5 comments about Eminent Victorians: Florence Nightingale, General Gordon, Cardinal Manning, Dr. Arnold.

1. In 1918, the Victorian Era was the visitable past, but World War I had wrenched the British far from their former frame of mind. According to Michael Holroyd's concise, non-spoiling introduction to the Penguin edition of EMINENT LIVES, author Lytton Strachey belonged to the camp that largely held the Victorians responsible for delivering the younger generation to the horrors of that war. So it is that Strachey, one of the Bloomsbury crowd, felt free to break with the tradition of sober, deifying biography and produce critical profiles of icons of Victorian culture. He went looking for the humans behind the legends of Cardinal Manning, Florence Nightengale, Dr. Thomas Arnold and General Gordon . . . . and found them wanting.
   
   Strachey provides more than enough evidence that his four subjects were driven by ego, ambition and the certainty of moral superiority. Cardinal Manning's story reflects the 19th century religious debate as the Evangelists and Catholics battled for England's soul. Manning followed his mentor Dr. Newman and capitulated to Roman Catholicism, after which he rose to prominence in Rome, helping to ratify church dogma (especially, the infallibility of the Pope), all the while marginalizing his original mentor. Florence Nightengale's achievements are not in doubt, it is how she pushed them through, probably bringing her friend and colleague Sidney Herbert and cousin Arthur Clough to early deaths. The Victorians called her an angel, Strachey thought her a demon. Dr. Arnold was sentimentalized as the headmaster of Rugby in TOM BROWN'S SCHOOL DAYS, but in the long view, he squandered the opportunity to make real educational reform by limiting curriculum to morally instructive classical texts in their original languages. General Gordon brings up the rear, his own ambition and ego the perfect catalyst for igniting the proclivities of Gladstone's government by doing things his imperialistic way in the Sudan, causing untold casualties and getting himself executed (not to mentioned dismembered) in the process. In a way his ending speaks for Strachey's overarching theme: General Gordon, faced with the final rebel attack at his door, did not take the moment left to escape. He used it to change out of his dressing gown and into his proper dress whites.
   
   Strachey trolled public record, personal journals and letter and eye-witness accounts to elucidate his subjects, their thinking and the effect of such. True, he shapes the facts to fit his vision, but all the same, they are facts and rather telling. Sometimes the text is dense with historical detail, but mostly it flows. I found it to be not only a valuable perspective on the Victorian era and the mood of the world in 1918 but a cautionary tale about cultures creating their icons. It is irresistible, and frightening, to draw contemporary parallels.



2. It is difficult to imagine anyone actually reading nineteenth century biographies. If encountered today, say in dusty archives, these works commemorating the dead - typically two thick volumes of "ill-digested masses of material" - are notable for their tediousness, seeming lack of design, and "lamentable lack of selection".
   
   With this book, Eminent Victorians (1918), Lytton Strachey deliberately set out to revitalize biography. His subjects - Cardinal Manning, Florence Nightingale, Dr. Arnold, and General Gordon - were all legends in their time, archetypical Victorians. His incisive style, sense of drama, and subtle irreverence made Eminent Victorians an immediate success, and one that remains fascinating today. Florence Nightingale and perhaps General Gordon have retained some eminence, but Dr. Arnold and Cardinal Manning have faded into the background, at least from the perspective of American readers.
   
   In his introduction Strachey wrote: "That is what I have aimed at in this book - to lay bare the facts of some cases as I understand them, dispassionately, impartially, and without ulterior intentions." Be that as it may, readers will undoubtedly discern some passion, some partiality, and some unstated objectives. Regardless, Eminent Victorians is an enjoyable, entertaining, intellectual adventure that brings life to Victorian biography.
   
   Henry Edward Manning at age thirty-eight was a rising man in the Church of England. He had many powerful connections: he was the brother-in-law of Samuel Wilberforce, who had lately been made a bishop; he was close friend to Mr. Gladstone, who was a cabinet minister; and he was becoming well known in influential circles in London. Within two years Manning - later to become Cardinal Manning - resigned his position and was received into the Roman Catholic Church.
   
   The real Florence Nightingale, not the saintly, self-sacrificing, delicate maiden lady of popular legend, was, according to Strachey, more interesting, but also less agreeable too.
   
   Dr. Thomas Arnold acquired the position of headmastership of Rugby School in August, 1828, and subsequently changed the face of Public School life.
   
   General Gordon is remembered for his death at Khartoum. Strachey's controversial account is great biography. (In the 1966 movie Khartoum, Charlton Heston played the role of General 'Chinese' Gordon.)



3. I just don't see that Strachey made Florence Nightingale and General Gordon look as foolish as he made Cardinal Manning and Thomas Arnold appear in "Eminent Victorians". I suppose that impression comes from having been brought up reading 20th century 'warts-and-all' biographies rather than the 'if-you-can't-say-something-nice-don't-say-it-at-all' biographies of the 19th century. Although Strachey made Manning and especially Arnold seem pretty icky, Nightingale and Gordon come through as pretty admirable human beings -- not perfect (i.e. human) but on the whole admirable.



4. Some of Lytton Strachey's choices of subject for the four scathing biographical essays contained in _Eminent Victorians_ may seem rather strange. Florence Nightingale was an obvious choice for any biographer, but who cared about Matthew Arnold in the post-war era when Strachey was writing these essays? Who gave a thought to Cardinal Manning or Chinese Gordon? And why combine their biographies into one book?
   
   The answer may be that all four shared one unusual character trait, one so reminiscent of the Victorian age that even the thought of it brings the scent of lavender to mind: extreme earnestness. Each figure cared very, very deeply about something, but for each that earnestness also masked a corresponding personal craving. Like many young Britons in the post-WWI era, Strachey was deeply distrustful of earnestness, often seeing it as an excuse for personal gain or fulfillment. This was especially true when one man's deeply held beliefs sent others to their deaths, as it often had during WWI. He had no time for official incompetence, ignorance, or inaction, but often found the opposite just as dangerous.
   
   The first essay in _Eminent Victorians_ is that of Cardinal Manning. Manning was a priest in the Church of England who became involved in the Oxford Movement, a group of churchmen who disliked the increasing secularization of the C of E and who wished to bring it back to its Catholic roots. Most of those involved remained in the Anglican communion, forming the nucleus of the "High Church" movement of the late 19th century. Manning found that he could not stop at that, though; unable to reconcile his belief in a Church Universal with his membership in a church that existed basically because Henry VIII was a serial adulterer, and unable to 'take back' the text of a tract he had written that was deeply critical of the Anglican church and which eliminated any chances of his gaining higher office, Manning found himself eventually in the arms of Rome. Strachey paints Manning as a weak, vacillating, impulsive man of great ambition whose conversion to Roman Catholicism was as much a political and career move as one of the heart and soul. Had Manning remained in the Church of England, Strachey implies, he would have been an archdeacon until death; only conversion to Roman Catholicism allowed him to fulfil his ambitions towards higher office. It's a masterful biography, one that explores not just its purported subject but also the birth of Anglo-Catholicism.
   
   The third essay, of Rugby school headmaster Matthew Arnold, reveals Strachey's hatred of the English public school system (or what we in North America would call the private school system). He skewers Arnold for failing to make the educational reforms he was hired to make and for delegating the discipline of younger students to the senior class, thereby condoning and even encouraging the type of severe bullying that caused many young men to consider suicide. Arnold, whose earnestness in creating 'Christian gentlemen' did not go so far as to allow him to teach them himself, refused to update the school curriculum ostensibly because gentlemen didn't need science, maths, or English literature, but really (as Strachey contends) because Arnold had studied Latin and Greek himself and didn't want to feel his own learning was unnecessary. Strachey points out that Arnold did little at Rugby except pronounce the Sunday sermon, intimidate students, and foster a personality cult that eventually made him the father of modern education in many Britons' eyes - even though he made no changes to the educational system itself. His reforms in discipline and in religion (and his lack of reforms in curriculum) were copied by most public schools, to the great detriment of the British people.
   
   In Strachey's essay on General Gordon, Strachey shows how a brave man with a strong belief in the rightness of his cause and an overwhelming desire for adventure may have been used to precipitate a war and to advance the cause of imperialism. Gordon, a war veteran and former colonial administrator (and a rather unstable fellow), was sent to the Sudan during a revolt to report on conditions there and to evacuate civilians who were loyal to Egypt, which was then controlled by the British. Gordon did none of the above; he instead tried to wipe out the insurrection, and for his troubles was killed and his staff and allies massacred. His death was used by the imperialist factions in the ruling party as a call to arms. Strachey wonders: was this deliberate? Was Gordon given alternate instructions by the imperialists? Did they intend for him to die, so that his death could be used as a rallying point for further imperialism? He argues his point well, and the essay is definitely worth reading.
   
   Strachey's portrait of Florence Nightingale is not quite as successful as the rest. Nightingale was born into a wealthy family, and like all young women of her class and time was expected to marry young, have children, and generally be nothing more than a society lady. Florence wanted more: she wanted to work, to make a difference, to change the world, and she wanted everybody around her to work as hard as she did. After many years of waiting, she finally had her chance; her efforts to reform British military hospitals and eventually the practice of medicine in the Empire did in fact change the world. Strachey seems to have thought that she pushed her colleagues too hard, that her own drive was so abnormal that her friends and family could not keep up. Granted, she did push some of her colleagues very hard, and one may have even died from overwork, but they chose to work with her because they believed in her, and given what she was able to do I think they were right to believe in her. It also appears that Strachey may not have been comfortable with a woman refusing to hide her intelligence or personal strength when dealing with men. I had the distinct impression while reading this essay that Strachey was sneering at those men who took orders from Nightingale or who assisted her in her work. Another reviewer mentioned that Nightingale is portrayed here as a 'pushy woman' - and she certainly is; however, most of Strachey's implied criticism seems to be directed towards the men who treated her as the intelligent, hard-working, valuable human being she was. Strachey also seems to have viewed her invalid status as something of a neurotic problem, which in the light of recent research (showing that she likely had undulant fever) may not be accurate.



5. Lytton Strachey gives us a revealing look at four prominent Victorian personalities: Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, Florence Nightingale, Dr. Thomas Arnold, and General Charles George Gordon. Personally, I most enjoyed learning more about Florence Nightingale and General "Chinese" Gordon. Manning and Arnold are simply more steeped in their own times and have, perhaps, less to offer to modern readers.
   
   The section on Gordon is the best. It covers the end of his life at Khartoum in a much more interesting fashion than that portrayed by Charlton Heston in the movie. The modern problems in Darfur show that in many ways little has changed there in the last 120 years.
   
   Strachey's style is to get behind the events of his subjects' lives to delve into their psychological motivations, and he is often less than kind to them. He frequently punctures their balloons and exposes their foibles in a very entertaining way.

5 comments about The Georgian Princesses.

1. John Van der Kiste has written a book that is easy to read. He treats his subjects with sympathy whilst not being afraid to point out the less than endearing aspects of their characters.
   With so many of the Georgian princesses having the same name it is easy to lose track of who is who. Thankfully the author has included a useful family tree at the beginning of the book which helps you to follow the various family lines.
   The downside of this book is its brevity. The author has covered over 150 years of history in a mere 221 pages which means none of the characters are covered in any great depth.
   This is a good book with which to gain an overview of these women but if you want an in depth study of them then this may not be the book for you.



2. I really enjoyed this book and found it fascinating to read about so many women who in other books are often only referred to as "wife" or "daughter" of someone else. Finally, I got to learn about who these women really were!

   Some reviewers found the fact that so many women had the same names confusing. It is a bit, but we can hardly fault the author for that! He does use nicknames when that will help to differentiate. And, the family trees were invaluable in keeping everyone straight. I didn't find the names a drawback at all. But, anyone who reads about royal/noble families will be accustomed to this.




3. The Georgian Princesses describes the lives of many of the women of Britain's House of Hanover in the 18th and early 19th centuries. In their lifetimes these women were regarded as mere pawns on the European chessboard of alliances and power politics. They were married off to men they scarcely knew and who in many cases were extremely unpleasant companions and expected to make the best of it. Most of the time all we now know of these women are their names on various genealogical charts. John Van Der Kiste has resurrected these royal ladies and given them new life.

   Most of these women turn out to have had fairly sunny and mild dispositions. They were rarely given much education and had few inner resources to fall back on when their lives and marriages soured, as they so often did. Nevertheless they seem to have borne their lot with dignity most of the time, and sometimes they were able to find consolation in religion or in extramarital affairs. I felt the sorriest for Caroline Matilda, sister of George III and known as Denmark's "Queen of Tears" for the suffering she underwent at the hands of a schizophrenic husband. I liked George II's consort Caroline of Anspach and Electress Sophia of Hanover (the progenitress of the family) the best for their sharp intelligence and senses of humor.

   Because so many of these women have similar names it can be confusing separating the Sophia Dorotheas and the Sophia Charlottes from the Carolines and Louises, but the genealogical charts at the front help a lot. Also, I felt some of the women got short shrift and were barely mentioned at all. Nevertheless, Van Der Kiste has turned out a very satisfying volume.




4. I thought the author did a remarkable job of writing about so many princesses and queens. I didn't find it hard to read at all and for those who did the family tree was very clear, all you had to do was turn back a few pages.
   I was very impressed and delighted by the amount of information you recieved without making it dry. One of my favorite books.
   Definately buy this book because you'll never see other books on some of these Queens. When was the last time anyone saw a biography on Queen Adelaide?
   If you liked this book you should read Victoria's daughters to pick up where this one left off by Jerold M. Packard.



5. I somehow finished this book because I felt challenged but I couldn't tell you one fact about any person described in this book with certainty. True, their names were alike, but the author jumps from one Duchess, Countess, Princess, Queen in the same paragraph and you can't tell who he is talking about. There was certainly research done, and I applaud that, but I still don't know who was what, when, or where. There were at least 10 people mentioned on every page, half with the same names so you just have to laugh and do the best you can.

1 comments about Gloriana: The Portraits of Queen Elizabeth I.

1. I really liked this book! I enjoy reading about and researching the Tudors (by researching, I mean reading existing research). I have a book "All the Queen's Men: Elizabeth and her Courtiers" by Neville Williams. I loved the reproductions of paintings in that book, and so tracked down "Gloriana" to see and compare as many pictures of Elizabeth as I could. I must say the pictures are great, and plentiful. The text is well written too. It describes the art and explains the purpose of and evolution of the stylised portraits of Elizabeth. It's not the book's fault, but it was missing some things I hoped to find, as follows: few pictures of those close to Elizabeth (I shouldn't probably have expected this, but I like to look for family resemblances, and the looks of her suitors!); little text description of Elizabeth (based on the author's reseach, I hoped he'd tell us whether her eyes were blue or brown, how tall she was etc. Hard to tell from the art - the colors and proportions vary); and finally, some portraits that are described in the text are not illustrated. Not many, but I wanted to see more. That being said, you can't go wrong with this book if you want to study the portraits. I am very pleased to have this as part of my little Tudor library! (My copy is paperback, I have not seen the hardback.)

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.

No comments about Names and Stories: Emilia Dilke and Victorian Culture.

4 comments about The Queen's Slave Trader: John Hawkyns, Elizabeth I, and the Trafficking in Human Souls (P.S.).

1. I absorbed this read with great interest. The subject of slave-trading has been too painful for me to tackle it head-on but here I got into it because I am interested in Elizabethan personalities. The thing that shocks me in the book is how matter-of-fact the trading really was. This fact-based account puts the reader into the then-contemporary perspective of humans as just another commodity to be dealt for profit and a highly lucrative one at that. The rewards for successful trading were enough to turn the Queen, Elizabeth, into a profiteer. In fact, we see an Elizabeth in denial after she has waxed moral in her view of the abduction of Africans. She says they should be asked to volunteer. (Which is ridiculous on the face of it.) Of course, Hawkyns only saw the green light to GO. One cannot view Elizabeth in any ideal sense after this: there is no Gloriana or Astraea in this book. The business of the Queen is business; Queen and country are one.
   
   There isn't much of a biography of Hawkyns in the book. At least, insofar as a biography fleshes out the nuance of the character. What we get is a very competent individual who is able to make both military and financial decisions in quicktime. The depth of the book is focused on the ambivalence of Hawkyns in matters of religion. This is, in my opinion, is what places the story into it's deeper historical context. The English, as other Europeans, who were destined to fight bloody civil wars in the next century, were obsessed with the outer manifestations of Christianity (ritual, plastic images, etc. or not) and had lost any real sense of Christian teachings. In this book, we lose any ability to condemn Hawkyns as an individual; we are overwhelmed by the brutality of the times. I think the author, Nick Hazlewood has done quite a good job here.



2. Attempts to analyze the historical sociology of capitalism and slavery too often deal in abstractions. And the morality of power politics, and economic globalization, as with Marx, tends to be sublimated into the account by value-free laws of history, etc,... All well and good, but. This account of a one vignette of the early gestation of the Atlantic slave trade, in England, speaks more eloquently by its plain account of actual people, at the moment of the crystallization of a dreadful circumstance. Significant is the detail of Queen Elizabeth, quoted early on as denouncing the traffic in human beings, succumbing to royal patronage once the immense profits possible became clear. While one can practically hear the ghost of Marx snorting with contempt, the plain fact of the matter is that there is an ethical history possible, and there was nothing inevitable in the way slavery, almost extinct in Europe, made a comeback in the early modern period. It is not utopian, as this portrait makes clear, to consider that politicians, instead of being untrustworthyfrom the word go, might actually not succumb to terrible temptations and enter in league with poor devils like the Hawkins portrayed here, basically a capitalist thug, soon a courtier. The portrait of John Hawkins gives a fine-grain series of images of one of the great and classic failures of economic globalization, and the terrible legacy and bitterness that it led to.



3. Nick Hazlewood has written an engrossing book that gives us a rare and in-depth look into the opening salvos of the English slave trade through the voyages of Sir John Hawkyns (also spelled John Hawkins), the first English trader. Hazlewood supplies a brief biography of the Elizabethan mariner but focuses on Hawkyns' three major slave-trading voyages starting from 1562, from his departure from England to his actual acquisition of slaves in West Africa, through to his transactions in the New World and return to England.
   
   This book is a must-have for those interested in the early Age of Exploration and the nature of early trans-Atlantic commerce, but it is of far greater significance and value for a general audience since it provides a rare glimpse into the little-known details of the wretched commerce in human beings that took place as the Americas were being settled. Treatments of the African slave trade often leave a reader wondering about the mindset and nature of the participants who were profiting from it, and Hazlewood provides us with a "you are there" feeling. He has clearly done his homework here, consulting primary literature in both English and Spanish archives to reconstruct the means by which Hawkyns acquired his slaves in West Africa, the "currency" exchanges which took place to seal the deal, the wretched and horrendous conditions on the slaving ships, and the nature of Hawkyns' eventual transactions in the Caribbean and Spanish outposts in America. What emerges is that Hawkyns was a remarkably shrewd and ruthless businessman, able to secure such an extraordinary profit margin from his deals that even Queen Elizabeth I-- initially opposed to the human commerce-- became a crucial investor in Hawkyns' slave-trading schemes, providing ships and resources for raising his crews and launching further voyages.
   
   Hazlewood also casts Hawkyns' commerce within the broader context of 16th-century European seafaring, demonstrating how Hawkyns' actions-- viewed as smuggling by Spanish authorities-- in many ways constituted the root of the conflict that would flare between the Spaniards and English (leading to the Spanish Armada attack and a 16-year war between the two countries) later in the century. The reader is treated to an in-depth look at Hawkyns' fateful third voyage in 1567, in which his ships were attacked by a Spanish squadron off Veracruz. Hazlewood provides perhaps the best description in any recent book of the clash at Veracruz and its aftermath, both for Hawkins and his unfortunate crew members who were seized by the Spaniards. The book does drag somewhat in its later chapters but is not at all a chore to read, and Hazlewood's evocative style ensures that readers have a concrete tableau of the events that were transpiring, rather than merely an abstract depiction of them.
   
   For what would become the United States as well as for Britain, the trans-Atlantic slave trade was integral to their history. Indeed, Americans are well aware of the brutal consequences of slavery from the Civil War in the 1860s, yet are often much less aware of the background to that "curious institution." Hazlewood details these often obscure origins with both accuracy and a highly readable presentation. The reader emerges from the book with a sense of the Hobbesian mentality and conditions that dominated seafaring in the 1500s, and a better sense of the psychology that enabled so many to allow themselves to partake in the bloody business of human enslavement and trans-Atlantic trafficking. Hawkyns is shown in all his complexity as a ruthless merchant and as an inspiring leader of his crews, who braved on-ship conditions and hostile oceans that would make most of us cringe barely minutes away from the dock. Hazlewood's book is an excellent complement to Harry Kelsey's book on John Hawkins-- which covers similar territory-- and to Hugh Thomas's general history of the slave trade. It's a must-have for historians, for teachers and school libraries (at many levels), and for those who want to learn about the often-obscure history of slavery and of the fascinating details of 16th-century Atlantic exploration and maritime commerce.



4. First, the good: Nick Hazlewood gives us a thoroughly researched book about an interesting character from English history, the seafarer/pirate John Hawkyns. I was constantly amazed at the in-depth information that Hazlewood was able to provide, even going so far as to relate many of Queen Elizabeth's conversations with or about John Hawkyns to the reader. We also get the words of Philip II, the Spanish king, and his ambassadors in London. We even get the gist of John Hawkyns' conversations with all the dignitaries he dealt with in the new world as he sold his horrific cargo. All in all, we get a fairly complete picture of Hawkyns the brute, the opportunist, and Hawkyns the leader of men. It is an interesting portrait.
   
   And now the bad: John Hawkyn's adventures in New Guinea and the New World aren't really enough to fill a book from cover to cover with enough drama or information to keep the reader enthralled. Hawkyns makes three missions to the New World to sell slaves, and each time he visits the same places, and employs the same tactics. By the third trip, I was reading out of obligation rather than excitement. And of couse, the drama of his defense against the Spanish Armada falls outside the scope of this book, though there is an attempt to tie it to an earlier conflict that occurred at the end of Hawkyns' slaving career. What I missed most was a sense of history throughout the course of the book. Oftentimes events were merely relayed in sequential, if wonderfully thorough, order, but an analysis of these events place or influence on world history were saved for the final chapter of the book.
   
   All in all, an OK read if you enjoy Elizabethan or Age of Sail histories, but not enough to recommend it to the general readership.

No comments about David Livingstone (Pocket Biographies).

2 comments about An Only Child (Irish Studies).

1. Like Frank, I grew up Catholic, so I greatly enjoyed his account of his childhood and the deftness at which he relayed the characters and situations of his life in early 20th century Northern Ireland. The account of his father's alcoholism and mother's strength in her modesty evokes powerful sentiments that O'Connor is amazingly skilled at.
   
   He overly criticizes the adolescent ideations and development out of his youth (bildungsroman), but it gives insight to his development as a writer (kunstlerroman), of which he is a candid and lucid artist.
   
   I felt the novel creeping a bit in the middle (otherwise I would give it 4 or 5 stars), and the transition is a bit murky to his engaging recount of actions against the British occupation of Northern Ireland and surrounding religious strife. The ridiculous skirmishes and characters are painted with his masterful brush, however, and truly bring the era to life.
   
   It is a story worth the read to the end on many levels.



2. O'Connor is rightly famous mostly for his short stories, but his criticism - both The Lonely Voice and A Mirror In the Roadway - along with this volume of his memoirs, well, they're all just really good. I found this book in a library many years ago and there are a hundred scenes that still spring instantly to life, and sentences that are always going to be part of how I look at the world. He betrays his greatest talent in the fact that the book reads like a collection of wonderful chapters rather than a coherent whole, but each is filled with the spirit of a generous, funny, humane man, one of those rare authors that you wish you could hang out with. The people that assure that books keep getting read seem to be forgetting about O'Connor a little, but the pages they keep alive rarely seem to stay in the blood and brain like his do.

5 comments about Charles: Victim or Villain.

1. This is a run down on Prince Charles' behavior. A single guy(and a future king) cheats with his friend's(Andrew Parker-Bowles) wife(Camilla); then continues to cheat with this same married woman while engaged to Lady Diana.
   Then takes gifts to his married lover against the wishes of Lady Diana. On his honeymoon, tokens of his continuing love affair shows up in Camilla photos falling from his diary and cuff-links(two C's connecting).
   The new Princess of Wales is rightfully hurt and confused.
   This behavior of Charles hardly gets the marriage off to a good start.
   Throughout the marriage, Diana is witness to numerous occasions where Charles(through actions or words) declares his never-ending love for a married woman and continues with his adultery.
   Charles and Camilla showed as much disregard for Andrew Parker-Bowles' feelings as they did for Diana.
   What is especially upsetting is that rather than publicly admit he was a heartless, cheating man, Charles continued to portray himself as a loving husband to Diana and a respectable man who would one day be crowned king. He was willing to let his subjects believe he was an honorable man.
   Not only is the future king a cad, he is a liar as well!
   Besides there is NO evidence showing Diana as metally ill, un-balanced or anything before her association with Charles. As for her tantrums, I would site inmaturity and sheer frustration as the reasons for her outbursts.
   Diana was a normal, sane, healthy young woman prior to her engagement. Her bulminia did not start until after she moved to Buckingham Palace and she realized she was a Lamb to the Slaughter. It was then she realized her future husband did not love her and was very much committing adultery with a married woman. Adultery was something that Charles would continue to practice throughout their marriage.
   What is equally the mark of a cad, is Charles even cheated on his mistress!
   To write a book that basically white-washes Charles' moraless antics, is a disgrace and an insult to everyone's itelligence.
   He is a Villain if I ever saw one!!!!!



2. This book is very pro-Charles which was to be expected. After all, both author and Charles are still alive. Diana can't fight back. And who knows what the truth is anyway?

   There isn't anything really new in this book except details about how news of Diana's death was received at Balmoral, actions of Charles and the Queen then, etc. There are conflicts with other accounts I've read. Was Diana's face damaged? Was an autopsy done in Paris? Other sources said her face was unmarked and body was not autopsied until it was returned to London. It is little details like this that make me wonder about rest of the book. What is the truth?

   I continue to be amazed at the influence the press has in England. Do they really have that much control over the Royal Family? Apparently they just make stuff up and everyone believes it. The Royals are so out of touch and isolated. I think they should just be left alone and out of the newspapers like they used to be.




3. I knew when I picked up this book that Ms Junor was always very anti-Princess Diana - even when she was alive she was very outspoken - and was obviously very pro - Prince Charles. I had hoped though that with the death of the Princess even this hardened lady would present a balanced view of both sides. Instead I was left with the distinct impression that she had swallowed the whole "poor Charlie " line. It takes two to make a marriage and two to destroy it. But her bitterness towards both the princess and the Queen were quite frankly astonishing - especially for someone who used to be editor of the Majesty magazine. This lady has more chips on her shoulder than a totem pole.

   I was horrified when Ms Junor decided she had the right to take on the role of amateur psychiatrist. That for me - was the end. I finished the book - but at the end of it all her superior attitude and downright condemnation of the Princess was appalling. I have no illusions that the Princess was not perfect. But she sold the princess as someone so calculating and evil that it does not equate with anything the rest of the world saw. I am not sure any of us thrown into that kind of limelight at the age of 19 would have coped any better - most of us would not. That does not excuse bad behavior. We all behave badly but most of us do not have "staff" to tittle tattle and exagerate our worst points.

   I enjoyed certain parts of the book and learned a lot more about Prince Charles - assuming that that part of the book is a true and detatched discription. However - having just read the introduction to another biography where the biographer states that it is easy to become self absorbed with the person they are writing about and to loose their sense of detatchment. I feel that Ms Junor did not achieve that.




4. Where does the author get her evidence? First that Diana was first to cheat, second she threatened Camilla Parker Bowles. The book seems to justify the fact that Charles was involved with Mrs. Parker Bowles from even before the marriage and that it was alright because Diana was scheming and nasty to him. It tries to create a spin on the royal marriage favoring Charles and his liaison with Camilla. This is the book to buy if you are ardently pro-Charles and agree that Diana was completely to blame for the breakup of the marriage.



5. This book is very interesting! The author is obviously a GREAT fan of Prince Charles! From interviews that I have seen with the author, I fully expected a Diana-bashing book and I wasn't far from the mark! Just the mere fact that the Princess of Wales is not here to defend herself against these so-called "facts" of Ms. Junor's shows you what kind of diabolical mind the author has! Ms. Junor herself is making quite alot of money writing about the misfortunes of the Prince & Princess of Wales. I should hope that the proceeds for this book would go directly to royal charities and those who are TRUE victims all around the world! Surely Ms. Junor would not want to line her own pockets with this scathing book - or would she? Think on, Ms. Junor!

No comments about 'A More Beautiful City': Robert Hooke and the Rebuilding of London After the Great Fire.