The Post-Industrial Utopians by Boris Frankel

Abstract

174 Book Reviews TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE One might object that this microscopic approach, this emphasis on individual personalities and specific corporate cultures, necessarily neglects the role of more general social and economic conditions af­ fecting innovation. Organizational politics and discordant personali­ ties may hamper development in one company, but in an industry as competitive as the computer industry, other, more congenial organi­ zational environments are not lacking. The formation of Control Data itself, by disgruntled former employees of Sperry Rand and Univac, is a case in point. The debate over the autonomy of development seems often to involve a confusion of these two planes, the organi­ zational and the social. Behind office doors, as this memoir suggests, personality may rule. But the invisible hand of efficiency (or profit) may keep opening those doors until it finds the right office. Gary Wren Dr. Wren teaches courses on technology and society, social theory, and research methodology in the Social Sciences Department of the University of California at Berkeley. The Post-Industrial Utopians. By Boris Frankel. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1987. Pp. xii + 303; notes, index. $35.00 (cloth); $12.50 (paper). How readers respond to Boris Frankel’s Post-Industrial Utopians will most likely depend on whether or not they agree with his assumptions about contemporary problems and possible solutions. He assumes that modern technological, environmental, military, and social traumas have created a “crucial period of social transition” (pp. 246-47). Con­ tinuation of Old and New Right programs will only increase tenden­ cies toward inequality, environmental destruction, and war, and, as a guide to understanding the present and the future, the Old Left is “bankrupt” (p. 271). As a source of new ideas that could revitalize socialist thought, Frankel turns to the postindustrial Utopians who advocate decreasing “mass waste and irrational social production and distribution” and increasing equality, tolerance, peace, new technol­ ogies, and “small-scale, decentralized democratic alternative lifestyles” (p. 12). Specifically, Frankel analyzes the writings of Rudolf Bahro (German), André Gorz (Austrian), BarryJones (Australian), and Alvin Toffler (American). In five chapters (divided into numerous brief sections) he critiques the economics, welfare systems, disarmament programs, envisioned cultural relations, and political strategies of the four authors. Drawing on these analyses and his traditional socialist perspectives, Frankel concludes with a description of his would-be postindustrial socialist state: a “concrete utopia” characterized as a “semi-autarky” (he rejects the notion ofa powerful world government) that strives for nuclear disarmament and utilizes centralized national TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Book Reviews 175 and decentralized local planning to provide essential social and eco­ nomic support for individuals, families, and communities. The early sections of chapter 4 (“Redefining Public and Private Spheres”) contain some of Frankel’s most specific comments about technology and culture and display typical strengths and weaknesses of his book. He praises Toffler for paying attention to phenomena often ignored by the Old Left, especially “electronic cottages”: homebased businesses spawned by computer and telecommunications rev­ olutions. He cautions, however, that the new technologies and non­ factory work environments will not necessarily lead to better lives for workers. On the contrary, isolated home workers may lose a sense of solidarity, a shared feeling which for Frankel is still a relevant heritage of the Old Left. Occupational gender discrimination could also be perpetuated, since lower-status work in word and data processing are already becoming woman’s work in office and home industries. To overcome the potential loss ofsolidarity and to prevent discrimination, state institutions will have to provide support systems (e.g., child care) and enforce egalitarian regulations. Frankel’s discussion of the electronic cottage demonstrates how he can constructively synthesize Old Left and postindustrial utopian ideas. Nonetheless, his examination is too brief (pp. 149—54) and quite vague. Had he presented even one example (Kerista, a San Francisco com­ mune, would have been an excellent choice), he could have moved beyond introductory generalities to more intricate analyses of rela­ tionships between home computer technologies and gender/family structures. Perhaps this criticism is unfair. Frankel does not strive for intricate analyses. Instead he hopes to raise numerous questions about nu­ merous topics. By doing so he has succeeded in compiling a catalog of challenges...