|
|
|
Reviews / Comptes Rendus
| Jane Lewis, The End of Marriage? Individualism and Intimate Relations (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing 2001)
|
| LEWIS' MAJOR CONCERN in this book is to examine the thesis that the growing individualism of the 20th century is selfish. She ends with the conclusion that this is not true. The book is premised on the notion that changes at the level of the family cannot be understood without considering the much broader social context, and that the cultural variable plays a key mediating role. She argues that the anxiety about increasing individualism centres on its implications for the sources of moral commitments. During the 20th century we have witnessed the gradual erosion of an externally imposed moral code. She concludes that commitment today takes different forms, but that this does not necessarily pose problems for social policy. |
1
|
|
Her stated goal is not to come to firm conclusions regarding the key variable that might explain family change, but to explore the part played by mentalities and norms in social change. The book is thus not intended to be definitive; rather, the purpose is to view the complex issue of family change using a different lens. She does that for sure. |
2
|
|
She discusses the decline of the breadwinner model of the family, the concomitant shift from public to private morality, and the abandonment of an external moral code for a more individualized approach to intimate relationships. She provides us with a fascinating history of the British understanding of individualism and marriage. We learn about shifting views with respect to morality from within and without, from the perspectives of the left and the right. |
3
|
|
It is, however, not always an easy route to follow. She traces ideas rather than events, and hence moves back and forth in time (roughly through the 20th century). For someone not highly knowledgeable about British intellectual history, this makes it difficult to always keep the actual chronology clearly in mind. |
4
|
|
The second half of the book presents an empirical study comparing married and cohabiting couples. There are two components: a large-scale quantitative study of attitudes towards marriage and cohabitation, and a qualitative study involving 17 married and 12 cohabiting couples and 72 of their parents, consisting of 32 married couples and eight widows. One of the selection criteria was that the younger couples could not have been married before or have a child from a different relationship, and their parents' marriage had, as well, still to be intact — although they were included if they had mothers who were widowed and had not separated before the death of their husband. |
5
|
|
The comparison is thus between stable marriages and stable cohabitation arrangements, with an intriguing intergenerational component. There are some wonderfully subtle distinctions she draws between changes in attitudes and in behaviour, and how both matter in different ways. It is also one of the few empirical studies comparing cohabiting with married couples in two different age cohorts. |
6
|
|
This is a very worthwhile book that offers two important things: first, an intellectual history of notions of intimacy between two heterosexual adults and how empirical forms of interaction are informed by a larger cultural context of shifting forms of morality. Second, and equally important, it adds to the scarce literature on cohabiting couples with an intriguing intergenerational component. The discussion is always complex, subtle, and illuminating. |
7
|
|
With respect, however, to making an original contribution to policy discussions, the book is less impressive. Her focus on intimate relationships between two (heterosexual) adults leads Lewis to bracket the question of parental relationships. Although she acknowledges off and on that much of the contemporary discussion and concern has shifted from couple to parental relations, she has nothing to offer on this score. Her empirical study is restricted to couples in which parenthood is shared by the two partners. I would argue that the most perplexing policy issues today have more to do with parental relationships than with couple relationships, and in particular, how to deal with parental obligations as well as rights when there is a discrepancy between parental and spousal roles. |
8
|
|
That said, this book remains a most welcome addition to the sociology of the family. |
9
|
|
|
Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.
|