Home Alone | The Atlantic - September 2002

Home Alone - Caitlin Flanagan

Happy Boxing Day? Is that how it's said?  Merry St. Stephen's Day? Whatever.  There is so much that I simply do not know.

For example, until this morning, I could not have told you who Caitlin Flanagan is.  I still can't, really, but I do know that she is a polarizing person in the world of housewifery.  I'll have more on that and my take on it in a moment.  First, though, we need to tackle this essay from a seven year old issue of The Atlantic.  And it's all about Martha.

Martha Stewart can draw an opinion from just about everyone.  Those opinions tend to be on one or two topics, and sometimes both, and the opinions, like many opinions, are not necessarily learned opinions.  Much like my commentary on these essays, one could easily say.  The two topics are: 1) the Martha Stewart way of keeping house and entertaining, and 2) the Martha Stewart insider-trading scandal that landed her some jail time.  The first topic is typically regarding the complexities or the thoroughness of Martha's approach, while the second topic usually reveals a complete lack of understanding of insider trading and the particular situation with Imclone.  I have my opinions on the matters, however unlearned they might be, but we can cover those at some other time.

In this essay, Mrs. Flanagan (I've decided that Ms. would probably insult her) reviews two books on Martha Stewart, Martha, Inc., by Christopher Byron and Martha Stewart, by Charles J. Shields (from the "Women of Achievement" series of books aimed at 9 to 12 year-olds.

Well, really, Mrs. Flanagan only reviews the first book, which she loathes.  Her reasons are compelling.  By the middle of the essay, she has brought the simple 112 page book for kids into play as a comparison.  Her points are salient and one wishes that biography was actually about a person and not about tearing down a person.  Mr. Byron appears to be injecting far too much of himself (that is, his views and opinions) than he should or probably realizes he is doing.  (Dude, even I know about the importance of thread count in sheets.)

While that part of the essay is well and good, Mrs. Flanagan continues by trying to capture, in general terms, why Martha Stewart is both annoying and compelling to women.  Her comparison of one of Martha's early books on weddings to a later volume is particularly telling.  Maybe her explanation is too simple.  I don't know.  I don't take anyone's writing at face value.  It is one more data point in the larger analysis.  But because I do not own stock in Martha Stewart, I'm not going to spend too much time worrying about it.

Now, let's talk about Caitlin Flanagan.  She is a writer, mainly reviewer and critic for The Atlantic.  She worked for the New Yorker for a time.  She is best known for her views on motherhood and housewifehood(?)  In this she is an polarizing as Martha Stewart.  Her opinions, as seen in her columns and her book, To Hell with All That, tend to really divide people, especially women.

I get the feeling that Mrs. Flanagan is playing the persona game here.  While she believes her own words about staying at home and valuing maintaining the house and raising the children, she also seems pretty pragmatic (apparently, they have a nanny and a maid at the Flanagans, oh, and a gardener.  Just add a chauffeur and an occasional visit from a child psychologist and you've covered 96% of a parent's role.  (I know, I know, that was cynical.  Providing a loving, nurturing environment is 96% of a parent's role. I get it.))

Maybe I am feeling a bit cynical here on the day after Christmas (Boxing Day sounds so much better) because I think that Mrs. Flanagan is doing two things in order to help her sell books and to keep people reading and listening to her:  1) keep being that polarizing figure to women, taking on "feminism" which she can define on her terms, and upsetting those self-described feminists, while making women who choose to stay at home feel valued, and 2) appealing to nearly 100% of the heterosexual male population.

We (men) supposedly like the notion of a homemaker who keeps things in order, cleans, prepares the food, looks after the kids, and puts out regularly.  Regarding the latter, I would wish that it wasn't treated as if it were just another chore, but most people (including men) believe that men will take what they can get.  As we age though, we expect more from our sexual unions than just a release of pent up lust.  At least I do.  Don't you agree, fellas?  Anyone?  Well, maybe I've lost some testosterone, but sex really does become an expression of emotion after a bit of aging has occurred.  Not always a deep loving emotion, but there needs to be something there.  Perhaps the old cliche that many men don't seek out prostitutes for sex, but for someone to talk to without judgement is really true.  (Of course, after unloading all that suppressed emotion, we expect sex.)

So, yeah, I dig Caitlin Flanagan for all the "wrong" reasons.  But I do like her writing.  Her dismantling of Christopher Byron was solid.  Some folks who've read his book and believe that it is even-handed and revelatory would do well to read this review.  I'm talking about a seven year old essay as if it was front page news.  Ah, the perils of randomly choosing essays to read and review.