No Permanent Waves

Recasting Histories of U.S. Feminism

Bibliographic Data

ID7306428
AuthorsKathryn Kish Sklar (Binghamton University, corresponding author)
Year2011
Volume98
Issue1
Pages162-163
Publication date2011-06-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of American History (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0021-8723 • E-ISSN: 1945-2314
PublisherOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/jahist/jar144
OpenAlexW2068625867
LanguageEN
Citations received16

Despite its playful title, this is a serious book. It aims to dismantle the reigning metaphor of the history of American feminism: waves. The metaphor began in 1968 when Martha Lear's article in the New York Times Magazine heralded the arrival of “the second feminist wave.” Instantly popular, the metaphor took hold among historians as a way to link past and present feminist movements. Initially the concept seemed like a win-win proposition because it strengthened representations of the impact of feminism historically and contemporaneously. Yet the metaphor's inadequacies grew apparent with age. Viewing the 1960s from the 1990s, historians argued that feminists transformed society, but the wave metaphor evoked images of a repetitive struggle with no gains. As the author of one of the book's chapters notes, “little is permanent about waves” (p. 121). Another problem emerged when new historical writings recast what was once viewed as the “doldrums” between 1920 and 1960 as a time when “the other women's movement” was alive and well among wage-earning women. And when younger feminists began to claim their own “third wave” and “fourth wave,” questions about what constituted a “wave” diminished the metaphor further. Now Nancy A. Hewitt conducts its funeral. Or tries to

Feminism · Metaphor · Political economy · Sociology · Theology · Third wave · Gender Studies · Historical Gender and Feminism Studies · History · Philosophy · Race, History, and American Society

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub