Marie antonette on bbc2

I thoroughly enjoyed it. It was a beautifully presented drama. I expect there'll be another series as this one ended quite well.

Apart from her lover Count Fernsen, who does escape in time back to Sweden.

Well at least with this story- no surprise about how it all ends for all of them ;) we know that.

It's not tosh at all.

I believe they call it "historical fiction".

Tosh is too kind a word for it.
Bridgerton, eat your heart out!

Tonight's episode was much better, and I really enjoyed it. I am wondering when her love affair with Count Fernsen of Sweden will come about in the series.

I have watched 3 episodes and it seems about as close to history as "the Great" was to the rise to power of Catherine the Great.

Just for starters, Countess du Barry was never a friend who attemtpted to initiate Marie Antoinette into the art of seduction. MA barely spoke to her and then only under protest. According to etiquette du Barry could not speak in the presence and was a "non person" until MA acknowedged her. Under great protest and pressure from her mother the empress and the king MA uttered one impersonal phrase which translates as "There are many people at Versailles today". They were never friends.

Also the king (Louis XV) already had a wife. He was married to Marie Leszczyńska, daughter of the dethroned king Stanisław I of Poland. So he would never have offered to marry Mme du Barry even if he had been free to do so. Kings of France did not publicly marry their mistresses (although Louis XIV is reputed to have married Mme de Maitenon in secret when near the end of his life).

Sorry I confused the quotations from several grans. Gransnet is not geared up with quotation boxes for comparing of ideas.

Fleurpepper wrote:
"volver

((Caleo

What is the point of a play unless there is some truth in it?)

Entertainment?

confused)

Fair enough- but then why make it about a real historical figure. Just write a story, make it up, get the great locations, costumes and actors, and make it fun and entertaining.

I agree with Judy Dench."

Sheer entertainment is perfectly okay I agree. I think you can make entertainment about a real historical figure AS Long As you make it fully clear it's not historically true. For instance Rowan Atkinson playing the character of Shakespeare.

The character of Lady Macbeth in the famous play is not historically true but is true as aspects of the human psyche.

People have been entertaining other people since time began. From time to time real people are taken as jumping off points for stories and plays. Entertainment is an important part of human experience.
Don't forget that history is written by the victors. It's not necessarily accurate either.
Now. Back to Versailles...

Fleurpepper

volver

Caleo

What is the point of a play unless there is some truth in it?

Entertainment?

Fair enough- but then why make it about a real historical figure. Just write a story, make it up, get the great locations, costumes and actors, and make it fun and entertaining.

I agree with Judy Dench.

Like that terrible example of how not to write a play, Macbeth?

Is that Judi Dench, well known for playing Lady Macbeth? The one who played Elizabeth I in Shakespeare in Love?

volver

Caleo

What is the point of a play unless there is some truth in it?

Entertainment?

Fair enough- but then why make it about a real historical figure. Just write a story, make it up, get the great locations, costumes and actors, and make it fun and entertaining.

I agree with Judy Dench.

No, they were often plain propaganda, bought with heavy silver.

volver

Caleo

What is the point of a play unless there is some truth in it?

Entertainment?

Seriously Caleo ? Are we to take Shakespeare's plays (for example) as being truthful then?

Caleo

What is the point of a play unless there is some truth in it?

Entertainment?

What is the point of a play unless there is some truth in it?

Jusr thought, would she have travelled to Versaille without a female servant?.

Aveline

volver I suspect the unfortunate young couple were being pelted with sugared almonds for fertility.
Poor kids - I mean the happy couple. So very young and under such pressure.

Thanks Aveline

I’ve not seen this one yet, looking forward to watching it, but oh yes the Kirsten Dunst film is just wonderful!

Loved episode one. Almost as much as the Kirsten Dunst film which I can watch any number of times.

volver I suspect the unfortunate young couple were being pelted with sugared almonds for fertility.
Poor kids - I mean the happy couple. So very young and under such pressure.

Fleurpepper

Joseanne

Not much different from Emily in Paris!
Enjoyed both for what they are.

Was Emily a very important historical figure though?

Yes, perhaps the fact I have studied her life for a long time has influenced my perception.

Pas du tout, BUT Emily was an influencer!

Joseanne

Not much different from Emily in Paris!
Enjoyed both for what they are.

Was Emily a very important historical figure though?

Yes, perhaps the fact I have studied her life for a long time has influenced my perception.

Crossed posts notgran

I enjoyed it. Many years ago I read a book (a novel) about her by Annunziata Asquith. I burst into tears at the end. I am lucky enough to have been to Versailles. Such opulence. No wonder there was a revolution.