{"id":4706,"date":"2026-05-25T11:50:01","date_gmt":"2026-05-25T18:50:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/?p=4706"},"modified":"2026-05-25T11:50:04","modified_gmt":"2026-05-25T18:50:04","slug":"reckoning-with-pierre-bourdieu-and-cultural-policy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2026\/05\/reckoning-with-pierre-bourdieu-and-cultural-policy\/","title":{"rendered":"Reckoning with Pierre Bourdieu and Cultural Policy"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the weekend John Ganz had an interesting discussion<\/a> of our rich tech-elites and aesthetic taste, of which they have little, and who would hope to destroy what for now remains that is human and beautiful. This leads him to consider Immanuel Kant\u2019s Critique of Judgement<\/em> (1790) and Pierre Bourdieu\u2019s Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste<\/em> (1979), where the latter book\u2019s title is clearly meant to evoke the former. I won\u2019t try to summarize Ganz – I recommend you read him yourself (not just this one piece) – but I will take this opportunity to try to wrestle with my own thoughts on Bourdieu, from the perspective of working for many years in the cultural policy field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let me take the excerpt from Distinction<\/em> that Ganz uses:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

The denial of lower, coarse, vulgar, venal, servile\u2014in a word, natural\u2014enjoyment, which constitutes the sacred sphere of culture, implies an affirmation of the superiority of those who can be satisfied with the sublimated, refined, disinterested, gratuitous, distinguished pleasures forever closed to the profane. That is why art and cultural consumption are predisposed, consciously and deliberately or not, to fulfil a social function of legitimating social differences.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

In Distinction<\/em> Bourdieu makes two claims, one about society and one about aesthetics, and I think it is important to separate the two, since it is possible for a reasonable person to believe that either one of the claims is true but not the other. This is but a blog post, so I know my treatment here is a bit sketchy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bourdieu\u2019s sociological claim is that people can use their cultural taste, whether genuine or simply an affectation, as a signal of how they ought to be classed, and can use this \u201ccultural capital\u201d to their advantage in making social and economic connections. If they acquire this cultural capital from their parents and\u00a0their\u00a0<\/em>social standing, then cultural taste works to preserve the transmission between generations of class status. In the translation of Bourdieu I have he says cultural capital can be \u201cexchanged\u201d for social and economic capital, but I wouldn\u2019t put it that way; it\u2019s not actually exchanged or traded – once you have it you don\u2019t need to part with it – it is simply useful in obtaining other sorts of capital.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is this claim true? Maybe, though I think it might have been much more the case in prior generations (Bourdieu was writing about France in the 1960s). Demonstrating elite taste in art is neither necessary nor sufficient for getting on in our<\/em> world, though I would grant that having a least basic manners, dress sense, and the ability to hold intelligent conversation still matter. But art? Enjoy any movies, music, or reading you like and no one in your economic world is going to care very much.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019m not sure Bourdieu\u2019s sociological claim is falsifiable – what evidence would prove him wrong? If I say that our elites mostly listen to bad music and watch junk movies, could a counter-claim be that \u201cwell, yes, but they are snobby about that too?\u201d I\u2019m really not sure what to do with this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bourdieu\u2019s aesthetic claim is that cultural judgments are nothing more than expressions of personal taste (used for social reasons), and have no truth-standing beyond that. Kant makes the distinction between matters of purely personal preference – \u201cI prefer a pinot noir to a malbec\u201d – where I don\u2019t expect everyone to feel the same, nor feel that everyone should<\/em> prefer pinot noir to malbec, to judgments regarding art, where the claim \u201cChopin\u2019s Nocturnes, especially as recorded by Ivan Moravec, are beautiful\u201d is meant to convey something greater than my personal enjoyment of them, and that other people ought<\/em> to find them beautiful too, and when they do we can enjoy the work communally. But Bourdieu (in common with the logical positivists) holds that it\u2019s all<\/em> personal preference, nothing more.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"\/<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course taste is subjective, that\u2019s why even people very knowledgeable about a sub-genre of art can still disagree about the relative values of different works. But Kant (and Hume before him) think that there are principles we ought to be able to agree on, regarding what works are beautiful, well-crafted, intelligent, respectful of their audience, subtle, expressive, and original, and which are ordinary, slipshod, banal, condescending, obvious, mechanical (these days, literally so), and formulaic. (I\u2019m not saying I have the masterful eyes and ears that enable me to discern all these things, far from it, but I can still recognize the existence of such standards, and to try to better understand them).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I come to cultural policy through economics, and there is something of a rule in the social science (economics or sociology) of the arts that you don\u2019t make aesthetic claims in your research. As a social scientist you might personally<\/em> believe that there are legitimate distinctions we can make about the value of art and artists, but in the paper you are submitting to the International Journal of Cultural Policy<\/em> or the Journal of Cultural Economics<\/em> or Poetics<\/em> you keep it to yourself. This is a good norm: it allows the reader to assess the social science claims on their own terms, without the empirical findings being muddied by the researchers\u2019 views on the subjectivity of cultural taste, and of their own tastes. But that norm doesn\u2019t mean Bourdieu and other skeptics are correct.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As I said above, one can believe one of Bourdieu\u2019s major claims without believing the other. One the one hand, I could say, yes, people sometimes try to acquire, or at least feign, an enjoyment of the high arts and make pronouncements on cultural value to improve their social standing, but that doesn\u2019t mean there is no such thing as legitimate judgment in the arts; my claim that Moravec\u2019s recordings are something beautiful (I might say) comes from experience of listening to piano recordings, of reading others who are more knowledgeable than I am about the genre, of carefully listening for the subtleties in his approach, and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the other hand I could say that the arts and judgments of beauty simply don\u2019t matter any more, if they ever did, in social and economic standing. But while Bourdieu was wrong about that, he is<\/em> right that all this elevated talk we get in art and cultural criticism is literally<\/em> nonsense, and just amounts to someone saying \u201cI like the colour blue, pinot noir, and Chopin\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

What does this mean for cultural policy? In my book, The Moral Foundations of Public Funding for the Arts<\/a><\/em>, I wrote this in the concluding chapter:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

One can insist on a neutral state regarding the good, but it is not how the Arts Council (and all the subsequent arts councils) were founded, and the rationale for public spending on the arts quickly withers without the guiding assumption that there is something intrinsically good in appreciating beauty and the arts (these not being the only intrinsic goods) and that people are better off with encouragement and subsidy that connects them to the arts. Further, the point of arts funding is to promote the intrinsic value of aesthetic appreciation, which means that there must be judgments in the funding body as to what artists and presenters rise to the level of artistic excellence where such appreciation is warranted. It is not simply a matter of \u201cmore art\u201d, but art that enhances people\u2019s well-being beyond the cultural goods that are easily and cheaply obtained in commercial markets.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

If you are going to have some sort of arts council that gives money to artists and arts organizations, they have to make some<\/em> sort of judgment about what is worth funding and what is not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If someone wants to make the claim that all judgments of cultural taste are nothing more than the expression of the likes and dislikes of the speaker, then the rationale for giving any funds to any particular artist or presenter dries up. Why fund this<\/em> instead of that<\/em>? Why publicly fund any art at all? Let citizens figure out themselves how to spend their income. Saying, \u201cwell, we can still have an arts council, we just need to tweak how it makes its grants\u201d does not get you anywhere. Handing out money through a lottery<\/a> doesn\u2019t get around the problem of asking how public arts funding is justified in the first place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you also<\/em> follow Bourdieu that consumption of elite-approved art just serves to reinforce social distinctions, that the only purpose of opera is to let the Sir Humphrey\u2019s of the world feel superior<\/a>, and use the intermission for political networking, then the case for funding the arts gets even worse – high art becomes a public bad<\/em>, and instead of being subsidized ought to be assessed a special tax, like we do for cigarettes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You can still study<\/em> the political economy of the arts through Bourdieu\u2019s lens, how elites have captured the arts and directed public money to uses that preserve their privilege. But your days as a \u201cpublic funding for the arts advocate\u201d are over.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
\"\"\/<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

(from the Los Angeles Times<\/a><\/em>)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

John Ganz concludes his post (rightfully) somberly:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Now, a clever reader might object at this point, \u201cWell, what about a hipster type who doesn\u2019t want people to know about their special tastes? Aren\u2019t they just hoarding social capital?\u201d Yes and no, perhaps. No one gets it like I get it<\/em> could be someone essentially saying, \u201cOther people who engage with this will see it as agreeable at best, or as a piece of cultural capital to show off their taste, but I perceive the beautiful in this thing, and I want to preserve that experience.\u201d So paradoxically, an apparent snob might be invested in the universality and permanence of an aesthetic experience, while a popularizer might be using it a) to make a buck, or b) to pose with it and have a moment of fashionability before they discard the thing in the trash heap along with all the other fads, thereby destroying the sensus communis, <\/em>the universal and timeless moment of beauty. I think people who work in museums and art education probably struggle with this: how to make aesthetic experience accessible enough to the public, but also communicate its importance and rarity. I think the best art criticism also does this: it\u2019s welcoming without dumbing down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To bring this full circle, we can already see how the communication revolution is actually quite corrosive to a sense of community. I think part of what\u2019s so dispiriting about the almost cancerous growth of AI and technology is what it seems to be doing to aesthetics: it\u2019s pulping it, turning it into slop, into another material to keep the engines running. And it\u2019s sad and angering that there are many people, who I think are insensitive to the experience of the beautiful and the sublime, who seem to be celebrating this destruction. There\u2019s a real sense in which it is really the destruction of humanity or a distinctly human way of experiencing the world.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Cross-posted at https:\/\/michaelrushton.substack.com\/<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

On the weekend John Ganz had an interesting discussion of our rich tech-elites and aesthetic taste, of which they have little, and who would hope to destroy what for now remains that is human and beautiful. This leads him to consider Immanuel Kant\u2019s Critique of Judgement (1790) and Pierre Bourdieu\u2019s Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste (1979), where […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":4707,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[26],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-4706","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-issues","8":"entry"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/image-2.png","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p3dIW5-1dU","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":3671,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2024\/12\/on-the-ingratitude-of-artists-receiving-a-guaranteed-income-from-a-benefactor\/","url_meta":{"origin":4706,"position":0},"title":"On the ingratitude of artists receiving a guaranteed income from a benefactor","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"December 11, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"(\u201cVanessa Bell in a Deckchair\u201d by Roger Fry) From Robert Skidelsky,\u00a0John Maynard Keynes 1883-1946, Economist, Philosopher, Statesman: The autumn of 1925 found Keynes, as usual, complaining of overwork (\u2018too much to do, no leisure, no peace, too much to think about\u2026\u2019). A substantial commitment was organising the London Artists\u2019 Association,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/image-4.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/image-4.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/image-4.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/image-4.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/image-4.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/image-4.png?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":2585,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2020\/11\/economic-impact-a-quick-and-dirty-critique\/","url_meta":{"origin":4706,"position":1},"title":"Economic Impact: A Quick and Dirty Critique","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"November 17, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Teaching arts policy this fall, I needed a two-page briefing to warn my students off using economic impact studies as an arts advocacy tool. Here's the result: What is an Economic Impact Study? Definitions are hard to come by. I can tell you how a number is calculated, so let\u2019s\u2026","rel":"","context":"With 3 comments","block_context":{"text":"With 3 comments","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2020\/11\/economic-impact-a-quick-and-dirty-critique\/#comments"},"img":{"alt_text":"big impact","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/cranberries.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/cranberries.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/cranberries.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/cranberries.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/cranberries.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/cranberries.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":2724,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2022\/04\/book-diary-april-22\/","url_meta":{"origin":4706,"position":2},"title":"Book Diary – April 22","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"April 22, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"I am writing a book, on the \"moral foundations of public funding for the arts\". It will eventually appear in the series New Directions in Cultural Policy Research, hopefully some time in 2023. But first I have to write it. This diary will chart my progress through the year, and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"my taxes paid for this?","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/CO.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/CO.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/CO.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":2356,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2018\/08\/back-to-school-a-cultural-planning-syllabus\/","url_meta":{"origin":4706,"position":3},"title":"Back to school – a cultural planning syllabus","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"August 16, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"So after a stretch in university administration, I am back full-time in the classroom this fall. One of my classes is in Cultural Planning and Community Development - i.e. \"place-based\" cultural policy - and though I've taught bits and pieces of the subject here and there, have never had the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"do we have to do *all* the readings?","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/back-to-class.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/back-to-class.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/back-to-class.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/back-to-class.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":965,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2013\/07\/amazon-and-the-independents\/","url_meta":{"origin":4706,"position":4},"title":"Amazon and the independents","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"July 30, 2013","format":false,"excerpt":"Two stories linked by artsjournal.com today about Amazon: gigaom.com (?) on how Amazon is further cutting prices on hardbacks, and the American Booksellers Association upset that President Obama held a major speech on jobs at an Amazon warehouse. Observations: First, while I possess no special insights into what goes on\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"can I help you find something?","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/07\/youve_got_mail_063udz92-300x168.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":1943,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2015\/12\/the-arts-effective-altruism-and-data\/","url_meta":{"origin":4706,"position":5},"title":"The arts, effective altruism, and data","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"December 29, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"The Seattle Times reports\u00a0\"With millennial philanthropy money flowing, arts groups miss out\": [Elizabeth] Van Nostrand explained that Effective Altruism \u201cis extremely quantitative. \u2018How much money does it take them to save a life? Give to the one that saves the most.\u2019 \u201d Though millennials like Van Nostrand and Salvatier are\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"passions > reasons","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/Hume.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4706","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4706"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4706\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4710,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4706\/revisions\/4710"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4707"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4706"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4706"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4706"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}