bout de papier, Vol. 6, No. 3 (1988), pp. 42–43
Political Wives: The Lives of the Saints by
Susan Riley, published by Deneau and
Wayne, Toronto, 191 pp. $26.00
“There is no subject I cannot trivialize”, wrote Susan Riley. She then set out to do just that in her book, Political Wives with its vague and unexplained subtitle, The Lives of the Saints. The wives who appear in her book were spotlighted not for all their saintly qualities but because it was so much more fun to write about the sinners.
Riley focusses on the wives of Canadian Prime Ministers of recent memory, beginning with a view of how Margaret Trudeau behaved in that position and then giving us a close look at Maureen Mcleer and the present ’incumbent’, Mila Mulroney. Riley also steps back to the days of Olive Diefenbaker and Maryon Pearson and gazes into the future, assessing the personalities of Geills Turner and Lucille Broadbent.
Riley is a political journalist who is well-known in the Ottawa scene and she has had ample opportunity to observe many of these ladies in action. She says that she, “tried to approach all of them with the same neutral curiosity with which I would approach any endangered species”. What is not clear is how many, if any of them, she sat down and talked with in preparing this book. Mila Mulroney is known to prefer male reporters, but could she be typical of the ’species”? In any case, there is no shortage of material to work with. All the old stories that have been headlined before just spilled from the files and, although Riley claimed that she had no interest in gathering up all these anecdotes and recycling them, that is what has happened. After all, in her own defense, she said that interviewing political wives would be like playing badminton, “one harmless exchange of birdies after another. The really interesting answers to the really interesting questions will go with most wives to the grave”. All the same, it is too bad that we have here is largely a run past of all the old stuff once more.
In the eyes of some, political wives are considered to be only ’amusing anachronisms, historic relics with no bearing on the way modern men and women lead their lives. The fact is that they do exist and they find themselves with a role to play. What are these women expected to be like? What qualities might they have to offer? They should be compassionate, we are told, have a good sense of humour but, above all, beauty is a most admirable asset. It would be to their advantage, as well, to possess those desirable virtues of charm, tact, piety and discretion. Now, that’s a lot to ask for, even • tongue-in-cheek, but, should such a paragon exist, the job ahead of her, as delineated here, would seem to be one that many might look on with envy. “They have unlimited expense accounts, maids and nannies; they travel to exotic places, eat at all the best palaces and have national attention any time they want it. But most of these women did not expect to be faced with living such a life style when they married. Perhaps Maryon Pearson said it best: “I married (my husband) for better or for worse, not just for lunch”. Although she was not always sympathetic to her role as a political wife, her sense of humour and her outlook carried her through the demands of the job. Some of the younger wives had more trouble adjusting. Margaret Trudeau never succeeded. When this erst-while flower child was suddenly thrust into the limelight, it scared her to the point that she reached out for help from Norah Michener, wife of the Governor-General at that time. What she was told was that “Protocol will protect you. If you get that right, you won’t have to put yourself on the line. You’ll be judged by your manners … Protocol is learning to do all the things that you have to do however much you find them unnatural and trying”. ’. This advice was not the solution for one of Margaret’s informal nature and it certainly was not heeded But was life ever any easier for those women whose lives were caught up in the careers of men who became Prime Ministers of Canada or who rose to prominence in other lands? It would seem not, as a general rule. In the days of the British Raj in India, one reads of wives (or sisters) who went out willingly with the Viceroy, “motivated by duty and love”. Unlike Margaret Trudeau, they had no qualms about their new role. After all, had they not been brought up on the best conduct books? They had read likes of Sermons to Young Women and The Whole Duty of Women. What they soon discovered, however, was that what worked in British surroundings was of no help to them in a land so strange, so different, that they soon feeling quite adrift. For some, the answer to their dilemma was to retire to their drawing-rooms and take refuge in their painting or sketching, something that many of them had a real talent for. So far, there is no indication that any of our political wives are closet artists, but, since Riley has chosen not to look into these closets, this is mere speculation. What we do know is that it has not been an easy transition to life at the top for those who have followed husbands to Ottawa. If they are not painting or sketching, just what are they doing? In addition to the already mentioned n attributes, Riley suggests that possessing ’a mindless vacant pleasantness’ would help. It would make it less painful to carry out the role which many think being a political wife is all about: “(They) are like background music, there and not there. They are usually engaged in purely decorative activities, like hugging orphans, descending the steps of airplanes behind their husbands, greeting foreign dignitaries…”. What, however, of the wife who sees her role differently, who is not content to just “smile vaguely and nod sagely”? What if she wants to involve herself in her husband’s work or if she has, perhaps, a cause of her own to further? What if she has a career of her own? How much freedom does she actually have to be a person in her own right? For that matter, what role models does she have? It is not necessary to go as far as India for answers or lack of them. One can start with Agnes, wife of Sir John A. Macdonald, the first Prime Minister of Canada, and see how she coped
Agnes may or may not have read the conduct books of her day but, in any case, she was brought up with the traditional values. Wives, in her time, were expected to be helpmates of their husbands, but their place was still firmly a step behind. For some, this worked out just as it still does today, but Agnes had trouble with the role. Although she married late and had the advantage of knowing that John A. would be at the very top in Canadian politics, she soon found out that her strong nature got in the way. She confessed to her diary that she wanted “to identify myself with all my husband’s pursuits and occupations. He is so busy and so much older than I that I would soon fall out of his life if I went my separate ways”. ’. But trying to get involved was not easy and, in her enthusiasm, she was likely to over-step the bounds. “If I interfere in any sort of way he will be annoyed … (He) is absolutely tyrannical in his public life so far as I am concerned”. What did she do then? On the face of it, it would seem that she adapted. She hugged her share of orphans, gave the dinner parties when the House was in Session, presided over the oyster soup and sherry on New Year’s Day receptions and kept abreast of Canadian politics from her seat in the gallery of the House and by going along with Sir John on political tours. It was on those tours that she came into her own by the use of her pen. Who has not read of the cow-catcher escapade which, like many other experiences, became an article for a prestigious English magazine. In addition, of course, she kept the home fires burning, cared tenderly for an invalid daughter and tried to keep John A. sober.
Almost a hundred years later, and with personal variations, political wives are still carrying out programs much like Agnes did, but the intervening years have brought about some changes. The greatest challenge has been issued in the name of feminism with some wives protesting that they are not public property. Riley is a strong feminist who refers to “the ludicrous restrictions that bind the life of a political wife as tightly as gauze bound the feet of Chinese women” and she says that the job description for such wives should carry the additional caveat that “feminists need not apply”. Her point is that “A feminist political wife is a contradiction in terms; it is like an impoverished dentist, an impetuous central banker, a taciturn talkshow host. It is like a subtle Joan Rivers. It doesn’t exist in nature”. A good point, but since political wives do not apply for the job but marry into it, they do exist. Margaret Trudeau in her own misguided way made a plea for a life of her own and then there was Maureen McTeer. “I don’t pretend not to have any ideas of my own” was her battle-cry but she soon discovered that her time had come too soon and that she had to make many concessions. “An unhappy interlude” is how her time is seen and, clearly, the author feels that the feminist banner has been put away for now. A chapter on Mila Mulroney, the present chatelaine of 24 Sussex Drive is entitles “Shopping your way to the top” or “The triumph of appearance over accomplishment”
Something that has happened since Mila had 24 Sussex redecorated yet once more, is the Americanization of the role of the wife of the Prime Minister of Canada. When I was searching for titles for my biography of Agnes, the term ’Canada’s First First Lady’ came to mind only to be rejected since there is no constitutional justification for using such a term. Now, it does not seem to matter and, followers that we are of trends south of the border, the First Lady’ label is in common use. So, too, are some of the expectations. Glamour is seen to be a necessity either on the part of the so-called First Lady herself or by the public and she is to have a cause, a safe cause, one that will not run counter to the government’s programs. This may give her a chance to show some of the desired qualities for the role. She can show that she is compassionate, has charm, tact, piety and discretion and with the veneer of glamour added, she will put in her allotted days and, depending on her own character, she will either love it or hate it.
That, too, is what one might say of this book. If your taste runs to the trival, it will titillate. If you are of a more thoughtful frame of mind, you may wish that a better book had been written on the public view of Political Wives.
The author says that she did not want to be mean, that she wanted, instead to be fair “and fairness is the death of humour”. Is this a humourous book? If so, it is black. Is it a mean book? Often it is just that and an example is when she calls Nancy Reagan “one of the miracles of hair-spray. [It] is the glue that holds her image together, that keeps her ageless and timesless… Her head has a cement-like cast, it looks too large and too heavy for the emaciated body”. Along with all the other things that political wives have to put up with as they go through their own particular motions, they have been peered at here, superficially, by a feminist who considers that some of them are “an embarrassment and disgrace to us all”. Perhaps it is too bad that more of them did not tell their own stories by doing what those ladies of the Raj did, keeping personal diaries so that they might, one day, be printed and we would then have a better understanding of how they saw themselves.
View the original scanned pages →
Originally published in bout de papier, Vol. 6, No. 3 (1988), pp. 42–43. Read the rest of this issue →
