4 comments about Irish Rebel: John Devoy and America's Fight for Ireland's Freedom.

1. My first introduction to John Devoy came as a student. I was studying the response of Irish-American newspapers to the outbreak of World War One and Devoy was a highly influential editorialist whose opinions were frequently reprinted in various Irish journals throughout the USA. He was a determined opponent of Woodrow Wilson's policy to intervene in the European conflict on behalf of the Allied Powers, generally, and in alliance with Great Britain specifically. When public opinion turned against Imperial Germany, Devoy argued in favor of neutrality.
   
   Devoy was a tireless agitator and advocate for the cause of Irish independence. He was imprisoned as rebel and his sentence was commuted on the condition that he agree to live out the remainder of his days in exile. He had been arrested for his participation in the Irish Republican Brotherhood after British agents infilitrated the group as a means to disrupt the Fenian plan to invade British North America (Canada). It was thought that staging such an attack would provoke a war between the United States and Great Britain that would in turn serve to liberate Ireland. While Devoy was languishing in prison, Fenian troops were able to cross the border and enter the Province of Ontario from the State of New York. A brief skirmish followed and the invaders were quickly beaten and forced to withdraw.
   
   Following his release and exile, Devoy committed the remainder of his life to promoting "The Cause." He attended meetings, wrote editorials, raised funds and organized membership campaigns over and over again. He traveled throughout the United States and worked alongside or quarreled with almost every important Irishman of note during his lifetime.
   
   Terry Golway has done a commendable job of honoring the memory of an undeservedly forgotten Irish patriot who performed most of his labors in relative anonymity on a distant foreign shore.



2. Golway tells the tale of John Devoy, greatest of the American Fenians, and a pivotal, if hitherto neglected, figure in the history of Irish nationalism. Devoy was an longlived agitator, fundraiser, journalist, convicted Irish revolutionary and American refugee who bankrolled Parnell, Patrick Pearse and Michael Collins, butted heads with the Ulster Presbyterian Woodrow Wilson and the egomaniacal Eamon de Valera, and sacrificed his personal happiness in the process. Golway's prose is sharp and terse, with a propulsive narrative drive. A fine work of history.



3. I wanted to take the opportunity to write after finishing the book this past week; it's a good start for anybody curious about the roots of the support--in money, arms, rhetoric, and/or direct assistance--that Irish Americans have long given for Irish freedom. Often, the zeal of the "exiled children in America", as we're referred to in the Irish Proclamation of Independence from 1916, has surpassed that of those Irish we've left behind back home. Golway's book gives you some of the reasons why this disparity may have emerged--the force of the Famine, deportation of many Fenians, the Civil War's effect in giving unwitting assistance to many Americans who returned to agitate in Ireland and abroad, and the economic success gained by a few Irish emigrants and even more the sacrifices of a few dollars of many many more Irish who did the grunt-work which fueled the fortunes of those few, no doubt. Today, many of these emigrants' descendants are criticized as "plastic Paddies" who know little about Ireland beyond a few ballads and sentimental slogans. Both their critics and their supporters among the Irish Americans themselves should study this book, which uses Devoy's long career as a basis for a complicated study of how factionalism, quarrels, and a somewhat clumsy mixture of idealism and pragmatism all combined to effect change back in Ireland. And it should also instruct those who still support the Irish struggle today--it shows the pettiness and begrudgery that has often plagued U.S. efforts at grassroots aid. Although at times in the later sections, I lost track of who was outwitting who in all of the internecine backstabbing among the various claimants of The Cause, this is not to discredit Golway's skill. He had an intricate story to narrate, and he keeps it fresh and even witty, without pandering to his readers. His own experience as a journalist, a career shared by Devoy, undoubtably enriches much of the ambiance behind this sometimes reticent figure, too. I often wonder how a biographer, faced with a subject who's written his or her autobiography already, can calculate a new angle from which to view the person. Golway manages to integrate Devoy's own words sparingly, and by filling in much of the context which Devoy would have kept mum about (or not known of), the author presents a surprisingly relevant case study of the dangers and the seductions of trying to achieve an ideal in a messy world of spies, politicians, revolutionaries, businessmen, and everyday folks. In a time when many Irish and non-Irish alike are taking a renewed and justified pride in this island's heritage, this book introduces you to the American contribution to the Irish situation. (I also was impressed by the author's taking the time to comment on his work in response to a superficial criticism posted; his graceful manner of answering his hasty critic shows real class.)



4. I hoped this book would confirm the above Synopsis and Kirkus and NY Times reviews which I already knew to be accurate as to Devoy, the subject. It is nicely written and contains much valuable and interesting detail. But, for reasons known only to the author, he selected nearly exclusively negative quotes to characterize Devoy and his tens of thousands of supporters of democracy for Ireland. It is on them, rather than on the genocidists opposing them, that the author pours the vocabulary of abuse. Only a psychology textbook could contain more synonyms for mental disorder than this book. It is full of "bitter; hate; hateful; hatred; grievance, old resentments; vengeance; murder; folly; ratholes of conspiracy; an Irish fight; a race of treacherous murderers; band of murderers; half-breed Jew; self-pity; divisive; slander; invective; irrational; acrimony; libel; firebrand; obsession; imbecile; foul; gross; vulgar; a murder society; destructive; decadence; raving lunatic; agrarian crime; wild tumult; fanatic; potatoes - neither man nor pig wanted more; perverse; turbulent; terrorists; violent; illicit; drunkenness and dishonesty; assassination; wretched quarrel; miserable; perfidy; stupid anger; vitriolic; contentious; treacherous; raged;" etc. Perhaps worst of all, the author indicates that it wasn't a republic (and all the benefits that flow therefrom) that Devoy et al struggled for, but for "a mystical, martyr-producing organism that could trace its bloody and tragic ancestry to Theobald Wolfe Tone." This grotesque slur that may well be explained by the author's execrable choice of sources: Cruise O'Brien, Edwards, O Grada, McCaffrey, et al. They constitute much of the "Potato Famine" school of Irish history which denies the existence and central role of the 75 British regiments that murdered 5.2 millions in the Irish Holocaust. Still; three stars is about right. It was worth the read if not the price. From it I learned that Devoy wrote an autobiography; "Recollections of an Irish Rebel" that I really want.

No comments about There Is No Alternative: Why Margaret Thatcher Matters.

5 comments about Perdita: The Literary, Theatrical, Scandalous Life of Mary Robinson.

1. mary robinson lived her life on her on term ,when woman were told there was only one path to follow,wife and mother.



2. The late 18th Century is a fascinating period of contradiction. The circumspect lives of George III and his wife are at odds at the so-called crème de la crème of society, including the Prince of Wales. Mary Robinson's life story reveals the opulent lifestyles, decadence, and life of privilege of England's aristocracy and nobles. A great commentary on this period.



3. For the eighteenth century, I suppose you could call her a great 'beauty' as she was privileged to be painted by the famous Gainsborough and other artists of that time. She was a social climber who had her own opera box complete with mirrors. As the actress portraying 'Perdita' in Shakespeare's "The Winter's Tale" she captured the fancy of George,the Prince of Wales, and became his mistress at the risk to her reputation and career. Had it happened in today's society, she could have married him and become royalty.
   
   Born in a former monastery in Bristol, England, on November 17, 1757, she was a notorious figure of society, theatre, and literary circles. She derived from Irish roots, she was the perfect 'Juliet.' After her betrayal (in which she produced letters to negotiate a future), she became ill with rheumatic fever and turned to writing Gothic novels. Living in the old ruins of a catheral as a lonely, introverted, sad child, she had a vivid imagination and used it in her books.
   
   She was a product of her time and used whatever wiles she had as a female to further her activities, whether in theatre, politics, royalty, celebrity writers or just her own poetry and fiction. She wrote a memoir of her sordid beginnings and sham of a marriage, which had allowed her to live a fashionable life in London for a short time, then to fall to the bottom of the ladder in debtors' prison. Her early years were one of abandonment and marriage one of infedilities. She had good teachers along the way.
   
   This was well researched and much effort put forth to show the truth, no matter how bad. Her triumphs were greater than her failures.



4. For those who enjoy the Regency period and life of George IV, this is one of the most perfect books to introduce you into the life of the period. It was a brief, intense and fascinating life which pushed the established mores to their limits.
   
   The Prince of Wales (lat to be George IV) became enamoured of Mary Robinson in her portrayal of Peridita in Shakespeare's, A Winter's Tale. She was a young actress, escaped from a bad marriage and strange father. She took to the stage for some income (as many women of the period did instead of taking up prostitution as such)
   
   The Prince of Wales became known as Florizel to Robinson's Perdita and she was his first 'major' mistress. Their lives intertwined for a brief period in his early adulthood - the beginning of what is known as the 'extended regency'. Robinson was then mistress to many of the influential peers of the time, and was even friends with Georgiana, the Duchess of Devonshire;
   
   At a time when Georgian morals were of questionable value (everything in private, nothing in public)- when profligacy, spending, appearance and general splendour were the order of the day - Mary Robinson orbited on at the perimetre of acceptability. An actress, an abadoned wife, a mistress, and more.
   
   I found this book overlong, but worth the effort to read. It is one of a series of books about women on the edge of society in this period, and has been great to build up a picture of life and living in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century. The author has gone to enormous efforts to track down information on Robinson, and it has paid off. There seems to be a good depth of research to back up the work. Overall a good read and well worth making the effort



5. I'll confess I would never have looked at this book if it hadn't been for the fact that I decided to read the 10 nominations for Richard and Judy's Best Read 2005.This book has been the biggest surprise of the lot,because, to be honest, I was not really looking forward to it.
   How wrong could I be ? This is a dazzling story of a fascinating woman. I am afraid to say the other biography in the Richard and Judy list,"Feel" by Chris Heath, which is all about pop singer Robbie Williams, comes off a very poor second when compared to this volume. Sadly of course there's no doubt which book will sell more.I wish all Robbie Williams fans, or indeed the fans of any of the over-hyped celebrities of today, would read this book and find out that maybe their hero's or heroine's exploits are not so special after all when compared to what the subject of this biography got up to.
   Mary Robinson, whose nickname was Perdita, was married at 15 and her marriage was something of a disaster and included spending some time in prison with her husband. She then made herself into one of London's most celebrated actresses and was a friend of the outstanding theatrical figures of the day.She became a leading figure in the glamorous high society of the city, reputedly being the most beautiful woman in Britain.She voluntarily gave up her theatrical career to become the mistress of the Prince of Wales, thus heightening her celebrity even further. Reading about this time of her life it appears that she was just as famous or infamous as any contemporary celebrity.Maybe more so.There are many obvious similarities.
   In the second half of the book the plot changes almost completely as Mary, after being ditched by her royal lover, re-invents herself as a writer. She is so successful in this enterprise that she becomes one of the leading lady literary figures of the era. She is primarily a poetess, but also writes plays, novels and political tracts and she becomes friendly with both leading political and cultural figures.
   It is an absolutely fascinating tale, made more moving perhaps by the fact that she was not lucky in love, suffered a debilitating illness for many years and finally died young at the age of 43.
   All this is retold in an easy and entertaining way by Paula Byrne and I would thoroughly recommend this book to anyone.

5 comments about Letters to Alice on First Reading Jane Austen (Weldon, Fay).

1. Written in the form of witty letters to a niece taking an undergraduate English Lit course, this book attempts to bring insight to the work of Jane Austen in particular and to answer those who question the relevance of literature in general. First published in 1984, there is no mention of deconstruction's effect on academic departments, but otherwise the author seems to address most issues pertinent to the reading and writing of fiction, beginning with a wonderful chapter on the lovely metaphoric City of Invention. Elsewhere, Weldon discusses non-literature, Latin, a writer's relatives and friends, feminism, literary truth, critics and invention. Austen is here as well,and the author enlightens with her discussions of Austen's life, times, works, style and death. There are many wonderful passages, and I especially admired the analyses of Austen's work, but I would have liked more of this, and in more detail. At one point the author writes: "[Jane Austen] knows how to end a scene, an episode, a chapter, before beginning the next: when to allow the audience to rest, when to and how to underline a statement, when to mark time with idle paragraphs, allowing what went before to settle, before requiring it to inform what comes next. It is a very modern technique. It requires ... consciousness of audience, and audience reaction." It should be evident from that passage that Weldon is an elegant, insightful and articulate writer, and I would have *loved* to have seen extended examples and analysis of specific Austen passages to illustrate the points made in the preceding excerpt.

   Ultimately, I didn't think the niece's subplot worked. Weldon first advises her not to attempt to write a novel, and then advises her to write it, and then advises her about dealing with the publisher when the novel is not only published but very successful. What's Weldon's greater meaning? Why would this undergrad's novel be published and who is reading it? Is it a condemnation or just a device to drive the conceit?

   I learned a lot about Jane Austen and about writing, and got some help for the next time someone tells me it's a waste of time to read a novel. Very enjoyable and highly recommended.




2. There's a national debate going on in my country concerning the value and relevance of literature in modern society. Students are liberally encouraged by their schools to drop literature from their curriculum in favour of more examination friendly subjects to increase their chances of achieving the maximum aggregate score for their "O" and "A" levels. So, it is not without some irony that I should be reading Fay Weldon's "Letters to Alice On First Reading Jane Austen" as my introduction to this author's works. Well, I was completely blown away by its first chapter/letter entitled "The City of Invention" which alone is worth the price of the book and....says it all. The imagery she uses in distinguishing the different genres in writing as well as the intrinsic or superficial merits of each form of writing is absolutely breathtaking. In it, she hints at why Shakespeare in the "city of invention" is that castle that marks the skyline and a compulsory stop for every tour group making the rounds of the "city". Weldon is eloquent, witty and wickedly funny with her pen. While she never quite hits the high of that first chapter again, she offers some rare and valuable insight into why Austen is read even today. Great literature has the power when read (whether quietly or aloud) to touch the masses by revealing the universality of some home truths or values they espouse. Although Austen fans will be delighted to see their favourite characters come to live in Weldon's world, you don't have to like Jane Austen to enjoy this book. To fellow Singaporeans sceptical about the value of literature in schools, my advice is "read this and you will see how absurd the question really is". No matter if you disagree after reading the book, b'cos you would have had a jolly good time. Great stuff. Truly.



3. I loved this book when it first came out years ago, and it still makes me laugh, as Jane Austin still makes me laugh. Fay Weldon is one of the few writers I know of who has the wit and the irony that we Austin-lovers look for. Letters to Alice is wise and insightful; read it!



4. Borrowed from a friend during my Jane Austen period, this book so delighted and inspired that it is now a dog-eared resident of my nightstand. As a neophyte pro-writer, I often have people ask me how I made the transition from "wanna-be" to "real" writer. This book was an important part of that process.



5. I thought someone ought to give fair warning to diehard "Jane Fans" that this book is not so much about Jane Austen as it is about coming of age and the relationship between two different generations. Jane is not its main focus. Borrow it from your local library, if they have it, but I wouldn't recommend buying it.

5 comments about Nelson: A Dream of Glory, 1758-1797.

1. There are possibly more books on the shelves of bookshops (certainly in England) about Nelson than any other English hero and because of the recent anniversary of Trafalgar many more have either been written or re-printed. How does the reader pick one out from the rest. Well my own recommendation would be to buy this particular volume,
   
   In the historical time scale, Nelson lived and died in the fairly recent past, so many of the books written about him are only regurgitated facts that have never been checked properly, or may have no foundation in factual terms. John Sugden has left no stone unturned in his quest for the truth, not only about the public persona of the man, but also gives a brilliant insight into the life of the private man. His hopes, his fears, his weaknesses and his strengths.
   
   John Sugden's writing style is both lively and stylish and does not leave the reader feeling overpowered with dull facts that he or she cannot take on board. Yes the book is a historical work, but it is written with a sensitive touch that almost makes the reader think they are reading an adventure novel. This is achieved without prostituting the historical content in any way. I enjoyed it immensely.



2. This is a very detailed biography of Nelson, the best that I have read. It really deserves a high rating.
   
   At almost 800 pages of narrative and 943 pages total, you really get your money's worth here (if money was an issue). It's thicker than your phone book if you're from Montana or the Dakotas. Heck, it's almost as thick as my Seattle phone book. And after reading it, my wrist muscles have become curiously strong.
   
   What I like about it:
   
   It is very detailed, this author really has spent the time to do the research and read the correspondences and contemporary accounts, it's no summary of already written books. That's very heroic in itself. I have a feeling that it's one of those rare books where academia is it's own reward and not just the profits, not that a biography of Nelson is going to be a bestseller (Maybe would have been in 1806).
   
   Gives a very good feel of what Nelson was like as a person and professionally. All over the book Sugden gives us his impressions of Nelson and backs it up with correspondence and notes from either him or the people he dealt with.
   
   Discussed his personal life in some detail, which is good because many other authors glossed over it, especially historical authors who had certain limits of decorum.
   
   Gives a very good background of the naval service in Nelson's day and the political situation, that in itself was worth reading the book for. In fact, I can also say that it's the best description of the Royal Navy and the political situation from the naval services point of view at that time that I've ever read - not only informative, but serves as a backdrop of how Nelson developed and why he did the things he did.
   
   When some things could not be explained, he did explain that no accounts or correspondence could be found to explain it.
   
   This is not a book for the amateur. For the serious reader, the detail is what makes the book so absorbing, I revel in the detail, keep it coming. This book is not exceptionally easy to read. Again, serious readers will not find that a hurdle. For readers looking for a lighter (and shorter book) a search through Amazon will give you a lot of hits - just look for one about 100 pages long.
   
   The minor negatives of the book
   1) Some of the minutae was too minute, however, I easily skipped over those small parts. For a book of this caliber, better to have too much (which I can always skip over) rather than to have too little.
   2) I wished that some actions were described in more detail, but perhaps there were no good accounts.
   3) I wish there were some more maps and maybe some diagrams, but this ain't a picture book.
   
   Overall, a very, very good biography. Highly, highly recommended. I look forward to part two. Meanwhile, some wrist strengtening exercises with the barbells.



3. As we know, not all history books are alike. Many are dry, while others try to make it interesting by either making stuff up or writing like Tom Clancy. Sugden does a good job of engaging the reader with interesting narrative, while clearly distinguishing facts from conjecture. You definitely get a taste for Nelson's charm, drive, as well as foibles. There is a lot of maritime terminology, but if you're interested enough to read an 800-page book about a naval hero, you can probably handle an occasional trip to the dictionary.
   So I found the book very exciting, but I have one major complaint. The author claims to aspire to make this book the new definitive Nelson biography. He tells in great detail his glories of the Battle of Cape St. Vincent, and then his great failure at Santa Cruz de Tenerife, where he lost his arm. Nelson gets really depressed, and returns to England. Then there is a conclusion of his career. Sugden observes that even though Nelson was depressed at the time, and likely to retire, no one could have imagined what glories were still ahead. The end.
   How can you have a definitive Nelson book, 800 pages long, and not include the Battle of Trafalgar? Argh! Admittedly, the vook title tells it right there, since these things happened after 1797. But if you're reading the book to learn about these things, well, you get the idea. I guess I'll have to read a different book to discover why his statue is in Trafalgar Square...
   NOTE: Rumor has it this is part one, and supposedly Sugden will be writing another book, to tell the rest of the story.



4. Its difficult for me to improve on the several excellent reviews of this work that have preceded mine. But most importantly I want to state quite categorically that this is not a boring book. Biographies by their nature are not action stories, they must discuss periods of their subjects life that are perhaps bland and slow, but without this our understanding of the person would be incomplete. Nelson was not solely defined by his actions in the great naval engagements in which he fought.
   
   Nelson was a fascinating bundle of contradictions, self serving and adulterous, disparaging of superiors he perceived as inept yet immensely loyal to able subordinates, devoted to his country, and personally courageous. He was a man who embodied the fighting spirit of the Royal Navy at the peak of its prowess and whose methods of warfare continued to influence the navy for another century.
   
   I await the second volume of this work with great expectations.



5. This is a truly awful book. Sugden writes well enough, and no doubt the book is AUTHORITATIVE, but anyone looking to be entertained should simply forget it. The author never met a detail he didn't like, but by the end of this book, the reader will have met more than he can count. Simply put, Sugden goes into such detail about so many insignificant and downright dull matters that he loses any sense of perspective and entirely fails to creat an interesting and READABLE account of a truly interesting life. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

5 comments about Life of Johnson.

1. This is the abridged version! Don't get this!
   
   I love Boswell's Life of Johnson, it is one of my favorite books in the world. (Definitely in the top five).
   
   It has altered my outlook on life, the universe, and everything.... in a permanently positive manner.
   
   But I absolutely hate, loath, and despise all pitiful "abridged" versions.
   
   And I could not find anywhere on Amazon's page that this is abridged!
   
   Now I have to send it back! What a pain!



2. 'No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money,' Samuel Johnson.
   Sorry, it is a hobby.
   
   Samuel Johnson the writer of the first comprehensive dictionary of the English language, which was a very big deal in his day as the elite felt the English language was in decline due to it being influenced by so many foreign influences and the marvel of Samuel Johnson's efforts and method of writing made him, according to Lord Chesterfield Lord Chesterfield's Letters (Oxford World's Classics), as someone to be deferred to as the Caesar of the English language. Samuel Johnson, along with his friend and former pupil David Garrick, helped place Shakespeare as the permanent king of the English language; further, Johnson was a great and singular essayist and has an eternal place as a minor poet of the English language. His dictionary shot Johnson into the inner circle of elite in English society.
   
   Boswell's "Life of Samuel Johnson" is a fascinating read as Boswell traces Johnson's life story. Samuel Johnson and Edmund Burke, a friend of his, and together the center of English political and cultural life with the 'Literary Club' that they had both started were big players in forming the English reaction to the major liberal events going on in their day and could be said to be the fathers of modern conservatism. They were alive to face the genesis of modern liberalism, in the form of Jean Jacque Rousseau along with the American Revolution, theirs was the conservative response. 'What hypocrites are the drivers of negroes to be demanding liberty,' Johnson in reference to the Americans. (It is funny that Samuel Johnson was against slavery while the more liberal Boswell was for it). Although, I know Edmund Burke felt England to be in the reconcilable wrong with the American Revolution Edmund Burke's Speech on conciliation with the American colonies,: Delivered in the House of commons, March 22, 1775; ed., with notes and a study plan ... I. Crane (Twentieth century text-books) the Doctor, Samuel Johnson, did not and felt the Revolutionaries hypocritical ingrates. What is good about conservatism lays with these two fellows, Burke and Johnson. It is also amusing that Johnson's conservativism included the observation that countries should be judged by the condition in which their poor lived, disapprobation given to the worse.
   
   Samuel Johnson came from very humble roots and his early life was spent in modest means, fortunately he was surrounded by books. His first years in London were quite a struggle, near pennyless, sometimes sleeping on the streets. The money he ended up getting for writing the dictionary wasn't much in the end, it was the fame that got him some wealth.
   
   A marvelous read. Giving advice about the legal profession, education: his advice - just do it; habits form early and habits are hard to break... lots of interesting views from how to conduct oneself socially (Boswell seemed in constant search of this) to political commentary (one of my favorite was his advice on being weary of those that wrap themselves in the flag)... too much to write about. Boswell, when he first meets Johnson is so filled with awe and reverance but it mellows out some, he even starts playing games with the Doctor; however, he always greatly respects him but the idolitry disipates.
   
   Although Samuel Johnson's conservativeness and strong opinions might turn people off I find it refreshing compared to the stealth tactics of politics today. Politicians don't say what they mean and that is also probably why the Doctor was discouraged from entering politics in his day by some close friends with ties in that area, somethings change only by degree. James Boswell, the author, didn't agree with the Doctor all the time but appreciated the hard, realistic way of looking at things and amusingly delivered (mostly by quirky analogies) that Samuel Johnson did.
   
   Then Boswell is a story in himself. Boswell's Rousseau-ist fever for the notions of the 'Noble Savage, Natural Man' The Noble Savage: Jean-Jacques Rousseau, 1754-1762 was interesting also; his generation caught it and he had strong sentiments towards it despite Johnson's arguments against its reasoning. This fever also, at the least, lent cover to the American Revolution.
   
   Johnson could only afford one year of college. Received an honarary Doctorate for his dictionary.
   
   One of the books one should read before they turn 20.
   
   The best synopsis of Rousseau and in his own words is probably 'Creed of a Priest of Savoy' The Essential Rousseau (Essentials)



3. If you feel obliged to wade through the canon once in a while, this won't be a waste of your time, though these days Gibbon's roughly contemporaneous history is a much better read, Boswell's extreme formality being a bit wearing over 1200 pages (in the edition I read).
   On the other hand, Boswell's telling of Johnson's life is sprightly and certainly not so tedious as the writings of Johnson himself. People who choose to read the Life will not be disappointed.
   On yet another hand, I can easily understand why the library copy I borrowed, though purchased in 1949, had not yet been read (the uncut pages showing me so): except to specialists, I would not recommend this book in lieu of, say, 1000 or so others.
   I guess this actually is a useless review: if you have already decided to read this, you shan't have gone wrong; if you're looking for a good read, you're probably not looking here.



4. I own the Penguins Classics edition but no matter. The story is wonderfully rich. Boswell really is a master story teller because at no point did the story become dry. I literally read and savored every single word.
   
   All I knew of Johnson is that he wrote the first English Dictionary. But I had no idea this man was full of wit. He had a temper no doubt and definitely went through periods of what sound like moderate to severe depression followed by periods of bursting with energy, joy and wit and incredibly prolific and productive in those bursts, enough so that he surprised most people with his abilities in those bursts of creative genius. I am biased as I am a psychiatric physician but it sound like bipolar disorder to me.
   
   Whatever the case may be, I drank this book up. I'm still reading it, have about 40 pages left and haven't put it down since I picked it up.
   
   A must read just because of the sheer wonderful story contained within!



5. Haven't read it yet. But the processing job on the book itself was faulty...several pages were bent over and thus not trimmed properly.

5 comments about George Eliot: The Last Victorian.

1. I have started to read a lot of biographies, and somehow most of the authors manage to extinguish my passionate interest in the lives of the greats by a tedious writing style. Kathryn Hughes' book George Eliot: The Last Victorian is innocent of such charges. In fact, the book is both eruditely scholarly and reads like an exciting novel. I hope Kathryn Hughes writes more biographies.



2. Whata complex person was George Eliot (1819-1880). Mary Ann
   was born in the English midlands in a rural, conservative and
   evangelical society. She became an agnostic, free thinker whose
   brilliant early works were translations of German scholarship dealing with a critical examination of the life of Jesus.
   Eliot had a succesion of love affairs which such literary types as John Chapman editor of the Westminster Review and the
   brillian but cold Herbert Spencer. Her true love was George
   Henry Lewes a literary man who never divorced his unfaithful wife Agnes continuing to support her and his children through the long years he spent living with Eliot.
   With the encouragement, nurturing care and support of Lewes the fragile, tempermental, moody and gloomy plain girl from the Midlands became the leading light in the intellectual-literary world of mid 19th century London.
   Eliot is in the first rank of Victorian novelists. Her classics include "Adam Bede"; "The Mill on the Floss"; "Silas
   Marner"; "Felix Holt the Radical': "The Spanish Gypsy"; "Romola"
   "Middlemarch" and "Daniel Deronda.:
   Eliot was a brilliant woman who all of her life was concerned about her plain appearance. She married young John Cross in 1880
   dying only eight months into the marriage.
   Hughes gives a plainly written account of Mary Ann's life from the provincial girl to the grand old lady of English letters.
   Her life was sad since her brother Isaac and family refused to accept her arrangement of living with a married man. She was
   scorned as a fallen woman by polite society but found a modicum of happiness with Lewes.
   Huges provides short adequate summaries of all the novels and poems by Eliot. Some readers may find the infighting among family members and literary people in London tedious.
   Hughes had done her homework producing a solid biography.



3. Though the book was overall a bit biased toward Eliot's needy side, and didn't include quite enough literary criticism for my taste, I still found this a great and very informative read, especially for those with not a lot of background on the subject of this major Victorian writer.



4. Hughes' life of Eliot is solid, comprehensive, and given its dazzling subject, remarkably tedious. The book provides an ample chronicle of Eliot's documented life without ever bringing Marian Evans or her marvelous writings to life.

   Hughes is much better at piling on the details of Victorian intellectual life than working her way inside the creative processes that created Middlemarch, Adam Bede, and Daniel Deronda. The first half of the book, covering Evans' family life and difficult early adulthood, reads well, the impressive accumulation of research making up for lack of narrative.

   But when Evans creates Eliot and the first of her fictions, the book should snap to life. It instead deflates, dutifully cranking out novel synopses and recounting scandals without ever getting at why Eliot's fiction was so beloved in her day, and remains so today.

   A novelist of uncanny power and tremendous influence, Eliot deserves a biography at the level of Peter Ackroyd's spectacular life of Dickens. We're still waiting...




5. George Eliot: The Last Victorian is an intimate biography of noted author Mary Ann Evans, who is perhaps better known by the pen name of George Eliot (1819-1880). Some of Ms. Evans' most famous works include the novels Silas Marner, Middlemarch, and Adam Bede. This informative biography focuses quite closely on Evans' life, including her friendships with Dickens and Trollope, and the controversial scandal of her relationship to a married writer George Henry Lewes. Biographer Kathryn Hughes also scrutinizes the Victorian society that Mary Evans lived in and wrote so much about. Even Queen Victoria enjoyed books by George Eliot, but you don't need royal blood to enjoy this intriguing and meticulously presented biography.

5 comments about Churchill: Visionary. Statesman. Historian..

1. This is another of the "short" Churchill books that have become popular over the last several years and are less than full blown biographies but more than just private musings of the author. This author has an engaging style and if you've read any of his previous books on this subject it should come as no surprise that this book is for the most part a positive portrayal. The book covers the several themes stated in the title with a varying degree, (in this reader's opinion), of success. The high points include insight into Churchill's role, (and motivation), as an historian, his role with Stalin and the division of post WWII Europe and the evolution of Churchill's relationship with Eisenhower, (maybe the best chapter in the book). Considering all that has been written on Churchill this reader found some "new" perspectives and food for thought in the above. On the downside, several of the other chapters - the rehashing of Gallipoli, Churchill's "wilderness" years do not provide much detail or insight and the last chapter - a journal entry written contemporaneously describing Churchill's funeral - was little more than filler to this reader. This disparity in the writing is unfortunately one of the salient points I took away from the book. That being said, (written), this book would not be the place to start with Churchill but it is a more than an adequate supplement.



2. I read this book here in Brazil, last year.It's cheap, concise and easy to understand.There's failures in this book?Yes.
   At first, this book is biased.John Lukacs is a Churchill's fan.
   To exemple, Mr. Churchill was a deeply eugenist.This book never talks about this.Another exemple is that in 1899, Winston Churchill spoke against Islam something like this:"How dreadfull are the curses which mohammedanism slays on its votaries...No stronger retrograde force exists in the world..."
   The core of this book is to show Churchill after 1930.Even this, it fails sometimes.In chapter 4, Lukacs claims that Eisenhower was wrong about than USSR, and Churchill was right.In fact both were right.The american politics for Cold War, was basically the same, for every american president, since Truman,in 1945, to George Bush in 1991.
   Churchill also was among the men who created Iraq.Churchill also put the last Iran's Xah in power.All of these Churchill's mistakes aren't in this book.
   This is a fan's book, not an unbiased book.



3. What we have is a series of essays written about Churchill by a man who is both a highly regarded historian and a fan.
   
   The last essay, I found quite moving where he discusses his time at Churchill funeral.
   
   Yet the quality of these essays is not brilliant. In some ways they are repetitive with the same facts repeated again in another essay. Also the writer is also prone to exaggeration eg that the Germans could in June or July 1940 successfully invaded Britain.
   
   I have read much on Churchill and found this book disappointing maybe as from a historian of the quality of John Lukacs, I expected more.



4. This was my first book by Lukacs and I am not a historical scholar. I picked it up to learn more about Churchill, and where this admirable leader was coming from. If you are looking for a primer or a thorough biography of W.S., this is not the book for you. However, if you are already familiar with his background, ancestry, and accomplishments in detail, this book serves as a kind of postmortem love letter.
   
   It is certainly well-written--Lukacs is a talented writer who knows how to turn a phrase, as he exhibits in his diary entries describing Churchill's funeral. However, for all of W.S.'s greatness, Lukacs seems a doggedly loyal to the man and utterly resistant to any criticism. There is also noticeable resentment toward Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and other American officials, as the author apotheosizes Churchill above any and all other leaders during the most critical time in 20th century history. Regardless of the veracity of his position, I would recommend reading up on other perspectives to temper Lukacs' ode to Churchill's infallibility.
   
   Overall, this is a brief and awe-inspiring read: a worthy eulogy for a worthy man that sometimes sparkles in prose, sometimes fizzles in excessive reverence.



5. John Lukas clearly states at the beginning of his short book that his collection of essays is neither a biography nor a scholarly study of Winston Spencer Churchill (pg. xiii). Therefore, potential readers of Lukas' book who do not know anything about the key milestones in the life and career of Churchill should not start here. These readers can read books such as "Churchill a Life", "Churchill a Study in Greatness", "Clementine Churchill The Biography of a Marriage", "Winston and Clementine The Personal Letters of the Churchills" or "The Wit & Wisdom of Winston Churchill" to fill in the most glaring gaps in their knowledge of Churchill for that purpose.

   Lukas writes to the attention of an audience who has an unquenchable thirst to know more and more about an individual who remains a source of inspiration to many men and women who stand in the way of barbarity and illiberalism around the world.

   Although Lukas is generally sympathetic to Churchill, he is not blind to his major shortcomings: impetuosity, impatience, stubbornness and fancifulness (pg. 4, 154). Furthermore, Lukas reminds his audience in his essay "His Failures. His Critics" that Churchill had accumulated errors and mistakes that Churchill critics and detractors were attributing to his flawed character (pg. 129). For example, Churchill's futile fight against granting Dominion status to India from 1929 to 1935 was perhaps compatible with his imperialist credentials but certainly a clear blemish on his record. As a very experienced politician and knowledgeable historian at that time, Churchill should have known much better (pg. 14-15, 24, 135-136). Therefore, Lukas' collection of essays should not be construed as a shameful hagiography.

   Furthermore, Lukas reminds his audience in "Churchill's historianship" and "Churchill the visionary" that Churchill was generally cognizant of the lessons that he could draw from past events to articulate his often-visionary policies while reflecting on and shaping history on his turn (pg. 1-18, 47). Churchill was not only a spectator, but also a key actor and play writer of human comedy (pg. 102).

   Lukas also explores the ups and downs that Churchill had in his relationships with other history shapers such as Charles De Gaulle, Dwight Eisenhower, Adolf Hitler, Franklin Roosevelt and Joseph Stalin (pg. 19-20). Lukas convincingly explains that Churchill was facing an unpalatable choice between a Europe entirely ruled by Nazi Germany or half of Europe dominated by the Communists in case of allied victory (pg. 11, 27-28, 35). Churchill rightly first gave top priority to successfully fighting Hitler to death before trying in vain to stop Stalin in 1944-1945. Unlike some unimaginative people, Churchill understood right at the birth of the Soviet Union that the Bolsheviks should be stopped immediately before they grew into a gathering threat to the world. War-weary, the victors of WWI, unfortunately, gave only half-hearty support to the White Russians in their desperate fight against the Soviets (pg. 23). Once again, long-term pains were the reward for short-term gains.

   Some (American) readers will not be very pleased while reading Lukas' unflattering portrait of Eisenhower and the men around him in "Churchill and Eisenhower." As mentioned above, Churchill was definitely right to try to thwart in 1944-1945 the apparently irresistible advance of the Soviets in Central and Eastern Europe. Churchill clearly understood that geography and territory mattered, not ideology (pg. 42). For that reason, the British army met the Russians east of the entry to the Danish peninsula at the request of Churchill in 1945 (pg. 45). Unfortunately, the American leadership did not want to hear anything about it at that time (pg. 35-40, 46). Some European regions such as former East Germany and the Czech Republic should have been eventually spared the murderous and inefficient rule of the former Soviet Union (pg. 43). The Greeks should continue to be very thankful to Churchill for saving them from a communist tyranny (pg. 41, 48).

   In his famous, visionary Iron Curtain speech in 1946, Churchill expressed his concern with the murderous, inefficient embrace of Communism in the European regions under Stalin's control. American reception of this historic speech was at best lukewarm (pg. 47). Churchill knew better and was predicting at the end of 1952 that time was not on the side of Communism (pg. 48, 79).

   After the death of Stalin in 1953, Churchill, Prime Minister again, could not convince his friend Eisenhower, who in the meantime became President of the U.S.A., of finding some kind of accommodation with the new Soviet leadership (pg. 70, 73-74). Subsequent events proved that Eisenhower was right when he saw no difference after Stalin was gone (pg. 71, 77). Contrary to what Lukas thinks, Eisenhower should not be described as a leader without any vision under the nefarious influence of men such as John Foster Dulles (pg. 79-80). Many western leaders shared Eisenhower's views on this subject (pg. 81-82). The former Soviet Union was not yet in sufficient decline in the early 1950s to negotiate in a position of force with it as world leaders such as President Ronald Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher understood very well in the 1980s.

1 comments about The Diary of Virginia Woolf, Vol. 3: 1925-30.

1. Of all of Virginia's diaries (there are five volumes), volumes 3 and 4 are perhaps the most interesting, if only because they span the period in which she wrote her classics such as Orlando, To The Lighthouse, and The Waves (which itself literally spans the period between Vol 3 and Vol 4.)

   If you read the collected Diaries and Woman Of Letters by Phyllis Rose, you will gain a vital series of insights into the life and thoughts of this most haunting of female writers.

   Whenever I think of Virginia, I always think of the lines from "Vincent" by Don Maclean...

   This world was never meant
   for one as beautiful as you...

   If you have never read any Virginia Woolf, I would respectfully suggest you rent a copy of Sally Potter's Orlando. While Sally takes artistic license with the novel, she has created a very sympathetic work of Art.

   This diary above all gives you many insights into her thought processes and her writing career, including her reactions to the publication of her works and their reception by the public and the sub-species known as Critics.

   Recommended.

4 comments about Camilla and Charles: The Love Story.

1. It was refreshing to me to read the good things about Camilla.To me she is a thoughtful woman who is trying to do the right thing for her Husband and The Royal Family.



2. This is not a "good read." Unless you like to read about the shennanigans of the bored and wealthy. Poor Camilla. The woman whose one ambition in life was to emulate her adulterous grandmother from the time she was little. Having gained the position of potential top-dog lady in the monarchy of the UK, she is pleased to have succeeded in following her lifetime adage of, "curtsy first, then jump into bed." Only it has been curtsy first and jump into many beds, whether married or not. Hmm. She is definately not a malefactor, but one wonders if it was good of author Caroline Graham to beatify a woman whose one sole purpose in life was to be the mistress of a king in order to have "the ear of the King." Poor Charles. She has his ear alright-among other things! This book left me nauseated by the first third of the book. Simple answer. Put it down and the feelings of nausea go away! Reading the dirty-laundry stories of these Royals--one is left with a lingering question. Where are the marriage counsellors that could tend to these poor people? Doctor Phil, could you make a Buckingham/Balmoral House call?? What if we taught our sons (and daughters) to "sow their wild oats" as Lord Mountbatten counselled Charles? Just think, we could all look forward to the same tacky open marriages torn apart by adultery, betrayals and death. Fun. Not! What have I learned from this book? That it is depressing. You would do much better to not buy this book. Better yet, buy the book "Franklin and Winston-An Intimate Portrait of an Epic Friendship" by Jon Meacham and stay healthy! Read what makes a book a true, wonderful read--which deserved every bit of being on the New York Time's bestseller list. Read about ordinary people who become extraordinary when they aspire to bettering their countries and end up bettering history! C. Graham's book deserves a -1 but it wasn't in the ratings menu. As the previous reviewer said, "C. Graham is perhaps Camilla's best supporter." History will always remember her Machevellian manipulations and the weakness of Britain's future king. This is not a love story that lifts the reader to heights of virtuous, selfless love. But, instead, plummets one into the chasm of what happens when people pursue reckless and lustful ambitions that make mockery of marriage, drive princesses to their deaths in car accidents and promote their children into the same kind of death-spiral lifestyles of careless sex, cocaine use and messy divorces. I wonder how history would have been different if Prince Charles had truly listened to Major Bruce Shand's words and taken the elderly father of Camilla's advice when he ordered him to leave his daughter alone. Pages 203-205 depicts at least one person who had the courage to stand up to the future king of England and tell him the truth. What is sad-Prince Charles listened, but didn't listen. Things might have been better in history today, if just one person in that crazy group had just done the right thing. Caroline Graham was desperately trying to win sympathies for Camilla and Charles, but only succeeded in showing readers why the British monarchy is dangerously teetering on the brink of collapsing. After Elizabeth's II's magnificent reign, perhaps that would be the best thing.



3. Easy book to read. If you follow the Royals this may have a lot you already know. This book addresses why Charles and Camilla ultimately ended up with each other. It also shows her in a good light. Their relationship mirrors the Duke and Duchess of Windsor. Co-dependent.......



4. In her acknowledgements Graham mentions that she was introduced to Camilla Parker Bowles more than 10 years ago, her friends asked her (Graham)to set the record straight. This is by my count her 3rd (4th?) Camilla book.
   The book starts out, and ends, with a little bit about the recent marriage between Mrs. P.B. and the Prince of Wales but most of the bulk of the book is material you'll have already seen in another of Ms. Graham's books on Camilla. The cover photos are recent of course as is one B/W picture inside the book, but I do think I've read all the rest before.
   Ms. Graham must be Camilla's greatest fan, seems to think more highly of her than perhaps even what she thinks of Prince Charles. The late Princess Diana, or Paul Burrell?- virtually nothing good about them here.
   Even if you are yourself a Camilla fan I think your money could be better spent elsewhere if you have the earlier books. What little new information is probably already in something like Majesty Magazine, not much point in buying it twice. I was disappointed in how little new material there was here, didn't expect "I love Diana" but I did hope to actually learn something new.