'Cheap Amusement Book Review\r'

'Dereck Rick opus Scott Keys History 9September2012 In the nurse, Cheap Amuse manpowerts: Working Women and Leisure in Turn-of-the-Century New York, Piess gos the indorser on the pilgrimage of trials and tribulations in becomeing-class women’s lives in the turn of the century. Going in astuteness of the unfair familial roles and societal fe ph everyic disparities, all the focal point to what women wantd to feign and do for leisure, Piess allows the reader to tint into a cartridge holder machine and break outs them a magnificent look into what a char’s daily life was kindred in late 1800’s and early 1900’s.By utilize ‘expert’ sources and ‘investigators’, Piess succeeds in her goal by honing in on a particular proposition cadence and topic which allowed the reader to aroma as if they were reading an in-depth narration textual takings on the matter, but failed at providing deeper content and backbone through concrete details. first off by explaining the typical family roles in the turn of the century, Piess expresses how while the men may spend his evenings at a topical anesthetic saloon, at a baseball plunk for or reading his daily paper, the women would very much be expected to work her â€Å" reprise side sincere twenty-four hours”.Piess explains this concept of the double twenty-four hour period to be that the muliebrity is expected to go about her daily work day of typically â€Å"domestic servants, needlewomen, laundresses…” (Peiss 1986), and come theatre to start her other job, being the housewife. The housewife duties ordinarily entailed cooking, cleaning, rinse, scrubbing, and most importantly… reservation her husband and kids happy. All the while, when the woman got her herculean earned paycheck, it was expected to go towards family needs. heretofore as young women in the family hearthstone, young operative girls were expected to hand over their paychecks in their entirety while their priapic counterparts were solo asked for a runty portion of their earnings. Even though women were getting paid at lower wages and it being warrant because women were seen as â€Å"temporary wage-earners who worked only until wedlock” (Peiss 1986), Piess automatically shows the struggles and disparities women faced in the work field and even at the home front.Even if the young girl or woman adduce the disparities for what they were, she were to keep her opinions of the unjust actions to herself or she would construe herself alienated and estranged from her devote family. Even though the disparities and unequal air was seen and picked up throughout the tidings, Piess moves on to spark topics such(prenominal)(prenominal) as leisure and hammer. â€Å"not content with the quiet recreation in the home, they [women] sought adventure in trip the light fantastic toe halls, cheap theaters, amusement parks, excursion boa ts, and gentle wind grounds” (Peiss 1986).Women would often time desire refuge through the cheap amusements they would find in their sp are time. If not the small concept of gossiping on the laissez passer home from work, going to parks, or spying a small gossip exit at work, women would often frequent the local anaesthetic bound halls where most of the time their in allow was waived or lowered. These trip the light fantastic toe halls were a way for women to dress in their flashiest attire, talk in their unladylike manner, be pursued by the opposite land up, consume alcoholic beverages, and let loose on the spring floor. When it came to fashion and and the pursuance of men in the terpsichore halls, the cardinal went hand and hand.Piess found that a pair of sisters frequently opted out of such social gatherings simply because they could not render the fashion to attract the likes of the opposite sex; â€Å"’We have not the money for more than or slight c lothes to attract the boys who would rattling administer for us and of course we have no money to pay for our own amusement, and as a result we stay at home’” (Peiss 1986). Even if it was a upstart hat to wear to work, women would find the instrument to get their feminine itch for retail… even if it meant going without a repast or walking the great lengths to work.Even when women were at the leisure, they were still being treated as unequal partners to the superior man. When out at a dance hall, men would use up who they wish to dance with and it was customary for women, like it or not, dance with the man who chose them for at least the remainder of one song. Peiss explains a process that was customary at dance halls and is even seen at modern day clubs, â€Å"At the beginning of a dance, women would dance together, with the men watching them from the sidelines; then ‘the boys step out, two at a time, appropriate the girls, and dance off in couplesâ⠂¬â„¢Ã¢â‚¬Â (Peiss 1986).The aforesaid(prenominal) process was known as â€Å" breakout” in which the women involved had no say in who she wished to dance with. If a man were to â€Å"treat” a woman, it was only polite that the woman dish out something in return. Be it flirtatious notions or intimate gestures, women were expected and most of the time froward partner in the prostitution-like proposition of the male and female interaction. â€Å"’Many women do their washing in this yard,’ noted a bourgeoisie tenement inspector” (Peiss 1986). Piess uses inspectors and random sources throughout her carry as guides to prove or solidify her point.What I was very unusual about was who these people were in which she was quoting. I do appreciate the fact that she uses outback(a) sources, but who are these outside sources and how veritable can they be? When it comes to her more special sites, such as, â€Å"’Some never boarded a street car fo r an evening’s ride without planning days before how they could spare the nickel from their lunch or clothes money’ noted reformist Esther Packard, describing women who lived on six dollars a hebdomad” (Peiss 1986), Peiss never goes into depth who the source is or a deeper back-story to the individual that the reader would rattling be inclined to know.When Piess was able to give names to the quotes she used, it showed credibility and left-hand(a) the reader wanting more of an understanding of the person’s story. though Peiss did a phenomenal job at proving her thesis in the sense of giving a book on a particularised time and topic, she failed to give the reader some real life backbone through a more personal aspect. The reader is left feeling the need of wanting more from the sources rather than from Peiss as a historian.Just as a sincere observation was make throughout the length of the book, it seems that Peiss may have been suggesting a sure ma tch that is seen in the 1890’s-1920’s in comparison to straightaway’s world. When referring to the saloons and how women who came unescorted by a male counterpart was seen as â€Å"fair spicy”. In today’s world, if a woman attends a bar without a man, she is also seen as such game. Though the dangers as being seen as a prostitute are not paralleled in the midst of the two different eras, the concept of men pursuing an unescorted female in such a setting remains consistent.In other similar tone, the notion Peiss points out of dance halls either with child(p) their farthermostthestes for women or motion the fare altogether is consistent with the parallel thought of clubs often times lowering or waving cover charges for women for the simple fact of luring women into their establishments. Peiss explains that owners of dance halls would alter their fees for women because women were usually unable to afford the fee and the owners really wanted mo re women, like today, to be at their establishment so the men would also come and lavish the women with drinks.Other similarities are seen throughout Peiss’ work such as women going on outings in pairs or groups of women, and also how when on the outings their â€Å"popularity” with the men is dependent on their willingness and capability to drink alcohol. An Appalachian State University student, behind C. McKnight at www. scribd. com boldly and confidently states, â€Å"Her study should be considered a valuable source by all historians and should become a reoccurring theme of the ornament and Progressive Era as far as the history of American woman is concerned” (McKnight 2011).Though I could understand where Mr. McKnight is coming from as far as the history aspect is concerned, to go as far as to openly say that this put of work should be considered a valuable source and should become a reoccurring them is a tad outlandish. As far as a concentrated topic o f a cardinal year time queer is concerned, Peiss did a phenomenal job at capturing the essence of a fairly tumescent group of women. But the fact of the matter is that Peiss only concerned herself with a forty year window of a specific gender, of a specific class.Moreover, it took her nearly two hundred pages to repeat her central estimation several times over. Peiss, though could grip to make her book a less repetitive insight into working women’s leisure, did a great job at showing the reader what life looked like at the turn of the century for working class women. Peiss created a very nail window for the reader to look into and gave them a concentrated view of what a certain time frame looked like for a specific group of people in a certain social class.The book was very well organized and was elicit in its topic of choice. I commit that this is an â€Å"O. K. ” book for historians to engage in. Besides the book’s incredible organization and provoke topic, the book itself is very repetitive and I believe too concentrated to take much more than needed on the concept of working-class women and their leisure time in the turn of the century. Bib Mcknight, John C. â€Å"Cheap Amusements Review. ” Scribd. N. p. , n. d. Web. 18 Sept. 2012. <http://www. scribd. com/doc/16674845/Cheap-Amusements-Review>.\r\n'