A review of the works of Anthony Giddens
A paper submitted to Dr May Eleanor B Ursos in partial fulfillment of
the requirements in MASOR 517 – Sociology of Development
Alvin Concha, MD
Ateneo de Davao University
MA Applied Social Research – Gender Studies
March 2006
This review contains
Why Giddens?
a brief rationale for choosing to review the works of Anthony Giddens...page 2
Who is Anthony Giddens?
a short account of the highlights of Anthony Giddens’ life...page 4
Grand sociological synthesis
a partial list of the books and articles of Anthony Giddens...page5
Late Modernity
Giddens’ views regarding the characteristics of the contemporary era…page 7
Structuration and duality of structure
Giddens’ important theory that reconciles micro- and macro-level issues…page 8
Agency
a description of how Giddens regards human beings…page 12
The self in late modernity
an important view on identity corollary to Giddens’ notion of agency…page 13
References
a list of some hardcopy and online sources on Giddens’ life and works…page 15
2
Why Giddens?
+++++++++++
In our class in Sociology of
Development, we have been
reviewing sociological theories
that take a macro perspective. The
theories of Marx, Durkheim and
Parsons are good examples of
theories that show how society and
culture determine, at least to some
extent, the behavior of the people.
On the other hand, it is convenient
to think that the perspective in the
opposite end of the spectrum, the
micro perspective, belongs in the
province of Anthropology. Thus,
the works of many feminists and, bounds of structural influence on
to some extent, those of Foucault, people are determined by what
Baudrillard and Jameson people affirm, maintain or
appropriate notions of human reproduce in the structure.
agency and are more concerned
with human activity at the Such is the basis of a
individual or small group level. promising theory as proposed by
Anthony Giddens. The theory of
Yet, it is perhaps not difficult structuration posits that “[h]uman
to imagine that, by virtue of an agency (micro level activity) and
individual’s being situated in a social structure (macro level
larger societal context, human forces) continuously feed into each
activity and structures in the other. The social structure is
society influence each other. reproduced through repetition of
Humans can behave, at least to acts by individual people (and
some extent, according to the therefore can change).” It is a
moulds provided by the structures theoretical middle-ground between
and culture, yet these same moulds sociological and anthropological
can be reshaped by humans. The theories. It connects both
3
disciplines in an attempt to this problematic. This can even be
produce more than one level of seen as an open space for multiple
explanations of certain possible theories around a single
phenomena. Many followers of phenomenon. If anything, the
Giddens would, however, theory of structuration recognizes
capitalize on his contribution to the that “truth,” as has been actively
discourse on human agency. My sought by theorists for the longest
take is that, as far as structuration time, is indeed unstable, at the
theory is concerned, human agency very least.
is only half of the picture.
“Giddens is excellent, because
Giddens’ theory is important he combines an old-school,
because it acknowledges and 'classical' sociological style with a
rejects cultural determinism, all at very contemporary awareness of
the same time. It illustrates that too changes in society, and he is happy
much of macro theories misses a to mix new theories with more
lot of nuances, and too much focus established sociological
1
on the individual equally forgets perspectives.” In the succeeding
significant forces. pages, I will review the works of
Anthony Giddens. As a
What are probably valuable at contemporary sociologist, he has
this point would be some dealt with a wide range of topics
principles on how much of micro- including economics, philosophy
and how much of macro-level and politics, among others. The
forces figure in a given situation. body of his works is undoubtedly a
However, I don’t believe Giddens very important contribution to
intends a formulaic approach to contemporary social analysis.
4
Who is Anthony Giddens?
At Cambridge,
Giddens worked for
a long time and was
promoted to full
professorship in
1987. He co-
founded Polity
Press, a leading
publisher in the
social sciences, in
1985. He became
the director of the London School
++++++++++ of Economics from 1997 to 2003.
He is also a member of the
Anthony Giddens was born in Advisory Council of the Institute
Edmonton, London in January 18, for Public Policy Research, a think
1938. He is the son of a London tank in the United Kingdom, with
Transport clerk. He grew up in close links to its ruling Labour
London and went to college at Party.3
Hull University. In 1961, after
college, he started teaching Social Giddens also became an
Psychology at the University of adviser to British Prime Minister
Leicester. He began to work on his Tony Blair. Together with former
sociological theories in Leicester. US President Bill Clinton, Tony
He earned his master’s degree in Blair adopted Gidden’s principle
the London School of Economics.2 of “Third Way” as his guiding
In 1961, he got a position at the political idea.
University of Cambridge, where he
created an academic department In June 2004, Giddens was
called Social and Political given a life peerage as Baron
Sciences. He earned his doctorate Giddens and sits in the House of
degree in the University of Lords for Labour.4
Cambridge in 1974.
5
Grand sociological synthesis
++++++++++
To date, Giddens have authored over 30 books, many of which have been
translated to some 35 languages, and over 200 articles on several disciplines
in the social sciences. He has also written important commentaries in the
fields of anthropology, psychology, philosophy, history, linguistics,
economics, social work and political science. Many would call his aggregate
works as the “grand synthesis” of sociological theories. His sociological
paradigms have been a consciencious mixture of micro and macrosociology.
By way of introduction to his works, below is a partial list of Giddens’ books
and articles.4
Capitalism and Modern London : Hutchinson Sociology: a Brief but
Social Theory. An Critical Introduction
Analysis of the writings 1982
of Marx, Durkheim and London : Macmillan
Max Weber Central problems in
1971 Social Theory : Action,
Cambridge : Cambridge Structure and
University Press. Contradiction in Social
Analysis
Functionalism: apres la 1979 Profiles and Critiques in
lutte London : Macmillan Social Theory
1976 1982
Social Research, 43, A Contemporary London : Macmillan
325-66 Critique of Historical
Materialism. Vol. 1. Social Class and the
New Rules of Power, Property and Division of Labour.
Sociological Method: a the State Essays in Honour of
Positive Critique of 1981 Ilya Neustadt.
interpretative London : Macmillan 1982
Sociologies. Cambridge : Cambridge
1976 The Class Structure of University Press
London : Hutchinson the Advanced
Societies. The Constitution of
Studies in Social and 1981 Society. Outline of the
Political Theory London : Hutchinson Theory of Structuration
1977 1984
6
Cambridge : Polity 1994
Press Cambridge : Polity On The Edge. Living
Press with Global Capitalism
A Contemporary 2000
Critique of Historical Beyond Left and Right London : Vintage
Materialism. Vol. 2. The — the Future of Radical
Nation State and Politics The Third Way and Its
Violence 1994 Critics
1985 Cambridge : Polity 2000
Cambridge : Polity Press Cambridge : Polity
Press Press
Politics, Sociology and
Social Theory: Runaway World
Encounters with 2000
Classical and London : Routledge
Durkheim Contemporary Social
1986 Thought Sociology
London : Fontana 1995 2001
Modern Masters Cambridge : Polity Cambridge : Polity
Press Press
The Consequences of
Modernity In Defence of Sociology The Global Third Way
1990 1996 Debate
Cambridge: Polity Press Cambridge : Polity 2001
Press Cambridge : Polity
Modernity and Self- Press
Identity. Self and Durkheim on Politics
Society in the Late and the State Where Now for New
Modern Age 1996 Labour?
1991 Cambridge : Polity 2002
Cambridge: Polity Press Press Cambridge : Polity
Press
The Transformation of The Third Way. The
Intimacy: Sexuality, Renewal of Social The New Egalitarianism
Love and Eroticism in Democracy 2005
Modern Societies 1998 Cambridge : Polity
1992 Cambridge : Polity Press
Cambridge: Polity Press Press
Reflexive Runaway World: How
Modernization. Politics, Globalization is
Tradition and Reshaping Our Lives
Aesthetics in the 1999
Modern Social Order London : Profile
7
Late modernity continuation of modern
++++++++++ institutional transitions. It is just a
One part of Giddens’ work deals late, radicalized and
traditionalized modernity that we
de-
with the characteristics of the are in, but not really
current era. In this age when many postmodernity. 1, 4-5
social theorists have invested a lot
of work in describing the present In this area of his work, Giddens
sociological state as a postmodern stresses on the contrast between
one, a few contemporary pre-modern or tradional culture
sociologists, including Giddens, and modern or post-traditional
maintain that we haven’t really culture. Because choices are
gone beyond modernity. Together predetermined by customs in
with Ulrich Beck and Scott Lash, traditional societies, individual
Giddens argue that important actions are not usually thought
changes have taken place in about. On the other hand, in post-
societies over the last few decades, traditional societies, people worry
but that such changes are a less about the dictates of customs
and traditions, and options
are wide-ranging and are
limited only by laws and
public opinion. People,
therefore are required to be
more aware of their
decisions, and their actions
become more reflexive.1,4
"The reflexivity of modern
8
social life consists in the fact that those very practices, thus
social practices are constantly constitutively altering their
examined and reformed in the light character."6
of incoming transformation about
Structuration and duality of structure
++++++++++
larger structures human beings are
Social theorists before Giddens, in. He wrote:
notably Marx, Parsons, Simmel
and Durkheim, have always “... [L]et me first of all expand upon
viewed society in a macro level, why I developed the concept of the
duality of structure. I did so in order
i.e., from the perspective of large
to contest two main types of
social structures. Giddens dualism. One is that found among
disapprove of these pre-existing theoretical perspectives.
generalizations. The works of Interpretative sociologies ... are
these sociologists tend to 'strong on action, but weak on
constitute “grand theories,” which, structure.' They see human beings as
purposive agents, who are aware of
at best, regard humans as
themselves as such and have reasons
necessary followers of the forces for what they do, but they have little
of the structure. Giddens also means of coping with issues which
disapprove of the theories that quite rightly bulk large in
place so much regard in micro- functionalist and structural
level activity, such as human approaches - problems of constraint,
power and large-scale social
action, and that tends to forget the
organization. This second group of
Giddens’ Structuration Theory
is one of his best-known ideas. At its centre is a cyclical relationship between
social structure and human action: MACRO
• social structure (acts on) human action, by enabling and constraining
• human action (acts on) social structure, by producing and reproducing
Giddens calls this the duality of structure.
STRUCTURATION(Basden, 2002) 7
MICRO
9
approaches, on the other hand, while middle ground that recognizes
'strong on structure', has been 'weak structure (including culture) and
on action'. Agents are treated as if
agency as two simultaneous and
they were inert and inept - the
playthings of forces larger than equally viable forces that influence
themselves.”8 people’s actions in a society. As a
result, the approach focuses on the
interaction of structure and agency,
Giddens first mentioned his or on “social practices ordered
theory on structuration in Central across space and time,” and not
Problems of Social Theory in really on individual actors or the
1977. He however expounded on large societal structures.9 "Society
this theory in The Constitution of only has form, and that form only
Society in 1984. Structuration has effects on people, in so far as
theory is very useful because it structure is produced and
1
attempts to “reconcile theoretical reproduced in what people do".
dichotomies of social systems such
as agency/structure, Giddens argues with a
subjective/objective, and moderate stance as regards macro
micro/macro perspectives, which and micro perspectives,
consider individuals as either acted recognizing that, while humans do
upon (as elements within a not own absolute freedom in
structural context) or as choosing their own actions and
9
autonomous agents” The idea is while their knowledge is limited,
not to reject both micro and macro they are nevertheless the agency
perspectives, but to provide a which reproduce social structures
and initiate social change.
Giddens called the balancing is not an intended project.”8 The
of agency and structure that avoids theory of structuration also
extremes of either structural or recognizes people (actors) as
agent determinism as the “duality knowledgeable and that their
of structure.”9 For him, “structure knowledge is reflexive and
and agency are a duality that contextualized. Habitual use of this
cannot be conceived of apart from knowledge to produce action
one another.”4 The resulting eventually becomes
synthesis is a set of actions institutionalized. Thus, theorists
enabled yet guarded by structures, that tend to favor a structuralist
which are, in turn, reproduced by framework often refer to Giddens’
those actions. “Human history is work when they seek to locate the
created by intentional activities but guiding structures within which
10
actors produce their actions, but do control of resources. “To
not necessarily regard structures as understand how they work
totally influential to such actions. together, consider how the
signification of a concept (e.g., the
There are three types of use of the word "patriot" in
structures in social systems, political speech) borrows from and
according to Giddens. The contributes to legitimization (e.g.,
distinctions among these structures nationalistic norms) and
are analytical and are not meant to coordinates forms of domination
regard each type as distinct from (e.g., a police state), from which it
one another. Rather, the three types in turn gains further force.”9
of structure mobilize and reinforce
one another. Structure can indeed constrain
human actions, but it also enables
The first type of structure is some actions by generating
that of signification. These common frames of meaning. An
structures produce meanings example would be language, which
through organized webs of is constrained by rules of syntax.
language, and include semantic This constraining effect precludes
codes, interpretive schemes and particular combinations of words.
discursive practices. The second Yet language also provides rules
type of structure is that of that enable new actions, like
legitimation. Structures of this type creating new and meaningful
produce a moral order via sentences. Thus, structures do not
naturalization in societal norms, only constrain human beings, but
values and standards. Structures of enable us, as well.
domination, the third type of
structure, produce power from
Structuration theory has been of "modalities of structuration," how
used by other theorists who social structures are appropriated
into concrete situations, to consider
explore the relation between
how technology is used with respect
technology and social structures. to its "spirit." Appropriations are the
Below are some interesting immediate visible actions that
examples: evidence deeper structuration
processes and are enacted with
DeSanctis and Poole (1990) borrow moves (DeSanctis and Poole
from Giddens in order to propose an 1992:128). Appropriations may be
"adaptive structuration theory" with faithful or unfaithful, be used
respect to the emergence and use of instrumentally, and be used with
group decision support systems. In various attitudes (1992:129).
particular, they use Giddens' notion
11
Orlikowski (1992) borrows interpretive flexibility within the
Giddens' structuration theory and theory of structuration. Orlikowski
applies her critique of the duality of (2000) revisits the theory of
structure to technology: "The structuration so as to replace the
duality of technology identifies notion of embedded properties
prior views of technology - as either (DeSanctis and Poole 1990, 1992,
objective force or as socially Orlikowski 1992) for enactment
constructed product - as a false (use). The 'practice lens' permits one
dichotomy" (p. 406). She compares to examine how people, as they
this to previous models (the interact with a technology in their
technological imperative, strategic ongoing practices, enact structures
choice, and technology as a trigger) which shape their emergent and
and considers the importance of situated use of that technology.9
meaning, power, norms, and
In sociology there has been a long-standing divide between those theorists
who prioritise 'macro level' studies of social life - looking at the 'big picture' of society
- and those who emphasise the 'micro level' - what everyday life means to
individuals. Giddens always had an interesting relationship with this dichotomy. He
seemed to admire Durkheim's preference for broad statements about society and
sociology itself (his 1976 treatise on methodology even bore the cheekily grand
Durkheim-style title New Rules of Sociological Method). But Giddens rejects
Durkheim's idea that we should be able to identify laws which will predict how
societies will operate, without looking at the meanings understood by individual
actors in society. Giddens is here much closer to the other 'grandfather' of sociology,
Weber, who argued that individuals' own accounts of social action were paramount.
But Giddens recognised that both perspectives had value - and since the 'macro' and
'micro' levels of social life naturally feed into each other, you shouldn't have to
choose between them. So he came up with the theory of 'structuration,' which
bridges this divide. (Gauntlett, MGA)
12
Agency
++++++++++
This reaffirmation of human
Human beings are always agency is important in the works
knowledgeable, to some degree, of Giddens, since it establishes the
about what they are doing. Such is role of humans, vis-à-vis the
the basic principle in Giddens’ greater structures that surround us.
assertion on agency. When people It views humans as independent
start to reproduce or replace movers of change and undermines
structures, they know what they the deterministic views of human
are doing. Actors (people or action that many theorists before
agents) apply social rules Giddens have proposed. It also
appropriate to their culture in brings back responsibility for
trying to reflexively negotiate with social phenomena to humans,
the structures around them. emphasizes on the consequences
of human decision-making and
Sociology, therefore, does not deal weakens the notions that people
with a given universe of structures, are at the mercy of socio-economic
but with one which is a result of and political forces beyond our
the actions by knowledgeable and control.10
reflexive subjects. “Sociologists,
unlike natural scientists, have to However, human agency has its
interpret a social world which is limits. “Men produce society, but
already interpreted by actors that they do so as historically located
inhabit it.”4 actors, and not under conditions of
their own choosing.”4
13
The self in late modernity
++++++++++
a reflexive project, an endeavour
Giddens put forward the that we continuously work and
appropriate questions regarding the reflect on.”4 Giddens said it more
self that everyone faces in this era: clearly in Modernity and Self
“What to do? How to act? Who to Identity11:
be? These are focal questions for
everyone living in The existential
circumstances of question of self-
identity is bound
late modernity -
up with the fragile
and ones which, nature of the
on some level or biography which
another, all of us the individual
answer, either ‘supplies’ about
discursively or herself. A person's
identity is not to
through day-to-day
be found in
social behaviour, nor -
behaviour.”11 important though
this is - in the
One of Giddens’ reactions of
more popular ideas others, but in the
capacity to keep a
is his notion of the
particular
self. For Giddens, narrative going.
an identity of the The individual's
self is very much biography, if she
related to the characteristics of the is to maintain regular interaction
society in general. While the self with others in the day-to-day world,
cannot be wholly fictive. It must
in the traditional culture is
continually integrate events which
contingent on choices occur in the external world, and sort
predetermined by customs, it them into the ongoing 'story' about
didn’t take much effort foe persons the self.
in the past to construct an identity.
In this period of late modernity or One’s life is an ongoing project of
post-tradition, however, people are the self. Everyday, we construct,
less concerned about the dictates maintain and reconstruct
of customs. “Self-identity becomes biographical narratives of
14
ourselves. Therefore, self-identity As with his other concepts,
is not a set of characteristics, but Giddens here continually points
one’s reflexive understanding of out reflexivity and awareness to be
her biography. “A stable self- the important characteristics of
identity is based on an account of a agents. It can be observed in many
person's life, actions and works of Giddens that his
influences which makes sense to examples around reflexivity and
themselves, and which can be awareness spans from government
explained to other people without affairs to novels, intimate sexual
much difficulty. It 'explains' the relationships and the self.
past, and is oriented towards an
anticipated future.”1
15
References
1. Gauntlett, D. (2002). Media, gender and identity. Routledge. London.
2. MSSES. (2002). Anthony Giddens. Internet. Accessed 13 March 2006.
Available at [Link]
3. IPPR. (2006) Institute for Public Policy Research.. Internet. Accessed 13
March 2006. Available at
[Link]
4. Anthony Giddens. (2006). Internet. Accessed 13 March 2006. Available at
[Link]
5. Liquid modernity. (2006). Internet. Accessed 13 March 2006. Available at
[Link]
6. Ritzer, G. (ed.). (2003). The Blackwell Companion to Major Contemporary
Social Theorists, Blackwell Publishing.
7. Basden, A. (2002). Giddens' Structuration from a Dooyeweerdian Perspective.
Internet. Accessed 13 March 2006. Available at
[Link]
8. Giddens, A. (1993). New rules of sociological method. Cambridge: Polity
Press.
9. Theory of structuration. (2006). Internet. Accessed 13 March 2006. Available at
[Link]
10. Human agency. (2006). Internet. Accessed 13 March 2006. Available at
[Link]
11. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity. Self and society in the late
modern age. Cambridge: Polity Press.
16
