Content area
Full text
In this issue of The Canadian Journal of Sociology, Rick HelmesHayes and Emily Milne have made an important contribution to the sociology and history of Canadian sociology, with an eye towards larger theoretical and methodological questions of concern to social scientists. Combining the framework of Harry Hiller (who is, along with HelmesHayes himself, an active historian of the English language sociological field in Canada) along with Nicholas Mullins' influential analysis of "theory and theory groups" rooted in the American case, Helmes-Hayes and Milne synthesize theory, develop useful and reasonable measures, and tell an important and interesting story of the "rise and fall" of the symbolic interactionist (SI) tradition in Canada.
It is not really a fall, of course, and Helmes-Hayes and Milne argue that symbolic interactionism in Canada has de-institutionalized, as it moved from a smaller and coherent theory group to a more diffuse and looser social structure, while retaining a broad influence in the field. While this is a controversial view from the perspective of some of the older and more established scholars, the younger sociologists interviewed by Helmes-Hayes seem to be comfortable with seeing SI as a rich tradition they draw on and are rooted in, without feeling the need to be part of a "pure" tradition, set off in some major way, from either mainstream American sociology or the various competing loyal and disloyal alternative traditions such as ethnomethodology, various post-modern theories or the political economy and feminist traditions that have been influential in the Canadian discipline. In an increasingly global world, where dialogue with non-English language traditions is essential, and in a context where both French language Quebec sociology and indigenous perspectives must surely be an important element of a viable national or set of national sociologies, the younger generation's flexibility and open vision of what a qualitative sociology might look like makes good sense.
Helmes-Hayes and Milne, however, do not offer us the conceptual tools to fully understand a core tension in their paper. This is the op- position to the very project of measuring the institutionalization of the theory cleared expressed by some core members of the SI tradition (including at least one reviewer for the journal) alongside the relative openness to this kind of sociology expressed by younger...