Contents:
For instance, his use of Voltaire was quite ambivalent. At first Clarke uses him as an important example for French disinterest in Canada, but later on he writes a whole chapter on Voltaire not being representative for his fellow countrymen. I also was a bit troubled by the guillotine. Clarke points out that the Brits already had a similar invention called the Halifax. Did Guillotine even know of the existence of this machine at all?
Were these machines totally identical? The French, in the person of Guillotine, did invent the guillotine, because it was his prototype that was used during and after the French Revolution. That the Halifax resembled this machine is in this case not really an argument. The situations differ way too much to make a sensible comparison between the two.
I could go on stating the other way that the Guernsey resistance did a terrible job on blowing up railways do they have a railway there? There was almost no resistance on the islands, so compared to the French the islanders were a bunch of Nazi-sympathizers…right? This is just to show how stupid you can make the argument At times the book suffers from this kind of reasoning, but these are rather spots on a further well-investigated book.
Dec 17, Dr. This is not just a book filled with subtle humour and facts galore, it is a veritable history lesson. Despite the title, it is not an anti-French manifesto, far from it. As well as plenty of passage highlighting reasons to love the French, it reminds us of the many things the world has to thank France for. That said, it also takes time to debunk some myths that the French love to trot out. The fact that le croissant was a Belgian invention is particularly irksome to my French friends.
As well al This is not just a book filled with subtle humour and facts galore, it is a veritable history lesson. As well all know, the English have always taken a tongue-in-cheek pride at infuriating our near neighbours across the water and this book does true justice to this now, thankfully, peaceful continental rivalry. Of course, there are parts of the book that tackle the issues of our war time differences and how such things are stitched into the fabric of our two nations.
It will no surprise you that the subject of food, le cuisine, comes up too. We laught at while, in may case, loving beyond most others their hoity-toity food and wine supping ways; they, in turn, are noted as ridiculing our stodgy, bland, unimaginative menus and beer swillinh culture. Overall, it is a great history lesson and riveting read. We, as Brits, have been annoying the French for many a century. The fact that we are now European partners does not, however, take away from the humour, accuracy and brilliance of this book.
You will feel better educated on Anglo-French relations when you have read it. Mar 11, Meaghan rated it really liked it Shelves: This is a very long book, nearly pages, as might be expected from a book that covers a millenium's worth of Anglo-French relations in great detail. The author is British but has lived on both sides of the channel, and he lobs potshots in each direction. I learned a surprising number of things, such as: Many things traditionally thought of as French, such as the guillotine, champagne and William of Normandy, were not French.
During World War II, the British hated their French allies almos This is a very long book, nearly pages, as might be expected from a book that covers a millenium's worth of Anglo-French relations in great detail. Voltaire was an enthusiastic Anglophile. The chapters come with delightful sub-headings, such as "In India and Tahiti: France Gets Lost In Paradise: And the Victorians said, 'It was an accident, honest.
I really enjoyed it. Apr 16, Lucy rated it really liked it Shelves: This book took me a while to finish because, like I do with nonfiction, I dipped in and out of it. While I did know about some periods of the years it was covering, I wasn't an expert enough to critique the information it provided in the book so I can't comment on the accuracy. However, I liked how the book was split into sections and the actual information was very readable as well. However, I found the first half of the book far more interesting than the second half. Maybe it was because t This book took me a while to finish because, like I do with nonfiction, I dipped in and out of it.
Maybe it was because that was where my interest lay more in the earlier periods of history but I found the last part of the book with De Gaulle fairly uninteresting, though I didn't know about any of it really. Jan 16, Emily Ross rated it it was amazing Shelves: It was written in a conversational manner and I rather liked that. It did make me question some of the facts, but I did my own research on the facts I questioned, and they were all right.
Nov 19, Eva Stachniak rated it it was amazing. I was entirely charmed by Stephen Clarke's account of French English relations. I read historical books compulsively, for my own writing and for pleasure. A writer who manages to add to my sense of history, give me new angles, new details to consider is a rare find. Clarke likes the odd detail, teh forgotten twist in old stories. He entertains and he teaches I enjoyed this very much. If we could give. It's definitely history-light, but Clarke has a nice way with tale-telling and makes the history interesting and accessible.
The book covers the disputes and arguments between les Anglais and the French, from William the Conqueror to present day. I enjoyed the humour and also the facts. Easy to read and it flowed very nicely and it taught me something. Apr 01, Lynne rated it liked it.
A bit of a slog to get through this! I already knew a lot of the general history. The 'corrections' to the French interpretation of events were often amusing and enlightening, but I began to wonder how biased the 'factual' corrections were. The joke were a bit intrusive and irritating at times. I found the last few chapters about the 20th century the most interesting. Overall, I'm glad I read it, but wish I had dipped in rather than reading all the way through. Jun 18, Sara Uckelman rated it really liked it. Last year I asked my f-list to recommend to me their favorite "new" book that they had read in the past year by "new" I mean "new to them".
I don't remember who recommended me this one, but I'd thank them if I did! This was a humorous and yet seriously edifying romp through Anglo-Gallic relations from the time of the conquest until a few years ago. Much of the early stuff I already knew perils of being a medievalist , but the 17th C chapters and later I found remarkably educational, in part be Last year I asked my f-list to recommend to me their favorite "new" book that they had read in the past year by "new" I mean "new to them".
Much of the early stuff I already knew perils of being a medievalist , but the 17th C chapters and later I found remarkably educational, in part because I realised that I knew a lot of facts from this period but almost none of the whys.
I found the bits about the channel tunnel and entering the EU particularly interesting, because those are bits that I really knew very little about and -- given Brexit -- are quite timely. Not sure I'd ever have cause to re-read it, hence not 5 stars, but I'd definitely recommend it to friends, hence not 3 stars. A 'deliciously' entertaining read from start to finish - probably the most entertaining history book I've ever read and I do enjoy a bit of history. Having read Stephen Clarke's 'A Year In The Merde' before this, my experience of reading this one was a quite welcome and pleasant subversion of my expectations - and I do have a penchant for the latter as well.
The book itself starts off in a seemingly patriotic tone, but as you carry on reading, laughing hysterically as you go along, Clarke's fon A 'deliciously' entertaining read from start to finish - probably the most entertaining history book I've ever read and I do enjoy a bit of history. The book itself starts off in a seemingly patriotic tone, but as you carry on reading, laughing hysterically as you go along, Clarke's fondness for France and French culture comes across rather clearly he even outright admits it at one point in the book ; consequently, the book gradually, but surely, gains a more 'balanced' tone, although "le French-bashing" is still prevalent of course.
Having said that, Clarke is very blunt in his condemning of certain British atrocities mentioned during his rather thorough journey through Anglo-French history, as well as being quick to point out some specific flaws manifested by the Brits. It's small tidbits such as these that ensure the book doesn't come across as lopsided. It's also very informative, although not necessarily in the manner of a traditional history book, with several rather obscure historical events being focused upon.
It also brings into question the origin of such French staples as the 'croissant' and 'champagne'. Jan 14, Rick rated it it was amazing Shelves: I love this book! This is how history should be passed on - the book is full of fascinating historical facts all built round the "special" relationship we have with our neighbours across the channel. It documents the often fractious history between France and England, throwing up a lot of information about the ripple effect this relationship has had on world events.
The section on early American history is particularly fascinating. For all the verbal attacks on the French and their history, autho I love this book! For all the verbal attacks on the French and their history, author Stephen Clarke obviously holds the country and its people in high regard. It's to be hoped he's written a similar book from a French perspective, given that he now lives and works in Paris!
This book should be required reading for anyone who wants a better understanding of the history that exists between England and France - and essential for anyone who collects fascinating trivia. I always knew that the Norman's weren't French but it was interesting to discover that Napoleon was,technically,Italian and that baguettes and croissants originated in Austria! Read this book - you wont be disappointed. Feb 10, Bas Kreuger rated it really liked it. Written by the English, that is. I can't imagine a historybook written by a Dutch scholar other than Maarten van Rossum and surely a French historian being funny ;- But Clarcke is and more so because he is as far as I can ascertain serious in his research and the stories he writes.
I am sure he picked his examples well so the picture that he paints puts the French in the silly seat, but it is convincing though. The French invading Britain in ?
William the Conqu Is history funny? William the Conquerer was a Norman and hated the French! Champagne a French fizzy wine? At least not until a Brit added some more bubbles to the wine and made a stronger bottle that could withstand the pressure. Napoleon victorious in Europe? Yes, but only until he ran into Wellington in a place called Waterloo.
Read Wam book reviews & author details and more at www.farmersmarketmusic.com Start reading Wam (FICTION ET LITT) (French Edition) on your Kindle in under a minute. Search results. one result for Books: "Wam Stories". Pie Me Good: Erotic Stories of Messy Misadventure. 28 Feb by WAM Stories. Kindle Edition · £
Hmmm, reluctantly and only because Churchill and Roosevelt let him but they didn't dare to tell him about the Invasion in Normandy for fear he would give the game away too soon, as he did with other invasions. And this is only a small part of the many stories Clarcke uses in his book. Mar 26, Conrad rated it it was amazing. This book was a very funny english humor book because of the way the author made fun of the french and made the book full of facts and funny stories keeping you deeply involved. The book was full of interesting facts and details on what had happened with the fighting not just the french and english but everywhere.
It was cool because of how the fighting had changed and it isn't what you would think today as in foods and sport.
The author described the events clearly with humor and detail. It was This book was a very funny english humor book because of the way the author made fun of the french and made the book full of facts and funny stories keeping you deeply involved. It was all humor though a lot lot of it was facts which I really loved because it was the kind of book I was looking for. WHen you started to get a little board he would draw you straight back in with the humor. It was timed perfectly, and I couldn't help but laugh out loud.
This is why this book should get 10 out of 5 stars and will always be one of my favorite books. Mar 18, Sam rated it liked it Shelves: At first this is a really funny book as Clarke goes through the main historical events that Britain well more England than anything and France share and how some of the French interpretations are not necessarily accurate. But after a few chapters it begins to get a bit tiresome and losses its amusing edge, even becoming mildly annoying by the end.
This is a good comprehensive history of the two nations and does throw up a few events and people that were otherwise hidden from the history books At first this is a really funny book as Clarke goes through the main historical events that Britain well more England than anything and France share and how some of the French interpretations are not necessarily accurate. This is a good comprehensive history of the two nations and does throw up a few events and people that were otherwise hidden from the history books most of us are familiar with and sheds new light on some of those most of us are familiar with.
Its also well written, easy and enjoyable to read which given how dry history books can be is not necessarily an easy task.
Feb 02, John rated it did not like it. Stephen Clarke's book on the fraut relationship between the French and the Anglo Saxons is chunky and sometimes gives interesting or indecent episodes. It aspires to be both as funny as ' and all that' and as informative as 'How the Irish saved civilisation' It is neither.
It strains to make the boring parts of history exciting, where instead they should be omitted. It misses key episodes like the results of the fall of Louisberg, or the return of the French to France after the Dunkirk evacua Stephen Clarke's book on the fraut relationship between the French and the Anglo Saxons is chunky and sometimes gives interesting or indecent episodes. It misses key episodes like the results of the fall of Louisberg, or the return of the French to France after the Dunkirk evacuation, or some of the stories of Ben Franklin in Paris.
Go elsewhere whether you want serious history, entertainment or titilation. You will be glad you did. Apr 16, Vicki Lesage rated it it was amazing. From my travels around France and from having lived in Paris for 9 years, I've always been interested in the British vs. French rivalry, but I could never bring myself to read about it because everything seemed so boring.
By Shelley and Thomas Jefferson Hogg. First verse letter to Edward Fergus Graham: Irvyne; Or, The Rosicrucian: Stockdale, 41, Pall Mall. Queen Mab; a Philosophical Poem: Shelley, ; New York: Alastor; or, The Spirit of Solitude: By the Hermit of Marlow. Printed for Thomas Hookham Jr.
A Tragedy, in Five Acts. Oedipus Tyrannus; or, Swellfoot the Tyrant. Translated From the Original Doric. Published for the author by J. With the types of Didot, ; Cambridge: Public Record Office, England: Posthumous Poems of Percy Bysshe Shelley. John and Henry L. A Philosophical View of Reform. By the late Percy Bysshe Shelley. Edward Moxon, on printed title page; engraved title page reads: Essays, Letters from Abroad, Translations and Fragments.
Shelley Memorials, from Authentic Sources. Lady Shelley [assisted by Edmund Ollier].
The Works of Percy Bysshe Shelley. Boston and New York: The Complete Poetical Works of Shelley , ed.
Matthews and reset,