What do you think?
Rate this book
Very Short Introductions #735
The History of Emotions: A Very Short Introduction
Very Short Introductions: Brilliant, Sharp, Inspiring
Emotions are complex mental states that resist reduction. They are visceral reactions but also beliefs about the world. They are spontaneous outbursts but also culturally learned performances. They are intimate and private and yet gain their substance and significance only from interpersonal and social frameworks. And just as our emotions in any given moment display this complex structure, so their history is plural rather than singular. The history of emotions is where the history of ideas
meets the history of the body, and where the history of subjectivity meets social and cultural history.
In this Very Short Introduction, Thomas Dixon traces the historical ancestries of feelings ranging from sorrow, melancholy, rage, and terror to cheerfulness, enthusiasm, sympathy, and love. The picture that emerges is a complex one, showing how the states we group together today as "the emotions" are the product of long and varied historical changes in language, culture, beliefs, and ways of life. The grief-stricken rage of Achilles in the Iliad, the happiness inscribed in
America's Declaration of Independence, the love of humanity that fired crusades and revolutions through the ages, and the righteous rage of modern protest movements all look different when seen through this lens.
With examples from ancient, medieval, and modern cultures, including forgotten feelings and the creation of modern emotional regimes, this Very Short Introduction sheds new light on our emotions in the present, by looking at what historians can tell us about their past. Dixon explains the key ideas of historians of emotions as they have developed in conversation with psychology and psychiatry, with attention paid especially to ideas about basic emotions, psychological construction, and
affect theory.
ABOUT THE The Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable.
Emotions are complex mental states that resist reduction. They are visceral reactions but also beliefs about the world. They are spontaneous outbursts but also culturally learned performances. They are intimate and private and yet gain their substance and significance only from interpersonal and social frameworks. And just as our emotions in any given moment display this complex structure, so their history is plural rather than singular. The history of emotions is where the history of ideas
meets the history of the body, and where the history of subjectivity meets social and cultural history.
In this Very Short Introduction, Thomas Dixon traces the historical ancestries of feelings ranging from sorrow, melancholy, rage, and terror to cheerfulness, enthusiasm, sympathy, and love. The picture that emerges is a complex one, showing how the states we group together today as "the emotions" are the product of long and varied historical changes in language, culture, beliefs, and ways of life. The grief-stricken rage of Achilles in the Iliad, the happiness inscribed in
America's Declaration of Independence, the love of humanity that fired crusades and revolutions through the ages, and the righteous rage of modern protest movements all look different when seen through this lens.
With examples from ancient, medieval, and modern cultures, including forgotten feelings and the creation of modern emotional regimes, this Very Short Introduction sheds new light on our emotions in the present, by looking at what historians can tell us about their past. Dixon explains the key ideas of historians of emotions as they have developed in conversation with psychology and psychiatry, with attention paid especially to ideas about basic emotions, psychological construction, and
affect theory.
ABOUT THE The Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable.
169 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2023
21 people are currently reading
225 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
January 17, 2024
As an introduction to the history of emotions this book does not disappoint. It is extremely well written and succinct. But also it manages to present the subject as very fascinating. It is also an important, relatively unusual perspective on history and even maybe psychology. This is not really a proper review as I rely heavily on including significant chunks of the text from the book. But i thought it would be useful to share some of the assertions and facts that i found fascinating.
The subject is quite new and still controversial. There is a camp of specialists that claim the basic emotions are the same from primordial days. Therefore they cannot really have history. Also the impact of emotional states on historic events cannot be objectively studied. I am very much simplifying the debate, but this is the idea.
However, there the opposite camp disagrees. And this book summarises where they are coming from. According to them:
“The history of emotions shows us that any particular way of thinking about feelings, past or present, is the product of contingent historical processes. This helps to unsettle the belief that any such picture is inevitable, natural, or universal. One standard psychological approach is to ask what emotions ‘we’ have, or how ‘the brain’ works, as if there were a singular answer that would be true for all brains and all humans in all times and places. The history of emotions, by and large, rejects such universalism. And yet the discipline is founded on an assumption, whether explicitly stated or not, of some kind of shared connection between the historian and their subjects. Historians of emotion, in however imperfect a way, do usually hope to help us see inside the minds of the dead. The range of feelings available in the past, while often diverging markedly from our own, are generally part of a recognizable, albeit very large and only partially shared, human repertoire.”
Somewhere in this book the emotions are compared with famous quantum physics wavefunction. According to this function, the electrons could be in many states at the same time until they interact with the environment. At this point the function “collapses” and the position of the electron could be described and defined. The same with an emotional state - it could be hidden inside and preferable, it could be indescribable and certainly unhistorical. However, at some point the emotions come out into the open and face with other people, society etc. - emotional “function collapses” to something that can be studied and put into a historical context.
The book briefly goes through different concepts with the subjects and some key individuals studying it. Then the author moves to some individual emotions (woe, happiness, rage and love) and shows how this work is done with the help of case studies.
Below are a few examples that intrigued me. The book contains much more inspire of being such a short volume.
Happiness
“We can trace its origins back to the politics and culture of the 18th century, when emotions and politics were starting to take on their modern shape. The 18th-century pursuit of happiness brought with it new terrors and anxieties. Happiness was a foundational aim for revolutionaries in both North America and France. It was written into the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America in 1776, and echoed in the Declaration of the Rights of Man adopted by France’s new National Assembly in 1789. The shadow side of this aspiration was evident in the violence and bloodshed of the armed revolutions undertaken in its name. The waves of revolutionary ecstasy had an undertow of terror, and the pursuit of happiness was haunted by fear.”
However, apparently the “happiness” included into 1776 US Declaration of Independence is a different phenomena compared to the emotional happiness we now refer to. It is referring more to “hap” which is luck and closer to “happenstance”. The confirmation of this is a “short essay, ‘On True Happiness’, written by Benjamin Franklin and published in the Pennsylvania Gazette some decades earlier.”
“Franklin contrasted this sorry state (of emotional happiness) with ‘true, solid happiness’, which was grounded in ‘an indifference to the things of this world, an entire submission to the will of Providence here, and a well-grounded expectation of happiness hereafter’. For Franklin and those who thought like him, the pursuit of happiness was mainly about being good rather than feeling good.
‘Happiness’ in 1776 was the ability to pursue prosperity through the solid and sober exercise of reason and virtue.”
However, in French revolution whatever they mean by “happiness” was much closer to the emotional state according to the author.
He also raises the question of putting happiness into the corner stone of modern social good. He notes that in the UK as well as in other western countries individual happiness is often monitored by the government and otherwise under a constant scrutiny of the society. But the other side of the coin of such approach is a growing anxiety of being somehow unhappy and especially in the relative terms:
“This modern to-and-fro between happiness, anxiety, and the state can be identified as a ‘structure of feeling’—a recurring pattern of emotions made possible by social and cultural factors.”
Love
No comments from me on the one, just excepts:
“So extensive was the remit of caritas as an ethical imperative that it was also used as the basis for activities which seem, to modern eyes, less obviously virtuous than being a good neighbour or respecting your elders. This is captured in the title of an article by the church historian Jonathan Riley-Smith—‘Crusading as an act of love’—which documents the ways that popes and preachers mobilized a language of fierce, zealous Christian charity in their crusading propaganda. In 1215, Pope Innocent III asked rhetorically how a man could claim to love his neighbour as himself if he learned that ‘his Christian brothers in faith.”
“From the 17th century onwards, a ‘charity’ (caritas) was also the name for a foundation set up to receive donations and use them in the pursuit of worthy causes. Such organizations proliferated rapidly from the later 18th century, and were closely connected with the culture of sensibility, with its ideal of extravagant compassion. Sensitive and wealthy individuals learned to shed both tears and cash in order to demonstrate their admirable feelings of pity and sympathy for those less fortunate than themselves.:”
“The 18th century saw the birth of what historians have termed a new ‘culture of sensibility’, in which educated ladies and gentlemen displayed their moral refinement and human sympathy by responding emotionally to sentimental plays, novels, and paintings. This culture was one in which sympathy for one’s fellow men and women, and public expressions of certain emotions, were newly valued alongside the powers of reason and intellect. Eighteenth-century sensibility found expression in religion and politics as well as in the art and literature of the age. Among the emotions most celebrated were love, compassion, and ecstasy as well as a delightful kind of aesthetic terror known as the ‘sublime’. An idea shared by many who adopted both the philosophy of sensibility and the ideals of the American and French Revolutions was that there was something universal about human nature, and that certain ‘rights’ flowed from that. All human beings had powers of reason, were linked by their powers of sympathetic feeling, and were owed dignity, liberty, and the protection of the state. The universality of this theory of rights and feelings, however, was not matched in practice. Whether understood as a political aspiration or as an emotional experience, ‘happiness’ was never equally available to all. There were many, including women and people of colour, who were forced to smile through their suffering in a show of cheerful submission, masking emotions of pain, despair, and terror, while being offered little of the sympathy and compassion lauded by the era’s moralists.”
Rage (and revenge as a possible manifestation of it)
It was interesting to find out that in legal definition of “loss of control” while acting under rage is currently broader remit (since 2009) as a defence compared with the old idea of “provocation”. Considering all debates and in the society and “me2” this seems almost counter-intutive, but here we go apparently:
“English attitude persisted into the 20th century, with the example of Othello still a cultural reference point. In resisting a ‘provocation’ defence in 1946, a Court of Appeal judge stated that, ‘Even if Iago’s insinuations against Desdemona had been true, Othello’s crime was murder and nothing else.’ The judge commented further that ‘as society advances, it ought to call for a higher measure of self-control in a defendant’. However, the change has in fact been in the opposite direction since then. The ‘loss of control’ defence introduced in 2009 has a much wider remit than the idea of ‘provocation’ of which it is the descendant. Today in England or Wales, if a husband is merely told that his wife has been unfaithful, believes it (whether or not it is true), and is enraged to the extent that he loses control and kills her, then he has the chance to ask a jury to reduce his crime to manslaughter. The ‘loss of control’ defence has been used successfully in exactly this way. In the 21st century, then, unlike any time between the 17th and 20th centuries, a real-life Othello might actually have a chance of being acquitted of murder, on the grounds that he was unable to control his jealous anger.”
Another interesting timely remark on “universal suppressed rage” that women allegedly feel for any reason:
“Some other women, however, found it frustrating that whatever emotions they felt, they would be told by those who subscribed to this view that ‘really’, they were angry. The psychologist Carol Tavris, in a popular book on Anger: The Misunderstood Emotion (1982), reported overhearing a conversation between two women in a café around this time. The first woman was trying to explain that she was feeling sadness because her father had died, while her Freudian companion insisted this was in fact repressed anger. So insistent was the friend, that eventually the first woman lost her temper, providing yet more evidence for the theory of universal suppressed rage.”
I’ve picked just a few cases but this little books is packed with interesting and relevant information. In my view, history of emotions has got some many interesting non-trivial applications for understanding the society, but also it is, to some extent, overlaps with literature. So i would recommend this book as a wonderful read which might open a new road for you.
The subject is quite new and still controversial. There is a camp of specialists that claim the basic emotions are the same from primordial days. Therefore they cannot really have history. Also the impact of emotional states on historic events cannot be objectively studied. I am very much simplifying the debate, but this is the idea.
However, there the opposite camp disagrees. And this book summarises where they are coming from. According to them:
“The history of emotions shows us that any particular way of thinking about feelings, past or present, is the product of contingent historical processes. This helps to unsettle the belief that any such picture is inevitable, natural, or universal. One standard psychological approach is to ask what emotions ‘we’ have, or how ‘the brain’ works, as if there were a singular answer that would be true for all brains and all humans in all times and places. The history of emotions, by and large, rejects such universalism. And yet the discipline is founded on an assumption, whether explicitly stated or not, of some kind of shared connection between the historian and their subjects. Historians of emotion, in however imperfect a way, do usually hope to help us see inside the minds of the dead. The range of feelings available in the past, while often diverging markedly from our own, are generally part of a recognizable, albeit very large and only partially shared, human repertoire.”
Somewhere in this book the emotions are compared with famous quantum physics wavefunction. According to this function, the electrons could be in many states at the same time until they interact with the environment. At this point the function “collapses” and the position of the electron could be described and defined. The same with an emotional state - it could be hidden inside and preferable, it could be indescribable and certainly unhistorical. However, at some point the emotions come out into the open and face with other people, society etc. - emotional “function collapses” to something that can be studied and put into a historical context.
The book briefly goes through different concepts with the subjects and some key individuals studying it. Then the author moves to some individual emotions (woe, happiness, rage and love) and shows how this work is done with the help of case studies.
Below are a few examples that intrigued me. The book contains much more inspire of being such a short volume.
Happiness
“We can trace its origins back to the politics and culture of the 18th century, when emotions and politics were starting to take on their modern shape. The 18th-century pursuit of happiness brought with it new terrors and anxieties. Happiness was a foundational aim for revolutionaries in both North America and France. It was written into the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America in 1776, and echoed in the Declaration of the Rights of Man adopted by France’s new National Assembly in 1789. The shadow side of this aspiration was evident in the violence and bloodshed of the armed revolutions undertaken in its name. The waves of revolutionary ecstasy had an undertow of terror, and the pursuit of happiness was haunted by fear.”
However, apparently the “happiness” included into 1776 US Declaration of Independence is a different phenomena compared to the emotional happiness we now refer to. It is referring more to “hap” which is luck and closer to “happenstance”. The confirmation of this is a “short essay, ‘On True Happiness’, written by Benjamin Franklin and published in the Pennsylvania Gazette some decades earlier.”
“Franklin contrasted this sorry state (of emotional happiness) with ‘true, solid happiness’, which was grounded in ‘an indifference to the things of this world, an entire submission to the will of Providence here, and a well-grounded expectation of happiness hereafter’. For Franklin and those who thought like him, the pursuit of happiness was mainly about being good rather than feeling good.
‘Happiness’ in 1776 was the ability to pursue prosperity through the solid and sober exercise of reason and virtue.”
However, in French revolution whatever they mean by “happiness” was much closer to the emotional state according to the author.
He also raises the question of putting happiness into the corner stone of modern social good. He notes that in the UK as well as in other western countries individual happiness is often monitored by the government and otherwise under a constant scrutiny of the society. But the other side of the coin of such approach is a growing anxiety of being somehow unhappy and especially in the relative terms:
“This modern to-and-fro between happiness, anxiety, and the state can be identified as a ‘structure of feeling’—a recurring pattern of emotions made possible by social and cultural factors.”
Love
No comments from me on the one, just excepts:
“So extensive was the remit of caritas as an ethical imperative that it was also used as the basis for activities which seem, to modern eyes, less obviously virtuous than being a good neighbour or respecting your elders. This is captured in the title of an article by the church historian Jonathan Riley-Smith—‘Crusading as an act of love’—which documents the ways that popes and preachers mobilized a language of fierce, zealous Christian charity in their crusading propaganda. In 1215, Pope Innocent III asked rhetorically how a man could claim to love his neighbour as himself if he learned that ‘his Christian brothers in faith.”
“From the 17th century onwards, a ‘charity’ (caritas) was also the name for a foundation set up to receive donations and use them in the pursuit of worthy causes. Such organizations proliferated rapidly from the later 18th century, and were closely connected with the culture of sensibility, with its ideal of extravagant compassion. Sensitive and wealthy individuals learned to shed both tears and cash in order to demonstrate their admirable feelings of pity and sympathy for those less fortunate than themselves.:”
“The 18th century saw the birth of what historians have termed a new ‘culture of sensibility’, in which educated ladies and gentlemen displayed their moral refinement and human sympathy by responding emotionally to sentimental plays, novels, and paintings. This culture was one in which sympathy for one’s fellow men and women, and public expressions of certain emotions, were newly valued alongside the powers of reason and intellect. Eighteenth-century sensibility found expression in religion and politics as well as in the art and literature of the age. Among the emotions most celebrated were love, compassion, and ecstasy as well as a delightful kind of aesthetic terror known as the ‘sublime’. An idea shared by many who adopted both the philosophy of sensibility and the ideals of the American and French Revolutions was that there was something universal about human nature, and that certain ‘rights’ flowed from that. All human beings had powers of reason, were linked by their powers of sympathetic feeling, and were owed dignity, liberty, and the protection of the state. The universality of this theory of rights and feelings, however, was not matched in practice. Whether understood as a political aspiration or as an emotional experience, ‘happiness’ was never equally available to all. There were many, including women and people of colour, who were forced to smile through their suffering in a show of cheerful submission, masking emotions of pain, despair, and terror, while being offered little of the sympathy and compassion lauded by the era’s moralists.”
Rage (and revenge as a possible manifestation of it)
It was interesting to find out that in legal definition of “loss of control” while acting under rage is currently broader remit (since 2009) as a defence compared with the old idea of “provocation”. Considering all debates and in the society and “me2” this seems almost counter-intutive, but here we go apparently:
“English attitude persisted into the 20th century, with the example of Othello still a cultural reference point. In resisting a ‘provocation’ defence in 1946, a Court of Appeal judge stated that, ‘Even if Iago’s insinuations against Desdemona had been true, Othello’s crime was murder and nothing else.’ The judge commented further that ‘as society advances, it ought to call for a higher measure of self-control in a defendant’. However, the change has in fact been in the opposite direction since then. The ‘loss of control’ defence introduced in 2009 has a much wider remit than the idea of ‘provocation’ of which it is the descendant. Today in England or Wales, if a husband is merely told that his wife has been unfaithful, believes it (whether or not it is true), and is enraged to the extent that he loses control and kills her, then he has the chance to ask a jury to reduce his crime to manslaughter. The ‘loss of control’ defence has been used successfully in exactly this way. In the 21st century, then, unlike any time between the 17th and 20th centuries, a real-life Othello might actually have a chance of being acquitted of murder, on the grounds that he was unable to control his jealous anger.”
Another interesting timely remark on “universal suppressed rage” that women allegedly feel for any reason:
“Some other women, however, found it frustrating that whatever emotions they felt, they would be told by those who subscribed to this view that ‘really’, they were angry. The psychologist Carol Tavris, in a popular book on Anger: The Misunderstood Emotion (1982), reported overhearing a conversation between two women in a café around this time. The first woman was trying to explain that she was feeling sadness because her father had died, while her Freudian companion insisted this was in fact repressed anger. So insistent was the friend, that eventually the first woman lost her temper, providing yet more evidence for the theory of universal suppressed rage.”
I’ve picked just a few cases but this little books is packed with interesting and relevant information. In my view, history of emotions has got some many interesting non-trivial applications for understanding the society, but also it is, to some extent, overlaps with literature. So i would recommend this book as a wonderful read which might open a new road for you.
October 29, 2025
"Mivel az érzelmek megtestesült ítéletek, az érzelmek története egyszerre testeknek és gondolatoknak a története. Először is tehát komolyan veszi a testet. Ennek a történetnek van pulzusa, vannak belei: ez a vér, az izzadság és a könnyek, a nevetés, a tánc és az ének története. Olyan történetírás, amely tág értelemben vett testi érzésekkel és érzékletekkel kapcsolatos kérdéseket tesz fel."
Ha valaki csak Romsicsot olvas, hajlamos elfelejteni, hogy a történelem nem pusztán események egymás utániságáról szól, hanem emberekről. Egyéni és kollektív döntésekről, amelyeket általában valamely érzelem hatása alatt hoztak meg. Persze érthető, miért szkippeli a klasszikus történettudomány az érzelmek világát. Egyfelől természetesen azért, mert az ezzel való kacérkodás már a pszichologizálás rémképét vetíti elő. Másfelől pedig arra csábít, hogy régi aktorok érzelmeit a ma használatos érzelemfogalmat alapján írjuk körül, ami táptalaja a hibás ítéleteknek. Azon, hogy "haragszom", mást értett Akhilleusz, mást Szent Ágoston, mást Dzsingisz kán és mást Othelló, de egyikük haragfogalma sem helyettesíthető be kommentár nélkül azzal, amit én érzek, amikor az a nyűves MÁV nem képes a ceglédi zónázó valamennyi járatát működő légkondival ellátni. Ahhoz tehát, hogy a történetírás az érzelmekhez biztonsággal tudjon nyúlni, először szükség van egy előőrsre: egy olyan történetírásra, ami az érzelmek történetét írja meg.
Hozzáteszem, ez a könyv szerintem nem az a könyv, még ha a cím ilyen illúziót is kelt. Ebben többek között terjedelmi korlátai is megakadályozzák. Sokkal inkább ízelítő ennek az újfajta történetírásnak a működéséből, arról, hogy miért szükséges, pár izgalmas példával kihímezve. De ízelítőnek kiváló. Nagyobb adagot is befogadnék belőle.
Ha valaki csak Romsicsot olvas, hajlamos elfelejteni, hogy a történelem nem pusztán események egymás utániságáról szól, hanem emberekről. Egyéni és kollektív döntésekről, amelyeket általában valamely érzelem hatása alatt hoztak meg. Persze érthető, miért szkippeli a klasszikus történettudomány az érzelmek világát. Egyfelől természetesen azért, mert az ezzel való kacérkodás már a pszichologizálás rémképét vetíti elő. Másfelől pedig arra csábít, hogy régi aktorok érzelmeit a ma használatos érzelemfogalmat alapján írjuk körül, ami táptalaja a hibás ítéleteknek. Azon, hogy "haragszom", mást értett Akhilleusz, mást Szent Ágoston, mást Dzsingisz kán és mást Othelló, de egyikük haragfogalma sem helyettesíthető be kommentár nélkül azzal, amit én érzek, amikor az a nyűves MÁV nem képes a ceglédi zónázó valamennyi járatát működő légkondival ellátni. Ahhoz tehát, hogy a történetírás az érzelmekhez biztonsággal tudjon nyúlni, először szükség van egy előőrsre: egy olyan történetírásra, ami az érzelmek történetét írja meg.
Hozzáteszem, ez a könyv szerintem nem az a könyv, még ha a cím ilyen illúziót is kelt. Ebben többek között terjedelmi korlátai is megakadályozzák. Sokkal inkább ízelítő ennek az újfajta történetírásnak a működéséből, arról, hogy miért szükséges, pár izgalmas példával kihímezve. De ízelítőnek kiváló. Nagyobb adagot is befogadnék belőle.
October 28, 2025
Fontos és érdekes téma - nagyon rövid, "bevezető a" jellegű kivitelben, ennek előnyeivel és hátrányaival. Előny, hogy egy csomó irányból összefog mindenféle szempontot, irányzatot, gondolatot és jópár ismert vagy kevésbé ismert anekdotát, Hátrány, hogy egy nagyon nagy és összetett kutatási területet kell prezentálnia - ráadásul tömören és érthetően, követhetően, lehetőleg élvezhetően is. Szóval egy mission impossible! De azért végig lehet tolni. A szerző angolszász törzsanyaggal és nyelvi fejtegetésekkel dolgozik, a fordító hősiesen megküzdött az etimologizáló-nyelvészkedő részekkel is. Dixon benyomásom szerint visszafogott élvezettel mosolyogja meg a különféle sarkos és megcáfolható érzelem-elméleteket, és bár nekem rokonszenves ez a távolságtartó kritikusság, azért kíváncsi lettem volna, mit gondol ő maga az érzelmek működéséről. Sokszor volt olyan benyomásom, hogy általánosságokba bocsátkozunk, mintha magazincikket olvasnék az érzelmek csodálatos világának megválaszolhatatlan, ám egzotikus kérdéseiről. Ez pedig több kérdést vet fel, mint amit a könyv alkalmasint megválaszol - kiindulásnak tehát pont megteszi.
November 28, 2023
Excellent read in Emotions
This is my fourth book in this series. N I simply loved this history of emotions. Emotions is one important topic in psychology and Organisational behaviour.
The book is fascinating. It goes to William James (considered a father of modern psychology) foundational essay on emotions n trace its history. Charles Darwin's work on emotions is referred to multiple times. I even marked Darwin's book in my reading wishlist. (A clear sign that the book not only engaged but also provided me reasons to go back to it again n again. A sign of a good book. No wonder, I gave it five stars).
A fascinating account of Oscar Wilde's trials also made me highlight to read further.
And detailed debate on Love. Is LOVE an emotion or not!
The book takes its narrative of emotions on crescendo, a climax. A sure sign that the reader will return to the book.
If you are a student of psychology, behaviour, or emotions, this is a must read.
Even if you aren't a student of these specialties, the book is engaging, written in plain lucid language even for any curious n general reader.
A short read, worth your time!
This is my fourth book in this series. N I simply loved this history of emotions. Emotions is one important topic in psychology and Organisational behaviour.
The book is fascinating. It goes to William James (considered a father of modern psychology) foundational essay on emotions n trace its history. Charles Darwin's work on emotions is referred to multiple times. I even marked Darwin's book in my reading wishlist. (A clear sign that the book not only engaged but also provided me reasons to go back to it again n again. A sign of a good book. No wonder, I gave it five stars).
A fascinating account of Oscar Wilde's trials also made me highlight to read further.
And detailed debate on Love. Is LOVE an emotion or not!
The book takes its narrative of emotions on crescendo, a climax. A sure sign that the reader will return to the book.
If you are a student of psychology, behaviour, or emotions, this is a must read.
Even if you aren't a student of these specialties, the book is engaging, written in plain lucid language even for any curious n general reader.
A short read, worth your time!
July 10, 2023
I wasn't entirely sure what I was going to get with this book. I figured there was a good chance that what I might get is a discussion of history through emotion -- i.e. looking at world events as influenced by emotional experience. However, I believe the book was aptly named as it did explore the changing landscape of how emotions have been viewed over time, and how varied perspectives on emotion can be seen through the discussion of historical events.
It's a tremendously challenging topic as emotions are subjective internal experiences, and getting a grip on how perspectives on them have changed isn't easy -- especially through the filter of language.
As one would expect of a history book, there is a chronological element to the organization, but chapters are themed by emotion (e.g. sadness, fear, anger, and love.) Some of the more interesting topics to me involved: changing perspectives on the universality of emotions and emotional expression (a subject where views have changed radically since Darwin,) the idea of performatives -or emotional expression for effect (whether it's truly felt or not,) and the question of whether love is rightly considered an emotion (i.e. while it's felt in a similar fashion, it's not as ephemeral as most of what we think of as emotion.)
Definitely an interesting and unique read.
It's a tremendously challenging topic as emotions are subjective internal experiences, and getting a grip on how perspectives on them have changed isn't easy -- especially through the filter of language.
As one would expect of a history book, there is a chronological element to the organization, but chapters are themed by emotion (e.g. sadness, fear, anger, and love.) Some of the more interesting topics to me involved: changing perspectives on the universality of emotions and emotional expression (a subject where views have changed radically since Darwin,) the idea of performatives -or emotional expression for effect (whether it's truly felt or not,) and the question of whether love is rightly considered an emotion (i.e. while it's felt in a similar fashion, it's not as ephemeral as most of what we think of as emotion.)
Definitely an interesting and unique read.
February 18, 2025
I struggled to grasp what this book was trying to achieve. Unlike other Very Short Introduction books I’ve read, this one feels more like a disjointed literature review rather than a cohesive synthesis. The various studies on the history of emotion seem too scattered, lacking a clear overarching methodology or central argument.
That said, the book does provide valuable insights on the topic of love. Using Martin Luther King Jr.'s 1957 sermon in Montgomery as a starting point, the author explores the distinction between love as an attitude and commitment versus the subjective experience of being in love. One particularly interesting debate is whether love should even be classified as an emotion at all.
The author highlights a recurring theme of love, which is the tension between tidy moral theories and messy emotional realities. As he puts it, "No matter how many times I repeat to myself the saintly mantra ‘Love is patient, love is kind,’ I still end up losing my temper with my children." He also introduces cultural theorist Lauren Berlant’s idea of cruel optimism—the concept that people can become trapped in self-defeating desires, believing it to be a source of fulfilment, when in fact it is an obstacle to their flourishing. Here is a quote: "Berlant includes fantasies of lifelong, happy, reciprocal romantic love among her examples of cruel optimism. She ponders why people stay attached to these fantasies when ‘evidence of their instability, fragility, and dear cost abounds’."
The entire chapter on love is highly readable and packed with insights like these. I only wish the rest of the book had been as engaging and well-structured.
(edited with the assistance of ChatGPT)
That said, the book does provide valuable insights on the topic of love. Using Martin Luther King Jr.'s 1957 sermon in Montgomery as a starting point, the author explores the distinction between love as an attitude and commitment versus the subjective experience of being in love. One particularly interesting debate is whether love should even be classified as an emotion at all.
The author highlights a recurring theme of love, which is the tension between tidy moral theories and messy emotional realities. As he puts it, "No matter how many times I repeat to myself the saintly mantra ‘Love is patient, love is kind,’ I still end up losing my temper with my children." He also introduces cultural theorist Lauren Berlant’s idea of cruel optimism—the concept that people can become trapped in self-defeating desires, believing it to be a source of fulfilment, when in fact it is an obstacle to their flourishing. Here is a quote: "Berlant includes fantasies of lifelong, happy, reciprocal romantic love among her examples of cruel optimism. She ponders why people stay attached to these fantasies when ‘evidence of their instability, fragility, and dear cost abounds’."
The entire chapter on love is highly readable and packed with insights like these. I only wish the rest of the book had been as engaging and well-structured.
(edited with the assistance of ChatGPT)
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 16, 2025
First one of these I've read where I really have not felt that the author is summarising a complicated field; rather, it felt like he was padding out the book by free-associating about different emotions, with a range of fluffy, half-baked ideas (and even for a Very Short Introduction, this is on the short side). It made me believe that the field being summarised is paper thin.
The basic concept, I think, is that emotions may have been different in the past. Foreign languages have different words for different emotional states, perhaps implying that they experience them differently (could only Germans have invented or discovered schadenfreude? Why do Israelis use the word עצבני to mean alternatively nervous, furious or irritable?) And the past, as they say, is a foreign country, so when people in the past experienced melancholy did they mean something different from our modern "depression"? (In fact the word "emotion" originally meant outward signs of excitement.) These speculations, akin to those about whether Homer really thought the sea was wine-coloured, are interesting, but I don't understand how they can make up a whole field.
I did however like the discussion of emojis as a new emotional language. It's a constrained vocabulary that people often use in quite different ways, and inferring the emotional tenor of the sender is not always easy. Historians of emotion, have at it!
The basic concept, I think, is that emotions may have been different in the past. Foreign languages have different words for different emotional states, perhaps implying that they experience them differently (could only Germans have invented or discovered schadenfreude? Why do Israelis use the word עצבני to mean alternatively nervous, furious or irritable?) And the past, as they say, is a foreign country, so when people in the past experienced melancholy did they mean something different from our modern "depression"? (In fact the word "emotion" originally meant outward signs of excitement.) These speculations, akin to those about whether Homer really thought the sea was wine-coloured, are interesting, but I don't understand how they can make up a whole field.
I did however like the discussion of emojis as a new emotional language. It's a constrained vocabulary that people often use in quite different ways, and inferring the emotional tenor of the sender is not always easy. Historians of emotion, have at it!
August 8, 2023
I kind of read this for work because I’m dipping my toe into affect theory, but I was impressed by the accessibility of this witty, wide-ranging history of emotions, which does what it says on the tin in a very invigorating way. The examples are chosen boldly across the centuries and extend to the present day (I particularly liked the section on emojis!). A main idea is that emotions are always embedded in particular historical contexts, so how we define anger or love depends on which society we find ourselves in. And emotions are highly political rather than only personal: some emotions are welcomed as socially and politically acceptable, some not. However, there has also been a big shift away from judging/condemning emotions to accepting/learning how to manage emotions. As a medievalist I was a bit disappointed that Dixon didn’t say anything about the emergence of so-called ‘courtly love’ in the Middle Ages, but that’s a minor gripe. After all, the book is very short. On the whole, I was utterly charmed.
June 23, 2024
Really enjoyed this book and learned a lot about emotions and history. Takeaways for me were 1) the idea that emotions consist of a bodily sensation and the interpretation of it (e.g. cultural influence), 2) the idea that people in the past must have had an incredibly different experience of the world from us because their emotions differ due to their interpretations of their bodily sensation, and 3) the variety of different emotions. I would highly recommend this multidisciplinary book.
May 3, 2024
It is what it is says in it's name, which is a big plus, given a plethora of books that are basically a newspaper headlines teasers. So it is a book about history of human emotions. And it is well written. On the other hand- don't expect much of it- though it is a fine and easy read. Just OK, I give it 4 stars, because it doesn't promise something that is not and it has a few valuable insights.
August 5, 2024
3.5 stars! V short but informative read. It’s just a random book I picked up from the library but happy that it surfaced some really interesting questions like: can emotions still be emotions without physical representations? Like facial expressions, body responses.
September 7, 2025
4.0
informative reflective
Short and informative, really lives up to the series name of being a very short intro lol. Using this as a jumping off point by going back to the referenced books and researches :) thanks to the people on MAM who recommended this.
October 24, 2023
geàrr-ch glè mhath. Nì mi tuilleadh sgrùdaidh ris an liosda leughaidh.
June 22, 2024
Thomas Dixon is a history professor at Queen Mary University in London, United Kingdom. Dixon published an introduction to the field of the history of emotions in 2023. The first chapter introduces the history of the field of emotions. The second chapter is a history of the emotions of sadness. The third chapter is on the relationship between linguistics and emotions. The fourth chapter is on the relationship between the emotions of terror and the emotions of happiness. Dixon writes that “before the French Revolution, ‘terror’ had a range of connotations, some of them quite positive. God, or strong earthly rulers, could inspire a terror which was a mixture of fear, reverence, and respect” (Dixon 115). I read the book on the Kindle. The meaning of the emotions of terror in English and French changed due to Maximilien Robespierre, who thought his regime during the French Revolution would lead to happiness for French society (Dixion 117). Chapter 5 is on anger. Chapter 6 is on the changing meaning of the concept of love over time. The chapter also covers the debate of whether love is an emotion or not. The book uses the last two pages of the chapter on the concept of love to summarize the book. The book is short and covers a large amount of ground. The book contains a section on references, further reading, an index, and images. In many ways, the book is in conversation with the book of philosopher Dylan Evans, who introduced the field of studying emotions. A reader should probably read the two books close together. Evans’ book answers the Goodreads reviewer Chimese Bateman's question about Dixon’s book; it covers the relationship between courtly love and the emotion of love in Medieval Europe (Evans 16-18). Thomas Dixon’s introduction to the field of the history of emotions is a good overview. I found the Goodreads Reviewer Chimese Bateman’s review helpful in writing this ‘review.’
Work Cited:
Evans, Dylan. 2019. Emotion: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. Kindle.
Work Cited:
Evans, Dylan. 2019. Emotion: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. Kindle.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews