Today's book is Nicholas and Alexandria by Robert K Massie. Obviously, Czar Nicholas II and his wife. A million years ago (as in, my first or second post) I wrote about Edvard Munch's (I remember his first name was Edvard, but I'm not as sure on the 'Munch' part) book on the Russian Revolution. Compared to Massie's version? It was a pathetic sprawling. His book was, as I've complained about already, poorly written. Extremely poorly written. Edvard also had an annoying habit of bringing of the fact that he was one of a select view who could actually view particular documents and pictures regarding the revolution and Romanovs. After the third or fourth time, you kind of get an urge to punt him out a window, you know? And he overlooked important details (Alexandria's confinement to a wheelchair and worsening health, for example) and the exact details of Rasputin's death. He often skipped around as well, didn't have quite a clear head for facts, gave no historical background.... What I'm trying to say is, Edvard, I'm disappointed in you. Robby Massie? Good job! Hang out sometime?
I think aside from that there's not much to say beforehand. I think my love of Russian history has quite preceded this post (my love of Russian history led me to reading War and Peace before my teacher in MENSA has, hahaha!) and my interest in the revolution as well so cool let's go, huh? (I'm not giving you much of a background here, other than Czar Nicholas II was the last emperor of Russia and the actual history of it is nothing like the animated film Anastasia. In fact, I did the math out [kind of] and discovered that if you were to make a drinking game out of it and drank for every one historical inaccuracy, you'd be OD'd about halfway through. NO, I did not try, and I disclaim any idiots who do decide to try it. IT WILL KILL YOU.)
In the very introduction to the book, Czar Nicholas II is praised--or honored--highly. Throughout the whole book he is. Very often the sentiment expressed appears to be, maybe he was not cut out for ruling, but he was a kind and fair and just man all the same. He was good to his family and friends and was a gentle fellow. All anecdotes about him seem to reflect this; him as a kind grandfatherly man who wouldn't willingly harm anyone. He was even kind and civil to those who had him in confinement, even when they were cruel to him. He reminds me of (though I suppose this means little to those who haven't read the book) the father in Baby by Patricia MacLachlan. A kind of melancholy but sweet person all the same. Kind and sad.
My first note is on a page giving a quick background of Nicholas II's grandfather and father's lives. It mentions the Empress Marie (Anastasia's grandmother; Nicholas II's mother. I feel the need to refer to her as Anastasia's grandmother mainly because it's more likely a reader will be familiar with the movie. She was the old lady who gives Anastasia the locket in the beginning) and her love for the winter palace--often I will be making notes in reference to the animated film--which is the palace the film starts out in. I looked it up and everything. Man, I love that movie. Hold on, I'm going to run upstairs and grab that soundtrack.
One bit I noted was when Nicholas II and Alexandra visited France. It was shortly after their daughter, Duchess Olga, had been born. I'm going to say she was a little under a year at the time, nine or ten months, but I could be lying a little. Anyway, Alexandra was put up in Versailles to sleep in Marie Antoinette's room. Alexandra was also generally disliked by the Russian people, called "that German woman". It sounds like a certain someone whose name I just typed... okay, I know. It's a little ridiculous to go back and be like "Oh she died because there were bad omens!" and it's easier to notice these similarities in retrospect. But it's still enough to make you blink a little. I'm not saying bad juju, but I'mtotallytyping'badjuju'onthisoneIfeelobligedto. (Marie Antoinette was the famous queen who was beheaded in the French Revolution, also strongly disliked by her new people. The French referred to her similarly as Alexandra was by the Russians--but it was "That Austrian woman" instead.)
A cousin--and worm of a man--of the Czar's was the current Kaiser, William. I call him a worm because he had several chances to help Nicholas out in general, and also he had several more chances to save the Romanovs from their fate, which he never took. The other chances to help were military chances, in which he misled and misinformed and purposely weakened Nicholas, or flat-out spurned him. Because of these discrepancies, when Nicholas in captivity was told the Kaiser had had a chance to save him and could possibly still he said he'd rather die than be saved. Yeah, the Kaiser seemed like (and was) the older cousin or sibling who is constantly picking on the youngens and leading them to despair. Unlike in Rugrats, however, it didn't turn out okay in the end, though as far as I'm concerned, the Kaiser got his just deserts when he was exiled. To so purposely whittle away at his cousin's life and ending in his murder and the murder of five children--Of course, I suppose we must keep this in perspective with the fact that Hitler took over after the Kaiser.
Anastasia was bratty as well. Massie never goes out and says if Anastasia really threw the cook in the brook, but she did behave when her father gave "that look" (she would climb trees and refuse to climb back down until her father directly ordered her to) and when saluting the cannon on the yacht at sunset she would make faces and run into corners. She also was apparently quite a tomboy. Apparently Alexei (the youngest child, male, would-be heir to the throne) also had this wild personality; of course, he could not act quite as madly as his sister--he had hemophilia. Basically, it means your blood will not clot as usual and can bleed unchecked. Massie goes into gory detail about this, being that his own son was born with hemophilia (his research led him to researching the Czarevich--Alexei, that is, Czarevich basically means 'prince'--and beyond that, how the whole family dealt with his disease, and eventually, the whole tail end of the Romanov house rule) so he is well-versed in what it does and goes in detail often explaining how it can afflict the victim. Honestly, it makes my stomach lurch. And as I speak of Alexei, one thing that did bother me about the novel is that Massie anglicized names--no biggie, but it bothered me a little. Alexei is referred to as 'Alex' or 'Alexis' and Grigori Rasputin as 'Gregory' which sounds about ten times less cool. I'm just being honest, okay?
In general, though, the girls were very much common and not stuck up because of their status. It is said they were not rude to maids and often worked in cleaning their rooms and making beds alongside them. The girls also were not rude and treated the maids and servants as equals. A Baroness once referred to Tatiana as "Imperial Highness" and she got most agitated and embarrassed and upbraided the Baroness for speaking so grandly of her. The girls were quite embarrassed when treated like the royalty they were. What I'm trying to say is, they weren't bad people. And--Olga once met a poor child on crutches, too poor to afford doctor's bills. She started taking money from her monthly allowance to pay those bills. I don't care of it looks biased. These were good people.
Alexei--moreover his hemophilia--is often blamed as the root of the Romanov problems. (Along with the changing times and ideas and Nicholas being uncut-out for rule.) Had he not been afflicted with hemophilia, Rasputin most likely would have never entered the picture, and Alexandra would not have only been a lot more stable, she would not have been a zealot and a puppet to Rasputin. Of course, the constant threat on Alexei's health and his sadness also weighed heavily on his parents' minds. (Rasputin had 'mystical powers' which he used several times to cure Alexei or miraculously stop his bleeding. Reports of the healing powers are vague and rare. The powers are up to speculation, Edvard bent more towards mystical powers, Massie attempts to give scientific explanations. I'd do more research on Rasputin himself, but so far the only book on him I've found was a book by Edvard. Not again. As for using Alexandra like a puppet--he cared not for his own power, but put random people in office. Alexandra automatically accepted them because her "dear Friend" recommended them, and Nicholas, not wanting to start a row with his wife, would put them in the position of power with a sigh. This made the upper class quite mad, understandably. In the end, she was worshiping him, and after his assassination at Yusupov's hands, she prayed to icons with his visage, or pictures of him, I can't remember exactly which.) The point I'm trying to make is that Russians did not know. The Czar and his wife didn't want the heir to the throne to appear weak and dishearten the people; or for a successor wanting to claim the throne by force to turn up, upon learning the heir was "an invalid living under the constant shadow of death". (The grand duchesses could not be heirs because of a law passed after I believe Catherine the Great's death--her son hated her and said women could no longer rule. I wondered why Nicholas II didn't just change it myself, to be honest.) Not saying anything about Alexei's illness is retroactively believed to have been a bad move--it certainly would have garnered sympathy from the Russian people.
Ah, yes--and when people spoke up against Rasputin or criticized him in court or were of higher order... Alexandra would have them dismissed. Nicholas again, would avoid a row and dismiss them. So Rasputin wasn't helping and Nicholas's nature towards his wife wasn't either.
"'Poor fellows, they are ready to give their lives for a smile.'"
Ah, and Rasputin was known for his affairs and sexual... uh... forwardness. (Once, he even came on to the Duchess Olga! She promptly left the room.) He became close friends with policeman and so when women reported rape they just wrote it off, even though a few policemen wrote very well-detailed and -documented notes on the situation. Alexandra was blinded by her reverence and refused to believe them, thinking everyone was just out to get her 'Dear Friend'. Even though he exposed himself in public in one case and basically announced he did whatever he felt to Alexandra whenever. (Later on, lewd cartoons were published of them together, and even him with the girls. In one of the places the family was confined to soldiers drew Alexandra and Rasputin together sexually in the bathroom. Whenever they led a girl to the bathroom they'd make her look upon it. Rumors also proliferated of these goings on, and even that Nicholas had been kicked out of the bedroom so Rasputin could get to Alexandra, and even that Rasputin treated Nicholas as a dog before being ordered out.) Rasputin's daughter wrote a book and claimed that this was planned by an actor to imitate him and disgrace her father's 'good name'. It falls apart under close inspection.
Yusupov, as I believe I've said earlier, finally was fed up. With a group of others hankering for Rasputin's ejection he made a plan to murder Rasputin. (Random fun fact: in his castle, when dungeons were poked into, skeletons hanging from chains on the wall could still be seen! Just thought I'd mention it. Fun fact two, he loved Oscar Wilde and was compared to Dorian Gray.) He grew close to Rasputin and invited him over late one night. Rasputin was weary about the invitation at first, but Yusupov mentioned a certain princess would be around--and Rasputin, instantly lustful, accepted without another thought. In preparation for the murder, Yusupov and his men poisoned cakes and wine. One cake supposedly had enough poison to kill "several men instantly". Rasputin ate two and remained unaffected. Rasputin drank wine and remained unaffected. He rushed upstairs where a party was being simulated (where the princess, really in Crimea, was supposed to be) and asked what to do--they suggested shooting him. Tricking Rasputin into turning with his back to Yusupov, Yusupov shot him in the back. A doctor came down, felt for a pulse--none. Rasputin was declared dead... Until a moment later he sprang up and attacked his would-be murderer. Yusupov ran up the stairs and out of the house, Rasputin bounding after him--and was shot by a different man twice, once in the shoulders and once "probably in the head". Yusupov then began to beat Rasputin with a club until he stopped moving. When he stopped moving, they rolled him in a curtain and tossed him in an iced-over lake. Massie writes that Rasputin had officially been killed by drowning, but more recent reports and studies say pneumonia. Either way, that of all things killed him. Then, when he was to be cremated, his tendons tightened and his body sprung up as though sitting up, returning from the grave to enact revenge. Which--in a way--he did. He warned that should be assassinated by someone of royal blood that was related to the Czar the Romanov house would fall in six months to a year's time. I personally think Rasputin had no mystical powers in that, however--HG Wells predicted pretty accurately of trials and tribulations in the 'future' (now) in The Shape of Things to Come and he was no holy man or starets. He simply could see from point A to point B better than most. I think the Romanovs were destined to fall somehow, and Rasputin just saw from point A to point B and knew it.
The murder itself is a curious thing. In Edvard's book, it appeared the royal family knew what was coming. At midnight, the family was awoken along with the doctor and maids and brought in a room to wait "until the automobiles arrived." (They were told they would be moved.) Alexei had been injured some days before and could not stand. According to Edvard, Nicholas asked a chair be brought in for him and his son to sit down (Edvard doesn't even mention that Alexandra could hardly stand and required a chair of her own!) and the soldiers mocked them by saying that they (Nicholas and Alexei) wanted to die sitting down. From Edvard's book, it seems quite clear that they knew they'd be shot. From Massie's book, however, they were completely caught unawares. The ex-Czar, his Empress, and Alexei sat, backs to the wall. The duchesses, the doctor and the maids were lined up behind their chairs. Yurovsky (killer of Nicholas) reentered the room with a shooting squad and said to Nicholas, "'Your relations have tried to save you. They have failed and we must now shoot you.'" Then he shot a confused Nicholas in the head, killing him instantly. The entire squad open fired on the family, and everyone, including Anastasia and Alexei, was killed. (Even in a time before DNA testing was available, Massie was sure that she had been killed, regardless of what was believed. Edvard seemed unsure, even though he mentioned the testing. However, one thing he mentioned which Massie did not was an account of a general who, while moving the corpses, was startled when a dog's body fell from a girl's sleeve. Anastasia was known for carrying her small King Charles Cavalier Spaniel in such a manner.) According to reports, however, the two youngest Romanovs did survive the longest of all shot.
Contrary to popular belief, Nicholas II's mother, Marie, never interviewed anyone claiming to be Anastasia or, in one case, Olga. Nicholas II's sister interviewed a few of the women, but apparently remained unsatisfied.
There my notes end, but in conclusion, I must share my own opinion on the matter: I can't believe anyone could do this. Send them into exile if you must, even kill Nicholas and Alexandra (political adversaries and all), but it is the killing of the children that disturbs me. I can't imagine who would murder five defenseless children and in such a brutal manner (Alexei was kicked in the head and stabbed with bayonets, along with being shot). I can't imagine anyone who could harden their heart that much and do such a thing with a clear conscious. Nicholas and his wife were scapegoats, so I can see them being assassinated but my heart is not stone for them either. It's just, they were all innocent, and the daughters and son still children, really--No, I can't go on. I find it hard to believe people are really inherently good after learning in detail these events. To do something like this... I don't know. It upsets me incredibly, maybe more than it should. It just doesn't seem right. It isn't right. It was never and will never be right.
*Apparently in 1996 Massie followed up this book with another book on the Romanovs. God willing, I'll be able to find it without too much trouble.
No comments:
Post a Comment