Bourdieu, Culture and the Production of Belief

Pierre Bourdieu is widely regarded as one of the greatest sociologists and thinkers in the 20th century due to his contributions to a broad range of areas. His studies on culture， amongst other things， have been in the center of discussions for and brought profound influence on our society. This essay attempts to explore Bourdieus research on culture， particularly the production of belief. It argues that the production of belief not only has relations with the object， but also is largely affected by the subjects own conditions， especially the field he/she belongs to， the cultural capital he/she owns and the habitus he/she possesses. The analysis is unfolded using a string of key propositions within Bourdieus theoretical framework. It is expected that this article could， at least to some extent， assist the understanding of Bourdieus works on how belief is produced in the reality， which is in line with Bourdieus own advocate of practice theory.

Bourdieu （1993） created three key concepts， namely field， capital and habitus， and these serve as the pillars of his theories. The application of the concepts is instrumental in interpreting the society from both objective and subjective perspectives as advocated by Bourdieu. More specifically， a field can be seen as an objective setting existed among various social positions. In society， there are a large number of fields that are autonomous and independent such as the religious field， the economic field and the like. As per Bourdieus （1979） own words， different social fields are places where participants struggle for victory. All these fields follow their own rules and are irreplaceable by other fields. Therefore， in different fields， naturally， subjects are restricted by differing rules. Nonetheless， Bourdieu reckoned that subjects were not in a totally passive position when facing these rules. On the contrary， subjects are able to change rules through practice， albeit unconsciously for most of the time. Through such practice， the unity of two opposite sides， subjectivism and objectivism， becomes possible.

When it comes to how the aforementioned practice could be done， capital and habitus step in. Bourdieu argued that social capital and cultural capital played crucial roles， and all these three forms were symbolic capital. He further stated that different classes in the society had， and were in turn positioned by， different amounts of total capital owned. In this essay， the focus is on cultural capital， which according to Bourdieu could usually be gained via education and other ways. To understand this concept， it is crucial to examine cultural capitals symbolic features.

Another concept habitus refers to all kinds of durable while changeable system of dispositions. Habitus is a reflection to the external world， and it comes from life experience， education and other backgrounds. As can be seen， the idea of habitus gives a heavy weight to subjectivism rather than objectivism. Bourdieu did not draw a clear line between habitus and capital， it could be reasonably concluded that habitus per se is a form of capital， and it more or less implies different resources owned by different subjects.

In terms of art， Bourdieu argued that culture of each time would create specific beliefs and values about art， and these beliefs and values dominated the ways through which people viewed artworks or even artists. Bourdieu （1996） further pointed out that the producer of artworks and accompanied values was not artist who created them physically; rather the true producer was the production field of belief that created them spiritually. Therefore， this essay argues that according to Bourdieu the value of artworks come not from themselves and artists behind but from the production of belief. In this context， the essence of analyzing artworks turns into the scrutinization of belief. First and foremost， visual art must be physically seen by its audience， but whats controversial is that how the audience view art is a matter of opinion rather than fact. As Berger （1972） argued the way we saw things was impacted by what we already knew or believed， the essence of which could fit well into Bourdieus key concepts as discussed earlier.

Advertising is another form of contemporary art discussed in this essay. Even though some might argue that advertisement is more like a commercial product rather than art， yet the fact that ads are watched by so much audience demonstrates its indispensable role in modern society. As to TV ads， the main group of audience is family members especially housewives who usually turn ads into buying decisions. Therefore， the field has been established. Also， as mentioned earlier field actively interacts with cultural capital. In this respect， it is reasonable to say the ordinary families， on average， do not have a very high taste for art. In other words， those who have a higher level of cultural capital like artists may probably reckon ads as vulgar from the perspective of art.

The production of belief in the context of culture is a complex one. Although it is difficult to precisely assess what factors play what roles in this process， Bourdieus theories might be instrumental in understanding some important facets. This essay reviews Bourdieus key arguments on field， cultural capital as well as habitus. Through applying these concepts to three contemporary art forms， the essay argues that the production of belief comes from a combination of subjectivism and objectivism. The artwork itself is important in producing beliefs regarding it， but the subject who views the artwork is also vital. Therefore， the production of belief can be seen as a cultural process where the subjects own backgrounds are integrated into the objects value as a whole.

References

1.Benjamin， W. （2008）. The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. UK： Penguin.

2.Berger， J. （1972）. Ways of seeing. Harmondsworth， UK： British Broadcasting Corporation.

3.Bourdieu， P. （1979）.Distinction： a social critique of the judgment of taste， London： Routledge.

4.Bourdieu， P. （1993）.Thefield of cultural production： essays on art and literature， Cambridge：Polity.

5.Bourdieu， P. （1996）. The rules of art： Genesis and structure of the literary field. USA： Stanford University Press.

作者簡介：崔怡婧，女，北京人。研究生學歷，研究領域為音樂，數碼文化，社會學以及管理學。目前，在北師大實驗中學任職音樂老師。改編的合唱作品在網易云音樂，QQ音樂等各大音樂平臺上發表。