I’m new to Bourdieu
The title of this book of his alludes to the Kant book I’ve been talking about. Do the Frenchies think Kant is tasteless? German-French crossovers are arguably the highest possible cultural synthesis, though I’m sure WASPs will disagree. He notes that the Anglo-Saxon world has had a certain fascination with French snob culture and he seeks to clear up stereotypes. Back in the Pale days I do know that French women were trafficked as the finest whores. (I love locker-room talk.)
This is his discipline
Sociology endeavours to establish the conditions in which the consumers of cultural goods, and their taste for them, are produced
He says the definition of cultural nobility has been debated since the 1600s.
He says the pure intention of the artist is to be autonomous. That’s probably their self-understanding at least. Viewed from above, very few are autonomous at all.
His first sentence warns that it’s going to be seen as a French book. Yes, yes it is. Just imagine me holding a gun to my head as I type this post. Just kidding, it’s not that bad.
You do know that the cathedral is its own idea of taste, right?
taste, one of the most vital stakes in the struggles fought in the field of the dominant class and the field of cultural production.
Our dominant class facilitates a lowbrow conception of taste.
We arguably don’t have this dynamic
one is still liable to be led into accepting one or the other of the self-interested representations of culture which ‘intellectuals’ and ‘bourgeois’ endlessly fling at each other.
Our culture is all bourgeois, alternate intellectual representations of culture are not allowed to be flung, if we were to speak strictly.
Bourdeiu is another Frenchman for whom there is no American equivalent. This is a retard country, just accept it. Sorry, that’s tasteless to say- it’s a tasteless country. We don’t put any “stock” in culture here.
He says this is based on visceral disgust, ayup
the ‘facile effects’ which ‘pure taste’ stigmatizes, it could be shown that the whole language of aesthetics is contained in a fundamental refusal of the facile…
which invite him to regress to the most primitive and elementary forms of pleasure
It’s so all-pervasive. He likens it to an infant feeding on a breast.
This is acute phenomenology
Disgust is the paradoxical experience of enjoyment extorted by violence, an enjoyment which arouses horror. This horror, unknown to those who surrender to sensation
There’s something enjoyable about “breastfeeding”, about lowbrow entertainment. Even the snob senses that. What the herd animal doesn’t do is recoil in disgust once that entertainment is experienced. That actually happened to me earlier- I got that adventure study in the mail and going from Kant to that, it’s just too much of a change in levels of culture. And Grug isn’t disgusted by adventure media itself, let alone a theoretical study of it. It’s like what Huckleberry Finn said, certain natures go for the pie everytime, others go for the mystery.
This is how Kant thought “pure taste” should be evaluated
the intensity of the impulse denied and the vulgarity refused
It’s a form of asceticism. It’s literally Hitler to tell people not to be creatures of pure impulse. Bordieu says vulgarians are “only natural” and can’t dominate their nature. No self-consciousness. That’s just humiliating if you’re an animal, sorry to tell you.