Search

This paper clarifies a distinction the sociologists make between the notions of spectator and public. Based on this distinction and on an ethnographic survey carried out in France among people who are distant spectators of the violence in Colombia, the paper states that these observers cannot be considered as a public concerned by Colombian issues. The purpose is to explain why it is difficult to turn those spectators into a public. This transformation does not come easily, not so much by the fact that many French viewers have no particular ties with Colombia, but rather because of two reasons. Firstly, because it is not common that the Colombian internal problems emerge as a subject of daily discussion in France. Secondly, because French spectators strive to make what is happening in Colombia intelligible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that the French Revolution constituted the basic metaphor through which Pierre Bourdieu perceived and analyzed gender hierarchies; that the class structure of the ancien régime and the mechanisms of its legitimation were the major metaphors he used through his scathing critiques on the order of the sexes; and that the ideals of liberté, égalité and fraternité were always his reformatory aims for a just, gender-neutral society. The paper shows how this preoccupation with the Revolution of 1789 structured Bourdieu's analysis of gender relations and sexual identities in contemporary society. It exposes the ways in which he identified men with the nobility and women with the third estate; it presents his analyses of the role that traditional ideologies and state bureaucracies play in legitimating this arbitrary order of masculine domination; and it analyzes his proposals for a sexual revolution while exposing the counter-revolutionary forces that persistently negate attempts to reform gender hierarchies. Fundamentally, this new reading of Bourdieu's exegeses on gender suggests that he was working with a ready-made interpretive scheme, a model of society that he was inclined to see as always reproducing itself: the ancien régime. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Julien Freund (1921–93) was a French sociologist and political theorist who taught at the University of Strasbourg in the 1960s and 1970s. Although he is the author of over two dozen books, Freund remained throughout his lifetime something of a marginal figure in his own country. Yet, strangely, Freund is now receiving more scholarly attention in France than ever before. The question is why? This paper attempts to provide an answer by looking at Freund's attempt to establish an alternative intellectual canon in France that was heavily indebted to the German tradition of political realism. The story begins with Freund's early relationship with Raymond Aron, and suggests, perhaps provocatively, that Freund is responsible for luring Aron back into his studies on Max Weber dating from the 1930s. It then moves on to explore Freund's relationship with Carl Schmitt. Freund became Schmitt's closest French friend and, for forty years, exhibited a veritable obsession with disseminating Schmitt's work in France. Finally, it suggests that recent attempts by those who wish to place Freund within a current tradition of French liberalism are mistaken. Instead Freund must be placed within a German Neue Rechte context, and specifically his desire to introduce the German tradition of political realism into France. In the end the article argues that the French Nouvelle Droite—with its stress on the cultural and ethnic foundations of the nation-state—pushed Freund's political thought in a decidedly anti-liberal and seemingly pseudo-fascist direction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the role of the state in the development of French Sociology after 1945. This role was important in the institutionalization of the discipline. It favoured the creation of research teams, resarch centres or laboratories. The State favoured the funding of french sociology too. This funding, in the form of research contracts with various public bodies, has contributed to the emergence of the figure of the expert and, more broadly, to the involvement of sociologists in sectoral policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the author's comment on researcher David Sciulli's paper about the continental sociology of professions. According to the author, Sciulli wanted to set a standard for the study of the professions. It is easy to follow Sciulli's arguments on the deficiencies in the earlier studies on professionalism, and a person can easily grasp what he understands as the shortcomings of this research. Sciulli states that certain European languages, particularly French, have not developed a word for professionalism and that French researchers therefore have not bothered with studies of professionalism. The reason for this omission seems not to be that Sciulli regards the French society to be without professionalism in his sense, as he makes a French institution from the 17th century, the only example of the usefulness of his own definition. Sciulli seems to think that French sociologists neglect the phenomenon--or he thinks that it does not matter if they have opinions if it is not possible to translate them directly into a theory of professionalism.