'The history of her age is the history of men': WTF
The above little gem of nuanced historical insight came from the review in the latest Literary Review of AN Wilson's new bio of the Queen Empress, by Simon Heffer.
It was (maybe) the history of men only if you assume that the only things that MATTERED were Parliamentary politics and military action.
Which does, do admit, also leave out quite a number of influential men.
But, honestly, when you think of the things that Victorian women accomplished - I will concede that many of them were not exactly approved of by Her Majesty, or would not have been if she had known about them - how can someone who has, apparently, written a book on the Victorians and has another coming out soon, make this assertion?
It is perfectly possible to make a case that QV herself was not that important in the larger scheme of things going on during her reign without dissing on her entire gender.
No biscuit for Mr H, but perhaps a rather overripe Royal sturgeon? This entry was originally posted at http://oursin.dreamwidth.org/2145995.html. Please comment there using OpenID. View
comments.