Quote: Tursiops @ February 20 2013, 6:03 PM GMTActually three, there are also those of us who haven't read the article, do not intend to, and have no opinion on the matter whatsoever.
Covered...
Quote: David Bussell @ February 20 2013, 12:41 PM GMTWhat about the people who haven't read the article at all?
He's not reading the thread either, assumedly to hammer him the point.
Dan
Quote: Godot Taxis @ February 20 2013, 12:12 PM GMTHilary Mantel didn't launch a 'scathing attack' on anyone. Neither did she 'rant' about anything. Her remarks about Kate were made in a lecture about 'Royal Bodies', given at the British Museum, wherein she discussed the bodies of Marie Antoinette as well as Henry the Eighth and Anne Boleyn in the context of public ownership and purposing.
Yes, rant was an ill chosen word. And of course tabloids have plucked out the best lines to use out of context, as they do. Until the lecture is published we won't know how maligned Mantel has been, but the fact she did use KM in a negative way with personal lines such as 'she has lifeless eyes' is enough to whip the scandal monger media into a frenzy. There can't be any way such an intelligent woman didn't know this would happen, so claims of gross insensitivity and self publicising exploitation at least are fair.
I'm not a keen royalist either, and agree that KM is probably just another chancer wanting the fairytale lifestyle of a princess and likes to look good. But it does seem now some of them are just being used as cheap targets by anyone who wants to make a name for themselves and has books or mags to sell.
Yup it's all about volume of sales with that Mantel woman. And Kate... blimey what a chancer! Another one of them! It's all quite shocking really.
So glad you agree Marc. Morning. 
Morning
Royal watchers are realling today after celebrated author and winner of the Mann Cooking Sherry book awared MarcP made a shock announcement.
"I'd like to give the queen one and no mistaking, I'd put a smile on her face."
Slurred the best selling former computer magazine model.
"I only write so many best selling murder mysteries, because when I get my hands on the readies I abuse myself all over the pictures of her maj and then the missus biffs me with a rolling pin until I write another best seller with James Patterson."
Sheringham's chief librarian said in a prepared statement.
"We are surprised as we originally only booked the celebrated and multi talendted performer to talk to the Towns Lady Guild about preventing hanging basket theft. The only hanging basket he adressed was the one threw up in."
The queen was not available for comment, but apparently quite enjoyed that one when the prossy got cut up in.
Wolf Hall has been sat upon my bookshelves glaring intimidatingly down at me, for the last couple of years, accusing me of being an intellectual wimp for not daring to turn the first page, it's sequels forming an orderly queue, promising further punishments to come...
I have therefore concluded that Hilary Mantel is a jealous munter for picking on poor sweet Kate, and no-one should read any of her works, ever.
I've been reading more of the Daily Mail these days as it's got a great app. And I think AN Wilson really slaps down her intellectual arrogance.
The post Diana royal wife, is the ultimate quiet unable to respond target. And if picking on her is what gives the shrill Mandrill her jollies good for her. But it's not got anything to do with looks. It's bullying and that's always an ugly thing.
As for the royal family, honestly who cares these days?
I mean they don't cost that much. We need someone to greet dignatries who isn't the PM and any other option these days would be ghastly. The politically correct degree would give us Abu Hamza, only after a sex change and having adopted a gay Rumanian baby or something.
For f**k sake sooty read the lecture - she doesn't bully anyone. And I mean actually read it, not Sooty read it (ie every tenth word).
The problem with the Royal Family is they are unelected and wield a lot of power, as the recent brouhaha over the non-disclosure of Charles' lobbying letters to government demonstrates.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ February 21 2013, 7:55 AM GMTUntil the lecture is published (...)
It's been online for some time. Zoo linked to it a couple of pages back and I've done it above.
You don't think the Daily Mail journalist actually went to the lecture do you? I doubt if there's anyone who works at the mail who can find the British Library.
Read the lecture and what a load of half informed drivel it was.
Her books are like a historical 50 shades of grey.
She's basically writing a love letter to Hitler, but that's ok because he died 600 years ago. (that's her pig awful books by the way).
The lecture is like an extended version of just a minute that managed to drag on for an hour.
Of course Godot you ignored the point that I made which is any picking at Kate when she's just doing her job is unfair.
But unlike Mandrill would, I do forgive you because you are both pretty and innocent.
I read it and have to agree it was erudite more than anything else. When you get into her style of writing, you understand there isn't much at all that's meant personally, it's more done with the cold presicion of an 'expert witness' as she must see herself. It's a style of history writing that's in vogue at the mo and there are a lot of woman at it. Her's was a bit haughty in style maybe but it's very readable too.
The Mail should be ashamed of their blatant contortion of what she said. There's no 'why she said it' in their piece because they left all the context out. Pretty disgusting that such bad journalism designed to totally twist what was said to fit their agenda is allowed to be published in the first place, but that's our untouchable free press law for you. Hearing it all over the news I thought there must be more personal venom in it, but reading it in whole, there really wasn't.
I'm still of the mind she knew she'd generate great publicity for herself by leaving these passages in tho. You could say it's brave, you could also say it's very smart from a business point of view. Personally I think she's being just as sharp as the tabloids are.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ February 22 2013, 8:25 AM GMTI'm still of the mind she knew she'd generate great publicity for herself by leaving these passages in tho. You could say it's brave, you could also say it's very smart from a business point of view. Personally I think she's being just as sharp as the tabloids are.
Not everybody is a media whore. I suspect Hilary Mantel does perfectly well as an author without having to indulge in cheap publicity stunts to sell books. And I doubt very much she would have welcomed the pretty unpleasant attacks on how she looks.
She was doing well as an author but she still wasn't really a massive name (outside her specialism). Now she is! I can't believe this publicity wasn't in some part intended, sorry. Just uttering Middleton's name to an audience in the Britsh Museum is not a good way to keep a dull and quiet life (which is in reality the norm for a typical writer) if that's what she wanted. I can't believe she did want that now.
IMO she's been just as seduced by the devil that is fame as KM has, and feels she's much more deserving of it than KM, which I would agree with. On the cold surface KM seems like just a lucky chancer who dreamt of having the fame and adoration and lush lifestyle of a Princess Di.
Which leads me back to thinking my origional thoughts of envy again. You can't really intellectualise envy and jealousy, these are strong primal feelings that exist in us all, and are heightened in the female of our species.
'
She was doing well as an author '
I just spat out my metaphorical cup of coffee!! Lol.