change.” Some of the material Carlsonrnbrings forward in this discussion is genuinelyrncreepy. For what one finds inrnovert mandates is an insistence thatrnAmerican society (especially families)rnmust be mobilized in toto “in order to allocaternits resources in the fullest andrnmost rational manner possible.” Morernintrusion and manipulation—all for “therngood” of those being intruded upon andrnmanipulated, of course—resulted. Carlson’srndiscussion of the infusion of thisrnmanagerial, social-engineering perspectiverninto the armed services and thern”home economics” movement is particulariyrngood.rnWc come to our present impasse. Forrnthose who can afford it, there is “KentuckyrnFried Children” in the formrnof franchised daycare outfits. (Or, ofrncourse, live-in immigrant housekeepersrnand childminders for all prospective AttorneyrnGenerals.) For others, there is arnfrantic scramble for tending to the kidsrnand two jobs and a home and, perhaps,rnelderly parents. “Scientific homemaking”rnmeans, in practice, less home, morernstress, overworked parents, undernurturedrnkids. Why should any of this surprisernus? Family relationships are notrnlike work relationships. Family relationshipsrnare different from friendships.rnFamilies rest on “communitarian ratherrnthan individualistic principles,” and ifrnfamilies are to sustain themselves theyrnmust be based on notions of sharing, notrnnotions of efficiency. Neither the logicrnof markets nor of states (in the form ofrnmacro-level top-down social-engineeringrnschemes) can substitute for families,rnbut this logic—to the extent that it intrudesrnupon and takes over families—rncan, has, and will continue to corrode actualrnfamilies and even our idea ofrnfamilies.rnLove alone will not hold families together.rnReligious belief “cannot functionrnas a substitute economy.” WhatrnCarlson argues so convincingly is thatrnthe family that works together is morernlikely to stay together. We need bothrnlove and work. Love and intimacy, hernconcludes, must be “concretely expressedrnthrough a common economicrnlife of both production and consumption.”rnRomanticists will never understandrnthis and, at bottom, both thernwildest revolutionarv and the most stalwartrnreactionary are romanticists.rnMy single critical query in respect tornCarlson’s book is this. If, as the authorrnclaims, the family emerges from naturalrnimperatives and there is something akinrnto a “universal model” for the embodimentrnof those imperatives in society,rnvvhy are we witness to such persistentrnfalling away from this norm? Is it becausernwe have so mucked things up thatrnthe imperatives cannot win out? Doesrnthis mean that, if “left alone” (to thernextent that anything and anybody canrnbe left alone by postmodern society),rnthe family industry and autonomy Carlsonrnfavors so heartily would reemergernwith vigor and clarity? Just how muchrnvariation on the male/liusbandry, female/rnhousewifery model does Carisonrnfind possible or desirable? We await furtherrncontributions from Carlson on thesernvital questions as we lurch into the nextrncentury, hailing as “independent” humanrninstitutions that could scarcely bernmore dependent on often unaccountablernand undemocratic forces outsidernourselves, whether market or state.rnIn Defense of the Traditional FamilyrnFrom Cottage to Work Station The Family’s Search for Social Harmony in the Industrial AgernAllan CarlsonrnThis book offers a fresh Interpretation of American social history, emphasizing the vital role of the family and householdrnautonomy and the joint threats to the family imposed by industrial organization and the state. Carlson shows that the UnitedrnStates—rather than being “bom modern” as a progressive consumerist society—was in fact founded as an agrarian societyrncomposed of independent households rooted in land, lineage and hierarchy. It also explains how the social effects ofrnindustrialization, particularly the “great divorce” of labor from the home, has been a defining issue in American domestic life,rnfrom the 1850s to the present.rnThe book critically examines five distinct strategies to restore a foundation for family life in industrial society, drawing onrnthe insights of Frederic Laplay, Carle Zimmerman, and G.K. Chesterton and outlines the necessary basis for family life.rnFamily survival depends on the creation of meaningful, “pre-modem” household economies. As the author explains, “bothrnmen and women are called home to releam the deeper meaning of the ancient words, husbandry and housewifery.”rn205 pages ISBN 0-89870-4294 Sewn Softcover $12.95rn”Allan Carison is the most perceptive writer on thernAmerican family today. His analysis, completernwith realistic solutions, complements the insistencernof John Paul 11 on the restoration of the family asrnthe first structure for human ecology.”rnCharles RicernUniversity of Notre Damern”Allan Carlson is a real treasure: an independent thinker, therngenuine article. This is a brave and powerful hook: a gimleteyedrnanalysis with the force of a jeremiad. Carlson’s range isrnimpressive and his vision of a family-based decentralizedrnpolitical and economic order, pounded in widespread landrnownership and a healthy respect for personal liberty, inspires.”rnWilliam KauffananrnAuthor, Euerji Man a Kingrnf g o a t f a s p R e s s 33 Oakland Avenue, Harrison, NY 10528rnName PI ease rush me sh I _copies of FromrnAddressrnCity, State, ZiprnCottage to Work Station ($12.95 ea.).rnI enclose full payment plus $1.50 perrnbook for shipping and handling.rnThe Family’s Search for SocialrnHarmony in the Industrial Agerni <, K A ) I L Srn34/CHRONICLESrnrnrn