People keep themselves clean. this is a rather safe assumption to make about our society. every once in a while, you'll walk past someone or someone will sit next to you in class, and you'll think - man, that guy needs a shower. but in reality, i don't think anyone at BYU showers less than twice a week. it's just not done. now check out this quote straight out of the 18th century. "I bore it better than i expected, not having been wett all over att once, for 28 years past." an upstanding citizen of Philadelphia, Elizabeth Drinker, said this of her first experience using the revolutionary product her husband had installed a year before - a shower box.
now, i don't know to what extent a 1790's shower box resembles the shower each of us uses every day, but that's not entirely the point. the point is, that this socially active and well-liked woman had gone 28 years without being immersed in water. the eeewwww factor intensifies as you realize that at elizabeth's time, a "bath" did not include soap, but was an immersion in either cold water or mineral water (the cold water was thought to constrict the blood vessels near the surface of the skin, then a vigorous rubbing with a towel would reopen them, giving a "vivifying" sensation).
bathing has always been associated with medicine - doctors of elizabeth's day recommended dunking an infant in cold water once a day for the first several months of life, and recommended cold baths to those whose constitutions were "liable to nervous, hysteric, and hypochondriacal affections, as well as to frequent attacks of flatulency and consequent indigestion" while warm water baths were prescribed to treat other ailments.
as medical knowledge increased, so did the general population's understanding of the benefits of cleanliness(starting with the upper echelons of society, of course). heightened understanding of the oil producing qualities of the epidermis, and the nature thereof to acquire "scum and vapor" led some to buy tin bathtubs for their homes, and to include soap as a part of the daily washing routine. others, such as Elizabeth, acquired these habits and knowledges as a part of the proverbial struggle to "keep up with the joneses". suddenly, personal cleanliness was a sign of status, a prerequisite to being accepted as normal in society. the ability of folk knowledge to be a group distinguishing thing (hunters vs farmers vs weavers)(the rich who bathe and the poor who can't afford to/wouldn't know how to operate a bathtub if they owned one) is clear to see in this example.
so, i think i like this example because it helps us see the origin of a folk knowledge that we all seemingly take for granted. one of my biggest questions for every folk knowledge post i've read is "so who came first, the chicken or the egg" who was the guy who just figured it out one day? in this case, it was some scientist sitting in a stuffy lab looking through a microscope who found out your skin makes gross stuff. that led to a chain of social disgust, fears and expectations that has landed us at the point that we "[crawl] around the house scrubbing and waxing and spraying germ killer on the kids."
I don't actually remember the last time I took a bath, but I definitely take a shower once a day. Once again, these paradigm shifts keep turning up. Bathtubs and the sense of cleanliness is another thing that has changed so much throughout history. In these days, it's probably safe to say that most people at least understand the importance of cleaning regularly. But you're right, not many people appreciate the bathtub as much as Elizabeth may have. But here's my questions: Why did the bathtub become some popular, while something like pokatok not? (referring to yours and Crista's posts).
ReplyDeleteWell... Pokatok change from inherent in Mayan life to a curious relic of history with the downfall of the civilization and the absorption of the Spanish/Christian value of life, whereas bathing started as a cultural bonding agent, then went out of vogue during the middle ages as superstitions took hold, and became more popular with a microscopic-level understanding of skin's structure (and the advent of the etiological research programme in medicine (I took Prof. Carter's class))...
ReplyDeleteCurious... Swimming seems to parallel bathing's history to a degree.
In response to Ted's question my immediate response would have been: because of necessity. Pokatok in ancient times didn't affect the overall health of the public (except for maybe a few deaths). I realized though that it was obviously different then. In our culture today, bathing is deemed as essential (I would say so at least, and I hope others would as well) Those who don't bathe are seen as lazy or unkept. Why did it change? I can see it as being because of necessity. It stopped diseases from spreading, it cleared up the air. If bathing hadn't started to increase, obscure diseases might still exist.
ReplyDeleteThis post also made me think of the post from another groups blog (can't find it at the moment) and the social aspect that bathing had. It has definitely progressed into something private, but why? I can think of one reason being because of status, those who could afford their own bathing room bathed alone and so we progressed.
This brings me to swimming, now the social aspect is available without the cleanliness factor. Exercise can also be brought into the equation of swimming. It is just so interesting to see how one basis idea can progress to create so many complex and different outcomes.