1 comments about History Of Margaret Of Anjou, Queen Of Henry Vi Of England.

1. Like Agnes Strickland's Queens of England, Abbott's history is outdated given all the new information and research that has been done since the original date of publication. For instance, there is now irrefutable evidence that Margaret was in Anjou from the years 1434-1442 with her grandmother, Yolande of Aragon. There are many other instances of this throughout the book.
   Secondly, Abbott spends a lot of time trying to give background on the times and places that Margaret lives that, while entertaining, have nothing to do with her and for a rather slim volume, take away from the account of her life. The chapter on Lady Neville comes to mind, especially as the chronology of it is not clear and he admits before he begins that is most likey fiction (it is).
   However, for anyone who loves the wars of the roses and Margaret of Anjou, this is a lovely addition and it's interesting to read history as it was written in the 19th century.

3 comments about Disraeli: A Brief Life.

1. Overall, this brief biography offers an interesting portrait of a commanding political figure of the Victorian era. In order to fully appreciate Smith's rendition, however, one should become acquainted with (if not actually reading) Disraeli's novels, as his writing seems to be Smith's point of departure, and frequent point of reference in telling the story of Disraeli's life. I, for one, was less interested in linking the biographical themes in Disraeli's novels to his life's events, and more interested in capturing the essence of the epoch, with more detail and attention paid to the political developments of Disraeli's age.



2. Paul Smith attempts the impossible - to write a brief life - of the complex, remarkable and enigmatic Jewish politician and author Benjamin Disraeli, Earl of Beaconsfield. Smith almost pulls it off but another 50 or so pages would have given him much more scope to portray Disraeli's major contributions to the politics of identity, social and political reform and the recognition of the inevitability of working class emancipation. Smith allows his fascination with Dizzy's Jewishness and "outsider" status to overwhelm the other facets of his character and beliefs. Part of Dizzy's greatness as a politician was the ability to simultaneously portray himself as the ultimate outsider and the loyal, patriotic "insider." Until the election of Ramsey MacDonald as the first Labour Prime Minister in the 1920s, Disraeli stands alone as the most unlikely Prime Minister Britain ever had. Smith's book includes some good quotes from commentators such as Gladstone and Michael Foot. A book deserving a fuller treatment in its second edition but still a very useful introduction to its subject for young students of 19th century history.



3. This is written for a british school person taking his or her O and or A levels. It is an enjoyeable read which put Disraeli in a comptempary historical view point. Yes, the Author actually compares Disraeli and his government to the tories of the 80's under the iron rule of Thatcher.

No comments about Gladstone (Routledge Historical Biographies).

5 comments about Elizabeth Wydeville: The Slandered Queen (England's Forgotten Queens).

1. An excellent history of Elizabeth Wydville. Sometimes a few too many details. Shows the love between Elizabeth and Henry. A great sadness at the end of the book showing how badly a queen can be treated after the king dies.



2. I thought this book had a great deal of conjecture in it. Regarding keeping this reader's interest, the book didn't come close to most of the historical books I've been reading lately, mostly by Alison Weir and Antonia Frasier. Additionally, the print was not dark enough for easy readability, and the print was rather small. Not easy on the eyes at all.



3. What a studied and fascinating work this book is! We've heard many versions of the presumed accounts of the 2 missing princes who disappeared from London Tower...but what of their mother, the first Queen Elizabeth? Although we've heard much smattering of slander about her in the past, now we have a new story to consider in this lavishly researched, footnoted and indexed work reviewing the Queen's life. Although you will feel the good weight of research that the author poured into the book, you will be able to read the Queen's fascinating story without needing to be a Rhodes Scholar to delve into it.
   
   We even get to sigh a romantic sigh as we imagine the meeting of (24 year old) Elizabeth when she met with the King (age 19) at the time he likely fell madly in love with her: "At Grafton, Elizabeth was on home territory. The Wydeville manor lay within a mile of Whittlewood Forest where the King was hunting. Having grown up here, Elizabeth knew the course that the hunters would take, the fields where the deer would be chased for the kill, the grassy spots ideal for picnics. Choosing a large oak tree, she stationed herself and her two small sons beneath it and waited. Hard in pursuit of prey, Edward saw the beautiful young mother with her children, pulled his horse up short, and marveled at the bucolic tableau." See what I mean? We really get a feel for the romance, the hardship, and the tragedy to follow.
   
   The ancestor of Mary, Queen of Scots and of Lady Jane Grey, this slandered queen's grandson will be Henry VIII, her great-grandaughter will be Queen Elizabeth I. In her time, she will become a widowed mother of two children but then secretly marry the King of England (the younger Edward IV), thus being crowned Queen of England in 1465, her father will be beheaded, her husband the King will become exiled leaving her alone while pregnant with many young children in tow, she will give birth to the future King of England (Edward V), her brother will be executed, her son (Sir Richard Grey) will be murdered upon order of Richard III, her two sons (King Edward V and Prince Richard of York) will disappear from the Tower of London with tragically uncertain fate, her 19-year-long marriage will be declared adulterous and their 10 children will be declared illegitimate, and she will be accused of witchcraft and sorcery.
   
   An amazing life, worth of the re-defining richly presented by this author.



4. I have to agree with another review that it was interesting to read a different interpretation of Elizabeth Wydeville. Some of the arguments fell short, but I still thought it was well done. I'm also not sure we are at a point to be spurning historical reinterpretation just yet.
   I enjoyed it and recommend that readers also read Baldwin's biography of Elizabeth



5. Is anyone else tired of hardline feminists writing revisionist histories of every female personage whose reputation may have been exagerated by contempory chroniclers?
   
   As contempory chroniclers are the only primary information sources, even assuming that they were all misogynistic and that they unjustly slandered every "liberated" woman, there are no better sources to prove otherwise. Portraying Elizabeth Wydeville as unculpable and virtuous is adding modern prejudice to her personage even more than her contemporaries possible misogyny.
   
   Frankly, this type of revisionist history is insulting as a scholar and as a female, and I was highly disappointed to see Alison Wier's name associated with this farce.

No comments about Reminiscences (Oxford World's Classics).

5 comments about Prince of Pleasure: The Prince of Wales and the Making of the Regency.

1. I'm past halfway and feel I know enough of the book to judge. The title, subtitle and back copy are misleading. This book offers far more political history than cultural history and the focus on the Prince himself wavers so often I found myself wanting to sit Saul David or his editor down and deliver a stern talking-to. Prince of Pleasure? Prince of Politics is more like it, with one endless shuffle of the cabinet after another. As if that weren't enough, the writing is flat, though at times David gets slangy or jokey as if aware of his prosaic style. And as a historian, he;s inconsistent: we get endless gross detail about how unclean and unhygienic Princess Caroline was, yet she goes on to have many lovers--did no one else besides her husband and some courtiers early on ever comment? Or did she have a soap-related epiphany? Inquiring minds want to know.



2. This is a good book about a bad man. While George IV is believed to have been a style setter and taste-maker, his life was so motivated by self-indulgance and egotism that even a biographer as talented as Mr. David cannot hope but to fail in his hopeless attempt to make the subject of this books attractive.
   George IV was the son of America's last king, George III. In his life there were hosts of empty headed women of easy virtue, massive tasteless building projects, flitations with radical politics, and more excess than the average Hollywood star of the moment. By his example, George IV makes Jim Morrison look like a choir boy. And what a bore he must of been as well!
   Mr. David attempts to make the prince likable, but one is compelled upon a dispassionate read of the facts to conclude with Thackery that he was little more than a cad with a crown. This is the opposite conclusion to which Mr. David attempts, and hats off to him for his efforts on behalf of this poor dead king's reputation. It is kind of difficult to feel any sympathy for a man who treated his wife so poorly, drank himself to excess, spent money fecklessly and in the end believed himself (rather pathetically) the victor of the battle of Waterloo.



3. He started off pretty, but it was only skin deep. He was vain and greedy. He was particularly irksome to both wives (secret and catholic Mrs Fitzherbert, "respectable" but dizzy Princess Caroline). But no-one is all bad - he loved his daughter, enjoyed parties and built a few memorable buildings. What a waste of a life. Despite the horrible cover, this is a solid book on the Prince Regent which will be read (or glanced at) by regency buffs the world over.



4. George IV or the Prince Regent is the caricature monarch of English history. In the age of the scything cartoonist, the larger than life Prince was the ideal subject through his loves, sense of melodrama and overblown antics. David, wisely in my opinion confines himself to the period before his ascendancy to the throne, after which George, by virtue of his gout and his unpopularity became a subdued, sorry figure. David whisks us through all the major episodes, Mrs. Fitzherbert, his doomed marriage, the infidelity of both spouses and his eternal opulence and theatrics. There is such a wealth of literature both on the Prince and the Regency, that a new approach or a fresh insight is virtually impossible, particularly from a biographical standpoint. Hence the best an author can do under the circumstances is provide a rollicking read and a fun, lively approach and David measures up to the task. This is a thoroughly enjoyable book about a perenially endearing cartoonlike figure. No revisionist breakthroughs here, but a lot of fun.



5. I am ambivalent at best about Saul David's book "Prince of Pleasure".

   On the good side I think he is very readable and I did enjoy a great deal of this book. Unfortunately I don't think he brought up much to shed new light on the Prince and indeed some of the matters on which he emphasised he failed to distinguish between rumour and innuendo, and what was actual provable fact - the supposed love children of the Prince Regent's sisters for instance. Other people have presented far better researched and more compelling arguments on these things than he did.

   The book left wondering what there was really new in this that Christopher Hibbert has not discussed in his 2 volume biography of the Prince Regent Published some 25 years ago? If there was anything new about the Prince I think it was mostly window decoration.

   Also I was somewhat disturbed by a number of errors of fact in the book - none of which really destroyed or influenced the subject of the book as they were on peripheral issues - but nevertheless annoying - for instance he said the Earl of Barrymore (better known as Hellgate) had been shot by the soldiers in his regiment - untrue. He died in an accidental shooting when his sporting gun went off in his carriage. David implies that Harriette Wilson made a fortune from her memoirs - also not true.

   I also found it hard to agree with some of the interpretations he put on various quotes from people - to prove that the Prince had had an affair with Harriette Wilson for instance - or his assertion from a very ambiguous quote that Beau Brummell was Gay.

   David does have a very neat way of blending in the elements of history with the life of the Prince Regent which I also found very enjoyable. I wish he would footnote a bit more so it was possible to see where he drew his information from.

   One final quibble I have with this book is that "Prince of Pleasure" is a title that is already used by J B Priestley's 1969 work on the Prince Regent and the Regency period. This was a popular book and well known. I wondered if David had read it, but it doesn't turn up in his bibliography - a fact I find surprising for he must have come across it in his research. It just seems a bit cheeky to use the same title in a book on exactly the same subject and not acknowledge it.

   In the end I am left wondering what he has added that was not already known about the Prince Regent. Still it is interesting and readable.

1 comments about The Self-Fashioning of Disraeli, 1818-1851.

1. Locates Disraeli in a European, cosmopolitan context, not merely as either a conservative empire-inventor or novelist but also as an outsider establishing himself as an insider. It contains a compelling essay on the breakdown or hypomania he suffered in his 20s.

No comments about Victoria and Disraeli: The Making of a Romantic Partnership.

4 comments about A Traitor's Kiss: The Life of Richard Brinsley Sheridan, 1751-1816.

1. This is a wonderful biography of a fascinating and engaging personality. Sheridan is a fine poet and an honorable politician (a nearly impossible achievement in the eighteenth-century as it is today), a genuine wit, he was also one of the greatest playwrights in the London theater of his day.
   
   Sheridan was a man of fashion and society, but not a fop. He wrote clever, romantic comedies, liked to live on the edge and yet always held fast to his principles -- supporting the American colonists, for instance, in their struggle for independence -- while refusing to be bought at any price.
   
   He lived in grand style from the first moment that he arrived in London (despite having nothing but his wife's dowry), spending all of the money that he made as quickly as he earned it -- sometimes MORE quickly than he earned it. He was passionate about few women but appreciative of the beauty of many, and he was a devoted and caring father. (His poem "If a Daughter You Have" is a small gem.)
   
   When he came home one night to find his theater burning as a result of a fire (probably set by his enemies in parliament), he calmly sat and sipped some wine, explaining to shocked witnesses: "Surely a man can have a glass of wine by his own fire."
   
   Toward the end of his life, although he was burdened by crippling debts, he refused an offer of a large sum of money in compensation for his support offered by the American colonists. He explained that his support had been a matter of principle.
   
   Read this biography and anything by Sheridan himself.



2. It's enough to say that a major artist has met with a superb biographer and this happy marriage has produced a very moving and absorbing account of this great man's life. Thank you Mr O' Toole!



3. I was familiar with Sheridan from his theatrical comedies, plays that have become standard in the repertoire. I was dimly aware of his service in Parliament. I wasn't aware of his extensive involvement in the great political questions of the day, particularly the Irish questions, nor of his centrality in the great debates of the late 18th century--the American war for independence, the expanding power of the East India Company, and many others.

   The book covers all of this, but what elevates this bio from the typical is the author's focus on Sheridan's rhetoric--his use of language. The richness of wordplay, situation, and satire in his plays turns out to be just a special case of a characteristic lifestyle of thought and interaction. It's just splendid to read this sort of thing from an intelligent writer. The book gets you thinking, and there are points at which you may challenge the author's conclusions, but you're not going to find many biographies of this depth, thoroughness, and thoughtfulness. A great read!




4. Sheridan (1751-1816) is best known for a few plays, superficially comedies of manners and morals, mainly The Rivals and The School for Scandal. O'Toole's work explores beneath the surface of these and other literary works, showing them as the products of Sheridan's personal and political life.

   Widely praised in the English and American press, this biography portrays Sheridan as a passionate (and compassionate) politician. He was a major player in a struggle for various complicated and sometimes seemingly contradictory causes and parliamentary power in the era of the American Revolution, King George III's intermittent madness, the French Revolution, and troubles in the British empire.

   Sheridan is shown to be a humanitarian, and, less convincingly, an Irish patriot in the guise of an English politician who happened to be Irish by birth at a time when Ireland was at times openly rebellious toward England. The family heritage in Ireland was actually Protestant, but tolerant of Catholicism to the point of having Jacobite tendencies, i.e. favoring the return of the Stuart monarchy that had ended with James II in the so-called Glorious Revolution of 1688. Sheridan's father, Thomas, was a man of the theatre, and also a scholar, concerned particularly with propriety in matters of language and spoken discourse. Richard was not his father's favorite and his mother, herself a writer, died while Richard was still a young boy.

   O'Toole's biography manages to relate the playwright's works to his family circumstances without indulging in psychological speculation. For example, the memorable character Mrs. Malaprop, in The Rivals, (immortalized by our word "malaprop" or "malapropism") is shown to be in part based on Thomas, who had pedantic tendencies. (Malaprops are best when they come from pretenders to perfection in language. An especially good one appeared a few years ago in The Smithsonian magazine when James J. Kilpatrick, a conservative political commentator and sometimes word policeman, referred to a mistake in diction as a "solipsism" instead of a "solecism".)

   The many portrayals of hypocrisy and venality in Sheridan's plays are well explained by reference to the politics and society of the period, but are timeless in their effectiveness. The book is most interesting in describing the realities of theatrical performances, whether the particulars are staging details, audience characteristics, or financial exigencies. But this is a political biography of a character whose political accomplishments and enlightened ideals outshine his well known literary works.

   Many of Sheridan's Irish contacts and English partisans in the intrigues within England in the years after 1789 were openly sympathetic to, or even allied with the French revolutionaries. Yet Sheridan was during this time a prominent member of the House of Commons and close to the Prince of Wales, later George IV. Some of his personal and political friends were tried as traitors during the peak of Sheridan's political prominence; he survived primarily because of his political acumen, eloquence, and insight.

   To the general reader, not well acquainted with the intricacies of English history, the work will nevertheless be interesting and convincing in portraying Sheridan as a politically adroit and ingenious man, even an Enlightenment figure. Sheridan's speeches and writings were well known to the American revolutionaries, and remained popular even after his death. He eloquently advocated religious toleration, freedom from colonial oppression, even feminism, and opposed slavery so effectively as to influence the young Frederick Douglass.

   Sheridan's personal flaws (he was a drunk and an adulterer), theatre life in London, political intrigues, the struggle for religious and political freedom in Ireland, and the impeachment trial of Warren Hastings for mismanagement of affairs in British colonial India, all well explained, make this book accessible and interesting. I offer three points of criticism.

   First, and most importantly, characters, terms, or events not known to the general reader or history reader, should be explained briefly. The English reader may know what a "rotten" borough was, and what a "pocket" borough was, in the days before parliamentary reform, but a sentence or two would explain this and give the reader a better understanding of the electoral politics involved.

   Second, an attempt at a definitive biography, published by a prestigious house such as Farar, should include illustrations. It is frustrating to read descriptions of presumably extant political cartoons of the day, some involving Sheridan's Drury Lane theatre, or major political figures, and not be able to see reproductions-surely the private collection or library would give permission. (In fact, the New York Review of Books included one cartoon in its review of this book.)

   Finally, O'Toole's prose is afflicted with some of the unfortunate mannerisms of academic style. He repeatedly uses the awkward, almost always disruptive "former...latter" construction, and equally often uses the term "context" when referring to real relationships or circumstances-the term should be reserved for relationships between words. These usages may be epidemic in doctoral dissertations or in the "scholarly" journals no one reads, but that does not excuse their appearance in a work like this-the author is the drama critic of the New York Daily News. In the age of word processing, surely an editor at Farar should have caught these irritating errors of style, possibly in preparation of the American edition. Then again, a careful editor might have noticed that at the end of the "Preface to the American Edition" the date is incorrectly listed as May 1988.

   If this clever and talented author had made his entertaining book more accessible, he would be open to the charge of "popularizing", anathema in academic and some literary circles. But it is a measure of his success in eliciting the nature of Sheridan that one wishes he had done so. After all, the political and religious difficulties in Ireland persist, and one could as well look beyond the Emerald Isle and argue that we too live in an age of comparably flawed, but ultimately noble political actors and causes, in need of better understanding of their human qualities.

No comments about The Journals of George Eliot.