3 comments about The Royal Marriages.

1. Lady Colin Campbell isn't a true Royal insider. While she may be 'in society', her title is one she gained via marriage and she personally had very humble beginnings on the island of Jamaica. Of course, there's not alot of info about that in her book.



2. If you like sitting down to dishy, vicious gossip, this book's for you. Lady Colin Campbell may be an insider but she's not an impartial one. That she's still in the Royals's camp tells me she's carrying a message for them. Although she makes a gratuitous stab at saying derogatory things about the Queen Mother, her real target is Diana, Princess of Wales, of whom she has a positively sulfurous view.

   Unfortunately, her credibility suffers when she paints Diana as completely without redeeming qualities, and the public as fools for not seeing through Diana's act. Like the Royals, whose minion she is, Lady Campbell is unable to accept that Diana could not sustain an "act" for so long if she were truly a phony.

   Lady Campbell further injures her case with her claim that Prince Charles is the innocent party. Even for a man who's lived his life in a royal cocoon, he can't be as naive as Lady Campbell paints him without making him seem stupid, and no divorce is so completely one-sided when there's blame to be assigned.

   Originally British society put these Hanoverian misfits on the throne to preserve the Church of England and Protestantism. Now that religious warfare is no longer a reason for keeping the Mountbatten-Windsor dynasty, maybe it's time the British allowed them to get a life--to rise or fall according to their individual merits just like us common folks. But then, we wouldn't be treated to such an entertaining soap opera, would we?





3. Campbell's book examines select English royal marriages with a decidedly unjournalistic bias and omission of historical facts.

   Starting with the marriage of King George V through the (unsuccessful) unions of Prince Charles, Princess Anne and Prince Andrew, Campbell weaves a wobbly tale that leaves the reader wondering what her editor was thinking.

   Jumping back and forth between flashes forward and flashes backwards, liberally sprinkling text with official royal names, legal names and pet names (and never explaining that she's actually referring to the same person), she has a gossipy, insider style that can be considered engaging, but unfortunately, only to the expert royal watcher (who will be the only person(s) who will understand what and who she's talking about).

   The same story/tidbit/personality traits are repeated with the same goofy enthusiasm ("Andrew and Sarah were intensely sexual."

   When Campbell favors a royal, it is no secret.

   She takes the unpopular (at least here in the US) position of admiring the Duke and Duchess of Windsor (who in her opinion, were merely misunderstood) -- and never mentioning their sympathetic friendship with Hitler (documented in 1938 with photographic evidence).

   Campbell is very harsh on the late Princess Diana, makes excuses for Charles' cold treatment -- and affair with Camilla Parker Bowles. Of the famous "tampax" recorded discussion between the long-time lovers Campbell writes, "They exchange the usual intimacies of people who are in love and at ease with one another."

   She lambasts the much less embarrasing "Squigygate" tapes and continually refers to Diana as vain and mentally unbalanced. Campbell uses the term "Birdbrained Spendthirft" often to describe Diana, while in the next chapter actually saintifying (if there's such a word) Sarah Ferguson, whose well-publicized dalliances are dismissed because Prince Andrew remained devoted, obsessed and forgiving. (And, to this reader, as "thick" as his former lovers dub him.)

   True, this was written before Diana's death, but the late Princess of Wales charitable works and popularity was/is undeniable -- and for her misfortune and real victimization to be turned against her in a vicious manner makes the chapters on the Charles and Diana marriage almost unreadable.

   For those less familiar with the older royals, the book refreshes gossip about Prince Phillips dalliances and some more-information-than-you-need-to-know sexual information about the now 98-year-old Queen Mother.

   In all, not a very satisfying read, given the many books that tackle the subject well. With a combination of bad, seemingly unedited writing (that's very difficult to follow) and such an ugly bias, royal watchers might be better served reading more accurate and engaging biographies on the English monarchy.

No comments about Charles Dickens' World: 2.

No comments about The Queen: A Revealing Look at the Private Life of Elizabeth II.

1 comments about Melbourne.

1. Listed as number 100 in Modern Library's list of best non-fiction books, this volume consists of Young Melbourne written in 1939 and Lord M published in 1954. It is political biography that manages to let the reader get fully involved with the person before he becomes a public figure. Lord Melbourne is just as interesting as romantic hero, whose wife flirts with both Lord Byron and bouts of madness, as he is as leader of the British Empire. Through the pages of Young Melbourne, it is difficult to imagine his almost accidental rise to power. Melbourne's final transitions to mentor of young Queen Victoria and forgotten political relic are covered with both sympathy to the character and enough detachment to maintain authorial objectivity.
   
   With an elegant style, Lord David reveals Melbournes "starved heart" and his curious character. In a day of absurdly packaged public figures, Melbourne is striking in his enduring individuality and idiosyncrasy.
   
   I would give a 4 plus rating for lovers of pre-Victorian British history or political biography and a 3 for the general reader.

2 comments about Peter the Great.

1. This is not the complete Tolstoi book in translation - much of the later Russian original book is cut out and the paperback book cuts off long before Tolstoi's full writing ends! Tolstoi's original carries through Peter's wars with Sweden and his later life, this one simply stops at the rebellion. It is not the complete book and should not be sold as if it were.



2. I have read this book in the original Russian version twice - once in my teens, and then when I was older. It was so good that I recommended it to my husband, who is an american, and loves histoical novels. What a disapointment it was when we discovered that this book containes only the first volume. It abruptly ends in the middle of Peter's life, before he meets Catherine I, wins war with Sweden, and builds St. Petersburg. If you are really interested in reading this wonderful book, look for another publisher who has both volumes.

No comments about Her Majesty; The Romance of the Queens of England, 1066-1910 (Essay Index Reprint Series).

No comments about George IV.

No comments about Child of My Love.

No comments about History of Friedrich II of Prussia.

1 comments about Queen Victoria (Monarchy).

1. This is a lovely little book with wonderful illustrations and photos of Queen Victoria. I found it interesting and informative. Many of the photos were ones rarely seen in other biographies. Worth having to add to your victoriana.