Tuesday 17 July 2012

Author Stephen Covey, dead at 79





SALT LAKE CITY — Considered a pioneer in the self-help genre aimed at helping readers become more productive in their lives, author Stephen R. Covey had an enormous impact on both the corporate world and the personal lives of millions.
 
The well-known motivational speaker and author of the best-selling “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People,” which sold more than 20 million copies in 38 languages, died Monday at a hospital in Idaho Falls, Idaho, due to complications from a bicycle accident in April, according to his family.








“In his final hours, he was surrounded by his loving wife and each one of his children and their spouses, just as he always wanted,” the family said in a statement. He was 79.
Covey was hospitalized in April after being knocked unconscious in the bike crash on a steep road in the foothills of Provo, Utah, about 45 miles south of Salt Lake City.
 
“This was one of the first books in recent times that was really directed at prioritizing the way you worked, so you could be more effective as an individual” said Adrian Zackheim, president and publisher of Portfolio, a business imprint at Penguin Group (USA). “It wasn’t about how to be a manager or how or to run a company. It was about how to conduct yourself.
 
“Covey’s influence was very pervasive,” added Zackheim, a rival publisher. “It was a book that applied to everybody. You would hear about whole organizations where everybody in the company was expected to read the book.”
Bookseller Barnes & Noble Inc. called Covey “an influence in both the business and self-help genres as he imparted a system and approach to life that worked in business and personal situations.”
 
In “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People,” Covey writes about the need to be proactive, to “begin with the end in mind,” habit No. 2, and “to seek first to understand, then be understood,” habit No. 5.
“Remember, to learn and not to do is really not to learn. To know and not to do is really not to know,” Covey wrote in the foreword.
 
“We are deeply saddened by the passing of Stephen R. Covey. His seminal work, “The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People,” will forever be one of the most influential books in the field of self-improvement,” Carolyn K. Reidy, president and CEO of Simon & Schuster, Inc., which published his book, said in a statement.
Covey also was the author of several other best sellers, including “First Things First,” ‘’Principle-Centered Leadership,” ‘’The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Families,” and “The 8th Habit: From Effectiveness to Greatness.”
 
Covey was the co-founder of Utah-based professional services company FranklinCovey. He lived with his wife in Provo, and has nine children and 52 grandchildren.
At the time of his bicycle accident, his publicist, Debra Lund, said doctors had not found any signs of long-term damage to his head.
 
“He just lost control on his bike and crashed,” Lund said. “He was wearing a helmet, which is good news.”
Catherine Sagers, Covey’s daughter, told The Salt Lake Tribune in April that her father had suffered some bleeding on his brain after the accident.
 
A telephone message left for Sagers on Monday wasn’t returned.
Sean Covey said his father was at a family gathering in Montana when his health began to deteriorate and he was rushed to the closest hospital.
 
“Our family, all nine kids and our spouses and my mom, were able to gather together again to be with him for the last few hours of his life, which is what he always wanted,” Sean Covey said in an email to The Tribune.
___
Rindels reported from Las Vegas. Associated Press writer Hillel Italie contributed to this report from New York.
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

COLUMN: A touch of humour

By Intizar Husain |  |


MAULANA Muhammad Husain Azad and Deputy Nazir Ahmad are two distinguished names in the early generation of Urdu prose writers. From among those following these giants, Mirza Farhatullah Baig stands distinguished because of his cultured prose style. It is gratifying to see that Oxford University Press has chosen to publish him under its
series “Jadid Urdu Classics”.

Compiled by Ajmal Kamal, the five volumes are from the articles he himself had compiled and published during his stay in Hyderabad State. Those collections, published long before Partition, were not available in Pakistan till now. Kamal has written the foreword and has provided the necessary information about the author.

Farhatullah Baig had the opportunity to learn Arabic from Deputy Nazir Ahmad. If now Baig is known as a great prose writer with a distinct style of his own, we may safely assume that the influence of the mentor too has played a part in this
respect. His character sketch of Nazir Ahmad clearly shows us how near and dear he was to his teacher.

In fact, it was after the publication of this sketch that he was recognised as a writer in the true sense. As he himself confesses, he wanted to pay homage to his mentor and benefactor yet was hesitant to write about him as he, while talking about his virtues, could not ignore his weak points. It was under the pressure of Maulvi Abdul Haq that he gathered the courage to write about Deputy Nazir Ahmad honestly. This character sketch was published in Anjuman’s journal Urdu, and without a pseudonym. And with this publication a writer was born, winning admirers far and wide, foremost among them Sir Ross Masood and Sir Akbar Hyderi. Encouraged by the recognition this piece bought, Baig wrote a few more character sketches and soon came to be known as the leading sketch writer of his times.

Soon after, two articles — Bahadur Shah Aur Phool Wallon Ki Sair and 1261 Hijri Main Delhi Ka Aik Mushaira — won him accolades for depicting Delhi as it existed in the years before 1857. What a lively description of the great city we get to read.

Baig brings to life its poets, its seasonal festivities, its religious rituals and its sophisticated manners. The description of the city transforms into a portrayal of a culture. Who could have foreseen that this resplendent culture would soon disintegrate with the fall of the city and the end of the Mughals. As depicted by Baig, Delhi’s appears to be a secular culture, giving due respect to the religious traditions of both the Hindus and the Muslims, ruled by a king respectful to different religious sensibilities.

Baig had evolved for himself a lively way of writing in which he always appears to be in a pleasant mood. He was endowed with a sense of humour which did not allow him to be dull in his expression and he came to be known as a humourist. In this respect, too, Baig stands distinguished because of the cultured way in which he expresses himself. Azmatullah Khan had defined his humour as light humour which does not provoke laughter, yet makes us smile and feel elated.

Even when Baig is engaged in critical appraisal of poetry, or involved in some kind of research, he somehow maintains this light mood. His research on Khwaja Aman, who is known as the translator of Bostan-i-Khiyal, offers such an example.

Baig was a prolific writer and wrote on a variety of subjects. The five volumes under discussion may be taken as the best selections from his vast store of writings.

Complete urdu books collection at www.diversedistribution.com

Barack Obama: the Making of the Man by David Maraniss – Review

BY ALEC MACGILLIS -
Obama plays basketball. Photo: Getty Images
Obama plays basketball. Photo: Getty Images
 
Barack Obama: the Making of the Man 
David Maraniss

As closely scrutinised as the rise of Barack Hussein Obama has been, there has always been one chapter in his life around which mystery has hung: his late teens and early twenties, which he entered as a fairly carefree lad who dreamed of basketball stardom and had a yen for good marijuana and exited as a dead-serious young man with an ascetic inclination and a churning political and racial consciousness propelling him into the public sphere. Obama’s memoir, Dreams From My Father, published when he was 34, skips past this period, which encompassed two years at Occidental College in Los Angeles, two years at Columbia University and two years of work in New York, prior to his pivotal decision, at 24, to become a community organiser in Chicago.

That gap is now filled for us, thanks to David Maraniss’s biography of Obama up to the age of 27, when he left Chicago for Harvard Law School. This carefully reported book offers revelations extending far into Obama’s disparate family past but its value lies above all in helping us to understand how it was that a sense of destiny awoke in a young man who, just a few years earlier, was being chided by his mother for suggesting that he might stay in Hawaii after high school: “Damn it, Bar, you can’t just sit around like some good-time Charlie.” The moniker was apt. Despite the dislocations of his childhood, what Maraniss describes as a “cycle of leaving and being left”, Barry had grown into a likeable and slightly aimless boy, who embodied the Hawaii imperative: “Cool head, main thing.” He showed few outward signs of struggle with his biracial identity, a reflection surely of both Hawaii’s relatively tolerant, multi-hued atmosphere and the acceptance of his grandparents, who’d long since overcome the shock of their teenaged daughter’s seduction by an older Kenyan man.

Maraniss, author of a 1995 biography of Bill Clinton, takes us forward as good-time Barry transforms into on-the-move Barack. We see him after a big high school basketball game when, despite being a second stringer, he finagles his way into the newspaper account with some finely honed quotes for the reporter. We see him at Occidental, where he gives his first political speech – an impromptu but well- received anti-apartheid riff – and discovers a worldly, intellectual bent in wide-ranging, substance-fuelled bull sessions with a bunch of classmates that includes several close Pakistani friends. We see him at Columbia, where, as he put it in an interview with Maraniss, he plunged “deep inside my own head . . . in a way that in retrospect I don’t think was real healthy”. Or, as Maraniss summarises it: “[He] conduct[ed] an intense debate with himself over his past, present and future, an internal struggle that he shared with only a few close friends, including his girlfriends Alex and Genevieve . . .”

The girlfriends! Obama had alluded vaguely in his memoir to a few white women he had dated prior to meeting Michelle Robinson; Maraniss not only fills in the picture for two of them, he has also got hold of their letters and journals. There are chuckles to be had at Obama’s pretentious letters to Alex McNear, in which he flits from Eliot to Yeats to Pound: “You seem surprised at Eliot’s irreconcilable ambivalence; don’t you share this ambivalence yourself, Alex?”

There is a more affecting story in the jour­-nals of Genevieve Cook, the hyper-perceptive daughter of an Australian diplomat whom Obama met after college. Cook captured her lover in terms that ring awfully familiar today. In their second month together: “His warmth can be deceptive. Tho’ he speaks sweet words and can be open and trusting, there is also that coolness . . .” A month later: “I feel that you carefully filter everything in your mind and heart – legitimate, admirable, really – a strength, a necessity in terms of some kind of integrity. But there’s something also there of smoothed veneer, of guardedness . . . but I’m still left with this feeling of . . . a bit of a wall – the veil.”

Behind the veil, the transformation was taking another turn. Obama was moving toward a deeper grounding in black American identity, despite having for years made only fitful gestures in this direction. One of his Pakistani friends recalled the switch: “Barack was the most deliberate person I ever met in terms of constructing his own identity and his achievement was really an achievement of identity in the modern world. That was an important period for him, first the shift from not inter­national but American, number one, and then not white, but black.” Obama drifted from Cook, who documented the demise of the relationship in a remarkably prescient journal entry: “That lithe, bubbly, strong black lady is waiting somewhere.”

Where does Maraniss leave us? With even greater appreciation for the tensions at work beneath Obama’s equanimity; also with greater scepticism for Obama the author, as Maraniss reveals just how much Obama had contorted his (admittedly embellished) story in Dreams From My Father to dramatise his search for racial identity. Above all, one is left with a deeper understanding of why Obama, as president, continued to press his conciliatory line until long after it was apparent to all others that his opposition was set on ruining him. As Maraniss describes it, drawing connections, knitting things together, was for Obama no mere campaign trope but a matter of existential salvation. As he wrote to McNear at the age of 22: “Caught without a class, a structure, or tradition to support me, in a sense the choice to take a different path is made for me . . . The only way to assuage my feelings of isolation are to absorb all the traditions [and all the classes]; make them mine, me theirs.” Obama affirmed this in an interview with Maraniss: “The only way my life makes sense is if regardless of culture, race, religion, tribe, there is this commonality, these essential human truths and passions and hope and moral precepts that are universal . . . If that is not the case then it is pretty hard for me to make sense of my life.”

We are now watching as Obama grapples with adapting this mindset to today’s political reality. But thanks to Maraniss, we have a better sense than before of how he came to it in the first place.
Alec MacGillis is a senior editor at the New Republic

Order at www.libertybooks.com

Elusive Enemies- Books About the Pursuit of Al Qaeda

Illustration by Jesse Lenz; Photographs from www.muslm.net, via Associated Press
Khalid Shaikh Mohammed at his capture in 2003, left, and in a photo said to have been taken at Guantánamo in 2009.
By JONATHAN MAHLER
Published: July 6, 2012
More than a decade after 9/11, it seems safe to say, the global war on terror has been both an extraordinary success and a colossal failure.
1- THE HUNT FOR KSM
Inside the Pursuit and Takedown of the Real 9/11 Mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
By Terry McDermott and Josh Meyer
2- HUNTING IN THE SHADOWS
The Pursuit of Al Qa’ida Since 9/11
By Seth G. Jones

First the good news: Since Sept. 11, 2001, the day the war unofficially began, Islamic extremists have killed just a handful of Americans on United States soil, nearly all of them members of the military. Al ­Qaeda is in retreat. Through the use of covert intelligence, special operations and drone strikes, we’ve managed to take down or take out many of its senior leaders.

At the same time, our intelligence agencies have demonstrated an almost mind-boggling inability to work together. We invaded Iraq, spending hundreds of billions of dollars on a long military campaign that claimed thousands of American lives and played right into the hands of our enemies by uniting Al Qaeda and the Iraqi insurgency. We tortured prisoners, not only staining our nation’s reputation but surely swinging more young Muslims to the cause of radical Islam than any Qaeda recruiting video ever could. We are still fumbling with how to try captured combatants, and what to do with those whom we don’t want to, or can’t, prosecute.

“The Hunt for KSM,” an in-depth account of the pursuit and capture of the architect of 9/11, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, gives us the war on terror at its best and worst. Here we have the story of dogged agents painstakingly cultivating intelligence and running down every semi-credible lead as they chase one of the world’s most dangerous terrorists across the globe.

We also have the story of the bureaucratic infighting that may well have delayed Mohammed’s capture and certainly ensured that the agents who knew him best — the ones most likely to be able to recognize when he was telling the truth and when he was lying — were nowhere in sight during the first three years of his interrogations in Pakistan and at a series of secret prisons.

At the center of this intragovernmental warfare are two familiar antagonists, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with their fundamentally different approaches to terrorism, epitomized by their reactions to 9/11. “The F.B.I., looking at the smoldering ruins in New York . . . reflexively asked: What happened?” the authors write. “The C.I.A. was far better at looking past the disaster that had occurred and asking the defining question of the period: What next?”

As turf wars go, it wasn’t much of a fight. In the wake of 9/11, when the need to prevent another attack was pretty much all that mattered, the C.I.A. instantly became America’s pre-eminent antiterror agency, and the F.B.I., with its years of hard-earned knowledge of radical Islam, was shunted aside. In the case of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed the result was especially tragic, according to Terry McDermott and Josh Meyer, both former journalists with The Los Angeles Times; it meant that Francis J. Pellegrino, an F.B.I. agent who had been obsessively tracking Mohammed since the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, was essentially cut out of the loop.

When Mohammed was betrayed to the C.I.A. by an old friend and chased down to a safe house in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, in early 2003, Pellegrino was asked to provide a list of questions to his interrogators, private C.I.A. contractors with no particular expertise in Al Qaeda. He declined. (“I don’t write questions,” he said. “I ask questions.”) The rest of the story should have been easy to predict: Mohammed provided his interrogators with a lot of bad information in order to get them to stop torturing him.

The two authors of “The Hunt for KSM” have reconstructed an almost decade-long clandestine manhunt in exacting detail, an undeniably impressive feat of sleuthing. Narrative velocity is not a problem either; from beginning to end, “The Hunt for KSM” moves along at the brisk pace of a good crime novel. Where the book falls short is in the depth and intimacy of its portraiture. McDermott and Meyer present a tantalizing cast of characters — most notably Pellegrino, a former accountant, and Mohammed, a modern-day Carlos the Jackal — but never quite bring us close to any of them.

The subtlety and imagination of the writing don’t always live up to the doggedness of the reporting, which can drain the emotional power from otherwise dramatic moments, as when Pellegrino finally finds himself sitting opposite his nemesis in an interrogation room at Guantánamo Bay. “Pellegrino thought K.S.M. might be the kind of guy you could sit down and have a beer with, if he hadn’t been one of the worst mass murderers in American history,” the authors write.

1- THE HUNT FOR KSM
Inside the Pursuit and Takedown of the Real 9/11 Mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
By Terry McDermott and Josh Meyer
2- HUNTING IN THE SHADOWS
The Pursuit of Al Qa’ida Since 9/11
By Seth G. Jones

Seth G. Jones’s “Hunting in the Shadows” provides a wider-angle view of the war on terror. Rather than zeroing in on the hunt for a single bad guy, Jones, a former senior adviser at United States Special Operations Command, seems determined not to leave any out. The result is exhausting, a seemingly endless rogues’ gallery of terrorists and their American pursuers since 9/11.

But if “Hunting in the Shadows” can at times make for slow reading, it is an important book, though less for the individual stories it tells than for the broader analysis Jones uses to frame them. As he sees it, the history of Al Qaeda’s war against the Western world can be best understood as a series of “waves.” The first started with the embassy bombings in East Africa in 1998, crested on 9/11 and ended with allied forces striking back against Al Qaeda’s leaders in Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere. The second began in 2003, after the American invasion of Iraq, and ended when a growing number of tribal sheiks in Iraq turned on Al Qaeda. The third rose between 2009 and 2011, driven by the emergence of the radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen, and concluded with the killing of Osama bin Laden and several other Qaeda leaders last year.

Studying these waves, and the counterwaves that repelled them, can tell us a lot about what works and what doesn’t when it comes to fighting terrorism. Most fundamentally, we have learned the hard way that the war on terror isn’t really a war — that if we attempt to defeat Al ­Qaeda by deploying large numbers of conventional soldiers to foreign countries we are only likely to create a backlash of ­radicalization.
Instead, Jones explains, we should rely on “a light-footprint approach” that favors special operations and intelligence-­gathering. We should help local governments to establish basic law and order in unstable areas where Al Qaeda is threatening to grow roots. And we should wage our own propaganda battle against Al Qaeda, one that emphasizes the organization’s indiscriminate murder of civilians. The war on terror, Jones writes, “is a war in which the side that kills the most civilians loses.”

President Obama recently declared that victory over Al Qaeda was “within our reach,” and that the time had come to refocus the nation’s energy and resources on domestic affairs. Let’s hope he’s right. But if he’s not, and a fourth wave is still to come, he and his successors in the White House would do well to keep these lessons in mind.

Jonathan Mahler is the author, most recently, of “The Challenge: How a Maverick Navy Officer and a Young Law Professor Risked Their Careers to Defend the Constitution — and Won.”

Bring Up the Bodies by Hilary Mantel - Review




 Portrait of Anne Boleyn

Originally appeared in the Guardian

Oh, those Tudors! We can't get enough of them. Whole bookshelves have been filled with them, acres of film consecrated to their antics. How badly behaved they were. What Machiavellian plottings and betrayals. Will we never tire of the imprisonments, torturings, entrail-windings, and burnings at the stake.

Philippa Gregory has very successfully tackled the Boleyn girls, Mary the Mistress and Anne the Aggravating. Then there's The Tudors, the TV series, in which church geopolitics are ably dealt with, though some of the underwear is anachronistic and Henry VIII is a dark, brooding romantic who never gets fat. This is stretching it, but makes for much better sex than if he were to wheeze and grunt and ooze from his decaying leg all over the bedsheets, as in real life.

I have a weakness for the Tudors, so I inhaled Hilary Mantel's terrific Booker-winning Wolf Hall – the first in her series about Thomas Cromwell the Calculating and Ruthless – in almost one sitting. Now comes the aptly titled Bring Up the Bodies, which picks up the body parts where Wolf Hall left off.
As the book opens, it's summer. Henry and his court are staying at Wolf Hall, home of the Seymours, where Henry has his piggy eye on stiff, prudish little Jane, destined to be his next queen. Thomas Cromwell is flying his hawks, named after his dead daughters. "His children are falling from the sky," Mantel begins. "He watches from horseback, acres of England stretching behind him; they drop, gilt-winged, each with a blood-filled gaze

… All summer has been like this, a riot of dismemberment." And we're off, into the deep, dark, labyrinthine, but strangely objective mind of Thomas Cromwell.
The historical Cromwell is an opaque figure, which is most likely why Mantel is interested in him: the less is truly known, the more room for a novelist. Cromwell rose from obscure and violent origins through a life abroad – sometime soldier, sometime merchant – to become England's top go-to man, the prime maker-and-breaker of fortunes and spines, secretly hated and despised, especially by aristocrats. He played Beria to Henry VIII's tyrannical Stalin: he did the dirty work and attended the beheadings, while Henry went hunting.
Cromwell elevated reform-minded Anne Boleyn, and sided with her until she stupidly thought she could get rid of him. Then he joined with her enemies to overthrow her, which we see him doing with steely finesse in Bring Up the Bodies. He was very feared and very smart, with a capacious memory for facts and also for slights, none of which he left unavenged.

While Cromwell has always had a bad press, Henry has generated mixed reviews. His early life was golden – Renaissance prince, sportsman, composer of poems, sprightly dancer, the glass of fashion and the mould of form, and so on – but he became increasingly despotic, bloodthirsty, rapacious, and possibly crazy. Charles Dickens, in his quirky A Child's History of England, has no use for him, calling him "a most intolerable ruffian, a disgrace to human nature, and a blot of blood and grease upon the History of England". In his later years, says Dickens, Henry was "a swollen, hideous spectacle, with a great hole in his leg, and so odious to every sense that it was dreadful to approach him". It's a 21st-century sport for doctors to weigh in on what exactly was wrong with Henry: it used to be thought he had syphilis, but diabetes now appears to be winning out. That, and possibly a brain injury from his jousting accident – an accident that causes Cromwell to lose his cool, since if Henry dies without an heir there will be civil war. Whatever else the Tudors did, they brought peace to England, and peace is what Cromwell works for. That, for Mantel, is one of the more praiseworthy motives for all the bloodletting that Cromwell engineers.

Peace rests on a stable king, and in that respect Cromwell has his work cut out. Already by the book's beginning Henry is beginning to fade, swell, and drool; his paranoia is growing, and the Plantagenets are plotting in the shrubbery. Cromwell sees this with precision and clarity, as he sees everything. He's a very self-aware narrator, and does not spare himself his own unwavering view, as when he appraises the portrait Hans Holbein has painted of him, "his dark purposes wrapped in wool and fur, his hand clenched around a document as if he were throttling it". His own son tells him he looks like a murderer, and other portraitists achieve a similar effect: "Wherever they begin, the final impact is the same: if he had a grievance against you, you wouldn't like to meet him at the dark of the moon."

But he also has corners of tenderness, and sees these in others: he's deep, not merely dark. And through him we experience the texture of how it feels to be sliding into a perilous dictatorship, where power is arbitrary, spies are everywhere, and one wrong word can mean your death. It's a reflection, perhaps, of our times, when democracies appear to be slipping back into the dungeon-filled shadowland of arbitrary power.
Cromwell's main opponent, Anne Boleyn, is as wilful and flirtatious as she usually is in fiction, but by the time of her death she has shrivelled to "a tiny figure, a bundle of bones". Is she more to be pitied than blamed? Not by Cromwell: "She does not look like a powerful enemy of England, but looks can deceive … If her sway had continued, the child Mary might have stood here; and he himself … waiting for the coarse English axe." Anne knew the rules of the power game but she hasn't played well enough, and she has lost. And, for the time being, Cromwell has won.

The ambiguous Cromwell is a character who fits Mantel's particular strengths. She's never gone for the sweet people, and is no stranger to dark purposes. Beginning with smaller canvases – novels set in present-day England – she moved to widescreen historical fiction with the masterful A Place of Greater Safety (1992), featuring the major actors of the French revolution as well as a large supporting cast and its twisted interactions. She relies on the same talent for intricacy in Wolf Hall and Bring Up the Bodies. There are a lot of people lurking around in Henry's court, all of them on the make or trying to sidestep the axe, and helping the reader keep track of them is a special craft.

Historical fiction has many pitfalls, multiple characters and plausible underwear being only two of them. How should people talk? Sixteenth-century diction would be intolerable, but so would modern slang; Mantel opts for standard English, with the occasional dirty joke, and for present-tense narration much of the time, which keeps us right there with Cromwell as his plots and Mantel's unfold. How much detail – clothes, furnishings, appliances – to supply without clogging up the page and slowing down the story? Enough to allow the reader to picture the scene, with lush fabrics and textures highlighted, as they were at the time. Mantel generally answers the same kinds of question that interest readers in court reports of murder trials or coverage of royal weddings. What was the dress like? How did she look? Who really went to bed with whom? Mantel sometimes overshares, but literary invention does not fail her: she's as deft and verbally adroit as ever.

We read historical fiction for the same reason we keep watching Hamlet: it's not what, it's how. And although we know the plot, the characters themselves do not. Mantel leaves Cromwell at a moment that would appear secure: four of his ill-wishing enemies, in addition to Anne, have just been beheaded, and many more have been neutralised. England will have peace, though it's "the peace of the hen coop when the fox has run home". But really Cromwell is balancing on a tightrope, with his enemies gathering and muttering offstage. The book ends as it begins, with an image of blood-soaked feathers.

But its end is not an end. "There are no endings," says Mantel. "If you think so you are deceived as to their nature. They are all beginnings. This is one." Which will lead us to the final instalment, and to the next batch of Henry's wives and Cromwell's machinations. How much intricate spadework will it take to "dig out" Cromwell, that "sleek, plump, and densely inaccessible" enigma? Reader, wait and see.

• Margaret Atwood's Year of the Flood is published by Bloomsbury.