Nancy Cott's Public Vows: A History of Marriage and the Nation seeks to illuminate marriage as government control of the population politically and socially by the U.S. government purposely regulating marriage with legal measures. Cott further depicts how gender and race were discriminated against by the Christian monogamous based institution of marriage in the United States. Cott's intention in this book was two fold. Firstly, to highlight how the concerted efforts by the U.S. government to promote Christian monogamous marriage and discourage other forms of marriage had a significant impact especially on gender roles in society in which all forms of public and private lives of men and women were affected. Secondly, the institution of marriage had a strong hand in creating the definitions of gender itself.



Cott asserts that the institution of marriage that has been promoted by the government shapes human identity in both public and private spheres and strongly influences gender roles within society and that these pieces of information are integral to understanding society as a whole. Cott sets out to accomplish proving her assertions by giving a systematic historical account of marriage from the beginning of the United States until present day. Cott discusses at great length, legal measures that supported monogamous marriage and discouraged other forms of human union throughout United States history. Cott also discussed in great length the changing economic positions of men and women through the history of marriage. Cott definitely demonstrated that Federal, State, and Local authorities whether the legislative or judicial had a strong role in shaping and charting the direction of marriage in the United States on a course of Christian, monogamous marriage. Cott in turn analyzes the results of government intervention in the institution of marriage and how it related to men, women, and minorities. As the reader of Public Vows there is not a dispute that this is a correct interpretation of monogamous marriage as a government promoted institution and it had differing effects on men, women, and minorities. If this book was written and published in the 1950's for example, it would have been shocking new information, however, since this book was published in 2002 the information that marriage is bound within a legal institution with civil benefits attached that benefit those married is now ordinary information that most know, or at least most who have been married know. The question for this reader was what kind of new information does this provide?



The answer is none because after hearing her explanation of the origins of her idea for this book in the seminar I attended, it was clear Cott's goal was not to provide new information nor were the goals of the book solely the ones mentioned in the book. Firstly, Cott mentioned that the inspirational idea came from her observation while standing in line to purchase a ticket at a movie theater. She noticed that people pair up as male and female couples and she wondered why this was so. Secondly, her association with a colleague that works for a civil rights organization for gay and lesbians wanted her input and expertise to help justify their cause for gay and lesbian marriage. Cott's intention was to illuminate the idea of marriage as an institution that provides legal and civil benefits for the individuals that are married. Cott's true goal was to provide tangible written evidence for what people in the 21st century already know which marriage is a heavily legal institution that provides civil benefits to those that are married. This assertion subtly implies that all couples should be able to enjoy the civil and legal benefits marriage provides. Cott provided evidence for the true goal of this book with her own words in the seminar.



Two pieces of evidence from her own explanation of why she wrote this book points to the fact her intention was not to provide new information, but to lend credibility to the idea of marriage as civil institution to hopefully benefit couples who are currently not allowed to enjoy the civil liberties marriage provides. Firstly, Cott hinted to the fact this was common knowledge in the 21st century because of her surprise at the reaction of the people who listened to her testimony in Vermont about marriage as a civil legal government institution. According to Cott, the people listening to her testimony were taken aback at the thought of marriage having more to do with civil liberties than a religious and spiritual bond between two people. Secondly, Cott mentioned that these individuals were from the small state of Vermont and implied these people were not in tune with modern thinking on marriage. The mere fact that Cott recognized these people listening to her testimony on marriage were not representative of main stream thought on marriage by people in the United States in the 21st century provides evidence that she knew she was not providing new information, but only taking a common cultural idea that marriage is a legal institution and illuminating it for those few who are not in the know already.



After listening to Nancy Cott in the seminar it is clear that the book was written with the main intention to take an intangible idea floating around in the cultural consciousness and transforming it into a tangible idea in the printed word to ultimately serve a cause. Cataloging an intangible idea in black and white on the pages of a book inevitably gives any idea more credibility. Nancy Cott''s goal was to lend credibility to the idea of marriage as a legal and civil institution which hopefully in the long run would prove that gays and lesbians should have the right to marry and enjoy the legal and civil benefits marriage provides individuals.