bourdieu field of cultural production ch1and2
DESCRIPTION
Bourdieu Field of Cultural Production Ch1and2TRANSCRIPT
European Perspectives
A Series in Social Thought and Cultural Criticism
Lawrence D. K¡itzman, Editor
European Perspectives presents outstanding books by leading European thinkers. With
both classic and contemporary works, the series aims to shape the major intellectual
controversies ofour day and to facilitate the tasks ofhistorical understanding.
For a complete list of books in the series, see page 323.
The Field of CulturalProduction
Essays on Art and Litetature
Pierre Bourdieu
Edited and Introduced bY
Randal Jobnson
ì4.Columbia University Press
dominant confersr hand an affirma-their judgement oft it and ludge it. Inegitimate discoursetion of the value of:ntific knowledge ->ecific interests - is
ld of the producers; field to the very
d of the appropriatesocial history of the'tistic field) is one of:ience of art, because
rajor obstacles to theart of the full realityto suppose that thepable of consideringwithout an end', is
:ct of contemplation,:s and museums, andionals appointed tonbolically. Similarly,rtion' devoid of any:ed from a very early¡f 'art for art's sake';imate relation to the'eplicate the originalrr itself, without any
>e understood unless
are always liable torich establishes the
e work that is de-
reed social approval: conception of theI the virtuoso whicH, leads audiences tonemory - which has
avant-garde works,
The Field of Cultural Production 37
The educational system plays a decisive role in the generalized
imposition of the legitimate mode of consumption.-One reason for this is
thát the ideology of're-creation' and 'creative reading'supplies teachers
- lectores assig-ned to commentary on the canonical texts - with a
legitimate subsiitute for the ambition to act as auctores. This is seen
mäst clearly in the case of philosophy, where the emergence of-a body ofprofessional teachers *^r ãcco-panied by- the development of a would-
t. "utono*ous
science of the history of philosophy, and the propensity
ro read works in and for themselves (philosophy teachers thus tend to
identify philosophy with the history of philosophy, i.,.. with a pure
colnmentary on past works, which are thus invested with a role exactly ,,<opposite to thaiof suppliers of problems and instruments of thoughty' '- r
*ni.n they would fulfil^for original thinking)' 'Ø'Given that works of art exist as symbolic objects only if they are
known and recognized, that is, socially instituted as works of art and
received by speciators capable of knowing and recognizing them as
such, the sociólogy of art and literature has to take as its oblect not only
the material proãuction but also the symbolic production of the work'i.e. the prodúction of the value of the work or, which amounts to the
same thing, of belief in the value of the work. It therefore has to consider
as contrib-uting to production not only the direct producers of the workin its materiality lartist, writer, etc.) but also the producers of the
meaning and value of the work - critics, publishers, gallery directors and
the whóle set of agents whose combined efforts produce consumers
capable of knowing and recognizing the work of art as such, inpaìticular teachers (but also families, etc.). So it has to take into account
not only, as the social history of art usually does, the social conditions ofthe production of artists, art critics, deal :rs, patrons, etc., as revealed by
indùes such as social origin, education or qualifications, but also the
social conditions of the próduction of a set of objects socially constituted
as works of art, i.e. thé conditions of production of the field of social
agents (e.g. museums, galleries, a ne
aãd prodùce the value-of works ofunderstanding works of art as a m in
which all the !o*ett of the field, and all its
structure and functioning, are concentrated' (See Figure 1.)
THE FIELD OF CULTURAL PRODUCTION AND THE FIELD OF POWER
In figure 1, the literary and artistic field (3) is contained within the field
of pówer (2), while possessing a relarive autonomy with respect to it,especially as'iegards itr econoÃi. and political principles of hierarchiza-
38 The Field of Cultural Production
Figure 1
tion. It occupies a dominated position (at the ne!ative Pole) in this field,
which is itseif situated at the dominant pole of the field of class relations
The Field of Cultural Production 39
by the fact that the more autonomous it is, i.e. the more completely itfulfils its own logic as a field, the more it tends to suspend or reverse the
dominant principle of hierarchization; but also that, whatever its degree
of independence, it continues to be affected by the laws of the fieldwhich encompasses it, those of economic and political profit. The moreautonomous the field becomes, the more favourable the symbolic powerbalance is to the most âutonomous producers and the more clear-cut is
the division between the field of restricted production, in which the
producers produce for other producers, and the field of large-scale
production lla grande production), which is pymbolica" excluded and
discredited (this symbolically dominant definition is the one that the
historians of art and literature unconsciously adopt when they exclude
from their object of study writers and artists who produced for the
market and have often fallen into oblivion). Because it is a good measure
of the degree of autonomy, and therefore of presumed adherence to the
disinterested values which constitute the specific law of the field, the
degree of public success is no doubt the main differentiating factor. Butlack of success is not in itself a sign and guarantee of election, and poètes
mauditsr like 'successful playwrights', must take account of a secondary
differentiating factor whereby some poètes maudits may also be 'failedwriters' (even if exclusive reference to the first criterion can help them toavoid realizing it), while some box-office successes may be recognized,
at least in some sectors of the field, as genuine art.Thus, at least in the most perfectly autonomous sector of the field of
cultural production, where the only audience aimed at is other pro-
ducers (as with Symbolist poetry), the economy of practices is based, as
institutionalized cultural authority (the absence of any academic train-ing or consecration may be considered a virtue).
One would have to analyse in these terms the relations between writers or
structural homologies between the field of publishers or gallery directors
and the field of the corresponding artists or writers does indeed mean that
40 The Field of Cultural Production
rhe former presenr properties close to those of the latter, and this favours
the relationihip of ìruit and belief which is the basis of an exploitation
ftetuppoting , i,igt degree of misrecognition on each side' Theseirn.r.'hàn,, iã the teãple' make their living by tricking the artist or writer
into taking rhe consequences of is oi her statutory professions of
disinterestedness.
This explains the inabilitY
grasp this anti-economy in e
down economic world. The I
those who enter it have an interest iprophecy, especially the prophecy of
Weber, demonstrates its authenticity
income, a heretical break with the prev
claim to authenticiry by its disintereste
no, ,n..n that thére is not an economic logic to this charismatic
economy based on the social mirac
tion other than the specifically aes
conditions for the indifference to ethe riskiest positions in the intellectt
for the caiacity to remain there over a long period without any
economic compensation.
The struggle for the Dominant Principle of Hierørchization
The literary or arrisric field is at all times the site of a struggle ben¡veen
,ü il principles of hierarchizadon: the heteronomous- pr!1cipf9'
i"uo"r"blå to th^ose who dominate the field economically and politically
mous principle (e.g. 'art for art's
ho are least endowed with sPecific
f indePendence from the economY,
electi,on and success as a sign of
er relations in this struggle depends
i Possessed bY the field, that is, the
extent to which it manages to impose its own norms and sanctions on
ä.-*f,"f. set of proàui.rr, including those who are closest to the
ã-å-i""ni pole of ih. fi.ld of power and therefore most responsive to
.*..i.,"t demands (i'e' the ,,'otih.t..onomous); this degree of autonomy
"".i., ."*iderab" from one period and one netional tradition to
"no,t.., and affects the whole sr;ucrure of the field. Everything seems to
in¿i."..'ttt"t it depends on the value which the specific capita.l of writers
and artists ,.p..r.nt, for the domi rant fractions' on the one hand in the
42 The Field of Cultural Production
scientificiry, ignore the fact, which is more than scientifically attested,
that the definition of the writer (or artist, etc.) is an issue at stake in
and to win assent when he or she consecrates an author or a work - with
a preface, a favourable review, a prize, etc.).'whil.
it is true that every literary field is the site of a struggle over the
definition of the writer (a universal proposition), the fact remains that
scientific analysts, if they are not to make the mistake of universalizing
rhe particutar case, need to know that they will only ever_encounter
histórical definitions of the writer, corresponding to a pârticuler state of
effectively entered the sub-field of drama once it came under attack from
the accredited advocates of bourgeois theatre, who thus helped to
produce the recognition they sought to pre
pbes' came into existence as active elemen
and no longer just that of journalism
philosophers felt called upon to take issue with them.- The boundary of the field is a stake of struggles, and the social
scientist's task is not to draw a dividing line between the agents involved
in it by imposing a so-called operational definition, which is most likelyto be imposed on him by his own preiudices or PresuPPositions, but todescribe a state (long-lasting or temporary) of these struggles and
therefore of the frontier delimiting the territory held by the competing
The Field of Cuhurøl Production 43
agents. One could thus examine the characteristics of this boundary,which may or may not be institutionalized, that is to say, protected byconditions of entry that are tacitly and practically required (such as a
certain cultural capital) or explicitly codified and legally guaranteed (e.g.
all the forms of entrance examination aimed at ensuring a numerus
clausus).It would be found that one of the most significant properties ofthe field of cultural production, explaining its extreme dispersion and
the conflicts between rival principles of legitimacy, is the extremepermeability of its frontiers and, consequently, the extreme diversity ofthe 'posts' it offers, which defy any unilinear hierarchization. It is clear
from comparison that the field of cultural prôduction demands neitheras much inherited economic capital as the economic field nor as much
educational capital as the university sub-field or even sectors of the field
of power such as the top civil service - or even the field of the 'liberalprofessions'.16 However, précisely because it represents one of the
indeterminate sites in the social structure, which offer ill-defined posts,
waiting to be made rather than ready made, and therefore extremely
elastic and undemanding, and career paths which are themselves full ofuncertainty and extremely dispersed (unlike bureaucratic careers, such
as those offered by the university system), it attracts agents who differgreatly in their properties and dispositions but the most favoured ofwhom are sufficiently secure to be able to disdain a university career and
to take on the risks of an occupation which is not a 'job' (since it is
almost always combined with a private income or a 'bread-and-butter'
occupation).
The 'profession' of writer or artist is one of the least professionalized there
is, despite all the efforts of 'writers' associations', 'Pen Clubs', etc. This is
shown clearly by (inter alia) the problems which arise in classifying these
agents, who are able to exercise what they regard as their main occupation
only on condition that they have a secondary occupation which provides
their main income (problems very similar to those encountered in
classifying students).
The most disputed frontier of all is the one which separates the field ofcultural production and the field of power. It may be more or less clearlymarked in different periods, positions occupied in each field may be
more or less totally incompatible, moves from one universe to the othermore or less frequent and the overall distance between the correspond-ing populations more or less g¡eat (e.g. in terms of social origin,educational background, etc.).
272 Not¿s to pp. 17-25
lécriuain,IÌécriuaìn, esp. pp. 7-1 1.Homo Academicus, pp.pp.115-18.
the psychology of the author and (6) ticEffects', .in Philippe Desan, Priscilla dyGriswold, eds, Literature and Social oiChicago Press, 1989), pp.256-66 at de
the psychology of the author and (6) ticEffects', .in Philippe Desan, Priscilla dyGriswold, eds, Literature and Social oiGrrswold, eds, Literature and Social ofChicago Press, 1989), pp.256-66 at de
4243
44
45
46
Cambridge, Mass.:L p.774./zre (London, New
L. A. Montrose, 'The Poetics and Politics of Culrure', in Veeser, The NeutHistoricism, pp. 15-36 ar p. 77.
Limits of Local Knowledge', in Veeser, The Neut Historicism,pp-243J6;also essays by E. Fox-Genovese, R. Terdiman, Frank Lentricchia and JaneMarcus in the same volume.Perhaps the most compellinghas come from feminist crimale-dominated power reladiscussion of the debate overNon-canonical: A Critique of the Current Debate', ELH, 54:3 (Fall 1987),pp. 483-527.In the'Postscript' to Distinction, esp. pp. 494-5.P. Bourdieu and A. Darbel, with Dominique Schnapper, L'amour de I'art,les musées d'art et leur public (Parisz Minuit, 1966), rev. ed. L'amour d'art,les musées d'art européens et leur public (1969). Published in English asTbe Loue of Art: European Art Museums and tbeir Public, trans. CarolineBeanie and Nick Merriman (Cambridge: .Polity; Stanford: Stanford Uni-versity Press, 1990).Tbe Loue of Art, p. 14.Ibid., pp. 62-3.See, for example, P. Bourdieu, 'Cultural Reproduction and Social Repro-duction', in Knou.,ledge, Education and Cuhural Change: Papers in tbeSociology of Education, ed. Richard Brown (London: Tavistock, 7973),pp.7l-ll2 at p.73.Cited in Distinction, p. 490.Distinction, p. 7.
47
48
515253
4950
5455
3
456
Not¿s to PP.2941 273
1 THE FIELD OF CULTURAL PRODUCTION
(1968), pp. 9-40.Ibid., p. 29.
'Le oroblème des étudesThéòrie de Ia littératurer. 'Polysystem Theory',ilustian F ormalism (The
them by the dominant.
910
11t2
13
274 Not¿s to pp. 41-54
74 Thus, writers and artists who are 'second-rank' in terms of the specificcriteria may invoke populism and social art to impose their reign on the'leading intellectuals' who, as has happened in China and elsewhere, willprotest against the disparity berween the revolutionary ideal and thereality, i.e. the reign of functionaries devoted to the Party. See M. Godman,Literary Dissent in Communist China (Cambridge, Mass.: HarvardUniversity Press, 1967).
15 Throughout this passage, 'writer' can be replaced by 'artist', 'philosopher''intellectual', etc. The intensity of the struggle, and the degree to which ittakes visible, and therefore conscious, forms, no doubt vary according to
I to the rari ch genreeriods, i.e. f 'unfairexercise of explains
why the intellectual field, with the permanent threat of casual essayism, isone of the key areas in which to grasp the logic of the struggles whichpervade all fields.)
16 Only just over â third of the writers in the sample studied by Rémy Pontonhad had any higher education, whether or not it led to.a degree. See R.
lonton, 'Le champ littéraire de 1865 à 1905' (Paris: Ecole des HautesEtudes en Sciences Sociales, 1977), p.43. For the comparison between theliterary field and other fields, see C. Charle, 'Situation du champ littéraire',Littérature,44 (1981), pp. 8-20.
17 For an analysis of the play of homologies berween producers, intermedia-ries (newspapers and critics, gallery directors, publishers, etc.) and catego-ries of audience, see P. Bourdieu, 'The Production of Beliefl, ch. 2 in thisvolume.
18 See P. Bourdieu, Distinction: A Social Critique of tbe Judgement of Taste,trans. Richard Nice (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1984),
PP.379 This much in artistic
field en 'pure and ineach e opposi theatreand'middle brow' boulevard theatre).
20 See R. \ù1. Lee, [Jt pictura poesis: The Humanistic Tbeory of Painting (NewYork: W. W. Norton, 1967);F. Bologna, Dalle arte minori all' industtialdesign: storia di un' ìdealogia (Bari: Laterza, 1972).
2l See D. Gamboni, 'Redon écrivain et épistolier', Reuue d'art (1980),pp. 68-71, and 'Remarques sur la critique d'art, I'histoire de I'art et lechamp artistique à propos d'Odilon Redon', Reuue sußse d'art et
Théâtre d'art et de I'Oeuure was constituted 'both on the model of theThéâtre libte and against it (and Naturalism was "flayed on the stage of theThéâtre d'art")'. See B. Dort,'Vers un nouveau théâtre', in Histoirelittéraire de la France, vol. 5 (Paris: Editions Sociales, 1977), pp. 615, 619.
25
26
2728
29
Not¿s to PP. 5Ç-62 275
This ambiguity lies at the heart of studies in an history which claim tocharacteriä thL work - and the world view expressed in ii - in terms of thegroup which commissions and consumes, pays and receives.M. Faure, 'L'époque 1900 et la résurgence de mythe de Cythère', Lemouvetnent social,709 (7979), pp. 15-34.
14): contribu-al dissertation
mplaryexDression of a field-effect converted seen lnthil declaration of Zola's: 'Anyway at they
littéraire (Yanves: Thot, 1982),1891). In other words: I myself
turalism, i.e. of myself, which mY
philosophique', p. 82.cìepancy berween positional age andiditìes, with such futilities, at such a
oung people, all betweenn Niagara Falls! The factempry pretension!' (cited
re, p. 158).mtnulte (Paris: MasPero, 7970),
dentiry andr discontin-
ith the logic
specific to the struggles which char oppositionsfòrmed in the litera-f field cannot p whole socialfield - as was often'done in late ñi i.e. at a timewhen the opposition between the ge eneralized tothe whole liiËrary field. See R. Woh-I, (Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard Universirv Press, 1979).V. Shklovsky, Sur la thèorie de la prose (Lausanne: L'Age d'Homme,79731, p.24.On t'Éá question of returns and Duchamp's approach to it, see 'TheProduction of Belief' (ch. 2 in this volume).The perception called Îor by a work produced in accordance with the logicof tÍre fiåld is a differeritial, distìnctive PercePtion' eftentive- to the
dif ferences, th e devi ation s f ro m y*, ;:i::"i1h" :'"""L f;i!r;," :::ion.ized producer, rew artprodìrced'by a sort of
This was said in so many words by a Symbolist Poet quest¡oned by Huret:in
"tt i"r.t, I consider'th. *o.si Symbolist pôet fai sup-e-rior to-any of
the writers enrolled under the banner of Naturalism' (Hurer, Enquêtesur l'éuolution littéraire, p.329). Another example, less forthright but
3031
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
276 Not¿s to pp. 62-4
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
51
52
50
Notes to pp. 66-7 277
E. de Goncourt and J. de Goncourt, Manette Salomon (Paris: Uniongénérale d'éditions, 1979), p.32.The solidarity which is built up, within anistic groups, between the richestand the poorest is one of the means which enable some impecunious artists
to carry on despite the u t.See M. Rogers,'The Ba : in M.C. Albrecht et al., eds, o York:
without actually forming a group. Gautier received Flaubert, Théodore de
Banville, the Goncourt brothers and Baudelaire at his Thursday dinnerparties. The rapprochement between Flaubert and Baudelaire stemmed
irom the near sìmultaneity of their early works and their trials. The
Goncourts and Flaubert much appreciated each other, and the former met
Bouillet at Flaubert's home. Théodore de Banville and Baudelaire were
long-standing friends. Louis Ménard, a close friend of Baudelaire, Banville
and Leconte de Lisle, became one of the intimates of Renan. Barbey
d'Aurevilly was one of Baudelaire's most ardent advocates. Whereas they
were close acquaintances, these writers were little seen in high society since
their high degree of professionalization limited their social intercourse (see
Cassagne, La Théorie de I'art pour I'art, pp. 130-4).'The Decadents did not mean to sueep aulay the past. They urged
'symbolistes et Décadentes, deux groupes littéraires parallèles', mimeo
(1982), p. 12 (emphasis added).
Ponton,-'Le champ littéraire de 1865 à 1905', pp.299ff; Jurt, 'Symbolistes
535455
5657
5859
6762636465
278 Not¿s to pp. 68-71
the grand, the tormented, the poignant, the pathetic . . . Those who spendthemselves in passion, in nervous agitation, will never write a booi of
Cited by Cassagne, ur I'art, p. 218.Ponton, 'Le ch-amp 05', pp.-69-70.An example of this Franèè, whose father's unusualposition as a Paristookseller enabled him to acquire a social capital and afamiliariry with the world of letters which compensated for his loweconomic and cultural capital.Ponton, 1865 à 1905', p. 57.P. Verno e',in Histoire littéraire de la France (Paris:ÉdidonsCited in
.98. Ton of oneterprise,have to
Schapiro, 'Courbet et l'imagerie populaire', p- 299.Ibid., p. 315ff.Ponton, 'Le champ littéraire de 1865 à 1905', p. 73.
who write for both boulevard theatre and vaudeville have characteristicsintermediate berween those of specialists in each genre.
60
66
Not¿s to pp.72-7 279
S. Mallarmé, 'La musique et les lettres', in (Paris:
Gallimard (Pléiade), 1945), p.647. On this ing putforward by Heinrich Merkl, see Jurt, 'Symboli
1
2
2 THE PRODUCTION OF BELIEF
traditional texts).i. ir ". "i.i¿.r,t,h"t
the art trader's guarantor role is particuìarly visible rn
;È; ä¡ã ;a painting, where the pu-rchaser's (the collector's) 'economic'
2
The Production of Belief:Contribution to an Economy of
Symbolic Goods
Once again, I don't like this word'entrepreneur',
Sven Nielsen, Chairman andManaging Director of Presses de
la Cité
In another area, I had the honour, if
H* :, x i'"ïiJ:i:',f:' i'.ï:å:'" åT u o r u -.,of Carlos Baker's translation ofHemingway.
Robert Laffont
The art business, a trade in things that have no price, belongs to the class
of practices in which the logic of the pre-capitalist economy lives on (as
it does, in another sphere, in the economy of exchanges between the
on disavowal of the 'economic' present to all forms of economism liesprecisely in the fac Practice -ãnd not merely in irtue of a
constant, collective and of thereal nature of the I
+ Translator's note: The tetms negation, denial and disavoutal are used to render the French
dénégation, which itself is used in a sense akin to that of Freud's Verneinøzg. See J. Laplancheand J. B. Pontalis, The Language of Psycbo-ana!srs (London: Hogarth Press, 1973), entry'Negation', pp.261-3.
Tbe Production of Belief 75
THE DISAVOWAL OF THE'ECONOMY'
In this economic universe, whose very functioning is defined by a
'refusal' of the 'commercial' which is in fact a collective disavowal ofcommercial interests and profits, the most 'anti-economic' and mostvisibly 'disinterested' behaviours, which in an 'economic' universewould be those most ruthlessly condemned, contain a form of economicrationality (even in the restricted sense) and in no way exclude theirauthors from even the 'economic'profits awaiting those who conform tothe law of this universe. In other words, alongside the pursuit of'economic'profit, whi ods business aò a businesslike any other, and no conomically'speaking (as
the best-informed, i.e. art dealers point out) and
9'-,tciis'^i
manager, the only legitimate accumulation consists in making a name
for oneself, a known, recognized neme' a capital of consecrationimplying a power to consecrate objects (with a tradema¡k or signature)or pérsõns (through publication, exhibition, etc') and therefore to give
value, the profits from this operation.The ion) is neither a real negation of the 'econo-
mic' in haunts the most'disinterested'practices, nor
76 The Field of Cultural Production
by a practical mastery of the laws of the functioning of the field in whichcultural goods are produced and circulate, i.e. by an entirely improb-able, and in any case rarely achieved, combination of the realismimplying minor concessions to 'economic' necessities that are disavowedbui notienied and the conviction which excludes them.2 The fact thatthe disavowal of the 'economy' is neither a simple ideological mask nora complete repudiation of economic interest explains why, on the onehand, new producers whose only capital is their conviction can establishthemselves in the market by appealing to the values whereby thedominant figures accumulated their symbolic capital, and why, on theother hand, only those who can come to terms with the 'economic'constraints inscribed in this bad-faith economy can reaP the full'economic' profits of their symbolic capital.
WHO CREATES THE'CREATOR'?
The 'charismatic' ideology which is the ultimate basis of belief in thevalue of a work of art and which is therefore the basis of functioning ofthe field of production and circulation of cultural commodities, is
undoubtedly the main obstacle to a rigorous science of the production of
The Production of Belief 77
personally is, the more strongly he consecrates the work.3 The art traderis not just the agent who gives the work a commercial value by bringingit into a market; he is not just the representative, the impresario, who'defends the authors he loves'. He is the person who can proclaim thevalue of the author he defends (cf. the fiction of the catalogue or blurb)and above all 'invests his prestige' in the author's cause, acting as a'symbolic banker' who offers as security all the symbolic capital he hasaccumulated (which he is liable to forfeit if he backs a 'loser').4 Thisinvestment, of which the accompanying 'economic' investments arethemselves only a guarantee, is what brings the producer into the cycleof consecration. Entering the field of literature is not so much like goinginto religion as getting into a select club: the publisher is one of thoseprestigious sponsors (together with preface-writers and critics) whoeffusively recommend their candidate. Even clearer is the role of the artdealer, who literally has to 'introduce' the artist and his work into evermore select company (group exhibitions, one-man shows, prestigiouscollections, museums) and ever more sought-after places. But the law ofthis universe, whereby the less visible the investment, the more product-ive it is symbolically, means that promotion exercises, which in thebusiness world take the overt form of publicity, must here be euphe-mized. The art trader cannot serve his 'discovery'unless he applies all hisconviction, which rules out'sordidly commercial' manoeuvres, manipu-lation and the 'hard sell', in favour of the softer, more discreet forms of'public relations' (which are themselves a highly euphemized form ofpublicity)- receptions, society gatherings, and judiciously placed confi-dences.5
THE CIRCLE OF BELIEF
But in moving back from the'creator' to the'discoverer' or'creator ofthe creator', we have only displaced the initial question and we still haveto determine the source of the art-businessman's acknowledged powerto consecrate. The charismatic ideology has a ready-made answer: the'great' dealers, the 'great' publishers, are inspired talent-spotters who,guided by their disinterested, unreasoning passion for a work of art,have 'made' the painter or writer, or have helped him make himself, byencouraging him in difficult moments with the faith they had in him,guiding him with their advice and freeing him from materìal worries.6To ayoid an endless regress in the chain of causes, perhaps it is necessaryto ceese thinking in the logic, which a whole tradition encourages, of the'first beginning', which inevitably leads to faith in the'creator'. It is notsufficient to indicate, as people often do, that the 'discoverer' never
78 The Field of Cultural Production
Y discovered' at least bY a. few -
field of production as a whole, i'e' wit;;hir':i;bi.; -
;" puulitttlt;,'said one of them, 'is his catalogue' - and
with those who do ""t "å¿ would or would not like to; in the
Place theirth a set of
asents who constitute 'connection nate to the
.f.d;#;,h;';l;' command' critics also
collaborate with the art trader in tthe reputation and, at least inworks. 'Discovering' the 'new t
eazine. academY, coterie, dealer orãf *h", are sometimes called 'Pe
lenobithevalgenerated.T
FAITH AND BAD FAITH
The source of the efficacy of all acts of consecration is the field itself, the
locus of the accumulateã social energy which the agents and institutions
The Production of Belief 79
es in which theY try to aPProPnateprevtousvalue of
erated in
o establish the value of this or that
mercenary compromises or calculat
that disavowal of the 'economy' is p
of the makers of works and the
interests or to conceal their strateg
ive screen between the artist and
them to the market and so Provunmaskings of the trutinterests, theY onlY have
'disinterestedness'. Onemiddle-men that, with a few illus
to recall the ideal, Painters an
calculating, obsessed with moneY
As for the artists, who cannot even
without confessing their self-interpr".eg :'ån:ïr:T,Jï;Ï:mically 'Ï:'-:":;::"^:ments. aft are adversaries in
äìiË"., who each abide by th' which demands the
;;;;;*ü of ¿ir..i-,,'"iier,".ío"s of personal interest, at least in its
;"Aiy ieconomic' iotÀ, ""¿
which hai every aPPearance of transcen-
80 The Field of Cultural Production
dence although it is only the product of the cross-censorshíp weighingmore or less equally on each of those who impose it on all the others.
A similar mechanism operates when an unknown artist, withoutcredit or credibility, is turned into a known and recognized artist. Thestruggle to impose the dominant definition of art, i.e. to impose a style,embodied in a particular producer or group of producers, gives the workof art a value by putting it at stake, inside and outside the field ofproduction. Everyone can challenge his or her adversaries' claim todistinguish art from non-art without ever calling inro question thisfundamental claim. Precisely because of the conviction that good andbad painting exist, competitors can exclude each oth.er from the field ofpainting, thereby giving it the stakes and the motor without which itcould not function. And nothing better conceals the objective collusionwhich is the matrix of specifically artistic value than the conflictsthrough which it operates.
RITUAL SACRILEGE
This argument might be encountered by pointing to the attempts madewith increasing frequency in the 1960s, especially in the world ofpainting, to break the circle of belief. But it is all too obvious that theseritual acts of sacrilege, profanations which only ever scandalize thebelievers, are bound to become sacred in their turn and provide the basisfor a new belief. One thinks of Manzoni, with his tins of 'artist's shit',his magic pedestals which could turn any object placed on them into a
work of art, or his signatures on living people which made them obietsd'art; or Ben, with his many 'gestures' of provocation or derision such asexhibiting a piece of cardboard labelled 'unique copy' or a canvasbearing the words 'canvas 45 cm long'. Paradoxically, nothing moreclearly reveals the logic of the functioning of the artistic field than thefate of these apparently radical attempts at subversion. Because theyexpose the art of artistic creation to a mockery already annexed to theartistic tradition by Duchamp, they are immediately converted intoartistic'acts', recorded as such and thus consecrated and celebrated bythe makers of taste. Art cannot reveal the truth about art withoutsnatching it away again by turning the revelation into an artistic event.And it is significant, a contrario, that all attempts to call into questionthe field of artistic production, the logic of its functioning and thefunctions it performs, through the highly sublimated and ambiguousmeans of discourse or artistic 'acts' (e.g. Maciunas or Flynt) are no lessnecessarily bound to be condemned even by the most heterodoxguardians of artistic orthodoxy, because in refusing to play the game, to
The Production of Belief 81
challenge in accordance with the rules, i.e. artistically, their authors callinto question not a way of playing the game, but the game itself and thebelief which supporrs it. This is the oñe unforgivabie transgression.
COLLECTIVE MISRECOGNITION
The quasi-magical potency of the signature is nothing other than theto mobilize the symbolic energyle field, i.e. the faith in the game
the game itself. As Marcel Mauss
specific properries of the magician, ;:ï:'1ïi¿' #;;:;:ffi ji:and representations, but rather to discover the bases õf the ãollectivebelief or_, more precisely, the collectiue misrecognitron, collectivelyproduced and maintained, which is the source of the power the magicianappropriates. If it is 'impossible to understand magiè without the magicgroup', this is because the magician's power, of which the miracle of thesignature or personal trademark is merely an outstanding example, is auali d imp o stur e, a legitimate a buse of power, collectively-misrecognizedand so recognized. The artist who puts her name on a ready-madeãrticleand produces an object whose market price is incommeniurate with itscost of production is collectively mandated to perform a magic actwhich would be nothing without the whole tradition leading up to hergesture, and without the universe of celebrants and believers whò give itmeaning and value in terms of that tradition. The source of 'creãdve,power, the ineffable mctna or charisma celebrated by the tradition, neednot be sought anywhere other than in the field, i.e. in the system ofobjective relations which consrirure it, in the srruggles of which it is thesite and in the specific form of energy or capital which is generated there.
So it is both- true and untrue ro say that the commeicial value of awork of art is incommensurate with its cost of production. It is true ifone only takes account of the manufacture of the material object; it isnot true if one is referring to the production of the work of arr as asacred, consecrated object, the product of a vast operation of. socialalchemy. jointly conducted, with equal conviction ãnd very unequalprofits, by all the egenrs involved in the field of production, i.e. obscureartists and writers as well as'consecrated' masters, critics and publishersas well as authors, enthusiastic clients as well as convinced vendors.Theserare contributions, including the most obscure, which the partialmaterialism of economism ignores, and which only have to be takên intoaccount in order to see that the production of the work of art, i.e. of theartist, is no exception to the law of rhe conservation of social energy.s
82 The Field of Cultural Productron
THE ESTABLISHMENT AND THE CHALLENGERS
Because the fields of cultural production are universes of belief which
can only function in so far as theyproducts and the need for those Pihe denial of the ordinary Practicestake place within them are ultimarelation to the'economy'. The'zealots" whose only capitalìs their belief
in the principles of the bad-faith economy and who preach a return to
;-h.;;,í;' ihe absolute and intransigent renunciation of the early days,
cånde-n in the same breath the mérchants in the temple who bring
'commercial'pharisees whconsecrattonthe field. Thus the fundamental law
est in the disavowal of self-interest'mercial' and the 'non-commercial'
ive PrinciPle of most of the
*ïïì:i:li'::*x';l:'#:befween ,bourgeois' art and 'intellectual' ert, between 'traditio¡al' and
W"ni-g"rd.'Jrt, or, in Parisian terms, berween the'right bank' and the,i.f, ú"it'., while ihis opposition can change its su-bstantive content
ities in different fields, it remains
('commercial') production, i'e. be
itt. fi.td of producers or even the
based on denial of the 'economY' a
ignores or challenges the expectatio-rä., no other dJmand thaå the one it itself produces, but in the long
;;;*;;t: " production which secures sutcess and the corresponding
Orãii* Uy ad!sdng to "
p..-.*irting demand. The characteristics of the
io--"réi"t énr.rpiir. "nd
,h. charãcteristics of the cultural enterprise,
understood ", " -or. or less disavowed relation to the commercial
enterprise, are inseparable. The dimic'ionsiderations and to the aofficially recognized and identififield. Thus the oPPosition betw
Tbe Production of Belief 83
corresponds to the opposition berween ordinary entrepreneurs seekingimmediate economic profit and cultural entrepreneurs struggling toaccumulate specifically cultural capital, albeit at the cost of temporarilyrenouncing economic profit. As for the opposition which is made withinthe latter group between consecrated art and avant-garde arr, orbetween orthodoxy and heresy, it distinguishes bet'ween, on the onehand, those who dominate the field of production and the marketthrough the economic and symbolic capital they have been able toaccumulate in earlier struggles by virtue of a particularly successfulcombination of the contradictory capacities specifically demanded bythe law of the field, and, on the other hand, the newcomers, who haveand want no other audience than their competitors - establishedproducers whom their practice tends to discredit by imposing newproducts - or other newcomers with whom they vie in novelty.
Their position in the structure of simultaneously economic andsymbolic power relations which defines the field of production, i.e. inthe structure of the distribution of the specific capital (and of thecorresponding economic capital), governs the characteristics and strate-gies of the agents or institutions, through the intermediary of â practicalor conscious evaluation of the objective chances of profit. Those indominant positions operate essentially defensive strategies, designed toperpetuate the status quo by maintaining themselves and the principleson which their dominance is based. The world is as it should be, sincethey are on top and clearly deserve to be there; excellence thereforeconsists in being what one is, with reserve and understatement, urbanelyhinting at the immensity of one's means by the economy of one's means,refusing the assertive, attention-seeking strategies which expose thepretensions of the young pretenders. The dominant ar" drawn towardssilence, discretion and secrecy, and their orthodox discourse, which isonly ever wrung from them by the need to rectify the heresies of thenewcomers, is never more than the explicit affirmation of self-evidentprinciples which go without saying and would go better unsaid. 'Socialproblems' are social relations: they emerge from confrontation betweentwo groups, two systems of antagonistic interests and theses. In therelationship which constitutes them, the choice of the moment and sites
of battle is left to the initiative of the challengers, who break the silenceof the doxa and call into question the unproblematic, taken-for-grantedworld of the dominant groups. The dominated producers, for their part,in order to gain a foothold in the market, have to resort to subversivestraqegies which will eventually bring them the disavowed profits only ifthey succeed in overturning the hierarchy of the field without disturbingthe principles on which the field is based. Thus their revolutions are onlyever partial ones, which displace the censorships and transgress the
84 The Field of Cultural Production
conventions but do so in the name of the same underlying principles.This is why the strategy par excellenc¿ is the 'return to the sources'which is the basis of all heretical subversion and all aesthetic revolu-tions, because it enables the insurgents to turn against the establishmentthe arms which they use to justify their domination, in particularasceticism, daring, ardour, rigour and disinterestedness. The strategy ofbeating the dominant groups at their own game by demanding that theyrespect the fundamental law of the field, a denial of the 'economy', canonly work if it manifests exemplary sincerity in its own denial.
Because they are based on a relation to culture which is necessarilyalso a relation to the 'economy' and the market, institutions producingand marketing cultural goods, whether in painting, literature, theatre orcinema, tend to be organized into structurally and functionally homolo-gous systems which also stand in a relation of structural homology withthe field of the fractions of the dominant class (from which the greaterpart of their clientele is drawn). This homology is most evident in thecase of the theatre. The opposition berween 'bourgeois theatre' and'avant-garde theatre', the equivalent of which can be found in paintingand in literature, and which functions as a principle of division wherebyauthors, works, styles and subjects can be classified practically, is rootedin reality. It is found both in the social characteristics of the audiencesof the different Paris theatres (age, occupation, place of residence,frequency of attendance, prices they are prepared to pay, etc.) and inthe - perfectly congruent - characteristics of the euthors performed(age, social origin, place of residence, lifestyle, etc.), the works andthe theatrical businesses themselves.
'High-brow' theatre in fact contrasts with 'middle-brow' theatre(théâtre de bouleuard) in all these respects at once. On one side, there arethe big subsidized theatres (Odéon, Théâtre de l'Est parisien, Théâtrenational populaire) and the few small left-bank theatres (Vieux Colom-bier, Montparnasse, Gaston Baty, etc.),10 which are risky undertakingsboth economically and culturally, always on the verge of bankruptcy,offering unconventional shows (as regards content and/or mise en scène)
at relatively low prices to e young, 'intellectual' audience (students,intellectuali, teachers). On the othèr side, there are the 'bourgeois'lltheatres (in order of intensity of the pertinent ProPerties: Gymnase,Théâtre de Paris, Antoine, Ambassadeurs, Ambigu, Michodière,Variétés), ordinary commercial businesses whose concern for economicprofitability forces them into extremely prudent cultural strategies'which take no risks and create none for their audiences, and offer showsthat have already succeeded (adaptations of British and American plays,revivals of middle-brow 'classics') or have been newly written inaccordance with tried and tested formulae. Their audience tends to be
èo
I\oo\
$.s
ts
-s
oÀ..s\o
_s'l\
s?¡9uB^
aseuurÁ9
!uto¡uY
ruJePow
srnãPesseqtUv
sa9s,(¡3 sdurer¡3 âlPgu¡oC
suEd âP er¡g9rlJ
årerPor{Jrw
nBrqury
lâllâtv
asre5uer¡ â¡pguro)
f¡eg'!asseu:edtuo¡4¡
Jtrqurolo) xnâl^
a?u?tl¡v
(uo?po)rruElJ !P âl¡v9ql
a:re¡ndod l?uor¡Bu aJ¡V?tll
uars¡¡ed ¡sE.l !p er¡g?tl
xX
vôd^+ç
xN È\O vO\\O\OON\Ov YY..vv9vóv
væ 6^.') ó
X
" o æhv6n\6hæC\óOdó s só^qsçhhhsçv
æ væ È\6 \g@ç Añ 6s ort
X
Sruó^ ç
x
vhN 6æ6ææ^çç
stçotló
\oo6 0bbç ç
ñ
EiFõ9d.Ye,.i
3-øco.'Ë8E¡õãu
EôùcE<
!
ko'õ qi"Ë-s.9({"r
o:
-E"o.:ÊÈ9:
Ëà
9,t
oqe= -è9è:6Ëg
3EøÊ
.;GOF
3-S¿Ë>'=!ã9C;ggi?oso9PõE9opiroo
"@ççàxX
g-ç'ã .E-=-øõ=ã9 o ¡¡¡o.-91 È .? e
¡EË Ë* I -Ëä=:.=f¡ E -¿ F A-¿ =oão oE ri 9o(J.9
EËE* Ë; suË*,-;EËË*; ËsÉÉÉvãi:9E:"=ÉúåÈ"#s
86 The Field of Cultural Productron
older, more'bourgeois' (executives, the professions, businesspeople),
and is prepared to pay high prices for shows of pure .entertainmentwhose êonuentions and staging correspond to an aesthetic that has not
changed for a century. Benveèn the 'poor theatre' which caters to the
domñrant-class fractions richest in cultural capital and poorest in
economic capital, and the 'rich theatre', which caters to the fractions
richest in ecänomic capital and pooresr (in relative terms) in culturalcapital, stand the classic theatres (Comédie
are neutral ground, since they draw their au
from all fractions of the dominant class
constituency with all rypes of theatre.l2 Their programmes -too are
neurral or áclectic: 'avanì-garde boulevard' (as the drama critic of. La
croix putit), represented b"y Anouilh, or the consecrated avant-garde.13
GAMES WITH MIRRORS
This structure is no new phenomenon. \ùøhen Françoise Dorin, in Le
Tournant, one of the greai boulevard successes, places_an avant-garde
author in typical vaudãville situarions, she is simpìy ¡ediscovering (anC
for the ,"-. r."tons) the same straregies which scribe used in L¿
inst Delacroix, Hugo and Berlioz: in 1836, to reassure
larmed by the outrages and excesses of the Romantics,
Oscar Rigaut, a poit famed for his funeral odes but
exposed as a hedonist, in short, a
boirgeois'grocers'.14Frãnçoise Dorin's play, which d
ole space of cultural Productionmindi, in the form of sYstems of
f perception, and in objective reality,
rhrough the mechanisms which pròd,r.é the complementary oppositions
bet*eãr, playwrights and their theatres, critics and their newspapers.
ih. pt"y itt.if offirr the conrrasring portraits of two theatres: on the one
haná, téchnical clarity and skill, g"ìeìy,lightness and frivolity,'t-ypicallyF..n.h' qualities; on the other, 'pretentiousness camouflaged under
ostentatious srarkness" 'a confidence-trick of presentation" hum-
ourlessness, portentous;ess and retentiousne¡s,.glgo.mY sp-eeches and
ã.."r, (." ti".k currain and a :affold certainly help . . .') In short,
ãir-"tittt, plays, speeches, epigrams that are 'courageously light',joyous, liuãly, uncomplicated, truè-to-life, as o-p-posed.to'thinking', i'e'
-ir.."61., téáious, problematic and obscure. 'We had a bounce in our
[essions, businesspeople),
rs of pure entertainmentan aesthetic that has not
:atre' which caters to the
capital and poorest in:h caters to the fractionselative terms) in culturalìrançaise, Atelier), whichence more or less equallynd share parts of theirelr programmes too are
ts the dram a critic of La¡nsecrated avant-garde. l3
.S
t Françoise Dorin, in Lees, places an avant-gârde
imply rediscovering (anC
¿hich Scribe used in Lø
:lioz: in 1836, to reassure
xcesses of the Romantics,for his funeral odes but
rers, ill-placed to call the
niddle-brow playwright'sarde playwright, can be
r demonstrates how the
: of cultural productionr the form of systems ofrnd in objective reality,mplementary oppositions:s and their newspapers.
f two theatres: on the one
ss and frivolity, 'typicallyness camouflaged underof presentation', hum-ss, gloomy speeches and
rinly help . . .') In short,tre'courageously Iight',pposed to 'thinking', i.e.
We had a bounce in our
The Production of Belief 87
backsides. They think with theirs. There is no overcoming this opposi-
tion, because it separates 'intellectuals' and 'bourgeois' even in the
inrerests they have most manifestly in common. All the contrâsrs which
Françoise Dorin and the 'bourgeois' critics mobilize in their judgements
on the theatre (in the form of oppositions between the 'black currain'
and the 'beautiful set', 'the wall well lit, well decorated', 'the actors wellwashed, well dressed'), and, indeed, in their whole world view, are
summed up in the opposition between la uie en noir and la uie en rose -dark thoughts and rose-coloured spectacles - which, as we shall see,
ultimately stems from two very different ways of denying the socialworld.ls
Faced with an object so clearly organized in accordance with the
canonical opposition, the critics, themselves distributed within the space
of the press in accordance with the structure which underlies the objectclassified and the classificatory system they apply to it, reproduce, in the
space of the judgements whereby they classify it and themselves, the
space within which they are themselves classified (a perfect circle fromwhich there is no escâpe except by objectifying it). In other words, the
different judgements expressed on Le Tournant vary, in their form and
content, according to the publication in which they appear, i.e. from thegreatest distance of the critic and his readership uis-à-uis the 'intellec-tual'world to the greatest distance uis-à-uis the play and its'bourgeois'audience and the smallest distance uis-à-uis the 'intellectual' world.l6
\íHAT THE PAPERS SAY: THE PLAY OF HOMOLOGY
The subtle shifts in meaning and style which, from L'Aurore to LeFigaro and from Le Figaro to L'Express, lead ro rhe neutral discourse ofLe Monde and thence to the (eloquent) silence of Le Nouuel Obserua-teur (see Table 2) can only be fully understood when one knows thatthey accompany a steady rise in the educational level of the readership(which, here as elsewhere, is a reliable indicator of the level oftransmission or supply of the corresponding messages), and a rise in rheproportion of those class fractions - public-sector executives andteachers - who not only read most in general but also differ from allother groups by a particularly high rate of readership of the papers withthe highest level of transmission (Le Monde and Le Nouuel Obserua-teur); and, conversely, a decline in the proportion of those fractions -big commercial and industrial employers - who not only read least ingeneral but also differ from other groups by a particularly high rate ofreadership of the papers with the lowest level of transmission (France-
Soir, L'Aurore). To put it more simply, the structured space of dis-
s-s
IS
LqJ
L
ocisllu
o
-s
o
o\Js-:oò
ÕRb¡Ou-sùssø*:s\*q,:-rYs
\3.:!ì9Èt*ç-l-t\
-:r-s
*O
ì!È
Èxs:\+- ll
US
-sN \!-
oo(!È
G
F
L
PSslrzbQ-sÊro
.OO\OÈh.ô h\o+hæ00<' +:f +"-\O(ôO\ có
tOONÊÉ..) 1".o¡\+NOONñO ÈO\ËÈ a.¡
q)\!r*JOè
q)Lâ-rt
Fr*l
Ê.
o_.ã"'o6
Á.2id#ê-o.9
=oU=
*qo-c
ú:vc
9ì;;$ob'E^EYXèOôtr!oê.cäõñ_C
r!
-DØa3E*==^: ;oè9e;9 c.dö sr,::ñ=¡aÍ I=u*
;ío!-ñ^d õ.=u d-É"ayG -
ÈHq)uáa
t--.= ! !
82FL ts r¡3. =:
-:,c :oF oû" q
NæÈO.îTôt-- t-- N t-- \o 0o
a.¡ a-.1 È..)
Oo\æ+Èrôo¡\c)\Ol--"-NÈóóaôaôaa)
o
'r.Èot\
,<\'xU
CÈNcô1ô ôl
oohO\..)
.ôæl'- N
ô¡ôll'-æF-çOu)O\È\O1ôdÈÈ4.¡Êt\¡
, , ÈO!l.-¡ o\ñI l(-"rtôôi N.î
Lo\*l
!àß1.
being occuPied bY Prisions and, as regards
O(ôÈ.ôl-.Ol-- l-- È N.ô OÉÈ
which is read more
lexcept the commerci¿
ihi, uniu.tt..r8 Thus tsous with the space ol
ihi.h disseminate the
oÊo\o\l'-ÈNÊ1ño\æõlËÊÈ È
about which theY are
they allow being mad
spaces and the sPace
Let us now run thr
ô.1 N\o l--
!5ØaJgC ¿ (,uõ;i+u:l¡rolØ.=xçoJíACo"-aøØoãç9 ó-", TES.-.- u Yt G9? g sË I r" 1ã 3E E s U X e E i.3=:9 A.ç *--ã ì:;(!tri > òôo i ã o Y rv: L ç+.- u,: aoUiÊ.r!F\JFJ r¡r
exDerimental stimulr'leit' and from 'righ
st'cO\¡)È
'Cheeky Françoise
Marxist imelliégclïste' shows uo r
and vertiginous null
theatrical Productnotorious 'incommthe contemPorarYlowest aPPetites ofher ways and weari
ity. has the imPude
bedroom farces, to
This is a crime it wi
with cheerfulnesslasting successes. (
Situated at the falmost has to sPea
critic does not mln
does not hide his
the oPPonent's mol
as an ironic antlPhpresupposes and
criticism and his
based on homol
tæ
.sÉ9_.rRo6
Á.2iñ
-El-*aÎo.9
=olø
ãqo-ctr-o
tõ"ËPs".=ñFd
.õEË+EC*pLOÀcd\vaÀd_C
5'O^d
!ø
= òo¡8s;H r's.: "=¡uÍ
=f!*ã c-9
:rõts:-ú oã06 À
=s+^=
6ioø
y,óEÍ o.o
t"".= L !qà Ég tr.q.a
3" ãY:t iÁh-s
Ì.\ o\ËO\è¡
O\Èc.¡.1coN
00ho\.ô
.ô oo#-N
The Production of Belief 89
lexcept the co e neutral Point in
ihi, uniu..t..r heatre is homolo-
gous with the are Produced and
itli.tr dissemi theatres and plays
about which they are formulated, these homologies and all the games
they allow being made possible by the homology between each of these
c¡\Èòl .ô
NN\o #r
spaces and the space of the dominant class.
Let us now run through the space of the judgements aroused by the
experimental stimulus of Françoise Dorin's play' moving from 'right' to'leÍt' and from 'right-bank' to 'left-bank'' First, L'Aurore:
This is a crime it will be difficult to forgive. Especially since she commits itwith cheerfulness and gaiety, using all the dreadful devices which make
lasting successes, (Gilbert Guille minaud, I" Aurore, 12 January 1973)'
Situated at the fringe of the intellectual field, at a point where he
almost has to speak as an outsider ('our intelligentsia'), the L'Aurorecritic does not mince his words (he calls a reactionâry a reâctionary) and
based on homology of position.
i' oo\oÈ
't.9o(., .ÉøO
nØàD:cc)
õ $?-Æ <¡.Ë=6OÈ!-o.= o. OFJ IL
)l'"r'
\IVANCE
:erm relationship between
f their readerships as a
ge each camp has of itsre of explanation, that is:ìetic or ethical choices by
e[d, by exposing cynical
'success at all costs, even
right-bank argument) or'ed on the left bank) of the
artial obiectifications ofall studies of the 'intellec-
:scribing as the product ofrost miraculous encounter
xist in the person of the
structural and functional
t's position in the field ofrdience in the field of the
riuains de seruice, whose
:s of the bourgeoisie, are
)y serve no one: they serve
l, in full unawareness ofrests, i.e. specific interests,
re 'interest' in a particulary associated with a certain
r in periods of crisis) has
implications, even in the
homologies, the practices
:ively autonomous field ofhe functions they fulfil in
ied by external functions,
:lic struggles among the
rg run at least, among the
r well only beca¡rse the
tellectual field and theirrss field is the basis of an
ciples as that required by
,eans that they most sin-
:he ideological interests of:sts as inteilectuals against
Tbe Production of Belief
their specific adversaries, the occupants of opposing positions in
field of production.zl
THE POWER TO CONVINCE
'sincerity' (which is one of the preconditions of symbolic efficacy) is
only possible - and only achieved - when there is a perfect and
immediate harmony between the expectations inscribed in the position
occupied (in a less consecrated universe, one would say 'the job
description') and the dispositions of the occupant. It is impossible to
understand how dispositions come to be adjusted to positions (so that
ân ns (all ser) or institutions,
ne Obser different Practicalco urlHu s (right-bank/left-
bank, private/subsidized), galleries, publishers, reviews, couturiers, etc.
- can function as classificatory schemes, which exist and signify only in
their mutual relations, and serve as landmarks or beacons. As is seen
more clearly in avant-garde painting than anywhere else, a practical
mastery of these markers, a sort of sense of social direction, is
indispensable in order to be able to navigate in a hierarchically
structured space in which movement is always fraught with the danger
of losing class, in which places - galleries, theatres, publishing houses -make all the difference (e.g. between 'commercial porn' and 'quality
eroticism') because these sites designate an audience which' on the basis
of the homology between the field of production and the field of
J
95
the
96 'l'he Field of Cultural Procluction
who have found their place in the structure work in the opposite way forthose who have strayed from their natural site . Avant-garde publishers
ancl the proclucers of best-sellers both agree that they would inevitably
come to grie f if they took it into their heads to publish works ob¡ectively
assigned to the opposite pole in the publishing universe: Minuitbest-sellers and Laffont nouueaux romans. Similarly, in accordance withthe law that one only ever preaches to the converted, a critic can only'influence' his readers in so far as they extend him this power because
they are structurally attuned to him in their view of the social world,their tastes and their whole habitus. Jean-Jacques Gautier gives a good
description of this elective affinity between the journalist, his paper and
his readers: a good Figaro editor, who has chosen himself and been
chosen through the same mechanisms, chooses a Figaro literary criticbecause 'he has the right tone for speaking to the readers of the paper',
because, witbout hauing deliherately tried, 'he naturally speaks the
language of Le !igaro, and is the paper's 'ideal reader'. 'lf tomorrow Istarted speaking the language of Les Temps Modernes, for example, or
Saintes Cbapelles des Lettres, people would no longer read me or
understand me, so they would not listen to me, because I would be
assuming a certain number of ideas or arguments which our readers
don't give a damn about.'23 To each position there correspond presup-
positions, a doxa, and the homology between the producers' positions
and their clients' is the precondition for this cornplicity, which is thatmuch more strongly required when fundamental values are involved, as
they are in the theatre . The fact that the choiccs whereby individuals join
groups or groups co-opt individuals are oriented by a practical mastery
of the laws of the field explains the frequent occurrence of the
miraculous agreement between objective structures and internalized
structures which enables the producers of cultural goocls to produce
objectively necessary and overdetermined discourses in full freedom and
slnce nty.The sinccrity in duplicity and euphemization which gives ideological
discourse its particular symbolic force derives, first, from the fact thatthe specific interests - relatively autonolnous with respect to class
interests - attached to a position in a specialized field cannot be satisfied
lcgitimately, and tlrerefore cfficiently, except at the cost of perfect
submission to the laws of the field (in this particular case, disavowal ofthc usual forrr of interest); and, second, from the fact that the homology
which exists between all fields of struggle organized on the basis of an
unequal distribution of a particular kind of capital means that the highly
censored and euphemized discourses and practices which are thus
produced by reference to 'pure', pure[y 'internal' ends are always
predisposecl to perform adclitional, external functions. They do so the
morc effectively the less aware they are of doing so, and when their
adjustment to dema
result of a strLrctural
-f Ht
The fundamental p
businesses and 'cult
characteristics of cul
offered. A firm is t
conversely, that m
and completely the
clemand, i.e. to pre-e
on the one hand, a
minimize risks by a
provided with mer
catching dustjacket
ensure a rapid retur
with built-in obsoles
cycle, based on acce
and above all on su
no market in the
presupposes high-r
ducts which rnay eit
as such, by the wei
cndorved with an e
material componellt
The uncertainty I
cultural goo,ìs can t
by Editions de Minprrz-e-winntng tro
copies distributed i
unsold copies), ac
avcrage). Robbe-G
oriy 746 copies in i
initial sales of the p
annual rate of gro
t964,19 per cent 1
Beckett's En øtte
years to reach I 0,
except 1963. From
form and by 1968
reached 64,897.
r the opposite way forrant-garde publishers
hey would inevitably
lish works objectivelyng universe: Minuity, in accordance with'ted, a critic can only
n this power because
'of the social world,Gautier gives a good
rnalist, his paper and
;en himself and been
Figaro literary criticreaders of the paper',
naturally speaks the
'ader'. 'lf tomorrow Irynes, for example, or, longer read me orbecause I would be
ts which our readers
e correspond presup-
producers' positions
rplicity, which is thatalues are involved, as
ereby individuals join
ry a practical mastery
t occurrence of the
rres and internalized'al goods to produce
es in full freedom and
hich gives ideological
st, from the fact thatvith respect to class
:ld cannot be satisfied
the cost of perfect
ar case, disavowal ofrct that the homolôgy
ed on the basis of an
means that the highly
ices which are thus
Lal' ends are always
ions. They do so the
3 so, and when their
The Production of Belief 97
adjustment to demand is not the product of conscious design but the
result of a structural correspondence.
THE LONG RUN AND THE SHORT RUN
The fundamental principle of the differences between 'commercial'
businesses and 'cultural' businesses is to be found once again in the
characteristics of cultural goods and of the market on which they are
offered. A firm is that much closer to the 'commercial' pole (and,
conversely, that much further from the 'cultural' pole), the more directly
and completely the products it offers corresponds to a pre-existent
demand, i.e. to pre-existent interests in pre-established forms. This gives,
on the one hand, a short production cycle, based on the concern to
minimize risks by adjusting in advance to the identifiable demand and
provided with marketing circuits and presentational devices (eye-
catching dustjackets, advertising, public relations, etc.) intended to
ensure a rapid return of profits through rapid circulation of products
with built-in obsolescence. On the other hand, there is a long production
cycle, based on acceptance of the risk inherent in cultural investments24
and above all on submission to the specific laws of the art trade. Having
no market in the present, this entirely future-oriented productionpresupposes high-risk investments tending to build up stocks of pro-ducts which may either relapse into the status of material objects (valued
as such, by the weight of paper) or rise to the status of cultural objects
endowed with an economic value incommensurate with the value of the
material components which go into producing them.25
The uncertainty and ramdomness characterizing the production ofcultural goods can be seen in the sales curves of three works published
by Editions de Minuit (Figure 3).26 Curve A represents the sales of a
prize-winning novel which, after a strong initial demand (of 6,143
copies distributed in 1959, 4,298 were sold by 1960 after deduction ofunsold copies), achieves low annual sales (seventy or so a yeâr on
average). Robbe-Grillet's La Jalousie (curve B), published in 1957, sold
only 746 copies in its first year and took four years to catch up with the
initial sales of the prize-winning novel (in 1960) but, thanks to a steady
annual rate of growth in sales (29 per cent a year average from 1.960 to1964,79 per cent 1964to 1968)had achieved a total of 29,462in1968.Beckett's En attendant Godot (curve C), published in L952, took fiveyears to reach 10,000 but grew at a fairly steady 20 per cent every year
except 1963. From this point the curve begins to take on an exponentialform and by 1968 (with an annual figure of 1.4,298) total sales hadreached 64,897.
¡'' -(,
I
104 'I'hc lìiclcl oí (iulrur.al Pnrclucirxr
\IAYS OII GIìO\øINCì OI,D
Tbe opposition betweer the two economies, that is to say, between tw<rrclationships to thc. 'ccorr{)''ry', can thus be scen u, '"r,, oppositionbetwcen two lifc c¡cl9¡ of thc crrrtu.ar p'ocluctio. trr,r.,r.rr,
"iwo cliffe-
rent ways in which firms, producers ancr products grou ord.at Tietrajectory lea_ding from th.e avant-garcle to consecration and thc trajec_tory leadìng fr'm the srnall firm tu-ih. '[rig, firrn are n-,uruuì! .*clusive.The small comlnercial firm has no rncorsecrared firm tha' thc big .com'er j:i:Cécil Saint-Laurent) has oi occupyin n rheconsecrated avant-gardc. In the .oi" n e solei1,"i ,:f::.i;l':[:lü'1.:;:nent d,ime; i ,äi:'[:::il::,:,."'"ïî,:lthc 'cc
cc o n o m v, rh e ch ro n o r. gi ca r o p p o s' iil5:ii.:ilï : : :a:*'.î:"",iå îf :old-established, rlre challcngc'ri ¿rnc rhc veterans) ,1.,. ou",rilgarde anclthe 'cltrssic', tcnds to.rnc.g. *itl.r the 'ecrn,rnic'
'pposition Lriween the
poor ancl thc rich (whoageing is alm.st inevita
car" and
tion of thc rclatio, to tl nsf'rma-
the 'ecoro¡ny, which is clenial ofbusiness
ancl the sizc of thc firr'..T'hc only defence against.growi.g olcl,is ar,efusal r' 'g* fat' through profits ancl for p.,iit, o .iur"r tJ.nte. th.clialectic of profit whi.-h, by ircr easi.¡3
'the iir.c of the fi.m a,r.r
consequently the ovcrhcacls,.irn¡roses a pùrsurt of profit th.u,,th larg..nra.rkers, leacling ro rhc dcvaluaiion .n,åil.d ,n
" ,ir-,o*
"iro;Jlr, <)
A firrn which enrers the phasc of cxproiting ,..rr',u'iåtJ curturalcapital rrns rwo cliffe rcrt ìcorornics iinrurr"i.,.n,,.,ry, ;;; orientecltowarcls.procluction, anrhors ard irnovation (in th. ."rá of Gallirnard,this is thc series cclitecl by Gc'rges r,ambrichs), ,rr. uil.,", ,owarclscxplcliti'g its resourccs aucì markcting its .,rnr..r"t.,i products (witrrscrics srrch as the Pléiacle cditions. ar_cl eipecia-lly Folio
"- íairr¡.1ris easy
to irnaginc the conrradicti.rs which reiurt fr,i,n ttr. i,r-,r-,1iái,uitiry ur
n are not alrcady turned towards
othcl publishcrs by
ragcd by tbe fact twhcn they appcar
'irrcotrgrutltts' e.g.
scrics.) It goes witfirnr's fouttcler may
proccss which is inbusittcsses.
'fhc differences
'big firms' ancl 'grea
that can be fcluncl,
ternporarily withouclevalr"red, and tl-re '
constantly growing
arxorìg the procluce
thc (biologically) yo
or 'outclated' autho
consccrated avalìt-
'IHlr
It is clear that the
youth can, once ag
thc 'econonry' whi'intellectuals' and a
their rnanner of d
tcprcsclltatlous as i'young' is lrornologgcois'seriousness o
ancl the 'intellectua
hand. The'bourgthc correspor-rc1ing
iclcntifics the 'intel
con-unon statlls as
wlrorn moncy ancl
Ilut the prioritychange ancl origirclationship bct
spc'cific law of ch
distinction whcreinevitably associat'rnarkccl a c1¿rte'c¡r
The Production of Belief 105
other publishers by the firm's prestige. (They may equally be discou-raged by the fact that the 'intelle :tual' series tend to pass unnoticedwhen they appear in lists in which they are 'out. of place' or even
'incongruóut; ..g. as an extreme case, Laffont's É,carts and Chønge
series.t It goes without saying that though the disappearance of thefirm's founãer may accelerate the process, it is not sufficient to explain aprocess which is inscribed in the logic of the development of culturalbusinesses.
The differences which separate the small avant-garde firms f¡om the
'big firms' and 'great publishers' have their equivalents in the differencesthat can be fouid, ámong the products, between the 'new' product,temporarily without'economic' value, the'old' pr9d,uct, irretrievablydevãlued, and the 'ancient' or 'classic' product, which has a constant orconstantly growing 'economic'value. One also finds similar differencesamong the !roducèrs, between the avant-garde, recruited mainly- amongthe (biologilally) young, without being limited ro a generation, 'finished'or'outdatid' authors or artists (wh r may be biologically young) and the
consecrated avant-garde, the'classics'.
THE CLASSICAL AND THE OLD-FASHIONED
106 The Field of Cultural Production
neutralized.
BEING DIFFERENT
The Production of Belief 707
As the newcomers come into existence, i.e. accede to legitimate
difference, or even, for a certain time, exclusive legitimacy, they
necessarily push back into the past the consecrated _producers withwhom they äre compared, 'dating' their products and the taste of those
who remain attacheã to them. Thus the various galleries or publishinghouses, like the various arrists or writers, are distributed at every
moment according ro their artistic age, i.e. according ro the age of theirmode of arristic !roduction and the degree to which this generative
scheme, which is ãlso a scheme of perception and appreciation, has been
canonized and secularized. The field of the galleries reproduces izsyncbrony the history of artistic movements since the late nineteenth
.Lnt.rry. Éach major gallery was an avanr-garde gallery ar some time orother, and it is that rñuch more fa ous and that much more capable ofconsecrating (or, which amounts to the same thing, sells that- much more
dearly), thã more distant its floruit, the more widely known and
recogníred its 'brand' ('geometrical abstract' or 'American pop') butalso-the more it is encãpsulated in that 'brand' ('Durand-Ruel, the
Impressionist dealer'), in a pseudo-concePt which is also a destiny'
Àt .u..y momenr, in whichever field (the field of class struggles, the
field of thl dominanr class, the field of cultural production), the agents
and institutions involved in the game are at once contemPoraries and
out of phase. The field of the presént is iust d ofstruggles (as shown by the fact that a¡ a sent
.*"äly in so far as he or she is at stake) the
,.nr. 'of presence in the same Present' in e of
orhers, .ìirtr, in practice, only in the struggle which synchronizes
discoráant times (sõ rhat, as I hope ro show elsewhere, one of the maioreffects of great historical crises, of the event
date), is that they synchronize the times ostructural durations). But the struggle whichin the form of the confrontation of differenbecause the agents and groups it brings together are- not Plesent in the
same present.- One onl/ haõ to think -of a particular field (painting,
literature or the theatre) to see that the agents and institutions who
clash, objectively at least, through competition and conflict, are sepa-
,"t.d in tíme aná in rerms of time. One group, situated at the vanguard,
have no contemporaries with whom they exchange recognition (apart
from other auani-garde producers), and therefore no audience, except in
the future. The ot-her grcup, commonly called the 'conseryatives" only
recognize their contemporaries in the past. The temporal movement
resuiting from the "pp.át"n..
of a group capable of 'making history' by
establisñing an advãnced position induces a displacement of the struc-
ture of the-field of the preient, i.e. of the chronological hierarchy of the
108 The Field of Cultural Producuon
opposing positions in a given field (e.g. poP art, kinetic art and figurativeart). Each position is moved down one rung in the chronologicalhierarchy which is at the same time a social hierarchy. The avant-gardeis at every moment separated by an artistic generation (the gap betweentwo modes of artistic production) from the consecrated avant-garde,which is itself separated by another artistic generation from the avant-garde that was already consecrated at the moment it entered the field.This is why, in the space of the artistic field as in social sPace' distances
between styles or lifestyles are never better measured than in terms oftime.a5
The consecrated authors who dominate the field of production also
dominate the market; they are not only the most expensive or the mostprofitable but also the most readable and the most acceptable because
ihey have become part of 'general culture' through a process offamiliarization which may or may not have been accompanied byspecific teaching. This means that through them, the strategies directedagainst their domination always additionally hit the distinguishedconsume.s of their distinctive products. To bring a new producer' a newproduct and a new system of tastes on to the market at a given momentis to push the whole set of producers, products and systems of tastes intothe past. The process whereby the field of production becomes a
temporal structure also defines the temporal status of taste. Because the
diffèrent positions in the hierarchical space of the field of production(which cãn be equally well identified by the names of institutions,galleries, publishers and theatres or by the names of artists or schools)
ãre at theìame time tastes in a social hierarchy, every transformation ofthe structure of the field leads to a displacement of the structure oftastes, i.e. of the system of symbolic distinctions between groups.Oppositions homologous with those existing today between the taste ofavant-garde artists, the taste of intellectuals', advanced'bourgeois'tasteand prõvincial 'bourgeois' taste, which find their means of expression onnt"tÈets syrnbolized by the Sonnabend, Denise René and Durand-Ruelgalleries, would have been able to express themselves equally effectivelyin t945, when Denise René represented the avant-garde, or in 1875,when Durand-Ruel was in that position'
This model is particularly relevant nowadays, because owing to thenear-perfect unification of the artistic field and its history, each,artistic
".t *hich 'makes history' by introducing a new position into the field
'displaces' the whole series of previous artistic acts. Because the wholeseriès of pertinent events is practically present in the latest, in the sameway thatìhe six digits afteady dialled on the telephone are contained inthe seventh, an aesthetic act is irreducible to any other act in a differentplace in the series and the series itself tends towards uniqueness and
The Production of Belief 109
came back. Even the pre-Raphaelites aren't a rehash of the Roman-
tics.'46
irreducibilitY of tion to.r,
"pp."..d so is that
f thè ãrtist and artist's
work closer to that of the 'intellectual' and makes it more dependent
than ever on 'intellectual' commentaries. Whether as critics but also the
110 The Field of Cultural Production
their practice, thanks to the combination of knowingness and naiïeté,
calculation and innocence, faith and bad faith that is required by
mandarin games, cultivated games with the inherited culture, whose
common feature is that they identify 'creation' with the introduction ofdeuiations lécarts], which only the initiated can perceive, with respect to
forms and formulae that are known to all. The emergence of this new
definition of the artist and his or her craft cannot be understood
independently of the transformations of the artistic field. The constitu-
tion of an unprecedented array of institutions for recording, preserving
and analysing works (reproductions, catalogues, art journals, museums
acquiring the most modern works, etc.), the growth in the personnel
employed, full-time or part-time, in the celebration of works of art, the
incieased circulation of works and artists, with great international
exhibitions and the increasing number of chains of galleries with
branches in many countries - all combine to favour the establishment of
an unprecedented relationship between t and the
work of art, analogous to that found in ions; to
such an extent that one has to be blind n about a
work is not a mere accompaniment, intended to assist its perception and
appreciation, but a stage in the production of the work, of its meaning
and value. But once again it is sufficient to quote Marcel Duchamp:
a. But to come back to your ready-mades, I thought that R.
Mutt, the signature on The Fountain, was the manufac-
turer's name. But in the article by Rosalind Krauss, I read:
'R. Mutt, a pun on the German, Armut, or Poverty'.'Poverty' would entirely change the meaning of Tbe Foun-
tain.
M.D. Rosalind Krauss? The redhead? It isn't that at all. You can
deny it. Mutt comes from Mott Works, the name of a big
firm that makes sanitary equipment. But Mott was too
close, so I made it Mutt, because there was a strip cartoon
in the papers in those days, Mutt and Jeff, everybody knew
it. So right from the start there was a resonance. Mun was
a fat little guy, and Jeff was tall and thin . . . I wanted a
different narne. And I added Richard . . . Richard is a good
name for a loo! You see, it's the opposite of poverty . . 'But not even that; just R. - R. Mun.
a. What possible interpretation is there of the Bicycle Wbeel?
Should one see it as the integration of movement into the
work of art? Or as a fundamental point of departure, like
the Chinese who invented the wheel?
The Production of Belief 111
M.D. That machine has no intention' excePt to get rid of the
appearance of a work of art. It was a whim, I didn't call it a
work of aft. I wanted to throw off the desire to creete
works of art. rù(/hy do works have to be static? The
thing - the bicycle wheel - came before the idea. Withoutany intentio nd dance about it, not at
all so as to nobodY has ever done itbefore me.' have never been sold.
solemnity of a book of PrinciPles.
535455
5657
5859
6762636465
278 Not¿s to pp. 68-71
the grand, the tormented, the poignant, the pathetic . . . Those who spendthemselves in passion, in nervous agitation, will never write a booi of
Cited by Cassagne, ur I'art, p. 218.Ponton, 'Le ch-amp 05', pp.-69-70.An example of this Franèè, whose father's unusualposition as a Paristookseller enabled him to acquire a social capital and afamiliariry with the world of letters which compensated for his loweconomic and cultural capital.Ponton, 1865 à 1905', p. 57.P. Verno e',in Histoire littéraire de la France (Paris:ÉdidonsCited in
.98. Ton of oneterprise,have to
Schapiro, 'Courbet et l'imagerie populaire', p- 299.Ibid., p. 315ff.Ponton, 'Le champ littéraire de 1865 à 1905', p. 73.
who write for both boulevard theatre and vaudeville have characteristicsintermediate berween those of specialists in each genre.
60
66
Not¿s to pp.72-7 279
S. Mallarmé, 'La musique et les lettres', in (Paris:
Gallimard (Pléiade), 1945), p.647. On this ing putforward by Heinrich Merkl, see Jurt, 'Symboli
1
2
2 THE PRODUCTION OF BELIEF
traditional texts).i. ir ". "i.i¿.r,t,h"t
the art trader's guarantor role is particuìarly visible rn
;È; ä¡ã ;a painting, where the pu-rchaser's (the collector's) 'economic'
280 Not¿s to pp. 77-81
10
Notes to PP. 82-6 281
11.
t2
13
282 Noú¿s to pp. 86-9
15 To give an idea of the power and salience of these raxonomies, oneexample will suffice: statistical study of class tastes shows that'intellectual'and 'bourgeois the oppositionbetween Goya fortunes of twoconcierge's dau ryants' quarters'and the other with a terrace',Françoise Dorin compares the first to a Goya, the second to a Renoir. See
F. Dorin, Le Tournant (Paris: Julliard,7973), p. 115.16 What is bought is not just a newspeper but also a generative principle
the basis of their opinion-generating principle.17 Analysis of
close to LequidistantSolr, wherethat Le Monde and the Nouuel Obseruateur constirute a final cluster.
18 Private-secto¡ executives, engineers and the professions are characterizedby a medium overall rate of readership and a distinctly higher rate ofreadership of Le Monde than businesspeople and industrialists. (Theprivate-sector executives remain closer to the industrialists by virrue oftheir quantity of lowJevel reading- France-Soir, L'Aurore - and also theirhigh rate of readership of financial, and business journals - Les Ecbos,
Nof¿s to PP.92-6 283
Information. Enter!rise - whereas the members of the professions are
;ió;;;; ;h; t.â.h.", by virtue of rheir rate of readership of the Nouuel
Obseruateur.)19 ittit
"ii áf cónciliation and compromise achieves the virtuosity of art for
not to s
sining nout themeans calbeit often tediousshe concludes - her'Boulevard' - but abecause for manY Yeers a master
at the crossroads of these two Pa
elds of cultural goods production as
aimed at distin"tion means that the
r haute couture 'creetions'or novels'
as instruments of distinction,etween the classes.
for their conformirY to their
clous.h.y;t. ¡,rtt things you feel ' ' '. I didn't
There are ptopL who sent things in' Ihaving a vague sens#' wåntrng to laJ*"y .". . It'J lots of little things' it's
the best in his categorY''
284 Not¿s to pp. 97-8
24 It is said that Jean-Jacques Nathan (Fernand Nathan), who is regarded as
being first and foremost a 'manager', defines publishing as 'a highlyspeculative trade'. The risks are indeed high and the chances of making a
profit when publishing a young writer are minute. A novel which does notsucceed may have a (short-term) life-span of less than three weeks; thenthere are the lost or damaged copies or those too soiled to be returned, andthose that do come back reduced to the state of worthless paper. In the case
of moderate short-term success, once the production costs, royalties anddistribution costs are deducted, about 20 per cent of the retail price is leftfor the publisher who has to offset the unsold copies, finance his stocks andpay his overheads and taxes. But when a book extends its career beyondthe first year and enters the backlist, it constitutes a financial 'flywheel'which provides the basis for forecasting and for a long-term investmentpolicy. \ùlhen the first edition has a be
reprinted at a considerably lower larincome (direct income and also DS,
paperback editions, television or film adaptations), which helps to financefurther more or less risky investments that may also eventually build up theback-list.
25 Because of the unequal lengths of the cycle of production it is rarelymeaningful to compare annual statements from different publishinghouses. The annual statement gives an increasingly incomplete picture of
cons constantly tends to appreciate.26 A fu ot appear on the diagram, ought to be added -
that a Godot whoòe career was over by the end ofin the red.
27 vestments, we must also include all theetcploit a back-list: new editions,
ons (for Gallimard, this is the Folio
economically ambrguous Posltron, because ot lts llnk wrth Les rresses de laCité), and the 'big'!ublishers, Laffont, Presses de la Cité and Hachette' theCité), and the'big' publishers, Laffont, Presses de la Cité and Hachette' theintermediate positions being occupied by firms like Flammarion (whereexperimental series coexist with specially commissioned collective works),Albin Michel and Calmann-Lévy, old, 'traditional' publishing houses, run
29
30
Not¿s to PP. 100-1 285
orize-winnins book.ili, i, 1... i".,i*t"Ay clearly in the theatre, where the classics market
(ìi;;';i;;i¿;f-";i.,..t'ât the iomédie Française) obevs quite specific rules
31
32
33
bç."ut. of its dependence on qhe ;d9c,afo1.l;t:t"l;ä;;;-; .pposiiion is found in all fields. Andi¿ de l"::9ït describes the
nnnnsirinn 'hi sees as characterizine the theatrical field, between theition 'he sees as characterizing the theatrical field, between .th.e.;;.o1.; ";d
the 'militants': iTheatre managers are people of alloDDosltron ne sees as cnaraclcfr¿urË' Lrrç rrrç¿rrrr4! uL¡st vçr"ev¡r -!¡;i,í.i";;;J.;
"ia ,tt. 'militants': iTh."tt. managers are people of all
*itt. fttäy h"u. on. thing in common; with each new,show, theyput an
34
sorts. rney nave onc urrlrH' lrr LUlrrrrlurri w¡rrr !4Lrr ¡¡çvv Jr¡vtrti"".ra-."í of money and tälent at risk on an unpredictable market. But the
286 Not¿s to pp. 101,-3
35
36
similarity stops there. Their motivations spring from very different ideolo-gies. For some, the theatre is a financial speculation like any other, morepicturesque perhaps, but giving rise ro the same cold-blooded strategymade up of the taking of options, calculated risks, liquidity problems,
exclusive rights, sometimes negotiated internationally. For others, it is the
vehicle of a message, or the tool of a mission. Sometimes a militant even
as to make failure a guarantee of qualiry, as the
olemical vision would have it: 'Nowadays, if youneed failures. Failure inspires confidence. Success is
suspect' (Dorin, Le Toumant, p.46).'Oh dear! All I do is reproduce what I see and hear, iust arranging it and
adapting it. Just my luck! What I see is always attrective, what I hear is
often funny, I live in luxury and champagne bubbles' (Dorin, Le Tournant,p.27). There is no need to evoke reproductive painting, nowadays
Nielsen to Orban, provide 'bourgeois' readers with alternative 'real-life'
exPenences.
In literature, as elsewhere, full-time producers (and, a fortiori, producers
for producers) are far from having a monopoly of production. Out of 100
people ì¡ Who's Who who have produced literary works, more thân a thirdare non-professionals (industrialists, 14 per cent; senior civil servants, I 1
per cent; doctors, 7 per cent, etc.) and the proportion of part-timeproducers is even greater in the areas of political writing (45 per cent) and
discoverer-publisher is always liable to see his
richer or more consecrated publishers, who offeration, their influence on prize juries, and also
publicity and better royalties.As opposed to the Sonnabend gallery, which brings together young (the
oldest is fifry) but already relatively recognized painters, and to the
Durand-Ruel gallery, whose painters are almost all dead and famous, the
Denise René gallery, which stands in that particular point in the space-timeof the artistic field in which the normally incompatible profits of the
avant-garde and of consecretion are momentarily superimposed, combinesa group of already strongly consecrated painters (abstract) with an
avant-garde or reâr avant-garde group (kinetic art) as if it had momentarily
37
38
39
40
41
Not¿s to PP. 104-6 287
managed to escape the dialectic of disdnction which sweeps schools away
42
43
44
288 Noú¿s to pp. 1.08-12
dustbins'or'Christo is packages'); and many concepts in literary or erristiccriticism are no more rhan a 'learned' designation of similar practicalgroupings (e.g. littérature obiectale Íor nouueau romctn, itself standing for'all the novelists published by Editions de Minuit').
prery"' (avant-garde painter, age thirty-five).46 Interview published in VH 107,3 (Autumn 1970), pp.55-61.47 That is why it would e rel
and the degree of acc t disdistinction leads to a to a(e.9., 'hyper-realism').
48 This played very fast and very'natu 'failure', who makes thesame kind of moves as everybody else, but out of phase, usually too late,
49 The next task would be to show the contribution the economy of works ofart, as a limiting case in which the mechanisms of negation and their effectsare more clearly seen (and not as an exception to the laws of economy),makes to the understanding of ordinary economic prectices, in which theneed to veil the naked truth of the transaction is also present to varyingdegrees (as is shown by the use made of a whole apparatus of symbolicagents).
3 THE MARKET OF SYMBOLIC GOODS
I 'Historically regarded,' observes Schücking, 'the publisher begins to play apart at the stage at which the patron disappears, in the eighteenth century'(with a transition period, in which the publisher was dependent onsubscriptions, which in turn largely depended on relations berween authorsand their patrons). There is no uncertainty about this among the poets.And indeed, publishing firms such as Dodsley in England or Cotta inGermany gradually became a source of authority. Schücking shows,similarly, that the influence of theatre managers (Drumaturgs) can be evengreater where, as in the case of Ono Brahm, 'an individual may help to
7
8
Notes to pp. 113-16 289
will be used from now on as shorthand forscientific' (as in cultural consecration, legitimacy,