Bauman and Bourdieu...

On pages 130-131, Bauman writes: "If the privilege of 'never being bored' is the measure of a successful life, of happiness and even of human decency, and if intense consumer activity is the prime, royal road to victory over boredom, then the lid has been taken off human desires; no amount of gratifying acquisitions and enticing sensations is likely ever to bring satisfaction in the way once promised by 'keeping up to standards'. There are now no standards to keep up to -- or rather no standards which, once reached, can authoritatively endorse the right to acceptance and respect, and guarantee their long duration. The finishing line moves on together with the runner, the goals stay forever a step or two ahead. Records keep being broken, and there seems to be no end to what a human being may desire. 'Acceptance' (the absence of which, let's recall, Pierre Bourdieu defined as the worst of all conceivable kinds of deprivation) is ever more difficult to attain and yet more difficult, nay impossible, to be felt as lasting and secure....From everywhere, through all communication channels, the message comes loud and clear: there are no precepts except that of grabbing more, and no rules, except the imperative of 'playing your cards right'. But if winning is the sole object of the game, those who get poor hands deal after deal are tempted to opt for a different game where they can reach for other resources, whatever they can muster."

In light of what is happening in this country at this time, I am at once mesmirized and choked with fear and disappointment. It's like watching a horror movie - I don't want to watch, but I can't look away.

Moving on... while waiting for my copy of Bourdieu to arrive, (and frantically seeking a library copy to tide me over, ) I came upon a book by Grant McCracken entitled Culture and Consumption II: Markets, Meaning, and Brand Management. (2005). I thought that one article on museums and culture, and another on what culture has to do with creating value were thought-provoking as I journey into a topic that's quite new to me. The museum and culture chapter talked about how museums see themselves / react when people leave "unmoved." Or, as McCracken says, "...the fact that visitors do not embrace Culture does not mean that they are without culture."

Chapter 4 - Swartz/Bourdieu... This chapter (more commentary to come, of course,) explores (66) three ways that Bourdieu separates himself from Marxism - [symbolic interests] extending economic interest to noneconomic goods (66); [power as capital] extending the idea of capital to all forms of power, whether they be material, cultural, social, or symbolic (73); [symbolic violence and capital] and emphasizing the role of symbolic forms and processes in the reproduction of social inequality (82).

"Bourdieu challenges both the Marxist theory of superstructrure and idealist views of cultural life by proposing a theory of intellectuals that emphasizes the specific symbolic interests that shape cultural production " (94.)

"Bourdieu's general science of the economy of practices attempts to reapproriate from the idealist/materialist bifurcation of human life the totality of practices as fundamentally interested but misrecognized forms of poweror capital....(his) sociological project is a study of the political economy of the various forms of symbolic capital....he focuses ...on symbolic producers who specialize in creating symbolic power...(and) he also thinks of his sociology as an instrument of

struggle against the various forms of symbolic violence" 94).

(more to follow...)

Anxious to study this...

I am truly anxious to examine the curriculum in this course.  Although my Bauman book hasn't arrived yet, I was able to get my hands on a borrowed copy and get a bit of a start.  My mind is racing through all sorts of ideas about how Bauman's ideas  "fit" education.  When Bauman talks about "community" on page 72, I began to think about how differently the term plays out for an eighteen year-old today from how it did 20 or 30 years ago.  How we use "community" to include and exclude, how much power various artificial communities have (or appear to have) to an eighteen year-old, and how publicly some personal "communities" play out their relationships have changed (redefined) connectedness, need, safety, power, and more. 

Book arrived.  I would like to add some commentary about Bauman while trying to avoid repeating things we have already talked about in a group.

I found the commentary in Chapter 2 which traced the "consumer vocabulary" helpful to assist me in wrapping my mind around some of what Bauman is trying to say.  "In stark distinction from the society of producers/soldiers, the society of consumers focuses its training and coercing pressures...exerted on members from their early childhood...on the management of the spirit....Such a change of focus becomes indispensable if members are to become fit to inhabit, and act in, their new natural habitat, wrapped as it is around the shopping malls where goods are sought, found and obtained, and the streets where the commodities obrained in the shops are put on public display to endow their beaters with commodity value" (54).  Bauman goes on, "Bombarded from all sides by suggestions that they need to equip themselves with one or other shop-supplied product if they want to be able to gain and retain the social obligations and protect their self-esteem...(55).  As he talked about the assault on the lives of children, I tried to reflect on how this concept impacts the educational setting - how consuming changes the performance power of students as they flow from role to role in their lives.  " 'To consume' therefore means to invest on one's own social membership...(56).    

To think about education - comparing how children compete in an educational setting and how they compete as consumers of products - raises many questions in my mind.  I think about this on several levels, and it raises questions on all of them...  a)  to a child, on what level (in what arena) is it most important for him/her to compete successfully,  b)  to a parent, same question...  c)  how do the educational options which have evolved over the past couple of decades reflect the ideas of consumerism/competition?  d) in mainstream (for lack of a better term) education,  what has caused us to abandon (not be able to sustain) some of the good /necessary  ideas, techniques, programs  we've come up with...why can't we sell / retain them?

Talk about consuming (spending) poorly.    

I found it appealing/intriguing to read about Anders' concept of Promethean challenge, pride, shame" (58-59) and how "societies are never ashamed nor can they be shamed,  shame is conceivable only as an individual condition" (59).

In light of what is happening to the economy, the comment on page 80, "That living on credit, in debt and with no savings is a right and proper method or running human affairs at all levels, at the level of individual life politics as much as at the level of state politics, has been, so to speak, 'made official' -- on the authority of the most successful and most mature among present-day sociaties of consumers.  The United States of America, ostensibly the world's most powerful economy, looked up to as a success model to follow by most of the inhabitants of the globe who seek the ultimate example of a gratifying and enjoyable life, is perhaps deeper in debt than any other country in history."   //  How prophetic, and Bauman is just one voice among many.  Now, in the fall of 2008, the economy is revealing itself for what it is - a wreck - and the politicians who have - as the media puts it - "lightly slapped wrists and looked the other way," now have to decide how much reaching out "across the aisle" they can do to actually put "country first."  It is a woeful situation.  When the next President takes office, what will he demand of the citizens?  What are we willing to sacrifice to "catch up" to the image we wish we still had in the global world?  //  In what ways are we willing to create programs which will successfully educate all young people in this country?  In what ways are we willing to successfully support the young people who want to enter the field of education?  I hold ambiguous feelings toward programs like Teach - for - America.  The eye-opening, service-giving aspects of the program are noble.  But, are we attracting people into these programs who will invest a career (or a year) to educating our citizenry?