What is Marriage For?: The Strange Social History of Our ... (ISBN 0807041351)

Amazon.com Review:
E.J. Graff had a very personal reason for asking the question in this book's title: she was married in 1991, but in a ceremony legitimized by neither church nor state. Graff and her dearly beloved, you see, are lesbians. But instead of being dominated by agenda, What Is Marriage For? is a playful and informative study of the institution of wedlock throughout history that will appeal to readers outside of its obvious constituency. Chapter by chapter, Graff looks at the legal, sociological, and anthropological assumptions about money, sex, procreation, tribal affiliation, and the pursuit of personal happiness that underlie the concept of matrimony in Western societies. Her eye for the odd historical footnote is especially striking: we learn, for example, that in ancient Rome, marriage vows were exchanged by the groom and his father-in-law, and that--the assertions of right-wing fundamentalists notwithstanding--families were actually far less stable in the premodern era (where as many as 50 percent of all French children lived with a stepparent) than they are today. Graff's conclusion? The rules of engagement have fluctuated so wildly over the centuries that the term "traditional marriage" is something of an oxymoron; same-sex unions are but one of the many ways in which marriage has evolved to meet the changing social dynamics of the 20th century. --Patrizia DiLucchio

Well done and extremely informative:
The historical overview Graff provides covers not only the institution of marriage itself, but also the wide spectrum of gender roles that have been standard in past Western culture. (For example, the idea that the wife should stay at home didn't occur to anyone until Victorian times brought along industry and 14-hour factory jobs!) The author writes a fine history, quoting original sources and backing up her information, in a tone conversational and interesting enough for even a reader like myself, usually terrible at reading history books, to follow and enjoy. Her overview of polygamy is the only thing in this book that fails. The overview is brief, and the only examples given are the Mormons and the Oneida commune. I might opine that she neglected this area on purpose. Part of this book's thrust (perhaps ten percent of the text is focused on it) is providing factual support for the idea that marriage between two people of any gender is simply the next natural consequence of the changes in our society and economy. The critics of this idea often use the negative media image of polygamy to their credit. I'm guessing that she glanced over it in order to keep this argument at bay -- which is a pity, because the book could have been stronger with an actual refutation, citing historical and modern examples of polygamy in their societal context. But at least she is careful enough with her language that she does not tar all multi-person couples with the same brush. Aside from this qualm, I'm quite satisfied with the text as a whole, and would recommend it to anyone who wants a better understanding of marriage and gender roles throughout the ages in their economic and social context.

Fascinating and eye-opening:
Like Graff, my daughter is a lesbian in a committed relationship, and it angers me that she is prohibited from marrying the person she loves. I was delighted to find this book exploring the changing purpose of marriage in the western world from Roman times to the present and read Graff's case that the battle over same-sex marriage is just the next iteration in a centuries-old line of views of what marriage is for. Graff never claims that her book is a balanced history; she lets readers know right up front that she is gay and that her purpose for doing all the research and writing was to present her argument that same-sex marriage should be legal. Anyone (like an earlier reviewer) who is surprised by that simply wasn't paying attention. Graff's writing is both informative and lively, with plenty of facts interspersed with anecdotes and human interest. I already agreed with her premise so I didn't need to be persuaded, but she makes her case so well that it's hard to see how anyone could read this book and still believe gay people should be denied the right to marry. Even for those who are already believe that, the book is well worth reading. Now I can back up my assertion that same-sex marriage should be legal with a persuasive argument based on historical fact: What conservatives call "traditional marriage" is actually less than 100 years old, and this is the logical next step in its evolution. This is an excellent book that belongs on the bookshelf of everyone who believes in human rights.

A Disappointing Tract for Same-sex Marriage:
What I expected was a well researched history of marriage laden with colorful commentary, humorous ironies, and insightful analysis. What I discovered is a heavy-handed argument for gay and lesbian marriage that is tedious to slog through. The author makes much of the fact that a)marriage has always been a strictly controlled institution that generally has financial implications; and b)that the institution has undergone constant, radical change. Somehow, this is supposed to support the thesis that states should revise their laws to include same-sex marriage. Somehow, I missed the logic. On one hand, since marriage has always been strictly controlled by the state, where's the injustice in the fact that it is still strictly controlled by states who allow only heterosexuals to marry? And on the other hand, while marriage has survived constant change through the ages, one thing has never changed: it has always been a heterosexual institution. My bottom line: flawed logic expressed in a pedestrian writing style makes for very dull reading.

Interesting Book that Opened My Eyes:
A very interesting book about the history of marriage and what this history suggests for the arguments surrounding gay marriage. It really opened my eyes up that what some call "traditional" marriage is hardly traditional at all in the context of human history where "marriage" took a variety of forms.

Missed the basics:
While E. J. Graff gives a broad social history of marriage, she does not delve deeply enough into the religious history of marriage which leads to errors in her arguments. From her book, one could conclude that the Catholic Church did not consider marriage to be a sacrament until the 13th century. However, Terullian in the 2nd century wrote, "Whence are we to find (words) enough fully to tell the happiness of that marriage which the Church cements, and the oblation confirms, and the benediction signs and seals; (which) angels carry back the news of (to heaven), (which) the Father holds for ratified." Lacking this foundation of the essence of marriage in the Christian Church which so heavily influenced our society, she cannot argue for what marriage is for because she does not know what marriage really is.