According to Bourdieu, (in Jenks:2004) Cultural Capital is ‘diffused within a social space…. transmitted by inheritance and invested in order to be cultivated’. Furthermore within his theory of Cultural Reproduction, Bourdieu believed that; ‘differentiated and stratified, socialisation practices, in combination with the system of education, function to discriminate positively in favour of these members of society who, by virtue of their location with the class system are the natural inheritors of cultural capital’ (Jenks:2004). Therefore, this statement suggests, within a Marxist discourse, that Cultural Capital – the demonstration of social and economic status and power - is a privilege, exclusive to the higher tiers of the social stratification paradigm, which is perpetual and must be tolerated by the masses.
Furthermore, cultural capital is only one facet within a trinity of ‘major types of capital’; the others being economic – ‘high levels of income and property’ - and social – ‘stems not so much from what you know but who you know’ capital (Thornton:1995) (ibid1) (ibid2). In addition, within contemporary society there exists a manifold of consonant and dissonant relationships pertaining to such a trinity. Of course, within the elite of society – the royal family provides the best example – there will be a harmonious consonance of the trinity paradigm. However, there are increasing instances of dissonant relationships within contemporary society such as; ‘those rich in economic capital but less affluent in cultural capital’ (ibid3). Indeed, the opportunist markets of economic opportunity – professional sport, media and reality shows – will perpetuate such dissonant relationships and, indeed, the rejection of new money celebrities by the hereditary social elite.
Furthermore, cultural capital is only one facet within a trinity of ‘major types of capital’; the others being economic – ‘high levels of income and property’ - and social – ‘stems not so much from what you know but who you know’ capital (Thornton:1995) (ibid1) (ibid2). In addition, within contemporary society there exists a manifold of consonant and dissonant relationships pertaining to such a trinity. Of course, within the elite of society – the royal family provides the best example – there will be a harmonious consonance of the trinity paradigm. However, there are increasing instances of dissonant relationships within contemporary society such as; ‘those rich in economic capital but less affluent in cultural capital’ (ibid3). Indeed, the opportunist markets of economic opportunity – professional sport, media and reality shows – will perpetuate such dissonant relationships and, indeed, the rejection of new money celebrities by the hereditary social elite.
No comments:
Post a Comment