(no subject)

Enjoying the Tudors even if it is historically inaccurate in places, grossly so in some, not so much in others. Also, Gabriel Anwar of Burn Notice is portraying the combined roles of Henry's sisters Mary and Margaret Tudor. Mary was married to the King of France, who was 30 years her senior, and died of natural causes after one year - when she married Duke of Suffolk, Charles Brandon in secret. While Margaret was married to the Portugese King. In this series, Margaret marries the King of Portugal who is 30 years her senior and she suffocates, then marries Charles Brandon in secret.

Also Henry the VIII weighed over 400 pounds when he died. They had to move him about by mechanical means. I've been told they won't do that in the series, since Rhys Meyers is a sex symbol.

Ah, well, most historicals take liberaties with the time period for dramatic effect. I rarely read them for historical accuracy. Actually, history is not always accurate since the interpreters often take their own liberaties in their interpretations. Good historians question their interpretations.

(no subject)

Hmmm...lj is a little less dead than it was the last five days.

My mother regaled me with the Andy Murray Wimbledon Finale over the phone today. If you aren't a tennis fan, nor a Brit, you probably don't know that Andy Murray is the first Brit to have won Wimbledon in 76 years. People in the UK are apparently ecstatic. According to my mother Wimbledon and its surrounding locals were packed. Murray won in three sets, and each set was an hour long. She cried at the end of it - because she was rooting for him and it was a moving win.

Worried about CAM BOOT, apparently you need to wear a sock with it or there will be redness and wear and tear on the boot. Yet another reason to break one's foot in the spring or fall, not in the height of summer.

Finished watching the first six episodes of S1 of The Tudors - then went online to see how accurate it is. Turns out it isn't accurate at all or only vaguely. Apparently the writers took huge liberties with the text. To the point - that a noted Henry the VIIIth scholar in the UK was annoyed when the BBC bought rights to the Tudors a few years back. Can't say I blame him - it is insanely inaccurate in places. That said - it inspires interest in the period. Certainly inspired me to hunt down the facts. Course I've always had a weakness for European History - particularly between 1490-1850, shortly before the Victorian period. In short I found the Tudors fascinating, and the whole Renaissance. Not overly fond of the Middle Ages, or the Victorians. The Edwardian period and the Regency Era (which is the era most historical romance novels take place in for some reason or other) is also interesting.
( Read more... )

My interest in this period stems from the fact that up until the fifth and sixth grade, when I changed elementary schools - history was basically "The Explorers to the American Revolutionary and Civil Wars" and that was it. And it was focused solely on US history (except for the Explorers, and to the extent that US was fighting with the Europeans.) Lots of boring memorization and not a lot of new or even accurate content. I know because my father had a Master's in History and done post-doctorate work. Suffice it to say the US educational system in the 1970s-1980s was a bit slip-shod in how it taught history, math (this was new math which few people could figure out), and science.

Recently the poor state of our public educational system was explained to me in one sentence:( Read more... )