No comments about Victoria Beckham: Queen of America.

2 comments about Katherine Howard: A Tudor Conspiracy.

1. This thin account of the life of Henry V1's fifth wife is readable and enjoyable. The unwary reader may miss the obvious bias of the author against the Roman Catholic religion. Anne Boleyn was a good woman, religious, pious and wrongfully betrayed by Catholic partisans who are the bad guys.
   "Katherine had been raised as a traditional Catholic. In awe of the
   rituals, swayed by the mysticism and unquestioning theological
   doctrines. She lit candles for her dead parents, ate fish on
   Fridays and said her prayers by rote in the happy assurance that
   whatever she did would be forgiven in the confessional."
   This myth of the meaning of the sacrament of Confession betrays either a willful misrepresentation or a deliberate slur. The good guys are Reformers whose motives a pure and noble. Katherine Howard was a pawn of the same partisans and her wild sexual behavior was largely the fault of adult neglect during her formative years. According to this author. If you want entertainment then this is your book. If you want a more scholarly presentation of the issues of the day and the actors in this Tudor drama then look elsewhere.



2. This book was somewhat disapointing not because of the skill of the author. The historical material is so thin, it is difficult to fabricate a story.

5 comments about South: The Last Antarctic Expedition of Shackleton and the Endurance.

1. SOUTH: THE LAST ANTARCTIC EXPEDITION
   
   Here is a list of equipment that Sir Ernest Shackleton did NOT have for his memorable Endurance expedition: GPS location finders; radio ; RADAR, SONAR; computerized navigation; professional medical care; thermal clothes; MRE'S (Meals Ready To Eat), double steel hull; air and logistical support, public relations agents; marketing proposals; lawyers.
   Shacketon's crew navigated with a sextant; traversed the icecap with dog sleds instead of ski-doos, and ate canned herring, tinned meat, pemmican, biscuits and occasional seals.
   
   What he did have was an old ship, a strong crew, an incredible work ethic, classic British stoicism and unerring sense of the right thing to do.
   
   His book reads like a Robert Louis Stevenson or H.G. Welles story, but it is the unvarnished truth. His matter -of -fact account is brilliantly illustrated by Frank Hurley's dramatic black & white photos of The Endurance encapsulated in ice, its masts and spars dripping frozen water like the maritime apparition in Melville's "Benito Cereno."
   I seriously doubt whether a modern expedition equipped with all the bells and whistles and sponsored with corporate money could duplicate what Shackleton's Endurance accomplished under the most adverse circumstances imaginable.
   Because the Endurance expedition occurred in 1914-15 at the start of World World War I
   Shackleton's accomplishment was largely overshadowed, and the Antarctic was all but forgotten until the `fifties and `sixties when its scientific and strategic value was rediscovered.
   Now, as the Antarctic ice cap melts from global warming, one wonders at Shackleton's accomplishment.



2. After more than a year of seeing pretty much nothing but ice and snow, and living in, at times, sub-zero temperatures, Sir Ernest Shackleton writes about his camp's current conditions; "Drifts four feet deep covered everything, and we had to be continually digging up our scanty stock of meat to prevent its being lost altogether... On this day, and for the next two or three also, it was impossible to do anything but get right inside one's frozen sleeping bag to try and get warm. Too cold to read or sew, we had to keep our hands well inside, and pass the time in conversation with each other." He's so matter-of-fact... no fluff here. He just tells it like it is. I love that about this book. The conditions worsen by leaps and bounds as the story continues, but I'll leave that for you to explore on your own. Anyway, the first few chapters are very informative regarding how the expedition was planned, where they were headed, how they got there, etc... for me, it started a little slow, but I understand why the writer wanted to include this information. So, then you get into the "meaty" survival stuff... and is it ever so fascinating. And for me, it's especially fascinating because it doesn't seem to be sugar-coated, as so many writers are proned to do when telling their story. In fiction, I don't mind so much the way a writer gives you every detail, written ever so eloquently, but when it comes to true stories... especially survival stories, I personally just want to hear the straight talk. A GREAT SURVIVAL STORY AND PERFECTLY WRITTEN for this reader.



3. When the Antarctic explorer ship Endurance became trapped by ice in the opening days of World War I, Sir Ernest Shackleton and his companions found themselves stranded for the winter. Months later, when the ice floe that had been their "home" became unstable as spring breakup began, the party - with their ship long since broken apart - took to their three open boats, and made their way to Elephant Island. There they set up a precarious camp, where most of the group waited while Sir Ernest and a few carefully chosen companions struck out for South Georgia. That South Atlantic island, 800 miles away, was known to have year-round British inhabitants.
   
   Those are the bare facts of one of the great true adventures, a story told here by Sir Ernest himself. His dry writing style may take some slogging, at first, for contemporary (especially American) readers; but his wit is equally dry, and his descriptions vivid. I was especially interested to note the differences between the Shackleton party's attitudes and those of today. Not only is this a magnificent survival tale (NOT ONE of Shackleton's men died!); it's also a snapshot of how those quintessential English explorers of another era thought about the world they were discovering. For better or for worse, how times and attitudes have changed!



4. What an expedition! There is a lot to be learned about leadership and survival by the adventurers on this journey. If you like men against the elements, who survive by their wits and never ever give up, this is the tale for you. A great winter read.



5. Shackleton was an amazing man full of true grit and true leadership. Among the many things that stand out in his story of survival is the importance of keeping a journal. Even after many supplies and equipment were left on the ice, the men were instructed to continue to carry their journals. And what if they had not? Where would be the true story that outshines most fictional adventure stories in the minds and imaginations of many, including myself?

   If you want to read more about Antarctica, I suggest T.H. Baughman's "Before the Heroes Came."

2 comments about Edward VII: The Last Victorian King.

1. edward 7th was the uncle of kaiser wilhelm and they did not like each other



2. He waited in the wings while his illustrious mother ruled on and on. And when his time came to strut across the kingly stage the performance was all too brief. But it was not merely a cameo role that "Bertie" was to play as Edward V11, as this portait by Christopher Hibbert makes clear.

   Hibbert traces Bertie's early life as a backward child who was to become the bane of his parents, Queen Victoria and her worthy, hardworking though somewhat stuffy Consort, Prince Albert. So concerned was Albert about his son that he consulted a phrenologist, who promptly noted the "feeble quality" of Bertie's brain.

   "Poor Bertie, he vexes us so much", wrote Victoria. And the vexation turned into near hysteria a few years later as a result of Bertie's escapades with young ladies definitely not thought worthy to be considered future queens.

   When Victoria's long reign ended in January, 1901, the Ewardian Age began. The new king was 59 years old, portly, and going bald. But he took up his new duties with obvious relish, fully conscious of his vocation, combining hard work with his more agreeable activities of cards, racing, partying and womanizing. Aware of the dangers of war in Europe, he set out to strengthen his country's position on the continent. He had notable success in Paris. At the beginning of the visit an aide noted the subdued response of the crowds when his carriage passed. "The French don't like us", the aid whispered. "Why should they?" replied the King and continued waving. By the end of the visit the King had won the French over and had cemented the Entente Cordiale.

   Hibbert writes that Edward V11 was popular as a monarch because he was a human one, and because, in spite of his racy life, he was never hypocritical or pompous. As Hibbert puts it, "he would rather sit down to a meal with an entertaining acrobat than a tedious duke."

   It's easy to form an analogy between Bertie's relationships with his parents and those between the Prince Regent and his father, George 111. And it's even more tempting to form a similar analogy between the current Prince of Wales and HIS parents, though we will probably have to rely on future historians to put that into perspective.

5 comments about Company Commander: The Classic Infantry Memoir of World War II.

1. Company Commander: The Classic Infantry Memoir of World War II by Charles B. MacDonald. I highly recommend Company Commander: The Classic Infantry Memoir of World War II by Charles B. MacDonald. At just 21 years of age, Captain Charles B. MacDonald first commanded I Company, 3 Battalion 23rd Infantry, 2nd Infantry Division from October 1944 to January 1945 and later G Company, 2 Battalion 23rd Infantry, 2nd Infantry Division from March to May 1945. This memoir was written in 1947 when recollections were still sharp. It resulted in a very detailed account of what it was like to take command of a line infantry company and lead it into battle. The book gives us template for writing a personal military memoir.
   
   It is by far the finest memoir of any junior officer in World War II. Charles MacDonald does a great job of keeping his focus on his own experiences. He does not speculate or waste my time by giving conjecture on the big picture. We only have first hand information from the events of his personal participation. He sticks to what life was like for a junior officer in command of an infantry company, sleepless, hungry, dirty, stressful, and very dangerous. He takes us from the Siegfried Line in the Ardennes, through the Battle of the Bulge, and to the end of the war in the Czechoslovakia.
   
   This book is a must-read for all army officers who seek to command at company-level and it is informative for military historians as well. It is still required reading at West Point and on the company level officer (second lieutenant, first lieutenant, and captain) recommended reading list by the U.S. Army today. Upon this book's publication in 1947, Charles B. MacDonald was invited to join the U.S. Army Center of Military History as a civilian historian, the start of a career during which he wrote three of the official histories of World War II in Europe and supervised the preparation of others. The book is simply the best. Read and reviewed by Jimmie A. Kepler in June 2006.



2. I loved this book. It depicted the toil and drudgery of the WWII combat infantryman. There are no frills in this story, just the day to day experience of being on the spearhead of the Allied push into Germany. It portrayed the feelings and emotions of the men, in a very accurate light. I'm sure that there are people that will read this book and feel that they haven't been entertained. However, this book is not about entertainment. It is about the reality of the men that fought so unselfishly in the Ardennes Forest, and suffered intense hunger, cold (this was one of the coldest winters ever recorded in Europe), anxiety and fears. It also portrays the humor that existed amoung these brothers in arms. It is a great companion to Mac's other history, "A Time for Trumpets." Great, GREAT book! Thanks Mac!



3. An excellent book about the leadership of an army officer during the
   crucial battles that ended WWII in Europe. As an untested officer thrown
   into the Battle of the Bulge he performed magnificently. His mettle was sorly tested,and his humanity shone through. A very,very good read



4. Charles B. MacDonald wrote what it was like for a 21year old to command two infantry companies in WW2. He took notes along the way (I have a page of his notes that survived). They cover the capture of Hombressen in Germany. I also have the original typewriter on which he typed the manuscript of his book. I have trvelled the route he took in 1944/45 and found his descriptions of the various lovcations to be exceedingly accurate in every detail.
   
   Will Cavanagh



5. This book is probably the finest memoir of any junior officer in WW2. Unlike so many war memoirs, MacDonald keeps his focus firmly on his own experiences, and doesn't waste his readers time by speculating on `the big picture' or describing incidents which he didn't personally take part in. He sticks to what life was like for a junior officer in command of an infantry company - disorientating, stressful and very dangerous.
   
   On the strength of this book MacDonald was selected to work on the famous Official History of the US Army in World War Two, and produced two of the best regarded volumes in that definitive series.

5 comments about William Wilberforce: A Hero for Humanity.

1. The story--or at least the legacy--of William Wilberforce is one that should be standard issue in all history courses. He is highly unknown in the US, perhaps because his greatest work came after its separation from Britain. But even I, who studied Political Science with strong philosophical and international emphases, had not heard of him until over 4 years after I graduated. Very well written book about the man who championed the cause and accomplished the abolition of the slave trade, and later the total abolition of slavery throughout the British Empire. Belmonte captures the essence of the man and his life through a text rich in its use of sources and first hand accounts, with appropriate use of personal insight and conclusions. True to the subtitle, Wilberforce is duly shown as a hero for humanity, a champion for everything human, and a role model for all who desire to make a real difference in this world. Couple with the movie "Amazing Grace," this book provides a rich look at a man who was the wealthies man of his time in all the ways that truly matter.



2. I read a lot of biographies, and have to say that while I am a fan of William Wilberforce and the movie Amazing Grace, this biography is not on my favorites list. Primarily, I disliked the structure of the book. It is written topically instead of chronologically having sections on his early life, his political life, his influence, his family life, etc. For example, the book has 10 chapters, and his marriage to Barbara Spooner isn't introduced until chapter 8! This made the book feel like a collection of essays instead of a typical biography. I won't read it again.



3. This was a fabulously written and researched book. The depth of the original documents that were touched made it authoritative and the writing style was captivating. The descriptions of his personal and family life and how he related to his peers was particularly valuable to me. I also gained any insights into the reading list of Wiliam Wilberforce which is always a window into a man's soul. Highly recommended.



4. This is a great introduction to the life and pursuits of William Wilberforce. His deep love and concern for humanity is fantastic.



5. I was truly unaware of who William Wilberforce was before reading "Amazing Grace" by Metaxes. Then I found "Real Christianity" by Wilberforce and now I am almost finished reading "William Wilberforce: A Hero for Humanity." The book, "William Wilberforce: A Hero for Humanity", is a can't put-it-down kind of read. It brings in notable contemporaries of Wilberforce which richly adds to the fiber of the text. Wilberforce's "Great Change" made him a mighty force for Biblical Christianity. I believe it should be a strongly suggested read for all politicians at every level of government (village, town, city, state, and federal). We need to see a moral turnaround in our beloved U.S.A. seen in the hearts of its citizens. Morality cannot be legislated. I give the book a five stars (thumbs) up.

No comments about Churchill and Chartwell: The Untold Story.

5 comments about Elizabeth I.

1. elizabeth was the most fascinating ,complex woman who every rule in the world.the author capture the reader's imagination by tell story of motherless princess who mother beheading darking her life,but her cunning lead her to become ruler over england for 45 years.



2. In my opinion this is the best of the numerous biographies I've read about this fascinating person. A balanced and fair, warts and all approach that allows the reader to form their own opinion. Highly recommended.



3. I had never read a historical biography before, and I had no idea a book like this could be such a page turner. I could hardly put it down! Somerset does a superb job placing this brilliant monarch in the context of her time period. She goes into detail about court intrigues, political strife, and personal relationships. I found the book much more exciting and dramatic than the movie. after reading this book, I felt that I understood not just Elizabeth better, but the whole Elizabethan era. To top things off, Somerset's style is easy to read. The book is well researched and objective; never over romanticizing or over criticizing. Plus, it's a thick book so you get more for your money. I would have liked to hear more about the Queen's supposed virginity (Somerset goes with the Virgin Queen angle) but I'd still pick this book over Allison Weir any day.



4. This is the most substantial and elegantly written of the recent biographies of Elizabeth I. Somerset is especially good on Elizabeth's character (indecisiveness was a big element in it). The book includes excellent summaries of complicated and obscure issues like the England's campaigns in the Netherlands. You get a clear sense of Elizabeth's learning and mastery of languagde, but I did wish for more quotation from Elizabeth's speeches and letters. On that front, it's helpful to read this biography together with Elizabeth I: Collected Works, which includes modern-spelling versions of these (plus her poetry, etc.).



5. This is an insightful and fascinating look into the age of Elizabeth I: not only does the author explore her complex private life, but her techniques of holding and exercising power and diplomacy - always mixed together - are examined with a depth that never romanticises this remarkable leader.
   
   The story begins with a frightening look into the battle for succession. Her half-sister, Bloody Mary, at the moment is attempting to re-convert the country with ruthless brutality to the Catholicism of her mother, whom Henry VIII divorced to marry Anne Boleyn, E I's mother. Thus, E I faced not only the normal suspicion of treasonous intent between bitter blood rivals with a personal twist, but also was open in her protestantism during the bloodiest epoch of the Reformation. While E I survived and was crowned as queen, the legitimacy of her claim was always under threat - her difficult though charismatic Catholic cousin, Mary Queen of Scots, served as a living reminder of how easily E I might be replaced on the throne. E I survives, of course, and more or less triumphs over all her adversaries, but she was never bloodthirsty.
   
   Behind this basic plot, Somerset masterfully dissects the machinery of government of the time. As an absolute sovereign, E I had the last word, but she relied on a series of deeply trusted advisors as well as a network of courtiers, with whom she forged extremely close (perhaps physical) relationships. They form a fascinating backdrop as the story unfolds with their attempts to manipulate while serving her. It is as complex as a Shakespearean drama and yet Somerset is wonderfully even-handed in her treatmet of them all, from Cecil and Dudley to the deranged and dangerous step son of Dudley. E I's missteps, pride, and personal need for attention and love are criticially covered in just the right level of detail: not academically over-exhaustive, but satisfyingly complete nonetheless. After reading this, I went to the National Portrait Gallery in London and immensely enjoyed looking at paintings of virtually all of the characters. Finally, the finances of the Kingdon, so interlinked with the patronage system she managed to keep her aristocrats happy, are explained in perfect detail that is never excessive. There is also a clear explanation of E I's carefully engineered religious compromise as embodied in the Anglican Church.
   
   Then there are the details of E I's diplomacy: she held out the prospect of marriage as a tool of this, ever enticing suitors, but never quite committing. It was a brilliant balancing act, in which she often felt personally vulnerable and perhaps even hopeful of finding a love match, while ever cunningly manipulative. This was perhaps the most fascinating for me, with characters surpassing her courtiers, such as the Duke d'Anjou, who preferred men and was later a transvestite before being murdered as the French King. But there were score of others, including Philip II, her great rival in Spain and former brother-in-law, whose Armada she crippled to make England a true world power with new naval techniques.
   
   Warmly recommended. THis is a masterpiece of popular scholarship, beautifully written, and elegantly subtle as well as demandingly critical. It is the perfect supplement to those who enjoyed Cate Blanchett's Elizabeth. The only thing that I would have wanted in this is a more in-depth cultural explanation of the Age she was identified with, but that would be a book in itself.

5 comments about Walking in the Shade: Volume Two of My Autobiography--1949-1962.

1. This second part of Doris Lessing's candid biography, which depicts her difficult beginnings in London, is a more bitter report than the first one. It is full of personal and ideological disappointments.

   Like so many young intellectuals in Europe, she finds shelter in the leftist Church (with capitalism as hell, Lenin, Stalin or Mao as Christ the Saviour, and Utopia as heaven) and becomes a believer in heart and soul. She still has difficulties to believe why she was so blind (even after a trip to Russia) and stayed like many others so long with the communist movement.
   The agonizing psychological struggle to become an apostate is very emotionally told.

   What saved her was art, in which she has a limitless belief: it can overthrow world powers.

   This is a moving, uninhibited and realistic work, exemplary for many idealistic but wilfully deceived young people in the ninteen fifties and sixties. Outsiders willing to write her biography will not have many more 'secrets' to reveal.
   Not to be missed.




2. I didn't enjoy this book nearly as much as Volume I, UNDER MY SKIN. But it's a fascinating book for 2 reasons.

   1. The light it sheds on the relationship between fiction & autobiography, & the glimpse it gives of the novelist's mind, how experience is tranformed into descriptions of people, places, events which are placed in the kaleidoscope of a particular work of fiction, shaken up, & emerge forming a different pattern. I probably would have said the same about UNDER MY SKIN, except I haven't read the CHILDREN OF VIOLENCE series yet, which corresponds with the period covered by Volume I of the autobiography. In Volume II, one sees many ingedients that went into THE GOLDEN NOTEBOOK.

   2. Lessing's observations of the period 1949-1962 in London, & comments on "the States" as she calls us.

   It is funny in places, too. I think there's more humor in both volumes of Lessing's autobiography than in anything else I've read by her, and I wonder why this is.




3. I didn't enjoy this book nearly as much as Volume I, UNDER MY SKIN. But it's a fascinating book for 2 reasons.

   1. The light it sheds on the relationship between fiction & autobiography, & the glimpse it gives of the novelist's mind, how experience is tranformed into descriptions of people, places, events which are placed in the kaleidoscope of a particular work of fiction, shaken up, & emerge forming a different pattern. I probably would have said the same about UNDER MY SKIN, except I haven't read the CHILDREN OF VIOLENCE series yet, which corresponds with the period covered by Volume I of the autobiography. In Volume II, one sees many ingedients that went into THE GOLDEN NOTEBOOK.

   2. Lessing's observations of the period 1949-1962 in London, & comments on "the States" as she calls us.

   It is funny in places, too. I think there's more humor in both volumes of Lessing's autobiography than in anything else I've read by her, and I wonder why this is.




4. Cold? No way.

   Although volume 2 lacks the profound personal revelations found in volume 1, it is a fascinating collection of her memories and point of view of England in the 1950's. She talks quite a bit about her life in a brutally honest way that few writers, let alone people in general, would be willing to admit.

   Her witty observations of society and what makes it tick are very entertaining, as well as many insights into what later became The Golden Notebook.

   Cold & self-serving? Not this book. It's an oustanding autobiography by one of the most brilliant minds of our time. I think negative reviewers of this book have gotten carried away with their own agenda. Doris Lessing never caters to expectation which makes her writing even more compelling.




5. I love biography. I never thought I would abandon a biography unfinished and feel no desire to pick it up and continue. I found this dull, self-serving and boring. Lessing seems to be busy making excuses and justifications for her 'fellow travelling' with Communists in 1950s London. Oh, pleeeze! So what? Heaps of people were members of the party or fellow travellers. many have also renounced or reassessed their former positions, but they don't feel the need to go into tortuous self-denial as Lessing does. I find her cold as a person - that's fine, one doesn't have to LIKE the subject of a biog/autobiog to be interested in them. But her writing is cold and detatched as a cold-water flat in misty wintry London!

5 comments about Elizabeth and Mary: Cousins, Rivals, Queens.

1. I received prompt and reliable service.... my book arrived so quickly and in perfect condition! I'm grateful!



2. For anyone looking for a straight forward biography of these two fascinating queens, Jane Dunn's excellent book is not for you. This is an in-depth, sociological, and psychological study of the two rival queens and the events that shaped their lives. Critical reviewers have accused Dunn of unfair bias toward Elizabeth, but, given the extraordinary achievements of Elizabeth, how can one not be? Mary Stewart was a very romantic, tragic, almost mythical figure, but she played the traditional female role of a queen who needed a king to rule with her; surprising considering she was the daughter of the formidable Marie de Guise. And her appalling choices of husbands #2 and #3 caused her life to spin out of control. Her poor decisions regarding the treason plot against Elizabeth displayed emotion over reason, and ultimately brought about her downfall. Elizabeth, on the other hand, was magnificent. In an era when women were commonly accepted as inferior to men, she not only overcame huge sociological prejudices to become the most powerful ruler of her era, but ultimately did it well, bringing Elizabethan England to great prosperity. The contrast between the two women, Elizabeth, struggling to be equal to a king in a totally male dominated world and Mary, relying on her femininity to achieve her desires, could not be more marked. The issue of succession, with Elizabeth's choice to remain a "Virgin Queen," (in name only, I have to say, I disagree with Dunn's viewpoint that she and Dudley were "just friends") in order to maintain her control, and thus leaving England without an heir, is complex and warranted more discussion in the book. But really, after all the historical sturm und drang does anyone else see the great irony that Mary's son James became king of the British Isles anyway, ascending to both the English and Scottish throne?



3. For anyone looking for a straight forward biography of these two fascinating queens, Jane Dunn's excellent book is not for you. This is an in-depth, sociological, and psychological study of the two rival queens and the events that shaped their lives. Critical reviewers have accused Dunn of unfair bias toward Elizabeth, but, given the extraordinary achievements of Elizabeth, how can one not be? Mary Stewart was a very romantic, tragic, almost mythical figure, but she played the traditional female role of a queen who needed a king to rule with her; surprising considering she was the daughter of the formidable Marie de Guise. And her appalling choices of husbands #2 and #3 caused her life to spin out of control. Her poor decisions regarding the treason plot against Elizabeth displayed emotion over reason, and ultimately brought about her downfall. Elizabeth, on the other hand, was magnificent. In an era when women were commonly accepted as inferior to men, she not only overcame huge sociological prejudices to become the most powerful ruler of her era, but ultimately did it well, bringing Elizabethan England to great prosperity. The contrast between the two women, Elizabeth, struggling to be equal to a king in a totally male dominated world and Mary, relying on her femininity to achieve her desires, could not be more marked. The issue of succession, with Elizabeth's choice to remain a "Virgin Queen," (in name only, I have to say, I disagree with Dunn's viewpoint that she and Dudley were "just friends") in order to maintain her control, and thus leaving England without an heir, is complex and warranted more discussion in the book. But really, after all the historical sturm und drang does anyone else see the great irony that Mary's son James became king of the British Isles anyway, ascending to both the English and Scottish throne?



4. Jane Dunn, Elizabeth and Mary: Cousins, Rivals, Queens - I would not advise any avid Mary Stewart admirers (or feminists) to purchase this book. Jane Dunn in my mind (and from the extensive text I have read) does Mary Stewart a great injustice with her blatant Elizabethan bias. She over looks the obvious motives of Queen Elizabeth for Mary's murder, instead painting Elizabeth as a strong woman in a man's world who had no option but conspire against, imprison and eventually have her cousin put to death.
   
   I was looking forward to an in-depth read, a psychological & sociological perspective of these two female power brokers... but instead found the book to view Mary in a very sexist fashion (surprising, as the author is female!). Jane Dunn's `Mary bashing' stems around her intolerance of Mary expressing and ruling with her female traits intact... Mary rules from the heart and is often merciful, and led by her intelligence and her emotions.
   
   In contrast to this, Elizabeth kills off the feminine aspects of herself, and rules with a cold, calculating and ruthless vision. She is the archetype that we 21st century women still struggle against...we do not want to have to behave like men to function at a effective level in this world, we want to be respected for our feminine qualities of caring, understanding and tolerance; something this world sadly lacks. Mary had these qualities and used them to great effect (i.e. allowing the blend of the two dominant religions in her land to co-exist). Mary had her faults as we all do but she accepted others and there faults and tried to negotiate for compromise and tolerance.
   
   Mary could have made a real difference in her time if it were for two factors.
   
   1. If she had the chance to grow and learn free of imprisonment.
   2. If she had had the support of her so called `sister' Elizabeth!!! Something that Elizabeth would never give...in fact Elizabeth was wriggled with the most terrible of negative female expression `Jealousy'... because she had suppressed her femininity, she became a twisted version of a woman, one who could not allow a real female Queen to share the same island...so much so she murdered her!
   Mary was wronged enough in her lifetime and Jane Dunn should be ashamed that she finds it necessary to slander her character and trivialize her even in death.



5. First, I would like to review the book itself, and then address some of its critics.
   
   Two of history's most famous queens, one for her unexpected and remarkable greatness, the other for her inexplicably poor judgment and bad luck. But was their famous rivalry inevitable? Was Elizabeth always the popular, talented, dominant one while Mary remained in her shadow? Jane Dunn asks these questions, and I was surprised - and pleased - by some of her answers.
   
   The first part of the book is essentially a point-by-point comparison of the two queens, detailing their very different youths and explaining how they would influence the women in later years. Essentially, Mary had a huge sense of entitlement, was overconfident in her own power and security, and was a much more 'traditional' woman - and Queen - of her day. Elizabeth, whose childhood was punctuated by dramatic changes of fortune, had a much more acute sense of how tenuous her position was, and how much she depended on the good will of her people to maintain power.
   
   Dunn does beat the Mary-as-charming-but-spoiled and Bess-as-brilliant-control-freak comparison into us a bit, but it is a good way of looking at the very different natures of these two women. Her book isn't a full biography of either queen; rather it's a look at the intersection between them - their relationship with each other, their competition, rivalry, and common causes. As such it's a fascinating look at a unique time in European history, the so-called "Age of Queens".
   Posterity-wise, Mary got the short end of the stick. History will always remember her as Elizabeth's paler shadow, a major annoyance and minor queen who had no one but herself to blame for her tragic end. Although Dunn does occasionally (perhaps unavoidably) slip into Mary-bashing and Bess-worship, on the whole she does a good job pointing out that that wasn't always the case - and, had a few things gone differently, we would paint a very different portrait of the two cousins. Her Mary and Elizabeth are fully human - flaws, quirks, charms, and all. It's the best way to explain the convoluted relationship between the two, and it provides a lot of useful character insight into all other aspects of these Queens as well. (I do wish Dunn had gone further into the possibility that Mary was bipolar. It's a fascinating hypothesis, and it would explain a lot.)
   
   Mary's end - which also serves as the book's - is too rushed; twenty years are covered in a handful of pages and the account of the execution itself offers nothing new. But until that point, I thoroughly enjoyed this provocative and inspiring portrait of two very different women whom circumstances thrust into such fierce competition.
   
   Now: Some reviewers seem to feel that Dunn was somehow "unfair" to Mary and that her comparison of the two queens is misogynist. I admit to being completely baffled by this point of view. It appears to stem from the argument that somehow Mary was a better "feminist" queen than Elizabeth, I suppose because Elizabeth "betrayed the sisterhood" by having Mary executed.
   
   Further, Dunn's critics seem to argue that Mary was a better "feminine" role model than Elizabeth was, apparently because she ruled through emotion rather than reason. They complain that Elizabeth is too "cold" and "calculating" to be a good example of a female ruler, while waxing rhapsodic about Mary's "mercy" and "gentleness". Let me be blunt: this is the sort of idiotic, feel-good, p.c. claptrap that has set the cause of working women back 50 years. Yes, there is something to be said for women's differing management styles; you will get no argument from me that in today's world, women should not have to emulate uber-masculinity to succeed. But - newsflash! - this was the 16th century. Not only were the roles of men and women completely different - and thus incomparable - than they are today, have you ever actually tried to get anything done with the kind of dithering, vapid leadership exemplified by Mary and her ilk?
   
   Attempting to repaint Dunn's dual biography as some sort of feminist management manifesto does a disservice, both to the author and her subjects. We should admire both Elizabeth and Mary for who they were and what they did, while admitting their flaws and shortcomings. But this is not the 1500s, and trying to appropriate their story to make a point about women today is grossly misrepresentative, self-centered, and intellectually careless. If you want to adopt antiquated delusions about women in the workplace, try reading Forbes online - not "Elizabeth and Mary".