P & M 73, 1995,351-366 351_ JlIrl/1I1 ADRIAN BROCK Constructing the subject , 1flL'IlS is An interview with Kurt Danziger' -gie Villi ;1. In the autumn of 1994, Kurt Oanziger retired from full-time teaching Icid,49, at York University in Toronto, Canada. He was born in Germany and studied psychology in South Africa and England. He has taught psy- chology in Australia, Indonesia, South Africa, Germany and Canada. 'vland« Danziger began his career in experimental psychology )e Er- but soon moved into developmental and social psycholo- de ja- gy. His work in these areas from the 1960's and 1970's has been translated into several languages and is still cit- ed and discussed. Around the middle of the 1970' s, his interests moved to history and theory of psychology and .rochi- he quickly established a formidable reputation in this con- field. Much of his work went against traditional accounts of the history of psychology, which had been accepted 'filly,is, for many years, and led to major changes in our view of psychology's past. Oanziger's contributions to several e Kei- different areas of psychology 'were recognised in 1989 Uitge- when he was elected a Fellow of the prestigious Royal ,Iksse- Society of Canada ~ one of the very few psychologists who have received this distinction. Kuri Danziget One of the more interesting features of Danziger's historical work is that it focusses on central aspects of psychology which have tradition- ally been neglected by historians of psychology ~ perhaps because they are regarded as timeless. During the 1980's, Danziger published numerous articles and chapters on the history of psychological me- thods. Much of this work was brought together in his book, Construct- ing the subject: Historical origins of psychological research (1990a), This book was the subject of a symposium which was held at the meeting of the International Society for the History of the Social and Behav- ioural Sciences in 1991. The papers from this symposium were subse- quently published in Theory and Psychology (Capshew et at, 1992). Some indication of the importance of the book can be seen in the lead review of the July 1992 issue of Contemporary Psychology. The reviewer writes: 'Without a doubt this is the most important book on the histo- ry of psychology to come along in years. It is my sincere hope that at some future time the understanding and the very teaching of the his- tory of our discipline will have been profoundly altered by Danziger's analysis.' (Stam, 1992, p, 632) Constructing the subject helped to bring Danziger's historical work to the attention of a broader audience of non-specialists. One of his main concerns has been to show that history of psychology is not the chronicle of a dead past but an active area of research which is of rele- _352 I' & M 73, 1995 vance to contemporary issues in psychology. This was the subject of invited addresses which he gave to the American Psychological Asso- ciation, the Canadian Psychological Association and the British Psy- chological Society in 1992 and 1993. An article based on these invited addresses, Does the history of psychology have a [u ture?, has already ap- peared (Danziger, 1994). As part of this concern to see history and theory of psychology re- cognised as a legitimate speciality within psychology, Danziger play- ed a central role in establishing the History /Theory option within the Psychology graduate programme at York University, which he coor- dinated for many years. One of the few of its kind in the world, the option has attracted students from Europe and the United States - many of whom have been supervised by Danziger himself. Oanziger's pioneering work in this field was recognised by the Cana- dian Psychological Association in 1994 when he received its first Award for Distinguished Contributions to Education and Training. Although he has now retired from full-time teaching, Danziger continues to be very active in research. He is currently working on a new book on the history of basic psychological concepts like person- ality, intelligence, emotion, motivation and the self. This is yet another example of Danziger's tendency to examine the history of central as- pects of the discipline which have been traditionally regarded as eternal. It will, no doubt, solidify his reputation as an important and original researcher. Could I start by asking you to say afew words abou t your background - where you were born, educated and 50 011? I was born in Breslau in 1926 - at that time part of Cermany.s When J was 11, my family emigrated to South Africa and so I finished my education in Cape Town, South Africa up to the M.A. level. I went to Oxford to do my D.Phil in 1949. The psychology department at Oxford was quite new at the time - was it not? Very new. It had only just been established as an experimental psy- chology department. As you know, there had been individuals there within psychology - the best known, of course, having been William MacDougall - long before but, as an institute, it was new. It had just been established before I came-' With George Humphreu as the head? Yes. And George Humphrey had been at Queen's University in Cana- da for a long time before returning to Oxford.? Oxford had a reputation as a hotbed of critical philosophers. I wouldn't say anti-psychology but certainly anti-psychology in the way that it was being done. I'm thinking '.Jfpeople like Gilbert Ryle.5 Did you encounter any of this criticism? I Yes. What I mostly encountered "vas the anxiety among the psycholo- I gists not to run afoul of the philosophers. They had the feeling that, as ~"::~~.::'>:"~:":~'" ... 1.lf&~:r;,.",.... CONSTRUCTING THE SUBJECT 353_ et of soon as they ventured into the realm of theory-conceptualization, they Asso- would be vulnerable to attacks from that quarter and so they didn't 1'sy- do it. The department tended to be almost dustbowl empiricist in its vited approach - except for Ceorge Humphrey himself who, at the time, yap- was putting the finishing touches to his book on thinking, which is still a very useable historical study." I didn't appreciate that at the gy re- time because I wasn't into the history of psychology. It was only after- play- wards that Irealised the opportunity that Ihad missed. Ididn't talk in the with Ceorge Humphrey about history at all - only about rats, which coor- is what I was doing at the time? the You started out in Australia I believe. self. It was very difficult to get an academic position in Britain when I Cana- graduated in 1951. There was still a backlog of ex-servicemen around t who would, of course, get priority. Iwas the first cohort of a younger mg. generation that had been too young to participate in the war and so ~er the best opportunity that presented itself was in Melbourne, Australia. on a That was a far more lively department at the time than Oxford. It too ·son- was new. It had only just been established but its resources were far nether superior. There was a whole different outlook. It was almost at the op- 11 as- posite end of the continuum. There was a lot of theorizing and a lot of critical debate going on. and You were still in experimental psychology at the time? Iwas supposed to be setting up the animal laboratory there and Idid but Igot interested in other things - although that had already started in Oxford. While Iwas there, Niko Tinbergen - the ethologist - ar- 'hen I rived. His fame didn't take very long to spread. Especially for someone 1y like myself who was working on animal behaviour, it clearly made -nt to sense to listen to what this man had to say. His lectures were just down the road in the zoology department. After listening to Tinbergen for a while, and after reading some of the ethology literature, Icame to real- it not? ise that what Iwas doing - which was pretty standard 1940's psycho- 'sy- logical rat experimentation - didn't make a whole lot of sense. While I here was too far into my project to abandon it at that point, Idecided that I liam wasn't going to continue doing that once Ihad graduated. I then had a just brief period when Itried to work with less artificial creatures than la- boratory rats - mainly wild rats - but that just didn't work out. You eueniuallu moved from Australia to South Africa. When was that? :::ana- That "vas in the mid-50's. By that time, Ihad made the switch from animals to children. I was doing Piagetian-type work with children'' but, being back in South Africa, there were enormous pressures to get say back into social psychology. Ihad done my M.A. thesis in social psy- mg chology at the University of Cape Town. While Iwas in Natal, Cordon f this Allport spent about half a year there on a sabbatical. That was quite interesting in terms of getting a more, shall we say, intimate insight holo~ into the strengths and weaknesses of American social psychology .at, as - seeing it transplanted into a very different environment. _354 P & M 73, 1995 Would YOll like to expand 011 that? Allport was very famous for his work 011 prejudice. Well exactly. This was right after the publication of his book on preju- dice.? He was very committed to the topic and strongly convinced of the social good that was likely to result from studies of prejudice.