Classicism and Romanticism in the Sociology of Time*

Abstract

The sociology of time has recently witnessed a shift in its underlying theoretical preferences. Early work emphasized system balance and the primacy of the social: a sense of optimism pervades these writings. In contrast, more recent analysts emphasize time's tyranny and the primacy of the individual; a gloomy pessimism pervades these writings. This paper analyzes representative writings of each period in order to demonstrate the shift. The current phase, the‘romantic interlude,’is said to derive from both a pessimistic national mood and dissatisfaction with academia during a period of educational contraction.

A Weberian Theory of Time

“…Weber would not concur, in particular, with the unqualified statement that 'generally speaking, organizational time demands precedence over interaction time' (Lewis and Weigert, 1981: 444, 446, 454), since the norms governing interaction time may turn out to be more binding on conduct than the institutional norms. Rather than unilaterally stressing either 'time's tyranny' as a functional requisite of modern societies, or individuals' opposition to it for the sake of personal autonomy and control of their own destinies (Jaworski, 1991), Weber preferred to dwell on the interactions between the non-institutionalized normative context, and the institutionally defined and enforced regulation of time. For instance, within educated civil servants or specific groups of factory workers informal social norms reinforce, generally speaking, the organization's formal regulation of working time, but formal norms cannot prevent the same or other groups of factory workers from deliberately slowing down the pace of their work, out of consideration for their fellow workers, when the criteria for measuring the work output are established.…”

“…They have examined the structures and meanings of social time (Lewis and Weigert, 1981) and, more particularly, the interactional context of time perception (Denzin, 1987), the language of time considered at both microsocial and macrosocial levels of analysis (Zerubavel, 1987) and the matching of the personal experience of time with its social and cultural definition (Flaherty, 1987). The sociology of time as a theoretical discipline, endowed with a subject matter of its own (Jaworski, 1991;Maines, 1987), and the conceptualization of temporality by classical authors such as Simmel (Molseed, 1987) and Durkheim (Katovich, 1987;Watts Miller, 2000), have also received attention.…”

Disaster Anniversay: A Social Reconstruction of Time

“…social time expresses the change or movement of social phenomena in terms of other social phenomena taken as points of reference" (p. 618). A disaster serves as a benchmark against which time is measured or as Charles E. Fritz (1961) and Lang and Lang (1989) suggest, disasters are a way in which people measure time. "B.D.…”

“…Until recently, however, time has not been developed by social scientists as a significant variable (Denzin 1987;Maines 1987). The concept time designates a social category of thought shared by a collective in order to synchronize and coordinate social action (Sorokin and Merton 1937;Zerubavel1979b;Lewis and Weigert 1981;Jaworski 1991;Luckmann 1991). Most people live within three time perspectives: past, present, and future.…”