Michèle Lamont

Lamont published this comparison of the values of white and non-white (African-American in the case of the US, North African in the case of France) working class men 20 years ago. One interesting element of reading it is comparing our different ways of thinking about race, class, and values since then. What hasn't changed is the extent to which the issues academic researchers focus on (then: multiculturalism; now: intersectionality) are absent from the issues their subjects care about. An show more interesting reminder of the ways in which humans seem to need to define themselves in part in opposition to people who aren't like them, even if they have to invent characteristics to ascribe to people who aren't like them. show less

This is a good introduction to social justice and its importance, couched in today's polarized environment. Lamont brings to the US a much-needed sociological lens to what is typically analysed purely through an economic lens, showing how this is too limited; for this she does a good job.
However, her book is muddled: Is it descriptive? if so, it has a clear bias toward "progressive" agendas and down plays reactive forces. Is it prescriptive? if so, the solutions are so wildly broad that it's show more difficult to understand how it all starts and how to apply her approach to smaller contexts. "Changing the narrative" is bland and hardly novel.
I'm happy I read it as a way to coalesce some of my thoughts but I'm not sure I'd recommend it. show less

Sadly overpromising title! This book is about how academics responsible for making fellowship grants think, and while this clearly has implications for broader issues it wasn’t what I was hoping for. Lamont documents differences by field in terms of how reviewers characterize excellence and the role of subjectivity—anthropologists are the most anxious about disciplinary issues, political scientists/economists least—and finds very little overt consideration of racial or socioeconomic show more diversity; diversity among fields and institutions tends to be much more important to reviewers. Theoretically rich, but not what I wanted to read. show less

Great book describing the ways we justify how we feel about others-- couching our objections in terms of morality.