78 SOCIAL SCIENTIST even if intuitively many of them appear tenable. The argument that the process of land reform inKarnataka was and is a case of "transition to capitalism from above^ with erstwhile large landlords and big peasants transforming themselves into capitalist farmers, is far too circumstantial, the contours of this transition itself being rather ill* defined. It also docs not take account of the general direction of movement in the economy within the framework of which the changes in the agrarian structure of rural Karnataka were contained. Nevertheless, this docs not detract from the main value of the book, which one would rather sec an an exercise in fresh and innovative thinking in an ^ important area. sc