L evi-Strauss r evolutionnaire : Pour une critique structuraliste Rapha€ el Piguet ABSTRACT French anthropologist Claude L evi-Strauss kept his distance from the May ’68 events, saying twenty years later that they had “disgusted” him. Why such a rejection, coming from a former socialist? Rather than the jaded dismissal of an old reactionary, L evi-Strauss’ reaction to May ’68 is better explained by the very tenets of structural anthropology, which rather than shying away from Marxism pushes its postulates further in an attempt to formulate a critical theory that is truly revolutionary. Instead of rehashing well-worn concepts, structuralism draws on Buddhism and indigenous worldviews to lay forth a non-dual, non-anthropocentric system of thought. Instead of glorifying man and its endlessly subjugating desires, L evi-Strauss strives to replace the human in the broader network of interconnections of which we are but a link among others. Through works that are theoretical as much as practical, his brand of structuralism offers a pioneering way of comprehending reality which is time grounded in solid epistemological foundations. At a time when it is urgent to depart from the self-centeredness of which May ’68 was, after all, a symptomatic manifestation, a structuralist approach is more necessary, and more revolutionary, than ever. KEYWORDS Anthropology; structuralism; Buddhism; Marxism; mythology; non-dualism Peut-on qualifier Claude L evi-Strauss de r  evolutionnaire ? La proposition semble antith etique, voire absurde, car l’image de L evi-Strauss qui s’est impos  ee aupr  es du public est celle d’un penseur abstrait, tout occup e par ses op erations binaires, un penseur r  eactionnaire et d etach e de la r  ealit  e. Ce repli apparent est particuli  erement flagrant dans le contexte de Mai 68, p eriode pendant laquelle il s’est content  ed’observer avec son habituel « regard  eloign e » les  ev enements qui se d eroulaient  a sa porte, ou pre- sque. Pourtant l’oeuvre de l’anthropologue contient une puissance subver- sive peut- ^ etre plus durable que celle d’une contestation superficielle de l’ordre  etabli,  a quoi se r  esument dans une certaine mesure les divers mouvements qui ont fait Mai 68. Face  a ceux-ci, L evi-Strauss a adopt  e une posture distante, un d egagement qu’il a soulign e par la suite. Comme il le raconte dans De pr  es et de loin, il s’est r  efugi  e dans sa propre « communaut  e restreinte », celle du Laboratoire d’anthropologie sociale au Coll  ege de France – qui fonctionnait, d’apr  es ses dires, sur le mode m^ eme 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 ß 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group CONTEMPORARY FRENCH AND FRANCOPHONE STUDIES https://doi.org/10.1080/17409292.2019.1669873