Página inicialGruposDiscussãoMaisZeitgeist
Pesquise No Site
Este site usa cookies para fornecer nossos serviços, melhorar o desempenho, para análises e (se não estiver conectado) para publicidade. Ao usar o LibraryThing, você reconhece que leu e entendeu nossos Termos de Serviço e Política de Privacidade . Seu uso do site e dos serviços está sujeito a essas políticas e termos.

Resultados do Google Livros

Clique em uma foto para ir ao Google Livros

Carregando...

Sketch for a Self-Analysis

de Pierre Bourdieu

MembrosResenhasPopularidadeAvaliação médiaMenções
941286,074 (3.44)1
Over the past four decades, French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu produced one of the most imaginative and subtle bodies of social theory of the postwar era. When he died in 2002, he was considered to be the most influential sociologist in the world and a thinker on a par with Foucault and Lévi-Strauss--a public intellectual as important to his generation as Sartre was to his. Sketch for a Self-Analysis is the ultimate outcome of Bourdieu's lifelong preoccupation with reflexivity. Vehemently not an autobiography, this unique book is instead an application of Bourdieu's theories to his own life and intellectual trajectory; along the way it offers compelling and intimate insights into the most important French intellectuals of the time--including Foucault, Sartre, Aron, Althusser, and de Beauvoir--as well as Bourdieu's own formative experiences at boarding school and his moral outrage at the colonial war in Algeria.… (mais)
Nenhum(a)
Carregando...

Registre-se no LibraryThing tpara descobrir se gostará deste livro.

Ainda não há conversas na Discussão sobre este livro.

» Ver também 1 menção

I have been captivated by the work of Pierre Bourdieu since I first struggled through Outline of a Theory of Practice in my second year of graduate school. He remains for me an intellectual touchstone because of the rigorousness of his work (a term he would undoubtedly reject). Hence, I looked forward to the translation of his "final" book with anticipation and some trepidation, for I sensed a logical but troubling divergence from the general orientation of his previous studies: an invocation of experience. Some inkling of this tendency appeared in earlier interviews and specifically in his Pascalian Mediations and the Science of Science and Reflexivity.

Bourdieu's Sketch for a Self-Analysis* is a curious undertaking. On the one hand, Bourdieu wishes to trump potential future biographers, who would, he seems to fear, get him wrong. On the other hand, the opportunity to self-analyse himself, an act of self-objectification he did not make available to the numerous people whom his models objectified, risks the charges of self-indulgence and, worse, self-promotion. There is a bit of both in this book, but less than might be expected from someone who did earned the right to commit the sin of intellectual egoism -- unlike the vast majority of academics who fry small fish caught in puddles and then present themselves to others as if they've harpooned the great white whale.

The book itself is interesting as a representation (to be sure a selective one) of the French intellectual field in the 1950s and 1960s, and the intersection of philosophical, institutional, and political trends: existentialism, Marxism, the rise of the social sciences; the war in Algeria and 1968. This period, according to Bourdieu, is decisive for his subsequent scholarly trajectory, drawing out his habitual contrarian disposition, which, of course, remained self-reflexive. Bourdieu presents himself as a contrarian who refuses to make a virtue of the necessity of this position-taking since -- and this is the central motif that runs throughout the book -- he was by circumstance an outsider: a child of provincial life, the product of a peasant/small bureaucrat paternal inheritance, who gravitated away from the highest form of intellectual life, philosophy, and toward the then less legitimate fields of ethnology and, eventually, sociology; never a Communist, he nonetheless fixated on issues of social reproduction and complicated Marx's basic scheme; never a structuralist, he nonetheless developed his theory of practice out of the ground of structuralism (i.e., Levi-Strauss); never a public intellectual in the mold of Sartre (his anti-model of academic life) and Foucault, he nonetheless engaged with political issues; finally, while he is viewed as a sociological auteur, he seems most proud of his effort to work within a team of empirically-oriented researchers.

And on and on. Contradictions, contraries, and contrarianness appear on each page of Sketch. Bourdieu's self-analysis is congenial, and probably will be received as such, by anyone who, in other terms, operates in a liminal space, betwixt and between two presumably incompatible binary oppositions. Bourdieu describes this as the "hidden face of a double life" (72), his cleft habitus (100) or his double distance.

"The sense of ambivalence towards the intellectual world that is rooted in these dispositions is the generative principle of a double distance of which I could give countless examples: a distance from the great game of French-style intellectual life, with its fashionable petitions, its demonstrations du jour or its prefaces for artists' catalogues, but also from the great role of professor, engaged in the circular circulation of thesis juries and examination boards, the games and stakes of power over reproduction; a distance, in politics and culture, from both elitism and populism." (107)

This ambivalence, evidenced in his account of his inaugural lecture** at the College de France, is not analyzed by Bourdieu in psychoanalytic terms: the Oedipal conflicts with various Fathers (but apparently not his biological father), his symbolic castration of these Fathers in the inaugural lecture (which shows that authority of the Father is arbitrary), his preferred immersion in empirical studies (perhaps reproducing the oceanic feeling?) and discomfort with playing the leading role of a leading French intellectual (e.g., his disdain for Sartre); in other words, he acquired the authority of the Father while refusing to play the role comfortably.

"This tension perhaps never appeared to me in a more dramatic fashion than when I gave my inaugural lecture at the College de France, in other words at the moment of entry into a role that I found hard to integrate into my own idea of myself. (...) Finally, I thought I saw a way out of the contradiction into which I was thrown by the very fact of a social consecration which assaulted my self-image: to take as the object of my lecture the idea of delivering an inaugural lecture, of performing a rite of institution, thus setting up a distance from the role in the very exercise of the role. But I had underestimated the violence of what, in the place of a simple ritual address, became a kind of 'intervention' in the artists' sense. To describe the rite while performing the rite is to commit the supreme social barbarism, that of wilfully suspending belief or, worse, calling it into question and threatening it in the very time and place where it is supposed to be celebrated and strengthened. I thus discovered in the moment of doing this, that what had become for me a psychological solution constituted a challenge to the symbolic order, an affront to the dignity of the institution which demands that one keep silent about the arbitrariness of the institutional rite that is being performed. The public reading of that text which, written outside the situation, still had to be read as it stood, withoug modification, before the assembled body of masters, Claude Levi-Strauss, Georges Dumezil, Michel Foucault and others, was a terrible ordeal. People told me later that my voice was toneless. I was on the point of breaking off and leaving the rostrum. Jean-Pierre Vernant gave me a severe look, or so it seemed: I read on to the end, for better or worse. "(108, 109-110)

Anyone who has felt compelled to objectify the arbitrariness and violence of the authority of a father can understand Bourdieu's compulsion and trauma: the need to fight all Father figures (i.e., to recreate them -- and the original Oedipal situation -- whenever ambivalence surfaces) and, nonetheless, to undermine the authority and privileges that accrues to one who successfully slays the Father (i.e., the prohibition on incest).

Beyond this, however, one can question the motif of doubleness. The self-analysis in Sketch makes it appear as if Bourdieu's singular intellectual trajectory was possible only on account of this doubleness which Sartre or Foucault (for example) lacked. Thus, Bourdieu explains his critical difference from Foucault, that Foucault always remained a "philosopher", on this basis: Foucault originated from a "well-to-do provincial bourgeois family" (79) whereas he (Bourdieu) did not. The assumption here which is unannounced in Bourdieu is this: only certain backgrounds generate doubleness, the cleft habitus. Is this really the case? Is it not the case, on the contrary, that everyone is afflicted or privileged by this disposition (e.g., ambivalence is a fundamental psychoanalytic concept)? If this is true, or at least is as plausible as an assumption as one that holds that only certain individuals have this cleft habitus, then Bourdieu's account of his singular trajectory is called into question; in other words, his propensity to epistemological breaks is not fully explicated by a habitus acquired in the family which predisposed him to recreate that habitus within the intellectual field. If everyone partakes in ambivalent relations with objects (people, ideas, things), then Bourdieu's singularity must be accounted for in a different manner.
__________________________
*Pierre Bourdieu, Sketch for a Self-Analysis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008).
**Pierre Bourdieu, "A lecture on the lecture," in In Other Words: Essays Towards a Reflexive Sociology (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990), 177-198.
8 vote theoria | Jan 16, 2009 |
sem resenhas | adicionar uma resenha
Você deve entrar para editar os dados de Conhecimento Comum.
Para mais ajuda veja a página de ajuda do Conhecimento Compartilhado.
Título canônico
Título original
Títulos alternativos
Data da publicação original
Pessoas/Personagens
Lugares importantes
Eventos importantes
Filmes relacionados
Epígrafe
Dedicatória
Primeiras palavras
Citações
Últimas palavras
Aviso de desambiguação
Editores da Publicação
Autores Resenhistas (normalmente na contracapa do livro)
Idioma original
CDD/MDS canônico
LCC Canônico

Referências a esta obra em recursos externos.

Wikipédia em inglês

Nenhum(a)

Over the past four decades, French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu produced one of the most imaginative and subtle bodies of social theory of the postwar era. When he died in 2002, he was considered to be the most influential sociologist in the world and a thinker on a par with Foucault and Lévi-Strauss--a public intellectual as important to his generation as Sartre was to his. Sketch for a Self-Analysis is the ultimate outcome of Bourdieu's lifelong preoccupation with reflexivity. Vehemently not an autobiography, this unique book is instead an application of Bourdieu's theories to his own life and intellectual trajectory; along the way it offers compelling and intimate insights into the most important French intellectuals of the time--including Foucault, Sartre, Aron, Althusser, and de Beauvoir--as well as Bourdieu's own formative experiences at boarding school and his moral outrage at the colonial war in Algeria.

Não foram encontradas descrições de bibliotecas.

Descrição do livro
Resumo em haiku

Current Discussions

Nenhum(a)

Capas populares

Links rápidos

Avaliação

Média: (3.44)
0.5
1 1
1.5
2
2.5
3 3
3.5 2
4 1
4.5
5 2

É você?

Torne-se um autor do LibraryThing.

 

Sobre | Contato | LibraryThing.com | Privacidade/Termos | Ajuda/Perguntas Frequentes | Blog | Loja | APIs | TinyCat | Bibliotecas Históricas | Os primeiros revisores | Conhecimento Comum | 203,224,510 livros! | Barra superior: Sempre visível