from Ben's mom
I confess I have not read Captiving, the latest by Christian men's movement guru John Eldredge and his wife Stasi. So I am hesitant to judge. However, I find myself often in agreement with Agnieszka Tennant. And I read her review of the book with interest.
I plan to read the book just to gasp incredulously at the idea that there is something ultra-feminist and domineering about a woman who would want "to room alone" when she traveled. (Gasp!) I guess I am one of those women because business travel always made me tired and having to share a room with another woman always seemed an exhausting idea.
And my views on female leadership in the church are considered to be downright archaic by many. But it does seem that if women are commanded in Scripture to teach the younger women, that it would hardly be unorthodox for them to be in charge of women's ministries!
So those who've read the book....Are Tennant's criticisms fair and accurate? What do you think?
6 comments:
WOAH. I found her review WAY off balance. As a disclaimer to what I'm about to say:
1. I hate "popular" books (for the most part). If everyone is harping on it, I'll likely avoid it. This book has become something of an icon to various Christian women which would tend to make me skirt it -- buuuut I DO think the Eldridges make some valid points.
2. I really liked Captivating. I also really didn't, in some respects.
The most infuriating thing (yes, infuriating) I think Tennant does in her book is MISquote Stacie. She says:
-- begin quote --
Stasi Eldredge writes. "Beauty is what the world longs to experience from a woman." She gives examples: "Pioneer women brought china teacups into the wilderness, and I bring a pretty tablecloth to eat on when my family camps. We wear perfume, paint our toenails, color our hair, and pierce our ears, all in an effort to be ever more beautiful."
-- end quote --
I've read that book three times. (I read it once and then joined a girl's study and re-read it as part of the study.) I really don't recall this whole portion of the "quote." Stacie (and John, obviously) are the parents of boys. They don't go camping to wear perfume and paint their toenails. She implies in a DIFFERNT section of the book (not related to camping at all!) that there are times when women want to dress up and be beautiful and attend balls. But it had nothing whatsoever to do with camping. Stacie opens the book with an outdoor experience which involved canoeing after dark in a rather dangerous situation. No mention of perfume.
I really think Tennant misses the point. She does correctly point out that the main message of the book is that all women long to be swept up into romance, to play an irreplaceable role in a great adventure and to be the Beauty of the story. I think we'd be hard pressed to deny that. But there's a wildness in that.
As far as the Eldrige approach to domineering women -- they do NOT say to "beware" of them. They mention that women can be GENERALLY classified into two different catagories -- domineering and passive. They describe both and then ask you to decide for yourself which one you are. Then they mention various pitfalls involved in either personality and mention things that either/or will have to work on. They do not say "beware."
So I take issue with Tennant. I think she got a little carried away and misread/misunderstood a few things.
I would NOT declare Captivating the feminine Bible. However, I think they have some valid points about women to consider. It's a worthy read whether you decide you agree with everything they say or don't.
I'd be really interested in any review you have to give following your reading of it, Rachelle.
I think Carrie had a lot to say and some good points. I'll leave it at this. I did not find the book anti-feministic or pro-feministic. To me it struck the perfect balance, something Christians don't quite get and the world always misses. I really enjoyed the book -- and well, R, you know me. :)
Some might argue that although there are thousands of school teachers, they are not necessarily in charge of what or even who they teach.
....Dad B
While I have to admit to reading Captivating rather skeptically the first time, I was touched by the book mainly because of its balance in dealing with the usual tug-of-war between the extremes that speak about a Christian woman's role. Stressing our heart's needs over our society, family, or church's list of duties required to be a "good" Christian woman.
At least in my opinion, the authors took great pains to point out that for one woman "beauty" may be the things listed such as china in the wilderness while for another woman her beauty shows itself in incredibly different ways such as bow-hunting elk (which I happen to know is an impossibility wearing perfume).
I found the reviewer's comment don't seem to make me think we read the same book. Unfortunately, her comments made me think more of someone who needs to defend a belief system against all "enemies", real or imagined.
Well, that's my two sense, for whatever it is worth.
Interesting. It's been just long enough since I read Captivating that I don't remember enough details clearly to ascertain the accuracy of the reviewer's quotes, but I certainly don't recall getting such a strong sense of anti-feminism or - how shall I put it? - demure/modest/keeper-at-home-only-femininity. So she may have been reading into things a bit, or she may have just picked up on things that stood out to her and made the most of them.
I do recall, however, not being that impressed with the book but reluctant to mention it because so many people liked it so much that I didn't want to offend anyone's sensibilities. Honestly, I'm sure it's a fine book, and I don't recall being offended by anything in it, but my impression was rather blah. Obviously, I considered the book forgettable enough to forget the gist of it. I didn't read it and feel awestruck by some deep insight or the thought of 'Wow! That is SO me! So THAT'S why I feel that way!' But then, I never really jumped on the Wild At Heart bandwagon either: read it, thought it made some good points but only said that which anyone with a degree of common sense and a keen sense of observation could easily pick up in a few years of experience.
Perhaps that's my main gripe with these kinds of books: common sense and social relations used to be learned and taught at a very young age, and so no one would have needed to waste time reading deep books explaining all these things. Just as practical skills like making a pastry and sewing on a button seem to have fallen out of favour, so common sense and thinking skills are no longer taught on a large scale, and people nowadays are staggering about blind, needing all the help they can get. (I'm generalising wildly here and referring mainly to the general population, which may or may not even be taught Home Ec anymore in public school; I'm sure most homeschooled youngsters know how to sew a button and read deep theology and apologetics.)
So if this book serves to meet a need in the female population, then I'm grateful for that, because I'm all for exalting beauty and character and femininity. I didn't find it objectionable enough to protest, and I'd be happy for anyone to read it and learn from it. I just didn't feel that it did anything for me.
Rachelle, I'd be interested to have you read the book and review it, first to see if you agree with the review and secondly to see what your opinion of its accuracy/usefulness is.
I'm left wondering one thing: did she really read the book? She's totally off base and her review is more editorial and does the reader no justice at all. Two thumbs way down.
For the record, all things being taken w/a grain of salt, Captivating is worth reading and is very thought-provoking. In a world when being a woman, being feminine, and embracing biblical womanhood in the face of an ungodly culture, I think more books like this need to be read and discussed.
Post a Comment