Scholarlink

<p><i>Democracy in Jonesville</i>, a collective work with 11 authors, was one of a series of works coming out of the first community study led by W. Lloyd Warner and a few eminent scholars working for the Committee on Human Development in the 1940s. The research was conducted in Morris, a mid-western town, and laid out the class structure of the community and their life organization. This paper argues that <i>Jonesville</i>, being a long-forgotten book, is a remarkable contribution to the development of Chicago sociology. It initiated a new mode of collective fieldwork at the convergence of the Chicago sociology and the social anthropology advocated by Warner and Robert Redfield. It became possible within the Committee on Human Development (hereafter CHD) rather than the Department of Sociology. This paper analyzes the institutional basis of the CHD and its leadership, the composition of the Morris project and its financial structure, and the role of individuals in the collective enterprise. We show how a Chicago style of work highly appraised by Howard Becker persisted despite the fact that the Department of Sociology was seemingly situated at a low point, which greatly shaped the direction of Chicago sociology in the 1950s and 60s.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Foretelling a New Chicago Sociology? The work of Jonesville in the Committee on Human Development, 1940–1950

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年8月2日

查看全文
  • Liping Wang

摘要

Democracy in Jonesville, a collective work with 11 authors, was one of a series of works coming out of the first community study led by W. Lloyd Warner and a few eminent scholars working for the Committee on Human Development in the 1940s. The research was conducted in Morris, a mid-western town, and laid out the class structure of the community and their life organization. This paper argues that Jonesville, being a long-forgotten book, is a remarkable contribution to the development of Chicago sociology. It initiated a new mode of collective fieldwork at the convergence of the Chicago sociology and the social anthropology advocated by Warner and Robert Redfield. It became possible within the Committee on Human Development (hereafter CHD) rather than the Department of Sociology. This paper analyzes the institutional basis of the CHD and its leadership, the composition of the Morris project and its financial structure, and the role of individuals in the collective enterprise. We show how a Chicago style of work highly appraised by Howard Becker persisted despite the fact that the Department of Sociology was seemingly situated at a low point, which greatly shaped the direction of Chicago sociology in the 1950s and 60s.