#philippa FUCKING gregory

[nostalgia-tblr]

concept: the black widow and jane foster 'the other boleyn girl' au.

[whats-in-a-sentence]

The white rhetoric around the riots – all caused by white lynch mobs motivated by racial hatred and economic grievances – demanded the soldiers of colour return to their colonial homes and an end to association between them and white women. The irony of a colonial race insisting that people stay in the land of their birth was invoked by Felix Hercules, of the national liberation movement in the British West Indies, in The Times of June 1919:

I do not believe that any excuse can be made for white men who take the law into their own hands because they say they believe that the association between the men of my race and white women is degrading.

If . . . the problem can be solved by sending every black or coloured unit forthwith back to his own country, then we should be compelled to see that every white man is sent back to England from Africa and from the West India islands in order that the honour of our sisters and daughters there may be kept intact.

"Normal Women: 900 Years of Making History" - Philippa Gregory

[polka-spots]

I have to say that I'm cross with Wolf Hall because I've always been staunchly "yeah I agree with ditching Rome (because I have strong views on the church as an institution which I won'tgo into) but not with ditching Katherine" and over the course of this book I've been swayed to team "...yeah I get where Henry was coming from apart from the locking her in mouldy houses bit" without noticing FUCK

[marybeatriceofmodena]

I can't fucking believe yall were up Rings of Power's ass when HotD decided to have Our Lady of Sorrows of Westeros cause a civil war because she forgot her own trashbag of a son was named after Aegon the Conqueror and she took a dying man's rambling about some pretty fundamental history as him designating him as heir. Like, I'm supposed to think this lady is smart. What even.

And if any Alicent stans want to come for me I want you to seriously sit down. And think about how your fave is written. How she reacts to things. How she processes information. Like, this is someone who's been in court for 20+ years and still doesn't get the basics. I hate Philippa Gregory's books with a passion but Mary Boleyn was a smarter bitch than this. This is a writers' problem.

[strangedreamings]

S3E3 (spoilers abound)

I knew that was a dream, it was too romantic. But good, Colin needs a wet dream or two about Pen. It's sad that it takes this to get him to realize he's attracted to her but hey, whatever works.

So Gregory didn't break his arm from being in the balloon like everybody guessed, interesting. Still chaotic, but not in the same way.

Colin, please, promise me you'll never play poker -- you couldn't bluff convincingly if your life depended on it. I'm glad Hyacinth is supportive of Pen, even if Eloise isn't.

"Must be rich, must be handsome, and he must be of high rank." John Stirling is an earl, one of the upper ranks of the nobility. Just saying...

Philippa really is dim. Let's hope that in her and Prudence's case, intelligence skipped a generation and any kids they have inherit Portia's brain. She's not perfect but she's leagues smarter than those two.

Mrs. Varley says Pen has a visitor and I assume it's Colin or Debling. It's El and my response? An out loud "What the fuck?"

Oh, El. She's maturing (slowly) but she's not ready for them to be friends again yet. Maybe by the end of E4? And can I just say that I LOVE that blue dress Eloise has on? She looks lovely AND SHE HAS HER FLOWERS BACK! So, the show's costume designer was holding back her flowers until she became more herself, got it.

Pen in a park and everyone's talking about her. Ugh. Honey, none of them are worthy of you. Take note of who's talking down about you now and when you're on top, see which of them kisses your ass. They're the ones to avoid like the plague.

God, I love weeping willows, they're like natural gazebos. And this one is HUGE.

Sorry, Pen, but the tulle in your hair looks stupid. It looks too much like you accidently left a curling rag in.

So now they're both nervous, so cute. Colin's world has been rocked to its foundations and he needs to find his footing all over again.

So, Debling is a vegetarian and a naturalist. He seems to prefer animals to people. Considering the ton, I can't say I blame him. Lady Cowper is threating to arrange a marriage for Cressida if she doesn't get married this season. No unconditional love there, that's for sure. Cressida, get yourself a husband whose estate is far from your father's and tell your parents the roads are bad, so they can never visit. That should keep contact with them restricted to letters and the Season.

I really hope this earl who just introduced himself to Francesca isn't John.

God, I love Alice. She's a sweeter person than the ton deserves. She's right about Colin being gallant, too bad he's only just starting to realize how badly he messed up.

Debling uses odd animal metaphors and his humor is a little whack but I like the guy. As long as he's honest about why he wants a wife, I'll support him. He's cute too. Beards were unfashionable during this era, so it's another sign that he doesn't care about what other people think.

Aww, Cressida. Yeah, your family doesn't support you at all. I'd ship her with Debling if they weren't so obviously wrong for each other. She does need a good man to marry her but I don't think she'll find him this season.

Oh, Colin, you are so far gone for Pen. Do something about soon, please, before you lose her forever.

I do not like Eloise's outfit. It looks like a modern business suit with an extra-long skirt.

I take it back, I think I do ship Debling and Cressida, but if what he's after is just someone to watch his estate while he's gone, I think she can do better. Still, isolation might be what she wants, who knows?

Eloise is third- and fourth-wheeling. I'd feel sorry for her but hell, she deserves this.

I just had to look it up -- yeah, "marriage whisperer" is a phrase that could have been used back then since "horse whisperer" was a phrase that was already in use. Still, it sounds too modern.

So, Lord Samadani's a marquess, not an earl. Is his first name John? Does he have a first cousin named Michael?

Debling, you're the one who insisted on this three-way conversation, figure out how to end it politely. Colin is so jealous. Do something about it.

Prudence's husband really is dim. She married him for his looks, didn't she?

Rescues all around. Debling's going to have to make his decision soon, this is getting ridiculous.

Another ball. A handsome man gives Violet her accidentally dropped glove. I assume this is the "unwanted" visitor Agatha was complaining about. Blood relative? Widowed in-law? He's the right age bracket for Violet, so that's good.

Cressida looks ridiculous and miserable. I have to wonder whose idea these gowns are -- hers? Her mother's? The modiste's? Whoever, they have no idea what they are doing. This one looks more like modern haute couture, and ugly haute couture at that.

Pen and Cressida in a literal race to Debling, good lord.

Okay, so Samadani is apparently not John. Good, he doesn't understand what Francesca's after.

BROTHER?! Interesting. He's hot. I love his voice and his thoughts on having grown children. Wow, if this is Violet's "gardener," she'll be fucking the brother of the woman who fucked her father. England really is a small country.

Who took a bunch of spoon handles and put them in Agatha's hair?

Agatha is in her own personal hell, I love it.

Is THIS John? He's not Scottish, going by what little he's said. Disappointing, but not the end of the world. Loves the quiet, understands that people need quiet, he's perfect for Frannie.

Shonda, Shonda, Shonda. Yes, a Lady can be a married woman HOWEVER, the daughters of dukes, marquesses, and earls are also addressed as Lady, so Benedict assuming Tilley is married is wrong.

This dance Tilley and Benedict are dancing looks like a cross between a waltz and a tango. I'm sure the choreographer was told to just give them whatever moves look best on camera.

Cressida really looks like she's going to cry. Ugh. I don't want her to suffer her book counterpart's fate.

Colin looks like he's about to kiss Pen in the middle of a crowded ballroom then in comes Debling to steal her away for a dance. Colin, please, move faster next time.

[natequarter]

I was reading your posts about how badly most/all historical fiction and period dramas are when it comes to faithful portrayals and was wondering about your thoughts on Wolf Hall, whether you read it, watched it, or both. And also, are there examples that you feel do it well? Or are there examples where they get it wrong but you still enjoy them? (Can you tell I’ve been on a historical fiction kick lately?) I know that’s a lot of questions, so please don’t feel obligated to answer them.

oh boy, this is... complicated. i'll start off with wolf hall, because that will probably be easier: necessary disclaimer that i have not watched or read all of wolf hall, but i have read a significant chunk of the first book.

firstly, i actually enjoyed reading wolf hall a lot. there are a couple of bits that grated me when i read it (iirc it suggests that henry viii was to become archbishop of canterbury before the death of his brother, which is emphatically not true; nitpicky, i know, but it's one of the misleading "fun facts" you often hear about henry viii), but for the most part i found it rather refreshing. i have to praise hilary mantel's writing style, of course; it's beautiful prose, and a relieving change from first person present tense narratives, which are bad. (disclaimer: this is a personal opinion. i happen to think that 99% of all first person narratives are utter shit.) in terms of plot events, i think my favourite parts of wolf hall are cromwell with his wife and children, and him grieving his wife and children; the quiet reminders of their absence are heartbreaking.

now, onto the things i didn't like. i didn't love the tv show; nothing wrong with it, necessarily, it just didn't click with me - and it probably didn't help that when i watched it the screen light to room light balance was very off. and as for mantel herself... quite a few people have pointed out that her treatment of the women (notably anne boleyn and jane parker, her sister-in-law) in her series comes off as misogynistic, and i personally find the treatment of thomas more grating. essentially, she buys into a lot of the old narratives of jane parker being 'scheming' and betraying anne boleyn and her brother george; and her depiction of anne can similarly come off as that of a scheming woman and nothing more. there is an argument to be made that we're seeing this through cromwell's eyes, so naturally he's going to be biased against certain people - but mantel is the writer and she chose what she wrote. she seeks to balance out the classic depictions of cromwell as scheming and more as a literal saint, but it tips over into just making more look like a villain - things such as him choosing to educate his wife are warped into more being... evil? somehow? there's a double standard with cromwell vs the other characters: when cromwell is pious, it's devotion; when more is pious, it's fanaticism, and the same with cromwell vs the women in the books. finally, hilary mantel was transphobic. i'm not here to argue about that one.

granted, i don't think these things make wolf hall unforgivably bad, by any stretch of the imagination. i think it's a complex, flawed book and the same applies to the show. i think this youtube review summarises it well overall - and of course these things are always nuanced and complicated and so on and so forth.

there are shows which do historical fiction absolutely horribly, like the spanish princess. i have no interest in defending that, because, as far as i'm concerned, it's a mess not worth attacking; that's been done to death. i would also consider the vast majority of books by philippa gregory and alison weir to be a major waste of time. weir is also a non-fiction writer, and her non-fiction is exactly as bad, so for the love of good, please don't pick those up either. both authors like to draft in rape, magic (dear god, don't talk to me about the fucking magic), not-like-other-girls female characters, incest (???) and a bucket load of misogyny in lieu of actual plot. neither of them are good writers, either.

onto works which do an alright or complicated job. i think wolf hall belongs here - it does some things very well, some things... not so well. i'd also put becoming elizabeth here - as you've said, this is one where they get things wrong but i can still enjoy it. the show covers the reign of edward vi (1547-1553) and the teenage years of elizabeth i (about 13-19, so literally her teenage years). the good parts? it's a fantastic depiction of edward vi and mary - both are brilliantly cast and the acting from them is amazing. it incorporates black characters into authentic period roles, the clothing is really well done, and it shows most of the important parts of edward's reign. the bad parts? well, elizabeth is played by a woman in her late twenties. this lets the whole thing down, frankly. it's supposed to be a show about elizabeth, and yet edward or mary could easily replace her as protagonists - i don't think the actor playing her is great, personally. and then there's the fact that this show portrays the grooming of elizabeth by thomas seymour. the show actually makes their relationship out to be genuine and the two sleep together, a deviation from history and a particularly troubling one given that the real elizabeth was uncomfortable with seymour's advances and actively tried to avoid him. it also spends six of its eight episodes on seymour when seymour was beheaded a third of the way through edward's reign. thus, it has its upsides and its major downsides - oh, and the characters say fuck a lot, which is mildly annoying. but i can enjoy it, as long as elizabeth's not talking and they're not focusing too much on seymour... a bit of a letdown from a show supposedly about her.

there's also the tudors, which is a bit of a mixed bag - it makes some inexplicable changes from history, but it often uses quotations from tudor sources in its dialogue. the casting can be a bit... wonky, but it does have its moments, and offers a somewhat more balanced version of more vs cromwell. i don't particularly like it because it often modernises the characters a bit - and i don't want that! making characters act like modern people seriously misses the point: this is historical fiction, not a modern thriller or whatever. the girlbossification of historical women who were often seriously held back by the men around them and wielded influence in rather different ways to what we think of as strong women is exhausting.

and there is historical fiction which i really enjoy. dissolution (and its sequels) is a murder mystery series by c. j. sansom, narrated by the fictional matthew shardlake, a disabled king's commissioner working for cromwell. he ends up investigating the murder of another commissioner at a monastery in scarnsea. it deals with the issues of religion, gender, and disability in very interesting ways; matthew is not infallible and clearly holds some very tudor views of the world. it's a richly-written world and it really does feel like you're in 1530s england, and i really recommend it. i also like becket (1964) and the lion in winter, neither of which are particularly striving for accuracy - but they're good dramas and brilliantly acted, and, you know, maybe henry ii was secretly in love with thomas becket. (both are heartwrenching films and i will never be over: 'You give the lions of England back to me like a little boy who doesn't want to play anymore. I would have gone to war with all England's might behind me, and even against England's interests, to defend you, Thomas. I would have given away my life laughingly for you. Only I loved you and you didn't love me. That's the difference.') my feelings on bill (2015) are more or less the same - it's an intentionally ahistorical film, and it works because it's well-written and not trying to accurately represent the past. the '70s series like the six wives of henry viii and the shadow of the tower are really enjoyable, too - because they actually cared about making decent series about the tudors relying on the actual events which transpired during the era!

i'll leave the question of costuming out in the open; i think this youtube video has some good points on whether period-accurate costuming is essential. i like it, personally, but i'm not going to be furious at a missed french hood; the only thing that will truly make me furious is a french hood with no veil. either bother, or don't bother! don't... don't do neither, jesus christ! as for historical accuracy in general - i think that's a question which will never have one true answer. personally, i do value a rough adherence to the historical timeline, at least for fairly well-know facts like, i don't know, henry viii having two sisters? why does the tudors merge them into one person? what? anyway. i think these posts offer some valuable insight into how vague and murky a concept historical accuracy really is and how it can be wielded as a weapon against people rather than in the interests of a good story (read at your own peril - they are quite long). there is also the problem of hindsight - as readers, we know that edward vi will die at only fifteen. the average person at the time did not! well, not until 1553. the point is, books where the narrator has seemingly prophetic powers or knowledge of future events are unrealistic. what i think is most important is writing stories that more or less accord to the timeline of history in the general details and capturing the attitudes of people who lived in the past decently. this is what really brings historical fiction to life, in my opinion. these also offer up good opportunities for parody and satire - a film which intentionally gets history wrong Because Incest is frustrating, but a film which intentionally gets history wrong to parody it, like blackadder, can be incredibly entertaining. inaccuracy is not always bad. that said, if you don't make henry viii ginger, i will hate you forever. soz. as for language - it's ridiculous to expect dialogue to be written 100% in middle english or what-have-you, but the occasional 'god's bones!' instead of 'oh my god' would be nice, and an avoidance of just putting a load of fucks in there...

and finally, for the elephant in the room... misogyny. there are certainly other -isms which permeate historical fiction as they do everything else, but this is the big one. so many depictions of women in historical fiction uncritically buy into the narratives of misogynistic medieval commentators which we have inherited from centuries of men recycling them. like calling women sluts, or witches, or writing them as genuinely sleeping with a male relative - taking the slander against them literally. like boxing women into a few stereotypes - docile and submissive; scheming bitch; old hag; and whore. like sexing up rapists and groomers. like forgiving historical men for things we condemn historical women for.

i hope this helped! i have many thoughts, none of which are easily summarised. i don't know if there's a right answer to this. but i do know one thing: the white princess is bad. thank you for the ask!

[tenderlady]

thank you to @fantasneeze for tagging <3

Rules: answer and tag people you want to get to know better and/or catch up with!

favorite color: red! my nails are always red and i'm almost always wearing at least one red item. right now it's my lipstick since i'm wearing all black otherwise.

last song: the aisle by pinkpantheress. the way i listen to music is insanely neurotic, so i've only recently got around to stuff that came out last year. absolutely goes, though! the girlies were right!

last movie: fucking aggro drift lmao. it was.......something? getting a gang together to go see i saw the tv glow tomorrow and i am stoked beyond belief.

currently reading: a bunch of stuff! primarily transit by rachel cusk. i'm also listening to normal women by philippa gregory, and one of these days i will actually finish joan didion's the white album.

currently watching: the borgias lol. i love 2000s era trash period dramas, and i am convinced that the borgias was the trashiest we got. it's so unbelievably dumb and i am having the time of my life. i'm also trying to keep up with dungeon meshi.

currently craving: a good night's sleep

tea or coffee: coffee, but i am ultimately a fan of all beverages <3

tagging @paulmccartneygrindr @menlove @planetaire and anybody else who wants to play <3

[rmelster]

🥺

““I definitely think it’s been… abused would be too strong a word, but it’s definitely been over-manipulated. I don’t like that, not just as a male actor but I don’t like that as a man and a human being. If it helps the story, if it’s in need of the story then of course it should be used. But if it’s just to get a flash of some lady’s assets then that’s just for the sake of doing it and I feel like that’s abusing the system.””

—

Aneurin Barnard in an interview on RadioTimes

Well said and this is exactly how I feel when watching the Starz version of “The White Queen”. Yes, additional scenes are added just to show boobs and butts. 

[glowingatdawn]

Incoming Rant

I’m kinda still mad they didn’t continue becoming Elizabeth.

I’ve been thinking about this and I’m still bitter and annoyed

Seriously- this could’ve been such a good show on three of them and Jane

But what the actually fuck. I’m still mad with the storyline they gave Elizabeth

The actors/ actress were fine but the writing ugh

This is how I I would’ve done it

Season 1- Edward Reign and death (should’ve never had Seymour nonsense plot- they did Elizabeth dirty)

Season 2- start with Jane taking the throne- and Mary taking it back

Season 3- First Half Mary Reign and last half with Bess starting her reign

Could’ve been short and sweet but no they wanted to follow Philippa Gregory book or whatever nonsense

Don’t even get me started how I was annoyed with the other White Queen, Princess and Spanish Princess! That rant won’t end

Holy cow I’m so damn annoyed.

I will say I did enjoy Robert and Bess cause I love them and how Mary was portrayed

But how the heck ! Ugh someone stop me. I need to vent my anger cause I’m still mad!

[myladyofmercy]

GET TO KNOW ME

got tagged by @bellzsad for this so thank you <3

NICKNAMES: Bee

HEIGHT: 177cm which is i think about 5'9 for the americans

LAST THING I GOOGLED: bavarian school holidays 2023

AMOUNT OF SLEEP: 6 hours tonight

DREAM JOB: not to work <3

FAVORITE SONG: my lady of mercy by the last dinner party (still can't believe i snagged that url)

MOVIE/BOOK THAT SUMMARIZES ME: useless magic by florence welch

AESTHETIC: no fucking idea bc i try around with stuff a lot and never stick to anything

FAV INSTRUMENT: i played the piano as a kid but in general i really enjoy all kinds of string instruments

FAVORITE AUTHORS: taylor jenkins reid, victor hugo, philippa gregory, philipp pullman idk i don't really have one

FUN FACT ABOUT ME: I'm gonna see hozier and the last dinner party live on saturday!!!

gonna tag @scrapsofinspiration @cantputitintowords @lazybug16 @tessabennet and @youweremyversaillesatnight for this <3

[patricia-von-arundel]

I'm pretty sure there should be international laws against putting Dan Brown on the same list of historical fiction writers as Anthony Doerr and Hilary Mantel. That's a war crime.

I was going to whine about Philippa Gregory for the same reason, but as much as I dislike her books, she is MILES AND MILES AND MILES better than the fucking hack who lies about the historical accuracy of his own books. Dan Brown is a TERRIBLE WRITER. Not even "okay, this is bad, but it's entertaining." I'd rather read Stephenie Meyer and nothing else for a year before I'd suffer through Dan Brown again.

Dan Brown sucks.

Not an opinion. Objectively, he is an awful writer who also does awful research. (Or "research," since I have doubts he actually does any beyond poking around Wikipedia until he finds some place and time and probably religion he can butcher.)

(Having studied medieval history, Dan Brown better hope I'm never in the same location he is, no matter how public the venue, because I will punch him in the face.)

Anyway, list is here.

Fuck you, Brown.

[rmelster]

The best one so far:

[branwendaughterofllyr]

I have much beef with Ms Philippa Gregory but. I must admit that the White Queen kinda fucks as a book.

[neomedievalist]

i dont remember if i posted about this but ive been reading the cousins war series (well ive just been reading the white queen) bc i have to for my seminar class this fall and im trying to get ahead and its so so so fucking bad. its so bad. is anyone here like. british and was forced to watch the bbc series with their parents or smth i have been liveblogging the pain this book has put me through to friends but its so difficult to convey just how agonizing it is to read. Like i dont even think they were that gender essentialist in the 15th century miss philippa gregory i think you are genuinely more sexist than the actual nobles were during the wars of the roses

[neomedievalist]

Okay well this article is paywalled. and so are like the first 6 other articles when you try and look this up. I finally found one that isnt (here) and i will not lie to you they are so vague about the new evidence that it makes me SO sus. it also looks like huuuge richard III society propaganda lol and they keep marketing this documentary about it. i incidentally have been studying the wars of the roses for the past couple months and all of this evidence listed is stuff we already knew. there have been theories about the tower prince claimants for years and things like the perkin warbeck incident are already well documented. i'm super sus at the specific wording in this article that says that elizabeth woodville may have smuggled her son away because i know thats a theory popularized by philippa gregory a historical fiction author who constantly invents stuff for her books and happens to be my mortal enemy. tudor propaganda is real as fuck but we do not need to swing to the other side and become ricardians

TRICKY RICK MIGHT NOT HAVE DONE IT????

[natequarter]

jean anouilh was the og tumblrina. he was out here shotgunning counterfactual timelines about joan of arc and plantagenet england (what if henry ii of england... was yaoi?). he was big on his greek plays, and he wrote antigone. becket is gayer than literal gay porn, it's hurt no comfort messy breakup angst with the scaffolding of a great tragedy (like, i dunno, antigone) and roughly the same accuracy as a philippa gregory novel. i dread to think what he'd do with--

Orphée notes that he can tell when Eurydice is lying because of the color of her eyes changes accordingly.

WHAT?

admit it, mr. anouilh, you are a time traveller dedicated to backdating your fanfiction. admit it already. i'm fucking begging you