On June 21 I started posting a series of character studies in honour of Alexander. It felt fitting since it was Alexander's death day. On August 25 I completely neglected to celebrate his birthday. That seems strangely fitting too, since Alexander didn't really enjoy a happy life.
Yes, he still has me.
Rest in Peace, my dear prince.
Showing posts with label Prince Alexander. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Prince Alexander. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
Alexander
Two separate pieces, one in English and one in Dutch, both about and dedicated to Alexander. I can't help myself.
Not quite yet.
I’m still counting the months, like I always do. I’m still dreaming away, as usual. My head’s still full with thoughts and my mind is still reeling. I can be distracted. I will be distracted. It’s not work. Work is from 9.30 am to 12.00 pm. Then I empty my mind again. The next block of work is from 1.00 pm to 6.00 pm. Usually I start pouring my thoughts earlier. I get distracted. Gladly.
He’s still in my head. I feel sorry for those who attempt to break into my head and heart. They’re only occasionally in my head and even less in my heart. He’s still in my heart.
He’s a fairy tale, a bad story, a prince. He’s still pulling at my heart strings. He’s even playing me. An impressive deed for a dead guy. My prince on the white horse? I don’t think so. Rather my white prince who used to talk to horses.
Business like, I direct my thoughts onto other paths. I think up mission statements and I try to define our views and our ambitions. Nothing personal, nothing private, nothing to do with him. Work is from 9.30 am till 6.00 pm. When I walk away I poor my head and my heart. He’s still there waiting for me.
Empty hands. A still heart. Haunted eyes. A long time ago.
Empty hands. A pounding heart. Dreaming eyes. Every evening.
I’m still counting the months. I’m not done yet.
Not quite yet.
Het is een vuur dat in alle hevigheid doorwoedt. Ongecontrolleerd raast het door het landschap van mijn hart en snijdt het alle strategieen de pas af. Ik heb geen uitleg voor wat ik voel, noch voor de redenen, het waarom. Ik heb geen woorden voor het stomme toeval dat hem in mijn zichtveld plaatste, of voor de tekenen aan de wand die wij nu zo hardnekkig negeren. Het alles dat wij nooit zullen hebben. Er is niets dat wij ooit zullen delen.
Vooral de eerste week was heftig. Zo heftig zelfs dat ik me zorgen ging maken. Ik die sowieso in slaap valt met denkbeeldige vrienden en dan, na langzaam wakker te zijn geworden, diezelfde vrienden weer naar voren haalt. Zelfs ik was niet voorbereid op de overweldigendheid waarmee Alexander zich op mijn netvlies vestigde en zich voortdurend aan me opdrong.
Not quite yet.
I’m still counting the months, like I always do. I’m still dreaming away, as usual. My head’s still full with thoughts and my mind is still reeling. I can be distracted. I will be distracted. It’s not work. Work is from 9.30 am to 12.00 pm. Then I empty my mind again. The next block of work is from 1.00 pm to 6.00 pm. Usually I start pouring my thoughts earlier. I get distracted. Gladly.
He’s still in my head. I feel sorry for those who attempt to break into my head and heart. They’re only occasionally in my head and even less in my heart. He’s still in my heart.
He’s a fairy tale, a bad story, a prince. He’s still pulling at my heart strings. He’s even playing me. An impressive deed for a dead guy. My prince on the white horse? I don’t think so. Rather my white prince who used to talk to horses.
Business like, I direct my thoughts onto other paths. I think up mission statements and I try to define our views and our ambitions. Nothing personal, nothing private, nothing to do with him. Work is from 9.30 am till 6.00 pm. When I walk away I poor my head and my heart. He’s still there waiting for me.
Empty hands. A still heart. Haunted eyes. A long time ago.
Empty hands. A pounding heart. Dreaming eyes. Every evening.
I’m still counting the months. I’m not done yet.
Not quite yet.
Het is een vuur dat in alle hevigheid doorwoedt. Ongecontrolleerd raast het door het landschap van mijn hart en snijdt het alle strategieen de pas af. Ik heb geen uitleg voor wat ik voel, noch voor de redenen, het waarom. Ik heb geen woorden voor het stomme toeval dat hem in mijn zichtveld plaatste, of voor de tekenen aan de wand die wij nu zo hardnekkig negeren. Het alles dat wij nooit zullen hebben. Er is niets dat wij ooit zullen delen.
Vooral de eerste week was heftig. Zo heftig zelfs dat ik me zorgen ging maken. Ik die sowieso in slaap valt met denkbeeldige vrienden en dan, na langzaam wakker te zijn geworden, diezelfde vrienden weer naar voren haalt. Zelfs ik was niet voorbereid op de overweldigendheid waarmee Alexander zich op mijn netvlies vestigde en zich voortdurend aan me opdrong.
Monday, July 15, 2013
Book Review - Ook Dit Gaat Voorbij
The book “Ook dit gaat voorbij” (Translation: “This Will Pass Too”) tells about the alleged teenage love between prince Alexander and Jettie, the daughter of a baron. In the summer of 1863 (when Alexander was 14) the family Schimmelpenninck have the young prince as a guest. Jettie, who is one year older than the prince, lives in the house Nijenhuis in Diepenheim with her family. Jettie and the prince get quite close, so close even, when the prince has grown up he returns to Jettie’s parents to ask for her hand. Of course that marriage never happens.
The book starts out with listing all the main characters. The old duke, Jettie’s grandfather, died in 1863. According to the book it was in the summer Alexander was with the family. Also according to the book, the prince was 14 years old. Me knowing the prince was born in 1851 and me being able to do a quick sum, made me come to the conclusion that or the named year is wrong or the named age of the prince is wrong. The prince couldn’t have been 14 in 1863, more like 11 going on 12. It is sort of important, because Jettie is one year older, 12 or 13. At that age, playing with dolls, maybe just. However at age 15 I would say she was too old, but she did, and it offended the prince somewhat. After he left the house he supposedely said he wanted to make Jettie grown up and not talk to dolls anymore.
Anyway, this is a very convoluted way of saying that the book came across to me as a very 60’s book. My mum, who doesn’t read books, has quite a few of these kind of books. It has the same sweet language, the same sweet structure of story telling and characters. In my opinion, the story is not told very well. A good story introduces the characters within the story. It also has one passage that seems to have nothing to do with the story, except that it apparently happened to prince Alexander. Maybe I missed something.
I will hold this book dear for a few passages. For instance when prince Alexander and Jettie go out riding the prince constantly keeps talking to the horse warning it for holes in the road and too deep mud tracks. Not only that, he also points out very big trees and other tourist attractions to the horse. The horse nods sideways letting him know he heard and understood.
I will also hold it dear for what to me looks like a very truthful, yet confronting, characterisation of the prince. He’s as sweet and brilliant as is always described. He’s also in such way socially awkward it makes me cringe sometimes. And he’s stubborn, and puts his opinions forward no matter what others say. That reminds me of what minister Weitzel once wrote in his diary: “The prince seems susceptible for a change of conviction, though his actions don’t always proof that.” Yeah, even I noticed that. Even in the book that comes across.
What I don’t like about the book is the alleged teenage love between the prince and Jettie. In most reviews I read it was noted the story was based on very thin evidence. So thin, only this book tells about it. Maybe it’s greed from my side; I want him for myself. Or maybe my dislike is based on something reasonable. I can see they liked each other. I don’t know what it was though. Could you call that a teenage love affair?
Another problem with the book is Jettie. Jettie is a sweet girl. Jettie behaves like a six year old while she’s supposed to be fifteen. Jettie’s character is described through the eyes of her grandfather who adores her, more than his other grandchildren. Jettie’s character is so minimal, in the end, I know nothing about her. Maybe I should read the book propperly.
I haven’t read this back before posting, but I’m quite sure this is more a ramble about a book than a proper review.
The book starts out with listing all the main characters. The old duke, Jettie’s grandfather, died in 1863. According to the book it was in the summer Alexander was with the family. Also according to the book, the prince was 14 years old. Me knowing the prince was born in 1851 and me being able to do a quick sum, made me come to the conclusion that or the named year is wrong or the named age of the prince is wrong. The prince couldn’t have been 14 in 1863, more like 11 going on 12. It is sort of important, because Jettie is one year older, 12 or 13. At that age, playing with dolls, maybe just. However at age 15 I would say she was too old, but she did, and it offended the prince somewhat. After he left the house he supposedely said he wanted to make Jettie grown up and not talk to dolls anymore.
Anyway, this is a very convoluted way of saying that the book came across to me as a very 60’s book. My mum, who doesn’t read books, has quite a few of these kind of books. It has the same sweet language, the same sweet structure of story telling and characters. In my opinion, the story is not told very well. A good story introduces the characters within the story. It also has one passage that seems to have nothing to do with the story, except that it apparently happened to prince Alexander. Maybe I missed something.
I will hold this book dear for a few passages. For instance when prince Alexander and Jettie go out riding the prince constantly keeps talking to the horse warning it for holes in the road and too deep mud tracks. Not only that, he also points out very big trees and other tourist attractions to the horse. The horse nods sideways letting him know he heard and understood.
I will also hold it dear for what to me looks like a very truthful, yet confronting, characterisation of the prince. He’s as sweet and brilliant as is always described. He’s also in such way socially awkward it makes me cringe sometimes. And he’s stubborn, and puts his opinions forward no matter what others say. That reminds me of what minister Weitzel once wrote in his diary: “The prince seems susceptible for a change of conviction, though his actions don’t always proof that.” Yeah, even I noticed that. Even in the book that comes across.
What I don’t like about the book is the alleged teenage love between the prince and Jettie. In most reviews I read it was noted the story was based on very thin evidence. So thin, only this book tells about it. Maybe it’s greed from my side; I want him for myself. Or maybe my dislike is based on something reasonable. I can see they liked each other. I don’t know what it was though. Could you call that a teenage love affair?
Another problem with the book is Jettie. Jettie is a sweet girl. Jettie behaves like a six year old while she’s supposed to be fifteen. Jettie’s character is described through the eyes of her grandfather who adores her, more than his other grandchildren. Jettie’s character is so minimal, in the end, I know nothing about her. Maybe I should read the book propperly.
I haven’t read this back before posting, but I’m quite sure this is more a ramble about a book than a proper review.
This Also Will Pass
Last Saturday the little book from the antique shop arrived: "Ook dit gaat voorbij". (Translation: "This Also Will Pass.")
It was a strange read. The book was written as a novel with the characters once having been real people.
It felt a little weird to me. Especially the words put in prince Alexander’s mouth made me feel a little uncomfortable, even though the author was very respectful and truthful. Yes, truthful, because he came across as a sweet, socially awkward, but intelligent young man with his own set of opinions and his own way of putting those opinions across. He felt every bit the prince I saw described in many descriptions. He came across as every bit the prince I love to hate.
Side step: that was the best use of “love to hate” I can think of, even though it came from my brains through my fingers.
He was every bit adorable. He was every bit fascinating. He was every bit stubborn. He was every bit socially inapt. He pursued with the passion I’ve come to known of him. He failed in every way he always seemed to. He was every bit the prince I came to know since that fatal day back at the start of May.
I’m not quite sure what to do now. Beside the fact that all of this lies in the past, he’s also an unreachable person. There’s no way I’ll ever meet him. Chances of news about him are very little, nearly even absent. There’s no development, no more life, nothing. There’s nothing there for me. It’s all distant, untouchable. Nothing of that history is mine, nor will I ever manage to attach only a little bit of me in there, because it is all done. How much longer? This also will pass.
Alexander.
Thoughts about him live on between sighs. *sigh* Alexander *sigh*. It’s as if recalling his life is as much a tragedy as his life was. Everybody who showed an interest in him seems to remember him with a sigh. Yes, it is strange how one gets more attention after death than during his whole life. Though technically, that’s not true. When he was still alive he got more attention. When he was alive people knew who he was, or they thought they know. The point is, people had an opinion about him, something people in general don’t anymore. Not about the late prince Alexander, youngest son of King William III.
Yes, he is a forgotten prince. But of all forgotten princes, he’s the one least forgotten.
*sigh* Alexander *sigh*
It was a strange read. The book was written as a novel with the characters once having been real people.
It felt a little weird to me. Especially the words put in prince Alexander’s mouth made me feel a little uncomfortable, even though the author was very respectful and truthful. Yes, truthful, because he came across as a sweet, socially awkward, but intelligent young man with his own set of opinions and his own way of putting those opinions across. He felt every bit the prince I saw described in many descriptions. He came across as every bit the prince I love to hate.
Side step: that was the best use of “love to hate” I can think of, even though it came from my brains through my fingers.
He was every bit adorable. He was every bit fascinating. He was every bit stubborn. He was every bit socially inapt. He pursued with the passion I’ve come to known of him. He failed in every way he always seemed to. He was every bit the prince I came to know since that fatal day back at the start of May.
I’m not quite sure what to do now. Beside the fact that all of this lies in the past, he’s also an unreachable person. There’s no way I’ll ever meet him. Chances of news about him are very little, nearly even absent. There’s no development, no more life, nothing. There’s nothing there for me. It’s all distant, untouchable. Nothing of that history is mine, nor will I ever manage to attach only a little bit of me in there, because it is all done. How much longer? This also will pass.
Alexander.
Thoughts about him live on between sighs. *sigh* Alexander *sigh*. It’s as if recalling his life is as much a tragedy as his life was. Everybody who showed an interest in him seems to remember him with a sigh. Yes, it is strange how one gets more attention after death than during his whole life. Though technically, that’s not true. When he was still alive he got more attention. When he was alive people knew who he was, or they thought they know. The point is, people had an opinion about him, something people in general don’t anymore. Not about the late prince Alexander, youngest son of King William III.
Yes, he is a forgotten prince. But of all forgotten princes, he’s the one least forgotten.
*sigh* Alexander *sigh*
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Another Book About Alexander
About one month ago I ordered a book about a supposed early relationship/love interest of Alexander. I ordered it at a Dutch antique bookshop. Very quickly, about two days later, I got the message didn't couldn't find the book, it was probably misplaced, but they were searching for me. Then there was one month of silence. Last Friday I inquired after the status of the research. The reply came Monday and started with an apology: "The book was probably sold right after it was registered online." They were sorry for not informing me. I asked if they could help me find the book somewhere else. Yesterday I had another reply from them telling me: "It's strange, but true, we found the book. It wasn't sold after all, only misplaced." And the request if I still wanted to buy the book. Peculiar string of events. I like to think Alexander himself had something to do with that.
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
Trouble in Kingdom - Analysis of the Fates of the Last 19th Century Princes
To tell people apart I’ll call King William III “III” and Prince William I shall call “Wiwill”.
Let’s just first note something: Both Wiwill (Wiwill) and Alexander let their health slip. Wiwill partied hard in Paris with much alcohol and girls. Alexander locked himself up in his palace not even opening a window and keeping the shutters closed not letting in any fresh air nor light. Was it stubborness or inability?
I think it’s fair to say they were both very stubborn.
Wiwill refused to give up his love, but when Mattie’s parents also refused it left him all alone. Still mad with his father he decided to stay away from him as far as possible and he relocated himself to Paris and refused to return to the Netherlands. He only returned to visit his mother and brother.
Alexander on his part locked himself up. His stubborness became apparent when the King, after the death of the Queen, found himself a new woman and married her shortly after. Alexander let all the curtains in his palace down on the wedding day. Neither did he ever meet his half-sister Wilhelmina, and the new Queen Emma only once incidentally. The contact with his father got worse and worse, even after the King reaching out to him; Alexander refused.
That stubborness was also in their parents. The King pledged to fight the new constitution from the moment his father, the then King William II, signed and commited to the constitution (1848). He kept his pledge, but never managed to turn things around back to absolute power for the King.
Queen Sophie was a very independent woman with strong ideas of how things should go. In everything she did, she tried to do it her way and in some cases even manipulate people into doing things to her advances or views. She certainly never gave in to her husband and she fed her ideas and opinions to her children.
Part of their (King, Queen and Princes) behaviour came from stubborness, but I also believe in all these lives the tragedy of their fates had a great and cripling influence on them.
The King was stuck in a role he didn’t want to be in. He could have refused the throne, which at first sight he was about to do. In the end he did accept the throne and became the longest running King in the 19th century in the Netherlands. Why he accepted in the end is not clear. What is clear is that he was not happy within that role. The combination of his unhappiness and his natural difficult character, made him an unbearable, violent and unreasonable man.
The Queen was stuck in a marriage she didn’t want to be in. She accepted III’s hand, because of her own father who had, together with the then crown prince William II, arranged the marriage. When she ventilated her worries and disapprovement, she was told that princesses didn’t have a right to be happy.
Later in the marriage, after Maurits death, Sophie returned to Wurttemberg with the intention of divorcing III and staying in Stuttgart (where Wurttemberg was). Prince Frederic, III’s uncle, intervened and convinced Sophie not to push for divorce. Also her own father didn’t want her to divorce, so Sophie returned reluctantly.
Wiwill, who became heir apparent to his father in 1849, had great trouble accepting his fate, just like his father. On top of that he wasn’t allowed to marry the girl he loved. All the royal strains put on him left him bitter and angry.
Alexander, who became heir apparent to his father after the death of Wiwill in 1879, wasn’t interested in becoming a King either. Also Alexander had trouble with the strains of being a Prince.
Both had grown up constantly being put down by their father and a mother with a tendency for dramatizing in an invironment that in any case puts strains on ones behaviour in a time those strains were tightend even tighter.
We’re talking here about two unhappy people, in an unhappy bond, in a situation that doesn’t give air, raising two children with amplified bad habits, unhappy and unhealthy (for mentality) behaviour, influencing those children and damaging them for life. We know the end results.
What puzzles me is the inaction of the two sons. Not the kind of inaction on a work related basis. III kept them from business as far as possible, just like he’d done with his wife. He gave them only small tasks. No, what puzzles me is the inaction on the own health front. I think their minds were so poisoned, they weren’t even able anymore to take at least care of their fysical health. I think they both landed in a vicous circle and they couldn’t break out anymore.
This might be the fatal combination: 1) Their father’s habit to throw themselves into the situation they don’t want to be in, because they don’t see a way out and 2) Their mother’s habit of dramatizing the situation even further.
1) King William III didn’t want to become King with the freshly rewritten constitution that had taken the last grains of absolute power from the King. When he found everybody badly wanted him to become King anyway, he relented and threw himself at the task screaming and kicking in an attempt to turn things around for his own benefit. In the 40 years he was King, he failed at that one thing and the Netherlands has a constitutional democry ever since his father, William II, signed the constitution.
2) Queen Sophie had the habit of dramatizing every situation. According to some people she did it to attract even more pity, or to submerge herself into it. It has been said she tried to create an image of a Queen people had to feel sorry for and think she was a poor social soul caught in a bad situation. I don’t know how much is true of that, but I do know she did write down certain situations more dramatic than they really were. Possibly, in the end she herself believed in the level of drama she had conjured up and therefore saw things even darker and therefore made it appear darker. It is true she was not a very happy person.
The result:
If both Wiwill and Alexander owned these two habits, it would have thrown them into situations that seemed unsolvable so they threw themselves at the situation, because they didn’t see a way out. Then the habit of dramatizing it even more would make the situation seem even graver and the boys would completely go with it striding towards their fate. In their opinion, there was no way out of a situation that was unsolvable and unbearable so they ran with it instead of finding the right means to fight it.
This seems a bit unfair, because both Wiwill and Alexander both fought for what they thought were their rights. Wiwill took a very strong and unmovable stand when it came to his marriage to Mattie (Anna Mathilda van Limburg-Stirum). King, Queen and country had to allow him to marry Mattie or he stayed away from the Netherlands forever. In the end it was Wiwill who lost.
Alexander fought three times in public by one open letter to a paper and by two brochures written by himself defending his decision to not appear at the opening of the States General. Then there was the whole case of his candidature to become Grand-Master National of the Freemasons. Alexander did manage, in the first case, two quieten his opponents and in the second case to win the position of Grand-Master National. All that for what it was worth.
So this turns out to be some musings rather than a proper analysis. I hope I have given some stuff for thought.
Let’s just first note something: Both Wiwill (Wiwill) and Alexander let their health slip. Wiwill partied hard in Paris with much alcohol and girls. Alexander locked himself up in his palace not even opening a window and keeping the shutters closed not letting in any fresh air nor light. Was it stubborness or inability?
I think it’s fair to say they were both very stubborn.
Wiwill refused to give up his love, but when Mattie’s parents also refused it left him all alone. Still mad with his father he decided to stay away from him as far as possible and he relocated himself to Paris and refused to return to the Netherlands. He only returned to visit his mother and brother.
Alexander on his part locked himself up. His stubborness became apparent when the King, after the death of the Queen, found himself a new woman and married her shortly after. Alexander let all the curtains in his palace down on the wedding day. Neither did he ever meet his half-sister Wilhelmina, and the new Queen Emma only once incidentally. The contact with his father got worse and worse, even after the King reaching out to him; Alexander refused.
That stubborness was also in their parents. The King pledged to fight the new constitution from the moment his father, the then King William II, signed and commited to the constitution (1848). He kept his pledge, but never managed to turn things around back to absolute power for the King.
Queen Sophie was a very independent woman with strong ideas of how things should go. In everything she did, she tried to do it her way and in some cases even manipulate people into doing things to her advances or views. She certainly never gave in to her husband and she fed her ideas and opinions to her children.
Part of their (King, Queen and Princes) behaviour came from stubborness, but I also believe in all these lives the tragedy of their fates had a great and cripling influence on them.
The King was stuck in a role he didn’t want to be in. He could have refused the throne, which at first sight he was about to do. In the end he did accept the throne and became the longest running King in the 19th century in the Netherlands. Why he accepted in the end is not clear. What is clear is that he was not happy within that role. The combination of his unhappiness and his natural difficult character, made him an unbearable, violent and unreasonable man.
The Queen was stuck in a marriage she didn’t want to be in. She accepted III’s hand, because of her own father who had, together with the then crown prince William II, arranged the marriage. When she ventilated her worries and disapprovement, she was told that princesses didn’t have a right to be happy.
Later in the marriage, after Maurits death, Sophie returned to Wurttemberg with the intention of divorcing III and staying in Stuttgart (where Wurttemberg was). Prince Frederic, III’s uncle, intervened and convinced Sophie not to push for divorce. Also her own father didn’t want her to divorce, so Sophie returned reluctantly.
Wiwill, who became heir apparent to his father in 1849, had great trouble accepting his fate, just like his father. On top of that he wasn’t allowed to marry the girl he loved. All the royal strains put on him left him bitter and angry.
Alexander, who became heir apparent to his father after the death of Wiwill in 1879, wasn’t interested in becoming a King either. Also Alexander had trouble with the strains of being a Prince.
Both had grown up constantly being put down by their father and a mother with a tendency for dramatizing in an invironment that in any case puts strains on ones behaviour in a time those strains were tightend even tighter.
 |
| This was made for the celebrations of III's 25th aniversary of being King. They never posed like that, because no-one involved was prepared to pose for a family portrait |
We’re talking here about two unhappy people, in an unhappy bond, in a situation that doesn’t give air, raising two children with amplified bad habits, unhappy and unhealthy (for mentality) behaviour, influencing those children and damaging them for life. We know the end results.
What puzzles me is the inaction of the two sons. Not the kind of inaction on a work related basis. III kept them from business as far as possible, just like he’d done with his wife. He gave them only small tasks. No, what puzzles me is the inaction on the own health front. I think their minds were so poisoned, they weren’t even able anymore to take at least care of their fysical health. I think they both landed in a vicous circle and they couldn’t break out anymore.
This might be the fatal combination: 1) Their father’s habit to throw themselves into the situation they don’t want to be in, because they don’t see a way out and 2) Their mother’s habit of dramatizing the situation even further.
1) King William III didn’t want to become King with the freshly rewritten constitution that had taken the last grains of absolute power from the King. When he found everybody badly wanted him to become King anyway, he relented and threw himself at the task screaming and kicking in an attempt to turn things around for his own benefit. In the 40 years he was King, he failed at that one thing and the Netherlands has a constitutional democry ever since his father, William II, signed the constitution.
2) Queen Sophie had the habit of dramatizing every situation. According to some people she did it to attract even more pity, or to submerge herself into it. It has been said she tried to create an image of a Queen people had to feel sorry for and think she was a poor social soul caught in a bad situation. I don’t know how much is true of that, but I do know she did write down certain situations more dramatic than they really were. Possibly, in the end she herself believed in the level of drama she had conjured up and therefore saw things even darker and therefore made it appear darker. It is true she was not a very happy person.
The result:
If both Wiwill and Alexander owned these two habits, it would have thrown them into situations that seemed unsolvable so they threw themselves at the situation, because they didn’t see a way out. Then the habit of dramatizing it even more would make the situation seem even graver and the boys would completely go with it striding towards their fate. In their opinion, there was no way out of a situation that was unsolvable and unbearable so they ran with it instead of finding the right means to fight it.
This seems a bit unfair, because both Wiwill and Alexander both fought for what they thought were their rights. Wiwill took a very strong and unmovable stand when it came to his marriage to Mattie (Anna Mathilda van Limburg-Stirum). King, Queen and country had to allow him to marry Mattie or he stayed away from the Netherlands forever. In the end it was Wiwill who lost.
Alexander fought three times in public by one open letter to a paper and by two brochures written by himself defending his decision to not appear at the opening of the States General. Then there was the whole case of his candidature to become Grand-Master National of the Freemasons. Alexander did manage, in the first case, two quieten his opponents and in the second case to win the position of Grand-Master National. All that for what it was worth.
So this turns out to be some musings rather than a proper analysis. I hope I have given some stuff for thought.
Friday, June 21, 2013
Prince Alexander - Character Study
Alexander was born 25 August 1851. One year before his birth his older brother Maurits had died of meningitis. Possibly the only reason Alexander’s parents found each other, in a short period of reconciliation, was their sadness over losing Maurits. Whatever the case, Alexander was conceived around Christmas.
Alexander was from birth on a sickly, nervous and shy child. Both his parents found him an ugly baby, with his father saying: “Foei, wat een lelijke jongen” (Damn, what an ugly boy) and he took pleasure from telling his wife how lacking and weak her son was. His mother meanwhile wondered if she was punished for attaching too much value to beauty.
It was soon decided his mother would raise him and her husband let her to it distancing himself from his youngest born son.
When Alexander was growing up it not only became clear how nervous and shy he was, he also turned out to be a clever and sharp minded boy. Undoubtly his mother encouraged him in developing his mind and she was a great influence on the boy. Alexander’s liberal opinions found birth in that period, when he spent most of his time with his mother.
The war between his parents, that had been going on long before Alexander was born, was only slightly tempered by the fact his parents didn’t share their lives together anymore. Since Alexander grew up with his mother he would easily choose his mother’s side in fights with his father. Not that his father ever sought his affections. Obviously, Alexander’s relationship with his father was far from close and would only grow more hostile as time went on.
Alexander grew up to be a clever man. His cleverness can still be found in some letters and the two brochures he wrote. Also in recollections of people he’s said to be a sharp minded and developed man.
Beside clever Alexander was also stubborn. One example is his not being present at the openening of the political year after he became heir aparent to his father. He explained in one letter and the two brochures he was too sad about the losses he had suffered (death of his mother 1877, and brother 1879) he couldn’t be present. That was in 1879. However, Alexander never went to the opening after his brother’s death. From an account from a minister I’ve got the impression that in the end even Alexander didn’t believe in his reasons to stay away anymore.
Another example is the unrest when Alexander became a candidate to become “Grootmeester Nationaal” (Grandmaster- National) of the freemasons. Alexander threw himself in that discussion with gusto.
A more painful proof of his stubborness is his holding on to the past. Alexander never managed to give the death of his mother and brother a place. He felt those losses deeply and that made him even more sad and melancholic, which made him feel the losses even deeper. In other words, Alexander lived in a vicious circel he didn’t want to and couldn’t break free from.
Alexander is most of the time a friendly and sympathetic man. However, if he feels something is not right he would speak his mind. One example is his reaction to a young lady writing a letter in French, which in those times was normal. Alexander wrote her back telling her she could write a letter in Dutch or not at all.
The above mentioned situations are also examples of Alexander’s principles and the way he dealt with those. Only when it concerned more personal matters, like the fact he didn’t seem to be able to come out of grieving, he would retreat and not contact anymore. That his old uncle Frederic found out. His uncle, only worried about his way of living, tried to encourage him to change his ways. Alexander ignored him and they lost contact somewhat. Alexander regretted that when his uncle died not long after their differences. It didn’t take him long to overcome that.
Nothing is known about Alexander’s ambitions. Not because his health wasn’t very promising and after becoming heir aparent he locked himself up in his palace. He kept up with news and developments, because he was aware of his duties as heir aparent, but the general public never saw anything of that. To the outside world he was just a reclusive.
In summary, Alexander was a clever, sharp minded, well developed, (over-)sensitive and fragile person.
Alexander died 21 June 1884 at age 32, today 129 years ago.
It was soon decided his mother would raise him and her husband let her to it distancing himself from his youngest born son.
When Alexander was growing up it not only became clear how nervous and shy he was, he also turned out to be a clever and sharp minded boy. Undoubtly his mother encouraged him in developing his mind and she was a great influence on the boy. Alexander’s liberal opinions found birth in that period, when he spent most of his time with his mother.
The war between his parents, that had been going on long before Alexander was born, was only slightly tempered by the fact his parents didn’t share their lives together anymore. Since Alexander grew up with his mother he would easily choose his mother’s side in fights with his father. Not that his father ever sought his affections. Obviously, Alexander’s relationship with his father was far from close and would only grow more hostile as time went on.
Alexander grew up to be a clever man. His cleverness can still be found in some letters and the two brochures he wrote. Also in recollections of people he’s said to be a sharp minded and developed man.
Another example is the unrest when Alexander became a candidate to become “Grootmeester Nationaal” (Grandmaster- National) of the freemasons. Alexander threw himself in that discussion with gusto.
A more painful proof of his stubborness is his holding on to the past. Alexander never managed to give the death of his mother and brother a place. He felt those losses deeply and that made him even more sad and melancholic, which made him feel the losses even deeper. In other words, Alexander lived in a vicious circel he didn’t want to and couldn’t break free from.
Alexander is most of the time a friendly and sympathetic man. However, if he feels something is not right he would speak his mind. One example is his reaction to a young lady writing a letter in French, which in those times was normal. Alexander wrote her back telling her she could write a letter in Dutch or not at all.
The above mentioned situations are also examples of Alexander’s principles and the way he dealt with those. Only when it concerned more personal matters, like the fact he didn’t seem to be able to come out of grieving, he would retreat and not contact anymore. That his old uncle Frederic found out. His uncle, only worried about his way of living, tried to encourage him to change his ways. Alexander ignored him and they lost contact somewhat. Alexander regretted that when his uncle died not long after their differences. It didn’t take him long to overcome that.
Nothing is known about Alexander’s ambitions. Not because his health wasn’t very promising and after becoming heir aparent he locked himself up in his palace. He kept up with news and developments, because he was aware of his duties as heir aparent, but the general public never saw anything of that. To the outside world he was just a reclusive.
In summary, Alexander was a clever, sharp minded, well developed, (over-)sensitive and fragile person.
Alexander died 21 June 1884 at age 32, today 129 years ago.
Thursday, June 20, 2013
My Two Weeping Angels
Most of the time it's persistence, sometimes pure luck.
A few nights back I read there's a marbel angel supposedl representing prince Maurits, the angel, holding a little boy on its arm, representing Alexander. Ever since I've been wanting to see that statue, but I couldn't find it anywhere on the Internet. <-- excited="" failed="" i="" make="" sense...="" so="" to="">
Luck has it, in the report, they visited the salon where that statue stands, I saw it in a flash and couldn't believe my luck. Of course I reloaded the report (not only to screencap the "two angels") and made screencaps.
I also managed to screencap a picture of Alexander I had never seen before.
A few nights back I read there's a marbel angel supposedl representing prince Maurits, the angel, holding a little boy on its arm, representing Alexander. Ever since I've been wanting to see that statue, but I couldn't find it anywhere on the Internet. <-- excited="" failed="" i="" make="" sense...="" so="" to="">
Luck has it, in the report, they visited the salon where that statue stands, I saw it in a flash and couldn't believe my luck. Of course I reloaded the report (not only to screencap the "two angels") and made screencaps.
 |
| Not very clear, but the best I could do |
the Last William - King Gorilla
In my research for everything about Alexander I found several websites dedicated to the Dutch royals. Several of those sites have individual entries on the many members. Usually the texts are very general and have small errors. Nothing to worry about, though it irritates me sometimes. One of those sites is http://koningshuis.wordpress.com. On every entry you can comment. I usually don’t accept when I find there are big mistakes or when other people have asked questions, which happened on this particular site. I think I fill most of the comments area.
The person asking the questions has posted a link to a report from a Dutch news show called “Brandpunt”. The report was called “De laatste Willem” (the last William) It was quite interesting, if I hadn’t known as much as I do. The reason I’m blogging about it is the blunt way they talked about Alexander. Let me see if I can find the exact words said about Alexander:
“…getormenteerde ziekelijke homoseksueel die niet wilde deugen..”
Translation: “…a tormented, sickly, homosexual, who didn’t want to be ok…”
And:
“…mismaakt, intelligent…”
Translation: “…deformed, intelligent, …”
The one blatant mistake “deformed” I have to adress. He was not deformed; he wore a corset in his teens to make sure he wouldn’t become so. What annoys me, but what I can’t help, is the minimal painting of the person he was. I’m sure he was much more than that, but he didn’t do anything to prove that.
Maybe it’s just very easy to offend me by saying anything about Alexander. Of course, I had no problem with "intelligent".
Other than that, I really enjoyed that report. I loved the little anecdotes about the king. Something you can now laugh about, because it’s been more than 100 years ago. And the fact they couldn’t find a statue of King William III. In the end they found one, but they never even bothered to put some bronze on it. It was covered in an unflattering plastic cover.
Well, so far for King Gorilla.
The report: De Laatste Willem
 |
| Original design for a King Gorilla statue Source: original |
“…getormenteerde ziekelijke homoseksueel die niet wilde deugen..”
Translation: “…a tormented, sickly, homosexual, who didn’t want to be ok…”
And:
“…mismaakt, intelligent…”
Translation: “…deformed, intelligent, …”
The one blatant mistake “deformed” I have to adress. He was not deformed; he wore a corset in his teens to make sure he wouldn’t become so. What annoys me, but what I can’t help, is the minimal painting of the person he was. I’m sure he was much more than that, but he didn’t do anything to prove that.
Maybe it’s just very easy to offend me by saying anything about Alexander. Of course, I had no problem with "intelligent".
Other than that, I really enjoyed that report. I loved the little anecdotes about the king. Something you can now laugh about, because it’s been more than 100 years ago. And the fact they couldn’t find a statue of King William III. In the end they found one, but they never even bothered to put some bronze on it. It was covered in an unflattering plastic cover.
Well, so far for King Gorilla.
The report: De Laatste Willem
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
the Media Perfect Prince
It seems my dear prince is very beloved by media people.
the Book: "Alexander - De vergeten kroonprins"
English: "Alexander - The forgotten crown prince"
the Book: "Alexander - De vergeten kroonprins"
English: "Alexander - The forgotten crown prince"
The first cover was the cover used for the first edition of the book, published in the late 70's of last century. The cover on the right is of the latest edition, published some time around 1997.
This book is the best and the most complete biography you can find on Alexander. There's not that much exciting to find out, Alexander didn't really do much of importance. Great parts of the book are filled with the complete texts from papers. It also includes Alexander's sent in letter as a reaction on an article in a paper and the two following brochures he published to explain his point made in the first mentioned letter. It's an interesting and exhausting read since it's all in old Dutch. But it gives a nice view of how Alexander's brain worked. Pretty well, I must say.
In the second edition is a an intro in which the below series "Wij Alexander" ("We Alexander") is mentioned. According to the author the series says Alexander went mad and got institutionalized, instead of dying in 1884. If the author of the book had watched the series right till the end, or had paid attention right till the end, he would have found out his assumptions of what the series was saying were wrong. To find out what I'm talking about watch "Wij Alexander". The piece of intro I'll add in the next entry.
To buy:
the TV-series: "Wij Alexander"
English: "We Alexander"
 |
| Find the |
The story plays in 1909 right after the birth of the (then) future Queen Juliana. Doctor Giltay returns to the Netherlands to finish his studies at an institution. In the institution he meets patient #4 who claims to be Prince Alexander, who at that point had been dead for 25 years.
Soon the care of this patient is handed over to Giltay who also gets the assignment to find out about a wooden box (mentioned before on this blog).
The questions are many: Is patient #4 really Prince Alexander? Where's the wooden box and why are people so keen to find it?
I thoroughly enjoyed this series. The story is clever and very respecting towards Alexander. Only facts are presented as facts and rumours remain rumours. If we're not certain about something, neither is the series. In other words, this series doesn't sling any false facts into the world, it merely plays with the already old existing rumours.
Also the pace of the story is right, the acting is superb and it all looks very authentic. Definately recommended.
the Play: "Alexander - de prins die niet wilde"
English: "Alexander - the prince who didn't want to"
I only found out about this play today. This play was only performed on Texel, I believe, for a small audience and only a few dates. The prince was played by Dutch actor Antonie Kamerling, who unfortunately was very depressed and commited suicide in 2010.
I can't really find much about the play except that it was performed in December (?) 2009 and that it gave a view on the Dutch royals from around 1890 from the viewpoint of Alexander. It was a solo performance.
If I find more, I'll post it here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)