ABSTRACT

The paper compares the lives of three female social scientists born in the first two decades of the twentieth century and belonging to the first generations that had the opportunity not only to study at universities, but also to realistically consider a professional career in academia. Marie Jahoda, Herta Herzog and Patricia L. Kendall made their ways separately and interacted only rarely with each other, but shared at least one characteristic which influenced their careers: they were married to Paul F. Lazarsfeld, one of the eminent sociologists of the twentieth century, prominent as someone who encouraged and supported many of his collaborators and students. The comparison of these three women shows that they were professionally successful but did not completely prioritize academic work before other interests, ambitions, and obligations. These priorities found a correspondence in their underperformance in academia with regard to the particular preconditions to enter the pantheon of an academic discipline. Both their oeuvres and their academic records suggest that they were not actively striving to become academic ‘immortals.’ Here it is shown that women, even if they are to be located below the ‘ultra elite,’ produced remarkable and memorable intellectual achievements.

摘要

这篇论文比较了三位出生于 20 世纪前 20 年、属于第一代的女性社会科学家的生活，她们不仅有机会在大学学习，而且有机会现实地考虑在学术界的职业生涯。Marie Jahoda、Herta Herzog 和 Patricia L. Kendall 分道扬镳，彼此间很少互动，但至少有一个共同点影响了他们的职业生涯：他们嫁给了 20 世纪著名社会学家之一保罗·拉扎斯菲尔德 (Paul F. Lazarsfeld)世纪，作为鼓励和支持他的许多合作者和学生的杰出人物。这三位女性的比较表明，她们在专业上取得了成功，但并未将学术工作置于其他兴趣、抱负和义务之前。这些优先事项在学术界表现不佳与进入学科万神殿的特定先决条件相关。他们的作品和学术记录都表明他们并没有积极努力成为学术“不朽者”。这表明女性，即使她们位于“超级精英”之下，也产生了非凡而令人难忘的智力成就。