![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
inulroThis is a biography of John Dee.
It's reasonably well written, and a nice easy read for non-fiction, but I found it infuriating in parts, mainly because the author skips over the subjects I'm most interested in.
I have to admit I really didn't know much at all about Dee before I read it, and the Elizabethan is not a period I've been all that interested in since I was about 14.
The book is successfuly in making the points that Dee was a great scholar and quintessential Renaissance man (or even an early Isaac Newton), and a central figure at the Elizabethan court. Because his posthumous fame mostly had to do with the "actions" with Edward Kelley (which make up the bulk of the book), he was written off as a black magician and in the course of the 18th and 19th centuries was written out of the standard histories of the Elizabethan court. I learned a lot about the state of learning in England at the time (far behind that of the Continent, of which I was not aware), and mathematics (Dee started out as a mathematician) was viewed with suspicion, akin to magic. The Renaissance was a lot less rational time than we usually think of it today.
Where I was left infuriated was around Dee's middle period travels in Europe - the book goes into detail about his first trip to the Low Countries, and of course the last residence in Krakow and Prague with Kelley, but the chronology at the back goes on to list things that he did on the continent which were not mentioned in the narrative, including attending the coronation of a Holy Roman Emperor. I would have liked more detail about Dee's place in Walsingham's spy network (he did pioneering work in cryptography), but it's entirely possible the evidence isn't really there. Finally, there is one sentence dedicated to his 10-year internal exile in Manchester, which I'd really like to know more about.
I was left with the feeling that John Dee should really be written back into Elizabethan history, but that this was not the book to do a very good job of that rehabilitation.
I also got the feeling that there's a Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle-type novel (or series thereof) in the subject matter, but I'm not going to be the one to tackle it.
I've now finished all the library books I'd foolishly taken out just before I went to Fantasycon, so now that Ramsey Campbell collection can jump the queue.
It's reasonably well written, and a nice easy read for non-fiction, but I found it infuriating in parts, mainly because the author skips over the subjects I'm most interested in.
I have to admit I really didn't know much at all about Dee before I read it, and the Elizabethan is not a period I've been all that interested in since I was about 14.
The book is successfuly in making the points that Dee was a great scholar and quintessential Renaissance man (or even an early Isaac Newton), and a central figure at the Elizabethan court. Because his posthumous fame mostly had to do with the "actions" with Edward Kelley (which make up the bulk of the book), he was written off as a black magician and in the course of the 18th and 19th centuries was written out of the standard histories of the Elizabethan court. I learned a lot about the state of learning in England at the time (far behind that of the Continent, of which I was not aware), and mathematics (Dee started out as a mathematician) was viewed with suspicion, akin to magic. The Renaissance was a lot less rational time than we usually think of it today.
Where I was left infuriated was around Dee's middle period travels in Europe - the book goes into detail about his first trip to the Low Countries, and of course the last residence in Krakow and Prague with Kelley, but the chronology at the back goes on to list things that he did on the continent which were not mentioned in the narrative, including attending the coronation of a Holy Roman Emperor. I would have liked more detail about Dee's place in Walsingham's spy network (he did pioneering work in cryptography), but it's entirely possible the evidence isn't really there. Finally, there is one sentence dedicated to his 10-year internal exile in Manchester, which I'd really like to know more about.
I was left with the feeling that John Dee should really be written back into Elizabethan history, but that this was not the book to do a very good job of that rehabilitation.
I also got the feeling that there's a Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle-type novel (or series thereof) in the subject matter, but I'm not going to be the one to tackle it.
I've now finished all the library books I'd foolishly taken out just before I went to Fantasycon, so now that Ramsey Campbell collection can jump the queue.
