As the editors point out in their introduction, the historians of everyday life in twentieth-century Scotland face a number of challenges that arguably make their task more demanding relative to historians charting the same phenomenon in earlier periods. Perhaps the most significant difficulty has been the fragmentation of the everyday experience as society and culture became more complex and reflected different interests and cultures. The approach adopted in this volume is what the editors describe as “bricolage”—a collection of different themes, perspectives, and snapshots that will convey some of the key issues regarding everyday life as it evolved through twentieth-century Scotland. The themes covered are “everyday experience” charted through statistics, the home, heterosexual couple relationships, paid work, masculinity, the Scottish Sunday, a case study of three “post-Presbyterians,” culture and art, health, and death. Some important issues arguably more reflective of the everyday experience that are obvious omissions are consumption, science and technology, sexuality, and aspirations.

One of the difficulties relating to the book is that often the everyday experience tends to drift out of focus into a general discussion of social history, although some of the contributors, such as Arthur McIvor in his chapter on paid work, valiantly pull it back center stage, largely through the use of extensive oral history. Furthermore, some chapters, such as Callum Brown’s discussion of the “Sabbath Wars,” tend to focus as much on public discourse and policy debate rather than the everyday experience. The postmodernist’s sleight of hand that conflates the “discourse of the everyday Sunday” and the experience of the everyday Sunday will not convince all readers. Although the editors, in their defense, claim that the comparative dimension of the everyday experience is beyond the scope of the volume, its absence does limit the collection’s relevance. Two of the strongest chapters, Stewart’s on health and McFarland’s on death, demonstrate the importance of a comparative discussion, because it is only then that we can see what was distinctive about the everyday Scottish experience. As Stewart points out, housing and work were fundamental to configuring Scotland’s particular health problems that differed from the rest of the United Kingdom. McFarland’s discussion of death shows that the peculiarities of Scottish ritual increasingly changed and adapted in response to expectations that were, at the end of the day, shaped by globalization. The traditional undertaker gave way to the ubiquitous funeral director.

The editorial aspiration that the volume would highlight the resistance and revolt to the “everyday,” which arguably gives the study its intellectual raison d’être and certainly accounts for its success and importance to studies of the early modern era, does not live up to expectations. Rather, what tends to come across is a passivity and mundane acceptance. The political everyday is sorely missed in this volume. Arguably the issue that fired up most Scots throughout the twentieth century relating to the everyday was housing. In the chapter on the home, the following could have been written by Prince Charles: “The tenement kitchen was all life rolled into one room and represented competing interests. It was an intolerable burden in terms of its lack of privacy, not to mention the hard work of keeping it tolerably hygienic. Conversely, it conveys an image of family life that was closer and more integrated than that enjoyed in the social housing which succeeded slum clearance” (51). This perspective comes across as hellishly patronizing.

On the plus side, historians will find a lot to take out of this volume. Brown’s statistical charting of the everyday experience is an exemplar of empirical history. Bartie’s chapter on culture and the arts demonstrates that the official discourse regarding the “elevation” of the people was largely blind to what ordinary men and women thought and is a refreshing change from the rather binary debate of “Scottish versus English” mentality that tends to dominate. Throughout, most contributors have used oral history, so the voices of ordinary Scots are heard. Finally, in carrying out this difficult task the editors are to be congratulated for putting together a volume that will add to the sum of knowledge of twentieth-century Scottish social history.