Bourdieu in American Sociology, 1980-2004

Jeffrey J. Sallaz and Jane Zavisca, 2007

As reviewed by Ralph Soule and Tamara Sole

Article’s Purpose

To evaluate the degree to which Pierre

Bourdieu’s work informed or influenced the

discipline of sociology in America between

1980-2004

Key Take-Aways Bourdieu developed theories for relating

culture and inequality

There’s been a steady diffusion of Bourdieu’s writings into

American sociology throughout the past 25 years An increasing use of Bourdieu’s ideas in American

sociology research

Bourdieu’s cultural capital remains the key influence on American sociology research

Overview of Bourdieu’s Concepts

Critical of a “mediocre and empirical” strand within sociology

Social structures influence individual mental structures that in turn reproduce or change social structures through

Capital: economic, cultural, social, symbolic

Field: The social “playing field” upon which actors act

Habitus: socially learned dispositions, skills and ways of acting, often taken for granted

Symbolic power: the ability of dominant groups to impose a social structure that suits their wishes

Overview of Bourdieu’s Concepts (cont.) Symbolic dimension of class inequality and reproduction

Grave doubts about ethnography since researchers can never truly see the world from their subjects’ point of view

States are essential for making and maintaining market fields, the “global market” is a political creation

The characteristics of products, especially symbolic meaning for consumers, exerts an independent influence on suppliers.

Common critiques: ideas are too static and too specific to French society

Methodologies Quantitative content analysis of 4 prominent

sociology journals American Journal of Sociology American Sociological Review Social Forces Social Problems

Review of 4 books explicitly apply Bourdieu’s theories Making Capitalism Without Capitalists (Eyal, et al. 1999) The Architecture of Markets (Fligstein, 2002) Money, Morals, and Manners (Lamont, 1994) Body and Soul, (Wacquant, 2004)

Article’s Conclusion

American scholars are increasingly likely to cite and acknowledge Bourdieu’s work Increased interest (as of 2004) in Bourdieu’s

work is not a fad or short-lived. Bourdieu citations were substantive

Many scholars are applying Bourdieu’s theories and are moving the research forward Bourdieu’s ideas were not limited to France

since they have been successfully transposed to the US and other countries.

Questions If social structures generate individual mental

structures that in turn reproduce social structures, how do social structures change?

  Give some examples of symbolic power (what Bourdieu

called the most effective form of power), the capacity of dominant groups to impose “the definition of the social world that is best suited to their interests.”

  Is there anything profound about Bourdieu’s assertion

that states are essential for making and maintaining market fields, or is this just a statement of the obvious?