» » The Duchess of Kent

Free eBook The Duchess of Kent download

by Mary Riddell

Free eBook The Duchess of Kent download ISBN: 0330367099
Author: Mary Riddell
Publisher: Pan Books (June 9, 2000)
Language: English
Pages: 480
Category: Biography and Memoir
Subcategory: Leaders and Notable People
Size MP3: 1872 mb
Size FLAC: 1886 mb
Rating: 4.8
Format: mbr lrf rtf lrf


Katharine, Duchess of Kent, GCVO (born Katharine Lucy Mary Worsley; 22 February 1933) is a member of the British royal family

Katharine, Duchess of Kent, GCVO (born Katharine Lucy Mary Worsley; 22 February 1933) is a member of the British royal family. Her husband, Prince Edward, Duke of Kent, is a first cousin of Queen Elizabeth II. The Duchess of Kent gained attention for her conversion to Catholicism in 1994; she was the first member of the royal family to convert publicly since the passing of the Act of Settlement 1701

Discover new books on Goodreads. See if your friends have read any of Mary Riddell's books.

Discover new books on Goodreads. Mary Riddell’s Followers. None yet. Mary Riddell. Mary Riddell’s books. The Duchess of Kent: The Troubled Life of Katharine Worsley.

Mary Riddell, in this sympathetic yet analytical book, addresses the possible affect on the young Katherine Worsley of. .I was interested in reading the life story of The Duchess of Kent because I am an .

Mary Riddell, in this sympathetic yet analytical book, addresses the possible affect on the young Katherine Worsley of parents who may have steered her too hard towards a royal marriage when their daugther had clearly been strongly attached elsewhere. Katherine Worsley's marriage in 1961 to the Duke of Kent plunged her into a life for which she was ill-prepared. sufferer and wanted to see how it had affected her and how the diagnosis then changed to coeliac disease. Besides that, I'd heard she'd had an unhappy marriage so I thought it would be interesting reading.

uk's Mary Riddell Page and shop for all Mary Riddell books. Check out pictures, bibliography, and biography of Mary Riddell. 5 (10 used & new offers). 4 (8 used & new offers).

The young Duchess of Kent immediately threw herself into her Royal duties. On a visit to India in the 1990s, she spoke to Mary Riddell for a magazine article, she later wrote a biography on the Duchess. The Worsley family were a popular and hard-working family in Yorkshire. I just love people, I value them she said, What’s the world about? Not possessions but people caring for one another.

Published June 9, 2000 by Pan Books.

1 2 3 4 5. Want to Read. Are you sure you want to remove The Duchess of Kent from your list? The Duchess of Kent. Published June 9, 2000 by Pan Books. Biography, Marriage, Nobility. Edward Duke of Kent (1935-), Katharine Duchess of Kent (1933-).

marlborough grammar school. Class of 2013 · Marlborough, Wiltshire. University of Nottingham. Class of 1968 · Nottingham, United Kingdom. University of Exeter.

Katharine, Duchess of Kent, GCVO (Katharine Lucy Mary; née Worsley; born 22 February 1933), is a member of the British Royal Family. The Duchess of Kent gained attention for her conversion to Catholicism in 1994, the first member of the Royal Family to convert publicly since the passing of the Act of Settlement 1701. The Duchess of Kent is strongly associated with the world of music, and has performed as a member of several choirs. YouTube Encyclopedic.

Katherine Worsley's marriage in 1961 to the Duke of Kent plunged her into a life for which she was ill prepared. She has not flinched from public duty, but has had ME, and in 1992 converted to the Roman Catholic church. This is a full biography.
User reviews
Haralem
This was a somewhat interesting book - like many I do like to read about the Royal family - although a great deal of what has been written needs to be taken with a grain of salt & be mindful of 'hidden agendas' Clearly the Duchess of Kent is a deeply caring, compassionate person who has used to power and prestige of her title to do much good to the un and underserved populations. One gets the sense that this came from a deeply, sincere wish to improve things for people who have had more than their share of pain and hardship. She was very unlike many celebrities who use these populations simply for good 'pr' or a sympathetic photo shot.

A few things did stand out though; it appears there could well have been issues with undiagnosed depression going back to her childhood. Its important to remember that far more is known about depression now than forty years ago. Just as with Diana-when she was dealing with (& still hiding) her eating disorders there was relatively little know about it and less knowledge on how to treat it. For decades women were often brought up to 'marry well' - meaning to marry into a situation where financially, socially you would be secure. It may not have been as prevalent in the 50's in this country as it was in England - but it would be a mistake to think it didn't exist . And - coming as she did from a prestigious, well off -- marrying into the Royal family was considered the 'gold' standard -especially --at that time. In the late 50s, early 60's The Queen and royal family was at the height of popularity and it was long before the scandals, divorces emerged. Many, many mother in the 40's and 50' believed that and hoped their daughter's would 'marry well' -so if you look at the world as it was then - she did what was expected & did it well. There isn't too much about the early years of the marriage how they were when the children young. It left me with the impression that she went from engaged to complete misery with little in between. There is no indication of either of them had affairs -but given their visibility if they did it would have been reported.

I did not completely agree with the perception that the royal family was 'cold'. I don't think being the Queen, or any prominent member of the Royal family is easy. While we see all the privilege -we don't see the heavy price that is paid for being under that kind of intensive scrutiny 24/7 for a life time. Queen Elizabeth did not apply for this job - she did not have an option. Though many say if her Uncle, King Edward VIII had not abdicated -
she would not have become Queen - that would only be true if he had children (which he didn't.). So - chances are good she would have inherited the crown anyway. Regardless of those who believe that they should do away with the Royal family or your a dedicated royalist - the Queen has been a consummate professional on the world stage for over 60 years. By the time the Duchess of Kent married, the Queen had clearly set the standards for what was expected on how a member of this family should conduct themselves. The Duchess made every effort to successfully do her job, fulfill her role with diligently and with dignity. But when her symptoms of depression really started to surface -its highly unlikely anyone in the family (her's or anyone else's) had any idea what she was talking about People simply had no point of reference of what manic depression, drug addiction, alcohol and substance meant. My mother was diagnosed as bi-polor and manic depressive -- but through out the 60's and 70s - the view was she was always 'in a bad mood' & she drank too much. There was no tangible reason for her 'bad moods' - she had a lovely home, 3 healthy children a good and supportive husband by any measuring stick -but no one -not even the doctors knew what to do with her. The overall tone in a post WWII world -whatever is wrong - you just pick yourself up and move on. This mindset was especially prevalent in Northern Europe after WWII - and in particular in England. The Royal family was in fear of being killed, captured or destroyed in WWI as they watched dozens of royal families destroyed from the assassination of the Tsar & family, many were killed or had to escape their country with the clothes on their back. Then in 1937 the abdication followed -- which was simply incomprehensible to England and the world at the time. WWII descended and when it was over - England was no longer a major world power. All of this shaped what the Royal Family is today - its an institution that has survived for 1,000 years. All of these world events and the family history shaped the institution the Duchess of Kent married into and the author gives very very little attention to this.

The book seemed to be unbalanced in that there was little to no information on the Duke of Kent - other than he did not understand or relate well to his wife. There little about his interests, what work he has been involved in, his reaction to the abortion and the child that was still born. Until Princess Margaret and her husband separated obviously divorce was not considered an option. But again - divorce in the 50s and 60s was not very prevalent -either in this country or England. I have no doubt this woman has suffered a great deal but the authors tone was indeed one of self pity-many people endure painful marriages under far, far worse circumstances and the Duchess certainly had resources and options most of us couldn't imagine. It also appeared very one sided - there are two people in a marriage and it is rare that only one person is completely at fault. Reference to Princess Diana were timely and appropriate - while perhaps similar on the surface they were two very different stories. Diana was -in hindsight - a child when she married and virtually no understanding of what marriage - and marriage to the Prince of Wales no less-- truly meant. Its also clear she had mental health issues which were undiagnosed and may have had roots in her childhood but not understood by her or anyone -until much damage was done. The chapters on her conversion to the Catholic Church were interesting -to a point -- but anytime a writer uses the phrasing ' no doubt she couldn't help but think...' - the writer is imposing his/her perspective on the issue -not necessarily what the subject of the book actually said, thought or felt. This is done consistently throughout the book - never a good indicator for a biographer.

It is an very interesting story, but the quality of writing is poor, unbalanced and repetitive.
Deeroman
Most people except the most devoted royalists will not know who the Duchess of Kent is, unless they have been watching Wimbledon tennis for the last forty-odd years. Diana wasn't the only member of the Royal Family who hugged in public and cared for others, nor was she the only English aristocrat with impressive bloodlines to marry into the House of Windsor. Kate Worsley, the long-suffering wife of the Queen's cousin the Duke of Kent, was at least as well born as Diana, and has done incredible charity work as well. This lady does not just hand out Wimbledon trophies; she walks the walk and talks the talk. After Diana's death, she was the first member of the Royal Family to lay flowers at Kensington Palace after Diana died (two days before Diana's mother came and five days before William and Harry came with Prince Charles), and she was the one who represented the Queen at the funeral for Mother Teresa in India.

Like Diana, Katherine Worsley was a lovely, blonde beauty from the shires who had an ordinary job before she married her prince. And just like Diana, she had doubts before her marriage about her future happiness. Her marriage has also been a failure, but unlike the powerful, more charismatic Diana, Kate has suffered in silence and paid an enormous price for her solitude and dignified loyalty to the Queen. She has remained unhappily married to the Duke, but they lead separate lives. He has probably had more than a few lady friends, but she has remained chaste and carried on. Something Diana the Queen of the Jet-Set would never have done.

The author is clearly not a Monarchist. Mary Riddell paints a portrait of the Queen and most senior members of the Royal Family as utterly devoid of normal human feelings. She also repeats the well-worn myth that Diana was better born than Charles and the Queen (not possible, given that Prince Philip's bloodlines are older than anyone's in the British aristocracy), therefore since Katherine Worsley shares bloodlines with Diana, the Duchess must be as well. Both women descend from the family of Oliver Cromwell, but while Diana was a collateral descendent, Kate is a direct descendent; yet this hardly justifies condemnation of the Royal Family. Cromwell executed Diana's ancestor King Charles I, so this hardly gives any of his descendants bragging rights. Riddell writes that neither the Princess nor the Duchess were "trailer trash" before they married into the Royal Family, but they might just as well have been, since in her view they were treated far worse. It is for this reason and many other radical reasons that I cannot give the book five stars, but I do sympathize with the Duchess more than I ever did with Diana, who wreaked havoc and openly rebelled against the Monarchy. The bitter Duchess of Kent has had an equally unforgivable life she has gracefully chosen to make bearable by bringing happiness and dignity to her fellow human beings.
skyjettttt
i always like to read about the royals and this book did not disappoint. it was a wonderful story and i did so enjoy it very much.
RED
The book arrived in perfect condition. It's an interesting story. I always wondered why she doesn't appear at Wimbledon any more.
Malakelv
So easy to find and buy a book you really want without having to leave your desk! Thanks again Amazon.