Caroline Bartlett Crane and Progressive Reform Social Housekeeping As Sociology

Linda J. Rynbrandt CAROLINE BARTLETT CRANE AND PROGRESSIVE REFORM

WOMEN AND SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY VOLUME I GARLAND REFERENCE LIBRARY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE VOLUME I 177 WOMEN AND SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY MARY Jo DEEGAN, Series Editor

CAROLINE BARTLETT CRANE AND PROGRESSIVE REFORM Social Housekeeping As Sociology by Linda J. Rynbrandt CAROLINE BARTLETT CRANE AND PROGRESSIVE REFORM SocIAL HousEKEEPING As SocIOLOGY

LINDA J. RYNBRANDT

I~ ~~o~!~!:n~~~up LONDON AND NEW YORK published 1999 by Garland Publishing

Published 2020 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN 52 VanderbiltAvenue, New York, NY 10017

First issued in paperback 2020

Routledge is an imprint ofthe Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

Copyright © 1999 by Linda J. Rynbrandt

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Rynbrandt, Linda J. Caroline Bartlett Crane and progressive reform : social housekeeping as sociology / by Linda J. Rynbrandt. p. cm. - (Garland reference library of social science ; v. 1177. Women and sociological theory ; v. 1) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8153-2982-2 (alk. paper) 1. Crane, Caroline Bartlett, 1858-1935. 2. Women sociologists-United States-Biography. 3. Women social reformers-United States-Biography. 4. Sanitation-United States-History. I. Title. II. Series: Garland refer- ence library of social science ; v. 1177. III. Series: Garland reference library of social science. Women and sociological theory ; v. 1. HM22.U6C737 1999 301 '.092-dc21 98-39886 [Bl CIP

Cover photograph of Caroline Bartlett Crane courtesy of the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Archives and Regional History Collections, Western Michigan University.

ISBN 13: 978-1-138-96988-9 (pbk) ISBN 13: 978-0-8153-2982-4 (hbk) DOI: 10.4324/9781315861111 Contents

Series Editor's Foreword 1x Preface Identity and Legacy: Recurring Questions xi Feminist xii Sociologist xm Race and Class xiv Who Was Caroline Bartlett Crane and Why Does She Matter Today? xv

Chapter I: "Lost Women" in Social Thought and Action 3 Introduction 3 Invisible Women in Sociology and Social Reform 4 Theoretical/Methodological Frame for Text 5 Feminist Debates: Epistemology/Methodology 5 Trends and Debates in Feminist Theory 6 Gender 7 Theory and Practice 9 History and Sociology 11 Archival Research 12 Method 13 Epilogue 14 Summary 16 Notes 17 vi Contents

Chapter 2: The Life and Times of Caroline Bartlett Crane 19 Introduction 19 Caroline Bartlett Crane 20 The Progressive Era 27 Twice-Told Tales 29 Conclusion 30 Summary 32 Notes 32

Chapter 3: Salvation, Sanitation and the Social Gospel 35 Introduction 35 Sociology 36 The Social Gospel and Sociology: Rationale for Refonn 37 Where Are the Women? 38 Debates and Dilemmas in Early Sociology 38 The "Social Construction" of Sociology 40 Legacy 44 Caroline Bartlett Crane 46 The People's Church 46 Crane and the University of Chicago Sociology 47 The "Institutional Church" 49 Sociology and Social Control 50 From Thought to Action 51 Conclusion 53 ~m~ry ~ Notes 54

Chapter 4: Images, Ideology and Networks in Progressive Refonn 57 Introduction 57 Women in Municipal Sanitation 59 Caroline Bartlett Crane and the "Ladies of the Club" 60 Women's Clubs 61 "A Woman's Place is in the Home" 63 Contents vii

Suffrage and Sanitation 64 Women Clean the Streets 65 Crane Hits the Road: Sanitary Surveys across the Nation 67 Toward Praxis 71 Whither Club-women 72 Domestic Feminism: Progressive or Regressive? 73 Conclusion 75 Summary 76 Notes 76

Chapter 5: "America's Housekeeper" Fights for Pure Food 79 Introduction 79 Local Meat Supply 80 Federal Meat Inspection 82 Conclusion 87 Legacy 89 Summary 90 Notes 90

Chapter 6: Building the Progressive Dream: Designs for Reform 91 Introduction 91 Institutional Church 93 America's Housekeeper 95 Everyman's House 98 Conclusion 101 Summary 102 Notes 103

Chapter 7: Public Visions and Private Nightmares 105 Introduction 105 Private Thought and Public Action 105 Methodological Approach, or How to Peek "Backstage" 107 Love and Marriage Progressive-Style 109 viii Contents

Love, Honor and Obey? 110 "Women's Work" and "Men's Work" in Progressive Reform 111 The Brown Thrush 115 Progressive Visions and Personal Nightmares 116 Conclusion 118 What Does It All Mean Today? 119 Summary 120 Notes 121

Chapter 8: Conclusion: Beyond Women Lost and Found 123 Introduction 123 Trends in Sociohistorical Research 124 The Challenge of Social Biography 125 Feminist Critiques of Progressive Era Reformers 126 Association and Alienation in Progressive Reform 128 The Process of Recovery 131 Lessons and Legacy 13 3 The Dilemma of Difference 133 The Problem of Praxis 134 The (Non)Impact of Feminist Thought on Sociology 137 Women in Sociology on the Eve of the Twenty-first Century 139 Conclusion 140 Boundary Work 142 Summary 143

Appendix A: Feminist Theories/Methods and Sociology 145 Appendix B: Methods 147 Bibliography 151 Index 169 SERIES EDITOR'S FOREWORD

C<;>ntemporary sociologists are disconnected from their female predecessors. Like Sisyphus, each generation of sociologists is condemned to push the boulder of women's knowledge and experience back to the top of the patriarchal mountain of the discipline. Although women in sociology like Caroline Bartlett Crane, the sub- ject of this book, have been brilliant social analysts and powerful public figures for over a century, their work is repeatedly ignored, forgotten, and lost. I hope that we can stop rolling this boulder up the mountain of male ignorance and control and see the world and new horizon from the mountaintop. Linda Rynbrandt's book helps anchor that boulder by analyzing sociology from a new location. Rynbrandt's perspective examines sociology through the work and life of Caroline Bartlett Crane, historical analysis, the political economy of the home, the gendered landscape of the Progressive Era, and feminist thought. Rynbrandt initiates this series on Women and Sociological Theory with an exciting subject and an innovative perspective connecting the past, present, and future. Caroline Bartlett Crane's robust vision of women's work and her national impact as America's Housekeeper highlights the gendered nature of being a sociolo- gist, a woman, and doing sociology. If Crane were able to join contemporary soci- ologists on the mountaintop, I imagine she would roll up her sleeves and say"there's a lot of work to be done here but the view is filled with human possibility."

Mary Jo Deegan Editor, Women and Sociological Theory

Preface

Sociology is ... the synthesis of all that has been learned about society. Sociology is ... the science of social ideals. Albion W. Small and George E. Vincent, 1894

Many people look upon sociology as merely the study of some poetic Utopianism. With others it is ... the study which teaches merely how to help the poor and elevate the degraded. I should define it rather as that science which above all others seeks to investigate broadly all human relations in a practical way. Caroline Bartlett Crane, "Sociology as a Study," ca. 1897

IDENTITY AND LEGACY: RECURRING QUESTIONS

Who was Caroline Bartlett Crane? Why does she matter today? Questions regarding identity and legacy recur throughout this text. Caroline Bartlett Crane (1858-1935) was active in many aspects of Progressive Era (ca.1890-1920) social reform. Crane was a pioneer for women's inclusion into public affairs and eventually became nationally known for her work in municipal sanitation. She acquired the title "America's Housekeeper" and became a leading figure in the vast network of Progressive Era reformers. Crane's legacy in social reform is important not only due to her own fame and accomplishments, but also because she represents many other women who worked for social justice in the Progressive Era. xii Preface

Although Crane was a nationally recognized woman in her own time, she was nearly forgotten along with many other women in the historical record. Recently, many of these "lost women" have been rediscovered, and their heritage in social thought and social reform has been reclaimed by a new generation of scholars and social activists. Still, questions remain. Scholars today examine the lives of these women and attempt to assign labels and assess motives and accomplishments. Was Crane a liberal, a conservative or a radical? Was she a feminist? Ifso, what kind? Was she really a sociologist? Was she a racist, elitist white middle-class reformer? If the answers are unsatisfactory or inconclusive based on today's politics and sensibilities, there is a tendency to dismiss these women and devalue their contributions to women and society. There is a danger that we may have discovered these lost women in the past only to lose them again by contemporary judgments which render them irrelevant at best, and dangerous at worst. It is doubtful that Crane and the vast majority of her contemporaries even thought in terms ofmany of these labels and categories. It is difficult in retrospect to place Progressive women reformers in current political and social categories. Definitions and meanings of these terms alter over time. Even beyond problems ofdefinition, there is the fact that individuals may be inconsistent in their politics. Also, most of these women reformers were so busy actually attempting to change the world, they had little time ( or perhaps little interest) for reflexive concern regarding their political orientation.

Feminist Crane did not call herself a feminist. However, she self-consciously worked for suffrage and social, political and economic advancement for women throughout her life. She deconstructed the word "woman" for a group of male clergy, and challenged them to consider the fact that their question regarding what women could do to unite society implied that the individuals placed within this particular category had unique, albeit secondary, responsibilities in this area. She noted that they never asked what men could do to promote this goal, as men were regarded as the norm, while women were seen as a special case (Crane, 1894). Preface Xlll

Sociologist Crane did consider herself to be a sociologist, as well as a minister, lecturer, writer and social reformer. She attended graduate classes in sociology at the University of Chicago, and initially planned to complete a graduate degree in sociology. She established groups to promote sociology and the study of society throughout the nation. She wrote material to be used in these study and action groups, and received advice and encouragement from sociologists, such as Charles Henderson and Charles Zeublin. She worked with a network of women, such as Jane Addams and Florence Kelley, connected with sociology in Chicago (Lengermann and Niebrugge-Brantley, 1998). Crane performed numerous social, sanitary surveys in which she utilized her sociological training, and in 1914 she taught a course for the University of Wisconsin in order to train other women to perform social surveys. There was a strong connection between thought and action in Crane's work. Following a pragmatist philosophy (Deegan, 1996b; Feffer, 1993; Seigfried, 1996), she believed that human action could improve the world. Along with Jane Addams and others, she took pragmatism and social philosophy into the streets. In the introduction to her report on the sanitary survey she performed in Minnesota, Crane wrote that "it is a record of actual work done in the field and ... it thus belongs, not to the domain of theory, but to that of applied sociology" (191 lb, p. 12). By the end ofher career, Crane no longer called herself a sociologist, but rather (re)defined her work as social work. Still, numerous writers listed her as a sociologist in obituary accounts following her death in 1935. Perhaps Crane described the situation best when she noted in 1896, that "the science of sociology is in an extremely inchoate and tentative state, and ... head professors do not yet agree as to some of the first principles thereof' (1896, p. 382). In this fluid context, Crane claimed the mantle of sociology, wrote about sociology, did sociology and promoted social reform on the basis of the new science of sociology. xiv Preface

According to Dirk Kasler ( 1981) the following are criteria for membership in the profession of sociology (quoted in Deegan, 1988. p. 9):

• occupy a chair of sociology and/or teach sociology • membership in the German Sociological Society ( changed here to membership in the American Sociological Society) • coauthorship of sociological articles or textbooks • self-definition as a sociologist • definition by others as a sociologist

Based on at least three ofthese standards, I would argue for Crane's status as an applied sociologist despite her lack of academic credentials and/or official connection to academe.

Race and Class Class and race issues also concern contemporary scholars in regard to motivations and accomplishments of women reformers in the Progressive Era. Racial inequality and class concerns were crucial issues then, as well as now. Women reformers in the Progressive period both reflected and refuted the prevailing views concerning social class inequality and racial injustice. Crane promoted racial equality in conjunction with the less than radical approach of Booker T. Washington. She also recognized the class-based nature of social reform and warned club-women against a noblesse oblige view ofreform. Crane (1896) stated:

Let us dismiss all that class, which surely does exist, of those who follow philanthropy, as they would bacteriology, if it were the fad, and exploit their "subjects" and "cases," with a due sense of the humorous and grotesque, if not of the pitiable; with a due sense, also, of the value of the "lower classes" as a foil to sweet charity in their own persons. (p. 382) Preface xv

WHO WAS CAROLINE BARTLETT CRANE AND WHY DOES SHE MATTER TODAY? Despite a great deal of study, I cannot definitively answer either question. Even so, I contend that Crane represents a remarkable cohort of women that scholars today should claim and examine. There is a rapidly growing literature on this subject, and I am pleased to be able to contribute a small addition to the expanding knowledge of women in the history of social theory and social reform. I do not call for an uncritical examination of these early women reformers. However, I do believe that the challenges they faced, the accomplishments they achieved, the mistakes they made and the obstacles they overcame may provide lessons for women and others interested in social equality and justice today. Whenever possible, I have attempted to let people speak for themselves in this text, without undue analysis or mediation on my part. Who was Caroline Bartlett Crane? Why does she matter today? I invite you to read on-decide for yourself.

CAROLINE BARTLETT CRANE AND PROGRESSIVE REFORM

l "Lost Women" in Social Thought and Action

INTRODUCTION Progressivism and feminism were intertwined as social movements. Nancy S. Dye, 1991

Some differences are playful; some are poles of world historical systems of domination. Epistemology is about knowing the difference. Donna Haraway, 1990

Caroline Bartlett Crane was a trailblazer; a pioneer in sociology, municipal sanitation, religion, and the woman movement. Despite her national renown in the Progressive Era, she is largely forgotten today. Her sad historical fate is not unusual. The history of women and social change has long been "ignored, misrepresented, or repressed" because politics and social protest have traditionally been interpreted almost exclusively from the masculine perspective (West and Blumberg, 1990, p. 4). Now, however, there is an emerging feminist analysis of social reform and protest which has led to new theoretical and methodological approaches to the issue. The inclusion of formerly hidden women in the political analysis of social change illustrates the feminist contention that the "personal is political" and the political is personal (Rowbotham, 1997, p. 379). DOI: 10.4324/9781315861111-1 4 Caroline Bartlett Crane and Progressive Reform

Invisible Women in Sociology and Social Reform Using the archival data of Unitarian minister and Progressive Era reformer Caroline Bartlett Crane (1858-1935), I investigate the relationship between Progressive Era ( ca.1890-1920) social reform and the origins of American sociology with a view to the vital contributions of women in these endeavors. Until recently, the role of women has been virtually invisible in accounts of Progressive reform. While this is no longer the case, considerable questions remain concerning what women accomplished, why they participated in social reform and how they succeeded in placing their social ideals within the center of a political system in which they were marginal (Tilly and Gurin, 1990; Frankel and Dye, 1991). I examine the origins of American sociology at the University of Chicago and observe the claims that were advanced by the first generation of sociologists to legitimate the social construction of the discipline of sociology. Professional sociologists and social activists, though with different strategies and tactics, attempted to create a new and unique ideology. Within these milieux, I focus on Caroline Bartlett Crane, a student in the sociology department of the University ofChicago in 1896, to illustrate how the larger goals and vision of the pioneers of academic sociology were accomplished, not only in academe, but also in the so-called real world at the local level. This research also addresses Crane's role in the mobilization of "club-women" for the purposes of municipal reform at the local and national levels. I illustrate the dialectics of praxis in social reform, and assess the reform efforts of Progressive women in the little researched area of municipal sanitation. In order to address recent critiques of white middle-class Progressive women reformers, I utilize Crane's private as well as her professional papers, to examine the personal motivations and inspirations behind the public actions and accomplishments. Finally, I analyze the relationship between images, ideology and agency in order to observe how women changed society from the political margins, and discuss the implications of political and social reform efforts in the past for contemporary political concerns. "Lost Women" in Social Thought and Action 5

Not only were women nearly invisible in conventional accounts of the Progressive period, but the role ofwomen in the origins of the social sciences has also been obscured (Deegan, 1988, 1991; Platt, 1992; McDonald, 1994, 1995). In this study, I endeavor to address these questions and redress past oversights with a sociohistorical examination of the gendered nature of agency and structure in the Progressive Era. This makes it possible to recognize and acknowledge a legacy ofwomen and reform in the past for women concerned with social thought and action today. In addition, I contend that an investigation of the relationship between politics and the academy in the Progressive Era offers lessons for feminists, and others, interested in reconnecting social knowledge and social action today (Hartman and Messer-Davidow, 1991; Maynard and Purvis, 1994).

THEORETICAL/METHODOLOGICAL FRAME FOR TEXT

Feminist Debates: Epistemology/Methodology Although this work is centered on an explicit feminist theoretical and methodological base, this approach is problematic. There is no consensus that a feminist theory/method is even possible. Sociologist Janet Chafetz promotes one definition offeminist theory. According to Chafetz a theory may be considered "feminist if it can be used to challenge, counteract, or change a status quo that disadvantages or devalues women" (quoted in Wallace, 1989, p. l 0). Judith Grant (1993) contends that there is no one feminist theory, but feminist theory is multicentered and undefinable, divided according to its attachment to one of several male theories, making it a kind ofa bandage on the misogynist canon of Western social thought (p. I). Barbara Ryan (1992, p. 154) argues, as well, that there is no one feminist theory or movement. She contends that since the movement developed from several ideological perspectives, feminism has always consisted of diverse orientations. This is both a strength and a weakness for the women's movement, and makes the issue of differences a major challenge for feminism in the present, just as it has been in the past. 6 Caroline Bartlett Crane and Progressive Reform

Contesting views abound concerning feminist theory. Sociologist Charles Lemert (1994) contends that "feminist thought [is] the single most creative and challenging source of social thought there is (p. ix)." He argues that it can no longer be seen as preoccupied exclusively with women's interests; as it has always been at odds with academic discourse and against the unspoken authority of mainstream social thought, feminist theory entails nothing less than a rethinking of authority. Lemert states that feminist theory today is not any one thing and offers an explanation why, accordingly, it is so intimidating to those who have read it just a little or not at all. Still, he insists it is one of the most important fields of social theory today (pp. x-xi). 1

Trends and Debates in Feminist Theory Many women (and men) a hundred years ago privileged differences between men and women. The second wave of feminist thought in the feminist thinking of the mid- l 960s focused on the denial of differences (among women and between women and men). This perspective, in tum, evolved to a view that privileged gender differences again. The original focus of the second wave was on androgyny and/or women's common identity of oppression under patriarchy ( e.g., de Beauvoir, 1953; Millett, 1970; Firestone, 1970). This gave way, in a sizable segment of feminist thought, to a rejection of androgyny and led to a woman-centered perspective that viewed female/male differences not as the cause of women's oppression, but rather as the seeds of women's liberation (Eisenstein, 1983, p. xi). However, the "undiffererentiated, undertheorized sisterhood" (Snitow, 1990. p. 16) of the second wave soon gave way to other differences, when lesbians, radical women and minority women expressed their rejection of a feminist movement dominated by educated, white, heterosexual women. Ifthis were not enough, the sex-wars over the issue of pornography erupted in the feminist movement in the early 1980s. Conflicts developed around the axis of identity/difference, theory/methods, liberal/radical, academe/politics and equality/essentialism. These concerns mirror conflicts faced by women in the past who were influential in the foundations of modem feminism (Cott, i 987). "Lost Women" in Social Thought and Action 7

Equality versus difference is probably the oldest debate in feminist thought. It has haunted feminists from the first women's movement in the last century, and is still problematic today. Feminists debated the issue when the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) was first advanced in 1923, and women still question whether equality with men means equity for women (Cott, 1987). The question was a serious factor in the defeat ofthe ERA in 1982 (Mansbridge, 1986), and the debate continues today both between feminists and antifeminists, and within the women's movement, as well. Much ofthis debate rests on the question of whether women are essentially different from men, and therefore due special privileges. Do they require exclusive protection, or should they be treated as equals in society and before the law? Women in the Progressive Era played with images ofgender differences to both facilitate and oppose social reform.

Gender In an important effort to define gender for contemporary feminist scholarship, historian Joan W. Scott (1986), suggests that gender be understood as a social rather than a biological depiction. She emphasizes the social construction of gender, and notes the power relationships implicit in the dynamics of gender. Crane's era exemplifies tensions and transitions in gender roles, and Scott's contentions regarding the situated and political nature ofthe concept of gender help clarify these changing symbols and beliefs regarding gender in the Progressive period. Scott questions: "[W]hy (and since when) have women been invisible as historical subjects, when we know they participated in the great and small events of human history" (p. 1074). She concludes that:

political processes will determine which outcome prevails ... political in the sense that different actors and different meanings are contending with one another for control. We can write the history of that process only if we recognize that man and woman are at once empty and overflowing categories. Empty because they have no ultimate, transcendent meaning. Overflowing because even when they appear to be fixed, they still contain within them alternative, denied, or suppressed definitions. 8 Caroline Bartlett Crane and Progressive Reform

Political history has, in a sense, been enacted on the field of gender. It is a field that seems fixed yet whose meaning is contested and in flux. (ibid.)

Crane struggled with this same issue a century ago. In a speech before the American Congress of Liberal Religions, Crane (1894) noted:

When a child, I sometimes amused myself, foolishly enough, by repeating some familiar word or name over and over, until it was emptied of all real significance and became filled with some curious and perhaps uncanny meaning which its mere sound suggested to my fancy. Some such foolishness, I think, the world is now practicing upon the word "woman," until the appellation that but just now conveyed an idea familiar enough to the world, has become the symbol for a great unknown quantity unknown-but not unknowable, if the world can help it. From her obscurity as a seldom commented upon member ofthe genus homo, she has been suddenly evoked by the spirit of the Nineteenth Century which discovered her, and invited everywhere to define herself sharply against the back-ground of the regnant sex; and it may be confessed that she has responded with no undue coyness or reluctance. (p. 18)

Although many women assumed that social change would result from the rhetoric ofprogress for women promoted by the Chicago World's Fair in 1893, in reality Crane argued that women were still defined as the "other" and relegated to prescribed roles in society. Crane suggested that the category "woman" was both overdetermined and overlooked in society. For example, she chided her fellow clergy when she sarcastically noted:

The proposed nearer and more helpful fellowship in the thought and work of humanity is thus inaugurated by assigning one half of humanity to the pleasant and placating task of talking about itself for a few minutes before beginning the discussion of the subject for which the convention is called-after which that one half ofhumanity has no part nor recognition whatever in this council for uniting the culture and religious forces of the world .... I ask pardon. The ladies are permitted to give a reception in honor of the Congress, and to provide suitable "Lost Women" in Social Thought and Action 9

refreshment for those who have gallantly and quite cheerfully borne the toils of thought and debate for them. (p. 19)

The debate over the category "woman" continues. Ann Snitow ( 1990) reflects on the divide in feminist thought and action between the need to recognize a common identity as woman and the need to abolish the category. She argues that the tensions between the need to "act as women and needing an identity not overdetermined by our gender ... is as old as Western feminism" (p. 9). Critics of the social (de)constructionists have questioned whether they have undermined their own categories. What, they ask, is left to study if there is no category called "women" (p. 16). Snitow argues, however, that the tensions regarding differences in feminist thought are a dynamic force that links women. She believes that the "dynamic feminist divide is about difference; [yet] it dramatizes women's differences from each other ... and the necessity of our sometimes making common cause" (p. 30). Crane and women in the Progressive Era often faced and debated these same issues, and Crane's archival papers offer intriguing insights into this continuous dilemma for feminist theorists.

Theory and Practice The debate between theory and practice has also been a long-standing problem in the movement. Although feminist theorists have long stressed the necessity of a feminist theory (now theories) for feminist political action, many activists have viewed theory as esoteric at best, and useless at worst. Needless to say, the effort to integrate theory and practice has met with only partial success. Early socialist feminists and radical feminists attempted to incorporate theory with action, but with mixed, generally disappointing results. Presently, theory and action remain, for the most part, separate. Feminist theory has become entrenched in academe, where it has little impact on the feminist movement. Progressive women reformers, such as Crane, offer lessons concerning the relationship between social thought and action today. Catherine MacKinnon (I 993) argues that the contemporary feminist movement's focus on consciousness-raising (CR), which emphasized the commonalities between women, created a new political practice and type 10 Caroline Bartlett Crane and Progressive Reform of theory: "a fonn of actions carried out through words" (p. 369). However, feminist philosopher Nancy Tuana (I 993, pp. 281-282) cautions that the critique of the concept of women is the paradox at the heart of feminism. She asks how feminists can recognize the importance ofdifferences between women without losing sight of what they have in common, and she insists that feminists must abandon the quest for a unitary theory: one theory or method is not enough.2 Beyond the theory or theories debate in feminist work, there is also contention regarding methods. Shulamit Reinharz (1992) insists on feminist methods rather than a feminist method. She contends:

Instead of orthodoxy, feminist research practices must be recognized as a plurality. Rather than there being a "woman's way of knowing," or a "feminist way of doing research," there are women's ways of knowing. (p. 4)

Sandra Harding ( 1987) asks whether there really is a "feminist method" and if so, how this methodology may challenge/complement traditional methods. She contends that it is hard to answer this question because much feminist research tends to conflate method, methodology and epistemology.3 However, Joyce Nielsen (1990) argues that not only is there a distinctive feminist approach to research, it is a "potentially revolutionary academic subdiscipline," which by its very nature is controversial (p. 1). She believes that feminist methodology is not only rooted in the older positivist approach, but also in a newer, emergent postempirical perspective. Nielsen insists that the feminist approach "is part-perhaps the best part----of a larger intellectual movement that represents a fundamental shift away from traditional social science methodology" (ibid.). Feminist critique has led to the questioning of scientific based knowledge claims, and so may be considered as more significant and potentially more reconstructive than other critical theories (p. 18). Nielsen proposes that feminist theory can provide a potential dialectical fusion between objectivism and relativism, and so transcend the dilemma created by the postmodern crisis in knowledge. "Lost Women" in Social Thought and Action 11

History and Sociology Sociologists tend to privilege the present over the past as an arena for social research. However, Theda Skocpol (1984) maintains that sociohistorical analysis can illuminate how the past is relevant to concerns in the present. She concludes that "excellent historical sociology can actually speak more meaningfully to real life concerns than narrowly focused empiricist studies that pride themselves on their 'policy relevance"' (p. 5). Based on Crane's archival data, I will examine the contention that Progressivism was really a women's movement, despite the fact that women had little formal political power (Lebsock, 1990, p. 36). Historian, Ann Firor Scott (1991) maintains that women's organizations, which Crane utilized, served as "the very heart of American political and social development" (p. 3). However, despite the fact that women's organizations were apparently so crucial to social reform, Scott laments how little we actually know about the process (p. 152). Crane's papers provide an important corrective to this problem. There has been a vast amount of material, such as the Crane archives, left by reformers of the Progressive period for social researchers, but historian Katherine Kish Sklar (1988) argues that scholars have only begun an investigation of the power of women in this era. She contends that "the papers of individual women are often the richest and most accessible sources for the study of women's power in the Progressive Era, but many have only recently been collected, and most have never fully been exploited" (p. 177). Sklar also believes that the analysis of "the relationships between national organizations and local units" are also a potentially valuable strategy for future research (p. 181 ). She maintains that an analysis of the social and political power of women reformers must include personal, as well as organizational papers.4 Since the lives of women were often not recorded in the official records of the day, alternative analytic tools and modes are necessary. Private papers supplement public documents and allow scholars to approach women's lives in a new way. Private papers also facilitate a subjective perception of what meaning women impute to their actions. 12 Caroline Bartlett Crane and Progressive Reform

Verstehen, or subjective meaning,is especially necessary in sociohistorical analysis. Although many sociologists do not consider the library and archives as a real source of data, Skocpol (1984) considers secondary data analysis the best choice for interpretative sociology. Barney Glaser and Anslem Strauss (1967) and William Gamson (1990 [1975]) also contend that the analysis ofdocuments may, at times, be superior to field research. The use of documents makes data available that may be impossible to acquire by other methods, it is usually less expensive, and the data are accessible to return to as often as necessary. There are drawbacks to the use of documentary data, as in all other types of data collection. The data may be incomplete, inaccurate or even completely absent. There are also historiographical problems inherent in the use ofhistorical documents, but with care these sources can be an appropriate, and even superior, source of research data.

Archival Research

The archival method presents both particular opportunities and challenges for the social researcher (Brooks, 1969; Burke, 1981; Hill, 1993). Unlike data available in library research, material in archival collections is unique and unlikely to be found anywhere else. Material in archives may exist in various forms, which makes it difficult to catalogue. Data often reaches a particular archive in an arbitrary, uneven and fragmentary fashion. Retrieval of information is therefore more complex than in typical documentary research. Archival data are much more closely regulated than material in library settings. The archivist virtually controls the research process. For this reason, archives have been equated with Erving Goffman's (1959, 1967, 1974) "total institutions," and archival research has been compared to Goffman's notion ofritual interactions (Hill, 1993). Michel Foucault's (1979) contentions concerning the connection between knowledge and power are also relevant due to the imbalance of power between archivist and researcher, the restricted access to knowledge and the complete, constant surveillance exercised over the researcher during the use of archival material (Thompson, 1996). The process of selection and interpretation work together in a dialectical manner throughout the entire research project. This makes "Lost Women" in Social Thought and Action 13 archival research a dynamic, often exciting process. However there are inherent problems in archival research even beyond the obstacles of missing, incomplete or inaccessible data. Michael Hill (1993, p. 64) cautions the archival researcher to be aware ofthe seductive concreteness of the material, multiple communication channels in a singular data source, the instability of"truth," the need to bracket the present in order to understand the past, and the potential for intentional fabrication in archival data. Although many ofthese concerns haunt more conventional social research as well, they are particular issues in sociohistorical archival research. One advantage of archival research is that with careful citation other researchers are able to verify previous studies and build on the work of prior social researchers. Also, Hill (1993) argues that archival research is especially useful for the process of recovery of potentially important, yet little known individuals, institutions and social movements in the past, whose stories may not be readily available in more traditional documentary sources. He claims that the "backstage" data available in archival collections "can enlighten politically disenfranchised minorities and unmask the mystery that covers discriminatory practices" (p. 63). This is a task of interest to many in the social sciences, and Hill insists that it is crucial that researchers in the social sciences do not relegate archival research exclusively to historians (p. 4). He argues that it is a great mistake to leave the history of the discipline of sociology to historians as institutional patterns, intellectual history and individual biographies of social scientists are best comprehended and interpreted by the use of the "sociological imagination" (Mills, 1959). However, since the process of the recovery of "lost" individuals, institutions and intellectual connections suggests a lack of accessible data, the challenge for the social researcher is clear. New questions, unorthodox data sources, and a willingness to encounter dead ends are necessary, but the chance to (re)discover forgotten individuals and lost intellectual foundations in the social sciences makes the challenge worthwhile.

METHOD The research for this project is a qualitative, sociohistorical case study of the Caroline Bartlett Crane (1858-1935) Collection in the Regional 14 Caroline Bartlett Crane and Progressive Reform

History Collections and Archives at Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan. In addition, I use a number of secondary sources to triangulate primary data and provide a social context for Crane's papers. Billy Franklin and Harold Osborne (1971) contend that it is difficult to define a case study because "it is not a specific technique. Rather, it is a method of organizing data for the purpose of analyzing the life of a social unit-a person, a family, a culture group, or even an entire community" (p. 184). A variety of study materials, such as personal documents and life histories, may be used. Despite concerns regarding validity and over generalization, the case study remains a prime method to access and assess data at a complex level. The case study approach is an excellent research design for the examination of social life in general, through a detailed investigation of the particular. (For further analysis of the validity issue in case study research, see Feagin et al., 1991; Ragin and Becker, 1992; Hamel, 1993; Yin, 1993).

EPILOGUE Women in history are no longer silent and invisible. However, this does not mean that there are no longer challenges for scholars interested in women and social change, past and present. There is much catching up to do, and revision and reconceptualizations inevitably lead to diverse interpretations, contentions and counterviews. Therefore, the portrait of women's roles in social thought and social change, especially the role of women in the Progressive Era, becomes simultaneously clearer and more complicated. A sociohistorical case study of one exceptional, yet rather typical woman ofthe era, provides a valuable contribution to this ongoing process. Barbara Nelson (1990) argues that the purpose of historical case studies and comparative historical analysis is "to advance theoretical understanding in an implicitly inductive matter" (p. 126). The goal of this text is not theory testing or building. Rather, it is an attempt to add to the expanding feminist sociohistorical discourse which, in part, uncovers the silences ofthe past. Not all silences are equally addressed in this research, however, as issues of class and race were often elided by the primarily white, middle-class women who were involved in Progressive social "Lost Women" in Social Thought and Action 15 reform, and the Crane archives are no exception. Often the silences and absences in the historical record are as telling as the observed social patterns. Although race and class are seldom overtly addressed in the Crane archival collection, it is possible to read between the lines and assess the tensions between race, class and gender in the Progressive Era. Descriptive sociohistorical case studies and archival research facilitate an appreciation of sociohistorical patterns over time. Skocpol's (1984) call for narrative, specific causal explanations, rather than grand theories fits well with this perspective. Skocpol argues:

The primary aim is not to rework or reveal the inapplicability of an existing theoretical perspective, nor is it to generate an alternative paradigm to displace such a perspective .... the primary aim is to make sense of historical patterns, using in the process whatever theoretical resources seem useful and valid. (p. 17)

One of the hallmarks of feminist theory is the close connection between theory and practice. Feminists contend that feminist theory "reveals the social dimension of individual experience and the individual dimension of social experience" (Schneider, 1990, p. 229). This case study, in which I utilize Crane's archival data to "see the general in the particular" (Bauman, 1990, p.10), is an excellent case in point. Elizabeth Schneider (1990) states:

Feminist theory involves a particular methodology, but it also has a substantive viewpoint and political orientation. Recognizing the links between individual change and social change means understanding the importance of political activity, not just theory. Theory emerges from practice and practice then informs and reshapes theory. (p. 229)

Liz Kelly, Shelia Burton and Linda Regan (1994) suggest that "[f]eminism for us is both a theory and practice, a framework which informs our lives. Its purpose is to understand women's oppression in order that we might end it" (p. 28). They contend that the goal of feminist research is to "create useful knowledge" (ibid.). Crane and her cohort of Progressive women reformers would feel very comfortable with that philosophy and goal, as they worked for praxis in the application of 16 Caroline Bartlett Crane and Progressive Reform scientific knowledge toward social reform. Many social reformers in that period, including Crane, combined theory and action into a pragmatist approach to reform which focused on education, experience, democracy and the environment (Deegan, 1996b; Feffer, 1993; Seigfried, 1996). Ann-Louise Shapiro (1994) urges a feminist historical consciousness which "recovers lost stories" and decenters the narrative (pp. 1-2). Skocpol (1992) found it necessary to decenter her own narrative in her investigation of the provision of social services in the Progressive era. While she was searching for causal explanations in traditional theoretical frames ofthe period, she found the real story was being written by women on the margins of the political system. None of the current political theoretical perspectives, which by their very nature excluded women, were adequate. Only by looking at what was not there, and who was excluded from the picture, was she able to draw some conclusions concerning the paradox of the unexpected failure of male-centered reforms and the unlikely success of women-centered reform efforts. This study is guided by a feminist approach to sociohistorical research. It is informed by my particular social and political concerns regarding the gendered nature of agency and structure, and social knowledge and social activism. However, I attempt to read and (re )interpret the historical data in my study from the perspective of the past, as well as that of the present; from the viewpoint of those who did not already know the end from the beginning.

SUMMARY In this chapter I introduce the topic of the text: the role of women in Progressive Era social reform and the history of sociology, as seen from the perspective of Unitarian minister and Progressive social reformer Caroline Bartlett Crane. I present the feminist theoretical and methodological debates which frame the research, and state my theoretical and methodological position within this particular research process. In Chapter 2 I outline the historical background of the life of Caroline Bartlett Crane and the Progressive period (ca. 1890-1920) of American society. I examine the relationship between early sociology at the University of Chicago and Crane's ideology for social reform in greater detail in References “A Noted Woman Preacher.” 7 March 1897. Newspaper clipping from the New York Sun . In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. “A Place to Fill.” n.d. Newspaper clipping from the Kalamazoo Daily Telegraph . In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. “A Woman Preacher in Brooklyn.” n.d. Unidentified newspaper clipping. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Abbott, P. and Wallace, C. 1990. An Introduction to Sociology: Feminist Perspectives. London: Routledge. Adams, S. 6 September 1913. “U.S. Inspected and Passed: A Review of Caroline Bartlett Crane’s Striking Series of Articles on Bad Meat and Worse Politics in Pearson’s Magazine .” Reprint from the Survey, New York. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Addams, J. September 1898. “The College Woman and the Family Claim.” The Commons: 3–7. Addams, J. 1960 [1910]. Twenty Years at Hull-House. New York: Macmillan. Alcoff, L. and Potter, E. (Eds.). 1993. Feminist Epistemologies. New York: Routledge. Alpem, S. , Antler, J. , Israels, P. and Scobie, I. (Eds.). 1992. The Challenge of Feminist Biography: Writing the Lives of Modern American Women. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Babbie, E. 1986. The Practice of Social Research (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Baker, P. 1984. “The Domestication of Politics: Women and American Political Society, 1780–1920.” American Historical Review 89: 620–647. Banner, L. 1980. Elizabeth Cady Stanton: A Radical for Woman’s Rights. Boston, MA: Little, Brown. Bannister, R. 1987. Sociology and Scientism: The American Quest for Objectivity, 1880–1940. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Barbre, J. (Eds.). 1989. Interpreting Women’s Lives: Feminist Theory and Personal Narratives. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Barrett, M. 1992. “Words and Things: Materalism and Method in Contemporary Feminist Analysis.” In Barrett, M. and Phillips, A. (Eds.), Destabilizing Theory: Contemporary Feminist Debates, pp. 201–219. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Bauman, Z. 1990. Thinking Sociologically. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell. Beard, M. 1915. Woman’s Work in Municipalities. New York: Appleton. Bennett, H. September 1910. “Caroline Bartlett Crane of Kalamazoo.” Pictorial Review: 12, 13, 63. Bennett, H. 1915. American Women in Civic Work. New York: Dodd, Mead. Berg, B. 1989. Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. “Biographical Sketch” ca. 1933. Typescript, pp. 1–19. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Blair, K. 1980. The Clubwoman as Feminist. New York: Holmes and Meier Pub. Brace, B. February 1925. “A Home Built Around a Mother: The Story of the Kalamazoo ‘Better Home’ in America.” Delineator 106: 2, 66, 68, 71. Breckinridge, S. 1972 [1933]. Women in the Twentieth Century. New York: Arno Press. Brooks, P.C. 1969. Research in Archives: The Use of Unpublished Primary Sources. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Brown, A. 1972. “Caroline Bartlett Crane and Urban Reform.” Michigan History 56(4): 287–301. Bulmer, M. 1984. The Chicago School of Sociology: Institutionalization, Diversity and the Rise of Sociological Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Bulmer, M. , Bales, K. and Sklar, K. (Eds.). 1991. The Social Survey in Historical Perspective, 1880–1940. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Burke, F. 1981. “The Future Course of Archival Theory in the United States.” American Archivist 44(1): 40–46. Campbell, B. 1978. The “Liberated” Woman of 1914: Prominent Women in the Progressive Era. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press. “Caroline Bartlett Crane: Women’s Clubs.” ca. 1904. Unidentified newspaper clipping Kalamazoo. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Cashman, S. 1988. America in the Age of the Titans: The Progressive Era and World War I. New York: New York University Press. “Cleaner Chicago Prospect Bright.” 11 November 1907. Newspaper clipping from the Chicago Tribune . In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Clemens, E. 1993. “Organizational Repertoires and Institutional Change: Women’s Groups and the Transformation of U.S. Politics, 1890–1920.” American Journal of Sociology 98(4): 755–798. Cohen, S. 1991. “The Pittsburgh Survey and the Social Survey Movement: A Sociological Road Not Taken.” In Bulmer, M. (Eds.), The Social Survey in Historical Perspective, 1880–1940, pp. 245–268. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Collins, P. 1991. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness and the Politics of Empowerment. New York: Routledge. “Constitution and By-laws of the Women’s Civic Improvement League.” 1904 Leaflet Kalamazoo, Michigan. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collections, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collection, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Conway, J. 1987. “Women Reformers and American Culture, 1870–1930.” In Friedman, J. (Eds.), Our American Sisters: Women in American Life and Thought (4th ed.), pp. 390–410. Lexington, MA: Heath. Cook, B.W. 1991. “Female Support Networks and Political Activism: Lillian Wald, Crystal Eastman, Emma Goldman.” In Kerber, L. and De Hart, J.S. (Eds.) Women’s America: Refocusing the Past (3rd ed.), pp. 306–325. New York: Oxford University Press. Cook, J. and Fonow, M.M. 1986. “Knowledge and Women’s Interest: Issues of Epistemology and Methodology in Feminist Sociological Research.” Sociological Inquiry 56(1) (Winter): 2–30. Cott, N. 1977. The Bonds of Womanhood: “Women’s Sphere” in New England, 1780–1835. New Haven: Yale University Press. Cott, N. 1987. The Grounding of Modern Feminism. New Haven: Yale University Press. Cowan, R. 1983. More Work for Mother: The Ironies of Household Technology from the Open Hearth to the Microwave. New York: Basic Books. Crane, C.B. 1891. “Travel Journals, Europe,” vol. 2. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1894. “What Women Can Do in Uniting the Culture and Religious Forces in Society.” Address before the First American Congress of Liberal Religious Societies, Chicago, pp. 18–21. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 6 August 1896. “The Word of the Spirit.” The New Unity, pp. 382–384. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 9 January 1898. “The Annual Sermon.” In the Annual Program (1897) of the People’s Church, Kalamazoo, Michigan, pp. 49–57. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. October 1900. “The Folly of Overwork.” Club Women, pp. 5–6. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1903. “Daily Reminder—1903.” In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 7 January 1904a. “The Argument for Local Meat Inspection.” Address at the 7th General Conference of Health Officials, Ann Arbor, Michigan. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1904b. “Women’s Clubs As Related to Penal and Pauper Problems.” Address to the Michigan Conference of Charities and Corrections 23rd annual convention. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 6 May 1905. “The Story of an Institutional Church in a Small City.” Charities 15: 1–8. Reprint. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1906a. “The Women’s Civic Improvement League” Pamphlet. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1906b. “Juvenile Civic League Work.” Women’s Municipal League Bulletin 5(4): 1–6. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1908a. “The White Women’s Burden.” Address to the Illinois State Federation of Women’s Club annual convention, pp. 15, 17. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. April 1908b. “The Women’s Club in the Fight against Tuberculosis.” The Journal of the Michigan State Medical Society: 199–210. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. ca. 1909. “Mrs. Crane Discusses Luncheon.” Kalamazoo Evening Telegraph. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1909. “Interest in Meat Inspection.” Typescript. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1910. General Sanitary Survey of Erie, Pennsylvania. Erie, PA, 22 pp. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1911a. “Municipal Housekeeping.” Baltimore. Reprinted from Proceedings of Baltimore City-Wide Congress, March 8–10, 1911: 205–225. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1911b. “Introduction.” Report of a Campaign to Awaken Public Interest in Sanitary and Sociologic Problems in the State of Minnesota: 7–12. Saint Paul, MN: Voldszeitung. Crane, C.B. 5 July 1912. “Co-operation with State Boards of Health.” Address before the General Federation of Women’s Clubs, San Francisco, pp. 3–12. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1913a. “Business versus the Home.” Pamphlet from the National American Woman Suffrage Association. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. March–July 1913b. “U.S. Inspected and Passed.” Pearson’s Magazine. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 5 April 1924a. “Making Garbage Respectable.” The Woman Citizen: 13, 26. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1924b. “Scenario for Everyman’s House.” Typescript, 21 pp. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1925a. “Memories of C.C.” Carthage College Bulletin 9(1). In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1925b. Everyman’s House. New York: Doubleday, Page. Crane, C.B. April 1925c. “Most Convenient House in the World.” Country Life 47: 70–76. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crane, C.B. 1933. “The City Sanitarian.” Typescript, pp. 1–6. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Crunden, R. 1982. Ministers of Reform: The Progressives’ Achievement in American Civilization. New York: Basic Books. Curtis, S. 1991. A Consuming Faith: The Social Gospel and Modern American Culture. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Davis, A. 1973. American Heroine. New York: Oxford University Press. Davis, A. 1967. Spearheads for Reform: The Social Settlements and the Progressive Movement, 1890–1914. New York: Oxford University Press. de Beauvoir, S. 1953. The Second Sex. New York: Knopf. Deegan, M.J. 1988. Jane Addams and the Men of the Chicago School, 1892–1918. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. Deegan, M.J. (Ed.). 1991. Women in Sociology: A Bio-Bibliographical Sourcebook. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Deegan, M.J. 1995. “A Century of Progress and Loss: Women in Sociology at the University of Chicago, 1892–1992.” In Fine, G. (Ed.), A Second Chicago School?: The Development of a Postwar American Sociology, pp. 322–364. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Deegan, M.J. May 1996a. “A Century of Progress and Loss: Women in Sociology at the University of Chicago, 1892–1992.” Paper presented at the International Sociological Association Research Committee on the History of Sociology Amsterdam Conference. Deegan, M.J. 1996b. “Dear Love, Dear Love: Feminist Pragmatism and the Chicago Female World of Love and Ritual.” Gender and Society 10: 590–607. Denzin, N. 1989. Interpretive Biography. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Diner, S. 1980. A City and Its Universities: Public Policy in Chicago. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. DuBois, E. 1978. Feminism and Suffrage: The Emergence of an Independent Women’s Movement in America, 1848–1869. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. DuBois, E. (Ed.). 1981. Elizabeth Cady Stanton/Susan B. Anthony: Correspondence, Writings, Speeches. New York: Schocken Books. DuBois, E. 1986. “Working Women, Class Relations, and Suffrage Militance: Harriot Stanton Blatch and the New York Woman Suffrage Movement, 1894–1909 7’ Journal of American History 74: 34–58. DuBois, E. 1987. “Outgrowing the Compact of the Fathers: Equal Rights, Woman Suffrage and the United States Constitution, 1820–1878.” Journal of American History 75(3): 836–862. DuBois, E. 1991. “Harriot Stanton Blatch and the Transformation of Class Relations among Woman Suffragists.” In Frankel, N. and Dye, N. (Eds.), Gender, Class, Race and Reform in the Progressive Era, pp. 162–179. Lexington University Press of Kentucky. Duffy, J. 1990. The Sanitarians: A History of American Public Health. Urbana, IL: University of Chicago Press. “Duties of citizenship.” 8 January 1894. Newspaper clipping from the Kalamazoo Daily Telegraph . In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collection, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Dye, N. 1991. “Introduction.” In Frankel, N. and Dye, N. (Eds.), Gender, Class, Race and Reform in the Progressive Era, pp.1–9. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky. Eisenstein, H. 1983. Contemporary Feminist Thought. Boston, MA: Hall. Evans, M. 1993. “Reading Lives: How the Personal Might be Social.” Sociology 27(1): 5–13. Fairchild, E. 1896. “The Function of the Church.” American Journal of Sociology 11(2): 220–233. Faris, R. 1967. Chicago Sociology, 1920–1931. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Farrell, J. 1967. Beloved Lady. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Faulkner, H. 1931. The Quest for Social Justice. New York: Macmillian. Feagin, J. , Orum, A. and Sjoberg, G. 1991. A Case for the Case Study. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Feffer, A. 1993. The Chicago Pragmatists and American Progressives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Firestone, S. 1970. The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution. New York: Bantam Books. Fitzpatrick, E. 1990. Endless Crusade: Women Social Scientists and Progressive Reform. New York: Oxford University Press. Flexner, E. 1972 [1959]. Century of Struggle: The Woman’s Rights Movement in the United States. New York: Atheneum. Foucault, M. 1979. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage. Frankel, N. and Dye, N. (Eds.). 1991. Gender, Class, Race and Reform in the Progressive Era. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky. Franklin, B. and Osborne, H. (Eds.). 1971. Research Methods: Issues and Insights. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Gamson, W. 1990 [1975]. The Strategy of Social Protest. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Giddings, P. 1985. Where and When I Enter: The Impact of Black Women on Race and Sex in America. New York: Bantam Books. Gilman, C.P. 1966 [1898]. Women and Economics: The Economic Factor between Men and Women as a Factor in Social Evolution. New York: Harper Torchbooks. Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine De Gruyer. Goffman, E. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Goffman, E. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. Garden Center, NY: Anchor Books. Goffman, E. 1974. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper and Row. Gordon, L. 1988. Heroes of Their Own Lives: The Politics and History of Family Violence. New York: Penguin Books Gordon, L. 1990. “The New Feminist Scholarship on the Welfare State.” In Gordon, L. (Ed.), Women, the State and Welfare, pp.9–35. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Gordon, L. 1994. Pitied but Not Entitled: Single Mothers and the History of Welfare, 1890–1935. New York: Free Press. Gorrell, D. 1988. The Age of Responsibility: The Social Gospel in the Progressive Era, 1900–1920. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press. Grant, J. 1993. Fundamental Feminism: Contesting the Core Concepts of Feminist Theory. New York: Routledge. Hamel, J. 1993. Case Study Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Hampsten, E. 1982. Read This Only to Yourself: The Private Writings of Midwestern Women, 1880–1910. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Haraway, D. 1990. “A Manifesto for Cyborgs.” In Nicholson, L. (Ed.). Feminism/Postmodernism, pp. 190–233. New York: Routledge Haraway, D. 1991. Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge. Harding, S. (Ed.). 1987. Feminism and Methodology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Harding, S. 1993. “Reinventing Ourselves as Other.” In Kauffman, L. (Ed.), American Feminist Thought at Century’s End, pp. 140–164. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Harris, L. 1975. The Myth and Reality of Aging in America. Washington, D.C.: National Council on the Aging. Hartman, J. and Messer-Davidow, E. (Eds.). 1991. (En)Gendering Knowledge: Feminists in Academe. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press. Hartsock, N. 1983. Money, Sex and Power. New York: Longman. Hayden, D. 1981. The Grand Domestic Revolution: A History of Feminist Designs for American Homes, Neighborhoods and Cities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hayden, D. 1984. Redesigning the American Dream: The Future of Housing, Work and Family Life. New York: Norton. Henderson, C. 1896. “The Rise of the German Inner Mission.” American Journal of Sociology 1(5): 583–595. Henderson, C. 1907 [1897]. The Social Spirit in America. Chicago, IL: Scott, Foresman. Herman, S.J. 17–19 June 1929. “Why ‘Public Credits’ Is the Logical and Practical Solution of the Housing Problem of the Lower Income Group.” Reprint of speech given at the Conference of Town Planning, Institute of Canada. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Hill, M. 1993. Archival Techniques and Strategies. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Hill, M. 1995 [1989]. “Empiricism and Reason in Harriet Martineau’s Sociology.” In Martineau, H. How to Observe Morals and Manners, pp.ix–xv. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. Hirsh, M. and Keller, E.F. (Eds.). 1990. Conflicts in Feminism. New York: Routledge. Hochschild, A. 1989. The Second Shift: Working Parents and the Revolution at Home. New York: Viking. Hoecker-Drysdale, S. 1992. Harriet Martineau: First Woman Sociologist. Oxford: Berg. Hopkins, C. 1982 [1940]. The Rise of the Social Gospel in American Protestantism, 1865–1915. New Haven: Yale University Press. Howerth, I.W. 1897. “A Programme for Social Study.” American Journal of Sociology 11(6): 852–872. Hoy, S. 1980. “Municipal Housekeeping: The Role of Women in Improving Urban Sanitation Practices.” In Melosi, M. (Ed.), Pollution and Reform in American Cities, 1870–1930, pp. 174–178. Austin: University of Texas Press. Hoy, S. 1995. Chasing Dirt: The American pursuit of cleanliness. New York: Oxford University Press. “If Women Vote.” ca. 1896. Unidentified newspaper clipping, Louisville, Kentucky. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Kasler, D. 5 November 1981. “Methodological Problems of a Sociological History of Early German Sociology.” Paper presented at the Department of Education, University of Chicago. Kelly, L. , Burton, S. and Regan, L. 1994. “Researching Women’s Lives or Studying Women’s Oppression? Reflections on What Constitutes Feminist Research.” In Maynard, M. and Purvis, J. (Eds.), Researching Women’s Lives from a Feminist Perspective, pp. 27–48. London: Taylor and Francis. Kerber, L. 1988. “Separate Spheres, Female Worlds, Woman’s Place: The Rhetoric of Women’s History.” Journal of American History 75(1): 9–39. Kerber, L. and DeHart, J.S. 1991. Women’s America: Refocusing the Past (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Kerber, L. , Kessler-Harris, A. and Sklar, K. (Eds.). 1995. U.S. History as Women’s History: New Feminist Essays. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Knight, D. (Ed.). 1994. The Diaries of Charlotte Perkins Gilman, vol. 2. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia. Koven, S. and Michel, S. (Eds.). 1993. Mothers of a New World: Maternalist Politics and the Origins of Welfare States. New York: Routledge. Kraditor, A. 1965. The Ideas of the Woman Suffrage Movement. New York: Columbia University Press. Lebsock, S. 1984. The Free Women of Petersburg: Status and Culture in a Southern Town, 1784–1860. New York: Norton. Lebsock, S. 1990. “Women and American Politics, 1880–1920.” In Tilly, L. and Gurin, P. (Eds.), Women, Politics and Change, pp.35–62. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Lemert, C. 1994. “Series Editor Preface.” In Clough, P. (Ed.). Feminist Thought: Desire, Power and Academic Discourse, pp. ix–xi. Oxford: Blackwell. Lengerman, P. and Niebrugge-Brantley, J. 1998. The Women Founders: Sociology and Social Theory, 1830–1930. New York: McGraw Hill. Leonard, J. (Ed.). 1914. “Caroline Bartlett Crane.” In Woman’s Who’s Who of America: A Biographical Dictionary of Contemporary Women of the United States and Canada, 1914–1915, pp. 213–214. New York: American Commonwealth. Link, A. 1954. Woodrow Wilson and the Progressive Era, 1910–1917. New York: Harper and Brothers. Link, A. and McCormick, R. 1983. Progressivism. Arlington Heights, IL: Harlen Davidson. MacKinnon, C. 1993. “Reflections on Sex Equality under Law.” In Kaufman, L. (Ed.), American Feminist Thought at Century’s End: A Reader, pp.367–424. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Mansbridge, J. 1986. Why We Lost the ERA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Mann, A. (Ed.). 1975. The Progressive Era. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden Press. Marshall, S. 1985. “Ladies against Women: Mobilization Dilemmas of Antifeminist Movements.” Social Problems 32(4): 348–362. May, H. 1949. Protestant Churches and Industrial America. New York: Harper and Brothers. Maynard, M. and Purvis, J. (Eds.). 1994. Researching Women’s Lives from a Feminist Perspective. London: Taylor and Francis. McCarthy, K. 1982. Noblesse Oblige: Charity and Cultural Philanthropy in Chicago, 1849–1929. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. McCarthy, K. (Ed.). 1990. Lady Bountiful Revisited: Women, Philanthropy and Power. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. McDonald, L. 1994. Early Origins of the Social Sciences. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press. McDonald, L. 1995. The Women Founders of the Social Sciences. Ottawa, Canada: Carleton University Press. Melosi, M. (Ed). 1980. Pollution and Reform in American Cities, 1870–1930. Austin: University of Texas Press. Melosi, M. 1981. Garbage in the Cities: Refuse, Reform in American Cities, 1870–1930. College Station: Texas A&M University Press. Millett, K. 1970. Sexual Politics. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Mills, C.W. 1959. The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press. “Miss Bartlett’s Church.” 3 October 1896. Newspaper clipping from the Chicago Record . In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Mowry, G. 1958. The Era of Theodore Roosevelt, 1900–1920. New York: Harper and Brothers. “Mrs. Crane and the Old Michigan Slaughter Houses.” 11 May 1912. Survey 28(6): 258. “Mrs. Crane Reformer and Lecturer.” 14 March 1909. Newspaper clipping from The Scrantonian . In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. “Mrs. Crane’s Motive.” 20 July 1912. The Woman’s Journal: 228. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. “Mrs. Crane’s Work in Kentucky.” 1 August 1909. Kentucky Medical Journal 7(13): 600–604. Muncy, R. 1991. Creating a Female Dominion in American Reform, 1890–1935. New York: Oxford University Press. Nelson, B. 1990. “The Origins of the Two-Channel Welfare State: Workmen’s Compensation and Mother’s Aid.” In Gordon, L. (Ed.), Women, the State and Welfare, pp. 123–151. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Nielsen, J. (Ed.). 1990. Feminist Research Methods: Exemplary Readings in the Social Sciences. Boulder: Westview Press. “Parents Lose the Custody.” 29 March 1905. Newspaper clipping from the Kalamazoo Gazette . In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Platt, J. 1992. “Acting as a Switchboard: Mrs. Ethel Sturges Dummer’s Role in Sociology.” The American Sociologist 23 (3): 23–36. Powell, A. November/December 1995. “Sociology on the Skids: A Once-Great Discipline Is Having an Identity Crisis.” Utne Reader. 28–30. Ragin, C. and Becker, H. 1992. What Is a Case: Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Reinharz, S. 1992. Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press. “Rev. Mrs. Crane Speaks.” 1903. Unidentified newspaper clipping. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Rickard, O. May/April 1985. “Minister of Municipalities: Caroline Bartlett Crane.” Kalamazoo Magazine: 10–12. Rickard, O. 1994. A Just Verdict: The Life of Caroline Bartlett Crane. Kalamazoo, MI: New Issues Press. Rittenhouse, J. 20 December 1896. “A Woman Pastor.” In Pittsburgh Leader. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Rosenberg, R. 1982. Beyond Separate Spheres: Intellectual Roots of Modern Feminism. New Haven: Yale University Press. Rosenberg, R. 1992. Divided Lives: American Women in the Twentieth Century. New York: Hill and Wang. Ross, D. 1991. The Origins of American Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rossi, A. (Ed.). 1973. The Feminist Papers. New York: Columbia University Press. Rowbotham, S. 1997. A Century of Women: The History of Women in Britain and the United States. London: Viking. Ryan, B. 1992. Feminism and the Women’s Movement: Dynamics of Change in Social Movement Activity. New York: Routledge. Rynbrandt, L. 1997. “The ‘Ladies of the Club’ and Caroline Bartlett Crane: Affiliation and Alienation in Progressive Social Reform.” Gender and Society 11: 200–214. Rynbrandt, L. Forthcoming. “Caroline Bartlett Crane and the History of Sociology: Salvation, Sanitation and the Social Gospel.” The American Sociologist. Santmyer, H. 1982 “… And Ladies of the Club.” New York: Berkeley Books. Schields, C. 1995. The Stone Diaries. New York: Penguin Books. Schneider, D. and Schneider, C. 1993. American Women in the Progressive Era, 1900–1920. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Schneider, E. 1990. “The Dialectic of Rights and Politics: Perspectives from the Women’s Movement.” In Gordon, L. (Ed.), Women, the State and Welfare, pp. 226–249. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Schwartz, H. and Jacobs, J. 1979. Qualitative Sociology: A Method to the Madness. New York: Free Press. Scott, A. 1984. Making the Invisible Woman Visible. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Scott, A. 1991. Natural Allies: Women’s Associations in American History. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Scott, J.W. 1986. “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis.” American Historical Review 91: 1053–1075. “Secures Divorces for Women Who Haven’t Money to Do It.” 11 March 1906. Newspaper clipping from the Detroit Free Press . In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Seigfried, C.H. 1996. Pragmatism and Feminism: Reweaving the Social Fabric. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Shapiro, A. (Ed.). 1994. Feminists Revision History. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Sherr, L. 1995. Failure Is Impossible: Susan B. Anthony in Her Own Words. New York: Random House. Sicherman, B. 1975. “American History.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 1(2): 461–485. Sinclair, U. 1906. The Jungle. New York: Doubleday, Page. Sklar, K.K. 1985. “Hull House in the 1890’s: A Community of Women Reformers.” Signs 10(Summer): 658–677. Sklar, K.K. 1988. “Organized Womanhood: Archival Sources on Women and Progressive Reform.” Journal of American History 75(1): 176–183. Sklar, K.K. 1992. “Coming to Terms with Florence Kelley: The Tale of a Relectant Biographer.” In Alpem, S. (Ed.), The Challenge of Feminist Biography: Writing the Lives of Modern American Women, pp. 17–33. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Sklar, K.K. 1995a. Florence Kelley and the Nations Work: The Rise of Women’s Political Culture, 1830–1900, vol. 1. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Sklar, K.K. 1995b. “Two Political Cultures in the Progressive Era: The National Consumers’ League and the American Association for Labor Legislation.” In Kerber, L. (Eds.), U.S. History as Women’s History: New Feminist Essays, pp.36–62. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Skocpol, T. (Ed.). 1984. Vision and Method in Historical Sociology. New York: Free Press. Skocpol, T. 1992. Protecting Soldiers and Mothers: The political Origins of Social Policy in the United States. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press. Skocpol, T. 1995. Social Policy in the United States: Future Possibilities in Historical Perspective. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Skretkowicz, V. May 1996. “Writing about War: Nightingale’s War Correspondence and the Making of Military Policy.” Paper presented at the International Sociological Association Research Committee on the History of Sociology Amsterdam Conference. Small, A. and Vincent, G. 1894. An Introduction to the Study of Society. New York: American Book. Small, A. 1895. “The Era of Sociology.” American Journal of Sociology 1(1): 1–15. Small, A. 1896a. “The Epitaph of Sociology.” American Journal of Sociology 1 (4): 509. Small, A. 1896b. “Scholarship and Social Agitation.” American Journal of Sociology 1(5): 564–582. Smith, D. 1979. “A sociology for women.” In J. Sherman and Beck, E. (Eds.), The Prism of Sex: Essays in the Sociology of Knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Smith, D. 1987a. The Everyday World as Problematic: A Feminist Sociology. Boston: Northeastern University Press. Smith, D. 1987b. “Women’s Perspective as a Radical Critique of Sociology.” In Harding, S. (Ed.). Feminism and Methodology, pp.84–96. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Smith-Rosenberg, C. 1975. “The Female World of Love and Ritual.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 1(1): 1–29. Snitow, A. 1990. “A Gender Diary.” In M. Hirsh and Keller, E.F. (Eds.), Conflicts in Feminism, pp. 9–43. New York: Routledge. “Sociology as a Study.” ca. 1897. Unidentified newspaper clipping, Milwaukee. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Solomon, B. 1985. The Company of Educated Women: A History of Women and Higher Education in America. New Haven: Yale University Press. Sprague, J. and Zimmerman, M. 1993. “Overcoming Dualisms: A Feminist Agenda for Sociological Methodology.” In England, P. (Ed.), Theory on Gender/Gender on Theory, pp. 255–280. New York: Aldine De Gruyter. Stacey, J. and Thome, B. 1985. “The Missing Feminist Revolution in Sociology.” Social Problems 32(4): 301–316. Stacey, J. 1995. “Disloyal to the Disciplines: A Feminist Trajectory in the Borderlands.” In Stanton, D. and Stewart, A. (Eds.), Feminism in the Academy, pp.311–329. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Stanley, L. and Wise, S. 1983. Breaking Out: Feminist Consciousness and Feminist Research. London: Routledge. Stanley, L. (Ed.). 1990. Feminist Praxis: Research, Theory and Epistemology in Feminist Sociology. London: Routledge. Stanton, D. and Stewart, A. (Eds.). 1995. Feminism in the Academy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Strasser, S. 1982. Never Done: A History of American Housework. New York: Pantheon Books. Talbot, M. 1896. “Sanitation and Sociology.” American Journal of Sociology 2(1): 74–81. Thomas, W.I. , and Znaniecki, F. 1927. The Polish Peasant in Europe and America, vols. 1 and 2. New York: Knopf. Thompson, P. June 1996. “At the Intersection of Practice & Theory: A Rethinking of the Archive.” Paper presented at the 17th Annual Conference of the National Women’s Studies Association, Saratoga Springs, New York. Tilly, L. 1989. “Gender, Women’s History and Social History.” Social Science History 13(4): 439–461. Tilly, L. and Gurin, P. (Eds.). 1990. Women, Politics and Change. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Tuana, N. 1993. “With Many Voices: Feminism and Theoretical Pluralism.” In England, P. (Ed.), Theory on Gender/Feminism on Theory, pp. 281–290. New York: Aldine De Gruyter. Tucker, C.G. 1990. Prophetic Sisterhood: Liberal Women Ministers of the Frontier, 1880–1930. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Wallace, R. (Ed.). 1989. Feminism and Sociological Theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. “Wedding Vows.” 1896. pp. 1–4. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. West, G. and Blumberg, R. (Eds.). 1990. Woman And Social Protest. New York: Oxford University Press. Wiebe, R. 1967. The Search for Order, 1877–1920. New York: Hill and Wang. Wilson, J. 1993. “The Subject Woman.” In England, P. (Ed.), Theory on Gender/Feminism on Theory, pp. 343–357. New York: Aldine De Gruyter. “Woman and Her Larger Home.” January 1909. Good Housekeeping 48: 3–10. “Woman as Municipal Housekeeper.” 2 May 1910. Newspaper clipping in the Chicago Record . In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collection, Kalamazoo, Michigan. “Woman Can Be Power Without Voting.” 5 February 1912. Newspaper clipping in the New York Evening Mail . In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collection, Kalamazoo, Michigan. “Women’s Civic Improvement League.” Leaflet. 1904. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. “Women of New York.” 1904. Newspaper clipping in the Kalamazoo Evening Telegraph . In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. “Who but a Woman?” 22 September 1910. The New Unity, pp. 52–55. In the Caroline Bartlett Crane Collection, Western Michigan University Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Wiley, H.W. July 1912. “Attack on Caroline Bartlett Crane.” Good Housekeeping 55: 107–109. Wright, G. 1980. Moralism and the Model Home: Domestic Architecture and Cultural Conflict in Chicago, 1837–1913. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Wright, G. 1981. Building the Dream: A Social History of Housing in America. New York: Pantheon Books. Yeatman, A. 1990. “A Feminist Theory of Social Differentiation.” In Nicholson, L. (Ed.), Feminism/Postmodernism, pp.281–299. New York: Routledge. Yin, R. 1993. Applications of Case Study Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.