Pierre Bourdieu was a French sociologist who lived from 1930- 2002. He grew up in provincial France and had a modest family background. Some of the themes of his later work and presaged in his early schooling which he described as ridden by tensions within the student body over status and class and marked by teaching that was didactic and harsh (eg Grenfell, 2004). These experiences did not put him off learning and he later went on to attend the elite École Normale Supérieure in Paris in 1951 before doing military service in the French colony of Algeria.

After military service which he worked for a short time in Algeria. His academic work in Algeria was mainly ethnographical and focused on tribal groups on the land and class differentiation in the city (including tensions between incoming French ‘pieds noir’ and the local population and the attempted assimilation of an Algerian middle class). He was also interested in gender issues, particularly within traditional society, and how subordination of women played out differently in different traditions.

A recurring theme of Bourdieu’s work in Algeria was the tension between traditional and modern society. Like classical sociologists such as Durkheim and Tonnies he was interested in what held society together and he contrasted mechanical solidarity in peasant community with looser modern relationships. Again like classical sociologists, he was interested in looking at the material and cultural basis for custom and traditions.

On returning to France his work shifted away from ethnography more into mainstream sociology. He is best known for his much cited ideas of field and habitus.

A field referred to the physical and social space we encounter. Fields may cover professional practices, personal and family networks and political agencies. Fields were shaped by all kinds of prexisting structures limiting what was possible within them (what was possible was described as doxa, what was unthinkable as heterodoxa). This sounds quite deterministic but heterodoxa becomes possible as we interact in many different fields and what is heterodoxa in on field might not be in another. Fields were flexible and ‘generative’.

Fields were also maintained and stretched by our habitus or ‘disposition’, this referred to our tendency to act in certain ways in like situations. He described this approach to exploring structure, disposition and tradition as constructivist structuralism (or structural constructivism) and the appeal in Bourdieu for many people lay in his understanding of the interplay of agency and structure (see for example the early take up of Bourdiean ideas in the UK in Williams, 1995)

The second key framework for which Bourdieu is well known is his differentiation of capital into three categories: economic (tangible money and resource); social (contacts and networks) cultural (education, qualifications and marks of distinction). The ways these forms of capital interact and change and the ways in which they are endorsed / defended / and challenged by others provides the basis for a sociological analysis. For example in his later work on ‘aesthetic’ culture he is interested in ways in which museums and certain kinds of art carries cultural capital which is endorsed by professional middle class to establish a level of power in society. Indeed all aspects of social life provide opportunities for differentiation or distinction.

There are more key terms asspciated with Bourdieu - for example connaissance (this is knowing and being familiar with); reconnaissance (broadly acknowledgement and recognition) and hypercorrection (or over compensating) and misrecognition. There is more to consider in respect to Bourdieu’s view on education and language but the key idea to take away from Bourdieu are that society is differentiated and power is always in dispute. How differentiation plays out is a subtle mix of physical resource, tradition and disposition.

For more:

Grenfell, M. (2004) Pierre Grenfell, London: Continuum provides a readable overview.There are many handy guides to Bourdieu posted on You Tube, and indeed many clips of the man himself. This lecture by Emmet Fox is not very wizzy but it does give a comprehensive overview:

To get a feel for application of Bourdieu’s ideas in research practice, then try

Groeniger, J. et al (2017) Does social distinction contribute to socioeconomic inequalities in diet: the case of ‘superfoods’ consumption, International Journal of Behavioural and Nutritional Activity, 14, 40.

Marom, N. (2014) Relating a city’s history and geography with bourdieu: one hundred years of spatial distinction in Tel Aviv, International Journal of Urban and International Research, 38, 4, 1344–62.

Powell, A. and Sang, K. (2015) Everyday experiences of sexism in male-dominated professions: a bourdieusian perspective, Sociology, 49, 5, 919 – 936.

Williams, S. (1995). Theorising class, health and lifestyles: can Bourdieu help us? Sociology of Health & Illness, 17(5), 577-604.