The article focuses on the fact that the consequence of Bourdieu’s death is that we now have to respond specifically to the texts that he produced between 1958 and 2002, rather than to the impact of writing and political action in combination, which was his goal during his life. The article raises general questions about the status of social texts in relation to the practices of philosophy and social scientific enquiry to which Bourdieu must have returned in preparing his final (...) course of lectures, published in 2001 as Science de la science et réflexivité. It then offers three case studies of this relationship in action in Bourdieu’s early work, considering his textual and scientific practices. It discusses aspects of the contemporary philosophical debate about the referentiality of texts at the time of this early work and thus indicates that this was a question of continuous importance in Bourdieu’s work. The article next reflects on the significance of Bourdieu’s thinking in this respect for the ways in which we should now respond to his texts and deploy his concepts empirically. It takes three examples of different ways in which Bourdieu’s texts have become pretexts for further research practice. These are characterized as ‘academic exploitation’, ‘nominal appropriation’ and ‘informed divergence’. The conclusion is that Bourdieu’s work demands a reflexive response, which requires that respondents should analyse rigorously their own situations and the grounds for transferring received concepts, and that this entails detailed attention to both Bourdieu’s texts and the contexts of their production, rather than a superficial exploitation or appropriation of his ‘consecrated’ texts. (shrink)

French social and philosophical thought has played a very significant role in the development of European and American social theory. This detailed, timely book provides a map of the production and reception of French social thought within a global sociological context. Critically comparing the work of five key theorists Derek Robbins examines how their ideas were produced and received before persuasively setting out the key differences between their philosophical and ideological positions. The book sensitively traces the cross-currents of social theory (...) and confidently leads the reader through the complex foundations of Western social thought. Each chapter represents a textual analysis of the production of a critical intellectual and focuses upon the work of: Althusser, Foucault, Aron, Lyotard, Bourdieu. This carefully crafted volume represents a significant contribution to the globalization of theory and will be essential reading for anyone interested in Western social theory and the foundations of sociological thought."--Publisher's website. (shrink)

Pierre Bourdieu is a colossus of postwar sociology. He is the author of over 30 books and more than 350 articles. He is ranked second only to Michel Foucault in the Social Science Citation Index. His work covers many fields - the sociology of culture, research methods, higher education, social theor.

The commentary provides contextual information about the seminar which Bourdieu and Passeron gave in the École Normale Supérieure on 6 December 1963. It appears that the intended series of seminars was curtailed, perhaps because the initial seminar of 6 December exposed the extent to which Althusser was formally managing the intentions of his guest speakers and resisting the implications of their ongoing research on students and their studies. The commentary argues that the conflict between Althusser and Bourdieu/Passeron was inter-generational in (...) that Althusser’s attitudes had been shaped by his experience as a victim of Nazi oppression whereas those of Bourdieu/Passeron were defined, instead, by their unwilling participation in the French colonial oppression of indigenous Algerians. Althusser was intent on examining philosophically the validity of various contemporary versions of social science whereas Bourdieu and Passeron were engaged in educational research which was scrutinizing sociologically the validity of precisely this supposedly detached philosophical perspective. In short, the commentary is aligned with the Bourdieu/Passeron position in that it seeks to offer an historical sociology of the encounter of December 1963. (shrink)

This review article is stimulated by the publication by Polity Press in 2008 of a translation of Bourdieu’s Le Bal des célibataires, which had been published by Editions du Seuil in the year of his death — 2002. Le Bal des célibataires assembled three articles about his native Béarn which Bourdieu had written at roughly ten-year intervals, starting in 1962. Given that Le Bal des célibataires formally constitutes a new publication in that it juxtaposes the three earlier articles, adds a (...) short introduction and republishes, as an appendix, a methodological article first published in the 1970s, the 2002 text provides access to four stages in the development of Bourdieu’s reflexive analysis of traditional society. The article draws attention to some of the objective socio-economic changes in Béarn society in the second half of the 20th century and asks whether the autonomous logic of Bourdieu’s conceptual development in this period was the product of his partisan participation in an originally traditional situation and whether his maintenance of this logic over time was a device to give scientific legitimation to that situation. Consideration of these microcosmic analyses of the Béarn raises questions relevant to international socio-economic development in general, about whether sociology is equipped to offer a scientific explanation of economic and technological changes in society or whether, by definition, it is categorally committed to a conservative value-orientation which criticizes ‘post-human’ postmodernity. (shrink)

"The political and academic worlds are fractured by two competing discourses: the universalism of human rights and cultural relativism. This fracture is represented by the deep separation of cultural analysis and theories of international politics. Derek Robbins in a brilliant interrogation of European thinkers from Montesquieu to Pierre Bourdieu seeks to replace cultural relativism with cultural relationism as a step towards reconciling Enlightenment universalism and anthropological insistence on cultural difference. Inter alia he reflects on the tensions between political and social (...) science and takes up the challenge from Raymond Aron to construct a sociology of international relations. A dazzling achievement." - Bryan S. Turner, The Graduate Center, CUNY Through historical studies of some of the work of Montesquieu, Comte, Durkheim, Boas, Morgenthau, Aron and Bourdieu, Derek Robbins examines the changing and competing conceptualisations of the political and the social in the Western European intellectual tradition. He suggests that we are now experiencing a new ‘dissociation of sensibility’ in which political thought and its consequences in action have become divorced from social and cultural experience. Developing further the ideas of Bourdieu which he has presented in books and articles over the last twenty years, Robbins argues that we need to integrate the recognition of cultural difference with the practice of international politics by accepting that the ‘field’ of international political discourse is a social construct which is contingent on encounters between diverse cultures. ‘Everything is relative’ (Comte) and ‘everything is social’ (Bourdieu), not least international politics. (shrink)

This e-special issue explores the reception of Bourdieu’s work in one journal, Theory, Culture & Society, which commenced at about the same time that Bourdieu was beginning to acquire an international reputation. It offers a case-study of the English representation of Bourdieu’s work through almost 40 years and focuses on the role of the journal in carrying Bourdieu’s work across cultural boundaries. It introduces the scope of that work but, primarily, it is designed to encourage reference to his texts in (...) the contexts of their production and reception in order to invite new reflection and new evaluation in relation to contemporary problems. (shrink)