The Papers of Joseph Henry . Vol. 3: January 1836–December 1837: The Princeton Years ed. by Nathan Reingold, et al (review)

Abstract

416 Book Reviews TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Summerton describes in great detail the administrative, legal, eco­ nomic, and political hurdles that had to be passed in order for the project to materialize. The meticulous character of her account makes it sometimes intriguing, sometimes tedious. She tells a well-documented story, but, since she has chosen a thematic rather than a chronological approach, it has not been possible to avoid repetitive passages. Among the themes or “critical issues” Summerton discusses in depth are the following: Why was such a major decision to build a district­ heating system made at all? How was a public/cooperative company organized to undertake the task? And how did this company use almost any means to gain a monopoly on the heating market in large parts of Mjolby? Summerton shows that the political decision to construct a system was made on rather loose grounds, and that it was clearly affected by the spirit of the times (in the wake of oil crises and Three Mile Island). She illustrates the tensions between profit motives and public interests that grew out of the internal structure of the company in charge of building the system, and she describes how the company was largely successful in keeping competing systems out of the district­ heating concession area. In my view the primary merit of Summerton’s case study is that it proves the usefulness of a sociological conflict perspective when analyz­ ing technological change. System building is no straightforward techni­ cal affair but includes processes of persuasion and the formation of alliances. Technological systems emerge as a result of ‘‘shared or comple­ mentary needs, interests, and concerns of a multitude of actors” (p. 258). If we want to understand technological development and diffusion, we have to understand the people and organizations that form them. Although Summerton’s book is based on solid scholarship, it is unfortunately plagued by reiterations, misprints, and faulty syllabica­ tion. The relative dullness of the text and the photographs seem fitting, however, since they reinforce one of the main findings of the study: technological work is mostly mundane and seldom glorious. Mikael Hard Dr. Hard is associate professor of human technolog)' at the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies at Gothenburg University. In the energy area, he has published The Diffusion of Cogeneration: Technology Commanding and Organizational Culture, Report no. FS II 92-108, at Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin fur Sozialforschung. The Papers of Joseph Henry. Vol. 6: January 1844-December 1846—the Princeton Years. Edited by Marc Rothenberg et al. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1992. Pp. xli+662; illustrations, notes, index. $55.00. Volume 6 of The Papers ofJoseph Henry concludes his years as a teacher and active researcher-scientist. The remaining volumes of this well- TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Book Reviews 417 edited series will detail his activities as Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. His election to this position and the first formulation of his plans for the institution provide the appropriate coda for this volume. Readers of Technology and Culture will probably find Henry’s activities in regard to a variety of technical problems to be of the greatest interest. Perhaps best known is his chairmanship of a special committee of the Franklin Institute appointed to investigate the explosion of the “Peace­ maker,” the experimental iron gun on board the USS Princeton, during its test-firing in February 1844. Henry also continued to give advice to Samuel Morse regarding the electric telegraph, although he became increasingly critical of the failure of Morse and his associates to give due credit for his own researches, which he felt were crucial to the invention’s success. As a technical consultant, Henry undertook such tasks as evaluating for a railway company the new printing telegraph of Royal E. House, examining Samuel Colt’s undersea gunpowder battery for the War Department, and giving advice on protecting buildings from lightning. While Henry considered such activities to be important, most of his research focused on more purely scientific concerns, particularly the study of electromagnetism, where he had made his reputation. Al­ though other researchers increasingly turned to the study of galvanic electricity, Henry persisted with the study of static electricity in the belief that it...