Banality in Politics: Margaret Thatcher and the Biographers
| Author | Mark Garnett |
| Published date | 01 May 2007 |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1478-9299.2007.00127.x |
| Date | 01 May 2007 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Banality in Politics: Margaret Thatcher and
the Biographers
Mark Garnett
University of Lancaster
There are numerous biographies of Margaret Thatcher, but as yet no full-length study has been written
by a political scientist.This is a disappointing omission from the literature, and reflects a general tendency
to undervalue biographical studies. One result has been the production of scholarly work on the
Conservative party between 1975 and 1990 which is unduly abstract and often misleading. Equally,
although some excellent biographies have been produced – and Thatcher’s memoirs are among the best
of their genre – the unique perspectives of political science can yield some fascinating insights into her
career, her party and the changing nature of British government. This article traces some of the crucial
interactions which influenced Thatcher – her family background, her experiences within the Conser-
vative party, her electioneering and her conduct of government. It concludes that although Thatcher’s
personality developed as a result of these encounters, as an adult she affected institutions far more than
they affected her.This raises interesting, but not insuperable challenges for political scientists. Individuals
do matter, and their influence can be appraised within a broader context. Ironically, it seems that complex
characters conform more readily to generalisable norms of political conduct;Thatcher, by contrast, broke
many of the accepted rules precisely because her personality was so banal.
‘What a banal woman!’ exclaimed the journalist T. E. Utley after his first meeting
with Margaret Thatcher (Sherman, 2005, p. 26). Later Utley changed his mind,
but his initial verdict had been right. Although Thatcher was the longest-serving
British prime minister of the democratic era, she was the least interesting person
to hold the office since Viscount Goderich. She had no outside interests, no
discernible imaginative powers and a limited sense of humour. Most of her
memorable phrases were scripted for her – the exceptions, like the notorious ‘We
have become a grandmother’, usually leave a chilling impression. Although the
word ‘Thatcherism’ will outlive her, it denotes an odd assemblage of unoriginal
ideas, rather than a novel and coherent approach to the business of government.
But, through a conjunction of fortuitous circumstances, the ‘banal woman’ came
to preside over her country at a crucial time. This is enough to justify the flood
of biographical studies which poured from the press after 1975, when she became
leader of the Conservative party. Few students of politics will think the early
books worth more than a cursory glance today, although some of them contain
valuable nuggets (Cosgrave, 1978; Murray, 1980; Wapshott and Brooke, 1983).The
best biographies, by far, are the volumes by HugoYoung and John Campbell – the
former written when Thatcher was confident of leading her party to a fourth
election victory, and the other, a two-volume study, completed after the
announcement that she would no longer make public speeches (Campbell, 2000;
2003; Young, 1989). The other indispensable published source is Thatcher’s
© 2007 The Author. Journal compilation © 2007 Political Studies Association
T H AT C H E R A N D T H E B I O G R A P H E R S
173
autobiography, also in two volumes (Thatcher, 1993; 1995). Opinions differ about
the literary quality, but in every respect the two books compare very favourably
to some prime ministerial memoirs (see, for example, Callaghan, 1987; Home,
1976).
The impression that the world already knows enough about the personality of
Thatcher was enhanced in 2005, with the appearance of John Sergeant’s Maggie
(Sergeant, 2005).The book is oddly reminiscent of Spike Milligan’s Adolf Hitler –
My Part in His Downfall; the career of the purported subject forms only part of the
background, while the author talks about himself. Charles Moore’s official tome
will appear in due course, based on the mass of papers housed at Churchill
College together with other sources unavailable to previous biographers.
However, it is unlikely that Moore will improve on Campbell’s balanced judge-
ments, or unearth any new material which could make Thatcher’s character seem
more attractive. Significantly, two of the most arresting recent additions to the
literature have been books about her husband and son (Hollingsworth and
Halloran, 2005; Thatcher, 1996).
Yet while so many have offered their thoughts about Thatcher, one source of
speculation has remained reticent. Political scientists have lavished attention on
Thatcherism and its impact, but they have not written much about the woman
herself. One of the best of many edited collections on the Thatcher years begins
with an explicit declaration of self-denial. According to Denis Kavanagh and
Anthony Seldon,‘We need to resist the temptation to explain too much in terms
of [Thatcher’s] dominating personality’ (Kavanagh and Seldon, 1989, p. v). It
would obviously be a mistake to explain ‘too much’ by reference to a single
individual. However, there is a parallel danger of belittling Thatcher’s personal role
in the political changes of the 1980s. Kavanagh and Seldon’s The Thatcher Effect
contains 25 chapters. Surely room could have been found for a contribution
which provided a sober assessment of the role played by that ‘dominating per-
sonality’ in the turbulent years between 1979 and 1990?
For many political scientists, of course, biography is a form of light entertainment
rather than a respectable academic undertaking. But it can be argued that for
anyone who wants to explore the interaction between individuals and institutions
– rather than just theorising about it – Thatcher provides a unique and fascinating
case study. Unlike her predecessors and most of her contemporaries, she was
prepared to face down established institutions if they opposed her.This defiance
was not the product of a deeply laid plan; only interesting people engage in that
style of thinking. Ultimately, even Thatcher’s spontaneous radicalism was subject
to institutional constraints. She was forced to leave office, not because she refused
to change course, but because she regarded any opposition to her will as funda-
mentally illegitimate, and persisted with her vocal protests even after she had
compromised.
This is hardly the place for another detailed account of Lady Thatcher’s life, or
even an attempt to supply the missing chapter from The Thatcher Effect. But on the
© 2007 The Author. Journal compilation © 2007 Political Studies Association
Political Studies Review: 2007, 5(2)
174
M A R K G A R N E T T
basis of existing material, it is possible to sketch some of the biographical themes
which are most relevant to an understanding of events during Thatcher’s political
career.The evidence shows that even banal individuals are the product of complex
social factors, but that even when these influences have been accounted for, an
irreducible and inexplicable essence of character remains.
Early Influences
Margaret Thatcher’s childhood certainly explains her lifelong conviction that, on
any issue under discussion, her view was correct. Although...
To continue reading
Request your trial