From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Thomas_K=F6hler?= <t.koehler-AT-mbox.agis.uni-hannover.de>
Subject: Re: Robbins book--review
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 01:44:26 +0100


Another topic: There is something in the bourdieuian self-construction /
bourdieuian schoolars re-construction of the generic structuralism that
irritates me: it's not that I am very astonished to see that the J.
Alexanders polemic Fin d'siecle social theory does not appear in the 4 vol
sample, and is even not cited in the Robbins monography. It is the strange
handling with data of recoverings and publications, Alexander sorts first in
a persuasive way and, if he is right, others, Bourdieu included, are sorting
in a deeply strange manner:
- the first Bourdieuian study was Sociologie de L'Algerie (The algerians),
pub. 1958 (1962) with a preface from Aron; it was a fine, but 'mainstream'
study in the tradition of 'British anthropology'; there wasn't a concept of
habitus or any 'typical' Bourdieuian concept;
- next there are Travail et travailleurs (1963) and Algerie 1960 (1963); the
habitus was born yet.
What has happened in between? What are the main influences that where
leading Bourdieu to his sociology? Cheleen Mahar states a connection with
Bourdieus Panofsky-reading (Robbins ed. vol 1, 32ff.); this statement has
the backing from Bourdieu, but this is wrong, as far as I can see. The first
elaboration of habitus-concept couldn't be done by discussing gothic
architecture - 1967...
For my readings it seems even strange that Robbins talks a lot about Sartre,
including a reminiscence on Dialectical reason (1960); but there are NO
discussions that deal with Sartres enlightful concepts of HABITUS, of
DISTINCTION, of FIELDS (champs) of experience etc. - central for the
Dialectical reason and, espacially, for Sartres Flaubert, vol. 3, 1973, and
I would say: central for La Distinction.
In my doctoral thesis I supposed to look a little bit more on Sartre and his
anthropology. It changed deeply with the 60's. He shifts from his
ontological view of mutual misunderstanding to a - even ontological - view
of possible understanding. Now, to keep it short, I'm thinking there is a
connection between Bourdieus concept of habitus and his anthropology, that
is from a Sartrean kind of mutual misunderstanding, some would call
'negativistic' (Honneth, Habermas too). And there's an unsolved problem in
the relationship Bourdieu-Sartre, espacially in regard to Sartres shift in
direction to an anthropolgy of - let's call it: mutual understanding ( -
that's a little styled).

- ?


****************************************************
Dipl. Sozialwiss. Thomas Köhler
Psychologisches Institut der Uni Hannover
Im Moore 21, 30167 Hannover
tel.: 0511-762-190-33, priv. 0511-3942551
mail: t.koehler-AT-mbox.agis.uni-hannover.de



**********************************************************************
Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu