P. 1
swidler, new sociology of knowledge

swidler, new sociology of knowledge

|Views: 152|Likes:
Published by Tomasz Warczok

More info:

Published by: Tomasz Warczok on Feb 16, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.

Ann~Rev. Sociol. 1994. 20:305-29 Copyright © 1994 by Annual Reviews lnc, All rights reserved

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1994.20:305-329. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org by University of Minnesota- Twin Cities - Law Library on 01/07/09. For personal use only.

Ann Swidler and Yorge Arditi Department of Sociology, Universityof California, Berkeley,California 94720
KEYWORDS: culture, literacy, authoritative culture-producing institutions knowledge, classification and boundaries,

Abserace The new sociology of knowledgeexamines how kinds of social organization make whole orderings of knowledgepossible, rather than focussing on the differing social locations and interests of individuals or groups. The review begins with the effects on knowledgeof the media through which it is preserved, organized, and transmitted. Wethen analyze collective memory,examinlng social conditions that shape howknowledgeis transmitted through time. The review then e×arnines howpatterns of authority located in organizations shape both the content and structure of knowledge, looking at how authority affects the scope, generality, and authoritativeness of knowledge. We then review recent work on howsocial power, particularly that embodiedin institutional practices, shapes knowledge. Weexaminehowknowledgereinforces social hierarchies and howthe boundaries and categories of systems of knowledge are constituted. Looking at power, gender, and knowledge, we discuss newversions of the standpoint theories that characterizedthe traditional sociology of knowledge,l~inally, we briefly review recent work on informal knowledge. INTRODUCTION The older sociology of knowledge epitomized by Mannheim asked how the social location of individuals and groups shapes their knowledge.Elementsof this tradition becameinstitutionalized in sociology and political science as attitude and opinion research. The sociology of knowledgeproper, however, concernedwith the social sources of knowledge and political ideologies, fell out of favor. Mannheim’s work has continued to inspire current scholarship 305 0360-0572/94/0815--0305505.00

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline 306 SWIDLER & ARDITI

("The Problemof Generations" [ 1952(1928)] as stimulus for Wuthnow [ 1976] or Schuman &Scott [1989]), but the tradition has comeunder criticism. Its imageof the relationship of knowledge and social position seems reductionist (Geertz 1983:152-3), and it has too thin a conception both of knowledgeand of the social positions or interests that affect knowledge. Recentlysociologists interested in culture, religion, science, and ideology, along with scholars in social history, philosophy,anthropology,and the history of science, havebegunto revitalize the field. Theexpansionof cultural studies throughoutthe social sciences has also greatly enriched the materials a sociologist of knowledge has to work with. Whilethere is as yet no unified field, many diverse strands of theory and research have begunto crystallize around commonthemes. Changes in the phenomena encompassed by the term "knowledge" are symptomaticof changes in the field. The traditional sociology of knowledge focussed on formal systems of ideas, concentrating especially on such matters as the world-views and politics of intellectuals. (This reviewlargely neglects the sociology of intellectuals, though we note the lively debates about the interests and social locations of contemporary intellectuals Ehrenreich & Ehrenreich 1977, Gouldner1979, Eyerman et a11987, Szelenyi &Martin 1988, Brint 1994). The search for social interests that bias even supposedlyneutral, disinterested, objective understanding of the world what the very term "knowledge"connoted was central to the agenda of the field. Newerwork in sociology and cultural studies suggests that formal systems of ideas are linked to broader cultural patterns--what we might think of as social consciousness. Wefocus not only on the ideas developed by knowledge specialists, but also on structures of knowledge or consciousness that shape the thinking of laypersons. Wedo not, however,attempt to cover all aspects of culture. The sociology of culture has focussed largely on works of art and entertainment. In cultural studies, culture connotes symbolicsystems that are deeply embedded, taken-for-granted, often enduring, and sometimesinvisible. The sociology of knowledge instead directs attention to cultural elements that are moreconscious, moreexplicitly linked to specific institutional arenas, and morehistorically variable. The new sociology of knowledgeexamineshowkinds of social organization makewholeorderings of knowledge possible, rather than focussing in the first instance on the differing social locations and interests of individuals or groups. It examinespolitical and religious ideologies as well as science and everyday life, cultural and organizational discourses along with formal and informal types of knowledge.It also expandsthe field of study from an examinationof the contents of knowledgeto the investigation of forms and practices of knowing. This review begins with a fundamental factor that shapes the ways knowl-

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1994.20:305-329. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org by University of Minnesota- Twin Cities - Law Library on 01/07/09. For personal use only.

Twin Cities .20:305-329. Lookingat the recent literature on power.annualreviews. Graff 1987.org/aronline THE NEWSOCIOI£)GY OF KNOWLEDGE 307 edge can be structured--the media through which knowledge is preserved. Downloaded from arjournals. and transmitted. exploring hownew approaches deepen the understanding of what a social standpoint involves. we turn briefly to recent work on informal knowledge. particularly that embodied in institutional practices.Webring together workon howforms of authority affect the scope. MEDIA AND THE STRUCTURE OF KNOWLEDGE Annu. generality. and knowledge. which multiplied and thus preservedidentical copies of texts. Goody1986. texts and authors could be placed in a firm historical sequence. arguing that writing conveysauthority only whenstate powerprivileges it (Clanchy 1979). examiningsocial conditions that shape howknowledgeis transmitted through time. Finally. has contrasted the organization of literate and oral cultures. Sociol. showingthat formal learning can create intellectually disciplined.Wethen review recent work on howsocial power.Law Library on 01/07/09. For personal use only. organized. arguing that the mediain whichwordsare transmitted have repeatedly transformed consciousness. in a set of sweepingarguments. specialized. and authoritativeness of knowledge. freed from the inevitable corruptions of scribal transmission.org by University of Minnesota. The review then examineshowpatterns of authority located in organizations shape both the content and structure of knowledge. 1977. rediscoveredtexts could be permanentlyrather than only temporarily recovered. Finnegan 1988) have drawn the contrast betweenorality and literacy less starkly." Historians. Ewald (1988). examinesthe fascinating case of an African kingdom whose rulers actively resisted writing in order to maintainthe flexibility and ambiguity of the gift exchanges on which their powerdepended. authorship of texts could be established. . 1982). we examinehowknowledgereinforces social hierarchies and howthe boundaries and categories that define the basic terms of systems of knowledge are constituted. Perhaps the most dramatic example of howsocial factors affect the basic structure of knowledge is what Goody& Watt (1963) called "The Consequences of Literacy. Rev.Annual Reviews www. transmission. It then rams to the analysis of collective memory. decontextualized knowledge even in nonliterate societies. we discuss revitalized versions of the standpoint theories that characterized the traditional sociology of knowledge. 1979) has argued that print. and cumulation of knowledgechanges knowledgeitself. anthropologists. decisively transformedthe shape of scholarly knowledge:corrected texts could be assembledand replicated. 1994. that knowledgeordinary people develop to deal with their everyday lives. Others (Olson 1977. Eisenstein (1969.annualreviews. Akinnaso (1992) notes the presence of both formal and informal learning in literate and nonliterate societies. In the next section. and psychologists have examined howthe introduction of new media for the recording. shapes knowledge. Walter Ong (1971. gender.

perhaps because formal knowledge remains bound by print and reading even while popular knowledge is increasingly visual. Sociol. Marshall McLuhan (1962. rather than as inevitable decay from a pristine past. 1994. multi-channeled. the early-modern period has proven particularly fruitful for study. She argues that print stimulated both production and consumptionand that ways of appropriating printed booksbecame a metaphorfor scientific exploration of the natural world. Ginzburg (1980) offers a remarkableaccount of howliterate and oral cultures interacted when print made the richly fabulous world of medieval books more widely available and reading began to give ordinary people confidence in their own ideas.Twin Cities . COLLECTIVE MEMORY Annu. For personal use only. often dependenton oral transmission of knowledge. Print culture infused by ~ still vigorous oral tradition appears to have a special vitality (Bakhtin 1984. Levine 1977). Mukerji(1983) traces the influence of printed objects. elaborating particular passages out of coatext and filtering what they read throughthe screen of oral culture. Studies of collective (Halbwachs1980 [1950]) or social (Fentress &Wickham 1992) memory ask howsocial groups retain. McKitterick 1990) have explored print and reading in both popular and elite contexts.org/aronline 308 SWIDLER & ARD1TI and knowledgecould be redefined as cumulative progress.annualreviews. We do not yet knowwhether and how the computer revolution will alter formal knowledge.org by University of Minnesota. People whoread very few books read them in a radically different way than modernreaders do. or reappropriate social . on materialism in Europeanculture. alter. creating instantaneous.Annual Reviews www. Vincent 1989. Grafton (1991. Eisenstein (1969) notes that the first effect of print wasto give a new lease on life to medievalbooks. MarcBloch (196111940])vividly describes howfeudal elites. 1992) has analyzed the reading practices of scholars in earlier eras. jumbled chronologies and unwittingly assimilated new practices into an apparently unchangingtradition. passionate reading prerevolutionary French readers. creating a flood of texts of mixedprovenance. Thompson1963. But the effects of new media on knowledge remain unclear despite decades of mass communicationsresearch.20:305-329. from pictorial prints printed mapsand books. 1989. Damton (1984:215-56)describes the intimate.Law Library on 01/07/09. globally shared communication. Becauseliteracy and especially print so profoundly altered both knowledge and knowing. and interactive. Rev. Downloaded from arjournals. while other historians (Chattier 1987.perhaps eventually supplanting the bookand undoing the "fixity" Eisenstein attributed to print. Historically specific modes of reading have been explored by numerous scholars. 1964) speculated that television wouldagain alter humanconsciousness as print had done.annualreviews. immediate.

20:305-329. For personal use only.in shaping the present.org/aronline THE NEWSOCIOLOGYOF KNOWLEDGE 309 knowledge. researchers have shownthat muchpresumedtradition is in fact "invented" to serve current social purposes (Hobsbawm & Ranger 1983. Onthe other hand. Tompkins(1985) has shown how Hawthorne’s work was systematically promoted by those whose status claims he embodied. the moreit is rhetorically effective..Law Library on 01/07/09.annualreviews. if they are commemorated. He also notes that events may be rememberedindirectly (as when new scandals are dubbed" gate") institutionally (whennewrules or procedures. and that whether a book was likely to be preserved as a "great work" depended on whether its author was part of a cohort youngenough to keep the workalive until a new generation could rediscover it. Barbara Hermstein Smith (1983) argues somewhatpolemically that what enters the literary canon dependson the interests of those whocontrol it. Downloaded from arjournals. Escarpit’s (1971) brilliant workmade clear that "external" factors as well as the qualities of aesthetic worksthemselvesaffect what will be retained in the culture. point out that survivors whopreserve. and Tuchman& Fortin Annu. memories of the past provide "a stable image upon which new elements are superimposed. Students of the French revolution have shownhownew traditions and rituals helped create new political realities (Hunt 1984) and. and if they concern the public center of national life. he asks why somethings are retained and others forgotten. Hobsbawm 1990.Using ~he image of culture as a repertoire or repository ($widler 1986).. Schwartz 1987. howmemories such as that of the storming of the Bastille (Schama1989) wer~ concocted political entrepreneurs. less charitably. especially defining nations and the character of national communities (Anderson 1983.org by University of Minnesota.annualreviews. and the morehighly resolved it is towardaction. Hedemonstrated that political upheavalsstrongly influenced whether works entered the French literary canon. like that of the "special prosecutor" are created). Schwartz (1991:234) has emphasized how. Wilford 1990). Kammen 1991). in an analysis of the reputations of English etchers. arguing that "a cultural object is morepowerfulthe more it is within reach. 1994." The second important line of research on collective memory involves systematic analysis of the factors that lead events or objects to be retained or lost as part of the stream of collective memory. Lang&Lang(1990). catalog. Sociol. the moreit resonates with existing opinions and structures . the morethoroughlyit is retained in institutions. as Watergate did. and promotean artist’s workgreatly increase its chances for renown." Interest in the uses and practical determinants of cultural memory come together in the study of literary or artistic canons--whatis preservedas part of a cultural heritage. First. Schudson(1989:175) has systematized arguments about the powerof culture. He notes that events are more likely to be remembered if they happenedduring one’s lifetime. if they touched people personally.Twin Cities . Rev. This work has developed in two important directions.Schudson(1992) has carefully analyzed howWatergate entered and influenced collective memory. .Annual Reviews www.

Zaret (1989. 1991. A major pioneer has been David Zaret (1985. 1994. or madecanonical.Twin Cities . It drew on intellectual precedents.annualreviews. grandparents. such as widespread knowledgeof the mutual obligations commercialcontracts entailed. While the factors shaping collective memory have been most clearly specified for art worlds." Challengesto the authority of Puritan clerics led them to develop "covenant theology" which refocussed ministers’ authority on helping laypersons monitor their inner lives rather than on seeking radical reforms which wouldput Puritan clerics in open conflict with the Anglican church. Covenanttheology madesalvation a predictable outcomeof a covenant between Godand man. economists. to make its ideas plausible to lay listeners.b) have used open-ended survey questions about important events and changes during the past 50 years to explore relationships between generation and the events that stand out in memory (they find that adolescence and early adulthoodare a formative period for historical memory. For personal use only. or physicists will be disseminated.org by University of Minnesota. The Heavenly Contract (1985) argued that theological change in English Puritanism derived from organizational "pressures" and intellectual "precedents. Downloaded from arjournals. 1991. Haskell (1976) for art and Griswold(1986) for theater have examined social conditions that lead to revivals or rediscoveries of objects fromthe artistic corpus.Annual Reviews www. as Mannheim [1952 (1928)] hypothesized) and between such memoriesand other attitudes. Sociol. 1992)extends these ideas.annualreviews. asking how structural or institutional factors influence which work by philosophers. preserved.Thesestudies raise the tantalizing possibility that similar research could be done on knowledge more narrowly conceived.Law Library on 01/07/09. (1984) have examinedthe effects of gender on literary reputation. AUTHO~TY AND ORGANIZATION New modelsof howsocial organization influences ideas are at the heart of the new sociology of knowledge. Sectarian conflict and religiously inspired radicalism following the triumph of Puritanism in the English . 1989. or great-grandparents to pass on firsthand accountsof the past--will affect the possibilities of historical memory. Hareven (1979) has suggested that basic demographic structurenwhether children have living parents.20:305-329.org/aronline 3~0 S~D~R&ARD~ Annu. Schuman & Rieger 1992a. Rev. others have examinedhoworganizations preserve and retrieve memory (Powel11986)and howwhole societies remember(Connerton 1989). Gdswold’s systematic exploration of whyspecific genres of English renaissance plays resonated with the social dilemmasof later centuries is echoed in Schwartzet al’s (1986) analysis of the revival of Masada in Jewish collective memory. 1992). arguing that liberal-democratic ideology emergedin seventeenth-century Englandas "a collective response to the problemof contested authority" (1989:165). HowardSchumanand collaborators (Schuman & Scott 1989.

Walzer (1973) noted that sixteenth-centuryEnglishPuritanismappealedto "sociologically competent" elites anxiousabout challengesto their authority. Afocuson problems of authorityin contextsthat directly affect ideological producers contains the seedsof a powerful.or personwhich can settle disputes and establish truth. Whilethis is not the place to reviewthe broad spectrum of workin the sociologyof science. and formal organizations" and that they shared "access to the intellectual precedents for the new ideology" (p.in contrast to the dependence of the arts andreligion on lay audiencesand powerfulpatrons. group.has analyzedthe organizational dynamics involvedin the "segmentation. 1994. Gerson(1993)." Liberalideology substitutedreligious toleration for efforts to build a "GodlyCommonwealth" and natural religion for sectarian doctrinal commitments. general approach to the sociology of knowledge. Konrad &Pfeffer 1990). Swidler(1979:118-30) observed that alternative schoolsthat renounced authority hadto dispensewith right and wrong answers to intellectual questions. Levitt &Nass 1989. Martin(1993) speculatesthat the authoritativenessof any belief system depends ultimately on the authorityof personsandthat a group’sauthoritystructure affects its epistemologicalassumptions.Twin Cities . Downloaded from arjournals. particularly comparisons organizational practices across academic disciplines. newresearchon scientific practice andscientific work organization (Knorr-Cetina1981. Gumport (1990." "intersection. Totake authorityfirst: It seems reasonableto believethat the authoritativeness of knowledge is grounded in patterns of social authority. .Arditi (1994)has traced broadtransformations in theories of manners in eighteenth-century England to a shift in the structure of authority withinwhichsocial elites operated.org/aronline THE NEWSOCIOLOGY OF KNOWLEDGE 311 Civil War providedthe "episodiccontext"that bore upon"ideologicalproducers. Hargens 1988. Indeed. for example. Thepost-Kuhnian (1970)sociologyof science. 1989)has emphasized that the growing authoritativeness of seventeenthandeighteenth-century science depended on its acquiring a single. andparticularly its relatively autonomous control over its own reward system." and "legitimation" of lines of scientific work.annualreviews. For personal use only. Rev. Sociol. secure sourceof patronagein the nationstate. 1991).Law Library on 01/07/09. Latour 1987) begins to link substantive features of scientific knowledge to scientific work organization. Crane(1976) and Kuhn (1969) havesuggestedthat what tinguishes sciencefromother cultural enterprisessuchas art or religion is its institutional autonomy. Latour &Woolgar 1979. Wuthnow (1987. To haveauthoritative knowledge is to havean institution.org by University of Minnesota. examining the case Annu. Zaret shows also that the English proponentsof liberal-democratic theoryandof natural religion wereloosely linked by "networks of friendship.20:305-329. patronage.annualreviews. suggeststhat the coherenceof intellectual "paradigms" is related (whether as causeor effect) to the extentof hierarchy andcoordination in the social organization of variousfields (Lodahl& Gordon 1972.Annual Reviews www. 65).

developedin the study of the arts. "Successfulscientific theories reflect commitmentsto work practices that are not easily changed. and prestige mean that even though scientific communitieslack unified authority. . fellowships. Star (1989:116) asks how scientific knowledge coheres without a central authority. what religious providers offer--than by "demand"--that is. standards.annualreviews.20:305-329. but rather as the consequence of commitmentsto training programs. Sociol. this picture of a localized.Annual Reviews www. and vocabularies [whichare] difficult to disentangle or dismantle" (p. at least for America. Robert Darnton’s work on The Business of Enlightenment (1979) and on the consequences royal censorship in Old RegimeFrance (1982) demonstrates howthe contexts in which culture is producedand distributed affect its intellectual content. negotiated order must be balanced against the forces promotinghierarchy and order within scientific communities.. Downloaded from arjournals. Wuthnow’s (1989) ambitious work suggests that broad economicchanges and Annu. Rev.Twin Cities . independent changes in religious needs or aspirations. career mobility.and others observethat the actual practices of scientific laboratories are highly local and that they undergoextreme simplification and reification before they are constituted as scientific fact. localized practices and findings are "joined across sites and . their basic social organization forces themto act as if someideas are better than others. Finke &Stark 1992. technologies. For personal use only." While Star. Latour & Woolgar. explores hownew academicfields are created and legitimated. The unequal distribution of academicrewards such as employment. The "production of culture" perspective 0aeterson 1976). Star (1989) analyzes the basis for the simultaneous "plasticity" and "coherence"of scientific theories. Important workin the sociology of religion (Butler 1990.religious participation maybe better explained by "supply"--that is. salaries. fellowship committees assessing research proposals. and so forth. 22).Law Library on 01/07/09.org/aronline 312 S~D~R&ARD~ feminist scholarship. observing that multiple. transformedto certainty at larger scales of organization. is nowbearing fruit in the general sociology of knowledge. The theoretical focus on authority relations is just one example of a broader movement in the sociology of knowledge toward attention to the specific organizational contexts in which knowledge producers work. someproblemsand problemsolutions moreimportant then others. A unifying hierarchy among ideas is built into the structures that allocate academicrewards.org by University of Minnesota. Thus the manufacture of scientific certainty maywell be a product of such central activities as departmentsdeciding whom to hire. and youngscientists seeking groundsfor selecting problems. This does not occur as the result of some self-propelling quality of ideas. even while local variations in the routines that organize scientific workmakedissensus both possible and invisible. 1994..annualreviews. Warner1993) provides evidence that. Theselines of workin the sociology of science convergewith workby Zaret and others to suggest that knowledgederives manyof its features from the way it organizes knowledge-producing communities.

343). Second. Zaret (1989) makesclear that shrining rationality as the objective ground of public debate was part of an effort to transcend divisive religious and political conflict. distant cultural world organized by abstract principles such as individualism or rationality construct knowledgedifferently than do those located socially and intellectually in moreparochial settings (see Lerner 1958. overlapping.org/aronline THE NEWSOCIOLOGYOF KNOWLEIX~E 313 changesin class structure influence ideas throughthe institutions that organize culture production. 81-82). and European socialism was more successful where liberal parties were too weakto competefor workingclass support.annualreviews. Scattered evidence suggests that those whomust regularly deal with an impersonal. Roof 1978.org by University of Minnesota. political bodies independent of traditional landowningclasses incubated and defended Reformationreforms (pp." Recent work on global culture also suggests reappropdating Merton’s (1957) distinction between locals and cosmopolitans (Hannerz 1990). he distinguishes several stages in the process by which any new ideology emerges: "processes of ideological production. and diplomacythat were creating a stronger sense among educated elites of Europe as a single. Universalismalso "fit well with the increasing levels of communication. Both Weber (1958 [190~-1905]) and Durkheim(1965 [1912]) explored this question. of selection among competingideologies.Twin Cities . 320) in the eighteenth-century public sphere contributed to distancing public roles from personal lives for Enlightenmentfigures and also to emphasizinguniversal argumentand abstract generalization (pp. including modem science (Merton 1970 [1929]. yet segmented character of social relations" (p. state patronage created the public sphere which was the seedbed of Enlightenment thought. Gould1992) have challenged some of Wutlmow’s historical arguments.20:305-329. Rev. Downloaded from arjournals. and of institutionalization" (p. Cohen1990). 538). As Wuthnow (1989: 343) puts it: "In trumpetingthe general over the particular. Sociol. Wuthnow’s (1989) analysis of Enlightenment discourse gives empirical substance to such a Durkheimianclaim by suggesting that the "dispersed. Horton 1971. Critics (Calhoun 1992. 1994. Durkheimargued that the developmentof an increasingly universal world society madeit possible for ideas to take universal form. Deemphasizing local Annu. writers from Locke to Rousseauwere directing strong criticism at the parochial passions that had caused muchof the seventeenth century to be dominated by war and were siding with the voice of tolerance and peace. or potentially single cultural zone" (p.Communities of Discourselinks the institutional settings of knowledgeproduction to the content and form of bodies of ideas. . universal rationality characteristic of modem thought.trade. For personal use only. Weberargued that Calvinism spurred rationalization in all spheres of life.annualreviews. to claim a universalized truth.Law Library on 01/07/09. 342-343ff). but his workis pathbreaking in two respects: first. An intriguing question is what institutional supports makeplausible the authoritative. Hewitt 1989). Bernstein 1975. For example.Annual Reviews www.

and the near-universaladoption of the Gregorian calendar. rather than seekingcausal links between formsof power and other social formations.annualreviews. Foucault(1973) has written of changes "epistemes"--not simplysystemsof classification. POWER AND PRACTICES Thecontemporarysociology of knowledge has been deeply concernedwith power (Ortner 1984. or regional variations. the Olympics). havetended to adoptsimilar educational systemsandschoolcurricula.Thomas et al 1987. pointingout that modern nation states. or a meter a meter. historical eras differ not onlyin what people think.org/aronline 314 SWIDLER & ARDITI Annu.his fundamental insights may be put simply:First.These internationalintellectual agreements in effect institutionalize and make real the universal authority of the rational to which Durkheim referred (and indeed Durkbeim wrote during the period [1870-1920] in which. just as the ability of asylums to confineandsegregatethe mentally ill enact psychiatric knowledgeof diagnosis and cure. despite differing internal needsanddifferent histories. Benavot et al (1991) stress increasing global strandardization.according to Robertson.org by University of Minnesota. poweris embodied practices or techniqueswhich havetheir own histories (Mann 1986). such as the creation of global competitions (Nobel prizes.for Foucault (1965.Law Library on 01/07/09. Third. techniquesof power are also.Featherstone 1990)discuss the intellectual consequences of a global culture. 1980). mental hospitals. simultaneously. Robertson (1992)sketchesthe concretehistorical turning points in the formation of global culture. these important elementsof a global culture were institutionalized).annualreviews. for Foucault(1977.agreement on worldtime. especially the workof Michel Foucault. but in what is thinkable.Despite difficulties in interpreting Foucault’s work. Downloaded from arjournals.20:305-329. Second. 1977. for example. or that wereally can know whattime it is in Tokyo or AddisAbaba. 1994. So.Annual Reviews www. Lamont & Wuthnow 1990). Rev. Sociol.the monasticpractice of confessionmade real corresponding formsof knowledge. 1978.1980). formsof knowledge. or clinics show how institutional practices make categoriesof knowledgereal.Meyer 1980. such as the varieties of sin or techniques for recognizing and recounting these. "Dividing practices" such as those of modern psychiatrydefine the .Twin Cities .the apparent objectivity of the worldweinhabit rests on an institutionalized globalculture. For personal use only.Differentepistemes are characterized by discrete rules of separation and associationamong thingsmsimilarity throughresemblance in the classical age andby causal associationin the age of reason. If wetake for grantedthat a minute is really a minute. Studies of such institutions as prisons.Foucault’s "genealogical" method traces historical transformations in techniquesof power. but the logic in terms of which these classifications are constructed. Several scholars (Moore 1966.

1994. with its project of making natives into Frenchmen. First. the contemporary theorists who havedrawn the strongest links between knowledgeand power. in stressing the overwhelming powerof society vis ~t vis its members.are both French. Rev.") Along with others (Clifford &Marcus 1986). It has nowbecome almost commonplace to argue that newcategories of personsare createdhistorically (see Hacking 1986). the central role intellectuals playin Annu. Downloaded from arjournals. . Durkheim. For personal use only. Priscilla Clark(1987) pointsto the distinctiveness of French literary culture. on the other.Annual Reviews www. Talal Asad(19"/3) has egplored how the British empire’spractice of indirect rule led British anthropology to discoverautonomous traditions and stable. Only. of "prmifive thought. led French anthropology to be preoccupied withthe structure. New forms of knowledge also create newsites wherepower can be applied (and where resistance can form)."suchas the academic disciplines.(We note that the French practice of direct rule. create "subjects" who define andcategorize themselves(Foucault1983).annualreviews. turn aspects of human life into objects of analysis. intellectuals havea more central cultural role andplayto a broader publicthan doacademic intellectuals in the United States. For example.for example. Variationin the authoritativenessandcentrality of knowledge across societies raises broadtheoreticalissues in the sociology of knowledge. such as psychotherapy or self-labeling.Foucault’ s arguments have stimulatedvaried work on how institutional practices ground systems of knowledge.org/aronline THE NEWSOCIOLOGY OF KNOWLEDGE characteristics by which the normalmay be recognized and separatedfromthe "deviant".as Miehele Larnont(1987)has pointed out in examining the career of JacquesDen-lda. Particularly fascinating is the contrast between France. functionalinstitutions among native peoples.Law Library on 01/07/09. In a fascinating study. onecan notethat Bourdieu andFoucault. Woolf1989). Second. Their workseemsto resonate with that of their French forebear. and England and the United States. interiorized psyches can a battle ensueover whether to liberate or repress unconscious drives. Sociol. Rabinow 1989. Theacademic disciplines havecome underscrutiny for the waystheir basic theories and methods reflect larger structures of power(MacKenzie 1981).Asad(1986)has arguedthat the basic intellectual andmethodological presuppositionsof anthropology are permeated by the unequalpower of colonizer and colonized.org by University of Minnesota. andother practices. practicesof "objectification.annualreviews. when individualsare seen as endowed with complex. Hacking (1990) has traced the concatenation of intellectual andpractical problems--the use of mortalitydata to calculateprofits from government sale of annuitiesor the use of social statistics to characterize nations--which by the nineteenthcentury had transformeda causallydeterminist worldinto a probabilistic one. andparticularlythe capacity for rationality.Twin Cities .the modem state’s needto define andcontrol populations led to new statistical techniquesandnew waysof categorizingpersons(Hacking 1982.20:305-329.on the onehand.

single-handedlywrote his Dictionary of the English Language. A major English dictionary waited a hundred years until SamuelJohnson. beginning the work in 1639 and completing it in 1694. founded in 1666. chartered by the British Crownin 1662. between 1746 and 1755. sponsored by a group of commercial publishers who sold subscriptions to finance the venture. received no royal financial support and thus becamea prestigious gathering of leisured gentlemen whoconducted experiments and shared the results of their scientific work. 1994. while British physicians accept only the most narrowly drawn empirical claims. was the first of several academiesestablished by the French state to enhance French science and culture. and someof the infrastructure. becoming "France’s acknowledged arbiter of scientific and technological activity" (Hahn1971:21). A focus on institutional authority can account for both the intellectual predilections and the relative centrality of French versus Anglo-American intellectual cultures. founded in 1635. Its eight members (shortly expandedto forty). had fifteen members whogave scientific advice to the royal administration. . The French Academy’sforty members immediately set about producing an authoritative dictionary of the French language. Sociol. while in France knowledge was groundedin a hierarchical system of intellectual authority.20:305-329.aided only by a few helpers paid from his ownpocket Annu." and to develop it for the arts and the sciences. Lamont (1992) finds that membersof the French middle class makemuchsharper and more hierarchical cultural distinctions than equivalent Americansdo.Twin Cities . Downloaded from arjournals. The Academic awardedliterary prizes and directed the flow of other government sinecures. It is instructive to contrast the histories of the first great national dictionades produced in France versus those in England.Annual Reviews www. The Academie Francaise. Their primary task was to formalize the rules of the French language." were appointed for life and received substantial stipends.annualreviews.org by University of Minnesota. "Les Immortels. radical form in France while remaining staunchly empiricist in England(Krieger 1970). Payer (1988) offers rich anecdotal evidence that contemporaryFrench medical research and practice privilege theory over empirical findings.org/aronline 316 SWIDLER & ARD1TI Frenchlife. Thus intellectual authority in England was based on shared observation and mutual exchange of ideas among a cultivated elite. that supports French writers (see Clark &Clark 1977). such as government patronage. Rev. The Royal Society of London.annualreviews. Enlightenment skepticism took an abstract. Thereare persistent differences in the intellectual directions of Frenchversus Anglo-American intellectual life (see Wuthnow 1989). thus guaranteeing that elite approval of literary workwouldprovide financial rewards even in the face of commercial failure. The Pads Academy of Sciences. to maintain its "purity. For personal use only.Law Library on 01/07/09. Onecan begin by noting the very different histories of the core institutions that supported knowledgeproduction in France versus those in England.

Licbcrson 1992:6-7). through hisconcept of the"habitus.Annual Reviews www. treats knowledge.annualreviews. For personal use only. recent theoretical and empirical workhas explored howauthority. BOUNDARIES.Heextends social knowledge more deeply into theperson. Bourdieu’s workc×tcnds thesociology of knowledge in several rcspects (dcspitc somecriticisms of hisempirical claims--Lamont & Larrcau 1988. inturn.Twin Cities ." In Distinction (1984). Sociol. power. By focussing on "practice" (Bourdieu 1977.org by University of Minnesota. Focussingneither on large-scale forces like class or the capitalist economy. both orthodox andheterodox positions share taken-for-granted "doxa. First. and practices within institutions shape knowledge. 1994.Law Library on 01/07/09. Thus even in its conception of language. Bourdicu (1969. while Johnson’ s English dictionary offered an individual rendition of the best English usage. asanembodied set ofskills andhabits that people usewith more or lessdc×tcrity toachieve strategic advantage. Bourdicu (1984. Butthat sameknowledge rcproduccs the larger system ofsocial distinctions andsocial hierarchies within whose terms people actively maneuver. AND DIFFERENCE Annu. Bourdieu & Passcron 1977) hasexamined howstatus groups benefit fromhaving theknowledge they posscss dcfincd asvalued or legitimate knowledge.org/aronline THE NEWSOCIOLOGY OF KNOWLEDGE 317 and by friends wholoaned the many booksfrom whichhe extracted illustrative quotations (Bate 1975:240-60). Bourdicu & Wacquant 1992). sccRinger 1990) hasargued thatall knowledge islocated within larger "intellectual fields" sothat themeaning of knowledge depends onitsrelation to thefield as a whole. embedded inlarger "cultural fields".annualreviews. including thevalued knowledge of academia or of the cultural elite. At thesametime. Bourdicu (1988) hastumcd hispowerful anthropologist’s eyeonthepractices that define prestige andmaintain power within hisown academic milieu aswell asonthecultural strategies ofAlgcrlans (1977) and ofthcFrench (1984).nor on influences such as the intellectual milieu or interests of individual actors. Rev. Bourdicu examines theinternalized "taste" people . IDENTITY.20:305-329. c×amining learned habits ofusing andinhabiting space. 1984) treats formal. Theconcern with power hastaken a second form inthework ofPierre Bourdieu andhiscollaborators. thebody. Frenchpractice created an authoritative codification of "pure" French. Thus "orthodox" and"heterodox" positions exist inrelation toa field of intellectual power relations. ~ntcllectual fields are. Reminiscent of Wcber’s (1968 [1920]) analysis ofstatus group competition (Collins 1975)." Bourdicu (1977. academic knowledge as similar to other kinds social knowlcdgcmlcss knowledgc of thcworld thanknowlcdgc of howto operate within it. Progress in the new sociology of knowledgehas comeespecially from what we might call the "middle"level of analysis. Downloaded from arjournals. andtime.

Law Library on 01/07/09. Like Meyer(1977). 1983) later workmoved toward a formal analysis of the ways cognitive frames boundand organize social interactions.org by University of Minnesota. Goffman’s(1974. 21). Downloaded from arjournals. Schwartz(1981) considers deeper issue at the intersection of the cognitive and the social: why do vertical classifications universally connote social and moral inequality? Pointing out that the original Durkheimian attempt to root social classifications in social structures is circular (Durkheim & Mauss 1963 [1903]). Related work by Levine(1988) traces the complexnineteenth-century process of boundingoffhigh from popular culture. products and practices" (p. rather than simplythe relatively advantaged or disadvantaged position of particular social groups within it. stratified systemof education. . DiMaggio (1982) has shownhow nineteenth-century Boston elites constructed the distinction between high and popular culture by founding organizations that could monopolize cultural objects (a high-culture repertoire). Rev. For personal use only.. Beisel (1992) analyzes the active effort by nineteenth-century American reformersto construct a moral boundarybetweenliterature and obscenity.and legitimate the high-culture/popular-culture distinction. Class or status group advantage. morepowerfuladults for the source of "vertical classification. DiMaggio (1987) examines the source of distinctions among artistic genres. Rather.org/aronline 318 SWIDL~R & ARDITI from different social milieus use to make social and cultural distinctions. DiMaggio (1992) has analyzed the historical process of creating "institutions with the powerto establish authoritatively the value of different forms of culture: in effect to create and to defend the boundariesamong varying kinds of aesthetic . In a brilliant Americanization of Bourdieu’s arguments. A big gap nonetheless remains between cognitive and social accounts of the ways people form and maintain boundaries. confidence. In Terra Cognita (1992) he traces the complex process through which European knowledge of the new world was reconfigured as people attempted to integrate newexperiences into established cognitive structures.Twin Cities . 1994.Annual Reviews www.20:305-329. As the work collected in Lamont&Foumier (1992) suggests. cultural capital includes the taste. captured by Bourdieu’s(1984) term "cultural capital.annualreviews. Bourdieu emphasizes the larger lessons conveyedby a hierarchical." is not simply accumulatedcultural expertise.. and familiarity that allows the culturally advantagedto reap a higher return on cultural investments than do those whobegin with less." Zerubavel (1991) catalogs the varied ways in which humanbeings make distinctions in everyday life. distinctions are often drawnto reinforce social inequalities. sacralize high culture (in distinct spaces with an awe-filled atmosphere).annualreviews. Schwartz looks to the universal dependence of children on larger. like economiccapital. He argues that social groups invent and maintain boundedcultural genres in order to communicate status group membership in face-to-face interaction (Collins 1981). But sociologists have thus far made less use than they might of work by social psychologists on howpeople make Annu. Sociol.

Montejano (1987) has analyzed howracial divisions crystallized in twentieth-century Texas. Brubaker(1992:1) contrasts the Frenchunderstandings of nationhoodand citizenship ("state-centered and assimilationist") with those of Germany ("volk-centered amddifferentialist"). and religion are of special interest because they appear as naturalized. Abbot conceptualizes professions as actors in a system. Sociol.ranks. Researchers have shownhowlarger organizational actors influence the form of cognitive categories and social boundaries. nationality. competingto define and establish exclusive control over jurisdictions. Boundaries of race. looking at howthe hardening of national boundaries affected the identity and experience of frontier populations.Annual Reviews www.org/aronline THE NEWSOCIOLOGY OF KNOWLEDGE 319 and use social categories. Downloaded from arjournals. permanent or ascriptive distinctions. primordial categories even whenthey are clearly socially constituted (Barth 1969. When professions attempt Annu. An academicknowledge system allows a profession to defend its jurisdiction. Anthropologists like AbnerCohen(1969.. 1974) have shownhowgroups sharpen ethnic and religious boundaries as they moveinto new economicniches. Following Aries (1962). Olzak (1992) has used ecological arguments to account for heightenedethnic group conflict. Oneof the most ambitious attempts to think about boundaries in fresh ways is Abbott (1988). tracing the histodcal sources of these differences.annualreviews.Law Library on 01/07/09. Cornell (1988) has examinedhowAmericanIndians cameto define themselves as tribes in response to the American state’s insistence on negotiating only with tribal groups. Lansberg 1989). . One of the most powerful ways of categorizing persons in the contemporaryword is that of national citizenship. such as departments. drawing sharper distinctions among classes and ages as well as between the sexes (see Farge & Davis 1993). Sahlins (1989) has examinednational boundaries. Thesocial psychological literature is replete with studies invoking strong group identification and intergroup polarization..annualreviews. even with only the slightest and most transitory experimental manipulations (Kramer &Brewer 1984). Fredrickson (1981) has scribed howdifferent systems of racial categories developed in the United States and South Africa. Rev." Theynote further that "[o]rganizations are certainly very much in the businessof creating categories. 56). Calhoun1993).Twin Cities . in part by moreclearly defining its borders (p. historians have suggested that heightened gender boundaries early in the modernperiod (Laqueur 1990) were part of a general Europeanprocess of social segregation.org by University of Minnesota. Baron&Pfeffer (1993:14)note that social categories "can be readily induced and need not rely on .20:305-329. Sexual boundariesare accentuated whenpolitical leaders seek to tighten group boundaries (Davies 1982). while Watldns (1991) has documentedthe increasing articulation between nation and demographicbehavior. For personal use only. and job titles" (see Baron 1986. 1994. reinforcing an understanding of racial categories as dynamicand historically contingent (Omi &Winant 1986).

org by University of Minnesota. Mannheim.annualreviews. One explanation of putative differences between men’s and women’sways of knowingtraces these differences to childhood experience (Chodorow 1978. ." For them. Sociol. Benjamin 1988). For feminist theorists. but of the differential effects of powerin the constitution of subjects. however.Annual Reviews www. and the sacred from the profane--no longer hold. If girls differentiate less from their mothersthan boys do and women remain enmeshedwith their mothers or their children. The search for a feminist epistemology has taken several forms. including the generation of gendered. which provide an interesting illustration of the varied ways knowledgemaybe socially shapedor determined.First are "standpointtheories.Law Library on 01/07/09.20:305-329. along with the always partial and situated nature of knowledge.Twin Cities . Feminists (Haraway 1991) have criticized Foucault for his failure recognize differences in the ways powerpenetrates people belonging to different social categories (gender. knowledge. in essence postmodernists argue that a new"order of things" has emergedin which the traditional categories that separated kinds of knowledge--or that separated truth from fiction. they are less Annu. those excluded from power. such as abstraction or reduction. 1988) postulate of a newhyperreality created not as a representation of already existing realities but from the power of signs themselves and Donna Haraway’s (1991) arguments for the embeddedness of cybernetics in every aspect of social reality today provide examples of such arguments." Whilethe topic of postmodernism is much too large to be addressed here (see Arditi 1993).that scientists demarcatescience from nonsciencedifferently in different circumstancesto justify claims for authority. Baudrillard’s (1983.annualreviews.differences in ideas are not consequences of the different "interests" of social groups.org/aronline 320 SWIDLER & ARD1TI raid others’ jurisdictions. "knowledges. For personal use only. 1994. autonomy. and resources. to subsume or displace the knowledge claims of their rivals (pp. high from popular culture. The motif of the constituted subject suggested by Foucault has been developed along independent lines by contemporaryfeminists. example. 98-108)." like those of Marx. In someways these developmentscan be seen as a return to earlier concerns of the sociology of knowledge. thereby constituting subjects differently. the constitution of "difference" has to be made a fundamental element of analysis. Downloaded from arjournals. Rev. and boundaries are brought together in new ways in two recent literatures. they developintellectual strategies. Hartsock 1987. and other pioneers in the sociology of knowledge. or raeialized. Power. Thus jurisdictional claims and knowledge frames are intimately linked (see Gieryn et al 1985. Halpern 1992).Feminist scholars (Smith 1979. Collins 1990) argue that the oppressed. Gieryn (1983) has shown.in particular Mannheim’s (1936) efforts to find a correlation betweenideas and their location within the social structure. race. those of "postmodernism"and "feminist epistemology. have a unique vantage point from which to understand aspects of the world that maybe invisible to dominantgroups. sexual preference).

relational aspectsof social life and are excluded from publicsystems of authority. The emphasison "practice" in cultural studies (Ortner 1984) has had salutary effect in making explicit the problem of howideas become plausible to those whohold them. Sociol. others (Schiebinger 1993)havearguedthat the modern sciences werespecifically constructed as maleenterprises.Mukerjee & Schudson 1991).theyare less likely to participate in whatis currentlytakento be universal.many recentexplorations of feministepistemology transcendthe distinction between old and newsociologies of knowledge by analyzing both howwomen’s knowledge differs systematically from that of men (althoughmostof this workis speculativerather than empirical)and howthe very nature of whatis takento be knowledge is shapedby malegender (Flax 1983).org/aronline THE NEWSOGIOLOGY OF KNOWLEI~E 321 likely to experiencethemselves as separate fromthe things they study(subjeet-objeet distinction. The sociology of formal and informal knowledge has converged. and partly becauseof intellectual innovations. For personal use only. Jr. (1992) has madean important .In this way. DorothySmith(1987). WilliamSewell. that is.20:305-329. But at least some works are of interest here becausethey examine howordinarypeopleactually take up and use (or reject) the knowledge generatedfor themby elites (Gamson 1992. Rev.Hunt1989. like attention to "discursivefields" which allowscholarsto discoverlarger organizing principles within popularformsof knowledge.Law Library on 01/07/09.Arelated position is a variant of arguments linking knowledge to authority structures: If men are vestedwith social authority.Swidler 1995). 1994. Riessman (1990)has examined how peopleconstruct narratives of their lives.Twin Cities . partly throughthe work of the new cultural historians who havedrawn explicit links between folk knowledge and high culture (Greenblatt1988. Evelyn FoxKeller (1985).analytic. objectiveknowledge.or to organize knowledge hierarchically(deductive reasoning).to use modes of thoughtthat sharply separateor disaggregate whatis studied (anal)tie reasoning). INFORMAL KNOWLEDGE Annu. or whetherit belongswithin a broadened sociologyof culture or a sociologyof consciousness remainsto be seen. accruingprestige andpower frommale styles of thought. If women are responsible for the private.annualreviews. Downloaded from arjournals.1992)analyzesthe intellectual structure ordinary thinking and the uses people makeof popular culture.annualreviews. Whether suchliterature is properlysociology of knowledge.Annual Reviews www. the knowledge ordinary people developto deal with their everyday lives (Gramsci 1971). then authoritative knowledge is "whatmen haveto say" and it "carr[ies] forward the interests and perspectivesof men" (Smith1987:18).org by University of Minnesota. There has also been a resurgence of workon informal knowledge (Geertz 1983). These argumentsfocus less on women as knowersthan on the purported maleness of modernscience.Billig (1987. see Keller 1983).

socialism amongthe workers of nineteenth-century Marseille--depends upon existing social and cultural arrangementsthat makethe ideology seemenactable in practice (see Mann1973). affecting both the authority knowledge can effectively claim and the forms that knowledge claims take (see Asad 1993). Nonetheless. an invcstmcnt made in a new market. Hoggart (1957) argued manyyears ago that English working-class culture remainedpredominantlyoral into the twentieth century. and Whitehead’s (1974) study of occultism suggests widespread re- . scholars need to pay careful attention to factors that directly affect the institutions and actors that produceand distribute knowledge. Second. For example. Fifth. Rev. the issue of the "authoritativeness" of different kinds of knowledgeraises manyquestions. social authority shapes the authoritativeness of knowledge. and substantive foci.not yet a unified field.annualreviews.org/aronline 322 SWIDLER & ARDITI Annu. A joke told to a new audience. perspectives. however.Twin Cities . a cavalry attack made on a newterrain. The new sociology of knowledge. Downloaded from arjournals. to explain whynew knowledgeemerges and to account for the social effects of ideas. 18). especially the transition to print. analysis of howthe social location of actors affects their knowledgemust account for the constitution of actors themselves. distinctions. 1994. shifts in the mediathrough whichknowledge is transmitted. CONCLUSION Little of the workreviewed here explicitly locates itself in the sociology of knowledge. amongthem for whom and to what extent officially approved forms of knowledge really do have authority. there are opportunities for fruitful research along the manylines where the literatures brought together here converge and diverge.these literatures allow at least somepreliminary conclusions. are made alonglines ef social differentiation. knowledge and power are intimately related because powerallows people to enact realities that make their knowledge plausible. Sixth. For personal use only. Sociol. social and intellectual. The fact that cultural schemasare "capable of being transposed or extended meansthat the resource consequencesof the enactmentof cultural schemasis never entirely predictable.org by University of Minnesota.annualreviews. contribution by clarifying howpeople reproducesocial structures by acting on the cultural "schemas" embedded in the world they inhabit.20:305-329. so Sewell has shown in earlier work(1974) howthe plausibility of a new ideology--in this case.Law Library on 01/07/09. an offer of marriage madeto a new patrilinc.Annual Reviews www. particularly hierarchical ones.Despite diverse disciplines. a crop planted in a newlycleared field or in a familiar field in a newspringmtheeffect of these actions on the resources of the actors is never quite certain" (p. does not have a single problematic around which debates revolve. First. Fourth. have dramaticeffects on the entire organization of knowledge systems. Third. Just as cultural schemasprovide the bases for practices that reproducestructures.

Twin Cities .Annual Reviews www. Elizabeth Armstrong. has madea strong case that British colonial rule had enduring effects in Nigeria.annualreviews. making"ancestral village" a central political identity while deemphasizingthe political significance of religion. like medievalCatholicism." Is it necessary that most laypersons actually share it7 Or. are forms of knowledge authoritative because established political authorities accept them? Or because they define public discourse.Such awareness might stimulate explicit attention to the concepts and causal modelsthat underlie particular historical or comparative arguments.Claude Fischer. is it an authority’s control over specific incentives and sanctions.800-347-8007. Rev. Downloaded from arjournals. Any Annual Revlcw chapter. AC~O~E~MENTS Wewould like to thank Elizabeth A.org Annu. because powerfulinstitutions enact distinctions that they cometo appear incontrovertibly real? Or can classifications crystallize on morepurely cognitive or interactionist grounds?Andunder what circumstances do distinctions remain hazy? These questions and others like them--about howmedia of intellectual transmission structure knowledge or howdiffering standpoints influence definitions of what constitutes knowledge--suggest that researchers wouldbenefit from greater awareness of the cumulative gains being madein the sociology of knowledge. my bepurchased from the Annual Reviews Preprlnts and Reprints service. 415-259. whatever people maythink privately? Anddo the officially authoritative forms of knowledge structure the claims even of heretics and dissenters? If social authority structures knowledge.5017. it is importantto ask precisely what about authority influences either the form or content of knowledge. For personal use only. Is it only. 1994. But this raises the question of what it meansfor knowledge to be "authoritative. Mostintriguing is howsocial categories become naturalized.Law Library on 01/07/09. Paul DiMaggio. and whydid this identity remain salient in post-colonial Nigerian polities? Moregenerally.org/aronline THE NEWSOCIOLOGYOF KNOWLEDGE 323 jection of the authority of modem science.John Martin and an anonymous reviewer provided valuable commentsand advice. Sociol. Armstrong and Ricardo Samuel for expert research assistance.20:305-329.org by University of Minnesota. or rather control over central symbols that anchors systems of knowledge?Or do authorities influence knowledge through their control over the institutions of intellectual life? How do conflicts between political and intellectual poweraffect the structure of knowledge? Similar questions can be asked about howsocial inequalities structure categorical distinctions. Jeff Manza. as Foucault claims.annualreviews. But how precisely did British rule privilege village identity. I . as well~s any articlecitedin anAnnual Review chapter. 1. Laitin (1986). emall: arpr@dass. for example.

Cambridge:Polity Bourdieu P. 1994. Univ. Transl. 1066-130Z London: Edward Arnold Clark P. 22(Jan):lg-23 Ardlti J. Press Bourdieu P. The socialpsychology of organizations and inequality. Genealogiesof Religion. Towardsa Theory of EducationalTransmissions. pp. Press Beisel N. In Culture and Its Creators: Essays in Honorof EdwardShils. NewYork: Semiotext(e) Baudrillard J. III. New York: Knopf Asad T. The concept of cultural translation in British social anthropology. 1992. pp. J Clifford. 19201986. Sociol. The Bondsof Love: Psychoanalysis. Out of the maze? Twists and riddles of postmodemthinking. London: Verso Arditi J. 1986. publishers. 103-18. 141-64. 1975. Literary France: The Making of a Culture. Simulacra and Simulations. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. J. London: Polity Chodorow N. LG Cochrane.annualreviews. 1993. Centuries of Childhood:A Social History of Family Life. London: Ithaca AsadT. 1961 (1940). Cha Y-K. Mass: Harvard Univ. Mass: Harvard Univ. 1987. 1993. Two European images of non. 1988. The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the Sociology of Gender. 1994. Rev.20:305-329. . Samuel Johnson. 1969. 1987. 104-27 Benavot A. Transl. Unpublished Barth F. 31:561-86 Baron JN. R Nice. Press Chattier R. Meyer WongS-Y. Admi~Sci. Press Bakhtin M. Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany. Codes and Control. Arguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical Approachto Social Psychology. eago: Univ. Hist. Theory Soc. Ar~ Sociol. Selected Writings. 1977. Chieagu Press Akinnaso FN. Reproduction In Education. 197-225. Stanford: Stanford Univ. language. 1969.Law Library on 01/07/09. 1991. Knowledge for the masses: world models and national curricula. Bus. Comp. Cambridge: CambridgeUniv. 1977.. Stud. Chieagu Press Brim S. The proliferation of job rifles in organizations. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. 1992. Feudal Society. Nationalism and ethnicity. 1983. Sch. 1977.Annual Reviews www. Princeton: Princeton Univ. London: Roufledge Bloch M. Outline of a Theory of Prac. 1984. Downloaded from arjournals. pp. See Lamont & Fournier 1992. 1979. 1975. Br. NewYork: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Baudrillard J. Society and Culture. Sociol. 1993. Professionals and Politics: A Study of the EducatedMiddle Class in America. Press Billig M. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Europeanrule. 1988. LA Manyon. Kamens D. 56(Feb):85-100 BenjaminJ. 1983. Soc.ed. Awashin a Sea of Faith: Chrislianizing the American People. and the Problem of Domination. ed.annualreviews. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Annu. Mass: Harvard Univ. HomoAcademicus. Press Butler J. Rabelais and His World. P Collier.org by University of Minnesota. R Baldick. 1990. Class. 1988. Feminism.Twin Cities . WaequantL. Patrons. Chicago: Univ. 1986. The Culture of Print: Powerand the Uses of Print in Early Modern Europe. 1992. Rev. Annu. For personal use only. Cambridge: CambridgeUniv. Transl. London: Sage Bourdieu P. Press AsadT. J Ben-David. Calif. 1973.In Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. MarcusGE. The Cultural Uses of Print in Early ModernFrance. Pfeffer J. Talking of the Royal Family. Bloomington: Ind. Schooling. TN Clark. 1994. Contemp. and prizes: Thewriter’s estate in France. Press Clanchy MT. In press Aries P. T Asad. Calif. M Poster. Press BaronJN. Press. lice. Soc. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press Clark PP. Sociol. Transl. ed. 19:211-39 Chattier R. Rev. In Anthropologyand the Colonial Encounter. 8:89-119 BourdieuP. Hegemony and etiquetle: An exploration of the transformation of practice and power in eighteenth-century England.org/aronline 324 SWlDLER & ARDITI Cited BiHig M. 1989. Transl. 1984 (1968). and knowledgein fiterate and nonliterate societies.Intellectual field and creative project. Transl. Sociol. Press Literature Abbott A. Clark TN. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. Press Calhoun C. 1992. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press Clifford J. Berkeley: Univ. Cambridge. ed. 1986. 1993. alism. Press Bourdieu P. Boston: Little Brown Bate WJ. 1987. Chicago Press Bourdieu P. 21(June):419-44 Calhoun C. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nation. 1992. Chieagu: Univ. Grad. From Memory to Written Record: England. 1992. H Iswolsky. Calif. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. NewYork: Pantheon Bemstein B. Berkeley: Univ. Stanford Univ.. Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor. ScL Inform. 1962. In press Brubaker R. Berkeley: Univ. 1988. Q. GEMarcus. 1978. Constructing a shifting moral boundary: literature and obscenity in nineteenth-century America. Passeron J-C. 34(1):68-109 Anderson B. Cambridge. pp. Beyondthe problem ofmeano ing: Robert Wuthnow’s historical sociology of culture. ed. Cambridge.

Transl. Intellectuals. 1963 (1903). New York: RandomHouse Foucault M. Press Darnton R. The professlonal-managerlal class. R Howard. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press Cornell S. 1982. Transl. New Brunswick. 1990. 87(Mar):1032-63 DiMaggio P. E Pick. Press Gamson W. 86(Mar): 984-1014 Conncrton P. Sociol. UK:Blackwell Finke R. Am. Hist. In Discovering Reality: Feminist Perspectives on Epistemology. The Order of Things: An Archaeologyof the Human Sciences. London: Sage Fentress J. 245-81. Press Escarpit R. Press Featherstone M. Transl. 2nd ed. R Hurley. 1980. NewYork: Oxford Univ. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge. Cambridge. Calif. 1969. Mass: Harvard Univ. Fredriekson GM. 2. 1992. NJ: Rutgers Univ. ASheridan.. Talking Politics. 1993. 1987. Press Darnton R. Social Memory. eA. Cultural entrepreneurship in nineteenth-centuryBoston. ed. Power~Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings. 1775-1800. Chicago Press Ehrenreich B. Chicago Press. Parts 1.J.annualreviews. The History of Sexuality. For personal use only. Am. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. 52 (Aug):440-55 DiMaggioP. Cultural boundaries and structural change: The extension of the high culture model to theater. Stud. 1978. The Elementary Forms of the Religioas Life. and authority: Explorations in and from the kingdom of Taqali. 1979. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Chicago: Univ. Radical Am. 1973. 1990. Methodology. 1969. J. 1776-1990: Winners and Losers in Our Religious Economy. IIL Dreyfus. Past Present 45:19-89 Eisenstein EL. 1. Metaphysics. Transl. 1988. Sociol. 1982. 1965 (1912). NewYork: Basic Davies C. Press Cohen IB. Press Collins PH. 1992. 4:33-50. Press Cohen A. and the dance. The Great Cat Massacre and Other Episodes in French Cultural History. Hew York: Oxford Univ. Universities and the State in WesternModern Societies.org by University of Minnesota. 1900-1940. Stark R. Sexual taboos and social boundaries. 1977. Primitive Classification. Rev.Twin Cities . P Rablnow. Global Culture: Nationalism. 1992. Calif.annualreviews. 1974. opera. Wickham C. New Brunswick.Berkeley: Univ.1981. Literacy and Orality: Studies in the Technologyof Communication. ed. New York: Random House Foucault M. On the microfoundations of macrosociology. eds. Calif. New York: Random House Foucault M. Press Geertz C. Classification in art. New York: Free DurkheimE. Two Dimensional Man: An Essay on the Anthropology of Power and Symbolism in Complex Society. Sociol. 1975. Press Farge A. Cambridge: CambridgeUniv. 1979. 1988. Berkeley: Univ. Conflict Sociology. Soderqvist T. Rev. A History of Women in the West: Fromthe Renaissance to the ModernEra. Sci. 303-22 DiMaggio P. 1990. Behav. Svensson LG.org/aronline THE NEW SOCIOLOGY CohenA. C Gordon. Chicago: Univ. New York: Random House Foucault M. and Philosophy of Science. and religion. Press FinneganR. 1987. Mass: Harvard Univ. Globalizatlon and Modernity. 1982.Consciousness. Political philosophy and the patriarchal unconscious:A psychoanalytic perspective on epistemology and metaphysics. The Literary Undergroundof the Old Regime. Transl. Voi. Mass: Harvard Univ. Downloaded from arjournals. Cambridge. The Return of the Native. New York: Basic Books Annu. MaussM. Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. White Supremacy: A Comparative Study in American and South African History. NJ: Rutgers Univ. In Michel Foucault: BeyondStructuralism and Hermeneutics. 19:719-34 Darnton R. 1983. writing. 1983. HowSocieties Remember. and the Politics of Empowerment. pp. Soc. Cambridge. Oxford. Custom and Politics in Urban Africa: A Study of HausaMigrants in Yoruba Towns. A Sheridan-Smith. 1994. London:Frank Cass OF KNOWLEDGE 325 Ewald J. Boston: Unwin Hyman Collins R. The Printing Press as an Agent of Change: Communicationsand Cultural Transformations in Early ModernEurope. Culture Soc. Ehrcnreich L 1977. Sociology of Literature. ed. 1988. The Churching of America. 1976. $ociol. 208-26. pp. Media. Am. Am. Rewardsystems in a~ science. Dordrecht: Reidel Foncault M. pp. NewYork: Academic Collins R. NewYork: Random House Foncauit M. 1992. The advent of printing and the problemof the Renaissance. 1965. Comp. R Needham. M Hintikka. Press Crane D.20:305-329. Puritanism and the Rise of Modern Science: The Merton Thesis. . See Lamont & Fournier 1992. Madnessand Civilization: A History of Insanity in the ABeof Reason. 1971. Afterword: The subject and power. The Business of Enlightenment: A Publishing History of the Encyclopedie. 21-57 Durkheim E. Transl. 1972-1977. Davis NZ. Berkeley: Univ. Speaking. 30:199-224 Eyerman R. 1984. 11 (March-April):7-31 Eisenstein EL. 1981.Annual Reviews www. S Harding. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Flax L 1983.Law Library on 01/07/09. 1989.

Press Grafton A. 1979. Chicago: Univ. 1988. Press Gramsci A. Calif. Press GoodyJ. The Collective Memory. eds. Publ. 1984. 15 (Autunm):9-29 Annu. Press Hobsbawm E. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Ancient Texts: The Power of Tradition and the Shock of Discovery. An~ Sociol. Greenblatt S. Cyborgs. 1992. Mass: Harvard Univ.Century Miller. Educ. Rev. Rev. Press Hacking I. Press HahnR. 1988. 1989.):13951 Hartsock N. 48 (Dec): 781-95 Gieryn TF. Sociol.Indlviduality. The consequences of literacy. and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. 1990. 5: 279-95 HackingI. 1979. The Logic of Writing and the Organization of Society. Feminist scholarship as a vocation.Annual Reviews www.Twin Cities . Sociol. Press Hobsbawm EL 1990. 1980. New York: Routledge Hareven TK. E pluribus unum?: Academicstructure. Theory Soc. 1971. Philadelphia: TempleUniv. 1986. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. 1986. U. 1986. Diffus. ed. Hist. Creat. 5(3):30445 Gould M. Univ. Berkeley: Univ. The Legacies of Literacy: Continuities and Contradictionsin WesternCulture and Society. Calif. Press Grafton A. Ithaca: Cornell Univ. NewWorlds. D Wellbery. Press Hunt L. Art J. 1985. course. Util.annualreviews. Press Haskell F. In Reconstructing Individualism: Autonomy. Higher Educ. Berkeley: Univ. Renaissance Revivals: City Comedyand Revenge Tragedy in the London Theatre. Bloomington: Ind. Culture. Dynamics of professional control: internal coalitions and crossprofessional boundaries. 1450-1800. Press Goody J.org by University of Minnesota. The Uses of Literacy: Changing Patterns in English Mass Culture. GNSmith. 1576-1980. Makingup people. Rev. New York: Int. Cambridge. 1963. 1991. Ant J. Boston: Beacon Hortnn R. 1666-1803. Rev. Calif. 1992. M Featherstone. 222-36. Rev. New York: Harper & Row Halpem SA.20:305-329. Watt I. J & A Tedeschl. Theory and history: Comments on Robert Wuthnow’sCommunities of Dis. Cambridge.Law Library on 01/07/09. ed. Sociol. Q Hoare. 1992. The sociology of knowledge about child abuse. Formsof Talk. . Professionalization of American scientists: Public science in the creation/evolution trials. J. In Global Culture. Bevins GM. Transl. 1990. African conversion. Press Hoggart R. For personal use only.1993. andthe Self. Mass: Harvard Univ. 84 (Suppl. Knowl. 1971. The Invention of Tradition. MSosna.annualreviews. 1980 (1950). Simians. HewYork: Penguin Goffman E. Nations and Nationalism Since ~780. Rediscoveries in Art: Some Aspects of Taste. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. 4(Mar): 357-77 Gieryn TF. Press Griswold W. Penn. Press Halbwachs M. The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmosof a Sixteenth. TCHeller. Stud. 1983. Berkeley: Univ. 210une):445-60 Gouldner AW. Am. pp. Downloaded from arjournals. Ar~Sociol. Comp. 1987. The Future of Intellectuals and the Rise of the NewClass. Sociol. Plan. ed. Higher Educ: Int. Dilemmas of the American Self. The Taming of Chance. Defenders of the Text: The Traditions of Scholarship in an Age of Science. Scholarly consensus and rejection rates. VYDitter. Biopowerand the avalanche of printed numbers. 1991.org/aronline 326 S~D~R&ARD~ Hacking I. Univ. 1991. Boundary-workand the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. and Class in the French Revolution. The NewCultural History. New York: Oxford Univ. The feminist standpoint: Developing the ground for a specifically feminist historical materialism. 157-80. Higher Educ. Hew York: Harper & Row Goffman E. Scientific work and social worlds. Cosmopolitansand locals in world culture. Shakespearean Negotiations: The Circulation of Social Energy in RenaissanceEngland. 1971. Transl. ed. Nous 22:53-63 Hacking I.Zehr SC. Cambridge: CambridgeUniv. FJ Ditter Jr. 1983. culture and the case of feminist scholarship. 1991. 53(Feb. pp. 1989. Africa 41:85-108 Hunt L. 1982. Ranger T. pp. Press Hewitt J. 1957. 97(Jan):994-1021 Hannerz. 1987. The dynamics of kin in an industrial community. Press Kammen M. The Anatomyof a Sciennfic Institution: The Paris Academyof Sciences. Press Graff HJ. Mystic Chords of Meraory: Gerson EM. Berkeley: Univ. Bloomington: Ind. Transl. 1990. Chicago Press GumportPJ. Calif. 20(Oet):231-43 Gumport PJ. Philadelphia: Univ. 1988. Stanford: Stanford Univ. In Feminism and Methodology:Social Science Issues. 1983. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Soc. Politics. 1974. 50(June):392-409 Ginzburg C.):S151-S182 Hargens LL. Fashion and Collecting in England and France. 237-51 Haraway D. S Harding. Selections from the Prison Notebooks. 1976. Humanities in Soc. 1994.

eds. Morals. Cambridge. NewYork: Columbia Univ. Rev. The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. San Francisco: Freeman Keller EF. Press York: HowardFertig Annu. Relat. 1990. NewYork: Norton KuhnTS. Press Latour B. Chapel Hill: Univ. 37(Feb):57-62 MacKenzieDA. Brace Mannheim K. Admin. Comment on the relations of science and art.Law Library on 01/07/09. 1986. 1990. Press Lang GE. Glencoe. 1987. Chicago: Univ.. Nass C. Soc. Dep. The Sources of Social Power. Ideology and Utopia: An Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge. Sci. Philos.20:305-329. 1988. Howto become a dominant French philosopher: The case of Jacques Derrida. 1992. E Shils. Chicago Press LamontM. Toronto: Univ.org/aronline THE NEW SOCIOLOGY OF KNOWLEDGE The Transformation of Tradition in American Culture. Making Sex: Body and Gen.Merton R. Money. The Uses of Literacy in Early Medieval Europe. 1990. ety in Seventeenth Century England. 1988. Vol I. 2/6-322. ed.Stud. 1970. Pets. Woolgat S. Einstein. Laitin D. 1958. gaps and glissandos in recent theoretical developments. 1981. 1962. Black Culture and Black Consciousness: Afro-American Folk Thought from Slavery to Freedom.Annual Reviews www. 1969. Effects of group identity on resource use in a simulated commons dilemma.Sociol.annualreviews. Renoir. Ill: Free Press Laqueur T. Univ. Am. Consciousness and Action amongthe Western Working Class. Cambridge. Understunding~Media: The Extensions of Man. NewYork: Columbia Univ. Reflection~ on Gender and Science. 2nd ed. Psychol. Differences between physical and social sciences in university graduate departments. 1989. Ill: Free Press Levine LW. and Greely: Evidencein sociology. The Passin8 of Traditional Society: Modernizing the Middle East. Lang K. Cambridge:Cambridge Univ. Hegemony and Culture: Politics and Religious Change among the Yoruba. 1983. can Upper-Middle Class.Pfeffer J. Cambridge: CambridgeUniv. ed. 1689-1789. TheStructure of Scientific Revolutions. Press McLuhan M. Berkeley. 11 (Sept):403-12 Kuhn TS. Press Knorr-Cetina K. 1992.org by University of Minnesota. 35(June):258-85 Kramer RM. Admin. Science in Action. NewYork: Knopf Keller EF. 1987. Larrean A. pp. J. The lid on the garbage can: institutional constraints on decision making in the technical core of college-text publishers. The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Makingofl~ypographic Man. . and 41:871-99 327 Latour B. Fournier M. Group structure and belief structure in American communes: A system. Press Levitt B. Brewer MB. Betwixt and between: Recent cultural sociology in Europe and the United States. New der from the Greeks to Freud. Calif. Theory6:15368 Lamont M. J. Rev. Social Theory and Social Structure. The problem of generations. Mass: Harvard Univ. 1993. Cultural capital: Allusions. 1952 0928). Mass: Harvard Univ. 1865-1930:The Social Construction of Scient=fic Knowledse. 1981. ed. Sociol.Twin Cities . NewYork: McGraw-Hill Merton R. 57(Feb): 1-15 Lodahl J. Rev.Social catesorization. 1970 (1929). Q. Oxford: Pergamon KonradAM. Unpublished McKitterick R. Beverly Hills: Sage LemerD. 1984. 1972. and Manners: The Culture of the French and Ameri. Am. Cambridge.Sci. Glencoe. 1990. Kings and Philosophers. Chicago: Univ. London: Macmillan Mann M. Am. Wuthnow R. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Martin J. Press Mann M. 1994. Toronto Press McLuhanM. Chicago: Univ. Sociol. NewYork: Oxford Univ. Chicago Press Lamont M. Hist. atic study in the sociology of knowledse. Sociol. pp.D. Statistics in Britain. Mass: Harvard Univ. 93(Nov):584622 Lamont M. Press Mannheim K. 1977. 1979. 1985.. 1970. Press Levine LW.. Laboratory Life. Chicago: Univ. 1936. GordonG. Q. ttighbrow/Lowbrow: The Emergenceof Cultural Hierarchy in America. entitlement. 287-315. 1964. 1986. 1990. Cultivating Differences: Symbolic Boundaries and the Making of Inequality. NewHaven: Yale Univ. Sociol. 1992. Technology and Soci.annualreviews. Comp. Chicago Press LamontM. L Wirth. North Carolina P~ss Lansbcrg I. 1973. A History of Power from the Beginning to A. A Feeling for the Organism: The Life and Workof Barbara McClintock. In Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge. justice in organizations. 1957. NewYork: Harcourt. 46:1044-57 Krieger L. 1989. 34(June): 190-207 Lieberson S. In Frontiers of Social Theory: The NewSynthesis. For personal use only. G Ritzer. Hum. 5ociol. Downloaded from arjournals. Etched in Memory: The Building and Survival of Artistic Reputation. 1760. ChicagoPress. Do you get what you deserve? Factors affecting the relationship betweenphysical and social sciences in university graduate departments.

The Everyday World as Problematic: A Feminist Sociology. Am. agency. Generations and collective memories. 1974. ture.org/aronline 328 S~D~R&ARD~ Religious Possibility in a Liberal Protestant Church. Press RingerF. From Graven Images: Patterns of Modern Materialism. 1989. Boston: Beacoil Schudson M. Rhetoric. NewBrunswick. H Spinnler. Boundaries: The Making of France and Spain in the Pyrenees.In The Prism of Sex: Essays in the Sociology of Knowledge. 1990. Sociol. 98(July):l-29 Smith BH.1978. C Mukerjee. Press Smith D. The Netherlands: Kluwer Schuman H. Theintellectual field. MA Conway. 1992. The Dynamics of Ethnic Competition and Conflict. Historical analogies. 83(July):55-77 MeyerJW. Press OngWJ01977. Beverly Hills: Sage Powell WW. 1979. Calif. Sociol. 1--61. Regions of the Mind: Brain Research and the Quest for Scientific Certainty. ed. Rev. Am. French Modern: Norms and Forms of the Social Environment. J. 1981. and the sociology of knowledge. Sociol. 1986. Rieger C. 1992a. Q. and Technology: Studies in the Interaction of F. Texas Press MooreWE. 1989. Anglos and Mexicans in the Making of Modern Texas. Vertical Classification: A Study in Structuralism and the Sociology of Knowledge. 1992. The recovery of Masada: A study in collective memory. The world polity and the authority of the nation state. NewYork: Elsevier Sahlins P. 26:126-66 Payer L. Introduction: Rethinking popular culture. Press OngWJ. 54 (June):359-81 Schwartz B. Barnett BM. London: Sage Roof WC. 1983.pp. George Washington: The Making of an American Symbol. NJ: Rutgers Univ. SchudsonM. 1-35 Smith D. Chicago Press Schwartz B. 1836-1986. 1979. Press Star SL. Social change and the fist of working-class politics in nineteenth-century Marseille. Past Present650Nov):75-109 Sewell WH Jr. Press Olson DR.xpression and Culture. Globalizatlon: Social Theory and Global Culture. Downloaded from arjournals. A theory of structure: Duality. Rev. 1986. Cambridge. 1992. Collective memory and collective memories. Am. pp.and France. Winant H. Nature’s Body: Csenderin the Makingof ModernScience. 1987. NewYork: Columbia Univ. Hist. Divorce Talk: Women and MenMakeSense of Personal Relationships. 18:153-80 Schudson M. Calif. and transformation. Harvard Educ. 323-36. 57(June):315-26 SchumanH. generational effects. Orality and Literacy: The Tech. WA Wagenaar. 1984.Twin Cities . For personal use only. Berkeley: Univ.Annual Reviews www. In Theoretical Perspectives on Autobiographical Memory. Contingencies of value. 1992. Crit. Global sociology: The world as a singular system. 1993.20:305-329.1986. 1976. 109-37. 1977. Rev. Fromutterance to text: The bias of languagein speechand writing. J. 56 (April):221-36 Schwartz B. 1971. J Sherman. Theory Soc. Am. 1983. The Production of Culture. Stud. NewYork: Penguin Pcterson RA. West Germany. In Studies of the ModernWorld System. Press Swidler A.annualreviews. The effects of education as an institution. 1994. Stanford: Stanford Univ. and Reconstruct the Past. ed. Press Mukerjee C. Ithaca: ComellUniv. 71:47582 Mukerji C. Wise. Sociol. Romance. Press SchamaS. Theory Soc. 19:269-94 Robcrtson R. tional memory. Ithaca: Coruell Univ. intelleco tual history. Sociol. A sociology for women. Berkeley: Univ. Austin: Univ. 1989. England. A Bergesen. Zerubavel Y. NewYork: Routledge & Kegan Paul OngWJ. 1991. M Schudson. Press OmiM. 1989. Rev. Sociol. Howthe past informs the present: Theuses andliabilities of organiza. Scott J. Rieger C. lnq. DCRubin. Community and Commitment: Annu. . 1991. Medicineand Culture: Varieties of Treatmentin the United States. ETBeck. 1989. London: Methuen OrmerS. NewYork: Basic Books SchumanH. Am. Comp. nologizing of the Word. J.annualreviews. 1987. ed. Rev. Ariz. Boston: Northeastern Univ. Interfaces of the Word:Studies in the Evolution of Consciousness and Cul. Howculture works: Perspecfives from mediastudies on the efficacy of symbols. Dep. pp.org by University of Minnesota. 1992b. 27:147-64 Sewcll WH Jr.1966.. 1982. 1990. Unpublished Rabinow P.Law Library on 01/07/09. Sociol. 1988. Organization WithoutAuthority: Dilemmas of Social Control in Free MeyerJW. NewYork: Knopf Schiebinger L. Theory in anthropology since the sixties. 1977. Univ. 1980.Sociol. Forget. Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution. Racial Formation in the United States: Fromthe 1960s to the 1980s. ed. Social change and collective memory: The democratization of George Washington. 1989. Sociol. Chicago: Univ. 47(Aug):257-81 Olzak S. Soc. Madison: Univ. 1987. Watergate and American Memory: How We Remember. ed. NewYork: Academic Montejano D. Mass: MITPress Riessman CK. In Rethinking Popular Culture: Contemporary Perspectives in Cultural Studies. NewYork: Free Press SchwartzB. Stanford: Stanford Univ. and attitudes toward war. Am.

Berkeley: Univ. In Economy and Society. 1991. J. Religion and the rise of liberal democratic ideology in seventeenth-century England. Press WuthnowR. party. Ramirez FO. Fame and mlsfortun¢. Literacy and Popular Culture: England. The three waves of new class theories. ed. MLeone. 1985. 1993. and occultism. Rev. Press Walzer M. In Habermas and the Public Sphere. status. Sociol. R~. 1987. Fortin NE. Hist. Comp. 1992. NewYork: Oxford Tuchman G. Reasonably fantastic: Someperspectives on Scientology. Mass: Harvard Univ. pp. Am‘ Sociol. Transl. I Zarctsky. Press Weber M. Chicago: Univ. Princeton: Princeton Univ. NewYork: RandomHouse Tompkins J. Society. Press Wuthnow R. Am. New York: Free Zerubavel E. Press Wilford JN. NewBrunswick. Calif. Boll I. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. 31(July):588-604 WuthnowR. Newbury Park. Meaning and Moral Order: Explorations in Cultural Analysis. Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. and European Socialism. 1995. Critical theory and the sociology of culture.Stud. Terra Cognita: The Mental Discovery of America. ed. Workin progress toward a new paradigm for the sociological study of religion in the UnitedStates. 1994. Cambridge. Curt. 90(July):72-96 Vincent D. Perspect. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Cambridge. 54(April):163-79 Zaret D. ed. 1987. Press Whitehead H.20:305-329. Anthropologyseen as father of Manri lore. 1988. Am. Martin B. The Fine L~ne: MakingDistinctions in EverydayLife. 212-35. Theory Soc. Sociol. Ara. C Witrich.51(April): 273-86 Swidler A. Press Swidler A. 1991. For personal use only. Talk of Love: HowAmericans Use Their Culture. Chicago Press. Berkeley: Univ. 1991. NJ: Rutgers Univ. Soc. The distribution powerwithin the political community: Class. G 329 Annu. Press .annualreviews. The Revolution of the Saints. Cambridge. 1976. T Parsons. 98(Mar): 1044-93 Watldns S. 1985.org/aronline THE NEW SOCIOLOGY OF KNOWLEI:~E Schools. 1750--1914. Rev. 1984. Press Warner RS. and the Individual. 1963. 1958 (190~5). The Consciousness Reformation. 1870-1960. pp.Twin Cities . 1973. Statistics and the modernstate. Calif. Soc. Downloaded from arjournals. 1989. Mass: Harvard Univ. Institutional Structure: Constituting State. 1992. J. Communities of Discourse: Ideology and Social Structure in the Reforraatlon. Roth. Religion. Chicago Press Zaret D. NewYork: Charles $cribner’s Sons Weber M.Law Library on 01/07/09. The Makingof the English Working Class. Sensational Designs: The Cultural Work of American Fiction. and printing in the public sphere of seventeenth-century England. Berkeley: Univ. C Calhoun. 1990. 1974. Press Zaret D. 547-87.annualreviews. pp.org by University of Minnesota. Calif: Sage Thompson EP. 20(B):59 WoolfS. 926-40.Meyer ~V. Sociol. In Religious Movements in Contemporary America. 1986. 1989. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. In preparation Szelenyi I. Mass: Harvard Univ. 1968 (1922). NewYork Times Feb.Annual Reviews www. Mass: MITPress Zaret D. Soclol. Cambridge. 17901860. FromProvinces into Nations: Demographic Integration in Western Europe. the Enlightenraent. Theory11:128 Zerubavel E. 1989. The Heavenly Contract: Ideology and Organization in Pre-Revolutionary Puritunsim‘ Chicago: Univ. science. 17:64567 ThomasGM. Calif. science fiction. 1989.

1994. Downloaded from arjournals. Rev.Twin Cities .20:305-329.Law Library on 01/07/09. Sociol. . For personal use only.org by University of Minnesota.Annu.annualreviews.

Law Library on 01/07/09.Annu. For personal use only.annualreviews.Twin Cities .org by University of Minnesota. Sociol. . 1994.20:305-329. Rev. Downloaded from arjournals.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->