"The Queen Mother: The Official Biography" by William Shawcross (2009)

[XeniaCasaraghi]

WoW! The 2009 book is nothing but facts recited? That sux because the book is so HUGE I expected facts along with explanations, opinions, personal POVs etc.
In the Morrow book, I believe the earliest chapter starts off with the author stumbling across Elizabeth II weeding her mothers garden. It is so adorable.
On the previous page an article about TQMs bad points was posted. I just want to say that as a black woman I can't fault Elizabeth for being racist, she was born in 1900 and I really wouldn't expect anything else from someone born at that time. I'm sure there were exceptions to racism and bigotry, but TQM seems to have harbored ideas the same as the majority when it came to minorities.

 

[Aliza]

WoW! The 2009 book is nothing but facts recited? That sux because the book is so HUGE I expected facts along with explanations, opinions, personal POVs etc.
In the Morrow book, I believe the earliest chapter starts off with the author stumbling across Elizabeth II weeding her mothers garden. It is so adorable.

I really enjoyed the Morrow bio, too. To be fair to Shawcross, the letters he includes that were written by the QM as Lady Elizabeth Bowes Lyon are wonderful reading. It's a good biography up until she meets the Duke of York.

I was also curious to read about QEQM's famous relationship with her brother, David, but other than in childhood, David Bowes Lyon only rates one or two passing mentions after the Royal Wedding!

It is so long and very heavy, so I too expected a wonderful read and great new material. I'm going to try the Vickers book and see if that is any better.

IMHO, the biggest failing is there is just absolutely no indications on what made HM "tick"; nothing about her psyche, no penetrating insights as to HM's character, just very little about the person behind the public face other than endless comments on HM's "style of living" being Edwardian. I didn't need to read a book that long to figure that out!

I'm just really glad I didn't spend any money on it but waited for it to become available at the library.

 

[IloveCP]

I think the reason why Shawcross did'nt explain why QM changed her mind about Bertie's proposal and,other things is,there is no record of her personal feelings.Shawcross wanted to keep the book acurate as possible and did not want to disrespect QM by putting his own words.We may never know what her personal feelings are about some things but,we should respect that since we would'nt like it if our lives were exposed to everyone.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

One reason Elizabeth said no to Albert was because she didn't want her life to be exposed to everyone. But 80% of her life was just like that especially when she became Queen of England. I just find it insane to write a 900 page book and provide nothing new about your subject; one job of a historian is to write and review the facts and when there is little to know information about a certain event to provide theories and speculation on what might have or did occur. To review a persons character and use that review to fill in some of the blanks. Usually there is not a definitive answer as to why something happened or why a person behaved in such a way, so the people researching them have to try to figure out the "why"; and from the reviews Shawcross just listed events and didn't tell a story.
I think the reason this official biography is so scarce, according to some, is because the author didn't want to offend the Queen; we will either have to wait a couple of more decades to hear the truth or wait until someone who isn't afraid of pissing off the royals to take a crack at writing a biography.

 

[Erin9]

It figures this would be my first post. I found this place because of my interest in and respect for George VI after watching The King's Speech. (That being said, as a history major, I've always been interested in how the monarchy shaped history- in particular England and Russia.)

That being said, I flipped through the Shawcross bio at the bookstore the other day and was also struck by his lack of conclusions as to why QEQM said "no" several times and what made her change her mind. That's what I'd been looking for!!lol

Still, I did glean some interesting info, having read through the letters:

** QEQM's family was reticient about her marrying Royalty (I believe her mother, specifically) because of all she'd give up--though her family adored Albert. IIRC, QEQM also addresses the freedoms she was giving up.

** They stayed friends AFTER she said "no"--and she seemed to REALLY want that. Interesting. She wasn't ready to say "yes", but she couldn't let go or really push him to move on either. She let him just keep coming. (And it doesn't seem to me that respect for his status drove that either.)

**This is obvious, but, he just wouldn't give up!! Very persistent young man when it came to knowing what he wanted. He seemed to know they'd make a good match, and all evidence of their life together suggests he was correct.

** There is no evidence at all that the Duke's family pushed her to say "yes". They seemed to stay out of it.

**She had plenty of other wealthy, desirable suitors should she have chosen one of them.

**She constantly speaks of being very "happy" once the decision is made-and admits to being surprised that she'd made it.

Maybe she just had trouble settling down. It certainly seems that she wasn't ready to commit to living such a public life. Also, due to the Duke's shyness, I suspect getting to know him took some time. But, that's conjecture.

I read somewhere that the first time that he proposed to her that he did it via someone else per family tradition, and that was a reason she said no the first time. I don't know if that's "fact", but I know I've read it somewhere. Evidently, later QEQM wrote to a friend of the Duke's thanking him for his advice to propose in person.

While all of this doesn't explain exactly what was going on, it does provide SOME answers as to what the issues were--and what they were not. I doubt we'll ever know it all.

 

[Aliza]

Welcome to the Royal Forums! I, too found my interest in Royalty emerge from my studies of history.

That said, having read every last word of the Shawcross biography twice I definitely think Shawcross came to different conclusions from some of yours listed above.

1)Elizabeth Bowes Lyon's mother was actually "for" the match; very much so and even refers to it as a "dream" when corresponding with Mabell, Countess of Airlee. (This surprised me, too.)

2)While they did remain friends after the rejection of his proposals - Elizabeth wrote to the Duke and told him that she should have realised he would see their continuing friendship as encouragement and she didn't want him to be further hurt.

3)I agree that her Mother did not interfere much at all, but my impression is that Elizabeth knew this match would please her parent.

4)You're absolutely correct; Lady Elizabeth had the pick of almost any eligible man in Britain! What a tribute to her charm, beauty of character, and loveliness!

5)I saw how Shawcross discussed her happiness after she changed her mind; my problem is that as he had unrestricted access to the archives - it was important to dig and discover (as much as possible) the REASON Lady Elizabeth changed her mind. (Did you catch the part where Lady E writes in a letter that she doesn't think she is capable of falling in love?) Very interesting stuff that Shawcross could have pursued, IMHO.

6) I think Shawcross did a good job on the point of Lady E's reluctance to lose her more casual and fun-loving lifestyle. If you noticed in my posts about this I have noted the best work Shawcross did was from Lady E's birth up until the engagement and marriage. After that, the public image prevails to an extraordinary degree for an official biography. Even much older authorised biographies such as Harold Nicolson's of George V and Wheeler-Bennet's of George VI were able to penetrate their subjects psyche to a good extent and one feels an understanding of both monarchs upon completing the respective books.

I'll be very curious as to your opinion when you read the whole book, if you decide to pursue it. As noted above, I'm looking to the Vickers' biography to see if there is a more complete portrait of one of the most fascinating women of the last century. I would also recommend the bio by Penelope Mortimer, though it lacks the usual respect one becomes accustomed to in Royal biographies. Mortimer at least asks the hard questions even if her answers don't always seem to ring true to me, but that is a very personal opinion.

Good to see another historian here! Do you have any particular interest in other members of the BRF outside of George VI and his Queen Consort?

 

[Aliza]

For an older biography, but one that "takes the gloves off" a bit, try Penelope Mortimer's bio of QEQM; I believe it was published in 1987 or 1988. If you are interested and have trouble finding it, send me a personal message and I will find my copy so I can give you the exact title. Mortimer certainly wasn't afraid to offend anyone, and even went too far, IMHO - but with all the hagiography surrounding the QM, it's valid to look for a more critical work to balance out the picture.

 

[Aliza]

I think the reason why Shawcross did'nt explain why QM changed her mind about Bertie's proposal and,other things is,there is no record of her personal feelings.Shawcross wanted to keep the book acurate as possible and did not want to disrespect QM by putting his own words.We may never know what her personal feelings are about some things but,we should respect that since we would'nt like it if our lives were exposed to everyone.

I certainly would never want an official biographer to put words in his or her subject's mouth but I do think part of good biography is revealing the inner person, as much as possible. IMHO, Shawcross didn't even try. As QEQM was a prolific letter writer and very open in her letters before her engagement - I think he could have done a better job in this department.

Interestingly enough, George VI specifically told his Queen that his diaries, upon his death, were to be relegated to the Royal Archives and NOT made available to historians and biographers. The interesting part is this: In one of the very few times, QEQM disregarded her husband's wishes and allowed his biographer complete access to all of his diary as she felt it was important for the British Public to see the inner man. Therefore, I don't think HM would have had a problem with those parts of her life being exposed since she recognised the importance of portraying the "man behind the King" during the writing of George VI's biography. Of course, that's just my opinion and I could be very wrong!

 

[Tsaritsa]

Aliza, IIRC, Mortimer was the first author to reveal an iron fist beneath the velvet glove-it caused quite a furore when it was first published. To my eternal regret, I gave away several Royal biogs to my local village fete, I hope whoever bought them enjoyed them as much as I.

 

[Aliza]

Aliza, IIRC, Mortimer was the first author to reveal an iron fist beneath the velvet glove-it caused quite a furore when it was first published. To my eternal regret, I gave away several Royal biogs to my local village fete, I hope whoever bought them enjoyed them as much as I.

I'm glad to know I wasn't the only one who appreciated Mortimer's work. One has to admit; there have been many sugary skims over the top of QEQM's life in the guise of biography and while I understand the reason for the furore when Mortimer published, though I did not agree with it, there has to be some balance introduced for the sake of historical scholarship if for no other reason.

The lady is dead now and can not be hurt anymore. As Shawcross emphatically states he was given no parameters (in his words, "on the contrary, I was encouraged to write exactly what I wished") and as he had unfettered access to the Royal Archives, there just doesn't seem to be any reason for the type of hagiographical biography he produced!

While I'm waiting for the Vickers' book, I am going to reread Mortimer; maybe between Mortimer and Shawcross I can get more of a sense of who this lady was when the doors closed and she was alone....

Thanks, Tsaritsa, for reminding me of how enjoyable Mortimer's bio truly is.

 

[Iluvbertie]

There is a very real reason for the work he produced - he believes that this is the woman who wrote about. He wrote what he wanted to write and good for him.
That he didn't try to read her mind and give his opinions is good - he leaves it up to the reader to make up their minds on the evidence he has produced.
Historians who present their opinions usually do so by presenting them as facts rather than making it clear that it is only their opinion - this work allows the reader to make up their own mind.
I enjoyed it.

 

[Erin9]

Welcome to the Royal Forums!

Thanks for the welcome!!

1. Hmmm. I just skimmed over that section of the book. My impression is that her mother adored Albert, but didn't wish the royal life on her. But, I did just skim it.

2.True. I remember that. However, even after she acknowledged that she was encouraging him, somehow their relationship continued. She really didn't cut him off.

5. Yes, I did see that part about "falling in love." Interesting. I can't say I believe that anyone is incapable of that--perhaps scared of it though. I absolutely agree here: I was surprised that he didn't use the evidence he had to come up with a theory as to why she said "no" then "yes." Most biographers try to come up with SOMETHING, even while acknowledging that they can't know for sure.

As I haven't read the whole book (not even close!!lol), I can't comment too much on how information about her life changes after she becomes DoY, although I remember the author mentioning it. However, having scanned part of the section on the abdication (which I do find fascinating), she did seem to make her feelings on that subject quite clear.

I do think that, whatever was going on, she was happy with the choice she ultimately made, and that's good. There certainly have been plenty of miserable marriages within the royal family and aristocracy over the centuries. So, it's nice to see a relationship that worked well, however it is that it came to be.

There are many monarchs and periods of British history that I find interesting--Henry VIII and his wives, Elizabeth I, Mary I, Eleanor of Aquitaine, the whole War of the Roses period (although that gets rather confusing). I haven't read much on the Stuarts-in particular the Civil War- or Hanovers, but I'd like to change that. George V sounds interesting.
I am interested in the present day BRF, too.

 

[Aliza]

...this work allows the reader to make up their own mind. I enjoyed it.

I'm glad you enjoyed it. Nevertheless, he was not commissioned to write a history about QEQM but a biography. As a trained historian and historiographer I know full well there is a somewhat small but very real difference between the historian's work and the biographer's art.

I would not have wanted his opinions. But I can not fathom how one could make up one's mind on the subject of why Lady Elizabeth changed her mind and accepted Bertie's proposal when Shawcross does not write one single word in explanation! That doesn't leave a reader to make up their own mind, because the only opinion one could have would be sheer conjecture!

As I've mentioned before, though I did not know it when I read the biography the first time, I have since been on Amazon and similar sites and the vast, vast majority have the same complaint as I do. The major reviews in the American papers I've seen were not too great, either, to put it mildly.

Still, it's a lot of book to read and it's great that you feel you got your time and money's worth out of it. Have you read Vickers' biography of her yet?

 

[IloveCP]

I don't know if this has been posted:

The Queen Mother William Shawcross's Official Biography - YouTube

 

[BeatrixFan]

I've just bought this and one chapter in, I'm absolutely amazed by the level of detail Shawcross has put in. Two pages on where exactly the QM was born?!

 

[DukeOfAster]

Very proud to have this book as well. WELL DONE is all I can say. Great detail to all events and for that I say thanks.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Did anyone else feel that this was an absolute trek to get through? Initially I thought the level of detail was fascinating but now it's getting to be a bit wearing. It stilts the story. He spends six pages telling us what the Duchess had for breakfast (not exactly but you get my point) but slips in really big things that I'd like to know more about. For example, what did the Queen Mother think of Queen Alexandra? What was her relationship with her like? If it's going to be this detailed, the level of detail should be consistent in my view. But no, we have page after page of pretty banal detail and then bam - Queen Alexandra's dead, how sad, never mind. To me it's just a bit too much. And it's overbearingly sweet. I had no idea that the Queen Mother was an absolute darling to each and every person she met. I could be wrong of course and the book might change but 400 pages in and I'm already eyeing up the new Duchess of Windsor biog I bought.

 

[IloveCP]

I kinda agree with you Beatrixfan.I thought some things were way too over detailed but,what do you expect from an offical biographer?Shawcross wanted every detail of her life.

I too wish what she thought about Alexandra and other things but,maybe there is no record of some things.

 

[scooter]

Really? I thought the entire book was a travellogue. "Then Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth travelled on June 20, 1952 to Denmark. It was a sunny day and Her Majesty wore a pale yellow chiffon outfit to be greeted by the Ambassador" seems to be all there is. Change the dates/weather/location/and color, but it's all the same.

 

[Baroness of Books]

I read the biography and agree with much of the comments here. Some episodes were analyzed to death and some skimmed over. As Scooter mention, a great portion of the book was a travelogue; there was so much detail of her travel itinerary, my eyes were glazing over. I'd have liked to have known what made Elizabeth finally change her mind about marrying Bertie as well, not about what was constantly served at meals. Shawcross is very reverential of the QM and for the thickness of the book, I came away somewhat disappointed. I thought to see more of the "iron fist in velvet glove" nature of the QM, but I think the author did treat his subject very reverentially.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

I really enjoyed the book and realized early on that only certain records were allowed to the authorized biographer (much like being on the Royal Forums). I couldn't put it down, and found the daily details as close to getting to live with the Queen Mother as I'll ever get. It would truly be fun to live with the Royals for a week or two. Sure, a lot of it may seem boring, most people have boring moments in their lives..

 

[BeatrixFan]

I agree with alot of what has been written. On the one hand, the book is really interesting and showed a new side to some of the "cast" - how George V and Queen Mary are documented amazed me - and I love the little letters from a young Princess Elizabeth etc. But the travelogue part annoys me and makes some of the chapters a bit clunky. I mean, it's an official biography and it's without a doubt the definitive account of the QM's life but in some places I find myself forcing myself not to skip bits.

 

[Baroness of Books]

I liked the portrayal of George V and Queen Mary as well; there were parts where it showed a warmer and more personable side to them, especially the anecdote where the King was very strict with his family about punctuality, but forgave Elizabeth her tardiness when late to the dinner table. She seemed to have really charmed the socks off him! I found all the descriptions of the royal homes to be very interesting as well, especially when the QM bought and restored Castle Mey. And, yes, I don't think you could get any closer to life with the QM than this book. I wouldn't mind trying royal life for a few weeks myself!

 

[BeatrixFan]

Well, I'm at the end of the war. And I have to say, it's a real hard grind to get to each chapter! It's especially hard when I've just bought some real crackers to read (My Memoirs by Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester, A Measure of Understanding by Queen Frederica and The Heart has it's Reasons by the Duchess of Windsor). I just don't see the point in so much detail. Like you Baroness, I've really enjoyed the portrayal of George V and Queen Mary but it begs the question, with all he put in about Queen Mary, why not save it and write a biography about her (which I'd love)? It's a real shame because the narrative is so slow in places. There's some genuinely interesting passages (I had no idea the Duke of Windsor was so vile to Bertie after the abdication) but elsewhere it's endless window dressing about clothes or meals. And the way the QM is portrayed is a bit tiring. There's one part where the QM is hinted at falling out with a member of the government over a message she didn't approve which was circulated to women who took in evacuees. You get the feeling that the critique of the QM from the minister was quite cutting so naturally it's not included.

All in all, I think the book is pretty much the Queen's commanded testament to how her mother should be thought of in generations to come and that's natural for a daughter but also for a reigning monarch who wants her dynasty to be remembered kindly. But I think the book really does lack reality in places. Of course most of the stuff that may have shown a different side was destroyed by Princess Margaret but even if it had survived I get the feeling it'd never have gone in.

 

[scooter]

And the draft was sanitized for publication by QE and Charles. Personally, I thought the book made an excellent doorstop, but that is about all.

 

[BeatrixFan]

I have to agree. I've sadly shelved it. I can't really bear anymore. Moved onto the Pope Hennesy biog of Queen Mary.

 

[Baroness of Books]

Hope you enjoy it better, BeatrixFan!

 

[Warren]

You'll enjoy Pope-Hennessy. His bio of Queen Mary is especially strong on her youth and the madcap life of her mother. You'll gain a new appreciation of the Duchess of Teck, why she was called "The People's Princess", and of Princess May's formative years while having quite a few laugh out loud moments along the way.

 

[Baroness of Books]

This sounds like an interesting bio; I'd be really interested to read about the madcap lifestyle of the Tecks!

 

[Mermaid1962]

I just adore the picture of King George V and Queen Mary near the end of the book. Either he has his hand on her knee or she has hers on his. I can't remember.

You'll enjoy Pope-Hennessy. His bio of Queen Mary is especially strong on her youth and the madcap life of her mother.