5 comments about The Guynd: A Scottish Journal.

1. I really looked forward to reading this book because I have long wanted to travel in Scotland, and I enjoy the extended travelogue where people live in a new land for a long time and get to know the locals. This was a good book, but not great. I had unanswered questions when it ended. For example, why did it take her 10 years to realize she and he husband were incompatible? Why did she keep her apartment in New York during the time she was living in Scotland? I kept thinking that if this were fiction, some of it would be implausible. Still, the characters you meet are worth meeting, and I did enjoy the book.



2. Ours was not the 'big' house, but the 'gardener's cottage' which we rented for a year, and both the marriage and the enterprise of that particular country home survive. But all the characteristics and challenges of the estate, garden, community, and home came to life again in the author's witty, canny prose. This is the best description of the many, layered facets of Scottish society and how the great homes and their residents fit into the scheme of their surroundings that I have read.



3. I enjoyed the book, but was shocked when I came to the passage describing how the author, while in a late stage of pregnancy, climbed a tall scaffolding to paint a wall. It seems like an amazing lack of judgment for someone who was pregnant late in life.



4. I wanted to read this witty memoir because of my romantic childhood fantasy of living in a mansion or castle in Europe. Oh how lucky the American author was to have fallen in love with Scottish man with an ancestral home and property. I was rather envious of their son, Elliot, who was able to spend his childhood exploring and playing in the gardens, on the lake, and in the house.
   
   But life isn't a fairytale. This is a story about a deteriorated, cluttered mansion, its 400 acres and a marriage that started as a whirlwind romance and came to mirror the mansion itself.
   
   There's a lot of humor in the writing. How could you not laugh at the author's stories about how hard it was to heat the house, find proper tenants, clear out a garden untouched for decades and to try to throw junk out when married to someone who can find a use for everything.
   
   If you don't know what an Aga stove is, you soon will. I highly recommend this book, but suggest curling up in a warm house with a hot cup of tea and a blanket. You'll need it.



5. I bought this book at my mother's request. She loved it. I'll be getting it back from her and reading it too.

5 comments about The Rothschilds (Kodansha Globe Series).

1. This book takes me back to a magical time, when sovereign finance held potentates at bay, and when bankers were literally masters of the universe. In the absence of universal taxation by governments, raising funds for war and peace is the sole, nearly impenetrable domain of the sovereign banker. To say that the historiography of finance capital, or more appropriately, 'haute banque' is much, much better than Lord of the Rings and Rowling's tomes would be an unforgivable travesty.



2. Buried in this detailed narrative are colorful and interesting phrases like "In one day, he reduced the bank's gold reserves by almost 100,000 pounds." This deals with an enraged Nathan Rothschild almost sinking the Bank of England by cashing hundreds of small notes, because the bank would not cash his notes which would be, uh checks. Ok, confused? The whole book is like this. Dramatic stories covering Mayer Rothschild from a German Jewish ghetto creating success and amazing good fortune. Sons and strong family power continue the legacy-financing princes during war, to controlling Brazil. Accounts describing Napoleon to Hitler.
   Counting houses and branches in England, Germany and throughout Europe. You want to read these stories but the script is flawed OR at the extreme height of high intellect. I think the former. I am employed in finance and banking-and I cannot follow the threads!
   And yet there are descripive, powerful passages that keep you turning the pages. The fact that the House of Rothschild is credited to Mayer having sons, as Morton starts off, is a telling statment but he buries you in all these individual accounts as decades roll by and the dynasty becomes mythic. The pictorial section is wonderful and perhaps paints a clearer picture than the text of a book, whose paperback cover claims to be a "Number One Best Seller."



3. I enjoy some of the conspiracy theories involving the Rothschilds. Of course I stop well short of anti-Semitism. Just fun coffee shop conspiracy talk give me a break. I bought this book for a buck at a used book store hoping to find a little more dirt on the famous family. There was some dirt but it is glossed over with phrases like "but he was the black sheep of the family" and "a ruthless but brilliant business maneuver" etc. etc.
   I am usually reading more challenging material so I was surprised how fast a read it was. There is important history here but it is so steeped in blatant flattery and celebrity worship that I felt a little ashamed for having read it - kind of like how one feels after watching Entertainment Tonight. Well that is an exaggeration. There has to be a better history of the Rothschild's out there but if you see this one for a dollar at a used bookstore I won't recommend against picking it up.



4. There are very few families in history that have managed to maintain a tradition of excellence over several generations -- "Shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations" is the rule. The two notable exceptions to the rule are the Medici and the Rothschilds.
   
   I purchased this book thinking that the author would provide some insight into how the Rothschilds achieved their long-standing record of success. Unfortunately, Mr. Morton is merely a sycophant, apparently incapable of providing the kind of detailed analysis the question calls for. Instead, he constantly marvels at how this family of rag merchants from Jew Street in Frankfurt ended up hobnobbing with the crowned heads of Europe. That is certainly an accomplishment of sorts, but absent any kind of descriptive analysis, it is little more than fodder for People magazine. Indeed, one can argue that the recent decline in the family's fortunes is due to their emulation of European aristocracy.
   
   A far better book on the same topic is the two-volume set, "The House of Rothschild: Volume 1: Money's Prophets: 1798-1848 and The House of Rothschild: Volume 2: The World's Banker: 1849-1999. After reading Mr. Morton, it is both refreshing and illuminating.



5. This is a very well written history of the Rothschilds. I recommend it for those interested in a strong overview of the family.

5 comments about Cromwell.

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



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



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



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



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

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

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

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

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

5 comments about Queen Victoria: A Personal History.

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



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



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



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



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

5 comments about The Lives of the Kings and Queens of England, Revised and Updated.

1. If you enjoy and read novels, biographies or history books about England and Europe this is a must have reference book. Very condensed, dry and factual history but a tremendous help in keeping people, time and places in order and perspective.



2. If your a history buff like I am you will love this book. It is a must for those interested in the past.



3. I love this book. Even with all of the reading I have done on the British Monarchy, this book had never before seen pictures. My only complaint would be that it often focuses more on political events rather than personal lives. But, there is wonderful information in this book, and I have enjoyed every page.



4. As a lover of British royal history, I think this is a fantastic overview that 'sums' things up, devoting a few pages to tell the story of each monarch. Antonia Fraser manages to pass on a lot of information in short form. The illustrations are wonderful, as are the charts (although as someone else mentioned, they are missing some details for us serious fanatics). I consider this is a great compilation if you just want the big picture, or a starting point to jump off into detailed biographies of individual monarchs and/or houses.



5. My dad gave me this lovely book for Christmas back in '99, and I have used it as a reference ever since. Although it is a splendid read from cover-to-cover, I find that it is one of the best books out there to really whet the appetite for more in-depth research into the monarch, rebel or time period of your choice.
   
   The genealogy charts are fun to puzzle out, and the illustrations, including coats of arms, maps, tapestries and portraits, add extra personality to the history, which is, in itself, fascinating.
   
   Of course, a book of this length only scratches the surface of the noble, scandalous, shocking and never-dull lives of the British monarchs, their families, friends and enemies, so you must dig deeper if any one subject appeals to you. All in all, a well-written, organized and illustrated overview of a sizeable chunk of history.

No comments about The Two Princes of Calabar: An Eighteenth-Century Atlantic Odyssey.

5 comments about Harrison (Editors of Rolling Stone).

1. This is a beautiful and lovingly produced book of George Harrison's life in pictures with comprehensive articles and tributes written about George and heaps of great photographs and more. George's wife, Olivia Harrison wrote a moving personal Foreword that brings tears to the eye and touches chords of hearts. No George Harrison fans could miss this much sought-after item. However, whether or not you are a George Harrison or Beatles fan, this is a great book to read and a wonderful gift to give.



2. Geroge is consider one of the quiet one in the band "i think" but not on the music, his talent surpass any
   other musician and is really sad not to have him anymore . In this book you'll find a great deal of pics since
   the Beginning and from his solo career , a must have book to put in your collection



3. Having been a "LLOG" (Lifetime Lover of George)I have read plenty about him. In general, his music is the best way to get to know George: it is unique, multi-textured, honest, witty, loving and spiritual. However, for reasons I certainly can't fathom, generally his post-Beatles work (with about two exceptions) got no respect!
   Of course I loved the photos, but in my opinion the written tributes from his wife, Olivia, and his friends/fellow musicians are what sets this book apart. Paul Simon's is particularly descriptive: I felt as though I was visiting Friar Park (the Harrison's home in England) right along with him; walking through George's beloved gardens, sitting in front of the fire, listening to an impromptu ukelele concert, receiving a thoughtful surprise upon returning home to the U.S. "He wasn't particularly quiet, he just didn't DEMAND to be heard." Beautifully put. (Note to Paul Simon: you just might have a second career there; I would buy your first novel!)
   This is also a great book for aspiring guitarists, as it gives mini-descriptions of particularly noteworthy ("Essential") Harrison performances, illustrating the subtleties and unusual but brilliant choices George made (at times even innovative or ground breaking) musically. People who previously believed that Lennon and McCartney were the ONLY geniuses in the Beatles will re-think that belief after reading this section particularly: they might even listen for certain passages in certain songs and think, "YEAH, WOW! That IS amazing!" They might give George's solo work (besides "All Things Must Pass") a listen and be pleasantly surprised. But we "LLOGs" have heard and appreciated the subtle brilliance of George Harrison all along.
   This book is a must-have for any George Harrison or Beatles fan, or any guitar or rock history aficionado.



4. For the recent Birthday of Georgie Boy, I can review this item as the best way of remembering one of the best humans that have ever walked this earth.



5. I must challege Candace Scott's remark in her review :
   
   "But it's a stretch, to put it mildly, to place Harrison in the same league as Lennon & McCartney as a songwriter. Ouch! I love George as much as anyone, but still expect truthful history to be written"
   
   I agree, George should not be placed in the same league as Lennon & McCartney because he was totally in his own league ! What is Candace making the comparison to here ? It was George, partially inspred by Pattie, his first wife, who led the other Beatles into the rich Vedic culture of spiritual India that inspired so many of their finest musical and lyrical masterpieces.
   
   So in that context, the "truthful history to be written", is that George was even partially responsible for some of the finest compopsitions of Lennon and McCartney.George gave great emphasis to the chanting of the Holy Names of the Lord, as in the chanting of the Hare Krishna maha-mantra, as found in "My Sweet Lord", and "It Is He ( Sri Krishna )", which is the ultimate function of music, according to the ancient wise sages, gurus and spiritual masters . This Krishna mantra has helped millions of people to give up harmful drugs, animal killing, etc...How many song-writers are doing that with their music today ? George was the innovator, to turn scripture into pop songs. He was divinely empowered and had the integrity to do this, not caring if he was "fab" to the eyes of the masses, unlike anyone before him.
   
   To minimize George's ability as a song writer in anyway only helps to disclose one's own superficiality, and lack of spiritual consciousness.
   
   George's songs overflow with essential messages of the futility and temporality of things material, such as "All Things Must Pass", the dangers of becoming too materially attached "Beware of Darkness" , the concern for living in harmony with this planet "Save The World", etc...
   
   In "Isn't It A Pity", George gives the essence of spirituality, by prompting us to develop equal vision and gratitude toward all beings, including animals :
   
   "Some things take so long
   
   But how do I explain
   
   When not too many people
   
   Can see we're all the same
   
   And because of all their tears
   
   Their eyes can't hope to see
   
   The beauty that surrounds them
   
   Isn't it a pity
   
   I was very disappointed by Candace Scott's inabiity to see that "beauty that surrounds her" and lack of gratitude towards the very substantial and deep contribution George made through his music in transforming the lives of millions of people. I went on to become a Hare Krishna monk over thirty years ago because of his music, and devoted the best years of my life to feeding free vegetarian meals to tens of thousands of people, helping others off drugs, and so many other volunteer activities.
   
   George Harrison is my first guru, and awareness of his contribution to the upliftment of the world will only increase as time goes by. Please read this book for it's deeper purpose.
   gaura_acbsp@yahoo.com

5 comments about Walking in the Shade: Volume Two of My Autobiography--1949-1962.

1. This second part of Doris Lessing's candid biography, which depicts her difficult beginnings in London, is a more bitter report than the first one. It is full of personal and ideological disappointments.

   Like so many young intellectuals in Europe, she finds shelter in the leftist Church (with capitalism as hell, Lenin, Stalin or Mao as Christ the Saviour, and Utopia as heaven) and becomes a believer in heart and soul. She still has difficulties to believe why she was so blind (even after a trip to Russia) and stayed like many others so long with the communist movement.
   The agonizing psychological struggle to become an apostate is very emotionally told.

   What saved her was art, in which she has a limitless belief: it can overthrow world powers.

   This is a moving, uninhibited and realistic work, exemplary for many idealistic but wilfully deceived young people in the ninteen fifties and sixties. Outsiders willing to write her biography will not have many more 'secrets' to reveal.
   Not to be missed.




2. I didn't enjoy this book nearly as much as Volume I, UNDER MY SKIN. But it's a fascinating book for 2 reasons.

   1. The light it sheds on the relationship between fiction & autobiography, & the glimpse it gives of the novelist's mind, how experience is tranformed into descriptions of people, places, events which are placed in the kaleidoscope of a particular work of fiction, shaken up, & emerge forming a different pattern. I probably would have said the same about UNDER MY SKIN, except I haven't read the CHILDREN OF VIOLENCE series yet, which corresponds with the period covered by Volume I of the autobiography. In Volume II, one sees many ingedients that went into THE GOLDEN NOTEBOOK.

   2. Lessing's observations of the period 1949-1962 in London, & comments on "the States" as she calls us.

   It is funny in places, too. I think there's more humor in both volumes of Lessing's autobiography than in anything else I've read by her, and I wonder why this is.




3. I didn't enjoy this book nearly as much as Volume I, UNDER MY SKIN. But it's a fascinating book for 2 reasons.

   1. The light it sheds on the relationship between fiction & autobiography, & the glimpse it gives of the novelist's mind, how experience is tranformed into descriptions of people, places, events which are placed in the kaleidoscope of a particular work of fiction, shaken up, & emerge forming a different pattern. I probably would have said the same about UNDER MY SKIN, except I haven't read the CHILDREN OF VIOLENCE series yet, which corresponds with the period covered by Volume I of the autobiography. In Volume II, one sees many ingedients that went into THE GOLDEN NOTEBOOK.

   2. Lessing's observations of the period 1949-1962 in London, & comments on "the States" as she calls us.

   It is funny in places, too. I think there's more humor in both volumes of Lessing's autobiography than in anything else I've read by her, and I wonder why this is.




4. Cold? No way.

   Although volume 2 lacks the profound personal revelations found in volume 1, it is a fascinating collection of her memories and point of view of England in the 1950's. She talks quite a bit about her life in a brutally honest way that few writers, let alone people in general, would be willing to admit.

   Her witty observations of society and what makes it tick are very entertaining, as well as many insights into what later became The Golden Notebook.

   Cold & self-serving? Not this book. It's an oustanding autobiography by one of the most brilliant minds of our time. I think negative reviewers of this book have gotten carried away with their own agenda. Doris Lessing never caters to expectation which makes her writing even more compelling.




5. I love biography. I never thought I would abandon a biography unfinished and feel no desire to pick it up and continue. I found this dull, self-serving and boring. Lessing seems to be busy making excuses and justifications for her 'fellow travelling' with Communists in 1950s London. Oh, pleeeze! So what? Heaps of people were members of the party or fellow travellers. many have also renounced or reassessed their former positions, but they don't feel the need to go into tortuous self-denial as Lessing does. I find her cold as a person - that's fine, one doesn't have to LIKE the subject of a biog/autobiog to be interested in them. But her writing is cold and detatched as a cold-water flat in misty wintry London!

5 comments about The Book of Margery Kempe (Norton Critical Editions).

1. The reason why this book is so inspirational is because Margery is very honest throughout about how difficult she finds her spiritual path and her commitment to God, combining this with marriage, children and the persecution and ridicule she faces on her pilgrimages. It is a very rewarding read because of this and one of my favourite books.



2. I read this for my Later Middle Ages history course, and I must admit that I didn't care for it. The book as other reviewers have said, is written over 20 years in hindsight, and Margery herself must have been an insufferable person whether her experience was true or not. It seemed to me that she brought most of her suffering upon herself and later justified it with her visions...but whether I agree with her experience is really not the point.
   
   As the first known English autobiography, and as an insight to one of the forms that faith took in the Middle Ages (not to mention being from the female perspective) this book is invaluable. But had it not been for class I wouldn't have suffered through the 50 pages of weeping and rambling that I did (we didn't even have to read the whole thing!). Though she was a pilgrim to many holy sites, she notates almost nothing of her external experiences in Jeruselam and Rome - so I don't think that it would be particularly useful to those interested in general history.



3. At first, I rather enjoyed this book - Margery Kempe is quite kooky. But reading more and more, Margery just became annoying, especially with all her weeping. Is it any wonder that no one wanted to travel with her? Or that she was arrested so often? Did she really think her activities would win people to God? Or am I just guilty of being another one of her persecutors?



4. Another book I read for class. I knew a little about Margery Kempe beforehand, like she had 14 children. I didn't know that the first autobiography ever written in English was so boring. I felt like Margery repeated herself, over and over. I wanted more details about her life- about her husband, her children, and her pilgrimages. I don't think I would pick this up unless you are specifically interested in early Christianity writings.



5. Margery Kempe lived from about 1373~1440s, and she really LIVED. In this book, accorded by many to be the first autobiography in English, a scribe records the tale of her life, but most specifically the aspects of it that relate to her spirituality. She was outspoken, controversial, courageous, annoying, devout, and eccentric and all of these aspects shine through into the book, even through the cloudy filter of a male religious scribe who may have 'polished' her words to make her sound more orthodox.

   Margery began life as the daughter of the mayor of Lynn in England, and made a well-suited marriage. After the birth of her first child, she went mad due to some pent-up guilt and an unsympathetic confessor, and during this madness was spoken to by Jesus. This moment changed her life, and snapped her out of the madness. She continued with her worldly ways with failed attempts at entrepenurism and her delight in the physical side of marital relations... but after aobut 20 years she felt the pull of God and decided she needed to devote herself entirely to him.

   Margery went about a long process of procuring chastity from her husband and set off on pilgrimages world wide. She was known for her loud, uncontrollable weeping fits that occured at random and caused many to claim she was a heretic. However, she stood trial before the Archbishops of England, on multiple occasions, and was never once convicted of heresy, and in fact often impressed the higher church officials with her knowledge of doctrine and the Bible. She went through many struggles in her life, but her deity was always there communicating with her or helping her through the cruelty of others, assuring her that all her pain on earth would only increase her joy in heaven.

   Some reader bewares: Margery was hated for a *reason*, you can see this in so many of the encounters that she has, it is so easy to imagine how nagging and annoying having a prim, preaching, all-knowing person along with you on a long voyage all day long would be; or how alarming it would be to have some woman in hysterical fits day after day in the middle of your church when you were trying to pray. Margery comes across as arrogant in some ways - but if you had the unshakable knowledge that your deity loved you and you were going straight to heaven, wouldn't you be a tad uppity too? She was humble though, for example she spent weeks living in a hovel serving a beggar woman while in Rome, and she returned home to nurse her dying husband when he had a fall.

   If you are interested in medieval studies, in women's history or feminism, in mysticism or religious history, this is a must-read for both its historical significance and its entertainment value. Its being taught at college campuses across the country now, so its gaining in recognition. Don't skip the introduction because its extremly informative, but the chapters can be read out of order because they are only loosely chronological and very short. In her time people either loved or hated Margery Kempe, and the same holds true today, so pick up the book and see which side you're on!

5 comments about The Royals.

1. To anyone with a serious interest in recent British history, absolutely avoid this book like the plague. The author lost me in the first chapter when she depicts King George VI and Queen Elizabeth on their famous and important visit to Washington DC in June of 1939, as living a life of lavish abandon while their subjects suffered wartime privation at home.
   Too bad the war didn't start till September, Ms. Kelley!
   After this outright lie, written for no other reason than to blacken the characters involved and tell an "interesting" story, needless to say, it was impossible to take anything else the author had to say very seriously. This book is meant for the readers of "the National Enquirer", and anyone else to whom such trivial things as dates and correct chronology of events are not important. Is it any wonder that publication was banned in the United Kingdom and this rag is to be found on the twenty five cent reject shelf?
   Nuff said.



2. I bought this book when it first came out and thoroughly enjoyed it. It wasn't sold in England and I made the mistake of loaning it to a Brit I worked with at the time. I never saw the book again. A decade or so later, I wanted to read The Royals again and found it on Amazon's used books. The book arrived quickly and in exactly the condition described by the seller. I'm very pleased to have the book again.



3. This is the first Kitty Kelley book I've ever read (I saw it on a family member's bookshelf and I felt like slumming), and it will be the last. This woman is not a biographer: she is a human garbage recycler. And a lousy writer at that.
   
   I hold no brief for the British royal family, although I do not object to the institution and find it an interesting if quaint relic of yesteryear. But this disorganized, poorly-written collection of gossip, innuendo, and previously-reported/disclosed information is pretty trashy stuff. There is nothing positive in this portrayal of the Royal Family, only a highly selective collection of slurs. Kelley obviously operates on the principle of, "If you can't say anything nasty, don't say anything at all." She certainly does not hold herself to any journalistic standard of verifying sources.
   
   Kelley is obsessed with sex: who is sleeping with whom, who is gay, who likes to watch porn. And sex is the entire focus of this book. About the institution of the British monarchy itself - a fascinating and complex subject - the reader learns little; Kelley is more interested, for example, in the sexual preferences of the Queen Mother's staff than she is in the Queen Mother herself.
   
   The writing is atrocious. Kelley repeats herself frequently - we get the same information about Phillip's extramarital exploits in at least three different places - and the book's lack of organization muddles the chronology of events. The author's use of similes is trite (a situation "smelled worse than a dead possum under the porch") and her syntax is careless. Worst of all, little of the sensational information we are treated to comes from the author's own investigation; she relies heavily on other published sources and the narrative is replete with thrice-told tales. The entire book gives the impression of being thrown together in a hurry and with little care.
   
   I felt slightly soiled after I finished this prurient tabloid hit-piece. The only thing that kept me going was the same impulse that makes one rubberneck at a bad traffic accident. Only recommended to those with a strong stomach and limited intelligence.



4. This book while big is full of lies and no wonder it isn't available in England because if it where the Queen would be all over it for the lies that it says about the royals.
   
   Here are just some of the things that Kitty Kelly says in the book that are not true
   
   1.The Queen Mum was illegitimate-she was the 8th of 9 children and her parents were married long before she was born
   
   2. The Queen Mum had to be impregnated by turkey baser to have Elizabeth and Margret
   
   3. Princess Margret was an anti-Semite because she walked out of Schindler's List
   
   4. Prince Harry is not Prince Charles' son- so not true. Harry's maternal grandfather had red hair and Princess Diana did not meet Harry's supposed father until he was already at least one year old
   
   Do not bother even reading this book. There are much better, more accurate books out there about the royal family.



5. I love reading about the royal family and I just loved this book! I have read several books about Diana so I knew the history there but I never knew what an awful mother the Queen is! And I didn't realize how everything has to be approved by her! Nor did I realize what a womanizer Price Philip was and all the mistresses he had over the years!
   
   Would highly recommend if you like reading about the Windsor Family.