Abstract
Dennis Smith, Editor 2002–2010
Current Sociology came into being in 1952. Its stated mission was to unite ‘the sociologists of the world’. That phrase has a manifesto-like ring, reminiscent of the previous mid-century. So was Current Sociology intended to unshackle the world’s sociologists? Help them lose their chains? Bring colleagues and students across the world together globally, not just in themselves but even, perhaps, for themselves? Free them from a disaggregated potato-like existence within a multitude of national sacks, to misquote Marx and Engels?
A partial answer is found in Current Sociology Volume 1, issue 1, 1952, on page 8. The journal’s purpose was to give its contributors and readers ‘regular channels for the exchange of information’. That immediately makes me think of William Thomas and Florian Znaniecki in The Polish Peasant in Europe and America (originally published 1918–1920). They tell us that newspapers played a large part in transforming Polish peasants into American citizens during the late-19th and early 20th centuries. Did Current Sociology, in a similar way, set out to foster collective solidarity among its global readership, to some extent at least?
If so, it had to make progress against a strong opposing tide of sub-disciplinary specialization within the broad profession of sociologists: sociology of religion, medical sociology, feminist sociology, sport sociology, political sociology and so on. Attendees at jamborees such as the ISA world congresses of sociology soon discover that the most convenient approach is to find your sub-disciplinary buddies and stick with them. But equally important, interwoven with clusters of like-minded people are unlike-minded folk who can give you a new angle on things. Over a cup of tea or coffee, perhaps. Or even a glass of beer or wine. Current Sociology provides a digital or printed version of that experience for a global readership. I was once delighted to be told this by a Turkish colleague. He reached over to shake my hand when I unmasked my editorial role as we sat with others on the shores of the Bosporus. Made my day.
For about half a century, Current Sociology published regular trend reports and major bibliographies on important subjects across the disciplinary field. This was a major accomplishment, vital in those post-war years. By 2002, when Current Sociology fell into my hands, at least partially, it had been transformed into a ‘regular’ journal publishing stand-alone papers ranging across the whole disciplinary spectrum. That complex process was initiated by my excellent predecessor, Susan McDaniel who then moved on to become ISA Vice-President for Publications.
With great skill, Susan played the leading role during Current Sociology’s rebirth as a ‘regular’ journal, beginning in 1997. At the end of her crucial tenure, I inherited responsibility for that vigorous infant. It was Ulla Björnberg, my colleague within the European Sociological Association, who first put the idea of offering to edit Current Sociology into my head. In 2001, Christine Inglis of the ISA ran me to earth in my lair at Loughborough University. Being approached directly in this way was very flattering but I asked, half playfully, where would I find the time and energy to do this job? Christine had done her research and had me all worked out. She just said: ‘But Dennis, this is global!’ That was enough.
Fortunately, I could hit the ground running. I had just come to the end of about a decade as one of the two managing editors of The Sociological Review, then still based in the splendid semi-rural setting of Keele University. My subsequent editorship of Current Sociology from 2002 to 2010 coincided with Julia Evetts’s exemplary stewardship of the monograph series. We were part of a team that also included Ann Smith, who managed the journal’s Loughborough office with tact and efficiency; as well as Carine Vassy and Angel Belderrain, who provided first-class French and Spanish translations. My editorial board combined scholarly quality with geographical and gender fairness. It had more females than males and fewer Europeans than non-Europeans.
I was responsible for producing four out of six issues per year and needed to build rapidly upon the existing flow of submissions my predecessor had conjured up. A useful device in the earliest years was a menu of special issues, normally one a year, on themes such as sociology meets globalization, unconventional forms of the family, economic sociology, South Africa 10 years after the freeing of Nelson Mandela, the idea of autonomous sociology and the global fashion industry.
After the first 4 years, the flow of submissions had built up enough for me to replace those special issues with specialized subsections within ‘general’ issues of the journal. For a while, I also enjoyed running substantial review articles, for example, on art, culture and taste, globalized youth, and heterogeneous societies. But the shiny and tasty fish in this stream were diverted elsewhere from 2006 when an annual issue of International Sociology dedicated to reviewing was instituted.
The space freed up by the loss of this relaxing and entertaining activity was usefully filled with a series of debates within Current Sociology’s pages. Fruitful topics were identified from among submitted contributions and likely respondents persuaded to join in. Each dialogue was contained between the covers of a single issue. We dealt with themes such as the character of public sociology, the threat of global warming, cosmopolitanism, the history of sociology, the work of Norbert Elias, the nature of professions, post-modern approaches to methods and the role of White trade union organizers in South Africa.
None of this disrupted the core business of publishing stand-alone papers. During my 8-year stretch, so to speak, I received about 700 submissions and arranged for the vast majority to be refereed, normally by experts in the relevant field. This involved reaching out beyond the editorial board on several occasions. Getting expert top-class referees meant winning the co-operation of very busy people by exhibiting, and therefore encouraging, a spirit of generosity and respect. I sent out at least 20 emails a week on Current Sociology business, that is about one thousand a year.
Current Sociology only published between a fifth and a quarter of all submissions. But in most cases, even authors who did not get accepted received useful advice from experts in their field. There was no ‘automated’ submission system, and when it became available, I did not use it. In fact, I did not delegate any of this editorial work. The reason was I was determined to maintain the journal’s distinctive ‘personality’ as I had inherited it: basically, first-class scholarly standards combined with an experience of friendly collegiality.
When asked how Current Sociology was distinct from International Sociology, my normal reply was that although they evidently overlapped, their missions were different. International Sociology was well placed to explore and explain the rich international diversity of theoretical approaches and empirical phenomena. By contrast, Current Sociology aimed to show how, in specific instances, theoretical and empirical investigations by sociologists could help make sense of the dynamic condition of current, that is, contemporary, society. It also contributed to current debates about what ‘making sociological sense’ means in practice. That includes, for example, the possibilities inherent in specific methodological techniques such as comparative and historical (or longitudinal) analysis.
Between 2002 and 2010, my own career and the state of the world were both changing. For 3 out those 8 years (2003–2006), I served as head of the large Social Sciences department at Loughborough, including an internationally known social policy centre, a distinguished group of social psychologists, and an equally renowned team in communication and media studies. I also participated in a major research project headed by Peter Taylor, then at Loughborough, on the history of leading global cities led by the Globalization and World Cities network. This was based in the university’s geography department and took me across the world from Mexico to China.
Meanwhile, established assumptions about power, hierarchy and how to run modern societies were being challenged almost everywhere, both peacefully and violently. My work on Current Sociology began soon after the airborne attacks on New York’s twin towers on 9/11 in 2001. This undermined the authority and persuasiveness of the Washington Consensus. I passed responsibility on to my successor Eloísa Martín in 2010 just as the so-called credit crunch and Arab Spring were making the headlines, transforming the global agenda yet again.
These issues fed into my book about four famous prisoners published in 2018. It is called Civilized Rebels: An Inside Story of the West’s Retreat from Global Power (Routledge). Anglo-Irish Oscar Wilde and existentialist Austrian Jean Améry both challenged Western socio-political hegemony from within. Nelson Mandela from South Africa and Aung Sang Suu Kyi from Myanmar mounted challenges from the South and the East, respectively.
Current Sociology’s editor is sheltered and sustained by two colossi: the ISA, intent on maintaining global sociology as a creative, relevant and critical intellectual practice, and the publisher, inevitably keen to translate the high reputation of its journals into steady and hopefully increasing sales. The quality of the academic content and the reputation of the publisher’s brand are, in fact, mutually dependent.
Journal editors are responsible for supercharging both by keeping the wheels of high-level academic publication turning in a way that generates ‘value’ for sociology as a whole. The editorial function is vital yet remains, by and large, very low profile. Does that imply a heroic capacity for self-exploitation on the part of the editors? Does the quasi-Marxian analysis I began with have some purchase after all?
That question does not take account of the great opportunity editing Current Sociology brought for worldwide travel. Introducing me to challenging and inspirational colleagues from Paris to Rio, Stockholm to Durban, and Beijing to Moscow. How else could I have experienced the eagle eyes of Immanuel Wallerstein and the amazing poetry of Ari Sitas? Or met distinguished Russian scholars such as Vassily Zhukov, Gennady Osipov and Svetlana Kirdina. Or talked with Vladimir Kultygin, now sadly deceased, and his impressive post-doctoral aide at that time, Maria Gornostaeva, with her expertise on social psychology, Lacan, and the dynamics of art, culture and genius.
Finally, where are today’s currents taking sociologists? Since at least the 1950s, the East has been rising. Meanwhile, the West is in danger of becoming a fragmenting, though hardly fragile, complexity. Meanwhile, its inhabitants enjoy gazing at their reflections in the broken shards.
The responsible current sociologist will not give a snap judgement on these matters. My own approach is to follow my deepest inclinations, which are historical and comparative. I am already reading, thinking and, Covid permitting, travelling to catch the spray from recent currents. The ocean is full of floating litter (flotsam) and items tossed over board (jetsam). The West’s imperial history is a large piece of flotsam, Brexit a huge lump of jetsam: both unsightly, both a danger to shipping. I’ll cast my charts and see what course can be plotted through the waves.