comedy as symbolic violence

-

SYMBOLIC VIOLENCE

• Process where power relations are perceived not for what they objectively are but in a form that renders them legitimate in the eyes of the beholder

Symbolic Boundaries

• Divisions based on non-material things, more so beliefs

• Class division is embedded in symbolic boundaries

Moral Boundaries

• Drawing boundaries based on mortality, good and bad

• Not as enforceable as symbolic and aesthetic boundaries because no consensus on what morally right and wrong

Legitimate Taste

• Cultural preferences and practices deemed acceptable and prestigious within a particular social field

Field Logic

• Integration of nomos and doxa

Different Styles of Appreciation for Comedy

• HCC: Has to be more than funny- Complex, original and intelligent ex. Satires

• LCC: funny, pleasurable and sociable, less likely to draw boundaries ( open attitude)

HCC view on LCC comedy

• Coarse, loud, vulgar, aggressive, insensitive

LCC view on HCC comedy

• Puzzled attitude because they do not think have the cultural capital to appreciate “legitimate comedy”

• Some explicitly rejected High brow comedy - humourless and snobs

the “right to speak” or pass judgement

• Social privilege to express opinions or make judgments, right to have and dictate TASTE

• Is a mark of status and is stratified along class

• Reflects a lack of confidence and sense of cultural inferiority

What does Friedman & Kuipers say about the relation of comedy and personhood?

• Comedy taste invokes strong symbolic boundaries among HCC and LCC because comedy has a strong relatiohsipp to personhood- ability to create social bonds

What does friedman & kuipers say about comedy and symbolic violence

• Whether comedy taste acts as symbolic violence depends on if HCC comedy taste is widely shared and if LCC feel excluded by HCC rejection

What does friedman & kuipers say about peoples use of comedy

• Those with high cultural capital use comedy taste as a tool in claiming social distance