You
are what you prefer
Do we define ourselves by our choices of consumption
and are we, on some unconscious level, already pre-conditioned to make these
choices by the environment we grew up in and the social group we ‘belong’ to?
Me and my friend Victoria’s and Astrid’s (with whom
I live together) own consumer preferences provide interesting information when
connected to the sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. He claims that people in modern
society use their cultural capital and consumerist styles to distinguish
themselves from others. Cultural taste, preferences and consumption thus
fulfill the social function, deliberately or not, of demarcating and
legitimizing social differences.
Instead of dividing different parts of society only
into classes, Bourdieu uses the concept of field: a social space with
its own rules, schemes of domination, legitimate opinions, etc. Among the main
fields in modern societies, Bourdieu cites the arts, education, law, politics
and economy. Most of Bourdieu’s work concerns the role of educational and
cultural factors.
It is important to realize that Astrid, Victoria and
I share the same educational background and have had more or less the same
upbringing with parents who share a similar education. Both my dad and Astrid’s
mum teach at a university, for instance. Therefore, it would be logical to
deduce that we share more or less the same consumer preferences, ones we have
‘learned to want’, as Bourdieu would say. It’s also important to bear in mind that
consumer preferences are not limited to food. They include tastes in art,
literature, music and many more.
If we apply Bourdieu to our life, whichever brand of
tea we prefer might turn out to have more implications than immediately
obvious. Habitus, a term used by Bourdieu; plays an important role in
contributing to social reproduction as it generates and regulates practices
which make up social life. Habitus refers to the lifestyle, values, expectations
and dispositions of particular social groups that are acquired through the
activities and experiences of everyday life. The conditions in which we live
generate tastes that are in accordance with these conditions, according to
Bourdieu.
On to the tea test: whilst
I succumb to the delicate flavours of Twinings English breakfast, Astrid goes
for the admittedly cheaper Westminster tea and Victoria for Lipton Green Tea.
As I spent the first eight years of my life in England, I suppose the Twinings
brand gives me a sense of nostalgia and of still being a part of English
culture. Astrid, though having lived in Utrecht her whole life, shares my love
of England and the Westminster brand
also has something distinctly ‘English’ about it. Victoria’s choice of green
tea could be linked to her concern for good health and healthy food; green tea
is prized for its antioxidant and fat-burning properties. By drinking green
tea, she is part of the ‘Healthy People’ brigade.
I suppose the fact that
we drink tea at all also says something about us, and by drinking tea we are consciously
saying something about ourselves. Although tea used to be a common drink of the
lower classes, heavily consumed in Ireland by the uneducated working classes,
it has become something select, delicate and healthy, consumed by the educated
economically stable people of today. We could be drinking coke and Fanta all
day, but instead we choose tea. And let’s not forget coffee: the lifeblood of
the 21st century, as British feminist Caitlin Moran states in
Moranthology. Café’s specialized in coffees have become increasingly trendy.
They are the new hangout of students and people who like to cultivate a hip
imago. A take-away coffee has become somewhat of a status-symbol, screaming: “I’m
busy”, “I have good taste” and “I do something interesting with my life and
therefore need a caffeine-fix.” It can be safely assumed that most people in
coffee shops are educated, share a common appreciation of good food and art, are
interested in the world around them (why else would they all be reading
newspapers or typing away at something their life demands from them?) and have
well-paid jobs or rich parents (why else would they be willing to fork out four
euro’s for a coffee ‘special’?)
Apart from tea, me and
my unit mates also share a common love of soymilk, ricecakes, cheese, spinach
and pepper. We don’t eat that much meat in general, something that research has
linked to educated women with a higher socioeconomic status. In eating
habits there seems to be a quality-quantity and substance-form antithesis. In
some (lower SES) social groups, the conditions the individuals live in generate
the taste of necessity (the most filling, economic foods), as they don’t aspire
to what is not available to them. For other (higher) social groups, the emphasis
lies on manner of presentation and serving.
Books: the next area of
investigation. On both my and Astrid’s shelf Harry Mulisch and Jane Austen are
to be found. On Victoria’s shelf are sitting Nietzsche and Freud and on mine
there is a book containing Dali’s works and more philosophical/autobiographical/fictional
literature.
When it comes to film,
we can all appreciate both art house and animation-movies for children, as we
can distinguish in them certain ‘fine’ qualities.
The fact that we seem
to share a common appreciation for the same kind of qualities in art can be
directly traced back to how we acquired this taste in the first place,
according to Bourdieu. In his Distinction, he discusses how the
work of art is not ‘love at first sight’, but presupposes an act of cognition,
a decoding operation which implies the implementation of a cognitive
acquirement; a cultural code. In other words, the capacity to appreciate all
the aspects of a work of art is largely dependent on your cultural background
and the social circle in which you were educated and raised.
According to Bourdieu, art and cultural consumption
are predisposed to fulfill a social function of legitimating social
differences. The denial of vulgar
(natural) enjoyment implies an affirmation of the superiority of those who can
enjoy the sublimated and refined. This is in contrast to the submission to
necessity which seems to be characteristic of working-class people who have a
pragmatic approach and go for the functional. In daily life, this is reflected
in an art of living which rejects specifically aesthetic intentions.
A lot of our preferences
and consumption patterns are self-evident to many people. Bourdieu refers to
this experience of the natural and social as appearing obvious as doxa. In Distinction,
Bourdieu states that doxa sets limits on social mobility; certain things are
learned to be regarded as being inappropriate and not belonging to your social
position. Therefore, doxa establishes social limits and increases a sense of
one’s ‘place’ in society to which certain things do and do not correspond. We,
as individuals, internalize these mental structures, which regulate our
consumption.
Drawing upon the mental
structures just mentioned, one could ask: how do we internalize them in the
first place? Part of an answer to this could be the reference to symbolic
violence. Bourdieu argues that symbolic violence is the imposition of
categories of thought and perception upon dominated social agents, who then
take this social order to be just. We eventually experience symbolic power and
culture as legitimate. If this theory is taken to a more personal level, our
parents can be appointed as powerful exercisers of symbolic power, steering us
away from ‘inappropriate’ things. The type of education we have (or haven’t)
received has a similar function with the addition of introducing us to things
that will help us become who we are and establish a particular social position.
This social position is
dependent on many factors and involves an interaction of economical social and
cultural forms of capital. Apart from how much you earn (your economic capital)
forms of prestige, attention or honour (symbolic capital) and cultural
capital (competencies, skills and qualifications) come into play. I don’t earn
much: I am a student and therefore my economic capital is practically non-existent.
I am, however, building on my cultural capital by studying at a renowned
university in Holland, offering a liberal arts and sciences program. My
symbolic or social capital is also partially defined by my studying here; I
will derive a fair amount of prestige if I
complete my studies, opening many doors to me. The fact that I am native in
three languages is also something that receives attention; something that adds
to my ‘value’ so to speak.
In conclusion, the ways we set ourselves apart from
different social groups in society is a complex process that we aren’t even
always aware of, as we have learned to recognize certain preferences and
practices as ‘natural’ and belonging to us or the kind of person we stand for
in society. It is interesting to try to become aware of the hidden meanings
behind something as seemingly innocent as the brand of food we choose to buy.
Next time in the supermarket: take a good look inside somebody’s shopping-cart and
try to deduce as much as possible from it!
Sources
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario