In the second half of 20th century France, what Pierre Bourdieu called “the absurd opposition between individual and society,” a “false opposition” between objectivity and subjectivity, was in vogue (Bourdieu, 1990:31). It was the clash between the structuralist view, where the universal rules of all societies provided a base to all social life and the postmodernist outlook which emphasized individual subjectivity. However, rather than viewing individuals and society as separate entities, Bourdieu emphasizes their relational nature, showing how they mutually shape and influence each other. Imagine society as a dance floor and individuals as the dancers – they move together, influencing each other’s steps and rhythms. Bourdieu’s perspective goes beyond seeing people as isolated actors making their own choices. It’s about recognizing how our actions and decisions are shaped by the larger social context we’re a part of. For instance, consider how your taste in music or fashion isn’t just about personal preference; it is also influenced by the trends and cultural norms around you. Likewise, society isn’t just a static backdrop – it is constantly shaped by its members’ collective actions and interactions, like a living, breathing organism. So, when Bourdieu talks about the relationship between individuals and society, he’s not describing a tug-of-war between two separate entities; he’s trying to explain the influence and interaction that defines our social reality. To do so, Bourdieu formulated three main concepts that are interrelated, namely habitus, capital, and the field. These concepts, when applied to the study of influencer culture, offer valuable insights into the relational dynamics, power structures, and mechanisms of influence within this field.

To understand the concept of field, one has to briefly get a taste of the other two concepts. Habitus, “a structuring structure which organizes practices and the perception of practices” (Bourdieu 1984: 170), acts as the first principle in the field. The second principle in field theory is the Doxa, which is the “universe of tacit presuppositions that organize action within the field.” These could also be called the rules of the game. He used the term habitus for the first time in his French translation of Panofsky’s work, for which he later on kept using alternate wordings such as “culturally conscious,” “habit-forming force,” “set of basic, deeply interiorized master patterns,” and “mental habit.” Habitus is like a cultural blueprint that runs deep within us, shaping our thoughts and actions based on the opportunities available within our social class. It prompts us to consider our behaviour as influenced and guided by ingrained tendencies we’ve absorbed from our upbringing and early societal experiences. For example, someone who grows up in a family where education is highly valued may naturally gravitate towards pursuing academic success, while another person from a different background might prioritize other forms of achievement based on their habitus.

In one of his papers, O’Hara explains the concept of the field by Bourdieu as follows: “The field is multiple and defined categorically in terms of economic, philosophical or scientific.” He also suggests that “different fields are relatively autonomous but structurally homologous: all the fields are subsumed by the field of power (O’Hara, 2000). This viewpoint emphasizes how different social spheres are interconnected and how power dynamics have a pervasive influence. Moreover, O’Hara emphasizes that the relational positions that the agents in a field have determined the structure of that field, supporting Bourdieu’s description of the field as a dynamic system. With this paradigm, agent placement analysis can be done relationally without requiring direct examination of the agents. Take social media, for example, where various “fields” exist, like fashion, leisure, and gaming. These fields all function according to their own set of laws, customs, and hierarchies, yet they are similar in the ways that power and influence are distributed. Social media influencers in the fashion industry hold different roles according to their follower count, engagement levels, and brand partnerships. As a reflection of Bourdieu’s theory that views the field as a dynamic system influenced by interrelated agent positions, these relational positions within the field contribute to the overall structure and functioning of the fashion influencer ecosystem.

In this essay, I am going to situate the field of influencer culture in the Bourdieusian sense to understand how agents within this sphere act, the habitus at play, and whether their position-taking serves to conserve or transform the existing social structure. Much like Bourdieu’s conception of the “intellectual field,” where writers, artists, and academics compete for symbolic capital, Influencer culture can be viewed as a field where individuals vie for attention, recognition, and status within the digital landscape. There has been an increase in the influencer culture globally, which can explain new forms of capital formation and consumption and hence also illustrate the applicability of Bourdieu’s theory beyond traditional academic or artistic domains, demonstrating its relevance to contemporary social phenomena.

Habitus: Cultural Blueprint in Influencer Culture

Habitus serves as an enticing lens through which I have tried to understand the dynamic layers that make up the composition of influencer culture. It is a cultural blueprint deeply ingrained within influencers, shaping their thoughts, actions, and strategies as they navigate the digital scenario to achieve success and wealth. Consider, for instance, an influencer whose habitus is steeped in the values of sustainability and environmental consciousness. This influencer’s content creation process is guided by a deep-seated commitment to promoting ethical brands and advocating for eco-friendly practices. Their habitus influences not only the types of products they endorse but also the messaging and storytelling techniques they employ to engage their audience. Through captivating visuals and compelling narratives, they inspire their followers to adopt a more environmentally conscious lifestyle, fostering a sense of community and shared values within their digital realm. This style of community building works for them. It helps them connect to more people via the internet and also attracts eco-friendly and sustainable brands. The ‘vegan’ vogue was able to stir up the same kind of revolution in the field of influencer culture. This influenced consumers to adopt veganism and ignited an increase in the number of vegan brands in the market. Thus, there exists a domino effect in the influencer culture and value sustenance. Moreover, their habitus informs strategic decisions, such as partnering with brands that align with their sustainability ethos and leveraging their platform to amplify environmental activism initiatives. Audiences are drawn to this influencer not only for their aesthetically pleasing content but also for the authenticity and integrity with which they embody their values. In this way, habitus not only shapes influencers’ content and engagement strategies but also fosters meaningful connections with their audience, ultimately driving the influencer’s success within the competitive domain of Influencer culture.

The Field of Capitalistic Influencer Culture

Another thing to put our focus on is the field’s diversity and the distinct rules governing its operation. Influencer culture operates as a structured space where individuals compete for attention, recognition, and influence, leveraging various forms of capital to enhance their standing within the field. Within the dynamic domain of influencer culture, Bourdieu’s conceptualization of the topic reveals an enthralling mosaic of dynamics and goals. Envision a vibrant marketplace where influencers in the beauty industry compete for attention, each showcasing their distinct combination of charisma and knowledge. In this domain, financial resources are crucial, as influencers pursue profitable brand alliances and sponsorships to bolster their content production activities. Imagine a beauty expert exhibiting the newest trends in cosmetics, deftly combining textures and hues to engage with their audience. With money in hand, they spend it on high-end cosmetics and state-of-the-art tools, turning their social media feed into a visual feast that demands respect and attention. All of it revolves around the production, circulation, and appropriation of symbolic as well as economic and cultural capital.

Applicability of the Field Theory

By applying Bourdieu’s concepts of habitus, capital, and field, we can gain a deeper understanding of how influencers navigate and shape this digital space. Firstly, the relational positions occupied by influencers within the field play a crucial role in shaping its overall structure. For example, consider the hierarchy within the fashion influencer niche on Instagram. Influencers with a large following and high engagement rates occupy top positions, enjoying greater visibility and access to lucrative brand collaborations. Meanwhile, emerging influencers may need help to break into the mainstream, facing challenges in gaining traction and recognition within the competitive field. Secondly, the concept of capital, encompassing economic, cultural, and social dimensions, is instrumental in understanding how influencers gain advantage and influence within the field. Economic capital enables influencers to invest in professional equipment, hire content creators, and attend industry events, enhancing their visibility and credibility.

On the other hand, cultural capital pertains to influencers’ knowledge, expertise, and cultural competencies, which they leverage to establish themselves as authorities within their niche. I see this as a form of hierarchy implementation by the high-rank holders, as they tend to form an influencer community among themselves through management agencies. These spaces require you to outperform others to access all the royalties and brand collaborations, which many small and emerging influencers need help to catch up with. Another factor that affects these positions is the possession of knowledge and cultural capital. For instance, beauty influencers with a deep understanding of skincare ingredients and makeup techniques can command authority and trust from their audience. Lastly, social capital plays a pivotal role in shaping influencers’ networks, collaborations, and opportunities within the field. Influencers with extensive social networks and connections may collaborate with fellow influencers, attend exclusive events, and secure brand partnerships, expanding their reach and impact. In conclusion, Bourdieu’s theory offers valuable insights into the relational dynamics, power structures, and mechanisms of influence within influencer culture, illuminating the intricate interplay between individual agency and social structure in understanding this digital phenomenon.

Habitus and Position-Taking in Influencer Culture

Habitus, as a deeply ingrained set of dispositions and behaviours, profoundly influences the position-taking behaviours of influencers within the field of influencer culture. Influencers’ habitus shapes their strategies and tactics, guiding them in maintaining or challenging the existing social structure within the field. An influencer with a habitus rooted in mainstream beauty standards may perpetuate conventional beauty ideals through their content, reinforcing the status quo within influencer culture. Conversely, an influencer whose habitus is informed by body positivity and inclusivity may challenge societal norms by promoting diverse representations of beauty, thus contributing to the transformation of the social landscape within the field. These position-takings are driven by influencers’ internalized dispositions and values, influencing the content they produce, the collaborations they pursue, and the messages they convey to their audience. By examining how habitus shapes influencers’ position-taking behaviours, we can gain insights into how individuals both reproduce and challenge the prevailing norms and power structures within influencer culture.

Conclusion

In wrapping up, trying to seep into the capitalistic influencer culture through Bourdieu’s lens has given us some fascinating insights. We have seen how influencers’ social positions shape the landscape, with economic, cultural, and social capital playing starring roles in their success. It’s like a digital marketplace where influencers with the right blend of charisma and know-how rise to the top while others struggle to break through. And let’s not forget about habitus – that inner compass guiding influencers’ decisions and content. Essentially, an influencer passionate about sustainability might weave eco-friendly brands into their posts, inspiring followers to make greener choices. Overall, Bourdieu’s theory offers a powerful toolkit for understanding Influencer culture’s working and its subjective nature. But there is still much to explore. We need to dig deeper into how new platforms and changing consumer behaviours are reshaping the game. And let’s not overlook the broader societal impacts – like how influencer culture shapes our sense of identity and authenticity. In essence, by continuing to unravel the mysteries of influencer culture with Bourdieu’s theory, we can uncover new layers of insight into our digital world and beyond.

References

Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

O’Hara, Dan. (2000). “Capitalism and Culture: Bourdieu’s Field Theory.” American Studies. 45 (1): 43-53.

***

Muskan Dhalwal is a postgraduate student at the Department of Sociology, South Asian University (SAU), New Delhi.