The movie is so fluffy. Very pretty to look at, and it seems to show Marie at a tender time. Like someone else said, it was before she was overtaken by her power. She was still a young girl. The movie seemed to show the lack of power monarchs really had very well. I think this is and important aspect of monarchy to consider - these were not people above manipulation, humiliation,embarrasment, or weakness.
Good presention.

The story of Marie Antionette is very much biased towards how bad of a monarch she was and the reason why the movie's was made was to show the plight and the unjust reactions towards the Queen of the time. She was made the scapegoat of the problems and she was also renamed "The Queen of Debt".The constant pressure from the people and her family especially her mother to produce an heir added to it. The movie portrays her in a better light and showed that she was after all a 14 year old when she became such an important figure of France. The main audience that was targeted as per the movie were mainly teenage girls but also the young adults and as who wouldnt want to know about such an infamous person.

i think that the painting portrays her very well. you can tell that there was a lot of money spent on her and she spent a lot of money. the movie does a good job showing how elegant and grand her life was. the except is historically based and doesnt show how all of the bureaucracy of her life, rather than the everyday life that she led.

In the olden days women grew up faster, where taken and made into brides then mothers. There where limited amount of choices women had and using their body and sexuality, as a tool to have their wishes fulfilled is a concept that is just now being stomped, out as Butch Lesbians enter the work force. For the first time the female form is aside. Women’s appearances do not come into play when their opinions are considered. The picture to me looks like a little girl all dressed up and ready to entertain the older men of society.

I think that both the novel and the portrait takes a sympathetic to Marie Antoinette, showing her as polished, young and niave. The only thing that i could see this as not sympathetic is the fact that the author makes her on a pedestal. This could be seen as a tense position, especially since she eventually got beheaded. This sort of sets a tone of superiority for Marie, something that was with her until her death.

I feel that the painting really portrays her innocence yet I feel that she is trying to live in a world which she is not ready for yet. The background seems as if she is sitting in some sort of castle which is almost ironic because she now has a lot of power even though she is only 14. It may be hard for her to appreciate the true beauty of the paintings in the background. I know when I was 14 and my parents took me to the museum etc. I had no interest in viewing the works of art. It also seems that she is dressed very extravagantly for her age as well. Due to the fact that she is so young, maybe this is why she becomes so materialistic when France was in a time of struggle. It is almost if she is playing house.

The audience appeal of the book I would say is definately for older people, especially women. There is no way that a young teenager would be able to relate to Marie's ways even if they are the same age as her. The modern day era is much different than to that of Marie's time. I don't know any 14 year old girls that would be interested in learning the life story of a monarch in this era. I think if the book were placed in a different time era than maybe.

I am interested to see what you have to say about the painting...

Kathryn Walker

From the artwork I get the impression that Marie Antoinette is very aware of her own image. She appears to have a certain elegance that she wants to translate to the audience of the portrait. While I agree that the dress that Marie Antoinette is wearing is very beautiful and very adult, the excessiveness of her wardrobe seems childish to me. The reading is sympathetic to Marie Antoinette’s youth at first. She is still a child and cannot fully understand the ways of the world; yes I agree that she is indulgent and full of her self, but in a way that is characteristic of a spoiled child and not an ignorant queen. “Two years ago Marie Antoinette had been in ecstasy at such an opportunity to recreate the pleasures of her youth.” (page 140) Because Marie never lived out her childhood, she never really grew up and doesn’t seem to have a sense of responsibility. “It was not even that the profit was the point of it all; the Queen gambled to be in the fashion and to amuse herself, not to win.” (page 141) Marie Antoinette seems reckless. The themes in the reading are more adult, and I don’t think they would appeal to a younger audience. If we are watching the film in class then I would say that that would appeal to a younger audience better that the reading because of the intricate costuming.

I do not believe that the portrait accuratelly portrays the person that Marie Antoinette was. The painting was made when she was fourteen, but the person in the portrait does not look like a fouteen year old at all. The portrait looks like one of a full grown women. I believe that the excerpt supports this accusation. The author is sympathetic to the the Queen. She is frowned upon by the people of France for her childish behavior. What do they except. She is a child! I believe the author's main claim is sympethetic to the Queen because she is just a kid and doing what kids do.

The author of the novel seems to sympathize with Marie Antoinette. It seems that even though she realizes the ineffectiveness of her rule, she seems to place more of a blame Loius XVI, and his lack of passion for her initially. It can be argued that her lavishness and desire for expensive was derived from her inability to conceive a child like everyone wanted her to in the beginning of their relationship. the painting seems to bring this lavishness to the forefront through the setting, but kind of shows Marie in a modest situation. Maybe at this time, since she had only been queen for a short period of time, she hadn't become crazy with power yet. Her dress is expensive, yes, but nothing compared to the type of attire she is famous for.

First, from looking at the portrait, Marie looks so innocent and elegant. Her dress, hair, posture, and piano skills do not make her look 14 however. From just looking at the portrait you get a feeling that Marie is a respectable woman, but in reality, after reading the excerpt you found out just how deceptive a 14 year old girl can be. I agree with Rene in fact that this novel is probably not suitable for the younger audience. Because of the things Marie does and because of the writing style this would appeal to the older women. Coming from a man that has never seen the movie and isn't enticed by a 14 year old girl running a muck, this would definitely not be appeal to most men.

My first impression of the portrait is that they were very kind in casting Kirsten Dunst to play her. Her dress and surroundings are very lavish and expensive looking. In the picture, Marie Antoinette seems to be portrayed as a reserved respectable woman who enjoys the art of piano playing. This portrait makes her appear to be a quiet and peaceful woman, while the novel depicts a much more harsh and unlikable side. The novel portrays her as an unhappy gambling addict who did not fulfill her sexual duties as Queen. It also talks about how she flirted and misled many men to believe she wanted them. The novel is probably most appropriate for adult women who are interested in history. I don't think it would be enjoyed by the majority of young girls and teenagers because writing style is a little more difficult to understand.

I didn't think the author was so much sympathetic toward Marie as much as she just tells it like it was. Here's the lifestyle of the French Aristocrats and we as the reader decide for ourselves what we deem morally correct or incorrect. But it is kind of a no-brainer because she was supposed to be looking out for her subjects, but instead couldn't care less about them. It is kind of satisfying to know that she reaped what she sewed, and her decapatation just goes to show, what goes around, comes around. But as far as her appealing to younger girls, I suggest they use Disney Princesses as idols, or better yet, Mother Teresa because no one wants their daughter to follow in the foot steps of the people who defined pretentious.

First of all, I don't think she looks 14 in the picture. It kind of seems like this painting makes her look older because of her hair/dress, and that she's playing the piano. I think the author is more sympathetic to Marie because of the section about the gambling/card games. I think the audience of this book would be people who like to read about history and royalty, and maybe teenage girls because they made the movie. It could be appealing to a younger audience because Marie Antoinette is a young princess and younger girls have their fantasies of being a princess.

Bridget

Hey guys. Please read the excerpt that was passed out in class from the biography of Marie Antoinette by Antonia Fraser. Also, check out this picture of Marie Antoinette. She is 14 in the painting, which was done right after her marriage to Louis XVI of France.

http://www.mozartforum.com/images/Marie%20Antoinette%201769-70.jpg

Some background on Marie Antoinette (if you don’t already know it):
Marie Antoinette was the Austrian-born Queen of France who was best known for her legendary splurging on expensive items and parties while France was suffering economically. She was imprisoned and later sent to the guillotine for treason by the French people, and is general considered to be a terribly ineffective monarch.

Some things to think about while reading:
• In regards to the picture, how is Marie Antoinette being portrayed? Pay close attention to the setting and her dress. What is your first impression of her upon seeing this portrait?
• Does the author seem to be criticizing Marie Antoinette, or is she more sympathetic?
• Who do you think would be the audience of this book? Would it be appealing to a younger audience? Why or why not?

Kristen