Top drawer yet again, 08 Nov 2008
After reading Dominique Enwright's excellent biography on Winston Churchill I had high hopes for this.I was not disappointed because this is fantastic addition to that book.
The thing that I like about her books on Chuchill is the fact that they aren't overblown at all.They stick to the basic facts and hold your interest throughout.This fine effort showcases the wit of the great man in an easy to follow way and I have no hesitation in giving this a full five stars to go alongside Ms. Enwright's first book.
There are many books out there about Churchill but I doubt you will find two finer ones simply because they are so easy to digest.Very highly recommended.

flavor minus ingredients, 06 Mar 2008
a beautful cover and many mistakes in the text. no attribution for many quotes either.

Very enjoyable, 12 Feb 2008
This relatively small book is divided into several sections with slices from Churchill's life and quotations related to politics, speaches, friends, animals, family, etc.

Here are few excerpts:

While campaigning in 1900, it is said that the young Churchill was doing a spot of canvassing when one of those he approached exclaimed:

"Vote for you? Why, I'd rather vote for the Devil!"

"I understand", Churchill answered, "But in case your friend is not running, may I count on your support?"

* * *

When passed a very long but turgidly written memorandum on some worthy but uninspiring subject, the elderly Prime Minister weighed the thick wad of paper in his hands and commented, "This paper by its very length defends itself against the risk of being read."

* * *

Churchill liked animals; sometimes he found this difficult to reconcile with his fondness for rich food. Anthony Montague Brown recalled that 'One Christmas he was about to carve a goose. Learning it was one of his own, he put down the knife and fork and said, "I could not possibly eat a bird that I have known socially."

* * *

A BBC broadcaster described once sitting next to Churchill as he gave a speech, keeping his audience hanging on to his every word. The boradcaster noticed, howver, that what appeared to be notes in Churchill's hand was only a laundry slip, and he later remarked upon this to Churchill. "Yes", said Churchill. "It gave confidence to my audience."

WHEN PARLIAMENT SPARKLED, 10 Jan 2008
Anyone watching the televised proceedings from Parliament could be forgiven for nodding off, given the uninspiring nature of much of the proceedings, and the mundane characters who participate. If you want a glimpse of what we're missing this book is essential reading. Winston Churchill was one of the great characters of the House, at a time when there was no shortage of such people. He is quoted as saying, of the then Russian Foreign Minister, "I have never seen a human being who more perfectly represented the modern concept of a robot". I can't help feeling that, were he a sitting MP today, he'd find no shortage of candidates to fit that description. This book lives up to its title.

The Great British Patriot, 24 Jan 2005
This book sums up almost all the great qualities of a man who for so many was one of the greatest Englishman who ever lived. Full of quotes of indeed great wit and humour as well as thought and intelligence. Just a short read of this book will keep you in the best of spirits, and will surely put you in a most patriotic mood. A brilliant read and a must have book.

Top drawer yet again, 08 Nov 2008
After reading Dominique Enwright's excellent biography on Winston Churchill I had high hopes for this.I was not disappointed because this is fantastic addition to that book.
The thing that I like about her books on Chuchill is the fact that they aren't overblown at all.They stick to the basic facts and hold your interest throughout.This fine effort showcases the wit of the great man in an easy to follow way and I have no hesitation in giving this a full five stars to go alongside Ms. Enwright's first book.
There are many books out there about Churchill but I doubt you will find two finer ones simply because they are so easy to digest.Very highly recommended.

flavor minus ingredients, 06 Mar 2008
a beautful cover and many mistakes in the text. no attribution for many quotes either.

Very enjoyable, 12 Feb 2008
This relatively small book is divided into several sections with slices from Churchill's life and quotations related to politics, speaches, friends, animals, family, etc.

Here are few excerpts:

While campaigning in 1900, it is said that the young Churchill was doing a spot of canvassing when one of those he approached exclaimed:

"Vote for you? Why, I'd rather vote for the Devil!"

"I understand", Churchill answered, "But in case your friend is not running, may I count on your support?"

* * *

When passed a very long but turgidly written memorandum on some worthy but uninspiring subject, the elderly Prime Minister weighed the thick wad of paper in his hands and commented, "This paper by its very length defends itself against the risk of being read."

* * *

Churchill liked animals; sometimes he found this difficult to reconcile with his fondness for rich food. Anthony Montague Brown recalled that 'One Christmas he was about to carve a goose. Learning it was one of his own, he put down the knife and fork and said, "I could not possibly eat a bird that I have known socially."

* * *

A BBC broadcaster described once sitting next to Churchill as he gave a speech, keeping his audience hanging on to his every word. The boradcaster noticed, howver, that what appeared to be notes in Churchill's hand was only a laundry slip, and he later remarked upon this to Churchill. "Yes", said Churchill. "It gave confidence to my audience."

WHEN PARLIAMENT SPARKLED, 10 Jan 2008
Anyone watching the televised proceedings from Parliament could be forgiven for nodding off, given the uninspiring nature of much of the proceedings, and the mundane characters who participate. If you want a glimpse of what we're missing this book is essential reading. Winston Churchill was one of the great characters of the House, at a time when there was no shortage of such people. He is quoted as saying, of the then Russian Foreign Minister, "I have never seen a human being who more perfectly represented the modern concept of a robot". I can't help feeling that, were he a sitting MP today, he'd find no shortage of candidates to fit that description. This book lives up to its title.

The Great British Patriot, 24 Jan 2005
This book sums up almost all the great qualities of a man who for so many was one of the greatest Englishman who ever lived. Full of quotes of indeed great wit and humour as well as thought and intelligence. Just a short read of this book will keep you in the best of spirits, and will surely put you in a most patriotic mood. A brilliant read and a must have book.

not a great biography, but a very creditable one, 08 Jul 2008
William Hague points out in the afterword to this book that Margaret Thatcher likened him to Pitt the Younger when he famously took the stage at the Conservative Party Conference aged 16 many years ago. He certainly has a sympathy for his subject but not a slavish one ; he sees weaknesses as well as strengths. It needs to be said that this is a hard-worked book, and Hague's conscientious research is everywhere apparent. He usually avoids the danger of an invisible wood hidden by multitudes of trees - perhaps not quite, or not always - but there is still a lot of information in the book, and it's a long book. Hague also faces a difficulty in the nature of his subject. If you take the politician away from Pitt, there is not much left. Disraeli, Gladstone and Churchill, to name only three, were interesting characters in themselves, never mind their achievements ; Pitt was an unmarried, totally dedicated politician with an enigmatic nature, little in the way of hobbies and few friends. He drank very heavily and no doubt enjoyed the experience, but even that stemmed from medical advice and not what might be thought an interesting recklessness of character. However, the events through which he lived - the American War, attempts at parliamentary reform, the 'madness' of the King (actually probably acute intermittent porphyria), the anti-slavery movement with his friend Wilberforce, the French Revolutionary Wars, the Napoleonic Wars - are all important and some are momentous. Hague tells the tale of all these things and his subject's involvement in them pretty well. He writes clearly and articulately and has quite a good sense of structure in his narrative - he is, for example, good at cliff-hangers at section and chapter endings. There are a few entertaining anecdotes (not many). What he fails to do for me is convey the astonishing power of Pitt as a parliamentary orator. Often he writes of a devastating speech, or one which thrilled the Commons with its clarity, logic and intellectual brilliance, but he doesn't really make that come to life in the quotations he chooses, which (admittedly out of context) seem to me wordy and even a little pompous sometimes. But fair's fair - I enjoyed the book, it is a good work of scholarship, it does cast a great deal of light on the subject and his time, and it is rather touching that it has been written by a modern politician who, whatever the similarities, has yet to come within shouting distance of Pitt's achievement in his time - as I am sure Hague would have the realism and humility to acknowledge.

Great introductory piece on a great man!, 07 Jun 2008
I thought this book a wonderful introduction to the life and administration of William Pitt the Younger. Mr Hague manages to, in a relatively short book (compared to Ehrman's) to outline and analyse Pitt's true uniqueness and irregularty as a man. Few men become PM at 24 and even fewer worked the excessive hours Pitt. Pitt's oratory was legendary and his clashes with Fox were too. Hague looks at these two characters in relation to the times with the end of America and the radicalism of Paine & co. Pitt's reactionary nature after the French revolution is analysed well as his economic policy of the 1780's which has become famous for it's originality and audacity. Hagues book isn't in the same league as Jenkins and Ehrman but is a splendid first attempt!

A rounded portrait of a great statesman, 29 Mar 2008
William Hague has a pleasant, straightforward and limpid style in which he can convey not only complex political situations, but a warmth of feeling towards his subject and a sensitive and empathic interpretation of behaviour and background.

He begins with Pitt's extremely precocious childhood. He was tutored at home, in large part by his father (whose loving nature may also be something of a revelation to readers). From earliest childhood young Pitt breathed in politics. Hague speculates that he learnt not only from his father's successes (his oratory, his foreign policy), but also from his failures (going to the Lords in 1766, or leaving the post of First Lord of the Treasury to someone else).

There are exciting accounts of several key episodes in his life: his rise to becoming Prime Minister at the age of 24; the Regency Crisis of 1788/9; his resignation over his disagreement with George III over Catholic Emancipation in 1801 (beautifully analyzed), and his promise, after the King's recovery from his recurring malady, never to raise the matter again; the drifting apart between Pitt and his old friend and nominee Addington during the latter's interregnum.

No minister except Walpole has for so long and so completely dominated the House of Commons. Pitt was universally acclaimed as a great orator, though only a very few passages quoted in this book - foremost among them his speech in 1792 advocating the abolition of the slave trade - make for stirring reading these days. Part of the appeal of his speeches is said to have been the cogency of their logical structure and his mastery of detail, which is not so easily conveyed in a book. He was a brilliant manager of the nation's finances - but his own were often in a ruinous state. He could not be bothered to pay much attention to them, and refused to take sinecure offices (except, at the King's insistence, the Wardenship of the Cinque Ports) or a large donation offered by the merchants of the City of London. He was hugely in debt at the time of his resignation in 1801, but he refused all offers of help, from the King, from Parliament, from his successor Addington in the form of sinecure offices, or from the City. Only through help from a handful of his closest friends was the pressure of debt slightly eased.

For Pitt rightly prided himself on his personal probity. He would accept nothing that might be construed as putting him under an obligation; but, though he was personally bored with appeals for his patronage, he did not scruple to allow his lieutenants to manage patronage and bribery on a massive scale, especially at critical moments of his rule. (Hague mentions only in passing his massive inflation of the peerage.)

His finances and his speeches made him a great war leader, but he was less so in the actual conduct of the wars. He underestimated France in the early days and overestimated Britain's military (as distinct from naval) resources. He made miscalculations of the kind that Chatham probably would not have made (though Chatham, of course, had faced a far less dynamic France). He twice (1796, 1797) sought for peace with France because of the immense drain on Britain's financial resources, but, encouraged by a string of French setbacks in 1798 and 1799, turned down the peace overtures Napoleon made immediately after seizing power in France in 1799. In this latter refusal he was strongly backed by his cousin, the hawkish foreign minister William Grenville.

Hague brings out the importance of Grenville throughout Pitt's career. A staunch ally until Pitt's resignation, he became so impatient with Pitt's early forbearance with regard to Addington that he joined Fox in opposition - which George III could not forgive. So when Pitt returned to office in 1804, he could not give a post to Grenville, who then practically became a Foxite Whig. As a result, Pitt no longer had the mastery of the Commons or even of the Cabinet that he had had before, and it added to the strain in those years of Ulm and Austerlitz. By that time Pitt was a shadow of his former self, increasingly exhausted and in dreadful health.

It is on the human side that Hague excels, and there is not always scope for that in the story. Much of Pitt's work in government - finance, trade, administrative reform, the shuffling of seats around the cabinet table - gives little scope to more than the thoroughly workmanlike treatment it receives here. Even the account of the wars with France are no more than that. For me, the best parts of the book deal with Pitt's character. He has generally been considered cold; but he had many close friends in whose company he was witty and amusing. A fine chapter discusses this contrast and shows Pitt, when Prime Minister, as relaxed and warm with family and real friends. There is a long and moving letter he wrote to Wilberforce when the latter announced his religious conversion in 1785. There is an astonishing scene a couple of years before his death when at one moment he was larking around with his intimates whom he allowed to blacken his face with burnt cork, and a moment later, quickly cleaned up, stiffly received political visitors. Between Pitt and his mother there was great warmth and affection. In his letters to her he always made light of difficulties or his poor health, not just because he was by nature optimistic, but because he wanted to spare her worries.

It is astonishing that Hague should have researched and written this book of 592 pages inside two years. The masterly ten-page summing up at the end is not only balanced in its judgments, but tells us a good deal about Hague himself. It is clear that he not only admires Pitt, but feels a great affection for him; and he will make many readers feel the same.



An interesting biography , 04 Nov 2007
Pitt the Younger by William Hauge is an interesting book dealing with one of the heroes of British politics. It describes the life of a man who devoted his short life to running the country in one of its hours of need. Although it perhaps lacks the analysis you find in some biographies it is all in all a very good book which is easy to read and will increase most reader's knowledge of this quite remarkable man.

Hague on Pitt, 31 Jul 2007
It is easy to see why William Hague reveres the memory of William Pitt the Younger and perhaps seems something of himself in him. Both were recognised as prococious talent early in their political careers, both were possessed of quick wit and intelligence, both dedicated their lives to politics at an early age. Hague hung Pitt's portrait in the Shadow Cabinet, hoping perhaps that some of his hero's skill in winning and maintaining power would rub off on him and his colleagues. When Hague was asked to write his memoirs after resigning as Tory leader in 2001, he dismissed the idea as ridiculous for a 40 year old, and chose instead to write about the prime minister regarded as the father of the Conservative Party.

Hague tells the story of the younger Pitt's short but astonishing life with great skill and lucidity, supplying parallels and contrasts with the modern political age. It is a fascinating account, not only of the life of Pitt, but also of British politics in general in the late eighteenth century. The circumstances in which Pitt became Prime Minister were extraordinary at the time, and would of course be completely impossible now. At this juncture considerable power still remained in the hands of the sovereign, and after the deadweight first two Georges, King George III had an almost Stuart-like determination to fully exercise the powers vested in him. He chose a moment to dismiss a government he did not like, that of Lord North and Charles James Fox, and to install the 24 year old William Pitt.

The story of how this youth managed to hold together a government against an indignant opposition, who still controlled the Commons, for long enough to win over a working majority is fascinating in its own right. Pitt, working with the King, managed gradually to consolidate the new government until the moment was right to dissolve Parliament and use the considerable powers available to incumbent prime ministers to ensure a clear majority in the subsequent House of Commons. He remained in office, with a short break, until his untimely death at 46.

Among the strengths that made Pitt such a political success were his remarkable oratory powers in the Commons, his shrewd use of the powers of patronage available to him and his innovative approaches to solving the nation's financial woes in the wake of the military catastrophe of the American War. It would be incorrect to say he was incorruptable - more accurately he had no regard for his personal financial situation, and died with huge debts. But he was quite comfortable with offering honours or financial incentives to those whom he knew would be motivated by them.

A criticism of Hague's work might be that too little time is spent on conclusions. The reader is left wondering why William Pitt the Younger should be regarded as a "great" prime minister. He was a brilliant speaker and his shrewdness in defending his position from his opponents was legendary. Statistically his position in British history is unassailable, having come to office at such a young age, and served as prime minister for a little short of nineteen years. But these things do not on their own make a great prime minister. Critics can point to his record of internal repression during the long war with revolutionary France and to his failure to legislate on any of the three great liberal causes which he professed to support - Catholic emancipation, parliamentary reform, and the abolition of the slave trade. The fact that the last of these was already accepted in principle by most of the British ruling class, and passed quickly into law after his death makes his tardiness hard to forgive.

The last great criticism of Pitt is his failure to read the military strength of France in 1793 and his consequential willingless to take Britain back to war with her old enemy. Pitt was convinced that France was bankrupt and would not be able to stand for long against a united European coalition. All his good work in paying back the national debt in the 1780s was undone, and if it was not for the newly created wealth of the industrial revolution, Britain would have bled itself to death bribing Austria and Prussia to remain in the field. As it was he was able to bridge the gap with his most enduring innovation - income tax.

Whatever the reader's conclusion about the William Pitt the Younger, Hague has written an excellent first book. One hopes that he will publish more.

Top drawer yet again, 08 Nov 2008
After reading Dominique Enwright's excellent biography on Winston Churchill I had high hopes for this.I was not disappointed because this is fantastic addition to that book.
The thing that I like about her books on Chuchill is the fact that they aren't overblown at all.They stick to the basic facts and hold your interest throughout.This fine effort showcases the wit of the great man in an easy to follow way and I have no hesitation in giving this a full five stars to go alongside Ms. Enwright's first book.
There are many books out there about Churchill but I doubt you will find two finer ones simply because they are so easy to digest.Very highly recommended.

flavor minus ingredients, 06 Mar 2008
a beautful cover and many mistakes in the text. no attribution for many quotes either.

Very enjoyable, 12 Feb 2008
This relatively small book is divided into several sections with slices from Churchill's life and quotations related to politics, speaches, friends, animals, family, etc.

Here are few excerpts:

While campaigning in 1900, it is said that the young Churchill was doing a spot of canvassing when one of those he approached exclaimed:

"Vote for you? Why, I'd rather vote for the Devil!"

"I understand", Churchill answered, "But in case your friend is not running, may I count on your support?"

* * *

When passed a very long but turgidly written memorandum on some worthy but uninspiring subject, the elderly Prime Minister weighed the thick wad of paper in his hands and commented, "This paper by its very length defends itself against the risk of being read."

* * *

Churchill liked animals; sometimes he found this difficult to reconcile with his fondness for rich food. Anthony Montague Brown recalled that 'One Christmas he was about to carve a goose. Learning it was one of his own, he put down the knife and fork and said, "I could not possibly eat a bird that I have known socially."

* * *

A BBC broadcaster described once sitting next to Churchill as he gave a speech, keeping his audience hanging on to his every word. The boradcaster noticed, howver, that what appeared to be notes in Churchill's hand was only a laundry slip, and he later remarked upon this to Churchill. "Yes", said Churchill. "It gave confidence to my audience."

WHEN PARLIAMENT SPARKLED, 10 Jan 2008
Anyone watching the televised proceedings from Parliament could be forgiven for nodding off, given the uninspiring nature of much of the proceedings, and the mundane characters who participate. If you want a glimpse of what we're missing this book is essential reading. Winston Churchill was one of the great characters of the House, at a time when there was no shortage of such people. He is quoted as saying, of the then Russian Foreign Minister, "I have never seen a human being who more perfectly represented the modern concept of a robot". I can't help feeling that, were he a sitting MP today, he'd find no shortage of candidates to fit that description. This book lives up to its title.

The Great British Patriot, 24 Jan 2005
This book sums up almost all the great qualities of a man who for so many was one of the greatest Englishman who ever lived. Full of quotes of indeed great wit and humour as well as thought and intelligence. Just a short read of this book will keep you in the best of spirits, and will surely put you in a most patriotic mood. A brilliant read and a must have book.

not a great biography, but a very creditable one, 08 Jul 2008
William Hague points out in the afterword to this book that Margaret Thatcher likened him to Pitt the Younger when he famously took the stage at the Conservative Party Conference aged 16 many years ago. He certainly has a sympathy for his subject but not a slavish one ; he sees weaknesses as well as strengths. It needs to be said that this is a hard-worked book, and Hague's conscientious research is everywhere apparent. He usually avoids the danger of an invisible wood hidden by multitudes of trees - perhaps not quite, or not always - but there is still a lot of information in the book, and it's a long book. Hague also faces a difficulty in the nature of his subject. If you take the politician away from Pitt, there is not much left. Disraeli, Gladstone and Churchill, to name only three, were interesting characters in themselves, never mind their achievements ; Pitt was an unmarried, totally dedicated politician with an enigmatic nature, little in the way of hobbies and few friends. He drank very heavily and no doubt enjoyed the experience, but even that stemmed from medical advice and not what might be thought an interesting recklessness of character. However, the events through which he lived - the American War, attempts at parliamentary reform, the 'madness' of the King (actually probably acute intermittent porphyria), the anti-slavery movement with his friend Wilberforce, the French Revolutionary Wars, the Napoleonic Wars - are all important and some are momentous. Hague tells the tale of all these things and his subject's involvement in them pretty well. He writes clearly and articulately and has quite a good sense of structure in his narrative - he is, for example, good at cliff-hangers at section and chapter endings. There are a few entertaining anecdotes (not many). What he fails to do for me is convey the astonishing power of Pitt as a parliamentary orator. Often he writes of a devastating speech, or one which thrilled the Commons with its clarity, logic and intellectual brilliance, but he doesn't really make that come to life in the quotations he chooses, which (admittedly out of context) seem to me wordy and even a little pompous sometimes. But fair's fair - I enjoyed the book, it is a good work of scholarship, it does cast a great deal of light on the subject and his time, and it is rather touching that it has been written by a modern politician who, whatever the similarities, has yet to come within shouting distance of Pitt's achievement in his time - as I am sure Hague would have the realism and humility to acknowledge.

Great introductory piece on a great man!, 07 Jun 2008
I thought this book a wonderful introduction to the life and administration of William Pitt the Younger. Mr Hague manages to, in a relatively short book (compared to Ehrman's) to outline and analyse Pitt's true uniqueness and irregularty as a man. Few men become PM at 24 and even fewer worked the excessive hours Pitt. Pitt's oratory was legendary and his clashes with Fox were too. Hague looks at these two characters in relation to the times with the end of America and the radicalism of Paine & co. Pitt's reactionary nature after the French revolution is analysed well as his economic policy of the 1780's which has become famous for it's originality and audacity. Hagues book isn't in the same league as Jenkins and Ehrman but is a splendid first attempt!

A rounded portrait of a great statesman, 29 Mar 2008
William Hague has a pleasant, straightforward and limpid style in which he can convey not only complex political situations, but a warmth of feeling towards his subject and a sensitive and empathic interpretation of behaviour and background.

He begins with Pitt's extremely precocious childhood. He was tutored at home, in large part by his father (whose loving nature may also be something of a revelation to readers). From earliest childhood young Pitt breathed in politics. Hague speculates that he learnt not only from his father's successes (his oratory, his foreign policy), but also from his failures (going to the Lords in 1766, or leaving the post of First Lord of the Treasury to someone else).

There are exciting accounts of several key episodes in his life: his rise to becoming Prime Minister at the age of 24; the Regency Crisis of 1788/9; his resignation over his disagreement with George III over Catholic Emancipation in 1801 (beautifully analyzed), and his promise, after the King's recovery from his recurring malady, never to raise the matter again; the drifting apart between Pitt and his old friend and nominee Addington during the latter's interregnum.

No minister except Walpole has for so long and so completely dominated the House of Commons. Pitt was universally acclaimed as a great orator, though only a very few passages quoted in this book - foremost among them his speech in 1792 advocating the abolition of the slave trade - make for stirring reading these days. Part of the appeal of his speeches is said to have been the cogency of their logical structure and his mastery of detail, which is not so easily conveyed in a book. He was a brilliant manager of the nation's finances - but his own were often in a ruinous state. He could not be bothered to pay much attention to them, and refused to take sinecure offices (except, at the King's insistence, the Wardenship of the Cinque Ports) or a large donation offered by the merchants of the City of London. He was hugely in debt at the time of his resignation in 1801, but he refused all offers of help, from the King, from Parliament, from his successor Addington in the form of sinecure offices, or from the City. Only through help from a handful of his closest friends was the pressure of debt slightly eased.

For Pitt rightly prided himself on his personal probity. He would accept nothing that might be construed as putting him under an obligation; but, though he was personally bored with appeals for his patronage, he did not scruple to allow his lieutenants to manage patronage and bribery on a massive scale, especially at critical moments of his rule. (Hague mentions only in passing his massive inflation of the peerage.)

His finances and his speeches made him a great war leader, but he was less so in the actual conduct of the wars. He underestimated France in the early days and overestimated Britain's military (as distinct from naval) resources. He made miscalculations of the kind that Chatham probably would not have made (though Chatham, of course, had faced a far less dynamic France). He twice (1796, 1797) sought for peace with France because of the immense drain on Britain's financial resources, but, encouraged by a string of French setbacks in 1798 and 1799, turned down the peace overtures Napoleon made immediately after seizing power in France in 1799. In this latter refusal he was strongly backed by his cousin, the hawkish foreign minister William Grenville.

Hague brings out the importance of Grenville throughout Pitt's career. A staunch ally until Pitt's resignation, he became so impatient with Pitt's early forbearance with regard to Addington that he joined Fox in opposition - which George III could not forgive. So when Pitt returned to office in 1804, he could not give a post to Grenville, who then practically became a Foxite Whig. As a result, Pitt no longer had the mastery of the Commons or even of the Cabinet that he had had before, and it added to the strain in those years of Ulm and Austerlitz. By that time Pitt was a shadow of his former self, increasingly exhausted and in dreadful health.

It is on the human side that Hague excels, and there is not always scope for that in the story. Much of Pitt's work in government - finance, trade, administrative reform, the shuffling of seats around the cabinet table - gives little scope to more than the thoroughly workmanlike treatment it receives here. Even the account of the wars with France are no more than that. For me, the best parts of the book deal with Pitt's character. He has generally been considered cold; but he had many close friends in whose company he was witty and amusing. A fine chapter discusses this contrast and shows Pitt, when Prime Minister, as relaxed and warm with family and real friends. There is a long and moving letter he wrote to Wilberforce when the latter announced his religious conversion in 1785. There is an astonishing scene a couple of years before his death when at one moment he was larking around with his intimates whom he allowed to blacken his face with burnt cork, and a moment later, quickly cleaned up, stiffly received political visitors. Between Pitt and his mother there was great warmth and affection. In his letters to her he always made light of difficulties or his poor health, not just because he was by nature optimistic, but because he wanted to spare her worries.

It is astonishing that Hague should have researched and written this book of 592 pages inside two years. The masterly ten-page summing up at the end is not only balanced in its judgments, but tells us a good deal about Hague himself. It is clear that he not only admires Pitt, but feels a great affection for him; and he will make many readers feel the same.



An interesting biography , 04 Nov 2007
Pitt the Younger by William Hauge is an interesting book dealing with one of the heroes of British politics. It describes the life of a man who devoted his short life to running the country in one of its hours of need. Although it perhaps lacks the analysis you find in some biographies it is all in all a very good book which is easy to read and will increase most reader's knowledge of this quite remarkable man.

Hague on Pitt, 31 Jul 2007
It is easy to see why William Hague reveres the memory of William Pitt the Younger and perhaps seems something of himself in him. Both were recognised as prococious talent early in their political careers, both were possessed of quick wit and intelligence, both dedicated their lives to politics at an early age. Hague hung Pitt's portrait in the Shadow Cabinet, hoping perhaps that some of his hero's skill in winning and maintaining power would rub off on him and his colleagues. When Hague was asked to write his memoirs after resigning as Tory leader in 2001, he dismissed the idea as ridiculous for a 40 year old, and chose instead to write about the prime minister regarded as the father of the Conservative Party.

Hague tells the story of the younger Pitt's short but astonishing life with great skill and lucidity, supplying parallels and contrasts with the modern political age. It is a fascinating account, not only of the life of Pitt, but also of British politics in general in the late eighteenth century. The circumstances in which Pitt became Prime Minister were extraordinary at the time, and would of course be completely impossible now. At this juncture considerable power still remained in the hands of the sovereign, and after the deadweight first two Georges, King George III had an almost Stuart-like determination to fully exercise the powers vested in him. He chose a moment to dismiss a government he did not like, that of Lord North and Charles James Fox, and to install the 24 year old William Pitt.

The story of how this youth managed to hold together a government against an indignant opposition, who still controlled the Commons, for long enough to win over a working majority is fascinating in its own right. Pitt, working with the King, managed gradually to consolidate the new government until the moment was right to dissolve Parliament and use the considerable powers available to incumbent prime ministers to ensure a clear majority in the subsequent House of Commons. He remained in office, with a short break, until his untimely death at 46.

Among the strengths that made Pitt such a political success were his remarkable oratory powers in the Commons, his shrewd use of the powers of patronage available to him and his innovative approaches to solving the nation's financial woes in the wake of the military catastrophe of the American War. It would be incorrect to say he was incorruptable - more accurately he had no regard for his personal financial situation, and died with huge debts. But he was quite comfortable with offering honours or financial incentives to those whom he knew would be motivated by them.

A criticism of Hague's work might be that too little time is spent on conclusions. The reader is left wondering why William Pitt the Younger should be regarded as a "great" prime minister. He was a brilliant speaker and his shrewdness in defending his position from his opponents was legendary. Statistically his position in British history is unassailable, having come to office at such a young age, and served as prime minister for a little short of nineteen years. But these things do not on their own make a great prime minister. Critics can point to his record of internal repression during the long war with revolutionary France and to his failure to legislate on any of the three great liberal causes which he professed to support - Catholic emancipation, parliamentary reform, and the abolition of the slave trade. The fact that the last of these was already accepted in principle by most of the British ruling class, and passed quickly into law after his death makes his tardiness hard to forgive.

The last great criticism of Pitt is his failure to read the military strength of France in 1793 and his consequential willingless to take Britain back to war with her old enemy. Pitt was convinced that France was bankrupt and would not be able to stand for long against a united European coalition. All his good work in paying back the national debt in the 1780s was undone, and if it was not for the newly created wealth of the industrial revolution, Britain would have bled itself to death bribing Austria and Prussia to remain in the field. As it was he was able to bridge the gap with his most enduring innovation - income tax.

Whatever the reader's conclusion about the William Pitt the Younger, Hague has written an excellent first book. One hopes that he will publish more.

A very good read, 22 Nov 2008
Andrew Marr has a wide range of experience of all aspects of British journalism from working on the Scotsman to becoming editor of the Independent and later political editor at the BBC.

This book combines anecdotal and biographical details with an historical approach to British journalism. It raises many questions about the ownership of national newspapers, the way journalists operate and many other issues and is a bit of an eye-opener.

I found this to be a well written, informative and entertaining read.

Behind the scenes look at journalism, 16 Dec 2005
The work of journalists, perhaps moreso than that of other professions, is often viewed in a stereotypical light. Andrew Marr's book however sweeps away much of the romance and glamour in favour of a down to earth this-is-how-it-is approach. He is well suited to the task, having moved through many of the important stages in the print and broadcast hierarchy over the course of his career.

Although the book is billed as a "short history of British journalism", most of the book is taken up with impressively detailed accounts of what a journalist does, how they do it, and why, addressing also issues of personal motivation, bias, editorial influence, government pressure... The historical section in fact only ends up occupying one chapter of this fairly dense book. Whilst it is undoubtedly fascinating, Marr is not a historian and a lot of the substance and cohesion you would expect from a historical essay is lacking; that said however it takes up only about 15% of the book and does provide valuable context for the rest of his narrative.

The main body of the book gives a blow by blow account of the various roles which newspaper (mainly broadsheet) journalists play, right from the commanding national editor down to the latest teenage provincial apprentice. He recounts a range of issues which the layman might not think about too often: What makes a story? What keeps a story alive? What should the balance of stories within a newspaper be? How does the editor decide what to put on the front page? These are then linked in with a more logistical account (based on his period as an editor), explaining how it all gets put together into something printable, how long it takes, what the priorities are for printers. He gives the reader an acute sense of how stressful and monotonous a lot of this routine work can be.

A study of this nature cannot avoid tackling journalism's relationship with politics. Marr also dedicates a lot of space to the tightrope, cloke and dagger world of the political hack, how journalists go about building up sources, developing and maintaining contacts, where they can sniff for stories. His account of this all too closed world is revealing and for me was the best part of this book.

His treatment of broadcast journalism is a bit more thin (a reflection on the few years spend on television) and talks about a world with which most people are probably more familiar. We are treated to an overview of the running battles between various governments and the BBC, along with explanations of the BBC's special status and the reasons why the rules of the game are that bit stricter for the Beeb.

Finally, Marr is acutely aware of the massive changes inflicted on the industry by the electronic revolution, and charts their impact on a range of fields. As well as the obvious practical changes (computer-based editing, email, satellit communications, internet), our new world of instantaneous communication and constant availability has also led journalists to think differently and in some cases has paradoxically made finding the story more difficult.

Although only one inch thick, the book is pretty long, at least 150,000 words at a rough guess. Marr does an impressive job of keeping it all hanging together and maintaining the momentum right up to the last page. Although densely packed with information, this book is very well written and the user friendly writing style makes the text flow easily along.

Any gripes? Perhaps one: in his discussion of the pressures an editor is under, in particular from politically-minded proprietors (which in the end covers most newspaper owners), not much space is given to the impact of commercial interests on journalistic decisions. Whilst the owner's impact is direct and obvious, the influence of advertisers' business interests is indirect yet, as acknowledged in passing by Marr, has a bearing on what a paper is willing to print. Newspapers really only stay afloat because of advertising revenue; in fact you could even say that instead of selling the news (the product) to us (customers), papers are selling our attention (the product) to advertisers (customers). How many newspapers are going to have the conviction to document the impact of companies like BMW and Mercedes on climate change when the very same two are writing the cheques which keep the paper's profits healthy? Other than this point however, the book is excellent and well-worth reading.

a great book on journalism and politics, 07 Nov 2005
Although this books begins almost as a conventional history of journalism and newspapers - as good as that is - it soon moves on to a much more intersting mix of personal story and insider account of political journalism, newspaper editorship and broadcast journalism. Once there, all the personality and insight that made Marr's TV work as BBC political editor shines through.

A great read for budding journalists, broadcasters and politicians everywhere.

Very Informative, 03 Sep 2005
I rate Andrew Marr very highly as a journalist and was sorry when he stepped down as the BBC's Policitcal Correspondant. His easy style and ability to explain the complex in simple terms was a great asset to the BBC.

Here that same style is used to give us an insiders look at how the News is reported, gathered, created. He has clearly done extremely extensive research going all the way back to the first newspapers right upto modern times. There is an awful lot in here that most people will not be aware of and it makes it a book that you look forwards to picking up.

He draws a lot on his own experiences, explaining the role of a newspaper editor in terms of how he did it and I think that could well have been expanded on. There is obviously a lot involved but there was not the space in a book trying to cover the entire history of journalism. Perhaps if he ever does an autobiography we will learn more - I for one would like to.

So, to sum up, this is an excellent read for anyone interested in the news or just generally interested in history. I certainly have no regrets having bought it.

Very interesting and entertaining, 31 Aug 2005
I bought the audio CD - something to listen and chuckle to in the car on the way in and out of work. Really enjoyed it! Shall miss Andy Marr as BBC Political Ed.

Top drawer yet again, 08 Nov 2008
After reading Dominique Enwright's excellent biography on Winston Churchill I had high hopes for this.I was not disappointed because this is fantastic addition to that book.
The thing that I like about her books on Chuchill is the fact that they aren't overblown at all.They stick to the basic facts and hold your interest throughout.This fine effort showcases the wit of the great man in an easy to follow way and I have no hesitation in giving this a full five stars to go alongside Ms. Enwright's first book.
There are many books out there about Churchill but I doubt you will find two finer ones simply because they are so easy to digest.Very highly recommended.

flavor minus ingredients, 06 Mar 2008
a beautful cover and many mistakes in the text. no attribution for many quotes either.

Very enjoyable, 12 Feb 2008
This relatively small book is divided into several sections with slices from Churchill's life and quotations related to politics, speaches, friends, animals, family, etc.

Here are few excerpts:

While campaigning in 1900, it is said that the young Churchill was doing a spot of canvassing when one of those he approached exclaimed:

"Vote for you? Why, I'd rather vote for the Devil!"

"I understand", Churchill answered, "But in case your friend is not running, may I count on your support?"

* * *

When passed a very long but turgidly written memorandum on some worthy but uninspiring subject, the elderly Prime Minister weighed the thick wad of paper in his hands and commented, "This paper by its very length defends itself against the risk of being read."

* * *

Churchill liked animals; sometimes he found this difficult to reconcile with his fondness for rich food. Anthony Montague Brown recalled that 'One Christmas he was about to carve a goose. Learning it was one of his own, he put down the knife and fork and said, "I could not possibly eat a bird that I have known socially."

* * *

A BBC broadcaster described once sitting next to Churchill as he gave a speech, keeping his audience hanging on to his every word. The boradcaster noticed, howver, that what appeared to be notes in Churchill's hand was only a laundry slip, and he later remarked upon this to Churchill. "Yes", said Churchill. "It gave confidence to my audience."

WHEN PARLIAMENT SPARKLED, 10 Jan 2008
Anyone watching the televised proceedings from Parliament could be forgiven for nodding off, given the uninspiring nature of much of the proceedings, and the mundane characters who participate. If you want a glimpse of what we're missing this book is essential reading. Winston Churchill was one of the great characters of the House, at a time when there was no shortage of such people. He is quoted as saying, of the then Russian Foreign Minister, "I have never seen a human being who more perfectly represented the modern concept of a robot". I can't help feeling that, were he a sitting MP today, he'd find no shortage of candidates to fit that description. This book lives up to its title.

The Great British Patriot, 24 Jan 2005
This book sums up almost all the great qualities of a man who for so many was one of the greatest Englishman who ever lived. Full of quotes of indeed great wit and humour as well as thought and intelligence. Just a short read of this book will keep you in the best of spirits, and will surely put you in a most patriotic mood. A brilliant read and a must have book.

not a great biography, but a very creditable one, 08 Jul 2008
William Hague points out in the afterword to this book that Margaret Thatcher likened him to Pitt the Younger when he famously took the stage at the Conservative Party Conference aged 16 many years ago. He certainly has a sympathy for his subject but not a slavish one ; he sees weaknesses as well as strengths. It needs to be said that this is a hard-worked book, and Hague's conscientious research is everywhere apparent. He usually avoids the danger of an invisible wood hidden by multitudes of trees - perhaps not quite, or not always - but there is still a lot of information in the book, and it's a long book. Hague also faces a difficulty in the nature of his subject. If you take the politician away from Pitt, there is not much left. Disraeli, Gladstone and Churchill, to name only three, were interesting characters in themselves, never mind their achievements ; Pitt was an unmarried, totally dedicated politician with an enigmatic nature, little in the way of hobbies and few friends. He drank very heavily and no doubt enjoyed the experience, but even that stemmed from medical advice and not what might be thought an interesting recklessness of character. However, the events through which he lived - the American War, attempts at parliamentary reform, the 'madness' of the King (actually probably acute intermittent porphyria), the anti-slavery movement with his friend Wilberforce, the French Revolutionary Wars, the Napoleonic Wars - are all important and some are momentous. Hague tells the tale of all these things and his subject's involvement in them pretty well. He writes clearly and articulately and has quite a good sense of structure in his narrative - he is, for example, good at cliff-hangers at section and chapter endings. There are a few entertaining anecdotes (not many). What he fails to do for me is convey the astonishing power of Pitt as a parliamentary orator. Often he writes of a devastating speech, or one which thrilled the Commons with its clarity, logic and intellectual brilliance, but he doesn't really make that come to life in the quotations he chooses, which (admittedly out of context) seem to me wordy and even a little pompous sometimes. But fair's fair - I enjoyed the book, it is a good work of scholarship, it does cast a great deal of light on the subject and his time, and it is rather touching that it has been written by a modern politician who, whatever the similarities, has yet to come within shouting distance of Pitt's achievement in his time - as I am sure Hague would have the realism and humility to acknowledge.

Great introductory piece on a great man!, 07 Jun 2008
I thought this book a wonderful introduction to the life and administration of William Pitt the Younger. Mr Hague manages to, in a relatively short book (compared to Ehrman's) to outline and analyse Pitt's true uniqueness and irregularty as a man. Few men become PM at 24 and even fewer worked the excessive hours Pitt. Pitt's oratory was legendary and his clashes with Fox were too. Hague looks at these two characters in relation to the times with the end of America and the radicalism of Paine & co. Pitt's reactionary nature after the French revolution is analysed well as his economic policy of the 1780's which has become famous for it's originality and audacity. Hagues book isn't in the same league as Jenkins and Ehrman but is a splendid first attempt!

A rounded portrait of a great statesman, 29 Mar 2008
William Hague has a pleasant, straightforward and limpid style in which he can convey not only complex political situations, but a warmth of feeling towards his subject and a sensitive and empathic interpretation of behaviour and background.

He begins with Pitt's extremely precocious childhood. He was tutored at home, in large part by his father (whose loving nature may also be something of a revelation to readers). From earliest childhood young Pitt breathed in politics. Hague speculates that he learnt not only from his father's successes (his oratory, his foreign policy), but also from his failures (going to the Lords in 1766, or leaving the post of First Lord of the Treasury to someone else).

There are exciting accounts of several key episodes in his life: his rise to becoming Prime Minister at the age of 24; the Regency Crisis of 1788/9; his resignation over his disagreement with George III over Catholic Emancipation in 1801 (beautifully analyzed), and his promise, after the King's recovery from his recurring malady, never to raise the matter again; the drifting apart between Pitt and his old friend and nominee Addington during the latter's interregnum.

No minister except Walpole has for so long and so completely dominated the House of Commons. Pitt was universally acclaimed as a great orator, though only a very few passages quoted in this book - foremost among them his speech in 1792 advocating the abolition of the slave trade - make for stirring reading these days. Part of the appeal of his speeches is said to have been the cogency of their logical structure and his mastery of detail, which is not so easily conveyed in a book. He was a brilliant manager of the nation's finances - but his own were often in a ruinous state. He could not be bothered to pay much attention to them, and refused to take sinecure offices (except, at the King's insistence, the Wardenship of the Cinque Ports) or a large donation offered by the merchants of the City of London. He was hugely in debt at the time of his resignation in 1801, but he refused all offers of help, from the King, from Parliament, from his successor Addington in the form of sinecure offices, or from the City. Only through help from a handful of his closest friends was the pressure of debt slightly eased.

For Pitt rightly prided himself on his personal probity. He would accept nothing that might be construed as putting him under an obligation; but, though he was personally bored with appeals for his patronage, he did not scruple to allow his lieutenants to manage patronage and bribery on a massive scale, especially at critical moments of his rule. (Hague mentions only in passing his massive inflation of the peerage.)

His finances and his speeches made him a great war leader, but he was less so in the actual conduct of the wars. He underestimated France in the early days and overestimated Britain's military (as distinct from naval) resources. He made miscalculations of the kind that Chatham probably would not have made (though Chatham, of course, had faced a far less dynamic France). He twice (1796, 1797) sought for peace with France because of the immense drain on Britain's financial resources, but, encouraged by a string of French setbacks in 1798 and 1799, turned down the peace overtures Napoleon made immediately after seizing power in France in 1799. In this latter refusal he was strongly backed by his cousin, the hawkish foreign minister William Grenville.

Hague brings out the importance of Grenville throughout Pitt's career. A staunch ally until Pitt's resignation, he became so impatient with Pitt's early forbearance with regard to Addington that he joined Fox in opposition - which George III could not forgive. So when Pitt returned to office in 1804, he could not give a post to Grenville, who then practically became a Foxite Whig. As a result, Pitt no longer had the mastery of the Commons or even of the Cabinet that he had had before, and it added to the strain in those years of Ulm and Austerlitz. By that time Pitt was a shadow of his former self, increasingly exhausted and in dreadful health.

It is on the human side that Hague excels, and there is not always scope for that in the story. Much of Pitt's work in government - finance, trade, administrative reform, the shuffling of seats around the cabinet table - gives little scope to more than the thoroughly workmanlike treatment it receives here. Even the account of the wars with France are no more than that. For me, the best parts of the book deal with Pitt's character. He has generally been considered cold; but he had many close friends in whose company he was witty and amusing. A fine chapter discusses this contrast and shows Pitt, when Prime Minister, as relaxed and warm with family and real friends. There is a long and moving letter he wrote to Wilberforce when the latter announced his religious conversion in 1785. There is an astonishing scene a couple of years before his death when at one moment he was larking around with his intimates whom he allowed to blacken his face with burnt cork, and a moment later, quickly cleaned up, stiffly received political visitors. Between Pitt and his mother there was great warmth and affection. In his letters to her he always made light of difficulties or his poor health, not just because he was by nature optimistic, but because he wanted to spare her worries.

It is astonishing that Hague should have researched and written this book of 592 pages inside two years. The masterly ten-page summing up at the end is not only balanced in its judgments, but tells us a good deal about Hague himself. It is clear that he not only admires Pitt, but feels a great affection for him; and he will make many readers feel the same.



An interesting biography , 04 Nov 2007
Pitt the Younger by William Hauge is an interesting book dealing with one of the heroes of British politics. It describes the life of a man who devoted his short life to running the country in one of its hours of need. Although it perhaps lacks the analysis you find in some biographies it is all in all a very good book which is easy to read and will increase most reader's knowledge of this quite remarkable man.

Hague on Pitt, 31 Jul 2007
It is easy to see why William Hague reveres the memory of William Pitt the Younger and perhaps seems something of himself in him. Both were recognised as prococious talent early in their political careers, both were possessed of quick wit and intelligence, both dedicated their lives to politics at an early age. Hague hung Pitt's portrait in the Shadow Cabinet, hoping perhaps that some of his hero's skill in winning and maintaining power would rub off on him and his colleagues. When Hague was asked to write his memoirs after resigning as Tory leader in 2001, he dismissed the idea as ridiculous for a 40 year old, and chose instead to write about the prime minister regarded as the father of the Conservative Party.

Hague tells the story of the younger Pitt's short but astonishing life with great skill and lucidity, supplying parallels and contrasts with the modern political age. It is a fascinating account, not only of the life of Pitt, but also of British politics in general in the late eighteenth century. The circumstances in which Pitt became Prime Minister were extraordinary at the time, and would of course be completely impossible now. At this juncture considerable power still remained in the hands of the sovereign, and after the deadweight first two Georges, King George III had an almost Stuart-like determination to fully exercise the powers vested in him. He chose a moment to dismiss a government he did not like, that of Lord North and Charles James Fox, and to install the 24 year old William Pitt.

The story of how this youth managed to hold together a government against an indignant opposition, who still controlled the Commons, for long enough to win over a working majority is fascinating in its own right. Pitt, working with the King, managed gradually to consolidate the new government until the moment was right to dissolve Parliament and use the considerable powers available to incumbent prime ministers to ensure a clear majority in the subsequent House of Commons. He remained in office, with a short break, until his untimely death at 46.

Among the strengths that made Pitt such a political success were his remarkable oratory powers in the Commons, his shrewd use of the powers of patronage available to him and his innovative approaches to solving the nation's financial woes in the wake of the military catastrophe of the American War. It would be incorrect to say he was incorruptable - more accurately he had no regard for his personal financial situation, and died with huge debts. But he was quite comfortable with offering honours or financial incentives to those whom he knew would be motivated by them.

A criticism of Hague's work might be that too little time is spent on conclusions. The reader is left wondering why William Pitt the Younger should be regarded as a "great" prime minister. He was a brilliant speaker and his shrewdness in defending his position from his opponents was legendary. Statistically his position in British history is unassailable, having come to office at such a young age, and served as prime minister for a little short of nineteen years. But these things do not on their own make a great prime minister. Critics can point to his record of internal repression during the long war with revolutionary France and to his failure to legislate on any of the three great liberal causes which he professed to support - Catholic emancipation, parliamentary reform, and the abolition of the slave trade. The fact that the last of these was already accepted in principle by most of the British ruling class, and passed quickly into law after his death makes his tardiness hard to forgive.

The last great criticism of Pitt is his failure to read the military strength of France in 1793 and his consequential willingless to take Britain back to war with her old enemy. Pitt was convinced that France was bankrupt and would not be able to stand for long against a united European coalition. All his good work in paying back the national debt in the 1780s was undone, and if it was not for the newly created wealth of the industrial revolution, Britain would have bled itself to death bribing Austria and Prussia to remain in the field. As it was he was able to bridge the gap with his most enduring innovation - income tax.

Whatever the reader's conclusion about the William Pitt the Younger, Hague has written an excellent first book. One hopes that he will publish more.

A very good read, 22 Nov 2008
Andrew Marr has a wide range of experience of all aspects of British journalism from working on the Scotsman to becoming editor of the Independent and later political editor at the BBC.

This book combines anecdotal and biographical details with an historical approach to British journalism. It raises many questions about the ownership of national newspapers, the way journalists operate and many other issues and is a bit of an eye-opener.

I found this to be a well written, informative and entertaining read.

Behind the scenes look at journalism, 16 Dec 2005
The work of journalists, perhaps moreso than that of other professions, is often viewed in a stereotypical light. Andrew Marr's book however sweeps away much of the romance and glamour in favour of a down to earth this-is-how-it-is approach. He is well suited to the task, having moved through many of the important stages in the print and broadcast hierarchy over the course of his career.

Although the book is billed as a "short history of British journalism", most of the book is taken up with impressively detailed accounts of what a journalist does, how they do it, and why, addressing also issues of personal motivation, bias, editorial influence, government pressure... The historical section in fact only ends up occupying one chapter of this fairly dense book. Whilst it is undoubtedly fascinating, Marr is not a historian and a lot of the substance and cohesion you would expect from a historical essay is lacking; that said however it takes up only about 15% of the book and does provide valuable context for the rest of his narrative.

The main body of the book gives a blow by blow account of the various roles which newspaper (mainly broadsheet) journalists play, right from the commanding national editor down to the latest teenage provincial apprentice. He recounts a range of issues which the layman might not think about too often: What makes a story? What keeps a story alive? What should the balance of stories within a newspaper be? How does the editor decide what to put on the front page? These are then linked in with a more logistical account (based on his period as an editor), explaining how it all gets put together into something printable, how long it takes, what the priorities are for printers. He gives the reader an acute sense of how stressful and monotonous a lot of this routine work can be.

A study of this nature cannot avoid tackling journalism's relationship with politics. Marr also dedicates a lot of space to the tightrope, cloke and dagger world of the political hack, how journalists go about building up sources, developing and maintaining contacts, where they can sniff for stories. His account of this all too closed world is revealing and for me was the best part of this book.

His treatment of broadcast journalism is a bit more thin (a reflection on the few years spend on television) and talks about a world with which most people are probably more familiar. We are treated to an overview of the running battles between various governments and the BBC, along with explanations of the BBC's special status and the reasons why the rules of the game are that bit stricter for the Beeb.

Finally, Marr is acutely aware of the massive changes inflicted on the industry by the electronic revolution, and charts their impact on a range of fields. As well as the obvious practical changes (computer-based editing, email, satellit communications, internet), our new world of instantaneous communication and constant availability has also led journalists to think differently and in some cases has paradoxically made finding the story more difficult.

Although only one inch thick, the book is pretty long, at least 150,000 words at a rough guess. Marr does an impressive job of keeping it all hanging together and maintaining the momentum right up to the last page. Although densely packed with information, this book is very well written and the user friendly writing style makes the text flow easily along.

Any gripes? Perhaps one: in his discussion of the pressures an editor is under, in particular from politically-minded proprietors (which in the end covers most newspaper owners), not much space is given to the impact of commercial interests on journalistic decisions. Whilst the owner's impact is direct and obvious, the influence of advertisers' business interests is indirect yet, as acknowledged in passing by Marr, has a bearing on what a paper is willing to print. Newspapers really only stay afloat because of advertising revenue; in fact you could even say that instead of selling the news (the product) to us (customers), papers are selling our attention (the product) to advertisers (customers). How many newspapers are going to have the conviction to document the impact of companies like BMW and Mercedes on climate change when the very same two are writing the cheques which keep the paper's profits healthy? Other than this point however, the book is excellent and well-worth reading.

a great book on journalism and politics, 07 Nov 2005
Although this books begins almost as a conventional history of journalism and newspapers - as good as that is - it soon moves on to a much more intersting mix of personal story and insider account of political journalism, newspaper editorship and broadcast journalism. Once there, all the personality and insight that made Marr's TV work as BBC political editor shines through.

A great read for budding journalists, broadcasters and politicians everywhere.

Very Informative, 03 Sep 2005
I rate Andrew Marr very highly as a journalist and was sorry when he stepped down as the BBC's Policitcal Correspondant. His easy style and ability to explain the complex in simple terms was a great asset to the BBC.

Here that same style is used to give us an insiders look at how the News is reported, gathered, created. He has clearly done extremely extensive research going all the way back to the first newspapers right upto modern times. There is an awful lot in here that most people will not be aware of and it makes it a book that you look forwards to picking up.

He draws a lot on his own experiences, explaining the role of a newspaper editor in terms of how he did it and I think that could well have been expanded on. There is obviously a lot involved but there was not the space in a book trying to cover the entire history of journalism. Perhaps if he ever does an autobiography we will learn more - I for one would like to.

So, to sum up, this is an excellent read for anyone interested in the news or just generally interested in history. I certainly have no regrets having bought it.

Very interesting and entertaining, 31 Aug 2005
I bought the audio CD - something to listen and chuckle to in the car on the way in and out of work. Really enjoyed it! Shall miss Andy Marr as BBC Political Ed.

History from a different perspective.., 28 Sep 2008
This is a fat book-but don't be put off. ffion's writing style is fluid and accessible: she keeps the clarity that is so often missing in biographies that cover such a wide timespan and range of characters. The tone is never judgemental and totally even handed in its treatment of (some not always likeable) people. As it takes a rather more personal and domestic view of late 19th/ early 20th century history the book makes a refreshing change from mere histories of the time. However we are never far from world events so one encounters them from the perspective of engaged bystanders rather than from the main players. It also throws the double standards of the contemporary moral and social climate into sharp relief and acts as an interesting mirror to the current political scene. In summary- an enjoyable and informative read.

Top drawer yet again, 08 Nov 2008
After reading Dominique Enwright's excellent biography on Winston Churchill I had high hopes for this.I was not disappointed because this is fantastic addition to that book.
The thing that I like about her books on Chuchill is the fact that they aren't overblown at all.They stick to the basic facts and hold your interest throughout.This fine effort showcases the wit of the great man in an easy to follow way and I have no hesitation in giving this a full five stars to go alongside Ms. Enwright's first book.
There are many books out there about Churchill but I doubt you will find two finer ones simply because they are so easy to digest.Very highly recommended.

flavor minus ingredients, 06 Mar 2008
a beautful cover and many mistakes in the text. no attribution for many quotes either.

Very enjoyable, 12 Feb 2008
This relatively small book is divided into several sections with slices from Churchill's life and quotations related to politics, speaches, friends, animals, family, etc.

Here are few excerpts:

While campaigning in 1900, it is said that the young Churchill was doing a spot of canvassing when one of those he approached exclaimed:

"Vote for you? Why, I'd rather vote for the Devil!"

"I understand", Churchill answered, "But in case your friend is not running, may I count on your support?"

* * *

When passed a very long but turgidly written memorandum on some worthy but uninspiring subject, the elderly Prime Minister weighed the thick wad of paper in his hands and commented, "This paper by its very length defends itself against the risk of being read."

* * *

Churchill liked animals; sometimes he found this difficult to reconcile with his fondness for rich food. Anthony Montague Brown recalled that 'One Christmas he was about to carve a goose. Learning it was one of his own, he put down the knife and fork and said, "I could not possibly eat a bird that I have known socially."

* * *

A BBC broadcaster described once sitting next to Churchill as he gave a speech, keeping his audience hanging on to his every word. The boradcaster noticed, howver, that what appeared to be notes in Churchill's hand was only a laundry slip, and he later remarked upon this to Churchill. "Yes", said Churchill. "It gave confidence to my audience."

WHEN PARLIAMENT SPARKLED, 10 Jan 2008
Anyone watching the televised proceedings from Parliament could be forgiven for nodding off, given the uninspiring nature of much of the proceedings, and the mundane characters who participate. If you want a glimpse of what we're missing this book is essential reading. Winston Churchill was one of the great characters of the House, at a time when there was no shortage of such people. He is quoted as saying, of the then Russian Foreign Minister, "I have never seen a human being who more perfectly represented the modern concept of a robot". I can't help feeling that, were he a sitting MP today, he'd find no shortage of candidates to fit that description. This book lives up to its title.

The Great British Patriot, 24 Jan 2005
This book sums up almost all the great qualities of a man who for so many was one of the greatest Englishman who ever lived. Full of quotes of indeed great wit and humour as well as thought and intelligence. Just a short read of this book will keep you in the best of spirits, and will surely put you in a most patriotic mood. A brilliant read and a must have book.

not a great biography, but a very creditable one, 08 Jul 2008
William Hague points out in the afterword to this book that Margaret Thatcher likened him to Pitt the Younger when he famously took the stage at the Conservative Party Conference aged 16 many years ago. He certainly has a sympathy for his subject but not a slavish one ; he sees weaknesses as well as strengths. It needs to be said that this is a hard-worked book, and Hague's conscientious research is everywhere apparent. He usually avoids the danger of an invisible wood hidden by multitudes of trees - perhaps not quite, or not always - but there is still a lot of information in the book, and it's a long book. Hague also faces a difficulty in the nature of his subject. If you take the politician away from Pitt, there is not much left. Disraeli, Gladstone and Churchill, to name only three, were interesting characters in themselves, never mind their achievements ; Pitt was an unmarried, totally dedicated politician with an enigmatic nature, little in the way of hobbies and few friends. He drank very heavily and no doubt enjoyed the experience, but even that stemmed from medical advice and not what might be thought an interesting recklessness of character. However, the events through which he lived - the American War, attempts at parliamentary reform, the 'madness' of the King (actually probably acute intermittent porphyria), the anti-slavery movement with his friend Wilberforce, the French Revolutionary Wars, the Napoleonic Wars - are all important and some are momentous. Hague tells the tale of all these things and his subject's involvement in them pretty well. He writes clearly and articulately and has quite a good sense of structure in his narrative - he is, for example, good at cliff-hangers at section and chapter endings. There are a few entertaining anecdotes (not many). What he fails to do for me is convey the astonishing power of Pitt as a parliamentary orator. Often he writes of a devastating speech, or one which thrilled the Commons with its clarity, logic and intellectual brilliance, but he doesn't really make that come to life in the quotations he chooses, which (admittedly out of context) seem to me wordy and even a little pompous sometimes. But fair's fair - I enjoyed the book, it is a good work of scholarship, it does cast a great deal of light on the subject and his time, and it is rather touching that it has been written by a modern politician who, whatever the similarities, has yet to come within shouting distance of Pitt's achievement in his time - as I am sure Hague would have the realism and humility to acknowledge.

Great introductory piece on a great man!, 07 Jun 2008
I thought this book a wonderful introduction to the life and administration of William Pitt the Younger. Mr Hague manages to, in a relatively short book (compared to Ehrman's) to outline and analyse Pitt's true uniqueness and irregularty as a man. Few men become PM at 24 and even fewer worked the excessive hours Pitt. Pitt's oratory was legendary and his clashes with Fox were too. Hague looks at these two characters in relation to the times with the end of America and the radicalism of Paine & co. Pitt's reactionary nature after the French revolution is analysed well as his economic policy of the 1780's which has become famous for it's originality and audacity. Hagues book isn't in the same league as Jenkins and Ehrman but is a splendid first attempt!

A rounded portrait of a great statesman, 29 Mar 2008
William Hague has a pleasant, straightforward and limpid style in which he can convey not only complex political situations, but a warmth of feeling towards his subject and a sensitive and empathic interpretation of behaviour and background.

He begins with Pitt's extremely precocious childhood. He was tutored at home, in large part by his father (whose loving nature may also be something of a revelation to readers). From earliest childhood young Pitt breathed in politics. Hague speculates that he learnt not only from his father's successes (his oratory, his foreign policy), but also from his failures (going to the Lords in 1766, or leaving the post of First Lord of the Treasury to someone else).

There are exciting accounts of several key episodes in his life: his rise to becoming Prime Minister at the age of 24; the Regency Crisis of 1788/9; his resignation over his disagreement with George III over Catholic Emancipation in 1801 (beautifully analyzed), and his promise, after the King's recovery from his recurring malady, never to raise the matter again; the drifting apart between Pitt and his old friend and nominee Addington during the latter's interregnum.

No minister except Walpole has for so long and so completely dominated the House of Commons. Pitt was universally acclaimed as a great orator, though only a very few passages quoted in this book - foremost among them his speech in 1792 advocating the abolition of the slave trade - make for stirring reading these days. Part of the appeal of his speeches is said to have been the cogency of their logical structure and his mastery of detail, which is not so easily conveyed in a book. He was a brilliant manager of the nation's finances - but his own were often in a ruinous state. He could not be bothered to pay much attention to them, and refused to take sinecure offices (except, at the King's insistence, the Wardenship of the Cinque Ports) or a large donation offered by the merchants of the City of London. He was hugely in debt at the time of his resignation in 1801, but he refused all offers of help, from the King, from Parliament, from his successor Addington in the form of sinecure offices, or from the City. Only through help from a handful of his closest friends was the pressure of debt slightly eased.

For Pitt rightly prided himself on his personal probity. He would accept nothing that might be construed as putting him under an obligation; but, though he was personally bored with appeals for his patronage, he did not scruple to allow his lieutenants to manage patronage and bribery on a massive scale, especially at critical moments of his rule. (Hague mentions only in passing his massive inflation of the peerage.)

His finances and his speeches made him a great war leader, but he was less so in the actual conduct of the wars. He underestimated France in the early days and overestimated Britain's military (as distinct from naval) resources. He made miscalculations of the kind that Chatham probably would not have made (though Chatham, of course, had faced a far less dynamic France). He twice (1796, 1797) sought for peace with France because of the immense drain on Britain's financial resources, but, encouraged by a string of French setbacks in 1798 and 1799, turned down the peace overtures Napoleon made immediately after seizing power in France in 1799. In this latter refusal he was strongly backed by his cousin, the hawkish foreign minister William Grenville.

Hague brings out the importance of Grenville throughout Pitt's career. A staunch ally until Pitt's resignation, he became so impatient with Pitt's early forbearance with regard to Addington that he joined Fox in opposition - which George III could not forgive. So when Pitt returned to office in 1804, he could not give a post to Grenville, who then practically became a Foxite Whig. As a result, Pitt no longer had the mastery of the Commons or even of the Cabinet that he had had before, and it added to the strain in those years of Ulm and Austerlitz. By that time Pitt was a shadow of his former self, increasingly exhausted and in dreadful health.

It is on the human side that Hague excels, and there is not always scope for that in the story. Much of Pitt's work in government - finance, trade, administrative reform, the shuffling of seats around the cabinet table - gives little scope to more than the thoroughly workmanlike treatment it receives here. Even the account of the wars with France are no more than that. For me, the best parts of the book deal with Pitt's character. He has generally been considered cold; but he had many close friends in whose company he was witty and amusing. A fine chapter discusses this contrast and shows Pitt, when Prime Minister, as relaxed and warm with family and real friends. There is a long and moving letter he wrote to Wilberforce when the latter announced his religious conversion in 1785. There is an astonishing scene a couple of years before his death when at one moment he was larking around with his intimates whom he allowed to blacken his face with burnt cork, and a moment later, quickly cleaned up, stiffly received political visitors. Between Pitt and his mother there was great warmth and affection. In his letters to her he always made light of difficulties or his poor health, not just because he was by nature optimistic, but because he wanted to spare her worries.

It is astonishing that Hague should have researched and written this book of 592 pages inside two years. The masterly ten-page summing up at the end is not only balanced in its judgments, but tells us a good deal about Hague himself. It is clear that he not only admires Pitt, but feels a great affection for him; and he will make many readers feel the same.



An interesting biography , 04 Nov 2007
Pitt the Younger by William Hauge is an interesting book dealing with one of the heroes of British politics. It describes the life of a man who devoted his short life to running the country in one of its hours of need. Although it perhaps lacks the analysis you find in some biographies it is all in all a very good book which is easy to read and will increase most reader's knowledge of this quite remarkable man.

Hague on Pitt, 31 Jul 2007
It is easy to see why William Hague reveres the memory of William Pitt the Younger and perhaps seems something of himself in him. Both were recognised as prococious talent early in their political careers, both were possessed of quick wit and intelligence, both dedicated their lives to politics at an early age. Hague hung Pitt's portrait in the Shadow Cabinet, hoping perhaps that some of his hero's skill in winning and maintaining power would rub off on him and his colleagues. When Hague was asked to write his memoirs after resigning as Tory leader in 2001, he dismissed the idea as ridiculous for a 40 year old, and chose instead to write about the prime minister regarded as the father of the Conservative Party.

Hague tells the story of the younger Pitt's short but astonishing life with great skill and lucidity, supplying parallels and contrasts with the modern political age. It is a fascinating account, not only of the life of Pitt, but also of British politics in general in the late eighteenth century. The circumstances in which Pitt became Prime Minister were extraordinary at the time, and would of course be completely impossible now. At this juncture considerable power still remained in the hands of the sovereign, and after the deadweight first two Georges, King George III had an almost Stuart-like determination to fully exercise the powers vested in him. He chose a moment to dismiss a government he did not like, that of Lord North and Charles James Fox, and to install the 24 year old William Pitt.

The story of how this youth managed to hold together a government against an indignant opposition, who still controlled the Commons, for long enough to win over a working majority is fascinating in its own right. Pitt, working with the King, managed gradually to consolidate the new government until the moment was right to dissolve Parliament and use the considerable powers available to incumbent prime ministers to ensure a clear majority in the subsequent House of Commons. He remained in office, with a short break, until his untimely death at 46.

Among the strengths that made Pitt such a political success were his remarkable oratory powers in the Commons, his shrewd use of the powers of patronage available to him and his innovative approaches to solving the nation's financial woes in the wake of the military catastrophe of the American War. It would be incorrect to say he was incorruptable - more accurately he had no regard for his personal financial situation, and died with huge debts. But he was quite comfortable with offering honours or financial incentives to those whom he knew would be motivated by them.

A criticism of Hague's work might be that too little time is spent on conclusions. The reader is left wondering why William Pitt the Younger should be regarded as a "great" prime minister. He was a brilliant speaker and his shrewdness in defending his position from his opponents was legendary. Statistically his position in British history is unassailable, having come to office at such a young age, and served as prime minister for a little short of nineteen years. But these things do not on their own make a great prime minister. Critics can point to his record of internal repression during the long war with revolutionary France and to his failure to legislate on any of the three great liberal causes which he professed to support - Catholic emancipation, parliamentary reform, and the abolition of the slave trade. The fact that the last of these was already accepted in principle by most of the British ruling class, and passed quickly into law after his death makes his tardiness hard to forgive.

The last great criticism of Pitt is his failure to read the military strength of France in 1793 and his consequential willingless to take Britain back to war with her old enemy. Pitt was convinced that France was bankrupt and would not be able to stand for long against a united European coalition. All his good work in paying back the national debt in the 1780s was undone, and if it was not for the newly created wealth of the industrial revolution, Britain would have bled itself to death bribing Austria and Prussia to remain in the field. As it was he was able to bridge the gap with his most enduring innovation - income tax.

Whatever the reader's conclusion about the William Pitt the Younger, Hague has written an excellent first book. One hopes that he will publish more.

A very good read, 22 Nov 2008
Andrew Marr has a wide range of experience of all aspects of British journalism from working on the Scotsman to becoming editor of the Independent and later political editor at the BBC.

This book combines anecdotal and biographical details with an historical approach to British journalism. It raises many questions about the ownership of national newspapers, the way journalists operate and many other issues and is a bit of an eye-opener.

I found this to be a well written, informative and entertaining read.

Behind the scenes look at journalism, 16 Dec 2005
The work of journalists, perhaps moreso than that of other professions, is often viewed in a stereotypical light. Andrew Marr's book however sweeps away much of the romance and glamour in favour of a down to earth this-is-how-it-is approach. He is well suited to the task, having moved through many of the important stages in the print and broadcast hierarchy over the course of his career.

Although the book is billed as a "short history of British journalism", most of the book is taken up with impressively detailed accounts of what a journalist does, how they do it, and why, addressing also issues of personal motivation, bias, editorial influence, government pressure... The historical section in fact only ends up occupying one chapter of this fairly dense book. Whilst it is undoubtedly fascinating, Marr is not a historian and a lot of the substance and cohesion you would expect from a historical essay is lacking; that said however it takes up only about 15% of the book and does provide valuable context for the rest of his narrative.

The main body of the book gives a blow by blow account of the various roles which newspaper (mainly broadsheet) journalists play, right from the commanding national editor down to the latest teenage provincial apprentice. He recounts a range of issues which the layman might not think about too often: What makes a story? What keeps a story alive? What should the balance of stories within a newspaper be? How does the editor decide what to put on the front page? These are then linked in with a more logistical account (based on his period as an editor), explaining how it all gets put together into something printable, how long it takes, what the priorities are for printers. He gives the reader an acute sense of how stressful and monotonous a lot of this routine work can be.

A study of this nature cannot avoid tackling journalism's relationship with politics. Marr also dedicates a lot of space to the tightrope, cloke and dagger world of the political hack, how journalists go about building up sources, developing and maintaining contacts, where they can sniff for stories. His account of this all too closed world is revealing and for me was the best part of this book.

His treatment of broadcast journalism is a bit more thin (a reflection on the few years spend on television) and talks about a world with which most people are probably more familiar. We are treated to an overview of the running battles between various governments and the BBC, along with explanations of the BBC's special status and the reasons why the rules of the game are that bit stricter for the Beeb.

Finally, Marr is acutely aware of the massive changes inflicted on the industry by the electronic revolution, and charts their impact on a range of fields. As well as the obvious practical changes (computer-based editing, email, satellit communications, internet), our new world of instantaneous communication and constant availability has also led journalists to think differently and in some cases has paradoxically made finding the story more difficult.

Although only one inch thick, the book is pretty long, at least 150,000 words at a rough guess. Marr does an impressive job of keeping it all hanging together and maintaining the momentum right up to the last page. Although densely packed with information, this book is very well written and the user friendly writing style makes the text flow easily along.

Any gripes? Perhaps one: in his discussion of the pressures an editor is under, in particular from politically-minded proprietors (which in the end covers most newspaper owners), not much space is given to the impact of commercial interests on journalistic decisions. Whilst the owner's impact is direct and obvious, the influence of advertisers' business interests is indirect yet, as acknowledged in passing by Marr, has a bearing on what a paper is willing to print. Newspapers really only stay afloat because of advertising revenue; in fact you could even say that instead of selling the news (the product) to us (customers), papers are selling our attention (the product) to advertisers (customers). How many newspapers are going to have the conviction to document the impact of companies like BMW and Mercedes on climate change when the very same two are writing the cheques which keep the paper's profits healthy? Other than this point however, the book is excellent and well-worth reading.

a great book on journalism and politics, 07 Nov 2005
Although this books begins almost as a conventional history of journalism and newspapers - as good as that is - it soon moves on to a much more intersting mix of personal story and insider account of political journalism, newspaper editorship and broadcast journalism. Once there, all the personality and insight that made Marr's TV work as BBC political editor shines through.

A great read for budding journalists, broadcasters and politicians everywhere.

Very Informative, 03 Sep 2005
I rate Andrew Marr very highly as a journalist and was sorry when he stepped down as the BBC's Policitcal Correspondant. His easy style and ability to explain the complex in simple terms was a great asset to the BBC.

Here that same style is used to give us an insiders look at how the News is reported, gathered, created. He has clearly done extremely extensive research going all the way back to the first newspapers right upto modern times. There is an awful lot in here that most people will not be aware of and it makes it a book that you look forwards to picking up.

He draws a lot on his own experiences, explaining the role of a newspaper editor in terms of how he did it and I think that could well have been expanded on. There is obviously a lot involved but there was not the space in a book trying to cover the entire history of journalism. Perhaps if he ever does an autobiography we will learn more - I for one would like to.

So, to sum up, this is an excellent read for anyone interested in the news or just generally interested in history. I certainly have no regrets having bought it.

Very interesting and entertaining, 31 Aug 2005
I bought the audio CD - something to listen and chuckle to in the car on the way in and out of work. Really enjoyed it! Shall miss Andy Marr as BBC Political Ed.

History from a different perspective.., 28 Sep 2008
This is a fat book-but don't be put off. ffion's writing style is fluid and accessible: she keeps the clarity that is so often missing in biographies that cover such a wide timespan and range of characters. The tone is never judgemental and totally even handed in its treatment of (some not always likeable) people. As it takes a rather more personal and domestic view of late 19th/ early 20th century history the book makes a refreshing change from mere histories of the time. However we are never far from world events so one encounters them from the perspective of engaged bystanders rather than from the main players. It also throws the double standards of the contemporary moral and social climate into sharp relief and acts as an interesting mirror to the current political scene. In summary- an enjoyable and informative read.

the real reference book, 17 Oct 2008
this british edition appears before the american one. this is the real reference book published by the publisher of finest hour magazine . the journal of the churchill society. however a couple of errors are in this first edition