Copans - In Search of Lost Theory Marxism and Structuralism Within French Anthropology

7/27/2019 Copans - In Search of Lost Theory Marxism and Structuralism Within French Anthropology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/copans-in-search-of-lost-theory-marxism-and-structuralism-within-french-anthropology 1/30

Research Foundation of SUNY

In Search of Lost Theory: Marxism and Structuralism within French AnthropologyAuthor(s): Jean Copans and Douglas WestgateReviewed work(s):Source: Review (Fernand Braudel Center), Vol. 3, No. 1 (Summer, 1979), pp. 45-73Published by: Research Foundation of SUNY for and on behalf of the Fernand Braudel CenterStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40240826 .

Accessed: 09/01/2012 00:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Research Foundation of SUNY and Fernand Braudel Center are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve

and extend access to Review (Fernand Braudel Center).

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=rfsuny

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=fbc

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40240826?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40240826?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=fbc

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=rfsuny



Review, II, 1,Summer1979,45-73.

In SearchofLost Theory:Marxismand Structuralism ithinFrenchAnthropology*

JeanCop ns

Iftheresanyone essonofvalueto the itizenswhogovern epublics,it is theknowledge ftheorigin f hatreds nd divisions.

-Machiavelli, 1952,345

We arelivingn a societymarchingnmasse toward he ruth"-bythat meanonewhich roduces nd disseminateshetoricunctioningas truth, assing or uch, ndtherebyoldingpecific inds fpower.One ofthefundamental roblems ftheWest s that rhetoric f"truths"which,furthermore,ever cease to change) has become

firmlyooted.Thewholehistoryf"truth" ofthepower haracter-isticofrhetorics truth remains o be written.

-Foucault, 1977

ThisFrance,which, o this ay,holds nhigheststeem hemost vidintellectual ierarchyfpowerknown o man.

-Macciocchi, 1977,33

«Translated yDouglas Westgate romAnthropologietSociétés, , 3, 1977,137-58.

Translation© 1979ResearchFoundationof SUNY 45



46 JeanCopans

Throughoutll of ts extsmaybefound, orrelativeotherepressionof creative ctionon thepartofthemasses, certain igure ftheo-reticalheroism. fthe massesare able to makehistory,t sbecauseheroesformulate hetheory ehind t.

-Rancière, 1974,71

Just s we cannot udge an individual n the basis of the manner nwhichhe sees himself, either anwe undertakeo udgea periodof

upheavalaccording o itsself-concept. - Marx, 1957,5

The dominant deasof n era havenever een nythingmore han heideas ofthe dominant lass.

-Marx and Engels,1962,44

The unityof knowledge)s locatedat a certainhistoricalevel, hatof political raining. othing hort f meditation ponthepolitical

allows one to conceivethe convergence f knowledge nd partialpractice,odiscover,n ts ntirety,hehorizon f heoryndpractice.

-Lefebvre, 1975,270

Quesaliddidnot become great orcerer ecausehe healedthe ick;he healedthe sick becausehe had alreadybecomea great orcerer.

-Lévi-Strauss, 1958,198

This text s the provisional esultof severalconcernsorcommitments.irst, t is thepursuit f an analysis fFrench

anthropologynd of therole Marxismplays n that nthro-

pology Copans, 1974,1976,1977,1978).Next, t s thedesireto explainto a publiceither ascinatedwith r surprised ythesophisticationfourworks, heunderlyingociological,institutional,nd ideologicalfactors fits theoreticalvolu-tion in France.1 have been

trying,bviously,odemystify

1. 1 include here themainargumentsf several alks nd coursesgiven nthe

DepartmentfAnthropology,aval University,n 1977.Thestudents'inceritynd

curiosityermitted e at ong ast to treatmy**nthropologys somethingxotic.



48 JeanCopans

actually postwar roduct.his ate rrival whichs at thesametime numericaleaknesscompared ithAmericanandAnglo-Saxonnthropologyransformedtself,onethe-less,within he paceofonegeneration.rench heoriesfanthropologyave,neffect,ecomenthe ast en o fifteenyearshe ocal oint fworld ttention.venf hedeologicalandtheoreticalace fFrenchnthropologyasbeen n newstage f mutationor omeyears, ne sforcedoadmit he

significancefthemarriagef tructuralismnd Marxismfthe 1960s.

We will ttempt,nthis rticle,o shed ight nthe ocio-historicaleasons orthedevelopmentf structuralistndMarxistheoriesnFrenchnthropology:developmentothjoint ndcoeval, or he ame auseswere esponsibleor heprimacyf hese wo urrents.urthermore,eshall eethatthe area of that success anthropologywas notdue tochance. n order o understandhereasoning ehind he

methodologyf hose heories,nehas oconsiderhe ollow-ing phenomena:hehistoryf theworking-classovementand itstheories,ndthe volutionndproblemsf Frenchsociety.

Concentrationsnd Chronologies

Insistencepontheoriginalityfthat nstitutionalndideologicaltructure hich roducesheFrenchntellectual

is crucial. heexplanationor hevery pecial ublic ole fthe ntellectualieswith tsoriginaluthorityunction,hichit hasplayed ccordingo some ince he eventeenthentury(andperhapsven efore).ince nthropologyaspracticallythe astdisciplineocome nto he niversity,twas nevitablethat heway t ppeared,ndabove llfunctioned,hould eaffectedythis act ery trongly.5

Centralizationf hepoliticalnd deologicalystems notanoffshootf apitalistevelopmentnFrance:withouteing

5. See thepostscriptiveemarks f A. deTocqueville ndB. Barret-Kriegel,ndthesecond partof Lourau, entitled Institutionnalisatione la sociologie" 1977,52-80).



In Search ofLost Theory 49

a condition fthisdevelopment,t has proven o be a ratherrestrictiveetting. hedirectinewhicheadsfrom ouis XIVto theJacobins,hen n to theNapoleons ndfinallyoemergein themore astingbourgeoisThirdRepublic s no less thenaturalcontextfor intellectual ctivity.The establishmentofthefree,ecular, ompulsoryrimarychool, nd the epa-ration fchurch ndstate rethe ndproducts fthis oliticalconcentrationf the ideologicalfunctions f intellectuals

to suchanextenthat heThirdRepublic ouldbenicknamed"The Professors' epublic." npoint ffact, heformationnddiffusionf a (bourgeois)political deologyofclass collabo-ration oeshand n hand with he limination ftheworking-class, peasant,and pettybourgeoiselite. The processesofselection,he educationalpathwaysweredirectlyinked ntothedevelopmentf thebourgeois tatemachinery.

Two characteristicsave defined hisenvironmentoracentury:ts centralizationnd its deology.Centralizations

both oncentrationndcentrality.oncentrationnParis sanhistoricalnd sociologicalfact.As for entrality,trefers sto the institutionsonstitutinghe materialfoundationofthat nvironment.o put ntooperation publicschoolsys-tem rowned yoneuniversitynd a fewGrandes coles alsoserves o indicatewhat ies at the center f thatapparatus.The heartor core of thatcenterwas theEcole NormaleSu-périeure E.N.S.) throughwhosehallspassed all thosewhowouldbecome nvolvednpolitics,etters,r scienceforthe

elaboration f thenew dominant message."The centraliza-tionofthe rainingroceduresor heprofessionaldeologues,theconcentrationf Frenchgreymatter,hecentralityftheGrandesEcoles, and of Paris; therein re the lines offorcewhichstill determineodaythespace allotedto theFrench

intelligentsia,nd above all, to its mostprestigious epre-sentatives. nthropology,orhistorical easons recentmar-

ginality),nd forreasonsof contentuniversalismnd exoti-

cism),has becomeone ofthe mostfinely olished nd most

visibleproducts fthisprocess.One comes,as a result, o amuchgreater nderstandingf the mportance fthematterunderdiscussion.



In Search fLostTheory 51

with hebourgeoisustforpower,which,nthecase of theFrench, asparticularlyharp nd clear.8

That deologicalonfigurationisappeared ith hedeathof heThirdRepublic1940).Postwarrancewatcheds newideological urrentsnd intellectualsainedascendancy.Thosecurrentsidevince, owever, deeply ootedink othepastononepoint: heir enewedttachmentothe nsti-tutionalpplicationsfpoliticalnd ideologicalentraliza-

tion.The ransom emandedfanthropologynorderhat tmight iseto a status fhigher ecognitionas to be itsabsoluteubmissionothemost raconianffectsf entrality:French nthropologyouldnotexist; t would be merelyParisian. veryone ightpeakon the ubject,ut twouldbe taughtnly n a limitedashion,ndespeciallyo at thedoctoralevel.

Whathappenedmmediatelyeforehat eriodwithwhichwearedealing?hefirstostwarenerationas xistentialist

andphenomenologicalSartre,Merleau-Ponty),philosophi-cal currentotwithoutts mbiguities.reoccupationithsocialmorality, ith xperience,nd with heday-to-dayinjectedcertainoncretenessnto he eryoulof heoreticalreflection.his concreteness,einterpretedn voluntaristicandhistoricisterms,ought,ccordingoSartre,oovercomedogmaticMarxism.n fact, heempiricalocialsciences,which evelopedfter 950, idso onthe asis f nabsoluteoppositiono the heoryorphilosophy).huswehave exis-

tentialist"xperiencenthe nehand,nd mpirical,tatisticalenquirynthe ther.his plit etweenhe renchhilosophi-cal traditionndAnglo-Saxonositivismsince he ociologymakingtsdebut-or tsreappearance- as nspiredargely

8. Remarkablenformationsto be found n all of thesepointsn various extsand articlespublishedn,"A proposde Durkheim,**evuefrançaisede sociologie,XVII, 2,April-June976.See DurkheinVsecture,Role desuniversitésans l'éduca-tion ociale dupays" pp. 181-89),he ext n"La grandeurmorale e a France**ub-lishedn theJournal es nstituteursn19 6 pp. 193-95). t sespecially ecommended

that one reads:P.

Birnbaum,La

conceptionurkheimiennee Tétat:

L'apolitismedes fonctionnaires"pp. 247-58: Thinkings theessential unctionftheState**

"Progressn centralizationunsparallel o progressncivilization**)nd V. Karady,"Durkheim,es sciences ocialeset TUniversité:iland*un emi-échec**pp. 267-31 ).



52 JeanCopans

byAmerican urrentsfthought)would soon be either ver-come or patchedup. The "new" anthropological heorieswould seek to transcend nd to synthesizehe experientialand theobjective,hetheoreticalndthe mpirical. alandierwastodraw, orhispart, rom isBritish fricanistolleagues,and Lévi-Strauss romAmerican nthropologists,ya rico-chetfrom he inguists. fter 956-1958,Marxism, ortspart,beganto "de-Stalinize."

The turning ointcameduring heyears1960-1962. xis-tentialism as no longer mandatoryeference-point.truc-turalism ecamean ideological ashion,nd what omecalledneo-Marxism ppearedas a virtual chool. 1968 wouldper-haps be thesymbolic eathknellforstructuralismsee Le-febvre), ut one had to waituntil heyears1973-1977 o seea systematic ejection f structuralismnd Marxism fromVAnti-Oedipe,o Clastres, nd to the so-called"nouveauxphilosophes"). hiscursoryndschematic eriodizationbvi-

ously explains nothing. n order moreclearly o delineatethe precisecauses ofthisparticularheoretical omination,weshallgive eparate onsiderationostructuralnthropologyandtoMarxism.Weshall xamine,nconclusion,he ttemptsof synthesis,s well as theattemptso go beyond his heo-retical s well as ideological onjuncture.

Once Upon a TimeThere Was a Structure9

It isnecessary

omakea distinctionetween hefollowingtwoproblems: hatofthe ntellectualnd ideological rigins

of Lévi-Strauss's tructuralism,nd thatof the "scientific"successofthiswholemore r ess imilar urrent f ontempo-rary tructuralism.he distinctions necessary ecause it iscertain hat the first eriodofintellectualmaturation ftheanthropologist1930-1950) s verydifferentrom hesecond(1950-1962)which ed to a quasi-global upremacy.

9. For thoseknowingn earlier inematographiculture, necan well maginethé ndignantnd veryParisian ccent of an Arletty creamingStructure!?"o thetune"Atmosphère!?"Atmosphère!?"n Hotel du Nord.



In Search ofLost Theory S3

In reality,ne might ewelladvisedto take a second ookat thebibliographicaltatementsn Tristes ropiquesbeforelending ny naive credenceto them.The visit to "Indian"territorys too rapidly onducted,ndtoo limited ntime, orchange of whichLévi-Strauss trongly isapproves to beobserved n theobjectitself.However, twas hissojourn ntheUnitedStatesthatmade a trueanthropologistf Lévi-Strauss.The themes fculturalnthropology ere oundergo

a transformationt the level of theoreticalnterpretation.The meetingwithJakobsonhas a fortuitiousharacter, utcertainlyinguistics, ne of the four "fields" of Americananthropology,layeda significantole in culturalism. oasand Sapir were notunknown o Lévi-Strauss nd mayhaveserved s modelsforhim.The fact emainshat anguage,kin-ship, cultural representations,nd "ecological" concernswouldbe capable ofbeing ntegratedn a deeperand morelastingmanner ntothegreatundergroundtreamrrigating

Frenchethnology han the themesof British unctionalism(whichwas primarily fricanist,et us notforget).

Lévi-Strausstoodthereforeetwixtnd between certainAmericannthropologyBoas and Sapir) and a certain radi-tionof theFrench ociological chool, Mauss,to be specific.The novelty, onetheless, ithin heFrench etting, as thelink between he field nd theory ornebya thematicnspi-ration omingfrom broad. That is whyone shouldtalk ofthe"apparition" fstructuralnthropology.ora longtime,

anthropologyad beeneitherultural rsocial. n France, ntheotherhand,ethnology ad remained minorbranchofsociology,tself heyounger ister fphilosophy. thnology,thanksto Lévi-Strauss,became independent,hanging tsnameatthe ametime. t made tsmark t the eveloftheory.

Structuralnthropologywas thus thefirst xplicit heoryofFrench thnologyonceived f as a sciencebothoftheoryand of thefield. Lévi-Strausswould sublimate t theideo-

logical and methodologicalevel his weak fieldexperience,

andwould ynthesizenwittingly,he raditionsfMaussandGriaule. n fact, wing o themultiplicityfmeanings f its



In Search of Lost Theory 55

the ideological-intellectualield.One does notyetfind thegrand, ll-inclusiveesign.

These ndicators,hesehypotheses,reofcoursemore ug-gestions hancertainties. owever, he silenceon thisperioddoes require f us a sortofsociological magination. n theotherhand, hemomentwe enternto hegolden geofstruc-turalismtrictlyefined,hecertaintiesre impressive.WithTotémismeujourd'hui ndLa Pensée auvage, he tructural-

ismofLévi-Strauss ame tobe seen as an original heoryx-tending eyond he narrow onfines fthe"primitivetate."Actually,t is a matterfrepetitiont thetheoreticalevelofthe iterarynd ideological uccessofTristesropiques.Afterhaving imported ome extra-anthropologicalheories, hestructuralismfLévi-Strausswas to serve n turn s a pointofreferenceorother omainsof the ocialsciences. do notknowwhether he effectivenessfa scientificheory an bemeasuredn thatway,butevidentlyt s oneofthe ndicators.

The mpact f structuralismoth s philosophyndanthropo-logicaltheory, owever, as to be seen within muchmoreconstrainingistorical ontext:

(a) The demandfor ocialsciences rew ery trongnFranceduringthe ate1950s. n 1957, programeading oa licensewasfinallynsti-tuted n Paris. Gaullism, n keepingwith tspolicyofnational co-nomic and neo-colonialdevelopment, ave significantmpetus o

appliedsurveysnd research. he modelofcomputerizedreatmentofdatamultipliedhepossibilitiesor omparison. inally,heoretical

confrontationecamea requirementn sociology nd then n eth-nology-anthropologyventhough t was formalized ithinhetriadofAron,Gurvitch, évi-Strauss.12

(b) That pragmatic emand, nd to that ncreasingly arked nsti-tutionalization,oesalongwith he ise n nationaliberationtrugglesand "peaceful" ecolonization:Algeria,Cuba, BlackAfrica,imitingourselves othesefew xamples, ecame ubjects fgreat oncern . .and areasfor tudy ndowedwithnewprestige.

12. Onemay

obtainupplementary

vidence fthisfactbynoticing

hatmost ftheimportantocial science ournals were foundedduring hatperiod: 'Homme,

Revue rançaisede sociologie, tc.



56 JeanCopans

Theendofthe1950sunderscored new risis fhistoricity:Budapest,ikeMay13,1958,13ndicated aradoxically weak-

eningof the interestmaintainedn the subjectof Westernreason.The actor becameexotic. f Europebecamevoid of

history,fitscapacityformakinghistory, as itbecause, sFoucaultwas later o write,Mankind s an invention hichthearcheology f ourthought asilydemonstratesasrecent,and which, erhaps, s drawing o a close?" Foucault, 1966,

398). Or is there omethinglse in theconvergencefintel-lectual structuralism, ouveau roman,technocratic ocialscience,byBarthes,Bourdieu,or Lefebvre? ut onceagain,this pirit f theepoch,or rather f a very recise poch,doesnot indicate otally he roleplayedby anthropology.

As the newcomer o thepublicarenaof the ntelligentsia,anthropology as free rom ll theconflicts hich raversed

philosophynd sociology; ll themore o because structural-ism claimed o be aphilosophicalifnotabovethephilosophi-

cal) and ahistorical. eliberately lacing tself n themargin,though dmittednto thecircle fFrench hought,tructural

anthropology as impressive yvirtue f itscoherence, hetalent nd productivityf its master. he effectsffashion,even fthey idremain ictated ytheconjuncturefhistoryand the structuref society,werenonetheless irmlyootedin a realityften eryoncrete ndsusceptibleo nexhaustableexegesis. t is imperativehatone recognizeshat heworkofa Lévi-Strauss endsitself erfectlyo the atter;whence he

spreadof a discipline nd a corpusofwork acking nyveryreal tradition.

The concentrationfanthropologywithin he mostpres-tigiousand elitist nstitutionsn the countryCollege deFrance,E.H.E.S.S., C.N.R.S.), thefreedomoproduce newscience, nd the llusion fbeing xotic,propelled y, reveninspite f, hediscipline xplain he uperabundancefmean-ingsthatanthropology rought o a society npolitical ndideologicalcrisis; s well as the kindofcomfort hat xisten-

13. Date ofthe oupwhich rought e Gaulletopower, ndmarked enyears f

crushing efeat or heFrenchworking-class ovement.



In Searchof Lost Theory 57

tialism adbeenrefusingtformore han ifteenearsStalinistMarxism, or tspart,had excluded tself romnyrole n thisarea). In addition, newouldhave to associate, round1968,linguisticswithanthropologynto thisrole of the"up-and-coming."

This historys also thatof the "new" FrenchMarxism,whose entrance nto the universityanceled out any revo-lutionaryffect.

The OrphansofMarx

Post-Stalinismasalwaysbeen onfusedwith resurrectionof Marxism. n effect,hevery reedom fconceptualbattlefor fifteen-yeareriodhaspermitteduch an illusion.Uponclosescrutiny,owever,t s not evident hatwe haveenteredintopost-Stalinism:heabstract onception ftheory,ilence

concerningheopportunismfpractice, nd the roleofthe

intellectual re still the clear stereotypes. step backwardbecomesall themore essentialbecause themethodologicalimage projected ytoday'sFrenchMarxism ensors nydis-agreeable eferencesoa pastpreferablyelegatedoobscurity.

How did party spirit"manifesttself n the "good olddays"?14 cientific houghtfounditselfunder the yoke ofpoliticalpragmatismand locked n (hencethedebatesoverproletariancience ndbourgeois cience). t sfor his easonthatthe intellectualwas nothingmore than an ideologue,

justifyingnapparentlymore erious nd profoundones, heline of the moment. n otherrespects, nti-intellectualistworkerism"Theyare thepetty ourgeois") oexistedwith

respect or heformalitiesf established ourgeois ntellectu-

alitytheProfessor,heScientist,heWriter).As forMarxist

praxis, t was reducedto therepetitionnd exegesisof anarbitrarilyonstructed ulgate.One has to immerse neselfin the onstrainingealityfthatnotuniquely rench racticeof Marxismnorder ocomprehendhe hanges nd the ubse-

14. One willgeta good idea of theatmospherenquestionbyreading heJ. T.Desanti,UnTémoin, ublisheds a supplemento thebookbyD. Dominique 1975,361-69).Read also thememoirsf Henri efebvre,dgarMorin, ierre ougeyrollas.



58 JeanCopans

quentfiliations.t is, infact, mpossible o write hehistoryof Marxism n France since 1945withoutwritinghatoftheP.C.F. (FrenchCommunist arty).15

After 956, he risis roughtnbythedeathofStalingrewworse:the Hungarian nd Polishrevolutionsnd Gaullismmade dents in the theoretical urity nd efficacityf thescientificdeologyoftheproletariat. he philosophers rewsilent, rtheywent way.Thusto the ilences fanAlthusser,

itwas appropriateo opposethemoreorlessopenresistancecoming romDesanti,Bottigelli,efebvre, araudy.The riseofde Gaulle,thepursuit f theAlgerian war,"and thedi-rection fthe tudentmovement lacedthedoubleproblem fa reappropriationftheorynda balanceof heoryndpraxisat the heartof Marxistthought.Althusser,whether olun-tarily rnot,obviouslytill ymbolizesll ofthat.Hiswritingsfrom 960-1965markedncounterpointhegreat uestions fthatperiod.16 here were severalreasons ervingo account

for irst is udience, henhis nfluence.peaking romwithinthe Communist arty,he personified,n spiteof all else,acertaincontinuitywhichone acknowledged n him). Hispraxisremained onsistentwith hecurrent raxisof"theo-retical"Marxism:philosophical tandpointdialecticmateri-alism), xegesis, ewreading. hispraxisbecame onfusednotherrespectswith the ideal-type rench ntellectual ro-duction: he "normalien" romUlm.17

Navigatingbetween he temptation f Marxismand the

most consistent pportunism,ven or especiallyhis mostrecentwritingsike22e Congrès Maspéro, 1977),his anti-dogmatisms illusory.

May 1968and the mmediate ftermatheemedoncemoreto put everythingnquestion.ButtheMarxismofthattimewas to get tssecond windafter1972, t least on the evelofpublishedmaterial romwhichwe stillbenefit. f this eem-

15. For thepreceeding eriod, ee the workofLindenberg, 975.

16. See the exts n PourMarx, ndtheprudentilences f he uthorn hisprefaceentitledAujourd'hui."

17. Translators ote:referso a graduate f the Ecole NormaleSupérieure.



In SearchofLost Theory 59

ingly riginal evelopment, hat should be noticed s notsomuch he basicconcepts,ike he Marxistmethodology hichis similar o that of otherpolitical nd ideologicalcurrents(Marxist,Trotskyist):heprinciple fclose reading ftexts,thefetishismf theparty,ndthefailure ocall into uestionthefigure f the ntellectualtheScholar,theMilitant).

We have beenstressinghe mpact fAlthusserince twas

throughhim, directly r indirectly,hat Marxismwould

"catchon" in anthropology.here s one notableexception,it is true,which s Claude Meillasoux forwhomwehave no

explanation,but perhaps t lies in what has appropriatelybeen called theoretical riginality). his Marxismwas tocatchonvery apidly iven hat hetheoreticalomainofthat

anthropologyadyet o be agreedupon,and that tructural-ism, hroughmimicryndcomplementarity,eft placefor t.Theinstitutionalxplanations, owever,eem o me obe evenmoreplausible: theconformityf the ideal-type f perfect

intellectualthe productsof the GrandesEcoles) permittedsimultaneously total nvestmentnanthropologicalmargin-alityas well as an overevaluation f whatwas asserted. n

short,revolutionizingnthropologywas greatly acilitatedforthe"Marxists"bythe fact hattheyncarnatedhe noblechannels f a universityareer.

A closeexamination ftheconditions or hedevelopmentof Marxismwithin nthropology rovesunequivocally,n

fact,thatthe assortment f generalconstraints f French

intellectualifewerereproducedna similar utautonomousmanner. he GrandesEcolesfor raining,hegreat stablish-ments or tatus,were rucial. nother espects,hedistinctionbetweennoblethemes nd common hemes,nd the dentifi-cationofthefirstor Marxist" nalysis, onfirmedhedomi-nanceoftherules f cientificunctioningver hedefinitionsofMarxistprinciple.

Originally erceived s a developmentfMarxismwithin

anthropologyas a new,moreuseful heory),henew general

line"was to be transformedynatural orcesnto develop-mentof Marxism tartingromanthropology'surrent er-spectivesndconcerns. his nversion as all themorebrutal



60 JeanCopans

because the"revolutionary"oliticalpositionswere cutofffrom rofessional raxis.Thosepositionswhich orrespondedto the ntirepectrumf Left nd extreme eft arties rystal-lized to an evengreaterxtent hetheoreticalpseudo-)oppo-sitionswhichwere,nturn, o become omeof thefunctionalstakes in the scientificmarket.AnthropoligicalMarxismpassed tself ff rom he tart,herefore,s a scientificheory,the alibi of a revolutionary olitical positionbeingwithin

easy reach,to be sure. But thefactof the matters thatthestatusoftheory,nd its inkto praxis,did not differ n thewhole from hatofother ociological heories.

A finalpointnot ackingnimportance:hiswasa dividedor multipleMarxism. From thebeginning,nthropologicalMarxismwassomethingo bespokenof ntheplural.Perhapsthe marginal spect of Frenchanthropology xplainsthatpossibility: he free reingrantedomnidirectional esearch.It is because Marxism's theoretical nd practical takes n

anthropologywere inconsequential hat Marxism becameMarxisms, ublimatingoanevergreaterxtent,nan infiniteredundancyof theoreticaldiscourse,the schismbetweentheoryndfieldwork.he fact sthat, ven oday, nyMarxisthistory r sociologymustcome directly o gripswith thepoliticalchoices mposedbythatconjuncturend particularpartisan allegiances.A given interpretationf nineteenth-centuryabor strikesmaybear some relation othetheory fstrikes f the contemporary orking lass and to thevery

practice fstrikes. o go on atgreat ength n the ubject fthe lineageofmodesofproduction r on kinshipbase andsuperstructureeads nowherebecause of the verytypeofobjectivesand theories anthropological"Marxismuses.18That said, theindividualknowledgeablenwhat he is doingmaycompare,forestallingmore or less any objection, worecentnd simultaneousublications hich eflectheMarxist"reflexes" f twodifferentenerations, peratingwithin wo

18. 1am indebted or his dea to a "provocative'*uestionfromYvan Simonisduring discussion f this exton May25, 1977.



62 JeanCopans

that,for heoreticaluccess orresponds,t the ametime, oan internal oidpeculiar otheFrenchnthropological ilieu,and to an externalpressure efinedby the positionof theFrenchntelligentsiais-à-visherest f heworld. he nternalvoid corresponds o thenovelty f the mportance ftheoryas such.Objectivelypeaking, oth tructuralistsndMarxistsare a minoritymongFrench nthropologists,utthey retheonlyones whoexpoundtheory,nd thuswho are called

upon to act as anthropology'sheorists. his success, here-fore,s nothing utan emptywordutteredn a silent heater.As for the social roots of sucha conjuncture,ne is obligedto ookto theUnionde a Gauche.J.Juillard,na very emark-able and widelynoted article,convincinglyxplains howMarxism onstitutedhe new deology or he ntellectuals.21It is self-evidento whatextent university"Marxismand"trade-union"MarxismS.N.E.S.U.P., S.N.C.S.) have onsti-tutedtheideologyofthegeneration fnewmandarins,nd

havebeen nstrumentalnwinning eypowerpositionsn thearenasofresearch,heuniversity,nd publishing.22

The openingofthe Socialistparty o Marxism, herevivalof the Communistparty's ntellectual lazon,wereactuallyactionsdesigned o counteracthedevelopmentf theactivi-tiesof "anti-institutional"r "massautonomy"ntellectuals.This unwillingnesso questiontheWestern ourgeois ntel-lectual model (theory ivorcedfrompraxis)is a reflection,according o PerryAnderson, f thefact hatWesternMarx-

ism is a Marxismofdefeats, f thereflux romrevolution.That is whythe violenceof ideologicalconfrontations ustnot maskthedeep convergencen the evel of the scientific

agenda.The tendency ariesbetweenhenonconflictingnityof structuralismnd MarxismGodelier), herefusal o trans-formdebateinto an open confrontationAuge), and the re-courseto a third oute Bourdieu).

21. See theexcerpt n the annex.

22. Therecould be exceptions:hencethesystematicepression f whichJeanSuret-Canalehas beenthetarget.As ithappened, t s true hatheplayedhishandmore s officialnd militantf theP.C.F. than s a member f theuniversity.



64 JeanCopans

were sufficient ver a fifteen-yeareriodto precludeanyemphasison the differencesetween heconcepts: n retro-spect,thisstability f relationshipsonfirmsurhypothesisof a comprehensiveonjuncturewhichpermittednthropo-logicalstructuralismnd Marxismto appear (and to disap-pear?) together.Conciliatory ttempts r middlegrounds(Bourdieu) trengthened,nfact, ather han plit hat difice.The solidarityof theorists as of governmentministers)

vigorously ursues ts own logic, ndependentftheoriginsand differencesf theorganizationftheorieswithinnthro-pology.

Theappearance f tructuralisms thefirstomplete heoryin Frenchanthropology,nd thepost- 960developmentfMarxismmaybe traced othe amecauses,eventhought sa matter f phenomenawhichunfolded n twocompletelydistinct evels,and which are absolutely rreducible ne totheother.The twophenomenarenot t all the amesince, n

the case oftheone,we have a scientificheorywhich, avingsprungup in a particular iscipline, ltimatelyervedas a

pretext or deologicalfabrication;while, n thecase of theother,we have the scientificspectof the deology fsocialclass which was seeking ts autonomywithin particularscientificiscourse.Obviously,wecouldpushfurtherndaskourselves ow twasthat he deology ftheproletariatametocollaboratewith n establishmentcientificndideologicalschool of thought.The onlyreasonableansweramongthe

possibleanswers s that the Marxism n questionno longerhad anythingo do withtherevolutionarydeologyof theproletariat.

Conclusions

Therevival fthe ocialsciences nFranceafter 945 ameaboutina contradictory ovement fempiricalndtheoreti-cal inspiration. utwhat simmediatelytrikings therevengeofscientism n

ideology.nthefaceof

ethnographicalmpiri-cism,structuralismsserted he privilegesnd thea priorisof thetheoretical.Marxism, eactingo a Stalinism, eemed



66 JeanCopans

deemsworthwhile.nthropologyeing,nspite feverythingelse,a social science, ne can understand ow itmusthaveattractedMarxist hinkersuitenaturallyrawn o social andhistorical hemes.Anthropologysalso a mannerfdiscussingthe Third World n theepoch ofnational iberation evolu-tions.Conceptual nnovationntheorys thereforeesponsiveto practical iberationn politics.However, herewillneverbe anylink in anysense of theword)between hetwo"do-

mains."One has towonder, rankly,hyMarxistmethodologyas

managedto exist.25f Marxismhasbeenadmittedo,and itsresearch onductedwithin,nstitutionalcientific ebate, fit has becomepossibleto makea careerofbeing Marxistthinker,s it notsimply ecause t s a question fa Marxismwhichno longerhas anything o do with hatespousedbyMarxor Lenin?Marxists inFrance, tanyrate can aynoclaim, nrelationo the tructuralists,otheposition forganic

intellectualsrom heproletariats opposedto the raditionalintellectuals,incetheyhave the samesocialorigin,he ameintellectual raining, nd the same theoretical xperience.There s noquestion fcalling ta compromise ith, revenrecuperation y,the established rder.This Marxism s anoriginalproductwith pecific auses, and one which s onlya specialvariantfrom he dominance fscientisticanguagein thebourgeoisdeology.t scertainlyotbecauseofpressurefrom heworking lass massesthatMarxist heorysreturn-

ing to the university,nd especially o anthropology. heopposition,real or imagined,betweenreformismnd anti-humanistMarxism that s so wellsymbolized yAlthusser,P.C.F. member nd supporter f an "orthodox"Marxisttheory)monganthropologistss irrelevant. ather, t is theresourcefulness f French intellectual heorizing hat hasinfluencedhevery orm fMarxismn theuniversity.hus, tis no paradoxthatMarxism's eal success s due toAlthusser,and not to the"renegade"Lefebvre.

25. If the "nouveauxphilosophes** elpedto raisethequestion,their nswerseems learly o reveal tsoriginn thedominantdeology. ee F. Aubral nd X. Del-court,1977.



In Search of Lost Theory 67

Before oncluding,et us call quickly o mind hegrowingsuccessof MarxismnBritishndAmericannthropology.nfact,Marxism s taking n a greaternd greatermportanceinAnglo-Saxon ocialsciences.The ournals, he ranslationsofMarxist lassics, ndofthewritingsfFrench heoristsre

multiplying.26hisdevelopmentlone would seem to merit

study.Let us call to yourattention, owever, hat,on thewhole,Marxism s and will remain ll the moreuniversity-

boundbecause t s without workinglass traditionnthosecountries. here s,ofcourse, he risis f Americanmperial-ism, hereexaminationfdominantheories,27ut t s the ackofeffectivenessfpasttheorieshathas drivenAnglo-Saxonresearchersnto the rmsoftheMarxists." hat swhyMarx-ism has not disrupted he sensitivityo empiricalproblemswhich auses Anglo-SaxonMarxist nthropologyand soci-

ologyor political cience) o deal,bya paradoxicalreversal,withthemes nd problemswithin morepoliticalcontext:

theclassstrugglefIndians iving n reservations,henatureoftheneo-colonial tate, heSouthAfricanystem,tc. The

politicaldemandsof Marxism remadevia theuniversities,butthe absenceofstrong talinistmovementsmakesdirect

politicalcontrolof theoretical evelopment bsolutely m-

possible. n onesense,Marxism, t thepolitical nd theoreti-cal levels, s in a position fbeingdominated ythedominant

ideology;butwithin heframeworkf itsowndevelopment,it is perhaps esstiedto theups and downs,theconflicts,f

Stalinist nd reformistrganizations.One finalritualisticuestionremains o be asked: What s

tobe done?The only xplanationn terms faction ies nanalterationf thepraxisofresearch,n a differentapportwiththefield,withpolitics, nd therefore,na differentraxisoftheconcepts.Butthatgivesrise o still nother uestion:Willit be a matter,t thatmoment,f the ameconcepts rofdif-

26. See Economy nd Society,DialectalAnthropology,ranslationsfGodelier,

Meillassoux,Rey,Terray mongtheanthropologists.

27. See thediscussion f thepositions akenbyAmerican esearchersnreaction

to the Americanmperialistolicies n J.Copans,éd., 1975.



68 JeanCopans

ferent nes? Theoreticalelaboration s neither seless nor

secondary, uranalysispermittinguch a conclusion nly fweweremaking bsolute riteria f therole of the nstitutionand of thepraxisof research which s notthecase. Bynomeansdo I wish o evade or todeny heplaceoftheory; uiteto thecontrary,ts needsare immense. t happens,however,that these needs can be addressedonly through different

praxiswhich ligns tselfwith, rconstructs,ther bjectives.

Present-dayMarxist heorysbuilding ponsome of theem-piricalrealities constructed"yclassicalethnology.28hat sbecause thasaccepteduncriticallyverylement ndproblemnot of a patently onceptualnature. deologies, nstitutions,thematics,nd geographical ivisions avebeentransformedonlyto the extent hat theoretical emodelingmet withre-sistance.By placingthemselvesnlyin the positionof the

replacementfconcepts nd their oles,29he Marxistshaveadmitted niversal cientificmeritnanthropology,nd thus

itsobjectives s theyhave beenconstructedver thecourseof thehistoryf thediscipline.Havingconfined urselves tthis evel o theworks fLévi-Strauss, emaybe edtobelievethat tructuralismasgonefurthernepistemologicaloubts.The reaction s purely cientistic,ut tis a normal ne,and

anthropology'sonservativedeologyustifiest. n the ase of

anthropologicalMarxism, hedivorce fthatpraxis romhe

postulationwhatother erm anweuse?)of a revolutionaryideology s clearly isible.

Fornearlywenty ears, he win rothersf he ntellectualconjuncturenFrance,Marxismndstructuralism,ere ynomeans a cause of thewell-knownrisis fanthropology,nlyitsillusoryhealers.But there s somethingmore serious:Bycommittingtselfwithgreat lair nddazzling pectacle o thefalsepathsof a losttheorynd objective, his nthropologyhas burnedbehind tself he last bridges o the illusions f

eighteenth-nd nineteenth-centuryumanistsnd evenposi-

28. Thus s t he ase,for xample,with he oncept f ethnic"orof thnic ame)which overs t one andthe ametime lasses,modesofproduction,nd social for-mations n FrenchMarxist iterature.

29. Questions oncerningmethod repistemologyre nottheworkofMarxists,or at leastofMarxisttheorists.hisapparent ivision f theworkreminds s ofa

deeply ootednabilityo ink onceptualizationndsocialpraxisincludingesearch).



In Searchof Lost Theory 69

tivists.Frenchanthropology as reachedadulthood at last,but t is an invalid.

Corrigendum

Two remarks n the style, it-was-obvious-but-better-to-remind-you-than-unduly-to-be-accused-of-omission."hisMarxismmustbe understood orwhat t s:a historicaltage,necessaryperhaps, n orderto pass on to a revolutionarypoliticalpraxis.Whateverhefuturefpresent-dayoncepts,they hall have ed,bycriticismfthem, otheir wndemise.It is wellunderstoodhat he uthor fthis rticles n nowayimmune o the awsofideological nd institutionaletermi-nations, hathebelongsbynecessityo this urrent fanthro-pologicalMarxism. amnot a moralist,ndthis extwas notwritteno soothemybad conscience.

For curiously,hiswillbe ordinarilyheonlyfundamental

replyfor our havingput anthropologynto thishistorical

perspective.

Annex

The bodyof French ntellectuals,hilosophersncluded,is a "creation t thesummit" f themonarchicaltate, nd ifin a short onjuncture,hatoftheRegency nd thereign fLouisXIV,characterizedythe ollapseofcentral ower, heybrokeloose into the opposition, hatmoment, lreadytoo

well-committedomemory,

mustnotcreateny

illusions. tforms gainstulteriornstitutionalizationithin heuniver-

sity n "historical ocumentary"n the French ntelligentsia.But if one forgets irst,he academies,then theuniversity,one will neverunderstand he primaryworkerismnd thefrantic nti-intellectualismf the Frenchtrade-union nd

revolutionaryovements hich ave lwayshadgoodreasons- that actmust erecognized forbeingwary f ntellectuals.

Fora longwhile heFrenchhad beenthe most iterary-mindedfall

thenations fEurope,but so farourwriters ad notdisplayed hatintellectual rilliancewhichwon themworld-wide ametoward hemiddleof theeighteenthentury. rue,they id notplayan active

part n publicaffairs,s Englishwriters id; on thecontrary, everhad theykept o steadily looffrom hepolitical rena. In a nation



70 JeanCopaw

teeming ith fficials oneof themen f etters eldposts f nykind,nonewas investedwith uthority.

Nevertheless,hey idnot likemost f heirGerman ontemporaries)resolutelyurn heir acks on politics nd retire o a world part,ofbelles ettres nd purephilosophy. n thecontrary,heywerekeenlyinterestedn all thatconcerned hegovernmentfnations; his, ne

might lmost ay,wasan obsessionwith hem.Questions uch s the

origin fhuman ociety,ts arliest orms,he riginal ightsf itizensand ofauthority,he "natural" nd the artificial"elations etween

men, f egitimacyfcustom,nd even hewhole onception f awall these bulked arge nthe iteratureftheday.As a result f thisincessantprobing ntothebases of thesociety n which hey ived,theywere ed bothto examine ts structurendetail and to criticizeitsgeneralplan.

Theirverywayof ivinged thesewriterso ndulgen bstract heoriesand generalizationsegardinghenature fgovernment,ndtoplacea blind onfidencenthese.For living s they id,quiteout oftouchwithpracticalpolitics, hey ackedtheexperiencewhichmight ave

tempered heir nthusiasms. hus they ompletely ailed o perceive

thevery ealobstacles n thewayof even the mostpraiseworthye-forms, nd to gauge the perils nvolved n even the mostsalutaryrevolutions.

Nevertheless,n thenation-wide ebacleoffreedom ehadpreservedone form f t;wecould ndulge,lmostwithoutestriction,n earneddiscussions n theorigins fsociety, he nature fgovernment,ndthe essential ights fman.

In Englandwriters n thetheory fgovernmentnd thosewho actu-

ally governed o-operatedwith ach other, he formeretting orththeirnewtheories, he attermending rcircumscribinghese n the

light fpractical xperience.n France,however, receptndpracticewerekeptquitedistinctnd remainedn thehandsoftwoquite nde-pendentgroups.One of these carriedon theactual administrationwhile heother etforth he bstract rinciplesn which ood govern-mentshould, theysaid, be based; one took the routinemeasures

appropriateo theneeds f hemoment,he ther ropounded enerallaw without thought or theirpractical pplication;one groupshapedthe course ofpublicaffairs,heother hatofpublicopinion[de Tocqueville,1955,138-46].

A fewold spectrestillhaunt his lready idiculoustage: hat fthe

intellectual dvisers o thePrince, ertainly,ut also thatofplebianpopulism.The double faceofthedesperate uestforpower, om-

pletely eculiar oFrance, f he ntellectuals. hether ne s n gree-



72 JeanCopans

theorganization f the ntellectual ield, hroughhepermanencefits nstitutionsnd of themodels tholds nhonor, mposes specialmethod f recruitmentnd a special tyle fvocation,ndemphasizesto themind hephilosophical ignificancef the mostprivate refer-ences and the most echnical rojectsBourdieu nd Passeron,1967,177,205-08].

References

L. Althusser, ourMarx (Paris: FrançoisMaspéro,1965).P. Anderson, onsiderationsn Western arxismLondon:New LeftBooks,1976).

F. Aubral & X. Delcourt,Contre a nouvelle hilosophie Paris:Gallimard, 977).

B. Barret-Kriegel,ntroduction J.T.Desanti,Lephilosophe t espouvoirs[Entre-tiens] Paris: Cal mann- evy,1976).

P. Bourdieu, StructuralismndtheTheory fSociologicalKnowledge," ocial Re-search.XXXV, 4, 1968,681-706.

P. Bourdieu, Le champscientifique,"ctesde la recherchen sciences ociales, I,

2/3,1976,88-104.

P. Bourdieu, nd J.C. Passeron, Sociologyand Philosophyn Francesince1945:"Death and Resurrectionf a PhilosophyWithout ubject,"Social Research,

XXXIV, 1, 1967,162-212.J.Copans,"Pour unehistoire tunesociologiedesétudes fricaines,"p. 81-1 0 n

Critiques tpolitiquesde l'anthropologieParis: FrançoisMaspéro,1974).

J.Copans, "Les tendances e l'anthropologierançaise,"n G. Balandier,d., Ques-tions la sociologie rançaisemarxisteParis: PressesUniv. de France,1976).

J. Copans, L'anthropologie conomique françaisemarxiste 1977). Unpublishedmanuscript.

J.Copans "Lévi-Strauss ace à Rousseauou la censure upolitiques,"nLe Sauvageà la mode \97&).

D. Dominique, Les StaliniensParis: Fayard,1975).

M. Foucault,Les motset les choses Paris: Gallimard,1966).M. Foucault,"Non au sexe roi," n Le NouvelObservateur,March 12,1977.

M. Godeher, Système,tructuret contradictionans eCapital.Response LucienSève"and"Mythe tHistoire,"nM. Godelier, d.,Horizons, rajetsmarxistesn

anthropologieParis: FrançoisMaspéro, 1973).

J.Juillard,La gaucheen avant," n Le NouvelObservateur,ebruary 1, 1977.

C. Lacoste-Dujardin,A proposde Pierre ourdieu tde 'Esquissed'unethéorie e a

pratique,"Hérodote,No.2, 1976,103-16.

H. Lefebvre, 'idéologie tructuralistsParis: Ed. du Seuil, 1975).

C. Lévi-Strauss, nthropologietructuraleParis: Pion, 1958).

D. Lindenburg, e marxisme ntrouvableParis: Calmann-Levy, 975).

R. Lourau, Le gai savoirdes sociologues,Collection10/18 Paris: UnionGénérale

D'Editions,1977).



In Search ofLost Theory 73

M. A. Macciochi,De la France Paris: Ed. du Seuil, 1977).

Machiavel, Histoires lorentines,"n Oeuvres ompletes Paris: La Pléiade, 1952).K. Marx, Preface" o A Contributiono theCritiquefPolitical conomyMoscow:

Progress ubl., 1970).K. Marx& F. Engels, Manifesto f heCommunist arty,"nKarlMarx,Frederick

Engels:CollectedWorks,VI (New York: International ubl., 1976).M. Pollack, La planificationes sciences ociales,"Actesde la recherchensciences

sociales, I, 2/3,1976,105-21.

N. Poulantzas, L'intelligentsiat epouvoir," e NouvelObservateur, ay30,1977.

J. Ranciere,Le leçond'Althusser, ollection dées (Paris:Gallimard,1974).A. de Tocqueville,The Old Regime nd the FrenchRevolutionNewYork: Double-

dayAnchor,1955).

Copans - In Search of Lost Theory Marxism and Structuralism Within French Anthropology

Documents

Transcript of Copans - In Search of Lost Theory Marxism and Structuralism Within French Anthropology