|
It's as if the primary reference researcher should have written the book instead. The author seems to be on a bit of a crusade which also detracts from the professionalism the work could exhibit. The concept of this book is fascinating. If you are willing to read past the mediocre writing, the ideas are interesting and well worth consideration. It's a book I will keep as a reference in my library. The authorship is amature and stilted. References cited tend to be very narrow.
There is an excellent complementary book also worth reading: "The Fall" by Steve Taylor about the patriarchal takeover in Neolithic times. When I first read this book over a decade ago, I found myself shocked and angry about the violently aggressive and coldblooded way our peaceful, responsible and communal world was effectively hijacked by the reptilian mentality - and not just once but repeatedly over the last 6,000 years. In her latest book, "Feelings Matter", DeRohan shows exactly how this reptilian mentality - the domination/patriarchal/migh-is-right attitude that celebrates war and killing - is being imprinted in all of us from birth and provides practical and peaceful suggestions that all of us can utilize to get free. However, I am compelled to point out that no author exhibits the masterly understanding of the imbalances created by the suppression of the feminine, the emotions, as Ceanne DeRohan and her "Right Use of Will" series of books. But what has been emerging since this book was first published in 1988, is evidence of a systematic suppression of the clues about sophisticated cultures that existed all around the world for tens of thousands of years before we were all dominated and enslaved - yes, both women and men - by a warrior race that continues to rule even today, without an iota of compassion. This pioneering book celebrates the value of partnership, equality, collaboration, non-violence, and connectedness to nature.
When I had a broader look at the "matriarchal prehistory" question I realised what my intuition from reading about genuinely anthropological studies of other cultures showed: that prehistoric matriarchies as claimed by Elizabeth Gould Davis were very unlikely.In "The Chalice and the Blade: Our History, Our Future", Riane Eisler argues that humanity has a future in the sexually egalitarian and peaceful culture she associates with very primitive societies and that violence and rigid patriarchy are closely linked through the destruction of what she terms the "chalice" in favour of the violence of the "blade". On another topic, modern studies and my basic knowledge of (and not only) Anabaptist cultures show that a peaceful culture is not necessarily one in which women's and men's roles overlap: indeed basic personality theory suggests that gentle and peaceful cultures are actually likely to be quite firm in acceptable gender roles vis-a-vis less peaceful ones. Because of this, "The Chalice and the Blade: Our History, Our Future" has very little impact on a knowledgeable reader and is as easy to forget as most books I have read. As an adolescent I was infatuated by Elizabeth Gould Davis' The First Sex and its description of a peaceful society ruled by women and its takeover by violent patriarchs. There is also no original cultural research but instead retreads that must be called "tired" for someone like me with experience in this issue.All in all, though there are few really bad things about "The Chalice and the Blade: Our History, Our Future", it simply has very little in content or style to recommend it. It is also possible to interpret the relative peacability of modern Europe as a reflection of the utter absence of industrial resources encouraging extreme conservation.The way in which more conservative but intelligent writers show ancient pagan cultures valued death so much more than cultures that Eisler criticises makes me feel she knows far too little to be writing on the topic. There are many, many better books on the topic available.
Eisler argues that a gylanic culture would be free of exploitation and would value birth rather than death, and peace rather than warfare. The issue of differences between cultures in the extent to which submissiveness and gentleness are valued in women is far too often overlooked by anthropologists of all political stripes, even those who look very seriously at the issue of machismo.Such an attitude has been developed by many people with a far better knowledge of anthropology and culture and less tendency to stereotype, from Peggy Reeves Sanday to Ursula Le Guin. Nevertheless, many theorists argue women actually had more rights in pastoral societies than in less violent and more frequently goddess-worshipping agricultural ones. Following on from Marija Gimbutas, she aims to locate this type of culture in the earliet farming societies of "Old Europe" such as Catal Huyuk - in spite of Cynthia Eller's evidence that these were much more violent societies than originally thought. Her description of the violence of pastoral people is well-known and of considerable importance to understanding cultural violence.
With age, I have come to see the book as absurd but still fascinating, even brilliant. Even anthropologists who do sometimes acknowledge the coexistence of relative gender egalitarianism and peaceability, like Peggy Reeves Sanday, do demonstrate there is no necessary relationship between them. In addition, Arthur Brooks clearly gives the impression that a culture like modern Scandinavia is really peaceful on the surface because of its large and effective government and would otherwise, as my interpretation of the superb model of Nisbett and Cohen suggests, be very violent rather than peaceable. Eisler refers to the type of culture she advocates as "gylanic", by which she means a culture based on partnership rather than on hierarchy and where women have the same rights as men, rather than outright female dominance, which she thinks would be as oppressive as the worst patriarchies. The same is true to a lesser extent of primitive pre-agricultural societies she sees as a model.
I recommend this because it provides a more balance view of history, one that does not diminish the fact that half of the human race is female.
The only possible area where the book isn't so convincing is its search for the causes of patriarchy and violence. I originally read this book several years ago and it transformed my view of the world. Steve Taylor's recent book The Fall goes very deeply into the psychological roots of these problems and The Fall: The Evidence for a Golden Age, 6,000 years of Insanity and the Dawning of a New Era presents a very inspiring view of the human race's possible future. It woke me up to the idea that the chaos and brutality of the present world haven't always existed, and did not have to exist. The evidence that Eisler presents for the existence of prehistoric partnership societies is compelling.
|
