Abstract
In Rethinking Family Practices David Morgan reviews how his concept of family practices has been taken up in recent scholarship and considers how it might be refined. Morgan introduced the idea of family practices in the conclusion of his 1996 book Family Connections, and it has since become one of the key analytical tools in this field. In the introduction Morgan reiterates that using the term family practices implies an attunement to the fluidity of family life, its everyday and active character and a concern with linking the perspectives of the actor and the observer of history and biography. The first three chapters seek to establish the continuing relevance of the concept by considering how it might be extended based on the author's own reflections on its limitations, a careful examination of alternative theoretical frameworks and the critiques the concept has generated. Morgan stresses throughout that the term ‘practices’ was already in widespread use before he came to develop it for family analysis and that the idea of family practices reflects the particular intellectual developments of the time, especially feminist scholarship and the ethnomethodological turn. This intellectually generous approach characterizes the book and it's refreshing to see a well known scholar recognize that the production of ideas is necessarily a collaborative endeavour. Chapter two starts by introducing eight different dictionary definitions of the word ‘practice’ as a way of theoretically locating the discussion. I wasn't immediately convinced of the effectiveness of this approach as I was concerned it would make the discussion theoretically light, however it does enable Morgan to draw attention to the everyday meanings of the term. Moreover the definition of ‘practice’ as a term encapsulating the tension between structure and agency – or action and habit as Morgan puts it, drawing on Bourdieu – provides an important theoretical refinement. A slightly distracting habit of the author is to frequently state what the book is not doing, this distracts the reader's attention from the discussion and overemphasizes the limited scope of the book. Chapter 3 explores competing approaches including Lynn Jamieson's work on intimacy, Carol Smart's idea of personal life and Miriam Glucksmann's idea of TSOL amongst others, arguing that these approaches are compatible and useful additions to family practices in that they all seek to capture the complexity of modern life and go beyond the pre-ordered category of the family. Although there is clearly value in seeing connections over differences when reviewing others' work, and in fact one of the strengths of this book is the author's ability to listen attentively to others' voices in the field, at times I felt this conciliatory approach prevented the author from making a bolder statement about the distinctiveness of his approach. Chapter 4 considers the development of family practices including Janet Finch's work on displaying families. The suggestion that to elaborate on this concept we might also look at how class and family practices of display overlap and that more attention should be paid to the different kinds of audiences involved in display are worth following up. In dealing with more critical developments – some of which are auto-critiques – namely that the family practices approach downplays structural constraints, doesn't pay enough attention to discourses, and reproduces a eurocentric and heteronormative model of intimate relationships, Morgan shows that these are limitations which can and should be incorporated into his approach rather than making it redundant. I was intrigued by Morgan's suggestion that although he has seldom focused on what he calls ‘the darker side of family life’ the concept of family practices could also be used to study abusive or destructive practices in intimate life. I would be keen to hear whether this is a potentially useful analytical tool for social scientists working in this area or whether these issues require a different theoretical apparatus altogether. Out of the substantive chapters the ones on Time/Space and Embodiment were least successful for me as they do not go beyond suggesting that there is a deep affinity between the practices approach and these contemporary trends in the social sciences. However the chapters on emotions and ethics particularly stood out for me as raising important questions. The argument that there are strong linkages between family and ethics – or doing family and doing ethics – is more sustainable here as the historical construction of this connection, including the division between the public and private sphere is highlighted. In chapter seven, Morgan insightfully points out that we need new sociological ways of thinking about emotions in family life without having to use the terminology of ‘emotional labour/work’. This is indeed a significant challenge for sociologists working in this field, however his reluctance to engage with psycho-analytical accounts of emotions prevents him in my opinion from furthering this debate. The conclusion makes an eloquent argument for the distinctiveness of family relationships thus justifying the usefulness of family practices as a particular but non-exclusive approach. As a sociologist of gender and families, reading this book has alerted me to the already existing linkages between space, time, embodiment and ethics in my own work and I hope it will encourage others to develop a sensitivity to these interconnections. Whilst at times I was longing for the book to provide a stronger statement about family life, Morgan's emphasis on theorizing family life rather than constructing a theory of family living has prompted me to think anew about the process of theory development and to acknowledge its open-ended nature. This is an engaging and stimulating read I have no doubt this book will be read widely by scholars in the sociology of families and beyond.