“More Work for Mother” by Ruth Schwartz Cowan is, essentially, a history of the technology of the home. The author’s hypothesis is that the home was only partially industrialized in the Twentieth Century, and that the failings of technology to truly revolutionize the home environment (or, more importantly, the work processes required to sustain it) stem from relations in complex social institutions and other (mostly intangible) forces.
This work is certainly not a call to return to the “abject poverty of the good ole’ days,” it is rather a very serious — and witty — look at why things (literally) are the way they are. Why can we send a man to the moon but haven’t the ability to pump our garbage disposals to our compost piles? The author asks this, and many other, questions with an eye to the imbalance of power and influence in social cultures.
The idea here is that household technologies control us, instead of the other way around. The “Vacuum Cleaner Theory” I have heard of seems to come from this work, if I am not mistaken. Although it is not termed such, the idea (as I have heard it explained) is detailed in full: When we had no technology for “vacuuming,” the entire family might have been involved in the beating of the rugs. The children might have helped gather materials for the creation of the brushes and beaters, the men and older children might have moved the furniture and carried the rugs outside. The men might have done some of the beating themselves. Then, along comes the invention of the vacuum cleaner. The rest of the family is relieved from the work because now the woman (or her helper) is able to carry out this process of cleaning by herself.
Furthermore, the standard of cleanliness goes up because the vacuum is more efficient at removing dust and dirt than the broom ever was. Hence, the process of vacuuming happens more frequently than the process of beating the rugs or sweeping with an old broom did, in order to maintain the new look of cleanliness. To top things off, not only can the user no longer make (or repair) the tools now necessary for living, but the process of vacuuming also carries costs: the investment in the tool, the electric cost incurred while operating the tool, the care and repair of the tool by a specialist. All of this assumes one’s home was already wired with electric.
Man, do I feel duped after reading this book. I recognize a lot of underlying assumptions I hold about daily practical reality that don’t serve myself, my family, nor my society well– ironically all in the name of being a Good Mom/Good Wife. But it also brings about a breath of fresh air to my thinking. I look around and suddenly it clicks: I am living in a veritable factory, a home fully equipped to run a micro-industry– or five!
Maybe a turn to (return to?) household micro-industry in the coming days might be the best option for a world running out of resources with a strained social fabric. Out with the day job, in with the home enterprise!
To think that this book was written in 1983 is amazing. Her insights get stronger and even more applicable with the passing of time. There will be more on this thread… I am soaking this up.
Other interesting finds include pdf files of American “domestic manuals” published in the 1800’s. While many things I have run into quote these authors/sources, I have not ran into the sources before. Here is the site, which is actually a collection of cookbooks and “receipts” called Feeding America, a digital library of Michigan State University.
Most applicable to my study are the somewhat trite writings of Lydia Marie Child, which are “Dedicated to Those Who are not Ashamed of Economy,” and also including “Hints to Persons of Moderate Fortune.” The first five pages are an overview of domestic economy in both of it’s meanings, first a proclamation that all things should be used and nothing shall go to waste, followed by the values of practical employment of children around the house and farm (and notes on their education), as well as a breakdown of income and spendings so as to ensure that no family live so much as one cent beyond their certain earnings.
Next on the list is Marion Harland’s In the Household: A Manual of Practical Housewifery, in which the opening lines declare the work to be written– unapologetically– by a woman for women, to be as comfortably experienced as a gathering of women in which “oh my” and “dear” would be spoken many times over. “Familiar Talk” she calls this, but this reverie is not to be confused with tolerance for anything other than a finely cultivated sentiment of household management. No snoveling, grimy housewives who sit in unclean houses allowed, dear reader. Before diving into the original and practical recipes, she quotes the words of a wise one to never forget that you learn by doing.
And the last I will write about here is by a man, WM. A. Alcott, and is a 390 page manifesto on the “physical education” of the young wife, i.e. a practical application of science and linear thought to the duties of a house wife, in order to raise the profession of housekeeping from it’s common level in order to bolster communities and create a healthy society. Sounds remarkably similar to the reasons
I myself might be looking into the state of current affairs in the domestic sphere. Similar, but different, I tell myself.
The author’s first chapter looks down upon most domestic manuals of the time calling them nothing more than un-original compendiums of fashionable recipes, and calls for housewives to “dare to disobey the mandates of fashion,” and to “dignify [the] profession.”
I can’t help but be reminded that our sense of decline in society and culture precedes us. The author writes that he hopes his “work will prove a timely contribution to the cause of human improvement– to the melioration, the elevation, the restoration of fallen humanity”– all this in 1838 America. The Ancients often expressed a sense of decline, and it seems this sense sticks with us through the ages, reminding this researcher that pre-industrial society was no picnic, either. Our problems didn’t begin when cities cropped up and families left the farm, or at any other moment in time we can point to as being the time when things changed. If there is a point at which history allows us to see a major shift, I think it might be wiser to see that shift as a reaction to a state of things– not the beginning of a given trend. This might be important, as is keeping an eye out for that elusive sense of eudaemonia in a given time or place.
Also on the list for this post is Margaret Visser’s “The Way We Are: The Astonishing Anthropology of Everyday Life,” a collection of short, witty essays running the gamut from English phonetics to why women wear heels. Although I enjoyed them all, the only essay really applicable to my study of the modern domestic dilemma (I think this is what I’m studying) is called Conspicuous Competence, and is a commentary on the idea that it is no longer the leisurely rich class who exist as the unskilled portion of society (kept carefully from labor in it’s various forms), but that in actuality, the poor classes have been being “deskilled” for years (considered unqualified and unable or unwilling to be competent).
As the rich develop “conspicuous competence” in areas as diverse as gourmet cooking (on 6 burner professional stoves) and walking (with eruditely chosen walking shoes) on calibrated running machines, the poorer classes have taken up leisure and fast food. It seems we have an issue of access to modern technologies here, as well as some cultural conditioning or cultural trends to look into. I would like to know how a class of people can be “deskilled” (or conversely, and more importantly, empowered with new skills.) I will be looking into this, and thank the author for pointing out this odd twist that I had not noticed before.
Researching (i.e. finding the materials) is wholly easier than actually reading them and writing them up… so more will follow quickly on the stacks of sources before me ; ) Most notably, some thoughts on Hannah Arendt, more from the Secret History of Domesticity, a few books regarding WWII/post-war changes in the home, and plenty of works from peer reviewed journals…
Tags: decline, domestic manuals, domesticity, home, housewifery, industrialization, social institutions, technology, things