Customer Reviews

Conduct Unbecoming a Woman: Medicine on Trial in Turn-of-the-Century Brooklyn

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Morantz-Sanchez has written a compelling account not just of the "crimes" and trial of Mary Dixon-Jones, but more importantly, it seems to me, an account of the times that allowed for the events to take place at all. Her analysis of the professionalization of gynecology, the place of surgery within that profession, and particularly the role of women within medicine is impeccable. Beyond that, however, Morantz-Sanchez offers a nuanced reading of late nineteenth-century Brooklyn, especially in comparison to its larger and more cosmopolitan neighbor, Manhattan. This analysis allows the reader to understand the relation Dixon-Jones had with her own neighbors and with the culture of Brooklyn at the time. She also does a great job situating the role that an evolving press played not only in the coverage of the "crimes" and the trial, but in the construction of Dixon-Jones' supporters and detractors. Throughout, Mary Dixon-Jones emerges as a truly fascinating character, a woman obsessed with success, a woman who knew how to get it. Conduct Unbecoming a Woman definitely is a story of "True Crime." But it is so much more than that. Marshaling a truly astounding amount of evidence in a really seamless fashion, Morantz-Sanchez shows the reader why the trial mattered, why it happened in the first place, and what it can tell us about much larger historical questions (of women professionals, of medicine at the turn of the century, of the emergence of the science of pathology, of Brooklyn and Manhattan). In that sense the book is not just entertaining (though it is that...), it's important.

Through this turn-of-the-century medical mystery, Ms. Morantz-Sanchez both breathes life into a long-forgotten story and in the process illuminates some persistent themes of gender and medicine. Finally a historian is demonstrating that good storytelling and complex historical analysis are not mutually exclusive -- nor are they solely the province of Civil War and other military historians. One does NOT have to be an academic to be compelled by this engrossing book. I have given this book as a gift to medical students, Brooklynites, and all types of intelligent readers in between -- none of whom have tossed it aside in favor of Court TV.

This book is a fabulous read. It is simultaneously a history of turn-of-the-century gynecology, a history of women, and a history of Brooklyn. It can be read as a medical murder mystery and as a very interesting cultural history -- and it deserves a wide audience. It was very refreshing to come upon a book that rejects the usual boundaries of "academic" and "non-academic" to carve out a space for clearly written, meticulously researched, smart and intriguing historical storytelling.

Morantz-Sanchez writes well and persuasively about a series of interconnected issues: medicine, the power of doctors and of patients, professional ambition, the place of women in society, Brooklyn as a community, and the power of the press and the courtroom. This book is in line with recent scholarship in cultural history, but it is by no means unwieldy or abstract. The times and tribulations of Mary Dixon Jones make for an excellent case study, especially since there are many ways to interpret the evidence. The author considers a wide variety of perspectives, including those of the patients themselves.

This book was recommended to me for a research project on gender and sexuality. As I read the book, I realized that it didn't overlap with my topic as much as I'd hoped; however, I couldn't put it down! Morantz-Sanchez creates a narrative that provides a necessary historical context to really understand the cases she discusses. At the same time, she keeps the narrative simple enough to really engage the reader. I found that I enjoyed "Conduct Unbecoming..." as much as--or more than--I would have if I had read it for academic purposes.

Conduct Unbecoming is simultaneously a history of gynecology, of a woman physician, and of Brooklyn. It reads as a page-turning medical murder mystery, a courtroom drama, and a cultural history. It was refreshing to come upon a book that crossed traditional boundaries of "academic" and "non-academic" works, to blend clear writing and compelling storytelling with meticulous historical research. I loved this book!

This book just didn't quite hit onto either of the reasons I purchased it. I bought this book on the basis of the title and the cover, which suggested it would be an interesting discussion of law, with, perhaps, a morbid thrill thrown in. This really isn't. What this book tends to be is a long examination of the history of women in medicine, and, more particularly, of one woman practicing in New York, who seems to quite possibly have been overpublished and undertalented, quick with the knife, and self-aggrandizing. If you are writing a treatise on the history of medicine and feminism, this would be an excellent work to refer to. If, like me, you picked it up as a lawyer or out of morbid curiosity, do yourself a favor and skip it, there's neither enough law nor enough gore to get you through the views on the advancement and development of gynecology as a specialty.

...In short, don't believe the hype. A page-turner, it ain't.

Let me be clearer than the author of this book :
This book is about a doctor who may or may not have butchered women. One newspaper, the Eagle, is against her. The other, the Citizen, is for her. The newspapers battle it out. We are led to believe that some personal rivalry between the editors of these respective papers (and not journalistic interest) is really causing them to duke it out in print. In the end everybody fights it out in the court room. AND it's all true.

So, that seems pretty interesting, doesn't it? Seems like there would be a lot of cool historical and social issues to examine, right? I thought so. So, I bought this ...That was a mistake.

... But after pages and pages or headache-givingly dense detail, I found myself searching in vain for the point. Yet, as far as I can tell, the author has no point to get to. None. She did some research. (Obviously not a lot though, since she only ever quotes from 2 sources.)Then she just lists the facts. Just the facts, ma'am, just the facts.

No thesis, no argument, no narrative, no point...

This is a very well-researched detective work on what in it's bare particulars is a complicated and powerful story in the annals of sexual politics, modern media and the darker recesses of professional medicine. However, what interest is inherent in this material is lost amid the author's refusal or inability to write in a direct, accessible manner. Academic history needs to be saved from academic prose -- this book is exhibit a.

This book was advertized as regarding the manslaughter and subsequent libel trials of Dr. Mary A. Dixon Jones in 1894. Based on the advertising, I expected the book to be about the two trials, the evidence involved and the courtroom machinations of the lawyers. Instead, it is a tiresome rendering of the history of gynecology, women's rights (or lack thereof), and disagreements in the medical profession. I found the style more academic than popular and suggest that the author was aiming more at the professional historian than the casual reader. Even for the professional historian, there is a great draught of facts surrounding the trials and there is more information on the history of gynecology as well as unproven speculation as to the effects of the trial on the medical community of Brooklyn.