Ladies’ Home Journal from December of 1961 offered a glimpse into the life of the typical American housewife of that era. Accented by Christmas, this magazine includes discussion on fashion, decor, cooking and miscellaneous events that included current events, advice articles and gossip. As I looked over the entire edition, the intended audience appeared to be women who spend their time primarily as homemakers. Like the 1920’s Newsweek magazine that I read earlier in the semester, this particular issue inundated with advertisements. Sears had an ad that caught my attention because of its similarity to modern promotions of women’s clothing. The page was an endorsement of value in women’s clothing that stressed value over high fashion; it stated that, instead of the impracticality of some glamorous wardrobes, women should be able to dress in the current trends without paying a fortune. Advertisements for establishments like Marshall’s or TJ Max share those principles in today’s culture, which surprises me how similar things are a half-century later.
Another article that was interesting was one talking about the psychology behind children’s toys. With Christmas looming in the background of this issue, Dr. Spock, a licensed children’s psychologist, wrote about what kind of toy is best for a developing toddler. He was absolutely correct when he said that the simpler a toy is for a child the more it aids in his ability to develop his imagination. Toys these days are equipped with so many different sounds, special effects, and gadgets that it limits what a child can do with it, especially if a parent is pushing them to play with it as it was intended. Simple blocks can be the best thing for a child to have because it allows them to play with it as a race-car, spaceship, or whatever they want without any guidelines on what it should be.
Besides the psychology behind the article, I found it intriguing that it was directed only at young boys. Not a single girl, doll, or other feminine product was mentioned in the entire article. In a magazine read by mothers and women everywhere, I found it ironic that only boys were considered when the article was written. It speaks to the impartiality that was still evident in the culture that, although women had gained greater independence during the second World War, girls were still not held in as high regard as boys. It may have been that girls were expected to only play with dolls or help their mothers around the house, but, regardless, they were not included in this article on the development of imagination in children.
Besides the article on what toys children should be given, Christmas was everywhere in this issue of Ladies’ Home Journal. Recipes amounted for at least a third of the article from cookies, to puddings, to full meals were included. Amongst these ideas for a Christmas feast were ads for different gifts. I had a moment of nostalgia when perusing the different options of games for the older child. Monopoly, Clue and Uncle Wiggily Game were staples in the Vincent household when I was a child, and I honestly had no idea those games dated as far back the 1960’s. Again I go back to how interesting it is to see the similarities between era’s that are as far apart as a half-century. There was also another advertisement for wrapping paper during the holiday season that had a blurb underneath talking about Scotch Tape. It spoke of this translucent adhesive as if it were a novelty for wrapping Christmas cheer even though it had been invented as far back as 1930. Something as simple and common in today’s world as tape was a product still finding its bearing with the population back in 1960, which makes me wonder what products will become mainstays in the future.
On another note, there was a fascinating article that seemed to not fit in with the rest of the material of the issue. The piece was written about a single mother struggling to support her five children. The man of the household died in a car-crash in 1956 after his friend lost control of the vehicle around a snowy bend. The mother, who had learned to type in school, had to support her children by scribing at a hospital for about ten hours daily, earning roughly $290 a month. Her children, however, were constantly getting sick because the family had to live in a dilapidated house until the mother could afford to move them somewhere better. The entire article was an attribute to the mother’s will and attitude during the entire process. In a culture fixated with women being the caretakers of the household, this woman was working full-time and taking care of the house because she couldn’t afford a baby-sitter and housekeeper. Her only regret about the whole situation was that she couldn’t offer her children the experiences of homemade bread and baked goods at home, or having a mother to come home to after school. The chaos and stress of her financial situation were all worth it if she could still provide for her family, and ensure that her children could still do those things that an average child could, like going to the movies or going on trips with friends. It was a true testament to a person who was not only defying the stereotype placed on her by society, but also defying the selfish nature that lies within each of us. I found it heartening that at least some people could acknowledge this act of greatness back in those times.
I must be honest that I do not often pick up a current issue of Ladies’ Home Journal, but it was enlightening to read one from such a long time ago when women weren’t as empowered as they are today. It had the characteristics of a typical, historic magazine, filled by advertisements with a couple legitimate articles interspersed. Amongst those articles were those obviously targeted at woman, like the recipes or housekeeping, but some went beyond that into areas of psychology and beyond. The most realistic of those articles dealt with a woman who challenged the very stereotype that the magazine targeted. Overall, an excellent choice for the right audience, but one which I don’t know if I could read religiously.
