Books Again

I gather the consensus here is that, of the two Hipshon books, 'The Death of Chivalry' is stronger than his full biography of Richard. Is that a fair statement?

And does anyone have any views on Baldwin? I'm looking for a good recent biography that incorporates the latest thinking. I was hoping 'The Maligned King' might fit the bill, but that's not really what it sets out to be...

Jonathan

Baldwin is to me a great disappointment, considering he was a Society scholar. Can't explain why, it just seems very wishy-washy, afraid to stick his neck out. At least the often-maligned Josephine Wilkinson is brave enough to make the occasional statement that she knows will upset die-hard supporters (that's when you can tease that out from an analysis of the saints which I'm sure Paul would have pointed out). I think he's also the research advisor for PG so that speaks for itself. As for Hipshon, yes Death of Chivalry is much better - he goes over to the dark side in the last part of the biography.
We desperately need a new good book on Richard by a reputable scholar (you know the sort the telly might like to front a programme). At the moment the best things seem to come in the smaller bits covered by JAH, Jones and Hammond.
But that's just my opinion; others might think differently.  Hope it helps a bit.


________________________________
From: Jonathan Evans <jmcevans98@...>
To: Richard III Society Forum <>
Sent: Saturday, 30 March 2013, 0:23
Subject: Books Again

 

I gather the consensus here is that, of the two Hipshon books, 'The Death of Chivalry' is stronger than his full biography of Richard. Is that a fair statement?

And does anyone have any views on Baldwin? I'm looking for a good recent biography that incorporates the latest thinking. I was hoping 'The Maligned King' might fit the bill, but that's not really what it sets out to be...

Jonathan

Hi Hilary

Many thanks for this.  I agree that the best books at the moment tend to be the more focussed studies.  Re the Baldwin, do you find it actively bad or just bland?

Cheers

Jonathan




________________________________
From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Saturday, 30 March 2013, 9:56
Subject: Re: Books Again


 
Baldwin is to me a great disappointment, considering he was a Society scholar. Can't explain why, it just seems very wishy-washy, afraid to stick his neck out. At least the often-maligned Josephine Wilkinson is brave enough to make the occasional statement that she knows will upset die-hard supporters (that's when you can tease that out from an analysis of the saints which I'm sure Paul would have pointed out). I think he's also the research advisor for PG so that speaks for itself. As for Hipshon, yes Death of Chivalry is much better - he goes over to the dark side in the last part of the biography.
We desperately need a new good book on Richard by a reputable scholar (you know the sort the telly might like to front a programme). At the moment the best things seem to come in the smaller bits covered by JAH, Jones and Hammond.
But that's just my opinion; others might think differently.  Hope it helps a bit.


________________________________
From: Jonathan Evans <jmcevans98@...>
To: Richard III Society Forum <>
Sent: Saturday, 30 March 2013, 0:23
Subject: Books Again

 

I gather the consensus here is that, of the two Hipshon books, 'The Death of Chivalry' is stronger than his full biography of Richard. Is that a fair statement?

And does anyone have any views on Baldwin? I'm looking for a good recent biography that incorporates the latest thinking. I was hoping 'The Maligned King' might fit the bill, but that's not really what it sets out to be...

Jonathan

I suppose it just didn't add anything to what I already know, as though he's afraid to speculate, to have an opinion, which just might be proved wrong. So why write it or read it? Don't know whether that helps? For example Jones on Cis,J AH on Eleanor are far braver, even it someone can pop up and discredit them. 

________________________________
From: Jonathan Evans <jmcevans98@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Saturday, 30 March 2013, 18:35
Subject: Re: Books Again

 

Hi Hilary

Many thanks for this.  I agree that the best books at the moment tend to be the more focussed studies.  Re the Baldwin, do you find it actively bad or just bland?

Cheers

Jonathan

________________________________
From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
To: ">
Sent: Saturday, 30 March 2013, 9:56
Subject: Re: Books Again


 
Baldwin is to me a great disappointment, considering he was a Society scholar. Can't explain why, it just seems very wishy-washy, afraid to stick his neck out. At least the often-maligned Josephine Wilkinson is brave enough to make the occasional statement that she knows will upset die-hard supporters (that's when you can tease that out from an analysis of the saints which I'm sure Paul would have pointed out). I think he's also the research advisor for PG so that speaks for itself. As for Hipshon, yes Death of Chivalry is much better - he goes over to the dark side in the last part of the biography.
We desperately need a new good book on Richard by a reputable scholar (you know the sort the telly might like to front a programme). At the moment the best things seem to come in the smaller bits covered by JAH, Jones and Hammond.
But that's just my opinion; others might think differently.  Hope it helps a bit.

________________________________
From: Jonathan Evans <jmcevans98@...>
To: Richard III Society Forum <>
Sent: Saturday, 30 March 2013, 0:23
Subject: Books Again

 

I gather the consensus here is that, of the two Hipshon books, 'The Death of Chivalry' is stronger than his full biography of Richard. Is that a fair statement?

And does anyone have any views on Baldwin? I'm looking for a good recent biography that incorporates the latest thinking. I was hoping 'The Maligned King' might fit the bill, but that's not really what it sets out to be...

Jonathan