text of lecture bourdieu and michon 2013

8/12/2019 Text of Lecture Bourdieu and Michon 2013

1/21

Bourdieu and Michon MA-course Literature and Society

Who or what decides upon an artists fate? Pierre Bourdieu, Pierre Michon

and the theory of the literary field [slide 1]

1. Introduction [slide 2]

Let me first introduce the subject of todays class by explaining why I have

chosen Pierre Michons short stories about Lorentino and Joseph Roulin as an

illustration of ourdieus theory of the mar!et of symbolic goods"

#irst of all because of the theme of this course"ourdieus theories have had $

and perhaps still have $ great influence in #rance when it comes to what he callsthe distribution of cultural capital in society% the role education plays in it% and

the way all forms of art &literature% painting' are affected by it" (hese ideas suit

perfectly with the theme of this course% literature and society" )ne of ourdieus

main wor!s isLa Distinction&*+,+- translated in *+./ asDistinction'- in this he

discusses the genesis of social relationships and examines the lifestyle of

#rances class structure" 0s you can read in the footnote at page *1% the articleyou have read for today is at the basis ofDistinction"

(he second reason is my own research project that focuses on the revival of the

painters novel" 2e will see that the way painters are portrayed in this !ind of

novel has a social dimension and the short stories written by Michon are good

examples of this"

I will start with a brief summary of the history and characteristics of the

painters novel% then we will discuss the theory of ourdieu and analyse the two

short stories"

2. he painters no!el

Marjolein van Tooren 09.09.13*


2/21


(he painters novel $ specialist disagree on the 3uestion whether it is a genre or

not $ was% at least in #rance% very popular in the nineteenth century% but

gradually disappeared at the beginning of the twentieth century" (he last

twenty4thirty years however% it is bac!% in #rance but also in the 5etherlands"

Rather surprisingly% we see artists not only in what is commonly called 6high

literature but also in 6low literature e"g" the detective novel" (he classic

example here is of course 7an rowns The Da Vinci code"

0 painters novel could be defined as follows8 a text in prose in which the

protagonist is a painter and in which visual art and aesthetics are discussed%either directly $ in the conversations the painter has with his friends and fellow

artists $ or indirectly $ e"g" by means of e!phrasis% the description of paintings

by the narrator $" 2hen we loo! at the way painters are portrayed in these

novels% we find a series of topoi% literary commonplaces" Roughly spea!ing% the

artist is [slide "]

eitheran inspired genius% misunderstood and socially marginali9ed-struggling for recognition% rebelling against the prescriptions of the 0cademy

of 0rt% living in an old and empty garret : and in this portrait we can clearly

see the influence of Romanticism &the first half of the century'

or a successful artist% socially compliant% who follows the aesthetic rules set

by the 0cademy and lives in a mansion- sometimes he is even a shrewd

businessman who capitali9es on the 6taste of the public% that is to say thebourgeois : that is how the painters novel expresses the commerciali9ation

of art in the second half of the century

0s you can see these literary commonplaces have a social dimension $ I will

come bac! on that later% while discussing ourdieu"

5ear the end of the *+

th

century the painters novel faded away% but the lasttwenty4thirty years we see it coming bac!% not only in #rance &perhaps you have

Marjolein van Tooren 09.09.13;


3/21


heard of Michel


4/21


going on in art and4or literature" (his is all the more interesting because

contemporary writers seem to revert to the same &social' commonplaces in the

portraits they s!etch of their painters" ourdieus theory of the literary4artistic

field could contribute to answering these 3uestions8 e"g" there might be analogies

between the literary4artistic field in the *+thcentury and the contemporary

literary4artistic field"

: return to realism- competition with other media &photography4film- 4computer

and video art' : leads to discussion among artists

)f course% we cannot discuss all the aspects of the revival of the painters novelin two hours- what I want to do is *' s!etch% explain and discuss in broad outline

the article you have read $ that will be necessary% I suppose $ and see the lin!s

with my research and ;' read the short stories in the light of ourdieus theory8

a' what can we say about the reasons Lorentino never became a famous painter-

b' why has Michon chosen himC c' why does he show us Dan Aogh through the

eyes of his postmanC

". Bourdieu

0s you probably !now ourdieu has had a great influence on teachers%

intellectuals and political activists in #rance% most certainly because of the fact

that his notions of fields% class% power relations and symbolic goods can explain

the failure of the ideal of 6education for everyone% which was one of the goals

of the students insurrections in the late *+EFs" In his main wor!La

Distinction!Distinction&*+,+4*+./'% ourdieu discusses the origin of social

relationships% examines the lifestyle of #rances social classes and analyses the

#rench educational system% which is still very hierarchic" (he places to be are

not the universities% but the 6grandes Gcoles to which a 6concours $ a

comparative exam $ is the only access8 every year there is a limited number of

places and only the best students are admitted" 0nd the selection is the same

Marjolein van Tooren 09.09.13/


5/21


after graduation8 those who have the highest mar!s obtain the best jobs% e"g" at a

prestigious 6lycGe in Paris and not somewhere in the country% 6la #rance

profonde- or when you loo! at political life there is an old boys networ! of

6Gnar3ues% former students of the Hcole 5ationale de l0dministration &they are

M0' " ourdieu ma!es it clear that the best and most successful students are

those who are the richest in terms of symbolic capital% in other words8 those who

come from families where &literary' culture is important"

ourdieus approach of art and culture is that of a sociologist% which means the

focus is on the world of art more than on the wor! of art for itself8*

he examines *' the way individual artists and groups of artists interact8

collaboration% mutual exclusion% conflicts and competition and ;' the way

their world &the artistic field4field of cultural production' is organised-

his aim is to discover the characteristics of the field% the patterns you can

discover% the way it functions and decides upon reputations and careers8 he

3uestion he as!s for instance is whether the avantBgarde can liberate art fromfixed &that is to say bourgeois' social structures and if so% howC

(his approach of art implies the end of the romantic concept of genius% one of

the commonplaces4topoi we have seen8

the wor! of art is no longer considered as the result of asupernatural gift-

artists and art are mereproducts of their time-

wor!s of art function insocial configurations&institutions' that determine

their reputation8 art academies% art criticism% museums% grant providers- these

configurations are intertwined with other social institutions

: this means that art is not a mystery but a social construction- the artist is an

actor in a social field of influence" 0nd that brings us to (he mar!et of

1This part of the lecture has been taken from Ton Bevers, Kunst, geschiedenis en sociologie, in: KittyZilmans en !arlite "albertsma, Gezichtspunten. Een inleiding in de methoden van de kunstgeschiedenis,

#imegen, $%#, 1&&', pp()*1+)-, 1&&'(

Marjolein van Tooren 09.09.13


6/21


symbolic goodsK : a little difficult to read- the argumentation often is

repetitive"

#. he &ar'et of sy&(olic )oods

4.1. The logic of the process of autonomization

ourdieu first explains how art or% to put it correctly% the field of cultural

production% became autonomous" 0s I said before% the notion of field is central

to his theory- let us see what it means [slide *]8

#ield &economic% educational% political% cultural' a structured space with its

own laws of functioning and its own power relations independent of those ofpolitics and economy : that is how the emancipation4liberation of the

artistic4literary field too! place8 for centuries% nobility and church determined

the cultural production"

ut8 even though each field is relatively autonomous% it is structurally

homologous with the others8 ourdieu uses the word 6correlation here"

Its structure is determined by the positions agents occupy in the field% so

there is always a competition going on between these agents for control of

the interests or resources that are specific to the field in 3uestion and can give

them authority" In the case of the field of cultural production% interests and

resources are not material- its capital is symbolic the authority inherent in

recognition% consecration and prestige that gives the artist symbolic power%

that is to say8 power not reducible to economic capital" 0 field is a social universe with its own laws of functioning8 external

determinants can have an effect only through transformations in the structure

of the field itself : that is the evolution ourdieu s!etches in the first

chapter of the article8 four main reasons &p" */'% three periods &p" *- the %irst

,ein+ the uattro cento the "eriod in )hich the story a,out Lorentino

ta/es "lace' in which we see a complete revolution of the artistic field%

Marjolein van Tooren 09.09.13E


7/21


because power relations are changing8 professional artists and intellectuals no

longer accept rules coming from others &church% academies% politics' and this

autonomy transforms the relations between artists and between artists and

nonBartists"

(he conse3uences of this growing autonomy are8 *' the creation of a divide

between artBasBcommodity and artBasBpure symbolism &pure art'- between the

field of large scale production LP' where cultural goods are produced for

nonBproducers of cultural goods% for the public at large- and the field of

restricted production RP' where cultural goods are produced for other

producers of cultural goods &cultural elite' - ;' the artist is submitted to thelaws of the mar!et of symbolic goods% although he might thin! he is

completely free"

:


8/21


the doxa &the reigning rules'" (herefore they are bound to disconcert the

orthodox by their 6obscurity and 6pointlessness and they will have to defend

their own positions"

: there is a permanent search for originality in matters of aesthetics- a

permanent search for distinction socioBcultural differentiation% for being

uni3ue"

: artists do so especially by using new stylistic and technical principles8 in

painting&from realism to impressionism to 3uestioning painting itself' and in

literature &from realism to the modernist and postmodernist novel% the latter

showing overtly its structure e"g" with the commentary of the narrator brea!ingthe suspension of disbelief : there are no references to external demands% hence

no acceptance outside the field'"


9/21


ou might wonder why the field of restricted production does not disappear%

since it is separate from the public at large" In chapter 1 ourdieu explains how

that is possible $ the main factor being the role of the educational system"

2hereas inthe field of largeBscale cultural production consumption is

independent of educational level% in the field of restricted cultural production%

consumption and educational level are closely related" (his is because in the

field of restricted production% consumption is related to aesthetic disposition and

the mastery of the codes"

(he field of restricted production can only function because of the existence of8

B the institutions that conserve the capital of symbolic goodsB the institutions that reproduce agents capable of understanding the code

ou could say that these institutions $ academies% museums and the educational

system create a system that maintains itself &p" ;/' because they

B have the power to grant cultural consecration

B reproduce producers of a specific type of cultural goods% the corresponding

consumers% the consecration authorities necessary for this type of wor!% acultivated public and the agents of legitimi9ation or canoni9ation"

0nd then ourdieu signals a paradox when it comes to innovation" Innovation

means that the field has to be receptive to new ideas8 a new definition of wor! of

art% new aesthetics% new values about production and distribution and the

formation of new networ!s to spread the new ideas" ut at that point the field of

restricted production finds itself in opposition with the institutions whose

mission is conservation &page ;E% he distinguishes between avantBgarde%

academies4museums and the educational system- between intellectual culture

and scholastic culture'"

: paradox or at least ambivalence8 with their innovations% producers in the field

of restricted production challenge $ conservative $ educational authorities but

they are dependent upon them for recognition" ourdieu observes that the liberty

Marjolein van Tooren 09.09.13+


10/21


they ta!e depends upon their social status8 intellectual functionaries &petitB

bourgeois' and independent artist4intellectual &bourgeois' both have a

subservient position% but those who come from the 6petite bourgeoisie are most

directly under the control of the state because they are dependent on grants"

0nyway% it is clear that school functions li!e a filter8 it reinforces successfully

those who already possess the attitudes and aptitudes of the cultivated classes $

who master the code of interpretation% !now the rules of the game $ and it

refuses those who do not have these 3ualifications" (his means that education

leads to reproduction of the culture of the dominant group% it reproduces thehierarchy of the social world &good example of correlation'8 education reinforces

and consecrates the ine3ualities instead of diminishing them" (his is where we

find the notion of 6habitus8


11/21


0part from the art produced in the field of restricted production% there is also

middleBbrow4average art% the product of the system of large scale production"

ourdieu discusses it in chapter / and he observes that8

B in contrast to the 6high culture where artists wor! for their fellow artists and

where innovation is the only means of survival% middleBbrow art obeys the

imperatives of competition for con3uest of the mar!et-

B in contrast to the 6high culture where the wor!s create their public% in middleB

brow art wor!s are entirely defined by their public &highest social denominator-

average spectator'-

B in contrast to the 6high culture that cherishes the cult of form for its own sa!e&out of devotion to art for its own sa!e'% middleBbrow art searches for effect8

because of its submission to the mar!et- the artists are cautious and use only

tried and proven techni3ues-

B in contrast to 6high culture that is autonomous% middleBbrow art is

heteronomous% that is to say dependent on the mar!et"

(hese differences% according to ourdieu% lead to a very une3ual power of

distinctionK &p" 1*'- middleBbrow culture has to define itself in relation to

legitimate cultureK &p" 1;'" (he practitioners of middleBbrow art% in the margins

of legitimi9ed art% find themselves in an ambivalent position8 they attac! what is

consecrated% but are not able to offer an alternative% so in fact their attac! is a

longing for recognition" ut the only reason they can attac! is that every artist

has his position in the cultural field% according to his degree of consecration"

4.$. "ositions and position%ta&ings


12/21


position in the field8 they act accordingly% e"g" by imitating academic critics and

borrowing their language that is generally considered as 6a high standard"

PositionBta!ing is partly a matter of habitus $ unconscious strategies $ and partly

a matter of conscious strategies $ based on the representation the agent has of

his own position in the field and that of the agent he interacts with $" (his is

again a matter of habitus8

B an author chooses a publisher according to his position in the field

B an editor judges an author according to his position in the field

B a critic judges a wor! by the name of the author and the publisher

(his leads to selfBpreservation% but innovation is still possible- it comes from the

critic who deciphers the wor! of an avantBgarde artist and thus encourages him

to continue" @ee the example of Les =ditions de Minuit $ a #rench publishing

house well !nown for its 6nose for innovation8 they published the 6nouveaux

romans &consisting entirely of metadiscourse' in the EFs and ,Fs and the soB

called minimalists &that reintroduced the intrigue and the characters' in the .Fsand +Fs" #irst the authors were mere individuals% but because the critics and the

public saw them as weird innovators they formed a !ind of school% their

reputation &status4position' gradually bettered and they became the leading

authors"

: this means that the toposof vocation and the choices the artist ma!es are

nothing more and nothing less than a decision based on positions in the field &p"

1+'8 what seems to be inspired by vocation% determined by an intellectual

itinerary or fashion is in fact the result of the artists hierarchic position in the

field and of his cultural capital &p" 1+'" @o again we must conclude there is

nothing sacred or mystic about the artist at wor!-

: the same goes for citations &intertextuality and interpicturality'8 to cite N to

pay tribute to or to be original% but to ta!e position in the field"

Marjolein van Tooren 09.09.13*;


13/21


$. Pierre Michon

efore studying the artistic field represented inthe short story% let us tal! about

the position of Michon in the contemporary literary field8

one of the great names of contemporary #rench literature &though perhaps his

wor!s are not really bestsellers'- he refuses to be a celebrity% a media

personality-

part of a new development8 after the form experiments in the novel $

6nouveau roman which ourdieu calls 6denovellisation in note **% page ;;

$ the story% the intrigue is bac! &not only in #rench% but also in 7utch

literature- cf" Daessens%De revanche van de ro(anand the essays published

by 0thenaeum% Pola! O Dan Aennep'" ou should note that from the *+th

century onwards the exclusion of all social or socially mar!ed content from

the wor! was a mar! of 6experimental that is8 highBbrow culture% but no

the story is the experiment' the innovation' the characteristic of novels

belonging to the !R""

Michon8 3uestions concerning art and artists8 why does a writer write or a

painter paintC


14/21


#or our analysis% two issues are important8 *' what can we say about Lorentino

en Joseph in the light of ourdieus theoryC and ;' why has Michon chosen

themC

$.1. Roulin and (ourdieu

hat is the interest o% o,servin+ Van $o+h throu+h the eyes o% 2ose"h oulin45

: in fact this short story is a perfect illustration of4discussion with ourdieu

Roulin is naQve% is unprejudiced and tries to understand the talent of Dan

Aogh- he sees and interprets the paintings before Dan Aogh became a myth%

famous because of his suicide and because of what art critics and arthistorians say about his wor!- Roulin !new Dan Aogh before his mar!et

value became proverbial% before his wor! was commerciali9ed"


15/21


(he narrator 3uestions the sources of Dan Aoghs reputation8

B Roulin does not read between the lines% but reads the lines themselves- he

does not frolic in metaphor &p" +'

B the novel that had been written too often ever since &p" **'

B a man as massively notable today $ and perhaps for as few reasons &p" *;'

(he narrator systematically undermines everything the 6learned boo!s say

about Dan Aogh and about his portraits of Roulin-

B Roulin would be surprised to see what these boo! tell about him &p" '

B the narrator systematically underlines that we do not !now anything for

sure8 he could% he could% he could &p" ,'

B the holy sanctuaries &p" *1'- hac!neyed words and attitudes &p" *,'

B including the commonplaces &p" ;,'

B 0ccording to Roulin &or is it the narratorC' the 6superlative citi9ens% les

a(ateurs% are told they should be 6enamored of certain wor!s of art &p" /,'"

(he world of art is represented by the young man% the artBdealer who visits

Roulin and tells him about Dan Aoghs rising star : Roulin as!s himself

who had decided that he was a great painter &p" /F'- the young man tries to

explain what nobody understands &p" //' : ironic remar! about 0mericans

who !now what beauty is and by their dollars are able to prove it

(his story shows us how the #RP wor!s and how reputation is determined by

social laws% by the hierarchy in the field"

$.1. #orentino and (ourdieu

Marjolein van Tooren 09.09.13*


16/21


an you e6"lain7 ,y analy&in+ the "o)er relations in the artistic %ield

re"resented in the story7 )hy Lorentino7 in s"ite o% his talent7 has "assed into

o,livion4 8 Lorentino does not "lay the +a(e o% "o)er relations

"oer relations beteen )asari and #orentino

Dasari [slide ]8 rich- went to school with members of the family 7i Medici-

friend of Michelangelo- his wor! &frescos% paintings% churches' were

commissioned by popes and grand du!es- his biography of more than ;FF

artists is worldBfamous- : he is an authority% can decide4has decided upon

reputations- an 6agent of legitimi9ation

does not pay much attention to Lorentino- he is not worth ten or twenty pages

&*;,'- [slide 1]all he does is suggest interpretations of his life $ 6leaves it as

understood &*;,'

but what does the narrator doC (wo remar!s8 hand poorly suited to painting

&*;*'- we do not have to believe Dasari &*;,' he casts a doubt on Dasaris

judgment% thus denying4perverting the power relations"

The *artistic+ field in the short story

(he end of the Suattro cento &*;*'% so at the beginning of the autonomy of

the artistic field% but that was only for the elite in #lorence and we read

Lorentino never dared to go there-

#ield of class relations8 opposition between the city and the country% between

townspeople and peasants8 the latter fear that they will not be understood%

will not have enough words to ma!e their existence !nown &*;1'- cf" *' the

allusion that @aint Martin is there not only for the du!es but also for old

Marias &*;1' and ;' the farmers poor mastery of the language &*;1% *;'

0rtistic field8 reflects these relations8

Marjolein van Tooren 09.09.13*E


17/21


B the peasant with the pig is send away and humiliated by the painters%

because &understatement' he did not seem to come from 0rcady &*;;'% thats

to say he is not one of the rich commissioners-

B the peasant is deeply moved by the magic of images &*;/'- because of his

ignorance% he has his own hierarchy% his values are completely different from

those that are commonly accepted : for the peasant a portrait is what is most

impenetrable and mysterious% because of the price $ you pay half the price of

a farm% only for the colours" @o8 in the hierarchy of the artistic field he is just

a nobody"

The position of #orentino

Dasari says that he is poor% that he ma!es portraits of the rich and mighty and

that he is a pupil4follower of Piero della #rancesca- but we do not !now for

sure if Dasari spea!s the truth% because according to the narrator he follows

the legend &*;*' and he is a romantic% that is to say he has a vivid

imagination &*;;'-5" (he narrator too has a vivid imagination% because we do not !now at all

if he is right- his story about Lorentino is not even a reconstruction% it is mere

supposition : part of his strategy to reveal% and then undermine% the power

relations8 he shows us that a low position in the hierarchy and a lac! of

reputation do not necessarily imply that you are a bad painter"

: so he needs an un!nown painter whose life is still a mystery to all of us"

2hat does the narrator tell us about LorentinoC

B that he is a painter without a sign &*;;' which means that he does not

belong to the established painters-

B how he ma!es the portrait &*;E'8 Lorentino is not an innovator but clings to

accepted representations $ the expected moment% the saint as a Romansoldier- hesitation which model to choose : he is ashamed to receive

Marjolein van Tooren 09.09.13*,


18/21


something from his master and to receive something from a peasant

influence of economic structure4power8 he is middleBclass-

Reconstruction of #orentino,s life *- habitus+

Loren9o d0ngelo Lorentino for his mother% the neighbours and his patrons

&*;,B*;.' : he accepts this as reasonable &free indirect speech' T reflection

of economic field- but also a denigration

does not see the chiaroscuro- he has been taught to imitate the style of Piero

authority &*;.'- he does not have the guts to innovate-

as!s himself if he has become what he wanted to be &*;.'- he has created a

perfect woman $ his daughter 0ngioletta $ but he has not painted her & the

toposof the struggle between art and family- toposof Pygmalion'

: Lorentino is wondering why he has not been successful &*;.'

: finds himself only good enough to paint a peasants saint for a peasant

&*;+'% but that is hisidea% determined by his position in the artistic field

which reflects his economic position- he would have preferred another saint

because they represent a higher &symbolic' value-

: he has a pupil% but he thin!s he has not taught him much8 he has taught

him theory% but not talent% genius- he has not been a master to artolomeo

&*1F' he has failed because he himself was among the greatest &Piero%

Dene9iano'- and artolomeo is li!e a peasant% which means he is not really a

pupil to Lorentino &*1*% *1;- is not even mentioned by Dasari *1;'8 he thin!sabout his artistic career in terms of power relations8 master4pupil% finds

himself unworthy% but we do not !now if that is true"

: Lorentino suffers from his imperfection% see the thoughts he attributes to

his wife 7iosa about him being successful and receiving orders from the

courts% the pope% the princes &*11B*1/' : not for artistic reasons but for

reasons of power% glorification% reward economic reasons &*1/'

Marjolein van Tooren 09.09.13*.


19/21


he thin!s he does not deserve this fate% revels in selfBpity &*1/B*1'% which

means he depreciates himself and that is exactly one of the theses of

ourdieu8 once you are in a certain class% you tend to repeat the social

evaluation of that class% it sort of becomes hereditary because you display the

behaviour they expect of you% it becomes your habitus"

!lash%bac& *- habitus+


20/21


Lorentino dreams of another patron% @aint #rancis disguised as a pope or a

warlord &*/,'% who would have inspired him to create a masterpiece"


21/21


Michon completely perverts hierarchy8 *' in the story he shows 6the rules of the

game and shatters them by suggesting that Lorentino was a very gifted man%

perhaps even a greater artist than Piero- in fact he shows the negative effects of

the mar!et of symbolic goods% of the hierarchy in the #RP and ;' he writes in a

very elo3uent% very polished #rench &that evo!es a funeral oration or a

laudation' on someone who has passed un!nown into history : paradoxically%

that ma!es him a distinguished writer ut what he really does is criticise the

commerciali9ation of art and the hierarchy in the world of art" 2ith the

apparition of @aint Martin &after which Lorentino paints his masterpiece' he

seems to return to the romantic topos of the inspired genius" (he story is acritical reaction to the contemporary world of art"

text of lecture bourdieu and michon 2013

Documents