Comments on: Disaffection and Everyday Life – Boswell

By: Callan Hass

Callan Hass — Thu, 07 Apr 2022 18:20:25 +0000

Emily,

I’m SO glad I wasn’t the only one thinking of Monty Python’s “Holy Grail” while reading this!! I am sure that there was discussion of opinions in the fields during the workday but I’m sure it didn’t flow nearly as freely as after hours in the tavern. I was fascinated by chapter two and the examination of “strengths” of drinks. I never really considered that class played a part in alcohol content and alcohol’s role as a dietary supplement. These days it is seen as more of a vice within society. I definitely concur with your strengths and weaknesses assessment. The structure of the book created a political-science feel and an ease of reading. I really appreciated Boswell’s emphasis on context in order to ensure understanding of her arguments. Overall I really enjoyed this book and thought it was an exemplary bottom-up analysis of the tumultuous Interregnum period.

By: Vincent Cervone

Vincent Cervone — Thu, 07 Apr 2022 15:29:33 +0000

Emily,

I think your observation that there might be a few chapters where maybe too many quotes and citations happen is a good one. I wasn’t bothered by the quantity of citations since this tells me that the author (Boswell) did her research and that she’s giving us everything that she has, so we aren’t left thinking that she’s holding back information. The quotes, I also didn’t mind but I felt that some of the quotes could have been removed or summarized.

Also, I didn’t get the Monty Python and the Holy Grail viewpoint until I went back and looked at that section and I can totally see it. Love that you noticed that.

By: Dr. Otis

Dr. Otis — Thu, 07 Apr 2022 13:56:33 +0000

In reply to Edward Kirsch. I absolutely made a "run away" slide for my plague talk on Tuesday...

By: Tyler Thompson

Tyler Thompson — Thu, 07 Apr 2022 03:12:17 +0000

Emily
I agree with your assessment that Dissatisfaction in Everyday Life in Interregnum England was a good book that provides insights into what life was like in Interregnum England. I appreciated how Boswell uses a bottom-up approach to examine the day-to-day impact that the new government had in England. Through the use of taxes on alcohol and public displays of Parliamentarian power, Boswell weaves together how everyday people felt towards their new government. Boswell also makes a point to show how dissatisfaction was harnessed by royalists to drum up support for Charles II. I also enjoyed that the author started the book by examining a street-level event that blew up into a larger discussion about Parliamentary power. The market riot of 1647 started out protesting the movement of the market on Cheapside in London but turned into a full protest against the tyranny of the Parliament during the Interregnum. Overall, I loved this book and learned a lot about England during a strenuous time in its history.

By: Anna Ciambotti

Anna Ciambotti — Thu, 07 Apr 2022 02:01:43 +0000

Hello Emily!

I agree that each chapter is super difficult to summarize. She covers such a good mix of “surface level” and deeper social and cultural topics that it makes it difficult to get a grasp on what each chapter is about sometimes. Another strength of the book that I found is that she provides a lot of historical context for certain topics. For example, she devoted several paragraphs to the histories of the Excise-men, which I found to be very helpful and insightful as I read the rest of the chapter.

By: Edward Kirsch

Edward Kirsch — Tue, 05 Apr 2022 20:55:25 +0000

I agree with Emily that the structure of Dr. Boswell’s book in two parts was a strength. At least it was for me personally as I read the book. The author seeks to explore how individuals and communities “grappled with” the effects of civil war and revolution and expressed grievances by “exploring key sites where the expression and formation of disaffection complicated, altered, and empowered everyday politics.” (6) For me, her exploration of “Sites of Disaffection” was important in setting the stage as I was not familiar with the role of the market, town cross, inns, and ale house in the 17th century as social sites of negotiation where, for example, the regime traditionally made proclamations, individuals exchanged gossip and news, and communities negotiated local and national policies and their enforcement. This set the stage for me to more fully understand how, for example, “the army’s effects on the micro-politics of every day life” “disrupted the delicate balance of power between the state and society as well as social relations within communities they encountered.” (130) As I have an interest in the history of the book, I was fascinated by Dr. Boswell’s exploration of how royalists exploited tensions and disaffection, both real, and in particular “imagined.” In that respect, this book bears a relationship to the “Murder of James I” book.

(By the way Emily, any reference to Monty Python is always welcome in my world. Although, my son does not always get it.)