It's an unusual history book that tries to point out how little is actually known about its subject. This was a good reminder that as much as we may think we "know" about Anne Boleyn, almost nothing comes from original sources and most comes from the writings of people who were highly partisan. Anne the historical person is unknowable from this point in history, but Anne the archetype changes with the times and is used in different ways. I did find the book a bit repetitive, and the author's opinion of who Anne was comes through too strongly in points given that she's already made the argument that there's not much we can know for sure, but I still found this a very interesting read. ( )

Divorced, beheaded, died; divorced, beheaded, survived. It's how you remember what became of the six wives of Henry XIII. That there's even a way to help you remember the love life of a monarch whose reign is 500 years in the past speaks to the enduring cultural relevancy of Henry and his wives. And if you were to ask someone off the street to name you just one of them, I'd put my money on it that they'd name Anne Boleyn. Witch, feminist before her time, seductress, all of the above and more....a lot of people have a lot of opinions about Anne, who she was, and what she did. But who was the "real" Anne Boleyn, and why do we still care?

Susan Bordo is a popular culture/gender studies academic, and brings a welcome level of inquiry, research, and critical thought to her examination of the legends that surround Anne Boleyn. Nearly all of Anne's personal correspondence and even official portraiture were destroyed by Henry in the aftermath of her death, so we have to rely almost entirely on secondhand accounts (many of them hostile, like Spanish ambassador Eustace Chapuys) to know much of anything about her at all. This has created a narrative with substantial gaps, which can only be filled by conjecture.

The book begins with a walkthrough of what we do and can know with relative certainty about Anne (what she probably looked like, her upbringing in the French court, her move to England and courtship with Henry, her proto-Protestant religious beliefs, her short reign, and the circumstances of her death). It then examines the myths that have sprung up around her, and how they've varied over time. Bordo's research pops up interesting facts, like that the "Anne as headstrong teenager" strain of Anne's mythology only pops up after World War 2, when the concept of teenager-hood was just becoming a thing and audiences were primed by wartime media to be ready for plucky heroines.

Bordo is displeased with the popular historical fiction surrounding Anne, and she rakes it over the coals pretty hard. Phillipa Gregory gets an especially high dose of her ire, to an extent which I actually feel is unfair. Gregory has never pretended to be writing scholarly, academic history, and while there are definitely people who probably look at her books and think they're reading something that's been heavily researched for historical accuracy, I have to imagine that most of us understand that she's using outlines of the actual people who were her characters and taking pretty heavy dramatic license with the rest. It's not Gregory's "fault", per se, that her book became enormously popular and is probably most people's go-to reference for Anne Boleyn. Some of her statements imply that she does hold herself out as somewhat of an authority in the era, but at the end of the day, there's a reason her books are filed in the fiction section. Then again, I own and enjoy many of Gregory's books, so maybe I'm just defensive.

At the end of the day, if you have an interest in Anne Boleyn that was sparked by the dreaded The Other Boleyn Girl, or Natalie Dormer's incredible portrayal on The Tudors, or Wolf Hall, or anything at all, really, you'll enjoy this book. It's accessible, well-researched, and put together in a way that makes for a really enjoyable reading experience! ( )

This is a hard book to rate for me. I feel like it vacilitated between a four and a two, which is why I left it at three, but I'm not completely comfortable with that rating. I guess a lot of my trouble was that I couldn't quite pin down what it was supposed to be. It was part biography, part social commentary, and part really personal, and all kind of thrown together.

I use the term "biography" in this instance rather loosely. If I hadn't had background on Anne I fell like I would have been in a bit of trouble trying to follow some of this. It bounces around a little bit too much for my taste and I feel like there is a lot of repetition and even re-quoting of the same passages from the same sources. It is heavily focused, perhaps rightly, on the trial and then backtracks to attempt to handle the charges against Anne.

Valid points against the neutrality of previous writers on the subject are brought up again and again, and then promptly ignored for this book's own narrative purposes, which makes it really obvious. Mary is a "spoiled brat", Henry is a sociopath, people's motives on writing badly about Anne are boiled down to an overly-simplistic view and those who write for her are ignored. Now, I don't really mind some creativity in terms of narrative or interpretation of events and people in my history. I know everyone does it, and that is why I read more than just one (or even two or three) non-fiction books on a given subject--in the hopes of being able to grasp the full narrative. My issue with it here is exclusively the unawareness of the language coupled with the awareness of everyone else doing it. It feels awkward to go from complaints about a lack of neutrality in the language directly into doing it.

The cultural history of Anne mostly consists of a discussion of her portrayals in popular culture and the responses to them. It was pretty heavily unbalanced in favor of picking apart the negative portrayals. Positive ones were brought up and then shortly dismissed unless words from one of those authors was needed to convict another, which was a shame, because I wanted to hear more about what they were doing right. Pages and pages and pages are devoted to complaints about historical inaccuracy in anything that is not kind in their portrayal of Anne, and occasionally in personal-sounding attacks against the authors.

The section on the fansites was probably my favorite. I found all of the interaction going on there to be fascinating and it was nice to hear thoughts about Anne from the kind of people who might also be reading this book, although they were clearly cherry-picked. I like the idea of an internet group that internally policed scholarship on the Tudors and required vigorous proofs for any statements made.

This was supposed to be a book to ease me into some more positive portrayals of Anne. I was aware that most historical fiction on her was pretty negative, and I had hoped this book would clear up why and steer me towards some interesting positive portrayals. Unfortunately, what it left me with was an awkward feeling towards her defenders. It was overzealous in her defense, and not quietly so. It was too focused on other authors. It left me with disbelief and a faint disquiet. Now I don't believe anyone. On the other hand, I am intrigued enough to pick up another book on Anne, and to reconsider what others have been saying about her, so in that regard the book succeeded at its purpose. ( )

After Anne Boleyn was executed in 1556, King Henry VIII tried to erase her from history by destroying her portraits, letters, and any other traces of her existance. Because of this, the real Anne Boleyn remains a mystery. Was she a wicked harlot or a Protestant martyr? A conniving husband-stealing shrew or feminist champion? In THE CREATION OF ANNE BOLEYN, author Susan Bordo sets out to “save” Anne the human being from the various myths created over the centuries.

The first half of the book was my favorite. It’s an in depth look at Anne’s relationship with Henry, and how certain people from her own time viewed her and her marriage with the king. It was interesting to hear the author’s opinions of Catherine of Aragon and Jane Seymour, and how they differed from Anne. Ms. Bordo also looks at the theories about Henry’s health that may have caused his fickle nature when it came to disposing of his wives.

I didn’t care for the second half of the book quite as much. It explored how different versions of Anne Boleyn have been created over the last 500 years to fit the standards of the time. The chapters dragged at times, and ideas were repeated. I did like that the author showed how Anne is portrayed in film and literature today, including her thoughts on The Tudors television show. One negative for me was her obvious dislike of Philippa Gregory’s The Other Boleyn Girl (both the book and movie). It’s fine if she doesn’t like Gregory’s portrayal of Anne, but hearing about it over and over got tiresome after a while. (I have not read or seen The Other Boleyn Girl, but now I want to!)

This book was narrated by Barbara Rosenblat, and she gave a brilliant performance. She added just the right amount of enthusiasm, humor, and sarcasm in her voice at the appropriate passages. I would give the narration alone 5 stars!

THE CREATION OF ANNE BOLEYN was expertly researched, and I enjoyed how it was so much more than a typical biography. The information presented was certainly thought-provoking, and I walked away from this book with a new view of England’s most notorious queen.

Rating: 3.5 Stars

Note: A copy of this audiobook was provided by Audible.com in exchange for an honest review. ( )

I was very pleased to read this book.I had considered that I had read a lot on Anne Boleyn before beginning but I was glad to know there is so much more.I have watched television shows,seen movies and been on websites devoted to her and still this book surprised me.A fascinating portrait of Anne Boleyn and how we have come to view her through the centuries. ( )