What do you think?
Rate this book
When the Lights Went Out: What Really Happened to Britain in the Seventies
In this riveting account of the most crucial and controversial period in modern British history, Andy Beckett travels the country, interviews the key figures and understakes forensic archival research to discover the true story of the decade. From Thathcherites to hippy anarchists, strikers to secret strike-breakers, he delivers his story with the vividness and dramatic tension of a novel.
576 pages, Paperback
First published May 7, 2009
56 people are currently reading
954 people want to read
About the author
Andy Beckett
13 books14 followersAndy Beckett was born in 1969. He studied modern history at Oxford University and journalism at the University of California in Berkeley. He is a feature writer at the Guardian, and also writes for the London Review of Books and the New York Times magazine. He lives in London.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 79 reviews
March 12, 2021
The 70s always fascinated me. I have not been even born until well after one third of that decade. So I do not have any personal recollections to speak of. But recently, I have become especially interested in the 70s's Britain. Based upon a number of articles I've read it seemed to hold the key for understanding the contemporary Britain and the recent political events such as Brexit.
This book is a good, easy to read overview of the political, social and economic events of that decade. It starts with Heath winning the election and ends with Thatcher doing the same for the first time in 1979. It is written by a left-leaning journalist/historian. But it is not preachy at all and he has put a lot of energy into this book. The strongest bit is his conversations with many people, politicians, trade union leaders and the journalists participating in the events.
Though it did not particularly address the relationship with Europe, it did help me to understand the country I live now much better. I've learned a lot about the strikes, trade union movements, the politicians struggling with the shifts in the society. I did not know before about 3 days week, for example. Although I've heard about the winter of discontent, I did not know what it entailed and the scope of it all. It is fair to say that my sufficiently idealistic view of the past in the UK of that decade, as opposed to the USSR were I was growing, was slightly dented. The book also touches upon the conflict in Northern Ireland and feminism/LGBTQ movement but does not go deep enough into any of these.
I posted a few updates if someone is interested. Here, I just note a few facts that I found amusing:
1) apparently in the late 70s there was a talk in the British press that the Britons are people of leisure, so they do not need so many consumer goods like the Germans for example. Not sure whether it needs a further comment;
2) the monetarism and austerity was actually first tried by the Labour government, not by Thatcher. Even with the trade unions the story is more complicated that I've thought initially - the social contract with the Labour government has run its course in 1978 and they could not find the common ground for the next one.
3) At the end of the 70s the British society was the most equal as it was ever. That was partly due to the previous two decade and the improvement of the lives of the masses. But partly due to economy far from flourishing. So the rich got poorer. However the employment was almost full and the social mobility was high. It is striking for me that there were no single first rank politician both Conservative and Labour who would be "an old Etonian"! It went downhill from there on this. But what puzzles me is that considering all this achievements in building an egalitarian society why so many were striking so often practically paralysing economy and the social services as well?
It is a fascinating book about the fascinating time which has defined the future trajectory of this country it seems. Now, I guess I need to read something from more right leaning perspective to complete the picture.
This book is a good, easy to read overview of the political, social and economic events of that decade. It starts with Heath winning the election and ends with Thatcher doing the same for the first time in 1979. It is written by a left-leaning journalist/historian. But it is not preachy at all and he has put a lot of energy into this book. The strongest bit is his conversations with many people, politicians, trade union leaders and the journalists participating in the events.
Though it did not particularly address the relationship with Europe, it did help me to understand the country I live now much better. I've learned a lot about the strikes, trade union movements, the politicians struggling with the shifts in the society. I did not know before about 3 days week, for example. Although I've heard about the winter of discontent, I did not know what it entailed and the scope of it all. It is fair to say that my sufficiently idealistic view of the past in the UK of that decade, as opposed to the USSR were I was growing, was slightly dented. The book also touches upon the conflict in Northern Ireland and feminism/LGBTQ movement but does not go deep enough into any of these.
I posted a few updates if someone is interested. Here, I just note a few facts that I found amusing:
1) apparently in the late 70s there was a talk in the British press that the Britons are people of leisure, so they do not need so many consumer goods like the Germans for example. Not sure whether it needs a further comment;
2) the monetarism and austerity was actually first tried by the Labour government, not by Thatcher. Even with the trade unions the story is more complicated that I've thought initially - the social contract with the Labour government has run its course in 1978 and they could not find the common ground for the next one.
3) At the end of the 70s the British society was the most equal as it was ever. That was partly due to the previous two decade and the improvement of the lives of the masses. But partly due to economy far from flourishing. So the rich got poorer. However the employment was almost full and the social mobility was high. It is striking for me that there were no single first rank politician both Conservative and Labour who would be "an old Etonian"! It went downhill from there on this. But what puzzles me is that considering all this achievements in building an egalitarian society why so many were striking so often practically paralysing economy and the social services as well?
It is a fascinating book about the fascinating time which has defined the future trajectory of this country it seems. Now, I guess I need to read something from more right leaning perspective to complete the picture.
April 3, 2014
To some extent, this is a good counterbalance to Dominic Sandbrook's biased, Whiggish Seasons in the Sun. It's more balanced and a lighter read. It's obvious that Beckett is approaching the subject as a journalist. He gives broad-brush political background, I would guess largely gleaned from secondary sources, but he really comes alive when focussing on individuals, especially interviewing people like Edward Heath, Jayaben Desai, and John Gouriet. Nothing wrong with that, clearly these individuals had important roles in what happened. But he gets too wrapped up in describing their houses, what they are wearing, his chats with taxi drivers, what the weather was like when he visited them (yes, really!). This would pass in a newspaper, but it's just filler here. The interviews mostly don't tell us anything new either. He also recounts visits to iconic sites like Saltley Gates (surprise! There's nothing there now) and Maplin (surprise! It's a mudflat).
So yes, there's interesting stuff here, but as with Sandbrook's book, I was disappointed with the lack of social and cultural history. Feminism, for example, is dealt with simply by interviewing one of the founders of Spare Rib. There isn't all that much on the rise of the National Front and the anti-racist movement. And I was really surprised that he omitted all mention of education, such a controversial topic in that decade. He seems to like colourful characters, so you'd think he would seize on Rhodes Boyson. And unlike Sandbrook, he minimises mention of Tony Benn, who is all but invisible here.
On the plus side, he did do a good job of explaining the Social Contract and demonstrating how the unions shot themselves in the foot with their greed for unsustainable pay rises in 1978 and 1979, thus landing themselves with Thatcher. And we all know how that turned out. It did make me reflect that the "greed is good" ethos was already there in the 1970s -- Thatcher didn't invent it, she just made it into a virtue.
Three and a half stars, rounded up to four. I'm still looking for the perfect book on the 1970s though!
So yes, there's interesting stuff here, but as with Sandbrook's book, I was disappointed with the lack of social and cultural history. Feminism, for example, is dealt with simply by interviewing one of the founders of Spare Rib. There isn't all that much on the rise of the National Front and the anti-racist movement. And I was really surprised that he omitted all mention of education, such a controversial topic in that decade. He seems to like colourful characters, so you'd think he would seize on Rhodes Boyson. And unlike Sandbrook, he minimises mention of Tony Benn, who is all but invisible here.
On the plus side, he did do a good job of explaining the Social Contract and demonstrating how the unions shot themselves in the foot with their greed for unsustainable pay rises in 1978 and 1979, thus landing themselves with Thatcher. And we all know how that turned out. It did make me reflect that the "greed is good" ethos was already there in the 1970s -- Thatcher didn't invent it, she just made it into a virtue.
Three and a half stars, rounded up to four. I'm still looking for the perfect book on the 1970s though!
October 6, 2011
Three prime minsters - with one in waiting - take centre stage with many other characters who today remain revered, lamented or downright detested in the nation's consciousness, along with others who have been forgotten by all but a few.
This is a delight to read, and is a fine balance of detail, statistics, political aims and comment that make for a flowing story of when Britain was finding itself juggling change and status quo.
Mr Beckett is able to retell the hopes of grand visions and schemes such as a new (and never built) airport for London and the engineering achievements that saw oil rigs built and working in the hostile North Sea in record time, against a backdrop of industrial strife, power cuts and seemingly all powerful unions.
Alongside these are the stories of Gay and Womens' rights and Free Festivals; the rise of the National Front and Rock Against Racism; the Troubles in Northern Ireland, The Queen's Silver Jubilee and entry into the EEC, Inflation, stagflation, and IMF loans; the Winter of Discontent and Margaret Thatcher.
I also liked the fact that the author had interviewed many of the central characters of his storylines, some now dead so we could read of their adventures and then hear their views 20-25 years' after the events.
If you remember these days - and I was only a child, where power cuts and parents' worrying about having no coal to heat our house are abiding memories - then this will serve as a fine aide-memoire and perhaps explain or add to the circumstances of your memories.
If you were not born, or were too young to remember the 1970s, then it will give you an understanding of the challenges Britain and Britons faced, and where the legacy of World War Two met modern times and how today - regardless of politics - Britain is a better place to live in, even if there are still many social, monetary and political problems (many resurfacing from the 1970s or perhaps never having gone away).
One interesting fact from Mr Beckett's book was that the fusty old men of Government provided a old RAF airfield and agreed to help organise a three-day Free Festival.
The book is worth reading to learn about this episode alone.
This is a delight to read, and is a fine balance of detail, statistics, political aims and comment that make for a flowing story of when Britain was finding itself juggling change and status quo.
Mr Beckett is able to retell the hopes of grand visions and schemes such as a new (and never built) airport for London and the engineering achievements that saw oil rigs built and working in the hostile North Sea in record time, against a backdrop of industrial strife, power cuts and seemingly all powerful unions.
Alongside these are the stories of Gay and Womens' rights and Free Festivals; the rise of the National Front and Rock Against Racism; the Troubles in Northern Ireland, The Queen's Silver Jubilee and entry into the EEC, Inflation, stagflation, and IMF loans; the Winter of Discontent and Margaret Thatcher.
I also liked the fact that the author had interviewed many of the central characters of his storylines, some now dead so we could read of their adventures and then hear their views 20-25 years' after the events.
If you remember these days - and I was only a child, where power cuts and parents' worrying about having no coal to heat our house are abiding memories - then this will serve as a fine aide-memoire and perhaps explain or add to the circumstances of your memories.
If you were not born, or were too young to remember the 1970s, then it will give you an understanding of the challenges Britain and Britons faced, and where the legacy of World War Two met modern times and how today - regardless of politics - Britain is a better place to live in, even if there are still many social, monetary and political problems (many resurfacing from the 1970s or perhaps never having gone away).
One interesting fact from Mr Beckett's book was that the fusty old men of Government provided a old RAF airfield and agreed to help organise a three-day Free Festival.
The book is worth reading to learn about this episode alone.
October 12, 2015
Since the so-called boom in popular history books broke out in the late 1990s with titles such as Anthony Beevor's Stalingrad, consumers of quality narrative history have been spoilt with an array of books on modern history. Britain in particular has been treated to a distinguished array of titles by the likes of Peter Hennessy, David Kynaston, Alwyn Turner and Dominic Sandbrook. Andy Beckett's "When the Lights Went Out" is one of the earlier books written on the seventies, and charts dangerous territory for the unwary historian. Few decades inspire more division than the seventies, with their politically loaded legacy. Those on the right construct the currently dominant narrative of a decade of decline, with the final exposure of the economic and political bankruptcy of Keynesian-ism and the postwar consensus. The left pick holes in this narrative in the odd blog and partisan publication but don't enjoy the exposure of being the mainstream view.
Andy Beckett does provide a differing perspective from the mainstream and negotiates the events and interpretations adroitly. He doesn't attempt to nitpick and excuse the problems, but equally he provides understanding and a nuanced investigation of the background. Part of the reason for this success is the blend of historic narrative and long-form journalism. Although he is a trained academic historian, the inclusion of journalistic devices such as visiting the location of events, and especially his interviews with key figures give great depth and immediacy to his writing. Some purists no doubt will sneer at this approach but although the evidence of recollection three decades later must always be treated with caution it also offers valuable perspective. As an example the well written expose of the 'siege of Hull' is all the more powerful for memories such as that of unionist Fred Beach.
Beckett doesn't excuse the excesses of seventies unionism, nor the faults of leaders such as Ted Heath, Harold Wilson, Jack Jones and Arthur Scargill. However he also goes to considerable effort to understand their backgrounds and motivation. His extended quotation of Callaghan's maiden Labour Party conference speech as Prime Minister really cast his premiership in a new light for me and balanced the old clichés of the Winter of Discontent and "Crisis, What Crisis".
This well written book really offers a very insightful look at the seventies. It is mostly politically oriented. Beckett is a bit derogatory towards histories that claim to find insights in popular culture, and doesn't focus to any great extent on social history. I share his reservations about popular culture as a barometer for the state of society and as evidence of wider changes, although it certainly has its place in understanding the milieu of the time.
Andy Beckett does provide a differing perspective from the mainstream and negotiates the events and interpretations adroitly. He doesn't attempt to nitpick and excuse the problems, but equally he provides understanding and a nuanced investigation of the background. Part of the reason for this success is the blend of historic narrative and long-form journalism. Although he is a trained academic historian, the inclusion of journalistic devices such as visiting the location of events, and especially his interviews with key figures give great depth and immediacy to his writing. Some purists no doubt will sneer at this approach but although the evidence of recollection three decades later must always be treated with caution it also offers valuable perspective. As an example the well written expose of the 'siege of Hull' is all the more powerful for memories such as that of unionist Fred Beach.
Beckett doesn't excuse the excesses of seventies unionism, nor the faults of leaders such as Ted Heath, Harold Wilson, Jack Jones and Arthur Scargill. However he also goes to considerable effort to understand their backgrounds and motivation. His extended quotation of Callaghan's maiden Labour Party conference speech as Prime Minister really cast his premiership in a new light for me and balanced the old clichés of the Winter of Discontent and "Crisis, What Crisis".
This well written book really offers a very insightful look at the seventies. It is mostly politically oriented. Beckett is a bit derogatory towards histories that claim to find insights in popular culture, and doesn't focus to any great extent on social history. I share his reservations about popular culture as a barometer for the state of society and as evidence of wider changes, although it certainly has its place in understanding the milieu of the time.
July 30, 2015
Thoroughly enjoyable book. I lived in the UK in the early 70's and this was a bit of a nostalgia trip. Made one almost want to relive one's youth to see if it was all that I remembered.
August 25, 2025
This is an excellent overview of the 1970s meticulously researched by Andy Beckett. In truth it mostly takes a political angle looking at the big beasts of 70s politics ( when we used to be ruled by proper politicians) and focussing on the pinch points of the times whether it be the miners bringing down Heath: the eponymous power cuts of the title ; right through to the winter of discontent and sunny Jim Callaghan. Beckett interviews key players now and gets their perspective on the times whilst also visiting key locations and soaking up the atmosphere of the times. His pen portraits are brilliant - Heaths head like an Easter island statue; Callaghans seeming prudery and he deals with the union leaders of the times - hugely influential and skilful. There is no Dominic Sandbrook anti union bias and Thatcher love. There are also more thematic chapters on feminism; the green movement and unlike Sandbrook less emphasis on popular culture or sport. Occasionally Beckett puts his own context into play and provides a personal perspective. He has stiff competition from books by Alwyn Turner ( Crisis, What Crisis?) and Andrew Marr - Will David Kynaston ever get to the 70s?
Beckett holds his own and despite this book being published way back in 2009 his judgements are sound and interesting. The only disappointment was the conclusion which just claimed the 70s has echoes today - I would have liked to have seen a more profound summing up. Still this was hugely entertaining and time to take a look at his recent book on Labour rebels - The Searchers ……
Beckett holds his own and despite this book being published way back in 2009 his judgements are sound and interesting. The only disappointment was the conclusion which just claimed the 70s has echoes today - I would have liked to have seen a more profound summing up. Still this was hugely entertaining and time to take a look at his recent book on Labour rebels - The Searchers ……
December 18, 2025
Growing up in the 1970s, I had nothing to compare the decade with (born in 1964, my awareness of the Sixties was vague in the extreme), but looked at in retrospect, it’s easy to see that it was a very peculiar decade. Dominic Sandbrook’s two books on the UK in the period (State of Emergency and Seasons in the Sun)) cover the ground at greater length and in more detail than Andy Beckett’s survey, but Beckett’s predates both of them and has the advantage of a more journalistic approach and research supported by face to face interviews with many of the key players in the events he describes - Heath, Healey, Jack Jones, Arthur Scargill and many others. It’s primarily a political and economic history though; and while Beckett does touch on social developments like the creation of Milton Keynes and the free festival movement, these feel rather like case studies. If you’re looking for more on changing social trends then Sandbrook is your man. But for a political and economic overview of the period (and Beckett’s explanation of the complex economic forces and debates at play in the Seventies is - for this non-economist at least - crystal clear and compelling) then When the Lights Went Out is a winner.
October 10, 2013
SOME THINGS THAT HAPPENED IN BRITAIN DURING THE 1970'S
After Andy Beckett's excellent "Pinochet in Piccadilly: Britain and Chile's Hidden History" I had high expectations of his newest book on Britain in the 1970's. There was also relief that Beckett had jumped in ahead of the irritatingly asinine Dominic Sandbrook, whose tomes on the 1950's and 60's I found a little on the shallow side. Unfortunately, by the time I reached the end of the book I felt disappointed. The book hadn't lived up to the promise of its subtitle: "What Really Happened to Britain in the Seventies".
Beckett's method in writing his history is to paint the political scene in broad-brush strokes. These are interspersed with more precise details of specific events often intertwined with retrospective interviews of the personalities involved: from the high and mightily prickly Edward Heath to more modest figures on the historical stage such as the still enthusiastic one time activist from the Grunwick strike, Jayaben Desai.
Certain sections of the book are interesting, though possibly because my knowledge of them was in itself sketchy. High points included those parts that dealt with the Heath Government, the Free Festival movement, the promise of North Sea Oil and the rise of the free market right (Hayek, Friedman, Mises, et al) whom became peculiarly attractive to those on the political right as the seventies progressed, or perhaps regressed is more accurate?. It covers, as is to be expected, a good deal of industrial action and deals reasonably fairly with the Miners confrontation with the Heath government as well as the Grunwick strike. The account of the "Winter of Discontent" is less comprehensive, focusing almost entirely on Hull and Westminster Hospital. Apart from that there is a good deal that is fairly standard for histories of the period: Kingsley Amis slabbers over the thought of Margaret Thatcher, Phillip Larkin whinges for middle England and a variety of right-wing think tanks sprout into being.
Another aspect of the book that I found problematic was the over reliance, especially when dealing with the Labour Government of the later 1970's, on insiders such as Jim Callaghan, Denis Healey, Bernard Donoughue, Gavyn Davies, Peter Jay and (oddly enough) Bill Rogers, to the exclusion of other dissenting voices in the Labour government. Beckett compounds this by dealing with these insiders in a less than rigorous manner.
The strengths of the book are that it is well written, at times even atmospheric. While it does burst some myths in particular with regard to the Labour government of 1974-79 it never really gets its teeth into the 1970's in a systematic manner. Perhaps the subtitle should have been "Some Things That Happened to Britain in the Seventies"? Despite these criticisms it is an interesting read.
After Andy Beckett's excellent "Pinochet in Piccadilly: Britain and Chile's Hidden History" I had high expectations of his newest book on Britain in the 1970's. There was also relief that Beckett had jumped in ahead of the irritatingly asinine Dominic Sandbrook, whose tomes on the 1950's and 60's I found a little on the shallow side. Unfortunately, by the time I reached the end of the book I felt disappointed. The book hadn't lived up to the promise of its subtitle: "What Really Happened to Britain in the Seventies".
Beckett's method in writing his history is to paint the political scene in broad-brush strokes. These are interspersed with more precise details of specific events often intertwined with retrospective interviews of the personalities involved: from the high and mightily prickly Edward Heath to more modest figures on the historical stage such as the still enthusiastic one time activist from the Grunwick strike, Jayaben Desai.
Certain sections of the book are interesting, though possibly because my knowledge of them was in itself sketchy. High points included those parts that dealt with the Heath Government, the Free Festival movement, the promise of North Sea Oil and the rise of the free market right (Hayek, Friedman, Mises, et al) whom became peculiarly attractive to those on the political right as the seventies progressed, or perhaps regressed is more accurate?. It covers, as is to be expected, a good deal of industrial action and deals reasonably fairly with the Miners confrontation with the Heath government as well as the Grunwick strike. The account of the "Winter of Discontent" is less comprehensive, focusing almost entirely on Hull and Westminster Hospital. Apart from that there is a good deal that is fairly standard for histories of the period: Kingsley Amis slabbers over the thought of Margaret Thatcher, Phillip Larkin whinges for middle England and a variety of right-wing think tanks sprout into being.
Another aspect of the book that I found problematic was the over reliance, especially when dealing with the Labour Government of the later 1970's, on insiders such as Jim Callaghan, Denis Healey, Bernard Donoughue, Gavyn Davies, Peter Jay and (oddly enough) Bill Rogers, to the exclusion of other dissenting voices in the Labour government. Beckett compounds this by dealing with these insiders in a less than rigorous manner.
The strengths of the book are that it is well written, at times even atmospheric. While it does burst some myths in particular with regard to the Labour government of 1974-79 it never really gets its teeth into the 1970's in a systematic manner. Perhaps the subtitle should have been "Some Things That Happened to Britain in the Seventies"? Despite these criticisms it is an interesting read.
August 9, 2016
You have to read several books on the 70s. No one is definitive, perhaps because of how much history happened, every book seems to leave out annoyingly important items, but different ones! To piece it together, read and compare several. This book merits to be one of them, for it reveals some impressive insights I have not seen elsewhere. But definitive and complete this book is not, it disappoints any such claim. It is really really bitty.
2 items of union history illustrate this odd mix of prizes and not bothering. This book reveals, and describes superbly, how the transport isolation of Hull enabled the TGWU to practically run the city during the Winter of Discontent, I have not read the on the ground detail of this story in any other book, and it is a story I missed at the time by following the wrong media, it did not stand out from the TV news at the time and I was not a tabloid reader. All the movement of goods in the city was run and permitted by a "dispensation committee" of the strikers, practically a worker's soviet. It is incredible and serious how for 2 months Hull was practically under revolutionary rule. Anyone whose revulsion at the swing to Thatcherism's opposite extremes by 9 years later makes them reluctant to believe how undemocratically controlling the 70s union militancy was, needs that story.
While that item alone is enough to make this book a significant historical resource, it is a shattering disappointment of incompleteness that the same book could possibly select to never mention the Upper Clyde Shipbuilders' work-in and Jimmy Reid. That was the 70s' other, and much more famous, experience of workers' control. No consideration either of the whole course of 70s trade union history, or of the Heath government's efforts towards it, stands up without Upper Clyde. No mention either of the Industrial Relations Courts Heath set up, no detailing of the 5 states of emergency and each strike behind them, yet the author actually interviewed Heath and devotes many pages to it. Incredible, and while he devotes a whole chapter to the Maplin airport project! His priorities are skewed.
Most of all with Heath, he gives too much space, many pages, to quite long potted biographies of some of the key figures, including the 4 Prime Ministers, that involve ghastly turn-off digressions into the 30s and 40s. If like me you find unbearable, and hate the sight of, the early twentieth century's boastful nostalgia industry that has bashed the young for generations and you want some 70s nostalgia as an antidote to it, don't come near this book, some of its pages will slam you in the face, I want to rip them out. It is an aspect of the book I strongly dislike. While its introduction poses a good question it intends to illuminate, on why the 70s attract a lot of cultural nostalgia alongside more political bogeying than any other modern era, there is no ending summing up any findings on this. The book peters out as unsatisfyingly abruptly as the Gospel of Mark. The question is misleading for a book that says very little on most 70s popular culture at all, he only selects to study "declinist" literature and the feminist culture. As part of making the book's point he should have told the story of punk. Yet he does select to tell very insightfully the story of the hippie inspired free festivals culture, and is a really good source on that, rare for a politics book though it is grassroots political history. He tells all the stories of the Albion Free State and Wilson's experiment of authorising the Waterfield festival in 1975, much needed refuting of the myth that such things only happened in the 60s. He details the Green Party's origins, surprisingly right wing involving the Goldsmiths and an alarmist Blueprint For Survival that wanted to reduce the country's population (how?!) another valuable insight.
This book properly explains, unlike some others exactly how the social contract worked, about the Liaison Committee that met at Transport House. Where most books that get lost in the density of economic detail, this one explains clearly, step by step, the history of Labour's annual pay restraint targets, why they went up and down trying and failing to balance with inflation, how it turned the social contract into a government instrument whose impact rightly angered workers, how Callaghan's swing to monetarism made the arrangement break down. This is history that makes the book well worth reading.
Yet its Labour Party history is misleading when it frequently refers to the role of Crosland's philosophy but never tells you he died, nor about Jenkins going to Brussels, nor that Foot was deputy PM. How dare he give the gravediggers strike, the Winter of Discontent's most totemic detail, only half a sentence's mention!! and no mention of the ambulance strikes nor the "If lives must be lost" comment by a picket, nor the health union COHSE who I remember were in the TV news every day. I agree with other reviewers that he selects out the Winter of Discontent's worst and he should not describe practically only the Westminster hospital and Hull. The frustrations.
Another is that it is a too totally English book. In the 70s more than for a long time before them, England was not the whole story. He covers the Irish troubles but his only serious nod to Scotland is on Shetland's oil prosperity. Aside from that he is not interested, he does not describe why the devolution issue got as far as a proposal for the first time in our democratic history, nor its ongoing role in the background to Callaghan's survival without a majority, he only mentions the referendum hastily in background to Callaghan's fall, and no criticism of the 40% rule that wrecked it. It is insulting he does not even name Calton Hill but names many suburbs of London, and that he does not bother at all with Wales's parallel story though Callaghan's seat was there. Frank Chapple, Dick Taverne, John Stonehouse, David Owen, John Pardoe, Anthony Blunt, the Thorpe trial, the Anti-Nazi League, European elections' creation, the Lib-Lab pact's role in driving devolution, all are never mentioned. That is a history full of shocking holes. It is a Swiss cheese with some cherries.
2 items of union history illustrate this odd mix of prizes and not bothering. This book reveals, and describes superbly, how the transport isolation of Hull enabled the TGWU to practically run the city during the Winter of Discontent, I have not read the on the ground detail of this story in any other book, and it is a story I missed at the time by following the wrong media, it did not stand out from the TV news at the time and I was not a tabloid reader. All the movement of goods in the city was run and permitted by a "dispensation committee" of the strikers, practically a worker's soviet. It is incredible and serious how for 2 months Hull was practically under revolutionary rule. Anyone whose revulsion at the swing to Thatcherism's opposite extremes by 9 years later makes them reluctant to believe how undemocratically controlling the 70s union militancy was, needs that story.
While that item alone is enough to make this book a significant historical resource, it is a shattering disappointment of incompleteness that the same book could possibly select to never mention the Upper Clyde Shipbuilders' work-in and Jimmy Reid. That was the 70s' other, and much more famous, experience of workers' control. No consideration either of the whole course of 70s trade union history, or of the Heath government's efforts towards it, stands up without Upper Clyde. No mention either of the Industrial Relations Courts Heath set up, no detailing of the 5 states of emergency and each strike behind them, yet the author actually interviewed Heath and devotes many pages to it. Incredible, and while he devotes a whole chapter to the Maplin airport project! His priorities are skewed.
Most of all with Heath, he gives too much space, many pages, to quite long potted biographies of some of the key figures, including the 4 Prime Ministers, that involve ghastly turn-off digressions into the 30s and 40s. If like me you find unbearable, and hate the sight of, the early twentieth century's boastful nostalgia industry that has bashed the young for generations and you want some 70s nostalgia as an antidote to it, don't come near this book, some of its pages will slam you in the face, I want to rip them out. It is an aspect of the book I strongly dislike. While its introduction poses a good question it intends to illuminate, on why the 70s attract a lot of cultural nostalgia alongside more political bogeying than any other modern era, there is no ending summing up any findings on this. The book peters out as unsatisfyingly abruptly as the Gospel of Mark. The question is misleading for a book that says very little on most 70s popular culture at all, he only selects to study "declinist" literature and the feminist culture. As part of making the book's point he should have told the story of punk. Yet he does select to tell very insightfully the story of the hippie inspired free festivals culture, and is a really good source on that, rare for a politics book though it is grassroots political history. He tells all the stories of the Albion Free State and Wilson's experiment of authorising the Waterfield festival in 1975, much needed refuting of the myth that such things only happened in the 60s. He details the Green Party's origins, surprisingly right wing involving the Goldsmiths and an alarmist Blueprint For Survival that wanted to reduce the country's population (how?!) another valuable insight.
This book properly explains, unlike some others exactly how the social contract worked, about the Liaison Committee that met at Transport House. Where most books that get lost in the density of economic detail, this one explains clearly, step by step, the history of Labour's annual pay restraint targets, why they went up and down trying and failing to balance with inflation, how it turned the social contract into a government instrument whose impact rightly angered workers, how Callaghan's swing to monetarism made the arrangement break down. This is history that makes the book well worth reading.
Yet its Labour Party history is misleading when it frequently refers to the role of Crosland's philosophy but never tells you he died, nor about Jenkins going to Brussels, nor that Foot was deputy PM. How dare he give the gravediggers strike, the Winter of Discontent's most totemic detail, only half a sentence's mention!! and no mention of the ambulance strikes nor the "If lives must be lost" comment by a picket, nor the health union COHSE who I remember were in the TV news every day. I agree with other reviewers that he selects out the Winter of Discontent's worst and he should not describe practically only the Westminster hospital and Hull. The frustrations.
Another is that it is a too totally English book. In the 70s more than for a long time before them, England was not the whole story. He covers the Irish troubles but his only serious nod to Scotland is on Shetland's oil prosperity. Aside from that he is not interested, he does not describe why the devolution issue got as far as a proposal for the first time in our democratic history, nor its ongoing role in the background to Callaghan's survival without a majority, he only mentions the referendum hastily in background to Callaghan's fall, and no criticism of the 40% rule that wrecked it. It is insulting he does not even name Calton Hill but names many suburbs of London, and that he does not bother at all with Wales's parallel story though Callaghan's seat was there. Frank Chapple, Dick Taverne, John Stonehouse, David Owen, John Pardoe, Anthony Blunt, the Thorpe trial, the Anti-Nazi League, European elections' creation, the Lib-Lab pact's role in driving devolution, all are never mentioned. That is a history full of shocking holes. It is a Swiss cheese with some cherries.
August 4, 2022
At the least, a very seventies dread has seeped back into how people in Britain and other rich countries see the world. Economic crises, floods, food shortages, terrorism, the destruction of the environment: these spectres, so looming in the seventies, did not go away during the eighties and nineties; yet they faded – they were often quite easy to forget about. Now that they have returned to haunt newspaper front pages almost daily, it is possible to wonder how many of Britain’s seventies problems were ever really solved.
These days Britons no longer mourn their empire. They are more comfortably European. They are more relaxed about race, sexuality and gender. Their government is no longer fighting a war in Ulster. The British population is rising rather than falling. The feel of national life is more feverish than entropic. The look of things is gaudy and skin-deep, rather than heavy, worn-out and grey.
In the conclusion, written in 2008, the author is thinking about the "return of the 70s". It's hard to read the 2nd paragraph, about the ways the end of the 00s was different to 70s, and not notice how all of these issues have been particularly prominent today, in 2022. With strikes a major national issue and the 70s being used again as a symbol of all that could go wrong, I thought it was a good time to educate myself a little more on what actually happened. The parallels were certainly striking in places and even more so the sense that indeed all the problems of the 70s were never solved, only deferred.
Overall the book was pretty enjoyable, with a ton of stuff I'd simply been completely unaware of and something new I highlighted most pages. He takes a very broad sweep view, trying to touch on lots of different strands so at times the obvious political and economic stuff is gone over quite quickly in parts. There's a particularly nice chapter focusing on the Gay Liberation Front and lots of stuff looking at least briefly at things like women's lib movement, the free festival movement, student occupations at unis, etc. In general I did feel I got a lot out of it in terms of getting a view of the "mood" of the 70s.
The broad sweep is obviously also an issue in that some parts get short shrift. For example, of the most notorious strikes of the period, only the Grunwick strike is covered pretty extensively (and it's an excellent section of the book). Both the NUM strike of 1972 - which along with the three day week of 1974 are the main two occasions when the lights did indeed go out - and the winter of discontent get surprisingly short shrift in terms of covering their causes, progression and how they won exactly. The NUM strike has a long section on the Battle of Saltley Gate, which was presumably very important symbolically but strikes me as more of a mythologised moment than something materially important. The winter of discontent gets an incredibly fascinating section focusing on the "occupation" of Hull by a committee of striking workers - something I'd absolutely not heard about before but I was astounded by. But the rest of union activity is blown through.
As the winter of discontent is probably the obvious thing I came in expecting a lot on I was somewhat disappointed by the briefness of the coverage. I was left with a lot of questions - how come so many different workforces - even non unionised ones - went on strike? How did the public actually see this and change their mind over the strikes? What was the government considering and why did they seemingly do nothing? Were their demands really excessive? How chaotic was the situation for most people? How did the TUC see it? What caused a sudden increase in militancy after years of calm? I felt like I didn't really get a better idea of what actually happened, which was frustrating. That doesn't mean the book was bad! Just if you're looking for a longer look on that you'll have to look elsewhere.
On a personal political level, parts of this were infuriating to read. Living in a year of massive oil price shocks and facing the climate crisis, reading the original plans for high density Milton Keynes served by efficient monorails with significant public provision seem an incredible what if. That we instead got a suburban car centric hell because the designers had visited Los Angeles and thought it looked impressive... It's almost unbelievable given they were living through an oil crisis themselves that they focused so much on cars! You read about right wing labour MPs secretly attending the meetings held by the right wing "free market" think tank the IEA and agreeing with them 100%
A 1970s senior economic advisor for labour says in a 2005 interview that the worst mistake the Callaghan government made was not having a firesale on council homes. The government GAVE AWAY rights to North sea oil and gas to companies and then were slow to tax the profits... And then pissed them down the drain anyway.
The most striking thing about the late 70s as talked about here to me was how even though the author seems left sympathetic he still seems to agree that the fact that the TUC was directly negotiating with the government to keep pay rise requests below inflation was bad merely because it was the unions having ideas above their station. Several government figures of the time mention how they felt humiliated, even though the TUC was sacrificing the interests of its workers at least to some extent to prop up the government and wider economy. And they were so mad about it that Callaghan announced that pay rises should be capped to 5% in a 1978 speech! Again far below rate of inflation. The attitude in government was that the TUC had got too big for their boots. And... We see how that worked out. The more militant individual unions broke ranks in the winter of discontent and sought the highest possible wage increases. This is also criticised as them being greedy! It's the typical anti union narrative, that them having any influence at all is too much, and coming from a labour government. When 65% or so of the workforce was unionised. It's an important corrective to some later ideas of labours role at the time.
July 9, 2025
Not necessarily the wildly revisionist take on the '70s that I'd been led to believe, but maybe that's to its credit - instead, Beckett takes this notoriously turbulent era in British history on its own terms, bringing it to life through interviews with '70s survivors and first-hand accounts of his visits to pivotal locations, in a way that makes it seem open-ended and high-stakes, as any historical period does to those living through it, rather than like the fraught but inexorable passage from permissive welfarism to laissez-faire individualism. How exactly things could have gone instead I'm not wholly sure, but Beckett lays enough stress on the decade's continuities with both the '60s and the '80s - and, more to the point, the extent to which spur-of-the-moment decisions, unexpected contingencies and 'events, dear boy, events' contributed to the general disarray - that he comfortably refutes the view of neoliberalism's inevitable rise memorably celebrated by the playwright Tom Stoppard as 'Thatcher and Murdoch save the day'. Intrigued to read the book he wrote next, on Thatcher's faltering first term, as well of course as his long history of Bennite Labourism, i.e. Corbynism.
July 26, 2021
I was born in 1960, so Harold Wilson and Ted Heath were the first politicians I remember, initially refracted through the comic lens of master-impressionist Mike Yarwood, along with the powerful union leaders like Vic Feather and Joe Gormley. That an early-evening TV entertainer could reliably raise a laugh by doing impressions of the boss of the Transport and General Workers Union speaks volumes for the prevailing mood, and I munched my tea while phrases like "free collective bargaining" and "the social contract" wafted around my adolescent ears.
Beckett's main focus is the politics of the era, and apart from a perfunctory chapter each on women's liberation, race relations, free festivals and gay rights it's this which mainly concerns him. He relies fairly heavily on secondary sources, politicians' self-serving memoirs in particular, and though he includes some recent interviews with significant actors reminiscing about events of forty years previously these are not terribly illuminating in the main.
His final chapter, written in 2008, contains a passage summarising the differences between the British of "then" and "now" which starkly illustrates the perils of prophecy: " These days Britons no longer mourn their Empire. They are more comfortably European".
So, a good primer for anyone interested in the era, and a bit of a nostalgia-fest for anyone of my age or older, but far from an essential read. 3 stars.
Beckett's main focus is the politics of the era, and apart from a perfunctory chapter each on women's liberation, race relations, free festivals and gay rights it's this which mainly concerns him. He relies fairly heavily on secondary sources, politicians' self-serving memoirs in particular, and though he includes some recent interviews with significant actors reminiscing about events of forty years previously these are not terribly illuminating in the main.
His final chapter, written in 2008, contains a passage summarising the differences between the British of "then" and "now" which starkly illustrates the perils of prophecy: " These days Britons no longer mourn their Empire. They are more comfortably European".
So, a good primer for anyone interested in the era, and a bit of a nostalgia-fest for anyone of my age or older, but far from an essential read. 3 stars.
November 21, 2023
More to do with the political side of the seventies as opposed to the social side.i found it a bit heavy going,but gave an insight to because the warring unions and the soft underbelly of the political parties completely ignored the fact that Thatcher was coming up through the ranks.and because of this we meaning this the working population paid and still are paying for the greedy right wing rich.
September 14, 2011
Wasn't really the 1970's history I was after as it focused on the politics of the era although these were admittedly a little more interesting than the anodyne stuff we get nowadays. I think I was looking for a more social and cultural history and will get around to State of Emergency by Dominic Sandbrook at some point.
April 18, 2021
I remember the power cuts of the early 70s, not always as dire for us primary school-aged children as for everyone else. And I definitely remember the rubbish piling up in the streets when those strikes were going on. And winters of discontent, "crisis what crisis" and the first female Prime Minister.
This was an interesting read, nicely balanced and well written. I didn't think the ending, talk of David Cameron and so on has aged well. Would like to see him tackle the 80s, 90s and 2000s
This was an interesting read, nicely balanced and well written. I didn't think the ending, talk of David Cameron and so on has aged well. Would like to see him tackle the 80s, 90s and 2000s
November 26, 2020
Fascinating look at the seventies political landscape seen through various key events. The author interviewed some of the key figures from that era including Heath, Healey and Scargill. Highly recommended.
December 23, 2023
An incredibly engaging and informative read! Recommended if you’re into modern political history, or just want to learn more about Britain in tumultuous times …
January 12, 2024
We all know the story of Britain in the 1970s. A decade of unrelenting doom and gloom, mindless strikes and economic disaster with Mrs Thatcher riding to the rescue in 1979. It’s a caricature of history but one that has been reiterated so many times that many accept it as fact. Andy Beckett’s political history challenges the myths and offers a more nuanced and complex account. Beckett interviewed most of the major political figures of the era who were still alive and travelled the country visiting many of the places where the battles of the seventies took place.
Beckett studied Modern History at Oxford and Journalism at the University of California in Berkeley and his book is a skilful blend of history and journalism. He records his meetings with the politicos of the period and also the places he visits as he makes his pilgrimage around the Britain of the noughties in search of the foreign country that is the past.
When the Lights Went Out covers the main political events from the election of Edward Heath in 1970 to Margaret Thatcher’s victory in May 1979: the miners strikes, the Three-Day Week, Northern Ireland, Britain’s entry into the EEC, the IMF crisis, the Winter of Discontent. Having read a number of books on the subject, I thought I knew quite a lot about it, but Beckett’s book frequently took me by surprise.
The seventies was a time of conflict in Britain but also one of widespread consensus. Early in his premiership Heath made right wing noises but they were out of character and unconvincing. Both his party and Labour remained supporters of the post-war consensus of a mixed economy and extensive Welfare State. This began to change after Thatcher became leader of the opposition in 1975, but as Beckett’s account makes clear, the process of transforming the Conservatives into the party of the aggressive free market society and moral authoritarianism was a slow and uncertain one.
The chapters dealing with the events leading up to the downfall of the Callaghan Labour government are particularly fascinating and gripping. Beckett points out that monetarism began not with Thatcher but with the Labour Government in 1976 and by the late seventies the economic position of the country was steadily improving. The Conservative Party victory in 1979 was not inevitable but the result of a number of unpredictable factors, chief among them Callaghan’s decision not to call an election in October 1978 as had been widely anticipated and the subsequent, and in hindsight, spectacular own goal by the Trades Unions of The Winter of Discontent.
The Conservative Party manifesto at the 1979 election was untitled, short and vague, by no means a blueprint for the right wing transformation of society that eventually took place, and their victory itself less than overwhelming - the Conservatives won only 43.9 per cent of the vote and the Labour vote actually increased.
The reader is left with the strong impression that when Thatcher came to power she had a very clear idea of the economic and social changes she wanted to make but was not certain that she had sufficient electoral support to do so. Or, indeed, sufficient support within her own party - by the start of the eighties members of her own government were calling for a policy U-turn. Thatcherism as an ideology, and Margaret Thatcher’s longevity as Prime Minister, was only secured following Britain’s victory in the Falklands War in 1982, but this takes us beyond the timeframe set by Beckett’s book.
Beckett also demonstrates that the idealism of the sixties had not completely disappeared by the start of the seventies. In fact, a number of radical and progressive movements such as gay liberation, feminism and environmentalism, first entered mainstream consciousness in the 1970s.
Compulsively readable, When The Lights Went Out provides fresh insight into a period of British history we too readily assume we understand.
Beckett studied Modern History at Oxford and Journalism at the University of California in Berkeley and his book is a skilful blend of history and journalism. He records his meetings with the politicos of the period and also the places he visits as he makes his pilgrimage around the Britain of the noughties in search of the foreign country that is the past.
When the Lights Went Out covers the main political events from the election of Edward Heath in 1970 to Margaret Thatcher’s victory in May 1979: the miners strikes, the Three-Day Week, Northern Ireland, Britain’s entry into the EEC, the IMF crisis, the Winter of Discontent. Having read a number of books on the subject, I thought I knew quite a lot about it, but Beckett’s book frequently took me by surprise.
The seventies was a time of conflict in Britain but also one of widespread consensus. Early in his premiership Heath made right wing noises but they were out of character and unconvincing. Both his party and Labour remained supporters of the post-war consensus of a mixed economy and extensive Welfare State. This began to change after Thatcher became leader of the opposition in 1975, but as Beckett’s account makes clear, the process of transforming the Conservatives into the party of the aggressive free market society and moral authoritarianism was a slow and uncertain one.
The chapters dealing with the events leading up to the downfall of the Callaghan Labour government are particularly fascinating and gripping. Beckett points out that monetarism began not with Thatcher but with the Labour Government in 1976 and by the late seventies the economic position of the country was steadily improving. The Conservative Party victory in 1979 was not inevitable but the result of a number of unpredictable factors, chief among them Callaghan’s decision not to call an election in October 1978 as had been widely anticipated and the subsequent, and in hindsight, spectacular own goal by the Trades Unions of The Winter of Discontent.
The Conservative Party manifesto at the 1979 election was untitled, short and vague, by no means a blueprint for the right wing transformation of society that eventually took place, and their victory itself less than overwhelming - the Conservatives won only 43.9 per cent of the vote and the Labour vote actually increased.
The reader is left with the strong impression that when Thatcher came to power she had a very clear idea of the economic and social changes she wanted to make but was not certain that she had sufficient electoral support to do so. Or, indeed, sufficient support within her own party - by the start of the eighties members of her own government were calling for a policy U-turn. Thatcherism as an ideology, and Margaret Thatcher’s longevity as Prime Minister, was only secured following Britain’s victory in the Falklands War in 1982, but this takes us beyond the timeframe set by Beckett’s book.
Beckett also demonstrates that the idealism of the sixties had not completely disappeared by the start of the seventies. In fact, a number of radical and progressive movements such as gay liberation, feminism and environmentalism, first entered mainstream consciousness in the 1970s.
Compulsively readable, When The Lights Went Out provides fresh insight into a period of British history we too readily assume we understand.
April 8, 2010
Andy Beckett’s ‘When The Lights Went Out’ sets out to try and rehabilitate the British experience of the seventies, but only partly succeeds. “Yes,” it says, “we all remember the three day week and the winter of discontent, but there were good things too.” As such there are passages on the increased recognition women, homosexuals and ethnic minorities achieved in that decade; and there are dry statistics showing how unemployment was actually far higher under Thatcher in the eighties – but the basic narrative can’t help but show one crisis stumbling into another.
This is a highly political book, with most of the action taking place in the environs of Westminster. As such, despite a clear and fluid style and numerous amusing anecdotes (who knew that in 1976 the Wilson government staged a free music festival for hippies?) it’s very much a history for political anoraks. Indeed, given everything is defined by what Margaret Thatcher did afterwards (a Prime Minister who Beckett is clearly hostile to), it’s a book for political anoraks with a good grip of the subsequent decade.
Both David Kynatson (‘Austerity Britain’; ‘Family Britain’) and Dominic Sandbrook (‘Never Had It So Good’; ‘White Heat’) will eventually cover this era, and I can’t help thinking both of those historians will have a more encompassing take.
This is a highly political book, with most of the action taking place in the environs of Westminster. As such, despite a clear and fluid style and numerous amusing anecdotes (who knew that in 1976 the Wilson government staged a free music festival for hippies?) it’s very much a history for political anoraks. Indeed, given everything is defined by what Margaret Thatcher did afterwards (a Prime Minister who Beckett is clearly hostile to), it’s a book for political anoraks with a good grip of the subsequent decade.
Both David Kynatson (‘Austerity Britain’; ‘Family Britain’) and Dominic Sandbrook (‘Never Had It So Good’; ‘White Heat’) will eventually cover this era, and I can’t help thinking both of those historians will have a more encompassing take.
May 2, 2024
Worth reading - an era which I was born into the tail-end of, and source of endless controversies that I've never fully understood. Obviously Thatcher divides opinion with razor-sharp boundaries amongst most people.
The author has a level head and remains pretty objective throughout, tracing the stories that defined Britain politically in the 70s. Also found out I was born on the day the British Treasury/government decided to accept a loan from the IMF during the 1976 recessionary period (when we were known as ‘the sick man of Europe’). Might explain a few things.
Particularly enjoyed the way he weaves together all the different political forces that interact and entwined - from Milton Friedman-influenced neo-liberal monetarists, to Marxist miners, to anarchist festival organisers, to One-Nation Tories.
The panoramic breadth of the author's vision affords him my trust, though there is only sparse mention of more global and high-level activity - such as American financiers’ judgments on the UK (they were close to giving up on the country, which would have been disastrous for the world's economy), and the importation of torture methods by the British from the Korean war. But as a focused study, it does the job well.
The author has a level head and remains pretty objective throughout, tracing the stories that defined Britain politically in the 70s. Also found out I was born on the day the British Treasury/government decided to accept a loan from the IMF during the 1976 recessionary period (when we were known as ‘the sick man of Europe’). Might explain a few things.
Particularly enjoyed the way he weaves together all the different political forces that interact and entwined - from Milton Friedman-influenced neo-liberal monetarists, to Marxist miners, to anarchist festival organisers, to One-Nation Tories.
The panoramic breadth of the author's vision affords him my trust, though there is only sparse mention of more global and high-level activity - such as American financiers’ judgments on the UK (they were close to giving up on the country, which would have been disastrous for the world's economy), and the importation of torture methods by the British from the Korean war. But as a focused study, it does the job well.
November 20, 2010
Really enjoyed this, and it inspired me to rake over my own personal history once more because, actually, understanding the past does help you relate to the present. The Seventies is currently undergoing an historical reassessment, usually because people are asking themselves "Was it really that bad?" and, if so, why? Politics figures large, of course, and that is where the focus of this book lies with a lot more about Jim Callaghan than Johnny Rotten. Still, as these kind of books go, I felt that this historian took a refreshing approach - he goes to visit the Wappings, the Falls Road, the slag heaps and slag villages left with them, and interviews all the major figures himself. You do feel you are with him on a journey into the recent past. (Andrew Marr, please note.) Hopefully he'll next turn his attention to the Eighties.
September 24, 2012
I've been reading this again, and I enjoyed it just as much the second time around. For anyone who lived through the decade in question, this book will be a treasure-trove of remembrances: on almost every page you'll discover something you haven't had occasion to think about in ages. For those who were a) not around in the 70s, or b) not in Britain, there's plenty of solid background information in this well-written text. And even if you were there at the time there are still revelations aplenty, as Beckett takes a cool, impartial look at how things fell apart and came together again over the course of ten extraordinary years. Strongly recommended.
January 5, 2013
An excellent tour of the 70s, including much detail I've not seen before. You can really feel like you are there experiencing it. Sadly though it lacks a great ending as so did the 70s. I'm not persuaded that Callaghan's was a good government (Peter Hennesey is more persuasive and still not quite enough) but I do have more sympathy than I did at the time. Also a good reminder of how different things could have been, for good and ill and how far the pendelum has swung to the right. Please can we have a happy medium between the unions running the country and the bankers running the country. Moving a little more in the direction of the early 70s would be no bad thing.
October 24, 2015
This is less a history more a reportage of the seventies and it's cast of political figures. I was six when the seventies ended so I endured part of this decade but can only remember parts and those memories are from a small childs perspective. This certainly cleared up some of my misunderstanding of the decade. I certainly had the winter of discontent and the three day weeks revelled together as one event. This history is not an exhaustive account of that period. That would take many more volumes than this. It does give a good purview of some of the bigger political figures and events of the decade.
December 31, 2013
A great 'prequel' to McSmith's No Such Thing as Society. This is much more narrowly a political history, though. Also, like McSmith, Beckett concentrates on the movers and shakers and we learn little of the average person (unless you count strike celebrities as average people). He tries to give Thatcher a fair hearing, but the between the lines sympathies seem to lie with the builders of the welfare state. An entertaining and informative read.
February 5, 2017
When you have to study the 1970s in Britain, this is an excellent read, as the author covers every aspect and every personality with a pace and style that read like a novel. The transitions are effortless and fit the chronology; the biographies are well timed and the interviews he led in the mid 2000s give a more recent perspective from some of the actors themselves. It is as complete as can be for this number of pages, and it leaves enough space for the reader's own analysis and point of you.
January 13, 2019
A journey through the bleak landscape of 1970's Britain. I was a child in the Seventies, but definitely not of the Seventies. My concerns would centre around listening to Radio Luxembourg, tennis and days I didn't have to go to school when the lights literally did go out due to the power struggle between government and unions. An enjoyable trip down memory lane plus much I would not have known or realised at the time.
September 8, 2012
Struck me as a well researched review of the 70's. Raised all manners of information to cancel out the bias & myths that were reported in the media at the time. Interesting facts about the various top politicians and related people in the civil service, unions, etc. A definite book for anyone who is interested in history of that time.
August 17, 2011
The nineteen-seventies in the UK saw the end of the growth of the working man's wages. Its been all down hill since. Andy Beckett does a good job of chronicling the change and as an aside demonstrating what a lot of light weights the current batch of politicians really are.
June 21, 2012
Three and a half, rather than four. Nonetheless, puts the 70s in a sober an realistic context. Quite prescient, in an understated way, about the parallels with the present day. And, delightfully, reminds us that Tony Benn wasn't always a cuddly, principled dissident.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 79 reviews