Technology and Culture

690 Book Reviews TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Part of the reason questions like these do not get addressed much is that there is little connection between the first three technical chap­ ters ofMixing the Waters (“Marshalling Support,” “Design,” and “Con­ struction”) and the later political chapters. For example, we find the corps choosing in 1973—74 to leave one bank of the perched canal in a natural state to create a “chain of lakes” rather than a watercourse of unchanging width. This, it was hoped, would enhance environmental quality. Yet Stine does not present the plan either in terms of any discussion of what environmental quality was to be or as informed by any of the public struggles going on at the time. Preoccupied with stratagems and public relations, his analyses of negotiations between promoters and opponents do not explore the reasons a compromise like this one might or might not be acceptable. (Ironically, the Envi­ ronmental Defense Fund made the chain-of-lakes proposal the key basis for a charge that the corps had exceeded its authority in altering plans—even if that alteration was to accommodate environmentalists’ concerns [pp. 48-49, 213].) Read in the run-up to an election, this is a depressing book. Histori­ ans are not supposed to make rules of policy-making, I am told, but there is inevitably a normativity in the way we tell stories. This book has implications for technology policy in the area of public works. It tells us that the real reasons works are constructed have little to do with the purposes for which we claim to be building them. To admit this may seem to promulgate a cynical and pernicious relativism and to under­ mine any confidence that we as a public can plan works to carry out common goals. Or, it may simply suggest a need for different institu­ tions for planning and executing public works than those that currently exist. To me, Stine’s story is not convincing as the whole story: the actors are too unidimensional, their views too unreflexive and uncritical, and many of their design decisions seem ultimately inexplicable. I am per­ suaded there’s more here; more that can be understood charitably and rationally. But I am a naive midwestern idealist; Stine has far more ex­ perience of Washington than I. Christopher Hamlin Dr. Hamlin teaches history oftechnology at the University ofNotre Dame and is direc­ tor of the Program in Science, Technology, and Values. He has a longstanding interest in the technologies ofwater; some ofhis recent work—an article on “Reflexivity in Tech­ nology Studies” and a book, Deep Disagreement in U.S. Agriculture (with Philip Shepard)— explores the role of the historian in contemporary technological controversies. Energy in World History. By Vaclav Smil. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1994. Pp. xviii + 300; illustrations, tables, bibliography, in­ dex. $48.95 (cloth); $19.95 (paper). Vaclav Smil, a professor of geography at the University of Mani­ toba, has devoted over twenty years to studying energy and the envi­ TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Book Reviews 691 ronment in both Western and non-Western societies. He has pub­ lished several books and scores of articles, and brings to Energy in World History both breadth of knowledge and a passion for under­ standing connections between human activities and the environment. On one level, this is a good book. Smil tells an important story in a straightforward fashion, arguing that energy has played a crucial role throughout human history. His definitions of energy terms and con­ cepts, expanded on in useful chapter appendixes, should be easily understood by nonspecialist readers. As well, he reminds us of an essential truth: the fossil fuels on which modern societies depend have been used for only a handful of generations and will not last many more. But, despite his grasp of energy issues, Smil is not up to speed in the history of technology. His is a Whiggish saga, written without reference to many works critical to his topic. Energy, asserts Smil, is at the root of all things: “the course of history may be seen fundamentally as the quest for controlling greater energy stores and flows” (p. 1). Societal “evolution,” he says...