destruction by cliché. Such a loss would be tragic, for the concept bears a meaning that is profound. It has been my privilege and good fortune to profit as person as well as student from the mentoring guidance of two skilled historians, Professor Oscar Handlin and Professor William R. Hutchison. Each labored tirelessly and far beyond ordinary responsibility to improve a style that was initially opaque. Each challenged assumptions and laid bare tortuous reasoning. Each encouraged or chastised as one or the other impetus was needed; and each carefully shared his own developing enthusiasm for the project as my ardor at times waned in the labors of research and writing. To both, I am grateful: beyond the requirements of any academic relationship, these dedicated scholars have taught me that — and how — scholarship is humanizing.
In its final stages, this manuscript was read by Dr. Daniel J. Anderson, Dr. Sarah E. Williams, Professor Philip Natale, and Professor John J. Quinn. Their comments, offered from their deep knowledge of the field of alcoholism studies, of Alcoholics Anonymous, and of literary acceptability, led to many minor changes and one major revision. If this study has usefulness to workers in the alcoholism field, it is largely due to the informed suggestions of Dr. Anderson, who also guided the early stages of my research into the alcoholism literature. Dr. Williams at a critical moment facilitated my understanding more deeply an aspect of my subject that until our meeting had eluded me. Professor Natale, beyond encouraging this study in its earliest stages, shared the burden of late stylistic revision. Professor Quinn guided the revision of Part Two, offering substantial as well as stylistic guidance and the encouragement of his contagious enthusiasm for some of the larger ideas attempted in that interpretation. To each of them, I am grateful for much.
The staff of the Hazelden Press, especially Mr. John Burns who exercised final editorial responsibility, offered their skill, patience, and enthusiasm, rendering more enjoyable than tedious the task of turning a technical dissertation into a readable book. I am especially grateful to them for their willingness and care to make available to a wide variety of readers the scholarly apparatus that, on the topic of Alcoholics Anonymous, should interest many readers who are not themselves scholars.
Finally, especially for the beginning of several of the interpretive insights explored in Part Two, I am grateful to my sister, Mary Ann Kurtz, who at the time of this research was Research Instructor in Psychology, Department of Pediatrics, The Medical College of Pennsylvania. Beyond the requirements of siblinghood, she gave generously of her time and skilled insight in drawing on her knowledge of the psychological literature to direct my attention to and aid my exploration of valuable and productive ideas deriving from current research. Whatever contribution this study might make to psychological thinking on alcoholism is largely due to her generosity and patience in assisting this endeavor in the midst of her own continuing responsibilities.
Despite all this diligent assistance from mentors, readers, and others, I am aware that very probably some flaws of citation and infelicities of style remain: the responsibility for these is, of course, only my own.
14 July 1979 E RNEST K URTZ
INTRODUCTION
The term not-God is the theme around which this history of Alcoholics Anonymous is recounted and its interpretation offered. The exact phrase appears nowhere in either the published literature of Alcoholics Anonymous or the primary sources used in this research, yet the two senses contained in this expression not only pervade the written documents but also lie at the heart of the A.A. fellowship and program.
“Not-God” means first “You are not God,” the message of the A.A. program. As is clear from
In its final stages, this manuscript was read by Dr. Daniel J. Anderson, Dr. Sarah E. Williams, Professor Philip Natale, and Professor John J. Quinn. Their comments, offered from their deep knowledge of the field of alcoholism studies, of Alcoholics Anonymous, and of literary acceptability, led to many minor changes and one major revision. If this study has usefulness to workers in the alcoholism field, it is largely due to the informed suggestions of Dr. Anderson, who also guided the early stages of my research into the alcoholism literature. Dr. Williams at a critical moment facilitated my understanding more deeply an aspect of my subject that until our meeting had eluded me. Professor Natale, beyond encouraging this study in its earliest stages, shared the burden of late stylistic revision. Professor Quinn guided the revision of Part Two, offering substantial as well as stylistic guidance and the encouragement of his contagious enthusiasm for some of the larger ideas attempted in that interpretation. To each of them, I am grateful for much.
The staff of the Hazelden Press, especially Mr. John Burns who exercised final editorial responsibility, offered their skill, patience, and enthusiasm, rendering more enjoyable than tedious the task of turning a technical dissertation into a readable book. I am especially grateful to them for their willingness and care to make available to a wide variety of readers the scholarly apparatus that, on the topic of Alcoholics Anonymous, should interest many readers who are not themselves scholars.
Finally, especially for the beginning of several of the interpretive insights explored in Part Two, I am grateful to my sister, Mary Ann Kurtz, who at the time of this research was Research Instructor in Psychology, Department of Pediatrics, The Medical College of Pennsylvania. Beyond the requirements of siblinghood, she gave generously of her time and skilled insight in drawing on her knowledge of the psychological literature to direct my attention to and aid my exploration of valuable and productive ideas deriving from current research. Whatever contribution this study might make to psychological thinking on alcoholism is largely due to her generosity and patience in assisting this endeavor in the midst of her own continuing responsibilities.
Despite all this diligent assistance from mentors, readers, and others, I am aware that very probably some flaws of citation and infelicities of style remain: the responsibility for these is, of course, only my own.
14 July 1979 E RNEST K URTZ
INTRODUCTION
The term not-God is the theme around which this history of Alcoholics Anonymous is recounted and its interpretation offered. The exact phrase appears nowhere in either the published literature of Alcoholics Anonymous or the primary sources used in this research, yet the two senses contained in this expression not only pervade the written documents but also lie at the heart of the A.A. fellowship and program.
“Not-God” means first “You are not God,” the message of the A.A. program. As is clear from
Similar Books
