The Jack-Roller and the Life History Method: Notes on the Chicago School’s Clifford Shaw and Howard Becker’s Humanistic Narrative of Young Male and Female Delinquents in Different Ages

Clifford Shaw’s (1930) The Jack-Roller is a landmark study of naturalism, ethnography and crime. It is the ‘own story’ of Stanley—a young delinquent in Chicago. Shaw’s series of ethnographic studies on delinquency sought to humanize deviance in opposition to pathological understandings of delinquency. The article looks on the representation of crimes committed and punishment received by young male and female delinquents. Shaw’s argument focuses on structural inequalities and poverty as the cause of deviance; as a result, female delinquency was not explained by sexual promiscuity, although he failed to recognize young women’s vulnerabilities. The second edition of The Jack-Roller introduced by Howard Becker (1966, Introduction. The Jack-Roller: A delinquent boy’s own story, pp. v–xviii) redefined Shaw’s study within the symbolic interactionist tradition. From the 1950s, Shaw and Becker disagreed over the writing of the deviant’s ‘own story,’ the control of the narrative and the authorial voice. The article adds to the literature on narrative, female deviance and youth delinquency.

Cuerpos Públicos, Cartas Privadas (ss. XVI-XVII)

The analysis of the correspondence between two sixteenth/seventeenth century female aristocrats —Luisa de Carvajal, Magdalena de San Jerónimo— enables us to reect on the value of relics and their relevance in the Spanish Baroque Counter-Reformation. We correlate Luisa's yearning for martyrdom as well as her mystical and religious exaltation with some of Magdalena's commitments at the Penitents House, at the Flemish Court, and as founder of the prison for prostitutes and female delinquents known as the Casa de la Galera, and, therefore, with dierent bodies and semiotics: the ill body of men, that polluting of 'working girls'; the bodies of virgins, of prostitutes, of actresses. These relate to dierent public spaces: the brothel, the theatre, the Magdalene asylum. And, in a very special manner, to the res publica and the Spanish Empire. All this based on the continuous background of Mary Magdalene's myth, a fundamental text that unites all the women considered here.

Errata

Hughes, J. R., Zagar, R. J., Busch, K. G., Grove, W. M., & Arbit, J. (2009) Looking forward in records of youth abused as children: risks for homicidal, violent, and delinquent offenses. Psychological Reports, 104, 77–101. In Table 1, page 83: For χ2 comparisons of Population, Sample, and Combined Abused Children+Controls, df = 3; n = 362, rather than 262; the χ2 of Population and Groups for Family is 19.15*. For χ2 comparisons of Population, Sample, and Combined Abused Children Later Homicidal+Controls, df = 3; Group for Single-parent should read 35, rather than 30; the χ2 of Population and Groups for Family is 37.36*. For χ2 comparisons of Population, Sample, and Combined Abused Children Later Nondelinquent, df = 3; the χ2 of Population and Groups for Family is 32.30*. On page 88, in Table 2, the two-tailed t-tests should show df = 360. In Appendix B on page 101, and in the References, MacDonald (1970) should be McDonald (1970). Zagar, R. J., Busch, K. G., Grove, W. M., Hughes, J. R., & Arbit, J. (2009) Looking forward in records of young adults who were convicted of homicide or assault as youth: risks for reoffending. Psychological Reports, 104, 129–154. In Table 1, page 138: For χ2 comparisons of Population, Sample, and Combined Assaulters+Nonviolent Delinquents, df = 3 for Family and Illnesses, df = 1 for Race subcategories (none significant). For Group Combined Assaulters+Nonviolent Delinquents, 64% were Single-parent, rather than 68%. For χ2 comparisons of Population, Sample, and Combined Homicidal+Normal Controls, df = 3 for Family (χ2 = 97.33*) and Illnesses, df = 1 for Race subcategories (none significant). For χ2 comparisons of Population, Sample, and Combined Homicidal+Nonviolent Delinquents, df = 3 for Family (62.34*) and Illnesses, df = 1 for Race subcategories (none significant). For the Groups, in Family, Stepparents is 5%, rather than 3%. In Table 2, page 140: For all two-tailed t-tests, df = 848. For Orphan status, t = −11.27+ (p < .01). For Table 4, on pages 142 &143: The Group Title for Column 5 should be Nonviolent Delinquent Later Noncriminals. There are 200 Low Socioeconomic Status Delinquent Assaulters Later Adult Assaulters, rather than 199. In Table 5, page 144: Homicidal Parental Alcohol+Substance Abuse is 35% (not 42%), Youth Alcohol+Substance Abuse is 29% (not 20%), 92% are Male (not 63%), and 8% are Female (not 37%). Column 4 should read Nonviolent Delinquents Later Noncriminals; Violent Family in that column should be 10%, rather than 99%. In Table 6, page 145: there were 21 Single-parent Controls (not 51), 15 Stepparent Controls (not 25), and 37 Mother+Father Controls (not 56). In Table 8, page 147: for Abused Infants vs. Controls, n = 384, rather than 382. Only statistically significant values of comparison statistics are shown in Tables 1, 2, 6, and 7. On page 154, and in the References, MacDonald (1970) should be McDonald (1970). Busch, K. G., Zagar, R. J., Grove, W. M., Hughes, J. R., Arbit, J., Bussell, R. E., & Bar-Tikowski, B. (2009) Looking forward in records of young adults who were convicted of sexual homicide, rape, or molestation as youth: risks for reoffending. Psychological Reports, 104, 155–184. In Table 1, page 164: For all χ2 comparisons of Population, Total Sample, and Combined Rapist+Molesters+Nonviolent Delinquents, df = 3. For χ2 comparisons of Population, Total Sample, and Combined Sexual Homicidal+Controls, df = 3. For χ2 comparisons of Population, Total Sample, and Combined Sexual Homicidal+Nonviolent Delinquents, df = 3; the Euro-American Group was 22%, rather than 21%. In Table 2, page 166, two-tailed t-tests, df = 444. In Table 5, page 170, Female Delinquents Later Adult Molesters should be 14, rather than 43. In Table 6, page 173: Delinquent Rapists: Unemployed should be 49% (not 60%). 84% (not 128%) were Male. Nonviolent Delinquent Unemployed should be 1% (not 22%). Sexual Homicidal: Parental alcohol+substance abuse should be 14% (not 24%). Sexual Homicidal: Youth alcohol+substance abuse should be 28% (not 36%). 15% (not 14%) Sexual Homicidal were Female. In Table 7, on pages 176–177, Sexual Homicidal and Nondelinquent Groups ns = 7 (not 10), and for the two-tailed t-tests, df = 12 (not 13). Only statistically significant values of comparison statistics are shown in Tables 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. On page 184, in Appendix A and in the References, MacDonald (1970) should be McDonald (1970).