Customer Reviews

A House in Gross Disorder: Sex, Law, and the 2nd Earl of Castlehaven

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

A nice and satisfying read. Herrup combined a truly impressive amount of primary sources, scattered over 10 different archives and libraries. Instead of drowning in the source material and the vast body of secondary literature, she offers a nice, crisp and concise 150+ page analysis.

All the raunchy details of the Castlehaven case are there, but the supposed escapades of the Second Earl of Castlehaven are not the prime focus of this book. Through the relatively restricted prism of a scandalous lawsuit, Herrup achieves in painting a surprisingly broad and kaleidoscopical image of civil society in the mid-17th-century Britain. She skillfully treat themes such as the relations between men and wives, the official and actual perceptions of catholics and Irish, the delicate position of King Charles I and the strife at the royal court between old nobility and the recently ennobled.

Herrup carefully avoids any references to the marquis De Sade. It's easy to see why. Inclusion of De Sade would probably have broadened the scope of the book too much: times, country and circumstances were so much different. But still, it's seducing to compare the two. Sade was given a death sentence in 1772, just as Castlehaven 141 years earlier. Both men did not repent, both their wives were of questionable reputation. And the accusations against Earl Mervin could have directly inspired parts of Sade's Philosophy In The Boudoir.

I loved this book. The story is unbelievable, and Cynthia Herrup does a great job of explaining all its ins-and-outs (no pun intended). If you want a novel, this ain't it. But if you want a great history book, this is for you. Me? I'm giving it to all my friends . . . and maybe my mom too!

I suspect this book was written as a PhD thesis. It is big on post-structural analysis of the Castlehaven trial - looking to interpret the trial in terms of the legal, religious, political and gender issues of the day. It also analyses the subsequent retellings of the story over time and how writers and commentators continue to interpret the story in light of the prevailing issues and conflicts of their own times. This very academic commentary is woven throughout the book and ultimately weakens what might have been a compelling account. Sadly, the balance between events and interpretation has been lost. Readers who are not familiar with the historical context and the broad details of the reign of Charles I, will struggle to understand much of the author's interpretation anyway. There are some engaging aspects to this account but they owe more to the natural curiosity raised by a tale about sexual deviancy, family discord and uncertain guilt, than to the author 's heavy-handed attempts to tell us what it all means (without ever explaining why we should care).

For my college's senior seminar class this book was required reading so we could get the experience of how a researcher used secondary sources.

I could only get to page 10 of this book, and I had this book for months before senior seminar, it was that slow of a read and boring.

The story of the Earl of Castlehaven is almost too amazing to be believed--not only for the actions of the Earl himself, but also for his trial and what *it* said about English society of the time. In addition, the light that the trial sheds on that time's notions of sexuality, "family," and politics is astounding. But somehow, someway, Cynthia Herrup manages to make it all deadly dull. Reading the book was an exercise in tedium--Herrup's prose is strictly academic and she's given to long paragraphs in which she says precisely nothing.

There are many fascinating books on the subject of sexuality, politics, and family during this period of English history. This isn't one of them.