5 comments about Parallel Lives: Five Victorian Marriages.

1. I read this book when it first came out and just re read it. The people then are just like people now. A gossipy fun book



2. The story of five marriages none of which quite fits the pattern of what might be considered to be a truly successful one i.e. one in which the mutual love and help of each other through the years helps both not only achieve their own private realization in work, but most importantly create a loving warm family with children who themselves form such a family. Instead we have Jane and Thomas Carlyle, Ruskin and Effi, Dickens and his mother - of -twelve he abandoned, the working Lewes and great George Eliot, each of whom is a story told well indeed by Rose who has a power of narrative and human perceptiveness that are outstanding.
   I found this work to be a very enjoyable ' read' but not a great and inspiring one in regard to living my own life.



3. The author avers that every marriage is a narrative construct. Phyllis Rose describes the courtship and decision to marry of Jane Welsh and Thomas Carlyle.
   
   The extraordinary and almost exclusive connection of John Ruskin with his parents is depicted. The thought-out plan of Frances and Charles Kingsley in the first four weeks of marriage is presented by way of contrast to the circumstances of John Ruskin and Effie Gray. Effie and John were troubled both by their own relationship and pulls and ties from their respective families. Ruskin was never to express remorse for his behavior. He did not understnd that he was partly at fault in the break up of his marriage.
   
   The views of Effie and John could not be reconciled. The story of the Ruskins anticipates MIDDLEMARCH. Ruskin admired John Everett Millais. Effie was a model for one of the paintings of Millais. The Ruskins and Millais and others spent four months together on a sort of extended reading party in Scotland. After six years the Ruskins reached a stalemate. Effie sought practical advice from Lady Eastlake whose husband headed the Royal Academy. She advised her to confide in her parents. There was a dramatic flight and the serving of papers. Ruskin's domestic calamities were less important to him than Turner's death. Eventually Effie and Millais had eight children.
   
   Harriet and John Taylor were Unitarians. They had an enlightened circle. Harriet was introduced to John Stuart Mill by her minister to divert her attention from marital incompatibilities. The Taylors and Mill formed a triangle. Two years after her husband's death Harriet agreed to become Mrs. Mill. Both Harriet and John Stuart Mill had been made lonely by exceptional intelligence. Mill's mind was a marvel, but he initiated nothing. Harriet served an executive function in the production of his books and articles. Mill's autobiography was written as a defense of his wife.
   
   Catherine Hogarth attended a birthday party Charles Dickens gave himself. She was twenty. Dickens was astonishing for his outpouring of invention. Ambitious men marry young. Dickens had devoted male companions and in the early years of his marriage enjoyed domestic happiness. After 1850 Dickens changed. He craved emotional intensity with another person. At the time of starting LITTLE DORRIT restlessness tormented him. He turned to the theater, to acting. Her met Ellen Ternan and began a sentimental attachment. In later life Kate Dickens felt she and the other children were wicked not to take their mother's part.
   
   The domestic life of George Henry Lewes and George Eliot centered on work. George Eliot seized her identity as a writer from her union with Lewes. The couple was spared the pursuit of respectibility.
   
   Notes, bibliography, and a timeline appear at the back of the book. This book has been well-known and lavishly praised since it was issued. Nothing about it changes the high estimation bestowed previously. The book lives up to all of the anticipated pleasure envisioned in the reading of it.



4. I loved this book when it was first published in the 80s for all the reasons put forth by the preceeding enthusiatic reviewers. So was startled to see it had only a 3 star rating when I visited Amazon a short while ago, searching for a second-hand copy.

   Why this book has been out of print for so long is totally mystifying. For, you see, I'm not alone in my love of it. - every person I've loaned it to has had nothing but praise for it.

   But most telling of all, each person has liked it so much that they've passed it on to a friend of theirs, who's evidently done the same, in a never-ending chain of handovers.

   Hence my search for yet another second-hand copy earlier today, But, more to the point, isn't this the best recommendation any book can genuinely have: being handed on from person to person with the exhotation : "You'll really love this book. . . you've got to read it now!"




5. Why did Phyllis Rose write this book? In her prologue, she states her opinion that marriage is the most creative thing we do. She says that marriages ("parallel lives")are fascinating because they "set two imaginations to work constructing narratives about experience presumed to be the same for both." Then she set out for 300+ pages in what amounts to little more than a gossipy complian-fest of "He did" - "She did". We get to hear all the wives gripes about their sexless, loveless marriages, then we get to hear about all the mens' whines about their frigid, shallow wives. Never once does Rose entertain the idea that one or more of her subjects may have been homosexual and were using marriage as the conventional way to get through their lives. Nothing does she tell us of what made these marriages so particularly and peculiarly Victorian - I know plenty of people right now in the year 2002 who have arranged their lives in much the same way as these Victorians.

   Reading this book, all I could think of how it reaks of 1980's feminism: self-centered, self-serving. Rose flips sides faster than a pancake when it's convenient to her argument (whatever that may be.) One minute she cries for a woman who must marry a distateful man just so she can get out of her parents' house, but she doesn't find it strange that a woman's brother stick his nose into the private business of her relationship with other men. Go figure!

   After finishing the book, I could only ask myself: Why was this book written???

5 comments about Six Wives: The Queens of Henry VIII.

1. David Starkey's "Six Wives" is very engaging and easy to read, despite the intimidating weight of the hardcover. Starkey is a brilliant historian and he breathes life into his subjects as he covers their life and times. He is an expert on all things Elizabethan and readers can trust that his interpretation of events always has extensive research behind it. The few pages of prints in the center of the book are a nice addition, though personally, I wish there were illustrations of the various castles and manors as well as the formal portraits we are given.



2. I read this book with great deal relish in thinking that I might get fresh perception on the history of the six wives of Henry VIII. What I found was an easy to read, easy to understand, well researched but highly opinionated book. I think the author tries so hard to be different from other historians and books on this subject that he managed to turned opinions and conjuctures into facts as he see it.
   
   Most of the book deals with two wives, Katherine of Aragon and Ann Boleyn. The rise, love and fall of both women who dominated much of Henry's life takes up much of the author's book. The rest of the four wives, Jane Seymour, Anne of Cleves, Catherine Howard and Katherine Parr all got parred down, almost like an summarized aftermath after the two main events. I always thought each woman was pretty unique. (Henry seems to like "Katherine or Catherine as a name in his women.)
   
   This book also proves to be dominated by Henry VIII as he's in almost every single page once he's crowned. From this book, the reader will have a good understanding about how Henry deals with his interpersonal relationship with his wives. You may have a better understanding of Katherine of Aragon and Ann Boleyn even if you may not agreed with many of the author's opinions. But after that, the rest of the four wives adds nothing to what lies published before this book.
   
   I would recommend Allison Weir or Antonia Fraser books on this subject initially. I would recommend this book only for experienced readers of this subject matter. Reason for that is that the author proves to be too opinionated in his writing and it would be best if you read this book if you got a good grounding on the subject.



3. Friends, this is an excellent book. If you were to watch his DVD series on Elizabeth and other Tudor monarchs, you would clearly see that David Starkey is an excellent scholar, has an outstanding grasp of the Tudor monarchs, is quite articulate, and can take the highly complex issues and explain them in a very understandable way. This book is no exception. It is very intelligently written, is helpful, and not just a rehash of other scholars.
   
   I find Megan's reveiw of this book so far from reality and utterly foolish as to be offensive. Her suggestion that one could learn as much from a story book is utterly absurd. Undoubtedly, her review must be the result not only of pure bias but also of pure inebriation.



4. Starkey's writing is terrible! First off, he thinks his view is the one, true, right one and all other Tudor biographers got it wrong! He has an annoying habit of making ridiculous assuptions about the personalities of the queens. He puts them into misogynistic,cartoonish categories--he dismisses Jane Seymour as a boring, mousey doormat, then speculates whether that was all really a *calculated act* on her part! I guess that's the only way she could be interesting to him as he seems to relish the conniving/bitchy/vamp portraits he paints of Ann Boleyn and Catherine Howard. Starkey supposes that 16th c. queens reacted to certain situations in a flippant manner as would modern teenagers, or teens on the "O.C." This is so ridiculous. These were patriarchal times and these queens were literally fighting for their lives. I can't believe some people loved this steaming pile of poop! This book is a waste of time and money! It isn't fit to line my bird's cage!



5. David Starkey's 'Six Wives: The Queens of Henry VIII' is obviously a highly researched piece of work. I've read many Tudor biographies, and this is by far the most extensive I have ever laid eyes on. But unfortunately I have more bad than good to say about it.
   
   What good I can say is trivial. It's a large, long book that takes some concentration and thought to get through. Starkey knew his material well before getting down to business, although I don't believe he wrote about everything he could have. In the space of 765 pages (not counting the index and notes, which took an additional 80+ pages) there is so much information on the politics of Henry VIII's marriages, one cannot help but feel some awe. But that is where the interest ends for me as a reader. Unlike with the Tudor biographies of Alison Weir and Antonia Fraser, I wasn't drawn into the story in the least. And this is where the bad begins.
   
   Where should I start? First of all, the book is completely unbalanced. Well over 300 pages are devoted to the rise and fall of Anne Boleyn, while barely 40 explain the relationship with Anne of Cleves. The same can be said for the story of Catherine Howard and Catherine Parr. Perhaps there really is much, much more to the relationship between Boleyn and Henry Tudor, but I still believe that a balance could have been found and more depth explored with Henry's other wives.
   
   Many reviewers have lashed out against Starkey's language and grammar. While I'm no English expert, I must agree that it's difficult to "get into" the story and stay focused on Starkey's writings. And yes, he does tend to ask too many questions and doesn't hesitate to express his opinion, and stick with it, over historical facts.
   
   And last for this review, but certainly not least and not the truly last of my personal complaints against the book, is Starkey's blatant disregard for other historians and authors. In his introduction, he denounces the books of Fraser and Weir (with author names), which totally lacks class and respect and in my opinion. And that's far from the only time he does such a thing. I remember at one point in the book, just after the birth of Elizabeth (daughter of Henry and Anne Boleyn), Starkey denounced, with a bit of cool arrogance, the "unsubstantiated" claim that Anne wanted to breast-feed Elizabeth but Henry wouldn't allow it. I won't deny that I have read about this before and that I really don't know if it's true or not, as I am not a hard-core historian. But I am curious as to why Starkey believes, as he seems to in many sections of his book, that his is the one and only true version of events. How does he know that? And just because there is no hard evidence for certain events, how does Starkey know that they did or didn't happen?
   
   PBS created a mini-series based on Starkey's book (Starkey himself narrated) which turned out to be worse than the book. It's a sorry thing that a book so long and informative should turn out so uninteresting, but it did.

4 comments about Edward VI: The Lost King of England.

1. Packed between the glamorous, Hollywood friendly administrations of Henry and Elizabeth, Edward (and Mary) get little attention/glory. This first time author succeeds in explaining why Edward's reign is significant.
   
   The book is more of a history of the reign than a biography. While it speaks to Edward's youth, education, governing, etc., there is much more text devoted to other key players and the politics of the time.
   
   I don't understand this recent fad of book jackets for historical biography using cut off portraits. Here are some examples from my recent reading ... you can see many more in bookstores and libraries. Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burrand John Donne: The Reformed Soul: A Biography and The Pirate Queen: Queen Elizabeth I, Her Pirate Adventurers, and the Dawn of Empire. Female subjects sometimes have only the bodice and a piece of their chin: Catherine the Great: Love, Sex, and Power and Elizabeth & Leicester: Power, Passion, Politics.



2. Edward VI, son of Henry VIII and Jane Seymour became King of England in 1547, aged 9, and died in 1553 aged 16. Edward's reign is often viewed as almost incidental in the Tudor dynasty: most of his regnal period was influenced by self-serving advisers.
   
   Edward was not merely a cipher. His role in the work of government was limited, but not non-existent. Henry VIII had originally intended that England be governed by a council of regency during Edward's minority. As a consequence of the struggle for power, as Henry was dying, Edward Seymour emerged as Lord Protector. In a court riven by factionalism, Seymour dominated until he himself was forced out and subsequently executed, by John Dudley (later the Duke of Northumberland). While it is difficult to catch significant glimpses of the boy behind the king, Mr Skidmore does provide images that show that Edward was not always sickly, and had considerable promise both academically and athletically. There is also evidence that Edward's influence on the religious change taking place was quite profound. Henry VIII's reformation was driven purely by expedience and was institutionally based. Edward, by contrast, was influenced by reformers and the 1552 Prayer Book marked a shift from doctrinal conservatism to a Church of England which was more fundamentally protestant.
   
   I'd recommend this book to anyone interested in knowing more about the short reign of Edward VI, the reasons why he named Lady Jane Grey as his successor and the development of the Church of England. Edward's reign cannot be looked at in isolation: far too many of the dominant political figures featured in the previous reign. However, reading Mr Skidmore's book sheds new light on a significant period of English history.
   
   Jennifer Cameron-Smith



3. This book ia a wonderful read for those with a true interest in Tudor history. I found it to be facinating, extremely well researched and rich in detail. I gained a wealth of knowledge of not only Edward VI but of those figures that surrounded him that were key during his brief but none the less important reign. I look forward to any further works by Chris Skidmore.



4. Edward VI is still a lost king despite this author's attempts to reveal an undiscovered chapter of this little explored time in Tudor history. The entire book only carries 2 real chapters on Edward: most of this book is about Edward Seymour, Duke of Somerset and John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland and their travails. Their machinations are the defining background to Edward's reign, but the book should be titled about them rather than Edward. This is a poor history of an intriguing figure.

5 comments about South: The Endurance Expedition.

1. The gripping history by Ernest Shackleton of a an expedition that collapsed totally. While the group on the "Endurance" was rescued without loss of life, the other part of the expedition on the "Aurora" sufferd greatly. This part of the story has been emitted in later books about the expedition and was most interesting.
   Shackleton wrote with a sense of humour that is astounding, given the character of the book.



2. Not as concise, powerful as Worsley's "Endurance". With all the verbiage, the question remains, why did he choose this route when he had failed the Amundsen route via the Ross shelf? Surely the Wedell sea approach was fraught with too many unknowns. And why didn't he try to land when he first approached the "harbor" in the shelf? More time exploring these issues would have been better than all the daily details of the drift through the icepack. Oh well, too late now, and his brave efforts to rescue his men were grand indeed. Clearly a greater hero than a planner.



3. We've had so few recently.



4. I took the book to work with me and found every possible moment to read it and totally absorb it's contents. Twenty-eight men survived the most horrendous situation imaginable by any human being...it makes the normal hardships that we live with seem trivial to say the least. In 1914, there were no cell phones, satelite systems for communication....these men were left with their resourcefulness...of which Sir Shackleton praised highly throughout the book. The leadership qualities of Sir Ernest Shackleton made it possible for them to survive, not months, but YEARS under these extremely trying circumstances. I couldn't help but wonder why a movie has not been made to depict this most amazing part of history.



5. What is even more interesting than the astonishing day to day labor of mere survival in hostile elements, is the way in which these men kept up their morale, how they faced those chanllenges. Fascinating reading, every page describes hardships you can't imagine not being fatal, and yet it's written in humble and straightforward narrative. At one point when clearly they were near death from starvation, thirst, cold and exhaustion, and floundering through unmarked wilderness a last bid to reach civilization or die, he remarks merely, "We were very tired". Interestingly, at one point when he and three others are crossing a mountain pass in jeopardy of their lives on a 3 day trek trying to find a camp, each of them had the lingering feeling that there was a fourth person with them, but they only realized this when they compared notes after they reached safety. Again Shackleton refuses to sentimentalize the moment, even though he clearly believes God was literally guiding them, saying only that thanks must be given to the appropriate parties. This is dry English manliness of the type you rarely see except in parody anymore. What speaks best of these explorers qualities is that immediately after returning to civilization, after months of being in literal despair for their lives in unimaginable hardship, they rushed to enlist in the war. You'd think they would feel themselves entitled never to rise from a featherbed again. You would at least expect that their struggle for life in the rawest elements would have given them an aloof distance from mere human conflicts, or made them reluctant to kill other men. This book definitely has what The Perfect Storm lacked in excellent, tight, compelling narrative.

5 comments about The Pursuit of Victory: The Life and Achievement of Horatio Nelson.

1. I think this book is way too thick. I would recommend for a reference when looking up facts about Lord Nelson, but not for learning about his life. I seriously doubt all the 'reviewers' with raving compliments on the back cover of the book read from start to the last page...
   
   I am giving 3 stars for the credit of compiling all the facts. However, the author could have done much better job at writing a "biography."



2. I highly recommend The Pursuit of Victory: The Life And Achievement of Horatio Nelson, a new biography of England's greatest warfighting admiral, Horatio Nelson.
   
   This biography does a superb job of providing context and background for Nelson's astonishing rise to fame and his equally astonishing victories at sea--and lesser known defeats, which always occurred on territory unfamilar to Nelson, i.e. land. We find that the extreme risks of Britain's war with Napoleonic France created a brief window of opportunity for commoners such as Nelson to rise within the class-conscious and peerage-dominated Admiralty. Merit was so essential to victory that the Admiralty could not afford to advance captains by favoritism alone.
   
   Equally interesting is the author's careful descriptions of the role of mentors in Nelson's career arc--captains and admirals above him in the bureaucratic Royal Navy who guided, aided and promoted him, not so much to benefit themselves but in recognition of his talents. Without these mentors--several of whom he maintained as close personal friends until death--his rise from the ranks of hundreds of junior captains to admiral at a young age would not have happened.
   
   Not that Nelson enjoyed a perfect career. A gross political miscalculation--falling under the influence of the King's ne'er do well son, who had been given a position as Admiral not on talent but on birthright--caused Nelson's career to falter at a critical juncture. Having fallen out of favor for his destructive sycophancy, Nelson was sent home without a command, where he languished for seven long years as a poor gentleman landowner.
   
   A renewal of the war with France gave him one more chance, and with the aid of his mentors, he assumed command of the Mediterranean Fleet (bypassing many jealous senior admirals), enabling him to score his first great strategic victory in the Battle of the Nile.
   
   Life at sea was not easy, and Nelson was often ill and exhausted. Having lost an eye and an arm in two land engagements (he was deployed twice to joint Army-Navy commands, both of which ended badly, partly due to Nelson's ignorance of land warfare), he was often in pain. he also had to make judicious political decisions regarding allies, harrass the Admiralty for supplies, maintain discipline on a huge fleet of wooden ships in poor weather, and a host of other challenges which would have ground down by sheer workload alone a lesser commander.
   
   This engaging, masterly paced work covers not just Nelson's life but the political context of the Royal Navy and the role of senior commanders in his rise to the highest levels of command. It is a portrait of one man's life set within a detailed account of his family, era, superiors and comrades.



3. Noted Nelson scholar Roger Knight has written an elegant biography of Great Britain's greatest fighting admiral, Vice Admiral Horatio Nelson, which was published shortly after the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar; both Nelson's greatest victory and the scene of his tragic, yet heroic, death. But is it the definitive biography devoted to Admiral Nelson's life and career? Although it does come close, regrettably, the answer is "no", since another eminent Nelson scholar, John Sugden, is currently at work on the second volume of his Nelson biography, which will cover Nelson's exploits from late 1797 to the Battle of Traflagar, which occurred on October 21, 1805 (This review is being published here at Amazon.com one day prior to the 201st anniversary of this battle.).
   
   Knight covers Nelson's life and career in a massive tome of more than 800 pages, breaking it down into five sections. Much to my amazement, Knight has successfully covered Nelson's life and career from his birth in 1758 to his appointment as captain of HMS Agamemnon in January, 1793 in slightly more than a hundred pages, "I Youth and Disappointment 1758-1793" (Readers who think they are missing important aspects of Nelson's career should turn instead to the first volume in John Sugden's Nelson biography, "Nelson: A Dream of Glory", which emphasizes the young Nelson's rapid rise through officer ranks to becoming among the Royal Navy's youngest post captains.). Here Knight demonstrates how Nelson relied upon patronage from well-connected relatives like his uncle Captain Maurice Suckling and substantial exposure to good seamanship and officer conduct, which allowed him to secure rapid promotion to Post Captain and command of a frigate during the American Revolution. We also get our first glimpse of the heroic Nelson through his participation in an ill-fated joint Royal Navy and Army invasion to seize Nicaragua from the Spanish, which will not only cost him his command of a heavily armored frigate, but also his good health, and indeed, almost his life. Knight covers succinctly Nelson's two tours of duty in the British West Indies, devoting substantial coverage to Nelson's adulation of the mediocre Prince William Henry, later, Duke of Clarence, and eventually, King William IV, assigned to Nelson's command as a junior Royal Navy frigate captain (Here we see Nelson's unabashed admiration for royalty emerge unexpectedly, which will have serious consequences for his career in the late 1790s.).
   
   The biography's second section, "II Maturation and Triumph 1793 - 1798" covers Nelson's early career during the French revolutionary wars, chronicling his eventual rise to Rear Admiral and his hard-fought victories at the battles of Cape Saint Vincent and the Nile. Nelson learns how to command a squadron at sea, cultivating friendships with many of the Royal Navy officers who would become his celebrated "Band of Brothers"; distinguished captains such as Thomas Troubridge, Samuel Hood, Benjamin Hallowell and Thomas Masterman Hardy. Knight also discusses Nelson's complex relationships with his superiors, most notably Admiral Sir John Jervis, later Earl Saint Vincent, his commanding officer at the Battle of Cape Saint Vincent. We also witness the disastrous attack on Tenerife, Santa Cruz, in the Canary Islands, which nearly costs him his life.
   
   The biography's third section, "III Passion and Discredit 1798- 1801", is devoted to the most controversial period of Nelson's career; his service as Commander-in-Chief, Mediterranean, in which he finds himself supporting unabashedly the Bourbon royal dynasty of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. Knight demonstrates clearly that Nelson's actions in "liberating" Naples following a French-supported popular insurrection, were motivated solely by his notions of loyalty and duty to a royal family in dire need of both, and though quite critical of them, he does not agree with Terry Coleman, author of "The Nelson Touch: The Life and Legend of Horatio Nelson", that these acts amounted to war crimes. Moreover, he demolishes completely the myth that Nelson fell immediately in love with Emma Hamilton, the young wife of Britain's ambassador to the Bourbon court at Naples, showing that it blossomed months later. And Knight, while sympathetic to Nelson, does show that Nelson's actions immediately before and after the Battle of Copenhagen, left much to be desired for someone serving as a fleet commander.
   
   In "IV Adulation and Death" Knight opens with Nelson, now living openly with Emma Hamilton, enjoying nearly 18 months of peace, finding time to take a leisurely journey through Wales and serving in the House of Lords. With the resumption of hostilities between Great Britain and Napoleonic France, Nelson, now a vice admiral, returns to the Mediterranean Sea as the Royal Navy's Commander-in-Chief, Mediterranean, hoisting his broad pendant aboard HMS Victory. Some of Knight's finest prose is devoted to the long chase across the Atlantic Ocean to the West Indies in search of French admiral Pierre Villeneuve's fleet, culminating of course in the bloody Battle of Trafalgar. In "V Transfiguration", Knight describes not only Nelson's funeral in London, but also takes stock of the admiral's character, yielding a sympathetic, yet highly nuanced, appraisal of Nelson's life and career.
   
   "The Pursuit of Victory: The Life And Achievement of Horatio Nelson" includes several appendices, of which the most important ones are the brief chronologies of the major events in Nelson's life and career, and of world events during Nelson's life, especially with regard to the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars. There is also a chronological recounting of Nelson's service aboard various Royal Navy warships, which, regrettably, isn't nearly as succinct as both chronological outlines. Less successful, but still quite useful, are the brief biographical sketches devoted to Nelson's family, friends, and associates, both in the British government, and of course, in the Royal Navy itself.



4. As others have noted, there are many biographies of Nelson, and almost all of them suffer from the same problem: that a man so brilliant, talented, contradictory, demented, jealous, generous, gracious, foolish, naive and clear-thinking is very hard to understand. The fact that his death at the triumphant British naval victory of Trafalgar in 1805 immediately turned his life into legend, means that from first to last it's been hard to get a handle on Nelson the flawed but unique human being.
   
   I've read many biographies of the man, and I was shocked to find that many second-hand truths fine biographers have relied on in prior biographies are incorrect. Knight's meticulous scholarship, his lifetime of study of the age of fighting sail in Britain and France, means that his careful analysis of sources in this book is stunning and irrefutable. No book I have ever read on Nelson is so thorough in finding every possible source to illuminate the daily life at sea, as well as by land, of this remarkable leader. That he quietly sets the record straight on innumerable myths and errors of past biographies with grace is simply another pleasure of the book. The fact that Knight deals tautly with the fairly disastrous consequences of Nelson's affair with Emma, Lady Hamilton, without letting it swallow his book, is a fine achievement. The heart of Nelson's importance in English history lies in his life at sea, and there Knight's study is especially enlightening.
   
   Although not a book for everyone - you need to want to learn about both Nelson and the Royal Navy during the Napoleonic Wars - I tend to agree with the dust jacket blurb, that this book will be THE definitive factual study of Nelson. But as Knight himself admits - in the end, the whole of the man is greater than the sum of his parts, and probably always will be.



5. There is no shortage of books about Nelson. The past couple of years have added several more titles. There is no shortage of interest in the man, and the great days of the Royal Navy.
   
   This book is very good--I doubt there are any better. It is detailed, full of new information, and extremely readable. The man can write, and the book carries you away.
   
   Nelson is presented as a man with some great abilities-- and some faults. He did not always distinguish himself, but he never made any fatal blunders. It is interesting to note that he, too, was able to benefit from connections--something that was almost impossible to get along without in the Royal Navy, with so many officers, and so few ships.
   
   Nelson's faults did cost him, but his strengths and abilities overcame them. He was lucky. His ability to ignore orders helped him, when it would have hurt others. His connections carried him through other difficulties, and , in the end, he was the right man at the right time.
   
   As is usual, the reader also comes to appreciate his great friend Collingwood. If Nelson had a secret weapon, it had to be Collingwood, who was less impetuous, and more reasoned in his actions. His behavior and skill helped Nelson more than a few times. This book, like so many others, makes it obvious.
   
   Nelson will always fascinate--his affair with Lady Hamilton, his bravery in battle, his fearless method of attack, and his brilliance always appeal to new generations. A great story about a great man.

5 comments about A Rage to Live: A Biography of Richard and Isabel Burton.

1. The author has done a very good job of investigative research and provides likely answers for many of the mysteries surrounding Burton's life (and loves). This seems the best researched biography of the fascinating Sir Richard Francis Burton.



2. A Rage to Live by Mary Lovell is an outstanding biography of both Sir Richard and the Lady Burton. Burton is about the only person that I have bothered to read multiple biograhies of. He was so complex and his life was just THAT interesting! There are a few other treatments of Sir Richard still in print, and Lovell takes these into account in her own telling. A great deal of data are available for the first time in this book, and the author uses this information adroitly to clear up long-standing misconceptions (and outright slanders) of both Burtons.
   
   Lovell provides a good bit of compelling discussion about the conflict between Burton and John Hanning Speke over the source of the Nile. It has been common for Burton biographers to over-simplify the nature of the disagreement: Burton thought the Nile originated in Lake Tanganyika, Speke argued for Victoria Nyanza. Not so! Speke only really WANTED the source of the Nile to be Victoria (the lake, not the queen), whereas Burton, a Man of Science, argued that the observations at hand were insufficient to decide one way or the other. With the available information, Burton understood that Tanganyika or some as yet unknown spring could still have been the head of the Nile. Lovell explains well the behind-the-scenes wrangling at the Royal Geographical Society by Burton's detractors to back Speke as much out of spite as any other reason.
   
   What really compelled me to read A Rage to Live -- besides what might best be called an obsession of the man -- was my desire to learn more about the Lady Burton, Isabel. She was an independent and interesting person herself, but she has been abused at the hands of other Burton biographers. To them, Isabel was an over-zealous Catholic, the schemer ready to use her influence and Richard's name for her own advancement, and the arsonist of Burton's papers and manuscript of the Scented Garden. Lovell makes the case that this is hogwash, the previous biographers have given too much credit to the bigoted opinions of Richard's spinster niece. Among the new information provided by Lovell's research is the fact that Richard was instructing Isabel what to write on his behalf. She was very much his partner in all aspects of their life together, and Lovell's story does provide some justice for the Lady Burton. Most significantly, Lovell demonstrates that Isabel burned at Trieste what Richard had instructed her to burn, and that many important papers did indeed survive.
   
   A Rage to Live is an enormous volume, more than 900 pages -- my train ride to and from work has been considerably lightened since I finished reading the book. It has the best maps of the recent Burton biographies, but the fewest illustrations. Sources are well documented. Previous reviewers have commented upon the state of the editing of this book; they make some good points. But speaking (NOT speke-ing) as someone who has tried to read everything that they can find by and about Sir Richard Francis Burton, Lovell's A Rage to Live is the best single source on the subject.



3. Author Lovell clearly wants to refurbish Isabel Burton's image, and she has done so. In doing so, Lovell does not appear to have let the desire to attain that goal outrun the evidence at hand. Indeed, Lovell provides the reader with a considerable body of previously unknown and/or unused material which supports her contention that Isabel Burton---long branded as some sort of religion-filled and -frenzied lunatic---was of a piece with many other Victorian women who actually helped their husband's careers immeasurably. (Consider, for example, Elizabeth Custer, wife of George Armstrong Custer.) This book is not the end-all-be-all for those interested in Richard Burton, however, for there is actually very little in the way of detail about his travels and experiences. This makes sense when the narrative hits areas Burton himself purposely left blank (his Indian years, forinstance). But this approach makes for problems in areas Burton purposely highlighted. I enjoyed the book as a book, and found Lovell a stylish writer who alerts her readers to her own biases (always welcome in a historian). But for those who have read about Burton before this could---stress on "could"---be an oddly unsatisfying piece of work. For those who come to the subject fresh, or wish to round out their understandings about this intriguing couple (hence the "could" caveat above), this is a wonderful book. It is, after all, not all about Richard (although Richard might've thought so; yet even here, Lovell makes him a good deal more rounded in his sensibilities and sensitivities than many who've earlier given him a go ). The book is about a couple, and within those parameters it is a solid and fascinating volume.



4. I have very much enjoyed Lovell's previous biographys (on Jane Digby and on the Mitford family) firstly because she goes all out to uncover new material, secondly because of her meticulous detailing of all sources - especially when going against the traditional view of previous writers, and lastly because I think she makes her subjects real and therefore an incredibly good read. She certainly does that with the Burtons - necessarily so because both Isabel and Richard Burton led full and active lives (it seems almost to be underselling the incredibly contributions they made to Victorian society) and the 700 odd pages which Lovell uses to talk about them barely seems enough.

   Having read the other reader reviews on this book I was struck by one person opining that there wasn't enough discussion on Burton's books in here. I would say that there is enough. This is a biography and it covers an awful lot of ground. Each of Burton's books was about his travel, and each trip is minutely detailed in which Lovell uses not just his books, but his notes, his letters, and other sources to track not just his trips, but the dynamics of his relationships with others. I also think it is fair to say that Lovell has talked about the impact his books made on society - certainly many of his books are still in print and in some cases are still used as text books in modern Eastern study as they are still considered relevant.

   Both the Burton's come alive under Lovell's pen. Isabel's intense love for Burton - and his for her. Lovell is careful in discussing each of Burton's controversies in life such as his falling out with Speke, and his inability to seem to get on with other men (Rigby, Playfair, the Ambassador while as Consul in Damascus and so on). Again these petty political battles are carefully detailed and the entire growth of each situation shown. Lovell demonstrates how many of Burton's strengths were also his greatest failings. He had a huge intellect, great intellegence but little patience and diplomacy to follow his calling in the Foreign Office. His energy was generally spent on his exploring in which he was ably supported and often accompanied by his wife, Isabel. Certainly with as many enemies as Burton managed to make, coupled with his ironic sense of humour he managed to leave behind a mythology of a rather horrid nature what he did and didn't do. He was fond of telling self-deprecating stories to people - at the expense of his reputation. Lovell has sifted through these rumours and misinformation to find the real man and his exploits underneath. These are no less amazing only less voilent.

   Burton was a scholar and a linguist of some note. While in India he learnt a number of the major dialects and would have been officially noted as the foremost scholar in the field had not professional jealousies prevented him from being credited with his last language exams. Certainly he passed top in his class in each of his exams. He opened up inner Africa for future European explorers making it possible for them to confirm the source of the Nile, he also was the first European to make the Haj as a disguised as a muslim - and these are just a few of the explorations he undertook.

   I think Isabel comes off a lot better under Lovell's pen than I have read about her before. She has also suffered a great deal of bad press in the past - again her own deeds are obfuscated by rumour and dislike. She was not the most likeable woman in the world, but in conclusion I did feel she was the only woman who could have matched Burton, especially in that stultifying conventional world which Victorian England limited their women to inhabiting.

   I really enjoyed this book. It was a long read - hard to do with a young baby handing around - but each chapter was almost like a new story. Lovell was excellent in tying each chapter in the Burton's life together into a fresh story - a fresh outlook on the Burton's altogether a satisfying read.




5. (1) This is the definitive biography to date of the incredible Sir Richard and Lady Burton. No question about it.

   (2) The author provides a significant amount of never-before-published information and reveals the existence of yet more --- which encourages us to think that Burton scholarship is entering a Golden Age.

   (3) The author deserves a lot of credit in many different respects.

   (4) What is crazy-making, therefore, is how appallingly slipshod the editing and proofreading was for this book. I gave up counting the typographical, factual, and stylistic mistakes.

   (5) The editors and proofreaders of this book should be drummed out of the business. It's an absolute disgrace.

   (6) 5 stars for the book anyway . . .

4 comments about The Windsor Knot: Charles, Camilla and the Legacy of Diana.

1. I thought that I knew all that there was to know about the whole Charles-Camilla-Diana triangle, then I started reading the Windsor Knot and I realized that I did not know all that much.
   
   The book is more than the story about Charles and Camilla and Diana's relationships with eachother. The author delves into the murky past of the players families and tells us about the some of the people that came before Camilla, Charles, and Diana.
   
   A very interesting, entertaining book!



2. Is there anything about the Di-and-Chuck saga that hasn't already been said? Christopher Wilson has decided that a book highlighting events from Camilla's perspective would fill a gap in the coverage of these events. It's a reasonable idea for a book, except that there's nothing to indicate he has talked directly to Camilla, and he's reduced to guessing what goes on in her mind.
   
   Nonetheless, the book is an easy read and approaches the well-known story from a different angle, adding a few tidbits such as describing the Queen's raging hatred of Camilla. According to Wilson, it was Camilla who encourged Charles to marry Diana. The book is rather ambivalent in its perspective on Camilla, suggesting she saw no ethical dilemma in cheating on her husband to be Charles' mistress and orchestrating the sham marriage between Charles and Di. Yet in other passages, Camilla is shown in a sympathetic light. Even if Camilla is responsible for her own fate, it can't be easy being the most hated woman in Britain.
   
   The book portrays Di's marriage as more of an empty shell than other authors have portrayed it. The author suggests Di knew what she was getting into, but was too naive and too intimidated to back out during the engagement. The marriage never had a chance; Di was never intended to be more than a showpiece. As the story is told in this book, the villain is Charles, who over and over is portrayed as self-centered even by the standards of royalty and utterly devoid of a moral compass or basic interpersonal skills.
   
   The early chapters cover Camilla's family history. Skip those and jump into the middle of the book which is far more interesting. The book, written in 2002, ends with the author speculating that everyone should brace themselves for a Charles-and-Camilla marriage announcement, which of course occurred in 2005.



3. As the Camilla PR campaign continues in the UK, it's helpful to remember her role picking out the "perfect mouse" for her lover to marry. As Diana herself expressed the dilemma: "there were three of us in the marriage so it was a bit crowded".

   Camilla selected the girl she thought would be too timid to object to the longrunning Charles/Camilla affair; slept with her lover days before the royal wedding, gave him trinkets and pictures to take with him on his honeymoon... no wonder Diana grew to hate both her husband and the "Rottweiler". One also wonders if Princes William and Harry will ever learn of the role Camilla (Queen Camilla) played in making their late mother so unhappy. The saga continues and I hope Christopher Wilson is there to cover it in his next book.




4. Unless you have NEVER read a SINGLE book on Diana and Charles, you will not find a scrap of new information here. I did not find a sentence that I have not read at least 10 times before. Additionally, it left out too much important information to be be a good, all-inclusive read.

4 comments about Winston and Clementine: The Personal Letters of the Churchills.

1. When I considered buying that book, I first felt quite uncomfortable about the idea of reading an exchange of private letters between Winston and Clementine. Fortunately, I overcame my discomfort fast. I quickly enjoyed reading that thick epistolary volume about their political and personal matters. The personal letters of the Churchills revealed to me how influential Clementine was on Winston across the board. Their deep love and trust was the secret of their successful marriage, even if Winston was not always an easy husband and politician to deal with. Corresponding by written messages (today perhaps by email) with each other on a regular basis, even when they were together, proved to be an excellent way to help them keep their enduring flame for each other intact. Today, too many marital and extra-marital relationships get dissolved prematurely because of a lack of enough communication between both players. Life is after all a comedy in which men and women play their part and need to know or rediscover how to communicate their joys and pains to one another in order to increase the odds that they will be successful in their relationship.



2. This book was introduced to me through a friend and, quite frankly, my first reaction was to cringe at the idea of reading such a bulky historical book. But from the first letter I was transfixed by the dialogue between husband and wife on both political and personal matters. This book brings with it a new aspect of Churchill's personality - he was not only a great statesman but he was a passionate man who loved his wife dearly which is seen clearly in the letters that were intended for her eyes only.

   I often wonder how he would have felt to know millions would one day read the letters he wrote to his "clemmie-cat". In any case, its a great read :)

   Cheers, Meagan.




3. The real service that this book performs is to remind the reader that great historical figures are not one dimensional. Chuchill was a renaissance man, warrior, journalist, historian, memoirist, politician and statesman. He was arguably the single greatest personage of this century and his name has become a symbol for the indominitable spirit of a free people. The collection of letters sent to and received from his wife are entertaining as well as educational. They provide a feel for the time in which they were written and place many of Churchill's famous accomplishments (and failures) in proper context. Amazingly, unlike today when the more we know of a public figure, the smaller they seem, in Churchill's case one comes away convinced that this was a great man in the truest sense, and that much of his greatness is due in no small part to his marriage to Clementine.



4. Winston and Clementine: Happily Ever After

   This is the story of a political marriage. In some ways it will be familiar to the contemporary reader, though it began and ended a long time ago.

   Both husband and wife in this marriage were interested in politics. The husband was elected again and again over decades to high office. For decades his wife fought at his side, entertained at his table, offered her judgment to him and his colleagues and his enemies. She took his place in his absence, and sometimes in his presence. She became an international figure. She had power, and she used it. Always she had a mind of her own.

   Sometimes this couple would quarrel. Once a serving dish was thrown. There was a period, not too long, when one of the partners was out of sympathy with the other, or anyway in sympathy with another.

   They knew trouble. They lost a daughter and many friends to death, and some friends to betrayal. They fought political wars at home in which their own party tried to deprive them of office. They fought shooting wars abroad-including the worst ever. More than once, they seemed down and out. Their livelihood as much as their career was threatened. After decades of struggle they reached the summit of power and they knew the adoration of a nation and a world. By then they had grown old together.

   Readers of this story will find that wives did not enter politics yesterday, and private lives were influential in politics before last week. But in other respects this story is unlike anything we have known in this time. Here are two people who won every honor that human affairs can offer, and they won them together. Meanwhile they operated upon those natural and traditional lines that involve that deepest of partnerships. Their division of labor augmented the strength of them both beyond what either could do, apart or together, if they both had done the same parts of the job. True, this is the story of a political partnership. More than that, it is a marriage.

   The editor of this book is the youngest child of Winston and Clementine, Mary, now Lady Soames. She brings to the work care, intimacy, and insight. She has adopted some of the best devices of Sir Martin Gilbert, Churchill's official biographer, to make the book available to the reader unfamiliar with the times and the people. Her notes are useful. She lets the letters themselves convey the story.

   One sees right away the amazing pace at which these people lived. Winston Churchill was a soldier whose bravery and judgment in battle were beyond doubt. He wrote every line of every speech he ever gave, save perhaps one, and they are not surpassed in eloquence or impact or amplitude. He wrote serious books, nearly forty of them. He served in the British House of Commons, and mostly in the Cabinet. Meanwhile he made his living writing and speaking in publications and before audiences all over the world. Their house teemed all day and much of the night with secretaries, researchers, and colleagues. He wrote once that statesmen should exist in a condition of "stress of soul." Ever he took that advice for himself.

   And necessarily, then, he imposed it upon his wife.

   Winston Churchill and Clementine Hozier were married in September 1908, and they remained so until parted by death in 1965. Martha Washington, wishing to keep her relations with our Founding Father private, burned most all of the letters that passed between them. The Churchills' letters are preserved intact in their remarkable abundance. Partly because they were so busy, and partly because they took many vacations apart, occasions to write were frequent. In their day the post traveled rapidly-Fed Ex was not necessary; e-mail was unavailable; the telephone came along, but its frequent use developed later. And so they wrote, and well they wrote.

   Nuggets are found in every shaft of this mine. Sir Winston is candid with his wife as with no other, especially in times of triumph or stress. When the first war begins, he unveils his character: "Everything trends towards catastrophe & collapse. I am interested, geared up and happy. Is it not horrible to be built like that? ...Yet I wd do my best for peace, & nothing wd induce me wrongfully to strike the blow." Another time, in a very different mood, he writes: "you have seen me very weak & foolish & mentally infirm this week...." And then the man of unbreakable will proceeds: "I cannot tell you how much I love & honor you and how sweet & steadfast you have been through all my hesitations & perplexity."

   Clementine often bears the burden of saying to her husband what others cannot. When the first war begins, she cautions him about the feelings of a dismissed Admiral: "there only remains the deep wound in an old man's heart. If you put the wrong sort of poultice on it, it will fester." When the second begins, she writes: "...there is a danger of your being generally disliked by your colleagues & subordinates because of your rough sarcastic & overbearing manner.... Therefore with terrific power you must combine urbanity, kindness and if possible Olympic calm."

   The letters of Winston are often more abstract and reflective than those of his wife. Sometimes they are effectively first drafts of things he will later publish. His life is saved once in the trenches by an annoying general who makes him walk two miles under fire just for a little chat; when he returns his dugout and all in it are destroyed. He reflects: "it is all chance or destiny and our wayward footsteps are best planted without too much calculation. One must yield oneself simply & mentally to the mood of the game: and trust in God which is another way of saying the same thing...."

   At the same time, one sees in the husband a sharp need for his wife. It is he who is "lonely among crowds." It is he who has no one but her "to break the loneliness of this bustling existence."

   History has more to say of Winston than of Clementine. He saved his country and more in a desperate crisis, and he leaves behind him a written account of prudential wisdom that is not surpassed. Both his words and his deeds exhibit a longing for honor. He fought for it. He met its demands with utter resolve and lifelong resilience. But of course there was more to his life than that. Honor itself is limited by the high purposes that define it, including the promises and affections that make a family. So he could write to her, at one of the lowest points in his life: "the nearer I get to honor, the nearer I am to you."

   Churchill ends My Early Life, his explicitly autobiographical work, with the passage: "Events were soon ...to absorb my thoughts and energies at least until September 1908, when I married and lived happily ever afterwards." And so together they did. And do.

1 comments about Clementine Churchill: The Biography of a Marriage.

1. This biography gives great insight into the lives of the Churchills'.It was written by Mary Soames, the youngest child of Winston and Clementine Churchill. It was amazing to see the love and devotion Clementine and Winston had for each other. They were ever faithful letter companions from the start of their romantic and strong relationship. While reading the profound letters they wrote to each other you feel as if you were there with them, feeling every emotion they felt. This biography also includes great stories and antecdotes that will keep you laughing, crying, or shouting for joy for hours. The effects this biography has on you are numerous, but the strongest one would have to be one of awe. Their marriage is a marriage to look up to. They did have troubled times. Like, when Winston went to join in the action of World War I after his loss of the position of First Lord of the Admiralty. Or of the times before WWII when Winston was trying so hard to get people to listen to him about the danger and potency of Hitler and the Nazis. They stayed together in good times and in bad and in sickness and in health. They stayed together until the death of Winston. I highly recommend this book so that you can experience this wonderful and lasting marriage and all that comes along with it.

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

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



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



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



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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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