Difference between revisions of "426--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Tuesday"
From McClurken Wiki
(→Chapter 1--Domestic Revolutions) |
|||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
Also, the reference to marriages being "corporate" between Puritanical and Revolutionary times seems dead on to me. Marriages at the time honestly seemed to resemble sports teams before the free agency market. Players (wives/husbands) were bought and sold at the whims of their owners (heads of family) and it wasn't until the introduction of rampant free agency (divorce) that the "players involved," really got a chance to live their own lives. Steinbrenner would be proud. -Cash Nelson | Also, the reference to marriages being "corporate" between Puritanical and Revolutionary times seems dead on to me. Marriages at the time honestly seemed to resemble sports teams before the free agency market. Players (wives/husbands) were bought and sold at the whims of their owners (heads of family) and it wasn't until the introduction of rampant free agency (divorce) that the "players involved," really got a chance to live their own lives. Steinbrenner would be proud. -Cash Nelson | ||
| − | A point that Mintz & Kellogg only mentioned in passing that really struck me was their opinion on the modern family on pg. 6. They wrote, “Unlike the contemporary American family, which is distinguished by its isolation from the world of work and the surrounding society, the Puritan family was deeply embedded in public life.” I find it very interesting that so early in their book Mintz and Kellogg have established this contrasting view of the current family (i.e. the Puritan family) and the “modern family.” I also found it interesting that they described the modern family as isolated. I think both Mintz and Kellogg have proven in their first chapter that the typical Puritan family was deeply rooted in public life, but can’t that be said about the modern family? What examples can we find of the Puritan family being isolated? – Mary Beth | + | A point that Mintz & Kellogg only mentioned in passing that really struck me was their opinion on the modern family on pg. 6. They wrote, “Unlike the contemporary American family, which is distinguished by its isolation from the world of work and the surrounding society, the Puritan family was deeply embedded in public life.” I find it very interesting that so early in their book Mintz and Kellogg have established this contrasting view of the current family (i.e. the Puritan family) and the “modern family.” I also found it interesting that they described the modern family as isolated. I think both Mintz and Kellogg have proven in their first chapter that the typical Puritan family was deeply rooted in public life, but can’t that be said about the modern family? What examples can we find of the Puritan family being isolated? – Mary Beth |
| + | |||
| + | The decline in parental permission in marriage and overall parental authority that emerged during the early eighteenth century seemed to stem largely from the shift in the New World's economy and rising industrialization. As children became less reliant on their parents' income when new industrious opportunities came to light, the notion of true class mobility progressively became a reality. Although Mintz and Kellog explain the weakening of parental authority as due to economic changes, I wonder what additional cultural changes contributed to this shift in the family structure. | ||
| + | Augusta C. | ||
== Chapter 2--Domestic Revolutions == | == Chapter 2--Domestic Revolutions == | ||
