Author Topic: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?  (Read 80336 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

rskkiya

  • Guest
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #15 on: April 02, 2005, 06:52:12 PM »
Quote

If all AA had done was to refuse to see visitors and behave in a difficult manner, however, no one would have accepted her as Grand Duchess Anastasia. It was the fact that she interspersed her bouts of "being difficult" with generous helpings of "cooperating" and giving detailed information that kept the illusion going. If she'd been genuinely crazy, there would have been no way to coach her, no way to feed her information to start with. Yes, she probably had post-traumatic stress disorder - but that's a far cry from being clinically insane.


    I have never stated that she was insane...although I do think that she was delusional.
 What are the clinical definitions of these terms?

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #16 on: April 02, 2005, 07:06:22 PM »
This is the definition I found on a mental health webpage for delusional disorder:

Delusional Disorder

Description

There is not a single type of Delusional Disorder. There are a number of subtypes, but they share a major common feature. This is that the person has a nonbizzare delusion - a delusion that could occur in real life, that is. For example, a person that feels they are being followed or poisoned is nonbizarre, while a person who feels their parents are from mars is bizarre. The subtypes are erotomanic, in which the person believes that a person of usually higher status is in love with them; grandiose, which is delusions of inflated worth, power, knowledge, identity, or special relationships; jealous is that where they believe the sexual partner is unfaithful; persecutory by which they believe they or someone they are close to is being maltreated; somatic, in which they believe they have a physical problem, defect, or illness; or, the mixed type, in which more than one of the previous types is present.


I don't think "insanity" is a clinical term.


Offline Elisabeth

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2131
    • View Profile
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #17 on: April 03, 2005, 03:06:20 PM »
I guess what I am trying to say is, I don't believe AA was psychotic. I don't believe she suffered from some kind of major, ongoing break with reality. She was not legally insane. She was, if anything, neurotic, which is completely different.

I agree that AA may have suffered from senile dementia in her later years, but she was still canny enough to adjust her story for Summers and Mangold as late as 1974. In her final years she supposedly engaged in some kind of correspondence with a woman claiming to be Nicholas and Alexandra's fifth daughter, adjusting her story yet again to include this fifth daughter (although this incident may well have been an invention of James Lovell, I really don't know - Peter Kurth doesn't write about it). Make of this what you will.

What's most significant to me is that none of the doctors who examined AA in her prime ever diagnosed her as suffering from some kind of mental disorder. On the contrary, they insisted that she was sane and not delusional.

Perhaps it  may come down to Orwell's definition of "doublethink," that is, our ability to hold two completely contradictory ideas in our head simultaneously. For example, look at anorexia nervosa. It is a serious mental illness and sometimes even considered symptomatic of an underlying personality disorder. Now most, if not all, anorexics will tell you that they "feel fat," even when they are seriously underweight. However, as most anorexics will admit amongst themselves, they know intellectually - not emotionally, but intellectually - that they are too thin. To what degree they are too thin may be, for them, a more debatable issue than it is for us - but they realize that they are too thin to be considered "normal," and many even take a weird kind of pride in this fact (even as it secretly worries them).

Perhaps AA also had this talent for "doublethink," which explains her ability to change her story when external circumstances seemed to demand it.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Elisabeth »
... I love my poor earth
because I have seen no other

-- Osip Mandelshtam

rskkiya

  • Guest
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #18 on: April 03, 2005, 07:46:48 PM »
Quote
Delusional Disorder
Description

There is not a single type of Delusional Disorder. There are a number of subtypes, but they share a major common feature. This is that the person has a nonbizzare delusion - a delusion that could occur in real life, that is. For example, a person that feels they are being followed or poisoned is nonbizarre, while a person who feels their parents are from mars is bizarre. The subtypes are erotomanic, in which the person believes that a person of usually higher status is in love with them; grandiose, which is delusions of inflated worth, power, knowledge, identity, or special relationships; jealous is that where they believe the sexual partner is unfaithful; persecutory by which they believe they or someone they are close to is being maltreated; somatic, in which they believe they have a physical problem, defect, or illness; or, the mixed type, in which more than one of the previous types is present.


Thank so much fror the definition!
   I am persuaded that AA may have suffered from the Grandious or Persecutory aspects of this condition.
   Also we have to "remember" that memories are not perfect rigid collections of fact, rather they are highly subjective impressions! There have been numerous examples of people "creating" memories or remembering things that never happened with a certain amount of subtle "coaching" - this sort of thing is not unusual nor is it always an attempt to trick or to deceive...
Example
   Greatgrandmama Xenia comes with a lovely gift for wee baby Timmy - but Timmy, being only 2 years old, does not remember this event --However if Mummy keeps reminding him of this - eventually he may create a memory of the situation.

rskkiya

Offline Robert_Hall

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6649
  • a site.
    • View Profile
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #19 on: April 03, 2005, 08:06:33 PM »
Oh, I give up.  I think she was just a cheap circus act that went big-time for a while and then believed her own publicity.
Life may not be the party we expected, but while we are here, might as well dance..

Do you want the truth, or my side of the story ?- Hank Ketchum.

Offline Jutte

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • I'm Not Like Them, But I Can Pretend
    • View Profile
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #20 on: April 24, 2005, 10:29:45 AM »
I'm new here and I'm very familiar with the Anna Anderson story and most aspects of the Romanov's deaths etc.

I realise DNA confirms AA was *not* AN, but disregard this for a moment.

I was wondering, would it be at all possible that AA was AN but didn't realise it? ie. in keeping with both the Anastasia films.
What i'm suggesting is that Anna Anderson really was AN, but because of mental illness or whatever, didn't realise it? Sorry if this has been in a thread before.
Don't Pretend To Sleep Now, I Brought You Some Strawberries

Offline etonexile

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1231
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #21 on: April 24, 2005, 10:52:33 AM »
Now that's a new twist...to be someone you claim to be...but not realize that you actually are that person...No...AA was a mad woman who's sad life was sorted finally by DNA testing....

Yes...Welcome to this fine site.....

Offline Jutte

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • I'm Not Like Them, But I Can Pretend
    • View Profile
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #22 on: April 24, 2005, 11:12:50 AM »
hmm but i'm one of these peopple, who knows about the DNA and how AA wasn't AN but would still like to believe it. I wonder is there any way the DNA testing could have been wrong? i've heard a lot of rumors about DNA samples being taken from hair they found posthumously in Anderson's home, though this is conflicted with Anderson's section of intestine being used for the DNA sample.

is there any way that AA could have been AN or in any way related to the romanovs? could the DNA samples have been 'stroked' or tampered with?
Don't Pretend To Sleep Now, I Brought You Some Strawberries

Offline Olga

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 0
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #23 on: April 24, 2005, 11:33:04 AM »
The samples were tested by three independent laboratories. They all got the same result.

Anna Anderson was not Anastasia Nikolaevna.

Offline Jutte

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • I'm Not Like Them, But I Can Pretend
    • View Profile
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #24 on: April 24, 2005, 11:40:03 AM »
i know that but the romantic in me wants to believe AN did survive the assasination attempt.

surely if it's possbile that German authorities tampered with the AA DNA and FS DNA then couldn't they have done the same for AA and AN?
Don't Pretend To Sleep Now, I Brought You Some Strawberries

Offline Olga

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 0
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #25 on: April 24, 2005, 11:43:31 AM »
Quote
i know that but the romantic in me wants to believe AN did survive the assasination attempt.


Well that's all very nice. If you believe AN survived why are you even posting here? Get a reality check.

Quote
surely if it's possbile that German authorities tampered with the AA DNA and FS DNA then couldn't they have done the same for AA and AN?


When did they do this? Did you even read my post above?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by olga »

Offline Jutte

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • I'm Not Like Them, But I Can Pretend
    • View Profile
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #26 on: April 24, 2005, 11:51:50 AM »
yes i did, and i'm just curious, there's no need to be rude. ive seen a lot of posts on here of people who believe AA [/i]was AN and i'm appealing to them on their opinions on the DNA. the anna anderson story interests me and i'd like to believe that she was telling the truth at least in part.
Don't Pretend To Sleep Now, I Brought You Some Strawberries

Mgmstl

  • Guest
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #27 on: April 24, 2005, 11:59:14 AM »
Jutte, you have the right to ask questions on anything and everything regardles of the what others tell you.

While the DNA results tell us she was not AN, if you voice any opinion otherwise, you will get comments such as that or worse from those who want to deter any discussion from happening.



Offline RussiaSunbeam1918

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 502
  • "You've got to hide your love away." -The Beatles
    • View Profile
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #28 on: April 24, 2005, 12:03:45 PM »
I don't think AA and AN were the same, but I think your story would make a pretty good (but fictionalized) book.

I read that a lot of [people thought her samples had been tampered with, and that's why they used her small intestines to do the DNA test. ???

-Dana

Offline Annie

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4757
    • View Profile
    • Anna Anderson Exposed!
Re: AA: Cunning - Mad - Con Artist or Victim?
« Reply #29 on: April 24, 2005, 12:03:54 PM »
If you read our threads here, you'll see we have discussed this in hundreds of posts, many of them turning to fights. AA was NOT AN. That is over.

However, since 2 bodies remain missing, I am surprised people who 'want it to be true (I used to be one of them) don't explore the remote yet interesting possibility that she (or Marie or Tatiana) may have escaped but was NOT AA?! That would be a lot more exciting than more AA rehashed again.