Social Status and Reputation of Writers in Modern Russia: Thematic Analysis
Research Article
How to Cite
Ryazancev A.P. Social Status and Reputation of Writers in Modern Russia: Thematic Analysis. Interaction. Interview. Interpretation. 2023. Vol. 15. No. 1. P. 27-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19181/inter.2023.15.1.2 (in Russ.).
Abstract
This article examines the forms of social evaluation of writers' work in modern Russia. As a methodological basis, the theory of the “literary field” developed by Pierre Bourdieu and his followers is used, on the basis of which a conceptual and empirical reconstruction of the concepts of social status and reputation was carried out. Based on an empirical thematic analysis of public interviews with leading Russian experts in the field of literary process, a set of topics regarding the social status of the writer and his literary reputation in the Russian literary field has been identified. A discrepancy in the opinions of various groups of experts was found, which may indicate the presence of antagonism in the modern literary field. This circumstance, coupled with the dependent state of the literary field on the political one, confirms the hypothesis of the marginalization of these concepts and, accordingly, related social practices in modern Russia.
Keywords:
social status, literary reputation, field of literature, thematic analysis
References
Bourdieu P. (1989) Social Space and Symbolic Power. Sociological Theory. Vol. 7. No. 1. P. 14–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/202060
Bourdieu P. (2000) Pole literatury` [The Field of Literature]. New Literary Review. No. 5. P. 22–87. (In Russ.)
Buetow S. (2009) Thematic Analysis and Its Reconceptualization as “Saliency Analysis”. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. Vol. 15. No. 2. P. 123–125. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009081
Charmaz K. (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. London: SAGE Publications. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/qhw.v1i3.4932
Dubois J., Meaghan E., Sing P. (2000) Pierre Bourdieu and Literature. SubStance. Vol. 29. No. 3. P. 84–102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3685563.
George G., Linus D., Scott D.G., Samantha S. (2016) From the Editors: Reputation And Status: Expanding the Role of Social Evaluations in Management Research. The Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 59. No. 1. P. 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.4001
Klingemann H.D., Mochmann E. (1975) Sekundäranalyse. Techniken der Empirischen Sozialforschung. No. 2. P. 178–194.
Mendelberg T. (2022) Status, Symbols, and Politics: A Theory of Symbolic Status Politics. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences. Vol. 8. No. 6. P. 50–68. DOI: https://do-i.org/10.7758/RSF.2022.8.6.03
Milner A. (2011) Science Fiction and the Literary Field. Science Fiction Studies. Vol. 38. No. 3. P. 393–411. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5621/sciefictstud.38.3.0393
Merton R. (1975) Thematic Analysis in Science: Notes on Holton's Concept. Science. No. 188. P. 335–338. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.188.4186.335
Sapiro J. (2004) Frantsuzskoye pole literatury: struktura. dinamika i formy politizatsii [The French Field of Literature: Structure, Dynamics and Forms of Politicization]. The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology. Vol. 7. No. 5. P. 126–143. (In Russ.)
Speller J.R.W (2011) Science and Literature. Bourdieu and Literature. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers. P. 103–130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0027
Bourdieu P. (2000) Pole literatury` [The Field of Literature]. New Literary Review. No. 5. P. 22–87. (In Russ.)
Buetow S. (2009) Thematic Analysis and Its Reconceptualization as “Saliency Analysis”. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. Vol. 15. No. 2. P. 123–125. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009081
Charmaz K. (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. London: SAGE Publications. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/qhw.v1i3.4932
Dubois J., Meaghan E., Sing P. (2000) Pierre Bourdieu and Literature. SubStance. Vol. 29. No. 3. P. 84–102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3685563.
George G., Linus D., Scott D.G., Samantha S. (2016) From the Editors: Reputation And Status: Expanding the Role of Social Evaluations in Management Research. The Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 59. No. 1. P. 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.4001
Klingemann H.D., Mochmann E. (1975) Sekundäranalyse. Techniken der Empirischen Sozialforschung. No. 2. P. 178–194.
Mendelberg T. (2022) Status, Symbols, and Politics: A Theory of Symbolic Status Politics. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences. Vol. 8. No. 6. P. 50–68. DOI: https://do-i.org/10.7758/RSF.2022.8.6.03
Milner A. (2011) Science Fiction and the Literary Field. Science Fiction Studies. Vol. 38. No. 3. P. 393–411. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5621/sciefictstud.38.3.0393
Merton R. (1975) Thematic Analysis in Science: Notes on Holton's Concept. Science. No. 188. P. 335–338. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.188.4186.335
Sapiro J. (2004) Frantsuzskoye pole literatury: struktura. dinamika i formy politizatsii [The French Field of Literature: Structure, Dynamics and Forms of Politicization]. The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology. Vol. 7. No. 5. P. 126–143. (In Russ.)
Speller J.R.W (2011) Science and Literature. Bourdieu and Literature. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers. P. 103–130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0027
Article
Received: 23.06.2022
Accepted: 28.03.2023
Citation Formats
Other cite formats:
APA
Ryazancev, A. P. (2023). Social Status and Reputation of Writers in Modern Russia: Thematic Analysis. Interaction. Interview. Interpretation, 15(1), 27-44. https://doi.org/10.19181/inter.2023.15.1.2
Section
Field work research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
