Cet article révèle qu’au cœur du débat effervescent sur le revenu de base inconditionnel (RBI), où s’affirment pourtant parmi les plus fortes utopies et revendications en matière de liberté, s’observe, tant du côté des opposants que des partisans de l’idée, « le triomphe de l’ animal laborans » annoncé par Hannah Arendt (1983). Soulignant l’incohérence des plaidoyers pro-RBI qui résulte de leur recours à l’ animal laborans, de même que les dangers que fait encourir ce présupposé anthropologique à la viabilité (...) des sociétés démocratiques, nous concluons en montrant en quoi la défense du RBI peut, à certaines conditions, constituer une opportunité exceptionnelle pour détrôner l’ animal laborans de la doxa contemporaine et faire advenir des postulats alternatifs salvateurs. (shrink)

The pace and import of this passage have severely tested modern critics' sense of a satisfying conclusion. In 1981 Leslie Topsfield wrote, “The ending of Yvain is unconvincing, and Chrétien's commonplace references to the mutual joy and peace without end of Yvain and Laudine leave some doubt whether he did not see in this conclusion the patching together of a story which on its higher level of meaning had transcended its narrative framework.” In 2001 Joseph Duggan argued that the (...) reconciliation occurs “only because Laudine does not wish to renege on her oath. Remarkably Chretien declares that Yvain is happier now than he has ever been, for he is loved and cherished by his lady and she by him. The notion that one can be constrained to love is as bizarre in a twelfth-century context as it would be today.” He concludes that in Yvain Chretien's “portrayal of motivation has come up a bit short.”. (shrink)