You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
lisa_setepenre 's review for:
Joan of Arc: A History
by Helen Castor
Helen Castor’s biography of Joan of Arc aims to separate Joan from the myths and legends that have sprung up around her and place her back into her political and military context, namely the last forty years of the Hundred Years War and France in the first half of the fifteenth century.
Therefore, Castor is not so interested in the study of the divine aspects of Joan’s life. The question of whether the voices Joan heard were from God. a symptom of a mental illness or something else is left unexamined– it is enough for Castor that Joan believed she heard them and her contemporaries would have believed the voices to have been sent from God or from the Devil.
I think Castor’s instincts are fairly good here. By avoiding questioning of Joan’s divinity, Castor avoids making a judgment that could either offend a reader who believes wholeheartedly in St Joan or stretch the credulity of a reader who doesn’t. The idea of placing Joan back into her historical context is also excellent as it allows us to see France, fractured by civil war and half-won by the English Henry V and his successor in France, John, Duke of Bedford, united by Joan rather than Joan as an exceptional individual floating around on her own.
However, Castor’s book has issues. For a start, she seems very keen to refer to Joan as a ‘slut’ or ‘whore’ – not because of anything Joan did, besides being a woman, but because that’s how her enemies referred to Joan. While this may help the reader understand how the English/Burgundians saw Joan, it’s a pretty immature gesture on the part of the author – it’s as though Castor’s thrilled she can get away with throwing misogynistic slurs around because it’s historically accurate.
Additionally, Castor is writing a popular, narrative history. This is fine and has its own worth but it also means that Castor doesn’t engage in any debates about Joan, not just her divinity. We get a straight, linear version of Joan’s trial under English-ruled France without any hint of interference from the English and though Castor does later reference the idea that it was a kangaroo court, determined to execute Joan whatever happened, she doesn’t actually evaluate or debate the claim – but the trial as she depicts shows minimal interference, leaving the reader to assume that, as that’s what Castor’s depicted, that’s what really happened. As someone who has very little actual knowledge of Joan, it’s something I would want to read about in far more depth than Castor supplies.
Castor’s narrative is firmly focused on the political/military arena which means there is no real discussion of Joan’s upbringing and of her life prior to the Siege of Orleans. It’s likely that there’s little evidence of Joan’s childhood and adolescence but a general discussion of life for lower-class women would have been welcome and provided some much-needed context, helping the reader understand how extraordinary Joan’s life was.
I also have to admit that I found the first 89 pages, dealing with the state of France ‘before’ Joan, a bit of a slog. It may have been my mood (it was very hot in Australia when I read them) but, while I am deeply interested in this time, I just found it difficult to parse. Maybe there was just too much information being crammed in and Castor’s chatty prose did little to alleviate this information overload – in fact, I found it annoying and apt to obscure what really happened. It also doesn’t help that there’s only 247 pages of actual content and a good portion of this is given over to what effectively is scene-setting before Joan even enters the narrative properly.
Castor’s way of referencing is also my least favourite form of referencing, after ‘no referencing at all’. There is no in-text referencing but a section of notes at the end of the book where the sources are broadly listed.
While the book is at its strongest when focusing on Joan and I ultimately enjoyed the characterisation of Joan that emerged from the pages, I was disappointed by this book. I don’t feel like I’ve got the full story, whether in terms of understanding Joan before she entered into the war or in terms of the debates about Joan’s life and trial that must go on. What Helen Castor’s book about Joan of Arc is overtly Helen Castor’s Joan of Arc, interested entirely in a military/political context, not a biography attempting to find the real Joan.
Therefore, Castor is not so interested in the study of the divine aspects of Joan’s life. The question of whether the voices Joan heard were from God. a symptom of a mental illness or something else is left unexamined– it is enough for Castor that Joan believed she heard them and her contemporaries would have believed the voices to have been sent from God or from the Devil.
I think Castor’s instincts are fairly good here. By avoiding questioning of Joan’s divinity, Castor avoids making a judgment that could either offend a reader who believes wholeheartedly in St Joan or stretch the credulity of a reader who doesn’t. The idea of placing Joan back into her historical context is also excellent as it allows us to see France, fractured by civil war and half-won by the English Henry V and his successor in France, John, Duke of Bedford, united by Joan rather than Joan as an exceptional individual floating around on her own.
However, Castor’s book has issues. For a start, she seems very keen to refer to Joan as a ‘slut’ or ‘whore’ – not because of anything Joan did, besides being a woman, but because that’s how her enemies referred to Joan. While this may help the reader understand how the English/Burgundians saw Joan, it’s a pretty immature gesture on the part of the author – it’s as though Castor’s thrilled she can get away with throwing misogynistic slurs around because it’s historically accurate.
Additionally, Castor is writing a popular, narrative history. This is fine and has its own worth but it also means that Castor doesn’t engage in any debates about Joan, not just her divinity. We get a straight, linear version of Joan’s trial under English-ruled France without any hint of interference from the English and though Castor does later reference the idea that it was a kangaroo court, determined to execute Joan whatever happened, she doesn’t actually evaluate or debate the claim – but the trial as she depicts shows minimal interference, leaving the reader to assume that, as that’s what Castor’s depicted, that’s what really happened. As someone who has very little actual knowledge of Joan, it’s something I would want to read about in far more depth than Castor supplies.
Castor’s narrative is firmly focused on the political/military arena which means there is no real discussion of Joan’s upbringing and of her life prior to the Siege of Orleans. It’s likely that there’s little evidence of Joan’s childhood and adolescence but a general discussion of life for lower-class women would have been welcome and provided some much-needed context, helping the reader understand how extraordinary Joan’s life was.
I also have to admit that I found the first 89 pages, dealing with the state of France ‘before’ Joan, a bit of a slog. It may have been my mood (it was very hot in Australia when I read them) but, while I am deeply interested in this time, I just found it difficult to parse. Maybe there was just too much information being crammed in and Castor’s chatty prose did little to alleviate this information overload – in fact, I found it annoying and apt to obscure what really happened. It also doesn’t help that there’s only 247 pages of actual content and a good portion of this is given over to what effectively is scene-setting before Joan even enters the narrative properly.
Castor’s way of referencing is also my least favourite form of referencing, after ‘no referencing at all’. There is no in-text referencing but a section of notes at the end of the book where the sources are broadly listed.
While the book is at its strongest when focusing on Joan and I ultimately enjoyed the characterisation of Joan that emerged from the pages, I was disappointed by this book. I don’t feel like I’ve got the full story, whether in terms of understanding Joan before she entered into the war or in terms of the debates about Joan’s life and trial that must go on. What Helen Castor’s book about Joan of Arc is overtly Helen Castor’s Joan of Arc, interested entirely in a military/political context, not a biography attempting to find the real Joan.