{"id":3082,"date":"2009-12-18T11:12:54","date_gmt":"2009-12-18T11:12:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/410"},"modified":"2009-12-18T11:12:54","modified_gmt":"2009-12-18T11:12:54","slug":"les-pratiques-d-ecriture-et-de-sociabilite-de-louise-d-epinay-a-la-lumiere-de-ses-contributions-a-la-correspondance-litteraire-et-de-ses-lettres-a-ferdinando-galiani-1755-1783","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/siefar.org\/gb\/les-pratiques-d-ecriture-et-de-sociabilite-de-louise-d-epinay-a-la-lumiere-de-ses-contributions-a-la-correspondance-litteraire-et-de-ses-lettres-a-ferdinando-galiani-1755-1783\/","title":{"rendered":"Les Pratiques d’\u00e9criture et de sociabilit\u00e9 de Louise d’Epinay \u00e0 la lumi\u00e8re de ses contributions \u00e0 la Correspondance litt\u00e9raire et de ses lettres \u00e0 Ferdinando Galiani (1755-1783)"},"content":{"rendered":"
Mélinda CARON
\n<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Thèse en Littérature, dir. Michel Delon et Benoît Melançon (co-tutelle), Paris IV-Sorbonne \/ Université de Montréal, 5 octobre 2009.<\/span><\/strong>
\n<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Les collaborations de Louise d’Épinay à la Correspondance littéraire <\/em>(1755-1783) et sa correspondance avec Ferdinando Galiani (1769-1783) constituent deux corpus complémentaires pour comprendre les pratiques de sociabilité de cette auteure et pour mettre au jour leur interaction avec ses pratiques d’écriture. Ses critiques, ses dialogues et ses lettres assurent la cooptation d’une élite par le prolongement qu’ils offrent aux mécanismes de distinction propres à la société de cour et par leur circulation en marge de la sphère mondaine. L’analyse des représentations de soi et du groupe dans ces ensembles permet d’approcher l’imaginaire social qui leur donne sens et qui explique la diffusion restreinte de ces textes. Cette étude, qui s’appuie sur des concepts issus de la sociologie, offre la possibilité d’un décloisonnement de la critique de la production de Louise d’Épinay tout en proposant une nouvelle approche de celle des femmes associées aux salons des Lumières.<\/p>\n

Mots-clés : <\/em>littérature française du XVIIIe siècle ; Louise d’Épinay ; pratiques de sociabilité ; représentation ; imaginaire social ; femmes de lettres ; mondanité.<\/span><\/div>\n

<\/div>\n
<\/p>\n

Louise d’Épinay’s Writing and Sociability Practices: A Study of her Contributions to the <\/em>Correspondance littéraire and her Letters to Ferdinando Galiani (1755-1783)<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Louise d’Épinay’s contributions to the Correspondance littéraire<\/em> (1755-1783) and her correspondence with Ferdinando Galiani (1769-1783) constitute two complementary corpora which allow us to understand this author’s practices of sociability and to reveal their interaction with her writing. Her critical work, her dialogues and her letters contribute to the co-opting of a social elite, via their circulation in the margins of good society and their extension of court society’s mechanisms of distinction. The analysis of self-representations and group-representations in these writings allow us to better understand the social representations that give them meaning and that explain their restricted circulation. This thesis, based on sociological concepts, proposes a renewal of Louise d’Épinay’s studies, and those of the women associated with Enlightenment literary salons.<\/p>\n

Keywords:<\/em> Eighteenth-century French literature; Louise d’Épinay; Social life and customs; Social representation; Women writers.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Mélinda CARON Thèse en Littérature, dir. Michel Delon et Benoît Melançon (co-tutelle), Paris IV-Sorbonne \/ Université de Montréal, 5 octobre 2009. Les collaborations de Louise d’Épinay à la Correspondance littéraire (1755-1783) et sa correspondance avec Ferdinando Galiani (1769-1783) constituent deux corpus complémentaires pour comprendre les pratiques de sociabilité de cette auteure et pour mettre au […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"categorie_personnage":[],"class_list":["post-3082","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-debats"],"translation":{"provider":"WPGlobus","version":"3.0.0","language":"gb","enabled_languages":["fr","gb"],"languages":{"fr":{"title":true,"content":true,"excerpt":false},"gb":{"title":false,"content":false,"excerpt":false}}},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/siefar.org\/gb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3082","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/siefar.org\/gb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/siefar.org\/gb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/siefar.org\/gb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/siefar.org\/gb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3082"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/siefar.org\/gb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3082\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/siefar.org\/gb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3082"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/siefar.org\/gb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3082"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/siefar.org\/gb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3082"},{"taxonomy":"categorie_personnage","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/siefar.org\/gb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categorie_personnage?post=3082"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}