Annette Ranald's Blog: Annette's History Reads, page 2

BOOK REVIEW: Hal Erickson, From Radio to the Big Screen: Hollywood Films Featuring Radio Personalities and Programs

If you're wondering why I haven't presented a book review on Monday for awhile, this is the reason. This was a chewy, chewy book to get through. But I wanted to get through it because this was the stuff my grandparents grew up on in the Depression era and some of these catchphrases became standard around our house. "Ain't that something! and "Holy mackerel there, Andy!" also "Tain't fair/funny, McGee," and "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?" or "It's a joke, Son!" I thought these little laugh lines were just something old people said. Now I know where they came from.

Hal Erickson's From Radio to the Big Screen: Hollywood Films Featuring Broadcast Personalities and Programs has a central thesis. Many radio programs became so popular that Hollywood just had to cash in on the success, often with disastrous results. Most radio programs were fifteen to thirty minutes long, while a standard movie run was over an hour. Trying to stretch plotlines and trying to bring a visual representation to the characters behind the voices in many people's head's often just didn't mesh. There were a few exceptions, such as when Clayton Moore played Lone Ranger, but they were few and far between.

Although the book has a central topic and Erickson does his best to hammer it home, the layout of this book makes it cumbersome. It's a two-column page for a reason. A one column layout would have been textbook size. The other reason it reads slowly is because he sets out to catalog most of the major radio-to-film efforts one by one. Then, there's the off-side comments, which are funny and in the spirit of the programs, but add for more prose. If you can get through it, it's a laudable effort, but a little bit goes a long way at each sitting.

I could see this book being useful as a guide to a collector, aficionado of these old programs and movies. It would have been nice to have a table of contents of each of the programs up front, that way people interested in Lone Ranger, Fibber McGee and Molly, or The Shadow could flip to the pertinent pages, see whether Hollywood had mangled their show and when. I could see the book being useful in a college-level course discussing the subject. It's not a sit down, cozy up and read book. It will get four stars on Amazon.
From Radio to the Big Screen: Hollywood Films Featuring Broadcast Personalities and Programs

BOOK REVIEW: Jane Robins: The Trial of Queen Caroline

During the Jodi Arias fiasco, I was amazed at how swept up the public gets in all these things. Thousands of people standing in downtown Phoenix screaming 'Justice for Travis.'. All fueled by the non-stop coverage by HLN and it's resident Georgia Peach, which makes you wonder whether public opinion can have an impact. It certainly can impact a decision to prosecute a case, as it did with George Zimmerman. But can the public prevent a case from being brought or affect the outcone of a verdict? How did this strange marriage of courts, media and public begin?

Jane Robins' book, The Trial of Queen Caroline: The Scandal That Nearly Ended the Monarchy, gives us several clues. It also has all the right players, a sympathetic defender, a lecherous bully, a Kato Kalinesque playboy, and a young and McDreamy attorney struggling through his first high-profile trial. You also have the madding crowd and the even more maddening jury. And instead of one judge who makes us all wonder what the heck just happened, you have an entire roomful of judges.

So let's sort this out. The story begins long before the trial in 1820. It began when our last king, George III forced his playboy son the Prince of Wales to marry Caroline of Brunswick. She was overweight, unintelligent, with zilch sex drive, or so it seemed. After they produced a daughter, Young George couldn't stand it anymore and proposed that they go their separate ways.

Fine by Caroline. She headed to Europe for years of party hopping and picked up a younger Italian companion. He served as an escort and hanger on and loved outlandish dress as much as the princess. These escorts, called cavalier servants, were a necessary fashion accessory to high class women traveling alone. But this guy seemed inordinately familiar with the Princess and was often in her bedchamber. Prince George heard the rumors but did nothing.

This state of affairs came to a screeching halt in 1820 when George III died and his son, George IV came to the throne. Trying to shake his playboy past himself, he refused to be crowned with Caroline, charging her with adultery. The common people saw through this hypocrisy and were easily agitated by the hack editors of the day with their penny news sheets. They turned Caroline, someone whom most people had never seen, to a defenseless woman driven out of England by her heartless husband. That her daughter had by this time died without ever really knowing her mother added to the pathos.

The first stage of the trial took place in the House of Lords, before such luminaries as the Duke of Wellington. Wellington was no longer the people's hero who had beaten Boney at Waterloo. He was viewed as being as corrupt and heartless as the other nobles. They were surrounded each day as they made their way to Parliament by booing mobs, demanding Caroline's exoneration.

Reporters made sure that the public got its daily dose of courtroom farce, complete with detailed descriptions of Caroline's bed and sheets. The day her companion testified and couldn't remember anything, no mi recuerdo became a catchphrase. Caroline's moods and neediness sorely taxed her lead attorney, Scotsman Henry Brougham, struggling himself with depression, pessimism, an unhappy marriage and a complex love life. Public opinion was appeased when Caroline was acquitted by nine votes. The King wanted to bring a case before the House of Commons, but knew he didn't stand a chance. Public opinion would stand it.

The only way out was to physically prevent Caroline from entering Westminster Abbey. When she showed up anyway and made a scene, the fickle crowds turned against her. George IV was crowned alone, Caroline died in obscurity. Henry Brougham became 1st Baron Broom and Vaux and later Lord Chancellor in this own right.

Robins' book packs all this into a readable story, which traces the standard script for a high profile celebrity trial.The Trial of Queen Caroline: The Scandalous Affair that Nearly Ended a Monarchy

Noor and Farah: Two points of view from women who were Middle Eastern royal consorts.

Two Middle Eastern royal consorts, two different fates, two different voices. Empress Farah Pahlavi (born 1938), widow of the late Shah of Iran, and Queen Noor al Hussein, widow of King Hussein of Jordan. Both were commoners with the right connections to be introduced to their future husbands, both married men who had been divorced/widowed numerous times before, both loved and admired then men they married and each bore her husband four children. But while Noor remains in his late husband's kingdom, still taking part in public life there and around the world, Empress Farah is an exile in the United States, coming out mainly for events like royal weddings.

Farah's book, An Enduring Love: My Life with the Shah: a Memoir, tells her story of being an army officer's daughter from an affluent background, fallen on hard times. Nevertheless, she managed to attend a university in Paris where, in 1959 at the Iranian Embassy, she met her future husband. With the help of Reza Pahlavi's daughter, Princess Shahnaz, the two began courting and were married in December, 1959. She bore Reza Shah Pahlavi four children, was crowned Empress of Iran in 1967. In 1979, the Shah and Shabinou fled Iran in the wake of the Islamic Revolution. The couple went first to Egypt and wandered from country to country until the Shah's death from cancer in 1980. Soon after, the American government allowed Empress Farah and her children to reside in the United States where she had lived ever since. She wrote her memoir in 2003.

When I read Farah's book, I expected to see over-the-top praise for her husband and unrelenting anger and bitterness over their fate. While she does express her anger and frustration at times, what surprised me was that she didn't dwell on her lot in life. She wasn't born royal, didn't expect to have the life she'd had, with glamorous trips abroad, jewels by Cartier, and acceptance into the royal club. Her focus remains on chronicling her life, and that of her husband and children. She ends on a note of hope, that her family will go home to Iran one day, if not as royalty, but at least in some capacity. This is a memoir of an intelligent, educated woman who's been through a lot.

Noor's book, Leap of Faith: Memoirs of an Unexpected Life, chronicles her journey from her birth as Lisa Halaby (in 1962). She is Syrian on her Father's side, Swedish on her mother's. Her father had a career in the Federal Aviation Administration and was able to give his daughter a good education, ultimately leading to graduation from Princeton. She ultimately became Director of Facilities Planning for Royal Jordanian Airlines and met King Hussein of Jordan. They married in June, 1978, and she bore Hussein four children. She remained at her husband's side, undertaking royal charities and official royal duties, until Hussein's death in 1999. Although the current King, Abdullah II is not her son, she remains a member of the Jordanian Royal Family and carries out official engagements. She wrote a biography of her husband in 2000, and her memoir, Leap of Faith, in 2003.

Noor had the luxury of writing from her security as a member of a still-reigning royal family. She, too, never expected to be in the position she was in. Because of her continued high-profile life, I expected to see in her memoirs a lot of cheering for the United States and Jordan and endless pleas for a Middle East peace. However, she also keeps her focus on her life, her family and her plans for the future. Both of these women had a platform to express a lot more than they did. That they both chose a restrained approach in their writing shows a lot for them.

Why we do NOT need another book or movie about Vlad as a Vampire--really!

I could title today's post any number of things. Why I don't read other people's historical fiction? I'm so sick of vampires I could spit up? Really! First it was all the Anne Rice Stuff. Then all the True Blood and Twilight stuff. Now, there's a new movie coming out about Dracula in 2014 "Dracula Untold", and I'm ready to scream. We don't need more books about vampires and we sure as heck don't need another book/movie throwing Vlad's legend to the bats again.

I picked up this book because I thought it would be a story about Vlad III Tepes of Wallachia, not about Vlad as Dracula, let alone Count Dracula. Only a few chapters in, and you know there's a vampire on the loose. You only hope that it's high-jacking the legend that it's not HIM again. Well, off we go into the modern-day descendant of Dracula who find she can't escape the family curse till she finds grandpa and kills him--again.

I'll say one thing for this book. It did clear up one question I'd always had about Vlad. Who was the King of Hungary? And what was his beef with Vlad? The King in question was Mathias I Corvinus (1443-1490). Americans don't know who he is but in Hungary, he's their George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Teddy Roosevelt all rolled into one. He brought the concept of codified law, a standing army, standardized coinage, to Hungary. He sleeps under one of the Carpathian Mountains and, one day, he will rise again when Hungary has need of a hero. He's also beloved in Romania, where he was born in Transylvania. He's mentioned in the Romanian National Anthem along with another of Vlad's frenemies, Stefan of Moldavia.

So what was the beef between Corvinus and Vlad? It was visceral, it was personal, it was family, it involved misplaced loyalties and, yes, the Order of the Dragon. Both Vlad II Dracula and John Hunyadi, Corvinus Father, were members of the Order of the Dragon, sworn to protect the Holy Roman Emperor or the King of Hungary from being assassinated by the infidels, read Turks. When Vlad II made a truce with the Turks and sent his two young sons, one of whom was our hero, to Turkey, Hunyadi felt that the old man had violated his vow as a Dragon Knight and had also betrayed Hungary. Hunyadi had Vlad II assassinated and killed. The feud was on.

No good feud lacks a heroine, and there was one here. Vlad's second wife, who isn't named it Kostova's book but you get a big fat clue because her descendant is named Helen. It was Ilona Szilaghy, Matthias' half-sister or cousin, depending on how you splice the family tree. She may have been related to the Bathorys (now there's a fine, upstanding bunch). She also was deeply in love with Vlad, probably the only person in the world who did love him. My point is, there are hints throughout the book of this rich backstory based solidly in history, yet the author chose to go down the well-worn path of Dracula the Vampire. Why?!?

What Caused the Downfall of Anne Boleyn?

In the Other Boleyn Girl, by Philippa Gregory, is novel in which Anne Boleyn is so desperate to have a child that she commits incest with her brother George. The resulting child is miscarried and a witch-taker hired to preside over the birth convincing Henry or Cromwell that Anne is an adulteress, a witch, and should be executed. Part of this storyline is based on an actual theory raised by Dr. Retha Warnicke in her non-fiction book, The Rise and Fall of Anne Boleyn. Disclosure alert: I took classes from Dr. Warnicke as an undergrad at ASU, have an autographed first addition of the book, she inducted me into Phi Alpha Theta, the history honor society, and she was one of several of my professors that I invited to a thank you picnic put on by the Disabled Student Resources department at ASU for their work in reasonable accommodation to disabled students. I admired her then and I would still take a class from her today.

But even back then I wasn't sure I quite bought the theory behind the book. Her idea was that Cromwell had chosen the men to execute with Anne based on the fact that they, and Anne's brother George, were parts of a homosexual ring at court. This despite the fact that several of the men were married and all were accused of having been with the Queen. This thesis is in addition to the Anne and George insist with bewitched baby idea. I could see Anne maybe giving birth to a deformed fetus (or what people in her day thought was a deformed fetus), and Henry giving up on her. But her disastrous miscarriage happened in January, and she wasn't toppled until May.

I've read that in recent years, particularly since the publication of Gregory's work, the other Boleyn Girl, and the two movies based on it, one British and the other American with Scarlett Johanssen and Natalie Portman in the title roles, Dr. Warnicke has walked this theory back a little, which I'm glad. So, how would I play this, as a novelist writing a book about the rise of Jane Seymour. There would be no witch-takers, that's for sure. It's possible that there was a problem with the baby, which caused the miscarriage. And, it's possible that Henry was fairly upset when he heard about it. He'd just been injured in a tournament at the time, though, and wasn't really in a position to make decisions about anything. But the baby wasn't the thing that toppled Anne. Henry would have kept trying until Anne went into menopause. He'd risked too much for her.

The Other Boleyn GirlThe Rise and Fall of Anne Boleyn: Family Politics at the Court of Henry VIIIIt was Cromwell who figured out a way to drag her down. Anne had her good qualities. She was a charming, entertaining woman, well read, etc. But Cromwell said it himself. "She was a considerable woman when ired." Meaning, she had a tongue and a temper and she'd alienated too many people at court, including him. Cromwell needed a pawn, someone he could play. Anne, now become arrogant as Queen, was no longer malleable. She had to go. Allison Weir raises a theory that Anne was pregnant again immediately after the January miscarriage, but there was no way to prove it. However, if Cromwell knew and suspected, he had to act fast. Anne was a flirt who liked to have the men at court paying attention to her. Flirtation could be spun into illicit affairs. Incest today sounds like a farfetched accusation. Back in the day, when people studied Greek and Roman history and mythology, where incest is rampant, it's an easier case to make. Cromwell didn't have to have his facts or dates straight, since Anne had no right to view the evidence and cross examine his witnesses. With Catherine of Aragon dead, there was no need to keep Anne around anymore. Anne's miscarriage didn't doom her. Her own behavior spun into something more than it was, did.

BOOK REVIEW: With Napoleon In Russia, by Armand de Caulaincourt

A friend of mine once asked me who I would like to take a two-week road trip with, and gave me a list of modern celebrities and politicians. So I answered him with the real life scenario of the ultimate creepy road trip.

Armand-Augustin-Louis de Caulaincourt, Marquis de Caulaincourt 1773-1827, was born in Old Regime France to an elite power couple. His father was a general in the Royal Army, his mother was a lady-in-waiting to Marie Antoinette. At the age of fourteen, as was customary, he joined his father's cavalry regiment. Two years later, his world exploded when the French Revolution broke out. After the Royal Family was imprisoned, both of his parents were wanted enemies of the state. Armand and his younger brother Auguste, remained in their regiment until they were expelled and sent to the prisons in Paris. Armand would find himself in the Conciergerie, on the verge of death, before a guard who knew his family helped him escape on the day his name was called to meet Madame la Guillotine.

Armand eventually made his way back to the army, enlisted as a cuirassier, a form of heavy cavalry, and worked his way into the favor of Josephine de Beauharnais, herself an aristocrat, the mistress and later wife of Napoleon Bonaparte. After Napoleon became First Consul of France, he needed a suitable retinue of young aides and Josephine recommended Armand. Napoleon's aides-de-camp, or equerries, as they were called, were expected to do whatever task was assigned to them, including any dirty business like handling agents of the former Royal Family. In 1804, Armand carried what he though were orders to arrest some English agents on the borders of France. What he actually carried in his dispatch bag were orders to arrest and assassinate the Duke of Enghien, a member of the Royal Family and potential heir to the throne.

For an aristocrat to take part, even unwittingly, in shedding the blood royal of France was a mark of bitter shame and it would haunt Armand for the rest of his life. When Josephine told him hat the Duke had been assassinated and Armand put two and two together and realized he'd carried the order, he was furious and devastated. He wanted to quit Napoleon's service. Josephine urged him to stay. He did, but he made several resolves. He would maintain a certain distance from Napoleon, never being taken in by his aura, mystique or, la gloire, as Napoleon himself termed it. Armand also determined to speak frankly to Napoleon and to keep careful notes of all that they discussed. The result was a series of books, of which this one today, With Napoleon in Russia, is the middle.

Napoleon was a man of many contradictions. While determined to divorce Josephine so that he could find a woman of suitable royal blood to produce him an heir, he would not allow his immediate subordinates to marry divorcees. Armand was in love with a beautiful countess, Adrianne de Cannisy. She was trapped in a marriage with a much older man. She wanted to divorce so that she and Armand could marry. Napoleon refused to allow it, and sent Armand as his envoy to St. Petersburg to get him away from Adrienne. Napoleon's advice was to find a beautiful, wealthy Russian heiress and forget about Adrienne. Armand became good friends with Tsar Alexander I, who knew very well that it would be no time at all before Napoleon lashed out at Russia. Napoleon suspected that Armand was becoming too happy in Russia and recalled him in 1811, as the build-up to the invasion happened.

The opening chapters of the book deal with Armand's attempts to talk Napoleon out of invading Russia. When the decision was made to go forward, Armand was appointed as Napoleon's Grand Equerry. This was the aide in charge of the Emperor's horses. Throughout the campaign, Armand rode to Napoleon's left, and was prepared to surrender his horse in case Napoleon's was injured. He was at Napoleon's side on 7 September 1812, when the Battle of Borodino happened. Through field glasses, he watched the struggle for the Great Redoubt. He also heard an aide give an order to his younger brother, General Auguste de Caulaincourt, to lead reinforcements to the Redoubt in order to storm it. Auguste had a creepy feeling that he wasn't coming back and he was able to say as much to Armand before leaving. Moments later, an aide came back to Napoleon and blurted out news of the death of Auguste, before realizing who the tall man was standing just over the Emperor's left shoulder.

When the campaign fell apart, and Napoleon had to make a made dash to save his government in Paris, Armand went with him, and here's where the road trip comes in. Across the frozen wastelands of Poland and parts of Germany, Napoleon freed his mind on a lot of subjects. Here is where you see the megalomaniac behind the world conqueror. He's angry at England for defying his Continental trade embargo. He's angry at the Tsar for not agreeing to give up his kingdom in exchange for Constantinople, which Napoleon intends to give him. And, he places the blame for Alexander's recalcitrance on an unlikely source, his one-time BFF, Marshal Jean Lannes, who had served as Alexander's escort during a summit meeting before dying himself in battle with a weeping Napoleon at his side holding his hand. According to Napoleon, Lannes had tipped of Alexander to Napoleon's designs and enabled him to prepare.

Nor does Napoleon remain content with throwing his best friend under the bus after he's dead. He blames the unrest in Paris on the former Royal Family and the aristocrats. He also admits to Armand that he had chosen him to bear the order for Enghien's assassination. That way, Armand would never have credibility amongst his fellow aristocrats and would be beholden to Napoleon. Then, Napoleon questions Armand's own loyalty because he'd seen his brother die, couldn't marry the woman he loved, was an aristocrat and must surely bear some animosity over how he was used in the Enghien affair. How Armand kept his wits during this hellish road trip and did not accidently/on purpose, kill Napoleon is anyone's guess. But we have the result. Armand's memoirs of a brilliant and twisted mind unraveling mile by mile across the frozen wastes of Europe. What a creepy road trip!
With Napoleon in Russia: The Memoirs of General de Caulaincourt, Duke of Vicenza

The Devil inthe Details: Historical Fiction Settings

Suppose you want to write a book about a midwife in the South during the Revolutionary War (which I am). What tools would she have at her disposal? What herbs or remedies would she use? Supposed your story is set in Tudor times. How did people in those castles eat, get dressed, bathe, or even go to the bathroom? What was life like in Tudor London if you weren't one of the great or the good? How about the peasant villages of medieval Europe around the time of the Black Death (1346-53)? How did those people go about their daily lives knowing that Death could snatch them at any moment. Did Romans in the days of the Caesar have kitchens in their homes? What was their wedding ceremony like?

In this day and age, who cares? You do if you're a historical novelist. You have to get the little details right because there are readers out there who know these answers and they'll rip into you in a nasty review if you don't. Little details like these set the ambiance for a story. Catriona Gordon, for example, uses her skills to keep both Patriots and Loyalists, Redcoats, Legionaries, and Continentals, and their families alive. She has to. It means her family's survival. I wore out my copy of Southern Folk Medicine: 1750-1820, by Kay Moss, making sure I got the necessary details down. I told you about the settle/bench controversy I had with Mom the other day. I wasn't about to make the mistake one author made, by calling a piece of furniture in the 17th century a couch. Couches, sofas and ottomans, by that name, didn't exist back then. Maybe they had a similar piece of furniture that served that purposes, but it wasn't a couch. Get it right.

Southern Folk Medicine, 1750-1820Life in a Medieval CastleThe Ties That Bound: Peasant Families in Medieval EnglandDaily Life in Ancient Rome: The People and the City at the Height of the EmpireElizabeth's London: Everyday Life in Elizabethan LondonDaily Life in Johnson's LondonHenry VIII: The King and His CourtHere are some other references that might help if you're writing a book about a certain era. Life in a Medieval Castle, by Joseph Gies; The Ties that Bound, by Barbara Hanawalt (about medieval peasant villages); Daily Life in Ancient Rome, by Jerome Carcopino; Elizabeth's London, by Eliza Picard; Henry VIII and His Court, by Alison Weir; and Daily Life in Johnson's London, by Richard Schwartz are just a few of the handy reference tools you'll need. Good luck.

Book Review: Buffalo Soldiers: A Narrative of the Black Cavalry in the West, by William and Shirley Leckie

Last week, I talked about how a narrative of a battle or military campaign shouldn't sound as though the author thinks his/her audience are a class at West Point or the War College. This book violates all those rules. Buffalo Soldiers: A Narrative of the Black Cavalry in the West by William and Shirley Leckie is in its second edition. I have both editions. Its a noble effort. At the time the first edition came out, in the 60's, there were no books about these guys. Now there are several books and novels but this book will no doubt stand out as the premiere authority on the subject. It should. A lot of painstaking work went into the research. I'm also glad that in this version, the Native Americans as marauding savages theme was toned down and acknowledgment of the disastrous destruction of their way of life was brought forward.

Still, though, my first clue that this was going to be a chewy read was the introduction, when William Leckie details his experiences in WWII as a commander of black troops. That should have told me that a veteran wrote this book, primarily for veterans. I have no military experience, but I focused on military history in college and throughout most of my life, and in my writing. So I can get through fairly technical books, but this took me several weeks to reread. I could see a basic reader, unless they have military experience, getting hopelessly lost. The book is a route march through the entire history of the Buffalo Soldiers from their inception (1867?), to the disbanding of the original 9th and 10th Cavalry Regiments in the 1880's. In those few tumultuous decades were dozens of engagements, minor and major, with moving parts all over the map.

The Buffalo Soldiers: A Narrative of the Black Cavalry in the West, Revised EditionI wish the authors had chosen a few major battles or campaigns and built the narrative around those. They did a good job setting these men in their context, including the ingratitude and prejudice they endured. We get glimpses of how grueling and thankless their lot was, but there's so many characters that getting to know them, and specific stories about them, is impossible. While perhaps a comprehensive history of the Buffalo Soldiers was needed in the 60's, maybe a more in-depth exploration of certain aspects of their history is more relevant now. Case in point, I'm still wondering which Native tribe gave them their name, the Comanches or the Utes seem the most likely candidates, but at which battle? Did these guys use the name when referring to themselves? Did their white comrades recognize it for the compliment that it was? The story was probably in there somewhere, but so buried I couldn't find it again. This is one of many brilliant gems that got buried in the mass of information surrounding it. I have the book on hand for reference, but it won't get a high grade on Amazon.

Lucrezia Borgia: Accomplice or Victim?

Lucrezia Borgia: Life, Love, and Death in Renaissance ItalyLucrezia Borgia: A NovelLucrezia Borgia (1480-1519), is one of those characters that I'm attracted to because she is most likely innocent of the crimes imputed to her. She's portrayed in fiction, art, and even some histories as the ultimate mob wife and daughter, who puts her brother Cesare up to killing their brother Juan and her second husband, Alfonso of Aragon. After being married and tamed by Alfonso d'Este, Duke of Ferarra, she learns the error of her ways and leads an almost nun-like life of wifely piety. The truth is way off the mark. Lucrezia was a pawn in her family's schemes, who los two men that she loved before finding refuge with a man powerful enough to keep her infamous relatives at bay. Besides, nobody had to put Cesare Borgia up to killing anyone. He managed that on his own.

Unfortunately, or rather fortunately, Lucrezia has been the subject of several biographies and novels that dispel the myths. No incest with her father, poisoned rings, or black widow plotting by her anywhere around. Sarah Bradford's book does a good job of bringing the real Letizia to life, even if narration is rather dense and difficult to read. She also sets Lucrezia in the context of her time. The Borgias weren't the only Italian or European family capable of murdering their own and others to get where they needed to be in life and power. These early years of the European Renaissance were rough on anybody. Lucrezia, we learn, was a seasoned survivor, with a heart and a conscience. She was loyal to her family, but she loved all three of the men she married, and the children she bore. She found escape from her brother's crazy world when she could.

Lucrezia Borgia: A Novel, by John Faunce, also does a good job of humanizing and soften Lucrezia. He, too, dispenses with the incestuous harpy and her poisoned ring, and instead portrays Lucrezia as the victim of her father and brother, which she likely was. This is the type of books some critics would carp at because of the modern sound of its dialogue and narration. It's written in first-person, as told by Lucrezia, and much of the narration and interchange between the characters has a modern feel to it. However, this is one of those books that can break the rules and still be an enjoyable, believable read. Thoughts and feelings can sometimes be universal. The horror of realizing that your brother killed the husband you love, the father of your child, can be recognized by anyone. As can the desire to escape, leave that behind, and lead a better life.

Book Review: Pearls of Creation, A to Z of Pearls, Seond Edition, by Marjorie Dawson

Next to history and writing, another passion of mine is jewelry. Pearls of Creation, A to Z of Pearls, 2nd Addition, by Marjorie Dawson satisfies my jewelry sweet tooth. When you get a copy of this lovely book, do yourself a favor and just look at the pictures. Pristine waters and beaches, colorful sea life, mollusks, pearls, and beautiful jewels created from them. If you think pearls only came in colors of white, cream, pink, blue/green, and grey/black, you'll be surprised. If you thought that the only shape for a pearl is round, think again. If you believed pearls only came from oysters in the ocean, here's a pleasant surprise. There are endless variations of colors for both natural and cultured (farmed) pearls, as well as high quality synthetic pearls for the likes of me who can't afford the real stuff yet.

Dawson's book has six chapters, and primarily two parts. The first several chapters talk about the history of pearl use and cultivation, including extensive attention to freshwater pearls. Who knew that in the United States, between 1857-1889 (?), there was a small pearl rush in the eastern states, as people discovered they could find pearls in mollusks in lakes and rivers and sell them for a bit of change. Also, I was glad to learn that the lives of mollusks in pearl farms are not wasted. Many farms reseed their mollusks several times, and take great care to house the creatures in clean, nutritious water and stress free environments. Further, when I tried Dawson's test on a strand of my pearls that I was sure was freshwater and real, sadly they were too heavy, too smooth, and thus fake. Caring for pearls is easy, as they require only soap and water. Pearls love to be worn, even high quality synthetics, such as mine, lighten up when they're next to human skin.

The second part of the book is an appendix, literally the A to Z of terms relating to pearls, different shapes and colors of pearls, the pearl industry and creation of pearl jewelry. How does a pearl get from a mollusk in a lake, river or ocean to a jewelry store near you. The number of terms to describe the color, shape, size, and usage of pearls was amazing. For the history nut in me, I hope Marjorie decides to do a book about historical and famous pearls, such as La Peregrina (Liz Taylor's baby), La Pelegrina (with which it is often confused), the Kellie Pearl (in the Scottish royal crown), and others. Keep our fingers crossed.