Identity and Control: How Social Formations Emerge - Second Edition

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A LTHOUGH the title is unchanged, I offer a thoroughgoing revision of my 1992 book, as suggested by the changed subtitle. I do incorporate much new material, but coming to understand more clearly what I had been trying to argue is what has kept up my momentum in rewriting and spurred me to develop important new connecting ideas. Professor Scott Boorman of Yale University proposed in 2003 that I revise this 1992 book. I was reluctant; he came to stay in New York for a month to argue the case on blackboard and by copious notes on content . Then for several summer weeks in Paris, Scott continued discussion in the idyllic setting at Reid Hall, in the Columbia University Center for visiting scholars on leave, which continued to be a generous host thereafter too. Scott agreed with the case study foundation; he counted fifty-eight major plus eighty-odd minor presentations in the 1992 book. Scott’s contribution to this edition is widespread; in particular , his reasoning influenced chapter 4, “Styles”—a central chapter not only in its placement but also in its significance for the theory. What finally decided me to undertake this revision was Michel Grossetti ’s suggestion that I clarify the 1992 book as he began to translate it into French. He hosted me many times at his University of Toulouse, where I held a Chaire d’excellence Pierre de Fermat, and Michel contributed much advice of his own. I am deeply grateful to both counselors, especially since this final product is rather different from what either would have chosen. My third crucial counselor has been Professor Richard Lachmann of State University of New York—Albany. His vision was close to mine, and his advice at key choice points was always terse, decisive, and constructive. Two contributors are named for each chapter in the table of contents. I ran a graduate seminar on Identity and Control in 2005 and then again in 2006. Frederic Godart, who is now also co-translator for the French version, along with Victor Corona, were in the first group and then continued informally with the 2006 seminar, which came to constitute a wonderful working group. Indeed, the exact assignment of person to chapter is a bit arbitrary, since all contributed ideas throughout. Some of the case studies surveyed have drawn at least in part on various earlier forms of the present theory. Several, as you will see, are doctoral theses in sociology at Columbia with which I had some connection. Peter Bearman was often the principal adviser to these xvi A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S Ph.D. candidates, and fortunately he has also frequently given me ideas. Two other recent applications, by Yally Avrahampour (2007) and by Petronille Reme (2005), draw especially on my book on markets (2002), which is kin to Identity and Control. I was helped by, and am grateful for, the insights and assessments offered in published reviews of the first edition—Abbott 1994; Boudon 1993; Calhoun 1993; Meyer 1993; Stinchcombe 1993. And I benefited very much from the thorough readings and analyses in three doctoral theses that have been devoted to Identity and Control: by Daniel Harrison (Florida State University 2000), by Matthias Wachter (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich 2001), and by Reza Azarian (Stockholm University), the latter of which has now been published (Azarian 2006). Stephen Brint (1992) earlier published an assessment of my work leading up to the 1992 book; Baecker (1997) offered what I see as a preview to this second edition. Over the past year, Corinne Kirchner of Columbia University made invaluable editorial contributions, as well as substantive suggestions, to this book project, including the final copyediting. And thanks to freelance copyeditor Joan Gieseke for her astute and meticulous copyediting work. Of course, I continue to owe all the debts that I recorded in the lengthy preface of 1992, which gives earlier background of ideas that also appear in the present book. What I came to understand only when well along in this revision was the emergence of entirely new depth and power in network analysis and theorizing in American sociology and other social sciences. Along with this came my recognition of major new theoretical depth in European sociology, notably in Bourdieu but also in Luhmann (who in 1992 was still little translated into English). So the somewhat carping tone of 1992, complaining about the state of social science...