What do you think?
Rate this book
To Be a Man: In Search of the Deep Masculine
The 1990s will be the decade in which the men's movement emerges as a vital force for redefining masculinity. To Be a Man can serve as the bible for the new male by exploring such issues as suppressed wildness, grief, and shame, as well as perennial topics such as competition, work, fatherhood, and loving relationaships. The audience for this New Consciousnesss reader also includes women who seek to understand their husbands and sons.
293 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 1991
2 people are currently reading
114 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
June 11, 2025
A COLLECTION OF WRITINGS ON MEN/MASCULINITY FROM A DIVERSE GROUP OF MEN
Editor Keith Thompson wrote in the Prologue to this 1991 book, “When I accepted the invitation to prepare this anthology of writings on what it means to be a man I realized it was probably inevitable that I would end up questioning prevailing assumptions about masculinity, mine included… Even so, it never occurred to me that composing this volume would lead me to a conclusion far more radical than the collective diagnosis of talk-show clinicians: namely, ‘masculinity does not exist.’… I found myself saying, ‘there are MANY masculinities, multiple ways to be a man.’” (Pg. xv)
He continues, “This is not to say that I believe there’s no common ground among the many masculinities that men embody today and the masculinities men have embodied in times past. It is to say, instead, that masculinity, taken literally as a ‘singular anything,’ invariably obscures the richness, complexity, and multiplicity of male experience, fostering the supposition that one or another model of male ways is ‘correct’ in some absolute sense, as if masculinity could not be big enough to include Sly Stallone and David Bowie… George Patton and Mohandas Gandhi… all at once… In a sense, ‘masculinity’ (one) is NOT big enough, whereas ‘masculinities’ (many) IS big enough AND deep enough… In the pages that follow I have attempted to include writings that capture these two sets of images in varying combinations… the differing moods or tones of these image groups actually appear closely related.” (Pg. xvi)
Robert Bly states, “Now there’s something wonderful about all this—the step of the male bringing forth his own feminine consciousness is an important one---and yet I have the sense there is something wrong… I see the phenomenon of what I would call the ‘soft male’ all over the country today. Sometimes when I look out at my audiences, perhaps the [majority of] young males are what I’d call soft… There is something favorable toward life in their whole general mood and style of living. But something’s wrong. Many of these men are unhappy. There’s not much energy in them. They are life-preserving but not exactly life-giving. And why is it you often see these men with strong women who positively radiate energy? Here we have a finely tuned young man… yet he himself has no energy to offer.” (Pg. 17)
He summarizes the ‘Iron John’ myth, then comments, “Contact with Iron John requires the willingness to go down into the psyche and accept what’s dark down there including the sexual. For generations now, the business community has warned men to keep away from Iron John, and the Christian church is not too fond of him either. But it’s possible that men are once more approaching the deep male. Freud, Jung, and Wilhelm Reich are three men who had the courage to go down into the pond and accept what’s there… The job of modern males is to follow them down.” (Pg. 19-20)
Aaron Kipnis notes, “The male initiation process, through which young men once were connected with the masculine powers in the earth, is for the most part lost to modern culture. In the absence of male initiation, many men have sought reconnection to soul through the feminine. However, femininity is not the primary cure to the drought in the masculine psyche. Indeed, the modern [desire] to personify the earth as a feminine entity effectively perpetuates the divorce of the male psyche from its own fecund, inner-masculine, life-affirming nature.” (Pg. 25)
Frederic Wiedemann suggests, “[Robert] Bly cries out that our male emotional bodies are not active because the male initiation was interrupted… I believe the male initiation is being taken into the Mystery together with other men, without recourse to a woman. When we men are in Mystery, we don’t know how to be. That is the Mystery and the initiation.” (Pg. 60)
Michael Meade observes, “Men feel a loss of home. The male spirit or soul doesn’t feel that it has a home. The man goes to work and deals with that set of responsibilities and difficulties. Then he goes home and deals with that set of responsibilities and difficulties. He doesn’t have a sense of home---as in a dwelling place, wherehe goes to dwell within himself. There’s also a loss of connection man to man… Men have inherited a great depth of sorrow; so have women…. But the tone for grieving, or dealing with sorrow, is different for a man than it is for a woman… Men activate each other’s emotions. And when men have some purpose and some depth of meaning that they’re dealing with, and they get together in a safe environment, then the feelings will deepen tremendously. That kind of opportunity is generally missing in men’s lives.” (Pg. 80-81)
Tav Sparks says, “But creating a new image of the masculine is not about rescuing altogether the inheritance of the past. It includes salvaging what is valuable. Courageous questing has proven to be indispensable, but I can also see a place in manhood for honor, duty, and even humility. To these timeless attributes, the surrender experience adds a deeper, more fulfilling sense of the masculine. And I can begin to derive a sense of power in choosing new attributes to fight for. These may be the ideals of my ancestors, yet they can be uniquely mine as well.” (Pg. 91)
Robert Bly points out, “Jung made a very interesting observation; he said that if a male is brought up mainly with his mother, he will take a feminine attitude toward his father. He will see his father through his mother’s eyes. Since the father and the mother are in competition for the affection of the son, you’re not going to get a straight picture of your father out of your mother. Instead, all the inadequacies of the father are well pointed out. The mother tends to give the tone that civilization and culture and feeling and relationship are things that the mother and the son and the daughter have together. Whereas, what the father has is something inadequate. Still, maybe brutal, unfeeling, obsessed, rationalistic, money-made, uncompassionate.” (Pg. 192)
Other writings are included in this collection by persons such as James Hillman, Sam Keen, Michael Meade, Warren Farrell, Wendell Berry, and others.
This book will be of great interest to those studying the mythopoetic men’s movement.
Editor Keith Thompson wrote in the Prologue to this 1991 book, “When I accepted the invitation to prepare this anthology of writings on what it means to be a man I realized it was probably inevitable that I would end up questioning prevailing assumptions about masculinity, mine included… Even so, it never occurred to me that composing this volume would lead me to a conclusion far more radical than the collective diagnosis of talk-show clinicians: namely, ‘masculinity does not exist.’… I found myself saying, ‘there are MANY masculinities, multiple ways to be a man.’” (Pg. xv)
He continues, “This is not to say that I believe there’s no common ground among the many masculinities that men embody today and the masculinities men have embodied in times past. It is to say, instead, that masculinity, taken literally as a ‘singular anything,’ invariably obscures the richness, complexity, and multiplicity of male experience, fostering the supposition that one or another model of male ways is ‘correct’ in some absolute sense, as if masculinity could not be big enough to include Sly Stallone and David Bowie… George Patton and Mohandas Gandhi… all at once… In a sense, ‘masculinity’ (one) is NOT big enough, whereas ‘masculinities’ (many) IS big enough AND deep enough… In the pages that follow I have attempted to include writings that capture these two sets of images in varying combinations… the differing moods or tones of these image groups actually appear closely related.” (Pg. xvi)
Robert Bly states, “Now there’s something wonderful about all this—the step of the male bringing forth his own feminine consciousness is an important one---and yet I have the sense there is something wrong… I see the phenomenon of what I would call the ‘soft male’ all over the country today. Sometimes when I look out at my audiences, perhaps the [majority of] young males are what I’d call soft… There is something favorable toward life in their whole general mood and style of living. But something’s wrong. Many of these men are unhappy. There’s not much energy in them. They are life-preserving but not exactly life-giving. And why is it you often see these men with strong women who positively radiate energy? Here we have a finely tuned young man… yet he himself has no energy to offer.” (Pg. 17)
He summarizes the ‘Iron John’ myth, then comments, “Contact with Iron John requires the willingness to go down into the psyche and accept what’s dark down there including the sexual. For generations now, the business community has warned men to keep away from Iron John, and the Christian church is not too fond of him either. But it’s possible that men are once more approaching the deep male. Freud, Jung, and Wilhelm Reich are three men who had the courage to go down into the pond and accept what’s there… The job of modern males is to follow them down.” (Pg. 19-20)
Aaron Kipnis notes, “The male initiation process, through which young men once were connected with the masculine powers in the earth, is for the most part lost to modern culture. In the absence of male initiation, many men have sought reconnection to soul through the feminine. However, femininity is not the primary cure to the drought in the masculine psyche. Indeed, the modern [desire] to personify the earth as a feminine entity effectively perpetuates the divorce of the male psyche from its own fecund, inner-masculine, life-affirming nature.” (Pg. 25)
Frederic Wiedemann suggests, “[Robert] Bly cries out that our male emotional bodies are not active because the male initiation was interrupted… I believe the male initiation is being taken into the Mystery together with other men, without recourse to a woman. When we men are in Mystery, we don’t know how to be. That is the Mystery and the initiation.” (Pg. 60)
Michael Meade observes, “Men feel a loss of home. The male spirit or soul doesn’t feel that it has a home. The man goes to work and deals with that set of responsibilities and difficulties. Then he goes home and deals with that set of responsibilities and difficulties. He doesn’t have a sense of home---as in a dwelling place, wherehe goes to dwell within himself. There’s also a loss of connection man to man… Men have inherited a great depth of sorrow; so have women…. But the tone for grieving, or dealing with sorrow, is different for a man than it is for a woman… Men activate each other’s emotions. And when men have some purpose and some depth of meaning that they’re dealing with, and they get together in a safe environment, then the feelings will deepen tremendously. That kind of opportunity is generally missing in men’s lives.” (Pg. 80-81)
Tav Sparks says, “But creating a new image of the masculine is not about rescuing altogether the inheritance of the past. It includes salvaging what is valuable. Courageous questing has proven to be indispensable, but I can also see a place in manhood for honor, duty, and even humility. To these timeless attributes, the surrender experience adds a deeper, more fulfilling sense of the masculine. And I can begin to derive a sense of power in choosing new attributes to fight for. These may be the ideals of my ancestors, yet they can be uniquely mine as well.” (Pg. 91)
Robert Bly points out, “Jung made a very interesting observation; he said that if a male is brought up mainly with his mother, he will take a feminine attitude toward his father. He will see his father through his mother’s eyes. Since the father and the mother are in competition for the affection of the son, you’re not going to get a straight picture of your father out of your mother. Instead, all the inadequacies of the father are well pointed out. The mother tends to give the tone that civilization and culture and feeling and relationship are things that the mother and the son and the daughter have together. Whereas, what the father has is something inadequate. Still, maybe brutal, unfeeling, obsessed, rationalistic, money-made, uncompassionate.” (Pg. 192)
Other writings are included in this collection by persons such as James Hillman, Sam Keen, Michael Meade, Warren Farrell, Wendell Berry, and others.
This book will be of great interest to those studying the mythopoetic men’s movement.
Displaying 1 of 1 review