Bourbaki, les années 1945-75 - Jean-Pierre Serre, Pierre Cartier, Jacques Dixmier & Alain Connes
Why MathOverflow recommends it
MathOverflow answerers point people to it as a firsthand source from former members on Bourbaki's membership, recruitment of figures like Grothendieck and Connes, and why categories were left out of the Éléments.
Recommended by 3 people across 3 different months, 2019 to 2025.
What it is
A 2019 roundtable at the Collège de France in French with Jean-Pierre Serre, Pierre Cartier, Jacques Dixmier and Alain Connes (moderating), recalling Bourbaki's golden years from 1945 to 1975. They discuss how they were recruited, the Bourbaki style, congress anecdotes, the writing of the treatises, and the group's legacy.
What people said
Recommends dohmatob · 2021-02 · MathOverflow · on “Reference for Connes Bourbaki membership or otherwise”
Let's hear from Connes himself. This video (in french, sorry) [this video] (featuring Serre, Dixmier, Cartier, and Connes) explains the the genesis of Bourbaki (over a +70-year period!), with an accent on membership and the historical circumstances around the recruitment of certain notable members (e.g Serre, Borel, Grothendieck). You'll also find details about the recruitment of Alain Connes (the interviewer), though this is not the focus of the conversation.
Recommends Dattier · 2021-09 · MathOverflow · on “When did Grothendieck join Bourbaki?”
A very good interview [this video] in French with former Bourbaki members Jean-Pierre Serre, Pierre Cartier and Jacques Dixmier, where the date is given, at the mark of 17:40. [Dixmier]: So we have spoken about how we became members [of Bourbaki], let's talk about others. Grothendieck was enlisted as a member of Bourbaki when he was in Nancy. [Serre]: No, he was not a member of Bourbaki when he was in Nancy, he was a student of a member, that is not the same thing. [Dixmier]: He was a student of Schwartz and Dieudonné, they said immediately: He is amazing. [Serre]: Still, this is a very different thing, one did not consider taking him on as a member right away. [Dixmier]: Well, I would say that h
Recommends Gro-Tsen · 2025-10 · MathOverflow · on “Why did Bourbaki's Élements omit the theory of categories?”
There is on YouTube a conversation [this video] (recorded around 2019 by the Collège de France) between Pierre Cartier, Jacques Dixmier, Jean-Pierre Serre and Alain Connes (acting as moderator) about the “golden years of Bourbaki” (1945–1975). The question of why Bourbaki didn't use categories or why they didn't publish a fascicule de résultats on categories is discussed between timestamps 51′30″ and 55′35″ in the video. I can try to transcribe and translate their discussion if there is interest, but the gist of it (summarized by Cartier around 54′45″) is that there were two problems: one is that everything would have had to be rebuilt from scratch [by this I suppose he means that many things tha
Cites AGenevois · 2019-08 · MathOverflow · on “Why did Bourbaki's Élements omit the theory of categories?”
An interesting discussion about Bourbaki can be found here: [this video] (in French). In particular, categories are mentioned.