A gothic sociology of modern civilization

Abstract

One of the striking features of contemporary sociology is the enormous renewal of interest in the ideas of its major founding figures and, in general, in its entire past. The short list of books which we had two decades or so ago on such people as Weber, Durkheim, Simmel, Mead and others has now been greatly augmented by the almost yearly addition of new titles, and for each book, there are a dozen or more essays treating various aspects of each author's work. Cottage industries have emerged about each thinker and bibliographical studies, sometimes vast in scope, have become necessary. The recent publication of several books on Robert Park's life and work is part of this stream of writings on the history of sociology. This revival of interest in Park and the various aspects of so-called "Chicago sociology" in general reflects the desire to tell new truths about the past of sociology, make hitherto unknown or neglected texts available for current inspection, and find new starting points for contemporary investigations. Stanford Lyman's new book on Park aims at all three goals. The first half of the book offers an "analysis and interpretation" of Park's forgotten early writings and integrates a reading or them into the understanding of Park's career and later intellectual itinerary. The book's second half re? prints some of these fugitive essays circling around the themes of German militarism, the Belgian imperialism of Leopold II in the Congo, "race re? lations" and the Afro-American experience, and more, including statements on sociological theory, method and teaching and autobiographical reflec? tions. Throughout his discussion, Lyman also wants to recommend for present consideration the uncompleted and forgotten "Gothic sociology" of modern "civilization" and its associated evils which he has discovered in Park's early writings. In the process, he corrects what he sees as some of the mistakes and misapprehensions about Park found in existing studies of his work. But Lyman does not seek to lionize his subject and his treat? ment of Park mixes criticism freely with analysis and praise.