19th Century Family Value How,

19th Century Family Value

How, according to Gillis, did 19th-century middle-class men's experience of the home differ from women's? One of the big differences is that men could be homeowners and this was something that was tantamount to goodness. If one owned a home, then he was a good, productive man -- and definitely not a Community because he had too much to do (114). Gillis states that the home was the one place where man and woman could meet and exercise his or her own rights. The world was a world unto itself and anything could happen in there and men and women were equally free to do what he or she wished.

Gillis states that it was man's idea to move their homes to the suburbs and into single-family dwellings. For women, homemaking was a profession that was easier to do when one had all of the services that the city had to offer. It was more convenient for homemakers than were the suburbs (115). But for men, Gillis notes, the home was a place where the men came home to relax, to get away from the city. Gillis states that, "As far as men were concerned, homemaking would remain a great mystery. Meals and clean shirts appeared as if by magic" (115).

Gillis states that before 1850, only adults had their own beds, but by the 1880s, children began to acquire their own rooms, which made the house more of a family home and not so much the man's house; once children had their own rooms, they personally identified with the home too (120).

As man ventured out into the city, he became more and more enthralled with the idea of home. Families ended up changing homes as the husband changed jobs or as he climbed up the ladder of success. There was a great symbolism put on the idea of "home" (122). It was the presence of a man as well that made a house a home. A woman could be the head of the household (say if her husband were dead), but in the eyes of the law (and everyone else), the house was the man's domain (122). but, just owning a house didn't make a man's house a home, there was the definite need for a woman -- and if she couldn't be a wife, then she would be a sister or daughter (123). For women, the home was a place of work, for it was where they put in their long hard hours while the men were away working. The home was her reason for being really. If she were out shopping, it was for the home (124); for the woman, the home was always where her heart and duty was.

Does Loudon make gender distinctions in his discussion of gardens? Loudon does make gender distinctions when he is discussing gardens. He talks about how satisfying it is for the master of the house to come to his garden after a long day in the city, how it is so nice to enjoy these gardens in the summer evening. Loudon makes a reference to the children watching their father as he delightfully tends to the garden (3).