my second biography this year, and definitely not the last. i´ve read three of Virginias books, night and day being one of my favorites of all time, at least of last year, and the only thing I knew about her was that she wrote fucking well, and was somewhat feminist. I really, really enjoyed this book, even though I really DIDNT like how the author sometimes steps in and makes some remarks which made me want to step through the pages and give him a little slap. (TW SA:) right at the beginning of the book he mentions that her half-brothers were behaving rather ungentleman-ly towards her, one incident being one feeling her up, the other thing being the other brother getting into bed with her and, judging from her diary entry, "behaving like a brute", which for me indicates something a little more than just being fucking creepy. however, the author then goes on to say that even though other scholars think that these incidents had a huge influence on Virginia and on her sexual life, he completely dismisses it and literally writes "Virginia made more of a drama of the affair than the facts justify." He backs this up by saying that someone who still writes to their abuser in such an affectionate way and still converses with him cannot possibly have suffered the fate that she "claims" to have suffered. oh, and that the man was so good, and so conventional, that rape couldn´t ever have been in his repertoire. OH! I´m sorry mister, it seems to me there´s some major misogyny leaking out of you. He's also very critical of her feminist/political work. Partly I agree, especially since she mostly seemed to care about her own class, wasn't very intersectional, if at all, and was "the most unpolitical person since Aristoteles invented the word" (ha) - BUT! she makes some great points. In "Three Guineas" (which I haven´t read), her entire tone becomes quite aggressive, criticizing men for war and implying that women would never do such a thing. Listen, there might be some errors here in her train of thought, but I agree, okay? What Nicolson does is argue on the basis of two, TWO, historical figures, Margareth Thatcher and Helen of Troy, that women were just as war-driven as men. Ohhhh, okay. Right. So yeah, even though it was interesting to read a biography that is interwoven with personal encounters with Virginia, I didn't really like these comments, but of course a biography should include critical commentary.