-
'\\II!
Thesocialworldisaccumulated
history,and
ifitisnottobereducedtoadiscontinuous
seriesofinstantaneous
mechanicalequilibria
betweenagents
who
aretreated
asinter-
changeable
particles,onemustreintroduce
intoitthenotionofcapitalandwith
it,accu-
mulationandallitseffects.Capitalisaccumu-
latedlabor(in
itsmaterialized
form
orits
'incorporated,'embodied
form)which,when
appropriatedonaprivate,i.e.,exclusive,basis
byagentsorgroupsofagents,enablesthem
toappropriatesocialenergyintheform
ofreified
orlivinglabor.1tisavisinsita,aforceinscribed
inobjectiveorsubjectivestructures,butitis
alsoalexinsita,theprincipleunderlyingthe
immanentregularitiesofthesocialworld.Itis
whatmakesthegamesofsociety-not
least,
theeconomicgame-something
otherthan
simplegames
ofchance
offeringatevery
momentthepossibilityofamiracle.~oulette,
whichholdsouttheopportunity
ofwinning
alotofmoney
inashortspaceoftime,and
therefore
ofchanging
one's
social
status
quasi-instantaneously,andinwhichthewin-
ning
oftheprevious
spinofthewheelcanbe
stakedandlostateverynewspin,givesafairly
accurateimageofthisimaginaryuniverse
ofperfect
competition
orperfect
equalityof
opportunity,aworldwithoutinertia,without
accumulation,
withoutheredity
oracquired
properties,
inwhich
everymomentisper-
fectlyindependentoftheprevious
one,every
soldierhasamarshal'sbatoninhisknapsack,
andeveryprizecanbe
attained,instanta-
neously,byeveryone,sothatateachmoment
anyonecanbecomeanything.Capital,which,
inits
objectified
orembodied
forms,takes
timetoaccumulateandwhich,asapotential
2TheFormsofCapital
PierreBourdieu
,..
capacitytoproduceprofits
andtoreproduce
itselqn
identicalorexpanded
form,containsa
tendency
topersist
inits
being,
isaforce
inscribed
intheobjectivity
ofthings
sothat
everything
isnotequally'possible
orimpossi-
ble.1And
thestructure
ofthedistributionof
thedifferenttypesandsubtypesofcapitalata
givenmomentintimerepresents
theimma-
nentstructure
ofthesocialworld,i.e.,theset
ofconstraints,
inscribed
intheveryreality
ofthatworld,whichgovernitsfunctioning
ina
durableway,determiningthechancesofsuc-
cessforpractices.
Itisinfactimpossibletoaccountforthe
structure
andfunctioning
ofthesocialworld
unlessonereintroducescapitalinallitsforms
andnotsolelyintheoneform
recognized
byeconomic
theory.
Economic
theory
has
allowedtobefoisteduponitadefinition
ofthe
economyofpractices
which
isthehistorical
inventionofcapitalism;andbyreducing
the
universeofexchangestomercantile
exchange,
whichisobjectivelyandsubjectivelyoriented
towardthemaximizationofprofit,i.e.,(eco-
nomically)
self-interested,ithasimplicitly
defined
theotherformsof
exchange
asnoneconomic,andthereforedisinterested.In
particular,
itdefines
asdisinterested
those
formsofexchange
whichensurethetransub-
stantiationwhereby
themostmaterialtypesof
capital-those
which
areeconomic
inthe
restrictedsense-can
presentthemselves
intheimmaterialform
ofculturalcapitalor
socialcapitalandviceversa.Interest,
inthe
restrictedsenseitisgivenineconomictheory,
cannot
beproduced
withoutproducingits
negativecounterpart,disinterestedness.
The
classofpracticeswhoseexplicitpurposeisto
From
J.E.Richardsun
(cd.),/!tmt//lllol:ofTheoryofResearchforIheSociolol{VofF-tlt/t'IIl;O
/l«"','('nwunll'rcsN,IIJKh);2415K.TranslnlcdhyRichardNicc.Rcprintl.dhy1"""IIiMMinll.
lIIaximizemonetaryprofitcannotbedefined
(IllRuehwithoutproducingthepurposeless
I'nality
ofculturalorartistic
practices
and
Iheirproducts;
theworldofbourgeoisman,
with
hisdouble-entry
accounting,
cannotbe
Inventedwithoutproducingthepure,perfect
universeoftheartistandtheintellectualand
Ihcgratuitous
activitiesofart-for-art's
sake
ftndpuretheory.Inotherwords,theconstitu-
tionofascienceofmercantile
relationships
which,inasmuchasittakesforgrantedthe
veryfoundations
oftheorderitclaimstoana-
Iyzt..'-privateproperty,profit,
wagelabor,
rlc.-is
notevenascienceofthefieldofeco-
nomicproduction,
haspreventedtheconsti-
lutionofageneralscienceoftheeconomyof
practices,which
would
treat
mercantile
"~changeasaparticularcaseofexchangeinall
hHforms.
Itisremarkablethatthepracticesandassets
Ihussalvagedfromthe'icywaterofegotistical
nlleulation'(andfromscience)arethevirtual
monopolyof
thedominant
class-as
ifl'l'Onomism
hadbeen
abletoreduce
every-
'hingtoeconomicsonlybecausethereduction
IInwhichthatdisciplineisbasedprotectsfrom
.~crilegious
reduction
everything
which
nrcdstobeprotected.Ifeconomicsdealsonly
withpractices
thathavenarrowly
economic
Intcrestastheirprincipleandonlywith
goods
Ihataredirectlyandimmediatelyconvertible
IlItomoney(whichmakesthem
quantifiable),
Ihcntheuniverseofbourgeoisproductionand
"~changebecomesanexceptionandcansee
IIHclfandpresentitselfasarealmofdisinter-
1'8tedness.Aseveryone
knows,priceless
,hingshavetheirprice,andtheextremediffi-
I'ultyofconvertingcertainpracticesandcer-
IIllnobjectsintomoneyisonlyduetothefact
Ihatthisconversionisrefusedinthevery
IlIIentionthatproducesthem,whichisnoth-
IlIgotherthan
thedenial(Verneinung)ofthe
peonomy.Ageneralscienceoftheeconomyof
IlrRctices,capableof
reappropriating
the
totalityof
thepractices
which,although
ubjectivelyeconomic,arenotandcannotbe
Nodallyrecognized
aseconomic,andwhich
ranbeperformed
onlyatthecostofawhole
Inborof
dissimulation'or,moreprecisely,
fllphemization,mustendeavortograspcapital
IlI1dprofitinalltheirformsandtoestablish
the
Inwswhereby
thedifferenttypesofcapital(or
power,which
amountstothesamething)
changeintooneanother.l
"I)epcnding
onthcfieldinwhieh
itrune.
TheFormsofCapital
47
tions,andatthecostofthemoreorlessexpen-
sivetransformations
whicharetheprecondi-
tionforitsefficacyinthefieldinquestion,
capitalcanpresentitselfinthreefundamental
guises:aseconom
iccapital,whichisimmedi-
atelyanddirectlyconvertibleintomoneyand
maybeinstitutionalized
intheform
ofprop-
ertyrights;as
culturalcapital,which
iscon-
vertible,oncertainconditions,intoeconomic
capitalandmay
beinstitutionalized
inthe
form
ofeducationalqualifications;andas
socialcapital,madeup
ofsocialobligations
('connections'),
which
isconvertible,incer-
tain
conditions,
into
economic
capitaland
maybeinstitutionalized
intheformofatitleof
nobility.3
CulturalCapital
Culturalcapitalcanexistinthreeforms:inthe
embodiedstate,i.e.,intheformoflong-lasting
dispositionsofthemindandbody;inthe
objectifiedstate,intheform
ofculturalgoods
(pictures,
books,dictionaries,
instruments,
machines,etc.),whicharethetraceorrealiza-
tionoftheoriesorcritiques
ofthesetheories,
problematics,etc.;andintheinstitutionalized
state,aform
ofobjectificationwhichmustbe
setapartbecause,aswillbeseeninthecaseof
educationalqualifications,itconfersentirely
original
properties
ontheculturalcapital
whichitispresumed
toguarantee.
Thereader
should
notbemisled
bythe
somewhatperemptoryairwhichtheeffortatt
axiomizationmaygivetomyargument.4
The
notionofculturalcapitalinitiallypresented
itselftome,inthecourseofresearch,asathe-
oreticalhypothesiswhichmadeitpossibleto
explaintheunequalscholasticachievementof
childrenoriginatingfromthedifferentsocial
classesbyrelatingacademicsuccess,Le.,the
specificprofits
which
childrenfromthedif-
ferentclassesandclassfractionscanobtainin
theacademicmarket,tothedistribution
ofculturalcapitalbetweentheclassesandclass
fractions.Thisstarting
pointimpliesabreak
with
thepresuppositions
inherent
bothinthe
commonsenseview,whichseesacademicsuc-
cessorfailureasaneffectofnaturalaptitudes,
andinhuman
capitaltheories.
Economists
might
seem
todeservecreditforexplicitly
raising
thequestion
oftherelationship
hl:twcl:ntheratesofprofiton
educational
-
8TheFonnsofCapital
investm
entandoneconomicinvestm
ent(and
itsevolution).Buttheirmeasurementofthe
yield
from
scholastic
investm
ent
takes
accountonlyof
monetaryinvestm
ents
and
profits,or
thosedirectly
convertible
into
money,suchasthecostsofschoolingandthe
cashequivalentoftimedevotedtostudy;they
areunabletoexplainthedifferentproportions
oftheirresourceswhich
different
agentsor
different
socialclassesallocatetoeconomic
investm
entandculturalinvestm
entbecause
they
failtotake
systematic
accountofthe
structure
ofthedifferentialchancesofprofit
whichthevariousmarketsoffertheseagents
orclassesasafunctionofthevolumeandthe
compositionoftheirassets(seeesp.Becker
19Mb).Furthermore,
becausetheyneglectto
relatescholasticinvestm
entstrategiestothe
wholesetofeducationalstrategiesandtothe
system
ofreproduction
strategies,
they
inevitably,byanecessaryparadox,letslipthe
besthidden
andsociallymostdeterminant
educationalinvestm
ent,namely,thedomestic
transmissionofculturalcapital.Theirstudies
oftherelationshipbetweenacademicability
andacademicinvestm
entshow
thattheyare
unawarethatabilityortalentisitselftheprod-
uctofaninvestm
entoftimeandculturalcap-
ital(Becker1964a:63-6).Notsurprisingly,
whenendeavoringtoevaluatetheprofits
ofscholasticinvestm
ent,theycanonlyconsider
theprofitabmty
ofeducationalexpenditure
forsocietyasawhole,the'social
rateof
return,'orthe'socialgainofeducationasmea-
suredbyitseffectsonnationalproductivity'
(Becker19M
b:121,155),Thistypicallyfunc-
tionalistdefinition
ofthefunctions
ofeduca-
tionignoresthecontribution
which
the
educationalsystemmakestothereproduction
ofthesocialstructure
bysanctioning
the
hereditary
transmission
ofculturalcapital.
From
thevery
beginning,
adefinition
ofhuman
capital,despite
itshumanisticconno-
tations,does
notmovebeyond
economism
andignores,
interalia,thefact
that
the
~from
educationalaction
dependson
theculturalcapitalpreviously
investedby
thefamily.Moreover,
theeco-
nomicandsocialyieldoftheeducationalqual-
ificationdep'endsonthesocialcapital,again
inherited,whichcanbeusedtobackitup.
THEEM
BODIEDSTATE
Mostofthepropertiesofculturalcapitalcan
bededucedfromthefactthat,initsfunda-
mentalstate,itislinkedtothebody
andpre-
supposes
embodiment.Theaccumulationof
culturalcapitalintheembodied
state,i.e.,in
theform
ofwhatiscalledculture,cultivation,
Bi/dung,presupposesaprocessofembodi-
ment,
incorporation,
which,insofaras
itimpliesalaborofinculcationandassim
ilation,
costs
time,timewhichmustbeinvestedper-
sonallybytheinvestor.Liketheacquisitionof
amuscularphysique
orasuntan,itcannotbe
doneatsecondhand
(sothatalleffectsofdel-
egationareruledout).
Theworkofacquisitionisworkononeself
(self-improvement),
aneffortthat
presup-
posesapersonal
cost
(onpaie
desapersonne,as
wesayinFrench),aninvestm
ent,aboveallof
time,butalsoofthatsociallyconstituted
form
oflibido,
libidosciendi,with
alltheprivation,
renunciation,
andsacrificethatitmayentail.
Itfollowsthattheleastinexactofallthemea-
surementsofculturalcapitalarethosewhich
take
astheirstandardthelengthofacquisi-
tion-so
long,ofcourse,asthisisnotreduced
tolengthofschoolingandallowanceismade
forearlydomesticeducationbygivingitapos-
itive
value(againintime,ahead
start)
ora
negativevalue(wastedtime,anddoublyso
becausemoretimemustbespentcorrecting
itseffects),accordingtoitsdistancefromthe
demands
ofthescholasticmarke,t.s
This
embodied
capital,external
wealth
convertedintoanintegralpartoftheperson,
intoahabitus,cannotbetransmitted
instanta-
neously
(unlikemoney,property
rights,or
eventitlesofnobility)bygiftorbequest,pur-
chaseorexchange.Itfollowsthattheuseor
exploitationofculturalcapitalpresents,par-
ticularproblemsfortheholdersofeconomic
orpoliticalcapital,whether
they
beprivate
patrons
or,attheotherextreme,
entrepre-
neursemployingexecutivesendowed
with
aspecificculturalcompetence(nottomention
thenewstatepatrons).How
canthiscapital,
socloselylinkedtotheperson,be
bought
withoutbuying
theperson
andsolosingthe
veryeffectoflegitimationwhichpresupposes
thedissimulationofdependence?How
can
thiscapitalbeconcentrated-as
someunder-
takingsdemand-without
concentratingthe
possessorsofthecapital,whichcanhaveall
sortsofunwantedconsequences?
Culturalcapitalcanbeacquired,toavary-
ingextent,dependingontheperiod,thesoci-
ety,andthesocialclass,intheabsenceofany
deliberateinculcation,
andthereforequite
tlllI'OI1Ndously,Italwaysremains
markedby
11.1'llI'liuslconditionsofacquisitionwhich,
Ihl'Olll(hthemoreorlessvisiblemarksthey
11'11VI'(Muchasthepronunciations
characteris-
Ih0111clnssorregion),helptodetermineits
.lllIrhwtivevalue,Itcannot
beaccumulated
IlI'yondtheappropriating
capacitiesofan
IIlIlIvlllul1lagent;itdeclinesanddieswith
its111111'1'1'
(withhisbiologicalcapacity,hismem-
1111',l'I'C.).Becauseitisthuslinkedinnumer-
'11I11wnystothepersoninhisbiological
"lIl(lIlnrityandissubjecttoahereditarytrans-
111INNlonwhichisalwaysheavily
disguised,or
I'ITn
Invisible,itdefiestheold,deep-rooted
,ltllll1wriontheGreek
juristsmadebetween
IlIhlll'lIl;dproperties(ta
patroa)andacquired
1"IIPI.rties(epikteta),i.e.,thosewhichanindi-
Ihlllnlnddstohisheritage.Itthusmanagesto
'1IlI1hil1etheprestigeofinnateproperty
with
Ihll1tul'itsofacquisition.
Becausethesocial
I,ulllhionsofitstransmissionandacquisition
.,II1wredisguisedthan
thoseofeconomic
1111'hnl, itispredisposedtofunctionassym-
1IIIIh'cnpital,i.e.,tobeunrecognized
ascapital
.lIlItI'l'cognizedaslegitimatecompetence,
as.11tIhelI'ity
exertinganeffectof(mis)recogni-
111111,
o.g"inthematrimonialmarketandinall
,I...II1lu'ketsinwhicheconomiccapitalisnot
IlIlIyI'eeognized,whetherinmattersofcul-
11111'withthegreatartcollectionsorgreatcul-
IIlI'nifoundations,
orinsocialwelfare,with
the
It'lIlIomyofgenerosity
andthegift.Further-
111111'11,
thespecifically
symbolic
logicofdis-
IIII"llonadditionally
securesmaterialand
q\llIho!icprofits
forthepossessorsofalarge
IlIhuntlcapital:anygivenculturalcompe-
11'IW
l'(e.g"beingabletoreadinaworldofillit-
1'1'1111111)derivesascarcityvaluefromits
I"IMIIioninthedistributionofculturalcapital
Ill1dyiddsprofitsofdistinctionforitsowner.
III01herwords,theshareinprofits
which
1II'IIreeculturalcapitalsecuresinclass-divided
lllU~lctiesisbased,inthelastanalysis,
onthe
(,wtIhatallagentsdonothavetheeconomic
I1l1dculturalmeansforprolonging
theirchil-
Ih'~I1'seducationbeyondtheminimum
neces-
IIlIrytorthereproduction
ofthelabor-power
1"1U
1Ivalorizedatagivenmoment.6
'(,husthecapital,inthesenseofthemeans
ornppropriatingtheproductofaccumulated
IlIhlll'intheobjectifiedstatewhichisheldbya
~lvel1agent,depends
foritsrealefficacyonthe
rOI'l1!ofthedistributionofthemeansofappro-
printingtheaccumulated
andohjeclivdy
IIvnilnhleI'CSCIIIrees;andtherclaliCII,,;!!ip01
TheFormsofCapital(~
appropriation
between
anagentandthe
resourcesobjectivelyavailable,andhencethe
profitstheyproduce,ismediatedbytherela-
tionshipof(objectiveand/orsubjective)com-
petition
between
himself
and
theother
possessorsofcapitalcompetingforthesame
goods,in
which
scarcity-and
through
itsocialvalue-is
generated.
Thestructure
ofthefield,i.e.,theunequaldistributionofcap-
ital,isthesourceofthespecificeffectsofcap-
ital,i.e.,theappropriationofprofits
andthe
powertoimposethelawsoffunctioning
ofthe
fieldmostfavourabletocapitalanditsrepro-
duction.
Butthemostpowerfulprincipleofthe
symbolic
efficacyofculturalcapitalnodoubt
liesinthelogicofitstransmission.
Ontheone
hand,theprocessofappropriatingobjectified
culturalcapitalandthetimenecessaryforitto
takeplacemainlydepend
ontheculturalcap-
italembodied
inthewholefamily-through
(amongotherthings)thegeneralized
Arrow
effectandallformsofimplicittransmission.'
Ontheotherhand,theinitialaccumulationof
culturalcapital,thepreconditionforthefast,
easyaccumulationofeverykindofusefulcul-
turalcapital,starts
attheoutset,
without
delay,withoutwastedtime,onlyfortheoff-
springoffamiliesendowed
with
strongcul-
turalcapital;inthiscase,theaccumulation
periodcoversthewholeperiodofsocializa-
tion.Itfollowsthatthetransmissionofcul-
turalcapitalisnodoubtthebesthidden
form
ofhereditary
transmissionofcapital,andit
therefore
receives
proportionately
greate)
weightinthesystemofreproduction
strate
gies,asthedirect,visibleformsoftransmis-
siontend
tobemorestronglycensored
and
controlled.
Itcanimmediately
beseen
thatthelink
between
economic
andculturalcapitalis
established
throughthemediationofthetime
neededforacquisition.Differencesinthecul-
turalcapitalpossessedbythefamilyimplydif-
ferencesfirstintheageatwhich
theworkof
transmissionandaccumulationbegins-the
limiting
casebeingfulluseofthetimebiolog-
icallyavailable,with
themaximum
freetime
beingharnessedtomaximum
culturalcapi-
tal-and
theninthecapacity,thusdefined,to
satisfythespecifically
culturaldemands
ofa
prolonged
processofacquisition.
Further-
more,andincorrelationwith
this,thelength
oftimeforwhichagivenindividualcanpro-
101110(hisacquisitionprocessdependson
the
-
(50
:TheFormsofCapital
\.-/' lengthoftimeforwhichhisfamilycanprovide
himwith
thefreetime,i.e.,timefreefrom
economicnecessity;whichistheprecondition
fortheinitialaccumulation(timewhichcanbe
evaluatedasahandicaptobemadeup).
THEOBJECTIFIED
STATE
Culturalcapital,intheobjectifiedstate,hasa
numberofpropertieswhicharedefined
only
intherelationshipwith
culturalcapitalinits
embodied
form,The
culturalcapitalobjecti-
fiedinmaterialobjectsandmedia,such
aswritings,
paintings,
monuments,
instru-
ments,etc.,istransmissibleinitsmateriality.
Acollectionofpaintings,forexample,canbe
transmitted
aswellaseconomiccapital(ifnot
better,becausethecapitaltransferismoredis-
guised).Butwhatistransmissible
islegal
ownershipandnot(ornotnecessarily)what
constitutes
theprecondition
forspecific
appropriation,
namely,thepossessionofthe
means
of'consuming'
apaintingorusinga
machine,which,beingnothingotherthan
embodied
capital,aresubjecttothesamelaws
oftransmission.
8
Thus
culturalgoodscanbeappropriated
both
materially-which
presupposes
eco-
nomic
capital-and
symbolically-which
presupposesculturalcapital.Itfollowsthat
theownerofthemeansofproductionmust
findawayofappropriatingeithertheembod-
iedcapitalwhichisthepreconditionofspe-
cific
appropriation
ortheservices
ofthe
holders
ofthis
capital.
Topossessthe
machines,heonlyneedseconomiccapital;to
appropriate
them
andusethem
inaccordance
with
theirspecificpurpose(defined
bythe
culturalcapital,ofscientificortechnicaltype,
incorporated
inthem),hemusthaveaccessto
embodied
culturalcapital,eitherinperson
orby
proxy.Thisisno
doubtthebasis
ofthe
ambiguousstatusofcadres(executives
and
engineers).Ifitisemphasized
thattheyarenot
thepossessors(inthestrictly
economicsense)
ofthemeansofproductionwhich
they
use,
andthattheyderiveprofitfromtheirowncul-
turalcapitalonlybyselling
theservicesand
productswhich
itmakespossible,then
they
will
beclassifiedamong
thedominated
groups;ifitisemphasized
thattheydraw
their
profitsfromtheuseofaparticularformofcap-
ital,thentheywillbeclassifiedamongthe
dominantgroups.Everythingsuggeststhat
astheculturalcapitalincorporatedinthe
meansofproductionincreases(andwithittheperiodofembodimentneeded
toacquire
the
means
ofappropriating
it),sothecollective
strength
oftheholdersofculturalcapital
wouldtend
toincrease-if
theholdersofthe
dominanttype
ofcapital(economic
capital)
werenotabletosettheholdersofcultural
capitalin
competition
with
oneanother.
(Theyare,moreover,inclined
tocompetition
bythevery
conditionsinwhich
they
are
selectedandtrained,inparticularbythelogic
ofscholasticandrecruitmentcompetitions.)
Culturalcapitalinitsobjectified
statepre-
sentsitselfwith
alltheappearancesofan
autonomous,
coherent
universe
which,
although
theproductofhistoricalaction,has
itsownlaws,transcending
individual
wills,
andwhich,astheexampleoflanguage
well
illustrates,
thereforeremains
irreducible
tothatwhicheachagent,oreventheaggregateof
theagents,
canappropriate
(i.e.,tothecul-
turalcapitalembodied
ineachagentorevenin
theaggregateoftheagents).However,it
shouldnotbeforgottenthatitexistsassym-
bolicallyandmaterially
active,effectivecapi-
talonlyinsofarasitisappropriatedbyagents
andimplemented
andinvestedasaweapon
andastakeinthestruggleswhichgooninthe
fieldsofculturalproduction(theartistic
field,
thescientificfield,etc.)and,beyond
them,in
thefieldofthesocialclasses-struggles
inwhich
theagentswieldstrengths
andobtain
'profitsproportionate
totheirmasteryofthis
objectifiedcapital,andthereforetotheextent
oftheirembodied
capital.'
THEINSTITUTIONAUZED
STATE
Theobjectificationofculturalcapitalinthe
form
ofacademicqualifications
isonewayof
neutralizingsomeofthepropertiesitderives
fromthefactthat,beingembodied,ithasthe
samebiologicallimitsasitsbearer.Thisobjec-
tification
iswhatmakes
the
difference
betweenthecapitaloftheautodidact,which
may
becalledintoquestionatanytime,or
eventheculturalcapitalofthecourtier,which
canyieldonlyill-defined
profits,offluctuat-
ingvalue,
inthemarketof
high-society
exchanges,andtheculturalcapitalacademi-
callysanctionedbylegallyguaranteed
qualifi-
cations,formallyindependentofthepersonof
theirbearer.With
theacademicqualification,
acertificateofculturalcompetencewhich
confersonitsholderaconventional,constant,
legally
guaranteed
valuewith
respectto
culture,socialalchemyproduces
aform
of
1'lIhlll"IIcapitlllwhichhasarclntivl:nulol1omy
vllI'l\viIIitshl:arl:randevenvis-a-visthecul-
111I'111cnpitnlheeffectivelypossessesatagiven
IIHllncntintime,Itinstitutesculturalcapital
hVl'OlIectivemagic,just
as,accordingto
"".rll:nu-Ponty,
thelivinginstitutetheirdead
Ih!'llughtheritualofmourning.
Onehasonly
tllthinkoftheconcours(competitiverecruit-
1l1l'l1ll:xamination)which,outofthecontin-
1111111ofinfinitesim
aldifferences
between
I"II'filrmances,producessharp,absolute,last-
"11differences,suchasthatwhichseparates
Iht,Instsuccessful
candidatefromthefirst
1I1\/llIccessfulone,andinstitutesanessential
.11t1('rencebetweentheofficiallyrecognized,
1IIIIII'IInteedcompetenceandsim
plecultural
1111'11111,
whichisconstantlyrequiredtoprove
11_.11I',Inthiscase,oneseesclearly
theperfor-
IIhlllvl:magicofthepowerofinstituting,
the
I",wl:rtoshow
forth
andsecurebeliefor,ina
WIU'd,toimposerecognition.
lIyconferringinstitutionalrecognition
onlilt'culturalcapitalpossessedby
anygiven
1\1('~nt,theacademicqualificationalsomakesit
I'IIMflibletocomparequalificationholdersand
"Ventoexchange
them
(bysubstitutingone
101'another
insuccession).Furthermore,
itIIInkesitpossibletoestablish
conversionrates
IIlHweenculturalcapitalandeconomiccapital
hyguaranteeing
themonetaryvalueofagiven
IlI'ademiccapital.lOThisproductofthecon-
vcrsionofeconomiccapitalintoculturalcapi-
1nlestablishesthevalue,intermsofcultural
!III /)ital,oftheholderofagivenqualification
I'Cativetootherqualificationholdersand,by
Ihesametoken,themonetaryvalueforwhich
Itcnnbeexchangedonthelabormarket(aca-
demicinvestm
enthasno
meaning
unlessa
minimum
degreeofreversibility
ofthecon-
vc:rsionitimpliesisobjectivelyguaranteed).
lIr.:causethematerialandsymbolic
profits
whichtheacademicqualificationguarantees
.IKOdependonitsscarcity,theinvestm
ents
Itlllde(intimeandeffort)mayturnouttobe
Irssprofitablethanwasanticipated
whenthey
weremade(therehaving
been
ade
]acto
liIlangeintheconversionratebetweenacade-
miccapitalandeconomiccapital),Thestrate-
Itiesforconverting
economic
capitalinto
culturalcapital,which
areamongtheshort-
IeI'm
factorsof
theschooling
explosion
nndtheinflationofqualifications,aregov-
ernedhy
changesinthestructure
ofthe
chancesofprofitofferedhythedifferenttypes
(}fcapital.
ThoForm.ofCapitol51
SocialCapital
Socialcapitalistheaggregateoftheactualor
potentialresourceswhich
arelinkedtopos-
sessionofadurablenetworkofmoreorless
institutionalized
relationships
ofmutual
acquaintance
andrecognition--or
inother
words,tomembershipinagroupll-which
provideseachofitsmemberswiththebacking
ofthecollectivity-owned
capital,a'creden-
tial'whichentitlesthem
tocredit,inthevari-
oussensesoftheword.Theserelationships
mayexistonlyinthepracticalstate,inmater-
ialandlorsymbolic
exchangeswhichhelpto
maintainthem.They
may
also
besocially
institutedandguaranteed
bytheapplication
ofacommon
name(thenameofafamily,a
class,oratribeorofaschool,aparty,etc.)and
byawholesetofinstituting
actsdesigned
simultaneously
toform
andinform
thosewho
undergothem;inthiscase,theyaremoreor
lessreallyenactedandsomaintainedandrein-
forced,inexchanges.Beingbasedonindissol-
ubly
materialandsymbolic
exchanges,
the
establishmentandmaintenance
ofwhichpre-
suppose
reacknowledgment
ofproximity,
theyarealsopartiallyirreducible
toobjective
relations
ofproximity
inphysical(geographi-
cal)spaceoreven
ineconomic
andsocial
space.12
Thevolumeofthesocialcapitalpossessed
byagivenagentthus
dependsonthesizeofthe
networkofconnections
hecaneffectively
mobilizeandonthevolumeofthecapital(eco-
nomic,culturalorsymbolic)possessedinhis
ownrightbyeachofthosetowhomheiscon-
nected.13Thismeansthat,although
itisrela-
tivelyirreducibletotheeconomicandcultural
capitalpossessedbyagivenagent,orevenby
thewholesetofagentstowhomheiscon-
nected,socialcapitalisnevercompletely
independentofitbecausetheexchangesinsti-
tutingmutualacknowledgmentpresuppose
thereacknowledgment
ofaminimum
ofobjectivehomogeneity,andbecauseitexertsa
multipliereffectonthecapitalhepossessesin
hisownright.
Theprofits
which
accrue
frommember-
shipinagrouparethebasis
ofthesolidarity
which
makesthem
possible.14Thisdoesnot
meanthat
they
areconsciously
pursuedas
such,even
inthecaseofgroups
likeselect
clubs,which
aredeliberatelyorganizedin
ordertoconcentrate
socialcapitalandsoto
derivefullbenefit
fromthemultipliereffect
-
~TheFormsofCapital
impliedinconcentration
andtosecurethe
profits
ofmembership-material
profits,
suchasallthetypesofservicesaccruing
from
useful
relationships,andsymbolic
profits,
suchasthosederivedfromassociationwith
arare,prestigious
group.
Theexistenceofanetworkofconnections
isnotanaturalgiven,orevenasocialgiven,
constituted
onceandforallbyaninitialactof
institution,
represented,
inthecaseofthe
familygroup,bythegenealogicaldefinition
ofkinshiprelations,whichisthecharacteristic
ofasocialformation.Itistheproductofanend-
lesseffortatinstitution,
ofwhichinstitution
rites-often
wronglydescribedasritesofpas-
sage-mark
theessentialm
omentsandwhich
isnecessaryinordertoproduceandrepro-
duce
lasting,useful
relationships
that
can
securematerialorsymbolicprofits(seeBour-
dieu
1982).Inotherwords,thenetworkof
relationships
istheproductofinvestm
ent
strategies,
individual
orcollective,
con-
sciouslyorunconsciously
aimedatestablish-
ingorreproducingsocialrelationships
that
aredirectlyusableintheshortorlongterm,
i.e.,attransforming
contingent
relations,
suchasthoseofneighborhood,theworkplace,
orevenkinship,intorelationships
thatareat
oncenecessaryandelective,implying
durable
obligations
subjectivelyfelt(feelingsofgrati-
tude,respect,friendship,etc.)orinstitution-
allyguaranteed
(rights).Thisisdonethrough
thealchemyofconsecration,thesymboliccon-
stitutionproduced
bysocialinstitution(insti-
tutionasarelative-brother,
sister,cousin,
etc.-or
asaknight,anheir,anelder,etc.)and
endlessly
reproduced
inandthrough
the
exchange(ofgifts,words,women,etc.)which
itencouragesandwhichpresupposesandpro-
ducesmutualknowledgeandrecognition.
Exchange
transformsthethings
exchanged
into
signs
ofrecognition
and,
throughthe
mutualrecognition
andtherecognition
ofgroupmembership
which
itimplies,
re-
produces
thegroup.By
thesametoken,it
reaffirmsthelimitsofthegroup,i.e.,thelim-
itsbeyond
whichtheconstitutiveexchange-
trade,commensality,
ormarriage-cannot
takeplace.Eachmemberofthegroupisthus
institutedasacustodian
ofthelimits
ofthe
group:becausethedefinition
ofthecriteria
ofentry
isatstakeineachnewentry,hecanmod-
ifythegroupbymodifyingthelimitsoflegit-
imate
exchange
through
some
form
ofmisalliance.Itisquite
logicalthat,inmost
societies,thepreparationandconclusionof
marriagesshouldbethebusinessofthewhole
group,
andnotoftheagentsdirectly
con-
cerned.Through
theintroduction
ofnew
membersintoafamily,aclan,oraclub,the
wholedefinition
ofthegroup,i.e.,itsfines,its
boundaries,
anditsidentity,
isputatstake,
exposedtoredefinition,alteration,
adulter-
ation.When,asinmodernsocieties,families
losethemonopolyoftheestablishmentof
exchangeswhich
canleadtolasting
relation-
ships,whether
sociallysanctioned(likemar-
riage)ornot,they
may
continue
tocontrol
theseexchanges,whileremaining
withinthe
logicoflaissez-faire,throughalltheinstitu-
tions
which
aredesignedtofavorlegitimate
exchangesandexcludeillegitimateonesby
producingoccasions
(rallies,cruises,hunts,
parties,receptions,etc.),-places(smartneigh-
borhoods,selectschools,clubs,etc.),orprac-
tices
(smartsports,
parlorgames,cultural
ceremonies,etc.)which
bringtogether,ina
seemingly
fortuitous
way,individuals
ashomogeneous
aspossibleinallthepertinent
respectsintermsoftheexistenceandpersis-
tenceofthegroup.
Thereproductionofsocialcapitalpresup-
posesanunceasingeffortofsociability,acon-
tinuous
series
ofexchanges
inwhich
recognition
isendlessly
affirmed
andreaf-
firmed.This
work,which
impliesexpendi-
tureoftimeandenergy
andso,directly
orindirectly,ofeconomiccapital,isnotprof-
itableorevenconceivableunlessoneinvestsin
itaspecificcompetence
(knowledge'
ofgenealogicalrelationships
andofrealconnec-
tions
andskillatusingthem,etc.)and.an
acquireddisposition
toacquire
andmaintain
thiscompetence,
whicharethemselves
inte-
gralparts
ofthiscapital}SThisisoneofthe
factorswhichexplainwhytheprofitabilityof
thislaborofaccumulatingandmaintaining
socialcapitalrisesinproportiontothesizeof
thecapital.Becausethesocialcapitalaccruing
fromarelationshipisthatmuchgreatertothe
extentthatthepersonwhoistheobjectofitis
richlyendowed
with
capital(mainlysocial,
butalsoculturalandeveneconomiccapital),
thepossessorsofaninherited
socialcapital,
symbolized
byagreatname,areabletotrans-
form
allcircumstantialrelationships
intolast-
ingconnections.They
aresought
afterfor
theirsocialcapitaland,becausetheyarewell
known,areworthyofbeingknown('Iknow
himwell');they
donotneed
10'mnkethe
'1I'lIlInllllnnce'ofniltheir'acquaintances';
they
111'1'klIowntomorepeoplethantheyknow,and
11\1'11'workofsociability,whenitisexerted,is
ht~hlyJ)I'oductive.
l~vcl'Ygrouphasitsmoreorlessinstitution-
111111.11
formsofdelegationwhichenableitto
111I1I't'lIlratethetotalityofthesocialcapital,
"hil'histhebasisoftheexistenceofthegroup
IIIIlIl\IiI~oranation,ofcourse,butalsoan
,1~_odRtlonoraparty),inthehandsofasingle
tI11"11Iorasmallgroupofagentsandtoman-
11.111Ihisplenipotentiary,chargedwith
plena
~"'''.''II.'agendietloquendi,16torepresentthe
1410111',
tospeakandactinitsnameandso,with
thiIIldofthiscollectivelyownedcapital,to
t-1'1'I'iHeapowerincommensurate
with
the
'1141'111
'Hpersonalcontribution.
Thus,atthe
11111"elementarydegreeofinstitutionaliza-
111111,
Iheheadofthefamily,thepaterJam
ilias,
IIII,'Idest,mostseniormember,istacitly
rec-
"1I1I1~edastheonlypersonentitledtospeakon
III,hllll'ofthefamily
groupinallofficialcir-
,1lIlIlIlnnces.Butwhereas
inthis
case,diffuse
111\"',lItionrequiresthegreattostepforward
'"111defend
thecollectivehonorwhenthe
11111111I'oftheweakestmembersisthreatened,
till
Institutionalized
delegation,
which
III_III'I~Stheconcentration
ofsocialcapital,
tll_11hnstheeffectoflimiting
theconsequences
IIIIlIdividuallapses
byexplicitlydelimiting
I"~ponsibilitiesandauthorizing
therecog-
1I11I,dspokesmen
toshield
thegroupasa
",hoh'fromdiscreditbyexpelling
orexcom-
11llIl1kntingtheembarrassingindividuals.
IIIheinternalcompetitionforthemonop-
liltol'legitimaterepresentationofthegroupis
1111110Ihreatentheconservationandaccumu-
1111Ionofthecapitalwhichisthebasis
ofthe
r.IIIIIP,themembersofthegroupmustregu-
.111'Iheconditionsofaccesstotheright
to11I'llnreoneselfamemberofthegroupand,
,.hoveItll,to
setoneselfupasarepresentative
hllll,'g:tte,plenipotentiary,spokesman,etc.)
IIIIIll'wholegroup,therebycommittingthe
.'"'1111capitalofthewholegroup.Thetitleof
IIlIhllityistheform
parexcellenceoftheinsti-
IlIl'Ionalizedsocialcapitalwhichguarantees
a1'"1'llcularform
ofsocialrelationshipinalast-
IIIKwny.Oneoftheparadoxesofdelegationis
Ihlllthemandatedagentcanexerton(and,up
11111point,against)thegroupthepowerwhich
Ih(l"roup
enahleshimtoconcentrate.(Thisis
11I,,'hnpsespeciallytrueinthelimiting
casesin
whichthemnndatedagentcreatesthe!(roup
wlllchCl'enteshil11hutwhkh
only
l~xiNIN
TheF
ormaofCapital53 .~.
throughhim.)Themechanismsofdelegation
andrepresentation(inboththetheatricaland
thelegalsenses)which
fallintoplace-that
muchmorestrongly,
nodoubt,whenthe
groupislargeanditsmembersweak-as
one
oftheconditionsfortheconcentration
ofsocialcapital(amongotherreasons,becauseit
enablesnumerous,varied,scatteredagentsto
actasonemanandtoovercomethelimitations
ofspaceandtime)alsocontaintheseedsofan
embezzlementor
misappropriation
ofthe
capitalwhichtheyassemble.
Thisembezzlementislatentinthefactthat
agroupasawholecanberepresented,
inthe
variousmeaningsoftheword,byasubgroup,
clearly
delimitedandperfectlyvisibletoall,
knowntoall,andrecognized
byall,thatofthe
nobiles,the'peoplewhoareknown',thepara-
digm
ofwhomisthenobility,andwho
may
speakonbehalfofthewholegroup,represent
thewhole
group,
andexercise
authority
inthenameofthewholegroup.Thenobleis
thegrouppersonified.Hebearsthenameof
thegrouptowhich
hegiveshisname(the
metonymywhichlinksthenobletohisgroup
isclearlyseenwhenShakespearecallsCleopa-
tra'Egypt'ortheKingofFrance'France,'just
asRacinecallsPyrrhus
'Epirus').Itisbyhim,
hisname,thedifferenceitproclaims,thatthe
membersofhisgroup,theliegemen,andalso
theland
andcastles,areknownandrecog-
nized.Similarly,phenomenasuchasthe'per-
sonalitycult'ortheidentificationofparties,
trade
unions,ormovementswith
theirleader
arelatentintheverylogicofrepresentation.
Everything
combinestocausethesignifierto
taketheplaceofthesignified,thespokesmen
thatofthegroupheissupposed
toexpress,not
leastbecausehisdistinction,his'outstanding-
ness,'hisvisibility
constitute
theessential
part,ifnottheessence,ofthispower,which,
beingentirelysetwithinthelogicofknowl-
edgeandacknowledgment,isfundamentally
asymbolic
power;butalsobecausetherepre-
sentative,thesign,theemblem,maybe,and
create,thewholereality
ofgroups
which
receiveeffectivesocialexistence
onlyinand
throughrepresentation.
17
Conversions
Thedifferenttypesofcapitalcanbederived
fromeconom
iccapital,butonlyatthecostofa
11100'eorlessgreateffortoftransformation,
-
I I
'11
11 11
54TheFormsofCapital
whichisneededtoproducethetypeofpower
effectiveinthefieldinquestion.Forexample,
therearesomegoodsandservicestowhich
economic
capitalgivesimmediate
access,
withoutsecondary
costs;others
canbe
obtained
onlybyvirtueofasocialcapitalof
relationships
(orsocialobligations)which
cannotactinstantaneously,attheappropriate
moment,unlessthey
have
been
established
andmaintainedforalongtime,asiffortheir
ownsake,andthereforeoutsidetheirperiodof
use,i.e.,atthecostofaninvestm
entinsocia-
bilitywhichisnecessarily
long-term
because
thetimelagisoneofthefactorsofthetrans-
mutation
ofapure
andsim
pledebt
into
thatrecognition
ofnonspecific
indebtedness
whichiscalledgratitude.ISIncontrasttothe
cynicalbutalsoeconomicaltransparencyof
economic
exchange,in
which
equivalents
changehandsinthesameinstant,theessential
ambiguity
ofsocialexchange,whichpresup-
posesmisrecognition,
inotherwords,aform
offaith
andofbadfaith
(inthesenseofself-
deception),presupposesamuchmoresubtle
economyoftime.
Soithastobeposited
simultaneously
that
economiccapitalisattherootofalltheother
typesofcapitalandthatthesetransformed,
disguisedformsofeconomic
capital,never
entirelyreducibletothatdefinition,produce
theirmostspecificeffectsonlytotheextent
thattheyconceal(notleastfromtheirposses-
sors)thefactthateconomiccapitalisattheir
root,inotherwords-but
onlyinthelast
analysis-at
therootoftheireffects.Thereal
logicofthefunctioning
ofcapital,theconver-
sionsfromonetypetoanother,andthelawof
conservationwhich
governsthem
cannotbe
understood
unlesstwoopposingbutequally
partialviewsaresuperseded:ontheonehand,
economism
,which,onthegroundsthatevery
typeofcapitalisreducibleinthelastanalysis
toeconomiccapital,ignoreswhatmakesthe
specificefficacyoftheothertypesofcapital,
andontheotherhand,semiologism
(nowa-
daysrepresentedbystructuralism,symbolic
interactionism,orethnomethodology),
which
reducessocialexchangestophenomenaof
communicationandignoresthebrutalfactof
universalreducibilitytoeconomics.19
Inaccordance
withaprinciplewhichisthe
equivalentoftheprincipleoftheconservation
ofenergy,profits
inoneareaarenecessarily
p;lidforbycostsinanother(sothataconcept
1;1".Wl1Shl1ote
hasnomeaning
inageneralsci-
------
enceoftheeconomyofpractices).Theuni-
versalequivalent,themeasure
ofallequiva-
lences,isnothing
otherthanlabor-time(inthe
widestsense);andtheconservationofsocial
energy
throughallitsconversions
isverified
if,ineachcase,onetakesintoaccountboththe
labor-timeaccumulated
intheform
ofcapital
andthelabor-timeneeded
totransform
itfromonetypeintoanother.
Ithasbeenseen,forexample,thatthetrans-
formationofeconomiccapitalintosocialcap-
italpresupposes
aspecificlabor,i.e.,an
apparently
gratuitous
expenditure
oftime,
attention,
care,concern,which,asisseenin
theendeavor
topersonalizeagift,
hasthe
effectoftransfiguringthepurely
monetary
import
oftheexchange
and,
bythesame
token,
thevery
meaning
oftheexchange.
From
anarrowly
economicstandpoint,this
effortisboundtobeseenaspurewastage,but
inthetermsofthelogicofsocialexchanges,it
isasolidinvestm
ent,theprofitsofwhichwill
appear,inthelongrun,inmonetaryorother
form.Similarly,ifthebestmeasureofcultural
capitalisundoubtedly
theamount
oftime
devotedtoacquiring
it,thisisbecausethe
transformationofeconomiccapitalintocul-
turalcapitalpresupposesanexpenditure
oftimethatismadepossibleby
possessionof
economiccapital.Moreprecisely,itisbecause
theculturalcapitalthatiseffectivelytransmit-
tedwithinthefamilyitselfdependsnotonly
onthequantityofculturalcapital,itselfaccu-
mulated
byspending
time,thatthedomestic
grouppossess,butalsoon
theusabletime
(particularly
intheform
ofthemother's
free
time)availabletoit(byvirtueofits
economic
capital,whichen~blesittopurchasethetime
ofothers)toensurethetransmissionofthis
capitalandtodelayentry
intothelabormarkcl
throughprolongedschooling,acreditwhich
paysoff,ifatall,onlyintheverylongterm.2
0
Theconvertibility
ofthedifferenttypesof
capitalisthebasis
ofthestrategiesaimedOIl
ensuringthereproductionofcapital(andthl'
positionoccupiedinsocialspace)bymeans01
theconversions
leastcostlyintermsofCOli
versionworkandofthelossesinherentinthe
conversionitself(inagivenstateofthesoci.,1
powerrelations).Thedifferenttypesofcapi,
talcanbe
distinguished
accordingtotheir
reproducibility
or,moreprecisely,accordil'Mi
tohoweasilytheyaretransmitted,i.e.,wilh
moreorlesslossandwith
moreorlessCOli
cealment;
therate
oflossandthedegree
or
TheForm.orCapital
55
''''''''',',,''''''""dIn"'y
I"/0"'"
""",
1'""-",,,"f"'o'ml"loo-pw-a
-
'.5~
TheFonnsofCapital
mostdecorousnamesthatcanbefound(hon-
oraria,emoluments,
etc.)tomatrimonial
exchanges,theprimeexampleofatransaction
thatcanonlytakeplaceinsofarasitisnotper-
ceivedordefinedassuchbythecontracting
parties.Itisremarkablethattheapparent
extensionsofeconomictheorybeyondthe
limitsconstitutingthedisciplinehaveleft
intacttheasylumofthesacred,apartfroma
fewsacrilegiousincursions.GaryS.Becker,
forexample,whowasoneofthefirsttotake
explicitaccountofthetypesofcapitalthatare
usually
ignored,neverconsidersanything
otherthanmonetarycostsandprofits,forget-
tingthenonmonetaryinvestments(interalia,
theaffectiveones)andthematerialandsym-
bolic
profitsthateducationprovidesina
deferred,indirectway,suchastheaddedvalue
whichthedispositionsproducedorreinforced
byschooling(bodilyorverbalmanners,tastes,
etc.)ortherelationshipsestablishedwith
fellowstudentscanyieldinthematrimonial
market(Becker1964a).
3.Symbolic
capital,thatistosay,capital-in
whateverform-insofarasitisrepresented,
Le.,apprehendedsymbolically,inarelation-
shipofknowledgeor,moreprecisely,ofmis-
recognitionandrecognition,presupposesthe
interventionofthehabitus,asasociallycon-
stitutedcognitivecapacity.
4.Whentalkingaboutconceptsfortheirown
sake,asIdohere,ratherthanusingthem
inresearch,onealwaysrunstheriskofbeingboth
schematicandformal,i.e.,theoreticalinthe
mostusualandmostusuallyapprovedsenseof
theword.
5.Thispropositionimpliesnorecognitionofthe
valueofscholasticverdicts;itmerelyregisters
therelationshipwhichexistsinrealitybetween
acertainculturalcapitalandthelawsofthe
educationalmarket.Dispositionsthatare
givenanegativevalueintheeducational
marketmayreceiveveryhighvalueinother
markets-notleast,ofcourse,intherelation-
shipsinternaltotheclass.
6.Inarelativelyundifferentiatedsociety,in
whichaccesstothemeansofappropriatingthe
culturalheritageisveryequallydistributed,
embodiedculturedoesnotfunctionascultural
capital,Le.,asameansofacquiringexclusive
advantages.
7.WhatIcallthegeneralizedArroweffect,Le.,
thefactthatallculturalgoods-paintings,
monuments,
machines,andanyobjects
shapedbyman,particularlyallthosewhich
belongtothechildhoodenvironment---exert
aneducativeeffectbytheirmereexistence,is
nodoubtoneofthestructuralfactorsbehind
the'schoolingexplosion,'inthesensethata
growthinthequantityofculturalcapitalaccu-
mulatedintheobjectifiedstateincreasesthe
educativeeffectautomatienlly1'~I"'ledhythe
environment.Ifoneaddstothisthefiletthat
embodied
culturalcapitalis
constantly
increasing,itcanbeseenthat,ineachgenera-
tion,theeducationalsystemcantakemorefor
granted.Thefactthatthesameeducational
investm
entisincreasinglyproductiveisoneof
thestructuralfactorsoftheinflationofquali-
fications(togetherwithcyclicalfactorslinked
toeffectsofcapitalconversion).
8.Theculturalobject,asalivingsocialinstitu-
tion,is,sim
ultaneously,asociallyinstituted
materialobjectandaparticularclassofhabi-
tus,towhichitisaddressed.Thematerial
object-forexample,aworkofartinitsmate-
riality-may
beseparatedbyspace(e.g.,a
Dogonstatue)orbytime(e.g.,aSimoneM
ar-
tinipainting)fromthehabitusforwhichitwas
intended.Thisleadstooneofthemostfunda-
mentalbiasesofarthistory.Understanding
theeffect(nottobeconfusedwiththefunc-
tion)whichtheworktendedtoproduce-for
example,theform
ofbeliefittended
toinduce-and
whichisthetruebasisofthe
consciousorunconsciouschoiceofthemeans
used(technique,colors,etc.),andthereforeof
theformitself,ispossibleonlyifoneatleast
raisesthequestionofthehabitusonwhichit
'operated.'
9.Thedialecticalrelationshipbetweenobject-
ifiedculturalcapital-ofwhichtheform
par
excellenceiswriting-and
embodiedcultural
capitalhasgenerallybeenreducedtoanexalted
descriptionofthedegradationofthespiritby
theletter,thelivingbytheinert,creationby
routine,gracebyheaviness.
10.ThisisparticularlytrueinFrance,wherein
manyoccupations(particularlythecivilser-
vice)thereisaverystrictrelationshipbetween
qualification,rank,andremuneration(trans-
lator'snote).
11.Here,too,thenotionofculturalcap~taldidnot
springfrompuretheoreticalwork,stillless
fromananalogicalextensionofeconomiccon-
cepts.Itarosefromtheneedtoidentifythe
principleofsocialeffectswhich,althoughthey
canbeseenclearlyatthelevelofsingular
agents-where
statisticalinquiry
inevitably
operates-cannotbereducedtothesetof
propertiesindividuallypossessedbyagiven
agent.Theseeffects,inwhichspontaneous
sociologyreadilyperceivestheworkof'con-
nections,'areparticularlyvisibleinallcasesin
which
different
individualsobtain
very
unequalprofits
from
virtuallyequivalent
(economicorcultural)capital,dependingon
theextenttowhichtheycanmobilizebyproxy
thecapitalofagroup(afamily,thealumniofan
eliteschool,aselectclub,thearistocracy,etc.)
thatismoreorlessconstitutedassuchand
moreorlessrichincapital.
I)N"I"hhoThlllld
"11lntllln"hlpM11I11)',IIII'IIlIrM~,
rI'I'I.ln'1111de:Ille:lllnl'Yfi,rlllollnHlllllll1111111
11.llllun,""IntheBenrllor
Ihe1111"11110
IIIlttlln.whe:re:nci~hbors,lousIJcs;.!(aword
wlth,h,inuldtexts,ISappliedtothelegitimate
Inhllhltantsofthevillage,therightfulmem-
',1"'.oftheassembly),areexplicitlydesignated,
IIIIIccllrdnncewithfairlycodifiedrules,and
IIrf""signedfunctionswhicharedifferen-
1IIIIcdIIccordingtotheirrank(thereisa'first
nClI"hhor,'a'secondneighbor,'andsoon),
pnrlicularlyforthemajorsocialceremonies
(J\lIIcrnls,marriages,etc.).Buteveninthis
II'He,therelationshipsactuallyusedby
noIIIUIIIISalwayscoincidewiththerelationships
Hm'lnllyinstituted.
ItMIlliners(bearing,pronunciation,etc.)maybe
hll'llIdedinsocialcapitalinsofaras,through
Ihl\modeofacquisitiontheypointto,they
IlIdlcnteinitialmembershipofamoreorless
I"'n.ligiousgroup.
I1Nlllionalliberationmovementsornationalist
hlC'ologiescannotbeaccountedforsolelyby
II'h~renceto
strictly
economicprofits,i.e.,
IIIIItdpationoftheprofits
which
may
be.1t'I'lvedfromredistributionofaproportionof
wl1l1hhtotheadvantageofthenationals
(1IIIIionalization)andtherecoveryofhighly
1IIIIdjobs(seeBreton1964).Tothesespecifi-
(1111)'economicanticipated
profits,which
wouldonlyexplainthenationalismofthepriv-
I1l1l1edclasses,mustbeaddedtheveryrealand
""I'Yimmediateprofitsderivedfrommember-
.hll'(socialcapital)whichareproportionately
11111111
erforthosewhoarelowerdownthesocial
hh'l'lITchy('poorwhites')
or,moreprecisely,
IIIIITethreatened
byeconomic
and
social
drdine.
"I'hereiseveryreason
tosupposethatsocializ-
11""or,moregenerally,relational:dispositions
111'1'veryunequally
distributed
amongthe
Mo!;illlclassesand,withinagivenclass,among
1I'IIctionsofdifferentorigin,
1/11\'fullpowertoactandspeak'(translator).
I1Itgoeswithoutsayingthatsocialcapitalisso
Inlllllygoverned
bythelogicofknowledgeand
IIcknowledgmentthatitalwaysfunctions
asMymboliccapital.
I",I1shouldbemadeclear,todispelalikelymis-
understanding,
thattheinvestm
entinques-
lionhere
isnotnecessarily
conceivedasa
cnlculatedpursuitofgain,butthatithasevery
likelihoodofbeingexperienced
intermsofthe
logicof
emotionalinvestm
ent,
i.e.,as
anInvolvementwhichisbothnecessaryanddis-
Interested.
Thishasnotalwaysbeen
appreci-
IItedbyhistorians,who(evenwhentheyareas
1I(e:rttosymbolic
effectsasE.P.Thompson)
te:ndtoconceive
symbolic
practices-pow-
deredwigsandthewholeparaphernalia
ofofficl.'-as
explicitstrategiesofdomination,
-
IlIll'mh'd
III111'HI'I'I1(11'01\1holow),lIml
1011111'1'
I'TelloIolIl.rOU"or!;hll,'hnhlccondUCln"'1,"lcu
IIledIII.:t8ofclnssnppl1nselllcnl.'Thisnnively
Mnehillvellinnview
lorgelsthntthemo~1sin.
cerely
disinterested
nctsmllY
he:thosc
hesl
corresponding
toobje:ctiveinterest.
Anum.
beroffidds,particularly
those:which
most
tend
todenyinterestandeverysortofcnlculn.
tion,
likethefieldsofculturalproduction,
grantfullrecognition,andwith
ittheconse.
cration
which
guarantees
success,
only
Inthosewho
distinguish
themselves
hyIhc
immediate
conformity
oftheirinvestm
e:nls,11
tokenofsincerityandattachmenttotheessclI
tialprinciples
ofthefield.Itwouldbethol'
oughly
erroneoustodescribethechoicesof
thehabituswhich
lead
anartist,writer,(11'
researcher
towardhisnaturalplace(nsubjecl,
style,manner,etc.)intermsofrationnlstrnl
egyandcynicalcalculation.
This
isdespih'
thefactthat,forexample,
shiftsfrom(1111'
genre,school,orspecialitytonnother,qunsi.
religiousconversions
thatareperlilfll1ed'ill1111
sincerity,'canbeunderstood
nscnpilulCOli
versions,thedirectionandmomenlofwhil'h
(onwhich
theirsuccessoftelldepelldH)111'1'
determined
bya'senseol'inveslmelll'
WIUl'lllM
thelesslikelytobe
seen
nsslIch
IhcIIUII'I!
skillfulitis.InnocenceisIheprlvill'fll'of,hOHI'
who
moveintheirfieldofaclIvilylikl'U"hIII
water.
19.To
understand
theattractiveness01'1hiMpllU'01
antagonistic
positions
which
SCI'VCU"l'III'h
other's
alibi,onewould
need
InullulYZl'Ih"
unconsciousprofits
andtheprolils
of1111I'1111
sciousness
which
they
procurelill'IlIlelll'(
tuals.Whilesomefindineconomlsm
aml'UI1H
ofexempting
themselves
bycxcludllll(Ihr
culturalcapitalandallthespecificprufilM
whichplacethem
onthesideofthedomIIIUIll,
others
canabandonthedetestablelerrninof
theeconomic,where
everything
remillllM
themthattheycanbeevaluated,in
IhcIUHI
analysis,
ineconomic
terms,
forthalof1111'
symbolic.(The
lattermerelyreproduce,
ill11111
realmofthesymbolic,thestrategywhcl'l'Il)'
intellectuals
andartists
endeavor
10ImpoHe.
therecognition
oftheirvalues,i.e.,,hrll
value,by
inverting
thelawofthemarkclit
which
whatonehasor
whatoncI'UI'II
completelydefineswhatoneisworthandwhil.
oneis-as
isshownbythepracticcofhallk
which,with
techniques
such
asthepCI'SOIlIl.
izationofcredit,tendtosubordinatcthc11:1'1I111
ingofloansandthefixingofinterest
rOIlcsIII11
exhaustiveinquiry
intotheborrower'spl'CSI'1
andfutureresources.)
20.Amongtheadvantages
procured
bycapilliIi
allitstypes,themostprecious
istheincr'I'usc
volumeofuseful
timethatismadcpossit.
throughthevariousmethodsofappropl'iali.
-
58TheFonnsofCapital
otherpeople'stime(intheformofservices).It
maytaketheformeitherofincreasedspare
time,securedbyreducingthetimeconsumed
inactivitiesdirectlychanneledtowardpro-
ducingthemeansofreproducingtheexist-
enceofthedomesticgroup,orofmoreintense
useofthetimesoconsumed,byrecourseto
otherpeople'slaborortodevicesandmethods
whichareavailableonlytothosewhohave
spenttimelearninghowtousethemandwhich
(likebettertransportorlivingclosetotheplace
ofwork)makeitpossibletosavetime.(Thisis
incontrasttothecashsavingsofthepoor,
whicharepaidforintime--do-it-yourself,
bargainhunting,etc.)Noneofthisistrueof
mereeconomiccapital;itispossessionof
culturalcapitalthatmakesitpossibletoderive
greaterprofitnotonlyfromlabor-time,by
securingahigheryieldfromthesametime,but
alsofromsparetime,andsotoincreaseboth
economicandculturalcapital.
21.Itgoeswithoutsayingthatthedominantfrac-
tions,whotendtoplaceevergreateremphasis
oneducationalinvestment,withinanoverall
strategyofassetdiversificationandofinvest-
mentsaimedatcombiningsecuritywithhigh
yield,haveallsortsofwaysofevadingscholas-
ticverdicts.Thedirecttransmissionofeco-
nomic
capitalremains
oneofIheprincipal
meansofreproduction,
andtheeffectofsocial
capital('ahelpinghand,''string-pulling,'
the
'oldboynetwork')tendstocorrecttheeffectof
academicsanctions.Educationalqualifications
neverfunctionperfectlyascurrency.They
are
neverentirelyseparablefrom
theirholders:
theirvaluerisesinproportiontothevalueof
theirbearer,especiallyintheleastrigidareasof
thesocialstructure.
References
Becker,G.S.(19Ma),A
TheoreticalandEm
pirical
Analysiswith
SpecialReferenceto
Education
(New
York:NationalBureau
ofEconomic
Research).
-(19M
b),Hum
anCapital(NewYork:Colum-
biaUniv.Press).
Bourdieu,P.(1982),'Lesritesd'institution',Actes
dela
rechercheen
sciences
sociales,43:58-63.
Breton,A.(1962),'The
EconomicsofNational-
ism',JournalofPoliticalEconom
y,72:376-86.
Grassby,R.(1970),'EnglishMerchantCapitalism
intheLateSeventeenthCentury:TheCompo-
sitionofBusinessFortunes',
PastandPresent,
46:87-107.
3ClassandPedagogies:VisibleandInvisible
I.1t..1I1~lIllIillesomeoftheassumptions
and
Ill"11111111111contextofa
particularformof
1"".IIIIIIII'11I11IOtschool
pedagogy,aform
,,1111"h,..IIIleastthe
followingcharacteris-
lit~ \\I"."IhI'controloftheteacheroverthe
,hll.lhiImplicitratherthanexplicit.
\\hl'II,Ideally,theteacherarranges
the
.,'1',I"~whichthechild
isexpected
tore-
.11111111(1'IIlIdexplore.
\\h"I'l'withinthisarranged
context,the
,hlld
IIpparently
haswidepowersover
\Ihiliheselects,overhowhestructures,
.llIdIIvcrthetimescaleofhisactivities.
\\'h.'n'thechild
apparently
regulateshis
IIWIItnovementsandsocialrelationships.
WIWl't'thereisareducedemphasisupon
11111I'IIIlsmissionandacquisitionofspecific
'I~IIIM(HCCNoteI).
ItWhjlll'cthecriteria
forevaluatingthepeda-
IIII~ynremultipleanddiffuseandsonot
II.Nnymeasured.
IlIvl.lblePedagogy
andInfantEducation
Ihll
I'nllcharacterisethispedagogyasan
111\INlhlepedagogy.Intermsoftheconceptsof
tlmllkntion
andframe,
thepedagogy
isIh.,.dthroughweakclassificationandweak
"""II!M
.Visible
pedagogies
are
realised
Ihllllll(h
strong
classification
and
strong
'''IIIW
/!,Thebasic
differencebetweenvisible
tllIlltllvifiiblepedagogics
isinthemannerin
~hll'hcriteria
aretransmitted
andin
the
Ih'III'I'"ofspeciticity
ofthecriteria.Themore
IInpllc-ilthemanneroftransmissionandthe
BasilBernstein
morediffusethecriteria
themoreinvisiblethe
pedagogy;themorespecificthecriteria,the
moreexplicitthemanneroftheirtransmis-
sion,themorevisiblethepedagogy.These
definitionswillbeextended
laterinthepaper.
Ifthepedagogyisinvisible,whataspectsofthe
child
have
high
visibilityfortheteacher?
Isuggesttwoaspects.Thefirstarisesoutofan
inferencetheteachermakesfromthechild's
ongoingbehaviouraboutthedevelopm
ental
stage
ofthechild.This
inferenceisthen
referredtoaconceptofreadiness.Thesecond
aspectofthechild
referstohisexternalbehav-
iourandisconceptualisedbytheteacheras
busyness.Thechild
should
bebusy
doing
things.Theseinner(readiness)
andouter
(busyness)aspectsofthechild
canbetrans-
formed
intooneconceptof,readytodo.'The
teacherinfersfromthe'doing'thestateof
'readiness'ofthechild
asitisrevealed
inhis
presentactivity
andasthisstateadumbrates
future'doing.'
Wecanbrieflynoteinpassingapointwhich
willbedevelopedlater.Inthesamewayasthe
child'sreadingreleases
thechild
from
the
teacherandsocialiseshimintotheprivatised
solitarylearning
ofan
explicitanonymous
past(i.e.thetextbook),sobusychildren(chil-
drendoing)releasethechild
fromtheteacher
butsocialise
him
into
anongoinginter-
actionalpresentinwhichthepastisinvisible
andsoimplicit(i.e.theteachers'pedagogical
theory).Thus
anon-doing
child
intheinvisi-
blepedagogy
istheequivalent
ofanon-
reading
child
inthe
visible
pedagogy.
(However,anon-reading
child
may
beata
greaterdisadvantage
andexperiencegreater
difficulty
thana'non-doing'
child.)
Theconceptbasictotheinvisiblepedagogy
1'1'11111./.Kllrllhl'llllld
A.11.1IIIINcy(CdN
.>,I'IIII'I"'1I1Ii1",,'//1//10'i"IM"m/i""(OxfordU
niversityPress,1978),511-34.
