What do you think?
Rate this book
Myths of Motherhood: How Culture Reinvents the Good Mother
This groundbreaking and irreverent history of motherhood is worth a hundred advice books for any mother who’s ever been made to feel guilty or frazzled by society’s impossible expectations. Analyzing data from the psychoanalyst’s couch to the hidden history of wet nursing, psychologist Shari L. Thurer wends her way from the Stone Age to the age of Hillary Rodham Clinton, painting a vivid, often frightening picture of life for mothers and children in a time when their roles were constructed by men. Along the way, she debunks myth after myth—exposing the not-so-golden ages of Classical Greece and the Italian Renaissance, and revealing the pervasive ideal of Dr. Spock’s selfless, stay-at-home mother as the historical aberration it actually was. A work of impassioned scholarship and astonishing range, The Myths of Motherhood does nothing less than recast our conception of good mothering.
416 pages, Paperback
First published May 6, 1994
12 people are currently reading
593 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 - 16 of 16 reviews
December 30, 2009
The image of mother at home, tending to the needs of her family, so popularized by sitcoms in the 1950s and 1960s, is actually a cultural anomaly. As Shari L. Thurer points out in The Myths of Motherhood: How Culture Reinvents the Good Mother (1994) the “fifties were an aberration” (250). Rather than being the norm, the nuclear family depicted by television families such as the Cleavers, the Nelsons, the Reeds et al, reflect a family model that existed for a very short time (the 1950s and early 1960s) in Western culture. Thurer’s point is not to disparage or laud the nuclear family but merely to point out that the frozen image of mom at home caring for her family while dad goes out to make money does not accurately reflect our history. As Thurer explains, a mother’s role and what culture perceives as the ideal mother, has undergone many permutations over time. More importantly, what we view as some sort innate ideal model of motherhood is always a social construct, an invention rather than a given.
Despite the relative brevity of the “at-home mom” in American society, that image remains our enduring model of motherhood. While viewing the at-home mother as the “ideal,” the mother’s dominance on the homefront was simultaneously the focus of criticism. As Thurer points out, in both literary and critical texts, mothers were blamed for society’s ills. For mothers, it was a classic lose-lose situation. Mothers who did not stay at home were viewed as unnatural (and caused their family psychic harm) while mothers who did remain at home were also blamed for every neurotic/psychotic impulse their family later evinced.
Oddly, even many feminists participated in the collective mother-bashing and provided accounts of how they were “victimized” by their mothers (270). Thurer, citing the arguments of Nancy Chodorow and Susan Contratto, speculates that the reason many feminists exclude mothers from their celebration of women hinges on their tendency to see mothers as all-powerful and thus all-responsible: “the cause of feminists’ debunking of mom [is their:] belief—to everyone’s belief—in an all-powerful mother, who, because she is fully responsible for how her children turn out, is blamed for everything, from her child’s limitations to the crises of human existence” (270).
Persistently, motherhood remains a site of ambivalence. The power mothers are imagined to have—in the domestic arena—is often viewed as destructive. Outside of the home, in the cultural/intellectual sphere, mothers have/had no power at all. As Thurer astutely notes, by the late 1970s “it was still only Portnoy’s complaint that mattered, not his mother’s” (286). Further, if mothers were complaining it was not in print; the autobiographies and books that were being written emerged from their daughters.
[from an earlier publication:]
Despite the relative brevity of the “at-home mom” in American society, that image remains our enduring model of motherhood. While viewing the at-home mother as the “ideal,” the mother’s dominance on the homefront was simultaneously the focus of criticism. As Thurer points out, in both literary and critical texts, mothers were blamed for society’s ills. For mothers, it was a classic lose-lose situation. Mothers who did not stay at home were viewed as unnatural (and caused their family psychic harm) while mothers who did remain at home were also blamed for every neurotic/psychotic impulse their family later evinced.
Oddly, even many feminists participated in the collective mother-bashing and provided accounts of how they were “victimized” by their mothers (270). Thurer, citing the arguments of Nancy Chodorow and Susan Contratto, speculates that the reason many feminists exclude mothers from their celebration of women hinges on their tendency to see mothers as all-powerful and thus all-responsible: “the cause of feminists’ debunking of mom [is their:] belief—to everyone’s belief—in an all-powerful mother, who, because she is fully responsible for how her children turn out, is blamed for everything, from her child’s limitations to the crises of human existence” (270).
Persistently, motherhood remains a site of ambivalence. The power mothers are imagined to have—in the domestic arena—is often viewed as destructive. Outside of the home, in the cultural/intellectual sphere, mothers have/had no power at all. As Thurer astutely notes, by the late 1970s “it was still only Portnoy’s complaint that mattered, not his mother’s” (286). Further, if mothers were complaining it was not in print; the autobiographies and books that were being written emerged from their daughters.
[from an earlier publication:]
October 22, 2020
This book transformed the way I look at mothering and, more broadly, nurturing/parenting practices. Incredibly interesting.
I never read such a fascinating telling of the history and evolution (and devolution) of the role of the mother.
I never read such a fascinating telling of the history and evolution (and devolution) of the role of the mother.
June 21, 2008
An interesting book to read while pregnant (which I did). But even if you’re not, or never will be, it is worth it. The book is an impressive (and often horrific) historical look at motherhood (and the social/religious rhetoric surrounding it) from the ancient world to today.
It’s a good book to read in conjunction with Yalom’s A History of the Wife… and you might as well through in Wolfe’s Misconception too for some interesting intersections about what society likes to say about how to be a good mommy.
It’s a good book to read in conjunction with Yalom’s A History of the Wife… and you might as well through in Wolfe’s Misconception too for some interesting intersections about what society likes to say about how to be a good mommy.
September 30, 2020
Ahh...Every mother (..or person) needs to read this book. Unfortunately, it was due back at the library before I could finish it (even with an extension!). This is more academic in nature than other popular nonfiction titles lately, but not so dry that it will bring you to tears like most of my college reading. The telling of the mythology across cultures (Western particularly, but in different time periods) is so smart and I was joyful much of the time I read it to be in the company of such an effective writer. However, the information made me gag. Just how horrible (if I may be so bold) woman had it in just about every period of time except pre-patriarchy truly left me gasping. Did you know that the Greeks, the cosmopolitan civilization that ours is based upon and reveres engaged in infanticide...and regularly? One note I keep coming back to is the interrelationship between how woman and children are treated. Not so much that mothering is the apex of that relationship but that in the ways a culture protects and nurtures children, mothers and by extension woman are often beneficiaries as they are supported in their mothering and other capabilities. I can't wait to get back to the rest of this book when it comes back through my library holds again.
July 1, 2017
I think everyone should have to read this book. What it means to be a 'good' mother has changed so much throughout history, but this fact is rarely acknowledged. Women in general and mothers in particular are at the whim of whatever theory is popular, and are expected to buy into whatever a magazine or therapist or (much earlier) royal family says is the 'right' way to mother or suffer the consequences of a self-righteous patriarchal society. This book is breathtaking in scope (pre-history to the early 90s), discusses both religion and science (analyzes the Virgin Mary's ever-changing male-written narrative as well as how Freud set the wave in motion to blame mother for every single psychological shortcoming of the child), and my only complaint is that it was published now 25 years ago so lacks any commentary on the likes of Dr. Phil or Goop.
Read
July 27, 2023Dropped halfway through the first chapter. This was published in the early 1990s and it shows, packed full of statements posited as factual that were only theoretical even then (and are now known to be false), unsurprisingly Euro- and Christo-centric, and starting off "strong" with that weird brand of 1990s "Great Mother Girl Power" semi-feminism that frankly hasn't aged particularly well. So it goes with older anthrophological books sometimes.
June 1, 2018
A fantastic study of motherhood up to the 90's. From the first working mother in the stone age to our 50's fantasy mother Mrs. Clever and everything in between. Sometimes it was a painful look at what caused woman to leave their babies to die in Greece or the blame that psychotherapy placed on mom but it was eye-opening.
January 23, 2019
It was good up to a certain point. Then it got really into the Medievals and the gods. It just lost me at page 108.
June 22, 2013
"The new emphasis on the joys of domesticity were not yet strangulating, as they would become for some women in the next hundred years, but in the meantime served as anew source of female authority. At this time, a mother's obligations to instruct the young provided her with a platform to express her ideas on a broad range of subjects. Armed with such a duty, she could give advice, teach morals, even proselytize a captive audience." (Thurer, 197, "The Exaltation of Mother: 18th- and 19th-Century Mom)
"The doctrine of "separate spheres" -- that is, the blessed home versus the cruel outside -- created a division of the wolrd according to gender, not seen since the Italian Renaissance."
"Our current ideal of the mother is, like all ideals, culture-bound, historically specific, and hopelessly tied to fashion. And, of course, fashions change. As we shall see, the diverse roles that women play in raising their children are not linked to timeless truths, but to more mundane things, like subsistence strategies, population pressures, biology, technology, weather patterns, and speculations about women's nature."
"The doctrine of "separate spheres" -- that is, the blessed home versus the cruel outside -- created a division of the wolrd according to gender, not seen since the Italian Renaissance."
"Our current ideal of the mother is, like all ideals, culture-bound, historically specific, and hopelessly tied to fashion. And, of course, fashions change. As we shall see, the diverse roles that women play in raising their children are not linked to timeless truths, but to more mundane things, like subsistence strategies, population pressures, biology, technology, weather patterns, and speculations about women's nature."
March 25, 2009
This book is a bit dated when it comes to mentions of current events, it was published in 1994, but it none the less offers a refreshing take on the cultural assumptions and ideological problems sorrounding modern motherhood by taking a look at how we got here. Starting in antiquity, and continuing through the 20th century, this brief(and often heartbreaking)tour of western history makes a commonsensical idea clear- that the more society values women, the greater importance it will assign that which is associated with women(and this includes children and child care). Everyone,(yes, mamas too), nurture best when we are nurtured. The more mothers/women are respected and esteemed by their greater society and their peers, the more likely their children will be safe, loved, and healthy.
March 1, 2008
This book is intense although I found some of the premises to be a little thin. It's a harsh read going through history and reading over and over the brutality that has been brought on children as well as women - quite horrifying sometimes. The only way I could really get through those parts is to just really disassociate myself from history - as if I was reading about an alien culture. I am glad I read it - it certainly gives context for where we are today but I don't really buy into the idea that things are so terrible - maybe that's just a coping mechanism.
March 19, 2008
This was a nice complement to "Of Woman Born." While that book was a bit more angry at patriarchy, this book is more factual, less emotional. It presents an interesting, easy history of how western society has reinvented its ideology of motherhood/woman's role over the centuries. Relates it to Christian images of Mary/the Madonna and also to the Industrial Revolution.
Women interested in this subject matter would be well served to read both these books. Together they present a nicely balanced view. (but if you only read one, read Of Woman Born!).
Women interested in this subject matter would be well served to read both these books. Together they present a nicely balanced view. (but if you only read one, read Of Woman Born!).
November 23, 2015
Цікава книжка, в якій розвіюється міф за міфом про "ідеальну маму", варто прочитати її замість сотні книжок про "методи виховання", тому що усі ці "методи" мають свої історії і продукуються своїми контекстами, які найчастіше відтворюють патріархальні відносини у суспільстві. Спробуйте подумати про маму з позиції мами, а не дитини чи сустпільства! Важко? Насправді дуже важко, адже ми не звикли бачити маму з її перспективи, так само я�� і вона не звикла бачити себе з власної перспективи, а коли вона таки на себе дивиться і приймає до уваги себе, то її одразу назвуть "недомамою".
August 1, 2016
Dense but interesting read looking at the history of "Mom" and the mother/child/society relationship through the ages. Interesting to see the cyclical "dos and don'ts" of parenting (namely mothering) and to see how the more things change the more they stay the same. Mothering has always been difficult work and now seems to be just as complicated (though slowly it seems Mothers are fighting back to make it known that THEY get the main say in how their child, and ultimately their self, is raised and treated).
March 16, 2015
Not so much a book about motherhood as it is a book about family dynamics, childhood, and historical constructions of femininity. A fascinating read that starts to tease apart the foundations of some of our deepest rooted myths and symbols surrounding mothers. One thing is for certain--if mothers still have it rough at least a large number of kids are better off than they used to be. This is a rough read in terms of facing a long history of infanticide, exposure, and infant abandonment.
March 1, 2015
Although this book was written 20 years ago, it still makes some good points on how our perception of the role of motherhood (and fatherhood) are culturally constructed to a good extent.
I wish the author had looked more at other cultures, rather than sticking to mostly Western European and American ones (over a large span of history, but still). However, she does mention in the acknowledgements that she did not feel like she was qualified to discuss motherhood of other cultures.
I wish the author had looked more at other cultures, rather than sticking to mostly Western European and American ones (over a large span of history, but still). However, she does mention in the acknowledgements that she did not feel like she was qualified to discuss motherhood of other cultures.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews