The Pros And Cons Of Cultural Capital

1507 Words7 Pages
A cultured man is a conquered man, and a conquered man will conquer. Though Bourdieu contradicts himself asserting cultural capital as primary while at the same time "subordinate to economic capital" (Swartz pg. 79), certain aspects of cultural capital remain superior to the general aspects of economic capital outlined in Swartz’ analysis of Bourdieu leaving it as the ultimately dominant form of capital. Particularly, the fact that cultural capital has a higher rate of accessibility to yield than economic capital makes it a much more lucrative form of capital to invest in for those with little capital to begin with.
Cultural capital is a connection to what Bourdieu describes as culture "verbal facility, general cultural awareness, aesthetic preferences, information about the school system, and educational credentials" (Swartz pg. 76). More specifically, it is a "social relation" (Swartz pg. 73) to these aforementioned forms of power. Which can mean possessing, possessing through association or simply, understanding this culture.
Economic capital, on the other hand, is more straightforward. It is respectable in the same way a sword is respectable. Undeniable and potent. No one can deny a 100 dollar bill because it lacks the subjectivity of a cultural item, which can potentially hold worth to some and be completely worthless to others. Why then does cultural capital hold no “theoretical priority” (Swartz pg. 78) over economic capital. This is because what Economic capital

More about The Pros And Cons Of Cultural Capital

Open Document