Written by student of Women's History Resource Site, 1998
Last Revision: 18 December 2001
Copyright © MMI Prof. Pavlac's Women's History Site
Throughout most of history, women have been referred to as a big mystery. Man has been trying to figure out what makes women work. Why are they more susceptible to periods of depression, and why are they more apt to be "hysterical" when men are not? In his book, A Dark Science, Masson tries to explain why women are viewed differently than men, and more importantly, why women have been treated in a different light than men by psychiatrists, psychologists, and even the court system.
The title of the book is very misleading. One would think that the entire focus of the book deals with women through the eyes of top psychiatrists and psychologists during the 19th century. Of the nine separate cases presented in the book, involving a total of 15 patients, only 4 patients are adult females, the remainder being male and female children. Before one even begins to read the cases that Masson has selected, a reader must first read through the preface and introduction. The preface is written by feminist Catherine MacKinnon. The preface by MacKinnon sets the tone for the entire book. Throughout MacKinnon's 11 page introduction one is lead to believe that the book is "a lot like reading pornography." (pg. XI) MacKinnon is a firm believer that the way women are treated in this book is the same way that women are treated and exploited in life and in pornography. Most of MacKinnon's article is based solely on opinion with no supporting fact.
One example of this is her opinion about Dr. Zambaco, who tried to stop two young girls from masturbating by burning them with hot irons: "He enjoyed writing about what he wrote about them, as many of his male readers enjoyed reading it "sexually." (Pg. Xvii) However, Dr. Zambaco writes his journal in a professional manner and explains all the forms of treatment used to dissuade the girls from continuing their practice. In the few outside examples that MacKinnon uses there is emphasis that the men are responsible for all the acts against children, and that women are accused of putting words into the mouths of children. Nowhere throughout MacKinnon's argument is there any documentation that women would be responsible for sex acts against children. In MacKinnon's closing statements in the preface she writes:" Like pornography, the approaches and procedures recounted and recommended and eroticized have been done, and will be done, to countless other women and girls because of these texts." (Pg. Xxii) MacKinnon ends the preface with one of the more derogatory comments about men; "These articles, as Stoltenberg said of pornography, ėlie about women but tell the truth about men.'" (Pg. Xxii)
Masson also follows the extreme in feminism as he writes his introduction. His comments about the articles are: "They are shockingly brutal, offensive, and pornographic." (Pg. 3) Masson also believes, once again without support, that almost all psychiatrists believe that "Freud's vision offers a satisfactory explanation." (Pg. 5)
Elaine Showalter, in her book review in The New Republic, says this regarding Masson: "Mason offers no evidence that the nine essays are either representative of general attitudes during the period in question or connected to modern psychiatric thought." Also, Showalter points out that "though the book presents itself as dealing with 'psychiatry,' only two of the nine men included were psychiatrists."
Christopher Fortune, in his book review in Psychology Today, feels this way of Masson's book. "While Masson's marshaling of these papers can be seen as a further offering to radical feminist cause, the grim episodes fall far short of constituting evidence for Masson's broader argument." Fortune also points out that Masson neglects any English-language sources. Furthermore, Fortune does not hesitate to point out that Masson offers no link between the therapeutic practices in the 19th century to those now, nor does Masson show how these papers support his thesis.
Masson's best point during the entire book comes at the end of his introduction: "It serves as a disturbing reminder that what is represented as the result of careful scientific research is often nothing more than an expression of the prejudices of the time." (Pg. 34) Other than this quote, Masson shines little light on the psychiatry of the time. His feministic approach does not help in his cause in revealing more information to the study of psychiatry or, more importantly, his study of women's history. The best that this book does is show how demented and misinformed people were in the late 19th century. His research could have been better used to find out what long term effects these procedures had. Fortune concludes his review by saying "Mason is right that relationships between sexual abuse and adult neurosis needs further consideration, but his casual research style, questionable reasoning and grandiose claims make no contribution to this important area for debate."
Overall Masson makes almost no attempt to shed new light in an area as important as abuse on women and children. His book would be of a better use for an introduction to an early women's history course or for a gothic horror class. For overall scientific research, and the enlightenment of readers to the atrocities of women during the 19th century, it does not fulfill the requirement. It is sad that these events did take place, however, Masson never draws to conclusion exactly why these events took place, or what was done to prevent them. He also does not show evidence that the practice continues, and if it does, why it continues. Perhaps Masson should go back to the start and review the information, and provide a better title for his book.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Arenofsky, Janice. Review of A Dark Science: Women, Sexuality, and Psychiatry in the Nineteenth Century, by Jeffery Moussaieff Masson. Library Journal, January1987, 93.
Janice Arenofsky gives very little space in her review of A Dark Science. Arenofsky does not go into very much detail on why she believes what Masson and MacKinnon write are true.
Fortune, Christopher. "A Bad History." Review of A DarkScience: Women, Sexuality, and Psychiatry in theNineteenth Century, by Jeffery Moussaieff Masson.Psychology Today, June 1987, 66-7.
Fortune, as a therapist and writer, gives a very detailed look at Masson's book. Not only does he draw on his journalistic skills, but also more importantly, he draws on his knowledge as a therapist and shows where Masson has erred in his research. Fortune's review is the place to start prior to reading this particular work of Masson's.
Showalter, Elaine. "Victorian Lady Killers." Review of A Dark Science: Women, Sexuality, and Psychiatry in the Nineteenth Century, by Jeffery Moussaieff Masson. The New Republic, 16 March 1987, 38-41.
Showalter falls back on her skill as a researcher in women's history, in her review of Masson's book. Showalter approaches her review with an open mind and gives credit to Masson where it is due. Showalter also, very adamantly, points out the flaws in Masson's research and his failure to support his thesis. Overall, Showalter gives an excellent review of Masson's book. Prior to reading A Dark Science, this is the review to read.
|
|
|
URL: http://departments.kings.edu/womens_history/reviewmasson.html Written by student of Women's History Resource Site, 1998 Last Revision: 18 December 2001 Copyright © MMI Prof. Pavlac's Women's History Site |