Scan barcode
wollstonecrafty's review against another edition
while I assume all biographers indicate this nowadays, I do respect lucasta miller for framing [b:L.E.L.: The Lost Life and Scandalous Death of Letitia Elizabeth Landon, the Celebrated "female Byron"|40594383|L.E.L. The Lost Life and Scandalous Death of Letitia Elizabeth Landon, the Celebrated "female Byron"|Lucasta Miller|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1549400569l/40594383._SX50_.jpg|63041660] primarily around the issue of biographical and generic ambiguity. between L.E.L. the writer and Letitia the person, the Romantic and Victorian literary periods, irony and sincerity, miller imbues all with virtual scare quotes. since I've worked on m. shelley's work during this waning period of the Young Romantics (tm tm tm taylor swift), it was fascinating to see the hallmarks of that period (wild print culture, annuals, cynicism/reactionary instincts) shape L.E.L.'s career as well. my one bone: by reading and delineating this period (20s/30s) as ambiguous/shifting/messy, she did have to almost universally claim that victorian bourgeois repression culture was dominant, which i'm sure many academics/victorianists would dispute. I think it was smart to keep it mostly focused on victorian literary culture, about which it's much more believable to make quasi universal statements.
as (essentially) pop history and a book ostensibly about one figure, I read carefully and somewhat suspiciously as to how miller does close reading, but found her analysis cogent. reviewers who think she's "reading into it too much," I ask: why are you reading this? do I really have to make the argument that close reading requires and rewards effort? instead i'd recommend you direct criticism at the few times she makes claims (not about the texts) that aren't as sound i.e. one notable passage when she claims v. woolf "must have known" about L.E.L's complicated truth. overall for popular history/biography, it was at once eminently readable but also stacked with enough literary analysis for me to trust it.
starting a narrative with a person's death is cliche by now, but because of it i did move through the book with a bittersweet affective sense of predestination. it's also sad to proudly emblazon your heroine as the "female byron" and then show how permanently damaging that very reputation was for her (while real byron just got to fuck off and die in greece).
as (essentially) pop history and a book ostensibly about one figure, I read carefully and somewhat suspiciously as to how miller does close reading, but found her analysis cogent. reviewers who think she's "reading into it too much," I ask: why are you reading this? do I really have to make the argument that close reading requires and rewards effort? instead i'd recommend you direct criticism at the few times she makes claims (not about the texts) that aren't as sound i.e. one notable passage when she claims v. woolf "must have known" about L.E.L's complicated truth. overall for popular history/biography, it was at once eminently readable but also stacked with enough literary analysis for me to trust it.
starting a narrative with a person's death is cliche by now, but because of it i did move through the book with a bittersweet affective sense of predestination. it's also sad to proudly emblazon your heroine as the "female byron" and then show how permanently damaging that very reputation was for her (while real byron just got to fuck off and die in greece).
erboe501's review against another edition
4.0
It was refreshing to read a biography and poetry analysis, since I've mostly read fiction or personal essays since grad school.
Following Miller's commentary was enjoyable and rewarding, although I believe we should always be careful when reading literary works autobiographically. Miller makes a strong argument for how LEL used her poetic voice to express a façade of her identity. But sometimes Miller extrapolated about Letitia's biographical facts based on the poetry.
In many ways Letitia's life was frustrating to read about, because she was sidelined and undermined so often because of her gender. Her relationship with her publisher and lover Jerden was maddening. And the double standards for liberated women versus men, while nothing new to read about, still left me indignant. I wasn't very familiar with the literary world of the 1820s and 30s, so I also enjoyed filling in that gap in my British Lit knowledge.
Not too heavily academic. And very dramatic in some places because Letitia's life was rather scandalous.
Following Miller's commentary was enjoyable and rewarding, although I believe we should always be careful when reading literary works autobiographically. Miller makes a strong argument for how LEL used her poetic voice to express a façade of her identity. But sometimes Miller extrapolated about Letitia's biographical facts based on the poetry.
In many ways Letitia's life was frustrating to read about, because she was sidelined and undermined so often because of her gender. Her relationship with her publisher and lover Jerden was maddening. And the double standards for liberated women versus men, while nothing new to read about, still left me indignant. I wasn't very familiar with the literary world of the 1820s and 30s, so I also enjoyed filling in that gap in my British Lit knowledge.
Not too heavily academic. And very dramatic in some places because Letitia's life was rather scandalous.
chluless's review against another edition
4.0
A well-researched, comprehensive and entertaining read.
However, as other reviewers have noted, there are times when analysis is obscured by assumptions about the emotional state of individuals from history.
This becomes a bigger problem when applied to readings of L.E.L’s poetry as if her work has been proven beyond doubt to reflect the specific moments Miller relates from Leticia Landon’s life.
Miller often reiterates the division between Leticia the person and L.E.L the poet, while acknowledging the purpose and consequences of her ambiguity. So these moments of unsubstantiated blurring in Miller’s biography read all the more strangely because of the earlier caution and distinctions.
My only other complaint is personal - a throwaway line about the ‘loathsome Rosamond’ Vincy from Middlemarch - but I won’t hold it against the author of an otherwise admirable book.
In fact, I loved this read so much that I’ve been persuaded to seek out Lucasta Miller’s other books.
Four stars.
However, as other reviewers have noted, there are times when analysis is obscured by assumptions about the emotional state of individuals from history.
This becomes a bigger problem when applied to readings of L.E.L’s poetry as if her work has been proven beyond doubt to reflect the specific moments Miller relates from Leticia Landon’s life.
Miller often reiterates the division between Leticia the person and L.E.L the poet, while acknowledging the purpose and consequences of her ambiguity. So these moments of unsubstantiated blurring in Miller’s biography read all the more strangely because of the earlier caution and distinctions.
My only other complaint is personal - a throwaway line about the ‘loathsome Rosamond’ Vincy from Middlemarch - but I won’t hold it against the author of an otherwise admirable book.
In fact, I loved this read so much that I’ve been persuaded to seek out Lucasta Miller’s other books.
Four stars.
readingoverbreathing's review against another edition
4.0
I picked this book up several months ago in a charity shop where, for whatever reason, they had several brand new copies of it for a fraction of its trade price. For such a good deal, and such an intriguing premise, I simply couldn't resist — I do love a good tell-all literary biography.
I myself had never heard of L.E.L. but I was very much ready to learn, and Lucasta Miller had plenty of research to share. Seriously, her efforts here were exhaustive — where the trail often ran cold with L.E.L., she would often find some other figure or trivia to fill in the gaps. Thus, you get a very comprehensive picture of the London literary scenes from the 1820s through to the early Victorians. Miller often indulged in asides connecting the literary dots between famous people; somehow during this time, almost everyone in London was only a few degrees from Dickens. I found this a fun part of the reading experience, particularly if your knowledge of nineteenth-century English literature is up to speed, but there were times where it seemed to get in the way of her analysis, particularly in the last chapter when she seemed to only want to talk about Charlotte Brontë.
One thing that really bothered me about Miller's analysis was that she was usually all too keen to make assumptions and draw conclusions about the emotional states and motivations of those whose lives she analyzes. If my English degree has taught me anything, it's that we don't try to read an author too much into their text, but Miller did that almost constantly here, and not just with L.E.L.
Overall, though, I really enjoyed this. It was a book, somehow seemingly rare these days, that made me excited to sit down with it to find out just where the story was going to go next. Miller really structures this beautifully — she gives away the ending from the very first page, but leaves the reader constantly guessing as to what exactly got Letitia Landon to that point. Like I said before, this book is well-researched but doesn't skimp on the scandal and thus the fun; it's a perfect pick-me-up for an English literature scholar like myself, something that draws on your knowledge and appreciation for the time period but without bearing down academically.
jessthanthree's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
slow-paced
3.5
Content Warnings
Moderate: Infidelity and Misogyny
_brad_white_'s review against another edition
3.0
In brief:
Lucasta Miller is a celebrated literary analyst whose knowledge and research of the Brontë’s is unmatched, even being included as part of the introduction for the Penguin Classics edition of Wuthering Heights.
But she should stick to her subject.
L.E.L was readable. It did make me want to read the literary works of Letitia Landon (which are sparse) but I wanted to read her works more than Miller’s. Miller’s account of the scandalous life of L.E.L is more informative of the time period than of Letitia herself. If interested in the Romantic period, particularly the transition between glamorous and celebrity Romantic literature to the strict and Christian Victorian literature, it is a must-read. But if at all interested in L.E.L herself there are probably more interesting critics elsewhere. Miller scandalises her life far too much. Calling her the ‘female byron’ is likely for publicity purposes and she tries to relate Letitia to famous authors such as Jane Austen and Percy Shelley through relatives of her friend’s dog. (hyperbolically stated in this review but it carries the same point) L.E.L is too dramatised, targeted at the mass audience rather than literary critics and analysts unlike her book on the Brontës.
Would I recommend it? Probably if you’re interested in Romantic literature. However be prepared for lots of dramatisation and unnecessary linking to random authors of the period who were irrelevant to the life of Letitia Landon.
Lucasta Miller is a celebrated literary analyst whose knowledge and research of the Brontë’s is unmatched, even being included as part of the introduction for the Penguin Classics edition of Wuthering Heights.
But she should stick to her subject.
L.E.L was readable. It did make me want to read the literary works of Letitia Landon (which are sparse) but I wanted to read her works more than Miller’s. Miller’s account of the scandalous life of L.E.L is more informative of the time period than of Letitia herself. If interested in the Romantic period, particularly the transition between glamorous and celebrity Romantic literature to the strict and Christian Victorian literature, it is a must-read. But if at all interested in L.E.L herself there are probably more interesting critics elsewhere. Miller scandalises her life far too much. Calling her the ‘female byron’ is likely for publicity purposes and she tries to relate Letitia to famous authors such as Jane Austen and Percy Shelley through relatives of her friend’s dog. (hyperbolically stated in this review but it carries the same point) L.E.L is too dramatised, targeted at the mass audience rather than literary critics and analysts unlike her book on the Brontës.
Would I recommend it? Probably if you’re interested in Romantic literature. However be prepared for lots of dramatisation and unnecessary linking to random authors of the period who were irrelevant to the life of Letitia Landon.
sophronisba's review against another edition
5.0
If you, like I, have a taste for books about scandalous women and the Victorian literati, this will be just your thing.
More...