- Email: [email protected]
Older women's attachments to their home and possessions
Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157 – 169
Older women’s attachments to their home and possessions Dena Shenk a,*, Kazumi Kuwahara b, Diane Zablotsky a a
Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of North Carolina Charlotte, 9201 University City Boulevard, Charlotte, NC 28223-0001, USA b 2-29-9-102 Nagaski, Toshima, Tokyo, 171-0051, Japan
Abstract The current cohorts of older women in the United States were raised with clear gender roles and expectations, defining a woman’s primary focus as her home and family. It seems likely, therefore, that they will have at least, in part, developed a sense of their own identities in relation to their homes and possessions. This study is based on indepth interviews with four older widows in Charlotte, NC, who still live in the homes where they lived with their deceased husbands. Utilizing a lifecourse perspective, this paper explores the themes in their attachment to their homes and possessions. D 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Place attachment; Home; Possessions; Identity; Lifecourse; Widowhood
1. Introduction The current cohorts of older women in the United States were raised with clear gender roles and expectations, defining a woman’s primary focus as her home and family. Many of them have invested enormous amounts of time and emotion in their homes as full-time homemakers as a result of traditional gender roles associated with their cohort (Howell, 1994). It is not surprising, therefore, that their identities are often tied to their families, homes, and possessions. Using a lifecourse perspective, this paper explores the attachment to their home and possessions of four older widows who have remained in the homes in which they lived with their deceased husbands. This is a common pattern with older widows tending to remain in their homes after the death of their husbands. The rate of moving for those 65 years and over is only 4.1% (Commerce Department * Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-704-687-4349; fax: +1-704-687-3091. E-mail address: [email protected] (D. Shenk). 0890-4065/$ - see front matter D 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jaging.2004.01.006
158
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
Census Bureau, 1998). If a widowed person is going to move after a spouse’s death, they typically do so during the first year of widowhood. The probability of moving for this group diminishes over time, and even after 20 years, 40% are estimated to be in the home they occupied when they became widowed (Chevan, 1995). Like many women of the older generation, they devoted themselves to their homes and families, with the roles of wife and mother being primary throughout their adult lives. At least, in part, their identities continue to be tied to these roles, although their husbands have died and their children are grown. The focus of this paper is to develop an understanding of their attachment to their homes and possessions. In particular, we will explore their connections to their families as reflected through the meanings of their homes and possessions.
2. Background 2.1. Lifecourse perspective Each person’s journey through life can be viewed as a road map, offering many alternative routes to many alternative destinations. The pathways that develop as we age are a result of accumulated decisions and the consequences of those decisions (Atchley & Barusch, 2004). The timing of events over an individual’s lifetime, in such areas as education, work, and family, affects the overall lifecourse whether they are ‘‘on-time’’ or ‘‘off-time’’ (Barresi, 1997). The concepts of on- and off-time refer to the timing of specific events and transitions within a person’s life, such as the birth of one’s last child, death of a spouse, or returning to college. The timing of such events, in relation to the cohort norms and cultural expectations, also affects their impact on the individual’s lifecourse. The lifecourse perspective offers the most appropriate background for investigating the attachment of these widows to their homes and possessions. This model allows us to explore the playing out of age-related roles and role transitions over time, while keeping in mind the social context in which individuals adapt to new circumstances and social statuses (Giele & Elder, 1998; Quadagno, 2002). According to the lifecourse principle, we cannot understand a single phase of a person’s life apart from its antecedents and consequences (Riley, 1998). At the same time, any individual’s life is intertwined or intersected with the lives of others (Riley, 1998). These assumptions led us to believe that the home, and its contents, would represent anchors in various ways to the woman’s past role as wife (and mother) and provide representations and guideposts to her future life as a widow. Making this transition represents the kind of age-related change that the lifecourse approach articulates. Currently, women are more likely to experience old age living alone, and their gender influences how they will respond to this experience. The socialization they received as a cohort has impacted the way they construct relationships and faced opportunities and choices (Moen, 2001). Furthermore, the influence of social stratification (in race, class, and gender), social capital as reflected in social support and assistance available in old age, and personal capital as found in resiliency and the ability to respond to stress all impact how aging persons experience social change (O’Rand, 2001). Looking at the attachment of home and possessions after widowhood brings us to the intersection of these macroand microforces, and sheds light on the similarities and differences in how women with different social characteristics navigate the change.
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
159
2.2. Place attachment Place attachment ‘‘is a set of feelings about a geographic location that emotionally binds a person to that place as a function of its role as a setting for experience’’ (Rubinstein & Parmelee, 1992, p. 139). A fundamental assumption in the literature is that what underlies a sense of place attachment are personal meanings of the home. Dill (1990) uses the term homelife to refer not only to what people do and experience every day at home, but also how they interpret their home environment. Rubinstein and Parmelee (1992) describe individuals as meaning makers, that is, as self-directed entities who actively assign personal meanings to their homes. The meaning of home has experiential aspects and involves the relationship between people and their environments (Dovey, 1985). Time is an important factor in the development of place attachment, which is relevant for these women who have remained in their previous homes. Moreland and Zajonc (1977) found that place attachment intrinsically occurs over time, based on frequency of exposure. Familiarity is an important aspect of place attachment and leads to development of a sense of order. ‘‘Remaining where one has lived for a long time means living in a home that is ‘known,’ in the sense of its providing a family of schemata for comprehension and action’’ (Lawton, 1990, p. 639). Typically, knowing how to do one’s tasks with minimal energy and attention promotes a sense of security (Lawton, 1990). For example, we can find light switches in the dark because our familiar environments enable us to ‘‘feel’’ them (Dovey, 1985). Rowles (1984, p. 146) describes this ‘‘sense of physical insideness, of being almost physiologically melded into the environment, [that] results from an intimacy with its physical configuration stemming from the rhythm and routine of using the space over many years.’’ Ironically, minor changes, such as a door unexpectedly left wide open, can easily turn out to be a hazard in this level of familiar environment (Rowles, 1993). The repetitious use of space allows the development of routines and rituals. Personal rituals are individually constructed, habitual, internalized routines (Pastalan & Barnes, 1999). Pastalan and Barnes (1999) explain and illustrate the nature of personal rituals with the following example: ‘‘The time and location are very specific and very individual. Perhaps the mirror must be well lighted, the products laid out methodically, and the makeup applied in a prescribed manner’’ (p. 84). Rituals not only ‘‘help to give meaning to individuals in terms of who they are, where they are, what they do, and why they do it’’ (p. 83), but the meaningfulness of rituals also anchors people to their environments. No less important to the development of order is the privacy in one’s home that allows us to personalize our activities. Perhaps, more to the point, the control afforded by ‘‘both physical and symbolic boundaries’’ (Dovey, 1985, p. 36) enables us to regulate our behavior at home and our interaction with the world outside (Altman, 1975; Dovey, 1985). Thus, ‘‘privacy lets us drop our smiles, our masks, and our roles temporarily, suspend etiquette, scratch an itch, curse, cry, fall apart [and] pull ourselves together’’ (Kron, 1983, p. 27). In this protected environment, one can be ‘‘at ease’’ (Kron, 1983) and ‘‘come closer to one’s self’’ (Dovey, 1978). Territoriality also provides freedom for us to express ourselves, and this often results in the personalization of our home environment (Kron, 1983). Personalization typically involves arranging, molding, and even manipulating a space (Marcus, 1992). By the definition of Altman (1975), primary territories are exclusively used and controlled by the residents on a daily and almost permanent basis. ‘‘In such territories, the identity of the owner is salient’’ (Altman, 1975, p. 112). ‘‘Decorating or personalizing this space in our own particular style is our way of saying: ‘This is mine. . .this is an expression of who I am’’ (Marcus, 1992, p. 88). Gradually, over time, the home and one’s identity begin
160
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
to overlap. The home ‘‘may be the outward manifestation of an inner reality, reflecting both (the woman’s) identity and her relationship to the larger community’’ (Swenson, 1998, p. 391). Rubinstein and Parmalee (1992, p. 148) described this interactive relationship between one’s home and one’s personal identity as follows: ‘‘Attachment to place develops most directly from life experiences and associated notions of what has been important in one’s life and who one is in the world.’’ ‘‘Individual identity is revealed by patterns of symbolic meaning that characterizes the individual’s unique interpretation of experience’’ (Kaufman, 1993, p. 18). This personalization of space with one’s identity is a human quest (Dovey, 1985). ‘‘Although one has little control over the things encountered outside the home, household objects are chosen and could be freely discarded it they produced too much conflict within the self’’ (Csikszentmihalyi & Rochberg-Halton, 1981, p. 17). This refers not only to objects that are seemingly related to the self, ‘‘but everyday utilitarian objects also serve the same purpose of providing information about the self, and yet their effect can be so pervasive as to be difficult to discern at first glance’’ (Csikszentmihalyi & Rochberg-Halton, 1981, p. 92). By their very nature, older adults’ memories and stories can highlight their identity in terms of their home. Often, the home is where people age and ‘‘what has happened in life is increasingly likely to have happened in this place’’ (Rubinstein, Kilbride, & Nagy, 1992, p. 80). In terms of our present focus, it is important that the home is also ‘‘where families grow and develop’’ (Rubinstein et al., 1992, p. 80). The parental home then often becomes ‘‘a focal point for family gatherings’’ for older parents and their adult children (Atchley, 1983, p. 14). One key element of the individual’s identity within the home then is ‘‘the theme of connection’’ (Rowles, 1987, p. 340). In the study of Kamptner (1989, p. 181) of the meanings of older adults’ possessions, he found ‘‘possessions as symbols of others was a theme mentioned over and over again.’’ For example, ‘‘more than any other object in the home, photos serve the purpose of preserving the memory of personal ties’’ (Csikszentmihalyi & Rochberg-Halton, 1981, p. 69). In addition, objects received as gifts can remind the owner of the givers, and relationships or bonds with those people (Kamptner, 1989). Similarly, heirlooms, such as dishware, silverware, furniture, and jewelry, tend to symbolize interpersonal–familial association (Kamptner, 1989). Possessions are important to those who relocate. Among nursing-home residents, possessions provide historical continuity, comfort, and a sense of belongingness (Wapner, Demick, & Redondo, 1990). The concrete nature of ‘‘things’’ also holds steady in their meanings, as individuals change throughout the lifecourse. They are visible connections that individuals have to their unique, historical past (Tobin, 1996). While the relationship between the home and one’s identity is individualistic, it occurs within the constraints of collective culture and social norms (Dovey, 1985; Rubinstein, 1989, 1990; Rubinstein & Parmelee, 1992). For example, ‘‘the symbolic value of kinship’’ (Csikszentmihalyi & Rochberg-Halton, 1981, p.241) in American society is reflected in ‘‘the theme of connection.’’ ‘‘Americans [also] thrive on a myth of unlimited independence and choice’’ (Rubinstein et al., 1992, p. 146), and ‘‘dependency is to be avoided at all costs’’ (Rubinstein et al., 1992, p. 4). Living in a culture that values independence so high, ‘‘to have a home, to live in one’s own home, to be in the home are very much part of a sense of personal coherence and continuing physical viability’’ (Rubinstein et al., 1992, p. 19). The combination of physical and autobiographical experiences in one’s home over time, then, results in a sense of place attachment by means of interpretation and active meaning, making that becomes blended with one’s identity.
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
161
3. Methodology This study is based on in-depth interviews with four older widows in Charlotte, NC, who still live in the homes where they lived with their deceased husbands and utilizes a lifecourse perspective. The interviews were conducted by the second author for her thesis research on place attachment and its significance in the bereavement process of older women. Eligible women were sought through senior organizations, aging service providers, and churches. Participants were selected according to the following criteria: (1) widowed between 2 and 10 years, (2) aged 60 or older, and (3) living in the home in which they resided with their husband. After initial contact by telephone, the second author conducted three interviews with each respondent in the participant’s home during spring 2001. During the first interview, each participant was asked to talk about her husband, marriage, child rearing, the death of her husband, and widowhood. The use of open-ended questions allowed each woman to tell her story in her own way, highlighting what she thought were the most important aspects or incidents of her life. As the interview progressed, the interviewer asked open-ended questions, adopted from Whitebourne (1986), in an attempt to elicit information about how she defined herself. For example, a respondent was asked ‘‘What is important to you about being a mother?’’ In the second interview, the participant was asked to show the interviewer around her home, and spontaneous questions were asked during the tour. Underlying this request was the literature that suggests that how a person decorates the home tends to reflect her place attachment, especially in terms of identity. The third interview focused on the participant’s current life at home. She was asked to describe her home environment and typical day at home, including issues related to daily routines, favorite activities, and personal rituals. Other questions related to privacy, age identity, personal values, and health status. Each interview was transcribed verbatim and analyzed for recurrent themes and patterns, along with prevalent words and phrases. Emerging themes were uncovered for each respondent, as well as patterns within the group of narratives. The next stage was to define the most important variables and to distinguish their relationships utilizing an ideographic approach focusing on sequences of events and behavior. Finally, each woman’s attachment to her home was described in terms of its significance in her life. These women all had the financial resources to meet the normative expectations laid out for them and were primarily homemakers. This study enables us to explore the range of ways in which they attach meaning to their homes and possessions and how their identities are related to their families, homes, and possessions.
4. Participants The women were between the ages of 64 and 80 years at the time of the first interview and had been widows between 3.5 and 7.5 years. They all had remained in the homes in which they lived in before their husbands died. Three of the women were full-time homemakers, while one of them worked outside the home after her children were in school. The length of residence in their current homes prior to the death of their husbands varied from 5.5 to 27 years; the total length of residence in their current homes varied between 13 and 30 years. All four women were white.
162
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
Mrs. Betty Rose1 is 80 years old and was married in 1943 when she was 22 years old. She has three children, and her mother lived with them until she died at the age of 76. She has lived in the same three-bedroom ranch house since they returned to Charlotte in 1967. After retiring in 1983, her husband developed Parkinson’s disease and cancer. She cared for him until he passed away peacefully at home the day after Thanksgiving in 1996 when he was 75 years old. Four and one-half years after her husband’s death, Mrs. Rose enjoys new things that she rarely did when she was caring for her family. She has no serious health problems and still lives independently in her home of almost 25 years. Mrs. Kelly Wilson is 69 years old and was married in 1954, when she was 22, to a man from her hometown. She intended to become a teacher but worked in a bank until she was 5 months pregnant with her first child. ‘‘You didn’t work that long in those days, especially when you were in public places, you know.’’ She had eight children and found great joy in raising her family. She and her husband built a ranch house a few blocks away from their previous two-story home and moved in 1988. Her husband retired in 1989 and died of lung cancer, at home, in 1993, just 1 month before his 62nd birthday. Seven and one half years after her husband’s death, Mrs. Wilson devotes a lot of time and energy to her church outreach ministry and to her 18 grandchildren. Mrs. Tracy King celebrated her 71st birthday during the series of interviews. She was born in 1930 and was married in 1956 when she was 26 years old. She had three different jobs before and shortly after her marriage, then stayed home to raise her son and daughter. The Kings were transferred four times by the insurance company her husband worked for before their move to her current home in Charlotte in 1986. Her husband retired in 1989 and was diagnosed with cancer. He died 8 months later in 1993 at the age of 63. Mrs. King reads a lot, plays golf, and travels often. She cares for her dog and enjoys the company of her daughter and her husband’s extended family. Mrs. Linda Forrest was born in 1936 and is 64 years old. Her 90-year old mother is legally blind and lives in a nursing home. She was married in 1956 when she was 20 years old and stayed home to raise her four children. Once her youngest child was in kindergarten, she started to work part time and then full time. The Forrests’ third move brought them to Charlotte in 1971 when her husband, a chemical engineer, took a new job, from which he retired in 1987. He later developed cancer and heart disease and died in the summer of 1998 when he was 74 years old. Mrs. Forrest gets up at 4:20 a.m. every morning and, on weekdays, begins her day by walking at the mall. She then works downstairs in her home office and has no plan to retire.
5. Findings The research findings are presented in terms of key themes and issues drawn from the analysis of the interviews with these four women. First, the cohort norms and cultural expectations that guided the lifecourse of these older women are presented as a background against which their lives can be viewed. Second, in seeking to understand how they define themselves and find meaning in their lives, we explore the ways in which their identities are tied to their homes and families. Third, we will look at their representations of home and the meaning of place attachment in their lives. Fourth, we explore their
1
Pseudonyms have been created to protect the anonymity of the respondents.
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
163
attachment to their homes and possessions, and finally, the use of personal rituals and routines in their present lives. 5.1. Cohort norms and expectations These women were born between 1920 and 1937, and each followed the cultural expectations of marrying, establishing a home, and raising children. Mrs. Wilson explained: ‘‘it was part of our role as being a good wife to set up our household. . .a comfort area for our husband and for our children.’’ For those who worked outside the home, few jobs were readily available for women of this generation. As Mrs. King explained, ‘‘working as a secretary, in a bank and teaching were the only decent opportunities for women in those days.’’ Those women who worked outside the home were generally expected to stop working when they became pregnant, staying home to raise their family. Mrs. Rose, for example, enjoyed her bookkeeping job, but she quit working when she became pregnant 1 year after she was married. She stayed home to raise her children and ‘‘make a home’’ because working outside the home was not a popular choice for wives and mothers in those days. As Mrs. Forrest explained: ‘‘Mothers did not go to work then. You were thought odd if you did and I had no. . .desire to go to work ‘cause you had your hands full at home.’’ As Mrs. Rose explained, ‘‘Happiness I think with our generation was taking care of your family, taking care of your husband, and having a family.’’ For example, she made all the arrangements for the family’s move to Charlotte, including selling their home and packing their things, when her husband got a good job offer there. One essential aspect of homemaking was preparing daily meals for the family. Each of the women discussed their continuing cooking efforts, even now that they no longer have family at home. For example, Mrs. Rose beats eggs and flour to make pancakes for breakfast and sometimes tries new recipes just for herself. Mrs. King ‘‘does biscuits’’ and eats homemade soup for lunch. In contrast, Mrs. Wilson and Mrs. Forrest indicated that they enjoy cooking on special occasions. Mrs. Wilson’s sons and their wives often come to her home for Sunday dinner. She explained, ‘‘Having lived alone, I can’t say that I do a lot of extremes as far as cooking. But if I have the family, it keeps your cooking skills polished, you know. As they say, if you don’t use it, you lose it. So I put on the dinner.’’ Mrs. Forrest similarly explained, ‘‘Since my husband died, I don’t cook for myself unless somebody is coming. I mean I’ll do something, but I won’t do anything elaborate.’’ When she welcomes her family, she bakes bread like her grandmother used to do for her family. She describes bread making as ‘‘very stress relieving [and] relaxing. It’s a labor of love.’’ Each of these older women followed the cultural norms and expectations for their cohort of women, devoting their lives to making a home and raising their children. This was made possible by the financial security provided by their husbands. They have each sought to retain their identity and find continuing meaning in their lives after the death of their husbands. 5.2. Identities tied to home and family For these older women, their identities are, at least, partly tied to their homes and families, and they find meaning in their lives through their relationships with their husbands and children. For example, Mrs. Rose talked about how memories of her husband help her to find meaning in her life.
164
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
And I do want to be reminded of my life ‘cause those 53 years were the biggest part of my life. And even though it makes me cry or makes me wish that I would have my husband still here [and] wish for things that I used to have. Even though they’re painful, they’re good for me. I think they’re good for me ‘cause they sort of keep me in my life. I don’t know that makes sense, you know. Maybe it extends. Although you’re not a couple anymore, you’re still part or still one half of the life that we lived. Although Mrs. Rose’s memories remind her of her loss, they also highlight the good relationship she had with her husband and help her to find meaning through her past role as a devoted wife. Mrs. Wilson described herself as a nester for her family. ‘‘In a sense of building a comfortable place to come. It was part of our role as being a good wife to set up our household, a comfort area for our husband and children. Some place you’re eager to come to and be accepted, a loving atmosphere.’’ She finds meaning in the role she played in developing a peaceful and loving home for her husband and children, and, in part, this is how she defines herself. 5.3. Place attachment and representation of home Older adults are self-directed entities who actively assign personal meanings to their homes. Each subject’s representation of her home depends on what portion of the family life-cycle was spent there. Mrs. Rose, for example, had already launched her youngest son when she moved into her current house in 1976. Mrs. King and her husband also built their house as a place to retire, not to raise their children. In comparison, Mrs. Forrest moved to Charlotte with her three teenage children and toddler, and her house was home for her entire nuclear family. ‘‘Family’’ is what Mrs. Wilson thinks makes her house her home. She gave this definition of home: ‘‘Home to me is not a house, home is the relationships of love and tenderness that you have with family primarily and friends and so forth.’’ Her home used to be where her family lived and ‘‘the relationships of love and tenderness’’ existed. Now that her husband and eight children are gone, is her house still her home? A dent on a wall in her bedroom provides a clue to the answer. Few people would notice it, let alone understand what it means to Mrs. Wilson, who took care of her husband at home with the help of hospice, a nurse, and her youngest son, toward the end of her husband’s life. On the morning following his death, as they were removing a rented hospital bed, they accidentally hit the wall with it. The spot was repainted, but the dent has remained as ‘‘kind of a gentle reminder (that) he was there.’’ She sums up philosophically that ‘‘life is a mixture of good and not so good events. . .realistically that’s the totality of our lives.’’ When asked what her home meant to her, Mrs. Wilson responded, ‘‘Again, certainly it has very, very good memories because of happy times when my husband was here.’’ She continued, ‘‘He died in this house. . .he died at home and all his family was here. . .so that point of view, that was a great gift [and] very great blessing because he had been granted that wish to die [at home].’’ This is an intriguing way in which this house is her home because of the memories, including her husband’s death. She went on ‘‘When I have to sell this house. . .I’m gonna set back and cry, because it’s where he died.’’ Her house is still the family home. Four of her six children who came to Charlotte with them in 1979 have remained in the city or nearby. Sometime after their father’s death, they spontaneously began to come ‘‘home’’ often for dinner on Sunday afternoon along with their wives. She said of their visits ‘‘. . . they foster that feeling of connectedness and caring.’’ By her definition, this should never be ‘‘a
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
165
command performance.’’ When they come strictly on a voluntary basis, their visits represent the true meaning of home and ‘‘the relationships of love and tenderness that you have with family primarily. . .’’ Not all of the women feel attachment to their homes in terms of their family or family roles. For Mrs. King, for example, place attachment reflects a more pragmatic meaning. She lives alone in the very roomy house that she and her husband had built for the two of them. They built the large house because they needed to invest the money they made from selling their previous home and were also ‘‘just used to hav(e)[ing] a lot of rooms.’’ The ideas that she and her husband incorporated into the design contributed to her feelings of convenience. For example, they had their bedroom built on the first floor and incorporated her ideas in designing the kitchen. As a result, this house turned out to be the most convenient place she ever lived. Mrs. King spends most of her time on the first floor and says, ‘‘I just love it here.’’ In addition to enjoying cooking her meals, the kitchen is where she reads a newspaper or books, watches sports on television, and does other things at the kitchen table. She sleeps and sometimes naps in her first-floor bedroom. Now that she has placed her new computer in the laundry room, next to the kitchen, the first floor functions like a ‘‘self-created control center’’ (Lawton, 1990, p. 640). Her design efforts were successful and she likes her home because ‘‘It’s convenient and I have everything I need.’’ She described her home as comfortable, explaining that she meant, ‘‘I have almost anything I want here, you know. Easily accessible.’’ For Mrs. King, comfort and convenience are the essence of her attachment to her home. 5.4. Home and possessions The older women’s homes were connected with positive memories, some of which were reflected in their possessions. As we will see, people have various kinds of items that are imbued by them with different meanings. One cultural pattern that they all followed was to decorate public spaces in their homes with family photographs. The living room and den or family room in each home showcased a display of photographs of relatives and themselves, taken on both special and ordinary occasions. Mrs. Forrest’s comment indicated her awareness of this cultural norm, ‘‘And I have pictures everywhere like everybody else does.’’ The display of family photographs portrays ‘‘the theme of connection’’ (Rowles, 1987). ‘‘Possessions as symbols of others’’ (Kamptner, 1989, p. 181), including family photographs, were identified by each of the respondents. One way in which an older woman’s home and possessions are important is in demonstrating how important she is to her family. Evidence of her husband’s consideration for Mrs. Rose can be seen throughout her house in the projects he initiated to maintain or improve their home environment. In consultation with her, he had a garage built, the kitchen remodeled, and the wood-burning stove replaced with a gas–log fireplace. He painted most of the walls in the house, but she particularly appreciates the new windows that are easy to open and clean. She sees these improvements as reminders of how much he cared for her because ‘‘he always did things I think which he was thinking for me, you know.’’ Similarly, Mrs. Rose sees the gifts from her three children and seven grandchildren as evidences of their feelings for her. Her older daughter’s crafts decorate the kitchen and den, and the television set in the den was a gift from this daughter. Her younger daughter bought her a new calculator for Christmas because something was wrong with the old one given to her by her husband, who knew his wife’s enjoyment of bookkeeping. There are magazines piled high in her bedroom from subscriptions that her younger daughter has given her. Her son and his wife gave her a cell phone as a gift and pay the monthly
166
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
bills. A focal point of the dining room is a set of china that her three children bought them for their 25th wedding anniversary. Her youngest grandchild created a collage of old family photos that hangs in the den. Another granddaughter gave Mrs. Rose her old computer. Even her goldfish is a gift from her daughter-in-law. Mrs. Rose feels that she does not have as many fancy things as other people do, but she is proud of the feelings expressed by the gifts her family has given her. They suggest that her life has been meaningful because as she explained, ‘‘I didn’t have my own money, my own career, and all, but I have no regrets about that. I would have regrets if we didn’t have a family life with my children and all.’’ As she reflected on her life, she repeated a common sentiment for women of her cohort with the question, ‘‘what’s more important than family?’’ Because possessions have no inherent meaning of their own, they can mean different things to different members of the family. For example, Mrs. Wilson described her husband as ‘‘a great garage person’’ who ‘‘loved working with wood.’’ The navy blue jacket that he wore when doing woodwork still hangs on a hook in the garage. Shortly after his death, she mentioned to her children that she was thinking of donating the jacket. She had already given some of his clothes to her sons. To her great surprise they gave her a staring look and responded, ‘‘Mom, leave that there.’’ Although it didn’t hold special meaning for her, she left the jacket hanging in the garage as they requested. She also told her sons to take nails and some other things from the garage but, again, they responded, ‘‘Leave them there, mother.’’ She explained, ‘‘Certainly, I mean I don’t get a lot of comfort in it being there, but that’s for them.’’ In comparison, she has a strong attachment to things her husband made. A dry sink that he made is in the entrance hall and the shed remains in the backyard. Just before starting his second career, her husband bought a lot of wood and built ‘‘a good size shed to keep things out of the garage.’’ She recalled, ‘‘Well, he had more fun. I’ve got photographs of him. He drew the design for it. He measured everything.’’ She continued her explanation in front of the shed, ‘‘Now, isn’t that the beauty? We had more fun in doing it.’’ That last comment seems very telling in terms of understanding her attachment to the dry sink and shed but not the jacket, nails, and other items in the garage. It’s not just that he made the dry sink and built the shed, but that she remembers the fun he had making them. Even more important is the fact that he shared his fun and joy with her, and these items seem to symbolize for her their shared happiness. Mrs. Forrest enjoys home decorating, and her house is decorated very creatively. She chose ‘‘generations’’ as a theme and decorated a corner of her dining room wall with photographs of her grandmother, mother, daughter, granddaughters, and herself. Mrs. Forrest described herself as a collector. She used to collect heart-shaped objects, rocking horses, and Beanie Babies. She now collects Santa Clauses and has over 100 of them. If she sells her house and moves, she will take her important possessions with her. A religious painting hanging in the living room is the gift that she and her husband bought for their first wedding anniversary with a monetary gift from his parents. A black and white painting in the family room is something that they bought because her husband really wanted it. A china cabinet that holds her Beanie Babies used to be her mother’s. A Madonna-shaped wall hanging in the bedroom was a thank you gift for her six years of volunteer work. A cross-stitch she made for her husband says, ‘‘my husband is a strong arm to lean upon, a loving heart to rely upon. All these things I found in you. My only lover and my best friend.’’ Of all the photographs displayed in her home, her absolute favorite is one of her and her husband at her son’s wedding. She noted with emotion, ‘‘Just look at the expression on his face. Isn’t that beautiful? That’s a very good expression.’’ These items that are her most prized possessions help us
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
167
to understand how she defines herself. They reflect her identity as a daughter, wife, mother, grandmother, and volunteer. 5.5. Personal rituals and routines By its very nature, routine is usually unconscious. Mrs. Rose, however, is aware of its importance and structures her days around personal rituals and routines, through which she maintains her identity. She noted, I have to have breakfast, lunch, and dinner all the time. They [her children] don’t even bother preparing dinner sometimes. They’re tired and they just snack or something. But I could never do that. I think it comes from all the years we were married. I had dinner every night with my family. . .and I guess [for] a woman who stayed home for most of her life that’s sort of an accomplishment, being able to prepare food and feed people. Nowadays maybe not. For her, cooking is a favorite and important routine that perpetuates her identity as a devoted homemaker. She described her days as ‘‘pretty much routine’’ and explains, I do a lot of things you get into the habit over 50 years of marriage. You get into the habit. There are habits you both do together and I do a lot of things the same, you know. A few little things have changed. Maybe doing things differently or eat different stuff. But I think I do almost like we used to do together, you know. I like that. . .and I think it sort of keeps you connected. For Mrs. Rose, as for the other participants, continuity between her present life and other periods of her lifecourse help her to maintain her identity as a homemaker. She is able to find meaning in her life through the daily routines and patterned behavior that are reminiscent of her days as a wife and a mother raising her children.
6. Conclusion While each individual’s attachment to her home and possessions is personally defined, each of the participants used the term ‘‘comfort’’ or ‘‘comfortable’’ to describe her home. The respondents of Rubinstein (1989) also reported that comfort is what made their houses their homes, and Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton (1981, p. 127) found that ‘‘the single characteristic of the home most often mentioned was ‘comfortable,’ ‘cozy,’ or ‘relaxing.’’’ There is a range of forms and levels of place attachment, but each of the women draw comfort from their homes. This concept combines both physical and emotional comfort derived from the familiarity and other characteristics previously discussed. As we have seen, through living in a home for a long time, there is a level of comfort based on familiarity and ease in performing routine tasks (Lawton, 1990). The level of comfort certainly changes over time and, perhaps, when the home no longer retains a high level of comfort and convenience, it is the time to consider making a move. Mrs. Forrest is thinking of selling her home of 30 years, although it ‘‘contains many memories and much love.’’ First, her good neighbors’ unexpected move made her think about moving. Seemingly after
168
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
this, too much space and the difficulty of keeping up the house began to pressure her. She also was concerned that the 14 steps would become a burden. Her ambivalence was evident as she pondered the challenge of a potential move: ‘‘I had been here all these years. Why look for trouble? But you can’t get anywhere if you don’t try. And it’s too easy not to try. And it’s really a pain in the neck to do it because it’s a lot of work emotionally, mentally, [and] physically. I think it’s something I’ve got to do. I think I will be a better person to do it.’’ Now that her long term home is no longer comfortable and convenient, she’s facing this possible challenge as the next part of her lifecourse. By rearranging her collections and familiar possessions in a new house, Mrs. Forrest believes she will be able to recreate her home in a new place. By their very nature, possessions have ‘‘the potential for the transferability of a sense of place’’ (Rowles, 1993, p. 69). ‘‘For example, the traveler may have a strategy for dealing with unfamiliar hotel rooms, including bringing a family photo, an alarm clock, or a journal to accommodate personal rituals’’ (Pastalan & Barnes, 1999, p. 87). Due to the high level of mobility that now characterizes our society, ‘‘increasingly, continuity and memories are rooted in things-movable, storable, shippable-rather than in the fabric of the house itself’’ (Marcus, 1992, p. 100). The women in this study were raised with clear expectations of their gender-based roles as wives and mothers and equally clear limitations regarding careers. Like the many women of their cohorts, they dedicated themselves to making a home and raising their families. As we have seen, they have at least, in part, developed a sense of their own identities in relation to their homes and possessions. Thus, based on the choices they have made throughout their lifecourse, they continue to frame their sense of identity in terms of their homes and personal possessions. Notably, their connections to their families are reflected through the meanings of their homes and specific possessions. This raises the important question of the extent to which these findings would hold true for older women who have maintained professional careers outside the home, including those who did not marry or raise children or those who were forced to work due to economic necessity. How do women of the same cohorts who had careers define and express their attachment to home and possessions? Having held different salient roles, how do they express and define such attachments? To what extent would these women frame their sense of identity in terms of their homes and possessions? These questions point to the need for further research that explores the range of variation of the meaning of home and possessions for a more diverse sample of older women. The implications of these findings could be useful in working with older women, particularly widows. For women of these cohorts who have dedicated their lives to making a home and raising a family. These questions point to the need for further research that explores the range of variation of the meaning of home and possessions for a more diverse sample of older women.
References Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social behavior: Privacy, personal space, territory, crowding. Monterey, CA: Brooks/ Cole Publishing. Atchley, R. C. (1983). Aging: Continuity and change. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing. Atchley, R., & Barush, A. (2004). Social Forces and Aging—An Introduction to Social Gerontology (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Barresi, C. M. (1997). Current issues in ethnogerontology. In K. F. Ferraro (Ed.), Gerontology—perspectives and issues (2nd ed.) (pp. 267 – 284). New York: Springer. Chevan, A. (1995). Holding on and letting go: Residential mobility during widowhood. Research on Aging, 17(3), 278 – 302.
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
169
Commerce Department Census Bureau (1998). Marital status and living arrangements: March 1998. Current Population Reports. [On-line] http://www.census/gov/prod99pubs/p20-514/pdf. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Rochberg-Halton, E. (1981). The meaning of things: Domestic symbols and the self. New York: Cambridge University Press. Dill, A. E. P. (1990). Transformations of home: The formal and informal process of home care planning. In J. F. Gubrium, & A. Sankar (Eds.), The home care experience: Ethnography and policy ( pp. 227 – 251). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Dovey, K. (1978). Home: An ordering principle in space. Landscape, 22(2), 27 – 30. Dovey, K. (1985). Home: An ordering principle in space. Landscape, 22(2), 27 – 30. Giele, J. Z., & Elder Jr., J. H. (1998). Life course research: Development of a field. In J. Z. Giele, G. H. Elder Jr. (Eds.), Methods of life course research: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (pp. 5 – 27). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Howell, S. C. (1994). Environments and the aging woman: Domains of choice. In A. Altman, & A. Churchman (Eds.), Women and the environment ( pp. 105 – 131). New York: Plenum. Kamptner, N. L. (1989). Personal possessions and their meanings in old age. In S. Spacapan, & S. Oskamp (Eds.), The social psychology of aging ( pp. 165 – 196). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Kaufman, S. R. (1993). Values as sources of the ageless self. In J. R. Kelly (Ed.), Activity and aging: Staying involved in later life ( pp. 17 – 24). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Kron, J. (1983). Home-psych: The social psychology of home and decoration. New York: Clarkson N. Potter. Lawton, M. P. (1990). Residential environment and self-directedness among older people. American Psychologist, 45, 638 – 640. Marcus, C. C. (1992). Environmental memories. In I. Altman, & S. M. Low (Eds.), Place attachment ( pp. 87 – 112). New York: Plenum. Moen, P. (2001). The gendered life course. In R. H. Binstock, L. K. George, & V. W. Marshall (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (5th ed.) (pp. 179 – 196). San Diego: Academic Press. Moreland, R. L., & Zajonc, R. B. (1977). Is stimulus recognition a necessary condition for the occurrence of exposure effects? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(4), 191 – 199. O’Rand, A. M. (2001). Stratification and the life course: The forms of life-course capital and their interrelationships. In R. H. Binstock, L. K. George, & V. W. Marshall (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (5th ed.) (pp. 197 – 213). San Diego: Academic Press. Pastalan, L. A., & Barnes, J. E. (1999). Personal rituals: Identity, attachment to place, and community solidarity. In S. Benyamin, & B. Ruth (Eds.), Aging, autonomy, and architecture: Advances in assisted living ( pp. 81 – 89). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Quadagno, J. (2002). Aging and the life course: An introduction to social gerontology (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Riley, M. W. (1998). A life course approach: Autobiographical notes. In J. Z. Giele, & G. H. Elder Jr. (Eds.), Methods of life course research: Qualitative and quantitative approaches ( pp. 28 – 51). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Rowles, G. D. (1984). Aging in rural environments. In I. Altman, M. P. Lawton, & J. F. Wohlwill (Eds.), Elderly people and the environment ( pp. 129 – 157). New York: Plenum. Rowles, G. D. (1987). A place to call home. In L. L. Carstensen, & B. A. Edelstein (Eds.), Handbook of clinical gerontology ( pp. 335 – 353). New York: Pergamon. Rowles, G. D. (1993). Evolving images of place in aging and ‘aging in place’. Generations, 17, 65 – 70. Rubinstein, R. L. (1989). The home environments of older people: A description of the psychosocial processes linking person to place. Journal of Gerontology, 44, S45 – S53. Rubinstein, R. L. (1990). Personal identity and environmental meaning in later life. Journal of Aging Studies, 4(2), 131 – 147. Rubinstein, R. L., Kilbride, J. C., & Nagy, S. (1992). Elders living alone: Frailty and the perception of choice. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Rubinstein, R. L., & Parmelee, P. A. (1992). Attachment to place and the representation of the life course by the elderly. In I. Altman, & S. M. Low (Eds.), Place attachment ( pp. 139 – 163). New York: Plenum. Swenson, M. M. (1998). The meaning of home to five elderly women. Health Care for Women International, 19, 381 – 393. Tobin, S. S. (1996). Cherished possessions: The meaning of things. Generations, 20, 46 – 48. Wapner, S., Demick, J., & Redondo, J. P. (1990). Cherished possessions and adaptation of older people to nursing homes. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 31, 219 – 235. Whitebourne, S. K. (1986). The me I know: A study of adult identity. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Older women’s attachments to their home and possessions Dena Shenk a,*, Kazumi Kuwahara b, Diane Zablotsky a a
Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of North Carolina Charlotte, 9201 University City Boulevard, Charlotte, NC 28223-0001, USA b 2-29-9-102 Nagaski, Toshima, Tokyo, 171-0051, Japan
Abstract The current cohorts of older women in the United States were raised with clear gender roles and expectations, defining a woman’s primary focus as her home and family. It seems likely, therefore, that they will have at least, in part, developed a sense of their own identities in relation to their homes and possessions. This study is based on indepth interviews with four older widows in Charlotte, NC, who still live in the homes where they lived with their deceased husbands. Utilizing a lifecourse perspective, this paper explores the themes in their attachment to their homes and possessions. D 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Place attachment; Home; Possessions; Identity; Lifecourse; Widowhood
1. Introduction The current cohorts of older women in the United States were raised with clear gender roles and expectations, defining a woman’s primary focus as her home and family. Many of them have invested enormous amounts of time and emotion in their homes as full-time homemakers as a result of traditional gender roles associated with their cohort (Howell, 1994). It is not surprising, therefore, that their identities are often tied to their families, homes, and possessions. Using a lifecourse perspective, this paper explores the attachment to their home and possessions of four older widows who have remained in the homes in which they lived with their deceased husbands. This is a common pattern with older widows tending to remain in their homes after the death of their husbands. The rate of moving for those 65 years and over is only 4.1% (Commerce Department * Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-704-687-4349; fax: +1-704-687-3091. E-mail address: [email protected] (D. Shenk). 0890-4065/$ - see front matter D 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jaging.2004.01.006
158
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
Census Bureau, 1998). If a widowed person is going to move after a spouse’s death, they typically do so during the first year of widowhood. The probability of moving for this group diminishes over time, and even after 20 years, 40% are estimated to be in the home they occupied when they became widowed (Chevan, 1995). Like many women of the older generation, they devoted themselves to their homes and families, with the roles of wife and mother being primary throughout their adult lives. At least, in part, their identities continue to be tied to these roles, although their husbands have died and their children are grown. The focus of this paper is to develop an understanding of their attachment to their homes and possessions. In particular, we will explore their connections to their families as reflected through the meanings of their homes and possessions.
2. Background 2.1. Lifecourse perspective Each person’s journey through life can be viewed as a road map, offering many alternative routes to many alternative destinations. The pathways that develop as we age are a result of accumulated decisions and the consequences of those decisions (Atchley & Barusch, 2004). The timing of events over an individual’s lifetime, in such areas as education, work, and family, affects the overall lifecourse whether they are ‘‘on-time’’ or ‘‘off-time’’ (Barresi, 1997). The concepts of on- and off-time refer to the timing of specific events and transitions within a person’s life, such as the birth of one’s last child, death of a spouse, or returning to college. The timing of such events, in relation to the cohort norms and cultural expectations, also affects their impact on the individual’s lifecourse. The lifecourse perspective offers the most appropriate background for investigating the attachment of these widows to their homes and possessions. This model allows us to explore the playing out of age-related roles and role transitions over time, while keeping in mind the social context in which individuals adapt to new circumstances and social statuses (Giele & Elder, 1998; Quadagno, 2002). According to the lifecourse principle, we cannot understand a single phase of a person’s life apart from its antecedents and consequences (Riley, 1998). At the same time, any individual’s life is intertwined or intersected with the lives of others (Riley, 1998). These assumptions led us to believe that the home, and its contents, would represent anchors in various ways to the woman’s past role as wife (and mother) and provide representations and guideposts to her future life as a widow. Making this transition represents the kind of age-related change that the lifecourse approach articulates. Currently, women are more likely to experience old age living alone, and their gender influences how they will respond to this experience. The socialization they received as a cohort has impacted the way they construct relationships and faced opportunities and choices (Moen, 2001). Furthermore, the influence of social stratification (in race, class, and gender), social capital as reflected in social support and assistance available in old age, and personal capital as found in resiliency and the ability to respond to stress all impact how aging persons experience social change (O’Rand, 2001). Looking at the attachment of home and possessions after widowhood brings us to the intersection of these macroand microforces, and sheds light on the similarities and differences in how women with different social characteristics navigate the change.
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
159
2.2. Place attachment Place attachment ‘‘is a set of feelings about a geographic location that emotionally binds a person to that place as a function of its role as a setting for experience’’ (Rubinstein & Parmelee, 1992, p. 139). A fundamental assumption in the literature is that what underlies a sense of place attachment are personal meanings of the home. Dill (1990) uses the term homelife to refer not only to what people do and experience every day at home, but also how they interpret their home environment. Rubinstein and Parmelee (1992) describe individuals as meaning makers, that is, as self-directed entities who actively assign personal meanings to their homes. The meaning of home has experiential aspects and involves the relationship between people and their environments (Dovey, 1985). Time is an important factor in the development of place attachment, which is relevant for these women who have remained in their previous homes. Moreland and Zajonc (1977) found that place attachment intrinsically occurs over time, based on frequency of exposure. Familiarity is an important aspect of place attachment and leads to development of a sense of order. ‘‘Remaining where one has lived for a long time means living in a home that is ‘known,’ in the sense of its providing a family of schemata for comprehension and action’’ (Lawton, 1990, p. 639). Typically, knowing how to do one’s tasks with minimal energy and attention promotes a sense of security (Lawton, 1990). For example, we can find light switches in the dark because our familiar environments enable us to ‘‘feel’’ them (Dovey, 1985). Rowles (1984, p. 146) describes this ‘‘sense of physical insideness, of being almost physiologically melded into the environment, [that] results from an intimacy with its physical configuration stemming from the rhythm and routine of using the space over many years.’’ Ironically, minor changes, such as a door unexpectedly left wide open, can easily turn out to be a hazard in this level of familiar environment (Rowles, 1993). The repetitious use of space allows the development of routines and rituals. Personal rituals are individually constructed, habitual, internalized routines (Pastalan & Barnes, 1999). Pastalan and Barnes (1999) explain and illustrate the nature of personal rituals with the following example: ‘‘The time and location are very specific and very individual. Perhaps the mirror must be well lighted, the products laid out methodically, and the makeup applied in a prescribed manner’’ (p. 84). Rituals not only ‘‘help to give meaning to individuals in terms of who they are, where they are, what they do, and why they do it’’ (p. 83), but the meaningfulness of rituals also anchors people to their environments. No less important to the development of order is the privacy in one’s home that allows us to personalize our activities. Perhaps, more to the point, the control afforded by ‘‘both physical and symbolic boundaries’’ (Dovey, 1985, p. 36) enables us to regulate our behavior at home and our interaction with the world outside (Altman, 1975; Dovey, 1985). Thus, ‘‘privacy lets us drop our smiles, our masks, and our roles temporarily, suspend etiquette, scratch an itch, curse, cry, fall apart [and] pull ourselves together’’ (Kron, 1983, p. 27). In this protected environment, one can be ‘‘at ease’’ (Kron, 1983) and ‘‘come closer to one’s self’’ (Dovey, 1978). Territoriality also provides freedom for us to express ourselves, and this often results in the personalization of our home environment (Kron, 1983). Personalization typically involves arranging, molding, and even manipulating a space (Marcus, 1992). By the definition of Altman (1975), primary territories are exclusively used and controlled by the residents on a daily and almost permanent basis. ‘‘In such territories, the identity of the owner is salient’’ (Altman, 1975, p. 112). ‘‘Decorating or personalizing this space in our own particular style is our way of saying: ‘This is mine. . .this is an expression of who I am’’ (Marcus, 1992, p. 88). Gradually, over time, the home and one’s identity begin
160
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
to overlap. The home ‘‘may be the outward manifestation of an inner reality, reflecting both (the woman’s) identity and her relationship to the larger community’’ (Swenson, 1998, p. 391). Rubinstein and Parmalee (1992, p. 148) described this interactive relationship between one’s home and one’s personal identity as follows: ‘‘Attachment to place develops most directly from life experiences and associated notions of what has been important in one’s life and who one is in the world.’’ ‘‘Individual identity is revealed by patterns of symbolic meaning that characterizes the individual’s unique interpretation of experience’’ (Kaufman, 1993, p. 18). This personalization of space with one’s identity is a human quest (Dovey, 1985). ‘‘Although one has little control over the things encountered outside the home, household objects are chosen and could be freely discarded it they produced too much conflict within the self’’ (Csikszentmihalyi & Rochberg-Halton, 1981, p. 17). This refers not only to objects that are seemingly related to the self, ‘‘but everyday utilitarian objects also serve the same purpose of providing information about the self, and yet their effect can be so pervasive as to be difficult to discern at first glance’’ (Csikszentmihalyi & Rochberg-Halton, 1981, p. 92). By their very nature, older adults’ memories and stories can highlight their identity in terms of their home. Often, the home is where people age and ‘‘what has happened in life is increasingly likely to have happened in this place’’ (Rubinstein, Kilbride, & Nagy, 1992, p. 80). In terms of our present focus, it is important that the home is also ‘‘where families grow and develop’’ (Rubinstein et al., 1992, p. 80). The parental home then often becomes ‘‘a focal point for family gatherings’’ for older parents and their adult children (Atchley, 1983, p. 14). One key element of the individual’s identity within the home then is ‘‘the theme of connection’’ (Rowles, 1987, p. 340). In the study of Kamptner (1989, p. 181) of the meanings of older adults’ possessions, he found ‘‘possessions as symbols of others was a theme mentioned over and over again.’’ For example, ‘‘more than any other object in the home, photos serve the purpose of preserving the memory of personal ties’’ (Csikszentmihalyi & Rochberg-Halton, 1981, p. 69). In addition, objects received as gifts can remind the owner of the givers, and relationships or bonds with those people (Kamptner, 1989). Similarly, heirlooms, such as dishware, silverware, furniture, and jewelry, tend to symbolize interpersonal–familial association (Kamptner, 1989). Possessions are important to those who relocate. Among nursing-home residents, possessions provide historical continuity, comfort, and a sense of belongingness (Wapner, Demick, & Redondo, 1990). The concrete nature of ‘‘things’’ also holds steady in their meanings, as individuals change throughout the lifecourse. They are visible connections that individuals have to their unique, historical past (Tobin, 1996). While the relationship between the home and one’s identity is individualistic, it occurs within the constraints of collective culture and social norms (Dovey, 1985; Rubinstein, 1989, 1990; Rubinstein & Parmelee, 1992). For example, ‘‘the symbolic value of kinship’’ (Csikszentmihalyi & Rochberg-Halton, 1981, p.241) in American society is reflected in ‘‘the theme of connection.’’ ‘‘Americans [also] thrive on a myth of unlimited independence and choice’’ (Rubinstein et al., 1992, p. 146), and ‘‘dependency is to be avoided at all costs’’ (Rubinstein et al., 1992, p. 4). Living in a culture that values independence so high, ‘‘to have a home, to live in one’s own home, to be in the home are very much part of a sense of personal coherence and continuing physical viability’’ (Rubinstein et al., 1992, p. 19). The combination of physical and autobiographical experiences in one’s home over time, then, results in a sense of place attachment by means of interpretation and active meaning, making that becomes blended with one’s identity.
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
161
3. Methodology This study is based on in-depth interviews with four older widows in Charlotte, NC, who still live in the homes where they lived with their deceased husbands and utilizes a lifecourse perspective. The interviews were conducted by the second author for her thesis research on place attachment and its significance in the bereavement process of older women. Eligible women were sought through senior organizations, aging service providers, and churches. Participants were selected according to the following criteria: (1) widowed between 2 and 10 years, (2) aged 60 or older, and (3) living in the home in which they resided with their husband. After initial contact by telephone, the second author conducted three interviews with each respondent in the participant’s home during spring 2001. During the first interview, each participant was asked to talk about her husband, marriage, child rearing, the death of her husband, and widowhood. The use of open-ended questions allowed each woman to tell her story in her own way, highlighting what she thought were the most important aspects or incidents of her life. As the interview progressed, the interviewer asked open-ended questions, adopted from Whitebourne (1986), in an attempt to elicit information about how she defined herself. For example, a respondent was asked ‘‘What is important to you about being a mother?’’ In the second interview, the participant was asked to show the interviewer around her home, and spontaneous questions were asked during the tour. Underlying this request was the literature that suggests that how a person decorates the home tends to reflect her place attachment, especially in terms of identity. The third interview focused on the participant’s current life at home. She was asked to describe her home environment and typical day at home, including issues related to daily routines, favorite activities, and personal rituals. Other questions related to privacy, age identity, personal values, and health status. Each interview was transcribed verbatim and analyzed for recurrent themes and patterns, along with prevalent words and phrases. Emerging themes were uncovered for each respondent, as well as patterns within the group of narratives. The next stage was to define the most important variables and to distinguish their relationships utilizing an ideographic approach focusing on sequences of events and behavior. Finally, each woman’s attachment to her home was described in terms of its significance in her life. These women all had the financial resources to meet the normative expectations laid out for them and were primarily homemakers. This study enables us to explore the range of ways in which they attach meaning to their homes and possessions and how their identities are related to their families, homes, and possessions.
4. Participants The women were between the ages of 64 and 80 years at the time of the first interview and had been widows between 3.5 and 7.5 years. They all had remained in the homes in which they lived in before their husbands died. Three of the women were full-time homemakers, while one of them worked outside the home after her children were in school. The length of residence in their current homes prior to the death of their husbands varied from 5.5 to 27 years; the total length of residence in their current homes varied between 13 and 30 years. All four women were white.
162
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
Mrs. Betty Rose1 is 80 years old and was married in 1943 when she was 22 years old. She has three children, and her mother lived with them until she died at the age of 76. She has lived in the same three-bedroom ranch house since they returned to Charlotte in 1967. After retiring in 1983, her husband developed Parkinson’s disease and cancer. She cared for him until he passed away peacefully at home the day after Thanksgiving in 1996 when he was 75 years old. Four and one-half years after her husband’s death, Mrs. Rose enjoys new things that she rarely did when she was caring for her family. She has no serious health problems and still lives independently in her home of almost 25 years. Mrs. Kelly Wilson is 69 years old and was married in 1954, when she was 22, to a man from her hometown. She intended to become a teacher but worked in a bank until she was 5 months pregnant with her first child. ‘‘You didn’t work that long in those days, especially when you were in public places, you know.’’ She had eight children and found great joy in raising her family. She and her husband built a ranch house a few blocks away from their previous two-story home and moved in 1988. Her husband retired in 1989 and died of lung cancer, at home, in 1993, just 1 month before his 62nd birthday. Seven and one half years after her husband’s death, Mrs. Wilson devotes a lot of time and energy to her church outreach ministry and to her 18 grandchildren. Mrs. Tracy King celebrated her 71st birthday during the series of interviews. She was born in 1930 and was married in 1956 when she was 26 years old. She had three different jobs before and shortly after her marriage, then stayed home to raise her son and daughter. The Kings were transferred four times by the insurance company her husband worked for before their move to her current home in Charlotte in 1986. Her husband retired in 1989 and was diagnosed with cancer. He died 8 months later in 1993 at the age of 63. Mrs. King reads a lot, plays golf, and travels often. She cares for her dog and enjoys the company of her daughter and her husband’s extended family. Mrs. Linda Forrest was born in 1936 and is 64 years old. Her 90-year old mother is legally blind and lives in a nursing home. She was married in 1956 when she was 20 years old and stayed home to raise her four children. Once her youngest child was in kindergarten, she started to work part time and then full time. The Forrests’ third move brought them to Charlotte in 1971 when her husband, a chemical engineer, took a new job, from which he retired in 1987. He later developed cancer and heart disease and died in the summer of 1998 when he was 74 years old. Mrs. Forrest gets up at 4:20 a.m. every morning and, on weekdays, begins her day by walking at the mall. She then works downstairs in her home office and has no plan to retire.
5. Findings The research findings are presented in terms of key themes and issues drawn from the analysis of the interviews with these four women. First, the cohort norms and cultural expectations that guided the lifecourse of these older women are presented as a background against which their lives can be viewed. Second, in seeking to understand how they define themselves and find meaning in their lives, we explore the ways in which their identities are tied to their homes and families. Third, we will look at their representations of home and the meaning of place attachment in their lives. Fourth, we explore their
1
Pseudonyms have been created to protect the anonymity of the respondents.
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
163
attachment to their homes and possessions, and finally, the use of personal rituals and routines in their present lives. 5.1. Cohort norms and expectations These women were born between 1920 and 1937, and each followed the cultural expectations of marrying, establishing a home, and raising children. Mrs. Wilson explained: ‘‘it was part of our role as being a good wife to set up our household. . .a comfort area for our husband and for our children.’’ For those who worked outside the home, few jobs were readily available for women of this generation. As Mrs. King explained, ‘‘working as a secretary, in a bank and teaching were the only decent opportunities for women in those days.’’ Those women who worked outside the home were generally expected to stop working when they became pregnant, staying home to raise their family. Mrs. Rose, for example, enjoyed her bookkeeping job, but she quit working when she became pregnant 1 year after she was married. She stayed home to raise her children and ‘‘make a home’’ because working outside the home was not a popular choice for wives and mothers in those days. As Mrs. Forrest explained: ‘‘Mothers did not go to work then. You were thought odd if you did and I had no. . .desire to go to work ‘cause you had your hands full at home.’’ As Mrs. Rose explained, ‘‘Happiness I think with our generation was taking care of your family, taking care of your husband, and having a family.’’ For example, she made all the arrangements for the family’s move to Charlotte, including selling their home and packing their things, when her husband got a good job offer there. One essential aspect of homemaking was preparing daily meals for the family. Each of the women discussed their continuing cooking efforts, even now that they no longer have family at home. For example, Mrs. Rose beats eggs and flour to make pancakes for breakfast and sometimes tries new recipes just for herself. Mrs. King ‘‘does biscuits’’ and eats homemade soup for lunch. In contrast, Mrs. Wilson and Mrs. Forrest indicated that they enjoy cooking on special occasions. Mrs. Wilson’s sons and their wives often come to her home for Sunday dinner. She explained, ‘‘Having lived alone, I can’t say that I do a lot of extremes as far as cooking. But if I have the family, it keeps your cooking skills polished, you know. As they say, if you don’t use it, you lose it. So I put on the dinner.’’ Mrs. Forrest similarly explained, ‘‘Since my husband died, I don’t cook for myself unless somebody is coming. I mean I’ll do something, but I won’t do anything elaborate.’’ When she welcomes her family, she bakes bread like her grandmother used to do for her family. She describes bread making as ‘‘very stress relieving [and] relaxing. It’s a labor of love.’’ Each of these older women followed the cultural norms and expectations for their cohort of women, devoting their lives to making a home and raising their children. This was made possible by the financial security provided by their husbands. They have each sought to retain their identity and find continuing meaning in their lives after the death of their husbands. 5.2. Identities tied to home and family For these older women, their identities are, at least, partly tied to their homes and families, and they find meaning in their lives through their relationships with their husbands and children. For example, Mrs. Rose talked about how memories of her husband help her to find meaning in her life.
164
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
And I do want to be reminded of my life ‘cause those 53 years were the biggest part of my life. And even though it makes me cry or makes me wish that I would have my husband still here [and] wish for things that I used to have. Even though they’re painful, they’re good for me. I think they’re good for me ‘cause they sort of keep me in my life. I don’t know that makes sense, you know. Maybe it extends. Although you’re not a couple anymore, you’re still part or still one half of the life that we lived. Although Mrs. Rose’s memories remind her of her loss, they also highlight the good relationship she had with her husband and help her to find meaning through her past role as a devoted wife. Mrs. Wilson described herself as a nester for her family. ‘‘In a sense of building a comfortable place to come. It was part of our role as being a good wife to set up our household, a comfort area for our husband and children. Some place you’re eager to come to and be accepted, a loving atmosphere.’’ She finds meaning in the role she played in developing a peaceful and loving home for her husband and children, and, in part, this is how she defines herself. 5.3. Place attachment and representation of home Older adults are self-directed entities who actively assign personal meanings to their homes. Each subject’s representation of her home depends on what portion of the family life-cycle was spent there. Mrs. Rose, for example, had already launched her youngest son when she moved into her current house in 1976. Mrs. King and her husband also built their house as a place to retire, not to raise their children. In comparison, Mrs. Forrest moved to Charlotte with her three teenage children and toddler, and her house was home for her entire nuclear family. ‘‘Family’’ is what Mrs. Wilson thinks makes her house her home. She gave this definition of home: ‘‘Home to me is not a house, home is the relationships of love and tenderness that you have with family primarily and friends and so forth.’’ Her home used to be where her family lived and ‘‘the relationships of love and tenderness’’ existed. Now that her husband and eight children are gone, is her house still her home? A dent on a wall in her bedroom provides a clue to the answer. Few people would notice it, let alone understand what it means to Mrs. Wilson, who took care of her husband at home with the help of hospice, a nurse, and her youngest son, toward the end of her husband’s life. On the morning following his death, as they were removing a rented hospital bed, they accidentally hit the wall with it. The spot was repainted, but the dent has remained as ‘‘kind of a gentle reminder (that) he was there.’’ She sums up philosophically that ‘‘life is a mixture of good and not so good events. . .realistically that’s the totality of our lives.’’ When asked what her home meant to her, Mrs. Wilson responded, ‘‘Again, certainly it has very, very good memories because of happy times when my husband was here.’’ She continued, ‘‘He died in this house. . .he died at home and all his family was here. . .so that point of view, that was a great gift [and] very great blessing because he had been granted that wish to die [at home].’’ This is an intriguing way in which this house is her home because of the memories, including her husband’s death. She went on ‘‘When I have to sell this house. . .I’m gonna set back and cry, because it’s where he died.’’ Her house is still the family home. Four of her six children who came to Charlotte with them in 1979 have remained in the city or nearby. Sometime after their father’s death, they spontaneously began to come ‘‘home’’ often for dinner on Sunday afternoon along with their wives. She said of their visits ‘‘. . . they foster that feeling of connectedness and caring.’’ By her definition, this should never be ‘‘a
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
165
command performance.’’ When they come strictly on a voluntary basis, their visits represent the true meaning of home and ‘‘the relationships of love and tenderness that you have with family primarily. . .’’ Not all of the women feel attachment to their homes in terms of their family or family roles. For Mrs. King, for example, place attachment reflects a more pragmatic meaning. She lives alone in the very roomy house that she and her husband had built for the two of them. They built the large house because they needed to invest the money they made from selling their previous home and were also ‘‘just used to hav(e)[ing] a lot of rooms.’’ The ideas that she and her husband incorporated into the design contributed to her feelings of convenience. For example, they had their bedroom built on the first floor and incorporated her ideas in designing the kitchen. As a result, this house turned out to be the most convenient place she ever lived. Mrs. King spends most of her time on the first floor and says, ‘‘I just love it here.’’ In addition to enjoying cooking her meals, the kitchen is where she reads a newspaper or books, watches sports on television, and does other things at the kitchen table. She sleeps and sometimes naps in her first-floor bedroom. Now that she has placed her new computer in the laundry room, next to the kitchen, the first floor functions like a ‘‘self-created control center’’ (Lawton, 1990, p. 640). Her design efforts were successful and she likes her home because ‘‘It’s convenient and I have everything I need.’’ She described her home as comfortable, explaining that she meant, ‘‘I have almost anything I want here, you know. Easily accessible.’’ For Mrs. King, comfort and convenience are the essence of her attachment to her home. 5.4. Home and possessions The older women’s homes were connected with positive memories, some of which were reflected in their possessions. As we will see, people have various kinds of items that are imbued by them with different meanings. One cultural pattern that they all followed was to decorate public spaces in their homes with family photographs. The living room and den or family room in each home showcased a display of photographs of relatives and themselves, taken on both special and ordinary occasions. Mrs. Forrest’s comment indicated her awareness of this cultural norm, ‘‘And I have pictures everywhere like everybody else does.’’ The display of family photographs portrays ‘‘the theme of connection’’ (Rowles, 1987). ‘‘Possessions as symbols of others’’ (Kamptner, 1989, p. 181), including family photographs, were identified by each of the respondents. One way in which an older woman’s home and possessions are important is in demonstrating how important she is to her family. Evidence of her husband’s consideration for Mrs. Rose can be seen throughout her house in the projects he initiated to maintain or improve their home environment. In consultation with her, he had a garage built, the kitchen remodeled, and the wood-burning stove replaced with a gas–log fireplace. He painted most of the walls in the house, but she particularly appreciates the new windows that are easy to open and clean. She sees these improvements as reminders of how much he cared for her because ‘‘he always did things I think which he was thinking for me, you know.’’ Similarly, Mrs. Rose sees the gifts from her three children and seven grandchildren as evidences of their feelings for her. Her older daughter’s crafts decorate the kitchen and den, and the television set in the den was a gift from this daughter. Her younger daughter bought her a new calculator for Christmas because something was wrong with the old one given to her by her husband, who knew his wife’s enjoyment of bookkeeping. There are magazines piled high in her bedroom from subscriptions that her younger daughter has given her. Her son and his wife gave her a cell phone as a gift and pay the monthly
166
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
bills. A focal point of the dining room is a set of china that her three children bought them for their 25th wedding anniversary. Her youngest grandchild created a collage of old family photos that hangs in the den. Another granddaughter gave Mrs. Rose her old computer. Even her goldfish is a gift from her daughter-in-law. Mrs. Rose feels that she does not have as many fancy things as other people do, but she is proud of the feelings expressed by the gifts her family has given her. They suggest that her life has been meaningful because as she explained, ‘‘I didn’t have my own money, my own career, and all, but I have no regrets about that. I would have regrets if we didn’t have a family life with my children and all.’’ As she reflected on her life, she repeated a common sentiment for women of her cohort with the question, ‘‘what’s more important than family?’’ Because possessions have no inherent meaning of their own, they can mean different things to different members of the family. For example, Mrs. Wilson described her husband as ‘‘a great garage person’’ who ‘‘loved working with wood.’’ The navy blue jacket that he wore when doing woodwork still hangs on a hook in the garage. Shortly after his death, she mentioned to her children that she was thinking of donating the jacket. She had already given some of his clothes to her sons. To her great surprise they gave her a staring look and responded, ‘‘Mom, leave that there.’’ Although it didn’t hold special meaning for her, she left the jacket hanging in the garage as they requested. She also told her sons to take nails and some other things from the garage but, again, they responded, ‘‘Leave them there, mother.’’ She explained, ‘‘Certainly, I mean I don’t get a lot of comfort in it being there, but that’s for them.’’ In comparison, she has a strong attachment to things her husband made. A dry sink that he made is in the entrance hall and the shed remains in the backyard. Just before starting his second career, her husband bought a lot of wood and built ‘‘a good size shed to keep things out of the garage.’’ She recalled, ‘‘Well, he had more fun. I’ve got photographs of him. He drew the design for it. He measured everything.’’ She continued her explanation in front of the shed, ‘‘Now, isn’t that the beauty? We had more fun in doing it.’’ That last comment seems very telling in terms of understanding her attachment to the dry sink and shed but not the jacket, nails, and other items in the garage. It’s not just that he made the dry sink and built the shed, but that she remembers the fun he had making them. Even more important is the fact that he shared his fun and joy with her, and these items seem to symbolize for her their shared happiness. Mrs. Forrest enjoys home decorating, and her house is decorated very creatively. She chose ‘‘generations’’ as a theme and decorated a corner of her dining room wall with photographs of her grandmother, mother, daughter, granddaughters, and herself. Mrs. Forrest described herself as a collector. She used to collect heart-shaped objects, rocking horses, and Beanie Babies. She now collects Santa Clauses and has over 100 of them. If she sells her house and moves, she will take her important possessions with her. A religious painting hanging in the living room is the gift that she and her husband bought for their first wedding anniversary with a monetary gift from his parents. A black and white painting in the family room is something that they bought because her husband really wanted it. A china cabinet that holds her Beanie Babies used to be her mother’s. A Madonna-shaped wall hanging in the bedroom was a thank you gift for her six years of volunteer work. A cross-stitch she made for her husband says, ‘‘my husband is a strong arm to lean upon, a loving heart to rely upon. All these things I found in you. My only lover and my best friend.’’ Of all the photographs displayed in her home, her absolute favorite is one of her and her husband at her son’s wedding. She noted with emotion, ‘‘Just look at the expression on his face. Isn’t that beautiful? That’s a very good expression.’’ These items that are her most prized possessions help us
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
167
to understand how she defines herself. They reflect her identity as a daughter, wife, mother, grandmother, and volunteer. 5.5. Personal rituals and routines By its very nature, routine is usually unconscious. Mrs. Rose, however, is aware of its importance and structures her days around personal rituals and routines, through which she maintains her identity. She noted, I have to have breakfast, lunch, and dinner all the time. They [her children] don’t even bother preparing dinner sometimes. They’re tired and they just snack or something. But I could never do that. I think it comes from all the years we were married. I had dinner every night with my family. . .and I guess [for] a woman who stayed home for most of her life that’s sort of an accomplishment, being able to prepare food and feed people. Nowadays maybe not. For her, cooking is a favorite and important routine that perpetuates her identity as a devoted homemaker. She described her days as ‘‘pretty much routine’’ and explains, I do a lot of things you get into the habit over 50 years of marriage. You get into the habit. There are habits you both do together and I do a lot of things the same, you know. A few little things have changed. Maybe doing things differently or eat different stuff. But I think I do almost like we used to do together, you know. I like that. . .and I think it sort of keeps you connected. For Mrs. Rose, as for the other participants, continuity between her present life and other periods of her lifecourse help her to maintain her identity as a homemaker. She is able to find meaning in her life through the daily routines and patterned behavior that are reminiscent of her days as a wife and a mother raising her children.
6. Conclusion While each individual’s attachment to her home and possessions is personally defined, each of the participants used the term ‘‘comfort’’ or ‘‘comfortable’’ to describe her home. The respondents of Rubinstein (1989) also reported that comfort is what made their houses their homes, and Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton (1981, p. 127) found that ‘‘the single characteristic of the home most often mentioned was ‘comfortable,’ ‘cozy,’ or ‘relaxing.’’’ There is a range of forms and levels of place attachment, but each of the women draw comfort from their homes. This concept combines both physical and emotional comfort derived from the familiarity and other characteristics previously discussed. As we have seen, through living in a home for a long time, there is a level of comfort based on familiarity and ease in performing routine tasks (Lawton, 1990). The level of comfort certainly changes over time and, perhaps, when the home no longer retains a high level of comfort and convenience, it is the time to consider making a move. Mrs. Forrest is thinking of selling her home of 30 years, although it ‘‘contains many memories and much love.’’ First, her good neighbors’ unexpected move made her think about moving. Seemingly after
168
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
this, too much space and the difficulty of keeping up the house began to pressure her. She also was concerned that the 14 steps would become a burden. Her ambivalence was evident as she pondered the challenge of a potential move: ‘‘I had been here all these years. Why look for trouble? But you can’t get anywhere if you don’t try. And it’s too easy not to try. And it’s really a pain in the neck to do it because it’s a lot of work emotionally, mentally, [and] physically. I think it’s something I’ve got to do. I think I will be a better person to do it.’’ Now that her long term home is no longer comfortable and convenient, she’s facing this possible challenge as the next part of her lifecourse. By rearranging her collections and familiar possessions in a new house, Mrs. Forrest believes she will be able to recreate her home in a new place. By their very nature, possessions have ‘‘the potential for the transferability of a sense of place’’ (Rowles, 1993, p. 69). ‘‘For example, the traveler may have a strategy for dealing with unfamiliar hotel rooms, including bringing a family photo, an alarm clock, or a journal to accommodate personal rituals’’ (Pastalan & Barnes, 1999, p. 87). Due to the high level of mobility that now characterizes our society, ‘‘increasingly, continuity and memories are rooted in things-movable, storable, shippable-rather than in the fabric of the house itself’’ (Marcus, 1992, p. 100). The women in this study were raised with clear expectations of their gender-based roles as wives and mothers and equally clear limitations regarding careers. Like the many women of their cohorts, they dedicated themselves to making a home and raising their families. As we have seen, they have at least, in part, developed a sense of their own identities in relation to their homes and possessions. Thus, based on the choices they have made throughout their lifecourse, they continue to frame their sense of identity in terms of their homes and personal possessions. Notably, their connections to their families are reflected through the meanings of their homes and specific possessions. This raises the important question of the extent to which these findings would hold true for older women who have maintained professional careers outside the home, including those who did not marry or raise children or those who were forced to work due to economic necessity. How do women of the same cohorts who had careers define and express their attachment to home and possessions? Having held different salient roles, how do they express and define such attachments? To what extent would these women frame their sense of identity in terms of their homes and possessions? These questions point to the need for further research that explores the range of variation of the meaning of home and possessions for a more diverse sample of older women. The implications of these findings could be useful in working with older women, particularly widows. For women of these cohorts who have dedicated their lives to making a home and raising a family. These questions point to the need for further research that explores the range of variation of the meaning of home and possessions for a more diverse sample of older women.
References Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social behavior: Privacy, personal space, territory, crowding. Monterey, CA: Brooks/ Cole Publishing. Atchley, R. C. (1983). Aging: Continuity and change. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing. Atchley, R., & Barush, A. (2004). Social Forces and Aging—An Introduction to Social Gerontology (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Barresi, C. M. (1997). Current issues in ethnogerontology. In K. F. Ferraro (Ed.), Gerontology—perspectives and issues (2nd ed.) (pp. 267 – 284). New York: Springer. Chevan, A. (1995). Holding on and letting go: Residential mobility during widowhood. Research on Aging, 17(3), 278 – 302.
D. Shenk et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 18 (2004) 157–169
169
Commerce Department Census Bureau (1998). Marital status and living arrangements: March 1998. Current Population Reports. [On-line] http://www.census/gov/prod99pubs/p20-514/pdf. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Rochberg-Halton, E. (1981). The meaning of things: Domestic symbols and the self. New York: Cambridge University Press. Dill, A. E. P. (1990). Transformations of home: The formal and informal process of home care planning. In J. F. Gubrium, & A. Sankar (Eds.), The home care experience: Ethnography and policy ( pp. 227 – 251). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Dovey, K. (1978). Home: An ordering principle in space. Landscape, 22(2), 27 – 30. Dovey, K. (1985). Home: An ordering principle in space. Landscape, 22(2), 27 – 30. Giele, J. Z., & Elder Jr., J. H. (1998). Life course research: Development of a field. In J. Z. Giele, G. H. Elder Jr. (Eds.), Methods of life course research: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (pp. 5 – 27). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Howell, S. C. (1994). Environments and the aging woman: Domains of choice. In A. Altman, & A. Churchman (Eds.), Women and the environment ( pp. 105 – 131). New York: Plenum. Kamptner, N. L. (1989). Personal possessions and their meanings in old age. In S. Spacapan, & S. Oskamp (Eds.), The social psychology of aging ( pp. 165 – 196). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Kaufman, S. R. (1993). Values as sources of the ageless self. In J. R. Kelly (Ed.), Activity and aging: Staying involved in later life ( pp. 17 – 24). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Kron, J. (1983). Home-psych: The social psychology of home and decoration. New York: Clarkson N. Potter. Lawton, M. P. (1990). Residential environment and self-directedness among older people. American Psychologist, 45, 638 – 640. Marcus, C. C. (1992). Environmental memories. In I. Altman, & S. M. Low (Eds.), Place attachment ( pp. 87 – 112). New York: Plenum. Moen, P. (2001). The gendered life course. In R. H. Binstock, L. K. George, & V. W. Marshall (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (5th ed.) (pp. 179 – 196). San Diego: Academic Press. Moreland, R. L., & Zajonc, R. B. (1977). Is stimulus recognition a necessary condition for the occurrence of exposure effects? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(4), 191 – 199. O’Rand, A. M. (2001). Stratification and the life course: The forms of life-course capital and their interrelationships. In R. H. Binstock, L. K. George, & V. W. Marshall (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (5th ed.) (pp. 197 – 213). San Diego: Academic Press. Pastalan, L. A., & Barnes, J. E. (1999). Personal rituals: Identity, attachment to place, and community solidarity. In S. Benyamin, & B. Ruth (Eds.), Aging, autonomy, and architecture: Advances in assisted living ( pp. 81 – 89). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Quadagno, J. (2002). Aging and the life course: An introduction to social gerontology (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Riley, M. W. (1998). A life course approach: Autobiographical notes. In J. Z. Giele, & G. H. Elder Jr. (Eds.), Methods of life course research: Qualitative and quantitative approaches ( pp. 28 – 51). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Rowles, G. D. (1984). Aging in rural environments. In I. Altman, M. P. Lawton, & J. F. Wohlwill (Eds.), Elderly people and the environment ( pp. 129 – 157). New York: Plenum. Rowles, G. D. (1987). A place to call home. In L. L. Carstensen, & B. A. Edelstein (Eds.), Handbook of clinical gerontology ( pp. 335 – 353). New York: Pergamon. Rowles, G. D. (1993). Evolving images of place in aging and ‘aging in place’. Generations, 17, 65 – 70. Rubinstein, R. L. (1989). The home environments of older people: A description of the psychosocial processes linking person to place. Journal of Gerontology, 44, S45 – S53. Rubinstein, R. L. (1990). Personal identity and environmental meaning in later life. Journal of Aging Studies, 4(2), 131 – 147. Rubinstein, R. L., Kilbride, J. C., & Nagy, S. (1992). Elders living alone: Frailty and the perception of choice. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Rubinstein, R. L., & Parmelee, P. A. (1992). Attachment to place and the representation of the life course by the elderly. In I. Altman, & S. M. Low (Eds.), Place attachment ( pp. 139 – 163). New York: Plenum. Swenson, M. M. (1998). The meaning of home to five elderly women. Health Care for Women International, 19, 381 – 393. Tobin, S. S. (1996). Cherished possessions: The meaning of things. Generations, 20, 46 – 48. Wapner, S., Demick, J., & Redondo, J. P. (1990). Cherished possessions and adaptation of older people to nursing homes. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 31, 219 – 235. Whitebourne, S. K. (1986). The me I know: A study of adult identity. New York: Springer-Verlag.