No comments about Nella Last's War: The Second World War Diaries of Housewife, 49.

5 comments about Churchill: A Life.

1. There are biographies and then there are biographies! This is one of those that belong on that lofty summit above those that try to ascend to such heights but fail miserably because they are either rather dull bios about rather dull people or the biographer is simply not up to the task. Martin Gilbert is most definitely up to the task and more.
   
   This is an abridgment of the eight-volume edition written by Winston Churchill's official biographer Sir Martin Gilbert. I was rather reluctant to buy it because it looked rather daunting being 959 pages long but wanting to know more about Sir Winston Churchill my curiosity finally got the better of me. Not only did this book reveal things about Sir Winston that I did and did not know but also the author's prose and vocabulary made this an absolute pleasure to read. I was very reluctant to finish this book simply because I wanted more to read. If you don't know much about Winston Churchill then this is the book to get. Even if you do know quite a bit about Sir Winston Churchill I'm sure you'll find a few things in here that you may not have known. If you are looking for bios that are well written, or any book that is, then this is one for you. Buy it and enjoy!



2. Even the most historically illiterate students are familiar with the role Winston Churchill played in the victory over Nazi Germany. Unfortunately, many students of history remain uninformed of the true breadth and scope of his life. This work, a condensation of Martin Gilbert's earlier two volume history, is an excellent antidote for such ignorance.
   
   It is no exaggeration to credit Winston Churchill for the survival of England in the years between the fall of France and the U.S. entry in the conflict with Germany and Japan. Such was the lingering horror of the events of World War I, that Churchill was virtually alone in fighting the appeasement policies of his own government which contributed to the early success of Nazi Germany.
   
   But, it should be noted that Winston Churchill was in his mid-60s when he became Prime Minister of a coalition government formed to prosecute the war with the Axis powers. He already had 40 years of parliamentary service under his belt, stints as First Lord of the Admiralty during World War I (where he presided over the disastrous Gallipoli campaign) and Chancellor of the Exchequer, service in the trenches of World War I as well as the Boer War and the Sudan campaign, time as both a war correspondent and published author.
   
   Despite this nearly unprecedented scope of accomplishments, were it not for the rise of Nazi Germany and Adolph Hitler, he would be virtually unknown outside the realm of British historians. For, as great protagonists and great events are required to bring out the greatness of our heroes (Grant needed Lee, Caesar, Pompeii), none is a better example of this than Winston Churchill.
   
   Were it not for Adolph Hitler, Churchill would have likely served out his later parliamentary years as little more than a back bench Conservative crank, labeled as a warmonger and kept on the fringes of party politics. Even in the months preceding the invasion of Poland, Churchill was kept outside of the Cabinet of his own party's government. He was never neatly pigeonholed in the existing English party system. It was only the formation of a coalition government that allowed his ascension to the Prime Ministership. As it was, the perfect combination of personalities and events allowed Churchill to achieve greatness on a historical scale. It is no accident that almost immediately following successful conclusion of the war, Churchill and the Conservative party were bounced from power by the Labour Party, only to be returned to face the Soviet Union in the early stages of the Cold War. Churchill was a "crisis" manager and ill suited for periods of peace and tranquility.
   
   As a man in his late 60s and early 70s, Churchill displayed an endurance and a level of accomplishments nearly unprecedented in human history. Consider that he likely logged more miles of travel (both in the air and on sea, during a time of great danger for each) and wrote and published more works of literature than nearly anyone else alive during a period when he was quite literally standing alone in what was almost a personal fight for the continued existence of the British Empire. The catalog of heart attacks and strokes suffered and recovered from are a source of absolute amazement
   
   Now, it is a common failing of many biographers to enhance the accomplishments and gloss over he failings of their subjects, and I doubt not that Gilbert has done so here. However, the historical record is quite clear and Churchill's life and accomplishments are well documented. His love of the grog is rarely mentioned, though it was obviously a personal vice which he passed on to his children. His relationship with his wife seems quite unusual, though perhaps not so in the context of Victorian and early 20th century upper class English society.
   
   Gilbert's writing style consists almost entirely of reference to and quotation from letters, diary entries and other correspondence to, from and about Churchill. While this would seem to create a work both choppy and halting, it is quite the opposite. Gilbert does a masterful job splicing these observations into historical events and produces a smoothly flowing and captivating narrative which should be required reading for any serious student of modern history.



3. If you are new to Churchill - this is the book to buy - its in paperback which is a drawback, however the skill Sir Martin has put into this compliation and chronology of his works on Churchill make this one to read, have and use for study.
   
   It has many quotes and not all from Churchill along with some amazing photos.



4. If you like Churchill and would like to know a on of info about him, more then just clever and witty quotes, then this is the book for you! Great book!!



5. An excellent biography of a most fantastic life. The book gives a very good outline of all major events in Churchill's life as an officer, a journalist, an author and above all: maybe the most important politician in Western Europe ever.
   
   Churchill's early years, at school and in wars in India, Cuba, Sudan and South Africa are well covered. His career as a Member of Parliament, as well as Cabinet positions up to WWI are also very interesting. Churchill had very modern reflections on the principles of welfare states in 1905, which caused him to leave the Conservatives for the Liberals.
   
   Churchill's finest hour is of course his early (from 1932) and consistent warning about German rearmament before WWII, and his leadership as British Prime Minister from 1940. The book's finest hour, in my opinion, is the last chapters. After the war, Churchill is 70 years old. His health is quite bad. He refuses to give in, and clings to power. From time to time, he decides to quit, but every time changes his mind. Just like the rest of us.
   
   The book has some serious flaws. Churchill made many mistakes during the interwar years, but Gilbert runs to his defence at every one. One example: Churchill took a major stance against Indian independence. According to Gilbert, this was because Churchill was concerned about the minorities of the sub-continent.
   
   Read and enjoy the book, as long as you are aware that Gilbert has done what many other biographers have done before him: fallen in love with his object.

5 comments about Eastern Approaches.

1. This is an exciting autobiography, which I have read and reread over the years. Of particular interest is the author's introduction into the SAS.
   
   This book will become a permanent fixture in your library.



2. Pre WWII, Maclean finagled trips through parts of the USSR where no westerner had previously been, even crossing into Afghanistan from the north at one point. He spent much of WWI aiding Marshal Tito's effort to drive the Germans out of the Balkans. Fascinating stuff, this, eloquently written and he's a damn good storyteller.



3. This book is of great historical value. The narration is witty and elegant. I would recomant it to everybody interested in European history.



4. This is a truly unique book and comparable only with Churchill's 'My Early Life' as an adventure history. Some people write adventure books, some people have adventures but Fitzroy McLean, like Churchill, or TE Lawrence, is able to do both. A rare treat and very easy to read.



5. Great entertaining read, although it is said to have inspired Ian Fleming to write James Bond, this story is worth a place on the silver screen.

5 comments about Virginia Woolf.

1. this is the best biography of Virginia Woolf to date. The book is broken into four parts based on four broad periods in VW's life: 1882 - 1904; 1904 -1919; 1919 - 1929; and 1929 - 1941. The chapters, however, are theme-based; for example, Chapter 15 is "Bloomsbury"; Chapter 19 is "War"; Chapter 24 is "Monk's House"; and Chapter 37 is "Fascism". This then serves as a wonderful reference book to go back to read about specific events (war) or themes ("Bloomsbury") without having to search through an index for disjointed entries. Of the four biographies I have read of VW (Quentin Bell's, Hermione Lee's, Julia Brigg's, and James King) I recommend this biography as the one to start. King, 1994, was willing to write more about her personal relationships (read, "sexual") and is a good follow-on.



2. Of the many literary biographies I've read, only Peter Ackroyd's "Dickens" seems to me as "definitive" as Ms. Lee's terrifically compelling book. One finishes it with the sense, however illusory (see Janet Malcolm's extraordinary "The Silent Woman" for a convincing argument that it must be), that the Virginia Woolf found in its pages is essentially identical to the actual woman who lived and wrote and died. Anyone with even a slight interest in her must consider this book essential reading. I found it a real page-turner throughout its considerable length despite being unconvinced of Woolf's literary eminence (except for her sparkling correspondence) and finding her character unattractive (i.e. snobbish, frigid, a false friend, etc.) even by the usual standard for writers.



3. Probably the best bio of Woolf we are likely to see for some time. Lee has succeeded brilliantly and gracefully in that most elusive and troublesome task of capturing the "spirit" of another human being and then conveying that without simplification or reduction. What is most moving is that Lee allows Woolf her complexity and contradictions, her courage and cowardice, her generosity and meaness, without indulging in a sort of inconoclastic glee in smashing received images of Woolf as victim or feminist icon (or any other of the several and various "Woolfs" to be found these days.) Lee's bio is a stunning feat of sympathetic imagination and rational scholarship which ranks with the other "best" bio of the last 20 years or so, Deirdre Bair's marvelous and beautiful "Simone de Beauvoir." I am grateful to both of these writers.



4. I am taking this book slowly and am nearing the end. It is terrific and I find, on the days I take off from reading it, that I miss Virginia Woolf and want to go back to the "place" that is her life. I thank Ms. Lee for giving me a closer intimacy with Virginia Woolf.



5. I enjoyed the book, but have a fairly detailed knowledge of Woolf & her contemporaries. I think a new reader of Woolf & her work might get lost in the maze of essentially unexplained personalties & their relationship to Woolf & her circle.

5 comments about Paul McCartney: Many Years From Now.

1. A unique approach of combining both Miles and McCartney's first person perspectives on the events and personalities of the Beatles and their era. Especially informative on the London scene of 1960 as well as the collaboration between McCartney and Lennon. While it has been criticized as being a bit parochial for Paul, it is after all, his side of things. After all, Paul is one of the main reasons that the logo on your Mac computer is based on



2. No doubt this was a great book, a great source of information on Paul, and a must for any true Beatlemaniac.
   The pluses of this book:
   --The author was close to Paul beginning in 1964. I think he provides the right balance to all the events, and since he was in the artistic and musical circles the Beatles and the Stones were in, he's able to put press hype into perspective. There were several sides of stories I'd never before heard or considered, but his version is the best.
   --The author had unlimited interview access to Paul, and to his archives. The text is full of long quotes by Paul, describing in detail his memories of songwriting, touring, fame, daily life, and anything else you could want to know about. In this way, the book sort of has a special place as the "official" Paul McCartney biography. It would not be unfair to say that Paul was the main writer and source of information, and Miles was the ghostwriter, and provider of context.
   
   The minuses:
   --Boring/unnecessary sections. Other reviewers complain that there were parts that were very boring and unnecessary. I enjoyed the whole book, but I definitely do know what they're talking about. One chapter, "Up the Smoke," seems to be mostly devoted to name-dropping all the famous people the Beatles hung out with when they were 21 and first got famous. Miles goes to a great length to describe the London celebrity scene pre-rock-n-roll. The book talks about all these old radio stars they met, all the restaurants and nightclubs they went to, all the special treatment they got as stars, and all the other great things about their new lifestyle, then ends up saying that a lot of these old stars got put out of business because of the Beatles.
   Similarly, the chapter "Avant Garde London" spends a long time going over people's lives who seemed very tangential. After reading all of it (and it's not the first Beatle book I've read), I still don't know exactly who people like Robert Fraser, Peter Brown, and John Dunbar were or why they were important, but I see their names everywhere.
   --In the great Paul/John debate, the book always rules in favor of Paul, but that could only be expected. I've come to the conclusion that there are no clear answers as to who wronged who when the Beatles broke up, and most of it was nobody's (within the Beatles anyway) fault. Paul has a platform to defend himself in this book, and actually does a very fair job. I think he's the best steward of John's memory, and the way he talks about John and their friendship is a credit to both of them. Both John and Paul come off looking good. As Paul says in the book, he's got no reason to tear John down in memory, and he wants to present things as they truly were. He's got one advantage no other biographer has, and that was actually being one half of the friendship. Paul defends John when necessary, and is conciliatory about some of John's attacks.
   
   I definitely recommend it. Goes over every song, gives lots of interesting stories, and a clear start-to-finish review of the Beatles' career.



3. I honestly enjoyed perhaps a good half of this book. The first few chapters, and the later sections on Paul's life in the Asher household, the making of the albums, and his romance with Linda, are quite good and fast-paced. However, there are also numerous long boring stretches, particularly most of the "Avant-Garde London" chapter. Mr. Miles isn't a professional writer or journalist, and it shows. He's a longtime close personal friend of Paul's, and it just comes across like he's way too close to be objective and analytical about his subject. He even writes himself in as a character on a fairly regular basis (esp. in "Avant-Garde London"), which ordinarily would be a hint the writer is way too close to the subject and story and a more neutral third party should be found. And at least half of the book seems to consist of huge block quotes from Paul (sometimes others), making it hard sometimes to tell when one quote ends and another begins, or when we've shifted back to the voice of the narrator. A good biographer is supposed to analyse and synthesise the information, challenge it when need be, and rewrite it in his or her own words, not merely present information.
   
   Apart from a number of typos and grammatical errors, there are a lot of factual errors too. Errors include attributing certain songs to the wrong albums, crediting them to the wrong vocalist, and leaving off songs entirely (e.g., George's two songs on YS are never even mentioned and we're told there were "only two new songs" on the album, instead of actually four). And when it comes time to discussing the individual songs, Paul can't stop intruding into songs which have long been established as having been written entirely or primarily by John to claim that he helped to write the song too, or that his minimal contribution was the most important contribution, taking credit for innovations and songs that rightly belong to John. So many times it seems like his underlying message is "Everything John did, I did better." And Mr. Miles never challenges any of this historical revisionism.
   
   The constant trashing on John, my own favorite Beatle, was really over the top, mean, and uncalled for. This constant unprofessional mean-spirited savaging of him doesn't square well with the frequent quotes from Paul about how they were very close friends and he loved John dearly! You don't need to put others down to build your subject up. And events that might cast aspersions on Mr. Miles's portrayal of Paul as an absolute prince are often left out. I almost wish the book had been written by Paul (as it is, at least half of it seems to be in his words), since he comes across as rather candid, honest, and open, like acknowledging that he could be very bossy, overbearing, controlling, and selfish in the studio, even when it really rankled his bandmates.
   
   Paul does seem like a really nice guy, and he was originally my favorite Beatle, but in this book he just comes across as childish, petty, insecure, and even a liar. That might not have been Mr. Miles's intention, but given his refusal to challenge anything Paul says, no matter that it's contradicted by every other source out there, it sure ends up that way. It's a shame, really, since in another biographer's hands this could have been a much better book, letting people know that Paul is a lot deeper, more interesting, and multi-faceted than his image would seem to suggest.



4. I probably can't improve on Amazon's editorial review on the first page of this site, because it says it all,but I will try anyway. This is the most revealing book I've ever read about any aspect of the Beatles, probably because it is told in Paul's own words, in that honest, matter of fact way that all four of them always had. And that's one of the reasons we love em. It really is more of an autobiography. There are three outstanding things about Many Years from Now. One is Paul's recollections about almost every Lennon McCartney song; who wrote what,and each writer's contribution. He even remembers where he was when he wrote each song,and he remembers smells and other people in the room,or what was happening in his life at the time. Very vivid memories. It's incredibly exciting to have this written down in a book that you can refer to any time. Also,his recollections match John's for every song except just two, In My Life and And I Love Her. That's amazing considering John did his song by song thing back in 1980, and Paul deliberately didn't look at it just to see if their memories matched, and they do. Speaking of John, the second wonderful thing about this book, is the facinating, personal info. that Paul brings to light about his best friend and song writing partner. It's obvious that Paul's feelings for John are deep and complicated and tied up with very strong emotion. He goes into a lot of detail about this. I don't understand some reviewers' remarks that Paul is somehow petty because he claims to have written the music to In My Life. Why is this so difficult to believe? Are some people so enamored by John Lennon that they can't imagine that he might have made a mistake? And why do they seem to think that Paul is the one who's lying here? Paul's been saying that he wrote the melody since John's 1980 interview came out. Why would he keep saying it if he didn't feel it was the truth? All through the 70's John was given to mood swings about Paul. Sometimes he loved him and sometimes he said the most outragiously rude things about him. Also, not for anything but how many acid trips did John take in the 60's? Not to mention his heroin use. Can't be so good for the memory. They are actually believing every word that this man says instead of someone who took only a few acid trips and never used heroin. John's feelings often changed with the wind. How could people have missed that? Anyway the third lovely thing about this book is Paul's candidness about everything. For instance, he talks about how he once became sexually aroused at the sight of his mother in her underwear. One reviewer was discusted by this but wait a minute. How many guys would ever admit something like that? Anyone who's read the Kinsey Report about human sexuality will know that there is nothing abnormal about this. But no one would ever admit it. To say the least there was certainly an oedipal thing on Paul's part,concerning his mom. This book is filled with no holds barred,honest stuff like this, and I found it refreshing. No one can ever again, say that Paul holds anything back. He also speaks very candidly about his drug use,revealing a few startling surprises. There is a section about the recording of each album which was wonderful. He talks about his early relationship with Linda,which I enjoyed. What I didn't like is that he dismisses two very important ladies, Dot Rhone and Jane Asher. I guess he has his reasons but I would have liked to see his candidness about these two for a change. I think it is because he didn't want to trespass on their privacy and also, Linda was pretty jealous especially about Jane. This book covers only his youth and the Beatle years, so Wings fans won't find anything here. He also tells the facinating story about his near nervous breakdown after the Beatles break up. The first time I read this book was when it first came out and I was really bowled over by it. At the time I didn't know much about McCartney. What an eye opener. I read it the second time just recently, and I had the same reaction. So I bought it. I will read it again because I love it and want it in my collection. If you only read one McCartney book it should be this one, but there are others that I recommend if you are so inclined: Paul McCartney the Definitive Biography by Chris Salwicz is very good. And of course the Anthology book, and Hunter Davies' authorised biography. Also Ray Coleman's Paul McCartney Yesterday and Today about Paul's music, mainly Yesterday. Even McCartney, the new one by Chris Sandford is not bad, but it is the weakest of the ones mentioned here.But this book, Many Years From Now is the BEST McCartney book, bar none. It is essential reading for not only Paul fans, but Beatle scholars as well. Even casual fans will enjoy it.



5. I really like this book. Especially the parts about the songwriting. Being a musician and songwriter myself, I've always have been interested in who wrote what within the team of Lennon/McCartney. For two guys to have agreed to put their names on whatever the other one wrote is a testimant to how they felt about each other's abilities. Of course, setting the record straight kind of dispells the original perception of the Beatles. During their time together, the Beatles made it look so easy and were so coy about it all. Years later, going into detail and saying who did what is informative and interesting but it does open up the possibility that someone is going to be critical about it. Especially, since the person doing it is Paul and his partner, the great John Lennon, is long dead. However, anyone who can give their partner full wrting credit for songs of the calibre of "Hard Day's Night", "Help", "I'm a Loser" or "Nowhere Man" just might be a fairminded person. Beatle records still sound great today-even cutting edge- and that's why the world is still interested in the Beatles. The kind of explosive creativity that was the Beatles invites investigation and I'm glad to be able to get Paul's take on things.

1 comments about Charlotte & Leopold: The True Story of The Original People's Princess.

1. James Chambers has selected, from the British monarchy's treasury of sensational history, the romantic and tragic story of Princess Charlotte (1796-1817, the daughter of the dissolute prince who would become George IV) and her husband Leopold (1790-1865, Prince of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld). This is a light biography, told sensationally and often novelistically, with a lot of dialogue, and there are no foot- or endnotes (the author claims that all quotes are already identified in the text, but I didn't find this to be true). It's also very light on the national politics and international background, with events like the Napoleonic Wars being mentioned rather than explained.
   
   Princess Charlotte was the product of the disastrous marriage between George, Prince of Wales (the eldest son of George III) and Caroline of Brunswick. The Waleses split up almost immediately, and Charlotte was brought up under a series of governesses and educated under Bishop John Fisher (whom she called the "Bish-UP", and the author annoyingly mimics this habit). Princess Charlotte was quite popular with the people, and her father, apparently in fits of jealousy, did everything he could to make her life miserable, keeping her away from her mother, firing servants that she grew close to, slighting her publicly, and treating her like a child even after she came of age. She was even grilled about her mother's activities when the Prince of Wales tried (unsuccessfully) to divorce his wife.
   
   The Prince of Wales was good enough, however, not to force Charlotte into marriage, so after an attempted match with the hereditary Prince of Orange, and an encounter with the rakish Prince August of Prussia that could have ruined her reputation, Charlotte finally met and settled on marrying a handsome officer of the Russian heavy cavalry, Prince Leopold. Even though he had not been her first choice for a husband, she quickly grew to love him, and by all accounts they had a happy and down-to-earth marriage. They did almost everything together, and Chambers relates a charming scene in which an old friend comes to visit and finds the couple at a table engrossed in piles of paper. In response to her hesitancy, Charlotte invited her in, saying, "`[T]is only Mr and Mrs Coburg settling their accounts."
   
   Things took a tragic turn when, after a worrisome pregnancy and a difficult labor, Charlotte delivered a stillborn son and then passed away shortly afterwards. The future of the monarchy was left uncertain and Leopold distraught (as was the obstetrician, whose death would complete what is known to medical history as the "triple obstetrical tragedy"). Although Leopold never really got over her untimely death (he died saying her name), he remarried fifteen years later and named his daughter Charlotte (later Empress Carlota of Mexico).
   
   Overall, this book was entertaining but a bit disappointing for its lack of depth. It's a decent introduction to Charlotte's life, but for depth and insight, a better (if older) choice is Prinny's daughter: A life of Princess Charlotte of Wales.

5 comments about The Book of Margery Kempe (Norton Critical Editions).

1. The reason why this book is so inspirational is because Margery is very honest throughout about how difficult she finds her spiritual path and her commitment to God, combining this with marriage, children and the persecution and ridicule she faces on her pilgrimages. It is a very rewarding read because of this and one of my favourite books.



2. I read this for my Later Middle Ages history course, and I must admit that I didn't care for it. The book as other reviewers have said, is written over 20 years in hindsight, and Margery herself must have been an insufferable person whether her experience was true or not. It seemed to me that she brought most of her suffering upon herself and later justified it with her visions...but whether I agree with her experience is really not the point.
   
   As the first known English autobiography, and as an insight to one of the forms that faith took in the Middle Ages (not to mention being from the female perspective) this book is invaluable. But had it not been for class I wouldn't have suffered through the 50 pages of weeping and rambling that I did (we didn't even have to read the whole thing!). Though she was a pilgrim to many holy sites, she notates almost nothing of her external experiences in Jeruselam and Rome - so I don't think that it would be particularly useful to those interested in general history.



3. At first, I rather enjoyed this book - Margery Kempe is quite kooky. But reading more and more, Margery just became annoying, especially with all her weeping. Is it any wonder that no one wanted to travel with her? Or that she was arrested so often? Did she really think her activities would win people to God? Or am I just guilty of being another one of her persecutors?



4. Another book I read for class. I knew a little about Margery Kempe beforehand, like she had 14 children. I didn't know that the first autobiography ever written in English was so boring. I felt like Margery repeated herself, over and over. I wanted more details about her life- about her husband, her children, and her pilgrimages. I don't think I would pick this up unless you are specifically interested in early Christianity writings.



5. Margery Kempe lived from about 1373~1440s, and she really LIVED. In this book, accorded by many to be the first autobiography in English, a scribe records the tale of her life, but most specifically the aspects of it that relate to her spirituality. She was outspoken, controversial, courageous, annoying, devout, and eccentric and all of these aspects shine through into the book, even through the cloudy filter of a male religious scribe who may have 'polished' her words to make her sound more orthodox.

   Margery began life as the daughter of the mayor of Lynn in England, and made a well-suited marriage. After the birth of her first child, she went mad due to some pent-up guilt and an unsympathetic confessor, and during this madness was spoken to by Jesus. This moment changed her life, and snapped her out of the madness. She continued with her worldly ways with failed attempts at entrepenurism and her delight in the physical side of marital relations... but after aobut 20 years she felt the pull of God and decided she needed to devote herself entirely to him.

   Margery went about a long process of procuring chastity from her husband and set off on pilgrimages world wide. She was known for her loud, uncontrollable weeping fits that occured at random and caused many to claim she was a heretic. However, she stood trial before the Archbishops of England, on multiple occasions, and was never once convicted of heresy, and in fact often impressed the higher church officials with her knowledge of doctrine and the Bible. She went through many struggles in her life, but her deity was always there communicating with her or helping her through the cruelty of others, assuring her that all her pain on earth would only increase her joy in heaven.

   Some reader bewares: Margery was hated for a *reason*, you can see this in so many of the encounters that she has, it is so easy to imagine how nagging and annoying having a prim, preaching, all-knowing person along with you on a long voyage all day long would be; or how alarming it would be to have some woman in hysterical fits day after day in the middle of your church when you were trying to pray. Margery comes across as arrogant in some ways - but if you had the unshakable knowledge that your deity loved you and you were going straight to heaven, wouldn't you be a tad uppity too? She was humble though, for example she spent weeks living in a hovel serving a beggar woman while in Rome, and she returned home to nurse her dying husband when he had a fall.

   If you are interested in medieval studies, in women's history or feminism, in mysticism or religious history, this is a must-read for both its historical significance and its entertainment value. Its being taught at college campuses across the country now, so its gaining in recognition. Don't skip the introduction because its extremly informative, but the chapters can be read out of order because they are only loosely chronological and very short. In her time people either loved or hated Margery Kempe, and the same holds true today, so pick up the book and see which side you're on!

5 comments about My Early Life: 1874-1904.

1. If you want to know about Winston Churchill's early life and just how well he was able to write well then look no further. The prose is rich, his vocabulary is extensive and the phrasing is pure Churchill. This is a great introduction into his life and writing ability and many sayings and phrases Churchill is known for are given in this volume. Few, if any, are willing to risk potential embarrassment by stating as one of their life's accomplishments any book that they have read. However, if one is able to add having read this book among those achievements then at least that part of their life will not have been wasted.



2. I got this for my grandfather for Christmas. He was POW during WWII, and was wanting to read about Churchill's POW experiences. A big hit!! My grandfather couldn't put the book down.



3. His writing is great; his stories are told in a refreshing, whimsical tone; and one gets the sense that he loves his life. Even though I was very familiar with the event of his life before reading this, I found it thoroughly engaging and would recommend it to anyone with an interest in this extraordinary man.



4. This 372 page long book would be good, but no more, if it wasn't for the first 40-or-so pages, which are a gem. The book covers the first 30 years of Churchill's life and the first forty pages cover his childhood. Although Churchill had a miserable childhood - his father was distant, his mother more interested in lovers than in her son, and he was bullied at boarding school - Churchill narrates his story with unsurpassed wit and without any hard feelings for the ones that failed him. Some passages, like the description of how he was grappling with the beast called maths, are just hilarious. The first forty pages alone make this book a must read. In the rest of the book, the most interesting part is the story of Churchill's capture by the Boers and escape. You don't need to be interested in Churchill, the statesman, to like this book. Here he is at his most human and disarming.



5. Definitely a good read! Churchill recounts his early years with subtle wit and elegant style. Even the battle scenes kept me interested, which was an unexpected surprise. A good view into the life of a middle-class British soldier before the World Wars.

5 comments about Anna and the King of Siam.

1. I really liked this book because it was really exciting. I also liked how it taught you about different traditions and religious beliefs. I have never read another book that took place in Siam, so that was really interesting. I liked how when after someone said something in the language that people in Siam speak, they would also print in English what they were saying. Anna the main character's, bravery and courage was great. I admire how she could stand up to a king without being scared.
   
   The story is about a widowed school teacher from England who travels to Siam to teach the king's son and Prince Chuklalonkorn along with his many brothers and sisters. The king's many children are eager to start their lessons, as is Anna, but little did they know that they would become more like friends than like a school teacher and her young pupils. In the beginning Anna and the king are always bickering and disagreeing with each other, but they too, soon become friends.
   
   I think that anyone who is interested in adventure should read this book. This book is for someone who loves to learn new things such as languages, religions and or monks because one of the Ladies in the palace is in love with a monk named Balat. The king also travels to different places for business and sometimes has dinner parties that involve people from different places. If I could be in Anna's place that would be great.
   I think that is a great adventure!



2. "Anna and the King of Siam" is really a great book. Even though a lot of this story is fictional and based on some facts, its still fascinating. The book is very in depth, with a lot of detail. The story does become dull at times, particulary after Tuptim's death, but the book still picks up again. It was interesting to see how many more characters there are, their weren't used in all the movies of this story.

   This book is definetly a great book for anyone interested in finding out more of the story of Anna and the King.




3. I can only adequately describe this book as dull and downright boring. Historically it needs to be taken with a grain of salt, although I accept that some of it is pertinent. As Jodie Foster's character in the recent remake of this saga posits, "England's ways are the ways of the world." Landon, with fervent missionary bent in hand, shouldn't have stayed in Thailand for so long given her contempt for their way of life.

   Ultimately the books so called historical authenticity is the very thing you question. The idea of underground torture chambers or cellars, granted that Bangkok is at best marshy swamp and 6m above sea level, is ludicrous. And we are talking about the area of ratanakosin, one of Bangkok's lowest points vis-a-via the water. Also, did Landon not bother to look at Siamese history prior to her arrival and reposit the politics of the harem against contemporary Siamese history? Was she so blind to the success of Mongkut, and certainly Chulalongkorn, not to question the integrity of what Leonowens (a reinvented woman, if ever there was one) was writing?

   The book just drags on about the role of women (a worthy issue nontheless) and the perfidous Siamese. It doesn't offer any insights into why the Siamese are this way, supposedly, and it smacks of neurotic Christo-centric 19th century morality, which bugs the hell out of most people. I can only reiterate that its ugly moralism and at times, often poor narrative, kill what could have otherwise been an interesting read.

   Save your money and don't get the latest cinematic representation regardless of how well dressed up it might seem.




4. "How old shall you be?"
   "I am 150 years old, your Majesty."
   "In what year shall you be borned?"
   "Seventeen hundred and twelve, your Majesty."
   "How many years should you be married?"
   "Several, your Majesty."
   Pause.
   "How many grandchildren shall you have by now? How many? How many? How many? Ha! You do not answer that so quick. I make better questions than you answers, hmm?" (pages 58-59)
   
   This is Mrs. Anna Leonowens (an English governess's) first introduction to the eccentric 59-year-old King of Siam, King Mongkut, in the 1860s. Margaret Landon's `Anna and the King of Siam' is an intriguing, historical tale based on ancient, Siamese records and the secret diaries, letters, and conversations of Anna in Bangkok that reads like fiction but is amazingly genuine [some parts]. Anna, along with her six-year-old-son Louis, embark on an erratic odyssey through a foreign land of a cryptic culture that will, in a few months, become traditional to them. Yet there are some seemingly barbaric issues to be cleared up. Among them are slavery, the King's concubines in the harem, and the unjust treatment of several subjects. While Anna may have altercations with the King, she comes to revere his intellectual methods of attempting to create Siam a scientific nation in modern times but expresses severe criticism on needless occasions. As a governess, her duties are to instruct the royal children (of which there are more than 67; however, only the eldest participate) and aid the King in composing extraordinary letters to renowned world leaders, such as Abraham Lincoln and Queen Victoria. Prince Chulalongkorn, Anna's most prominent and smartest pupil, is heir to the throne on account of being the eldest; she attempts to steer him onto the positive path of ruling the country justly. Also bestowing color to Anna's experiences, including misadventures, other than irrelevant talks with the King on that of Moses and ethics is a cast of supporting characters: Tuptim (the slave), Lady Thiang (the King's head wife), Lady Son Klin, and countless others. Across Anna's remembrances, a message is conveyed: despite one's differences they must master the skill of understanding the outsiders and point them to salvation, excluding falsehood by supplanting it with truthfulness. 'Anna and the King of Siam' is a fascinating web of Siam's (now Thailand's) superb past filled with rich descriptions for a journey neither the reader or Anna will let sink into oblivion even until the breaking end. --P.J. Persad



5. The history of Anna and the King of Siam is as romantic as the story itself. Author Margaret Landon found what may have been the only copy of Anna' book, The English Governess at the Siamese court while she was a missionary in Thailand. Later, she located the Romance of the Harem in a second-hand bookstore in Chicago. She paid a $1 for the book, which turned out to be a fine investment. Landon combined the two books and added fictional elements to create a skillfully written novel.

   The exotic setting and romantic story so impressed the wives of both Rogers and Hammerstein that they convinced their husbands to write a musical based on the book. And thus we get the musical The King and I, plus several movies, most recently one with Jodie Foster.

   Landon wrote other novels (Never Dies the Dream) based on her missionary experience but never achieved the same greatness as in Anna and the King of Siam. This is a well structured novel, with a lot of drama. The death scene of the Fa-ying is incredibly touching. Anna is believable; sometimes annoyingly persistent, other times selfless and very very brave.

   The actual writins of Anna Leonowens are also available. It's fun to read Landon's book and then the source material she used. You may agree with me that Landon's skill as a novelist took Anna's story and made it unforgettable.

5 comments about Queen Victoria: A Personal History.

1. I really enjoyed the book, but it gets so wordy, that it has literally put my daughters to sleep. My only wish is that he would have relied less on letting us know who people were (titles, positions, etc.) and more on Victoria's personality and life. I did enjoy her love affair with her husband!



2. Once again, Christopher Hibbert has spun a wonderful biography that makes his subject come alive before you're eyes, and at times to allow the reader's imagination into the very shoes of Queen Victoria!



3. Christopher Hibbert has the marvelous ability to make historical subjects come alive. He succeeds again in this biography of Queen Victoria,
   
   This book is titled a Personal History, and that's really the focus. He turns the venerable monarch into a human being, with hopes, fears, heartaches, heartbreaks, a sense of humor, mood swings, petulance and even (gasp!) desires.
   
   Victoria's image (at least to Americans) is of the stuffy old monarch, unsmiling, and always dressed in black. Hibbert portrays quite a different picture - of a young woman who loved parties, dancing, and the affection of men. He also makes clear Victoria's physical passion for her husband, Albert. This is evident in the passage where, after giving birth to eight children, she is advised by her doctor not to have anymore. Her response was "You mean I can't have any more fun in bed?" Not what we expect from a Victorian!
   
   The portrait of a post-Albert Victoria is of a woman devasted by the death of her lover. Clearly the modern picture of Victoria comes from this stage of her life. However, this image is based on incorrect assumptions. Where we assume the stolid, frumpy queen arises from her belief in Victorian morals, in this book the picture is of a woman who lost her most precious soulmate, and whose last 40 years were a struggle against loneliness and depression, while bearing the heavy responsibility of being the most powerful monarch in the world.
   
   The book also vividly portrays the numerous characters in this remarkable woman's life, including Lord Liverpool, the Duke of Wellington, Disraeli, and Kaiser Wilhelm.
   
   Recommended to anyone with an interest in English history.



4. As i read the book, i realized that Mr Hibbert was not going to give me a very good account of the Queen.He constantly talks about the Queen's changing moods, her dislikes for some of her prime ministers and her treatment of her servants.To me this things are a waste of time.Mr Hibbert fails to tells us how the Queen felt about the political situation of Europe in her time.The author very rarely mentions her views on the different wars England waged during her time. At times i felt like i was reading a gossip column on a supermarket tabloid.Mr Hibbert wastes too many chapters on things like her servants, dinner parties and the sort.The book is too tight since most of the times it covers the Queen's opinion of non-important things.



5. After reading some glittering medieval and Tudor biographies, I wanted to fill in the gaps closer to our own day. Christopher Hibbert's comprehensive, readable biography is a good starting-point. However, as detractors have pointed out, it is short on political analysis. The emphasis is on "royal".

   Hibbert sets the stage for Victoria's accession with a marvellous summary of how her various royal forebears failed to provide an heir, so that she succeeded by default. He delineates Queen Victoria's complex relationships with several Prime Ministers: her neediness with Lord Melbourne and Disraeli, antipathy towards Palmerston and Gladstone, respect for Salisbury. Unfortunately he does not clearly enough differentiate between Whigs and Tories. But he does acquaint the reader with the major political personalities and put you in a position to explore further. A useful reference alongside this book is "The Prime Ministers from Walpole to Macmillan" (possibly only available in the UK, and in danger of going out of print).

   Skilfully interweaving Victoria's personal history with national and international landmark events, Hibbert provides handy, if underwritten, overviews of the Indian Mutiny, the Crimean War, the Great Exhibition, and Chartism. He also sketches contemporary European royals like Napoleon III, exploring tensions between France, Italy and Austria.

   Co-dependency, egotism and self-pity characterised Victoria's personal contacts. Her henpecking of her intelligent, unpopular consort Albert, and later selfish blocking of her children's marriages in order to keep them around, echo her own repressive childhood. But Victoria's households at Balmoral and Osborne were beacons of domesticity, and she was well-travelled and sophisticated.

   She hated pregnancy, resented her children, and was scathingly dismissive of the Prince of Wales (the future Edward VII). After Prince Albert's untimely death, she avoided official engagements for years, to the consternation of her government and people. She fostered obsessional bonds with her Scottish and Indian servants.

   Her prolific writings reveal a needy, infantile and self-obsessed woman. Her USE of CAPITALS in an age before the telephone, is a way of SHOUTING (not unlike the internet), and italics give her prose stridency.

   So what were Queen Victoria's merits, if any? By dint of longevity she was the epoxy glue of the Age which took her name, and her progeny peopled the Royal houses of Europe. Surviving several assasination attempts, Victoria held her family and household in thrall, and the country in awe. Somehow she inspired the loyalty, if also exasperation, of her Governments.

   Henry VIII or Elizabeth I she ain't, but the story is worth reading. Christopher Hibbert gives an urbane, accessible account, with mercifully short chapters.