Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 10:25:09 +0100 From: Shiera El-Malik <elmaliks-AT-tcd.ie> Subject: Re: [BOU:] Derrida and Bourdieu Thank you, Rohit! Quoting Rohit Chopra <cosmicomic-AT-hotmail.com>: > Managed to find this 1996 discussion from the archive, thru google. > > **************** > File bourdieu.archive/bourdieu_1996/96-12-01.092, message 141 > From owner-bourdieu Mon Nov 25 04:21:55 1996 > Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 11:30:57 +0200 > From: sestoft-AT-coco.ihi.ku.dk (Carsten Sestoft) > Subject: Re: Derrida and Bourdieu > > Dear George > > Your very interesting comments merit some further words. > > > The relationship between Bourdieu and Derrida is quite > >fascinating. I wish I knew more about it. > > I suppose you know that Bourdieu and Derrida were born the same year (1930) > and that they both have the agregation de philosophie, although I think > that Derrida entered the Ecole Normale Superieure a year later than > Bourdieu. As Bourdieu says in "Fieldwork in Sociology" (Choses dites, > 1987), they were together in a group (around 1951) at the Ecole which aimed > at defending liberty against stalinism. Derrida was born in one of the > Maghreb countries (Maroc?) and arrived at Paris at the age of circa 18, > much like Bourdieu, who also, with his time in Algeria, no doubt has had > some of the same non-Parisian experiences, i.e. experiences of something > different from the legitimate world of Parisian learning, which in that > context became stigmata of social marginality. As Louis Pinto (in "La > theorie en pratique", Critique, no 579-580, August-September 1995) > suggests, their strategies in relation to philosophy can be seen as having > much the same kind of non-conformist habitus as their condition of > possibility, only with the difference that Bourdieu chose to leave the > philosophical field, while Derrida remained on the borders of the field. > > > On the surface they would seem to be worlds apart. What has > >become known as "deconstruction" would seem to have nothing whatever to > >do with Bourdieu's sociological approach to the study of culture. > > I think one should distinguish the image of Derrida produced in America, > mainly by literary scholars, from the image of Derrida in France, although > it becomes less and less easy as the American reception begins to influence > the perception of Derrida in France. It is in the American reception that > Derrida has become identified almost exclusively with deconstruction. > > > Yet, I think that it is possible to identify commonalities. While > >Bourdieu criticizes Derrida in his essay "Towards a 'Vulgar' Critique of > >'Pure' Critiques" in _Distinction_, he does so by saying that Derrida > >does not go *far enough* in his reading. Bourdieu obviously relies in > >large part on Derrida's reading of Kant--for it uncovers the social > >distinctions at the heart of Kant's critique without naming them as such. > > You are surely right here: Bourdieus critique is that Derrida doesn't go > far enough in a questioning of the very activity of philosophy (the > philosophical illusio), cf. above. > > > I think the real point of identity lies in the fact that both > >Derrida and Bourdieu uncover the pratico-logical dimension of culture. It > >seems to me that Derrida concentrates especially on how practice can > >revolutionize established relations (overturn and displace them--the true > >meaning od "deconstruction"). While Bourdieu is largely interested in > >breaking with idealized visions of the culture, exposing the social basis > >of culture (while at the same time avoiding reductionism). > > I also agree here, although with one reservation: because Derrida remains a > philosopher, he refuses (or is unable) to give a historical and > sociological explanation of the ways practice changes and undermines > established relations; he can only show that, in a philosophical > perspective, the relations become unstable and contradictory, i.e. he shows > that philosophy is somehow false, but not what could be true. > > > One thing I find especially refreshing about Bourdieu is that he > >encourages us to think about these points of commanality and > >complementarity and not to remain stuck in typical (and ultimately > >destructive) academic polemics. > > Yes, I agree, - and it has taken me a long time to understand that even the > positions with which I disagree may be able to say something sensible on > particular points! So much academic nonsense comes from the inability to > discuss issues outside the traditional trenches (if you can say that in > English). > > Carsten Sestoft > University of Copenhagen > >********************************************************************** > >Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu > >Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu > >Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu > > > ********************************************************************** > Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu > Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu > Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu > > _________________________________________________________________ > Cool ringtones, snazzy logos! Expressive cards, fun games! > http://www.msn.co.in/Mobile/ Get it all at MSN mobile! > > ********************************************************************** > Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu > Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu > Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu > Shiera el-Malik Department of Political Science Trinity College 2/3 College Green Dublin 2 353/1 608 3528 353/86 105 3675 ********************************************************************** Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005