3
Men and Their Work by Everett Cherrington Hughes Review by: Frank E. Jones The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science / Revue canadienne d'Economique et de Science politique, Vol. 25, No. 4 (Nov., 1959), pp. 523-524 Published by: Wiley on behalf of Canadian Economics Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/139003 . Accessed: 12/06/2014 16:39 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. . Wiley and Canadian Economics Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science / Revue canadienne d'Economique et de Science politique. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 16:39:40 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Men and Their Workby Everett Cherrington Hughes

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Men and Their Workby Everett Cherrington Hughes

Men and Their Work by Everett Cherrington HughesReview by: Frank E. JonesThe Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science / Revue canadienne d'Economique etde Science politique, Vol. 25, No. 4 (Nov., 1959), pp. 523-524Published by: Wiley on behalf of Canadian Economics AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/139003 .

Accessed: 12/06/2014 16:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Wiley and Canadian Economics Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science / Revue canadienne d'Economique et deScience politique.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 16:39:40 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 2: Men and Their Workby Everett Cherrington Hughes

spontaneous repression" or "popular" totalitarianism which would require less control by a central authority. There is nothing particularly new in the idea that the open society has had its enemies at many times in history, but it is rather startling to realize that early drafts of the modern dictator's handbook can be found as far back as Chinese and Indian antiquity. There is for example the Book of Lord Shang, dating from the fourth century, B.C., which lays it down that "those who praise ancient institutions to decry the present regime shall be exterminated with all the members of their families." As well as the

despotisms of ancient India and China, Mr. Moore looks at repression in some non-literate societies and in Calvin's Geneva. In the latter, the Consistorium was the prototype of the modern secret police and agencies of thought control. "Like the Bolsheviks, the true Calvinists had a deadly fear of error and its social

consequences, believing every error must be nipped in the bud." The major element in these historical examples favouring the growth of totalitarianism, Mr. Moore thinks, is the occurrence of some threat to the society or to an

important part of it. For the modern industrial society, however, the great danger lies in mutual spontaneous repression as a highly developed form of the tyranny of the majority where ultimately we all become each other's brain washers. This last idea is developed further in a short paper "Reflections on

Conformity in Industrial Society." Both optimistic and pessimistic views of the effects of industrialization can, of course, be supported, but there is nothing inherent in industrialization that makes for either freedom or enslavement. Man has achieved a relative degree of freedom from economic necessity. The next

stage should be to create the institutional order by which we can achieve a

degree of freedom from each other. Mr. Moore leans to the pessimistic view. He would be more happy if the social sciences were performing their true

role of social criticism. In two challenging essays, "The New Scholasticism and the Study of Politics" and "Stategy in Social Science," he condemns the absence of values in contemporary social science. Sociology particularly suffers from a "static bias and a tendency toward triviality" because it tries to copy the natural sciences. The social sciences should, he feels, concern themselves with the

problems of freedom and compulsion; they should abandon their present attachment to power interests and go back to their traditional function of critical analysis. Few sociologists will agree with him when he says, "Modern

sociology has less to say about society than it did fifty years ago." But his

arguments are formidable and not to be sloughed off as those of a cranky deviant. The two other essays are "Notes on the Process of Acquiring Power," and "Thoughts on the Future of the Family." Together these six papers show Mr. Moore to be a critic well worth listening to.

JOHN PORTER Carleton University

Men and Their Work. By EVERETT CHERRINGTON HUGHES. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press. 1958. Pp. 184. $4.00.

FOR anyone who is curious to understand how sociologists study occupations, this collection of thirteen essays by Everett Hughes provides a good intro- duction. For those who know the field, many of the essays will be familiar, since

spontaneous repression" or "popular" totalitarianism which would require less control by a central authority. There is nothing particularly new in the idea that the open society has had its enemies at many times in history, but it is rather startling to realize that early drafts of the modern dictator's handbook can be found as far back as Chinese and Indian antiquity. There is for example the Book of Lord Shang, dating from the fourth century, B.C., which lays it down that "those who praise ancient institutions to decry the present regime shall be exterminated with all the members of their families." As well as the

despotisms of ancient India and China, Mr. Moore looks at repression in some non-literate societies and in Calvin's Geneva. In the latter, the Consistorium was the prototype of the modern secret police and agencies of thought control. "Like the Bolsheviks, the true Calvinists had a deadly fear of error and its social

consequences, believing every error must be nipped in the bud." The major element in these historical examples favouring the growth of totalitarianism, Mr. Moore thinks, is the occurrence of some threat to the society or to an

important part of it. For the modern industrial society, however, the great danger lies in mutual spontaneous repression as a highly developed form of the tyranny of the majority where ultimately we all become each other's brain washers. This last idea is developed further in a short paper "Reflections on

Conformity in Industrial Society." Both optimistic and pessimistic views of the effects of industrialization can, of course, be supported, but there is nothing inherent in industrialization that makes for either freedom or enslavement. Man has achieved a relative degree of freedom from economic necessity. The next

stage should be to create the institutional order by which we can achieve a

degree of freedom from each other. Mr. Moore leans to the pessimistic view. He would be more happy if the social sciences were performing their true

role of social criticism. In two challenging essays, "The New Scholasticism and the Study of Politics" and "Stategy in Social Science," he condemns the absence of values in contemporary social science. Sociology particularly suffers from a "static bias and a tendency toward triviality" because it tries to copy the natural sciences. The social sciences should, he feels, concern themselves with the

problems of freedom and compulsion; they should abandon their present attachment to power interests and go back to their traditional function of critical analysis. Few sociologists will agree with him when he says, "Modern

sociology has less to say about society than it did fifty years ago." But his

arguments are formidable and not to be sloughed off as those of a cranky deviant. The two other essays are "Notes on the Process of Acquiring Power," and "Thoughts on the Future of the Family." Together these six papers show Mr. Moore to be a critic well worth listening to.

JOHN PORTER Carleton University

Men and Their Work. By EVERETT CHERRINGTON HUGHES. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press. 1958. Pp. 184. $4.00.

FOR anyone who is curious to understand how sociologists study occupations, this collection of thirteen essays by Everett Hughes provides a good intro- duction. For those who know the field, many of the essays will be familiar, since

Reviews of Books Reviews of Books 523 523

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 16:39:40 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 3: Men and Their Workby Everett Cherrington Hughes

Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science

all but one have been previously published. Hughes, however, works with broad strokes to express his ideas and rereading brings fresh appreciation of his efforts and fresh ideas to the reader.

The book is less general than its title suggests, as there is no attempt to discuss occupations in cross-cultural perspective or to discuss the great variety of occupations in our society. However, a good measure of generality will be found in Hughes's approach to work which argues that occupations should be treated as a single series-allowing such delightful juxtapositions as physician and plumber, and psychiatrist and prostitute-which yields a common set of

analytical problems. For example, Hughes points out that mistakes always occur in the performance of occupational tasks and that it is essential to bear in mind the issue of the right to define mistakes and failure when interpreting occupational behaviour. In his view, the provider and the recipient of a service are always concerned to establish the right to decide when a mistake has been made and to define where failure lies. Hughes calls attention to other forms of status enhancement or protection such as may be observed in the widespread concern among workers over the use of appropriate occupational titles and in the allocation of "dirty work" to subordinates. A more recently published essay introduces the view that demands by incumbents of occupations for special privileges and for the right to tell their "publics" what is good for them is another important dimension of occupational analysis. He also emphasizes the

importance of studying the conflicts which occur between the demands de- termined by occupational roles and those determined by sex roles, ethnic roles, and other socially defined roles.

To Hughes, these essays deal with the social psychology of occupations and the issues he discusses clearly reveal his strong interest in the relationship between occupation and a person's identity in modern industrial society. In his view, to understand human behaviour in our kind of society, it is essential to understand how the self is moulded by occupation. In these terms, an occu- pation is regarded as role or a set of expectations defined by both the providers and the receivers of a service, and, as a consequence of the importance accorded to work, the occupational role is viewed as exerting a strong influence in

shaping the incumbent's attitudes and responses in behaviour spheres outside the work situation.

Although we need a great deal more research to demonstrate the validity of Hughes's argument, his emphasis on the relation between work and self is un- doubtedly well placed. It is regrettable, nonetheless, that he does not relate his ideas to the sociology of occupations for it does seem possible to analyse occu- pational behaviour in terms of role systems, without reference to self or per- sonality, and to interpret the issues to which Hughes refers-mistakes, status protection, licence and mandate, the conflict between routine and emergency- in terms of the problems encountered by ongoing role systems. There is much to be said for Hughes's viewpoint which requires treating occupational be- haviour in terms of occupational "selves," but I should like to see this rather atomistic approach supplemented by analysis directed to social structure.

FRANK E. JoNEs McMaster University

524

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 16:39:40 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions