RE: Bourdieu and meaning

From: Vincent Campbell (v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk)
Date: Wed May 16 2001 - 16:03:38 BST

  • Next message: joedees@bellsouth.net: "Re: Information"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA03644 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 16 May 2001 16:08:54 +0100
    Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745E99@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
    To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: RE: Bourdieu and meaning
    Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 16:03:38 +0100
    X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Goebbels once said 'whoever speaks the first word to the world is always
    right'.

    The credibility of the French philosophical establishment has been hit hard
    by the critiques of Sokal & Bricmont. They seem to remain rather...
    evidence free in their arguments, at least in their pronouncements beyond
    purely philosophical concerns, where the notion of evidence is a different
    kettle of poisson entirely.

    Bourdieu's ideas are always interesting, his lectures on TV and journalism
    feature in the courses I teach, but I can't pretend I'm not suspicious
    regarding the empirical validity of a lot of his work.

    Vincent

    > ----------
    > From: Ryan, Angela
    > Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 2:31 pm
    > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > Subject: Bourdieu and meaning
    >
    > <May I throw in Bourdieu's idea:
    > > "Dès qu'on traite le langage comme un objet autonome,
    > [...] on se condamne > à > chercher le pouvoir des mots dans les mots,
    > c'est-à-dire là où il n'est > pas: > [...]. Ce n'est que par exception
    > [...]
    > que les échanges symboliques se > réduisent à des rapports de pure
    > communication et que le contenu > informatif > du message épuise le
    > contenu
    > de la communication. Le pouvoir des paroles > n'est autre chose que le
    > pouvoir délégué du porte-parole: et ses paroles > [...] sont tout au plus
    > un
    > témoignage ... de la garantie de délégation > dont > il est investi. [...]
    > l'autorité advient au langage du dehors...
    > > [Pierre Bourdieu, Ce Que Parler veut dire, p 103-5]
    > > > I shan't insult you by translating! I find my students
    > find Bourdieu less > clear in translation to English, than in the French,
    > perhaps that is > generally true.>>
    > Only for those who speak French....
    >
    > OK I'll try to transliterate (with apologies, because I think Bourdieu
    > changes meaning when translated):
    > "If we treat language as an autonomous object, [...] we condemn ourselves
    > to
    > finding the power of words in the words, that is, where it is not [...]
    > Only
    > exceptionally does symbolic exchange [symbol-exchange] consist solely of a
    > purely communicative interrelation, or the informative content of the
    > message co-equal the whole content of the communication. The power of
    > words
    > is none other than the power delegated to the speaker: and his/her words
    > [..] are at most an evidence [witness statement] ... of the delegation
    > warranty he/she bears. [...] authority invests language from outside [it]"
    > Bourdieu's book is very well translated into English, by the way, as
    > Language and Symbolic Power (ed J Thompson). I feel that the difference
    > between French and Anglophone philosophical mindsets, and the nature of
    > philosophy, does mean an inevitable shift in meanings.
    > As for the American Declaration: it does indeed, paradoxically, state a
    > belief which the locators did not implement, which was not so and still is
    > not; this is an example of Bourdieu's point, whereby the belief invested
    > in
    > that beautiful assertion makes it true, and being so accepted, it becomes
    > the basis by which later generations may have worked and may work upon its
    > becoming (if incompletely) the case.
    >
    > Yours sincerely
    > Angela
    >
    > ==============================================================This was
    > distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
    >

    ===============================This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 16 2001 - 16:12:37 BST