Jun 17, 2010
Does reading about masculinity make you more or less masculine?
Like this post?
In some comments yesterday, a few people gave their thoughts on the book Wild at Heart.
Now, I don’t know much about that book. I assume, with a title like that, the cover probably has a bucking stallion and cleavage on it. Not really my genre.
A simple Amazon search shows I’m not far off:
Turns out, though, it’s actually about being a man’s man.
Still not my genre.
There’s something about reading up on how to be a dude that seems kinda useless, if not completely self-defeating. It’s like trying to become beautiful by flipping through fashion magazines at the grocery store while you stand in line to buy Twinkies.
Does anyone else feel like it’s inherently non-manly to read books about manliness?
* * * * *
Unfortunately, many feel like it’s inherently non-manly to read books period.
Yes. A real man would just watch the movie.
I suppose it’s the same as any Christian self help book. If that isn’t your genre, then there’s no convincing you. Since “Wild at Heart” is for men, I haven’t read it. But other stuff by the same author was helpful for me.
Sorry if you weren’t after a serious answer. BTW, I know a very manly man who has read it, and it caused him live differently and start a new ministry to men in AK. (All following heart surgery.)
Jan -
I’m not a man either but have read it a couple of times. I found that it helped me relate to men in a different (and hopefully better!) way. Sometimes the best defense is a good offense and it pays to know your enemy (and other such war/sport analogies)
Well the book made me feel rather emasculated AS I was reading it, not sure what that means!
If we’re going biblical, much of the Wisdom literature in there is aimed at men, so I gotta assume it’s manly!
I’m not even which concept of masculinity we’re using as the standard here, any help?
Some may find this interesting. I just read it yesterday, so it came right to mind. It addresses your question from a slightly different angle. The author, Arturo Vasquez, criticizes an essay that complains about a supposed retreat and erosion of “manly virtues.” Both writers are Catholic.
http://arturovasquez.wordpress.com/2010/06/17/the-social-construction-of-american-masculinity/
One of my favorite blogs:
http://artofmanliness.com/
(despite the fact that I am not a man)
They address their discomfort with “manly literature” (such as “GET SIX PACK ABS FAST” articles) in their about section and try to offer something different…
For centuries, young males learned masculinity from living in close proximity to, working alongside, and observing older men in their families. That system worked pretty well… until it didn’t.
Although the factors involved in the breakdown of that system were complex and plentiful, two very salient factors were 1) the end of the agricultural life-style as a mainstream and viable way of life AND 2) the changing dynamic of the nuclear family.
When the agricultural life-style ceased to be a viable way of life for mainstream America, and as people began migrating to cities (in many cases far away from their families) everyone became more isolated. Instead of growing up on the farm watching their fathers (or grandfathers or uncles) work day-in and day-out as they tended to the affairs of farm life, boys began watching their fathers leave early in the morning for the factory and return late at night. In less than a few decades, boys went from spending 10 or more hours a day alongside their fathers soaking up what it meant to be a man, to (if they were lucky) getting to spend one or two solid hours with their dads after work in the evenings.
Admittedly, I’m romanticizing the agricultural life-style a bit, but the point remains, when we became an industrialized nation, boys in this country simply stopped being able to spend as much time around their dads as they had before.
And now for the second factor, the changing dynamic of the nuclear family.
As the divorce rate has steadily climbed over the past 50 or 60 years and as more and more boys have found themselves growing up in single-mother homes, we’ve had multiple generations of men who have grown up with only cable TV and their peers to look to for examples of masculinity.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not bashing the job single-mothers have done raising boys in this country. I realize they’ve done an amazing job fulfilling a role they were never meant to have. I know several men who grew up in single-mother homes who have turned out to be outstanding men. All I’m saying is that even the best mom in the world cannot ever fully MODEL for her sons what it means to be truly masculine. She can TELL him what it means to be a man until she’s blue in the face, and for some boys that’s enough. For other’s it’s not though.
As I said before, I’m not saying she can’t raise boys who grow up to be real masculine men. In fact, I know several men who despite growing up without a father figure, grew up to be tremendous men because of the role their mothers played in their lives. I even happen to share a blog with one those men. I’m just saying that it’s near impossible for a mom (single or otherwise) to be an EXAMPLE to a young boy of what it means to be a real man. Though she may extol the virtues of masculinity to the point of exhaustion, the fact remains that the most effective way to learn anything has always been (and still remains) to observe it in action.
As the combination of these two factors have converged on modern American society over the last several decades, generations of boys have grown up without a single masculine example in their lives.
What Eldredge, and others like him, are trying to do is help the men (who came of age as these two forces were re-shaping the landscape of masculine development in this country) see that manhood is about more than just the machismo they’ve grown up watching on TV. It’s about more than nailing hot chicks, getting in fights, consuming large quantities of alcohol, driving fast, excelling at sports, and swearing a lot.
In a world where a lot of boys are growing up in homes with fathers who are either completely absent or who are so busy working they can’t spend the type of QUANTITY time a young man needs to learn what it means to be masculine, Eldredge offers an alternative to the masculinity offered by prevailing pop-culture.
If you value true masculinity as something worth pursuing then there’s nothing self-defeating or useless at all about reading about it. If a man wants to learn to be a better man, then I applaud him for trying to read and examine what other men who have come before him have to say about the topic.
Is it self-defeating to read about personal finance if you want to learn to manage your money better? Is it self-defeating to read about spirituality if you want to be more spiritual? Is it self-defeating to read about parenting if you want to learn to be a better parent?
Obviously there is something to said for reading about something verses actually doing it, but reading about masculinity because you want to learn to be a better man is no different than the examples above.
So… to answer your question, reading about masculinity CAN make you more masculine IF you apply what you to learn to your real life (that which exists outside the pages of whatever book your reading).
-Michael
I’m comfortable enough with my masculinity to not read your comment. That’s freakin’ long.
Just watch the movie “Fight Club.” It’s all about the plight of young men who lacked time with their fathers.
Then blow up the city.
Zach’s comment sounds like something one of my former officemates would say.
lol, zach…agreed.
Thanks for the History of Masculinity, Michael. :) But seriously, I appreciate what you’re saying. Your explanation is probably why my husband just wasn’t interested in reading it. He grew up working alongside his dad. My hubs has never questioned his masculinity or needed to figure out what it should be or how it should look. He never felt the need to have his masculinity validated and/or strengthened/explained by reading a book about it….but I guess I can see why the book meets a need for the millions of boys being raised without fathers. Thanks for your perspective, it curbed my usual snark. :)
Yeah… it was pretty long. Getting to the point: FAIL.
Kudos Michael — we wordy people have to be able to laugh at ourselves.
Good post (especially for those who wouldn’t read the book.) Too bad people still complained about the length.
**************
Is it self-defeating to read about personal finance if you want to learn to manage your money better? Is it self-defeating to read about spirituality if you want to be more spiritual? Is it self-defeating to read about parenting if you want to learn to be a better parent?
***************
I feel the same way about reading books about marriage (your dad’s book being the exception).
I’ll comment in a circuitous way. I teach people how to fly. It’s not my primary profession any more, but I am appropriately certificated as such. When I take new students, they don’t know anything about flying at all (even if they think they know something) but I’ve found it’s useful to think of them as a pilot from the beginning. I think and speak in this way: they’re learning how to fly safely, how to fly independently, and in addition to passing a series of tests and earning their pilot’s certificate they’re working with me to build a foundation for them to continuously learn how to be a better pilot.
I’ve realized that it’s counterproductive in our relationship for me to consider them an outsider and myself as an insider who is transferring some talisman that allows them to join the club.
I think most men have lots to learn about how to be better men (or better fathers or husbands or simply more “manly”) but I’m not sure it helps me when some “manly” expert speaks or writes in a de facto exclusive and divisive manner.
All said, I’ve neither read the book nor even looked at its preview on Amazon, but isn’t the question really about branding and not utility?
Ironically, I’m not a fan of Wild at Heart. It is one of Eldredge’s worst books for more reasons than just having a crappy title.
“The Way of the Wild Heart” also another crappy title is much better.
I must say, Abraham, the pose you did for the “Hearts Are Wild” cover is some of your best work ever.
I am feeling a little smug about it.
It’s captivating, really.
This book helped me a lot particularly in helping me understand myself and the way I was raised. I am grateful and will probably give it a closer read sometime. It’s not scripture of course and nothing else should be regarded as such but the author consistently points to scripture and it’s ultimate value comes from its dependence on ultimate Truth.
I haven’t read Wild at Heart but I was particularly disappointed when I realized about 100 pages in that Eldridge’s “Raising the Dead” was not about zombies.
To each his own.
right?
I have 3 Perspectives on it:
My father—read the book, after struggling to gain his feet from his wife leaving him. g LOVED it.
I— read the book, after my father read it, and felt a deeper empathy for what my dad was going through as a man.
My husband— never read the book, and is never interested in doing so. He thinks the book’s lame.
It’s a to each his own kind of book (like most books).
Here is an excellent review of the book Wild at Heart….
http://www.ccwtoday.org/article_view.asp?article_id=105
…the book isn’t perfect by any means…it has faults. nevertheless, i think it makes some good points, and God has/can/will use it. i would recommend reading it…at the very least you’ll be able to develop your own opinion, not basing what you think about it on the opinions of others…or the cover. :) woooooo!
The bible is a good book for finding out what it means to be a real man.
Wild at Heart is a great book for men to work through some of the wounds they’ve received throughout life as well as to see and accept our God-given roles as husbands, fathers, and men in our community.
All-in-all, I think Wild at Heart has a lot to offer.
To those who read the book… did it bother anyone that Eldredge edited Scripture at the very beginning of the book?
Book: “The heart of a man is like deep water…” Proverbs 20:5 NKJV
Actual: “Counsel in the heart of man is like deep water, but a man of understanding will draw it out.” Proverbs 20:5 NKJV
This changed the whole subject of the sentence. I stopped reading there.
it’s not Scripture, so it can’t be taken too heavily, but i know men who have been blessed by this book. you, Abraham, were blessed to have a Christ-like man as a father who i assume offered you love and validation as his son. there are many men who grew up without that figure, and this book speaks volumes to them.
I know some guys who swear by this book and say it’s revolutionized their life.
My dad read it cover-to-cover, because he’s heard these kinds of reviews, and he hated it. He doesn’t watch movies (movie analogies are a big part of the book) and he’s not very outdoorsy (which is kind of the source of the whole “Wild” imagery). He didn’t relate to it and didn’t appreciate feeling like he was being put in a box.
I always think it’s dicey to try and say, “This is the way all [people group's] hearts work”. It just seems like it’s painting with an awfully broad brush and is apt to alienate as many people as it resonates with.
But to your question, I would say I don’t think it’s inherently un-manly to read about masculinity. For some guys it can be a very valiant effort towards rising up to one’s calling. For others, it can simply be an unhelpful round of navel-gazing.
An utterly forgettable book. A long literary whine followed by an encouragement to introspective self fulfillment as I recall.
I manned up and set it on fire.