Les lettres de Lucrezia Gonzaga da Gazzuolo (1524-1576), imprimées pour la première fois à Venise en 1552 et republiées en 2009 seulement, constituent un riche corpus épistolaire en partie inexploré qui n’a pas encore fait l’objet d’une étude systématique. Les quelques travaux critiques qui nous ont introduit à une lecture du recueil montraient la pertinence d’une vaste analyse intertextuelle de ce livre de lettres. Notre étude a révélé la présence constante et multiforme de la figure intellectuelle de son éditeur non déclaré : le polygraphe Ortensio Lando. Son choix éditorial consistant à miser sur l’exemplarité que Lucrezia incarnait dans son vécu à la fois actif et tragique découle de l’importance croissante que l’industrie culturelle accordait aux femmes-auteurs et, par conséquent, au public féminin.Sur le recueil pèse le doute d’une paternité problématique qui nous a conduit à placer au centre de notre réflexion le rapport d’interdépendance qui liait étroitement Lucrezia à Ortensio Lando. La thèse révèle la dépendance formelle et thématique des lettres par rapport à l’écriture ‘irrégulière’ du polygraphe irrévérencieux. Cela permet de dévoiler toute l’ampleur d’une tortueuse initiative éditoriale conçue et orchestrée par Lando dont la visée principale s’est avérée être la diffusion d’une nouvelle forme de dissidence spirituelle inspirée par la Philosophia Christi d’Érasme. Face à une crise religieuse croissante, cette diffusion, qui passe à travers l’usage de l’imprimerie, repose sur le succès retentissant du ‘livre de lettres’ et se manifeste, entre autres, par un prosélytisme réformiste complexe. Les lettres s’insèrent ainsi dans un univers littéraire enchevêtré qui concerne d’un côté les écrits de Lando publiés entre 1550 et 1554 et de l’autre, le vilipendé Enchiridion militis christiani d’Érasme, et elles deviennent, dans un moment d’intensification des contrôles inquisitoriaux, une forme discrète de diffusion de positions religieuses hétérodoxes. Le recueil représente aussi un terrain d’enquête fertile pour réfléchir sur le statut de la lettre en tant qu’instrument de diffusion de la modernité et d’affirmation socioculturelle de la femme cultivée, mais aussi pour évoquer des questions méta-littéraires telles que les notions d’autorité, d’authenticité et d’auctorialité, et pour s’interroger sur les possibilités et les limites éditoriales d’une consécration littéraire des femmes. / Lucrezia Gonzaga da Gazzuolo’s (1524-1576) Lettere, first published in 1552 in Venice and reprinted in 2009 only, constitutes a rich epistolary corpus that remains relatively untouched, not having been studied systematically yet.The few academic studies that introduced us to this volume of letters made apparent the need for an extensive analysis of it, with a focus on its intertextuality. Our work reveals the constant, if many-faceted, intellectual presence of Lucrezia’s unofficial editor: the polygraph Ortensio Lando. His editorial decisions capitalize on Lucrezia’s exemplarity, given her misfortunes and active daily life, and on the growing importance of women authors in the cultural industry and, in turn, of women readers.Suspicions of a not-so-straightforward authorship prompted us to center our reflection on the tight relation of interdependence between the gentlewoman and the writer. Our study sheds light on the formal and thematic influence of the irreverent polygraph’s ‘irregular’ writing style on Lucrezia’s letters. This leads us to uncover the full scope of a tortuous publishing project, conceived and orchestrated by Lando, aiming crucially at propagating a new strain of spiritual dissidence, inspired by Erasmus’s Philosophia Christi. Such dissemination, in face of rising religious tensions, would rely on the overwhelming demand for ‘letterbooks’, and take the form, among others, of a complex and reformist proselytism. The letters are thus part of an intricate literary universe ranging from the writings of Lando published between 1550 and 1554 to Erasmus’s much-maligned Enchiridion militis christiani. During a time of increased inquisitorial control and interventions, epistolography become a discrete means of heterodox religious propaganda. The collection of letters also opens up a promising field of investigations and research on the letter: first as a tool to broadcast modern ideas as well as the socio-cultural claims of learned women, but also as a crux for meta-literary issues such as authority, authenticity and auctoriality, and finally a springboard for reflecting on the editorial possibilities and limitations acting upon the literary consecration of women.

The object of this study is good governance, the context for its consideration is the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), and the disciplinary perspective from which it is considered is Public Administration. Good governance is a conceptual problematique. It is multi-dimensional, value-laden, trans-contextual and nebulous. The question of what good governance means is a subject of contestation. Good governance is used in NEPAD as a principle without the attempt to clarify its meaning at the conceptual level. Much of the existing body of scholarship on NEPAD also considers good governance largely as a principle rather than a concept. This erroneously presupposes unanimity on its meaning. The African leadership is divided on what good governance means in the context of NEPAD. In this regard scholarship largely fails to provide an intellectual solution. The extent of complexity of the concept in the study lies in the fact that the context of its consideration [NEPAD] is itself a subject of contestation whereas the disciplinary perspective [Public Administration] from which it is considered has not yet reached a consensus with itself about its theoretical base. Against this background the question that the study asks is, what does the concept good governance in the context of NEPAD mean for Public Administration? The study examines this question to make a contribution towards a better insight into, and broadening of, the body of scientific knowledge by engaging in conceptual, theoretical and philosophical studies to understand good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. The study finds that the paradigm of engagement in the existing body of literature is framed in the binary logic, which is rooted in realist epistemology or positivism. This approach to scientific discourse is limited in dealing with complex conceptual, theoretical and philosophical questions. The study develops, as a contribution to science, an alternative epistemological framework from which good governance in the context of NEPAD could be understood. Such epistemological framework is, for the purpose of this study, termed the contingent co-existence of opposites. It is used to conceptualise good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. / Public Administration / D.Litt. et Phil. (Public Administration)

L’émergence de la Chine dans le système international post-guerre froide pose un défi pour la position hégémonique des États-Unis et l’ordre mondial libéral. Lorsqu’ils tentent d’expliquer ce défi, les spécialistes tendent à se concentrer uniquement soit sur le hard power chinois (en particulier, sa puissance militaire) soit sur son soft power (l’attrait de sa culture et idéologie). Cette thèse développe un cadre d’analyse alternatif inspiré de la sociologie de Pierre Bourdieu, articulé autour de la notion de pouvoir symbolique. Elle conçoit la politique internationale en termes d’une lutte symbolique (entre, par exemple, une orthodoxie et une hétérodoxie) dont l’issue est déterminée par au moins trois facteurs cruciaux : contexte, capital et lieux communs. Ce cadre est appliqué à l’analyse du nouveau rôle de la Chine dans le monde depuis la fin de la guerre froide, lequel est indiscutablement l’un des développements les plus remarquables des relations internationales des temps modernes. La thèse démontre que la Chine ne défie pas l’hégémonie des États-Unis et l’ordre mondial libéral au sens conventionnel de la puissance matérielle ou de l’idéologie, mais plutôt au niveau symbolique. La thèse soutient que la conjonction des trois facteurs susmentionnés a été nécessaire à l’influence mondiale de la Chine : (1) la crise de légitimation des États-Unis (sur les plan économique, politique et idéologique), couplée à l’extraordinaire ascension de nouvelles puissances dans le système international comme la Chine, ont créé un contexte historique favorable ou « condition de possibilité »; (2) l’énorme capital symbolique accumulé par la Chine, en raison non seulement de son nouveau statut de grande puissance, mais aussi de son approche pragmatique des questions nationales et internationales, en a fait une source d’inspiration convoitée mondialement ; (3) la mobilisation stratégique par la Chine de son capital symbolique, sous la forme d’un ensemble de lieux communs ‘rhétoriques’, a grandement contribué à légitimer sa puissance, en particulier aux yeux des élites dirigeantes dans le monde en développement, dissimulant ainsi le caractère asymétrique et arbitraire de ses relations. Ensemble, ces trois éléments –contexte, capital, lieux communs– expliquent le pouvoir symbolique de la Chine, c’est-à-dire la perception selon laquelle, contrairement aux États-Unis, elle propose des réponses pertinentes et cohérentes aux problèmes d’organisation sociale, économique et politique de ce monde. L’ascension de la Chine remet ainsi en question le « méta-capital » des États-Unis, c’est-à-dire son monopole sur la production du capital économique, social, culturel et symbolique. L’accent mis sur cette dimension symbolique de la lutte pour définir et imposer la « vision légitime du monde social et ses divisions » révèle une rupture avec la pratique conventionnelle de la politique des grandes puissances, au profit d’une transformation pacifique du système international et d’une diplomatie symbolique. Cet accent sur le pouvoir symbolique ouvre des avenues prometteuses pour l’étude du changement et des sources d’autorité sur la scène politique mondiale, traditionnellement définie comme « anarchique ». / China’s rise within the international system in the post-Cold War era challenges the hegemonic position of the United States and the Western liberal order. In trying to explain this challenge, scholars tend to either focus on Chinese hard power (in particular, its military power) or on its soft power (the attractiveness of its culture and ideology). This thesis develops an alternative Bourdieu-inspired framework addressing symbolic power. It conceptualizes international politics in terms of a symbolic struggle (such as that between orthodoxy and heterodoxy) whose outcome is determined by at least three crucial factors: context, capital and commonplaces. The framework is applied to the analysis of China’s new world role, which is arguably one of the most remarkable developments in modern international relations. The thesis shows that China does not challenge U.S. hegemonic position and the Western liberal order in the conventional sense of material power or ideology, but rather at the symbolic level. The thesis argues that the combination of the three above-mentioned factors has been necessary to China’s worldwide influence : (1) the legitimation crisis of the United States (economically, politically and ideologically), paired with the extraordinary rise of new illiberal powers on the world scene such as China, created a favourable historical context or “condition of possibility”; (2) the huge amount of symbolic capital accumulated by China, not only because of its new status as a great power, but also because of the success of its pragmatic approach to national and international issues, made it become a source of inspiration for countries across the world; (3) the strategic mobilization by China of its symbolic capital, in the form of ‘rhetorical’ commonplaces, greatly contributed to legitimize its power, especially in the eyes of ruling elites in the developing world, thereby dissimulating the asymmetric and arbitrary nature of the Chinese power and relations. Together, these three components -context, capital, and commonplaces- explain the emergence of China as a symbolic power, i.e. the perception that, unlike the United States, China now has the authority to speak the truth and to define causes of and remedies for certain problems and crises. China’s rise challenges the Unites States’ ‘meta-capital’, that is, its monopoly on the production of economic, social, cultural, and symbolic capital. The focus on this symbolic dimension as a ‘weapon’ in the struggle to define and impose the “legitimate vision of the social world and its divisions” reveals a rupture in the conventional practice of great powers politics, pointing to a peaceful transformation of the international system and symbolic diplomacy. It shows that a focus on symbolic power opens promising avenues for the study of change and sources of authority in world politics, traditionally defined as “anarchic”.

The object of this study is good governance, the context for its consideration is the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), and the disciplinary perspective from which it is considered is Public Administration. Good governance is a conceptual problematique. It is multi-dimensional, value-laden, trans-contextual and nebulous. The question of what good governance means is a subject of contestation. Good governance is used in NEPAD as a principle without the attempt to clarify its meaning at the conceptual level. Much of the existing body of scholarship on NEPAD also considers good governance largely as a principle rather than a concept. This erroneously presupposes unanimity on its meaning. The African leadership is divided on what good governance means in the context of NEPAD. In this regard scholarship largely fails to provide an intellectual solution. The extent of complexity of the concept in the study lies in the fact that the context of its consideration [NEPAD] is itself a subject of contestation whereas the disciplinary perspective [Public Administration] from which it is considered has not yet reached a consensus with itself about its theoretical base. Against this background the question that the study asks is, what does the concept good governance in the context of NEPAD mean for Public Administration? The study examines this question to make a contribution towards a better insight into, and broadening of, the body of scientific knowledge by engaging in conceptual, theoretical and philosophical studies to understand good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. The study finds that the paradigm of engagement in the existing body of literature is framed in the binary logic, which is rooted in realist epistemology or positivism. This approach to scientific discourse is limited in dealing with complex conceptual, theoretical and philosophical questions. The study develops, as a contribution to science, an alternative epistemological framework from which good governance in the context of NEPAD could be understood. Such epistemological framework is, for the purpose of this study, termed the contingent co-existence of opposites. It is used to conceptualise good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. / Public Administration and Management / D.Litt. et Phil. (Public Administration)