This is not a new book, being published in 2007, but I was interested in it as part of some genealogical research I’m doing and it has relevance to this blog as its subject was certainly a woman forced to carry a history bucket. It also has contemporary relevance in light of the current frictions between Ukraine and Russia reflecting a resurgence of old feuds.
In 1921, Alexandra Andreyevna Voronina lived in the city of Kharkov in the Ukraine with her mother. Once a very wealthy family, they had fallen on the hardest of times. Her father disappeared years earlier and it was never known whether he had deliberately abandoned them or was the victim of sinister action (common enough in the Bolshevik era). Not only had the region suffered the after-effects of the Russian Revolution and the ensuing Civil War, it was also devastated by an epic famine in which some starving individuals had resorted to cannibalisation to survive (there are verified images of this in the book).
Originally training to be a ballet dancer, Alexandra had to compromise her dreams and do whatever work she could. She found it in the office established by the Norwegian explorer and humanitarian, Fridtjof Nansen, from where famine relief was co-ordinated. Nansen’s representative in Ukraine was Captain Vidkun Quisling. Alexandra fell completely under his spell and, although barely seventeen years of age, married him.
There follows a lengthy, and often depressing, litany of what today would be classified as spousal abuse – not physical, but definitely mental. Quisling, who has left a highly controversial mark on history being the man who led Norway and sided with Hitler during World War II and for which he was later executed, was controlling, cold and calculating, probably psychotic. He manipulated Alexandra into an abortion and then forced her to accept - and even share a bedroom with - the new woman in his life, another Russian, Maria Vasilyevna Pasetchnikov.
 |
| A forcibly staged photograph of the two "wives" on the balcony of the Quisling apartment |
Maria, in turn, was a nasty character who may have been an agent sent to spy on Quisling and the Norwegian relief effort and she added further layers of scheming and subterfuge to the cruel treatment of Alexandra.
Back and forth across Europe, Alexandra was often left to fend for herself in places where she knew no-one, then with little warning, was drawn back into Quisling’s net, then abandoned again. In spite of promises that he’d keep her safe and secure as long as she lived, he was erratic with money. In spite of all that he did to her, Alexandra still hoped that Maria would be sent packing, that she and Quisling would get back together again.
My main quibble with her story is that some areas are overly detailed while others are glossed over and leave more questions. Alexandra often complained about being isolated for weeks or months in places, or left destitute without any means of support. She said she survived solely on a diet of bananas and cream for months on end - curious foods that may not have been as cheap as the poor person’s diet of bread and dripping (or the French equivalent). With Quisling being so mean in providing her with a regular income and unable to work, she must have had some regular source of money other than just help from generous friends. She would certainly have needed funds when travelling around Europe plus undertaking artistic and ballet studies in France and eventually being able to buy her passage to Shanghai. The latter part of her life in Shanghai and later in California includes two further marriages and a child, but this is all rushed through. The fact her mother was abandoned on her own in the Crimea for the rest of her life is also troubling and it would have been interesting to find out what efforts, if any, had been made to get her out
Alexandra seemed overly naïve, compliant and trusting. From our more liberated distance of a century later, it can be hard to understand why she did not stand up to her treatment and find a way of being self-sufficient. But one has to remember the attitude of the times and the fact she was still in her teens, subservient to her husband’s whims and not financially independent. Her story has its sad echoes today with still far too many women at the mercy of unscrupulous and controlling men.
Three stars.
Back and forth across Europe, Alexandra was often left to fend for herself in places where she knew no-one, then with little warning, was drawn back into Quisling’s net, then abandoned again. In spite of promises that he’d keep her safe and secure as long as she lived, he was erratic with money. In spite of all that he did to her, Alexandra still hoped that Maria would be sent packing, that she and Quisling would get back together again.
My main quibble with her story is that some areas are overly detailed while others are glossed over and leave more questions. Alexandra often complained about being isolated for weeks or months in places, or left destitute without any means of support. She said she survived solely on a diet of bananas and cream for months on end - curious foods that may not have been as cheap as the poor person’s diet of bread and dripping (or the French equivalent). With Quisling being so mean in providing her with a regular income and unable to work, she must have had some regular source of money other than just help from generous friends. She would certainly have needed funds when travelling around Europe plus undertaking artistic and ballet studies in France and eventually being able to buy her passage to Shanghai. The latter part of her life in Shanghai and later in California includes two further marriages and a child, but this is all rushed through. The fact her mother was abandoned on her own in the Crimea for the rest of her life is also troubling and it would have been interesting to find out what efforts, if any, had been made to get her out
Alexandra seemed overly naïve, compliant and trusting. From our more liberated distance of a century later, it can be hard to understand why she did not stand up to her treatment and find a way of being self-sufficient. But one has to remember the attitude of the times and the fact she was still in her teens, subservient to her husband’s whims and not financially independent. Her story has its sad echoes today with still far too many women at the mercy of unscrupulous and controlling men.
Three stars.
No comments:
Post a Comment