Looking For Non-publics

1. The Role of the Term Non-Public1 in Ordering Cultural Initiatives

Chapter 1 thE RoLE oF thE tERm non-PUbLIC1 In oRDERIng CULtURAL InItIAtIVEs analysis Of the mOdalities Of the term nOn-public in public sectOr literacy initiatives Julia bonaccorsi université paris-est ties became stronger between librarians, educators and facilitators in a number of cities, and, as such, public readings took on a larger role in local cultural initiatives. Librarians were confronted by the problem of the non-public and attempted, in increasing numbers, to reach out to the more or less literate communities. richter, 1979: 167; own translation If the concept of public is scientifically relevant and operational (Cefaï & Pasquier, 2003; Ethis, 2002) on both sociological and methodological levels, the category of non-public, because it looks at something absent, a sociological intangible, leads primarily to discursive and symbolic productions, like those from community agents or public authorities. 1. in france, non-public refers to the population who cannot or chooses not to participate in public sector cultural initiatives. the term is in opposition to the french term public which means the audience of a particular cultural action (initiative). those “left out” represent a challenge to cultural planners who try to target a wide audience. throughout the article, we will use public and non-public in the original french. 8 | Looking for non-pubLics More generally, researchers frequently encounter the non-public category in studies on norms and values (cultural policies, institutions, and so on; Bonaccorsi, 2009). The concept is analyzed as a “public problem” (Lacerenza, 2007), and leads to exploring the process and operations that result specifically in legitimizing public resources which are used to resolve the “problem” (Gusfield, 2009). This article proposes a theoretical review of a category defined and used by cultural agents as both an objective in itself and a tool for legitimizing their initiatives (Bertrand, 2003: 145). In cultural institutions, certain publics are “considered ‘non-publics,’ when they accumulate distance factors relating to cultural practices” (Mengin, 2003: 187). In this context, researchers come to regard the non-public as an abstract category, mobilized by agents in cultural institutions to delineate and define the boundaries of their initiatives. As a first consideration, non-public can be defined in two different ways. From a “marketing” perspective, the term refers to a target responding to the logic of quantitative visit objectives. From an ideological perspective, it borrows from the tradition of the cultural democratization ideal articulated in Jeanson’s famous Déclaration de Villeurbanne (1973). On the one hand, this term seems like an attempt to justify professional practices and institutions (also to define, to a certain degree, the parameters of the cultural initiative) while appearing “technocratically” in the Ministry of Culture’s statistics. On the other hand, it seems to signal an ideological trend, exposed by sociologists, or brandished by cultural agents in a variety of ways, in which the social dimension dominates. To speak of the non-public, as Bertrand (2003) attests, is to invoke the masses, the excluded. It is, in other words, to engage in a political characterization of society. Thus, the marketing approach will not burden itself for long with the non-public, preferring the issue of public fidelity, for instance. Jean-Michel Tobelem has this to say on the subject: [. . .] as for the issue of winning over “non-publics” (which have yet to be rigorously defined), a veritable obsession in the discourse on democratization, it must be broached with the awareness that such an approach – perfectly legitimate and worthy – requires constancy and determination in directing initiatives which are particularly heavy in human terms and in forming necessary partnerships (in the social and educational realms as well as in municipal policy, etc.) (tobelem, 2003: 258; own translation). Thus, Tobelem argues, the non-public necessitates other public initiatives outside the cultural realm.2 2. note henceforth the externalized nature of the perception of the non-public, influenced by the establishment of networks and supported by cultural organizations in a territory. tHe roLe of tHe terM non-pubLic in orDering cuLturaL initiatiVes | 9 From here, depending on the enunciator and the enunciation context, one can see to what extent the non-public is attributed multiple and everchanging values, analytic frameworks and symbolic content. This article will examine these shifts and differences. In other words, we hope to examine the operation of signification at work in usages of the term nonpublic using a communicational semiotic and discursive analysis.3 As a first step...