Lord Ashcroft’s book about Carrie ?

BlueBelle

Well if their childhood was that terrible not sure how his brothers and sister all seem pretty ok

His sister Rachel wrote about the children travelling, unaccompanied, between France and England to visit their separated parents. She said the neglect they lived with would have led to social work involvement had they lived in a Council estate.
Their mother suffered m.h.problems. Stanley Johnson broke her nose ‘accidentally’ on one occasion.
Boarding school at primary school age.

And numerous affairs. Stanley Johnson is as good at manipulating his image as his son is.

Numerous young women employed as nannies forced to work naked by Stanley.
This was in France. He claimed that it was because they didn’t have a washing machine

The oaf is responsible for his own behaviour, not his parents or current wife.

Nor his staff and civil servants.

I think his parents did a lot to shape him into what he is. And whilst he is responsible for setting the culture at No 10, his staff presumably have minds of their own. Some of those who departed probably know they will be charged by the Met and have jumped before they were pushed. None of this excuses the laissez faire attitude to leadership though.

Iam64

BlueBelle

Well if their childhood was that terrible not sure how his brothers and sister all seem pretty ok

His sister Rachel wrote about the children travelling, unaccompanied, between France and England to visit their separated parents. She said the neglect they lived with would have led to social work involvement had they lived in a Council estate.
Their mother suffered m.h.problems. Stanley Johnson broke her nose ‘accidentally’ on one occasion.
Boarding school at primary school age.

My DH travelled unaccompanied to and from boarding school (no siblings with him) from primary school age.
My friends children and now grandchild travelled from various overseas locations, unaccompanied, to and from different boarding schools.

They weren't considered neglected and have grown up to be perfectly normal, well-functioning adults.

Perhaps because his father was, how shall we put it? odd?

Baggs

Callistemon21

Baggs

To knock her down at the very start smacks of some underlying resentment on the part of the author. Maybe waiting until Boris went would have been more meaningful? Or is it designed to be an indulgent "told you so" type book?

Read it and then, and only then, you'll know.

He's got form.

He may well have, but one should still read a book, any book, before making judgments about it, don't you think? Otherwise it's just like silly university student tantrum tactics when their "safe spaces' are violated by ideas they don't find comfortable.

"fascinating portrait of a woman who is still under the age of thirty-five." That quote is from the review I posted earlier. It sounds rather intriguing than otherwise to me, as if Carrie really is someone it's worth getting to know more about. It certainly doesn't sound like a knocking down yet.

No thank you.

We (or rather DH) came across Ashcroft many years ago.
I would not contribute a penny to his wealth.

You don't need to read the book to form a judgement. There were articles (one written by the author) and extracts galore in the DM yesterday which give a clear view of the tone and content of the book.

Stand out moments were Ashcroft describing how Carrie deliberately broke a leg in order to get a better hotel room at a conference and Johnson begging aides to make his life better as he was made miserable by his wife at home.

I was also astounded to read that when Carrie takes a taxi No.10 aides bribe the taxi driver to go a meandering, convoluted route to keep her out of the way longer. This seems very cruel to a woman who was one of taxi driving John Worboys intended victims.

Stand out moments were Ashcroft describing how Carrie deliberately broke a leg in order to get a better hotel room at a conference

Really?
When I broke an ankle I spent a long time in A&E, which was normal.

I'd take anything Ashcroft says with a huge spoonful of Maldons.

A very rich man, keeping his name in the media by ridiculing a woman?

GrannyGravy13

A very rich man, keeping his name in the media by ridiculing a woman?

No, just veangeful (and rich of course), GrannyGravey

As I said earlier, Carrie has obviously annoyed him and he always gets his own back.

I was also astounded to read that when Carrie takes a taxiNo.10aides bribe the taxi driver to go a meandering, convoluted route to keep her out of the way longer.
Really? That sounds ridiculous. She was born, raised, schooled, worked in the capital. We Londoners know when taxi drivers are giving us the runaround. I'm sure she doesn't just sit there and enjoy the scenic route without questioning it.

Callistemon21 I agree

Callistemon21

^Stand out moments were Ashcroft describing how Carrie deliberately broke a leg in order to get a better hotel room at a conference^

Really?
When I broke an ankle I spent a long time in A&E, which was normal.

I'd take anything Ashcroft says with a huge spoonful of Maldons.

What is Maldons?

I don't think the "saintly" Marina was very saintly. She did exactly the same to Boris's first wife that Carrie did to her. What Carrie sees in Boris baffles me, but I might read the book to know more about what makes her tick.

I looked it up. Oh, that. Posh salt. Nuff said.

grannyrebel7

I don't think the "saintly" Marina was very saintly. She did exactly the same to Boris's first wife that Carrie did to her. What Carrie sees in Boris baffles me, but I might read the book to know more about what makes her tick.

Me too, rebel. I think what shocks me the most about gransnet at the moment is the sheer ignorant (and I mean ignorant) judgmentalism. Read the damn book and then judge it.

And if you don't want to read the damn book, fine, but shut up about it because you are ignorant of it.

Ignorant would mean lacking of knowledge or awareness though Baggs and as the author has put a lot of the content of the book out there nobody who has read the articles in the papers over the last few days is ignorant of its content.

Baggs

I looked it up. Oh, that. Posh salt. Nuff said.

We buy Cornish sea salt, actually!

Baggs

And if you don't want to read the damn book, fine, but shut up about it because you are ignorant of it.

I'm ignorant of the book (and wish to remain so) but I'm not ignorant about Ashcroft.

Coastpath

Ignorant would mean lacking of knowledge or awareness though Baggs and as the author has put a lot of the content of the book out there nobody who has read the articles in the papers over the last few days is ignorant of its content.

I would say nobody who has read what’s in the press about the book is ignorant of what the press thinks about it, which is a slightly slant ?

*slightly different slant

That's a good point Baggs.

One of the Mail's articles was actually written by Ashcroft on the subject of his own book. It was possible to get a hint of the tone and content and also his process and view of the book and its subject, but not possible to judge the book in the same way as if you'd read it, so you are right.