I've just finished reading Amanda Foreman's biog of the Duchess of Devonshire. I've got to tell you, I was somewhat disappointed. I know the book caused a sensation when it came out ten years ago, and I admire Foreman's scholarly take on the Duchess which avoids making nonsense assumptions that its subject was a proto-feminist, but a lot of the time I kept wondering if Georgiana was really worthy of a biography of such weight. Yes, she was an interesting woman, but she was constrained by her aristocratic position, which meant much of the book is taken up with trivialities: her ruinous gambling habit and the general bed-hopping of her set. This is why I've now turned to Norma Clarke's Queen of the Wits: A Life of Laetitia Pilkington because I'm more interested in figures on the fringes of Georgian society - people who had the freedom of movement than Georgiana did. I'll post more on that when I've finished it.Saturday, 27 December 2008
Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire
I've just finished reading Amanda Foreman's biog of the Duchess of Devonshire. I've got to tell you, I was somewhat disappointed. I know the book caused a sensation when it came out ten years ago, and I admire Foreman's scholarly take on the Duchess which avoids making nonsense assumptions that its subject was a proto-feminist, but a lot of the time I kept wondering if Georgiana was really worthy of a biography of such weight. Yes, she was an interesting woman, but she was constrained by her aristocratic position, which meant much of the book is taken up with trivialities: her ruinous gambling habit and the general bed-hopping of her set. This is why I've now turned to Norma Clarke's Queen of the Wits: A Life of Laetitia Pilkington because I'm more interested in figures on the fringes of Georgian society - people who had the freedom of movement than Georgiana did. I'll post more on that when I've finished it.
No comments:
Post a Comment