What do you think?
Rate this book
Dominic Sandbrook’s History of Britain #2
White Heat: A History of Britain in the Swinging Sixties, 1964-70
never read brand new book on Britain in the swinging '60s
896 pages, Paperback
First published August 3, 2006
127 people are currently reading
1328 people want to read
About the author
Dominic Sandbrook
46 books564 followersAn English historian, commentator and broadcaster and author of two highly acclaimed books on modern Britain: Never Had It So Good and White Heat. Their follow-up is State of Emergency.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 78 reviews
April 8, 2015
This is the second volume of Dominic Sandbrook’s history of Britain in the Swinging Sixties. The first book, “Never Had It So Go,” took us to 1964 and this looks at the history of Britain from 1964 – 1970. This book begins with the funeral of Winston Churchill – that monumental leader, who had led the country through war. The national mood, indeed, was one of self-pity and there was a sense of decline. However, there was soon to be an outpouring of new music, design, technology and talen and England – or, perhaps, specifically, London, was about to swing… I say London, because, as the author is always reminding us, for most people England was most certainly not swinging. Plays, such as “Cathy Come Home,” highlighted homelessness and poverty and, for most people, they may have read about the nightclubs and counter culture of London, but they did not experience it first-hand. In Sunderland in the mid-Sixties, nine out of ten privately owned houses had no indoor toilet and three quarters of houses had no bath. Of course, the after effects of war meant there was still a lot of slum housing being used and the country was still re-building. The late Sixties would see the beginning of tower blocks and housing estates which would bring their own social problems in the next decade.
Like the previous book, the author tends to alternate chapters on political and economic matters with social history, which helps the book flow seamlessly between more weighty issues to more frivolous ones. Political issues concern Ted Heath and Harold Wilson, Mary Whitehouse and the permissive society, the Moors Murders, the 1967 act which decriminalised homosexuality, racial tension and education reforms; specifically the (in my opinion, disastrous) promotion of comprehensive education and attack on the grammar school system.
Socially, of course, it was a time of huge change. Musically, there was the meteoric rise of the Beatles; including their success in the United States, which opened the floodgates for other British acts to pour through. This book concentrates mostly on the Beatles and the Rolling Stones (including the notorious Redlands drugs bust), but also looks at other acts, such as the Kinks and the Who, and of music as a source of national pride. Along with music, there is the British film industry, the theatre and television; a new generation of photographers, such as Terence Donovan and David Bailey, models such as Jean Shrimpton and Twiggy, fashion, sport – a minor event called The World Cup – and art and design. Sandbrook pulls in just about everyone, from Mary Quant to Terence Conran, Michael Caine and the Krays, in his examination of this decade. It was a time of classlessness – or, rather, a new class of youth and ability – of the counter culture and drugs. However, only a minority of people went to nightclubs such as the Bag o’Nails, the Ad Lib and the Scotch of St James’s, to sit alongside the ‘in crowd.’ For most people, the swinging Sixties was something they read about in magazines.
I really enjoyed both this book, and the previous one. The author makes history readable, enjoyable and, often, very funny. If you are looking for a good introduction to this decade, these books will give you a thorough account of all the major events in Britain – from politics to social history. If you are interested in reading on, “State of Emergency” by the same author, looks at Britain from 1970 – 1974 and continues with, “Seasons in the Sun,” (1974-1979).
Like the previous book, the author tends to alternate chapters on political and economic matters with social history, which helps the book flow seamlessly between more weighty issues to more frivolous ones. Political issues concern Ted Heath and Harold Wilson, Mary Whitehouse and the permissive society, the Moors Murders, the 1967 act which decriminalised homosexuality, racial tension and education reforms; specifically the (in my opinion, disastrous) promotion of comprehensive education and attack on the grammar school system.
Socially, of course, it was a time of huge change. Musically, there was the meteoric rise of the Beatles; including their success in the United States, which opened the floodgates for other British acts to pour through. This book concentrates mostly on the Beatles and the Rolling Stones (including the notorious Redlands drugs bust), but also looks at other acts, such as the Kinks and the Who, and of music as a source of national pride. Along with music, there is the British film industry, the theatre and television; a new generation of photographers, such as Terence Donovan and David Bailey, models such as Jean Shrimpton and Twiggy, fashion, sport – a minor event called The World Cup – and art and design. Sandbrook pulls in just about everyone, from Mary Quant to Terence Conran, Michael Caine and the Krays, in his examination of this decade. It was a time of classlessness – or, rather, a new class of youth and ability – of the counter culture and drugs. However, only a minority of people went to nightclubs such as the Bag o’Nails, the Ad Lib and the Scotch of St James’s, to sit alongside the ‘in crowd.’ For most people, the swinging Sixties was something they read about in magazines.
I really enjoyed both this book, and the previous one. The author makes history readable, enjoyable and, often, very funny. If you are looking for a good introduction to this decade, these books will give you a thorough account of all the major events in Britain – from politics to social history. If you are interested in reading on, “State of Emergency” by the same author, looks at Britain from 1970 – 1974 and continues with, “Seasons in the Sun,” (1974-1979).
June 19, 2020
This a lengthy, but excellently-written, book covering the political and social events of the period 1964-1970. Whilst analysing in a balanced way the politics of the time there are also enthralling chapters on fashion, music, the swinging sixties, the world situation etc. that makes it a totally well-rounded read. I'm glad to see there are several more in the series and am looking forward to reading more of them.
By using it as a 'coffee-table' book, picking it up every day or so and reading a chapter of two at a time, has for me been an excellent way to read it - I didn't get overburdened by all the facts and revelations that are thrown your way but it gave me time to savour it and ponder the events of the time. Also found it interesting as it was set in a period when I was between 8 and 15 years of age but also for part of that time living in Australia where we (or at least I) didn't really hear much of what was going on back in the UK. Great read - 9/10.
By using it as a 'coffee-table' book, picking it up every day or so and reading a chapter of two at a time, has for me been an excellent way to read it - I didn't get overburdened by all the facts and revelations that are thrown your way but it gave me time to savour it and ponder the events of the time. Also found it interesting as it was set in a period when I was between 8 and 15 years of age but also for part of that time living in Australia where we (or at least I) didn't really hear much of what was going on back in the UK. Great read - 9/10.
January 9, 2019
Tempted to rank it one star, but refrained as a nod toward the enormous amount of detail Sandbrook includes in a history of the Sixties that concludes with the proposition that the sitcom Dad's Army is as important a gauge of the decade as the Beatles. That's indicative of the problem with Sandbrook's perspective; he's relentlessly dedicated to the idea that "public opinion," which unfailingly reflects his not-very-well-concealed prejudices, is the gauge of what's important historically. That, in turn, is reflected in his very heavy reliance on opinions from the press as his methodological foundation. Writing history from newspapers is always dangerous; writing history from tabloids, which he doesn't really differentiate from the more serious press, is just a terrible idea. Again and again, he uses phrases like "most people," "spoke for millions," alongside invocations of the "middle class" or an anonymous, but in his mind representative, man in the street.
One of Sandbrook's primary targets is the whole idea of "Swinging London," although he does devote many pages to the "scene" and revels in a fair amount of celebrity gossip. Of course, the worlds of rock music and fashion were never the center of daily experience for "regular people," but that doesn't mean they didn't have an impact on "ordinary" lives.
Another problem with the book is Sandbrook's refusal to sift through the evidence and arrive at either balanced judgments or a clear articulation of unresolvable tensions. Instead, he presents one position, then, via a transition introduced by "Still" or "on the other hand," presents an opposed position with equal authority. It doesn't help that the "evidence" for both positions is likely to be quotes from newspapers or retrospective accounts from participants in political or cultural events.
A final grouse: Sandbrook's sense of the music that was at the center of Britain's international presence is shaky at best. He's determined to downplay the roots of British Invasion rock in African American music, preferring to emphasize the nostalgic, music-hall elements in Sgt. Pepper's and the Kinks' Village Green Preservation Society (both of which I love, by the way). And he somehow decides that the sales figures for The Sound of Music soundtrack and Cliff Richards means they matter more than the Beatles or the Stones. Come on....
Still (yeah, I know...), anyone who wants to get a sense of the political machinations of the Wilson government or the economic tribulations of the pound will find everything they could hope for. Wasn't worth anything resembling 780 pages of reading, but I do have a clearer idea of how Britain's experience relates to some of the larger currents of the Sixties.
One of Sandbrook's primary targets is the whole idea of "Swinging London," although he does devote many pages to the "scene" and revels in a fair amount of celebrity gossip. Of course, the worlds of rock music and fashion were never the center of daily experience for "regular people," but that doesn't mean they didn't have an impact on "ordinary" lives.
Another problem with the book is Sandbrook's refusal to sift through the evidence and arrive at either balanced judgments or a clear articulation of unresolvable tensions. Instead, he presents one position, then, via a transition introduced by "Still" or "on the other hand," presents an opposed position with equal authority. It doesn't help that the "evidence" for both positions is likely to be quotes from newspapers or retrospective accounts from participants in political or cultural events.
A final grouse: Sandbrook's sense of the music that was at the center of Britain's international presence is shaky at best. He's determined to downplay the roots of British Invasion rock in African American music, preferring to emphasize the nostalgic, music-hall elements in Sgt. Pepper's and the Kinks' Village Green Preservation Society (both of which I love, by the way). And he somehow decides that the sales figures for The Sound of Music soundtrack and Cliff Richards means they matter more than the Beatles or the Stones. Come on....
Still (yeah, I know...), anyone who wants to get a sense of the political machinations of the Wilson government or the economic tribulations of the pound will find everything they could hope for. Wasn't worth anything resembling 780 pages of reading, but I do have a clearer idea of how Britain's experience relates to some of the larger currents of the Sixties.
February 19, 2015
I actually enjoyed Dominic Sandbrook’s second book about the sixties more than his first. Whereas the previous volume ‘Never Had It So Good’ had to explain the context of Britain in the late fifties/early sixties, this book is able to launch straight into 1964 and beyond. Once again politics mixes in with more well trodden cultural and social trends of the decade, and once again the politics are the most interesting part. No, I’ll rephrase that – the descriptions of what went on at Downing Street in this book are absolutely bloody fascinating
The Wilson government of this period is one of the most dysfunctional Britain has ever seen, with constant back-biting and plotting, and some truly volatile characters. I particularly enjoyed George Brown, an aggressive alcoholic who was uniquely unsuited to the role of Foreign Secretary. My eyes boggled at tales of him humiliating himself and embarrassing others at countless diplomatic dos, causing scenes that would have buried lesser politician’s careers and yet still keeping his job. (It actually made me wistful at the staidness of today’s lot. Not that I really want current Foreign Secretary David Miliband to start drunkenly abusing Belgium emissaries, but an evil part of me would enjoy the fuss it’d create.) Sandbrook writes that it got to the point at the Foreign Office where if George Brown attended a function and there weren’t terrible rumours of what he’d done flying about the next morning, that the staff became deeply worried in case he’d perpetrated an act so horrendous everyone was too scared to tell them about it.
These two books are a thoughtful and highly interesting look at this highly interested decade, showing that for all the media tales of sex, drugs, rock’n’roll, transcendental meditation and rebellion, for millions of ordinary people in Britain things didn’t really change much at all.
The Wilson government of this period is one of the most dysfunctional Britain has ever seen, with constant back-biting and plotting, and some truly volatile characters. I particularly enjoyed George Brown, an aggressive alcoholic who was uniquely unsuited to the role of Foreign Secretary. My eyes boggled at tales of him humiliating himself and embarrassing others at countless diplomatic dos, causing scenes that would have buried lesser politician’s careers and yet still keeping his job. (It actually made me wistful at the staidness of today’s lot. Not that I really want current Foreign Secretary David Miliband to start drunkenly abusing Belgium emissaries, but an evil part of me would enjoy the fuss it’d create.) Sandbrook writes that it got to the point at the Foreign Office where if George Brown attended a function and there weren’t terrible rumours of what he’d done flying about the next morning, that the staff became deeply worried in case he’d perpetrated an act so horrendous everyone was too scared to tell them about it.
These two books are a thoughtful and highly interesting look at this highly interested decade, showing that for all the media tales of sex, drugs, rock’n’roll, transcendental meditation and rebellion, for millions of ordinary people in Britain things didn’t really change much at all.
January 11, 2025
A big, exhaustively researched book which could easily have been an exhausting read but Sandbrook's style and eye for a good (i.e. hilarious) anecdote ensures that's never the case. From high politics to popular culture and leisure, the range is impressive. Sandbrook's equally at home - and sometimes at play - describing the machinations and ineptitudes of Wilson's cabinet, A Clockwork Orange or the decline of the seaside holiday. He's as flexible in terms of style as he is in subject matter. Whilst some chapters martial an intimidating amount of primary and secondary reading into lucid and compact surveys of fashion, architecture or the status of women, there are some great set piece narrative chapters too on the 1966 world cup and the death of Brian Jones.
White Heat is unapologetically a conservative revisionist account of the swinging sixties. Psychedelic drugs, eastern mysticism and free love were indulgences limited to a far smaller minority than we like to imagine. The mass of Wilson's Britons spent most of their time watching Dad's Army and listening to the Sound of Music soundtrack. As Sandbrook argues, the great political and social victories of the age - the abolition of the death penalty and the decriminalisation of male same-sex relations - were in reality impositions by a tiny liberal elite onto an apathetic, and even explicitly hostile, public. Maybe the most interesting and disturbing political legacy of the 60s lies not on the left but on the right with the rise of explicitly racialised immigration politics and the first stirrings of Thatcherism, both embodied in Enoch Powell.
For the most part I found all of this provocative and (reluctantly) convincing. In some ways, though, Sandbrook does have his cake and eat it by at once indulging in lengthy (and very enjoyable) anecdotes about London night clubs or the apocalyptic visions of J.G. Ballard or Anthony Burgess only to dismiss these as the concerns of a tiny minority that mattered far less than we think they did. Some of the political chapters I could also take or leave, but that's more a personal gripe.
Overall, though, a lot more enjoyable and engaging than any 800 page/40 hour book has any right to be.
White Heat is unapologetically a conservative revisionist account of the swinging sixties. Psychedelic drugs, eastern mysticism and free love were indulgences limited to a far smaller minority than we like to imagine. The mass of Wilson's Britons spent most of their time watching Dad's Army and listening to the Sound of Music soundtrack. As Sandbrook argues, the great political and social victories of the age - the abolition of the death penalty and the decriminalisation of male same-sex relations - were in reality impositions by a tiny liberal elite onto an apathetic, and even explicitly hostile, public. Maybe the most interesting and disturbing political legacy of the 60s lies not on the left but on the right with the rise of explicitly racialised immigration politics and the first stirrings of Thatcherism, both embodied in Enoch Powell.
For the most part I found all of this provocative and (reluctantly) convincing. In some ways, though, Sandbrook does have his cake and eat it by at once indulging in lengthy (and very enjoyable) anecdotes about London night clubs or the apocalyptic visions of J.G. Ballard or Anthony Burgess only to dismiss these as the concerns of a tiny minority that mattered far less than we think they did. Some of the political chapters I could also take or leave, but that's more a personal gripe.
Overall, though, a lot more enjoyable and engaging than any 800 page/40 hour book has any right to be.
May 27, 2024
Love these. There's something very suspicious about a history book that is Strangely Reminiscent of the Times We Live In but the effect is appealing when the book was actually written in 2006... the Strangely Reminiscent bank shot. State of Emergency next, time to see what ol Ted Heath gets up to. (Also very interested to see his opinions on the solo Beatles records.)
January 24, 2015
This book seems to be largely marketed as a social and cultural history of the 1964-70 period. Actually, I found it far more interesting as a political history. As another reviewer has said, it is readable, informative, and gossipy - all good things. About a third of the chapters are devoted to the travails of Harold Wilson's government and these I found by far the most interesting, learning new things and being left staggered by just how dysfunctional so much of the Labour Cabinet seems to have been.
The cultural stuff on the other hand just seemed to be hitting all the familiar landmarks I already knew - Sergeant Pepper, Carnaby Street, the Redlands bust, England winning the World Cup. Perhaps I just came to the book knowing too much about Mick Jagger and not enough about Barbara Castle! Or perhaps it's impossible to write about the 60s in Britain without acknowledging these as major events. If the latter is the case, however, then it rather undermines the author's view that the best-known aspects of the Swinging Sixties only happened to members of a small moneyed metropolitan scene, only slightly touching the lives of average people. If they weren't that important, then I was left wondering why we were spending so much more time in the Beatles' recording studio than in the semi-detached houses and tower block flats of the rest of the country.
Also, I have to admit that the occasional sneeriness against Swinging London pretensions stuck in my throat. Of course the Carry On films made more money than Blow Up or Performance, of course just because the Beatles became interested in Indian religion it didn't mean that everyone from Folkestone to Forfar suddenly started practising transcendental meditation. But these points are made in my view with a (dare I say it?) Daily Mail-style undertone of contempt for intellectual curiosity or the 'liberal intelligentsia' that struck me as unpleasant and unnecessary.
Overall though, highly readable, and a comprehensive run through the period. I'm keen to read the author's other books on the 50s and 70s, eras I think I know less about, to see how they compare.
The cultural stuff on the other hand just seemed to be hitting all the familiar landmarks I already knew - Sergeant Pepper, Carnaby Street, the Redlands bust, England winning the World Cup. Perhaps I just came to the book knowing too much about Mick Jagger and not enough about Barbara Castle! Or perhaps it's impossible to write about the 60s in Britain without acknowledging these as major events. If the latter is the case, however, then it rather undermines the author's view that the best-known aspects of the Swinging Sixties only happened to members of a small moneyed metropolitan scene, only slightly touching the lives of average people. If they weren't that important, then I was left wondering why we were spending so much more time in the Beatles' recording studio than in the semi-detached houses and tower block flats of the rest of the country.
Also, I have to admit that the occasional sneeriness against Swinging London pretensions stuck in my throat. Of course the Carry On films made more money than Blow Up or Performance, of course just because the Beatles became interested in Indian religion it didn't mean that everyone from Folkestone to Forfar suddenly started practising transcendental meditation. But these points are made in my view with a (dare I say it?) Daily Mail-style undertone of contempt for intellectual curiosity or the 'liberal intelligentsia' that struck me as unpleasant and unnecessary.
Overall though, highly readable, and a comprehensive run through the period. I'm keen to read the author's other books on the 50s and 70s, eras I think I know less about, to see how they compare.
Read
July 26, 2011Readable, informative, intelligent, funny, gossipy, and not afraid to puncture a few of the myths surrounding the Swinging Sixties, Dominic Sandbrook's even-handed treatment of the period is brilliantly written and cleverly researched. The result is a riveting book which is just as compelling when it deals with the Rolling Stones or Mary Quant as it is when it deals with Harold Wilson or the Troubles in Northern Ireland. 'White Heat' is real social history, and it comes to some thought-provoking conclusions about the period; rightly stating that the social change that was so evident during the Sixties could trace its roots back to the 1940's at least, and that the majority of the British public actually remained pretty conservative in outlook throughout a decade famed for its liberality, rock 'n' roll, drugs, flower power and free love in the modern popular mind. I thoroughly enjoyed this book, Sandbrook's writing is such that he even managed to make the chapters on the economic history of the period (particularly the devaluation of the pound) absolutely compelling, page-turning reading, and I loathe economic history! This is a book that should be read by anyone with an interest in why Britain is the way it is today.
January 4, 2020
This book felt a lot longer than the other two in the series that I’ve read, and not just because of the size. As much as I like Sandbrook’s writing, he has quirks that get under my skin. If you take a shot every time he uses the phrase “of the day”, you’ll die.
Still, I don’t think I could ask for a social history more complete than this one. It addressed all the economic issues of the era and discussed the political fallout and really turned the idea of the “swinging sixties” upside down.
Still, I don’t think I could ask for a social history more complete than this one. It addressed all the economic issues of the era and discussed the political fallout and really turned the idea of the “swinging sixties” upside down.
April 4, 2019
This is the second volume of Sandbrook’s 4 volume (at the time of writing - a fifth is scheduled for release later in 2019) social and political history of Britain.
Following on from Never Had It So Good, this essentially covers the Harold Wilson years. Starting with Winston Churchill’s funeral and ending with Ted Heath’s election as prime minister, the first Wilson government forms the political spine around which this book is written.
In typical Sandbrook style this political core is surrounded with a mixture of social and cultural analysis. Chapters dealing with the political history of the time are interspersed with softer chapters handling music, sport, television and other cultural manifestations, as well as more serious sections focusing on specific topics (women’s rights, the deterioration of the situation in Northern Ireland, urban planning).
In many ways, it’s an astonishing piece of work - Sandbrook marshals his resources and it never drags even considering the length. He clearly has his biases and focuses, but overall this has claim to be one of the definitive books on the subject.
Following on from Never Had It So Good, this essentially covers the Harold Wilson years. Starting with Winston Churchill’s funeral and ending with Ted Heath’s election as prime minister, the first Wilson government forms the political spine around which this book is written.
In typical Sandbrook style this political core is surrounded with a mixture of social and cultural analysis. Chapters dealing with the political history of the time are interspersed with softer chapters handling music, sport, television and other cultural manifestations, as well as more serious sections focusing on specific topics (women’s rights, the deterioration of the situation in Northern Ireland, urban planning).
In many ways, it’s an astonishing piece of work - Sandbrook marshals his resources and it never drags even considering the length. He clearly has his biases and focuses, but overall this has claim to be one of the definitive books on the subject.
October 20, 2025
This was an epic 40 hours via audiobook and I was expecting at least a 4 star read but i think unfortunately the author isn't fair with his framing of what he calls 'public opinion'. He often refers to it but then ignores other views, the student protest section in particular i would have liked to hear more about their views rather than the mocking ones he provided from newspapers and the universities. aobviously brilliantly researched but I was a bit disappointed overall.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 9, 2025
800 page history books should not be this easy to tear through. This one was even more ludicrously readable than Sandbrook’s first book. Every chapter was fascinating and the breadth of research staggering. I knew absolutely nothing about the Wilson government, the origins of the Northern Ireland troubles, 60s urban poverty, the tortured story of The Rolling Stones or a dozen other topics but this book has them all. Can’t wait to press on into the 1970s.
February 5, 2024
A great read. Especially the chapters on Northern Ireland (except that Sainsburys had not opened there in the 1960s and therefore citing it (along with the Beatles and Coronation Street) as an element of life in the UK was a bit off-target.) Also an hilarious insight into the Harold Wilson cabinet.
January 4, 2022
تاریخ معاصر بریتانیا بین سالهای 1964 تا 1970. هر اتفاقی که در بریتانیا بین این سالها افتاده رو میشه اینجا دید، از برگشتن قدرت به دست حزب کارگر تا از از دادن خانه ی شماره 10 توسط آنها، از اوج گیری بیتلز تا جدایی گروه، از رولینگ استونز تا پینک فلویدز، از قهرمانی در جام جهانی 1966 تا حذف به دست آلمان در 1970، از شروع نا آرامیها در ایرلند شمالی تا ورود نیروی نظامی انگلستان به ایرلند شمالی. این دومین جلد از مجموعه تاریخ معاصر بریتانیای دومینیک سندزبروکه و هنوز حداقل سه جلد دیگه اش مونده که مربوط به سالهای بعد از 1970 است، امیدوارم در قرون آتی به اونها هم برسم
July 7, 2023
An epic social account of the not so swinging Sixties.
March 5, 2023
too much
December 24, 2012
The second part of Sandbrook's treatise on post-war Britain has a simple central message - the sixties was largely something which happened to other people. Not Sandbrook himself, of course - he was born in the following decade - but the mythology of the decade is largely based on the experiences of a small elite, many of whom continue to dominate the media to this day.
For the rest, swinging was the last thing on their minds, with the rising tide of consumerism set against a backdrop of austerity and imperial decline, governed by politicians who cared more for poll ratings than policies and struggling to cope with the changes wrought by immigration, liberalization and a world which seemed to be slipping away. All this and the Troubles too.
Sandbrook's skill in weaving strands of narrative is in full play here, threading together the stories of op-art and pop, sport and social housing in a compelling narrative, ending the decade with Labour losing the 1970 election, the Beatles breaking up and England losing the Germany in the 1970 world cup. It's a definite full-stop which confirms one thing about the sixties mythology - it was a decade with a definite end. I look forward to reading the next installment in the new year.
For the rest, swinging was the last thing on their minds, with the rising tide of consumerism set against a backdrop of austerity and imperial decline, governed by politicians who cared more for poll ratings than policies and struggling to cope with the changes wrought by immigration, liberalization and a world which seemed to be slipping away. All this and the Troubles too.
Sandbrook's skill in weaving strands of narrative is in full play here, threading together the stories of op-art and pop, sport and social housing in a compelling narrative, ending the decade with Labour losing the 1970 election, the Beatles breaking up and England losing the Germany in the 1970 world cup. It's a definite full-stop which confirms one thing about the sixties mythology - it was a decade with a definite end. I look forward to reading the next installment in the new year.
December 31, 2016
This is a very long book, covering only 6 years of British history. Yet these 6 years contain many of the trends and influences that have made Britain what it is today.
Sandbrook is a very reasonable historian. He defuses flower power, the swinging sixties, the anti-Vietnam demonstrations etc. and reveals them for what they were. The preoccupation of Britain's own guilded youth, and the mass media. Fashions that came an went. Using "Dad's Army" as an example he underlines the basic caution and conservatism of the British. For truly for most people the sixties were "business as usual", slightly more affluent, but pretty much the same as the forties or fifties. After all change is not what the British do...
Sandbrook is a very reasonable historian. He defuses flower power, the swinging sixties, the anti-Vietnam demonstrations etc. and reveals them for what they were. The preoccupation of Britain's own guilded youth, and the mass media. Fashions that came an went. Using "Dad's Army" as an example he underlines the basic caution and conservatism of the British. For truly for most people the sixties were "business as usual", slightly more affluent, but pretty much the same as the forties or fifties. After all change is not what the British do...
October 12, 2013
Dominic Sandbrook has written another riveting volume of British social history. As he did in Never Had It So Good, he provides the perfect mix of politics, fashion and the arts. The sections on the Macmillan government are especially good because almost everyone involved seems to have kept a diary. As I write this, Congress and the President are still in deadlock over the debt ceiling. Do you suppose people are tweeting or shredding?
August 10, 2021
This was very much the sequel to Sandbrook's earlier book, as the successful balance of politics, pop culture and societal development continued from the point when Conservative rule was replaced by Harold Wilson's government. Although long, this reflects the breadth of the subject matter rather than the book being too detailed, as it was easy to read and I was engaged throughout, though it did take me a few months to finish in the end.
With the sheer amount of content, Sandbrook's skill is to give detailed accounts of pivotal cabinet scenes while covering other subjects much more concisely, and as a result no chapter feels too long despite taking about half an hour to read. As a result this was not a book for a quick dip into as you get much more from the subjects when reading them in one sitting. Nor is it strictly chronological, with the political developments covered in order while other chapters could span a few years when discussing new towns or high rise council housing.
Part of my interest is due to a gap in my knowledge, and perhaps others will consider this quite elementary. However, I know about the Beatles and rarely care for the background stories of musicians, and yet I still found the music sections interesting; likewise, the films I have never seen. There were some minor irritations, and pointing out that 11 million people were watching a given programme on television compared to just 250,000 who watched The Rolling Stones in Hyde Park came across as churlish. The author regularly pointed out the relative popularity of media pet interests and more mainstream pursuits but the comparison between a live event and a TV broadcast was daft, although generally his point seemed sound - that it was important to remember what most of the country was doing, not just those in trendy London circles. Perhaps he could have chosen to quote Jonathan Aitken less too.
Overall, it was very accessible without seeming too neat. He liked to quote polls indicating the population at large's thoughts as well as key media figures, even when it wasn't positive in the case of Enoch Powell, and it focused on both the wider trends and individual stories across all topics. But while his publisher was clearly pleased enough with sales figures to commission further books on the 70s, Sandbrook ought to remember that 7.6 billion people probably have no idea who he is.
With the sheer amount of content, Sandbrook's skill is to give detailed accounts of pivotal cabinet scenes while covering other subjects much more concisely, and as a result no chapter feels too long despite taking about half an hour to read. As a result this was not a book for a quick dip into as you get much more from the subjects when reading them in one sitting. Nor is it strictly chronological, with the political developments covered in order while other chapters could span a few years when discussing new towns or high rise council housing.
Part of my interest is due to a gap in my knowledge, and perhaps others will consider this quite elementary. However, I know about the Beatles and rarely care for the background stories of musicians, and yet I still found the music sections interesting; likewise, the films I have never seen. There were some minor irritations, and pointing out that 11 million people were watching a given programme on television compared to just 250,000 who watched The Rolling Stones in Hyde Park came across as churlish. The author regularly pointed out the relative popularity of media pet interests and more mainstream pursuits but the comparison between a live event and a TV broadcast was daft, although generally his point seemed sound - that it was important to remember what most of the country was doing, not just those in trendy London circles. Perhaps he could have chosen to quote Jonathan Aitken less too.
Overall, it was very accessible without seeming too neat. He liked to quote polls indicating the population at large's thoughts as well as key media figures, even when it wasn't positive in the case of Enoch Powell, and it focused on both the wider trends and individual stories across all topics. But while his publisher was clearly pleased enough with sales figures to commission further books on the 70s, Sandbrook ought to remember that 7.6 billion people probably have no idea who he is.
January 21, 2022
Picking up from what its prequel had left off, both Tories and Labours were gearing up for an election. This time it was a rather handicapped Tories with Sir Alec Douglas Home, a rather out-of-place figure, against a seemingly overwhelming, man of modernity and science, Harold Wilson, whose white heat slogan promised a brave new world to voters who began to be accustomed to material affluences brought by previous Macmillan administration. Even with riding such momentum, Wilson got a very close majority. Thus, Britain’s cautious sixties, or more popularly known as the swinging sixties, continued.
While Wilson’s administration jumped from one folly to another, like the futile attempt to defend the pound sterling right to its failure to beat the trade union through its “In Place of Strife” bill, we followed some of the Labour’s greatest: Wilson the master tactician, so masterful he was that he was lacking sorely in long term vision, Callaghan the keeper of the cloth hat, friend of the trade union whom ironically became the catalyst of his downfall in the future, the manic Brown, whose endless gaffes caused Wilson endless headache. Other important political figures from the other side of the aisle also featured: the oversold Ted Heath, the prophetic, but rather aloof, Enoch Powell, ranting about the danger of immigration, or the incendiary Rev. Ian Paisley, stoking religious strife in Northern Ireland.
Even against such shambles, Britain’s culture continued to develop itself. The Beatles made their names, setting out for the British invasion, with the likes of the Rolling Stones following closely, while modern pop-art, the Avengers and Doctor Who, also, the miniskirt were all the rage. In legal front, the campaign for abolition of death penalty and decriminalisation of homosexuality found headway, due to the rather liberal Home Secretary at that time, Roy Jenkins. However, despite these rather bewildering changes, the often feared chaos that would be predicted never arrived, and British continued its creeping revolutions.
As with other books that combining political and cultural discussions, I tend to pick up pace during the politics part, while noticeably lagging during the culture part. However, as a whole, I view this book as superbly written, and I am looking forward to read the sequels.
While Wilson’s administration jumped from one folly to another, like the futile attempt to defend the pound sterling right to its failure to beat the trade union through its “In Place of Strife” bill, we followed some of the Labour’s greatest: Wilson the master tactician, so masterful he was that he was lacking sorely in long term vision, Callaghan the keeper of the cloth hat, friend of the trade union whom ironically became the catalyst of his downfall in the future, the manic Brown, whose endless gaffes caused Wilson endless headache. Other important political figures from the other side of the aisle also featured: the oversold Ted Heath, the prophetic, but rather aloof, Enoch Powell, ranting about the danger of immigration, or the incendiary Rev. Ian Paisley, stoking religious strife in Northern Ireland.
Even against such shambles, Britain’s culture continued to develop itself. The Beatles made their names, setting out for the British invasion, with the likes of the Rolling Stones following closely, while modern pop-art, the Avengers and Doctor Who, also, the miniskirt were all the rage. In legal front, the campaign for abolition of death penalty and decriminalisation of homosexuality found headway, due to the rather liberal Home Secretary at that time, Roy Jenkins. However, despite these rather bewildering changes, the often feared chaos that would be predicted never arrived, and British continued its creeping revolutions.
As with other books that combining political and cultural discussions, I tend to pick up pace during the politics part, while noticeably lagging during the culture part. However, as a whole, I view this book as superbly written, and I am looking forward to read the sequels.
May 28, 2025
This is kinda more of the same, only with a much more negative tone throughout. This is understandable, given what was to follow (the Troubles, economic crises, the break-up of the Beatles, etc etc), but it feels like the entire book is focused on foreshadowing what the author knows is coming rather than what was actually happening at the time.
It makes the whole thing feel very old school, teleological history, rather than the semi-revisionist ("the Sixties weren't that revolutionary!) argument Sandbrook seems to think he's making. (That argument largely made very explicitly in the final paragraph of most chapters, becoming really rather tedious after a while...)
Given all this - and the clear tease in the conclusion that the light of the new Thatcherite dawn is beginning to appear beyond the dark horizon with her appointment to Ted Heath's 1970s Cabinet - throughout I found myself distracted by trying to work out what Sandbrook was leaving out or downplaying.
Given his core focus on popular culture and politics, three key questions remain unanswered, for me:
1) How did the "Swinging London" cliché come about, given Sandbrook seems so keen to dismiss it as marginal? And what impact did this have on Britain's self-perception and international perceptions?
2) Why does Sandbrook seem to believe that things that weren't embraced by the majority of the population weren't important? Few things change overnight - does that the point at which momentum for change starts to build isn't important?
3) Harold Wilson is repeatedly referred to as "a master tactician" - about the only semi-positive thing Sandbrook has to say about him. Why aren't we given any real examples of this tactical mastery? As presented here he seems like a bumbling incompetent who was hated by most of his colleagues. Yet he ended up forming governments after *four* general elections,.so he must have been doing something right. What?
I think I've had enough of this series for now - especially given how depressing the next two books are likely to be, spanning the period 1970-79... May come back to them in a few months...
It makes the whole thing feel very old school, teleological history, rather than the semi-revisionist ("the Sixties weren't that revolutionary!) argument Sandbrook seems to think he's making. (That argument largely made very explicitly in the final paragraph of most chapters, becoming really rather tedious after a while...)
Given all this - and the clear tease in the conclusion that the light of the new Thatcherite dawn is beginning to appear beyond the dark horizon with her appointment to Ted Heath's 1970s Cabinet - throughout I found myself distracted by trying to work out what Sandbrook was leaving out or downplaying.
Given his core focus on popular culture and politics, three key questions remain unanswered, for me:
1) How did the "Swinging London" cliché come about, given Sandbrook seems so keen to dismiss it as marginal? And what impact did this have on Britain's self-perception and international perceptions?
2) Why does Sandbrook seem to believe that things that weren't embraced by the majority of the population weren't important? Few things change overnight - does that the point at which momentum for change starts to build isn't important?
3) Harold Wilson is repeatedly referred to as "a master tactician" - about the only semi-positive thing Sandbrook has to say about him. Why aren't we given any real examples of this tactical mastery? As presented here he seems like a bumbling incompetent who was hated by most of his colleagues. Yet he ended up forming governments after *four* general elections,.so he must have been doing something right. What?
I think I've had enough of this series for now - especially given how depressing the next two books are likely to be, spanning the period 1970-79... May come back to them in a few months...
June 26, 2022
I am a big fan of these expansive, well researched (apparently) and detailed social histories of the UK. This is the third of these tomes I have read, filling in the gap between "Never had it so good" and "Seasons in the Sun". Perversely, I didn't read them in order but they stand alone of course, covering specific periods in the history of my country of birth.
As I mentioned in my reviews of previous books, reading these is a rewarding and fascinating adventure but the text is small and the pages, many. Despite enjoying the read and coming back to it frequently, it still took me over a month to consume. Admittedly I don't read fast and I had a lot going on over the past 5 weeks but still, it is an undertaking.
This volume covers the first administration of Harold Wilson until his loss to Heath in 1970. The "White Heat" of the title refers to the social and societal change promised by Wilson and his socialist government, a promise that unravelled into the chaos of devaluation, runs on sterling, inflation, austerity and battles with the Unions especially Hugh Scanlon ("Hughie, get your tanks off my lawn) and Jack Jones. The relatively narrow loss to the Tories was unexpected (although perhaps not so much in hindsight) and led to 4 years of a Heath premiership covered in the next volume entitled "State of emergency". It is the travails of the Wilson administration that form the bedrock of the book but there is plenty about life in the UK during this time too.
Sports, fashion and especially music are broadly and deeply discussed and it is fascinating if you are interested in the UK history of the middle third of the 20th Century, especially if you lived through any of it. I thoroughly enjoy these books and plan to tackle the next in the series later this year. They are well worth your time.
As I mentioned in my reviews of previous books, reading these is a rewarding and fascinating adventure but the text is small and the pages, many. Despite enjoying the read and coming back to it frequently, it still took me over a month to consume. Admittedly I don't read fast and I had a lot going on over the past 5 weeks but still, it is an undertaking.
This volume covers the first administration of Harold Wilson until his loss to Heath in 1970. The "White Heat" of the title refers to the social and societal change promised by Wilson and his socialist government, a promise that unravelled into the chaos of devaluation, runs on sterling, inflation, austerity and battles with the Unions especially Hugh Scanlon ("Hughie, get your tanks off my lawn) and Jack Jones. The relatively narrow loss to the Tories was unexpected (although perhaps not so much in hindsight) and led to 4 years of a Heath premiership covered in the next volume entitled "State of emergency". It is the travails of the Wilson administration that form the bedrock of the book but there is plenty about life in the UK during this time too.
Sports, fashion and especially music are broadly and deeply discussed and it is fascinating if you are interested in the UK history of the middle third of the 20th Century, especially if you lived through any of it. I thoroughly enjoy these books and plan to tackle the next in the series later this year. They are well worth your time.
February 18, 2022
This 1000+ page history is rather disillusioning to someone like me who rather romanticises this time in Britain. But an historian tries to break down myths and replace them with evidence - and I think Sandbrook does a fair job of it, while doing a very good job of keeping it all readable.
His thesis is that the novelties that people associate with Britain, and particularly London, in the 1960s were largely the experience of a privileged few. And he provides compelling evidence for this. Britons largely remained sexist, homophobic, racist, and unimpressed with the notion of social revolution. The most significant changes that actually took hold in people's lives during the period rather than later were the unprecedented prosperity of the middle class and the increased freedom of women to have both work and leisure, and to consider divorce without the threat of dramatic economic repercussions.
While he covers an impressive range of historical experiences, music, cinema, immigration, Northern Ireland, liberal changes to the law (and those changes were profound even if largely unpopular with the public), foreign policy, labour relations, and more, his real enthusiasm is for the dramas inside Wilson's Labour cabinet. You have a far more rounded impression of George Brown and Barbara Castle at the end of the book than you do of Paul McCartney or Michael Caine. That unevenness is probably the biggest weakness of this history.
While I'm sure many details and analyses that Sandbrook makes can be justly criticised by expert historians on those subjects, he has done a fine job of providing an entertaining, informative overview of the period with a pretty admirable dedication to fair treatment of political opposites without excusing abominable people.
His thesis is that the novelties that people associate with Britain, and particularly London, in the 1960s were largely the experience of a privileged few. And he provides compelling evidence for this. Britons largely remained sexist, homophobic, racist, and unimpressed with the notion of social revolution. The most significant changes that actually took hold in people's lives during the period rather than later were the unprecedented prosperity of the middle class and the increased freedom of women to have both work and leisure, and to consider divorce without the threat of dramatic economic repercussions.
While he covers an impressive range of historical experiences, music, cinema, immigration, Northern Ireland, liberal changes to the law (and those changes were profound even if largely unpopular with the public), foreign policy, labour relations, and more, his real enthusiasm is for the dramas inside Wilson's Labour cabinet. You have a far more rounded impression of George Brown and Barbara Castle at the end of the book than you do of Paul McCartney or Michael Caine. That unevenness is probably the biggest weakness of this history.
While I'm sure many details and analyses that Sandbrook makes can be justly criticised by expert historians on those subjects, he has done a fine job of providing an entertaining, informative overview of the period with a pretty admirable dedication to fair treatment of political opposites without excusing abominable people.
February 6, 2020
2nd in a series of five books on recent British History.
No need to change the formula - you get alternate chapters on politics, then social history - so the 790 pages never get boring.
Politics - The Wilson Labour and just coming into the Heath Conservative years. We certainly had character politicians then. My favourite - George Brown, the permanently drunk foreign secretary. Seemed to spend his days apologising to everyone. A great sense of technological advancement and hope.
Social History - Beatles appear an awful lot - so do the Stones. Nods to the Kinks/Animals. No doubting Pop Music was important culturally. The description of the 1966 World Cup final actually had me in tears. If he wants to give up the Social History, he would make a damn fine sports writer. TV a new medium - and the book ends with a review of the importance of Dad's Army in documenting the national psyche of the age.
Interspersed are some real gems of information and characters - 1964 and half of the the population is under 35. That is staggering.
Always pointers to things to look into. In the month it took me to read the book, I have watched Ipcress File, Alfie and If. I have listened to the Animals. I have added on to the list of things to look into, the fashion photographer Terrance Donovan and Kevin McDonalds Sibylla's Night Club. I have purchased the Books London Spy and The New London Spy.
I found it informative and easy to read and will be moving onto book 3.
No need to change the formula - you get alternate chapters on politics, then social history - so the 790 pages never get boring.
Politics - The Wilson Labour and just coming into the Heath Conservative years. We certainly had character politicians then. My favourite - George Brown, the permanently drunk foreign secretary. Seemed to spend his days apologising to everyone. A great sense of technological advancement and hope.
Social History - Beatles appear an awful lot - so do the Stones. Nods to the Kinks/Animals. No doubting Pop Music was important culturally. The description of the 1966 World Cup final actually had me in tears. If he wants to give up the Social History, he would make a damn fine sports writer. TV a new medium - and the book ends with a review of the importance of Dad's Army in documenting the national psyche of the age.
Interspersed are some real gems of information and characters - 1964 and half of the the population is under 35. That is staggering.
Always pointers to things to look into. In the month it took me to read the book, I have watched Ipcress File, Alfie and If. I have listened to the Animals. I have added on to the list of things to look into, the fashion photographer Terrance Donovan and Kevin McDonalds Sibylla's Night Club. I have purchased the Books London Spy and The New London Spy.
I found it informative and easy to read and will be moving onto book 3.
August 25, 2021
Less insightful than its predecessor and Sandbrook's political leanings encroach on the narration more, too. I personally do see the value in recounting the well-trodden stories of the Beatles, the Stones and the 1966 World Cup, but the level of detail gone into here about the minutiae of football matches and personal squabbles adds nothing but window dressing. And for all Sandbrook likes to hammer home the point (which I agree with) that 'Swinging London' was a privileged and pretentious enclave unrepresentative of the experience of most ordinary Britons, he can't help but keep an inordinate amount of focus on the very swinging set he decries and, in general, on London. English regions outside the South East, with the exception of interesting narration on anti-immigration campaigning in the West Midlands, are generally wheeled out as a homogenous mass of deprivation seen only in relation to and as a contrast with the London political and cultural scene. Northern Ireland rightfully has a few chapters dedicated to it, but Scotland and Wales are barely mentioned at all - I don't think Wales was mentioned even once. I get that this is meant to be a general, popular history of the period, but ultimately Sandbrook undermines his own argument against a young, middle-class London-centric image of the 60s by essentially positioning almost everything in relation to that scene.
April 4, 2020
This the second of the author’s history of post war Britain, the sixties in all its glory. The Wilson labour government inherited a deficit from the previous Tory administration( yes, it’s not just the left that is remembered for these things!) and wanted to forge itself in the white heat of technology. Like the other Harold, Macmillan, this Govt would start well but suffer Ill fortune and Ill judgements. And here it is : the social changes, the Vietnam war, the music, the Irish troubles. Against the hippy culture and some good legislative change is that for all the peace and love we were still deeply institutionally racist . And if the deference given to the Royals etc was giving way to celebrity culture exemplified in Beatlemania, that too is a case that the more things change....
One of Sandbrook’s great strengths, along with a knack for political précis , is the way he shows how popular culture reflects the political and social picture ; sometimes he misjudges what is truly representative, but this is still a good chronicle, and as a Tory that he is he gives this Labour run a very good hearing. Also as the Tory that he is, it’s clear that Heath is not his favourite of his party’s leaders .......
One of Sandbrook’s great strengths, along with a knack for political précis , is the way he shows how popular culture reflects the political and social picture ; sometimes he misjudges what is truly representative, but this is still a good chronicle, and as a Tory that he is he gives this Labour run a very good hearing. Also as the Tory that he is, it’s clear that Heath is not his favourite of his party’s leaders .......
July 12, 2022
I found this a very readable, very though-provoking and interesting book. It's not that long since i read the first in this series and it's also a period close to where my memories start so much of the people and events are not new to me which was the case with Never Had It So Good. Having said that, it changed my perspective on some things, and reinforced my views on others, not least the "Swinging Sixties" myth. Having been brought up by a father who preferred the Stones to the Beatles i wasn't surprised to read that The Beatles were not the force they now seem to be.
The politics of the time was more complicated and difficult than i previously thought, it seems there were some very tough times indeed. We have the beginnings of "The Troubles" proper in Northern Ireland. I was quite surprised to hear how little attention was paid to those issues on the eastern side of the Irish Sea.
It held my attention and i will certainly dip into again as a cross reference when the nineteen sixties come up again. Would i want to go back and live there instead of now? Maybe but not without knowing what would come next!
The politics of the time was more complicated and difficult than i previously thought, it seems there were some very tough times indeed. We have the beginnings of "The Troubles" proper in Northern Ireland. I was quite surprised to hear how little attention was paid to those issues on the eastern side of the Irish Sea.
It held my attention and i will certainly dip into again as a cross reference when the nineteen sixties come up again. Would i want to go back and live there instead of now? Maybe but not without knowing what would come next!
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 17, 2024
I loved this book. The popular perception of the 1960s in Britain is the movie p”Blow Up.” Sandbrook argues that while there was change (increased access to birth control, homosexual rights, Britain’s changing demographics), people (the “non literate” portion of the population, as one minister termed them) were generally opposed to these changes, particularly non white immigrants and the end of capital punishment. There is considerable myth busting as in the other works in the series. Enoch Powell was not as fixated on being a racist as one might think, although he was enough of one to insist on separate Rand special rights for white people from his humble Mayfair mansion. Sandbrook is not really a fan of Harold Wilson and this book is filled with all manner of political intrigue. However, the most hilarious figure in this period, funnier than Monty Python, is Wilson’s deputy, George Brown, who at one point drunkenly asked a Peruvian cardinal to rumba to the Peruvian national anthem, which he mistook for dance music (he was foreign secretary)..
This is an excellent addition to the series, Sandbrook needs to write faster because it have almost finished all of them.
This is an excellent addition to the series, Sandbrook needs to write faster because it have almost finished all of them.
August 26, 2021
A highly enjoyable popular history of the sixties in the UK and forms one volume of Sandbrook’s treatments of each decade.
This volume follows the Wilson Labour government from its optimistic vision of the “white heat” of technology that gives the book its title to the shock defeat to the underdog Edward Heath in 1970.
Interspersing political commentary with the contemporary landscape, it covers music, fashion, design, film, television, strangely only referencing sport with England’s World Cup campaigns of 1966 and 70.
Sandbrook successfully punctures the cliches of the swinging sixties by illustrating real life outside of the small groups of London- based figureheads that most of the swinging applied to. Contains a useful bibliography for those wanting to pursue aspects of the book in more detail.
The writing is accessible and the lead up to the last Wilson election campaign reads like a thriller.
Well recommended, and leaves you wanting to immediately race into the follow up volumes.
This volume follows the Wilson Labour government from its optimistic vision of the “white heat” of technology that gives the book its title to the shock defeat to the underdog Edward Heath in 1970.
Interspersing political commentary with the contemporary landscape, it covers music, fashion, design, film, television, strangely only referencing sport with England’s World Cup campaigns of 1966 and 70.
Sandbrook successfully punctures the cliches of the swinging sixties by illustrating real life outside of the small groups of London- based figureheads that most of the swinging applied to. Contains a useful bibliography for those wanting to pursue aspects of the book in more detail.
The writing is accessible and the lead up to the last Wilson election campaign reads like a thriller.
Well recommended, and leaves you wanting to immediately race into the follow up volumes.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 78 reviews