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.

5 comments about Princess Diana: The Hidden Evidence.

1. The book is written well enough which is why I am giving it two stars, however its the content that speaks volumes...volumes about diddley squat. I tried to read this book with an open mind, however the more I read, the quicker I came to the conclusion there was no conspiracy to commit murder against Diana. How did I arrive at this conclusion? I used plain, old common horse sense and took a closer look at the real facts that are known about the case. Sorry, but I just don't buy into the author's rip current theories. Diana died in a tragic car crash at the hands of a drunk driver, being heckled by bunch of vultures who were salivating over every juicy morsel in her life and due to the fact that both she and Dodi were not wearing their seat belts. The French way of taking their time with severe trauma patients and crawling at a snail's pace to the hospital certainly didn't help matters either. If there was a murder and cover-up, where's all the others that move in the same circles who have been oh so done away with or was she the only one since JFK? Were there some mysterious events that occured? Of course, there are always mysterious events surrounding ANY death when it can't be explained down to the last minute detail. If you are into "way out" conspiracy theories this may be the book for you, otherwise there are other quality books out there on the life and tragic loss of Diana. I highly suggest shopping around.



2. I read this book as I thought there was a lot more to the death of Princess Diana then has ever been brought out. And, according to this book, there is. Since the house of Windsor is in reality German and the house of Stuart is Scottish and Diana is a descendent of the house of Stuart, it is more then understandable why certain members of the house of Windsor would want her out of the way since she was more entitled to the throne then Prince Charles. Then you have the military-industrial complex which, in reality, rules this earth. When Diana started the campaign against landmines, she was a very visible and known world wide person who was able to bring to the forefront the damage that landmines do to innocent people. Since Diana's death I have not heard anymore talk about banning landmines anywhere in the world.
   
   It is brought out that Henri Paul worked for MI6 and the CIA. That could have been in as much as money was deposited into his bank accounts that was a lot more then he was making at the Ritz. It is also alleged that his blood sample was switched with another sample taken from a suicide victim at the morgue. But, has anyone thought that Henri Paul was drinking that night knowing that he had a mission to perform and that was to make sure that Princess Diana was killed in an automobile accident? It is entirely possible that was the case. As for the carbon monoxide in Henri Paul's blood sample, it has been brought out that he was smoking cigars at the Ritz prior to leaving on his last ride. That in itself will cause an increase of carbon monoxide in the blood.
   
   There are many unanswered questions to the death of Princess Diana and we will never know the answers to them. If MI6 and the CIA want to cover up their involvement in the accident they most certainly could and no one will be able to find out if they were involved or not. The intelligence agencies of a lot of countries know how to keep something from being linked back to them and this could or could not be the case here.



3. The book was written in the form of a trial and the reader is the jury. Well, if I was on that jury, I would have voted for the defense. And if I was the judge, I would have thrown the case out after the prosecution finished his case for lack of evidence. The title is perfect "Hidden Evidence" as the evidence was so hidden that I couldnt find it in the book. The author makes many hypothesis but does not have any REAL support for his hypothesis.
   
   I believe that we have not heard the full and real story of the death of Diana and was hoping to find it here - but I was disappointed. Stay clear.



4. My beloved Princess Diana was most definitely murdered by the Establishment. This book gives hard facts to support this statement and points out inconsistencies within the investigation, both in France and England. Assasinations like this have been going on since the beginning of time, since John the Baptist. If you loved Princess Diana you must read this book. It will make you so sad to realize what was done to her.



5. Oh, for God's sake! What utter drivel. Diana wasn't bright enough to implicate anyone more substantial than a poorly trained manicurist.

   Here's a conspiracy question to think about -- if Diana was so committed to the anti-landmines issue why did she chose Dodi Fayed as a consort? Some of his relations are huge arm dealers. Hey -- maybe THEY knocked her off!

5 comments about Sir Francis Drake: The Queen`s Pirate (Yale Nota Bene).

1. The discontented sources used for this book were a sure guarantee that Sir Francis Drake's historical accomplishments would not be shown as world-shaking events but merely "maritime myth". Many in the Royal Admiralty and Queen Elizabeth I's court blatantly reviled Drake as an upstart commoner and threat to the courtly status quo. They frankly hated Drake's guts, and wrote down all their antimosity, while all of Drake's firsthand accounts (especially the journals and logs of his Circumnavigation) have been lost to posterity.
   
   Why did the author treat Drake's actions as cruel and/or unusual in an era when Spanish and Portuguese colonists/explorers/conquistadores' brutality towards the peoples of the Americas, Africa and Southeast Asia knew no bounds whatsoever? Drake showed much more consideration for the native peoples he met than most of the Spanish or Portuguese had ever done.
   
   The author uses a contemporary politically judgemental tendency to color his attitudes. Having read some of the sources cited in this book and seen none of the spiteful inferences made in TQP, I think the author's attitude perhaps colored his interpretive judgement.
   
   Drake's piracy is condemned, although he only appropriated the riches that the Spanish had extracted through forced labor from the Incas and Aztecs. But nowhere does the author either state or condemn the brutal methods the Spanish used to rob the indigenous people of their culture and their freedom in the name of Empire and the Roman Catholic Church.
   
   Drake had many flaws: a legendary temper, brusque manner and lack of courtly breeding, but he proved himself as a leader of men, a superb sailor and an erascible member of English maritime history.



2. Most professional historians at least try to feign objectivity in their treatment of historical figures. Harry Kelsey does not. The author despises Drake and makes no attempt to hide that fact. Kelsey set out to do a hatchet job and he certainly wasn't going to let history get in the way.
   
   Although the author does a reasonable job of addressing many of the established historical events, he deliberately fails to report dozens of well documented incidents of Drake's mercy and largesse. While Drake's Spanish contemporaries were torturing or executing the Englishmen they captured, Drake repeatedly spared his captives' lives, fed and treated them well, then eventually released them unharmed. These accounts are well documented BY DRAKE'S CONTEMPORARY SPANISH ENEMIES, yet Kelsey cannot bring himself to report these incidents.
   
   Why? Harry Kelsey loathes Drake and cannot force himself to simply objectively report the positive things that Drake's own enemies said about him.
   
   
   More objective treatments of Drake include
   
   1. "Francis Drake" by John Cummings
   
   2. "The Secret Voyage of Sir Francis Drake" by Samuel Bawlf
   
   3. Passing treatment of Drake in "The Queen's Slave Trader" (biography of John Hawkins) by Nick Hazlewood
   
   Even Kelsey's own more recent (2003) work "Sir John Hawkins -- Queen Elizabeth's Slave Trader" treats Drake (albeit incidentally) more evenhandedly than his "Sir Francis Drake: The Queen's Pirate".



3. Judging by the editorial the book gives a completely wrong picture judging actions from another time and place by modern rules.

   Sir Francis Drake had very little in common with the pirate from the movies. He was more of talented gentleman of 16 century on dangerous, but profitable enterprize.

   I do not remember Drake looting churches, but even if he did - one must not forget about him being protestant during major religious unrest in Europe. His attituide to his enemies was good and he wasn't bloodthirsty. His moral values were quite normal for his time. And his military prowess definitely was higher than normal.

   His performance during engagement with Spanish Armada was good as well (worth to mention, that, unlike of admiral Hogwart - commander of the English fleet, Drake owned some ships of English fleet). The book "Defeat of Spanish Armada" by Garrett Mattingly gives very accurate account on that issue.

   He never lost Queen's favor. He rather lost Queen's admiration, because results of his last expeditions were less spectacular, but he died vice-admiral commanding his fleet.

   I have unplesant feeling that the book is just one of those "detroning" biographies, which use the standard approach "all great people are just good liars" and aimed to entertain readers with no background in the area. Pity, because writing biography of Drake give unique possibility to make reader understand 16 century through picture of this great military leader.




4. For afficionados of Drake, Elizabethan England, or nautical history, this is a first rate read! The scholarship is thorough and well documented without leaving the prose too dry. Author Kelsey exegetically strips the gloss which has been after-added to most accounts of Drake's life (my brother, who is a nautical archaeologist, found it professionally worthwhile). Unfortunately, Kelsey's apparent bias against Drake's commercial focus prevents a discussion of Drake's larger role as an economic multiplier in the Elizabethan fiscus. The cash brought in by Drake's expeditions and similar ilk were probably critical in enabling the crown to finance the struggle against the Spaniards. Still, all in all, highly recommended.



5. I love the story of Sir Francis Drake and his adventures in the Spanish Main and was eager at this chance at such a thourouh telling of his story.

5 comments about Heart of Oak.

1. I bought this book many years ago. I greatly enjoyed it, as it had a veracity to its description of lower-deck life. I re-read it recently, and still enjoyed it.
   
   I suppose I should have realized that it was fiction, as I don't think there ever was an E-class destroyer "HMS Eclectic", and no destroyer of that name sailed with HMS Hood and Prince of Wales to intercept the Bismarck (HMS Electra was in that group and picked up the 3 survivors from HMS Hood), as Jones claims. Nor was there a destroyer of that name that sailed with HMS King George V from Scapa Flow, nor did one join the action later from convoys. Some of the details of the action are also inaccurate, but not badly so for a supposed personal narrative (e.g., 6" secondary armament on KGV, when they were 5.25")
   
   Similarly, while there were four O-class destroyers involved in the sinking of the Scharnhorst, there was no "HMS Obstinate" (Jones' ship), nor was one of that name ever commissioned.
   
   Anthony Dalton's biography of Jones seems to paint him as a very interesting, but less-than-pleasant person. It certainly seems to have nailed any notion of Jones' books being other than substantially fiction. The history of the author does seem to add an extra level of interest to the stories. But that said, the stories are good, the feel for characters is strong, and they are very readable.



2. I needed information re- life on board a British ship during WWII. I found many fascinating details and much accurate information in this book. I found that some of the humor was less funny that announced, but on the whole, I found this book
   very interesting. It was in great part a tale based on personal experience, and
   it held my interest throughout. I'm going to read more by this author...



3. It is a terrific book - and I have enjoyed it for many years. However I recently discovered it is - as Anthony Dalton's new biography of Jones shows - complete fiction - in the sense that Jones was never at any of the events he described. In fact he didn't join the Royal Navy till AFTER World War II.
   
   But that is not to diminish the writing of the tale - Jones imaginings make for a "real" perspective of life in the lower decks of the WWII Royal Navy - and I imagne that in his immediate post-was career in the navy he learned enough to set the scene accurately.
   
   But remember - it is a work of fiction - set on a real historical timeline - but still a good read.



4. Heart of Oak is one the finest war books and sea stories that I have read. I found it hard to put down. Although the intensity of the war and its effects on the men was depressing, I was compelled to keep reading.

   Jones' gives the reader a different and personal perspective--that of the lowly, poor, and teenage sailor; looked down upon by everyone else and facing death, boredom, and discomfort constantly.

   I agree with another reviewer that it is unlikely that Jones witnessed as much as he claimed, and I cannot attest to the accuracy of his descriptions of life aboard His Majesty's Navy, but there is a truthfullness and sincerity in Jones' narative that I find totally convincing.




5. A welshman's soulful and realistic retelling of a matelot's live in Her Majesty's Navy during the dark days of World War II. Tristan Jones recounts his experiences with all the colour and song of a poet; a sea poet - and that he is. The lives of these men carry with you long after reading this book. Put Tristan Jones near the top of my favorite author's list.

No comments about Magnificent Monarch: Charles II and the Ceremonies of Power.

3 comments about Jane Austen: Her Life: The Definitive Portrait of Jane Austen: Her Life, Her Art, Her Family, Her World.

1. This book claims to cover a great deal of new material, although I would have to say that it doesn't seem to me to add much to other biographies. I would guess that a lot of the new material relates to Frank Austen, since the biography begins, somewhat surprisingly, with a several page account of his entry into the Navy. I would therefore recommend it to Janeites, who will want all the details, but those who have already read a biography and are not terribly interested probably won't find that this rewards the additional reading. (I am among those who just love details, although this is a bit much even for me.)
   
   Previous biographers, such as Elizabeth Jenkins (Jane Austen: A Biography), have portrayed the Austens as a loving and harmonious family. Recent biographers have challenged this view, sometimes even arguing for serious tension between Jane and her sister Cassandra. Honan argues for a relatively harmonious group, with some normal dissensions.
   
   I give somewhat mixed marks to the writing. I find statements such as "The deepest purpose of her burlesques was always to ensure her freedom within the loving group of the Austens ... " (p.70) as unverifiable verbiage that adds little to the reading experience. I don't think that we needed several pages on the actual events of the Battle of Trafalger, although of course it adds to the general historical detail. On the other hand, Honan's reconstruction of JA's possible thoughts as she agonized over withdrawing from her engagement to Bigg-Withers are quite affecting, even if speculative. I don't think that I have ever read a more moving account of her courage during her last illness.
   
   The bibliographic citations are frustratingly uneven and incomplete. Previous biographers have pilloried Edward Austen (Knight) for his failure to offer his mother and sisters a home immediately after his father's death. Honan claims in passing that he did make such an offer and they declined it. There is no citation for this startling, and in understanding the interactions of the Austens, important statement! Honan also agrees with Valerie Grosvenor Myers (Jane Austen, Obstinate Heart: A Biography) in stating that Mrs. Cassandra Austen (JA's mother) was reluctant to get married, but neither cites a source! This claim suggests a number of interesting possibilities regarding the mother-daughter relationship and JA's own decisions regarding marriage, and is certainly important enough to require substantiation.
   
   One of the reviewers has mentioned that there are numerous errors in the book. I can't say that I was struck by them, unless the reviewer is speaking of difference in interpretation, but I can't claim to be any expert, either.
   
   Honan includes several family trees and the notes, such as they are, are arranged so as to be easy to find. There is an index, not as detailed as it might be. There is a useful review of materials and previous writings on Austen and related topics.
   
   Honan does not like John Halperin's book, The Life of Jane Austen, which he claims is inaccurate, but it is so far my favorite and the most focussed of the long biographies. For a short biography, which I like to read before long biographies when available, I recommend Carol Shield's book, Jane Austen (Penguin Lives), and Valerie Grosvenor Myer's Jane Austen, Obstinate Heart: A Biography, as a midlength book. The latter is flawed by a lack of notes.



2. I found 23 factual errors in Honan's book -- when I mentioned this to someone I was told that a reader in Virginia had found 142. There are much better biographies of Jane Austen out there -- for starters, no one has yet surpassed Elizabeth Jenkins', first published in the 1930s, and a fine recent one, a good introduction to JA's life, is Maggie Lane's latest, Jane Austen's World. Don't be put off by the fact that it is slick and, as they say, richly illustrated -- it's readable, sound and remarkably complete despite its size.



3. Park Honan (professor of English and American Literature at the Universiy of Leeds in England) wrote "Jane Austen: Her Life" in the late 1980's. At the time he wrote his book, he had access to much new material including a treasure trove of letters written by various folks who knew Ms. Austen. Mr. Honan has included an impressive bibliography in his book which should keep one reading for years to come.

   Honan says Ms. Austen understood the current affairs of her time and he provides ample documentation to substantiate this assertion. He also suggests her knowledge of current events is reflected in her writing, albeit thinly disguised.

   Although Austen lead a somewhat sheltered life as the daughter of an English vicar, she lived in exciting times. Napolean was at his height, the Revolution in France and subsequent 'Reign of Terror' kept English on pins and needles, thirteen of England's 23 American colonies had revolted and created a new nation that had sided with the French, and the aristocracy was in turmoil over scandels surrounding the monarcy.

   Austen was kept abreast of these activities in a variety of ways including letters from her naval brother Frank. Historians have uncovered over 500 letters Frank wrote to family members, and he kept meticulous journals of his time in the navy. Although he probably did not tell Jane everything, he did share many newsworthy events such as the difficulties on his ship the 'London' when six men were hanged and some others "lashed for insolence, mutiny and an 'unnatural crime of Sodomy." Honan says Austen refers to this incident in "Mansfield Park" when she has the character Mary Crawford who is living next door with her adulterous admiral uncle say, "Of Rears and Vices, I saw enough."

   Honan says Austen was influenced by the writings of Mme. de Sevigne, whom Ms. Austen's father considered too much of a feminist. Jane Austen was very concerned about the plight of women and considered adultry and divorce a scourge on women. She was aware of the Regent Prince's attempt to put aside his wife Queen Charlotte on "trumped up" charges of adultry. She sympathized with the Queen, unaware that the Queen was a fan of her books.

   Influenced by works such as the third Earl of Shaftesbury's "Characteristics of Men, Manners, Opinions, Times" she enjoined her readers to have the 'sense' "to control one's emotions through observation, reason and moral understanding" and the sensibility to have an "accurate perception of other people and their feelings."

   There are plenty of examples throughout Honan's book of the effect of external events on Ms. Austen's writing and thinking, not only her books, but in the letters that did survive and journals kept by Ms. Austen and others.

   This is an informative an excellent book for anyone who wants to know more about Ms. Austen's life and works.

5 comments about Dickens: A Biography.

1. 
   All you need to know about Charles Dickens is here. Fred Kaplan has given us a well-rounded look at the literary lion in his natural habitat. What more could we ask for, except to savor - anew or again - another of Boz's novels?
   
   We appreciate Dickens because he loves all of his characters so completely - even the most irredeemable ones. With Kaplan's book, we find that Dickens himself is one of his best creations.



2. The key word is "scholarly." If you want the run-of-the-mill pulp bio, you won't find it here. What you will find is a treasure of information on Dickens and his life. I have read every major biography of Dickens, and Kaplan's work is by far the best. I don't know how others could call it "boring," for I couldn't put it down. If you need your biographies "punched up," perhaps you should try Ackroyd's bio, which is more colorful but also more rambling. This is solid work, from a solid researcher.



3. two stars due to the tons of information, but way too much that is strangely disconnected from Dickens' vibrant writing and his nearly frantic appreciation of life. Reading this (many passages you have to skip through they are so deadly), it's as though Kaplan waded through all of Dickens' writings even though not one of the novels struck a chord and really got to him. And there's that deadly present tense, i.e. Dickens goes here instead of went, writes to Forster instead of wrote; only makes it all more artificial, distant, bloodless, boring.



4. This book seems to have been written by a business man and not a man of literature. I felt as though I were reading Charles Dicken's family budget diary rather than a life-history. This biography is lengthy with details that are indescribably boring. I found myself longing for more of the emotional aspects of this marvelous man's life. Kaplan writes in a dry, uninspiring style. I had 'great expectations' for this book but found those expectations dashed to pieces on the rock of boredom.



5. Charles Dickens is without a doubt one of my favorite authors. I have read all of his major novels (some numerous times) and many of his other works. The most important things to know about Dickens are right there in his own words. However, the man himself is a fascinating subject from his rise through a poor youth to his triumph as the most famous authors of his age or, indeed, any age. Certainly, Dickens is worthy of a well-written biography. Fortunately, there are well-done ones out there.

   I had read Kaplan's book a number of years ago and recently read it again. It remains one of the best. Kaplan gives us a complete and balanced portrait of Dickens' entire life. He is sufficiently laudatory of Dickens' successes without being fawning. Additionally, he is not afraid to point out Dickens' weaknesses--as a son, husband, father, friend and author, though his weaknesses as a author are few enough. We get a real sense of Dickens as a human being.

   One of the reasons I think Kaplan is so successful in his portrait is that he weaves numerous quotes from letters by Dickens and his many correspondents almost seamlessly into the text. It gives more of a feeling for Dickens as a man of his time as opposed to looking back and trying to compose a modern view of him. I also like the way Kaplan shows Dickens as an acute observer who integrated people and places he knew into his fiction. There are risks in reading a novel too biographically but it is interesting to try to pin down an author's inspirations and themes. Kaplan handles this quite well but he doesn't go into any of the novels in depth so someone unfamiliar with Dickens' books might have trouble in some places.

   Overall, Kaplan finds an nice balance between depth and readability. He is able to pack a lot into 556 pages. Anyone with an interest in Dickens would be foolish not to read one of the best biographies of the man in print.

5 comments about A Summer Bright and Terrible: Winston Churchill, Lord Dowding, Radar, and the Impossible Triumph of the Battle of Britain.

1. This book gave me a new slant on a subject that I thought I knew. I didn't appreciate the Air Marshall until I read what he accomplished in saving England from Hitler.



2. Anyone searching for a decent history of the Battle of Britain, a biography of Lord Dowding, insight into the development of radar OR the role of Winston Churchill in any of these will have to look elsewhere. In this poorly edited atrociously written volume the author manages to take fascinating material and reduce it to a sort of peculiar tabloid scandal sheet. It is painfully unclear what Fisher's intent is in writing this book, at one point it seems like he is trying to ressurect the reputation of an "unsung hero" but at the next he is doing his best to make fun of the very person that he has built up. The style of the book borders on the peculiar -there are no notes or citation, just a somewhat sparse "bibliography" yet we get large sections in quotation marks & whole mental dialogs that occur in the heads of the protagonists, who "chortle" and sneer at each other on every third page -don't get me wrong here, Fisher has written a very "post-modern" book, there really are no heroes, just different levels of fools, knaves and villains, all of whom steal from each other, cut each other out of the credit, thwart each other's ambitions, and generally behave like a nasty set of academics at a faculty meeting from hell. As an example of the egregious errors in this text, for some reason Fisher seems obsessed with tanks -even though he conspicuously ignores Churchill's role in their initial development. Again and again he talks about tanks "winning" the First World War & "breaking the back" of the German armies. This is odd, given that the tank arrives in the First War in September of 1916 -half-way through- and had little if any impact on the situation on the Western Front. Strangely, the role of the Royal Navy's blockade in "breaking the back" of Germany's will to fight seems to have escaped Fisher's notice... Fisher's cultural biases are also very much to the fore: at one point the English pilots spend their time between missions either throwing up or suffering from diarrhea. Their American counterparts in the meantime "chat". Fisher regularly allows his purple prose to wander into this sort of silliness & one is constantly wonderingif things really were as terrible (and silly) as he says how on earth did the Germans not win? In all seriousness, this is a very stupid and above all "little" book that simply isn't worthy of the subject. It is not just that readers will be mislead by Fisher's poor use of the material it is more that they are likely to not bother to pursue the many important themes that ctually emerged in the run-up to the Battle of Britain because they are so turned off by the shallowness of the schloarship exhibited here. One reads this book for the same reason one slows at car wrecks, out of a morbid interest in calamity.



3. Well worth buying since this area has not been properly covered to my knowledge. Disagreeably journalistic style.
   With all due respect to Dowding and none to the Air Ministry, someone should extend the book's scope and write a book on all the cock-ups and how they came into being and were tolerated. Examples: Leigh Mallory insubordination, no camouflage paint on planes, why 1932 jet wasn't developed, formation flying, no deflection shooting practice, insufficient swopping of fatigued/fresh pilots between groups, no calling back of semi-trained pilots who were jettisoned before finishing courses, etc, etc. Most of these errors were obvious before fighting started.
   A Summer Bright and Terrible: Winston Churchill, Lord Dowding, Radar, and the Impossible Triumph of the Battle of Britain



4. A Summer Bright and Terrible: Winston Churchill, Lord Dowding, Radar, and the Impossible Triumph of the Battle of Britain by David E. Fisher is the story of more of the more eccentric military geniuses, High Dowding, the Commander of RAF Fighter Command during The Battle of Britain. I mention eccentric because Dowding's bend-of-mind makes folks like Patton and Montgomery seem dead normal.
   
   In fact, if you combined Patton's belief in reincarnation and the afterlife with Montogomery's stubbornness, you get a pretty good idea of how - under normal circumstances - loopy this man was. Fisher describes a man that openly spoke of discussions with dead fighter pilots and who married a woman whose dead husband recommended to Dowding that he do so. The woman, by the way, had had dreams about a man named Hugh - vastly older than she - who had protected her as a child.
   
   So, was Hugh Dowding a nut case?
   
   It doesn't necessarily matter because this man also was responsible for some of the most innovative developments in aerial combat: multi-gunned monoplane fighters, radar and its associated ground-control infra-structure and the twin-engined radar carrying night fighter. Along the way, he also managed to stand up to Winston Churchill and maintain a cadre of the aforementioned fighters in England when the PM was bound and determined to lose them all in an effort to save France.
   
   And in return for these efforts, he was villified in person and behind his back; left in suspense as to his future for months on end, dis-obeyed by several of his immediate suboridinates and, ultimately, force out of service.
   
   The story is one of the most true examples of doing the right thing, despite and in spite of the potential repercussions. An absolutely excellent work. I only wish that Fisher had footnoted the book. By not not doing so, he hoists himself on his own petard of chastising those who mis-quote or fabricate.



5. I discovered Lord Dowding as the author did through Dowdings book "Lynchgate". The Battle of Britain, whilst not the saviour as most believe put a serious dent in Hitlers War Machine. Britain was to remain free and a "stepping stone" back into Europe.
   
   Without Lord Dowding none of this would have been achieved. Bombing had been shown to be the way of modern warfare and fighters stuck in a time warp could not catch them. Dowding's obstinacy and prescience established a data-linked system of radar, operation rooms and fighters. Without him the World may have been a much different place.
   
   Since owning and reading the book, I have lent it out to various people, some who admit to only occassionally reading! Everyone has been awe stuck by the story. Our debt of gratitude to those who fought the Second World War is aptly enhanced.

3 comments about The Godwins: The Rise and Fall of a Noble Dynasty (The Medieval World).

1. The author does a good job describing the Rise and Fall of the Godwin family. It rose out of obscurity and ended for the most apart at the infamous Battle of Hastings. The hard part about piecing together information on the Godwins is that there's so little information out there. Most of it comes from books written a couple hundred years after their fall or from the viewpoint of the Normans which you don't really know how much information from them you can trust. I do like was how the author did point this out when ever he brought up a Norman point he was also able to counter it with other explantations that sounded just as reasonable like why Harold didn't wait before attack William's army or decisions Edward the Confessor made and things the Godwins did and their background (as much as there was). I liked reading more about the rest of the Godwins, his brothers and sisters and parents.



2. "The Godwins" by Frank Barlow is an excellent account of the turbulent history of England in the half-century leading up to the Norman Conquest, charting the rise and fall in fortunes of the dynasty established by Earl Godwin and which reached its zenith with the succession of his son, Harold, as king in 1066.
   
   Though the book is less than 200 pages long, Barlow nevertheless is able to write in great depth about his period, evoking a sense of the turbulent politics and the rapidly shifting fortunes of his subjects. He describes the rapid rise of Godwin and his family, from relative obscurity in the reign of Aethelred 'the Unready' (978-1016) to power and wealth under Edward the Confessor (1042-66), and then finally to the kingship itself with Harold's succession in 1066. His account of the events leading up to the Norman invasion, as well as of the Battle of Hastings itself, is thorough and detailed in every respect.
   
   The sources available to the historian for the 11th century are fuller than for earlier periods, but nevertheless remain somewhat fragmentary. Barlow, however, does an excellent job of drawing them all together in a scholarly yet readable manner. Indeed these sources are constantly referenced throughout the book, with a list of notes at the end of every chapter. Moreover, where there are uncertainties or discrepancies in the material, he is careful to highlight them. To help the reader keep track of the various players, there are four family trees, depicting both the Anglo-Saxon and the Danish royal lines, as well as Godwin's own family. Also included are 12 pages of black and white plates, reproducing images of the coinage of the age in addition to key scenes from the Bayeux Tapestry.
   
   All in all, "The Godwins" is a truly excellent book; indeed, one of the best on the subject of King Harold and the Norman Conquest. Also highly useful for understanding the social history of eleventh-century England is Richard Fletcher's "Bloodfeud: Murder and Revenge in Anglo-Saxon England", while at the same time a useful counterpart to Barlow is David C. Douglas's "William the Conqueror", which deals with the same period but from the Norman perspective.



3. My wife is a Godwin and during the Queen Elizabeth II corination the Godwins were invited. By reading the book you can see why and it has been a big help while doing our family history.

No comments about Benjamin Disraeli (Jewish Encounters).