automatic, potentially self-destructiveninclination? This question remainsnunanswered. Landscapes and naturalnbeauty are brilliantly depicted, but actuallynall of the characters needed morenfully articulated natures, particularlynPolitics / Sociology / IdeologynSeymour Martin Lipset: Political Mann(expanded edition); The Johns HopkinsnUniversity Press; Baltimore.nby William C. Havardno. ‘ver the past 30 years SeymournMartin Lipset has enjoyed a succesnd’estime that is rare for an academiciannin the social sciences. He is one of thatnclose-knit band of sociologists who werenprecocious undergraduates at City Collegenin the decade roughly spanningnWorld War II, took advanced degrees atnprestigious American universities (Columbianin Lipset’s case), and then proceedednto populate the growing facultiesnof the major departments of sociology,nespecially in the Northeast and on thenWest Coast. As in so many forms ofnAmerican enterprise, overcapitalizationnand high-powered marketing techniquesnnot only produced a post-World War IInboom in sociology, but even led to claimsnon the part of some of its entrepreneursnto have reduced the other social sciencesnto the status of subsidiaries. In the laten1940’s, for example, I heard Talcott Parsonsndeliver a series of lectures in Londonnon the current state of the social sciences,nand while I do not recall much of the contentn(Parsons was even more difficult tonfollow aurally than in print), the gist ofnthe argument was that economics andnpolitical science were in static intellectualnconditions from which they could recovernonly through strong infusions ofnsociological concepts and methods. AtnProfessor Havard is chairman of the departmentnof political science at VanderbiltnUniversity.nS O M ^ H H M ^ ^nChronicles of Culturenwith regard to motivation. It’s one thingnto find and put into words the pulchritudenof mountains and skies, quitenanother to find the sense of a humannbeing. Only the latter, however, determinesnserious literature. DnHarvard and a few other places, either asnsnobbish gestures to modesty or in an attemptnto throw a veil of respectabilitynover a cacophonous parvenu amongnlearned disciplines, sociology was keptnpartly disguised behind such euphemismsnas “Social Relations.”nRegardless of the label under which itnis packaged, sociology is a product fornwhich the demand has expanded geometricallynin the period since World WarnII, ostensibly because of its utility as thenfoundation for university “training” innthe newly integrated (as of the 1950’s)n”behavioral sciences,” and latterly for itsnpossible applied value in solving problemsnof public policy.nLipset’s place as a high-ranking executivenin the social-science corporatenstructure has been recognized and securednby the universities in which he hasntaught (Toronto, Columbia, Berkeley,nHarvard, and Stanford), by his electionnto memberships in both the NationalnAcademy of Sciences and the AmericannAcademy of Arts and Sciences, and bynhaving been the recipient of at least threenmajor awards for scholarship. He hasnbeen elected to numerous officesnin professional associations and is currentlynthe president of the American PoliticalnScience Association. Lipset oncenheld a joint appointment in social relationsnand government at Harvard and isnnow professor of sociology and politicalnscience at Stanford.nPolitical Man, first published in 196O,nis Lipset’s most celebrated book. Andnmeasured by the figures in thenpublisher’s blurb on the back cover ofnthis new edition—translation into 15nlanguages, with worldwide sales of morennnthan 250,000 copies—it must also be onenof the most successfiil books in the socialsciencengenre (best-selling textbooksnaside) to appear in the current era of thenbehavioral sciences. Given what sociologistsnmight refer to as such positive indicatorsnof influence, and consideringnwith what deference Political Man hasnbeen treated in the “literature,” it is notnsurprising that the author should havenmade so few substantial alterations ofncontent, method, and interpretation innpreparing a second edition of a book thatnhad gone unrevised for a generation.nNeither social history nor sociology per senhas ordinarily displayed so much stability.nTrue, the revision has increased thentotal bulk of the volume by the additionnof two long chapters totaling over 100npages. But these chapters, devoted ton”Second Thoughts and Recent Findings”nand a review of “the end of ideology”nthesis, do little more than confirmn—or reconfirm—the principal conclusionsnof the i960 edition. After all,nwhy should one rebuild a monumentnbefore which so many have yielded sonmuch homage when a little refurbishingnwill do?nAlthough not directly touted asnsuch. Political Man is a synthesis of whatnhas happened to political sociology at thenhands of those who might be regarded asnsuccessors to the “four great Europeansnwhose ideas are, more or less, the basis ofnpolitical sociology: Marx, TocqueviUe,nWeber and Michels. “Marx and Tocqueville,naccording to Lipset, were concernednmainly with class conflict and consensus,nwhile Weber and Michels were fixed onnthe relation between bureaucracy andndemocracy as the critical determinants innthe social configurations of modern politics.nLipset and, by inference, most of hisncolleagues who followed in the wake ofnthe^e path-breakers have also been concernednwith the conditions of social andnpolitical stability—the effort to explainnthe relation between the requirement ofnsome (determinable?) degree of consensusnand the way in which conflict may benconstructively channeled in the effort tonreconcile interests—and the socialzon^-n