Ideology and Social Surveys: Reinterpreting the Effects of "Laborsaving" Technology on American Farm Women

Technology and Culture

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 355-385

  Kline, Ronald R ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031489815     PISSN: 0040165X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3107126     Document Type: Review

References (167)

1. For recent work on these issues, see Merritt Roe Smith, "Technological Determinism and American Culture," Michael L. Smith, "Recourse of Empire: Landscapes of Progress in Technological America," and Leo Marx, "The Idea of Technology' and Postmodern Pessimism," in Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism, ed. Merritt Roe Smith and Leo Marx (Cambridge, Mass., 1994); Howard Segal, Future Imperfect: The Mixed Blessings of Technology in America (Amherst, Mass., 1994); and John Jordan, Machine Age Ideology: Social Engineering and American Liberalism, 1911-1939 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1994). use "ideology" in the nonpejorative sense of cultural codes as advocated by Clifford Geertz in The Interpretation of Cultures (New York, 1973), ch. 8. For a similar usage in the history of technology, see Eric Schatzberg, "Ideology and Technical Choice: The Decline of the Wooden Airplane in the United States, 1920-1945," Technology and Culture 35 (1994): 34-69.
2. For recent work on these issues, see Merritt Roe Smith, "Technological Determinism and American Culture," Michael L. Smith, "Recourse of Empire: Landscapes of Progress in Technological America," and Leo Marx, "The Idea of Technology' and Postmodern Pessimism," in Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism, ed. Merritt Roe Smith and Leo Marx (Cambridge, Mass., 1994); Howard Segal, Future Imperfect: The Mixed Blessings of Technology in America (Amherst, Mass., 1994); and John Jordan, Machine Age Ideology: Social Engineering and American Liberalism, 1911-1939 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1994). use "ideology" in the nonpejorative sense of cultural codes as advocated by Clifford Geertz in The Interpretation of Cultures (New York, 1973), ch. 8. For a similar usage in the history of technology, see Eric Schatzberg, "Ideology and Technical Choice: The Decline of the Wooden Airplane in the United States, 1920-1945," Technology and Culture 35 (1994): 34-69.
3. For recent work on these issues, see Merritt Roe Smith, "Technological Determinism and American Culture," Michael L. Smith, "Recourse of Empire: Landscapes of Progress in Technological America," and Leo Marx, "The Idea of Technology' and Postmodern Pessimism," in Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism, ed. Merritt Roe Smith and Leo Marx (Cambridge, Mass., 1994); Howard Segal, Future Imperfect: The Mixed Blessings of Technology in America (Amherst, Mass., 1994); and John Jordan, Machine Age Ideology: Social Engineering and American Liberalism, 1911-1939 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1994). use "ideology" in the nonpejorative sense of cultural codes as advocated by Clifford Geertz in The Interpretation of Cultures (New York, 1973), ch. 8. For a similar usage in the history of technology, see Eric Schatzberg, "Ideology and Technical Choice: The Decline of the Wooden Airplane in the United States, 1920-1945," Technology and Culture 35 (1994): 34-69.
4. For recent work on these issues, see Merritt Roe Smith, "Technological Determinism and American Culture," Michael L. Smith, "Recourse of Empire: Landscapes of Progress in Technological America," and Leo Marx, "The Idea of Technology' and Postmodern Pessimism," in Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism, ed. Merritt Roe Smith and Leo Marx (Cambridge, Mass., 1994); Howard Segal, Future Imperfect: The Mixed Blessings of Technology in America (Amherst, Mass., 1994); and John Jordan, Machine Age Ideology: Social Engineering and American Liberalism, 1911-1939 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1994). use "ideology" in the nonpejorative sense of cultural codes as advocated by Clifford Geertz in The Interpretation of Cultures (New York, 1973), ch. 8. For a similar usage in the history of technology, see Eric Schatzberg, "Ideology and Technical Choice: The Decline of the Wooden Airplane in the United States, 1920-1945," Technology and Culture 35 (1994): 34-69.
5. For recent work on these issues, see Merritt Roe Smith, "Technological Determinism and American Culture," Michael L. Smith, "Recourse of Empire: Landscapes of Progress in Technological America," and Leo Marx, "The Idea of Technology' and Postmodern Pessimism," in Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism, ed. Merritt Roe Smith and Leo Marx (Cambridge, Mass., 1994); Howard Segal, Future Imperfect: The Mixed Blessings of Technology in America (Amherst, Mass., 1994); and John Jordan, Machine Age Ideology: Social Engineering and American Liberalism, 1911-1939 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1994). use "ideology" in the nonpejorative sense of cultural codes as advocated by Clifford Geertz in The Interpretation of Cultures (New York, 1973), ch. 8. For a similar usage in the history of technology, see Eric Schatzberg, "Ideology and Technical Choice: The Decline of the Wooden Airplane in the United States, 1920-1945," Technology and Culture 35 (1994): 34-69.
6. For recent work on these issues, see Merritt Roe Smith, "Technological Determinism and American Culture," Michael L. Smith, "Recourse of Empire: Landscapes of Progress in Technological America," and Leo Marx, "The Idea of Technology' and Postmodern Pessimism," in Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism, ed. Merritt Roe Smith and Leo Marx (Cambridge, Mass., 1994); Howard Segal, Future Imperfect: The Mixed Blessings of Technology in America (Amherst, Mass., 1994); and John Jordan, Machine Age Ideology: Social Engineering and American Liberalism, 1911-1939 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1994). use "ideology" in the nonpejorative sense of cultural codes as advocated by Clifford Geertz in The Interpretation of Cultures (New York, 1973), ch. 8. For a similar usage in the history of technology, see Eric Schatzberg, "Ideology and Technical Choice: The Decline of the Wooden Airplane in the United States, 1920-1945," Technology and Culture 35 (1994): 34-69.
7. For recent work on these issues, see Merritt Roe Smith, "Technological Determinism and American Culture," Michael L. Smith, "Recourse of Empire: Landscapes of Progress in Technological America," and Leo Marx, "The Idea of Technology' and Postmodern Pessimism," in Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism, ed. Merritt Roe Smith and Leo Marx (Cambridge, Mass., 1994); Howard Segal, Future Imperfect: The Mixed Blessings of Technology in America (Amherst, Mass., 1994); and John Jordan, Machine Age Ideology: Social Engineering and American Liberalism, 1911-1939 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1994). use "ideology" in the nonpejorative sense of cultural codes as advocated by Clifford Geertz in The Interpretation of Cultures (New York, 1973), ch. 8. For a similar usage in the history of technology, see Eric Schatzberg, "Ideology and Technical Choice: The Decline of the Wooden Airplane in the United States, 1920-1945," Technology and Culture 35 (1994): 34-69.
8. On the progressive ideology of electricity, see James W. Carey and John J. Quirk, "The Mythos of the Electronic Revolution," American Scholar 39 (1970): 395-424; Thomas P. Hughes, "The Industrial Revolution that Never Came," American Heritage of Invention and Technology 3 (Winter 1988): 58-64; and Ronald Kline, Steinmetz: Engineer and Socialist (Baltimore, 1992), pp. 252-61. For expressions of this ideology in regard to the rural home, see Rural Electrification News, published from 1935 onward by the U.S. Rural Electrification Administration.
9. On the progressive ideology of electricity, see James W. Carey and John J. Quirk, "The Mythos of the Electronic Revolution," American Scholar 39 (1970): 395-424; Thomas P. Hughes, "The Industrial Revolution that Never Came," American Heritage of Invention and Technology 3 (Winter 1988): 58-64; and Ronald Kline, Steinmetz: Engineer and Socialist (Baltimore, 1992), pp. 252-61. For expressions of this ideology in regard to the rural home, see Rural Electrification News, published from 1935 onward by the U.S. Rural Electrification Administration.
10. On the progressive ideology of electricity, see James W. Carey and John J. Quirk, "The Mythos of the Electronic Revolution," American Scholar 39 (1970): 395-424; Thomas P. Hughes, "The Industrial Revolution that Never Came," American Heritage of Invention and Technology 3 (Winter 1988): 58-64; and Ronald Kline, Steinmetz: Engineer and Socialist (Baltimore, 1992), pp. 252-61. For expressions of this ideology in regard to the rural home, see Rural Electrification News, published from 1935 onward by the U.S. Rural Electrification Administration.
11. On the progressive ideology of electricity, see James W. Carey and John J. Quirk, "The Mythos of the Electronic Revolution," American Scholar 39 (1970): 395-424; Thomas P. Hughes, "The Industrial Revolution that Never Came," American Heritage of Invention and Technology 3 (Winter 1988): 58-64; and Ronald Kline, Steinmetz: Engineer and Socialist (Baltimore, 1992), pp. 252-61. For expressions of this ideology in regard to the rural home, see Rural Electrification News, published from 1935 onward by the U.S. Rural Electrification Administration.
12. Joann Vanek, "Keeping Busy: Time Spent in Housework, United States, 1920-1970" (Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan, 1973); "Time Spent in Housework," Scientific American 231 (November 1974): 116-20; "Household Technology and Social Status: Rising Living Standards and Status and Residence Differences in Housework," Technology and Culture 19 (1978): 361-75; and "Work, Leisure, and Family Roles: Farm Households in the United States, 1920-1955," Journal of Family History 5 (1980): 422-31.
13. Joann Vanek, "Keeping Busy: Time Spent in Housework, United States, 1920- 1970" (Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan, 1973); "Time Spent in Housework," Scientific American 231 (November 1974): 116-20; "Household Technology and Social Status: Rising Living Standards and Status and Residence Differences in Housework," Technology and Culture 19 (1978): 361-75; and "Work, Leisure, and Family Roles: Farm Households in the United States, 1920-1955," Journal of Family History 5 (1980): 422-31.
14. Joann Vanek, "Keeping Busy: Time Spent in Housework, United States, 1920- 1970" (Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan, 1973); "Time Spent in Housework," Scientific American 231 (November 1974): 116-20; "Household Technology and Social Status: Rising Living Standards and Status and Residence Differences in Housework," Technology and Culture 19 (1978): 361-75; and "Work, Leisure, and Family Roles: Farm Households in the United States, 1920-1955," Journal of Family History 5 (1980): 422-31.
15. Joann Vanek, "Keeping Busy: Time Spent in Housework, United States, 1920- 1970" (Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan, 1973); "Time Spent in Housework," Scientific American 231 (November 1974): 116-20; "Household Technology and Social Status: Rising Living Standards and Status and Residence Differences in Housework," Technology and Culture 19 (1978): 361-75; and "Work, Leisure, and Family Roles: Farm Households in the United States, 1920-1955," Journal of Family History 5 (1980): 422-31.
16. Ruth Schwartz Cowan, "The 'Industrial Revolution' in the Home: Household Technology and Social Change in the 20th Century," Technology and Culture 17 (1976): 1-23; More Work for Mother: The Ironies of Household Technology from the Open Hearth to the Microwave (New York, 1983).
17. Ruth Schwartz Cowan, "The 'Industrial Revolution' in the Home: Household Technology and Social Change in the 20th Century," Technology and Culture 17 (1976): 1-23; More Work for Mother: The Ironies of Household Technology from the Open Hearth to the Microwave (New York, 1983).
18. Judith A. McGaw, "No Passive Victims, No Separate Spheres: A Feminist's Perspective on Technology's History," in In Context: History and History of Technology - Essays in Honor of Melvin Kranzberg, ed. Stephen H. Cutcliffe and Robert Post (Bethlehem, Pa., 1989), pp. 172-91; and Ellen Lupton, Mechanical Brides: Women and Machines from Home to Office (Princeton, N.J., 1993), pp. 15-27. For citations of the thesis, see, for example, Susan Strasser, Never Done: A History of American Housework (New York, 1982), p. 251; Christine E. Bose, Philip L. Bereano, and Mary Malloy, "Household Technology and the Social Construction of Housework," Technology and Culture 25 (1984) : 53-82; Glenna Matthews, "Just a Housewife ": The Rise and Fall of Domesticity in America (New York, 1987), pp. 111-12, 245; David E. Nye, Electrifying America: Social Meanings of a New Technology, 1880-1940 (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), p. 258; Judy Wajcman, Feminism Confronts Technology (University Park. Pa., 1991), ch. 4; and Katherine Jellison, Entitled to Power: Farm Women and Technology, 1913-1963 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1993), pp. xx, 53-54.
19. Judith A. McGaw, "No Passive Victims, No Separate Spheres: A Feminist's Perspective on Technology's History," in In Context: History and History of Technology - Essays in Honor of Melvin Kranzberg, ed. Stephen H. Cutcliffe and Robert Post (Bethlehem, Pa., 1989), pp. 172-91; and Ellen Lupton, Mechanical Brides: Women and Machines from Home to Office (Princeton, N.J., 1993), pp. 15-27. For citations of the thesis, see, for example, Susan Strasser, Never Done: A History of American Housework (New York, 1982), p. 251; Christine E. Bose, Philip L. Bereano, and Mary Malloy, "Household Technology and the Social Construction of Housework," Technology and Culture 25 (1984) : 53-82; Glenna Matthews, "Just a Housewife ": The Rise and Fall of Domesticity in America (New York, 1987), pp. 111-12, 245; David E. Nye, Electrifying America: Social Meanings of a New Technology, 1880-1940 (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), p. 258; Judy Wajcman, Feminism Confronts Technology (University Park. Pa., 1991), ch. 4; and Katherine Jellison, Entitled to Power: Farm Women and Technology, 1913-1963 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1993), pp. xx, 53-54.
20. Judith A. McGaw, "No Passive Victims, No Separate Spheres: A Feminist's Perspective on Technology's History," in In Context: History and History of Technology - Essays in Honor of Melvin Kranzberg, ed. Stephen H. Cutcliffe and Robert Post (Bethlehem, Pa., 1989), pp. 172-91; and Ellen Lupton, Mechanical Brides: Women and Machines from Home to Office (Princeton, N.J., 1993), pp. 15-27. For citations of the thesis, see, for example, Susan Strasser, Never Done: A History of American Housework (New York, 1982), p. 251; Christine E. Bose, Philip L. Bereano, and Mary Malloy, "Household Technology and the Social Construction of Housework," Technology and Culture 25 (1984) : 53-82; Glenna Matthews, "Just a Housewife ": The Rise and Fall of Domesticity in America (New York, 1987), pp. 111-12, 245; David E. Nye, Electrifying America: Social Meanings of a New Technology, 1880-1940 (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), p. 258; Judy Wajcman, Feminism Confronts Technology (University Park. Pa., 1991), ch. 4; and Katherine Jellison, Entitled to Power: Farm Women and Technology, 1913-1963 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1993), pp. xx, 53-54.
21. Judith A. McGaw, "No Passive Victims, No Separate Spheres: A Feminist's Perspective on Technology's History," in In Context: History and History of Technology - Essays in Honor of Melvin Kranzberg, ed. Stephen H. Cutcliffe and Robert Post (Bethlehem, Pa., 1989), pp. 172-91; and Ellen Lupton, Mechanical Brides: Women and Machines from Home to Office (Princeton, N.J., 1993), pp. 15-27. For citations of the thesis, see, for example, Susan Strasser, Never Done: A History of American Housework (New York, 1982), p. 251; Christine E. Bose, Philip L. Bereano, and Mary Malloy, "Household Technology and the Social Construction of Housework," Technology and Culture 25 (1984) : 53-82; Glenna Matthews, "Just a Housewife ": The Rise and Fall of Domesticity in America (New York, 1987), pp. 111-12, 245; David E. Nye, Electrifying America: Social Meanings of a New Technology, 1880-1940 (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), p. 258; Judy Wajcman, Feminism Confronts Technology (University Park. Pa., 1991), ch. 4; and Katherine Jellison, Entitled to Power: Farm Women and Technology, 1913-1963 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1993), pp. xx, 53-54.
22. Judith A. McGaw, "No Passive Victims, No Separate Spheres: A Feminist's Perspective on Technology's History," in In Context: History and History of Technology - Essays in Honor of Melvin Kranzberg, ed. Stephen H. Cutcliffe and Robert Post (Bethlehem, Pa., 1989), pp. 172-91; and Ellen Lupton, Mechanical Brides: Women and Machines from Home to Office (Princeton, N.J., 1993), pp. 15-27. For citations of the thesis, see, for example, Susan Strasser, Never Done: A History of American Housework (New York, 1982), p. 251; Christine E. Bose, Philip L. Bereano, and Mary Malloy, "Household Technology and the Social Construction of Housework," Technology and Culture 25 (1984) : 53-82; Glenna Matthews, "Just a Housewife ": The Rise and Fall of Domesticity in America (New York, 1987), pp. 111-12, 245; David E. Nye, Electrifying America: Social Meanings of a New Technology, 1880-1940 (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), p. 258; Judy Wajcman, Feminism Confronts Technology (University Park. Pa., 1991), ch. 4; and Katherine Jellison, Entitled to Power: Farm Women and Technology, 1913-1963 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1993), pp. xx, 53-54.
23. Judith A. McGaw, "No Passive Victims, No Separate Spheres: A Feminist's Perspective on Technology's History," in In Context: History and History of Technology - Essays in Honor of Melvin Kranzberg, ed. Stephen H. Cutcliffe and Robert Post (Bethlehem, Pa., 1989), pp. 172-91; and Ellen Lupton, Mechanical Brides: Women and Machines from Home to Office (Princeton, N.J., 1993), pp. 15-27. For citations of the thesis, see, for example, Susan Strasser, Never Done: A History of American Housework (New York, 1982), p. 251; Christine E. Bose, Philip L. Bereano, and Mary Malloy, "Household Technology and the Social Construction of Housework," Technology and Culture 25 (1984) : 53-82; Glenna Matthews, "Just a Housewife ": The Rise and Fall of Domesticity in America (New York, 1987), pp. 111-12, 245; David E. Nye, Electrifying America: Social Meanings of a New Technology, 1880-1940 (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), p. 258; Judy Wajcman, Feminism Confronts Technology (University Park. Pa., 1991), ch. 4; and Katherine Jellison, Entitled to Power: Farm Women and Technology, 1913-1963 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1993), pp. xx, 53-54.
24. Judith A. McGaw, "No Passive Victims, No Separate Spheres: A Feminist's Perspective on Technology's History," in In Context: History and History of Technology - Essays in Honor of Melvin Kranzberg, ed. Stephen H. Cutcliffe and Robert Post (Bethlehem, Pa., 1989), pp. 172-91; and Ellen Lupton, Mechanical Brides: Women and Machines from Home to Office (Princeton, N.J., 1993), pp. 15-27. For citations of the thesis, see, for example, Susan Strasser, Never Done: A History of American Housework (New York, 1982), p. 251; Christine E. Bose, Philip L. Bereano, and Mary Malloy, "Household Technology and the Social Construction of Housework," Technology and Culture 25 (1984) : 53-82; Glenna Matthews, "Just a Housewife ": The Rise and Fall of Domesticity in America (New York, 1987), pp. 111-12, 245; David E. Nye, Electrifying America: Social Meanings of a New Technology, 1880-1940 (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), p. 258; Judy Wajcman, Feminism Confronts Technology (University Park. Pa., 1991), ch. 4; and Katherine Jellison, Entitled to Power: Farm Women and Technology, 1913-1963 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1993), pp. xx, 53-54.
25. Judith A. McGaw, "No Passive Victims, No Separate Spheres: A Feminist's Perspective on Technology's History," in In Context: History and History of Technology - Essays in Honor of Melvin Kranzberg, ed. Stephen H. Cutcliffe and Robert Post (Bethlehem, Pa., 1989), pp. 172-91; and Ellen Lupton, Mechanical Brides: Women and Machines from Home to Office (Princeton, N.J., 1993), pp. 15-27. For citations of the thesis, see, for example, Susan Strasser, Never Done: A History of American Housework (New York, 1982), p. 251; Christine E. Bose, Philip L. Bereano, and Mary Malloy, "Household Technology and the Social Construction of Housework," Technology and Culture 25 (1984) : 53-82; Glenna Matthews, "Just a Housewife ": The Rise and Fall of Domesticity in America (New York, 1987), pp. 111-12, 245; David E. Nye, Electrifying America: Social Meanings of a New Technology, 1880-1940 (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), p. 258; Judy Wajcman, Feminism Confronts Technology (University Park. Pa., 1991), ch. 4; and Katherine Jellison, Entitled to Power: Farm Women and Technology, 1913-1963 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1993), pp. xx, 53-54.
26. My analysis draws upon recent work in the sociology of science and technology, which stresses the "interpretative flexibility" of scientific theories and technological artifacts. See Harry Collins, Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice (London, 1985); and Trevor J. Pinch and Wiebe E. Bijker, "The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other," in The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, ed. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Pinch (Cambridge, Mass., 1987), pp. 17-50. In this article I address the issue of how stable interpretations of this data were constructed (the issue of "closure mechanisms," to use the sociologist's terminology) in terms of the ideologies of the researchers.
27. My analysis draws upon recent work in the sociology of science and technology, which stresses the "interpretative flexibility" of scientific theories and technological artifacts. See Harry Collins, Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice (London, 1985); and Trevor J. Pinch and Wiebe E. Bijker, "The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other," in The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, ed. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Pinch (Cambridge, Mass., 1987), pp. 17-50. In this article I address the issue of how stable interpretations of this data were constructed (the issue of "closure mechanisms," to use the sociologist's terminology) in terms of the ideologies of the researchers.
28. On the large number of social science sources for rural history and general remarks about their interpretation, see Hal S. Baron, "Rural Social Surveys," Agricultural History 58 (1984): 113-17; and Harold T. Pinkett, "Government Research Concerning Problems of Rural Society," ibid., pp. 365-72.
29. On the large number of social science sources for rural history and general remarks about their interpretation, see Hal S. Baron, "Rural Social Surveys," Agricultural History 58 (1984): 113-17; and Harold T. Pinkett, "Government Research Concerning Problems of Rural Society," ibid., pp. 365-72.
30. Alan I. Marcus, Agricultural Science and the Quest for Legitimacy: Farmers, Agricultural Colleges, and Experiment Stations, 1870-1890 (Ames, Iowa, 1985), pp. 7-12; and John Mack Faragher, Sugar Creek: Life on the Illinois Prairie (New Haven, 1986), pp. 232- 33.
31. Alan I. Marcus, Agricultural Science and the Quest for Legitimacy: Farmers, Agricultural Colleges, and Experiment Stations, 1870-1890 (Ames, Iowa, 1985), pp. 7-12; and John Mack Faragher, Sugar Creek: Life on the Illinois Prairie (New Haven, 1986), pp. 232-33.
32. Report of the Commission on Country Life (1909; reprint, New York, 1917), pp. 103, 104. On the Country Life Commission and movement, see Clayton S. Ellsworth, "Theodore Roosevelt's Country Life Commission," Agricultural History 34 (1960): 155-72; and William L. Bowers, The Country Life Movement in America, 1900-1920 (Port Washington, N.Y., 1974). A later study shows that the commission largely ignored the data it collected. Only 1 percent of the respondents to the commission's inquiries were farm women, and the "majority of the total sample and of the farmers were unqualifiedly satisfied" with the condition of farm homes, sanitary conditions on farms, and communication services. See Olaf F. Larson and Thomas B. Jones, "The Unpublished Data from Roosevelt's Commission on Country Life," Agricultural History 50 (1976): 583-99, on pp. 588, 597 (italics theirs).
33. Report of the Commission on Country Life (1909; reprint, New York, 1917), pp. 103, 104. On the Country Life Commission and movement, see Clayton S. Ellsworth, "Theodore Roosevelt's Country Life Commission," Agricultural History 34 (1960): 155-72; and William L. Bowers, The Country Life Movement in America, 1900-1920 (Port Washington, N.Y., 1974). A later study shows that the commission largely ignored the data it collected. Only 1 percent of the respondents to the commission's inquiries were farm women, and the "majority of the total sample and of the farmers were unqualifiedly satisfied" with the condition of farm homes, sanitary conditions on farms, and communication services. See Olaf F. Larson and Thomas B. Jones, "The Unpublished Data from Roosevelt's Commission on Country Life," Agricultural History 50 (1976): 583-99, on pp. 588, 597 (italics theirs).
34. Report of the Commission on Country Life (1909; reprint, New York, 1917), pp. 103, 104. On the Country Life Commission and movement, see Clayton S. Ellsworth, "Theodore Roosevelt's Country Life Commission," Agricultural History 34 (1960): 155-72; and William L. Bowers, The Country Life Movement in America, 1900-1920 (Port Washington, N.Y., 1974). A later study shows that the commission largely ignored the data it collected. Only 1 percent of the respondents to the commission's inquiries were farm women, and the "majority of the total sample and of the farmers were unqualifiedly satisfied" with the condition of farm homes, sanitary conditions on farms, and communication services. See Olaf F. Larson and Thomas B. Jones, "The Unpublished Data from Roosevelt's Commission on Country Life," Agricultural History 50 (1976): 583-99, on pp. 588, 597 (italics theirs).
35. Report of the Commission on Country Life (1909; reprint, New York, 1917), pp. 103, 104. On the Country Life Commission and movement, see Clayton S. Ellsworth, "Theodore Roosevelt's Country Life Commission," Agricultural History 34 (1960): 155-72; and William L. Bowers, The Country Life Movement in America, 1900-1920 (Port Washington, N.Y., 1974). A later study shows that the commission largely ignored the data it collected. Only 1 percent of the respondents to the commission's inquiries were farm women, and the "majority of the total sample and of the farmers were unqualifiedly satisfied" with the condition of farm homes, sanitary conditions on farms, and communication services. See Olaf F. Larson and Thomas B. Jones, "The Unpublished Data from Roosevelt's Commission on Country Life," Agricultural History 50 (1976): 583-99, on pp. 588, 597 (italics theirs).
36. "Is This the Trouble with the Farmer's Wife," Ladies Home Journal, February 1909, 5. On the work patterns of farm women in the 20th century, see Deborah Fink, Agrarian Women: Wives and Mothers in Rural Nebraska, 1880-1940 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1992); Jellison; Mary Neth, Preserving the Family Farm: Women, Community, and the Foundations of Agribusiness in the Midwest, 1900-1940 (Baltimore, 1995); and Jane Adams, The Transformation of Rural Life, Southern Illinois, 1890-1990 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1995).
37. "Is This the Trouble with the Farmer's Wife," Ladies Home Journal, February 1909, 5. On the work patterns of farm women in the 20th century, see Deborah Fink, Agrarian Women: Wives and Mothers in Rural Nebraska, 1880-1940 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1992); Jellison; Mary Neth, Preserving the Family Farm: Women, Community, and the Foundations of Agribusiness in the Midwest, 1900-1940 (Baltimore, 1995); and Jane Adams, The Transformation of Rural Life, Southern Illinois, 1890-1990 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1995).
38. "Is This the Trouble with the Farmer's Wife," Ladies Home Journal, February 1909, 5. On the work patterns of farm women in the 20th century, see Deborah Fink, Agrarian Women: Wives and Mothers in Rural Nebraska, 1880-1940 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1992); Jellison; Mary Neth, Preserving the Family Farm: Women, Community, and the Foundations of Agribusiness in the Midwest, 1900-1940 (Baltimore, 1995); and Jane Adams, The Transformation of Rural Life, Southern Illinois, 1890-1990 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1995).
39. "Is This the Trouble with the Farmer's Wife," Ladies Home Journal, February 1909, 5. On the work patterns of farm women in the 20th century, see Deborah Fink, Agrarian Women: Wives and Mothers in Rural Nebraska, 1880-1940 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1992); Jellison; Mary Neth, Preserving the Family Farm: Women, Community, and the Foundations of Agribusiness in the Midwest, 1900-1940 (Baltimore, 1995); and Jane Adams, The Transformation of Rural Life, Southern Illinois, 1890-1990 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1995).
40. Martha Bensley Bruère and Robert Bruère, "The Revolt of the Farmer's Wife!" Harper's Bazaar, November 1912, 539, 550, 580; December 1912, 601-2, 621;January 1913, 15-16, 37; February 1913, 67-68, 92; March 1913, 115-16; and "After the Revolt," Harper's Bazaar, May 1913, 235, 248. I would like to thank Kathleen Babbitt for drawing my attention to this series.
41. Martha Bensley Bruère and Robert Bruère, "The Revolt of the Farmer's Wife!" Harper's Bazaar, November 1912, 539, 550, 580; December 1912, 601-2, 621;January 1913, 15-16, 37; February 1913, 67-68, 92; March 1913, 115-16; and "After the Revolt," Harper's Bazaar, May 1913, 235, 248. I would like to thank Kathleen Babbitt for drawing my attention to this series.
42. David B. Danbom, The Resisted Revolution: Urban America and the Industrialization of Agriculture, 1900-1930 (Ames, Iowa, 1979); Katherine Hempstead, "Agricultural Change and the Rural Problem: Farm Women and the Country Life Movement" (Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1992), chs. 5-6; and Jellison, ch. 1.
43. David B. Danbom, The Resisted Revolution: Urban America and the Industrialization of Agriculture, 1900-1930 (Ames, Iowa, 1979); Katherine Hempstead, "Agricultural Change and the Rural Problem: Farm Women and the Country Life Movement" (Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1992), chs. 5-6; and Jellison, ch. 1.
44. David B. Danbom, The Resisted Revolution: Urban America and the Industrialization of Agriculture, 1900-1930 (Ames, Iowa, 1979); Katherine Hempstead, "Agricultural Change and the Rural Problem: Farm Women and the Country Life Movement" (Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1992), chs. 5-6; and Jellison, ch. 1.
45. USDA, Office of the Secretary, Social and Labor Needs of Farm Women, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, Educational Needs of Farm Women, and Economic Needs of Farm Women (Washington, D.C., 1915, reports nos. 103-6); Literary Digest, December 20, 1919, 74, 78; and New York State College of Agriculture, Extension Service News 6 (1919): 77-78, on p. 78. On research in rural-urban mental health, see Pitirim Sorokin and Carle Zimmerman, Principles of Rural-Urban Sociology (New York, 1929), pp. 264-73; and Sorokin, Zimmerman, and Charles Galpin, eds., A Systematic Source Book in Rural Sociology (Minneapolis, 1932), 3: 236-50.
46. USDA, Office of the Secretary, Social and Labor Needs of Farm Women, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, Educational Needs of Farm Women, and Economic Needs of Farm Women (Washington, D.C., 1915, reports nos. 103-6); Literary Digest, December 20, 1919, 74, 78; and New York State College of Agriculture, Extension Service News 6 (1919): 77-78, on p. 78. On research in rural-urban mental health, see Pitirim Sorokin and Carle Zimmerman, Principles of Rural-Urban Sociology (New York, 1929), pp. 264-73; and Sorokin, Zimmerman, and Charles Galpin, eds., A Systematic Source Book in Rural Sociology (Minneapolis, 1932), 3: 236-50.
47. USDA, Office of the Secretary, Social and Labor Needs of Farm Women, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, Educational Needs of Farm Women, and Economic Needs of Farm Women (Washington, D.C., 1915, reports nos. 103-6); Literary Digest, December 20, 1919, 74, 78; and New York State College of Agriculture, Extension Service News 6 (1919): 77-78, on p. 78. On research in rural-urban mental health, see Pitirim Sorokin and Carle Zimmerman, Principles of Rural-Urban Sociology (New York, 1929), pp. 264-73; and Sorokin, Zimmerman, and Charles Galpin, eds., A Systematic Source Book in Rural Sociology (Minneapolis, 1932), 3: 236-50.
48. USDA, Office of the Secretary, Social and Labor Needs of Farm Women, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, Educational Needs of Farm Women, and Economic Needs of Farm Women (Washington, D.C., 1915, reports nos. 103-6); Literary Digest, December 20, 1919, 74, 78; and New York State College of Agriculture, Extension Service News 6 (1919): 77-78, on p. 78. On research in rural-urban mental health, see Pitirim Sorokin and Carle Zimmerman, Principles of Rural-Urban Sociology (New York, 1929), pp. 264-73; and Sorokin, Zimmerman, and Charles Galpin, eds., A Systematic Source Book in Rural Sociology (Minneapolis, 1932), 3: 236-50.
49. USDA, Office of the Secretary, Social and Labor Needs of Farm Women, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, Educational Needs of Farm Women, and Economic Needs of Farm Women (Washington, D.C., 1915, reports nos. 103-6); Literary Digest, December 20, 1919, 74, 78; and New York State College of Agriculture, Extension Service News 6 (1919): 77-78, on p. 78. On research in rural-urban mental health, see Pitirim Sorokin and Carle Zimmerman, Principles of Rural-Urban Sociology (New York, 1929), pp. 264-73; and Sorokin, Zimmerman, and Charles Galpin, eds., A Systematic Source Book in Rural Sociology (Minneapolis, 1932), 3: 236-50.
50. Florence Ward, "The Farm Woman's Problems," Journal of Home Economics 12 (1920): 437-57, on pp. 449-50. On Ward, see Gladys L. Baker, "Women in the U.S. Department of Agriculture," Agricultural History 50 (1976): 190-201.
51. Florence Ward, "The Farm Woman's Problems," Journal of Home Economics 12 (1920): 437-57, on pp. 449-50. On Ward, see Gladys L. Baker, "Women in the U.S. Department of Agriculture," Agricultural History 50 (1976): 190-201.
52. Hempstead, pp. 101-21, on p. 116. On the urban base of the Country Life movement, see Bowers (n. 9 above).
53. Hempstead, p. 201 (quotation). See, for example, Henry Wallace, "The Socialization of Country Life," Wallaces' Farmer, January 7, 1910, 2, and USDA, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, p. 66; Hempstead, p. 201 (citing Martha Crow in 1915); Charles Galpin, Rural Life (New York, 1918), chs. 5-6; and "Why Young Women Are Leaving Our Farms," Literary Digest, October 2, 1920, 56-57. On the agrarian myth, see Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform (New York, 1955), chs. 1-3; and David Danbom, "Romantic Agrarianism in Twentieth-Century America," Agricultural History 65 (1991): 1-12.
54. Hempstead, p. 201 (quotation). See, for example, Henry Wallace, "The Socialization of Country Life," Wallaces' Farmer, January 7, 1910, 2, and USDA, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, p. 66; Hempstead, p. 201 (citing Martha Crow in 1915); Charles Galpin, Rural Life (New York, 1918), chs. 5-6; and "Why Young Women Are Leaving Our Farms," Literary Digest, October 2, 1920, 56-57. On the agrarian myth, see Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform (New York, 1955), chs. 1-3; and David Danbom, "Romantic Agrarianism in Twentieth-Century America," Agricultural History 65 (1991): 1-12.
55. Hempstead, p. 201 (quotation). See, for example, Henry Wallace, "The Socialization of Country Life," Wallaces' Farmer, January 7, 1910, 2, and USDA, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, p. 66; Hempstead, p. 201 (citing Martha Crow in 1915); Charles Galpin, Rural Life (New York, 1918), chs. 5-6; and "Why Young Women Are Leaving Our Farms," Literary Digest, October 2, 1920, 56-57. On the agrarian myth, see Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform (New York, 1955), chs. 1-3; and David Danbom, "Romantic Agrarianism in Twentieth-Century America," Agricultural History 65 (1991): 1-12.
56. Hempstead, p. 201 (quotation). See, for example, Henry Wallace, "The Socialization of Country Life," Wallaces' Farmer, January 7, 1910, 2, and USDA, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, p. 66; Hempstead, p. 201 (citing Martha Crow in 1915); Charles Galpin, Rural Life (New York, 1918), chs. 5-6; and "Why Young Women Are Leaving Our Farms," Literary Digest, October 2, 1920, 56-57. On the agrarian myth, see Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform (New York, 1955), chs. 1-3; and David Danbom, "Romantic Agrarianism in Twentieth-Century America," Agricultural History 65 (1991): 1-12.
57. Hempstead, p. 201 (quotation). See, for example, Henry Wallace, "The Socialization of Country Life," Wallaces' Farmer, January 7, 1910, 2, and USDA, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, p. 66; Hempstead, p. 201 (citing Martha Crow in 1915); Charles Galpin, Rural Life (New York, 1918), chs. 5-6; and "Why Young Women Are Leaving Our Farms," Literary Digest, October 2, 1920, 56-57. On the agrarian myth, see Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform (New York, 1955), chs. 1-3; and David Danbom, "Romantic Agrarianism in Twentieth-Century America," Agricultural History 65 (1991): 1-12.
58. Hempstead, p. 201 (quotation). See, for example, Henry Wallace, "The Socialization of Country Life," Wallaces' Farmer, January 7, 1910, 2, and USDA, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, p. 66; Hempstead, p. 201 (citing Martha Crow in 1915); Charles Galpin, Rural Life (New York, 1918), chs. 5-6; and "Why Young Women Are Leaving Our Farms," Literary Digest, October 2, 1920, 56-57. On the agrarian myth, see Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform (New York, 1955), chs. 1-3; and David Danbom, "Romantic Agrarianism in Twentieth-Century America," Agricultural History 65 (1991): 1-12.
59. Hempstead, p. 201 (quotation). See, for example, Henry Wallace, "The Socialization of Country Life," Wallaces' Farmer, January 7, 1910, 2, and USDA, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, p. 66; Hempstead, p. 201 (citing Martha Crow in 1915); Charles Galpin, Rural Life (New York, 1918), chs. 5-6; and "Why Young Women Are Leaving Our Farms," Literary Digest, October 2, 1920, 56-57. On the agrarian myth, see Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform (New York, 1955), chs. 1-3; and David Danbom, "Romantic Agrarianism in Twentieth-Century America," Agricultural History 65 (1991): 1-12.
60. Hempstead, p. 201 (quotation). See, for example, Henry Wallace, "The Socialization of Country Life," Wallaces' Farmer, January 7, 1910, 2, and USDA, Domestic Needs of Farm Women, p. 66; Hempstead, p. 201 (citing Martha Crow in 1915); Charles Galpin, Rural Life (New York, 1918), chs. 5-6; and "Why Young Women Are Leaving Our Farms," Literary Digest, October 2, 1920, 56-57. On the agrarian myth, see Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform (New York, 1955), chs. 1-3; and David Danbom, "Romantic Agrarianism in Twentieth-Century America," Agricultural History 65 (1991): 1-12.
61. Mary Meek Atkeson, The Woman on the Farm (New York, 1924), pp. 21-24, on p. 24; and Louise Stanley, "The Development of Better Farm Homes," Agricultural Engineering 7 (1926): 129-30, on p. 130.
62. Mary Meek Atkeson, The Woman on the Farm (New York, 1924), pp. 21-24, on p. 24; and Louise Stanley, "The Development of Better Farm Homes," Agricultural Engineering 7 (1926): 129-30, on p. 130.
63. Another concern was that, in the face of a rising urban population, too much outmigration might lead to food shortages and rising food prices. Martha and Robert Bruère asked in 1912, "Shall the nation go hungry because the farmers' wives don't like their jobs? For, after all, a man will not live on the farm without a wife." See "The Revolt of the Farmer's Wife: The War on Drudgery," Harper's Bazaar, November 1912, 539, 550, 580, on p. 539.
64. See, for example, New York Times, May 30, 1915, V, 14-15; and Literary Digest, October 2, 1920, 56.
65. See, for example, New York Times, May 30, 1915, V, 14-15; and Literary Digest, October 2, 1920, 56.
66. "The Trouble with the Farmer's Wife," Wallaces'Farmer, February 19, 1909, 262; and Clarence Poe, "Is the Farm Woman Getting a Square Deal?" Progressive Farmer, April 17, 1915, 381. Poe's letter to the secretary of agriculture had prompted the USDA suwey of the crop correspondents.
67. "The Trouble with the Farmer's Wife," Wallaces'Farmer, February 19, 1909, 262; and Clarence Poe, "Is the Farm Woman Getting a Square Deal?" Progressive Farmer, April 17, 1915, 381. Poe's letter to the secretary of agriculture had prompted the USDA suwey of the crop correspondents.
68. Mrs. T. R., "In Defense of the Farmer's Wife," Wallaces' Farmer, September 17, 1909, 1164. Deborah Fink tends to support this view of patriarchy, while Nancy Osterud, Mary Neth, and Katherine Jellison emphasize mutuality within a flexible patriarchal system. See Fink (n. 10 above); Osterud, Bonds of Community: The Lives of Farm Women in Nineteenth-Century New York (Ithaca, N.Y., 1991); Neth, "Gender and the Family Labor System: Defining Work in the Rural Midwest," Journal of Social History 27 (1994): 563-77, and Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), ch. 1; and Jellison (n. 5 above), pp. 181-86.
69. Mrs. T. R., "In Defense of the Farmer's Wife," Wallaces' Farmer, September 17, 1909, 1164. Deborah Fink tends to support this view of patriarchy, while Nancy Osterud, Mary Neth, and Katherine Jellison emphasize mutuality within a flexible patriarchal system. See Fink (n. 10 above); Osterud, Bonds of Community: The Lives of Farm Women in Nineteenth-Century New York (Ithaca, N.Y., 1991); Neth, "Gender and the Family Labor System: Defining Work in the Rural Midwest," Journal of Social History 27 (1994): 563-77, and Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), ch. 1; and Jellison (n. 5 above), pp. 181-86.
70. Mrs. T. R., "In Defense of the Farmer's Wife," Wallaces' Farmer, September 17, 1909, 1164. Deborah Fink tends to support this view of patriarchy, while Nancy Osterud, Mary Neth, and Katherine Jellison emphasize mutuality within a flexible patriarchal system. See Fink (n. 10 above); Osterud, Bonds of Community: The Lives of Farm Women in Nineteenth-Century New York (Ithaca, N.Y., 1991); Neth, "Gender and the Family Labor System: Defining Work in the Rural Midwest," Journal of Social History 27 (1994): 563-77, and Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), ch. 1; and Jellison (n. 5 above), pp. 181-86.
71. Mrs. T. R., "In Defense of the Farmer's Wife," Wallaces' Farmer, September 17, 1909, 1164. Deborah Fink tends to support this view of patriarchy, while Nancy Osterud, Mary Neth, and Katherine Jellison emphasize mutuality within a flexible patriarchal system. See Fink (n. 10 above); Osterud, Bonds of Community: The Lives of Farm Women in Nineteenth-Century New York (Ithaca, N.Y., 1991); Neth, "Gender and the Family Labor System: Defining Work in the Rural Midwest," Journal of Social History 27 (1994): 563-77, and Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), ch. 1; and Jellison (n. 5 above), pp. 181-86.
72. Mrs. T. R., "In Defense of the Farmer's Wife," Wallaces' Farmer, September 17, 1909, 1164. Deborah Fink tends to support this view of patriarchy, while Nancy Osterud, Mary Neth, and Katherine Jellison emphasize mutuality within a flexible patriarchal system. See Fink (n. 10 above); Osterud, Bonds of Community: The Lives of Farm Women in Nineteenth-Century New York (Ithaca, N.Y., 1991); Neth, "Gender and the Family Labor System: Defining Work in the Rural Midwest," Journal of Social History 27 (1994): 563-77, and Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), ch. 1; and Jellison (n. 5 above), pp. 181-86.
73. "Farm Women Who Count Themselves Blest by Fate," Literary Digest, November 13, 1920, 52, 55.
74. Atkeson (n. 17 above), p. 297; and Frances Gilbert Ingersoll, "A Farm Wife's Protest," Rural New Yorker, March 14, 1929, 482.
75. Atkeson (n. 17 above), p. 297; and Frances Gilbert Ingersoll, "A Farm Wife's Protest," Rural New Yorker, March 14, 1929, 482.
76. Jellison, pp. 27-30. Neth argues that Hoag's portrayal of mutuality is more representative of the actual status of farm women than the crop-correspondent survey. See Neth, Preserving the Family Farm, p. 237.
77. Michael Adas, Machines as the Measure of Men: Science, Technology, and Ideologies of Western Dominance (Ithaca, N.Y., 1989).
78. See Claude S. Fischer, America Calling: A Social History of the Telephone to 1940 (Berkeley, 1992), pp. 93, 102 (census statistics) ; James H. Shideler, "Flappers and Philosophers and Farmers: Rural-Urban Tensions of the Twenties," Agricultural History 47 (1973) : 283-99; Don S. Kirschner, City and Country: Rural Responses to Urbanization in the 1920s (Westport, Conn., 1970); and Nye (n. 5 above), ch. 7.
79. See Claude S. Fischer, America Calling: A Social History of the Telephone to 1940 (Berkeley, 1992), pp. 93, 102 (census statistics) ; James H. Shideler, "Flappers and Philosophers and Farmers: Rural-Urban Tensions of the Twenties," Agricultural History 47 (1973) : 283-99; Don S. Kirschner, City and Country: Rural Responses to Urbanization in the 1920s (Westport, Conn., 1970); and Nye (n. 5 above), ch. 7.
80. See Claude S. Fischer, America Calling: A Social History of the Telephone to 1940 (Berkeley, 1992), pp. 93, 102 (census statistics) ; James H. Shideler, "Flappers and Philosophers and Farmers: Rural-Urban Tensions of the Twenties," Agricultural History 47 (1973) : 283-99; Don S. Kirschner, City and Country: Rural Responses to Urbanization in the 1920s (Westport, Conn., 1970); and Nye (n. 5 above), ch. 7.
81. See Claude S. Fischer, America Calling: A Social History of the Telephone to 1940 (Berkeley, 1992), pp. 93, 102 (census statistics) ; James H. Shideler, "Flappers and Philosophers and Farmers: Rural-Urban Tensions of the Twenties," Agricultural History 47 (1973) : 283-99; Don S. Kirschner, City and Country: Rural Responses to Urbanization in the 1920s (Westport, Conn., 1970); and Nye (n. 5 above), ch. 7.
82. See Progressive Farmer, February 12, 1910, 130-31; T. N. Carver, "The Organization of a Rural Community," in Department of Agriculture, Yearbook 1914 (Washington, D.C., 1915), pp. 135-36; Atkeson, p. 304; and Frank Sincebaugh's survey form, in R. F. Buchanan, "An Economic Study of Farm Electrification in New York State," field records for Delco plants, 1927, College of Home Economics Papers, Cornell University Archives, microfilm reel 143.
83. See Progressive Farmer, February 12, 1910, 130-31; T. N. Carver, "The Organization of a Rural Community," in Department of Agriculture, Yearbook 1914 (Washington, D.C., 1915), pp. 135-36; Atkeson, p. 304; and Frank Sincebaugh's survey form, in R. F. Buchanan, "An Economic Study of Farm Electrification in New York State," field records for Delco plants, 1927, College of Home Economics Papers, Cornell University Archives, microfilm reel 143.
84. See Progressive Farmer, February 12, 1910, 130-31; T. N. Carver, "The Organization of a Rural Community," in Department of Agriculture, Yearbook 1914 (Washington, D.C., 1915), pp. 135-36; Atkeson, p. 304; and Frank Sincebaugh's survey form, in R. F. Buchanan, "An Economic Study of Farm Electrification in New York State," field records for Delco plants, 1927, College of Home Economics Papers, Cornell University Archives, microfilm reel 143.
85. See Progressive Farmer, February 12, 1910, 130-31; T. N. Carver, "The Organization of a Rural Community," in Department of Agriculture, Yearbook 1914 (Washington, D.C., 1915), pp. 135-36; Atkeson, p. 304; and Frank Sincebaugh's survey form, in R. F. Buchanan, "An Economic Study of Farm Electrification in New York State," field records for Delco plants, 1927, College of Home Economics Papers, Cornell University Archives, microfilm reel 143.
86. Sybil B. Smith, "Development of Home Economics Research at ihe Agricultural Experiment Stations under the Purnell Act," Department of Agriculture, Report on the Agriculture Experiment Stations, 1926 (Washington, D.C., 1927), pp. 89-96; H. C. Knoblauch et al., State Agricultural Experiment Stations: A History of Research Policy and Procedure, Department of Agriculture, Miscellaneous Publication No. 904, May 1962, pp. 222-23 (text of Purnell Act); and Joel P. Kunze, "The Purnell Act and Agricultural Economics," Agricultural History 62 (1988): 131-49. On the history of home economics, see Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirde English, For Her Own Good: 150 Years of the Experts' Advice to Women (New York, 1978); Matthews (n. 5 above), ch. 6; Margaret W. Rossiter, Women Scientists in America: Struggles and Strategies to 1940 (Baltimore, 1982), pp. 200-201, 258-59; and Carolyn Goldstein, "Mediating Consumption: Home Economics and American Consumers, 1900-1940" (Ph.D. diss., University of Delaware, 1994), ch. 1.
87. Sybil B. Smith, "Development of Home Economics Research at ihe Agricultural Experiment Stations under the Purnell Act," Department of Agriculture, Report on the Agriculture Experiment Stations, 1926 (Washington, D.C., 1927), pp. 89-96; H. C. Knoblauch et al., State Agricultural Experiment Stations: A History of Research Policy and Procedure, Department of Agriculture, Miscellaneous Publication No. 904, May 1962, pp. 222-23 (text of Purnell Act); and Joel P. Kunze, "The Purnell Act and Agricultural Economics," Agricultural History 62 (1988): 131-49. On the history of home economics, see Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirde English, For Her Own Good: 150 Years of the Experts' Advice to Women (New York, 1978); Matthews (n. 5 above), ch. 6; Margaret W. Rossiter, Women Scientists in America: Struggles and Strategies to 1940 (Baltimore, 1982), pp. 200-201, 258-59; and Carolyn Goldstein, "Mediating Consumption: Home Economics and American Consumers, 1900-1940" (Ph.D. diss., University of Delaware, 1994), ch. 1.
88. Sybil B. Smith, "Development of Home Economics Research at ihe Agricultural Experiment Stations under the Purnell Act," Department of Agriculture, Report on the Agriculture Experiment Stations, 1926 (Washington, D.C., 1927), pp. 89-96; H. C. Knoblauch et al., State Agricultural Experiment Stations: A History of Research Policy and Procedure, Department of Agriculture, Miscellaneous Publication No. 904, May 1962, pp. 222-23 (text of Purnell Act); and Joel P. Kunze, "The Purnell Act and Agricultural Economics," Agricultural History 62 (1988): 131-49. On the history of home economics, see Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirde English, For Her Own Good: 150 Years of the Experts' Advice to Women (New York, 1978); Matthews (n. 5 above), ch. 6; Margaret W. Rossiter, Women Scientists in America: Struggles and Strategies to 1940 (Baltimore, 1982), pp. 200-201, 258-59; and Carolyn Goldstein, "Mediating Consumption: Home Economics and American Consumers, 1900-1940" (Ph.D. diss., University of Delaware, 1994), ch. 1.
89. Sybil B. Smith, "Development of Home Economics Research at ihe Agricultural Experiment Stations under the Purnell Act," Department of Agriculture, Report on the Agriculture Experiment Stations, 1926 (Washington, D.C., 1927), pp. 89-96; H. C. Knoblauch et al., State Agricultural Experiment Stations: A History of Research Policy and Procedure, Department of Agriculture, Miscellaneous Publication No. 904, May 1962, pp. 222-23 (text of Purnell Act); and Joel P. Kunze, "The Purnell Act and Agricultural Economics," Agricultural History 62 (1988): 131-49. On the history of home economics, see Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirde English, For Her Own Good: 150 Years of the Experts' Advice to Women (New York, 1978); Matthews (n. 5 above), ch. 6; Margaret W. Rossiter, Women Scientists in America: Struggles and Strategies to 1940 (Baltimore, 1982), pp. 200-201, 258-59; and Carolyn Goldstein, "Mediating Consumption: Home Economics and American Consumers, 1900-1940" (Ph.D. diss., University of Delaware, 1994), ch. 1.
90. Sybil B. Smith, "Development of Home Economics Research at ihe Agricultural Experiment Stations under the Purnell Act," Department of Agriculture, Report on the Agriculture Experiment Stations, 1926 (Washington, D.C., 1927), pp. 89-96; H. C. Knoblauch et al., State Agricultural Experiment Stations: A History of Research Policy and Procedure, Department of Agriculture, Miscellaneous Publication No. 904, May 1962, pp. 222-23 (text of Purnell Act); and Joel P. Kunze, "The Purnell Act and Agricultural Economics," Agricultural History 62 (1988): 131-49. On the history of home economics, see Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirde English, For Her Own Good: 150 Years of the Experts' Advice to Women (New York, 1978); Matthews (n. 5 above), ch. 6; Margaret W. Rossiter, Women Scientists in America: Struggles and Strategies to 1940 (Baltimore, 1982), pp. 200-201, 258-59; and Carolyn Goldstein, "Mediating Consumption: Home Economics and American Consumers, 1900-1940" (Ph.D. diss., University of Delaware, 1994), ch. 1.
91. Sybil B. Smith, "Development of Home Economics Research at ihe Agricultural Experiment Stations under the Purnell Act," Department of Agriculture, Report on the Agriculture Experiment Stations, 1926 (Washington, D.C., 1927), pp. 89-96; H. C. Knoblauch et al., State Agricultural Experiment Stations: A History of Research Policy and Procedure, Department of Agriculture, Miscellaneous Publication No. 904, May 1962, pp. 222-23 (text of Purnell Act); and Joel P. Kunze, "The Purnell Act and Agricultural Economics," Agricultural History 62 (1988): 131-49. On the history of home economics, see Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirde English, For Her Own Good: 150 Years of the Experts' Advice to Women (New York, 1978); Matthews (n. 5 above), ch. 6; Margaret W. Rossiter, Women Scientists in America: Struggles and Strategies to 1940 (Baltimore, 1982), pp. 200-201, 258-59; and Carolyn Goldstein, "Mediating Consumption: Home Economics and American Consumers, 1900-1940" (Ph.D. diss., University of Delaware, 1994), ch. 1.
92. Sybil B. Smith, "Development of Home Economics Research at ihe Agricultural Experiment Stations under the Purnell Act," Department of Agriculture, Report on the Agriculture Experiment Stations, 1926 (Washington, D.C., 1927), pp. 89-96; H. C. Knoblauch et al., State Agricultural Experiment Stations: A History of Research Policy and Procedure, Department of Agriculture, Miscellaneous Publication No. 904, May 1962, pp. 222-23 (text of Purnell Act); and Joel P. Kunze, "The Purnell Act and Agricultural Economics," Agricultural History 62 (1988): 131-49. On the history of home economics, see Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirde English, For Her Own Good: 150 Years of the
93. Ilena Bailey, "A Study of the Management of the Farm Home," Journal of Home Economics 7 (1915): 348-53; Bailey, "A Survey of the Farm Home," Journal of Home Economics 13 (1921): 346-56; and Ward (n. 14 above), p. 440.
94. Ilena Bailey, "A Study of the Management of the Farm Home," Journal of Home Economics 7 (1915): 348-53; Bailey, "A Survey of the Farm Home," Journal of Home Economics 13 (1921): 346-56; and Ward (n. 14 above), p. 440.
95. Ilena Bailey, "A Study of the Management of the Farm Home," Journal of Home Economics 7 (1915): 348-53; Bailey, "A Survey of the Farm Home," Journal of Home Economics 13 (1921): 346-56; and Ward (n. 14 above), p. 440.
96. Hildegarde Kneeland, "Report of the Work of Division of Economic Studies for Year Ending June 30, 1924," attached to memo from Kneeland to Louise Stanley, July 24, 1924, Bureau of Home Economics Archives, National Archives, Washington, D.C., RG 176, Entry 2, Box 550 (hereafter cited as BHE Archives); Goldstein, ch. 2; "Research in Home Economics at the State Agricultural Experiment Stations," Journal of Home Economics 19 (1927): 154-57; and Paul Betters, The Bureau of Home Economics, Its History, Activities and Organization (Washington, D.C., 1930), pp. 56- 64. The BHE also furnished time charts to home economists who were not participating in the Purnell-funded studies. See, for example, Eloise Davison to Ilena Bailey, October 21, 1924, BHE Archives, Entry 6, Box 611; and Louise Stanley to Martha Van Rensselaer, October 26, 1925, BHE Archives, Entry 1, Box 8.
97. Hildegarde Kneeland, "Report of the Work of Division of Economic Studies for Year Ending June 30, 1924," attached to memo from Kneeland to Louise Stanley, July 24, 1924, Bureau of Home Economics Archives, National Archives, Washington, D.C., RG 176, Entry 2, Box 550 (hereafter cited as BHE Archives); Goldstein, ch. 2; "Research in Home Economics at the State Agricultural Experiment Stations," Journal of Home Economics 19 (1927): 154-57; and Paul Betters, The Bureau of Home Economics, Its History, Activities and Organization (Washington, D.C., 1930), pp. 56- 64. The BHE also furnished time charts to home economists who were not participating in the Purnell-funded studies. See, for example, Eloise Davison to Ilena Bailey, October 21, 1924, BHE Archives, Entry 6, Box 611; and Louise Stanley to Martha Van Rensselaer, October 26, 1925, BHE Archives, Entry 1, Box 8.
98. Hildegarde Kneeland, "Report of the Work of Division of Economic Studies for Year Ending June 30, 1924," attached to memo from Kneeland to Louise Stanley, July 24, 1924, Bureau of Home Economics Archives, National Archives, Washington, D.C., RG 176, Entry 2, Box 550 (hereafter cited as BHE Archives); Goldstein, ch. 2; "Research in Home Economics at the State Agricultural Experiment Stations," Journal of Home Economics 19 (1927): 154-57; and Paul Betters, The Bureau of Home Economics, Its History, Activities and Organization (Washington, D.C., 1930), pp. 56- 64. The BHE also furnished time charts to home economists who were not participating in the Purnell-funded studies. See, for example, Eloise Davison to Ilena Bailey, October 21, 1924, BHE Archives, Entry 6, Box 611; and Louise Stanley to Martha Van Rensselaer, October 26, 1925, BHE Archives, Entry 1, Box 8.
99. Hildegarde Kneeland, "Report of the Work of Division of Economic Studies for Year Ending June 30, 1924," attached to memo from Kneeland to Louise Stanley, July 24, 1924, Bureau of Home Economics Archives, National Archives, Washington, D.C., RG 176, Entry 2, Box 550 (hereafter cited as BHE Archives); Goldstein, ch. 2; "Research in Home Economics at the State Agricultural Experiment Stations," Journal of Home Economics 19 (1927): 154-57; and Paul Betters, The Bureau of Home Economics, Its History, Activities and Organization (Washington, D.C., 1930), pp. 56-64. The BHE also furnished time charts to home economists who were not participating in the Purnell-funded studies. See, for example, Eloise Davison to Ilena Bailey, October 21, 1924, BHE Archives, Entry 6, Box 611; and Louise Stanley to Martha Van Rensselaer, October 26, 1925, BHE Archives, Entry 1, Box 8.
100. See, for example, Jean Warren, "Use of Time in Its Relation to Home Management," Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 734, June 1940, p. 6. For an example of home agents working with ethnic women, see Joan M. Jensen, "Crossing Ethnic Barriers in the Southwest: Women's Agricultural Extension Education, 1914-1940," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 169-81.
101. See, for example, Jean Warren, "Use of Time in Its Relation to Home Management," Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 734, June 1940, p. 6. For an example of home agents working with ethnic women, see Joan M. Jensen, "Crossing Ethnic Barriers in the Southwest: Women's Agricultural Extension Education, 1914-1940," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 169-81.
102. Vanek, "Keeping Busy" (n. 3 above), pp. 59-60, briefly addresses this point. One researcher noted that only 33 percent of those contacted through women's clubs "submitted usable reports. The remaining 67 percent comprised not only those who lacked interest or initiative but also those who felt that their circumstances were such that they could not hope for a 'typical' week for some time to come. It also included many who were working under such physical or mental strain that they shrank from adding to their burdens by contracting to keep the record. Summer reports were especially difficult to obtain." See Maud Wilson, "Use of Time by Oregon Farm Homemakers," Oregon State Agricultural College Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 256, November 1929, p. 11. On the bias of the USDA toward serving the upper classes, see Neth, Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), ch. 4. For an argument that home-demonstration agents served more than the upper two-thirds of farm families, see Gladys Gallup, "The Effectiveness of the Home Demonstration Program of the Cooperative Extension Service of the United States Department of Agriculture in Reaching Rural People and in Meeting Their Needs" (Ph.D. diss., George Washington University, 1943), pp. 29-30.
103. Vanek, "Keeping Busy" (n. 3 above), pp. 59-60, briefly addresses this point. One researcher noted that only 33 percent of those contacted through women's clubs "submitted usable reports. The remaining 67 percent comprised not only those who lacked interest or initiative but also those who felt that their circumstances were such that they could not hope for a 'typical' week for some time to come. It also included many who were working under such physical or mental strain that they shrank from adding to their burdens by contracting to keep the record. Summer reports were especially difficult to obtain." See Maud Wilson, "Use of Time by Oregon Farm Homemakers," Oregon State Agricultural College Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 256, November 1929, p. 11. On the bias of the USDA toward serving the upper classes, see Neth, Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), ch. 4. For an argument that home-demonstration agents served more than the upper two-thirds of farm families, see Gladys Gallup, "The Effectiveness of the Home Demonstration Program of the Cooperative Extension Service of the United States Department of Agriculture in Reaching Rural People and in Meeting Their Needs" (Ph.D. diss., George Washington University, 1943), pp. 29-30.
104. Vanek, "Keeping Busy" (n. 3 above), pp. 59-60, briefly addresses this point. One researcher noted that only 33 percent of those contacted through women's clubs "submitted usable reports. The remaining 67 percent comprised not only those who lacked interest or initiative but also those who felt that their circumstances were such that they could not hope for a 'typical' week for some time to come. It also included many who were working under such physical or mental strain that they shrank from adding to their burdens by contracting to keep the record. Summer reports were especially difficult to obtain." See Maud Wilson, "Use of Time by Oregon Farm Homemakers," Oregon State Agricultural College Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 256, November 1929, p. 11. On the bias of the USDA toward serving the upper classes, see Neth, Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), ch. 4. For an argument that home-demonstration agents served more than the upper two-thirds of farm families, see Gladys Gallup, "The Effectiveness of the Home Demonstration Program of the Cooperative Extension Service of the United States Department of Agriculture in Reaching Rural People and in Meeting Their Needs" (Ph.D. diss., George Washington University, 1943), pp. 29-30.
105. Vanek, "Keeping Busy" (n. 3 above), pp. 59-60, briefly addresses this point. One researcher noted that only 33 percent of those contacted through women's clubs "submitted usable reports. The remaining 67 percent comprised not only those who lacked interest or initiative but also those who felt that their circumstances were such that they could not hope for a 'typical' week for some time to come. It also included many who were working under such physical or mental strain that they shrank from adding to their burdens by contracting to keep the record. Summer reports were especially difficult to obtain." See Maud Wilson, "Use of Time by Oregon Farm Homemakers," Oregon State Agricultural College Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 256, November 1929, p. 11. On the bias of the USDA toward serving the upper classes, see Neth, Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), ch. 4. For an argument that home-demonstration agents served more than the upper two-thirds of farm families, see Gladys Gallup, "The Effectiveness of the Home Demonstration Program of the Cooperative Extension Service of the United States Department of Agriculture in Reaching Rural People and in Meeting Their Needs" (Ph.D. diss., George Washington University, 1943), pp. 29-30.
106. Jellison (n. 5 above), ch. 1; Neth, Preserving the Family Farm, chs. 1, 8; Cynthia Sturges, "'How're You Gonna Keep 'Em Down on the Farm?': Rural Women and the Urban Model in Utah," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 182-99; Dorothy Schwieder, "Education and Change in the Lives of Iowa Farm Women, 1900-1940," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 200-215; Kathleen Babbitt, "The Productive Farm Woman and the Extension Home Economist in New York State, 1920-1940," Agricultural History 67 (1993): 83-101; Jane Adams, "Resistance to 'Modernity': Southern Illinois Farm Women and the Cult of Domesticity," American Ethnologist 20 (1993): 89-113; and, for a later period, Sara Elbert, "Amber Waves of Grain: Women's Work in New York Farm Families," in "To Toil the Livelong Day": America's Women at Work, 1780-1980, ed. Carol Groneman and Mary Beth Norton (Ithaca, N.Y., 1987), pp. 250-68.
107. Jellison (n. 5 above), ch. 1; Neth, Preserving the Family Farm, chs. 1, 8; Cynthia Sturges, "'How're You Gonna Keep 'Em Down on the Farm?': Rural Women and the Urban Model in Utah," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 182-99; Dorothy Schwieder, "Education and Change in the Lives of Iowa Farm Women, 1900-1940," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 200-215; Kathleen Babbitt, "The Productive Farm Woman and the Extension Home Economist in New York State, 1920-1940," Agricultural History 67 (1993): 83-101; Jane Adams, "Resistance to 'Modernity': Southern Illinois Farm Women and the Cult of Domesticity," American Ethnologist 20 (1993): 89-113; and, for a later period, Sara Elbert, "Amber Waves of Grain: Women's Work in New York Farm Families," in "To Toil the Livelong Day": America's Women at Work, 1780-1980, ed. Carol Groneman and Mary Beth Norton (Ithaca, N.Y., 1987), pp. 250-68.
108. Jellison (n. 5 above), ch. 1; Neth, Preserving the Family Farm, chs. 1, 8; Cynthia Sturges, "'How're You Gonna Keep 'Em Down on the Farm?': Rural Women and the Urban Model in Utah," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 182-99; Dorothy Schwieder, "Education and Change in the Lives of Iowa Farm Women, 1900-1940," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 200-215; Kathleen Babbitt, "The Productive Farm Woman and the Extension Home Economist in New York State, 1920-1940," Agricultural History 67 (1993): 83-101; Jane Adams, "Resistance to 'Modernity': Southern Illinois Farm Women and the Cult of Domesticity," American Ethnologist 20 (1993): 89-113; and, for a later period, Sara Elbert, "Amber Waves of Grain: Women's Work in New York Farm Families," in "To Toil the Livelong Day": America's Women at Work, 1780-1980, ed. Carol Groneman and Mary Beth Norton (Ithaca, N.Y., 1987), pp. 250-68.
109. Jellison (n. 5 above), ch. 1; Neth, Preserving the Family Farm, chs. 1, 8; Cynthia Sturges, "'How're You Gonna Keep 'Em Down on the Farm?': Rural Women and the Urban Model in Utah," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 182-99; Dorothy Schwieder, "Education and Change in the Lives of Iowa Farm Women, 1900-1940," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 200-215; Kathleen Babbitt, "The Productive Farm Woman and the Extension Home Economist in New York State, 1920-1940," Agricultural History 67 (1993): 83-101; Jane Adams, "Resistance to 'Modernity': Southern Illinois Farm Women and the Cult of Domesticity," American Ethnologist 20 (1993): 89-113; and, for a later period, Sara Elbert, "Amber Waves of Grain: Women's Work in New York Farm Families," in "To Toil the Livelong Day": America's Women at Work, 1780-1980, ed. Carol Groneman and Mary Beth Norton (Ithaca, N.Y., 1987), pp. 250-68.
110. Jellison (n. 5 above), ch. 1; Neth, Preserving the Family Farm, chs. 1, 8; Cynthia Sturges, "'How're You Gonna Keep 'Em Down on the Farm?': Rural Women and the Urban Model in Utah," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 182-99; Dorothy Schwieder, "Education and Change in the Lives of Iowa Farm Women, 1900-1940," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 200-215; Kathleen Babbitt, "The Productive Farm Woman and the Extension Home Economist in New York State, 1920-1940," Agricultural History 67 (1993): 83-101; Jane Adams, "Resistance to 'Modernity': Southern Illinois Farm Women and the Cult of Domesticity," American Ethnologist 20 (1993): 89-113; and, for a later period, Sara Elbert, "Amber Waves of Grain: Women's Work in New York Farm Families," in "To Toil the Livelong Day": America's Women at Work, 1780-1980, ed. Carol Groneman and Mary Beth Norton (Ithaca, N.Y., 1987), pp. 250-68.
111. Jellison (n. 5 above), ch. 1; Neth, Preserving the Family Farm, chs. 1, 8; Cynthia Sturges, "'How're You Gonna Keep 'Em Down on the Farm?': Rural Women and the Urban Model in Utah," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 182-99; Dorothy Schwieder, "Education and Change in the Lives of Iowa Farm Women, 1900-1940," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 200-215; Kathleen Babbitt, "The Productive Farm Woman and the Extension Home Economist in New York State, 1920-1940," Agricultural History 67 (1993): 83-101; Jane Adams, "Resistance to 'Modernity': Southern Illinois Farm Women and the Cult of Domesticity," American Ethnologist 20 (1993): 89-113; and, for a later period, Sara Elbert, "Amber Waves of Grain: Women's Work in New York Farm Families," in "To Toil the Livelong Day": America's Women at Work, 1780-1980, ed. Carol Groneman and Mary Beth Norton (Ithaca, N.Y., 1987), pp. 250-68.
112. Jellison (n. 5 above), ch. 1; Neth, Preserving the Family Farm, chs. 1, 8; Cynthia Sturges, "'How're You Gonna Keep 'Em Down on the Farm?': Rural Women and the Urban Model in Utah," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 182-99; Dorothy Schwieder, "Education and Change in the Lives of Iowa Farm Women, 1900-1940," Agricultural History 60 (1986): 200-215; Kathleen Babbitt, "The Productive Farm Woman and the Extension Home Economist in New York State, 1920-1940," Agricultural History 67 (1993): 83-101; Jane Adams, "Resistance to 'Modernity': Southern Illinois Farm Women and the Cult of Domesticity," American Ethnologist 20 (1993): 89-113; and, for a later period, Sara Elbert, "Amber Waves of Grain: Women's Work in New York Farm Families," in "To Toil the Livelong Day": America's Women at Work, 1780-1980, ed. Carol Groneman and Mary Beth Norton (Ithaca, N.Y., 1987), pp. 250-68.
113. Inez Arnquist to Hildegarde Kneeland, February 23, 1927 (quotation); Arnquist to Laura Brossard, March 31, 1927 (quotation); Brossard to Arnquist, April 9, 1927; Kneeland to Arnquist, May 22, 1928; Kneeland to Arnquist, June 27, 1929; Arnquist to Kneeland, July 5, 1929 (quotation); and other correspondence between Kneeland, Brossard, and Arnquist, from September 25, 1926, to July 13, 1929, BHE Archives, Entry 6, Box 607. A copy of the classification, "Study of the Use of Time by Homemakers," March 1928, is in BHE Archives, Entry 8, Box 641.
114. Vanek, "Keeping Busy," pp. 53-55; Blanche M. Kuschke, "Allocation of Time by Employed Married Women in Rhode Island," Rhode Island State (Allege Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 267, July 1938; and J. O. Rankin, "The Use of Time in Farm Homes," University of Nebraska College of Agriculture Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 230, December 1928. Vanek lists four town and urban studies, and two compilations of the farm studies.
115. Vanek, "Keeping Busy," pp. 53-55; Blanche M. Kuschke, "Allocation of Time by Employed Married Women in Rhode Island," Rhode Island State (Allege Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 267, July 1938; and J. O. Rankin, "The Use of Time in Farm Homes," University of Nebraska College of Agriculture Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 230, December 1928. Vanek lists four town and urban studies, and two compilations of the farm studies.
116. Vanek, "Keeping Busy," pp. 53-55; Blanche M. Kuschke, "Allocation of Time by Employed Married Women in Rhode Island," Rhode Island State (Allege Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 267, July 1938; and J. O. Rankin, "The Use of Time in Farm Homes," University of Nebraska College of Agriculture Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 230, December 1928. Vanek lists four town and urban studies, and two compilations of the farm studies.
117. See Lowry Nelson, Rural Sociology: Its Origins and Growth in the United States (Minneapolis, 1969); Harry C. McDean, "Professionalism in the Rural Social Sciences, 1896-1919," Agricultural History 58 (1984) : 373-92; Stephen P. Turner and Jonathan H. Turner, The Impossible Science: An Institutional Analysis of American Sociology (Newbury Park, Calif., 1990), pp. 24-28, 41-57; Martin Bulmer, Kevin Bates, and Kathyrn Kish Sklar, eds., The Social Survey in Historical Perspective, 1880-1940 (New York, 1991); and Goldstein (n. 28 above), pp. 110-11.
118. See Lowry Nelson, Rural Sociology: Its Origins and Growth in the United States (Minneapolis, 1969); Harry C. McDean, "Professionalism in the Rural Social Sciences, 1896-1919," Agricultural History 58 (1984) : 373-92; Stephen P. Turner and Jonathan H. Turner, The Impossible Science: An Institutional Analysis of American Sociology (Newbury Park, Calif., 1990), pp. 24-28, 41-57; Martin Bulmer, Kevin Bates, and Kathyrn Kish Sklar, eds., The Social Survey in Historical Perspective, 1880-1940 (New York, 1991); and Goldstein (n. 28 above), pp. 110-11.
119. See Lowry Nelson, Rural Sociology: Its Origins and Growth in the United States (Minneapolis, 1969); Harry C. McDean, "Professionalism in the Rural Social Sciences, 1896-1919," Agricultural History 58 (1984) : 373-92; Stephen P. Turner and Jonathan H. Turner, The Impossible Science: An Institutional Analysis of American Sociology (Newbury Park, Calif., 1990), pp. 24-28, 41-57; Martin Bulmer, Kevin Bates, and Kathyrn Kish Sklar, eds., The Social Survey in Historical Perspective, 1880-1940 (New York, 1991); and Goldstein (n. 28 above), pp. 110-11.
120. See Lowry Nelson, Rural Sociology: Its Origins and Growth in the United States (Minneapolis, 1969); Harry C. McDean, "Professionalism in the Rural Social Sciences, 1896-1919," Agricultural History 58 (1984) : 373-92; Stephen P. Turner and Jonathan H. Turner, The Impossible Science: An Institutional Analysis of American Sociology (Newbury Park, Calif., 1990), pp. 24-28, 41-57; Martin Bulmer, Kevin Bates, and Kathyrn Kish Sklar, eds., The Social Survey in Historical Perspective, 1880-1940 (New York, 1991); and Goldstein (n. 28 above), pp. 110-11.
121. and Goldstein (n. 28 above), pp. 110-11.
122. Goldstein, pp. 21, 22, 141; Stanley (n. 17 above), p. 130.
123. Wilson (n. 32 above), pp. 37, 39, 46 (italics hers).
124. Inez F. Arnquist and Evelyn H. Roberts, "The Present Use of Work Time of Farm Homemakers," State College of Washington Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 234, July 1929, pp. 26-27; and Margaret Whittemore and Bernice Neil, "Time Factors in the Business of Homemaking in Rural Rhode Island," Rhode Island State College Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 221, September 1929, pp. 19-20.
125. Inez F. Arnquist and Evelyn H. Roberts, "The Present Use of Work Time of Farm Homemakers," State College of Washington Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 234, July 1929, pp. 26-27; and Margaret Whittemore and Bernice Neil, "Time Factors in the Business of Homemaking in Rural Rhode Island," Rhode Island State College Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 221, September 1929, pp. 19-20.
126. Jessie E. Richardson, "The Use of Time by Rural Homemakers in Montana," Montana State College Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 271, February 1933, p. 23.
127. Warren (n. 31 above), pp. 42 (quotation), 49, 74, 77-79.
128. Ina Z. Crawford, "The Use of Time by Farm Women," University of Idaho Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 146, January 1927; Grace E. Wasson, "The Use of Time by South Dakota Farm Homemakers," South Dakota State College Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 247, March 1930; and Kuschke (n. 35 above).
129. Ina Z. Crawford, "The Use of Time by Farm Women," University of Idaho Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 146, January 1927; Grace E. Wasson, "The Use of Time by South Dakota Farm Homemakers," South Dakota State College Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 247, March 1930; and Kuschke (n. 35 above).
130. Ina Z. Crawford, "The Use of Time by Farm Women," University of Idaho Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 146, January 1927; Grace E. Wasson, "The Use of Time by South Dakota Farm Homemakers," South Dakota State College Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 247, March 1930; and Kuschke (n. 35 above).
131. E. W. Lehmann and F. C. Kingsley, "Electric Power for the Farm," University of Illinois, Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin No. 332, June 1929, pp. 375, 401-3. On Lehmann's employment by Illinois utility companies, see Lehmann to Rachel Mason, August 21, 1928; and Max Hoagland to Lehmann, December 11, 1928, E. W. Lehmann Papers, University of Illinois Archives, Urbana, Ill., Box 5 (hereafter cited as Lehmann Papers).
132. Hildegarde Kneeland, "Women on Farms Average 63 Hours Work Weekly in Survey of 700 Homes," Department of Agriculture, Yearbook of Agriculture, 1928 (Washington, D.C., 1928), pp. 620-22, on p. 621. Although Kneeland does not identify the researchers, the areas of the country she mentions and the dates of the work indicate that her data included those gathered by Wilson and Arnquist, with Crawford and Warren providing partial data on their ongoing projects.
133. Hildegarde Kneeland, "Is the Modern Housewife a Lady of Leisure," Survey Graphic 62 (1929): 301-2, on p. 302.
134. Hildegarde Kneeland to Louise Stanley, July 17, 1930, BHE Archives, Entry 2, Box 550. On Lehmann's project, see Eloise Davison to Lehmann, July 8, 1930; Lehmann to Vera Meacham, July 16, 1930; and Lehmann to E. A. White, September 17, 1930, Lehmann Papers, Box 5.
135. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Nutrition and Home Economics, "The Time Costs of Homemakers - A Study of 1,500 Rural and Urban Households," 1944, mimeographed copy in National Agricultural Library, Washington, D.C. Kneeland also ignored the question of time saved by household technology in other articles that she published on the time studies. See Kneeland, "Women's Economic Contribution in the Home," Annals of the American Academy 143 (1929): 33-40; Kneeland, "Leisure of Home Makers Studied for Light on Standards of Living," Department of Agriculture, Yearbook of Agriculture, 1932 (Washington, D.C., 1932), pp. 562-64; and Kneeland, "Home-making in This Modern Age," Journal of the American Association of University Women 27 (1934): 75-79 .
136. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Nutrition and Home Economics, "The Time Costs of Homemakers - A Study of 1,500 Rural and Urban Households," 1944, mimeographed copy in National Agricultural Library, Washington, D.C. Kneeland also ignored the question of time saved by household technology in other articles that she published on the time studies. See Kneeland, "Women's Economic Contribution in the Home," Annals of the American Academy 143 (1929): 33-40; Kneeland, "Leisure of Home Makers Studied for Light on Standards of Living," Department of Agriculture, Yearbook of Agriculture, 1932 (Washington, D.C., 1932), pp. 562-64; and Kneeland, "Home-making in This Modern Age," Journal of the American Association of University Women 27 (1934): 75-79 .
137. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Nutrition and Home Economics, "The Time Costs of Homemakers - A Study of 1,500 Rural and Urban Households," 1944, mimeographed copy in National Agricultural Library, Washington, D.C. Kneeland also ignored the question of time saved by household technology in other articles that she published on the time studies. See Kneeland, "Women's Economic Contribution in the Home," Annals of the American Academy 143 (1929): 33-40; Kneeland, "Leisure of Home Makers Studied for Light on Standards of Living," Department of Agriculture, Yearbook of Agriculture, 1932 (Washington, D.C., 1932), pp. 562-64; and Kneeland, "Home-making in This Modern Age," Journal of the American Association of University Women 27 (1934): 75-79 .
138. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Nutrition and Home Economics, "The Time Costs of Homemakers - A Study of 1,500 Rural and Urban Households," 1944, mimeographed copy in National Agricultural Library, Washington, D.C. Kneeland also ignored the question of time saved by household technology in other articles that she published on the time studies. See Kneeland, "Women's Economic Contribution in the Home," Annals of the American Academy 143 (1929): 33-40; Kneeland, "Leisure of Home Makers Studied for Light on Standards of Living," Department of Agriculture, Yearbook of Agriculture, 1932 (Washington, D.C., 1932), pp. 562-64; and Kneeland, "Home-making in This Modern Age," Journal of the American Association of University Women 27 (1934): 75-79 .
139. In fact, one home economist with the Colorado Extension Service said in an article for the REA: "Let us suppose that electricity in the home can reduce the labor load to the eight-hour day for five and one-half days a week making a forty-four hour week which has been generally established in business." See Exine Davenport, "Electricity's Part in America's First Industry," Rural Electrification News, July 1940, 13-14, on p. 13.
140. Morris Cooke to Paul Appleby, January 24, 1936; and Appleby to Cooke, January 31, 1936, BHE Archives, Entry 3, Box 579.
141. Clara Nale, "Electric Aids for Farm Wife Make Her Self-Sufficient, Rural Electrification News, December 1937, 9-10, on p. 9. On Nale, see Ronald Kline, "Agents of Modernity: Home Economists and Rural Electrification in the United States, 1925- 1950," in Rethinking Women and Home Economics in the 20th Century, ed. Sara Stage and Virginia Vincenti (forthcoming).
142. Clara Nale, "Electric Aids for Farm Wife Make Her Self-Sufficient, Rural Electrification News, December 1937, 9-10, on p. 9. On Nale, see Ronald Kline, "Agents of Modernity: Home Economists and Rural Electrification in the United States, 1925-1950," in Rethinking Women and Home Economics in the 20th Century, ed. Sara Stage and Virginia Vincenti (forthcoming).
143. George W. Kable, "Lines and Loads, or Farms and Folks," REA Annual Administrative Conference (Washington, D.C., January 9-13, 1939), pp. 623-43, on pp. 632-33, booklet in Morris L. Cooke Papers, Franklin Delano Roosevelt Library, Hyde Park, N.Y., Box 139.
144. John M. Gries and James Ford, eds. Household Management and Kitchens, vol. 9 of the President's Conference on Home Building and Home Ownership (Washington, D.C., 1932), pp. 26-32, on p. 30. Effie I. Raitt was chair of the Household Management Committee. The figure of 2,500 families in this report (p. 27) is probably a misprint of 1,500, the usual number given in later references to the BHE compilation.
145. John H. Kolb and Edmund S. de Brunner, Rural Social Trends (New York, 1933), pp. 65-66, on p. 66. For similar comments regarding farm men, see Rankin (n. 35 above), p. 7; and Neth, Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), p. 227. On Ogburn and Recent Social Trends, see Jordan (n. 1 above), pp. 179-84.
146. John H. Kolb and Edmund S. de Brunner, Rural Social Trends (New York, 1933), pp. 65-66, on p. 66. For similar comments regarding farm men, see Rankin (n. 35 above), p. 7; and Neth, Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), p. 227. On Ogburn and Recent Social Trends, see Jordan (n. 1 above), pp. 179-84.
147. John H. Kolb and Edmund S. de Brunner, Rural Social Trends (New York, 1933), pp. 65-66, on p. 66. For similar comments regarding farm men, see Rankin (n. 35 above), p. 7; and Neth, Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), p. 227. On Ogburn and Recent Social Trends, see Jordan (n. 1 above), pp. 179-84.
148. John H. Kolb and Edmund S. de Brunner, Rural Social Trends (New York, 1933), pp. 65-66, on p. 66. For similar comments regarding farm men, see Rankin (n. 35 above), p. 7; and Neth, Preserving the Family Farm (n. 10 above), p. 227. On Ogburn and Recent Social Trends, see Jordan (n. 1 above), pp. 179-84.
149. Paulena Nickell and Jean M. Dorsey, Management in Family Living (New York, 1942), pp. 56-65, 86-93, on p. 91.
150. Ruth L. Bonde, Management in Daily Living (New York, 1944), pp. 81-86, on p. 83.
151. Bureau of the Census, Statistical History of the United States from Colonial Times to the Present, rev. ed. (Stamford, Conn., 1965), 1: 510; and Nye (n. 5 above), ch. 7.
152. Bureau of the Census, Statistical History of the United States from Colonial Times to the Present, rev. ed. (Stamford, Conn., 1965), 1: 510; and Nye (n. 5 above), ch. 7.
153. Marianne Muse, "Time Expenditures on Homemaking Activities in 183 Vermont Farm Homes," University of Vermont Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 530, June 1946, pp. 43-44, 49, 52-53, 59-60.
154. Elizabeth Wiegand, "Use of Time by Full-time and Part-time Homemakers in Relation to Home Management," Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, Memoir No. 330, July 1954, pp. 39 (quotation), 42-43.
155. May L. Cowles and Ruth P. Dietz, "Time Spent in Homemaking Activity by a Selected Group of Wisconsin Farm Homemakers," Journal of Home Economics 48 (January 1956): 29-35.
156. Sarah L. Manning, "Time Use in Household Tasks by Indiana Families," Purdue University Agricultural Experiment Station, Research Bulletin No. 837, January 1968.
157. Nickell and Dorsey (n. 54 above), 2d ed., 1950, pp. 111-24; 3d ed., 1963, pp. 103-12; 4th ed., 1967, pp. 127-32. Another popular book on home management just cites the BHE studies without much discussion; see Lillian M. Gilbreth, Orpha M. Thomas, and Eleanor Clymer, Management in the Home (New York, 1954), pp. 28-29; 2d ed., 1959, pp. 28-29.
158. Kathryn E. Walker and Margaret E. Woods, Time Use: A Measure, of Household Production of Family Goods and Services (Washington, D.C., 1976), p. 32.
159. Kline, "Agents of Modernity" (n. 50 above).
160. This tension between reform and research for research home economists mirrors that between sales and education for home economists working for private companies and the REA. See Goldstein (n. 28 above), and Kline, "Agents of Modernity."
161. Vanek, "Keeping Busy" (n. 3 above), p. 88, briefly discusses this point.
162. At least one study by home economists did investigate more thoroughly the non-household work of women in gardening, taking care of poultry, milking, and farming in the field. See M. Ruth Clark and Greta Gray, "The Routine and Seasonal Work of Nebraska Farm Women," University of Nebraska College of Agriculture Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 238, January 1930.
163. Jellison (n. 5 above), ch. 6. See also Elbert (n. 33 above).
164. See, for example, Fischer (n. 26 above); Michele Martin, "Hello Central?" Gender, Technology, and Culture in the Formation of Telephone Systems (Montreal, 1991); and Ronald Kline and Trevor Pinch, "Users as Agents of Technological Change: The Social Construction of the Automobile in the Rural United States," Technology and Culture 37 (1996): 763-795.
165. See, for example, Fischer (n. 26 above); Michele Martin, "Hello Central?" Gender, Technology, and Culture in the Formation of Telephone Systems (Montreal, 1991); and Ronald Kline and Trevor Pinch, "Users as Agents of Technological Change: The Social Construction of the Automobile in the Rural United States," Technology and Culture 37 (1996): 763-795.
166. See, for example, Fischer (n. 26 above); Michele Martin, "Hello Central?" Gender, Technology, and Culture in the Formation of Telephone Systems (Montreal, 1991); and Ronald Kline and Trevor Pinch, "Users as Agents of Technological Change: The Social Construction of the Automobile in the Rural United States," Technology and Culture 37 (1996): 763-795.
167. I address the issue of the mutual construction of ideology, artifacts, systems, and cultural practices in a book-in-progress on the social history of the telephone, automobile, radio, and electric light and power in the rural United States.