Abstract

This article challenges what is now the orthodoxy concerning the heritage of Bourdieu (1930–2002): namely, the judgement that his distinctive sociological innovation has been his theory of social reproduction, and that he has failed to provide a necessary theory of social change. Yet Bourdieu consistently claimed to offer a theory of social transformation as well as accounting for continuities of power. Indeed, he provides two substantive keys for an understanding of historical transformation—first, a theory of prophets (religious or secular) as the authors of heresies or “symbolic revolutions” that dispel current doxa; second, a theory of the “corporatism of the universal”: the role of intellectuals or other educated professionals in pursuit of social justice and other universalistic goals. Moreover, Bourdieu fuses his theories of “symbolic revolutions” with a materialist analysis of their social preconditions, including a fresh account of social crises. Crises—war, famine, recession, and especially the intensified precarity of the educated—have, for him, a profound impact, both within differentiated fields and across fields. Conflicts that become effectively synchronized across fields acquire great resonance within the wider field of power, particularly due to hysteresis or “maladjusted habitus.” Indeed, the appearance of crises, together with new prophetic heresies, leads the subordinate classes to question the taken-for-granted order of things and to orchestrate their resistance. Alongside his corpus of published writings, this article draws widely on Bourdieu’s posthumously published lectures. These cast a distinctive new light on how his well-known conceptual instruments can aid us in the study of historical change. They also expand on how social science itself might be used to facilitate progressive social movements.

Highlights

  • This article challenges what is the orthodoxy concerning the heritage of Bourdieu (1930–2002): namely, the judgement that his distinctive sociological innovation has been his theory of social reproduction, and that he has failed to provide a necessary theory of social change

  • Bourdieu’s analysis of the rise of the State and the role of symbolic power in national integration moves too closely within the orbit of Durkheim’s evolutionary republicanism.13. Despite such reservations about his interpretation of the French Revolution, he has made important contributions to the study of social transformation, notably, in On the State, the rise of a legal profession trained in universalistic practices, the establishment of democracy and the origins of the welfare state

  • The work of Manet has an epistemological primacy: the symbolic revolution he made was crucial to the genesis of the modern artistic field itself

Read more

Summary

Extended author information available on the last page of the article

In 2001, Pierre Bourdieu attended a colloquium at Cerisy-la-Salle in his honour, to which I was invited. He offers an accompanying, internally consistent theory of structural change, admittedly, his theory needs further elucidation of the precise situations in which crises emerge and successful symbolic or social revolutions are provoked As he has argued, such crises may eventually terminate certain patterns of enduring reproduction, whether what is at stake is the peasant world-order, traditional forms of patriarchy, the post-war “trente glorieuses,” or the shift from academic to modern painting. Bourdieu’s analysis of the rise of the State and the role of symbolic power in national integration moves too closely within the orbit of Durkheim’s evolutionary republicanism.13 Despite such reservations about his interpretation of the French Revolution, he has made important contributions to the study of social transformation, notably, in On the State, the rise of a legal profession trained in universalistic practices, the establishment of democracy and the origins of the welfare state. The work of Manet has an epistemological primacy: the symbolic revolution he made was crucial to the genesis of the modern artistic field itself

The intelligentsia as a universalistic corporation
Exploitation and margins of freedom
Conclusion

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.