No comments about The Kings and Queens of England.

5 comments about Aristocrats: Caroline, Emily, Louisa, and Sarah Lennox, 1740-1832.

1. This case study of a socially and politically prominent family of bluebloods throughout the Hanoverian and Regency periods actually begins with Charles Lennox (created 1st Duke of Richmond), who was the illegitimate offspring of Charles II and Louise de Kéroualle (created Duchess of Portsmouth as a reward). The four ladies in question were daughters of the second duke and the great-granddaughters of the king. All of them married leading politicians and/or peers, all were both very private and very much in the public eye, and all were well educated, especially for women in that time. Because they were women, their influence was necessarily indirect, but they certainly were influential -- although, as Tillyard, an award-winning historian, shows, they were more concerned with family matters: childrearing, household finances, entertaining on behalf of their husbands, and trying to maintain a degree of personal freedom. But above all, they were always aware of their origins. Since this book was written for the popular market, there are no footnotes, but the author's use of public documents and private family journals and correspondence is extensive, and quotations are frequent.



2. When I lived in England some years ago I read this book and recommended it to a dear friend who was incontestably an "Aristocrat" in every sense that it's used in Britain. My friend said that she was reading it, too, and though she could barely bring herself to pronounce the name of the book (which she considered embarassing), she loved it because it perfectly evoked the 18th century as history, and yet was as engrossing a page-turner as a novel. Stella Tillyard gets it just right in her fine quadruple biography. Buy it!



3. This is an excellent book and a fast read. Stella Tillyard captures an age and the people who lived it as though she were there herself. I would give this book a 5 but for one serious flaw I find in many a book. Is the author trying to impress her audience with her vast knowledge of French? Or simply trying to
   punish those of us with less then her education (in languages).
   There are examples on page after page, paragraph after paragraph
   where the author quotes one of many letters in French, with NO translation. I often think authors do this to impress.
   Sorry, I don't speak French. Her audience it seems is mostly English speaking, so why leave the reader hanging wondering just what was said. That doesn't help make the story more understandable. It detracts. If it were only once or 2wice I could look up a translation somewhere. But in this book it happens so often it would take far too long. The wonder is why she bothered with English at all.



4. Living in Ireland as I do one is surrounded by historical buildings.I was familiar with Leinster House,Carton House and Castletown House already and found this book has made those old houses far more interesting.Having finished the book I decided to visit Celbridge,Co. Kildare,which is where one finds Castletown House and also the house where Sarah lived.
   Driving along the main street of the village I turned off towards Tea Lane and halfway up I saw Sarah`s house,now part of a school.Just up the road was the graveyeard where Louisa is buried but the gates were locked.I went back down the main street to the end of the village and drove along an avenue of trees to Castletown House.It is almost 300 years old and the Irish government has spent seven million euros or dollars to conserve it.Much work remains to be done but I really felt close to Louisa,Emily and Sarah after my visit there.If you plan to visit an ancient Irish house I suggest you read Aristocrats and then go to Castletown.Carton House in nearby and is now becoming part of a golf course.Leinster House is the seat of the Irish parliament and The White House is reputed to be modelled on it.
   Of the women themselves I found Caroline the most sophisticated and interesting.I was really struck by how much pain each suffered during their lives.Emily buried 12 of her 22 children and they were not all babies either,so one appreciates modern medicine more after reading about such mortality.



5. Stella Tillyard does an amazing job bringing the Lennox sisters to life. I felt as though I knew each sister quite well once I had finished the book---and I only wished I could have spent even more time with them.
   Sarah Lennox's story was undoubtedly the most interesting (early on she was tapped as a possible wife for George III, she then fell into an unhappy marriage, embarked on a scandalous affair, was divorced, and then ultimately found happiness with a man who came from a social background beneath hers). Lennox's comment that "she only knew true happiness after the age of 36" was especially poignant after reading abt her privileged upbringing. Despite her unhappiness, Lennox managed to live life to the fullest.
   In fact, all of the sisters managed to live life to the fullest---from Caroline who eloped with the radical Henry Fox to Emily who passed through all of the stages of marriage (from happiness to dissatisfaction which ultimately caused her to have an affair).
   I can't recommend this book too highly---my only regret after reading it was that I would never be able to meet and hang out with any of the Lennox sisters!

5 comments about O Come Ye Back to Ireland: Our First Year in the County Clare.

1. Easy read, entertaining and educated me about what County Clare was like a few decades ago. Took place in the area my grandmother came from so was especially interesting to me. On a recent trip to Ireland, I met one of the authors, Christine Breen. She gave us a tour of Kiltumper Cottage which was center stage of the story. Fascinating lady. And such a treat to see the cottage I read about! Highly recommend this book!!



2. This book was interesting as I am married to an Irish woman and we travel to Ireland often. The descriptions of everyday life in Ireland are grand and are usually explained as compared to life in the states. It's not a very humourous book, but worth resding if you long for Ireland.



3. Before I knew it, I was done with this book and on-line ordering all three of Niall Williams' next books. Rather than just another quaint book about "the Irish", this book weaves a funny and entertaining story of two Americans trying to fit-in in rural west Ireland. From learning the customs to waiting to get a party-line phone, there was a smile on every page.



4. I am planning a trip to Ireland and always enjoy reading some books set in the place I am visiting. This story of a couple who moves to Ireland definitely gave a feel for the place. Both the material poverty but social richness.



5. When I traveled to Ireland two years ago and felt like I'd "come home" from the beautiful scenery (I never knew there could be *that* many shades of green) to the friendly people, to the rather mystical appearance of a Dolmen-shaped cloud in the sky just after we had viewed Dolmen in north County Clare, the experience was one I will not only never forget but hope to repeat sometime soon. During this time it was County Clare which spoke to me most of all.

   Niall Williams, born in Dublin and Christine Breen, from New York, have left their Manhattan home to move to County Clare and into the cottage where Chris's grandfather was born. The struggles and triumphs of their first year are engagingly told in this wonderful little book. I was able to be transported back to the rural west of Ireland I learned to love in just a few short days.

   In leaving their jobs and friends in Manhattan, Niall and Chris took a very big risk. To go to a place with no central heating, a telephone out of the early 20th C., and to one of the wettest summers on record took real courage. They quickly fit right in with their neighbors and by the time they host a New Years Eve party they are definitely one of "them."

   If you're an armchair traveler, someone who's visited the Emerald Isle, or just hope to someday, this is a story to cherish. I have also now read their book of travel essays and am awaiting arrival of their other two books which I have recently ordered.

   Although I am too old to do what Niall and Chris have done, it's great to live vicariously through them! Well done!

5 comments about Winston Churchill (Penguin Lives).

1. I've never been a big fan of Winston Churchill, but after reading esteemed historian John Keegan's succinct biography of the man, I must say that I like AND respect him just a little bit more. Keegan himself confesses that he never thought much of old Winston until he stumbled across an old recording of his speeches (in NYC of all places) and realized what a gifted and inspirational orator and leader he was. He led his beloved Britain through her darkest hours in modern history, to a victory that was anything but assured. The people seemed to genuinely love him, and his sentiment was seemingly mutual.
   
   His years as Prime Minister during WW2 are the most well known, but Churchill led an amazingly full life, and his life of public service began way back in the late 19th century. Keegan describes how the young Winston, who did poorly in school, but had an undeniable intelligence, educated himself in politics, history and the English Classics. He was a romantic who was in love with his small island nation, and he dedicated his life to it. He was a brave soldier who served in numerous wars, including WW1, and while it would be fair to say he was a little too fond of war, he was no different from the average English officer of the time in this regard. In my eyes, his major fault was his hypocrisy. It just seems hard to reconcile his staunch imperialism with his constant talk about the virtues of freedom and liberty, and how Britain was the main proponent of such things. I would have liked for Keegan to address this point a bit more, but for such a short biography, I can let it slide.
   
   I was intrigued to learn that Churchill and IRA founder Michael Collins were on friendly terms and greatly admired each other. In fact, Churchill apparently had a "gut sympathy for fighters" which is why he had more respect for the Irish and Boers of South Africa than he did for Ghandi and his passive movement in India.
   
   Anyways, the book is extremely well written and entertaining, and I found it to be an overall excellent introduction to the life of one of the most important figures of the 20th century. 4.5 stars.



2. In 1895 when his father died, the sickly and indifferent 21-year-old military cadet Winston Churchill was flat broke, the legacy of a father who was a compulsively extravagent wastrel.
   
   Lord Randolph had been syphilitic since early youth. His mother, American-born Jennie Jerome whose father was a stockbroker and part-owner of 'The New York Times', was always attracted to men other than her husband or her sons (Winston, born 1874, and John Spencer, born 1880). In modern terms, they were trailer trash; in Phoenix, Sheriff Joe would have set aside a bunk in his tent-city jail for Winston.
   
   But, instead of slums, Winston was born and brought up in Blenheim Palace, built 1704-22 and still one of the great estates of England. American ex-presidents get palatial libraries as their memorials; the British rewarded their leaders with mansions and great estates. Blenheim Palace was one of the finest, far better than the estates later awarded to Nelson and Wellington.
   
   Perhaps it was the milieu of Blenheim Palace, but Churchill matured into a man absolutely convinced of the majesty of the British virtues of patriotism, loyalty, courage and fair play. For him, being British meant manliness, courage, tenacity and ultimate moral decency. It resonated with the vigorous American spirit of Theodore Roosevelt and the beauty of the strenuous life.
   
   President George Bush is reported to keep a bust of Churchill in the Oval Office; perhaps as a reminder of the complete contrast to himself. Bush ducked the Vietnam War in the Texas Country Club Air Guard; Churchill eagerly sought war, even though he hated it.
   
   Like Ulysses S. Grant, Churchill was a gifted wordsmith instead of a stumblebum. He free-lanced as a journalist while serving as a British officer and was sometimes earning 20 times his military pay. He never stopped learning, he wanted facts, order, reason. His mother sent him crates of books while he was on duty, and he devoured them all.
   
   Gen. Sir Herbert Kitchener described him as a "medal-hunter" and "self-advertiser" who was "super-precocious" and "insufferably bumptious." It was a good assessment. But, the public loved his books and even the Prince of Wales praised him. Whatever one thinks of Churchill, his career and successes are due to his own effort, intelligence, work and nerve.
   
   In brief, this is the story of a man who might well have ended up as a Soho souse, but instead became the greatest man of the past century. He did it through his own efforts, not because of Daddy's friends, money or ability to pull strings.
   
   This book defines the character of a great man.



3. Doubtless this biography is insufficient to really understand Churchill, but for those who are fairly ignorant of the man, it provides a useful quick sketch, and perhaps a jumping off point for further reading.



4. Let me make clear at the outset that I am no historian. Indeed, I wouldn't even qualify as an amateur historian. I am just your average 30-something fairly ignorant reader living a period of love for more or less recent history. Given this premise, I found this little book quite perfect for what I was looking for.
   
   This is a short, entertaining, and VERY well written biography of one of the greatest men in the 20th century. Because of the serious limits of my knowledge on the subject, I certainly cannot judge on the accuracy of the reports. However, to the best of my knowledge, the author is considered a reputable WWII historian. Indeed I liked this book so much that I also purchased his history of WWII. You can read this book in a day, and it will entertain you like a good novel, while also informing you as few novels would do.
   
   I would not pay too much attention to those reviewers that complain about this book not delving into Churchill's shortcomings as a man or as a politician. This is a very small book, about 190 small-format pages. You can hardly expect a comprehensive treatise from such a book. Also, I suspect that emphasizing Churchill's shortcomings would be like emphasizing Hitler's moments of tenderness with his lovers or with some German children during the Nazi regime. I mean, they surely happened, but it's not what you want to spend pages on, if you have only limited space to devote to the topic, isn't it? Besides, even if the Churchill that emerges from this book is certainly a truly great man, he does not emerge as a perfect great man. To me that was enough, and I am glad I read this book.
   
   I am grateful to the author, and I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a short, beautifully written biography of this man, to whom I certainly owe something...



5. Publisher's Weekly is entirely mistaken, in their comments above, in suggesting that Sir Winston Churchill once belonged to the Labour Party.
   
   He never did, of course.
   
   Churchill did, however, cross the floor to join the Liberal Party, often making common cause there with his Liberal ally David Lloyd George. He left the Liberals and returned to the Conservative Party (at first, as a "Constitutionalist") in the 1920's...
   
   Alan D. Hyde

5 comments about Kings, Queens, Bones and Bastards.

1. There is a lot of history in this book. Over 1500 years is covered. The author digs deep into history to give us the histories of the people that became the Kings and Queens of England from the reign of Egbert in the 800's to Queen Elizabeth II who is currently reigning.
   
   The book is broken down into sections. The first section details the lives of the King or Queen in question. The next details the people that they married. The next is how the person died and where they are buried. The next section details wither the King or Queen had any illegitimate children.
   
   Very informative book for people who are interested in the royal family or just want to learn more. It also has a family tree that connects the first King of England to Queen Elizabeth-fascinating stuff!



2. This is a fun book that gives interesting and little known facts occuring in the royal history of England. It ties together many unions, births, deaths and other important events of English royalty and lesser royals. It is an easy read and a great reference for understanding the royal succession.



3. Honestly, people - calm down. Did any of the previous readers/reviewers honestly expect a book with the title "Kings, Queens, Bones and Bastards" to be a flawless description of centuries of English history ? And that with scholarly accuracy and intellect ? Take it for what it is worth. Read the "Oxford Illustrated History of the British Monarchy" if you want accuracy. This book is a highly entertaining, easy read. I highly recommend it for its amusing anecdotes and enjoyable style.



4. leading to Princess Sophia Dorothea`s apartement.

   In fact Count Königsmarck was last seen whe he left his house in Hannover on the evening of 11.July 1694. No corpse was ever found. Of course there were rumours all over the town that he had been assassinated and murdered and that his body had been thrown in the river Leine. But wether this had really happened an if it was being carried out on the instruction og George Ludwig (the latter George I) or his father Ernest Augustus, Elector of Hannover or the Countess of Platen (who was not only Königsmarck`s mistress but also Ernest Augustus`s) will never be known. Princess Sophia Dorothea was not divorced and put under house arrest in Ahlden because the dying Königsmarck was found lying before her bodouir But because she was forced to return to her father in Celle. This business was called run away and although she did not "flee" voluntarily and although of course her father turned her down she was accused of wilful deserting thus justifying George Ludwig to divorce her. As a note of history she became not only the mother of the english dynasty of Hannover but through her daughter, another Sophia Dorothea, the mother of the prussian dynasty of Hohenzollern.

   But on the whole the book is remarkably enertaining and gives you a fascinating insight into 1500 years of englisch history.




5. The book is entertaining but if your goal is the study of history, do not buy this book. It is, as another reviewer pointed out, full of mistakes. The first one I found (that stood out) was on page 10. The author states that Mary II (of William III and Mary II) was the sister of James II. She was, in fact, James II's daughter. William's mother, Mary, was the sister of James II and Charles II.

   I also found that Hilliam's method of tracing the lines of descent of the various royal houses of Great Britain seemed designed to confuse, rather than enlighten, the reader. I think that it even confused the author himself(see page 10).

   On the plus side, the sections on Bones and Bastards are entertaining to read, if you don't plan on using this book for research purposes.

5 comments about One Pair of Hands.

1. Not only have I throughly enjoyed this tale relating the author's brief career "below stairs", but I've lent it around and everyone who's read it has loved it too. Highly recommended for "upstairs/downstairs" types, for humor, for those who are interested in mid 20 century london below stairs life, or for Monica Dickens fans -- grab her "Talking of Horses" too.



2. "One Pair of Hands" by Monica Dickens clearly demonstrates that writing skills are genetic. Like her great-grandfather Charles, Monica Dickens knows how to write well. The book is charming. It chronicles her life during her twenties when she decides to try her hand at domestic service out of sheer boredom. As they say, hilarity ensues! Readers who have ever made a complete mess in the kitchen or have ever had a stingy boss can relate whole-heartedly to her trials and tribulations.



3. An quick and easy to read book, but thouroughly fascinating. Monica Dickens describes the life of a cook-general in 1930s England. The upper classmen she meets are described excellently. She meets a lazy bachelor, enigmatic owner of a vast country estate, and a kind family, her last employees. This book is not long and engages readers. The only thing i didn't like was that the only personal reflection included in the book was left to the end. The rest of the book was devoted to her life and the people she meets. However, i recommed this excellent book.



4. This was one of the most delightful books I have read in ages. Monica Dickens (great-granddaughter of Charles), despite her privileged upbringing, despite being presented at Court as a debutante, is bored and has little desire to do the rounds of social events expected of a young upper class girl in the mid 1930s. And so she decides to try her hand at domestic service. If you have ever enjoyed watching the wonderful "Upstairs Downstairs" series or reading other tales which reflect the upstairs downstairs lives of the British class system, this is for you. It is light, entertaining and the author writes so fluidly, it has inspired me to begin reading more of her works.



5. Looking for a light but well-written book? This is it. Absolutely charming.

5 comments about Never at Rest: A Biography of Isaac Newton (Cambridge Paperback Library).

1. A first rate biography should include a good description of the important achievements of the subject, give a good sense of the subject's personality, provide the appropriate historic context in which to view the subject, be well written, and have good documentation. Westfall's biography of Newton is first-rate in all these dimensions. Newton is arguably the most important person in modern history. His work inaugurates both modern mathematics and modern physics. His achievements as a physicist set the pattern not only for physics but also for the other natural sciences. Newton's impact in larger culture extended also beyond the world of sciences. The historian of religion George Marsden wrote that Newton was the most important individual in the founding of the 18th century Enlightenment. Though Newton cannot be considered a member of that movement, his example of demonstrating universal natural laws understandable by human reason was immensely influential in European intellectual culture.
   Westfall provides a detailed chronological account of Newton's life that covers all his major (and minor) achievements and is simply excellent at integrating the relevant historical background information. As Westfall writes, we regard Newton as a scientist and the emphasis in on Newton's career as a working scientist and mathematician. But, this is described very clearly within the context of late 17th century Europe. Westfall, for example, devotes ample pages to Newton's study of alchemy and theology. Since Newton spent a large fraction of his life working in these areas, it would be imposing an anachronistic perspective to minimize attention to these topics. Westfall is excellent at describing both the intellectual and social milieu in which Newton functioned. The sections detailing the history of mathematics and physics of Newton's important predecessors and contemporaries are first-rate, particularly his analysis of the impact of Descartes analytical geometry and mechanistic philosophy. His descriptions of 17th century Cambridge, with its concentration of pseudo-academic placemen, and of the generally patronage driven world of Caroline Britain are excellent. Never at Rest provides a vivid impression of the nature of scientific work in Newton's time. Westfall does not shirk from presenting complex mathematical and physical topics. These sections are tough going for those who don't recall a lot of math and physics but very worthwhile because they give an excellent sense of Newton's transforming effects on these disciplines.
   Westfall delineates Newton's difficult personality very well and is fair in dealing with the numerous conflicts in which Newton became enmeshed, particularly the famous priority dispute with Leibnitz. Some of Newton's behavior is shown also to have stemmed from unexpected sources. Newton's theological researches led him to the conclusion that much accepted Christian theology is wrong and he had to conceal his Arianism and anti-Trinitarianism for much of his life. Some of Newton's achievements are shown as stemming from unexpected sources also. Westfall shows that Newton's alchemical researches, with their rather mystical element, probably contributed to freeing him from dogmatic mechanistic philosophy and facilitated his development of the idea of a universal, intrinsic gravitational force.
   Newton is a fascinating figure and this biography will remain the standard for the foreseeable future.



2. I just finished Westfall's biography of Sir Isaac Newton. The man was way more amazing than I ever expected. For myself, being neither a mathematician nor a physicist, the most fascinating and surprising thing was his in depth and, for the time, out of the box examination of religion.
   
   As with his scientific studies, Newton's religious studies were relentless in the pursuit of Truth. Between the end of the Bible and the nineteen century, I can find no one who concluded more precisely such doctrines as the nature of God, the relationship of the Father and Son, the relationship of God and man, the nature of early Christianity, or the magnitude and meaning of the then extant departure of Christianity from the original. Obviously, this is from an observer who agrees with his conclusions.
   
   Newton's prodigious talent for leaving no stone unturned in his examination of his subject matter, coupled with his utter genius leaves me entirely in awe.
   
   Westfall's 20 year effort in writing this biography has yielded a masterpiece!



3. This is a remarkable biography because it so thoroughly tells the story of Sir Isaac Newton in all its various aspects. Newton's determination to know, his science (breathtaking science, his awesome brilliance), the religious and alchemical investigations, the cranky aloofness, are all carefully and fully drawn; by the end of the book, you feel, along with the author, that you have got to know the subject (at least to the extent one might get to know the great man).
   This is a great biography, because it is so detailed, so in depth and so successful at bringing Newton in view. It is also likely that it will for many years surpass any other biography of Newton because of its thoroughness.
   I think it is worth reading not only because the reader learns so much about the science and life of one of history's great thinkers, and to some extent how he thought, but also because the reader gains an appreciation of the hard work of invention even for one so gifted as Newton, and some insight into the hard work of turning observations into theoretical constructs.
   A magnificent biography.



4. There are a fair number of Newton biographies, this one is the most comprehensive and thorough, with a full treatment of the development of Newton's scientific and mathematical thought. What is remarkable is how rapidly Newton mastered the essentials of the techniques of his contemporaries, quietly reaching the forefront of knowledge, this in a few years, and without much prior training before his arrival in the world of Cambridge, where he flowered at once despite the almost defunct educational status of this university. The myth, however, of the annus mirabilis needs replacement with the reality of the anni mirabili, next to the near abandonment of mathematics for some years as Newton's concerns passed to encompass something broader than pure physics and his deskdrawer 'calculus' still embedded in geometrical formalisms. The final composition of the Principia in the wake of the coaxing forth of De Motu is grounds for thunderous applause for Halley who had the presence of mind to grasp who he was dealing with and the politic manner needed to communicate/negotiate with the reclusive prime mover of theory. His great work complete Newton is off to rescue the coinage at the Royal Mint,thence to the forgettable episodes of the priority quarrel with Leibniz. This work is slow but superb on all aspects of Newton's life.



5. This is the most authorative biograghy of Newton, the greatest genius of all time!! No need to add more words to praise him. Though the book runs over 900 pages, you would be reading the book breathless until the last page!!! ( similar view from other readers. )

5 comments about Defining the World: The Extraordinary Story of Dr Johnson's Dictionary.

1. Dr. Samuel Johnson created the first comprehensive English dictionary almost single-handedly, and this book traces the story of it's creation. Hitchings wrote his doctoral thesis on the same subject, and this book seems to be an expansion of his original work - I originally read the British publication but have since learned that this American publication is the same with a different title. The author is obviously well-researched on his subject, and this book is entertaining and informative, though sometimes slow and dry. The frame of the book is Johnson's life and the chapters are charmingly titled by a word and definition from the dictionary that is relevant to the chapter's subject matter, but the true meat and real delight of this book are the choice words and definitions Hitchings gleans from the original work and the anecdotes of Johnson's life that give glimpses into his mind.
   
   The writing of the dictionary was truly an achievement, and Hitchings traces Johnson's ingenuity, labors, and ultimate impact with great care. In every paragraph it is obvious that Hitchings is an expert in his material and he treats the subject matter with respect. In addition to the many historical facts he presents regarding Johnson's life and career, Hitchings seems to take delight in sharing as many definitions as he can squeeze in, especially the odd ones, and draws many conclusions about Johnson himself from how they were written. In fact, I had the impression while reading it that it was the peculiarities of the Dictionary that got Hitchings interested to begin with. The fact that he is obviously an expert in his subject and presents his proof, from the dictionary, other contemporary sources, and Johnson's extensive writing, with every deduction makes this story both believable and interesting.
   
   The only real fault in this book to me was the fact that Hitchings' writing is at times a little too dry and too fond of long words. Parts of the book drag and feel repetitive, though when I went back to figure out where the repetition was, I couldn't find it. It just felt that way while reading it, that I just wanted Hitchings to get to his next point already. Hitchings includes an immense amount of material with Johnson's life - history of dictionaries, circumstance of and commentary on life in the 18th century, and definition after definition - so the book felt very long.
   
   The best part of this book is the joy of entertaining definitions. My favorites are the confusing ones, like "to lie with" meaning "to converse in bed," and the list of words with vastly different meanings than they carry today, such as "urinator" meaning "a diver, one who searches underwater." Hitchings shows his own flashes of humor and personality in his work, just as Johnson did, by sharing his favorite anecdotes of Johnson and his own tart remarks on Johnson's writings, such as the above definition of "to lie with," where he points out that Johnson "could certainly have been more straightforward." For anyone who enjoys words and their various meanings, it is well worth a read.



2. This is an extraordinary book itself--part biography, part intellectual history, part cultural history, part criticism and part paean. I suppose it must be all these things to convey to the reader the extraordinary magnitude of Johnson's achievement as well as the extraordinary nature of Samuel Johnson, the eighteenth century polymath who 250 years ago created, single-handedly, the first great dictionary of the English language and in so doing produced a work of lasting greatness while at the same time laying down the standards by which lexicography is practiced even today.
   
   Hitchings 35 chapters all begin with a word and a definition from Johnson's Dictionary. (Some letters are represented more than once, others not at all.) Thus we have chapters with titles like "Adventurous," "Amulet," "English," Lexicographer," "Patron," and "Philology." Johnson's definition of the word lexicographer is worth quoting. It reveals not only the self-deprecating man but also his emphasis on etymology. To Johnson, a lexicographer is "a writer of dictionaries, a harmless drudge, that busies himself in tracing the original and detailing the signification of words."
   
   Johnson began work on the Dictionary in 1747, commissioned by a coalition of printers and booksellers. When he began, he confidently estimated that he could complete the work in three years. (In fact, it took him eight years.) He was to be paid 1,500 guineas (¤1,575), in installments, about ¤150,000 in today's money. The task dragged out because Johnson soon realized "the moral importance of the work and the philosophical difficulties of rationalizing language."
   
   Johnson's innovation as a lexicographer was to infer meanings from actual use. Thus he read great swaths of English literature, searching for and recording examples of how writers actually used words. For the most part, lexicographers still follow Johnson's methods, though now they include spoken as well as written examples. By the time he had done, Johnson had approximately 110,000 quotations to illustrate 42,773 entries. (He used only half the quotations he collected.) Previous dictionary writers had simply taken their word lists from other works. Johnson did look at previous attempts and then abandoned that approach in favor of his perusal of English writers.
   
   Early on, Johnson sought the patronage of the Earl of Chesterfield, a wealthy young aristocrat with a known interest in the arts. In an age before large publishing houses, contracts, copyrights and royalties, patronage--that is, financial support--was about the only way a writer could make a go of it. In the event, the Earl was of little or no help. Nonetheless, as the dictionary neared publication, Chesterfield let it be known that he would like the Dictionary to be dedicated to him. Johnson's reaction is famous. In a letter to the Earl, Johnson asserted that "[t]he notice which you have been pleased to take of my Labours, had it been early, had been kind; but it has been delayed till I am indifferent and cannot enjoy it, till I am solitary and cannot impart it, till I am known and do not want it."
   
   Homer nods and even Johnson makes mistakes. His definitions are sometimes inaccurate or more complex than the thing defined. He defines "pastern" as the knee of a horse. It is not. His famous definition of "net"--anything with interstitial vacuities--is unnecessarily difficult. He also includes a number of unusual words, words which are today unknown and were unusual even in his own day. Examples include `amatorcultist,' a `little insignificant lover'; `bellygod,' `one who makes a god of his belly'; `deosculation', the `act of kissing'; `mouth-friend', `one who professes friendship without intending it' (one can see reason for reviving this word); `mouth-honor', `civility outwardly expressed without sincerity' (this one, too); `potvaliant', a person `heated with courage by strong drink'; `schiomachy', `battle with a shadow'; `shapesmith', `one who undertakes to improve the form of the body'; `vaticide', a `murderer of poets' (who would do such a thing); and `goldfinder,' a word used, humorously, by those who empty toilets. Still, despite its defects, Johnson's Dictionary was the standard for a century. The poet Robert Browning felt it necessary to read the thing through as a means of preparing himself for his career as a poet. And many other writers felt the same sort of respect for Johnson's work.
   
   Such was Johnson's authority that no one felt the need to replace his Dictionary until 1857, when it was more than 100 years old. In that year, Hitchings writes, "London's august Philological Society decided that a new English dictionary was needed." Work on that dictionary, which was to become the Oxford English Dictionary, began on 12 May 1860. Completed with an army of assistants, the work on OED continued for 68 years. James Murray, the principal lexicographer, "worked with Johnson's Dictionary open on the table beside him in his Scriptorium. . . . In the end the OED reproduced around 1,700 of Johnson's definitions, marking them simply `J'. His layout and method of definition were also followed."
   
   Even though the American Noah Webster despised Johnson, his reach extended across the Atlantic in his own day and touches us even now in the twenty-first century. According to Hitchings, American legal scholars, particularly constitutional scholars, consult Johnson's Dictionary to understand the meanings of words current at the time of the founding of our Republic. Hitchings cites the February 2000 case of Campbell v. Clinton. This action was brought by seventeen members of the US Congress, who argued that in authorizing approximately 4,500 air strikes in Yugoslavia, President Bill Clinton was declaring war, and, constitutionally, only Congress could make such declarations. The meanings of both `declare' and `war' were called into question, and the courts decided to "consult the dictionary which would have been the standard authority at the time when the Constitution was drawn up in 1787. That standard authority was of course Johnson."
   
   Though it is now more than 250 years old, the great work continues to influence the affairs of men. Hitchings has written a spellbinding account of both the man and the work.



3. If you're a lexplorer like me, if on the way to looking up "occurrence" for the seventy-third time to see if it's two c's or two r's (both) and an "e" or and "a" (an e) and get sidetracked first by osmometry, and then of course osmotic, then you are going to love this book. Did you know that as late as 2000, American jurists were consulting the Dictionary to try to figure out what the founders meant by the word "declare," as in "declaration of war?" Divided into chapters headed with definitions from the Dictionary in alphabetical order, written with affection, respect and not a little glee, this book is going to make you want to go out and do like Robert Browning did, read the Dictionary from cover to cover in preparation for a life of writing poetry.
   
   Did you know that a turtle is a word "used among sailors and gluttons for a tortoise?"



4. When Americans say dictionary they usually mean Webster. In Great Britain, the Oxford English Dictionary would more likely come to mind.
   
   A few may realize that for more than a century the term meant Johnson to our ancestors.
   
   For most, dictionary is like the 10 Commandments--writ in stone, accepted without question and its origin rarely considered.
   
   So, for many it may be hard to realize there was no such authoritative reference before Samuel Johnson's Dictionary of the English Language was published on April 15, 1755. There were earlier attempts that bogged down in the complexity of the task and it took Johnson eight years (five more than he anticipated) to complete the project.
   
   Hitchings gives us an entertaining and impressive glimpse into Johnson's world, his enterprise and its impact on history. The chapters are arranged alphabetically like words in a dictionary and are replete with humor, insight and intelligence.
   
   Johnson's seminal work was supplanted by the OED but its legacy to that work will be more apparent now to readers of this book. Though he admired the man, Hitchings tells us Webster loathed Johnson's dictionary and strove to separate his own work from English language authority.



5. This is an extremely well- written and pleasurable book. It tells the story of the making of Dr. Johnson's Dictionary. Each of its chapters is presented as a dictionary entry beginning with the word 'Adventurous' and concluding with 'Zootomy'. The entry by entry device does not disturb the narrative flow of the book. Hitchings tells the story chronologically and provides excellent background biographical material. He gives a picture of Johnson's early years which in some sense complements and completes the picture given by Boswell in the English language's most well-known biography.
   The picture Hitchings makes of Johnson is of an enormously vibrant figure , a man of tremendous energy who while condemning himself all the time for his 'sloth' was doing the work of many men at once. Hitchings in telling this story gives a very vivid picture of London life, especially London low- life in the late eighteenth century. His recounting of the friendship of Johnson with the poet Savage, about whom Johnson wrote his most interesting 'life as a poet' gives a sense of the tremendous disorder , dirt and yet attractiveness of that world.
   Johnson despite his lonely dedication to his scholarship was an enormously sociable person, and this book is peopled with dozens of remarkable characters among them the actor Garrick, and the Dictionary's as it were patron, Lord Chesterfield.
   The creating of the Dictionary was a tremendous labor. Johnson originally thought it would take three years but it took ten. The achievement was great, and as Hitchings makes clear it was not an etymological one alone. The 'Dictionary' is as Hitchings sees us a work of thought and of morals, and above all a work of Literature.
   Hitchings traces the various aspects of the works creation, and reception, its importance to English Literature and Language.
   This is an outstanding and highly recommended work, written with the intelligence and perception which a close association with Johnson's work would seem to almost necessarily bring.

5 comments about Forty Ways to Look at Winston Churchill: A Brief Account of a Long Life.

1. Finally, someone wrote a biography of Churchill that didn't require a 6 month commitment. I have always wanted to read a biography of Churchill but they were all soooo darn long. Gilbert, Manchester, Jenkins.....the shortest is over 1 million pages long!!! (Okay, a bit of an exaggeration). 40 Ways to Look at Winston Churchill is the first Churchill biography to come along that can be read without having to quit your job to finish it. The format is unique and enjoyable. 40 very brief chapters that each cover his life from a different angle. The book is also an enlightening exposition on the biography genre itself. It was a very easy read. Many reviewers have complained that it is disjointed, superficial, gimmicky, repetitive, and/or self-contradictory. Some of those points are valid. I'll briefly address these one by one:
   1)Disjointed: Necessary given the format
   2)Superficial: Okay, then go read one of the 1000+ pagers.
   3)Gimmicky: I rather like the "40 ways" format
   4)Repetitive: True. That's why I gave 4 stars instead of 5
   5)Self-contradictory: This is deliberately done to show how the same set of facts can yield entirely opposing conclusions. I think this is one of the book's best attributes. It doesn't arrive at artificially certain conclusions like other biographies tend to do. True to its title, it shows the different ways to look at his life (he's a drunk/he's not a drunk, he was a natural leader/he wasn't, etc).
   
   In short, you may be disappointed if you re a Churchill buff but I recommend it if you just want a taste of who he was. It's an entertaining, well-written, easy to read book (if not comprehensive).



2. I was well on my way to reading "everything" about and by Churchill by the time I came across this wise and wholly admirable book. The magnitude of Churchill's life and times, and the tragic figure he cut--tragic in the full Greek sense of all that is necessary to constitute true tragedy--can create among some people an almost insatiable appetite for details. I would have to be counted among them. Frankly, I thought this book might make an interesting "snack" between the stack of Churchill books I'd just read and the stack I was about to. Instead I found that 40 ways... was a full course meal. What the author has accomplished is much more substantial than I would have thought possible in such a slim (for Churchill anyway) volume. You recognize that an individual's greatest strength must necessarily be the source of their greatness weakness, a self portrait reflected in a double edged sword, so to speak. I was impressed by the case she made that the times he lived in floodlight these strengths and weaknesses to further define him, and because there was greatness in Churchill, to help define the very times in which he lived.
   
   I was perhaps skeptical that this reduction and summation, pro/con approach would prove to be "gimmicky" or perhaps a shortcut to a more scholarly undertaking. Now I feel that the "gimmick" was instead an apt and inspired construct for examining an enormously complex thing. (It's a methodology that would be useful to apply to FDR, among others). To Rubin's credit she hasn't used this format to avoid judgment, but to elongate the period of consideration before judgment. I've read enough about the man to have done very well on the true/false test, but I still spent a long time pondering the several questions I got wrong. The test reminded me again that the complexities of his life are almost beyond my ability to assimilate them. Hence the fascination I suppose.
   
   Some years ago I was very impressed and moved by a biography of Brahms written by Jan Swafford. Swafford makes the point early that Brahms had been very fortune in both the timeframe he was borne into and in the timeframe of his death. Swafford's take was that the music world of Vienna changed immensely after 1897 and it had been Brahms' good fortune not to live to see it. I was struck at the time by looking at lives that way and Rubin makes a similar and equally valid point about Churchill in her book. He was unlucky to have outlived his time and was in a sense victimized by the nearly indestructible constitution that had served his so well for the first 70 years. There is no shortage of first-hand accounts of Churchill's flirtations with real danger. He was well aware of the historical advantage he might have had if he perished under heroic circumstances. He also enjoyed the adrenal rush these occasions afforded him. Of these accounts, none is better than the biography of his personal bodyguard of approximately twenty years, Walter Thompson, "Beside the Bulldog". More on his book at the close.*
   
   
   I noted with special interest the author's mediation on the subjectivity of biographers and the essential criteria she establishs for evaluating a life. Her comments on Manchester's "knowing insight" into a single photo of Churchill's mother illustrate the need for caution before you make a commitment to a particular version of Churchill's story and the thousands of pages that may go with it. Rubin has done a service to readers and biographers both, clarified the task for writers to come and possibly even established some ground rules. While the sales numbers for this book (and I've no idea what they are) may not suggest broad influence, I'm confident that the methodology used will have larger ramifications for a future generation of biographers. Would-be great writers long for a subject through which they can imbue their own greatness. This process of subverting one large ego for the other, a process that can subsume many years of the writer's life is full of temptations and seduction. It's almost inevitably that the writer's own feelings influence what gets exposed and what gets tidied up. The end product edges towards a symbiosis of the subject's life and the particular aspects of that life that speak to the author's own experience and or fascinations. By comparison, Rubin's approach in this book feels free of artifice. It's the case where not spending a dozen years of your life on a single project is actually a good thing, not just for the author but for the book as well.
   
   (For Churchill fans, my favorite first-hand account of his life is Walter Thompson's (to be re-released in print in late 2007). If you haven't read this former Scotland Yard detectives' account of the near twenty years he spent by Churchill's side than you have missed a great treat, for nowhere else does Churchill live and breathe as tangibly as in these pages.
   
   Thompson joined up with Churchill around 1918 and stayed with him through the end of WW 2. There were some years during the 1930's that Thompson was assigned elsewhere, but he did accompany Churchill to the US during the Al Capone years of the 1930's and was there when Churchill was hit by a car crossing against traffic in NYC. He was by Churchill's side during many of the secret FDR meetings, on ship and at The White House for Christmas. His take on things goes a long way towards answering many of the questions your book raises, though of course, Thompson hide things as well, both about Churchill, himself and the harsh treatment he received from Mrs. Churchill, who resented his constant presence to the extent that she frequently refused to feed Thompson while assuring her husband that arrangements had been made for him. Thompson's take on FDR, though only a small part of this book will interest historians. Thompson's displays a vivid command of the language, considerable wit, and more uniquely, he conveys an unusually keen sense of place. Marry those talents with his genius for sketching characters with deft precision and you get a compelling book. The panorama of Egypt, Morocco and the Gaza Strip, (eerily unchanged) circa 1920 are but a few locations that unfold before the eye. Add laying bricks next to Churchill at Chartwell, carrying Churchill's paintings materials throughout the world, (most notably in Marrakech and France), meeting Mussolini, dodging shrapnel on rooftops during the blitz and Thompson's fascinating and very favorable account of T.E. Lawrence (which led me to The Seven Pillars of Wisdom)and you've got an account unlike any other. The book Churchill's Bodyguard by Thomas Hickman will be re-released this fall. He substitutes Thompson's exceptional prose with his own dry and rather academic voice and while Hickman's account fills in the storyline for Thompson's own complicated life, it's not a substitute for the original).



3. I bought this book while I was writing a book of my own in which Churchill is a central figure. I wanted new insights on the man, and listening to the author on a radio talk show, I thought she might be able to provide those for me. I was sadly disappointed when I started reading the book.
   
   The title comes from the fact that Rubin offers 40 exceptionally brief chapters (3 to 5 pages in length) that offer a different "perspective" on Churchill. The idea probably sound very good and innovative as a book proposal, but it is such a shallow account that the reader can be excused for feeling deceived. Chapter three is nothing more than a listing of people Churchill met during his life. Chapter fourteen is nothing other than a listing of facts about the man in bullet format. Each chapter as three complete sentences. Another chapter is a collection of quotes from him and another about him.
   
   I spent good hard earned money on this book, if you choose to read this book I suggest you borrow it from the library instead.



4. This book is a good way to get a fresh look (forty of them) at Churchill, but not a good way to approach him if you are starting from scratch. It's not a conventional biography - read at least an encyclopedia article first. The author captures different angles of his life in each chapter, using a variety of techniques. I found it an engaging read and recommend it to anyone who wants to think about Churchill or sort the facts in one's head. I won't spoil what I thought was the most interesting way to look at Churchill suggested by Rubin...



5. It is the lot of great men and women to be entombed in biographies the size of the Lenin Mausoleum. And when sub-biographers turn their hand to popularizations one gets, well, sub-biography; the standard judgments taken from the big biographies but in too brief a compass to give the reader much sense of the subject of the biography beyond the biographer's predilections. One way out is through a cutaway like John Lukacs' superb Five Days in London. Another is through the lens of a skilled and constantly shifting pararazza like Gretchen Rubin, who excels in delivering a biographical portrait that is digestible for those with less than Proustian appetites for bulk, but is very far from a "popular" biography.
   
   Someone has distinguished between the simplicity that lies this side of complexity, and the simplicity on the far side. I'm in no doubt where Forty Ways to look at Winston Churchill is to be found.
   
   Nigel Cameron

1 comments about Spymistress: The Life of Vera Atkins, the Greatest Female Secret Agent of World War II.

1. The author of Spymistress states that Vera Atkins had "lustrous black hair" whereas in fact she was a blue-eyed blonde, as anyone who ever met her could have told him.
   If the author cannot get the colour of his subject's hair right it is hardly surprising that much of the rest of the book turns out to be nonsense too. The fantasies woven here have no interest. The author trivialises a great woman's life story. He does so in the knowledge that the dead cannot answer back.
   The true story of Vera Atkins's life is far more compelling than anything in this book. I know this because I spent five years researching her extraordinary story across the world. I interviewed her at length before she died and I had sole access to her archive.
   I am writing this review not to promote my own book but to defend Vera's integrity. This false "biography" desecrates the memory of a remarkable woman, misses the real story entirely, and brings the American publishing industry into disrepute. In short, it is a publishing farce.