2 comments about Lady Godiva: A Literary History of the Legend.

1. Who is the most famous Anglo-Saxon (real, ancient Anglo-Saxon) of all? Chances are you can't name a thing the kings Aethelred or Alfred the Great did in their reigns. Chances are you never heard of Leofric, Earl of Mercia, or his wife Godgifu. Undoubtedly, though, you have heard of Godgifu under the name by which she has come down to us, Godiva. You might know her chocolates better than her legend these days, but even on the chocolate box, she rides naked on her horse; a legend like that can never die. The life of the legend is traced in _Lady Godiva: A Literary History of the Legend_ (Blackwell Publishing) by Daniel Donoghue. Godiva has been, and will continue to be, more than a hawker of confections, and this summary of the life of the real Godiva, the origin and transformations of her legend, and the use to which her story has been put, makes clear Godiva's importance.

   Godgifu was pious and generous, especially to the local convents and monasteries. She did nothing that would have made her famous; there is no history that hints of anything resembling the legend, which was only first written down over two centuries after her death. She saved the people of Coventry from taxation by fulfilling her husband's "impossible" condition that she ride naked through the town. The tale that the villagers agreed to keep their windows shut and not look, except for Peeping Tom the tailor who was thereupon struck blind, is a later addition. Peeping Tom didn't even get that name until the seventeenth century. Godiva became a star of processions through Coventry, processions that had previously featured religious items like transubstantiated bread. Donoghue takes us through bad ballads and Tennyson's poem, to Victoria's enthusiasm for the legend, and to the takes on Lady Godiva by Dr. Freud and Dr. Seuss.

   It is clear that Godiva still rides, but her identity has changed for our times. Donoghue shows how the legend has lost the story that concentrated on Godiva's virtue and generosity. There is now no heroism and no coercion. She paraded herself naked, and is understood these days as an exhibitionist. Peeping Tom is only infrequently associated with her legend, and is more a part of legal issues than folklore. Donoghue also explains the attraction of medieval legends in general; Dungeons and Dragons and Harry Potter are part of popular medievalism, which is booming. Serious medieval studies, concerning how this part of our past has been viewed by successive centuries, are still vibrant in academia. This study of a particular legend, clear, serious, and comprehensive, lets Godiva ride on in new intellectual exposure.




2. I enjoyed this book although it is authored by a Professor of English at Harvard University and is therefore written in somewhat ponderous college professor language. This academic jargon isn't helped by the fact that Godiva was a real Anglo-Saxon woman who died in 1067 the year after William Conqueror seized England. "Godgifu," Godiva's Anglo-Saxon name was the wife of Leofric, the earl of Mercia. Godiva's granddaughter became the last Anglo-Saxon queen of England. Godiva was immensely wealthy in her own right and probably much richer than her husband who was primarily a politician. Historically Godiva is recorded as a very pious and powerful benefactor of the church and it's monasteries, whose members also happened to be the chief historians of the Middle Ages. It was not until 150 years after her death that the story of Lady Godiva's heroic horseback ride was recorded in great, and unusual narrative detail by the monk historians of the Benedictine abbey of St. Albans. From that point forward the legend of Lady Godiva's naked, mid-day ride through the village of Coventry has captured the imaginations of audiences for more than a thousand years. The story has changed just as the details of a 1,000-year long children's game of "Pass It On" would change each time the tale was repeated.
   Coventry added Godiva's famous ride to its annual public processions in 1678 and attracted huge crowds of interested spectators from the very beginning. The Coventry re-enactments of Godiva's ride have continued right up to the present time and still attract thousands of interested visitors. Earlier re-enactments of Godiva may well have been part of earlier processions for Corpus Christi that began in England in 1318?
   One of the features of the original legend was that Godiva made her ride to free the citizens of Coventry from a cruel tax imposed by her husband. She eventually tricked him into making a bargain to rid the villagers of the tolls and taxes. He had declared that if she rode naked through the village at midday on market day, then he would cancel the tax. To his stunned amazement, she did exactly that and he had to abide by his bargain. In the original legend, Godiva submits herself to this naked ride for the high purpose of saving the people of Coventry from starvation because of the heavy taxes. She tricks her husband into the bargain because he believed her incapable of agreeing to such public exposure. Her motives are good, and the townspeople show their respect by going into their homes and shuttering the windows so that Godiva's ride is unobserved. Godiva's honor is saved and the people rewarded. Peeping Tom was added to the story much later.
   From that original telling of the legend the motives and details of the ride have changed with the times. The myth has been the subject of countless poems, ballads, stories, artworks and modern reincarnations in new media like motion pictures. The myth has been so well known throughout the western world that Freud, Tennyson, Dr. Seuss, and Sylvia Plath referred to it as a cultural touchstone reference. Plath committed suicide shortly after writing her 1962 poem "Ariel" in which she rewrote the story from a subjective point of view and Godiva breaks free of the bonds of society. The legend of Godiva has changed with the passage of time and major changes in society. Immortal characters such as "Peeping Tom" soon became an important part of the story's fabric, but Godiva has become a hero to feminism as well as the enduring erotic personification of male voyeurism. Throughout the story's history Godiva's deed has been considered unselfish, honorable and heroic rather than scandalous. The beautiful woman riding naked upon a horse through the center of town has become an embodiment of contemporary society's dreams throughout different historical eras. Godiva is more than just the name of a popular brand of chocolate candy; she is a happy fantasy from the Middle Ages world that includes Robin Hood, King Arthur, and Harry Potter. The scholarly arguments about whether or not Godiva actually made such a heroic ride are discussed in great detail. The biggest obstacle to the legend being true is that in the Anglo-Saxon world, Godiva would not have had to ask her husband to cut the taxes of Coventry because she personally owned and ruled Coventry. She could have cut the tolls by her own decree since the village belonged to her alone and had been a part of her family for decades.
   This book does explore almost anything anyone would like to know about the story, legend or myth of Lady Godiva's famous erotic ride. The occasional examples of Middle English spelling and syntax plus the Sylvia Plath poem discussion does require careful and slow reading--like reading Beowulf in the original or an early translation.

4 comments about Queen Victoria (British History in Perspective).

1. Queen Victoria has more biographies written about her than any woman born after 1800. This biography takes note of the work done in the past and tries to fill in where the author thinks previous works have been lacking. She is a paradoxical monarch who is largely misunderstood. Becoming Queen in 1837 at the tender age of 18, her 64 year reign would span one of the greatest periods of cultural evolution in history. Europe was also unusually peaceful during this period. A shrewed politian, Victoria was the last British monarch to wield great authority. To help explain the "Victorian" zietgiest, a large portion is devoted to the relationship between Victoria and her Husband, Prince Albert. This book's greatest weakness is it's greatest asset: it is short (many other biographies are published in large volumes). At the expence of the druging details of history, he provides a biography that is both interesting and manageable. In the author's own words, he aims to "whet the readers appitite for more and to alert that same reader to the books and articles in which additional historical nourishment may be found." (p.13) A great book, an easy read; 4.5 out of 5 stars.



2. Written by a Professor Emeritus of History of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Queen Victoria is an engaging expose of both the private and public life of the princess who inherited Britain's throne as a teenager and became the strong guiding figure and symbolic head of the largest empire in the world. Drawing upon past studies and research as well as Victoria's own writings to illuminate her not only as a ruler, but as a human being gripped by concerns ranging from gender roles and religion to political machinations and the state of Ireland. An excellently researched and presented portrayal of one of the strongest and most influential women of history.



3. When you think of Queen Victoria, sometimes you visulize a cold and distant monarch. This book looks into to life of a very young queen and how her impact influenced a 3 generations. It will help the reader understand the English family and monarchy. Paced well and very enjoyable. It will be time well spent. Donna Pitcock



4. There's a lot of good information in this book about the history of Victoria's life.

5 comments about The Titled Americans: Three American Sisters and the British Aristocratic World into Which They Married.

1. Interesting story about these sisters but it is very shallow in that it never gets past the surface. We never know what drives these women and never get a true sense of their personalities. then towards the last third of the book, it becomes more of an itinerary than anything else. All you read is "....then Clare went here, then Jenny went there..." I think this author has promise. Apparently, this is her first book so I am hoping that she learns more writing skills. Lots of incorrect historial information as well. Unless I am missing something, was there someone called "Grand Princess Tsarvena" and "Grand Prince Tsar"? Apparently, the author tells us these 2 people were the future Nicholas II and Alexandra, who, according to the author "..attended his sister Marie's wedding to Queen Victoria's son..." Now, last I read, Marie was the daughter of Alexander II and NOT the sister of Nicholas II. AND, Nicholas II didn't even know Alexandra at this time. This is just one historical error but since this was my first connection with these sisters how can one be assured that they are reading the truth.



2. Elisabeth Kehoe's "The Titled Americans" is a good examination of the lives and careers of the surviving daughters of American financier Leonard Jerome: Leonie, Clara (originally Clarita), and especially, Jennie, the oldest, and probably best known for being the mother of Winston S. Churchill. Kehoe covers a lot of ground, focusing primarily on the lives of Leonie and her Leslie family and of Clara and her Frewhen family. Unfortunately, as another reviewer has so aptly noted here, we do not really get more than a terse descriptive look at these sisters, their husbands, and children. Without question, Jennie Jerome Churchill (Lady Randolph Churchill) was undoubtedly the most interesting of the three, working tirelessly as a dutiful politican's wife and as an unpaid resident "American Ambassador" to the United Kingdom at a time when relations between Americans and the British were far more cordial, and far less friendly, than they are now. I was struck reading how the lives of all three sisters were in many instances quite similar, having endured either poverty or unhappily married bliss (or in at least one instance both) inspite of their matrimonial alliances to British aristocracy. This slender volume serves mainly at best as a fine overview of the Jerome sisters and of their families; those wishing to read more about them should read the elegant biographies written by family members, most notably those by Winston S. Churchill.



3. This work chronicles the rise of one American family in the first half of the 1800s. The father is able to acquire a fortune through the stock market, and the mother is determined to take her three daughters to Europe where they will be able to trade their financial prospects for a European title, coming at the beginning of a series of marriages in which American heiresses were joined to less wealthy but socially advanced British nobility (particularly minor nobility). However, as the fortunes of the Jerome family wax and wane with the unsteady stock market, so do the prospects, marriages, and lives of the three Jerome sisters. Of special interest because one of the sisters (Jennie) is the mother of Winston Churchill.
   
   Quote: "It was all the more important to women of their class to adhere to these standards because they had so little else beyond their social position. Their story thus illuminates what it meant to be a female member of the British aristocracy during its decline, when incomes were falling but lifestyles were slow to follow the downward spiral."
   
   
   While I enjoyed this story and learning about the interesting lives led by the sisters, I also felt that it dragged on for rather longer than it needed to given its subject matter. And I'm a history teacher, so it's not that I automatically think history non-fiction is going to be boring :). However, the research seemed well done (end notes, yay!), and the stories of the lives of the three sisters and their offspring were woven together nicely.



4. The author has done a good job for her first book, her writing style is engaging allowing you to imagine you are witnessing the trails and trumipths of the Jeromne sisters.
   
   However, there was times that I had to consult the family tree (found in preface pages of the book) in order to understand which family members the author was writing about.



5. My title applies to the protagonists of the book as well as the book itself. The three Jerome sisters were certainly fascinating women, though incredibly self-absorbed at the expense of their children. The husbands all come off as cads, which I suppose can excuse some of their excesses. You almost get exhausted reading all the examples of shallowness throughout the generations. There were some eggregious errors by the author (one passage referred to a Tsar of Russia as Nicholas II before Nicholas was even born! The author must have meant his father, Alexander III). It's errors like this that detract from getting into the story. It's entertaining, but not as good as other bios of the time period.

5 comments about Royal Affairs: A Lusty Romp Through the Extramarital Adventures That Rocked theBritish Monarchy.

1. Publisher's Weekly called Amanda Elyot (a/k/a Leslie Carroll) the "Queen of historical fiction". Well, the Queen has now turned her attention to fact, in her non-fiction debut, "ROYAL AFFAIRS: A Lusty Romp Through the Extramarital Adventures that Rocked the British Monarchy".
   
   For lovers of salacious tabloids, this book is a MUST READ! It's hard to believe the goings on among the Royals. Fans of Showtime's "The Tudors" and the popular novel and film "The Other Boleyn Girl", will love the fact that "Royal Affairs" spotlights the TRUE stories behind these beloved (or reviled -depending on how you view it) historical personalities. The old cliche, "truth is stranger than fiction" absolutely applies here. The actual shenanigans of these royal figures and their lovers, as Ms. Carroll recounts wittily, are frequently more exotic, exciting and passionate than those engaged in by their fictional counterparts. Just imagine our ancestors devouring every word of delicious gossip about the royals of their time as we've all digested every titillating word about Prince Charles, Princess Diana and royal mistress Camilla, who had the guts to hang on in until the Prince made an "honest woman" out of her.
   
   The reason for most of these royal marriages was not love -but political and economic gain. So it's not surprising that many kings, queens, dukes and duchesses indulged their libidos without benefit of marriage. Ms. Carroll is a meticulous researcher and her efforts recall various forms of sexual encounters from flirtations and love letters to rampant sex with glamourous (and not so glamourous -or beautiful) men and woman who willingly shared their wares.
   
   For sheer FUN, pick up a copy of ROYAL AFFAIRS... it will make a truly marvelous addition to your summer reading list. You might also pick up some royal tips to add sparkle to your own sex lives.



2. Royal Scandals: A Lusty Romp Through the Extramarital Adventures that Rocked the British Monarchy is a compendium of just that: all the famous (and infamous) affairs the English monarchy conducted over the course of a millennium. From Edward II and his shameless promotion of his court favorites, to Henry VIII and his six wives, to Charles II and his many mistresses, to Prince Charles and his affair with Camilla Parker-Bowles, Leslie Carroll gives us a "tell all" about famous royals' love lives which is absolutely fascinating to the modern American.
   
   Its in her favor that the author isn't a professional historian; these royal affairs are related with a gossipy tone. However, there's a caveat to this: some of Carroll's facts are incorrect. She's primarily a fiction writer, and she tries too hard at times to adopt the lingo--she's fond of such terms as "heir and a spare" and "maitresse en titre." It's also difficult to credit an author who lists Michael Farquhar's A Treasury of Royal Scandals: The Shocking True Stories History's Wickedest, Weirdest, Most Wanton Kings, Queens, Tsars, Popes, and Emperorsas one of her sources. But nonetheless, its clear that Carroll must have done a lot of research in order to write this book, and that she's really enthusiastic about her subject matter.



3. Leslie Carroll's Royal Affairs is one of those rare books on history that manages to be both impeccably researched and historically accurate, and wildly entertaining. It's a juicy, brilliantly-written romp through the extra-marital affairs of the kings and queens of England, the kind of book you can either read cover to cover or dip in and out of. The whole book is of very high quality and beautifully presented - kudos to the publishers, as well as to the author for writing such a terrific work!



4. This is a lusty romp of a book...as the title says. It is a light fluffy read about the British Royals and their love lives..and I found it enjoyable. Highly recommend it.



5. As one reviewer put it...this is definitely a piece of 'fluff'. Thankfully, I am familiar with the British Monarchy so was able to weed-out the historical gaffs and expressions by ambassadors taken out of context.
   
   One glaring gaff is that Ms Carroll wrote that George and Anne Boleyn's father was dead before the sister and brother were executed. That is not true. He was very much alive, and continued to be so for a few years after their deaths.
   
   A major mistake like that always puts me on-edge as to how much to believe in any sort of 'factual' book.
   
   Still and all...it was fun, a definite page-turner, and a good introduction to the American public of the piccadillos of the various Kings and Queens which have graced Great Britain's throne throughout the ages.
   
   Gospel truth? Not by a long shot. However, it is easy enough to pick up, and put down, as the beach waves call.

2 comments about My Fight for Irish Freedom.

1. This is a good book and helps you understand much of how the Irish war for independence was gotten off the ground. For those interested in this period in Irish history it offers a unique insight from a hero of epic proportions. Some scenes from the book sound like they belong in a Hollywood script more than a true historic account and yet, that is what this book truly is. A must read for those interested in the struggle for Irish freedom.



2. Most certainly one of the best books pertaining to the troubles from 1916-1922 to have survived over the years.
   Dan Breen in great detail describes his ascendancy to the top rung of the organization then known as the Irish volunteers (Later the IRA) in his native county Tipperary and the ensuing life on the run, the inevitable price to be paid for his part in the Soloheadbed Ambush in 1919, which arguably launched the Anglo-Irish War. His description of some of the leading characters of the day, most notably Michael Collins and Eamon de Valera, are as valuable as his tragic insights into the Civil War following the Peace Treaty of 1921, including his tireless efforts to bring peace between both the Free State and the Republicans.
   I have an extensive library that includes masterpieces by Ernie O'Malley, Tom Barry, and Pat Deasy, among others, but I still believe this might be the best account yet, always worth re-reading.

3 comments about Fanny Kemble's Journals.

1. I was attracted to this book after I saw the movie, Enslavement, based on the life of Fanny Kemble who lived before, during and after the Civil War. This book uses exerpts from her letters and journals to tell the story of her adult life, but it does not contain all of her written material. She published several journals, letter collectiions, and plays. Fanny was a remarkable woman, obviously much before her time. She was unusually independent and energenic, and her writing includes few of the steriotypes typical of the period. However, we are able to see how the customs of society restricted her ability to act, especilly her efforts to help eliminate slavery and improve the life of her husband's slaves. Because of her popularity as an actress she was able to earn a living after divorcing her husband, but he had control over their children until they reached adulthood. This book gives unusual insight into the lifestyles and concerns of the period. It actually reads like a novel.



2. I must say, I have never seen insight so dignified on such a subject in all my years of book review. When I read this book, every page enlighten me with an overwhelming sensation of sadness, guilt, freedom and anger. Every one of my emotions were totally stimulated by this master piece of modern society. Regardless of the date in which Fanny published this book, it still leaves a gruesome reminder of the pure agony suffered from the hands of Prejudice and Hate. I have just finished watching the TV movie of Fanny's story, and I am absolutely blown away by the extreme emotional precision used in creating this film. Let this film and this book be a lasting reminder, to the youth of our age. It is important for the younger teenage generations of this new century, understand the facts of what had to be done, to win them the lives they have today. I rate this book 5 plus stars. It was amazing. :-) ~ LiteratureLuver418thCentury... ~



3. Fanny Kemble provides us with a unique and courageous account of the 'peculiar institution' that was thrust upon her by her marriage to Pierce Butler, the wealthy scion of a Southern plantation owner.
   Already a celebrated actress when she came to America, Fanny was well-educated and accustomed to earning her own living when she married Pierce. It was only after traveling from Philadelphia to Butler Island, near Darien, Georgia, that she became aware of the full horror and degradation of slavery. She toured the plantation, helped to nurse the sick, did what she could to improve their conditions, and opened her door to all who dared to air their grievances, much to the dismay of her husband. Eventually, their disagreements on these points led to a divorce, and Fanny returned to Europe where she resumed her theatrical career.
   This volume also contains Fanny's letters to friends and confidants that provide a valuable insight into the cultural climate in England as well as America for much of the 19th century.
   These journals and letters are not only entertaining, but a must for any serious student of American history.

5 comments about George Orwell: As I Please, 1943-1945 : The Collected Essays, Journalism & Letters (Collected Essays Journalism and Letters of George Orwell) (Collected Essays Journalism and Letters of George Orwell).

1. I don't know if George Orwell is the best writer this century has produced, but he is among the most decent human beings who was also an extremely talented writer. And that decency, that honesty and sense of fair play come through loud and clear through this wonderful mix of editorial pieces and personal letters. It does not matter whether he is writing about the Socialist movement, the Monarchy, the manner in which Americans were treated in England during WWII, the English language, writing, colonialism, nationalism, anti-Semitism, or how to make a proper cup of tea, his honesty is ever-present. For he wrote these essays (I think) because although "emotional urges which are inescapable, and are perhaps even necessary to political action, [they] should be able to exist side-by-side with reality. But this requires a moral effort." If you are prepared to make such a moral effort-or simply want to spend a few nights with a truly wonderful human being and gifted writer, I highly recommend this book.



2. It is a pleasure to read Orwell. I think that there are two major reasons for this. Stylistically he an exceptionally clear writer. His work has a quiet elegance. Secondly, he is a writer who says meaningful things. Whatever subject he writes about he writes about not only with knowledge but with real ' sense'.
   In this third volume of his collected essays, jouralisms, and letters there are a number of outstanding longer pieces, including those on 'The English People' 'Notes on Nationalism' and 'Anti- Semitism'
   He is an excellent letter writer and I especially enjoyed his insights into literature. His remarks on Conrad and Koestler and European as opposed to British Literature are sensible and insightful.
   All through this work there are scattered gems of humane perception.



3. The last review that I did on George Orwell's work was Homage to Catalonia, his compelling story of his involvement in a Party of Marxist Unification (POUM) left-wing militia regiment in the Spanish Civil War. I noted there that this is the Orwell that today's militant leftists need to read. The current compilation of articles that he did during World War II and shortly thereafter are not in that same category although they are, as always with Orwell, well worth reading. No matter the subject matter of the articles they conform to the points that he made in Politics and the English Language about using precise, clear and rational political language. Unfortunately, at the time of the Tribune writings Orwell had already made his peace, even if critically, with British imperialism. This is obvious from the subject matter of some of the articles, particularly those in defense of holding on to the old empire or at least its prerogatives. The articles themselves vary from the topical and mundane under war time conditions to the speculative but as always written in a bit of a tongue and cheek manner. That said, although Orwell by this time was an anti-Stalinist socialist of some sort he preferred to outsource the fight against Stalinism to world imperialism. Apparently, as the recent furor over his naming names of British communists to British intelligence indicates, he had no such qualms about doing so. Certainly this was not his finest hour. He left that in Spain.



4. George Orwell' (1903-1950)anthology titled AS I PLEASE is an interesting collection of his careful literary criticism and political insights which were much more often right than wrong. Readers can learn so much about not only the situation and conditions in Great Britian between 1943 and 1945, they can learn much about the international situtation and Orwell's complete disillusionment with the "Left" both in Great Britain and in Europe.
   
   This reviewer thinks that Orwell's literary criticism of Arthur Koestler is the best article of literary criticism. Orwell focused on Koester's DARKNESS AT NOON which Orwell thought was Koestler's best work. Orwell argued that Koestler was a supporter of the "Left" during the Spanish Civil War and was arrested and faced the prospect of being shot. Koeslter escaped but had to know how the Stalinists betrayed the Spanish Left during the Spanish Civil War. Koestler was a member of the Hungarian Communist Party, knew of the Stalinist purges of Lenin's Bolsheviks, and saw a repeat of all this in Spain.
   
   Orwell also had intelligent commentary of literature and humor. Orwell stated that good humor had all but disappeared in Great Britian because of political and religious sensitivity. Orwell stated that the best comedy was that which attacked hypocrisy and pretensioness. Orwell cited Aristophanes, Rabelais, Shakespear,Voltaire, etc. who did not hestitate to mock and write comedy of the self righteous and "high and mighty." Orwell was bothered by the fact that such humor almost disappeared from English litature during his life time. An interesting aside is that Orwell complimented Hillaire Belloc and G.K. Chesterton for their humor. Orwell was critical of both in some of the other essays in this anthology.
   
   Orwell not only wrote good literary criticism, he wrote solid political commentary. Readers can see the beginnings of his best known novels-ANIMAL FARM and 1984. Orwell's comments on ill feeling between British and American troops. Orwell stated that since American troops were paid at least five times as much as British troops, social divisions and hard feelings were almost inevitable. Orwell also commented that many American troops refused to admit that British casualties were larger than American casualties which indeed they were.
   
   Orwell's best political commentary dealt with such concepts as Fascism, Pacifism, the Trotskyites, the Stalinists, etc. Orwell's major criticism of the "Leftists" was that because they were anti-Fascist, they would not become anti-totalitarian because of refusal to oppose the Stalinists and Big Communism and its obvious record of mass murder and concentration camp brutality. Orwell makes hash out of the accusation that the Internatianl Jews heavilty subsidized Britian's Trotskyites. Orwell commented if that were true, one had to ask why Trotsky's supporters were always so poor. Orwell accused much of the "Left" of refusing to accept facts and assessments of World War II. For example, many of the British and American leftists commented that the Soviet Union was an example of the biblical inscription that the meek shall inherit the earth. Orwell noted that those who made this remark obviously had not read Soviet anti-German propaganda which was full of hatred and violent vengence. Orwell also noted that the Left expected British military failure while extolling Soviet victories during World War II.
   
   Orwell also expressed serious concern over the distortions and falsification of history. For example, both the "Allies" and "Axis" claimed victory when their was defeat. Casualty figures were distorted as were events. What was worse was the description of non-events or events that never occured. Orwell commented that the Leftists never wrote a word about the SovietGerman "Non-Aggression Pact" which was negotiated in 1939 with the secret protocol of the Soviets and Germans to invade Poland.
   
   Orwell made comments that his novel titled ANIMAL FARM was censored or kept from publication because of British concerns of offending their Soviet "allies." Little did Orwell know that this novel would be a best seller after he died. Orwell can also see the outlines of his 1984 in this collection of essays.
   
   One development that concerned Orwell toward the end of World War II was the emerging anti-Semitism in Great Britain and to a lesser degree in the United States. Orwell was clear that accusations and slurs agains Jewish people were patently false. Yet, Orwell was clear that facts and reason were of no avail to many because they were immune to knowledge and reasoned thinking. Orwell attributed much to a weakened Great Britain at the end of World War II, and the British Empire would soon be dismantled. Orwell argued that nationalism and the fear of the loss of Empire incited anti-Semitism among people who would otherwise not fall for such nonsense.
   
   While Orwell was wrong in some of his earlier predictions, he was honest enough to admit this and explained why which something most "intellectuals" are loathe to do. If Orwell had lived another 50 years, he would know that his important predictions came true. This reviewer was pleased to see Orwell admit he was wrong as this showed a degree of honesty that is sadly lacking.
   
   This reviewer did not like the format of the book. As this reviewer stated elsewhere, the book should have been arranged by topic rather than by chronology. However, this is a matter of taste. This reviewer strongly recommends this anthology which is part of a four volume set of Orwell's thought. This is yet another excellent collection of Orwell's great writing.



5. Sorry for the prank in the headline, it is not a comment on Orwell but a quote from the book, from the essay 'The English People', written in 44, but published later. Orwell tries to characterize the English. I would never have dared to write that myself.
   This is volume 3 of 4, and the first that I give 5 stars. It is less uneven, less self-contradictory, probably more honest than the previous 2. GO had grown up, I assume. The bulk of the book are his leaders under the name that the collection carries: As I please. He comments on events of the time, and does it with lasting interest.
   I don't want to repeat my friend Jim Egolf's summary of the book, nor his assessment of its historical value. All true.
   But Jim left out an important subject that Orwell also included, and that I want to bring to your attention. The fact is that GO was an impossible romantic about England. He honestly thought that there was merit in English cooking! One essay is called: In Defence of English Cooking.
   He lists a few items that we are supposed to accept as proof of his odd point of view. Believe it or not, one of the items which supposedly prove the high standard of English cooking are English apples. I rest my case.
   'It is not a law of nature that every restaurant in England is either foreign or bad.' Written 1945. My regular visits in recent years, all in basically friendly intention, make me conclude: if anything changed, then for the worse, because now even many of the foreign restaurants are bad.
   Dui bu qi.

1 comments about Catherine Parr: Henry VIII's Last Love.

1. It was dangerous to be married to Henry VIII. His first wife was cast away and died prematurely; the second was beheaded; the third died in childbed. When Henry was casting about Europe for his next wife, Christina of Denmark is supposed to have quipped, "If I had two heads, one should be at the King of England's disposal." Fortunately for his fourth wife, she was merely divorced (and outlived Henry); but the fifth was beheaded; and the sixth too had a brush with the king's deadly wrath. Only by her wits did Catherine Parr survive.
   
   In the first biography of Catherine Parr (1512-1548) in a quarter century (since Anthony Martienssen's), Susan James approaches her subject as more than just the sixth queen of Henry VIII (which is the context of books like Antonia Fraser's, Alison Weir's, and David Starkey's). The present book is a new, slightly shortened edition of the 1999 biography Kateryn Parr: The Making of a Queen. The footnotes of the earlier book have been relegated to the end, and gone is the last section on Catherine's brother William Parr after her death, as are the appendices, including the love letters of Catherine and Thomas Seymour and a discussion of the painting previously thought to be of Lady Jane Grey. What remains is a lively (if abruptly ended) account of Catherine Parr's life, rich in detail about her before, during, and after her reign as queen.
   
   It is a Victorian misconception that Henry married Catherine for her nursing abilities--but she was well-versed in the medical arts of that period. She also had a humanist education normally given to noble boys at the time, since she was tutored in the same group as her brother, her sister, and their cousins, all under the keen eye of their mother Maud Parr. (Maud had been widowed young and took advantage of the independence this allowed; she was also a lady-in-waiting to Katherine of Aragon, who, ironically, was probably Catherine's godmother.)
   
   Rather, Henry became genuinely attracted to Catherine when she was still married to Lord Latimer (her dying second husband) and in the service of the princess Mary. No doubt it helped Henry with his competitive spirit that Sir Thomas Seymour was also courting the soon-to-be widowed Catherine. And it was perhaps key that Catherine (unlike Anne of Cleves) didn't offend Henry's sensitive nose: "she carried with her small jewelled boxes of lozenges flavoured with liquorice or clove or cinnamon for sweet breath."
   
   The notion of Catherine as Henry's nurse gives the impression--wrongly--that she was secure in her position. She certainly found her niche in the royal family, making peace between its warring members and restoring her stepdaughters Mary and Elizabeth to the line of succession (she'd had practice with her Latimer stepchildren, and this part of the traditional view is correct). And she made a good and competent regent when Henry was making war in France--almost too good, though, because her conservative enemies (including Bishop Gardiner and Thomas Wriothesley) began to conspire against her. Ever since the break with Rome, Henry had been growing steadily more conservative in his religious views, although he tolerated Catherine's progressive beliefs and her choice of his younger children's tutors (enthusiastic reformers). She'd had to keep her beliefs secret during her previous marriage, especially when she was a hostage in the 1536 Pilgrimage of Grace protesting Henry's dissolution of the monasteries. But now as queen, she felt the freedom to read forbidden books and argue with the king--tendencies that the conservatives exploited in their efforts to overthrow the queen.
   
   When the conservatives contrived to have Catherine arrested, she had her forbidden books destroyed and then took to her bed, sick. She was probably more sick with fear than anything, but the ploy brought Henry to her, and she expressed her fear of his displeasure and eagerness to make amends. The next day when she was permitted to visit him, Henry baited her for another argument, but she demurred, saying that she had only argued with him to distract him from his health troubles and to learn from him. This savvy appeal to his self-concern and vanity had the intended effect, and Henry received her back into favor--and into his bed. Wriothesley and the guards were not informed, and when they came to arrest the queen, Henry publicly humiliated them. The conservatives thus fell from power, and into their place came the reformers, including Edward Seymour and John Dudley, who would wield power during Edward VI's reign.
   
   Catherine, too, had influence with the new king, until she alienated him by her ill-advised affair and hasty marriage with Sir Thomas Seymour. It was, finally, a marriage for love long frustrated--but it was fateful all around. Catherine herself died in childbirth (and the child appears to not have survived infancy); Thomas Seymour went to the block; and her stepdaughter Elizabeth suffered a blow to her reputation and nearly lost her life.
   
   Susan James has written an excellent scholarly biography of Catherine, illuminating her motives and passions and highlighting her influence on the future Elizabeth I (who shared with Catherine a particular "restraint in the face of religious excess"). Catherine Parr comes across as a formidable woman, a match for Henry VIII, and a role model for her stepdaughters.

5 comments about We Shall Not Fail: The Inspiring Leadership of Winston Churchill.

1. Anyone who gave less than 4 stars for this book needs to have their head examined! This is a great book about a great man. I read a lot, but when I read that this man read entire volumes, I was impressed. The fact that England isn't speaking German today is largely due to the perseverence of Churchill. As far as good writing, Celia Sandys (Churchills grand-daughter) did a wonderful job. Any leader would learn a lot by reading this or other books about or by Churchill.
   
   I liked it and highly recommend it.



2. I am a Churchill fan and have read much by many on the subject. This book might serve as a primer on Churchill. It captures some of his distinguishing characteristics. While some of them relate to leadership, others were just extensions of his personality. He was a bullish, long winded, contrarian, egoist. Without a doubt he was also an extraordinary leader and a man for his time during WWII.
   
   Unfortunately, in some chapters Celia Sandys takes a personality style or quirk and tries to stretch it into an inspiring nugget of leadership truth for the masses. She gives anecodtal evidence of a particular facet of Churchill's outlook and then ends each chapter with Churchillian Principles. They are meant to convey that he had distilled these principles and lived by them, however, there are many biographies out there that will show you the complete Churchill. He was a leader. He was stubborn, relentless and fully taken with himself. But let's don't over do it. These were manifestations of WHO Churchill was, not leadership principles. Churchill wouldn't have changed any of them even if he discovered they weren't exceptional leadership traits. He simply would have continued on undeterred.
   
   Still, I would recommend this book to any not familiar with Churchill and who may not be up for a lengthy biography. You'll get enough for a flavor of the man or you may be intrigued enough to conduct more serious study about him. I don't think you will be able to take any one of the "Churchillian principles" and infuse it into your personal management or leadership style.



3. First a caveat to my review. I only bought this book for information on Winston Churchill, and have no interest on the business aspect of this book at all. I got exactly what I wanted, insight on Churchill the man, and even learned a bit about some great business minds. The book is full of little vignettes of Churchill, and how he operated and used his personal skills. Divided into chapters which define Churchill at his best, and even some of his worst. The gems of the book are the little stories given to reinforce thought processes of the authors on Churchill. Such as the one where Churchill, after a late night meeting, ran into a trunk G.I in a hallway. The G.I addressed Churchill as "Fatso", and asked him where the bathroom was. Churchill gave the man concise instruction on finding the restroom, then added "It is marked Gentlemen...., but do not let that discourage you." Priceless, stuff on a great man. If I were more intersted on the business side of the book a five would have been given.



4. Found the book in my case that had kind of sit there for some time. Was a book short without the library being open so why not? It was a great decision. Having always thought alot of Churchill this book was excellent to expose his deep thinking and ways with people. Any executive could learn a multitude of actions from this book. Todays world does not follow most of these ways and it probably is the reason we are in the mess we are currently in. We need more men as great a Churchill. Are you out there?



5. There is no question that Winston Churchill was an inspiring and powerful leader, probably the best that the twentieth century produced. He took over a nation reeling from defeat and standing literally alone against the mightiest military power ever assembled before the massive American forces were mustered at the end of World War II. When many were convinced that England would be forced to surrender, he rallied the British so that they held on until the Soviet Union and the United States entered the conflict.
   This book is a recapitulation of many of the actions and principles used by Churchill to achieve his war aims and at that level, the book is a success. Beyond that, there is an attempt to relate these actions to managing a modern business. While there is some justification to the comparisons, the book is very weak in that area.
   The problem of course is that the British position in the first years of World War II was a literal matter of life and death. If they failed, the nation could cease to exist and even in the best case scenario of victory, thousands of British citizens would be brutally killed. This simply cannot be transferred into the leadership of a business. The capitalist system has programmed a rate of business failures into the regular operations, so the failure of a business is at most a local catastrophe. Therefore, all such comparisons suffer from a serious, if not fatal flaw.
   The authors use the incident of the destruction of the World Trade center towers as the most similar modern incident and there is repeated praise of the American and British leaders after the fact. While some of that praise is justified, the reality is that despite the horrific nature of the event, it was a singular event, unlike the Blitz, which was nightly.
   For these reasons, I rank the book highly in the historical sense, although there is a glossing over of some of Churchill's mistakes. This is balanced by a poor rank in the modern business sense, because the situations are just not that comparable.

5 comments about My Country Right or Left 1940-1943: The Collected Essays Journalism & Letters George Orwell (Collected Essays Journalism and Letters of George Orwell).

1. This is a great collection of essays and other writers by one of the foremost socialist critics of totalitarianism and domination. It is also a great book for admires of writers such as Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn and Edward said, as all share the same overarching purpose: to be a tireless critic of power and domination wherever it may be found. It is ironic to the extreme that so many conservative revisionists attempt to claim Orwell as their own, which is due to the tragically myopic misreading of his writings, especailly 1984 and Animal Farm. Both books are condemnations of totalitarianism, and in the case of Animal farm, the final page attests to Orwell's repugnance of capitalism. Let it not be forgotten that Orwell fought in the Spanish Civil War in the aid of the socialist-anarchists. This is truly a great collection, which should be required reading for those who may not be familar with Orwell's non-fiction work.



2. ...Country Right or Left is part of a four volume set of essays commissioned by Orwell's wife Sonia. Whatever the criticisms that have been made of her stewardship of Orwell's legacy, these four volumes contain much of the best of Orwell's essays, letters and diary excerpts. This volume covers the early war years and much of the writing is shaded by that war.

   This is Orwell at his finest, on one hand a confirmed socialist dedicated to fighting the right whether the Tory party or fascism; one the other hand an anti-Stalinist and critic of the left and always an anti-totalitarian.

   Contained within "My Country Right or Left" is some of Orwell's best writing. In "Pacifism and the War", a notorious piece at the time, he accuses pacifists of aiding the fascist cause. "The Art of Donald McGill" is an essay about, of all things, postcards that are popular among the middle and lower classes. The postcards themselves, Orwell argues, say much about England's political and social attitudes. It's actually a perceptive piece of pop art and social commentary. Among my favorites is the essay concerning Mark Twain (Mark Twain- Licensed Jester). Orwell, a great admirer of Twain's, is critical of him for not being forceful enough in his social criticism. He accusation is that Twain pulls his punches far too often. It's a great piece of criticism and is Orwell at his finest.

   What holds a large amount of this Volume together are the letters to the Partisan Review, a New York publication that contracted with Orwell to write commentary on England during this early war period. The issues vary from English politics, reflections on the clothing worn by the masses, attitudes towards democracy and so on. All well written, never dull and very often wrong in their predictions. There is much more here including excerpts from his diary, letters to other major figures of the day and reflections on the Spanish Civil War.

   This is some of the greatest essay writing in the English language. Even sixty years later the essay's read clearly and give insight to Orwell's thinking.




3. For years, I have been impressed by the quality of the essays in Dickens, Dali, and Others, Shooting an Elephant, and Such, Such Were the Joys. I was looking forward to reading more of Orwell's essays. I soon discovered, however, that Orwell's essays not published in book form shared all the faults of those that I had read, but few of the virtues.
   
   Many cite Orwell's honesty as his primary virtue, but these essays reveal a man who is, if not dishonest, then at least quite blind to his own experiences. He states, without any supporting evidence, that "only Socialist nations can fight effectively" (p. 67, from The Lion and the Unicorn), despite the fact that he served in an army organized along socialist lines (as narrated on p. 255), if not the army of a socialist nation, five years prior to the publication of this statement; the army was defeated decisively by Generalissimo Franco's decidedly non-socialist forces.
   
   Orwell also frequently resorts to name-calling. Those who disagree with him politically are almost invariably "reactionaries", "Fascists", or "pro-Fascist". Jack London is "not . . . a fully civilised man."; rather, he possesses a "streak of savagery". Any thought, expression, or even word of which Orwell disapproves is "vulgar", from the cartoon postcards of Donald McGill to Kipling's statement that "He travels the fastest who travels alone" to Yeats's use of the word (!) "loveliness" (Orwell also claims that "Yeats's tendency is Fascist." on p. 273).
   
   It is clear to me after reading this volume that the editors who selected pieces for the three volumes of essays published during Orwell's lifetime made the right choices; they show him at his best. The rest of the material here is hardly worth reading except as a window into the soul of a man who was incapable of viewing the world except through the distorting lens of a commitment to socialism.



4. This book is an anthology of Orwell's essays, literary criticism, letters to friends,and political criticism. Those who read this book can read some interesting letters that Orwell wrote to the editors of THE PARTISAN REVIEW on the fortunes of W.W. II involving the British. The book concludes with Orwell's diary of the war. While George Orwell (1903-1950)was a self admitted "leftist," he was not an ideologue. Orwell showed that he was a well read individual and knew very well that political labels conceal the desire for political power regardless of political titles and party affilations.
   
   Orwell was a master of literary criticism. Two examples are his review and comments on Hitler's MEIN KAMPF and Tolstoy's denounciation of Shakespear. Orwell commented that an English review of Mein Kampf favaored the German dictator. Orwell correctly predicted such praise would soon evaporate which it did. Orwell informed readers that praise for Hitler was not unusal. One must note that Churchill complimented Hitler in Churchill's book titled GREAT CONTEMPORARIES. Churchill also complimented Hitler in a speech to Parliament in November, 1938. Here Orwell shows not only his ability as a literary critic, but he informs younger readers that the political disapproval word,fascism, had a different connotation. Many Europeans including the British middle and upper classes had serious concerns of Big Communism with its record of mass murder and concentration camp brutality.
   
   Orwell showed himself again as a literary critic when Orwell critisized Tolstoy for the latter's condemnation of William Shakespear. Orwell correctly refuted Tolstoy on a couple of issues. First, Tolstoy read Shakespear in translation which may have tainted his understanding of Shakespear. Also Tolstoy tried to condemn Shakespear in lieu of Tolstoy's social philosophy. Orwell stated such criticism was useless because such criticism would have been incomprehensible to Shakespear and his English contemporaries in the 16th and early 17th centuries. Orwell also chided Tolstoy for his assumed superiority. Tolstoy could not understand why Shakespear literary work was so appealing and wrote that everyone should know that Shakespear was some sort of scoundral. Yet, Orwell wryly comments that Shakespear's literay work was available throughout the world while Orwell could not find Tolstoy's essay until he found it in a museum.
   
   The best part of this Orwell anthology are his political essays. Orwell noted that there was suppose to be a bitter political divide betwen Fascism and Big Communism. When the German-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact in 1939 unhinged this concept and angered Communists and their fellow travellers. When asked about this unexpected turn of diplomatic events, Molotov (I believe it was Molotov) who said that the difference between Socialism (Bib Communism) and Fascism was a matter of taste. Approximately two years later when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, this view sure changed. Orwell stated that Stalin and his supporters would have called themselves Fascists if they thought such a label would enhance their power. Hitler and his supporters would have done the same. Orwell clearly indicated that men who have concentrated power will use whatever political labels to keep or enhance their complete hold on power.
   
   Orwell used the political chaos both inside the Soviet Union and in Europe to sound a serious warning that literature could be lost because of the rapid changes in political loyalties. The sudden changes in internal enemis in the Soviet Union serves as a classic example. The heros of the Workers' Paradise were concentration camp victims the next day because they could not stay current with ruling party's changing enemy's list. The Non-Aggtression Pact mentioned above is another good example. Orwell reflected that in previous centuries, literary men (an women)had "a frame of reference." Their political and religious loyalties were stable from cradle to grave. However, given the rapidly changing of enemies, literary figures had no such stability and writing could be dangerous especially in the Soveit Union where writers were either sent to concentration camps or committed suicide. Had Orwell lived longer, he would have been pleased to see such Soviet writers as Boris Pasternak (DR. ZHIVAGO) and Alexander Solzhenitsyn who surived the Soviet purges and yet were awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature. In fact, Solzhenitsyn sent ten years in a Soviet concentration camp from which he emerged as a literary giant. Orwell did suggest that totalitarian thought control could not survive the spirit and soul of thoughtful men.
   
   Among Orwell's many talents was his ability to expose political hypocrisy. Many of the British leaders were demanding that Mussolini be charged for "war crimes." Orwell scoffed at this nonsense. Orwell cearly indicated to his readers that those British leaders who demanded such "war crimes" trials against Mussolini were exactly the same British leaders who ten years previously praised Mussoini for the acts they now wanted to charge as war crimes. Orwell had a solid memory, and when Mussolini moved against the Communists and aided Franco in the Spanish Civil War, many of the same British leaders who wanted to try Mussolini for "war crimes," praised him for his actions which they awkardly tried to define as war crimes ten years later. Among those who praised Mussolini in the 1920s-1930s included Churchill.
   
   In parts of the book Orwell showed himself as a military expert. When there were threats of a possible German invasion, Orwell had practical suggestions of arming the British citizen with the most practicle weapons. Orwell fought in the Spanish Civil War and volunteered for W.W. II, but illness kept out of that conflict. Orwell also took pride in his position in the Home Guard.
   
   This reviewer has one criticism. Orwell's letters to the PARTISAN REVIEW, political essays, literary criticism, etc. should have been arranged by topic rather than by time sequence. This would enable readers to easily read the book. However, this reviewer could not have done nearly as good a job. Orwell simply enhanced his position as a great novelist, literary critic, political thinker, and excellent prose writer. Readers would to well to read this book to have a better understanding of the war years (W.W II) than is presented in badly written textbooks and popular accounts. This reviewer highly recommends this book.



5. This is my first volume of essays, articles and letters by Blair/Orwell, which I read thanks to Jim Egolf's recent review here. The man contradicts himself quite a bit, but I do not regret the time spent. Who wants to get bored by people that one always agrees with?
   The main theme of the book, due to the time of the sample, is England in war with totalitarianism/fascism/nazism. Though Orwell was in his heart a leftist, he had enough insight from own experience to understand the nature of totalitarianism, he was a dedicated anti-Stalinist, and he staid away from party politics.
   And yet: his long essay 'The Lion and the Unicorn', one of the core texts of this book, gives a political vision, that puzzles me. He displays a surprising naivete about the strength of economic planning in socialism. Of course, we have the benefit of hindsight, we know that a central planning bureaucracy can be the right approach for a short term effort, like for a war, but will be hopelessly lost in inefficiencies in 'normal' times. Orwell was deeply convinced that state capitalism or socialism was the future, there would be no return after the war.
   I have decided to ignore his political recipes, but to enjoy his social analyses: England is a rich man's paradise, but the ruling class is too stupid to run the country.
   One of his main contributions to our understanding of the confict of the time: his juxtaposition of the ideology of hedonism (which nearly led the West into the abyss) against the ideology of social sacrifice, which helped the Nazis to succeed, luckily only temporarily.
   I wonder if he fully understood the real antagonism of Hitler to the West or if he got deceived by the temporary diversion of the pact with Stalin. (I notice when I browse the reviews and comments in this neighborhood that there is a certain willingness to say, the West should have gone with Hitler against the Soviets. Oh my, what a misunderstanding.) Probably he did. In a nice remark after the German attack on Russia he says, had this happened before the Hitler-Stalin pact, there was a chance of serious political disturbance in Britain, because the ruling class might have wanted to join the attack on Germany's side.
   My favorite text in the collection is the essay on H.G.Wells' inability to understand Hitler. Wells was the man who envisaged scientific progress against reactionary societies earlier in the century. He was unable to understand that Hitler's essentially irrational and superstitious ideology was capable of an efficient alliance with the other side of science.