No comments about The Real Oliver Twist: Robert Blincoe: A life that Illuminates a Violent Age.

1 comments about David Roberts: Travels in Egypt & the Holy Land.

1. This is not nearly as nice as another David Robert's book, Egypt: Yesterday and Today, but the images are just as beautiful, even in their reduced size. His work is truly amazing and after traveling in Egypt you really appreciate his vision of the past.

2 comments about Edward VI (Yale English Monarchs) (The English Monarchs Series).

1. This book represents a comprehensive and conclusive study of an important Tudor figure. An academic study of a less well-known English monarch, this book is a fitting epitaph to a leading historian of our time.



2. Very well-researched, with a wealth of primary source material (perhaps too much!), this book is quite academic and dry. Rather than a traditional biography, the book is more a study of various aspects of the reign of Edward VI (e.g. policies on religion, economics, land use, etc.) first under the leadership of Edward Seymour, Duke of Somerset, and later, John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland. I did not feel that I really learned anything about these three figures as people. "Fans" of Tudor history, having read a biography or two of Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, are likely to be disappointed in this book. It is much more geared to the historian with a serious, even professional, interest in the period.

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.

5 comments about Ringo Starr (Beatles).

1. Reading this was like running down to the cellar to change a fuse in your bare feet during a thunder and lightening storm, with the floor covered in broken glass and thumbtacks.
   
   If you buy this book, buy a dictionary along with it. This author took a simple and easy read subject and turned it into pain-filled bother. The information, I think, is there. You'll need to crawl up sharp rocks on the hottest day of the year with no water, to get to it though.



2. It seems this book was written for the author to show off how many big (and useless) words are in his vocabulary. Although it is filled with some good and valuable information you can't read more than a few pages at a sitting because of the writing style. If you took all of the useless words out the book would be about 75 pages.



3. This book was much harder to read than I expected. The author is British and expects that his readers are all British. Unless you have an intimate knowledge of England, its television shows, its local celebrities and its slang, it is easy to get lost. As an American, I found myself unable to follow a good deal of the book. I understood enough to get the gist, but feel I missed an awful lot of the information because it may as well have been written in a foreign language.



4. As an inveterate Beatles fan, I was naturally drawn to this book. Clayson does an admirable job of following Ringo from his early days in the rough Dingle section of Liverpool to his years as a Beatle and beyond.

   Clayson's use of quoted interviews with people who knew and worked with Ringo is what makes this book so effective. I like the way he portrays Ringo as approachable, as somewhat humble about his stellar success as one quarter of the world's number one band. This is definitely worth reading.




5. Its like this, until there is a better book on Ringo, (the most well known Drummer in the 1960s, and probably R&R) this is the one. And Clayson does it with lots of quotes from Ringo and people who worked with him and knew him. Because Ringo really doesnt want a book written about him, with him getting totaly involved that is. So, if someone wants to write a book about him, I guess he says, "Go ahead, But no interviews" So some of it is Clayson's research, and lot's of quotes as I mentioned.You will learn about Ringo, you'll see a side of him that you may have never read. Is it a great book? not in the true sense, "great", is it a pretty good book? yes. Why not great? well, one reason, because there's no pictures. It makes up for that with things I never knew or heard in other Beatle books.This book is actually more like 3-4 stars, but it does get your attention at times, so I gave it 4. Is this all about the Beatles and Beatlemania? yes and no, its mainly about Ringo. That is after all what your looking for, and you hear his side of the Beatles through quotes, and quotes from some other people, too numerous to mention, put it this way, lots and lots of people. e.g. His ex-wife, other drummers sometimes, George Martin, the other Beatles of course, and many more.Sometimes the book drifts, but not too far. He talks about Pete Best, and Jimmy Nicol, but not too much, just enough probably. And mentions some things about them that you may not have heard.In this book Clayson gives us some quotes picked from various interviews (mainly from 60s-70s) so you can get Ringo's candid opinion's about his Drums, and other Drums, and Ringo's opinion's about a famous drummer or two, Such as Buddy Rich.
   Also we find out what Ringo usually did after tours,
   opinions about his children, his money, the Beatles, how he drank in the early days, and how he stopped, and much more.Is it a fun book with lists, etc.? sort of, at times, but no lists perse. Does it have some info you probably never knew? (sure you've heard some of it before) yes.The index is pretty good too, most Beatle books need an index.Learn some stuff not read often about The worlds famous Rock Drummer.Buy it and Enjoy.

1 comments about Edward, Prince of Wales and Aquitaine: A Biography of the Black Prince.

1. If you're looking for an upbeat, easy-to-read history of Prince Edward, look elsewhere. This is definitely NOT the book for you.
   
   If you are looking for a book that details the life of a great leader, and digs deeply into the machinations behind the events of his times, this is definitely the book to get.
   
   So, point of the review: Armchair historians beware! This is a deep, quite dry history of the Black Prince.

No comments about Algernon Sidney and the English Republic 1623-1677 (Cambridge Studies in Early Modern British History).

2 comments about Oscar Wilde's Last Stand.

1. There are a number of ways to count the trials of Oscar Wilde, but what's becoming widely known as the "fourth" Oscar Wilde trial is a fascinating incident which occurred after his death. It is certainly must reading for anyone wanting to be acquainted with the Wilde story; especially if you're American. Maud Allen, the Canadian-American who brought about the libel action which initiated the trial, is familar to Canadians and some Americans since Felix Cherniavsky's 1991 book "The Salome Dancer" was published and mentioned this incident. And now Philip Hoare, a Briton, provides us with a fuller treatment of the trial's flow. Hoare's book is nicely written and has some stunning photographs of Maud Allan performing on stage. My only criticism is that Mr. Hoare says Ms. Allan's opponent, Noel Pemberton Billing, was "Mosley Before His Time." He refers to Sir Oswald Mosley, a later leader of the British fascists. If Mr. Hoare really knew his fascists, rather than his sterotypes, he would know that Mosley affiliated with the left wing tradition as a moderate member of parliment. Mosley continued to advocate those economic remedies as a fascist, continued his interest and associations with Britains's cultural vanguard, and was remarkably tolerant about homosexuals. In fact, it's no secret that Mosley's son by a first marriage, Nicolas, was homosexual, and to that son Mosley left the papers detailing his long, extraordinary, and tragic career. Today Nickolas is a prominent and respected liberal novelist, and his books about his father, Rules of the Game and Beyond the Pale, indicate that respect was mutual.



2. This is how history should be written: exhaustively researched, well organized, good command of the language. This book goes way beyond what the title promises, giving us an encompassing social history of the "upper classes" of Britain from 1900 to 1918. Many surprises here, all of them believable. The only request: to give us, in an appendix, a more thorough vitae of the players.

5 comments about Jane Austen's World: The Life and Times of England's Most Popular Author.

1. This is an enjoyable flip-through for Jane Austen and Regency lovers, but because the format limits the length of any entry, it is a rather abbreviated overview without a lot of depth. Many of the entries had me yearning for more information, especially those items about social mores, society, relationships within the family, etc.



2. These days many books come along that discuss specific influences on Jane's writing such as poets, other authors, politics and social customs. This book allows a return to the overview of her story. The hard cover book is 8 x 11 in. which makes it easy to be a coffee table presentation or to read in a comfortable upright chair or even in bed (Yes, I do it!) Six well written chapters choronical her life, who she was, what it was like to live in Regency England, the society and spirit of her times, what her country was like, and her influence through the ages especially via her six novels and in the recent movies and television productions. For the old timers who have followed Jane Austen for some time or for the new comers wanting to know more, this is the book for you.



3. This is a really great book. I'm a fan of Jane Austen and have read all her novels but there were many things in them that I didn't understand because I didn't know the culture, customs and history of that time. Just one small example--Mr. Darcy hands his letter to Elizabeth Bennett instead of mailing it. Apparently unmarried men and women did not correspond with each other unless they were relatives or engaged to be married. Another example--balls and dances were a primary way for unmarried people to meet and socialize and one of the few ways they could talk alone to each other (while on the dance floor). So the balls/dances in Jane Austen's books are much more significant than I realized.

   I would highly recommend this book for anyone who wants to understand Jane Austen's novels better.




4. This books is so informative! Easy to read, lots of information about the Georgian and Regency Eras, very informative. It goes into depth about Jane Austen's time and her life. It talks about everything from the Army, to everyday life, to the madness of King George, fashion, etc.. So much info! If you're into history or Jane Austen, you'll like this book.



5. This books is so informative! Easy to read, lots of information about the Georgian and Regency Eras, very informative. It goes into depth about Jane Austen's time and her life. It talks about everything from the Army, to everyday life, to the madness of King George, fashion, etc.. So much info! If you're into history or Jane Austen, you'll like this book.

2 comments about NELSON THE COMMANDER (Military Classics).

1. A simple title for a book, perhaps. On closer scrutiny, however, this title becomes all the more appropriate for a book which seeks to go beyond that which we thought we knew about this great hero and his many great victories.
   
   Geoffrey Bennett was a distinguished naval historian who also served for 35 years in the Royal Navy. As such, he brings an understanding of naval history and naval issues to this book in a way which is rarely achieved and, together, these attributes combine to create the most interesting read. In telling the reader about the "real" Nelson - faults and all, the author does not seek to remove this great hero of Trafalgar from his worthy pedestal. Instead, in this well written biography, he sets out to ensure that Nelson remains firmly where he belongs - as the man he was, rather than as the mythical legend in which light he is so often portrayed. In short, we have read about the legend, now we learn about the human being that was that legend.
   
   Although there are a few minor typographical errors on photograph captions, the selection of images is exactly right and adds much to the overall interest in the work.
   
   NM



2. This is one of the best biographies about Nelson ever written. The author's main goal of this book was to tell the story of Nelson the man rather than Nelson the legend. In this he succeeds admirably