pierre bourdieu.doc

8/14/2019 PIERRE BOURDIEU.doc

1/47

Pierre Bourdieu 1979

Classes and Classifications

Source : Distinctions. A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. Conclusion.1984, translated b !ichard "ice, #ublished b $ar%ard &ni%ersit 'ress, 1984,()4##. * selected from ##. 4((+484.

Taste is an acquired dis#osition to differentiate- and a##reciate-, as ant sa s

/ in other 0ords, to establish and mar differences b a #rocess of distinction

0hich is not 2or not necessaril 3 a distinct no0ledge, in eibni5-s sense, since

it ensures recognition 2in the ordinar sense3 of the ob6ect 0ithout im#l ing

no0ledge of the distincti%e features 0hich define it. The schemes of the

habitus, the #rimar forms of classification, o0e their s#ecific efficac to the

fact that the function belo0 the le%el of consciousness and language, be ond

the reach of intros#ecti%e scrutin or control b the 0ill. 7rienting #ractices

#racticall , the embed 0hat some 0ould mista enl call %alues in the most

automatic gestures or the a##arentl most insignificant techniques of the bod

/ 0a s of 0al ing or blo0ing one-s nose, 0a s of eating or tal ing / and

engage the most fundamental #rinci#les of construction and e%aluation of the

social 0orld, those 0hich most directl e #ress the di%ision of labour 2bet0een

the classes, the age grou#s and the se es3 or the di%ision of the 0or of

domination, in di%isions bet0een bodies and bet0een relations to the bod0hich borro0 more features than one, as if to gi%e them the a##earances of

naturalness, from the se ual di%ision of labour and the di%ision of se ual

labour. Taste is a #ractical master of distributions 0hich ma es it #ossible to

sense or intuit 0hat is li el 2or unli el 3 to befall / and therefore to befit /

an indi%idual occu# ing a gi%en #osition in social s#ace. t functions as a sort of

social orientation, a sense of one-s #lace-, guiding the occu#ants of a gi%en #lace in social s#ace to0ards the social #ositions ad6usted to their #ro#erties,


2/47

and to0ards the #ractices or goods 0hich befit the occu#ants of that #osition. t

im#lies a #ractical antici#ation of 0hat the social meaning and %alue of the

chosen #ractice or thing 0ill #robabl be, gi%en their distribution in social s#ace

and the #ractical no0ledge the other agents ha%e of the corres#ondence

bet0een goods and grou#s.

Thus, the social agents 0hom the sociologist classifies are #roducers not onl

of classifiable acts but also of acts of classification 0hich are themsel%es

classified. no0ledge of the social 0orld has to ta e into account a #ractical

no0ledge of this 0orld 0hich #re+e ists it and 0hich it must not fail to include

in its ob6ect, although, as a first stage, this no0ledge has to be constituted

against the #artial and interested re#resentations #ro%ided b #ractical

no0ledge. To s#ea of habitus is to include in the ob6ect the no0ledge 0hich

the agents, 0ho are #art of the ob6ect, ha%e of the ob6ect, and the contribution

this no0ledge ma es to the realit of the ob6ect. ut it is not onl a matter of

#utting bac into the real 0orld that one is endea%ouring to no0, a no0ledge

of the real 0orld that contributes to its realit 2and also to the force it e erts3. t

means conferring on this no0ledge a genuinel constituti%e #o0er, the %er

#o0er it is denied 0hen, in the name of an ob6ecti%ist conce#tion of ob6ecti%it ,

one ma es common no0ledge or theoretical no0ledge a mere reflection of

the real 0orld.

Those 0ho su##ose the are #roducing a materialist theor of no0ledge0hen the ma e no0ledge a #assi%e recording and abandon the acti%e as#ect-

of no0ledge to idealism, as ;ar com#lains in the Theses on Feuerbach,

forget that all no0ledge, and in #articular all no0ledge of the social 0orld, is

an act of construction im#lementing schemes of thought and e #ression, and

that bet0een conditions of e istence and #ractices or re#resentations there

inter%enes the structuring acti%it of the agents, 0ho, far from reactingmechanicall to mechanical stimulations, res#ond to the in%itations or threats of


3/47


4/47

The cogniti%e structures 0hich social agents im#lement in their #ractical

no0ledge of the social 0orld are internali5ed, embodied- social structures.

The #ractical no0ledge of the social 0orld that is #resu##osed b reasonable-

beha%iour 0ithin it im#lements classificator schemes 2or forms of

classification-, mental structures- or s mbolic forms- / a#art from their

connotations, these e #ressions are %irtuall interchangeable3, historical

schemes of #erce#tion and a##reciation 0hich are the #roduct of the ob6ecti%e

di%ision into classes 2age grou#s, genders, social classes3 and 0hich function

belo0 the le%el of consciousness and discourse. eing the #roduct of the

incor#oration of the fundamental structures of a societ , these #rinci#les ofdi%ision are common to all the agents of the societ and ma e #ossible the

#roduction of a common, meaningful 0orld, a common+sense 0orld.

All the agents in a gi%en social formation share a set of basic #erce#tual

schemes, 0hich recei%e the beginnings of ob6ectification in the #airs of

antagonistic ad6ecti%es commonl used to classif and qualif #ersons or

ob6ects in the most %aried areas of #ractice. The net0or of o##ositions

bet0een high 2sublime, ele%ated, #ure3 and lo0 2%ulgar, lo0, modest3, s#iritual

and material, fine 2refined, elegant3 and coarse 2hea% , fat, crude, brutal3, light

2subtle, li%el , shar#, adroit3 and hea% 2slo0, thic , blunt, laborious, clums 3,

free and forced, broad and narro0, or, in another dimension, bet0een unique

2rare, different, distinguished, e clusi%e, e ce#tional, singular, no%el3 and

common 2ordinar , banal, common#lace, tri%ial, routine3, brilliant 2 ntelligent3

and dull 2obscure, gre , mediocre3, is the matri of all the common#laces 0hich

find such read acce#tance because behind them lies the 0hole social order.

The net0or has its ultimate source in the o##osition bet0een the elite- of the

dominant and the mass- of the dominated, a contingent, disorgani5ed

multi#licit , interchangeable and innumerable, e isting onl statisticall . These

m thic roots onl ha%e to be allo0ed to ta e their course in order to generate, at


5/47

0ill, one or another of the tirelessl re#eated themes of the eternal sociodic ,

such as a#ocal #tic denunciations of all forms of le%elling-, tri%iali5ation- or

massification-, 0hich identif the decline of societies 0ith the decadence of

bourgeois houses, i.e., a fall into the homogeneous, the undifferentiated, and

betra an obsessi%e fear of number, of undifferentiated hordes indifferent to

difference and constantl threatening to submerge the #ri%ate s#aces of

bourgeois e clusi%eness.

The seemingl most formal o##ositions 0ithin this social m tholog al0a s

deri%e their ideological strength from the fact that the refer bac , more or less

discreetl , to the most fundamental o##ositions 0ithin the social order: the

o##osition bet0een the dominant and the dominated, 0hich is inscribed in the

di%ision of labour, and the o##osition, rooted in the di%ision of the labour of

domination, bet0een t0o #rinci#les of domination, t0o #o0ers, dominant and

dominated, tem#oral and s#iritual, material and intellectual etc. t follo0s that

the ma# of social s#ace #re%iousl #ut for0ard can also be read as a strict table

of the historicall constituted and acquired categories 0hich organi5e the idea

of the social 0orld in the minds of all the sub6ects belonging to that 0orld and

sha#ed b it. The same classificator schemes 2and the o##ositions in 0hich

the are e #ressed3 can function, b being s#ecified, in fields organi5ed around

#olar #ositions, 0hether in the field of the dominant class, organi5ed around an

o##osition homologous to the o##osition constituting the field of the social

classes, or in the field of cultural #roduction, 0hich is itself organi5ed around

o##ositions 0hich re#roduce the structure of the dominant class and are

homologous to it 2e.g., the o##osition bet0een bourgeois and a%ant+garde

theatre3. So the fundamental o##osition constantl su##orts second, third or nth

ran o##ositions 2those 0hich underlie the #urest- ethical or aesthetic

6udgements, 0ith their high or lo0 sentiments, their facile or difficult notions of


6/47

beaut , their light or hea% st les etc.3, 0hile eu#hemi5ing itself to the #oint of

misrecogni5abilit .

Thus, the o##osition bet0een the hea% and the light, 0hich, in a number ofits uses, es#eciall scholastic ones, ser%es to distinguish #o#ular or #etit+

bourgeois tastes from bourgeois tastes, can be used b theatre criticism aimed at

the dominant fraction of the dominant class to e #ress the relationshi# bet0een

ntellectual- theatre, 0hich is condemned for its laborious- #retensions and

o##ressi%e- didacticism, and bourgeois- theatre, 0hich is #raised for its tact

and its art of s imming o%er surfaces. contrast, ntellectual- criticism, b a

sim#le in%ersion of %alues, e #resses the relationshi# in a scarcel modified

form of the same o##osition, 0ith lightness, identified 0ith fri%olit , being

o##osed to #rofundit . Similarl , it can be sho0n that the o##osition bet0een

right and left, 0hich, in its basic form, concerns the relationshi# bet0een the

dominant and the dominated, can also, b means of a first transformation,

designate the relations bet0een dominated fractions and dominant fractions

0ithin the dominant class< the 0ords right and left then ta e on a meaning close

to the meaning the ha%e in e #ressions li e right+ban - theatre or left+ban -

theatre. =ith a further degree of de+reali5ation-, it can e%en ser%e to

distinguish t0o ri%al tendencies 0ithin an a%ant+garde artistic or literar grou#,

and so on.

t follo0s that, 0hen considered in each of their uses, the #airs of qualifiers,the s stem of 0hich constitutes the conce#tual equi#ment of the 6udgement of

taste, are e tremel #oor, almost indefinite, but, #recisel for this reason,

ca#able of eliciting or e #ressing the sense of the indefinable. >ach #articular

use of one of these #airs onl ta es on its full meaning in relation to a uni%erse

of discourse that is different each time and usuall im#licit / since it is a

question of the s stem of self+e%idences and #resu##ositions that are ta en forgranted in the field in relation to 0hich the s#ea ers- strategies are defined. ut


7/47

each of the cou#les s#ecified b usage has for undertones all the other uses it

might ha%e / because of the homologies bet0een the fields 0hich allo0

transfers from one field to another / and also all the other cou#les 0hich are

interchangeable 0ith it, 0ithin a nuance or t0o 2e.g., fine?crude for

light?hea% 3, that is, in slightl different conte ts.

The fact that the semi+codified o##ositions contained in ordinar language

rea##ear, 0ith %er similar %alues, as the basis of the dominant %ision of the

social 0orld, in all class+di%ided social formations 2consider the tendenc to see

the #eo#le- as the site of totall uncontrolled a##etites and se ualit 3 can be

understood once one no0s that, reduced to their formal structure, the same

fundamental relationshi#s, #recisel those 0hich e #ress the ma6or relations of

order 2high?lo0, strong?0ea etc.3 rea##ear in all class+di%ided societies. And

the recurrence of the triadic structure studied b @eorges umB5il, 0hich

@eorges ub sho0s in the case of feudal societ to be rooted in the social

structures it legitimates, ma 0ell be, li e the in%ariant o##ositions in 0hich the

relationshi# of domination is e #ressed, sim#l a necessar outcome of the

intersection of the t0o #rinci#les of di%ision 0hich are at 0or in all class+

di%ided societies / the di%ision bet0een the dominant and the dominated, and

the di%ision bet0een the different fractions com#eting for dominance in the

name of different #rinci#les, bellatores 20arriors3 and oratores 2scholars3 in

feudal societ , businessmen and intellectuals no0.

Knowledge without Concepts

Thus, through the differentiated and differentiating conditionings associated

0ith the different conditions of e istence, through the e clusions and

inclusions, unions 2marriages, affairs, alliances etc.3 and di%isions

2incom#atibilities, se#arations, struggles etc.3 0hich go%ern the social structure

and the structuring force it e erts, through all the hierarchies and classifications


8/47

inscribed in ob6ects 2es#eciall cultural #roducts3, in institutions 2for e am#le,

the educational s stem3 or sim#l in language, and through all the 6udgements,

%erdicts, gradings and 0arnings im#osed b the institutions s#eciall designed

for this #ur#ose, such as the famil or the educational s stem, or constantl

arising from the meetings and interactions of e%er da life, the social order is

#rogressi%el inscribed in #eo#le-s minds. Social di%isions become #rinci#les

of di%ision, organi5ing the image of the social 0orld. 7b6ecti%e limits become a

sense of limits, a #ractical antici#ation of ob6ecti%e limits acquired b

e #erience of ob6ecti%e limits, a sense of one-s #lace- 0hich leads one to

e clude oneself from the goods, #ersons, #laces and so forth from 0hich one ise cluded.

The sense of limits im#lies forgetting the limits. 7ne of the most im#ortant

effects of the corres#ondence bet0een real di%isions and #ractical #rinci#les of

di%ision, bet0een social structures and mental structures, is undoubtedl the

fact that #rimar e #erience of the social 0orld is that of do a, an adherence to

relations of order 0hich, because the structure inse#arabl both the real 0orld

and the thought 0orld, are acce#ted as self+e%ident. 'rimar #erce#tion of the

social 0orld, far from being a sim#le mechanical reflection, is al0a s an act of

cognition in%ol%ing #rinci#les of construction that are e ternal to the

constructed ob6ect gras#ed in its immediac < but at the same time it is an act of

miscognition, im#l ing the most absolute form of recognition of the social

order. ominated agents, 0ho assess the %alue of their #osition and their

characteristics b a##l ing a s stem of schemes of #erce#tion and a##reciation

0hich is the embodiment of the ob6ecti%e la0s 0hereb their %alue is

ob6ecti%el constituted, tend to attribute to themsel%es 0hat the distribution

attributes to them, refusing 0hat the are refused 2-that-s not for the li es of

us-3, ad6usting their e #ectations to their chances, defining themsel%es as the

established order defines them, re#roducing in their %erdict on themsel%es the


9/47

%erdict the econom #ronounces on them, in a 0ord, condemning themsel%es to

0hat is in an case their lot, , as 'lato #ut it, consenting to be 0hat

the ha%e to be, modest-, humble- and obscure-. Thus the conser%ation of the

social order is decisi%el reinforced b 0hat ur heim called logical

conformit ,- i.e., the orchestration of categories of #erce#tion of the social

0orld, 0hich, being ad6usted to the di%isions of the established order 2and

thereb to the interests of those 0ho dominate it3 and common to all minds

structured in accordance 0ith those structures, #resent e%er a##earance of

ob6ecti%e necessit .

The s stem of classificator schemes is o##osed to a ta onom based on

e #licit and e #licitl concerted #rinci#les in the same 0a that the dis#ositions

constituting taste or ethos 20hich are dimensions of it3 are o##osed to aesthetics

or ethics. The sense of social realities that is acquired in the confrontation 0ith

a #articular form of social necessit is 0hat ma es it #ossible to act as if one

ne0 the structure of the social 0orld, one-s #lace 0ithin it and the distances

that need to be e#t.

The #ractical master of classification has nothing in common 0ith the

refle i%e master that is required in order to construct a ta onom that is

simultaneousl coherent and adequate to social realit . The #ractical science-

of #ositions in social s#ace is the com#etence #resu##osed b the art of

beha%ing comme il faut 0ith #ersons and things that ha%e and gi%e class-2-smart- or unsmart-3, finding the right distance, b a sort of #ractical

calculation, neither too close 2 getting familiar-3 nor too far 2 being distant-3,

#la ing 0ith ob6ecti%e distance b em#hasi5ing it 2being aloof-, stand+offish-3

or s mbolicall den ing it 2being a##roachable,- hobnobbing-3. t in no 0a

im#lies the ca#acit to situate oneself e #licitl in the classification 2as so man


10/47

sur%e s on social class as #eo#le to do3, still less to describe this classification

in an s stematic 0a and state its #rinci#les.

The #ractical attributi%e 6udgement- 0hereb one #uts someone in a class bs#ea ing to him in a certain 0a 2thereb #utting oneself in a class at the same

time3 has nothing to do 0ith an intellectual o#eration im#l ing conscious

reference to e #licit indices and the im#lementation of classes #roduced b and

for the conce#t. The same classificator o##osition 2rich?#oor, oung?old etc.3

can be a##lied at an #oint in the distribution and re#roduce its 0hole range

0ithin an of its segments 2common sense tells us that one is al0a s richer or

#oorer than someone, su#erior or inferior to someone, more right+0ing or left+

0ing than someone / but this does not entail an elementar relati%ism3.

t is not sur#rising that it is #ossible to fault the #ractical sense of social s#ace

0hich lies behind class+attributi%e 6udgement< the sociologists 0ho use their

res#ondents- self+contradictions as an argument for den ing the e istence of

classes sim#l re%eal that the understand nothing of ho0 this sense- 0or s orof the artificial situation in 0hich the are ma ing it 0or . n fact, 0hether it is

used to situate oneself in social s#ace or to #lace others, the sense of social

s#ace, li e e%er #ractical sense, al0a s refers to the #articular situation in

0hich it has to orient #ractices. This e #lains, for e am#le, the di%ergences

bet0een sur%e s of the re#resentation of the classes in a small to0n

2 communit studies-3 and sur%e s of class on a nation+0ide scale. ut if, as hasoften been obser%ed, res#ondents do not agree either on the number of di%isions

the ma e 0ithin the grou# in question, or on the limits of the strata- and the

criteria used to define them, this is not sim#l due to the fu55iness inherent in

all #ractical logics. t is also because #eo#le-s image of the classification is a

function of their #osition 0ithin it.


11/47

So nothing is further remo%ed from an act of cognition, as concei%ed b the

intellectualist tradition, than this sense of the social structure, 0hich, as is so

0ell #ut b the 0ord taste / simultaneousl the facult of #ercei%ing

fla%ours- and the ca#acit to discern aesthetic %alues- / is social necessit

made second nature, turned into muscular #atterns and bodil automatisms.

>%er thing ta es #lace as if the social conditionings lin ed to a social condition

tended to inscribe the relation to the social 0orld in a lasting, generali5ed

relation to one-s o0n bod , a 0a of bearing one-s bod , #resenting it to others,

mo%ing it, ma ing s#ace for it, 0hich gi%es the bod its social #h siognom .

odil hexis, a basic dimension of the sense of social orientation, is a #ractical0a of e #eriencing and e #ressing one-s o0n sense of social %alue. 7ne-s

relationshi# to the social 0orld and to one-s #ro#er #lace in it is ne%er more

clearl e #ressed than in the s#ace and time one feels entitled to ta e from

others< more #recisel , in the s#ace one claims 0ith one-s bod in #h sical

s#ace, through a bearing and gestures that are self+assured or reser%ed,

e #ansi%e or constricted 2 #resence- or insignificance-3 and 0ith one-s s#eechin time, through the interaction time one a##ro#riates and the self+assured or

aggressi%e, careless or unconscious 0a one a##ro#riates it.

There is no better image of the logic of sociali5ation, 0hich treats the bod as

a memor +6ogger-, than those com#le es of gestures, #ostures and 0ords /

sim#le inter6ections or fa%ourite clichBs / 0hich onl ha%e to be sli##ed into,

li e a theatrical costume, to a0a en, b the e%ocati%e #o0er of bodil mimesis,

a uni%erse of read +made feelings and e #eriences. The elementar actions of

bodil g mnastics, es#eciall the s#ecificall se ual, biologicall #re+

constructed as#ect of it, charged 0ith social meanings and %alues, function as

the most basic of meta#hors, ca#able of e%o ing a 0hole relationshi# to the

0orld, loft - or submissi%e-, e #ansi%e- or narro0-, and through it a 0hole

0orld. The #ractical choices- of the sense of social orientation no more


12/47

#resu##ose a re#resentation of the range of #ossibilities than does the choice of

#honemes< these enacted choices im#l no acts of choosing. The logocentrism

and intellectualism of intellectuals, combined 0ith the #re6udice inherent in the

science 0hich ta es as its ob6ect the #s che, the soul, the mind, consciousness,

re#resentations, not to mention the #etit+bourgeois #retension to the status of

#erson-, ha%e #re%ented us from seeing that, as eibini5 #ut it, 0e are

automatons in three+quarters of 0hat 0e do-, and that the ultimate %alues, as

the are called, are ne%er an thing other than the #rimar , #rimiti%e dis#ositions

of the bod , %isceral- tastes and distastes, in 0hich the grou#-s most %ital

interests are embedded, the things on 0hich one is #re#ared to sta e one-s o0nand other #eo#le-s bodies. The sense of distinction, the discretio

2discrimination3 0hich demands that certain things be brought together and

others e#t a#art, 0hich e cludes all misalliances and all unnatural unions /

i.e., all unions contrar to the common classification, to the diacrisis

2se#aration3 0hich is the basis of collecti%e and indi%idual identit / res#onds

0ith %isceral, murderous horror, absolute disgust, meta#h sical fur , toe%er thing 0hich lies in 'lato-s h brid 5one-, e%er thing 0hich #asses

understanding, that is, the embodied ta onom , 0hich, b challenging the

#rinci#les of the incarnate social order, es#eciall the sociall constituted

#rinci#les of the se ual di%ision of labour and the di%ision of se ual labour,

%iolates the mental order, scandalousl flouting common sense.

Advantageous Attributions

The basis of the #ertinence #rinci#le 0hich is im#lemented in #ercei%ing the

social 0orld and 0hich defines all the characteristics of #ersons or things 0hich

can be #ercei%ed, and #ercei%ed as #ositi%el or negati%el interesting, b all

those 0ho a##l these schemes 2another definition of common sense3, is based

on nothing other than the interest the indi%iduals or grou#s in question ha%e in

recogni5ing a feature and in identif ing the indi%idual in question as a member


13/47

of the set defined b that feature< interest in the as#ect obser%ed is ne%er

com#letel inde#endent of the ad%antage of obser%ing it. This can be clearl

seen in all the classifications built around a stigmati5ed feature 0hich, li e the

e%er da o##osition bet0een homose uals and heterose uals, isolate the

interesting trait from all the rest 2 i.e., all other forms of se ualit 3, 0hich

remain indifferent and undifferentiated. t is e%en clearer in all labelling

6udgements-, 0hich are in fact accusations, categoremes in the original

Aristotelian sense, and 0hich, li e insults, onl 0ish to no0 one of the

#ro#erties constituting the social identit of an indi%idual or grou# 2 ou-re 6ust

a ...-3, regarding, for e am#le, the married homose ual or con%erted Je0 as acloset queen- or co%ert Je0, and thereb in a sense doubl Je0ish or

homose ual. The logic of the stigma reminds us that social identit is the sta e

in a struggle in 0hich the stigmati5ed indi%idual or grou#, and, more generall ,

an indi%idual or grou# insofar as he or it is a #otential ob6ect of categori5ation,

can onl retaliate against the #artial #erce#tion 0hich limits it to one of its

characteristics b highlighting, in its self+definition, the best of itscharacteristics, and, more generall , b struggling to im#ose the ta onom most

fa%ourable to its characteristics, or at least to gi%e to the dominant ta onom the

content most flattering to 0hat it has and 0hat it is.

Those 0ho are sur#rised b the #arado es that ordinar logic and language

engender 0hen the a##l their di%isions to continuous magnitudes forget the

#arado es inherent in treating language as a #urel logical instrument and also

forget the social situation in 0hich such a relationshi# to language is #ossible.

The contradictions or #arado es to 0hich ordinar language classifications lead

do not deri%e, as all forms of #ositi%ism su##ose, from some essential

inadequac of ordinar language, but from the fact that these socio+logical acts

are not directed to0ards the #ursuit of logical coherence and that, unli e

#hilological, logical or linguistic uses of language / 0hich ought reall to be


14/47

called scholastic, since the all #resu##ose schole, i.e., leisure, distance from

urgenc and necessit , the absence of %ital sta es, and the scholastic institution

0hich in most social uni%erses is the onl institution ca#able of #ro%iding all

these / the obe the logic of the parti pris, 0hich, as in a court+room, 6u ta#oses not logical 6udgements, sub6ect to the sole criterion of coherence, but

charges and defences. Duite a#art from all that is im#lied in the o##ositions,

0hich logicians and e%en linguists manage to forget, bet0een the art of

con%incing and the art of #ersuading, it is clear that scholastic usage of

language is to the orator-s, ad%ocate-s or #olitician-s usage 0hat the

classificator s stems de%ised b the logician or statistician concerned 0ithcoherence and em#irical adequac are to the categori5ations and categoremes of

dail life. As the et molog suggests, the latter belong to the logic of the trial.

>%er real inquir into the di%isions of the social 0orld has to anal se the

interests associated 0ith membershi# or non+membershi#. As is sho0n b the

attention de%oted to strategic, frontier- grou#s such as the labour aristocrac -,

0hich hesitates bet0een class struggle and class collaboration, or the cadres-, acategor of bureaucratic statistics, 0hose nominal, doubl negati%e unit

conceals its real dis#ersion both from the interested #arties- and from their

o##onents and most obser%ers, the la ing do0n of boundaries bet0een the

classes is ins#ired b the strategic aim of counting in- or being counted in-,

cataloguing- or anne ing-, 0hen it is not the sim#le recording of a legall

guaranteed state of the #o0er relation bet0een the classified grou#s.

ea%ing aside all cases in 0hich the statutor im#osition of an arbitrar

boundar 2such as a E)+ ilo limit on baggage or the rule that a %ehicle o%er t0o

tons is a %an3 suffices to eliminate the difficulties that arise from the so#hism of

the hea# of grain, boundaries / e%en the most formal+loo ing ones, such as

those bet0een age+grou#s / do indeed free5e a #articular state of social

struggles, i.e., a gi%en state of the distribution of ad%antages and obligations,


15/47

such as the right to #ensions or chea# fares, com#ulsor schooling or militar

ser%ice. And if 0e are amused b Al#honse Allais-s stor of the father 0ho

#ulls the communication cord to sto# the train at the %er moment his child

becomes three ears old 2and so needs a tic et to tra%el3, it is because 0e

immediatel see the sociological absurdit of an imaginar %ariation 0hich is as

im#eccabl logical as those on 0hich logicians base their belo%ed #arado es.

$ere the limits are frontiers to be attac ed or defended 0ith all one-s strength,

and the classificator s stems 0hich fi them are not so much means of

no0ledge as means of #o0er, harnessed to social functions and o%ertl or

co%ertl aimed at satisf ing the interests of a grou#.

Common#laces and classificator s stems are thus the sta e of struggles

bet0een the grou#s the characteri5e and counter#ose, 0ho fight o%er them

0hile stri%ing to turn them to their o0n ad%antage. @eorges ub sho0s ho0

the model of the three orders, 0hich fi ed a state of the social structure and

aimed to ma e it #ermanent b codif ing it, 0as able to be used simultaneousl

and successi%el b antagonistic grou#s: first b the bisho#s, 0ho had de%ised

it, against the heretics, the mon s and the nights< then b the aristocrac ,

against the bisho#s and the ing< and finall b the ing, 0ho, b setting

himself u# as the absolute sub6ect of the classif ing o#eration, as a #rinci#le

e ternal and su#erior to the classes it generated 2unli e the three orders, 0ho

0ere sub6ects but also ob6ects, 6udges but also #arties3, assigned each grou# its

#lace in the social order, and established himself as an unassailable %antage+

#oint. n the same 0a it can be sho0n that the schemes and common#laces

0hich #ro%ide images of the different forms of domination, the o##osition

bet0een the se es and age+grou#s. as 0ell as the o##osition bet0een the

generations, are similarl mani#ulated. The oung- can acce#t the definition

that their elders offer them, ta e ad%antage of the tem#orar licence the are

allo0ed in man societies 2 outh must ha%e its fling-3, do 0hat is assigned to


16/47

them, re%el in the s#ecific %irtues- of outh, virt, %irilit , enthusiasm, and get

on 0ith their o0n business / night+errantr for the scions of the mediae%al

aristocrac , lo%e and %iolence for the outh of !enaissance Florence, and e%er

form of regulated, ludic 0ildness 2s#ort, roc etc.3 for contem#orar

adolescents / in short, allo0 themsel%es to be e#t in the state of outh-, that

is, irres#onsibilit , en6o ing the freedom of irres#onsible beha%iour in return for

renouncing res#onsibilit . n situations of s#ecific crisis, 0hen the order of

successions is threatened, oung #eo#le-, refusing to remain consigned to

outh-, tend to consign the old- to old age-. =anting to ta e the

res#onsibilities 0hich define adults 2in the sense of sociall com#lete #ersons3,the must #ush the holders of res#onsibilities into that form of irres#onsibilit

0hich defines old age, or rather retirement. The 0isdom and #rudence claimed

b the elders then colla#se into conser%atism, archaism or, quite sim#l , senile

irres#onsibilit . The ne0comers, 0ho are li el to be also the biologicall

oungest, but 0ho bring 0ith them man other distincti%e #ro#erties, stemming

from changes in the social conditions of #roduction of the #roducers 2i.e., #rinci#all the famil and the educational s stem3, esca#e the more ra#idl

from outh- 2irres#onsibilit 3 the readier the are to brea 0ith the

irres#onsible beha%iour assigned to them and, freeing themsel%es from the

internali5ed limits 2those 0hich ma ma e a G)+ ear+old feel too oung

reasonabl to as#ire- to a #osition or an honour3, do not hesitate to #ush

for0ard, lea#+frog- and ta e the escalator- to #reci#itate their #redecessors-fall into the #ast, the outdated, in short, social death. ut the ha%e no chance of

0inning the struggles o%er the limits 0hich brea out bet0een the age+grou#s

0hen the sense of the limits is lost, unless the manage to im#ose a ne0

definition of the sociall com#lete #erson, including in it characteristics

normall 2i.e., in terms of the #re%ailing classificator #rinci#le3 associated 0ith

outh 2enthusiasm, energ and so on3 or characteristics that can su##lant the

%irtues normall associated 0ith adulthood.


17/47

n short, 0hat indi%iduals and grou#s in%est in the #articular meaning the

gi%e to common classificator s stems b the use the ma e of them is

infinitel more than their interest- in the usual sense of the term< it is their

0hole social being, e%er thing 0hich defines their o0n idea of themsel%es, the

#rimordial, tacit contract 0hereb the define us- as o##osed to them-, other

#eo#le-, and 0hich is the basis of the e clusions 2 not for the li es of us-3 and

inclusions the #erform among the characteristics #roduced b the common

classificator s stem.

The fact that, in their relationshi# to the dominant classes, the dominated

classes attribute to themsel%es strength in the sense of labour #o0er and

fighting strength / #h sical strength and also strength of character, courage,

manliness / does not #re%ent the dominant grou#s from similarl concei%ing

the relationshi# in terms of the scheme strong?0ea < but the reduce the

strength 0hich the dominated 2or the oung, or 0omen3 ascribe to themsel%es

to brute strength, #assion and instinct, a blind, un#redictable force of nature, the

unreasoning %iolence of desire, and the attribute to themsel%es s#iritual and

intellectual strength, a self+control that #redis#oses them to control others, a

strength of soul or s#irit 0hich allo0s them to concei%e their relationshi# to the

dominated / the masses-, 0omen, the oung / as that of the soul to the

bod , understanding to sensibilit , culture to nature.

The Classification-Struggle'rinci#les of di%ision, ine tricabl logical and sociological, function 0ithin and

for the #ur#oses of the struggle bet0een social grou#s< in #roducing conce#ts,

the #roduce grou#s, the %er grou#s 0hich #roduce the #rinci#les and the

grou#s against 0hich the are #roduced. =hat is at sta e in the struggles about

the meaning of the social 0orld is #o0er o%er the classificator schemes and

s stems 0hich are the basis of the re#resentations of the grou#s and therefore of


18/47

their mobili5ation and demobili5ation: the e%ocati%e #o0er of an utterance

0hich #uts things in a different light 2as ha##ens, for e am#le, 0hen a single

0ord, such as #aternalism-, changes the 0hole e #erience of a social

relationshi#3 or 0hich modifies the schemes of #erce#tion, sho0s something

else, other #ro#erties, #re%iousl unnoticed or relegated to the bac ground

2such as common interests hitherto mas ed b ethnic or national differences3< a

se#arati%e #o0er, a distinction, diacrisis, discretio,dra0ing discrete units out of

indi%isible continuit , difference out of the undifferentiated.

7nl in and through the struggle do the internali5ed limits become

boundaries, barriers that ha%e to be mo%ed. And indeed, the s stem of

classificator schemes is constituted as an ob6ectified, institutionali5ed s stem

of classification onl 0hen it has ceased to function as a sense of limits so that

the guardians of the established order must enunciate, s stemati5e and codif

the #rinci#les of #roduction of that order, both real and re#resented, so as to

defend them against heres < in short, the must constitute the doxa as

orthodo . 7fficial s stems of classification, such as the theor of the three

orders, do e #licitl and s stematicall 0hat the classificator schemes did

tacitl and #racticall . Attributes, in the sense of #redicates, thereb become

attributions, #o0ers, ca#acities, #ri%ileges, #rerogati%es, attributed to the holder

of a #ost, so that 0ar is no longer 0hat the 0arrior does, but the officium, the

s#ecific function, the raison dtre, of the bellator. Classificator discretio, li e

la0, free5es a certain state of the #o0er relations 0hich it aims to fi fore%er b

enunciating and codif ing it. The classificator s stem as a #rinci#le of logical

and #olitical di%ision onl e ists and functions because it re#roduces, in a

transfigured form, in the s mbolic logic of differential ga#s, i.e., of

discontinuit , the generall gradual and continuous differences 0hich structure

the established order, but it ma es its o0n, that is, s#ecificall s mbolic,

contribution to the maintenance of that order onl because it has the s#ecificall


19/47

s mbolic #o0er to ma e #eo#le see and belie%e 0hich is gi%en b the

im#osition of mental structures.

S stems of classification 0ould not be such a decisi%e ob6ect of struggle ifthe did not contribute to the e istence of classes b enhancing the efficac of

the ob6ecti%e mechanisms 0ith the reinforcement su##lied b re#resentations

structured in accordance 0ith the classification. The im#osition of a recogni5ed

name is an act of recognition of full social e istence 0hich transmutes the thing

named. t no longer e ists merel de facto, as a tolerated, illegal or illegitimate

#ractice, but becomes a social function, i.e., a mandate, a mission 2 Beruf 3 , a

tas , a role / all 0ords 0hich e #ress the difference bet0een authori5ed

acti%it , 0hich is assigned to an indi%idual or grou# b tacit or e #licit

delegation, and mere usur#ation, 0hich creates a state of affairs- a0aiting

institutionali5ation. ut the s#ecific effect of collecti%e re#resentations-,

0hich, contrar to 0hat the ur heimian connotations might suggest, ma be

the #roduct of the a##lication of the same scheme of #erce#tion or a common

s stem of classification 0hile still being sub6ect to antagonistic social uses, is

most clearl seen 0hen the 0ord #recedes the thing, as 0ith %oluntar

associations that rum into recogni5ed #rofessions or cor#orate defence grou#s

2such as the trade union of the cadres-3, 0hich #rogressi%el im#ose the

re#resentation of their e istence and their unit , both on their o0n members and

on other grou#s.

A grou#-s #resence or absence in the official classification de#ends on its

ca#acit to get itself recogni5ed, to get itself noticed and admitted, and so to

0in a #lace in the social order. t thus esca#es from the shado0 e istence of

the nameless crafts of 0hich >mile en%eniste s#ea s: business in antiquit and

the ;iddle Ages, or illegitimate acti%ities, such as those of the modern healer

2formerl called an em#iric-3, bone+setter or #rostitute. The fate of grou#s is bound u# 0ith the 0ords that designate them: the #o0er to im#ose recognition


20/47

de#ends on the ca#acit to mobili5e around a name, #roletariat-, 0or ing

class-, cadres- etc., to a##ro#riate a common name and to commune in a #ro#er

name, and so to mobili5e the union that ma es them strong, around the unif ing

#o0er of a 0ord.

n fact, the order of 0ords ne%er e actl re#roduces the order of things. t is

the relati%e inde#endence of the structure of the s stem of classif ing, classified

0ords 20ithin 0hich the distinct %alue of each #articular label is defined3 in

relation to the structure of the distribution of ca#ital, and more #recisel , it is

the time+lag 2#artl resulting from the inertia inherent in classification s stems

as quasi+legal institutions sanctioning a state of a #o0er relation3 bet0een

changes in 6obs, lin ed to changes in the #roducti%e a##aratus, and changes in

titles, 0hich creates the s#ace for s mbolic strategies aimed at e #loiting the

discre#ancies bet0een the nominal and the real, a##ro#riating 0ords so as to

get the things the designate, or a##ro#riating things 0hile 0aiting to get the

0ords that sanction them< e ercising res#onsibilities 0ithout ha%ing entitlement

to do so, in order to acquire the right to claim the legitimate titles, or,

con%ersel , declining the material ad%antages associated 0ith de%alued titles so

as to a%oid losing the s mbolic ad%antages besto0ed b more #restigious labels

or, at least, %aguer and more mani#ulable ones< donning the most flattering of

the a%ailable insignia, %erging on im#osture if need be / li e the #otters 0ho

call themsel%es art craftsmen-, or technicians 0ho claim to be engineers / or

in%enting ne0 labels, li e #h siothera#ists 2 kin s th rapeutes3 0ho count on

this ne0 title to se#arate them from mere masseurs and bring them closer to

doctors. All these strategies, li e all #rocesses of com#etition, a #a#er+chase

aimed at ensuring constant distincti%e ga#s, tend to #roduce a stead inflation of

titles / restrained b the inertia of the institutionali5ed ta onomies 2collecti%e

agreements, salar scales etc.3 / to 0hich legal guarantees are attached. The

negotiations bet0een antagonistic interest grou#s, 0hich arise from the


21/47

establishment of collecti%e agreements and 0hich concern, inse#arabl , the

tas s entailed b a gi%en 6ob, the #ro#erties required of its occu#ants 2e.g.,

di#lomas3 and the corres#onding ad%antages, both material and s mbolic 2the

name3, are an institutionali5ed, theatrical %ersion of the incessant struggles o%er

the classifications 0hich hel# to #roduce the classes, although these

classifications are the #roduct of the struggles bet0een the classes and de#end

on the #o0er relations bet0een them.

The Reality of Representation and the Representationof Reality

The classif ing sub6ects 0ho classif the #ro#erties and #ractices of others, or

their o0n, are also classifiable ob6ects 0hich classif themsel%es 2in the e es of

others3 b a##ro#riating #ractices and #ro#erties that are alread classified 2as

%ulgar or distinguished, high or lo0, hea% or light etc. / in other 0ords, in the

last anal sis, as #o#ular or bourgeois3 according to their #robable distribution

bet0een grou#s that are themsel%es classified. The most classif ing and best

classified of these #ro#erties are, of course, those 0hich are o%ertl designated

to function as signs of distinction or mar s of infam , stigmata, es#eciall the

names and titles e #ressing class membershi# 0hose intersection defines social

identit at an gi%en time / the name of a nation, a region, an ethnic grou#, a

famil name, the name of an occu#ation, an educational qualification, honorific

titles and so on. Those 0ho classif themsel%es or others, b a##ro#riating or

classif ing #ractices or #ro#erties that are classified and classif ing, cannot be

una0are that, through distincti%e ob6ects or #ractices in 0hich their #o0ers-

are e #ressed and 0hich, being a##ro#riated b and a##ro#riate to classes,

classif those 0ho a##ro#riate them, the classif themsel%es in the e es of

other classif ing 2but also classifiable3 sub6ects, endo0ed 0ith classificator

schemes analogous to those 0hich enable them more or less adequatel to

antici#ate their o0n classification.


22/47

Social sub6ects com#rehend the social 0orld 0hich com#rehends them. This

means that the cannot be characteri5ed sim#l in terms of material #ro#erties,

starting 0ith the bod , 0hich can be counted and measured li e an other

ob6ect in the #h sical 0orld. n fact, each of these #ro#erties, be it the height or

%olume of the bod or the e tent of landed #ro#ert , 0hen #ercei%ed and

a##reciated in relation to other #ro#erties of the same class b agents equi##ed

0ith sociall constituted schemes of #erce#tion and a##reciation, functions as a

s mbolic #ro#ert . t is therefore necessar to mo%e be ond the o##osition

bet0een a social #h sics- / 0hich uses statistics in ob6ecti%ist fashion to

establish distributions 2in both the statistical and economic senses3, quantifiede #ressions of the differential a##ro#riation of a finite quantit of social energ

b a large number of com#eting indi%iduals, identified through ob6ecti%e

indicators- / and a social semiolog - 0hich see s to deci#her meanings and

bring to light the cogniti%e o#erations 0hereb agents #roduce and deci#her

them. =e ha%e to refuse the dichotom bet0een, on the one hand, the aim of

arri%ing at an ob6ecti%e realit -, inde#endent of indi%idual consciousnessesand 0ills-, b brea ing 0ith common re#resentations of the social 0orld

2 ur heim-s #re+notions-3, and of unco%ering la0s- / that is, significant 2in

the sense of non+random3 relationshi#s bet0een distributions / and, on the

other hand, the aim of gras#ing, not realit -, but agents- re#resentations of it,

0hich are the 0hole realit - of a social 0orld concei%ed as 0ill and

re#resentation-.

n short, social science does not ha%e to choose bet0een that form of social

#h sics, re#resented b ur heim / 0ho agrees 0ith social semiolog in

ac no0ledging that one can onl no0 realit - b a##l ing logical instruments

of classification / and the idealist semiolog 0hich, underta ing to construct

an account of accounts-, as $arold @arfin el #uts it, can do no more than

record the recordings of a social 0orld 0hich is ultimatel no more than the


23/47

#roduct of mental, i.e., linguistic, structures. =hat 0e ha%e to do is to bring into

the science of scarcit , and of com#etition for scarce goods, the #ractical

no0ledge 0hich the agents obtain for themsel%es b #roducing / on the basis

of their e #erience of the distributions, itself de#endent on their #osition in the

distributions / di%isions and classifications 0hich are no less ob6ecti%e than

those of the balance+sheets of social #h sics. n other 0ords, 0e ha%e to mo%e

be ond the o##osition bet0een ob6ecti%ist theories 0hich identif the social

classes 2but also the se or age classes3 0ith discrete grou#s, sim#le countable

#o#ulations se#arated b boundaries ob6ecti%el dra0n in realit , and

sub6ecti%ist 2or marginalist3 theories 0hich reduce the social order- to a sort ofcollecti%e classification obtained b aggregating the indi%idual classifications

or, more #recisel , the indi%idual strategies, classified and classif ing, through

0hich agents class themsel%es and others.

7ne onl has to bear in mind that goods are con%erted into

distincti%e signs, 0hich ma be signs of distinction but also

of %ulgarit , as soon as the are #ercei%ed relationall , to

see that the re#resentation 0hich indi%iduals and grou#s

ine%itabl #ro6ect through their #ractices and #ro#erties is an

integral #art of social realit . A class is defined as much b

its being!perceivedas b its being, b its consum#tion /

0hich need not be cons#icuous in order to be s mbolic / as

much as b its #osition in the relations of #roduction 2e%en if

it is true that the latter go%erns the former3. The er eleian

/ i.e., #etit+bourgeois / %ision 0hich reduces social being

to #ercei%ed being, to seeming, and 0hich, forgetting that

there is no need to gi%e theatrical #erformances

2representations3 in order to be the ob6ect of mental

re#resentations, reduces the social 0orld to the sum of the


24/47

2mental3 re#resentations 0hich the %arious grou#s ha%e of

the theatrical #erformances #ut on b the other grou#s, has

the %irtue of insisting on the relati%e autonom of the logic

of s mbolic re#resentations 0ith res#ect to the material

determinants of socio+economic condition. The indi%idual or

collecti%e classification struggles aimed at transforming the

categories of #erce#tion and a##reciation of the social 0orld

and, through this, the social 0orld itself, are indeed a

forgotten dimension of the class struggle. ut one onl has

to reali5e that the classificator schemes 0hich underlieagents- #ractical relationshi# to their condition and the

re#resentation the ha%e of it are themsel%es the #roduct of

that condition, in order to see the limits of this autonom .

'osition in the classification struggle de#ends on #osition in

the class structure< and social sub6ects / including

intellectuals, 0ho are not those best #laced to gras# that0hich defines the limits of their thought of the social 0orld ,

that is, the illusion of the absence of limits / are #erha#s

ne%er less li el to transcend the limits of their minds- than

in the re#resentation the ha%e and gi%e of their #osition,

0hich defines those limits.


25/47

H'age I41

7riginall #ublished as "#konomisches $apital, kulturelles $apital, so%iales $apital." in &o%iale 'ngleichheiten (&o%iale )elt, &onderheft *+,edited b !einhard rec el. @oettingen: 7tto Schart5 K Co.. 198E. ##.18E+98. The article a##ears here for the first time in >nglish. translated b!ichard "ice.

The Forms of Capital

PIERRE BOURDIEU

The social 0orld is accumulated histor , and if it is not to be reducedto a discontinuous series of instantaneous mechanical equilibria bet0eenagents 0ho are treated as interchangeable #articles, one must reintroduceinto it the notion of ca#ital and 0ith it, accumulation and all its effects.Ca#ital is accumulated labor 2in its materiali5ed form or itsLincor#orated,L embodied form3 0hich, 0hen a##ro#riated on a #ri%ate,

i.e. , e clusi%e, basis b agents or grou#s of agents, enables them toa##ro#riate social energ in the form of reified or li%ing labor. t is a %isinsita, a force inscribed in ob6ecti%e or sub6ecti%e structures, but it is alsoa le insita, the #rinci#le underl ing the immanent regularities of thesocial 0orld. t is 0hat ma es the games of societ +not least, theeconomic game+something other than sim#le games of chance offering ate%er moment the #ossibilit of a miracle. !oulette, 0hich holds out theo##ortunit of 0inning a lot of mone in a short s#ace of time, andtherefore of changing oneMs social status quasi+instantaneousl , and in0hich the 0inning of the #re%ious s#in of the 0heel can be sta ed andlost at e%er ne0 s#in, gi%es a fairl accurate image of this imaginaruni%erse of #erfect com#etition or #erfect equalit of o##ortunit , a0orld 0ithout inertia, 0ithout accumulation, 0ithout heredit or acquired

#ro#erties, in 0hich e%er moment is #erfectl inde#endent of the #re%ious one, e%er soldier has a marshalMs baton in his na#sac , ande%er #ri5e can be attained, instantaneousl , b e%er one, so that at eachmoment an one can become an thing. Ca#ital, 0hich, in its ob6ectified orembodied forms, ta es time to accumulate and 0hich, as a #otentialca#acit to #roduce #rofits and to re#roduce itself in identical ore #anded form, contains a tendenc to #ersist in its being, is a force


26/47

inscribed in the ob6ecti%it of things so that e%er thing is H Page 242 notequall #ossible or im#ossible. iH1 And the structure of the distribution ofthe different t #es and subt #es of ca#ital at a gi%en moment in timere#resents the immanent structure of the social 0orld, i.e. , the set of

constraints, inscribed in the %er realit of that 0orld, 0hich go%ern itsfunctioning in a durable 0a , determining the chances of success for #ractices.

t is in fact im#ossible to account for the structure and functioning ofthe social 0orld unless one reintroduces ca#ital in all its forms and notsolel in the one form recogni5ed b economic theor .>conomic theorhas allo0ed to be foisted u#on it a definition of the econom of #ractices0hich is the historical in%ention of ca#italism< and b reducing theuni%erse of e changes to mercantile e change, 0hich is ob6ecti%el and

sub6ecti%el oriented to0ard the ma imi5ation of #rofit, i.e. ,2economicall 3 self!interested , it has im#licitl defined the other forms ofe change as noneconomic, and therefore disinterested . n #articular, itdefines as disinterested those forms of e change 0hich ensure thetransubstantiation 0hereb the most material t #es of ca#ital+those 0hichare economic in the restricted sense+can #resent themsel%es in theimmaterial form of cultural ca#ital or social ca#ital and %ice %ersa.

nterest, in the restricted sense it is gi%en in economic theor , cannot be #roduced 0ithout #roducing its negati%e counter#art, disinterestedness.

The class of #ractices 0hose e #licit #ur#ose is to ma imi5e monetar #rofit cannot be defined as such 0ithout #roducing the #ur#oselessfinalit of cultural or artistic #ractices and their #roducts< the 0orld of

bourgeois man, 0ith his double+entr accounting, cannot be in%ented0ithout #roducing the #ure, #erfect uni%erse of the artist and theintellectual and the gratuitous acti%ities of art+for+artMs sa e and #uretheor . n other 0ords, the constitution of a science of mercantilerelationshi#s 0hich, inasmuch as it ta es for granted the %er foundationsof the order it claims to anal 5e+#ri%ate #ro#ert , #rofit, 0age labor, etc.+is not e%en a science of the field of economic #roduction, has #re%entedthe constitution of a general science of the econom of #ractices, 0hich0ould treat mercantile e change as a #articular case of e change in all itsforms.

t is remar able that the #ractices and assets thus sal%aged from theLic 0ater of egotistical calculationL 2and from science3 are the %irtualmono#ol of the dominant class+as if economism had been able to reducee%er thing to eco+ nomics onl because the reduction on 0hich thatdisci#line is based #rotects from sacrilegious reduction e%er thing 0hich

needs to be #rotected. f economics deals onl 0ith #ractices that ha%enarro0l economic interest as their #rinci#le and onl 0ith goods that are


27/47

directl and immediatel con%ertible into mone 20hich ma es themquantifiable3, then the uni%erse of bourgeois #roduction and e change

becomes an e ce#tion and can see itself and #resent itself as a realm ofdisinterestedness. As e%er one no0s, #riceless things ha%e their #rice,

and the e treme difficult of con%erting certain #ractices and certainob6ects into mone is onl due to the fact that this con%ersion is refusedin the %er intention that #roduces them, 0hich is nothing other than thedenial 2 erneinung 3 of the econom . A general science of the econom of

#ractices, ca#able of rea##ro+ H page 243 #riating the totalit of the #ractices 0hich, although ob6ecti%el economic, are not and cannot besociall recogni5ed as economic, and 0hich can be #erformed onl at thecost of a 0hole labor of dissimulation or, more #recisel , euphemi%ation,must endea%or to gras# ca#ital and #rofit in all their forms and to

establish the la0s 0hereb the different t #es of ca#ital 2or #o0er, 0hichamounts to the same thing3 change into one another. iiHI

e#ending on the field in 0hich it functions, and at the cost of themore or less e #ensi%e transformations 0hich are the #recondition for itsefficac in the field in question, ca#ital can #resent itself in threefundamental guises: as economic capital , 0hich is immediatel anddirectl con%ertible into mone and ma be institutionali5ed in the formsof #ro#ert rights< as cultural capital , 0hich is con%ertible, on certainconditions, into economic ca#ital and ma be institutionali5ed in the

forms of educational qualifications< and as social capital , made u# ofsocial obligations 2LconnectionsL3, 0hich is con%ertible, in certainconditions, into economic ca#ital and ma be institutionali5ed in theforms of a title of nobilit . iiiHE

CULTURAL CAPITAL

Cultural ca#ital can e ist in three forms: in the embodied state, i.e. , in theform of long+lasting dis#ositions of the mind and bod < in the ob-ectified state, in the form of cultural goods 2#ictures, boo s, dictionaries,instruments, ma+ chines, etc.3, 0hich are the trace or reali5ation oftheories or critiques of these theories, #roblematics, etc.< and in theinstitutionali%edstate, a form of ob6ectification 0hich must be set a#art

because, as 0ill be seen in the case of educational qualifications, itconfers entirel original #ro#erties on the cultural ca#ital 0hich it is

#resumed to guarantee.


28/47

The reader should not be misled b the some0hat #erem#tor air0hich the effort at a iomi5ation ma gi%e to m argument. i%H4 The notionof cultural ca#ital initiall #resented itself to me, in the course ofresearch, as a theoretical h #othesis 0hich made it #ossible to e #lain the

unequal scholastic achie%ement of children originating from the differentsocial classes b relating academic success, i.e. , the s#ecific #rofits0hich children from the different classes and class fractions can obtain inthe academic mar et, to the distribution of cultural ca#ital bet0een theclasses and class fractions. This starting #oint im#lies a brea 0ith the

#resu##ositions inherent both in the commonsense %ie0, 0hich seesacademic success or failure as an effect of natural a#titudes, and inhuman ca#ital theories. >conomists might seem to deser%e credit fore #licitl raising the question of the relationshi# bet0een the rates of

#rofit on educational in%estment and on economic in%estment 2and itse%olution3. ut their measurement of the ield from scholastic in%estmentta es account onl of monetar in%estments and #rofits, or those directlcon%ertible into mone , such as the costs of schooling and the cashequi%alent of time de%oted to stud < the are unable to e #lain thedifferent #ro#ortions of their resources 0hich different agents or differentHPage 244 social classes allocate to economic in%estment and culturalin%estment because the fail to ta e s stematic account of the structure ofthe differential chances of #rofit 0hich the %arious mar ets offer theseagents or classes as a function of the %olume and the com#osition of theirassets 2see es#. ec er 19(4b3. Furthermore, because the neglect torelate scholastic in%estment strategies to the 0hole set of educationalstrategies and to the s stem of re#roduction strategies, the ine%itabl , ba necessar #arado , let sli# the best hidden and sociall mostdeterminant educational in%estment, namel , the domestic transmissionof cultural ca#ital. Their studies of the relationshi# bet0een academicabilit and academic in%estment sho0 that the are una0are that abilitor talent is itself the #roduct of an in%estment of time and cultural ca#ital2 ec er 19(4a, #. (E+ ((3. "ot sur#risingl , 0hen endea%oring toe%aluate the #rofits of scholastic in%estment, the can onl consider the

#rofitabilit of educational e #enditure for societ as a 0hole, the Lsocialrate of retum,L or the Lsocial gain of education as measured b its effectson national #roducti%it L 2 ec er 19(4b, ##. 1I1, 1GG3. This t #icallfunctionalist definition of the functions of education ignores thecontribution 0hich the educational s stem ma es to the re#roduction ofthe social structure b sanctioning the hereditar transmission of culturalca#ital. From the %er beginning, a definition of human ca#ital, des#ite itshumanistic connotations, does not mo%e be ond economism and ignores,

inter alia, the fact that the scholastic ield from educational actionde#ends on the cultural ca#ital #re%iousl in%ested b the famil .


29/47

;oreo%er, the economic and social ield of the educational qualificationde#ends on the social ca#ital, again inherited, 0hich can be used to bacit u#.

The /mbodied &tate. ;ost of the #ro#erties of cultural ca#ital can bededuced from the fact that, in its fundamental state, it is lin ed to the

bod and #resu##oses embodiment. The accumulation of cultural ca#italin the embodied state, i.e. , in the form of 0hat is called culture,culti%ation, Bildung , #resu##oses a #rocess of embodiment,incor#oration, 0hich, insofar as it im#lies a labor of inculcation andassimilation, costs time, time 0hich must be in%ested #ersonall b thein%estor. i e the acquisition of a muscular #h sique or a suntan, itcannot be done at second hand 2so that all effects of delegation are ruledout3.

The 0or of acquisition is 0or on oneself 2self+im#ro%ement3, aneffort that #resu##oses a #ersonal cost 2 on paie de sa personne, as 0e sain French3, an in%estment, abo%e all of time, but also of that sociallconstituted form of libido, libido sciendi, 0ith all the #ri%ation,renunciation, and sacrifice that it ma entail. t follo0s that the leastine act of all the measurements of cultural ca#ital are those 0hich ta e astheir standard the length of acquisition ++ so long, of course, as this is notreduced to length of schooling and allo0ance is made for earl domesticeducation b gi%ing it a #ositi%e %alue 2a gain in time, a head start3 or anegati%e %alue 20asted time, and doubl so because more time must bes#ent correcting its effects3, according to its distance from the demands ofthe scholastic mar et. %HG

This embodied ca#ital, e ternal 0ealth con%erted into an integral #artof the HPage 245] #erson, into a habitus, cannot be transmittedinstantaneousl 2unli e mone , #ro#ert rights, or e%en titles of nobilit 3

b gift or bequest, #urchase or e change. t follo0s that the use ore #loitation of cultural ca#ital #resents #articular #roblems for theholders of economic or #olitical ca#ital, 0hether the be #ri%ate #atronsor, at the other e treme, entre#reneurs em#lo ing e ecuti%es endo0ed0ith a s#ecific cultural com#etence 2not to mention the ne0 state

#atrons3. $o0 can this ca#ital, so closel lin ed to the #erson, be bought0ithout bu ing the #erson and so losing the %er effect of legitimation0hich #resu##oses the dissimulation of de#endenceN $o0 can this ca#ital

be concentrated+as some underta ings demand+0ithout concentrating the #ossessors of the ca#ital, 0hich can ha%e all sorts of un0antedconsequencesN

Cultural ca#ital can be acquired, to a %ar ing e tent, de#ending on the #eriod, the societ , and the social class, in the absence of an deliberate


30/47

inculcation, and therefore quite unconsciousl . t al0a s remains mar ed b its earliest conditions of acquisition 0hich, through the more or less%isible mar s the lea%e 2such as the #ronunciations characteristic of aclass or region3, hel# to determine its distincti%e %alue. t cannot be

accumulated be ond the a##ro#riating ca#acities of an indi%idual agent< itdeclines and dies 0ith its bearer 20ith his biological ca#acit , hismemor , etc.3. ecause it is thus lin ed in numerous 0a s to the #ersonin his biological singularit and is sub6ect to a hereditar transmission0hich is al0a s hea%il disguised, or e%en in%isible, it defies the old,dee#+rooted distinction the @ree 6urists made bet0een inherited

#ro#erties 2 ta patroa3 and acquired #ro#erties 2 epikteta3, i.e., those 0hichan indi%idual adds to his heritage. t thus manages to combine the #restigeof innate #ro#ert 0ith the merits of acquisition. ecause the social

conditions of its transmission and acquisition are more disguised thanthose of economic ca#ital, it is #redis#osed to function as s mbolicca#ital, i.e., to be unrecogni5ed as ca#ital and recogni5ed as legitimatecom#etence, as authorit e erting an effect of 2mis3recognition, e.g., inthe matrimonial mar et and in all the mar ets in 0hich economic ca#italis not full recogni5ed, 0hether in matters of culture, 0ith the great artcollections or great cultural foundations, or in social 0elfare, 0ith theeconom of generosit and the gift. Furthermore, the s#ecificalls mbolic logic of distinction additionall secures material and s mbolic

#rofits for the #ossessors of a large cultural ca#ital: an gi%en culturalcom#etence 2e.g., being able to read in a 0orld of illiterates3 deri%es ascarcit %alue from its #osition in the distribution of cultural ca#ital and

ields #rofits of distinction for its o0ner. n other 0ords, the share in #rofits 0hich scarce cultural ca#ital secures in class+di%ided societies is based, in the last anal sis, on the fact that all agents do not ha%e theeconomic and cultural means for #rolonging their childrenMs education

be ond the minimum necessar for the re#roduction of the labor+#o0erleast %alori5ed at a gi%en moment. %iH(

Thus the ca#ital, in the sense of the means of a##ro#riating the #roduct of accumulated labor in the ob6ectified state 0hich is held b agi%en agent, de#ends for its real efficac on the form of the distribution ofthe means of a##ro#riating H Page 246 the accumulated and ob6ecti%ela%ailable resources< and the relationshi# of a##ro#riation bet0een anagent and the resources ob6ecti%el a%ailable, and hence the #rofits the

#roduce, is mediated b the relationshi# of 2ob6ecti%e and?or sub6ecti%e3com#etition bet0een himself and the other #ossessors of ca#italcom#eting for the same goods, in 0hich scarcit +and through it social%alue+ is generated. The structure of the field, i.e. , the unequaldistribution of ca#ital, is the source of the s#ecific effects of ca#ital, i.e.,


31/47

the a##ro#riation of #rofits and the #o0er to im#ose the la0s offunctioning of the field most fa%orable to ca#ital and its re#roduction.

ut the most #o0erful #rinci#le of the s mbolic efficac of culturalca#ital no doubt lies in the logic of its transmission. 7n the one hand, the

#rocess of a##ro#riating ob6ectified cultural ca#ital and the timenecessar for it to ta e #lace mainl de#end on the cultural ca#italembodied in the 0hole farnil + through 2among other things3 thegenerali5ed Arro0 effect and all forms of im#licit transmission. %iiHO 7nthe other hand, the initial accumulation of cultural ca#ital, the

#recondition for the fast, eas accumulation of e%er ind of usefulcultural ca#ital, starts at the outset, 0ithout dela , 0ithout 0asted time,onl for the offs#ring of families endo0ed 0ith strong cultural ca#ital< inthis case, the accumulation #eriod co%ers the 0hole #eriod of

sociali5ation. t follo0s that the transmission of cultural ca#ital is nodoubt the best hidden form of hereditar transmission of ca#ital, and ittherefore recei%es #ro#ortionatel greater 0eight in the s stem ofre#roduction strategies, as the direct, %isible forms of trans+ mission tendto be more strongl censored and controlled.

t can immediatel be seen that the lin bet0een economic andcultural ca#ital is established through the mediation of the time neededfor acquisition. iffer+ ences in the cultural ca#ital #ossessed b thefamil im#l differences first in the age at 0hich the 0or oftransmission and accumulation begins+the limiting case being full use ofthe time biologicall a%ailable, 0ith the ma imum free time beingharnessed t.o ma imum cultural ca#ital+and then in the ca#acit , thusdefined, to satisf the s#ecificall cultural demands of a #rolonged

#rocess of acquisition. Furthermore, and in correlation 0ith this, thelength of time for 0hich a gi%en indi%idual can #rolong his acquisition

#rocess de#ends on the length of time for 0hich his famil can #ro%idehim 0ith the free time, i.e. , time free from economic necessit , 0hich isthe #recondition for the initial accumulation 2time 0hich can be e%aluated

as a handica# to be made u#3.The 0b-ectified &tate. Cultural ca#ital, in the ob6ectified state, has a

number of #ro#erties 0hich are defined onl in the relationshi# 0ithcultural ca#ital in its embodied form. The cultural ca#ital ob6ectified inmaterial ob6ects and media, such as 0ritings, #aintings, monuments,instruments, etc., is transmissible in its materialit . A collection of

#aintings, for e am#le, can be transmitted as 0ell as economic ca#ital 2ifnot better, because the ca#ital transfer is more disguised3. ut 0hat istransmissible is legal o0nershi# and not 2or not necessaril 3 0hat

constitutes the #recondition for s#ecific a##ro#riation, namel , the #ossession HPage 247 of the means of LconsumingL a #ainting or using a


32/47

machine, 0hich, being nothing other than embodied ca#ital, are sub6ect tothe same la0s of transmission. %iiiH8

Thus cultural goods can be a##ro#riated both materiall +0hich #resu##oses economic ca#ital+and s mbolicall +0hich #resu##osescultural ca#ital. t follo0s that the o0ner of the means of #roduction mustfind a 0a of a##ro#riating either the embodied ca#ital 0hich is the

#recondition of s#ecific a##ro#riation or the ser%ices of the holders ofthis ca#ital. To #ossess the machines, he onl needs economic ca#ital< toa##ro#riate them and use them in accordance 0ith their s#ecific #ur#ose2defined b the cultural ca#ital, of scientific or technical t #e,incor#orated in them3, he must ha%e access to embodied cultural ca#ital,either in #erson or b #ro . This is no doubt the basis of the ambiguousstatus of cadres 2e ecuti%es and engineers3. f it is em#hasi5ed that the

are not the #ossessors 2in the strictl economic sense3 of the means of #roduction 0hich the use, and that the deri%e #rofit from their o0ncultural ca#ital onl b selling the ser%ices and #roducts 0hich it ma es

#ossible, then the 0ill be classified among the dominated grou#s< if it isem#hasi5ed that the dra0 their #rofits from the use of a #articular formof ca#ital, then the 0ill be classified among the dominant grou#s.>%er thing suggests that as the cultural ca#ital incor#orated in the meansof #roduction increases 2and 0ith it the #eriod of embodiment needed toacquire the means of a##ro#riating it3, so the collecti%e strength of the

holders of cultural ca#ital 0ould tend to increase++if the holders of thedominant t #e of ca#ital 2economic ca#ital3 0ere not able to set theholders of cultural ca#ital in com#etition 0ith one another. 2The are,moreo%er, inclined to com#etition b the %er conditions in 0hich theare selected and trained, in #articular b the logic of scholastic andrecruitment com#etitions.3

Cultural ca#ital in its ob6ectified state #resents itself 0ith all thea##earances of an autonomous, coherent uni%erse 0hich, although the

#roduct of historical action, has its o0n la0s, transcending indi%idual

0ills, and 0hich, as the e am#le of language 0ell illustrates, thereforeremains irreducible to that 0hich each agent, or e%en the aggregate of theagents, can a##ro#riate 2i.e., to the cultural ca#ital embodied in eachagent or e%en in the aggregate of the agents3. $o0e%er , it should not beforgotten that it e ists as s mbolicall and materiall acti%e, effecti%eca#ital onl insofar as it is a##ro#riated b agents and im#lemented andin%ested as a 0ea#on and a sta e in the struggles 0hich go on in thefields of cultural #roduction 2the artistic field, the scientific field, etc.3and, be ond them, in the field of the social classes+struggles in 0hich the

agents 0ield strengths and obtain #rofits #ro#ortionate to their master of


33/47

this ob6ectified ca#ital, and therefore to the e tent of their embodiedca#ital. i H9

The 1nstitutionali%ed &tate. The ob6ectification of cultural ca#ital inthe form of academic qualifications is one 0a of neutrali5ing some ofthe #ro#erties it deri%es from the fact that, being embodied, it has thesame biological limits as its bearer. This ob6ectification is 0hat ma es thedifference bet0een the ca#ital of the autodidact, 0hich ma be called intoquestion at an time, or e%en the H Page 248 cultural ca#ital of thecourtier, 0hich can ield onl ill+defined #rofits, of fluctuating %alue, inthe mar et of high+societ e changes, and the cultural ca#italacademicall sanctioned b legall guaranteed qualifications, formallinde#endent of the #erson of their bearer. =ith the academicqualification, a certificate of cultural com#etence 0hich confers on its

holder a con%entional, constant, legall guaranteed %alue 0ith res#ect toculture, social alchem #roduces a form of cultural ca#ital 0hich has arelati%e autonom %is+P+%is its bearer and e%en %is+P+%is the culturalca#ital he effecti%el #ossesses at a gi%en moment in time. t institutescultural ca#ital b collecti%e magic, 6ust as, according to ;erleau+'ont ,the li%ing institute their dead through the ritual of mourning. 7ne hasonl to thin of the concours 2com#etiti%e recruitment e amination30hich, out of the continuum of infinitesimal differences bet0een

#erformances, #roduces shar#, absolute, lasting differences, such as that

0hich se#arates the last successful candidate from the first unsuccessfulone, and institutes an essential difference bet0een the officiallrecogni5ed, guaranteed com#etence and sim#le cultural ca#ital, 0hich isconstantl required to #ro%e itself. n this case, one sees clearl the

#erformati%e magic of the #o0er of instituting, the #o0er to sho0 forthand secure belief or, in a 0ord, to im#ose recognition.

conferring institutional recognition on the cultural ca#ital #ossessed b an gi%en agent, the academic qualification also ma es it #ossible to com#are qualification holders and e%en to e change them 2b

substituting one for another in succession3. Furthermore, it ma es it #ossible to establish con%ersion rates bet0een cultural ca#ital andeconomic ca#ital b guaranteeing the monetar %alue of a gi%en academicca#ital. H1) This #roduct of the con%ersion of economic ca#ital intocultural ca#ital establishes the %alue, in terms of cultural ca#ital, of theholder of a gi%en qualification relati%e to other qualification holders and,

b the same to en, the monetar %alue for 0hich it can be e changed onthe labor mar et 2academic in%estment has no meaning unless a minimumdegree of re+ %ersibilit of the con%ersion it im#lies is ob6ecti%el

guaranteed3. ecause the material and s mbolic #rofits 0hich theacademic qualification guarantees also de#end on its scarcit , the


34/47

in%estments made 2in time and effort3 ma turn out to be less #rofitablethan 0as antici#ated 0hen the 0ere made 2there ha%ing been a de facto change in the con%ersion rate bet0een academic ca#ital and economicca#ital3. The strategies for con%erting economic ca#ital into cultural

ca#ital, 0hich are among the short+term factors of the schoolinge #losion and the inflation of qualifications, are go%erned b changes inthe structure of the chances of #rofit offered b the different t #es ofca#ital.

!CIAL CAPITAL

Social ca#ital is the aggregate of the actual or #otential resources 0hichare lin ed to #ossession of a durable net0or of more or lessinstitutionali5ed relationshi#s of mutual acquaintance and recognition ++or in other 0ords, to membershi# in a grou# iH11++0hich #ro%ides each ofits members 0ith the bac ing of H Page 24" the collecti%it +o0nedca#ital, a LcredentialL 0hich entitles them to credit, in the %arious sensesof the 0ord. These relationshi#s ma e ist onl in the #ractical state, inmaterial and?or s mbolic e changes 0hich hel# to maintain them. Thema also be sociall instituted and guaranteed b the a##lication of acommon name 2the name of a famil , a class, or a tribe or of a school, a

#art , etc.3 and b a 0hole set of instituting acts designed simultaneouslto form and inform those 0ho undergo them< in this case, the are moreor less reall enacted and so maintained and reinforced, in e changes.

eing based on indissolubl material and s mbolic e changes, theestablishment and maintenance of 0hich #resu##ose reac no0ledgmentof #ro imit , the are also #artiall irreducible to ob6ecti%e relations of

#ro imit in #h sical 2geogra#hical3 s#ace or e%en in economic andsocial s#ace. iiH1I

The %olume of the social ca#ital #ossessed b a gi%en agent thusde#ends on the si5e of the net0or of connections he can effecti%elmobili5e and on the %olume of the ca#ital 2economic, cultural ors mbolic3 #ossessed in his o0n right b each of those to 0hom he isconnected. iiiH1E This means that, although it is relati%el irreducible to theeconomic and cultural ca#ital #ossessed b a gi%en agent, or e%en b the0hole set of agents to 0hom he is connected, social ca#ital is ne%ercom#letel inde#endent of it because the e changes instituting mutualac no0ledgment #resu##ose the reac no0ledgment of a minimum ofob6ecti%e homogeneit , and because it e erts a multi#lier effect on theca#ital he #ossesses in his o0n right.


35/47

The #rofits 0hich accrue from membershi# in a grou# are the basis ofthe solidarit 0hich ma es them #ossible. i%H14 This does not mean thatthe are consciousl #ursued as such, e%en in the case of grou#s li eselect clubs, 0hich are deliberatel organi5ed in order to concentrate

social ca#ital and so to deri%e full benefit from the multi#lier effectim#lied in concentration and to secure the #rofits of membershi# ++material #rofits, such as all the t #es of ser%ices accruing from usefulrelationshi#s, and s mbolic #rofits, such as those deri%ed fromassociation 0ith a rare, #restigious grou#.

The e istence of a net0or of connections is not a natural gi%en, ore%en a social gi%en, constituted once and for all b an initial act ofinstitution, re#resented, in the case of the famil grou#, b thegenealogical definition of inshi# relations, 0hich is the characteristic of

a social formation. t is the #roduct of an endless effort at institution, of0hich institution rites+often 0rongl described as rites of #assage ++ marthe essential moments and 0hich is necessar in order to #roduce andre#roduce lasting, useful relationshi#s that can secure material ors mbolic #rofits 2see ourdieu 198I3. n other 0ords, the net0or ofrelationshi#s is the #roduct of in%estment strategies, indi%idual orcollecti%e, consciousl or unconsciousl aimed at establishing orre#roducing social relationshi#s that are directl usable in the short orlong term, i.e., at transforming contingent relations, such as those of

neighborhood, the 0or #lace, or e%en inshi#, into relationshi#s that areat once necessar and electi%e, im#l ing durable obligations sub6ecti%elfelt 2feelings of gratitude, res#ect, friendshi#, H Page 25# etc.3 orinstitutionall guaranteed 2rights3. This is done through the alchem ofconsecration, the s mbolic constitution #roduced b social institution2institution as a relati%e ++ rother, sister, cousin, etc.++ or as a night, anheir, an elder, etc.3 and endlessl re#roduced in and through the e change2of gifts, 0ords, 0omen, etc.3 0hich it encourages and 0hich #resu##osesand #roduces mutual no0ledge and recognition. > change transformsthe things e changed into signs of recognition and, through the mutualrecognition and the recognition of grou# membershi# 0hich it im#lies,re#roduces the grou#. the same to en, it reaffirms the limits of thegrou#, i.e., the limits be ond 0hich the constituti%e e change ++ trade,commensalit , or marriage ++ cannot ta e #lace. >ach member of thegrou# is thus instituted as a custodian of the limits of the grou#: becausethe definition of the criteria of entr is at sta e in each ne0 entr , he canmodif the grou# b modif ing the limits of legitimate e change throughsome form of misalliance. t is quite logical that, in most societies, the

#re#aration and conclusion of marriages should be the business of the0hole grou#, and not of the agents directl concerned. Through the


36/47

introduction of ne0 members into a famil , a clan, or a club, the 0holedefinition of the grou#, i.e., its fines, its boundaries, and its identit , is #utat sta e, e #osed to redefinition, alteration, adulteration. =hen, as inmodern societies, families lose the mono#ol of the establishment of

e changes 0hich can lead to lasting relationshi#s, 0hether sociallsanctioned 2li e marriage3 or not, the ma continue to control thesee changes, 0hile remaining 0ithin the logic of laisse5+faire, through allthe institutions 0hich are designed to fa%or legitimate e changes ande clude illegitimate ones b #roducing occasions 2rallies, cruises, hunts,

#arties, rece#tions, etc.3, #laces 2smart neighborhoods, select schools,clubs, etc.3, or #ractices 2smart s#orts, #arlor games, cultural ceremonies,etc.3 0hich bring together, in a seemingl fortuitous 0a , indi%iduals ashomogeneous as #ossible in all the #ertinent res#ects in terms of the

e istence and #ersistence of the grou#. The re#roduction of social ca#ital #resu##oses an unceasing effort of socia+ bilit , a continuous series ofe changes in 0hich recognition is endlessl affirmed and reaffirmed.This 0or , 0hich im#lies e #enditure of time and energ and so, directlor indirectl , of economic ca#ital, is not #rofitable or e%en concei%ableunless one in%ests in it a s#ecific com#etence 2 no0ledge of genealogicalrelationshi#s and of real connections and s ill at using them, etc.3 and anacquired dis#osition to acquire and maintain this com#etence, 0hich arethemsel%es integral #arts of this ca#ital. %H1G This is one of the factors0hich e #lain 0h the #rofitabilit of this labor of accumulating andmaintaining social ca#ital rises in #ro#ortion to the si5e of the ca#ital.

ecause the social ca#ital accruing from a relationshi# is that muchgreater to the e tent that the #erson 0ho is the ob6ect of it is richlendo0ed 0ith ca#ital 2mainl social, but also cultural and e%en economicca#ital3, the #ossessors of an inherited social ca#ital, s mboli5ed b agreat name, are able to transform all circumstantial relationshi#s intolasting connections. The are sought after for their social ca#ital and,

because the are 0ell no0n, are 0orth of being no0n 2L no0 him0ellL3< the do not need HPage 25$ to Lma e the acquaintanceL of alltheir LacquaintancesL< the are no0n to more #eo#le than the no0,and their 0or of sociabilit , 0hen it is e erted, is highl #roducti%e.

>%er grou# has its more or less institutionali5ed forms of delegation0hich enable it to concentrate the totalit of the social ca#ital, 0hich isthe basis of the e istence of the grou# 2a famil or a nation, of course, butalso an association or a #art 3, in the hands of a single agent or a smallgrou# of agents and to mandate this #leni#otentiar , charged 0ith plena potestas agendi et lo2uendi, %iH1( to re#resent the grou#, to s#ea and actin its name and so, 0ith the aid of this collecti%el o0ned ca#ital, toe ercise a #o0er incommensurate 0ith the agentMs #ersonal contribution.


37/47

Thus, at the most elementar degree of institutionali5ation, the head ofthe famil , the #ater familias, the eldest, most senior member, is tacitlrecogni5ed as the onl #erson entitled to s#ea on behalf of the familgrou# in all official circumstances. ut 0hereas in this case, diffuse

delegation requires the great to ste# for0ard and defend the collecti%ehonor 0hen the honor of the 0ea est members is threatened. Theinstitutionali5ed delegation, 0hich ensures the concentration of socialca#ital, also has the effect of limiting the consequences of indi%idualla#ses b e #licitl delimiting res#onsibilities and authori5ing therecogni5ed s#o esmen to shield the grou# as a 0hole from discredit be #elling or e communicating the embarrassing indi%iduals.

f the intemal com#etition for the mono#ol of legitimatere#resentation of the grou# is not to threaten the conser%ation and

accumulation of the ca#ital 0hich is the basis of the grou#, the membersof the grou# must regulate the conditions of access to the right to declareoneself a member of the grou# and, abo%e all, to set oneself u# as are#resentati%e 2delegate, #leni#otentiar , s#o esman, etc.3 of the 0holegrou#, thereb committing the social ca#ital of the 0hole grou#. The titleof nobilit is the form #ar e cellence of the institutionali5ed social ca#ital0hich guarantees a #articular form of social relationshi# in a lasting 0a .7ne of the #arado es of delegation is that the mandated agent can e erton 2and, u# to a #oint, against3 the grou# the #o0er 0hich the grou#

enables him to concentrate. 2This is #erha#s es#eciall true in the limitingcases in 0hich the mandated agent creates the grou# 0hich creates him but 0hich onl e ists through him.3 The mechanisms of delegation andre#resentation 2in both the theatrical and the legal senses3 0hich fall into

#lace ++ that much more strongl , no doubt, 0hen the grou# is large andits members 0ea ++ as one of the conditions for the concentration ofsocial ca#ital 2among other reasons, because it enables numerous, %aried,scattered agents to act as one man and to o%ercome the limitations ofs#ace and time3 also contain the seeds of an embe55lement ormisa##ro#riation of the ca#ital 0hich the assemble.

This embe55lement is latent in the fact that a grou# as a 0hole can bere#resented, in the %arious meanings of the 0ord, b a subgrou#, clearldelimited and #erfectl %isible to all, no0n to all, and recogni5ed b all,that of the nobiles, the L#eo#le 0ho are no0n,L the #aradigm of 0hom isthe nobilit , and 0ho ma s#ea on behalf of the 0hole grou#, re#resentthe 0hole grou#, H Page 252 and e ercise authorit in the name of the0hole grou#. The noble is the grou# #ersonified. $e bears the name ofthe grou# to 0hich he gi%es his name 2the meton m 0hich lin s the

noble to his grou# is clearl seen 0hen Sha es#eare calls Cleo#atraL>g #tL or the ing of France LFrance,L 6ust as !acine calls # rrhus


38/47

L>#irusL3. t is b him, his name, the difference it #roclaims, that themembers of his grou#, the liegemen, and also the land and castles, are

no0n and recogni5ed. Similarl , #henomena such as the L#ersonalitcultL or the identification of #arties, trade unions, or mo%ements 0ith

their leader are latent in the %er logic of re#resentation. >%er thingcombines to cause the signifier to ta e the #lace of the signified, thes#o esmen that of the grou# he is su##osed to e #ress, not least becausehis distinction, his Loutstandingness,L his %isibi

pierre bourdieu.doc

Documents