Cultural Capital And Social Capital

In the opening to Paul Fussell’s essay “A Touchy Subject”, he observes that no one really quite understands how class works, and each class theorizes the deciding factors between them, through the colored lenses of station. Of interest though, is the description he gives of the Upper Class, who “perceive that taste, values, ideas, style, and behavior are indispensable criteria of class, regardless of money or occupation or education” (McQuade) If that criteria is taken and applied to society, other social classes are revealed that lie hidden within the umbrella of Low, Middle and Upper. There is a group of people that embodies their own values, who celebrate their ideas, flaunt their style and act with a certain behaviors, and they have formed a class of their own; Geekdom.

Chapter 3 of The Real World: An Introduction to Sociology explains to the reader what culture is and goes into depth of the different concepts within culture. It defines culture as “the entire way of life for a group of people” (Ferris & Stein, 2010, p. 77). Culture is described as a “lens” through which one views the world and is passed from one generation to the next. This “entire way of life”, according to sociologists, consists of two major categories: material and symbolic culture. Material culture involves the entities associated with a cultural group, such as tools, machines, utensils, buildings, and artwork. When examining material culture, it can convey a great deal about a particular group or society. Symbolic culture embraces ways

Steele argues that Staples can show knowledge of white culture by whistling Vivaldi. So, when Staples is walking during dark hours in Chicago he can avoid the stereotype threat of blacks being violent by showing he has knowledge of classical music—by showing acculturation. Acculturation here can be defined as an immigrants or unfamiliar person(s) assimilation to their host culture. According to Steele and “The Potential Roles of Self-Fulfilling Prophecies, Stigma Consciousness, and Stereotype Threat in Linking Latina/a Ethnicity and Educational Outcomes”, It is often thought that acculturation and education level as connected. Steele’s argument is that by Staples showing knowledge of white culture, he is showing education. Therefore, people will view him as an educated man and educated people don’t usually attack others. So, Staples must not be dangerous. The association between acculturation and education may be true, but showing acculturation isn’t effectively fighting the cloud. On the contrary, it feeds it.

By incorporating his own sociological thinking and data, McLeod creates a whole new way of thinking about social class through his own research and findings. Most in particular to this is how he analyzed Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital and habitus. He states, “Bourdieu’s most important contribution to reproduction theory is the concept of social capital, which he defines as the general cultural background, knowledge, disposition, and skills that are passed from one generation to the next.” (McLeod 2009: 13). This contribution of Bourdieu’s theory shows how the lower classes shape the attitudes and aspirations of both Brothers and Hallway Hangers throughout. By definition, habitus refers to values, dispositions, and expectations of particular social groups that are acquired through the activities and experiences of everyday life. Bourdieu explains how the cultural capital of having an education and social skills that can be converted to economic capital can lead the upper and working class to cultural

As a student from a working-class background, I did not have access to the type of cultural capital needed to gain upward social mobility. For example, I come from a family that has had no formal education beyond high school and so I was without the knowledge of how to gain access into the realm of higher education. My family had never gone through the application process and so they did not know how to access and utilize the college help that my school provided. Also, my high school only had fourteen counselors available to provide assistance to the 4,263 students that attended the school (Illinois Report Card 2010). This counselor-to-student ration meant that not much time could be devoted to each student to give them the help they needed to navigate the complex college application system (Civil Rights Data 2009, Illinois Report Card 2010). During my time in high school, I never actually spoke to any of the counselors about college plans and I was not even aware that they could help in that area. In the following sections I detail how the cultural capital borrowed or learned from scholarship programs and cultural mentors ultimately impact a student’s upward mobility most.

The stereotypes our society associates with certain languages, dialects, careers, styles and preferences then translates into stereotypes against working class people, often regarding them as less intelligent, inferior, and lazy (Barone, 1999). In a study purposed to examine the psychology associated with classism, Langhout, Rosselli and Feinstein (2007) found that fifty-eight percent of those they interviewed endorsed at least one type of citational classism. Identifiably, I can relate to the casual dismissal of the term “dumb redneck,” a reference to an activity that culturally relates to a truncated dialect and a rural point of view. Even more damaging, I have been guilty of dismissing the term “nigger rig,” a reference to a task accomplished in a make-shift fashion with the only materials at hand. These attitudes illustrate that class privileges are perceived upon the basis of the group quality: the upper class is more civilized, more gifted and more intelligent; the lower class is not as deserving because of their apparent inferiorities (Barone, 1999). In sitcoms especially, the working class is portrayed as unintelligent, and those in poverty are often viewed as criminals (Yeskel, 2007). Following the patterns of racial discrimination, these stereotypes covertly disguise the differences in socioeconomic class as the natural order of society.

The study of culture allows an individual to research and investigate the ways in which ‘culture’ can create and transform a being through individual and shared experiences, everyday life and power. The subject closely examines ways in which a person’s identify is shaped by their encounters with people, texts, institutions and overall understanding. Over time many cultural theorists have put forward many ideas and notions surrounding culture and its affect on one’s self identity, social identity and therefore subjectivity. Theorists such as, Michel Foucault, Pierre Bourdieu and Judith Butler are a minor fraction of academics that believe that subjectivity is not inherent and naturally occurring but dynamic and adaptable according to society and our ever-changing culture. It is through the concepts of performativity and habitus that the ideas surrounding subjectivity being dynamic and fluid are presented.

The question I have posed is a very contentious one, which has been debated by scholars and graduates for some time, with many arguing that popular culture and mass media are ways of brainwashing the 'masses' into the ways of a dominant social order. Others believe that popular culture is a type of 'folk' culture which encompasses the idea of an 'alternative' culture incorporating minority groups, perhaps with subversive values sometimes challenging the dominant control groups, as was scene with the advent of the 'Indie' music scene in the mid nineteen nineties. In this dissertation I aim to uncover whether aforementioned 'subversive values' can be uncovered in popular culture or whether popular culture is really a means by which the masses can direct dominant controlling forces.

Cultural studies are influenced by the “Marxist interpretation of society,” but according to, “Stuart Hall believed that mass media has highlighted those people that are already in positions of power” and the media has exploited the poor keeping them powerless. “Hall says that he describes mass media as the dominance that maintain

Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital has been extremely influential, and has garnered a great deal of literature, both theoretical and empirical. Like Marx, Bourdieu posited that capital was the foundation of social life and dictated people’s position within the social hierarchy (Bourdieu 1986). According to Bourdieu, the more capital one possesses, the more prestigious a position one occupies in social life (Bourdieu 1986). In addition to that, Bourdieu extended Marx’s idea of capital beyond the economic and into cultural symbolism (Bourdieu 1986). Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital that refers to the collection of symbolic elements (e.g. skills, tastes, clothing) one acquires through being part of a particular social niche and his concept of habitus that refers to the physical manifestation of cultural capital owned by individuals due to life experiences are his major influential concepts that are very useful in deconstructing power in development and social change processes. However it must be recognized that these concepts also propagate social inequalities at the same time. This essay will closely examine his concepts of capital that comes in three forms - embodied, objectified, and institutionalised, and habitus in the fields of education and stratification have made of it. Bourdieu’s work will be analysed in the context both of the debate on class inequalities in educational attainment and of class reproduction in advanced capitalist societies.

Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital relates to the symbolic characteristics namely skills, tastes and preferences, mannerisms, material goods, credentials etc. that a person gains by virtue of his or her membership of a particular social class. Bourdieu emphasizes on the importance of cultural capital as a major source of social inequality. Rooted in the Bourdieu concept of cultural capital is the aspect of social environment which he called the ’habitus’. According to him, one’s habitus will allow or not allow him or her to progress in life (Bourdieu, 1986). As regards this concept of habitus, it can be said that one’s social identity/nationality may or may not offer him or her opportunities in life. The concept of habitus can be likened to the concept of social capital (Portes, 1998:6) which refers to the ability of

Pierre Bourdieu developed the concept of cultural capital in order to attempt to explain the differences in educational outcomes in France during the 1960’s. Cultural capital is theorised as the forms of knowledge, skill, education; any advantages a person has which, give them a higher status in society, including high expectations (Nick Stevenson, 1995.pp.46-48). This differentiates economic and social status from the class agenda which, is rigidly sustained through an exclusive cycle. Cultural capital itself can be used in analysis of the class system, and how the dominant aesthetic and ideology is sustained from generation to generation.

A student’s cultural capital will have an impact on their education. It will either be positive or it can be negative for the child. In this essay I will explain the idea of cultural capital and then use it to analyse the impact it has had on education in different settings. The first educational setting I will discuss is a story called Butterflies, written by Patricia Grace (2002), and the second being the contrast in education between high and low decile schools in New Zealand. This essay will demonstrate the implications of the inequality in education because of cultural capital, and the effects it has on a student’s presence, participation and achievement.

Pierre Bourdieu is a French Theorist. Bourdieu’s theory is to emphasize constructivist structuralism and he was influenced by Karl Marx by cultural capital. Bourdieu presents the question of class. Bourdieu claimed that capital forms the foundation of social life. Bourdieu thinks the more capital a person have, the more powerful they will be, and Marx had the same view as well. Bourdieu went on to claim that it had something to do with the symbolic realm of culture. When Bourdieu brings culture into it he means the peoples attribute to the world, structured by inequality and culture structures of inequality, also states that is a big part of social inequality. Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital is skills, tastes, posture, clothing, mannerisms, material belongings, credentials, etc. You usually receive them through a social class. Bourdieu divides capital into three forms embodied, objectified, and institutionalized. He gives an example of embodied cultural capital, while a luxury car is an example of cultural capital in its objectified state. In its institutionalized state cultural capital would be credentials and qualifications (degrees or titles that shows cultural authority and acceptance.

Childress and Freidkin named three factors of their model of reception that shapes the meaning of cultural objects for a particular audience and or individual. In the class lecture it is stated that, “the meaning of cultural objects is not simply formed by social context or producers… it is created, redefined, distributed, and interpreted by a wide range of actors” (Vila-Henniger, 10/31). Part of what creates the meaning comes from the audience and their interpretations, which can be completely different to what the producer intended it to mean. One of factors that is mention is sociodemographic predisposition. It is a common framework that “demographic social positions not only influence cultural participation but also affect interpretations of texts themselves” (Childress and Friedkin 2012: 48). What this means is that people are biased because their positions in societies and their backgrounds plays a role in how they interpret and view things. These include their gender, race, economic class, etc. In the article, they talk about a study that was conducted using members of book clubs. These participants meet on a regular basis to discuss works of fiction. The participants are given the book Jarrettsville to read. They chose this book because draws the reader “into issues related to gender and race, and they are embedded into groups that are markedly homophilous and undifferentiated on dimensions of education, income, and race” (Childress and Friedkin 2012:48). They