What do you think?
Rate this book
The Forms of Capital
This is the third of five volumes based on the lectures given by Pierre Bourdieu at the Collége de France in the early 1980s under the title General Sociology . In these lectures, Bourdieu sets out to define and defend sociology as an intellectual discipline; in doing so he introduces and clarifies all the key concepts for which he has become so well known, concepts that continue to shape the way that sociology is practised today. In this volume, Bourdieu focuses on one of these key concepts, capital, which forms part of the trilogy of concepts – habitus, capital, field – that define the core of his theoretical approach. A field, as a social space of relatively durable relations between agents and institutions, is also a site of specific investments, which presupposes the possession of specific forms of capital and secures both material and symbolic profits. While there are many different forms of capital, two are fundamental and effective in all social economic capital and cultural capital. These and other forms of capital exist only in relation to the fields in which they are the distribution of the forms and quantities of capital constitutes the structure of the field within which agents act and they confer power over the field, over the mechanisms that define the functioning of the field and over the profits engendered in the field – over, for example, the transmission of cultural capital in the educational system. An ideal introduction to one of Bourdieu’s most important concepts, this volume will be of great interest to the many students and scholars who study and use Bourdieu’s work across the social sciences and humanities, and to general readers who want to know more about the work of one of the most important sociologists and social thinkers of the twentieth century.
17 pages
Published January 1, 1986
About the author
Pierre Bourdieu
299 books1,073 followersBourdieu pioneered investigative frameworks and terminologies such as cultural, social, and symbolic capital, and the concepts of habitus, field or location, and symbolic violence to reveal the dynamics of power relations in social life. His work emphasized the role of practice and embodiment or forms in social dynamics and worldview construction, often in opposition to universalized Western philosophical traditions. He built upon the theories of Ludwig Wittgenstein, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Edmund Husserl, Georges Canguilhem, Karl Marx, Gaston Bachelard, Max Weber, Émile Durkheim, Erwin Panofsky, and Marcel Mauss. A notable influence on Bourdieu was Blaise Pascal, after whom Bourdieu titled his Pascalian Meditations.
Bourdieu rejected the idea of the intellectual "prophet", or the "total intellectual", as embodied by Sartre. His best known book is Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, in which he argues that judgments of taste are related to social position. His argument is put forward by an original combination of social theory and data from surveys, photographs and interviews, in an attempt to reconcile difficulties such as how to understand the subject within objective structures. In the process, he tried to reconcile the influences of both external social structures and subjective experience on the individual (see structure and agency).
Bourdieu rejected the idea of the intellectual "prophet", or the "total intellectual", as embodied by Sartre. His best known book is Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, in which he argues that judgments of taste are related to social position. His argument is put forward by an original combination of social theory and data from surveys, photographs and interviews, in an attempt to reconcile difficulties such as how to understand the subject within objective structures. In the process, he tried to reconcile the influences of both external social structures and subjective experience on the individual (see structure and agency).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
October 26, 2017
Read this for a sociology class and was stoked to discover it on Goodreads (falling behind on my reading challenge ...). He writes in a fairly ornate (French) style that some will hate, but I really liked it.
January 1, 2023
This was such an insightful book into the structures of society. Bourdieu gave really interesting viewpoints and comparisons that really changed my view on society. It is a dry read at times but when Bourdieu gets to the main points in his lectures what he has to say is worth the wait.
Read
June 12, 2023"The social world is accumulated history, and if it is not to be reduced to a discontinuous series of instantaneous mechanical equilibria between agents who are treated as interchangeable particles, one must reintroduce into it the notion of capital and with it, accumulation and all its effects. Capital is accumulated labor (in its materialized form or its “incorporated,” embodied form) which, when appropriated on a private, i.e., exclusive, basis by agents or groups of agents, enables them to appropriate social energy in the form of reified or living labour." p.1.
"So it has to be posited simultaneously that economic capital is at the root of all the other types of capital and that these transformed, disguised forms of economic capital, never entirely reducible to that definition, produce their most specific effects only to the extent that they conceal (not least from their possessors) the fact that economic capital is at their root, in other words—but only in the last analysis at the root of their effects." p.24.
"So it has to be posited simultaneously that economic capital is at the root of all the other types of capital and that these transformed, disguised forms of economic capital, never entirely reducible to that definition, produce their most specific effects only to the extent that they conceal (not least from their possessors) the fact that economic capital is at their root, in other words—but only in the last analysis at the root of their effects." p.24.
Read
August 15, 2022Pairs well with an understanding of historical materialism, and sheds some light on how capital cannot be so easily reduced to purely economic terms- things like social and cultural capital have tangible effects on society that must be dealt when struggling against capitalism (ex: the ways caste, race, or nobility influence the structure of labor in societies)
November 6, 2022
Essa coleção em volumes das palestras de Bourdieu é um tesouro para desvendar e aprofundar a sociologia de um dos pensadores mais importantes dos séculos XX e XXI.
November 13, 2022
does this count as a book idc probably not but this was one of those things my brain has conceptualized in abstract form but was unable to flush out in words. i love bourdieu.
April 28, 2024
I met Pierre Bourdieu in the anthropology of consumption course I took as an elective. After watching the movie Entre les murs today, I felt that i need to re-read what he wrote about capital in this essay.
Pierre Bourdieu defines capital as the "accumulated history of society" and divides capital into 3. These are economic capital, which includes all kinds of commodities that can be converted into money; cultural capital, which is acquired in forms of education what starts from the family at a young age and social capital, which consists of social connections and networks. In this essay, he talks about their definition and their transformations.
You can see the exemplification of Bourdieu's theses in the movie Entre les murs. A student who does not receive cultural capital from the family and uses a completely different language within the family and at school cannot understand the course and fails at the end of the semester. In the movie, the teacher writes a simple word on the board while explaining verb conjugations. But students do not even know the meaning of this word used in normal life because lack of cultural capital.
Although the idea explained in the essay is very good, the very long sentences made by Bourdieu make understanding a little difficult, probably due to the linguistic structure of French.
In conclusion, it is an eye-opening work.
******************************************************************************
Pierre Bourdieu ile seçmeli olarak aldığım tüketim antropolojisi dersinde tanışmıştım. Bugün Entre les murs filmini izledikten sonra bu essayde sermaye ile ilgili yazdıklarını tekrar okuma gerekliliği hissettim.
Pierre Bourdieu sermayeyi ''toplumun biriktirilmiş tarihi" olarak tanımlıyor ve sermayeyi 3 e ayırıyor. Bunlar paraya dönüşebilecek her türlü emtiayı içine alan ekonomik sermaye, eğitim biçimlerinde sahip olunan ve daha küçük yaşta aileden başlayan kültürel sermaye ve toplumsal bağlantı ve networklerden oluşan sosyal sermaye. Bu essayde bunların tanımını ve birbirlerine dönüşümlerinden bahsediyor.
Entre les murs filminde ise Bourdieu'nun bu savlarının örneklendirmesini görebiliyorsunuz.. Kültürel sermaye aktarımı aileden gelmediği ve aile içerisinde ve okulda bambaşka dil kullanılmasından dolayı öğrenci dersi anlayamıyor ve dönem sonu başarısız oluyor. Filmde öğretmen fiil çekimlerini anlatırken tahtaya basit bir kelime yazıyor. Ama öğrenciler normal hayatta kullanılan bu kelimenin anlamını dahi bilmiyorlar. Neden olarak göçmen ve işçi sınıfına ait kültürel sermayenin oluşmadığı bir aile olduğunu görebiliyorsunuz.
Essayde anlatılan fikir çok iyi olsada fransızcanın dil yapısından olsa gerek Bourdieu'nun kurduğu çok uzun cümleler anlaşımı biraz zorlaştırıyor.
Sonuç olarak ufuk açıcı bir eser.
Pierre Bourdieu defines capital as the "accumulated history of society" and divides capital into 3. These are economic capital, which includes all kinds of commodities that can be converted into money; cultural capital, which is acquired in forms of education what starts from the family at a young age and social capital, which consists of social connections and networks. In this essay, he talks about their definition and their transformations.
You can see the exemplification of Bourdieu's theses in the movie Entre les murs. A student who does not receive cultural capital from the family and uses a completely different language within the family and at school cannot understand the course and fails at the end of the semester. In the movie, the teacher writes a simple word on the board while explaining verb conjugations. But students do not even know the meaning of this word used in normal life because lack of cultural capital.
Although the idea explained in the essay is very good, the very long sentences made by Bourdieu make understanding a little difficult, probably due to the linguistic structure of French.
In conclusion, it is an eye-opening work.
******************************************************************************
Pierre Bourdieu ile seçmeli olarak aldığım tüketim antropolojisi dersinde tanışmıştım. Bugün Entre les murs filmini izledikten sonra bu essayde sermaye ile ilgili yazdıklarını tekrar okuma gerekliliği hissettim.
Pierre Bourdieu sermayeyi ''toplumun biriktirilmiş tarihi" olarak tanımlıyor ve sermayeyi 3 e ayırıyor. Bunlar paraya dönüşebilecek her türlü emtiayı içine alan ekonomik sermaye, eğitim biçimlerinde sahip olunan ve daha küçük yaşta aileden başlayan kültürel sermaye ve toplumsal bağlantı ve networklerden oluşan sosyal sermaye. Bu essayde bunların tanımını ve birbirlerine dönüşümlerinden bahsediyor.
Entre les murs filminde ise Bourdieu'nun bu savlarının örneklendirmesini görebiliyorsunuz.. Kültürel sermaye aktarımı aileden gelmediği ve aile içerisinde ve okulda bambaşka dil kullanılmasından dolayı öğrenci dersi anlayamıyor ve dönem sonu başarısız oluyor. Filmde öğretmen fiil çekimlerini anlatırken tahtaya basit bir kelime yazıyor. Ama öğrenciler normal hayatta kullanılan bu kelimenin anlamını dahi bilmiyorlar. Neden olarak göçmen ve işçi sınıfına ait kültürel sermayenin oluşmadığı bir aile olduğunu görebiliyorsunuz.
Essayde anlatılan fikir çok iyi olsada fransızcanın dil yapısından olsa gerek Bourdieu'nun kurduğu çok uzun cümleler anlaşımı biraz zorlaştırıyor.
Sonuç olarak ufuk açıcı bir eser.
February 7, 2022
better than putnam
January 8, 2016
Bourdieu is genius, truly remarkable understanding of social capital transfer over time. The topic remains unexplored, would try work it with visual materiality.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews