Read a few pages at a time while nursing the baby at night ...With the recent birth of the royal baby of William & Kate Middleton (yet to be named), my interest in the royal family was renewed. And with the excessive media coverage surrounding the birth, I was in the mood for a little scandal & mud-slinging. Kelley delivers. What else would you expect from an Irish woman covering the British monarchy? I found the first 300 pages interesting - I especially loved the WW2 era information. I thought the coverage of the main royals was interesting and fair. Minor royals seem to get treated worse with random rumors throw unnecessarily into the text. The last 200 pages could also have been cut, in my opinion. I was never that interested in Diana or Fergie and the last 200 pages seem devoted to their marriages and scandals.The biggest shocker for me was just how rich the royal family really is ... I guess I never thought about it before. Or I assumed they were rich in titles only. Hearing how much money they have makes it all seem less enchanting and magical. Why are the British people paying them an annual salary? It would be like Steve Jobs having his employees pay him. Also, hearing how rude they are to others was disenchanting. Hearing that someone thinks they are “divinely inspired” to be better than others in this day-&-age is offputing.Overall, I learned a lot of history from reading this book (aside from the reported rumors). And found it an interesting read.
I had little more than a passing interest in the royal family of Britain when I picked up this hefty volume. I'd read Kelly's work in the past, though, so I decided to take a chance on it. It turned out to be a very engaging read, even while describing the dense details of royal ancestry. Kelly humanized the royals without airbrushing or defaming them. She even resisted making Princess Di (or, more accurately, Lady Diana) into a two-dimensional character, casting her as a troubled human being rather than either a neurotic madwoman or an angel of mercy. She even managed to give Prince Charles a little colour, stiff and chilly as he is. Most enigmatic for me, though, was her portrayal of Queen Elizabeth II. Here we see her flaws, her stiffness, her awkwardness and distance from her subjects. We also see her occasional warmth, her wicked sense of humour, and her admirable commitment to her royal duty. Overall, it's a nuanced portrait--one which very obviously necessitated careful and thorough research. It's a long, long read, but don't be discouraged: it's well worth it.
What do You think about The Royals (1998)?
What a fascinating read! Kitty Kelley is known for her well-researched books, and while the palace had this book essentially banned in England because the queen was so offended by it, I thought it was a balanced view. But the royals do live in a different world--and not just because of the extraordinary privileges. The perceive themselves to be better--way, way better than the rest of us. One eye-popping fact: On the night before his wedding to Lady Diana Spencer, Prince Charles spent the night with Camilla Parker Bowles. Whaaaaaaaa? The book is filled with juicy tidbits like this. I highly recommend it.
—Cathryn Conroy
One reviewer described this as "a dishy expose" on the House of Windsor. My, but the secrets that family has been hiding - during WW2, Elizabeth II and her family didn't spend the night at Buckingham Palace as they claimed to Londoners, but instead spent their nights at the less targeted Windsor Castle. Nor did they use "ration cards" to buy either food or clothing - while many English people were just shy of starving, these people ate bacon and eggs for breakfast. This book, written in classic potboiler style, tears away the curtain of faux honour and pseudo-honesty that this family has used to enshroud itself for decades, and exposes it for the tawdry crew of liars that it is. Logically, every family has skeletons in the closet, so why wouldn't incredibly powerful people have skeletons hanging about in their wardrobes too? I admire Kitty Kelley's exhaustive research; she doesn't do what Lady Colin Campbell did in her book Diana in Private, and simply state her own opinions in the guise of "an anonymous source." Kelley reveals most of her sources, and thus lends credibility to her book.
—Lady
This book has been in my library for awhile -- after watching 'The King's Speech' I was blasted with the urge to learn more about this institution than I have through their various scandals. Kelly takes you a step closer into the lives of these unfortunate folk that were born into servitude. Reading this book makes me happy that I was born of a more humbler lineage. She makes a concerted effort to avoid taking sides in the various calamities that have befet this family and whets your interest to explore their history just a bit more.
—Mary
