Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Rethinking Social Control

  • John R. Sutton
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Rethinking Social Control
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Rethinking Social Control
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Rethinking Social Control
      Available formats
      ×

Abstract

Copyright

References

Hide All

1 Dario Melossi, The State of Social Control (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990).

2 Edward A. Ross, Social Control (New York: MacMillan, 1901); Herbert Mead, George, “The Genesis of the Self and Social Control,” 35 Int'l J. Ethics 251 (192425); see also Hamilton, Gary G. & Sutton, John R., “The Problem of Control in the Weak State: Domination in the United States, 1880–1920,” 18 Theory & Soc'y 1 (1989).

3 Talcott Parsons, The Structure of Social Action (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1937); id., The Social System (Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1951).

4 Erving Goffman, Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates (Garden City, N. Y.: Anchor, 1961); Edwin M. Lemert, Human Deviance, Social Problems, and Social Control (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall, 1967).

5 Howard Becker, Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance (New York: Free Press, 1963); Joseph Gusfield, Symbolic Crusade (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1963); Kai T. Erikson, Wayward Puritans: A Study in the Sociology of Deviance (New York: John Wiley, 1966).

6 This category is too broad and varied to permit more than an impressionistic listing. Classic statements of the Marxist position are found in Richard Quinney, Critique of Legal Order: Crime Control in Capitalist Society (Boston: Little, Brown, 1974). and Ian Taylor, Paul Walton, & Jock Young, The New Criminology: For a Social Theory of Deviance (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1973); see Anthony M. Platt, The Child Savers: The Invention of Delinquency (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969), for an empirical application that synthesizes Marxism with labeling theory. Important early statements of the feminist position include Marcia Millman, “She Did It All for Love: A Feminist View of the Sociology of Deviance,”in Marcia Millman & Rosabeth Moss Kanter, eds., Another Voice: Feminist Perspectives on Social Life and Social Science (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday-Anchor, 1975), and Susan Brownmiller, Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1975); for more recent statements see Gelsthorpe, Loraine & Morris, Allison, “Feminism and Criminology in Britain,” 28 Brit. J. Crim. 223 (1988), and Edwin M. Schur, Labeling Women Deviant: Gender, Stigma, and Social Control (New York: Random House, 1984). For studies bearing a poststructuralist influence–especially via Foucault–see Stanley Cohen, Visions of Social Control (Cambridge, Eng.: Polity Press, 1985); Nanette J. Davis & Bo Anderson, Social Control: The Production of Deviance in the Modern State (New York: Irvington, 1983); David Garland, Punishment and Modern Society: A Study in Social Theory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990) (“Garland, Punishment”); Melossi, State of Social Control (cited in note 1); and Stephen Pfohl, Images of Deviance and Social Control: A Sociological History (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994).

7 Hagan, John, “The Legislation of Crime and Delinquency: A Review of Theory, Method, and Research,” 14 Law & Soc'y Rev. 603 (1980); Michael Ignatieff, “State, Civil Society and Total Institution: A Critique of Recent Social Histories of Punishment,”in Michael Tonry & Norval Morris, eds., 3 Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981); Mennel, Robert M., “Attitudes and Policies toward Juvenile Delinquency in the United States: A Historiographical Review,” 4 Crime & Just. 191 (1983); David J. Rothman, “Social Control: Uses and Abuses of the Concept in the History of Incarceration,”in Stanley Cohen & Andrew Scull, eds., Social Control and the State (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1983).

8 E. g., E. P. Thompson, Whigs and Hunters: The Origin of the Black Act (New York: Pantheon, 1975); Michael B. Katz, Poverty and Policy in American History (New York: Academic Press, 1983); id., In the Shadow of the Poorhouse (New York: Basic Books, 1986).

9 Erving Goffman, Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963).

10 Garland, Punishment.

11 Jonathan Simon, Poor Discipline: Parole and the Social Control of the Underclass, 1890–1990 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993).

12 David Garland, “Penal Modernism and Postmodemism” (unpub. MS., 1994).

13 Selznick, Philip, “Foundations of the Theory of Organizations,” 13 Am. Soc. Rev. 25 (1948).

14 For a thorough comparison of the old and new institutionalisms, see DiMaggio and Powell's Introduction at 11–15.

15 Paul J. DiMaggio, “Interest and Agency in Institutional Theory,”in Lynne G. Zucker, ed., Institutional Patterns and Organizations (Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger, 1988).

16 Philip Selznick, Leadership in Administration 17 (Evanston, Ill.: Row, Peterson, 1957).

17 See John W. Meyer & Brian Rowan's ch. 2 and DiMaggio and Powell's ch. 3.

18 Hamilton & Sutton, 18 Theory & Soc'y (cited in note 2).

19 Philippe Nonet & Philip Selznick, Law and Society in Transition: Toward Responsive Law (New York: Harper & Row, 1978).

20 See Hamilton & Sutton, 18 Theory & Soc'y at 26–31.

21 Pound, Roscoe, “The Limits of Effective Legal Action,” 27 Int'l J. Ethics 150 (1917);; David Garland, Punishment and Welfare: A History of Penal Strategies (Brookfield, Vt.: Gower, 1985).

22 Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (New York: Pantheon, 1979).

23 Tolbert, Pamela S. & Zucker, Lynne G., “Institutional Sources of Change in the Formal Structure of Organizations: The Diffusion of Civil Service Reform, 1880–1935,” 28 Admin. Sci. Q. 22 (1983).

24 Meyer, John W., Tyack, David, Nagel, Joane, & Gordon, Audri, “Public Education as Nation-Building in America: Enrollments and Bureaucratization, 1870–1930,” 85 Am. J. Soc. 591 (1979).

25 See, e. g., Arthur L. Stinchcombe, “Social Structure and Organizations,”in James G. March, ed., Handbook of Organizarions (Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1965).

26 John R. Sutton, Stubborn Children: Controlling Delinquency in the United States, 1640–1982 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988) (“Sutton, Stubborn Children”).

27 John Mohr deserves credit for the tectonics imagery.

28 See, e. g., David J. Rothman, The Discovery of the Asylum (Boston: Little, Brown, 1971); Sutton, Stubborn Children chs. 2–3.

29 It is possible to break this general distinction down further and to discuss more finegrained differences among institutional logics. For example, the punitive justice model can be motivated either by the logic of just deserts (it is morally right to punish offenders, regardless of any instrumental outcome) or the logic of deterrence (punishment discourages further deviance). Variations on the treatment model include eugenics, various psychologically oriented approaches, and welfarist approaches that emphasize the pathogenic aspects of communities and subcultures.

30 Sutton, Stubborn Children.

31 Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., The Common Law (Boston: Little, Brown, 1905); Pound, 27 Int'l J. Ethics (cited in note 21).

32 Sudnow, David, “Normal Crimes: Sociological Features of the Penal Code in a Public Defender Office,” 12 Soc. Prob. 255 (1965).

33 Sykes, Gresham & Matza, David, “Techniques of Neutralization: A Theory of Delinquency,” 22 Am. Soc. Rev. 664 (1957).

34 Reiss, Albert J. Jr., “The Social Integration of Queers and Peers,” 9 Soc. Prob. 102 (1961).

35 Stuart Hall, The Hard Road to Renewal: Thatcherism and the Crisis of the Left (London: Verso, 1988).

36 Swidler, Ann, “Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies,” 51. Am. Soc. Rev. 273 (1986).

37 Philippe Bourdieu, Outline of a Theory of Practice (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1977); id., Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984).

38 Harold Garfinkel, Studies in Ethnomethodology (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1967).

39 Mary Douglas, How Institutions Think ch. 9 (Syracuse, N. Y.: Syracuse University Press, 1986).

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed