1 Dario Melossi, The State of Social Control (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990).Google Scholar

2 Edward A. Ross, Social Control (New York: MacMillan, 1901); Herbert Mead, George, “The Genesis of the Self and Social Control,” 35 Int'l J. Ethics 251 (192425); see also Hamilton, Gary G. & Sutton, John R., “The Problem of Control in the Weak State: Domination in the United States, 1880–1920,” 18 Theory & Soc'y 1 (1989).Google Scholar

3 Talcott Parsons, The Structure of Social Action (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1937); id., The Social System (Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1951).Google Scholar

4 Erving Goffman, Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates (Garden City, N. Y.: Anchor, 1961); Edwin M. Lemert, Human Deviance, Social Problems, and Social Control (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall, 1967).Google Scholar

5 Howard Becker, Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance (New York: Free Press, 1963); Joseph Gusfield, Symbolic Crusade (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1963); Kai T. Erikson, Wayward Puritans: A Study in the Sociology of Deviance (New York: John Wiley, 1966).Google Scholar

6 This category is too broad and varied to permit more than an impressionistic listing. Classic statements of the Marxist position are found in Richard Quinney, Critique of Legal Order: Crime Control in Capitalist Society (Boston: Little, Brown, 1974). and Ian Taylor, Paul Walton, & Jock Young, The New Criminology: For a Social Theory of Deviance (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1973); see Anthony M. Platt, The Child Savers: The Invention of Delinquency (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969), for an empirical application that synthesizes Marxism with labeling theory. Important early statements of the feminist position include Marcia Millman, “She Did It All for Love: A Feminist View of the Sociology of Deviance,”in Marcia Millman & Rosabeth Moss Kanter, eds., Another Voice: Feminist Perspectives on Social Life and Social Science (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday-Anchor, 1975), and Susan Brownmiller, Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1975); for more recent statements see Gelsthorpe, Loraine & Morris, Allison, “Feminism and Criminology in Britain,” 28 Brit. J. Crim. 223 (1988), and Edwin M. Schur, Labeling Women Deviant: Gender, Stigma, and Social Control (New York: Random House, 1984). For studies bearing a poststructuralist influence–especially via Foucault–see Stanley Cohen, Visions of Social Control (Cambridge, Eng.: Polity Press, 1985); Nanette J. Davis & Bo Anderson, Social Control: The Production of Deviance in the Modern State (New York: Irvington, 1983); David Garland, Punishment and Modern Society: A Study in Social Theory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990) (“Garland, Punishment”); Melossi, State of Social Control (cited in note 1); and Stephen Pfohl, Images of Deviance and Social Control: A Sociological History (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994).Google Scholar

7 Hagan, John, “The Legislation of Crime and Delinquency: A Review of Theory, Method, and Research,” 14 Law & Soc'y Rev. 603 (1980); Michael Ignatieff, “State, Civil Society and Total Institution: A Critique of Recent Social Histories of Punishment,”in Michael Tonry & Norval Morris, eds., 3 Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981); Mennel, Robert M., “Attitudes and Policies toward Juvenile Delinquency in the United States: A Historiographical Review,” 4 Crime & Just. 191 (1983); David J. Rothman, “Social Control: Uses and Abuses of the Concept in the History of Incarceration,”in Stanley Cohen & Andrew Scull, eds., Social Control and the State (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1983).Google Scholar

8 E. g., E. P. Thompson, Whigs and Hunters: The Origin of the Black Act (New York: Pantheon, 1975); Michael B. Katz, Poverty and Policy in American History (New York: Academic Press, 1983); id., In the Shadow of the Poorhouse (New York: Basic Books, 1986).Google Scholar

9 Erving Goffman, Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963).Google Scholar

10 Garland, Punishment. Google Scholar

11 Jonathan Simon, Poor Discipline: Parole and the Social Control of the Underclass, 1890–1990 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993).Google Scholar

12 David Garland, “Penal Modernism and Postmodemism” (unpub. MS., 1994).Google Scholar

13 Selznick, Philip, “Foundations of the Theory of Organizations,” 13 Am. Soc. Rev. 25 (1948).Google Scholar

14 For a thorough comparison of the old and new institutionalisms, see DiMaggio and Powell's Introduction at 11–15.Google Scholar

15 Paul J. DiMaggio, “Interest and Agency in Institutional Theory,”in Lynne G. Zucker, ed., Institutional Patterns and Organizations (Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger, 1988).Google Scholar

16 Philip Selznick, Leadership in Administration 17 (Evanston, Ill.: Row, Peterson, 1957).Google Scholar

17 See John W. Meyer & Brian Rowan's ch. 2 and DiMaggio and Powell's ch. 3.Google Scholar

18 Hamilton & Sutton, 18 Theory & Soc'y (cited in note 2).Google Scholar

19 Philippe Nonet & Philip Selznick, Law and Society in Transition: Toward Responsive Law (New York: Harper & Row, 1978).Google Scholar

20 See Hamilton & Sutton, 18 Theory & Soc'y at 26–31.Google Scholar

21 Pound, Roscoe, “The Limits of Effective Legal Action,” 27 Int'l J. Ethics 150 (1917);; David Garland, Punishment and Welfare: A History of Penal Strategies (Brookfield, Vt.: Gower, 1985).Google Scholar

22 Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (New York: Pantheon, 1979).Google Scholar

23 Tolbert, Pamela S. & Zucker, Lynne G., “Institutional Sources of Change in the Formal Structure of Organizations: The Diffusion of Civil Service Reform, 1880–1935,” 28 Admin. Sci. Q. 22 (1983).Google Scholar

24 Meyer, John W., Tyack, David, Nagel, Joane, & Gordon, Audri, “Public Education as Nation-Building in America: Enrollments and Bureaucratization, 1870–1930,” 85 Am. J. Soc. 591 (1979).Google Scholar

25 See, e. g., Arthur L. Stinchcombe, “Social Structure and Organizations,”in James G. March, ed., Handbook of Organizarions (Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1965).Google Scholar

26 John R. Sutton, Stubborn Children: Controlling Delinquency in the United States, 1640–1982 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988) (“Sutton, Stubborn Children”).Google Scholar

27 John Mohr deserves credit for the tectonics imagery.Google Scholar

28 See, e. g., David J. Rothman, The Discovery of the Asylum (Boston: Little, Brown, 1971); Sutton, Stubborn Children chs. 2–3.Google Scholar

29 It is possible to break this general distinction down further and to discuss more finegrained differences among institutional logics. For example, the punitive justice model can be motivated either by the logic of just deserts (it is morally right to punish offenders, regardless of any instrumental outcome) or the logic of deterrence (punishment discourages further deviance). Variations on the treatment model include eugenics, various psychologically oriented approaches, and welfarist approaches that emphasize the pathogenic aspects of communities and subcultures.Google Scholar

30 Sutton, Stubborn Children. Google Scholar

31 Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., The Common Law (Boston: Little, Brown, 1905); Pound, 27 Int'l J. Ethics (cited in note 21).Google Scholar

32 Sudnow, David, “Normal Crimes: Sociological Features of the Penal Code in a Public Defender Office,” 12 Soc. Prob. 255 (1965).Google Scholar

33 Sykes, Gresham & Matza, David, “Techniques of Neutralization: A Theory of Delinquency,” 22 Am. Soc. Rev. 664 (1957).Google Scholar

34 Reiss, Albert J. Jr., “The Social Integration of Queers and Peers,” 9 Soc. Prob. 102 (1961).Google Scholar

35 Stuart Hall, The Hard Road to Renewal: Thatcherism and the Crisis of the Left (London: Verso, 1988).Google Scholar

36 Swidler, Ann, “Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies,” 51. Am. Soc. Rev. 273 (1986).Google Scholar

37 Philippe Bourdieu, Outline of a Theory of Practice (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1977); id., Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984).Google Scholar

38 Harold Garfinkel, Studies in Ethnomethodology (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1967).Google Scholar

39 Mary Douglas, How Institutions Think ch. 9 (Syracuse, N. Y.: Syracuse University Press, 1986).Google Scholar