The obit was posted on the website yesterday afternoon, after Private Eye pointed out that there was none, and a full three weeks after her death. It got her age wrong. I DESPAIR I REALLY DO!!
So you mean to say she *was* actually 34 and all this time I've been annoyed over nothing?! How unlike meDawn's wiki said she was born in '86. & FWIW, her good friend Juliet Jacques wrote an obit of her and said she was 34.
Absolutely this. He is only a food critic, and only even has THAT job because of who his father was.He’s such a bizarre person. I mean, he’s only a food critic. That’s it. He’s not solving world poverty, or splitting atoms. He just puts down words and pushes them around a bit, but without the talent or incision of his Pa. He’s irrelevant really yet the way he goes on you’d think he was the victim of some awful crimes against humanity.
He’s a raging alcoholic right? There’s no other explanation for his bizarre Twitter rants, other than being an outright plonker.
agree, used to love his columns (although disagreed with a lot of his views!!). A.A. Gill would have been a lot of fun to have dinner with. Giles? no thank youGiles is such an inferior critic compared to the late A.A. Gill. Love or loathe him he was incredibly talented with words. I recommend his book Pour Me very highly.
Bloody disgusting that as Dawn said she was sacked by the Grauniad for criticising Tom Watson of all people.Dawn's wiki said she was born in '86. & FWIW, her good friend Juliet Jacques wrote an obit of her and said she was 34. Apparently Dawn's Guardian obit was written by people who knew and were friends with her & aren't Grauniad staff. How that paper has behaved about this whole thing is very odd. She was a brilliant reporter, covering elements of the housing crisis that just aren't well understood. Don't know why they couldn't honour that promptly, despite their role in sacking her.
On topic - Giles - ashamed to say that I used to enjoy his writing but everything he does these days seems to be posinous and bitter. & he's clearly got some deep-seated issues.
It seems like he has a very volatile temper...I’d guess their house is often an unpleasant place to be with Giles raging at the kids and wife about minor issues.Esther admitting she has to play referee between her husband and her children in public to the point of needing to throw money to smooth it over, jfc.
No sympathy for a woman who happily ‘confessed’ (in a paid newspaper column) a big part of her attraction to her husband was his huge London home. As the saying goes, marry for money, earn every penny.
I think part of the initial attraction would also be Giles’ journalism career (and that of his father) - Esther was a failed writer but her connections now have writing for The Times.He’s deeply unpleasant.
I find his marriage fascinating. It’s doesn’t seem as though he has a public head person and at home he is submissive/quiet/devoted spouse and father.
He seems complex, very hard work and entirely joyless to live with. And also it comes across as though he wears this odious behaviour as a badge of pride. A sign of intelligence and superiority that sets him above the plebs that sully his existence in this world.
Is the money really enough? There must be more to it surely?
I left a financially stable marriage as home life became horrendous and my kids were suffering. I’m really struggling getting back into work, having been a SAHM for so long. I don’t regret leaving ever. Surely Esther has no financial issues if she leaves. What pleasure can she get out of being with him? Isn’t she embarrassed by him?
What do you think is the attraction?
Yes I didn’t think of that. You’d think that draw would have faded now though.I think part of the initial attraction would also be Giles’ journalism career (and that of his father) - Esther was a failed writer but her connections now have writing for The Times.