![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Jul. 29th, 2008 08:29 pmI can't say i wasn't warned. I'm reading a biography about Jane Boleyn (who was married to Queen Anne Boleyn's brother, George). Jane turned evidence in that helped convict both her husband and sister-in-law of incestuous treason and later, she helped Queen Katherine Howard have an affair behind Henry's back. She died on the scaffold for that one.
So.
Others that have read the book mentioned that since there wasn't a lot of information available about Jane, a lot of the book is supposition. I had already bought it so I am reading it anyway. Now, i haven't even got to where Anne meets her end yet but so far, they were right! The book really isnt' about Jane at all, not much. It's about Tudor history and a bit about how the ladies in waiting would have lived. The author pulls Jane's name in just so you won't forget it's supposed to be about her but it's in sentences like "Jane and the Boleyn family would have understood this" or "Jane must have known all the details because her husband would have told her" or "Jane's sister-in-law knew what she had to do" (meaning, Anne). Those aren't direct quotes, just to give you an idea of how this is written. It seems well researched as far as it goes but i would hardly call it a biography of Jane. Why write a book about someone if there are very few facts you can pull out? It ends up coming across rather faked even though most of the fact about everyone else, where she could get it, seems fairly spot on. But see, everyone and their dog has written about Henry and Anne and Wolsey and that lot so she must have wanted to do something different. I'll finish it but i wouldn't recommend it either.
Little flurry of activity at work then it will settle down again.
Still hot and somewhat humid.
NO SCRABULOUS! Eek!
So.
Others that have read the book mentioned that since there wasn't a lot of information available about Jane, a lot of the book is supposition. I had already bought it so I am reading it anyway. Now, i haven't even got to where Anne meets her end yet but so far, they were right! The book really isnt' about Jane at all, not much. It's about Tudor history and a bit about how the ladies in waiting would have lived. The author pulls Jane's name in just so you won't forget it's supposed to be about her but it's in sentences like "Jane and the Boleyn family would have understood this" or "Jane must have known all the details because her husband would have told her" or "Jane's sister-in-law knew what she had to do" (meaning, Anne). Those aren't direct quotes, just to give you an idea of how this is written. It seems well researched as far as it goes but i would hardly call it a biography of Jane. Why write a book about someone if there are very few facts you can pull out? It ends up coming across rather faked even though most of the fact about everyone else, where she could get it, seems fairly spot on. But see, everyone and their dog has written about Henry and Anne and Wolsey and that lot so she must have wanted to do something different. I'll finish it but i wouldn't recommend it either.
Little flurry of activity at work then it will settle down again.
Still hot and somewhat humid.
NO SCRABULOUS! Eek!
