Reviews

Who Cooked the Last Supper?: The Women's History of the World by Rosalind Miles

gurkenlimo's review against another edition

Go to review page

informative reflective slow-paced

4.0

chantellenore's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging informative reflective sad medium-paced

3.5

This is an interesting book, but I'm not sure it's all true (I stumbled across an incorrect representation of ancient Egyptian politics which is what makes me suspicious). The author really should have expanded her discussion more beyond Eurocentric history. 

loxeletters's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark informative inspiring

2.75

Very mixed feelings.

On the one hand, this book valiantly attempts a noble endeavour: re-framing and retelling the history of the world, focusing on women. This intention alone is noteworthy. And it arguably does an okay job, for the most part.

On the other hand, it also sets itself up for failure immediately. As a kind of feminist popsci book, it was never going to cover "The Women's History of the World", as its subtitle (and main title of the 1st edition) proclaims. Indeed, the further we move towards modernity (the book is structured in semi-chronoligal, semi-topical chapters), the less we learn about women across the world, as the book instead focuses more and more on English and US American women. Thus, the chapter about revolutions discusses solely the experience of women in the US, England, and France. Most egregiously, the chapter on imperialism spends barely five full pages on the experiences of colonised women, instead devoting itself to underscoring the importance of white women to the success of empire. Reading about their plight of living in strange, hot climates was bizarre, to say the least. Again, the British and US empires are the main focus.

This is my main gripe with the book. Some others include the aforementioned structure, which failed to convey a clear timeline or progression of how "women's history of the world" unfolded, at times jumping back and forth between times and places. Of course, history isn't always clear and linear, but it is the job of historiography to clear up the muddle and draw connections. The argumentative structure within chapters was  sometimes similarly confusing.

There has been some criticism of this book regarding sourcing, especially Miles' uncommon/unsupported interpretations of sources. Without the time to review every single source used - and there are a lot! - I inevitably struggled to trust almost anything that the author was saying. Coming out of this book, I feel as though I've learned quite some stuff, but at the same time many of Miles' points could be without any scientific backup and I wouldn't know it. This is why I can't comfortably praise the book for teaching me a lot.

Finally, and this is the most nitpicky of all, I felt at times the inclusion of long quotes by male white authors where I'm sure a women's quote could've been found was disappointing. The book ending on a quote by a man... Really? 

And speaking of endings, I would've wished for a separate conclusion that could've tied some points together and maybe cleared up some of the muddled structure of the book.

sincerelymiranda's review against another edition

Go to review page

informative medium-paced

4.0

keefburger's review against another edition

Go to review page

informative medium-paced

3.5

erueth's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark emotional informative inspiring reflective tense slow-paced

4.0

A wordy but informative history of the patriarchy, women’s rights and development of modern feminism. Only 3 of 287 pages devoted to the experience of BIPOC women in the US (perhaps a reflection of the books origin in the 1980s). 

gudgercollege's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

This is a fun but flawed historical document. It's mostly about what white free women were up to, and just barely mentions slavery in America or elsewhere. She at least mentions that women were involved in anti-racist and abolitionist movements, but doesn't describe any of their actions or their thoughts, generally. There's also only a token mention of queer women. Miles is wry and angry, and that's my thing, but this isn't very comprehensive and should be read in the context of the pre-intersectional feminist movement. I'm glad I read it now rather than in or just out of college, where I would've been more focused on white feminism than on total liberation.

sleepysapling's review against another edition

Go to review page

I'm sure this was great for when it was written in the 80s but thankfully we have evolved past this.  Picking and choosing facts some that are unverified so it's not really history. Aggressive tone that makes it annoying to read and structure is really loose as well. I also cannot abide anyone who only says that Margaret Thatcher had a "historic reign" and not mention how fucking awful she was

books_bakes_bri's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark emotional informative reflective medium-paced

5.0

This book was really hard (emotionally) to get through, but incredibly important. I’m thankful I read it. 

awainwright's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark emotional informative inspiring reflective slow-paced

4.0