What do you think?
Rate this book
The Image of Man: The Creation of Modern Masculinity
What does it mean to be a man? What does it mean to be manly? How has our notion of masculinity changed over the years? In this book, noted historian George L. Mosse provides the first historical account of the masculine stereotype in modern Western culture, tracing the evolution of the idea of manliness to reveal how it came to embody physical beauty, courage, moral restraint, and a strong will. This stereotype, he finds, originated in the tumultuous changes of the eighteenth century, as Europe's dominant aristocrats grudgingly yielded to the rise of the professional, bureaucratic, and commercial middle classes. Mosse reveals how the new bourgeoisie, faced with a bewildering, rapidly industrialized world, latched onto the knightly ideal of chivalry. He also shows how the rise of universal conscription created a "soldierly man" as an ideal type. In bringing his examination up to the present, Mosse studies the key historical roles of the so-called "fairer sex" (women) and "unmanly
men" (Jews and homosexuals) in defining and maintaining the male stereotype, and considers the possible erosion of that stereotype in our own time.
men" (Jews and homosexuals) in defining and maintaining the male stereotype, and considers the possible erosion of that stereotype in our own time.
240 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1996
14 people are currently reading
513 people want to read
About the author
George L. Mosse
55 books31 followersGerman-born American social and cultural historian.
Mosse authored 25 books on a variety of fields, from English constitutional law, Lutheran theology, to the history of fascism, Jewish history, and the history of masculinity.
He was perhaps best-known for his books and articles that redefined the discussion and interpretation of Nazism.
Mosse authored 25 books on a variety of fields, from English constitutional law, Lutheran theology, to the history of fascism, Jewish history, and the history of masculinity.
He was perhaps best-known for his books and articles that redefined the discussion and interpretation of Nazism.
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
May 11, 2018
Mosse examines the roles of factors such as athletics, medicine, social and religious institutions, et al in the construction of masculine identity, and how that normative or stereotypical identity influenced the social, political, and cultural landscape of modern Europe. He also considers the role of institutions in perpetuating gender stereotypes and linking them to the well-being of the nations and social classes.
The idea of masculinity did not change markedly between the French Revolution and the Second World War. "The construction of modern masculinity," Mosse argues, "was closely linked to the new bourgeois society that was in the making at the end of the eighteenth century" when aristocratic ideas of manliness were reconfigured to reflect middle class concerns about moral purpose and activities.
Mosse's subtitle “The Creation of Modern Masculinity” reveals his argument: masculinity is socially constructed and externally imposed. More ground-breakingly, he argues that “the masculine stereotype” is as much a part of national or social identity as of personal, leaving “hardly one modern ideology untouched” and therefore an examination of the concept(s) is essentially to understanding “the ideals and functioning of normative society.”
Mosse posits a mutually affective relationship between moral and behavioral standards and ideals of masculinity; this model is applicable to any given period, although the content of the ideals is of course subject to alteration. In this study Mosse focuses on the normative masculine stereotype which he identifies as dominant throughout the second half of the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth, examining the process by which it evolved and the effect these ideas had on western society.
The ideal of masculinity, Mosse, argues, must be examined as “a totality” not by study of any of several component attributes. His reason for taking this position is his argument that masculine identity has historically been “regarded as of one piece from the very beginning: body and soul, outward appearance and inward virtue were supposed to form one harmonious whole, a perfect construct where every part was in its place.”
Mosse makes an interesting distinction between ideals or standards of masculinity, which have always existed, and masculinity as a stereotype, which he says developed only in the modern period. He puts this development in the context of “a general quest for symbols” which arose as a reaction to the confusions and instability of modern times. He also attributes this stereotyping process to the increasingly important role of science, which perforce classes men as a homogenous group rather than as individuals. Mosse also touches on the way in which this stereotyping was reinforced by negative stereotyping of marginalized groups, such as Jews, gypsies, and blacks.
An intriguing question raised by Mosse is the relationship between the growth of stereotypes masculinity and the corresponding emergence of the women's rights movement. Perhaps the increasing independence of women was perceived as a threat by men, whose insecurity was expressed by the strengthening of masculine stereotypes. On the other hand, the causal relationship may go in the other direction, with women's increasing “mannishness” being a response to their internalization of the masculine ideal; Mosse suggests that women may have adopted the idealized masculine virtues in an attempt to take part in the defense of their national or cultural integrity.
In a broader socio-political context, Mosse devotes much of the book to exploring the relationship between ideals of masculinity and the trends of fascism, socialism, and imperialism. But Mosse does not neglect the chronological placement of masculinity, either; he traces the modern stereotype of masculinity back to the ideas of the Enlightenment and, even further, to the influence of medieval chivalric ideals, although these of course underwent transmutation over time, especially in response to the development of the bourgeois class. Mosse views customs such as dueling as ligaments connecting these disparate eras.
Mosse's examination of this topic is comprehensive. As well as taking more obvious questions of morality and behavior into consideration, he also discusses issues ranging from ideals of beauty and attitudes toward physical fitness to Pietism to anti-Semitism to the labor movement to hysteria to war propaganda, drawing connections between them.
Appropriately, in light of wide range of issues, Mosse makes use of a wide range of source material, from literature to legal precedents. His brief but well-balanced study of uses of the myth of the Wandering Jew could easily serve as the basis for a longer examination of this image. He does an excellent job of extrapolating from specific events or individuals – Oscar Wilde and his green carnation, for instance, or a poster advertising a cure to neurasthenia – to broader social or political conclusions which are coherent and convincing.
Mosse titles his last chapter with a question, “Toward a New Masculinity?” Here he summarizes post-war developments in the masculine stereotype and its perception, moving chronologically toward the present day. At the end of this summation he restates his thesis in no uncertain terms: “The fate of modern masculinity was and is bound up with that society of which it is a part, and especially with society's attitude toward respectability. Respectability, however, provides society with essential cohesion, and it is difficult to envision its downfall or even radical change.” In the following paragraph he poses the question, “If manliness has reflected the hopes and wishes of modern society, what then would happen if these changed drastically, if there was no further need to reconcile order and progress, and if the dynamic thought vital to the functioning of society was no longer perceived as threatening the longing for harmony?” Although Mosse is no optimistic about the likelihood of such a change, his work in this field is of use for anyone striving to affect such social alterations.
The idea of masculinity did not change markedly between the French Revolution and the Second World War. "The construction of modern masculinity," Mosse argues, "was closely linked to the new bourgeois society that was in the making at the end of the eighteenth century" when aristocratic ideas of manliness were reconfigured to reflect middle class concerns about moral purpose and activities.
Mosse's subtitle “The Creation of Modern Masculinity” reveals his argument: masculinity is socially constructed and externally imposed. More ground-breakingly, he argues that “the masculine stereotype” is as much a part of national or social identity as of personal, leaving “hardly one modern ideology untouched” and therefore an examination of the concept(s) is essentially to understanding “the ideals and functioning of normative society.”
Mosse posits a mutually affective relationship between moral and behavioral standards and ideals of masculinity; this model is applicable to any given period, although the content of the ideals is of course subject to alteration. In this study Mosse focuses on the normative masculine stereotype which he identifies as dominant throughout the second half of the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth, examining the process by which it evolved and the effect these ideas had on western society.
The ideal of masculinity, Mosse, argues, must be examined as “a totality” not by study of any of several component attributes. His reason for taking this position is his argument that masculine identity has historically been “regarded as of one piece from the very beginning: body and soul, outward appearance and inward virtue were supposed to form one harmonious whole, a perfect construct where every part was in its place.”
Mosse makes an interesting distinction between ideals or standards of masculinity, which have always existed, and masculinity as a stereotype, which he says developed only in the modern period. He puts this development in the context of “a general quest for symbols” which arose as a reaction to the confusions and instability of modern times. He also attributes this stereotyping process to the increasingly important role of science, which perforce classes men as a homogenous group rather than as individuals. Mosse also touches on the way in which this stereotyping was reinforced by negative stereotyping of marginalized groups, such as Jews, gypsies, and blacks.
An intriguing question raised by Mosse is the relationship between the growth of stereotypes masculinity and the corresponding emergence of the women's rights movement. Perhaps the increasing independence of women was perceived as a threat by men, whose insecurity was expressed by the strengthening of masculine stereotypes. On the other hand, the causal relationship may go in the other direction, with women's increasing “mannishness” being a response to their internalization of the masculine ideal; Mosse suggests that women may have adopted the idealized masculine virtues in an attempt to take part in the defense of their national or cultural integrity.
In a broader socio-political context, Mosse devotes much of the book to exploring the relationship between ideals of masculinity and the trends of fascism, socialism, and imperialism. But Mosse does not neglect the chronological placement of masculinity, either; he traces the modern stereotype of masculinity back to the ideas of the Enlightenment and, even further, to the influence of medieval chivalric ideals, although these of course underwent transmutation over time, especially in response to the development of the bourgeois class. Mosse views customs such as dueling as ligaments connecting these disparate eras.
Mosse's examination of this topic is comprehensive. As well as taking more obvious questions of morality and behavior into consideration, he also discusses issues ranging from ideals of beauty and attitudes toward physical fitness to Pietism to anti-Semitism to the labor movement to hysteria to war propaganda, drawing connections between them.
Appropriately, in light of wide range of issues, Mosse makes use of a wide range of source material, from literature to legal precedents. His brief but well-balanced study of uses of the myth of the Wandering Jew could easily serve as the basis for a longer examination of this image. He does an excellent job of extrapolating from specific events or individuals – Oscar Wilde and his green carnation, for instance, or a poster advertising a cure to neurasthenia – to broader social or political conclusions which are coherent and convincing.
Mosse titles his last chapter with a question, “Toward a New Masculinity?” Here he summarizes post-war developments in the masculine stereotype and its perception, moving chronologically toward the present day. At the end of this summation he restates his thesis in no uncertain terms: “The fate of modern masculinity was and is bound up with that society of which it is a part, and especially with society's attitude toward respectability. Respectability, however, provides society with essential cohesion, and it is difficult to envision its downfall or even radical change.” In the following paragraph he poses the question, “If manliness has reflected the hopes and wishes of modern society, what then would happen if these changed drastically, if there was no further need to reconcile order and progress, and if the dynamic thought vital to the functioning of society was no longer perceived as threatening the longing for harmony?” Although Mosse is no optimistic about the likelihood of such a change, his work in this field is of use for anyone striving to affect such social alterations.
June 15, 2009
George L. Mosse was one of the most important German historians of his generation. As a Jewish homosexual emigre and survivor of the Third Reich, he was critical to the re-thinking and nuancing of the understanding of National Socialism and the Holocaust that took place beginning in the mid-1960s. The journal he founded with Walter Laqueur, _The Journal of Contemporary History_, has become established as one of the most important locations for debate on twentieth-century History.
This book represents something of a swan-song for Mosse. It was written and published shortly before his death in 1999, by which time he was sufficiently established to guarantee that nearly anything with his name on it would get a release. The subject of this book is the kind that requires that degree of security to undertake - he claims to be able to trace the modern concept of masculinity from its intellectual roots in the ancient Greeks through its reinterpretation in the Enlightenment all the way to the (post-)modern world of MTV and "be all you can be."
The boldness of the attempt combines with Mosse's erudition and engaging writing to make a very exciting read that is well worth engaging. This is not to say that it is without flaws, however. Mosse vastly simplifies masculinity by reducing it to a psychological "stereotype" that lacks the subtle nuances of R.W. Connell's conception of "hegemonic" and "marginalized" masculinities. For Mosse, the hegemonic version is the only one, and it exists without challenge, isolating and destroying competitors until some kind of quantum paradigm-shift occurs to displace it. Mosse not only fails to engage Connell's systematized approach, he fails to mention Connell or any previous writer on the subject of masculinity, presenting himself as completely original and alone in considering the subject (actually, apparently as an afterthought, he mentions John Tosh's work in a footnote near the end of the book, but manages to add insult to injury by misspelling his name).
I've rated the book as highly as four stars despite these flaws, partly on the assumption that most of those who find this review in goodreads will be unfamiliar with the more advanced work on masculinity and because this is an engaging and enjoyable read for a novice to the subject. I think that the first chapters, particularly, identify some very interesting figures in the history of masculine thought - his work on Winckelmann and Lavater could easily be integrated into our understanding of the intellectual roots of "hard" manliness. His analysis of the Fascist concept of masculinity, the area with which he is most familiar, is also valuable, even if he does inevitabilize it in his narrative a bit overmuch. It is too bad that Mosse didn't have the time (or perhaps the interest) to go farther with this project, to bring it into line with the most current research of the time, but what he has given us at the end of his career is a fascinating insight into a part of the human story, especially as it relates to men.
This book represents something of a swan-song for Mosse. It was written and published shortly before his death in 1999, by which time he was sufficiently established to guarantee that nearly anything with his name on it would get a release. The subject of this book is the kind that requires that degree of security to undertake - he claims to be able to trace the modern concept of masculinity from its intellectual roots in the ancient Greeks through its reinterpretation in the Enlightenment all the way to the (post-)modern world of MTV and "be all you can be."
The boldness of the attempt combines with Mosse's erudition and engaging writing to make a very exciting read that is well worth engaging. This is not to say that it is without flaws, however. Mosse vastly simplifies masculinity by reducing it to a psychological "stereotype" that lacks the subtle nuances of R.W. Connell's conception of "hegemonic" and "marginalized" masculinities. For Mosse, the hegemonic version is the only one, and it exists without challenge, isolating and destroying competitors until some kind of quantum paradigm-shift occurs to displace it. Mosse not only fails to engage Connell's systematized approach, he fails to mention Connell or any previous writer on the subject of masculinity, presenting himself as completely original and alone in considering the subject (actually, apparently as an afterthought, he mentions John Tosh's work in a footnote near the end of the book, but manages to add insult to injury by misspelling his name).
I've rated the book as highly as four stars despite these flaws, partly on the assumption that most of those who find this review in goodreads will be unfamiliar with the more advanced work on masculinity and because this is an engaging and enjoyable read for a novice to the subject. I think that the first chapters, particularly, identify some very interesting figures in the history of masculine thought - his work on Winckelmann and Lavater could easily be integrated into our understanding of the intellectual roots of "hard" manliness. His analysis of the Fascist concept of masculinity, the area with which he is most familiar, is also valuable, even if he does inevitabilize it in his narrative a bit overmuch. It is too bad that Mosse didn't have the time (or perhaps the interest) to go farther with this project, to bring it into line with the most current research of the time, but what he has given us at the end of his career is a fascinating insight into a part of the human story, especially as it relates to men.
November 30, 2016
Although there were several parts that were thoroughly interesting, as a whole ‘The Image of Man’ was somewhat unsatisfactory. Given its short length, the amount of detail that could possibly be included was limited. Consequently, there was a generality to it that I found disappointing. Mosse claims that the basic stereotype of masculinity in Western Europe changed very little between the late 18th century and the mid 20th. To my mind, this can only be considered true if said stereotype is only described in terms of very broad concepts, like toughness, self-control, and stability. I wondered about the evolution of masculine stereotypes in terms of dress, manners, and behaviour, which surely varied a great deal more. Or, if that stretches the term ‘stereotype’ too far, how the definitions and manifestations of toughness and the like changed over time. This book discusses this generally, but not specifically enough for my taste.
On the other hand, the chapter on ‘The New Fascist Man’ is more interesting as it deals with a much more limited frame. Mosse compares Italian and German Fascist notions of the masculine and highlights the contradictions that emerge from such an extreme stereotype of manliness. For example, the Nazis glorified the nude male body but wanted to de-sexualise all depictions thereof to avoid the risk of homoeroticism. The methods for abstracting naked bodies from such associations included depersonalising statues into bland archetypes and situating photographic representations of nudity within nature. Another notable point concerned the SS, who were considered the epitome of masculinity and supposed to lead an ascetic warrior existence. Given that their hyper-masculine milieu carried the risk of homoeroticism, they were forbidden from touching each other even when fully clothed! That seems so extreme as to prove deeply counter-productive; surely forbidding all touching implies that even casual touches carry an erotic charge? Actually, that’s a theme that the book barely mentions - the perceived appropriateness of touching in masculine stereotypes.
Another area that was mentioned but only managed to pique my interest before moving on was duelling. Mosse notes that duelling codes in 19th century France and Germany differed considerably, resulting also in contrasting death rates. In England, meanwhile, duelling never attained anything like the same popularity. Reading Alexander Hamilton taught me that it was a popular pastime in late 18th & early 19th century America, especially amongst politicians. Presumably that was in part French influence at work? I’d like to read more about duelling, there’s something fascinating about its archaic absurdity. Likewise, as the book was published twenty years ago, there’s hardly a mention of changing masculine stereotypes since the 1970s.
Although it lacked depth in places, one important message is very well conveyed by ‘The Image of Man: that masculine stereotypes can be systematically manipulated to appalling effect. As Mosse puts it: ‘Fascism heightened the warrior qualities of masculinity; racism brutalised them and transformed theory and rhetoric into reality’. I also feel that the title of the book demanded a more specific physical description of this ideal stereotype of masculinity. From the references given, I pictured him as Leyendecker’s Arrow Collar Man.
On the other hand, the chapter on ‘The New Fascist Man’ is more interesting as it deals with a much more limited frame. Mosse compares Italian and German Fascist notions of the masculine and highlights the contradictions that emerge from such an extreme stereotype of manliness. For example, the Nazis glorified the nude male body but wanted to de-sexualise all depictions thereof to avoid the risk of homoeroticism. The methods for abstracting naked bodies from such associations included depersonalising statues into bland archetypes and situating photographic representations of nudity within nature. Another notable point concerned the SS, who were considered the epitome of masculinity and supposed to lead an ascetic warrior existence. Given that their hyper-masculine milieu carried the risk of homoeroticism, they were forbidden from touching each other even when fully clothed! That seems so extreme as to prove deeply counter-productive; surely forbidding all touching implies that even casual touches carry an erotic charge? Actually, that’s a theme that the book barely mentions - the perceived appropriateness of touching in masculine stereotypes.
Another area that was mentioned but only managed to pique my interest before moving on was duelling. Mosse notes that duelling codes in 19th century France and Germany differed considerably, resulting also in contrasting death rates. In England, meanwhile, duelling never attained anything like the same popularity. Reading Alexander Hamilton taught me that it was a popular pastime in late 18th & early 19th century America, especially amongst politicians. Presumably that was in part French influence at work? I’d like to read more about duelling, there’s something fascinating about its archaic absurdity. Likewise, as the book was published twenty years ago, there’s hardly a mention of changing masculine stereotypes since the 1970s.
Although it lacked depth in places, one important message is very well conveyed by ‘The Image of Man: that masculine stereotypes can be systematically manipulated to appalling effect. As Mosse puts it: ‘Fascism heightened the warrior qualities of masculinity; racism brutalised them and transformed theory and rhetoric into reality’. I also feel that the title of the book demanded a more specific physical description of this ideal stereotype of masculinity. From the references given, I pictured him as Leyendecker’s Arrow Collar Man.
June 3, 2025
This is an excellent and quirky (in the Leslie Fielder sense) volume on the history of masculinity. Mosse turns out to be a highly readable and lucid motherfucker. Yes, there's the obvious source of the Greek beauty ideal when it comes to what masculinity means. And Mosse trots out the greatest patriarchal hits, going into duels and homosexuality. But the man is too wild and bold of a thinker to stop there. He's truly excited and determined about pinning down the ABSOLUTE source of modern masculinity and all of its faults. And ultimately it is that scholarly obsession, commingled within a levelheaded tone, that makes this book worthwhile: a vital reminder of how the legacy of testosterone-charged bullshit is a pivotal factor contained within some of the worst events in human history. Yeah, I dig this Mosse guy. And I now see why so many Holocaust historians have quoted him. There's really nobody else out there working this corner of the "manliness is silly and even dangerous" room quite like him.
September 4, 2023
Lettura imprescindibile (e piacevole) per comprendere l'evoluzione della mascolinità normativa in Europa, con un'attenzione particolare alla Germania.
March 24, 2010
Apparently, European society (especially the Germans) loves them some buff and level-headed men. Seriously though, was I supposed to get more out of this book? I must have missed something. Mosse has much better work.
December 27, 2022
Com o livro The Image of Man: The Creation of Modern Masculinity, George L. Mosse faz uma espetacular volta pela história humana da conemporaneidade explicando como determinadas performatividades de gênero foram compondo, através dos tempos, aquela marca cultural que entendemos hoje em dia como masculinidade. Entretanto, é preciso destacar que, conforme Raewyn Connel estabelece não existe uma masculindade, mas masculinidades. Como Mosse coloca, o que ele está pesquisando aqui não é a masculindade real, mas a masculinidade idealizada, ou seja, seu estereótipo, a visão distorcida que, de alguma forma se fixou na mente da humanidade e que desafiou fronteiras culturais e nacionais. Um bom capítulo que Mosse desenvolve neste livro é o que fala dos contraestereótipos, ou seja, aquelas marcas culturais de gênero que dizem o que não deve ser a masculinidade estereotípica ou idealizada. Neste livro, Mosse dá ênfase aos judeus e aos homossexuais, mas existe uma miríade de categorias masculinas que não se encaixam no esterótipo viril da masculindade que é exigida a ser performada por todo homem a partir de seu nascimento. O homem masculino é a única categoria de ser humano que se policia e policia o outro em busca de um identidade que nele ele sabe qual é e que muda constantemente com o passar dos anos.
July 5, 2025
Na ‘Ik werk al (ik word er alleen niet voor betaald)’ door Lynn Berger en het gesprek over de mythe van het kerngezin, twee boeken die de vorming van het vrouwelijke perspectief analyseren, nu eens een boek die de maatschappelijke positie van de man probeert te kaderen. Hoe de Griekse atleet een stereotiep werd voor de ideale man, dit grotendeels gestuurd door maatschappelijke en politieke organisaties. Het motto ‘een gezonde geest in een gezond lichaam’ is ook maar een manier om iedereen in het gareel te laten lopen. Dus als je nu gaat hardlopen, is het omdat je het zelf wilt of ook maar dat beeld van Griekse ideaalbeeld achterna holt?
January 16, 2021
Lectura algo densa y repetitiva, pero que señala algunos aspectos muy interesantes para el estudio de la masculinidad dentro de la Modernidad. Muy recomendable.
October 10, 2022
Very easy read and interesting history, but nothing much new for me
December 7, 2023
I love that Mosse basically wrote thee book on nationalism and masculinity in 1996 and no one has done it better since. Get on his level.
September 28, 2024
Great writing. Interesting thoughts on masculinity, the body, medicine, anti-Semitism, racism...
October 14, 2025
Por aquí empecé
October 15, 2012
This is not just an historical excursion on the establishment of masculinity in Europe, but a history of Europe through masculinity. It is a good work the start with, if you're interested in masculinity studies.
July 27, 2008
A very interesting look at the creation of masculinity throughout European history. Presents itself with some select highlights of masculine alterations and lets you figure out the rest on your own.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews