Ferdinand MountReseñas

Ferdinand Mount is a witty writer who knows many people, so the book is littered with the all sorts of folks, many or all of whom you may know of. I knew of only a few, so for much of the book I didn't really know who he was talking about. In some cases it didn't matter, but in others it would have been a boon. Nevertheless, I was going along just fine until I got to more modern times. He talks way too much about Margaret Thatcher and the politics of her era -- politics and policies that he seems to have been in favor or, well of course, he worked for her devising policy. But what killed it for me was his remark about someone he knew who had gone off to fight in the Spanish Civil War with the "Reds." Francisco Franco overthrew a democratically elected government. Those who fought against him to restate that government came from different political positions. Some were communists, socialists, anarchists, and others were what we would now call liberals. They were all democrats who were fighting against a fascist leader. Franco never entered into World War II, but Hitler and Mussolini supported him in the Civil War. It was German bombers that bombed the town of Guernica. Franco was a fascist. So to simplify who the Spanish republicans were by calling them "Reds" is to be ignorant or at the far end of the right wing. This made me lose trust and interest in his political ramblings.

An intriguing family mystery. As usual, the real life mysteries are better than the fictional ones, especially when they are so well written. I had a problem keeping track of all the names and who was who, but I believe the problem was my poor memory and not the writing.

A few things drew me to this book. First of all it was the intrigue behind the author's Aunt Munca, not just the fact that she used the name of a Beatrix Potter mouse but also the fact she was quite a mysterious figure for him. He grew up spending quite a lot of time around her but never really felt that he knew her fully.

The second thing was the mention of Sheffield and there is a fabulous lengthy chapter in the book about my home city in the late 19th and early 20th century. I'm sure any reader would agree that there is something extra special about reading about a place you know well.

And then there's that gorgeous cover with the image of a glamorous looking man and woman lightly holding hands. I was desperate to know their story.

Kiss Myself Goodbye is Ferdinand Mount's account of his aunt's life. A shadowy character, edging around questions she doesn't want to provide true answers to, he manages to discover endless amazing things about her life both up until the point she is a part of his life and beyond. And it truly is fascinating. The whole thing had my jaw dropping on many occasions, and sometimes nodding along sagely as previously unknown or seemingly unconnected pieces of information all slotted into place.

I particularly enjoyed Mount's journey of discovery through genealogy research, the way he found out so much from birth, marriage and death certificates. He has a difficult job as Munca didn't seem to tell the truth about herself so every single detail is hard won.

Kiss Myself Goodbye is the name of a song the author remembers from a trip to a nightclub with his Aunt Munca but it's also remarkably fitting as Munca spent her lifetime kissing her real self goodbye and reinventing herself. They often say the truth is stranger than fiction and that's definitely true of Munca's life.

I found this to be an engrossing story of a woman with more layers than an onion and a social history read packed with informational gems. Whilst there was the odd section that didn't completely absorb me, the vast majority of it was utterly captivating. It's a fabulous book.

Mount has written a considered account of the rise of the British oligarchy. He looks at the way that the power and money has become concentrated in the hands of a few business leaders, non doms and and Whitehall mandarins. These groups have vested interests at heart, as can be seen in the way that the revolving doors between government and business work; the way that directors and non executive directors sit on each other’s boards, and the fact that the nominated shareholders (pension funds) also now sit on the boards of these companies.

And yet he sees that there is change just starting, if not to reign in the excesses, but to temper them at least. Politicians are starting to make noises about the ratio between the top earners and the bottom earners in companies. JP Morgan said it should never exceed 20 to 1, but it can now be 400 to one in the worst cases. Politicians are starting to wrest power back from the government and mandarins through the select committees. The living wage organisation, supported even by Boris Johnson, is making an attempt to get large companies implementing it; this will life numerous people out of poverty and into jobs. He makes some good suggestions about the lack of training opportunities and that people who are not suitable for university cannot go to technical schools, as they do in Germany.

Well worth a read for those interested in the way that the political system works in this country.

A book that purports to be a piece of sociology. In fact it's a piece of polemic with its heart in the right place but starting from false premises. The author, I feel, is somewhat disingenuous; the plain, if not 'ordinary', name masks the fact that he is Sir Ferdinand Mount, third baronet and a one-time political commentator on The Times. He argues from a patrician point of view as a journalist and takes an idealised view of the working class, carefully cherry-picking his sources to confirm his prejudices and taking a sour view of those primary sources and more recent academic writers like EP Thompson who don't confirm his view. There is no bibliography to show he has done his homework.

His tone is rather condescending too. I don't feel he would have let his idealised working-class folk into his own exalted circles but would be happy to let them have their own chapels – he's big on religion even though Dickens and others record the workers staying away from God in droves – and mutually-funded schools. His solutions, predictably, are those of the old "one-nation" patrician Tory; more grammar schools to allow hand-picked individuals who can be trusted to behave to "rise above" their roots (as with most grammar school proponents there's no critique of the secondary modern schools in which 80% of children were taught to know their place.

The author means well but he misses the point. He shows little awareness of the struggles of the working-classes to find a place in a post-industrial economy. It's readable enough thouigh.

A book that purports to be a piece of sociology. In fact it's a piece of polemic with its heart in the right place but starting from false premises. The author, I feel, is somewhat disingenuous; the plain, if not 'ordinary', name masks the fact that he is Sir Ferdinand Mount, third baronet and a one-time political commentator on The Times. He argues from a patrician point of view as a journalist and takes an idealised view of the working class, carefully cherry-picking his sources to confirm his prejudices and taking a sour view of those primary sources and more recent academic writers like EP Thompson who don't confirm his view. There is no bibliography to show he has done his homework.

His tone is rather condescending too. I don't feel he would have let his idealised working-class folk into his own exalted circles but would be happy to let them have their own chapels – he's big on religion even though Dickens and others record the workers staying away from God in droves – and mutually-funded schools. His solutions, predictably, are those of the old "one-nation" patrician Tory; more grammar schools to allow hand-picked individuals who can be trusted to behave to "rise above" their roots (as with most grammar school proponents there's no critique of the secondary modern schools in which 80% of children were taught to know their place.

The author means well but he misses the point. He shows little awareness of the struggles of the working-classes to find a place in a post-industrial economy. It's readable enough thouigh.

At first I thought this book was a typical airport read and I regretted purchasing it. But I pushed on and found, although the author's thesis was sufficiently unsupported by evidence other than what one might glean from travelling around a bit, that I quite liked the Richard Dawkins bashing section enough to give it a go. There are some useful references to a number of other works I would like to read, and otherwise I am glad to have finished the book. Nevertheless, I must be more careful in future about how I choose my books. Airport books tend not to deliver value for the time spent - time that could be invested reading more important works. But we live and learn I suppose.

The author has led an unconventional life. Although this autobiography is not in chronological order, it is coherent and always interesting.½

This must be the ultimate curate's egg of a book. It begins with a description of Britain's oligarchy, omitting any mention of the powerful families that have run this country since time immemorial. The owners of our media sources are seen as sole representatives of the bad guys.

Just as I am about to lay this tome aside and write a blistering critique upon this site, our author produces an insightful piece upon the way in which both Labour and Conservative governments have stripped power from local bodies and secreted it into government offices and quangos.

I am beginning to question my initial judgement when, Mr. Mount moves onto the topic of the coalition government, which was obviously just coming to power as he was penning this work. We are assured that this is the solution to all the aforementioned ills and that, although the Conservatives will be held back by the Lib Dems, they will be our liberators. History has, of course, removed any doubt as to the inaccuracy of that prediction.

Were the above not to be bad enough, our author decides to end the book with a party political broadcast on behalf of the blue party. This is the weakest section of all; it seems that all rational has gone out of the window as dubious doctrine is extolled and flags are waved.

The book deserves its three stars for the section concerning the dismantling of local government: it more than deserves to lose the other two for its sneaky partisanship and painfully inaccurate predictions.