"Sydmlfe Power and Embodied Knowledge: An introduction -to ~ ~ ~ O F W E S ~ T I T R E ~ D E ~ L A r&

-. r the sociology fof Pierre Bourdieu." '

- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - & --

-- -- - - - - - - - -- -A - --- -- - -

Perdission is hereby L ' ~ o r i s a t i m est. par Is prdsente, accordbe B la B I B L I O T H ~

dr pr4ter w* de vendre des exemplaires dc/ film. z Q

. d the fitmi

The a u W raserw other pub1 igbti& si8)ib. d neither the

thdwni de l w s ex t r~ i ts de cells-ci M doivsnt &re imprimtfs - ,

I . - *

twlomltibraryofcanada ~uena t iona leducanada i

Collections Development~Branch Direction du d6veloppement des coll@ctions

C a d i a n Theseson - -ice I% thks canadiennes - - - --- -

Microfiche Service sur microfiche

NOTICE

The-quality of this microfiche is heavily dependent upon t h e quality of the originaf thesis submitted for microfitrning. Every effort has been made to ensure the highest quality of reproduction possible.

- - - -w-*- s- - -- - - -- aremrsjg~T~ma*--fim-w *-*- granted the degree.

Some pages may have indistinct print especially i f the originaf pages were typed with a poor typewriter ribbon or if the university sent us a poor photocopy. *

Previously copyrighted materials (journal articles, tests, etc.) are not filmed.

Reproduction in full or in part of this film is gov- errted by the Canadian Copyright Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-30. "Please read the authorization forms which accompany this thesis.

La qualfie de cette rrJicrofiche depend grandement de la qualit6 de la these soumise au microfilmage. Nous avons tout fait pour ,assurec une qualit6 supkrieure de reproduction.

-- - - S'iT-'ma--tfeeS Vage, S - V L ~ tt ezcommrrmqtrer== -pi-p

a v e c Iruniversit6 qui a conf6re le grade.

La qualit6 d'impression de certaines pages peut laisser 5 dksirer, surtout si les pages originales ont Bte dactylographiks a I'aide d'un ruban u d ou si I'univer- site nous a fait parvenir une photocopie de mauvaise qualit&.

Les documents qui font deja I'objet. d'un droit d'auteur (articles de revue, examens publik, etc.1 ne

- 1 fo*as&wOw - -- -- -----A- - -- -

La reproduction, meme partielle, de ce micr"ofilm est soumise 5 la Loi canadienne sur le droit dlauteur, s F ~ C 1970, c. C-30. Veuillez prendre connaissance des formules d'autorisation qui accompagnentxette these. _

THE DISSERTATION LA THESE A ETE . HAS BEEN MICROFILMED MICROFILMEE TELLE QUE , .

EXACTLY AS RECEiVED NOUS L'AVONS RECUE

Ottawa, Carrada K I A ON4

SYMBOLIC P O W R *AND E-&BODIED KNOWLEDGE :

INTRODUCTION TO OF P I E R R E BOURDIEU

A T H E S I S SUBMITTED -IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF / / L

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE O F

MASTER OF ARTS

I N THE DEPARTMEW$

DSvid R, M a c L e n n a n 1 9 8 1

Simon Fraser u n i v e r s i t y

A l l = r i g h i s resprved. T h i s thesis may n o t be 4 , reLprctdnwd in whale nr in- - or o ther means, w i t h o u t p e r m i s s i o n of t h e author .

i

Name: David R. MacLennan

Degree : .Master o f A r t s

T i t l e of Thesis : Symbolic Power and Embodied Knowledge : An In t roduc t ion t o t h e Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu

E x w n i n g Committee

Cha i rperson :

J - Anthony Wilden

Senior Supervisor

L G . T

Paul Heyer I * = I

J 1

Martin Silverman Department of Anthropology and Sociology Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia . -

Richard Coe .

Exte rna l Examiner A s s i s t a n t Professor Bpartme

- . - -- n t 02 English Simon F r a s e r Universi ty

D a t e approved I ~ & w ~ L I%\

I hereby g r a n t to Simon F r a s e r University t h e r i g h t t o lend

. . my t h e s i s o r d i s s e r t a t i o n ( t h e t i t l e o f which i s shown below) t o u s e r e

of t h e

cop ie s

of any

beha l f

Simon F r a s e r Un ive r s i t y L ip ra ry , and t o make p a r t i a l o r s i n g l e *

only f o r such u s e r s o r i n response t c r a r eques t from the l ib ra ry

o t h e r university, er o t h e r - educa t iona l i n s t i t u t i o n , on its 'own

o r f o r .one of i t s u s e r s . I f u r t h e r ag ree t h a t permission f o r

mulpiple, copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g ran t ed -

- ~ - ~ - - ---- -- - - --- ~

~ ~ ---- ~ ~- -- - - - -- - - -- - - - - --

by me or the Dean of Graduate S tud ie s . It i s understood t h a t copying

o r pub l i ca t i on of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be allowed

wi thout my w r i t t e n permission.

Ahthor :

(s i g M u r e )

. (da t e )

! . . ABSTRACT

he t h e s i s examines P i e r r e Bourd ieu ' s a n a l y s i s o f t h e

p r o d u c t i o n of- knowledge i n t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s , . a n d o f t h e I e

cri ter ia and dssumptions employed i n t h e assessment of t h i s

knowlepge. Bourdieu c r i t i c i z e s two modes o f t h e o r e t i c a l know-

l e d g e : t h e phenomenological , which examines t h e c o n t e n t s of *

human consc iousness , and t h e s t r u c t u r a l i s t , which examines t h e

- - - -

- - --- - -1% w-1 J+r--&ksk-&&kk=ana i n f o r m +mmm -sEkmT--

ness; * R e con tends t h a t t h e s e modes o f knowledge a r e n o t exc lu-

s i v e and should n o t be conceived as a l t e r n a t e p e r s p e c t i v e s .

They should *be conce ived , r a t h e r , as neces sa ry s t a g e s i n t h e

development of a s c i e n t i f i c e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e s o c i a l world . **

Bourdieu a rgues t h a t t h e p r i n c i p l e s of s t r & $ u r a l i s t

t h o u g h t can be used t o demohs t ra te t h e l i m i t s o f phenomeno-.

logical thought . S i m i l a r l y , t h e limits o f s t r u c t u r a l i s t t hough t I L

can be c l a r i f i e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o a t h i r d mode of knowledge,

t h e " theo ry o f p r a c t i c e , " t h a t is addressed th rough t h e concep t

o f the h a b i t u s . The t h e s i s traces Bourd ieu ' s a n a l y s e s of t h e s e

t h r e e modes of knowledge and d e v o t e s p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n t o

h i s c e n t r a l concep t , t h e h a b i t u s .

. The s t r u c t u r a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e e s t a b l i s h e s b a s i c me thodo log ica l

o r i n c i p l e s and an approach t o meaning f r o m the s t u d y of l anguage -

as an abstract system. The i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r phenomenological

I .

rr ,

i v . ;

t h e o r i e s of meanihq i n B o u r d i e a a p p l icat i on of s t r u c t u r -e'

--

&

a l i s t p r i n c i p l e s to t h e s tudy of c u l t u r a l systems i s con- + .

s ide red . "

. P a r t 2 addresses Bourdieu 's a n a l y s i s of' t h e l i m i t a t i o n s

. of t h e s t r u c t u r a l i s t model. ~ o u r d i e u argues t h a t s t r u c t u r -

a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e s e x h i b i t a major conceptual e r r o r : )hey - ,

confuse ep i s t emolbg ica l boundaries and thus mis take a b s t r a c t

t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t s f o r b i o l o g i c a l u n i v e r s a l s ; and they

do n o t address " p r a c t i c a l sense" l i t e r a l l y embodied by i n d i - - -

- ---c -

--- -

-- --- -- ffid-sm- ?~%TI- eveLF?Ey r n t e r a c t i o n s . Z

. Also i n P a r t 2 is a d i s c u s s i o n of t h i s " p r a c t i c a l sense . "

Bourdieu c la ims t h a t early i n l i f e i ~ d i v i d u a l s a c q u i r e a system .

of genera l demeanours a n d - d i s p o s i t i o n s Chat enab le them t o re-

cognize and produce s o c i a l l y accepted conducts. Because t h i s

I system of d i s p o s i t i o n s o r h a b i t u s e n t a i l s sensori-rnoto~_and - - - - - - --

- - -

- -- --

a kind o f -emot iona l knowledge, it c& be understood a s an .

"embodied knowledge. "

P a r t 2 concludes by f u r t h e r f r a c i n g Bourdieu 's c r i t i q u e . I .

of s t r u c t u r a l i s t views of l i n g u i s t i c and s y F o l i b systems. . .

a

The p o l i t i c a l f u n c t i o n s of symbolic systems are examined and "

t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h e s e p o l i t i c a l func t ions f o r t h e concept

of t h e - h a b i t u s a r e explored.

- -- - Pint-3-con3faes-BEGEdZFu's~ a n a l y t i c a l d i s c u s s i o ~ of

t h reTerence to what might be view- ?. ed a s n p e r s o n a l " and " i n s t i t ~ t i o n a l ~ d o m i n a t i o n . Bourdieu

contends t h a t one of the reasons t h a t t h e dominated do n o t

r e b e l i s t h a t they recognize e x i s t i n g va lues and r e g u l a t i o n s

a s a p p r o p r i a t e and jus t - - i n a word, " l e g i t i m a t e . " .A

I n a d d i t i o n t o cons ide r ing ~ o u r d i e u ' s models o f d i f f e r e n t

"modes o f domination,:' P a r t 3 examines howkhe r e ~ o ~ n i t i o n ' b f ,. leg i t imacy i s securqd i n s p e c i f i c s o c i e t a l con tex t s . ~ o u r d i e u -

1

k CI

explores t h e means whereby con t ro l . over s o c i a l r e s o u r c - s and <

& i

t h e d i s p o s i t i o n s and a b i l i t i e s c o n s t i t u t i n g esteemed ha&itus - -

" '-7 Lt is exerc i sed . P a r t 3 focuses on how t h i s . c o n t r o 1 i s l e g i t i -

- 1 - --- P - - - - --- -- - - -- - --- - - - - - - -

-- - -- - --- -- -- --

- r-- - L

Because Bourdieu analyzes both t h e ep i s t emolog ica l and ,

t h e i d e o l o g i c a l foundat ions of t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s , h i s work

provides a v a l u a b l e r e f e r e n c e p o i n t f o r e m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s o f

t h e c o n t r o l of s o c i a l r e sources and human beings i n d i f f e r e n t

TABLE OF' CONTENTS I * -

Approval ii

iii

- -

A b s t r a c t

Table o f Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In t roduc t ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - .

1,' BREAKING WITH PHENOMENOLOGY: THE STRUCTURE OF . SYMBOLIC SYSTEMS

PART

The problem of meaning and th% b a s i c . . . . p r i n c i p l e s o f s t r u c t u r a l i s t thought - -

L

~ ~ i e u r s S ~ k e ~ ~ f - a.%llturzLl=cm@e~~ -: i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r a theory of meaning . .

1

LIMf TS OF THE STRUCTURALIST MODEL-,J' 2. THE

114. - The s t r u c t u r a l i s t error: consequences o f an inadequate theory of p r a c t i c e . . . . . . The h a b i t u s and s o c i a l h i s t o r y . . . . . . .

I

The h a b i t u s as a theory of l e a r n i n g and social izat i -on- . , . ,-, , ,,--,-. -,-. ,-- ,

- IV.

The p o l i t i c a l funct ions of symbolic systems h

HABITUS I N CONTEXT 3 . THg,

V I I . Personal domination: the ' h a b i t u s i n non s'tate societies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I n s t i t u t i o n a l domination: t h e - h a b i t u s i n ' s ta te s o c i e t d e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V I I I .

Conclusion ,

N o t e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -I

ioo

The i n f l u e n c e s shap ing t h e development o f P i e r r e Bourdi,euls

t hough t are remarkably v a r i e d . A f t e r e a r l y t r a i n i n g i n p h i l o - -

sophy a n 3 a&thropoloqy , . Bdurdieu d i d f i e ldwork e s among t h e Kabylei

people of A l g e r i a (p?k*of which was under,taken d u r i n g t h e

A l g e r i a n W a r of ~ n d e ~ e n d e h c e p1954-19621) . O n r e t u r n i n g t o

France i n t h e s i x t i e s , he t a u g h t i n e s e v e r a l l o c a t i o n s and began

s t u d i e s on t h e socia l c o n d i t i o n s o f c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i o n and t h e

/

t i e s as a d i r e c t e u r d ' e t u d e s h a t L 'Ecole ? r a t i q u e d e s Hautes

-Etudes ( P a r i s , and D i r e c t o x , Cen t r e de S o c i o l o g i e ~ u r o & e n e .

( P a r i s ) . F i n a l l y , s i n c e 197<, Bourdieu h a s e d i t e d t h e j o u r n a l

A c t e s de l a r e c h e r c h e e n s c i e n c e s s o c i a l e s .

Given t h e b r e a d t h p f Anf l uences on m u r d i e u ' s - i n t e l l e c ~ u a l - - ---

developmenti it i s n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t t h e o u t p u t o f h i s c a r e e r

\ iz+also remarkably v a r i e d and even "encyc loped ic , " as one

r ev i ewer p u t s i t (DiMagg i~ , 1-979: 1460) . - A s a r e s u l t of t h e

range of B o u r d i e u ' s w r i t i n g s , t h e i r a p p r o p r i a t i o n by Anglo-

American s o c i a l s c i e n c e has been adcc&tpanied by c e r t a i n problems.

Raymond Wil l i ams , w r i t i n g of Bourdieu's i n f l u e n c e on "Anglo-Saxon

though t and . r e s e a r c h , " remarks t h a t . t h e " f ragrnentary and p a r t i a l . - -- - - - -- - - - p- -- -- - -

a b s o r p t i o n of w h a t is a r i c h and u n i f i e d body o f t h e o r y and

r e l a t e d empirical work . . ' . can' l e a d t o a dange r of s e r i o u s l y

mi s read ing [ ~ o u r d i e u ' s ] t h e o r y n (1980 : 209) . Bourdieu, hi 'mself , i s p a r t l y - r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e danger a•’

p o t e n t i a l m i s r e a d i n g s . H i s s t y l e , f o r example, seems n e e d l e s s l y •÷

.-

Z- . - * complex, True, a lmost a l l h i s a r t i c l e s and books a r e framed by

e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l and methodological debates--a p o i n t t h a t perhaps

\ - warran t s some degree of a b s t r a c t i o n , ,Fur'ther, h i s a t t e m p t s t o . combat t h e conceptua l dichotomies endemic t o t h e s o c i a l sc i ences

--such a s t h e purported oppos i t ion between ind iv idua l i sm and

holism--no 'doubt j u s t i f i e s c e r t a i n complex i t i e s of .syntax and

what h i s t r a n s l a t o r c a l l s a "prot7isional e c l e c t i c i s m " (Outl ine:

v i i i ) . But o n e h a s t o ques t ion h i s tendency t o p i l e c l a u s e upon

methodological opponent, . Few Anglo-American r e a d e r s have

acquired--or would want t o acquire-- the f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h t h e

i n t e l l e c t u a l s t r u g g l e s o f t h e French academic f i e l d t h a t BoLur-

t h i n k e r obsessed wi th " t h e endeavour t o out - th ink and subsume

everyth ing" (Bpcrrdieu, 1980 : 11) , *,

+ Never the less , d e s p i t e d i f f i c u l t i e s stemming from a lack of

a v a i l a b l e Eng l i sh t r a n s l a t i o n s , a fragmentary-appropriation by

d i f f e r e n t d i s c i p l i n e s , and a d i f f i c u l t , a b s t r a c t w r i t i n g s t y & @ , - / it i s p o s s i b l e , as Williams s u g g e s t s , t o i d e n t i f y a powerful

*

u n i t y i n Bourdieu 's work, The o b j e c t of t h i s t h e s i s i s t o ' . - - - - -- - - -- --

c l a r i f y this, u n i t y and t o p r e s e n t an Yc=unt of whtat i s , i n f a c t ,

5 . a coherent and p e n e t r a t i n g a p p r o a c h t a $ n e socla l world.

One dimension of t h e u n i t y runnin through Bourdieu's work , *

is a f u n c t i o n of h i s sustained c r i t f c a l examination of the s o c i a l - #

3

and l o g i c a l c o n d i t i o n s of t h e s o c i a l sc i ences : more p r e c i s e l y , of

t h e a c t i v i t y by which knowledge and r e s e a r c h i n the social - -

* z <

I problems. ThusI e a r l y &n h i s I% j o r ; t h e o r e t i c a l work ,' Out l ine of - - b

* - * * h Theory of p r a c t i c e , ' Bourdieu co&&nts a b a s i c problem 'of -, - * .

#

anthropol6gica. l '(and soc io logica l ) . f ieldwbrk: What p rov j s ion do - " . Q * * * .

I

r e s e a r c h e r s make i n t h e i r . '&xplanat i&s 'of behavior f o r t h e t

accounts by' which,informants rendei- t h e i r own behavior Sean- *

.* . - - - - - - - - .- 0 -- - - -% * - ingf u l ? -

* t

Y e t , though -Bourd*ieur s c r i t i q u e has r o o t s jn p i a c t i c B 1 6 L

t w .

- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - problems - of --- an th ropo log ica l -- -- fTeldwork,' -- h i s a t t empt pp-pp-p t o * s i t u a t e it , - w i t h i n French i n t e l l e c t u a l h i s t o r y ' r e s u l t s ' :- i n a form of &sen-

* #

t a t i o n ' t h a t b e l i e s i t s p r a c t i c a l o r i g i n s . Thus ' ~ o u r d i e u p u t s

f o r t h a grand progress ion o f what he c a l l s "modes of theoGet ica1 *

knowledge" t h a t r e c a l l s Auguste Comte 's ( 1 7 9 8 ~ Y 8 5 . 7 ) - s h i s t o r i c a l b

- and l o g i c a l h ie ra rchy o f t h e sciences: Bourdieu see phenomenoi +

c o n s i d e r s both t h e s e modes of t h e o r e t i c a l knowledge a s pre-', - C

4

condi'tions .of h i s own c o n t r i b u t i o n s , which'he ca l l s t h e " sc ience

of p r a c t i c e . " A s BourdJeu p u t s it: li. . . t h e s e modes o f knowledge C

c a r e , s t r i c t l ' y speaking, i n no way mutual ly e x c l u s i v e and may be @

d e s c r i b e d as moments [or s tages] i n t h e d i a l e c t i c a l advance

towards adequate knowledge" (Out l ine : 3) . 3

However, Bourdieu ' s exaniination of d i f f e r e n t . a p p r o a c h e s t o - - - - - -

-p---p

t h e s o c i a l s ~ o r l d is r a d i c a l l y d i s t i n c t i n a number of ways from * ,

Comte's a n a l y s i s of d i f f e r e n t forms of s c i e n t i f i c knowledge. One

of t h e most s i g n i f i c a n t of t h e s e d i s t i n c t i o n s concerns t h e - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

r e l a t i o n of t h e n a t u r a l t o t h e s o c i a l ' s c i ences and, m o r e s p e c i f i -

, cally, t h e rol'e of ' l a y ' knowledge, i n d i v i d u a l experience ' and . I 4

. . . *

* * - r - -. - - & . . rnotlvatlon, etc., l n s c l e n t l r l c ' e x p l a s a t l b n , -".f 4 - .

F For Comf e., , as Anthony. ~ i b d e n s p o i n t s p u t , ~ f % & e n t i f i c -- C -

r * 1

knowledge--including t h a t :in the. s o c i a l sciences--is5."r&levatory" + . a (1977: 9 . .That is t o sap , s c ~ e n f i f i c

',corrective' fo t h e unexamined

. . h$abi ts, e tc .-. that c o n s t i t u t e l a y knowledge and inform Cndividual - - - - - - - - - - r - - - - - - -

experience. - - -However, p h e n ~ m e n o h g ~ , - t4*&p&nt- of- depa-zAure -&r - - - . .

Bourdieu 's p e r s p e c t i v e , js grounded i n Ferman p h i l o ~ ~ o b h e r Edmund : i x b

sc ience . AS a g a i n s t the view .of s c i e n t i f i & k h l e d g e a s a

* . > -

P c o r r e c t i v e t o indiv idual . experience wor ld , Husse r l po in ted '

'I

7 , t o the cent ra l - -and large*. unanaly zed--role of sndivk3ual 3 '

exper ience i n our knowledge sf t h e phenomena o f the-world. This A

J

it p r o p o s i t i o n regarding tQe r o l e of F exper ience 1 . i n knowledge Xis , of

- - -- - - - - world.--- C

* For l a y knowledge and t h e meani+ful exper ience of i n d i v i d u a l s

are e s s e n t i a l asp&cts o f tlie s o c i a l worid. T E u s w-t c l a s s i c a l

s o c i o l o g i s t Max ~ & e r (1864-1920) - c a l l e d - ' adequac~" - i n r e s p e c t o f 5 r *

the meanings i n d i v i d u a l s a t t a c h t o their a c t i o n s must be' & -.

c e n t r a l concern of s&io lo&ica l explanat ion . a -

!This said, it must be s t r e s s e d mat t h e phenomenological A.

c r i t i q u e of s c i e n ~ s t i c or p o s i t i v i s t s o c i d o g i e s h a s the s t a t u s &

of a fait accompxi i n s o u r d i e n ' s .- o v e r a l l p e r s p e c f i v e , Brat is ,

. ph"enomenologica1 s $&logy, such 'as t h a t which. is derived from I

- ' ~ l f r e d S c h u t z ' s attempt t o wed the work of E u s s e r l (Schutz ' s 4 *.

7

T h i s p o i n t is w e l l i l l u s t r a t e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g passage f r o m ' - ' , , -

t h e i n t e l ~ e c t u a l au tob iography o f a l e a d i n g proponent o f s t r u c - < >

t u r d l f st thought , French a n t h r o p o l o g i s t Claude ~ 6 v i - s t r q p s s . 3%-

P \

Wri t ing i n 1955, %close- t o t h ~ p e r i o d of Bourd ieu ' s* f i rs t f i e l d - - work, ~ & i - ~ t r a u s s r e f l e c t s on t h e i n f l a e n c e s t h a t had h e l ~ d -

/. shape h i s view of t3e necessity of a s t r u c t u r a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e :

w r-

- .-. .Marxism seemed tam m e t o proceed i n t h e s a m e way -as . geologyrand p ~ y c b o - a n a l y s i s _ ( i n t h e s e n s e i n which i t s founder unders tood it) . A l l . t h r e e showed t h a t . . , t r u e real i t? is never t h e most obvious o f real i t ies . . . . . L - - - ---- *

- 7 - - -- - - & - - - - --- - d .And so I stood o u t a g a i n s t t h e new t e n d e n c i e s i n e t a -

- .,A p h y s i c a l t h i n k i n g t h a t w e r e t h e n [ the t h i r t i e s ] beg inn ing .to t a k e shape. Phenomenology 1 found unaccep tab le , i n so , f a r as it p o s t u l a t e d a c o n t i n u i t y between expe r i ence and*

r e a l i t y . Tha t t h e one enveloped and e x p l a i n e d t h e o t h e r I was q u i t e w i l l i n g t o agree, b u t I had l e a r n e d f r a n [~ancism geology and p-eho-analysis] t h a t ' t he re i s no c o n t i n u i t y i n t h e passage betw&en t h e two and t h a t t o r e a c h r e a l i t y

y w e must f i k s t r e p u d i a t e expe r i ence , even thougli w e may . later i n t e g r ~ t e it i n an o b j e c t i v e s y n t h e s i s i n which s e n t i m e n t a l i t y p l a y s no p a r t (1967 a; 61-2) ,

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I n this passage ~ & i - ~ t r a u s s p rov ides a r a t i o n a l e f o r h i s view o f

Fthe r e v e l a t o r y f u n e t i o n o f t h e s o c i a l s c i ences - - i , e , , f o r h i s I' -view of s t r u c t u z a l i s t knowledge as pmvidin 'g a m o r e e f f e c t i v e

portraxal of t h e l o g i c of c u l t u r a l phenomena t h a n i s a v a i l a b l e i n

lay knowledge and t h e unexamined expe r i ence o f i nd iv idua l s . ' But

unlike a s i m p l i s t i c version o f t h e r e v e l a t o r y r o l e o f t h e s o c i a l

sciences, ~ & i - ~ t r a u s s does n o t d i s m i s s comple te ly l a y knowledge

e x p l a n a t i o n of the social world. i

- P a r t - 4: ES~eaki-nq w i ~ ?hen-logy -

P a r t 1 of the t h e s i s o u t l i n e s t h e s t r a t e g y through whicK -

.. s t r u c t u r a l i s t thought 'b reaks w i t h phenomenology. I i o c u s on a i

P problem t h a t h a s r e c e n t l y ach ieved some prominence z i n Anglo-

American soc io logy : t h e prob lem,of meaning. Anglo-American

p e r s p e c t i v e s i n • ’ iuenced by phenomenology--for example, e thno-

:+ methodolosuL-Fonstrue d! problem o f medning w i t h r e f e r e n c e ti t h e a c c o u n t s th rough which. i4 ld iv idua ls r e n d e r t h e i r i ' n t e r a c t i o n s

w i t h o t h e r T n d i v i d u a l s meaningful . - h

Taking t h i s phenomenological approach t o meaning a s ' a ' .

n e g a t i v e i n s t a n c e , I i l l u s t r a t e t h e "break" t o which Bourdieu - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - ---- -- -- - - - - - - - - -- -

pp- -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - p - p - -

r e f e r s when h e speaks o f s t r u c t u r a l i s m as " supe r sed ing" a n - I ' e a r l i e r mode o f t h e o r e t i c a l knowledge, phenomenhogy. I demon-

s t rate how the methodologica l p r i n c i p l e s o f t h e s t r u c t u r a l i s t

t r a d i t i o n may be used t o c l a r i f y t h e g e n e r a l symbbl ic p a t t e r n s

and codes--the "grammars, " i f you w i l l - - t h a t unde r ly i n d i v i d u a l -

- - - e x p e r i e n c e a n d t h a t organizetheaccounts t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s g i v e

o f t h i s e x p e r i e n c e .

S p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n is devoted t o i d e n t i f y i n g t h e p r e s e n c e i n ,

s o m e o f Bourd ieu ' s e a r l y art icles o f s t r u c t u r a l i s t -. methodologica l

p r i n c i p l e s , many o f which are d e r i v e d from t h 8 stAy of l a n g u a g e

as an a b s t r a c t system. For example, L i n g u i s t N o a m ,Chomsky's , . I /

c o n t r i b u t i o n t o s t r u c t u r a l i s m i n v o l v e s an a t t e m p _ t t o s p e c i f y an / * /

i d e a l s p e a k e r / l i s t e n e r ' s knowledge of* t h e a b s t r a c t sys t e m . o f / / language, a knowledge he ca l l s " l i n g u i s t i c competence." I

i s o l a t e some of the p a r a l l e l s between Chomsky's n o t i o n s o f / 2

: 3 l i n g u i s t i c c o m p e t e k e n and Bourdieu s nut ion%ultural / - - -4 - - - -

compelence. " I then* examine, some o f t h e i rnp l ica t ioh of " c 1- -

t u r d competencen and r; lated n o t i o n s f o r phenornenologica J

t m o r i e s of meaning. a .

P a r t 2: The L imi t s of t h e ~ t r u c t u r a i i s k ~ o d e l

P a r t 2 o f t h e t h e s i s d e a l s w i t h a more complex sef of '

i n t e r r e l a t e d concept? t h a n was d e a s t w i t h i n Dart 1. I focus on

what i s perhaps theamain po lemica l t h r u s t - o f B o u r d i e u ' s work:

h i s c r i t i q u e of s t r u c t u r a l i s m , which he c a l l s the seconq mode-o'f

t h e o r e t i c a l knowl&dge, a? d i s t i n c t A from _ ph&omenoldgy, which h e - =

ca l l s t h e f i r s t mode of t h e o r e t i c A 1 knowledge. Boprdieu 'examines ,

t h e c o n d i t i o n s under which s t r u c t u r a l ~ s t kpowledge i s produced. -- -- - - -- - - - - - - - - -

- - -

The: s t r u c t u r a l i s t r e s e a r c h e r , ' a rgues Bourdieu, must d i s t a n c e him/ "

. h e r s e l f from p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r a c t i o n s between i n d i v i d u a l s i n o r d e r L

- t o c l a r i f y the g e n e r a l s y m b o l i c ~ c o d e s t h a t make p a r p c u ~ a r in;er- -- a c t i o n s p o s s i b l e . ~ h i s d is tancing--and ' t h e concomi tan t c o n s t r u c -

t i o n of modefs of symbolic o r c u l t u r a l sys tems-- is n e c e s s a r y , i n . . - B o u r d i e u 's view, % 2 s c i e n t i f L e x p l a n a t i n n a•’ social a c t i o n ,

%

The proble'm w i t h s t r u c t u r a l i s t t hough t , Bourdieu a r g u e s , i s

t h a t it f a i l s t o r e f l e c t c r i t i h l l q on t h e changes i t - i n f l i c t s on

l a y knowledge and i n d i v i d u a l expe r i ence when it c o n s t r u c t s

a b s t r a c t m o d ~ l s of c o n c r e t e i n t e r a c t i o y s . More o f t e n t h a n n o t , . f Bourdieu c o n t i n u e s , s t r u c t u r a l i s t s " a v e r t . . . [a] me thodo log ica l

p o s t y l a t e .of i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y i n t o - = . a n o n t o l o g i c a l t h e s i s 1 '

( O u t l i n e : 20) . That i s t o s a y , t h e y p r o j e c t a b s t r a c t mbdels of

i n t e r a c t i o n c o n s t r u c t e d i n c o n t r a s t t o l a y knowledge and i n d i v i -

d u a l expe r i ence i n t o t h e " l i v e d - e p e r i e n c e " of t h e everyday l i v e s

' %- 4

of a c t u a l i n d i v i d u a l s . O r t h e y locate t h e s e a b s t r a c t models- a t

some mys te r ious l e v e l of r e a l i t y such as t h e "unconsc iousn o r t h e --.1

/

b i o l o g i c a l o r g q i z a t i o n of t h d huhan # b r a i n .

C

Bourdieu contends t h a t i n f a i l i n g t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e ade- ., "t

q u a t e l y between t h e a b s t r a c t models of t h e o r e t i c a l knowledge and f--?.-

t h e p r a c t i c a l knowledge of everyday l i f e , s t r u c t u r a l i s t s f a i l

t o qch ieve t h e " o b j e c t i v e s y n t h e s i s " t h a t ~ ' e v i - ~ t r a u s s recom-

mended i n X955 (see above, p. 5 ) . They f a i l , i n s h o r t , t o

c o n j o i n i n s o c i a l e x p l a n a t i o n an unde r s t and ing of l a y knowledge

and i n d i v i d u a l e x p e r i e n c e and a n unde r s t and ing of t h e g e n e r a l . 3 a

d . - I n a d d i t i o n t o c l a r i f y i n g ~ o u r d . i e u ' s c r i t i q u e o f s t r u c t u r -

a l i s t e r r o r s , P a r t 2 o f t h e t h e s i s o u t l i n e s ~ o u r d i e u ' s a t t e m p t t o

, rnove.beyond s t r u c t u r a l i s m t o a t h i r d mode o f t h e o r e e i c a l know-

l e d g e , which he ca l l s the " s c i m c e of p r a c t i c e . " C e n t r a l t o . - 3&ieu ' s " s c i e n c e o f p r a c t i c e " is ' t he n o t i o n olf "embodied

"-%,j". ,:- - -- - - - - - - --- L - - - - -

kn&ledgel ' o r h a h i t u s th rough- which Bourdieu ' a t t empt s t o a c h i e v e I

t h e k ind o f " o b j e c t i v e s y n t h e s i s n a l l u d e d t o by ~ 6 v i - ~ t r a u s s . 1 -

By means of t h e h a b i t u s - concept , , Bourdieu e l u c i d a t e s t h e ?

manner by which ind iv ' i dua l s produce and reproduce i n - ' t h e i r every- -

day i n t e r a c t i o n s ' t h e ssyn$lic p a s t e r n s ;r d e s t h a t , as . t he . - s t r u c t u r a l i s t s d k m ~ n s ~ t r a t e , ' u n d e r l i e c u l t h r a l b e h a v i o r s arid .

produc t s . Ventur ing i n t o domains t h a t . soc io lo$y h a s t r a d i t i o n -

c a r q i ~ l r ~ a le of b e h a v i o r , t h i n k i n s and

u . e x y ~ e r i e n c i n g , etc. T h i s g e n e r a l s t y l e o r d i s p o s i t i o n o rgan izes ' '

and c o n s t r a i n s an i n d i + i d u a l i s a c t i v i t i e s and ~ r o d u c t s and , s i m i - -

l a r l y , e n a b l e s an i n d i v i d u a l t o a n t i c i p a t e . t h e o r g a n i z a t i d n and

c o n s t r a i n t s e x p r e s s e d i n the a c t i v i t i e s and p r o d u c t s w i t h which

7

d e f i n e s as a sys t em o f d i s p o s i t i o n s , r e p r o d u c e s p a t t e r n s - - f o r , I

example c u l t u r a l codes - - s imi l a r t o t h e p a t t e r n s a s s i m i l a t e d

d u r i n g p r o c e s s e s o f l e a r n i n g an 'd%ocia l i .za t ion. I

One o f t h e b a s i d a ims of P a r t 2 of t h e t h e s i s i s t o c l a r i f y . -

Bourd i eu ' s views on t h e p a t t e r n p roduc ing and p a t t e r n r e c o g n i z i n g

- c a p a c i t y o f t h e h a b i t u s and , most i r nDor t an t l y , - t o show t h a t t h e 1

t y p e 'of knowled e a d d r e s s e d t h r o u g h ' ;he h a b i t u s c o n c e p t i n c l u d e s 2 P . more t h a n i n t e l l e c t u a l or men ta l knowledge. T h a t i s , I a t t e m p t

- - - --- - - - - - -- - -- - --- -

t o show how t h e c o n c e p t of t h e h a b i t u s a d d r e s s e s both- l a y kno;-

l e d g e as a 'men ta l ' a b i l i t y and t h e v a r i o u s d imens ions of l a y -x

knowledge and i n d i v i d u a l e x p e r i e n c e t h a t are l i t e r a l l y embodied f i ,

i q d u r a b l e c o r p o r e a l s t y l e s . .'

L e t m e g i v e an example. Bourdieu would admi t t h a t s a y , i n

speak ing , i n d i v i d u a l s - - - - - - may -- c o n s c i o u s l y - --- m o n i t o r - - - t h e i r -- - - words and -

s e a r c h f o r t h e r i g h t p h r a s e o r t o n e of voice* t o u s e i n g i v e n . I

I

- s i t u a t i o n . But; a r g u e s B o u r d k u , t h e manner. i n which t h i s moni-

, , t o r i n g t a k e s p l a c e i s n o t a d e q u a t e l y p o r t r a y e d by t h e s t r u c t u r a -

l i s t s , who somet imes s e e m t o imply t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s c o n s u l t

e x p l i c i t r u l e s i n t h e i r a c t u a l speech a c t d - The t a c i t non v e r b a l

c u e s used i n such a s i t u a t i o n are f a r removed from e x p l i c i t

r u l e s and, Bourd ieu would a r g u e , a l l human i n t e r a c t i o n e x p r e s s e s

b o d y t o body, i .e . on the h i t h e r s i d e 02 words o r c o n c e p t s , and

which p l e a s e s ( o r d i s p l e a s e s ) w i t h o u t c o n c e p t s " ( O u t l i n e : 2 ) .

Pa r the rmore , Bour&ieu e x p l a i n s ,"sociql i n f o n n a t i o n i s n o t P

only e x p r e s s e d by v a r i o u s b o d i l y d i s p o s i t i o n s and speech s t y l e s . J'

1

S& in fn rmat im-a-~~x_er -d i n & F ~ O F - . I i n t e r a c t i p ~ r n ~ ~ 1 1

/

through v a r i o u s c u l t u r a l p roduc t s i s a l s o " read" by what Bourdieu

c a l l s t h e ' s o c i a l l y informed body." Bourdieu e l a b o r a t e s on t h i s 1

f u n c t i o n o f t h e body, a t once e x p r e s s i v e and i n t e r p r e t i v e , i n t h e

Lf fo l lowing d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e h a b i t u s :

he h a b i t u s ] i s t h e system of i n s e p a r a b l y c o g n i t i v e and e v a l u a t i n g s t r u c t u r e s which o r g a n i z e s t h e v i s i o n o f t h e A

world i n accordance wi th t h e c o n s t r a i n t s d e l i m i t e d by a d e t e r m i n a t e s t a t e of t h e s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l wor ld : ...C t h e h a b i t u s -is thus] no th ing h t h e r t han t h e s o c i a l l y informed body,, w i t h i t s tastes and d i s t a s t e s , i t s compuls ions and r e p u l s i o n s , w i t h , i n a word, a l l i t s s e n s e s , t h a t i s t o s a y ,

-- - -not on ly t h e t r d i t i o n a - l f i v e senses--which n e v e r e s c s - e the- - - Z s t r u c t u r i n g a c t i o n o f s o c i a l determinisms--but a l s o t h e I

s e n s e of n e c e s s i t y a n d + h e s e n s e o f d u t y , t h e s e n s e o f . ?

d i r e c t i o n and t h e s ense o f r e a l i t y , t h e s e n s e of b a l a n c e and t h e s e n s e o f beau ty , cormnon s e n s e and t h e s e n s e o f t h e s a c r e d , t ac t i ca l s e n s e and t h e s e n s e o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , b u s i n e s s - s e n s e and t h e s e n s e of p r o p r i e t y , t h e s e n s e o f humour and t h e s e n s e of a b s u r d i t y , moral s e n s e and t h e s e n s e o f p r a c t i c a l i t y , and. s o on ' (Out l ine : 124) . Underlying t h e d i s p o s i t i o n s o f t h e h a b i t u s , t h e n , - l s ' a n *

"embodied knowledge" o r , - - -

more -

a b s t r a c t l y , 2 s e t OF

schemes (schemata) t h a t e n a b l e i n d i v i d u a l s t o p roduce and

a p p r e c i a t e s o m e p r o p o r t i o n of t h e symbolic p r o d u c t s and a c t i v i ~ a

t ies of a g i v e n s o c i e t y .

I n P a r t 2 o f t h e thes ' i s I e x p l o r e t h e h a b i t u s f rom two

p e r s p e c t i v e s . F i r s t , w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o changing modes o f social 4"=

r e g u l a t i o n : I o u t l i n e be c e n t r a l importance o f t h e embodied . - knowledge o f t h e ha& i n societies w i t h o u t w r i t t e n r u l e s o r

- - - - - - - - -- - - -- - -- - - -

l a w s . Second w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e - l i f e h i s t o r i e s o f i n d i v i -

d u a l s : I examine t h e formal a s p e c t s of t h e t h e o r y o f l e a r n i n g and

s o c i a l i z a t i o n t h a t u n d e r l i e s t h e h a b i t u s concep t . O f p a r t i c u l a r -

i n t e r e s t h e r e i s t h e l e a r n i n g t h a t t a k e s p l a c e "on t h e h i t h e r a I

-

i " s i d e - o • ’ w o r d s o s - c o n c e p t s " ( O u t l i n e : 2 ) : A s Bourdieu putsit:- P c %.

\ $ " . . . i n a l l societies . ch i ld ren a r e p a r t i c u ' l a r l y a t t e n t i v e t o - t h e

g e s t u r e s and p o s t u r e s which, i n the ' i r e y e s , e x p r e s s * e v e r y t h i n g + -

t h a t goes t o make a n accomplished adu l t - - a way of wa lk ing , a tilt . .

o f t h e head, f a c i a l expression^, ways o f s i t t i n g and of u s i n g * - n

a-

implements, a lways a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a tone o f v o i c e , a s t y l e of

speech, ' and (how c o u l d it .be o the rwi se? ) a c e r t a i n s u b j e c t i v e

- expe r i encev (Ou t l i ne : 8 7 ) .

F i n a l l y , t o conc lude P a r t 2, I l i n k t h e n o t i o n o f embodied -

,knowledge o r Kab l tu s - t o b roader socTal p r o c e s s e s . This i n v o l v e s -

o u t l i n i n g a second a s p e c t of Bourd ieu ' s c r i t i q u e o f s t k u c t u r a l i s t

knowledge: h i s c r i t i q u e o f t h e s t r u c t u r a l i s t s ' f a i l u r e t o s i t u a t e

symbol ic sys tems w i t h i n p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l c o n t e x t s and t o add res s

t h e p r a c t i c a l and p o l i t i c a l f u n c t i o n s of symbol ic sys t ems , o r

what Bourdieu calls "symbolic power. "

P a r t 3 : The ~ a b i t u s i n Context

I n P a r t 3 of t h e t h e s i s I show some c o n c r e t e a p p l i c a t i o n s of

. the two mai.n c o n c e p t s of ~ o u r d i e u ' s t h e o r y o f p r a c t i c e - - t h e - -

h a b i t u s and symbol ic power. Bourd ieu ' s n o t i o n of symbol ic power

4 t is l i n k e d t o h i s n o t i o n o f d i f f e r e n t modes o f domina t ion .

Loosely f o l l o w i n g webe?, Bourdieu a r g u e s t h a t p a r t o f the reason

t h a t dominated groups do n o t r e b e l a g a i n s t t h e dominant i s \

-- -- -

- -be m s e tkey-r ecognize -€Kis s ~ ~ i a l r e g u l a t l o n s t o -wnlcITt7ley

1 . . -.P -tn-r - 1 --- - ~y UG r ~ ~ r t 1 ~ t p . i ~ r-11 t l lbLmdll - -

I n add i t i ' on t o d e a l i n g w i t h s p e c i f i c e m p i r i c a l i n s t a n c e s of <

domination, I a t t e m p t , i n P a r t 2, t o a o n v e y a s e n s e of t h e range + f \ . --

a

i n modes o f dominat ion th rough a discus<iqn of t h e a n a l y t i c a l l y . '4 .$

d i s t i n c t t y p i f i c a t i o n s t h a t Bourdieu u s e s t o c h a r a c t e r i z e t h e - -- - -- - -- - - - -- - - -

exerc i s ,e o f symbol ic power i n non - s t a t e 'and s t a t e . s o c i e t i e s . A t

one end o f a continuum i s t h e s i t u a t i o n where s o c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s

a r e embodied i n t h e d i s p o s i t i o n s of t h e h a b i t u s and need on ly be

"awakened" by euphemism o r c o l l e c t i v e l y w i t n e s s e d myth and *

r i t u a l . I n t h e s e s i t u a t i o n s , t h e r e i s l i t t l e d i s p u t e over what

e x i s t s , what i s r i g h t and what i s p o s s i b l e ( c f . Therborn, 1978:

171-73) .

A t t h e o t h e r end o f a con t inuum- i s t h e s i t u a t i o n where s

s m i d refjuf at- are expzicit a& are e n f o r c e d by specialists. - 1

I n t h e s e s i t u a t i o n s t h e r e i s p o t e n t i a l d i s c o r d o v e r what e x i s t s ,

what i s r i g h t and what i s p o s s i b l e . Thus, i n s t a t e s o c i e t i e s ,

w e f i n d s p e c i a l i s t s "engaged i n a s p e c i f i c a l l y symbol ic [and

p o l i t i c a l ] s t r u g g l e t o impose a d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e s o c i a l world

most i n con fo rmi ty wi th . . . [the] i n t e r e s t s [of dominant groups] ". 1

(Bourdieu, 197%: 1 1 5 ) .

Another a s p e c t of Bourd ieu ' s n o t i o n o f symbol ic power

t h e manner i n which c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s a r e d e f i n e d ,

r e i n f o r c e d and t r a n s n i t t e d through t i m e i n d i f f e r e n t soci$l (

8

c o n t e x t s . I n P a r t 3 I e x p l o r e Bourd ieu ' s view o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e s

between t h e reproduc tkon of t h e c o n t r o l o v e r 'mater ia l ' and

c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s inAnon s t a t e and s t a t e s o c i e t i e s . ', . < w d i e u h - d i , s ~ i ~ n ~ - ~ f - - t ~ d i ~ r = - i ~ s e b n hl s

" c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l " ) i n non s t a t e and s t a t e s o c i e t i e s . I n non

s t a t e s o c i e t i e s c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l i s embodied by i n d i v i d u a l s i n \

t h e form o f v a r i o u s esteemed d i s p o s i t i o n s ( such a s t h e

\ - - - - - - - pp - -- - --

d i s p o s i t i o n mat r e i n f o r c e s an i n d i v i d u a l ' s ~ r e p u t a t i o n fok l a

%

\ bonourable conduct) . Fbreover; cu t u r a l c a p i t a l 2s eva lua ted

in fo rmal ly through p u b l i c pinion and through. ' f a c e t o f a c e ' .E

i n t e r a c t i o n . S i m i l a r l y , cu l tu ra* l c a p i t a l must be maintained

through 'upkeep' (gs i n t h e maintenance o f a r -qpu ta t ion) . .

F i n a l l y , Bourdfeu sugges ts t h a t i n some non s t a t e s o c i e t i e s , ,

such a s t h a t of t h e Kabyle, t h e t r ansmiss ion of c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l . 4 ,

through t h e a c q u i s i t i d n , i n primary s o c i a l i z a t i o n , ' of v a r i o a s .,

r e spec ted demeanours - and - a b i l i t i e s , - - i s n o t a s c o n t r o v e r s i a l a s -

it is i n democratic s t a t e s o c i e t i e s .

I n s t a t e s o c i e t i e s , on t h e o t h e r hand, c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l - - i n

t h e form of degrees , q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and r e l a t e d jobs - -ex i s t s '

independent ly of s p e c i f i c " b i o l o g i c a l " i n d i v i d u a l s . Cont ro l dve r

the e v a l u a t i o n and d i s t r i b u t i o n of c o g n i t i v e and more genera l

a b i l i t i e s i s T n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d in-ediic%Eion sy3tems.K -

Unlike t h e s i t u a t i o n i n some'non s t a t e , s o c i e t i e s , a rgues

Bourdieu, t h e o f f i c a l ve r s ion of s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n i n demo-

c r a t i c s t a t e s o c i e t i e s - - i . e . t h e view of s o c i e t y a s a "merito-

c racy" - - re j ec t s t h e leg i t imacy of t h e i n h e r i t a n c e of p r iv i l ' ege %- . \

{such a s c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l ) . Also r e j e c t e d i n t h i s o f f i c i a l

v e r s i o n i s t h e t a c i t f a c e ,to f a c e e v a l u a t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l s . - 1 f '

one h a s t h e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s one sppposedly g e t s t h e job, regard- - - - - - - -- - - -------- -- -- .

- - l e s s of o n e ' s - g e n e r a l demeanour a s in f luenced by ,one ' s age, sex , - - - --

race, c l a s s , e t c .

As a g a i n s t t h i s o f f i c i a l ve r s ion ~ o u r d i e u contends t h a t *

inlher i tance of c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l i s c e n t r a l t o the reproduct ion of

d o e n a t i o n i n s t a t e s o c i e t i e s . Th i s t r ansmiss ion of c o n t r o l over I

, r

- . i 1

1 - - * . , . . c u l t u r a l r-e-scq~ms; is leg1 t l m d t e d Ly t 7 - tlk,t --

- ' * - c o n c e a l s t h e role o f i n f o r m a l e v a l u a t i o n i n . s c h o l a s t i c s u c c e s s d - f a i l u r e . Thus, s u g g e s t s Bourdieu, t h q e d u c a t i o n system a t t r i -

- b u t e s t o ' i n d i v i d u a l ' d i f f e r e n c e s such a s ha rd work and 'good

tast,eI1 outComes t h a t a r e a c t u a l l y t h e r e s u l t o f s o c i a l d i f f e r e n - -

_- - c e s l e a r n e d du r ing pr imary s o c i a l j . z a t i o n , embod ie s i n t h e

a d i s p o s i t i o n s of t h e h a b i t t t s , and e v a l u a t e d by in fo rma l a s well as -

in Part 3 , t h e n , I show how Bourdieu c o n t e x t u a l i z e s l a y - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - -

knowledge.and i n d i v i d u a l e x p e r i e n c e , n o t o n l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o

symbol ic s i x u c t u r e s , b u t w i t h r e s p e c t t o E roade r s o c i a l proces-.

ses. Thus, I show how i n d i v i d u a l s occupying a g iven p o s i t i o n i n

s o c i e t y - - i , e . i,n a p a r t i c u l a r r e l a t i o n t o a s o c i e t y ' s ' m a t e r i a l '

and c u l t u r a l resources - -acqui re , i n p r imary s o c i a l i z a t i o n , . @articuli)h-dispos.itions of b e h a v i o r , t h o c g h t and e-xperience : i n

s h o r t , a h a b i t u s . T h i s hab i tus - - th rough t h e media t ion of f a c t o r s ' x

such a s ' f a c e t o f a c e ' i n t e r a c t i o n , ' p u b l i c o p i n i o n ' and t h e

e d u c a t i o n sys tem-- increases t h e l i k e l i h o o d t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s w i l l

a c h i e v e t h e same p o s i t i o n i n s o c i e t y as t h a t i n t o which they were

born . P a r t 3 t h u s a d d r e s s e s a prob.lem t h a t Bou-rdieu , poses a g a i n

and a g a i n th roughout his work: How do t h e c o g n i t i v e and mot iva t - ) i n g schemes o f t h e h a b i t u s c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e p roduc t ion and

4- - + - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - --

r e p r o d u c t i o n of the s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s o f domina t ion of which they o .

are t h e p roduc t?

T h i s t h e s i s i s a n i n t r o d u c t i o n t o Bourd ieu ' s work. My p r i - _I-

mary a ims are c l a r i t y and coherence , n o t c r i t i c i s m . The views

e x p r e s s e d h e r e are Bourd ieu ' s , u n l e s s s t a t e d o t h e r w i s e .

i 2-\' 1 -, --- + A F w * ~ m ~ - ~ ~ = \ A 7 1 .

*-THE STRUCTURE OF SYPlBOLIC SYSTEMS , n

4 f

CHAPTER I: THE PROBLEM OF MEANING ,AND THE B&IC PRINCIPLES d OF STRUCTURALIST THOUGHT. i

A * t'

-'L

3 * >-- A? *<- -q.

I n a b r i e f yo rk ing def ini t ion- ; . - BouQieu r e f e r s t o he no me- --L,

1 -. n o l o g i c a l knowledge i n t h e fo l lowing t e r m s :

~ h e - knowledge w e s h a l l c a l l ph*enomenologi'cal (or , . t o speak ' i n t e rms o f cu r r en . t l y a c t i G e s c h o o l s , "e thnometho@ologica l" ) sets o u t t o make e x p l i c i - t Ehe t r u t h of pr imary e x p e r i e n c e

3 of t h e s o c i a l w&orld, i . e . % a l l t h a t i s i n s c r i b e d i n t h e =_ - r e l a t i o n s - h i p o f f ami l i ag i ty dth t h e f a m i l i a r environment, - -

t h e unques t ion ing apprehens ion of t h e s o c i a l world which, by d e f i n i t i o n , does n o t r e f l e c t on i t s e l f and e x c l u d e s t h e . q u e s t i o n o f t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f i t s own p o s s i b i l i t y (Ou t l i ne : +: ,

Thi s d e f i n i t i o n , fo l lows t h e g u i d e l i n e s which had -been se t f o r t h

i n t h e e a r l y p a r t of t h i s c e n t u r y ' b y t h e German p h i l o s o p h e r

Edmund H u s s e r l , tKe founder o f phenomenology. H u s s e r l w a s - --- - - - -

c r i t i c a l of . t h e xanne'r i n w h i c h sb -c= l l&d " ; c i en t i f i cM approaches

t o t h e wor ld d e a l t w i t h i n d i v i d u a l expe r i ence .

Arguing a g a i n s t t h e i d e a l o f a n e u t r a l s u b j e c t o f knowledge

and a vikw o f s c i e n t i f i c knowledge as a s imple ' c o r r e c t i v e ' t o

i n d i v i d u a l expe r i ence . Husse r l . p roposed an approach t o knowledge

whicfi would be based s o l e l y on t h e exper iende o f i n d i v i d p a l s . To - i s o l a t e t h i s e x p e r i e n c e i n i t s c l e a r e s t form, he reasoned , i t

would be n e c e s s a r y t o fo l low c e r t a i n procedures ._ T r a d i t i o n a l - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

assumptions of t h e n a t u r a l s c i ences - - fo r example. t h e view -;that

r e a l i t y e x i s t s independent of i n d i v i d u a l experience--were t o be B

s y s t e m a t i c a l l y b ~ a c k e t e d a s i d e . H u s s e r l c a l l e d t h i s b r a c k e t i n g a -T

- - - - - - - L

- - - / - - - - - -

- - - -- - ---

s ta temenf of. h i s methodologica l p r i o r i t i e s : a

W e must r e g a r d n o t h i n g as v e r i d i c a l [ t r u t h disc los i -ng]- e x c e p t t h e p u r e immediacy and g iveness i n t h e f i e l d o f t h e ego c o g i t o m i v i d u a l exper ience] which the epoch6 h a s -. *-

opened t o u s . I n o t h e r words, w e must n o t make a s s e r t i o n s about t h a t which w e do- 'not o u r s e l v e s s e e (1975: 9 ) .

kerleau-panty s u g g e s t s t h a t when t h e t h e o r i s t pe r fo rms t h e

epochg, he "at t ,mnpts t o r e v e a l and make e x p l i c i t i n h imse l f t h a t i

pure source o f a l l t h e meanings which ~ o n s t i t u t e t h e wor id

a r und him and h i s g m p i r i c a l s e l f " (quoted i n P h i l l i p s o n , 1972: -- 3- - P - - - -- - - - - -- _ -_ r - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -

128) . Notably, i n t h e work o f H u s s e r l , t h e emphasis on p u r i t y >

t h a t i s e v i d e n t i n b o t h t h e s e q u o t a t i o n s was r e l a t e d t o a s e a r c h *

f o r e s sence , o r core o f e s s e n t i a l p r o p e r t i e s . his -essence w a s

.- - t o be sought th rough a n - i n t u i t i v e e x p l o r a t i o n o f o n e ' s own

expe r i ence . When Bourdieu s u g g e s t s t h a t phenomenological know- -,

, l edge -exc ludes , - "by def i-nitioaf"-q&scionf o n the- -condi t ions o f - -

"pr imary e x p e r i e n c e , " h e i s r e f e r r i n g , i n p a r t , t o t h i s a s p e c t o f .

H u s s e r l ' s method.

Recent ly , th rough tKe work o f ~ u s s e k l ' s s t u d e n t ; A l f r e d

I Schu tz , phenomenological methods have ach ieved some s t a r u r e i n . Anglo-American s o c i o l o g y ( t h i s i s most e v i d e n t i n "ethnomethodo-

l o g i c a l " approaches t o s o c i o l o g y ) . onep c r i t i ca l area a t which J A -

s t r u c t u r a l i s t t hough t d i v e r g e s from phenomenological approaches -

- - - - - - - p-p-pp

t o soc io logy i s d e f i n e d by what h a s been c a l l e d t h e "problem of '%?

meaning."' B ~ u r d i e u ~ ~ s r e j e c t i o n of t h e approach t o meaning of

* t h i s p a r t i c u l a r t y p e o f phenomenology o f f e r s a n i m p o r t a n t i n s i g h t

' +

on t h i s d ivergence . Bourdieu states:

Our approach i s . : . r a d i c a l l y opposed .... t o the i n t e r a c t i o n i s m

* - - --- - - - - - - -- - _ , - -- -- -- --

. - P

.which r e d u c e s t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n s o f +social s c i e n c e ' t o " c o ~ n s t r u c t i o n s of t h e second degree , t h a t i s , con ' s t ruc t s of t h e c o n s t r u c t s made by a c t o r s on tfie s o c i a l s cenen , as Shufz does , o r , l i k e G a r f i n k e l , t o accoun t s o f t h e a c c o b n t s which a g e n t s p roduce and th rough which t h e y p r o d u c q t h e meaning o f t h e i r wor ld .... t h e p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r a s c i e n c e o f commonsense r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s which s e e k s t o be more t h a n a c o m p l i c i t o u s d e s c r i p t i o n i s a s c i e n c e of t h e s t r u c t u r e s which govern bo th p r a c t i c e s and t h e cbncomi tan t r e p r e s e n t a t 5 o n s 1 t h e j l a t t e r be in$ t h e p r i n c i p a l o b s t a c l e t o t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of such a . s c i e n c e ( O u t l i n e : 21) .

C-

For purposes O F - s i m p l - i f i c a t i o n , t k i s . p o s i t i o n can be- s een a s a

r e j e c t i o n o f any u n q u a l i f i e d s u b s c r i p t i o n t o t h e f o l l o w i n g propo-

s i t i o n about meaning: "Meaning i s produced i n , o r . t h r o u g h t h e

accounts by which i n d i v i d u a l s make sense o f t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s

w i t h o t h e r i n d i v i d u a l s . " S i g n i f i c a n t l y , Bourdieu rejects t h i s

p r o p o s i t i o n on meaning w i t h r e f e rence , t o t h e concep t o f s t r u c t u r e

- - the concep t which makes p o s s i b l e t h e b reak w i t h phenorpenolo- .-. L g i c a l knowledge. It i s t h u s p o s s i b l e t o approach t h e break by

- _ - - _ c l a r i f y i n g Azhe manper- i n whick-the--pr&&enr OS ~t&~,-as-& - - - -

. r

i s " d i s p l a c e d " by t h e concept o f ,

l i n g u i s t i c s has been u t i l i z e d a s a p r i v i -

l eged model f o r many s t r u c t u r a l i s t t h e o r i e s , w e w i l l b eg in w i t h

t h e concep t of l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e .

Ferd inand d e ~aussure- he concept of l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e t

and t h e b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s o f s t r u c t u r a l i s t t hough t w e r e f irst

formula ted e x p l i c i t l y by Swiss l i n g u i s t Ferd inand d e S a u s s u r e . *

(1853-1913) . ~ a u s s u r e was profoundly . d i s s a t i s f i e d , w i t h t h e

l i n g u i s t i c s of h i s t i m e . H e f e l t t h a t t h e l i n g u i s t s of t h e . .

n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y h a d f a i l e d , a l l t q o o f t e n , t o r e f l e c t d r i t i - )L - - -

tally on thepwork - they w e r e doing. Thus h e w r i t e s t o a n e d i t o r * 8 The u t t e r inadequacy o f c u r r e n t t e rminology , t h e need t o 3

-

- . - .. - . . -. rerorm and, ~n o r d e r t o ao tnat, to uenscmdxclce *dc o i o b j e c t language is , c o n t i n u a l l y s p o i l my p l e a s u r e . in ,

If ph i lo logy [ h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s ] , though I have no d e a r e r wish than n o t t o be khink about t h e n a t u r e of ' language i n g e n e r a l , w f i l l e a d , agiiirist m r w i l l , t o a "

. ' book i n which I s h a l l exp la in , w i t h k t e n t g % i a s m br' \,passion, why t h e r e i s n o t a s i n g l e term used in:[ l inguis-

t i c s ] which h a s any meaning f o r m e (q7uoted i n q l l e r , 1977 : 4- s_

" -

As JonathanFCul ler p o i n t s o u t , -Saussure+ "never wrote the book"

assembled posthumously from h i s s t u d e n t s n b t e s . ) ~ o w e v d r , h i s C

t h e o r e G c a 1 wokk of d e f i n i t i o n provides t h e framework from which

The c e n t r a l theme o f P ~ ~ u s s u r e ' s t h e o r e t i c a l work i s

expressed i n h i s r e j e c t i o n of approaches which take t h e "obvious"

a s a p o i n t o f d e p a r t u r e . Thus Sausspre a r g u e s t h a t w e should n o t

approach t h e d i E f e r e n t r a ' ~ ~ e c & of language s o l e l y i n terms of the- -

d a t a ~mds-crr-sandsL "gFverrwin- of -of-

concepts def ined by t h e v a ~ i o u t e x i s t i n g c a t e g o r i e s of a n a l y s i s . 1

This had been t h e f a i l i n g o f Neo-grammarians , w h o ha3 then

9 procee'bed t o provide exp iana t by t r a c i n g t h e *.'

h i s t o r i c a l t r ans fo rmat ions of sounds and words. In c o n t r a s t t o 1

this kind of =&roach, ~ a u s s u ~ i i n s i s t e d t h a t one mui t begin r i t h '

a s p e c i f i c n o t i o n o f the n a t u r e of t h e phenomenon one i s ., .

s tudying . I n f a c t , f o r Saussure, t h e copsc iobs t h e o r e t i c a l a c t

of d e f i n i n g and delimiting t h e ' o ~ j & c t w of inquiry is a necesgary

p r e l c o n d i t i o n of the s c i e n t i f i c understanding of langriage. This

s t r a t e g y has t h e obvious v i r t u e of enab l ing t h e t h e o r i s t t o s e t i -

f o r t h a coordinat&? set of hypotheses and t o s y s & = t i c a l l y '* d i s c a r d , i n a r e l a t e d fash ion , what i s i r r e l e v a n t t o h i s i n q u i r y .

,

. 4. I"

S a u s s c r e remarks: "Far f r o m i-t being t h e o b j e c t t h a t a n t e d a t e s

t h e viewpoint-, i t wou-18 s ' e e m t h a t i t i s t h e v i ewpo in t t h a t

c r e a t e s t h e objecti" (1966: 83. > j

S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r e t i c a l p r o g r e s s away f r o m t h e . obvious - i)

towards t h e c o n c e p t of s t r u c t u r e i s grounded i n h i s d e f i n i t i o n of

t. lmquage a s a s y ~ c h r o n i c system. This d e f i n i t i o n i n v o l v e s two

i n n o v a t i v e d i s t i n c t i o n s . .

I - The ' f i r s t d i s t i n c t i o n a r i s e s when Sau'ssure r e l e g a t e s t h e

imesiate datum c o n s i d e r e d i n i t s o b s e r v a b l e m a t e r i a l i t y " ' ,

( O u t l i n e : 2 3 ) --to a secondary s t a t u s i n l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y . I n

lace of t h e speech of i n d i v i d u a l s , S a u s s u r e o f f e r s l anguage '

( langue)--which Sourdieu c h a r a c t e r i z e s as an a b s t r a c t sys tem d

" i r r e d u c i b l e t o . . . c o n c r e t e m a n i f e s t a t i o n s n ( O u t l i n e : 23)--as t h e * - -~ -- - ~ -- ~ ~

central f o c u s o f linquistic inquiry. Saussu re s t a t e s : " . . . f rom

LFIe very o u t s e t w e must p u t bo th f e e t - o n g r w n d of language and

use languaqe as t h e norm of all o t h e r m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of speech" f c

f 1 9 6 6 : 9) . 1 w

'. , It is d i f f i c u l t t o pro5uce a c o n c i s e r a t i o n a l e for t h i s

1

d i s t i n c t i o n between language and speech. In fact, it is neces-

sa,y t o achieve a preI*inary "feel" for the d i s t i n c t i o n - - t h r o u g h

---

a emsTderation of Saassure's general v i e w s on t h e c h a r a c t e r of - -- eqce - -- lf one is zo gain any sense of j u s t i f i c a t i o n f r o m the

s p e c i f i c examples t h a t Saussure adduces i n s u p p o r t of it. I t i s

Saussnre ' s r a t i o n a l e bypasses s p e c i f i c i n s t a n c e s to draw out a

a 7 20. L- ' ,

- - - - - - - -- p a - r_ , - - - - -

less e x p l i c i t , j u s t i f i c a t i o n . FoXLr)wing S a u s s u r ~ , R n i ~ r d i ~ n d r a w ' - . . I

a t t e n t i o n t o t h e "common sense" view of languzge. From t h i s =

p e r s p e c t i v e , : 'speech appea r s & t h e p r e c o n d i t i o n f o r language,

a s much from t h e i n d i v i d u a l a s from t h e c o l l e c t i v e p o i n t of view, -

qeech , because because lan$age cannot be apprehended o u t s i d e of s, -

C language is l e a r n t through speech, and because speech i s ' t h e -

s o u r c e o f i n n o v a t i o n s i n , and t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s o f language"

(Ou t l i ne : 2 3 ) . However, a s Bourdieu p o i n t s . o u t , i n t h e r e l a t i o n

o f speech t o language, t h e s e a s p e c t s of speech have o n l y a chron-

-- - - - 3o+calprToYl'ty~~=-CTonsI~r ~ a u s s u r e ' ~ d e f i < i t i o n of l anguage a s

" a system o f l i n g u i s t i c s i g n s (words) i n which t h e o n l y e s s e n t i a l 4

t h i n g i s t h e union of meaninqs and sound-images" (1966: 1 5 ) .

C l e a r l y , one c o n d i t i o n o f l i n g u i s t i c communication r e q u i r e s t h a t -

two s p e a k e r / l i s t e r _ e r s a s s o c i a t e (more r less) ?he same meaning

w i t h t h e same "sound-image"; and i f w e a c c e p t the above d e f i n i - - - - --- - - - - - -

- -

' t i o n o f l anguage ( langue) t h e n t h e most b a s i c form o f t h i s a s o-

n w i l l be l o c a t e d i n language ( l anque ) . The i m p l i c a t i

-* +

k S a u s s u r e draws from t h i s s i t u a t i o n , - s u g g e s t s Bourdieu, i s

i n t h e l o g i c a l o r d e r of i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y , speech i s t h e pro-

d u c t o f l a n p a g e " (Ou t l i ne : 24)-- in S a u s s u r e ' s own words, "language -

i s necessa ry if s ~ e e c h i s t o b e i n t e l l i g i b l e ' ' (1966: 18) . The second d i s t i n c t i o n t h a t i s r e q u i r e d t o d e f i n e language

c o n c e p t u a l l y s e p a r a t e v iewpoin ts . The f i r s t v i ewpo in t concen-

t rates on the changes tha t =cu r i n language over a periad of

time. I n a game of ches s , e x p l a i n s Saussu re , t h i s v iewpoin t

- would co r r e spond t o an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e change i n v a l u e s of I

t h e v a r i o u s p i e c e s a f t e r a s p e c i f i c move. Saussu re c a l l s t h i s

v iewpoin t h i s t o r i c a l ( e v o l u t i o n a r y ) o r d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s .

The second v iewpoin t c o n c e n t r a t e s on t h e n a t u r e o f t h e l i n g u i s t i c *. '

system a t a p a r t i c u l a r p o i n t i n t ime. I n a game of c h e s s , th ' i s

would co r r e spond to an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e r e l a t i v e v a l u e s of

t h e d i f f e r e n t p i e c e s a t a s p e c i f i c p o i n t i n t h e game. Saussu re I.

ca l l s t h i s second v iewpoin t t h e s t u d y o f l i n g u i s t i c s t a t e s , o r

synch ron ic linguistics. - -

These two d i s t l nc t ions - -be tween language and speech , and

6 between synchron ic and d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s - - e n a b l e Saussu re t o

d e f i n e language a s an a b s t r a c t synch ron ic sys tem. This t a c t i c caq

be c o n s i d e r e d is a f i r s t p r i n c i p l e o f s t r u c t u r a l i s t t hough t .

Having succeeded i n d e f i n i n g h i s o b j e c t of i n q u i r y - - i . e . , - -.

F k - - -

l anguage as a synch ron i c svs te rn- -gussure ' is- a b l e - t o a d d r e s s t h e '

problem which had been s k i r t e d i n p r e v i o u s l i n g u i s t i c s : "What i s 9

t h e n a t u r e s f t h e complex pheriornenon o f human speech ( l a n q a q e ) ? "

Guided by t h e framework se t o u t by synchron ic l i n g u i s t i c s ,

Saussu re a t t e m p t s t o d e l i m i t t h e g e n e r a l p r o p e r k i e s of t h e l i n g -

u i s t i c s i g n o r word. I t is i n t h i s c o n t e x t t h a t t h e concept of -

l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e emerges.

E a r l y - -- - in - - - - - t h e - - Course i n Genera l L i n g u i s t i c s Saussu re m a k e s a n

-

i m p o r t a n t p o i n t about t h e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n f o r

'4 word) . H e s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e s i g n can be d i v i d e d i n t o two compo-

nents--a sound image ( s i g n i f i e r ) and a concep t ( s i g n i f i e d ) . Furthermore, the relationship between t h e two components i s

a r b i t r a q . There i s no " n a t u r a l " c o n n e c t i o n between t h e s i g n i -

t *

- - - - - - -, ., m a me signified-(-ffofinstance, t h e s i g n i f i e x - " t r e e W . i s i n ' ,

no way t r e e - l i k e ) . L a t e r i n t h e Course i n G e n e r a l L i n g u i s t i c s

, . S a u s s u r e e x p l a i n s t h i s p o s i t i o n more f u l l y :

. . , i n language t h e r e are on ly d i f f e r e n c e s . Even more impor t an t : a d i f f e r e n c e g e n e r a l l y i m p l i e s p o s i t i v e t e r m s between which t h e d i f f e r e n c e i s se t u ~ : b u t i n language t h e r e are o n l y d i f f e r e n c e s w i t h o u t p o s i t i v e te rms . \;ether we t a k e t h e s i a n i f i e d or t h e s i g n i f i e r , lanquage h a s n e i t h e r i d e a s crr' sou'nds , t h a t e x i s t e d b e f o r e t h e l i n g u i s t i c system, b u t on ly c o n c e p t u a l and p h o n i e d i f f e r - ences t h a t have i s s u e d from t h e sys tem (1966 : 120) . Thi s i s a d i f f i c u l t i n t t o g r a s p , b u t it i s a c c e s s i b l e i f P"

examining t h e second k ind of d i f f e r e n c e which Saussure d i s t i n g -

u i shes - - the phonic d i f f e r e n c e s . When S a u s s u r e makes t h i s c l a i m

f o r t h e importance of phonic d i f f e r e n c e s he i s say ing t h a t t h e

m o s t impor t an t f a c e t ab t t h e a c o u s t i c e l emen t of human speech i s

n o t t h e way an i n d i v i d u a l u t t e r s a sound. The l e t t e r " t , " a s i n - - - - -- - -

" t i p , " c ~ u l d be pronounced i n numerous ways by numerous s p e a k e r s ,

a s long a s it i s n o t confused w i t h t h e f i r s t sound i n t h e word

"dip ." P h o n e t i c a l l y ( i n s p e e c h ) , t h e sounds may be v e r y c l o s e , a s

a c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the p h y s i c a l v o c a l movements r e q u i r e d t o pro-

duce them i n d i c a t e s . However, phonemical ly ( i n l a n g u a g e ) , they

are q u i t e . ~ i s t i n g u i s h a b l e ( f o r ~ n ~ l i s h n a t i v e s p e a k e r s ) . The *

first sound i n " d i p " r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e v o c a l chords be a l lowed t o -

i n t h e languaqe - s y s t e n of English--which e n a b l e s i n c l i v i d u a l

s p e a k e r / l i s t e n e r s t o d i s t i n g u i s h " t " from "d . " Saussu re i s

r e f e r r i n g t o t h i s kind of ?henomenon when h e s u g g e s t s t h a t i n

language d i f f e r e n c e s are more impoetan t t h a n , and, i n fact,

d e f i n e , what a r e perceived as p o s i t i v e t e r m s .

2 3 . I % *.

- - - - I t i s p o s s i b l e t o o f f e r a more t a n g i b l e example o f t h i s I - - A - - - - - - - - 7 ---

--p--p--ppp,------------ - I

phenomenon when we move from t h e l e v e l of phonic d i f f e r e h c e s t o .

t h e l e v e l - o f concep tua l d i f f e r e n c e s or meaning. H e r e , as i n t h e

-, example o f phonic d i f f e r e n c e s , Saussure makes - h i s c a s e f o r t h e .- z - 2

importance of d i f f e r e n c e s by r e f e r r i n g t o t h e language sys tem,

n o t t o i n d i v i d u a l speech . To c l a r i f y t h e -iss-ue he u s e s t h e c h e s s

ana logy (which was employed t0'mak.e t h e s y n c ~ r o n i c / d i a c h r o n i c

d i s t i n c t i o n ) and u s e s t h e 'term v a l u e ( v a l e u r ) when he' w i shes t o

d w o t e meaning a t t h e l e v e l o f language. ~ a u s s u r e ' s . c e n t r a l . -

p o i n t 2s t h a t tKe v a l - -of a n i n d i v i d u a l chess piece--say, a -- -

i - -

knight--does no? r e s i d e i n t h e p r o p e r t i e s which are i n t r i n s i c t o

t h e subs t ance o f t h e p i e c e . For i n s t a n c e , t h e k n i g h t cou ld be

l o s t o r des t royed a t a p b i n t i n t h e game w i t h o u t b r i n g i n g a n end

t o p l a y . T h i s i s because t h e k n i g h t , p e r s e - - t h a t i s , t h e k n i g h t

i n i t s s imple m a t e r i a l i t y " o u t s i d e i t s squa re and t h e o t h e r con- - - - - - - - - - - -

d i t i o n s of t h e game" (Saussure , 1966: 110) - - i s o f no consequerlce

t o t h e game. The k n i g h t t a k e s on v a l u e , s a y s S a u s s u r e , and

"becomes a rea l c o n c r e t e e l emen t , " on ly i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e o t h e r

? i e c e s a s t h e s e ' r e l a t i o n s h i p s are d e f i n e d by t h e f i x e d r u l e s of

t h e game (1966: U O f . I n f a c t , one could i g n o r e t h e appearance o f -

t h e k n i g h t and s u b s t i t u t e a lmos t any o b j e c t f o r it, as long as

(i) f o r p r a c t i c a l purposes t h e o b j e c t is d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e from t h e +

*?I-- *- * f - - ~ - ~ , t t & - - t i i j - * h e & 3 & & u e r s M--t*------2 . , -

- -A- of +-t. Thns t h e v a l i ~ e of a k n q h t i s n o t

d e f i n e d by s u b s t a n c e b u t by r e l a t i o n s h i p - - a n d i n a c h e s s game . t h e s e r e l a t i o f i s h i p s are d e f i n e d by r u l e s which s p e c i f y t h e d i f - d

f e r e n c e s betwe-en p i e c e s .

24 . , \ . ,

t - - - - -

b- - I n - s u w e s t i n g - -- - - t h a t - t h e - l i n q u i s t i c - s i q n (word) i s c o n s t i t u t e d

by phonic and concep tua l d i f f e r e n c e s Saussure i s d e p a r t i n g from

a mode of t hough t t h a t h a s permeated wes te rn d i s c o u r s e s i n c e t h e

e a r l y c r eek p h i l o s o p h e r s . T h i s t r a d i t i o n a l view a s s e r t e d t h a t

adequate knowledge o f the ' w6;ld r e s t e d on t h e a b i l i t y o f a

t h i n k e r t o d i s t i n g u i s h t h e pr imary o r e s s e n t i a l p r o p e r t i e s which 1

de f ined t h e i k n t i t y of s u b s t a n c e s , and secondary o r non e s sen - F 3

t i a l a t t r i b u t e s which w e r e n o t c r u c i a l t o t h i s i d e n t i t y . '

w r r e s p o n d i n g l y , by d e f i n i n g t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n i n t h i s

manner, a programmatic

by Bourdieu i n a c r i t i q u e of "spontaneous [phenomenblogical]

p h i l o s o p h i s s ~ o f knowledge" ( l968b : 703) . Bourdieu s u g g e s t s t h a t

one s t a g e i n a n adequa te s o c i o l o g i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n e n t a i l s g i v i n g

"methodological primacy t d o b j e c t i v e r e l a t i o n s [ s t r u c t u r e s ] a s ' & a g a i n s t t h e [ i n d i v i d u a l s ] e n t e r i n g i n t o them and t h e r e p r e s e n t a z

- - - - - - -- -- - - -

t i o n s they m a y have o f them" (1968b: 703) . Within S a u s s u r e ' s

per ispect ive , as i n Bourd ieu ' s proposed approach, "methodologica l -

prirqacy" i s g i v e n t o " o b j e c t i v e r e l a t i o n s " ( s t r u c t u r e s ) . For /

I S a y s u r e , however, t h e s e s t r u c t u r e s a r e n o t t h e s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s

icr

of dominat ion t o which ~ o u r d i e u i s r e f e r r i n g ; f o r S a u s s u r e , t h e s e '

s t r u c t u r e s are t h e o f r e l a t i o n s h i p which e x i s t e b e t w e e n 0

t h e words of a language a t a g iven p o i n t i n t i m e . T h i s emphasis . -

- o n e s k a b 2 i skhg=the&at-fonslrh+ w h k h ~re-ex-irst -d-+dp-- ,

o r , t o u s e a n o t h e r example, i n d i v i d u a l human b e i n g s ) i s a second

b a s i c p r i n c i p l e of s t r u c t u r a l i s t thought . .

W e can now d e f i n e s t r u c t u r a l i s t approaches ( a t least i n

i n q u i r y a s a synchron ic s t r u c t u r e d system.

Noam Chomsky--The p r i n c i p l e s o f s t r u c t u r a l i s t t h o u g h t have

been a p p l i e d i n numerous a r e a s o f t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s , from French

an thropology t o American l i n g u i s t i c s . Noam Chomskp, a w e l l known

member o f t h e l a t t e r d i s c i p l i n e , h a s used c e r t a i n d i s t i n c t i o n s ,

s i m i l a r ' t o t h o s e made by Saussu re i n h i s i n q u i r i e s i n t o human

speech. Bourdieu, i n a r e c e n t a r t i c l e ("The economics o g-

u i s t i c exchanges" (1977 ) 1 , has c r i t i z e d Chomsky ' s t h e o r e t i c a l 3

c a t e & - i e s Yn o r d e r t o e l u c i d a t e h i s own apprdach t o speech .

Neve r the l e s s , Bourdieu does u t i l i z e s t r u c t u r a l i s t p r i n c i p l e s a s 1

a r t i c u l a t e d i n Chomsky's work t o b reak bo th w i t h phenomenology and

wi th v a r i o u s forms o f n a i v e behaviour ism ( i . e . w i t h p e r s p e c t f v e s

on human behav iou r which p o r t r a y i n d i v i d u a l s as p a s s i v e l y r e a c t -

i n g , and l e a r n i n g t o react, t h e " s t i m u l i " o f " sense d a t a " ) . - - - - - - -

- - - - - - -

chomsky d e a l s w i t h a p rob lema t i c a s p e c t of human speech

which seems t o have escaped S a u s s u r e ' s d i r e c t a t t e n t i o n . Focus-

s i n g on a s p e c i f i c k ind of l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e (Chomsky u s e s t h e

terms "grammatical" o r " s y n t a c t i c " s t r u c t u r e ' ) , ~ h o m s k y seeks t o

accoun t f o r what appear t o be t h e i n f i n i t e c r e a t i v e capacities o f

i n d i v i d u a l s . ow ever, Chomsky is n o t concerned w i t h the creat ive

a b i l i t i e s o f a f e w ' g i f t e d ' i n d i v i d u a l s . H e i s concerned, r a t h e r ,

s t r u c t u r e d e . , "grammat ica l ly c o r r e c t " ) s e n t e n c e s , and (b) -4.

r ecogn ize whe the r a given s e n t e n c e is grammatical , even if t h a t

s en t ence may have neve r been hea rd p r e v i o u s l y .

f

- -

To u n d e r s t a n d Chomsky's concern w i t h t h e c r e a t i v e a s p e c t of - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - -

human s p e e c h , it i s n e c e s s a r y t o , c o n s i d e r h i s - a p p r o a c h i n r e l a -

t i o n t o b e h a v i o r i s t a p p r o a c h e s t o human b e h a v i o r (which Bourdieu

would i n c l u d e i n t h e c a t e g o r y o f " m e c h a n i s t i c " a q r o a c h e s J

( O u t l i n e : 73 ,951. Chomsky's c r i t i c a l review o f modern b e h a v i o r i s t

B .-FA S k i n n e r ' s s t u d y o f human s p e e c h ( V e r b a l B e h a v i o r (1957) )

p r o v i d e s a u s e f u l summary o f t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p . S k i n n e r had

c l a i m e d t h a t e x p l a n a t i o n s o f human s p e e c h s h o u l d n o t havp t o t

depend on r e f e r e n c e s t o f a c t o r s - - s u c h a s t h e meaning t h a s p e a k e r s - \ i n t e n d t o s o n v e y i n t h e i r speech a c t s - - w h i c h are n o t capable-&

measurement by " n e u t r a l " o b s e r v e r s . Human s p e e c h , a r g u e d s k i n -

n e r , l i k e a l l o t h e r a n i m a l b e h a v i o r s , c a n b e e x p l a i n e d a$ a d 9

r e s p o n s e t o i d e n t i f i a b l e s t i m u l i i n t h e e n v i r o n m e n t . I n h i s

r e v i e w of S k i n n e r ' s book, Chomsky c o n t e n d s t h a t t h i s p r o p o s i t i o n

is a b s u r d and u s e s examples such as t h e f o l l o w i n g i n s u p p o r t o f J

- -

h i s c o n t e n t i o n : ir +

A t y p i c a l example o f ' s t i m u l u s c o n t r o l ' fo r S k i n n e ~ would be the r e s p o n s e to . . . a p a i n t i n g w i t h t h e r e s p o n s e ' D u t c h ' . Such r e s p o n s e s are a s s e r t e d t o b e ' u n d e r t h e c o n t r o l o f L e x t r e m e l y s u b t l e p r o p e r t i e s ' o f t h e p h y s i c a l o b j e c t .... Suppose i n s t e a d o f s a y i n g 'Du tch ' w e had s a i d ' C l a s h e s w i t h t h e w a l l p a p e r ' , ' I t h o u g h t you l i k e d a b s t r a c t w o r k ' , 'Never s a w it before' ... or wha tever else m i g h t c o m e i n t o o u r minds when l o o k i n g a t a p i c t u r e ... S k i n n e r c o u l d o n l y s a y t h a t e a c h o f t h e s e r e s p o n s e s i s under t h e c o n t r o l o f s o m e o t h e r s t imu- l u s p r o p e r t y o f t h e p h y s i c a l o b j e c t (Chomsky, 1958: 31)

Chomsky g o e s on t o p o i n t o u t - t h a t S k i n n e r ' s mode o f e x p l a n a t i o n 2 omes-ciFccuulr hen-applied- - t6compi-ixf orm~--b-ehavio-r-such

as- human s p e e c h . W l i F n b e h a v i o F i ~ t s L G e ~ o n f r o n t e d w i t h phenomena T

of - th i ' s l e v e l .of c o m p l e x i t y , s u g g e s t s Chomsky, t h e t e n d e n c y i s t o

i s o l a t e r e s p o n s e s and t h e n t o a t t e m p t t o c h o o s e approP-

- 7

- - - - - - -- - -- - - - -- --- -- -- . --

r ia fe s t i m u l i . Bu t , accord ing t o Chomsky , . t h e fundamental weak-

n e s s o f t h e b e h a v i o r i s t model i s i t s i n a b i l i t y t o accoun t f o r L

i

t h e c r e a t i v e a s p e c t of human speech--the v e r y problem t o which h e . *

d i 2 e c t s h i s t h e o r e t i c a l a t t e n t i o n s . I e

. I n o r d e r t o p rov ide a concep tua l b a s i s f o r h i s no' t ion of t h e

c r e a t i v e c a p a c i t i e s o f human s p e a k e r s , Chomsky d i v i d e s human > -

speech-into two c a t e g o r i e s which cor respond roughly t o ~ a u s s b r e ' s -

c a t e g o r i e s o f language ( langue) and speak ing ( p a r o l e ) . The f i r s t

of Chomsky's c a t e g ~ r i e s , compe-e, refejcs t o an ideal sp-Per/

h e a r e r ' s k owledge of language. The concept o f competence t h u s %, *$ * d i f f e r s from S a u s s u r e ' s language i n t h a t S a u s s u r e i s r e f e r r i n g t o

t h e system o f l i n g u i s t i c s i g n s which makes up a l anguage , whereas

Chomsky i s r e f e r r i n g t o t h e i d e a l s p e a k e r / l i s t e n e r ' s knowledge o f

t h i s system. However, t h e two concep t s are s i m i I a r i n t h e - > -

impor t an t s e n s e t h a t bo th emphasiie t h e e x c a u s t i a e and t h u s i d e a l

c h a r a c t e r o f t h a t t o which- t hey r e f e r . Saugsure contends t h a t

r- language s p e c i f i e s a l l p o s s i b l e r e l a t i o n s between l i n g u i s t i c

s i g n s and Chomsky contends t h a t competence i s t h e p e r f e c t know-

l e d g e o f a language.

The concep t o f performance , which co r r e sponds t o ~ a u s s u r e ' s

concep t o f speak ing , i s Chomsky's second i m p o r t a n t t h e o r e t i c a l '

c a t e g o r y . - - -- - -- Performance -- r e f e r s t o t h e a ~ ~ l i c a t i o n -oLth&deal k J ' ; *

l i n g u i s t i c knowledge d e f i n e d as competence t o a n i n d i v i d u a l P

speech a c t . But Chomsky's

almost e x c l u s i v e l y i n ' t e r m s 4

doubt p a r t i a l l y because h e

c e n t r a l t h e o r e t i c a l

*

bo th t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of - l i n g u i s t i c knowledge and t h e a p p l i c a t i o n

of l i n g u i s t i c kno edge t o a n a c & a l 'speech a c t ( l i n g u i s t i c \ p r a c t i c e ) . he^ meqely s u g g e s t s t h a t f o r c pe t ence t o be " r e f l e c - T , t e d " (Chomsky, 1965: 4 ) i n performance t h e i d e a l s p e a k e r / l i s t e n e r

must be " u n a f f e c t e d by such grammat ica l ly i r r e l e v a n t c o n d i t i o n s + -

as memory l i m i t a t i o n s , d i s t r a c t i o n s , s h i f t s o f a t t e n t i o n and ,

f I

,-d

i n t e r e s t and e r r o r s (random o r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ) . . ." (1965: 3 ) . i'

Thz r - e su l t , a s will become e v i d e n t i n t h e n e x t two chapte rs , i s a - - -

somewhat impover ished d e f i n i t i o n o f performance ( p r a c t i c e ) .

Having d e f i n e d h i s c e n t r a l " o b j e c t " o f i n q u i r y a s l i n g u i s t i c . .

competence, Chomsky addres se s t h e . p o b l e m of what appea r t o be -

t h e i n f i n i t e c r e a t i v e c a p a c i t i e s of human s p e a k e r / l i s t e n e r s . He

prdposes t h a t w e look beyond t h e seemingly l i m i t l e s s v a r i e t y o f - - - - - - - - - - - -

A s e n t e n c e s produced by s p e a k e r s t o t h e common p a t t e r n s o r s t r u c -

- - . -+ t u r e s which u n d e r l i e t h e s e n t e n c e s . These unde r ly ing s t r u c t u r e s ,

' by d e f i n i t i o n , are s i m p l e r t h a n t h e i r m a n i f e s t a t i o n s i n t h e

s e n t e n c e s of performance. Chomsky c a l l s t h e s e s i m p l e r s t r u c -

tures, deep s t r u c t u r e s , t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e them from t h e more

complex s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e s . H e con tends t h a t i f w e can account

f o r t h e manner i n which t h e s e s i m p l e r deep s t r u c t u r e s are c o n s t i -

/ t u t e x a n d t h e n X t r 3 n s f o r m e d i n t o t he -more complex s u r f a c e s t r u c - - --- --

-

t u r e s , w e w i l l have an unde r s t and ing of a s p e a k e r ' s competence. - --

I t w a s w i t h such an end i n mind t h a t Chomsky used t h e - - I

n o t i o n of r-dles. One of h i s c e n t r a l ' , concepts , the " g e n e r a t i v e - grarmnar," i s d e f i n e d a s a f i n i t e set o f r u l e s w i t h c e r t a i n capa-

2 /C-

c i t i e s . F i r s t , t h i s s e t o f r u l e s . ( o r "code") s p e c i f i e s , a t t h e

l e v e l of t h e deep s t r u c t u r e , a number of a b s t r a c t s y n t a c t i c

r e l a t i o n s h i p s among words. Second, t h i s s e t o f r u l e s d e s c r i b e s

t h e l o g i c a l s t e p s by which t h e deep s t r u d t t n e s , in a pro-cess

which main ta ins ' t h e . i n i t i a l a b s t r a c t r e l a t i o n s h i p s , become x" .

s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e s o r s e n t e n c e s . ' Th i s p r o c e s s - o f t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , t.

*

i d c apab le o f g e n e r a t i n g a 7 p o t e n t i a l l y i n f i n i t e number of s en t en -

t ces ( o r "megsages") ; it i s d e s c r i b e d , however, by a f i n i t e se t o f

r u l e s , working on a base c o n s t i t u t e d by a f i n i t e number o f

I t i s p o s s i b l e t o sumriarize t he - f u l l range 05 c a p a c i t i e s

t h a t . Chomsky . had v i s u a l i z e d f o r t h e g e n e r a t i v e grammar i n terms

of t h e f o l l o w i n g somewhat

o f a fo rmal ( s y n t a c t i c a l )

t i o n of t h e l o g i c a l s t e p s . - - - - -

s i m p l i f i e d f u n c t i o n s : (i) s p e c i f i c a t i , o n

base- o f deep s t r u c t u r e ; (ii) d e s c r i p -

by which t h i s deep stricture i s t r a n s - * - - - - - - - - - - - -

k -

- formed i n t o ;b s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e ; (iii) c l a r i f i c a t i o n o f , t he .

manner i n which' semant ic and p h o n e t i c i n p u t i s i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o

t h e p r o c e s s a long t h e way (1965: 141-42) .

Claude ~gvi-~trauss- nothe her modern t h i n k e r whose use o f t h e

p r i n c i p l e s o f s t r u c t u r a l i s t t hough t h a s had l a s t i n g impact on t h e h

s o c i a l s c i e n c e s i s French a n t h r o p o l o g i s t , Claude ~ & i - ~ t r a u s s .

UnlikqChomsky, however, L s v i - ~ t r a u s s i s i n t e r e s t e d i n a v a k s t y

bf s p b m t k c - s y s tems- -nut just--l angiiaaqe . M o r e o v e r ; T2 re B o u r d l e u l --

model t o symbol ic w e r e under taken i n r e l a t i o n t o i n f o r - - %

mation c o l l e c t e d on p r e - s t a t e societies. A n examina t ion of L&i-

S t r a u s s ' e a r l y s t r u c t u r a l i s t s t u d i e s of k i n s h i p is u s e f u l t o an,

unde r s t and ing .o f bo th Bourd ieu ' s u s e of s t r u c t u r a l i s t p r i n c i p l e s , P

and h i s e v e n t u a l r e c o g n i t i o n

t h i i k i n g .

. . A *

of t h e l i m i t s o f s t r u c t u r a l i s t & ,

~ G v i - s t r a u s s ' i n t e r e s t i n deve lop ing a more i n c l u s i v e strut.-

t u r a l i s t model w a s spa rked by h i s e$posure t o s t r u c t u r a l l i n g u i s -

t ics. I n one of h i s e a r l i e s t p u b l i s h e d e s s a y s ~ 6 v i - s k r a u s ' s

a rgues t h a t t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e d i s c o v e r i e t o f t h e l s t r u c t u r a l

l i n g , u i s t s ex t end f a r beyond. t h e d i s c i p l i n e of l i n g u i s t i c s i t s e l f . =

He impl ied t h a t b reak th roughs h i m i l a r t o ' t hose made i n l ingui i -

kics on the-app%ic&&oa c f - s t r t ~ c t m - a l i s f p r i n c i w Z e s ~ m l d - b e - ~ ~ = ~ ' -

i n t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s i n g e n e r a l . To ach ieve t h i s k ind of ,

p r o g r e s s , s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s - - f o r ' example an th ropo log i s t s - - shou ld

work towards t& development and a p p l i c a t i o n o f " a method ana lo-

gous i n form- ( i f n o t i n c o n t e n t b - t o t,he method used by ' t h e

s t r u c t u r a l l i n g u i s t s " (1967bi 3 4 ) . L g v i - ~ t r a u s s ' f i r s t c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h i s k i n d o f method came

r i n t h e f i e l d of k i n s h i p s t u d i e s . ' Drawing a t t e n t i q n t o &e work

o f s t r u c t u r a l l i n g u i s t , N. ~ r o u b e t s k o ~ , ~ g v i - ~ t r a u s s q u e s t i o n e d /

t h e predominance of d i a c h r o n i c ( h i s t o r i c a l ) and what Troubetskoy

c a l l e d " a t o m i s t i c , " approaches w i t h i n an thropology . ~ c c o r d i n g t o

L g v i - ~ t r a u s s , such approaches sough t t h e e x p l a n a t i o n of e x i s t i n g

k i n s h i p p a t t e r n s i n o f t h e p a s t , and ended, too

&yot1967b : 3 5 ) . , 3wk-s-

, t o view k i n s h i p systems

as " s y n c h r o n i c ~ w h o l e s " /196%: 35) (analoqous t o t h e ' a b s t r a c t f

sys tems o f language ( l angue ) which w a s d i s c o v e r e d by Saussu re . 5

d v i - ~ t r a u s s a t t empted t b c l a r i f y ano the r basic a s p e c t o f

F

h i s methodology and t h a t of famous B r i t i s h a n t h r o p o l o g i s t , A.R.

Radcliffk-Brown (1881-1955) - ,

elementary [nuclear] fami ly '

which - a k i n s h i p i s b u i l t up"

/ Radcliffe-Brown had i d e n t i f i e d ' t h e

and t h e " u n i t of s t r u c t u r e from

(quoted i n L g v i - ~ t r a u s s , 1967b:.50) . L g v i - ~ t r a u s s contended t h a t t h i s emphasis on what h e , c a l l e d t h e

" b i o l o g i c a l f a m i l y " (196%: 50) made it d i f f i c u l t t o a p p r e c i a t e - --

t h e s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r of t h e phenomenon of k i n s h i p . I n c d n t r a s t

t o Radcliffe-Brown's view t h a t r e l a t i o n s h i p s between elementary - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - -

- - - -- - -- - - - - - - - = = - - = = % 55i)* - --

" f a m i l i e s were "secondary and derived" (Levi-Strauss , I

d-7 ~ S v ? - ~ t r a u s s a s s e r t e d : "The essence bf m a n k i n s h i p i s t o

kequire t h e e s t ab l i shment of relat ions2among what ~adcliffe- row? c a l l s 'e lementary famil ies" ' (196%:51). These r e l a t i o n s ,

suggested ~&i-~trauss , a r e in f luenced by t h e system of' kin,ship . . terms -- - ( f o r - example, uncle/nephew, mother/daughter, e t c . ) . H e

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - -

held , moreover, t h a t b o t h t h e k i n s h i p r e l a t i o n s and t h e +system

of k i n s h i p terms to which they a r e dynamically connected, pre-

e x i s t , and h e l p t o d e f i n e , what are perce ived a s elementary

f a m i l i e s . Thus it was impera t ive , f o r ~ & i - ~ t r a u s s , t h a t t h e X- r

- a n t h r o p o l o g i s t d i d n o t i s o l a t e elementary f a m i l i e s as b a s i c u n i t s k

o f kinship . H e recommended r a t h e r , t h a t a t t e n t i o n be focused o n '

r e l a g i o n s between f a m i l i e s , as s p e c i f i e d , i n p a r t , by t h e system

--the emphasis on synchrony and t h e emphasis on r e l a t i o n s h i p s

fstrttctnres) r a t h e r tharr-unh--in h i s first ma-jor--work, - The

Elementary S t r u c t u r e s of Kinship ( 1 9 4 9 b Guided .by t h e s e , *- -- - - . %'

- * s p e c i f i c k i n s h i p systems t h a t he s t u d i e d , a set of a b s t r a c t

. . 1C

rules which desc r ibed what H e f e l t w e r e t h e t h r e e b a s i c k i n s h i p

s t r u c t u r e s ( o r more ~ r e c i s e l y , xttarriage p a t t e r n s ) i n non s t a t e * s o & e t i e s . ~ u k m r i z i n ~ , s e v e r a l y e a r s la ter , t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e

o f t h e s e r e s u l t s , Levi-Strauss remarked t h a t t h e d i s c o v e r y - b f g

basic s f x u c t u r e s ",,,can be achieved on ly by- t x e a t i n g marriage - - - -- . -

r e g u l a t i o n s and k inship .sys tems as a k ind of languagen (P967b: Q

C \

61) . f - - -- - - -- - - - - -- -- -- - -- - -- -- - - - -- - - - - -- ----

-- - -- - --- - - - -- -- -- -

Though t h e above p r o p o s i t i o n was con t roVers ia1 w i t h i n t h e t

I . s o c i a l s c i e n c e d i s c o u r s e o f s t h e t ime, Levi-Strauss 9 w a s not con-

t e n t t o rest h i s case w i t h t h e a s s e r t i o n t h a t k i n s h i p s y s t e m s R

should b e , t r e a t e d - l i k e a language. H e a l s o sugges ted t h a t kin-

s h i p systems, and indeed, a v a r i e t y o f symbolic systems might

" .2.cons_titut& P_benomem&oseinnermosteis the - - -- - -- - - -ssp--

t h a t gf lariguagen + (196%: 6 2 ) . I n o#eS words, Levi-Strauss

contended t h a t t h e symdolic systems t h a t form a c u l t u r e were not - " .- j u s t - l i k e a language, they w e r e - languages--or, more correctly,

they w e r e ~ o m p l e t e l y legitimate .examples o f a phenomenon which,

Levi-Strauss sugges ted , included language as a sUbs,&ti This 6,

phenomenon Levi-Straws c a l l e d communication. =

I n an important essay c a l l e d '"social S t r u c t u r e , " Levi-

S t r a u s s indicated - - the t h r e e different . kinds of exchange {as

" exchange

b a s i c l e v e l s 1

P

of informat ionu) which'he b e l i e v e d formed the t h r e e

of communicat ion~in s o c i e t y : " . . . the comunica%ion h

o f women, t h e communication oi exchange of g ~ o a s '

ami sernces, and t h e c o ~ u n i c a t i o n l o r ,exchange] o f messages"

(f967br 296). This l i s t , of c o u r s e , immediate ly r a i s e s s e v e r a l

q u e s t i o n s . For exarrple,.do women have any s a y i n t h e i r a l l e ed 4 ! f role i n t h i s p r o c e s s of exchange? ~ b v i - ~ t r a u s s n e v e r r e s ~ ~ d s

adequa te ly to t h i s k i n d of q u e s t i o n . H i s i m p l i c i t r e sponse , a t

least i n t h i s . e s s a y , i s t h a t h e i s n o t i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e views o f -\

specific individuals on eligible m a r r i a g e p a r t n e r s U967b: 298)

(nor, f o r t h a t , m a t t e r , i s h e p r i m a r i l y concerned w i t h t h e a c t u a l

mar r i ages t&t take p l a c e (H67b: 285) ) . I n s k e a d , l i k e Chomsky, -

- -- - - - - - -- - - -- - -

- - -- - - -

-- ---- - - -- - - - -

d v i - ~ t r a u s s i s i n t e r e s t e d i n an i d e a l s e t of r u l e s (or a s e t o f %

rules which c o u l d on ly be r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e knowledge of an i d e a l

i n d i v i d u a l ) . T h i s set of rules acts l i k e a code i n s p e c i f y i n g

- the r e p e r t o i r e o f a l l e l i g i b l e , marriage p a r t n e r s . Moreover, l i k e

Chomsky ' s g e n e r a t i v e grammar, the r u l e s s p e c i f y t h e b a s i c s t r u c -

tures LQr relationshi- w h i c L W & h - - a f 3- s&f&fy- sanc t i aned

marriages.

~ 6 v i - ~ t r a u s s went on t o stress t h a t t h i s id iom o f r u l e s w a s 1 I

of great impor tance t o t he d i s c i p l i n e s which had t r a d i t i o n a l l y

s t u d i e d t h e a r e a of social l i f e k h i c h h e c a l l e d communication.

In f a c t , h d went so. far as t o recommend t h a t a l l of t h e s e d i s c i - - .P

~ i i n d s (social anthropology, economics, L i n g u i s t i c s ) shou ld

"...consist.exclusively of the s t u d y of r u l e s and have l i t t l e - -- PA

zozeern w i t h the natnre of t h e p a r t n e r s ( e i t h e r i n d i v i d u a l s o r I

groups) w h o s e play i s being p a t t e r n e d a f t e r t h e s e ru les . . . .What , 4 I

is importantis t o f i n d o u t when a g i v e n p l a y e r can make a cho ice

f+ - -

and vheq h5 cannot" (1467b:298) . '~h& L ~ v i - S t r a u s s Fin h i s

attempt to apply s t r u c t u r a l i s t p r i n c i p l e s t o the study ol$symbolic >

r e f i n e d ' by l i n g u i s t Noam Chomsky . .It would be "possible t o pu r sue t h e ana logy b e t v e e n Chomsky

and ~ 6 v i - ~ t r a u s s a l l u d e d t o above by s u g g e s t i n g t h a t ~ g v i - ~ t r a u s s ' c. t

approach t o s t r u c t u r e d behav io r e x h i b i t s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f a

t h e o r y o f " d u l t u r a l competence." From t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e sets

of abstract r u l e s to which ~ E v i - ~ t r a u s s r e f e r s ac t as a k i n d o f

c u l t u r a l code , t h e knowledge o f which would e n a b l e an i d e a l i n d i -

v i d u a l t o a l l t h e i n t e l l i g i b l e ( o r , t o u s e Chomsky's word,

I n a number o f e a r l y ar t ic les Bourdieu, h i m s e l f , makes a

p r o v i s i o n a l a t t e m p t t o ex t end t h e l i n g u i s t i c made1 i n t h i s fash-

ion, Tha t is, w h i l e s u b j e c t i n g t h e n o t i o n o f c o q e t e n ~ e t o I " e-

s e v e r a l i m p o r t a n t cri t icisms, Bourdieu d b t l i n e s t h e manner i n

which the p r i n c i p l e s of 3ho~ght_used-b-~-Saussure, Chomsky. and r

o t h e r s t r u c t u r a l i s t t h i n k e r s caA- b e a p p l i e d t o . t h e e x p l a n a t i o

* the g e n e r a l b e h a v i o r of i n d i v i d u a l s .

-- - CHRPTER 11 : B O U R D I E U ~ S T H E O R Y OFCULTU-GL COMPETENCE : ITS

I M P L I C A T I O N S F O R A THEO3Y O F F E m I N G

I n an a r t i c l e publ ished s e v e r a l y e a r s b e f o r e t h e p u b l i c a t i o n

i n French o f t h e Out l ine o f a Theory of P r a c t i c e , Bourdieu ex-

amines t h e s o c i a l cond i t ions f o r what he c a l l s " a r t competencen--

- i . e . , z t h e a b i l i t y t o produce and/or a p p r e c i a t e phenomena s o c i a l l y

des ignated a s ' a r t . * This t o p i c h a s s p e c i a l re levance t o our-,'

d i e u ' s c r i f i q u e of phenomenology: on a g e n e r a l l e v e l , because

most phenomenological t h e o r i e s dwel l on t h e c e n t r a l importance of

- t h e r e l a t i o n of percept ion t o behaviour ( s e e , f o r example, M .

Merleau-Ponty's The Phenomenology of Pe rcep t ion , 1962); and on a

more s p e c i f i c l e v e l , because Husse r l , t h e ' founder ' of phenomen-

ology, p laced a continued emphasis on t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of a "pure"

and "uncondit ioned" a c t of see ing .

A r t Codes--In t h e article on art a m p e t e n c e Bourdieu r e j e c t s

a p r o p o s i t i o n from t h e a r t wbrld--a p r o p o s i t i o n which he charac-

t e r i z e s as " t h e myth of t h e ' f r e s h e y e ' " (1968a: 590)-- that d* a t t r i b u t e s " a r t competence" t o m$sterious a b i l i t i e s of apprec ia-

t i o n such a s those t h a t might be grouped under t h e ca tegory of

'good t a s t e . ' I h c o n t r a s t t o t h i s kind of emphasis--which is

similar, i n some r e s p e c t s , t o H u s s e r l ' s views on human pe rcep t ion

--Bourdieu sugges ts t h a t t h e percept ion of any i n t e l l i g i b l e form - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- -- - - -.

depends on a s e t of r u l e s o r " a r t code." - --- -- , To i l l u s t r a t e t h i s p o i n t Bourdieu refers t o an example used .

by t h e famous a r t h i s t o r i a n , Erwin Panofsky. Panofsky, i n an

essay on Renaissance a r t , compares two p a i n t i n g s . I n one p a i n t i n g

("The Vis ion of t h e ' ~ h r e e Magi" by Renaissance p a i n t e r Roger

- - - - - - -- -- -, -

van d e r Weyden), a f i g u r e i d e n t i f i a b l e a s " t h e i n f a n t Jesus"

appears t o b e f l o a t i n g i n mid-air: I n t h e o t h e r p a i n t i n g

( " C h r i s t Resurrec t ing t h e Youth of Nai rn ," c . l000Y, a whole c i t y i

s e e m s to be hovering i n space. Bourdieu asks how it i s p o s s i b l e

to account f o r t h e a b i l i t y t o pe rce ive t h e two r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s i n

t h e appropr ia t e manner: t h a t i s , t o pe rce ive t h e c h i l d a s an

a p p a r i t i o n arig t h e town a s a r e a l town.

The answer, sugges t s Bourdieu, can .be found i n t h e p 'art icu- 0

l a r s e t of r u l e s o r a r t code which d e f i n e s t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f - - -- - - - - - - - -

space i n t h e r e s p e c t i v e p a i n t i n g s . These two d i s t i n c t a r t codes

make it p o s s i b l e t o d i s t i n g u i s h betwe.en t h e "miraculous" and t h e

" n a t u r a l . " To f a c i l i t a t e t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n t h e codes must s p e c i f y

information which w i l l enab le t h e viewer t o recognize t h e space

surrounding the town a s "an a b s t r a c t , u n r e a l background"

f Bourdieu, 1968a: 590) - a n d *e space surrounarng-" t h e iilf a n t -- L

J e s u s n a s a " n a t u r a l , three-dimensional space i n which t h e super-

n a t u r a l and miraculous can, . .appear a s such" (Bourdieu, 1968a:

590) . Any a t tempt t o i n d i c a t e t h e manner i n which t h e a r t codes

i n ques t ion s p e c i f y t h i s , and more complex types of informat ion ,

qu ick ly becomes very complicated--as Bourdieu ' s somewhat'wordy

account attests, B r i e f l y , it i s e v i d e n t t h a t t h e r u l e s which -- - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - --

c o n s t i t u t e the code must spec5fy c r i t e r i a both f o r t h e i n c l u s i o n

of phenomena i n t o c a t e g o r i e s and for t h e r e l a t i o n of t h e s e ca te -

+&+' g o r i e s t o one another. On a s u p e r f i c i a l l e v e 1 , ' t h i s imvolves t h e

c r i t e r i a of "sameness" and d i f f e r e n c e which make p o s s i b l e the

f igure/ground d i s t i n c t i o n s of ' s imple ' pe rcep t ions . . On a deeper

l e v e l , t h e code would s p e c i f y c r i t e r i a f o r t h e formation of more - - - - -- -- -- -- -- -- - - - - - - -- -

complex moral and s t y l i s t i c ( e t c ; ) c a t e g o r i e s , For example, wi th 4

r e fe rence t o t h e p a i n t i n g of t h e " i n f a n t J e s u s , " t h e code would

f a c i l i t a t e d i p t i n c t i o n s which range from normal. i n f a n t / s a c r e d

i n f a n t t o Renaissance r e l i g i o u s painting/modern s u r r e a l i s t pain-

s t i n g . I n any case , r e g a r d l e s s of the-dynamics of t h e coding

t

I process , Bourdieu 's c e g t r a l p o i n t is c l e a r . I t i-s k h e depth o f ,

an audience ' s a r t competence ( o r knowledqe of t h e a r t code)

r a t h e r than t h e " f reshness" o r " p u r i t y " of t h e i r a c t of s e e i n g

t i o n o r a l i e n a t i o n ) i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e a r t of t h e i r c u l t u r e .

Moreover, any a t t empt by t h e r e s e a r c h e r t o e x p l a i n t h e r e l a t i o n - 9

s h i p between behaviour and pe rcep t ion i n audience response must

;be informed by a kn&wledge o f t h i s a r t cod;--not s o l e l y by t h e .

phenomenological b r a c k e t i n g a c t h y i t y ( t h e epoch6) o r some mys- - - - - -- - -- - - - -- -

t e r i o u s a c t o f empathy i n which t h e r e sea rcher a t t empts t o re- ,= .

c r e a t e i n t u i t i v e l y t h e p e r c e p t i n n o r " l i v e d exper iencen of t h e

audience,. /

C u l t u r a l competence: master p a t t e r n s and i n d i v i d u a l p a t t e r n s

--Bourdieu develops t h e theory of a r t competence--which c l e a r l y

owes something t o Saussure--from a p e r s p e c t i v e which a l s o has

marked similarities t o Chomsky's theory of l i n g u i s t i c competence.

s u b s e t s of t h e q e n e r a l cateqory of c u l t u r e , he v i s u a l i z e s spec i - - - - -- - -- -

f i c competences (such a s a r t o r l i n g u i s t i c competence) as compo-

nen t s of a g e n e r a l c u l t u r a l competence.

Consider, f o r example, Bourdieu 's d e f i n i t i o n of c u l t u r e i n

- --

an a r t i c l e > n schoolIing4nd F t e m s T F h 3 u g h t which f i r s t ap- L

peared i n Eng l i sh kn 1967: "Cul tu re . . . i s a common set o f p rev i - L i

ously a s s i m i l a t e d master p a t t e r n s from which by an ' a r t o f inven- 4

i

t i o n ' s i m i l a r t o t h a t involved i n t h e w r i t i n g of music, an i n f i - s 4 n i t e number o f i n d i v i d u a l p a t t e r n s . . . a r e genera ted" .- (1.971~:. 192) . B F

T h i s . d e f i n i t i o n of c u l t u r e depends, a t f i r s t g l a n c e , .on an ana-

logy wi th musica l composition. However, i t js c l e a r t h a t i t s + F 8

conceptual foundat ion i s r e l a t e d t o t h e one on which ~horc;sky

based h i s theory of l i n g u i s t i c competence. Like Chomsky's l i n - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-- - -- - --

g u i s t i c model, Bourdieu 's model of c u l t u r a l competence c o n s i s t s

o f two l e v e l s : t h e l e v e l of master p a t t e r n s (Chomsky's "deep

s t r u c t u r e " ) and t h e l e v e l of i n d i v i d u a l p a t t e r n s o r messages

3 (Chomsky' s " s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e " ) . But un l ike chornskyl s deep .

s t r u c t u r e s , Bourdieu 's master p a t t e r n s enab le an i n d i v i d u a l t o .

produce a f u l l range o f cu l turaLmessages , i n c l u d i n g " r e l i g i o u s

prophesy, p o l i t i c a l speech, p u b l i c i t y image, t e c h n i c a l ob jec t , "

To c l a r i f y what would be meant by t h e t e r m & l t u r a l compe-

tence , Bourdieu again draws on an example from t h e work o f Edwin

Panofsky. Panofsky, i n a p e n e t r a t i n g l i t t l e e s say on t h e c u l t u r e

of t h e middle ages (Gothic A r c h i t e c t u r e and ~ c h o l a s t i c i s m , 19571,

had at tempted t o account f o r an analoqy he pe rce ived between +he *- - - - - - - - - - - ~ p--------p--pp---p ~ p ~ - p ~ - p ~ ~ - ~ p - ~ - ~ - -

a r t s , phi losophy, and r e l i g i o n of t h e t i m e . I n p a r t i c u l a r , -- -

Panofsky sough t to account f o r c e r t a i n p a r a l l e l s i n t h e phi loso-) i

p h i c a l d o c t r i n e known as Scho las t i c i sm and t h e g e n e r a l s t y l e of

Gothic a r c h i t e c t u r e . I n developing an exp lana t ion of t h e s e

p a r a l l e l s , Panofsky t r ied t o s t e e r a course between empty gener-

a l i t i e s such a s t h e unifyi'ng " ' s p i r i t of t h e t i m e s , I" and t h e d

impor tant , b u t t o o s p e c i f i c , " i n f luences ' which a r e i n e v i t a b l y

e x e r t e d on p a i n t e r s , s c u l p t o r s and a r c h i t e c t s by e r u d i t e a d v i s o r s

[shch a s t h e S c h o l a s t i c philosophers]" (Panofgky, quoted i n

Bourdieu, 1971b: 184) .- I n c o n t r a s t t o t h e s e o p t i o n s o f qener-

nd p a r t i c u l a r i t y Panofsky r e f e r s t o a "method of proce-

- dure" o r "mental h a b i t " which, i n h i s view, "must have been t h e -. f i r s t t h i n g t o impress i t s e l f on t h e mind of t h e laymah whenever

it came i n touch w i t h t h a t of t h e schoolman [ s c h o l a s t i c phi lo- -

sopher] " (Panofsky, quoted i n Bourdieu, 1971b: 184) . This "mental h a b i t n can be c h a r a c t e r i z e d a s a pe rvas ive em-

phas i s on making c l e a r o r making e x p l i c i t t h e t r u t h s of r e l i g i o n .

It e n t a i l e d a sys temat ic d i v i s i o n of t h e phenomena under consi-

d e r a t i o n i n t o sets and s u b s e t s ( i . e f , i n t o c a t e g o r i e s of d i f -

f e r e n t l e v d s of g e n e r a l i t y ) such- that-one- system o f d i v i s i o n s

. p a r a l l e l e d t h e n e x t set of d i v i s i o n s i n time o r space . I n t h e

w r i t i n g s of some of t h e S c h o l a s t i c s t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h i s p r i n - -

c i p l e r e s u l t e d i n an o r g a n i z a t i o n which de r ived more from a r t i -

f i c i a l s t a n d a r d s than from t h e na tu re of t h e - s u b j e c t m a t t e r it- *

s e l f . Thus Panofsky d e s c r i b e s t h i s p a r t i c u l a r method of proce-

-2- dure as. b e i n g guided by " t h e p o s t u l a t e of c l a r i f i c a t i o n f o r

c l a r i f i c a t i o n ' s sake" (Panofsky,. 1973: 35) . During t h e course of t h e s tudy, Panofsky demonst ra tes t h a t

t h i s p r i n c i p l e o f exp lana t ion i s expressed i n t h e work of a l l t h e

important S c h o l a s t i c philosophe;s. He a lso , a rgues convinc ingly

t h a t t h e same p r i n c i p l e can be s a i d t o inform the a r c h i t e c t u r e o f .

the- Gothic churches, from t h e most b a s i c of " f ~ u n c t i o n a l " forms ' t o

i

who had a c q u i r e d t h e "mental h a b i t s " of t h e S c h o l a s t i c s would i

see ] t h e panoply of s h a f t s , r i b s , t r a o e r y , p i n n a c l e s ,

and c r o c k e t s . . . [as] . a s e l f - a n a l y s i s and s e l f - e x p l a n a t i o n o f .

a r c h i t e c t u r e . . . [in t h e same way] a s t h e customary a p p a r d t u s of " .

p a r t s , d i s t i n c t i o n s , q u e s t i o n s , and a r t i c l 5 s [is] . . ,a s e l f -

a n a l y s i s and s e l f - e x p l i c a t i o n of r ea son [or p h i l o s o p h i c a l t d i s -

course] " (Panofsky, 1973: 59) . Bourd ieu ' s p o i n t i n drawing o u r a t t e n t i o n t o t h i s d i s c u s s i o n

- - -

' of Panofsky 's i s t h a t Panofsky ' s "mental hab i t s ' " o r "methods of <- ''a,

p rocedure" are ana logous , i n some s e n s e s t o t h e "mas te r p a t t e r n s n -,

_ which he , h i m s e l f , f e e l ~ * ~ c o n s t i t u t e a c u l t u r e . Summarizing, w i t h

. r e s p e c t t o t h e s c h o o l as t h e s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n r e s p o n s i b l e f o r

t h e s e "mas t e r p a t t e r n s , " Bourdieu states:

I n a s o c i e t y [such as - t h e ,of t h e S c h o l a s t i c s ' t i m e ] - -

where t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n o f i s t h e monopoly o f a -

s c h o o l , t h e u n d e r l y i n g u n i t i n g works o f l e a r n e d c u l t u r e (and a t t h e same t i m e behav iou r and though t ) are governed by t h e p r i n c i p l e [panof s k y ' s "menta l h a b i t s n o r "mode o f procedure'] emanating from t h e e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i - - t u t i o n s . These i n s t i t u t i o n s are e n t r u s t e d w i t h t h e f u n c t i o n o f t r a n s m i t t i n g c o n s c i o u s l y (and a l s o i n p a r t unconsc ious ly) t h e unconscious . More p r e c i s e l y , t h e s c h o o l produces i n d i - v i d u a l s who p o s s e s s t h i s system of unconscidus ( o r ex t remely obscu re ) schemes [ i .e. , t h e "mas te r p a t t e r n s " or " c u l t u r a l codes") c o n s t i t u t i n g t h e i r c u l t u r e (Bourd ieu , 1971b: 185) .

I .

B o u r d i e u ' s e x t e n s i o n of t h e l i n g u i s t i c model t h u s makes it

. p o s s i b l e t o view a l l c u l t u r a l o r symbolic as " s t r u c - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

t u r e d n sys tems . The i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y of t h e s e " s t r u c t u r e d " sys-

terns depends on t h e c u l t u r a l codes t h a t d e f i n e b o t h t h e under-

l y i n g s t r u c t u r e s and t h e messages t h a t can be g e n e r a t e d f r o m

them. Knowledge o f t h i s code can, as Bourdieu h a s i n d i c a t e d , be A

termed a c u l t u r a l competence.

I ,-

Z I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h e s tudy of meaning--In o u t l i n i n q t h e

i 1

var ious a p p l i c a t i o n s of s t r u c t u r a l i s t thought I have at tempted t o

supply informat ion which may n o t be s e l f - e v i d e n t t o some ~ n g l o -

American r e a d e r s . I t should be made clea;, however, t h a t Bour- 2

d ieu , a t no p o i n t , adopts- the u n c r i t i c a l a t t i t u d e t h a t charac- -

t e r i z e s t h e foregoing summary. Far from it. H i s arguments,

e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e Out l ine of a Theory of P r a c t i c e (and s i n c e i t s

p u b l i c a t i o n (orig.--Z973-) taKe the form of a c r i t i q u e - o f s+xuc- -

t u r a l i s m .

Never the less , t h e use of s t r u c t u r a l i s t p r i n c i p l e s does, i n

Bourdieuts view, c o n s t i t u t e a necessary s t a g e i n a s c i e n t i f i c

exp lana t ion of human behaviour. Moreover, t h e v a r i o u s * l e s s c r i -

t i ca l r e f e r e n c e s t o s t r u c t u r a l i s t p r i n c i p l e s i n Bourd ieu t s work -

e -- - - - - - - - - - - - -

do perform $I impor tant funct ion . They p rov ide a framework f6r

d i s c u s s i n g t h e n a t u r e and s i g n i f i c a n c e of the break wi th pheno-

menological knowledge t h a t Bourdieu advocates . ~ a v i n g provided

some background on s t r u c t u r a l i s t thought , w e can now r e t u r n t o

Bourdieuts account of t h i s break. More s p e c i f i c a l J y , w e can - '..

. r e t u r n t o Bourdieu ' s r e j e c t i o n of t h e fo l lowing p r o p o s i t i o n which

c h a r a c t e r i z e s c e r t a i n American schools o f phenomendlogy : "Meaning

Bourdieuts e a r l y at tempt t o ske tch t h e parameters of a

genera l c u l t u r a l competence provides an i m p o r t a n t i n s i g h t on t h e

problem of meaning.. Recal l , f o r example, Eiourdieuts d i s t i n c t i o n , I, '

between the two l e v e l s of c u l t u r a l competence. A t one l e v e l ( t h e

-

4 2 . 1

-

.?

- - - - - - - - - + pp-

- -

l e v e l o f t h e deep s t r u c t u r e ) are l o c a t e d t h e m a s t e r p a t t e r n s ..

which are d e f i n e d 'by t h e c u l t u r a l codes . A t t h e o t h e r l e v e l ( t h e

l e v e l . o f t h e s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e ) are. l o c a t e d t h e i n d i v i d u a l pa t -

t e r n s which a r e exp res sed i n c u l t u r a l mesages. C l e a r l y t h i s

n o t i o n o f l e v e l c a s t s some doubt on any t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e S which, l i k e phenomenology, h o l d s t h a t meaning i s m y s t e r i o u s l y

"g iven" i n t h e speech a c t s o r g e s t u r e s . (i .e., t h e messages) of

' i n d i v i d u a l s ( o r i n s o m e c o n s t i t u t i v e a c t o f p u r e and uncdndi- % 0

t i o n e d percep- t ion) .p-pThus Bourdieu a r q u e s , i n cont ras t t o t h e -

American phenomenologis ts , t h a t t h e l o g i c a l c o n d i t i o n s of cu l - TL

t u r a l messages are n o t l o c a t e d s o l e l y a t t h e level of t h e message

or a t t h h l e v e l of t h e accounts i n d i v i d u a l s g i v e of t h e i r i n t e r -

a c t i o n s . The l o g i c a l c o n d i t i o n s o f t h e message are l o c a t e d , i n

p a r k , a t the l e v e l o f t h e c u l t u r a l code which is i n t u r n d e f i n e d

f 2

Tn r e I S t i o n t o the &tract symbol ic systems whichpmake up a t ,

g iven c u l t u r e . C l a r i f y i n g t h i s p o s i t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o *

Saussu re , Bourd ieu asserts: "As a : s t r u c t u r e d sys tem, language i s

fundamenta l ly . t r e a t e d [by ~ a u s s u r e ] as t h e [ l o g i c a l ] c o n d i t i o n of

t h e i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y o f speech, t h e s t r u c t u r e d medium which has t o

be c o n s t r u c t e d [in theory] i n o r d e r t o accoun t f o r t h e c o n s t a n t

r e l a t i o n s h i p between sound and sense" (1977b: 114) . - From t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e meaning of a c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t - p- - - - - - pp - - - - - - -

depends on t h e degree t o which i%q messages f o l l o w t h e cons- I

t r a i n t s d e l i m i t e d by the c u l t u r a l codes which u n d e r l i e t h e sym-

b o l i c sys t em t o which it be lbngs . Hence any a t t e m p t t o develop

3 a s c i e n c e of t h e meanings which emerge i n human i n t e r a c t i o n must

p roceed w i t h somi! awarsness o f t h e s e c u l t u r a l codes and t h e

A r e c o g n i t i o n of t h e systemic c h a r a c t e r of meaning provides

g u i d e l i n e s f o r reconsider-ing t h e problem of. meaning a s it is

- posed by t h e phenomenologists. I n f a c t , t h e concepts of symbo-

l i c system and symbolic s t r u c t u r e can be s a i d t o ' d i s p l a c e ' t h e t

p ~ o b l e m of meaning i n three . ways.

F i r s t , meaning, when viewed a s a system, is never exclu-

s i v e l y a > f u n c t i o n o f the- i n t e r a c t i o n s between indiv iduals ' o r of

t h e i r accounks of S e s e i n t e r a c t i o n s . A s Bourdieu p u t s it-: .

" .. .: i n t e r p e r s o n a l ' r e l a t i o n s a r e never , except , i n appearance,

- i*

i n d i v i d u a l t o i&di.vidual and.. . t he t r u t h o f . . . [an]

i n t e r a c t i o n i s never i n t h e i n t e r a c t i o n " /

w

(Out l ine : 81). Rather, tHe t r u t h o r meaning of an i n t e r a c t i o n i s

dqf ined , on one l e v e l , by t h e s_vmbolic system which e x i s t s inde- -- - - - -

pendent of the i n t e r a c t i o n s -of s p e c i f i c i n d i v i d u a l s . ~ u r t h e r -

more, meaning cannot be genera ted or comprehended wi thout r e f e r - *

ence t o a c u l t u r a l code which s p e c i f i e s t h e symbolic s t r u c t u r e .

This code, sugqes t s Bourdieu, "does no t depend, upon i n d i v i d u a l R /

w i l l s and consc iousnesses , and f o r c e s i t s e l f upon i n d i v i d u a l s , - p

o f t e n wi thou t t h e i r knowledge, determining t h e d i s t i n c t i o n s [or

acts of*comprehension] they c& make and those which escape them"

- - - - - - Second, - --- as t h e preceding q u o t a t i o f l i n d i c a t e s , t h e i n d i v i d u a l rr

i s never f u l l y conscious of t h e c u l t u r a l code @iich*enables him

o r h e r t o i n t e r p r e t the var ious messages genera ted w i t h i n a sym-

5 o l i c system. Thus t h e so-ca l led "source" of meaning is no t , as --

phenomenologists l i k e Husser l contend, t h e copscious exper ience

C - --- -- - -- - - -- -

of i n d i v i d u a l s Nor is comrnunicatiop between i n d i v i d u a l s s o l e l y

a func t ion o f t h e i r conscious i n t e n t i o n s . , Says Bourdieu:

' " C o ~ u n i c a t i o n of consc iousnesses ' presupposes a community of

'unconscious' ( i . e . of l i n g u i s t i c and c u l t u r a l competences) '~

(1977: 8 0 ) . Bourdieu e l a b o r a t e s on t h i s p o i n t w i t h r e s p e c t t o . . *

t h e not ion +of " o b j e c t i v e i n t e n t i o n , " o r i n t e n t i o n as it i s de- 1

f i n e d i n r e l a t i o n t o a system. H e concludes: "Because [an i n d i - ' >

v idua l ' s ] a c t i o n s o r works a r e t h e product of a modus operandi -.

[Gode qf Er_oc_edur_el of which he . i s n i t the broducer- and- h L - n o = ===-

conscious mastery, they c o n t a i n an 'ob jec- t ive i n t e n t i o n ' ... which , P

always out runs h i s conscious i n t e n t i o n s " (Out l inh: 79) . Third, ,meaning does n o t arise i n an i n d i v i d u a l a c t o f c rea-

't

t i o n (descr ibed by Husser l as "pure" and i n "perfiect freedom"

(see Ph i l l ipson , 1973: 120-31) ) . Nor i s meaning e x c l u s i v e l y t h e --- - - - - - -

-- - -

e s u I t of what Shutz c a l l e & "mearing-endowing i n t e n t i o n a l a c t s of f - w h i c h [the iridividual becomes] aware by re f l ex i$e g lance" (1967:

36). Meaning i s made p o s s i b l e by a s e t of c o h s t r a i n t s (Bour-

d i e u ' s "master p a t t e r n s n ) wh;& u n d e r l i e a symbolic system. \

Hence a l l i n d i v i d u a l a c t i o n s are mediated: they are meaningful I

3

{ o r meaningless, a s the case may be) only i n \ r e l a t i o n t o t h i s

system of con t r a i n t s . 2 - .

When - - viewed -- from -- t h i s - l terkpect ive n o t e e s S B a o ~ ~ d k u e ~ c

views o f c r e a t i v i t y are c l e a r l y inadequate . Even t h e most inno- --

v a t i v e of c u l t u r a l behaviours , he sugges t s , a r e n o t spontaneous;

nor a r e they produced myster ious ly , o u t of noth ing ( o r , more pre-

c i s e l y , i n r e l a t i o n t o noth ing)

because a l l c u l t u r a l behaviours

- Bourdieu a rgues , r a t h e r , . t h a t

and products are s t r u c t u r e d

-- -- (i .e., they a r e meaningful o n l y i n r e l a t i o n t o an under ly ing

D

, stqucture) t h e freedom which , they appear t o e x h i b l t i s always

r e l a t i v e . TO express t h i s r e l a t i v e freedom Bourdieu uses such

4 phrases as " inven t ion w i t h i n l i m i t s " and " regula ted improvisa-

t i o n " (Out l ine : 9 6 , 79) . Summarizing, he s t a t e s : " a aster pa t -

v te rns] provide bases and s t a r t i n g p o i n t s f o r developments ...j u s t 2

a s t h e ruTes of 'harmdny and coun te rpo in t s u s t a i n what se.emsS t o be

t h e most i n s p i r e d a n d f r e e s t musical ' i nven t ion ' I " . (1971ci 192) . There a r e b t h u s t h r e e i n t e r r e l a t e d ways i h which the. s t r u c -

~- ~

- - ~ - - ~ -- - --- - -- - -- - - -- -~ ~ - ~ - -~ - - - --

t u r a l i s t r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e s y s t e m i d c h a r a c t e r of meaning d i s -

- . .. - p l a c e s t h e q u e s t i o n of meaning a s it i,s posed by t h e phenomenolo- *

t g ' ists : ' (a) meaning i s k rea ted as a systemic r a t h e r than an i ~ t e r -

? +

persona l ques t ion ; (b) meaning i s seen t o d e r i v e from unconscious

a s w e l l & consc ious f a c t o r s ; (c) t h e product ion of meaning i s

unconditioned. Summarizing t h e import of t h e s e t h r e e d i sp lace - /"..,/"..,

ments Bourdieu states:

... s t r u c t u r a l i s t knowledge does no t , s t r i c t l y speaking, c o n t r a d i c t t h e phenomenological a n a l y s i s of primary exper i - '

ence of t h e s o c i a l ~ w o r l d and o f t h e irmnediate comprehension of the-utterances, a c t s o r works o f o t h e r s . I t merely d e f i n e s t h e limits of i ts v a l i d i t y by e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e par- t i c u l a r cond i t ions w i t h i n which it i s p o s s i b l e , c o n d i t i o n s

' - which phenomenological a n a l y g i s . i gnores (Out l ine : 128) . I w i l l e l a b o r a t e f u r t h e r on t h e s e condi t ions- - in p a r t i c u l a r ,

- -- - - - - ---- - -- . . on t h e i r social and p o L i t i c a l aspects-- in chap te r VI. Before

proceedins, however, it 5s necessa ry t o examine Bourdieu 's c r i -

t i q u e of t h e manner i n which s t r u c t u r a l i s t t h i n k e r s have por- - - - -

t r ayed the r e l a t i o n s between symbolic ~ y s t e m s and i n d i v i d u a l

performance (or p r a c t i c e ) .

PART 2: . TRE LIHITS OF THE STRUCTURALIST MODEL

CHAPTER 111: THE STRUCTURALIST ERROR: CONSEQ~ENCES OF AN INADEQUATE THEORY OF PRACTICE ,

-&en a c t u a l i n d i v i d u a l s c a r r y on a conversa t ion do they con-

s u l t a set of a b s t r a c t r u l e s ' i n t h e i r ' p i n d s ' s i m i l a r , t o t h o s e . -

- ,

descr ibed b y one -of .ChQnsky ! s generati-ve gs"hmpars?- And if .not, .- .- , *

what mode of knowledge i s it which enables them t o main ta in a ' >

degree of grammatical i ty i n t h e i r sen tences , which, a11 o t h e r '

s a t i o n t o cont inue? It 'is Bourdieu 's con ten t ion t h a t t h e t h r e e

s t r u c t u r a l i s t t h i n k e r s discussed--%ussure, Choms,ky and ~ & i -

Strauss--have n o t devoted adequate a t t e n t i o n t o t h e s e k inds of

q u g t i o n s . I n o t h e r words, they have n o t examined c r i t i c a l l y t h e 4 J I

r e l a t i o n betwe*een a b s t r a c t conceptua l models and p o s s i b l e explana---- - - - -

5 t i o n s of a c t u a l performance o r " p r a c t i c e n (such as those devel- #-=

oped by means of t h e h a b i t u s -con&pt) . -

I

Ferdinand de Saussure--Saussure, as Bourdieu argues , was n o t

con ten t to t a k e the most v i s i b l e man i fes ta t ion of language--the c

. i n d i v i d u a l speech act--as the p o i n t of d e p a r t u r e f o r l i n g u i s t i c s .

In fact-, for Saussure, the immediate, o r , w $ a t the phenomenolo- t- , - '

g i s t s would- cal l , "primary, " exper ience 6f speaking w a s an

o b s t a c l e to clear thinking ab * l ingu i s t i c s , Anokher o b s t a c l e f

t o t h e dkvelopment of a coheren t l i n g u i s t i c s , according t o .

Saussure, was the haphazard c o l l e c t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c c a t e g o r i e s

> -- Together these o b s t a c l e s impeded the formation of a concept o f

-

*

l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e . And wi thou t s o m e concept ion of l i n g u i s t i c

s t r u c t u r e , the seemingly l i m i t l e s s v a r i e t y o f sound and meaning *

i n i n d i v i d u a l speech a c t s made i t a - d i f f i c u l t t o s p e c i f y e x p l i c i t l y

the e s s e n t i a l - p a t t e r n s i r i speech.

I n response t o . t h i s s i t u a t i o n , and &attempt " t o g e t h i s

bear ings ," Saussure fo l lows a s t r a t e g y which some phi losophers of -

science have clairndd l ies a t t h e r o o t o f a l l s c i e n t i f i k a c t i v i t y :

he s e t s language up as a t h e o r e t i c a l " o b j e c t n i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e

phys ica l p a r t of c o m u n i c a t i o n ' , t h a t i s , speech a s a precons t ru- ,

t e d o b j e c t l i a b l e t o s t a n d i n t h e way of c o n s t r u c t i n g langGage a s - 1

an a b s t r a c t system: {Outline: 2 4 ) . Saussure, however, does n o t appear t o have cons idered t h e

- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- f u l l range o f i m p l i c a t i o n s which t h i s temporary " s e t t i n g a s i d e "

of t h e problem of speaking may have f o r a theory of performance. ,? . Instead, he proceeds, somewhat offhandedly, t o propose a theory

of t h e speech act w h i c h is cons t ruc ted i n o p p o s i t i o n t o h i s I a 0 .

theory of language as a n abstract system. Saussure u s e s t h i s +

s t r a t e g y of o p p o s i t i o n t o d i s t i n g u i s h a t ieast t h r e e . f a c e t s of

the fanguage/speaking r e l a t i o n . ' F i r s t l y , i n S a u s s u r e ' s view, 2

hi-

(Saussure, 1966: 141 . Therefore speaking, by d e f i n i t i o n , i s "an

- i nd i~ iduaL ack" CSaussnre, 1966: 1 4 ) , Secondly , language i s

c o n s t i t u t e d by f i x e d r e l a t i o n s such as t h o s e sugges ted by

Saassure ' s metaphor of a column suppokting a c e i l i n g (Saussure, <

"L :

1966: 1 2 4 4 ) S p e a k i n g , on the o t h e r hand, "is c h a r a c t e r i z e d by

b r e e d o m of combinatiorisw (Saussurg, 1966 : 124) . T h i r d l y , whi le

language s p e c i f i e s exhaus t ive ly a system of r e l a t i o n s h i p s between

sounds' and meanings, i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r / l i s t e n e r s proceed wi th a

n e c e s s a r i l y incomplete knowledge of t h i s a b s t r a c t system. I n

Saussure ' s words: " . . . language i s n o t complete j n any speaker ; it -

- // e x i s t s p e r f e c t l y on ly w i t h i n a communityn (1966: 1 4 ) :

9

Thus Saussure a t t empts t o found a theory of speech o r l i n -

g u i s t i c p r a c t i c e on t h e b a s i s of a s e r i e s o f s imple o p p o s i t i o n s - - - -- - - - -

between languag a s s o c i a l , f ixed , and complete, and speaking a s

' i n d i v i d u a l , f r e e , and incompl-ete. I n proceeding i n t h i s manner

Saussure o v e r s i m p l i f i e s many of t h e i s s u e s whichare c e n t r a l t o an

adequate theory o f l i n g u i s t i c p r a c t i c e . That i s t o s a y , he over-

s i m p l i f i e s t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between what is addressed when lan- a

when concep tua l i z ing t h e mode o f knowledge i n e f f e c t i n

i an a c t u a l speech act. 'b

I t is p o s q i b l e t o i d e n t i f y t w o i n t e r r e l a t e d t e n d e n c i q s a i n - i

Ssrassure's work t h a t are symptomatic of h i s f a i l u r e t o formula te -t- !f

an adequate theory o f l i ~ g u i s t i c p r a c t i c e . The f i r s t o f t h e s e

tendencies might b e c a l l e d biologism. Consider, f o r example,

Saussure ' s emphasis, e a r l y i n t h e Course i n ~ e n 6 r a l ~ i n g u i s t i c s ,

6n t h e s t a t u s o f language as a t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t which pro- u -

v i d e s a r e f e r e n c e p o i n t f o r the s tudy o f c o n c r e t e speech: "lan-

guage is a se l f - con ta ined whole and a p r i n c i p l e of c l a s s i f - i c a t i o n - .. . he a c t i v i t y of the speaker [the product ion of c o n c r e t e

- -

speech] should be s t u d i e d i n a number of d i s c i p l i n e s which have i

no p l a c e - i n l i n g u i s t i c s except -through 1 a n g ~ 1 a g ~ (1 966:-J&l&&--- -

A t t h e same ' t i m e , however, Saussure a s s e r t s , w i thou t q u a l i f i c a -

t i o n , t h a t language has a b i o l o g i c a l s t a t u s : " L i n g u i s t i c s i g n s ... which added t o g e t h e r c o n s t i t u t e language--are r e a l i t i e s w h i c h ,

have t h e i r seat i n t h e b r a i n n (1966: 1 5 ) . I n t h i s s t a t ement , .

Saussure i m p l i e s t h a t tee i n d i v i d u a l ' s knowledge o f language ( o r 'i

% competence) i s , i n some sM&es, a r e f l e c t i o n on a b i o l o g i c a l

l e v e l , of = t h e o r e t i c a l cons t ruc t - - the a b s t r a c t system of lan-

guage. Th i s i s analogous to ' say ing t h a t t h e baking of bread - - - - - - - -

req=res t h a t bakers Kave reczpes i n s c r i b e d on t h e i r - b r a g s .

The second of t h e s e symptomatic t endenc ies might be c a l l e d

i n t e l l e c t u a l i s m . Consider, f o r example, how w e l l S a u s s u r e ' s bio-

l o g i z a t i o n of t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s knowledge of language f i t s i n wi th

h i s admit ted ly ske tchy views on language l e a r n i n g . Saussure does

not appear t o recognize t h e a c t i v e components o f language learn- - - - - - - - -

- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -

i n g ( a s when a c h i l d i m i t a t e s v a r i o u s speech s t y l e s and then

a t t empts t o apply them i n con tex t s similar t o those i n which they

w e r e o r i g i n a l l y h e a r d ) . I n s t e a d he c h a r a c t e r i z e s language acqui-

s i t i o n as a "pass iven process which "never r e q u i r e s premedita- -

t i o n " (1966: 1 4 ) . Y e t , whi le Saussure d e s c r i b e s language acqui- i a a;

s i t i o n as the pass ive a s s i m i l a t i o n of a n a b s t r a c t system (which i

i s recorded i n t h e b r a i n ) , he c l a i m s t h a t a c t u a l speaking o r z

--

-- - t u d i s m is

expressed most e f f e c t i v e l y i n the fol lowing a s s e r t i o n : "Language f ?. -

exists in the form of a surn of impressions d e p o s i t e d i n t h e b r a i n - of each m e m b e r of a conanunity, almost l i k e a d i c t i o n a r y of which

8

- ----I-L _ _ _ _ . - _ -

i d e n t i c a l c o p i e s have been d i s t r i b u t e d t o each i n d i v i d u a l " I

1 9 ) . This s t a t e m e n t sugges t s a model o f performance i n which - s p e a k e r / l i s t e n e r s draw on t h e i n f o b a t i o n d e f i n e d by a b s t r a c t

systems l o c a t e d i n t h e i r minds--where "mind" -can mean e i t h e r

b r a i n o r consc iousness . Bourdieu s u g g e s t s t h a t t h i s theory of

2erformance as m e r e execut ion (Bourdieu u s e s t h i s Saussur ian word

p e j o r a t i v e l y ) is conceptua l ized "wi th in a l o g i c which, though i t y

does n o t u s e t h e word, i s t h a t o f t h e r u l e ' t o b e a p p l i e d n

u fOut1Zne: 2 4 ) . 1i.l ether w o r d s , Baurd ieu emphasizes tlie i n € e l l e c - -

t u a l i s t a s p e c t of Saussu re ' s e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l ambigui ty , and

accuses S a u s s u r e o f implying t h a t when i n d i v i d u a z s communicate

l i n g u i s t i c a l l y t h e y consc ious ly fo l low t h e d i c t a t e s of an ab-

s t r a c t system, and apply r u l e s , such a s t h o s e which might be

found i n grammar books. C o m e n t i n g on t h e o r e t i c a l weaknesses - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

such as this, which d e r i v e , on one l e v e l , from a f a i l u r e t o d i s -

t i n g u i s h between p r a c t i c e and t h e o r i e s abou t p r a c t i c e , Bourdieu

remarks : n k t u r a l i s r n [of which Saussure s work i s exemplary]

c o n s t r u c t s a t h e o r y o f p r a c t i c e (as execu t ion ) b u t on ly as a

n e g a t i v e by-product o r , one might say , w a s t e p roduc t , immediately

d i sca rded , of t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n 6f t h e sys tems o f o b j e c t i v e r e l a -

t i o n s [ o r s t r u c t u r e s (Out l ine : 2 4 ) . T h i s u n r e f l e c t i v e and

analogous structuralist models (Out l ine : 25) . Xaam Chnmsky--&urdiw s u u g e s t s t h a t Ilhmzky, l ike Saussure,

is g u i l t y of over-e-hasizirr! t3e t h e o r e t i c a l d e s c r i ~ t i o n of

a b s t r a c t l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e s a t t h e expense o f t h e types of

t

knowledge t h a t guide t h e l i n g u i s t i c p r a c t i c e of a c t u a l i n d i v i -

d u a l s . An example of Chomskyfs a t t i t u d e t o t h i s issue-- the

i s s u e of t h e r e l a t i o n of competence t o performance ( see above,

I pp. 27-28)--is given i n - t h e fo l lowing passage:

- There h a s been a f a i r amount of c r i t i c i s m of work i n gene- r a t i v e grammar on t h e grounds t h a t it s l i g h t s t h e s tudy o f performance i n f a v s r of s tudy o f under ly ing conpetence. The f a c t s , however, s e e m to be t h a t t h e on ly s t u d i e s ' o f ,

nerformance, o u t s i d e of p h o n e t i c s . , . a r e those c a r r i e d o u t a s a by-product of work . in g e n e r a t i v e granmar (Chomsky, 1965: 15 , my emphasis).

s t a n t i v e dilemmas _of t h e theory of performance ( p r a c t i c e ) t h a t

are no t j u s t " b y - ~ r o d u c t s " o f t h e o r i e s o f competence sTmilar t o

those p u t f o r t h by Chornsky-. ~ p p r o a c h i n g t h e theory o f l i n g u i s t i c Cr

p r a c t i c e through a not ion o f "expanded competence," Bourdieu

writes :

Language i s a p r a x i s : it is made f o r say ing , i.e. f o r use i n s t r a t e g i e s which are i n v e s t e d wi th a l l p o s s i b l e f u n c t i o n s - .... It is made t o be spoken a p p r o p r i a t e l y . Chomsky's no t ion of competence i s an a b s t r a c t i o n t h a t does n o t inc lude t h e cohpetence t h a t enab les t h e adequate u s e o f competence (when - t o speak, keep s i l e n t , speak i n t h i s o r t h a t s t y l e , etc. . What is problematic i s n o t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of producing a n i n f i n i t e number of gramnatically coheren t sentences b u t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f us ing an i n f i n i t e number of sentences i n an i n i i n i t e number of s i t u a t i o n s , c o h e r e n t l y and p e r t i n e n t l y . P r a c t i c a l mastery of grammar i s ' n o t h i n g wi thou t mastery o f t h e s o c i a l cond i t ions f o r adequate use of t h e i n f i n i t e p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f f e r e d by grammar (1977d: 646) .

- - - - The o f ~ ~ s t b c p z ~ i e - w r = ~ ~ t & - - - - -

Bourdieu 's n o t i o n o f expanded compete-3 11 be discussed b - - - - - -

elow

w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e concept of t h e h a b i t u s . I t should be noted

h e r e , however, t h a t Chomsky is p a r t i c u l a r l y c q e f u l about nain- -

t a i n i n g t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between competence and performance, a

d i s t i n c t i o n t h a t Bourdieu accused Saussure of confusing. Thus

When we spe'ak of a grammar a s g e n e r a t i n g . a sen tence w i t h a c e r t a i n s t ~ u c t u r a l d e s c r i p t i o n , we mean simply t h a t t h e grammar a s s i g n s t h i s s t r u c t u r a l d e s c r i p t i o n t o t h e sentence. When w e s a y t h a t a sentence h a s a c e r t a i n d e r i - v a t i o n wi th r e s p e c t to a c e r t a i n grammar, we s a y no th ing about how t h e speaker o r hearer might proceed, i n some p r a c t i c a l o r e f f i ' c i e n t way, t o c o n s t r u c t such a d e r i v a t i o n . ~ h e s e q u e s t i o n s belonq t o t h e theory of language use--the theory o f performance (1965: 9 ) .

E+

Some of t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between p o s s i b l e t h e o r i e s o f compe- F B r

tence and performance are addressed by phi lbsopher W-V. Quine i n

t h e fo l lowing anecdote. - - - - - - - -

" Imaghe , - - " Quine begins, " tw_o_ sys_terns=gf - - , - - -

English grammar: one an old-fashioned system t h a t draws h e a v i l y

on t h e L a t i n gramnarians, and t h e o t h e r a s t r e a m l i n e d forniulat ion

due t o Jespe r sen" (1972: 4 4 2 ) - Rightly o r wrongly, Quine

sugges ts t h a t bd th grammars " f i t n t h e Eng l i sh language equa l ly . -

That is , b o t h s p e c i f y " t h e same i n f i n i t e set of well-formed

The two d i f feren ' t grammars, Quine c o n t i n u e s , are used t o ,a

teach Eng l i sh to two h y p o t h e t i c a l groups of Danish s t u d e n t s .

Quine asserts t h a t t h e two grammars " f i t n t h e l i n g u i s t i c beha-

v i o r of a l l t h e s t u d e n t s (and of English. n a t i v e s p e a k e r s ) . Says

euine: "Behavior f i t s a r u l e whenever it conforms t o it: when- ,

ever t h e r u l e t r u l y d e s c r i b e s t h e behaviorn (1972: 442) . However, t h e r u l e s of7each grammar "guide' t h e behavior of on* - - ---- --

h a l f s t u d e n t s : " . . ,behavior i s n o t gu ided by t h e r u l e u n l e s s -

t h e behaver knows t h e r u l e -and can state it" (Quine, 1972,: 442 ) . Fina l ly , a g a i n s t an image of n a t i v e speakers be ing guided by

e x p l i c i t grarmnatical r u l e s (such a s those: t a u g h t i n schoo l ) , - Quine a s s e r t s : ". . . n e i t h e r system cp ides us [sic] n a t i v e speakers

of i n e s s e n t i a l schoolwork" (1972: 442).

Q u i n e ' s n o t i o n of " f i t t i n g " may be viewed a s r e l e v a n t t o

a p o s s i b l e theory of l i n g u i s t i c competence w h i l e h i s no t ion of -

"guiding" may be viewed a s r e l e v a n t t o a theory of l i n g u i s t i c

performance. . Q u i n e sugges t s t h a t Chomsky works wi th a n o t i o d o f - &

" i m p l i c i t guidance" (1 972 : 444). -Bourdieu, who ci tes Quine ,

w r i t e s :

One i s e n t i t l e d t o p o s i t an ' i m p l i c i t c p i d a n c e ' , a s , - - - aceor-&np-*.e-@~i~fe F Charsky bes, i n e & e r - t o a c e e w e for- - --

a p r a c t i c e . . .g overned by r u l e s unknown t o agen t s ; b u t only on t h e c o n d i t i o n t h a t one does nof mask t h e q u e s t i o n of t h e m e c h a n i s b producing t h i s conformity i n t h e absence of t h e i n t e n t i o n t o conform, by reso r t ing to t h e s a l l a c y of t h e r u l e which i m p l i c i t l y p laces i n t h e consciousness of t h e i n d i v i d u a l agen t s [an a b s t r a c t t h e o r e t i c a l ] knowledge [which, in actuality is] b u i l t up a g a i n s t [the] exper ience [of t h d s e ind iv idua l s ] " (Out l ine : 29) . t

'Bourdieu' s .concern about t h e ep i s t emolog ica l s t i t u s o f * - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -

Chomsky's r u l e s s u r f a c e s i n o t h e r trays. Thus Bourdieu draws -.

a t t e n t i o n t o a passaqe where homsky ( d k e Saussure) sugges t s

f t h a t t h e r u l e s o f - a n i n d i v i d l ' s r compe tence a r e l o c a t e d i n t h e

human b r a i n . In Chomsky's wordsc "A person who knows h i s - language h a s r e p r e s e n t e d i n h i s b r a i n some ve ry a b s t r a c t system

of r u l e s t h a t ' d e t e r m i n e by f r e e i t e r a t i o n an i n f i n i t e r ange-o f

sound/meaning correspondences" (Chomsky, quoted i n 'Out l ine : 203).

( " f i t t e d " 1 by the riz1es Mhis --- e m a l s o occur

as, t o use Bourdieu ' s words, " t h e product o f a myster ious cere- - *:

% b r a 1 ... mechanism" (Outl ine: 29) . This p o s i t i o n d i f f e r s both .- &

from t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t a s s e r t s r u l e s merely " f i t " the sentenceB6i

produced by speaker /hearers and from the p o s i t i o n t h a t r u l e s

pmvilide a n ! ! imgdic i t -guidaanc~ & s p . e a & ~ ~ l l m m r r i ~ ,

Bourdieu s t a t e s : "...Chomsky...holds s imul taneous ly , t h a t t h e

r u l e s o f grammar a r e inscr ibed: in neuro-phys io logica l me&anisms, 8

t h a t they a r e systems of normseof which a g e n t s have a c e r t a i n

awareness, and l a s t l y t h a t they a r e ins t ruments f o r t h e descr ip-

t i o n of languige" (Outl ine: '27) . Chomsky, sugges t s ~ o u r d i e u , i s n o t a b I e t o a n t i c i p a t e ade-

1 q u a t e l y t h e k inds o f f a c t o r s r e l e v a n t t o a theory o f l i r i g u i s t i c

>

p r a c t i d e . I n a s t y l e t h a t i s s i m i l a r , i n some r e s p e c t s , t o t h a t --- - p -

o f ~ a u s s u r e ' s course ii General ~ i n ~ u i s t i c s , Chomsky l e t s cover t

t h e o r i e s of p r a c t i c e emerge as "by-products" of t h e t h e o r e t i c a l * c o n s t r u c t i o n 6$ t h e i d e a l knowledge of competence. Thus Chomsky

a does n o t d i s t i n g u i s h . - s u f f i c i e n t l y between t h i s i d e a l t h e o r e t i c a l

knowledge and t h e mode of-knowledge i n e f f e c t i n a c t u a l l i n g u i s -

t i c p r a c t i c e . H e a l s o does n o t address t h e s o c i a l cond i t ions 5or - - - - - - - -p - p p p -- -

t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of t h i s competence, and what Bourdieu, i n a

r e c e n t article, c a l l s "expanded competencen: chat is, t h e compe- 3

t ence t o apply competence and t h u s t o use "an i n f i n i t e number of -

sentences i n an i n f i n i t e number of s i t u a t i o n s , c o h e r e n t l y and 3

p e r t i n e n t l y " (Bourdieu, 1977d: 646) , -.

Claude Levi-Strams--Bourdieu sugges t s t h a t c e r t a i n inev i -

- table problems conf ron t the r e s e a r c h e s who proceeds w i t h nan

inadeCuaZor--whichpmuKts t o p t h e a x tEng--an i T l i c i F

- t ; ~ ~ c e ~ (Vut lme: 23)- r-orexample, -a

(and Bourdieu means s t r u c t u r a l i s t r e s e a r c h e r a t t h i s p o i n t ) may

be faced w i t h " incompatible t h e o r i e s of practicen such as the

bio logism and i n t e l l e c t u a l i s m t h a t have been i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e

work of Saussu re and Chomsky (Out l ine : 2 7 ) . I n one response t o

t h i s s i t u a t i o n t h e s t r u c t u r a l i s t r e s e a r c h e r a t t e m p t s t o "save

appearances" by m e a n s o'f nebulqus concep t s l i k e t h e " r u l e "

o r t h e "uncon'scious" (Out l ine : 27 ) . Bourdieu demonst ra tes

t h a t ' t h e French a n t h r o p d l o g i s t ~ l a u d e ~ z v i - s t r a u s s , prov ides a-

i n s t r u c t i v e example o f t h i s k ind o f response. ,

I t may b e r e c a l l e d t h a t i n h i s essay , ' " s o c i a l S t r u c t u r e , " --

~ & i - ~ t r a m s c=med-€-o %ve l i t t T = i n t e r e s t e i t h e r i n -The-vzews

o f i n d i v i d u a l s on e l i g i b l e marr iage p a r t n e r s o r i n t h e a c t u a l

marr iages tha$ t a k e p l a c e . H i s i n t e r e s t , r a t h e r , was i n " s o c i a l

s t r u c t u r e , " which, a s he de f ined it, "has. no th ing t o do wi th

e m p i r i c a l r e a l i t y b u t w i th models t h a t a r e b u i l t up a f t e r i t "

performances, o r what Quine c a l l e d "guidance"; he was i n t e r e s t e d

i n models that would account f o r observed r e g u l a r i t i e s i n pe r fo r -

mance (i .e . , Quine ' s " f i t t i n g " ) . Bourdieu draws t h e r e a d e r ' s f .

a t t e n t i o n t o t h i s p o i n t of view w i t h b r i d r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e

g e n e r a l i d iom of t h e anthology i n which t h e e s s a y S S o c i a l

S t r u c t u r e q i s faund. For i n s t a n c e , Bourdieu n o t e s , " t h e imperious

w a y i n which ' c u l t u r a l norms' and a l l t h e ' r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n s ' o r

Bourdieu then i n c l u d e s segments from t h e p r e f a c e s p e c i a l l y w r i t -

t e n f o r t h e second e d i t i o n o f - L g v i - ~ t r a u s s ' Elementary S t r u c t u r e s

of Kinship , I n one o f t h e segments quoted ,by Bourdieu, d v i -

S t r a u s s ' i s e l a b o r a t i n g on t h e " p r e s c r i p t i v e systemn which w a s one

type o f marr iage p a t t e r n o r " s t r u c t u r e " which h e had i d e n t i f i e d :

" I t is nonethe less t r u e t h a t t h e empi r i ca l r e a l i t y of go-called

p r e s c r i p t i v e systqms only t a k e s on i t s f u l l meaning when related, . .

t o a t h e o r e t i c a l model worked o u t by t h e n a t i v e s themselves p r i o r

t o e t h n o l o g i s t s [anthropologists] '. . . . th he i n d i v i d u a l s who t a k e ,

par t ' i n t h e system a re ] aware t h a t marr iage w i t h t h e m a t r i l i n e a r

c r o s s cous in (mother' s b r o t h e r ' s daughter ) p rov ides t h e s i m p l e s t

i l l u s t r a t i o n of t h e r u l e , , . .while marr iage w i t h t h e p a t r i l i n e a r

vocably". ( ~ g v i - ~ t r a u s s , quoted, with emphasis i n Out l ine : 2 8 ) .

I n t h i s l a t e r example o f ~ 6 v i - ~ t r a u s s ' p o s i t i o n on models, ~ 6 v i - * ' * +

S t r a u s s s e e m s t o have modified h i s c p n t e n t i o n t h a t n a t i v e s ' view-

p o i n t s are i r r e l e v a n t and t h a t t h e i r a c t i o n s are guided by uncon-

s c i o u s s t r u c t u r e s . However, he never c l a r i f i e s p r e c i s e l y ' t h e - - - - - - - -- -

d i s t i n c t i o n between f i t t i n g and guid ing nor does he f i n a l i z e h i s p F

p o s i t i o n on t h e knowledge which i s i n e f f e c t i n i n d i v i d u a l t

p r a c t i c e .

, A f t e r r w d i n g t h i s example of i n t e l l e c t u a l i s m from a r e c e n t '%

--d.

(1966) p r e f a c e by L & i - ~ t r a u s s it "mayicome as a s u r p r i s e " ( t o

use a phrase of Bonrdieu 's) t o f i n d G v i - s t r a w s speaking o u t f o r k

a kind of biologism a f e w y e a r s be fo re . Consider the fo l lowing

--. j u s t i f y h i s "ana ly t i c" approach t o t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s a g a i n s t

phi losopher Jean-Paul S a r t r e ' s accusa t ion t h a t he is a "transcen- I /

d e n t a l m a t e r i a l i s t , " states: '!.,.mathematical thought ... r e f l e c t s /

1

t h e f r e e func t ion ing of t h e mind, t h a t i s , t h e a c t i v i t y of t h e d

cells of t h e c e r e b r a l c o r t e x , r e l a t i v e l y emancipated from any * 1 j

- . I d

e x t e r n a l ~ o n s t r a i n € a n ~ e y l f r g ~ ~ n l y ~ s o t n r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ % ~ 2 4 % ) . 1

The c e n t r a l t h r u s t of t h i s p r o p o s i t i o n revolves around' t h e v e r b I P I

" r e f l e c t . " Yet, w i thou t q u a l i f i c a t i o n , " r e f l e c t " t e l l s us l i t t l e ", J *

about t h e s i g n i f i c h c e t o b io logy of t h e product; and. p r i n c i p l e s .:

t o f mathematical thought . Why bother -. Co make the p o i n t a t Q a l l ?

4 By a s s e r t i n g t h a t mathematical thought r e f l e c t s b i o l o g i c a l - $ -

$ 9 * *

phenomena and i s t h e r e f o r e " u n i v e r s a l , " ~ 6 v i - s t r a u s s i s a t t e m p t - a 9

i n g t o j u s t i f y c e r t a i n major absences a i n h i s i o r k . For &ample , - -

~ g v i - ~ t r a u s s ignores , more o r less, t h e f a c t t h a t what we observe \

- - - - - - - - -- ---

a s evidence of t h e func t ion ing of t h e mind (such a s t h e p roduc t s

o f mathematical thought o rasys tems of k i n s h i p terminology) i s t h e .i , . .

r e s u l t of an ongoing i n t e r a c t i o n between i n d i v i d u a l s and t h e i r * i

b i o l o g i c a l and s o c i a l environments. 1n p l a c e of t h e s e k inds of 5. 1

c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , ~ & i - ~ t r a u s s p o s i t s an " e s s e n t i a l i d e n t i t y "

between &he mind-and t h e b r a i n _(ox, more g e n e r a l l y ,-between t h e -

mind and " n a t u r e w ) (see Out l ine : 202-3) . Moreover, where one

might expect a q u a l i f i c a t i o n f o r t h i s - p o s i t i o n , ~ 6 v i - s t r a u s s

o f f e r s a l o f t y g e n e r a l i z a t i o n , a sugges t ion t h a t he h a s reached a

fundamental t r u t h about human conceptua l processes. Thus, a f t e r

c la iming t h a t mathematical thought ' r e f l e c t s " t h e f u n c t i o n o f t h e

b r a i n , ~ & i - ~ t r a u s s remarks: "As the mind t o o i s a t h i n g , t h e

func t ion ing o f - a t h i n g t eaches us something about t h e n a t u r e of

t h i n g s " (quoted, w i t h emifhasis, i n Out l ine : 202) . I t is t o t h i s

k ind of bioloqism, which might more a p p r o p r i a t e l y be c a l l e d

reductionism; t h a t Bourdieu is r e f e r r i n g i n t h e folSowing com- F

ment: " L 6 v i - ~ t r a u s s e x p l i c i t l y evacuates i n d i v i d u a l and c o l l e c -

t i v e h i s t o r y (and everyth ingw covered by , t h e concept of t h e

i \

hab i tus ) by &tabl i ;hing a d i r e c t ,' unmediated, i d e n t i t y between t h e mind and n a t u r e n (Out l ine : 202 ) .

It i s apparen t t h a t ~ S v i - ~ t r a u s s has adopted more t h a n one

s t r a t e g y i n o r d e r t o "save appearances" i n t h e f a c e o f an impo-

ver i shed theory o f performance. Not only' does he r e l a x h i s pos i - \

t i o n on t h e t h e o r e t i c a l s t a t u s of r u l e s enough t o make a r e c e n t -

case f o r what Bourdieu c a ~ l s an i n t e l l e c t u a l i s t t heory of pe r fo r -

mance--i ..e., - a theory of performance which p o r t r a y s ind iGidua l s -- -- - - - -

as. g&iae& -expf ickk farma-3 r u l e s . H e a l s o , in a ma=-€ypiiCal

approach, sets f o r t h a - r e d u c t i o n i s t argument f o r a d i r e c t l i n k

4 between t h e r e g u l a r i t i e s i n human behaviour and " n a t u r a l " o r d *. -

"universa lW's j t ruc tures which a r e somehow r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e s e

rY u l a r i t i e s . Furthermore, i n both h i s i n t e l l e c t u a l i s t and h i s

r e d u c t i o n i s t approaches L & i - ~ t r a u s s f a i l s , a s Bourdieu n o t e s , t o - - -- - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -- - -

C -

address t h e s o c i a l and h i s t o r i c a l c o n d i t i o n s f o r t h e product ion

of symbolic behaviours and p roduc t s .

To c l & - i f y Bourdieu 's crit icisms .of L g v i - ~ t r a u s s it is use-

f u l t o c o n s i d e r t h e phenomenon of k i n s h i p i n p r e - s t a t e s o c i e t i e s

--the t o p i c t o which ~ g v i - ~ t r a u s s f i r s t a p p l i e d t h e s t r u c t u r a l i s t

, model. I t i s widely accepted t h a t non s t a t e s o c i e t i e s d i f f e r from

o r s t a t u s ) . I n o t h e r words, r e l a t i o n s between persons and

' m a t e r i a l ' r e s o u r c e s ar-e i n e x t r i c a b l y tied t o s tatus r e l a t i o n s , -

between persons [as economiq h i s t o r i a n Kar l Polanyi p u t s it,

"economic systems. . .are embedded i n s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s n (1975 :

L.. '. 272)). S i g n i f i c a n t l y , w i t h i n state s o c i e t i e s , c u l t u r a l resour- .- c e s can be i n c r e a s e d and embe l lLhed by fo l lowing t h e e s t a b l i s h e d

norms of marr iage behaviour. I t i s thus impoxtant t h a t s t u d e n t s - ' 1 ' 1

of k i n s h i p q u e s t i o n , •’or example, how t h e ' m a t e r i a l ' r e sources f = a n d p r e s t i g e o f a family o r c l a n (whidh w i l l conceivably vary

'

// through t i m e ) w i l l a f f e c t t h e l i k e l i h o o d of an e l i g i b l e son or 3 - - A

4

* daughter marrying accor-g t o a convent ional marr iage p a t t e r n .

Under what p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l h i s t o r i c a l c i rcumstances w i l l s t r ic t

- - - - a b z e ~ e ~ ' ~ ~ s x M A e a & i f i e d f n r praqma ti c purposes s-uzh - -i- ,

as t h e exchange of ' m a t e r i a l ' r e sources t h a t o f t e n t k e s p l a c e 2 between t h e f a m i l i e s o f the r e s p e c t i v e spouses? An correspon-

d ingly , when w i l l ..- t h e - more t a n g i b l e "pay-offn o f ' m a t e r i a l ' re- I

sources exchanged i n marr iage be d e f e r r e d i n favour o f n t h e

p res t5ge acc ru ing f roat.. .ethical impeccab i l i ty [i-e., marriage

'according t o r u l e '1 " outline:^ 22) . Wben the s o c i a l and h i s t o r i c a l f a c t o r s which a f f e c t t h e

answers t o t h e s e k inds o f q u e s t i b n s a r e cons idered , t h e d i i f i c u l -

t i e s which conf ron t a r e s e a r c h e r , l i k e ~ & i - s t r a u s s , who seeks t o

i s o f a t e u n i v e r s a l ruLes, s t a n d o u t i n s h a r p r e l i e f : Bourdieu con- '--

tends t h a t G v i - s t r a w s never conf ron t s t h e s e d i f f i c u l t i e s ade- -.

quately . I n s t e a d , %as noted above, G v i - s t r a u s s resorts t o postu- 't

s i b l e for t h e s e regular i t i -es . Furthermore, i n an a t t empt t o 4 + r

achieve a deqreeFof c r e d i b i l i t y for these("hirect l i n k s " d v i -

S t r a w s e n s h r i n e s the u n i v e r s a l s t r u c t u r e s i n a myster ious ' loca-

t i o n such as the brain or tlie unconscious. s

From Bourdieu ' s pe r spec t ive , t h i s t y p e o f s t r a t e g y t r a i s e s Q

fundamental

d t i o n i n h i s

doubts concerning the v a l u e of ~ 6 v i - ~ t r a u s s ' c o n t r i -

theory of human behaviour, ~ o m e n t i n g on t h e s i t u a -

t y p i c a l l y i c o n o c l a s t i c manner, Bourdieu s u g g e s t s -

t h a t , rather t han extending t h e explanatory power: of k o c i o l b g i c a l , .

t heory , ~ & i - ~ t r a u s s has sukeeeded i n " r e s t o r i n g , , .old enkele- f _ i I _ A - - a - - - -

c h i e s [u l t imate causes] of the metaphysics of n a t u r e i n t h e 4

a p p a q n t l ~ s e c u l a r i z e d form of a s t r u c t u r e s t r u c t u r e d i n ' t h e ah- /

--- -- - ---- y z z s e ~ e a w ~ c ~ e - F ~ ~ ~ m s ~ -2-7-1-- - --- F - -- --

P 4

According t o Bourdieu, the&, s t r u c t u r a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e s ex-

h i b i t a number o f t endenc ies (such a s intellectualism and b i o l o -

gism) p a r t l y because t h e y d o n o t develop an adequate

4) theory of p r a c t i c e - The i n ' t e l l e c t u a l 'roots' of t h e s e tenden-

'C

- cies can be tracea t o two c l o s e l y r e l a t e d but conce ually - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- 4-- d i s t i n c t issues. The f i r s t i s s u e , which concerns t h p o l i t i c a l

, functirons o f symbolic systems, has been toucped on b r i e f l y above.

As r ega rds Chomsky's theory of competence, t h i s i s s u e would en-

t a i l q u e s t i o n s p e r t a i n i n g 4 0 the s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s f o r t h e acqui-

s i t i o n of a p a r t i c u l a r competence as w e l l as to the k i n d s of

knowledge and pawer ' required to apply t h i s competence i n a spec i - . f ic social context (i ,e , , "ekpanded competence" ) . As r e g a r d s

societies, this &sue would involve di u s s i o n s of the - Unique *

F 9

a .

&ial h i s t o r i c a l f s i t u a t i o n s . and r e l a t i o n s of p&er w h i c h -de - . . . -

ends. T h i s asPpect- of

focuses mainly on the

b urdieu * s c r i t i q u e of- stryctura+f sm', ; which,

k- -. s --- a *- . *

w i l l be examined i n Chapter V I .

The second iswe concerns the r e l a t i o n of t h e o r e t i c a l con- F . L

strucgs t o t h e mode of knowledge i n e f f e c t i n a c t u a l p r a c t i c e .

This i s sue , which provides a necessary conceptual foundation f o r

an explanat ion of t h e conce t of t h e hab i tu s , w i l l be addressed -

- . i n the - next .- u two - --- ~chapt&s, d -

- * - -- L.

'Ic

. I n d f o o t n o t e e a r l y i n t h e Out l ine o f a Theory o f ~ r a c t i c e , A% -

~ o u r d i e u makes t h e fol lowing r e v e a l i n g s t a t ement on t h e r e l a t i o n

b e t w e e n - t h e o r e t i c a l knowledge and t h e mode of knowledge i n e f f e c t

i n a c t u a l p r a c t i c e :

If it is me c a s e t h a t making p r a c t i c e e x p l i c i t s u b j e c t s it t o an e s s e n t i a l a l t e r a t i o n , - b y speaking of what goes wi thout saying or by naming r e g u l a r i t i e s by d e f i n i t i o n unremarked, it fo l lows t h a t any s c i e n t i f i c o b j e c t i f i c a t i o n ought t o be greceeded by a s i g n i n d i c a t i n g "everything ' tA&%es p l a c e a s

n - --- - - - --- i f . . . , w h h f u n c t i c m h g - - - - - -- - -

- t h u a m p w a y - - a s q&aptiEiers-b==-- = = -

\ l o g i c , would c o n s t a n t l y remind u p o f t h e ep i s t emolog ica l s t a t u s of the cons t ruc ted concepts of o b j e c t i v e sc ience (Out l ine : 203) .

Bourdieu 's p o i n t i s r t h a t concepts such a s S a u s s u r e ' s langue and

Chomsky's competence should be represen ted as, and a p p l i e d f o r , 4 what they are: models of a b s t r a c t systems t h a t a r e cons t ruc ted i n

c o n t r a s t to t h e exper ience The primary func t ion - -- -- - - - - -

o f such models i s t o spec i fy a cohbrent and e x h a u s t i v e set of

-b %

r u l e s or r e l a t i o n s that describe, o r i n Quine ' s words, " f i t , "

observed r e g u l a r i t i e s i n i n d i v i d u a l behavior . To p r o j e c t t h e s e

a b s t r a c q s y s t e m s i n t o the " l i v e d exper iencen of i n d i v i d u a l s , o r

t o loca ?? e them a t some unexplained level o f r e a l i t y such as ~ 6 v i - f

S t r a u s s ' "unconscious," is , i n Bourd e u ' s words, t o "convert . . . \ [a] methodologica l p o s t u l a t e of i n t e i g i b i l i t y i n t o an onto- . P

\ -- -- ---

T0gic~Ithesism~foutline: 120) . such ' a s t r a t e g y (whether con-

us'or- unconscious) w i n i n e v i t a b l y obscure a fundamental

d i s t i n c t i o n : t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e knowledge of the theo-

- ---

- rfst who witfrdraws-from-social a c t i V i X 3 e s &d observes them 'from

a d i s t a n c e ' and the .embodieda knowledge of t h e i n d i v i d u a l who is

I n o r d e r t o g rasp t h e f u l l s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h e embodied 4

knowledge of t h e h a b i t u s and of t h e m y s t i f i c a t i o n s t o which it i s

sub jec ted by i m p l i c i t t h e o r i e s of p r a c t i c e it i s necessary t o

have a c l e a r understandfng of t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e o r e t i c a l I

and p r a c t i c a l knowledge.'*&e fo l lowing two c h a p t e r s a t t empt t o

c l a r i f y t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n from two p e r s p e c t i v e s . F i r s t , from t h e

p e r s p e c t i v e of s o c i a l h i s t o r y : t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e o r e t i - '

c a l and p r v t i c a l know1 edge i s i l l u s t r a t e d with r e f e r e n c e to- -- - - -

- - - - -- - - - -- -- - - --- -

c e r t a i n s o c i a l - h i s t o r i c a l v a r i a b l e s i n t h e t r ansmiss ion o f

c u l t u r e . Second, with r e f e r e n c e to t h e l i f e h i s t o r y of i n d i -

v i d u a l s (ontogeny): t h e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e embodied knowledge which

i s addressed by t h e h a b i t u s concept i s d i scussed wi th r e f e r e n c e

t o t h e b a s i c components of a theory o f i n d i v i d u a l l e a r n i n g and

-iaf i z a t i o n . I n -fri;s-aria-sis -of 3 o T E f3ese _Phenomena 3 o K d i g u

draws examples f r o m h i s f ie ldwork among t h e Kabyle people of

Alger ia . 1

Changinq Modes of S o c i a l Regulation--In d i s c u s s i n g d i f f e r e n t

ways o f t r a n s m i t t i n g c u l t u r e through t ime, Bourdieu devo tes con-

s i d e r a b l e a t t e n t i o n to changing modes of s o c i a l r e g u l a t i o n . . Bourdieu p o i n t s o u t t h a t among t h e Kabyles t h i s ca tegory of

n o t l inked and c o n s i s t e n t l y t o a system

e x p l i c i t l a w s a s is t h e comparatkve ca tegory o f phenomena i n

modern state societies (a ca tegory t h a t would i n c l u d e " l ega l -

j u r i d i c a l n phenomena). Though t h e r e does e x i s t , amdng t h e - -

Kabyfes, a documented set of c r i m e s and corresponding p e n a l t i e s ,

the fundamental concern of the Kabyles is n o t to s i t u a t e an

o f f e n s e inpa g r i d o f " u n i v e r s a l l y a p p l i c a b l e " r u l e s . Notes

Bpurdieu: " . . . t h e [vi l lage] assembly o p e r a t e s n o t a s a c o u r t pro-

nouncing judgement by r e f e r e n c e t o a p r e - e x i s t i n g code, b u t a s a

c o u n c i l which endeavours t o r e c o n c i l e t h e a d v e r s a r i e s ' p o i n t s of

v i e w and persuade them t o a c c e p t a 'cornpromise.. . [ ~ u r t h e r m o r e l t h e

7 mediators d e c i s i o n ... w i l l n o t be accepted u n l e s s it is c o n s i s t e n t r

with t h e ' s e n s e of j u s t i c e ' and imposed i n a manner recognized by

t h e ' sense of honour' " (Out l ine : 200) .

s t a t u s t h a t it does i n contemporary s o c i e t y . Equal i n importance

t o a se t o f e x p l i c i t and c o n s i s t e n t l y enforced r u l e s , a r e t h e

Kabyle "sense o f j u s t i c e " a n d - * s e n s e of honour." Such no t ions

may appear t o o vague t o e a r n much n o t i c e i n

s o c i e t y n and, indeed, it is p r e c i s e l y t h e s e

- clef ined an& in&Lvi-tluamy- experfrencea v a l u e s

a "sc ience o f

k inds of s o c i a l l y

i n t e l l e c t u a l i s t and r e d u c t i o n i s t exp lana t ions . Y e t , f o r Bourdieu,

c o l l e c t i v e l y de f ined sen t imen t s l i k e t h e "sense of honour" a r e of i

prime importance, w i t h i n c e r t a i n s o c i a l c o n t e x t s , t o a mainte-

nance of t h e s o c i a l order . Furqe rmore , t h e s e sen t imen t s and 7 1 similar systems of va lues are p a r t i a l l y c o n s t i t u t i v e o f t h e prac- .

1 t ica l knowledge addressed by t h e h a b i t ~ s ~ c o n c e p t . Commenting on

t h e d i s t a n c e of t h e "sense o f honour" from t h e theory of pract-

impl ied by the model of the rule guided i n d i v i d u a l (i .e., by -4

i n t e l l e c t u a l i s t e x p l a n a t i o n s ) , Bourdieu states:

Talk of rules, a euphelaized form of iegalisrn, i s never more - fallacious #an-when applied to t h e most homogenous soc ie-

ties (or the least c o d i f i e d areas of d i f f e r e n t i a t e d societies) where most r i t u a l i z e d ,

most p r a c t i c e s , i n c l u d i n g those seemingly can be abandoned t o the o r c h e s t r a t e d .

- -- - -- -- - -- -

improvisa t ion of common d i s p o s i t i o n s [ie. , hab i tus ] : t h e r u l e i s never , i n t h i s case ; more tlian a ,second-best in tended t o make good t h e occas iona l m i s f i r i n g s of t h e c o l l e c t i v e e n t e r p r i s e o•’ i n c u l c a t i o n tending t o produce h a b i t u s t h a t are capable of genera t ing p r a c t i c e s r e g u l a t e d wi thout express r e g u l a t i o n o r any i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d ca-11 t o o r d e r

There a r e two c e n t r a l p o i n t s being made i n t h i s passage,

. The f i r s t p o i n t r e l a t e s t o t h e degree of i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n of

the i n d i v i d u a l s who ensure t h a t behaviour conforms--to t h e v a l u e s

and "norms" of -iety . German s o c i o l o g i s t , Max Weber ' (1864-

i n a key passage t o which Bourdieu r e f e r s i n a l a t e r d i s c u s s i o n

o f the h a b i t u s ( s e e Out l ine : 76, 215) . Weber sets f o r t h a c l a s -

s i f i c a t o r y continuum of " l a w , " "convention, " and "custom. " Law,

n o t e s Weber, is c h a r a c t e r i z e d by an " a t l e a s t r e l a t i v e l y c l e a r l y

d e l i m i t e d group o f persons, who would cont inuous ly h o l d them- $

s e l v = s ready f o r Ehe special esk o f l e g a x - T o e r c i o ~ ~ € l i r o u g h phy- -

t sical or psychologica l m e a n s n (1968, 1: 3 2 0 ) . Convention, Weber

goes on, " . . . sha l l be s a i d to e x i s t wherever a c e r t a i n conduct is

sought to b e ind2ced wi thout , however, any coerc ion , p h y s i c a l o r

psychologica l ; and, a t least under normal circumstances, wi thou t

any d i r e c t i o n o t h e r than t h e express ion of a p p r o v a l - o r disappro-

val on the p a r t o f those persons who c o n s t i t u t e t h e environment

of the actor" (1968, 1: 319). F i n a l l y , Weber d e f i n e s custom - - - -- p-pp - -

( S i t t e ) (which would inc lude phenomena addressed by Bourdieu 's *

h a b i t u s concept) as " ., .a t y p i c a l l y uniform a c t i v i t y which i s

k e p t on t h e bea ten t r a c k simply because men are 'accustomed' t o - -

it and p e r s i s t i n it by u n r e f l e c t i v e i m i t a t i o n . It is a collec-

t i v e w a y of a c t i n g (Massenhandeln), t h e pe rpe tua t ion o f which by

- - - - - - - -

- -- --

t h e i n d i v i d u a l i s ' r e q u i r e d ' i n any sense by anyone" ( F ! ,

1: 319). t

?

The second p o i n t being made by Bourdieu, which is c l e a r l y

r e l a t e d t o t h e f i r s t , r e f e r s t o t h e l e v e l o f e x p l i c i t n e s s of \

norms and behaviour . On t h e one hand, a s i n t h e case o f "law," \

norms may t a k e t h e form of e x p l i c i t w r i t t e n r u l e s , which have a

t a n g i b l e e x i s t e n c e e x t e r n a l t o t h e i n d i b i d u a l . When a s o c i e t y i s

o r i e n t e d towards l e g a l norms a t t empts a r e made t o s i t u a t e complex

and o f t e n ambiguous even t s i n - r e l a t i o n t o t h e p r e c i s e c l a s s i f i - -,

- ---- - ~- - - - ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~

~ - - - - - -- -- --- ~- ~ -- - -- - - - ~~ ~ -- -

c a t i o n s d e l i n e a t e d by t h e r u l e s . On t h e o t h e r hand, as i n . t h e

case of t h e Kabyle "sense of honour," norms may t a k e less e x p l i -

c i t forms. J u d i c i a l processes among t h e Kabyle focus on t h e I

e v e n t ' r a t h e r than on t h e a b s t r a c t w r i t t e n c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s w i t h i n . ,

which t h e e v e n t migM be s i t u a t e d . Moreover, t h e a n s e n s e ,of

Bourdieu p u t s it, l i t e r a l l y embodied by i n d i v i d u a l s , r a t h e r t h a n

expressed by explici t r u l e s . Thus, a s t h e fo l lowing d e s c r i p t i o n

sugges ts , t h e "sense o f honour" is c o n s t i t u t e d by t h e m o d a l i t i e s "

of knowledge t h a t are addressed by t h e h a b i t u s concept : " . . . the

p o i n t [or sense] o f honour i s a pe&nanent d i s p o s i t i o n embedded i n - J1

t h e agents * . [ ind iv idud l s* ] very bod ies i n t h e f o m of mental

d i s p o s i t i o n s , schemes of pe rcep t ion and thought , ex t remely gen- - - -- - -p-p---p

era1 i n t h e i r appl ica t ion . . . and also, a t a deeper Level, i n t h e

form of bodi ly postures and s t a n c e s , ways e f s t and ing , s i t t i n g ,

looking, speaking or walking" (Outl ine: 15) . - - - -

The-preceding colnm~ts on the degree o f i n s t i t u t i o ~ a l ~ t i o n

of i n d i v i d u a l s admin i s t e r ing norms and t h e level of e x p l i c i t n e s s

of t h e norms themselves h e l p t o c l a r i f y Bourdi-eu's c r i t i q u e of

exp3anat ions which depend on an idiom of m l e s t o ,account f o r

p a t t e r n s of behaviour i n s o c i e t i e s such a s t h a t of t h e Kabyles. 1 f '. Y

r Among t h e Kabyles, as Bourdieu no tes , " t h e r u l e i s never more

than a second b e s t n (Out l ine : 1 7 ) . The t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t s *

of i n t e l l e c t u a l i s m (which Bourdieu als; c a l l s " l e g a l i s t f o r - -

d malism") (Out l ine : 1 7 ) obscure both t h i s secondary s t a t u s of t h e +

-

=c< - r u l e and t h e c r u c i a l d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e o r e t z c a l and prac-

t i c a l knowledge. I n e l a b o r a t i n g , a s i n t h e fo l lowing passage., , . I

- - - - =on f he f unccun_gf -this pract icalar e&adieLknsd I - - &ge-&n-- iz =- - -

I

J Kabyle s o c i e t y , Bourdieu i s a b l e t o demonstrate both t h e imrnedi-

7

a t e e m p i r i c a l u s e f u l n e s s of t h e h a b i t u s concept and i t s r e l e -

u vance t o a g e n e r a l theory of practice: ". . . [in ~ a b y l i a ] t h e I

r u l e s of customary l a w have some g r a c t i c a l e f f i c a c y o n l y t o t h e 1

e x t e n t that, s k i l f u l l y manipulated by t h e h o l d e r s of a u t h o r i t y 1 - - - -- -- - - - - - - -

- - - - - - -- -- -- - --- - ---- --- -- -- -- - -- 7

wi th in t h e c l a n ( t h e ' g u a r a n t o r s ' ) , they 'awaken', s o t o speak, #

I

the schemes o f p e r c e p t i o n and a p p r e c i a t i o n d e p o s i t e d , i i ? - t h e i r b

i ncorpora ted s ta te , i n every member o f t h e group, i .e . t h e d i s -

% p o s i t i o n s of t h e h a b i t u s " (Out l ine : 1 7 ) .

Changing Modes of ~ r a n s m i t t i n g Culture--In a d d i t i o n to

examining s o c i a l - h i s t o r i c a l v a r i a b l e s i n modes of s o c i a l xegu- 3

- l a t i o n , Bourdieu examines changing modes of t r a n s m i t t i n g , *

, y cultural phenomena i n g e n e r a L & - p c z i n & - 0 1 1 + ~ F o c t k s -

- - - -

without w r i t i n g tor wi th a minimal amount of w r i t i n q ) must r e l y

on o t h e r m e d i a f o r t h e conse rva t ion of t h e s o c i a l in fo rmat ion

necessary t o the reproduct ion of the s o c i a l o r d e r , N e a r t h e end - - - - - - - - - - -

of the O u t l i n e of a -Theory o f P r a c t i c e he cites a work bp 4

f . b

t h i s t o p i c . A comparison o f t h e approaches bf Havelock and -, K

Bourdieu t o t h e t ransmiss ion of c u l t u r e and knowled i n soc ie - .e t i e s wi thout w r i t i n g ( i n t h e modern sense) p r o v i d e s an important

p e r s p e c t i v e on t h e h a b i t u s concept.

Havelock no tes t h a t when w r i t i n g i s secondary i n importance

t o o t h e r modes of communication, as i n Greek s o c i e t y b e f o r e P l a t o . i

(c. 427-347 B.C.) , o r a l dis60urse p l a y s a c r u c i a l r o l e . in ' t h e

s t o r a g e of social information. I n o rde r t o enhance t h e r o l e of -

-

- - -- - - - - - -

- -- - -

p - p -- -

o r a I d i s c o u r s e a s a k i n d o f p " c o l l e c t i v e memory" c e r t a i n mnemonic

techniques are 'brought into- play. Pu t s imply, t h e mnemonic

q u a l i t y of speech i s augmented by t h e techniques w e today c a l l

""poetic" ( f o r example, rhythm, rhyme, r e p e t i t i o n ) , wh i l e t h e s e

p o e t i c techniques a r e themselves a u w e n t e d by a f u l l r e p ' e r t o i r e .

of "dramatic" s k i l l s ( f o r example, va r ious s t v l e s of bQdypmove- - -

-

- - - - A---

ment, d i f f e r e n t f a c i a l express ions , song, e tc . ) . Refe r r ing t o

t h e dramat ic performances t h a t w e r e q u i t e common i n Greek s o c i a l

l i f e , Havelock d e s c r i b e s t h i s process g r a p h i c a l l y : %

. . . [for t h e purposes of f a c i l i t a t i n g memorization] t h e p o s s i b l e cambinations of motions performed by t h e lungs , la rynx, and t e e t h are d r a s t i c a l l y r e s t r i c t e d [i .e., t h e i r redundancy is increased] j u s t as t h e p o s s i b l e combinations

1 of spoken words and phrases are r e s t r i c t e d . . . . [~ur the rmore ] performance upon the l y r e invoking a motion o f t* hands sets up a corresponding rhythm i n ano the r part of .'. . [the reciter's] body which proceeds- p a r a l l e l w i t h t h e A t i o n si

-p --- - - t h ~ v ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ [ ~ i n a l l ~ ~ ~ e g s and f e e t ahd t h e i r

motions. . . [are] organized i n dancing. . . t o which th audience F-- ~ r r r e c l t a t i o n . . . t h r o u g h t h e eyes , ... and perhaps a s

'l they watch t h e i r nervous systems respond s p ~ a t h e t i c a l l y wi th s m a l l concealed motiolrs o f their own w i t h o u t neces- s a r i l y a g i t a t i n g t h e l e g s (1963:-149-50).

-

~ a v e l o c x ' s d e s c r i p t i o n has been puiTposely e d i t e d h e r e t o .

d e s c r i p t i o n of g e s t u r e s used t o evoke t h i s shad ing o f emotion and ?

t h a r s 9 t l e t y of i n t e l l e c t u a l i n s i g h t ,

t i o n a l @o*&t, s t r e s s i n g t h e mnemonic

ponents o f t h e t o t a l process . This is

Havelock g i v e s us a func-

r o l e o f t h e v a r i o u s com-

impor%ant g iven t h e

tendency t o n e g l e c t t h e foundat ion of@human communication and - memolry i n b o d i l y techniques. Furthermore, t h i s k-&d o f descr-ip-

t i o n provides an uncomplicated summary o f t h e kirids o f phenomena

which are addressed by t h e concept of t h e h a b i t u s . -

- - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- -

- - -- - - - - - -

- - -- -

- - - -

-- - -

However, Havelock has a p a r t i c u l a r axe t o g r i n d i n o h i s d i s -

cuss ion o f t h e b o d i l y components of t h e mnemonic process . Not'

06ly does he want t o d e s c r i b e t h e changes t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z e d t h e -

t r a n s i t i o n from oral t d w r i t t e n ' c u l t u r e i n Greek s o c i e t y . He , ' .

a l so , , l i k e P l a t o be fo re him, wants t o convince the r e a d e r of t h e

i n h e r e n t s u p e r i o r i t y 05 _ d i s c Q u x fxe_ed-from its-centralroleas --+*

a mnemonic d e v i c e w i t h a l l the b o d i l y t echn ique emot ional .

d-nsions t h i s role e n t a i l s . Thus Havelock i s o s t e n s i b l y con- - cerned wi th some b a s i c "empir ica l" q n e s t i o n s (such as t h e changes

* A

i n c u l t u r a l c o p t e n t t h a t accompanied t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n of dis-- -1

course i n w r i t t e n s i g n s t h a t e x i s t a p e n + & n t l y qf p a r t i c u l a r - .

i n d i v i d u a l s ) , Y e t , at t h e same t i m e , Havelock is involved i n

d e f i n i n g a set of value-laden concepts--such as, r a t i o n a l i t y ; 7 ,

- - - --- ----

self-conscicxusness, and autonomy-in o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e ' d i s c o u r s e

of the embodied, f e e l i n g . i n d i v i d u s l . This o p p o s i t i o n between the

mind and l o g i c on the one hand, and the body and an absence of

- l o g i c o n the 0the.r F ~ a d , i s sug&sted i n t h e fo l lowing statemerit:

" . . . i t -is the hallmark of a concept o r an i d e a t h a t it is more c*

e f f e c t i v e l y i s o l a t e d and pohdered in s i l e n c e and wi th phys ica l -

immobili ty. ~ e - e n a c t m e n t and emotional i d e n t i f i c a t i b n have no - . .

p l a c e i n t h e c o g i t a t i v e process proper" (Havelock, 1963: 167) . Havelock ' s condescending a t t i t u d e t o b o d i l y techniques i s

d7 d f u r t h e r evidenced i n h i s * use of P l a t o ' s idiom of t r a n c e and

awakening t o d e s c r i b e t h e h i s t o r i c a l p e r i o d when'widespread u s e '-'.-

of mimetic t echn iques gave way, i n c e r t a i n s e c t o r s o f ' ~ r e e k

-- - -

s o c i e t y , t o a b s t r a c t d i s c u r s i v e argument: "So it is t h a t t h e long - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - -- - - -- - - -

- - - - -

- -

s l e e p of man i s i n t e r r u p t e d and h i s s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s ~ , separa- - -

t i n g i t s e l f from t h e l azy p lay ,of t h e e n d l e s s s a g a - s e r i e s of

e v e n t s [as expressed i n dramatic performances], beg ins t o th ink

and be thought o f " (1963: 210) . \ The documentation on t h e t r a n s i t i o n from o r a l t o w r i t t e n

sugges ts . Because the no t ion o f embodied knowledge is fo re ign %

3

and perhaps even vaguely d i s d a i n f u l t o modern r e a d e r s s o depen-

d e n t on t h e w r i t t e n word, Bourdieu uses Greek examples t o s i t u a t e Y

t h e h a b i t u s concept h i s t o r i c a l l y . Indeed, t h e fo l lowing summary

could almost have come from Havelock: 0

%

Every group e n t r u s t s t o bod i ly mechanisms those p r i n c i e l e s m o s t b a s i c t o it and m o s t i n d i s p e n s i b l e t o i t s conservat ion . I n societies which l a c k any o t h e r r ecord ing and o b j e c t i f y i n g

- -- - - - - - -- --

f n--7-ieetiTedKnowPedge c a n s u r v i v e only i n i t s em- bodied state. Among o t h e r consequences,. it f o l l o w t h a t it

A.

c i w h d -- - -

as P l a t o dote&--can d e l i v e r it only a t t h e p r i c e of a s o r t of gymnastics in tended t o evoke it: m i m e s i s . The bodv i s t h u s con t inuous ly mingled wi th a l l t h e knowledge i t &pro-

- durses, lwhich can never have t h e ob j e c t i v i t j i and d i s t a n c e stemming from o b j e c t i f i c a t i o n i n w r i t i n g ( O u t l i n e : 218) .

However, Bourdieu 's aims d i f f e r from t h o s e o f Havelock i n a t ..-,

l e a s t two s i g n i f i c a n t ways. F i r s f , whereas Havelock 's d i scuss ion

is informed by h i s d e s i r e t o pronounce a v e r d i c t on t h e in l ie rent

s u p e r i o r i t y 'of a b s t r a c t d i scourse , Bourdieu 's inqu iky i s predi-

c a t e d on t h e assumption t h a t t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c f e a t u r e s of a

given,mode o f communication are de f ined , i n t h e l as t a n a l y s i s , by-

t h e s o c i a l c o n t e x t i n which it i s loca ted . Thus, w h i l e Bourdieu

d does n o t i g n o r e t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e of c t h e mediwn i n which s o c i a l

i&cmna&ia-i~s&ored, h i s ~ f a c a l - c o n c e r n i s t be - func t i_onpf t h a t =

informat ion w i t h i n a s o c i a l c o n t e x t .

Second, because of h i s ves ted i n t e r e s t s i n t h e c o n t r a s t s

between embodied and a b s t r a c t d i scburse , Havelock d i r e c t s h i s

a t t e n t i o n t.o p o e t s and phi losophers ; t o dramat ic performances and 1

p h i l o s o p h i c a l debates-- i . e . , t o exeqplary i n d i v i d u a l s and -events 1

-- - -- - - - - -.

- - - i n t h e o r a l -and w r i t t e n t r a d i t i o n s . ~ o u r d i e u , - h & e G r , is %& - '

, cerned w i t h embodied knowledge i n everyday l i f e and how t h e

r o u t i n e behaviours of d a i l y l i v i n g h e l p t o reproduce a given

s o c i a l o r d e r . Thus p a r t of B o u r d i e u ' s . a n a l y s i s o f Kabyle s o c i e t y

c e n t e r s on the s t r u c t & i n g of space i n t h e Kabyle house. I

Bourdieu argues t h a t informat ion regarding K w l e b e l i e f s about

tbe n a t u r e of the s o c i a l world and, indeed, about t h e n a t u r e of

~the,_c~~m~Q~_areei~4~~r_ib~clinnthe svmbo 1ic s t r u c t u r e o f t h e Kaby- , .

l i a n house, This i n f o k t i o n may be encoded i n t h e r e l a t i o n s

between symbolic o b j e c t s o r i n t h e boundar ies ( e x p l i c i t and i m -

p l i c i t ) which - d i s t i n g u i s h - masculine p and feminine p a r t s of t h e

house. The Kabyles, Bourdiea e x p l a i n s , l e a r n and remember t h i s

informat ion by l i t e r a l l y embodying it i n c e r t a i n h a b i t u a l . i

1

p a t t e r n s o f moving a b u t t h e house. ~ l a b o r a t i n g , Bourdieu draws

our a t t e n t i o n t o t h e process by which the o r g a n i z a t i o n of every-

day a c t i v i t y i s int;rtwined wi th l a r g e i p a t t e r n s i n t h e j o c i a l I

un ive r se : t

A l l t h e symbolic manipulat ions o f bbdy exper ience , s t a r t i n g wi th displacements w i t h i n a mpth ica l ly s t r u c t u r e d space, &. t h e movements o f going i n and coming o u t [of the house1 , t end . t o impose t h e i n t e q r a t i o n o f - t h e body space wi th cosmic space by grasping i n terms of t h e same [embodied analogies] . . . t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between man and t h e n a t u r a l 8 world and t b e complementary and opposed* s t a t e s and a c t i o n s ' of t h e two sexes i n t h e d i v i s i o n of s e x u a l work [i ie . , - i n

- - the sexual-ct-asscdnstrai.need by_ _s_ocial--noms~and1_the- = - 7

seirual d i v i s i o n of work, and hence i n t h e work 'df b i o l o g i c a l and social reproduct ion (Outline: 91) .

'5.

? I t i s e v i d e n t t h a t although t h i s proce s , as' ~ 6 u r d i e u l a t e r p u t s

it, may " . . . f a l l s h o r t of [abstract] . [ th is ] does n o t

mean it is s h o r t on log ic" (Out l ine : 120) . ' ,4 iu i9&rtat t o ~ u h h e r as r e g a r d s 2 ' t h i s secdnd 'poin t ,

- - - - - -

noEK mat w h i l e - t h e hab-itus c o n c e p t may be c l a f i g i e d by cont ras- E

t i n g it t o t h e a b s t r a c t d i s c o u r s e of t h e w r i t t e n t r a d i t i o n ,

~ o u r d i e u ' s o v e r r i d i n g ' i n t e r e s t i n l inking ' t h e knowledge of every- '

day l i f e w i t h t h e maintenance o f the- s o c i a l t o t a l i t y e n t a i l s a h -A

demonstrat ion bf t h e cont inued importance of emdodied knowledge

i n modern s o c i e t y . I n f a c t Bourdieu -integrates the no t ion o f . %+

abstract d i s c o u r s e i n t o t h e h a b i t u s ctmcept through t h e idL a o f t C

- - - -

" r e l a t i o n t o 'high c u l t u r e f e - - o r , m o r e s p e c i f i c a l 9 , through the -- - - -- pppp---- -- - - . ' >

i d e a of the r e l a t i o n o f v a r i o u s classes or groups to the abstract

d i s c o u r s e ( f o r example, s y n t a c t i c a l l y complex " p r e s t i g e * Engl ish)

of the dominant classes. d

~ e ~ & s t Formalis--It h a s been demonst ra ted t h a t modes of

="=-3 - - - - - - - - - - A -- -- - - - - - - - - -- - -

1 0 -

. social r e g u l a t i o n v a e among d i f f e r e n t s o c i e t i e s . Weber, f o r

example. sets f o r t h a con<inum ranging from fhe e x p l i c i t ab- *

s t r a c t r u l e s of l a w t o t h e " u n r e f l e c t i v e i m i t a t i o n " o f customs- + C

\ ~ u r t h e r m o r e , modes o f t r a p s m i t t i n g c u l t u r a l phenomena i n g e n e r a l ,

< have. undergone cons ide rab le - h i s t o r i c a l change. Havelock, for

example, i l l u s t r a t e s the d i f f e r e n c e s between t_he e+odied d i s - - . -

u r s e of t h e or& t r a d i t i o i r and t h e a b s t r a c t d i s c o u r s e - a q t h e ' - - - - "9, writken* t r a d i t i o n , Th i s discusslTbn of t h e d i f f e r e n t m o d a l i t i e s

-- of normative and g e n e r a l c u i t u r a l phenomena raises t h e fo l lowing

- - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- -- --- - - - - - -

problem.. ' Given t h a t Weber '&\ examination 6f d i f & r e n t modes of \

t r a n s m i t t i n g c u l t u r a l phenomena a r e l e s s t h a n r a d i c a l i n t h e i r .'?

r e s p e c t i v e d i s c i p l i n e s , how is it p s s i b l & t o account f o r t he

a n g o i n s t e n d e n c y t o d i s c u s s a l l human behaviour, ' r e g a r d l e s s of / J

r

, , s o c i a l con tex t , as i f it were " r u l e guided," I n other words,

- . 7practice [cu?=entl; dominant] . . . surv ived a l l t h e denuncia t ions o f

l e g a l i s t formalismR {Out l ine : 17) . There are severak . r e a s o n s f o r t h i s s i t u a t i o n . F i r s t , - /

, F - because the s o c i e t i e s b h i c h h t a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s 'are t r a i n e

are so f i rmly grounded in--the l ega l - ju r i ' d i ca l modes of s o c i a l . . . !!R

r .ii - *

* .

r e g u l a t i o n , it . i s not s u r p r i s i n g that 'leg&ist formalismY should - + I . .

be so p e r s i s t e n t . Sedond, with p a r t i c u l a r t e f e r e n c e t o f . . - - - - - -- - -- -

7 9 . . %

.. - Bourdieu's concept of embodied n w l e d g e (the h e i t u s ) : t h e r e 'is a,

a long t r a d i t i o n i n western t h o u g h t ' p ~ r t r a ~ i n ~ the body as a n t i - '

A .- \

thetical to t h e mind, the i n t e l l e c t , l ~ g i c , ~ e t c . - - i n s h o r t , i n - A. . - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -

portraying the body as a threat t o any k i n d of pa tern or order. ' t -

'k -

3

'Be cla$nt~ ' tha t sacial-- theorists- @d reseazrhers have- fail&& tq, - - - - -

'* - - - . - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - ., - _ e - . - - . '

' ' r e Q g n ~ z @ theG"ways in which- t h e 5.nfomati?n or "data" thek- gather: - I 3 1 . - ' . , . . - 4 *. 1

is _ .i inf luenced bk the social, condit idns i n which &ey gather that . - 9 . -

* -- , I - 5 - a .

. c . - P ; infonnafion. - - ' One 06 the ponsequencesnfthiefai-c; lnn, , ; , _ - - - - -

-. -- - - - * - x .-- --

D - -* .. ,I'-

9 . a i ~ o u k d i e u , is #at the tendency to . re fer jnhiscrirpinately 'to , . -

. , is quite & s s l b ~ ~ ins&&t@ from the noise-and b=tlezbf ., .. .

day activity. .In combination; these factors engender a W r - ' - . kind7'*f response to 'the. questions of tha &thropologist; -

. - il 4

eoretical return- to his w n practi-& '{~ut~ne: 19). . Elabora- 2 t

~o'mdieu indicates hck an uncritical appyoach.to the infor- d - ' - --- - - - -------- * - - - - - - - - - -- - - '-i

obscures t h e kinds of phenomena which c o n s t i t u t e t h e l iabi tus.

* Speaking of- the cha rac t e r of t h e responses t o a n t h r o p o l o g ~ s ~ '

quest ions, Bourdien no tes : .- ... the inf$,rmantls d iscourse , i n which he s t r i v e s t o g ive himself t@g appearances of symbolic mastery of- h i s p r a c t i c e , tends t o draw a t t e n t i o n t o the most remarkable 'moves ' , i . e. tbose m o s t esteemed o r reprehended, in the d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l

- - - games 4such.. ,as marriage wi th t h e pa rdXe1 cowsin among t - -- - m i u ~ i a g e - s4zategiesS. -COuUine; 19) , . - - .

-P 'i,

Bourdieu's re fe rence t o marriage s t r a t e g i e s .in t h i s guota-

t i o n a l l udes t o a s i t u a t i o n which he discusses l a t e r i n t h e -

-- -- - - - - ppp- - - - - - -- -- - - -- --- - - -- -- - - - -

-- .- --- 7---

Outline of a Theory of Prac t ice . Among the Kabyles, no t e s

Bourdien, t h e most e t h i c a l l y & h i a t e marriage, t h a t is , t h e

k ind bf marriage which w i l l most enhance a family's p r e s t i g e i s a '

marriage between p a r a l l e l cousins ( s e e Outline: 30-43) . C

Bourdieu claims t h a t when informants a r e subjected t o genealogi- I

cal sues tionin~theyin&tabIy p r tray p ~ t ~ ~ ~ i i a g e ~ a s a ~ l ~ s e - - -- - - -- ---

. to this i d e a l as poss ib le (i-e., they choose "the more orthodox .K

of two p u k i i s l e ways of ~Zass i fy ing a marriage" tOutt2ne : 19) ) , though the relations between ind iv idua ls are o f t e n q u i t e ambigu-

u s Thus the anthropologist's faith i n explicit l e g a l norms

governing makriages is reinforced by the received impression of

a high likefihmd of ideal marriages, Summarizing, Bourdieu 5

note?: '*-,the .subtlest pitfall doubtless lies in the fact that - -- '. -

s ~ h descllploas -{for example, of ~~irriages] f r e e l y draw on t h e

highly arpbigtrous vocabulary of rules, the language of grammar,

wrality, and law, to express a s o c i a l practice that i n fact

dependent on the ed sense of honour wbich is c o n s t i t u t i v e T p

the

's

(Outline :

\ CHAPTER V: THE HABITUS A S A THEORY OF L E A R N ~ G AND SOCIALIZATION

Even a f t e r t h e h a h i t u s has been s i t u a t e d i n r e l a t i o n t o i m -

p o r t a n t s o c i o - h i s t o r i c a l v a r i a b l e s , i t i s n o t u n l i k e l y t h a t t h e

r e a d e r w i l l r e t a i n a s e n s e of u n c e r t a i n t y , and perha* even f rus -

\\ t r a t i o n , w i t h Bourdieu 's t r ea tmen t of t h e concept . For\,though \

t h e embodied knowledgg o f t h e h a b i t u s can be c l a r i f i e d by'\\its - - - - - 1

r e l a t i o n to, say , e x p l i c i t l e g a l r u l e s , t h e q u e s t i o n remains:, . 4- \

what, e x a c t l y , i s the h a b i t u s ? Is t h e r e ' n o t a more subs tant ive ' ,

a b a s i c unity of meaning amidst t h e v a r i e t y of- s i g n i f i c a t i o n s *

t h a t the h a b i t u s t a k e s on i n difke ' rent con tex t s?

The t r u t h i s Bourdieu never o f f e r s a comprehensive d e f i n i -

t i o n t h a t focuses on t h e h a b i t u s p e r se . This i s because a

i c e n t r a l component o f t h e de f in i< ion o f t h e h a b i t u s concerns i t s t

role i n s u s t a i n i n g {or reproducing) t h e s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s i n a

p a r t i c u l a r social t o t a d . t Y . Thus the h a b i t u s is a lmost always I

d e f i n e d i n r e l a t i o n t o a s p e c i f i c social o r d e r o f which it i s t h e !A 'h

product , and which, as Bourdieu asserts somewhat t a u t o l o g i c a l l y . (5-e., c i r c u l a r l y ) , it helps to -reproduce. I n Bourdieu 's words:

"The coherence to be ob rved i n all products of the a p p l i c a t i o n L of the same habitus has no other basis-than the coherence which

A

*-- y ~ m x x @ x z s L m ~ 'Lhe . . d

-a-

sexes or age-classes--or between social classes) of which they

- Nevertheless , i n s p i t e of t h e f a c t t h a t t h e meaning of t h e

hab i t u s emerges on ly i n r e l a t i o n t o s p e c i f i c s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s , -

t h e r e are c e r t a i n "formal" p rope r t i e s of t h e h a b i t u s t h a t can be

gleaned from Bourdieufs various cursory d e f i n i t i o n s . An examina-

t i o n of t h e s e formal p rope r t i e s w i l l he lp t o e x t r i c a t e t h e habi-

t u s concept from the tendency towards a c i r c u l a r i t y " ( a s

a generat-ive p r imip fe -wh ich both i s produced by a - - -.

s o c i a l con tex t ) which it exh ib i t s i n some of Bourdieu's mbre

condensed de sc r ip t i ons . - - - - - - - - - -- -- -- - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - ppp -- -- - - - -

I n very gene ra l terms it can be s a i d t h a t the hab i tu s con-

sists of a system o f learn& d i spos i t i ons2 (of behaviour., of ex-

per ience , o f speech, of thought, etc.) embedded, i n a fundamental

way, i n bod i ly schemes, When one r e c a l l s the stress Bourdieu

p laces on t h e importance of t h e r e l a t i o n s of t h e h a b i t u s t o a - a1 C - ontext , Lt h e c ~ i h l e - t x r + e z c e i v e W a f r w -

cept--the system of learned d ispos i t ions--as encompassing t h e

b a s i c elements of a theory of human s o c i a l 5 z a t i o n (which neces-

s a r i l y inc ludes a theory of human l&rn ing) . These p r e f a t o r y ,

remarks i n mind, it is use fu l t o fosus on onesof Bourdieu's own i

d e f i n i t i o n s i n o r d e r to have a gu ide l i ne f o i a s s e s s i n g what kind

of theory of learning and s o c i a l i z a t i o n h e has i n mind.

An e x p e e i a l l y important d e f i n i t i o n o f the hab i tug appears

in the second chapter of the Outl-ine o f a Theory of PracSice.

Bourdien is a t t q t i n g to clarify hcsv the h a b i t u s concept avoids

the s imple c i r c u l a r i t y t h a t o f t e n r e s u l t s when t h e o r i s t s a t tempt

ac t i on or whether human ac t i on de f ine s t h e form of s o c i a l

- c o n d i t i o n s ( a problem t o which Bourdieu r e f e r s i n d i r e c t l y a s a

" f a l s e dilemma" (Out l ine : 72). I n -demonstrat ing how t h e h a b i t u s L -

concept may avo id t h i s dilemma through i ts p o r t r a y a l o f t h e

ond i t ioned freedom" of human a c t i o n , Bourdieu d e f i n e s t h e habi-

". . .a sys tem'of l a s t i n g , t r ansposab le B i s p o s i t i o n s which,

i n t e g r a t i n g p a s t exper iences , f u n c t i o n s a t , e v e r y moment a s a

ma t r ix of p e r c e p t i o n s , a p p r e c i a t i o n s , and a c t i o n s and makes pos- --

s i b l e t h e achievement of i n f i n i t e l y d i v e r s i f i e d t a s k s , t h i n k s t o

L a n a l o g i c a l t r a n s f e r s of schemes p e r m i t t i n g t h e s o l u t i o n o f s i m i - -- -pp--p-----pp---p- ~ ~- ---- - ~

~

- -- p---p---p-

-

l a r l y shaped problems" (Outline:. 82-3) . : Theor ies o f Learninq--This p e r s p e c t i v e on t h e r e s u l t s of '

s o c i a l i z a t i o n as th'ey a r e embodied i n t h e h a b i t u s can be s i t u a t e d

i n r e l a t i o n t o a number o f impor tan t t h e o r e t i c a l p o s i t i o n s . W e

m can n o t e , f i r s t , t h a t Bourdieu has a n a n t i - i n t e l l e c t u a l i s t view

schemes is n o t a f u l l y conscious a c t i o n . I n o t h e r words, a s 5

Bourdieu has demonskrated r e p e a t e d l y , t h e i n d i v i d u a l , i n confron- f - t i n g t h e problems posed by h i s or h e r environment (i.e., t h e

problem of speak ing d p e f t i n e n t l y " o r behaving i

e t h i c a l l y , etc . ) , is n o t pr dependent on a conscious re- * f d

f e r e n c e to e x p l i c i t r u l e s or on a consc ious adherence t o the ex- 1

p l i c i t d i c t a t e s of a p re -es tab l i shed " ro le ." The " r u l e , " as i -die= remarks, "is never more than a second best" (cf. b v e ,

p.65 f . I n clarifying this paint w i t h respect t o i n d i v i d u a l 4 ?

learning, Bourdieu draws a t t e n t i o n to an example used by Fxench -- - - -

S - - - -

? - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - -1

p h e n o k n o l o g i s t &=ice wrleau-Panty (1908 3961 . ~ e r l e a u - ~ o n t y ,' !

p o i n t s 41967: 1 2 4 ; quoted i n Outl ine: 20) ( f o r example, t h e f

vowels). These semi-conscious a c t i o n s of cross-checking pre- ~ "

suppose t h e non-consciaus &usc le memory, o r , as Merleau-Ponty

calls them, "muscle s t r u c t u r e s n (1967: 124) , on which they de- - A pend. Of course , both t h e s e t y p e s of a c t i o n are more e f f i c i e n t - - rr

b- .I - i . e., they- a l l o w mqreLof t h e i n d i v i d q a l 's a t t e n t i o n t* be devoted - *

t o s p e l l i n g , grammar and composition--than t h e p a i n f u l l y slow

a c t i v i t y of t h e beginger who must consc ious ly view t h e keyboard

This example o f t h e t y p e w r i t e r p rov ides an impor tant i n s i g h t

i n t o t h e f u n c t i o n of c r e a t i v i t y i n l e a r n i n g . C l e a r l y , t h e func-

t i o n of c r e a t i v i t y i n human l e a r n i n g i s c r u c i a l f o r Borudieu a s J

is a t t e s t e d by h i s c l a i m t h a t the h a b i t u s "makes p o s s i b l e t h e

-- achievement of i n f i n i t e l y d i v e r s i f i e d t a s k s " (Outline: 83). This - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - -- - -- -- -

d i s t i n g u i s h e s , h i s p o s i t i o n from t h a t df t h e b e h a v i o r i s t s l i k e

B,F, Skinner (cf. above, p. 26J~who pr t ray ~ g a n i s m s ( inc lud ing * *

. human beings) as p a s s i v e l y r e a c t i n g , and l e a r n i n g t o react, . t o

tbe .sense datag of *external s t i m u l i . " I t a l s o d i s t i n g u i s q e s r

Bourdieu 's p o s i t i o n on human l e a r n i n g and behavior from views -

which posir what he calls a "mechanical" (Outline: 7 3 ) response

3 to any 'externaln explicitly d e f i n e d set of sac'ial d i r e c t i v e s .

--

TotesBourdieu: 'It is necessary t o abandon a l l t h e o r i e s which

. . * d 8

d i r e c t l y determined by t h e an teceden t c o n d i t i o n s and e n t i r e l y

* assemblies, "models,' or "roles"' (Outl ine: 431.

Y 81 '* I

- - - - ' - -- - - - - -- i - - - - - - - _ -- - - --- -

?us aqa ins t these persoec t ives on a' simple rnecllanical deter-

mination of behavior--i, e , , a determination which engenders a

completely p red ic tab le behavior a s a response t o an i d e n t i f i a b l e

s t imulus o r injunction--Bourdieu pos ts a type of c o n s t r a i n t , j 'I

imminent i n behavior, which allows f o r an element of c r e a t i v i t y

o r freedom. H e descr ibes t h i s mediated freedom ( c f . above, p.

44 - ) a s " . . . - [a] condit ioned - - and cond i t i ona l freed-. :. [which] i s

a s remote from a c r ea t ion of unpr&ctable novelty a s it 'is from

a simple mechanical reproduction of i n i t i a l conditionings"(~cltLine:

l e v e l of learning of behavior always presupposes l i m i t s ( a s i n

the cons t r a in t s which a r e embodied i n schemes) a t a more b a s i c

l e v e l . I

\ Bourdieu's views on t h e cha rac t e r of t h e c o n s t r a i n t s which

a behavior cap thus be d i s t ingu ished from t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l i s t d i -

mension of Chomsky's ana lys i s . I n t h e p lace of an a b s t r a c t sys-

t e m of e x p l i c i t s y n t a c t i c c o n s t r a i n t s which Chomsky fo rku la t e s ,

Bourdieu p o s i t s a system of concrete c o n s t r a i n t s grounded i n a

bodily matrix and a specific social context .

s t r a i n t s that Bourdieu p o s t u l a t e s are largely \

pos i t i on must be f u r t h e r d i s t ingu ished f ~ o m any perspective--

scious processes.

above. Eiaving a t t a i n e d a typing speed of e igh ty words a minute,

J

and having acquired m e basic "rulesn of grammar and spelling as '

well as a "welx-raunded" vocabulary, the typist may;attempt to

develop his/her skills of composition. However, the condition I

for the assimilation of the-context-sensitive second or third

order "rules" of rhetoric and style which are necessary to apply

the grammatical and lexical information appropriately and per- - - -

suasively is a thoroughly embodied knowledge of the more basic

"rules." If the typist has to attend consciously to the '"rules"

a si&plistically intellectualist 'perspective would suggest, his L

4- or her project of learning composition will be seriously impe ed-

Bourdieu's antilintellectualist view pn levels of learnihg

has broader implications for the degree of consciousness involved

in socialization. This becomes evident when he focuses on the

- mode of transmission of the general abiliti-es a child mist lead - . f n order to become adequately socialized (i .e., to be able to

1

foll&, with reasonable ease, the basic routines of everyday

life). Speaking of the processes of socialization in Kabyle

s u c k ety , Bourdieu notes :

So long as the work of education is not clearly institu- tionalizea as a specific, autonomous practice, and it is a

thout atqaining the . The child imitates not e ' %actions (Outline: 87 ) .

?

-

Body heris [style or demeanour] speaks directly t o the motor

- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- func t ion , i n a e form o f a p a t t e r n of p o s t u r e s tha t ' i s both

I

i n d i v i d u a l and sys temat ic , because l i n k e d t o a whole system d of t echn iques invo lv ing body and t o o l s , and charged w i t h a ;

h o s t o f s o c i a l meanings and values: i n a l l s o c i e t i e s , c h i l - l 3

d ren are p a r t i c u l a r y a t t e n t i v e t o t h e g e s t u r e s and posture^ .

which, i n t h e i y eyes, express everyth ing t h a t goes t o make -t,

- an accomplished adul t --a way of walking, a - t i l t o f t h e head, f a c i a l expressions, ways o f s i t t i n g and of us ing implements, always a s s o c i a t e d , w i t h a tone of voice, a s t y l e o f speech,

I, and ( h a ? could it be otherwise?) a c e r t a i n , s u b j e c t i v e

4 [individual] exper ience (.O t l i n e : 87) : +

In addition t o be ing a n t i - i % t e l l e c t u ~ l i s t , a n d t h u s c r i t i c d l

of unexamined assumptions about t h e a c t u a l r o l e of consc iousness i 'r

and c r e a t i v i t y i n l e a r n i n g , Bourdieu 's theory o f l e a r n i n g is, as - - ~ ~ -~ ~ ~

3 4 - -- - -

4

i nd ica ted , a n t i - b e h a v i o r i s t . Like Chomsky, Bourdieu rejects t h e - i i

not ion of i n d i v i d u a l s p a s s i v e l y r e a c t i n g , and l e a r n i n g t o r e a c t , ' i S

t o ' the v a r i o u s s t i m u l i ( sense d a t a ) of t h e i r environment. ' Con- $

s i d e r fjourdieu's s u g g e s t i o n , t h a t t h e h a b i t u s "makes p o s s i b l e t h e * i 1

I

achievement of i n f i n i t e l y d i v e r s i f i e d t a s k s , thanks t o a n a l o g i c a l

- C 1

0

problems" ~~: 83). Bourdieu 's p o i n t i s t h a t an e s s e n t i a l cqm- - , ' O

\ - -

ponent of t h e l e a r n i n g process, Me k r y OK the - i n d i v i d u a l ,

involves the s t o r a g e of p a t t e r n s - a n d r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t are s i m i -

lar to the patterns pnd r e l a t i o n s h i p s which are expressed i n t h e #

' L

i n d i v i d u a l ' s environment, Thus the l e a r n i n g process of the - t

- i n d i v i d u d entails sometking other than an endless c o n f r o n t a t i o n ' !

w i t h unique configurations of sense data o r "events ." The learn-

ing7&cesr can be lore accurately understqod a d n a c t i v e recog-

nition of similar €at same l e v e l ) or problems. P u t

another way, because the social environment is produced by indi- , J - - - - - - - - - 0 -- - - - - - - - -

v i d u a l s rho h k enrbodied similar patterns or schemes, these

p a t t e r n s w i l l b e replicated i n va r ious l e v e l s and domains of the 1 . !

C

84. 1

- - -- - - - - - - -

- - - -

s o c i a l e-t, s--l~, P7--

Middle Ages (abbvk, pp. 35-37 ) i n which he argued t h a t t h e

w p o s t u l a t e of c l a r i f i c a t i o n f o r c l a r i f i c a t i o n ' s sake" engendered

\

a similar s t r u c t u r e i n Gothic Arch i t ec tu re and S c h o l a s t i c Phi lo-

sophy. _ _ $.

The r e p l i c a t i o n of s i m i l a r p a t t e r n s , which might a l s o be

c a l l e d redundancy, is elucid-ate-d by communications t h e o r i s t

Gregory Bateson i n a seminal a r t i c l e on a r t i n non-s ta t e bocie-

I ties : - - - - - - -

A - - - - -- - - --- - -

A n T F r ? t e o f events o r o b j e c t s (e.g., a sequence o f pho- neines, a p a i n t i n g , or a f rog , o r a c u l t u r e ) s h a l l be s a i d t o c o n t a i n "redundancyw o r " p a t t e r n " i f t h e a g g r e g a t e can be d iv ided i n any way by a " s l a s h mark,- such * t h a t a n obse rve r pe rce iv ing on ly what i s on one s i d e of t h e s l a s h mark can pess, with b e t t e r than random success , what i s on t h e o t h e r s i d e o f t h e s l a s h mark, W e may s a y t h q t what i s on one s i d e of t& s l a s h c o n t a i n s informat ion or h a s meaning about what i s on the o t h e r xde . O r , i n eng inee r ' s language, t h e aggrbagate c o n t a i 'redundamy . " O r , aga in , from t h e p o i n t o f -view of a c y b e r n e t i c observer t h e in fo rmat ion avai lab le_- - -

-- - - - - ----

s - - a n o n e s i d e - of the s l a s h w i l l . rest a i n (i .e . , reduce t h e d p r o b a b i l j t y of) wrong guess ing (1 72: 130-31) .' Given this d e f i n i t i o n o f r e c f u n d a q , it becomes easier t o under-

stand ~ o b r d i e u ' s a t t e m p t - t o r e l a t e the h a b i t u s as a p roduc t ive , -

, . s t r u c t u r i p g modus operandif t o c u l t u r e as a s t r u c - .

tused product (opus operatum) . C l a r i f y i n g th is r e l a t i o n between 1 the patterns p r e s e n t in the (in this case) social environment and

. the patterning or sdructuring action which is expressed through

- ~ , q e z i e ~ a t r i v e principle uf the hab i t u s , Bourdien writes :

n xnwherent serfes ot =gures, w h i c h can be learnt - - only g r a d u a l l y , tfrrongh repeated attempts and w i t h con- F'

stinuous predictable progress, a numerical series is mastered more easily because it c o n t a i n s a s t r u c t u r e [redundancy]

--=hi& itr--txrmecessary t5 xmmorize al3- €he n-rs one- by one: in vezhal products such as proverbs , sayings, maxhm, songs, r i d d l e s , or games; . i n o b j e c t s , sue-h as tools,

, -

t h e house, o r the v i l l a g e ; o r aga in , i n p r a c t i c e s such as -4 c o n t e s t s of honour, g i f t exchanges, rites, etc., t h e ma-

t e r i a l which t h e Kabyle c h i l d has to a s s j m i l a t e , is t h e pro- d u c t of t h e s y s t e m a t i c a p p l i c a t i o n o f p r i n c i p l e s coherent i n ' p r a c t i c e , which means, t h a t i n a l l t h i s e n d l e s s l y redundank m a t e r i a l , he h a s no d i f f i c u l t y i n grasping .>the ' r a t i o n a l e of what a r e c l e a r l y series and i n making it h i s own i n t h e form of a p r i n c i p l e genera t ing cogduct organized i n accordance -

s- wi th t h e sane r a t i o n a l e ' (Outl ine: 88) , %

On t h e s u r f a c e , t h i s a n t i - b e h a v i o r i s t view of s o c i ' a l i z a t i o n

appears open t o the accusat iom of t h e "s imple c i r c u l a r i t y n men- *

b

F tioned above--i,e., t o t h e accusa t ion t h a t t h e concept o f ' t h e /' - - - - - - - -- - - -- - -- - - -- - - habi -- tu%-wpreesr -- - - - - c% -- m t h i n q - -- -- - buta -- - '%BY - - - - o n w w & a l - p z h - - 3z@_ucinqY - -

A and "being produced by" a g i v e n - s o c i a l c o n t e x t , However, such an

accusa t ion can be countered by drawing a t t e n t i o n t o t h e f a c t t h a t ,

Bourdieu p o r t r a y s l e a r n i n g a s a m u l t i - l e v e l l e d process. Thus,

whi le t h e r e may be similarities - ( o r "homo1ogies," a s Bouydieu,

. sch,emes, -- - the deep s t r u c t u r e o r the code) there may be discrepan-

cies, - and thus r o o m for c r e a t i v i t y o r "freedom" a t a n o t h e r l e v e l %

(the l e v e l of the surface s t r u c t u r e or message) , 'F-

As t h e p r e v i o u s d i s c u s s i o n i n d i c a t e s , the t h e o r y of l e a r n i n g , ,

which u n d e r l i e s Fp.rdieuas concept of the h a b i t u s i s both a n t i - T

i n t e l l e c t u a l i s t and a n t i - b e h a v i o r i s t . I n l i b h t o f the sugges t ion

t h a t Bourdieu's view of l e a r n i n u is also a m u l t i - l e v e l l e d one, it -C

is possible to classify both i n t e l l e c t u a l i s n t and behaviorism *

l and , of course, biol - i s m ) as reductionist t h e o r i e s , Reduction-'

ism, i* t h i s sense, is t h e tendency to either c o n c e n t r a t e on one - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - -- -

f- k v e l of human Iearning~or behavior t o the e x c l u s i o n of the other

levels or to reduce levels one to ano the r , Bourdieu 's theory of

. human l e a r n i n g , l i k e h i s theor; o f humdn behav io r , i s t h u s

Y

1 profoundly q n t i - r e d u c t i o n i s t . * I %

I ~ a v i n g i s i t u a t e d Bourdieu's theory o f l e a r n i n g w i t h r e$pec t " -

b 4 to o t h e r t h e ries of l ea rn ing , i t , i s necessary t o expand, some-

1 ' .

what, on t h e \ v i e w of t h e hum* individua; on whicf i 'h i s assumptions ' 3 about t h e theofy o f leakning which u n d e r l i e ; t h e h a b i t u s conc&pt ;

- 3 " * L -- - ".

a r e based. Bourdieu's a n t i - r e d u c t i o n i s t view of l e a r n i n g as - , m u l t i - l e v a l e d process involves p d r t r a y i n g ' t he i n d i v i d u a l . as a, 1

t h i s a n t i - r e d u c t i u n i s t -, - p e r ~ p e c ~ i y e - pn ' le&ning enta i$s a view of . -

t h e i n d i v i d u a l as dynamically s i t u a t e d on t h e fundamenta,l -axes- o f . =*

time', w d space: - -

- =

F i r s t , %as regards t h e s i k u a t i o n of t h e .embodied s e l f . i n

a long t h e s e l i n e s , . B ~ U - d i e u .links the n o t i o n of t h e "unconscious" -. PTL B - I S

. ,, 6 -

(which he as,sociaes G i t h tb5 6 & i d b o d i l y schemes) to what he *

calls "the fo&et<+& of history* ( 0 ; t l i n e i 78) or "genes i s .

- #

-1. ~ k k h k i m (1859-1911). t o clarif* this '

. - r . . . .in each of us, in vary jng proportions,* $ther> is part

of yes*dayNs laan; it is -,yesterday's nian who inev' i tably

rim; 6 - W e r e f a $r- r ~ u l t , Yet e - t

' r

sense =of*the pas t , Xecause he- is inveteraizez [do routed and habit-13 in us; he qakes u p Ule unconscious kt - of ourselves. Consequently- we are, le* + to take n;o . aacotmt of -'- ,

< him,_a_lrly_mOlre ~thzp~we-take-acd%unr Q•’ his legithate flwlunds,. - ' - - - A-

JConversely we are very mu& mo2e a w a r e of ~e most recent . - attainments of ciwiljzation, because; being recent, they , have not yet had tin& fo sett le-hto om uncohskious. - . - .

. (Outline: 791

I n a - r e c e n t article, Bourdieu focuses more s p e c i f i c a l l y on .

' , t h e process of indivi.dual development. ~e\r*es for the impoi- a . . . \

-xL , tan&= i? a d u l t l i f e : of childhood experiences as t he se are sto?ed

- Z . * 1

' or .:~+&rnember~du i n bodily s t y l e s : "The body is an ihstrument .

ah ich . r eco rds .. its o h previous us5s and'which, although cqntinu- . . - ously &if ied' by them, ' gives gx&ater weight to the earliest of -

-L ? - - - - - - - . - - - \ - a - -- * - - - - . - - * < . . - - - -. -A- - -- - - -

t h e m ; i t conta ins , i n the fbrm of l a s t i n g automatisms, t l i e m a c e '

. and the memory o f t h ~ s o c i a l events, e s p e c i a l l y the early ones, .& .ll-q a r e * - - - - - - - - ---- .*e---- g a t w ( 1 9 7 7 d t - 6 I L - , T h s p p--pp pp --

cons t r a in t3 which' the p a s t exerts o y p r e s e n t behavior are no t '

0 Y

"mechanicalp o r + "one-d5mensional. " I n f a c t , because t h e ,behav$or . . - vidua ls from . s i e i l a t social back&ounds is def inkd &

s a m e r e l a t i v e l y u&riscious c o n s t r a i n t s , such ind iv idua ls are.

G.H. Mead (1863-1931), i n order to illustrate this point: "In . r\- i

- - -- - - - - = - - - . A f , -

dog-fights,' as' in ' the fighting of chi ldrsn o r boxers, each I$ove '"

, 1 .

. , : tkiggers off, a cumter--ye, every s w c e of the becomes a '

, ** 'sign prepndnt w i t h , a w g that the opponent bas to grasp while:. n . - I e

i - .

it is st211 'hcipient. reading in b e beginnings of a stroke or' a . - * A . - * @ . .

Sidestep the i.rinnt future,. i .a. t h e blow or the d k ' . - Y .

f~lltline: 11) . ~oG.rdieo adds. 4ith referenee* to the soc id l -- --- r -

- , - + - - - " - -

h a c t i p m of this ability to aqticipate future behaviors ? .. , .@e. . ' 5 d * z . -

2 _

capgble of preparing e r i h t e to a mv&t that ha& barely - . . - - " - 9 I -

payqlr. sq&aq&sW pus- s d t m ~ ~ ~ . rm q6a0xm uf #A& a m '

j-- :yfiT; : :rip= :padoo~ .:hewn :lo$ sTt : enj--, suofq~s~ddo sno5 * -- -- -,

a d - -- v -,i=---

t .- . -oTomoq go. . - ;as - P -02 -6uTp~da~e parrnekm s i asqoq aqq- * : rn ' : suoyq . . a =

, . - 2 -

r e p l e t e w i t h e x p l i c i t , r i g o r o u s l y . d e f i n e d , boundar ies , and l a i d t i i

o u t i n l f r a n t of a c e r e b r a l obse rve r , is q u i t e f o r e i g n t o t h e

f u n c t i ~ n i n g of fhe body a s map (see, f o r example, ~ & i - ~ t r a u s s ' i 4

i 1

- d . f a b s t r a c f , and i n ~ r e d i b l y cdmpiex model of t h e " to temic operakorn

(1966: 1 5 2 ) ) . Bourdieq a rgues t h a t t h e body a s map f u n c t i o p s t n o t as a "conscious r i i a ~ ~ e r y o f a s o r t of ca ta logue of oppbs i t ions" - - %

- - - -- a -- - + (Outl ine: 118) which, i n c e r t a i n s t r u c t u r a l i s t accounts .. a r e f

claimed t o be r e f l e c t i o n s of t h e human b r a i n . I n s t e a d , the

. * house a r e -n, . .based on moveihents or p o s t u r e s of t h e human body,

' such as going up_andL coming down ( o r going forwards and going J - backwards), going t b t h e l e f t and going t o t h e r i g h t , going i n

and coming o u t (or f i l l i n g and emptying) , s i t t i n g and s t and ing

( e t c . ) " [Outl ine : 119) . Thus, t h e body f u n c t i o n s as what Bourdieu

c a l l s a n p r a c t i c a l o p e r a t o r n (Out l ine : 119) which makes p o s s i b l e , t +

"geometry i n t h e t a n g i b l e worldn (Jean Nicod, quoted by Bour-

d i e u , Out l ine : 119) . By p r a c t i c a l o p e r a t o r , Bourdieu means t h a t 0

t h e bod i ly a c t i o n s mentioned i n t h e previous q u o t a t i o n ("going up o

and coming down," etc,) b r i n g abou t c e r t a i n g e n e r a l q u a l i t a t i v e C

t ransformat ions i n t h e world of c u l t u r a l meanings and va lues 3

( s o c i a l space) j u s t a s mathematical o p e r a t i o n s b r i n g abou t quan t i -

n *. 4 1 1

It is p o s s i b l e , a t this p o i n t , t o summarize the b a s i c pre- * t

cepts. that c o n s t i t u t e t&e _theory of l e a r n i n g and s o c i a l i z ~ t i o n - a 4 3

underlying t h e concept of t h e h a b i t u s . Bourdieu t a k e s a pro-

foundly a n t i - r e d u c t i o n i s t s t a n d on l e a r n i n g ; t h a t i s t o say , he -

).

views l e a r n i n g as a mul t i - l eve l l ed p rocess , undertaken by a /-

( r e l a t i v e l y ) con'scious embodies i n d i v i d u a l , dynamically s i t u a t e d

on axes of t i m e and space , 7.

/" The b a s i c theme t h a t i n t e g r a t e s t h e v a r i b u s s t r a n d s making /'-

/- up t h i s a n t i - r e d u c t i o n i s t theory of l e a r n i n g i s Bourdieu ' s focus -4

on t h e r o l e of t h e bodyL i n t h e l e a r n i n g process . Unfor tunate ly ,

this b a s i c theme o f Bourdieu 's t l i e o r e t i c a l p o ~ i t i o n i s a l s o one -

# of t h e most d i f f i c u l t a s p e c t s o f h i s work t o grasp . The dynamics

of t h e "sociaZly informed bodyn ( o u t l i n e ( 124) o r h a b i t u s , ~ ~

- - -- - -- - -- -- -- -- - ~ ~- - ~

--p---pp------ -- ~ --

n o t t o mention i t s very p l a u s i b i l i t y , a r e i n e v i t a b l y obscured by

t h e dominant western t r a d i t p o n t h a t p o r t r a y s t h e body and r e l a t e d '

phe'norhena' (such as emotions) ah .a t h r e a t t o l o g i c and order--and -

t hus t o l ea rn ing . ~t ' i s t h u s impdrtant t o pause f o r a moment t o

examine more c l o s e l y t h e k inds of c o n s i d e r a t i o n s involved i n

- - alibtirrg. t f i e b d y - a - c e n t r a P ~ction'in-learniS~mcia2iza t i on r - - - - -- -. - ..- I n what sense can t h e b o d i l y schemes-which c o n s t i t u t e t h e

- h a b i t u s be s a i d t o possess a l o g i c ? What is t h e r e l a k i o n of t h i s

l o g i c t o abstract conceptua l thought?

Levels of Learning and Communication--The t a s k of provid ing

a conceptua l foundat ion f o r responding t o t h e s e and s i m i l a r ques-

t i o n s can be approached w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e i d e a of l e v e l s of *

l ea rn ing . Bourdieu himself does n o t fol low this approach. H e -- --- -- - -- - - - -- -

fol lows t h e less r i g o ~ u s and less e x p l i c i t s t r a t e g y of. l e t t i n g b - L'

t h e sense of l e v e l s edrge from h i s var ious u s e s o f "scheme, "

" d i s p o s i t i o n , " etc., and h i s major d i s t i n c t i o n between embodied - - - - - - - - - - -

" r i S t u a l n l o g i c and a b s g r a c t " c o n c e ~ t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c " logic (which

Bourdieu calls "logical l o g i c (O;tline : 1 4 2 ) ) . However, fo r

purposes of c l a r i f i c a t i o n , it is u s e f u l t o e l a b o r a t e on t h e idea

of l e v e l s of l e a r n i n g and t o i d e n t i f y more s p e c i f i c a l l y t h r e e

The c h a r a c t e r o f t h e s e d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f l e a r n i n g ( they

could a l s o be c a l l e d l e v e l s o f communication) and t h e r e l a t i o n s '

between them can be i l l u s t r a t e d by t h e metaphor of t h e m a p l t e r r i - -- - - -

t o r y r g l a t i o n s h i p , Communication t h e o r i s t s Anthony Wilden and

Richard Coe make p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e use of t h i s metaphor i n D

- -- -- - - ,- - - - -a- -&&-_~n=&he~c_an~- o f ~ r r n r , I n bt-gooduc ing -t hheeiir di sc US- -~ . -- -- --

* s i o n of e r r o r w i t h an a n a l y s i s of t h e ways e r r o r can be reduc~ed

o r avoided, Wilden and Coe d e f i n e map i n t h e fo l lowing manner:

. . . pmapn can b e used] t o r e f e r t b any r e p r e s e n t a t i o n which is used t o o rgan ize informat ion . Without such a r ep resen ta - t i o n a System cannot o r i e n t i t s e l f , select in fo rmat ion o r t r a n s f o m in fo rmat ion i n t o meaning t i . e . , i n t o in fo rmat ion r e l e v a n t t o t h e system's The f u n c t i o n o f t h e map i s

-

- - p r e c i s e l y - t o a l l o w th-systenr f- an-er&n&sm- te 4 e c i d e - -

% which informat ion t o emphasize, which t o deemphasize, and which t o ignore . To be u s e f u l , t h e r e f o r e , t h e map must con ta in less v a r i e t y than t h e t e r r i t o r y . . . . [ thus allowing] t h e organism t o reduce v g r i e t y t o manageable p r o p o r t i o n s " (1978: 1-2) .

Using t h i s d e f i n i t i o n of t h e map / t e r r i to ry r e P a t i o n as a

genera l gu ide f ine , we can r e t u r n t o t h e problem of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g

between the three l e v e l s of l ea rn ing . A t t h e f i r t l e v e l of B l ea rn ing , t h e c h a r a c t e r and degree of t h e v a r i e t y of t h e map i s - - - - - - - -

pp -

close t o t h a t of t h e territory. Thus t h e r e is a g r e a t d e a l of /-

cont inui ty/between the map'and the t e r r i t o r y ; a change i n t h e

- t e r r i t o r y i s represen ted by a very s i m i l a r change i n t h e map.

This l e v e l o f I e a r n i n g will be termed analog l e a r n i n g because of

i ts fundamental d%endenc$'e on t h e mapping o f d i f f e r e n c e s on a

continuum.

Bourdieu a l l u d e s t o t h i s l e v e l of l e a r n i n g when h e mentions --

" l e a r n i n g by doing" (Outl ine: 217) o r r e f e r s t o t h e Greek n o t i o n

of mimesis: "Man d i f f e r s from o t h e r animals i n t h a t he i s t h e -\

ong m o s t g iven to mimicry (mimetikotaton) and l e a r n s h i s f i r s t .

l e s s o n s through mimesis ( d i a mimeseos)" ( A r i s t o t l e , quoted i n

Bourdieu, O u t l i n e i 96) . I n d e s c r i b i n g t h i s predominantly analog

l e v e l of l e a r n i n g Bourdieu w r i t e s o f " . . . a p p r e n t i c e s h i p through

s imple f a m i l i a r i z a t i o n , i n which t h e a p p r e n t i c e i n s e n s i b l y and

-= , =, - iln~nnscj~us& anuL-.tbainciples o f the_" a x I L a n d L # e a L o f = _ _

l i v ing- - inc lud ing those which a r e n o t known to ,the producer of

t h e p r a c t i c e s o r works i m i t a t e d n (Out l ine : 88) . 3

I n t h e i n t e r e s t s o f ~ l a r i f y i n g ~ t h i s l e v e l of ana log l e a r n i n g

it i s i n s t r u c t i v e t o i s o l a t e an example of where it occurs i n i t s

s i m p l e s t o r most elementary form, A p a r t i c u l a r l y u s e f u l example - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - -

of t h i s e lementary form of p r e d o ~ n a n t l y analog l e a r n i n g i s given

i n an article on & i l d development by French phenomenologist,

Maurice Merleau-Ponty. he-article, e n t i t l e d "The C h i l d ' s Rela-

t i o n s w i t h O t h e r s , " is o s t e n s i b l y concerned w i t h the c h i l d ' s

a c q u i s i t i o n o f basic g e s t u r a l and l i n g u s t i c ab-ties. However, L 'Merleau-Ponty i s e q u a l l y concerned wi th d i s p e l l i n g t r a d i t i o n a l

views of communication--the s&ne views t h a t Bourdieu ' s theory of

- * -- - - - -e h a b i t u s a t t e m p t s to combat--which begin with_Lndividual con- w -

-- sc iousness (as an elementary u n i t o r "monad) and proceed t o

concep tua l i ze communication a s b r i d g i n g a h y p o t h e t i c a l gap between .

a number of consc ious monads, (Theoyis- whose reason ing i s - - -f ,

1

cons t ra ined by t h i s presuppos i t ion t e n d 4 0 p o r t r a y t h e body as an - -- 1

appendage t o t h e source and d e s t i n a t i o n of information-- the mind--

'I - & p k n t k e k x t s ~ - & - 11 db _ILJ e.qua w - \

t h e brain.) By address ing t h e development o f corrrinunicative

a b i l i t i e s i n a comprehensive manner, Merleau-Ponty n o t only * .

c l a r i f i e s an elementary form of a n a l o g i c l e a r n i n g ; he a l s o demon-

strates t h e importance i n combatting "monadology" of t h e concept

of "scheme" which i s e s s e n t i a l t o Bourdieu's d e f i n i t i o n of t h e

h a b i t u s (as, for example, i n Bourdieu 's d e f i n i t i o n of the h a b i t u s -- - *

a s invo lv ing "ana log ica l t r a n s f e r s of schemes" (Out l ine : - 8 3 ) ) .

Merleau-Ponty begins by a s k h g how t h e c h i l d , who has n o t -- 1 - - .- -- -

- -

-- - - - -

- --- - -- -

- ---

y e t acqui red a r t i c u l a t e speech, js a b l e t o i n t e r p r e t t h e a d u l t

express ions of benevolence, a loofness , approval , d i sapprova l , e t c .

I n o t h e r words, r e f e r r i n g t o t h i s problem a s c ' l a s s i c a l psycholo- >

g i s t s had s e e n it, Merleau-Ponty asks how t h e c h i l d i-s a b l e to

I "pe&ive ac ross . :. [the] body. . . [ the adu syche?'! (p. 1 1 4 ) . 7 '

In r e s ~ o n d i n g t d these- r h e t o r i c a l _ques_tions~~~leal~ -- - P o n e zux~ues - -

i

t h a t c l a s s i c a l psychology w a s wrong i n l v i e w i n g t h e body a s a

pass ive medium through which messages w e r e s e n t . The body, he

contended, w a s i n no sense a c o n t a i n e r of a " . . . ' p syche ' ... [portrayed as] a series of ' s t a t e s of con&ciousneks' t h a t are

'. \ igorous ly c losed i n on *themselves *ani i n a c c e s s i b l e t o anyone b u t

me [i .e., the indiv idLal o r monad]" ' (p. ,1161 . On t h e cont rary :

[ ~ o n s c i o u s n e s s ] is above a l l a r e l a t i o n h b e .. world.. . [and a - - --

person's]consciousnesS .. . . is comporting -

r = '-/ -- -elf 6owards t he .wor ld Li.e., a c e r + a i n . c o n t e x t u a l l y def ined

s t y l e of behavior] (Herleau-Ponty , p. 117) . I4erfeau-Pone goes oK t o e x p l a i n t h a t a p e r s o n ' s s tate of

consciousness .(or a t t i t u d e ) i s grounded i n c e n e s t h e s i a which

g of sp-c * . t h a t ufw7d P - P S S to I

the s u b j e c t [.individual] t h e state of h i s d i f f e r e n t organs and

d i f f e r e n t ' bodi ly f u n c t i o n s [ the p o s i t i o n s of t h e l imbs, etc .] " ( p 4 But this c e n e s t h e s i a o r k i n e s t h e t i c w e r i e n c e i s n o t

ai j u s t t h e "agglomeration of s e n s a t i o n s n ( ~ e r l e a u & o h t ~ , -_- p. 117)

which t h e e a r l y psycho log i s t s had desc r ibed . 2 t h a j was t h e ---. - + case , contends Wrleau-Ponty, t h e tendency wo;ld be f o r t h e chiLd

/

t o remain "swallowed up i n a cenes thes ia" (p. 113) . O r , on t h e

o t h e r hand, t h e c h i l d would be faced w i t h t h e formidable (and i n - -~ ------p-- p-------pp-pp--

~- - ~- ~ - ----- - - -----p- -- -----p----p-------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Merleau-Ponty ' s view, u n r e a l i s t i c ) f o u r s t a g e d t a s k o f movTng

- f rom h i s psych&, t o h i s k i n e s t h i t i c exper i ence , t o h i s v i s u a l

image of t h e a d u l t , t o t h e a d u l t ' s psyche (p. 115) . Thus, a g 3 i n s t ~ + . .

i,

the view of t h e c h i l d ' s exper ience o f h i s body a s an "agglomera-

ti& o f s e n s a t i o n s , " Merleay-Ponty argues : "The body i s f i r s t

and - foremost - -p a system whose - -- - d i f f e r e n t i n t i o c e p t i v e i n t e r n a l l y ' - - - - --- - - - -

o r i e n t e d ] and e x t o c e p t i v e [ ' ex te rna l ly t o r i e n t e d ] a s p e c t s e x p r e s s

each other reciprucal ly . . . .The conscioxkness I have o f my body i s L

n o t t h e c o n s c i o u s ~ e s s & ' a n i s o l a t e d mass;. it is a p o s t u r a l I'

schema" (p. 117)

Returning to the problem of t h e c h i l d ' s a t t e m p t - t o i n t e r p r e t

a d u l t a t t i t u d e s as expressed i n g e s t u r e s , Merleau-Ponty observes

t h a t because a t t i t u d e s are expressed through s t y l e s o f behavior -

- --

and p a t t e r n s of facial express ion the c h i l d need n o t fo l low a - - .

mysterious r o u t e to the a d u l t ' s psyc

' immediately ' meaning•’ul--i .e , , they are meaningful wi thout t h e

conscious isofati-on of a preckse-image express ing an a b s t r a c t ' -.

a t t i t u d e of ' lover or 'hateB--" ... because t h e y aze themes o f . -

. .

p o s s i b l e a c t i v i t y fox t h e c h i l d ' s own bodym (Merleau-Ponty,

p ." 117) . * 1n o r d e r t o c l a r i f y t h i s impor tant p o i n t , I i p o t e some- \

what l e n g t h i l y from Merleau-Ponty :

A t - f i r s t t h e c h i l d i m i t a t e s n o t persons b u t conducts . And t h e problem of knowing how conduct can be t r a n s f e r r e a from another t o 'me i s i n f i n i t e l y less d i f f i c u l t t o s o l v e t h a n t h e problem of knowing hqw I can r e p r e s e n t t o mys4.f-a p s y ~ h e t h a t i s r a d i c a l l y f o r e i g n t o me.

I f my body i s t o a p p r o p r i a t e t h e conducts g iven t o me v i s u a l l y and make them i t s own [i .e . , understand them), it

% must i t s e l f be given t o me n o t a s a mass of u t t e r l y p r i v a t e sensa%ions b u t i n s t e a d by what has been c a l l e d a' " p o s t u r a l , " o r F c ~ r p ~ r e a l , schema. "

I n a d d i t i o n , t h e diffe-r-t senso-ry domains IsightPL_= --

touch, a n d t h e sense o f e o v e i e n t i n t h e j o i n t s ) which a r e ,

involved i n the percep t ion of my body do n o t p r e s e n t them- s e l v e s t o m e as s o many a b s o l u t e l y d i s t i n c t r eg ions . Even i f , i n t h e c h i l d ' s f i r s t and second y e a r s , the t r a n s l a t i o n 7 o f one i n t o t h e language of o t h e r s is imprec ise and incom- p l e t e , they a l l have i n common a c e r t a i n s t y l e of a c t i o n a

* c e r t a i n g e s t u r a l meaning t h a t makes of ' t h e c o l l e c t i o n an a l ready organized t o t a l i t y , Understood i n t h i s way, t h e - exper ience I have of my own, body could be t r a n s f e r r e d '"to another much m q e e a s i l y than t h e cenes thes ia of classical

- - psychology, g i v i n g rise t o what Wallon c a l l s a " p o s t u r a l - -

impregnatiofi" o f my & b o d y b y -the conducts 1 3 t n e s s (pp. 117-8).

This , t hen , i s t h e most elementary example of ana log l e a r n -

ing . Both t h e c h a r a c t e r a n d t h e degree of t h e v a r i e t y of t h e " ' v

"map" ( i n ' t h i s case, t h e c h i l d ' s " p o s t u r a l scheman) a r e very

s i m i l a r t o t h a t o f t h e t e r r i t o r y n ( t h e a d u l t ' s " p o s t u r a l schema"). I

The process o f l e a r n i n g entai1.s a predominantly cont inuous - .

mapping from t h e a d u l t ' s p o s t u r a l schema t o t h e " p o s t u r a l irnpreg- - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - -- -- --

na t ion" of t h e c h i l d , As such, t h i s example a l s o C l l u s t r a t e s a

s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d %ase of the !analogical t r a n s f er o f schemesn t o

which Bourdieu r e f e r s i n h i s - d e f i n i t i b n of t h e h a b i t u s .

Such a d e t a i l e d exp lana t ion of analog l e a r n i n g and communi-

, c a t i o n makes it p o s s i b l e t o r e t h i n k t h e t r a d i t i o n a l , e d l a n a t i o n s

t h a t ~ o r t r a v e d communication a s a l i n k a s e between d i s c r e t e i n d i -

v idua l s which was made by a conscious a c t express ing a p r i v a t e

i n t e n t i o n . Frdm Bourdieu 's pe r spec t ive , communication and 3 < d ---. . ,

learning. [ i n , t h e m o s t ge'neyal sense) , a r e ongoing p r o c e s s e s t h a t

/r connect peop le a t a l l t imes r e g a r d l e s s . of t h e ~ o ~ c i o u s i n t e n - 'f ' t i o n s . The body acts a s a s o c i a l l y grounded code which d e f i n e s

2, t and expresses i n d i v i d u a l s i p t l e a s t a s much a s t h e y u s e ' Z t ' t o

-7- \ ---5

d e f i n e and e x p r e s s themselves: "With i t s messages, pe rce ived o r f

n o t , t h e body contaminates and overdetermines [ c o n s t r a i n s i n many t

(Bourdieu, 1977e: 51) . I n t h e fol lcwing passage Bourdieu impl ies . ,

t h a t some phenomenologists have f a i l e d t o r e c o g n i z e - t h e s e p o i n t s

and thus t h e y remain t rapped i n t h e problem of t r y i n g t o l i n k r_

individuaL Copscious i n t e n t i o n s : "The homogeneity - of h a b i t u s i s

what. . .causes p r a c t i c e s and works- - t o be immediately i n t e l l i g i b l ~

and f o r e s e e a b l e , and hence taken f o r granted . Th i s p r a c t i c a l ' ~4 -

comprehension o b v i a t e s [makes unnecessary] t h e "- intent ion" and

" i n t e n t i o n a l t r a n s f e r t o t h e o t h e r " dear t o t h e phenomenologists, L

by d ispens ing , f o r t h e o r d i n a r y occas ions of l i f e , w i t h c l o s e

- a n a l y s i s of -nuances of , a n o t h e r ' s p r q c t i c e and t a c i t or e x p l i c i t

i nqu i ry ( 'What do 'you man? ' ) i n t o h i s i n t e n t i o n s " (Out l ine : 80) . Before proceeding t o t h e second l e v e l of l e a r n i n g it is

- te~est*kee#&--6fte4-#i&*&uses+f & + c ~ ~ ~ e p -

-- - - Cp .-hemi n was w i t h r e ~ e r ~ D E K O ~ -- a - p o i n t t h a t h e l p s t o suppor t Bourdieu 's views on t h e impor-ce of

bodi ly p o s t u r e s t o memory. I n a classic work emem em be ring), S i r

L F.C. B a r t l e t t , a B r i t i s h s o c i a l psychologis t , proposed t h a t

c e r t a i n b o d i l y s c h e m a ~ form a h e s s e n t i a l foundat ion t o t h e = . ,

process ,of remembering. B a r t l e t t wrote: " . . .when a s u b j e c t i s

being asked t o remember, ve ry o f t e n t h e f i r s t t h i n g t h a t emerges

i s something i n t h e n a t u r e o f an a t t i t u d e (p. 2 0 7 ) . . . [ the bod i ly

schemas] are an organismt s way of keeping up a n a t t i t u d e towards

= . the environment which it f i n d s t o be adequate and s a t i s f a c t o r y "

(p. 2 0 3 ) . L a t e r , i n an a r t ic le which r e l a t e d memory to i n t e l l i - " .

gence and i d e n t i f y , French c h i l d psychologis t J e a n 'P iaget w a s t o - .. note, fo l lowing B a r t l e t t : " . . . [one of t h e components of #memory]

- - -

c o n s i s t s - - - - of - - a c t i o n - - "schemes" - - - - - - o r r e p r e s e n t a p v e "schemes". .'.A - - - -

- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- __-- - --- - -- - - --- -

P

scheme . i s t h a t p a r t o f an a c t i o n which Js r e p e a t a b l e o r genera l i -

zable i n ano the r a c t i o n o r opera t ion . . , eve ry th ing t h a t w e have - seen i n each o f o u r expe'riments shows t h e t i q h t dependence df

memorv on t h e conservat ion- and development o f schemes" (1968: 1 4 ,

15) . Most r e c e n t l y , an i n t e r e s t i n g analogy s u p p o r t i n g t h i s l i n e 4

of reasoning h a s been -d*awn In-relra€~Lonto-bloIog~ca~- deTensF--

mechanisms by American s e m i o t i c i a n (semiot ics : t h e s t u d y of s i g n

systems) , ~ h o m a s Sebeok : " . . . t h e immunologic memory which con-

sists of an a r r a y of ce l l s*whose s u r f a c e r e c e p t o r s alXow them t o

respond to p a r t i c u l a r types of molecules, i s supplemented by

another , commonly c a l l e d a n x i e t y , which p r o t e x t s [sic] t h e

bsycho-socia l ] S e l f . . . .What i s maintained by a n i i e t y , another ,

- s o r t of m e d r y , i s n o t b i o l o g i c a l subs tance b u t ' t h e p a t t e r n of . - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- --- --

behavior t h a t it opera tes" (1979: 265 , my emphasis) . Thus, i n

s p i t e of t h e f a c t t h a t one wou d be hard p ressed t o i d e n t i f y a 2 - sus ta ined and comprehensive body of r e sea rch s u p p o r t i n g Bourdieu 's 0

hypotheses on t h e r e l a t i o n of bod i ly Schemes t o memory (and thus

- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - --

to l ea rn ing) ,. t h e r e is a v a r i e t y of work f r o m d i v e r s e , and- highly

respected s o u r c e s l end ing credence t o t h i s b a s i c p r o p o s i t i o n . 6

The second , more complex, l e v e l o f learn ing-- iconic l e a r n i n q '

--is c h a r a c t e r i z e d by,some degree BT c o n t i n u i t y between t h e terri-

, tory and t h e map. However, t h i s cont inuous mapping, u n l i k e t h a t

of analog l e a r n i q g , may e n t a i d some very complex t r ans fo rmat ions .

Pu t another way, t h e c h a r a c t e r and degree of t h e v a r i e t y i n t h e

map may be q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from t h e c h a r a c t e r and degree b f t h e

C

v a r i e t y i n t h e t e r r i t o r y . This is immediately e v i d e n t , s ay , i n

t h i s i c o n i c l e a r n i n g . The t h r e e dimensional volume o f t h e real

human being i s mapped on t h e two-dimensional s u r f a c e on which t h e . drawing t a k e s ' p l a c e (a process which, o f course , a l s o invo lves

continuous m o t o r movements and- coordina ted ba&c schemes) . What

i s impor tant i n i c o n i c l e a r n i n g i s n o t t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of a - > - - - - - - . - - -- - -p----p---- --

P

COPY of t h e t e r r i t o r y , o r even t h f r n a i n t e n a n ~ ~ o f a d i r e c t con t i -

n u i t y wi th t h e t e r r i t o r y . What is impor tant is t h a t t h e r e l a -

t i o n s h i p s between s i q n i f i c a n t f e a t u r e s of t h e t e r r i t o r y be

preserved i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s 'within t h e map. ' Thus, t h e c h i l d ' s

drawing. of a humd b e i n g reproduces the minimal e lements o f b i l a -

teral symmetry: a head and a body, two arms and two l e g s .

w i t h i n the context o f Bourdieu's d i s c u s s i o n s , t h e Kabple

- - - - - - - - - ~arexcellencec)f=- i c o n i c l e a r n i n g . rvor

lei a= 6I1U 'I

social r e l a t i o n s h i p s of t h e Kabyle w o r l d are encoded i n c e r t a i n

s i g n i f i c a n t rrlatimships w a n the- Kabyle house. The degree of - -

v a r i e t y w i t h i n the house i s cons iderably l e s ~ t h a n t h a t of t h e -

social un ive r se , n o t t o megtion t h e cosmos. Furthermore, t h e V *

$-

c h a r a c t e r o r q u a l i t y o f t h e v a r i e t y -whlcWj.'is coded i n t h e s o c i a l . space of t h e house i s d i f f e r e n t f ~ o m t h a t of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s

(th 'e l a t t e r t y p e o f v a r i e t y e x i s t i n g i n t h e p a t t e r n s which express

t h e whole r e p e r t o i r e of h a b i t u a l behav io r s between t h e sexes and

age.groups) . The v a r i e t y o f t h e house a s map i s aga in transformed

and reduced when, as i n K e y l i a n s o c i e t y , t h e body a c t s as a k i n d

o f map t o t h e territory of t h e house. A s a r e s u l t of t h i s i c o n i c

l i k e any o ther=map, "organizing in fo rmat ion , " o r , a s Bourdieu

p u t s it, " i n t e g r a t i n g p a s t exper iences [and funct ioning] . . . as a

m a t r i x of p e r c e p t i o n s , apprec ia t ions and a c t i o n s " (Out l ine : 8 3 ) . It i s apparen t t h a t Bourdieu's i n t r i c a t e d@cussion deal ing '

w i t h what h e calls " r i t u a l p r a c t i c e " .cover% a range of-phenomena

c a t i o n " ( o r i c o n i c l e a r n i n g and i c o n i c l o g i c ) . I n combination

w i t h va ry ing p ropor t ions of analog communication and a t h i r d

l e v e l of communication--conceptual/linguistic communication--this - .

r i t u a l / i c o n i c communic t i o n dominates t h e Kabylian world. 2 Bourdieu t a k e s p a i n s t o d i s t i n g u i s h r i t u a l / i c o n i c communi-

c a t i o n from c o n c e p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c communication as it is i n t h e P

d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e s e &o kinds of communication t h a t h i s

&ion o f le&s of l e a r n i n g -emerges U o r example,. conceptual /

l i n g u i s t i c communication tends t o fo l low more o r less r i g o r o u s l y

the b a s i c r u l e s of "formaln l o g i c . ~ h ' i s means that conceptual /

l i n g u i s t i c communication i s based on r e f e r e n c e s - t o classes of

/ phenomena (groups o f* phenomena having c e r t a i n p r o p e r t i e s ) .which /

-J . j a r e de f ined by d i s c r e t e , p r e c i s e boundarie's . $bus f a m i l i a r ?- ,

4 * 1

l i n g u i s t i c terms' such as "e i the r /o r" and s imple negat ion ("not" v *

a r e e.xtremely important t o c m c e p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c commuqication;

a phenomenon exh&bi+--eertain p r o p e r t r e s must be e i t h e r "A" - o r

"no t A."

R i t u a l / i c o n i c communication, on t h e o t h e r hand, i s based on - - . r - -

very d i f f e r e n t p r i n c i p l e s and ambiguity r q t h e r than c lar i ty is 91

one .of i ts d e f i n i t i v e a spec t s . Thus, w i t h i n t h e c o n s t r d i n t s of '

+

behavior o r symbol, can be " A , " "not . A" o r b o t h "A" - and "not A , " .

depending on t h e context . Moreover, w i t h i n r i t u a l / i c o n i c l o g i c ,

two c l a s s e s o f phenomena can be bo th d i f f e r e n t - and s imi lar - -again Z

depending on t h e , context . I n Bourdieu ' s. words , :

This mode o f apprehension . [i . e . , apprehension through I

- - - - ri tualkcun-i;c ~ c & ~ - n e v e r - - e x p % i & + ~ + y & a a - - - ~ - -- - -

t i c a l l y l i m i t s . i t s e l f t o any one a s p e c t o f t h e terms it l i n k s , b u t t a k e s each one, each t i m e as a whole, e x p l o i t i n g t o t h e f u l l t h e f a c t *at two "data-re never e n t i r e l y a l i k e i n - a l l r e s p e c t s b u t are always a l i k e i n some r e s p e c t , a t least i n d i r e c t l y ( i .e. through t h e mediat ion of some t

-/

common term). R i t u a l p r a c t i c e l thus] e f f e c t s a f l u i d , "fuzzy"

a b s t r a c t i o n , b r ing ing t h e same symbol i n t o d i f f e r e n t rela- t i o n s through d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s or b r i n g i n g d i f f e r e n t '

a s p e c t s o f t h e same r e f e r e n t i n t o t h e same r e l a t i o n of o p p o s i t i o n [sic1 ; i n o t h e r words, it excludes t h e S o c r a t i c quest>on of t h e r e s p e c t s i n which t h e r e f e r e n c e i s appre- hended (shape, co lour , func t ion , e tc . ) , thereby obv ia t ing

-- -

(making unnecessary] t h e need t o d e f i n e i n each case the' - --grkncime grsvel ning iire~I~ok-&d&-fid , ,

a f o r t i o r i t h e need t o s t i c k t o t h a t p r i n c i p l e a t a l l times V t l i c z : 111 2) . -

I n o r d e r to c l a r i f y t h e r o l e of ambiguity i n r i t u a l / i c o n i c ' .

c o ~ ~ ~ c a t i o n i t - i s useTul t o s i t u a t e €his l e v e l o f communication

i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e social c o n t e x t i n which it o p e r a t e s . Bourdieu i 3

&ires several i l l u s t r a t i o n s o; t h e f u n c t i o n of t h i s ambiguity o r . B

k "x

" i n d e t e k n a n c y n i n the r i t u a l / i c o n i c com&iibatim of ~ a b y f h -

society. For example, among t h e Kabyl bere is a r&n-m&ing

" r i t i a l t h a t u t i l i z e s "a d o l l it his lit^, t h e b e t r o t h e d ] made o u t

o f a l a d l e [ t h l o n j a ] dressed l i k e a b r i d e , which i s t5ken. round A , -. &

i n a p rocess ion whi le the r a i n is' c a l l e d dowa" (Out l ine : 1 4 0 ) .

(Rain is bo th masculine ("dry w a t e r , which through i ts heavenly - - - - u 2 A - origifi . p a r t a k e s o f solar maleness"' (06 t l ine : 140) ) and femi-nine

"4 1

s .

("it par take& of k t , ter@Striai femin in i tyn (outline-40) ) . ) ';

Commenting o n - t k - ~ i g w i k u ~ ~ - k i _ ~ y r n b ~ l t h e - l i k e - - -- - - - - -- -- pp - - -- -

pp

- l a d l e o r t h i s l i t h , 3oS&dieu n o t kc. s .,

\

-

~

F i r s t , t h e r e i s a nkme, t h i s l i t h , which may be no &ore t h y -

a euphemism to denote a p h a l l i c symbol, and which, by - ,

encouraging a "•’%male" r ead ing [through i t s b r i d e - l i k e appearance], o r i e n t s t h e r i t u a l a c t i o n s , s i n c e be ing m a l e it s p r i n k l e s and be ing female it j s s p r i n k l e d . Then t h e r e i s a

' shape , -an ambiguous one for t h e taxonomy i t s e l f , s i n c e t h e l a d l e can be t r e a t e d as a hollow, l i q u i g - f i l l e d o b j e c t which

- - - - - - - - - sprink-, o r a s a h o l l o w , y ~ @ . I as **---- --

l ed . [of course , the hand le o f m l e m z a l s o be seen t o have p h a l l i c connota t ions , e s p e c i a l l y when grasped by an encompassing hand.] F i n a l l y , t h e r e i s a func t ion , tha t - of the' l a d l e - i t s e l f , an implement ma'de to; s p r i n k l e or s e r v e from t h e (female) Gooking p o t (Outl ine: 140-141) .

i

<--

The rairi-makin; r i t u a l which uses the d o l l l l i k e l a d e l $ thus . * I

as Bourdieu no tes , "br ings t h e same symbol i n t o d i f f e r e n t rela- *

* t i o n s through d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s * (see above, p, 100) . The t h i s -

l i t h can be bo th feminine i n re la t ioe t o t h e mascul ine r a i n o r -- - - - - - - -

mascul ine i n r4ation to the- feminine e a r t h . E labora t ing on t h e .- dangers or t r y i n g to identT* the t h i s l i t h as e i t h e r m a s c d n e or - feminine w i t h the mutually e x c l u s i v e set of p r o p e r t i e s su'ch

\ l abe25ng wouf d evoke, Bowdi6u n o t e s : *. . .the meaning o f a &

symbol i s o n l y ever f u l l y determined i n and- th rough the a c t i o n s it

e f f e c t s or undergoes {the raven, f o r example, be ing less ominous

J , mic i n t e r p ~ ~ t a t i o ~ l i e . ] i n wanting t o impose a d e c i s i o n on. t h e

- . e

4 = . -I

undecidable, i n decree ing mde' o r -female a symbol which d i f f eyen t ,

p r a c t i c e s t r e a t i n d i f f e r e n t g as c d r y - o r west, f e c u n d a t i n g o r .=" _- -

* *- feeundable) "_ (Out l ine : -141) .

* - 0

- In s p i t e of t h e f a c t * t h a t t h e boundaries between ' s e h a n t i c ,,

' 3 domains * i n r i t u a l / i c & i c c o m n i c a t i . o n a r e *:more - f l e x i b l e than t h e - -

-%

boundaries i n c o n c e p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c conimunication, t h e r e 'are def-. . - . * P ,

' i n a t e EonSt ra in t s 'opt&ating w i t h i n t h i s mor-e c o n c r e t e l e v e l of - -

be r e ~ & e d t o a c v a r i e t y of- o t h e r syrribols and a c t i o n s , t h e r e does L*c 0

e x i s t an underlying r i t u a l / i q o n i c 7 - "deep-s t ruc tb ren ( o r "code" ) of _ _---

c e r t a i n basic symbols and a c t i o n s which d e f i n e s both reoccur f ing - 7

p a t t e r n s of r e l a t i o n and t h e dominant " t o n a l i t y " o f a11 t h e r e l a - -- - _ . ,

t i o n s , I n Bourdieu' s words : ir . . . - - - - - - a -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

3 - . . . i n r e l a t i n g o b j e c t s -and s e l e c t i n g a s p e c t s , t h i s p r a c t j c a l ' taxonomy ti .e . of ri t u a l / i c o n i c . communication] appl ies - , - success iye ly o r s imul taneeus ly , p r i n c i p l e s which a r e a l l i n d i r e c t l y . r e d u c i b l e t o one ano*er [at t h e l e v e l of t h e deep-s t ruc ture or code l , and t h i s enab les it t o c l a s s i f y t h e same "data" from s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t s t a n d p o i n t s wi thout c l a s s i f y i n g th$m i n d k f f e r e n t ways lwhereas a more r i g o r o u s system [say; w i t h i n c o n c e p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c communication3 would make as many c l a s s i f i c a t i ' o n s as it found p r o p e r t i e s f r a t h e r than c l a s s i f y i n g "da ta? according to . a few f undamen- ta1 polarities a t the l e v e l o f t h e deep s t r u c t u r e j ) . The universe. thus undergoes a d i v i s i o n which can b e ' s a i d t o be l o g i c a l , though it seems t o break a l l t h e rales of 1-ogical

-8 ivMonf ( f o r - e x - ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ i ~ dlvi s 1- . . . 'L

exclusive or e x h a u s t i v e ) , for a l l i ts dichotomies a r e in'def- . . . t anaPysis the func t ion ~ i n t a i n e d ] principum d i v i s i o n i k (Outzine: 112) .

-- - - f n ttder- t o ' - i U u s t r & e d m t Bourdieu means by *his n s i n g l e "

.qr elementary .(there may be m o r e than one) p r i n c i p l e o f d i v i s i o n ,

PC- -

. a passage t h a t b r i e f l y o u t l i n e s 'the r e l a t i o n bf t h e symbolic i 1 ..

. . s t r u c t u r e o f t h e Kabyle house t o - the rest of t h e Kabyle un ive r se , -lot.

s Bourdieu draws a t t e & i o n t o the underlying -male/fema3e p r i n c i p l e r-

of d i ~ i s i o n i

- P . . . t h e hoase i s o r g k z ~ d according to a set of hoqologous oppos i t ions [cont radic t ions) - - f i r e : [is to] w a t e r : : l a s ]

- d o k e d r raw : r fri-ghr low : : -Ifght: shade : : day: n i g h t - r : - - - - male: female : : - n i f [male honour] : fiurma [female honour] : : f e r t i l i z i n g ; able t o be f e r t i l i z e d . But i n f a c t t h e same 6ppos i t ions [ con t rad ic t ions ] a r e e s tabhished be tween t h e '

house :-as a whole and t h e rest of t h e un ive r se , t h a t is , t h e - --- - - - - - - - - -=--3&~+- -.?F-.--sse&+, -+he +e Ids z m = + m a & e t

I t fo l lows t h a t each o f t h e s e two p a r t s of t h e house (and, by t h e same token, each of t h e o b j e c t s p laced i n it and each of t h e a c t i v i t i s c a r r i e d o u t i n it) i s i n a sense q u a l i f i e d a t two degrees f by . the b a s i c male/female p r i n c i p l e of d i v i - sionf , f i r s t as female (noc tu rna l , dark. etc .) i n s o f a r as it p a r t a k e s of t h e un ive r se of we house, and s e c o n d a r i l y a s male o r female i n s o f a r as it belongs t o one o r t h e o t h e r # o f - t h e d i v i s i o n s of t h a t universe (Outl ine: 90-91) .

- I n an early article which concen t ra ted e x c l u s i v e l y on t h e symbolic

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - --- - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - -- - - - -

s t r u c t u r e o f t h e Kabyle house, Bourdieu d e s c r i b e s how th i s 'mode

- of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , which i s based on an elementary p r i n c i p l e .of '

d i v i s i o n , o p e r a t e s : he structu;e o f t h e type a [is to] b [as]

b l [is to] b2 i s d o u b t l e s s one o f t h e s i m p l e s t and&most powertful

t h a t may be employed by a mythic- r i tua l system s i n c e it cannot

oppose wi thou t s imul taneous ly u n i t i n g (and i n v e r s e l y ) , w h i l e a l l

the t ime b e i n g cap,able of i n t e g r a t i n g i n a set o r d e r a n i n f i n i t e -

- - - - - --

numbsr d m - b y t h e simple a p p l i c a t i o n of-&e same p r i n c i p l e of

d i v i s i o n i n d e f i n i t e l y repeated" (19 73b : 163) , * , -

Bourdieu is i n t e n t on c o n t i n u a l l y r e in f&ing t h e d i s t i n c - C

. t - tbrr between~itttal/*co& -commun+cation, w i t h i t s -concrete'/ 3

sensua l foundat ion and o f t e n ambiguous semantic domains, and f -

Fa I I f"

- 4%

c o n c e p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c c o m u n i c a t i o n w i t h i ts tendency towards t I

i a b s t r a c t i o n and p r e c i s i d n . T h i s i s because t h e p e c u l i a r charac- 1-

t ter of r i t u a l / i c o n i c copmunication i s o f t e n obscured when it i s

discussed i n c o n c e p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c t e r m s . Such i s t h e c a s e when !! 3 3 '*

a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s ' i n q u i r i e s concerning t h e Kabyle r i t u a l y e a r ' -* 5-

l ead ~ & y l e informants t o aaap t a "quas i s c i e n t i f lc [i .e., a - 4 -

predominant2y c o n c e p u t a l / l i n g u i s t i c ] a t t i t u d e " t b t ime anh hence -

t o a t tempt r ender t h e i r embodied sbnses of time' i n a b s t r a ' c t and

p l e x i t i e s o f t h e s i t u a t i o n are ampl i f i ed f u r t h e r by the ' f a c t , t h a t

Kabyle t i m e i s drawn from both thd Berber and t h e 1siami.c t r a d i - .

t i o n s and thus :

I . . . i d e n t i c a l pe&,ods a r e given d i f f e r e n t names, and s t i l l ' x

mre o f t e n i d e n t i c a l names cover d i f f e r e n t p e r i o d s va ry ing - --- conwidP_rably-in l e n g t h an&sFtuated at d$f fexen tL t imes i n - - -

t h e year,, depending on t h e r eg ion , t h e t r i b e , t h e v i l l a g e , and even the informant . Moreovbr a t two d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s

' i n t h e same' conversa t ion , an informant may o f f e r two d i f f e r - e n t names (e .g,. one Berber , and one ,drawn from t h e I s l a m i c t r a d i t i o n ) f o r t h e same moment o f t h e y e a r (Out l ine : 9 8 ) .

Nevertheless , w r i t e s Bourdieu: " t h e r e i s a g r e a t t empta t ion .

[among anthropologis t s ] to\amass and c o l l a t e t h e s e d i f f e r e n t pro-

duct ions i n o r d e r t o c o n s t r u c t a lacuna-f ree , c o n t r a d i c t i o n - f r e e

whole/ a sort of unwr i t t en s c o r e - o f which a l l t h e c a l e n d e r s 8

t

7 t

Bourdieu a&ues t h a t , i n c o n t r a s t t o t h i s hstract r e n d i t i o n

of t h e which "cannot be-understood u n l e s s it is set down on

paper,' t ime f o r the pabyltt is n o t a n e u t r a l backdrop a g a i n s t *- - which e v e n t s a r e l i v e d (Outl ine: 9 8 ) ; nor i s it an o b j e c t of I

g e s t . Bourdieu expla ins : "...the a n t h r o p o l o g i s t ' s in t e r ro -ga t ion

t i t s e l f t a c i t l y s u b s t i t u t e s for discont inuous marks, in tended t o

be used f o r p r a c t m - e n d s , t h e ca lendar as an o b j e c t of thought ,

predisposed t o become an o b j e c t o f d i scourse and t o be unfolded .

t a s a t o t a l i t y e x i s t i n g beyond i t s ' a p p l i c a t i o n s ' and independ-

e n t l y of t h e needs and i n t e r e s t s of i t s use r s" ( o u t l i n e : 106) .

Fur the r i n c o n t r a s t to t h i s a b s t r a c t t i m e , Bourdieu contends t h a t .. ~ a b H i a n t i m e may- n o t even obdy t h e "laws of success ion" a s for -

--- -- ~-~ ---- ~ ~ - - - -~ - ~- - - - - -- -- -- -~ ~ --- - -- ~ =-=--- - - -~~ -- - ~ - - - -

. = mulated Xn ci%&gtual l i n g u i s t i c terms : " i . e . (I.) 'y folloyrs x' .. C--= . .

. . ex*es ' x fo l lows + y ' : - (2.) i f y f01low&~x and z fo l lows y;.;hen /C

z fol lows x; (3 .1 e i t h e r y follows x or x fo l lows y (Out l ine :

107) .

A s a g a i n s t t h e s e a b s t r a c t views of t ime, couched a predomi-

/ argues t h a t Kabylian t i m e i s c r e a t e d by p s a c t i c a l a c t i v i t i e s , ; \ / - --

which-a re l i n k e d to cosmological and social r e l a t i o n s .as.-well as ,

A - . t o e c o l o g i c a l c o n s t r a i n t s (Out l ine : 222) . ' I n o t h e r words, Kabyle

t ime 5s punctua ted n o t by s ta t ic guide-marks'but by t h e p r a c t i c a l *

. )

demaks of e v e j d a y l i f e an$ henceqby e . ous contextually I P-

r e l e v a n t e&pmisms or s e d s of t h e . p p r o p r i a t e or i n a p p r o p ~ i a t e . - . *

t*. Ip Bourd ieurs words: a . . . t h e l i n e a r diagram, o f t h e -- -- - -- -

a n t f i r O o j 6 g i s t ' s ca lendar subs t i ' t u t e s a l i n e a r , homogeneous, t~

~ n n m s tune ror pract .-

cal tlme whlch IS made up of incornmen- -

s u r a b l e i s l a n d ? o f dura t ion , each with i ts own rhythm, t h e t i m e - - *

that flies- by. or drags, depending on what one is doing, i .e., on .

the f u n c t i o n s confe r red on it by t h e a c t i v i t y i n p rogress" - k

By in$&icatingXthemmanner + whereby ritual/iconic communication , 5-.

is embedded in practic=l activity Bourdieu is thus able to dis- .

tinguish it from conceptual/linguistic communication. Moreover,

by demonstrating the social'con&itions which must be met for'con- i

ceptual/linguistic communication to become a dominant inflbence -

on social life, Bourdieu further illustrates the distance between -

the two levels of communication;. As ~ourdieu puts it: : Y

* ' \ . The logic a of practice [i .e., logic which exists at .ehe : --

- - lzve3 of -~om~wnk&ion~ -ewes -& number & its- properties4to the fact that what modern "academic" - conceptual/linguistic logic calls the "universe of L

discourse" there remains implicit in its practical state, A One mukt never lose sight of the conditions ,which have to be fulfilled for a genuine universe of discourse torappear: the intellectual ,and daterial' equipment needed for the succes- sive operations of methodical recording; the leisure rekuired to carry out these operations and analyse their products: an "interesfn in such.activities, which, even if not experienced as such, cannot be divorced from a reason- able expectatia &- rmteria&+d/~rsy&dic+xof i t t Let -

course [discourse about discourse], etc. (Outline: 222) . from the existence of a market'for discourse and metadis-:$

-7 In Kabyle society there does not'&xist a "market" for ab- li

stract cbnceptual /linguistic c&munication. ~ h & p;edominant :

. . A , ritual/icpnic communication does not involve, like certain kinds

.

df anthropology, a seeking 'of "eterna-1 answers to. . .eternal d /. questions* (Outline: 115); nor does ~t draw its value mainly

. from, as in current (academic) conceptual/linguistic communica-

- - - - - - -- -- - - -- -- - - - ---,

tion, "the relations of competition between literate soholaks who

question and interpret [knowledge 's] letter by reference to the - k

s

questionings and readings of past and contemporary interpreters"

(Outline: 156). However, because most anthropologists come,from f

'-\ -a 2- P

pp

social environmenks where such competition prevails, the ten- -

dency, Bourdieu argues, is,to represent all ritual/iconic commu- 4

communication.

contrasting- ritual/iconic comunication to these conditions

and principles of donceptual/lingyistic communication, Bourdieu

writes: "Rites take place because, and only because, they find

their raison d'etre in the conditions of existence % . and the dis-

positions of agents who cannot afford the l&my of logical

---.

(Outline: 115) . Summarizing, Sourdieu suggests that the exercise

of ritual/iconic cdmmunication among .the Kabyle "follows the

principle of economy of logic, whereby no more logic is mobilized

than -is required by the needs of practice" '(Outline: 110) . \E The territory/map .mdel breaks down or becomes less use ul

- -- - - - -- - - - - _ - I - - - - - - - -

when the third level of learning (and communication)--conceptual/

linguistic learnin -is a~proached. At this level the relation- 7 ship between the signified and the signibier through which signi-

ficant features'of the territory are re~resented - is characterized

by its discontinuity and by its arbitrarity. For example, as

Saussure pointed ou t , the signifier "tree" is in no way "tree-

like" (cf. abpve, , -- p. 22) . One consequence of the arbitrarity of T - d"'

- - - ~ e g x t u s l / - l d p i s t i c ~ & o n 5 s thdt,raativeetothe

e 2 communication, concevtual/ linguis tic communica- I o t h e r IS

tion allows for a certain context independence.

Partly because - of the arbitarity - and discontinuity which - - characterizes co&eptual/linguistic comunication, messages .at

'the ana log and i c o n i c l e v e l s . T h i s - a r b i t r a r i t y , combined wi th a 1

number of f e a t u r e s p e c u l i a r t o this c o n c e p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c l e v e l + . 5

1

-f i of communication alone--for example, an a b s t r a c t , complex syn&x, .

T $

t e n s e , s imple negat ion . . ("not") , etc.--makes p o s s i b l e t h e t r a n s - I : - . mission o f i n f ~ r m a t i o n ~ w i t h ., a minimal amount o f ambigility.

o i

Demonstrating t h i s p o j n t wi th r e f e r e n c e to t h e indeterminancy of

'analog and i c o n i c communication, communications t h e o i i s t s Paul

Watz awick e t a l . note: - L " [in c o n t r a s t t o t h e exactness o f propo- .

- -- - ---- - - - - -- - -- -

- s i t i o n s o f c o n c e p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i ~ E i % i m u n i c a t i o ~ ~ € h e r e alFTieaTs =- -

of sorrow and tears of joy, t h e clenched f i s t may s i g n a l aggres-

s i o n or c o n s t r a i n t , a smi le may convey sympathy o r contempt,

r e t i c e n c e may be i n t e r p r e t e d as t a c t f u l n e s s o r i n d i f f e r e n c e

(1967: 65). I n Bourdieu's words: " . . . r i t u a l r o o t s are always

Even thou& t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l i n g u i s t i c s i g n s and

the territories they r e p r e s e n t is never completely a r b i t r a r y ,

Bourdieu conceives of c o n c e p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c communication i n a

way t h a t is s i m i l a r t o Saussure ' s n o t i o n o f t h e a r b i t r a r y s i g n i -

fier. For example, the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between words i n a sentence

.- do not p a r a l l e l r e l a t i o n s h i p s between s i g n i f i c a n t f e a t u r e s of

the "territoryw% to which they r e f e r . Thus t h e k ind - of v a r i e t y - -- --- - pp

that c o n s t i t u t e s c o n c e p t u a l 7 ~ ~ u i s t i c F o m u n i c a t i o n idiffere w

it r e p r e s e n t s iexcegt i n i n s t a n c e s , more common i n conceptual /

linguistic communication than - m y o t h e r type, where a q i v e n ; 1

i

c o n c e p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c comntunieation comments on, and t h u s . I

Another impl ica t ion of t h e element o f a r b i t r a r i t y i n

c o n c e ~ t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c communication is, a s suggested, a degree

of c ~ n t e x t ~ i n d e p e n d e n c e . Because t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of

conceptua l l i n g u i s t i c communication a r e n o t l i n k e d by r e l a t i o n s

of c o n t i n u i t y ta t h e t e r r i t o r i e s to wh'ich they r e f e r , representa-

t iow. can be l inked t o r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of . .

e l a b o r a t e conceptua l models t h a t a r e meaningful even though they

- a r e f a r rembved i n t i m e , space, and " l ikeness" from t h e terri- - -- - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - -- - - - - -- -

t o r i e s t h e y a r e meant t o r e p r e s e n t . Thus, one of t h e s o c i a l /

t e c h n o l o g i c a l sup&& f o r t h e development of c-onceptual/ l inguis-

t ic communication, w r i t t e n d i s c o u r s e , enab les t h e i n d i v i d u a l t o

r e v i s e , manipulate and reorgan ize c o n c e p t u a l / l i n q u i s t i c repre-

s e n t a t i o n s wi th a minimum of corporeal /emotional p a r t i c i p a t i o n .

This makes it possib_l_efor a g r e a t - d e a l qf conscious a t t e n t i o n

to be devoted t o exactness and log ' ica l cons is tency. An

exemplayy i n s t a n c e o f this kind o f s i t u a t i o n exis ts i n some

academic%isc ip l ines i ( f o r example, t h e philosophy of " l o g i c a l

pos i t iv i sm") where s c h o l a r s focus a lmost e x c l u s i v e l y on t h e 6

8

i n t e r n a l cons i s t ency o f "maps" ( i . e , , on t h e "soundness" o r

a " v a l i d i t y " o f l i n g u i s t i c a rgumenta t ion) , r a t h e r than on t h e .

r e l a t i o n o f "maps" t o "territories,"

Thouqh c o n w p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c communication's r e l a t i v e con-

text independence may be v a l u a b l e i n s o m e s i t u a t i o n s , c a r r i e d t o

an e x t r e n e it can l s o b e u s e l e s s and even dangerous t o t h e L cont inued exis3ence of an i n d i v i a u a l - o r - s o c i a l group. Th i s is

- *. ' a. -

I - . . a.

B t h e case when c o n c e p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c cow-unica t ion becomes m o r e - o r less completely tu rned i h on i t s e l f and thus c u t o f f from

o t h e r l e v e l s of commbica t ion and from t h e environments it is

&ant t o r e p r e s e n t . concep tua l / l ingu&t ic communication then +

becomes n r e d u c t i v e " i n t h e sen 1 e o u t l i n e d by ~onununicat ions * . -

. . a t h e o r i s t s Wilden and ~ o e : " F a x f u n c t i o n t o a l low t h e organism

' to. rkduce v a r i e t y t o manageable p ropor t ions . That r e d u c t i o n of -

v a r i e t y i s i n e v i t a b l e : it becomes r e d u c t i v e only when t h e map --- - -- - - - -

does n6t r e t a i n the r e q u i s i t e v a F i e t y t o achieve t h e g o a l o r

goals of t h e organism o r group: for exdmple, t h e long-term s u r v i

v a l of t h e organism or group" (1978: 2) '. I t should b e &hasized a t t h i s p o i n t t h a t any atteppt t o

a s s e s s t h e va lue of t h e s e d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of communication--the

analog, t h e r i t u a l / i c o n i c , and t h e conceptual/linguistic-accord- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -

- i n g t o a se t of c o n t e x t independent c c i t e r i a i s o f l i m i t e d value.

The e x i s t e n c e of each l e v e l depends on t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e 3

previous levels; and every c h i l d i n every s o c i e t y , by t h e t ime he

o r s h e An speak, u t i l i z e s a l l t h r e e . I n t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s , t h e

va lue of any given l e v e l of communication o r t h e p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y

between l e v e l s is a f u n c t i o n of the e c o l o g i c a l and sohial con tex t 4

i n which it i s loca ted .

[It i s IperXa3 o X y i i i n s o c i e t i t h a t a t t e m p t s t o d e

ce of analog and r l t u a l

comunica t ion . )

Levels og Cortstraint--Before proceeding to a d i s c u s s i o n of /'

the political f u n c t i o n s of symbolic systems and t h e h a b i t u s , the

r e l a t i o n s between t h e t h r e e l e v e l s o f c o m u n i c a t i o n and l e a r n i n g -

. . . 5 - - t h a t a r e ' J v l n r l y uyrstktutive of t h e h a b i t u s should be 'ou t l ined . 6

- F i r s t , as r e g a r d s t h e s t a t u s of t h e t h r e e levels ;of l e a r n i n g and

t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s development through- t ime ( d i a c h r o n i c a l l y )

t h e i n d i v i d u a l "matur&" he o r she success ive ly a c q u i r e s a ".

t i v e "masteryn of t h e t h r e e l e v e l s of communication, beginning

with t h e analog.and moving to t h e r i t u a l / i c o n i c and t h e concepr -

h t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c , . The $recess by which t h e ' ind iv iduals moves from'

4 a dependence on one l e v e l of l e a r n i n g t o a t t empts t e a s s i m i l a t e ' -

-, t h e o t h e r l e v e l s can p roper ly i n t h a t t h e - -- - - - -

- - - - - -

- - - - - - - - -- - -- --

i n d i v i d u a l both conserves and l e v e l of 1

l e a r n i n g i n ehe t r a n s i t i o n . Such a d i a l e c t i c a l change i n human

behavior ( i n t h i s c a s e a move t o a new l e v e l of l e a r n i n g ) has been .

.7 summarized e f f e c t i v g l y by Anthony Wilden: "When a n organism

undergoes a d i a l e c t i c a l change t h e r e i s an emergence, o u t of an C

o l d p o s i t i o n and behavior, o f a new pos i t ion-adbebvior- -and. . . nothing i n t h e o l d p o s i t i o n ' s c o n f l i c t s [and approaches t o pro-

blems] could have provided enoaih informat ion t o p r e d i c t what t h e

new p o s i t i o n would be [i . e . , the change is q u a l i t a t i v e r a t h e r

than t p a n t i t a t i v e ] " C1980b: 218) . Second, a s r ega rds t h e r e l a t i o n s between t h e t h r e e l e v e l s of

l e a r n i n g at a given p o i n t i n t i m e ( synchronica l ly) w i t h i n an dndi-

v i d u a l who has acqui red a l l t h r e e : Bourdieu's p o s i t i o n on t h i s - - - - -- -- - - -- -

p o i n t must be d i s t i n g u i s h e d from t h a t of P i a g e t . P i a g e t , whi le .

recognizing l e v e l s of l e a r n i n g s i m i l a r t o those o u t l i n e d he re ,

views t h e "mature" i n d i v i d u a l as governed almost e x c l u s i v & l y by - m n c e p t u a l / l i n g u i s t i c forms of communication. I n d o n t r a s t t o

t h i s pe r spec t ive , Bourdieu ol low the approach of

C

Merleau-Ponty who a g a i n s t 'piag& t h H t b " the- unsoph i s t i ca ted 91 - -I_

9. -& - - I r 'i t h ink ing :o f Gur ear l iest y e a r s remains an ind i spensab le a c q u i s i - j

1 i' t i o n under ly ing t h a t &f m a t u r i t y n (1978: 355) .

* .&* I . / < . - p . t/

This p e r s p e h i v e ,on t h e dynamic and ongoing r e l a t i o n s

between the-el 'ementayy fo&s of l e a r n i n g and communication and 9

t h e more complex forms can be c l a r i f i e d w i t h t h e h e l p of c e r t a i n - -

concepts from modern systems theory . Fdr example, wi th in t h e

framework of systems terminology, it would be p o s s i b l e t o c l a s s i -

-- - - -

- g th& r & b k y - w tk=~&=~Lms ZaveZs of- 3-arn1 '~ a s a= -=:= -==-

" h i e r a r c h i c a l " r e l a t i o n s h i p . Hierarchy i n t h i s s e n s e r e f e r s s n o t

t o l e v e l s o f power as i n t h e s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l use of h ie ra rchy . -'.. -: 4 .

It r e f e r s r a t h e r t o t h e s u c c e s s i v e l y encompassing leve ls ; o f t h e C

o r g a n i z a t i o n of information--i .e. , t o t h e code/message, deep

s t r u c t u r e / s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e relat ionships\--on which a l l ' l i v i n g - - - - - - -. -- -

- - -- - - - - - systems and a l l forms of c o m u n i c a t i o n a r e - b a s e d . I t i s i n s t r u c -

. t i v e t o &ote again frc& Anthony wilden t o i n d i c a t e t h e r e l a t i o n

between levels of learn ing . (communication o r behavior ) from t h i s 7

viewpoint: " . . . in format ion a t one l e v e l of t h e system rsay, a

human oroanism] may c o n s t r a i n or c o n t r o l t h e expresqion o r

p a t t e r n i n g of information a t o t h e r l e v e l s . of t h e systemn (1977:

42); I n t h e words of another communications/systems t h e o r i s t ,

~ a c h s u b s y s t e m o r l e v e l l d o m i n a t ~ s it-wn suhorfiim+~ s m a l l p a r t s w i t h i n i t s orbi t o r domain, r e s t r a i n i n g t h e i r degrees of freedom [i.e., a c t i n g Pike a code t h a t c o n s t r a i n s t h e

l f o m of a l lowable messages or behaviors] accprding t o i t s own , 1 i n t e g r a l p o r t i o n of the o v e r a l l pa-ttern, much as i ts own

degsees of freedom have been cons t ra ined [coded o r mediatedl ,

by the p a t t e r n o f a c t i v i t i e s of t h e h i g h e r system of which it / is p a r t and p a r t i c i p a n t (1968: 14-15) .

E

. -

Within t h e terms o f what i s being d i scussed here-- i .e . , t h e t

I theory bf l e a r n i n g r e l e v a n t t o t h e h a b i t u s ~ o n c e p t - - t h i s would I

3 .L * I mean t h a t t h e s ~ f a l c o n t e x t c o n s t r a i n s t h e analog l e v e l o f

comrnunica~ion, which c o n s t ~ a i n s t h e r i t u a l / i c o n j c l e v e l , which, ,

i n t u r n , c o n s t r a i n s t h e conceptua l / l inguis t i c leve.1.

I t becomes p o s s i b l e a t t h i s p o i n t t o summarize t h e impli- - 4

- -

c a t i o n s f o r t h e theory of human behavior ( o r p r a c t i c e ) , a s . 4

2

a d s s e d b y d t h e concept -of t h e h a b i t u s , which d e r i v e from Bour- %

n o t view human behavior as gover-&d-by u n i - l e v e l l e d and d i r e c t l y

antecedent "causes," whether these causes come i n t h e form of t h e 1

'.J .

s t i m u l i of sense-da ta o r t h e hypo the t i ca l ly e x p l i c i t r u l e s which - - 2 7

1 c o n s t i t u t e r o l e s . Nor does he see human behavior as guided s o l e - ,

l y by t h e conscious d e l i b e r a t i o n s of an i n d i v i d u a l who i s dis- 1

1 - - - - - --- - - - - --- - - - - - -

t i n c t from, and thus capable of manipulat ing, a p a s s i v e body

'% towards pre-def h e d g o a l s , - 3-

*: Bourdieu a t t e m p t s t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e h i s p e r s p e c t i v e from bo th I

t h e s e views: from t h e f i r s t , which he c a l l s "mechanis t ic ,

because it tends t o reduce the l e v e l s of c o n s t r a i n t i n human e -

s

a c t i o n t o s p e c i f i c un i - l eve l l ed causes; f r o m t h e second, which h e j 4

calls " f i n a l i s t n ( t e l e o l o g i c a l ) , because it p o s i t s a myster ious , f 4

+in~-ag- Ln ,h-&ion-As-againsLh&h %c-c . I f -4 9

- 4 - I ; and "finallst n e w s , Bouraeu contends t h a t human behavior i s

overdetermined. That is to say, a c e r t a i n h a b i t u a l s t y l e o f

behaGior (_of addreqs-ing problems, of - i n t e r a c t i n g wi th pe r sons , -

etc.) is de f ined and cons t ra ined by t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f progress- $ .!

i v e l y "deeper" l & v e l s of c o n s t r a i n t (the "deepest" levels b e i n g ..

f C

t h e e c o l o g i c a l and s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s on which a given s o c i e t y i s =

- b

based) ,

or Bourdieu, t h e n , a given p a t t e r n o f behavior and exper i -

f - <

egce is i n f l u e n c e d n o t by a s i n g l e antecedent cause , b u t by what 7 -3- - /

-+--* can be Wders tood as a mul t i tude of l e v e l s of c o n s t r a i n t s loca- - *< - L;

t e d a t d d r e n t l e v e l s of o rgan iza t ion . Linking t h i s p o s i t i o n - - - .

on t h e h a b i t u s as a system of overdetermined d i s p o s i t i o n s to t h e

r e l a t i o n s between analog, r i t u a l / i c o n i c , and conceptual /Pinguis-

whether a r t i c u l a t e d i n ges tu res o r , a f o r t i o r i , i n what psycho-

, .. somatic medicine c a l l s "the* language o f t h e o rgans ' i s incompara-

b l y more ambiguous and more overdetermined [i . e . , more c l o s e l y

and r i g i d l y c o n s t r a i n e d by t h e -deeper s o c i a l and l o g i c a l con- C

strain*] t h a n t h e most overdetermined u s e s of o r d i n a r y language" 4.

( t l i n b : 120) . Bourdieu adds: "It fo l lows t h a t s imply by * b r b g t o t h e l e v e l of discourse--as one m u s t / i n o r d e r t o

*

s tudy it s c i e n t i f i c a l l y - - a p r a c t i c e [ o r behavior] which. o&s a

number of i ts p r o p e r t i e s t o t h e f a c t t h a t i t f a l l s s h o r t 06, d i s c o u r s e (which does n o t mean it is s h o r t on l o g i c ) one s u b j e c t s

6 %

it t o no th ing less than a change i n o n t o l o g i c a l s t a t u s t h e more ., s e r i o u s i n i t s t h e o r e t i c a l consequences because it h a s eve ry .--

- - - - -- - - c ~ - o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r l l c ~ j ; , f *--- ' 2 -

If we n-xetllrntotheMefinition of t hehab i tu s mentioned --

earlier i n this c h a p t e r , we are perhaps b e t t e r equipped t o under-

s t a n d - how - - the h a b i t u s l i n k s - - an i n d i v i d u a l -- - t o &he p a s t through a >

/ kind of overdetermined and overdetermining embodiment o f k s or

h e r s o c i a l con tex t : "The body [ a fundamental dimension o f t h e

3

"

- L.

I-"

= r- 4

115. 9

- - 2- -- - ----- --- -

" - - - - -- w I -

habitue] i s an cinstrument t h d t records i t s own previous us& and 4 >

which, al though continuously modified by them, g ives g rea t e r %r.-

P weight t o t h e e a r l i e s t of them; it -&ntaini i n t h e form of l a s t - - h g automatislas, t h e t r a c e and the memory of ti@e social events,

e spec i a l l y t h e e a r l y ones, of which these automatisms are the

product" (Bourdieu, 1977d: 660) . This embodiment def ines con- +

u L A

, ' s t r a h t s on t h e i nd iv idua i ' s mode o'f ac t ing , &inking, speaking,-

etc., such t h a t ", , , t h e e f f e c t s of any new experience i n t h e

habi tus d e ~ n d on t h e r e l a t i onsh ip between. t h a t experience and ~~ - -- -- -~ ~ -- - - -

- - ~

the experiences a l ready in t eg ra t ed i n t o t he hab i tu s in the form

of c l a s s i f y i n g and generat ive schemes; and i n t h i s re la t ionsh ip , . . - /

the informative e f f i c i ency of every new experience tends t o

decl ine a s t h e number of experiences a l ready i n t e g r a t e d i n t o the ., ,&

s t r u c t u r e of the habi t& increases" (Bourdim, 1977d: 6603.

-- -

~ F - h ~ X t u s - a I s o 6 r i e n ~ s meerF-ndivIdua1 Xowards t n e u t u r e , - -- -

D

as the fol lowing quo tavon which stresses t h e genera t ive aspec t

of t h e hab i tu s "[the hab i tus can b=] understood as a I

f

system of l a s t i n g , &nsposable d i y i t i o n s , which, i n tQra t ing ---3-

-4

p a s t experience, funct ions as 'a matrix of percept ions , apprecia-

8 : t i o n s , and a c t l o n s and makes poss ib le t he achievemerit of i n f i-

nite ly d i v e r s i f i e d t a sks , thanks t o t h e S rans fe r s of schemes *

permi t t ing t h e sol'ution of s i m i l a r l y shaped prob lems~, (Out l ine : - -- --

A

..

1

Fina l ly , as a' -cunsequence 'of t h e f orementioned overdetermi- I >

na t ion ( i n its -st general sense) the habi tus o r i e n t s t h e - - - - - - - - -- - - - -

ind iv idua l towards the reproduction of the s o c i a l con tex t of

which it is the p=&uct. Bourdieu i l l u s t r a t e s t h i s p r o p s s

f - k%

e f f e c t i v e l y i n r e l a t i o n to Kabyle society where k f o r m a t i o n - r e l e -

vant t o , t h e - d i v i s i o n of labour (which i s g r o u ~ d e d i n gender)._i's ,

encoded in both t h e s d o l i c s t r u c t u r e of therKabyl ian house and

the embddied styles of b e h k o r of ~ a b ~ l i a n ch i ld ren . ~owev&,

argues Bourdieu, the r o l e o i t h e hab i tus i n ' t h e reproduction of a'

* d \

social con tex t is qlsu (though perhaps n o t so skrafrghtfomardly) -L .- - - . - -

important i n so;ieties - where t h e d iv i s ion of labour is not based /r '

exclusively on gender: 1

- -- - -- - - - ~~a+!tziks--y - ----- a l - n ~ t s o f a & e n s s n t . b ~ -- -

an e s s e n t i a l overdetermination, speak inseparably and = a

simultaneously of his class--or , more p r e c i s e l y , h i s p o s i ~ , t i o n i n the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e andohis r i s i n g and f a l l i n g

tka j ec to ry fi.e., the l ike l ihood ~f h i s moving t o i3 c l a s s membership 'above' o r 'below' h i s e x i q n g position]--and of h i s (or her ) body--or, more preciseJy, a l l t he proper-

qualified, of which he cpr s h e is the bearer-- t o p e r t i e s of course, b u t a l s o , p h y s i c a l

- prope r t i e s pra ised l i k e s t r eng th o r beauty, o r stkgmatized" (Outline: 87) ,

- - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- -- > -- -- - - - .

This role of t h e habi tus i n t h e reproduction of a g i r en %

s o c i a l con tex t w i l l be examined more c l o s e l y at varioust points

the next three chapters. C

- - - - - - -- - - - - - - , - - . - -337 ,- 1

0 - \ I

CHAPTER VI: THE POLITICAL FUNCTIONS O F SYI&OLIC SYSTEMS .

I 1

. - The previous chapte&- have o u t l i n e d the f i r s t of t h e two . . i 4 c e n t r a l themes informing-$ourdieul s c r i t i q u e o f s t r u c t u r d l i ~ t *

e-7 - 1 . 1 . - a 3

thought . -Th i s f i r s t theme' i s de f ined by Bourdieu 's p roposa l tha f ,

s t r u c t q r a ' l i s t t h e o r i s t s 'fail t o d i s t i n g u i s h adequate ly between . , 7a - - - *

- < - - the a s t r a c t modelsAthatf form much of t h e subs tance o f t h e i r u

p e r s p e c t i v e , and t h e embodied knowledge i n e f f e c t i n t h e ,every-

concept) . f

This chap te r a t t empts t o c l a r i f y a second, equa l ly impor tant

a s p e c t of ' ~ o u r d i e u ' s c r i t i q u e of s t ruc tu ra . l i sm, This second

cr i t ica l theme concerns t h e s t r u c t u r a l i s t s ' f a i l u r e t o deyote I

s u f f i c i e n t a t t e n t i o n t o t h e r e l a t i o n between s y k b o l i c sysfems and C

* - s E c i e t y a s a w h o l e . Emur&iieu*s approa-ch t o - ~ - ~ d a t i a n - - - - --- -

- -- -

involves,a c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e ractical and p o l i t i c a l f u n c t i o n s k -

of symbolic systems. r

Symbolic Product ion--"Structural a n a l y s i s , " w r i t e s Bourdieu,

[ leads t o an] understanding - which does n o t r e f e r myth [and o t h e r

\symbolic produc'ts] t o anyth ing b u t i t s e l f w (1977b: 113) . ' Thus

6 s ~ u c t u r a l i s t s , such as Saussure, a t t empt t o map o u t an exhaus- /-- .'\

t i v e and i n t e r n a l l y c o n s i s t e n t set of r e l a t i o n s betwee& s i g n s . -

They f a i l t o exp lo re t h e e x t e r n a l r e l a t i o n s between sigm, t h e i r

human u s e r s and a p a r t i c u l k _ - s o c i a l c o n t e x t o f use. A s Bourdieu L-

a p u t s i t : "Saussurian l incpi&+os [and by i m p l i c a t i o n , d v i - - - - - - - - - -- -

S t r a u s s i a n anthropology and ~ h p n s k ~ i a ; l i n g u i s t i c s ] p r i v i l e g e b

the s t r u c t u r e of s i g n s , 7

t h a t is, t h e r e l a t i o n s - between them,

t h e expense o f t h e i r p r a c t i c a l . func t ions . , , ." (Out l ine :

C l a s s i c a l soc io l ' og i s t Emile Durkheim ,(1859-1917) made an . -

i n f l u e n t i a l a t t empt t o c o n c e p t u a l i z e J t h e s e p r a c t i c a l f u n c t i o n s o f

-. symbolic systems (or " c u l t u r e " ) . Durkheim's approach t o t h e

problem i s r e l e v a n t t o t h e p r e s e n t d i s c u s s i o n because magy of

+ Bourdieu's i d e a s on t h e p r a c t i c a l and p o l i t i c a l func t ions of - - - .

c u l t u r e are framed by c r i t i c a l r e f e r e n c e s t o a s p e c t s o f

~ u r k h e i m ' s work.

0

b a s i c ca tegor ies- - for example, of sca'Ce and t ime--that o rgan ize

human experience and thought. But, u n l i k e German phi losopher

1, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) , wfio h e l d t h a t many fundamental ca te - L

g o r i e s w e r e u n i v e r s a l , Durkheim maintained t h a t both fundamenml I

c a t e g o r i e s and symbolic c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s w e r e grounded i n - -9

p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l con tex t s . I n Bourdieu 's words: "With ~urkheinf . F b , ... forms o f c l a s s i f i c a t i o n are no longer u n i v e r s a l ( t r anscen-

d e n t a l ) forms and become.. .social forms-- that is t o s a y , forms 3 %a *

which +re. . . r e l a t i v e t o a p a r t i c u l a r group" (1977b: 112) . A good 4

example o f t h e role o f s o c i a l f a c t o r s i n d e f i n i n g b a s i c cate-

g o r i e s is t h e . p r o c e s s o f s o c i a l i z a & i o n among t h e Kabyles. The -*,

Kabyle c h i l d ' s pe rcep t ion of space and h i s / h e r very i d e n t i t y a r e

space as a ca tegory of thought and pe rcep t ion is a profoundly

social category, - - -

For Durkheim, then , the symbolic c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s and b a s i c

c a t e g o r i e s t h a t u n d e r l i e c u l t u r e emerge from p a r t i c u l a r social

con tex t s . Bourdieu ag rees w i t h Durkheim on t h i s gen'eral p o i n t . 5

-. *- * .

However, Bourdieu p-ar ts company w i t h Durkheim on the r k l a t e d

' q u e s t i o n s of t h e p roduc t ion and p r a c k i c a l f u n c t i o n s o f c u l t u r e .

Many of Durkheim's views on c u l t u r e w e r e based on f ie ldwork

undertaken i n non state s o c i e t i e s b y t h e e a r l y a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s .

P a r t l y because o f the apparen t s i m p l i c i t y of t h e s e s o c i e t i e s - -

f o r example, the;r l a c k o f specialization--Durkheim t ended , a s

Anthony Giddens puts it, " t o speak o f ' s o c i e t y ' a s a homogeneous

--

- Pent% ty" +=mt -*=-*= meTTmfIe Fm- mote o f me -gysye* -6 f - = =- = -

-

b- E e l i e f s and c a t e g o r i e s t h a t c o n s t i t u t - e l c u l t u r e h e used t h e vas-. " c o l l e c t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i p n n ( r e p r 6 s e n t a t i o n c o l l e c t i v e ) (see, f o r

example, Durkheim, 1964) . Bourdieu sugges t s t h a t Durkhein under-

p layed t h e e x i s t e n c e of d i v i s i v e i n t e r e s t s i n s o c i e t i e s and

t r e a t e d c u l t u r e as it was "a c o l l e c t i v e p roduc t c o l l e c t i v e l y \ -

\

-P y P -- A - Pp - - - - -

, - appropr i a t ed and consumed" (1977b: 1 1 4 ) . Dcrkheim's view o f

' I '

. c u l t u r e a s a c o l l e c t i v e p roduc t is expressed i n t h e f o l l o w i n g

passage where h e emphasizes how t h e va lue of c o l l e c t i v e represen-

t a t i o n s ex tends f a r beyond t h a t o f ' i n d i v i d u a l ' t hough t s and

va lues : " C o l l e c t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s a r e t h e r e s u l t of a n immense

co-operation which s t r e t c h e s o u t n o t merely i n t o space, b u t i n t o

-time a s w e l l ; t o make them, a m d l t i t u d e of minds have a s s o c i a t e d , P

- - ~ i ~ i r r e - t f e P r e 1 1 . . L-~S an 5~ mtimi~s;-for%em, l ong -

ledge" 11964:- 1 6 ) . Thus, f o r Durkheim, c u l t u r e i s a k i n d of C I

. c o l l e c t i v e heritage VtLidL includes s o c i e t y s most v a l u a b l e ideas

and sen t imen t s . i

Given Durkheim's. i d e a s on the co-operat ive p roduc t ion of J

1

% c u l t u r e , it i s n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t he should see s o c i a l i n t e g r a -

t i o n .as on& of t h i p r a c t i c a l func t ions of c u l t u r e . Bourdieu -

'describes Durkheimts p o s i t i o n as . follows: "The ... s i g n i f i c a n c e of

t h e world, (and i n p a r t i c u l a r of t h e s o c i a l world) presupposes

what Durkheim c a l l s l o q i c a l conformism, t h a t i s 'a homogenous

conception o f t i m e , space, number and cause which makes under-

s tanding p o s s i b l e between i n t e l l i g e n t be ings ' . . . . o or ~ u r k h e i m ]

Symbols a r e t h e prime.imstruments of s o c i a l i n t e g r a t i o n n '(1937b:

. *

Bourdieu, as sugges ted , c o n t e s t s both Durkheim's view of A

r

c u l t u r e ad a c o l l e c t i v e p roduc t or h e r i t a g e and any s i m p l i s t i c

adherence t o Durkheim's c la im t h a t c u l t u r e f u n c t i o n s t o i n t e g r a t e

s o c i e t y as a whole, A s a g a i n s t t h e f i r s t emphasis i n Durkheim's

work--the emphasis on c u l t u r e as a c o l l e c t i v e -product--Bourdieu - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - -

p o i n t s t o t h e r o l e o f i n s t i t u t i o n s and s p e c i a l i s t s i n producing - 1

and e v a l u a t i n g c u l t u r a l goods. Bourdieu a rgues t h a t c l a i m s t h a t

t h e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s and- s p e c i a l i s t s express t h e i n t e r e s t s of

s o c i e t y as a whole a r e o f t e n m y s t i f i c a t i o n s of t h e a c t u a l s i t u a -

t ion. The a c t i v i t y of t h e i n s t i t u t i o n s and s p e c i a l i s t s , s u g g e s t s

Bourdieu, is a p t t o express competing and s e c t i o n a l r a t h e r than

co-operative and c o l l e c t i v e i n t e r e s t s . Thus ~ o u r d i e u fo l lows

genera l i n t e r e s t s ( see , f o r example, Bourdieu, 1977b: .115-16) . A s a g a i n s t me second emphasis i n Durkheim's woqk--whi(=h

J involves a claim that culture func t ions t o i n t e g r a t e s o c i e t y as

a whole--'Bourdieu maintains t h a t c u l t u r a l s i g n s are manipulated

- - - - by groups t o b r i n g about a l i m i t e d i n t e g r a t i o n . Thus, i n s t i t u -

t i o n s t h a t have e s t a b l i s h e d t h e r i g h t t o d e f i n e ' s t a n d a r d s of -..

exce l l ence ' among c u l t u r a l goods i n e v i t a b l y d e f i n e bo th a

dominant o r ' h igh ' c u l t u r e and a v a r i e t y o f s u b o r d i n a t e c u l t u r e s .

Through both formal and informal processes o f educa t ion i n d i v i -

dual$ acqu i re vary ing degrees of s e n s i t i v i t y t o t h e 'h igh

c u l t u r e . ' A s a r e s u l t , i n p a r t , of t h e s e d i f f e r e n t degrees of k-

s e n s i t i f i t y t o ' h igh c u l t u r e , ' r e l a t i o n s of i n c l u s i o n and exclu- - \ -

-- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -

s i u n are &t=ITskeTbetween S F f e G t s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s of 4 i n d i v i d u a l s ( i .e . , between i n d i v i d u a l s of d i f f e r e n t age , r a c e ,

sex and s o c i a l background). Bourdieu summarizes t h e process o f

l i m i t e d i n t e g r a t i o n t h a t i s assoc ia ted w i t h t h e s e r e l a t i o n s of

i n c l u s i o n and exc lus ion as follows: - i

The dominant ['hdgh8] c u l t u r e c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e e f f e c t i v e -

- a p - -- - -

i n t e g r a t i o n o f %lib ZomZfiant c l Z s s (by makmg p o s s i b l e immediate communication between a l l i t s members and d i s t i n - guish ing them from t h e o t h e r c l a s ses ) . . , .The c u l t u r e which u n i t e s (as a medium of communication) a l s o d i v i d e s (as an ins t rument o f d i s t i n c t i o n ) and l e g i t i m a t e s d i s t i n c t i o n s by d e f i n i n g a l l c u l t u r e s (des ignated s u b c u l t u r e s ) by t h e i r 4 d i s t a n c e from t h e dominant c u l t u r e ( i .e. c u l t u r a l depr i - v a t i o n ) . The dominant c u l t u r e 4s i d e n t i f i e d w i t h * c u l t u r e i as such ( t h a t i s t o say , as ' e x c e l l e n c e ' ) (1977b: 115) . 1 For Bourdieu, then , c u l t u r e does n o t j u s t c l a s s i f y t h e

n a t u r a l and social worlds . Culture--through t h e manipulat ion of

v a r i o k groups--also " s e t s up an oppos i t ion [con t rad ic t ion] -- -- - -

between t h e t h i n g s deemed s u i t a b l e o b j e c t s f o r t a l k i n g and

th ink ing about , and t h o s e which are unworthy of speech and

thought, t h e unth inkable o r unmentionable" (Bourdieu, ' l972a: -

1255). That i s t o say, c u l t u r e a l s o c l a s s i f i e s i n d i v i d u a l s , and,

by e s t a b l i s h i n g a set o f t a c i t s t andards , " d i s c r i m i n a t e s between '

- two b a s i c types" (Bourdieu, 1971a: 1255) : t h o s e i n d i v i d u a l s who

a r e s e n s i t i v e to 'h igh c u l t u r e ' ( t h o s e w i t h - " t a s t e ' " ) and those A

who are i n s e n s i t i v e t o 'h igh c u l t u r e ' ( t h o s e wi thou t " t a s t e , " t h e

"profahum vulgusn (Bourdieu, 1971a: ,1256) ) . ,The n o t i o n o f s e n s i t i v i t y t o ' hiigh c u l t u r e ' --which Bourdieu

a l s o ca l l s " t a s t e " or, " r e l a t i o n t o c u l t u r e m - - i s examined f u r t h e r

i n Chapter VIII i n a d i scuss ion of t h e r o l e of educa t ion systems

i n modern ' soc ie ty . It i s s u f f i c i e n t t o n o t e , a t t h i s p o i n t , t h a t

- --

- - - - - - -

- = % n r d + ~ j e ~ ~ a p - p r o a ~ ~ s T - s ~ m ~ ~ 350 se of strUBur-

a l i s t s , t h a t focus e x c l u s i v e l y on render ing e x p l i c i t t h e

" i n t e r n a l l o g i c n o f symbolic systems o r c u l t u r e .

Bourdieu a l s o r e j e c t s t h e Durkheimian t r a d i t i o ( i n whichthe 4 . r8

would i n c l u d e t h e f u n c t i o n a l i s t t r a d i t i o n o f soc io logy)

' _ which p o r t r a y s c u l t u r e as a c o l l e c t i v e product wi th a primary - - - - - - -

- - - ---- - ---- - -

f u n c t i o n o f s o c i a l i n t e g r a t i o n . I n exp lo r ing t h e s o c i a l cgndi-

t i o n s of symbolic o r c u l t u r a l product ion , Bourdieu c l a r i f i e s t h e

manner i n which c u l t u r e serves p a r t i c u l a r r a t h e r than g e n e r a l -

i n t e r e s t s . H e also p o i n t s o u t t h a t i n s t i t u t i o n s and s p e c i a l i s t s

may compete t o restrict the access of some s o c i a l groups t o power

over both c u l t u r a l and ' m a t e r i a l 1 r e sources . Bourdieuls a t t empt

. to l i n k c u l t u r e t o b roader s o c i a l process t h u s invo lves an

The Habitus and S o c i a l In terac t ion--Bourdieuls views on t h e

p o l i t i c a l f u n c t i m s of culture have impor tant i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r

t h e concept of the h a b i t u s . These i m p l i c a t i o h s can be c l a r i f i e d 1 ii d

by c o n t r a s t i n g a view of human i n t e r a c t i o n based on the h a b i t u s

- 2 - - -- - - - - -- -

-with ' i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c ' views o f human i n t e r a c t i o n . ,

Bourdieu argues t h a t in(h iv idua1is t ic views of human i n t e r -

- a c t i o n p l a c e t o o much emphasis on t h e immediately observable

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of i n t e r a c t i o n . Thus, i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c views of

i n t e r a c t i o n would inc lude t h e phenomenological p e r s p e c t i v e d i s -

cussed i n t h e f i r s t chapter . The phenomenological p e r s p e c t i v e

exp la ins i n t e r a c t i o n s with prima*y re fe rence t o t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s '

pe rcep t ions o f the meaning of those i n t e r a c t i o n s . Mor f

- - 15 '

phenomenologists - - - - - - - - - whom -- - - Bourdieu c r i t i c i z e s s u b s c r i toPtthe - - -- -

- - -

fo l lowing p r o p o s i t i o n about meaning: "Meaning i s produced i n o r

through t h e accoun t s by which i n d i v i d u a l s make s e n s e of t h e i r

i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h o t h e r i n d i v Is" ( s e e above, p . 1 7 ) .

AYso inc luded i n t h e i n d i v i ~ l i s t i c approach t o human i n t e r -

a c t i o n a r e wha'h Bourdieu c a l l s "mechanis t icn approaches (see -

OutlTne: 72-78; cf. a o v e p. 8 K ) L Mechan i s t i c approaches-de- -

emphasize the s i g n i f i c a n c e of i n d i v i d u a l s ' p e r c e p t i o n s of t h e 4 f

meaning o f i n t e r a c t i o n s , The i r focal 'concern i s w i t h a s p e c t s of

the i n t e r a c t i o n t h a t can be permanently recorded f o r f u t u r e r e f - - e rence by a purpor ted ly n e u t r a l observer . P a r t of t h i s recording

process e n t a i l s t h e breakdown o f t h e i n t e r a c t i o n i n t o d i s c r e t e

components (a p r a c t i c e which i s o f t e n accompanied by a n a t tempt

t o e s t a b l i s h s o m e k i n d of ' c a u s a l ' r e l a t i o n between t h e s e com- - - - - - - - - ---- - - - - -- - - - --

ponents) , Bourdieu argues t,ht mechanis t ic approaches f a i l t o

make a d i s t i n c t i o n between behavio9 per se--as documented i n . 5

6 " h a s t i l y made r e c o r d s of t h e m o s t e x t e r n a l and o s s i f i e d charac ter - -

istics pf social l i f e " (Bourdieu and Saint-Mart in , 1974: 339)--

B and i n d i c e s of a "mode of behaviour" which i s i n f l u e n c e d by t h e

- - - - - - - --- - - - - --

s o c i a l backgrounds of i n t e r a c t i n g i n d i S i d u a l s .

Bourdieu 's criticisms of mechanis t ic approaches t o i n t e r a c - ' *

t i o n could apply equa l ly w e l l t o phenomenological approaches that' 3

p l a c e t o o much weight on i n d i v i d u a l s ' v e r b a l accounts of i n t e r a c -

t i o n s . ~ b t h mechanist ic- and ph~nornenological approaches f a i l t o - address how an Snd iv idua l ' s p a s t i s ' c a r r i e d ' i n f o t h e present ' - and c o n s t r a i n s i n - a v a r i e t y of non conscious 'ways t h e i n d i v i d u a I 1 s

ongoing a c t i v i t i e s , Bourdieu's views on t h e importance kn human

--

i n t e r a c t i o n of c o n s t r a i n t s t h a t a r e de f ined by a v a r i e t y of i n f l u - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

ences a r e i l l u s t r a t e d i n t h e fo l lowing s t a t ement : " . . .when we c,

& "5. speak of class hab i tus , w e are i n s i s t i n g , a g a n s t a l l forms of t h e

[ i n d i v i d u a l i s t ] i l l u s i o n which c o n s i s t s i n d i r e c t l y r e l a t i n g

p r a c t i c e s to p r 6 p e r t i e s i n s c r i b e d i n t h e > i t u a € i o n , t h a t ' i n t e r -

p e r s o n a l ' r e l a t i o n s a r e never, excep t i n appearance, ind iv idua l -

t o - i n d i v i d n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s and Mat-the tmtk- of -the i n t e r a c t k o n

i s never e n t i r e l y contained i n the in ' te&ct ionw (Outl ine: 81) .

Thus * ~ o u r d i e u a l l u d e s t o t h e i n f l u e n c e o f g e n e r a l s o c i a l and

. c u l t u r a l f a c t o r s on a given s i t u a t i o n through mention of t h e

h a b i t u s concept , t -

By means of t h e h a b i t u s , it w i l l be r e c a l l e d , t h e i n d i v i d u a l

assimilates some propor t ion of t h e c u l t u r a l p roduc t s of a s o c i e t y . L

The durab le d i s p o s i t i o n s of t h e h a b i t u s act as a k ind of memory -- - - - - - -- -- -- - - - --- -- -- --

which is c o n s t i t u t e d by schemes f o r t h e product ion and apprecia- P

t i o n o f c u l t u r a l phenomena. S i m i l a r l y , t h e corporeal s t y l e s o f

the h a b i t u s act a s a 'code or "master p a t t e r n " t h a t c o n s t r a i n s C p a r t i c u l a r p a t t e r n s of thought , speech, p e r c e p t i o n , etc., among

i n d i v i d u a l s . It is u s e f u l t o c i te aga in , a t t h i s poip; a

passage t h a t was used i n t he previous c h a p t e r t o summarize t h e 6

o r i g i n s and func t ions o f t h e h a b i t u s : J

- The body [a b a s i c dimension of t h e hab i tus ] is an ins t rument which records i t s own p rev ious uses and which., a l though cont inuous ly modified by them, g ives g r e a t e r weight t o t h e ea-rliest of them; i t c o n t a i n s i n t h e form of l a s t i n g automa- t i s m ~ , t h e t r a c e and t h e memory oT t h e s o c i a l e v e n t s , e s p e c i a l l y t h e e a r l y ones, of which t h e s e automatisms a r e t h e product . The e f f e c t s of any new exper ience on t h e formation of the h a b i t u s depend on t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h a t exper ience and t h e exper iences a l r e a d y i n t e g r a t e d i n t t h e h a b i t u s i n the form o f c l a s s i f y i n g and genera t ive

6: schemes; and i n t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p , which t a k e s t h e form of a d i a l e c t i c a l process of s e l e c t i v e r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e

- - I t n f o r m a t i v e ~ H & e $ e n e y &-eve~y -w exper-icne kend* &Q = =:= == - -

d e c l i n e as t h e number o f exper i ences a l r e a d y i n t e g r a t e d i n t o the- s t r u c t u r e o f t h e hab i tus ' i n c r e a s e s (Bourdieu, l977d: 660) . E a r l y i n childhood, then , i n d i v i d u a l s undergo processes of

/--

s o c i a l i z a t i o n t h a t , through t h e mediat ions o f t h e hab i tud , c o n t i -

nue t o e x e r t c o n s t r a i n t s on t h e i r behavior , thought , pe rcep t ion ,

e t c . , f o r t h e rest of t h e i r l i v e s . I t fo i lows from t h i s , sugges t s -- ---- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Bourdieu, t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s from similar s o c i a l backgrounds w i l l

undergo s i m i l a r p rocesses of s o c i a l i z a t i o n and thus w i l l a c q e i r e

l a r h a b i t I t must b e s t r e s s e d , however, t h a t Bourdieu

a t i n d i v i d d a l s from similar backgrounds w i l l

behave, t h i n k and pe rce ive i d e n t i c a l l y . Bourdieu q u a l i f i e s h i s

p o s i t i o n as fol lows: "Though it is imposs ib le f o r - a l l members of

t h e same class (or even t w o of them) t o have had t h e same exper i -

- - - - ences, i;n - # c e s ~ - i + ~ s - ~ z k a i ~ t - e a c ~ t h e - - -

pp - - - r 7 n n a e l y -emembe+ of another class t o

have been confronted w i t h the s i t u a t i o n s most f r equen t f o r t h e

members of t h a t classn (Outline: 8 5 ) .- - -

* 2 With t h e no t ion o f the habi-~ ~ o u r d i e u thus a t t empts t o

' C

avoid both extremes of i n d i v i d u a i s m (which' a t t empts t o e x p l a i n b .'

- i n t e r a c t i o n s o l e l y in' terms of d i r e c t l y r ecordab le a s p e c t s o f

C

t h e i n t e r a c t i o n ) and extremes of what might be c a l l e d environ-

mentalism (which a t t empts t o e x p l a i n i n t e r a c t i o n s o l e l y i n terms

of f a c t o r s ' e x t e r n a l 1 t o t h e i n t e r a c t i o n ) .' I n c o n t r a s t t o

i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c p e r s p e c t i v e s , Bourdi-eu c la ims t h a t n e i t h e r i n d i -

v i d u a l s ' accounts a f t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s nor t h e i r obse rvab le

behaviors i n i n t e r a c t i o n s , form an adequate b a s i s f o r a s c i e n t i -

f i c explanat ion o f i n t e r a c t i o n s . B o t h phenomenological and w '

= = =- ~-a-a&-stii~dypnnfindibi-W7i~&end, to i g n - ~ ~ - e _ t h e __crones txXaaiintssss ,,,, +

t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s b r i n g

s o c i a l i z a t i o n stemming

a g a i n s t indiv idual i sm, - -

whole ' soc ia l s t r u c t u r e

-

yet, ~ o u r d i e u a l s o

\

t o an i n t e r a c t j o n as a r e s u l t of a g iven

from,a pa r t i cu la i - s o c i a l background. A s ,

*-A' Bourdieu a s s e r t s polemical ly: " . . . t h e

is p r e s e n t i n the. i n t e r a c t i o n " (1977d:

w i t h which 'he would inc lude American func t iona l i sm and ,some

read ings of 14arx2--#at p o r t r a y i n d i v i d u a l s as comple te ly d e t e r -

mined by t h e i r s o c i a l backgrounds. I n t h e p lace of t h e s e pers - 8,

p e c t i v e s , Bourdieu proposes a more s u b t l e a n a l y s i s of the i n f l u -

ence of the i n d i v i d u a l ' s p a s t on h$s/her p r e s e n t

t Bourdieu's a n a l y s i s of gome o f t h e types of

human - a c t i o n was d i scussed i n the chap te r on t h e - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- l i f e h i s t o r y of the i n d i v i d u a l wi th r e f e r e n c e to

and f u t u r e .

i n f l k c k on

h a b i t u s and t h e --

a number o f

d i f f e r e n t k inds of c o n s t r a i n t l o c a t e d a t d i f f e r e n t levels o f

social, i n t e r p e r s o n a l and i n d i v i d u a l o r g a n i z a t i o n (see, for . - - - - - -

example, pp. 1U-4, above). I t i s worth noth ing h e r e t h a t Bour-

d i e u l s analysies of t h e s e c o n s t h i n t s t a k e s i n t o account the ,

I - --

. nuances o f phenomenologicar brands of ind iv idua l i sm and d e v o t e s p p

a t t e n t i o n , f o r example, t o t h e r o l e i n i n t e r a c t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l s p B

, accounts of t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s , and t o t h e i r ~ t a t e d motives f o r * . ' *

i n t e r a c t i n g . But through thk h a b i t u s concept, Bourdieu also

addresses such f a c t o r s as t h e s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s ~ f ~ i n d i v i d u a l s '

accounts o f inters-ction, t h e non conscious dimension.of i n t e r a c -

t i o n and the 'un in tended corrsequences of i n t e r a c t i o n . 3- - /

Furthermore, wi th r e f e r e n c e t o t h e h a b i t u s , ~ o u r d i e u

manner s i m i l a r , i n s o m e r e s p e d t s , t o t h e manner he l i n k e d c u l t u r e 4

t o broader social processes . For example, Bourdieu uses t h e con3

c e p t of h a b i t u s t o demonstrate the r o l e of embodied d i s p o s i - /

t i o n s i n d e f i n i n g t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s s e n s i t i v i t y t o 'h igh c u l t u r e . '

~ o u r h i e u also uses t h e h a b i t u s concept t o exp lo re how an i n d i v i -

iiu& ' s relati- 4 ~ - p k* m2+t;trep i~ f luef fcek the way-ke/she- - l i ves -- ?

and exper iences h i s / h e r r e l a t i o n t o othex i n d i v i d u a l s .

Bourdieu 's a t t empts t o c o n t e x t u a l i z e i n t e r a c t i o n a r e b e s t

i l l u s t r a t e d by h i s no t ion of t h e l i n g u i s t i c h&tus. Bourdieu

p o i n t s o u t that i n d i v i d u a l s from d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l backgrounds

acqui re d i f f e r e n t s t y l e s of speaking. Thus t w o i n d i v i d u a l s

b rough t - toge the r i n a g iven space w i l l , i n s p i t e o f themsezves,

feel sense of ease o r d iscomfor t depending on t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e

- norms and convent ions that, l i k e t h e ' s t andards of e x c e l l e n c e '

f o r 'high culture, ' are def ined s o c i a l l y *rather than

A s Bourdieu p u t s it, wi th p a r t i c u l a r e m h a s i s on t h e

habi tus :

n

i n d i v i d u a l l y . -.

l i n g u i s t i c

* 1 - The d e f i n i t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c a c c e p t a b i l i t y is n o t I n t h e s i t u a t i o n b u t i n t h e r e l a t i o n between a s i t u a t i o n and h a b i t u s which is i t s e l f t h e product o f t h e whole h i s t d e y of -

i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p with a p a r t i c u l a r system of s e l e c t i v e . re inforcements . The d i s p o s i t i o n which l e a d s one t o "watch one1 s tongue", t o "mind one ' s p ' s and q ' s " , t o pursue c o r r e c t n e s s through c o n s t a n t s e l f - c o r r e c t i o n s , i s no th ing o t h e r t h a n t h e product o f t h e i n t r o j e c t i o n of s u p e r v i s i o n and o f c o r r e c t i o n s which i n c u l c a t e , i f n o t a p r a c t i c a l mastery o f me l z n g u i s t i c norm, then a t l g a s t t h e recog- n i t i o n of it.. Through t h i s durable d i s p o s i t o n which', i n -

some c a s e s , i s t h e r o o t of a s o r t of permanent l i n g u i s t i c i n s e c u r i t y , tFie - superv i s ioh and censorsh ip of t h e clominant language e x e r t a c o n s t a n t p ressu re on those who recognize it more than &hey can use it. By "watching t h e i r tungues", the dominated groups recognize i n p r a c t i c e , i f n o t t h e

-- -- - s u p e r v i s i o n of t h e dominant (though they "watch th&mselvesn

- : % C i S € ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ i - r ~ s ~ e ) 7 then +.tr-Z~as t -ae= leg5 ti - - -=- =

macy o f t h e d o m i n h t language (1977d: 155-56). . .

Note t h a t i n t h i s passage Bourdieu is n o t d e s c r i b i n g a

complete and "mechanical" de terminat ion o f i n d i v i d u a l s by t h e i r

social backgrounds. I n d i v i d u a l s have some freedom, b u t it is a

"condit ioned" o r " l i m i t e d A freedom, with t h e s e limits being set

by t h e - c h a r a c t e r of-th&r f anti* &f-e-ar& mere f om+&-education-- -

as w e l l as by t h e i r r e l a t i o n t o t h e ' m a t e r i a l ' and c u l t u r a l

r e sources o f a g iven s o c i e t y . Through t h e media t ion o f t h e

h a b i t u s , which carries " the trace and memory o f social even t s , "

the p a s t o f t h e i h d i v i & i l A d h i s / h e r g e n e r a l s o c i a l background r;

i n f luences ongoing i n t e r a c t i o n s , This i n f l u e n c e is e x e r t e d , f o r

example, by embodied ' s enses ' of r i g h t and wrong and by '!a prac-

t ica l s p o t t i n g of d l u e s which [enables] i n d i v i d u a l s t o s i t u a t e

o t h e r s i n h i e r a r c h i e s o f age, weal th , power o r c u l t u r e . . . . n

{Outline: 2 6 ) . I n the fo l lowing passage Bourdieu evokes an image - e

of how, through t h e mediation o f the h a b i t u s , i n d i v i d u a l s ' s o c i a l - --- -

backgrounds influence t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r a c t i o n s : " . . . [the

d i s p o s i t i o n s of t h e h a b i t u s a c t as] reminders.. .of th'e conduct *-

s t r a t e p i c a l l y , whether symbolical ly o r a c t u a l l y , t o - reduce ri t]

(by n o t - ' l e t t i n g onese l f go, ' n o t 'becoming familiar , ' i n s h o r t , 2.. t

. ' s tanding on one ' s d i g n i t y , ' o r on he o t h e r hand, ref us ing t o 0

* . ' t ake l i b e r t i e s ' and ' p u t onese l f forwakd ,*' i n s h o r t 'knowing

x

one ' s p l a c e and s t a y i n g t h e r e ) (Outl ine: 82) ,

f Despi te t h e - - f a c t that - t h e hab i tus is by no means Lcomple te l . - -s - - - -

+

cons t ra ined .by ah' i n d i v i d u a l ' s s o c i a l background, th; " c o g n i t i v e

and mot iva t ingn schemes- tha t c o n s t i t u t e t h e h a b i t u s have impor- - - - - - -- --- ---p

- --

t=5 t-l-- =-- ---- -- l c a t i o n s f o r t h e s - i l i t y Xf s o c i a l p r e l a t i G K s i n gene-

ral . Thus Bourdieu argues t h a t t h e d u r a b l e a t t i t u d e s e x h p l i f i e d

i n t h e phrase 'knowing one ' s p l a c e ' a r e produced by a p a r t i c u l a r t

s o c i a l i z a t i o n undergone as a r e s u l t of t h e individual?^ b i r t h

i n t o a p a r t i c u l a r p o s i t i o n i n a s o c i a l t o t a l i t y . A t t h e *same

behavior i n c r e a s e the l i k e l i h o o d t h a t the i n d i v i d u a l w i l l achieve

a similar p o s i t i o n i n the social t o t a l i t y : as that into which he/ ,

she w a s born,: i n o t h e r words, t h a t he/she w i l l have t h e same

degree of c o n t r o l over a g iven soc ie tyPs ' m a t e r i d l n and c u l t u r a l i X

resources as hisfher p a r e n t s or member& ?f their social or

class had, I n t h i s way, p a t t e r n s o f i n d i v i d u a l behav io r and

exper ience embodied i n h a b i t u s function t o reproduce the s o c i a l . r e 1 a t l o i E of don=e%n of which they the produc t (see

T h a r o l e of the h a b i t u s i n social rep roduc t ion w i l l be

- discussed f- &=+he-next two heters; A t thh -poikt 3? d l 3

o u t l i n e Bourdieu's attempt t o refine h i s v i e w of the r e l a t i o n

I / between c u l t u r e and broader s o c i a l p rocesses .

C u l t u r e and Domination--In o r d e r t o ~ ' c l a r i f y t h e p o l i t i c a l t

- dimension o f symbolic systems it is* necessary , i n Bourdieu's '

view, to s i t u a t e the d e f i n i t i o n s o f r e a l i t y t h a t c o n s t i t u t e a "i

given c u l t u r e w i t h i n a s o c i a l con tex t . his c o n t e x t u a l a t i o n 3. 2 r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e r e s e a r c h e r make an a t t e m p t t o i d e n t l f y fAe

groups w h o are, a s - ~ o u r d i e u p u t s it, n..-.eXgaged i n a s p e c i f i -

celly symbolic [aad p o l i t i c a l ] s t r u g g l e t o impose t h e d e f i n i t i o n

On s e v e r a l occas ions Bourdieu i d e n t i f i e s t h e g e n e r a l charac-

ter of t h e d e f i n i t i o n s o f r e a l i t y imposed and supported by domi- t

n a n t groups. More o f t e n than n u t , s u g g e s t s Bourdieu, t h e d i s - c

t i n g u i s h i n g a t t r i b u t e of €he symbolic sy'stems of which t h e s e

d e f i n i t i o n s a r e a p a r t i s t h e i r tendency t o m y s t i f y r e l a t i o n s of

domination. Thus, f o r example, a c t i o n s , policies, or d e f i n i t i o n s F

of r e a l i t y t h a t s k v e p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t s may be rep resen ted a s I i

s e r v i n g an abstract g e n e r a l i n t e r e s t . S i m i l a r l y , r e l a t i o n s of

domination , . &ay be def ined as * n a t u r a l t or 'God-ordained,' ar t h e i r

e x i s t e n c e may 'be denied a l t o g e t h e r .

It is hpurtant to n o t e t h a t , f o r Bourdieu, t h i g l i n k between J ' /

**it y ~ ~ ~ - i f ~ Z y illy eifects oZ r-

concep tua l i z ing the political f u n c t i o n s of- c u l t u r e . H e recogni-

zes the distance,' for example, b e t w e e n theomtical discussions at +

-- -7 this g e n e r a l l e v e l of inquiry, and a n a l y s e s o f t h e way p a r t i c u l a r

2 kinds sf m y s t i f i c a t i o n funct ion i n p a r t i c u l a r social contexts.

! . i

-. , - I n o r d e r to erqphasize h i s concern wi th t h e s p e c i f i c cha rac t e r t

i 1 .. 1 of t h i s p rocess of mys t i f i ca t ion , Bourdieu makes a p o i n t o f

. d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g h i s approach from t h a t o f what'he c a l l s t h e

"Marxist t r a d i t i o n n (1977b: 1 1 4 ) - Thus, on t h e one hand, Bour-

d ieu suppor t s i n p r i n c i p l e t h e Marxist theory o f c u l t u r e a s

ideology t h a t g ive s "pre-eminence t o t h e p o l r t i c a l func t ions of -

'symbolic systems'" (Bourdieu, 1977b: 1 1 4 ) . Y e t , on t h e o t h e r - -

hand, Bourdi-&u promises t h a t h i s theory of c u l t u r e w i l l provide j - - -- - - - -- ----- -

2 *--rreep*d-- i ; ; r&~tF~-e=r-esea~Chers =tem-eseape- -===T

5 s

t h e crude reduc t ion of i deo log i ca l products t o t h e i n t e r e s t s of 4 t h e c l a s s e s which they se rve ( a ' s h o r t c i r c u i t ' e f f e c t f requent ly 7

found i n ' ~ a m i s t ' c r i t i c i s m ) " (Bourdiey, 1977b: F16). - , Bourdieu' s s t r a t e g y f o r escaping ' t h i s ' s h o r t c&cuit' o r

2 : i

r e d u c t i o n i s t tendency &B t h e explanat ion of c u l t u r e involves a 3

- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - i

, -:--7- 7-- A-

c l o s e Gxamination o f the r h e t o r i c o f c u l t u r e and of t h e s o c i q l

J. <- condi t ions t h a t make t h e myst i fy ing func t ion of c u l t u r e possible, +

This examina5ion has two aspects: t h e f i r s t concerns what Bourdieu ,> i : c a l l s t h e "relative au$onomym of t h e dominant c u l t u r e (and s f

L Z 3

producers) w i t h ' r e s p e c t t o the i n t e r e s t s of the dominant groups Q

and the c h a r a c t e r of the r e l a t i o n s o f domination; t h e second 1

concerns what Bourdieu c a l l s a t h e " leg i t imat ing" func t ion of i 4

.r - 1 - - - - - -- - - e E k 3 A 3 X v - --

- 7 2

A s r ~ ~ a ~ i i c +h- fir-+, t h p v e all- - <

ture: Bourdieu attempts t o show t h a t Qe.:dominant c u l t u r e fu l -

- -- f iUs its p o l i t i c a l funct ion even though-it may n o t be e x p l i c i t l y

-, l inked with t h e interests of t h e daminant group, Bourdieu's most

detai led i l l u s t r a t i o n of this propos i t ion is based on h i s s tudy

t t

C

of t h e educat ion system i n modern France. Bourdieu a rgues t h a t '

c h i l d r e n from p r i v i l e g e d s o c i a l backgrounds i n h e r i t p r i v i l e g e ' i n

tihe form o f va r ious a b i l i t i e s and s e n s i b i l i t i e s (such a s s e n s i -

t iv i ty t o ' h igh c u l t u r e ' ) acquired dur ing chi ldhood s o c i a l i z a t i o n .

Because t h e r e ,is a f avorab le r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e s e a b i l i t i e s

and s e n s i b i l i t i e s a n d - t h e c u r r i c u l a and i n s t r u c t i o n a l s t y l e s of * -

t h e schools , t h e s e c h i l d r e n have an advantage over c h i l d r e n from ~r

l e s s p r i v i l e g e d backgrounds.

- ~ u t , sugges t s Bpurdieu, t h e educa t ion system t e n d s t o obs-

-cWe t h i s advantage by a t t r i b u t i n g success a t schoo l e i t h e r t o

hard work o r t o myqwrious ' g i f t s ' such a s 'good t a s t e . ' Thus

the educat ion system s e r v e s t h e i n t e r e s t s of dominant groups by

e s t a b l i s h i n g a " d i s i n t e r e s t e d " appearance. J t e s t a b l i s h e s t h i s

" d i s i n t e r e s t & a q p e a r g c e by c la iming t o t r a n s m i t t h e b e s t of a - ---- pp - -

" n a t i o n a l c u l t u r e , " whi l e , i n .+ a c t u a l i t y , t r a n s m i t t i n g a c u l t u r e - 6

t h a t - i s , i n Bourdiea 's words, "unequal ly r-ovedn from indiv idu-

a l s wi th d i f f e r e n t social backgrounds. Furthermore, t h e educa-

t i o n system r e i n f o r c e s this " d i s i n t e r e s t e d " appearance by a t t r i -

b u t i n g f a i l u r e s t o a c q u i r e what it t r a n s m i t s t o i n d i v i d u a l r a t h e r

than social d i f f e r e n c e s (i .e. , t o ' g i f t s ' o r hard work) (see; f o r

example,. ~ o d d i e u and Passeron, 1977: 177-219;~ c f . b e l o w , pp.

A c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e a c t u a l manner i n which r e l a t i o n s of

domination are por t rayed y i e l d s a n o t h e r example of the r e l a t i v e

-

aGtOnomy of culture- w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e - i n t e ~ e s t s of t h e dominant 1

and the c h a r a c t e r o f the r e l a t i o n s o f domination. I t i s possi-

b l e , f o r example, t o d i r e c t l y obscure t h e social c o n d i t i o n s of

i domination. Such a d i r e c t m i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n occurs when it is

claimed t h a t t h e s e x u a l d i v i s i o n & l a b o r i n s o c i e t y i s based

s o l e l y on b i o l o g i c a l and psychologica l d i f f e r e n c e s between men

and women ( r a t h e r than on d i f f e r e n c e s t h a t gresexaggera ted and - 9

d i s t o r t e d by s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s ) . But more i n s idzous t h a n t h i s d i r e c t misrepresenta-

L - t i o n are i n s t a n c e s where groups w i n a u t h o r i t y t o o f f e r explana--

t i o n s o f , s ay , t h e r e l a t i o n s between t h e sexes , by conceal ing t h e - /

- -

- - - se&&--co&F~s=ef--tkj;s-awt~i~. This is t b - case a r g v e s -- -

Bourdieu, i n some k inds o f soc io logy. Bourdieu sugges t s t h a t some

s o c i o l o g i s t s a t t empt t o e s t a b l i s h c r e d i b i l i t y f o r t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r ,

approach t o t h e s tudy o f human behavior by: ( a ) a s s e r t i n g t h a t

the pr inc ip - l e s of e v a l u a t i o n of t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s should be as

c l o s e as p o s s i b l e t o those of t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s ; (b) attempt-

i n g t o convey an image of t h e k ind of s o c i a l s c i e n c e t h a t they &

p r a c t i c e which conforms to t h e dominant image of t h e n a t u r a l

s c i e n c e s (1975: 38-39) . Bourdieu lists a number of t a c t i c s b y

which t h i s image o f s c i e n t i f i c i t y i s achieved: " . . . the e x a l t a -

t i o n o f q u a n t i f i c a t i o n , f o r m a l i z a t i o n and L t h i c a l n e u t r a l i t y . . . t h e o s t e n t a t i o u s d i s p l a y o f technology [computers, f o r example]

. . . . [the at tempt] t o p r e s e n t appearances of cumula t iv i ty [incre-

T n do- t h W l t l a 1 f r r p a a f cgClQLOn . . . . -

symbolic system, contends ~ o u r d i e u , w e must t h u s cons-ider more

than j u s t the possibility t h a t a g iven s o c i o l o g i c a l s tudy d i r e c t -

l y m y k t i f i e s the r e l a t i o n s of domination i n s o c i e t y . W e mu*

also cons ide r t h e degree t o which c e r t a i n schoo l s of soc io logy,

by o s t e n s i b l y adher ing t o . a * ' s c i e n t i f i c l methodology, e l u d e t h e

q u e s t i o n o f t h e social c o n d i t i o n s of t h e s o c i a l sc i ences . When

t h e r e l a t i v e autonomy of t h e s o c i a l sc i ences is acknowledged, ,

t hen , t h e i r mys t i fy ing (and thus p o l i t i c a l ) func t ion p o t e n t i a l l y i f + +

i nc ludes 'bo th a d i r e c t mis represen ta t ion of r e l a t i o n s of domina- j . j

t i o n and an a t t empt t o obscure t h e s o c i a l c o n s t r a i n t s governing *

t h e i r product ion and exchange.

Bourdieu's a t t empt t o e s t a b l i s h a p e r s p e c t i v e f o r c l a d l f y i n g

- - *he p o l i t i c a l f unct&ns_of - - - c u l t u r e -has, a s sugges ted , - - - - a - second - ---- - - -

-

aspec t . This second s t r a t e g y f o r i d e n t i f y i n g - t h e s p e c i f i c manners

i n which c u l t u r e may myst i fy r e l a t i o n s of domination i s based on

t h e not ion o f " l eg i t ima t ion . " -

Bourdieu's no t ion o f l e g i t i m a t i o n covers a wide range of

s o c i a l phenomena. ~ r o a d l ~ speaking, f o r Bourdieu t h e p rocess o f i I

l e g i t i m a t i o n . rekrs-tb t h e p r o c e s s b y wh-ii3i €Fie c l = s s i f i c a t i o n s

o f 2 given s o c i a l environment--from fundamental d i v i s i o n s o f

space and ti- t o t y p i c a l p a t t e r n s of behavior and thought--are *

made t o appear ' n a t u r a l . ' Thus- l e g i t i m a t i o n p rocesses , and t h e

groups who suppor t and manipulate them, f o s t e r i n members of a

s o c i e t y a t t i t u d e s of acceptance, b e l i e f s i n t h e ' s e l f - e v i d e n t '

q u a l i t y of d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s of s o c i a l l i f e . These a t t i t u d e s and

b e l i e f s regarding - t h e appropr ia teness of everyday r o u t i n e s are - - - - - - -

--

s u s t a i n e d even though, from some perspec t ives , t h e e x i s t i n g clas- -

s i f i c a t i o n s can be .made t o appear q u i t e

This n o t i o n of " a r b i t r a r i n e s s " i s c l o s e l y l i n k e d w i t h Bour-

d i e u ' s d e f i n i t i o n o f l e g i t i m a t i o n , .As he p u t s it: ". . . the

r ecogn i t ion of l eg i t ima t ion . . . [is a func t ion of 1 the misrecog- j i

1

i

thus p o s s i b l e t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e concept of l e g i t i m a t i o n w i t h %

r e fe rence t o Bourdieu ' s view of t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e "natu-

r a l " and t h e " a r b i t r a r y . "

* \ Consider t h e fo l lowing examples drawn' from Kabyle s o i e t y . P The o r g a n i z a t i o n of space i n t h e Kabyle house, f o r i n s t a n c e , i s

a r b i t r a r y i n - s o f a r as t h e boundaries t h a t d e f i n e t h e different

segments o f t h e house (such a s t h e masculine and . f & m h i n e a r e a s )

t i o n a l requirements" (Bourdieu, 1971d: 99) . The d i v i s i o n of

l a b o r i n Kabyle s o c i e t y i s a l s o a r b i t r a r y . There is, Bourdieu

would argue , no evidence t o sugges t t h a t t h e tendency t o restrict

% women t o household d u t i e s and t o exclude them from t h e t r ansac - Z

t i o n s of t h e market can be e b l a i n e d e x c l u s i v e l y wi th r e f e r e n c e

- to, say , ' hman-nature. -FinaHy rt?rerelations-of--dom&n*im- --- -

between men and women i n Kabyle s o c i e t y could conceivably be . Jess

h i e r a r c h i c a l . Because t h e r e l a t i o n s of domination a r e - n e i t h e r -

' God-ordained ' n o r b i o l o g i c a l l y determined--i. e . , because they I '

are "not deduc ib le from a u n i v e r s a l p r i n c i p l e n ( ~ e p r o d u c t i o n : 10)

--they are a r b i t r a r y i n Bourdieu 's sense .

However, whi le t h e va r ious c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s and r e l a t i o n s

d e t a i l e d above are arbitrary from t h e t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e - - - - --- - - - - - -- -- - - -- -- -- - - -- -

t h a t Bourdieu advocates , from t h e viewpoint o f a p a r t i c i p a n t i n

Kabyle s o c i e t y they are u s u a l l y taken for g ran ted and expef ienced

as being q u i t e ' n a t u r a l , ' That i s to say , a lmost a l l t h e p a t t e r n s --

of ~ a b ~ l e - l i f e - - t h e d i v i s i o n of t h e house i n t o mascul ine and

feminine s e c t i o n s , the sexua l d i v i s i o n of everyday r o u t i n e s , etc.

. --work towards making the different classifications and relations I

B appear as naturally Given rather 'than arbitraw. The self-

evident quality of various classifications of space and activity 8 3 a

is further sustained by (and sustains) certain basic elements of Z ,' 4

$ the Kabyle personality--such as the typical attitudes of feminine %

3

deference and malk pride. As a result of this configuration of 3 J - bi -6

mutually reinforcing patterns, alternate viewpoints--viewpoints w

that might help to disclose the arbitrarity of the existing

For ourd die;, this process by Ghich important cultural

values and classifications are kept--". . .to very different .A T

degrees and with very different means" (Outline: 164)--outside of

the domain of explicit cr-iticism, is the process by whlch the

"misrecognition of arbitrariness" is maintained (.Outline: 168). I

- - - - m d %t i s *is same prucess--i-. e;, the-cancomi3zant-" recognkkim - -- --

of legitimacyn--that functions to enhance the political function

of culture in specific social contexts.

It is important to make two points of clarification with

respect to Bourdieu's view of legitimacy before concluding this *

chapter. The first concerns,&he complexity of the individual's

experience of legitimacy and the second'concerns the differences F %

in the character of legitimacy in non state and state societies.

nature of the individual's experience of legitimacy through his

use of the term misrecognition (as in his assertion that the 4

f - -

"recognition of legitimacy. . . [is a- function of ] the misrec& . nition of arbitrariness-" (Outline : L58) . Within the French

*

- 7 - - --

-- - a c a d e m i c d ~ s c o u r s e , t h e term mis recogn i t ion (m&onnajssance)

conveys some connota t ions t h a t d e r i v e from psychoanalyst Jaques.

~ a c a n ' s work on t h e Freudian t h e o r f t h e self. ' ,In Lacan ' s a -1 - p e r s p e c t i v e , "misrecognit ion" i s u s e d , t o ,descr ibe t h e psycho-

l o g i c a l c o n d i t i o n where the i n d i v i d u a l both f a i l s t o recognize

( a t one l e v e l of consciousness) and r cognizes ( a t ano the r l e v e l - e, 6

of consciousness) a p a r t i c u l a r set of f a c t o r s : c o n t r i b u t i n g t o -

? h i s / h e r s t a t e of being. A s Lacan p u t s it, i n h i s d i s c u s s i o n of

- .

a r e c o g n i t i o n , a s is manifested i n sys temat ic f a i l u r e t o recog- 1 FA n i z e , where it must obviously be ahmit ted t h a t what i s d e n i e d X i s

i n some fash ion recognized" (quoted i n Wilden, 1975 : 96 ; . cf . .-I

d e f i n i t i o n of " d e n i a l , " below, p. 1981. 5

Within t h e c o n t e x t of Bourdieu 's p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e term mis- *

- - recogn* t i a n h&ps to m v e y sense4 khe -tiof&+ chetraeker of- - --

a given ind iv idua ff-& s r cogn i t ion o f leg i t imacy. For example, t h e

women of Kabyle s o c i e t y ~ g h t never acknowledge t h e i r p o s i t i o n o f +

- subord ina t ion a s , say , one s i t u a t i o n among a number o f poten- .

t i a l l y less h i e r a x c h i c a l s i t u a t i o n s . Thus, whi l e they f a i l t o

recognize d ~ @ ~ n a t i o n a t t h i s conscious l e v e l of exper ience , they

recognize it a t another l e v e l , by conforming t o t h e s e x u a l l y

d i f f e r e n t i a t e d r o u t i n e s of everyday l i f e . Moreover, they "use"

t h i s f a i l u r e t o v e r b a l l y acknowledge o r c r i t i c i z e domination t o . *

seek whatever advantages they.rnay s e c u r e given t h e e x i s t i n g

s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s .' Bourdieu d e s c r i b e s t h i s t y p i c a l l y ambivalent

j way-of recognizing t h e leg i t imacy o f domination: " . . . s o c i a l 2 i 4

c a t e g o r i e s [of ind iv idua l s ] disadvantaged by t h e symbolic o r d e r , 7

---- - -- -- - -pppp-p -- ---- C-

such as women and t h e young, cannot b u t r ecogn ize t h e l eu i t imacy .

of t h e dominant c & a s s i f i c a t i o n i n t h e ve ry f a c t t h a t t h e i r only

chance o f n e u t r a l i z i n g those of i t s e f f e c t s most c o n t r a r y t o

t h e i r own i n t e r e s t s lies i n submi t t ing to them i n o r d e r t o make

use of themn (Outline: 104-105) . *In a d d i t i o n t o e l a b o r a t i n g t h e no t ion o f l eg i t imacy i n

g e n e r a l wi th r e s p e c t t o t h e a t t i t u d e s of i n d i v i d u a l s , Bourdieu .

makes a p o i n t of i n d i c a t i n g t h e way i n which t h e processes of

k g i t ima t ion - - - vary m d e r d i f f e r e n t _ s o c i a l cond i t ions . A t one- e n d =- - -

of a continuum i s t h e s i t u a t i o n where, a s i n Kabyle s o c i e t y ,

" . . . the e s t a b l i s h e d cosmological and p o l i t i c a l o r d e r i s perce ived

n o t as a r b i t r a r y , i . e . as one p o s s i b l e o r d e r among o t h e r s , b u t a s

a s e l f - e v i d e n t and n a t u r a l o r d e r which goes wi thou t say ing and

t h e r e f o r e goes unquestionedw (Out l ine : 1662'. I n t h i s type of -

sztuati-Mii, Bouraieu contends, l eg i t imacy i s i E G e x p 1 i c i f l y

chal lenged, The limits imposed on i n d i v i d u a l s by t h e i r r e l a t i o n

to a s o c i e t y ' s ' m a t e r i a l ' and c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s correspond

c l o s e l y w i t h t h e limits embodied i n t h e a s p i r a t i o n s o f indiv idu-

als. Bourdieu sugges ts t h a t it is i n t h e s e k inds of s i t u a t i o n s

t h a t " . . . the n a t u r a l and s o c i a l world appears as s e l f - e v i d e n t n

(Outl ine: 164) . H e cont inues : ".This e iper ienc; [of s e l f -

evidence] -- - - - w e - - s h a l l c a l l doxaw (Out l ine : 1 6 4 ) . -p I n Kabyle soc ie ty , .

then, t h e predominance o f what Bourdieu ca l l s " t h e dpxic r e l a t i o n G f

. t o the s o c i a l worldn diminishes t h e l i k e l i h o o d of controversy

over what e x i s t s , what i s p o s s i b l e and what i s r i g h t .5 -

A t t h e other end o f a continuum is t h e s i t u a t i o n ,

~ o u r d i e u d i s t i n g u i s h e s from * t h e dox ic r e l a t i o n t o t h e

which /

s o c i a l

-- - - - - - - --

world," where l eg i t imacy may b e challenged--where, i n Bourdieu 's

words, t h e r e may e x i s t "orthodox o r heterodox b e l i e f implying

awareness o f t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f d i f f e r e n t o r a n t a g o n i s t i c

b e l i e f s " (Outline: 164) . I t i s onTY i n t h i s l a t t e r k ind of s i t u - ,

a t i o n t h a t t h e r b x i s t s "opin ion a s l i b e r a l ideology unders tands

it, i.e. a s one of t h e d - i f f e ren t and e q u a l l y l e g i t i m a t e answers

which can be given t o an e x p l i c i t q u e s t i o n about t h e e s t a b l i s h e d

p o l i t i c a l o rde r" (Out l ine : 166-167): ( I t i s t h i s e x p l i c i t ques-

consc ious ly c,ompares what. e x i s t s w i t h -what

r i g h t - - t h a t i s u s u a l l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e

Bourdieu argues t h a t t h e - cha l l enge t o

i s p o s s i b l e and what i s

g e n e r a l use of t h e term

doxa presupposes a

' l a c k of correspondence between t h e c o n s t r a i n t s on ind iv idua v der ined b y t h x i r r e l a t i o n - t o a p e f y l s +miierZal t and-(cultural

t r e sources , and t h e a s p i r a t i o n s of i n d i v i d u a l s (what i s pe rce ived

t o be p o s s i b l e ) . ' T h i s s i t u a t i o n may occur i n modem s o c i e t y when,

f o r example, a n economic c r i s i s makes it imposs ib le f o r t h e

modern l i b e r a l democracy t o f u l f i l l i t s promises t o indiv iduals - -

such as t h e promise of f u l l employment or t h e promise of a wage

t h a t w i l l s ecure a 'decent ' s t andard o f . l i v i n g , '

Bourdieu sugges t s , however, t h a t t h i s l ack o f correspondence - - - - - - - - -. - - - - -

between what he cal ls "ob j ec t$veN c o n s t r a i n t s (i . e. the indiv idu-

a l ' s r e l a t i o n t o a s o c i e t y ' s ' m a t e r i a l ' and c u l t u r a l r e sources )

and what he cal ls " sub jec t ive" c o n s t r a i n t s (the i n d i v i d u a l ' s <

4 - - -

a s p i r a t i o n s ) "...is n o t i n i t s e l f a s u f f i c i e n t c o n d i t i o n f o r the

product ion of a cg i t ica l d iscourse" *(Out l ine : 169) . An "objec t -

im" crisis may make p o s s i b l e the f i r s t glimmerings of 'a

conscious r e c o g n i t i o n of " t h e a r b i t r a r i n e s s of t h e taken f o r

g r a n t e d [dbxa] "--for example, a r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t i n e q u a l i t y can- ,

n o t be adequate ly explained o r j u s t i f i e d wi th r e f e r e n c e t o God,

n a t u r e o r some o t h e r f a c t o r o u t s i d e of human c o n t r o l . But t h i s

conscious r e c o g n i t i o n must f i n d both ' m a t e r i a l ' and symbolic

suppor t b e f o r e a c r i t i i u e t h e d e s i r e d p o l i t i c a l e f f e c t s *

can be developed, Bourdieu exp la ins : " I t i s .only when t h e domi-

- - - n a t e d - -- _ - have - t h e _ -- m a t e r i a l a n d - -- - - - - symbolic _ -- - _ - me-ans - pf - _re j-ng - - t h e d e f i - - - -- -- - - _

. n i t i o n of t h e real t h a t i s imposed [by ther dominant] . . . t h a t t h e I '

-

a r b i t r a r y ~ p r i n c i p l e s ~ o f t h e prev i l i n g c l a s s i f i c a t i o n can-appear P a s such" (Out l ine : 1 6 9 ) . .

0

When t h i s ' rna ter ia1 ' ' and symbolic suppor t i s e s t a b l i s h e d , it

becomes p o s s i b l e for t he dominated t o pursue! t h e i r " i n t e r e s t i n

t h e taken f o r g ran tedn (Outl ine: , 169) . Th i s c h a l l e n g e t o doxa i s

expressed through t h e c r i t i c a l d i s c o u r s e s t h a t Bourdieu groups

under t h e ca tegory of "heterodoxy" (as c o n t r a s t e d t o "orthodoxy" ) . t /

r . Heterodoxy, which arises once it is p o s s i b l e to conceive o f .'what *. Bourdieu ca l l s "competing p o s s i b l e s , " makes consc ious a previous-

P

l y ' t ac i t r e c o g n i t i o n of domination (Outl-ine: 169) , Bourdieu a+-

summarizes the ' s ign i f i cance of t h i s moment wi th a q u o t a t i o n from - -- - - - -- - _ -- -- --

f .a - - Jean-Paul S a r t r e : "Words [wreak] havoc.. .when they f i n d a name

f o r what had up t o then been l i v e d namelessly" (quoted i n Outl ine:

170). - - - - - _

I t is t h u s understandable that Bourdieu s u g g e s t s h i s approach- ...-

to s o c i e t y forms a b a s i s f o r a theory OF symbolic power. When

- -- - -- \ r e l a t i o n s between symbolic systems and r e l a t i o n s of domi

0

i s concealed, and when, correspondingly, a n a i v e b e l i e f i t h e 2 leg i t imacy o f t h e e x i s t i n g s o c i a l ' o r d e r i s s u s t a i n e d , it be omes 'Y l e s s impor tant t o e x e r c i s e s o c i a l c o n t r o l through p h y s i c a l means

o r even through o v e r t coercion and propaganda. The u n c r i t i c a l <

assumptions embodied i n t h e doxic r e l a t i o n t o t h e dominant d e f i -

n i t i o n of t h e s o d a 1 world func t ion t o s u s t a i n a given s o c i e t y *. "L '

wi thou t t h e d e l i b d r a t e conscious i n t e r v e n t i o n , b of s p e c i f i d i n d i d i -

assumptionsn t h a t character i .ze doxa are n o t r e s t r i c t e d t o C- non t

s t a t e societies such as that of t h e Kabyle . -It w a s only q u i t e i

f 1 ' r e c e n t l y t h a t it became p o s s i b l e t o c r i t i i z e (wi thout t o t a l

excommunication) t h e ' p resuppos i t ion of e t h i c a l n e u t r a l i t y i n t h e

- - s m i a l s c h n c e s . &Ir~rnarre,-tfre-irrstituti6nstkatf;egit4mate--

d i f f e r e n t p roduc t s of t h e world o f ' h igh c u l t u r e ' con t inue t o

p r e s e n t that world as, i n ~ o u r d i e u ' s worlds: "...a sac red i s l a n d a - -, 5 a

s y s t e m a t i c a l l y and o s t e n t a t i o u s l y opposed t o t h e profane , every-

day world o f product ion , a sanc tua ry f o r g r a t u i t o u s , d i s i n t e r -

e s t e d a c t i v i t y i n a universe given over to*rnoney an6 s e l f - . .

d i n t e r e v (Outl ine: 197) . 7 - - - - . - The n e x t two chap te r s w i l l exp lo re t h e d i f f e r e n c e s & betweeh

-- -p- - --

I

t h e e x e r c i s e o f symbolic power i n pon s ta te and s ta te s o c i e t i e s :

*at Bourdieu d e s c r i b e s as d i f f e r e h c e s inenmodes o f domination."

An a t t empt w i l l be made to show how--given p a r t i c u l a r r e l a t i o n s - - - - -

of domination, some farm of dox ic r e l a t i o n , - a n d a set of typical

d i s p o s i t i o n s or habi tus- - indiv iduals ac t t o ' reproduce a s o c i a l -

resources.

. % .

PART 3: THE HABITUS IN CONTEXT

CHAPTER VII: PERSONAL DOMINATIOF?: THE HABITUS IN NON STA- SOCIETIES

ear the beginning of Chapter IV I argued t h a t , a l though t h e t rr

characte; of t h e hab i t u s c&ld be d iscussed i n formal terms ( a s a q$

* 5 e *

theory o f l e a rn ing and s o c i a l i z a t i o n ) , Bourdieu both- d e f i n e s and > - -. - > - * A - > --

uses t h e concept wi th t o p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l con tex t s .

H i s over r id ing a i m i s t h e func t ion of t h e h a b i t u s '

t o t a l i ties.

For Bourdieu, an e s s e n t i a l s t e p - i n conceptual iz ing t h e r o l e

, of t h e hab i t u s i n t h e reproduct ion of s o c i e t y involves a "L-

d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n between two b a s i c types o f s o c i a l . c o n t e x t o r , i

more s p e c i f i c a l l y , between two d i f f e r e n t "modes o f domination. " .. I3okdieu thus a t tempts t o cqn t ex tua l i z e and &f ine t h e no t ion df

the hab i tus by s e t t i n g f o r t h some gene ra l d i f f e r ences between -

domination i n non s t a t e and state s o c i e t i e s , This d i s c u s s i o n of

the d i f f e r e n t modes of domination e n t a i l s a cons idera t ion of t h e .- *

processes 'whereby c o n t r o l ove r va r ious -- forms of s o c i a l resources'

i s exerc ised , r e in fo rced and t r a n s m k t e d through t i m e - i n t h e two

types of soc i e ty , r

-- - --- 9 . I L a l l l tLaL

w-

(i-e., "the habitus") through a d i scus s ion of d i f f e r e n c e s i n 1. ' - -

-- - legakjuridical $hemmenain d i f ferent societies.

Weber, Buurdieu pointed o u t that d i f f e r e n c e s i n l e b a l - j u r i d i c a l

a I

phenomena (or, more general ly , i n processes of s o c i a l con t ro%P~

could be c l a s s i f i e d according t o t h e i r degree of e x p l i c i t n e s s and

t h e i r degree of i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n . P

Bourdieu app l i e s t he se and r e l a t e d c r i t e r i a q u i t e s t r a i g h t -

forwardly to b r ing i n t o focus the d i f fe rences between t h e two

modes of domination. Thus, argues ~ o u r d i e u , i n ' a non state -- A

' society such a s t h a t of t he Kabyles, domination i s n o t i n s t i t u -

1

t i ona l i zed nor does it opera te with reference t o ehpl ic i t w r i t t e n I .

domination i n Kabyle sozlicty rr;ight be character ized as "personal '

1 dominationw --i.e. as domination t h a t can only be maintained

through ongoing personal s t r a t e g i e s . Thus, among the Kabyles,

" r e l a t i ons o f domination cap be set up and maintained only a t t h e

-- -- - cost - - - - of - - - - - - s t ra$egies-which - -

- - - - - - must - - -- be -

endless ly --- - renewed -- - because - - t h e - -- - - - - - - --

condit ions requ i red f o r an i n s t i t u t i o n a l l y mediated l a s t i n g

=propr ia t ion of o t h e r agen ts ' labour, s e rv i ce o r homage have n o t +-%

been brought togetherw (Outline: 183) . a7 I Consider t h e r o l e of "the sense of honour" among t h e ~ a b y l e s .

I n Kabyle society honour is c l o s e l y l inked t o domination or the h

control over social res6urces; Its r o l e i n t h e processes of, I

domination is b e s t understoodswith reference t o Bourdieu's -- --

~ c E Z S i o ~ f of ~ . s i g n x ? i c a n c e of legitimacy i n s o k i a l con t ro l .

4 h i s repu ta t ion as an honourable person h i s con t ro l over resources

- wi3f be rqa* as-apprdprkate and j u s t and t h e persons who are -

subjected t o this control--his wife , h i s ch i ld ren and h i s kin--

w i l l experience their ob l iga t ions t o him as ' n a tu ra l ' and 'self-

ev iden t f (i .e., a s " leg i t imate* i n Bourdieu's sense ) ,

B'ourdieu 'uses t h e no t ion of t h e "sense of honour" as an

exemplary ca se i n d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g personal domination from more

i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d forms of domination. I n c o n t r a s t t o t h e

r sona l p rocesses o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l domination, Bourdieu r r

explains; t h e preseKce af honour i s no t eva lua ted wi th reference - - ,

t o a b s t r a c t standardsqand e x p l i c i t r u l e s . a t h e r , honour is . B evaluated i n r o u t i n e i n t e r a c t i o b f everyday L i f e wi th keference

- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - - - -- - -- - -- -- - --- - -- -- - - pp - -

t o indicgs--"postures and s t ances , ways o f s t and ing , s i t t i n g , *>a ,

looking, ,speaking, and walkingn (Outline: 15) - - tha t a r e embodied

i n bhe habitus of s p e c i f i c i nd iv idua i s . Bourdieu i l l u s t r a t e s t h i s

po in t i n t h e fo l lowing desc r ip t i on of t h e man of honour:

The man of honour 's pace i s steady and determined. H i s way - - - - - - -

- o f w&kim~+at ef a - = w h & ~ wker&& @ftg-anii-- - - - -

knows he w i l l a r r i v e on the, whatever t h e o b s t a c l e s , expresses s t r e n g t h and resolut5on, a s opposed t o t h e h e s i t a n t ,

g a i t ( t h i k l i thamahmahth) annohc ing i ndec i s ion , half-hearted, promises f a w a l amahmah), ? the f e a r of cormnitments and t h e i ncapac i t y to f u l f i l l them. A t t h e same t i m e it is a measured pace: it c o n t r a s t s a s much wi th t h e h a s t e of t h e man

- who nthrows h i s feet up %high a s h i s head", "walks a long wi th great strides"., "daneesW--running be ing weak and f r i v o l o u s conduct--as it does with the s lugg i shnes s of t h e man w h ~ " t ra i l s a longn (Outline: 94 ) .

\

Much of what d b n s t i t u t e s honbur i n Kabyle s o c i e t y is thus .

ons of coffcrztc s . F u r t h m o x e , a y v y d 1 ell,

the p r i v i l e g e of pass ing judgement on a "po in t of honour" is n o t

- canfinP_d --a &a--of anonymous s p e c i a l i s t s w i t b expertise i n - - .

some e s o t e r i c o r obscure c o l l e c t i o n s of r u l e s on e t h i c a l conduct.

On the con t ra ry , honour is evaluated by means t h a t are, i n s o m e - - 1 ,

r e s p e c p , a c c e s s i b l e t o a Notes Bourdieu: " . . . t he p recep t s of

custom [ t h a t govern Kabylian l i f e ] , very c lose . . . t o sayings and

proverbs, . . ,have no th ing i n common with t h e t r anscenden t r u l e s of

a j u r i d i c a l code: everyone i s able, n o t s o much t o c i t e and

r e c i t e them from memory, as t o reproduce them ( f a i r l y a c c u r a t e l y ) "

(Outline:.

The " p r e c e p t s o f custom" t h a t h e l p t o d e f i n e honour a s an

element o f p e r s o n a l domination can be f u r t h e r d i s t i n g u i s h e d from - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - -- - -~

1 ----- a e z r T i n s t i t u t i o t n n a ~ z e d C o O ~ t e r p ~ t s ~ . e . , 'raws J on tx~-5aFl sP'-------

of t h e i r s e n s i t i v i t y t o s o c i r a l context . Thus, as noted previous-

ly., when a s o c i e t y i s o r i e n t p d towards l e g a l norms a t t empts a r e

made t o s i t u a t e complex and o f t e n ambiguous e v e n t s i n r e l a t i o n t o

t h e p r e c i s e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s d e l i n e a t e d by a b s t r a c t c a t e g o r i e s and -

genera l r u l e s . However among t h e Kabyle, a rgues Bourdieu, t h e

t l a w ' ] always seems t o

case, from s p e c i f i c niisdeed

formula t ing the fundamental

s p e l l s b u t e x p l i c i t l y (e . g .

t h e g e n e r a l r u l e : " . . . [ ~ a b ~ l i a n

from -cular case t o p a r t i c u l a r

t o s p e c i f i c s a n c t i o n , never e x p r e s s l y

p r i n c i p l e s which ' r a t i o n a l ' l a w

a l l men are e q u a l i n honour) "

(Outl ine: 16) Honour is thus tied to persons - and c o n t e x t s and

it i s n o t unusual t o f i n d t h a t t h e s e v e r i t y o f a dishonourable -- -- - - -

act i x j u d g e d n o t o n i j F 3 3 3 i r e f e r e n c e t o the r e p u t a t i o n o r s t a t u s

p l a c e it w a s committed and t h e t i m e o f day o y e a r that it was t - ea~~&t~ed(8uklitte:--fd) . - 1 -

%\

I n ~ a b y y s o c i e t y , .then. honourable conduct is eva lua ted i n . *

' f a c e t o f a c e * s i t u a t i o n s by m a n s t h a t are taci t , c o l l e c t i v e l y

a c c e s s i b l e , and c o n t e x t dependent: i n .a word, 'persona-1. ' - More-

over the r e l a t i o n s o f dependence between persons and t h e c o n t r o l C

over s o c i a l r e s o u r c e s i n Kabyle s o c i e t y a re ' con ' t ingen t on t h i s

personal e v a l u a t i o n of honour. The "sense of honour" i s thus a

c e n t r a l component o f t h e d i s t i n c t i v e l y pe r sona l mode o f domi-

n a t i o n among t h e Kabyle.

I t should be s t r e s s e d t h a t honour a s d i s c u s s e d ,here i s no t a

s t a t i c e n t i t y l i k e t h e degrees o r t i t les t h a t ~ o u r d i e u ' u s e s t8

r e s p e c t , honour i s permanent: a s an u l t i m a t e v a l u e embodied i n a

durable d i s p o s i t i o n , t h e sense of honour i s necessary t o t h e

reproduct ion o f t h e r e l a t i o n s o f dominatiori i n Kabyle s o c i e t y . - l

Y e t , i n ano the r r e s p e c t , honour i s impermanent and p reca r ious :

an i n d i v i d u a l i s n o t guaranteed s t a t u s once and f o r a l l as a

conscious p e r s o n a l and group s t r a t e a i e s a r e r e q u i r e d t o maintain .. t h e p u b l i c image o f honour and t o "awaken" t h e semi-conscious

a t t i t u d e s o f deference and r e s p e c t embodied i n t h e d u r a b l e d i s - '2

p o s i t i o n s o f t h e h a b i t u s . To i l l u s t r a t e t h e role o f t i m e i n

t h e s e s t r a t e g i e s and, similariy, t h e importance o f t h e c o n t i n u a l

upkeep of honour i n personal domination, Bourdieu focuses on t h e

Bourdieu sugqes t s t h a t exchanges amon t h e Kabyle may be

thought of as cha l l enges t o an i n d i v i d u a l ' s honour. "Generous

exchange, " w r i t e s Baurdieu, " t ends toward overwhelming generos i ty ; - - -

t h e g r e a t e s t g i f t is a t t h e same t ine t h e g i f t most l i k e l y t o . .

t h r o w i t s r e c i p i e n t i n t o dishonour by p r o h i b i t i n g any couriter-

g i f t " (Out l ine : 1 4 ) . Thus, Bourdieu, a rgues , t h e Kabyle "economyn

is a "dual economy:" it c o n s i s t s o f an " o f f i c i a l r e a l i t y (gener-

o s i t y , mutual a i d , e t c . 1 " and an u n o f f i c i a l r-ealit? of e x p l o i t - f

a t i o n i n which t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l and h i s l ineage

p lay an impor tant , a l b e i t unacknowledged p a r t (Out l ine : 192) .

Bourdieu e x p l a i n s :

The r i c h man i s " r i c h s o a s t o be a b l e t o g i v e t o the o o r , " say t h e Kabyles. This i s an exemplary d i s c l a i m e r : gecause g i v i n g is also a way o f possess ing ( a g i f t which i s n o t

-- - m&ekeby =-eeu&z~-+zf+ m e s .it %as&isg--bezx&,=~esMet-- - ---

i n g t h e d e b t o r ' s freedom and f o r c i n g him t o adop t a peace- f u l , co-opera t ive , prudent a t t i t u d e ) ; because i n t h e absence o f any j u r i d i c a l guarantee, o r any c o e r c i v e f o r c e , one of t h e few ways o f "holding" someone is t o keep ue a l a s t i n g asymmetrical r e l a t i o n s h i p such a s indebtedness ; an%;e t h e o n l y recoggized, l e g i t i m a t e form of possess ion i achieved by d i spossess ing onese l f - - i .e . o b l i g a t i o n , g r a t i t u d e , p r e s t i g e , o r pe r sona l l o y a l t y ( O u t l i n e : 195) .

persona l domination descr ibed h e r e depends, i n a fundamental way,

I on t h e passage o f t ime and c o n t i n u a l upkeep by indiv iduals . .

P Bourdieu stresses t h i s p o i n t both t o show t h e .. -

persona l domination and t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e h i s v i e w from perspec-

t i v e s (such as t h a t of s t r u c t u r a l i s t Claude ~ g v i - ~ t r a u s s ) which

rely on abstract models o r t h e idiom o f " r u l e s n t o express t h e

t r u t h of exchanges i n non state s o c i e t i e s such as t h a t of t h e

Kabyle. Thus contends Bourdieu, t h e meaning and f u n c t i o n of what

has been c a l l e d "g i f t -g iv ing" by s o m e a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s i s l i d f e d

t o .the i n t e r v a l between g i f t and c o u n t e r - g i f t n (Out l ine : 6j . 3ourdieu elaborates, i n d i c a t i n g t h e n a t u r e of t h e c o n t r o l t h a t

g i f t - g i v i n g h e l p s t o e s t a b l i s h : " U n t i l h e h a s g iven i n r e t u r n ,

t h e r e c e i v e r is "obi iged," expected t o show h i s g r a t i t u d e t o h i s

benefacto;, or, a t least, t o have regard f o r him, t o r e f r a i n from

us ing a g a i n s t him a l l t h e weapons he o therwise might, t o p q l l h i s 1

punches, lest he be accused of i n g r a t i t u d e and s t a n d condemned by

"what peop le s a y , " which i s what g ives a c t i o n s t h e i r s o c i a l /

meaningH (Out l ine : 6) . a

Bourdieu adds, however, t h a t p o s i t i o n s o f advantage a r e , i n

most c a s e s , temporary, and t h a t t h e element of c o n t r o l ca'n be - -

exeFcLse'd in-booWr f i ~ e c t i - O n ~ - T h e passage oE- t i m e e z a --byL --- t h e r e c e i v e r o f a g i f t t o c r e a t e a bond between himself and t h e

person who gave him t h e g i f t . A s Bourdieu p u t s it: "The man who

has n o t [responded t o a c ~ i f t ] . . . sees h i s s a p i t a l [of honour]

diminished from day t o day by pass ing time--unless he is capable

e . of t ransforming forced de lay i n t o s t r a t e g i c deferment, t h e space 4

- - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - -- - --- - - - - - - -

of t ime i n t o d e l i b e r a t e spac ing o u t : p u t t i n g o f f revenge o r t h e 3

r e t u r n o f a g i f t can be a way of keeping o n e ' s partner-opponent +

i n t h e dark about o n e ' s i n t e n t i o n s . . . [thus d e l a y is] a way-of d

e x a c t i n g f r o q him t h e d e f e r e n t i a l conduct that i s requ i red as

long a s r e l a t i o n s are n o t broken o f f " (Out l ine : 6-71 ,

The s e n s e o f honour is thus dynamic rather than s t a t i c .

Grounded in i n d i v i d u a l conduct and 'face t o face' i n t e r a c t i o n

- -rather- t h a n i w e r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p e e i - a f i s k s ~ 4

I F F s Of -tion that +- of -ur -es Q " -

p o s s i b l e m u s t be "end less ly renewed." Bourdieu summarizes, -4

- indicatinq the c e n t r a l i t y i n Xabyle s o c i e t y o f t h e r e l a t i o n

between the form of social resources c o n t r o l l e d (the forms of

m c a p i t a l m as Bourdieu cal ls t h e m ) , and pe f sona i i n t e r a c a o n s

between f a m i l i a r i n d i v i d u a l s :

I n i t s f u l l d e f i n i t i o n , t h e patrimony [ s o c i a l r e sources o r c a p i t a l ] of a family o r l i n e a g e i n c l u d e s n o t only t h e i r l and and ins t ruments o f product ion b u t a l s o t h e i r k i n and t h e i r c l i e n t e l e , nesba, the network o f a l l i a n c e s , o r , more broad- l y , of r e l a t i o n s h i p s , t o be k e p t up and x e g u l a r l y main- t a i n e d , r ep resen t ing a h e r i t a g e o f commitments and d e b t s o f honour, a c a p i t a l o f r i g h t s and d u t i e s b u i l t up i n t h e course .of success ive genera t ions and provid ing an a d d i t i o n a l source of s t r e n g t h which can be c a l l e d upon.. . f in ) e x t r a - . -

o r d i n a r y - s i t u a t i o n s ...(.. ,such as unusual c i rcumstances o f economic crisis, p ' o l i t i c a l c o n f l i c t , o r simply urgent farm work) (Outl ine: 178-79) .

r- ~ - - - - -- ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~- - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - -- - ~ ~ --p-----p-- ~ -- --p---------------- ~- -- ~ ~ - ~

Although t h e use o f t h e t e r m " c a p i t a l m i n t h i s passage

sugges t s Bourdieu i s drawing on a Marxian conceptua l framework,

it would be an e r r o r t o r e a d " c a p i t a l , " . i n t h e sense it i s used G

by Bourdieu, as a s imple e x t e n s i o n of Marx's use of t h e term.

For Marx, "capf t a l n is more than products o r "goods. " " C a p i t a l , "

h i s t o r i c form o f s o c i e t y [i .e. capitalism] " (1973: 264) . Thus

Marx c r i t i c i z e s t h e o r i s t s , such a s s o u d h o n , who decon tex tua l i ze

t h e n o t i o n o f c a p i t a l . "according to [such t h e o r i s t s ] ," Marx k

e x p l a i n s , " c a p i t a l would have e x i s t e d i n a l l forms o f s o c i e t y , ?

4

and is something a l toge the l ' unhis t o r i c a l . . . . C a p i t a l i s [ thus1

conceived as a th ing , n o t as a [ soc ia l ] r e l a t i o n n (1973 : 257-8) . For Marx, then , goods are only viewed as c a p i t a l when they are '

produced w i t h i n a p a r t i c u l a r k i n d o f s o c i a l r e l a t i o n . 1

For Bourdieu, on-other hand, c a p i t a l i s most o f t e n

de f ined i n respect of "rare and worthy" goods, though he stresses -- -

t h a t - t h e va lue of these is n o t n & e s s a r i l y i n t r i n s i c t o

them, b u t is def ined p a r t i a l l y by s o c i a l groups who may be i n

r * c o n t l i c t wi th one a n i S T A s a g e n s t a l i m i t e d no t ion o f

c a p i t a l which i s used w i t h i n what h e c a l l s "economism," Bourdieu . b

o f f e r s what he b e l i e v e s is $ more comprehensive n o t i o n t h a t

inc ludes " a l l t h e goods, m a t e r i a l and symbolic ... t h a t p r e s e n t - themselves as rare and worthy of b e i n g sought a f t e r i n , a

2' p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l formation--whi h may be ' f a i r words' o r s m i l e s ,

a, f

handshakes o r shrugs, compliments o r a t t e n t i o n , cha l l enges or

i n s u k t s , honour o r honours, powers o r p l e a s u r e s , g o s s i p o r

s c i e n t i f i c informat ion , d i s t i n c t i o n o r d i s t i n c t i o n s , e t c . ". - - - - --- - - -

- - -- - - - - -

- - - - - - - - --- -

--

(Out l ine : 178) . Honour and. t h e Market--The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f pe r sona l

domination%+dentified above can be sharpened by c o n t r a s t i n g them i

w i t h concre te i n s t a n c e s of i n s t i t u t i o n a l domination. I n t h e case

o f Kabyle s o c i e t y , t h e e m p i r i c a l c i rcumstances t h a t make such a

v i l l a g e s a r e c e n t r a l i z e d markets where, a t l e a s t i n p r i n c i p l e ,

t h e processes o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l domination opera te . 3

This i s n o t t o s a y t h a t t h e market dominates t h e Kabyle

."economy." Many goods are produced f o r consumption i n the "-?

v i l l a g e r a t h e r t h a n f o r exchange i n t h e market. Moreover, honour,

which as an i n t e g r a l a s p e c t o f p e r s o n a l domination i n f l u e n c e s

c o n t r o l ove r product ion and d i s t r i b u t i o n i n t h e v i l l a g e , a l s o

p l a y s a s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e i n t h e exchanges o f t h e market. Never-

theless, the t e n s i o n between t h e p e r s o n a l domination of t h e

v i l l a g e and the i n s t i t u t i o n a l domination of t h e market enab les - -

Bourdieu to: (a) c l a r i f y the two models o f domination he h a s

developed; (b) . i l l u s t r a t e # a t , wh i l e pe r sona l and i n s t i t u t i o n a l * I

domination are a n a l y t i c a l l y d i s t i n c t t y p i f i c a t i o n s , a c t u a l s o c i a l

contexts may e x h i b i t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of both modes o f domination,

The e x t e n t t o which t h e t r a d i t i o n a l f a c t o r s o f p e r s o n a l

domination i n f l u e n c e exhanaes i n t h e markets n e a r the Kabyle ,

v i l l a g e s leads Bourdieu t o l a b g l t h e s i t u a t i o n a "good f a i t h " .

economy (Out l ine : 173) . Apparently echoing Jean-Paul S a r t r e 's

not ion o f* "bad f a i t h n (mauvaise f o i ) , - uses f a i t h "

h e r e t o r e f e r t o t h e r o l e of t h e c h a r a c t e r of i n d i v i d u a l s i n

t h e s e p a r t i c u l a r market exchanges. Among t h e Kabyle , a rgues - -- - - -

--- - - - - - - - --

Bourdieu, t h e cond i t ions f o r s u c c e s s f u l a'ccess t o and c o n t r o l f

over market goods r e q u i r e that i n d i v i d u a l s p r e s e n t an approp- r

r i a t e p u b l i c image o f t h e i r conduct. For example, t h e y must

conceal p ro fane motives o f s e l f - i n t e r e s t and,expedience: t h a t is,

any sugges t ion t h a t they might be r igorous ly c a l c u l a t i n g a n

- - ' e f f i c i e n t means towarch a purely mater iar galn;3- nt the-same

time they must appear t o r e s p e c t t h e t r a d i t i o n a l v a l u e of honour.

They must, i n more concre te terms, have a r e p u t a t i o n f o r d%s-

charging t h e i r o b l i g a t i o n s t o k i n and t o o t h e r s wi th whom they "

t r a d e , They must a l e o , i n a p p r o p r i a t e c ircumstances, appear t o

p lace a to ta l t r u s t i n t h e honour o f t h e i r t r a d i n g p a r t n e r s .

Bourdieu contends t h a t i n s o f a r a s i n d i v i d u a l s e x h i b i t t h i s k ind

of behavior and mainta in a r e p u t a t i o n f o r a c t i n g honourably and - -- --- -- -

" i n good faith," t h e i r " c a p i t a l " of honour (as he ca l l s it) w i l l

a f fo rd them a p r i v i l e g e d p o s i t i o n i n market exchanges (Out l ine :

173-4, 185-6) . 3

-

Bourdieu s u p p o r t s t h i s p r o p o s i t i o n wi th r e f e r e n c e t o a f . . - -

s i t u a t i o n where honourable i n d i v i d u a l s act as media tors i n m a r k e t - . . . - 1

exchanges. I n such s i t u a t i o n s i n d i v i d u a l s who have 8 r e p u t a t i o n ,

both i n t h e i r v i l l a g e s and i n the market, f o r a c t i n g honourably

are c a l l e d upon t o vouch f o r t h e q u a l i t y o f goods t h a t are be ing

exchanged. Bourdieu no tes f u r t h e r , t h a t t h e s e d i s t i n g u i s h e d 2

i n d i v i d u a l s have s p e c i a l accesg t o market goods, a p o i n t under-

scored by t y p i c a l Kabylian sayings :

"7. -2

The t r u s t i n which [such men] a r e ' h e l d , and t h e connect ions < $ -

which they can mobi l ize , enable them t o "go t o t h e market X

wi th on ly t h e i r f aces , their names, and t h e i r honour f o r , -

money" ...- anCLevenHtQpwaq~..,vhethe~,they-have monex,.on -- -- - - - -- L - - - p-

them o r not . " S t r i c t l y pe r sona l qualities, '-'which cannot b e i

borrowed o r l e n t , " [thus1 count a t l e a s t a s much as weal th or so lvency ( o u t l i n e : 183) .

5

While t h e s e " s t r i c t l y p e r s o n a l q u a l i t i e s " gelp t o d e f i n e t h e a i

f

p rospects o f &he man who comes t o 'buy' they also d e f i n g and are j 1

expressed i n t h e ' a t t i t u d e s of the man who is ' se l l ing . ! Broadly

speaking, t h e s e a t t i t u d e s p are m a f e s - , t aspa qGneralp G u s t i n t h e

"good f a i t h ' of the buyer. This tr%t is based on a number o f I

f a c t o r s i n c l u d i n g such i n h e r i t e d o r "ascr ibed" f a c t o r s - a s the +l1

l i neage of%$he p rospec t ive buyer. Y e t , as mentioned p rev ious ly , < 9 3

such i n h e r i t & q u a l i t i e s are n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o ' i n s u r e t h e 0 t

i n d i v i d u a l a permanent r e p u t a t i o n f o r honourable conduct '(see

above, p. 152). Notes Bourdieu: "The c h a r a c t e r o f honour, no less

than p u r i t y of l i n e a g e , imposes d u t i e s r a t h e r t h a n bes towing ' p- - - - - - - -- - -- -- - - - - - -- - -- - -

p r i v i l e g e s " (1965: 221). Thus the i n d i v i d u a l ' s r e p u t a t i o n i s /

always ' s u b j e c t t o review, ' as it were, and t Q e f a t e o f a par- 1 . =

t i c u l a r exchange may h inge o n such s u b t l e f a c t o r s as t h e b u y e r ' s r - --

g e s t u r e s and gacial express ions (or; i n g e n e r a l terms, t h e

buyer ' s h a b i t u s ) . C

Trad i t i ona l values such as honour thus 'have an inf luence on

I the movement o f +goods and se rv ices i n Kabyle soc ie ty . To under-

i _ I '

s tand the w a y t h i s in f luence i s f e l t i n p a r t i c u l a r exchanges it I @

i s usefu l t o emphasize t h a t most exchanges i n Kabyle soc i e ty take

place between p a r t i e s who have soneukind of personal r e l a t i o n t o ' f

W 3 3

one another. That is t o say, exchanges a r e based on personal - - -

d - 2 - 5

guarantees between f a m i l i a r individuals r a t h e r than by impersonal * \

documents such a s con t r ac t s o r deeds. This f a m i l i a r i t y may range

buyer and h i s l ineage t o a ' f ace t o face ' a p p r a i s a l of the "good

f a i t h " of t h e buyer. The cons t r a in t s on exchange t h a t e x i s t a s a

consequence of t h i s f a c t o r of f l h i l i a r i t y a r e descr ibed by

~ o h r d i e u i n t h e fol lowing passage: "The man of good f a i t h would

no t th ink o f s e l l i n g f r e s h food products--milk, b u t t e r , cheese, - -

-- - -- -- - -- -- - - - -- --- -

- - - - - - - -

vegetables, fruit--.to another peasant, but always d i s t r i b u t e s

&hem among f r i e n d s o r neighbours. H e p r a c t i c e s no exchanges - involving money and a l l h i s r e l a t i o n s a r e basedwn t o t a l confi-

dence; un l ike t he shady dea le r , he has recourse t o none of t he '

~. guarantees (witnesses, w r i t t e n documents, etc. ) with which

commercial t r a n s a c t i o n s a r e surroundedn (Out l ine : 173) . ~ h o u ~ h pe r sona l experience and r e l a t i o n s of f a m i l i a r i t y pw

less personal f ac to r s : i . e . , t h e p r i n c i p l e s of persona l domi- _ _ . _ . . . -

--- - nation- - y i e l d t o the princibles of i n s t i t u t i o n a l domination; - +. -

- A t one end of the spectrum the re is t r a d i t i o n a x exchange

governed by t h e strategies 'and values of \personal domination.

such c i rcumstances , t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t e i t h e r p a r t y involvgd i.n .

t h e exchange w i l l be cheated i s l i m i t e d i n s o f a r a s t h e honour of

I t h e i n d i v i d u a l s and t h e l ineages t h e y r e p r e s e n t i s a t s t a k e .

Moreover, gua ran tees t h a t t h e exchange i s f a i r can be de f ined and

confirmed immediately, i n an i n t e r a c t i o n between i n d i v i d u a l s . I n

these i n t e r a c t i o n s information deemed r e l e v a n t t o t h e - t r a n s a c t i o n \ A

i nc ludes p e r s o n a l demeanour and appea l s t o t h e memory o f p a s t

i n s t a n c e s o f j u s t exchange.

t h e "shady d e a l e r , t h e man who f e a r s n e i t h e r God nor m&"- \ = ( 0 u t l i n ~ ? ? l 7 4 ) . Such exchanges are a lmost t o t a l l y unpredic table : , L -

1 ". . .old informants ," w r i t e s Bourdieu, " w i l l t a l k e n d l e s s l y o f

t r i c k s and f r a u d s which a r e cormnon p r a c t i c e i n t h e ' b i g markets , '

t h a t is to s a y , i n exchanges between s t r a n g e r s . There are count- - - - - -

-- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -

less t a l e s d f mules which run o f f as soon as t h e purchase r has

. gut them home, oxen made t o look fatter by rubbing them wi th a

p l a n t which makes them swe l l ( a d h r i s ) , and purchase r s who band

t o g e t h e r t o f o r c e p r i c e s downn (Out l ine : 174) .j- v

To i l l u s t r a t e t h e na tu re o f t h e t r ans fo rmat ions t h a t occur

between t h e s e two extremes, Bourdieu examines t h e " in te rmedia te - -

s t a g e s " and, i n p a r t i c u l a r , t h e v a r i o u s forms o f guarantee /

The fo l lowing sunanary of the range i n v a r i a t i o n s a m o n a t -

guarantees eff e c t i v e l ~ de f ines t h e b a s i c f a c t o r s t h a t d i f feren-

t i a t e pe r sona l from i n s t i t u t i o n a l domination: - - - - - - - - -

The genera l law of exchange% means t h a t t h e c l o s e r .the i nd iv idua l s a r e i n the genealogy, t he easier it i s t o make agreements, the more frequent they .are, and t h e more completely they are en t rus ted t o good f a i t h . Conversely, a s t he r e lq t ionsh ip becomesdmore impersonal, i.e. a s one moves o u t from t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between b ro the r s t o t h a t between v i r t u a l s t r ange r s @eople from t w o d i f f e r e n t v i l l a g e s ) or even complete s t r ange r s , s o a t r ansac t ion i s 1es.s l i k e l y t o occur a t a l l , bu t i t can and increas ingly , does become purely "economic" i n cha rac t e r , i .e. c l o s e r t o i t s e c o n o r n i c 4 a l i t y , and the i n t e r e s t e d c a l c u l a t i o n which is never absent from the most generous exchange.,.can be" more ana more opeKly revealed. This exp la ihs why recourse t o formal guarantees becomes more and more except ional a s t he social d i s tance between t h e p a r t i e s decreases , and a l s o a s the solemnity of the guarantees i nc reases , because t h e a u t h o r i t i e s responsible f o r au then t i ca t ing and enforc ing - = - *Gm Pe- - - - - = - == ---- - - --

- mme-remo~andfor venerated. (FSrs t there ' i s the word of witnesses, which is enhanced if they a r e d i s t a n t and i n f l u e n t i a l ; then there i s a simple paper drawn up by someone n o t spec ia l i zed i n t h e production of l e g a l documents; then t h e - c o n t r a c t signed before a t a l e b , proyidihg a reli- gious b u t n o t a l e g a l guarantee, which i s less solemn when drawn up by the v i l l a g e t a l e b than by a well-known t a l eb ; then t h e C a d i ' s 4 w r i t t e n document; and f i n a l l y t he con t r ac t signed i n f r o n t of a lawyer) (Outl ine: 173-4) .

&

The factors- influencing-the c o n t r o l of social-_L-esources i n

Kabyle s o c i e t y that a r e described by Bourdieu i n t h e o u t l i n e of a

Theory of P r a c t i c e serve t o set o f f t h e *good f a i t h " economy

q u i t e c l e a r l y from the "mSrketn ecoaomy. Control over s o c i a l

"Tesources i n the good- fa i th economy is exe r t ed through personal

doitination. The r e l a t i o n s of domination t h a t make t h i s con t ro l /--I

poss ib le are es tab l i shed with re fe rence t o q u a l i t i e s t h a t are \

odied by individualg i n the form of hab i tus . Moreover t he se , ---

- re ons of personal domination a r e no t s t a t i c ; t h e i r r.epro- --

f i f duct ian depends on the cont inual d e l i b e r a t e a c t i v i t y of

\.

ind iv idua ls . As Bourdiey puts" it: "[individuals] have t o work 1

- - - - - -

- - -

d i r e c t l y , d a i l y , personally, t o produce and reproduce the i

con&itions of 4ornination which are never e n t i r e l y , trustworthy. ..

* - W C & ~ Q ~ a~p-iate the labour, s e rv i ce s , goods, honiage, and

respec t -of o t h e r s wiEhout 'winning' them persona l ly , ' t y ing '

them--in short, c rea t ing a bond between persons" (Outline: 1 9 0 ) .

On the o t h e r hand, domination o r con t ro l over resources i n a

market economy is .exerted through means t h a t i s t independently,

i n some senses , of the *conscious e f f o r t " o f sp c i f i q ind iv idua ls P / * 4 .

found i n t h e market economy are based on forms of what ~ o u r d i e u

the cha rac t e r of t h e . i n s t i t u t i o n a 1 domination t h a t occurs i n such

contexts Bourdieu w r i t e s :

. . . fin] s o c i a l formations.. .mediated by ob j i n s t i t u - t i o n a l i z e d mechanisms, such as those producing and guaran- t ee ing t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of " t i t l e S n ( t i t l e s of nob i l i t y , deeds of possek ion , academic degrees, etc. ) , r e l a t i o n s of domination have the opaci ty and perinaxience of th ings and.

- - -- escape &he q~asp of- h d i w * e s Y md-pPo~Weer~ -

Objec t i f i ca t i on [of s y m b o m r a n t e e s t h e p e m n e n c e and c m u l a t i v i t y of ma te r i a l and symbolic a c q u i s i t i o n s which can then s u b s i s t without t he agents having t o recrea them continuously and i n t h e i r e n t i r e t y by deliberate ac on.. . (Outline: 1 8 4 ) ,

*. When dominat20n is. i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d , then, the r e l a t i o n s bf

domination tend t o take on an appearance that belies the r o l e

played by i n 'viduafs i n their reproduction. Pos i t i ons of p r iv i -

lege, su& as those defined and guaranteed by degrees and formal 2 - - * +

q u a l i f i c a t f o s exhibit the permanence and impersonal q u a l i t y of .b -

the i n s t i t u t i o n s that back them. ~ o r e o v e k , candidates f o r such

pos i t i ons appear to be selected with respect t o 'ob jec t ive '

such as the sex, race, social background, etc. --of the persons

who a r e being se l ec t ed , F ina l ly , both t h e soc ig l ly valued forms

of knowledge neGessary t o seek a pos i t i on of p r i v i l e g e , and the 2.

means whereby an ind iv idua l ' s fpossess ion ' of such khowledge i s .

c e r t i f i e d (degrees, etc. ) , e x i s t independent of s p e c i f i c indi- - 4

viduals . - The d is put able - and t h e ~ e i f ~ ~ v i d e n t - - T h e degree t o which -. - -

4. this impersonal and ~ n g - l i k e appearance of domination i n s t a t e

s o c i e t i e s is an accurate expression 'of t he a c t u a l s i t u a t i o n w i l l

is examined i n more d e t a i l . I t should be noted a t . t h i s po in t , 4

however, t h a t some aspec t s of personal domin-ation a l s o e x h i b i t

cpalities t h a t make them -less access ib le * t o i nd iv idua l conscious-

ness 'and power,

f e x h i b i t t he se q u a l i t i e s no t because they appear t o be re in forced - by phenomena that may-seem impersonal and removed from t h e i n t e r -

ac t i ons of gveryday l i f e (such a s exahinat ions, formal qua l i -

f i c a t i o n s , the ' laws' of t h e market, etc.) . On the contrary: i n

non state societies such a s t ha t of t h e Kabyle, domination s e e m s v

"opaque" and seemingly beyond t h e realm of human agency (i .e . 'self-evident' or even ' n a tu ra l ' ) because it- i s s o deeply

-- -&%a- individuals ' t o t a l d i s p o s ~ t l O n s ( n a b l t u ~ and ~ITF

Bourdieu wouldaca l l them) aspec t s of personal domination which

- - - - - a~%-expr&ss~d~-fez-exzmple~ in- se3atiens bebeen -WR and lwomen i n - -

Xabyle society, can thus be d i f f e r e n t i a t e a from aspec t s of / *

personal domination that are based more on d e l i b e r a t e personal

s t r a t e b and cont inual upkeep. , I

+- - dnst ruct ive examples of the latfe;, more %vo lun ta r i s t i c ,- .

a, aspecf of personal domination are the " o f Q c i a l i z i n g strateqies"

! v 1

t h a t /inform f a b y l e marriages. The element of *rategy., argues

Bourbieu, has been de-emphasized by some anthropologis ts s tudying 1

mar &ages i n non s t a t e s o c i e t i e s . Bourdieu contends; s i m i l a r l y , - - - - - - - - - - - A -

- - - - - t h a t anthropologis ts all- t o o o f t e n take t h e i r na t ive informants '

remarkable 'moves,' i .e. those m o s t esteemed o r reprehended, i n

t h e d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l games" (Outline: 1 9 ; c f . above, p .75 ) . he

r e s u l t : a f t e r the anthropologis ts record these moves and order . I

them i n r e spec t of l o g i c a l consistency they a r e l e f t with an

impoverished official vers ion af a c t u a l marriage p rac t i ce . his -

pa-ers t enas t o obscure wha L ourdieu c a l l s " o f f i c i a l i z i n g *

s t r a t e g i e s . " -,

An o f f i c i a l i z i n g s t r a t e g y is used t o confer legi t imacy on a

marriage t h a t may appear t o be arranged f o r motives of profane -

' s e l f - i n t e r e s t , ' o r a marriage t h a t i s simply "extra-ordinary."

Its goal, as Bourdieu p u t s it, is ( ' to transmute ' e g o i s t i c , '

, private, p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t s . . . -

publ ic ly avowable, l e g i t i m a t e i n (Outline: 4 0 ) . One 7 - ..-

example of such a ~ & r a w ' w a s discussed above. I t w a s noted

a>t a mrriage t h a t is, from an o u t s i d e r ' s p o i n t of v i e w , /-- L -- - -

-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - - - -

/-

amenable to more than one kind of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , w i l l inevitably

be c l a s s i f i e d according t o o f f i c i a l norms--i.e. i n the most 2 - J

- r -- --

convent ional way p o s s i b l e (Out l ine : 19; c f . above, p . 75) . A v a r i e t y o f o t h e r s t r a t e g i e s - - o r b e t t e r , t a c t i c s w i t h i n a

genera l s t ra tegy--come, in to p lay when, f o r example, a marr iage i s e

arranged between i n d i v i d u a l s who a r e s e p a r a t e d by a g r e a t e r than

usual - s o c i a l o r geographical d i s t ance . Bourdieu a rgues t h a t , i n

c o n t r a s t t o ordinaqemarr iages t h a t merely e n s u r e t h e cont inu-

a t i o n - of e x i s t i n g p??%&cal k i n s h i p r e l a t i o n s , such e x t r a -

o rd ina ry marr iages may 'pay o f f f i n a g r e a t d e a l of prestige and

H y e v e r , i n o r d e r t o r eap t h e b e n e f i t s & a t , accrue from such

a marriage, t h e i n d i v i d u a l and h i s l ineage must be a b l e t o mobi-

l i z e a range o f social resources (both symbolic r e s o u r c e s , such - as t h e s o c i a l s k i l l s r equ i red t o maintain an e x t e n s i v e network of

k in , and ' m a t e r i a l ' r e sources , such as t h e g i f t s of produce, - r.

- - livestock, etcr , -a€ a r e given t o X e d i a t o r s p a n d t o meders of

t h e b r i d e ' s family) . I f t h e s o c i a l r e sources can be mobil ized

then the group can use t h e a p p r o p r i a t e tactics t o r e n d e r

' o f f i c i a l ' a marr iage t h a t by convent ional s t a n d a r d s i s unaccept-

a b l e o r even unth inkable .

These " o f f i c i a l i z i n g ' tactics a r e e s s e n t i a l , i n Bourdieu 's

view, I n c o n t r a s t t o o r d i n a r y marr iages where s o c i a l acceptance

is grounded i n the quasi-conscious, a lmost au tomat ic , a t t i t u d e s -p- -- -- - - --

embodied i n t h e h a b i t u s , t h e c o l l e c t i v e acceptance of e x t r a -

o rd ina ry marr iages must be "shaped and won. n 6 Therefore a

d e l i b e r a t e emphasis is placed on fo rmal i ty and o s t e n t a t i o u s g i f t - - - - -

giving. I n Bourdieu's words: " I n s o f a r as it b r i n g s l a r g e groups

i n t o i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p through' the f a m i l i e s and l i n e a g e s d i r e c t l y

r - -- -- - - --

I n v o l v e d , . . . -extra-ordinary marriage must appear] t o t a l l y

o f f i c i a l and every a s p e c t of t h e c e l e b r a t i o n i s [thus] s t r i c t l y

r i t u a l i z e d and magica l ly s te reotyped: t h i s i s d o u b t l e s s because

t h e s t a k e s dare s o high and t h e chances o f a r i f t s o g r e a t t h a t

t h e agen t s d a r e n o t t o t r u s t t h e . r e g u l a t e d improv i sa t ion of

o r c h e s t r a t e d h a b i t u s " (Out l ine : 5 4 ) . - - The p e r s o n a l domination r e s u l t i n g from t h e p r e s t i g e and

. * p o l i t i c a l a l l i a n c e s t h a t ex t ra-ord inary marr iages make p d s s i b l e

i s thus e s t a b l i s h e d by d e l i b e r a t e s t r a t e g y . S o c i a l acceptance - - - - --- --- - -- - - - - - -- - -- -

-

must be c u l t i v a t e d by t h e , appropr ia t e " o f f i c i a l i z i n g " tactics; i t

i s n o t taken f o r g ran ted and cannot be l e f t t o t h e t r a d i t i o n -

dominated and, t o some e x t e n t , ' u n r e f l e c t i v e d i s p o s i t i o n s of t h e

hab i tus .

Yet t h e r e are, a s suggested, o t h e r a s p e c t s o f persona

nakion where the h a b i t u s in r e h t i o n t c r kts enviromrrent pzays-a -

much more impor tan t r o l e : where, i n o t h e r words, t h e s t a b i l i t y of

r e l a t i o n s o f p e w u n a l domination r e q u i r e s a minimum o f conscious L

a t t e n t i o n and d e l i b e r a t e a c t i o n by i n d i v i d u a l s . I n t h e s e circum- "4-

s t ances , the r e l a t i o n s of domination are s o i n t i m a t e l y bound,Qith ti

t h e r o u t i n e s o f everyday l i f e and t h e d i s p o s i t i o n s o f tpe h a b i t u s 1 L

t h a t they appear t o be a p a r t - of t h e ' n a t u r e o f t h f d 6 s ' r a t h e r 1 than con t ingen t on an o r d e r t h a t i s a c c e s s i b l e t o human c o n t r o l . -

A l i m i t i n g case of this a s p e c t o f pe r sona l d o m i n a t i o n e t h e P

r e l a t i o n between men and women i n non s t a t e s o c i e t i e s such as

t h a t of t h e Kabyle. To be s u r e , even i n t h e case of t h e - -

r e l a t i o n s between the sexes among the Kabyle, s o m e care and

a t t e n t i o n i s r e q u i r e d t o maintain t h e r e l a t i o n s o f dependence. 4

- One can imagine, for example, t h a t t h e use of a de

ppp - --- -- - f-rpm;lrkL

a g e s t u r e o f , kindness a t t h e r i g h t t i m e would f u n c t i o n

(as Bourdieu t e n k it) t h e a t t i t u d e s of defe.rence and

humi l i ty t h a t women a r e s o c i a l i z e d t o d i s p l a y i n Kabyle s b c i e t y . L

The s i g n i f i c a n c e & the appropr ia t e u s e o f a u t h o r i t y i s

i l l u s t r a t e d - i n t h e fol lowing exce rp t from a s t o r y o f an honoura-

b l e e l d e r , Belkacem, recounted by one of Bourdieu ' s Kabyle 9

informants: "To s t r a n g e r s who asked him how he had acqui red h i s A

i n f luence i n t h e region , Belkacem r e p l i e d : ' I f i r s t gained t h e - -- ---- - --t

- xespeekof-wg wire,--- ui-mychi-rdren, then 0fI.y roth hers

my r e l a t i v e s , then o f my l o c a l i t y , then o f my v i l l a g e : t h e r e s t , ,

merely fol lowed' " (1965: 239) . , .

But t h e cond i t ions f o r t h e reproductic&'bf t h e subordina t ion

of women i n Kabyle s o c i e t y are much more comprehensive than

s p e c i f i c a c t i o n s by s p e c i f i c men towards

suggest .

s p e c i f i c women might

a r e coded i n genera l themes and c o r r e l a t i v e s modes

of a c t i o n t h a t c o n s t r a i n p a r t i c u l a r s t a t ements a n d - a c t s . These \

themes stress, f o r example, t h a t women a r e "bad by na tu re . " As %

Bourdieu e x p l a ns it: 2 " 'The s t r a i g h t e s t woman, ' s a y s a proverb,

' is as t w i s t e d as a s i c k l e . ' o or t h e ~ a b ~ l e ] Woman i s l i k e a ' i i /

young s h o o t which bends to t h e l e f t ; man i s the guardian who sets

it s t r a i g h t again. Woman cannot be s t r a i g h t , b u t on ly s t r a i g h t - - 4

- - eka42-h5h~ef ieal-Pz&-t ion i m a r f e g - 6 ~ : 7 I

As the passage su - a T

s o c i a l l y a c c e p t a b l e person depends on h e r r e l a t i o n t o a man-

Once a woman a t t empts -

a u t h o r i t y s h e becomes

\

t o s t e p beyond the c o n s t r a i n t s - o f atale 2

e v i l , by d e f i n i t i o n , a l i a b i l i t y t o the

s h e comes i n con ta4 t . Bourdieu makes t h i s p o i n t d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g C

L , ,_

t h e " female- fe~ia le ," o r t h e woman who h a s r e s i s t e d male domi-

n a t i o n , from t h e nmale-female": "The female woman p a r exce l l ence

is t h e woman who does n o t depend on any man; wfio has escaped from

t h e a u t h o r i t y of h e r pa ren t s , h e r husband and h e r husband's

family, and has no c h i l d r e n , ' Such a ,woman- i s wi thou t hurma-

[female honour] : ' she i s bad wood; 'I ' she i s t w i s t e d hood. She

is a k i n t o f a l low lard, t h e wilderness'; s h e h a s a f f i n i t i e s with '

- -- - -- - -- - - - - _ - _ - _ _- - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - -

t h e dark f o r c e s o f u n c o n t r o l l e d na tu re . Magic i s h e r bus iness . . . " (Out l ine : 126) .

,

Women's powers, then, a r e " s e c r e t , c l a n d e s t i n e , and p r i v a t e " %*

as contrastect t o t h e "publ ic , o f f i c i a l , solemn, and c o l l e c t i v e "

powers of the men (Outl ine: 4 1 ) . Consequently,, any a t t empt by *

women t o i n t e r v e n e I n p u b l i c a f fairs:-i .e, i n _ a f f a i r s o u _ t s i d e _ o f - , -- -

hdusehold and o t h e r mundane feminine a c t i v i t i e s - - i s c o n t r o l l e d by . ,

7

% men. A s Bourdieu p u t s it: "Even when women do wield'. . .real pgwer,+

1. as i s o f t e n the c&se i n matrimonial m a t t e r s , t hey can e x e r c i s e it

- - f u l l y only$n conditon t h a t t h e y l e a v e t h e appearance o f power,

id-.-

t h a t is,'its o f f i c i a l m a n i f e s t a q o n , t o t h e men" (Out l ine : 4 1 ; , b

zd& above, ' . I

' Because male domination i s l a r g e l y t a k e n f o r granted and -- -- La-- -

- ' forms a basic dimension of Kabyle .'common s e n s e ' it i s r a r e i y , i f

e v e r , d i spu ted . I n s t e a d , t h e themes o f m a l e domination are et .=

,

embedded i n ' s e l f - e v i d e n t 1 . o r 'doxic ' a s p e c t s of Kabyle l i f e . and

are, correspondingly, ernbbdied uniformly' i n the r e g u l a t e d y d , i n

some respects, non conscious a t t i t u d e s o f t h e m a l e and female A

habi tus . The s t a b i l i t y of themes and a t t i t u d e s d e r i v e s ~

from d e l i b e r a t e ac t ions of s p e c i f i c i nd iv idua l s than-from t h e

f a c t t h a t t h e s o c i a l information t h a t r e i n f o r c e s h i e r a r c h i c a l \

r e l a t i o n s between the sexes i s so heav i ly redundant and thus i s

r ep l i ca t ed a t s o many l e v e l s and i n s o many domains of t he .

r

Kabyle world ( c f . above, p.1031,

,For example, t h i s s o c i a l inrormation o r c o l l e c t i v e memory *- - 1

is encoded i n metaphysical and r e l i g i o u s themes t h a t connote the

c presence of masculine hnd feminine p r i n c i p l e s i n the order ing of

d iv ide the region i n t o publ ic , o f f i c i a l a r e a s such a s the market - and t h e c e n t e r of the v i l l a g e and p r i v a t e , secret areas such a s

t h e i n t e r i o r o f t he houseO7 It is f u r t h e r insc r ibed i n t h e

d iv i s ion of labour t h a t reserves p re s t i g ious a c t i v i t i e s f o r men L /

and l i m i t s women t o r e p e t i t i v e , mundane t a sks . F ina l ly , it is - -- -

--- - - - - - - <

- - - - - - - -

w r i t t e n i n pa t t e rn ings of &household space and a c t i v i t i e s (see,

C, f o r example, Outline: 87-95).

Understandably, these themes of masculine dominance and

feminine submission become p a r t of t he Kabyle c h i l d ' s i d e n t i t y

very e a r l y i n l i fe . This i d e n t i t y , Bourdieu arques by way of t he i

habi tus concept, i s grounded i n genera l s t y l e s of bodily <omport- t

nrent, S o c i a l l y defined notions of domination and submission a r e

coded i n se~aL-+_h=rt Lm *~YT - surrounding space m t b l and v i ~ r g - ~ e - ~ . - ~ d - s it~e

s o c i a l l y def ined sexual connotations t h a t cons t r a in i t s des t iny I

by rou t ine comings and goings_' i n the house- M later in the - - - - - - -

- - - --

v i l l age . As Bourdieu notes i n a passage c i t e d above (p. 7 Z ) :

- - - - - "Al l t h e symbolic manipulat ions o f body exper ience , s t a r t i n g

wi th displacements w i t h i n a myth ica l ly s t r u c t u r e d 3 a c e , e .g . t h e

movements of going i n and coming o u t , t end t o impose t h e i n t e g r a -

t i o n of body space wi th cosmic space" (Outl ine: 91) . He goes on:

"For example, t h e oppos i t ion [ i - e . c o n t r a d i c t i o n ] between move-

ment o u t towards t h e f i e l a s of Lhe market, towards t h e product ion

and.. ~ i ~ x c u l a t i o n of gooas, and t h e movement inwards, owards t h e

accumulation and consumption of t h e products of work, corresponds

symbol ica l ly t o t h e oppos i t ion [=ont radic t ion] between t h e male - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -

body, self-&nclosed and d i r e c t e d towards t h e o u t s i d e world, and

t h e female body, res imbl ing t h e -dark, damp house, f u l l of food,

u t e n s i l s , and c h i l d r e n , which i s e n t e r e d and l e f t by t h e same

i n e v i t a b l y . s o i l e d opening" (Out l ine : 91-92.) . !

I t & & i t t l e wonder then t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s of pe r sona l domi- I .

n a t i o n .between men and w m n amear t u - b e - p a r t of t h e n a t u r e of - - t h i n g s ' r a t h e r than p a r t of an o r d e r t h a t i s a c c e s s i b l e t o human

agency. Bourdieu c h a r a c t e r i z e s this extreme c a s e of pe r sona l

domination where t h e s t a b i l i t y o f t h e r e l a t i o n s of domination

r e s t more on t h e r e g u l a t e d d i s p o s i t i o n s of t h e h a b i t u s ( i n

r e l a t i o n t o a s o c i a l l y coded environment) t h a n on t h e d e l i b e r a t e

a c t i o n s 03 i n d i v i d u a l s , i n t h e fo l lowing g raph ic d e s c r i p t i o n of 1 -

t h e i d e a l Kabyle man and woman: f - -- ---- - --

, i- ',

3%- c tznds up s t r a i g h t and W r s t h e p c ~ ~ r ~ he approaches or wishes t o welcome by looking him r i g h t i n the eyes; never on the a le r t because e v e r th rea teneg , he le ts noth ing t h a t happens around him escape him, whereas a gaze that is u~, i n khec clouds or fixed, on t h e grouna i s the mark of an i r r e s p o n s i b l e man, who has noth ing t o f e a r because he h a s no r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n his group. Conversely, a woman i s expected t o walk w i t h

% Y

* - --- - - - - a 5 t 0 o p , - - ~ d b i l i q d o w n , ~ e p i n g h e r e y e s on t h e

s p o t where s h e w i l l n e x t p u t h e r f o o t , e s p e c i a l l y i f she happens t o have t o x w a l k p a z t t h e thajma' t h [male assembly] ; h e r g a i t must a v o i d . the. excess ive swing of t h e h i p s which comes from a heavy s t r i d e ; s h e must always be g i r d l e d wi th t h e thimehremth, a r e g u l a r p i e c e of c l o t h wi th yellow, r e d and b lack s t r i p e s worn over h e r d r e s s , and t a k e c a r e t h a t h e r he3dscarf does n o t become unknotted, r e v e a l i n g he r h a i r . I n s h o r t , t h e s p e c i f i c a l l y feminine vi-flue, l a h i a , modesty, r e s t r a i n t , r e s e r v e , o r i e n t s t h e whole female body downwards, towards t h e ground, t h e i n s i d e , t h e house, whereas male exce l l ence , n i f , is a s s e r t e d i n movements upwards, outwards, t o w a r d s t h e r men (Out l ine : 9 4 ) .

I n a non state s o c i e t y o r a s o c i e t y wi thout w r i t i n g , then , - - -

- -- - - - - - - - - - - -

-

t h e s o c i a l informat ion necessary f o r t h e r ep roduc t ion of s o c i e t y

is , t o a l a r g e e x t e n t , i n r i b e d i n t h e d i s p o s i t i o n s o r h a b i t u s -

df i nd iv idua l s . A s wilden, who ch-arac ter izes t h e s e s o c i e t i e s a s .. .

"cool c i v i l i z a t i o n s " ( r e s i s t a n t t o change) , p u t s it: " I n t h e

coo l c i v i l i z a t i o n wi thout w r i t i n g a s such, t h e p a s t o f t h e /

s o c i e t y - - i t s memory, itsset b f instr~ctions~~its-satred toxt-- - -

i

i s l i t e r a l l y embodied i n every domici le , i n every person o r group b'

- -

marked by a k i n s h i p term or by a taboo, i n every pe r son o r group

I who exempl i f i e s a r i t u a l o r who r e c a l l s myth: Except i n - s o f a r

a s t h e ground p l a n of t h e v i l l a g e and/or w a ~ i o u s ~ c u l t u r a l o b j e c t s .

7

and , implem&s provide a minima-1 -ebpective memoe f o r t h e surviv- d

4 of t h e o rgan iza t ion of the s o c i e t y from genera t ion ' , t o gen . .

%

the s i g n i f i c a n t d i s t i n c t i o n s i n such a s o c i e t y have t o b e main- . - - - --p------ -- -- - - - -- - -- --

-- -- r'

t a i n e d , i e c o n s t r u c t e d , r ep resen ted , and, i n e s sence , re- invented

-7

In t h e very f l e s h of each genera t ion" (1980: 40'7) .. 9 -

For Bourdieu, t h e l i m i t i n g case of s i t u a t i o n s .where domina-

t i o n ' i s s t a b i l i z e d through t h e u n r e f l e c t i v e , embodied d i s p o s i t i o n s *

of the h a b i t u s i s t o be found i n t h e r e l a t i o n s ' b e t w e e n men and % ' .; i .

0 . *

-- - - - - - -- -

women i n s o c i e t i e s such a s t h a t o f t h e Kabyle. However,

Bourdieu p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h e reproduct ion a f domination i n npn

s t a t e s o c i e t i e s a l s o depends on an i n ' t e r a c t i o n between h a b i t u s

and r e l a t i v e l y conscious i n d i v i d u a l and group s t r a t e g i e s . ~ h u s , JL 4

on t h e one hand, p r e s t i g i o u s knorledge and s b c i a l l y valued a b i l i -

t ies and demeanours--in s h o r t , t h e "symbolic c a p i t a l " t h a t a f f o r d s

i n d i v i d u a l s c o n t r o l over s o c i a l r e sources - - i s embodied i n t h e

conduct of s p e c i f i c i n d i v i d u a l s . Yet, on t h e o t h e r hand; t h e

s o c i a l r e c o g n i t i o n p f t h i s symbolic- c _ a ~ i t a l must, i n m a n y cases, - -- -

P - -

be d e l i b e r a t e l y c u p i v a t e d and "end less ly renewed." This i s I

accomplished through appeals to ' cerenony and f o r m a l i t y t h a t . a

I

" 'awakent . . . the s.chemes of pe rcep t ion and a p p r e c i q o n L

: depos i ted , i n t h e i r incorpora ted s t a t e . . . i . e. [ in] t h e d i spos i -

I

tisons of t h e h a b i t u s n (Outl ine: 1 7 ) , - ---- - - - - - - - - - - --

- -

- - 2

By c o n t r a s t , symbolic c a p i t a l i n p s t a t e s o c i e t i e s i s preserved 6

i n t e x t s and c e r t i f i e d by l i k e degrees t h a t e x i s t inde-

pendent o f s p e c i f i c ind iv idua l s . Moreaver, t h e o f f i c i a l ve r s ion

-- -".

of s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n i n s t a t e s o c i e t i e s s u g g e s t s t h a t success ,

i n a p p r o p r i a t i n g symbolic c a p i t a l i s @ dependent on pe r sona l 1

q u a l i t i e s such a s i n h e r i t e d symbolic c a p i t a l . Success i s J 1 i

por t rayed as f u n c t i o n of m e r i t and i s e v a l u a t e d by ' o b j e c t i v e 1 - c r i t e r i a such as those purpor tedly i n e f f e c t i n some form+ of

- - 4 - -- -- - - - -

# examination, +

L - -- -- --

f,

The c o n t r a c t i o n s and e r r o r s of t h i s o f f i c i a l v e r s i o n of Y 6

', i n s t i t u t i o n a l domination and some of t h e complex i t i e s o f t h e

&

2 a c t u a l s i t u a t i o n k i l l be d iscussed i n t h e n e x t and f i n a l chapter . -3

% "a &

CHAPTER VIII : INSTITUTIONAL ' DOMINATION : THE HABITUS IN STATE SOCIETIES

Bourdieu uses a n a l y t i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n s between personal and

i n s t i t u t i o n a l domination t o c l a r i f y e m p i r i c a l i n s t a n c e s of domi- . * na t ion i n modern s t a t e s o c i e t i e s . He no tes t h a t t h e i d e a l s of

-. t ' o b j e c t i v i t y ' and ' success through m e r i t , ' t o which modern s t a t e .-

s o c i e t i e s supposedly a s p i r e , can be understood i n r e l a t i o n t o

concepts of a ' p u r e l y ' i n s t i t u t i o n a l domination, Yet he 'contends F

- -- -- - ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

a t t h e same t ime, t h a t t h e a c t u a l dominat ion- tha t occuks -

modern s tate s o c i e t y a l s o i n ~ l u d e s ~ v a r i a t i o n s on t r a d i t i o n a l

forms of p e r s o n a l domination, Thus t h e purpor ted . i d e a l s of

' o b j e c t i v i t y ' and ' success through m e r i t ' express .some aspec t s

of t h e a c t u a l s i t u a t i o n , However, t h e i d e a l i s o f t d n v o k e d , I +\,

- - -

unwi t t ing ly o r not,' t o l e g i t i m a t e p rocesses of domination t h a t - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -

a would be unacceptable a s forms of b l a t a n t l y p e r s o n a l domination.

Bourdieu m a i n t a i n s t h a t t h e ' o f f i c i a l ' o r i d e a l v e r s i d n of i n s t i -

t u t i o n a l domination, t o g e t h e r w i t h f a c e t s of persona.l domination,,

express t h e r e a l i t y of dorm=ion i n modern s tate s o c i e t y .

The O f f i c i a l Version of I n s t i t u t i o n a l omi in at ion--Bourdieu

s u g g e s t s t h a t c r i t e r i a f o r . ' d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g i n s t i t u t i o n a l from '

persona l dominat ion can be de r ived from Weber's a i s c u s s i o n of

- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - --- - - - - -- -- - --

d i - f f i e n t t y p e s of social r e g u l a t i o n . A s noted above (p. 65 1 ,

- F e a e r . s c = a t e g o r l e s o f r e g u l a t o r y o r l e g a l - j u r i d i c a l phehomena. are . -

based on an assessment of t h e e x p l i c i t n e s s and t h e i n s t i t u t i o n -

a f i z a t i o n of these phenomena. Bourdieu d e s c r i b e s a dumber of . .

d i f f e r e n t ways i n which domination i n modern state' s o c i e t y i s

maintained with r e fe rence t o e x p l i c i t w r i t t e n r u l e s and l a w s , . - .

- - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - L *--- - i n s t i t u f i o n a l i z e d processes adminis te red by s p e c i a l i s t s and, i n

genera l , o b j e c t i f i e d forms o f symbolic capital t h a t a r e d i s t i n c t

. from s p e c i f i c i n d i v i d u a l s .

Before proceeding t o t h e s e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y i n s t i t u t i o n a l

asp c t s o f domination i n s t a t e s o c i e t i e s , it i s worth no t ing t h a t I t h e con ten t o f many iorms o f knowledge i n state s o c i e t y ( a s i n

I _ non s t a t e s o c i e t y ) i s represen ted as be ing independent o f prac-

I - t i ca l i n t e r e s t s . I n s t a t e s o c i e t y t h e t r u t h c la ims of t h i s

o f f i c i a l - - - - - image of - knowledge - -- may _be formu1at .d wi-th r e f e r e n c e to - - - - --

un ive r sa l r u l e s of log ic : wi th r e f e ence t o ' u n i v e r s a l ' pr in- f t

c i p l e s of t h e "phys ica l , b i o l o g i c a l s p i r i t u a l n o rde r ; o r w i t h Yk r e fe rence t o an .inte'rnal r e l a t i o n [whi&, one assumes, means a

. .I

d i r e c t a c c e s s ] t o ' t h e n a t u r e o f t h i n g s ' 'human nature"'

(Reproduction: 8; see a l s o Bourdieu, 1975b: 34-35). -

However, a e s p i t e these-c la i - an k p r o b l e m a t i c c e r t a i n t y ,

t h e r e remains room ( a t l e a s t i n democrat ic s t a te s o c i e t i e s ) " f o r ?

opinion as l i b e r a l ideogogy- unders tands it, i.e. as one of the 2 - 2

d i f f e r e n t and equa l ly l e g i t i m a t e answers which can be given t o an - e x p l i c i t q u e s t i o n about t h e e s t a b l i s h e d p o l i t i c a l o r d e r w ( o u t l i n e : c 167-68; see above, p. Ug); Thus the realm of t h e s e l f -

ndoxau i n s ta te societies is less e x t e n s i v e t h a n t h a t i n non

*state societies -~ ~

S o c i a l an th ropo log i s t Jack Goody makes a s i m i l a r p o i n t ,

l i n k i n g the e x t e n t of t h e taken f o r g ran ted o r s e l f - e v i d e n t t o

t h e form o r medium by which knowledge i s t r ansmi t t ed : "Members o f ii

oral (i .e. ' t r a d i t i o n a l ' ) s o c i e t i e s f i n d it d i f f i c u l t t o develop

a l i n e of s c e p t i c a l t h i n k i n g about , s a y , t h e n a t u r e of matter o r

- -- -- --

s r e l a t i o n n i p t o God s~t'mply because a con t inu ing c r i t i ca l -man-- 4

0 1 t r a d i t i o n can ha rd ly e x i s t when s c e p t i c a l thoughts are n o t - i

w r i t t e n down, n o t communicated a c r o s s time"nd space , n o t made - 1' '

a v a i l a b l e - f o r men t o contemplate i n pr ivacy a s w e l l as t o h e a r i n 3 4 1

performance" (1977: 4 3 ) . 2 i $

. Like Goody, Bourdieu i s very much concerned w i t h t h e • ’ o m as % - -8 - C

w e l l a s the c o n t e n t o f knowledge. I n s t a t e s o c i e t i e s , a s i g n i f i - -

+ c a n t p ropor t ion .of knowledge or symbolic cap i t a l - -wi th which , . . f

Bourdieu inc ludes " r e l i g i o n , phi losophy, a r t , and sc iencen- - i s - - - - - - - - -- - - - - , - - - - -

- - - -

- - - -- - - -

. = --L

- - - - c '

"preserved.. , i n t e x t s " (Out l ine : 187) . Knowledge thus e x i s t s

independent ly of s p e c i f i c i n d i v i d u a l s and does n o t have t o be

e m b q e d t o the same e x t e n t as was necessary i n s o c i e t i e s wi thou t

w r i t i n g .

There are two r e l a t e d i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h i s " o b j e c t i f i c a t i o n "

o f knowledge, as Bortrdiett ear2 s it. - F i r s t , social1 y valued know- - -- -

ledge t ends t o be formalized. The m o s t obvious 'case of t h i s is

good usage (tgrltmm6;t)r b u t a l m o s t a l l d i s c i p l i n e s have t

b a s i c axioms from they a t t empt t o draw a set o f l o g i c a l l y

c o n s i s t e n t impl ica t ions . Second, a s Goody noted, knowledge i n * its o b j e c t i f i e d (wr i t t en ) ' form is open to a more s u s t a i n e d criti-

cism than is embodied knowledge. I n d i v i d u a l s can d i s t a n c e them- > a d

'.

\ s e l v e s f r o m knowledge and s u b j e c it t o a cri t ical s c r u t i n y i n

. -X - - - --- .-

respect of t h e r u l e s of f o m l 1 gic . This p r a c t i c e is frequent- - *

\ 6 r

ly performed by specialists, "the l i terate scholar^,^ as Bourdieu

calls them, 'who q u e s t i o n and i n t e r p r e t [knowledge's] let ter by - -

s - -.F

refekence to the and r e a i i n g s bf p a s t and contemporary 3 G "k -- 3% I<

i n t e r p r e t e r s " (Outl ine: 156; see above, p. 106). This k i n d o f - I

w

ques t ion ing i s imposs ib le i n a s o c i e t y ' w i t h o u t w r i t i n g where

knowledge "is never detached from t h e body &at b e a r s it And

tihich--as P l a t o noted--can d e l i v e r it only 'a t t h e p r i c e o f a sort - of gymnastics in tended t o evoke it: mimesis" (Out l ine : 218) .

But n o t on ly i s knowledge i n its' w r i t t e n form d i s t a n c e d from d

. ,

i nd iv idua i s . The w r i t t e n and spoken d i scourse through which some - . - -.

> - - - of t h e mosf p r e s t i g i o u s forms of mowledge a r e t r a n s m i t t e d a r e *

a l s o he ld to be #eelat ively n e u t r a l with r e s p e c t t o i n d i v i d u a l -

o f d i scobrse used- i n formal e d u c a t i o n a l s e t t i n g s a r e claimed t o ~

, P

possess a u n i v e r s a l v a l i d i t y or, i n d i f f e r e n t terms, to be an

i n f a l l i b l e index o f q u a l i t y . Thus Bourdieu sqys of as it-

C is taugh t i n schoo l s : " ~ r b a r , always i m p l i c i t l y no&ative, c-

g e n e r a t e s e f f e c t s - t - m i c a 1 to a l l ideology: i t makes t h e r e l a t i v e -

4 - - - - - ------- - - - - - - - -- --

appear 'absolute and t h e a r b i t r a r y appear l e g i t i m a t e " ( Bourdieu

and Boltanski , 1975: 22; my t r a n s l a t i o n ) .

d i d e o l o g i c a l basis 4of t h i s c l a i m t o u n i v e r s a l i t y w i l l be >

d i scussed s h o r t l y . It is s u f f i c i e n t to n o t e a t t h i s p o i n t t h a t

Bowdieu c r i t i c i z e s t h i s claim by c o n t r a s t i n g the elements of ---- , - 3 ,

s t y l e a s s o c i a t e d wi th ' l e a r n e d ' d i scourse wi th d i s c o u r s e as it i s

a c t u a l l y spoken i n different s e c t o r s of French s o c i e t y . N o t e s

. . . -- . tongue, even fbr the c h i l d r e n of s t h e p r i v w e d classes, hllty+hic

timeless amalgam o f former sta tes o f t h e h i s t o r y of t h e language *

is very unequal ly removed from the lanquages a c t u a l l y spoken by - - - - - - - - - - -

the d i f f e r e n t social classes"

An integral asp& of, the t r ansmiss ion o f knowledge is the P

f r

C -

assessment of i t s a c q u i s i t i o n by i n d i v i d u a l s . I n s ta te s o c i e t y , -1 - ~.

the criteria f o r a s s e s s i n g &he a c q u i s i t i o n o f knowledge are fo r -

malized so t h a t the s k i l l s and a b i l i t i e s t o which they refer a r e

descr ibed e x p l i c i t l y and p r e c i s e l y . I d e a l l y t h e examinat ions

which p u r p o r t to o p e r a t i o n a l i z e t h e s e c r i t e r i a f u n c t i o n t o mini- .F,

- mize t he - r o l e ' pe r sona l l , iudgeent i n e v a l u a t i o n . S u t perhaps- _. . -

B more a c c u r a t e l y , s u g g e s t s Bourdieu, they elevate a p e r s o n a l , - group, o r class based jwgernent t o a ' c o l l e c t i v e l y ' s anc t ioned

examination i s nothingd b u t the b u r e a u c r a t i c bapt ism o f knowledge,

the o f f i c i a l r e c o g n i t i o n of t l - x ' ~ n s u b s t a n t i a t i o n o f profane I

\ . knowledge i n t o s a c r e d knowledge" (Reproduction: 1 4 1 ) , 3 , I n America and Canada, a t least, t h i s e f f o r t t o remove

= . - - - - ' personal ' - --- judgement A ----- from the e v a l u a t i o n of a b i l i t y h a s been -

carried t o the extreme as is a t t e s t e d by "mul t ip le c h o i c e n exams - 1,

I

that can be marked by machines. But whatever the e x t e n t of the

fqrera l iza t ion o f e v a l u a t i o n , what is o s t e n s i b l y removed a t a l l

costs is the taci t 'face t o face' assessment of g e n e r a l demeanour

and social backgronnd that is so importpnt i n . non state societies.

-'Everyo& who sits for the examination, as Bourdieu p o i n t s out, is

* . +.-- f o a a l l y equal (Reproduction: 166) . Persona l q u a l i t i e s (age, s e x , . - - #' -- - - - - - race, C l a s s ) of tlmse u_ho administer the examinat ion and t h o s e -

_ I - relevant to the buslness of d e t e r - -

&ding the pre&ence of the various s o c i a l l y s a n c t i o n e d a b i l i t i e s

- - - - - - -- eensta-e -bdge;-- - - - --- - - -- - -

7 - - \.. closeiy link&' to' the sSptezn o f examinations - is the system

d

G emphasizes the d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e system o f q u a l i g i c a t i o n s

and p o s i t i o n s and t h e embodied symbolic c a p i t a l of p e r s o n a l .

doqina t ion . Embodied symbolic c a p i t a l , such as the s e n s e of .- . , honour i n Kabyle s o c i e t y is t i e d t o persons and c o n t e x t s , and t h e

ir

maintenance o f an honourable -x~put 'a t ion r e q u i r e s ongoing ~ e r s - o n a l

s t r a t e g i e s . But academic q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and t h e p o s i t i o n s to - - - - - - - - -- -> -- c - i . , '

which they are l i n k e d a r e t o some e x t e n t independent o f p a r t i c u - *

l a r persons and c o n t e x t s . As Bourdieu p u t s it:

. . .academic q u a l i f i c a t i o n s a r e o c u l t u r a l [symbolic] c a p i t a l what money i s t o econo d c c a p i t a l .... Academic q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , l i k e money, have a conventional,^ f i x e d va lue

' which, b e i n g guaranteed by l a w , i s f r e e d from l o c a l l i m i - t a t i o n s ( i n c o n t r a s t t o s c h o l a s t i c a l l y u n c e r t i f i e d c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l ) and temporal f l u c t u a t i o n s : t h e c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l which t h e y i n a sense guarantee once and f o r a l l does n o t c o n s t a n t l y need to be proved, The o b j e c t i f i c a t i o n accomp-

/ l i shed by academic degrees and diplomas and, in a mare

- -

g e n e r a l way, by a l l forms of c r e d e n t i a l s , i s i n s e p a r a b l e -- f ronrthe -oIxj-ecEif i c a m o n i w A I c n ~ a ~ a a r a t n ees by TfEfjxnlng - ---- --

permanent p b s i t i o n s which are d i s t i n c t from t h e b i o l o g i c a l ind iv idua l sAio ld ing them, and may be occupied by agen t s who are + i o l o g i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t bu t in te rchangeab le i n terms of the 4 u a l i f i c a t i o n s r e q u i r e d (Outl ine: 187) .

I n t h e o f f i c i a l ve r s ion o f t h e system of aaademic q u a l i f i -

c a t i o n s and positions d e s c r i b e d above, the s i g n i f i c a n c e of some

types of 'pe r sona l ' qualities is supposedly+minimized by 'objec-

tive* asses-nt procedures, I f one h a s the q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , one

- - - -- - supposedly gets m e position regardless ot one ' s age, sex, race,

9 - le *

c

" i n s t i t u t i o n a l domination' funct ions with r e s p e c t to the "legal-

* ~ u r e a u c r a t i z a t i o n o f f e r s above a l l he optimum p o s s i b i l i t y f o r c a r r y i n g through the p r i n c i p l e 'r o s p e c i a l i z i n g a d m i n i s t r a t i v e - funct ions according t o p u r e l y o b j e c t i v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . I n d i v i d u a l performances are a l l o c a t e d t o f u n c e i o n a r i e s who have "special ized t ra i ing and who by

' c o n s t a n t p r a c t i c e i n c r e a s e t h e i r e x p e r t i 1 e . " ~ b j e c t i v e " d i s c h a r g e 'of bus iness p r i m a r i l y means a d i s c h a r g e of b u s i n e s s according t o c a l c u l a b l e r u l e s and "wi thout regard f o r persons* (1968, 3: 9 7 5 ) . \

\

\ 's >

A - - T h u s , under ly ing a l l t h e s e f e a t u r e s o f i n s t i t u t l ~ n a l domi-

na t ion are not& of formal eqkility. arid t h e r e l a t e d not ion of

a meri tocracy: i -e . , t h e b e l i e f t h a k , i n d i v i d u a l s should-be-- jUged -- -- - - ---

---- - - - -- --

- -

by t h e i r achievement. o r performance and not- by - i n h e r i t e d or a -

a s c r i b e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Associated wi th @is n o t i o n of formal

3 .- e q u a l i t y is tbe a s s e r t i o n that i n d i v i d u a l s i n a s t a t e democracy /'

should b e f r e e t o compete for s o c i a l r e s o u r c e s unhampered by

con t ingenc ies of b i r t h . Tbe importance of the e d u c a t i o n system - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- t o - t h i s f reedom-was s ~ r e S 3 e G T b ~ - ~ ~ ~ h n -p=osbpher?nd educa- - t o r , John. Dewey (1859-1952). I n Dewey's words: "It- is the o f f i c e .

o f the s c h o o l environment, , .to see t o it t h a t each ' i n d i v i d u a l

gets an o p p o r t u n i t y t o escape from the l i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e s o c i a l

group i n which he was burn, and come i n t o l i v i n g c o n t a c t with a

' broader environmentm (quoted i n Bowles and G i n t i s , 1976: 21) . Demcrat ic societies, as Dewey sugges t s , a t t e m p t t o mini- . -

mize the role p l a y e d v f a n i l i background i n d e f i n i n m * .

power over social resources . Such a means of t r a n s m i t t i n g pow&. --

was c o n t e s t e d , for exanple, i n the e i g h t e e n t h and n i n e t e e n t h

centuries by t h e middle class i n England and Continental . ~ u r o ~ e *' - -

- -- - - A --- -- - 4

'under the banner of 'career open to t a l e n y * (Thompson, 1978: ' .

-

Is accesS t o p r i v i l e g e , f o r r easons o t h e r t h a n achievement

o r m e r i t , as i n f r e q u e n t as some images o f democra t ic s o c i e t y s e e m

t o suggest? TO what e x t e n t do t h e i n s t i t u t i o n a l processes out-

l i n e d aboGe, func t ion , as Weber p u t i t , "according t o c a l c u l a b l e r . Q

r u l e s " and "without r ega rd f o r persons?" I n responding t o t h e s e

q u e s t i o n s Bourdieu c l a r i f i e s t h e complexity o f i n s t i t u t i b n a l 1 - 2

L d

doh ina t ion i n e m p i r i c a l con tex t s and ex tends t h e concepts of t h e

h a b i t u s apd p e r s o n a l .domination. -

- --

I n h e r i t e d P r i v i I e g e and t h e - Ideoloqy o f Giftedness--Bourdieu - - - - -- - - . - - - - - f I

p o i n t s o u t t h a t the middle c l a s s , h-aving r e j e c t e d t h e leg i t imacy 4

o f i n h e r i t i n g p r i v i l e q e as a-function of p e r s o n a l q u a l i t i e s . . . .

d e r i v i n g from family s t a t u s found it necessa ry to f i n d a new I

means f o r t r a n s m i t t i n g s o c i a l resources . I n o r d e r t o coun te rac t

t h e inhexibed r i g h t s of a r i - s t o c r a t i c l i n e a g e s it became necessary 1

t o E I a b =at t h e SiEEesZ -infiviZiuals born is, a n d o u g j t t t o --

be, a r e s u l t of ' pu re ly i n d i v i d u a l ' r a t h e r t h a n s o c i a l f a c t o r s .

These i n d i v i d u a l f ac to r s* are bf two, a t first g l a n c e c o n f l i c t i n g ,

types. F i r s t , success is a t t r i b u t e d ' t o " i n n a t e a b i l i t y . " I n

t h i s p e r s e t i v e success is 'he ld t o be ,a r e s u l t o f n a t u r a l r a t h e r

than s o c i a l f a c t o r s and is shrouded w i t h a l l t h e mys te r i e s of

*,at Bourdieu calls "the ideology of&ftednessn ( talent o r 'good

taste ') (see Bortrdieu, 1968:605-12; 1974a:42; ( h t l m e --- --

: 236-7). SeCHd;

and &re i n keeping w i t h %he values of the meritocracy, success

i s a t t r i b u t e d to 'ham3 w o r k ' and the s t u d e n t ' s e f f o r t s t o receive

t h e message t r a n s m i t t e d i n the. clwsroom (Reproduction: 2 0 5 ; - - - - - - t t - - t t

Though the n o t i o n of ' i nna te a b i l i t y " s e e m s i n c o n f l i c t w i t h

P \ , t h e va lues of t h e meri tocracy, it c l e a r l y has t h e p o t e n t i a l t o

' 4

h e l p , a s Bourdieu p u t s it, t o "d i s s imula te t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p * . -.

between aca-c a t ta inment and i n h e r i t e d c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l " J

Outl ine : k237'f. This p o t e n t i a l has been s u b s t a n t i a l l y r e a l i z e d - where t h e no t ion o f I .Q. and i n h e r i t e d a b i l i t y has , i n

_ I-" * conjunct ion with t h e use o i s t andard ized t e s t i n g , l e n t an a u r a of

- , s c i e n t i f i c * legi t imacy t o t h e i n h e r i t a n c e of ' n a t u r a l ' p r i v i l e g e :

s p 6 c i f i c a l l y to t h e purpor ted b i o l o g i c a l i n h e r i t a n c e of = a c i a l

. . L ~ w - ~ & ~ 2 t C w - e x - t b ~ s e n -se-+9@3= > = ==-=-=99 ==:=----= - - F , >

But s c i e n t i f i c leg i t imacy notwi ths tanding , t h e peaceful co- ,

e x i s t e n c e of t h e s e s u p e r f i c i a l l y c o n f l i c t i n g views has a long and

i n t e r e s t i n g h i s t o r y . That i s - t o say , t h e c o n f l i c t between t h e

p r e d i s p o s i t i o n t o s o c i a l success and t h e i n h e r i t a n c e of c u l t u r a l

and ' cogn i t ive ' abilities on t h e one hand, and, on t h e o t h e r hand,

the not ion success through hard work -----

and t h e development

c u l t u r a l and ' cogn i t ive ' a b i l i t i e s , h a s been h i s t o r i c a l l y

accepted by impor tant s e c t o r s of the middle class i n Northern

European c a p i t a l i s t c o u n t r i e s . \ r,

This c o n f l i c t was expressed- in t h e doctrine of p r e d e s t i -

n a t i o n as%rmulated by John G v i n C.509-1564) and h i s fo4-

lowers. They maintained: (1) t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s w e r e cho en by \

w a s beyond mr td p e r t o or r e w i n A p w , . . a ( 9 )

that through hard work and worldly success i n d i v i d u a l s could ,

n e v e r t h e l e s s ,- - - - - ---

a t t a i n _ some degree of c = r t i t u d o saal~t is ( c e r t a i n t y +

of s a l r a t i o n ) and demonstrate p u b l i c l y t h a t they w e r e among t h e

,je=ect= (see Weber, 1976: 98-128). Bourdieu refers to this

f certitude s a l u t i s i n t h e fo l lowing passage where by " c u l t u r e " he A

.O means' s e n s i t i v i t y _to. t h e t r a d i t i o n a x domain of 'h igh c p l t u r e : '

The worship of c u l t u r e by t h e r u l i n g c l a s s is probably less d i s i n t e r e s t e d t h a n migfit appear . . . [ s e n s i t i v i t y t o 'h ight ] c u l t u r e is , f o r fiourgeois s o c i e t y i n i t s p r e s e n t phase, what o t h e r modes,of l e g i t i m i z a t i o n o f t h e s o c i a l o r d e r and of - the h e r e d i t a r y t r ansmiss ion o f p r i v i l e g e w e r e f o r s o c i a l groups which d i f f e r e d as m u c h by t h e s p e c i f i c form taken by ~ l a s s ~ a n t a g o n i s m s a s by the n a t u r e of t h e p r i v i l e g e ' t r a n s - -

m i t t e d , S ince he cannot invoke t h e r i g h t s of b i r t h / ( h i s l i o r i c a l l y refuSed t o h i s c l a s s by t h e a r i s t o c r a q y ) o r

r i g h t s o f n a t u r e (a weapon once d i r e c t e d a g a i n s t t h e d i s - t i n c t i o n s p r a c t i s e d by t h e n o b i l i t y b u t which might i n . i t s t u r n backf i r e o n _b_oU~eQisLdis t incc t io~ ' l nox -xe t * e ----- y- -- -- - - -- - -

- -- - - - - - - - T- --

a s c e t i c v l r t u e s which enabled t h e f i r s t g e n e r a t i o n df ent repreneurd t o j u s t i f y success by m e r i t , t h e h e i r t o bour- g e o i s p r i v i l e g e must appeal t o t h e a n t i - n a t u r a l i d e a of a b i r th - l inked [ s e n s i t i v i t y - t o ' high '1 - c u l t u r e , a g i f t o r grace i n which is roo ted t h e c e r t i t u d a s a l u t i s o f the -bour - g e o i s employer and a d m i n i s t r a t o r (1971a: 1256) . -

8 2

The ideology o f a b i r t h l i n k e d s g n s i t i v i t y t o ' h igh c u l t u r e ' I

* 1

is - - - b a s i c --- - - t o - - t h e transmiss'ion of p r i v i l e g e i n modern c a p i t a l i s t 1 - - - - - - - - - - - p- - - -- - - ---- - - - - - - - - -

c o u n t r i e s . What i s m y s t i f i e d by t h i s ideology a r e t h e sources of . i

the v a r i o u s c u l t u r a g competencgs and schemes of a p p r e c i a t i o n t h a t j-

f L

Bourdieu subsumes under t h e terms " t a l e n t w and "good t a s t e . "

Bourdieu contends that b ~ u r g e o i s ~ h e i r s t o c u l t u r a l competence are \I

i c o n s t r a i n e d a g a i n s t making a d i r e c t l i r f k to d i s t i n g u i s h e d 'blood' *

because of their s t r u g g l e against the i n h e r i t e d r i g h t s of a r i s t o - - i i

cratic l ineages . A t the same time, members o f t h e bourgeoisie i

p a r t i c u l a r k ind o f f &ly exper ience ("primary s o c i a l i z a t i o n " ) . i

T h u s they must-deq-the early--social factors that coxtribute to

their s e n s i t i v i t y t o cultured-for example, the e a r l y v i s i t s to 4

t h e museum and t h e t h e a t r e r a t h e r t h a n the c i r c u s and t h e . ,

s p o r t i n g event , t h e d i s c u s s i o n o& l i t e r a t y r e r a t h e r than tele-

v i s i o n , etc, The p a t t e r n s and consequences o f t h i s d e n i a l which

a r e ev iden t i n t h e no t ions of a " b i r t h - l i n k e d s e n s i t i v i t y t o h igh - -

c u l t u r e " and t h e " ideology of g i f t e d n e s s " a r e d i scussed by

Bourdieu i n h i s a n a l y s i s o f t h e s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s o f a r t percep-

, t i o n and t h e a p p r e c i a t i o n of ' h igh c u l t u r e : t *

- - - - - -

\

\ Since t h e i r a r t competence is t h e product o f an irnpercep- t i b l e f a m i l i a r i z a t i o n and an automat ic t r a n s f e r r i n g of a p t i t u d e s , m e m b e r s o f t h e p r i v i l e g e d classes a r e n a t u r a l l y

-- - - - - - - -- - *SSddgmof fn aaC1l-I &-&bFmcgee al . =--

which is t r a n s m i t t e d by a process o f unconscious t r a i n i n g . But, i n a d d i t i o n , the c o n t r a d i c t i o n s and ambigu i t i e s of t h e * r e l a t i o n s h i p which t h e most c u l t u r e d among t h a i n t a i n wi th t h e i r c u l t u r e a r e b o t h encouraged and pe t e d by the paradox which d e f i n e s the ' r e a l i z a t i o n ' of c u l t u r e as beconing n a t u r a l : c u l t u r e b e i n g achieved on ly b e negat ing

> i t s e l l -as such, t h a t is t o sav as a r t i f i c i a l and a r t i - f i c i a k l y acqui red , so as t o become second n a t u r e , a h a b i t u s

\ . . . s i i e n c e concerning t h e social p r e r e q u i s i t e s f o r t h e a p p r o p r i a t i o n of c u l t u r e . . . i s a se l f - seek ing s i l e n c e because

- - -- -- - -&-Wka&-We* *-possiHe*- . . ~ f - ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ f - pr+7 -- - -- v i l e g e by p re tend ing t h a t . it is a g i f t o f n a t u r e (1968a: 608) -1

Thus the hab i tus-the t a c i t l y t r a n s m i t t e d embodiid cknqeten- 1

ces t h a t are c e n t r a l t o p e r s o n a l domination--surface again w i t h i n ,

maern conkexts of i n s t i t u t i o n a l domination. But because of t h e ,

ideals to which social o r g a n i z a t i o n i n democrat ic state societies

i s supposed to conform, this dimension of domination t h a t owes so I

-d t o * L'a&tyrs- hi&- 0

a r ~ ~ e r that of r t a n t 1

i n g t h i s p e r s o n a l dimension of domination and, s i m i l a r l y , l e g i t i -

the educa t ion system,

- q - Education a d thePersona1 n i m g n s i o n o f T n s t i t u t i ~ ~ ~ a -

t

Domination--Bourdieu1s v i e w of t h e educat ion system is t h u s

d i f f e r e n t from t h a t o f John ~ 6 w e y (sek above, p. 174).2 The -

educat ion system, argues Bourdieu, does n o t perform an e q u a l i z i n g

funct ion i n s o c i e t y by i n t r o d u c i n g t h e freedom t o compete where

#ere once was h e r e d i t a r y p r i v i l e g e . Bourdiecf' sugges t s , on t h e

con t ra ry , t h a t t h e educa t ion s y s t e m func t ions to reproduce t h e -

r e l a t i o n s o f domination i n s t a t e s o c i e t i e s . It performs t h x s <

r e v e a l i n g example of the i n f l u e n c e of t h e o f f i c i a l v e r s i o n o f

i n s t i t u t i o n a l - d o m i n a t i o n i n t h e fol lowing passage c i t e d from a

s tudy of B r i t i s h schools . This passage demonst ra tes t h e con-

t s t r a i n t s a g a i n s t a l lowing *-personala judgement t o o v e r t l y 4

and e v a l u a t i o n i n t h e educa t ion system: a

Before looking a t the c o n s t i t u e n t e lements o f s e l e c t i o n po l i cy , it i s a p p r o p r i a t e t o cons ide r which c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a cand ida te f o r u n i v e r s i t y admission may l e g i t i m a t e l y be taken i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h e s e l e c t i o n process.?. .In a democracy, i n s t i t u t i o n s supported o u t of p u b l i c funds ought n o t directly and openly to select on t h e basis of some o f thein. Amongst t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s it would n o t normally be l e g i t i m a t e to pay attention to i n the s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s are

, s i b l f n g o r d e r , age above the minimum -(or l e n g t h of t ime $nt at school), physical appearance, a c c e n t or i n t o n a t i o n ,

- - -- - - - -

socia-economic status of parent , and p r e s t i q e of last schoo l attended, Rie- for the i h c l u s i o n of some of these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s an such a fist are se l f - ev iden t . Even if, L T .. * re, Ir mur& De shown that those w i t h p a r e n t s who v e x i n the social hierarchy tende3 to be 'bad r i s k s a i n terms of academic performance at u n i v e r s i t i e s , a d i r e c t and open bias of s e k c t i o n policy against such candidates would be urraccc*&le' fquoted 5n Reprodnctian: 2031;209) L

-

& 4

Given t h e s e c o n s t r a i n t s , how does t h e educa t ion system . - > -

manage t o e l i m i n a t e , by an i n e v i t a b l y ' p e r s o n a l ' assessment , <

r ' c e r t a i n s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s of i n d i v i d u a l s and l e g i t i m a t e t h e . - t ransmiss ion of h e r e d i t a r j ' p r i v i l e g e ? , '

Bourdieu contends t h e r e are two b a s i c components o f t h i s

k ' process. F i r s t , t h e educa t n system must d e f i n e and r e i n f o r c e -. --

I ,+

i s o c i a l l y acceptabxe ' s tandards o f exce l l ence . ' That i s t o say , \ ,

- the educati-on system must d e l i n e a t e what c o n s t i t u t , e s ' h igh I

number of d i f f e r e n t means inc luding: t h e system, o f examinat ions

( c f . above, p. 1721; the a u t h o r i t y inves ted i n t e a c h e r s ; a n d t h e

i n t e r a c t i o n of schoo l s with a v a r i e t y of d i f f e r e n t a g e n t s and

agencies h a t t o g e t h e r d e f i n e " t h e degree of l eg i t imacy t

(experienced as q u a l i t y ) of c u l t u r a l ob jectsn (Bourdieu, 19 71a : < A

I - 0 - - - - 325e; ' - - -

- - -- -

Second, t h e educa t ion system must d e f i n e and reward the

appropr ia t e q r e l a t i o n to c u l t u r e , " a s Bourdieu c a l l s it. The

not ion of r e l a t i o n to 'high c u l t u r e ' is c e n t r a l t o Bourdieu 's %

a n a l y s i s of the role o f pe r sona l domination ~ n d t h e h a b i t u s - / i n

reproducing i n e q u a l i t i e s i n state s o c i e t i e s , To understand t h i s

not ion it is necessary to recall Bourdieu 's co&nts on the

e-ly a c q u i s i t i o n of c u l t u r a l d i s p o s i t i o n s (sey above, p. 178) . I n his d i s c u s s i o n of a "birth-linked c u l t u r e " Bourdieu spoke of

the o f t e n i m p e r c e p t i b l e processes of a c h i l d ' s family exper ience # t

through which a sensitiv5ty to the dominant c u l t u r e became

of a c q u i r i n g c u l t u r e g i v e s to t h e c h i l d r e n o f the dominant

c u l t u r a l p roduc t s . S i m i l a r l y , t h i s p a r t i c u l a r r e l a t i o n t o cul - j

t u r e g i v e s t o t h e c h i l d r e n o f t h e p r i v i l e g e d an advantage over - --3 t h e c h i l d r e n ' o f t h e less p r i v i l e g e d when it becomes t i m e t o e n t e r !I t

2

the school environment. Bourdieu e x p l a i n s how t h i s advantage 1 s d 3 opera tes : "By doing away wi th g iv ing e x p l i c i t l y t o everyone what 2 -i

I

it i m p l i c i t l y demands of--eve-ryone-, t h e educa t ion system demands 2 -

of everyone a l i k e t h a t they have what it does n o t g ive . h his

c o n s i s t s mainly of l i n g u i s t i c and c u l t u r a l competence and t h a t +

- - -- - - - - -~ ~ --- - - -- ~ ~- ---- ~ ---- -- ~ ------ - --------------A

~

r e l a t i o n s h i p of f a m i l i a r i t y wi th c u l t u r e which can on ly be pro-

duced by fami ly upbringing when it t r a n s m i t s t h e dominant ['high1]

c u l t u r e " (1977a: 4 9 4 ) . -,

The manner by which t h e r e l a t i o n t o c u l t u r e becomes embodied . i

i n h a b i t u s and hence assessed by pe r sona l i n t e r a c t i o n i s b e s t - argues ~ o u r d i e u , "is the most impor tant p a r t o f t h e c u l t u r a l

" her i t age" (1974a: 4 0 ) . Through a t a c i t i n c u l c a t i o n the c h i l d ' s

speech qatterw beco3 -A basic/camponent of i t s to ta l d i s p o s i t i o n

' e a r l y i n l i f e . These speech p a t t e r n s owe t h e i r d u r a b i l i t y t o 1 *

t h e i r i n c o r p o r a t i o n into b o d i l y s t y l e s : 1

;F

Language tspeech] is a body technique and s p e c i f i c a l l y l i n - 1

g u i s t i c , e s p e c i a l l y phonet ic , competence is a dimension of 3

# u f n + v l . e I ~&3'te a - - - - --- - -

is ;sq&-essed. . . .The 'preferredg shape of the buccal aperature, iLe. the most f r e q u e n t a r t i c u l a t o r y $ - p o s i t i o n is a component of the g l o b a l s y s t e m a t i c use of i the mouth ( ind t h e r e f o r e a component of body h e x i s ) " F 3 fBourdieu, 1977d: 660-61)- 4

SAC~ patterns and later w r i t i n g - a b i l i t i e s f u n b t i o n as

I n a person ' s speech h a b i t s - - p a r t i c u l a r l y e t h o s e t h a t are s most unconscious, a t any r a t e l e a s t amenable t o c o n s ~ i o u s i c o n t r o l such as pronunciation--the memory o f h i s o r h e r i

3 o r i g i n s , which may be otherwise ab ju red is prese rved and exposed .... Pronunciat ion and more cjenerally t h e r e l a t i o n t o

i language, whether a s s u r e d - o r insecure - - l ike 'a l l manifes- 1

t a t i o n s o f t h e hab i tus , which is h i s t o r y t u r n e d i n t o nature--are , f o r ord inary pe rcep t ion , r e v e l a t i o n s of the i

person i n its u l t i m a t e t r u t h n (l977d: 659, 667) . -. - - -. . - - -

%Zflence of t h e d u r a b i l i t y o f l i n g u i s g i c h a b i t s such as

pronuncia t ion and t h e i r a b i l i t y t o b e t r a y a s p e a k e r ' s s o c i a l -- ~ ------------p--p---------- -- ~ ------p--p-p----

-----------p---p-----p------------ ~ -p-p---

background comes from a v a r i e t y o f sources--perhaps t h e -most r) T

famous b e i n g Shaw's Pygmalion. B u t t h e r e are o t h e r f a c t o r s I .

bes ides p ronunc ia t ion involved, For example, Bourdieu draws

a t t e n t i o n t o t h e d i f f e r e n c e s i n l i n g u i s t i c products-- i .e . what

might be recorded a c o u s t i c a l l y on t ape . Like B r i t i s h soc io lo-

q&t-B-asi l Be rns te in , Bourdieu n o t e s t h a t workingr 'c lass -- -- speech - - - - - - - - - - --

tends to r e l y on concre te c o n t e x t o r i e n t e d p h r a s i n g s whereas

middle class speech tenifs towards a b s t r a c t i o n and ' context - .,-

independence. ' I n Bourdieu' s ' k r d s :

[the essence) of working class language.. .man i fes t s i t s e l f i n the thdency to move from piprticular case to p a r t i c u l a r case, f rom illustration to parab le , or t o shun t h e bombast. of f ine words and tfie turgidity of grand emotions, through banter, rudeness and ribaldry, manners of b e i n g and doing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of classes who are never fully g iven the social c o n d i t i o n s f o r the severence between o b j e c t i v e de- notation a d subjective conn~tat ion, between the things seen and all they w e to the viewpoint f r o m which they are seen" (Reproduction: 116 - 17).

neither w L t h the particularities of pronunciation n o r w i t h --

(Reproduction: 1 3 4 ) , H i s concern is r a t h e r with t h e modus

.operandit t h e g e n e r a l r e l a t i o n t o language and c u l t u r e embodied

i n t h e d u r a b l e d i s p o s i t i o n s o f t h e h a b i t u s . H e s-arizes t h e

g e n e r a l r e l a t i o n s to learned d i scourse a n d ' l e g i e a t e c u l t u r e as *

fo l lows : "Broadly speaking, r e l a t i o n s t o ['high'] c u l t u r e range 't

from excel lence,_ the-xule convexted i n t o a h a b i t u s capah le .p f - .- 't

p l a y i n g wi th me r u l e o f t h e game, through t h e strict cohformity

of those condemned merely t o execu te , t o the d i s p o s s e s s i o n o f t h e

laymann (Out l ine : 201).

P u t ifi more concre te terms, ~ o u r d i e u l o c a t e s a t one end of . t h e spectrum the c e r t i t u d o - s u i ( s e l f a s su rance ) of the dominant

classes t h a t i s expressed i n " t h e supreme form of l i n g u i s t i c

prowess, i.e. e a s e i n accompli&bg-the p e r i l o u s , r e l a x a t i o n i n -.

'- t ens ion" - (19 -- 4 7d: 6 5 9 ) . - - - Thus members of the dominant c l a s s e s -- qan - -

r e l a x and " a f f e c t ' t h e common touch '" i n s i t u a k i o n s demanding

forraa;fity, while, a t ttte middle o f the spectrum, members of t h e

lwer lniddle class and the upper working class are r e s t r i c t e d t o

hyper-correc tness and c o n s t a n t self-survei

659. "664). ina ally, at the o t h e r end o f t h e spectrum are the L m e m b e r s of the working class i n g e n e r a l , whg, ar'gues Buurdieu, \. are excluded from eve& a t t e w t i n g to emulate t h e dominant s t y l e s

Within the French educa t ion system, t h o s e members of the -

miare a s s - warkf ng ctTasscs r h * -do manage to make f t to the- upper- .

levels of e d u c a t i w ar= m e t with specialists i n charge OF

B \ .=I i F .

eva lua t ion . Bourdieu contends t h a t i n v i o l a t i o n of t h e o f f i c i a l ) : - f 9

' v e r s i o n of i n s t i t u t i o n a l domination, t h e processes of e v a l u a t i o n

and s e l e c t i o n are pervaded w i t h the ta.cit pe r sona l assessments * ( .

\

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f personal domination. The s t u d e n t s who ' a re not 1 i

from t h e p r i v i l e g e d c l a s s e s and who a r e n o t h e i r t o an e a s F a n d 1 g ri

f a m i l i a r L r e l a t i o n tp c u l t u r e as a r e s u l t of a par t i cu la r mode of + - r'

2 A

1- a c q u i r i n g c u l t u r e , are a t a disadvantage. Th i s disadvantage i s

demonstrated m o s t g r a p h i c a l l y i n t h y o r a l examinations t H a t s t i l l - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - -- -p - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - -- - p- p- - -- -

p l a y a s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e i n t h e French system of edKcafifiP

Bourdieu' s words :

... nothing , c e r t a i n l y n o t t h e a p p r e c i a t i o n or even t h e m o s t t e c h n i c a l knowledge and know-how, goes uncontaminated by the - system o f convergent or, more p r e c i s e l y redundant

impressions bear ing on one to ta l d i s p o s i t i o n , t h a t is , on the system of manners characteristic of a social p o s i t i o n . Thus, i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e ease t h a t is called ' f o r c e d , '

-

parXidula61y f r e G e n T -#oseml'ddlecTr working-cXaM s t u d e n t s who s t r i v e , by r a p i d d e l i v e r y and n o t wi thou t many false n o t e s , to conform t o the norms of u n i v e r s i t y wrbaljzing, the ease that is c a l l e d 'patural' affirms the well-mastered mastery o f language i n the casualness o f the d e l i v e r y , t h e eveness of t h e tone and the s t y l i s t i c under- s t a t ement t h a t betoken the a ~ t o f concea l ing art, t h e supreme manner o f suggesting, by the tempering applied t o the temptat ion o f speaking toq w e l l , t h e p o t e n t i a l e x c e l l e n c e of one 's speech, I f the laboured r e l a t i o n t o language is unconsciously ca ta logued as the poor man's ease, or; #hat amounts W the same t h i n g , the o s t e n t a t i o n of nouveau r i c h e , t h i s is because it lets i t s . p r e s e n t a t i o n f u n c t i o n show through too clearly n o t t o b e ' s u s p e c t e d p f . s e l f - i n t e r e s t e d v u l g a r i t y i n the e y e s of academics. . . .

- - - - - - -

- [Repr&uction : 118-19) ; - e

This is n o t the place t o document the numerous manifes-

tations of t h i s tacit persona l e v a l u a t i o n i n the French educa t ion I . ,

- -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ft B

, s y s t e m . Buurdien supplies abundant ev idence of t h e v a r i e t y o f , 5% r, -2 '5

Q + contexts-- including comiaents on w r i t t e n exams--in which t h e b a s i c

- \

d e e i

- - schemes of eva lua t ion thatP of t en ;ely on the "fuzzy" l o g i c of 4- a.

pe%nai do&natioq ace appl ied (c f . above, p .loo). Examples of f - d' i

such schemes are: m b r i l l i a n t / d u l f ; unconstrained/painstaking;

Y

,9 . -. t h i s public , l eg i t imate , and l eg i t ima t ing evaluat ion a r e r e f lec- a * - w. i n the 'self -evaluat ion of candidates : oreo over, t h i s

I

Q. - . , purportedly impersonal and formal eva2uation is re inforced i n

,. numerous informal evaluat ions with t h e consequence t h a t a sys- 1

s - #

temat ic and oft"en non conscious in f luence is exer ted an the

ind iv idua ls l ea rn to 'love t h e i r f a t e ' and appear to choose the

occupational goa l that ' ob jec t ive ' - statistical s t u d i e s

they are m o s t l i k e l y t o achieve. Coll&ete examples of t h i s

attitude--which Bourdieu descr ibes as "necess i ty made i n t o a ..

virtue' (Outline: 77)-are documented by B r i t i s h s o c i o l o g i s t Paul /

W i l l i s (2977). W i l l i s is paraphrased by f i c h a e l A p p l e : 9 4

4 - * e scnool , 'by re ectxnq ma t h e lsj do, the lads {working-clkss

effentinate, or no t physical enough, The seeds of s o c i a l r e p r d u c t j o n lie i n t h i s very rejection. The d i s t i n c t i o n s . made' and k t e d upon by the f a& imply a s t rong dichotomy

- - - - - - - - - - - v- &EEa•’xa& 2abettr, - T k e d ~ o f &rengtk - --

in the physiea3, the dismissing of mental :b&k l ea rn ing , ' provides an +qmrtant element' i n the recre t i o n of the L ,

Y

* _

% it v

B

a 3 + i d e o l o g i d a l hegemony of t h e dominant lasses" (1980: 67) . - I

P c ; - - 3

I t is clear, then , t h a t i n s t i t h t i o n a l dominat ion- involves a 2 &.

I

3 fundamental d u p l i c i t y . On t h e one .hand, it invo lves a h igh Y

3 L

degree of,,bureaucratiza;tion, S o c i a l processes a r e r e g u l a t e d i n .* 4 i -

r e s p e c t , o f e x p l i c i t w r i t t e n laws by s p e c i a l - i s t s 1 A

> -s, &

i n s t i t u t i o n a l s e t t i n g s , Y e t on dU o t h e r hand, \

m t i o n s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h bureaucra t i za t ion- - fo r example, , " t h e -

- - -- - --- -2rxZ f I Z K ~ = - o f - & i f f e ~ ~ & ~ ~ - ~ ~ l f f t f J n & = ~ h a n d = _ = ' w i A h a a 5 -

regard f o r persons ' " (Weber, 1968 : '975) --act as what Bourdieu *

c+- t

c a l l s a "smokescreen" Tor s u r v i v a l s o f personal domination

. ,.+-- (Outl ine: 1 8 8 ) . I n o t h e r words, b u r e a u c r a t i c p rocesses and tafk

. of freedom and e q u a l i t y conceal t h e i n h e r i t a n c e o f s o c i a l p r i v i -

1 l e g e ( i n the form o f embodied c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l or esteemed- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- h a b i t u s ) and t h u s obscure the role of personal domination wi th in T

the i n s t i t u t i o n a l frameworks of s ta te s o c i e t i e s . Bourdieu

summarizes, emphasizing t h e r o l e o f t h e educat ion system i n t h i s

process :

L

By awardipg a l l e g e d l y i m p a r t i a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n s (which a r e # .

a l s o l a r g e l y accepted as such) f o r i s o c i a l l y condi t ioned a p t i t u d e s Which it treats. as unequal ' g i f t s ' , [ t h e educat ion s y s t e m ] t ransforms de f a c t o i n e q u a l i t i e s i n f o dc j u r e ones and economic a n d s o z a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n t o d $ s t i = t ~ o n s of . .

- - - - - -- q u a l i t u - , ~ n d - ~ t i ~ - - t k e - t ~ - . - h e r i t a g e . I n doing so , it i s performifig a conf idence t r i c k . Apart from enab l inq the e l i t e to j u s t i f y be ing what it is,+ t h e i & ~ l & g ~ of g i f Q d n e s s , the c o r d r s t o n e of t h e whole e d u c a t i o n a l and socPal system, h e l p s t o enc lose t h e under-

\ t: p r i v i l e g e d c l a s s e s ' i n - t h e r o l e s which s o c i e t y has given them

' by making t h e m see as n a t u r a l i n a b i l i t y t h i n g s which are onlf a r e s u l t of an i n f e r i o r s o c i a l s t a t u s , and by persuad- i n g them t h a t they owe t h e i r s o c i a l f a t e (which i s inc reas - i n g l y t ied t o t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l f a t e a s s a c i e t y become$ m o r e r a t i o n a l i z e d ) t o t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l na tu re and Weir l a c k of g i f t s f l974a: 42) . .

, CONCLUSION

~ o u r d i e u ~ s work is informed by a c o n f r o n t a t i o n between

epis temologica l a n a l y s i s and t h e p r a c t i c a l problems o f an thro- - \

po log ica l f ie ldwork. I n an e a r l y summary i n Eng l i sh o f - h i s -

t h e o r e t i c a l work, he r e f e r s t o a remark by Husser l on the- foun-

da t ions o f t h e socZa1 sc iences : "The s o c i a l s c i e n c e s have,

n e c e s s a r i l y , t o quote Husser l , ' a thematics w i t h a c o n s i s t e n t l y

dual o r i e n t a t i o n , a thematrcs c o n s i s t e n t l y l i n k i n g theory of t h e - -- - -- -- -- -

- - - - -- - -- --- - -- -

s c i e n t i f i c f i e l d with. a theory of t h e knowledge [ t h a t c o n s t i -

tu tes] t h a t theoryn (1973: 56) A s Bourdieu p u t s it: - " . . . episte-

mological r e f l e c t i o n on t h e cond i t ionsL of p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e

- [social] s c i e n c e s forms* an i n t e g r a l part of t h e [soc ia l ] s c i e n c e s " S

(1973a: 56) . I

- - - - Later, i n themore-comprePlensive~~heore3~ca~~s~~ement ,- - A

\

Outl ine o•’ a Theory of P r a c t i c e , Bourdieu a p p l i e s t h i s epistemo-

l o g i c a l r e f l e c t i o n - l o the d i f f i c u l t i e s he f aced s tudy ing marr iage C

L

L

s t r a t e g i e s among t h e Kabyle people of ~ l g e r i a . Faced w i t h a - complex, dense ly t e x t u r e d process of s o c i a l a c t i o n , and c o n f l i c t -

i n g accounts by p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h a t i n t e r a c t i o n , ~ o u r d i e u found *

t h e a v a i l a b l e methodologies--such a s phenomenology and s t r u c t u r -

marriage ' p rac t i ces , and the ongoing i n t e r a c t i o n s he w a s a b l e /-.

alism--were inadequate. H e set t o work t o r e c o n c i l e h i s t o r i c a l - - - - - -- - --- - - -- d Y records gf marriage p r a c t i c e s wi th informants ' accounts of

t o observk. The so lu tbon t o this dilemma, he cane t o b e l i e v e , s ' lay i n i d e n t i f y i n g t h e changes t h a t occurred when, as a ' s c i en -

t i f i c ' r e s e a r c h e r , he brought " t o t h e l e v e l of d i s c o u r s e [ i n t h e

d

c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a b s t r a c t models of marr iage p rac t i ce ] . . .a

p r a c t i c e which owes a number o f , i ts p r o p e r t i e s t o t h e f a c t that / '..

it f a l l s s h o r t of d i s c o u r s e (which does n o t k e a n .it is- s h o r t on

l o g i c ) " (Out l ine : 120) . Summarizing t h e impor t o f t h i s s o l u t i o n ,

Bourdieu w r i t e s : t

' Philosophy aims a t t h e I o q i c g l ~ r i f i c a t i o n of thoughts . . . .wi thout phi losophy thougs ts a r e , ;a? it were, c loudy and i n d i s t i n c t : i t s t a s k is t o make them cE2m and g i v e them s h a r p boundar ies . ' [ l i t t g e n s t e i n ] I n t h i s sense t h e fore- going ana lyses may be s a i d t o belong t o ph i losophy . ' But

- - - ----

u n l i k e p h i l o s o p h i c a l a c t i v i t y a s W i t t g e n s t e i n conceives it, - ---pp - - - - ---

- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- --

T h i y d o n o t a c h 7 e V e t h e i r end i n ' t h e c l a r i f i c a t i o n o f p r o p o s i t i o n s , ' A r i s i n g i n response t o s c i e n t i f i c d i f f i c u l - t ies and n o t t o t h e r ead ing of t e x t s , they a r e in tended to h e l p surmount d i f f i c u l t i e s , by provid ing n o t on ly procedures f o r r e s e a r c h b u t a l s o procedures f o r v a l i d a t i o n , means of dec id ing between competing accounts o f t h e same p r a c t i c e s (Outl ine: 30) . The c e n t r a l concept of Bourdieu's t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e ,

and t h e concept t h a t i n t e g r a t e s t h e ana lyses t o which Bourdieu -

-- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -

r e f e r s i n t h i s passage , is' t h e concept o f t h e h a b i t u s . T h e n

h a b i t u s concept i s t h e outcome, i n ' p a r t , o f Bourdieu ' s c r i t i c a l

r e f l e c t i o n on L\e d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e a b s t r a c t t h e o r e t i c a l

knowledge of ' s c i e n t i f i c ' r e sea rcher s and t h e p r a c t i c a l embodied

knowledge on Frlhich i n d i v i d u a l s depend i n t h e i r ,everyday l i v e s .

~ h r o u g h the h a b i t u s concept , Bourdieu addresses t h e non

L C elements of social a c t i o n , a dimension of s o c i a l a c t i --

n=lnifestTn-i-n~~-dUaSsr~ccounts o f t h e i r ac t ions , I n

.- .. n m 01 m e e a s t o s ouc systems ana 9

- broaoerjS;) s o c i a l p rocesses , Bourdieu a l s o addresses such f a c t o r s as t h e

unacknowledged-conditions of social a c t i o n , thepunintended conse- -

9

quences of s o c i a l a 'ct ion, and t h e p o l i t i c a l f u n c t i o n s both of

s o c i a l a c t i o n and of symbolic systems ( c f . Giddens, 1979) .

-

Bourdieu e x p l o r e s , by means o f t h e h a b i t u s concept , how t h e

i n d i v i d u a l ' s s o c i a l background, h i s h e r p a s t a s it w e r e , i s

' c a r r i e d ' i n t o t h e preSent and i n f l u e n c e s h i s h e r ongoing i n t e r - -?

a c t i o n s . A s a g a i n s t perspec&?ves t h a t p o r t r a y i n d i v i d u a l s a s

"mechanicallyn determined by t h e i r s o c i a l backgrounds, Bourdieu '

a rguesJha t i n d i v i d u a l s a r e no t determined, b u t a r e r a t h e r

cons t ra ined , by what c a n , b e viewed as v a r i o u s l e v e l s of s o c i a l ,

are, t o some e x t e n t , ' f r e e t i n t h e i r s o c i a l a c t i o n s , b u t it is a

"condit ioned" o r " l i m i t e d R freedom, wi th t h e s e l i m i t s be ing ' se t .

- by t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s s o c i a l i z a t i o n an8 h i s / h e r r e l a t i o n t o a given /

- so=?ety' s m a t e r i a l and c u l t u r a l resources .

u n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e sense of even a "limitedn freedom seems - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - -

to- fje miss ing from some of Bourdieu's accounts o f t h e h a b i t u s i n

context . Thus i n d i v i d u a l s born i n t o a s o c i a l p o s i t i o n of sub-

o r d i n a t i o n are condemned t o recognize t h e supposed l eg i t imacy of

t h e i r subord ina t ion , o r a t l e a s t t h e l eg i t imacy of t h e d e f i n i -

t i o n s of t h e s o c i a l wor ld supported by'dominant groups. On

reading Bourdieu ' s a n a l y s e s of the French educa t ion system one

f i n d s onese l f asking: "What about t h e s t r u g g l e s * n e c e s s a r y t o . -- - i m p s ! = ~ ~ k r t i c u l a r ~ - o f i ~ L v d u s s 2 + "What Wt t h z .

p o t e n t i a l f o r dominated groups t o resist dominatl . -- - --

-on>'' In a 4

6 ., Bourdieu p a i n t s a very p e s s i m i s t i c p i c t u r e of t h e p o t e n t i a l l f o r

* \ I

t h e dominated t o combat t h e "symbolic power" t o which they a r e - I - .'-

sub jec ted , I-'-

'-& Despite t h e o v e r s i g h t s i n i r e g a r d t o t r a d i t i o n s o f r e s i s t a n c e

t h a t t h e p e s s i m i s t i c tone of Bourdieu 's theory o f symbolic power $

- may encourage, social s c i e n t i s t s , as I hope I h&ve shown i n t h i s

t h e s i s , s t a n d t o l e a r n a l o t from Bourdieu 's p e r s p e c t i v e . This

is e s p e c i a l l y t r u e o f s o c i o l o g i s t s (and neo Marx i s t s ) who have

been c o n t e n t t o ' l e a v e t h e o r i e s of i n d i v i d u a l consc iousness ,

thought, mot iva t ion , etc., t o psydhologis t s . Or of s o c i o l o g i s t s ,

who, a s Bourdieu s a y s of t h e s t r u c t u r a l i s t s , are c o n t e n t t o l e t " a

"a theory of p r a c t i c e . : . [emerge] a s a ; . . w a s t e p roduc t , immedi-

a t e l y d i sca rdedn i n a t temcts t o develop a b s t r a c t models of 4

Through t h e concept 05 t h e h a b i t u s , Bourdieu h a s developed

a p e r s p e c t i v e on t h e h d i v i d u a l t h a t i s s e n s i t i v e t o complexi t ies ,-

of human consciousness and s o c i a l i z a t i o n , on t h e one hand, and,

on t h e o t h e r hand, t o v a r i a t i o n s i n s o c i a l c o n t e x t s . I n f a c t ,

t h i s t h e o r y o f t h e s u b j e c t i n a s o c i a l c o n t e x t , as w e l l a s h i s - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - -

F --- -

t e l l i n g r e f l e c t i o n s on t h e c o n d i t i o n s Bf t h e o r e t i c a l knowledge, . are probably Bourdieu's d n t r a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o t h e s o c i a l

sc i ences . That i s t o say,._ i n a d d i t i o n t~ h i s ep i s t emolog ica l

c o n t r i b u t i o n s , Bourdieu has provided us w i t h a s t r a t e g y f o r

spanning l e v e l s of a n a l y s i s , f o r l i n k i n g t h e rndst i n t i m a t e and '

a p m e n t l y t r i v i a l tastes and d i s t a s t e s of everyday l i f e wi th

j 1 - - t e d i n Wxrl e u of t h e role of t h e d i e d know

\ ledge of the h a b i t u s i n non s t a t e s o c i e t i e s w i t h o u t w r i t i n g and'

wi thout i n s t i t u t e d means of social r e g u l a t i o n . I n such socie- /--*

t ies , Bourdieu has demonstrated, the s o c i a l in fo rmat ion necessary

f o r t h e r ep roduc t ion of s o c i e t y .is l i t e r a l l y embodied i n t h e -", -

< -

sys tern of d i s p o s i t i o n s c o n s t i t u t i n g t h e h a b i t u s : This s o c i a l

movements abou t t h e house and v i l l a g e . I n t h i s process. 'of . i f %

a s s i m i l a t i o n hab i tus a c t s a s a c e n t r a l means f o r t h e percept ion

and eva lua t i on o f the s o c i a l world. The hab i t u s i s a l s o c e n t r a l

by members of t h e s o c i a l world.

I n t h e examples Bourdieu draws from Kabyl~! s 0 6 i e t y ~ ' a d u l t f ..

- - - - - - -

~ ' ~ a l s - a r ~ - e v a ~ d ~ ( 3 0 ~ & - i ; ~ t ~ - ~ ~ y = p--pp -- i i

e x h i b i t the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c demeanours of male and female honour. +

Among t h e Kabyles, a man's r epu t a t i on f o r honourable conduct a s 3

t r i b u t e s t o h i s success i n t h e s t r u g g l e f o r c o n t r o l over

'ma. ter ia l I1 c u l t u r a l and human resources . (Women and t h e young

a r e , f o r the most p a r t , excluded from t h i s s t r u g g l e . ) Thus, t h e

process of l e a r n i n g t h e respec ted demeanours and a b i l i t i e s

embodied i n t h e habi tus c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e s t a b i l i t y of Kabyle

- r s o c i a l o rgan iza t ion by making it pos s ib l e f o r dominant groups t o t t- 5

t r ansmi t esteemed hab i tus (which Bourdieu d e s c r i b e s as " c u l t u r a l 4 b

c 1 f

c a p i t a l w ) from genera t ion t o genera t ion . !j

,Of course , t h e impl ica t ions of Bourdieu 's pe r spec t ive reach * 6 '*, I E 1 =r=ycKifi x & e ~ - d n u x r s t a t e & e h . Bourdl- .I work.

> . l l l U S b Z Y b Z 3 U- kl earcher s

, extend t h e i r . i n q u i r i e s p a s t t h e r i g i d boundaries t h a t d iv ide ,

say, relo logy f r o m socio logy, and both t h e s e d i s c i p l i n e s from I.

pkychology. ~ h u s Bourdieu's concept of t h e habitus--a theory of

- -/ t he s u b j e c t i n . a s o c i a l context--is r e l e v a n t t o t h e s tudy . . of both

non state and s t a t e s o c i e t i e s .

Bourdieu argues t h a t i n s t a t e s o c i e t i e s as c o n t r a s t e d wi th

non state s o c i e t i e s , s o c i a l o rgan iza t ion i s r e g u l a t e d a s much by, 4

e x p l i c i t r u l e s and s - p e c i a l i s t s as by t h e embodied d i s p o s i t i o n s o f

t h e h a b i t u s . .Never the les9 , even i n s t a t e s o c i e t i e s t h e h a b i t u s "i

I plays an impor tan t and o f t e n unacknowledged p a r t i n s o c i a l repro-

duct ion. Bourdieu p o i n t s o u t t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s born i n t o s i m i l a r

p o s i t i o n s &n a s o c i a l h i e r a r c h y acqu i re s i m i l a r habitus-:i.e.

h a b i t u s , as sugges ted above, c o n s t r a i n s *their p r e s e n t and f u t u r e

a c t i v i t i e s . ~ h u s , f o r example, i n d i v i d u a l s ' a s p i r a t i o n s - - a s p i r a -

t i o n s t h a t are moulded by i n d i v i d u a l s ' a n t i c i p a t i o n s of t h e k ind %

of r e c e p t i o n t h e i r speech s t y l e s and bodi ly demeanours w i l l

r ece ive i n df f f e r e h t contexts--funct ion t o make c e r t a i n t h a t - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - -

i n d i v i d u a l s from less p r i v i l e g e d backgrounds 'know t h e i r p l a c e '

and s t a y t h e r e ( c f , Out l ine : 82) . I n t h i s way t h e h a b i t u s con-

t r i b u t e s t o mainta in ing the- s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s o f domination i n

s t a t e s o c i e t i e s .

I n democrat ic s t a t e societies, Bourdieu c o n t i n u e s , educa t ion

systems f u n c t i o n t o conceal the process of what Bourdieu c a l l s i

t h e " i n h e r i t & c $ of c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l [such as esteemed habi tus] . "

a h k e t h a t tbev have w h a t lt does not given - ( I 977c: 4 9 4 ) . Because

the educat ion system p l a c e s emphasis on modes of c~rtimunication

and h a b i t u s that - are closer than those acqui red d u r i n g the

primary s o c i a l i z a t i o n o f ' t h e dominant than t h o s e acqu i red dur ing

the primary s o c i a l i z a t i o n of t h e dominated, s t u d e n t s from less .

p r i v i l e g e d backgrounds a r e a t a disadvantage. y e t t h e education

system c o n t r i b u t e s t o r e i n f o r c i n g t h e f i c t i o n t h a t s c h o l a s t i c

success i s a f u n c t i o n o f pure ly i n d i v i d u a l fac tors - -such as hard I

A ybrk and 'good t a s t e t - - r a t h e r than s o c i a l faFErs-.T Thus the .

C + /". educat ion system, i n Bourdieu 's view, h e l p s t o legi&mate t h e

,, -1

4 k h e r i t a n c e of c u l t u r a l capi ta; i n s t a t e societies ($ p r o c e s s \

-that i s o v e r t l y r e j e c t e d as contravening t h e i d e a l o f t h e "meri--

t h e s tudy of t h e r o l e o f t h e h a b i t u s i n s t a t e s o c i e t i e s . For

i n s t a n c e , how does the s o c i a l o rgan iza t ion of space i n t h e house x

* o r t h e work p l a c e a s ' r e a d ' by t h e d i s p o s i t i o n s of t h e h a b i t u s

func t ion t o keep i n d i v i d u a l s ' i n t h e i r p l a c e ' ? More s p e c i f i c a l l y , ,

how do embodied a t t i m d e s of shame deference and r e s p e c t a c t t o - - -- - - - -

- - - -

keep i n d i v i d u a l s i n t h e i r p l a c e a s a f u n c t i o n of t h e i r c l a s s ,

r a c e and sex? Fgnal ly , how does a t a c i t r e c o g n i t i o n of t h e

supposed l eg i t imacy of c e r t a i n c u l t u r a l products--such a s ' sc ien-

t i f i c ' knowledge--prevent i n d i v i d u a l s from i n v e s t i g a t i n g : t h e

social c o n d i t i o n s i n f l u e n c i n g t h e product ion and exchange of

those products ; t h e s e c t i o n a l i n t e r e s t s they s e r v e ; t h e assump-

t i o n s on which t h e y are based; t h e p o l i c i e s implemented i n t h e i r -72.

name_?-- - - -- - - - -- --

e ' ' h '

INTRODUCTION

NOTES

1. P i e r r e Bourdieu, Out l ine of a Theory o f P r a c t i c e (Camridge: 9

Cambridge Unive r s i ty P ress , 1 9 7 7 ) . H e r e a f t e r c i t e d a s

2. I n t h i s t h e s i s I have used t h e t e r m s t r u c t u r a l i s m , s t r u c t u r - a l i s t , etc. , where Bourdieu uses t h e terins o b j e c t i v i s m ,

1 o b j e c t i v i s t , etc. Bourdieu i n t e n d s t h a t t h e c a t e g o r y ob jec t iv i sm should i n c l u d e works of w r i t e r s a s d i v e r s e as Claude L g v i - ~ t r a u s s ,

- - -- -& * Te cce -& Ts3~ri;s-a- -+f *ca~+--ifeee-eee-e-e f -

i n t e n d s t h a t t h e ca tegory ob jec t iv i sm cover w r i t e r s l i k e ~ 6 v i - S t r a u s s who i n v e s t i g a t e ' t h e s t r u c t u r e of symbolic systems and w r i t e r s l i k e neorMarxist, Al thusser , who i n v e s t i g a t e t h e s t r u c - t u r e of s o c i e t y a s a whole. - Because Bourdieu 's f o c a l concern i s wi th ~ 6 v i - ~ t r a u s s i a n types o f qb jec t iv i sm t h a t a t t e m p t t o iden- t i f y t h e structures underlying ,symbolic sys tems, and because L & i - ~ t r a u s s i a n objec t iv ism i s known t o Anglo-American reader& a s s t r u c t d m , I have decided t o use t h e term s t r u c t u r a l i s m , \

and t o restr ict it t o cover t h e s t ~ u c t u r a l i s t s t u d y o f symbolic systems ( u n l e s s o therwise ind ica ted) .

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -

3 . ~ o u r d i e u ' s view of ' p rogress ' i n t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s must be d i s t i n g u i s h e d from Thoman Kuhn's views on " s c i e n t i f i c revo-

l u t i o n s . " Kuhn i s i n t e i e s t e d i n _ d i s p e l l i n g myths of c o n t i n u i t y and cumula t iv i ty i n , t h e h i s t o r y of sc ience . As a g a i n s t views of incrementa l progress i n s c i e n t i f i c endeavours, Kuhn m a i n t a i n s '

1 t h a t sci3ence i s more a p t l y c h a r a c t e r i z e d by d i s c o n t i n u i t y . - Kuhn

argues t h a t t h e h i s t o r y of sc ience i n v o h e s a -number of breaks between i n t e r n a l l y c o n s i s t e n t and mutual ly e x c l u s i v e sets of as%umptions, proble&s and methods which he ca l l s "paradigms" (see Kuhn, 1970) .

Bourdieu on t h e o t h e r hand does n o t p o r t r a y t h e d i f f e r e n t "moments" o r s t a g e s i n h i s perspect ive- - i .e . phenomenology,

, s t r u c t u r a l i s m and t h e " sc ience of pract ice"-as approaches or "paradigms." For Bourdieu, as s u

- . -- " w e w e r r t E r ~ r - e n t * + a ~ - & f t - a & ~ a l a n r e s s i o n , and t h e r e s u l t s of one mode do n o t c a n c e l o u t t h e ga ins

0 , In -ad 1 ts nre_dP - P

c e s s o r s , a g iven mode both conserves and' subsumes t h e g a i n s of t

i t s p r e d e c e s s o r ( s f . Bourdieu's no t ion of a movement t h a t con- serves and subsumes has roots i n both t h e n o t i o n o f an epistemo- l o g i c a l b ~ e a k ( rup tu re ) put f o r t h Sache la rd and i n t h e n o d o n o f ~ i a l e c t l c a l change f o r t h by G-W. Hegel

- (1770-1831)_.

NOTES (cont inued) :

i 3 z I . There are numerous sources f o r t h i s "problem of meaning" a s

I . it s u r f a c e s i n American soc io logy. One o f t h e m o r e i n f luen- -?? $ t i a l d i s c u s s i o n s o f t h e problem can be found i n t h e work of Max 4 Weber f o r whom, as ~ i d d e n k no tes , " t h e a i m o f soc io logy i s t o 1 ana lyse and e x p l a i n soc ia l - '@ct ion through t h e s t u d y o f t h e ." - subjec&ive meanings w h e r e b Y h d i v i d u a l s o r i e n t - t h e i r conduct-" - (1974: 8; see Weber, 19681: 1236) . Alf red Schutz is in f luenced both by Husse r l and by Weber i n h i s a t t empt t o deve,lop t h e con- c e p t u a l foundat ions of a phenomenological soc io logy.

-

- - - -- -=zAs-~~&=&+~*i-f&~m*~:*b R O ~ ~ R & - ~ ~ U & ~ ~ ~ - - = - F

Bourdieu r e f e r s both t o t h e p a t t e r n s under ly ing symbolic systems and t o the p a t t e r n s under ly ing s o c i a l systems. However, f o r purposes o f c l a r i f i c a t i o n , I w i l l base t h i s i d i s c u s s i o n of t h e

- l i m i t s o f phenomenological g e w s of meaning on t h e no t ion of symbolic s t r u c t u r e . The re levance o f broader s o c i a l processes t o a d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e s e l i m i t s of phenomenological views of meaning w i l l be d i scussed i n Chapter V I .

3 . The s t r u c t ) r r a l i s t p r i n c i p l e s formulated by Saussure should n o t be confused wi th t h e s t r u c t u r a l i s t t r a d i t i o n i n American

CHAPTER IV'

whose chief proponent-s-LeanardEloomfield- -- - - 7--

' 1

1. " S e t t l e d i n very heavy d e n s i t i e s , ... i n r e g i o n s of h i l l y , rugged. t e r r a i n , the Kabyles a r e p r i m a r i l y a r b o r i c u l t u r a l i s t s "

(Bourdieu, 1962: 1). 9 - 2. Bourdieu p o r t r a y s t h e sexes i n a r e l a t i o n o f nfasculine domi- f-

n a t i o n (i .e. , a t d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of power) and t h u s t h e 8 sugges t ion t h a t t h e masculine and feminine are Ropposed" (on t h e a

same l e v e l ) i s somewhat misleading ( c f . no te 4 , Chapter V, below). 4

1 L

\ 1. Using t h e example of speech as c o n t r a s t e d w i t h language as an

a b s t r a c t s t r u c t u r e d system, Anthony Giddens i n d i c a t e s h ~ w one c : a s p e c t of t h e cond i t ions f o r a given a c t i o n ( o r product ) a r e reproduced by t h a t ac t idh :

- - - + 6 .., - - i

Speech ( a c t i o n ) presupposes a s u b j e c t ( a c t o r ) , and speech 3 - acts are s i t u a t e d contextual ly--as is d ia logue between . ;$

- g

NOTES (cont&ued) - % p- , &&% &-

$' g speakers ( k n t e r a c t i o n ) . Speech and d ia logue a r e each complex accomplishments of t h e i r producers : knowing how

l t o produce them, on t h e o t h e r hand, i s very d e f i n i t e l y -,

n o t t h e same as being a b l e t o s p e c i f y e i t h e r t h e - . c o n d i t i o n s which make p o s s i b l e t h e i r product ion o r t h e

unintended consequences they may be ins t rumenta l i n b r i n g i n g about. Considered as a s t r u c t u r e ... ( n a t u r a l ) language i s a cond i t ion of t h e g e n e r a t i o n o f ' s p e e c h '

a c t s - and the achievement of d ia logue , b u t a l s o t h e - - - a - unintended consequence of t h e product ion o f speech and t h e accomplishment of dialogue (1976% 127) .

2. Bourdieu e x p l a i n s , i n a foo tno te , h i s u s e of t h e term dispo- - - -- -- - -- -- - - - '. %-it-- spes&k&oa s e e f ~ t s - e i x u===---- -

l a r l y s u i t e d t o e x p r e s s y h a t i s covered bye the concept of h a b i t u s (de f ined a s a system o f d i s p o s i t i o n s ) . I t expresses f i r s t t h e r e s u l t of a n .organizing a c t i o n , wi th a meaning c l o s e t o t h a t of words such as s t r u c t u r e ; it a l s o d e s i g n a t e s a way pf beinq, a '

h a b i t u a l state ( e s ~ e c i a l l y of t h e body) and, i n p a r t i c u l a r , a - .. p r e d i s p o s i t i o n , t e n d e n ~ ~ , - ~ r o ~ e n s i t v ,- o r i n c l i n a t i o n (Out l ine : 214).

3 . Included i n t h i s p o s i t i o n would be the n o t i o n , s o impor tant t o American sociolpgy, of t h e s o c i a l r o l e which comes t o

def h e - i n d i v i d d behaxi- - = a s - a - r e s u l ~ ~ a s s n m p t i o n s ~ o l f - - - - -

m e r i c a n soc io logy than as a r e s u l t of an adequate theory o f s o c i a l i z a t i o n . Evidence of t h i s q u e s t i o n begging approach t o t h e problem of s o c i a l i z a t i o n i s p r e s e n t i n t h e fo l lowing d e f i n i t i o n o f f e r e d by T a l c o t t Parsons i n a r e c e n t a n q o l o g y (American . * Sociology) : "Complementary t o t h e i n s ti t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n of t h e normative system, w e speak of t h e i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n o f t h e expec- t a t i o n system i n the p e r s o n a l i t y of t h e indiv idual . . . .The process of t h e i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n of t h e s e m o t i v a t i o n a l l y relevant ' . s t r u c - t u r e s [one f a c e t of the s o c i a l r o l e ] i s what s o c i o l o g i s t s c a l l s o c i a L i z a t i o n . The process grouflds i n t h e g e n e t i c a l l y given p l a s t i c i t y o f the human organism and i t s c a p a c i t y t o l e a r n (1968: 327, 328) . 4 . S i g n i f i c a n t l y , t h e s e so-cal led "oppos i t ions" are, i n r e a l i t y ,

- - - - - - -- - & i S - v l a r it ias-(a~cis&in different l e v e l s of s o c i a l l v *fined . . va lue ) r a t h e r than u n i z e l l e d , pure ly

~tlons. As such they might be more appropr ia t e ly -

i a d i c t i o n s . " %

5. Compare h i s no t ions of "master p a t t e r n " and " i n d i v i d u a l p a t t e r n s , " above, pp, 37-38).

6 Other r e c e n t app l i ca t ions may be found i n c o g n i t i v e psycho- l o g i c a l (see N e i s s e r , 1976) and reading resea rch (see, f o r

example, Kinkch and Kintch, 1978) . *

-,

- * . > - NOTES (cont inued) -

-r

CHAPTER VI i

. - "- f f

1. "Environmentalismn a s it i s used h e r e should n o t b e confused wi th S t a n l e y Aronowitz's use o f ' t h e term (see Aronowitz,

1976). Aronowitz uses t h e t e r m t o c o n t r a s t p e r s p e c t i v e s t h a t exp la in human mental a b i l i t i e s through r e f e r e n c e t o i n n a t e (ge'netic) f a c t o r s wi th ' pe r spec t ives t h a t e x p l a i n mental a b i l i t i e s with r e f e r e n c e t o l e a r n i and s o c i a l i z a t i o n ( o r what h e c a l l s k." -

- -- "environmentalll f a c t o r I

I t should be note khat Bourdieu u s e s ' t h e term "mechanis t icn q u i t e l o o s e l y t o cover any s i m p l i s t i c view of a mechanical de te r - mination, whether t h i s view p o r t r a y s de te rmina t ion a s d e r i v i n g from f a c t o r s observed .wi th in an i n t e r a c t i o n , o r from f a c t o r s ------ purpor tedly ry3ng ' o u t s i d e ' The~eraCcti-OYi-m-~~F*ia-= system. For purposes of c l a r i f i k a t i o n I have r e t a i n e d t h e term "mechanist ic" f o r t h e former k ind of de terminat ion and used the* term environmentalis ism" f o r t h e ' l a t t e r k ind .

2 . This would i n c l u d e structuralist" read ings o f Marx such d those p u t f o r t h by French,phi losopher Louis Al thusse r . A s

a g a i n s t Al thusser , who a t t empts t o c l a r i f y t h e s h - u c t u r e s t h a t *

c o n s t i t u t e s o c i e t y as a whole r a t h e r than j u s t symbolic s t r u c - _ tuxes , Bonrdieu w r i t e s : "So long as one a c c e p t s t h e canonic

oppos i t ion which, endlessay reappear ing i n new f o h s throughout - -

f the-hist6ry o f s o ~ a 1 tTiougl i t~~c lwa~ys piis ' h n m a 1 1 5 s t ~ - - ~ ' a ~ t - - - - # s t r u c t u r a l i s t readings of Marx, ...[ one i s condemned] t o f a l l i n t o

, the f e t i s h i s m of s o c i a l l a w s t o which [ ~ l t h u s s e r i a n s t ruc tu ra l i sm] , cons igns i t s e l f when i n e s t a b l i s h i n g between s t r u c t u r e and p r a c t i c e t h e r e l a t i o n o f . . . t h e score t o t h e per formance . . . i t merely s u b s t i t u t e s f o r t h e c r e a t i v e man of s u b j e c t i v i s m [which would i n c l u d e phenomenology] a man subjugated t o t h e dead laws of a n a t u r a l h+toryn (Outl ine: 8 4 ) . ,

3. Ifi a series of t h e o r e t i c a l works, Ahthony Giddens has made cons ide rab le p rogress i n c l a r i f y i n g t h e s e a s p e c t s of s o c i a l

a c t i o n which, he claims, are n o t adequate ly concep tua l i zed i n i modern s o c i a l theory (see, f o r e x a p l e , Giddens, 1979: 49-95). j

This d i s c u s s i o n is indebted t o h i s c l e a r s t a t ement of fie 4

problem. - ----- -- --

F 4. P i e r r e Bourdieu and ~ e a n - ~ l a u d e Passeron, ~ e p r o d u c t i o n i n

(London: Sage, 1977) . H e r e a f t e r c i t e d a s Reproduction. . 5. This series of ques t ions concerning what exis ts , what i s A possibfe and what -is r i g h t i s used by Swedish s o c i a l - t eora t Goran Therborn t o c h a r a c t e r i z e the r o l e of ideology i n s o c i e t y . Therborn a rgues t e d by dominant

t h a t i d e o l o g y - i . e groups--del ineates

. , t h e i d e a 3 ahd- v a l u e s suppor- f o r i n d i v i d u a l s what e x i s t s ,

CHAPTER V I I

i 6 . - 1, The phrase "personal dofftination" i s borrowed from B a r n e t t and

Silverman ( l979f whose ana lys f s of d i f f e r e n t . t y p e s o f domi- - nati-on 5s s imf ia r , -in- some- r e s p e c t s , t o that of Bourdieu, - - * - - A

%

2. H i s t o r i a n A. Gurevitch p rov ides an i n t e r e s t i n g a n a l y s i s of t h e r o l e %n f e u d a l Europe o f what Bourdieu cal ls the ' "dua1

economy." Gurevi tch c o m e n t s on t h e "c loseness o f t h e i d e a s of . ( L ~ - l j - d n C I L I I t ~ * I* & - ~ - O * t t ~ ~ n n + g h n

viewed feuda l s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s i n t h e s e tkrrns (1977: 18-20). H e a l s o cites troubadour say ings t o i l l u s t r a t e the s i g n i f i c a n c e of g i f t s in-the bon t ro l over s o c i a l resources : "I say no word a g a i n s t arms o r reason, b u t g i f t s govern a l l " tquoteh i n Cure- v i t c h , 1977: 1 9 ) -

3. The motives o f s e l f - i n t e r e s t and expedience, contends . Bourdieu, a r e p r e s e n t i n some way and t o s o m e degree, i n a l l

exchanges. However,. i n the good f a i t h economy, such va lues 'mus t always be accanpaniedqby a d e n i a l or Verneinmig i n the .F reud iah S~RS~,- - -BT 4+e& ,-eiawq r cfersko-a-pz-~e~an i n d i - -

v i d u a l disavows a t one l e v e l a n image, thought or ernotlon t h a t i s recognized a t ano the r l e v e l . I n Bourdieu' s words : " C~abyle ] d e n i a l s o f i n t e r e s t are never m o r e than p r a c t i c a l -d i sc la imers : l i k e Freud ' s V e r n e i n u n ~ , the d i s c o u r s e - t h a t s a y s what i t s a y s only i n t h e form t h a t t e n d s t o show t h a t it is n o t saying it, they s a t i s f y i n t e r e s t i n a ( d i s i n t e r e s t e d ) manner designed t o show that they are fiat s a t i s f y i n g i n t e r e s t ( o u t l i n h : 194; cf . d i scuss ion of Lacan's n o t i o n o f mhonnaisance , above, pp. s

P - 4. The Cadi is a judge who possesses r e l i g i o u s as w e l l a s 4 1 e g a l

a u t h o r i t y and who may d e l i v e r a verdict t h a t i s de r ived more f r o m t h e con t ingenc ies of a p a r t i c u l a r - c a s e than from t h e pre- s c r i p t i o n s of an abstract l a w .

---+< m a 3 b-in -in 4 n 1 I 8 PA a~ ~ ~ b u r -*-&-~r & a L v - ~ w -

r e l a t i o n s h i p s kept i n working o r d e r w (Out l ine : 39) . Bourdieu +P nf tbi r o f f 1 a-exlstence, k l n s h l p . 7 a r s tha t , i n

r e l % . o n s &at a z n o t maintained by v i s i t s , g i f t s : etr. , may n o t be a v a i l a b l e f o r use when t h e p r a c t i c a l d i scharge of k i n s h i p s

o b l i g a t i b n s is r e q u i r e d ( f o r example, i n h a r v e s t t i m e , o r i n t h e case of a p o l i t i c a l feudl, S t r a t e g i e s a r e @us.required t o - -

e n s u r e - t h a t -k inship , r e l a t i o n s that e x i s t i n p r inc ip le - - i . e . according t o o - f f i c i a l representation?-cam be mobi l ized i n prac- t ice , As Bourdieu p u t s it:* " O f f i c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s which do n o t recei,ve cont inuous maintenance tend t o become what they are f o r

r

."

't. 5

F.

* *

* , NOTES (cont inued) '

- & + - r

t h e g e n e a l o g i s t [and s o m e a ~ t h r o p o l o g i s t s ] : t h e o r e t i c a l r e l a t i o n - s h i p s - l i k e abandoaed roads on an o l d map" ( o u t l i n e : 38).

6 . The not ion of a p o l i t i c a l s t r a t e g y t h a t e n t a i l s an a t t empt t o shape and win a r ecogn i t ion o f l e g i t i m a c y ' i s adapted from a

discus$.j;on by S. H a l l e t al. of Antonio Gramsci 's no t ion o "hegemony" (see B a l l e t a l . , 1976: 3 8 - 4 3 ) . b 7. Bourdieu remarks: "When a [Kabylef man +an t s t o say t h a t t h e ;,

is topsy-turvy he s a y s t h a t ' t h e women are going t o - i market' " Out l ine : 517) . r

- w - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - -

L ---- - - - - - --

L' , - -

1. Bourdieu capt&res t h e element of c o n t r a d i c t i o n i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n w i t h the fo l lowing anecdote ~ x ~ e n s i t i v i t y t o

-'high c u l t u r e '1 was understood a s [a na tu re ] by a very c u l t i v a t e d o l d man who d e c l a r e d dur ing a conversa t ion 'Educat ion, S i r , i s i n b o r n f n (1968a: 6Q9) .

2 . ~ o & d i e u ' s a n a l y s i s i s baked greaominant ly on h i s 'observa- -- *ions &-the Fren~,hdystea&-~lu~tim&r&e t r a d i t i o ~ - - o f an a r i s t o c r a t i c 'h igh c u l t u r e ' i s s t r o n g e r t h a n ' i t i s i n Canadian o r American edu,caVion, It i s clear, however, t h a t > Bourdieu's work is n o t t o t a l l y i r r e l e v a n t t o t h e Canadian and h r i c a n s i t u a t i o n s p a r t i c u l a r l y i f one cons ide r s t h e s u r v i v a l s o f t r a d i t i o n a l va lues i n some of the more e s t a b l i s h e d univer- s i t ies.

l 4- 3 . Bourdieu has been c r i t i c i zed t ; fo r n o t devot ing enough a t t e n - t

t i o n to the p o t e n t i a l wi th in i the educat ion system for a r e j e c t i o n by s t u d e n t s o f t h e dominant va lues . W i l l i s ' s t udy i s m o r e s e n s i t i v e t o t h i s p o t e n t i a l f o r r e s i s t a n c e though, as suggested, h i s work demonstrates ' th* r e s i s t a n c e a t one l e v e l may r e i n f o r c e domination a t another l e v e l .

BIBLIOGRAPHY B c

9%t

Apple, Yichael ' 1 9 80 "Analyzing dbtenpina t ions : unders tanding and e v a l u a t i n g

t h e product ion of autcomes i n scho-1s . " C u r r i c u l w I n q u i r y 10: 53-76, . 7 -

Aronowitz , S t a n l e y 1976 " T h e - t r a p of envi r~nrn~enta l i sm." I n

c a p i t a l i s m : A S o c i o l o g i c a l , R e a d e r , Roger Dale, Ceof f Esland and Madelaine MacDonald.

G London:. Routledge & Kegan Paul i n a s s o c i a t i o n wi th The . Open U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s .

, . - - - - - - - - -- - L

-- - -- A --- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - --- - -

- --- - - - -

- - - - --- -- -

Bateson, Gregory 1972 " ty le , g r a c e and information i n h r i m i t i v e a r t . " In

Steps t o a n Ecology o f Mind, pp. 128-52. New York: B a p h n t i n e ,

f Bart1e t t ;Freder ic C . 4

1932 Remembering; A Study i n Experimental and S o c i a l Psychology, Gambridge: Unive r s i ty P r e s s .

Barne t t , S teve , and Martin Silverman . -1979 Ideology and Everyday L i f e : Anthropology, deomarxis t -

ThduLqh t , -and the--Pro6 Ien-of f d e 0 1 ~ g y ana The S5ci a l-- - -

Whole, Ann Arbor: The Unive r s i ty of Xichigan Press . t

.Bourdieu , P i e r r e 1962 The Alger ians . Trans la ted by A l a n C.M. ROSS. w i th

p r e f a c e by Raymond Aron. Boston: Beacon P r e s s . 1965 "The sen t imen t of honour i n Kabyle s o c i e t y . " Irr Honour

and Shame,.pp. 191-241. Edi ted by J. P e r i s t i a n y . London: Weidenfeld and *Nicholson. - 8

1968a "Out l ine of a s o c i o l o g i c a l theory of a r t pe rcep t ion . " , I n t e r w t i o n a l J o u r n a l of S o c i a l Sc ience Research 20:

5897612. 1968b - " S t r u c t u r a l i s m and theory of s o c i o l o g i c a l knowledge. "

S o c i a l Research XXXV: 681-706. 1971a "The t h i n k a b l e and t h e unth inkable . " T i m e s L i t e r a r y

- - - - - -- - -- - - - pp- -

S u ~ ~ l e m e n t . 15 O c t o b F r 1 9 7 1 : - 1 2 5 5 - 1 2 3 7 1971b " ~ k t e l l e c t u a l f i e l d and c r e a t i v e p r o j e c t . " yn Knowledge

OF Educat ion, pp. 161-88. Edi ted by M.K.D. Young. London: C o l l i e r M.acMillan.

1971c "Systems of Education and Systems o p h o u g h t . " I n Knowledge- and- C a n t r o i :-New ~i rec t io rk for t h e Sociology o f Educat ion, pp, 189-207. Ed i t ed by M.K.D. Young, - - - - London: C o l l i e r MacMillan.

1973a "The t h r e e forms of t h e o r e t i c a l knowledge." S o c i a l Sc ience I n T o m a t i o n 12: 53-80.

"The Berber House. " Xn. Rul'es ahd Meanings, pp. 98-110. Ed i t ed by Mary Douglas. Harmondsworth: Penguin. "The school a s a conse rva t ive f0rc.e.: s c h o l a s t i c and n a t u r a l i n e q u a l i t i e s . " I n contempo* Research i n t h e Socio logy ,of ducati ion, pp. 32-46. Ed i t ed by . Eggles ton . ,

'The s p e c i f i c i t y of t h e s c i e n t i f i c f i e l d - and t h e s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s of t h e progress of reason." S o c i a l Sc ience Informat ion 1 4 : 19-47. O u t l i n e o f a Theory of P r a c t i c e . T ~ a n s l a t e d by Richard N i c e . C a m b r i d e : Cambridqe Unive r s i ty P r e s s . "Symbolic pow&." I n identity and ~ t ; u c t u r e , g p . 112- 119. Ed i t ed by D. Gleeson. D r i f f i e l d : Naf fe r ton Books. " C u l t u r a l rep;oduction and s o c i = l reproduct ion . : I n %

Power-and ~deo- low i n Educat ion, pp. 487-511. Edi ted by A,&. EiLse y and L- X a r a h e L New Y-ork : _Ox•’-od Uni-ve_rrs - -

P r e s s . "The economics of l i n g u i s t i c exchanges." s o c i a l Science Informat ion 16: 645-668: "Remarques p r o v i s o i r e s u r l a pe rcep t ion s o c i a l e du corps ." A c t e s de la recherche en s c i e n c e s s o c i a l e s 1 4 : 51-54.

I .

" S a r t r e . " I n on don Review of Eooks , 20 November - 4 December: 11-12 . .

Bourdieu, P i e r r e , and Luc ~ o l t a k s k i , 193'5 "Le f6 t i ch i sme -de l a langue, " Acte-s _de-la Recherche en - -

Sc iences S o c i a l e s 4: 2-32. - -

*

Bourdieu, Pierre, and ~ e a n - ~ l a u d e Passeron 1977 Reproducti.on i n Education, Soc ie ty and Cul tu re . Trans-

l a t e d by Richard Nice. London: Sage. f

Bourdieu, P i e r r e , and Monique de S a i n t Martin 1974 " S c h o l a s t i c exce l l ence and t h e va lues of t h e educa t iona l

system." I n Contemporary Research i n t h e Sociology of Educat ion, pp. 338-71. Edi ted by J. Eggleston. London: Methuen.

Bo*les, Samuel, and Herbert G i n t i s 1976 Schooling i n C a p i t a l i s t America: Educat ional Reform and

- -- I t h m a d k k i k s nf l ? [ ~ ~ & & e N e w Y o r ) . ~ a s i ~ c ~ Books,

-

' Chomsky, Noam 1959 "Review of B.F. Skinner , Verbal Behavior." I n Language

35: 26-58. 1965 - Aspects of t h e Theory of' Syntax. Cambridge, - ' M a s s : The .

M.1.T. P ress .

C u l l e r , Jonathan a .

1976 Saussurg. London: Fontana.

V

DiMaggio, P a u l 1979 "Revfew Essay: On P i e r r e Bourdieu." American Journa l of

~ o c i o l ~ g y 84: 1460-74. 4 *

Durkheim, Emi3.e The Elementary Forms of t h e Re l iq ious L i f e . Trans la ted by Joseph Swain. London: George Al len and Unwin Ltd.

Anthony Giddens , 1976 New ~ u i e s o f Soc io log ica l Method: A P o s i t i v e C r i t i q u e

I n t e r p r e t i v e Socio loqies . London: Hutchison. - '

S t u d i e s i n S o c i a l and P o l i t i c a l Theory. London: -

Hutchison, Durkheim. ~ a s s o c k s ' , Sussexz The H a r v e s t e r Press Limited. Ce 'ntral Problems i n S o c i a l Theory: Act ion , s t r u c t u r e and C o n t r a d i c t i o n i n S o c i a l Analysis . London: MacMillan.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -

- - - -

Anthony ( e d i t o r ) P o s i t i v i s m and Sociology. London: Heinemann.

Giddens , 1974

Goody, Jack b

1977 The Domestication o f t h e Savage Mind. London: Cambridge Unive r s i ty P ress . 'i

1

Gurevitch, A. 1977 "Repre*sentations of propezty dur ing t h e h igh Middle

Ages." Economy and S o c i e t y 6: 1-30. . <

H a l l , S., and T. J e f f e r s o n ( e d i t o r s ) 1976 - Res i s t ance Through R i t u a l : - Youth Subcu l tu res i n Post-war

B r i t a i n , London: Hutchison. F

Havelock, E r i c A. ~ f e f ace t o P l a t o . Cambridge, Mass : Harvard Unive r s i ty P r e s s .

Husser l , 1975

Edmund , The P a r i s Lectures . Second E d i t i o n , T r a n s l a t e d by P e t e r Koestenbam. T h e ~ a ~ u e :. Martinus N i jhof f ,

P

Jensen, Ar thur R. 1969 "How much can w e boos t IQ and s c h o l a s t i c achievement?"

-

- UarvarcYEihxza tionxEReVieW5%--I.=323~-

Kint=h, W., and E.H. Kintsch 1978 "The r o l e of schemata i n t e x t comprehension." In te rna -

t i o n a l Journa l of P s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c s 5: 17-29.

1970 The S t r u c t u r e of S c i e n t i f i c Revolut ions. Second E d i t i o n , $ - f*

en la rged . Chicago: Unive r s i ty of Chicago P r e s s .

Levi -S t rauss , Claude 19.66 The Savage Mind. T r a n s l a t e d b y ' ~ e o r g e Weidenfeld and

Nicolson Ltd. Chicago: U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago P r e s s * 1967a 119553 T r i s t e s !Fropiques : An ~ n t h r o p o l o ~ i c a l Study. o f

. P r i m i t i v e S o c i e t i e s i n B r a z i l . T r a n s l a t e d bv John 2

~ u s s e l k . Hew York: Atheneum. 1967b S t r u c t u r a l Anthropology. T r a n s l a t e d by C l a i r e Jacobsen

and Brooke G. Schoepf. Garden C i t y , New York: Anchor - Books.

1969 [1949] The ~ l e m e n t a r ~ S t r u c t u r e s o f Kinsh ip . Revised E d i t i o n . London : S o c i a l S c i e n c e Paperbacks .

Marx,' Karl , 1973- ' [1857-18581 Grundr i s se : Foundat ions o f t h e C r i t i q u e of

P o l i t i c a l Economy. Harmondsworth: Peng.uin.' - - - - - - - - -- - - -- $ - -

- --

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice ,1964 ,"The c h i l d ' s r e l a t i o n s w i t h o t h e r s . " T r a n s l a t e d by ":

W i l l i a m C ~ b b . I n he Primacy of P e r c e p t i o n s , pp. 96-155. , Edi t ed by ~arrtes PI. Edie . Evanstons Noathwestern

U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . y

1967 119421 The S t r u c t p r e of Behavior. rans slated by Alden L.. F isheg. Boston: Beacon P r e s s .

1978 [ 1962 ] * Phenomenology of Pe rcep t ion . T r a n s l a t e d by C o l i n , Smith. London: Routledge and Kegan Pau l .

- N e i s s e r , U l r i c - - - - - - - - - - -

rP

1976 Cogni t ion and R e a l i t y : P r i n c i p l e s an@ I m p l i c a t i o n s o f ' \ Cogn i t i ve Psychology. San Freeman and

Company. I .+

=.

Panofsky, Erwin -. -

1973

Parsons ,

Gothic A r c h i t e c t u f e and S c h o l ~ s t i c i s m : An I n q u i r y i n t o t h e Analogy of t h e A r t s , Phi losophy and ~ e - l i g i o n i n t h e Middle Ages. New York: Meridian.

'3

T a l c o t t . .

1968 "An Overview." I n American Sociology.: p e r s p e c t i v e s , , '

Problems, Methods. DD. 319-35. E d i t e d bv T a l c o t t Parsons. . . * A

New York: Bas i c Books. -

P h i s Q n D s o n , M i c U 1 ,- . --- 1972 "Phenomenological Phi losophy and Sociology. 'I I n New -

-- - - D i r e c t i o n s i n S o c i o l o g i c a l , Theory. Ed i t ed by P . -er,

, M. P h i l l i p s o n , D. Silverman, and-D. Walsh. London: % C o l l i e r - M a c ~ i l l a n .

P i a g e t , J ean Ir

1968 On t h e Development o f Memory and I d e n t i t y , T r a n s l a t e d by E leanor Duckworth. C la rk U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s ' w i t h Barre P u b l i s h e r s .

Po lany i , K a r l L

/ 19 57 [194-43 The Grea t ~ r a n s f o & a t i o n . Boston: Beacon Press. \

; t

Quine , W.V. % .+

19 72 "Methodological r e $ l e c t i o n ? on c u r r e n t : l i n g u i s t i c * d

theory ." I n Semant ics o f N a t u r a l Language, pp. 442-54. 4 Edi t ed by Harman and gavidson. Dordrecht , Holland: D . Reidel'.

1

de Saussu re , Ferdinand - .-

1966 [1916 'J Course i n General L i n g u i s t i c s . T r a n s l a t e d , w i t h % -

an i n t r o d u c t i o n a n d n o t e s by Wade Baskin. E d i t e d by Cha r l e s and A l b e r t Sechehbye i n c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h - A l b e r t R i e d l i n g e r . Toronto: MqGraw-Hi311.

- - - - - --- - .- - - - - - - -

Schutz , Al f red -1967 l3.9321 ~ h e ~ h e n o r n e A o l o g y of t h e

+ by George Walsh and F rede r i ck 'Lehne r t . With an i n t r o - d u c t i o n by ~ e o r g e ' ~ a 1 s h . Michigan: Northwestern Univer- s i t y P r e s s .

Sebeok , Thoriias 1979 "The s e m i o t i c s e l f . " I n The sign and I t s Mas te rs .

Ed i t ed by Thomas Sebeok. Aus t in : ~ n ' i v e r s i t y o f , Texas .

P r e s s . t i r

.Skinner , B . F. 1957 Verbal ~ e h a v i o r . New ~ o r k : ' Appleton-Century-Crafts .

* Therborn, Goran.

1978 F a a t Does t h e Ruling C l a s s D o When it Rules? S t a t e Apparatuses and S t a t e Power -under ~ e u d a l i s m , Cap i tq l i sm 1 " c

Thompson, E . P . 1978 "The g r i d o f i ~ h e r i t a r i c e : a comment." I n Family and

I n h e r i t a n c e : Rura l So-ciety i n Western Europe 1200-1800. Ed i t ed by Jack Goody, Joan Th i r sk and E.P. Thompson. London: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s .

Watzlawick, Pau l , J. Beavin, and D. Jackson - - - - - - - - -,

1967 Pragrnatids o f Ruman C o m u n i c a t i o a . New York: w . H . Norton and Company-

Weber, Max 1968 Economy and S o c i e t y , Volumes 1 and 3. T r a n s l a t e d by

E. F i s c o f f e t a l . Ed i t ed by G. Roth and C. W i t t i c h . New York: Bedminis ter .

1976 11 904-1905] The P r o t e s t a n t E t h i c and t h e S p i r i t of . Capi ta l ism.- T r a n s l a t e d by ~ a l c o t t Parsons . New York:

Cha r l e s S c r i b n e r ' s Sons.

Weiss, Pau l A. 1969 "The l i v i n g system: determinism s t r a t i f i e d . " I n Beyond .

Reductionism. E d i t e d by Arthur Koestler and J . R . Smythies. London: Hutchison.

.-3 Wilden, Anthony -- a& ,

1975 The ~ a n ~ u a i e o f t h e S e l f : The Func t ion of Lanquage i n Psychoana lys i s . By Jacques Lacan. T r a n s l a t e d w i t h n o t e s and commentary by Anthony Wilden. New York: D e l l .

1977 "Infurmak-ion." TransZaW as " I n f o m a z i o n e . " , & - - .*

E n c i c l o p e d i a E inaud i , V o l . VI. General e d i t o r : Ruggiero Romano. Tur in : E inaudi , 1977-.

1980a System and S t r u c t u r e : Essays i n Communication and Exchange. Second e d i t i o n . London: Tav i s tock .

--- - - - - 1 9 Gana&&a-&aeouwr =+*~+P&SS-- 7----

Wilden, Anthony and Richard Cbe V

1978 "Error . " P u b 1 i s h e d . h I t a l i a n i n E c i c l o p e d i a E inaud i , V o l . V. General editor: Ruqqiero Romano. Tur in : E inaudi .

8 ,

w i l l i b s , Raymond and r ~ i c h o l a s Garnham 1980 " P i e r r e Bourdieu and t h e soc io loqv o f c u l t u r e : a n i n t r o -

duc t ion . " Media, C u l t u r e and soc.i&tY 2 : 209-23.

- - W i l l i s , P au l - -- - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - -- - --

1977 Learninq t o ~ ~ b o u r . Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath. I

-1

1