Society gets its due share of attention; but as is fitting and absolutely essential in any discussion of revolution, it is the peculiar nature of and crisis of the state that occupies the centre of the stage."
Similarly, Michael Kimmel of the University of California -- Santa Cruz,12 states that "Theda Skocpol is perhaps the most ambitious and exciting of a new generation of historical-comparative sociologists who have focused their attention squarely on the big issues of social change that once preoccupied the classic sociologists."
The difficulty that some reviewers had about this book is because of some of the misinformation. For example, George Yaney 12 of the University of Maryland states it is based almost entirely on secondary sources in French and English. Also, "One can find flaws in Skocpol's book. First, it fails to offer a sold theoretical structure to replace the ones she mauls. Having torn up Marx's analysis pretty severely, Skocpol still, from time to time, offers up Marxist canons and metaphors as if their validity could still be taken for granted." She also hands out vague sociological generalizations in parts of the book as if they were concrete historical descriptions. Yet, given that, he adds, "it would be pedantic to dwell on flaws and weaknesses. Skocpol's purpose is to set forth new perspectives, not to write up a new theory or discover new data, and I think she has done her job very well." He notes, as others have, it is not easy to combine academic disciplines and even harder to write on comparative history. She has managed to do both together and should be congratulated for doing so. She is, on the whole, a careful scholar and must be a courageous person.
Yaney ends his book review discussing Skocpol's contribution on why an agrarian revolution developed in Russia but not in Prussia-Germany. In Prussia, the peasants lost almost all their land but in Russia the government assured them a relatively large amount. As a result, agriculture in Prussia-Germany advanced and became productive in the former, but not in Russia. He then states: "One can support or attack this interpretation in a number of ways, but it is exciting...
She is not only daring to write about such an extensive topic, but also to write about it knowing that she is opening herself up to the Yaneys of the world and their commentaries -- good and bad. That is indeed very courageous and the way that new ideas come into the world.
Endnotes
Theda Skocpol, States and Social Revolutions (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979), xi
Ibid.,5
Krishan Kumar "States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia and China by Theda Skocpol" the British Journal of Sociology. 31, no. 2 (1980), 310-311. www.jstor.org.libdb.fairfield.edu/search/BasicResults?Search=Search&Query=aa:%22Krishan%20Kumar%22&hp=25&si=1"
Michael Kimmel "States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. By Theda Skocpol." http://www.jstor.org.libdb.fairfield.edu/browse/00029602" the American Journal of Sociology. 86 No.5 (1981) 1145-1154
George Yaney "States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China." Slavic Review. 39 no. 3, (1980) 496-499
References
Kimmel, Michael. "States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. By Theda Skocpol." http://www.jstor.org.libdb.fairfield.edu/browse/00029602" the American Journal of Sociology. 86 No.5 (1981): 1145-1154
Kumar, Krishan. States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France,
Russia and China by Theda Skocpol" the British Journal of Sociology. 31, no. 2
1980): 310-311.
Skocpol, Theda. States and Social Revolutions New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979
Yaney, George. "States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China." Slavic Review. 39 no. 3, (1980): 496-499
