5 comments about Winston Churchill: A Life (Penguin Lives).

1. Publisher's Weekly is entirely mistaken, in their comments above, in suggesting that Sir Winston Churchill once belonged to the Labour Party.
   
   He never did, of course.
   
   Churchill did, however, cross the floor to join the Liberal Party, often making common cause there with his Liberal ally David Lloyd George. He left the Liberals and returned to the Conservative Party (at first, as a "Constitutionalist") in the 1920's...
   
   Alan D. Hyde



2. Let me make clear at the outset that I am no historian. Indeed, I wouldn't even qualify as an amateur historian. I am just your average 30-something fairly ignorant reader living a period of love for more or less recent history. Given this premise, I found this little book quite perfect for what I was looking for.
   
   This is a short, entertaining, and VERY well written biography of one of the greatest men in the 20th century. Because of the serious limits of my knowledge on the subject, I certainly cannot judge on the accuracy of the reports. However, to the best of my knowledge, the author is considered a reputable WWII historian. Indeed I liked this book so much that I also purchased his history of WWII. You can read this book in a day, and it will entertain you like a good novel, while also informing you as few novels would do.
   
   I would not pay too much attention to those reviewers that complain about this book not delving into Churchill's shortcomings as a man or as a politician. This is a very small book, about 190 small-format pages. You can hardly expect a comprehensive treatise from such a book. Also, I suspect that emphasizing Churchill's shortcomings would be like emphasizing Hitler's moments of tenderness with his lovers or with some German children during the Nazi regime. I mean, they surely happened, but it's not what you want to spend pages on, if you have only limited space to devote to the topic, isn't it? Besides, even if the Churchill that emerges from this book is certainly a truly great man, he does not emerge as a perfect great man. To me that was enough, and I am glad I read this book.
   
   I am grateful to the author, and I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a short, beautifully written biography of this man, to whom I certainly owe something...



3. Doubtless this biography is insufficient to really understand Churchill, but for those who are fairly ignorant of the man, it provides a useful quick sketch, and perhaps a jumping off point for further reading.



4. In 1895 when his father died, the sickly and indifferent 21-year-old military cadet Winston Churchill was flat broke, the legacy of a father who was a compulsively extravagent wastrel.
   
   Lord Randolph had been syphilitic since early youth. His mother, American-born Jennie Jerome whose father was a stockbroker and part-owner of 'The New York Times', was always attracted to men other than her husband or her sons (Winston, born 1874, and John Spencer, born 1880). In modern terms, they were trailer trash; in Phoenix, Sheriff Joe would have set aside a bunk in his tent-city jail for Winston.
   
   But, instead of slums, Winston was born and brought up in Blenheim Palace, built 1704-22 and still one of the great estates of England. American ex-presidents get palatial libraries as their memorials; the British rewarded their leaders with mansions and great estates. Blenheim Palace was one of the finest, far better than the estates later awarded to Nelson and Wellington.
   
   Perhaps it was the milieu of Blenheim Palace, but Churchill matured into a man absolutely convinced of the majesty of the British virtues of patriotism, loyalty, courage and fair play. For him, being British meant manliness, courage, tenacity and ultimate moral decency. It resonated with the vigorous American spirit of Theodore Roosevelt and the beauty of the strenuous life.
   
   President George Bush is reported to keep a bust of Churchill in the Oval Office; perhaps as a reminder of the complete contrast to himself. Bush ducked the Vietnam War in the Texas Country Club Air Guard; Churchill eagerly sought war, even though he hated it.
   
   Like Ulysses S. Grant, Churchill was a gifted wordsmith instead of a stumblebum. He free-lanced as a journalist while serving as a British officer and was sometimes earning 20 times his military pay. He never stopped learning, he wanted facts, order, reason. His mother sent him crates of books while he was on duty, and he devoured them all.
   
   Gen. Sir Herbert Kitchener described him as a "medal-hunter" and "self-advertiser" who was "super-precocious" and "insufferably bumptious." It was a good assessment. But, the public loved his books and even the Prince of Wales praised him. Whatever one thinks of Churchill, his career and successes are due to his own effort, intelligence, work and nerve.
   
   In brief, this is the story of a man who might well have ended up as a Soho souse, but instead became the greatest man of the past century. He did it through his own efforts, not because of Daddy's friends, money or ability to pull strings.
   
   This book defines the character of a great man.



5. I've never been a big fan of Winston Churchill, but after reading esteemed historian John Keegan's succinct biography of the man, I must say that I like AND respect him just a little bit more. Keegan himself confesses that he never thought much of old Winston until he stumbled across an old recording of his speeches (in NYC of all places) and realized what a gifted and inspirational orator and leader he was. He led his beloved Britain through her darkest hours in modern history, to a victory that was anything but assured. The people seemed to genuinely love him, and his sentiment was seemingly mutual.
   
   His years as Prime Minister during WW2 are the most well known, but Churchill led an amazingly full life, and his life of public service began way back in the late 19th century. Keegan describes how the young Winston, who did poorly in school, but had an undeniable intelligence, educated himself in politics, history and the English Classics. He was a romantic who was in love with his small island nation, and he dedicated his life to it. He was a brave soldier who served in numerous wars, including WW1, and while it would be fair to say he was a little too fond of war, he was no different from the average English officer of the time in this regard. In my eyes, his major fault was his hypocrisy. It just seems hard to reconcile his staunch imperialism with his constant talk about the virtues of freedom and liberty, and how Britain was the main proponent of such things. I would have liked for Keegan to address this point a bit more, but for such a short biography, I can let it slide.
   
   I was intrigued to learn that Churchill and IRA founder Michael Collins were on friendly terms and greatly admired each other. In fact, Churchill apparently had a "gut sympathy for fighters" which is why he had more respect for the Irish and Boers of South Africa than he did for Ghandi and his passive movement in India.
   
   Anyways, the book is extremely well written and entertaining, and I found it to be an overall excellent introduction to the life of one of the most important figures of the 20th century. 4.5 stars.

3 comments about In Front of Your Nose, 1945-1950 (Collected Essays Journalism and Letters of George Orwell).

1. Essays and journalism and very good footnotes deal with starvation in Europe, prevention of literature, Gandhi, an attempt to form an organization which would deal with issues like expelling people from their homes, people forced back to Soviet Russia, and much more including civil liberities for anarchists.



2. The late James J. Martin stated that one could learn great prose from reading George Orwell. Orwell's anthology titled IN FRONT OF YOUR NOSE is a good book to learn political insight and excellent writing. Orwell was not only knowledgeable, but he expressed some of the political tragedies and problems of the 20 th. century in this book. Readers should note this book is the fourth volume of essays of Orwell's essays literary criticism, political protest, etc.
   
   Orwell was one of the very few who realized what a disaster W.W. II was for both Europeans and Asians. His essays on the forced repatriation of millions to the Soviet Union to miserable die in concentration camps were among the first to publicize this tragedy. Orwell's essays were blunt in stating that the only real winner from W.W. II was Big Communism especially in lieu of the rapid disintegration of the British Empire.
   
   Orwell gave a good description of the inconsistent thinking of the British people. The British wanted total victory at any cost, and found themselves in bad economic shape. Many British complained about the immigration of Polish refugees to mine coal in Great Britain. Yet, the British public also complained (whined) about coal shortages. Orwell indicated the inconsistency of these remarks and commented that the British failed to see the logic between acts and consequences. Orwell Presented a clear picture of what was to occur with the British Empire which disintegrated rapidly after "victory" during W.W. II.
   
   Orwell's essay on Gandhi is an interesting case study of Orwell's honest assessment of political leaders. Orwell is clear that he could not live like Gandhi, and Orwell admitted that he probably could be friends with the Hindu leader. Yet,Orwell highly praised Gandhi's courage, policy of nonviolent resistence to the British rules, and Gandhi's honesty. Orwell gave Gandhi praise for being honest and a decent man among political rogues, hypocrites, and cowards. Whether one agrees with Gandhi, he was indeed a brave, honest man. Among poltical figures these are rare traits indeed.
   
   This reviewer disagrees with part of Orwell's criticism of James Burnham. Orwell correctly shows Burnham's errors in predicting the outcome of W.W.II. However, Orwell should have recognized Burnham's book THE MANAGERIAL REVOLUTION was a solid account that political and economic affairs were to be controlled by managers and "experts" rather than a market economy and by traditional political processes.
   
   Orwell's anthology has interesting essays of literary criticism and correspondence. Orwell was suprisingly well versed with continental European poltical leaders and literary figures. There is an interesting letter that Orwell wrote to Arther Koestler, author of DARKNESS AT NOON,in which Orwell favorably compares this book with Orwell's own 1984.
   
   Orwell also has some disturbing remarks regarding "allied" abuse and torture of defeated German prisoners of war. Orwell reflected that he remembered British and U.S. propaganda against the Germans before and during W.W. II. Yet, right in front of his nose, the "allies" were acting in the same beastial manner against those caught on the wrong side of the war. This was quite disturbing to Orwell, or any thoughtful person.
   
   This reviewer has always been very impressed with Orwell's work. Any thoughtful individual who is not afraid of clear writing, honesty, and truth would enjoy Orwell. Unfortunately, the number of such people is small. As Orwell wrote one time, propaganda and lying do not decieve people. Propaganda and lying only help people who want to be deceived.



3. This fourth volume concludes the excellent essay collection from a man who died much too young and with whom I do by far not always agree, but who provided me a very satisfying and instructive reading experience.
   I chose the headline from one of the essays in this volume because it gives Orwell in a nutshell, including my own ambiguities about him. He argues against the Soviet apologists, in the early post war time, who say that one must break eggs to make an omelette. (Is that a Lenin quote, btw?) His question: so where is the omelette? strikes me as witty and appropriate, but at second glance as callous and cruel. After all he seems to imply that yes, you may kill a few million people for a 'good' purpose, but the purpose must be met.
   In such moments Orwell is deserted by his own devotion to clarity and he gets caught in his own puns. That does happen to him. As much as he lambasts against bad language, he will write e.g. 'I could multiply these examples endlessly' (talking about bad stories from the Soviet Union), when he actually means, he could add to these examples for some time.
   Reading the man for 4 volumes gives me the conviction, that this suspicious interpretation of mine is unfair. No, he would not have intended to mean that.
   The title 'In Front of Your Nose' refers to our ability to harbor contradictory notions without suffering too much from it: the English intelligencia in the 30s was able to oppose Hitler as well as disarmament and conscription. Another example: the gospel of Matthew tells us that Jesus descended from Abraham and David through his father Josef, and then proceeds to tell us that Josef was in fact not the father. (I am sure theologists are perfectly able to talk this contradiction away.)
   Vol. 4 has plenty of worth while literary criticism as well, like the previous 3. The essay on good bad books predicts that Uncle Tom will outlive the complete works of Virginia Woolf. (Frankly speaking for me that has already happened.) Jack London could tell his stories well, but they are not well written.
   Let us close our Orwellian peregrination with a timeless reminder: political language is designed to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. Right, my AFs in the much afflicted US?

5 comments about While My Guitar Gently Weeps : The Music of George Harrison.

1. Finally, someone analyzes George's musical catologue with the scholarly insight it deserves. Simon Leng understands how to connect the events in George's life to his artistic endeavors. Mr. Leng ably demonstrates that he has pondered long & hard about George's majestic contributions to twentieth century arts and beyond. Bravo.



2. This is a pretty good book. Unlike it's competitor, or companion "here Comes the Sun", this book is coming from a primarily music-analysis point of view, rather than a spiritual hagiography/biography. The analysis is pretty much song by song and focuses mainly on his solo albums, not his Beatles work, so anyone who wants to read about the first and early forays into Indian music will not find it here- that said, he does go into detail about the people who worked closely with George in the production of all his work (including the introductions to Ravi Shankar and some of the faces behind the scenes).
   I liked this book- if I had to pick one or the other of the two competing
   "musical histories" I would choose this one, if only because while it recognizes George's spiritual quest could not be divorced from his music, it focuses on the mechanics of that music rather than the personalities of (and the followers of) the "spiritual masters" he encountered on the way.



3. The review title refers to the monumental critical analysis by Ian MacDonald, Revolution in the Head: The Beatles' Records and the Sixties, which this book closely resembles both in structure and style. I think it is, in a word, AWESOME that a solid critical appreciation of George Harrison's entire body of work has been issued. Simon Leng has done a truly commendable job of treating Harrison's solo discography with the respect and attention is deserves. There is, in fact, much more to George's post-Beatles ouput than "All Things Must Pass" (though that is certainly the peak of his accomplishments) and Mr. Leng offers opinions of it all, song by song.
   
   As with the Ian MacDonald work, this book is written by someone who is obviously a major fan - but not a fanboy. A clear-eyed objectivity is (more or less) maintained as Leng analyzes Harrison's music. I didn't agree with every single opinion of every single song - but it did inspire me to relisten to George's music from a different perspective. Ultimately, I believe that's exactly what this type of book should do. The focus is squarely on the music (though some biographical information is included in between discussing the albums, which is welcome - especially since George's career isn't as well known or documented as Lennon and McCartney's).
   
   If you're a longtime fan of Harrison's work, you're likely to find something new to listen for. If you're a newcomer, you're likely to want to immediately acquire any of music you aren't familiar with.



4. This book provides an insightful description and analysis of Harrison's music and his era. It's really an achievement. Leng is a mature, sensitive and intelligent writer: his knowledge of Harrison and his wonderful music is evident, as is his affection for the subject. Leng traces Harrison's solo work, how it evolved and why. He also places Harrison's work in context: Can you imagine a time when songs about peace, love and spiritual yearning topped the pop charts? And if you are just a bit too young to know why, say, Bob Dylan, was such a big deal, then read this book. Harrison's music and his spiritual growth were a big deal, too, and rightfully so - and Leng should be commended for recognizing and illuminating this.



5. If you're a Beatles fan, there are so many books that discuss their music that a newcomer could easily be paralyzed by the sheer volume of choices. If you are a GEORGE HARRISON fan, however, there are relatively few books available, and this is a good thing, because Simon Leng's "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" is all you need for critical analysis of his work. The book moves chronologically, skimming over the Beatles years and digging in around 1969, when George became a solo artist and producer-for-hire. Each album is discussed, track by track, and unreleased recordings and guest spots for other artists are also covered. The original hardcover first came out in 2001, so get the newer softcover, which received a considerable re-write and is updated for George's final album, "Brainwashed." Leng is clearly a George fan, and he does fawn and over-defend some lesser work, but the book is still an invaluable guide to the underrated solo career of the Quiet Beatle.

3 comments about Cochrane: Britannia's Sea Wolf.

1. This book was first published in 1978 but has now been re-released to the benefit of all who enjoy a fast-paced historical account. After reading this book I am amazed that it has taken nearly twenty years to be re-released. What a great story Mr. Thomas tells of Thomas, Lord Cochrane, later the 10th Earl of Dundonald. From his birth through to his death covering all his exploits in numerous sea battles and actions, so many in fact that you find it hard to believe that he survived.

   The book covers Cochrane's battles during the Napoleonic Wars during which, on many occasions, he sent his ship in action against overwhelming odds. It was during this period that he was recognized, as one of Britain's most daring and successful captains. It was also during this period that he made many enemies, although he pressed hard in every action and took many risks, he always considered the well being of the men under his command. This later led to his single-handed campaign against corruption in the Admiralty.

   Following the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 Cochrane commenced an extraordinary career as a mercenary admiral. He subsequently commanded the navies of Chile and Brazil and launched campaigns against their protagonists, Spain and Portugal. After finishing his 'little wars' in South America he took command of elements of the Greek navy in their war against the Turks. In all these campaigns Cochrane again showed that he was one of the best naval commanders of his time.

   The narrative flowed along smoothly and although I have no great knowledge of maritime history I had no problems in following this story. In over 350 pages of text along with a number of black & white plates and a few maps Mr. Thomas tells a wonderful and exciting story. This is the type of book, which I am sure any person who has a love for history or who enjoys the novels of C. S. Forester and Patrick O'Brien will just love. A must for any serious student of naval tactics or Napoleonic warfare.




2. As the blurb on the back cover says: forget Horatio Hornblower, forget Jack Aubrey. Even the license given to them as fictional characters can't surpass the facts of Lord Cochrane's extraordinary life. A supremely creative tactician and breathtaking improviser at sea (it was no less a person than Napoleon who nicknamed him the 'Sea Wolf') his story ashore is worthy of a book in itself.

   This book has it all: blood, guts and glory pitted against both the enemy abroad and the corrupt establishment at home. Once read, there's no forgetting this man and his story.




3. This book is remarkable historical background for anyone who enjoys the Jack Aubrey, Lord Ramage, Horatio Hornblower sets of historic fiction.
   The biographer details many of the challenges met by those fictional characters, including the pervasive corruption of the British admiralty system, which fictional heroes endure and which Thomas Cochrance fought against his entire life.
   Donald Serrell Thomas highlights a few of the many ship-to-ship actions from 1793-1808. But he spends as much time investigating the politics of the pre-reform parliamentary system where a few powerful purses controlled the representation from numerous "rotten boroughs" -- one of which elected Cochrane.
   The author also outlines the details of a remarkably modern-sounding stock market fraud case, in which Cochrane was found to be a co-conspirator. The author thinks (as most of Britain came to think) that Cochrane was innocent, although another recent study came to an opposite conclusion based on the same evidence.
   If you're a fan of the "Sharpe's Rifles" series, read "Sharpe's Devil" before you read this book. But read both!

5 comments about My Year Off: Recovering Life After a Stroke.

1. Very insightful book. Referring to the past reviewer who dismissed this book because Mr. McCrum's stroke was not catastrophic enough, I am very sorry to hear of your loved one's difficulties. However this book could be helpful to many who suffer lesser degrees of stroke and eventually recover fairly well. I can understand this book would not be useful to you personally in light of your experiences. I can say though without a doubt, as a stroke survivor, that even a mild stroke is something no person would EVER want to experience. It often strikes like a lightning bolt and even if function is eventually regained it is hard for a person to ever get over being completely paralyzed and helpless even for a short period of time. Books like Mr. McCrum's help the world at large start to realize stroke can affect anyone, even the young. Best wishes and good health to all.



2. This book was not quite up to my expectations. It was interesting but I felt the writer wasn't being totally honest about his rate of recovery since it conflicted heavily with his wife's view. I actually liked his wifes diaries, they were very helpful in what the actual recovery process was. I wouldn't highly recommend paying the money for this book.



3. While I found this book interesting it would be most disappointing if I were someone looking for real answers. If someone is looking for real recovery then I would recommend a book called Peeling the Onion:
   Reversing the Ravages of Stroke. In 2000 my grandmother had a stroke which left her paralyzed, unable to roll over in her bed and unable to speak. Long-short, I took a shot and took her to this clinic where, in less than a week she and I were again having two-way conversations and she could transfer herself from the car to the wheelchair. By the time we went home she was walking 400 feet with a walker. Strokes change families but they don't have to be permanently debilitating. If you are looking for help for the stroke and not just a book to read, you might want to order it. Thank God for Dr. Hammesfahr and his stroke therapy!Peeling the Onion: Reversing the Ravages of Stroke



4. I found Robert McCrumb's book to be very helpful in understanding how the stroke victim feels about what he is going through. My father just had a stroke and I spent a week with him in the ICU and rehab unit, trying to help him get his life back. During a victim's recovery period we rarely if ever hear from them, especially if they suffer from aphasia (loss of speech). Mr McCrumb's book tells us what we never quite understand-what the stroke victim really feels, thinks, hopes for, and dreams about. I appreciated the inclusion of his wife's diary, as she was his primary support person throughout his recovery. It was also interesting to learn how differently a stroke was treated in the mid 90's in the UK, versus in 2007 in the USA in Madison, WI. where they were able to administer the new TPA drug that helps prevent damage. Overall I would highly recommend this book as a good read, with not too much medical jargon to scare you away yet enough to help you relate to what he was going through.



5. I am also a stroke survivor. I was very fortunate to survive and to experience struggle, failure and triumph as a life's second chance. My year off, which I read soon after my stroke 4 years ago provided me with guidance and insight as to what to expect. Especially the emotional aspect of my recovery. I also loved the author's music recommendations which revealed to me another way in which the brain recovers. I sprang from that and explored into frequenting activities that stimulated positive thinking (i.e. beautiful art). I learned so much from this book! I'm grateful that it was the first book I read during my recovery! Thank you for being so insightful!!!

4 comments about William Marshal: Knighthood, War and Chivalry, 1147-1219 (2nd Edition).

1. David Crouch's biography of William Marshal, an icon in his own time, a courtier and knight who served five kings--Henry II, Henry the Young King, Richard the Lionheart, John, and Henry III--as well as a queen, Eleanor of Aquitane, coming to represent the ideal of the corteis (courtly) to his peers and the embodiment of chevalerie for those who have since studied the period, does much to ground the legend and question earlier interpretations that often accepted the contemporary accounts of Marshal's life at face value. Earlier biographers, such as Painter and the French doyen of medieval history, Georges Duby, based much of their understanding of Marshal's life upon the posthumous "Histoire de Guillaume le Mareschal," a still extant epic poem commissioned by Marshal's sons and followers to celebrate his life and many accomplishments. Surprisingly, previous writers have chosen to base their biographies, especially Duby, almost entirely upon what is obviously, regardless of any factual accounting, a suspect source, in doing so ignoring other contemporary documents that go a long way to tempering the portrait of Marshal, not only in the "Historie" but in the subsequent biographies from which they were based.

   Instead of the chivalric hero of battlefield and tournament cast in the mold of Chretien de Troyes, or the often fortunate simpleton of Duby that rose to the heights of medieval society through the sheer prowess of his arms, in Crouch we find a poor, relatively minor-born knight who through valor and shrewd financial self-interest uses both the battle and tournament field to promote his own fortunes, aided at times by pure good luck, which he is quick to turn to his own advantage. Upon entry to the courts of the powerful we discover a man who was deft in manipulating the intrigues of his betters for his own benefit, quick to ally himself with those who could help him, adept at playing one party off against another, and, when his politics stumbled, able to ultimately survive and reverse his misfortunes where other men fell. Charismatic, he both received and demanded loyalty from the mesnie and supporters that surrounded him. Generous to his followers, he could be equally stern and unforgiving to those that opposed him, in many ways reflecting the values of the aristocratic society of which he was a part. At the end, he survived both rebellions and the displeasure of the kings whom he served, becoming one of England's most powerful magnates and regent for Henry III, in effect ruling England in the boy king's stead.

   The author uses his biography to examine the role of the mesnie in 12th century medieval society, as well as the function of the tournament, both as a social phenomenon and an avenue for advancement, both financial and social. He investigates the evolving notion of chivalry, both as an ideal and its actual practice. And he makes a cursory foray into the influence of religion, especially as it pertained to the noble's household, with its dependence upon an administration of clerical clerks. As much an insight into medieval military and noble society as a biography, the author has leavened his account with some wonderful anecdotes, such as Richard I's remonstrance with Marshal against killing him in battle, and Henry II's pique with his son over the latter's crossbowmen firing at him during a period of The Young King's insurrection. The various interactions and shifting allegiances between King Henry II and his often recalcitrant sons is illuminating in itself. Though Marshal was often out of the king's favor, Henry II nonetheless twice requested that Marshal serve his son, even though the son was at war with his father, and Marshal's military skills and allegiance would be turned against him! Quite a different mindset than what we're accustomed to today.

   At present, this must be considered the definitive biography of a medieval icon who not only influenced his own times, but the imaginations of subsequent generations. I suspect that many who read this account will be left wishing for more. Both the Painter and Duby biographies have their value, though the former has long been out of print and will require some effort to find. Read their accounts, then use this book to place their flaws in perspective. Also, Crouch indicates that the original "Historie" will soon be available in translation.

   An exceptional book, and very highly recommended. My only complaint is that the price asked by the publisher is preposterous.




2. My brother is a veteran (medic) and once in a long while he remarks on the brothers in a unit he served with in Vietnam in awe, "There were some real fighting SOBs in our unit." Marshal was the master of arms, the greatest of all western knights. Please read this cracker jack book and consider Marshal's lessons on leadership: competence, loyalty, largess, shrewdness in avoiding the axe, empathy, commitment, iron will, courage, and the ability to do the right thing when at the crossroads.
   An example for the later occured when tweleve year old Henry III came to pay his last respects to The Marshal on his death bed. William lectured the King on refraining from "acting" as former kings acted towards others. IOW, Marshal meant, "Don't be a sociopath like your late father King John." I find it odd that no thinks that starving oppenents to death and walling a mother and her child up alive in a castle wall is not sociopathic. Murdering nobles made the southern barons rebel against John, not just having to pay exorbinant amounts to have seizen of their inheritence. After John died of fever, imagine Marshal as regent of England and protector of the young King Henry rallying most of the rebel barons through his strength of character and leading the English army to victory at Lincoln against the remaining rebels and a French army under the banner of the French king's son invited to take the crown of England. Oh, by the way, The Marshall was 70 at that time. William took the Templar oath on his death bed and is buried in London Temple Church along with his son and two of the De Clares.
   Did Henry III take The Marshal's teaching to heart? Hell no. In the years following William's death, Henry was swayed by his "foreign" advisors (French) who pursued a policy of eliminating (the effectiveness of and/or the lives), when possible, The Marshal's descendants in both the male or female lines (De Clares and Marshall intermarried). Can't kill everybody.
   This book ought to be required reading for all U.S. ROTC and military academies cadets on the subject of leadership and ethics. Many of our best character leaders, meaning our brave generals who have spoken up agianst the bungling incompetence of Rumsfeld and Cheney are reminders of the true values of chivalry that is the essence of William the Marshal.
   When I watch Lord of the Rings (the charges into the breach and the rallying speeches) and King Arthur, I think to myself, "That's how it was, except our 24th great grandfather really did slam in to the enemy while his household knights roared, 'God save The Marshal!'" Yes, he really was a fighting SOB. Freedom, truth, and doing the right thing are worth fighting for. The Marshal's values, along with many men and women who held similar values are part of our American and military cultures. William did not go around waterboarding prisoners, but interesting enough the sociopathic Angevins and Normans did. Hell, even the Puritans stopped the practice of dunking as punishment. To think Rumsfeld and Cheney think it is necessary in order to save American cultural values is a lie, a very ancient lie that is making King John smirk in hell and The Marshal whorl in his grave (except it is probably too tight in there for him spin in his cript)at the London Temple Church.



3. This is a fantastic book about one of the Mediaeval period's most powerful and brilliant men. Coming from humble beginnings, William Marshall eventually served four Kings and became the regent of England and guardian of the boy King Henry III son of King John. It is taken from the actual biography commissioned in his honour by his sons, and is the only surviving account of the life of a knight of the 13th century. Eventually made the Earl of Pembroke, William Marshall gives an insight into the life and thought of a mediaeval knight, his ideas of honour, duty and allegiences. A very readable book and highly to be recommended to anyone interested in this period of England's history.



4. This is a book that would be a benefit to anyone with an interest not only in William Marshal, but medieval people and the society in which they lived.
   William Marshal was one of very few men that not only lived up to the hype written about him, but he exceeded it. He truly was a great knight, a great man of honor in all that he did.

No comments about Best Little Stories of Winston Churchill.

5 comments about William Wallace: Brave Heart.

1. As a child of 9 I picked out the decor for my new room - Wallace Plaid - which dumbfounded my family since our Clans were MacGillivray, Ogilvie, Grant, Fraser and Montgomerie! But I thought Wallace such a great, sweeping figure. This was decades before Randall Wallace accidentally discovered William Wallace on a vacation in Scotland and read Anne Porter's Highland Chiefs. Wallace, to me, was such a true Patriot - not a Saint, but a man willing to go to the wall, to die for what he believed. Not many of us would walk in his shoes, so I have to admire his willingness to die for an idea.
   James MacKay gives a richly details account of the Scottish clime of politics that formed and fermented Wallace. It might be a little bit more than the average reader would be interested in (I would suggest Grey's book on Wallace in that case), but for those wishing to know more without wading through Blind Harry, this is a wonderful work.

   A perfect gift to that friend that watched Braveheart more than once!!




2. I'm a big fan of the movie Braveheart, and of history, but I could never get into this book. It's written somewhere in between a novel and a work of history. Because it strattles this line it brings out the best of neither world.

   The author clearly attempted to write a biography on Wallace based on Blind Harry's poems, but he filled in many details to poems that are probably embellished history. I just found the book rather dull.




3. As a Wallace aficionado, i looked forward to reading this, but to say i was disappointed was an understatement.
   This badly researched book was full of inaccuracies.
   The author puts forward an alternative Wallace birthplace, putting forward detail that the unsuspecting reader would probably take on board. For instance, he says "Corsbie is of course, now known as Crosshouse", whereas these two places are seperate entities.
   He places one monument, that of Leglen Wood, 20 miles away from its correct location, and claims Wallace was born in Ayrshire, whereas the Wallace family were vassals of the Stewart family, who never owned land in this area, and so Wallace could not have been born there.
   Dates are wrong, one monument he claims was built in 1970, was actually built in 1910.
   I feel the author, no stranger to controversy, has jumped on the Wallace bandwagon, and has rushed this work out to take advantage of the boom caused by Braveheart. Many people see details in print, and assume they are true. This book has so many inaccuracies that it will actually lead its readers astray.



4. I have read many reviews, and as a medieval history student people need to realize when writing about the middle ages many sources are not original. This is a great book, that argues from many points of where Wallace may have lived. They are guesses, but based on the best availiable sources. Also writersd need to take into consideration where the accounts came from, and how they were altered in such a way. Of course accounts from an english lord wont be in favor of wallace. What i did liek about the book, is how it is left out about the battle at york, which in the movie got peope excited. #1 sieges almost never worked for opposing armies, also if an opposing army did break through walls were lines with archers and it was rare that anyone would take the castle. #2 It was a small rebel army, nit a trained military, and at this point the whole english army would have been sent north for protection, so i highly doubt wallace would have sacked york, the movie is incorrect as usual. As for the book, the author does the best he can with what is given to him.



5. THE GOOD: The book is interesting but largely because of the target and not so much due to the execution of relaying the story about said target. This was my first step into the life of William Wallace and will admit that I enjoyed it, somewhat.
   
   THE BAD: I felt like the book could have been laid out a little better. Through much of first part, it seemed like there was a lot of back filling about things other than Wallace. I understand the author needs to create the world in which Wallace was born, but to do so at the expense of leaving the subject of your book out I think is a mistake. I wanted more Wallace in these early chapters and while he wasn't totally absent, I think he could have been more present.
   
   THE UGLY: Not being an expert on WW, I wonder at the inaccuracies within this book regarding his life. I know the main source comes from Harry's story but there are parts in the book where the author even casts doubts on the validity of Harry's writing. There were also parts where it was explained, with surprising detail, how WW had combatted numerous English foes by himself in an almost superhuman like way. Maybe it's true, maybe it's not...I don't know. But I did find myself wondering what was accurate adn what was not.
   
   Ubermonkey says that there are probably better books one can buy regarding the outstanding life of William Wallace.

2 comments about The Palace Diaries: The True Story of Life at the Palace by Prince Charles Secretary.

1. I normally don't read books of this type, but, yesterday (Sunday, 21 Sep 2008), I walked into the Barnes & Noble bookstore in Natick, Massachusetts, and discovered a discussion going on with the author of this book, Sarah Goodall. Struck by her attractiveness, I decided to take a seat and listen. In the end, I decided to purchase the book and have her sign it. After she signed her book for me, I told her that the photo on the cover doesn't do her justice (Sarah Goodall is a beautiful woman). And, last night, I read the entire book in one sitting. It's a very easy read. It's a very open and frank account of her life as the Lady Clerk to HRH (Prince Charles) from 1988 to 2000 when she was fired and banned from the palace. She's holds nothing back as we watch her grow (with the help of her inner nanny) amid a very entertaining series of events. She is refreshingly open about her many sexual affairs with men which lends the book an extra spicy appeal -- she's obviously a woman with a very healthy libido. The book paints a good and syspathetic portrait of HRH, who she quietly loves (though never acts upon). I've come away with a different perspective of Prince Charles because of this book. He comes across as a sensitive and well-meaning man who has finally found happiness with Camilla. In the Prologue at the beginning of the book, she confesses that she wrote the book for two reasons: 1) to make some much-needed money, and 2) that her story of her twelve years inside the household of the Royals is an interesting one. Yes, it is, and I do wish her well in her quest to be financially rewarded for a lively and intimate account of her life during this period.



2. normally don't read books of this type, but, yesterday (Sunday, 21 Sep 2008), I walked into the Barnes & Noble bookstore in Natick, Massachusetts, and discovered a discussion going on with the author of this book, Sarah Goodall. Struck by her attractiveness, I decided to take a seat and listen. In the end, I decided to purchase the book and have her sign it. After she signed her book for me, I told her that the photo on the cover doesn't do her justice (Sarah Goodall is a beautiful woman). And, last night, I read the entire book in one sitting. It's a very easy read. It's a very open and frank account of her life as the Lady Clerk to HRH (Prince Charles) from 1988 to 2000 when she was fired and banned from the palace. She's holds nothing back as we watch her grow (with the help of her inner nanny) amid a very entertaining series of events. She is refreshingly open about her many sexual affairs with men which lends the book an extra spicy appeal -- she's obviously a woman with a very healthy libido. The book paints a good and syspathetic portrait of HRH, who she quietly loves (though never acts upon). I've come away with a different perspective of Prince Charles because of this book. He comes across as a sensitive and well-meaning man who has finally found happiness with Camilla. In the Prologue at the beginning of the book, she confesses that she wrote the book for two reasons: 1) to make some much-needed money, and 2) that her story of her twelve years inside the household of the Royals is an interesting one. Yes, it is, and I do wish her well in her quest to be financially rewarded for a lively and intimate account of her life during this period.

4 comments about George Orwell: An Age Like This 1920-1940: The Collected Essays, Journalism & Letters (Collected Essays Journalism and Letters of George Orwell).

1. I read this set many years ago, and it's great. There were better novelists, but Orwell was the best 20th Century essayist, at least in English, that I know of. Together with "Down and Out in Paris and London," "Homage to Catalonia," and "The Road to Wigan Pier," these four large volumes comprise the best of Orwell's nonfiction. As an essayist, Orwell was consistently clearminded, idealistic, honest and to the point. He is a pleasure to read, and he is one of my intellectual heroes.

   I don't have a copy in front of me as I write this, but I'm pretty sure this first volume contains Orwell's unforgettable essays on the inner life of colonialism, "Shooting an Elephant" and "A Hanging". I highly recommend this set to anyone who is the least bit interested in Orwell.




2. I'm not going to review all four volumes of this collection separately; what I say below applies to them all.

   There are lots of reasons to read Orwell's letter, essays and journalism:

   1. He's a great writer. It's a pleasure to read him, just for entertainment value. There's a little piece of doggerel from Orwell's school days that he quotes several times that is now stuck in my head:

   The rain it raineth every day
   Upon the just and the unjust fella
   But more upon the just because
   The unjust has the just's umbrella

   I don't know why that sticks with me, but it's a great illustration of Orwell's use of solid, colloquial and even humorous English.

   Moreover, in addition to providing wonderful model prose he occasionally writes essays about writing and language (the use of "Basic English", oratorical versus conversational English, what drives a writer, the totalitarian perversion of word meanings, etc.), which are insightful and interesting.

   2. If you're interested in the Second World War (or for that matter, the Spanish Civil War), Orwell's writings amount to a sort of diary, a primary document. Even his book reviews almost inevitably contain some reference to the political and historical scene.

   3. Orwell loved socialism (yes, the man who write _1984_ was a democratic socialist), but he loved freedom more. His simultaneous battle for socialism and against totalitarianism (i.e., the Soviet Union) is engaging, even -- or maybe particularly -- where he drops the ball.

   ...

   I think Orwell's heart was in the right place -- he had seen close up (and written a good deal about) the suffering of the poor. Like many people who have their hearts in the right place, he jumped immediately to the idea that redistribution of private property and collective ownership of the means of production were the only way forward.

   On the other hand, he was a writer and a man of ideas, a person who greatly prized personal freedom. His essays give an intriguing glimpse into the battle raging inside him between collectivism and individual liberty.




3. In a way, Orwell's reports on English poverty in the 1930s are an update on F.Engels's solid and shocking study on the situation of England's working class nearly a hundred years before. (Engels was not only Marx's financier, he contributed major works himself. His place among communist icons is of a different quality from later politicians like Lenin, Stalin etc. His book on the working class was straightforward sociology and it wrote history.) However Orwell was not a scientist, his texts remain journalism and he devoted less time to it in total, though his personal commitment while it lasted was breathtaking. He lived it. He lived with them, his subjects. I am of split mind about that.
   I am not sure that I think all that highly of Orwell as a reporter. There is something missing. He remains strangely aloof, there seems to be little passion, little empathy, little sympathy, but a certain condescension and impatience with the victims of circumstances.
   His reports and analyses on the situation in Spain are of a different caliber. They are a passionate attempt to explain the conflicts inside the Republican, anti-Franco camp to whoever wanted to listen. As we know from history, it was useless.
   The book is a guide through parts of European history, written by a contemporary observer. Letters help understand the personal situation of the writer. Reviews add to our understanding of the man more than of the reviewed books.
   Some of his reviews would be smash hits here in Amazon, e.g. the one on Mumford's Melville bio. Less popular might be his aside that Conrad's genius is proven by the fact that women don't like his books. He had a hard time figuring out Henry Miller, who was something new, but if he was something good was not so easy to decide. (He does shed some more light on himself here by mentioning that birth and copulation are disgusting subjects. Odd, isn't it? But maybe the usual for the time.)
   And there is an excellent long essay on Dickens, the greatness and the shortcomings of the great novelist. This text motivates me to go on with the volumes 3 and 4 of the set. The man had a lot to say, even if I don't like all of what he says.



4. Dive into his life and be amazed at the quality and quantity of his output. Superb