Transgender Warriors : Making History from Joan of Arc to Dennis Rodman by Leslie Feinberg Summary and Reviews
|
List Price: Our Price: $9.55 You Save: $15.40 (62%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $6.25 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of Transgender Warriors : Making History from Joan of Arc to Dennis Rodman
Book Review: Feinberg's "Transgender Warriors"
Summary: 1 Stars
While there certainly have been people throughout history who did engage in cross-dressing as a preference, this book has managed to ignore most of them while erroneously claiming such to be the case about numerous others who did not legitimately fit the description. Perhaps the worst distortion occurs in the section on Joan of Arc, about which the following points should be made:
- On the issue of her decision to wear male clothing, and the book's claim that she allegedly "died for the right" to wear it: this subject is covered in a great many eyewitness accounts and other documents which clarify the "spin" which her accusers put on the issue when they wrote the trial transcript. Direct quotes from Joan in a number of accounts say that she wore soldiers' clothing (of a type which had "laces and points" which allowed her to firmly tie the pants and tunic together), partly as a defense against rape (which was especially a problem while in prison) as well as to discourage sexual advances while bedding down with her army in the field. This was the accepted way of doing it, and if it was thus being done out of necessity the Church itself granted permission (see medieval theological works such as "Summa Theologica", "Scito Vias Domini", and so on). Her accusers were distorting medieval theology when they said that it was "always" an act of heresy. A number of eyewitnesses said that in the end her guards maneuvered her into a "relapse" by leaving her nothing to wear but her old male clothing, and she had no choice but to put it back on after arguing with them "until noon", according to one eyewitness. The author of this book, on the other hand, adopts the dishonest tactic of repeating the claims made by Joan's enemies on this subject while ignoring everything else.
- Even English financial documents prove that it was the English who ran and paid for her trial, and the eyewitness accounts state that they convicted her out of revenge rather than from any genuine belief that she was a heretic. To see what her religious views actually were, you need to look at the eyewitness accounts as well as the letters which she dictated to scribes during her military campaigns, which bluntly declare her devotion to, quote, "King Jesus, the King of Heaven", "Saint Mary", and so forth. This is why there was a successful appeal of her case after the English were finally driven out of from Rouen near the end of the war, leading the Inquisition to overturn the verdict on July 7, 1456.
- Needless to say, the above evidence also refutes the author's claim that Joan was a pagan, which is based on misconceptions about the nature of her trial as well as confusion over other issues, such as her native region (the modern usage of the word "Lorraine" is confused with the Duchy of Lorraine (which was supposedly a hotbed of witchcraft in that era); Joan did not come from the _Duchy_ of Lorraine, which wasn't even a part of France at that time).
- She did not lead a "proletarian" army, but in fact the core of her army was composed of the usual aristocrats and mercenaries (such as Duke Jean II d'Alencon, whom Joan always called "my fair Duke" ("mon beau Duc"); the Count of Dunois, the Baron of Coulances, Lord Saint-Severe, Lord Etienne de Vignolles (aka "La Hire"), and so on). Feinberg's spin on this, as with so many other subjects, is merely an invention.
- There are other anachronisms, such as when the author interprets Joan as a "feminist" while ignoring certain of her recorded statements which sound like precisely the opposite (such as the comment: "I would rather stay home with my poor mother and spin wool [rather than lead an army]", or her statement to Catherine de la Rochelle to "go home to your husband and tend your household", etc). Feminism is a modern movement which really had no counterpart in the 15th century.
...
Book Review: Fluff, not history
Summary: 1 Stars
As someone who has researched the original documents and is currently translating one of the Latin copies of the trial transcript, I can only view this book as a farce. It's clear that neither the author nor her readers have bothered to study the documents about Joan of Arc's case (especially the retrial documents drawn up when the case was appealed and examined by the Inquisition in the 1450s). According to the retrial witnesses Pierre Cusquel, Martin Ladvenu, Isambart de la Pierre, and Guillaume Manchon, Joan said that she wore male clothing as the standard "lawful" defense against the attempted rape that she had endured (i.e., the pants worn by men in that era could be fastened securely to the tunic, making it difficult for an attacker to pull them off, whereas a dress offered no such protection whatsoever), and she resumed male clothing after her abjuration because "a great English lord had entered her cell and tried to rape her" (according to Martin Ladvenu). Another witness, Jean Massieu, added that her guards had switched her dress with male clothing in the night, and she finally put on the latter after a long argument with the guards which "went on until noon", according to Massieu. She indicated at many points that she would have rather worn a dress, had it not been for the circumstances she was in. These are the facts behind the matter, based on the medieval documents. Amazon.com carries a number of books by Regine Pernoud which contain extensive excerpts from both trials, presented with respect and scholarly accuracy. Leslie Feinberg's view, on the other hand, is merely another attempt to repeat the dishonest charges made against Joan of Arc by her political enemies.Book Review: Here's to Feinberg's Transgendering History Quest
Summary: 5 Stars
The Stonewall frontliner offers an engaging expedition back through the past into the present through critical transgender-centering reinterpretations of familiar and unfamiliar stories. Hir re-reading of Joan of Arc from a transgender socialist feminist perspective is intriguing, motivating, and delightful. Feinberg is able to achieve visibility for heterosexistly obscured transgender moments and people across a lengthy span of time and geography.Braiding hir own narrative into the work provides a reflexive empassioned appeal to liberation workers that renews spirits to confront gender, desire, and sexed supremacy with a certain pride in transgender revolutionary work. The blend of freshly unearthed truths, experiential revelations, and proffers for theory work well for a feminist readership.
Book Review: History
Summary: 5 Stars
Thanks to Amazon turning 3 crowns in 1 I'm sending this to countaract - hmmm...Book Review: History
Summary: 1 Stars
Ref: Reader from USA, 23 July 99: Sorry, haven't read all the books avail on Joan of Arc yet, but so far she put her clothes (male, if you so wish) back on in prison although they offered her a dress - maybe you wanna do a search on Joan of Arc at Amazon - just a suggestion...Back when I've read this book (three crowns to influence average rating as little as poss - sorry).