![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Many good social histories are centered around a single person and use that person to throw light on their times and customs. These generally fall into one of the following categories:
I've read books I've enjoyed in all three categories. Then there's D.J. Taylor's Bright Young People: The Rise and Fall of a Generation. His central character is Elizabeth Ponsonby. She was not a writer, or an artist, or a wit, or somebody whose early promise was never filled. She was at the center of the Bright Young Things because her party concepts were ingenious and infamous. Elizabeth he was one of the co-devisors of the Bath and Bottle Party, held at St George's Swimming Baths, whose invitation instructed "Please wear a Bathing Suit and bring a Bath towel and a Bottle." Even if she didn't organize it, Elizabeth was always the life of any party. None of the other survivors of the period quote anything memorable she had to say, which, given the prolific memoirs available, suggests she didn't.
So. Why is this book centered on the life of Elizabeth Ponsonby? Her father was a comfortable but not wealthy Labour minister, and his and his wife's diaries and papers were made available to the author. That's it. Not only are we focused on a minor person in the period, but we're seeing her through the eyes of her parents, who were certainly not in the Bright Young Thing circle and in fact despised it. They thought Elizabeth was selfish, expensive, and dissolute, and despaired of her as she proceeded through wild parties, some sort of flamboyant sexual misbehavior (probably adultery), alcoholism, and a bad marriage to an embezzler. Few of Elizabeth's letters survive and she didn't keep a diary. Why are we looking at the period through her eyes? Because that's where the lamp-post is.
There is a secondary viewpoint character, the failed writer and successful alcoholic Brian Howard, who envisioned wonderful books but never actually got around to writing them. He did write diaries of his own, which are quoted, but I didn't find them engaging or enlightening. His own biography, which is supposed to be good, is called Portrait of a Failure, which pretty much sums it up.
When discussing other prominent characters in the period, the author draws on newspaper clippings from the social columns, or on the more famous participants' memoirs, letters, and novels. If you want to know what Beverley Nichols or Evelyn Waugh or Cecil Beaton, or the Mitfords, all of whom were everywhere and knew everybody, were up to, you might as well read their own witty writings, because everything in this book is quoted directly from them.
Note to self: Why haven't you ever read Vile Bodies?
- Person A, though little-remembered today, was an important influence on their community and friends.
- Person A, though forgotten today, left private papers that vividly illustrated aspects of everyday life.
- Person A, though well-remembered today, was at the center of events and (ideally) I have new research to bring on the subject.
I've read books I've enjoyed in all three categories. Then there's D.J. Taylor's Bright Young People: The Rise and Fall of a Generation. His central character is Elizabeth Ponsonby. She was not a writer, or an artist, or a wit, or somebody whose early promise was never filled. She was at the center of the Bright Young Things because her party concepts were ingenious and infamous. Elizabeth he was one of the co-devisors of the Bath and Bottle Party, held at St George's Swimming Baths, whose invitation instructed "Please wear a Bathing Suit and bring a Bath towel and a Bottle." Even if she didn't organize it, Elizabeth was always the life of any party. None of the other survivors of the period quote anything memorable she had to say, which, given the prolific memoirs available, suggests she didn't.
So. Why is this book centered on the life of Elizabeth Ponsonby? Her father was a comfortable but not wealthy Labour minister, and his and his wife's diaries and papers were made available to the author. That's it. Not only are we focused on a minor person in the period, but we're seeing her through the eyes of her parents, who were certainly not in the Bright Young Thing circle and in fact despised it. They thought Elizabeth was selfish, expensive, and dissolute, and despaired of her as she proceeded through wild parties, some sort of flamboyant sexual misbehavior (probably adultery), alcoholism, and a bad marriage to an embezzler. Few of Elizabeth's letters survive and she didn't keep a diary. Why are we looking at the period through her eyes? Because that's where the lamp-post is.
There is a secondary viewpoint character, the failed writer and successful alcoholic Brian Howard, who envisioned wonderful books but never actually got around to writing them. He did write diaries of his own, which are quoted, but I didn't find them engaging or enlightening. His own biography, which is supposed to be good, is called Portrait of a Failure, which pretty much sums it up.
When discussing other prominent characters in the period, the author draws on newspaper clippings from the social columns, or on the more famous participants' memoirs, letters, and novels. If you want to know what Beverley Nichols or Evelyn Waugh or Cecil Beaton, or the Mitfords, all of whom were everywhere and knew everybody, were up to, you might as well read their own witty writings, because everything in this book is quoted directly from them.
Note to self: Why haven't you ever read Vile Bodies?
