Abstract
This article welcomes Born’s proposal that the sociology of art learn from ‘adjacent fields’ that can ‘augment the sociological repertoire’. It agrees especially that sociologists can learn much from the anthropology of art and material culture studies. However, it challenges Born’s claim that the sociology of art has ‘seen little progress in recent years’ and thus questions certain aspects of her proposal for a ‘post-Bourdieuian theory of cultural production’. The central argument is: rather than an ‘analytics of mediation’ — which Born recommends — the sociology of art can benefit from studying material ‘mediators’ at work in concrete artistic networks, and the role of aesthetic agency and art in the constitution of social life more generally. The ar ticle concludes that the path forward for a sociology of art may lie precisely in not trying to force a reconciliation between macro and micro approaches, or between humanities and social science perspectives.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
