Long before I read Mantel, I read Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror. Tuchman looked for parallels between "the calamitous 14th century" and our own troubled times. I think Mantel takes us to the 1520s and 1530s to show us a world we recognise all too well. Both More and Cromwell are active participants in making that new world: where it is no longer sufficient to just obey, one must also believe. The medieval acts of heresy and treason are becoming the thought-crimes of the modern state and modern society. And you must "arrange your face" because your thoughts can get you killed. I suppose we could argue that the printing press and the vernacular bible are fundamental to this transition: we are freer to think for ourselves and so not thoughts themselves must be policed.
Yes, exactly. More and Cromwell are both variations on the “new man,” fighting over what the new world will look like. And yes, the Tuchman is a classic--one of the books that originally got me into medieval studies.
Loving this context for our Wolf Hall read! Thank you. Was not expecting it to start with Foucault, but this makes a lot of sense. Kafka's Penal Colony came to mind to extend the idea. Thanks for warning us that the Reformation happened 🤣
Ah, the danger of interpreting for oneself! This is where I think Cromwell had a lot in common with Zen Buddhists. However, I've yet to read Mantel's interpretation and am eager to do so soon.
This part: “Early in the novel, Cromwell contemplates More’s absolute certainty of his own righteousness: “ etc
I think about how Zen is about riddles and questions I’m juxtaposition with certain answers from some religions. Although I would also argue most religions in the pure sense also ask one to think!
I’m not sure where I’m going with this and Cromwell. Probably should read the book first :)
Oh, I see—the idea that Cromwell is more comfortable with the possibility of uncertainty and ambiguity, which are states that are rejected by certain forms of fundamentalism. Yes, that makes a lot of sense!
Okay. I understand better now the comparisons you made. Thos. More restricted all access to the English translation of the Bible then written in Latin, to the point of burning both the text and the Self. While those behind the current FL admin. and its supporters acted to keep certain content away from those of a certain school age but didn’t propose any restrictions to the existing access to it by any person outside that age group. I didn’t see the similarity or connection in the two as I read the essay; it’s thought provoking. Thanks!
Consider in 2023 who is being told " must conform, reform or be eradicated". I have not read the books yet, but look forward to hearing the various viewpoints on the text.
I really enjoyed reading this analysis, Professor. If even possible, I am looking more forward to the long read and considering other readers’ thoughts.
Is keeping one of Toni Morrison’s books out of elementary school libraries, while allowing the author’s other works to be available in the same libraries, really parallel to forbidding in 1550 (on pain of death) the reading or possession of the English Bible? Access to the subject Morrison book and all of her others in places other than elementary school libraries was not threatened, as I remember it.
Along the same lines, is the removal of illustrated homoerotic books and graphic novels from elementary school libraries - but permitting access to them everywhere else - also comparable to what More brutally enforced, Professor Halbrooks?
Historical comparisons are always imprecise. But what is comparable is targeting certain groups of people (ethnicities, religions, genders) and using censorship to label them as other.
Thanks John for sharing these essays again.
Long before I read Mantel, I read Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror. Tuchman looked for parallels between "the calamitous 14th century" and our own troubled times. I think Mantel takes us to the 1520s and 1530s to show us a world we recognise all too well. Both More and Cromwell are active participants in making that new world: where it is no longer sufficient to just obey, one must also believe. The medieval acts of heresy and treason are becoming the thought-crimes of the modern state and modern society. And you must "arrange your face" because your thoughts can get you killed. I suppose we could argue that the printing press and the vernacular bible are fundamental to this transition: we are freer to think for ourselves and so not thoughts themselves must be policed.
Yes, exactly. More and Cromwell are both variations on the “new man,” fighting over what the new world will look like. And yes, the Tuchman is a classic--one of the books that originally got me into medieval studies.
Mantel and Tuchman left us some of the most masterful prose on the period, though both saw it through the lens of their formative years.
Loving this context for our Wolf Hall read! Thank you. Was not expecting it to start with Foucault, but this makes a lot of sense. Kafka's Penal Colony came to mind to extend the idea. Thanks for warning us that the Reformation happened 🤣
Ah, the danger of interpreting for oneself! This is where I think Cromwell had a lot in common with Zen Buddhists. However, I've yet to read Mantel's interpretation and am eager to do so soon.
Wow--I had never thought of Cromwell juxtaposed to Zen Buddhists! I will want to hear more about this.
This part: “Early in the novel, Cromwell contemplates More’s absolute certainty of his own righteousness: “ etc
I think about how Zen is about riddles and questions I’m juxtaposition with certain answers from some religions. Although I would also argue most religions in the pure sense also ask one to think!
I’m not sure where I’m going with this and Cromwell. Probably should read the book first :)
Oh, I see—the idea that Cromwell is more comfortable with the possibility of uncertainty and ambiguity, which are states that are rejected by certain forms of fundamentalism. Yes, that makes a lot of sense!
Okay. I understand better now the comparisons you made. Thos. More restricted all access to the English translation of the Bible then written in Latin, to the point of burning both the text and the Self. While those behind the current FL admin. and its supporters acted to keep certain content away from those of a certain school age but didn’t propose any restrictions to the existing access to it by any person outside that age group. I didn’t see the similarity or connection in the two as I read the essay; it’s thought provoking. Thanks!
Consider in 2023 who is being told " must conform, reform or be eradicated". I have not read the books yet, but look forward to hearing the various viewpoints on the text.
I really enjoyed reading this analysis, Professor. If even possible, I am looking more forward to the long read and considering other readers’ thoughts.
Is keeping one of Toni Morrison’s books out of elementary school libraries, while allowing the author’s other works to be available in the same libraries, really parallel to forbidding in 1550 (on pain of death) the reading or possession of the English Bible? Access to the subject Morrison book and all of her others in places other than elementary school libraries was not threatened, as I remember it.
Along the same lines, is the removal of illustrated homoerotic books and graphic novels from elementary school libraries - but permitting access to them everywhere else - also comparable to what More brutally enforced, Professor Halbrooks?
Historical comparisons are always imprecise. But what is comparable is targeting certain groups of people (ethnicities, religions, genders) and using censorship to label them as other.
Florida is Inquisition? Oh, my.