« The Unboxing! | Main | Of Little Books »

Saturday, 21 August 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Fear not Mike. How big a problem is it to search through Amazon.co.uk (via your link of course), when you've given us the title and author. You may even find something else of interest along the way... perhaps that was the problem!

By apologising to "the Great British" you have excluded everyone from Northern Ireland, also UK residents.



And the Dutch

You needed worry about us Canadians Mike - we figured out the search functions some time ago. You just keep the reviews and recommendations coming.

Sorry. Didn't mean to make you feel guilty.

Not your fault. I was already feeling guilty.


Great British? A minefield. If you mean the great British (as in the people of Great Britain) are marvellous etc, then we'll take that compliment. If you mean "Great British" (as in the individual citizens of 2 sovereign nations, a principality and a province) grossly aggregated together and forced to share a hitherto unknown corporate description, well then, we'll stop squabbling together and turn our ire on the rebellious ex-colonists who inhabit George III's estate on the other side of the Atlantic. Just as soon as we've sorted out the French, our favoured (spelt correctly) and traditional enemy.

I'm struggling to concoct an equivalent American description: how about an amalgamation of oil drillers' West Texas, hippy Oregon, Boston Brahmins and money-driven Las Vegas going under the name of "Wonderful South Canadians"? The mind boggles.



"the rebellious ex-colonists who inhabit George III's estate on the other side of the Atlantic"

Estate? Estate? Hmm. Well, if you're going to go back to historical first principles, then wouldn't you be constrained to admit that the British Isles are nothing but an undesirable out-of-the-way province belonging to the Dukes of the Normans? That's probably how your King Henry II would have seen it--as a lesser part of his greater holdings. Didn't he seldom see fit even to visit? Although Eleanor deigned to administer it for a time as a favor to her son, Richard Lionheart. Who seldom visited either....

And then the Isles played the part of a sort of consolation prize for the incompetent John--the place to which he was forced to retreat after he'd squandered and mismanaged the greater parts of the realm he inherited.

And didn't your favored and traditional enmity with the French, as you style it, have its beginnings as a sort of extended fit of pique by said John, who, dissatisfied to have only England, wanted back the greater prizes he felt should be his due on account of they belonged to his parents--after he got his butt chased ignominiously off the continent? Correct me if I'm wrong.

And as for enmity, when was the last time your country fought in a war with the French as anything but allies? I don't wish to give insult here, but is it possible you were taught history out of a textbook that was somewhat past expiry? Say by a century or two? Granted, the French were largely responsible for wresting those colonies of George III's that you mention from his grasp. Granted, you might understandably still resent that, given that the son became a colossus that casts the father in shadow.

Touché, mon ami across the main... :-)


As a Brit in Oman I use either site US/Uk depends on price.


Shame, Mike, making we Limeys tap the mouse an extra time. Don't worry, we on this side of the Pond always go through your site for our purchases of gentleman's relish, brogues, tweeds and naughty milkmaid outfits.

Maybe you should look into geo-IP based linking. I am sure there are frameworks out there that automatically send people to the correct Amazon store based on the country they're viewing your site from. Sure, it'd be a one-time headache, but maybe it'd boost your commisions.


You make the classic mistake of over-trashing King John, whose reputation rests entirely on the Magna Carta thing and the cartoon imagery that legend's managed to impose. Yes, his rule tended to the arbitrary - as was expected of any contemporary ruler. His fatal mistake was to exhibit weakness - or, at least, lethargy - at key moments during his reign. When he was on form, however, he was no worse than others - and certainly he was a more effective ruler than his idiot brother Richard, whose idea of good kingship was to empty the nation's coffers, have the jews slaughtered and then bugger off on an extended fighting holiday.

And as the heir to the Angevin household, John had every legal right to inherit those parts of France that belonged to it. He was unfortunate to be up against a hugely effective (for once) French King (whose own character made John a fluffy bunny by comparison).

And the Anglo-French rot set in well before John. Duke William's conquest of England meant that from then on her King would be a French vassal also - fatal.

But yes, we all love the French now, and they us. Our love, though, like all love, is founded on fond illusion. We still think they're sexy, and they still imagine we're Leslie Howard.

Yes you should be guilty for doing this..Hope you don't do this in future !! thanks

Apology Letters

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007