Beyond Structure: A Review of Pierre Bourdieu Structures, Habitus and Practices - Essay Example

5 May 2008 Beyond Structure: A Review of Pierre Bourdieu, 'Structures, Habitus and Practices' (1977) from Outline of a Theory of Practice, translated by Richard Nice For over 40 years until his death in 2002, French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu attempted to define society with many books, teachings, and articles, and his analysis of the subject has become an integral part of any studies of social identity and structure. But just reading the words written by Pierre Bourdeu is not enough, especially for the layman. His prose is often difficult to read, and each sentence requires careful analysis. When he speaks of habitus, as he does in the article being reviewed here, he does not offer a simple definition. He presents several interpretations in terms of society. Only by multiple readings can a possible interpretation of his thinking be extracted. He goes on to say, "when we speak of class habitus, we are insisting, against all forms of the occasionalist illusion which consists in directly relating practices to properties inscribed in the situation, that 'interpersonal' relations are never, except in appearance, individual-to-individual relationships, and that the truth of the interaction is never entirely contained in the interaction" (81). In other words, the more effort made to compartmentalise habitus, the more different ways of defining it occur. Bourdeu dissects every aspect of the subject he is discussing until he gets to the heart of the matter. But each dissection leads to the next explanation until finally he reaches a conclusion which even then requires further analysis. In Loc Wacquant's biographical study of Bourdieu (2006), he notes Bourdieu's simple beginnings in France as the son of a sharecropper who became the village postman, In the 1940s, Bourdieu moved to Paris to study at a prestigious school at a time when philosophy was the discipline of the moment. However, after graduation, he moved from philosophy to social science after first-hand experience in Algeria and the clash between imperial capitalism and homegrown nationalism. His interests expanded to social hierarchies and his painstaking research conducted over more than two decades finally brought him recognition. In the final decade of his life, he extended his inquiries into religion, science, literature, painting and publishing, thereby expanding his studies into areas which led to new areas of studies and initiating critical analysis of his works which in turn opened a dialogue with other students of socialism. When he died in 2002, he was considered one of the world's foremost public intellectuals. His influence will always be part of the sociology field. In the article under review, Bourdieu notes that in each of us is part of "yesterday's man" which predominates and is inveterate within us, the unconscious part of ourselves, while we are very much aware of the most recent attainments of civilisation because they have not yet settled into our subconscious. Conscious orchestration appears as objective meaning, whether internal or objective, because the internal consists of unconscious past experiences and therefore is not realised as subjective. In other words, "subjects do not, strictly speaking, know what they are doing or that what they do has more meaning than they know" (79). The homogeneity of habitus is what-within the limits of the group-causes practices and works to be immediately intelligible and foreseeable, and hence taken for granted. With the homogeneity of conditions of existence within the group, one is condemned to the nave artificialism "which recognises no other principle unifying a group's ordinary or extraordinary action than the conscious coordination of a conspiracy" (80). It is their present and past positions in the social structure that biological individuals carry with them, at all times and in all places. Even forms of interaction such as sympathy, friendship or love are dominated through the harmony of habitus, the objective structure of the relations between social conditions. The habitus is based on history which produces individual and collective practices which in turn produces history-in other words, past surviving the present and extending into the future. Engendered by objective structures, the dispositions and situations are never wholly independent. Objective analysis assigns sub-systems to the unifying principle of practices-matrimonial strategies, fertility strategies, or economic choices-which is nothing other than habitus producing and being reproduced. It is Bourdieu's contention that "the opposition between the structure and the individual against whom the structure has to be won and endlessly rewon stands in the way of construction of the dialectical relationship between the structure and the dispositions making up the habitus" (84). As an example of the debate on the relationship between "culture" and "personality", Bourdieu presents Cora DuBois's analyses on the Alor Island natives in which she determined that the four personality types she studied-all different-could be found in any society, but together as a group they represent their culture. The conclusion here is that the class habitus is represented as a population, a group, rather than individuals, even though individuals are a part of the habitus (86). Bourdeu complains that "sociology treats as identical all the biological individuals who, being the product of the same objective conditions, are the supports of the same habitus", but he goes on to say, "social class, understood as a system of objective determinations, must be brought into relation not with the individual or with the 'class' as a population, but with the class habitus, the system of dispositions (partially) common to all products of the same structures" (85). Therefore, statistical regularities such as employment rates or income curves give a sense of reality which is "perhaps the best concealed principle of their efficacy" (86). Relations between class, habitus and the organic individuality which can never be entirely removed from sociological discourse could be considered as a subjective but not individual system of internalised structures. In other words, it is through relation of diversity within homogeneity that the singular habitus of the different members of the same class are united. For example, "the habitus acquired in the family underlies the structuring of school experiences . . . and the habitus transformed by schooling, itself diversified, in turn underlies the structuring of all subsequent experiences . . . from restructuring to restructuring" (87). According to Wolfreys (2000), Boudrieu considers habitus as the means by which the 'social game' is inscribed in biological individuals. In his article on 'Classes and Classification' (1979), Bourdieu says "to speak of habitus is to include in the object the knowledge which the agents, who are part of the object, have of the object, and the contribution this knowledge makes to the reality of the object" (par. 2). He notes that social divisions become principles of division, organising the image of the social world. By continually breaking down the perceived meanings of specific phrases, Bourdeu shows how different factions of society create their own limitations while considering their ideas to be the solution. "People's image of the classification is a function of their position within it" (par. 16 ). St. Clair, Rodriguez and Nelson (2006, par. 11) call Bourdieu's habitus "a mindset of dispositions that guide and direct social interactions". One is either a participant or an observer, but Bourdieu goes beyond this and sees himself as an observer who observes himself as a participant. He uses the analogy of sports to describe what he calls habitus. When a player has a sense of his body, his strengths and weaknesses, he knows when he is in the "zone" and when he is not. Bourdieu's game of choice is cricket, but golf is an excellent sport to show habitus. When a golfer is in the "zone", he sees himself as a participant who cannot lose, and outside influences have no effect, but when things go wrong, he becomes a participant who observes himself as a loser and the outside world intrudes. It becomes a case of mind vs. body vs. mind vs. body, transcending the dichotomy. In trying to understand Bourdeu's discussion of structures, habitus and practices by studying his method of writing, his ideas become evident through his prose style. An indication of the way in which his ideas expand in all directions with each conclusion leading to something else can be seen in his body image analogy (Bourdieu, 1979) when he states that the body has its own social physiogomy. It shows attitude and movement, encompasses space, and develops speech, but it goes beyond this to show concepts of both attitude and movement as self-assured, aggressive, or careless by gestures and postures, and space and speech as physical, intellectual, or cultural through interaction, attitude and words which calls for further analysis. There is no real conclusion in Bourdieu's works because every conclusion leads to a new discussion. For instance, the following conclusion quoted from his article calls for further exploration of his statement: In a class society, all the products of a given agent, by an essential overdetermination, speak inseparably and simultaneously of his class, or, more precisely, his position in the social structure and his rising or falling trajectory-and of his (or her) body-or, more precisely, all the properties, always socially qualified, of which he or she is the bearer-sexual properties of course, but also physical properties, praised, like strength or beauty, or stigmatised (87). As an example of how Bourdieu's findings impact society, in education, there is an established curriculum which limits what teachers can do with their students. When all teachers have the same training, no matter who they are as individuals, they are self-contained within the group, unable to perform outside the lines. Teachers are categorised by certain qualities that determine "good" and "bad" teachers (Scahill, 1993). But can teachers transcend acquired habits of meaning with standard teacher training At present, especially in the UK, by the time a teacher qualifies through an established curriculum, there is no opportunity for specialised training. Bourdieu believes that individuals can and should go beyond accepted standards. What does it mean to be human What is expected of us Can we control what happens to us We are still looking for simple answers to these mysteries. Bourdieu asks us to take into consideration the subconscious and conscious facets within the individual, and how this exploration influences group studies. Simplicity is not part of his equation. Diversity must necessarily be part of homogeneity as individuals contribute their own past history to the group they are in. But Bourdieu does not just accept the dichotomy of mind vs. body, insisting that there is more to the human condition than such a simple concept. He proves that in his study of structures, habitus and practices. References Bourdieu, P 1977, 'Structures and the Habitus: Structures, habitus and practices', Outline of a Theory of Practice, translated by Richard Nice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 78-87. Bourdieu, P 1979, 'Classes and Classifications', from Distinctions: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, Conlusion, 1984, translated by Richard Nice, Harvard University Press, 604 pp-Selected from pp. 466-484, viewed 23 April, 2008, http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/bourdieu.htm Scahill, J.H. 1993, 'Meaning-Construction and Habitus', Philosophy of Education, viewed 25 April, 2008, http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/eps/PES-Yearbook/93_docs/SCAHILL.HTM St. Clair, R, Rodriguez, W, Nelson, C 2006, 'Habitus and Communication Theory', University of Louisville, viewed 26 April, 2008, http://louisville.edu/rnstcl01/R-Bourdieu.html Wacquant, L 2006, 'Pierre Boudrieu', Department of Sociology, University of California-Berkley, viewed 22 April, 2008, http://sociology.berkeley.edu/faculty/wacquant/wacquant_pdf/PIERREBOURDIEU-KEYTHINK-REV2006.pdf Wolfreys, J 2000, 'In perspective: Pierre Bourdieu', International Socialism Journal, summer 2000, issue 87, viewed 22 April, 2008, http://www.isj1text.ble.org.uk/pubs/isj87/wolfreys.htm Read More