#2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

2004 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS For Public Sociology

Michael Burawoy University of California–Berkeley

Responding to the growing gap between the sociological ethos and the world we study, the challenge of public sociology is to engage multiple publics in multiple ways. These public sociologies should not be left out in the cold, but brought into the framework of our discipline. In this way we make public sociology a visible and legitimate enterprise, and, thereby, invigorate the discipline as a whole. Accordingly, if we map out the division of sociological labor, we discover antagonistic interdependence among four types of knowledge: professional, critical, policy, and public. In the best of all worlds the flourishing of each type of sociology is a condition for the flourishing of all, but they can just as easily assume pathological forms or become victims of exclusion and subordination. This field of power beckons us to explore the relations among the four types of sociology as they vary historically and nationally, and as they provide the template for divergent individual careers. Finally, comparing disciplines points to the umbilical chord that connects sociology to the world of publics, underlining sociology’s particular investment in the defense of civil society, itself beleaguered by the encroachment of markets and states.

This is how one pictures the angel of history. His caught in his wings with such violence that the face is turned towards the past. Where we per- angel can no longer close them. This storm irre- ceive a chain of events, he sees one single catas- sistibly propels him into the future to which his trophe which keeps piling wreckage upon back is turned, while the pile of debris before wreckage and hurls it in front of his feet. The him grows skyward. This storm is what we call progress. angel would like to stay, awaken the dead, and —Walter Benjamin make whole what has been smashed. But a storm is blowing from Paradise; it has got alter Benjamin wrote his famous ninth Wthesis on the philosophy of history as the Direct all correspondence to Michael Burawoy, Nazi army approached his beloved Paris, hal- Department of Sociology, University of California, lowed sanctuary of civilization’s promise. He Berkeley, CA 94720 (burawoy@socrates. portrays this promise in the tragic figure of the berkeley.edu). Innumerable people, impossible to angel of history, battling in vain against civi- acknowledge by name, have contributed to this proj- lization’s long march through destruction. To ect. However, the author would like to thank Sally Benjamin, in 1940, the future had never looked Hillsman, Bobbie Spalter-Roth and Carla Howery in bleaker with capitalism-become-fascism in a the American Sociological Association office, all of joint pact with socialism-become-Stalinism to whom helped in many ways, not least in providing overrun the world. Today, at the dawn of the 21st facts and figures, and organizing speaking engage- ments. For their comments on a draft of this paper century, although communism has dissolved thanks to Barbara Risman, Don Tomaskovic-Devey, and fascism is a haunting memory, the debris and their students, as well as to Chas Camic and continues to grow skyward. Unfettered capi- Jerry Jacobs. The live version of this address can be talism fuels market tyrannies and untold obtained on DVD from the American Sociological inequities on a global scale, while resurgent Association. democracy too often becomes a thin veil for

AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2005, VOL. 70 (February:4–28) #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

FOR PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY—–5 powerful interests, disenfranchisement, men- intensive examinations, literature reviews, tai- dacity, and even violence. Once again the angel lored dissertations, refereed publications, the of history is swept up in a storm, a terrorist all-mighty CV, the job search, the tenure file, storm blowing from Paradise. and then policing one’s colleagues and succes- In its beginning sociology aspired to be such sors to make sure we all march in step. Still, an angel of history, searching for order in the despite the normalizing pressures of careers, broken fragments of modernity, seeking to sal- the originating moral impetus is rarely van- vage the promise of progress. Thus, Karl Marx quished, the sociological spirit cannot be extin- recovered socialism from alienation; Emile guished so easily. Durkheim redeemed organic solidarity from Constrictions notwithstanding, discipline— anomie and egoism. Max Weber, despite pre- in both the individual and collective senses of monitions of “a polar night of icy darkness,” the word—has born its fruits. We have spent a could discover freedom in rationalization, and century building professional knowledge, trans- extract meaning from disenchantment. On this lating common sense into science, so that now, side of the Atlantic W. E. B. Du Bois pioneered we are more than ready to embark on a sys- pan-Africanism in reaction to racism and impe- tematic back-translation, taking knowledge back rialism, while Jane Addams tried to snatch peace to those from whom it came, making public and internationalism from the jaws of war. But issues out of private troubles, and thus regen- then the storm of progress got caught in soci- erating sociology’s moral fiber. Herein lies the ology’s wings. If our predecessors set out to promise and challenge of public sociology, the change the world we have too often ended up complement and not the negation of profes- conserving it. Fighting for a place in the aca- sional sociology. demic sun, sociology developed its own spe- To understand the production of public soci- cialized knowledge, whether in the form of the ology, its possibilities and its dangers, its poten- brilliant and lucid erudition of Robert Merton tialities and its contradictions, its successes and (1949), the arcane and grand design of Talcott failures, during the last 18 months I have dis- Parsons (1937, 1951), or the early statistical cussed and debated public sociology in over 40 treatment of mobility and stratification, culmi- venues, from community colleges to state asso- nating in the work of Peter Blau and Otis Dudley ciations to elite departments across the United Duncan (1967). Reviewing the 1950s, Seymour States—as well as in England, Canada, Norway, Martin Lipset and Neil Smelser (1961:1–8) Taiwan, Lebanon, and South Africa. The call for could triumphantly declare sociology’s moral public sociology resonated with audiences wher- prehistory finally over and the path to science ever I went. Debates resulted in a series of sym- fully open. Not for the first time Comtean posia on public sociology, including ones in visions had gripped sociology’s professional Social Problems (February, 2004), Social Forces elite. As before this burst of “pure science” was (June, 2004), and Critical Sociology (Summer, short lived. A few years later, campuses—espe- 2005). Footnotes, the newsletter of the American cially those where sociology was strong—were Sociological Association (ASA), developed a ignited by political protest for free speech, civil special column on public sociology, the results rights, and peace, indicting consensus sociolo- of which are brought together in An Invitation gy and its uncritical embrace of science. The to Public Sociology (American Sociological angel of history had once again fluttered in the Association 2004). Departments have organ- storm. ized awards and blogs on pubic sociology, the The dialectic of progress governs our indi- ASA has unveiled its own site for public soci- vidual careers as well as our collective disci- ology, and introductory textbooks have taken up pline. The original passion for social justice, the theme of public sociology. Sociologists have economic equality, human rights, sustainable appeared more regularly in the opinion pages of environment, political freedom or simply a bet- our national newspapers. The 2004 ASA annu- ter world, that drew so many of us to sociolo- al meetings, devoted to the theme of public gy, is channeled into the pursuit of academic sociologies, broke all records for attendance credentials. Progress becomes a battery of dis- and participation and did so by a considerable ciplinary techniques—standardized courses, margin. These dark times have aroused the angel validated reading lists, bureaucratic rankings, of history from his slumbers. #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

6—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

I offer 11 theses. They begin with the reasons attack on “fat-cat sociology,” and forthright for the appeal of public sociologies today, turn- demands from the Caucus of Black Sociologists, ing to their multiplicity and their relation to the the Radical Caucus, and the Caucus of Women discipline as a whole—the discipline being Sociologists, oppositional voices were still in a understood both as a division of labor and as a minority. The majority of members had grown field of power. I examine the matrix of profes- up in and imbibed the liberal conservatism of sional, policy, public, and critical sociologies as the earlier postwar sociology. Over time, how- it varies historically and among countries, com- ever, the radicalism of the 1960s diffused paring sociology with other disciplines, before through the profession, albeit in diluted form. finally turning to what makes sociology so spe- The increasing presence and participation of cial, not just as a science but as a moral and women and racial minorities, the ascent of the political force. 1960s generation to leadership positions in departments and our association, marked a crit- THESIS I: THE SCISSORS MOVEMENT ical drift that is echoed in the content of soci- ology.2 The aspiration for public sociology is stronger Thus, political sociology turned from the and its realization ever more difficult, as soci- virtues of American electoral democracy to ology has moved left and the world has moved studying the state and its relation to classes, right. social movements as political process, and the deepening of democratic participation. To what shall we attribute the current appeal of Sociology of work turned from processes of public sociology? To be sure, it reminds so adaptation to the study of domination and labor many of why they became sociologists, but pub- movements. Stratification shifted from the study lic sociology has been around for some time, so of social mobility within a hierarchy of occu- why might it suddenly take off? pational prestige to the examination of chang- Over the last half century the political cen- ing structures of social and economic ter of gravity of sociology has moved in a crit- inequality—class, race, and gender. The soci- ical direction while the world it studies has ology of development abandoned modernization moved in the opposite direction. Thus, in 1968, theory for underdevelopment theory, world sys- members of the ASA were asked to vote on a tems’ analyses, and state orchestrated growth. member resolution against the Vietnam War. Race theory moved from theories of assimila- Of those who voted, two-thirds opposed the tion to political economy to the study of racial ASA taking a position, while in a separate opin- formations. Social theory introduced more rad- ion question, 54% expressed their individual ical interpretations of Weber and Durkheim, opposition to the war (Rhoades 1981:60)— and incorporated Marx into the canon. If fem- roughly the same proportion as in the general inism was not quite let into the canon, it cer- population at the time. In 2003, 35 years later, tainly had a dramatic impact on most substantive a similar member resolution against the war in fields of sociology. Globalization is wreaking Iraq was put to the ASA membership and two- havoc with sociology’s basic unit of analysis— thirds favored the resolution (Footnotes the nation-state—while compelling deparochiali- July–August 2003). Even more significant, in zation of our discipline. There have, of course, the corresponding opinion poll, 75% of those who voted said they were against the war, at a time (late May, 2003) that 75% of the general population supported the war.1 2 In 1968, the 19 elected members of the ASA Given the leftward drift of the 1960s this is Council were white and male, except for one woman, an unexpected finding. Despite the turbulence Mirra Komarovsky. In 2004, the 20 member Council of the 1968 Annual Meeting in Boston, which was exactly 50% female and 50% minority. As to the included Martin Nicolaus’s famous and fearless broad profession, between 1966 and 1969, 18.6% of sociology PhDs were earned by women, whereas the figure was 58.4% in 2001. Figures for racial break- 1 Data for public support of the Vietnam War come down begin later. In 1980, 14.4% of sociology PhDs from Mueller (1973: Table 3.3), while data for pub- were earned by minorities, whereas in 2001 the fig- lic support of Iraq War come from Gallup Polls. ure was 25.6%. #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

FOR PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY—–7 been counter-movements—for example, the THESIS II: THE MULTIPLICITY OF ascendancy of assimilation studies in immi- PUBLIC SOCIOLOGIES gration or the neoinstitutionalists who docu- There are multiple public sociologies, reflecting ment the worldwide diffusion of American different types of publics and multiple ways of institutions—but over the last half century the accessing them. Traditional and organic public overwhelming movement has been in a critical sociologies are two polar but complementary direction. types. Publics can be destroyed but they can also If the succession of political generations and be created. Some never disappear—our stu- the changing content of sociology is one arm of dents are our first and captive public. the scissors, the other arm, moving in the oppo- What should we mean by public sociology? site direction, is the world we study. Even as the Public sociology brings sociology into a con- rhetoric of equality and freedom intensifies so versation with publics, understood as people sociologists have documented ever-deepening who are themselves involved in conversation. It inequality and domination. Over the last 25 entails, therefore, a double conversation. years earlier gains in economic security and Obvious candidates are W. E. B. Du Bois (1903), civil rights have been reversed by market expan- The Souls of Black Folk, Gunnar Myrdal (1994), sion (with their attendant inequalities) and coer- An American Dilemma, David Riesman (1950), cive states, violating rights at home and abroad. The Lonely Crowd, and Robert Bellah et al. All too often, market and state have collaborated (1985), Habits of the Heart. What do all these against humanity in what has commonly come books have in common? They are written by to be known as neoliberalism. To be sure, soci- sociologists, they are read beyond the academy, ologists have become more sensitive, more and they become the vehicle of a public dis- focused on the negative, but the evidence they cussion about the nature of U.S. society—the have accumulated does suggest regression in so nature of its values, the gap between its prom- many arenas. And, of course, as I write, we are ise and its reality, its malaise, its tendencies. In governed by a regime that is deeply antisocio- the same genre of what I call traditional public logical in its ethos, hostile to the very idea of sociology we can locate sociologists who write “society.” in the opinion pages of our national newspapers In our own backyard, the university has suf- where they comment on matters of public fered mounting attacks from the National importance. Alternatively, journalists may carry Association of Scholars for harboring too many academic research into the public realm, as they liberals. At the same time, facing declining did with, for example, Chris Uggen and Jeff budgets, and under intensified competition, Manza’s (2002) article in the American public universities have responded with market Sociological Review on the political signifi- cance of felon disenfranchisement and Devah solutions—joint ventures with private corpora- Pager’s (2002) dissertation on the way race tions, advertising campaigns to attract students, swamps the effects of criminal record on the fawning over private donors, commodifying employment prospects of youth. With tradi- education through distance learning, employing tional public sociology the publics being cheap temporary professional labor, not to men- addressed are generally invisible in that they tion the armies of low-paid service workers cannot be seen, thin in that they do not gener- (Kirp 2003; Bok 2003). Is the market solution ate much internal interaction, passive in that the only solution? Do we have to abandon the they do not constitute a movement or organi- very idea of the university as a “public” good? zation, and they are usually mainstream. The The interest in a public sociology is, in part, a traditional public sociologist instigates debates reaction and a response to the privatization of within or between publics, although he or she everything. Its vitality depends on the resusci- might not actually participate in them. tation of the very idea of “public,” another casu- There is, however, another type of public alty of the storm of progress. Hence the paradox: sociology—organic public sociology in which the widening gap between the sociological ethos the sociologist works in close connection with and the world we study inspires the demand a visible, thick, active, local and often counter- and, simultaneously, creates the obstacles to public. The bulk of public sociology is indeed public sociology. How should we proceed? of an organic kind—sociologists working with #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

8—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW a labor movement, neighborhood associations, can participate in their creation as well as their communities of faith, immigrant rights groups, transformation. Indeed, part of our business as human rights organizations. Between the organ- sociologists is to define human categories— ic public sociologist and a public is a dialogue, people with AIDS, women with breast cancer, a process of mutual education. The recognition women, gays—and if we do so with their col- of public sociology must extend to the organic laboration we create publics. The category kind which often remains invisible, private, and woman became the basis of a public —an active, is often considered to be apart from our pro- thick, visible, national nay international counter fessional lives. The project of such public soci- -public—because intellectuals, sociologists ologies is to make visible the invisible, to make among them, defined women as marginalized, the private public, to validate these organic con- left out, oppressed, and silenced, that is, defined nections as part of our sociological life. them in ways they recognized. From this brief Traditional and organic public sociologies excursion through the variety of publics it is are not antithetical but complementary. Each clear that public sociology needs to develop a informs the other. The broadest debates in soci- sociology of publics—working through and ety, for example about family values, can inform beyond a lineage that would include Robert and be informed by our work with welfare Park (1972[1904]), Walter Lippmann (1922), clients. Debates about NAFTA can shape the John Dewey (1927), Hanna Arendt (1958), sociologist’s collaboration with a trade union Jürgen Habermas (1991 [1962]), Richard local; working with prisoners to defend their Sennett (1977), Nancy Fraser (1997), and rights can draw on public debates about the Michael Warner (2002)—to better appreciate the carceral complex. Berkeley graduate students, possibilities and pitfalls of public sociology. Gretchen Purser, Amy Schalet, and Ofer Beyond creating other publics we can con- Sharone (2004), studied the plight of low-paid stitute ourselves as a public that acts in the service workers on campus, bringing them out political arena. As Durkheim famously insist- of the shadows, and constituting them as a pub- ed professional associations should be an inte- lic to which the university should be account- gral element of national political life—and not able. The report drew on wider debates about the just to defend their own narrow professional working poor, immigrant workers and the pri- interests. So the American Sociological vatization and corporatization of the universi- Association has much to contribute to public ty, while feeding public discussion about the debate as indeed it has, when it submitted an academy as a principled community. In the best Amicus Curiae brief to the Supreme Court in the circumstances traditional public sociology Michigan Affirmative Action case, when it frames organic public sociology, while the lat- declared that sociological research demonstrated ter disciplines, grounds, and directs the former. the existence of racism and that racism has both We can distinguish between different types of social causes and consequences, when its mem- public sociologist and speak of different publics bers adopted resolutions against the War in Iraq but how are the two sides—the academic and the and against a constitutional amendment that extra-academic—brought into dialogue? Why would outlaw same-sex marriage, or when the should anyone listen to us rather than the other ASA Council protested the imprisonment of messages streaming through the media? Are the Egyptian sociologist, Saad Ibrahim. we too critical to capture the attention of our Speaking on behalf of all sociologists is diffi- publics? Alan Wolfe (1989), Robert Putnam cult and dangerous. We should be sure to arrive (2001), and Theda Skocpol (2003), go further at public positions through open dialogue, and warn that publics are disappearing— through free and equal participation of our destroyed by the market, colonized by the media membership, through deepening our internal or stymied by bureaucracy. The very existence democracy. The multiplicity of public sociolo- of a vast swath of public sociology, however, gies reflects not only different publics but dif- does suggest there is no shortage of publics if ferent value commitments on the part of we but care to seek them out. But we do have a sociologists. Public sociology has no intrinsic lot to learn about engaging them. We are still at normative valence, other than the commitment a primitive stage in our project. We should not to dialogue around issues raised in and by soci- think of publics as fixed but in flux and that we ology. It can as well support Christian #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

FOR PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY—–9

Fundamentalism as it can Liberation Sociology sociology, professional sociology and critical or Communitarianism. If sociology actually sociology. supports more liberal or critical public soci- Champion of traditional public sociology, ologies that is a consequence of the evolving C. Wright Mills (1959), and many others since ethos of the sociological community. him, would turn all sociology into public soci- There is one public that will not disappear ology. Mills harks back to the late 19th centu- before we do—our students. Every year we cre- ry forefathers, for whom scholarly and moral ate approximately 25,000 new BAs, who have enterprises were indistinguishable. There is no majored in sociology. What does it mean to turning back, however, to that earlier period think of them as a potential public? It surely does before the academic revolution. Instead we have not mean we should treat them as empty vessels to move forward and work from where we real- into which we pour our mature wine, nor blank ly are, from the division of sociological labor. slates upon which we inscribe our profound The first step is to distinguish public sociol- knowledge. Rather we must think of them as ogy from policy sociology. Policy sociology is carriers of a rich lived experience that we elab- sociology in the service of a goal defined by a orate into a deeper self-understanding of the client. Policy sociology’s raison d’etre is to pro- historical and social contexts that have made vide solutions to problems that are presented to them who they are. With the aid of our grand tra- us, or to legitimate solutions that have already ditions of sociology, we turn their private trou- been reached. Some clients specify the task of bles into public issues. We do this by engaging the sociologist with a narrow contract whereas their lives not suspending them; starting from other clients are more like patrons defining where they are, not from where we are. broad policy agendas. Being an expert witness, Education becomes a series of dialogues on the for example, an important service to the com- terrain of sociology that we foster —a dialogue munity, is a relatively well-defined relation with between ourselves and students, between stu- a client whereas funding from the State dents and their own experiences, among students Department to investigate the causes of terror- themselves, and finally a dialogue of students ism or poverty might offer a much more open with publics beyond the university. Service research agenda. Public sociology, by contrast, strikes up a learning is the prototype: as they learn students dialogic relation between sociologist and pub- become ambassadors of sociology to the wider lic in which the agenda of each is brought to the world just as they bring back to the classroom table, in which each adjusts to the other. In pub- their engagement with diverse publics.3 As lic sociology, discussion often involves values teachers we are all potentially public sociolo- or goals that are not automatically shared by gists. both sides so that reciprocity, or as Habermas It is one thing to validate and legitimate pub- (1984) calls it “communicative action,” is often lic sociology by recognizing its existence, bring- hard to sustain. Still, it is the goal of public ing it out from the private sphere into the open sociology to develop such a conversation. where it can be examined and dissected, it is Barbara Ehrenreich’s (2002) best-selling another thing to make it an integral part of our Nickel and Dimed—an ethnography of low- discipline, which brings me to Thesis III. wage work that indicted, among others, Wal- Mart’s employment practices is an example of THESIS III: THE DIVISION OF public sociology, whereas William Bielby’s SOCIOLOGICAL LABOR (2003) expert testimony in the sexual discrim- ination suite against the same company would Public sociology is part of a broader division be a case of policy sociology. The approaches of sociological labor that also includes policy of public and policy sociology are neither mutu- ally exclusive nor even antagonistic. As in this case they are often complementary. Policy soci- 3 There is a vast literature on service learning. ology can turn into public sociology, especial- Two volumes of special relevance to sociology are ly when the policy fails as in the case of James Ostrow et al. (1999) and Marullo and Edwards Coleman’s (1966, 1975) busing proposals or (2000). when the government refuses to support policy #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

10—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW proposals such as William Julius Wilson’s each research program, exemplary studies solve (1996) recommendation to create jobs in order one set of puzzles and at the same time create to alleviate racialized poverty, or Paul Starr’s new ones, turning the research program in new involvement in abortive healthcare reforms of directions. Research programs degenerate as the Clinton administration. Equally, public soci- they become swamped by anomalies and con- ology can often turn into policy sociology. Diane tradictions, or when attempts to absorb puzzles Vaughan’s (2004) widely reported engagement become more a face saving device than a gen- with the media over the Columbia Shuttle dis- uine theoretical innovation. Goodwin and Jasper aster, based on her earlier research into the (2004, chap. 1) argue that such has been the fate Challenger disaster, paved the way for her ideas of the social movement theory as it has become to be taken up in the report of the Columbia overly general and ingrown. Accident Investigation Board (2003) and, in It is the role of critical sociology, my fourth particular, its indictment of the organizational type of sociology, to examine the foundations— culture of the National Aeronautical and Space both the explicit and the implicit, both norma- Administration (NASA). tive and descriptive—of the research programs There can be neither policy nor public soci- of professional sociology. We think here of the ology without a professional sociology that sup- work of Robert Lynd (1939) who complained plies true and tested methods, accumulated that social science was abdicating its responsi- bodies of knowledge, orienting questions, and bility to confront the pressing cultural and insti- conceptual frameworks. Professional sociology tutional problems of the time by obsessing about is not the enemy of policy and public sociolo- technique and specialization. C. Wright Mills gy but the sine qua non of their existence—pro- (1959) indicted professional sociology of the viding both legitimacy and expertise for policy 1950s for its irrelevance, veering toward and public sociology. Professional sociology abstruse “grand theory” or meaningless consists first and foremost of multiple inter- “abstracted empiricism” that divorced data from secting research programs, each with their context. Alvin Gouldner (1970) took structur- assumptions, exemplars, defining questions, al functionalism to task for its domain assump- conceptual apparatuses, and evolving theories.4 tions about a consensus society that were out of Most subfields contain well established research tune with the escalating conflicts of the 1960s. programs, such as organization theory, stratifi- Feminism, queer theory and critical race theo- cation, political sociology, sociology of culture, ry have hauled professional sociology over the sociology of the family, race, economic sociol- coals for overlooking the ubiquity and profun- ogy, etc. There are often research programs dity of gender, sexual, and racial oppressions. within subfields, such as organizational ecolo- In each case critical sociology attempts to make gy within organization theory. Research pro- professional sociology aware of its biases, grams advance by tackling their defining silences, promoting new research programs built puzzles that come either from external anom- on alternative foundations. Critical sociology is alies (inconsistencies between predictions and the conscience of professional sociology just as empirical findings) or from internal contradic- public sociology is the conscience of policy tions. Thus, the research program on social sociology. movements was established by displacing the Critical sociology also gives us the two ques- “irrationalist” and psychological theories of tions that place our four sociologies in relation collective behavior, and building a new frame- to each other. The first question is one posed by work around the idea of resource mobilization Alfred McLung Lee (1976) in his Presidential which in turn led to the formulation of a polit- Address, “Sociology for Whom?” Are we just ical process model, framing and most recently talking to ourselves (an academic audience) or the attempt to incorporate emotions. Within are we also addressing others (an extra-aca- demic audience). To pose this question is to answer it, since few would argue for a hermet- 4 In the formulation of the idea of research pro- ically sealed discipline, or defend pursuing grams I have been very influenced by Imre Lakatos knowledge simply for knowledge’s sake. To (1978) and his debates with Thomas Kuhn, Karl defend engaging extra-academic audiences, Popper, and others. whether serving clients or talking to publics, is #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

FOR PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY—–11

Table 1.Division of Sociological Labor

Academic Audience Extra-academic Audience Instrumental Knowledge Professional Policy Reflexive Knowledge Critical Public not to deny the dangers and risks that go with In practice, any given piece of sociology can it, but to say that it is necessary despite or even straddle these ideal types or move across them because of those dangers and risks. over time. For example, already I have noted that The second question is Lynd’s question: the distinction between public and policy soci- “Sociology for What?” Should we be concerned ology can often blur—sociology can simulta- with the ends of society or only with the means neously serve a client and generate public to reach those ends. This is the distinction under- debate. lying Max Weber’s discussion of technical and Categories are social products. This catego- value rationality. Weber, and following him the rization of sociological labor, redefines the way Frankfurt School were concerned that technical we regard ourselves. I’m engaging in what Pierre Bourdieu (1986 [1979], 1988 [1984]) rationality was supplanting value discussion, would call a classification struggle, displacing what Horkheimer (1974 [1947]) referred to as debates about quantitative and qualitative tech- the eclipse of reason or what he and his collab- niques, positivist and interpretive methodolo- orator Theodor Adorno (1969 [1944]) called gies, micro and macro sociology by centering the dialectic of enlightenment. I call the one type two questions: for whom and for what do we of knowledge instrumental knowledge, whether pursue sociology? The remaining theses attempt it be the puzzle solving of professional sociol- to justify and expand this classification sys- ogy or the problem solving of policy sociology. tem. I call the other reflexive knowledge because it is concerned with a dialogue about ends, THESIS IV: THE ELABORATION OF whether the dialogue takes place within the aca- INTERNAL COMPLEXITY demic community about the foundations of its The questions—“knowledge for whom?” and research programs or between academics and “knowledge for what?”—define the funda- various publics about the direction of society. mental character of our discipline. They not Reflexive knowledge interrogates the value only divide sociology into four different types, premises of society as well as our profession. but allow us to understand how each type is 5 The overall scheme is summarized in Table 1. internally constructed. Our four types of knowledge represent not only a functional differentiation of sociology but 5 This scheme bears an uncanny resemblance to Talcott Parsons’s (1961) famous four functions— also four distinct perspectives on sociology. The adaptation, goal attainment, integration, and latency division of sociological labor looks very dif- (pattern maintenance) (AGIL)— that any system has ferent from the standpoint of critical sociology to fulfill to survive. If critical sociology corresponds as compared, for example, with the view from to the latency function based on value commitments, policy sociology! Indeed, critical sociology and public sociology corresponds to integration, largely defines itself by its opposition to pro- where influence is the medium of exchange, then fessional (“mainstream”) sociology, itself policy sociology corresponds to goal attainment, and viewed as inseparable from renegade policy professional sociology with its economy of creden- sociology. Policy sociology pays back in kind, tials corresponds to adaptation. Habermas (1984, attacking critical sociology for politicizing and chap. 7) gives Parsons a critical twist by referring to the colonization of the life-world (latency and inte- thereby discrediting the discipline. Thus, from gration) by the system (adaptation and goal attain- within each category we tend to essentialize, ment). As we shall see Thesis VII combines homogenize and stereotype the others. We must Habermas’s colonization thesis with Bourdieu’s (1988 endeavor, therefore, to recognize the complex- [1984]) field analysis of the academic world. ity of all four types of sociology. We can best #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

12—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW do this by once again posing our two basic ques- sources of underdevelopment, and so forth. tions: knowledge for whom and knowledge for Such critical debates are the subject of the arti- what? This results in an internal differentiation cles in The Annual Review of Sociology, and of each type of sociology, and, therefore, a more they inject the necessary dynamism into our nuanced picture. We also learn about the ten- research programs. The four divisions of pro- sions within each type driving it in this direc- fessional sociology are represented in Table 2. tion or that. Because of its size, we can discern a func- Let us begin with professional sociology. At tional differentiation, or as Abbott (2001) might its core is the creation, elaboration, degenera- call it “fractalization,” of professional sociolo- tion of multiple research programs. But there is gy, but the other types of sociology are less also a policy dimension of professional sociol- internally developed so that it is better to talk ogy that defends sociological research in the of their different aspects or dimensions. Thus, wider world—defense of funds for politically the core activity of public sociology—the dia- contested research, such as the study of sexual logue between sociologists and their publics— behavior; the determination of human subjects is supported (or not) by professional, critical and protocols; the pursuit of government support, policy moments. Take, for example, Boston say, for minority fellowship programs, etc. This College’s Media Research and Action Project policy dimension of professional sociology is that brings sociologists together with commu- concentrated in the office of the American nity organizers to discover how best to present Sociological Association, and represented in social issues to the media. There is a profes- the pages of its newsletter Footnotes. Then there sional moment to this project based on William is the public face of professional sociology, pre- Gamson’s idea of framing, a critical moment senting research findings in an accessible man- based on the limited ways in which the media ner for a lay audience. This was the avowed operate, and a policy moment that grapples with purpose of the new magazine, Contexts, but a the concrete aims of community organizers. similar function is performed by the regular Charlotte Ryan (2004) describes the tensions Congressional Briefings organized by the ASA within the project that stem from the contra- office. Here, also, we find the plethora of teach- dictory demands between the immediacy of ers who disseminate the findings of sociologi- public sociology and the career rhythms of pro- cal research and, of course, the writing of fessional sociology, while Gamson (2004) textbooks. It is a delicate line that separates this underlines the university’s limited economic public face of professional sociology from pub- commitment to a project to empower local lic sociology itself, but the former is more inti- communities. mately concerned with securing the conditions Policy sociology also has its professional, for our core professional activities. critical and public moments. Here an interest- Finally, there is the critical face of profes- ing case is Judy Stacey’s (2004) experience as sional sociology—debates within and between an expert witness defending same-sex marriage research programs such as those over the rela- in Ontario Canada. The legal opponents of tive importance of class and race, over the effects same-sex marriage drew on her widely read of globalization, over patterns of overwork, over article published in the American Sociological the class bases of electoral politics, over the Review (Stacey and Biblarz 2001). The authors

Table 2. Dissecting Professional Sociology

Professional Policy Research conducted within research programs that Defense of sociological research, human subjects, fund- define assumptions, theories, concepts, questions, ing, congressional briefings and puzzles. Critical Public Critical debates of the discipline within and between Concern for the public image of sociology, presenting research programs findings in an accessible manner, teaching basics of sociology and writing text books #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

FOR PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY—–13 argued that while studies show some slight dif- sions. We should not forget this complex inter- ferences in the effects of gay parenting on chil- nal composition as we refocus on the relations dren—that they were more open to sexual among the four major types. diversity—there was no evidence that the effects were in any way “harmful.” Opponents of same- THESIS V: LOCATING sex marriage argued that Stacey and Biblarz THE SOCIOLOGIST had drawn on studies so scientifically weak that A distinction must be made between sociology no such conclusions could be drawn. Judy and its internal divisions on the one side and Stacey, therefore, found herself in the unaccus- sociologists and their trajectories on the other. tomed position of defending the scientific rigor The life of the sociologist is propelled by the mis- of her conclusions. Moreover, her defense of gay match of her or his sociological habitus and the civil liberties entailed the defense of marriage— structure of the disciplinary field as a whole. an institution she had subjected to intense crit- icism in her scholarly writings. In this case, we We should distinguish between the division of see how constraining policy sociology can be sociological labor and the sociologists who and how its dependence upon professional soci- inhabit one or more places within it. About 30% ology can pit it against critical and public soci- of PhDs are employed outside the university, pri- ologies. The four faces of any given type of marily in the world of policy research from sociology may not be in harmony with each where they may venture into the public realm other. (Kang 2003). The 70% of PhDs, who teach in We can see this again in critical sociology. In universities, occupy the professional quadrant, her classic article, “A Sociology for Women,” conducting research or disseminating its results, Dorothy Smith (1987, chap. 2) took sociology but they may hold positions in other quadrants to task for its universalization of the male stand- too, at least if they have tenure track positions. point, especially the standpoint of ruling men By contrast, the army of contingent workers— who command the macro-structures of society. adjuncts, temporary lecturers, part time instruc- Drawing on the canonical writings of Alfred tors—are stuck in a single place, paid a pittance Schutz, she elaborates the standpoint of women ($2,000 to $4,000 a course) for their often ded- as rooted in the micro-structures of everyday icated teaching, with insecure employment and life—the invisible labor that supports the macro usually without benefits (Spalter-Roth and structures. Patricia Hill Collins (1991) further Erskine 2004). They are more prevalent in the developed standpoint analysis by insisting that high prestige universities where they can amount insight into society comes from those who are to 40% of employees teaching up to 40% of multiply oppressed—poor black women—but courses. These are the underlaborers who sub- she too drew on conventional social theory, in sidize the research and the salaries of the per- her case not Schutz but George Simmel and manent faculty, releasing them for other Robert Merton, to elaborate the critique of pro- activities. fessional sociology. Moreover, for her there was Thus, many of our most distinguished soci- a public moment too—the connection of black ologists have occupied multiple locations. James female intellectuals to the culture of poor black Coleman, for example, simultaneously worked women was necessary to bring greater univer- in both professional and policy worlds while sality to professional sociology. Thus, we see the being hostile to critical and public sociologies. professional and public moments of critical Christopher Jencks, who has worked in similar sociology but what of its policy moment? Could policy fields, is unusual in combining critical one argue that here lies the realpolitik of defend- and public moments with professional and pol- ing spaces for critical thought within the uni- icy commitments. Arlie Hochschild’s sociolo- versity, spaces that would include gy of emotions is strung out between interdisciplinary programs, institutes, and the professional and critical sociology whereas her struggle for representation? research on work and family combines public These are just a few examples to illustrate the and policy sociology. Of course, these sociolo- complexity of each type of sociology, recog- gists have or had comfortable positions in top nizing their academic and an extra-academic as ranked sociology departments where conditions well as their instrumental and reflexive dimen- of work permit multiple-locations. Most of us #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

14—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW only occupy one quadrant at a time. So we undergraduate degree in philosophy at the should also focus on careers. University of Texas he went to Wisconsin to Sociologists are not only simultaneously work with the German émigré Hans Gerth. located in different positions, but assume tra- There he wrote his dissertation on pragmatism. jectories through time among our four types of Robert Merton and Paul Lazarsfeld recruited sociology. Before the consolidation of profes- him to Columbia University because he showed sional careers, movement among the quadrants such promise as a professional sociologist. was more erratic. Increasingly disaffected with Unable to tolerate the “illiberal practicality” of the academy and marginalized within it by his Lazarsfeld’s Bureau of Applied Research he race, after completing The Philadelphia Negro turned from instrumental sociology to a public in 1899, and after setting up and running the sociology—New Men of Power, White Collar Atlanta Sociological Laboratory at the and Power Elite. At the end of his short life he University of Atlanta between 1897 and 1910, would return to the promise and betrayal of W. E. B. Du Bois left academia to found the sociology in his inspirational The Sociological National Association for the Advancement of Imagination. This turn to critical sociology coin- Colored People (NAACP) and become editor of cided with a move beyond sociology into the its magazine, Crisis. In this public role he wrote realm of the public intellectual with Listen, all sorts of popular essays, inevitably influenced Yankee! and The Causes of World War Three— by his sociology. In 1934 he returned to the books that were only distantly connected to academy to chair the sociology department at sociology.7 Atlanta, where he finished another classic Today careers in sociology are more heavily monograph, Black Reconstruction, only to regimented than they were in Mills’s time. A typ- depart once again, after World War Two, for ical graduate student, perhaps inspired by an national and international public venues. His undergraduate teacher or burnt out from a drain- relentless campaigns for racial justice were the ing social movement—enters graduate school acme of public sociology, although, of course, with a critical disposition, wanting to learn his ultimate aim was always to change policy. more about the possibilities of social change, Public sociology is often an avenue for the mar- whether this be limiting the spread of AIDS in ginalized, locked out of the policy arena and Africa, the deflection of youth violence, the ostracized in the academy. conditions of success of feminist movements in While W. E. B. Du Bois was taking the route Turkey and Iran, family as a source of morali- out of the academy, his nemesis, another major ty, variation in support for capital punishment, figure in the sociology of race, Robert Park, was public misconstrual of Islam, etc. There she traveling in the opposite direction.6 After years confronts a succession of required courses, each as a journalist, which included radical exposés with its own abstruse texts to be mastered or of Belgium’s atrocities in the Congo, he became abstract techniques to be acquired. After three Booker T. Washington’s private secretary and or four years she is ready to take the qualifying research analyst, before entering, and then shap- or preliminary examinations in three or four ing and professionalizing the department of areas, whereupon she embarks on her disserta- sociology at the University of Chicago (Lyman tion. The whole process can take anything from 1992). 5 years up. It is as if graduate school is organ- C. Wright Mills was of a later generation, but ized to winnow away at the moral commitments like Du Bois he became increasingly disaffect- that inspired the interest in sociology in the ed with the academy. After completing his first place. Just as Durkheim stressed the non-contractual elements of contract—the underlying consensus

6 Thanks to Stephen Steinberg for pointing out this coincidence. Although he played a major role in professionalizing sociology, Park did not give up 7 The distinction between “public sociologist” and social reform, and this despite his endorsement of “public intellectual” is important—the former is a detached social science and his proclaimed opposi- specialist variety of the latter, limiting public com- tion to the action sociology of the women of Hull mentary to areas of established expertise rather than House. expounding on topics of broad interest (Gans 2002). #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

FOR PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY—–15 and trust without which contracts would be Those who have endorsed public sociology impossible—so equally we must appreciate the have often been openly contemptuous of pro- importance of the non-careerist underpinnings fessional sociology. Russell Jacoby’s (1987) of careers. Many of the 50% to 70% of gradu- The Last Intellectuals began a series of com- ate students who survive to receive their PhD, mentaries that lament the retreat of the public sustain their original commitment by doing intellectual into a cocoon of professionalization. public sociology on the side—often hidden from Thus, Orlando Patterson (2002) celebrates their supervisor. How often have I heard facul- David Riesman as “The Last Sociologist,” ty advise their students to leave public sociol- because Riesman, and others of his genera- ogy until after tenure—not realizing (or realizing tion, tackled issues of great public significance all too well?) that public sociology is what keeps whereas professional sociology of today tests sociological passion alive. If they follow their narrow hypotheses, mimicking the natural sci- advisor’s advice, they may end up a contingent ences. In asking “Whatever Happened to worker in which case there will be even less time Sociology?” Peter Berger (2002) answers that for public sociology, or they may be lucky the field has fallen victim to methodological enough to find a tenure track job, in which case fetishism and an obsession with trivial topics. they have to worry about publishing articles in But he also complains that the 1960s genera- accredited journals or publishing books with tion has turned sociology from a science into recognized university presses. Once they have an ideology. He captures the cool reception of tenure, they are free to indulge their youthful public sociology among many professional passions, but by then they are no longer youth- sociologists who fear public involvement will ful. They may have lost all interest in public soci- corrupt science, threaten the legitimacy of the ology, preferring the more lucrative policy world discipline as well as the material resources it of consultants or a niche in professional soci- will have at its disposal. ology. Better to indulge the commitment to pub- I take the opposite view—that between pro- lic sociology from the beginning, and that way fessional and public sociology there should be, ignite the torch of professional sociology. and there often is, respect and synergy. Far from The differentiation of sociological labor with being incompatible the two are like Siamese its attendant specialization can create anxiety for twins. Indeed, my normative vision of the dis- the sociological habitus that hankers after a cipline of sociology is of reciprocal interde- unity of reflexive and instrumental knowledge, pendence among our four types—an organic or a habitus that desires both academic and solidarity in which each type of sociology extra-academic audiences. The tension between derives energy, meaning, and imagination from institution and habitus drives sociologists rest- its connection to the others. lessly from quadrant to quadrant, where they As I have already insisted, at the heart of our may settle for ritualistic accommodation before discipline is its professional component. Without moving on, or abandon the discipline altogeth- a professional sociology, there can be no poli- er. Still, there are always those whose habitus cy or public sociology, but nor can there be a adapts well to specialization and whose energy critical sociology—for there would be nothing and passion is infectious, spills over into the to criticize. Equally professional sociology other quadrants. As I shall now argue special- depends for its vitality upon the continual chal- ization is not inimical to public sociology. lenge of public issues through the vehicle of public sociology. It was the civil rights move- THESIS VI: THE NORMATIVE MODEL ment that transformed sociologists’ under- standing of politics, it was the feminist AND ITS PATHOLOGIES movement that gave new direction to so many The flourishing of our discipline depends upon spheres of sociology. In both cases it was soci- a shared ethos, underpinning the reciprocal ologists, engaged with and participated in the interdependence of professional, policy, public movements, who infused new ideas into soci- and critical sociologies. In being over-respon- ology. Similarly, Linda Waite’s (2000) public sive to their different audiences, however, each defense of marriage, generated lively debate type of sociology can assume pathological within our profession. Critical sociology may be forms, threatening the vitality of the whole. a thorn in the side of professional sociology, but #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

16—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

Table 3. Elaborating the Types of Sociological Knowledge

X Academic Extra-academic Instrumental Professional sociology Policy sociology —Knowledge —Theoretical/empirical —Concrete —Truth —Correspondence —Pragmatic —Legitimacy —Scientific norms —Effectiveness —Accountability —Peers —Clients —Politics —Professional self-interest —Policy intervention —Pathology —Self-referentiality —Servility Reflexive Critical sociology Public sociology —Knowledge —Foundational —Communicative —Truth —Normative —Consensus —Legitimacy —Moral vision —Relevance —Accountability —Critical intellectuals —Designated publics —Politics —Internal debate —Public dialogue —Pathology —Dogmatism —Faddishness it is crucial in forcing awareness of the assump- turn is different from the foundational knowl- tions we make, so that from time to time we may edge of critical sociology. From this follows change those assumptions. How bold and invig- the notion of truth to which each adheres. In the orating were Alvin Gouldner’s (1970) chal- case of professional sociology the focus is on lenges to structural functionalism, but also to the producing theories that correspond to the empir- way policy sociology could become the unwit- ical world, in the case of policy sociology knowl- ting agent of oppressive social control. Today we edge has to be “practical” or “useful,” whereas might include within the rubric of critical soci- with public sociology knowledge is based on ology the movement for “pure sociology,” a sci- consensus between sociologists and their entific sociology purged of public engagement. publics, while for critical sociology truth is What was professional sociology yesterday can nothing without a normative foundation to guide be critical today. Policy sociology, for its part, it. Each type of sociology has its own legitima- has reenergized the sociology of inequality with tion: professional sociology justifies itself on the its research into poverty and education. More basis of scientific norms, policy sociology on recently, medical research has married all four the basis of its effectiveness, public sociology sociologies through collaboration with citizen on the basis of its relevance and critical sociol- groups around such illnesses as breast cancer, ogy has to supply moral visions. Each type of building new participatory models of science sociology also has its own accountability. (Brown et al. 2004; McCormick et al. forth- Professional sociology is accountable to peer coming). review, policy sociology to its clients, public Such examples of synergy are plentiful, but sociology to a designated public, whereas crit- we should be wary of thinking that the integra- ical sociology is accountable to a community of tion of our discipline is easy. Connections across critical intellectuals who may transcend disci- the four sociologies are often difficult to accom- plinary boundaries. Furthermore, each type of plish because they call for profoundly different sociology has its own politics. Professional soci- cognitive practices, different along many dimen- ology defends the conditions of science, poli- sions—form of knowledge, truth, legitimacy, cy sociology proposes policy interventions, accountability, and politics, culminating in their public sociology understands politics as dem- own distinctive pathology. Table 3 highlights ocratic dialogue whereas critical sociology is these differences. committed to opening up debate within our dis- The knowledge we associate with profes- cipline. sional sociology is based on the development of Finally, and most significantly, each type of research programs, different from the concrete sociology suffers from its own pathology, aris- knowledge required by policy clients, different ing from its cognitive practice and its embed- from the communicative knowledge exchanged dedness in divergent institutions. Those who between sociologists and their publics, which in speak only to a narrow circle of fellow aca- #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

FOR PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY—–17 demics easily regress toward insularity. In the lic sociology as “pop sociology,” while over- pursuit of the puzzle solving, defined by our looking the ubiquitous and robust but, often, less research programs, professional sociology can accessible public sociology. As a community we easily become focused on the seemingly irrel- have too easily gone to war with each “other,” evant.8 In our attempt to defend our place in the blind to the necessary interdependence of our world of science we do have an interest in divergent knowledges. We need to bind our- monopolizing inaccessible knowledge, which selves to the mast, making our professional, can lead to incomprehensible grandiosity or policy, public and critical sociologies mutually narrow “methodism”. No less than profession- accountable. In that way we would also contain al sociology, critical sociology has its own patho- the development of pathologies. logical tendencies toward ingrown Institutionalizing reciprocal interchange would sectarianism—communities of dogma that no also require us to develop a common ethos that longer offer any serious engagement with pro- recognizes the validity of all four types of soci- fessional sociology or the infusion of values ology—a commitment based on the urgency of into public sociology. On the other side, policy the problems we study. In this best of all worlds, sociology is all too easily captured by clients in this normative vision, one would not have to who impose strict contractual obligations on be a public sociologist to contribute to public their funding, distortions that can reverberate sociology, one could do so by being a good pro- back into professional sociology. If market fessional, critical or policy sociologist. The research had dominated the funding of policy flourishing of each sociology would enhance the sociology, as Mills feared it would, then we flourishing of all. could all be held to ransom. The migration of sociologists into business, education and poli- THESIS VII: THE DISCIPLINE AS A cy schools may have tempered this pathology FIELD OF POWER but certainly not insulated the discipline from such pressures. Public sociology, no less than In reality disciplines are fields of power in which policy sociology, can be held hostage to outside reciprocal interdependence becomes asymmet- forces. In pursuit of popularity public sociolo- rical and antagonistic. The result, at least in the gy is tempted to pander to and flatter its publics, United States, is a form of domination in which and thereby compromising professional and instrumental knowledge prevails over reflexive critical commitments. There is, of course, the knowledge. other danger that public sociology speak down Our angel of history, having aroused himself in to its publics, a sort of intellectual vanguardism. the 1970s, was swept back in another storm Indeed, one might detect such a pathology in during the 1980s. Sociology was in crisis— C. Wright Mills’s contempt for mass society. undergraduate enrollments plummeted, the job These pathologies are real tendencies so that situation for qualified sociologists worsened, the critical views of Jacoby, Patterson, Berger there were rumors of department closures, and and others with regard to professional sociolo- intellectually the discipline seemed to lose direc- gy are not without foundation. These critics err, tion. From the pen of Irving Louis Horowitz however, in reducing the pathological to the (1993) came The Decomposition of Sociology normal. They conveniently miss the important, complaining of the politicization of sociology. relevant research of professional sociology, James Coleman (1991, 1992) devoted articles showcased, for example, in the pages of to the dangers of political correctness and the Contexts just as they overlook the pathologies invasion of the academy by the social norm. of their own types of sociology. The profes- Stephen Cole’s (2001) edited collection, What’s sionals are no less guilty of pathologizing pub- Wrong with Sociology? brought together such distinguished sociologists as Peter Berger, Joan Huber, Randall Collins, Seymour Martin Lipset, 8 I say “seemingly” irrelevant because first and James Davis, Mayer Zald, Arthur Stinchcombe, foremost one’s research program defines what is and Howard Becker. They mourned sociology’s anomalous or contradictory. If the results may seem fragmentation, incoherence, non-cumulative- trivial, then the research program itself must bear the ness as though a true science—using their image burden of relevance and insight. of natural science or economics—is always inte- #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

18—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW grated, coherent and cumulative! Their 1950s sion. At least in the United States professional optimism had turned sour in the face of the bar- and policy sociologies—the one supplying rage of critical challenges to consensus sociol- careers and the other supplying funds—dictate ogy during the 1960s and 1970s. Now the the direction of the discipline. Critical sociolo- chickens were coming home to roost and soci- gy’s supply of values and public sociology’s ology, or their vision of it, was in jeopardy supply of influence do not match the power of Perhaps the most interesting and thorough- careers and money. There may be dialogue along going of this genre of writing was Stephen the vertical dimension of Table 1, but the real Turner and Jonathan Turner’s (1990) The bonds of symbiosis lie in the horizontal direc- Impossible Science that reconstructed the his- tion, creating a ruling coalition of professional tory of sociology from this bleak standpoint. and policy sociology and a subaltern mutuali- From the beginning, they aver, sociology had ty of critical and public sociology. This pattern neither a sustainable audience nor reliable clients of domination derives from the embeddedness and patrons. It was continually overrun by polit- of the discipline in a wider constellation of ical forces, interrupted by a transitory scientif- power and interests. In our society money and ic ascendancy in the period after World War power speak louder than values and influence. Two. If there is a common thread running In the United States capitalism is especially through all these narratives of decline it is one raw with a public sphere that is not only weak that attributes sociology’s malaise to the sub- but overrun by armies of experts and a pletho- versive power of its reflexive knowledge, ra of media. The sociological voice is easily whether this be in the form of critical or public drowned out. Just as public sociology has to face sociology. a competitive public sphere, so critical sociol- In one respect I concur with the “declinists”: ogy encounters the balkanization of disciplines, our discipline is not only a potentially integrat- and as a result critical discussion is deprived of ed division of labor but also a field of power, a access to its most powerful engine—parallel more or less stable hierarchy of antagonistic dispositions in other disciplines. knowledges. My disagreement, however, lies The balance of power may be weighted in with their evaluation of the state of sociology favor of instrumental knowledge, but we can still and the balance of power within our discipline. make our discipline ourselves, creating the Sociology’s decline in the 1980s was short lived. spaces to manufacture a bolder and more vital Far from being in the doldrums, today sociolo- vision. To be sure there is a contradiction gy has never been in better shape. The numbers between professional sociology’s accountabil- of BAs in sociology has been increasing steadi- ity to peers and public sociology’s accounta- ly since 1985, overtaking economics and history bility to publics, but must this lead to warring and nearly catching up with political science. camps—each pathologizing the other? To be The production of PhDs still lags behind these sure critical and policy sociologies are at odds— neighboring disciplines, but our numbers have the one clinging to its autonomy and the other been growing steadily since 1989. They will, to its clients—but if each would recognize parts presumably, continue to grow to meet the of the other in itself, mutuality could displace demand for undergraduate teaching, although antagonism. Instead of driving the discipline the trend toward adjunct and contingent labor into separate spheres we might develop a vari- shows no sign of abating. Membership of the ety of synergies and fruitful engagements. American Sociological Association has been Here there is no space to explore any further mounting rapidly for the last four years, restor- the potential antagonisms and alliances within ing the all time highs of the 1970s. Given a this field of power. Suffice to say, if our disci- political climate hostile to sociology this is per- pline can be held together only under a system haps strange, yet it could be that this very cli- of domination, let that system be one of hege- mate is drawing people to the critical and public mony rather than despotism. That is to say the moments of sociology. subaltern knowledges (critical and public) My second point of disagreement with the should be allowed breathing space to develop “declinists” concerns the threat to sociology. I their own capacities and to inject dynamism believe it is the reflexive dimension of sociol- back into the dominant knowledges. ogy that is in danger not the instrumental dimen- Professional and policy sociology should rec- #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

FOR PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY—–19 ognize their enlightened interest in flourish- movement unto itself that laid the foundations ing critical and public sociologies. However of professional sociology. Sociologists would disruptive in the short term, in the long term remain in close contact with all manner of instrumental knowledge cannot thrive without groups in a burgeoning civil society even after challenges from reflexive knowledges, that the formation of American Sociological Society, is, from the renewal and redirection of the as it was called then, in 1905. In its origins, values that underpin their research, values therefore, sociology was inherently public. that are drawn from and recharged by the The second phase of sociology saw the shift wider society. of engagement from publics to foundations We have sketched out the field of power that and government. Beginning in the 1920s with comprises the relations among the four soci- the Rockefeller Foundation’s support for the ologies in a relatively abstract manner. Their Institute for Social and Religious Research concrete combination will vary among depart- (which would sponsor the famous Middletown ments, over time within a single country, among studies) and then its support for community countries, and even assume a changing global research at the University of Chicago and at the configuration. Accordingly, the next three the- University of North Carolina, foundations ses explore the specificity of the contemporary became increasingly active in promoting soci- configuration of United States sociology by ology. At the same time rural sociology man- pursuing a series of comparisons and in this aged to create a research base within the state way we will deepen our encounter with the itself (Larson and Zimmerman 2003). As direc- national and global forces shaping disciplinary tor of the President’s Research Committee fields. (1933), William Ogburn pulled together a mas- sive volume on Recent Social Trends in the THESIS VIII: HISTORY United States. During World War II, state spon- AND HIERARCHY sored sociology continued, the most famous being Samuel Stouffer’s (1949) multi-volume In the United States the domination of profes- study of morale within the United States army. sional sociology emerged through successive After the war a new source of funding dialogues with public, policy and critical soci- appeared, namely the corporate financing of ologies. But even here the strength of profes- survey research, epitomized by Lazarsfeld’s sional sociology is concentrated in the research work at the Bureau of Applied Social Research departments at the top of a highly stratified at Columbia University. The more sociology system of university education while at the sub- depended upon commercial and government altern levels public sociology is often more funding the more it developed rigorous statis- important if less visible. tical methods for the analysis of empirical Today we accept the domination of profession- data, which invited criticisms from many al sociology as a normal feature of United States quarters. sociology but it is actually a quite recent phe- The third phase of American sociology, there- nomenon. We can plot the history of United fore, was marked by critical sociology’s engage- States sociology as the deepening of profes- ment with professional sociology. Its inspiration sional sociology in three successive periods. was Robert Lynd (1939) who criticized sociol- Professional sociology began in the middle ogy’s narrowing of scope and its claims of value of the 19th. century as a dialogue between ame- neutrality. It was perhaps most famously con- liorative, philanthropic and reform groups on the tinued by C. Wright Mills (1959), who referred one side, and the early sociologists on the other to sociology’s originating engagement with side. The latter often came from a religious publics as “liberal practicality” and to the sec- background but they transferred their moral ond period of corporate and state funding as zeal to the fledgling secular science of sociol- “illiberal practicality.” He did not realize, how- ogy. After the Civil War the exploration of social ever, that he was inaugurating a third phase of problems developed through the collection and “critical sociology,” which would redirect both analysis of labor statistics as well as social sur- theoretical and methodological trends within veys of the poor. Collecting data to demon- the discipline. Alvin Gouldner (1970) produced strate the plight of the lower classes became a a milestone in this third phase, attacking the #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

20—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW foundations of structural functionalism and research and professionalism in the upper reach- allied sociologies, and creating space for new es of our university system is made possible, at theoretical tendencies influenced by feminism least in part, by the overburdening of our teach- and Marxism. This critical sociology provided ing institutions, the four-year and two-year col- the energy and imagination behind the recon- leges. The configuration of sociologies in these struction of professional sociology in the 1980s institutions is analogous to that in poorly and 1990s. resourced parts of the world. As the next thesis From where will the next impetus for soci- intimates diversity within the United States mir- ology come? Thesis I claimed that the gap rors diversity at the global level. between the sociological ethos and the world is propelling sociology into the public arena. THESIS IX: PROVINCIALIZING Moreover, professional sociology has now AMERICAN SOCIOLOGY reached a level a maturity and self confidence United States sociology presents itself as uni- that it can return to its civic roots, and promote versal, but it is particular—not just in its con- public sociology from a position of strength— tent but also in its form, that is, in its an engagement with the profound and disturb- configuration of our four types of sociology. At ing global trends of our time. If the original the same time it exercises enormous influence public sociology of the 19th. century was over other national sociologies, and not always inevitably provincial, it nonetheless laid the to their advantage. Thus, we need to remold foundation for the ambitious professional soci- not only the national but also the global divi- ology of the 20th. century, which, in turn, has sion of sociological labor. created the basis for its own transcendence—a 21st century public sociology of global dimen- The term “public sociology” is an American sions. invention. If, in other countries, it is the essence This is not to discount the importance of of sociology, for us it is but a part of our disci- local public sociology, the organic connections pline, and a small one at that. Indeed, for some between sociologists and immediate communi- U.S. sociologists it does not belong in our dis- ties. Far from it. After all the global only man- cipline at all. When I travel to South Africa, ifests itself through and is constituted out of however, to talk about public sociology—and local processes. We must recognize that so much this would be true of many countries in the local public sociology is already taking place in world—my audiences look at me nonplussed. our state systems of education where faculty What else could sociology be, if not an engage- bear the burden of huge teaching loads. If they ment with diverse publics about public issues? can squeeze some time beyond teaching, they That the American Sociological Association take their public sociology out of the classroom would devote our annual meetings to public and into the community. We do not know about sociologies speaks volumes about the strength these extra-curricular public sociologies because of professional sociology in the United States. their practitioners rarely have the time to write Moreover, in a world where national profes- them up. Fortunately, Kerry Strand, Sam sional sociologies are often weaker than public Marullo, Nick Cutforth, Randy Stoecker and sociologies, focusing on the latter signifies a Patrick Donohue (2003) have cast a beam on to challenge to the international hegemony of this hidden terrain by putting together a hand- United States sociology, and points toward soci- book on organic public sociologies or what they ology’s reconstruction nationally and globally. call community-based research. The volume The configuration of our four types of soci- lays out a set of principles and practices as well ology varies from country to country. In the as numerous examples, many of which combine Global South, as I have intimated, sociology research, teaching and service. has often a strong public presence. Visiting The broader point is that the US system of South Africa in 1990 I was surprised to dis- higher education is a large sprawling set of cover the close connection between sociology institutions, steeply hierarchical and enormously and the anti-apartheid struggles, especially the diverse. Therefore, the configuration of our four labor movement but also diverse civic organi- sociologies looks very different at different lev- zations. While in the United States we were els and in different places. The concentration of theorizing social movements, in South Africa #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

FOR PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY—–21 sociologists were making social movements! American sociology, was nonetheless also This project drove their sociology, stimulating geared to the policy world and here the feminist a whole new field of research—social move- input was very important. With a population of ment unionism—which U.S. sociologists redis- only 5 million and less than 200 registered soci- covered, as though it were a brand new idea, 20 ologists the professional community is small, so years later! But South African sociology not that the more ambitious seek a place in the only focused on social mobilization but on the wider society whether in government or as pub- targets of such mobilization. Sociologists ana- lic intellectuals. They are regular contributors to lyzed the character and tendencies of the newspapers, radio and television. Norwegians apartheid state, debated the strategy of the anti- have energetically taken their public sociologies apartheid movement. They asked whether they abroad, becoming an international hub with should be servants or critics of the movement. links not to just to the United States but to Today, however, ten years after apartheid South Europe and countries of the Global South. Africa presents a less favorable context for pub- The rest of Europe is quite variable. France lic sociology, as sociologists are drawn off into has one of the longest traditions of professional NGOs, corporations or state apparatuses, as the sociology, and at the same time cultivated a new government calls on sociologists to with- traditional public sociology, with such leading draw from the trenches of civil society and lights as Raymond Aron, Pierre Bourdieu and focus on teaching, and as social research is Alain Touraine. In England professional soci- channeled into immediate policy issues or ology is of a more recent, post-World War Two, “bench-marked” to “international,” i.e. vintage, easily vulnerable to the Thatcher American, professional standards. The demo- regime that sought to muzzle public and poli- bilization of civil society has gone hand in hand cy initiatives fostering a more defensive inward with a shift from reflexive to instrumental soci- looking profession. The return of a Labour ology (Sitas 1997; Webster 2004). government gave sociology a new lease of life, Similar tendencies can be found elsewhere, expanding the sphere of policy research and but each with their national specificity. Take propelling its most illustrious and prolific pub- the Soviet Union. Sociology disappeared under- lic sociologist, Anthony Giddens, into the ground in the Stalin era, only to resurface as a House of Lords. weapon of official and unofficial critique under the post-Stalin regimes. Opinion research In mapping the fields of national sociolo- became a form of public sociology during the gies one learns not only how particular is the thaw of the 1960s before it was monopolized by sociology of the United States but also how the party apparatus. Under the stalwart leader- powerful and influential it is. Turning out 600 ship of Tatyana Zaslavskaya, Perestroika brought doctorates a year, it strides like a giant over sociologists out in force. Sociology became world sociology. Many of the leading sociolo- intimately connected to the eruption of civil gists, teaching in other parts of the world, were society. With the evisceration of civil society in trained in the United States. The American the post-Soviet period, however, the fledgling Sociological Association has over 14,000 mem- sociology proved defenseless against the inva- bers with 24 full time staff. But it is not simply sion of market forces. With but a few exceptions the domination of numbers and resources but, sociology was banished to business schools and increasingly, governments around the world are to centers of opinion and market research. holding their own academics, sociologists Where it exists as a serious intellectual enter- included, accountable to “international” stan- prise, it is often funded by Western founda- dards, which means publishing in “Western,” tions, employing sociologists trained in England journals, and in particular American journals. or the United States. It’s happening in South Africa and Taiwan but The situation is very different in Scandinavian also in countries with considerable resources, countries with their strong social democratic such as Norway. Driven by connections to the traditions. Here sociology grew up with the West and publishing in English, national soci- welfare state, which conferred a strong policy ologies lose their engagement with national orientation but an equally strong public moment. problems and local issues. Within each country, Norwegian sociology, very much influenced by states nurture global pressures, which fracture #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

22—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW the national division of sociological labor, driv- because they were created at a particular ing wedges among the four sociologies. moment of history, is to miss their ongoing and Without conspiracy or deliberation on the changing meaning and the interests they repre- part of its practitioners, United States sociolo- sent. It is to commit the genetic fallacy. In order gy becomes world hegemonic. We, therefore, to underline the grounds for the division of the have a special responsibility to provincialize disciplines, and in the interests of brevity, I fall our own sociology, to bring it down from the back on schematic portraits of academic fields, pedestal of universality and recognize its dis- inevitably sacrificing attention to both internal tinctive character and national power. We have differentiation and variation over time and place. to develop a dialogue, once again, with other The natural sciences are largely based on national sociologies, recognizing their local tra- instrumental knowledge, rooted in research pro- ditions or their aspirations to indigenize soci- grams whose development is governed by sci- ology. We have to think in global terms, to entific communities. The extra-academic recognize the emergent global division of soci- audience is from the policy world—industry or ological labor. If the United States rules the government—ready to exploit scientific dis- roost with its professional sociology, then we coveries. Increasingly, this extra-academic audi- have to foster public sociologies of the Global ence enters the academy to direct or oversee its South and the policy sociologies of Europe. We research, prompting opposition to collusive rela- have to encourage networks of critical sociolo- tions, whether these be in the area of medical gies that transcend not just disciplines but also research, nuclear physics or bioengineering national boundaries. We should apply our soci- (Epstein 1996; Moore 1996; Schurman and ology to ourselves, become more conscious of Munro 2004). Such critical reflexivity, often the global forces that are driving our discipline, extending into public debate, is not the essence so that we may channel them rather than be of natural science as it is of the humanities. channeled by them. Thus, works of art or literature are ultimately validated on the basis of a dialogue among nar- THESIS X: DIVIDING THE DISCIPLINES rower groups of cognoscenti or within broader publics. Their truth is established through their The social sciences distinguish themselves from aesthetic value based on discursive evaluation, the humanities and the natural sciences by their that is, as critical and public knowledges, combination of both instrumental and reflexive although, of course, they may be elaborated knowledge—a combination that is itself vari- into schools of instrumental knowledge and able, and thereby giving different opportunities even enter the policy world. for public and policy interventions. The social sciences are at the crossroads of Interdisciplinary knowledge takes different the humanities and the natural sciences since in forms in each quadrant of the sociological field. their very definition they partake in both instru- It is said that the division of the disciplines is mental and reflexive knowledge. The balance an arbitrary product of 19th. century European between these two types of knowledge, howev- history, that the present disciplinary special- er, varies among the social sciences. Economics, ization is anachronistic, and that we should for example, is as close as the social sciences move ahead toward a unified social science. get to what we might call a paradigmatic sci- This positivist fantasy was recently resurrected ence, dominated by a single research program by Immanuel Wallerstein et al. (1996) in the (neo-classical economics). The organization of Report of the Gulbenkian Commission on the the discipline reflects this with its paucity of Restructuring of the Social Sciences. The proj- prizes (Clark Medal and Nobel Prize), elite con- ect looks harmless enough but in failing to pose trol of the major journals, clear rankings not just the questions—knowledge for whom? and of departments but of individual economists, knowledge for what?—the new unified social and the absence of autonomously organized science all too easily dissolves reflexivity, that subfields. Dissident economists survive only if is, the critical and public moments of social they can first establish themselves in profes- science. In a world of domination unity too eas- sional terms. Indeed, one might liken profes- ily becomes the unity of the powerful. To declare sional economics to the discipline of the the division of the disciplines as arbitrary, just Communist Party with its dissidents and its #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

FOR PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY—–23 coherent doctrine that it seeks to spread the human geography often react against the sci- world over, all in the name of freedom.9 The entific models of their colleagues, while serv- internal coherence of economics gives it greater ing as bridges to the humanities. Philosophy, prestige within the academic world and greater another cross-over between social sciences and effectiveness in the policy world. humanities, finds its distinctive niche in criti- If economics is like the Communist Party, cal knowledge. American sociology is more like Anarcho- Disciplinary divides are far stronger in the Syndicalism, a decentralized participatory United States than elsewhere, so that “interdis- democracy. It is based on multiple and over- ciplinary” knowledge leads a precarious exis- lapping research traditions, reflected in its very tence at the boundaries of our disciplines. Each active 43 sections and their ever proliferating of the four types of sociology develops a dis- awards (Ennis 1992), and in the over-200 soci- tinctive exchange and collaboration with neigh- ology journals (Turner and Turner 1990: 159). boring disciplines. At the interface of Our institutional mode of operation reflects our professional knowledge there is a cross-disci- multiple perspectives—although not always adequately. The discipline, a hierarchical and plinary borrowing. When economic sociology elitist caste system though it is (Burris 2004), and political sociology borrow from the neigh- nonetheless is more open than economics as boring disciplines the result is still distinctive- measured by faculty mobility between depart- ly part of sociology—the social bases of markets ments and the patterns of recruitment of grad- and politics. At the interface of critical knowl- uate students (Han 2003). The discipline is more edge, there is a trans-disciplinary infusion. democratic in its elections of officers. Member Feminism, poststructuralism and critical race resolutions are not restricted to professional theory have all left their mark on critical soci- concerns, and they require the support of only ology’s engagement with professional sociolo- 3% of the membership to be put to a vote. Thus, gy. But the infusion has always been limited. The if economics is more effective in the policy development of public knowledge often comes world, the structure of the discipline of sociol- about through multi-disciplinary collaboration ogy is organized to be responsive to diverse as, for example, in “participatory action publics. To the extent that our comparative research” that brings communities together with advantage lies in the public sphere, we are more academics from complementary disciplines. A likely to influence policy indirectly via our pub- community defines an issue—public housing, lic engagements. environmental pollution, disease, living wage, Looking at the other social sciences, politi- schooling, etc.—and then works together with cal science is a balkanized field but one more a multi-disciplinary team to frame and formu- inclined toward policy than publics, toward late approaches. Finally, in the policy world instrumental rather than reflexive knowledge. there is joint-disciplinary coordination, which Today tendencies toward rational choice mod- often reflects a hierarchy of disciplines. Thus, eling have led to a reaction in a reflexive direc- state funded area studies often worked with tion. The Perestroika Movement within political science upholds a more institutional approach well-defined policy goals that gave precedence to politics, and buttresses political theory as to political science and economics. critical theory. Anthropology and geography Having recognized the power of the discipli- are balkanized across the instrumental-reflex- nary divide, captured in varying combinations ive divide, so that cultural anthropology and of instrumental and reflexive knowledge, we must now ask what this variation signifies? Specifically, is there anything distinctive about sociological knowledge and the interests it rep- 9 Marion Fourcade-Gourinchas (2004) documents resents? Might we as well be economists or the enormous international influence of American political scientists and by happenstance we end economics. Working off the ideas of Amartya Sen (1999), Peter Evans (2004) has striven valiantly to up as sociologists—a matter of little conse- push economics toward an organic public engage- quence, a biographical accident? Do we have an ment, an economics sensitive to local issues and identity of our own among the social sciences? deliberative democracy. This brings me to my final thesis. #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

24—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

THESIS XI: SOCIOLOGIST AS It examines the social preconditions of politics PARTISAN10 and the politicization of the social just as eco- nomic sociology is very different from eco- If the standpoint of economics is the market nomics, indeed it looks at what economists and its expansion, and the standpoint of polit- overlook, the social foundations of the market. ical science is the state and the guarantee of This tripartite division of the social sci- political stability, then the standpoint of soci- ences—I have no space here to include such ology is civil society and the defense of the neighbors as geography, history and anthropol- social. In times of market tyranny and state des- ogy—was true of their birth in the 19th. centu- potism, sociology—and in particular its public ry, but it became blurred in the 20th. century face—defends the interests of humanity. (with the fusing and overlapping boundaries of The social sciences are not a melting pot of state, economy and society). For the last 30 disciplines, because the disciplines represent years, however, this three-way separation has different and opposed interests—first and fore- been undergoing renaissance, speared-headed most interests in the preservation of the grounds by state unilateralism on the one side and mar- upon which their knowledge stands. Economics, ket fundamentalism on the other. Through this as we know it today, depends on the existence period civil society has been colonized and co- of markets with an interest in their expansion, opted by markets and states. Still, opposition to political science depends on the state with an these twin forces comes, if its comes at all, interest in political stability, while sociology from civil society, understood in its local, nation- depends on civil society with an interest in the al and transnational expressions. In this sense expansion of the social. sociology’s affiliation with civil society, that is But what is civil society? For the purposes of public sociology, represents the interests of my argument here we can define it as a prod- humanity—interests in keeping at bay both state uct of late 19th. century Western capitalism that despotism and market tyranny. produced associations, movements and publics Let me immediately qualify what I’ve said. that were outside both state and economy— First, I do believe that economics and political political parties, trade unions, schooling, com- science, between them, have manufactured the munities of faith, print media and a variety of ideological time bombs that have justified the voluntary organizations. This congeries of asso- excesses of markets and states, excesses that are ciational life is the unique standpoint of soci- destroying the foundations of the public uni- ology so that when it disappears—Stalin’s Soviet versity, that is, their own academic conditions Union, Hitler’s Germany, Pinochet’s Chile— of existence, as well as so much else. Still, while sociology disappears too. When civil society acknowledging this I would not want to write off flourishes—Perestroika Russia or late Apartheid all political scientists and economists. South Africa—so does sociology. Disciplines, after all, are fields of power, each Sociology may be connected to society by an with its dominant and oppositional forces. Think umbilical cord, but, of course, this is not to say of the Perestroika Movement in political science sociology only studies civil society. Far from it. or the network of Post-Autistic Economics—an But it studies the state or the economy from the economics that recognizes individuals as mature standpoint of civil society. Political sociology, and multi-faceted human beings. As sociologists for example, is not the same as political science. we can find and, indeed, have found allies in and collaborated with these oppositional forma- tions. The field of sociology is also divided. Civil 10 Taken from Alvin Gouldner’s (1968) essay of the society, after all, is not some harmonious com- same title. Equally pertinent to Thesis XI are the munalism but it is riven by segregations, dom- challenging words of Pierre Bourdieu: “The eth- inations, and exploitations.11 Historically, civil nosociologist is a sort of organic intellectual of humankind who, as a collective agent, can contribute to denaturalizing and defatalizing existence by put- ting her competency at the service of a universalism 11 It is here that I part company with the Durk- rooted in the understanding of particularisms.” Cited heimian perspective of communitarians, such as in Wacquant (2004) Amitai Etzioni (1993) and Philip Selznick (2002), #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

FOR PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY—–25 society has been male and white. As it has often slighted in merits and promotions. Already become more inclusive it has also been invad- departments have created awards and blogs, ed by state and market, reflected in sociology by and have begun designing course syllabi for the uncritical use of such concepts as social public sociology. Third, if we are going to capital. Civil society is very much a contested acknowledge and reward public sociology then terrain but still, I would argue, in the present we must develop criteria to distinguish good conjuncture the best possible terrain for the from bad public sociology. And we must ask defense of humanity—a defense that would be who should evaluate public sociology. We must aided by the cultivation of a critically disposed encourage the very best of public sociology public sociology. whatever that may mean. Public sociology can- How can we accomplish this goal? As I have not be second rate sociology. already suggested in Thesis VII the institution- Important though these institutional changes al division of sociological labor and the corre- are, the success of public sociology will not sponding field of power have hitherto restricted come from above but from below. It will come the expansion of public sociologies. We would when public sociology captures the imagination not have to defend public sociology if there of sociologists, when sociologists recognize were not obstacles to its realization. To sur- public sociology as important in its own right mount them requires commitment and sacri- with its own rewards, and when sociologists fice that many have already made and continue then carry it forward as a social movement to make. That was why they became sociolo- beyond the academy. I envision myriads of gists—not to make money but a better world. So, nodes, each forging collaborations of sociolo- there already exist a plethora of public soci- gists with their publics, flowing together into a ologies. But there are also new developments. single current. They will draw on a century of Thus, the magazine Contexts has taken a major extensive research, elaborate theories, practical step in the direction of public sociology. The interventions, and critical thinking, reaching ASA head office has made vigorous efforts in common understandings across multiple bound- outreach and lobbying, with its congressional aries, not least but not only across national briefings and its regular press releases, but also boundaries, and in so doing shedding insulari- in the columns of our newsletter Footnotes. This ties of old. Our angel of history will then spread year the ASA has introduced a new award that her wings and soar above the storm. will recognize excellence in the reporting of sociology in the media. We need to cultivate a Michael Burawoy is Professor of Sociology at the collaborative relation between sociology and University of California–Berkeley. After studying journalism, for journalists are a public unto industrial workplaces in Zambia, Chicago, Hungary, and Russia, he is turning his attention to the academic themselves as well as standing between us and workplace. a multitude of other publics. The ASA has also established a task force for the institutionalization of public sociologies, REFERENCES which will consider three key issues. First, it will Abbott, Andrew. 2001. Chaos of Disciplines. consider how to recognize and validate the pub- Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. lic sociology that already exists, making the American Sociological Association. 2004. An invisible visible, making the private public. Invitation to Public Sociology. Washington, DC: Second, the task force will consider how to American Sociological Association. introduce incentives for public sociology, to Arendt, Hannah. 1958. The Human Condition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. reward the pursuit of public sociology that is so Bellah, Robert, Richard Madsen, William M. Sullivan, Ann Swidler, and Steven Tipton. 1985. Habits of the Heart: Individualism and who focus on the moral relation of individual to soci- Commitment in American Life. Berkeley, CA: ety and who regard hierarchies, dominations, exclu- University of California Press. sions, etc. as unfortunate interferences. Just as they Benjamin, Walter. 1968. Illuminations: Essays and do not center the divisions of society they also side Reflections. Edited and with an introduction by step divisions within sociology and within the acad- Hannah Arendt. New York: Harcourt Brace emy more generally. Jovanovich. #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

26—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

Berger, Peter. 2002. “Whatever Happened to of California, Berkeley, CA. Unpublished manu- Sociology.” First Things 126:27–29. script. Bielby, William. 2003. Betty Dukes, et al. v. Wal- Fraser, Nancy. 1997. Justice Interruptus. New York: Mart Stores, Inc. Routledge. Blau, Peter and Otis Dudley Duncan. 1967. The Gamson, William. 2004. “Life on the Interface.” American Occupational Structure. New York: John Social Problems 51:106–10. Wiley. Gans, Herbert. 2002. “More of Us Should Become Bok, Derek. 2003. Universities in the Marketplace. Public Sociologists.” Footnotes (July/August) Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 30:10. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1986 [1979]. Distinction: A Social Goodwin, Jeff and Jim Jasper, eds. 2004. Rethinking Critique of the Judgment of Taste. New York: Social Movements. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Routledge and Kegan Paul. Littlefield. ———. 1988 [1984]. Homo Academicus. Stanford, Gouldner, Alvin. (1968). “The Sociologist as Partisan: CA: Stanford University Press Sociology and the Welfare State.” American Brown, Phil, Stephen Zavestoski, Sabrina Sociologist 3:103–16. McCormick, Brian Mayer, Rachel Morello-Frosch, ———. 1970. The Coming Crisis of Western and Rebecca Gasio Altman. 2004. Sociology of Sociology. New York: Basic Books. Health and Illness 26:50–80. Habermas, Jürgen. 1984. The Theory of Burris, Val. 2004. “The Academic Caste System: Communicative Action. (Two Volumes). Boston, Prestige Hierarchies in PhD Exchange Networks.” MA: Beacon. American Sociological Review 69: 239–264. ———. 1991 [1962]. The Structural Cole, Stephen (ed). 2001. What’s Wrong with Transformation of the Public Sphere. Cambridge, Sociology? New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction MA: MIT Press. Publishers. Han, Shin-Kap. 2003. “Tribal Regimes in Academia: Coleman, James. 1966. Equality of Educational A Comparative Analysis of Market Structure Opportunity. Washington, DC: United States Across Disciplines.” Social Networks 25:251–80. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Horkheimer, Max. 1974 [1947]. Eclipse of Reason. ———. 1975. Trends in School Segregation, New York: Seabury Press. 1968–1973. Washington, DC: Urban Institute, Horkheimer, Max and Theodor Adorno. 1969 [1944]. ———. 1991. “A Quiet Threat to Academic Dialectic of Enlightenment. New York: Seabury Freedom.” National Review 43:28–34 Press. ———. 1992. “The Power of Social Norms.” Duke Horowitz, Irving Louis. 1993. The Decomposition of Dialogue 3. Sociology. New York: Oxford University Press. Collins, Patricia Hill. 1991. Black Feminist Thought. Jacoby, Russell. 1987. The Last Intellectuals : New York: Routledge. American Culture in the Age of Academe. New Columbia Accident Investigation Board. 2003. York: Noonday Press. Report. Vol. I. Washington, DC: Government Kang, Kelly. 2003. Characteristics of Doctoral Printing Office. Scientists and Engineers in the United States: Dewey, John. 1927. The Public and Its Problems. 2001. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. New York: Henry Holt. Division of Science Resources Statistics. Du Bois, W.E.B. 1903. The Souls of Black Folk. New Kirp, David. 2003. Shakespeare, Einstein, and the York: A.C. McClurg Bottom Line. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Ehrenreich, Barbara. 2002. Nickel and Dimed. New Press. York: Henry Holt. Lakatos, Imre. 1978. The Methodology of Scientific Ennis, James. 1992. “The Social Organization of Research Programmes. Cambridge, England: Sociological Knowledge: Modeling the Cambridge University Press Intersection of Specialties.” American Sociological Larson, Olaf and Julie Zimmerman. 2003. Sociology Review 57:259–65. in Government: The Galpin-Taylor Years in the Epstein, Steven. 1996. Impure Science. Berkeley, U.S. Department of Agriculture 1919–1953. CA: University of California Press. University Park, PA: University of Pennsylvania Etzioni, Amitai. 1993. The Spirit of Community. New Press. York: Simon and Schuster. Lee, Alfred McClung. 1976. “Sociology for Whom?” Evans, Peter. 2004. “Development as Institutional American Sociological Review 41:925–36. Change: The Pitfalls of Monocropping and the Lippmann, Walter. 1922. Public Opinion. New York: Potentials of Deliberation.” Studies in Comparative Harcourt, Brace and Company. International Development 38:30–53. Lipset, Seymour Martin and Neil J. Smelser. 1961. Fourcade-Gourinchas, Marion. 2004. “The Sociology: The Progress of a Decade. Englewood Construction of a Global Profession: The Case of Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Economics,” Department of Sociology, University Lyman, Stanford. 1992. Militarism, Imperialism, and #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

FOR PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY—–27

Racial Accommodation: An Analysis and and Revival of American Community. New York: Interpretation of the Early Writings of Robert E. Simon and Schuster. Park. Fayetteville, AK: University of Arkansas Rhoades, Lawrence. 1981. A History of the American Press. Sociological Association, 1905–1980. Washington, Lynd, Robert. 1939. Knowledge for What? The Place DC: American Sociological Association. of Social Sciences in American Culture. Princeton, Riesman, David. 1950. The Lonely Crowd: A Study NJ: Princeton University Press. of the Changing American Character. New Haven, Marullo, Sam and Bob Edwards (eds.). “Service- CT: Yale University Press. Learning Pedagogy as Universities’ Response to Ryan, Charlotte. 2004. “Can We Be Compañeros.” Troubled Times.” Special issue of American Social Problems 51:110–13. Behavioral Scientist 43:741–912 Schurman, Rachel and William Munro. 2004. McCormick, Sabrina, Julia Brody, Phil Brown, and “Intellectuals, Ideology, and Social Networks: The Ruth Polk. Forthcoming. “Public Involvement in Process of Grievance Construction in the Anti- Breast Cancer Research: An Analysis and Model Genetic Engineering Movement.” Department of for Future Research.” International Journal of Sociology, University of Illinois, Urbana- Health Services. Champaign, IL. Unpublished manuscript. Merton, Robert. 1949. Social Theory and Social Selznick, Philip. 2002. The Communitarian Structure. Glencoe, IL: Free Press Persuasion. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Mills, C. Wright. 1959. The Sociological Imagination. University Press. New York: Oxford University Press. Sen, Amartya. 1999. Development as Freedom. New Moore, Kelly. 1996. “Organizing Integrity: American York: Random House. Science and the Creation of Public Interest Sennett, Richard. 1977. The Fall of Public Man. New Organizations, 1955–1975.” American Journal of York: W.W. Norton. Sociology 101:1592–1627. Sitas, Ari. 1997. “The Waning of Sociology in South Mueller, John. 1973. War, Presidents and Public Africa.” Society in Transition 28:12–9. Opinion. New York: John Wiley. Skocpol, Theda. 2003. Diminished Democracy: From Myrdal, Gunnar. 1944. An American Dilemma: The Membership to Management in American Civic Negro Problem and Modern Democracy. New Life. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. York: Harper and Row. Smith, Dorothy. 1987. The Everyday World As Ostrow, James, Garry Hesser, and Sandra Enos (eds.). Problematic. Boston, MA: Northeastern University 1999. Cultivating the Sociological Imagination: Press. Concepts and Models for Service-Learning in Spalter-Roth, Roberta and William Erskine. 2004. Sociology. Washington, DC: American Association Academic Relations: The Use of Supplementary for Higher Education. Faculty. Washington, DC: American Sociological Pager, Devah. 2002. The Mark of a Criminal Record. Association. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, Stacey, Judith. 2004. “Marital Suitors Court Social University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. science Spin-Sters: The Unwittingly Conservative Park, Robert. 1972 [1904]. The Crowd and the Public. Effects of Public Sociology.” Social Problems Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 51:131–45 Parsons, Talcott. 1937. The Structure of Social Action. Stacey, Judith and Timothy Biblarz. 2001. “(How) New York: McGraw Hill. Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter?” ———. 1951. The Social System. New York: Free American Sociological Review 66:159–83. Press. Stouffer, Samuel et al. 1949. The American Soldier. ———. 1961. “An Outline of the Social System.” Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Pp. 30–79 in Theories of Society edited by Talcott Strand, Kerry, Sam Marullo, Nick Cutforth, Randy Parsons, Edward Shils, Kaspar Naegele, and Jesse Stoecker, and Patrick Donohue. 2003. Community- Pitts. New York: Free Press. Based Research and Higher Education. San Patterson, Orlando. 2002. “The Last Sociologist.” Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. The New York Times, May 19th. Turner, Stephen and Jonathan Turner. 1990. The President’s Research Committee on Search Trends. Impossible Science: An Institutional Analysis of 1933. Recent Social Trends in the United States. American Sociology. London and Newbury Park, New York: McGraw-Hill. CA: Sage Publications. Purser, Gretchen, Any Schalet, and Ofer Sharone. Uggen, Christopher and Jeffrey Manza. 2002. 2004. Berkeley’s Betrayal: Wages and Working “Democratic Contraction? Political Consequences Conditions at Cal. Presented at the annual meet- of Felon Disenfranchisement in the United States.” ing of the American Socioogical Association, American Sociological Review 67:777–803. August 16, San Francisco, CA. Vaughan, Diane. 2004. “Public Sociologist by Putnam, Robert. 2001. Bowling Alone: The Collapse Accident.” Social Problems 51:115–18. #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70102-burawoy

28—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

Waite, Linda and Maggie Gallagher. 2000. The Case Wacquant, Loïc. 2004. “Following Bourdieu into the for Marriage. New York: Doubleday. Field.” Ethnography 5(4). Wallerstein, Immanuel, Calestous Juma, Evelyn Fox Warner, Michael. 2002. Publics and Counterpublics. Keller, Jurgen Kocka, Domenique Lecourt, V.Y. New York: Zone Books. Webster, Edward. 2004. “Sociology in South Africa: Mudkimbe, Kinhide Miushakoji, Ilya Prigogine, Its Past, Present and Future.” Society in Transition Peter J. Taylor, and Michel-Rolph Trouillot. 1996. 35:27–41. Open the Social Sciences: Report of the Wilson, William Julius. 1996. When Work Gulbenkian Commission on the Restructuring of Disappears. New York: Knopf. the Social sciences. Stanford, CA: Stanford Wolfe, Alan. 1989. Whose Keeper? Berkeley, CA: University Press. University of California Press.