June Books

Half the year is almost over! Hope you are enjoying your summer. Here are the books I finished in June.



The Chosen Peoples by Todd Gitlin and Liel Leibovitz -- The authors discuss the idea of chosenness - especially related to the Jews of old, America and the state of Israel - and how it has shaped world events.  They also touched on the "unchosen" or people other than these who believe they are also Chosen (e.g., Muslims).

"The idea of chosenness by a single God, having shaken a polytheistic world millennia ago, set off aftershocks that continue to shake the ground well into our own day.  And there is, in principle, no limit to the violence that can be justified against a people who were, after all, stamped long ago with the mark of Cain." (pg. 173)




A Short History of the Jewish People by Raymond P. Scheindlin  -- a very readable, and somewhat interesting look at the Jewish people from ancient to modern times.  I had these two things on Facebook at one point.

On September 1, 1939 Poland was the country with the highest concentration of Jews in the world and was the main center of Jewish religious and cultural life.

How crowded was the Warsaw ghetto? When all 400,000 of its Jews were required to live within the 840 acre ghetto and then an additional 150,000 refugees were crammed into that space, the density reached THIRTEEN PERSONS PER ROOM, and homeless people were dying of exposure, hunger and disease in the streets.

From Plato to NATO by David Gress  -- the big book I started on my birthday and finished on June 8 (my goal was to finish it by the end of August)

A few things of note:



A Roman "peculiarity" -- "To a Roman, as to a Greek, the most basic freedom was freedom from slavery, or, as in Herodotus, from foreign occupation. But Roman freedom included another aspect that related more directly to later Western notions. This was the idea of freedom as the right of the citizen not to be abused by the government, the freedom that implied equality before the law, and that was guaranteed by time-hallowed and solemn laws and by designated officials. Roman libertas in this sense had little to do with the Greek idea that the mark of the free citizen was that he participated equally in political decisions. The government of the Roman Republic was elected by a small number of rich and influential people and the republic was always an oligarchy. So in Rome, to be free meant that however insignificant the citizen, there were certain things the government could not do to him, because he was protected by laws that stood above any government."  (pg. 99)


"Americans prided themselves on being innovators and free of the past; Europeans, including the revolutionaries of France, prided themselves on continuity. Even the sign of the eagle changed character after its migration. In an amazing feat of symbolic transformation, Americans succeeded in defining their eagle as a bird of freedom and defiance, rather than symbolizing military conquest and the power of an authoritarian state." (pg. 125)


I found this cute:  "In 269, in an ominous precedent, Gothic hordes invaded Greece. Their king told his men not to burn the libraries of Athens, because as long as the Greeks could study, they would not fight."  (pg. 146)



"Many people in the West, including many in the liberal Anglo-Saxon democracies, believed that war was a test of national manhood and that periodic wars were necessary to purge the nation of degeneracy, which tended to spread if peace lasted too long. Angell recognized these ideas, but assumed they would die out and become unacceptable, just as, for example, the slave trade had become unacceptable to Europeans in the space of a single generation at the end of the eighteenth century.  In the past, values had changed, sometimes quickly, and in modern society, value change was coming quicker still. Therefore, those who spoke of 'unchangeable human nature' and insisted that war was a permanent fact of life were - according to Angell - mistaken." (pg. 340)


"The praise of toil in the Georgics was unusual and subversive in antiquity. Greeks and Romans considered earning your bread by the sweat of your brow dishonorable; not having to work was the mark of the full citizen. In such a culture, Virgil's praise of the iustissima tellus, the most just earth, which yielded its fruits only to hard human labor, was original.  Virgil's message in the Georgics, that all human life depended on the soil and therefore on labor, was, with Christianity, one of the reasons the later West turned the classical order of social and economic values upside down. Thus, where antiquity despised the man who had to work to buy his leisure time, the West, and especially America, regarded such a man more highly than the rentier, the 'man of leisure.' Work, in the West, ennobled the worker; in antiquity, it degraded him and made him unfit for the highest civic callings."  (pg. 366)


"Pity and compassion, to the Greeks, were comprehensible only if they served pride and the drive for fame.  To ancient philosophers, from Plato ... to Marcus Aurelius..., gratuitous pity 'was a defect of character unworthy of the wise and excusable only in those who have not yet grown up. It was an impulsive response based on ignorance. Plato had removed the problem of beggars from his ideal state by dumping them over the borders.'"  (pg. 79)



"The Third Empire was a political and theological category and was not easily compatible with Hitler's own program, which is why he disliked and in 1939 forbade the phrase to be used." (pg. 385)


"Relativism, Gellner concluded, was 'an affectation, specially attractive amongst the more naive provincials in privileged cultures,' by which he meant American academics. It was popular among those who could afford it, who derived some moralistic and masochistic satisfaction from it, and who mistakenly believed that they were doing the rest of the world a favor by adopting it. But they were not; the poor countries did not want Western postmodernism but Western science and technology, and in particular the methods by which science and technology became prosperity.  'Precariously modernizing societies, with an uncertain grip on the new benefits, are perhaps a little less likely to indulge in an orgy of science-bashing. ... But a really rich industrial country,' like the United States, 'can and does afford the luxury of denouncing and renouncing it all.' It was therefore in America, where the liberal synthesis had worked best of all and was therefore taken for granted, that relativism found the most fertile ground."  (pg. 511)




Iran:Empire of the Mind by Michael Axworthy  -- This book explores Iranian history from Zoroaster to the present day (or 2007 since this is when it was published)

I found this interesting:  "Since the 1979 revolution, Iranian women are subject to one of the most restrictive dress codes in the Islamic world, yet partly in consequence Iranian families have released their daughters to study and work in unprecedented numbers, such that over 60 per cent of university students are female and many women (even married women) have professional jobs."  (xiv)

This was a pretty good book, covered a wide variety of topics and helped me better understand the Iranians and what shaped them.  I must admit I struggled somewhat in following all the names, but I think I learned something so that's good!



The Call to Seriousness: The Evangelical Impact on the Victorians by Ian Bradley -- I can't even remember why I put this book on my Amazon Wishlist. I must have seen it recommended in another book sometime last year. It's not even a new book - as in, it came from a library. Likely they threw it out as too old to interest anyone.  But, it was really quite interesting to me!  These are Evangelicals of the Church of England sort. They greatly influenced the Victorian Age and, wow, about half the time I was really disliking these people when the author would share good things about them and I'd find myself admiring them.  I could relate to much of this as it sounds like things I remember growing up. Things I may not have been taught, but practices that were from my grandparents' generation. Such as playing cards being a bad thing. We did it although we never gambled (a no-no in my circles).  Attending the theater, reading novels, fairytales, dancing - all taboo amongst these Evangelicals. I guess the name of the book would tell you this: they wanted to be serious about life so amusements were frowned upon!  Drinking alcohol in moderation was OK, however. This is different from how I grew up where alcohol was a terrible thing best avoided.

The Evangelicals showed how people could influence society by getting involved in politics.  They wanted to impose their standards on the rest of society -- and not all of it was bad. Apparently English society was pretty rotten then and even many nonEvangelicals apparently liked some of the cleaning up of society that they legislated.  While I might disagree with some of their stances - such as their desire to make people attend church on Sundays - on the grounds of individual freedom, I like some others as they were hugely involved in abolishing slavery and animals fights and working for better factory conditions for workers.  They also contributed three-fours of the charity work in England and the author credits them with the volunteerism and charitableness of English people even today (or as of this book's writing anyway; it was published in 1976).

This is what I noted on Facebook about it:

I'm reading a book about the Evangelicals in England and their impact on the Victorians.  They liked legislating morality and had their own policing tactics that makes me think of a mix between Communist regimes where neighbors spy and tattle on rule breakers and present-day Saudi Arabia and Iran.  One guy was so into people observing the Sabbath that he introduced a bill which "included the closure of markets on both Saturdays and Mondays to prevent the necessity for Sunday travel"!  Can you imagine? Thankfully the bill never passed and the guy was not re-elected, but still!

The Importance of the Opposites

I've heard people say there has to be darkness/pain/evil/death/a hell/people going to hell in order to give richer meaning to the opposite: light/good health/goodness/life/heaven/the Elect.  I thought of that as I read this quote.


What do you think about this guy's idea of heaven?  Do you tend to agree with him?  What is your ideal heaven and what are your beliefs about it (or an afterlife)?


"It is certainly too monotonous for an Eternity...to make a new life desirable it must give us something to do, something worth striving for, and a career by which we may improve in virtue ... If we are to increase in virtue we need occasion for self-denial, self-control, and self-sacrifice. But these cannot exist where there is no want, no offence, no pain. Want and pain, toil and trial, cannot be wholly banished out of my Heaven."  ~ Francis Newman


From The Call to Seriousness: The Evangelical Impact on the Victorians by Ian Bradley

On the benefits of the bubonic plague

A few weeks ago on NCIS: LA, a doctor was captured who wanted to reinfect much of the world with small pox! (Thank goodness agents Hanna and Callen got her in time!) Her thinking?  The planet was overcrowded and needed to be saved. By getting rid of horrible diseases which killed lots of people, we were tampering with nature and allowing the earth to get too crowded.  It took thousands of years to reach a billion people and then within only a few short years (comparatively), another billion, then another and another. Now I am wondering how many others out there think like this doctor and believe diseases should be free to run rampant and kill people in order to save the planet. Maybe wars and infanticide can be good things so the earth doesn't get too crowded. Um, I don't think so, but perhaps some do.

Later in May as I was reading From Plato to NATO the author, David Gress, states that in "1348, bubonic plague arrived from south Asia, killing around a third of the population in its first visitation, and thereafter returning every generation  or so to cull those who had been born since the last epidemic.  ...The plague solved the food crises, and for survivors, reversed the balance of economic power between peasants and landlords. Until the famine that began in 1315, the population of western Europe had been growing probably somewhat more rapidly than the food supply. Europe around 1300 was full of landless laborers willing to work for a pittance.  Peasants were increasingly tenants, not owners, and at the mercy of landlords who could evict them and find more docile tenants without difficulty.

The plague changed this.  Surviving peasants found themselves fewer and more in demand. Landlords suffered losses when their tenants died and, unable to meet their obligations, were willing to pay more to have their land tilled and rents paid. Peasants who received better conditions were more often able to buy their land."  (pg. 234-235)

So there ya go again.  Plagues' benefits.  I guess, too, there are wars and abortion and infanticide (humanity's ways) and earthquakes, tsunamis and famines (nature's way) of controlling the population.  And homosexuals. They can't have children. Well, they can, thanks to technology.  Same with infertile couples. What do you think? Are we tampering too much with nature by finding cures for diseases and allowing infertile couples to conceive whether it be by IVF or some other means?

If only we could find a way to harness those hurricanes and stop those shifting plates underground ... or maybe not.

Thoughts?

I wonder if Earth would think differently than we do.

Pop

This morning around 11:40, my sweet Pop went to be with Jesus. He passed away peacefully as family members sang to him and told him how much he meant to everyone.

I just did a search for "Pop" on my blog and came up with all these.  Some are posts that just have the word "pop," but many are about him or mention him or picture him.  Good memories.

He was a truly, wonderful person. I cannot ever remember seeing him depressed. He abounded in joy. And, man oh man, did he love Jesus.

June 6, 1949

I am incredibly happy for him right now.  He will be missed!

May Books

Another month is nearly over, and I don't think I'll finish another book by tomorrow so I'll go ahead and post this now.  I'm still making pretty good progress on From Plato to Nato which is the somewhat intimidating book I started one month ago today. For those asking, I am on page 398.



What Saint Paul Really Said by N.T. Wright  -- the author claims Paul was not the founder of Christianity rather a "faithful witness and herald of Jesus Christ"; this book was a bit difficult for me to get into, but had some interesting points. I especially enjoyed the thoughts of Jesus within Jewish monotheism and how Paul's views of creation, for instance, would contrast with the pagans - as well as what many of us believe today



The Aquariums of Pyongyang by Kang Chol-Hwan -- My friend Adam has lived in Seoul for several years now and he recommended this book which I got for my birthday.  Political prisoners' families often are taken to camps to serve sentences. The author was ten years old when his grandmother, uncle, father, sister and himself were taken to such a place. This book tells the story of life inside the camp and Kang's escape to China and later South Korea.

Can you imagine? -- So in this book I'm reading on North Korea, Kang Chol-Hwan talks about a Confucian tradition "which continues to hold sway in present-day* Korea."  This happened in his family**:  "a married woman BELONGS to her HUSBAND'S FAMILY and remains so, irrespective of divorce or separation. If she tries to return to her parents' home, she will most likely be turned away."  (emphasis mine)

‎* This book was published in 2000 in France so maybe things have changed since then.

** His father at age 15 was forced to marry a girl about the same age. They didn't love each other so when he divorced her, she had to live with HIS parents. He went to Japan, married again and then brought his new bride to live at his parents' house. Where his exwife still lived. Awkward.


When Kang finally made it to South Korea he had a hard time adjusting at first.  He was one of the oldest at college, yet students would sit in front of him and smoke - something you didn't do to an older person where he came from. He said "The North is hypertraditionalist. Friendships between members of the opposite sex is not the norm.  When a man speaks to a woman his own age, he employs the familiar form of address, she the formal.  Relations follow a strict hierarchy.  Here, we were equal!  Some of the female students were so self-confident, they hardly paid me any attention when I spoke to them."  (pg. 228)

I posted these notes on Facebook, and Adam and I discussed them somewhat. That was interesting hearing his thoughts on Korean culture.




Not a Fan. by Kyle Idleman -- This pastor challenges us to be followers of Jesus, not just fans.

"For many Christians the concept of denying themselves was not part of the deal. They grew up with the message that such a radical decision really isn't necessary. So they signed up to follow Jesus, but if denying themselves was part of the explanation, it was definitely the fine print. That's especially true of American Christians. In part, this is due to the collision of Christianity with American capitalism. It has created a culture of consumers in our churches. Instead of approaching their faith with a spirit of denial that says, 'What can I do for Jesus?' they have a consumer mentality that says, 'What can Jesus do for me?'"  (pg. 148)




If Walls Could Talk: An Intimate History of the Home by Lucy Worsley -- see previous post on childbirth and bicycling

"Before 1696, the basic tax upon a household was levied upon the number of hearths. But the 'hearth tax' was difficult to collect because tax inspectors needed to enter people's houses to check the number of fireplaces.  Clearly they weren't going to be welcome visitors. When in 1696 a new tax was levied instead upon windows, the inspectors had only to walk round the outside of the house and count."  Detractors called this "a tax upon light and air." (pg. 196)

"In 1908, Ellen Richards calculated that an eight-room house required eighteen hours of cleaning time a week just to remove dust.  Washing the windows and walls would take the total up to twenty-seven hours a week, even before the clothes-washing, bed-making and cooking began. This was simply unsustainable after the two world wars removed the huge infrastructure of servants who had done such work in the past."  So labor-saving tips were needed and "books for the newly servantless middle classes began to appear."  One taught how to break an egg, and advised "them not to chop onions with raw hands because the smell will linger and spoil the enjoyment of a later cigarette."  (pg. 266)


"[Refrigerators] were initially rather glamorous possessions, and in the 1930s their owners might invite their friends to a 'refrigerator party' where each course was pre-prepared and then whipped from its own shelf in the fridge.  Cookbooks from the period show guests in evening dress gathered in the kitchen to enjoy the novelty of eating an entire meal of cold food."  (pg.271)




Memories of Eden by Violette Shamash -- This book was the memoir of a Jewish lady who grew up in Baghdad before it was Iraq. Well, it became Iraq during her time there.  I enjoyed reading about interactions with the neighbors (she said they got along well with the Muslims and, in fact, often acted like mediators between Shias and Sunnis who argued with each other more than they did the Jews.) By the way, Jews made up 40% of the population of Baghdad at this time.   I found the Jewish culture aspects interesting though I think none of it really surprised me.  They favored sons.  Mother in laws were upset when mothers produced more daughters.  Same old stupid stuff.  Did you know haircuts were immodest?

"Before the 1930s, the mere idea of having a haircut was unthinkable, a girl's hair being considered her crowning glory. The only way to tame such a lot of thick and wavy hair was to wear it in two ringlet-like plaits. Almost all of us wore it this way, but it was time consuming and seemed old fashioned.  The breakthrough came when the first ladies' hairdressing salon opened and was patronised by the younger element - a controversial break with tradition. A popular song that captured the disapprobation of our elders went "...'The chaste daughter [of the house] has had her hair cut! God help us, where will that lead us? She's taken leave of her modesty.'"  (pg. 30)

And a girl's life mission - of course - was to get married, keep house and raise babies.  Education was not necessary for girls although Violette's dad let his daughters attend school.  Working outside the home was seen as something only girls from poor families would do. So well-to-do ladies would never stoop so low as to work.

The chapter on love and marriage was good as was her discussion of sabbath and "high holy days."

Also I was under the impression that Muslims welcomed Jews into the Middle East when it was awful Christians in Europe who persecuted Jews. Well, I suppose to some degree this was true, but not the entire truth. I was shocked to read of the Arabs embracing Nazism and turning on their Jewish neighbors and friends. Not all of them. The author gave very sweet examples of Muslims who protected scores of Jews. But still, I didn't realize the Arab Muslims (and maybe Christians?) embraced Hitler's ideas of ridding the world of Jews.  That was sad for me to read.

The author and her family ended up leaving Iraq for India, later Palestine, then Cyprus and finally London.



In the Steps of St. Paul by H.V. Morton -- This book was given to me by a thoughtful friend for my birthday.  Initially I thought I'd have to wait until I read the other big book I'm reading, but later when I was flipping through this one, I saw where it was not overly-deep and would be a nice book to read at the same time as the other book (From Plato to Nato).  In the past year or so I've enjoyed travel books from Vietnam, through various other parts of Asia, Iraq and the Middle East and even the one about the family who took a whole year to travel around the world.  This book tells of the author's journey to the various places mentioned in the Bible where Paul traveled - anywhere from his journey to Damascus to persecute Christians to his missionary travels to his imprisonment and supposed death in Rome.

The author talked of ruins he saw (he especially admired the Parthenon p. 312), customs of the people then and now, how Paul would have seen the cities (it was quite thought-provoking when he would describe the ghost towns some places now were compared to how they would have been back in their primes), people he met, how these certain 'races' were (sometimes these were a bit off-putting [i.e., describing how current Greeks were unlike the ones depicted on statues and the impression that they were not as pretty; how he described Arabs and Jews], but in the introduction Bruce Feiler warned about this so it wasn't as surprising). Actually that part was also rather interesting because his honesty revealed quite a bit about how people were perceived back then. Oh, did I mention this travel was in the mid 1930s?  So, yeah, I do wonder how things have changed in these cities/towns/ports in these last 75 years!

Some brief notes I took:

-- impressions of Tarsus - how St. Paul was born at this place that bridged East and West; rather fitting for a man who took an eastern faith into the western world  (pg. 68)

-- in Aleppo he met a sheik with four wives listed on his British passport (pg. 88)

-- he mentioned a custom of salting Arab babies (pg. 91)

-- he discussed Antioch's scientific achievements, modernity (pg. 99)

-- mused on Paul's 'thorn in the flesh' - could it be malaria, headaches?  (pg. 104)

-- talked about the destruction goats have caused by eating vegetation and seedlings and leaving lands barren (p. 125)

-- he met a Cypriot who could "speak American" (pg. 125) -- did I mention the author was English?

--  the author greatly admired the progress made by Ataturk and told of the great changes in Turkey; once he made me laugh when a Turk told a sexist joke and the author said with the new modernity in Turkey, he (the Turk who made the joke) should be a feminist (pg. 201)

-- I enjoyed the section on Paul "the babbler" which was when the Athenians wanted Paul to explain himself more. The author said Paul didn't speak from an Old Testament knowledge of religion which would have made no sense to these people. Instead he used common religious terms and ideas in order to establish some commonality.  (pg. 318)

-- The authors impressions of Greece and the Greeks in particular was interesting especially as I compared what a couple Greek men told him about their own people. "'That is the curse of my country,' said Sophocles.  'We all know. We all think we could do so much better than the people in charge. We all believe that if we were in control of the country everything would be all right. Every Greek rules Greece in his own mind.'"  (pg. 329)

-- The author mentioned the love of the sea is a modern notion because often in ancient writing the sea is an enemy. I enjoyed his musings on this.  (pg. 428)

Talkin' Tradition

I tend to think of stuff like this Cherokee (NC) war dance as more cultural/traditional than anything in my life

Have you ever had people ask what your region is famous for or to tell them about your culture and drawn a blank? I have.  Well, I could maybe figure out a food* that is well-liked in this area, and perhaps tell you North Carolina grows a lot of tobacco, but I can't always find something that seems "traditional" and "cultural" that distinguishes my area from others.   Likely I'm just blind to those things or assume most people do that so how can that be cultural/traditional if it's normal?  Should I even be using those terms together like that?  Let me look them up ...

This was in South Horr, Kenya when Andrew went December 2011 - time for a wedding

OK, here is culture as defined by Dictionary.com

1.the quality in a person or society that arises from a concern for what is regarded as excellent in arts, letters, manners, scholarly pursuits, etc.

2.that which is excellent in the arts, manners, etc.

3.a particular form or stage of civilization, as that of a certain nation or period: Greek culture.

4.development or improvement of the mind by education or training.

5.the behaviors and beliefs characteristic of a particular social, ethnic, or age group: the youth culture; the drug culture.

and tradition

1.the handing down of statements, beliefs, legends, customs, information, etc., from generation to generation, especially by word of mouth or by practice: a story that has come down to us by popular tradition.

2.something that is handed down: the traditions of the Eskimos.

3. a long-established or inherited way of thinking or acting: The rebellious students wanted to break with tradition.

4. a continuing pattern of culture beliefs or practices.

5. a customary or characteristic method or manner: The winner took a victory lap in the usual track tradition.

So I guess tradition is more the things that influence or make up culture? I don't know.  

Anyway, I read this in From Plato to NATO by David Gress, and wanted to see what you thought about the West not losing, but rejecting tradition.

"What Eliot saw was that the West was becoming a world, an outlook, and a culture that no longer wanted or needed tradition***.  The West by 1920 was not a civilization that had lost its traditional moorings, which one could perhaps restore or at least rediscover or describe. It was a civilization that rejected moorings of any sort. The essence of the modern West was that it had no essence, no heritage, no tradition. Tradition had become not the missing center of culture, but something that the culture increasingly regarded as its enemy."  (pg. 163)

***For Eliot this apparently meant "Western civilization needed both the church and the literary tradition of antiquity" and "the West was dying because it had forgotten its own tradition, one of myth and the hidden traces of the sacred." 
 
 

 Do you agree with Eliot's thoughts on the West's view of tradition?  Do you consider tradition as an enemy?  How could it be?  And how would you answer someone wanting to know about the cultural and/or traditional aspects of your area of the world?  What is it famous for? What do y'all do that distinguishes you from others?

*  We were asked this while in Syria and Andrew told them our region was (locally anyway) famous for its barbeque.  Yes, that's BBQ as a noun and it means THIS although, thankfully, I mostly only see it on sandwiches or plates.   That's better. Well, maybe not for a Muslim. Alas, we are neither Muslim nor Jew nor vegetarian.  And although the one asking never treated us any differently in the slightest, I was a little embarrassed/shy that Andrew said this in a culture that considers pork unclean.  Makes me feel like a dirty Christian ...  

 

On Childbirth and Bicycling; Updates

One of the books I received for my birthday was If Walls Could Talk: An Intimate History of the Home by Lucy Worsley.  The book is divided into sections such as the bedroom, living room, kitchen and bathroom. Within each part, there are a variety of topics. Anything from the description of the actual types of beds to closets to knickers to being born and being murdered. And that's just in the bedroom section!

In the chapter on "Being Born," she mentions the old days when people lived and died in their bedrooms (which, by the way, were much more communal than our private bedrooms are today).  Now, she states, both are often done in the hospital.  But during the time of births at home, she writes:

"The gathering of the women, the gossiping, the pleasure they took in their shared experience made giving birth a much more sociable event than it is today, when it's chiefly an individual drama. In fact, the bonding nature of childbirth explains why the users of the 'molly-houses' (male brothels) of early eighteenth-century London replicated its rituals: homosexual men pretended to give birth, and celebrated with the traditional party afterwards. The first known piece of printed gay porn was entitled A Lying-In Conversation with a Curious Adventure (1748), and it describes a man in drag infiltrating a lying-in chamber.  Fetishising childbirth is not common in modern male gay society, and that's probably because lying in bed alone in a hospital is not nearly so much fun." (pg. 20)

(Sidenote: I wonder why nature didn't make it possible for gay couples to procreate. Now we can do it artificially thanks to technology, but nature didn't deem this possible for same-sex couples. This came to mind one day when I was thinking of population control, but that's a topic for another time perhaps.)

Other interesting facts:

"The medieval death rate was one in every fifty pregnancies  Considering that it wasn't unusual for a woman to give birth a dozen times, the odds quickly mounted up for reproductive wives. Many pregnant Tudor ladies had their portraits painted for the poignant reason that they might well have been saying goodbye to their husbands for ever when they disappeared into confinement.  If so, their families would at least have had a final image of a lost loved one."  (pg. 18)

In the past women used more of a birthing chair since midwives understood the importance of gravity in delivering children. As male doctors took over the birthing process, women started lying on beds - probably because it was easier and more comfortable for the men attending those giving birth.  (pg. 24)


Men also introduced forceps to help with delivering babies.  Midwives continued to have misgivings and used them only in extreme circumstances - like when someone had labored four or five days!  (pg. 23)


The Victorians thought it tasteless to refer to "being with child" and suggested "the genteel lady should merely inform 'her friends that at a certain time she will be confined'.  The downside of all this tasteful gentility was that women began to think of pregnancy as an illness, and Victorian books about childbirth began to refer to it among 'the diseases of women'.  In the bedchamber, as in society at large, women began to be seen as fragile, vulnerable and incompetent at looking after themselves."  (pg. 26)

---------------------------------------------------


Not related to childbirth, but one tidbit I learned in this book is about bicycling's role in the emancipation of women. According to Susan B. Anthony:

"Let me tell you what I think of bicycling. I think it has done more to emancipate women than anything else in the world. It gives women a feeling of freedom and self-reliance. I stand and rejoice every time I see a woman ride by on a wheel...the picture of free, untrammeled womanhood."

Here is an interesting article explaining more about this.


I wonder if this is the real reason women riding bikes has been frowned upon in some cultures. Hmmm.


-----------------------------------------------
A couple of updates:

Soon after I posted the pictures of my birthday books, I received one more that was late in arriving. Andrew got me a book about Iran that had been on my Wishlist ever since Lat read and blogged about this country many months ago.

As of now, I am on track to finish From Plato to Nato - the book I called intimidating in my last post - well within the four month time frame I generously allowed myself.  Reading 5 pages per day, I should be on page 45. Instead I'm on 125. And it's actually pretty interesting stuff. So that's good.