|
|
|
SOCA1312 - Socio-anthropology of the symbolic
[1 Q. • 30 Th. • 3 ECTS - credits]
| Lecturer :
|
|
Delchambre Jean-Pierre |
|
|
|
| Language of instruction :
|
|
French (possible a text in English to study).
|
|
|
|
| Learning outcomes :
|
|
This course aims not only to take a deeper look at the question of the ‘symbolic', which is central in sociology and anthropology (as well as more generally in the human and social sciences), but also to envisage applications and the practical meaning of this question, by considering contemporary issues in an original way. Specifically, rather than systematically go down the theoretical route, this course draws on current research into the socio-anthropology of ‘play' (and transitional and experiential spaces). In other words, the student is given the opportunity to study the symbolic in an applied analytical way, which has a twofold advantage of: (1) making this important subject- although one which is sometimes perceived as abstract and off-putting - much more accessible and alive; and (2) giving students a taste of the world of research.
|
|
|
|
| Prerequisites :
|
|
There are no formal prerequisites. However, as this course builds on first and second year sociology and anthropolgy courses, it assumes students have basic social sciences skills.
|
|
|
|
| Course contents :
|
|
In the human and social sciences the symbolic is less a specific object of study (one linked to a specific field and easily defined), than a cross-cutting dimension, an essential part of the human being and of life in the community (cf. the classic contributions on ideas such as exchanges and gifts, myths and rituals, language, culture, religion, poetic imagination, creative imagination, symbolic effectiveness, etc.). The way in which this complex and multi-facetted question has been tackled by numerous scholars would on its own merit an entire course (definitions, issues, controversies, etc.). While such theoretical aspects obviously cannot be neglected, they are taken into account indirectly via the analytical category of ‘play'. The socio-anthropology of ‘play', which lies at the heart of the course, studies the way in which we take part in ‘play', individually or collectively, through situations (ordinary or institutional) or through instruments (symbolic, technological, material or immaterial, etc.), in order to exist in the world in a way which is not only meaningful (a criteria often in relation to the symbolic function), but also interesting (the feeling that things are worth it). From this point of view, the symbolic function is not limited to the production of meaning (the language and intelligibility model). It also aims to provide a tangible interest - and here, we are hypothesising that as an anthropological category ‘play' (which is not limited to play in the sense of individual play, even if child's play and adult hobbies - cultural activities, events and shows, sports, etc. - are useful for analysing this aspect of participation in play) provides analytical leverage, making it possible to study this second aspect of the symbolic (play and language, far from being in opposition, should be understood as an integrated whole, as complementary).
The course is in two parts.
1) Presentation of the toolbox with the aim of familiarising students with the socio-anthropology of ‘play', as well as with a series of questions and issues on the theme of the symbolic. We study scholars that have taken the importance of ‘play' seriously (cf. Winnicott, J. Dewey and G. H. Mead, Caillois and Huizinga, H. Joas, E. Belin, etc.). We deploy a few key concepts (the distinction between play and game, experience and transitional phenomena, places where we live, supports and apparatuses, mediations, Bourdieu and illusio, belief as a frame of mind that encourages people to agree to play, etc.), and we will attempt to make links with certain contemporary questions (pragmatic sociology and commitment regimes, the new anthropology of material cultures, metamorphoses of belief, etc.).
2) Use of conceptual tools for research. There are two questions that can guide our inquiry: a) what are the places, frames of mind, and apparatuses that enable, or even foster, an agreement to play in today's social organisation? b) how can we empirically test the hypothesis that certain contemporary malaises might be the result of a difficulty to “agree to play” (we might even speak about a crisis of the illusio), a difficulty which affects different social groups to different degrees in the social arena, that is, they might represent new forms of domination widened to include the economy of the symbolic, leading to “existential power relations” (F. Flahault) or forms of “social suffering (R. Castel), at the border of the social and the social and the psychic (A. Ehrenberg, A. Honneth, etc.)?
|
|
|
|
| Mode of delivery :
|
|
Presentation of conceptual resources, introduction to issues and debates; illustrations and applications drawn from ongoing research.
The active participation of students is encouraged.
Students may, if they wish, replace a part of the examination with another piece of work (to be discussed in advance with the lecturer).
In addition, and this is of course also an option, students may request to take part in the university seminar "Play and the symbolic", which is organized by the course lecturer and which involves the participation of a group of researchers whose research interests include the socio-anthropology of play.
|
|
|
|
| Assessment methods and criteria :
|
|
Assessment is by oral examination and focuses on the material covered in classes (with the lecturer's approval, it may be possible to relace part of the examination with a piece of coursework).
|
|
|
|
| Recommended or required reading :
|
|
Introductory texts to socio-anthropology of play.
A portfolio of key texts on the importance of play and the symbolic.
Bibliography.
|
|
|
|
|
