Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:22:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Wacquant on boxing


I am not Elisabeth Franck.  She is the author of  that little piece of 
journalism that called the attention to academic kibitzers to Wacquant's 
connection with boxing, as a practictioner of the very phenomenon that he 
is studying.  I make no claims about Wacquant.  However, the appeal of 
boxing is a very loaded cultural phenomenon, as Franck herself notes, while 
emphasizing that Wacquant does not deal with boxing in an abstract or 
romantic fashion.  So there are the motives for finding this sport an 
object of fascination, and then to practice it oneself: well, there's 
scholarly dedication for you.  The question of what Wacquant is about is 
not to question his scientific credentials or even intellectual 
integrity--it's a fundamental motivational question--why do you care, 
what's in it for you?  I myself could study a number of things that disgust 
me personally, though perhaps not with elan.  To make the "sacrifice" of 
participating in the very barbarism I'm studying, well, that's quite a big 
step.  And so I ask, well, why would Lacquant subject himself to that?  If 
he doesn't relish his own participation, then he's quite a trooper. And if 
he does, then the appeal of this unspeakable barbarism for him demands 
explanation.  And I think I'm entitled to an answer.

At 02:51 PM 7/12/01 -0400, Rick Fantasia wrote:
>Dear Elisabeth Franck:
>If you aren't aware of what " Wacquant all about"  I would recommend that 
>you invest a bit of time and effort to find out.



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