Scan barcode
crabbygirl's review against another edition
4.0
Flanagan is one of my fav magazine authors (her article about abortion in The Atlantic does the best job I've ever read wrt seeing - really seeing - both sides of a fraught situation) so I was thrilled to see she'd written this nostalgic (for me) timepiece capturing the highs and lows of early parenting.
like the author, I too straddle the contradictions of being an independent feminist attracted to the traditional role of motherhood. yes, as children we grew up dreaming of the day we'd have our own homes and families to care for. yes, as young adults we absorbed the message that it was demeaning for women to be subservient to men and relegated to the home to perform repeated, menial tasks. but yes, once married and with offspring, we found some meaning in being that integral, necessary, person to the functioning of the home; a zen practise amidst the laundry and the decluttering.
like the author, I too straddle the contradictions of being an independent feminist attracted to the traditional role of motherhood. yes, as children we grew up dreaming of the day we'd have our own homes and families to care for. yes, as young adults we absorbed the message that it was demeaning for women to be subservient to men and relegated to the home to perform repeated, menial tasks. but yes, once married and with offspring, we found some meaning in being that integral, necessary, person to the functioning of the home; a zen practise amidst the laundry and the decluttering.
sundaydutro's review against another edition
Could only get about 3 chapters in before I gave up. Sounds like a great book but I found it terribly dull.
emiged's review against another edition
4.0
Humorous series of essays regarding various aspects of being a wife and mother in the modern world. Some made rather annoying assumptions ("if [an at-home mother:] is in any way solvent...she has, at the very least, a once-a-month cleaning woman to do the most onerous tasks" - um...or not...) and occasionally came across as a bit more yuppie than the women I think she was trying to relate to (no, not everyone has a nanny until the children are in kindergarten). But at the same time, Ms. Flanagan really captured the overwhelming love, angst, joy, fear, guilt, and pride that women feel about their families, sometimes simultaneously. She seems to have really honed in on the conflicted feelings that so many mothers have whether they are working outside the home, work-at-home, or stay-at-home moms.
Looking frankly at the feminist movement, she points out and praises the benefits and increased choices it has brought to women that are so taken for granted nowadays. But she also is able to bring out some of the detriments and negative effects that have resulted as well - several times she points out that many of the advances that upper- and middle-class white women have been able to make (specifically being freed from housework and child care) have unfortunately come at the expense women from minorities and their children. It sounds so serious when I write it like that, but she does it in such a funny and insightful way! And she examines modern weddings, sexless marriages, Erma Bombeck, nannies, overscheduled children, Martha Stewart, organization, the loss of her mother and her own fight against breast cancer in the same manner: both light-hearted and heart-piercingly accurate. I didn't always agree with what she was saying, but I chuckled my way through the book and could understand and respect where she was coming from.
For more book reviews, come visit my blog, Build Enough Bookshelves.
Looking frankly at the feminist movement, she points out and praises the benefits and increased choices it has brought to women that are so taken for granted nowadays. But she also is able to bring out some of the detriments and negative effects that have resulted as well - several times she points out that many of the advances that upper- and middle-class white women have been able to make (specifically being freed from housework and child care) have unfortunately come at the expense women from minorities and their children. It sounds so serious when I write it like that, but she does it in such a funny and insightful way! And she examines modern weddings, sexless marriages, Erma Bombeck, nannies, overscheduled children, Martha Stewart, organization, the loss of her mother and her own fight against breast cancer in the same manner: both light-hearted and heart-piercingly accurate. I didn't always agree with what she was saying, but I chuckled my way through the book and could understand and respect where she was coming from.
For more book reviews, come visit my blog, Build Enough Bookshelves.
tsunanisaurus's review against another edition
2.0
I struggled with this book immensely. While I agreed with [what I discerned to be] some of her core points - that the housewife decision is not one to be ashamed of, that not all gender roles are oppressive, etc - I found her to be an extremely unlikeable voice. It appeared to me that her opinion was muddled. At times, it was almost hard to figure out what side of the opinion line she stood.
Her writing is not wrought with wit, as the book jacket alluringly enticed me with. She seems a very petty woman, very naive and unappreciative. Particularly about her "servant" [her own words], Paloma. Whom, she says, was a life-saver and deeply meaningful in her life, but who was oddly vacant from her acknowledgments.
I credit Ms. Flanagan for her unwavering bluntness and for the audacity to dive into the highly controversial topic that she did, but I truly struggled to not throw this book against a wall and light it on fire. I still (despite my inclination to use it as fire starters) found it to be a worthwhile read, for it raises questions and makes you think.
Her writing is not wrought with wit, as the book jacket alluringly enticed me with. She seems a very petty woman, very naive and unappreciative. Particularly about her "servant" [her own words], Paloma. Whom, she says, was a life-saver and deeply meaningful in her life, but who was oddly vacant from her acknowledgments.
I credit Ms. Flanagan for her unwavering bluntness and for the audacity to dive into the highly controversial topic that she did, but I truly struggled to not throw this book against a wall and light it on fire. I still (despite my inclination to use it as fire starters) found it to be a worthwhile read, for it raises questions and makes you think.
rcollins1701's review against another edition
4.0
In an age of ideological purity tests, Flanagan points out the hypocrisies inherent when our flawed human selves butt up against our carefully crafted identities. Part history, part commentary, part eulogy, this will leave you with plenty of questions to ponder.
luvbug7554's review against another edition
2.0
This was not supposed to be an autobiography, but it was. It was like listening to the journal of a woman who is trying to convince herself that she made the best choices in being a SAHM. Although, sometimes she is proud, and sometimes depressed. For most of the book, the "mommy wars" are a non-issue. Then there is the end, quoting Dr. Spock about how the best thing for a child is to be surrounded by the love of the mother all day long.
Yuck. Thanks Flanagan. Let's just fire up some Mommy Wars. (I hate to mention this, but you're a working mother-you're a published author. so pppt)
Yuck. Thanks Flanagan. Let's just fire up some Mommy Wars. (I hate to mention this, but you're a working mother-you're a published author. so pppt)
friendscallmeal's review against another edition
3.0
It is a very honest book, which I think is a terrific thing. Caitlin freely admits that her circumstances (marrying well enough that she really doesn't worry about money) mean that she doesn't face the same pressures that some other people do. She's honest about things like how she has a nanny and still stays home the whole time. I didn't begrudge her any of that, especially since she had twins. Probably everyone who has twins should have a nanny, maybe two.
Where the book is bad is her writing style, which is filled with way too many (often unnecessary) references to living large in swanky Cali, and this vague feeling that she only gets paid when she uses a 50 cent word. There are times when you need to resort to words you learned after 5th grade, but she writes as if she thinks the more SAT words you can use in an essay, the more readable it becomes. I'll acknowledge this is a lot of hateration for word choice, but it's really off putting, and it kills the flow of the book.
Where the book is good, however, is her insight. Certainly there are a lot of feminists who will acknowledge the potential paradoxes of class --i.e. white middle to upper-middle class woman is oppressed by her husband on account of she has to stay home and has no money. She gets a job, has money and status and a facsimile of an appropriate and modern marriage. But probably she did this by hiring domestic help, likely brown skinned domestic help, that statistically speaking, she's paying under the table, maybe less than minimum wage, and almost certainly no benefits, retirement, social security, etc... In other words, is (white, middle to upper middle class) women's liberation built on the back of (brown to black skinner poor) women?
She also raises (I thought) another interesting question: is the problem with the asymmetrical power dynamic in a single income marriage really related to gender (he's working), or that there's a single earner, or that one person's toil is monetized while the other's is in the home? She talks about the day her mother said "to hell with all that," stopped being a stay-at-home mom, and got a job as a nurse. Her's mom's "awakening" seems less to do with the joys and challenges of the new work, and as much to do with 1) the arrangement that 100% of the money she earned was hers and 2) she had a new attitude with her husband forever after.
In other words, is it fair to say that the problem with the single income family only exists if the people let it? If the spouses don't value the contributions differently and they don't let the person who made the money have the sole power over decisions, what difference does it make who made the money? That, in effect, most feminists are fighting the wrong war. The problem isn't women at home, it's women forced to be at home, or women's contributions at home being ignored. That there are a number of inconvenient truths about most child care arrangements, and women who want to raise their children full time should generally be supported by other women, except that it can be hard to say "right on, sister!" on the drive from work to the daycare center.
Even if you don't buy her arguments they're thought provoking. If only she listened to her editor and wrote in readable prose.
Where the book is bad is her writing style, which is filled with way too many (often unnecessary) references to living large in swanky Cali, and this vague feeling that she only gets paid when she uses a 50 cent word. There are times when you need to resort to words you learned after 5th grade, but she writes as if she thinks the more SAT words you can use in an essay, the more readable it becomes. I'll acknowledge this is a lot of hateration for word choice, but it's really off putting, and it kills the flow of the book.
Where the book is good, however, is her insight. Certainly there are a lot of feminists who will acknowledge the potential paradoxes of class --i.e. white middle to upper-middle class woman is oppressed by her husband on account of she has to stay home and has no money. She gets a job, has money and status and a facsimile of an appropriate and modern marriage. But probably she did this by hiring domestic help, likely brown skinned domestic help, that statistically speaking, she's paying under the table, maybe less than minimum wage, and almost certainly no benefits, retirement, social security, etc... In other words, is (white, middle to upper middle class) women's liberation built on the back of (brown to black skinner poor) women?
She also raises (I thought) another interesting question: is the problem with the asymmetrical power dynamic in a single income marriage really related to gender (he's working), or that there's a single earner, or that one person's toil is monetized while the other's is in the home? She talks about the day her mother said "to hell with all that," stopped being a stay-at-home mom, and got a job as a nurse. Her's mom's "awakening" seems less to do with the joys and challenges of the new work, and as much to do with 1) the arrangement that 100% of the money she earned was hers and 2) she had a new attitude with her husband forever after.
In other words, is it fair to say that the problem with the single income family only exists if the people let it? If the spouses don't value the contributions differently and they don't let the person who made the money have the sole power over decisions, what difference does it make who made the money? That, in effect, most feminists are fighting the wrong war. The problem isn't women at home, it's women forced to be at home, or women's contributions at home being ignored. That there are a number of inconvenient truths about most child care arrangements, and women who want to raise their children full time should generally be supported by other women, except that it can be hard to say "right on, sister!" on the drive from work to the daycare center.
Even if you don't buy her arguments they're thought provoking. If only she listened to her editor and wrote in readable prose.
heather_ann's review against another edition
4.0
This book was witty and light hearted, while also allowing the reader to do some introspection. It is definitely written for a more privileged class of women, who have an option to stay home while also keeping one foot in the professional realm. In particular, discussions about hiring help and enrolling kids in endless activities may ring a little hollow for the class of moms who can afford neither. Still, I am lucky enough to be in the audience this book was written for, so a lot of it resonated with me. I am also happy to see that the author of this book, Caitlin Flanagan, is still producing interesting pieces of commentary and has successfully staved off the grim cancer mentioned at the end of this book. As I work part time from home during Covid with my one year old daughter playing at my feet, I thought of her and her mom, and was reminded not to take this time for granted.
miss_tricia's review against another edition
3.0
Not exactly memoir, not entirely essays, not terribly objective, definitely not advice. But funny. If you see another book about the trial and rewards of being an upper-middle class mom as unnecessary, you'll find this irritating. However, I think Flanagan is honest enough about the failures and inconsistancies of both her own perspective and those of women around her who have made different choices that the book is worthwhile. Like any good essayist, she pulls together facts from disperate places and puts them together in a way that throws each piece of information into sharp relief.
llynn66's review against another edition
2.0
Flanagan has a sharp wit and can write some enjoyable prose. But she really comes across as a Stepford Bee-otch in this book, so it was hard for me to appreciate. On the one hand, she has all the fond rose tinted memories of childhood that I love as well. I recall a simpler time (don't we all?) when I spent long happy days in the company of my mom doing things around the house and around the small town where we lived. I remember when things felt organized...when weekends were generally weekends (not errand death marches or extra time spent at work) and when kids were not expected to assume schedules that would intimidate society debutantes. Our constant craving for organized activities, structure and "school" for toddlers drives me insane. Yes. I stay home with my kid. Yes. I enjoy it. Yes. I chose to because I wanted to give her a few years of "childhood" the way I remember it. And yes. I feel this has been the best choice for MY family (not necessarily for yours...that is your call.)
So it is occasionally nice to hear something positive about being an "at home mom".
But...Flanagan is not going to be the standard bearer for women who choose to stay at home with their kids. There are two glaring problems with Caitlin Flanagan.
1. She apparently stays at home with her kids mainly so she can drive them to the nonstop activities I mention above...or so she can get on the phone to hire people to come into her house and do the work that middle and working class "housewives" do. (As in cooking, cleaning, taking actual care of her children and basically everything. I never really did figure out what Caitlin Flanagan did at home herself. How can you write a tribute to the domestic arts and hands-on mothering if you don't do your own housework and even fail to clean the puke off your own child? (the nanny does that) Caitlin Flanagan...thy name is Carol Brady!
2. As much as she waxes poetic about her late mother's housekeeping mojo and all the benefits inherent in having a parent at home with you during the formative years...in the end she seems to harbor a true disdain for moms who don't work jobs outside the home. Lucky Caitlin can call herself an "at home mom" because she doesn't have to go to an office to work. However she does not have to be one of us frumps (with no life) either....the kind she pokes fun at during a school event for one of her kids. No. Caitlin is "important." She's writing a book! And she writes articles for major periodicals...from home...while her nanny wipes puke...and her housekeeper cleans the bathroom...and her "organizer' deals with the endless clutter that makes most of us regular mommy folk feel like a high level explosive containing Little People just detonated in the middle of our living room.
So read this for a few good yuks. We can all benefit from poking fun at ourselves from time to time. And it is kind of refreshing to know that many women are conflicted by the myriad roles and expectations that are currently in place. But, unless you are upper middle class or higher, don't expect to relate to this book.
So it is occasionally nice to hear something positive about being an "at home mom".
But...Flanagan is not going to be the standard bearer for women who choose to stay at home with their kids. There are two glaring problems with Caitlin Flanagan.
1. She apparently stays at home with her kids mainly so she can drive them to the nonstop activities I mention above...or so she can get on the phone to hire people to come into her house and do the work that middle and working class "housewives" do. (As in cooking, cleaning, taking actual care of her children and basically everything. I never really did figure out what Caitlin Flanagan did at home herself. How can you write a tribute to the domestic arts and hands-on mothering if you don't do your own housework and even fail to clean the puke off your own child? (the nanny does that) Caitlin Flanagan...thy name is Carol Brady!
2. As much as she waxes poetic about her late mother's housekeeping mojo and all the benefits inherent in having a parent at home with you during the formative years...in the end she seems to harbor a true disdain for moms who don't work jobs outside the home. Lucky Caitlin can call herself an "at home mom" because she doesn't have to go to an office to work. However she does not have to be one of us frumps (with no life) either....the kind she pokes fun at during a school event for one of her kids. No. Caitlin is "important." She's writing a book! And she writes articles for major periodicals...from home...while her nanny wipes puke...and her housekeeper cleans the bathroom...and her "organizer' deals with the endless clutter that makes most of us regular mommy folk feel like a high level explosive containing Little People just detonated in the middle of our living room.
So read this for a few good yuks. We can all benefit from poking fun at ourselves from time to time. And it is kind of refreshing to know that many women are conflicted by the myriad roles and expectations that are currently in place. But, unless you are upper middle class or higher, don't expect to relate to this book.