No comments about The Wit & Wisdom of Winston Churchill: A Treasury of More Than 1,000 Quotations and Anecdotes.

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.

1 comments about Charles Darwin: Interviews and Recollections.

1. A man of such renown has been written up in many volumes. His letters and his self-knowledge have won readers for more than a century now. A few of his intimate recollections are presented here in one small volume, most helpfully. But to Darwin's own candor and depth of memory the editor--a scholar and a person plainly admiring this great and modest man--has linked the living witness of a dozen people of many kinds who visited, questioned, even quarreled with the biologist.

   As in a well-made play, the qualities of Darwin's character unfold from the tales. Here is the child with a conscience, who admitted to made-up wonders--and soon regrets the deception. Here is Alfred Wallace, the specimen collector from Indonesia, who wrote a brief paper to Darwin himself to seek aid in publishing the essay that described in brief the very theory Darwin had spent twenty years documenting to convince the wide world. Alfred Walllace sent it to that very man just as Darwin's big treatise was newly ready. What is wonderful is how Darwin and Wallace understood that stroke of fate, and remained lifelong friends in the face of the celebrity Darwin won and deserved, as Wallace's insight was given what was due him.

   Here are Darwin's friends--Huxleys, Hooker, his cousin Galton, his devoted sons--recalling family life. Here too is the feminist author Harriet Martineau, guest at the Darwin's a few times, and her estimate of this man. The power of this pageant of commentary is all but unique among biographies, even though nothing really new is here.

   Most touching--and most winning--of all is the little-read narrative by father Charles himself of the life of his oldest daughter Ann, who died at ten years age of a delayed effect of scarlet fever. With no sentimentality, but with discernment and love, he writes: "She had a truly feminine interest in dress...such undisguised satisfaction escaping somehow all tinge of conceit & vanity beamed from her face, when she got hold of some ribbon...of her mamma's."

   True simplicity, dignity, and precise perceptions shine from this book of many writers (a few of them enemies of Darwin's). It is a model of compilation, and would repay a wide readership even if it were the drama of a comfortable undistinguished Victorian, and not that of arguably the most influential of scientists and his wide circle.

   Philip & Phylis Morrison

5 comments about J. R. R. Tolkien: Architect of Middle Earth.

1. In some ways the author gives a better picture of Tolkien's England than Humphrey Carpenter; possibly because the latter is so much a creature of the same universe (born and brought up in Oxford) that he doesn't realise how different it is to some people.
   
   But the author's errors aren't confined to Middle Earth:
   
   Bournemouth isn't (and never has been) in Devon, you can't go 'along' the Carfax, Christopher Tolkien was a don at New College, not University College. Oxford doesn't have four teaching terms a year, the colleges don't award degrees, Exeter College isn't adjacent to Balliol...
   
   He doesn't even know that the pound sign precedes the amount. He has apparently looked at a map of Oxford, but never been there. Indeed, the book reads as though he had never been to Britain.
   
   I agree with the other reviewers: save your money.



2. I agree with what has been said already in most of these reviews, but felt compelled to add that while Grotta got a lot of information concering LOTR wrong, and while he obviously did bear a grudge against Christopher Tolkien and the Tolkien estate, he did manage to give a rather acceptible cursory introduction to Tolkien, and the amount of time spent discussing the legal battle between Ace and Houghton Mifflin was enlightening, if not slanted. I'd suggest that if you're looking for an introductory biography that you don't intend to take as gospel and wish to read quickly, this is for you. Otherwise, keep your money and read Carpenter's.



3. This is an easy-to-read and interesting book, which helps you to learn about J.R.R. Tolkien's life. Especially interesting to me was how The Hobbit, Lord of the Rings, and The Silmarillion came to be published. It is true what other reviewers have mentioned -- that there are a few unfair snide remarks about J.R.R. Tolkien and his family. But these are only a few lines and are easily overlooked. Overall, the coverage is balanced and concentrates on facts, and avoids being either an attack on Tolkien or adoration of him.
   
   But the author gets into trouble in the few parts where he attempts to discuss the content of LotR. You can't take seriously an analysis of Lord of the Rings by somebody who gets Moria and Mordor mixed up. There is a discussion of Christian themes in LotR which is interesting until Grotta makes the fantastic statement "Without a spiritual being in Tolkien's mythology who closely conforms to the Biblical archetype of the Devil (Sauron was a flesh and blood creature)...". Huh? The story of Melkor/Morgoth's fall in THE SILMARILLION exactly conforms to the story of Satan's fall and Melkor/Morgoth has exactly the role of Satan. Moreover, many readers of LotR -- including the ones who make a big-budget movie trilogy out of it -- would disagree that Sauron in the Third Age was a "flesh and blood creature". Likewise, later Grotta mentions that Thingol was Luthien's brother, although these are major characters in THE SILMARILLION and the father-daughter relation is very clear and important. None of these mistakes are small details; they show that Grotta isn't really very familiar at all with Tolkien's writings.
   
   But as an easy-to-read overview of Tolkien's life, this book is fine.



4. I must say that this biography created an odd sensation in me while in the midst of reading it. I was both enthusiastic and unsettled at the same time that it should be finished. The book is filled with ideas going in the wrong direction, misinformation, mediocre writing, a misrepresented Tolkien, a misrepresented Christopher Tolkien, a misrepresented Silmarillion, a misrepresented, ah, but I digress. The enthusiasm I felt was obviously about being able to complete it quickly, (it was written very simply, almost as if for a young adolescents), but the unsettlement arose from the fact that once I found some idea that was really out there, or some totally wrong info, I started to like looking for these, enjoying the non-fact filled fun of it all.
   
   That is not to say that the book is all bad (hence the two stars) . Lacking the goodwill and blessings of the Tolkien Estatein writing this book, (that was given to the much praised Humphrey Carpenter,) he ends up basing it upon other writings, a few interviews of Tolkien fans and friends, and a large amount of guesswork, so he does a decent job of establishing Tolkien's early life and getting a few of the good professor's friends and old students to make a quote here and there.He also tells an interesting and factual (!!) tale of The Lord of the Rings' first print run and its subsequent print history. So far so good huh?
   
   The problems start to arise almost at the begining when Grotta states that Tolkien was exceedingly lazy and noncommital, flitting from one project to another, hopelessly muddling things. While there is some degree of truth to this,there is no way anyone can say that these exaggerated terms are true.When you are a highly respected childrens author, , almost unarguably the best writer of English literature in this century, one of the highest decorated professors of language in western culture, and you create an entire world with history and multiple languages along with it, you don't really find time to be lazy.
   
   Also, as in almost every other review of this book, Grotta shows a definate grudge against the Tolkien Estate, not pulling any punches when he mentions it. It is understandable that one might be hurt at the rejection, but hey, it is their choice who gets access to Estate holdings. You don't just let anyone who comes along wanting to write a biography have total and free access to your things, do you?
   
   I will give him some slack because the main bulk of his text was written and published before the Silmarillion was released. This glaringly shows throughout the book though. He later (in a subsequent printing) includes a chapter about the Silmarillion, but he never goes back and fixes his inferrences about the early histories of Middle Earth. He says that there wasn't any evil before the creation of the world, but in the Silmarillion, the first part tells how Morgoth came to be before the creation! There are many more like this.
   
   Another annoyance is in his new chapter on the Silmarillion, you can see that he just skimmed it, or maybe he just bought the cliff-notes. He makes out the Valequenta to be a lesser, almost nonessential work, (is he insane?), and the only real description of any of the stories found within is of Beren and Luthien. He does a quick and ugly job of it, making it sound rather boring, meanwhile he keeps saying that Thingol (the king and father of Luthien) is really Luthien's brother! Arrrggg.....
   
   But one of the most glaring irresponsabilities is this, taking Christopher Tolkien's name and rubbing it around in the dirt. Grotta puts him down at almost every chance. He claims that Christopher actally rewrote huge sections of manuscript (in the Silmarillion), and that it could obviously be told because they weren't worded the way that Tolkien did in his other works, saying they were much more ameturish. Sorry bud, but there isn't any bit of ameture within any of his books, and there was never any intention of it being written in the same style. Actually, most of it was rewritten by Tolkien himself in an effort to fit in with his now published works (Hobbit and LOTR), and at the same time to condense it to a more readable narrative style, because the original works were to large to all be published together. He later goes on to say that he hopes that Cristopher doesn't have any intentions of writing his own fictions, Middle Earth or otherwise, because we can now see how poorly he writes. Ouch! On another note about Christopher, Grotta slips into calling him Tolkien as if it were his father's name, making for total confusion if your not paying close attention.
   
   Another danger point of this book is the choice of artwork. Once again someone has taken the Hilderbrandt brothers' art and strewn it chaotically across the pages of a book. I guess it is rather fitting though that an irresponsibly written book should have irresponsible paintings. I know that these are just their interpetations, but come on, we don't have to make them so popular. Most of their work looks like it belongs in a children's fairy tale, which would be alright for the hobbit maybe, but perhaps they should have taken a que from Tolkien and when he changed his style to epic writing, they should have followed suit with epic paintings.Thay also seem to have a poor eye for the proper details, painting peoples and castles as if Tolkien didn't descibe them properly.
   
   My final word is to avoid it at almost all costs, unless you find a cheap copy like I did to at least make the booksheves look nice.



5. I've only read some of this book so far, but it's apparent to me that the author has never read The Silmarillion and has read The Lord of the Rings only once. He makes consistent errors throughout the book with regard to Tolkien's world (such as mixing up Moria and Mordor and claiming Luthien is Thingol's sister), which leads me to wonder if he's even bothered to check up on his other facts. I get the impression that his critique of the Silmarillion is based on the reviews he's read and not having actually read the work himself. As others have noted, it's obvious he had some problems with Tolkien's survivors, as the venom towards them is apparent. Do yourself a favour and pass this one over for Humphrey Carpenter's authorised biography and The Letters of JRR Tolkien. You'll learn far more about the man, and from a far more credible source.

3 comments about Court Lady and Country Wife: Two Noble Sisters in Seventeenth-Century England.

1. This was an excellent scholarly work, while yet imminently readable. Betcherman follows the vastly different lives of two sisters during 17th century England, with one being immersed in Court life while the other centers her life around home matters. It is a fascinating read and very enlightening for those interesed in social history, women's history, 17th century British history, or any combination. I highly recommend it to the casual historian as well as to the more serious scholar.



2. This book was very good and although I cannot say I devoured it, I certainly had trouble putting it down. It was eye opening in the way that many modern readers may find their ideas of life and marriage in the seventeenth century shaken up a bit. It is amazing to see just how influential these women could be in their own circles.



3. This tale of two sisters in the Baroque Court brought me back to my 11th grade history class. A chronic truant, it was one of the few classes I considered it worth my while to attend because it was the first time I learned that history was a panoramic drama to rival anything I could find in books or teenage gossip. Similarly, the lives of Lucy Percy, the Countess of Carlisle, and her sister, Dorothy, a mother of twelve in the Leicester countryside, is both a page-turning story and a unique perspective on the English Civil War.

No comments about Black Puddings With Slim: A Downpatrick Boyhood.

5 comments about Ungentle Shakespeare - Arden Shakespeare: Scenes from his Life (Ungentle Shakespeare: Scenes from His Life).

1. Honestly, I can't understand why people with such an education as she holds would feel so compelled to drag Shakespeare through the mud, except it just seems to be the fashion among many Academics.
   
   And I have to admit, my Life experience shows there is no good correlation between education (big brains) and an ability to reason with good discretion. It's almost Aristotelian, that smart people need to harness their 'intellect' if they're to make a good pursuit of Truth.
   
   As one of the other reviewers said, she believes any 'veneration' of Shakespeare (Bardolatree) is to the detriment of his peers. If that's her case, she could apply her critical tools & methods to their works, but instead she cherry-picks from scant biographic facts and spins her web to catch an 'ungentle' Shakespeare. For instance, to compare his 'generosity' with 'public-minded' politicians who give for others to notice, is in fact, unfair, because promoting one's Public Image is contrary to Biblical lessons (don't parade your charity) Shakespeare may have actually taken to heart, so we just don't know. (In fact, I hope I don't sound skeptical, but sometimes I wonder if names on buildings and Foundations might be as much (or more) about Ego as it is philanthropy.)
   
   In her Preface she says, 'I don't believe any Elizabethans were what we might now call 'nice' - liberal, unprejudiced, unselfish.' To me, this is an unconscionably close-minded, prejudiced and (yes) self-aggrandizing statement to make. She is, in fact, very generous giving her Judgments of the (mercurially) quick & (syphilitically) dead Shakespeare. (She Nose.)
   
   To be honest, I did not study her entire book because I've learned to read how a person thinks and judged myself she is not very disciplined in her 'objectivity,' sometimes even laughably so. The unfunny part is that's she's a Professional and others defer to her expertise.
   
   If you want a good biography and have already read 'Will in the World,' Ackroyd's Shakespeare and Schoenbaum's Documents, maybe you should take a break and just brush up on your Shakespeare. It's far better not to read yet another biography, but to 'read him'. Hope this review helps.



2. I enjoyed this highly original Shakespeare biography, if only because of its deliberate departure from mainstream Bardolatry. Biographers of Shakespeare are in a paradoxical situation: Shakespeare left behind reams of writings of genius, and many legal documents, but there is little solid indication of what sort of personality he was, or what made him tick. Would-be biographers therefore resort to supposition and fabrication to fill in the numerous blanks. Biographies of Shakespeare thus reflect more about the desires, needs, and personality of the biographer than Shakespeare himself. Duncan-Jones' book is no exception. She seems to be motivated by a rather adolescent resentment of Shakespeare because many fine Elizabethan or Jacobean writers, such as Sidney, Nashe, Webster, and Marston, are neglected at his expense. This leads her into the worst possible interpretation of Shakespeare's activities at every turn. Despite this, or because of it, Ungentle Shakespeare is compelling, provocative, and important, by forcing us to acknowledge the possibility that Shakespeare (gasp!) was a complex, flawed guy. It is well-written and generally well-argued. Occasionally, her animus against Shakespeare leads her into assertions which are plain silly: Why should Shakespeare's appropriation of Robert Greene's Pandosto for the plot of The Winter's Tale be seen as "settling scores"? More realistically, this is a probably a generous tribute to a departed rival.

   Readers seeking a more favorable slant are advised to read Michael Wood's intriguing biography (another shocker: was Shakespeare Catholic?) or the very sober, but highly reliable biography by Park Honan.




3. The reviewer who dismissed this book as "fiction" was totally wrong. This is a highly original book, which shows us that the implications of the familiar evidence for Shakespeare's life have never been fully understood until now. The author is not afraid to challenge many of our most entrenched assumptions about Shakespeare -- not least the hope that he must have been "a nice person". Duncan-Jones uses her brilliant knowledge of original documents and sources to demonstrate that there is a great deal of evidence that Shakespeare behaved pretty badly in relation to the poor and towards his daughters, and that he wangled his way to getting a coat of arms. It's a refreshing picture, which hasn't been presented in ANY previous biography; perhaps it's no coincidence that this is the first Shakespeare biography written by a woman. But this is by no means simply a hatchet job. Duncan-Jones' account of Shakespeare's social climbing is balanced by some wonderfully sensitive accounts of the plays; she shows her capacity both for sharp psychological insight, and for appreciative literary criticism. Anyone interested in Shakespeare (and who isn't?) needs to buy this book.



4. As with Duncan-Jones's biography of Sidney, her strength is her imagination. A book, like so many other 'Shakespeare biographries', that belongs on the 'fiction' shelf.



5. Recent years have given us several fine new works on Shakespeare, among them Harold Bloom's prickly but masterful "The Invention of the Human" and Park Honan's well-researched, sober "Shakespeare - A Life". To these we must now add Katherine Duncan-Jones' "Ungentle Shakespeare". Where Bloom illuminates the works and marvels at the scope of Shakespeare's mind, and Honan relates the life based on the "facts", with as little speculation as possible, Ms. Duncan-Jones draws on what is clearly an encyclopedic knowledge of documents, history, and scholarship to consciously extract from the context of the times possible insights into the man and his craft.

   The author (refreshingly) sets out with nothing special to prove and no incipient desire to deify or demonize the Bard. Even Honan seems to tend, if in doubt, to "find in the Bard's favour": the sum left Stratford's poor in Shakespeare's will, for example, is deemed a "generous bequest". Until, that is, it is viewed next to the bequests of other contemporary people of wealth, as Duncan-Jones does, revealing it as paltry by comparison - once we view it in a broader context.

   This is the pattern for the entire book: intentionally not an exhaustive biography, "Scenes From His Life" (the book's sub-title) are used to illuminate the poet's achievement, hitherto unexplored but likely aspects of his personality, and his journey through his times in a way that nicely supplements more (and also far less) cautious biographys. In questioning certain aspects of received wisdom, Duncan-Jones invites us to envision Shakespeare the man, living and interacting in a complex, high-pressure reality, not as a Cultural Icon on a pedestal.

   For those of us who wish to "take him all in all", Duncan-Jones' "Ungentle Shakespeare" is a wonderful invitation to broaden our perspective on the Bard. Orchids to the Arden Series for publishing it, as it expands on and supplements information in the series' excellent introductions to specific plays. My bottom line: I've seldom put down a biography with such a sense of having gotten real insights about a famous historical figure about whom (ostensibly)"little is known".

No comments about Family Album: A Personal Selection from Four Generations of Churchills.

2 comments about Fanny Burney: A Biography.

1. Fanny Burney, despite herself, was a feminist. She would have hated that idea, but she was an intelligent woman in an age when women were considered either ornaments, mothers, or whores. No other avenue was acceptable for a women of that time, educating a women was considered a waste of time! Into this world, Fanny Burney, hindered by dyslexia, educated herself, and changed the literary world forever. Claire Harman has written a well documented biography that dives deeply into Fanny Burney's life, devotion to her father, and the world that surrounded and shaped her.



2. I confess that Burney's never been my favorite novelist, but I do like biographies so I picked this one up. I found it extremely readable and engaging, and I grew more sympathetic toward Burney and her writing upon learning more about her life--her learning disability and subsequent insecurity, her father's interference with her career, her miserable years at court, her rushing to publish novels so that she could pay the bills, and, of course, her horrifying mastectomy (about which I read with my fingers across my eyes, as one might hide one's face during the scary part of a movie).

   I wish there had been more room for "Harman's careful disentangling of fact from wishful thinking and manipulation," but I can see why this would be more appropriate for a book of criticism than a biography.

   If you're at all interested in Burney or the times in which she lived--even (or especially?) if you don't like her writing--I believe you'll find this book worthwhile.

No comments about Duke of Wellington (British Library - Historic Lives).