Not Oprah’s Book Club: Committed

Like Elizabeth Gilbert, I am a skeptic when it comes to marriage. Just the history of the institution–rife with misogyny, racism, and heterosexism–is enough to turn me off, but you add to that the subtle and not so subtle ways in which it seems to encourage limiting gender roles, and you’ve really got yourself a tough sell. Don’t even get me started on the abomination that is the wedding industry.
In Gilbert’s latest book, Committed, she spends the year leading up to her marriage to Felipe (yes, the hot guy in Bali from Eat, Pray, Love) investigating the institution’s history, cross-cultural comparisons, philosophical, and sociological angles. I don’t envy Gilbert’s challenge to follow up her gargantuan bestseller. If you haven’t seen her speak on the subject, don’t miss her TED talk:

What I do envy is Gilbert’s guts in writing what must have seemed an inevitably limiting and controversial book. Certainly plenty of Eat, Pray, Love fans were not happy to find out that Gilbert is both feminist and Democract, not to mention a marriage skeptic.
So, point blank, I admire the woman. But beyond that, I admire the writing. While Gilbert doesn’t get into the politics of marriage (something I have spent a lot of time writing and thinking about), she explores various traditions, not to mention eras, through out the world, with ingenuity, playfulness, and smarts. There are times when her journey seems so privileged as to be irritating (oh, whoa is me, I have to spend months traveling through out fascinating Asian countries with my fiance on a personal vision quest about marriage). But Gilbert’s just so damn likable, that it’s hard not to jump on board, even if the ride is a little out-of-touch.
For me, the best writing came at the very end, when she explored the radical potential to be found in the privacy of the family unit.

She writes, “It is not we as individuals, then, who must bend uncomfortably around the institution of marriage; rather, it is the institution of marriage that has to bend uncomfortably around us. Because ‘they’ (the powers-that-be) have never been entirely able to stop ‘us’ (two people) from connecting our lives together and creating a secret world of our own.” She references slaves, who married one another in secret ceremonies in various times and places, and the contemporary struggle for gay marriage legislation in the U.S. She goes on:

To somehow suggest that society invented marriage, and then forced human beings to bond with each other, is perhaps absurd. It’s like suggesting that society invented dentists, and then forced people to grow teeth. We invented marriage. Couples invented marriage. We also invented divorce, mind you. And we invented fidelity, too, as well as romantic misery. In face, we invented the whole damn sloppy mess of love and intimacy and aversion and euphoria and failure. But most important of all, most subversively of all, most stubbornly of all, we invented privacy.

I’ve rarely read anything, especially from a mainstream memoir like this one, so convincing as to the radical potential of marriage. I’m not rushing to pick out a ring anytime soon, but I’ve certainly been given food for thought.

Join the Conversation

  • rosezilla

    I thought the privilege you mentioned completely overwhelmed the book. The whole idea that she had to get married so her rich boyfriend could come and go to the US as they pleased……….Give me a break! This book could have been interesting if the ‘voice’ was removed from the subject matter.
    I hope someone reads it and writes a much better book and comes on to Feministing to tell us all about it. In the meantime I would definitely NOT recommend picking this book up (its the first book I haven’t been able to finish in years….I managed to finish a Jodi Picoult vomit-worthy book written in the second person over this!)

  • Tapati

    I think you meant to write woe is me…
    I enjoyed the book and to those who rankle at her privilege, I think she addressed that head on. She doesn’t claim to be anything but what she is, in that regard. From what other position could she write? Pretending to be without economic privilege would be insulting. Living as if she didn’t possess it would be stupid. Though the whole reason they traveled through Asia was to save money and be together, rather than being apart during that time. Their income was adversely affected by “Felipe’s” inability to travel to America for his business. I’m sure they still had plenty by the standards of any poor person in the world, but they didn’t have unlimited funds or spend their time in luxury hotels for the whole trip.
    Gilbert is a likable person and an excellent narrator and I’m sure I’d enjoy a conversation with her about marriage or anything else.

  • rosezilla

    I don’t object to the privilege….god knows EPL a giant privilege sandwich, but I felt in that book, she addressed it head on. But it was interesting because it was about her.
    In Committed, she’s trying to cash in her cred with EPL readers by assuming that they want to read her book about marriage. There was a good article about the creation of this book in the NYTimes (she owed the publisher another book but had a hard time writing it). If it was a book about her and Felipe travelling the world, it could have been good. If it was a well-written book about marriage, that would have been great. I found the book was too little of the personal, and too much marriage told from an annoying perspective. Just my opinion, of course….