Abstract
How is it that some sociological texts can defy time and lay claim to be classics while others fall into obsolescence? The paper assumes that an adequate answer must include reference to discourse aims, how a text is written and reading effects. A comparison is made between the earlier (pre-1933) writings of Karl Mannheim and the later (post-1933) writings, with the aim of identifying qualities of the former that made them candidates for classic status and explaining why the latter, due to their instrumental aim, could not hope to achieve such status.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
