It is me, Stan Lee

Elizabeth in Marvel: 1602

Sir Nicholas: I am afraid Armageddon is rather outside my department, majesty

*Dr. Strange walks into the room*

Dr. Strange: Majesty, I come bearing terrible news. The prognosis of your illness has revealed itself to me.

Queen Elizabeth: *Gasp* I regret to hear of unfortunate news 

Dr. Strange: Your majesty, the skies of England are blood red not because Armageddon is ensuing. Rather -- the skies of London are red for our God is prematurely mourning your oncoming death. 

Queen Elizabeth: Doctor, I admire your prescience regarding my ensuing death. But, I believe the notion that death is knocking at my door is nonsense. For I have brought England their first colony and the first-born English citizen within those colonies: Virginia Dare.

Dr. Strange: Majesty, your relentlessness is commendable. However, you have been diagnosed with blood poisoning. I surmise that you have minimal time left. Therefore, you must identify who your heir will be. Naming your successor is indispensable to a smooth transition of power!!

Queen Elizabeth: Yes, the future of England is in my hands. I shall name a successor within the year.

Leave the Horse Out of This

I was actually expecting this reading (The Virgin's Lover) to be a lot cringier than it ended up being (as the phrase "romance novel" is one I'm always wary of), but still I did find a couple of cringe moments within it. For example, on page 143, as Elizabeth and Robert admire the portrait of Archduke Ferdinand, Robert makes a peculiar, clearly allegorical and not intended to be skeezy but skeezy (to me) nonetheless about how one ought judge a horses' potential the same way they may a man to marry; in short, feeling it up.

"I would want to know how he felt when I gentled him under my hand, smoothed his neck, touched him everywhere, behind the ears, on the lips, behind the legs. I would want to know how responsive he was when I had him between my legs," (p. 143) and so forth and so on.

My comment, then, is this: I find it interesting, though quite unsettling, that this author, and as we observed in Wednesday's class, many authors' want to sexualize Elizabeth, be it allegorically or directly. I guess a powerful, intelligent woman is just not interesting enough for the masses, though that's human psychology for ya, isn't it? I'm not saying that's how it ought to be, but from reading this, that sure is how it is here.

Censorship yet again...

I related todays reading on "The Marriage Game" to a topic less concerned with marriage. On Page 338, Elizabeth is in outrage because of a pamphlet that talks about her religion upon marriage and wants the pamphlet destroyed. This reminds me of the censorship that the Catholic church implemented during the 1500's. The church put out index's of banned books and discouraged enlightened thinkers such as Martin Luther and Galileo Galilei. Their reasoning behind their censorship was to keep people from challenging the beliefs of the church and ultimately to keep their power at the time. Serious actions and punishments were taken by the church and Elizabeth wants similar actions to be taken in the book for similar reasons. "Publish a proclamation condemning this pamphlet as lewd and seditious, and have all the copies confiscated and burned." (the marriage game, 339). The similarities are vibrant to me and I can not help but reflect upon the connection between the Catholic church and their censorship that still exists today, and Elizabeth's censorship in the book.

Love is No Game

In "The Marriage Game", Alison Weir writes skillfully to turn something small into something that will surely stick out to her readers. This is displayed in a scene where Elizabeth reads the letter Robert sent her stating that he married Lettice and they are having a child.Weir makes sure that the importance of this moment is illuminated. In this section of the story, she uses imagery, word choice, rhetorical questions, and stylistic choices to make the readers feel Elizabeth's pain. Imagery is created when she states "...which made her cry out in agony. Weeping torrents, she sank to the floor, beating her breast" (Weir, 304). Not only can we picture Elizabeth on the floor sobbing, but we can hear it. Weir also uses particular diction to emphasize Elizabeth's feeling of betrayal. She refers to Robert's actions as "treachery"(303) as she cries out in "agony"(304). Weir uses her own linguistic style to portray Elizabeth's thoughts on what Robert has done as extreme and completely unforgivable. "He should not have it this time. He would never have it again"(303), "she would go right now and do that, and let him know how deeply he had hurt and displeased her, and that nothing would ever be the same again, ever" (304). She asks rhetorically, "Did he not know how much she had loved him, and still did love him, God help her"(304)? Weir creates a dramatic, human-like, relatable version of Elizabeth's heartbreak using all these components. Pointing out how hurt Elizabeth was shows that she did not see this as some "Marriage Game", she really did love and care for Robert. Someone that only keeps these men close to the kingdom for fun, sure was heartbroken when she found out she was left for someone else.