C Wright Mills argues in The Sociological Imagination that the really substantive issue that concerns sociology is not only the difficulty of shuttling between levels of abstractions – ‘we must also’, he writes, ‘speak of problems’. The sociological problem is the bridge between history and biography, and it’s in the formulation of the problem that the sociological imagination realises its full potential. The sociologist is distinguished from ‘the ordinary man’ insofar as he or she is uniquely positioned to make visible – that is, make relevant – the relations between the daily experience that is here and now, and structures and forces (capitalism, power, patriarchy) which are not visible in themselves. Making the connections between these domains is the political task of the sociologist, which Mills argues should be exercised in work, in educating, and in life. The Sociological Imagination then, is as much about the experience of sociology – about the experience of being a sociologist, and about what experience understood in sociological terms makes possible for others – as it is about the complexity of the relations between theory, method, and data. In this paper I want to explore the character of that experience a little more, and to consider two challenges to it, which bring the relevance (or not) of sociological relevance into sharp relief.
