This review essay summarizes and critically analyzes three books that deal with the institutional and academic history of the New School for Social Research (NSSR), the prestigious social science institution in Manhattan. The essay focuses on the distinctive approaches in each of the three books, which range from mostly institutional (Friedlander) to mostly academic (Krohn), with the book by Rutkoff and Scott standing somewhere in between. The evolution of the NSSR from 1919 is described. The essay pays attention to the school’s foundational moments: in 1919 (by a group of former Columbia University faculty) and 1933 (when the institution received and hosted a significant number of exiled intellectuals leaving Europe around the rise of fascism). The essay describes the slow changes over the decades that converged in the 1980s in a marked academic reorientation led by a new president (Jonathan Fanton) and a new Dean of the Graduate Faculty of Political and Social Science (Ira Katznelson). Both contributed to shaping the NSSR that we have known in recent decades. The essay ends by identifying one major weakness in the three books reviewed: the absence of any discussion of the urban studies tradition at the NSSR.

中文翻译：

---

纽约社会研究新学院：更新杰出的遗产

这篇评论文章总结并批判性地分析了三本书，这些书涉及曼哈顿著名的社会科学机构新社会研究学院 (NSSR) 的制度和学术历史。这篇文章侧重于三本书中每一本书的独特方法，从主要是制度性的（弗里德兰德）到主要是学术性的（克罗恩），鲁特科夫和斯科特的书介于两者之间。描述了 1919 年以来 NSSR 的演变。这篇文章关注了学校的基本时刻：1919 年（由一群前哥伦比亚大学教员组成）和 1933 年（当法西斯主义兴起时，该机构接收并接待了大量离开欧洲的流亡知识分子）。这篇文章描述了几十年来的缓慢变化，这些变化在 1980 年代发生了明显的学术重新定位，由新任校长 (Jonathan Fanton) 和新任政治与社会科学研究生学院院长 (Ira Katznelson) 领导。两者都为塑造我们近几十年来所熟知的 NSSR 做出了贡献。这篇文章最后指出了所审查的三本书中的一个主要弱点：在 NSSR 中没有对城市研究传统进行任何讨论。