Search

C. Wright Mills' The Sociological Imagination (1959) represents one of the most influential texts of postwar American sociology. The title has become a catchphrase that stands for a style of thought that transcends both theoretical dogma and the constraints of mere methodological rule following. This article sets out to show that Mills' vision of the sociological imagination had more in common with the then dominant lines of scholarship than his broadside against Parsonian grand theory and Lazarsfeldian abstracted empiricism in the main part of the book would suggest. Among the tools that Mills introduced as fostering the sociological imagination were 2 × 2 tables. The article traces the use of such tables over time and across scholarly communities and shows that, contrary to Mills' own estimate, these tables describe a common nexus between his own work and that of Parsons and Lazarsfeld. All three scholars made ample use of this formal tool to construct sociological arguments at central places of their oeuvre. Given its shared use across otherwise divergent schools, the 2 × 2 table is a prime example for what historians of science have called paper tools, i.e. statistical formulas, algorithms, tables, diagrams, graphs, etc., that structure scientific research across different schools of thought and theoretical approaches. Drawing on the notion of paper tools, the article advances a post-Kuhnian perspective on the history of sociology that shifts the research focus from substantive ideas to formal tools and demonstrates elements of commensurability among presumably incommensurable schools of thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

American sociologist C. Wright Mills is one of the most important and controversial sociologists of the post-war period. Of Mills' works, one book stands out: The Sociological Imagination, published by Oxford University Press in 1959. Little known is that Mills drafted his book during a 12-month Fulbright visit to University of Copenhagen 1956-1957. In the rich biographical literature on Mills this is mentioned only in the passing, or not at all. Based on hitherto unused archival material, this paper offers the first detailed account of his Copenhagen-visit during the Cold War. Bringing together this bulk of new historical traces sheds new light on the year Mills himself referred to as a "pivotal moment." These 12 months in Copenhagen, amid the Cold War, was formative for Mills in two ways: First, Copenhagen was an entrepot to European center-left thinking both east and west of the Iron Curtain. Second, the stay in Copenhagen offered a 'space of selfhood', allowing Mills a necessary respite to develop his critical thinking. He did so in close cooperation with like-minded colleagues in Copenhagen. In the mid-1950s, the discipline was in the making in Denmark, and the visit of a prominent US scholar like Mills offered opportunities for Danish sociologist to further the discipline – and their standing within the discipline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

C. Wright Mills repeatedly assumed two main roles throughout his life: those of designer and craftsman. Indeed, design and craftsmanship influenced, substantively and stylistically, most everything he did. Mills's implementation of these two qualities extended to a number of areas including writing books and building houses, but also to motorcycle mechanics, photography, and carpentry. After consideration of Mills's biography and philosophy in the context of design, style, and craftsmanship, two talks that he delivered in Aspen and Toronto, in 1958 and 1959 respectively, are examined. In both cases he addressed his remarks, specifically, to engineers, city planners, artists, and architects. Mills's handwritten notes and various excerpts as well as published sources are consulted to show that Mills-through his biographical exemplification as designer and craftsman, as well as through his writings on power and the cultural apparatus-has had a decisive influence on the sociological study of design and designers; indeed, on designers themselves and on our understanding of design culture. But more than that, I contend that just as sociology and sociologists have wholly embraced Mills's notion of the sociological imagination, so too must they fully espouse and embody his ideals and practices on design and craftsmanship. It is in this way that the discipline and its practitioners can strive for the standard of excellence that Mills set for himself and for his work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]