“L'ENFANT ET LA VIE FAMILIALE SOUS L'ANCIEN RÉGIME” BY PHILIPPE ARIÈS: AN INTERVIEW ON THE STORY OF CHILDHOOD

Abstract

“A book has a life of its own; it escapes its author to belong to a public that is not always the one the author intended,” noted Philippe Ariès in the preface to the new edition of his work L’enfant et la vie familiale sous l’Ancien Régime (Le Seuil, 1973, first version in Plon 1960), translated into Spanish twenty-seven years later as: Philippe Ariès (1987). El niño y la vida familia en el Antiguo Régimen. Madrid: Taurus. Spanish version by Naty García Guadilla.

In this context, the Latin American reader now has at his disposal the Spanish translation of a document that we consider fundamental for understanding the history of childhood and the history of mentalities, namely, Jean-Bertrand. Pontalis and François Gantheret. Entretien avec Philippe Ariès. In: L’enfant. Published under the direction of Jean-Bertrand Pontalis. Paris. Gallimard, 1979. pp. 19-40.

The translation of this document complements first-hand a review and reception of the work of Philippe Ariés, published under the title «Philippe Ariès: birth, posterity and validity of a model of interpretation of childhood. A review of the Francophone historiographical literature». In: Alzate, M-V and Gómez, M.A. (Compilers). Pensar la infancia I. Pereira-Colombia. Editorial Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira-Maestría en Infancia, 2020. pp. 127-139 (see: https://repositorio.utp.edu.co/items/b06fcf25-944f-4a38-b9c7-99a1ad543257). As we noted in 2020, the theses of Philippe Ariès’ work, L’enfant et la vie familiale sous l’Ancien Régime, remain suggestive and current. Ariès’ work shows us how childhood is a relatively recent social construction; his theses have given children a place in history and the social sciences. The French historian’s theses imply a status of childhood that cannot be thought of outside of school and family; precisely, this was the part that Ariès assumed as having a long historical duration to analyze the way in which the family feeling increased gradually and powerfully, without which it is not possible to understand the profound “anthropological mutation” that constitutes the birth of the “child of desire”; as was affirmed years later with the revolution of the conditions of procreation.