Search

Embracing the manifesto for a 'live' sociology, I included portraiture into the research design of an ethnographic study into women's lived experiences of French suburbia and organised an exhibition entitled Habitantes d'Hier and d'Aujourd'hui: exposition sociologique et photographique. This was a personal project in the neighbourhood of my youth and was motivated by the intention to shine some light on the invisible stories of women living in lower-middle and middle-income suburbs in France. In this article, I reflect on the use of portraiture for the possibility it offers in capturing the ethnographic encounter as well as in giving saliency and offering a visual representation of the sociological analysis. I also discuss the exhibition of these portraits as a moment of conviviality grounded in the endeavour of writing differently from hegemonic modes of academic communication and dissemination allowing for a sharing and sharpening of the sociological imagination. It represents an opportunity to think beyond some of the more neoliberal imperatives that govern academia today and shape our sociological craft. I argue for the value of creating a moment of conviviality, that is a space challenging modes of dissemination, engagement and even impact to some extent, as well as modes of knowledge production: broadly opening up more possibilities for a truly public sociology to continue to exist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article develops a series of arguments about social fields, subfields, and social spaces that can help us understand empires and colonies. First, we have to assume that the scale of fields is not always coextensive with the boundaries of the national state but is often much larger, or smaller. Imperial fields are among the most spatially extensive ones, though they may not be as territorially extensive as truly global fields. Second, we need to make a distinction between imperial fields and imperial social spaces (based on Bourdieu's distinction between social fields and social spaces). The third argument is that colonies in modern empires were characterized by two different kinds of fields: fields that were simply extended into the overseas territories, versus completely separate fields unique to one or more of the colonies. The colonial state is an example of a field that is specific to the colony. By contrast, scientific fields were often simply extended from the metropole into the colonies, encompassing both. The fourth argument concerns subfields. Transported into imperial realms, this distinction suggests that some colonial offshoots of fielded metropolitan practices do not constitute separate fields but are nonetheless differentiated from their main overarching field. These four points are illustrated with examples from British, French and German imperial policy, colonial statecraft and colonial sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Today Pierre Bourdieu is well known as one of the most important social scientists of the 20th century. One of the outstanding qualities of his work has been his innovative combination of different methods and research strategies as well as his analytical skills in interpreting the obtained data (his ‘sociological gaze’). In this paper, we attempt to retrace the development of an extraordinary way of doing social research and show the benefit of Bourdieu's visual sociology for his empirical fieldwork and sociological theory. The article particularly stresses the significance of his photographic archive, which has long been ignored within the appreciation of Bourdieu's work. Studying Bourdieu's photography gives access to his œuvre in several new ways: not only can we understand how Bourdieu became an unconventional sociologist practicing his craft in the midst of a colonial war. Bourdieu's visual anthropology also offers an insight into the status nascendi of Bourdieu's sociology in all its elementary forms and contents. Through his photography Boudieu demonstrated the concepts of ‘habitat and habitus’, the material and symbolic living conditions of the Algerian population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a comparative study of the social mobility of women in France and Sweden. One question which will be central to this and to subsequent papers will be that of how far analyses of the mobility of women tend to support, or to require qualification of conclusions that have been drawn with respect to the mobility of men. On the basis of absolute rates of intergenerational mobility for women, Sweden would appear to have markedly more mobility overall than France. The total mobility rate is consistently higher than in France, whether mobility is assessed in terms of our nine-class schema or various collapses of this. The composition of the various occupational classes of women as regards social background is somewhat more similar in Sweden than it is in France. But the striking contrast is that the differences in origin distributions of women by occupational category are much greater as compared to men in Sweden than they are in France. It is in the case of women's outflow mobility patterns-and thus chances of mobility according to social background--that our two societies show the most marked differences, in contrast to results obtained when comparing men's mobility.

The article studies the role played by the positivist thought in the early years of the French Third Republic. It might help sociologists clarify some aspects of the relationship between the world of politics and that of science and modern philosophy. The author proposes to raise the sociological problem, namely the various functions fulfilled by scientific ideas in modern political movements and in the light of this, to analyze the role played by Comtist philosophy in the republican movement of 19th century France. Many followers of the Comtist philosophy succeeded in reconciling French philosopher Auguste Comte's basic teachings with a demand for liberal and democratic institutions. Philosopher Emil Littré was the most prominent among the followers of Comte who joined the republicans. Littré claimed in 1877 that positivism had played an important role in assuring the victory of Republicanism and democracy which then seemed firmly established after a decade of bitter struggles. Both, the Comtist intellectualist sociologist and the modem historian of ideas seem to assume that doctrines of a purely intellectual and philosophical origin determine the character of political movements.