Writing from Experience: The Place of the Personal in French Feminist Writing

Through a discussion of the work of Marie Cardinal and Annie Ernaux, this article aims to problematize the anglophone academic world's tendency to associate French feminisms predominantly with avant-garde or highly theoretical texts. The work of Ernaux and Cardinal is presented alongside a discussion of its reception by readers and critics in France, and by academics in English-speaking countries. The first part of the article identifies aspects of Ernaux's and Cardinal's works which cannot be encompassed within a critical framework based on the dichotomy between naive realism on the one hand and the politically and linguistically radical text on the other. Ernaux's plain language, for instance, is clearly very unlike the linguistic experimentation of ‘feminine writing’ nonetheless the emphasis on social class in her writing constitutes a political intervention which is at least equally valid.The reception study in the second part of the article provides further evidence of the relevance to gender politics in France of Cardinal's The Words to Say It (1975) and texts published by Annie Ernaux in the 1980s and 1990s. The ambivalent response of critics seems to indicate the troubling nature of writing which combines the codes of realism and autobiography (or autobiographical fiction in Cardinal's case) with the depiction of taboo subjects such as menstruation, or a daughter's response to her mother's debilitating illness and death. The article also charts the widespread popularity of these texts in France, particularly with women readers, and gives some examples of the pleasures described in letters to the authors. In conclusion, we argue that the ambivalent space between popular and high culture occupied (albeit differently) by Ernaux and Cardinal may be particularly effective in terms of gender politics, and that even in the late 1990s, the personal may be as political as ever.     

Poverty across the Life Cycle: Evidence from the PSID

The likelihood of experiencing poverty at some point during the adult life cycle is estimated. These probabilities are derived through a set of life tables built upon 25 waves of data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, and represent an alternative approach to studying poverty than prior empirical studies. Life table analyses are divided into early adulthood (ages 20–40), middle adulthood (ages 40–60),and later adulthood (ages 60–80). The findings indicate that individuals within the sample face a significant risk of poverty at some point during their adult lives, particularly during the early and later stages of adulthood. Duration tends to be relatively short (1 or 2 years), but once poverty occurs, it is likely to occur again. Results also reveal the profound life‐course effect that race, education, and gender have upon the likelihood of encountering poverty during the adult years. Several policy and research implications are discussed. © 2001 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.     

Methodological debate in poverty studies: towards ‘participatory qual–quant’?

Compared with the divisive views of the past, integrative thinking has recently come to characterise the methodological debate on poverty. ‘Qualitative vs quantitative’ has given way to ‘qual–quant’; ‘cross-disciplinarity’ has replaced ‘economics vs anthropology’. This article attempts to review this change. It begins with a historical overview of the pure economic approach to poverty and its critique. The critique, both from within economics and from the participatory and anthropological disciplines, is examined, and recent trends are considered. The current ‘qual–quant’ approach is illustrated with examples, and the author concludes that the future may well see the emergence of a ‘participatory qual–quant’ approach.