5 comments about Shakespeare: The Evidence: Unlocking the Mysteries of the Man and His Work.

1. Being a Shakespearean actor, I am very interested in consuming any information concerning the bard from critiques of the plays and sonnets to varied information about his life. Usually though its a chore to ponder through overblown scholarly disertaions on the works that totally ignore the dimension of the presentation and performance. Even more so with dull biographers who grapple with sparse facts on Shakespeare's life and who eventually draw a very incomplete view of the man. That all changed in reading this book! Ian Wilson paints the most complete portrait of the bard that I have ever read. Piecing together bits of direct and surrounding evidence, selections of the plays and political intriques of the time Wilson writes an exciting narrative that reads more like a screenplay then a dissertation. I found myself dieing to know what happend next as his life unfolded. Here Shakespeare appears as a true Human being and not the stuff of half baked legend and places emotion and motivation behind the writing of the plays. It describes in detail his dealings with the high members of the court of England, rising through the ranks of the theatrical world and gives a poignant glimpse into the man himself and dispels any allusion to the authorship question, especially from Edward De Vere. Given the success of "Shakespeare in Love", Hollywood should take this book and fashion a mini-series on his life. There is more than enough drama and mystery in these pages for three films. Definitely a great read for any scholar or Shakespearean actor that seek to relish the rich legacy that Will left to our culture.



2. This is a fascinating book, but I was dismayed by Wilson's anti-Elizabeth bias. He refers to her as a "hideous old woman" responsible for the death of "many worthy young people" like Mary Queen of Scots and the Earl of Essex. Worthy young people...those two? Mary Stuart was singularly lacking in common sense, and, after catching Mary red-handed plotting against her numerous times, Elizabeth had little choice politically but to execute her. As for Essex, he was a spoiled egomaniac who bit the hand that fed him. Wilson also does himself no service by referring to Robert Cecil as "the little secretary Cecil" or by repeating without caveat a discredited story about how Essex's ring was not given to Elizabeth.



3. Books on Shakespeare roughly seem to fall into two categories: Standard scholarly books that downplay the man and focus on the plays and ingenious, entertianing books by frequently learned amateurs of anti-stratfordian theories of authorship. Anti-stratfordians have an advantage with the popular reading public; whereas academics are content to deal with texts as if they have no referents, laypeople necessarily have to ask (as William Paley said in his "natural theology) what kind of man wrote these plays. Anti-stratfordians are all too willing to oblige.

   Furthermore the field is fairly well uncontested as practically all academics consider anti-stratfordian theories as beneath their contempt. This is a shame because generally they are entirely worthy of contempt. Ian Wilson is educated amateur, with the sort of background one associates with anti-stratfordians. He summarizes and interprets the available evidence and comes to some remarkable conclusions.

   Best of all, his is not an "anti-anti-stratfordian rant" he concentrates on considering the "stratford man" not knocking other candidates. But the position of there being an "authorship problem" is made untenable. Particularly when read in conjuction with Matus' SHAKESPEARE IN FACT which addresses subsequent assessments of shakespeare (culminating in romantic "bardolatry") as well as a dissection of the claims for Oxford. This even though there are plenty of "arguably"'s, "almost certian"'s, "likely"'s that stud the text which the loyal opposition will make much of.

   The one substantian objection is that Wilson argues for the likelihood of a position (for example the identity of the "dark lady") and then frequently treats it as establish fact. This is a chief vice of anti-strafordians A few more qualifiers would have enhanced the book's credibility.




4. This is a great book. It is easy to read and it is interesting. Mr. Wilson does not just write about Shakespear and give his theories, he provides reasoned arguments about those theories. Mr. Wilson also provides alternative arguments and alternative theories regarding Shakespear.

   My only complaint? I'd like to see a list of the main people that are discussed with some clue as to their context. I say this because you will be introduced to someone on page 10 and not read about him again until page 87. A quick reference page would be very helpful in keeping everyone straight.

   Otherwise, this is a great book.
   Enjoy.




5. "Shakespeare: the Evidence" is a wonderful resource for anyone who is intrigued by William Shakespeare and the Elizabethan era, but becomes bogged down by dense research doctrines, or frustrated by conclusions drawn from sketchy evidence.
   
   And yet Ian Wilson presents a staggering amount of research (including phtographs of contemporary paintings, maps and sketches). But because the book is written gracefully, and the form and pressure of the time are depicted in fascinating detail, it is a delicious read.

5 comments about Ungrateful Daughters: The Stuart Princesses Who Stole Their Father's Crown.

1. I loved this book. It is well written and contains such detail that the characters truly come to life. I have many books on the Restoration and none of them describes James, Duke of York and his second wife Maria Beatrice and the "ungrateful daughters" better. Many jucy details. What they wore, how they looked, their quirks and peculiarities give a much fuller picture of the court and courtiers. This book is an easy read and would engage a reader who does not like usual history books. This does not mean it is light. It's the writing of an author who is a keen observer of the subjects.



2. Better books on the time period can be found. The writer distorts historical fact to fit her own agenda.



3. The Stuarts were more than a series of Scots-English monarchs, they were a contentious family filled with ambitious, egotistical, often ignoble figures who were not above slipping the knife in to advance their own careers. The generational and religious tension chronicled in this well-written true-to-life soap opera began with James II's move toward the Catholic Church, which alienated both his people and his two staunchly Protestant daughters, Mary and Anne, each of whom reigned after him. Whether Mary's husband, William of Orange, usurped the crown in the Glorious Revolution depends on your point of view, but Anne (who wasn't speaking to her older sister at the time of her early death) declared her half-brother, James ("The Old Pretender"), an outlaw -- having previously claimed, in letters to Mary, that their hated stepmother's pregnancy was a Catholic hoax and plot. Waller's narrative is compelling and enjoyable as well as informative. You can almost see a screenplay waiting to be written.



4. The Glorious Revolution of 1688 was a compelling human drama as well as a major political event. At the center of the political events were Mary II and Anne, daughters of James II, real human beings who faced difficult decisions as to where their duty lay. Unfortunately, Ungrateful Daughters does a very poor job of telling this story. Instead of a story of real people dealing with an actual dilemma, Waller's book tells the tale as a shallow soap opera with the principals divided into neat categories of victims (James II and Mary Beatrice) and villains (William, Mary, and Anne).
   
   The theme of James II as victim has come into vogue in recent years, as the result of a revisionist historical interpretation which casts him as a proto-modern champion of religious toleration. Regardless of the sincerity of James's professions about liberty of conscience, they were the result of the fact that members of his own Roman Catholic faith were a minority in Britain and would thus be the beneficiaries of any alteration in religious policy. James certainly never exhibited any inclination toward tolerance that would not end up benefiting members of his own Church. There is no record that his enthusiasm for toleration ever led him to press for better treatment of Protestants in countries with a Catholic majority. At exactly the same time that James was advocating tolerance of Catholics in Britain, the Protestants in Louis XIV's France were being forced to either convert to Catholicism or emigrate, and there is no record that James II ever protested to Louis about their treatment.
   
   However, the deeper issue between James II and Parliament was not religious but political. James professed that he, as king, had the power to suspend and dispense with laws enacted by Parliament. Parliament, understandably, strongly disagreed with this claim, and there was bound to be a clash at some point. Religious policy just happened to be the issue upon which the disagreement came to a head. Waller is not as sympathetic to James as the most extreme revisionists (which incurred the ire of at least one reviewer on this site), but the theme of James as victim is a major one, as evinced by the title of the book itself.
   
   Waller spends a great deal of time discussing a pivotal event leading up to the revolution - the birth of Prince James Francis Edward (later known as the Old Pretender) to King James and Queen Mary Beatrice in the summer of 1688. It was the prospect of a Catholic heir to the throne that pushed many who were undecided into supporting the intervention of William. Even before the birth there were many rumors circulating that the Queen's pregnancy was a conspiracy on the part of the Catholics to ensure the birth of a Catholic heir to the throne, and the rumors became certainties for many people after a boy was born, just as many Catholics had predicted. The fact that both Mary and Anne gave credence to these rumors is the crux of Waller's portrait of them as "ungrateful daughters." Historians have long accepted that there was no truth to the rumors insinuating that the new prince was not the son of the king and queen, and Waller excoriates both Mary and Anne for doubting it and doing nothing to stop the rumors. Anne in particular is held up as the villain of the piece, and, reading Waller's account, one gets the impression that she single-handedly fomented the rumors surrounding the birth of her half brother and could have stopped the revolution in its tracks had she acted differently.
   
   However, Waller utterly fails to take into account that the circumstances of the prince's birth were not nearly as clear in 1688 as they are with the benefit of hindsight. At the time there were plenty of suspicious circumstances for those who wanted to doubt. The very fact of the birth of a healthy son to a woman whose eight previous pregnancies either ended in miscarriage or produced sickly babies who died soon after birth was in itself suspicious. Also, the birth took place a full month earlier than was expected. Waller argues that the discrepancy was due to a mistake on the part of the royal physicians as to the date of conception, which was probably the case, although she does not explain why this should have been clear to everyone in 1688. Additionally, although the birth was witnessed by numerous people, they were all either Catholics or political allies of James, whose testimony was regarded as suspect. Notably absent, besides Anne herself, were the Dutch ambassador and Edward and Lawrence Hyde (brothers of James's first wife and thus uncles of Mary and Anne), whose testimony would have been accepted as conclusive. From the perspective of three hundred years in the future, all these things may appear insignificant next to the fact that a baby boy was born in full view of numerous witnesses. However, in the atmosphere of 1688, with the prospect of a Catholic heir who might someday decide that a re-conversion of Britain to Catholicism was preferable to toleration (just as Louis XIV had reversed his grandfather's edict giving toleration to French Protestants), the questionable aspects surrounding the birth gave plenty of material to justify doubts on the part of those who were disposed to be suspicious.
   
   The doubts about the new prince's legitimacy did not rest upon the testimony of either Anne or her sister. Neither Anne nor Mary started the rumors, although Anne repeated them and Mary in Holland believed them. The stories were spread throughout the country by such popular press as existed at the time and many prominent political figures lent credence to them and spread them. Anne's conduct in this affair leaves a nasty taste in the mouth, but it is far from clear that she could have done anything effective to quash the rumors, even if she had wanted to. Even if she had publicly denied the rumors, there was nothing to prevent people from dismissing this as done at the behest of James. Nuance, however, has no place in this book. By portraying Anne as holding the balance of affairs in her hand and failing to accurately consider events in the context of their time, Waller gives an incomplete and distorted picture of events.
   
   There are numerous instances throughout the book of sloppy research and assumptions presented as fact. For example, Waller claims at one point that certain letters (not written by Anne) "imply" that Anne promised her father that she would restore the throne to her brother. There is no solid evidence that Anne actually made such a promise, and Waller does not present any. However, this supposed promise becomes a major theme in the book, and Waller refers to it again and again as fact, describing certain actions of Queen Anne during her reign as violations of the promise that she made to her father - a promise that there is no proof Anne ever made. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated example, but rather typical of Waller's method. Assertions are made on flimsy evidence, or no evidence at all, and thereafter referenced as fact.
   
   The story of the Revolution of 1688 has the potential to be a compelling tale of real people living through momentous events. The two princesses who are the chief subjects of this book could be portrayed as real women who had to make difficult choices when their duty to their father came into conflict with what they saw as their duty to their faith and their country. Instead, what this book gives is a two-dimensional caricature of two women who "stole their father's crown" for no better reason than petty vindictiveness.



5. Ungrateful Daughters is a beautifully written book that I highly recommend to any English history nut. I not only felt as if I knew each person intimately, but the sequence in which the author writes keeps it fast-paced and interesting. It is the first book I've read about the latter Stuarts (and I've read many) that kept me involved from start to finish. It is a skillful study of personalities, motives and all the human strengths and weaknesses everyone of us possess. Ms. Waller presents the political influences on the women in question in an engaging manner - a great accomplishment since politics during the Stuart reign are so complex one can easily be overwhelmed by them. Ungrateful Daughters is one of the best historical biographies I have ever read!

2 comments about Elizabeth: The Queen Mother: A Twentieth Century Life.

1. Elizabeth The Queen Mother by Grania Forbes offers an array of photographs that are fun, but the writing is wretched. The author is one of these writers who begins every third sentence with However. And that gets really tedious, a sign of an insecure and inept writer. While there are some fine photos which cover, naturally, the entire 20th century (the subject was born in 1900 and still lives!) their chronology in this book is immensely flawed, as if seemingly by a mixmaster. You are led to believe it's chronological, then you are fooled to the point of aggravation.



2. This new edition of Elizabeth: The Queen Mother, a classic biography which provides a photo portrait of Britain's most beloved Royal, and which blends in a history of modern Britain in the process, provides a new text and new photos bringing her life into to modern times, and covers her recent death as well. Fans of the British Royalty in general, and the Royal Queen of Britain in particular, will relish this display and history.

3 comments about Winston Churchill: Statesman of the Century (Great Leaders).

1. Beautifully simply profoundly written book .A must reading for all laymen all good people interested in a champion of freedom.



2. I purchased this book because I needed to do a research paper which included a short biography on Churchill. This book is very concise and proved to be an asset to my paper. The biographies by Gilbert or Jenkins are very lengthy and it is difficult to sum them up and take out the main points. I am glad I found this book by Robin H Neillands.



3. Go read David Irving's biography instead, meticulously researched and you can read it online free.

5 comments about Granuaile: The Life and Times of Grace O'Malley 1503-1603.

1. I'm an O'Malley, so you can bet I was looking forward to this book. However, with all due respect to the author, at least in the early going, this book contains some anti-Christian, radical feminist claims that put into question the integrity of the rest of it. For instance, on page 17-18 (paperback edition) the author states: "The writings of the early Christian saints, such as Paul, John, Ambrose, Jerome and Augustine, reflected the degraded position of women in Roman society. Augustine wrote of the 'horrible beastliness of women'..."
   
   Not surprisingly, the author can not substantiate this claim and therefore does not give reference to the original source documents in her endnotes as she does with other claims. Don't get me wrong, there is no doubt that the period in which Granuaile lived was male dominated, and at times, shamefully so. However, that doesn't give an author a license to try to right any injustices by yet another injustice.
   
   It's a shame that the apparent good intentions of this author were laid waste by her seeming desire to bash males and Christianity. A biographer should, at the very least, seek, know and uphold the truth, and then tell the good, the bad and the ugly in an even handed way. This isn't too much to ask.



2. This book was excellently written. To the person who said the anti-christian statements were not true- Let me guess? Your a christian right. Thats the problem with christians, they still deny the truth no matter what. Christianity has always been a man's religion and its the most degrading religion to women and womens rights that has ever existed. I'm glad this author had the guts to be more unique and unconventional to tell the TRUTH. Sorry Christians. I know you never appreciate that.



3. It's my fault really but this book is just not what I was looking for and I could not get through it.



4. Anne Chambers' book provides a fascinating and inspiring glimpse into the life of an extraordinary Irish woman. Ms Chambers does an excellent job painting a picture of life in Ireland during the 16th century and the role of women in Ireland through the ages. Anyone traveling to Ireland or interesting in Irish history and the role of women in Irish society will benefit from reading this biography.



5. Anne Chambers is the authority on Granuaile O'Malley, and she has written the definitive scholarly work in this biography on her.

No comments about Prince Rupert: The Last Cavalier.

No comments about 274 Things You Should Know About Churchill.

4 comments about Queen Victoria's Children.

1. A very in depth and intriguing view into the life and lifestyles of the children and grandchildren of the "grandmother of europe", Queen Victoria. If you are after something easy to read and digest but not too in depth,on a wide variety of royals, then Van der kiste is the author for you. I find his books to be very interesting to read as well as informative, which is a hard combination to find. Very good reading! Im on to his next book.



2. If you have nothing else in your library re: the 9 children of Queen Victoria & Prince Albert -- no other biographies of Vicky, Albert Edward, et al.-- then this is the book to have. It gives a good overview of the lives of all nine children. However, I found it a little tedious to read because I HAVE read separate biographies of Vicky, Albert Edward, Louise, Arthur & Beatrice, and those biographies are the sources for Van der Kiste's book. So, if you are like me a royalty buff who's already got the biographies, you don't need to read this because it has nothing to add. But it's a well-written & concise history of all the children's lives.



3. This author produces very workmanlike and highly readable popular histories of the modern period, this time with a bio-political survey of Victoria's nine children and forty grandchildren. They possessed widely differing personalities but remained a close-knit family -- though relations often were strained by divided loyalties through marriage into other European dynasties. The author also makes good use of illustration and includes a good (though brief) bibliography.



4. "Oh madam, it is a princess!"
   "Never mind, the next will be a prince." -- Queen Victoria's comment when informed as to the gender of her first child
   
   I've always been interested in the Victorian period of English history. One of the most fascinating of the people of the time is the woman who gave her name to the era, Queen Victoria herself. Longtime author John van der Kiste, who has penned several biographies of the European royalty, now turns his attention to the Queen and her nine very different and unusual children.
   
   While this is a good place to start research on the various children of Victoria, the treatment is just too light and shallow to be of any real use. Most of the information that is given is of the 'who was born, married, and died' variety, along with various illnesses and mishaps. Almost nothing is given of the sibling rivalries and dramas that must have played out in such a huge family with so many distinct characters. Van der Kiste has written other collective biographies of royal siblings, and several stand-alone biographies of various royals, but this is not one of his better efforts.
   
   The best part of the book is one of the appendices that lists all of the children, and provides pertinent information about their own children and the many intertangled relationships that they would create -- by the First World War, descendants of Queen Victoria would be found either occupying or marrying into nearly every throne in Europe with the exception of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, several small German principalities and the Italian royal house.
   
   The author did update his book and bibliography, making note of the new material and books published on the individuals, it's still not really worth the effort to seek out a copy unless you are a fan of van der Kiste's work. The photographs are rather muddled, and not very unique to the work -- many come from other sources. Most of all, the entire narrative has the feel of a cut-and-paste job; while it is good to see the story of Queen Victoria and her children presented in a cohesive whole, and in chronilogical order, it simply lacks the depth of other, far better written, biographies.
   
   Somewhat recommended.

5 comments about Balancing Act: The Authorized Biography Of Angela Lansbury: The Authorized Biography of Angela Lansbury.

1. This is one of the finest celebrity biographies that I have ever read. Actress Angela Lansbury is profiled with candor and wit in Martin Gottfried's "Balancing Act". Gottfried conducted countless interviews with the star herself of whom he says, "No biographical subject could have been more cooperative.", and many, many of those who knew her and worked with her. The book details her early life in London, her arrival in America during WWII, and her first film, at MGM, where they promptly decided to change her name to "Angela Marlow". The book writes with candor about her first failed marriage and her Hollywood years into the late forties, when she married Peter Shaw (and the marriage is still going strong). In the early fifties, she gave birth to her son Anthony and daughter Deidre Shaw, and in the late sixties, with her Hollywood career in a slump, she bounced back on Broadway in her Tony-Award winning title role in the musical "Mame". The book is at its most exciting when detailing her Broadway career, and not just with "Mame", but with her three other Tony-Award winning roles in "Dear World", "Gypsy", and "Sweeney Todd". And after Broadway, Lansbury conquered television with her ever-popular "Murder, She Wrote" series. Since then, Lansbury has enjoyed steady acting and puttering in her rose garden. Many humorous anecdotes and behind-the-scenes stories told by Lansbury concern stars like Ingrid Bergman, Spencer Tracy, Katharine Hepburn, Marlene Dietrich, Judy Garland, Frank Sinatra, and Bea Arthur among them. She is a rueful raconteur and thrilled with her extraordinary professional and personal life. With the color and gusto of "Balancing Act", Angela Lansbury is profiled up close and personal and, as always, absolutely great!



2. With angela Lansbury's cooperation, the author was able to construct the life of the star and her dreams without being intrusive into episodes of her life. He truly respected the subject and the star rewarded him with candor. it is too often that authors choose biographies to sensationalize a life. In this case, the author told it straight but with humanity and dignity and affection for a woman of icnredible talent and character.



3. This authorized biography of Angela Lansbury is interesting and well-written...but she was a part of the project, had final say over what was and wasn't included, and left SO MUCH out! Her personal life is covered much better in the other two unauthorized biographies of Angela Lansbury. But what really floored me in this one was her descriptions of "fan psychology" and the way she talks about teenagers who looked up to the character she portrayed in shows like "Mame." She describes the kids' adulation of her in terms of being "a tragedy." While one fan clearly became out of control in terms of following her around and pestering her, the rest of us - legions of us - didn't. Hello! What's so tragic about children looking up to, and being inspired by, a responsible celebrity?



4. If you are an Angela Lansbury fan like I am, you will love this book. It tells of her family, her marriage, children, her days at MGM, her talks and encounters with movie stars, her movie career, Murder She Wrote and after. It is a well-written book not trashy like the Kitty Kelly biographies or sugar coated. I enjoyed reading this book. A GREAT READ.



5. Hello Ms. Lansbury:
   
   I just wanted to tell you how much enjoyment your performances have given my wife and I, over the years. Oh, and your decision to move to Ireland after your house in Malibu burned down: Brilliant! I grew up in Santa Monica, where there was too much money and too many drugs... So many kids my age (I was born in 1954, and graduated from Santa Monica High in 1972) had their lives destroyed by drugs. Los Angeles and Hollywood are terrible places to raise kids! You are so very lucky, to have raised a beautiful son and daughter, and to have had a husband who loved you, for so many decades. I only hope that my wife and I can enjoy over 50 years of marriage, as you and your spouse successfully did! Best wishes to you and your family. [...]

5 comments about The Queen of Whale Cay: The Eccentric Story of 'Joe' Carstairs, Fastest Woman on Water.

1. Nonconformist is an understatement. Eccentric isn't outre enough. Over-the-top words do not adequately describe Marion "Joe" Carstairs. She was a breakneck ambulance driver in World War I France, a world record-holding speedboat racer, the supreme ruler of her own Bahamian island, and pal to notables such as the Duchess of Windsor, Tallulah Bankhead, and Marlene Dietrich.

   Assigned to write an obituary of "Joe" Carstairs for the London Daily Telegraph, Kate Summerscale soon became fascinated by the woman who held sway in the 1920's as heiress to the Standard Oil fortune. This singular individual wore men's clothing meticulously tailored for her on Saville Row, favored female lovers, was tenaciously devoted to a small leather doll whom she christened Lord Tod Wadley, and managed to thumb her nose at almost every convention.

   As Ms. Summerscale unearthed more and more amazing information about her extraordinary subject, she determined to carry her findings far beyond a terse death notice. The result is The Queen Of Whale Cay, a buoyant, highly readable biography that became a London Times bestseller and nominee for the Whitbread Biography of the Year Prize.

   Estranged from her parents and disliked by a step-father, young "Joe" was sent to boarding school in America. Of this time her diary only records, "Left family aged 11." At the age of 16 she drove ambulances in France, where "Paris was heavily shelled....whole sides of houses fell down and people lay bleeding in the streets."

   Returning to London after the war, "replenished, brimming with vigour and ambition," "Joe" and some friends opened a chauffeuring service, and took on "any driving work, far and near."

   Galvanized by machines and speed, in 1925 Joe used her wealth "to commission the best motorboat money could buy." She was a daredevil on water, competing in races in Britain, Cannes and Detroit, where she vied with the famous Gar Wood.

   Yet, racing was not enough. She sought even greater challenges by leaving England in 1934 to rule and reside on Whale Cay, the Bahamian island she purchased for $40,000. Upon arriving she found the only inhabitants were a black couple who tended the lighthouse. "Joe asked them whether they lit the beacon every night, and they replied, to her amusement, "Only when the weather's good."

   She worked alongside laborers to lay a road from one end of the island to another. A store was built, and a large hole dug then filled with blocks of ice for refrigeration. Her home, the Great House, was constructed with the help of 300 men. It was a "sturdy Spanish villa, white, with red tiles..." From there she had dominion over a colony of 500 Bahamians, and entertained friends from throughout the world.

   During the 1960's, as Bahamians became increasingly independent, the atmosphere on Whale Cay changed, and "Joe" retreated to Miami. In 1975 she sold the island for approximately 1 million dollars. Three years later, deciding she'd had enough of women, she invited a handsome older man to move in with her. Hugh Harrison "stayed with her as a friend and paid companion until she died." In 1993 "Joe" and Wadley were cremated together.

   Generous, outrageous, at times a bold prankster, "Joe" Carstairs defies description. Her life defies fiction. The Queen of Whale Cay is intriguing reading, a candid portrait of a nonpareil, an incorrigible, unconquerable 20th century woman.

   - Gail Cooke




2. I saw this slim volume in the store and was fascinated by the picture on the cover - a woman dressed as a man with a little battered doll on her shoulder - "what in the world is this?" So, I started to read. What a surprise. This is the story of Marion "Joe" Carstairs, a Standard Oil heiress, a champion speed boat driver, friend to the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, an unrepentant lesbian, owner of the Caribbean isalnd Whale Cay, and the constant companion of Lord Todd Wadley (yes, a funny little doll). This is one of the most immediately engaging books I've ever read. What a character she was, and what a life she led. "The Queen of Whale Cay" is an absolute charmer from start to finish. Looking for a little slice of forgotten history to while a way some time? This is the book for you.



3. On paper, this book sounds fabulous. A rich, beautiful lesbian lives a scandalous life filled with excitement, traveling around the world, meeting lots of famous people, and making love to dozens of willing female partners. Imagine a Howard Stern sex epic with a sumptuous budget and a Merchant Ivoery feel!
   
   Kay Summerscale does a very professional job as a biographer. Unfortunately, the story is not that exciting. Yes, Joe Carstairs was a rich lesbian, and a rebel, but she was not in any sense a "fun" person. She was apparently some kind of borderline schizophrenic. All she could do to act "manly" was to throw screaming tantrums, smoke, spit and swear. Not an attractive personality. The whole thing with carrying the little doll around for 60 years comes across as sick, not funny or charming.
   
   Read the book for the sumptuous settings and try to imagine someone glamorous, like Gloria Holden (from the lesbian classic DRACULA'S DAUGHTER)having the same adventures, but in a fun way.



4. Kate Summerscale stumbled onto a treasure trove when she was asked in the 12990s to write the obituary for a British daily for M. B. "Joe" Carstairs, an eccentric Standard Oil heiress who had set speedboating records in the 1920s and who literally ruled her own Bahamian island for several decades, not only paying all the inhabitants directly out of her pocket but also establishing their rules and punishments. Carstairs also was one of the great lesbian lovers of the twentieth century, having affairs with dozens of beautiful actresses including Greta Garbo and Tallulah Bankhead--and to top off everything, was obsessed with a small leather manikin she named "Lord Tod Watley" and took with her everywhere, proclaiming him the great love of her life. The material is so terrific that this slim little biography can't help but be a fun read, but the book is held back tremendously by Summerscale's amateurish writing style, which consists of endless flatly declarative sentences and which rarely uses transitions between new ideas. Clearly Summerscale is quite erudite (her allusions to Woolf and Djuna Barnes are not only illuminating but actually quite clever), but the prose was a real drawback to what would have been otherwise a terrific tale.



5. Joe Carstairs comes off as a fascinating study of what it was like to be a moneyed lesbian somewhat outside the usual literary lesbians of the early 20th century. There aren't many stories about these women, and we can certainly use more.
   
   Alas, Carstair's definitive biography is yet to be written. Summerscale uses Freudian analysis-- badly-- and literary allusions-- somewhat better-- to illustrate who and what Carstairs was about. Summerhill basically creates a book that is about 50 years behind the time it was written. It would help if Summerscale had any actual clue about lesbian culture and cultural theory, but it seems she'd rather turn Carstairs into a freak instead of exploring her as an outsider.
   
   The most egregious example of this is early on in the book, in which she talks about how Carstairs "rejects her feminity to reinvent herself." You can't reject what you don't have in the first place. Grounding the biography firmly in the mistaken beleif that a female body will naturally be feminine creates a caricature of Carstairs rather than the fully human characterization she deserves.
   
   This is worth reading, but it's worth reading with a very critical eye on Summerscale's clunky writing and outdated analysis.