Bad Movie Logo
"A website to the detriment of good film"
Custom Search
HOMEB-MOVIE REVIEWSREADER REVIEWSFORUMINTERVIEWSUPDATESABOUT
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 18, 2017, 11:06:15 PM
585494 Posts in 45120 Topics by 5971 Members
Latest Member: Jus#gnnick[Psigyqirorufij
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Other Topics  |  Off Topic Discussion  |  My Life, Day 14,089 « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: My Life, Day 14,089  (Read 655 times)
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4089


« Reply #15 on: September 18, 2017, 06:10:03 PM »

Continuing . . .

What the writer got write.

The subject's . . .
Intelligence
Apparently, she could read and understand not only English, but also Latin, Greek, and even Hebrew.

Success as monarch.
Certainly, more so than the woman who proceeded her, and I should say with the help of her teenage husband, who not only sat in on the Privy council, when they had a Privy council, but actually chaired her Privy council.

Fanatic. Yes.
Religious fanaticism makes many of us uncomfortable, even if it is Christian fanaticism, especially when it comes from a child, as she was, so this part of her is often overlooked, but she was fanatical in her belief as a Protestant.

 Necessary removal. Yes.
But not for the reason normally given, which we'll get to later.

Her age. 17.
Yesterday, it was thought, she was only 16, when she was executed.
Today, her birthday has been pushed back, so we now believe she was 17, when executed, but still a child in many ways.

38. She came from a household of 200 to 300 servants, and she probably would have gone back to a household of the same size, after she was married.

48. What a girl should know, ere they marry. We know what she was taught, we just don't know whether this was what she was taught. If not, she was actually ill-educated to be a wife, a mother, a housewife, which people often fail to remember.

130. Even if it is only a footnote, Matilda was the 1st woman to make a try for the throne of England. For which I have always had a sneaky admiration.

157. Her father tearing down the royal canopy, when she was no longer Queen. Which actually plays out as a scene in one of the fictional books on her life.

196. Jane and Mary. Both had a steadfast adherence to religion. Unfortunately, it was two different religions--Protestantism and Catholicism--with neither one apparently willing to compromise with the other.

Numbers are the page numbers of the book, where these can be found.

Next time: what the writer got wrong.
Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4089


« Reply #16 on: October 01, 2017, 02:24:29 PM »

Continuing . . .

What the writer got wrong.
The number is the page number where the info is found.

His age
Yesterday: it was thought that he was the typical husband, who was older than his wife.
Today: it is thought that he was the atypical husband, who was younger than his wife.

And as further proof, the writer may have got it wrong. The writer has the youngest brother born in 1538 or 1539, and with the husband thought to be only a year older than his younger brother, he'd be born in 1537 or 1538, not 1535, as she has it.

Boys were more valuable than girls.
Yes and no.
The 1st and 2nd sons, or the heir and the spare, were valuable, after that any boys were a drag on the family finances. There were the apprentice fees, the education fees, till some time in the ir 20s, when the boy could contribute to his family. At least a girl would bring her dowry to her husband's family.

20. Henry VIIII. was loved by all.
No. If European Protestants and Catholics could agree on anything, then it was their dislike of Henry VIII. He was liked someone better by his subjects. When liked by most of his subjects at the beginning of his reign, he was liked by a third to half of his subjects by the end of his reign.

295. The husband never won his wife's heart.
Maybe yes or no, but he did win something--her respect. As when she was still queen, she signed official documents with her married name or Jane Dudley. And when she left a bit of graffiti on the wall of her cell, when she was imprisoned, she also signed it Jane Dudley. And when asked to be the godmother of the newborn son of one of her jailers, she said yes, and when then asked what to name the boy, she said: "Name him after my husband. Name him Guildford."

Who initiated the plot to put her on the throne?
Yesterday: it was thought to be her father-in-law, who wanted to maintain his hold on power.
Today: it is thought it was the young king, who knew he was dying and wanted to maintain the Protestant reforms initiated by him.

130. Where she is listed as 3rd in line to the throne, behind her 2 cousins,  she was actually 4th, or behind her 2 cousins and her mother.

136. While the Church gave its blessings to a girl who married at 12. Certainly, it was a marriage of cohabitation, where the wife lived with her husband and his family, but slept in her own bed. Not a marriage of consummation, as the writer seems to have it. For we have historical proof of what happened when a girl of 12 consummated her marriage. Married at 12. Sex at 12 with her husband.
Pregnant at 13. Gives birth to child at 13. She was lucky both the mother and child survived, but the mother was so torn up inside delivering the child, she would never have anymore children.

155. Support from Europe.
The new queen, replacing this queen, received no support from Europe at the beginning of her attempt to gain the throne. Europeans were satisfied with the way things were going. It was only after it looked like the new queen would replace the old queen, did the rest of Europe come to the new queen's support.

156. No likeness of the subject or her husband.
Again maybe yes or no. Someone who is an expert on portraits from this area, while he is not 100% sure one portrait is a contemporary portrait of the subject, he is 90% sure it is her. As her husband,  the portrait believed to be him has never been identified as him, but it has never been identified as anyone else neither. Unlike the portrait of what was thought to be his mother-in-law and her 2nd husband, which has now been identified as being 2 different people.

To be continued . . .

Next time: again more on what the writer got wrong (IMHO.)
Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4089


« Reply #17 on: October 08, 2017, 02:38:20 PM »

Continuing . . .
with what the writer got wrong (IMHO)
Again, the number is the page where the fact can be found.

210. Jane understood her father-in-law's reason for changing his religion to Catholicism.
or, maybe not. maybe he was not trying to save his life, but the lives of his 5 sons--2 of whom were boys still in their teens.

 30. Katherine's death was due to anorexia or tuberculosis.
actually, it was a combination of tuberculosis compounded by anorexia.

Matilda's "supposed" arrogance.
nothing supposed about it. she was arrogant. even her biographers that are favorable to her pronounce her arrogance, but if she was not arrogant, would she not be the 1st woman to make a try for the throne of England?

219. [Mary] had no wish to see Jane her cousin die.
if she did, then she had lied to others and she lied to herself, because she had the power to prevent her cousin's death.

238. Cramped quarters.
again, maybe not. I have visited the prison cell where jane's husband and 3 of his brothers were imprisoned, and it is a fairly large room. of course, with the servants also bunking there, and the husband had 2 servants, and his brothers probably each had the same number. it'd be more crowded, but still doable, without being too "cramped."

219. Need to execute husband wife.
no. at least not for the reason given, which we'll get to later.

211. For similar aims and ambition.
or, why the father of jane's father-in-law was executed, or, maybe not. As what is the quickest way for a new monarch to become popular with the populace. that is to execute, with or without justification, an unpopular member of the old government. which is probably the reason jane's father-in-law's father was executed.

280. Executed for her [Jane's] father's crime.
an excuse. the true reason that jane and her husband were executed were their--at least on her part--strong opposition to converting England from Protestantism to Catholicism. And less than a decade later, they knew this was just an excuse, as foxe pointed out in his book of martyrs the true reason for their deaths.

338, "Iane" his mother.
while the husband's mother's name was jane or iane as it was spelled then, it refers not to his mother, but to his wife jane. a boy does not call his mother by her 1st name, he calls her mother or mom or ma, or if in the U.K. then mum, but he'd call his wife by her 1st name.

Next time: the writer's biases.
Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 217
Posts: 4089


« Reply #18 on: October 16, 2017, 06:45:08 PM »

Continuing . . .
Nicola Tallis' Crown of Blood
And just as some men have a bias against women, then some women, such as the writer, have a bias against men.
Again, the number is the page, where the fact can be found.

The writer takes the subject's hubby to task for his petulance, when his wife refused to make him king or king consort, but only a duke. Not that hubby did not mishandle it, but there are reasons. None of which the writer mentions.

1st. That was a terrible snub. when his wife, seemingly, at first agreed to make him king or king consort, then changed her mind.

2nd. He was a product of time, which was almost totally sexist, as it was believed that a woman could not make a decision on her own, but had to be told what to do by her parents and later her husband.

3rd. Everyone was winging it. This was only the second time something like this had come up, and the first time was over 400 years before this.

217. The subject's father/hubby's father-in-law can express his abhorrence for Catholicism and is taken to task by the writer for it, but have the subject express the same thing, and the writer says nothing about it.

242. The writer takes father/father-in-law to task for his stupidity, and--yes--he did some things that were totally stupid, but so did most of the women featured in the book, including the book's subject, and nowhere does the writer take any of these women to task for their stupidity.

The writer is not only biased against something, but she is biased for something, such as a love match between man and woman. All of these were love matches by at least one of the people involved.

Robert and Amy
ending in the wife's death, which is now believed to have been suicide.
Henry and Anne
ending in the wife's execution
Henry and Katherine
ending in the wife's execution
Mary and Philip
ending in disappointment for both of the people involved.

Thus, the marriage between the subject and her husband looks good by comparison. At least the subject had enough respect for her husband, that she had her godson named after her husband.

To be continued:

Who was the better person: the wife or the husband.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Other Topics  |  Off Topic Discussion  |  My Life, Day 14,089 « previous next »
    Jump to:  


    RSS Feed Subscribe Subscribe by RSS
    Email Subscribe Subscribe by Email


    Popular Articles
    How To Find A Bad Movie

    The Champions of Justice

    Plan 9 from Outer Space

    Manos, The Hands of Fate

    Podcast: Todd the Convenience Store Clerk

    Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

    Dragonball: The Magic Begins

    Cool As Ice

    The Educational Archives: Driver's Ed

    Godzilla vs. Monster Zero

    Do you have a zombie plan?

    FROM THE BADMOVIES.ORG ARCHIVES
    ImageThe Giant Claw - Slime drop

    Earth is visited by a GIANT ANTIMATTER SPACE BUZZARD! Gawk at the amazingly bad bird puppet, or chuckle over the silly dialog. This is one of the greatest b-movies ever made.

    Lesson Learned:
    • Osmosis: os·mo·sis (oz-mo'sis, os-) n., 1. When a bird eats something.

    Subscribe to Badmovies.org and get updates by email:

    HOME B-Movie Reviews Reader Reviews Forum Interviews TV Shows Advertising Information Sideshows Links Contact

    Badmovies.org is owned and operated by Andrew Borntreger. All original content is © 1998 - 2014 by its respective author(s). Image, video, and audio files are used in accordance with the Fair Use Law, and are property of the film copyright holders. You may freely link to any page (.html or .php) on this website, but reproduction in any other form must be authorized by the copyright holder.