Bourdieu First Run

     Bourdieu opens up Distinction by talking about taste and how it is an “acquired disposition to ‘differentiate’ and ‘appreciate.’” This rings true in several cases of literature, especially when it comes to the two terms, meaning and pleasure. The unique thing about literature is that everyone has a different opinion. Some people may love reading Jane Austen while others may despise reading her work. The symbols in one novel may mean something to one person, but someone else may have a completely different interpretation. Literature requires this acquired disposition because literature needs to be performed on like surgery, removing, dissecting, and analyzing little things that have big meanings. Bourdieu talks about how people perceive schemes and a large part of this depends on the classification systems that readers use. The great thing about literature is the ambiguity when it comes to interpretations and the open-mindedness that is available while reading. There is never really such a thing as the “right” answer, but instead there is an abundance of answers. Literature is an acquired taste, because it takes years of practice when it comes to explicating text and finding a strong stance. The meaning of the text can easily be differentiated, as well as the pleasure of a text too as some works require a finite amount of analysis to find enjoyment.

One thought on “Bourdieu First Run

  1. kscombs says:

    Looking back on Pierre Bourdieu’s essay “Distinction,” I have come to ponder what his theory means for myself, and if I agree with that outcome, or his theory at all. In his essay, Bourdieu emphasizes the importance and the impact of the social class system, and the idea which he puts forth, the “embodied social structure.” According to Bourdieu, we are born into a specific class system and out tastes are determine by that class system. Different classes are distinguished, or distinct, from one another based off of the tastes which the people in said class, have inherited.

    I applied this theory to myself and this is what I came up with…

    I was born into a pretty well off family as far as finances are concerned, both my parents were well educated and always made sure I was receiving a strong education.

    Some of my tastes include classical piano, for I began classical piano training at the age of five, good food, beautiful clothing, and I value my education.

    So far so good right Bourdieu?

    Well what about the other tastes that I have that do not seem to correlate with the rest? I greatly enjoy a nice Big Mac and fries from Mcdonalds every now and then, I enjoy attending grungy rock concerts when I get bored of playing 10 page long Beethoven Sonatas, and I also greatly enjoy throwing on my cheapest pair of jeans and T-shirt and going on a road trip opposed to flying to a glamorous city.

    Where does this leave me? I am not quite sure if I can accept Bourdieu’s theory, for I strongly believe I have many tastes that I am passionate about that do not fit in my usual social realm, that seem to extend past my limits, yet I would still say that I am confident in my place in society and not necessarily confused by all my different tastes, rather theyre just a part of me.

    Like

Leave a comment