Lost Opportunity - Rated 
There is certainly a need for a one volume biography of Sir Robert Walpole. Unfortunately this is unsatisfying. Firstly, it is difficult to read and I had to force myself to get to the end. Coxe's biography of Walpole, although over 200 years old, is far better. Secondly, there are numerous factual errors. To take one, Pearce mentions that Stanhope was appointed Captain General following Marlborough's death. Stanhope predecessed the Duke and was never Captain General. Another example is that Pearce thinks Bolingbroke was in exile for decades after 1715, yet he was back in Britain in the 1720s and early 1730s. And there are mnay others. Annoyingly, Pearce swallows Jacobitwe propaganda and uncritically refers to the Duke of Cumberland as the Butcher, a very one sided and partial interpretation. Finally, there does not seem much new in this, and in the section about literature, I had the impression that this was the opposition to Walpole by numbers, with sections about The Beggar's Opera and Fielding's various attacks (incidentally Fiedling became a Walpole supporter in the 1740s). I was also surprised that Pitt advocated the death sentence to Walpole in the 1740s, yet Walpole's son, Horace, later referred to Pitt as one of the five greatest men of the period (Horace was very hostile towards his father's enemies). Pearce does not resolve this conundrum; perhaps he is unaware of it.
The Great Man; Sir Roberts Walpole - Rated
The content of this book is comprehesive but I am afraid the writing,"?journalese", makes it very difficult to read: long and convoluted sentences.
It compares very unfavourably with Douglas Hurd and William Hague.
One of the worst written biographies...EVER! - Rated 
This book is a total disgrace. Pearce has written interesting works in the past, but this so-called biography of Walpole is barely literate. The English is so poor that the reader will be struggling to get past the first couple of chapters.
What were the publishers thinking about when they allowed this rubbish to go to print in this state? Have they stopped employing editors and proof readers? Who knows?
Anyway, believe me, this book will not improve your knowledge of Sir Robert Walpole at all. Instead you will spend hours re-reading passages and trying to make sense of them. It is so very, very badly written. Frankly, if you want that sort of mental exercise you would find it cheaper to by a decent puzzle book.
I hope that the publishers do not re-print this work unrevised in paperback as that will only leave more readers feeling equally fleeced. Take my advise, save your money and frustration and leave this rubbish well alone. You may think that I am being harsh and unfair, but you wouldn't if you attempted to read this rambling nightmare of a book.
Shame on you Edward Pearce.
In Defence of Pearce (if not Walpole) - Rated 
I'll try to balance out the very negative comments on this book with some praise.
First of all some of the criticisms are justified to an extent...Walpole doesn't appear as often as you would expect, and Pearce's prose is, to use an eighteenth century word, "singular". My own criticism of the book is that it is certainly not balanced. Of the two adjectives in the subtitle of the book, scoundrel is clearly demonstrated, but genius hardly so. Walpole emerges as a lucky, vindictive chancer
So what are we left with? A superb account of the statesmen of the era; the depictions of such characters as Bolingbroke, the Duke of Newcastle and Henry Pelham are brilliantly sketched out as well as that of George I (much kinder than most accounts) and George II (somewhat harsher). The great events are narrated in an exciting and readable form, considering their complex nature - the Glorious Revolution, the succession of George I, the South Sea Bubble, and the fall of Walpole.
I would say it's worth a read, though I maybe in the minority here.
Help English required - Rated
I was so looking forward to reading it but Edward Pearce's appalling writing style means I gave up with 50 pages to go. Quite frankly a disgrace. Interesting subject destoyed by one of the worst writing styles I have every come across.
Avoid
|
