Mark Granovetter didn’t win (yet) the ‪‎Nobel Prize. Here is his rejection letter, from 1969.

A prominent economic sociologist Mark Granovetter didn’t win (yet) the Nobel Prize in economic science. Let’s take a look at his rejection letter.
You may think I’m talking about the Nobel… I’m not. And that makes this even more interesting!

Granovetter rejection letter

This is the rejection letter Granovetter‬ received from American Sociological Review in 1969 on an early version of his seminalThe Strength of Weak Tiespaper. A rejection, not even “revise and resubmit”.
Eventually this pioneering research was published in 1973 in American Journal of Sociology and became the most cited paper in the Social Sciences, with about 30,000  / 39,000 45,000 citations according to Google Scholar.
It could be a heartening opportunity to look at the reviewers’ remarks, such as:
– “…it should not be published. I respectfully submit the following among an endless series of reasons that immediately came to mind.”
– “… I find that his scholarship is somewhat elementary.. [he] has confined himself to a few older and obvious items”
There are more... (a link to the full letter)
Besides that there is an instructive point here, as Granovetter pointed out in his email to Shamus Khan: “I’d note also that this rejection illustrates the importance of framing. I framed the original draft [of “The Strength of Weak Ties”], which I wrote in grad school, as a treatment of “alienation”, more or less in response to the ideas of Louis Wirth and others that the city was an “alienating” place. The editor therefore sent the paper to reviewers who seemed to be European-oriented alienation theorists, who rightly saw that I was not talking about alienation as Marx did, but failed to imagine that there might be any other valid way to talk about it, as you can see from their comments. When I later revised the paper for AJS, I pulled all references to alienation out, and it obviously fared much better.”
Let me finish with the conclusion of one of the reviewers: “Finally, if I have taken the liberty of extensive criticism, it is because the paper at least provocative. That is what Author himself hopes for his paper. But it is not enough.“

Well, the lesson of this amazing story is clear: Rejections and objections are an inseparable part in the course of scientific inquiry. So, keep up and keep on!

***
Join the Economic Sociology and Political Economy community through
Facebook / Twitter / LinkedIn / Google+ / Reddit / Tumblr

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Oleg Komlik and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Mark Granovetter didn’t win (yet) the ‪‎Nobel Prize. Here is his rejection letter, from 1969.

  1. Pingback: Academic CV of Failures – a motivational lesson | Economic Sociology and Political Economy

  2. Pingback: Science is at your feet: Political Science and Sociology’s Most Cited Papers from Each Decade since the 1950s | Economic Sociology and Political Economy

  3. Pingback: “Ask yourself in the most silent hour of your night: must I write?” | Economic Sociology and Political Economy

  4. Pingback: Lattes dos Fracassos: uma aula motivacional – VOX MAGISTER

  5. Pingback: Neil Smelser: “Economic sociology, intellectually, is one of the strongest fields in sociology” | Economic Sociology and Political Economy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s