Husbandry
The last time I heard the word "husbandry" was about 20 years ago when asking my fellow sandwich maker at the university restaurant what he was studying. He said, "Animal Husbandry." My wonder at the coupling of "husband" with "animal" has not ceased, primarily by having planted an extremely important verb into my mind: "to husband"
That idea alone blossomed into a rich image only slightly grasped in the following etymology given by the free on-line dictionary:
from Old Norse húsbóndi ‘master of a house,’
from hús ‘house’ + bóndi ‘occupier and tiller of the soil.’
The original sense of the verb was ‘till, cultivate.’
Granted, the verb “to husband” is never used. Nevertheless this original concept of cultivating seems to be the key missing idea from today’s noun. I can only speculate how this verb also happens to associate with marriage, but it would seem to be an ancient idea. And this seeming can be reconstructed from that phrase “Animal Husbandry,” which refers to a body of knowledge and hosts of disciplines dealing in the proper handling of animals as resources. The best images for this relate to service animals before the time of the combustion engine: horses, milk cows, herd dogs, pack mules, sheep/goats (wool), plow oxen. In our industrial age the raising of food animals skews the concept of husbandry, but our sensibilities cling to it as evidenced by the market demand for free-range poultry, and meat produced from humane methods of raising and butchering the animals. In short, the modern idea of humane treatment of animals was already inherent in good animal husbandry. And so in the case of service animals “to husband” means cultivating the lives of the animals so that they can serve well, and serve long, the purpose for which they had been bred and sold.
Proper husbandry, then, requires much more care and concern for an animal’s welfare, resulting in an increase of both its intrinsic and its economic value. The case of food animals is much the same, where culinary value correlates to the animal’s quality of life, i.e. its having been raised and butchered humanely. In this regard, husbandry acquires its human analogue from the efforts to increase and sustain the intrinsic value of the animal in one’s care. It’s a small step in reason, then, to say that a good husband increases and sustains the intrinsic value of his wife. The more common phrasing says—with the same essential meaning—that a good husband appreciates his wife. Further, “to appreciate” now takes an active meaning, which is to cultivate, and thereby increase, her intrinsic value. The analogy separates from the animal example in a multitude of ways, but it’s extremely valuable to freeze the focus here. Every wife wants to be appreciated, in both the passive and active meaning. Husbandry thus understood also brings immediately to mind the chivalrous imagery that women themselves crave: to be an honored princess or queen alongside the strong (and good) prince or monarch—Knight in Shining Armor. This is how the good husband has been mythologized, a codified aspiration. Of course it’s fanciful, and in high relief clearly expresses what women want on deep levels, both primal and moral. Something so fundamental deserves respect.
Good husbandry (“to husband”) also has implications deserving respect, not the least of which is purpose. The male of the human species is an intensely purpose driven creature. (I take no pain to establish this generalization, obvious to anyone who themselves take pain to shed ideological glasses and simply look) A young man who sees husbandry this way has a clear purpose, a goal for his aspirations, a reason to get beyond himself into a morally compelling way to live and serve! Is it not an obvious good for a man to behave in this unselfish, mature way?
Good husbandry forms half of the collaborative framework between a man and a woman, marriage. What has been said of husbandry—having the goal to cultivate his wife’s intrinsic value—begs this question: What is a wife’s intrinsic value? Obviously this involves the unique qualities of the specific woman, but it especially involves what is generally true for all women. So, where men are intrinsically purposive, women intrinsically nurture (thank God). The most recognizable image of this is the Mother. Whereas we have grand imagery for the Knight, we likewise have powerful maternal archetypes, Mother Earth, Mary Mother of God, Holy Church our Mother in Christ. When a man “husbands” well, his wife “mothers” best. We also know that mothering properly extends to many things: the husband, the children, the pets, friends, family, the home, and even her own career. He “husbands” her, she “mothers” him; a more perfect circle is hard to find, and worthy of intense respect.
Husbandry. To Husband. This calls to the natural best in men and channels them and their best toward the cultivation of the natural best in women. For many decades the great false idols of career and professional vocation have lulled many into believing that we promote our natural best through the professional paths. Rather what does work is when the professions are used as means to serve the ends of good husbandry and good mothering. And this is proven out in so many examples of regret from men or women who allowed their careers to interfere with their familial role.
Husband well, men, for many others depend on it.
That idea alone blossomed into a rich image only slightly grasped in the following etymology given by the free on-line dictionary:
from Old Norse húsbóndi ‘master of a house,’
from hús ‘house’ + bóndi ‘occupier and tiller of the soil.’
The original sense of the verb was ‘till, cultivate.’
Granted, the verb “to husband” is never used. Nevertheless this original concept of cultivating seems to be the key missing idea from today’s noun. I can only speculate how this verb also happens to associate with marriage, but it would seem to be an ancient idea. And this seeming can be reconstructed from that phrase “Animal Husbandry,” which refers to a body of knowledge and hosts of disciplines dealing in the proper handling of animals as resources. The best images for this relate to service animals before the time of the combustion engine: horses, milk cows, herd dogs, pack mules, sheep/goats (wool), plow oxen. In our industrial age the raising of food animals skews the concept of husbandry, but our sensibilities cling to it as evidenced by the market demand for free-range poultry, and meat produced from humane methods of raising and butchering the animals. In short, the modern idea of humane treatment of animals was already inherent in good animal husbandry. And so in the case of service animals “to husband” means cultivating the lives of the animals so that they can serve well, and serve long, the purpose for which they had been bred and sold.
Proper husbandry, then, requires much more care and concern for an animal’s welfare, resulting in an increase of both its intrinsic and its economic value. The case of food animals is much the same, where culinary value correlates to the animal’s quality of life, i.e. its having been raised and butchered humanely. In this regard, husbandry acquires its human analogue from the efforts to increase and sustain the intrinsic value of the animal in one’s care. It’s a small step in reason, then, to say that a good husband increases and sustains the intrinsic value of his wife. The more common phrasing says—with the same essential meaning—that a good husband appreciates his wife. Further, “to appreciate” now takes an active meaning, which is to cultivate, and thereby increase, her intrinsic value. The analogy separates from the animal example in a multitude of ways, but it’s extremely valuable to freeze the focus here. Every wife wants to be appreciated, in both the passive and active meaning. Husbandry thus understood also brings immediately to mind the chivalrous imagery that women themselves crave: to be an honored princess or queen alongside the strong (and good) prince or monarch—Knight in Shining Armor. This is how the good husband has been mythologized, a codified aspiration. Of course it’s fanciful, and in high relief clearly expresses what women want on deep levels, both primal and moral. Something so fundamental deserves respect.
Good husbandry (“to husband”) also has implications deserving respect, not the least of which is purpose. The male of the human species is an intensely purpose driven creature. (I take no pain to establish this generalization, obvious to anyone who themselves take pain to shed ideological glasses and simply look) A young man who sees husbandry this way has a clear purpose, a goal for his aspirations, a reason to get beyond himself into a morally compelling way to live and serve! Is it not an obvious good for a man to behave in this unselfish, mature way?
Good husbandry forms half of the collaborative framework between a man and a woman, marriage. What has been said of husbandry—having the goal to cultivate his wife’s intrinsic value—begs this question: What is a wife’s intrinsic value? Obviously this involves the unique qualities of the specific woman, but it especially involves what is generally true for all women. So, where men are intrinsically purposive, women intrinsically nurture (thank God). The most recognizable image of this is the Mother. Whereas we have grand imagery for the Knight, we likewise have powerful maternal archetypes, Mother Earth, Mary Mother of God, Holy Church our Mother in Christ. When a man “husbands” well, his wife “mothers” best. We also know that mothering properly extends to many things: the husband, the children, the pets, friends, family, the home, and even her own career. He “husbands” her, she “mothers” him; a more perfect circle is hard to find, and worthy of intense respect.
Husbandry. To Husband. This calls to the natural best in men and channels them and their best toward the cultivation of the natural best in women. For many decades the great false idols of career and professional vocation have lulled many into believing that we promote our natural best through the professional paths. Rather what does work is when the professions are used as means to serve the ends of good husbandry and good mothering. And this is proven out in so many examples of regret from men or women who allowed their careers to interfere with their familial role.
Husband well, men, for many others depend on it.
Comments
Post a Comment