French Country Decor Ideas

  

From Léonce:

Over the past few months, I’ve saved countless home décor images on Pinterest (and if you enjoy French and Parisian inspiration, feel free to follow me there for more). Not that I’m currently renovating my apartment here in Amsterdam (although, truth be told, that would be one of my dreams) but I recently realized that many of the images I had saved seemed to gravitate toward the same aesthetic: French country style, sometimes also called French cottage style.

And without quite realizing it at first, this is also the direction my own Amsterdam home has slowly been evolving toward over the past few months. An aesthetic that feels rustic yet chic. Simple and unpretentious. Filled with natural materials: wood, linen, glass, ceramics, copper, and brass. A touch of vintage, but never kitsch. The kind of interior that creates a warm and welcoming atmosphere and that, to me, often evokes the charm of grandmother’s houses, countryside homes where everything feels convivial and where one immediately feels at ease.

Amsterdam, and the Netherlands more broadly, have influenced this shift more than I expected. Kitchens here often feel more rustic than Parisian ones, and because winters can be long and sometimes harsh, homes and apartments tend to have a naturally cozy and comforting quality that I’ve come to appreciate more and more.

This article is therefore a blend of different European influences which I hope will inspire you and perhaps give you a few ideas for bringing the charm of a French country home into your own space, wherever you may live. My inspirations draw from several places: the interior of Claude Monet’s house in Giverny, the Parisian atelier of Astier de Villatte in the 5th arrondissement near Place Maubert, the architecture and interiors typical of Amsterdam houses, as well as the timeless charm of traditional British cottages. (Read more.)

Share

Will the GOP Hold the House and Senate?

 From Tierney's Real News:

What will happen in the midterms? Here’s my best thinking right now.

Republicans currently hold both the House and Senate by narrow margins.

Left-leaning pollsters project Democrats will flip the House in 2026 by 9–15 seats while Republicans cling to the Senate by a single vote.

A few weeks ago, right-leaning pollsters expected Democrats to take the House by one seat and Republicans to expand their Senate edge to 2–3 seats.

In the past week, however, many of those same voices on the right have flipped: they now predict the GOP will hold both chambers—again by narrow margins.

All bets are off.

Here’s a sample of what some conservatives are saying on X right now:

• David Marcus: GOP hold in both houses.

• Ted Cruz: If we show up and unify, the GOP can grow our majorities in both the House and Senate. It’s all about turnout.

• Bill Mitchell: Democrats are going to lose in November in the most humiliating fashion possible.

• RNC Chair Joe Gruters: I expect Republicans to hold both chambers—220 House seats and 53 Senate seats.

• Seth Levy: 53-47 GOP in the Senate and 218-217 Republican in the House. Republicans hold both.

• House Speaker Mike Johnson: Republicans will hold and grow the House majority.

• Unseen1: With all the propaganda and fake polls, there’s no way of predicting. 50/50 chance the GOP keeps the House; I think they hold the Senate.

(Read more.)

Share

Jesus by Another Name

 From The Logres Institute:

Unlike many other authors, we have explicit writings from Lewis explaining what he was trying to portray. In the remainder of this article, I presume that Rice is writing from a position of ignorance. To cure his lack of knowledge, I invite him to acquire a copy of Lewis’s Letters to Children before he writes about Narnia in the future. Lewis was transparent in his explanations, and his actual letters to the children who wrote to him explain why Christians are justly upset by this casting decision. You mess with Jesus, and you mess with the literal foundations of the Christian faith. Aslan is Jesus, in another world.

To truly understand Lewis, one must read Lewis; and more of his writings than just Narnia. Any claims on what he thought as he wrote the Narnia tales need to be backed by primary source material to be valid, not by opinion that fits one’s own personal narrative. Lewis’s replies to his youngest readers provide helpful insight.

In a letter written by Lewis from Magdalen College Oxford, 22nd. January 1952, Lewis writes to a child named Carol about how to pronounce Aslan and who He is:

Dear Carol,

It is a pleasure to answer your question. I found the name in the notes to Lane’s Arabian Nights: it is the Turkish for Lion. I pronounce it Ass-lan myself. And of course I meant the Lion of Judah. I am so glad you liked The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. I hope you will like the sequel (Prince Caspian) which came out in November.

Yours sincerely,

C.S. Lewis

(Read more.)

Share

She Almost Won

 Henrietta Maria came very close to helping her husband and Prince Rupert win the English Civil Wars. From Atlas Obscura:

Around midday on July 4, 1643, in the countryside just north of Birmingham, Queen Henrietta Maria was in her battle tent. Outside, shells exploded. Musket balls* zoomed past. Anxiously, the Queen of England waited. Taking Burton-Upon-Trent, a strategic town with a river crossing connecting northern and southern England, was her army’s first real challenge. Defeat was not an option. But the fighting had already raged for five hours—how much longer would it take to deliver a victory? Three hours later, the queen got her answer. Her royalist army had finally broken through the town’s defenses. Victory was secured.

Eighteen years earlier, the queen had arrived on English shores as a 15-year-old French bride. And now, at 34, she was a warrior queen. The queen would jokingly call herself “she-majesty generalissima.” Lines from a contemporary poem, its author unknown, portrayed her as not just defeating but unmanning Parliament’s forces, literally: “Tis here a woman leads; but one would swear, the armies did consist of women there.” Her skill garnered wide respect from diplomatic elites; the Venetian ambassador observed, “Without [the queen’s] encouragement and aid the king would never have put himself into a position to resist.” During the English Civil War, Queen Henrietta Maria was, it seems, all that stood between King Charles’s sure defeat at the hands of Parliament. (Read more.)

Henrietta Maria and her household hiding in a ditch during the bombardments at Bridlington in 1643

Henrietta Maria hiding from Parliamentarians during her escape to France in 1644

 

The novel Generalissima is available HERE.

Share

Independent Report Demolishes Transgender Suicide Claim

From AMAC:

A groundbreaking report has demolished a favorite rhetorical tactic used by transgender activists to argue in favor of harmful procedures for gender-confused minors.

For years, the left has emotionally blackmailed the parents of gender-confused kids, insisting that families must sign off on dangerous, irreversible drug regimens or even surgeries, or else their child will surely commit suicide. But independent researchers recently confirmed there is no proof that restricting minors from this so-called “gender-affirming care” leads to more suicides.

A favorite line of transgender activists and their allies in the medical establishment is this: “Would you rather have a dead son or a live daughter?”

Medical professionals and social workers will frighten parents with some form of this bad-faith argument, claiming that “treatments” like cross-sex hormones, puberty blockers, or surgeries that leave kids permanently disfigured are “life-saving.” A compliant liberal media has willfully repeated this lie in their own biased coverage of debates about transgender drugs and surgeries.

But a comprehensive study from Do No Harm looked at Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data across 23 states that have banned transgender drugs and surgeries for minors. Their conclusion? There is “no evidence that these bans have increased suicide rates.”

Do No Harm is an advocacy group which “represents physicians, nurses, medical students, patients, and policymakers focused on keeping identity politics out of medical education, research, and clinical practice.” It was founded in 2022 and opposes transgender drugs and surgeries for minors.

“The alarmist prediction that restricting medicalization of gender-distressed minors would produce a spike in youth suicides is not supported by the data,” Do No Harm scholars Jay Greene and Ian Kingsbury write in their new report. (Read more.)

Share

Arthurian Legend for a Disenchanted Age

 From Express:

In a time of tech-bro billionaires, a meaning crisis among an anxious youth and questions surrounding national identity, where better to go than back to the old stories to have one’s heart reenchanted? That’s something poet, scholar and priest Malcolm Guite has become renowned for on his popular self-titled YouTube channel, which has 220,000 subscribers and counting. The real-life waistcoat-wearing hobbit, with wizard-like long silver hair and beard, has charmed millions around the world with his videos from the perspective of a visitor to his cosy, book-lined study. For each typical upload, Guite will settle into his wing armchair, light one of his many pipes, and usually read aloud from a chapter of JRR Tolkien or CS Lewis.

The 68-year-old author of several books, including five collections of poetry, realised that it’s been about a century since there was a proper re-telling of Britain’s great myth, the Arthurian legend. In what could well be his magnum opus, Guite has set about writing Merlin’s Isle: An Arthuriad, a four-volume epic ballad of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table.

Beautifully illustrated by Stephen Crotts, the first volume, Galahad and the Grail, is set in the 5th century, after the Romans have departed, leaving Britain in a chaotic mess of savage warlords before the Anglo-Saxon invasion. King Arthur seeks to unite the realm by establishing a kingdom of peace and stability, one led by his chivalric knights who are fierce in battle against the “might is right” pagans, while being gentle and kind to the weak and vulnerable they are sworn to protect. (Read more.)

Share

The Mystery of the ‘Real’ Milady de Winter

  

Yet another descendant of Mary Boleyn. From History Extra:

In the preface to The Three Musketeers, Dumas claims that he was researching Louis XIV in the Bibliothéque nationale de France when he happened upon the first volume of The Memoirs of M. d’Artagnan. This is not entirely true: he found the book in the public library in Marseilles, borrowed it and never returned it.

The Memoirs of M. d’Artagnan is a first-person pseudo memoir written by a former soldier, Gatien de Courtilz de Sandras, and first published in 1700. It tells the story of d’Artagnan, a young man setting out on his journey to become a musketeer. As well as d’Artagnan, Dumas discovered Athos, Porthos and Aramis, who would eventually become major characters in The Three Musketeers. He also found Milady de Winter. Courtilz never gives Milady’s name. Instead, she is referred to simply as ‘Milady’ followed by a dash or asterisks where her name should be. She is introduced as a maid of honour to Henrietta Maria, queen to the executed Charles I of England, whose exile in France Milady shares.

The daughter of an English peer, Milady has as much wit as beauty, and d’Artagnan thinks her the most beautiful woman he has ever seen. He promptly falls in love with her. There then follows a complicated sexual intrigue, one of several for Courtilz’s d’Artagnan. Once it is over, Milady is never heard from again. This is the episode that Dumas adapted for The Three Musketeers. The affair of the queen’s diamonds is absent from Courtilz, but at least part of the story as Dumas told it is supported by several contemporary memoirs. Those of Françoise Bertaut de Motteville, Pierre de La Porte and Henri-Auguste de Loménie, Comte de Brienne – all of whom served at the royal court of France – each provide an account of the Duke of Buckingham’s visit to France in 1625. Buckingham had been sent to escort Henrietta Maria, then Charles I’s new queen, to England. While in France, he ostentatiously courted the queen, Anne of Austria.

None of these memoirs, however, mention the diamonds that Anne was said to have given to the duke. For this part of the story, it is necessary to consult the memoirs of Henri-Auguste's son, an obscure publication known as Recueil A, and the memoirs of François de La Rochefoucauld. Louis-Henri de Loménie, Comte de Brienne served Louis XIV as secretary of state, a position he inherited from his father. He left a memoir, which was published in the early 19th century. Certain editions, particularly that edited by Jean François Barrière, include an account of the queen’s diamonds.

It does not form part of Brienne’s original narrative – he was not even born at the time of the alleged diamond affair. Instead, it is mentioned in an introductory essay, written by the editor, explaining the manners and customs of 17th-century France. It is then related in full in an appendix, Éclaircissements historiques, or ‘historical clarifications’. In this version, the diamond thief is named as Lady Clarik. However, the story was lifted word-for-word from Recueil A, and inserted into the memoir. Recueil A is the first volume of a large collection published in the 18th century. It comprises an assortment of documents, including extracts of memoirs, concerning the history of France. The author of the account of the diamond affair is enigmatically identified as ‘M. le M. de T’. Behind these initials, according to the anonymous editor of the Recueil, is René de Froulay, Comte de Tessé.

The Comte de Tessé was a real person. Born in 1651, he was a military man, diplomat and courtier. He did indeed leave a memoir, but the diamond affair does not appear in it. The story as found in Recueil A and later inserted into the memoir by Brienne is, therefore, unreliable. What then of La Rochefoucauld? In his memoir, the lady who stole the diamonds was not Lady Clarik but the countess of Carlisle. In fact, Lady Clarik did not exist – but Lady Carlisle certainly did. (Read more.)

 

Read about the Countess of Carlisle in my Henrietta Maria novels, HERE and HERE.

Share

And Do Not Split the Vote

 From Tierney's Real News:

Voting third-party (Libertarian, independent, or any other) in a tight race does nothing but help Democrats win. In America’s winner-take-all system it functions as a split of the conservative vote. Those ballots come disproportionately from voters who would otherwise support the Republican.

Those of you who have followed me for years know that I despise the Koch Libertarians and the fake influencers for this very reason. They are a greater danger to America than the Democrats. Why? Because their entire purpose is to fool conservatives into voting for 3rd party candidates in the name of Liberty. They convince good conservatives and Christians to waste a conservative vote on a Koch Libertarian or "Freedom” candidate.

What does this do? It takes votes away from Republicans so that Democrats win, every time! In most states, let’s say that roughly 51% of the population is conservative, 49% liberal. If the Koch Libertarians can convince just 3% of the population to vote Libertarian or independent - the end result looks like this: Democrats 49%, Republicans 48%, Libertarian 3%. DEMOCRATS WIN. EVERY TIME.

3rd party ringers (Libertarians & Independents) ALWAYS HELP DEMOCRATS win. That's how Bill Clinton, a Democrat, won the presidency with only 43% of the vote - because Ross Perot took HALF THE CONSERVATIVE vote and helped the Democrats win in 1992!

The Kochs saw how successful this approach was to flip the country BLUE and have been running with it ever since.

If you want conservatives to govern, vote Republican and MAGA - not third party. Otherwise you’re just helping the Democrats win. (Read more.)

Share

How to Re-enchant Your Life

 From Léonce:

Over time, we have done away with waiting, boredom, and much of uncertainty. We have learned to plan our routes, order food before we are hungry, know whether a restaurant is worth going to before we step inside, check the weather before we look at the sky. We can fill almost every empty minute, find an immediate answer to almost any question, see a place before we have ever set foot there. All of this is, of course, very convenient.

But I sometimes wonder whether, in removing so many small frictions and in-between moments from our lives, we have also removed, almost by accident, some of the conditions that allowed the world to surprise us. Perhaps enchantment depends on some of the very things we have spent years trying to eliminate: waiting, uselessness, mystery, slowness, surprise, imagination, attention.

There is a concept that has stayed with me since my student days: Max Weber’s idea of the “disenchantment of the world.” Very roughly put, it describes the way modernity made the world more rational, more explainable, more calculable. I would be hard-pressed now to reproduce everything I learned about it then, but the phrase itself has never quite left me.

The disenchantment of the world. (Read more.)

Share