded in a tie or 1-run ball game and
                              > > blaming
                              > > > > him for the loss when the ball hit scores a run. Plus, I'd go
                              > > > > further, blaiming your closer when the two winning runs are
                              > > scored
                              > > > > off an error by the center fielder. Marie Antoinette had almost
                              > > no
                              > > > > poliitcal role until 1787. Louis suffered a breakdown in nerves.
                              > > She
                              > > > > assumed the role because he needed her, and she rose to the
                              > > occasion.
                              > > > > But it was quite late in the ball game. She did what she could
                              > > and
                              > > > > as stated above - she still might have saved the game had Louis
                              > > not
                              > > > > made the three errors cited above.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Forth, her role as queen and political actor that really began
                              > > in
                              > > > > 1787 ended with the overthrow of the monarchy August 10, 1792.
                              > > so,
                              > > > > the true period of her poliitcal awakening and activity as
                              > > she "grew
                              > > > > up fast" and did her best to learn and act on the job was just 5
                              > > > > years - and she did that under the glare of being for much of
                              > the
                              > > > > time the effective head of state. Even more than a President,
                              > > the
                              > > > > King was absolute ruler.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > When US Presidents Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman and Lyndon
                              > > Johnson
                              > > > > had to grow up fast because the assassination of the US head of
                              > > state
                              > > > > suddenly brought these ceremonial (Vice President) men to power
                              > > each
                              > > > > were men more than 50 years old and each had been a politician
                              > > for
                              > > > > over 30 years before taking office as Vice President. In
                              > > contrast,
                              > > > > Marie Antoinette was just 30 years old, she had been a carefree
                              > > > > ornament (fashion and etiquette showpiece for monarchy) and
                              > > breeder
                              > > > > (womb for the dauphin), and thus essentially zero training in
                              > > > > political office. Now she had to bootstrap herself into being
                              > > the
                              > > > > head of state of France. Add to that she had to do so not only
                              > > with
                              > > > > a public that hated her but also at a time of enormous personal
                              > > > > stress. Her cherished son whom she had so waited for and so
                              > > adored
                              > > > > was dying of TB despite all her efforts to save the little boy.
                              > > He
                              > > > > died on June 4, 1789 a month after the Estates General was
                              > called
                              > > and
                              > > > > month before the Fall of the Bastille.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Fifth, I'd repeat the points made by George and Lady, that the
                              > > life
                              > > > > of Marie Antoinette was literally and figuratively cut short.
                              > She
                              > > was
                              > > > > indeed beheaded but her role as queen was cut short over a year
                              > > > > earlier in August 1792. She had just 5 years for her political
                              > > > > career. She was out of office at age 36 and beheaded at age 37.
                              > > She
                              > > > > surely paid the highest price for her failures. But thinking of
                              > > > > George and Lady's points, one wonders, if she had not been cut
                              > > off so
                              > > > > young and after so short a time, what kind of politician she
                              > > might
                              > > > > have matured into.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Sixth and last point, Pimprennelle is fond of saying to
                              > > detractors
                              > > > > READ HER LETTERS (reminds me of the 1884 Democratic slogan by
                              > > > > Cleveland's supporters to answer Blain - Burn Burn Burn this
                              > > letter!)
                              > > > > There are published letters of Marie Antoinette - you can read
                              > > her
                              > > > > letters. If you, I believe you will discover the kind and
                              > > generous
                              > > > > human being Marie Antoinette was.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > But as to what kind of politician she might have been.... might
                              > > have
                              > > > > been had it not all ended so soon for her... READ THE
                              > > TRANSCIPTS...
                              > > > > read the transcripts of her trial - the grace, dignity, insight,
                              > > > > adroitness of her answers. Richard Nixon saved his political
                              > > life
                              > > > > with the Checkers Speach. If you read Marie Antoinette's
                              > > answers, I
                              > > > > suggest you'll believe she could have been aquitted if the jury
                              > > was
                              > > > > not stacked against her. She unlike Nixon was not a Duke
                              > > educated
                              > > > > lawyer, she had no coaches, she had no chance to prepared, she
                              > > was
                              > > > > kept in a dungeon and purposely sleep deprived. Yet, she
                              > handled
                              > > the
                              > > > > trial for her life with brilliance.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Hence, this Queen, this politician despite her failures had in
                              > my
                              > > > > view the potential for greatness as a politician had she ever
                              > > gotten
                              > > > > the kind of second chances so many of the greats Lincoln,
                              > > Churchill,
                              > > > > DeGaulle, Roosevelt got in their political lives. After
                              > disaster
                              > > at
                              > > > > Gallipoli, with the India bill, with the abdication crisis and
                              > > more,
                              > > > > who in 1936 would have imagined Churchill back in power much
                              > less
                              > > the
                              > > > > svaior of his country revered for all time as the leader of
                              > > Britain
                              > > > > in their finest hour. Marie Antoinette never got her chance for
                              > > > > vindication.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Axel
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, George
                              > Caffine
                              > > > > <geocaffine@> wrote:
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino Affect
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > This gets back to our discussion of monarchy versus democracy.
                              > > A
                              > > > > good leader is one who picks: good-hearted advisors, ones who
                              > > give
                              > > > > winning advice; and then taking the right advice when it's
                              > > offered.
                              > > > > Beyond the charisma, nothing more is needed. I always thought it
                              > > was
                              > > > > silly when they blamed Jimmy Carter for not rescuing the Iran
                              > > > > hostages, as if he should have swung down from a helicopter,
                              > like
                              > > > > Rambo or Batman.
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > My belief that Marie Antoinette would have made a good Queen
                              > is
                              > > > > based on sentiment, she never had a chance to prove it. Her
                              > poise
                              > > and
                              > > > > ability to win over the people was expressed, but the volume of
                              > > hate
                              > > > > and falling blade cut off any hope of success. Of course, I have
                              > > to
                              > > > > contrast that belief by agreeing she was prone to faux pas
                              > > (sorry, I
                              > > > > have to point out the joke: prone is lying flat, faux pas is
                              > > false
                              > > > > step; result: tripping and falling on her face) so her good
                              > > > > intentions might have too often have led to faulty execution
                              > > (sic).
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > Sorry: I seem to be suffering from runaway silliness.
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > ----- Original Message ----
                              > > > > > From: doritmi <drub@>
                              > > > > > To: Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com
                              > > > > > Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:35:05 PM
                              > > > > > Subject: Re: The Affair of the Diamond Necklace and the Domino
                              > > > > Affect
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > Ok, I have several time made long posts about why I do not
                              > > think MA
                              > > > > > was a wonderful queen. would those who think differently - as
                              > > > > Kristin
                              > > > > > did before - explain why you think she was a good queen as
                              > > opposed
                              > > > > to
                              > > > > > being a "wonderful personality" or dying as a hero? I agree
                              > > with
                              > > > > Axel
                              > > > > > she matured towards the end. she still, in my view, was not a
                              > > good
                              > > > > > politician. dying heroicly four years after the start of the
                              > > battle,
                              > > > > > losing all the steps on the way, is not the sign of a
                              > successful
                              > > > > > politician or a tallented leader. I get why you'd call her
                              > > tragic,
                              > > > > > heroic, etc'. but in what way was she a wonderful queen?
                              >
                              > --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "Axel"
                              > <Rand103242@> wrote:
                              > >
                              >
                              > RE: Queen: handicapped policitian weaned in Inferno of Revolution
                              >
                              >
                              > Was Marie Antoinette a good queen? As a political leaderof France,
                              > was MA a good politician?
                              >
                              > I believe if we asked for a show of hands, the prevailing world
                              > sentiment would be - are you outa your mind?
                              > Marie Antoinette was an awful queen. She was no politician. She had
                              > not a clue.
                              >
                              > However, perhaps it's the contrarian in me. I'm not so ready to
                              > dismiss the question. Obviously, Dorit's points are salient as they
                              > normally are *smiles* But I do think that George and Lady are on to
                              > something.
                              >
                              > Simon Schama put it quite cogently in the recent Grubin documentary
                              > on Marie Antoinette that aired on PBS last fall. The documentary
                              > more than any other film to date gives air to the campaign of
                              > vilification against Marie Antoinette with Chantal Thomas among the
                              > Talking Heads.
                              >
                              > Schama in that film mentions the recognition of public hatred of her
                              > after the Necklace Affair. That affair and especially the court's
                              > verdict and public approval of it were (along with her cool reception
                              > in Paris when she presented her second boy born in 1785), were a big
                              > time wake up call to Marie Antoinette.
                              >
                              > As Schama said, "Marie Antoinette had to grow up. She had to grow up
                              > very fast!"
                              >
                              > In the years before Revolution she worked as a politician to try to
                              > repair both her image and her monarchy - there was the Vigee LeBrun
                              > 1787 portrait, the later 1788 portrait and other efforts of the Queen
                              > to improve her image, to cut and take more care to her expenses, to
                              > try to aid Louis in the governmental crisis of 1787-89, and to try to
                              > win favor with the French people, including favoring double
                              > representation of the 3rd estate, commoners in the Estates General
                              > called for May 1789.
                              >
                              > Then, as the Revolution took hold the Queen was ever the activist to
                              > attempt to stem the tide of Revolution. She was key to the outing of
                              > Necker in July 1789, the calling out of troops to protect Versailles
                              > in September 1789 and the flight to Varennes in June 1791. She
                              > conducted correpondence with Austrians and others for intervention,
                              > she was key to the Brunswick Manifesto.
                              >
                              > We can look at each of these and say - Yes, Marie Antoinette was a
                              > polician... she was also a walking disastor... everything she touched
                              > turned to ruin.
                              >
                              > But to this, I'd offer three comebacks.
                              >
                              > First, you have to consider the hand she was dealt. To some extent
                              > she was changing deck chairs on the Titanic. a) France was bankrupt.
                              > Much of that the rsult of 7 Years War she had nothing to do with and
                              > participation in the American Revolution which she opposed. b) She
                              > was hated as Queen - part from her own devices, but part also from
                              > the campaign against her and part too from her role as a strong woman
                              > and an Austrian foreigner.
                              >
                              > Second, you have to consider that she operated as a politician with a
                              > hand tied behind her back - she was Queen and not King and she had
                              > been bred to follow the king (despite that her mother acted
                              > differently). Thus, when several key crunch moments occured
                              > in 1789 - to leave Versailles, in 1791 - to cut their way free at
                              > Varennes, and in 1792 - to defend the Tuileries - it was Marie
                              > Antoinette who wore the pants in the family. She was a do-er and she
                              > was a fighter. It was the Queen who would make the key tactical move
                              > in 1789, and who would fight when fighting was needed in 1791 and
                              > 1792. Her wimp, phlegmatic husband always shied from confrontation
                              > and she would not overrule him when he was decided on lethargy.
                              >
                              > Third, as said in my title above the Queen was tested by the infermo
                              > of Revolution. In baseball parlance, it's like bringing in your
                              > closer with the bases loaded in a tie or 1-run ball game and blaming
                              > him for the loss when the ball hit scores a run. Plus, I'd go
                              > further, blaiming your closer when the two winning runs are scored
                              > off an error by the center fielder. Marie Antoinette had almost no
                              > poliitcal role until 1787. Louis suffered a breakdown in nerves. She
                              > assumed the role because he needed her, and she rose to the occasion.
                              > But it was quite late in the ball game. She did what she could and
                              > as stated above - she still might have saved the game had Louis not
                              > made the three errors cited above.
                              >
                              > Forth, her role as queen and political actor that really began in
                              > 1787 ended with the overthrow of the monarchy August 10, 1792. so,
                              > the true period of her poliitcal awakening and activity as she "grew
                              > up fast" and did her best to learn and act on the job was just 5
                              > years - and she did that under the glare of being for much of the
                              > time the effective head of state. Even more than a President, the
                              > King was absolute ruler.
                              >
                              > When US Presidents Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson
                              > had to grow up fast because the assassination of the US head of state
                              > suddenly brought these ceremonial (Vice President) men to power each
                              > were men more than 50 years old and each had been a politician for
                              > over 30 years before taking office as Vice President. In contrast,
                              > Marie Antoinette was just 30 years old, she had been a carefree
                              > ornament (fashion and etiquette showpiece for monarchy) and breeder
                              > (womb for the dauphin), and thus essentially zero training in
                              > political office. Now she had to bootstrap herself into being the
                              > head of state of France. Add to that she had to do so not only with
                              > a public that hated her but also at a time of enormous personal
                              > stress. Her cherished son whom she had so waited for and so adored
                              > was dying of TB despite all her efforts to save the little boy. He
                              > died on June 4, 1789 a month after the Estates General was called and
                              > month before the Fall of the Bastille.
                              >
                              > Fifth, I'd repeat the points made by George and Lady, that the life
                              > of Marie Antoinette was literally and figuratively cut short. She was
                              > indeed beheaded but her role as queen was cut short over a year
                              > earlier in August 1792. She had just 5 years for her political
                              > career. She was out of office at age 36 and beheaded at age 37. She
                              > surely paid the highest price for her failures. But thinking of
                              > George and Lady's points, one wonders, if she had not been cut off so
                              > young and after so short a time, what kind of politician she might
                              > have matured into.
                              >
                              > Sixth and last point, Pimprennelle is fond of saying to detractors
                              > READ HER LETTERS (reminds me of the 1884 Democratic slogan by
                              > Cleveland's supporters to answer Blain - Burn Burn Burn this letter!)
                              > There are published letters of Marie Antoinette - you can read her
                              > letters. If you, I believe you will discover the kind and generous
                              > human being Marie Antoinette was.
                              >
                              > But as to what kind of politician she might have been.... might have
                              > been had it not all ended so soon for her... READ THE TRANSCIPTS...
                              > read the transcripts of her trial - the grace, dignity, insight,
                              > adroitness of her answers. Richard Nixon saved his political life
                              > with the Checkers Speach. If you read Marie Antoinette's answers, I
                              > suggest you'll believe she could have been aquitted if the jury was
                              > not stacked against her. She unlike Nixon was not a Duke educated
                              > lawyer, she had no coaches, she had no chance to prepared, she was
                              > kept in a dungeon and purposely sleep deprived. Yet, she handled the
                              > trial for her life with brilliance.
                              >
                              > Hence, this Queen, this politician despite her failures had in my
                              > view the potential for greatness as a politician had she ever gotten
                              > the kind of second chances so many of the greats Lincoln, Churchill,
                              > DeGaulle, Roosevelt got in their political lives. After disaster at
                              > Gallipoli, with the India bill, with the abdication crisis and more,
                              > who in 1936 would have imagined Churchill back in power much less the
                              > svaior of his country revered for all time as the leader of Britain
                              > in their finest hour. Marie Antoinette never got her chance for
                              > vindication.
                              >
                              > Axel
                              >
                            • doritmi
                              I loved the finishing line. but I disagree with you about some of the points (and you and Kristin are right abotu no one changing opinions. a. the evidence
                              Message 14 of 24 , Jul 7, 2007
                                I loved the finishing line.
                                but I disagree with you about some of the points (and you and Kristin
                                are right abotu no one changing opinions.
                                a. "the evidence was unmistakeable that that failure was due to her
                                husband". wrong. the question is very controversial, and recent
                                biographies actually put at least half the blame on MA, see, for an
                                example in English, Fraser's.
                                b. "She cuckolded her husband:" oh, I agree with you there was no
                                evidence of that, but I doubt Axel meant anything beyond "that what
                                the French people thought, and it contributed to the hate against her"
                                - and he's right: that's what many thought, since that's what
                                contemporary libels accused her of. and that's the fault of the
                                aristocracy, not the revolutionaries. they wrote the first libels. and
                                they didn't want to over throw the monarchy: just to badmouth this
                                young austrian.

                                but I do agree that a lot of MA's troubles had little to do with her
                                actions and much to do with hostility towards her.


                                --- In Images_of_Marie_Antoinette@yahoogroups.com, "George Caffine"
                                <geocaffine@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > I suppose Kristin Marie Wall is right when she says no one is
                                > changing their opinion. I think my opinion has grown barbs but its
                                > direction is unchanged. You say she squandered her good will, that
                                > she was supposed to be a womb and a breeder but failed at that. Total
                                > nonsense, the evidence was unmistakeable that that failure was due to
                                > her husband. She cuckolded her husband: nonsense, there is
                                > absolutely no evidence of that. She squandered her good will: that
                                > good will was disappearing long before 1774, when her husband failed
                                > to impregnate her, when there was already serious talk of annulment
                                > and returning her to Austria--specifically for that reason.
                                >
                                > The cuckolding and scorn by the people were inventions of evil powers
                                > out to overthrow the monarchy. With all her faults, Marie Antoinette
                                > had almost nothing to do with the hatred that was arrayed against
                                > her.
                                >
                                > I feel bad, now that more facts are in, because the ridiculous lies
                                > are still held as credible. Marie Antoinette was no saint, she had no
                                > training as a politician, assuming such training ever existed, and an
                                > honest evaluation of the person should be made by sweeping away the
                                > bovine doo-doo.
                                >
                                >
                                > > >
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.