David Riesman’s The Lonely Crowd and C. Wright Mills’ White Collar sit on the shelf like a pair of old photographs—faded, perhaps, but still revealing. They capture America at a moment when the country had stepped into its new postwar prosperity, blinking at the bright lights of mass media, corporate culture, and suburban expansion. The war was over, the economy was humming, but something about the American character was shifting. Riesman, along with co-authors Nathan Glazer and Reuel Denney, set out to chart those changes in The Lonely Crowd (1950), while Mills took a scalpel to the growing class of salaried professionals in White Collar (1951).
Both books are, at their core, studies of adaptation. Riesman’s argument is that American society has transitioned from being “tradition-directed” (guided by inherited customs) to “inner-directed” (steered by internal moral compasses) to “other-directed” (shaped by the expectations of others). It’s this final category—the “other-directed” personality—that preoccupies him. In a world of advertising, opinion polls, and corporate hierarchies, Riesman saw Americans drifting further from individual conviction and closer to an existence defined by social calibration. A man of the 1950s, in other words, didn’t stand on his principles; he adjusted to the room.
Mills, meanwhile, wasn’t content with sociology alone. White Collar is part analysis, part indictment. His focus is on the growing army of middle-class workers—clerks, managers, salesmen—who believed themselves independent but were, in his view, increasingly ensnared in bureaucratic systems that drained them of autonomy. These weren’t the self-made entrepreneurs of an earlier age; they were company men, trapped in an economic machine that dictated their daily routines and, eventually, their values.
What makes these books endure isn’t just their analysis of midcentury America—it’s how uncomfortably familiar they still feel. The Lonely Crowd’s notion of an “other-directed” society reads today like a blueprint for the social media age. Riesman worried that Americans were becoming too sensitive to the approval of their peers, shaping themselves according to shifting social cues. Drop that idea into 2025, and you’ve got Instagram influencers and X mobs, real-time validation shaping selfhood. Mills’ critique of the corporate world, meanwhile, anticipated the rise of an economy where entire lives are structured around career identity, where people live not just to work, but to be seen working.
Riesman was more detached, Mills more combative, but together they captured something essential: the tension between success and selfhood, between adaptation and authenticity. And while their America is long gone, their questions are still hanging in the air. Who are we, when so much of our identity is shaped by forces beyond our control? And are we still capable of standing firm, or are we all just adjusting to the room?
Join us in making the world a better place – you’ll be glad that you did. Cheers friends.