Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 12:06:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Nacho Cordova <cordova-AT-wam.umd.edu>
Subject: Re: Bourdieu, Subjects, and Althusser


Hi Folks:

	Hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving (if you celebrate it).
Gianpolo, I have been away so have not had time to check my email or
respond, but I like to comments you make and the questions that come up in
my head. Kent thanks for responding also to my post. I still hope others
in the list will pick some of this up but perhaps we need to tease it out
a bit more to unravel other issues I believe are associated.

I ask your patience for now, I will respond when I have more time in a few
days when I get back home. Thanks,

Best Regards,

N. Cordova
cordova-AT-wam.umd.edu

On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, gianpaolo baiocchi wrote:

> 
> Nathan,
> 
> your question really interests me as well.  While Bourdieu does not, as
> kent points out below, rely on categories of the subject (or of identity,
> for instance) explicitly, I have often wondered whether there is a
> compatibility 'in spirit.'  Both Bourdieu and Althusser are concerned with
> reproduction (cultural reproduction in one case, and 'ideological
> reproduction' in the other), and the importance of individuals in that
> reproduction.  For Althusser, ideology works through, and ultimately,
> only through individual subjects.  Bourdieu also places a great deal of
> importance in the ways individuals come to embody and enact certain
> 'ruling ideas.'  Obviously there are differences, but I have often thought
> you could read Bourdieu as an account of the interpellation of the class
> subject.  Do you think it is worth the symbolic violence to Bourdieu to do
> so?
> 
> Gianpaolo Baiocchi
> Department of Sociology
> University of Wisconsin-Madison  
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, 21 Nov 1999, kent strock wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Nathan,
> > As one of the main protagonists in this debate about appropriateness, I 
> > think your post has been one of the most "appropriate" and thought provoking 
> > in a long time and am sorry if you felt trepidation in posting. "I" think 
> > your posting was exactly the type that can further thoughts on Bourdieu and 
> > benefit us all and the type I was trying to formulate theoretically and 
> > textually. Contary to what S Pines says in his attack on my post(not postS 
> > which may lead to some misunderstandings) which focused on thoughts on 
> > reading Bourdieu and practicing Bourdieu.  While I think his response lacked 
> > any subtlety of reading or decorum, I do agree with him on several points 
> > and think we agree more than he thinks. However, I will respond to that 
> > problem  and his attacks later.
> >      You raise questions, having read enough Bourdieu to provoke questions 
> > and thoughts, which I think in agreeing with S. Pines shows that one must 
> > not have read everything or that too much reading can stultify a sciencific 
> > habitus that Bourdieu want to cultivate both at a theoretical level AND a 
> > TEXTUAL level.  In raising these questions you leave traces of thought and 
> > production and practices a form of reading that i think is the product of 
> > scientific habitus that Bourdiue wishes to promote. Your meditations helps 
> > us all do that, particularly in discussing Althusser.
> >    I think you draw intersting and provacative comparisions and distinctions 
> > between the two.  Bourdieu at times or much of the time doesn't always pay 
> > intellectual debts. Which I think does cause some problems in how he is read 
> > and reacted too, but I think it also has a political agenda attached to it.  
> > He wants to and us to resist reducing his thought, our thought, concepts and 
> > texts, to the handed down, naturalized schemes of perception of the dominant 
> > scientific habitus produced by the field. He sees real political stakes 
> > involved in "fighting" spontaneous sociology and a too close of an alliance 
> > with a particular thinker and concepts does reify particular concepts or 
> > types/forms of reading(which again drawing on the Nietzsche metaphor of the 
> > over-used coin which has had the detail and subtlety of the image erased -it 
> > maintains a symoblic value) produced by schemes of perception which serve 
> > the capitalist logic of production of bibliophia which has permeated 
> > American academia.  Put another way he does ask, thru his formulations of 
> > concepts and TEXTUAL practices, for estrangement and an alienation from 
> > those concepts which we use off-handedly.  I see this lack of biblophia or 
> > paying of certain debts to say to Althuser or particularly Merlou-Ponty as a 
> > practice by which he discourages us to invoke their authority, but more 
> > importantly not rely on the stultified concepts that inevitably history has 
> > forced upon them.
> >     What I find most useful and exciting in Bordieu, and secondary to his 
> > constellation of concepts that comprise a "machine", with its attending 
> > concepts of habitus etc.,  for thinking the social is this critique of 
> > spontaneous sociology and the representation of the world it produces.  
> > Perhaps he can be accused of a naive nominalism, but he does state in 
> > Reflexive Sociology that perhaps changing representations of the world can 
> > change the world.  Or maybe as we PRACTICE academic production within this 
> > context, it is our role and only political tool at our disposal.
> >    As for your question about various concepts that can be used such 
> > subject, agent and actor, I would guess that he doesn't use subject as much 
> > as the other terms, if he uses it much at all.  I would say in one of his 
> > basic "projects" is to get away from the opposition between subject/object 
> > and all that goes along with that discourse and his insistance that academic 
> > discourse follows the Fuzzy logic of all other forms of practice and his 
> > movement from agent to actor etc reflects  this and resists the tendencies 
> > of theoretical reason which the academic, tends toward the axiomatic and 
> > reductive.  To make a suggestion some of these basics including the value of 
> > relationality will help in using Bourdieu. To make another suggestion is to 
> > approach the question from phenomenological perspective. how are these 
> > schemes of perceptions used to orient the agent thru practices and objects 
> > in creation of the/a world of or within experience.
> > thanks,
> > kent
> > 
> > >From: "Nathaniel I. Crdova" <cordova-AT-wam.umd.edu>
> > >Reply-To: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> > >To: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> > >Subject: Bourdieu, Subjects, and Althusser
> > >Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 08:32:50 -0500
> > >
> > >Folks:
> > >
> > >     Given the recent discussions in this list about appropriateness of
> > >inquiries I start this post with some trepidation. Consequently, I offer 
> > >the
> > >following caveat:  I am just starting in my understanding of Bourdieu. I
> > >have done some reading of his work (Language and S. P., Logic of Practice,
> > >and other little bits I have found, interview with Eagleton, a piece on
> > >habitus and structure, etc.) but truly have read more about him, than work
> > >directly by him, and what I have read by him is not quite settled yet, 
> > >which
> > >I consider a good thing.  So, my inquiries here are not for an easy out, 
> > >but
> > >rather as a means of extending my understanding through conversation with
> > >others engaged in the same process.
> > >
> > >     I know last year a brief conversation ensued about Bourdieu and
> > >subjects, agents, and actors. I have read the archives, but remain a bit
> > >confused. I am trying to discern how Bourdieu sees this process of the
> > >constitution of subjects (subjectivities). I believe it was in the Logic of
> > >Practice that Bourdieu mentions that individuals need not always act as
> > >subjects, that is from the position of subjects. I know he makes a
> > >distinction between agent and actor, with agent being less "free" to choose
> > >self-reflexively his/her actions. What I am truly interested in is whether
> > >Bourdieu buys the ideological interpellation process posited by Althusser,
> > >and to what extent. While Althusser is extremely deterministic in his
> > >account, I see Bourdieu as wanting to move away from such an account.
> > >
> > >Althusser also does not theorize much or well enough for me, what happens
> > >after an interpellation has failed. For him the process is all or none, and
> > >misses something rich there. Part of my interest is seeing whether Bourdieu
> > >picks up after Althusser here. My understanding is that Bourdieu sees a
> > >field not just as static structure but as a struggle for
> > >positions/positioning. Thus, it seems reasonable to assume that there will
> > >be a process of subjectification, that is of constituting subject positions
> > >for others to adopt. But somewhere else I read that positions within a 
> > >field
> > >(for B.) are determined by the allocation of capital to actors. To what
> > >extent can this allocation process be seen as an interpellative or
> > >constitutive process imbuing the position with certain forms of capital 
> > >that
> > >create dispositions for such "subjects/agents/actors?"  At this point
> > >subjects/agents/actors? are located in the field in particular ways bound 
> > >to
> > >act in accordance with a variety of dispositions but not necessarily
> > >determined by those? Are these subjects/agents/actors also constantly under
> > >interpellation or for B. I gather, positioning practices?
> > >
> > >A next set of questions for me revolve around the notion of whether
> > >positions should be looked at as identities. Or is it "postures" (having
> > >more of an effect on the process of positioning in the field) that are
> > >identities? Has anybody in the list commented on Stuart Hall's view of
> > >identities as the suture point of ideological discourses and Bourdieu's
> > >positions or "postures?" While I am clear on how the ideological discourse
> > >approach theorizes the constant shedding and uptake of identities, I am
> > >uncertain as to how Bourdieu theorizes this except for the possibility of
> > >the production and exchange of forms of capital.
> > >
> > >On pages 216-221 of Robert Paul Resch's "Althusser and the Renewal of
> > >Marxist Social Theory" (Univ. of California Press, 1992)  Resch quotes
> > >Bourdieu by stating that for B. individuals interpellated as subjects are
> > >not so much determined by a set of rules as endowed with a social sense
> > >(here he moves to Bourdieu --> "cultivated dispositions, inscribed in the
> > >body schema and the schemas of thought, which enables each agent to 
> > >engender
> > >all the practices consistent with the logic of challenge and riposte, and
> > >only such practices, by means of countless inventions, which the 
> > >stereotyped
> > >unfolding of ritual would in no way demand" (Bourdieu 1977, 15). This seems
> > >to jive with my understanding of more flexibility for subjects, but I still
> > >have the questions about how these subjects come to be and whither the
> > >distinctions between subject, agent, and actor.
> > >
> > >Well, enough here, I am just going on, but I would appreciate any responses
> > >to help make this stuff a bit clearer and to see if others are seeing it 
> > >the
> > >way I am. Thanks for listening, and have a great day all.
> > >
> > >NC
> > >cordova-AT-wam.umd.edu
> > >
> > >**********************************************************************
> > >Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> > >Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> > >Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> > 
> > ______________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
> > **********************************************************************
> > Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> > Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> > Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> > 
> 
> **********************************************************************
> Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> 

**********************************************************************
Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu