Elaine Frantz Parsons

This expansive book, and the topics with which it deals, are not particularly well-represented by its title. It is actually made up primarily of a close reading of legal cases brought, usually by wives, under the newly implemented dramshop acts which came into force in some states after the War of the Rebellion, and a look at the rhetorical strategies adopted by both temperance/prohibition advocates and opponents both in the courtroom and in their respective literatures. The courtroom dominates the first half of the book, the literature the second. This rhetoric is analyzed largely from the standpoint of the irony of how many assumptions about the ideals of society were shared by both sides of the debate (actually in my experience, not that unusual in the courtroom), but also, especially in the final chapter, with an eye toward the further irony that, for all the scholarship devoted to analyzing prohibition as a necessary precursor to women's suffrage, mainstream sentiment within the movement was definitely pointed toward restoring the drunkard to his natural place as head of the household and societal decision-maker; many explicitly stating that they wanted to get prohibition done and get back to the hearthside. Although I found portions of this book mildly interesting and her ideas well-developed and persuasive, as a whole this book was not especially interesting reading, even for this reader who has a high interest in the area. It should be seminal for research interests, but of reading interest only for those interested in prohibition/temperance, if that.… (meer)