The good things: * Reclaim the women! I am always in favour of a book that hiI read this book courtesy of NetGalley.
I am ambivalent about this book.
The good things: * Reclaim the women! I am always in favour of a book that highlights a woman who has either been forgotten, or whom history has portrayed in an unfavourable-because-patriarchy light. This book largely does that, going into details about Marie's life, highlighting the reasons for the decisions that she made as well as the importance of those actions, not just her womb. These are really important things. * It's accessible. This is intended for a general readership: there are no footnotes, it opens with a list of people the reader can refer back to when the titles etc get to be too much, and it usually balances complex foreign policy decision-making with ease of reading.
The slightly uncomfortable things: * The lack of footnotes etc means it's not the most detailed of historical research: there's not that many primary sources directly used, and no other historians are referenced, which makes me a bit queasy. * There are some editing mistakes. Sentences that lack of a primary verb, probably because there are so many clauses that it's easy to get lost; sentences where it's unclear whether one person with multiple titles, or several different people, are being discussed. * Marie's apparently deliberately decision to remain single after James V's death is lamented as sad for a woman in her 30s. But... she's a widow twice over, she has the disastrous example of her mother-in-law to show how badly things can go for a widowed queen with an infant monarch. Why couldn't this be a sensible political choice? Why couldn't this be a relief to a woman whose life has been tied to the idea of marriage for more than two decades, usually not at her own decision? No evidence to suggest that she regretted this, and so... attributing emotions is a fraught business. It shouldn't be done.
The negative things: * At one point, Clegg describes Marie's daughter Mary as having various ailments, and suggests they may be dismissed as nothing more than an anxiety related disorder. Uh. That's... not good. * The way Marie's whole life is framed around men. Now I understand that to some extent, with the biography of a powerful woman in the sixteenth century this is unavoidable; her male relations were always going to play a huge part, especially early on, and any husband likewise. However, it felt like a lot of space was spent on men and their doings, sometimes only tangentially connected to Marie's life. Perhaps this was for added context, but it just served to detract from making Marie the focus. The greatest example of this is the title. In a book of nearly 220 pages, Henry VIII dies on p140. Marie was on a list of possible wives but got away; she got in his way to some extent around the issue of young Mary marrying Prince Edward... but to call her the Scourge of Henry VIII is ridiculous. I guess it made a good title? But I was expecting to discover that she had actively, and over a long period, skewered Henry's ambitions in the north. Yeh not so much.
Look, overall, for people wanting to find out more about Marie of Guise, this isn't a bad option - not bad at all, in fact. Just beware that it's by no means perfect.
Merged review:
I read this book courtesy of NetGalley.
I am ambivalent about this book.
The good things: * Reclaim the women! I am always in favour of a book that highlights a woman who has either been forgotten, or whom history has portrayed in an unfavourable-because-patriarchy light. This book largely does that, going into details about Marie's life, highlighting the reasons for the decisions that she made as well as the importance of those actions, not just her womb. These are really important things. * It's accessible. This is intended for a general readership: there are no footnotes, it opens with a list of people the reader can refer back to when the titles etc get to be too much, and it usually balances complex foreign policy decision-making with ease of reading.
The slightly uncomfortable things: * The lack of footnotes etc means it's not the most detailed of historical research: there's not that many primary sources directly used, and no other historians are referenced, which makes me a bit queasy. * There are some editing mistakes. Sentences that lack of a primary verb, probably because there are so many clauses that it's easy to get lost; sentences where it's unclear whether one person with multiple titles, or several different people, are being discussed. * Marie's apparently deliberately decision to remain single after James V's death is lamented as sad for a woman in her 30s. But... she's a widow twice over, she has the disastrous example of her mother-in-law to show how badly things can go for a widowed queen with an infant monarch. Why couldn't this be a sensible political choice? Why couldn't this be a relief to a woman whose life has been tied to the idea of marriage for more than two decades, usually not at her own decision? No evidence to suggest that she regretted this, and so... attributing emotions is a fraught business. It shouldn't be done.
The negative things: * At one point, Clegg describes Marie's daughter Mary as having various ailments, and suggests they may be dismissed as nothing more than an anxiety related disorder. Uh. That's... not good. * The way Marie's whole life is framed around men. Now I understand that to some extent, with the biography of a powerful woman in the sixteenth century this is unavoidable; her male relations were always going to play a huge part, especially early on, and any husband likewise. However, it felt like a lot of space was spent on men and their doings, sometimes only tangentially connected to Marie's life. Perhaps this was for added context, but it just served to detract from making Marie the focus. The greatest example of this is the title. In a book of nearly 220 pages, Henry VIII dies on p140. Marie was on a list of possible wives but got away; she got in his way to some extent around the issue of young Mary marrying Prince Edward... but to call her the Scourge of Henry VIII is ridiculous. I guess it made a good title? But I was expecting to discover that she had actively, and over a long period, skewered Henry's ambitions in the north. Yeh not so much.
Look, overall, for people wanting to find out more about Marie of Guise, this isn't a bad option - not bad at all, in fact. Just beware that it's by no means perfect....more
These are beautiful books, even in electronic copy - this Atlas of Forgotten Places, and the Atlas of Improbable PlI read this courtesy of NetGalley.
These are beautiful books, even in electronic copy - this Atlas of Forgotten Places, and the Atlas of Improbable Places; I'm sure they're even more lovely in paper. That's definitely a key thing to note. The photography of each place is generally very good, and evocative of whatever idea is being presented; and the maps are also intriguing. They show where the place is in context - near other towns or within a country or whatever is relevant - and also shows the layout of the particular area. Because with this Atlas in particular, I think, many of the places featured aren't just individual buildings (although there are plenty of those); they're also entire towns, or bits of towns. And the maps show what still exists, what's crumbling, what's changed over time. They're really well produced.
Chapters includes Vacant Properties, Unsettled Situations (abandoned towns, largely), Dilapidated Destinations (tourist spots and hotels), Journeys Ended (airports etc), and Obsolete Institutions. Sometimes the categorising is a bit of a stretch, but I'm happy enough to go along with it. It closes with Alcatraz, which I thought both amusing and fitting; there's a town called Santa Claus, a lighthouse, several hotels, and a Bangkok mall, as well.
I have two quibbles. One is an admittedly minor irritant: the book needed slightly better editing (ashes are interred, not interned, surely). The other is that sometimes most of the entry for a location is a digression - about Napoleon, when the entry is about something on Corsica, or about why an indigenous group where bowler hats when it's about a railway in Bolivia, or how both cardigans and balaclavas were named for military things (a man and a place) associated with the Crimean War, when it's a submarine base in Balaklava. If you're going to feature a place, surely you should spend your two-ish pages talking just about that place? Expanding more on what it was like and what led to its being forgotten? It made me wonder whether Elborough was padding for the sake of making each entry about equal, and pointless words really, really annoy me.
I should also note that the list of places mentioned in the blurb on Goodreads is wrong - three of the places mentioned there do not actually feature in the book that I read (I doublechecked the index and everything). So if you want to read about the abandoned Peter's Ice Cream Factory, it's not in this book.
Those quibbles aside, though, I have no trouble recommending this for the armchair traveller, or the lover of quirky facts. ...more
I read this courtesy of NetGalley. It comes out in May 2022.
I have been known to joke that historical women were invented in the 1960s - before that,I read this courtesy of NetGalley. It comes out in May 2022.
I have been known to joke that historical women were invented in the 1960s - before that, only Cleopatra, the Virgin Mary, Joan of Arc and Elizabeth I existed (obviously none outside of the European context). More recently I have added that queer people were invented in the 21st century.
I was joking, but ... only because there's an element of truth. Straight white men rule history, amiright?
This book, then, is a massively important addition to the history of the fight for suffrage.
I should point out that although I have a fairly substantial library of suffrage books, they are all either Australian or British. My knowledge of the American experience is limited to the film Iron Angels, and the magnificent "Bad Romance" spoof video clip. I do not, therefore, know a lot about the private lives of the main characters like Susan B. Anthony, who aren't covered here in any detail because it's been done elsewhere. It's interesting therefore to get the focus on women who were, apparently, lesser lights - or who have become such as the history of the period has been presented.
I'm also not an expert on queer history, so I don't know whether Rouse's particular definition is standard or expansive. Here, queer is outlined as "individuals who transgressed normative notions of gender and sexuality... suffragists who were not strictly heterosexual or cisgender" (p2). There's a nice point about how language changes and that words we might use to describe relationships today, for instance, may not have been available to or appropriate for people in the past.
The chapters follow general themes, or categories, allowing Rouse to explore different ways in which queerness was expressed - and fought against, in some instances. For example, in the chapter "Mannish Women and Feminine Men", she examines how some suffragists fought against the derisive stereotype of 'mannish women' by insisting that suffragists perform femininity to a signifiant degree - to the detriment of gender non-conforming individuals and those women who advocated less restrictive dress. Other chapters include "Queering Domesticity" and "Queering Family" - so many of these women ended up setting up house together, and whether they were in physically romantic relationships can often not be conclusively determined, but they still spent their lives together! There's also "Queering Transatlantic Alliances", "Queering Space" and "Queering Death", so it covers the entire gamut of suffragist lives.
There's a really nice intersectionalism at work here, too, with commentary on how "queer white suffragists... helped maintain a system of white supremacy by policing access to the vote" (p63), for example. There are definitely black and First Nations people mentioned in the book, but I suspect one problem of not being familiar with the American history here is that I didn't automatically recognise the name of any of the suffragists - let alone recognise whether they were white or not. Still, Rouse did point it out, and made note of the times when white suffragists, for instance, either tried to block black women from marching in demonstrations or told them to go to the back of the line. There's mention, too, of class - something that's often lacking in standard stories of the British fight for suffrage, if it focuses on Emmeline and Charitable Pankhurst and forgets Sylvia.
I'm really glad this book exists. It's a really great look at the American fight for women's suffrage in general (as far as I can tell), as well as presenting a dimension that is much-needed across all history....more
(That, children, is called 'foreshadowing'. You can almost see the BUT lI read this courtesy of NetGalley.
I really, really wanted to love this book.
(That, children, is called 'foreshadowing'. You can almost see the BUT looming behind those words.)
A book that's basically the postcolonialist version of Persian history we've all been waiting for! A view on Persian history that's not just repeating the Greek and Roman commentaries that were absolutely written with a very particular perspective! YES PLEASE. And even more when the Llewellyn-Jones makes the acerbic comment in the introduction about how the concept of European superiority can be dated back to Herodotus etc and the way they presented the terrifying East. So yes, let's have a version of Persian history that is largely based on Persian sources, or uses the Greek sources very carefully - to find the Persian reality behind the Greek propaganda.
And it starts so well. There's a discussion about Persia vs Iran as a name - and I'm not sure whether his explanation of the political nuances there are accurate, so I defer to others on that, but it seemed to make sense within what I do know. There's a discussion about the archaeological activities that give historians what they know from Persepolis etc, and a candid admission about the lack of sources. The Persian history proper starts with a discussion of the movement of different peoples into the area we know today as Iran, and some speculation about how they interacted etc. Then it moves into discussing the development of the Persian empire as empire, and interaction with the Medes. All of this section was intriguing and the use of inscriptions was well done. I did start to get a bit uncomfortable about the lack of reference to other sources - like other historians; I understand that getting the balance of what can seem to be most approachable, and what can seem too scholarly, may revolve around footnotes etc but... there's just no way the author didn't use other references.
I also started to get a bit uncomfortable when the author claimed that Cyrus' mother "delighted in singing Median nursery rhymes to him" (p60 of the e-version), because that seems... weirdly specific? And then I got to the description of him as "lean and good-looking in that way that Persian men are uniquely handsome" (p63 of the e-version) and I had to stop and blink and decide whether to laugh or cry. What happened to treating the Persians as real people and not exoticising them, which I thought was part of the postcolonial agenda? I also have a problem with the statement that "A society that requires such codes of respectful behaviour" (obeisance before the monarch, etc) "is very likely to have autocratic political organisation, characterised by the coercive power of a king" (pp194-5). It just seems too blanket a statement.
And then! We have Darius' half-sister and wife described as "a Lady Macbeth-like villainess, hellbent on power and ruthless in her bloody ambition" (p288) and I really started to wonder whether it was now a different author, or if he had been to sexy the book up. Next we have "years of adoration and unnaturally demonstrative mother love meant that [Darius] was self-centred, cruel, vindictive, and brutal" (p292); and that mothers experience "that particular twang of jealousy... when their sons give their hearts to other women" (p294). In case we worried that it was about misogyny, we then have a eunuch described as "a veritable creature of the court" (uh, eunuchs who are made eunuchs to BE at court are literally that??) who was "born to corruption, whose ambitions were for the very highest office of state" (p333) and I just can't even. The author then has the temerity to accuse the Greeks of employing the "topos of the wicked eunuch" and I need to ask some questions about self-awareness.
So. I am ambivalent about this book. It's a super necessary idea, and the use of Persian inscriptions and the way some of the Greek sources are handled is a really good example of how to read through sources to get more than they think they're saying. On the other hand, some of the descriptions are clearly ridiculous (robes of "chiffon-like linen, gauzy cotton, and shimmering silk" (p293) - not to mention that nursery rhyme - really need some evidence!). And the bits quoted above are enough to make me despair. Did I learn something about the Persian empire and the kings who ruled, and the way it all worked? Absolutely. Is this the last word in Persian imperial history? I sure hope not.
Would not recommend to someone who is completely new to the history of this area and time, or to someone who is naive in reading historical books. For those looking to deepen their knowledge, it's useful - with the caveats above. ...more
This is one of my favourite types of history books.
1. It's about a fairly niche topic - the drinking of Japanese tI read this courtesy of NetGalley.
This is one of my favourite types of history books.
1. It's about a fairly niche topic - the drinking of Japanese tea in America - which is shown to have connections with all sorts of issues and events across many decades. Trade connections! Racism and how attitudes towards different ethnicities develops and is deliberately cultivated! What happens to the samurai class when they're moved out of Japanese society! Civil war and foreign war! Marketing and world expos and food regulation. It's all here, and it's woven in and through the overall topic beautifully.
2. There's intriguing and what seem like weird facts. Like the idea of a punch made from 'very strong tea', plus a 1.25 pounds of sugar, a pint of cream AND THEN a bottle of either claret or champagne. I feel ill even thinking about it. Also, the idea that apparently people used to add Prussian blue to green tea, to give it a stronger colour??
3. There's a personal connection to the author, and it's neither gratuitous (I really like tea!) nor tenuous (my next door neighbour's grandfather lived in Taiwan!) nor overly emphasised. Instead, the Hellyer family had been involved in importing "Japan tea" to America for many years, back when that was what it was called and when - as the subtitle suggests - "Japan filled America's tea cups". When appropriate, the Hellyer family experience is used to illuminate particular aspects of the story - Europeans as merchants in Japan, the shipping to America, and so on.
4. It's just really nicely written. Hellyer has clearly done a lot of research, and has been very thoughtful in the way he's put together the material. The overall story is easy to follow - but there's no sense of a steady march towards a definite end. I mean, in one sense there is, because the reality is that American tastes in tea did change (not least away from tea). But it's not all 'oh woe everything was always leading to downfall' - instead, it follows the changes in fashion and expectations and international relations and shows how those things interrelate with the drinking of, and importing/exporting of, tea.
I love history books about food that illuminate a seemingly mundane part of ordinary life and show just how complicated such things really are. ...more
I like to imagine Nicola Twilley and Geoff Manaugh saying "No one would have believed..." like Richard Burton at the start of Jeff Wayne's War of tI like to imagine Nicola Twilley and Geoff Manaugh saying "No one would have believed..." like Richard Burton at the start of Jeff Wayne's War of the Worlds, when asked how they feel in 2021 about this book. They started it, as far as I can tell, many years before 2020... and then finished it while large portions of the world were getting the ideas of 'quarantine' and 'isolation' mixed up. (As the pair make clear, quarantine is when there is doubt about the infection status of a person or object.)
I came across this book because I am a massive fan of Gastropod, "food through the lens of science and history", co-hosted by Twilley. And as a fan of wide-ranging history in general, it seemed like a good bet that it would be right up my alley. The podcast did one episode using some of the ideas from the book - talking about the quarantining of cocoa plants, mostly, so as to prevent the spread of chocolate-destroying pests, which I am heartily in favour of.
As the name suggests, the book covers both the history and the future of quarantine - and, of course, the present. Many more people know, in 2021, the origins of the word - the 40 days people and cargo on ships were kept out of places like Venice, for fear of sickness. Manaugh and Twilley visit Venice and Dubrovnik and Malta, places where quarantining had a long history in architecture and laws, and occasionally in famous people getting grumpy about being stuck.
The middle section is about quarantine today. As an Australian this is a particularly real issue; we really don't want to bring yet more pests and diseases in if we can avoid it. There's a reason dogs don't get to be smuggled in, JOHNNY DEPP. It was fascinating to read about measures that are used around the world to try and stop invasive stuff - and how often, this is a stop-gap measure, because with ever-increasing world trade it's just so easy for teeny critters and seeds to travel. This section also looks at 'quarantining' radioactive waste - which is a bit of a stretch, since there's no real question about the stuff being dangerous; and the authors acknowledge that it is, indeed, about isolation, rather than quarantine; but their argument is that places doing this stuff are fascinating for 'quarantine tourists' because they showcase 'extreme engineering controls'. And this section also looks at the measures used around space travel: like I didn't know the first couple of sets of Apollo astronauts were required to quarantine for fear of moon diseases.
My one grumble about the book is a minor Australian one. In discussing Australian legislation from 1884, they call Australia "the newly unified continent" (p125). Australia didn't federate until 1901. My quick google suggests that there were, indeed, "Sanitary Conferences" at this time aiming to have a united policy across the colonies, so I guess in that sense the continent was unified?
In the section about the future, Twilley and Manaugh do look at COVID responses, comparing them to medieval responses in terms of government use of power, and even deploy Foucault as a way of examining government (over)reach. We're discussing these questions a lot at the moment, of course, and it was interesting to see it all in this context. And what was completely terrifying was to discover that there's a "data-aggregation and modelling firm with close ties to the US defense industry" (p328) called Palantir. Palantir. The seeing-stones of Tolkien's Middle Earth. Wikipedia notes that "beings of great power could manipulate the stones to see virtually any part of the world". And someone at this company thought this was a good name for this company.
I think, given our situation at the moment, one of the last points made in the book is particularly pertinent: "Ironically, if quarantine does work... it will almost always be perceived as an overreaction" (p349).
Well written, well researched, broad ranging and examining difficult issues with compassion and clarity. This is a great history of quarantine and I thoroughly recommend it. Exactly WHEN you want to read it will depend on your experience of 2020 and 2021, I suspect. ...more
Honestly I've had such a good year for book-related histories: The Gilded Page (MI read this courtesy of NetGalley.
Oh. My.
What an astonishing book.
Honestly I've had such a good year for book-related histories: The Gilded Page (Mary Wellesley), and The Bookseller of Florence (Ross King), and now this. Interestingly, this book contains parts of those two, because understanding how libraries function requires some knowledge of books themselves function, and how the book trade functions. It's been like a mini-course in the whole book production history of Europe.
The authors begin with a discussion of the fabled Library of Alexandria, which is appropriate given its mythical place in the history of libraries... and ALSO that there's some attempt to do something similar in the Alexandria of today, which is, let's say, not the Alexandria of yesteryear.
What utterly intrigued me was the way that exactly what a library is FOR has changed over the centuries. I am a huge fan of the public library, and absolutely uphold its place as a community resource. I do know that in medieval Europe, libraries were the province of monasteries and nobles - not least because that reflects the literacy of the age, and also the aspirations of such people.
It was the use of libraries as exhibitions of wealth that was one aspect explored beautifully here - collecting the 'right' books, and beautiful versions. And then how do you have architecture that reflects that? If you're worried about scholars nicking off with your precious tomes, and you only have a few books, then you chain the books up (literally) and your building reflects that. But when books starting getting more accessible and you are HAPPY for them to be accessed (unlike Oxford libraries not allowing students in and having opening hours for about three hours a week), then what the rooms look like needs to change.
I deeply appreciated the exploration of libraries as both weapons within colonialism and imperialism, and victims of it too. Colonial outposts in NZ and India being sent books; translations into the languages of the colonised; and libraries being looted, or outright destroyed, across the globe - these are things that need to be remembered and dealt with as people keep thinking about the use and abuse of knowledge as power. It would have been so easy to not include those things, and to stick with somehow seeing libraries as just repositories of books - ignoring books as power - but I'm so glad the authors wanted to give a rich and full exploration of libraries as institutions.
Look, I just loved this book. It's beautifully written and has lovely images. It covers predominantly European examples of libraries. It does so across just over two millennia, from monastery to castle to private home to public institution. And the modern arguments about what a library is for! Clearly these authors are defenders of the existence of libraries, but they're not just stuck in mid-20th century versions. They are, if anything, ambitious for what place libraries can and should have in communities.
I love books and I love libraries and this was a wonderful history of them both. ...more
Partly this is a factor of the subject matter: according to McQuinn, there's a serious lack of documentarThis is not quite the book I was hoping for.
Partly this is a factor of the subject matter: according to McQuinn, there's a serious lack of documentary evidence about either Isabelle of Gloucester or Isabelle of Angouleme; and what does exist in the latter case is often dreadfully prejudiced. So clearly that's a problem.
Partly, for me at least, it was the writing style. Because of that dearth of information, there's a HUGE whack of "maybe"s and "probably"s throughout. In order to make it a book at all, the first two chapters - on Childhood and Education, and The Role of Women and Queens - is a long, meandering discourse on "some of what we know about medieval women" and then occasional reference back to how this may possibly have impacted on either or both of the Isabelles. This vagueness really irked me. For me personally, it was also boring: in part because I already knew most of it (which I know isn't the case with every reader... but also, are your general reader going to pick up a book about John's wives? He's one of the least interesting of the English kings, surely).
Then there were phrases like "Romantic fantasies of teenage girls cannot truly have changed much over time" (p23) when part of of the book has been addressing both how we can't know exact details of their education, and also how noble girls were brought up to expect political marriages so... you can't have it both ways. I'm also going to say that claiming anything about your expectations of marriage as "entirely natural" is a problem. And "assuming that teenagers across time periods are at least a little bit similar" (p116) is just a big nope from me.
The sections where there's actual evidence about the two women were quite interesting, and McQuinn compared different perspectives in useful ways. I was particularly intrigued to learn that when the second Isabelle was quite young and early in her marriage to John, she was placed in the care of the first Isabelle - that is, the new wife is in the care of the previous wife. Which would just have been weird. Perhaps less so than you might expect for the women, though, given that there's a large age difference and that neither of them actually picked John.
I'll admit that I ignored the final chapter on literary representations of the two women. ...more
Part travel memoir, part personal memoir, and part food history; it's an intriguing combination. Furstenau discusses her oRead courtesy of NetGalley.
Part travel memoir, part personal memoir, and part food history; it's an intriguing combination. Furstenau discusses her own history - born of Bengali parents, in Thailand, and then growing up in the US. Throughout the book are comments about how hard it was to demonstrate that her visa to India ought to reflect that heritage, but given a lack of paperwork for her parents, it wasn't to be. This sense of questioning where she belongs is woven through her discussion of "Indian" food, as she looks into the histories of both ingredients and dishes. "Indian" because some of what is discussed is about how now-common ingredients in Indian food actually came to India (green peas, chillis, potato... cheese...); and also some things you might think of as Indian are not, and some things appropriated by others are, of course, from India.
The author travels around India, sometimes visiting relatives and sometimes finding food-connected people, who talk about history and share recipes and teach her to cook some of the dishes. And these recipes are included, of course - Sandesh and Nolen Gur Cheesecake; Kedgeree (which is Indian, not Scottish, and the story of it becoming a breakfast staple is fascinating and I have never eaten it!); Koraishutir Kochuri (puffed bread with green pea filling, and goodness I really want to make this)... and so many others.
This book is very readable; it's enjoyable to journey around India, it's varied in what ingredients and ideas it discusses, and the recipes seem easy to follow. ...more
What an absolutely remarkable book. It's not quite what I was expecting - which was a history of, I guess, where xenophobia has occurred, and maybe itWhat an absolutely remarkable book. It's not quite what I was expecting - which was a history of, I guess, where xenophobia has occurred, and maybe it consequences. But more interestingly that that, this is a history of the very concept of xenophobia. It does use examples of historical xenophobia - of course it does; you can't discuss what the word means without showing what it has looked like. But it's more psychological and philosophical than I was expecting, as a way of getting to the guts of why humans can react so poorly towards strangers, and how we have tried to explain that to ourselves.
And the first thing I learned is that 'xenophobia' as a word is brand new. Like, end of the 19th century new. Makari goes through his whole journey of discovery about this - detailing what he read and what explanations he chased down - in what almost amounts to a thriller in terms of sudden clues popping up. This was the first hint that not only was this going to be fascinating information, but also that the style was going to keep me engaged and keep me ploughing through what otherwise might have been overwhelming, both intellectually and emotionally. This was also building on a very personal opening to the book: Makari outlines his own family's experience of being "xenos" - strangers - descended from Lebanese ancestors, living in America, experiencing the dismissal of "Arabs" and wondering about his family's place in the world. Being published in 2021, as well, and of course, the question of xenophobia and how "we" react to the "stranger" remains as tragically relevant today as it has been at any time in the past.
Part 1 explores "The Origins of Xenophobia" - where the word originates, how it was used to describe the so-called Boxer Rebellion in China - and therefore the 'mad' reaction of Chinese people to Westerners and all the 'enlightenment' they could bring. And then how the word was used in colonial contexts - xenophobia is a product of the inferior mind, because 'they' don't understand what 'we' (colonisers) are bringing, and they don't know any better than to be hostile! And then on through Conrad's Heart of Darkness, flipping that idea of xenophobia around and showing how colonisers might be the scared ones... and then on into discussion of immigration. Sadly, that connects really early on with Jewish migration, and then of course the book leads into the Holocaust.
Part 2, then, explores "Inside the Xenophobic Mind." I have neither philosophical nor psychological training, so this part both taught me many new things, and was also surprisingly approachable. Well, approachable in terms of understanding in general, although again confronting in some parts - like the experiments to train kids into having phobias to try and understand how such fears can develop... and also because some of the philosophical aspects definitely went over my head. So this section, too, made me think much more both about xenophobia as a concept but also about how different groups have approached the desire to understand it - external or internal reasons, love and projection and can we ever truly know someone else... and so on.
I would heartily recommend this to people who are interested in why humans act the way they do, for people seeking an understanding of the way the world is and has been; whether you're an historian or not, whether you've knowledge of psychology or not, Makari makes difficult concepts relatively straightforward to grasp. And he doesn't claim to be able to explain all of humanity, but the book does suggest a range of ways that we might try to think about ourselves, and our neighbours, and our leaders... and think about why we react the way we do. And that can only be a good thing, right? In fact, I think that as many people as possible should read this book, so that we can be much better at talking about these things, and be a little less defensive. ...more
I already love medieval manuscripts and the stories that go along with them - about marginalia and the shRead thanks to NetGalley.
I loved this book.
I already love medieval manuscripts and the stories that go along with them - about marginalia and the sheer effort that goes in to making one. What Wellesley has done here is look at manuscripts to understand the people who made them, used them, saved them, and occasionally caused their destruction. I read this in uncorrected proof, as an ebook (and there's some twisty lineage there from hand-written sheepskin to pixels), so I'm not sure whether the published version will have images, but that's about the only thing that would make this even more of a joy to read.
An overview of the chapters will show just why this is such a fabulous book. Chapter 1: Discoveries. aka "near heart-attack-land at the idea that the Book of Margery Kempe was nearly not found." She uses just a couple of manuscript discoveries to show just how contingent our 21st century knowledge of, awareness of, and possession of such manuscripts is. Chapter 2: Near Disasters. Imagine me having heart palpitations at the fire in Ashburnham House, home of the Cotton collection and various other rather important bits of parchment. As above with the contingency, with added flames. Chapter 3: Patrons. Who wanted stories written about themselves, and who wanted their own copies of particular books (Henry VIII annotated his Book of Psalms. I have no problem with this, other than it reveals his colossal ego, equating himself with David.) Chapter 4: Artists. The images added to some manuscripts make them incredible works of art. Wellesley examines what is known about some of the people who did this work, their inspiration and their methods. Chapter 5: Scribes. Who did the physical act of writing... and that some of them were women. Chapter 6: Authors and scribes. Probably one of the hardest things for moderns to grasp is the lack of the concept of 'author' in the medieval period. If a student copies a quote without a reference, they're in trouble; 700 years ago, someone could copy out a story from Chaucer's Canterbury Tales and stick it in their own collection of stuff with nary an acknowledgement (yes I am aware this happens today; it was less of a cause for hue and cry back in the day, for various reasons). Figuring out exactly who was the author of various things is the work of a lifetime for some historians. Chapter 7: Hidden Authors... basically carries on a similar idea from Chapter 6, but in particular looks at works written for (and by?) anchorites - people who had decided to get themselves walled away, to devote themselves more fully to Christ.
The book's intrigue - who wrote it? who sold it? why do we only have one copy? It's got feminism - women wrote and read and commissioned and created. It's suffused with a love of books and reading, it's a celebration of books as objects, and it ends with Gutenberg and that weird interstitial period where some manuscripts were created by copying out the text from a printed book. And the author's voice is present throughout, which I found a lovely touch: what it was like to view a manuscript at the British Library, or a discovery as an undergrad, or an experience learning about the making of parchment.
This is a wonderful book about books. Entirely accessible to the non-medievalist, in fact a great entry for those with no real conception of the medieval manuscript. ...more
This is definitely not the sort of book that I can read all in one hit. I took me several weeks, in fact, of dippinI read this courtesy of NetGalley.
This is definitely not the sort of book that I can read all in one hit. I took me several weeks, in fact, of dipping in and out. But that's ok, because this is in no sense a narrative, or a memoir, or something that particularly requires you to remember pertinent details from one moment to the next. Instead, this is a wide-ranging book on the idea of how people relate to trees (and plants in general), how humans are like and unlike trees, what we can learn from them, how various humans have written about or otherwise interpreted trees, and what it might mean for a human to be more like a tree.
Like the editor at Yale who decided to pick this up for their press - it had already been published in India - I too was captivated by the first line: "At first it was the underwear. I wanted to become a tree because trees did not wear bras."
PREACH.
Reading it in 2021 as I did, perhaps the idea that most (I'm sorry) took root (really, I am sorry) was the idea of tree time. That tight schedules and being rushed and hurried / harried and always needing to be places and do stuff at speed is just... not fun. (Especially when the pandemic makes all of that also feel like running in place.) Tree time, though? Trees, in Roy's words, show "disobedience to human time".
I don't agree with everything that Roy talks about here - I don't even agree that all of the questions she asks are relevant or useful. But I appreciate her asking them nonetheless, and therefore forcing me to consider them whether I want to or not.
Chapters range across a meditation on why flowers are seen to be attractive but not trees, in art and how children are taught to draw or paint; the ideas of x-raying plants, what the way nature is studied says about humans, what it might mean to have sex with a tree, what death means for trees and how religions connect to and reflect on trees and forests. And a lot more. Roy writes in the first person - this is an intensely personal book for all it's not a memoir; Roy examines her own memories, and reactions, and hopes and intentions and fears, throughout the book. After all, it's her musing on becoming a tree that instigates the whole thing; she reflects on her childhood experiences of trees, and how that relationship changes as she gets older; commenting on what it means to be childless and to be ageing, to be in a relationship and part of a family, and how those things are like and unlike the world of trees.
Aside from the meandering consideration of trees and how humans can be / are not like them, one thing that was particularly interesting for this Anglo Australian was the lack of cultural touchstones that I am familiar with. There were a few - a reference to Shakespeare here, Brecht there, DH Lawrence and Ovid. But much of the literature and art and philosophy referenced was foreign to me, which is only right since Roy is writing in India, and comes (I think) from a Bengali background. There are Hindi and Buddhist texts, Indian philosophers and authors... and a bunch of western authors, too, whom I'd never heard of because I don't go in for philosophy or botany in any great way.
This was an intriguing, insightful, challenging and wide-ranging consideration of plants and humanity. Well worth reading if you're feeling like humans need to, or could, learn how to be different. ...more
The good things: * It's always good to have another woman featured in a history book! And I mean that very seriI received this to review via NetGalley.
The good things: * It's always good to have another woman featured in a history book! And I mean that very seriously. Minor men have had tomes devoted to them. To have an individual suffragette whose name is not Pankhurst (not that I don't love a Pankhurst) get a book is AWESOME.
* I love suffrage history in all its guises and having a book that's about circumstances outside of London - or Manchester - is great.
These things are big and important. The negative things are generally smaller, so although there are more they are basically balanced in my mind. But these are important things to note, I think:
The negative things * There are some really annoying editorial aspects. Partly this is about commas instead of semi colons, which I think must be from the editor becuase I’ve seen the same thing in other books from this publisher. It irks the editor in me.
* There’s a chapter about “Men and the Media”, which has basically nothing to do with the suffragette in question. If the author had placed her in a wider context more often, then this might almost have made sense a chapter - but even then I’d be dubious. This chapter had no place in this biography. And nor did the chapter about the relationship between the royal family and the suffrage question - it was completely out of place.
* The title. Almost by definition if you were a suffragette you were a rebel, and Edith did nothing that was rebelling against the WSPU general vibe. So the title is click bait at best.
* One of the historian’s problems with writing such a biography is the dearth of resources. There’s a fine line to be walked in between theorising from thorough research, and making vague suppositions about things like, in this case, the relationship between wife and husband.
* A couple of specific irritants: the idea that women went in hunger strike to be classed as political prisoners becuase then they’d get better perks, rather than becuase of a real political reason, is just insulting. Also, the author suggests that the whole WSPU and Pankhursts ditched campaigning in WW1, when actually Sylvia Pankhurst was disowned by her mother and sister for doing the opposite.
Finally, I found the discussion about whether 21st century can or should condone the militancy of the suffragettes quite lacking in depth. It was more a series of questions than a rigorous interrogation of the place of violence in political campaigning. And it didn’t really need to be included - there’s no need to pass judgement on the subject of your biography.
Overall I think this is a really worthwhile biography - Edith was clearly a fascinating woman and I greatly appreciated being able to learn about her place in the suffrage movement. I've seen the picture of her being removed from the gates of Parliament and had no idea who she was! It's not perfect, but it's a good addition to the suffrage library. ...more
An amusing jaunt through “improbable” places around the world. The author doesn’t claim to have visited these placeI received this book via NetGalley.
An amusing jaunt through “improbable” places around the world. The author doesn’t claim to have visited these places, so it’s not like it’s a travel guide; the term atlas has been chosen deliberately.
The chapter headings give a suggestion of the sorts of places covered, although sometimes that’s a stretch. Dream Creations - sometimes an individual’s dream, sometimes more a societal aspiration; Deserted Destinations - deliberately, as in Wittenoom in WA, abandoned due to asbestos; or because people just… drifted away; Architectural Oddities - did you know that the London Bridge built in 1831 today stands in Arizona? Floating Worlds -like the Palms; mostly islands; Otherworldly Space, which seems to be mostly about death; And Subterranean Realms - I did not know there was an underground railway in London dedicated to mail delivery.
Overall it’s a fun read, best viewed as one to dip into I think rather than reading cover to cover in a single sitting. Don’t expect a lot of detail about most places; this is a taster, not a through investigation of most places....more
Lutz travels all over the place, attempting to be that person who doesn't just go on organised tours or stay oI received this to review via NetGalley.
Lutz travels all over the place, attempting to be that person who doesn't just go on organised tours or stay on the typical tourist paths - to experience, at least briefly and in a small way, the 'real' place he's visiting. He's self aware enough to know that he's always still an American tourist, but he does try to talk to people about themselves and their lives.
Towards the end he confronts the issue of his privilege, pointing out that he still works while traveling and he chooses cheap fares and long stopovers so it’s not as expensive as it might be - but of course he is still privileged to be able to travel at all. At the start he argues about the idea of appropriation, and whether it's appropriate that he write about other cultures at all - which he is clearly fine with, given this is his third such book. This I am less convinced by, but only because I don’t think this is what is meant by appropriation.
Anyway: overall this is a really enjoyable book. Not one to read in a single sitting necessarily becuase there’s no chronological or otherwise thematic order to the chapters. Each is about the author's visit to a different country - many, to my eyes, exotic for the difficulty of getting there or the unusualness of being there (… and then there’s NZ, which was quite funny really). The Marshal islands, Djibouti, Madagascar, Bhutan - Lutz describes, usually, his arrival and then his encounters with various people. Guides, sometimes drivers, restauranteurs, people at the bar; seems like he’ll talk to anyone, which of course gives rise to the title of the book. He isn’t claiming everywhere is perfect nor that everyone is a delight, including as he does a couple of near-muggings and being rorted occasionally too. But he is making the claim that at least for someone like him - male, white, middle class - travel without an organised tour and off the usual path can be enjoyable.
Engagingly written, if you're content to read a vignette-style approach (which I am); usually thoughtful, and certainly engaged with places I haven't read much about. ...more
Loading...
