Jane Ridley (1) (1953–)

This is a very good and readable biography, written with a genuinely human touch combined with scholarship. As befits a book by a professor of biography, it is also partly a biographical history of George V, focussing particularly on the Gore and Nicholson works, and Pope-Hennessy's work on Queen Mary (Rose's biography of the king gets less attention). Ridley does not shy away from noting George's faults, but she takes a generally sympathetic tone and comes to conclusions about his reign which are generally favourable. Her attitude towards Queen Mary (who is covered extensively in the book, to the extent that it is almost a joint biography) is sometimes a little waspish but mostly positive. The book has a notably realistic take on Prince John. Most politicians do not come off unscathed.

The use of George V British Empire stamps in the endcover design is a nice touch given George's role in building up the Royal collection.

At times there is perhaps a lack of imagination in the view taken of those who served the King, for example in the section at the end dealing with role played by Lord Dawson in the King's final hours.

One criticism which could be levelled at the book is the somewhat casual handling of facts about WWI; for example, the Battle of Passchendaele casualty and death figures are confused. Ridley says at one place that the Russians had left the war in 1917, but in another says March 1918. More generally, subjective judgements about the conduct of the war are included with little or no supporting evidence.

There is also some careless editing – for example, we are told in a throwaway line that Fred Dudley Ward was a 'glovemaker's daughter', making her sound quite working class, and only in a later chapter appears a detailed footnote on her rather different antecedents. Ms Ridley, or perhaps her editor, seems over-fond of the [sic] marking, with it appearing in often unncessary places.

But these are quibbles. This is a book to read, enjoy and retain.… (altro)

A very interesting biography of Edward VII, one that I think tries to achieve a sense of balance between the somewhat dissolute prince of the pre-1892 period, and the one who seems to have snapped to and gotten sensible after the death of his own heir (Albert Victor). One advantage the author appears to have is some recently discovered (or re-discovered) material lurking in the Royal Archives, some of which she found herself. In spite of the mass destruction of large chunks of the archive of Queen Victoria and of Edward VII (something the author goes into in an epilogue), there's a lot of fresh light that can be shown, and I think the result is readable and balanced. (It also helps that I read this right after reading a biography of Albert Victor -- some of the ground covered is the same). I would recommend this.… (altro)

This is an engaging biography, easy to read but properly researched and referenced. It is highly sympathetic to its subject, but does not hide Edward's failings. Some bias is detectable, especially against Queen Victoria, Prince Leopold, Lillie Langtry, Lord Salisbury and particularly Princess Alicky of Hesse (later the last Czarina).

A biography of Edward is in some ways quite difficult for the years between 1861 and 1901 given his lack of purposeful activity, but this is overcome with lot of detail about the social side of the prince's life. Some of the new revelations in the book are not very significant, even if they are interesting. In the section dealing with Edward's years as king (quite short compared with the rest, given its relative importance), Ridley makes a convincing case for the effectiveness of Edward's 'soft' diplomacy in European affairs, while noting the differing views on this issue.

There is a useful appendix dealing with the history of the King's papers and early biographical efforts. Professor Ridley teaches a course in biography and is an expert in this general area.… (altro)