A Theory of Structure, Article Review Example

The article “A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Transformation” by W. H. Sewell is republished regularly since its first publication in 1992. It focuses on the concept of “structure” as one of the most significant, nevertheless evasive notions possessing no adequate definition.

The topicality of the theme is justified by the central position of “structure” in the discourse of social sciences and its constant contradictory interpretations of it in domains of sociology and anthropology. The author addresses the audience of experts in social science, who comprehend abundant specialized terminology and are acquainted with authoritative works of A. Giddens, C. Levi-Strauss, P. Bourdieu, and E. Goffman.

The work comprises subsections devoted to specific aspects of the problem (“What is Structure?”, “Structures as Rules”, “Structures as Resources”, “The Duality of Schemas and Resources” and others). Logical chapter division and multiple revisions, declared by the author (Sewell, 1), enable easy following of the coherent line of reasoning and valid consistency.

From the first pages, the author sets the definite purpose to elaborate an adequate theory of structure and overcome “the… cardinal weaknesses of the concept as it is normally employed in social science” (Sewell, 3). Aiming to rethink thoroughly and reconceptualize the notion, W. H.  Sewell departs from core ideas of the preceding researches.

Though the author emphasizes the serious gaps of the structure theories of A.Giddens and P. Bourdieu, he does not set the task to represent the profound critique or appreciation of their work. He applies the statements and conclusions as the foundation for further investigation and argues the established interpretations of structure. Sewell appeals to a number of notions, associated with structure theory in social science. The researcher interrogates the duality of structure (Giddens), habitus (Bourdieu), rules, resources, schemas, stasis, structure change, agency, and their interpretation by other scientists.

Sewell analyses Giddens’ concept of duality and regards it a reasonable idea. On the other hand, he claims that the concept of structure Giddens elaborates is not sufficient to serve the basis of a theoretical system. Sewell analyses the terminology of Giddens theory and introduces changes in it, offering to use “schemas” instead of “rules”.

According to Sewell, the concept of “habitus” (temporary durable structures), developed by Bourdieu may be presumed partially rational, but it does not correspond to possible structural change.

Sewell defines the boundaries of the discussion reasonably and sets feasible tasks. In the section “Varieties of Structures”, he claims that offers no detailed typology of structuring because of lack of space. The researcher dwells on the structures of language, state and capitalism and indicates key dimensions of depth and power along which the structures vary (Sewell, 22).

“Conclusion” summarizes Sewell’s points in the concept of structure interpretation. He explains the key points which distinguish his concept from the common usage of the notion in sociological and anthropological discourse. The scientist goes over the outcomes of discussion: “structures…are constituted by …cultural schemas and sets of resources” and are dynamic; structures empower agents (Sewell, 29).

Thus, the article surely provides original, profound research of the antecedent frameworks and new results in the course of the arguments and executes the tasks set in the introduction. The work serves a professional and influential model for further investigations.

References

Sewell, W. H. (1992). A theory of structure: duality, agency, and transformation. The American Journal of Sociology, 98, 1 – 29.