Sociology and Education

• Published date: 01 March 1951
• Author: Hans Blumenfeld
• DOI: 10.1177/000271625127400175
• Date: 01 March 1951
• Subject Matter: Articles

244

outstanding.

This

portion

of

the

book

reflects

an

exceedingly

thorough-going

and

detailed

investigation

into

a

field

hitherto

largely

unexplored,

and

the

results

should

prove

to

be

of

exceptional

interest

to

the

urban

mortgage

market

in

general

and

to

life

insurance

companies

in

particular.

JAMES

C.

DOLLEY

University

of

Texas

SOCIOLOGY

AND

EDUCATION

BROWNELL,

BAKER.

The

Human

Com-

munity :

Its

Philosophy

and

Practice

for

a

Time

of

Crisis.

Pp.

vi,

305.

New

York:

Harper

&

Brothers,

1950.

$4.00.

This

is

a

new

variation

on

the

old

Gemeinschaft-Gesellschaft

theme.

Such

po-

lar

concepts

may

be

used

to

determine

the

location

of

phenomena

on

the

peri-

sphere

of

a

universe.

They

also

may

be

abused

to

divide

the

world

into

heaven

and

hell.

Mr.

Brownell’s

book

moves

on

both

planes,

that

of

the

scientific

treatise

and

that

of

the

revivalist

sermon.

&dquo;The

rural

community

is

the

human

community

is

the

true

community

is

The

Community

is

The

Community

is

The

Community.&dquo;

This

proclamation

of

salvation

is

couched

in

emotionally

loaded

terms

such

as

&dquo;organic,&dquo;

&dquo;poetic,&dquo;

&dquo;integral,&dquo;

&dquo;plasmic,&dquo;

and

&dquo;holo-

phrastic.&dquo;

It

is

enlivened

by

equally

color-

ful

damnation

of

urbanism,

which

is

iden-

tified

with

&dquo;corruption,&dquo;

&dquo;death,&dquo;

and

&dquo;de-

feat.&dquo;

Imbedded

in

these

precahings

are

impres-

sionistic

thumbnail

sketches

of

rural

com-

munities

which

the

author

investigated

as

head

of

the

&dquo;Montana

Study.&dquo;

These

lively

descriptions,

,probably

the

most

in-

teresting

part

of

the

book,

unfortunately

break

off

where

the

reader

expects

the

in-

vestigation

to

start.

This

reviewer

is

in

sympathy

with

the

author’s

rejection

of

the

vague

use

of

the

term

&dquo;community&dquo;

to

denote

any

group

that

has

anything

whatever

in

common

and

with

its

limitation

to

&dquo;a

group

of

people

who

know

one

another

well.&dquo;

It

is

Mr.

Brownell’s

main

thesis

that

&dquo;only

in

the

community ...

are

found

whole

human

beings

in

relation

to

whole

human

beings,&dquo;

that

&dquo;to

live

in

a

continuum

of

familiar

things

and

of

people

known

well,

is

essential,&dquo;

and

that

outside

the

com-

munity

&dquo;interpersonal

relationships

are

solely

between

the

isolated

functions.&dquo;

Fre-

quently

he

makes

such

extreme

statements

as

&dquo;the

community

incorporates

the

whole

man

in

all

his

functions.&dquo;

Taken

literally,

this

would

preclude

any

private

sphere;

it

would

also

preclude

exogamy.

In

other

places

he

admits

that

&dquo;men ...

take

part

.in

many

groups&dquo;

and

that

&dquo;a

measured

diversity

and

enrichment ...

are

good.&dquo;

It

would

seem

to

this

reviewer

that

the

real

problem

consists

in

determining

such

measures.

Neither

logical

deduction

nor

actual

observation

seems

to

confirm.

the

author’s

dogma

that

relations

between

whole

human

beings

are

impossible

in

the

city.

The

difference

between

’rural

and

urban

societies

is

rather

than

in

the

former

the

circles

of

human

relations for

all

per-

sons

are

co-terminous,

while

in

the

latter

they

are

overlapping.

No

doubt

this

dif-

ference

modifies

personality

structure

and

social

and

cultural

life;

but

it

is

not

a

priori

certain

that

it

destroys

them.

This

is

not

to

deny

that

much

of

Mr.

Brownell’s

criticism

of

contemporary

civi-

lization

is

valid;

though

it is

curious

that

he

should

imagine

that

he

is

dealing

with

&dquo;the

unconsidered

problem.&dquo;

Actually

his

strictures

closely

parallel

the

familiar

socialist-communist

criticism.

It

is

doubt-

ful

whether

his

formulation

of

the

&dquo;pro-

fessionalization ...

and ...

correspond-

ing

disintegration

of

community

life

and

the

fragmentation

of the

human

personal-

ity&dquo;

is

really

an

improvement

on

the

Marxian

theses

of

the

&dquo;self-alienation

of

the

human

being,&dquo;

the

&dquo;replacement

of

all

human

relations

by

the

cash

nexus,&dquo;

and

the

&dquo;enslaving

subordination

of

the

individual

under

the

division

of

labor.&dquo;

&dquo;

However,

Mr.

Brownell

rejects

the

socialist

answer,

be-

cause

he

sees

the

evils

of

the

&dquo;urban

sys-

tem&dquo;

duplicated

in

the

Soviet

Union.

In

view

of

the

difficulties

of

access

to

relevant

sources

one

wonders

about

the

foundation

for

a

statement

like

&dquo;large-scale,

com-

mercialized

agriculture

under

centralized

control ...

has

many

of

the

same

social