| The Ignorant Schoolmaster Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation ed) Jacques Ranciere ‘Tremlaaed, with an bntrodnaaion, by Kristin Ross ‘Stanford University Pest Stanford, CaliforniaLita 2f Campos Coin in Patina ams notes (Mae ia, aah ‘heigert choker asus Rave tngshte ih satowatcen. by Riso Rss. ‘nen Le se eat, Povey g (c= Haw ta 9f1 @k) ase ean sep pe ye Bae FrancePigrpy. 5. Bbxaon Ply 4 Blsaton france Poet pacin 1 Tie thorsrauanern oat This ook pied an wi ee i rig 19 Yas ete cee year oF hs iin 7 e605 04 eh 8) a! 0 Contents “Translators Introduction it Bourdieu and the New Sociology, i. Pegi Reforms, wi The Lesion of Alchuser, sw The Practice oF Equi, 29 ‘An Inteleceual Advenvure ‘ ‘Te Bxplicative Order, 4, Chance al WH, 8 "The Egunciparary Master, (2. The Citle of Pomet, «5 ‘The Ignoeane One's Lesson 19 “The lland ofthe Book, 20. Calypuo and the Lock: smith, 25. The Master and Socrates, 29, The Power of the Ienoran, 31, To Each His Orn, 35. The Bind ‘Man and His Dog. 39. Everything Is in Everything, “ Reason Besneen Equals 45 OF Braigs an Lane, 46. An Attentive Animal, 50. ‘A Wil Served bya intelligence 54. Te Principle of Yeracity 57. Reson nd Language, 60. Me Too, I'm Painter, 69, The Poets Leno 2. The Carty oF Equals, 96Comets - 4 The Sociery of Contempe 5. The Emancipator and His Monkey Notes 7s ‘Te Law of Gravity, 76, Inequality’ Pasion, 8 Rhetorical Madness, 85, The Superior Inferior, 86 ‘The Pilosopher-ing and the Sovereign Pople, 8 How to Rave Reasonably, 9, The Spech om the Aventine, 96 Emancipaocy Method and Socal Method, 102, Eman. Cipation of Men and Inseructon ofthe Puople. tos. ‘Men of Progres, 109. OF Sheep ant Men, 113. The Progressives Circle, 117. On the Heads of the People Yaa, The Triumph of the Old Master, 12. Socieay Pedagogicisd. 130, The Panecstc's Stories 15 Emancipation’ Tomb «38 143 ‘Translator's Introduction la The Ignorant Schotmaser Jacques Ranciére re- ‘counts the story of Joseph Jacotor, a achvclteacher driven into ‘exile during the Restoration who allowed that expevcace to fer- ment into a method for showing illiterate parents how they themselves could ceach their childeen how eo read. That Jaco tor’ story mighe have something to do with the post-1968 de- bates about education in France was not immediately apparent romore of the book's readers when ic appeared in 1087. How «could the experiences ofa man who hod lived all ehe great peds- {ogical adventures of the French Revolution, whose own uco- pian eeaching methods knew a brief—if worldwide and per- fectly serious —flurry of atention bebe passing rapidly into the oblivion Ranciére’s book reseues them from —how could these experiences “communicate” with edministatos fice to face withthe problems of educating immigeant North African childeen in Pats, or with intellectuals intent on mapping the Freach school systems continued reproduction of soci ine- qualities? Rancitres book explained aothing abour che failures fof the school system: i entered directly ito none of the con-ii Thamators Itradeton emporary polemical debates. Its polemics, dramatically ce- counted ia the second balf of the book, were eather those ofthe fra of the ignorineschoolnaser, Joseph Jacotor: che eects of _Jacoto's ural enethod: is face’a che hands ofthe eeformers land pedagogic inseirucions it undermined; ins flacerenc by the educational policies pot ineo effect, under the auspices of Francois Guizot and Victor Cousin, by the July Monarchy due- ing the 1830's. The names of the most listened-to theoretical voites on post'68 education——thoac of Pierre Bourdieu and Jean-Claude Milner —are not mentioned by Ranciee. Yer che ‘book's subject was obviously education. Key’oeds ike "les- sons” and “intellecual,” “ignorant” and “schoolmaster” ap- peared. if in a somewhat paradoxical arrangemens, sf its cle ‘And education was again, in the 19805, under scrutiny ia France, ‘Readers in Feance ha dificuty situating ehe book, as they have had dificuley, generally speaking, keeping up with he ‘maverick intellectual itinerary of its author. For although in 1965, Ranciére published Lire le capital with his teacher Louis ‘Anse, he was beer known for his celebrate lta ertique of his coauthor, La Lago a'Alebuser (3973), ste fo the journal he founded the same year, Réoleslogigue. Trained asa philos- ‘opher, a professor of philosophy ac the Univesity of Paris, but immersed cather unfashionably since 1974 ineatly-ninercenth century workers’ archives, Rancitre wiote books that eluded classification —books that gave voice 0 the wild journals of ar- tisans, ro the daydreams of anonymous thinkers, co worker ‘Poets ‘aed philosophers who devised emancipatory systems Alone, in she semi-ntealspaceiace of the eactered late-night _moments their work schedules allowed thee. Were these books primarily history? The philosophy of history? The history of philosophy? Some readers cook Le Mafire ignorant to be a feag- rent of anecdotal history, a curiouity ocean archival oddity. Tramsaters warcision i Esducatrs read it—some quite anxiously, given Jacotor's sf ration char anyone can lean alone—in the imperative, a6 4 contemporary prescriptive, «Kind of soicidal pedagogical How (0. A few reviewers read it on the level at which it might, J think, mose immediaely adress a American or British rade ‘cship only beginning ro come to seems withthe legacies of a decade of Reaganism ana Thatchetsm se an exty, or perhaps a fable or parable, that enacts an extraordinaey philosophical meditation on equality. Bourdiew and the New Sociology ‘The singular hiseory of each gations collectivity plays con- siderable oe in the problems of education, Though the English {tanslatin appears in very dtfereat conditions,” it may be use- ful co begin by discussing ehe book's French context, a context Still profoundly marked by the curbulence of the student up- "sings of May '68 and by the confusions and disappointments, the eversals and deserions, of ee decade that followed the all but total collapse of the Parisian intlligensia of the Lefe the “end of polities” anid the triumph of sociology. For ie was perhaps as 2 reaction ¢o the unexpectedness of the May upesings ther he 19708 fwored the elaboration of a num bet of social seismologies and above all energized soctologicsl teflection itself: the criticism of institutions and superstruc- tutes, of the muleform power of domination. In the wake of the polisica failure "6, the socal sciences awoke to the study 8f power: t0 the New Philosophers’ self-promotionsl mea takeover, to Michel Foucaule, but most imporcantly, perhaps, to the sociology of Pierre Bourdiew—the endemous influence of ‘whose work would, given the time lag and ideology of trans- lation, begin in earnest in the English-speaking works only in the ealy 19805. No less than the New Philosophers, Bourdieu hse nin’ Se yo ast ini sa mah a ra ln aex Braman’ tract - ould be sid to have profited fom both the suces and the fit tre ofthe May movernen, the frst Rraning his work the energy fd posture of etique, the second enforcing fit ce Rev tational pull of seractse If Bourdieu work had little serious impact on methodolog- ical debates tmong profesional sociologist, is elec on bi torias, anchopologiets, profesor of reach, educational re formers, ae historians, ghetto high schoolteachers, and pop: lar jouralists was, iespresd. In the inteoduetion,t0 Empire da nope (399) 2 calling Of esas edited by Rancite and the Rawls liga collective, the suchorsatib- ue the extrordinary success of Bourdiets themes of repro ‘duction and dssinccion—-che phenomenon of ther being, 00 Seal, in everyone's head—ro che imple ac that they sere, ‘Which is osay tha they offered the most thorough philosophy OF the sol, the one thae best explained t the most people the teoresical and pli sigficaion of the lst twenty year oftheir lives, Bourdieu had produced, in oohee words. 4 Aiscourceenticely in keeping with his time, stint char com: bine in the words ofthe editor, “the orphaned fervor of de- ‘nouncing the systen with the disenchanted cetude of = ewes Belore May 1968, steeped inthe theoretical and political rmompere of the Athusserian batele for revolutionary science against ideology, Bourdieu and Jean-Claude Paseron published {Ler Haiti (2984), 0 analyse of the University tat helped ful the densnciation of the institution by showing eo be en- Lirely absorbed in he reproduction of neal social snucrt, ‘The post May dissipation of hopes for socal chonge, however, served only «0 amplify the influence ofthat work, and patie. ‘thy of tbonteicl sequels, La Reprdictin (1970) and La Division (1979)? Bourdieu struceraliserigoe witha Marx Jae accene permitted an exhaustive interpetive analysis of class divisio and its inscription ~mimtely catalogued in the nist details of posture oF daily Behavior as souls cha could Carey of an existence entirely divorced fom the practical hy- Tramsats Itredction x potheses of Marxism or the navetés of hope for socal eeansfor- ‘mation. I allowed, Relies Ingiguer argues, "the denunciation Df both ehe mechanisms of demination ad the illusions of lib Rancitre, in his own crtieal contribution go the volume, ‘acked Bourdieu and the new sociology a the latest ao! most influential foom of « discourse deriving its authority from the Presumed naiveté ot ignorance of its abjects of study: in the Fealm of education, the militant inseeuctors in La Repradusion ‘ho need the legicimacy of che system's authoriey to denounce ‘the arbitrariness of that legitimacy; and the working-class ste sents excluded from the bourgeois aysteny of favors and prvi lees, who do not (and cannot) understand their exclusion, By tracing che passage ftom Les Hester 0 La Rejredution, Rat tre uncovered s logic whereby the socal cite ins by show ing democracy losing. Ie was, for example, a «0 obvious, he wrote, 19 say tha working-class youth are almost entirely ex. ‘tuded from the university system, aed that thet culural ine ferioity isa eesult oftheir economic inferiority. The socilogise attained the level of “Scie” by providing a teutolony whose systemic workings, veiled ro the agenes rapped within is stipe ‘eee evident tohim alone. The perfec circle, aesonding to Ran citre, was made "via ewo propositions 1 Workings youth eed cr he Livery eense they mma eee oh hye a 2 Thar innorsce ofthe eee fr which they ae excaded ‘sasuuctral eer prodced by he vey exten of he sym shar ‘cade them ths Rano The, "Bourdieweffce” could be summed up inthis peeece itl: “they are excluded Heease ey dow tow why heya excluded and they done Hw wy they are rcled beetase they ate excluded.” Or beter: 1 The ssn ede it eve bea ges ue ‘ized. " ve