A harvest of virtues as well as sustenance

Two new books remind readers how closely most Americans used to be connected to the land.

from the July 11, 2007 edition

Page 2 of 2

Page 1 | 2

At age 8, she would cook meals for the family. Rather than feeling put upon, she felt honored. At 13, she served as a hired girl for a family with six children.

By today's standards of pampered American childhood, Mrs. Kalish and the other girls and boys in her rural area might elicit sympathy for being overburdened with responsibilities.

Yet far from resenting her rigid upbringing and childhood of hard work, she emphasizes the happiness she felt during that time, calling those early years "quite a romp."

Even the exhausting work of haying had its uses. The children, she says, "did have a proud sense of achievement, knowing that we were doing our part in this important venture."

With all that physical activity, childhood obesity was almost surely not a problem.

Noting that children on the farm were drafted into the workforce early, Kalish writes, "Even the youngest children seemed to have a natural inclination to be useful."

That desire to be useful, which knows no age limit, can be especially hard to satisfy in an era where automation and technology offer push-button ease, and where parents often stand ready to do everything for their offspring.

As Americans have moved from farms to cities, two profound changes have occurred. Younger generations have little knowledge of where food comes from. Many people have also lost an understanding of – and an appreciation for – hard physical labor. The poetic description of the Midwest as the nation's bread basket masks the intense labor and economic uncertainties farmers face.

Kingsolver knows that most families cannot replicate her family's experiment in self-reliance. Likewise, Kalish is not sentimental about the economic strains her family faced.

They understand that there is obviously no going back to a more rural way of life. But both books suggest an intriguing question: In a sophisticated urban and suburban culture, built on the premise of bigger, better, faster, and more expensive, is there value in encouraging a greater appreciation for simpler living, closer to families and the land when possible?

Kingsolver and Kalish both make eloquent, persuasive cases for answering in the affirmative. Sustenance, after all, comes in many forms.

1 | Page 2