Archives pour la catégorie Comptes rendus
Politiques éducatives et projets de société
Nous sommes fières d’annoncer la parution du numéro 29 des Cahiers du MIMMOC, auquel nous avons participé.
Politiques éducatives et projets de société : mots d’ordre officiels et expériences alternatives (Europe, Amériques, Afrique et Asie ─ XXe-XXIe siècles)
-
I. Mots d’ordre officiels – évolutions et tensions
-
La Bolivie et ses récents changements éducatifs [Texte intégral]Entretien
-
-
II. Expériences alternatives – contraintes et ouvertures
-
Éducation et migration : l’école française à l’épreuve de l’altérité [Texte intégral]
La petite enfance au Royaume-Uni : commission d’enquête 2023
Au moment où on s’inquiète de la fermeture des services pour la petite enfance, et la veille de l’interrogation du ministre par la commission parlementaire chargé d’une enquête sur le sujet, mardi 9 mai 2023, un retour sur l’ouvrage La politique de la petite enfance au Royaume-Uni (1997-2010), Paris, Houdiard, 2018 s’impose.
Ci-dessous des liens vers – une intervention au Café-lecture de la MSHS de Poitiers en janvier 2019 où je présentais mon livre,
et des compte-rendus parus dans des revues françaises :
– Caignet, A. Compte rendu de l’ouvrage La politique de la petite enfance au Royaume-Uni (1997-2010) : Une nouvelle frontière » de l’Etat-providence britannique? de Susan Finding, Revue Française de Civilisation Britannique [Online], XXIV-3 | 2019, DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/rfcb.4190;
– Join-Lambert, H. (2021). Susan Finding, La politique de la petite enfance au Royaume Uni (1997-2010). « Une nouvelle frontière » de l’Etat-providence britannique: Paris, Michel Houdiard éditeur, 2018, 223 pages. Travail, genre et sociétés, 45, 170-173. https://doi.org/10.3917/tgs.045.0170 .
Gendered Employment Policies: European Social Models and Gendered Employment
Vient de paraître : « Gendered Employment Policies: European Social Models and Gendered Employment Today » dans Working Women, 1800-2017: A Never-Ending (R)Evolution, ouvrage dirigé par Martine Stirling and Delphine Sangu, chez Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, 2021, pp.25-36.
This paper continues work previously done on gendered employment, particularly with respect to the public services and in particular the education, health, and care sectors in European countries (United Kingdom, France, Italy, Denmark and Norway).[1] It explores whether the welfare typology noted within Europe influences gendered employment and looks at how gendered employment policies initiated within the European social policy framework have affected that. Based on statistical evidence from various European and governmental agencies, the discussion looks in particular at the United Kingdom and its place in the welfare model typology in view of the gendered employment policies which were initiated from the turn of the 21st century.
[1] Susan Finding, Anémone Kober-Smith, (ed.) Politiques familiales et politiques d’emploi «genrées» au Royaume-Uni et en Europe, Observatoire de la société britannique, 14, 2013.
L’économie britannique et le Brexit
Vient de paraître:
L’économie britannique et le Brexit, sous la direction de Susan Finding, Revue L’Observatoire de la société britannique n°24, Septembre 2019, 190 pages
Résumé
À l’aune d’une nouvelle ère de relations internationales pour le Royaume-Uni, une ère de reconfigurations politiques, sociales et économiques, sont réunis dans ce numéro des articles qui analysent l’impact sur l’économie britannique de la sortie du pays de l’Union européenne, le « Brexit ». Le présent numéro fait le point sur les débats autour de certaines questions économiques soulevées par la décision et le processus du Brexit. Les articles dans ce numéro se classent dans trois catégories principales : le Royaume-Uni dans son ensemble ; le devenir de l’économie des régions à gouvernance autonome (Écosse et Irlande du nord) ; et le secteur des finances. Les contributions font ressortir des questions fondamentales sur le plan politique et économique : la philosophie politique qui sous-tend la société britannique, la place des services et le poids de la finance dans l’économie britannique, les relations internes au Royaume entre les régions, et les relations extérieures en dehors de l’UE, en particulier avec les États-Unis.
Les contributions publiées sont le fruit d’une journée d’étude tenue à Poitiers en novembre 2018: programme Brexit
Sommaire
Gabriel Siles-Brügge, Préface / Le Brexit : incertitudes et contradictions
Susan Finding (Poitiers, MIMMOC), Introduction / Brexit, souveraineté nationale et mondialisation
Céline Lageot (Poitiers, CECOJI), Le processus constitutionnel de sortie de l’UE du Royaume-Uni
Emma Bell (Savoie, TRIANGLE), Brexit : Towards a neoliberal real utopia?
Louise Dalingwater, (Paris3, CERVEPAS), NHS staffing shortages and the Brexit effect
Gilles Leydier (Toulon, BABEL), ‘Don’t panic but do worry’ : L’Écosse et les enjeux économiques du Brexit
Philippe Cauvet (Poitiers, MIMMOC), ‘It’s not just the economy, stupid !’ Brexit, the Good Friday Agreement and the Irish border conundrum
Nicolas Sowels (Paris1, CREC), Brexit and Financial Services : the Major Sticking Points
Martine Azuelos (Paris3, CERVEPAS), The London-New York Nexus in the Shadow of Brexit
Christian Aubin, Ibrahima Diouf (Poitiers, CRIEF), Les conséquences monétaires du Brexit
Le ‘Festival of Britain 1951’ : une certaine idée du Royaume-Uni
Le numéro 20 des Cahiers du MIMMOC est paru.
20 | 2019 Le ‘Festival of Britain 1951’ : une certaine idée du Royaume-Uni
La journée d’études, Londres et le « Festival of Britain » 1951, organisée par Moya Jones et Philippe Chassaigne, de l’Université de Bordeaux-Montaige, avec le soutien de l’EA 2958, CEMMC, et la participation de spécialistes français des études culturelles et politiques du Royaume-Uni, s’est tenue le jeudi 8 novembre 2018. Les articles qui composent ce numéro des Cahiers du MIMMOC reprennent les communications qui y ont été présentées.
Dans les analyses qui composent ce numéro, on retracera le contexte historique et politique, les retombées culturelles (architecture, cinéma et musique), et l’image que renvoient les manifestations et produits associées au Festival (publicités, festivités à Londres et dans les provinces).
Le narratif, le roman national, qui s’en dégage reflète la vision orientée du passé et de l’avenir du pays façonnée par les élites dirigeantes politiques et culturelles en cette période charnière qui clôt les années d’austérité et de guerre et ouvre une période de prospérité.
-
1851-1951-2022 : Jamais deux festivals sans trois ? [Texte intégral]
-
Le Festival et son impact urbanistique [Texte intégral]
-
Churchill festivalier, réticent ou enthousiaste ? [Texte intégral]
-
The Festival of Britain (1951) beyond London [Texte intégral]
-
Quelle musique anglaise pour la ‘Nouvelle Jérusalem’ ? [Texte intégral]
Reconciling British & Irish democratic rights
Nous avons participé à la journée d’étude organisée à Toulouse 1 Capitole les 31 janvier et 1er février 2019 sur la question du Home Rule :
Reconciling British and Irish Democratic Rights – Union, Empire and the Challenge of Irish Home Rule (1870-1914)
On trouvera les enregistrements vidéo en suivant ce lien.
On behalf of Philippe Cauvet & myself, members of the MIMMOC research group at Poitiers University, we would like to renew our thanks to the distinguished speakers who accepted our invitation to come to Toulouse, to our colleagues here at Toulouse 1 Capitole & the CAS research team, to the Société française d’études irlandaises (SOFEIR) and to colleagues & graduate students present.
Although this topic echoes in part questions about « the break-up of Britain » predicted in 1977 by Tom Nairn[1], or, from a different angle, « the survival of the United Kingdom » analyzed by Alvin Jackson thirty years later, in 2007[2], which have also featured on the Agrégation syllabus as « devolution » and which we were also involved in organizing a day conference for together[3], little did we realize as the idea of organizing this conference was discussed, that the subject, indeed the title, Reconciling British & Irish Democratic Rights, would raise so many parallels with the debates of the days prior to the conference, in the UK House of Commons in December and January 2019 :
- The indivisibility of sovereignty
- Self-government better or worse
- A project that was rejected by both pro- and anti- independence supporters be they nationalists or unionists, Brexiteers or remainers.
Speakers :
Eugenio Biagini (Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge)[4] « Home Rule, Democracy and the United Kingdom 1885-1914 ».
Pauline Collombier-Lakeman[7] (Strasbourg) « the Irish Home Rule controversy as « a harbinger of dreams and nightmares » « .
Professor Alvin Jackson[9] (Edinburgh) « Opposing Home Rule in Ireland and Britain Unionism 1885-1914 ».
Nathlie Duclos[11] (Toulouse Jean Jaurès) « Scottish Home Rulers and the Irish Home Rule debate ».
Simon Deschamps[12] (Toulouse Jean Jaurès) : « From Irish Home Rule to Indian Swaraj : The Empire Strikes Back, 1870-1914 ».
Anne-Catherine de Bouvier[13] (Caen) « Violence and Constitutionalism »
Matthew Staunton, « What Ireland Sees : Redmonite Home Rule in Sinn Féin’s editorial cartoons »
Matthew Kelly[14] (Northumbria) « Home Rule’s Nationalist & Republican Opposition before 1914 »
[1] Tom Nairn, The Break-up of Britain: Crisis and Neonationalism, London: New Left Books, 1977.
2 Alvin Jackson, The Two Unions. Ireland, Scotland, and the Survival of the United Kingdom, 1707-2007, OUP, 2008. Professor Jackson is also author of Home Rule: An Irish History, 1800-2000, Oxford, OUP, 2003 ; The Ulster Party: Irish Unionists in the House of Commons, 1884-1911 (OUP), Colonel Edward Saunderson: Land and Loyalty in Victorian Ireland (OUP).
[3] See the proceedings of that conference: S. Finding, M. Jones, P. Cauvet, (dir.), Unfinished business : Devolution in the UK, Bordeaux : Presses universitaires de Bordeaux, 2011.
[4] British Democracy and Irish Nationalism, 1876-1906, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2007 ; The Shaping of Modern Ireland (co-ed.) Dublin, Irish Academic Press, 2016; The Cambridge Social History of Ireland since 1740 (co-ed.), Cambridge, Cambridge University press, 2016.
[5] James Belich, Replenishing the Earth. The Settler Revolution and the Rise of the Angloworld, Oxford, OUP, 2011.
[6] See Peter Cain, « British Free Trade, 1850-1914: Economics and Policy », REFRESH, 29, Autumn 1999.
[7] Pauline Collombier-Lakeman, The Home Rule Question (1870-1914), Paris, Belin, 2018.
[8] Reviewed by Alvin Jackson in Irish Historical Studies, 26, 103, May 1989, pp.232-324. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021121400010051.
[9] Jackson, A. (2018) Judging Redmond and Carson. Royal Irish Academy ; Jackson, A. (2012) The Two Unions: Ireland, Scotland, and the Survival of the United Kingdom, 1707-2007. Oxford University Press ; Jackson, A. (2010) Ireland, 1798-1998: war, peace and beyond. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K: Wiley-Blackwell ; Jackson, A. (2003) Home rule: an Irish history, 1800-2000. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
[10] Pieter M. Judson, The Habsburg Empire: A New History, Harvard University Press, 2016.
[11] Nathalie Duclos, La dévolution des pouvoirs à l’Ecosse et au Pays de Galles 1966-1999, Paris, Editions du Temps, 2007.
[12]Simon Deschamps et Cécile Révauger, Sociabilité maçonnique et pouvoir colonial dans l’Inde britannique (1730-1921), Bordeaux, Presses universitaires de Bordeaux, 2019.
[13] Co-directrice, La Grande Famine en Irlande, 1845-1851 (avec Christophe Gillissen), numéro thématique de la Revue Française de Civilisation Britannique, XIX-2 | 2014.
[14] The Fenian Ideal and Irish Nationalism, 1882-1916 (Boydell and Brewer: Woodbridge, 2006, 2008) ; ‘Radical nationalisms, 1882-1916’ in Tom Bartlett (ed.), The New Cambridge History of Ireland (forthcoming: 2017) ; ‘Political autobiography. From Wolfe Tone to Ernie O’Malley’ in Liam Harte (ed), The Cambridge History of Irish Autobiography (forthcoming: 2017) ; ‘Irish nationalisms’ in Richard Bourke & Ian McBride (eds), The Princeton Guide to Irish History (Princeton, 2015) ; ‘Home Rule and its Enemies, 1870-1916’ in Alvin Jackson (ed.) Oxford Handbook of Modern Irish History, 1600-2000 (Oxford, 2014).
La politique de la petite enfance au Royaume-Uni
Education in the 1970s: increased opportunities, rising discontent?
Finding, S., ‘Education from Plowden to Thatcher – red, yellow, black and blue building bricks. A decade of increased opportunities or of rising discontent?’ est paru dans A Fresh Look at Britain in Crisis 1970-1979, (dir. S. Porion), Paris, Atlande, 2017 et fait suite à la journée d’étude « Le Royaume-Uni à l’épreuve de la crise, 1970-1979), tenu le 21 octobre 2016 à l’Université François Rabelais, Tours (voir compte rendu).
The historiography of the educational field in these years is amply covered, especially in terms of policy and of ideology. Most works covering the period of the 1970s dividing it up into binary divisions corresponding either to the political chronology (Heath, Wilson and Callaghan governments) or ideology – Conservative and Labour, or to the areas of education – compulsory and post-compulsory – primary and secondary – higher and further or vocational. This paper does not escape those strictures, partly due to the subject matter itself.
The building bricks in the title of this paper refer partly to the political divide – Red and Blue, and partly to the various publications, the so-called Yellow Book of 1976, the Black Papers published between 1969 and 1977. One could add various White Papers (government policy documents) the Green Paper of 1977 (official discussion paper), and the Brown Paper of 1979 (which never made it to Green or White paper stage.
However it is perhaps more useful to divide this analysis up into two main themes characterized by questions concerning firstly, expansion and equality, and secondly, standards and opportunity. The threads which run through the period general to other fields, are also to be found in the educational field. These transcend the political divide, and which were leitmotivs in the discourse of the time, whether it be left, right or center. Among these are the role of central government, the power of the trades unions, the cost of welfare in a period of financial turbulence, and ultimately, the critique of the post-war welfare consensus.
Preserving the Sixties. Cultural politics and political culture in the Sixties
Review of Preserving the Sixties. Britain and the ‘Decade of Protest’, Edited by Trevor Harris and Monia O’Brien Castro, Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan , 2014. 197 pp. (xvi p.). ISBN 978-1-137-37409-.
Do the Sixties need to be preserved? Surely, the cultural legacy of that decade speaks for itself and the current revival of Sixties style in fashion and interior design, not the mention the perennial impact of pop culture and music on the cultural scene fifty years on, are evidence enough that preservation is assured.
This collection of essays examines the political culture and the politics of culture in Britain during that iconic period. Eleven contributions by British and French academics are arranged into two general sections under the heading of politics and culture, a choice which may seem somewhat artificial, given the interchangeable nature of the two headings. Following three introductory pieces – the thought-provoking Foreword by Dominic Sandbrook, the Introduction by the editors, and a historiographical overview by Mark Donnelly, the chapters progress broadly from political science and historical to the cultural studies approach, but all contributions inevitably deal with both, the Sixties being defined by their cultural imprint. The themes and specific topics covered range through political organization and legislation (Industrial relations, abortion), political groups and culture (radical left, Northern Irish civil rights) cultural expression of political protest (satire, music, fiction). Inevitably notions of counter-culture, liberation, youth, modernity are evoked and definitions proposed.
A definition of the ‘Swinging Sixties’ is first suggested by the first three pieces (Sandford, O’Brien Castro & Harris, Morris). The idea that the hip counter-culture was a mass phenomenon is countered, only relatively few experienced the inner sanctum of the ‘chic’, ‘in’, ‘with it’ circles. Yet not only dress and music, but also education, technology and consumer goods underwent massive transformation in this period and there was undeniably a liberalization of mores and a democratization of access to culture.
The circumstances and consequences of the 1967 abortion law (Pomiès-Maréchal and Leggett), industrial relations legislation (Chommeloux), the situation in Northern Ireland that lead to Bloody Sunday (Pelletier), are examined with reference not just to the political and social setup, but also to cultural and social representations at the time and subsequently. For example, the complicated links between the Radical Left (Communists, International Marxists, International Socialists, Socialist Workers Party) and popular cultural icons John Lennon and Mick Jagger (Tranmer) reveal that simplistic categorization does justice neither to the singers nor the left-wing political groups.
The final section provides a close reading of several iconic cultural artefacts, the Beatles’ White Album (Winsworth), the Kinks’ songs (Costambeys-Kempczynski), the Monty Python television show and the weekly satire TW3 (That Was The Week That Was) (Roof), or again emblematic poetry and novels (Vernon) or the work of playwright Brian Friel (Pelletier).
The multiple contradictions of the Sixties are highlighted. Several pieces underline the underlying tensions between consumerism and the critique of consumer society via music and television (Winsworth, Roof), or the opposition between individual freedom and state or collective action (Vernon), indeed the oxymoron ‘collective laissez-faire’ is used to describe industrial relations at the time (Chommeloux), or again the generational confrontation between the hedonistic culture of babyboomers with its accompanying ideals of enduring halcyon and their parents’ war-weary, unselfish and upright posture of dignity and fortitude at all costs (Donnelly, Winsworth, p.160, Morris, p.33). The book confirms the antagonisms between conservative traditionalists in the Labour party supported by its traditional and traditionalist working-class electorate (Pomiès-Maréchal and Leggett, Tranmer), shunning popular culture and long-haired idols, and the liberal permissive intelligentsia whose idea of what constituted ‘civilized’ behaviour (p68-69) was to lead to social reforms that the former disapproved of (such as the decriminalization of homosexuality and abortion).
Similarly the Sixties were an era of unbound optimism and unlimited growth and the wholesale rejection of the past, when ‘modern’ became a by-word for a tabula rasa in architecture and town planning, bulldozing historic landmarks, when a ‘major reordering of space’ (Morris) aimed at rationalizing haphazard higgledy-piggledy development in towns and homes and the railways (the Beecham Axe) – concrete jungle versus rural idyll, before the setting in of an awareness that the aesthetic and functional arrangements of previous eras had some value, reinstating nostalgia for the steam train, the trunk line, the village green (Costambeys-Kempczynski).
The essays also attempt to place markers at defining moments which flag the beginning and end of this era, and to replace the decade during which visible social change was manifest, in a longer time-scale. The decade or so of The Sixties is defined in terms of the economy and industrial relations as a period of transition between post-war orthodox interventionism under the portmanteau term of Butskellism and post-modern neo-liberal Blatcherism (Chommeloux). In cultural terms, the modernism of the Sixties pop music and mid-century modern architecture for example, gave way to punk and neo-eclectic post-modern architecture. The Sixties were accused of being the cause of all subsequent evils: capitalism and consumerism, welfare dependency, technology and multinationals, and yet, as Donnelly points out, they were also a period of collective protest, state surveillance, of a revolution in the mind (Hardt & Negri, Empire, 2000).
The bibliography at the end of each chapter give indications for further reading, whilst the index provides a useful, though incomplete, number of entries into the text. The Fab Four are all indexed but not Roy Jenkins, Edward Heath but not Bernadette Devlin, Bloody Sunday, NICRA (Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association), the CRA or the CDU (Campaign for a Democratic Ulster). The index does reveal however, by way of the number of entries under these headings, two polysemic and frequently used terms from the period, typical of the discourse and preoccupations of the period: class and revolution. Perhaps these notions could have been examined in a specific chapter each, especially as the subtitle of the book is Britain and the ‘Decade of Protest’.
This collection is an excellent survey of a number of phenomenon whose roots stretch back not only to the 1950s but to pre-Second World War Britain, a picture not only of the Sixties, but of Britain in the mid-twentieth century, following the hiatus and upheavals of the war. To determine whether they are to be considered as the end of a forty-year period (1930-1970) or a prelude to the next forty years (1960-1997) would need a wider lense.