According to Stephanie Coontz, "worrying about the decay of marriage isn't just a Western habit", and it definitely isn't anything new (1). Every generation tends to have this misconception of there being some "Golden Age of Marriage" in the past and therefore conceives their marriage situation as worst than their mothers or grandmothers. In this book, Coontz gives examples of many different ways marriage is perceive in other cultures and therefore shows us how complicated it is to generalize marriage in any way. She wants to see how is it that relationships in the West has changed more in the past thirty years than in the last three thousand years. She also wants to explain what took so long for the revolutionary implications of the love match relationship to come into play(9).
In Chapter one, "The radical idea of marrying for love", Coontz writes about how in the last two centuries, the West has developed this whole new set of values about the way to organize marriage and sexuality through "love" (23). This emphasis on a loving relationship has placed high expectations on our modern relationships. The expectation for marriage to satisfy every need from psychological and social needs to intimacy and sex. The one quote that struck me from this chapter is:
"this package of expectations about love, marriage, and sex, however, is extremely rare. When we look at the historical record around the world, the customs of modern America and Western Europe appear exotic and exceptional" (20).
Coontz gives examples of how in America, such practices like polygamy and cheating are the stuff of "trash TV" but in other cultures, "individuals often find such practices normal and comforting"(20). My personal reflection on this is that although other cultures practices polygamy and adutery, even the older Hmong generation did practice polygamy, I can't find it in myself to accept it. Yes, I have been culturally influenced by the west, but also because I have personally seen and heard stories of too cases in which women and children are second to men's lust and passion.
In Chapter two, "The many meanings of marriage", Coontz goes on to say that there is no such thing as a "universal institution of marriage" (24). Some argue marriage is universal due to the biological urge to mate and reproduce, but apparently, marriage is much more complicated than this because than we would not be discussing the future of marriage today (25). Throughout history, marriage has not only united two individuals but two sets of families, therefore mate selection has not solely been left to the decision of the individuals but constrained by society. Coontz reminds us that there are many exceptions to marriage and it's more than living together, engaging in sexual activity, and cooperating economically (26). This may apply to our perception of marriage in the West but Coontz shows how different cultures view marriages differently.
I found the part on the Chinese's way of a "ghost marriage" to be very interesting. Since most parents only allow one daughter to remain unmarried, if the others want to be single, one way is to conduct a marriage ceremony with a dead man (27). I think it's also important to consider the spiritual side of marriage.
In Chapter three, "The Invention of Marriage", Coontz, argues that "marriage is a social invention, unique to humans" (34). In this chapter, Coontz does not believe that "marriage was invented to oppress women any more than it was invented to protect them...in most cases, marriage probably originated as an informal way of organizing sexual companionship, child rearing, and the daily tasks of life". But due to economic and social changes, marriages have been effected in many ways (44).
Throughout this first section and especially in this chapter, Coontz allows us to be aware of other realities other than our own. Different people have different ideas of how marriage is according to their given situation. Therefore, as Americans, we should consider if our "winner-take-all global economy" is the way to keep going (49).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
It's really interesting to see how much marriage has changed throughout history. Especially to see how some practices are traded or abandoned. I agree with you, Ka Zoua, that polygamy is not something I can see any real benefits from nowadays. But maybe this is just how I was raised...
But yes, some of the practices seemed to make so much sense to me. Like "the Navajo people of North America, in which descent and inheritance pass through the female line." (29) If our society were matrilineal we wouldn't have "bastard" children...at least that's how I see it. Who cares who the father is? A child is born and we obviously know who the mother is. We need to give mothers more credit.
Thanks for your summary. As Laura O. mentioned, I also agree that polygamy isn't necessarily one of the best historical marriage practices to bring back into current American society. Although the issue is still being debated, and is even in popular media (HBO's "Big Love"), I think there's a lot of roadblocks for many people to take it seriously, especially most Western feminists.
I enjoyed the first three chapters of this book, and look forward to continuing on. I think it fits very appropriately into third wave discourse, especially in its discussion on marriages practices around the world.
Post a Comment