I'm disappointed that this book does not describe in more depth Charles' role as a MODERN king-to-be. Britain was once one of the greatest empires the world had ever seen; in fact, most of its colonies have only been relinquished post-World War II. Yet, there is no sense of Charles as a truly modern man of the late 20th Century. He could be much more than a mere figurehead for England, and yet he has chosen to do no more than his mother does in terms of being a compass for England's winds of change. Charles seems to have absolutely no political, social or economic advisers surrounding him. Could this be because he is, as so many accounts have suggested over the years, a rather dim bulb? After all, the Windsors have never been known for being bright. Tellingly, Charles NEVER has any people of color as friends, or in his entourage. No one from Hong Kong or China or India or Kenya or Nigeria or Barbados or a couple dozen other former colonies of color is ever seen anywhere near the Prince, whether as a friend, confidant, or consultant. And yet there are hundreds of thousands of well-educated men and women of color from the former colonies, who've been educated at Oxbridge (Oxford and/or Cambridge) or the London School of Economics or Britain's other elite learning institutions, who are of an age with the Prince and could certainly fit into the Prince's circle. What an example he could set for an England still going through the pains of post-colonialism! But no. The King-to-be is as stuffy, conventional, and ultimately, as out of touch with the new England as his mother and father. This is the side of the Prince that warrants full examination . . . . . .

respect for his counrty's monarchy than he does.

I enjoyed reading parts of this biography, however, it does not put His Royal Highness in a good light. That is truely a shame since the PoW has no real peers. How can Mr. Holden judge Prince Charles so harshly, when the closest peer he has is HRH Prince Felipe Of Spain or some other heir to a throne? Besides that, he is heir to the throne by divine right, not public opinion. He should be shown respect at all times. On the other hand, I was LOL at some parts of it because it seems that the PoW does not have any common sense.

The chapter(s) on Charles' love for achitecture is downright BORING! And Poundbury? What was that? That chapter went over my head.

One more thing, does the author know how to write about BOTH sides of the story?

Although some may find fault with the author for criticizing Charles more than Diana, frankly Charles is more 'accident prone' so it's beyond me how any even-handed author could write anything about the Charles/Diana events without sounding too pro-Diana.

Though well intentioned at heart, Charles is a product of his breeding--not just the man warped by being surrounded by sycophants but a man who has inherited the Hanover/Windsor genetic faults. First among these is the fact that Charles, like his great-grandfather George V, is not too bright. Unlike George V, he wants to be seen as bright and this is what leads him into trouble. Charles's lack of focus and desire to meddle in politics is a fault he shares with Edward VIII--along with an overly long, dissolute bachelorhood and a penchant for choosing the wrong woman.

Diana has her faults too, but to paraphrase Jane Austen's comment about George IV, "She was bad, but she would not have become as bad as she was if he had not been infinitely worse."

All the author had to do was write from record and let the actions of the man damn him. This is what he did. Charles is his own worst enemy.

Charles will be king in due time, but for the sake of the monarchy, may Elizabeth II live a long time, may Charles gain a better sense of what a British monarch should do before he becomes king and may his reign be a short one.

Bruno Richard Hauptmann was the kidnapper and murderer of Charles Lindbergh, Jr. No speculative or fictionalized evidence by Anthony Scaduto or anyone else can change that unalterable fact.

I would give this book zero stars except that Amazon won't let me. What a waste of paper.

this was a good book. i'd like to get that out before hand. i think that in real life, the actual event was more mysterious and intriging. while i'm not rating a movie, i think that an event that captured an entire nation's attention and sombody accused of killing "the eaglet" that everybody hated, could have used a better book. i would suggest reading about the "Lindbergh Kidnapping" before you read this book, so you don't get lost.