H-NET BOOK REVIEW
Published by H-Women@h-net.msu.edu (January, 2000)
Daniel Horowitz. Betty Friedan and the Making of The Feminine
Mystique: The American Left, The Cold War, and Modern Feminism.
Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1998. 354 pp.
Bibliography and index. $30.95 (cloth), ISBN
Reviewed for H-Women by Katherine Osburn ,
Tennessee Technological University
Deconstructing Betty Friedan
In her 1963 feminist classic The Feminine Mystique Betty
Friedan condemned the limited and unsatisfying gender roles of
the post-World War II era. Her passionate plea for expanded
public roles for women was especially effective because she
spoke as one who had been trapped and nearly suffocated by the
role of the suburban housewife. While historians of post-war
gender studies have argued that gender roles were far more
complex than those portrayed in The Feminine Mystique,
Friedan's personal narrative of the bored middle-class housewife
turned activist has been accepted as a model for the evolution
of feminist consciousness in the second-wave feminist movement.
Daniel Horowitz's study suggests that, like the book she wrote,
Friedan herself is far more complex than the persona she has
created.
Using an extensive collection of Friedan's papers archived at
Smith College, Horowitz argues for a multi-causal view of
second-wave feminism: "Though most women's historians have
argued that 1960s feminism emerged in response to the suburban
captivity of white middle-class women during the 1950s, the
material in Friedan's papers suggested additional
origins--anti-fascism, radicalism, and labor union activism of
the 1940s" (p. 7). His unauthorized biography weaves the
strands of these "isms" into an compelling account that
functions exceptionally well on many levels: as biography, as
historiography of feminism, and as social movement history.
Betty Friedan herself, however, has publicly rejected the story
Horowitz tells in this biography. She has stood by her 1973
statement that "it is a decade now since the publication of the
Feminine Mystique and until I started writing the book, I
wasn't even conscious of the woman question." (Friedan in The
Feminine Mystique, 10th Anniversary Edition, New York, Dell
Publishing Co.: 1974, p. 1.) Knowing from the onset of the book
that Friedan rejects its major premises immediately draws the
reader into the narrative, for one wonders what Horowitz will
argue that Friedan repudiated.
Horowitz is a superb biographer, immersing his subject in the
currents of history. He provides the reader a clear sense of
the places and periods that shaped young Bettye (the spelling
she used until graduate school) Goldstein (Friedan). He
recreates her childhood in Peoria, Illinois as the bright
daughter of a prosperous Jewish merchant whose wealth gave the
family social standing above Peoria's poorer Jews, but whose
Jewishness marginalized them from the rest of the middle class.
In this context of social alienation, Bettye was drawn into the
leftist critique of capitalism that was popular among some
intellectuals in the 1920s and 1930s. Writing for her high
school newspaper, Goldstein published columns and book reviews
that addressed workers' rights and criticized fascism. She even
wrote a satire on women's limited career choices that she
modeled on the parable of the grasshopper and the ant. Despite
her precociouness in high school, Goldstein did not develop into
a fully committed, politically active social critic until she
went to college.
During her years at Smith College (1938-1942) and later in
graduate school at Berkeley, (1942-1943), Bettye Goldstein
embraced many progressive causes. She became an outspoken
advocate of labor unions and a critic both of fascism and of
U.S. involvement in Britain's struggle against fascism (because
Britain was an imperialist nation and therefore an unworthy
ally). During her senior year, Goldstein studied at the
Highlander Folk School in Monteagle, Tennessee, which trained
labor activists. Returning to Smith, she supported the
successful unionization of the campus maids. Upon graduation,
Goldstein went to Berkeley to pursue a doctorate in psychology,
but left after only one year. Horowitz directly challenges
Friedan's later account of why she ended her graduate studies so
abruptly. In the Feminine Mystique and elsewhere, Friedan
claimed that she had won a lucrative and prestigious fellowship
that would have allowed her to finish her studies, but that her
then boyfriend pressured her to turn it down because he felt
threatened by her success. Friedan claims she chose love over
career because the Mystique had already exerted its hold on
American women. According to Horowitz, however, Friedan left
for a combination of reasons because "she was apparently unable
to combine activism and academic work or to find the kind of
leadership position and attention" that she had held at Smith
(p. 88). Fear of being unable to find an academic position as a
Jewish woman and her desire to help the struggle against fascism
by helping organize workers (she abandoned her earlier
isolationism after Pearl Harbor), also contributed to her
decision to leave Berkeley and begin a career as a journalist.
Goldstein's work as a journalist reflected her interest in
radical social critique, including women's rights. Her first
position was as a Popular Front labor journalist for the
Federated Press (1943-1946), where, in 1946, she wrote an
article on the formation of the Congress of American Women. In
discussing her departure from the Federated Press, Horowitz
challenges Friedan's later "Mystique" account that she lost her
job to a returning vet, arguing instead that, while "sexism
played some role in the loss of a job" her political radicalism
was also a key issue (p. 120). With the end of the war and the
onset of McCarthyism, the Federated Press moderated its assaults
on capitalism and fired its more outspoken writers like
Goldstein. From 1946-1952 Goldstein worked for the UE News,
"the official publication of the United Electrical, Radio, and
Machine Workers of America" (p. 121). She married Carl Friedan
in 1947 and continued to work after the birth of her first
child.
In 1952 she published a thirty-nine page pamphlet entitled UE
Fights for Women Workers in which she clearly outlined her
support of equal pay for equal work, condemned discrimination
against women, and documented the appalling conditions of Latina
and African American factory workers. In 1953 her UE pamphlet
UE, Women Fight for a Better Life! UE Picture Story of Women's
Role in American History, Friedan addressed the childcare
problems that women factory workers faced. According to
Horowitz, she left UE due to a complex tangle of sexism,
economics, and cold war politics. Friedan, however, has given
versions of the event that support her contention that gender
was the primary issue in her departure: that she was fired
because she was pregnant with her second child and her union
failed to live up to its promise of a maternity leave, and that
she left full time employment (with relief) because it was too
arduous to combine work with caring for two small children.
Horowitz again argues that sexism was only part of the
picture--that McCarthyism had "dramatically reduced the
membership of UE [and that] the union had to cut its staff" (p.
141). According to Horowitz, Friedan may also have volunteered
to quit because she had less seniority. The actual
circumstances of the firing remain murky, but it is clear that,
on some level, Friedan was simply worn down by trying to juggle
her personal and professional lives.
Like so many others in the post-war period, the Friedans fled to
suburbia in 1950 where Betty became a community activist and a
freelance writer while she raised her three children. During
these years she also entered therapy to combat her increasing
sense of unhappiness. Friedan has given contradictory accounts
of her life in the suburbs, noting that she often felt trapped
and yet she was also able to step back from career pressures and
experience personal growth. Friedan's time in suburbia hardly
mirrored the inane experiences of consumerist housewives driven
by the Mystique. Even after the Friedans moved again to a more
affluent suburb in 1956, Friedan associated with thoughtful and
stimulating people such as Herbert Gutman and C. Wright Mills,
continued to research and write, worked for the Democratic
Party, and taught courses in writing at New York University and
the New School for Social Research. Horowitz then analyzes how
Friedan created the Feminine Mystique and authored a new
narrative for her life.
This leads to the really interesting story in this book, which
is the contradictions between the persona Friedan created for
herself in 1963 (a woman who became an activist because she was
trapped by stultifying gender roles of the post-war middle
class) and her past life as an activist. Horowitz suggests that
Friedan's self-constructed identity was "puzzling" to him. "It
is possible," he wrote in his introduction, "that Friedan has an
explanation of her own life that, for one reason or another, I
cannot fathom" (p. 14). Despite his claim that he really
doesn't understand Friedan, Horowitz provides a thoughtful,
multi-faceted analysis of why she might have interpreted her
life as she did. He suggests that Friedan, an "outsider" all of
her life, may have reinvented herself out of a desire to be more
accepted. He posits that her therapy may have caused her to see
a sharp break between her earlier years and her experiences as a
housewife so that she believed that "her radicalism involved
nothing more than dabbling and that she had no genuine interest
in women's issues" (p. 247). Finally, he argued that many 1940s
radicals retreated from Popular Front activities because they
were disillusioned by Stalin's horrific behavior and emotionally
battered by McCarthyism. Moreover, the hypocrisy of sexist
progressive men and the failure of 1940s social movement to
address adequately women's issues may also have encouraged
Friedan's disaffection. Disillusionment with leftist causes may
have encouraged Friedan to view her actions as a popular front
activist as somehow inauthentic.
Horowitz also blames McCarthyism for Friedan's passionate
defense of her "trapped housewife" identity as her objective
reality. He notes Friedan's response to an American Quarterly
article where he first exposed her involvement in Popular Front
activities in the 1940s. In a speech at American University,
Friedan remarked, "some historian recently wrote some attack on
me in which he claimed that I was only pretending to be a
suburban housewife, that I was supposed to be an agent." (p. 15)
In reply, Horowitz asserted that, "I made clear that she was a
suburban housewife, but one whose experience was marked by
discontent, nonconformity, ambivalence, and very real
professional achievement" (p. 15). This latter portrayal is far
richer and more complex than Friedan's portrait, so why has
Friedan so adamantly rebutted it? Horowitz argues that, in
part, she feared that exposing her earlier left activities might
give conservative critics of feminism ammunition to discredit
the movement. In Horowitz's interpretation, some of Friedan's
language reflected a fear of red-baiting that lingered from
watching her associates persecuted during the McCarthy years.
While evidence of her radical past is clear in the documents of
her life, Horowitz is also prepared to accept that perhaps
Friedan might simply have a different interpretation of their
significance. Horowitz cautions that he could be
misunderstanding Friedan's meaning when she uses terms like
"feminism" or maybe that the two of them did not "share the same
view of cause and effect" (p. 14). Horowitz balances deftly
between arguing that Friedan's life was not exactly what she
claimed and acknowledging the power of the subjective in
Friedan's accounting of her journey. "Though she may have been
under the sway of the Feminine Mystique briefly," he writes,
"her sense of being trapped was enormously powerful" (p. 164).
Thus, Horowitz avoids the simplistic interpretation that Friedan
is a conscious hypocrite.
The question of how each of us remembers and retells the past is
crucial to the historian. Friedan clearly sees her life very
differently than does Horowitz. This led Horowitz to conclude
rather wryly that "In the end, Friedan's story of the trajectory
of her life is enough to tempt anyone to embrace post-modernism.
Its emphasis on contradictions, omissions, narrative
disruptions, unstable texts, as well as on the tendency to of
texts to work against themselves, makes more understandable
Friedan's story of her life" (p. 247). In deconstructing that
story through his wonderfully lucid and absorbing narrative,
Horowitz has made a significant contribution to our
understanding of the complex origins of second-wave feminism.
Copyright (c) 2000 by H-Net, all rights reserved. This
work may be copied for non-profit educational use if proper
credit is given to the author and the list. For other
permission, please contact H-Net@h-net.msu.edu.