No comments about The Mistresses of Charles II (History & Politics).

2 comments about Lloyd George: War Leader, 1916-1918 (Penguin Biography).

1. The nausea I felt on reading this book is no slight on the author; but rather it derives from my ambivalent attitude towards this contoversial historical figure. Gwynfor Evans, with reference to Lloyd George's oratry, once wrote that he could move people with his speech; but he himself was unmoved.
   At the beginning of his career David Lloyd George did indeed show promise. As a native Welsh speaker he pretended to champion the Welsh cause which he was soon to betray for his own personal ambitions. Even though his native Welsh tongue was fast becoming a dying language, this did not disturb him and he made no effort to promote the use of Welsh; rather he delighted in using the little-known language merely to show off in front of others who could not understand. It is a sad legacy that during his era the number of Welsh speakers greatly diminished.
   Early in his career (while he was still of fighting age) Lloyd George saw it advantageous to oppose the Boer War. Later he became a fanatical supporter of the First World War and is thus responsible for the death of thousands of poor expendable young men (whom he had purported to represent). In the aftermath, his intransigance also resulted in the Irish tragedy; rather than solve the Irish problem, he fuelled it - with the barbaric black and tans and in securing the evil partition - with this legacy of partition, he is thus indirectly responsible for the hundreds of victims lost in the troubles in Northern Ireland.
   Lloyd George did introduce some limited token reform, e.g. a pittance for the old age pension etc. However, there could have been many more important social reforms if he had stood aside to let Kier Hardy's Labour Party take power (alas there is no longer a proper Labour Party in Britain today). Lloyd George also opposed the suffragettes - on the illogical grounds that some women, had they been allowed to vote, might have voted Tory, not Liberal. This showed his attitude towards women - that they should be just accessible sex objects for his own gratification rather than people deserving respect who had a right to vote. Indeed, his private life, like his political life is marked by lies and betrayal. In addition to his 'official mistress', he also behaved like a sexual pervert (and would have made even Clinton seem almost moral by contrast). No doubt, some readers will find my review offensive and give it a negative vote - that is their right. Yet what of the rights of the young men whom he sent to the front? Despite his ostentatious and well-publicised confrontaions with the inept military command during the 'Great' War, he did nothing substantial to remove incompetent generals like Haig (he knew that to do so would have had catastrophic consequences for his own personal political career); nor did he exert himself unduly in order to improve the lot of the men on the front. While Lloyd George will be inflated by fawning writers as 'the man who won the war', he does not deserve such fame when the real heroes lie forgotten under some common grave in France. All that posterity preserves from them is their names inscribed on a cenotaph which noone ever reads.
   P.S. For another view of the war as experienced by the men who were actually fighting (not hiding with a mistress or various promiscuous contacts in the comfort of a lounge) then see the next book which I have reviewed.



2. By December 1916, the British Empire found itself in its most dire situation yet; the war, which should have been short, lengthened; Casualties mounted, its allies wavered, and its leadership seemed questionable.
   
   Parliament, voting their disapproval of the conduct of the war, went to replace Herbert Henry Asquith. His replacement as head of the coalition government was the young secretary of War, the most charismatic of the Pre-War politicians - David Lloyd George.
   
   "Lloyd George: War Leader 1916-1918", is the forth and final volume of John Grigg's biography of the "Welsh Wizard". I've read the penultimate book (Lloyd George: From Peace to War 1912-1916), and felt it was a mixed bag - a story of a fascinating figure, but not particularly well told.
   
   This volume, published posthumously, is a marked improvement. The main reason is that as Prime Minister, Lloyd George's scope was wider. In reading about him now, we encounter not only his day to day struggles, but the vast arena of international relations during what Churchill called "The World Crisis". The Modern World was born, so to speak, in the trenches of the Great War, and we get a front seat view of the emergence of Communist Russia, the destruction of the Grand European Empires, the unraveling of the Middle East, and the rise of American Hegemony.
   
   Yet the books readability suffers from Grigg's insistence of inflicting on us every personal struggle, every routine appointment, every minor speech and any mundane maladiy of his hero. The blow by blow account of his Prime Ministry may conceivably be of interest for the Specialist; For the General reader, it is tiresome and somewhat incoherent.
   
   There several big questions about the Lloyd George Premiership: What was his role in the winning of the war? How much responsibility did he have for the ultimate collapse of the British Empire, and particularly for the loss of Ireland? And was he responsible for the (self?) destruction of the Liberal party?
   
   In addition, Lloyd George's private life is something of a wonder; He had lived in a de facto bigamous arrangement, sharing his life with his wife Margaret, and with his much younger secretary, Frances Stevenson. In his late life and after his death the "official" Lloyd George clan understandably resented and loathed Stevenson and her daughter from Lloyd George; But in war time, the relationship had been much more ambiguous. There are hints of a story that would put "Dallas" to shame, but Grigg avoids it.
   
   Indeed, Grigg only addresses the first of these issues: Lloyd George as a Prime Minister and War Leader. Although he probably would not have admitted it, Lloyd George emerges from his account as a remarkably un-remarkable premier. The energetic Minister of Munitions is all but gone; Instead, Lloyd George seemed to have replayed his role as secretary of War - a more or less figurehead, while the war is run by the Generals.
   
   As an "Easterner", the military strategy pursued by Britain in 1917 was almost the exact opposite of the one Lloyd George advocated. Although the British did conquer (Liberate?) Palestine by the end of the year, the massive effort was on a great, costly and futile offence on the Western Front - the 3rd Ypres, better known for its ultimate futile battle, Passchendaele.
   
   Not only did Lloyd George oppose the attack, he was supported in his opposition by his main coalition partner, Conservative MP Andrew Bonar Law, who doubled as Chancellor of the Ex-Chequer and member of the War Cabinet. But the offence was the Apple of the Douglas Haig's eye, and Haig, the Commander of Chief of the British Expeditionary Force, won the day.
   
   For better or worse, the great men (usually) who led their countries to through fierce wars took responsibility for the military situation. Lincoln and Churchill both sacked Generals left and right. But Lloyd George, in his own words, considered it "too great a responsibility [for the Civilian Leadership] to take the strategy of the war out if the hands of their military advisors" (p. 167). He felt unable to either sack Haig or outmaneuver him; Instead, Haig outmaneuvered the Prime Minister, sacrificing his underlings for his mistakes and remaining unscathed in Command throughout the war.
   
   Although Lloyd George's premiership was not without its triumphs (particularly the achievement, in 1918, of a semi-united command, something he had labored on from the beginning), the ultimate conclusion I got from the volume was that even though George's strategic sense was correct, his political acumen failed him in reasserting his vision. Lloyd George clearly contributed to Victory, but it was not, in the end, His Finest Hour.

1 comments about Mary of Scotland.

1. It is a beautifully romantic play about Queen Mary - the young ill-fated queen of France and Scotland. The playwright writes parts for woman as well as he does for the men. It's a wonderful role for any young talented actress who is interested in a period piece. Though Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth were cousins and fairly close in age, they never met in real life. However, Maxwell Anderson wrote a climatically potent scene between Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth near the end of his play. Although a period piece, you can identify with all the different characters and their complexities. There is no "small" role in this play. Each character has purpose and personality. The play is written in layers within layers and therefore may take a couple of reads to truly appreciate the beauty of it. Enjoy!

1 comments about Winston Churchill on Empire (Studies in statesmanship).

1. An intelligent and penetrating examination of Churchill's seldom studied views on empire and relations with the developing world. Delightfully written, it will appeal to the Churchilll specailist and casual reader alike.

No comments about Bolingbroke And His Times.

No comments about The New Curate.

No comments about The King In Exile: The Wanderings Of Charles II, From June 1646 To July 1654 (1905).

2 comments about From Winchester to This.

1. if you are a Henry Root fan this is enjoyable but quirky-as you would expect



2. William Donaldson is one of those writers (like say Iain Sinclair or Thomas Merton) who is incapable of writing a bad sentence. And this book is Willie pure - wonderfully funny and tragic at the same time.
   
   However, one warning: he always took pleasure in seeing what he could get away with. If you have already read his other books, this one will probably be quite a disappointment, as most of it appears in one form or another in either his "fiction", his "journalism" or his "comic books" (as always with Willie's work, the categories are loose).
   
   I'd go so far as to say it is almost entirely cut and paste. Amazing, really, that he didn't sue himself for breach of copyright.

No comments about Vårt folks historia.

1 comments about Charles Darwin: Evolution by Natural Selection (British Men of Science).

1. I was very lucky to find this little book in a used bookstore. Readers who can't get this book from Amazon.com may have to go to the library instead.

   Sir Gavin De Beer, an eminent embryologist at University College London, was also a Darwinian scholar of distinction. This book strikes a good balance between Darwin's life and Darwin's thought. Though this book is 40 years old, I don't think there is a better treatment of the subject in a book of comparable size. The biographies by Browne, and Desmond and Moore are mandatory of course but this little book has a unique place of its own.

   I end this review with Darwin's philosophy, expressed in some of the most fascinating lines from his personal Notebook and quoted in this book:

   "We can allow satellites, planets, suns, universe, nay whole system of universe to be governed by laws, but the smallest insect we wish to be created at once by special act, provided with its instincts, its place in nature, its range, etc."

   "Why is thought being a secretion of brain more wonderful than gravity a property of matter?"

   "Free will is to mind what chance is to matter; it is our arrogance, our admiration of ourselves."

   "Chance governs the descent of a farthing, free will determines our throwing it up."

   "It may be doubted whether a man intentionally can wag his finger from real caprice, it is chance which way it will be, but yet it is settled by reason."

   "A train of throught action &c. will arise from physical action on the brain."

   The amazing fact is that Darwin was writing when our knowledge of the brain and genetics was still sketchy. Darwin was a prophet of genius.