TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Book Reviews 441 Is not theory itself a little explanation machine? Constructivism retains interpretative flexibility and remains not yet black-boxed. Suffice it to say that there are enough surprises to make this second iteration required reading for those who live where sociology abuts the history and philosophy of technology. Thomas F. Gieryn Dr. Gieryn teaches in the Department of Sociology at Indiana University. From Memex to Hypertext: Vannevar Bush and the Mind’ s Machine. Edited by James M. Nyce and Paul Kahn. San Diego, Calif.: Academic Press, 1991. Pp. xi+367; references. $39.95. The phrase “from Memex to Hypertext” well expresses this book’s central concern with the current state of computer-based data storageand -retrieval systems. This is apparent in the two essays by the editors, James M. Nyce and Paul Kahn, and also in the seven essays by Vannevar Bush, centering on his classic “As We May Think” of 1945, and the seven essays by computer scientists and information specialists on the extent to which Bush’s ideas have been achieved. Whatever the merits of the essays by historians Larry Owens (a study of Bush’s differential analyzer previously published in Technology and Culture) and Colin Burk (a study of the rapid selector, a component of Memex), they stand outside the chief concern of the book and thus of this review. This collection has appeal for historians for the same reason that Bush conceived of Memex during the 1930s: he required, as a researcher and writer, a simpler means of gathering, storing, and retrieving data. Bush sought control of an expanding, personal database so that he could retrieve specific items or streams of information. He envisioned a memory system that, as he wrote in 1945, would not be “prone to fade.” Bush lauded human intelligence, finding “the speed of action, the intricacy of trails, the detail of mental pictures . . . awe-inspiring.” Memex, being “a device in which an individual stores all his books, records, and communications, and which is mechanized so that it may be consulted with exceeding speed and flexibility,” would serve as “an enlarged intimate supplement to his memory” (p. 102). None of this could have been achieved with the technology Bush had to draw on throughout the twenty-plus years he massaged his idea of Memex. Yet microfilm, dry photography, vacuum tubes, and massproduction techniques would not solve the problems of specialization and the vast and increasing bodies of knowledge being created during the 1940s—even if Bush could have gathered these components into a desk along the lines imagined by a Life magazine illustrator in 1945. In assessing the larger meaning of Memex, Nyce and Kahn obscure the issue when they attempt to prove that it was more than a “pragmatic solution to a particular problem” by placing Memex in a utopian literary 442 Book Reviews TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE tradition (p. 43). The editors might better have chosen authors to examine Bush’s idea in its economic, political, and ideological contexts. Considerations of the growth of big science, the Cold War, and the post-World War II belief in the supremacy of science and technology are more likely keys to the meaning of Memex than utopian literary traditions. Norman Meyrowitz comes closest to a social perspective when he quotes Bush on the manned space program: “The welfare of the children depends far more upon effective libraries than it does on the collecting of a bucket of Talcum powder from the moon” (p. 298). Here exists an entry point for comprehending Memex as a historical construct. Yet Meyrowitz turns from doing history when he states that the problem in the 1990s is probably not the space program, but other programs that expend funds needed to build our “intellectual superstructure” (p. 298). Instead, this collection presents an intriguing discussion of the present impossibility of Bush’s central notion of trails and trailblazing. Classicist Gregory Crane, in an essay entitled “Aristotle’s Library,” doubts its pos sibility in the absence of a “common library” such as that studied by 19th-century scholars. Authors Theodor H. Nelson, Linda C. Smith, Tim Oren, and Randall H. Trigg consider Memex more directly, discussing in detail...