From: "Pam Stello" <stello-AT-socrates.berkeley.edu> Subject: Re: bourdieu on literary prizes Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 18:53:19 -0700 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. apologies to others b/c i cannot reply only to Glen. Glen -- Just to thank you very much. your note is very helpful. yes, it is discoursing... and as you describe, though i had not thought of it! and not too many parentheses at all. Thank you for the Knorr-Cetina cite. i will write more later, and will get back to you when i have read knorr-cetina. thank you again. that was very kind of you to respond. ----- Original Message ----- From: Glen Fuller To: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 6:53 PM Subject: RE: bourdieu on literary prizes Pam, The desire you speak of, is that a desire (jealousy?) of scientific genius in the form of a Lacanian desire, a lack? If 'scientific genius' is a result of the discoursing of a particular performance (an act of 'science,' whatever that is) then what you would need is a hierarchy (genius at top, etc), and if it were functioning as an economy of (a lack of) genius, then you would need a discursive formation to signify (or 'territorialise' is probably better) performances as (a lack of) genius. (Too many parentheses?) I have a few friends doing PhDs in maths, and they do set people up in hierarchies. However, normally it is their work that is discoursed (the performance, an act of science), and the person in relation to the work. So they say things like "Oh his work is crap, all he does is run 'experimental' experiments, steal equations from someone else and then fiddle the numbers until it works." Have you read Knorr-Cetina's work on sociality with objects, where the person assumes the lack(s) of the object? Knorr-Cetina works with scientists (and stockmarket traders, where the 'personality' of the trader affects the field or market). Cheerio, Glen. -----Original Message----- From: owner-bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu [mailto:owner-bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu] On Behalf Of Pam Stello I am trying to think through "desire" in relation to the idea of scientific genius as money in a symbolic economy, though not sure what I'm doing with this. This is a new idea. What does seem clear to me is that scientific genius as the money form in the symbolic economy in mathematics, for example, constrains the proliferation of meaning within a social system of valorization, like Foucault's author function. What could be common knowledge for every well socialized member of the many mathematics fields is possible only for the "better prepared, " read biologically male. How this works for women in mathematics as a "class" in relation to desire is what I'm trying to understand, though may not be a viable direction to take.
HTML VERSION: