Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T14:28:36.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Veblen, the Insider – at least in the First Half of his Life - Charles Camic, Veblen: The Making of an Economist Who Unmade Economics (Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 2020, 504 p.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2022

Christian Fleck*
Affiliation:
Institute of Advanced Studies, Vienna, Austria [[email protected]]
Get access

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Copyright
© European Journal of Sociology 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Harald Hagemann, 2011, “John Bates Clark (1847-1938),” in Heinz D. Kurz, ed., Klassiker des ökonomischen Denkens Band 2: Von Vilfredo Pareto bis Amartya Sen (München, C. H. Beck: 9-25); Marlies Schütz, 2016, “John Bates Clark (1847-1938),” in G. Faccarello and H. D. Kurz, ed., Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume I (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar: 320-322).

2 Lewis A. Coser claimed that Edward Bellamy had a strong impact on Veblen’s thinking [Pages 289-290, in Lewis A. Coser, (1971) 1977, Masters of Sociological Thought: Ideas in Historical and Social Context (New York, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich)]; Camic rejects this interpretation, although it does so on the basis of unsatisfactory arguments [221 and 317].

3 John Dos Passos, The 42nd Parallel (1930), 1919 (1932), and The Big Money (1936), published together in one volume titled USA by Modern Library in 1937.

5 Two papers ignored by Camic may be sufficient to support my criticism: Robert Dimand, 1998, “Fisher and Veblen: Two Paths for American Economics,” Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 20 (4): 449-465; and Cohen, Avi J., 2014, “Veblen Contra Clark and Fisher: Veblen-Robinson-Harcourt lineages in capital controversies and beyond,” Cambridge Journal of Economics, 38 (6): 14931515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Camic’s reconstruction of the trajectory of this concept is much more persuasive than his application in Veblen: Charles Camic, 2011, “Repetition with Variation: A Mertonian Inquiry into a Lost Mertonian Concept,” in Y. Elkana, A. Szigeti and G. Lissauer, eds, Concepts and the Social Order: Robert K. Merton and the Future of Sociology (Budapest, Central European University Press: 165-188).

7 Veblen is prominently portraited in Arthur K. Davis’s article [1968], Coser,’s one [(1971) 1977] and Dorothy Ross’s book [1991], but ignored in Pitirim Sorokin’s [1928], Neil J. Smelser and Paul B. Baltes’ [2001], Stephen P. Turner [2014], ones and sidelined in Craig Calhoun’ book, [2007]. Cf. Arthur K. Davis, 1968, “Veblen, Thorstein,” in D. L. Sills, ed., International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, (New York, MacMillan: 303-308); Coser, (1971) 1977 [cf. infra note 2: 263-302]; Dorothy Ross, 1991, The Origins of American Social Science (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press); Pitirim Sorokin, 1928, Contemporary Sociological Theories (New York, Harper & Row); Neil J. Smelser and Paul B. Baltes, eds, 2001, International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Amsterdam, Elsevier); Stephen P. Turner, 2014, American Sociology: From Pre-Disciplinary to Post-Normal (Basingstoke, Palgrave Pivot); Craig Calhoun, ed., 2007, Sociology in America: A History (Chicago, University of Chicago Press).

8 The “International Thorstein Veblen Association”, founded in 1994, seems to have stopped its activities after the death of its founder Arthur J. Vidich in 2006.