Reflections: Blurring the boundaries and shaping the agenda

The published work of Susan Strange defies easy classification, so it is not surprising that the diverse American and European reactions - both sympathetic and critical - also fail to fit neatly into concise categories.1 Strange's scholarship crossed numerous academic boundaries and disturbed generally conservative disciplinary cultures. She eschewed what she considered simplistic borderlines between academic disciplines and she disparaged cliquish research. The confines she sought to transcend were not only epistemological and disciplinary, however; they were sociocultural and national as well. Trained as a journalist, she detested social science jargon. An academic without a doctorate or even a formal disciplinary affiliation, she argued with economists as well as political scientists. An empiricist, she had little use for abstract theories. A British citizen who participated actively in American policy debates of American scholars, she urged her colleagues to provide analysis and interpretation relevant to policy makers. She was, in short, an articulate and passionate student of a rapidly changing global order.