Sometimes when I don't love a book, I go and read other people's reviews to see if maybe they didn't like the same thing and figured it out for me. UnSometimes when I don't love a book, I go and read other people's reviews to see if maybe they didn't like the same thing and figured it out for me. Unfortunately, often when you read reviews on a biography, you get things like: "I thought this was a novel, but it's like a textbook." Then they give the book only one star, because not being bad historical fiction is the book's fault.
I really find Josephine rather fascinating--not likable, but fascinating. She's raised to such heights and has really limited desire to be there. I think she would have been quite happy just being wealthy and left alone to do nothing. Toward the end of her marriage to NB, she just sounds horribly bored. However, when people don't enjoy reading, I find their boredom unsympathetic--she could have picked up a book or two.
The marriage of J&N was more a tale of a complete power shift and how J reinvented herself to fit his ever changing ego.
The book is fine, but not definitive. Others have noted historical mistakes and the author sometimes puts feelings into the subject's mouth. This gets increasingly frustrating. It's fine, but I think you'd get more from a really good book on Napoleon....more
Who doesn't need to read a book about brothels in the Levee District of Chicago? I think this really was a vacuum in my knowledge of US History and stWho doesn't need to read a book about brothels in the Levee District of Chicago? I think this really was a vacuum in my knowledge of US History and stuff I really should know.
Like how much Madams made versus their women (referred to as "harlots" throughout the book). I sure there was a better thing to call them. I honestly giggled a little each time. Then again, you probably run out of good words to use. But it did come across as a grandmother grasping her pearls each time the "harlots" did something.
The book tells the story of the Everleigh Club and Mina and Ada Everleigh who were the Madams. Also how eventually the whole district was brought down by a concentrated effort of ministers and politicians and the horror of "white slavery"--girls being sold to brothels and then kept there against their will.
It's a good story, somewhat long, but a good read. At times the details seem to overwhelm the flow of the story but Karen Abbot never loses track of what her focus is on. She never goes deeply into organized crime or the rising tide of the WWI. She stays squarely on the topic only reaching out to the tendrils if they add to the story.
Definitely an interesting read about something I knew nothing about....more
First off, Isabella was a bad ass. There's no way around a woman who took the crown and got proclaimed Queen wThis was some good history awesomeness.
First off, Isabella was a bad ass. There's no way around a woman who took the crown and got proclaimed Queen without her husband having a say.
That said she was far from perfect. She was intolerant, demanding, stubborn, pigheaded, and not someone I would have drinks with. You would sit across the table wishing you could kick her and no one would know it was you. I respect her, but I don't like her.
This was a very thorough biography. At times too thorough, thus the loss of the star. Downey was very willing to follow tangents down to the bitter end. Supporting characters were discussed in great and (at times) tiresome detail. It was 34 biographies in one.
This was a good background, but I did wonder it was just filler for a lack of information. Also it was selective. While Pope Alexander's history was discussed endlessly, Catherine of Aragon was discussed slowly. I was listening to this book on my tablet, and I swear I missed completely the heir Juan dying. You would think that would have been a long discussion or something, wouldn't you?
It's a good book and I would suggest it for anyone wanting to know more about the history of Spain....more
In college, I had to choose a "concentration" for my International Affairs degree. I chose Western Europe, like 95% of my cohorts. I think in some wayIn college, I had to choose a "concentration" for my International Affairs degree. I chose Western Europe, like 95% of my cohorts. I think in some ways, with my reading, I still follow that same thing. I read a lot of history of western Europe. Often failing to leave my comfort zone.
This was a wonderful trek out of my comfort zone.
The book tells the story of Cixi (FYI: they change names a lot) and her rise to power. Despite being brought to the palace as a concubine, she gained power first by having the only son by the emperor, then holding on to power after her son's death by naming a young child as her adopted heir and ruling as regent, then taking back the power after her named heir tried to have her killed. Oh, by the way, then she had him killed before she died so he wouldn't ruin all the stuff she did.
She modernized China, educated women, brought the railroad--she pretty much changed China. Oh, and she also armed the Boxers, which wasn't her best idea.
This was an audio book, so it's hard to judge the readability because it is so affected by the narrator. However, it was engaging and I was never bored. It is a tome, so it's not "light" reading.
At times, the book bent over backwards to rehabilitate Cixi, but her reputation was in the dirt after her death. And it was very much more of "well, she didn't kill THAT person--but yes these other people." The author was intent on showing that rather than being a roadblock in the reformation of China, she was the driving force in many of the changes. Also, I'm pretty sure I would like to have drinks with her. ...more
I generally rate books independent of what others say, because I don't know your life. However, I'm always curious when it seems that my rating is oveI generally rate books independent of what others say, because I don't know your life. However, I'm always curious when it seems that my rating is overshot (I'm usually far more harsh than others). So I investigated those who rated the book lower.
Here's what I got from the ones that wrote reviews:
-book is overly detailed -it doesn't read like a novel -there's a lot of research with not a lot of story
Yeah, so it's a history book. History books generally don't read like novels. Because they aren't novels. They are history--and that should include research and details.
Personally, I was not overwhelmed by the research, because it is what a history book should be...researched. I thought the author took some jumps of logic and analysis that I would be hesitant about taking, but it was backed up. I also thought she should have cited her sources more clearly throughout the text.
The book was extremely interesting because there were some suitors I had only had mentioned in passing, such as Eric of Sweden (dang, as a Swede, I would have loved her as Queen).
This is not going to change your view of history or of Elizabeth. But it is a nice sugar dusting on the french toast of your knowledge....more
There were many things I liked about this book. She didn't limit herself to just European princesses, which would have been my temptation as well. So There were many things I liked about this book. She didn't limit herself to just European princesses, which would have been my temptation as well. So kudos to you, LRM! Go you!
It's a fun read, and not a bad one, but please don't confuse it with the end of your research path about princesses, people being awful, or anything of the sort. This is history nerd beach reading. And that's great.
Let it be history nerd beach reading. We need stuff to read at beaches.
I did question things horribly, and I'm not sure who the perp is on this. I went to wiki to learn dates about the princess, and there was an almost word-for-word sentence about the same thing. The book and the site had the same source, so I'm not sure who did who when in the library with a candlestick. My hackles though, they were raised.
It's a fun book, read it for fun. Just please don't cite. ...more
It's not earth shattering, it's not enlightening. It's the historical equivalent of loadedThis was fine.
In the way that a meal at TGIFriday's is fine.
It's not earth shattering, it's not enlightening. It's the historical equivalent of loaded potato skins--yummy, filling, but not nutritious.
Abbott, whose book History of the Wife I loved, goes encyclopedic on the life of every mistress mentioned in history or literature. It's like tiny little biographies of each of them, including the harem and the concubine system. She discusses Jane Eyre. Seriously. In a book about mistresses--that's kind of a stretch. I also never have to read Of Human Bondage or Dr Zhivago. That entire chapter should be labeled "don't read unless you don't want to read any of these books." And for the record, how she misses Sister Carrie when listing mistresses in fiction bugs the beejeezus out of me.
I got a lot about Marilyn Monroe, Camilla Parker-Bowles, and Joyce Maynard (who, in my opinion, hardly counts as a mistress since she didn't really live with Salinger for that long, more of a really vindictive ex-girlfriend). I got little bio about these, but then nothing about Diane du Poitiers (seriously, how do you skip that one!). The omissions were more startling than the inclusions.
Not that I'm a prude, far from it, but wow, did this book love the detail about the sex lives of those involved. Lots of detail. Also fun facts like Maria Callas ingesting a tape worm to lose weight.
This whole book was wearisome. There was no connecting. It was just bio after bio of women who hated being "the other woman," women who loved it, women who didn't care. Pretty much if you've ever loved, liked, or just dated a guy who you either didn't want to marry or who didn't want to marry you for whatever reason, you qualified to be in this book.
It's better for skimming than to read, and I gave it the third star strictly because some of the bios were entertaining.
I love when I expect a book to be one thing, and then it turns out to be something completely--and in this case wonderfully--different. I can tell youI love when I expect a book to be one thing, and then it turns out to be something completely--and in this case wonderfully--different. I can tell you I really loved this book. I think it's probably a four star book, but I liked it so much and loved reading it so much (and will miss it) that it earned the extra five.
I consider myself Episcopalian--about as far from Evangelical as you can get. I can honestly feel my spine straighten when anyone talks about "submitting" and "a woman's place." So I kinda thought this book would be a tongue-in-cheek look at the more odd instructions that are in the bible. And it's not.
I think Evans could have gone there. I think a lot of people thought she would and were preemptively offended, which makes sense, and I hereby apologize for purchasing this book under that notion. I think it would have been an easier book for her to write.
However, instead Evans went further and trod a more treacherous path. Yes, she chose some odd instructions, but she also looked into the history of those instructions. And what they meant, and what they mean today. Evans related them back to her own faith in a way that felt real, not forced or trite. It was less of a "hey this is fun" and more a spiritual journey.
Each month, she chose to focus on one theme of verses--charity, submission, the ideal woman, etc.For example, she looked at Proverbs 31, and how it is viewed in the Orthodox Jewish faith, and it isn't seen as a "how-to-be-the-perfect-Christian-woman" and more a "wow, you are really awesome." It is sung by a husband to his wife at the end of week in recognition of all she has done for him. Rather than "virtuous woman"--it's "a woman of valor." Eshet Chayil!
Evans started using this phrase Eshet Chayil! to describe the women she met on her journey--the female pastor in Texas who received death threats for leading a congregation, the women in Bolivia who live on less than $500 a year, and her mom and her family--and eventually she even used it to describe herself. Rather than reading that passage and seeing all the things we should be doing, we should read that passage and see all the things we already do--and should celebrate them. I know some pretty wonderful Eshet Chayils--I have no idea how you pluralize that.
I also think it would have been tempting for Evans to go into a feminist rant--not that I don't enjoy those. But instead, she comes away from this journey adoring her husband more, loving her family, and feeling closer to God.
I've decided that I need to be a better baseball fan.
And like any nerd that decides to do something better, I read about it.
This is a really good bookI've decided that I need to be a better baseball fan.
And like any nerd that decides to do something better, I read about it.
This is a really good book about baseball and learning about how things work. Like I didn't know all the different ways to get on base. And the history of the designated hitter.
Honestly I didn't know a lot of things.
This book helped.
Admittedly not enough to feel like I'm an expert or even knowledgeable. But at least less of a moron.
Bad things: There are like bazillion chapters in this book and they could have been just sections, because some "chapters" were two paragraphs.
(FYI, I totally skipped the useless quotes from women liking baseball at the end of all the chapters, I hardly care about my memories of baseball, I don't think I care about theirs.)...more
I wavered back and forth on this rating. Probably the fairest would be a 3.5 or about there, but let's round up because we're feeling generous.
The proI wavered back and forth on this rating. Probably the fairest would be a 3.5 or about there, but let's round up because we're feeling generous.
The pros: This is a well researched book on not only Katherine, but also the world she lived in and the pressures she faced. Honestly, we just can't know a lot about her. Women were not written about a lot. If it wasn't for Anya Seton's bio on KS, we would probably ignore her as well--but a best seller will do that for a girl. Who doesn't love the tale of a powerful man marrying his life long love despite public opposition? It's a dang good Cinderella story, and we all know how popular that can be. Lucraft makes excellent arguments about the tightrope KS had to walk and that to be a woman loved by John of Gaunt, she couldn't be the stereotypical mistress. In order to hold the place she did, she couldn't have been Alice Perrers or the like. By all evidence, Katherine had to be substantially different. Lucraft does well in showing the differences.
The cons: The evidence about Katherine's life is rare. Lucraft relies on suppositions and external evidence, sometimes getting caught in the minutia of her arguments. Margery Kempe is interesting, but probably deserves her own book rather than pages in Katherine's. I think these arguments are valid, just perhaps went on a little long in places. It made for tedious reading in parts.
The pros of this being a book about someone my foolish romantic nerd heart adores definitely outweighs the cons, but they can't make me blind to them--alas....more
It's amazing what a road trip and a day off can do for your reading stats! I need to do this at least once a month if I really want to finish this queIt's amazing what a road trip and a day off can do for your reading stats! I need to do this at least once a month if I really want to finish this quest for 50 books by the end of the year.
With this book, I'm again pushing my envelope a bit further, even if it's still European and Women's History. The French Revolution and I have never been close friends, and most of my reading has focused on Marie Antoinette and the royalist party. My knowledge of the other side is at best...limited. From what I gather, there were a lot of heads cut off.
After reading this book, I am now fully in awe of the American Revolution, if for no other reason than at no time did our capital city smell like rotting meat from all the executions. The French Revolution seems to have gone off the rails very quickly, and these 6 women came along for the ride.
Through the lives of the six women, you see how women were at the forefront of the revolutionary movement only to be systematically relegated to the background, not only through laws but also through revolutionary iconography.
This is an exceptional book and gave me the impetus to read more about the French Revolution. I'll just have to brace myself for all the blood....more
What a fascinating book. I finished it super quick--mostly because while away from it, I wanted to be back reading it and finding out what happened neWhat a fascinating book. I finished it super quick--mostly because while away from it, I wanted to be back reading it and finding out what happened next.
My knowledge of the Italian city-states during the Renaissance isn't the best, but I do have some light scaffolding to build my knowledge base on. I know about the Medicis and the Sforzas and I just finished the book on all the popes. This interweaved all of those fact and provided a new player on the stage--Caterina. Who, pardon the language, was a bad ass.
Married at age 10 to a nephew of the pope to further her father's goals, Caterina was to be the strong one in the marriage. Numerous times she was able to save her family and rescue it from the brink. As a woman, her bravery and audacity won her as much censure as it won her accolades. She fought battles, won sieges, and was a prisoner of the Borgias.
The story is told using many quotes from her letters and is extremely well told. I walked away wishing I could have coffee with Caterina and have her tell me about her adventures. After reading, I definitely felt that I knew her, which is always the sign of a good biography. It's also nice to read about a Renaissance woman who played the lead in her own life--so often women of her time are relegated to supporting cast.
One, I figured out how to get books on my nook from the library. This is a win for me, and a painful loss for Barnes & Noble.
Two, I am torn on my revOne, I figured out how to get books on my nook from the library. This is a win for me, and a painful loss for Barnes & Noble.
Two, I am torn on my review. I don't know if an author should be punished for limited information. There are very good reason why we know such little about Mary Boleyn. One she was the sister of a disgraced queen, and two, even during her sister's reign, Mary was an embarrassment to her family and a threat to her sister's marriage (it was frowned upon to marry the sister of your former mistress--especially after you divorce your wife for being formerly involved with your brother).
Alison Weir does her best with the information she can gather, but she has even better success debunking theories and long-held rumors. From Mary being the younger daughter to her being pretty much passed around the French court like a library book, theories have plagued what little we know of her. Weir does an admirable job of examining each theory and showing convincing evidence to the contrary.
The bad part is that once you get rid of the theories, there's not much left. Much of what we know of Mary Boleyn is made up of these suppositions and the fictional accounts of her life have lent credence to rumors and added to the myth of Mary without adding anything to the facts.
Perhaps the greatest strength of this book is not so much what we know of Mary Boleyn's life, but how the author reveals what we still don't (and may never) know. ...more
As usual, being able to buy books at 2am is proving to be my downfall. This book came to my attention while I listened to the last episodes of the "HiAs usual, being able to buy books at 2am is proving to be my downfall. This book came to my attention while I listened to the last episodes of the "History of Rome" podcast. And I'm extremely glad I came into this book with a well oiled working knowledge of Roman history--even if I had only listened to the names, I did recognize them.
This book is not simply a biographical look at women who were married to emperors. It is instead a far more ambitious and interesting look at the role of women in the empire. Obviously, our knowledge of women and their lives during the ancient times is severely limited. As the saying goes "quiet women seldom change history," and there were so many quiet women those days.
The author starts with Livia and ends with the incomparable Galla Placidia--who I have decided I thoroughly admire. The author, thus called because that's one hell of a last name you got there, examines not just how the women acted in their role as empress, but how they were perceived, portrayed, and memorialized. Without losing sight of the very deeply ingrained bias against women in general and the even deeper ingrained proclivity among Romans to repeat calumnies as truth (it's really almost amazing how many stepmom-empresses were incestuous poisoners...you'd think they had some sort of union or something), the author sifts through the evidence without ever resorting to speculation (YES I AM LOOKING AT YOU, JULIA FOX --author of Jane Boleyn). When the documentation is slight, the author states it clearly and makes no unfounded suppositions (AGAIN, LOOKING AT YOU JULIA FOX).
Do I wish we knew more about these women? Yes, because I think they would have good stories to tell. However, this book does its dangedest in an informed, interesting, and well-documented way. This definitely added to my knowledge of the time, and my wish to have Galla Placidia over for drinks....more
Julia Fox is a much better writer when she has facts to write about. Seems that when she actually has a subject that she can research, she writes a muJulia Fox is a much better writer when she has facts to write about. Seems that when she actually has a subject that she can research, she writes a much more compelling and interesting book. Go fig.
Though I've read a lot about Katherine of Aragon--in fact the book that started this whole fascination of mine is Katherine by Garrett Mattingly--this was an interesting twist on her tale. By throwing in Juana, her sister, you got a better view of both their characters.
I knew far less about Juana, and Fox makes a compelling argument that Juana, although volatile, immature, and a bit off-kilter, wasn't batpoop nutso. However, the males in her family (her husband, her dad, and her son) had every reason to keep up the line that she was. Given that in high stress situations, she acted rationally and with cunning, she was probably as sane as most rulers of Spain. Juana's biography would however be a short one, as she was imprisoned for 46 years of her life while her dad then her son ruled for her.
As for Katherine, most of this was old hat for me. However, Fox does investigate the well-known "last letter" Katherine supposedly wrote to Henry and presents evidence that this may have been all made up by a sympathetic biographer--which has been known to happen once or twice.
The book overall was a good one, cited plenty of primary sources, discussed opposing views, and made reasonable conclusions without making assumptions. So yes, Julia Fox did a complete 180 from her biography of Jane Rochford. After starting off grimacing at the author, I came away not completely terrified to read another book of hers.
I admit that she may have earned half a star because I like listening to British voice (take note audiobook producers!). ...more
It's a notable skill to thread together tiny fragments of evidence and come away with not just a convincing portrait of a person, but one that is threIt's a notable skill to thread together tiny fragments of evidence and come away with not just a convincing portrait of a person, but one that is three-dimensional.
Cleopatra, for generations, has been a synonym for dangerous, destroying, all-consuming passion. This was not helped by having her played by Elizabeth Taylor who notoriously fell in love with her costar during the filming (Richard Burton for those of you playing along at home).
But what it easily and almost casually forgotten in this tumultuous romp is that Cleopatra ruled her kingdom for two decades, without a single uprising on record. While Rome assassinated and proscribed, exiled and deposed, Cleopatra ruled.
She ruled over one of the richest kingdoms in history and one of the most bountiful. She could have starved Rome with a word. Unlike other women of her age, she was not silent or obedient, but aggressive in her own interest and that of her kingdom (and not above slaughtering a few family members in the process).
This book allows the stories of her love affairs play out, but reminds us that with Cleopatra, love was not the main goal--preservation and aggrandizement of her kingdom was. This book allows you to walk away with a vivid picture of the woman who was considered a goddess in her own life time--and why that wasn't such a stretch of the imagination.
Yet another book from my Borders grave robbery. I've read a lot about the French revolution, and especially Marie Antoinette (she's a thoroughly intriYet another book from my Borders grave robbery. I've read a lot about the French revolution, and especially Marie Antoinette (she's a thoroughly intriguing character), but not much about what happened after. And especially not much about Marie-Therese, the last survivor of that family.
The book starts out with a sketch of her parents. I appreciated the author not falling into what has to be a seductive trap--writing a bio of Marie Antoinette's daughter but focusing on Marie Antoinette instead. After discussing her childhood before the revolution, the author does go into detail about the horrors that Marie-Therese witnessed. It's no surprise that MT was reluctant to discuss her experiences during this time--including witnessing murders, decapitations, parading of heads, and threats to her family.
By the time MT was released from her prison, she was 17 and had lost her father, mother, aunt, and brother to the revolution. Her entire life had been filled with brutality and loss. The fact she wasn't a complete nut case is astounding. She went on to marry and help to restore the Bourbons to the throne twice, only to lose it...twice.
The book is interesting, though I did find some of the information to be questionable and contrary to books that had much better citations and analysis. The author did address the rumor of the Dark Countess, a woman who was supposedly MT living in hiding while an impostor lived as MT in public. Nagel does a good job of dismissing this fairy tale as best she could without DNA evidence (the city where the Dark Countess is buried will not allow the body to be exhumed, as the rumors make them some good money).
Overall, although the book did not earn a place in my permanent library, it was enjoyable and fascinating. The character of Marie-Therese is just as intriguing as her mother without the "train wreck" flavor. You come away not only admiring her endurance, but her ability to find a semblance of happiness and peace....more
I borrowed this book from the library about a lifetime ago. So I really should be taking it back. But once you reach the max fine...really, what's theI borrowed this book from the library about a lifetime ago. So I really should be taking it back. But once you reach the max fine...really, what's the incentive?
The hold up was that I couldn't get into it. It's not that the subject isn't interesting, because I dare you to find something boring about Eleanor of Aquitaine. Double Dog Dare! The problem was the writing.
The first parts of the book were pretty much recitations of facts and happenings, with very little analysis. She covers Matilda, Eleanor of Aquitaine, Isabella of France, Margaret of Anjou, and Mary Tudor. And wow, did she skimp on Mary Tudor. I admit she wasn't Queen for long, but she deserved a few more pages at least.
It wasn't until she started comparing and explaining how these women fit together and set the stage for Elizabeth, perhaps influencing her that the author's passion came out. But those few pages simply can't make a book that drags along like a barge through muddy water.
It's a fine read if you have nothing better, but you'd be better off just picking out five biographies--and then reading a good one on Elizabeth....more
This may be the most unorganized, poorly thought-through book I've ever read.
That would sum up my review, but I feel that I should be more descriptivThis may be the most unorganized, poorly thought-through book I've ever read.
That would sum up my review, but I feel that I should be more descriptive.
When I bought this book, what I thought I was getting was a look behind the male-centric view of history. The title seemed to be saying this...and even the back says "Here is the history you never learned--but should have."
But this isn't the book I got. Instead I got a rant of epic proportions using carefully and selectively chosen research loosely strung together using in chapters that only differed in content by the heading. Often I would find myself reading on a subject and think "Oh, I thought I finished this chapter" only to look up and see indeed I had. The chapter title had changed but the subject matter hadn't. In a chapter seemingly on "Women and Empire" and supposedly about how women during the age of colonialism fared (both native and colonial), women who ran bordellos in America's wild west were discussed...at length.
Also the author seems convinced that men have conspiratorial cabal lasting centuries to think of ways to enslave women. I don't doubt that men have gained, but I really doubt that there were meetings of "hey, let's get rid of these mother goddess and get a guy as the head god." Unfortunately, the way it's told here, it seems to be a conscious effort, put in place specifically to enslave women. There's plenty to be angry about in world history if you're a woman, we don't need to be looking for conspiracies and the New World Order.
By the end, I just felt yelled at by a crazy drunk on the street. Sure, he might have something interesting to say, but there's no following his train of thought, and in the end...why bother?
The sad thing is that I still want to read the book that I thought I bought, and I would catch small vignettes of interesting details...then she'd go off again. Women's history is a vibrant and much needed area of study. This book does it no favors....more
Loading...
