tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5611561027305931377.post2008664765995956311..comments2024-03-28T04:57:14.057+00:00Comments on Romantic Novelists' Association Blog: Lynne Connolly - A Different Type of TBR PileAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05679564568712601070noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5611561027305931377.post-90506108938516979242009-08-30T23:30:55.331+01:002009-08-30T23:30:55.331+01:00They believed, at least BPC did. His pragmatic and...They believed, at least BPC did. His pragmatic and clever father didn't. He was the one who nearly won in the '15, came much closer than his son, and after he lost, he used his position politically, became a cuckoo and a wedge to retain some influence in Europe.lynneconnollyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687025766573756077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5611561027305931377.post-46651150542237868752009-07-21T15:28:14.339+01:002009-07-21T15:28:14.339+01:00"You aren't automatically a prince just b..."You aren't automatically a prince just because you and your family say so, even if you're a Stuart."<br /><br />Were they still keen on the idea of the divine right of kings at that point, or did the Stuarts give up on that after what happened to Charles I?Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5611561027305931377.post-10461661674123852572009-07-21T14:59:54.366+01:002009-07-21T14:59:54.366+01:00Hi Laura!
I meant that I love books about angsty h...Hi Laura!<br />I meant that I love books about angsty heroes and strong women who drag them out of their self-pity. I've finished the book now, and it was a real treat.<br /><br />Bonnie Prince Charlie - He wasn't a prince because he wasn't acknowledged by the people of the country he claimed to be prince of (the public acclamation at Edinburgh doesn't really count - not under the Act of Settlement of 1689), he was never the son of a king. You aren't automatically a prince just because you and your family say so, even if you're a Stuart.<br />He was considered handsome in 1745, but by 1755 he'd degenerated into a fat, womanising wife-beating alcoholic. And this was his so-called friends and advisors talking. According to eye-witness accounts, he was, at the time of Culloden, moderately tall, pale-faced with protruberant light blue eyes, and likely to redden at the least agitation. He didn't take well to academic studies (he could have been dyslexic) and had the unfortunate Stuart propensity for tantrums and insisting on getting his own way.<br />If by any miracle he'd won the '45, and after King Louis's rejection of the campaign at Calais, he was never likely to, it would have been a complete disaster for Britain, which at the time was moving from an autocratic monarchy to an oligarchy, on its way to more reforms in the nineteenth century. BPC would have had none of that. His father, a much better prospect, might have done a little better. But it didn't really matter because that branch of the Stuarts petered out after Charlie and his brother (a Catholic cardinal) died.<br />"Bonnie" often implies good of heart as well as body, and BPC showed little of that.<br /><br />Magdelena, I could agree with you more. My iPaq is my constant companion. I use it for reading, remembering dates, shopping lists, it's invaluable.lynneconnollyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687025766573756077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5611561027305931377.post-7744000844504172622009-07-21T12:06:31.800+01:002009-07-21T12:06:31.800+01:00I read e-books on my Hewlett Packard IPAQ pocket P...I read e-books on my Hewlett Packard IPAQ pocket PC. At the moment, Microsoft Reader is my fave format, but I also use Mobipocket, Adobe PDF...whatever a desktop or laptop will do, the IPAQ will do, and it fits in my very small purse. Also has my Outlook calendar (synced with laptop), a picture viewer, mobile version of Word, Excel, PowerPoint. I love e-reading, and at this point, reading a paperback or hardcover isn't fun anymore.Magdalena Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09674381212999247449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5611561027305931377.post-83857087691713884032009-07-21T11:20:00.442+01:002009-07-21T11:20:00.442+01:00"what’s not to like?"
Was that a rhetor..."what’s not to like?"<br /><br />Was that a rhetorical question? I suspect it is, but I'm not absolutely certain. Just a few days ago <a href="http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2009/07/17/the-agony-and-the-excruciation/" rel="nofollow">I saw what I think was another rhetorical question</a>. The author referred to herself as "girl" and then added "I use that term loosely. Woman sounds weird, though, right?"<br /><br />It would seem pedantic to reply to a rhetorical question, but on the other hand any question, even a rhetorical one, does seem to invite a response. I suppose that with rhetorical questions that's only a problem if the reader's answer to the question differs from the one the author intended the reader to give.<br /><br />"Two biographies of Bonnie Prince Charlie (who wasn’t Bonnie and wasn’t really a prince, either)"<br /><br />I'm intrigued. Why wasn't he really a prince, and do you mean that you don't think he really looked like <a href="http://www.nationalgalleries.org/index.php/collection/highlights/4:583/results/0/3858/" rel="nofollow">this</a>? Or is it that ideas about what constitutes masculine beauty have changed?Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.com