Other Countries

• Date: 01 March 1956
• DOI: 10.1177/000271625630400181
• Author: J. Lloyd Mecham
• Published date: 01 March 1956
• Subject Matter: Articles

194

Centuries.&dquo;

John

Mundy

supplements

earlier

studies

of

Toulouse

in

his

&dquo;Hospi-

tals

and

Leprosaries

in

Twelfth-

and

Early

Thirteenth-Century

Toulouse,&dquo;

and

Ken-

neth

Setton

in

his

&dquo;The

Archaeology

of

Medieval

Athens&dquo;

by

wit

and

learning

gives

life

and

meaning

to material

from

excava-

tors’

notebooks.

GRAY

C.

BOYCE

Northwestern

University

DAVID

RODNICK.

The

Norwegians: A

Study

in

National

Culture.

Pp.

vi,

165.

Wash-

ington,

D.

C.:

Public

Affairs

Press,

1955.

$3.25.

The

Norwegians

is

a

report

of

a

study

based

on

field

work

carried

out

during

Dr.

Rodnick’s

one-year

visit

to

Norway

in

1950

as

a

Fulbright

research

grantee.

The

pub-

lisher

has

attempted

to

make

up

for

the

author’s

failure

to

clearly

express

the

pur-

poses

of

the

study.

The

blurb

on

the

paper

cover

points

out

that

Dr.

Rodnick

seeks

to

find

out

what

Norwegians

are

like,

how

they

get

along

together,

and

why

they

be-

have

as

they

do.

The

book

will

inevitably

be

met

with

suspicion

by

many

because

the

author

also

has

neglected

to

describe

clearly

the

sample

and

the

procedures

followed

in

collecting

the

data.

The

findings

and

interpretations

are

pre-

sented

in

eleven

chapters

dealing

with

per-

sonal

and

cultural

characteristics

of

Nor-

wegians :

family

relations,

descriptions

of

various

occupational

and

socioeconomic

groups,

religious

patterns,

and

political

trends.

Chapter

II

deals

with

Norwegian

people’s

attitudes

toward

other

nationalities.

In

reading

this

chapter

one

should

keep,

in

mind

that

Scandinavian

people’s

appraisal

of

each

other

is

characterized

by

subtle

banter

and

raillery,

the

true

meaning

of

which

is

not

easily

detected

by

a

visitor.

Those

sections

of

the

book

are

best

where

the

author

has

been

able

to

supplement

the

interview

material

with

information

from

other

sources.

The

topic

of

religion

has

received

undue

emphasis

at

the

ex-

pense

of

such

important

variables

in

Nor-

wegian

culture

as

education

and

recreation.

Problems

of

translating

Norwegian

ideas

into

American

English

are

apparent.

The

word

&dquo;clever&dquo;

is

put

to

strange

uses.

The

reader

will

be

aided

in

his

understanding

of

many

quotations

if

he

substitutes

the

word

&dquo;able.&dquo;

Another

weakness

of

this

study

is

its

failure

to

organize

observations

around

relevant

themes.

However,

in

view

of

the

limitations

of

the

data,

an

attempt

in

this

direction

might

have

done more

harm

than

good.

As

it

stands,

the

book

is

of

little

scientific

value

and

at

best

it

is

a

readable

account

of

some

features

of

Norwegian

life.

Above

all,

it

furnishes

proof

of

the

author’s

statement

that

&dquo;it

is

not

possible

for

a

visi-

tor

to

understand

through

one

year

of

field

work

the

complexities

of

three

and

a

quar-

ter

million

people

and

to

be

able

to

con-

clude

that

his

description

is

exactly

what

they

are

like.&dquo;

OLUF

M.

DAVIDSEN

University

of

Wisconsin

OTHER

COUNTRIES

STANLEY

R.

Ross.

Francisco

I.

Madero:

Apostle

of

Mexican

Democracy.

Pp.

ix,

378.

New

York:

Columbia

University

Press,

1955.

$5.50.

Francisco

I.

Madero

was

an

unlikely

revolutionary.

Born

of

a

marital

union

representing

two

of

the

greatest

landowning

families

in

northern

Mexico,

it

was

strange

that

he

should

have

launched

an

attack

on

the

very

system-&dquo;the

Diaz

peace&dquo;-of

which

he

was

a

beneficiary.

But

stranger

still

was

the

fact

that

&dquo;the

Apostle

of

the

Mexican

Revolution&dquo;

had

no

intention

of

being

a

revolutionary.

The

man

who

opened

the

floodgates

to

socio-economic

revolution

steadfastly

refused

to

recognize

the

urgency

of

meeting

the

demands

for

reform,

but

was

preoccupied

in

giving

to

the

people

of

Mexico

democratic

conditions

under

which

they,

through

their

represent-

atives,

could

devise

the

needed

laws,

all

in

good

time.

Madero’s

failure

to

understand

the

sig-

nificance

and

strength

of

the

forces

he

had

unleashed

proved

to

be

his

undoing.

Blindly

confident

that

faithful

adherence

to

democratic

processes,

conciliation,

and

co-operation

would

consolidate

the

nation,

he

gravely

miscalculated

the

depth

of the

cleavage

that

separated

the old

and

the

new