Review: Homeward Bound: Why Women are Embracing the New Domesticity by Emily Matcher

I added this book to my Amazon Wishlist, which doubles as my To Read list, a couple of years ago and it's just been sitting there, staring at me. I admit, I was a reluctant to read it as I wasn't interested in a couple hundred pages on why liking to knit and bake makes me a bad feminist. If I want that, I can just post on some select forums.

But I have been going through a trend of challenging my comfort zones, so I bought it and read it. I'm really happy I did. My assumptions about Matcher's intentions were wrong, and given the tone she takes from the very beginning, I'm going to guess she expected my reaction...that or she's just a much more empathic writer than I ever will be. Her writing style is conversational without being sloppy and while her sources are repeated, they are current for the publication date and relevant to the topic.

A brief overview of the book -

Matcher introduces the concept of New Domesticity, then gives a very brief over view of domesticity in America, taking the time to explain that her summation is only America and only applies to white women of a certain class. She is very clear about the standards having been different for the poor and minorities. I appreciate that she clearly states the limits of her observations, rather than allow the reader to assume it applies universally.

She then delves into various aspects of the New Domesticity, profiling a variety of bloggers and writers who are known personalities in those various spheres, with some expected overlap. These range from the place of blogs in New Domesticity to Etsy to Foodies to Parenting to Homesteading to Feminism and back again. Whew.

She ends the book with her takeaways on the phenomenon, which I really loved. Her takeaways and my own conclusions were similar, which I liked, though a great deal of the details along the way was eye-opening. She asked a lot of questions about 'why' and 'where does this lead' that I hadn't really thought through or considered. It let me chew on a lot of ideas and question my own goals.

If I were to sum up my takeaway of Matcher's book in one sentance, it would be "extremists are crazy." Okay, that might be a little glib, but by the end of each chapter, I was asking myself if any of the people had heard of moderation and it's virtues. She wasn't critical so much as questioning (I was critical), so I never felt the need to defend them in my head (which I absolutely do when I read), allowing me to absorb first, consider second. Almost every practice listed was given the leniency of "if this works for you and your family/kid/life...", though the motives and long term effects were questioned. The exception was the anti-vaccine crowd, which I can't blame her for.

I highly recommend this to anyone and everyone. Even if you don't think this New Domesticity nonsense has any place in your life, you probably know someone who does (know anyone with an etsy store? who bakes their own bread? who homeschools their kid?) and it creates a framework for understanding. The reasons lists might not be their reasons, but it places the national trend into perspective.

Reluctantly, I Return

I've been a communication hiatus for awhile. I keep waiting for life to slow down, but it hasn't so I think I have to just accept it and come out of my cave. Something about the computer and phone has been particularly offensive, likely because they seem to give the outside world an expectation of access into my life. Funny words from someone who writes a blog, no matter how sporadically. But there's a difference between that which I chose to share and what people expect. My primary annoyance with Facebook* is the apparent assumption that we will share everything. People have been shocked, even offended, that I haven't put wedding pictures on Facebook. I have no intention to do so, though I know my sister and mother will likely do so once they get them. I simply dislike displaying my life. That's true in person as well, as I keep aspects of my life very private (such as religion). I'm not embarrassed by those parts, I just don't think they're anyone else's business.

Once upon a time (the mythical Good Ole Days), this sort of reticence to be available for public viewing was the mark of good breeding. The old adage of one's name appearing in the papers three times in one's life - when they're born, when they marry, and when they die - is laughably quaint in our all-access world. I actually found an issue of LIFE magazine (November 14, 1955) that has an article titled "Society's Switch to Publicity", discussing the rise of the celebrity socialite, so this isn't new, just relatively new for the general masses, where anyone can be someone online. The egalitarian (and American) in me likes that and rejoices at the rise of the marginalized who "make it" due to YouTube or a blog. The part of me that finds scrutiny and uninvited commentary distasteful cringes every time.

While being called "old-fashioned" wouldn't be unfamiliar for me or even unwelcome, this reluctance can come across as anti-social. I must learn how to mitigate the feeling that by dipping a toe into the internet social waters, I am not committing to dive in and certainly not a splash fight. Then again, moderation has always been my struggle.

All that said, the best way to talk to me regularly remains a letter, either handwritten or typed, since I will always answer. I am happily accepting penpals for any who are interested.

*If you want to follow me on social media, Facebook is useless except for the most basic changes, like marital status and location. Google + is your best bet.