Abstract
The paper explains the important role played by Harriet Martineau in the scientization of British politics and consequently in the development of Victorian Social Science. I suggest that there is much we can learn about the scientificity of social knowledge from the relationship between Martineau’s deafness, her career as a social investigator and a reporter, and her reflections about the practice of social science. Because Martineau was a pioneer who entered into a field that was not yet institutionalized, her knowledge making practices inevitably reflects the particular dispositions that guided her innovations. Martineau’s exposure, early in her career, to the modus operandi of governmental social investigations by royal commissions and her experience with popularizing the products of these investigations via wide public opinion campaigns, coupled with Martineau’s specific dispositions as a deaf woman, facilitated her interest in mediating credible knowledge about society and helped her to develop an innovative methodological skill-set as a social investigator, which later on in her career made her a pioneer figure in the field of social science.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
This temporal profile of scientific activity, which distinguishes science from ‘faster’ practices such as journalism or politics, is also recognized by Bourdieu who sees the “suspending of urgency, the pressure of ‘things to do’” as a “scholastic disposition” and as conditions of existence of all scholarly fields (Bourdieu 2000, 206).
At the same time, we can view the acceleration of scientific activities as a politicization of science: the acceleration of the production, circulation and public dissemination of academic knowledge production. In his On Television and Journalism Bourdieu criticizes this very process when he condemns the ‘fast thinking’ and the intellectual ‘fast food’, which is served up by scholars who are seduced by the swift velocities of the media and its logic of commercialization. These “media intellectuals,” according to Bourdieu becomes “cultural celebrities,” who prefer to speak publicly (and under rigorous time constraints) by writing “fast and short pieces for newspapers” or appearing on radio and TV talk shows rather than publishing academic articles in journals “who nobody ever reads.” (Bourdieu 1998).
I use the term “Governmental Investigations” instead of the more commonly used term “Royal Commissions”, which originated in the fifteenth century, to indicate a transformation in the modus operandi of these commissions in the nineteenth century. Governmental investigations were composed from three to seven politicians who served as commissioners in London and were responsible for the writing and the dissemination of the official reports, and a few sub-commissioners (or inspectors) who were often recruited from Oxbridge (lawyers, priests, medical doctors) and were responsible for data collection un the filed and writing periodical local reports that will later be integrated into the official reports.
In arguing that Martineau’s innovative empirical methods were important in establishing social investigations as a filed of scientific expertise (social science), I’m in no way suggesting that empiricism is the only scientific method or that Martineau’s method are the only proper way to do social science.
Because the draft of the initial chapter did not survive we are unable to estimate the particular contribution and added value of Martineau’s own field research in America to her reflection on the practice of social research in How to Observe.
Martineau was well aware that her deafness might be used to question the reliability of her investigations. In her Autobiography, Martineau writes about Sydney Smith, an American slave owner who made the sarcastic remark that “she is writing a book … to prove that the only travellers who are fit to write books must be both blind and deaf.” In a revealing passage, Martineau attributes Smith’s reference to her deafness to a passage she wrote in the preface to her Society in America: “In that preface I explained the extent to which my deafness was a disqualification for travel, and for reporting of it: and I did it because I knew that, if I did not, the slaveholders would make my deafness a pretext for setting aside any part of my testimony which they did not like” (1877, 186).
References
Bohrer, S. F. (2003). Harriet Martineau: Gender, disability and liability. Nineteenth-Century Contexts, 25(1), 21–37.
Bourdieu, P. (1998). On television and journalism. London: Pluto Press.
Bourdieu, P. (2000). Pascalian meditations. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Davis, L. J. (1995). Enforcing normalcy: Disability, deafness, and the body. New York: Verso.
Deegan, M. J. (2001). Making lemonade: Harriet Martineau on being deaf. In M. R. Hill & S. Hoecker-Drysdale (Eds.), Harriet Martineau: Theoretical & methodological perspectives (pp. 41–58). New York and London: Routledge.
Durkheim, E. (1895/1982). The rules of the sociological method. New York: Free Press.
Elias, N. (1956). Problems of involvement and detachment. British Journal of Sociology, 7(3), 226–252.
Fenwick, F. M. (1885). Harriet Martineau. Boston: Roberts brothers.
Fliegelman, J. (1993). Declaring Independence: Jefferson, national language and the culture of performance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Frankel, O. (2006). States of inquiry: Social investigations and print culture in nineteenth century Britain and the United States. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
Gabay, N. 2007. The political origins of social science: The cultural transformation of the British parliament and the emergence of scientific policymaking, 1803-1857. A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of California, San Diego.
Goody, J. (1987). The interface between the written and the oral. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Polity Press.
Hazlitt W. (1825/1902). “Advice to the patriot,” in A.R. Waller and Arnold Glover (eds.), The collected works of William Hazlitt. London: J.M Dent & CO.
Heilbron, J. (2011). Practical foundations of theorizing in sociology: The case of pierre bourdieu, chapter five in Charles Camic. In N. Gross & M. Lamont (Eds.), Social knowledge in the making (pp. 181–205). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Herbert, C. E. (1836). Anecdotes and annals of the deaf and dumb (second ed.). London: Robert H.C. Tims.
Hill, M. R. (1988). Introduction to the transaction edition: Empiricism and reason," in Harriet Martineau’s Sociology, in H. Martineau, How to observe manners and morals, (pp.xv-lx). London: Transaction Publishers.
Huzel, J. P. (2006). The popularization of malthus in early nineteenth-century England: Martineau, cobbett and the pauper press. London: Ashgate Publishing.
Johnson, B. (1981). Introduction, in Jacques Derrida, Dissemination, trans. by Barbara Johnson. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kellner, D. (1999). Virilio, war and technology: Some critical reflections theory. Culture & Society, 1999(16), 103–125.
Kitto J. (1848/2003). Lost senses. London: Kessinger Publishing.
Lepenies, W. (1988). Between literature and science: The rise of sociology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lipset, S. M. 1968. "Harriet Martineau's America: An introductory essay," in Harriet Martineau, Society in America. Gloucester: Peter Smith.
Martineau, H. (1832-4). Illustration of political economy, 9 vols. London: Charles Fox.
Martineau, H. (1833). Poor law and pauperism illustrated. London: Charles Fox. Publish under the superintendence of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge.
Martineau, H. (1834a). Illustration of taxation. 5 Parts. London: Charles Fox.
Martineau, H. (1834b/1975). Letter to the deaf, In Harriet Martinea: Miscellanies, Vol1, pp. 248-295. Boston: AMS Press.
Martineau, H. (1837/1981). Society in America. New Brunswick and London: Transaction Publishers.
Martineau, H. (1838). How to observe morals and manners. London: Charles Knight.
Martineau, H. (1845). Forest and game-law tales (Vol. 1). London: E. Moxon.
Martineau, H. (1848). Eastern life: Present and past. London: Lea and Blanchard.
Martineau, H. (1877). Harriet Martineau's autobiography, 3 Vols.; edited by Maria Weston Chapman. Elibron Classics: Adamant Media Corporation.
Mulvihill, J. (2004). Upstart talents: Rhetoric and the career of reason in english romantic discourse 1790-1820. Newark: University of Delaware Press.
Murphy, T. W. (1997). The Oldest Social Science? Configurations of Law and Modernity. Oxford: Clarendnon Press.
Ong, W. (1977). Interfaces of the world. New York: Cornell UP.
Ong, W. (2002). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. New York: Routledge.
Orazem, C. (1999). Political economy and fiction in the early works of Harriet Martineau. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Pels, D. (2003). Unhastening science. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
Richardson, H. S. (1877). Harriet Martineau account of herself. The Contemporary Review, 19, 1112–1123.
Rona-Tas, A., & Gabay, N. (2007). The invisible science of the invisible hand–the public presence of economic sociology in the USA. Socio-Economic Review, 5(2), 319–367.
Rossi, A. S. (1973). The first woman sociologist: Harriet Martineau (1802–1876). In A. S. Rossi (Ed.), The feminist papers (pp. 118–124). Hanover/London: Adams to de Beauvoir.
Sacks, O. (1989). Seeing voices: A journey into the world of the deaf. New York: Harper Collins.
Schudson, M. (1997). Why conversation is not the soul of democracy. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 14, 297–309.
Virilio, P. (1986). Speed and politics. An essay on dromology. New York: Semiotext(e).
Webb, R. K. (1960). Harriet Martineau. New York: Columbia University Press.
Winter, A. (1998). Harriet Martineau. In G. Kelly (Ed.), Dictionary of literary biography: British reform writers (pp. 1832–1914). Washington, D.C.: Bruccolli Clark Layman.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gabay, N. “With the Practiced Eye of a Deaf Person”: Harriet Martineau, Deafness and the Scientificity of Social Knowledge. Am Soc 50, 335–355 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-019-9401-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-019-9401-0