Just Finished Reading: The Last Emperor of Mexico – A Disaster in the New World by Edward Shawcross (FP: 2021) [288pp] 

Many years ago, I remember watching a Western on TV and was confused more than a little when a bunch of American mercenaries ambushed some French cavalry (complete with shiny breastplates and lances) in Mexico. I couldn't help but wonder: what on earth are FRENCH cavalry doing in Mexico? I presumed that they might have been protecting French interests or maybe the French ambassador. Or that they might have been 'on loan' to the Mexican Emperor Maximilian who I presumed was Spanish... I was partially right. The French forces were indeed 'on loan' to the emperor who was, in fact, Austrian. The things you learn. 

I'll freely admit that my 'knowledge' of Mexican history was effectively zero (essentially things gleaned from some of the older westerns) until I finished this intriguing book. I think the biggest surprise was the actual nationality of the emperor himself. It turned out that he was the annoying younger brother of the emperor of the Austro-Hungarian Empire who was 'looking for a role' in the world. Maximilian's name came up in conversation with Napoleon III of France and, after some initial resistance, was thought to be a good fit for the position. Unfortunately, there were just a few problems. Firstly, no one had actually asked the Mexican ruling class what they thought (to say nothing of the people themselves). At that time Mexico was going through a slow-motion Civil War between Conservative and Liberal forces and the imposition of a new Emperor could be political dynamite or, as some hoped, the thing which managed to bring things together. A bigger issue was the Monroe Doctrine of the United States which prohibited any European power from interfering in America's backyard. The idea of an Austrian monarch ruling a neighbouring country and propped up by French forces would not exactly sit well in Washington.  

Fortunately, both problems seemed to have solutions. Firstly, Maximilian was lied to about his support within Mexico and Second, the US became engaged in a Civil War with the breakaway Confederacy. Pre-occupied at home it was expected that if the Confederacy won then the Monroe problem would go away and if the Union won (eventually) they would be weakened and presented with a fait accompli. As you might imagine these were far from solid foundations for a new regime. 

The saddest thing about the whole fiasco is that Maximilian had the very best of intentions regarding his new country. The problem (along with everything else mentioned above) was that Max was both incredibly naive and focused on ALL of the wrong things – for example detailed court protocol rather than boring finances. Maximilian expected that his very presence would be enough to stabilise the country and that the people would love him BECAUSE his was their emperor. Despite being clear that it was going to be a disaster from the outset it was actually mesmerising to watch an entire country turn into a train wreck month by month over a few short years. I only had the smallest of hints that any of this had happened, and the details regularly blew my mind. Quite fascinating and a must read for anyone with even the vaguest interest in Mexican/American history. 

['The Last' Project has (finally) started...! More to come.] 

Just Finished Reading: A History of Britain in 21 Women by Jenni Murray (FP: 2016) [276pp] 

It is a truth (generally acknowledged) that many women have been ‘written out’ of History. Part of this is through ignorance, but part of it is intentional and at least part of the authors intentions with this interesting book was to put part of that oversight right. Another part was to showcase women she admires and who she took as examples to aspire to. Most of the list was pretty obvious – indeed unavoidable – given British history. Women such as Boadicea (using the old spelling that both the author and I grew up with) and Elizabeth I are shoe-ins on any such list as this. Others I was either unaware of – like Aphra Behn (a 17th century playwright) or Ethel Smyth (a 19th century composer) or only knew in passing.  

Naturally a good chunk of the text, and a good number of the women listed, revolved around the movement for and the gradual increase of the Rights of Woman, with an expected chapter on Mary Wollstonecraft, and included Emmeline Pankhurst, Millicent Garrett Fawcett and Constance Markievicz who was the first woman MP elected in the 1918 General Election. Nancy Astor (also getting her own chapter here) was actually the first woman MP to take her seat in the House of Commons as Constance Markievicz had refused to do so as a member of Sinn Fein who boycotted the English parliament in protest at the lack of Home Rule for Ireland. 

The last few women on this list had the extra ‘wrinkle’ of having actually being interviewed by the author during her career as a journalist. These included Labour politician Barbara Castle (who I liked), Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (who I voted for TWICE) and fashion designer Mary Quant (who I definitely want to read more about). Rounding the list out was Scottish SNP Leader Nicola Sturgeon whose political career has been.... ‘interesting’ to say the least, especially lately! 

Overall, this was an interesting read which introduced me to a few objects of further interest as well as showcasing the fact that women did actually exist in the historical past and did actually have an impact on British history. One of the things I find most gratifying, even in just the 10 years since the publication of this work, is the number and range of women's biographies from across the globe that have plucked important (and often fascinating) women from the previous obscurity they had been condemned to inhabit. Definitely worth your time for both snapshots of British history and as an introduction to some of the women who helped shape it. More to come. 

Just Finished Reading: Istanbul – Memories and the City by Orhan Pamuk (FP: 2005) [333pp] 

On reading this interesting memoir by the Nobel Prize winning Turkish author I was pleased that I had read a history of modern Istanbul beforehand. This is, however, no criticism of this work. The previous history of the city gave me a good – indeed excellent – foundation to understand the deeper context that pervaded this work. The author was born in Istanbul in 1952 (around the time that the previous history book ended its narrative) so grew up in a city in the midst of change – from ancient to modern, from East to West, from religious to secular. It's not surprising that such a transition moulded and transformed the other into someone, in effect, living between two worlds and being nostalgic for a world that had been ‘lost’ (and was indeed crumbling or actively burning down around him) whilst struggling to exist in an officially sanctioned modern western looking world that was unfamiliar to him. It's odd how the official focus was very much directed at the west as an icon to look up to and emulate whilst the countries, and cities, rich Ottoman history was officially ignored, sidelined and sometimes actually denigrated. I think that would confuse anyone – never mind a sensitive soul searching for himself whilst walking the streets of an ancient city full of a rich culture from across an extensive fallen empire. I wasn’t at all surprised that his first impulse was to paint in order to reflect what he saw every day on his youthful wanderings. 

This was a memoir of painful honesty. The common theme throughout was the deep melancholy he felt growing up in a place that had not only seemed to forget its own history but had effectively been ordered to do so. Looking back was frowned upon. Wanting to look back, needing to look back to make sense of things was questionable and quite possibly disloyal. The only way to face was forwards and westwards. The authors quest for who he was and where he fitted into the grand scheme of things – especially within a Turkish historical context – was complicated (to say the least!) by his families emotional and financial slow-motion collapse throughout his young life. Despite being born into a moderately wealthy family (from money accumulated by his grandfather) his father continued to make bad financial decisions throughout his life bleeding money and slowly impoverishing the extended family. On top of this the authors father was often away from home and all too often with women other than his wife. This added complication was woven into the narrative almost as a microcosm of the city itself as it progressively crumbled, collapsed and was neglected into picturesque rubble. 

Apart from the often-beautiful writing (you can certainly tell why he won the Nobel Prize for Literature) the thing that I really liked about this book was the many photographs scattered throughout the text. Many of them were good and quite a few were simply excellent – sometimes breathtakingly so. I was MOST impressed. This book gives a great feel to the city of the author’s birth. He makes it seem exotic and familiar, dilapidated and picturesque, crowded and abandoned, timeless and ephemeral. I found it quite haunting. I look forward to reading more by this author and will likely be returning to him later in the year. Definitely recommended for anyone interested in the liminal spaces – in more ways than one - between the west and the exotic east. 

Translated from the Turkish by Maureen Freely

Just Finished Reading: The Men of 1924 – Britain's First Labour Government by Peter Clark (FP: 2023) [238pp] 

It was a risk but, they thought, worth it. The recent election had not provided any part with a clear majority but there was enough Liberal support to allow the brand-new Labour Party to form a government – the first in British history. Views across the country varied with political affiliation. Socialists, of which there were a growing number, saw it as an opportunity to gain for the working man and push back against the Capitalists. The trade unions saw it as an opportunity to bring in new laws and strike down old ones to protect jobs and improve the often-harsh working conditions in factories and mines. The working-class voters wanted to see what they could do, to give them a chance. 

The elected Labour politicians had hopes too, but they also were more than aware of the pitfalls and problems ahead of them. The first and foremost was the simple calculation of the number of Labour MPs – not enough. Certainly not enough to do anything ‘radical’ (as some members and some supporters certainly wanted them to do), not that the Labour leadership wanted any truck with that. Feared as either communists in sheep's clothing or some other form or revolutionary (as some of them were!) the leadership wanted to prove to the electorate – including Conservative and Liberal voters – that the country was in ‘safe hands’ despite everything they had heard or read in the papers. So, it was part ‘business as usual’ and part dressing appropriately to meet the King. 

A problem the whole Labour government was more than aware of – for obvious reasons – was their sheer lack of experience. Although many of the new members had been – and indeed many still were – leaders of various trade unions – few had been council leaders or in any other kind of administrative positions and fewer yet had knowledge or experience of foreign affairs. Picking cabinet posts was going to be difficult and challenging. Choosing members of the House of Lords to aid in any legislation was going to be even more of a challenge.  

Unfortunately, the opportunities to gain experience, pass meaningful legislation and prove to the electorate that they had nothing to fear from a Labour administration ended abruptly after only 10 months in office with the withdrawal of Liberal support and the loss of a confidence vote. Although they increased the number of MPs in the subsequent election, the Conservatives with Stanly Baldwin at the lead were back in power – and with a majority. The Labour experiment was over – for now. 

This was a surprisingly interesting – indeed often fascinating – look at the 20th century seismic political shift in British politics. For generations previously there had been two political parties – Conservative and Liberal. The growing Working class tended to vote Liberal but for a number of reasons that allegiance was falling away. Slowly (indeed very slowly) the number of Labour MPs increased and were increasingly voted into parliament. But it was only in 1924 that enough had done so to form a government – minority or not. Split into 3 parts – the political shift and the growth of Socialism, the government itself and mini-biographies of the men involved (the leader, Ramsey MacDonald, getting a whole chapter to himself) - this was chocked full of information and I honestly learnt a LOT.  

I do actually have quite the fascination for the ‘Between the Wars’ period as the world recovered from one global conflict and then prepared for another and this fills in a gap in my knowledge very nicely indeed. I have another book about this presently sitting on my Wish List so I’ll be deepening my knowledge of this event soon(ish). I’ll also see about adding a few more Prime Ministers from this period to my ‘list’. Definitely recommended for anyone interested in the emergence of British socialism and the Labour movement.

Just Finished Reading: Wanderers – A History of Women Walking by Kerri Andrews (2020) [263pp] 

This was an ideal ‘coupling’ with my previous walking book, so I was more than a little pleased to pick it up for a song at my (excellent) local Charity shop. Covering the lives and walks of 10 famous female authors this was often an eye-opening read. The author is both a keen hillwalker and a senior lecturer in English Literature so had (both) feet in each camp.  

Of the 10 authors I’m afraid that I’d only heard of (and read) 3 of them – Virginia Woolf, Anais Nin and Cheryl Strayed. In my ignorance I hadn’t realised that the poet Woodsworth had a sister equally as obsessed in walking their local environment (especially in the Lake District) as he was. The others – Elizabeth Carter, Ellen Weeton, Sarah Stoddart Hazlitt, Harriet Martineau, Nan Shepherd and Linda Cracknell were all completely new to me. 

They were, to say the least, an INTERESTING bunch of women. Not only were many accomplished authors of their time they were also accomplished walkers much to the astonishment and exhaustion of male friends, family and the larger society. Women walking LONG distances, especially on their own, was viewed as quite bizarre – radical even. Despite this (or maybe a little because of it) they managed walking tours or eye-watering length in Scotland, the North of England or (in Cheryl Strayed’s case) the Pacific Crest Trail. 

One woman who particularly interested me was Ellen Weeton, an early 19th century Lancashire governess and hill climber. She was born in Upholland near Wigan which is where my sister presently lives and not too far from where I spent most of my formative years (11-23). Despite not having a private income (like so many of the other early examples in the book) she still managed to ‘bag’ numerous hills shaking off any male guides or company that might slow her down or prevent her from exploring mid-trek. She sounded like quite the formidable character! 

The only (slight) ‘criticism’ that I had with this was the sometimes-over-enthusiastic focus on a few of the listed women to the detriment of narrative flow. It's certainly forgivable but I felt that just a little more restraint would have helped tighten things up a bit. Apart from that (very) minor niggle I found myself liking this very much indeed. If you’re a walker, interested in rather eccentric people (there’s plenty in here for everyone), or want to delve into some of the other aspects of authors/poets lives then this is a book for you. Recommended. 

Just Finished Reading: Churchill & Orwell – The Fight for Freedom by Thomas E Ricks (FP: 2017) [270pp] 

It surprised me that two of the early 20th centuries icons never met. Although Orwell and Churchill ‘crossed paths’ - although never at the same time or place – they only read each other's works at a distance. Even more surprising, as the author points out, was the fact that we know of them at all. From an early age Winston liked to put himself into the middle of things, partially for the sheer thrill and (more importantly) in order to gain a public reputation that could be converted into electoral votes. He was in the thick of things – with bullets flying – on the Afghan border, South Africa (where he was captured and escaped from a POW camp) and Cuba. Interestingly, it was in New York 1931 (aged 57) where he was hit by a car and suffered several cracked ribs and a slashed skull. If the car had been going faster and the injuries had been worse then England would have been denied its iconic Prime Minister in its (and his) finest hour. Likewise, Orwell was shot in the throat (everyone in the area assumed he would be dead before they reached him or soon after) in Spain during the Civil War in 1937. Imagine a world without Homage to Catalonia, Animal Farm or 1984. Would anyone even know who George Orwell was today?   

Covering the two greats' lives and their formative years, this quite excellent look how their joint opposition to authoritarianism (of BOTH extremes) shaped both their lives and the word we live in today (and indeed some of the very language we use to describe and think about it – imagine a world without the concert of Orwellian politics). Churchill was an anti-Fascist from the earliest days and spent his wilderness years vainly warning Britain (and by extension the Western Powers) about the rise of the authoritarian leaders in both Italy and Germany. Although Churchill was pleased when Germany was stupid enough to invade the Soviet Union, he already had great misgivings about Stalin and never trusted him. For Winston it was a clear ‘enemy of my enemy’ temporary accommodation. Orwell's journey was a little more complex. Although never a Communist he was most definitely ‘of the Left’ and felt the need to do something (other than write) about the fighting in Spain. Randomly allocated a position in an Anarchist division it wasn’t long before his direct experiences soured him to the Russian ‘advisors’ in the war zone and not much longer after that he was warned that both himself and his wife had been added to an effective ‘capture & kill’ list. It transpired that the true enemies of the Communists were not their Fascist foes but the more ‘politically dangerous’ Socialists and Anarchists.  

This was VERY well written (as you might expect from a Pulitzer Prize winner) and often honestly fascinating. If you’re interested what drove Winston Churchill so hard during WW2 and what underlay Orwell’s political beliefs and informed his later and most famous works, this is definitely the book for you. One of the highlights of the year. I’m looking forward to (finally) reading the authors book on the Iraq war. 

Just Finished Reading: How Churchill Waged War – The Most Challenging Decisions of the Second World War by Allen Packwood (FP: 2018) [264pp] 

You really can’t discuss (or arguably understand) the Second World War without reference to Winston Churchill. Although he wasn’t British Prime Minister at its outbreak, indeed he was still very much in the political wilderness at that point, it wasn’t long before he assumed that position on the resignation of Neville Chamberlain. But what made him such an effective leader and how did he cope (and indeed keep his job) when things went badly wrong? 

This honestly fascinating analysis of Churchill’s strategic and political thinking during WW2 not only increased my appreciation of the man himself but really enhanced my understanding of the North Africa campaign in particular. Previously I had looked on the fighting there in a simple one-dimensional fashion – it was to protect the Suez Canal and the MUCH shorter route to India and the rest of the British Empire. This is indeed true – but barely tells half of the story. Of course, the loss of Egypt and the Canal would have been devastating and maybe could have knocked Britain out of the war (or at the very least lengthened the conflict significantly) but its simple retention would have merely enabled the existing status quo. The significance of the North African campaign was far larger than that. Firstly, it would show the Russians that Britain was still in the fight and was drawing away troops from the Russian Front. This, hopefully, would bolster Russian resistance and prevent them from making a separate peace with Germany. Continuing the fighting in the North African desert also showed the Americans that we were not beaten and that it was worth their time and expense to keep sending us weapons and other goods to continue a (potentially) winnable war – despite what Roosevelt’s ambassador to Britain was feeding him. The ongoing conflict in Africa also (probably) had an effect on both Spain and Turkey preventing them from joining the Axis Powers (although I don’t think that Spain seriously contemplated this so soon after their Civil War). Finally, despite the victory in the Battle of Britain (as well as the ongoing slog in the Battle of the Atlantic) the British Army had yet to develop the fighting skills to beat the Germans in particular (the Italian Army was CRUSHED in the early North Africa battles) at their own game. Once the right General was in place and the right weapons in his arsenal the Afrika Corps was sent packing, and the strategic initiative started to swing in favour of the Allies. The rest, as they say, is History. 

As the author is the Director of the Churchill Archives Centre it should come as no surprise that this is a deeply researched work. Covering the initial decision to assume the role as Prime Minister, to the type of Government he created on the assumption of that role (being both PM and the first Minister of Defence), to the competing demands of fighting in France and then coping with her defeat, his approach to both the USSR and the USA as allies or potential allies, to coping with (and politically surviving) the Fall of Singapore (something I MUST read far more about) to, finally, Churchill’s decision to fight the 1945 General Election on his war record – and LOSE! I learnt a LOT from this book, and it has become one of the best Churchill books I’ve read so far. Highly recommended to anyone who wants to understand British warfighting policy in WW2 and those who want a deeper insight into how Winston thought and fought. 

Just Finished Reading: We Are What We Read – A Life Within and Without Books by Vybarr Cregan-Reid (FP: 2024) [271pp] 

After reading and enjoying a previous book by this author (on RUNNING indeed!) I snapped this up on a recent visit to my local Indie bookshop. The plus factor, I would’ve picked it up anyway, was the fact that it was on books and the importance of reading for personal growth. It turned out to be much more than that. 

Essentially the book was divided into three streams which met up, mixed and then separated throughout the text. The main thrust, as you might expect, was about books themselves and how reading them changes us in positive ways. The author pointed to several studies were reading serious (or ‘proper’) literature actually increased a person's empathy, not just at the time, not just for a short time afterwards, but (apparently) permanently by rewiring the brain itself. Presumably “Literature” was used, rather than ‘just’ standard novels because the tests would’ve been performed on Uni students and by educated and professional scientists who wouldn’t ‘stoop’ to using trashy novels that the rest of us read? [I think this is the only, very minor, irritation I had with the whole book – the emphasis on ‘literary’ novels rather than ‘popular’ (and, by implication, trash) ones. 

The vehicle used to showcase the power of books and reading, and their capacity to induce change, was the author’s own lived experience. Much like me, although he COULD read, he showed very little interest in reading until quite late in life. With me it was around the age of 14. With the author it was much later – in his 20’s - but it happened in much the same way. One day a friend (who worked at a publishing house) dropped a book in his lap and advised him to read it. Which he did – eventually – and it completely blew his mind. After that he was (again eventually) reading everything that author had produced, then similar things, then other things and on.... Eventually someone suggested he go to Uni and STUDY literature which, eventually he did, followed by a MA and a PhD and then a teaching job. 

The third, and probably least interesting, theme in the book was the LONG war by the UK government on the Humanities in general and English in particular because, supposedly, such studies are not ‘useful’ or ‘practical’. It always used to both annoy and amuse me whenever I was home that my mother would ask what I was doing my latest degree ‘for’, as if everything had to be work related or have immediate/practical application. Of course, Education in its broadest sense is MUCH more than that – and doubly so with the Humanities or English. 

Although this wasn’t QUITE what I was expecting – especially the author struggling with being a gay teenager in Britain in the 1980’s during the AIDS epidemic/panic - I still enjoyed it a great deal. It did twinge my deeply entrenched belief that I am nowhere near ‘well-read’ (whatever THAT means) a few times and prompt me to dig into my Classics pile looking for books he recommended, but I forgave him for that. Overall, this is a very personal ‘love-letter’ to books and reading as well as a plea for its continued place for study in the University. Recommended. 

Just Finished Reading: Priests De La Resistance! - The Loose Cannons Who Fought Fascism in the 20th Century by Fergus Butler-Gallie (FP: 2019) [260pp] 

To be honest it was difficult to resist a book with a pun both in the title AND the sub-title. No doubt it helped that the book also covered an odd aspect of WW2 and I’m always looking for the odd nooks and crannies of that particular conflict. I’ve long been interested in resistance movements across the globe and across time with a particular focus on the French resistance in particular. My reading, up to this point, has looked at the political aspects of this resistance especially focusing on the Communists and local Nationalist groups in various European countries. This was something quite different looking instead at the religious (exclusively Christian here) side of things. 

Looking at around 15 examples (all but 2 from occupied Europe during WW2) this was a fascinating, uplifting, harrowing and sometimes honestly funny look at some of the priests, nuns and other religious characters who put everything on the line to fight Fascism. Sadly (showing my lack of knowledge in this area) the vast majority of the people mentioned where completely unknown to me. The only one I recognised was Dietrich Bonhoeffer – not a name easily forgotten once discovered. Naturally one of the things I love about books like this is that they introduce me too a whole new side of things and to fascinating people of which I was previously ignorant. Being an ‘odd-ball’ myself (although generally I don’t think of *myself* that way) I was delighted to see just how ‘odd’ this cast of characters was. I think almost without exception they were outliers in their own faith organisations and all too often barely tolerated by their ecclesiastical hierarchy. Honestly, I liked them instantly! But it didn’t surprise me that someone who was a constant thorn in the side of their bishops or others above them was equally a thorn in the side (and often much more) to the Fascist authorities who tried to control them. Above all else it was their faith that not only sustained them through the years of Occupation but it was their faith that drove their opposition to Fascist ideology and the practical effects of it – from deportation of Jewish populations to the general oppression of the local population. 

Reading these potted biographies its difficult not to be uplifted by their efforts (often valuable, life-saving, inspirational) to fight a very real evil in their midst. I also found it difficult not only to admire these men and women who put their lives a distant second to doing the right thing but to love them for what they did. They were probably ‘difficult’ people in a whole host of ways but I do think they would have been fun – lovely provocative fun – to have in your community and most especially to know them or, if you were very lucky, to be friends with them. Told with a wonderful style I really enjoyed reading about a whole host of people that shouldn’t really be allowed to fade into historic obscurity. Definitely recommended and I’ll be looking out for the authors previous work on the English clergy. 

Just Finished Reading: The Trigger – The Hunt for Gavrilo Princip: The Assassin who Brought the World to War by Tim Butcher (FP: 2014) [297pp] 

When the young Serbian assassin, Gavrilo Princip, stepped out of the crowd in Sarajevo in 1914, fired twice and killed the heir to the Austrian crown and his wife, what exactly was he trying to achieve? What did he expect to happen next? One thing he didn’t think would happen was that he’d live to see the end of that day – a cyanide capsule attested to that fact. What he had hoped was that he would live up to his heroes and strike back against the oppressors of his country and his people – the Serbs. He may well have expected Austria to go to war with Serbia over the attack, but Princip expected that this war would be short and that it would bring together the Balkan states to throw off Imperial domination. Did he think it might result in a larger war? Possibly. In the recent past, Russia had voiced both official and private support for its southern neighbour. But Russia was also an Empire and also a Monarchy. Could they really support the act of someone who struck at the heart of both? It was not an academic question. The lives of millions might rest on how that question was answered. 

But who exactly was Princip, where did he come from, and why did he think Franz Ferdinands death was worth his young life? These questions are what the author sought to find out – but not in a way I expected. The book's subtitle pointed me in the wrong direction. I had assumed, wrongly it turned out, that this book was about the Austrian, or indeed local police, hunt for the assassin. However, Princip was apprehended at the scene of the shooting and arrested immediately. The ‘hunt’ in question was for the history, the personality and the radicalisation of the assassin himself. But the book turned out to be much more than that. The author was a journalist during the Balkan/Yugoslav Wars in the 1990’s so knew the region and the people’s reasonably well. He had made life-long friends there and seen things that haunted him to the present. Part of the book was the author relating his experiences as he, and friend, visited Princip’s home village, talked to surviving family and then travelled in his footsteps (often literally) from his home to Sarajevo and that fateful meeting.  

Part history of the events and the conspiracy leading up to the assassination, part discussion of the 90’s conflict, part high-level history of the region, and part travelogue this was an intriguing mix and story threads that worked really well. It showed where Princip came from – both geographically and culturally – how he arrived at his destination – both physically and politically and how it impacted on the region both at the time and how echoes of that event still reverberate today. It was, in many ways, a very interesting (and sometimes haunting) narrative. Definitely recommended for a new look at one of the defining moments of modern times.  

Just Finished Reading: The Assassination of the Archduke – Sarajevo 1914 and the Murder That Changed the World by Greg King and Sue Woolmans (FP: 2013) [292pp] 

I think it is more than arguable that THE pivotal moment (or most definitely A pivotal moment) in the 20th century occurred on 28th June 1914 when a young Serbian man shot and killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie on the streets of Sarajevo. A little over 4 weeks later Europe and the world was at war – a conflict that accounted for around 20 million deaths. Like most people, in the West at least, I certainly knew OF the event and some of the details behind it. What I didn’t realise, until reading this excellent book, was just how many details I was unaware of. 

The book was essential formatted into two halves – covering the life and (apparently very happy) marriage of the archduke in the first section and the more immediate run-up to the assassination in the second half. Naturally I enjoyed the second half more – being the person that I am – but the first half was FAR from boring. It was interesting that Franz never even entertained the idea of eventually becoming Emperor of Austria-Hungary. He was 4th in line and only an unusual set of circumstances led him to the cusp of that role. I also had no idea just how controversial his marriage was. Apparently by marrying a mere countess – who he was apparently deeply in love with – he ‘shamed the Imperial crown’ and was made to suffer repeated public humiliation because of it. Indeed, he had to sign an agreement that his children would not be allowed to inherit any rights, privileges or position once he became Emperor. [Side note: This is known as a morganatic marriage: relating to or denoting a marriage in which neither the spouse of lower rank, nor any children, have any claim to the possessions or title of the spouse of higher rank. This was obvious a favourite word of the authors who, throughout the book used it repeatedly. Although I wasn’t exactly counting, they must have used it 30 times at a minimum and I wouldn’t be in the least surprised if the use count exceeded 50 times. Although it did start to get irritating after a while I did eventually find it funny.] After YEARS of public abuse for marrying for love I, personally, would have used very undiplomatic language to tell the Empire what it could do, and where it could stick, the crown. Franz (and especially Sophie) were made of sterner stuff. 

The assassination itself was, well, weird. Even at the time there was much speculation that it was the result of a conspiracy. In effect, of course, it was – just (maybe) not the conspiracy some people were thinking of. There was definitely a conspiracy involving the assassins themselves. On top of that there was another conspiracy by members of the Serbian military to train, arm and assist the assassins in their attempt. What is not so clear, despite some very strange goings-on, was if there was any AUSTRIAN complicity in the killing. Franz didn’t want to go to Sarajevo but was essentially ordered to do so by the emperor, the visit and the route was advertised months in advance, the archduke's personal security detail was left at the local rail station because of lack of transport for them, the local governor (despite protestations) failed to arrange additional security for the event or even take normal standard precautions and on... All VERY strange. Was it a set-up? I think there’s a distinct possibility. Austria was certainly looking for an excuse to ‘deal’ with Serbia once and for all and an attempted assassination would provide that very excuse. If the archduke was actually killed....? Well, there was always someone around to take his place on the throne. 

Apart from the mildly irritating ‘morganatic’ on repeat this was a very interesting read. I learnt a lot about the run-up to the event itself as well as the immediate aftermath. Together with a few more upcoming reads I’m now much more aware of why and how Europe and the world ended up fighting one of the most destructive wars in our long and bloody history and why the world remains in such a mess today. All because a car paused at the side of a street in exactly the wrong place at the wrong time. SO many ‘what-ifs’ spring from that day. So many possibilities... Definitely recommended to anyone interested in how the Great War started. More to come – soon. 

Just Finished Reading: The Road to Wigan Pier by George Orwell (FP: 1937) [212pp] 

I grew up (ages 10-23) about 7 miles from Wigan so it's not that surprising that I’d heard about this classic for as long as I can remember. Recently, especially after reading another non-fiction by Orwell, I thought it was about time I finally got around to reading it. It wasn’t really what I was expecting and, to be honest, I was a little disappointed that Wigan itself didn’t appear more prominently in the narrative. But that was my only, very minor, quibble with this work. 

The word that comes to mind concerning his descriptions of working-class life in the North of England around that time is: grim. Not only was unemployment rife and of long duration – the area was only just beginning to recover from the Great Depression despite industrial uptick due to the ongoing (slow) rearmament program – but the general living conditions were often appalling. Born in a dilapidated Victorian terrace myself (built I think in 1888) I could easily visualise Orwell’s accounts of the houses he stayed in during his time there. I could also sympathise with the tales of overcrowding – although I have no solid memory of such – as my parents and my brother and I shared a TWO-bedroom house with my maternal grandparents. How we actually managed that is beyond me! 

Another early section that really jumped out at me was his description of a visit to a coal mine and a discussion of the conditions below ground as well as how poorly treated (and paid) the coalminers were. In the 1970’s - so a little over a generation later – my school offered a trip to one of the last working coal mines in the area. I THINK it was probably Golborne Colliery. So, when Orwell described the conditions at the coalface and the hardship of just getting there and back – UPAID – I was right there with him. The group of us (plus a teacher or two) only stayed there a few hours but by the time we got back I was both exhausted and filthy – and we hadn’t actually DONE anything. The guys who actually WORKED down there, 8, 10 or more hours a day, week in and week out – just the thought of it amazes me, as it did Orwell who had nothing but praise for them. 

Whilst the first half of the book covered conditions for the workers – both above and below ground – the second half moved onto more political and sociological discussions of Class which was much more important and honestly rigid almost 100 years ago. Orwell had some interesting ideas about the prospect of a ‘classless’ society as well as the problems of ‘social mixing’. In some ways little has changed, although so-called social mobility is far easier these days where money talks louder than old-school ties – at least in most places. I did find it interesting when Orwell mused on the possible future European war and the dangerous rise of fascism both on the Continent and in England itself. Interestingly he thought that fascism could indeed take hold here if it wasn’t intelligently challenged.  

Overall, this was a very interesting look at a particular Class in a particular part of England at a particular time – and viewed (of course) from a Middle-class perspective [Orwell was VERY conscious of his position in the class hierarchy and that in itself was another fascinating look at the lived experience of the control system that Class was/is]. Inevitably this was at times very dated – a LOT has changed in the last 90 years or so – and, as a look into a very different world, could be quite confusing at times – even the language used was different in some ways back then – but as a brief glimpse of a slice of cultural/political/industrial history it's definitely worth a read and is worthy of the name Classic. More Orwell to come. Recommended.  

Just Finished Reading: Darkest Hour – How Churchill Brought Us Back from the Brink by Anthony McCarten (FP: 2017) [265pp] 

It is arguably the most important political transition in modern UK history – from Neville Chamberlain to Winston Churchill in May 1940. But how exactly did it happen and, more importantly, why Churchill? Like many people I was hugely impressed by Gary Oldman’s portrayal of Winston in the 2017 movie also written and co-produced by this author. Apart from humanising an iconic figure it also showed the sometimes-fraught events that led to Churchill becoming Prime Minister (as well as the newly created role of Minister of Defence) at just the moment he was needed. 

Even before the Germans advanced into the Low Countries on their way to France it was clear that Chamberlain’s appeasement policy had failed. With the crisis only deepening it wasn’t long before the Labour opposition was calling for his resignation. But who would replace him? The two options – neither of which seemed good at the time – were Lord Halifax or Winston Churchill, with Halifax being championed by the incumbent Conservative party and Churchill insisted on by Labour. Both men had their problems: Halifax stated time and again that he didn’t want the job of PM but would only serve if there was no good alternative. The other issue is that he was a Lord – so couldn’t sit in the House of Commons, which would be quite an impediment going forward! Churchill, meanwhile, was loathed and mistrusted by many. He had changed parties (twice!) before and was seen as fundamentally unreliable. He was seen as a maverick (true) and as a hot head (also true). But he had opposed the Appeasement policy from the outset and had consistently pointed out the dangers of Germany’s growing power and ambition. Over the space of several weeks both factions manoeuvred to get ‘their man’ into position with Churchill, as we know, getting the job in the nick of time. 

This was an interesting read. The author looked at those eventful days through the lens of 3 iconic speeches Churchill gave – to Parliament in two cases and to the public with one more – showing how they came to be, and the techniques Winston used (including trying out various phrasing on people to see what reaction they had to them). That was a nice touch. The other thing he focused on was the number of meetings – both before and after Churchill became PM – and how they shaped the arguments for and against each man taking up the top job. I did have some criticism here when the author speculated on what exactly was said BEFORE the minute taker arrived. I did think this was a step too far to be honest and soured my opinion of the book a bit (although only a bit). One important thing to remember is that the minutes of a meeting never fully reflect what was said during it. I’ve been in FAR too many meetings and had taken minutes in a few to understand that. The minutes are not, and are not intended to be, a verbatim report of what was said. If that was the case, they’d be far less coherent than they actually are! Minutes reflect what was meant to be said. The chair often directs the minute taker NOT to record something that is not wanted in the record. Once the minutes are taken and they typed up, they’re circulated around the participants and amended, before being re-typed and re-circulated for final approval. Only once they have been approved – in effect twice – are they finally released to a larger audience and become an official record. So, minutes might very well reflect what was said (in a general way) but they are ultimately designed for public consumption (and History) rather than a real-time account and this is why, by and large, tape records are not allowed in meetings – they record EXACTLY what happened! 

But anyway, I’m not completely convinced that Halifax had much of a chance of being PM (even if the King did indeed prefer him to Winston) or that Churchill was *such* an outsider that parliament would’ve turned him down – especially with such an existential crisis upon us. From what I know (more to come on THAT subject), the political drama in the movie was ramped up more than a little. Chamberlain clearly had to go – not least because he was dying of cancer as well as being WAY out of his depth as a wartime Prime Minister. Halifax *might* have been suitable if no one else was available. Luckily, for so many people, Churchill not only was available but seemed to be MADE for the role. It was a long time coming but he was the right person in the right role at exactly the right time. How different things could’ve been without him. Recommended (with a few caveats) and much more to come on this pivotal moment. Oh, and if you haven’t seen the movie... Do so. It’s EXCELLENT. 

[Labels Added: 0, Labels Total: 75]  

Just Finished Reading: Rebel Writers – The Accidental Feminists by Celia Brayfield (FP: 2019) [246pp] 

I’d heard of a group of male authors in the 50’s and 60’s called The Angry Young Men (writers such as Stan Barstow, John Braine, John Osborne and Alan Sillitoe amongst others) and I even have some, typically unread, books by them but I had never heard about the ‘Angry Young Women’ who were their contemporaries. Of course, much was made of the men’s efforts and many column inches appeared in the papers discussing their new, radical, ‘kitchen sink drama’ style of writing featured between the pages of a book or on the BBC’s Play of the Week. The women, and often very young women, were seen as more exotic and not a little transgressive – becoming published authors in their TEENS and writing about poverty, sex, abortion (illegal at that time) and contraception (difficult to obtain until the advent of the Pill and even then, only initially available to married women). In some cases, most notably with Edna O’Brien, their books were vilified and, in some cases, actively banned for years after initial publication. Even a successful print run had its own problems attached – from media pressure, fame (however brief) and the fact that the youngest authors had to have their financial affairs countersigned by their husbands or fathers.  

What these women authors chronicled – although they were singularly unaware of it at the time – was a radical change in British life as old the certainties of their parent’s generation gave way to the more radical, more free and more open 1950’s and 1960’s. They brought, intentionally or not, many of the daily problems experienced by women, and especially working-class women, into the public (and middle-class) domain which inevitably raised questions about solutions of poverty, single parenthood, divorce, childcare, prostitution, the legalisation of abortion, homosexuality, race issues and much more. These authors – both men and women – introduced a new perspective into modern literature: from the bottom looking up rather than from the top (or middle) looking down or, all too often, simply ignoring conditions that were long considered ‘beneath’ them. It was quite a revelation for everyone. 

I’d come across this book (or at least the cover!) some time ago when searching for works on rebels, so when I saw it going cheap in my favourite Indie bookshop picked it up as at least potentially interesting. I’m so glad I did. Not only did I learn a great deal about these authors – only one (Edna O’Brien) I’d tried before – but also about the times they wrote about. Although I hadn’t actually heard of many of the authors before, I had come across much of their output in movie adaptation or in play form on TV such as ‘The L-shaped Room’, ‘A Taste of Honey’, ‘Up the Junction’, ‘Poor Cow’ and ‘Georgy Girl’. What made an already interesting subject even more so was the excellent writing by the author who melded together the lives of the authors themselves, the times they were writing in (and about), the on-going social upheaval they witnessed and helped along, the reactions of critics and the reading public (plus both politicians and churchmen) to their output and much else perfectly. It was all quite fascinating! If you have any interest in this radical period of British literature and theatre or just in post-War Britain and the emergence of the ‘Swinging Sixties’ this is a definite recommendation. 

[Labels Added: 1, Labels Total: 73] 

Just Finished Reading: The First Four Minutes by Roger Bannister (FP: 1955/2004) [237pp] 

It was one of THOSE challenges. Some thought it impossible, simply beyond human capacity. It certainly seemed that way. For years it had been ever so slowly approached but never surpassed. Of course, there’s nothing quite like the ‘impossible’ to motivate people. But if a man could climb Everest, then a man could run the Four Minute Mile – at least theoretically. The question was: How. Would it be enough to run a series of quarter-mile races in less than a minute or would it take something more, something that would draw on reserves yet to be imagined. Trainee doctor and Oxford University runner was about to find out. 

OK, let’s just start by saying this is a very unusual read for me – I mean, SPORT, right? Not just running for fun but actual competitive sport. So, odd it certainly is. But the breaking of the (proven mythical) Four-Minute mile ‘barrier’ was an iconic post-War achievement so there was a certain appeal to the whole thing. As anyone growing up in England not too long after the event, Bannisters achievement has become part of the English mythos even for non-sports people like me. What I didn’t know, and was most intrigued to find out, was the process behind the headlines. It did not fail to interest – much to my surprise. For one thing this was a very well written book – despite the author being just 26 when this was published. He certainly knew how to build tension and tell a good, often personal, story. 

I think one thing that surprised me most was just how haphazard and amateurish his whole training process was. For most of his early career he had no coach and regime – he essentially did what he thought best and what ‘felt right’. Indeed, he was very sceptical indeed of any kind of rigid dogmatic ideas about running. Bannister ran because he liked it and trained in-between other things – he was training to be a doctor after all. Another thing that surprised me was the fact that, apart from track running, he ran cross-country races and spent his off-hours fell-running and hill climbing, either of which could’ve resulted in sprained or broken ankles despite also aiming at breaking the Four Miles! These days he’d probably be called ‘reckless’ in this regard. The other thing I found particularly interesting was his observations of the (recently) post-War world as he travelled to run in competitions in Europe, Scandinavia, New Zealand and the US. His observations, particularly about early-50's America (most especially compared to austerity Britain still barely recovering from the War) were rather eye-opening! 

I won’t give anything away here by saying that he did, finally, break the Four Minute ‘barrier’ on 6th May 1954 with a time of 3:59.4 seconds. This was a world class record that lasted exactly 46 days before being beaten in Finland by Australian John Landy in 3:58 dead. Rather oddly, just like the ‘sound barrier’, the record for the mile started falling with regularity as soon as it became breakable and now stands at 3:43.13 seconds. Interesting in the book, Bannister believed that the absolute limit was 3:30 seconds on his understanding of human physiology. Definitely a different read for me and an informative one especially if you have any interest in running, sport or sporting records.

[Labels Added: 0, Labels Total: 69]

Just Finished Reading: Churchill and the King – The Wartime Alliance of Winston Churchill and George VI by Kenneth Weisbrode (FP: 2013) [189pp] 

One of the things that most intrigued me in the excellent 2017 movie Darkest Hour (more later!) was the relationship between the newly appointed PM, Winston Churchill and the new(ish) King George VI. To be honest it wasn’t something that I’d ever thought about before as my knowledge of and interest in the Monarchy is generally pretty low. So, when I came across this book I snapped it up. 

Now Winston and the King obviously knew each other for a host of reasons – for one thing they moved in the same circles and Winston had been a minister in various roles long before he became PM. There was also some baggage between the two as Churchill had championed the Kings older brother during the recent, and still raw, Abdication Crisis. So, with all that said and with Winstons' mostly deserved reputation as a maverick and a self-publicist how did they become allies and then, apparently, friends? That is the meat of this surprisingly detailed but slim book. The short answer (or answers) is that they both had a great deal in common – in their personal, family and military histories – and they both had strengths and weaknesses that complemented those of the other. After some reluctance they both came to recognise each other's positive attributes and their shared determination to win the war seemingly against the odds. 

I learnt a LOT here. I’m generally familiar with Churchill’s troubled relationship with power from various readings over the years (much more of that to come I’m afraid) but I knew almost nothing about George VI. I had read a while back about his brother’s abdication and knew that he (George) was at first a reluctant monarch but that was about it. I’m now much more familiar with the man himself and with his relationship with Winston (which I guess was the point of the whole book!). It’s an interesting one. Was the King vital to the defence of the realm in those dark days? No, but he wasn’t irrelevant either. Winston’s job as PM would have been more difficult – and arguably much more difficult – if the King had opposed him as Edward might have done in George's place. It’s feasible that Churchill might have thrown in the towel at several points during the war without the King’s very public and, more importantly, private support. That’s something I hadn’t considered before. All in all, this was an interesting and sometimes fascinating look at a part of Britain’s war that I had previously overlooked. If, like me, you wondered about the relationship between these two men I can’t think of a better place to start to understand it. Recommended.  

[Labels Added: 2, Labels Total: 66] 

Just Finished Reading: Heart Beguiling Araby – The English Romance with Arabia by Kathryn Tidrick (FP: 1990) [219pp] 

The British have long been fascinated and focused on the Arab peninsula, long before the oil and long before the area became the political nightmare it is today.  It was, according to this deeply interesting slim volume, however based on a delusion if a persistent one. That delusion resided deep with the psyche of the British imperial imagination – that the desert Arabs and particularly the Bedouin were just like them, not noble savages but noble gentlemen in desert garb. This ideal, apparently highly resistant to the experience reality of travellers in the region, was founded on the works of Richard Burton (1821-1890), Gifford Palgrave (1826-1888), Wilfred Scawen Blunt (1840-1922) and Charles M Doughty (1843-1926) who each in their own way added to the myth. So pervasive was this idea in the higher echelons on British society that it informed and directed British foreign policy in the region as some dreamt of expanding the Empire onto that peninsula to the exclusion of all other powers – most especially the Ottoman Empire. When the Ottoman’s sided with Germany in WW1 this was Britain’s opportunity to make the dream come true. The discovery and steadily increasing requirements for oil certainly helped and some British players, most notably a young officer known to history as Lawrence of Arabia, were all too happy to make an imperial Arabia a reality. 

I have long wondered at the British fascination and romance with the desert. The Foreign Office was indeed infamous (at least until recently) for being confirmed Arabists no doubt until (or likely just after) such a position became increasingly untenable with its suspected whiff of antisemitism. Part of that fascination is the romance of desolate places much loved by British travellers and tourists from the 18th century onwards. Part of it, no doubt, was the supposed romance of wild peoples – and especially wild men – who were seemingly more ‘alive’ than their civilised counterparts in the stuffy drawing rooms of England. Part of it was the understandable rejection, at least of a psychic level, of the modern world and the increasing pace of change (laughable looking back from the 21st century but understandable all the same) and the desire to ‘escape’ back into a more idyllic and simpler time. No doubt part of it was childhood readings of the Arabian Nights and the Bible and the seeming ability to ‘drop into’ the pages of formative books. 

Told with a deep understanding of the time and region and with a great deal of knowing humour (I laughed out loud more than once at the authors comments regarding some of the major players) I derived both a great deal of knowledge and a great deal of pleasure on almost every page. If you’ve ever wondered about early European and especially British encounters with Arabia or, like me, wondered what all the fuss was about in the 19th and early 20th centuries in that region then this is definitely the book for you. Much more on that troubled zone to come. 

[Labels Added: 2, Labels Total: 63] 

Just Finished re-Reading: Shoot the Women First by Eileen MacDonald (FP: 1991) [241pp] 

The first time she heard about it she wasn’t sure what to think. Apparently, a head of a German anti-terrorist unit was giving the advice that, in any terrorist situation, the security services of the country involved should prioritise in ‘neutralising’ the female terrorists as quickly as possible – in other words to shoot the women first. But why? This book was the authors attempt to discover the reason behind that advice – not by speaking to the security services (that came later), but by speaking to the terrorists themselves. Over the subsequent months she travelled to Spain to speak to the women of ETA, the Basque separatist organisation, interviewed Kim Hyon Hui the North Korean woman who planted the bomb on Korean Air Flight 858 killing all on board in an attempt to disrupt the Seoul Olympic games that year, spent time with the women of the West Bank and interviewed Leila Khaled, infamous hijacker of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), felt vulnerable, for the first time, when she spoke to women from the IRA, interviewed Susanna Ronconi of the Italian Red Brigades and finally spent some time with a number of infamous women of the Red Army Faction from Germany including Astrid Proll. 

I remember reading this not long after it came out in paperback. It was the days when I was commuting into London each day on the train from Kent. You can imagine to looks I got when people saw the title! Reading it over 30 years ago meant that I had very little memory of the text so it felt like the first time. It was interesting looking back to the sometimes dark days of the 70’s and 80’s when planes were being hijacked on a regular basis and bombs were going off all over Europe – including the very city I worked in each day. It was also interesting peeking into the minds of the women doing the hijacking, planting the bombs and shooting it out with the police and security services. Most interesting, naturally, was both their motivation and the ever-present question of why they were considered more dangerous than men.  The author went through several theories – including the old arguments about female terrorists being lesbians or ugly (neither of which is universally true) or even that they felt that had to out-do the men to prove they were worthy (sometimes true to some extent). The answer slowly crystalised through conversations and with a final interview with a member of the German Security Services. Male terrorists, it appeared, treated their activity as a ‘job’ - something they did. Female terrorists, by contrast, treated it as their life. Generally, they had sacrificed much more than the men – family, children, a future – and so their dedication to the cause was much greater. When confronted by armed police a male terrorist would be more likely to surrender, a female terrorist much more likely to pick up her AK-47 and start shooting.  

One of the things that most surprised the author – no doubt expecting the women she spoke to be monsters or at the very least damaged or broken people – was how very ordinary these women were. Although a few frightened her in various ways, she couldn’t help but like a number of them and even admire their stance in the face of oppression and dangerous violence. Many, if not all, were feminists of one sort or another striving for a form of equality. All of them were looking to the future for a better life and better prospects for their children or the future generations of their people. None took their activities lightly and many agonised over the people they had personally killed but felt they had little choice in the matter.  

In some ways this was not an easy read. These women were often killers after all who used violence and the threat of violence to promote their political ends. But terrorism cannot be effectively opposed in any age if we do not at least attempt to understand those who undertake these actions and the reasons behind their acts. I think this book – not at all dated since its original publication – goes a small way towards that understanding. Recommended if you can source a copy.  

[Labels Added: 0, Labels Total: 47] 

Just Finished Reading: The Nanny State Made me – In Search of a Better Britain/A Story of Britain and How to Save It by Stuart Maconie (FP: 2020) [281pp] 

I picked this up for several reasons in addition to the standard ‘Buy one get one Half price’ deal: It was about the Welfare State, it was written by someone I’m aware of and haven’t read anything by him before and it was (by and large) about the North or at the very least from a Northern perspective. Although initially it took me a while to settle into this rather rambling narrative at times, I ended up liking it quite a bit. I’d heard the author talk several times on TV (he worked/works for the BBC), so I actually ‘heard’ him chat away in his own voice in my head as I read along – and ‘chat’ was definitely the word here. 

Part history of, and indeed love letter to, the Welfare State (although in nothing like the detail of my previous book on the subject naturally), part polemic against those who opposed its founding and are even now trying to dismantle it and part autobiography, this was an interesting look into the impact the Welfare State had on also all of us growing up in Britain. Very early on the author makes a very valid (and funny) point. Those in positions of power who disparage the Welfare State by calling it a ‘Nanny State’ are the only ones who HAD nannies – unlike the rest of us. It is, I think, a telling argument. It is only our ‘betters’ who generally oppose a system that is meant to alleviate the conditions that prevailed before its arrival in the late 1940’s - poverty, ill health, ignorance and poor-quality housing. Using his own life story growing up in the North of England – primarily in Wigan, a mere 7 miles where I was coming of age around the same time – as well as fellow beneficiaries of Welfare provision (from schools, libraries, doctors and public parks) this was a very personal ‘take’ on the making of modern Britain. Naturally, given the state of things, this is not simply a tale of good news, a tale of community over greed or a tale of civil society over wealth inequality. It is also a defence of the provision of welfare in all its aspects in an environment where such a provision is under attack as never before, from library closures, privatisation of bus services, ‘redevelopment’ of public parks, the lack of social housing, and the chronic underfunding of so many of the services so many rely on. 

Reading through this rambling but often entertaining (with laugh out loud moments) narrative, I was struck time and again by the close correspondences with my own life. The author was born 18 months after and 11 miles further east than me. He spent his formative years in and around Wigan – only 7 miles away where I lived ages 10-23 – and even taught (briefly) in Skelmersdale College only 2 years after I left with good enough A Levels to attend University. So, we almost met (as he taught Sociology – a subject I took at the College). Weird! Inevitably this was, in many ways, a cosy comfortable read being focused (mostly) on life in the North of England in the years I lived there. Interesting and informative on many levels and full of interesting insights and people this is a great piece of social history. Definitely recommended to anyone who wants to understand how the Welfare State works at the ‘coalface’ and what its loss would mean to so many. More from this author to come I think!

[Labels Added: 1, Labels Total: 37] 

Just Finished Reading: Frostquake – How the Frozen Winter of 1962 Changed Britain Forever by Juliet Nicolson (FP: 2021) [319pp] 

England, 1962. It wasn’t quite a white Christmas but when it started snowing on December 26th at least the children were happy with the prospect of snowmen and sledging before they returned to school after the holidays. But as temperatures continued to drop and snow continued to fall everyone, including the children, just wanted the winter to finally end. They had a long wait ahead of them as the snow would fall for another 10 weeks. The winter of 1962/63 turned out to be one of the coldest and longest ever recorded. In some places the sea froze, in others diesel fuel in trucks and buses froze overnight, greatly restricted travel and deliveries of vital supplies. Army helicopters dropped hay to starving farm animals and across Britain hundreds of birds, apparently frozen in flight, fell dead onto ever deepening snow drifts. No one could remember anything quite like it. Yet the country failed to grind to a complete halt. Milkmen on skies (as on the front cover) delivered frozen milk to grateful housewives, bands like the up-and-coming Beatles kept on touring despite the weather and millions of television viewers stayed warm enjoying breakthrough satirical shows that poked fun at the Establishment in ways never seen before. Under the deepening blanket of snow things were changing, women like the designer Mary Quant and model Jean Shrimpton were making names for themselves and making money too, the old deference for authority was starting to crumble helped on by the political crisis brought on by the Profumo Affair and the people longed to break free of austerity Britain and start having fun. The ‘Swinging Sixties’ was just around the corner – once the ice melted. 

Although I was alive at the time – aged 2 ½ - I have no memory of this momentous winter. I can’t believe that living in a Victorian terraced house in Liverpool we were somehow immune to the cold, but I guess that I was simply too young or too unaware of events for it to have stuck with me. The author was 8 at the time and weaves her own and her family's story into the narrative which I thought was a good way to thread things together. I also liked the fact that, although she stayed in London and the Southeast for most of the events portrayed, the narrative covered the North as well as the South with interesting snippets of history around the early days of the ‘Mersey Beat’ and somewhat briefer mentions of the Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan. Although I’d only recently read a whole book on the Profumo Affair, I was impressed that the author had managed to add a few more facts that I’d been unaware of. Overall, this was solid Social History and I enjoyed it quite a lot. I always find there’s something slightly odd about reading history books about a time that you lived through. There’s a kind of temporal ‘echo’ working faintly in the background. But as this was very early in my life the ‘echo’ was very faint indeed so didn’t distract from the narrative. Recommended for any fans of 60’s Britain. 

This is the last review of 2022. My 'Best of the Year' List will be coming on Saturday.