{"title":"Barthes’s Frenchness","authors":"P. Roger","doi":"10.5871/bacad/9780197266670.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Barthes doesn’t think in terms of identity, even less national identity, yet amongst his contemporaries (the ‘French theorists’) his writing seems the most ‘French’. He admits this somewhat paradoxically by devoting sarcastic analyses to ‘Frenchness’ whilst testifying, in the more intimate pages of Roland Barthes par Roland Barthes, to a profound attachment to the ‘land’ of his childhood, the ‘light of the South-West’, ways of being and speaking, or of preferring pears to exotic fruit. This book sparked the revisionist reading of Barthes’s intellectual itinerary that would gather momentum after his death: behind the structuralist and fellow-traveller of the avant-garde lurked a conservative writer, a crypto-Gidian explorer of the self. In fact, a benefit of the 1975 commission was to enable Barthes’s return to anthropology. Michelet par lui-même (1954) and Mythologies (1957) had allowed Barthes to explore national identity in historical and anthropological terms, and a custom-made ‘ethnology of France’ (‘Notre France, in the manner of Michelet’) was a persistent project. Although formulated with calculated lightness, the question of Frenchness runs throughout this ‘Barthes by himself’; far from signalling a farewell to politics and ideology, it provided the right frame for a socio-anthropological exploration of France and Barthes’s ‘French’ identity.","PeriodicalId":396873,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Barthes","volume":"80 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interdisciplinary Barthes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5871/bacad/9780197266670.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Barthes doesn’t think in terms of identity, even less national identity, yet amongst his contemporaries (the ‘French theorists’) his writing seems the most ‘French’. He admits this somewhat paradoxically by devoting sarcastic analyses to ‘Frenchness’ whilst testifying, in the more intimate pages of Roland Barthes par Roland Barthes, to a profound attachment to the ‘land’ of his childhood, the ‘light of the South-West’, ways of being and speaking, or of preferring pears to exotic fruit. This book sparked the revisionist reading of Barthes’s intellectual itinerary that would gather momentum after his death: behind the structuralist and fellow-traveller of the avant-garde lurked a conservative writer, a crypto-Gidian explorer of the self. In fact, a benefit of the 1975 commission was to enable Barthes’s return to anthropology. Michelet par lui-même (1954) and Mythologies (1957) had allowed Barthes to explore national identity in historical and anthropological terms, and a custom-made ‘ethnology of France’ (‘Notre France, in the manner of Michelet’) was a persistent project. Although formulated with calculated lightness, the question of Frenchness runs throughout this ‘Barthes by himself’; far from signalling a farewell to politics and ideology, it provided the right frame for a socio-anthropological exploration of France and Barthes’s ‘French’ identity.
巴特没有从身份的角度思考,更没有从国家身份的角度思考,然而在他的同时代人(“法国理论家”)中,他的作品似乎是最“法国”的。他对“法国性”进行了讽刺性的分析,同时在罗兰·巴特(Roland Barthes par Roland Barthes)的更亲密的篇章中证明,他对童年时代的“土地”、“西南之光”、存在和说话的方式,或者更喜欢梨而不是异国水果的深刻依恋,这多少有些矛盾。这本书引发了对巴特思想历程的修正主义解读,这种解读在他死后愈演愈烈:在这位结构主义者和先锋派同路人的背后,潜伏着一位保守的作家,一位神秘的自我探索者。事实上,1975年委员会的一个好处是使巴特能够回归人类学。Michelet par lui-même(1954)和Mythologies(1957)使巴特能够从历史和人类学的角度探索民族认同,定制的“法国民族学”(“Michelet方式下的法国”)是一个持续的项目。“法国性”的问题,虽然是经过深思熟虑而轻描淡写地表述出来的,但却贯穿于《巴特自己》的始终;它远没有向政治和意识形态告别,而是为法国和巴特的“法国人”身份的社会人类学探索提供了正确的框架。