Cultural Hierarchies in Popular Fashion - Essay Example

Cultural Hierarchies in Popular Fashion Introduction Fashion is synonymous to the style, way, mode, method and common way through which people clothe themselves and present themselves to the society (Barnard, 2013). “Fashion is an ongoing process and ever changing phenomenon that leads the world … fashion is what is acceptable and adopted by the society at any given point in time” (Khurana, 2010, p. 14). The two definitions above indicate that fashion is somewhat related to a social consensus of what is modern and what is in vogue. This creates the impetus for the acceptance and the adoption of given products and services as a means of meeting appearance and clothing needs. The purpose of this paper is to examine the idea of culture and taste as presented by Bourdieu in his conceptual writings. The essence of this paper is to examine and review the idea of taste in the analysis of cultural hierarchies and how it operates in the context of popular fashion. The paper will critically evaluate the conceptual framework of Bourdieu’s work. On this basis, the paper will analyse the idea of culture and tastes and how it relates to popular fashion with an emphasis on a real case and situation. Conceptual Framework The idea of cultural capital and tastes do not exist in vacuum. They are based on important concepts and frameworks that weave into the broader context of Bourdieu’s works. Bourdieu was born in the 1930s and he became an authority in the field of Sociology. Many of his theories are relevant to defining social ideas and concepts like fashion and habits. The idea of cultural capital is a sub-section of one of four main ideas and concepts that he uses to describe how people accept their role and status in society. Therefore, Bourdieu begins his thesis by saying there are four species of capital that determines the fields of interactions within society (Bourdieu, 1984). These fields of interactions lead to the definition of habitus which are the frameworks within which people act and do things (Williams, 2008). Finally, the Habitus forms the basis for symbolism or what Bourdieu defines as symbolic violence (Bourdieu, 1984). These four concepts and ideas come together to shape what is ideal and what is befitting for different people and different classes of persons in society. These variables are applicable to many perceptions and views that exists and it comes together to define fashion and appearance, since those two are part of a framework of what is desirable and what is not. To recap the pointers, the main interlinked issues in Bourdieu’s central argument are: 1. Species of Capital; 2. Fields; 3. Habitus; 4. Symbolism/Symbolic Violence The first two variables relate directly to the cultural capital dimension whilst the last two variables relate directly with tastes and habits. These four variables come together to define how society creates perceptions and how these affect the way people think and behave in the broader sense. Cultural Capital Cultural capital is part of the structuralist view presented by Bourdieu who asserts that the relationship between structure and agency are dialectic rather than oppositional (Bourdieu, 1990). This means they are two ideas and concepts that complement each other. Structure is represented by agency which manifests itself in four main species of capital, one of which is cultural capital. The entire list includes: 1. Economic capital, 2. Cultural capital, 3. Social capital and 4. Symbolic capital (Bourdieu, 1986) Economic capital refers to the control of assets and other forms of resources that can be easily converted to cash or regenerate cash (Bourdieu, 1986). This provides the framework for defining who controls the power and authority of the society and the community and it also defines the way through which institutional structures are defined. On the other hand, cultural capital exists in three main forms: 1. Embodied state; 2. Objectified state & 3. Institutionalised state (Bourdieu, 1986) The embodied state of cultural capital refers to the long-term disposition of the mind and body to certain views of culture (Chris, 2000). This includes the generally accepted commanders of ideas, knowledge and experiences in a given community. The objectified state of cultural capital involves the presentation of these cultural ideas in the form of books like authoritative religious texts and other instruments and machines. Finally, institutionalised state of cultural capital includes various forms of authorities and entities that seem to have the legitimate power to confer rights to certain relics of cultural importance in the society. Economic capital and cultural capital are somewhat interlinked because the distribution of cultural credibility comes with various forms of economic benefits and strengths that give credence to the structures of society (Storey, 2001). Social capital is made up of various group affiliations and group connections that define the way and manner in which things are done in a given society or community (Bourdieu, 1990). This includes durable networks of partners and various stakeholders in a given system and procedure. These are often based on a long-term horizon that defines the way people are interlinked to each other and interact through relationship networks and systems. Symbolic capital refers to the way and manner within which various form of capital is represented in a given society or community (Bourdieu, 1986). This include the resources based on prestige, honour and recognition and they provide a representation of the standing of a given person or individual in the society. Fields are an embodiment of a series of networks of current and historical relations between objective positions anchored in capital (Bourdieu, 1990). Objective positions are taken by agents who have authority within those fields for example administrators and professors in the academic field (Medhurst, 1999). This is determined by the amount of weight of capital that is controlled by a person who holds a given position. Fields in Bourdieu’s theory are areas of conflict and competition and this is often influenced by the level of social and economic capital controlled by any group of people and this is through the overlap of the functions of different groups (Bourdieu, 1990). For instance, religious leaders might not accept some aspects of scientific teaching and view it as a threat. Academics might have issues with administrators who might have conflicting views etc. Therefore, there is a constant conflict of desires and wills which leads to the creation of a framework for the shaping of the fields and boundaries at every given point in time. To Bourdieu, fields are shaped by historical variables and this differs from other thinkers like Marx and Strauss who give different reasons for the shaping of fields (Edkins, 2011). And in his views, fields are created by patterns that are defined by habitus. Tastes & Habits Habitus is viewed as the mental or cognitive structure of symbolism (Bourdieu, 1990). This includes the internalisation of external social structures that we acquire as individual throughout our lifetime (Swartz, 2012). This includes the structure and system through which we produce our thoughts and create external social structures and view things. Habitus reflects individualistic perceptions that are based on the images and things that are revealed to them in society and in the wider society. These individual views come together to define habits in the collective sense of the society. Habitus therefore guides the way in which people think and perceive things that occur around them. Habitus generally suggests but do not determine thoughts of people. According to Bourdieu, people act on practical sense or fuzzy logic or a reasonable reaction to situations based on their stimulus (Bourdieu, 1990). Habitus matches a field in society and we react to things based on cohesion and social collectivism and cohesion. Finally, habitus leads to symbolism and the creation of classes in society because people in various unpleasant classes in the social ladder tend to adapt to the pressure and stress around them by doing various activities (Bourdieu, 1990). This involves the creation of a cultural stream that allows people who are under domination to accept as legitimate, their own suffering. This is sometimes referred to as symbolic violence and people are depicted as such and they tend to accept those images and views as normal (Williams, 2008). Application to the Context of Fashion The theories of Bourdieu are applicable to the world of fashion in many ways and manner. Appearances and fashion need to match the kind of context and situation within which a given individual is leading his or her life. Basically, the control of a given class of capital provides the impetus for the definition of the kind of appearance a given individual is supposed to have. Economic capital often comes with roles like directorship and managerial positions. Therefore, a individual in such a position has to appear in a given form or a given situation. This is because appearance is important in adding up to the credibility of an individual. Capital & Fields Cultural capital and its components provide the impetus for the definition of fashion trends in a given society. This is because the way people dress is an embodied state of the cultural ideals and beliefs that exist in a given society or community. This is because culture is a soft concept that embodies the views and values of the people. Hence, the way people dress is an objectified view of how they are to be seen in the society and this reflects their status and defines their role and position in the culture. However, most importantly, culture defines the broad framework of institutions that must exist in a given community and how these institutions must work together to shape the culture and social affairs of the people. Cultural capital and its distribution forms the framework for the distribution of power and the creation of classes in the society. Therefore, there is a framework of dresses and fashion that exists with different people. For instance, in 1500 England, members of the nobility were expected to dress in more glamorous clothes whilst the serfs were to be shabbily dressed because the cultural capital sought to come with some levels of symbolisms that were somewhat different and varied in different ways and forms. Social capital is also borne out of the cultural variable. Although in today’s world social capital is often limited by legislation which ensures things are done fairly, informal arrangements and issues are still very strong. These informal arrangements still define the kind of appearance a person must have at any point in time. A Jewish Rabbi is expected to dress in a modest way when meeting members of his community. A judge is supposed to dress up as a member of the society and the community comes with numerous structures that dictate what is appropriate for what time. In a social gathering that commemorates a stage of life, there is the need to preserve social connections and social life. A wedding will dictate some kind of formal dressing in order to ensure that members of the wedding conform in order to gain acceptance. Fashion and appearance affect and are affected by symbolic capital. The clothes a person wears and the jewellery and other materials might confirm an individual’s social standing and status. For instance, the regalia of the Queen of England are meant to show her position as the occupant of the Throne of Britain and its dependencies. Fields form an overlap of networks and spaces of interaction amongst different groups and classes of people. And due to the fact that there are historical connotations to the interaction of fields, there are different overlapping forms of fashion that run through different social settings. For instance, an individual might have religious clothes that are sown to certain specifications and aid a given appearance that is necessary for religious rituals. These might be reminiscent of ancient clothes that go back several centuries. In other situations, an individual might want to wear more modern clothes to meet certain ends like business meetings where they might need to show credibility. Hence, the idea of fields implies that an individual might need to switch between different fashion processes in order to reflect the historical and divergent connotations of “fields” in Bourdieu’s conception. Habits & Tastes Habitus helps us to identify the meaning of each clothing article and what it symbolises to most people in the society. This includes the conception of the mind that defines the way and manner in which we assess various cloth types and what we associate with certain objects of fashion. For instance, some colours are associated to certain moods and feelings. However, the interaction of habitus determines what every colour or symbol means and what it adds to the appearance of an individual who wears it in a given culture. Habits are both individualistic and collectivist in outlook. This is because every individual has his own personality based on the way he was raised and his internal perception as well as social views of things. However, habits do not define the way people think. Rather, people take their decision based on the logic and reasonableness of a given situation. Therefore, habitus provides a mental view of symbols and this allows the individual to define the brands and clothing types that are most appropriate for a given individual. This helps to form various patterns in terms of demand and market segmentation. This is because habits define the way through which groups and sections of the society are arranged and their psychology can be used in terms of defining the kind of markets and the systems of selling fashion products to consumers in the society. Symbolism defines the tastes and preferences of individuals in the society. This is because symbolism seeks to provide a process through which products can be identified easily by consumers. This is because symbolism defines various ideas and concepts in the society and this changes and modifies in the way people change things. Therefore, fashion has a direct correlation with the habits and tastes of individuals and groups of people. These forms of habits and tastes are based on fields and the various forms of capital. The fields and networks define the appropriate setting and appropriate appearance that a person needs to put forward in every situation. This shapes the foundations for defining the boundaries in fashion and it is in turn influenced by the distribution of capital in a given society. Discussions in the Context of London London is generally seen as a major financial capital city in the world and it is reputed to be a boiling point of different cultures due to its history and its processes. Therefore, the fashion sector of the country has parallels that reflect the elements of Bourdieu’s theories of cultural capital and tastes. London’s cultural capital relates to the long-term disposition of the city that goes back to Roman times and the previous divisions of the city and geographical class. The embodiment of the city include the royal power and distributions as well as the cultural segmentation of the city which means that some groups of people are found in certain parts of the city. A study by BBC Lab UK indicates that there are seven main classes in the UK and London indicate that economic capital and social capital culminates in different variables and processes that define the status of people and place them into the following groups: 1. Elite; 2. Established Middle Class; 3. Technical Middle Class; 4. New Affluent Workers; 5. Traditional Working Class; 6. Emergent Service Workers; 7. Precarious Proletariat (Butler, 2013) Each of these groups have embodied states of mind about what an ideal culture should be and this include shared values and common views on how life should be. Thus, the elite might have an idea of going for Haute Couture and customised products as a means of showing off their status in society. On the other hand, the emergent service workers made up of younger members of the society like young professionals and workers might have an idea of mass produced products as a better representation of themselves. They all have different values and representations that they consider as objectified states. Hence, they all have different sources of authority. Whilst a person in the precarious proletariat class might owe allegiance to some kind of popular music cult and dress like them, members of the elite might want to dress up and look traditional instead of more modern products and brands. These different classes dictate social capital and symbolic capital to these different classes of people. Hence, their identification of social events that they might want to attend might be different. Their dresses might be different and they might want to show up in different attires and appearance forms. With their different historical values, the different classes of London are meant to have different perceptions of what is most appropriate fashion and what is not an ideal form of clothing. Therefore, people are meant to value different symbolisms and a hippie is likely to have a taste of fashion that is different from an elite member of the House of Lords who might have other views and ideas of life. Conclusion Bourdieu’s work provides a comprehensive explanation of the social and cultural space and how it determines and shapes up people’s lives through the definition of fields and spaces that set the spate for identifying what is ideal and what is not. The study shows that cultural capital is a one of the four species of capital that defines the motivation and means through which agency and structuralism occurs. This defines the fields and the fields shape the habits and tastes of people in society because people tend to accept their social standings based on the conceptions and views they internalise. Fashion is influenced by the division of cultural capital and its related forms of capital like social and economic capital. These classes define the way and manner in which people appear in clothes and other relics. The species of capital give room for the definition of fields which are based on historical trends and processes that occurred in the past and define various fields that overlap and dictate the mode of fashion. These fields give room for the creation of habits that also shape the kind of tastes and preferences of people in various matters. Symbolism is an acceptance of one’s status in the social and cultural framework and this allows people to live harmoniously in a given class of society and achieve their aims without questioning their roles and status in life. References Barnard, M., 2013. Fashion as Communication. 3rd ed. London: Routledge. Bourdieu, P., 1984. "A Grand Bourgeois", "A Young Executive" and a Baker's Wife. Distinction, pp. 132-149. Bourdieu, P., 1984. A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Distinction, pp. 1-7. Bourdieu, P., 1986. The forms of capital. In: J. Richardson, ed. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education . New York: Greenwood, pp. 241-258. Bourdieu, P., 1990. In Other Words. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.. Bourdieu, P., 1990. The Logic of Practice. Stanford: University of Stanford Press. Butler, D., 2013. The Great British Classes and where they live in London. [Online] Available at: http://www.rentonomy.com/posts/100 [Accessed 31 December 2014]. Chris, B., 2000. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. London: SAGE. Edkins, J., 2011. Critical Theorists and International Relations. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Khurana, p., 2010. Introduction to Fashion Technology. 2nd ed. London: Firewall Media. Medhurst, A., 1999. If Anywhere: Class Identifications and Cultural Studies Academics. In: S. R. Munt, ed. Cultural Studies and the Working Class. London: Cassell. Storey, J., 2001. Cultural Theory and Popular Culture. London: Prentice hall. Swartz, D., 2012. Culture and Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Williams, S. J., 2008. Theorising class, health and lifestyles: can Bourdieu help us?. Sociology of Health and Illness, 17(5), pp. 577-604. Read More