Modern Culture : A New Form Of Capital

The Bay Area is one of the most financially exhaustive places to call home in this nation, thus it is no surprise to say that even a “comfortable living” in cities such as Berkeley or San Francisco places one relatively high on the annual income scale. The city of Berkeley, my hometown, is an amonole: distinct from other conventionally affluent cities across the country such as Irvine. Berkeley has always been baked with a splendor of various cultures showcased through the multitude of ethnicities, advanced tastes in art and music, along with an unapologetic exemplification of the sense of self whether it may be through clothing, sexual orientation, conduct, etcetera. With this and Bourdieu’s ideas on habitus -the

The two types of capital are cultural capital and economic capital. This is then used by showing the resulting inequalities and allocating various social slots for men and women based on said differences. This in turn legitimizes the inheritance of social privileges in societies where democracy is thought to be the right and virtuous way. (Wacquant, 1996)

As described in Social Class Matters, placement in a class system can occur through ascription or achievement. The class that a person is ascribed to or achieves greatly correlates to the privilege in their life, and can determine many things in life – access to quality education, availability of medical care or living conditions. Social class matters as it can almost pre-determine the quality of life that a person will lead.

Cultural capital and field results in inequality for a number of reasons. Cultural capital has to do with capital resources such as skills learned and specific knowledge pertaining to certain subjects. It also has to do with skills and behaviors learned at home. Field has to do with a social institution such as a school. These two things result in inequality because of the way children are brought up and how involved they are in social institutions. When a child is involved in a multitude extracurricular activities, they are more likely to succeed in school because they have a more stable schedule and not as much free time so they are forced to learn time management. Often times schools favor middle class cultural capital because middle class

Cultural capital is the concept that middle and upper class parents pass on behaviors and habits to their children that promote acquisition of wealth and education. When I examine my life, I realize that I may have benefited from cultural capital. I grew up in a rural farming town with a population of 1,500. The town was isolated, 40 miles from another city. Most families in this town were of lower social economic status, and depended on farming as a livelihood. My father worked as a Mechanical Engineer 40 miles away. Compared to the population, my family was wealthy (although wealth is relative to a location). My family was of middle socioeconomic status. I saw my family receive benefits over other families in the town. My family could afford

Simmel’s major work usually considers money and finances as well as the impact money has on society. In the book ‘The philosophy of Money’, Simmel is concerned with money as a symbol and how societies wealth affects itself and its people. He also finds that within society money becomes an impersonal or objectified measure of value. This grants neutral, rational ties amongst those within society which are institutionalised with money. He believed that the use of money and finances distances the individual from objects. This then provides the ability to overcome distance meaning that an individual with money has the means to travel greater distances. This overcomes person to person limitations which would occur without financial backing, and in some cases, asserts dominance over the other party.

In his work on privilege and disadvantage, Bourdieu outlined three forms of capital individuals can possess which increase social mobility. He maintained that economic, social and cultural capital are all influential in the interaction between individuals and their place in society. ‘Cultural capital’ is described as having everything required to fit in with a certain group of people (Davies 2018). Examples of these requirements include having the appearance, accent, education, tastes and knowledge considered appropriate by the group. Investment into one’s cultural capital can be achieved by conforming to a social

Bourdieu claims that cultural capital acts as a social relation within a social system of exchange that includes the accumulated cultural knowledge that confers power and status. Displaying cultural capital can lead to benefits, such as gaining status or acceptance and this can also transfer into social capital. Social capital is a resource, based on group membership, relationships networks of influence and support. This social capital can have other benefits, such as gaining economic capital and this can often be reinvested in cultural capital. This process continues it is considered cyclical and shapes or effect social interactions and relationships. Displaying cultural capital can bring rewards or incur cost, depending on the cultural/social

yield in wealth of the yield they take as compensation for their attempts. This extra work has been portrayed by Marx and others as surplus work. The extra thing made by surplus work was portrayed as surplus thing. Additionally, the social estimation of the surplus thing (as regularly chose in market exchange associations) was portrayed assurplus regard. Shortly we have most of the fixings critical to a by and large strict significance of class process. Class process is the social method that results in i) people performing surplus work, ii) the surplus things (of this work) being appropriated and iii) the movement of the surplus regard (fit as a fiddle or in monetary edge) to other

Cultural capital helps us become successful, achieve goals and rise up the social ladder. Without necessarily having financial capital or wealth. French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu saw social class groups as identifiable according to their levels of “cultural and economic capital.” Increasingly, individuals distinguish themselves not according to economic or occupational factors but on the basis of cultural tastes and leisure pursuits (Giddens 211). Cultural capital can exist in three forms: embodied state, for example, personality, skills, and speech. Institutionalized, such as, education or specialized knowledge. And objectification, in

Bourdieu explains that if an individual is not a possessor of these items, they shall be categorized within the controlled groupings, however should an individual utilise his yield from any form of capital he will be categorized within the dominant groups.(Bourdieu ,50) The institutionalized state is described as ‘a form of objectification which must be set apart because it confers entirely original properties on the cultural capital which it is presumed to guarantee’ (Bourdieu 47) . This state provides academic qualifications and credentials which develop a ‘certificate of cultural competence’ ( Bourdieu, 50) which may then be used as a rate of conversion between economic and cultural capital. Bourdieu defines social capital as ‘the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalised relationships’ (Bourdieu, 51).

Websites are becoming increasingly important in today's society. They are seen as the image of the company and reflects its standards. The most important quality would be functionality, if it is not user friendly then it will be passed on by. Second to that is appearance, aesthetic is a major factor in the modern day culture. The website needs to deliver the message that the company is trying to convey, wether it is a store, news, or social site it should be instantly recognizable as such. The internet has become a part of the populations lives and if a business wishes to be successful then they must utilize this vital tool.

Economic capital is very distinguished in that it can be in the form of a property right, but social capital and cultural capital are a little confusing. Why can’t social and cultural capital be tied together? I understand that they are both “convertible”, so why can’t social capital be a subtopic of cultural capital instead of a whole new topic under capital? The only difference that I see is that cultural capital is in forms of educational qualifications and social capital is in forms of title of nobility. So can someone obtain the status of both social and cultural capital in the same context?

Marx suggests that as society becomes more capitalized, the more people will experience four types of alienations. As it has been previously noted, once a person is alienated from his very activity of labor, not only does he face economic problems he , also loses himself and his connections with those around

As an efficient business or not-profit organization, cultural enterprise is the significant component in the cultural economy .The cultural economy comprises all those sectors in modern capitalism that caters to consumer demands for amusement, ornamentation, self-affirmation, social display and so on. These sectors comprise various craft, fashion, media, and entertainment and service industries with outputs like jewelry, perfume, clothing, films, and recorded music or tourist services. Such outputs have high symbolic value relative to utilitarian purpose. (Bourdieu, 1971,Lash and Urry, 1994). In addition, Culture as embodied in the everyday artifacts that constitute the materiality of social life, but also as it is expressed in such domains of human activity as art or science. Powerful versions of philosophy, aesthetics, scientific