The Sociology of Poverty: To the Memory of Georg Simmel

Author(s): Lewis A. Coser

Source: Social Problems, Vol. 13, No. 2 (Autumn, 1965), pp. 140-148
Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Society for the Study of Social
Problems

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/798899 .

Accessed: 21/06/2014 03:23
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of California Press and Society for the Study of Social Problems are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Problems.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.199 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 03:23:40 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

140

SOCIAL PROBLEMS

imposeson a wholeclass:a classwhich a unique sociologicalphenomenon:

bases its unityon a purelypassive a numberof individualswho, out
the factthat of a purelyindividualfate, occupy
characteristic,
specifically
the societyacts towardit and deals a specificorganicpositionwithinthe
withit in a particular
way.To deprive whole; but thispositionis not deterbut
thosewho receivealmsof theirpolit- minedby thisfateand condition,
ical rightsadequatelyexpressesthe ratherby the fact that others-indicommunities-atfact thattheyare nothingbut poor. viduals,associations,
As a resultof this lack of positive temptto correctthiscondition.Thus,
qualification,as has already been whatmakesone poor is not the lack
noted,the stratumof the poor, not- of means.The poorperson,sociologitheircommonsituation, callyspeaking,is the individualwho
withstanding
becauseof thislack
uni- receivesassistance
doesnotgiveriseto sociologically
means.
of
is
In
this
forces.
way,poverty
fying

THE SOCIOLOGY

OF POVERTY

To the Memory of Georg Simmel

LEWIS A. COSER
BrandeisUniversity
Discussionsof theextentof poverty typicalnot only of the deprivedbut
in a given societyusuallyhave been of verylargestrataof thepopulation.
problems.One The economiesof such societiesare
doggedby definitional
man's povertyis another'swealth; gearedprecisely
to thecreation
of ever
minimalstandardsin a developedin- newneeds.
dustrialsocietymay be viewed as
Ratherthantakingas a pointof deUtopian goals in an underdevelopedparturethecondition
or feltcondition
one. What may be felt to constituteof those presumedto be poor, this
in a society paperwillattempt
unendurabledeprivation
toprovidea different
where the underprivileged
compare perspective.
Simmel'slead,
Following
their lot with that of othersmore
povertywill be dealtwithas a social
favorably
placed in regardto the dis- category
thatemergesthroughsocietal
of incomeand wealth,maybe definition.1
tribution
view
Justas in Durkheim's
in societies
where crimecan bestbe definedas consisting
acceptedas legitimate
are sociallyavail- in actshaving"the externalcharacterno suchcomparisons
sanctioned.
able or culturally
isticthattheyevokefromsocietythe
One mayarguethata poor man is particular
reaction
calledpunishment,"2
one whose economicmeans are not
1 Georg Simmel, Soziologie, Leipzig:
withtheeconomicends
commensurate
1908, p. 454-493.
he seeks; yet this does not standup Duncker und Humblot,
I have relied very heavily on Simmel's
In societiesthat ex- hitherto
under scrutiny.
untranslatedessay, "Der Arme," in
hibit a straintowardanomy,a dis- the above volume. In fact, much of what
junctionbetweenthe ends that are I say in the firstpart of this paper is little
strivenfor and the means available more than a restatementof some of Simmel's seminal ideas.
forattaining
them,boundlessappetites 2 Emile Durkheim,The Rules of Socioat logical
forevercreatenew dissatisfactions
New York: The Free Press
Metbod,
1950, p. 35.
everylevel reached.This seemsto be of Glencoe,

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.199 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 03:23:40 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Sociologyof Poverty

141

so I shall argueherethatthepoor are The poor werenot considered

in their
menwho have been so definedbyso- own right but mainlyas a means
reac- towardthe other-worldly
ends of the
cietyand have evokedparticular
tions fromit. From this perspective,rich.Thispeculiarfunction
of thepoor
thepoorhavenotalwaysbeenwithus. was, however,of some consequence
In Orientalsocieties,forexample,de- forthe societyfor it helpedto unify
privationwas not sociallyvisibleand the Christian
community.
not withinthe focusof social aware- The medievalstatusof thepoorwas
ness.The modernobserver
fromthat assignedto
mighthave verydifferent
discernedtherea greatprevalenceof thepoorin PuritanEngland.Here they
want and misery,
yetthe membersof were giventhe social positionof the
thesocietythemselves
did notperceive "eternally
to the
damned"--confirming
the fitness
of theirsurvival.
and wereunawareof itspreva- righteous
poverty
lence.In such societies,the condition To the Puritanconscience,the poor,
of thosewho were depriveddid not havingno calling,werenotconsidered
seem to touchthe sensibilities
of the a partof the society.WritesWilliam
a leading16thcentury
Puritan
upperstrata;and it is, afterall, they Perkins,
who determinethe conscienceand preacher,
"Rogues,beggars,vagabonds
consciousnessof the society. The ... commonly
are of no civilsociety
nor of any particular
deprived,insofaras theywere recog- or corporation,
nized at all, weresimplyput intothe Church:and are as rottenlegges,and
same categoryas, say, the victimsof armes,thatdroppefromthebody...
disease or naturaldisaster.They did to wanderup and downefromyeare
not exist phenomenologically
as a to yeareto thisende,to seekand procurebodilymaintenance,
is no calling,
separatecategory.
the poor emergewhen butthelifeof a beast."He specifies
in
Historically,
as a another
passage:" ... wandering
societyelectsto recognizepoverty
begspecialstatusand assignsspecificper- garsand rogues,thatpassefromplace
sons to that category.The fact that to place,beeingunderno certainMagsome people may privatelyconsider istracieor Ministrie,
norjoyningthemthemselves
irrele- selvesto anysetsocietiein Church,or
pooris sociologically
vant. What is sociologically
relevant Commonwealth,
are plaguesand banes
is poverty
as a sociallyrecognized
con- of both,and are to bee takenas main
dition,as a socialstatus.We are con- ennemiesof thisordinanceof God."''
cernedwithpovertyas a property
of The poor are heredefinedas not bethesocialstructure.
longingto the body of societyand
In medievalsociety,
thepoorhad the hencenotsubjectto thebondsof solifunction
of affording
the richthe op- darity
whichbindall itsmembers.
The
forsociallyprescribed
are asportunity
"good poor,like Indianuntouchables,
deeds." In the Catholicinjunctionto signeda statuswhichmarkstheirexgive alms the concernwas not essen- clusionfromthesocialorder.
In modernsocietiesthedeprivedare
condition
of the
tiallywiththephysical
withthemoralcon- assignedto the core categoryof the
poorbutprimarily
ditionof the rich. The giver rather pooronlywhentheyreceiveassistance.
than the recipienttendedto be the It mightbe objectedthatthecategory
The good of the economically
moral centerof attention.
deprivedis presmanwerecon- entlymuch largerthan that of the
worksof theChristian
sidereda major avenue to salvation. assistedpoor. Whereasthe latterenGiving alms hencewas meantto in- globes around 8 millionpersonsin
creasethe chancesof the giverin the
3 Quoted in ChristopherHill, Puritanto im- ism
next world and not primarily
and Revolution,New York: Schocken
of
the
chances
the
in
this.
poor
Books, 1964, pp. 227-228.
prove

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.199 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 03:23:40 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

142

SOCIAL PROBLEMS

between40 and namelythatsocietyreactsto themin a

America,
contemporary
50 millionfall into the formercate- particular
manner.The poor cometo
not in terms
gory.However,the pointis precisely be viewedand classified
thatthecurrent
widespreaddiscussion of criteriaordinarilyused in social
of theproblems
of poverty
can be seen categorization,
that is, not by virtue
in largepartas an effort
to broadenthe of whattheydo, butbyvirtueof what
corecategory
of thepoor by insisting is done to them.To quote Simmel
thatmillionsnot heretofore
included again: "Povertyhence presents a
deservesocietalassistance.
If I under- unique sociologicalconstellation:a
standMichaelHarrington
and his co- number
of individuals
occupya specific
thinkers
that organic position within the social
aright,
theyarguein effect
a redefinition
of theproblem
ofpoverty whole throughpurelypersonalfate;
is requiredso thattheverylargenum- but it is not personaldestinyor perwhichdetermine
the
ber of deprivedwho have so far not sonal conditions
received assistancecan be included positionbutratherthefactthatothers
societalhelp -individuals, associations,or social
amongthepoorreceiving
of one kindor another.
to correctthisstate
totalities-attempt
Henceit is notpersonalneed
It is nota person'slackof economic of affairs.
meansthatmakeshim belongto the whichmakesfor poverty;rather,the
core category
of the poor.As long as sociological category of poverty
a mancontinues
to be defined
primarilyemergesonlywhen thosewho suffer
in termsof his occupational
status,he fromwant are receivingassistance."'
is notso classified.
or
Doctors,farmers,
as
Thoughthe poor are recognized
financial havinga specialstatusin modernsoplumberswho have suffered
reversesor strainsare still typicallycieties,it is stilla statusthatis marked
or plumbers. onlyby negativeattributes,
called doctors,farmers,
thatis, by
does not have.
of assistance,"
argues whatthe status-holder
"The acceptance
himfromanyother
GeorgSimmel,"removesthemanwho This distinguishes
has receivedit fromthe preconditionstatus-holder
in thatit does not carry
of theprevious
his withit theexpectation
status;itsymbolized
of a socialconformal declassification."'
From that tribution.
This lackof expectation
of a
pointon his privatetroublebecomesa social contribution
by the poor is
publicissue.In individualpsychologi-symbolized
bytheirlackof socialvisical termsthesequenceof eventsleads bility.Those who are assignedto the
fromthe experience
of deprivation
to statusof the poor offendthe moral
of othermembersof the
a quest for assistance;the matteris sensibilities
reversedhoweverin sociologicalper- societywho,unwittingly,
or wittingly,
spective:thosewho receiveassistance keep themout of theirsight.What is
are definedas being poor. Hence, at issuehereis notonlyphysicalsegrepovertycannotbe understoodsocio- gationinto specialareas and districts
citizenswould not
logicallyin termsof low incomeor that right-minded
but ratherin termsof the normallycare to visit and that are
deprivation
socialresponse
to suchdeprivations. typically
notshownto tourists,
butalso
The modernpoor are a stratum
The Gradthat a kindof moralinvisibility.
is recruitedfromheterogeneous
ori- grindsand Bounderbysof Victorian
gins,and individualmembersof this Englandheld viewsof the poor that
stratum
havea greatnumberof differ-werenotveryfarremovedfromthose
ing attributes.
Theycometo belongto of theirPuritanancestors.
Theyconsethe commoncategory
of the poor by quently
awareness
ofthefacts
repressed
virtueof an essentially
passive trait, of deprivation.
Onlythepersistent
agi4 Simmel, op. cit., p. 489.

5 Ibid., p. 493.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.199 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 03:23:40 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Sociologyof Poverty

143

tationof a hostof reformers

led $2,000 itcannotbe considered
finally
deprived
to the horrified
discoveryby proper at all. Two yearslaterMichaelHarringVictoriangentlementhatBritainwas ton's The OtherAmerica,8followed
in factsplitinto"'twonations."This by a spateof otherbooksand articles,
accountsforthefactthat,thoughgen- suddenlyhelpedto picturedeprivation
eralwellbeingand standards
of living as the centraldomesticissue in the
in Englandduringthe UnitedStatesand led to theemergence
clearlyincreased
nineteenth
of poverty.
century,
perceiveddepriva- of a new social definition
tion increasedthroughout
the century The deprivedin Americanow were
as humanmiserygainedat leastsome seenas constituting
about25 percent
of
the populationall of whomdeserved
visibility.
Lestit be believedthatwe deal here assistance.The numberof objectively
onlywiththemoreremotepastit may deprivedis notlikelyto have changed
be well to remindus of a verysimilar appreciablybetweenthe complacent
trend in the recenthistoryof the fiftiesand the self-critical
sixties,but
United States.JohnK. Galbraithre- the extentof perceiveddeprivation
markeduponthisa fewyearsago when changeddrastically.
As a consequence,
he wrote: "'In the UnitedStates,the what appearedas a peripheralprobsurvivalof poverty
is remarkable.
We lem only a few yearsago suddenly
nationalsalience.
ignoreit because we share with all assumesconsiderable
societiesat all timesthe capacityfor
not seeing what we do not wish to
see. Ancientlythis has enabled the
[I should like to point out here
noblemanto enjoy his dinnerwhile thatit will not do to arguethatthe
remainingoblivious to the beggars statistics
indicatingthe extentof dearoundhis door.In ourown dayit en- privationwere availableall along. In
ables us to travelin comfort
through-thefirstplace it is not the availability
but theiruse whichis of
out South Chicago and the South."6 of statistics
At thepresentmoment,
whenpoverty socialsignificance.
it can
Furthermore,
is suddenlyreceivingfrontline
atten- be argued that a societybothersto
tionamongpoliticians,
scholars
andthe keep accuratestatistics
mainlyof those
massmedia,it is difficult
to rememberphenomenait deemsworthy
of attenthat only recentlyit seemed hardly tion. Some extremecases fromtotalivisibleat all. Five yearsago the edi- tariansocietiescome readilyto mind.
torsof Fortunemagazinepublisheda As EverettHughes has remindedus
of GermanStatistivolume,Americain the Sixties,7in in his examination
whichtheyattempted
to forecastthe cal Yearbooks,in the Nazi and premajor social and economictrendsof Nazi period,"Fromearlierworkwith
the nextdecade.Theyconcludedthat Germanofficialstatistics,
I was pracsoon deprivation
would no longerbe ticallycertainthatthe pre-NaziGerwithus at all. They announcedwith man had a religion,but not a race.
flourish
that"only" The statistical
self-congratulatory
Germanwas the oppo3,600,000familieshaveincomesunder site of the statistical
American,who
makesover had a racebut no religion... . Race
$2,000 and thatif a family
in the pre-Nazi Yearbooks was a
6 John K. Galbraith,The Afuent Socicharacteristic
of stallions."9But all
Boston:
ety,
HoughtonMifflin,1959, p. 333.
7 The Editors of Fortune, America in YearbooksundertheNazi regimeconthe Sixties,New York: Harper Torchbooks,
8 Michael Harrington,The Other Amer1960, p. 102. Note the followingadditional
comment: "Only about a million domestic ica, Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1963.
servants, marginal farm operators, and
9 Everett C. Hughes, Men and Their
farm laborers and their families still look Work, New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1958, p. 146 and p. 150.
trulypoor." Ibid., p. 102.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.199 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 03:23:40 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

144

SOCIAL

PROBLEMS

tained, among others,a category"Ra- etaryrequirements.

Harringtonconcial Classification of People who cludes on the basis of these new
Married in X Year." A characteristic figures
thatthe deprivednumbermore
which was hithertoofficially
unnoticed nearly50,000,000.12]
was suddenly made visible through
statistics.Or, to give anotherexample,
"In Lebanon therehas not been a cenEnoughhas beensaidto indicatethe
sus since 1932 for fear thattakingone extentto whichobjectivemiseryand
would reveal such changes in the perceived deprivationmay diverge.
to theinitialstatereligious composition of the popula- We can now return
tion as to make the marvelouslyintri- mentthat,in modernsocieties,
persons
cate political arrangementsdesigned to are assigneda positionin the status
balance sectarianinterestsunviable."'0 category
of thepoorwhentheyreceive
Finally, in the 1941 Indian census assistance.Receiptof such assistance
there were 25 million tribal peoples, is predicatedupon the society'swilbut in 1951, after independencewas lingnessto assumea measureof reforthepoor and upon its
attained, the number had shrunk sponsibility
of the factthattheyare
throughwhat has been called "geno- recognition
a part of the community.
cide by definition"to 1.7 million.'1
effectively
No such drastic surgery was, of But what are the termsupon which
is grantedand whatare
course, performedon American statis- suchassistance
fortherecipient?
tics. Yet one cannot help but be theconsequences
Here I would like to contendthat
struck by the fact that, to give one
of relief,theveryasexample, the number of underprivi- theverygranting
of thepersonto thecategory
leged will vary greatlydepending on signment
where you fix the income line. Thus of thepoor,is forthcoming
onlyat the
of the person
the aforementionedFortune study de- price of a degradation
fined deprivationas a family income whois so assigned.
To receiveassistancemeans to be
under $2,000 and concluded thatthere
and to be removedfrom
were only 3,600,000 poor families. stigmatized
runof men.It is a status
RobertLampman used the $2,500 cut- the ordinary
offfor an urban familyof fourand on degradation
throughwhich,in Harold
this basis came to the conclusion that Garfinkel's
words,"thepublicidentity
intosome19 per cent of the American popula- of an actoris transformed
tion, 32,000,000 people, were under- thinglookedon as lowerin the local
privileged. In the same period, the schemesof social types."13In this
AFL-CIO, using a slightly higher perspective,the societal view of a
definitionof what constitutedlow in- personbecomessignificant
in so far
come, found that 41,500,000 Ameri- as it altershis face. Once a personis
cans-24 percentof the total popula- assignedto the statusof the poor his
tion-has substandardincomes. After role is changed,just as the careerof
all these studies were published, the the mentalpatientis changedby the
as a mental
Bureau of Labor Statisticsissued a re- veryfactthathe is defined
Let megivea fewillustrative
port containingnewlycalculatedbudg- patient.'4
of whatis at issuehere.
ets for urban families of four which instances
showed that previous calculations
12 Harrington, op. cit., pp. 192-194.
had underestimatedminimal budgla Harold 'Garfinkel, "Conditions of
to Clifford Geertz, "The

Integrative
Revolution" in Geertz (ed.), Old Societies
and New States, New York: The Free
Press of Glencoe, 1963, p. 126.
11 Ibid.

Successful Degradation
Ceremonies,"
AmericanJournalof Sociology,61, (March,
1956), p. 420.
14 Cf. Erving Goffman,Asylums, New
York: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1961,
passim.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.199 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 03:23:40 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Sociologyof Poverty

145

Membersof nearlyall statusgroups again,thetreatment

of thepoordiffers
in societycan makeuse of a variety
of sharply.When monies are allocated
mechanisms
to shieldtheir to them,theydo not have freedispolegitimate
behaviorfromobservability
by others; sitionover theiruse. They mustacsocietyrecognizesa rightto privacy, countto the donorsfortheirexpenses
thatis, the rightto concealpartsof and the donors decide whetherthe
his rolebehaviorfrompublicobserva- money is spent "wisely" or "fooltion. But this rightis denied to the ishly."That is, thepoorare treatedin
poor. At least in principle,facetsof this respectmuch like childrenwho
his behaviorwhichordinarily
are not haveto accountto parentsforthewise
public are in theircase underpublic use of theirpocketmoney;the poor
controland are open to scrutiny
by are infantilizedthroughsuch prosocial workersor otherinvestigators.cedures.
In orderto be sociallyrecognizedas
As the above examplesmakeclear,
poor a personis obligatedto makehis in the veryprocessof being helped
privatelife open to public inspec- and assisted,the poor are assignedto
tion.15The protectiveveil which is a specialcareerthatimpairstheirpreavailableto othermembersof society vious identityand becomesa stigma
which marks their intercourse
with
is explicitlydenied to them.
welfareinvestiWhereas otherrecipientsof social others.Social workers,
and
servicesmayupon occasionbe visited gators, welfare administrators
mostof their local volunteerworkersseek out the
at homebyinvestigators,
contactwiththeagencyis likelyto be poor in orderto help them,and yet,
in the agency ratherthan in their paradoxically,
theyare theveryagents
Subjectiveintenprivatehomes.Generally,in modern of theirdegradation.
society,the exerciseof authority-ex- tions and institutional
consequences
cept withinthe family-is separated divergehere.The help renderedmay
fromthe home. With regardto the be given fromthe purestand most
thisis notthe benevolentof motives,yet the very
poor on relief,however,
case. Here theirhomeis the place in fact of being helped degrades.
whichmostcontactswiththe agency Assistancecan be given eitherby
workersor by professionals.
are likelyto take place. voluntary
investigators
They are typicallybeing investigatedThe formerpattern prevailed till
in situand hencehave muchless of a roughlyWorld War I, the latterhas
in ourdays.Such
chanceto concealtheirprivateaffairs cometo predominate
of assistancehas
observers.
fromthesuperordinate
Such professionalization
an invasionof hometerritory,
because had twodivergent
setsof consequences
To be caredfor by
theusualstagemanagementfor the recipient.
it prevents
is necessarilya professionalwho is paid for his
forthevisitof outsiders,
and degrad- workmeansthattherecipient
as humiliating
neednot
experienced
be gratefulto him, he doesn'thave
ing.
Whenmoneyis allocatedtomembers to say thankyou.In facthe can hate
of any otherstatusgroupsin society, the persongivingassistanceand even
withtheyhavethefreedomto disposeof it displaysome of his antagonism
in almostany way theysee fit.Here out losingthe institutionally
provided
aid. Professionalization
removesthe
15 On the notion of observability,cf. personalelementin the relationship
Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and So- and marksit as an impersonal
transcial Structure,New York: The Free Press, action therebyfreeingthe recipient
1957, pp. 374-375, and Rose Laub Coser, bothfrom
and
personalembarrassment
"Insulation from Observabilityand Types
AmericanSociologi- frompersonalobligation.When the
of Social Conformity,"
cal Review, 26, pp. 28-39.
poor is, so to speak, "promoted"to

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.199 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 03:23:40 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

146

SOCIAL

PROBLEMS

a case he may be spared certainper- is a case. As in everytypeof bureausonal humiliations.

Yet thisis not the craticprocedure,the impersonalaswhole story.The verymannerof bu- pects of the case mustof need take
reaucraticprocedureused in dealing precedenceover distracting
personal
with a personon reliefis differentconsiderations.
In fact,case workers
or
fromthat employedwith respectto, investigators
wouldbe incapacitated
in
say, an unemployedperson. Receipt the exerciseof theirtaskswere they
of unemployment
insurance
is seen as to indulgein "over-rapport,"
thatis,
an unquestioned
of theperrightwhichhas been in an undueconsideration
earned.Controlby the donoragency sonal needs of the client. Excessive
overthe recipient
is minimal.Here it sympathy
would impairrole performstandsin contrastto controlover the ance. The welfareworker,moreover,
personon reliefwhere controlis a is not supposedto deserveesteemfor
forrelief.Hencethepro- his accomplishments
fromtherecipient
precondition
fessionalin an agencydealing with of aid but ratherfromprofessional
the unemployed
has littlepowerover peers and superiors.The clientwho
personshe serves,but the welfarein- is definedas "poor" has littleif any
or the case workerhas a possibility
of controlling
his behavior.
vestigator
greatdeal of powerover the assisted Hence thereexist built-ininsulating
in- mechanisms
whichinsurethatprofespoor.This powerwas considerably
in passing, sionalconcernwiththepoordoes not
creased,it maybe remarked
when the givingof assistanceshifted corrupttheprofessional
intoconsiderassistance
to ing thepooras anything
fromso-calledcategorical
butan object
of aid. In this
grantingcase workersleewayto vary of careand a recipient
assistanceaccordingto the specific way the status discrepancy
between
needs of the client.This changeof themis continuously
This
reaffirmed.
in thosecases
moreover,
forhumanitarianis accentuated,
policywas instituted
and benevolent
reasons,to be sure.But wherewelfareworkersare of lower
it standsto reasonthatit has greatly middleclassoriginand feelthatclose
withclientsmightendanger
increasedthe discretionary
power of association
the case workerover the client.
the respectablestatustheyhave but
achieved.
has still recently
Prescribedimpersonality
The professionals
and thepoordo in
beothereffectson the relationship
tweenprofessionalized
welfareworkers fact belongto two basicallydifferent
of aid. As long as worlds. In AlexanderSolzhenitsyn's
and the recipients
finenovelaboutRussianconcentration
volunteers
or othernon-professionals
were the main dispensersof charity,camps,One Day in the Life of Ivan
was likelyto markthe Denisovich,'6occurs an episode in
condescension
to get some
relationshipbetweendonorsand re- whichthe hero attempts
cipientsof aid, but it was also likely medicalrelieffromthemanin charge
but is turnedaway
to be characterized
by a fairlyhigh of the infirmary
The relationshipwith indifference.
level of spontaneity.
He thereuponrewas so definedas to makea reciprocal flects,"How can you expecta man
a manwho's
and emotionbetweenthe who'swarmto understand
flowof affect
two actorspossible,evenif it did not cold." This beautifully
capturesthe
to say.
always,or usually,occur.But profes- gistof whatI havebeentrying
the As longas socialworkers
sionalization
and thepoor
prevents
bydefinition
This is notdue to hap- belongto theoppositeworldsof those
flowof affect.
who arewarmand thosewhoare cold,
butto theinstitutionalization
penstance
of
of a structurally
type
asymmetrical
16 Alexander
One Day in
Those who renderassist- the Life of IvanSolzhenitsyn,
relationship.
Denisovich, New York:
ance have a job to do; the recipient E. P. Dutton, 1963.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.199 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 03:23:40 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Sociologyof Poverty

147

their relationshipis necessarilyan to give as well as to receive.Theycan

one. As in otheraspects be fully integratedinto the social
asymmetrical
of case work,those in need address fabriconly if they are offeredthe
thosewho can relievesome of their opportunity
to give.
wantsas supplicants,
and theasymme- In orderto be able to serve,they
at optitryis notonlyone of feelingsand atti- mustfirstbe able to function
of pow- mumcapacity.
Devicessuchas a guartudes,it is also an asymmetry
er.Thisis an extreme
caseof unilateral anteed minimumincome for every
dependence.PeterBlau's formulationcitizen,assuringhim freedomfrom
is helpfulhere:"By supplying
services pressingwant,may verywell be a
in demandto others,a personestab- precondition
for the abolitionof delishespoweroverthem.If he regularly pendency.
Butitis a precondition
only.
notas an end
rendersneeded servicesthey cannot It needsto be considered
othersbecome in itselfbut only as a meanswhich
readilyobtainelsewhere,
thepoorto be freefromanxidependenton and obligatedto him permits
fortheseservices,and unlesstheycan ety while they train themselvesfor
of such servicesto the
furnish
otherbenefits
to himthatpro- the rendering
duce interdependence
as will make theminterby makinghim community
withothers.
equallydependenton them,theiruni- dependent
I showedearlierhow the corecatelateraldependenceobligatesthemto
complywithhis requestslesthe ceases gory of the poor arises only when
to continue
to meettheirneeds."17
theycome to be definedas recipients
Blau stresseshere that unilateral of assistance.We now see thatcorredependencecomes into being when lativelythe poor will be with us as
the receiverof benefitsis not in a long as we provideassistanceso that
can be solved
position to reciprocatewith benefits the problemof poverty
thathe can in turnbestowupon the only throughthe abolitionof unilatof dependence.
donor. This, I believe,touchesupon eral relationship
This is not theplace to spell out in
The poor,when
thecruxof thematter.
areassigneda low detail concretemeasureswhich will
assistance,
receiving
and degradedstatusby virtueof a "solve" the problemof poverty.I
thattheycannotthem- know of no such global solutionsat
determination
to society.Their in- the presentmoment.But I wish to
selvescontribute
in which,
in turndegrades indicateat leastthedirection
abilityto contribute
them to the conditionof unilateral I believe,such solutionsare to be
for exreceivers.
Built intothe systemof re- looked for. I am impressed,
of recentexperilief is not onlythe definition
of their ample,bythenumber
but the expec- ments,fromMobilizationfor Youth
beingnon-contributors,
in which
tationthattheyare not evenpotential to AlcoholicsAnonymous,
contributors.In an instrumentally
"some people who do not seem to
thosewhocannotgive benefitfrom receivinghelp often
orientedsociety,
whentheyare giving
but onlyreceiveand who are not ex- profitindirectly
pectedto give at a futuretime are help."'8 A numberof such projects
naturallyassigned the lowest status. have of late used a varietyof nonrecruitedlargelyamong
They cannotengage in activitiesthat professionals
and this is the poor. The New York StateDiviestablishinterdependence
whytheycannotbe givensocialrecog- sionforYouthand severalotheragencan neverbe
nition.Poverty,
therefore,
unlessthepoorare enabled 18 Robert Reiff and Frank Riessman,
eliminated
17 Peter Blau, Exchange and Power in

Social Life, New York: John Wiley and

Sons, 1964, p. 118.

The Indigenous Nonprofessional, New

York: National Instituteof Labor Education, Mental Health Program (mimeo,
p. 11.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.199 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 03:23:40 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

148

SOCIAL

PROBLEMS

ciesforexampleemployformer
youth- abolitionof the status they occupy
and ariseswhentheycease "actingpoor,"
ful offendersin interviewing
related tasks. Howard University'si.e.,whentheyrejecttherolebehavior
Community
Programtrains whichis requiredbythestatus.When
Apprentice
when
delinquentyouth to be recreation,thepoor beginto reactactively,
child welfare, and researchaides. theyrefuseto continueto be passive
of aid, theyundermine
the
Mobilizationfor Youth employsin- recipients
digenousleadersas case aides,home- verystatusthat theyoccupy.This is
and
workhelpers,and thelike.Thesejobs whyrentstrikes,demonstrations,
forthe otherpoliticalactivitiesby the poor
offeremployment
opportunities
and hence serve di- shouldbe seen as avenuesof activizaunderprivileged
to
reduce
rectly
povertyby transform-tion whichtendto lead to a restrucin the
welfarecasesintohome- turingof theirrelationships
ingdependent
makers,and formerdelinquentsinto community.
This indigenousnonSimmel observesthat thoughthe
researchers.19
as FrankRiessmanand notionof assistance
professional,
necessarily
implies
"is a peer takingfromtherichand givingto the
RobertReiffhave written,
of the client and can more readily poor,it nevertheless
was neveraimed
identifywith him. He possessesno at an equalizationof theirpositionsin
special body of knowledgewhich society.As distinctfromsocialistenmakes him an expertand can feel, deavors,it does not even have the
therefore,that in reversedcircum- tendencyto reduce the differences
stancesthe clientcould do the same betweenrichand poor but ratheracthem.21
Or, as T. H.
job justas easily.In theplaceof subtle ceptsand bolsters
patronageor noblesseobligeconcepts, Marshallonce put it, "The common
he is likelyto feel that'therebut for purpose of statutoryand voluntary
the grace of God go I.' To the in- effortwas to abate the nuisanceof
withoutdisturbing
thepattern
'helping poverty
digenous non-professional,
20 of inequalityof which povertywas
.
others'is a reciprocal
process
These are onlya few and stillvery the most obvious unpleasantconsebut I believethat quence."22This is whywhat I have
feeblebeginnings,
The suggesteddivergessharplyfrommost
theypointin the rightdirection.
taskis to createvaluedstatuspositions previouspolicies.It aimsnotat allevifor thosewho were formerly
passive ating povertybut at abolishingit
of assistance.Such valuable through
theelimination
of thedespised
recipients
statuspositionscan only be thosein statusof the receiverof assistance.It
whichtheyare requiredand enabled is, to be sure,a Utopianproposal.But,
and as Max Weber,thatsupremerealist,
to make a social contribution
in a joint un- has argued,"Certainly
all politicalexbecomeactivepartners
of mutualaid. This can be perienceconfirms
thetruth-thatman
dertaking
done throughhelping others with would not have attainedthe possible
whom but recently
theysharedsimi- unlesstimeand again he had reached
lar problemsor throughworkingin out for the impossible."23
large-scale projects similar to a
21 Simmel, op. cit., p. 459.
domesticPeace Corpsor a replicaof
the New Deal's CivilianConservation 22 T. H. Marshall, Class, Citizenship
Development, New York:
Corps.Yet anothercase in whichthe and SocialAnchor
Books, 1965, p. 105.
Doubleday,
the
to
contribute
themselves
poor may
23 Gerth and Mills (eds.), From Max
19 Ibid., p. 6.

20 Ibid., p. 12.

Weber, New York: Oxford University

Press, 1948, p. 128.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.199 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 03:23:40 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions