Author Topic: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?  (Read 128360 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4665
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #45 on: January 26, 2005, 09:23:33 AM »
Belochka raises a valid point that needs expanding upon. Again, the entire thrust of this thread imposes a late 20th early 21st century idea on the victorian era.  Girls HAD NO SOCIAL LIFE in Victorian society whatsoever before they were "brought out" to society at age 16.  They were expected to  stay at home with mother, learn housekeeping skills, needlework etc etc. In this respect, they were not deprived at all, as private tutors were hired to teach them far more than the average girl, even of the upper classes, might have learned at the era, not to mention the travel and attending many public events before age 16. So, adding on the fact that they were daughters of the Emperor, I think they were not in the slightest bit deprived when viewed from the perspective of their PEERS at the time.

MariaR

  • Guest
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #46 on: January 26, 2005, 09:58:22 AM »
...and this is exactly what I was wondering. To them, for their time period were they deprived? My thought was that it seemed all fairly typical of the time....but in Cowles book she mentioned (I wish I had it in front of me!) that they were not allowed to go to many official/royal social functions even. I had figured they had a fairly "normal" royal upbringing until maybe the war intervened and they had to be more secluded...that always seemed such a tragedy to me. But Cowles made me wonder if even before the war they lived a less than "normal" royal life.

On a secondary thought: because of their "seclusion" from other girls/boys their age do you think this would have any play on their relationship with the Standart officers? I've always thought of their relationship with the officers a innocent/experimental one....but seen in the light of perhaps they wished for more interaction, perhaps they were deprived...maybe these relationships had a bit of desperation to them? Maybe OTMA took these relationships more serious than perhaps they otherwise would??

Thoughts?

MariaR

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4665
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #47 on: January 26, 2005, 10:06:16 AM »
They were not all that secluded, even before the war. They were often at charity bazaars, selling donated items to the "regular" people attending, they helped every Easter and Christmas to distribute literally hundreds and hundreds of presents to staff and military regiments.  They were surrounded by staff, not just the officers on Standart. The officers would have been keenly aware of not letting any "attachment" get beyond the innocent lest their entire military career come crashing to a halt. Each GD had a personal staff with them daily.  They were interacting with adults constantly.  During the War they were MORE involved with even more charity work and daily visits to hospitals.

MariaR

  • Guest
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #48 on: January 26, 2005, 10:21:43 AM »
P.S. Sarai~

I checked the thread out you mentioned! Thanks, there are some really insightful comments there~~ lot's of food for thought~helps broaden my picture of OTMA  and their relationship w/their parents better~~

Ah. a great forum, this is!

MariaR

MariaR

  • Guest
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #49 on: January 26, 2005, 10:25:42 AM »
Quote
They were not all that secluded, even before the war. They were often at charity bazaars, selling donated items to the "regular" people attending, they helped every Easter and Christmas to distribute literally hundreds and hundreds of presents to staff and military regiments.  They were surrounded by staff, not just the officers on Standart. The officers would have been keenly aware of not letting any "attachment" get beyond the innocent lest their entire military career come crashing to a halt. Each GD had a personal staff with them daily.  They were interacting with adults constantly.  During the War they were MORE involved with even more charity work and daily visits to hospitals.




You would think then, if anything all this company of adults would make them mature a bit faster.....

Offline Angie_H

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 976
  • http://booboogbs.deviantart.com My Colored Pics!
    • View Profile
    • Eigna
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #50 on: January 26, 2005, 10:54:45 AM »
Quote



You would think then, if anything all this company of adults would make them mature a bit faster.....

I don't know about that. I guess it depends on how the adults treated them.
I understand that because of their rank the girls didn't mingle much with "ordinary" people, but they didn't have much association with members of the Romanov family either, i.e. like cousins & such

Offline RichC

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 757
    • View Profile
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #51 on: January 26, 2005, 05:06:49 PM »
Quote
And with Felix and Irina...from what I understand, Irina WANTED to marry him!


Even if she wanted to marry him, and I agree that she did, her parents should have advised her better.  If she completely understood what she was in for and Felix was up front with her, then she must have been an unusually mature individual for 18!

RomanovFan

  • Guest
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #52 on: February 01, 2005, 10:55:50 AM »
The Imperial children were deprived in a sense.  Because they were so isolated from the reality of what was going on (the wars, starvation of the people, failure to help the people, ect.), yes they did get to spend more time with their parents than they would've been had they not been isolated. They were deprived of friends close to their age, besides each other. While most 18-year-olds were preparing to be "launched into society", Olga, at 18, was given a grand ball, but it was attended by mostly other Romanov relatives. No close friends of her own outside the royal family because she had none. None of the children were ever given the chance to make friends on their own. Nicholas and espcially Alexandra, sheltered their children so much that they were probably very anti-social.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by RomanovFan »

Janet_W.

  • Guest
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #53 on: February 01, 2005, 12:13:43 PM »
I think we're imposing our own current thoughts re: "deprivation" on this topic. These days a 14 year old often feels "deprived" if he or she can't have multiple body piercings, wear hooker apparel and spend the entire weekend at the multi-plex eating junk food and terrorizing the average citizen.

The children of Nicholas and Alexandra were brought up in a rarefied atmosphere. What else would you expect of royal children? Even Princes William and Harry, for all of their mother's efforts, could not escape that situation . . . nor should they. If you have the means to keep your children sequestered from the hardscrabble ugliness of the world, of course you will do so.

Nicholas and Alexandra did not, however, want their offspring to be spoiled. And as the children grew older, they participated in experiences which encouraged them to be aware of others less fortunate.

Much has been written of Alexandra wanting to keep her daughters to herself, and therefore denying them relationships with others their own age. I do not deny there is probably some truth in this. However, I think the actual situation was a bit more complicated. Just who would OTMA socialize with? Aunt Xenia's children were primarily boys and, it appears, a fairly pugnacious group. Irina? Perhaps. But considering what happened later--that her parents gave permission for her to marry Felix--well, does that possibly indicate a preference for the accumulation of wealth over emotional stability?  From all that I've read, this would not have been the case with Nicholas and Alexandra. Alexandra loved Nicholas for who he was; she had refused her English cousin, who was in line for the British throne, because she could not love him. Nicholas married Alexandra not because of her wealth--she was, by all accounts, a relatively impoverished and minor princess--but because he loved her profoundly. Parents with values such as these would be inclined to want the same for their children.

Olga and Tatiana had each other for companionship, but apparently very few others; the only friend I can think of at the moment is Rita Khitrovo. (Though of course we are not privvy to every bit of information re: this or any other area.) But again, given Alexandra's feeling of antipathy--in many ways justified--toward the "bright young things" of St. P society, it's no wonder the girls had limited social contacts. Still, they managed to attend dances, flirt, and enjoy themselves . . . we have contemporary accounts of this. I think that, given their "exalted" position, the two eldest girls at least did enjoy themselves and--had war not intervened--gradual freedoms would have been granted the youngest two. This is typical of the family dynamic; older children usually “blaze the trail” for those who follow.

Deprivation is a tricky topic. My sense of deprived teenagers might not be yours, and vice-versa. In a sense each one of us has had some sort of deprivation, whether it be lack of financial resources, an abundance of financial resources, permissive parents, strict parents, too little socializing, too much socializing, etc.  In this life, no one can have it all. Parents can only do their best, and if they are empathetic and ethical, that "best" may be quite satisfactory.



Offline Georgiy

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2024
  • Slava v vyshnikh Bogu
    • View Profile
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #54 on: February 01, 2005, 01:53:08 PM »
A good question would be did they themselves feel deprived? If they themselves didn't feel deprived, and were happy, then who are we to say they were deprived.

Denise

  • Guest
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #55 on: February 04, 2005, 09:39:28 PM »
Quote
A good question would be did they themselves feel deprived? If they themselves didn't feel deprived, and were happy, then who are we to say they were deprived.


I doubt that they felt deprived.  It was the only upbringing they knew, and were a very close loving family.  That closeness is probably what kept them going once they got to Ekaterinburg and faced the hopelessness of their situation.  

Denise

Offline Belochka

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4447
  • City of Peter stand in all your splendor - Pushkin
    • View Profile
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #56 on: February 05, 2005, 05:31:49 AM »
I would also like to believe that it was because the girls were members of a close and loving family, that their isolation made their situation in Ekaterinburg more tolerable.

The girls were not certainly deprived of wholesome family values.  



Faces of Russia is now on Facebook!


http://www.searchfoundationinc.org/

Madal

  • Guest
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #57 on: February 05, 2005, 06:27:04 AM »
Olga and Tatiana had each other for companionship, but apparently very few others; the only friend I can think of at the moment is Rita Khitrovo.

There is an Olga and Rita's  photo in Livadia.org but ... Who was Rita Khitrovo? How did Olga and Rita meet?

olga

  • Guest
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #58 on: February 05, 2005, 08:12:48 AM »
Margarita Khitrovo was a Lady in Waiting to Olga Nikolaevna.

rskkiya

  • Guest
Re: The Imperial children "sad,sheltered" life?
« Reply #59 on: February 05, 2005, 09:33:02 AM »
Quote
The girls were not certainly deprived of wholesome family values.  



    (ACCCK) That particular phrase really bothers me--but I think that I understand your meaning!
     Like anything their lifes and all the "privations" that they may have suffered were rather relative.  After all many factory workers would have loved their clean beds (simple though they seem to us ) and envied their balanced regular meals and daily baths...I and many others are glad to not be forever in the spotlight forever to be "stared at"!
    It's rather sad that they had so few friends, and that they seem to have never matured.