Symposium on Michel Lallement's "Work: Contemporary Sociology"

• Published in: Sociologie du travail (Paris) Vol. 51; no. 1; pp. 126 - 144
• Main Authors: Castel, Robert, Edwards, Paul, Bagnasco, Arnaldo, Piore, Michael J, Lallement, Michel
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: French
• Published: 01.01.2009
• Subjects: France; Modern Society; Sociology of Work; Work
• ISSN: 0038-0296
• DOI: 10.1016/j.soctra.2008.12.007

Five participants, R. Castel, P. Edward, A. Bagnasco, M. Piore, & M. Lallement himself, partake in this symposium, each presenting a perspective on the work in question. Castel states Lallement presents a nearly complete & convincing synthesis of contemporary achievement in the sociology of work. He sums up the work by maintaining it answers the basic question, "How, by virtue of work, do human beings create a society?" States he considers it petty, therefore, to go looking for overlooked facts or issues which simply involve quarreling over details. Focuses, rather, on why the book is a success. Maintains that any deficiencies are essential to the perspective adopted by the author. Methodology is described as functionalist, defining work in structural terms & society itself as structured by work. States Lallement raises questions about processes of change; mentions the mutations capitalism has undergone recently, notably in the form of globalization. Suggests that perhaps we need to rethink the ways in which work structures things in this new context. P. Edwards concerns himself with the light English-language sociology can throw on this work. Focuses on the differences in form & content between Lallement's work & that of his Anglo-American counterparts. Notes lack of tables, graphs, & glossaries, for example. Likewise, he says there is no clear evidence of the intended reader: is the book for specialists or the general reader? As such, the book is more of an essay than a scholarly contribution. On the other hand, points out that Lallement is subtler in many ways than his English-speaking counterparts. A. Bagnasco, for his part, points out the book is not only a sociological treatise on its subject but an example of contemporary sociology with work as its focus. Places the work within the framework of the two major currents of sociological thought, finding Lallement in the Durkheim camp, rather than the Marx-Weber-Simmel group. Admits that reading the book was a learning experience & finds it of value far beyond its subject. Piore identifies the work's purpose as threefold: better understanding work in contemporary society, to reaffirm an intellectual tradition (i.e., that of the sociology of labor,) & finally the treatment of a particular problem: free will versus determinism. Concludes with the fact he considers the book as a plea for a return to work or labor as the central topic for analyses of society, as opposed to those approaches that consider this an antiquated concern. Therefore states his fundamental disagreement with the thesis. Argues in favor of the obsolesce of a society defined by work regarding this as the case in the old industrial societies. Insists on the importance of new technologies & the trend toward identity politics based on sexuality, race, physical condition & other realities more purely social than economic. Describes current U.S. society, for example, as one in process in which only vestiges of a industrial society remain. Wonders, therefore, about the continued relevance of the work. Finally, Lallement responds to his critics, clarifying, refuting, & elaborating as necessary. [Copyright Elsevier SAS.]