5 comments about Diana: Her True Story in Her Own Words.

1. If you need to read just ONE book rehardsing Princess Diana... This is THE one you must pick!
   
   You will be delighted with all the details and will admire even more this wonderful person.
   
   A book you MUST have on your shelves!



2. Andrew Morton's book, written in collusion with the late Diana, is a well-written, cleverly confected polemic designed to undo the very people who made her what she was (or, as some in the UK were wont to say, "After all, she's just a royal by injection"). Purportedly the daughter of a famous alcoholic (Lord Spencer), she exhibited all the classic symptoms of an adult child of an alcoholic; low self-esteem, poor boundaries, poor impulse control, chronic depression, a pattern of blaming others for her problems, etc. Of course, one can add on bulemia (from which she suffered before she married her poor husband), and other deep-seated psychiatric disorders. All this is clearly shown in the book to any critical reader. My daughter's godmother, the late Ouida Huxley, used to regale us with stories told her by one of the Queen's closest confidants, who herself witnessed how during the height of her omnipotence Diana would disparage her husband to his face, in front of the family, on his lack of charisma compared to her. She pulled cute pranks like screaming and rolling about on the floor when she didn't get what she wanted (in this particular case, to go to Majorca instead of Balmoral) in a fine impression of a grand mal epileptic seizure, in front of the Queen at a family meeting. For some reason (and it wasn't Camilla, who re-entered the scene only after all efforts at marital repair were exhausted), Diana felt as if the ungrateful royals needed to be paid back for her psychic pain, not realizing that the source of her suffering was in her own head. Andrew Morton's book is the result. It's as one-sided as an autobiography by a narcissist. Morton was either duped, or a willing collaborator in the tearing down of Britain's primary civic institution, the Monarchy. This work (if such it may be called) is about as accurate as Soviet propaganda. It is a fantasy woven from scraps of truth. If Diana had lived, and married the dreadful Dodie Fayed, she would have lost her titular "Princess" title, and reverted to merely the (alleged) daughter of an earl, and would have once again been "Lady Di". Dodie's dad was planning to lugubriously install the two love-birds in the Windsors' old place in the Bois de Boulogne. Eventually, no doubt, she would have tried out one of her famous emotionally wracking "turns" on Dodie (an Egyptian man, mind you) and would have infallibly been kicked out on her coutured posterior. During that time anyone who knew her, even from a distance, could see that Diana's life was on an inexorable and endless downward cycle (remember, even her brother, who so "courageously" dissed his own godmother, the Queen, on international television, refused to have Christmas dinner with D the last year of her life). Andrew Morton's book is a classic celebrity bio. Poor Diana. She was never happy, she would never be happy, and she was going to sow chaos and destruction wherever she went. Death, however, mercifully came for Diana before her life got even worse.



3. I first read this book when it came out in 1992. Like everyone else, I was shocked and blamed Prince Charles for the marriage falling apart.
   
   Since she died, there's been a number of credible stories come out that shows Diana to be manipulative, emotionally immature, stubborn and just plain bizarre. While her devotion to her children is unquestionable, and her charity work obviously came right from her heart, there were too many other aspects of her character that were not so glossy.
   
   I mean come on, if your wife was pregnant and threw herself down the stairs to get your attention, would you not seriously question her mental stability? Anyone who can cut themselves with a lemon peeler or smash themselves against a glass cabinet is obviously a few bricks short of a load and in serious need of help. When she did the Panorama interview in 1995, she declared that she felt "betrayed" when her former lover James Hewitt did a tell-all book.............uh, well didn't she do the exact same thing to her husband when she told Andrew Morton all the dirty details of their marriage?
   
   While I despised Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles for their affair, I understand now (a decade later) why he would turn to her: for some NORMALCY in his life.
   
   Be that as it may, the one fasinating thing about Diana is her uncanny ability to predict things. In this book, it tells of her conversations when she was young that she was going to marry someone "in the public eye". She also apparently predicted her father's stroke in 1975. But what was fasinating to read in 1992 was Diana's belief that "while she knows that William will one day be King, she is firm in her belief that she will never become Queen" and "I am performing my duty as Princess of Wales, but I can't see it for much longer than 15 years." As we all know, she was Princess of Wales for 16 years. She made these statements 6 years before she died.....



4. Saint Therese of Lisieux, The Little Flower wrote that she had prayed to discover her true vocation - and that she had found it: "to be love in the heart of the Church"! A novel by Carson McCullers wears the title: "The Heart is A Lonely Hunter". "The heart" is the location of the reality of our life . . .it is where we really dwell . . . and where God dwells with us.
   
   Princess Diana Spencer was indeed a "lonely hunter" searching for herself and for meaning "in her heart" . . . and she found that meaning in the hearts of countless millions throughout the world -- many who encountered her personally and countless millions who never physically met her but DID meet her soul.
   
   Diana's external beauty simply was a radiation outward and visibly of her real true inner beauty - Melanie (Safka) the folk singer wrote a song titled, "Beautiful People", and while Melanie hadn't envisioned "Diana" who probably had just been born about the time she recorded that song, Diana WAS a "beatiful person".
   
   This book by Andrew Morton comes about as close as we might ever come to hearing the voice of Diana speaking for herself. She presents herself to us as she was: frailties included - but "the flaws" are what mark individuals as unique and as the amazing persons that they are - and the faults simply lend contrast to their perfections and more noble character.
   
   The world cried when Diana died . . . and she left us wondrous memories of a "Camelot" that did exist if but for a fleeting moment . . . and she left us an example of how "love" can exist in the heart of the worldfor any other person in need, whatever their need or hurt and wherever they may live. She was a friend of Mother Terese and Mother Terese was a friend to Diana (Diana was buried with rosaries Mother Teresa gave her) - they lived in two different atmospheres but shared that sense of "human pain".
   
   This volume lets Diana linger with us a while longer . . . and the photographs bring her back once again and remind us of why we all fell under her spell.
   
   And beneath the surface of her image . . . between the lines of her words, we can also find hints as to how we can live a more compassionate and understanding and caring life of "love" ourselves.
   
   Diana is missed . . . and she should be . . . but the world was blessed that she walked among us even for so brief a time. Her smile is now eternal.



5. I sort of liked this book more than some of the other biographies I've read before. To be honest before I read this book I have NEVER heard of Princess Diana. While I read this book I felt sympathetic toward her because she had a real hard life after she became involved with the Prince Charles. Most of the sympathy went into the fact that she received pretty much no help from any one except her mother and father but no help whatsoever from the royal family and was expected to know everything she was supposed to. She had bulimia and no experience at all at being royalty and the somewhat rude expectations from the royal position and the responsibilities that came with it. Not only that but the prince that proposed to Diana (the prince that became her husband) was cheating on her with another woman and everyone was trying to hide the fact that he was seeing the other woman. Along with that problem came the fact that her husband cared more about the other woman than Diane even though she was his wife. An example was that when Diana was still engaged to the prince and the paparazzi were following her and the other woman the prince was seeing, Diana was being followed by like 36 paparazzi the other woman was only being followed by 4 people the prince was sympathetic towards the other woman and didn't even care about the hardships Diana was going through.
   So overall I would give the book a good rating since it had a personal interview with Diana and used her own words rather than some facts that could very well be just rumors that were spread.
   S.Brock

5 comments about Twilight of Splendor: The Court of Queen Victoria During Her Diamond Jubilee Year.

1. One of my favorite authors on the subject of royalty continues to be Greg King. He has focused most of his work on Tsarist Russia, but now with Twilight of Splendor he has taken a look at one of the most pivotal years of Great Britain's Queen Victoria -- a monarch who set her mark on an entire century, and whose presence still lingers today.
   
   King takes one year in the Queen's life, and explores her daily life, starting first with an outline of her childhood, and marriage to Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, and then to some of the momentous events of the years 1896-1897, when she became Britain's longest reigning monarch, and the festivities surrounding her Diamond Jubilee year to celebrate sixty years on the throne. By this time Victoria was not just a queen, but also Empress of India, and the British Empire was indeed a land where the sun never set. Colonies and possessions sent emissaries and gifts, all building towards a grand festival in London to mark the occansion.
   
   But King goes beyond a mere listing of Queen Victoria's children and grandchildren -- he explores the rather tempetuous relationships that she had with them, especially her daughters. Neither were her sons spared the maternal disapproval either -- her eldest son Bertie, the Prince of Wales, she blamed for his father's death and his social life brought further displeasure. He in turn, took out his frustrations at not having any sort of decision-making in political roles in hard living, mostly involving smoking, chasing women and sport. Nor was Bertie the only fast living Royal -- daughter Louise was notorious for her acid tongue and mischief making, and Helena developed a near crippling addiction to opium.
   
   The most interesting section was an exploration of the various courtiers that surrounded the Queen. There was an enormous army of servants, from those who laboured in the royal kitchens, footmen who carried messages and opened doors, housemaids who swept and scrubbed and tidied, all the way up to the aristocratic men that oversaw their work. While these men would never be confidants or friends, they would form close bonds of trust with the Queen, working with her for years, until ill-health or death remove them from the office. Much more shadowy were the servants that worked more closely with the Queen, most notorious being a Scotsman by the name of John Brown, of whom it was said that the queen had actually married him, and after his death, two Indian servants who were arrogant scoundrels.
   
   The Queen's court of servants, family and attendants moved in a predictible round of seasons and holidays. Springtime and most of summer were spent at the castle complex at Windsor, autumn in the Scottish highlands at Balmoral, and winter at Osborne House on the Isle of Wight. Buckingham Palace was a place that the Queen loathed to stay in, and it was only during the most formal of events that the queen would stay at the Palace for even a night. In addition, the Queen and her household would holiday on the French Riviera every two months in springtime, an activity that continued from 1890 to nearly the very end of her long life. Pilgrimages would be made to her beloved husband's tomb every year on the anniversary of his death.
   
   And sometimes, relatives would visit from the far reaches of the world to visit. One of the more momentous occansions was when one of Victoria's favorite granddaughters visited during the autumn of 1897. Alix and her siblings had been raised mostly by the Queen after the death of their mother, Alice, and Alix had been wooed and won by Nicholas II, Tsar of Russia. Now Alix was Empress, and with her husband and child went to visit as the new couple toured Europe after their coronation. Another momentous occansion that is covered is the grand costumed affair at the height of the London season at Devonshire House. Royalty and aristocracy mingled, as much to show off their wealth, and to be seen and see. Several ladies managed to arrive as the same characters from history, accompanied by much glaring. Other little snippets included the rituals of garden parties and presentations, Christmas celebrations, and finally the Diamond Jubilee itself.
   
   I have to say that this was a real eyeopener of a book. All too often authors skip over the people who kept the various castles and palaces running and livable. King also adds in plenty of gossipy details, little touches that help to make these stiff figures from formal portraits come alive as well. While King's narrative does get repetitous what with the same descriptive passages being used over and over, the story does move along crisply, with quite a bit of detail being given. There are several inserts of black and white photos and etchings as well. Along with the bibliography and footnotes, there is an appendix that list the various members of the Queen's hosuehold during the final years of her life.
   
   For anyone interested in the details of how royals lived in the nineteenth century, this is a splendid read. I discovered that the royalty of the time were imprisoned as much as they ruled from a golden, rather spendid, cage. Days were carefully measured and plotted out, and oridinary people and the journalists were just as curious about them as they are now in the twenty-first century. While the reading does get a bit dull in spots, it's still enjoyable, and there's quite a bit of humor here and there to liven things up.
   
   Recommended.



2. Queen Victoria is the longest reigning monarch in English history. She ascended the throne in 1837 dying on January 22, 1901. During those sixty plus years she saw the Western World transform itself from an agricultural to an industrial economy. Though she preferred candles she saw electricity come into general use. Victoria stoold 4ft 10. high.She was proclaimed as Empress of India in 1877. Victoria lent her name to an age and a vanished nineteenth century world explored in depth by historian Greg King in "Twilight of Splendor." King is most noted for his earlier work on the court of Tsar Nicholas II of Russia.He focuses on her life and that of her empire in 1897 as her jubilee year on the throne was celebrated by millions of her obedient subjects.
   In this 300 page book the author examines Victoria and her family. She was raised as the daughter of the Duchess of Kent who was early widowed. She and her mother did not get along well. Victoria spoke with a German and Scotch accent. She became queen when her sailor uncle William IV died in 1837. She was plain and intelligent. Victoria came to rely on such Prime Ministers as her beloved Lord Melbourne and later Disraeli.
   She was honest and witty. She lacked a good formal education though she could read foreign languages and the occasional novel. Victoria had a fierce temper and a tart tongue. Victoria was very obese and had no fashion sense. Her tastes in art and literature were middle-brow.
   Victoria married Albert of Saxe-Cothburg. The happy couple were parents of nine children prior to Albert's death in 1861. Victoria worshipped Albert sleeping each night next to a picture of him taped to the headboard of her bed. Albert's room and possessions remained as they had left them when he died. She was buried next to him at Frogmore. The Royal Albert Hall was built in his memory. When Albert died Victoria refused to wear anything but black for the rest of her long life.
   Victoria had rocky moments with her large brood of children. She did not get along well with the Prince of Wales who lived a womanizing, dissolute playboy life. He became King in 1901. Victoria was closest to her eldest daughter Vicki who became the mother of Kaiser Wilhelm II. Several of her children married crowned heads of Europe. She was truly the grandmother of monarchy.
   In addition to telling the story of Victoria's family we learn from Greg King about the architecture of her palaces of Buckingham, Osborne on the Isle of Wight, Balmoral in Scotland and Windsor Palace. Victoria hated London living in Buckingham and prefered Windsor or her other castles. She was waited on hand and foot by hundreds of servants in a well organized royal househod. King goes into detail on what she ate along with her guests. He tells us what attendance at balls and social events was like in her day. Victoria was no snob enjoying friendships with an Indian servant and the Scottish gilly John Brown. She did not like the British aristocracy and practiced middle class morals. She enjoyed painting and wrote two books on her life in the Highlands at Balmoral. All of her life she kept a detailed diary of her life and times.
   Victoria was no intellectual but a good person who gave millions to chairty and led England with dignity and honor. When she died in 1901 over one-fourth of the world was ruled by Great Britain.
   King's book is well-researched and gives us a good insight into the private and public life of one of England's greatest rulers. He does fail to discuss the poverty of many of Victoria's subjects though he does briefly cover the conflict with the Boers in South Africa and Irish unrest.



3. just got the book on her daughter the last princess.i hope it is as good as this one was.



4. I don't think I've ever criticized a book for too much detail, but I do need to in this case. The book is obviously very well-researched, but sometimes it absolutely overwhelms the reader with details. A tour of a circa-1897 room, for example, provides the author with an opportunity to describe nearly every item in the room, how long it had been there, when it had last been moved, and who liked which items more than the others. Sometimes it was just too *much*, and I felt I was drowning in detail. In addition, every time the author cited an amount of money circa-1897, he provided a currency exchange in dollars and pounds in 2007 figures, down to the last dollar! I think it would have been enough to say that a diamond necklace would cost $22 million today, and not necessarily have to say that it would cost $22,316,812. The obsessive detail on that was a bit overwhelming.
   
   There were also a couple places where the author had favorite terms or words he liked, and used over and over. Lace wasn't just lace - it was always "Honiton lace". A member of the public who wrote something was *always* referred to as a "wag".
   
   Overall, while it was an interesting look into the Diamond Jubilee year of Queen Victoria, there was just *too* much detail. The minutiae of the book detracted from the splendor and grandeur of her celebration.



5. king explores the rather tempetuous relationship queen victoria had with her childern and grandchildern,their relationship with each other.who just happen to be many of europe's royal houses.

3 comments about Charles & Camilla: Portrait of a Love Affair.

1. After reading a previous biography on England's current monarch and spouse by Gyles Brandreth, I was keenly keeping an eye out for his next book, this time talking about the current Prince of Wales and his second marriage, this time to his long-time mistress, Camilla Parker-Bowles. Along the way, Brandreth takes a look at the history of royal mistresses, the ancestry of the couple in question, and reveals that there's quite a bit more going on than meets the eye.
   
   The custom of a prince or king having several mistresses -- what can be called 'girlfriends' today -- is a custom as old as when the first monarch plopped a crown on his head. Until recently, most royal marriages were arranged, where King A was available, or his son was, and King B had an unmarried daughter, and would exchange daughter in return for say, a peace treaty or financial support or whatever it was that they needed at the time. History rarely records what the poor girl thought of the match, and what was expect of her was to be fruitful, bear several heirs, and if she was lucky, there would be genuine affection in her marriage. For fun, royal men have turned to other women, an arrangement that winked at, but so long as they didn't make a fool of themselves, the men got away with it. It was only recently, with the union of England's Queen Victoria with a minor German princeling by the name of Albert, that romance -- and fidelity -- began to be the norm. For the first several chapters of the book, Brandreth discusses the various peccadillos of England's royal families, and shows how the standard came to be.
   
   The first cracks showed up with England's Edward VIII and the notorious Mrs. Simpson, a woman who was divorced, twice, and certainly not the virgo intacta that was expected of a royal wife. But Edward VIII stepped down for the woman he loved, and his younger brother Bertie -- George VI -- took the throne, and did a pretty good job of a task he never wanted. Stress and smoking made his reign a short one, and his elder daughter, Elizabeth II, is now England's queen. Which brings us to the current royal heir, Charles, the Prince of Wales, a young man of rather nervous temprament and the resources to live a life of a popular playboy.
   Unfortunately, he had those ears, and somehow the good looks of his parents skipped a generation. At a polo match, he met a young woman of aristocratic stock, funny, and just as interested as he was in polo and horses.
   
   She was Camilla Shand, somewhat pretty, and when she met the Prince, she commented, "My great-grandmother was your great-great-grandfather's mistress, so how about it?" The story, whether true or not, has entered myth, and it was rumored that the pair became lovers, and at least friends. But Charles was a bit uncertain about asking anyone to be his wife, and that lack of confidence let Camilla slip away to another man, a dashing Army officer by the name of Andrew Parker-Bowles. Camilla got married, raised some children, and remained a good friend of the Prince, while Charles went on to his chase after women, and finally, when he was in his thirties, asked another aristocratic young woman to marry him, and this time, he was accepted.
   
   This is where Brandreth's book gets interesting. Besides all of the gossip about who's sleeping with whom, a tanscription of the notorious 'tampon' conversation, he paints a very telling portrait of the Prince of Wales. As well as looking at the outside, he also attempts to look at the why as well. This is where the book becomes the most interesting, and there's quite a few AHA! moments there for the reader who isn't numbed and dazed by all of the various begats and mudslinging.
   
   And yet -- this isn't nearly as good as the biography that Brandreth wrote about Charles' parents. For one, it gets a bit too intimate in spots, and I was downright embarassed. It's one thing to read about someone who has gone on to their eternal reward, but quite another when they're alive and kicking. Diana Spencer doesn't come off too well in this one either, showing her as a very naive, not-too-bright young woman, who was just as emotionally needy as her husband, and didn't have the wits to be quiet about it. There's plenty of venom being flung about, and at times, it's not much more than a scandal sheet, and not too objective.
   
   Still, out of all the various books out there (and no doubt will continue to appear), it's not too bad, and better than most. For anyone who enjoys eavesdropping on royalty, it's not a bad read at all. There are some problems -- Brandreth is a cackling hen of a writer, flooding the pages with footnotes and smirking connections among Europe and England's elite. One thing that this book really needed was a genealogical chart or several to show all of the connections and help to keep everyone straight. I had to be constantly backing up now and then to make sure I was thinking about the right person he was discussing. Too, by scattering the footnotes throughout the book, instead of lumping them at the end as most histories do, makes it very distracting to follow along.
   
   On the other hand, there are quite a lot of photographs in several inserts, several appendices that talk about the various duties and organizations that the Prince is involved with, along with various sources and an index to track down minor royals.
   
   Summing up, this one is actually better than what I make it sound. It's a very solid four star read, despite the problems, and one that I suspect I will reread again in the future. What it does do is help to understand a very complex relationship, and finally, a love story that managed to survive scandal, death and publicity to finally come to a settled, and maybe even a peaceful resolution.
   
   Four stars. Recommended.



2. I picked up this book expecting the advertised insight into the relationship between Prince Charles and his long-time mistress Camilla, who at long last became his wife and is now known as the Duchess of Cornwall.
   
   It took perseverance.
   
   The flashes of insight are scattered through a narrative that begins with the monarchs of England and their mistresses from about the year dot. Or 736. Or something. And meanders down to the present day with endless details about the ancestors and descendants of kings, princesses, mistresses, near-mistresses, cousins, courtiers, generals, admirals, and probably a few of their horses.
   
   Reading this book is like a Sunday afternoon visit with a gossipy old uncle who knows everybody - and their dogs and cats. He rambles and rummages among a lot of boring history, can't resist going off on tangents, and yet if you listen long enough he does eventually dish the dirt. When you leave, you have learned something new, and you feel you've cheered up the old boy by engaging in the visit. Even if most of the begats and ranks and titles went in one ear and out the other.
   
   I agree with another reviewer: this book cries out for some charts to help the reader follow all of that genealogy described in such excruciating detail.
   
   This isn't a fast read. Nor is it uncritically admiring of anyone, including Charles and Camilla. On the subject of Charles' ill-starred first marriage, it's nowhere near as comprehensive and gifted as Tina Brown's The Diana Chronicles. But Brandreth leaves us with a portrait of Prince Charles as an intelligent, sensitive, dutiful boy who didn't respond as well as his sturdier sister to the often harsh regimens of his school days. Who grew into a dutiful and complex young man, still oddly diffident with women, and working hard to fulfill the duties of the unique lifelong role he was born into. Although it ended in tears - and worse - he began his first marriage in good faith, retained some affection and concern for Diana long after the marriage died, and was always an involved father.
   
   The portrait of Camilla is less complete, but then she wasn't famous from birth so information is harder to obtain. Brandreth presents her as a naturally happy person who likes to have fun. She's intelligent but not an intellectual, and is devoted to horses, hunting, gardening, and her close-knit family. And, for much of her life, to the Prince of Wales. Camilla grew up in a close and happy family, and her stability, warmth and optimism no doubt play a strong counterpoint to some of Charles' more skittish tendencies. She sounds like a good person to have as a friend: ready to have fun, loyal, and unlikely to make a fuss about a little mud tracked into the house.
   
   In Camilla, from the beginning, Charles found his soulmate. Brandreth eventually gives us a portrait of a deep and strong relationship that has survived against all odds. Whether you like these two people or not, they clearly belong together. I wonder what would have happened if they could have married each other first.
   
   As a "portrait of a love affair" this book is cluttered with too much information, both irrelevant and intimate. I didn't need the transcript of the entire "Camillagate" phone call, but it's in there. And I don't care who begat whom in 14th Century Britain. I'll take it as read that kings have historically married for duty and taken mistresses for everything else. Some historical perspective is helpful, but Brandreth piles on too much detail.
   
   You might while away a long plane flight with this book, but better also pack something else to read when you get fed up with Brandreth's incessant fussing and fidgeting.



3. Good Lord.
   Someone please save the British people from this family.
   This book was somewhat interesting but depressing and I really wanted it to end.
   These wretched, god awful people. They are not nice. They are immoral, the whole lot of 'em. They deserve each other and their never ending troubles which just perpetuate generation after generation after generation.
   God save William and Harry.

5 comments about Shakespeare: The Biography.

1. A very readable book that perhaps repeats what thewriter believed to be shakespeare's many facets and qualities. Chapters are very short and invite the reader to carry on reading. It is an easy read book, filled with lots of fascinating information and one that i would recommend to someone wanting not just to find out a lot about Shakespeare but someone who wanted him set into his slot in history.



2. The following is a review of the Audiobook version of Peter Ackroyd's "Shakespeare: The Biography" read by Simon Vance.
   
   The hallmark of a good biography is the author's ability to breathe life into both his subject and the time and place his subject lived. It isn't enough to tell the story of a man if you fail to put that man in his proper context Peter Ackroyd has a gift for bringing both his subject (for example, see The Life of Thomas More) and a time and place (for example, see London: The Biography) alive.
   
   In "Shakespeare: The Biography" Ackroyd brilliant re-creates the milieu of both Stratford-on-Avon and London by culling a great deal of source material. Ackroyd captures both the startling seditious plots against Elizabeth I as well as the mundane land transfers and legal court cases of the day.
   
   In rendering Shakespeare, Ackroyd makes amply sure the reader is aware that there is not much material (other than his collected works) to which to draw from. When Ackroyd is positing a hypothesis about the whereabouts or the attitudes of Shakespeare, he alerts the reader that he is doing so. He provides the evidence for which he posits his hypothesis and even offers alternatives and allows the reader to choose.
   
   "Shakespeare: The Biography" turns out to be just as much a "biography" of the collected works of Shakespeare as it is a biography of the man. All of Shakespeare's "accepted" works are represented and some it is speculated that he wrote.
   
   The narration by Simon Vance is phenomenal. By the end, I easily concluded that if Simon Vance were to read the local phone book, I would probably listen to it. Vance's voice is clear and distinct. His diction is spot on.
   
   All in all, I would highly recommend "Shakespeare: The Biography" in any format you could get your hands on.



3. Of course, any biography of Shakespeare is mostly a biography of Renaissance England, since so little is known of his actual life, but Ackroyd pulls together every scrap of fact and weaves it all together in a way that makes the era and the man full of life and energy. He uses a lot of "evidence" from the plays, but that's okay. Did Shakespeare follow the dictum "write what you know?" I loved this biography; I feel like I know Shakespeare the man as well as I possibly can! (I listened to it on CD; very well done.)
   Bobbye Larson



4. Peter Ackroyd is the greatest living biographer. Simple as that. Unfortunately, this is probably his least satisfying biography. This is not to say that the book is not an enjoyable read, for it most assuredly is. But it is not up to Ackroyd's usually outstanding snuff.
   Part of the reason for this is that there is so little evidence of Shakespeare's life available to the researcher beyond the plays themselves. We just don't know that much. Mr. Ackroyd also presents the book in numerous very brief chapters, which tends to make the work choppy, and lends itself to occasional repetition.
   Still, the book is well worth the effort. Ackroyd's prose remains a rich, sumptuous meal, highly satisfying, yet easily digested. As the evidence is so thin, Ackroyd frequently speculates about what Shakespeare may have done, or what he may have been thinking at any given time. One gets the impression that Mr. Ackroyd's speculations are right on target. The book gives tremendous insight into what life was like in the late 16th and early 17th centuries. This is probably its greatest strength.
   In short, Shakespeare: The Biography is an excellent book. It's just not quite as excellent as what I've been used to with Peter Ackroyd.



5. I'm surprised by the number of five-star reviews: I feel I'm being rather generous with four. This "biography" is a collection of very short chapters dealing with aspects of Elizabethan life nominally connected with specific periods or events of Shakespeare's life--aspects political, economic, cultural, religious, moral, aesthetic, economic, literary, theatrical, architectural, sartorial, legal, familial, pedagogical, erotic, hygienic, pathological, psychological, sociological, and linguistic (among others). Some of this is quite interesting: I found the book generally held my interest. But these lucubrations--they often amount to a kind of noodling--are almost never tied to a real argument, and while they sometimes seem to enlighten, they rarely allow a strong sense of a Shakespearian personality to coalesce.
   
   Still, I'm grateful to Ackroyd for some insights, among them: the collective, open-ended nature of the process of composition as well as of the performance of the plays; the influence of legal education and practice upon Elizabethan theater in general and Shakespeare's work in particular; the improvisational nature of his writing; they way in which the plays' unity is often mainly a matter of language and image rather than theme.

5 comments about Queen Victoria: A Personal History.

1. Christopher Hibbert has the marvelous ability to make historical subjects come alive. He succeeds again in this biography of Queen Victoria,
   
   This book is titled a Personal History, and that's really the focus. He turns the venerable monarch into a human being, with hopes, fears, heartaches, heartbreaks, a sense of humor, mood swings, petulance and even (gasp!) desires.
   
   Victoria's image (at least to Americans) is of the stuffy old monarch, unsmiling, and always dressed in black. Hibbert portrays quite a different picture - of a young woman who loved parties, dancing, and the affection of men. He also makes clear Victoria's physical passion for her husband, Albert. This is evident in the passage where, after giving birth to eight children, she is advised by her doctor not to have anymore. Her response was "You mean I can't have any more fun in bed?" Not what we expect from a Victorian!
   
   The portrait of a post-Albert Victoria is of a woman devasted by the death of her lover. Clearly the modern picture of Victoria comes from this stage of her life. However, this image is based on incorrect assumptions. Where we assume the stolid, frumpy queen arises from her belief in Victorian morals, in this book the picture is of a woman who lost her most precious soulmate, and whose last 40 years were a struggle against loneliness and depression, while bearing the heavy responsibility of being the most powerful monarch in the world.
   
   The book also vividly portrays the numerous characters in this remarkable woman's life, including Lord Liverpool, the Duke of Wellington, Disraeli, and Kaiser Wilhelm.
   
   Recommended to anyone with an interest in English history.



2. Once again, Christopher Hibbert has spun a wonderful biography that makes his subject come alive before you're eyes, and at times to allow the reader's imagination into the very shoes of Queen Victoria!



3. I really enjoyed the book, but it gets so wordy, that it has literally put my daughters to sleep. My only wish is that he would have relied less on letting us know who people were (titles, positions, etc.) and more on Victoria's personality and life. I did enjoy her love affair with her husband!



4. i guess growing up knowing you will rule england make you believe the world around you was there to please you.growing up her mother keep her away from other kids,turning into a grown up without being a child.when she finally broke away she was queen.then she married albert and nine kids later .after albert death she was in mourning that she wanting all around to share .she in later year became a very selfcenter woman who couldn't see other's point of view.



5. As a self described Anglophile, I have read countless royal biographies and histories, mainly focusing on the Tudor and Stuart eras. I decided to dive into Queen Victoria with this book and it did not disappoint!
   
   Although a long book, Hibbert traces the life of Victoria in an engrossing and interesting way that keeps you turning the pages. Victoria comes to life in all of her capriciousness. Her mercurial personality, painted so vividly through the observations of others and through her own diary entries, makes you alternatively detest her, think her mad, then go to loving or pitying her.
   
   The only thing that prevents this from being a five star review is that the organization of the book sometimes threw me off. While generally a chronological account of Victoria's life, some chapters, such as one covering the Price of Wales, leap ahead. It is not too jarring, but sometimes irritating.
   
   Overall, a wonderful read that gives real insight into a woman whose myth and spectre looms so large. My true rating is 4.5 stars.

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

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

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

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

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

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




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



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

5 comments about Shakespeare: The World as Stage (Eminent Lives).

1. This is one volume in the series "Eminent Lives." After having read this book, I am interested in exploring this series further.
   
   William Shakespeare, of course, was a great playwright, whether of comedy or tragedy, and a fine poet as well. Bill Bryson, the author of this slender volume, notes how little we actually know of Shakespeare, when he says (Page 7): ". . .all we know about Shakespeare is contained within a few scanty facts: that he was born in Stratford-upon-Avon, produced a family there, went to London, became an actor and writer, returned to Stratford, made a will, and died." After 400 years, the author observes, there are only about a hundred documents speaking to the Bard of Avon and his family.
   
   The book begins by exploring what little is known about Shakespeare's early years (by the way, one cool point in this book is the multiple spellings of his name over time; Shakespeare himself spelled it differently at different points in time). The introductory comments also note something absolutely amazing: zillions of plays were written and performed in Shakespeare's time. Of the total number, only about 230 texts still exist--of which 15% are by Shakespeare, a stunning percentage. We know more about his work than any other playwright of the era.
   
   The book is organized by time period. Chapter 2 examines the years from 1564-1585, Shakespeare's youth. The chapter begins with an effort to understand his father's life (John Shakespeare) as well as that of his mother (Mary Arden). We have little information on the Bard--his birth certificate, his marriage certificate (with Anne Hathaway), birth certificates for his children--during this period. From 1585 to 1592, Chapter 3 suggests, little is known about Shakespeare. Chapter 4 considers his early years in London. He began as an actor and turned, over time, into an author of plays. In 1592, he had even earned in a publication the scorn of a critic. By 1594, his theatrical troupe, the Lord Chamberlain's Men, had become one of the major forces in theater, including leading actors of the day.
   
   Subsequent chapters consider his plays, his business success (he did well as a joint owner of the troupe and the Globe Theater), his sonnets, what little we know of his family life (his son, Hamnet, died in his early youth). He was successful under Queen Elizabeth and, after her death, King James I, who viewed many of his performances. A number of contentious issues are addressed, including Shakespeare's sexuality, his relationship with his wife and family. There is even a brief description of the debates over whether Shakespeare actually wrote the works attributed to him. Finally, the end game of his life. . . .
   
   If one wishes a brief introduction to the life of Shakespeare (with a dash of wit thrown in by the author), this is a good place to start. Nicely written and well done!



2. This book is exactly what you would expect of Mr. Bryson: a well-informed, humorous and well-written account of Wm. Shakespeare's life.
   
   The problem is, as the author points out in the foreward, scarcely anything is known about Shakespeare's life, so the book of necessity resorts to broad speculation and focuses largely on persons connected to Shakespeare, rather than on the man himself. The paucity of useful information about Shakespeare likely explains the book's size, which is quite small.
   
   Not that I blame Mr. Bryson for any of this: he obviously did the best he could with a limited amount of information and resources from which to draw.
   
   To be honest, being a big fan of Bryson's work, I bought this book because of its author rather than the subject. While this book doesn't dissapoint, reading it is not the pleasurable experience one can expect from Bryson's great works, like A Walk in the Woods, In a Sunburned Country and A Short History of Nearly Everything.
   
   To me, Bryon is at his best when he can accurately and dryly convey the true essence and personality of people (common folk and historical luminaries alike). Given the utter dearth of information available about Shakespeare, it's just not possible for Mr. Bryson to shine with this book.
   
   Still, if you're a fan of either man, you will probably enjoy this slim volume.



3. This review is about the audiobook version, which surprisingly reveals Bill Bryson to have a weird Anglo-American accent. Perhaps his living in England so long has done this, as there is little hint of any midwest twang.
   
   On to the book. For those looking for the humorous version of Bryson you won't get it here, although he peppers this book with various wry observations. Bryson starts at the beginning, where Shakespeare's family came from, what the times were like, and how a provincial like Shakespeare could become a prolific and brilliant playwright who has survived over the centuries.
   
   Mostly, Shakespeare himself is shrouded in mystery, although Bryson explains how public records of the time mostly referred to matters of legality or vital statistics and don't reveal much else. There are many questions. Which portrait of Shakespeare is the right one? What was his relationship like with his wife? What on earth was he up to between 1592 and 1595? Certain questions will probably remain a mystery forever.
   
   Still, Bryson attempts to debunk most of the conspiracy theories that won't go away, mostly in regard to those who believe that someone else (usually Francis Bacon) wrote the Bard's plays. Bryson brings up the conceit of literary types as one of the reasons that doubt still exists. "How could a mere provincial write this well?" This kind of snobbery still remains today, as if good writing is only restricted to a certain class of people.
   
   This book can get a bit dry, especially in a lengthy entry about the several folios that came out after Shakespeare's death. Then again, many who care about this kind of thing will find it interesting. There is also a lot of historical background of the time which helps give some perspective.
   
   Bryson doesn't provide many answers about Shakespeare the man. One wishes that he would have drawn some conclusions of his own, some possible scenarios, but then again he shows how speculation unsupported by evidence has led to many of these conspiracy theories.



4. Certainly, we may ask, "Do we really need another book on Shakespeare?" Well, the answer may not be that we need one but we can use one. This is a great book for the general audience that has enjoyed Shakespeare on the page or on the stage. It answers many of those what about questions, insofar as facts and historical data will allow. In many ways it is a good book for the other end of the shelf from "Will in the World." Bryson does not give us what ifs but rather known facts. Speculation can be fun, but should be identified as such. Many of us enjoyed "Shakespeare in Love" but knew it was really a fictional piece, made more of whole cloth than are most romans a clef. Bryson identifies such speculative forays and is especially clever in his ending which makes clear that the "Baconists" don't bring any bacon home with their theories. This book gives us a good picture of the controversies and foibles surrounding Shakespeare fans from the Chandos portrait to Folger's obsessive collecting. Many intricacies of Shakespearian scholarship are touched upon without becoming academically dry. His discussions of the the city and suburbs of London or the intricacies of sixteenth century printing are as precise and informative (but a bit more limited) than what I have heard from academic experts. This is an enjoyable text for both general and more specialized friends of the Bard.



5. This is one of the easiest, breeziest, most charming bios of Shakespeare you'll ever read. And it is one of the worst. Don't bother reading it. Bryson candidly confesses to the absolute lack of information about William Shakspere of Stratford-on-Avon, then plunges ahead, not letting the lack of facts slow him down. A quick example: on p. 90, he states "we know nothing at all about the relationship, if any, that existed between Shakespeare and Southampton." But one page later, he states outright that Southampton was his patron. Bryson's treatment of the authorship issue is ignorant and despicable, but at least he recognizes its existence. He would be surprised to learn that he does contribute positively to the authorship debate when he quotes Caroline F. E. Spurgeon's classic study, Shakespeare's Imagery and What It Tells Us, which described Shakespeare's appearance based on how he used imagery: "a compactly well-built man, probably on the slight side, extraordinarily well-coordinated,lithe and nimble of body, quick and accurate of eye, delighting in swift muscular movement." We have no way of knowing whether that describes Shakspere or not, but it sure does describe almost perfectly Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford. When you consider that Shakespeare might have been a pen-name, Bryson's defense of the Stratford man falls apart, as do all traditional biographies which generally do not confront the issue fairly and honestly.

5 comments about The First Elizabeth.

1. A great book about a Queen whose story reads more like "The Godfather" than you'd guess.

   Elizabeth I, thrust onto the throne while her country was still in the midst of it's centuries-long emergence from Roman rule, turned England into Great Britain through a heady mixture of guile, guts, and British steel(How's that for rhetoric?).

   It's a great book, as are most of Erickson's titles.




2. The major difference in "The First Elizabeth" by Carolly Erickson and "The Life of Elizabeth I" by Alison Weir is stylistic. Both women are thoroughly versed in the life of their royal subject, and obviously enthusiastic about her as well.

   Erickson's style, however, leans more toward novelistic narrative. She seems to be sitting with you, telling you a story about this great monarch with her infamous "virgin" status, her political adeptness, her fearsome temper, her penchant for swearing oaths that made one's blood freeze, and her ability to command deep love and adoration from her subjects.

   This style is especially appealing for those for whom this biography is their first foray into Tudor biography. It introduces the major players in the queen's life thoroughly so that one is well acquainted with Robert Dudley, Cecil and Walsingham, as well as Mary I and the many other colorful characters that populated the Queen's life. You also get a real feel for the terror and uncertainty of Elizabeth's youth, when she lived in fear of death at the hands of her unstable, Catholic sister.

   Erickson adroitly paints a stunning (and sometimes shocking) picture of life at court - and what a life it must have been. Living at the various castles Elizabeth moved between (they changed castles regularly so that the one previously used could be cleaned and "aired out") was far from our 21st century idea of luxury, and when you read about the trials and travails inherent in the Queen's annual "progresses", you'll never gripe about rush-hour traffic again!

   Again, I would recommend this to anyone starting out to read about Elizabeth I, and to the reader already familiar with the life of the greatest queen of England. Those of the latter group might find that the author falls in love a bit too much with her subject (and who wouldn't, as this lady is one of the most fascinating people in history). In some places towards the end the flow of the narrative (going from event to event) isn't quite as seamless as it could be (you feel as though you are jumping from one to the other without a lead-in sentence/paragraph) but never mind that. Erickson does a marvelous job of painting a portrait of the life and times of Elizabeth and it's a most pleasurable learning experience and enjoyable read.

   After finishing "Elizabeth I", the reader would do well to continue on with Weir's biography mentioned above. I started with Weir and am now committed to reading Erickson's extensive series on the Tudors, including "Great Harry", "Mistress Anne", etc.




3. I tend to read mostly fiction, but for some reason earlier this year I decided to foray into biographies. This book gives you a peek into Elizabethan life, gives you insight into Elizabeth I's personality, and you learn quite a lot of history, scandals, and rumours-of-the-day along the way.

   This book reads more like a biographical novel than a pure biography, which, considering the subject matter is about 500-years old, probably means some license was taken with dialogue, etc., however, I think the style makes the subject infinitely more memorable.




4. Carolly Erickson has done her homework on the Tudors of England and in her 1984 biography of Queen Elizabeth (1533-1603)
   does a fine biographical profile.
   Elizabeth's mother Anne Boleyn died at the stake failing to produce a male heir for the cruel HENRY VIII. Her only chld was Elizabeth who ruled Britain from 1558 to her death in 1603.
   Elizabeth had a difficult and dangerous life dealing with such
   enemies as:
   1. The might of Spain and France.
   2. Various Catholic groups wanting to assasinate the Protestant leaning queen.
   3. Personal enemies include her half-sister Queen Bloody Mary
   who at times had Elizabeth imprisoned in the tower. She burned
   Protestants at the stake in her short reign from 1546-1553 following the death of her half-brother Edward VI (son of Henry and Jane Seymour). Another enemy was Mary Queen of Scots who Elizabeth had executed in 1587.
   4. Elizabeth was very intelligent, crafty and skilled in survival in a dangerous time of civil war, various rebellions and complicated international political and religious warfare.
   Erickson is good at writing Elizabeth's story focusing on her many love affairs most notably with the Earl of Leicester.
   Elizabeth's reign is well told in this biography which is a good place for a burgeoning interest in Tudor History to bloom.
   The book is one of the finest I have read on Elizabeth. I can
   recommend it to anyone who enjoys a good story well told about one of the great female rulers in history!



5. Erickson gets one star for a lively and readable writing style. She's great at engaging the reader.
   
   I'd give her zero for accurate substance.
   
   If you examine her body of work, you find that she's a Mary Tudor apologist and that bias informs every line of this "biography" of Elizabeth as she revels in gossip and ignores accomplishments.
   
   Erickson should stick to novels, because that's what she's writing here. She misrepresents facts and her editorial slant colours every line. Nearly any other biography would give you a better idea of what really went on.

5 comments about Cromwell.

1. Cromwell is perhaps the single most controversial figure in English history. Only John and Richard III have attracted as much venom as he has, and there are still people alive today who hate him -- see some of the other reviews here for at least one example. Naturally the truth is complicated, and Fraser lays out a good deal of detail in support of her case, which is that Cromwell was much maligned, and was on the whole a good and religious man trying hard to do what he thought was right.

   I had no prior belief about Cromwell, but I have to say Fraser convinced me rather of the opposite -- that he was a religious fanatic, brilliant but limited, who was neither a great ruler nor personally very admirable. Her apologies for some of his worst sins, such as the terrible events in Ireland, are outlandish.

   On the plus side, this is a thorough and detailed book, with enough information to allow a reader to make up their own mind. Fraser does at least keep the facts separate from her opinions. The book is excellent on Cromwell himself; it's pretty good on details of the Civil Wars, though it doesn't go to the level that an exclusively military history might. However, it's surprisingly weak on the overall political background. To truly understand Cromwell you need to know what came before and after. I would have liked to see more about the religious state of the country, and why it got that way, and also about the Revolution of only thirty years after his death. But in concentrating on Cromwell the man (at perhaps too great a length), Fraser has skimped on the surrounding politics.

   Overall, I'd recommend this only if you're deeply interested in knowing a lot about Cromwell's life, or if you already know the political and religious framework of the years 1640-1660. If you know both, this is a fine book (allowing for Fraser's open bias) but it's no place to start.

   One other note: the paperback edition (which is what I have) does not have any of the photographs or other plates that are apparently in the hardback -- Fraser makes occasional reference to "the plate opposite page 709" and so on, so I would bear that in mind in choosing between the two editions.




2. Most of my review will echo the discontents expressed by my fellow reviewers, but I hope I can provide an original analysis. If you are deliberating on whether to read this book, do not delve into the lengthy journey without prior knowledge of Cromwell. A more terse and concise biography is more suitable for the beginner. Antonia Fraser knows this time period intimately, and she would probably be incapable to produce a more superficial work on such a massive figure in English history. Although there is a small amount of side information and exposition about the historical events surrounding Cromwell (e.g., The English Civil War), the reader gets the feeling that the author assumes that we know much of the pertinent information already. This causes the novice reader on Cromwell to tend to find herself lost during some of the key events in his life. With some prior knowledge of the time period, this confusion could be avoided.
   
   Antonia Fraser is an erudite writer with stylistic flair, but is also painfully verbose. The sentences are often long and protracted, often with frequent use of the characteristic British punctuation, the semicolon. The result is a biography that is over a hundred pages too long. This is especially true when one considers that this biography is purely a narrative, and there is little writing that delves into the theoretical and political ideas that motivated Cromwell. This may be because Cromwell was motivated by fanatical and zealous devotion to his religion. When one is so enthralled by an unsubstantiated, uncouth dogma, there is little room to ponder questions when an inept but clear answer is to be found. Cromwell was not a theoretician, but a pragmatic man. This is interesting because most of his language and actions are littered with references to the metaphysical, however crude and obtuse those references and underlying thoughts are.
   
   Fraser paints Cromwell as an avuncular, charming man whose religious ethics seeped into his daily actions. While this may be true when applied to his personal life, it is impossible to reconcile this image with the man who sanctioned and even performed atrocities during his invasion of Ireland. The motivation for Fraser's subtle attempt at vindicating Cromwell can only be speculated on, but perhaps she is so enamored with English history that it became nature for her to fall in love with one of its heroes. Whatever the motivation, the bias is there, and needs to be acknowledged.
   
   For those that merely want to get a sense of who Cromwell was and the time period he lived in, a shorter biography will suffice. Try and pick one without the verbosity and slight sycophancy of Fraser.



3. Growing up an Irish Catholic American, I grew up hating Oliver Cromwell without really knowing why (an influence of my Irish grandmother). Fraser's biography of this brilliant and driven soldier is thoroughly researched and surprisingly sympathetic. She gives a great insight into what drove this man as well as giving a broad look at the political, cultural, and religious influences behind the brutal English Civil War. Cromwell was a brilliant general whose strategic and tactical genious beat the King's trained forces. His genius, unfortunately, did not extend to the political sphere. This is a great account of a flawed individual.



4. Fraser's book is best at trying to place Cromwell in his time. It is pointless to upbraid her for writing a book about someone who could be an unpleasant, violent and designing character - Europe was full of even more violent generals and religous fanatics at the time
   
   By carefully following his career and the people around him she shows how he rose from mediocrity to high office AND was a brilliant general even though he started as at the age of 40
   
   I thought it was well written and a good introduction to a complex character in a complex time



5. This was a concise and thoroughly researched book on Oliver Cromwell. I have only one complaint - Antonia Fraser eludes to illustrations that are not present in the book. Either a cost cutting decision or gross incompetence on behalf of the publisher, it is a major distraction. If deciding to purchase this softcover edition, keep that fact in mind.

5 comments about Never Give in: The Extraordinary Character of Winston Churchill (Leaders in Action Series) (Leaders in Action Series).

1. In reading the reviews under this section, I find that a reader either loves this book or hates it - there is very little middle ground.
   
   I believe those who discount this book are looking for an objective work on the history of Churchill. While this is a very fascinating subject, the market is saturated with such works, so if that is what you are looking for, go elsewhere...
   
   Those who love the book don't seem to place such emphasis on its historical precision; rather on the value of the information as it pertains to their own lives and leadership styles.
   
   I found this book to contain many great nuggets of wisdom and my highlighter saw much action as I poured through the pages.
   
   I recommend this book to anyone who wants to improve their leadership qualities. If you are looking for a historical masterpiece, this isn't it nor did the author intend it to be...



2. 
   Delight is an expected find when reading works on or about Winston Spencer Churchill. Joy is the confirmation any time these works attain to the stature and measure of the man. Refreshment is the derivative as joy and delight meet in a polished offering like 'Never Give In.'
   
   Stephen Mansfield has once again done well and served all parties equally in dispensing this gleaned narrative of the Twentieth Century's self-recognized 'Great Man.'
   
   A man's man for all seasons, highlights of the legendary Churchill are brought forth in a parade of honed chapters refined like glistening diamonds. Those seeking heavyweight analysis will even so finish the book satisfied, while newcomers will be impressed especially in these breathtaking times.
   
   Mr. Mansfield wisely moves through Churchill's life subject by subject, examining deftly moments which shaped the Character that so helped weld the first half of this century just gone. Superlatives tax the description of this work that may, in the field of Churchillian retrospectives, become the essential tome for both those initiating study, as well as we who yearn for one more look at a superb man under fire.
   
   The most excellent aspect of the work is Mansfield's examination of Churchill's testimony regarding Jesus, a subject far too long neglected. As is the practice learned from the Master, the best is always saved till last.
   
   TL Farley,
   author,
   When Now Becomes Too Late,
   Distant Reaches
   
   When Now Becomes Too Late { Print Edition }
   
   When Now Becomes Too Late { Kindle Edition
   
   { Prophecy : The Rapture in Brief ! }
   
   
   Distant Reaches { Print Edition }
   
   { True Life Adventures in Ireland, Boston and on the North Atlantic }



3. This book challenges you and tests your knowledge and paradigms.
   I found it thought provoking, intelligent, and sophisticated.
   This should be a must read for everyone who seeks truth and meaning.
   Way to go Mr. Mansfield!!!



4. I'd recommend this book not "only" because of the great information on Churchill's life struggles and events. I'm recommending this book mainly due to the writer's superb writing. I never thought I'd read a biography in one sit. You just can't stop reading, your eyes roll through the text with so much ease and pleasure. You feel Churchill's hardships, his courage, his character. Great book.



5. Mr. Mansfield has done a very nice job. He writes with the presupposition that history is the outworking of the providence and plan of God, a presupposition I accept, and which I believe is overwhelmingly confirmed by history itself. We all view the world through our presuppositions, and none of us can claim "neutrality." Those who "ding" Mansfield for his Christianity or for illuminating the Christian faith of his subject miss the point of the book. Would you have us all live in the ghetto where the only view allowed is secular humanism? Thankfully, we still live in a country where one is allowed to have Christian presuppositions. It was Mansfield's purpose to write from this point of view. If you "ding" him for having that purpose, then are you not saying that there should no freedom to express opinions different from your own? I am most amused by the reviewer who implies that Mansfield cannot understand England because of that country's current spiritual condition. Surely Churchill's England was different from today's England. England's decline (and our own here in America) can be directly traced to abandoning the Author of our lives and freedoms. Mansfield makes the point that Churchill understood England's place in preserving the freedoms of its Christian heritage, not only for itself but also for the western civilization, against the Nazi threats (definitely not the forces of goodness and light).
   
   This history is written by a Christian (Mansfield) about a Christian (Churchill). If Churchill was, indeed, someone who experienced true conversion to Christianity, then his faith would have permeated all that he was and did. It would and did give him the necessary heart and spirit to persevere under severe trial. Conversion is not a matter which has no impact upon the personal and professional life of a man - it will govern all that he is - his thinking and life.
   
   What a great little book! I am also delighted to discover that Churchill, when asked whom he should like to be if he could not be himself, thought about it and answered "Mrs. Churchill's second husband." All of his manly achievements notwithstanding, that aspect of his character put him over the top in my estimation.