Something different-suggestions/criticisms wanted

Apologies in advance if you receive this message more than once. We wanted to reach a large group with this message. If it is not relevant to you, feel free to delete it.

 

This message is directed mainly towards those who have read, or especially, used in class the book "Crisis and Change :  Basic Questions of Marxist Sociology" by Peter Knapp and Alan Spector. The book attempted to take a materialist approach to Marxism, rather than a psychological-cultural one or a moral-humanist one, but it attempted to develop strong critical thinking and a many-sided, dialectical approach to Marxism, rather than the mechanistic approach taken by many in the materialist tradition. The book is a cross between a monograph which offers a particular perspective on Marxist social science, and a text book. It is the text book character of much of the book that makes it different from other books on Marxism.

 

We are in the process of revising the book for a second edition, and we would like suggestions, comments, criticisms from any of three groups of people. Most important would be those who have used the book as part of a course that they have taught. Second would be those who have read the book. Third would be those who just have some suggestions about what should go into a book directed at undergraduates and graduates that attempts to explain Marxist sociology and Marxist social science in general in a systematic way, based on forty questions (and exercises) that students might have about society, in four sections: dialectics, theory of history and society, economics, and politics.  We will preserve the main format of the book, but there are especially two areas that could use revision:  a) writing style; and b) updating the content. We are not looking for general praise or general criticism, but rather want to incorporate into the book suggestions, especially from people who are familiar with it, because we believe it will be a better book with the advice of others.

 

 

To make it easier, there is a questionnaire below.

This will take about ten minutes, but if we get ten or twenty responses, it will result in a better book. It will probably be best, (and fastest) if you have a copy of the book in front of you while you do this.  You can just e-mail this back to me personally (please don't send it to the whole list; we have plenty of postings on more pressing matters!)

Thanks, in advance......Alan

 

=====================================================================================================

 

I) If you have used the book in a course, what was the course title and what was the level of the course? (Beginning, intermediate undergrad, advanced undergrad, graduate. If not, skip to question 2.

 

 

 

2) In order to update the book (from 1991) we plan to add some discussion of some of the following topics: the collapse of the USSR & its allies; the rise of religious and secular ethno-nationalism; post-modernist thought; the debate over "white privilege"; Marxist approaches to "the intersection of race, gender, and class", and the "globalization/imperialism" debate. Are there any other topics which would make the book more relevant?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3) Were there some sections of the book which were particularly helpful in teaching? If so, which sections?

 

 

 

Were there some sections of the book which were not at all relevant to the course you were teaching? If so, which ones?

 

 

 

4) If you read the book, but did not necessarily teach from it in a course, were there some sections of the book which you thought were particularly strong? If so, which ones?

 

 

 

 

Were there some sections that you thought were particularly weak?

 

 

 

 

4)Are there any topics currently in the book which you believe could be cut out?

 

 

The book currently has five appendices: 1)a summary of how to do statistical analysis, (in order to ground Marxist research in probabilistic analysis); 2) a short discussion of the points of overlap between probabilistic analysis and dialectical analysis; and 3) a discussion of chaos theory; 4) a note on chapter order; and 5) a listing of Marxian-oriented journals in the social sciences.  Were those appendices useful, or would the book be just as strong without them?  Please be specific about each one. 

 

 

5) When the book was first published, it was decided to put the dialectics section at the end, because perhaps it would be better to ground the discussion more in concrete areas first, with the more general dialectics discussion last. One possible revision is to change the chapter order, putting the dialectics section first, so that the work would proceed from the most general, to the most specific. Instructors could still assign parts of the book in whatever way best fits the particular course, because the book has a modular nature. Do you have any opinions on the chapter order (general to specific, versus putting dialectics at the end)?

 

 

6) In general, how would evaluate the readability of the book? Is the level too high for most students? Is it not scholarly enough? Is the writing style too "stiff" (which is a different issue from whether the level of writing is too high.)  Can you offer specific examples or specific sections where the writing style/explanations could be clearer? The writing quality is especially important for a book such as this.

 

 

 

 

 

7) Are there any other suggestions you have about this book or for a basic book in Marxist sociology/social thought (whether or not you have read this book)? Thanks again. Please send e-mail responses to spectors@netnitco.net