Alexander Palace Forum
Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => The Yussupovs => Topic started by: valmont on January 28, 2004, 03:38:54 PM
-
I read somewhere that Grand Duke Dimitri Pavlovich Romanov and Prince Felix Yussupov did not remain friends in exile. Did Felix Yussupov and Grand Duke Dimitri Pavlovich Romanov ever saw each other again?.
Does anyone know that reason(s) why the split appart?
-
It's my understanding that GD Dimitri was upset that Yussupov broke their promise and talked about Rasputin's murder. I don't know if they ever did see each other, but considering the Yussupov's wife was a relative it's certainly possible. Hopefully someone with more knowledge about this can let us know.
-
Well, I read a letter from GD Dimitri to Felix Yusupov yesterday in the Alexander palace site, and in that letter, GD Dimitri is practicly begging Fellix to write him back. It is obvious they were very close friends, and you can actually feel the closeness between them when you are reading that letter.
Is there any information regarding further contac between them after the revolution??
-
I red somewhere that Gran Duke Dimitri was in love with Felix's wife (Gran Duchess Irina). Is that true?
And I also red that there were rumors about an homosexual relation between the two. Where can I have that information?
-
For a very thorough account of the life of Felix Yusupv, his supposed homsexuality (there is contention as to whether he was homosexual, bi-sexual, or just a transvestite), his relationship with the Grand Duke Dimitri Pavelovich, and their relationship after the revolution, and a good account of the murder of Rasputin, try the book "The Man Who Killed Rasputin" by Greg King. King and Penny Wilson have also just written a new book "The Fate of the Romanovs" which captures the day to day life of the imperial family in the House of Special Purpose, and gives a bloody, dramatic account of the murder. In his book on Yusupov King dicusses the question of just who took part in the murder of Rasputin. The Grand Duke is suspected of doing the actual shooting and this was covered up to protect the imperial family, Yusupov taking the blame. It also discusses the fact that the Grand Duchess Elizabeth might have played a more important role than has been mentioned before. New documents indicate that a number of members of the Romanov family were involved in the plot.
-
After the revolution Dmitri, Yussupov and Dmitri's sister, Marie all ended up in London and she writes in her memoirs, A Princess in Exile: "Felix tried to resume his friendly relationship with my brother but in spite of all his efforts he did not succeed in doing so........ Dmitri was revolted by Yussupov's lighthearted attitude towards the event of which he himself never had spoken, and could not forgive his chatter. The silence he himself continuously observed on the subject made me believe that he had never lived down this tragic and resounding affair, in which he had taken part only in hope of averting an impending revolution. Dmitri avoided Yussopov, but I and my husband continued to see him."
-
I take with a grain of salt anything GD Marie says. In my opinion she was a spoiled brat and thinks nothing of telling lies to further her own cause.
-
well, aren't most princesses spoiled brats (all those feathered hats and faberge...) I realize this topic is about Felix and Dmitri but really such an attack on Marie is uncalled for. What is your reasoning to judge her so harshly? She makes it very clear in her memoirs, which are quoted extensively in many books and biographies on the period, that she still socialized with Felix and Irena in London and Paris but her brother would have nothing to do with him, he was disgusted by Felix, by the way he capitalized on what was for him an act of honor and duty to their country not common talk and cabaret. Why should her saying that be taken with a grain of salt? What cause is she serving? Loyalty to her brother? The survival of the the survivors?
-
Her memoirs when compared to others makes me believe this, along with her actions themselves. Sorry you feel it's an attack on her, but that is my opinion and my belief. I've read just about all the books available on the Romanovs (the ones in English, that is) and have drawn my conclusions of her through them - not just one book, but all of them.
-
Without entering an opinion about Marie's books, I was most privileged to have known a genuine Princess from Moscow who was about 15 when she and her family escaped the Revolution to Paris (she would never reveal her true age, even to her daughter). She passed away years ago at about age 92. A charming, elegant and truly aristocratic lady in the most positive sense of the word with crystal clear memories of Moscow and the aristocracy she grew up in. She and GD Marie were close friends after the Revolution and remained so until Marie's death. She described Marie to me in only the most positive of terms...and this lady would have definitely have made her true feelings clear! She pulled no punches, but was always "discrete" in her speaking. I never got any sense of Marie being a "brat" or lying to further her cause, from this lady who knew her well. Just my 2 cents second hand, as it were.
-
She did have a chip on her sholder when it came to Grand Duchess Elizabeth. Between Sergei and Elizabeth she preferred Sergei. GD Marie says Elizabeth was cold and distant.
I personally found her descriptions of Alexandra rather cruel and ungrateful, since Nicholas and Alexandra did so much for them, including taking them in and providing apartments for them in the palace. It seems to me that GD Marie purposefully distances herself and her brother from Nicholas and Alexandra in her books. They both (and especially Dmitri) spent lots of time with the family - practically living with them for weeks at a time. You would never know this from reading GD Marie's books.
To face facts, both Dmitri and Marie betrayed Nicholas and his wife after 1916. They were involved in and encouraged conspiracies against them when both had sworn oaths of loyalty to the Tsar. One can make excuses for this, that conditions in the country drove members of the Tsar's own family to this, but I think it was opportunistic and dishonest.
-
Who was really betrayed. Nicholas and Alexandra went to great lengths to shame Grand Duke Paul when he decided to marry his second wife. Marie and Dmitri were not allowed to follow their father into exile. Sergei and Ella were too into their own worlds of misery and duty to foster little more than cursory victorian child raising customs on these children whose exsitence reminded them daily of their father's liberation from the rules and regulations and dreadful duties of the familgia Romanov. After the assasination of Sergei, Ella became more and more isolated in her religious fervor and by then Alexandra was going crazy over "baby" so who was really there for either child.
Marie was still a girl when she was married off to the Swedish prince and were it not for the war would probably have been as harshly treated as her own father had been for breaking up her miserable marriage. It was to her own father that she finally went when she left the prince. Her own father who believed it was his duty to return to Russia at the outbreak of war and do what he could for family and country.
It is at this point you say Dmitri and Marie started to betray Nicholas and Alexandra. I think it was at this point that they realised what they had been deprived of by their judmental and vindictive Uncle and Aunt: a loving, intelligent, vibrant family and present father. Nicholas and Alexandra felt betrayed because Marie and Dmitri chose their father and his "unworthy" wife over them. In addition Grand Duke Paul and Princess Paley had an active salon which drew family and statesmen alike who were concerned at the turn the court was taking and how profound the influence of Rasputin and his ilk had become. Alexandra was furious about these goings on and was aware that the family thought Nicholas should lock her up in a convent for the sake one and all so she isolated Nicolas from their reasonings and threw everyone who came to try out of the palace including her own sister.
Though they may seem to have been disloyal, Dmitri's patriotic assasination of Rasputin and the extreme exile that saved his life as well as Marie's post-mortem memoirs only confirm the tragic and inevitable facts of Nicholas and Alexandra's responsibility and complicity in their own fates, the fates of their children and many others in their family including The Grand Duke Paul who was shot with some other Grand Dukes and Ella who was thrown down a mineshaft with Marie and Dmitri's half brother among other relatives.
-
Thank you, Bob for so eloquently expressing my exact opinions on GD Marie. Perhaps spoiled brat was a bit extreme but that is how I feel about her. I wonder what her first son thought about her?
-
Dear All,
I read with great interest the string regarding Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna (the younger).
I'm afraid that I have always felt a certain degree of sympathy for Maria. The early death of her mother certainly affected the way she was treated by her father--many biographies (except MP's own...) mention that Paul treated his children with distance after the death of his wife, finding them a painful reminder. GD Paul was also very familiar with the House laws of the Imperial Family, and was certainly aware of what would happen in the case of morganatic marriage. To choose that over his children, was acually quite selfish, and Marie's golden recollections of her father and her own childhood have often struck me more as wishful thinking and revisionism than as fact.
On Marie's wardship to Sergei and Ella, I am afraid that MP's description of Ella's coldness have less to do with Ella's personality, than a young wife's reaction to her own marriage and surroundings. Though Ella was devoted to Sergei, his homosexuality precluded a normal marital relationship, and I am certain that her disappointment was aimed at the wards she didn't really want, and who reminded her that she would probably have no children of her own.
Marie's arranged marriage was unhappy, and her adult life was marked by very serious depression, which ultimately resulted in her suicide. I would hesitate in calling her "spoiled" or judging her in any way; she was surrounded by unhappy people, and had a life filled with little joy. She blamed her unhappiness on her father's absence, and certainly blamed the Emperor for that, when in fact, it was her father's own doing -- and that is a bitter pill to swallow.
Best, Nick
-
I quite agree with Nick. Marie actually was one of the few royal women to actually get out and work after the revolution. True, she was lucky enough to have a yearly stipend from the King of Sweden to help make ends meet, she nonetheless made some attempt at finding a purpose in life. Be it working for Chanel or on the lecture circuit, the GD Marie didnt just sit around and wait for restoration. While she definately wouldnt have won mother of the year, she was a far cry better than any of the Grand Dukes that got out. I am wondering if anyone knows if Dimitri and Maries rooms were in the Alexander or Catherine Palace> I seem to recall reading they were in the Catherine, in which case there familial connection with the Emperor and Empress might be more superficial than it first seems. The point that the children did in effect loose their father due to the banishment of Pauls morganatic marraige is well taken. Remember that they never did fully get him back. Even when permitted to return to Russia with Princess Paley, their was alot of jealousy between the old and new family. The Princess Paley had a particular grudge against Dimitri, and I recall reading a letter she had written to Paul scolding him for wasting a good bottle of champagne from their cellars on his son!
-
hi! this is my first post on here and i'm sorry to say that it isn't a very interesting one but how exactly do you pronounce Yussupov?
-
It is correctly pronounced "yu-SOO-poff" with the accent on the second syllable.
Generally in Russian words and names, but not always, it is the second syllable which is stressed (tol-STOY, ro-MAN-ov, shu-VAL-ov. Unless, in a multisyllabic word, the root syllable of the original word is present in other than the secondary position. (STRO-gan-ov, OR-lov, etc.)(Never mind. Too complicated for here.)
The name Iusupov (or Yusoupoff, as the family spelled it) is drawn from the name of their ancestor Yusuf, who converted to Orthodoxy (see Greg King's biography of Princess Zinaida Yusupov on the site). The "ov" ending in Russian is roughly the same as the french particle "de" meaning "of" Yusupov can be roughly translated as "of Yusuf" This is not true for every name, and is a very general rule.
"Sky" at the end of the name can mean the same thing. For example, the Princes Beloselsky were originally from Beloselsk. Also, illegitimate members of the Romanov family were known as "Romanovsky" meaning "of the Romanovs"
More than you asked for, sorry. And remember, there are many exceptions.
Best,
nick
-
It would create massive confusion if we even had the ability to put any of this in Cryillic !
-
No one has really addressed the relationship between Felix and Demitri. Were they just really close friends or was there a physical relationship between the two? Does anyone know? ???
-
Well now, Felix made no secret of being gay. Dimitri, however was a different story. Since they are the only ones who would know for sure, and they are both dead, it is just guessing, I suppose.
-
I don't think anyone knows for sure - all of the parties involved are gone.
-
By reading GD Dimitri's letter to Felix, you can infer GD Dimitri care much about Felix, he actually begged Felix to write him. In Victorian times that could be seen as a close friendship, with nothing out of the ordinary between two good friends, I guess that also could disguise any other type of relationship, if there was any.
To me, they acted, before and in exile, as if they had had a relationship.
Arturo Vega Llausás
-
After reading the book about Felix, plus taking into account other sources, I think it highly likely they had a sexual attraction, if not an actual sexual relationship. What makes it all the more intriguing--like a Noel Coward play, updated for 2004!--is that they were both vying for Irina's hand in marriage.
Felix and Dmitri were volatile, emotionally high-strung young men, each "blessed" with good looks, a great deal of money, and not too much to do, unless it was to get into trouble. No wonder Alexandra disapproved of them!
-
If it is true (realizing that may never be known), it's interesting that the family simply "overlooked" with disapproval the gay lifestyle. I wonder how the average Russian of the age would have faired being gay? :-/
-
I think that the average homosexual russian of that age would have faired the same way -'overlooked'. Sexuality even during that day was alot more open than what it seemed. I read somewhere - can't think of where at the moment, that there were many prostitutes during the time - both men and women for men and women. So that their homosexuality could be hidden by getting a prostitue or overlooked if the person was not willing to deny the fact (their homosexual). And was not necesarily looked down on, just never really mentioned. So one could be homosexual, but for the most part 'overlooked' by most.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
-
From what I've read, another attitude re: homosexuality seemed to be that once a man who was "that way" found the love of a "good woman," all would be corrected. Hence, the mismatch of of the "ill-behaved" Ducky to Ernie, eventually resulting in divorce . . . but a few years later, Ernie's "successful," apparently happy marriage to "Onore."
-
Good Point, Janet.
Does anyone knows of any more examples like this?
Arturo Vega-Llausás
-
Sergei was homosexual. I remember reading that he "calmed down" after his marriage to Ella. She was obviously instrumental in this. Saint that she is . . .
-
All this discussion of Romanov homosexuality in the 19th and 20th century is anachronistic. While undoubtedly we know from his diaries that KR had homosexual experiences, people were not "gay" in the sense they are today and everyone was expected to marry a member of the opposite sex, regardless of personal preferences.
The truth is, it is next to impossible to neatly categorize these individuals as hetero, homo, or bisexual. They are all dead now, and we cannot possibily know where they stood on all of the above.
-
What you say is true Lisa, but like most of the discussions on this site...they deal with speculations. The Romanov's and other noble families' behaviors played a significant role in the political situations of the time. Their popularity ebbed and flowed with public opinions formed from what they did. Russia was a much different place than Victorian Englad..despite what the empress thought.
-
I agree with Reed.
Besides, this is a discussion site. For discussion. We are entitled to talk about whatever we want, regardless of "speculation".
-
Hello!,
So glad I found this site. I've always been intrigued about Nicholas and Alexandra...
I'm currently reading Lost Aplendor: The Amazing Memoirs of the Man Who Killed Rasputin - by Prince Felix Youssoupoff. He literally has me reading between the lines, regarding his sexuality...anyway...
I'm still trying to understand what relationship he was to the Csar. Can anyone give me a good breakdown. Also, any websites that offer a Russian Royal family tree. Yes, I already have the Queen Victoria lineage..
Thanks for you help!
GREAT SITE!
-
Felix was related to the Tsar only by marriage...Irina, Felix's wife, was the Tsar's niece. I believe that is correct.
-
Thanks Reed,
But I'm looking for more of a breakdown of names. I guess I should try re-wording the question.
Where can I find a Yussupov family tree...
Thanks
Carol
-
There are several experts who are on this site. Greg King may be the one to ask. Just finished his book..The Man Who Killed Rasputin. Excellent book, Greg!
-
For me, Greg King's book on Prince F. F. Yusupov, "The man who killed Rasputin", was highly informative, and wonderful to read as well. There is also a detailed book (in French) about the Yusupov family, "Les Youssoupov", written by Jacques Ferrand and including splendid. I got both books through http://www.eurohistory.com/bookstore.htm
-
For Calandon......Read Greg King's book The Man Who Killed Rasputin, it is simply wonderful, it says it all. ..Arleen
-
Thanks all..
I was fansinated reading "Lost Splendor".
Will plan on reading Greg King's book to learn more about Prince Felix.
-
A couple of things -
Jorge Saenz is far too modest! He's the author of A Poet Among the Romanovs, recently published by the European Royal History Journal. Good to see you post here!
I would also like to clarify that I was not in any way trying to limit discussion. I do think, however, that discussion should be responsible discussion. It was in that spirit that I pointed out that much of the discussion was very anachronistic, in that it did not reflect the situation of homosexuality in the time period. I was also pointing out that, unlike the situation with KR and his diaries, we have no clear information about the purported homosexuality of these people. They both have descendants. So, I think it behooves us to use some discretion in our discussions.
Just my opinions.
-
For Calandon......Read Greg King's book The Man Who Killed Rasputin, it is simply wonderful, it says it all. ..Arleen
Thanks for the recommendation! Though I should say my book on Felix certainly isn't the last word at all-in the ten years that have passed since I wrote it, I've learned far more about him than I ever suspected!
Greg King
-
Though I should say my book on Felix certainly isn't the last word at all-in the ten years that have passed since I wrote it, I've learned far more about him than I ever suspected!
Greg King
Well, it then should be great if you could publish an updated edition of your book, as it is a very good one !
-
Well, it then should be great if you could publish an updated edition of your book, as it is a very good one !
Unfortunately, authors rarely get a chance to do major updates on their work, especially something on someone like Felix (too expensive to change the typesetting). It really only becomes a financial possibility if you write a substantially new book, which can then be published on its own. I DO plan to re-write one of my books in the future and add in hundreds of pages of new material and unpublished letters, but that's on King Ludwig II of Bavaria, not the Romanovs.
Greg King
-
Greg, maybe you could fill US in with a few of the things you have learned about Felix. This is another reason why we'all love the Romanovs so much, the material is never ending. The mystery just keeps going on forever.
I read your book on King Ludwig of Bavaria, I got it at the library since I only buy Russian related books, but you made me interested in him, it was a good book! ..Arleen
-
Lisa I feel compelled to address your concern regarding any discussion regarding Felix's alleged sexual proclivities.
With all due respect, any information that has been gleened over the years by various authors is information which is in the public domain. Much of our opinions are developed or influenced by what we choose to read. If there are suggestions made about Felix's personal life, then we should as individuals be also free to express these matters here in a sensitive fashion.
While considering your point that there may be living descendants who might be reading these words, with respect this is not relevant. If we all decided to be selective about any of these issues then this presents us with a form of censoreship.
Who then becomes the arbiter as to what issues may be sensitive to any existing Noble family?
These issues are not new, no startling information has been divulged which would present any undue ramifications. In fact may I suggest that Felix's sexuality does go to the core of his personality. If we are to understand his mentality in any clear way, we must be presented with all the facts as they are revealed and not choose to be selective.
No matter what personal opinions we have regarding homosexuality or transvestisism etc ... the behaviour did exist then, no matter whose glasses we choose to see it through. It persisted all levels of society, and as we are fully aware not even the Romanovs were immune.
IMHO ;)
-
Wasn't F. F. himself who first wrote about his youth indiscretions? So, how could a relative complain about others repeating what he told?
-
As I remember Felix was quite open about his transvestism in his own book The Lost Splendour, however he was silent about his homosexual pursuits. When he became engaged to Irina he stated that this commitment caused problems, but without clarifying what the problem was. We now now that the problem was. Irina's parents were initially displeased with this union because he was known to be a homosexual.
It must be remembered that during that era when he wrote his book in 1953, homosexuality was deemed to be a criminal offence. Furthermore his wife Irina proof-read and apparently argued about the facts in his notes as he penned them (described in Dobson's book on Yussopov).
To openly admit such behaviour would have created a few more problems not only for him but his wife as well.
:)
-
(described in Dobson's book on Yussopov).
Dear Belochka,
Which is the exact title of this book ?
Thanks :)
-
Hi Thierry,
The book is:
Prince Felix Yusupov The Man Who Murdered Rasputin by Christopher Dobson, Harrap London 1989
The title is written using one "s" in the name.
-
Many thanks, Belochka !
I just ordered a copy of this book. Did you like it ? Was it interesting ?
-
Hi Thierry,
Yes I did enjoy the book. It presented an interesing perspective about Felix and of those who surrounded him. It is sympathetically writen, rather than being judgemental.
There is a second book which may interest you as well:
Rasputin in Hollywood by Sir David Napley, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London 1990.
This second book (written by a lawyer) deals with the legal case the Yussoupov's brought against MGM, concerning a film they produced called Rasputin the Mad Monk.
To me this book had more appeal because it presented actual court excerpts, which revealed considerable detail about how Youssupov reasoned.
I hope you enjoy your new acquisition!
;D
-
Hi Belochka,
Many thanks for your review ! I am tremendously waiting for it now :o
Thanks for telling about the other one, too. I have added it to my want-to-buy list : those Romanovs cost me a lot of money ;D
-
Your most welcome Thierry!
Its the bulging bookshelves which are more of a concern.
::)
-
Getting back to the question about how regular, everyday folk would have behaved back then, I would like to point out that we are talking about a culture that looked the other way only when it concerned the wealthy or aristocracry. For the common man, you were sure to hide any tendencies that were not deemed the norm - in other words, old Russia - especially in the out-back & villages was very traditional, & very ruthless in it's treatment toward's those who behaved differently. I think it is safe to say that not much has changed even today.
Masha
-
The reason they stopped speaking had nothing to do with Irina! They were very close in 1912-13, and the marriage did hurt Dmitri a little but they were good friends again, they were very close when they invited Rasputin over that night in 1916, remember?
They were also close in exile for awhile. Felix and Irina attended Dmitri's 1926 wedding. They did not stop speaking until after Felix's 1927 Rasputin book came out. It was the code of silence thing.
While on this subject, does anyone know any details about the theory that Dmitri had a much bigger role in the murder than was reported by Felix or Purishkevich?
-
Since this thread mostly concerns Felix's sexuality I thought I'd share this interesting and possibly disturbing vignette from Lost Splendor here. What do you all make of it?
As for the enigma of procreation, I solved it in the same simple manner. Being sure, for instance, that an egg laid by a hen was nothing but a fragment detached from the rooster's body, and that this fragment was instantly replaced, I deduced that the same phenomenon occurred with human beings. The difference between the sexes, which I had noticed on statues and by a study udy of my own anatomy, had led me to this strange conclusion, with which I was quite satisfied. Then, one day, the truth was brutally revealed to me by a chance encounter at Contrexeville, where my mother was taking the waters. I was then about twelve. I had gone out alone one evening after dinner, for a walk in the park. I happened to pass a summer house, and glancing through the window I saw a very pretty young woman in the arms of a stalwart youth. A strange emotion swept over me as I watched them embracing with such obvious pleasure. I tiptoed closer to gaze at the handsome couple, who were of course unaware of my presence.
On returning to the hotel, I told my mother of my experience; she seemed upset and quickly changed the subject.
Troubled and fascinated by what I had seen, I spent a sleepless night. The next day, at the same hour, I went back to the summer house only to find it empty. I was just going home when I met the young man coming up the path. I went up to him and asked him point-blank whether he had an appointment with the girl that evening. He stared at me in astonishment, then began to laugh and asked why I wished to know. When I confessed that I had watched them in the summer house, be told me he was expecting the girl at his hotel that same evening, and asked me to join them there. Imagine my feelings on receiving this invitation.
Everything conspired to make things easy for me. My mother was tired and went to bed early, and my father had an engagement to play cards with some friends; furthermore, the young man's hotel was near ours. He was sitting on the veranda waiting for me. He congratulated me on my punctuality and took me to his room, and had just begun to tell me that he was from the Argentine when his girl friend appeared.
I don't know how long I was with them. When I got home, I threw myself fully dressed onto my bed and fell into a deep sleep. That fateful evening, I had received an answer to the question that had mystified me. As for the Argentinean to whom I owed my initiation, he had disappeared the next day and I never saw him again.
My first impulse was to go to my mother and tell her everything, but a feeling of modesty and apprehension held me back. I was so amazed by what I had learned that, in my youthful ignorance, I failed to discriminate between the sexes. In my imagination, I began to picture men and women I knew in the most ridiculous postures. Did they really all behave in such a strange fashion? I was seized with giddiness, as fantastic pictures floated through my mind. A little later, when I told all this to my brother, I was surprised to find him completely uninterested in the questions that so engrossed me. So I retired within myself and never again touched on this matter to anyone.
-
Hmmm.
This passage sounds like somthing out of "The Autobiography of a Flea" by Anonymous ... famous late victorian porno...
I wonder if it's real, or just something that Felix made up to make his life more glamourous.
R.
-
If this really did happen to him, poor kid. It sounds like a '3 way', so if that's what it was, and it happened, he was molested. :(
-
Well, he didn't seem to mind actually. I think it's creepy though on the part of the Argentine.
I agree with rskkiya, it does sound unlikely though.
-
The first time I read it, I wondered about the factuality of the parts where he is a 'girl' singer, the teenage transvestite who wowed the crowd! It sounds as if it were an elaborate fantasy he had, as we all have fantasies about being stars. Seems he fancied himself a turn of the century "Boy George" character? Anyway, it was an interesting story, and I hope it is true, though we will never know because no one is alive to tell. As for the 3 way, I hope that wasn't true, but if it were, it explains why he was so confused about sex. Poor kid. Yes the Argentine does sound creepy. These days he'd be hauled away, I guess.
-
Actually, the Argentine sort of ended the confusion. It did open up a "whole new world" for Felix however.
-
I mean how since it was a 3 way, and he got all those images in his head of people in all different positions, I think he was kind of confused and had nobody to talk to about it.
-
Meh, I'm sure he figured it out.
-
Since he had trouble 'distiguishing between the sexes' maybe he just decided he was a bit of both, and he would have a bit of both and be bi ;)
-
Interesting theory. I've definitely heard worse. :-/
-
Are there any pictures of Dimitri and Felix? any one know of a website or have pictures?
-
Are there any pictures of Dimitri and Felix? any one know of a website or have pictures?
I would love to have a picture of them together too! I've looked but have never found one. If any exist I hope someone will link us up!
I have also read there are wax figures of Felix and Dmitri (not the Moika ones!) in their old private rooms at a club on the Nevsky Prospect in St. Petersburg where they played their guitars and entertained their interesting guests. It sounds like they had a wonderful tiime! From Lost Splendor:
During 1912 and 1913 I saw a great deal of the Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovich... He spent all his free time with me; I saw him almost every day and we took long walks and rides together.
Dmitri was extremely attractive: tall, elegant, well-bred, with deep thoughtful eyes, he recalled the portraits of his ancestors. He was all impulses and contradictions; he was both romantic and mystical, and his mind was far from shallow. At the same time, he was very gay and always ready for the wildest escapades. His charm won the hearts of all, but the weakness of his character made him dangerously easy to influence. As I was a few years his senior, I had a certain prestige in his eyes. He was to a certain extent familiar with my "scandalous" life and considered me interesting and a trifle mysterious. He trusted me and valued my opinion, and be not only confided his inner-most thoughts to me but used to tell me about everything that was happening around him. I thus beard about many grave and even sad events that too place in the Alexander Palace....
Almost every night we took a car and drove to St. Petersburg to have a gay time at restaurants and night clubs and with the gypsies. We would invite artists and musicians to supper with us in a private room; the well-known ballerina Anna Pavlova was often our guest. These wonderful evenings slipped by like dreams and we never went home until dawn.
-
Does anyone have pictures of Felix and Dimitri? or does anyone know of a site with them? does anyone ahve pictures of the Yussupov with any Dimitri?
Thanks
-
There were a few earlier posts about the attitudes to homosexuality & categorization etc in Imperial Russia, and this seems to be a relevant link:
http://community.middlebury.edu/~moss/RGC2.html
-
Is it true that Ella "appoved" Felix and Dmitri's plan of murdering Rasputin?
-
I've read of at least one letter from Grand Duke Dmitri to Felix in exile on this board, and I feel like I've read of some other letters that passed between the two at various times, I cannot, however, seem to find them. :( I think people have said they're on the Alexander Palace site, but I think I'm just not looking in the right places. If someone could please point me in the right direction, I'd really appreciate it.
Thanks,
Amanda
-
I thought they did not keep contact.. although I am sure they must have been in the same room in more than one family reunions...
-
I've also heard that they did not keep in contact, but I've seen in other threads that there was at least one letter between the two, post-exile. Perhaps that information is incorrect, I'm not sure.
-
Felix and Dimitri certainly did have some contact in exile.Marie Pavlovna writes often of Felix and Irina in both books of her memoirs and even went on holiday with them to Corsica ..so there was a link there....
-
I think Felix was at Dmitri's 1926 wedding. I don't think they broke off for good until Felix's 1927 book on the murder of Rasputin was published and Dmitri felt he had been publically betrayed by Felix telling of his part in it (they had supposedly promised never to speak of that night in public, and Felix's endless bragging and broken promise of silence angered Dmitri.)
There was one very friendly letter written soon after the murder in the AP time machine under "letters of Felix and Zenaida Yussoupov". Keep scrolling, I think it's the very last one on the list.
-
Is there any documentary evidence that Felix and Dmitri were in a homosexual relationship together?
-
Is there any documentary evidence that Felix and Dmitri were in a homosexual relationship together?
No, this was just gossip which unfortunately continues over a century later.
-
One idea about the two is that unlike Dmitri, Felix was not a blood relation to the Romanovs he only married into them. Therefore, he could afford to be open about his sexuality unlike Dmitri who was a Russian grand duke.
-
Rather than gossip, Lisa, I think it was more innuendo. It was no secret that Felix is what we would call "Gay" now. By association, Dimitri became part of the sexual scenario. What difference does it make? Both married, went on their respective ways in the turmoil.
And, I doubt rank or family had anything to bear on it. They would not be the first in their families to be homosexual. Both families were immensely rich and powerful,. that overrides any moral qualms.
-
Your comment that money overides moral crimes is a bit of a ridiculous attitude to have. At the time the Tsar incumbent was Nicholas II. Argued to be the most pious of the Tsars. One reason why he did not take up a mistress when he was married to Alexandra. Moreover, it is argued that Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovitch's relationship wherever it be platonic or not was a factor why he never became engaged to Grand Duchess Olga!
-
We are not discussing NII here, the topi is Felox and Dimitri.
-
Your comment that money overides moral crimes is a bit of a ridiculous attitude to have. At the time the Tsar incumbent was Nicholas II. Argued to be the most pious of the Tsars. One reason why he did not take up a mistress when he was married to Alexandra. Moreover, it is argued that Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovitch's relationship wherever it be platonic or not was a factor why he never became engaged to Grand Duchess Olga!
Where did you read about Dmitri's alleged relationship with Felix being a factor with regards to why he never got engaged to GD Olga? I think the main reason Dmitri never wed Olga was his participation in the murder of Rasputin.
-
Your comment that money overides moral crimes is a bit of a ridiculous attitude to have. At the time the Tsar incumbent was Nicholas II. Argued to be the most pious of the Tsars. One reason why he did not take up a mistress when he was married to Alexandra. Moreover, it is argued that Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovitch's relationship wherever it be platonic or not was a factor why he never became engaged to Grand Duchess Olga!
Where did you read about Dmitri's alleged relationship with Felix being a factor with regards to why he never got engaged to GD Olga? I think the main reason Dmitri never wed Olga was his participation in the murder of Rasputin.
That really doesn't work. Rasputin's murder was scant weeks before the Revolution - it would have to have happened earlier to be the reason they didn't marry. That reason has been extensively discussed on this Forum. Olga was very intellectual and very Christian. Dmitri was a bon vivant. While age wise a marriage between them would have made sense (at least on paper) they were completely unsuited for friendship or marriage with each other.
If Alexandra thought that Dmitri was involved in anything unsavory, she would never have allowed him around her children - and surely she did.
-
I agree with you. I was just pointing out that to say that Felix and Dmitri's alleged relationship had anything to do with why he didn't marry GD Olga is inaccurate.
-
I agree with you. I was just pointing out that to say that Felix and Dmitri's alleged relationship had anything to do with why he didn't marry GD Olga is inaccurate.
And I agree with you on that point too.
Since the Emperor had to approve all marriages in the Imperial Family, it can be surmised that Felix was not objectionable to Nicholas, because he gave her away at her wedding!
-
I was under the impression both he & Dmitri were quite objectionable, to the extent that they were followed/harrassed by the secret service. I guess that comes from Lost Splendor though, plus it was probably fairly typical of anyone at court, so it might have been one of FY's embellishments.
-
Much of what FY wrote was embellishment!
-
I was under the impression both he & Dmitri were quite objectionable, to the extent that they were followed/harrassed by the secret service. I guess that comes from Lost Splendor though, plus it was probably fairly typical of anyone at court, so it might have been one of FY's embellishments.
Felix was married to the Emperor's only niece and Dmitri was a grand duke who was raised as part of the Emperor's family. Without doubt there would have been Okhrana surveillance based on who they were, not necessarily what they were up to.
-
the rumors about felix and dmitri in a sexual or romantic relationship, where did these rumors come from? who started them? were people saying this at the time, like 1913 or so I think is when most people think they were together, or was it only much later that people started wondering?
-
the rumors about felix and dmitri in a sexual or romantic relationship, where did these rumors come from? who started them? were people saying this at the time, like 1913 or so I think is when most people think they were together, or was it only much later that people started wondering?
Male homosexuality seems to upset people and cause comments in general much more than females who prefer their own gender. So straight men who are friends with gay men are often (even today) the subject of gossip about whether or not they are in a gay relationship if they have such friendships. And, it happens in reverse.
This happened to me with my friend Susie who I've known since we were in diapers. When Suze moved to San Jose, we started hanging out and spending time together with her partner. Soon people were asking if I was gay, too. I said, no, Suze and I are friends. (and we still are!)
Dmitri and Felix were friends, they knew one another from childhood when DP was at Ilyinskoe and FY was at the big estate his family had nearby. When Felix returned from university, he was quite dashing and Dmitri was an officer and getting the Russian Olympics started. For a time, Felix moved in with Dimitri and Felix decorated his house.
Were they lovers? Well, there was certainly gossip to that effect and they were beautiful young men. They could also have been friends and not lovers because of their long association. Since they chose not to enlighten us on the topic, I'll go with, it's none of my business and I would of course think nothing different of either man either way.
-
You're right, Lisa, and we will never know whether the rumors are true. I agree that they aren't our business, but i was simply curious as to who specifically was saying this, whether within the Romanov family itself these rumors were being paid attention to. i never feel as if I can come to a conclusion about precisely why Dmitri was forbidden by Nicholas to see Felix, because I have heard so many different angles. If these rumors were being said in earshot of the Imperial Family, history would be influenced by their decision not to marry Olga and Dmitri, not to consider Dmitri next in line, etc. I'm just wondering who was saying these rumors, and who heard them.
-
If these rumors were being said in earshot of the Imperial Family, history would be influenced by their decision not to marry Olga and Dmitri, not to consider Dmitri next in line, etc. I'm just wondering who was saying these rumors, and who heard them.
Sasha_18, as an author of Felix's documental biography, who spent 4 years in Russian archives with original documents, I can only tell you, that many of the rumors on Felix-DP relationship probably appeared already after the revolution. Not to mention that nothing like that was ever mentioned in the correspondence of Russian courtisans between themselves.
Funny, but I would say that prince Yussupoff had invented a lot in his memoirs.
For example, his famous story of dressing as a woman and singing in the cabaret. I had checked not only the letters of his close friends and brother to each other but also all central newspapers of the period and ...to my surprise had not seen any mention of the his outrageous behavior. More than that at that time, he appeared to be a rather banal young men with mustache, whose identity was outshined by his brother's. In fact, Nikolai WAS a real RULES BREAKER!
So I tend to think, that Felix appropriated to himself in his book a lot from the extravagant behavior of his brother....But this is already another story!
-
i always get upset whenever it seems someone has fabricated their life in their biography, especially someone with access to so much history. i feel there is quite a bit of ambiguity about the revolution and how it truly played out, because there was so much propaganda afterwards. i wish people felt more of a responsibilty to the truth when writing about themselves, rather than wishing their lives were more exciting. If Felix pretended to have a larger role than he did or even simple exaggerations about his behavior, he is changing how people think of the revolution, the imperial family, russians at the time. when one had such a hand in history, one has absolutely no place fabricating or stretching the truth in any manner: leaving the rest of us to say: we'll never know how it really happened, because the ones who would have told the truth weren't writing anything. :'(
-
You're right, Lisa, and we will never know whether the rumors are true. I agree that they aren't our business, but i was simply curious as to who specifically was saying this, whether within the Romanov family itself these rumors were being paid attention to. i never feel as if I can come to a conclusion about precisely why Dmitri was forbidden by Nicholas to see Felix, because I have heard so many different angles. If these rumors were being said in earshot of the Imperial Family, history would be influenced by their decision not to marry Olga and Dmitri, not to consider Dmitri next in line, etc. I'm just wondering who was saying these rumors, and who heard them.
About that not my business stuff - does not mean that any of us cannot make inquiries.
To my knowledge, Nicholas and Alexandra were not intending to marry Olga to anyone. Dmitri was never next in line - there was always one of the Alexandrovichi (Michael, Alexei, George) ahead of the Vladimirovichi (Vladimir, Kiril, Boris, Andrei) before Dmitri in the succession.
So while various influential people may have speculated about DP marrying one of Nicholas' girls - it was never a reality. Nicholas may have worried about Dmitri, but he could have prevented him seeing Felix but did not - the two men remained friends.
In summary, the rumors which reached the Imperial couple involved Dmitri clubbing and drinking, and all they did about it was to worry about him - as would parents today. No more consequences than that.
-
I would have said pretty much the same thing, Lisa. Adding that the banishments came about because of the Rasputin murder, not their personal relationship. And, as for gay men have straight male friends, it is fairly common. Not at all unusual. I am an openly gay man and have had and still do straight male friends. I imagine it is pretty much the same with gay and straight women.
Felix was pretty much "out" for his times and considering their rarefied world, he would of course had close male friends who were straight. If you like someone, you simply them him, does not mean you are going to bed with him/her.
-
Well i wasn't making inquiries about whether or not they had a relationship, but certainly we are free to discuss whatever we like here, provided we are respectful. :)
I find it interesting that perhaps no one at the time was saying these things, and that the rumors developed over the years.
I thought it was well known that olga and dmitri were being considered for marriage, there was a french press cliping about it but i suppose that doesn't mean anthing. It's news to me that there is no evidence of this as I remember reading letters from Nicky to Alix stating that Dmitri was not behaving well for marriage with Olga.
-
Well i wasn't making inquiries about whether or not they had a relationship, but certainly we are free to discuss whatever we like here, provided we are respectful. :)
I find it interesting that perhaps no one at the time was saying these things, and that the rumors developed over the years.
I thought it was well known that olga and dmitri were being considered for marriage, there was a french press cliping about it but i suppose that doesn't mean anthing. It's news to me that there is no evidence of this as I remember reading letters from Nicky to Alix stating that Dmitri was not behaving well for marriage with Olga.
It would be great if you could find reference to this in their correspondence.
In contrast, everything I've ever read about Nicholas and Alexandra's attitudes about their children's' marriages indicates they did not try to do any arranging or coercing. The only possible fix up was with Carol of Romania, and as soon as Olga proclaimed her disinterest in him, there was no more discussion.
As stated numerous times, Dmitri remained a favorite of the couple, especially Nicholas, until his participation in Rasputin's murder became known to them. I would imagine their sense of betrayal was enormous.
-
Lisa, i'll do my best to track down the source. I think I remember it being in A Lifelong Passion, so I will have to go find it and double check. if it's not there, i apologize for suggesting incorrect information and obviously none of you will believe it anyway unless there is a source.
I have read this about Dmitri and Olga in so many books, without a source listed, and I think it's ridiculous that I've thought it was common knowledge because I read ill-informed and poorly researched books. Sad
-
Lisa, i'll do my best to track down the source. I think I remember it being in A Lifelong Passion, so I will have to go find it and double check. if it's not there, i apologize for suggesting incorrect information and obviously none of you will believe it anyway unless there is a source.
I have read this about Dmitri and Olga in so many books, without a source listed, and I think it's ridiculous that I've thought it was common knowledge because I read ill-informed and poorly researched books. Sad
Dear Sasha 18: Please don't be upset about bad source information. There's a great deal of it about the latter Romanovs, and royals in general, as I have discovered much to my chagrin. When it comes to 19th century/early 20th century royals, I try to remember they were the "celebrities" of their day. Doubtless you know that much of what is written about celebs today is also untrue, but it gets printed anyway.
The thing about Dmitri and Olga was the whole thing looked so good on paper. Both were intelligent, attractive, and sensitive - and born within 5 years of one another. But the reality was much different than those surface similarities. Olga was very serious, religious, and purposeful. Dmitri, on the other had, was interested in other religions (so was Orthodox because he was born that way), loved clubbing and drinking, and was at times the idle royal people thought he was. So, they would not have made a match.
But, the people who wrote about them (and even those who write about them today) completely disregard the reality - just as many disregarded the factors that made Charles and Diana so very incompatible.
It's not a matter of not believing you, Sasha 18, it's just many of us have studied these people for decades, often to the point that we think we know them. And, of course we don't really know them. That's why I said, it would have been inconsistent with what I know of the Emperor and Empress for them to have behaved that way. Doesn't mean they didn't!
-
you are very kind Lisa. I have to admit i was rather intimidated by the number of professional historians on this site and didn't start posting for 2 years after i found this site, and was just following threads. I'm sure we have all read a lot of books, but not having done any primary research I feel very much like no one wants to hear my conjectures !!
anyway, i moved this summer and it turns out they don't have A Lifelong Passion at the library in my new city :-[ if anyone has access to this book, you can go to the index and look through when Dmitri is mentioned, I think it is there. I want to get to the bottom of this Olga marriage business, and I am surprised to hear he was not being considered to be next in line. I remember it being in a letter Alix wrote to Nicky, that Dmitri was drinking too much or not behaving well and he needs to be groomed for the throne ??
there certainly are a lot of nonsense books about modern royals, I can easily picture the same gossip snowballing over the decades until it was considered common knowledge.
why, then, was dmitri forbidden to see felix by his uncle nicholas? or is this rumor too?
-
I do have this book and looked through it briefly. In the index it mentions Dmitri visiting/ possibly visiting Alexandra twice before he murder of Rasputin- no other references to Alexandra and Dmitri until after the murder of Rasputin. On p. 463 she writes to Nicholas in April 1916 that Dmitri may show up to visit her, if it doesn't bore him. She says nothing else with regards to Dmitri. Then on p. 471, in August 1916, she writes to Nicholas that Dmitri has visited her, and that his heart is not good like hers, but that it is just the begining of his having this problem, and that it can be cured, if he takes a cure. I couldn't find any other references, although I can look more thoroughly- I checked under Dmitri's entry in the index, and Alexandra's, and Olga's. Felix Yusupov also is quoted from his memoirs on p.471 about the relations between Nicholas and Alexandra and Dmitri prior to the murder of Rasputin. He says that they looked on Dmitri as son, but says nothing about a possible marriage between Olga and Dmitri. What's interesting is page 381, where it quotes from Yusupov's memoirs, saying that both he and Dmitri wanted to marry Irina, but that Irina only wanted to marry Felix, at least that's what Felix says she said after he ( Felix) told Irina that Dmitri had wanted to marry her too. To quote Felix, " Dmitri bowed before a desicion which he realised was final, but our friendship was to suffer and our relations were never the same afterwards." One has to take Felix with a grain of salt though.
Alexandra does mention in this book, p. 453 that she doesn't want Olga marrying Boris, GD Vladimir A and Miechen's son, who was a well known playboy type. She writes to Nicholas that although the ever ambitious Miechen pushed this marriage, she, Alexandra did not think that Olga would ever agree to this marriage, and that she, Alexandra agreed with Olga's inclinations there. Maybe you were thinking of that, but she was writing of Boris, not Dmitri. I do recall a quote/ or something like you remember Sasha18, but it might not come from this book. Maybe the Complete Wartime Correspondence mentions this- I will check it.
-
i always get upset whenever it seems someone has fabricated their life in their biography, especially someone with access to so much history. i feel there is quite a bit of ambiguity about the revolution and how it truly played out, because there was so much propaganda afterwards. i wish people felt more of a responsibilty to the truth when writing about themselves, rather than wishing their lives were more exciting. If Felix pretended to have a larger role than he did or even simple exaggerations about his behavior, he is changing how people think of the revolution, the imperial family, russians at the time. when one had such a hand in history, one has absolutely no place fabricating or stretching the truth in any manner: leaving the rest of us to say: we'll never know how it really happened, because the ones who would have told the truth weren't writing anything. :'(
Sasha_18
You are right that we will never know the truth of what actually did happen.
However, before getting too upset about the truth in Felix's memoirs we shall take into consideration the reason why he wrote it in the first place. Vain as he was, Felix still was less concerned about his own role in the history than by the financial problems of his family after the war. The people of his circle were "not made to work on the factories" (and still many of them in exile did have to learn to do it), so they used any possible way to earn money by the means known to them. By writing memoirs, for example.
In our times it seems strange that someone close to the country TOP decision maker will mot want to say something about his own influence on the politics, but for the court members like Yussoupoffs it was rather normal to stay away from revealing the truth breaking the word of honor. It is also important to mention that he was not representing just any nobility but those who were related to the Royal family MEMBERS. We don’t have equivalent of this social institutions in our days. Life shuffles present favourites every 5-10 years, so there is no attachment to the image of the beloved "country-ruler".
Having said that, I just want to reassure you, that during his life Felix Yussupoff has already heard everything we have to say to him today ))))
-
You know what, I think you are very right. I am thinking about this and it seems like Felix has his own personal reasons for writing memoir which have nothing to do with presenting the world with historical clarification. Because really he could not talk frankly about the assassination, he and his co conspirators had made a pact to only talk about it in a certain light to save reputations and legal matters etc. I have read Lost Splendour about twenty times trying to glean new meanings from his generic and at first glance somewhat self-promoting phrases, and I have decided that Felix Yusupov wrote his memoirs for someone who knew all the details of his life and could understand references that most people would overlook. Maybe he was only writing it to get more money (he and Irina were actually quite poor for a very long time), and had no concern about whether or not any historian would find illuminating facts from reading it. I just don't think it can be considered a historical document, I dont know if that is bad ?
-
You know what, I think you are very right. I am thinking about this and it seems like Felix has his own personal reasons for writing memoir which have nothing to do with presenting the world with historical clarification. Because really he could not talk frankly about the assassination, he and his co conspirators had made a pact to only talk about it in a certain light to save reputations and legal matters etc. I have read Lost Splendour about twenty times trying to glean new meanings from his generic and at first glance somewhat self-promoting phrases, and I have decided that Felix Yusupov wrote his memoirs for someone who knew all the details of his life and could understand references that most people would overlook. Maybe he was only writing it to get more money (he and Irina were actually quite poor for a very long time), and had no concern about whether or not any historian would find illuminating facts from reading it. I just don't think it can be considered a historical document, I dont know if that is bad ?
Many sources need to be taken with a grain of salt, which is one of the challenges for all historians. Yusupov can be untruthful and self serving, true. But, so are many other people who write memoirs. That's why corroboration is so important - as is looking at events as a big puzzle - we look for inconsistencies as well as consistencies. That does not mean his memoirs have no value - it's just we can't take what he says as "gospel truth".
-
This is true, like as general picture of the time one would benefit very much from reading it, and learn more of Felix's character than perhaps he intended ! If one were to ask, like some people in this thread have wondered, what is nature of his relationship with his best friend Dmitrii Pavlovich, I think yes, then you would take it with a grain of salt as he would have many reasons not to tell the absolute truth. I just find it slightly annoying that in his memoirs he says he holds nothing back and tells absolute truth, when it is very easy to see where his story contradicts other historical documents. But we have to take perspective into account, of course, and really he did not know everything of the time just like we do not know every political and governmental thing going on in our countries and why they are doing what they do.
Of course all of you know this, being historians :) People like me, who have undirected research, often get very confused about which way to go! Haha :D
I would also like to add that maybe he was protecting Dmitrii by taking all the credit, as I have read this lots of places, and that Purishkevich did not even have the courage to lace the cakes, but Felix tells it like it happened to make more dramatic story, clouding the truth because it was a very controversial move, and remains so even today.
I in no way am dismissing Felix, he is one of my favorite characters of this time, but sometimes his ego is a little bit much and gets in the way of decent research.
-
Why are there never any pictures of Felix and Dmitri together? They were best friends, and Felix says they spent every day together, you would think there would be some photographic records of this !
-
I don't know if anyone else has notice that G.D Dmitri addressed Natasha as "dearest Friend" in his letters to her, which he keeps stressing those words and of course we know of his romantic affections for her. but what I notice is that he does the same with "dearest friend" in his letters to Felix yusupov. It just gives a thought....
-
It was not terribly unusual then for men to write to one another in terms which seem thoroughly over the top today. Admiral of the Fleet Sir John Fisher, who definitely had an eye for the girls (if not a girl in every port) wrote to one newspaper editor as 'my beloved Fiennes', and the soldier and diplomat Sir Mark Sykes addressed his lifelong friend Aubrey Herbert as 'my sweet Aubrey'. Both were married with several children - Sykes had six, despite dying from Spanish 'flu at 39, and Herbert four.
Dimitri as a young man seems to have had a tendency to melodrama, so calling both Yussoupov and Natasha 'dearest friend' may just be that, especially if he were not calling both 'dearest friend' at the same time.
Ann
-
Ann is correct...and if you think Dmitri and Felix sound rather affectionate towards one another you should check out Nicholas's exchanges with the Kaiser (Pre-WWI) and with brother-in-law Ernie. Few men, even as relatives, would speak to each other in such a way in this day and age but things were different 100-plus years ago
-
I do not know, but I still call my closest male friends "dear, dearest, loving, etc. It may be old fashioned but it makes them happy. It shows true affection and such. They return in kind. Which makes me happy. In my case, it is a term of sincere affection, not politie 19 cenrury etttitique.
I reecntyly wrote an obit about a friend and used all the flowering words I could think , a lot of which were not quiet really true, but, I do not spael ill of the dead, with few exceptions So, the old tradiition has not gone. Especially in Asia.
-
It is not how they address each other but the how they express themselves to each other. Homosexual acts (I use the term that applied at the time in Russia) rather than gay were not uncommon particularly in the nobility. Dimitri's step father (best term i can think of given the mess his early years were) was Gay. Felix was gay. Many put on an act the evidence I believe is overwhelming
-
'Dimitri's step father (best term i can think of given the mess his early years were) was Gay.'
Are you thinking of Grand Duke Sergei? Not a stepfather in the legal sense (married to Dimitri's mother). Foster father would be more accurate.
Ann (pedantic as ever).
-
I do not know, but I still call my closest male friends "dear, dearest, loving, etc. It may be old fashioned but it makes them happy. It shows true affection and such. They return in kind. Which makes me happy. In my case, it is a term of sincere affection, not politie 19 cenrury etttitique.
I reecntyly wrote an obit about a friend and used all the flowering words I could think , a lot of which were not quiet really true, but, I do not spael ill of the dead, with few exceptions So, the old tradiition has not gone. Especially in Asia.
I have to agree with this and especially in a letter. "Intimate Friend" is also another term I've heard used. I can't speak for Felix and Dmitri but I always think of Jonathan and David in the Bible. David said something along the lines that Jonathan's companionship was dearer to him than that of any woman's.
-
I do not know, but I still call my closest male friends "dear, dearest, loving, etc. It may be old fashioned but it makes them happy. It shows true affection and such. They return in kind. Which makes me happy. In my case, it is a term of sincere affection, not politie 19 cenrury etttitique.
I reecntyly wrote an obit about a friend and used all the flowering words I could think , a lot of which were not quiet really true, but, I do not spael ill of the dead, with few exceptions So, the old tradiition has not gone. Especially in Asia.
I have to agree with this and especially in a letter. "Intimate Friend" is also another term I've heard used. I can't speak for Felix and Dmitri but I always think of Jonathan and David in the Bible. David said something along the lines that Jonathan's companionship was dearer to him than that of any woman's.
In those times, I imagine that most women were still regarded as appendages to men. They were on show when occasion demanded it, displaying evidence of their husbands wealth. They were readily available, whenever the need arose, to sate certain appetites and most importantly, provided children...........but they weren't their husbands' best friends, possibly had no desire to be, but weren't given the opportunity. It was to another man that husbands were likely to turn to discuss those things that only men can talk about. I have my doubts about how much of their converserations involved "deep and meaningful", but certainly I think the men believed then necessary.
-
Interesting point. At risk of going slightly off the subject, I was talking to my father (aged 84 and an old-fashioned military man) last week about Prince Harry. He made the point that Prince Harry seems to have no close male friend - lots of rich pals to go to Las Vegas with, but no one to give him sound advice and rein him in where necessary. I think it's only recently that a man's wife has been expected to be his best friend (and vice versa) and it is assumed that they must 'do everything together'. A hundred years ago it was perfectly normal for a man to go off shooting or similar with his male friends for a couple of weeks, but he would no be thought to be neglecting his wife and children.
I think it's possible (but would put it no more strongly) that Dimitri was 'a bit bi', but apart from his affection for Yussupov (again, to put it no more strongly), all his known relationships were with women.
Ann
-
Didn't Alexandra say that he (Dmitri) behaved like who ever he was with for the moment? That might be something to consider too. I wish I could remember where I read this. I know Felix admitted that he charmed people often. He writes afterward in "Lost Splendor" that he knows saying so sounds vain.
-
Interesting point. At risk of going slightly off the subject, I was talking to my father (aged 84 and an old-fashioned military man) last week about Prince Harry. He made the point that Prince Harry seems to have no close male friend - lots of rich pals to go to Las Vegas with, but no one to give him sound advice and rein him in where necessary. I think it's only recently that a man's wife has been expected to be his best friend (and vice versa) and it is assumed that they must 'do everything together'. A hundred years ago it was perfectly normal for a man to go off shooting or similar with his male friends for a couple of weeks, but he would no be thought to be neglecting his wife and children.
Good point there Ann. I've even had guy friends telling me in the past, in confidence and prior to my own current relationship and marriage, that the key to success and happiness is that your girlfriend has to become your best friend. I don't necessarily disagree with this. Not only is Jen the person I am closest to spiritually and emotionally, but she's also the person I prefer to hang out with almost all of the time over others.
That's interesting what you and feodorovna had to say about how this idea of your spouse also being your best friend is probably a most recent phenomenon. Makes sense though as well since gender roles have been broken down a bit over time. Just yesterday I sat around watching and discussing football all day with Jen. Can't see too many husband and wife combos doing the equivalent of that back in the Victorian era...
I think it's possible (but would put it no more strongly) that Dimitri was 'a bit bi', but apart from his affection for Yussupov (again, to put it no more strongly), all his known relationships were with women.
How much should the following be taken into account though...
While homosexuality within the royal family might have been the worst kept secret in the court during this time there was still an obligation for men to marry women and raise families. Certainly views on homosexuality back then were not as liberalized as they've become in most western societies (although oddly enough Russia was possibly more accepting a hundred years ago than now)...the pressure to appear "straight" was greater then than it would be in most western societies today.
Also I think it important to separate sexual attraction with love and companionship. Obviously we can love family members and friends who we are not physically attracted to. It's not unimaginable that a Felix or Dmitri type could have had a sexual preference for other men while preferring a woman to be in an actual relationship with. Obviously essential for child bearing but also that they offered the kind of support, affection and tenderness a male spouse was not believed to be able to offer.
In many ways Felix really had the best of everything by marrying his charming and supportive wife Irina who also seemed open to his sexual dalliances with more sexually desirable young gentleman. That said, if we are to say that a Yusupov was probably bisexual with a preference for men (a '4' or '5' on the six-point "Kinsey Scale"), then in a more opened minded 2012 society it's probably just as likely that he would have been unmarried and in gay relationships. A bit harder to say with Pavlovich (who I think would score a point or two lower on the aforementioned scale) but this certainly would not have been out of the question as well.
-
I think it will always be harder to say with Dmitri until their is proof out of his own words. I say so because who would have ever guessed KR's struggle? I wouldn't have even been inclined to think.
-
I think it will always be harder to say with Dmitri until their is proof out of his own words. I say so because who would have ever guessed KR's struggle? I wouldn't have even been inclined to think.
I would never think of that Kr struggled since he was happily married and had 9 children. Also the same can be be said about other Romanov men such as Nicholas Michailovich and Kyril who were rumored to had affairs with men, even though both seemed that they were strongly linked to women.
-
My view on KR is that he was predominantly heterosexual - 9 children indicates a fairly active sex life with Elizabeth Mavrikievna! - but had homosexual tendencies with which he struggled and at times could not resist.
I don't know a great deal about Nikolai Mikhailovich. He never married, and nowadays if a prominent man does not marry there are all kinds of rumours - maybe the rumours about him are no more than that. This was an age when plenty of men either did not marry or married quite late in life.
Ann
-
My view on KR is that he was predominantly heterosexual - 9 children indicates a fairly active sex life with Elizabeth Mavrikievna! - but had homosexual tendencies with which he struggled and at times could not resist.
I don't know a great deal about Nikolai Mikhailovich. He never married, and nowadays if a prominent man does not marry there are all kinds of rumours - maybe the rumours about him are no more than that. This was an age when plenty of men either did not marry or married quite late in life.
Ann
I believe KR was known to be a frequent visitor of male brothels. He struggled with his inner demons regarding homosexuality (or perhaps just those "tendencies") because he felt that he was acting sinful...both in the sense of engaging in homosexual activities and since doing so was basically cheating on his wife. Yet he kept going back. It sounds to me like he either had an incredible sexual appetite that constantly needed to be fulfilled, or he was probably something less than "predominantly" heterosexual.
-
It rather depends on how frequent his visits to male brothels were, in comparison with his sex life with his wife.
I do remember reading in Greg King's book on the Russian court and extract from KR's diary in which he sums up his history up to that point. It includes the line 'and did not sin for seven years'. That is quite a long time. I will need to check the book before I can say any more on this point.
Back to Dimitri and Yussupov.
Ann
-
Didn't Alexandra say that he (Dmitri) behaved like who ever he was with for the moment? That might be something to consider too. I wish I could remember where I read this. I know Felix admitted that he charmed people often. He writes afterward in "Lost Splendor" that he knows saying so sounds vain.
I think that was from the book 'A lifelong passion" Felix did mention have a strong influence on his (dmirti)character. I also find it a little strange how he describes Dimitri, as almost like how he would describe himself.
-
Reading about Felix nearly 100 years later, I don't like him (far too melodramatic for my tastes!), but clearly he was a very charismatic person, and people fell under his spell.
Ann
-
Reading about Felix nearly 100 years later, I don't like him (far too melodramatic for my tastes!), but clearly he was a very charismatic person, and people fell under his spell.
Ann
Same here. I know/knew people with traits like Felix and they were impossible. If I had to be stuck in a cardboard box in the middle of the Atlantic in the dead of winter with either Felix or Dmitri, I'd choose Dmitri.
-
As to the way men addressed each other and behaved towards each other then, someone has just posted a link to the Kaiser's letters to Nicholas, which are quite interesting in this regard. http://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Willy-Nicky_Letters_between_the_Kaiser_and_the_Czar
Wilhelm normally addresses Nicholas as 'Dearest Nicky', describes him and other men in terms of being dear old friends and similar. Probably more intimate than most men today.
Ann
-
What's interesting is page 381, where it quotes from Yusupov's memoirs, saying that both he and Dmitri wanted to marry Irina, but that Irina only wanted to marry Felix, at least that's what Felix says she said after he ( Felix) told Irina that Dmitri had wanted to marry her too. To quote Felix, " Dmitri bowed before a desicion which he realised was final, but our friendship was to suffer and our relations were never the same afterwards." One has to take Felix with a grain of salt though.
Any other sources for GD Dmitri wanting to marry Irina?? Was it only in Youssupoff book?
-
I believe Greg King made the claim also in his book "The Man Who Killed Rasputin". Check out pages 110-111 if you have a copy. Where King pulled his facts from I'm not sure.
-
What's interesting is page 381, where it quotes from Yusupov's memoirs, saying that both he and Dmitri wanted to marry Irina, but that Irina only wanted to marry Felix, at least that's what Felix says she said after he ( Felix) told Irina that Dmitri had wanted to marry her too. To quote Felix, " Dmitri bowed before a desicion which he realised was final, but our friendship was to suffer and our relations were never the same afterwards." One has to take Felix with a grain of salt though.
Any other sources for GD Dmitri wanting to marry Irina?? Was it only in Youssupoff book?
If I recall correctly, Princess Zenaide wrote to Felix, stating she had spoken to the Dowager Empress who had said she preferred Dmitri for Irina. However, that despite her own desires, she would do nothing to stop a marriage between Felix and Irina, if Irina wished it.