2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Don't bother: nothing new, even for the ultimate Royals fan, October 29, 1998
By A Customer
This review is from: Charles at Fifty (Hardcover)
Really no new info here. Stick with Dimbelby account, even if Charles himself regrets having participated in its production. Far too little about life without Diana; the author may have moved out of Charles's circle by the time of the Paris accident, and his information seems decidedly second-hand. For revelations, however tawdry and perhaps even untrue, save up for Penny Junor's new tome.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Don't buy this book; you've heard it all before., January 5, 1999
By A Customer
This review is from: Charles at Fifty (Hardcover)
I was extremely disappointed with "Charles at Fifty" for three reasons. First, the title is grossly misleading. It implies that most or all of the book will examine the Prince of Wales as he is today (i.e., how he's handling Diana's death; his relationship with his sons and Camilla, his parents, etc.) Instead, almost all of it is a biography of Charles, going back all 50 years. Relatively little focuses on Charles after the divorce. Second, there's very little here that we've not already seen or heard somewhere else. (Readers are forced to sit through yet another rehashing of the Waleses' maital woes.) Third, the book is terribly one-sided. Diana is portrayed as the innocent victim of a cold, heartless, selfish man who used her. Little effort is made at telling his side of the story. Far superior to Holden's book is Penny Junor's "Charles: Villian or Victim;" however, be warned that Junor is VERY pro-Charles.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
3.0 out of 5 stars
Blatantly biased against Charles, September 6, 2007
This review is from: Charles at Fifty (Hardcover)
I've always believed that a biographer should strive to be as evenhanded about his subject as possible: Show the person "warts and all," as Oliver Cromwell once said, the bad with the good, and let the reader decide on the noted person's merit or lack of same.
Anthony Holden apparently would not agree with that belief -- at least, not when it comes to Prince Charles. Despite his protestation in the prologue that he has "attempted to tell the tale as objectively as possible," he also refers to "my informed disillusion with the prince to whom I once warmed." Holden also acknowledges that he and Charles no longer speak to each other, and that Charles's office was not cooperative with him in the preparation of "Charles At Fifty."
Wonder why? Could it be that he had already burned his bridges with the Prince of Wales with the tone of the first two biographies of him he wrote, when Charles turned 30 and 40? I haven't read those books, but anyone who has worked his way through "Charles At Fifty" might guess that the others were hardly fair, either.
In this book, Holden plain and simply trashes Charles's reputation in every way he can. In addition, he seems to detest the monarchy in general, as well as Charles in particular.
The earlier chapters of this book at least make a passing swipe at objectivity here and there. But once Princess Diana enters the picture, it is evident by Holden's writing that he positively adored her; he takes her side in every conflict the couple had during their unhappy marriage, in a manner so obvious that a blind man could see it.
Holden's malicious glee in relating every incident in which Diana got the better of Charles in their public relations battle -- or should I say every time that Holden believes she did -- is palpable. One can almost hear him smacking his lips with relish at Charles's discomfiture with his out-of-control, publicity-seeking wife.
Holden's obvious belief voiced in the book's final pages, that with Diana divorced, then dead, Charles must choose between the throne and Camilla Parker-Bowles, is not likely to be fulfilled. Charles and Camilla were married, and the House of Windsor did not fall; I predict that one day he will sit on the throne, and his son Prince William will have to wait his turn.
And Mr. Holden will have wasted all that bile for nothing.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No