Thesis Eleven http://the.sagepub.

com

The Rescue Narrative in Social Theory

Philip Smith
Thesis Eleven 2002; 70; 118
DOI: 10.1177/0725513602070001011

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://the.sagepub.com

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Thesis Eleven can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://the.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://the.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Downloaded from http://the.sagepub.com by Alejandra Ramírez on August 7, 2007

© 2002 Thesis Eleven Pty, Ltd., SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
10 Smith (to/k) 7/11/02 3:18 PM Page 118

REVIEW ESSAY

THE RESCUE NARRATIVE IN

SOCIAL THEORY
A review of Anthony Elliott and Bryan S. Turner
(eds) Profiles in Contemporary Social Theory (Sage,
2001); Bent Flyvbjerg, Making Social Science Matter
(Cambridge University Press, 2001); Gavin Kendall
and Gary Wickham, Understanding Culture (Sage,
2001); Chris Shilling and Philip A. Mellor, The Socio-
logical Ambition (Sage, 2001). Luigi Tomasi (ed.)
New Horizons in Sociological Theory and Research
(Ashgate, 2001)

Philip Smith

The social sciences pride themselves on their reflexivity. Yet perhaps the
impulse loses momentum a little prematurely. We can identify three stages to
this reflexive action. The first is the academic activity through which we move
beyond commonsense knowledge to critically assess and interpret the social
world by carefully using the theories and methods of our profession. The vast
majority of sociologists are engaged in this middle-range activity and go no
further. The second level involves critical reflection on the discipline. In effect
this is reflexivity about stage 1 activity considered in toto. This tends to be the
work of academic opinion leaders. The texts to be reviewed here are all, to
greater or lesser degree, engaged in this second-stage activity.
This article takes things one step further and reviews these texts in turn,
opening up a third level of reflexivity. It does so by pointing to the narrative
frames that structure writing and legitimate such intellectual work. I suggest
that each text can be read as an exemplar of the genre of academic

Thesis Eleven, Number 70, August 2002: 118–126

SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi)
Copyright © 2002 SAGE Publications and Thesis Eleven Pty Ltd
[0725-5136(200208)70;118–126;025334]

Downloaded from http://the.sagepub.com by Alejandra Ramírez on August 7, 2007

© 2002 Thesis Eleven Pty, Ltd., SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
10 Smith (to/k) 7/11/02 3:18 PM Page 119

Smith: Rescue Narrative in Social Theory 119

production that we can call the ‘rescue narrative’. This form diagnoses a
problem or issue and then offers a solution. Through this process the intel-
lectual inscribes him- or herself variously as the bringer of salvation or, in
more fatalistic scenarios, as a stoic bearer of the bitter pill of wisdom. In the
classics of social theory the problem to be solved is usually located outside
of the discipline in the dysfunctions of modernity. Hence Marx offered
salvation from poverty, oppression and alienation and Durkheim made some
sensible suggestions on how we can escape from anomie. Weber, fitting the
second type, offered diagnosis of the ills of societal rationalization but was
unable to propose a convincing cure. Perhaps reflecting the routinization of
academic production, today, it seems as if social theorists have made a rather
narcissistic turn. They seek to rescue us not from the external evils of the
world but rather from the internal sin of our own theoretical activity. The
archetype here has something of the following structure. Social science or
sociology or cultural studies or social theory is in crisis. Perhaps this is
because our ideas and vocabularies are worn out. Maybe they have failed to
come to terms with a fast-changing world. Or have we been outpaced by
other disciplines? We need to confront this reality through an act of rescue –
essentially improved theory, epistemology, moral awareness or methodology.
Responding will be challenging but also rewarding and will lead to intellec-
tual renewal as well as critique as we step boldly into the next century.
Sounds familiar? It should do. This is the template for the thousand and one
keynote speeches that we have all sat through with sometimes greater and
sometimes lesser interest as we wait for afternoon tea. It is also the pattern
of legitimation used to justify the books reviewed here.
Treated as anthropologically strange, reflexive texts in the field of social
theory can be considered as a kind of mythopoetic production. Folklorists
and literary theorists have pointed to the patterns and logics that sit beneath
genres such as the Russian folk story (Propp, 1968) or the romances of the
American West (Smith, 1950). Each tale can be thought of as a distinctive and
creative improvisation upon a shared ground. In a similar way the theoreti-
cal acts of disciplinary diagnosis and cure reviewed here are intelligent and
original expressions of a common narrative framework. And each act of
telling works to evoke a particular range of sentiments. Usually anxiety and
uncertainty are generated at first as we see something broken and in need
of help, to be replaced by hope and enthusiasm as a solidaristic rescue
package is put together. What we see then is Victor Turner’s (1977) ritual
process of rupture and repair enacted in a textual space. The texts of stage
2 reflexivity, then, are small acts of drama which, when done well, have the
narrative and moral authority to compel our attention. Yet this theatrical tool
is a double-edged sword. Dramatic tension can wear thin when claims of
crisis remain undocumented and the assembled rescue forces look too feeble
to carry the day. For the most part this is the case with the books considered
here.

Downloaded from http://the.sagepub.com by Alejandra Ramírez on August 7, 2007

© 2002 Thesis Eleven Pty, Ltd., SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
10 Smith (to/k) 7/11/02 3:18 PM Page 120

120 Thesis Eleven (Number 70 2002)

Our first illustration of this theme is Making Social Science Matter. Here
the Danish planning expert Bent Flyvbjerg sets out to, ‘. . . re-enchant and
empower social science . . . recover social science from its current role as loser
in the Science Wars’ (p. 166). He identifies a crisis whose indicators are low
public esteem, failure at prediction and an inability to construct core know-
ledge. The tool Flyvbjerg presents for hauling ourselves out of this sump is
the idea of phronesis. Taken from Aristotle this can be broadly translated as
‘practical wisdom’: a reflexive form of inquiry that takes account of values and
ethics. It can be contrasted with both episteme (scientific knowledge) and
techne (applied know-how). Flyvbjerg asserts that if social science accepts the
terms of debate set down in the natural sciences (episteme) we are doomed
to failure. Instead we should play to our strengths. That is to say, conduct
theory and research that is self-consciously informed by human values and
that pays attention to themes of power and inequality. This will ‘. . . help
restore social science to its classical position as a practical, intellectual activity
aimed at clarifying the problems, risks, and possibilities we face as humans
and societies, and at contributing to social and political praxis’ (p. 4).
Much of Flyvbjerg’s text is given over to a more detailed specification
of phronesis. He elaborates and defends a plethora of characteristics. Phro-
netic research is sensitive to context, makes use of examples and case studies,
involves the accumulation of detail, is informed by consciously chosen
human values and is sensitive to the play of power. In addition it involves
narrative exposition, joins structure and agency and opens up dialogue for
multiple and contending voices. This concatenation is supported with
particular reference to the theoretical work of Bourdieu, Geertz and most of
all Foucault.
Making Social Science Matter is supported by glowing back cover
endorsements from heavyweights Robert Bellah, Ed Soja, Pierre Bourdieu and
Steven Lukes and so it is with some diffidence that I move on to themes of
critique. To my reading the real strength of this book lies in its advocacy of
narrative case study research and a compelling rejection of the natural science
model. Flyvbjerg does a masterful job here. In other respects, to be frank,
the project of phronesis disappoints. Flyvbjerg draws upon leading social
theorists in a pick-and-mix way and without real consideration of the incom-
mensurabilities that can divide paradigms. Surely it should be harder than he
makes it appear to marry Geertz’s humanist hermeneutics with Foucault’s
allegedly post-hermeneutic post-humanism! There is also a telling want of
historical memory, with Flyvbjerg failing to engage with previous texts of this
ilk. In reading this book I was minded of Alvin Gouldner’s (1970) call for
intellectual modesty, or even Robert Merton’s (1968) advocacy of the middle
range. And for all its invocation of contemporary social theory, the perspec-
tive seems remarkably consistent with that advanced by C. Wright Mills in
The Sociological Imagination – another classic rescue narrative. Mills (1970),
we remember, railed against both ‘grand theory’ and ‘abstracted empiricism’

Downloaded from http://the.sagepub.com by Alejandra Ramírez on August 7, 2007

© 2002 Thesis Eleven Pty, Ltd., SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
10 Smith (to/k) 7/11/02 3:18 PM Page 121

Smith: Rescue Narrative in Social Theory 121

and suggested we engage in work that married theory and data, was attentive
to power and had broadly emancipatory goals. It is not clear that Flyvbjerg
demonstrates any advance on that classic. For all the 204 pages of this book,
one is left with the impression that the concept of phronetic research can be
applied to just about anything that ‘takes values and power seriously’ (p.
162). To his credit Flyvbjerg cites concrete examples of texts that meet his
criteria – a strategy that usually provides clarity. Here it only confirms the
impression that phronesis is such a broad church that it covers most of what
social science and social theory already does. Consider the following:
Hacking’s Rewriting the Soul, Putnam et al’s Making Democracy Work, Bellah
et al’s Habits of the Heart, Butler’s Gender Trouble and Rabinow’s French
DNA. Confronted with such a heterogenous list of exemplars we can all pat
ourselves on the back like M. Jourdain. A more careful reflection might see
such feelings of self-congratulation slowly give way to the suspicion that
phronesis is not only a catch-all concept, but also one that loses rather than
gains power from its very inclusiveness.
In Gavin Kendall and Gary Wickham’s Understanding Culture the thing
in need of salvation is the field of cultural studies. Isolated and self-indulgent
in its ivory tower it has become a fat cat that is intellectually facile and theor-
etically indolent. The text begins by framing the rescue narrative through a
cute medical analogy: ‘Cultural Studies is in poor health – enough to need
our doctoring’ (p. 5). The concrete illness, it seems, is that the field has
become obsessed with meaning and power and tends to read these off in
glib and superficial ways. This is a plausible enough argument – indeed it is
one to which I have contributed (Sherwood et al., 1993). Yet Kendall and
Wickham do too little to demonstrate this sickness and so readers other than
myself may well be left wondering what the problem is. Chapter 1 is
supposed to document the malady, but in fact would work as effectively as
a survey of the field for the true believer. There is too much review and not
enough critique here and the narrative simply does not convince that a rescue
is needed. The result is a loss of readerly anxiety. This is a pity because the
rescue package assembled by Kendall and Wickham shows considerable
focus and intellectual clarity – more so than that of Flyvbjerg. At the core of
their proposed agenda is the study of ‘ordering’. This refers to the ways in
which humans and social organizations work to manage or control their
affairs. It is an activity that ranges from the bureaucratic to the everyday, from
the global to the face to face and from the obsessive to the casual. For Kendall
and Wickham culture is all about ordering and cultural studies would do well
to shift its focus in this direction.
Like Flyvbjerg, Kendall and Wickham trace their steps back to Antiquity
for a legitimating charter. Their hero (somewhat less well known than
Artistotle) is Pyrrho of Elis – a figure who provides the groundwork for the
methodological position of ‘Pyrrhonian scepticism’. Bolstered by more recent
contributions from Wittgenstein and John Law, and shadowed by Foucault’s

Downloaded from http://the.sagepub.com by Alejandra Ramírez on August 7, 2007

© 2002 Thesis Eleven Pty, Ltd., SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
10 Smith (to/k) 7/11/02 3:18 PM Page 122

122 Thesis Eleven (Number 70 2002)

genealogies and archaeologies, the result is an approach that is characterized

by scepticism rather than realism but which is at the same time strongly
empirical. Or, to be more accurate, nominalist in orientation. Cultural studies,
Kendall and Wickham argue, will be saved from banality once it engages in
the description of systems of ordering and their knowledge bases. It should
also try to map out the consequences of these.
There is much that is refreshing in the rescue package that Kendall and
Wickham have assembled. While Flyvbjerg is relentlessly earnest, the authors
of Understanding Culture write in an engaging and self-reflexive way. Often
they are amusing and seek to engage conversationally with the reader
through small moments of irony. The combination of Pyrrho, Law, Wittgen-
stein, Foucault and La Tour is as eclectic as Flyvbjerg’s dream-team, but is
perhaps more original and is held together by stronger family resemblances.
But, as with Flyvbjerg, doubt sets in when we look to the empirical studies
that exemplify this new paradigm. Studies of ordering, just like those of a
phronetic nature, appear to have been going on for years but without anyone
noticing. So Kendall and Wickham talk us through studies of governmental-
ity, diverse historical research on crime and punishment, Weber’s Protestant
Ethic and conversation analytic work on everyday talk. Having read over this
list-like invocation of material the reader is left with two choices just as he/she
is at the end of Flyvbjerg’s book. To some the accumulated panoply of
evidence will suggest a tool of great power and value by virtue of its general
applicability. To others this very generality will equate to a lack of precision.
Moreover the position elaborated by Kendall and Wickham remains haunted
by the familiar paradoxes of the idiographic/nomothetic distinction. They
stress that they study ‘instances’ (p. 117) and ‘appearances’ (p. 188) rather
than locating the big object of Culture and reading off broader claims. Such
a position has the merit of intellectual modesty, but hinges on the problem-
atic assumption that accounts of appearances can be separated from expla-
nations and generalities. Surely all intellectual inquiry, whether implicitly or
not, works with these because abstraction is a priori to theory. The Protes-
tant Ethic, for example, is not simply a neutral description of a system of
ordering but also an analytic and ‘causal’ account. Were things otherwise, the
sociology advocated by Kendall and Wickham would come to resemble the
mental world of Funes, who remembered only a plurality of instances in
(literally) phenomenal detail and was thereby, as Borges (1972) tells us,
barely capable of thought.
In formulating a rescue story sociologists are not restricted to texts of
novelistic length such as those we have just examined. An alternative way to
begin to save ourselves is through the teamwork of an edited volume.
Consider the sprawling collection of essays edited by Luigi Tomasi that is
entitled New Horizons in Sociological Theory and Research. Back in 1999
Tomasi wrote to possible contributors to this ambitious volume. He urged
them to

Downloaded from http://the.sagepub.com by Alejandra Ramírez on August 7, 2007

© 2002 Thesis Eleven Pty, Ltd., SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
10 Smith (to/k) 7/11/02 3:18 PM Page 123

Smith: Rescue Narrative in Social Theory 123

. . . describe the central task of sociology for the third millennium, to provide
a profound and innovative interpretation of the changes now taking place
world-wide. . . . to reflect on the complex structure and organisation of soci-
logical inquiry, revitalising the discipline and beginning new and systematic
analysis of theoretical and methodological problems essential for the survival
of sociology. (p. 1)
Clearly we have here an apocalyptic vision calling for heroic rescue efforts
that will chart out ‘new horizons’ (p. 3) and ‘new frontiers’ (p. 2).
Some contributors entered into the spirit of the exercise and echo the
thematic of unease. Thus Michel Wieviorka writes that ‘. . . since the middle
of the twentieth century the discipline has undergone an ever-deepening
crisis which has bred centrifugal tendencies and worked towards its disinte-
gration’ (p. 69). Similarly Dirk Kaesler proclaims that: ‘We have entered the
year 2000. The world system is in turmoil and crisis’. The major problem with
New Horizons in Sociological Theory and Research is not the validity of such
millennial angst, but rather that Tomasi’s mission statement gave contributors
carte blanche. The result is a text marked by heterogeneity rather than focus.
Diagnoses and prescriptions fall out in diverse patterns like a bundle of I-
Ching sticks thrown down on the table by a drunken soothsayer. Some are
theoretical and others methodological, some modest while others seem to
have Promethean agendas. The dispersion arising from this broadcasting of
ideas is shadowed by the fact that many contributors ignored Tomasi’s call
to arms altogether. In a couple of unfortunate cases one receives the impres-
sion that authors simply used this opportunity to off load unpublished and
(to this reader anyway) incomprehensible essays in a non-refereed forum.
Other writers were more pliant in providing intelligent but rather deadpan
discussions on their pet topics framed by tokenistic nods towards crisis dis-
course. Hence Raymond Boudon asks a few rhetorical questions (e.g. ‘Must
we be pessimistic about the past and the future of sociology?’ p. 47) before
launching into a rather dense discussion of varieties of positivism. Shmuel
Eisenstadt talks briefly about the ties between classical sociology and mod-
ernity and then reviews the fortunes of the nation-state and questions relating
to multiple modernities. Ulrich Beck refuses such niceties but provides
perhaps the most stimulating essay in the bunch suggesting that the political
and intellectual challenges of cosmopolitanism should come to centre stage
in contemporary sociology. Zdzislaw Krasnodębski evidently read Tomasi’s
letter with care. Here, at last, we find what is really needed – an intelligent
entry that reflects on the history of crisis discourse rather than taking crisis
as an unquestioned point of departure. Krasnodębski, for example, points to
antecedents such as Gouldner and demonstrates how the failure of Marxism
has left us for the first time in years without an off-the-shelf rescue package.
Bravo!
Another enterprise that takes the collective route in salvaging
social theory is edited by Anthony Elliott and Bryan S. Turner. Profiles in

Downloaded from http://the.sagepub.com by Alejandra Ramírez on August 7, 2007

© 2002 Thesis Eleven Pty, Ltd., SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
10 Smith (to/k) 7/11/02 3:18 PM Page 124

124 Thesis Eleven (Number 70 2002)

Contemporary Social Theory is a textbook where invited contributors have

offered brief and accessible accounts of 34 leading thinkers. By now it should
be no surprise to the reader to find that the introduction flags the necessity
for this exercise in terms of a crisis narrative. It is with echoes of Tomasi in
our head that we read that ‘. . . the major traditions of classical social theory
appear profoundly strained in the face of core institutional transitions now
sweeping the globe’ (p. 1). These ‘. . . dramatic changes to the contemporary
global order’ have led to ‘. . . a pressing need for sustained critical discussion
of both the coherence and dispersion of contemporary social theory’ (p. 2).
Such hyperventilated statements seem rather perfunctory in the context of
this book and once rhetorical formalities are dispensed with, the entries settle
down to become resolutely phlegmatic and sensible. They contain bio-
graphical information on each thinker, report on their major ideas and
writings and offer an evaluation. This is a useful gazetteer and it will doubt-
less allow students to get up to speed in writing assignments. As with any
Who’s Who it is inevitable that questions will be asked about inclusions and
exclusions. Some figures such as Foucault, Habermas and Bauman would
probably make it onto anybody’s list. Others such as Nancy Chodorow, Juliet
Mitchell, Herbert Marcuse and Peter Berger were perhaps at the peak of their
influence in earlier decades and could have been substituted. I would suggest
that Mary Douglas, Victor Turner, Talcott Parsons and Claude Lévi-Strauss
deserve a place in the pantheon – but then I am a Durkheimian. No doubt
readers will have their own joys and disappointments and in a perverse way
making one’s own desert island selections forms one of the unintended
pleasures of the text. Chaqun à son goût!
But such issues of inclusion and exclusion are not simply a matter of
taste – they cut to the very plausibility of the author’s claims about epochal
global transformations. We can broach this theme by attributing nationalities
to social theorists. In an age of global and hybrid identities this is a prob-
lematic but not pointless endeavour in as far as it provides a more objective
tool for reflexivity. Of the 34 scholars discussed in this volume, 15 might be
thought of as French, nine as American, seven as German and three as British.
No other nations are represented. With the possible exception of Edward
Said (who, it should be said, holds a Chair in the United States), scholarship
from Third World and non-western traditions is notably absent. Europe and
the United States remain ascendant as the powerhouses of theory. Feminist
perspectives fare quite well (there are entries on Kristeva, Irigaray, Chodorow
and Mitchell), but current thinking about issues of race, identity and post-
colonialism seems chronically under-represented. At the risk of introducing
an unpleasant and crude identity politics we should also note that of the 34
entries, some 27 are on white male theorists. It could be argued that in so
far as this group is undoubtedly dominant in the field of social theory the
editors have provided a fair sample. Yet the case can also be made that selec-
tions such as this perpetuate canons. Some readers will feel that a less

Downloaded from http://the.sagepub.com by Alejandra Ramírez on August 7, 2007

© 2002 Thesis Eleven Pty, Ltd., SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
10 Smith (to/k) 7/11/02 3:18 PM Page 125

Smith: Rescue Narrative in Social Theory 125

conservative and more inclusive selection could have been made and that
the text is strangely old fashioned and unadventurous. Certainly there is an
irony here when we look back to those opening statements about those ‘core
institutional transitions now sweeping the globe’. Within social theory, it
seems, established systems of authority and knowledge production have
proven remarkably resistant to change.
Finally we come to The Sociological Ambition by Chris Shilling and
Philip Mellor. Where Elliott and Turner look toward contemporary theoreti-
cal flavours for salvation, Shilling and Mellor seek to establish a dialogue
between the theory of today and that of the classical era of sociology. Their
text argues vigorously against the idea that the founding figures of the socio-
logical tradition are simply dead, white, European males. To the contrary,
they claim that the detailed examination of Comte, Durkheim, Parsons,
Simmel and Weber shows that they are of the greatest importance. This is
because, just like many of their contemporary critics, they assert that social
life and moral life are intimately connected. According to Shilling and Mellor
these figures can help rescue sociology because of their concern with system-
atic theory and the analysis of the social whole. This contrasts with the con-
temporary ‘. . . fragmentation of the discipline into multiple directions
apparently no longer possessed of a common core’ (p. 11). Resulting from
this has been an irreversible break up of sociology towards either specialisms
ruled by ‘. . . abstract empiricism or a theoretical and moral tribalism that
endorses as superior the experiences and viewpoint of one social group over
another’ (p. 4). What is needed, they conclude, is ‘. . . a return to the scope
of the classical sociological ambition, albeit with a more inclusive recognition
of the diverse groups that exist within social totalities’ (p. 20). This worthy
thesis is illustrated through a series of chapters reviewing classical theorists
and contemporary nodes of discourse (conflict sociology, feminist sociology,
racial sociology, rational sociology and post/modern sociology). Discussions
of the latter focus on their failure to offer a vision of social life that has the
scope, vision and theoretical coherence of the classical models even if they
ask important questions of those same paradigms.
The argument made by Shilling and Mellor is perhaps not novel. The
classics are reaffirmed every year – think for example of recent writings by
figures such as Levine (1995) or Ritzer (1996). Moreover, relative to the scale
of its claims, The Sociological Ambition sometimes moves a little too quickly.
The alleged failings and dead ends of ‘Racial Sociology’, for example, are
reviewed in only 18 pages. A final point of comment is that the book, like
that of Kendall and Wickham, falls between the stools of textbook and
research monograph. Hence some readers will find there is too much review
and not enough critical evaluation. Perhaps this reflects the realities of the
contemporary publishing industry, where original scholarly work must be
packaged as course-adoptable before the contract can be signed. Despite
these reservations, The Sociological Ambition stands out as the most

Downloaded from http://the.sagepub.com by Alejandra Ramírez on August 7, 2007

© 2002 Thesis Eleven Pty, Ltd., SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
10 Smith (to/k) 7/11/02 3:18 PM Page 126

126 Thesis Eleven (Number 70 2002)

comprehensive and erudite of the offerings considered here and lives up to

the high standards set by its authors in their previous collaborations.
Adopting the ironic gaze of the commentator has perhaps led me to
write a rather harsh review. So it should be said in closing that these five
texts provide substantial collective reassurance that social theory remains a
fresh and diverse area. Each provides worthwhile moments and even the irri-
tations are of a stimulating kind. The treatment of the rescue narrative,
however, has been less successful. In only one of the texts (Flyvbjerg) was
a crisis of sociology or social theory or cultural studies documented or dis-
cussed at length. To be sure individual theories, theorists and theoretical areas
were shown to have problems, but not the discipline as a whole. Perhaps
because of this ideas of decline and fragmentation fail to develop any sub-
stantial credibility. They are ritualistic tropes that can be ignored because they
have become familiar. Squandering this intellectual currency might be fool-
hardy. Remember the story of the boy who cried wolf?
To conclude, clearly there is space in social theory for three major
works. The first can document or falsify ‘crisis’ in a sustained way. The second
could trace the genealogy of the rescue narrative in classical and contem-
porary social theory, mapping out the logic of its elementary forms. And the
third could set about inventing a new rhetorical device that will really wake
us up. Any takers?

Philip Smith is Reader in Sociology and Head of Sociology at the University

of Queensland. He is author of Cultural Theory: An Introduction (Blackwell, 2001),
co-author of Researching the Visual (Sage, 2000) and co-editor of The Cambridge
Companion to Durkheim (Cambridge University Press, Forthcoming).

References
Borges, Jorge Luis (1972) Labyrinths. London: Penguin.
Gouldner, Alvin (1970) The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology. London: Heinemann.
Levine, Donald (1995) Visions of the Sociological Tradition. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Merton, Robert (1968) Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Free Press.
Mills, C. Wright (1970) The Sociological Imagination. London: Penguin.
Propp, Vladimir (1968) The Morphology of the Folktale. Austin: University of Texas
Press.
Ritzer, George (1996) Classical Sociological Theory. New York: McGraw Hill.
Sherwood, Steven, Smith, Philip and Alexander, Jeffrey (1993) ‘The British are Coming
. . . Again! The Hidden Agenda of Cultural Studies’, Contemporary Sociology
22(2): 370–5.
Smith, Henry Nash (1950) Virgin Land. London: Oxford University Press.
Turner, Victor (1977) The Ritual Process. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Downloaded from http://the.sagepub.com by Alejandra Ramírez on August 7, 2007

© 2002 Thesis Eleven Pty, Ltd., SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.