Pierre Bourdieu: Taste and Class

Pierre Bourdieu Taste and ClassTaste, a illuminate culture turned into nature, that is, embodied, helps to shape the discriminate proboscis. It follows that the body is the most indisputable materialization of class taste (Bourdieu, 1984 190). Do you agree with Bourdieus statement about the importance of societal class to embodiment?(2064/2000)Introductionnot plainly do I disagree with Bourdieus statement as presented above, it is my contention that this does not accurately represent the intention and focus of Bourdieu. For not only do I disagree that class is central to embodiment, rather believing that all forms of neighborly distinguishableiation class, ethnicity, age and sexual urge ar embodied, but that Bourdieu himself believed that it is sexuality that provides the models for the other, consequently secondary, forms of social differentiation. To support my argument, I first provide a brief system of Bourdieus possible action of social practice, discussing the relationship between class and embodiment within it. Next I examine Chris Schillings interpretation of Bourdieu, demonstrating that, in common with other theorists, Schilling interpreted Bourdieu as being ultimately refer with class as an axis of social differentiation, thereby ignoring the role of gender in his theory that even as Schilling seeks to extend Bourdieus theory to include gender, ethnicity and age his interpretation is fundamentally flawed.In the final section I contest this class-focussed interpretation of Bourdieu by arguing that, following Beate Krais, by examining twain his later work and his early ethnography it is evident that gender is a primary bushel in his work that Bourdieu believes that gender provides the model for all other forms of social differentiation. However, whereas Bourdieu seems pessimistic regarding the individuals ability to resist their class or gender differentiation, the women interviewed by Beverley Skeggs (1997) actively resisted their c lass slur, even as they were do by it. In the conclusion I summarise my argument that not only are other social differentiations of central importance to embodiment namely gender, age, and ethnicity gender was of central importance to Bourdieu, providing the model for other forms of differentiation, before concluding that work still needs to be through with(p) before age and ethnicity hobo be adequately compound into Bourdieus schema.Embodiment and Social Class in the Work of BourdieuIn this section I first briefly outline Bourdieus theory of social practice, and then discuss the relationship between class and embodiment within it, before then examining Chris Schillings (1994) account of Bourdieu. I ask that Schilling foc drops on Bourdieus class analysis, in common with many other theorists, and therefore misses the way in which Bourdieu is ultimately concerned with gender as a form of social differentiation. Pierre Bourdieu developed his theory of cultural slap-up and so cial practice with Jean-Claude Passeron1 in France in the 1970s, as part of an motility to explain class-based differences in educational achievement. In his theory the forms of capital cultural, social and economic interact to mask the way in which social hierarchies are reproduced. pagan capital is, for Bourdieu, divided into trey subcategories embodied, objectified and institutionalised. Embodied capital is imbued during the period of socialisation, is linked to the body, and represents external wealth converted into an integral part of the person (Bourdieu, 1986 244-5) whether an individuals accent, their taste for opera, or their preference for rugby over football this form of capital cannot be accumulated beyond the appropriating capacity of an individual agent and clay marked by its earliest conditions of acquisition (Bourdieu, 1986 245). Objectified capital refers to goods such as paintings, antiques and fine wines objectified capital hence entails both the material wealth needed to get such items and the embodied capital needed to consume them. Institutionalised capital is those academic qualifications which enable an individual to exchange between cultural and economic capital, epoch social capital are those friendships and networks which enable an individual to produce and reproduce lasting, useful relationships that can secure material or symbolic profits (Bourdieu, 1986 249. The three forms of capital combine to produce a persons habitus, or set of preferences and predispositions.Class is thus central to Bourdieus theory of embodiment within his schema the financial, educational, social and cultural resources of an individual shape not only their taste but also their life chancesTaste, a class culture turned into nature, that is, embodied, helps to shape the body. It is an incorporated principle of classification which governs all forms of incorporation, choosing and modifying everything that the body ingests and digests and assimilates, physiologically and psychologically (Bourdieu, 1999 190, my tenseness added).Finally, embodiment is central to his theory for it is via the process of socialization that the dynamics of power are written onto the very bodies of the individual (Bourdieu, 1999 190). Schilling argues that Bourdieu does not engage with the body as simultaneously social and biological, but rather concentrates on its unfinishedness at own (Schilling, 1994 128) that acts of labour are required to turn bodies into social entities and that these acts influence how people develop and hold the physical shape of their bodies (Schilling, 1994 128). Schilling stresses the way in which Bourdieu argues that social class imprints on the body of an individual by focussing on the way peoples taste for food both marks their class position and affects their bodiesBodies develop through the interrelation between an individuals social location their class-based material circumstances, habitus and taste. These factors se rve to naturalize and perpetuate the different relationships that social groups have towards their bodies (Schilling, 1994 130).Similar readings have resulted in Bourdieus theory being criticized for being inherentist John Frow argues that Bourdieu simply reads off an individuals culture from their class position (Frow, 1995 63). Or that his theory is therefore deterministic in that it minimizes the ability of the individual to shape their own destiny. Finally, such a reading of Bourdieu leads one to conclude that he prioritized the role of class in corporation, thus minimizing the effects of other forms of differentiation, such as gender, ethnicity and agethe conflict between classes is of greatest importance to Bourdieus work, and attempts by the dominant classes to define lower class body implicating activities as crude, or attempts on the part of the working classes to define upper class practices as pretentious, occupy a prominent place in his book on French life, Distinction (1984) (Schilling, 1994 141).Yet I would contend that Schilling has misinterpreted Bourdieus theory that whilst it is true that in his middle years of which Distinction forms a part he did focus on the dynamics of class in society and as it is written on the body of the individual, however in Bourdieus early ethnography his focus was instead on the primary differentiation of gender, and it was to this concern that he returned in his later years.Gender as the Primary Form of Social Differentiation for BourdieuIn this section I argue, in agreement with Beate Krais (2006), that gender is a primary concern in the work of Bourdieu that he believes it is gender that provides the model for all other forms of social differentiation. However, whereas Bourdieu seems unduly pessimistic regarding the individuals ability to resist their class social differentiation, the women interview by Skeggs (1997) actively resisted their class positioning even as they were shaped by it. However, she prov ides little leaven of these womens attempts to resist their gender.Beate Krais argues that gender is one of the most powerful classifications for Bourdieu (Krais, 2006 120) and that he chooses his early ethnography in Algeria for inclusion in his 2001 Masculine Domination, as among the Kabylia at this time there existed practically no other form of social differentiation (Krais, 2006 120). She demonstrates that, for Bourdieu, it is the social construction of femininity and masculinity that first shapes the body, defines how it is perceived and thus determines an individuals identity (Krais, 2006 121). This interpretation is borne out by my reading of Bourdieu when he discusses the Kabylia the opposition between male and female is realized in posture, in the gestures and movements of the body (Bourdieu, 1999a 70). He continues classificatory schemes through which the body is practically apprehended are always grounded twofold, both in the social portion of labour and in the sexual division of labour (Bourdieu 1999a 72). Thus Bourdieu argues that social differentiation according to gender is both universal and historically constant the same system of classificatory schemes is found, in its essential features, through the centuries and across economic and social differences (Bourdieu, 2001 82).However, Krais goes on to criticise him for presenting gender as hermetic and indestructible that by using the example of such a traditional society, rather than that of a modern society such as that of France or Britain, he misses the role of gender as a site of at large(p) and political struggle (Krais, 2006 123). Yet Bourdieus pessimism seems borne out by the work of Beverley Skeggs (1997), in that the women she interviewed, whilst resisting their class position do not appear to resist their gender in the womens claims for a caring/ respectable/ responsible personality class was rarely directly figured but was constantly present. It was the structuring absence (Skegg s, 1997 74, my emphasis added) although she argues that gender and class are inseparable. The women never see themselves as just women it is always read through class (Skeggs, 1997 91), she provides little evidence of the way in which these women resist their gender each seems keen to position themselves as gendered individuals, as women, even as they deny their class.ConclusionIn conclusion, not only do I disagree that class is central to embodiment, rather believing that all forms of social differentiation class, ethnicity, age and gender are embodied, but that Bourdieu himself believed that gender provides the models for the other, therefore secondary, forms of social differentiation. Many have accused Bourdieu of economic determinism, taking his theory of the three forms of capital to prioritise the role of class in creating social inequality. However, for Bourdieu capital is both metaphoric and materialistic and should be viewed as similar to power (Ashall, 2004 24) although Bourdieu believes that all of the forms of capital can be converted into economic capital, for him none are reducible to it (Bourdieu, 1986 243).Embodiment is central within his theory, for it is in this way that social differentiation becomes incorporated into shapes and delineates the body, as made evident through his focus on food and sport in Distinction. Although much of his writing is concerned with the operation of class throughout society, by examining his early ethnography in Algeria, and his later use of this material in Masculine Domination, we can see that he believed gender to be the model for all other forms of social differentiation, and therefore central to his work. iodine next must ask how other forms of social differentiation, namely age and ethnicity, can be incorporated into his theory, for though Schilling argues that this can be done by taking his definition of class in its broadest sense (Schilling, 1994 147) this would appear to damage the sociological un derstanding and definition of both class and gender. What is needed is a way to conceptualise how the differing forms of social differentiation interact.BibliographyAshall, Wendy (2004) Masculine Domination Investing in Gender? Studies in Social and Political Thought, Vol. 9, pp. 21-39, available URL at http//www.sussex.ac.uk/Units/SPT/journal/archive/pdf/issue9-2.pdf, date accessed 25/11/06.Bourdieu, Pierre (2001) Masculine Domination, Cambridge Polity Press.Bourdieu, Pierre (1999) The Habitus and the Space of Life-Styles, Distinction A Social critical review of the Judgment of Taste, capital of the United Kingdom Routledge, pp. 169-225.Bourdieu, Pierre (1999a) Belief and the Body, The Logic of Practice, Cambridge Polity, pp. 66-79.Bourdieu, Pierre and Passeron, Jean-Claude (19981977) Reproduction in Education, Society and nicety (2nd Edition), London Sage.Bourdieu, Pierre (1986) The forms of Capital in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, London Greenw ood Press, pp. 241-258.Frow, John (1995) Accounting for Tastes Some Problems in Bourdieus Sociology of Culture, Cultural Studies, Vol. 1(No. 1), pp. 59-73.Krais, Beate (2006) Gender, Sociological Theory and Bourdieus Sociology of Practice, Theory, Culture and Society, Vol. 23, (No. 6), pp. 119-134.Schilling, Chris (1994) The Body and Physical Capital, The Body and Social Theory, London Sage, pp. 127-149.Skeggs, Beverley (1997) (Dis)identifications of Class On Not Being Working Class, Formations of Gender Becoming Respectable, London Sage, pp. 74-97.1Footnotes1 Bourdieu, Pierre and Passeron, Jean-Claude (19981977) Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture (2nd Edition), London Sage.