Bob Atchison "Whines" about being called names by the Director of the State Museum-Preserve, Dr. Ivan Sautov....
Concerning the restoration of the Alexander Palace I would have to agree with Mike Pyles a/k/a "Tsarfan" published statement on Atchison's Russian History forum:
"...I would argue that being the last resident does not make one necessarily the most important resident. Alexander I and Nicholas I (whose favorite residence was the Alexander Palace) were more important historically than Nicholas II, whose real claim to fame was marrying for love instead of policy, bringing hemophilia into the Russian royal family, isolating the monarchy from the stanchions of its support among the nobility and military, and losing the throne.Nor do I think that preserving the Alexander Palace as Nicholas and Alexandra knew it contributes that much to our understanding of their lifestyles. We have vastly more photographic evidence of their lifestyles than of their immediate predecessors', as well as more letters, diaries, and memoires. Also, Nicholas and Alexandra simply adapted the Alexander Palace as best they could to their needs and desires. If one wants really to understand them in their preferred domestic settings, it is better to study Livadia, which was entirely their own creation, or the New Palace (which is being rebuilt, I believe), in which they lived far more than is generally recognized. In fact, they were often resident at the New Palace when officially reported to be at the Alexander Palace.Most Russians rightly focus on the entire history of their monarchy, paying more attention to the accomplishments of Peter I and Catherine II than to the failures of Nicholas II. Hence the palaces associated with the glories of the Russian monarchy -- Peterhof, the Winter Palace, the Catherine Palace, Pavlovsk -- justifiably get the money, the attention, and the crowds.The real claim to fame of the Alexander Palace is not that it was the last residence of Nicholas and Alexandra, but that it is one of the world's jewels of neo-classical architecture. It is the unfortunate association of the Alexander Palace with Nicholas and Alexandra and the fetishistic association of the building with their melodramatic fates that has obscured the real role of the palace as a document to one of Russia's greatest architects and the patrons of superb taste who engaged him.I, for one, would love to see the Alexander Palace returned as much as possible to the masterpiece Quarenghi built. And the Concert Hall was the largest space he created there, being the terminus of a magnificent suite of neoclassical parade rooms that had no equal in that style in Russia . . . or anywhere else of which I know..."
And...
"...Truth be told, part of the reason I would prefer the restoration of the Concert Hall is that I just do not find the private lives of Nicholas and Alexandra appealing . . . largely because I think their succumbing to their private needs and desires had so much to do with the destruction of the Russian monarchy and the passing of these magnificent buildings from venues of human activity into sterile museum space -- or worse. This is distinctly at odds with the fact that I literally froze when standing in front of Monomakh's Cap, realizing it had once crowned the head of Peter the Great. I'm as capable of a fetishistic bout as the next person and, just as with the next person, it seizes me when it involves something associated with someone I admire and leaves me cold when the object is associated with someone I abjure.Oh, well . . . no one is going to ask me what to do with the Alexander Palace in any case...."
Labels: Bob Atchison, Restoration of the Alexander Palace, Russia



