We can make the empirical observation that even if the stories of class defectors are gradually beginning to be published by Quebec publishers, unlike in France where their number continues to grow, those from here do not all have the same rating in the media.
As was the case for Cecile and Marx by Michel Lacroix, published at the same time as Duplessis Street by Jean-Philippe Pleau, but which has completely passed under the media radar (in the press, on television and on the radio).
Hence my question: since the two authors claim to be class defectors and their analyses claim to be based on the reading of Bourdieu and Ernaux, why have the media reserved most of their attention to Pleau’s book?
It is true that the writing of the two essayists is very different: a fluid narration in Pleau and branched in Lacroix, which makes reading their works a distinctive experience in social space.
On Pleau’s side, his presence on the media scene stands out compared to the more hushed academic environment of Lacroix (a professor of literary studies at UQAM). We must take into account the fact that the niche readership, induced by Cecile and Marxwill be studied in the academic field: which was not the case, last spring, for Pleau’s readership, which was attached to the high-audience television shows on Radio-Canada, which received him with great fanfare, consecrating him as a successful author. The rankings battle is selective in terms of the media’s focus on the stories of class defectors.
Explanations
In the days following the publication of my free opinion in The Duty (“Trump has the ear of a ‘literary’ essayist as a running mate,” THE DutyJuly 20, 2024), I received emails from academics intrigued by the clause in my text, concerning the status of class defector, claimed by Jean-Philippe Pleau, which I seemed to call into question.
My question was about what I consider to be a flaw in his description of his upward social mobility, in Duplessis Streetbut which the media reviews had not raised.
When he says he suspended his doctorate in sociology to undertake a certificate in communication at UQAM, was this not an option that resulted from his split habitus, leading to a downgrading of his social mobility? Or, on the contrary, a strategic decision that could, from then on, be a matter of careerism and, consequently, could possibly discourage class defectors who have successfully completed their master’s degree from then undertaking doctoral studies in order to obtain tenure after defending their thesis?
Asymmetry
What is problematic in the story of Duplessis Streetit is the asymmetrical articulation between the two narrative threads which unfold incongruously: family misery and social advancement.
As much as the references to the father and mother are carried out with a lot of details that can arouse empathy, the stages of the institutional journey, which will lead the author from the CEGEP of Drummondville to the Université Laval then to the UQAM, are devoid of congruence, in sociographic terms, with his career as a radio host on the airwaves of Radio-Canada.
Thus, the fateful and irreversible moment of his change of direction would have occurred when he was a research agent at the National Institute of Scientific Research (INRS), following his open letter published in The Dutywhich condemned studies on university-business partnerships, carried out by INRS professors.
However, this lapidary denunciation is issued without the slightest explanation of his status as a research agent, acquired in this institute nevertheless recognized for the integrity of its researchers, such as Michel Trépanier, who has published articles on the autonomy of scientific research in the sociological analysis of science-industry partnerships.
The sequence of events is epic. After receiving a reprimand from the director of the INRS, concerning this open letter, he will consider that the academic world is not for him. As luck would have it, it is a phone call from Jacques Parizeau’s secretary, who wants to speak to him in order to congratulate him on his critical analysis of university-business partnerships, favored by the INRS, which will make him abandon the sociology practiced in the academic field, to devote himself body and soul to a radio sociology broadcast in the public space.
One might wonder what Pierre Bourdieu, the designer of the class defector, would have thought of it when one knows his sociological critique of certain favorite presenters, from radio-television mediation, who allow themselves to popularize scientific objectification without reflexivity.
It is now up to academics and essayists to publish analyses of this kind of indexicality of sociology and literature.