“This book not only upends the traditional interpretations of one of America’s great philosophers, but also sketches a new form of analysis, in which a scholar’s personal experience of his intellectual life evolves in continuous dialogue with the reception of his work by others. Huebner gives a uniquely vivid picture of the gap between an individual’s own experience and his socially perceived self—a gap extensively discussed by Mead and here brilliantly illustrated and theorized. A truly wonderful book.”
— Andrew Abbott, University of Chicago
“Nobody in the last twenty years has advanced research on George Herbert Mead as much as Daniel Huebner does in this book. On the basis of extensive archival research he adds considerably to our understanding of Mead's intellectual development and of his activities as a public intellectual. By means of an original approach to the study of knowledge making in academic scholarship, Huebner moreover solves many mysteries in the confusing history of Mead reception. This book opens up new perspectives on one of the most profound and original thinkers of the twentieth century.”
— Hans Joas, Freiburg Institute for Advanced Studies
“This well-written book is based upon a superb job of historical research. Huebner has unearthed a large number of previously unexplored sources related to G. H. Mead's career and social psychological writings, and he discusses these in a balanced and highly insightful manner.”
— Gary A. Cook, author of George Herbert Mead: The Making of a Social Pragmatist
“Becoming Mead is an outstanding accomplishment written by a very promising young sociologist—the book deserves to be read by everyone interested in the trajectories of pragmatism, social interactionism, Chicago School, history of ideas/sociology/American social thought and several other branches of humanistic scholarship.”
— Christian Fleck, author of A Transatlantic History of the Social Sciences
“Becoming Mead is extremely interesting and empirically and historically rich. There are insights here that will have relevance for scholars interested in debates on canons, collaborative circles, and sociology of philosophy. I like the book a lot and learned much.”
— Neil McLaughlin, McMaster University