Madness in Civilization: A Cultural History of Insanity, from the Bible to Freud, from the Madhouse to Modern Medicine

This is a masterpiece of scholarly synthesis, a tour through Western (mainly) civilization seen through its treatments of madness. Reading it makes one depressed, as the victimization of disordered minds and their owners has been the one consistent thread through religious, folk, mesmerist, clinical, psychoanalytical and other trends in treatment. The vanity of the bourgeois professions, Flaubert might say. It struck me throughout that those who pretend to guide civilization ought to look at their own pathological behaviors, especially when treating those who are suffering at their hands. One enhancement to the book that's probably a bridge too far: more treatment of rustic or village societies who are less encumbered by highly institutionalized arrangements such as psychiatry and global religions. Very hard to include, I understand, but therein may lie some insights.

It feels hypocritical to say this because I plan on using parts of this when I teach Hamlet next year; but I was disappointed in this book. It is certainly not BAD. I think the issue is that it’s been sitting on my shelf for so long, and I had such high expectations for it. Schull spends a lot of time talking here about the ways the mad we’re treated, depicted, housed, and defined. And those are all very interesting perspectives. The two things that keep this from being great, to my mind, are the superficiality of its analyses when it comes to the aforementioned perspectives, and a dearth of talk about actual psychology. The latter may be an unfair critique as the subtitle of this book is “a cultural history of insanity.” Nonetheless, I felt a bit shortchanged with regard to what psychology has meant and means when it talks about insanity. The few chapters at the end of the book DO talk about the problems with DSM ideology and classification; this was not enough for me however.

Andrew Scull on the second page of the first chapter of his book, serving as an introduction I imagine, dismisses the premise of Thomas Szasz that "mental illness" is a myth, therefore, the words madness and "mental illness" are used almost interchangeably throughout this volume. Elsewhere he is neither so severe nor so judgmental towards dissident "mental health" professionals. Mention is made of French academic Michel Foucault on three occasions, and each mention is mockingly sarcastic. At one point, in criticizing Foucault, where he disputes Foucault's claim to a "great confinement" during the 16th century, I think this criticism stems from a misreading of Foucault. Yes, there was an asylum building boom in the nineteenth century and, yes, this asylum building increased the population of 'lunatics', and one would be very correct in calling it a 'great confinement', however certain events had to lead up to that 'great confinement', and one of them was the, in general, 'great confinement' of indigents and lumpen elements that preceded it, and allowed for the more concentrated confinement of 'lunatics' in the first place. Foucault's position changed somewhat over the years, and if a person does get a hold of the unabridged later edition of his thesis, it helps to follow up any such reading with a reading of Psychiatric Power, among his lecture series, for his revised view some 10 years later. Having been greatly influenced by both Szasz and Foucault I cannot in my right mind give Madness in Civilization 5 stars, but I will cede it 4. It was a better book, after the intro, than I thought it would be.After taking on Szasz and Foucault, in a history no less, I had thought maybe Scull was going to give vast praise to biological psychiatry and see some kind of pharmaceutical revolution as responsible for deinstitutionalization. This was not to be the case, and that's why I am able to give his book the 4 stars that I did. It would, after all, have not been entirely logical for Scull, as a sociology professor, to have done so. Also, I don't think he could have done so without lying a great deal more than anybody should. He deals with mad-doctoring before it became a medical specialty, and he deals with the psychiatric profession afterwards. He goes from Henry Cotton's seeing infection as the source of 'madness', to various forms of "shock" treatment, to Walter Freeman's icepick lobotomies when it comes to harmful practices. (It would be wrong, however, to pretend that all forms of shock treatment and surgical brain mutilation are no longer current.) He also goes into the current relationship of psychiatry (and madness) to the pharmaceutical industry, and the questions about efficacy and ethics that it raises. It may not convince anybody to change their views on the subject, all the same, it might be able to enhance their knowledge and enlighten them a little about the history of the our views towards the mad. All in all, I would call his book a good and worthwhile read.

A good overview of the different approaches taken to the intractable problem, that persons become 'mad'. The author is hard on those who tried their best according to the then best available knowledge, but whose efforts were subsequently seen to be inadequate or incorrect. Others, who have and do exploit the difficulties of the 'mad' deserve the attack made upon them. For anyone interested in mental matters, a worthwhile summary of best efforts (and the worst).

I ate this up. I'm a 32 year old mother of two studying counseling and psychology with a lifetime interest in studying mental and emotional health and illness. I found this book to be entertaining, informative, sometimes mind-blowing, honest, refreshing in it's approach and of course, an exceptionally visually appealing cover design. Love having it on my bookshelves.

Will not continue, it seems well researched enough but it's terribly boring. The history stuff is teaching me nothing new and it barely ties back to madness in any enlightening way. Not for me. Did not finish.

What a tough read! Very dense, yet interesting. Still though: whew!

A beautifully written history of madness. The footnotes are most impressive. Bravo!

Well written, in depth, book.

a truly wonderful book! masterful

If you or a loved one has ever been driven to psychosis by a psychiatrist, then reading Madness in Civilization will do wonders for your battered soul. It reveals the foibles, follies, and phantasms of the psychiatric profession from the beginning to the present day. When I was sixteen years old, I was forced to undergo two years of psychiatric torture as the result of one homosexual experience, which led to an acute schizophrenic psychosis. My lover had to undergo a similar psychiatric treatment and committed suicide as a result. There can obviously be no justice for him or me, but reading Madness in Civilization made me aware that the victims of psychiatry are legion. We are not alone. We should all be grateful to Andrew Scull for his brilliant criticism of psychiatry. I have recently published this story in a book entitled What Rough Beast, by Robert Dole, published in London by Austin Macauley in 2017.

A jarring account of madness, as biased as it is artistic. This treatise is more of a cry for social change than a dry academic manuscript. A cynical, jabbing exposé of humanity's struggles with the unknown, which ultimately and irrevocably continued to worsen the original problem, rather than making it better - often in the interests of money, power and status, as is often the case. A wonderful read for those contemplating the human rights of the mentally ill, a dramatic and incredibly empowering offer for the mentally ill themselves. For all the shortcomings of the writing - often ranting and at times confusing prose, this deserves the 5 stars I gave it. A riveting experience.

Este libro es excelente con respecto a la información que presenta y a la calidad de las hojas!! Hace todo un recorrido a través de la historia de la locura de forma interesante y amena (trae ilustraciones). También recomiendo "Breve historia de la locura" de este mismo autor.