MobileRead Forums - View Single Post - Literary Queen Victoria by Lytton Strachey

Hamlet53 · 09-24-2013, 02:44 PM

So I really can't add much to the existing comments about this book as related to it as a work of literature. The writing was excellent and designed to keep the reader interested, if not a page turner than at least a book one would be loath to put down. Obviously a lot of historical fact had to be omitted in a relatively short book that covered a lifetime of almost 82 years and almost 64 of those years as queen. That and at least the middle third of the book was more a biography of Prince Albert. Still I came away feeling that the author had left me well informed about Victoria the person throughout her lifetime. So I will confine my comments to observations about Victoria and Strachey's take on her.

It was certainly not new to me, but the first portion of the book certainly reminded me of how inbred royals all across Europe had become by the 19th Century. It is impossible to say how big an impact this produced on history, but it must have had some significance. If Prince Albert's sympathy for his native Germany could have had an effect on the foreign policy of Great Britain, how much more so must similar feelings of allegiance to family or to birth nation have had in countries where monarchs still retained significant power? Then there is the significance of Victoria's being so prolific in producing offspring. Victoria was a carrier of the gene for hemophilia, and through her children and grandchildren transmitted this genetic disorder though out European royal families (attached figure 1). This gained historical significance for sure in at least one case with the fact that Alexis the son and would have been heir of Nicholas II of Russia was afflicted through his mother Alexandra, a granddaughter of Victoria. Speaking of which I was reminded of a photograph that was included in the book Nicholas and Alexandra that I read many years ago (attached figure 2). Talk about inbreeding! The photo shows Nicholas II of Russia and George V of England, both grandsons of Victoria, posing together in similar attire. That's Nicholas on the left..

I found that while Strachey was willing to be honest about some of Victoria's limitations as a person and as a queen, there was still a “God Save the Queen” attitude underlying the book. Certainly both Victoria and Albert would be examined more critically in a biography written today than one written in 1921. Victoria was the perfect Queen of England for her day though with an attitude of pompous superiority that was a reflection of how the British viewed themselves with respect to the rest of the world.

In Strachey's recount of Victoria's behavior in the last couple decades of her life I was reminded of the comic observation that what would be referred to as insane among ordinary people is called eccentric among the upper class.

09-24-2013, 02:44 PM	#16
Hamlet53 Nameless Being	So I really can't add much to the existing comments about this book as related to it as a work of literature. The writing was excellent and designed to keep the reader interested, if not a page turner than at least a book one would be loath to put down. Obviously a lot of historical fact had to be omitted in a relatively short book that covered a lifetime of almost 82 years and almost 64 of those years as queen. That and at least the middle third of the book was more a biography of Prince Albert. Still I came away feeling that the author had left me well informed about Victoria the person throughout her lifetime. So I will confine my comments to observations about Victoria and Strachey's take on her. It was certainly not new to me, but the first portion of the book certainly reminded me of how inbred royals all across Europe had become by the 19th Century. It is impossible to say how big an impact this produced on history, but it must have had some significance. If Prince Albert's sympathy for his native Germany could have had an effect on the foreign policy of Great Britain, how much more so must similar feelings of allegiance to family or to birth nation have had in countries where monarchs still retained significant power? Then there is the significance of Victoria's being so prolific in producing offspring. Victoria was a carrier of the gene for hemophilia, and through her children and grandchildren transmitted this genetic disorder though out European royal families (attached figure 1). This gained historical significance for sure in at least one case with the fact that Alexis the son and would have been heir of Nicholas II of Russia was afflicted through his mother Alexandra, a granddaughter of Victoria. Speaking of which I was reminded of a photograph that was included in the book Nicholas and Alexandra that I read many years ago (attached figure 2). Talk about inbreeding! The photo shows Nicholas II of Russia and George V of England, both grandsons of Victoria, posing together in similar attire. That's Nicholas on the left.. I found that while Strachey was willing to be honest about some of Victoria's limitations as a person and as a queen, there was still a “God Save the Queen” attitude underlying the book. Certainly both Victoria and Albert would be examined more critically in a biography written today than one written in 1921. Victoria was the perfect Queen of England for her day though with an attitude of pompous superiority that was a reflection of how the British viewed themselves with respect to the rest of the world. In Strachey's recount of Victoria's behavior in the last couple decades of her life I was reminded of the comic observation that what would be referred to as insane among ordinary people is called eccentric among the upper class. Attached Thumbnails Last edited by Hamlet53; 09-25-2013 at 06:55 AM.