"Everyday Life" by J. Robert Wegs in Growing Up Working Class

In J. Robert Wegs' article titled "Everyday Life", we get a glimpse at what real-life consisted of in Vienna during the pre-World War I stage, and during the war. He states that it had already been established prior to his writing this article, that the conditions surrounding the working-class family were not the greatest during the early 20th century. His argument is that, although previous scholars have made many arguments and claims stating that these conditions were the cause of family disintegration and the decline of family life, it is not as true as previously stated.

Wegs discusses a few different aspects of family life that back up his argument and helps persuade the reader to change his views on such topics. Birth rate and family size, nourishment and food in the home, personal possessions, and leisure activity and play are discussed in length to help us fully understand how life was for the working class family in Vienna during the pre-war and inter-war periods.

Regarding birth rate and family size, Wegs states that "After experiencing the material deprivation brought about by the typical large families of the period before WWI, some parents decided to limit the size of their families." I agree with his argument that the economy of the time forced families to limit the number of children they could have, and more importantly he claims that in these smaller families, the children were able to receive more love and affection.

Through numerous interviews and studies, Wegs was able to round up information about the working class family in regards to their diets during this depriving time period. Granted, the portions of meals the children were alloted were meager, he came to the conclusion that "the view that all working-class families suffered equally from undernourishment results from an inattention to economic-social divisions among laboring families." In general, he stated that almost all families were able to "make do" on low incomes and eat well

Personal possessions and leisure activity was the last topic Wegs discussed in regards to the working-class family in Vienna. He states that "for most working-class families it was not how much one had but rather how one dealt with scarcity that was important. It was also common practice for these working-class children to spend much of their time in the streets playing, but they made the most of it and were happy.

His conclusion summed up everything he talked about very well. He states, "While there is no denying that difficult conditions existed in Vienna's working-class districts in the early twentieth century, it is also difficult to deny that a relative stability, rather than disintegration, characterized life for most of the working class there." I agree with Wegs' unique view on the poor working-class family in Vienna. His arguments were very convincing and thorough, and i believe that no matter what state people find themselves in, they will always find a way to maintain a certain amount of human dignity and find a way to achieve happiness.

"Keystone of the Patriarchal Family? Indissoluble marriage, masculinity and divorce in Liberal Italy," by Mark Seymour

In this article, Mark Seymour discusses the arguments for and against divorce laws in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in Italy. Those who opposed the divorce laws argued that such laws would be harmful to women because it would allow men to abandon their wives more easily. Because it was more difficult for women to remarry than men, their economic situation would have greatly declined as a result of such practices. The predominant Catholic ideology of the region was also very influential in keeping divorce laws from being passed. The Catholic church promoted the idea that divorce laws would "empty marriage of all meaning and lead to a free-for-all" and "free love." On the other side of the debate, authors such as Anna Franchi demonstrated through their writing the horrible plights of women who were forced to remain in unhappy or even abusive marriages. Seymour points out that Italy's failure to initiate divorce laws before the 1970's illustrates the resilience of Italy's patriarchal system. Many Italians feared that passing divorce laws which allowed equality for men and women would lead to emasculation of men and essentially undermine the stability of society.

This article relates to Mary Hartman's chapter "What Men and Women Want" because it demonstrates the fact that many felt that a man's masculine identity would be compromised if they did similar work (because of marriage equality) as women. This article fits under the category of gender because of it's exploration of traditional gender ideals which were threatened by divorce laws in Italy. It also fits under the categories of Law, Church and State, as well as Marriage and Its Dissolution for obvious reasons.

"Not Quite Pukka" by Elizabeth Buettner

Understanding European families during the after the long Nineteenth Century is very complicated. Many of the European nations, especially Britain and France, were colonial powers by this time. Families in the homeland would colonize, but they still considered themselves European subjects. This is where this article comes in. It argues that with so many families leaving Britain for India, it became socially important to know who was still British, and who had ‘gone native.” British families in Europe would ideally return to Britain, and needed to keep up their British social status. While domiciled families would not return to Europe, and so did not comfortably fit into the Euro-centric system. This would have implications in Britain itself, although this is not discussed in this paper. British peoples would be very sensitive to social markers that qualified someone as a “true Brit”

Due to the above paragraph, I would categorize this article under “Categories of Difference.” I would also categorized it under “Family relationships and family economics.” The article discusses how families would sacrifice to be able to send their children to a school in Britain. They did this because the increased social status of having their children go to Britain. For their children it was economically imperative to maintain their British markers. Without these markers British employment would be difficult, if not impossible. There would also be economic benefit for the parents. Children attending school in Britain would have been a sign that the parents were not going domiciled. Thus, it was probably a sign that they still upheld British values.

"Households and Families: Structure and Flux" by Alan Duben and Cem Behar

Duben and Behar used information from the 1885 and 1907 censuses of Istanbul and other areas of Turkey to discuss marriage and family patterns in pre-WWI Turkey. Their main conclusion was that Turkey followed the southeast marriage pattern in a some ways, yet resembled northwestern Europe in other ways. Men and women married relatively early in Istanbul, with the men about ten years older than the women. However, when married the new couples generally left their parent's house and started their own household free from their parent's influence. Extended families still had close ties with young couples but the men were free to make their own decisions for their families. In consequence of young couples moving out, households tended to be quite small which defies Hartman's arguments the SE Europe had more numerous family groups. Duben and Behar do agree with Hartman that the age at marriage is the key to many other aspects of domestic life. They also point out that patterns in Istanbul and rural Anatolia (Turkey) were quite different, with rural Anatolia conforming more to Hartman's idea os SE Europe. The Hainal line is mentioned in reference to the fact that Turkey supports Hainal's ideas in a few ways and does not support it in other. Duben and Behar shed some light on Europe as a whole by discussing Turkey in particular. The example of Turkey shows how no family pattern fits across the board - each culture had its own peculiarities.

"Marriage" by Josef Ehmer

In this passage, Ehmer discusses the idea of marriage in the 19th century and shows how demographics, the state, and other aspects changed during this time.

Many historians have argued that, beginning in the 18th century and carrying on into the 19th century with Romanticism, there was a shift toward romantic love as a reason for marriage. Young people were generally allowed to choose their marriage partners during this time. In addition, there began to be social disapproval for marriages forced by parents or with economic motivations. This did not mean that husbands and wives were considered equals in the marriage, though. In many occupations, husbands and wives had to work well together in order to achieve economic success. However, after the first half of the nineteenth century this began to shift and husbands were seen as the breadwinners and wives as the homemakers. Despite the idea of romantic marriage during this period, there were still social motivations involved. Forming kinship alliances was considered important in some rural societies and others considered marriage one of the few ways they could increase their social standing.

However, the state did not follow this ideal, and legal provisions argued for marriage to be “a moral and legal order independent of the wills of the two spouses.” Thus, control over marriage shifted from the Church to the state. Divorce was an issue that reveals the attitude of the state and marriage. In most countries in Europe until the mid-1800s, it was near impossible to legally divorce. However, even after divorce was later allowed under certain circumstances, in reality it rarely happened.

In discussing marriage demographics, Ehmer disagrees somewhat with the concept of the Hajnal line. Although the overall trends indicate that Western Europe married later than in the east, there was a great deal of regional variation. In Italy, for example, the marriage age for women could vary between 21 to 27 years, depending on which region you look at. This variation also holds true for celibacy rates across Europe. Marriage patterns did change during the 1800s, but in very different directions for countries. Ehmer believes this variation indicates overall that marriage was considered a choice for Europeans in the nineteenth-century.

"The Middle-Class Household" by John Tosh

In this chapter Tosh discusses the changes in the middle class. There was a shift in the middle-class as it began to expand. The first generation of middle-class were shop and factory owners that lived adjacent to their place of business. Many young people were apprenticed to professions different from that of their parents, and as a result were able to enter higher levels of the middle class. This is part of the reason the middle class expanded so much. On page three Tosh says “But strength of numbers lay with the men of trade and business. It was this entrepreneurial element which increased most rapidly during the first half of the nineteenth century and accounted for the largest number of fresh recruits to the middle class.”
Tosh argues that the “Masculine self-respect certainly demanded that a man provide for his family, and great shame was attached to one who ‘failed’. “(pg 14) Many of the changes that occurred from one generation to the next in the middle class were attempts to prove to society that the man of the house could provide for his family by maintaining a ‘proper’ household. The second generation of middle class began moving away from their places of work. Increasingly home became a place of refuge and not a place of work. If there was work to be done at home it was to be done in a way and place that interference to the rest of the household was minimal.
Another point that Tosh makes is that women were withdrawing from the day to day practices of business. Part of being able to provide was to allow your wife to have a life of luxury. How little your wife was required to be involved in work became yet another social marker. Part of that shift was also the separation of the servants from the household. They were no longer considered part of the family but simply one more way to measure wealth. The more servants you could afford the better off you were. And if you could afford to hire male servants then you were really doing well. Tosh points out that during this period when the middle class expanded so much people became extremely preoccupied with their status in that middle class. It really seems to me that this is when the wide spread attitude of keeping up with the Jones came into play.
This chapter falls into the theme of Family Relationship and Family Economics because Tosh discusses the shift from women being an important part of the working relationship with their husbands to not being involved at all. As the middle class expanded the women's role began to be reduced and the responibility for making decisions and being the breadwinner fell completely on the man.

Interpreting the Western Past with the Women and the Households Left in, 1500-1800 by Mary S. Hartman

In this Chapter from The Household and the Making a History, Mary Hartman states that the late marriage pattern in Northwestern Europe and the fact that brides were nearly as old as grooms when entering into marriage had far reaching consequences and was the motivating factor in the most important developments of the era namely religious upheaval, new systems of political authority, and transformed structures of livelihood.

She argues throughout that she goes against the original view that the strong currents of social change moved from wider society to households but rather she argues from households to the wider society. Concerning the Reformation, more people then ever before were seeking personal reasons for the ways they were supposed to live their lives. "The comparatively independent position of wives as partners in household governance also helped ensure that more women then ever before would have common interest with men, as well as some peculiar interests of their own, in becoming active heretics."(Hartman, p.214) Younger people were making more choices for themselves and had more responsibilities and looking for a towards a supreme being who had a preordained their fate.

She tells us that daily experiences in family life set the stage for political behavior. The late marriage pattern created more choices for young people including whom and when to marry this created families that contained two contributing adult decision makers. This is important because it represents an voluntary contract in which both partners agree to create and maintain the unit and both must contribute by supporting and sustaining members. This shaped the perception of state and politics as a voluntary contact. She also address the industrial reformation and tells up that the lalte marriage pattern created nuclear families that came to rely on alternate means then possesion of land to facilitate a living. This and the women in the work force prior to marriage contributed greatly to the industrial revolution.

Hartman argues that Households and work structures accompanying woman's late marriage had an enormous effect on gender arrangements and attitudes, one that literally shaped societal relations, structures, and developments" (Hartman, p.224) The uses a wide range of evidence from a study of the professions and work of the middle class to the traditions of village festivals to sermons. He evidence does seems to support her theory.