[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Alternatively the strictly entrepre-neurial aspects of this kind of working practice can also be sidelined ifnot ignored.This element becomes a strategic hat to be put on for thoseoccasions that some kind of government subsidy or funding arrange-ment needs to be attended to.Bourdieu, in contrast, would surely seethese groups as struggling for position in a cultural field where the oddsare against them and where they actively endorse a value system whichis that of the dominant group (that is, the values of entrepreneurialcapitalism).That these local subcultures seem also to invert the values offinancial security would be to him merely a mark of the distinctivenessof their claim to the cultural field (Bourdieu, 1993).In sharp contrast tothis, I extend the politics of subculture developed by Hebdige into thefield of labour and everyday life, that is, into cultural work, suggestingthat there is no definitive break between the symbolic re-articulationanalysed by Hall et al.and by Hebdige and manifest in style, and cul-tural practices pursued as a way of making a living (Hall and Jefferson(eds), 1976; Hebdige, 1978).What from a cultural studies perspectivemight be seen thus as a site of struggle, a point where there is greatinvestment of concern on the part of government (restless young peoplein a post-industrialising economy), precisely because it also marks out apossibility of discontinuity and contestation, for Bourdieu would be Uses Cultural Studies 10/3/05 11:52 am Page 129 Needs and Norms : Bourdieu and Cultural Studies 129instead part of the means by which the new surplus of cultural produc-ers struggle to assert themselves as unique or differentiated providers ofservices for the expansion of lifestyle and cultures of consumption.How then might we summarise the relation between Bourdieu andcultural studies? These are different, but also convergent, pathways.The shared interest in dominated culture and in the means by whichsymbolic violence is enacted upon the man or woman of poor tastemarks an area of overlap.Several passages in Distinction where there isvery rich description of the sense and feel of poverty and then of afflu-ence and comfort are sharply reminiscent of Hoggart s literaryethnography of working-class life The Uses of Literacy (Hoggart, 1957).If a group s whole lifestyle can be read off from the style it adopts infurnishing or clothing, this is not only because these properties are theobject of the economic and cultural necessity which determines theirselection, but also because the social relations objectified in familiarobjects in their luxury or poverty, their distinction or vulgarity, their beauty or their ugliness impress themselves through bodily experi-ences which may be as profoundly unconscious as the quiet caress ofbeige carpets or the thin clamminess of tattered garish linoleum, theharsh smell of bleach.Every interior expresses in its own languagethe present and even the past state of its occupants, bespeaking theelegant self assurance of inherited wealth, the flaunting arrogance ofthe nouveaux riches, the.shabbinesss of the poor and the gildedshabbiness of poor relations striving to live beyond their means.(Bourdieu, 1984: 77)There is, then, a connection with strands of writing from early culturalstudies, although Stuart Hall s work is much more influenced byAlthusser and Gramsci and with the reworking of the relations betweenculture and economy in a non-reductionist way.But as Garnham pointsout, Bourdieu draws from Marx as much as he does from Durkheim; theeconomic field is a base line of social organisation and other fields referback to it through their own dynamics of struggle for capital.And in sofar as the classificatory schema sets itself up as universal, where in factit operates to the advantage of the dominant social classes, it is not sounlike the dominant ideology thesis of Althusser.It too relies on natu-ralisation and on misrecognition for its effectivity, although of courseAlthusser s concern with the materiality of ideology proposes close Uses Cultural Studies 10/3/05 11:52 am Page 130130 The Uses of Cultural Studiesattention to the politics of meaning and thus to textuality.But one keydifference lies in the way early cultural studies work looked specificallyto different social groups and subgroups and their distinctive culturalpractices in an attempt to understand not only the forces which securedconsent and stability, but also which produced rupture and crisis ofhegemony.In varying degrees these diverse constituencies, for example,black youth, white working-class youth ( the lads ), then also punks, andother subcultural groupings, found some kind of capacity for politicalexpression.These took shape within available cultural forms (such aspopular music) but through rearrangement of these codes they unsettledthe assumed social relations of consent by disrupting the dominantinterpretation of reality, or adding to those pre-existing accounts otherswhich were more disputatious.Bourdieu s rather dismissive response tothis kind of work is tempered only by his agreement with Willis, that thelads have in fact only a small degree of room to disturb dominantsocial relations in schooling, and that this very counter-cultural practiceitself is one of the means by which their long-term adjustment to sub-ordination is secured.Field and HabitusI have already introduced at least two of Bourdieu s key concepts: fieldand habitus.But more needs to be said about them if we are to be ableto decide on their value for cultural studies.The field provides Bourdieuwith an open and closed spatial model for understanding social struc-ture.It encompasses the infinity of layers of organisations, institutionsand practices which are characteristic of advanced societies.Bourdieutakes the economy and market as his two primary concepts upon whichhe then builds up his theory of fields.These proliferate but follow theprinciples of the capitalist market economy [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl milosnikstop.keep.pl
.Alternatively the strictly entrepre-neurial aspects of this kind of working practice can also be sidelined ifnot ignored.This element becomes a strategic hat to be put on for thoseoccasions that some kind of government subsidy or funding arrange-ment needs to be attended to.Bourdieu, in contrast, would surely seethese groups as struggling for position in a cultural field where the oddsare against them and where they actively endorse a value system whichis that of the dominant group (that is, the values of entrepreneurialcapitalism).That these local subcultures seem also to invert the values offinancial security would be to him merely a mark of the distinctivenessof their claim to the cultural field (Bourdieu, 1993).In sharp contrast tothis, I extend the politics of subculture developed by Hebdige into thefield of labour and everyday life, that is, into cultural work, suggestingthat there is no definitive break between the symbolic re-articulationanalysed by Hall et al.and by Hebdige and manifest in style, and cul-tural practices pursued as a way of making a living (Hall and Jefferson(eds), 1976; Hebdige, 1978).What from a cultural studies perspectivemight be seen thus as a site of struggle, a point where there is greatinvestment of concern on the part of government (restless young peoplein a post-industrialising economy), precisely because it also marks out apossibility of discontinuity and contestation, for Bourdieu would be Uses Cultural Studies 10/3/05 11:52 am Page 129 Needs and Norms : Bourdieu and Cultural Studies 129instead part of the means by which the new surplus of cultural produc-ers struggle to assert themselves as unique or differentiated providers ofservices for the expansion of lifestyle and cultures of consumption.How then might we summarise the relation between Bourdieu andcultural studies? These are different, but also convergent, pathways.The shared interest in dominated culture and in the means by whichsymbolic violence is enacted upon the man or woman of poor tastemarks an area of overlap.Several passages in Distinction where there isvery rich description of the sense and feel of poverty and then of afflu-ence and comfort are sharply reminiscent of Hoggart s literaryethnography of working-class life The Uses of Literacy (Hoggart, 1957).If a group s whole lifestyle can be read off from the style it adopts infurnishing or clothing, this is not only because these properties are theobject of the economic and cultural necessity which determines theirselection, but also because the social relations objectified in familiarobjects in their luxury or poverty, their distinction or vulgarity, their beauty or their ugliness impress themselves through bodily experi-ences which may be as profoundly unconscious as the quiet caress ofbeige carpets or the thin clamminess of tattered garish linoleum, theharsh smell of bleach.Every interior expresses in its own languagethe present and even the past state of its occupants, bespeaking theelegant self assurance of inherited wealth, the flaunting arrogance ofthe nouveaux riches, the.shabbinesss of the poor and the gildedshabbiness of poor relations striving to live beyond their means.(Bourdieu, 1984: 77)There is, then, a connection with strands of writing from early culturalstudies, although Stuart Hall s work is much more influenced byAlthusser and Gramsci and with the reworking of the relations betweenculture and economy in a non-reductionist way.But as Garnham pointsout, Bourdieu draws from Marx as much as he does from Durkheim; theeconomic field is a base line of social organisation and other fields referback to it through their own dynamics of struggle for capital.And in sofar as the classificatory schema sets itself up as universal, where in factit operates to the advantage of the dominant social classes, it is not sounlike the dominant ideology thesis of Althusser.It too relies on natu-ralisation and on misrecognition for its effectivity, although of courseAlthusser s concern with the materiality of ideology proposes close Uses Cultural Studies 10/3/05 11:52 am Page 130130 The Uses of Cultural Studiesattention to the politics of meaning and thus to textuality.But one keydifference lies in the way early cultural studies work looked specificallyto different social groups and subgroups and their distinctive culturalpractices in an attempt to understand not only the forces which securedconsent and stability, but also which produced rupture and crisis ofhegemony.In varying degrees these diverse constituencies, for example,black youth, white working-class youth ( the lads ), then also punks, andother subcultural groupings, found some kind of capacity for politicalexpression.These took shape within available cultural forms (such aspopular music) but through rearrangement of these codes they unsettledthe assumed social relations of consent by disrupting the dominantinterpretation of reality, or adding to those pre-existing accounts otherswhich were more disputatious.Bourdieu s rather dismissive response tothis kind of work is tempered only by his agreement with Willis, that thelads have in fact only a small degree of room to disturb dominantsocial relations in schooling, and that this very counter-cultural practiceitself is one of the means by which their long-term adjustment to sub-ordination is secured.Field and HabitusI have already introduced at least two of Bourdieu s key concepts: fieldand habitus.But more needs to be said about them if we are to be ableto decide on their value for cultural studies.The field provides Bourdieuwith an open and closed spatial model for understanding social struc-ture.It encompasses the infinity of layers of organisations, institutionsand practices which are characteristic of advanced societies.Bourdieutakes the economy and market as his two primary concepts upon whichhe then builds up his theory of fields.These proliferate but follow theprinciples of the capitalist market economy [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]