This study deals with the sociological views and third-way solutions for the agrarian crisis by three eminent figures of folk sociography, Ferenc Erdei, Gyula Illyés and Zoltán Szabó. The analysis points out that all these works reflect the ultimate secession of the peasantry from the rest of society, and thus the authors describe the position of peasantry in social hierarchy by a kind of sub-social position. Instead of his social vision based on the central social group of peasantry, Illyés approached the peasant question from the angle of their vulnerability, presenting the everyday life and desperate situation of this decaying social group, contrary to the romantic attitudes of the middle class. Zoltán Szabó, surveying the social situation of peasantry, reached the conclusion that the realistic assessment of the situation means that third-way politics, which considered peasantry as the hope of national rejuvenation, cannot be pursued any longer. The conclusion of this present study is that in the case of Szabó and Erdei, their different abilities to assess social realities lie in the background of their different approaches to the situation of peasantry. Erdei, experiencing the repressed state of peasantry in his own life, placed his ‘peasant revolt at all costs’ principle above his more differential sociological view and awareness of social realities.

Nincs absztrakt.

The study analyses Erdei’s view of society in his 1941 work, The Hungarian Peasant Society and seeks answer to the question: To what extent did Erdei succeed in adopting Hajnal’s social theory, the theoretical paradigm that led Erdei to his most successful social analyses. The study points out that although the work’s theoretical part reflects Hajnal’s views, its sociographic descriptions draw on Erdei’s earlier writings and the impacts of folk sociographies. It is this duality that leads to contradictions in Erdei’s descriptions of the Hungarian peasantry and other groups of society. The study also argues that the reason for discrepancies preventing The Hungarian Peasant Society from becoming a coherent representation of society lies not in the novelty of the method or in Erdei’s not yet fully developed ways of expression but is more related to politics influencing this depiction of society. Furthermore, the study points out that in spite of ideological contents that continuously pervade Erdei’s works, an image of society unfolds that makes efforts to understand the characteristic features of Hungarian society by drawing on historical developments. Despite of all the unevenness and contradictions of the text, it can, of all Erdei’s works, best take a hold of the characteristics of social groups of different origins and traditions. The sociographic part of the volume contains the most differentiated description of the Hungarian peasantry. This analysis directs attention to the fact that despite its imperfections, The Hungarian Peasant Society contains the first valid description of Hungarian society between the World Wars.

When attempting to examine Erdei's social views on the 'dual structure' of the Hungarian society, most previous studies on his oeuvre disregarded his early writings. This study points out the significance of his early works enlightening the changes and contradictions of his thoughts. These early works deal with the transformation of the peasantry giving not only a sociological description about its social origin but also theories for its political rise. Present study focuses on this duality of his analyses of social structure.