# The Measurement and Coherence of Taste: Analysing the Music, Art, and Literary Tastes of French Academics

Louis Gabrysiak, Delaina Haslam

► To cite this version:

Louis Gabrysiak, Delaina Haslam. The Measurement and Coherence of Taste: Analysing the Music, Art, and Literary Tastes of French Academics. Biens Symboliques = Symbolic Goods, 2024, 14, 10.4000/12bhc. hal-04702661

HAL Id: hal-04702661

https://hal.science/hal-04702661v1

Submitted on 19 Sep 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>
# The Measurement and Coherence of Taste:
Analysing the Music, Art, and Literary Tastes of
French Academics

Mesure et cohérence des goûts. Une analyse des goûts musicaux, picturaux et littéraires des universitaires français-es

Medición y coherencia de los gustos. Un análisis de los gustos musicales, pictóricos y literarios de lo(a)s académico(a)s francese(a)s

Messung und Kohärenz des Geschmacks. Eine Analyse des Musik-, Bilder- und Literaturgeschmacks französischer AkademikerInnen

Louis Gabrysiak

Translator: Delaina Haslam

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

OpenEdition
Journals

**Electronic version**

URL: https://journals.openedition.org/bssg/4320

ISSN: 2490-9424

**This article is a translation of:**

Mesure et cohérence des goûts. Une analyse des goûts musicaux, picturaux et littéraires des universitaires français-es - URL : https://journals.openedition.org/bssg/4147 [fr]

**Publisher**

Presses universitaires de Paris Nanterre

**Electronic reference**

Louis Gabrysiak, "The Measurement and Coherence of Taste: Analysing the Music, Art, and Literary Tastes of French Academics", *Biens Symboliques / Symbolic Goods* [Online], 14 | 2024, Online since 10 September 2024, connection on 18 September 2024. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/bssg/4320

This text was automatically generated on September 18, 2024.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

The text only may be used under licence CC BY-SA 4.0. All other elements (illustrations, imported files) are "All rights reserved", unless otherwise stated.
# The Measurement and Coherence of Taste: Analysing the Music, Art, and Literary Tastes of French Academics

Mesure et cohérence des goûts. Une analyse des goûts musicaux, picturaux et littéraires des universitaires français·es

Medición y coherencia de los gustos. Un análisis de los gustos musicales, pictóricos y literarios de lo(a)s académico(a)s francese(a)s

Messung und Kohärenz des Geschmacks. Eine Analyse des Musik-, Bilder- und Literaturgeschmacks französischer AkademikerInnen

Louis Gabrysiak

Translation : Delaina Haslam

<footnote n="1">1 For Pierre Bourdieu, the tastes and lifestyle of an individual are in relative unity because they come from the same “generative schemes.” Aesthetic dispositions that are expressed in a particular cultural domain are transferable from this domain to another in such a way that “a typical structure of preferences for and knowledge about painting is likely to be linked to a similar structure of knowledge and tastes in music, or even jazz or cinema” (Bourdieu, Darbel & Schnapper 1969: 101). This idea of the unity and coherence of tastes underpinned the construction of the questionnaire used to establish the “anatomy of taste” (Bourdieu & de Saint-Martin 1976) which was later included in *Distinction* (Bourdieu 1984a). In view of this, the hierarchical space of taste has a homologous relationship to the space of social positions: the consumption choices of an individual will focus on goods and works occupying most often a homologous position in the space of taste with that occupied in the space of social positions.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2 In the wake of *Distinction*, debates in the sociology of cultural practices have focused in particular on the question of the rise of cultural eclecticism, namely the fact that the upper classes consume and appreciate symbolic goods and works that are far apart or even at opposite ends of the cultural hierarchy (Peterson & Kern 1996). Studies that aim to reproduce the analysis of *Distinction* anywhere other than France and at any other</footnote>
point in time by remaining as close as possible to the approach of Bourdieu, in particular by combining different types of taste indicator, are generally critical of this idea of rising eclecticism (see Prieur, Skjott-Larsen & Rosenlund 2008 and, for a synthesis, Duval 2010). Within this literature there are different ways of measuring and objectifying taste, and indicators are constructed on the basis of different hypotheses so that differences in results are the product of these methodological differences. Quantitative research documenting a rise in eclecticism is most often based on statistical analysis using aesthetic genre classifications. Such classifications are then distributed throughout the analysis using scales of legitimacy, and its use and the rationale behind its constitution rarely discussed. Each genre is defined as being very legitimate, or having average or little legitimacy. These scales, when they are not constructed a priori, are constructed by inferring the degree of legitimacy of a genre or practice using the social position of practitioners or enthusiasts of this practice according to the hypothesis of homology between a hierarchy of cultural practices and a hierarchy of social positions (Robette & Roueff 2014).

Genre is therefore considered a reliable indicator not only of taste—which cannot be observed as such it itself—but also of a positioned taste—“classified and classifying”—in the space of tastes and practices, in such a way that it is possible to describe an individual who claims to like both jazz and rap as “omnivorous” or eclectic. However, criticism of genres as imprecise “portmanteau words” is not new (see DiMaggio 1987).

Genres hide a field or subfield of production behind a general category. This field or subfield is structured around poles (restricted audience versus the general public, symbolic versus commercial recognition, etc.), and in it artists occupy specific positions relative to one another (Bourdieu 1996; Duval 2016). While the use of genres can be relevant and defended when it comes to ascertaining and studying an affinity between a genre and a social group (that is to say two aggregated groups, of artists and works on the one hand, and of individuals on the other), it appears much more problematic when studying the tastes or cultural profiles of individuals. It is possible to state a preference for rock, pop, or easy-listening and chanson, and to like very diversely consecrated or recognized works or artists within these genres.

Based on analysis of the answers given by a population of French academics to three open questions about their favourite musicians, writers, and painters, this article will examine the relative homogeneity of academic taste and the permanence of unity and relative coherence of tastes based on co-citations and artist combinations in these three fields, studied using network analysis. Do the theories of eclecticism and dissonance stand up to analysis when we move away from genre classifications assigned by researchers between legitimate, average, and popular in favour of questions that relate to a preference for certain artists? Does the preponderant place given to musical taste in sociological literature not lead to over-generalizations based on a specific cultural sphere? Is taste shaped by logics other than genre, as captured by the co-citations of different artists? How should we differentiate between artists within the space of taste and thus determine the existence or not of relative unity? What possible major cultural gaps have been observed?

There's a dual purpose to surveying a population of academics. Level of education is the biggest determining factor of taste (Robette & Roueff 2017): by studying a small population whose members are highly qualified, the effect of the qualification obtained is neutralized and allows us to better observe the other principles of determination and
differentiation of taste. Being part of a profession with a high volume of cultural capital, academics are also a focus of cultural legitimacy; they embody the cultural pole of the dominant class. They therefore constitute a privileged point of observation of the transformations of cultural legitimacy.

7

First, the article discusses different ways of measuring taste and their legitimacy in use in sociological literature, showing how the method employed here is original in its use of open questions relating to artist names and in its analysis of occurrence grids. The second section focuses, in view of this, on the artists cited by this population of academics. It shows that within this profession of individuals whose qualification level is both high and identical, “cultural diversity” is entirely relative. Indeed, the list of artists cited testifies to the significance that scholarly culture continues to hold. However, this is not exclusive and such preferences are accompanied by more contemporary artists who occupy intermediate positions in their respective fields of production. Each sphere of taste has its own structure; the co-occurrences operating between literary authors are not governed by the same logic as that of musicians or painters on account of the different structures that govern the sphere and their respective field of production. Be that as it may—and this forms the focus of the third section—it is possible for tastes in music, literature, and art to intersect, and to obtain categories of taste that are relatively coherent from the point of view of the position of the different artists in their respective spaces of taste. We will see that these taste categories are linked to the social characteristics, other than level of education, of the respondents. Finally, we observe that "cultural transgressions"—that is, listing among cited preferences artists from different spheres that are distant from one another in terms of legitimacy—occur principally in musical tastes. These transgressions consist in the expression of a taste for musicians who have little legitimacy in combination with very legitimate tastes in literature and art.

Methodology

The data presented and used in this article come from a questionnaire written and distributed as part of a thesis combining ethnographic and statistical approaches and focusing on the lifestyles of academics. The research focused on the staff of a provincial university, one of the ten largest in France in terms of student enrolment, covering all university disciplines across all forms of higher education within a wide geographical area. This university holds an intermediate rank in international tables, thanks in particular to a few disciplines and research laboratories with high visibility, mainly in the fields of life and earth sciences. The questionnaire, conducted online and hosted on a personal server, was completed in 2016. The link to access it was first disseminated via an internal email list at the university, which was unmoderated and independent from management, before being sent out via “targeted” mailings to laboratories and teams. A total of 250 complete questionnaires were collected. For the purposes of this article, only the 183 complete questionnaires filled in by permanent humanities and science lecturers (which is equivalent to a little over 11% of all lecturers in these disciplines at the university studied) have been used¹. Disciplinary groups are generally represented equally, with a slight over-representation of “multidisciplinary” courses. The sample is, however, characterized by a significant number of women and senior lecturers, two characteristics that are linked on
account of the gender structure of the jobs. In the university studied, nearly 80% of professors are men², while women represent only 35% of all permanent lecturers (43.4% of our sample).

# 1. Surveying Tastes in Culture

## 1.1. Asking about Preferences without Genre Classifications

8 In their systematic review of works on eclecticism or omnivorousness, Robette and Roueff (2014) distinguish five types of possible question in order to construct taste indicators. These questions relate to either practices or preferences³. Questions about practices elicit a higher number of responses than questions about preferences: we may, indeed, say that we like doing an activity without having actually practised it for a long time, or by practising it occasionally. But questions about practices have the disadvantage of being sensitive to many material constraints, such as the cultural offer available and respondents' proximity to it, or the presence of children in the home whose cultural appetite may differ from those of their parents. Asking about preferences in abstracto places the individual in a situation whereby he or she has theoretical access to all cultural possibilities, thereby neutralizing these material constraints. Responses thus obtained are in theory purer, although there is a risk of accounting for very different degrees of engagement in the same way.

9 In the context of studying the relative homogeneity of academic taste, using preference questions seemed most appropriate. While the population studied—non-Parisian academics—has a common profession and is homogeneous as regards its educational level, the living conditions of its members are diverse (place of residence, family background, age, see Gabrysiak 2021). Asking about preferences rather than practices also allows us to account for the differences between Paris and other agglomerations. The most prestigious institutions, which represent the top of the academic field, are historically concentrated in Paris (Bourdieu 1984b). From a cultural point of view, the inhabitants of inner Paris benefit from a wider range of cultural activities and have unique cultural behaviours (which are not simply explained by their socio-economic characteristics and the high concentration of managers and intellectual professions), particularly with regard to attendance at live performances, which is higher than the national average (Lombardo & Wolff 2020: 22). This uniqueness of practices is not reflected in preferences. It is still necessary to determine which questions to ask in order to better understand these preferences.

10 Most often in surveys, preferences are gleaned via questions relating to favourite genres, whether of music (the most studied), literature, or film. This is particularly the case in research into issues of eclecticism, omnivorousness, and dissonance, from the pioneering work of Richard Peterson (Peterson & Kern 1996; Peterson 2004) to the more contemporary work of Bernard Lahire (2008), to which I will return, or that of Tak Wing Chan and John H. Goldthrope (2007), and Taru Lindblom (2022). However, genre classifications appear problematic in several respects, and some researchers have hypothesized that the emergence of the figure of the omnivore may simply camouflage the current difficulty for researchers in drawing a clear boundary between genres and
the relevance (or erasure) of such boundaries (Bellavance, Valex & de Verdalle 2006: 142).

11 Within this literature, Lahire's *La Culture des individus* (2008) is the only work which undertakes an empirical and detailed study of the transfer or non-transfer of aesthetic dispositions from one cultural domain to another (Lahire 2013). In so doing, it offers a good illustration of the problems posed by the imprecision of genre classification. Bernard Lahire's demonstration is based on the *1997 Enquête sur les pratiques culturelles des Français* survey⁴, as well as on a series of interviews. For the quantitative part of the survey, Lahire categorizes certain preferences and leisure activities according to a scale of legitimacy (very legitimate, or with average or little legitimacy), using aesthetic genres as indicators (rap, for example, has “little legitimacy”). He has seven spheres: music, books, film, television programmes, cultural visits (exhibitions, museums, galleries, amusement parks, etc.), cultural nights out (theatre, cinema, concerts, opera, etc.), and “leisure and entertainment.” According to the chosen method, each survey respondent is assigned a profile: “little legitimacy match,” “dissonant” (dominated by more or less legitimacy) and “legitimate match.” The individual profiles are then aggregated and quantified as rates within the general population.

12 Lahire concludes from this statistical analysis that the most common profile, the cultural norm, is dissonance: that is, for most individuals, having a mix of tastes for goods situated at varying legitimacy levels (legitimate/average/little legitimacy). This “dissonance” implies that transferring dispositions would be problematic: that a probable taste for a given object in a given domain could not be deduced from a taste expressed for another object in another domain. However, these findings depend on the genre classifications used and their distribution according to different degrees of legitimacy, which can lead to exaggerating the importance of the “dissonance.” Indeed, some genres are, at the level of the general population, chosen often and others very little. In the case of music, most of the dissonance can be explained by combinations of the “chanson/French easy-listening” genre (coded little legitimacy) and genres such as jazz or classical music (very legitimate). “The item corresponding to ‘easy-listening/ chanson,’ which is probably the most heterogeneous and polysemous of all the genres proposed, is cited by nearly half of respondents, and... only four other genres are cited by at least 10% of respondents” (Coulangeon 2003: 128). However, in the survey used by Lahire there is a question inviting listeners to “chanson/French easy-listening” to specify whether their interpretation of this term is closer to “chanson à texte” (a genre of song recognized for its literary credentials) or “contemporary chanson or pop hits,” etc.⁵ Taking these details into account in order to distinguish, within the polysemous genre of “chanson/French easy-listening,” legitimate (chanson à texte) and illegitimate choices, is sufficient to significantly modify the results obtained⁶.

13 In order to avoid these pitfalls and so as to retain statistical analysis of taste and its transferability from one cultural domain to another, I have favoured the use of open questions about favourite artists rather than questions about artistic genres. The questionnaire distributed to French academics employed at a major non-Parisian university contained three open questions: “Which are your favourite writers (maximum five answers)?;” “Which are your favourite musicians or groups (maximum five answers)?” and “Which are your favourite painters (maximum five answers)?” I hypothesized that a sufficient number of the same names would be cited by respondents to allow me to analyse co-citations.⁷
## 1. 2. How to Approach Open-Ended Questions about Taste Statistically?

14 While I deemed the use of open questions on preferences for artists to be an appropriate indicator of taste, it presupposes knowing which statistical methods to apply to these artist co-citations and how to situate the artists mentioned in relation to one another.

15 Several recent works have been based on analysis of answers given to one or more open or semi-open questions. These include the last three films seen by a sample of 18-20-year-olds (Boyadjian 2021), favourite musicians or groups from a pre-coded list of genres (Vlegels & Lievens 2017), and pieces of music recently heard and enjoyed by a population of 15-25 year olds (Azam et al. 2018). Answers obtained to open questions are treated and organized differently according to the stated object and hypotheses of each study. Investigating the persistence of the concept of cultural capital in explaining the formation of taste, Boyadjian classifies the films cited according to whether they have obtained a label of “arthouse” or “discovery and research” or no label from the Association française des cinémas d’art et d’essai [the French arthouse film association]. Rather than using the social position of respondents as the basis for his legitimacy scale, he uses a professional association recognized within the cultural field studied. He then establishes correlations between these different categories of film seen and the social profiles of respondents.

16 For their part, Azam et al. use network analysis to establish clusters of respondents (“music profiles” which combine social profile and ways of listening to and discovering music) and artists (the most cited artists together). The linking of these clusters allows them to establish a typology of “musical realms.” Finally, Vlegels and Lievens also use network analysis to form and relate clusters of music groups and clusters of listeners. They focus on links between clusters in order to establish different patterns of omnivorousness.

17 Having read this work, the use of network analysis seemed particularly suitable to deal with questions about the names of preferred artists. Network analysis allows a “from the ground-up” approach (Lamont 2010), requiring no recoding or pre-formed categories. The main names and their links appear in order to characterize style, the unifying principle of taste, a *posteriori* without supposing genre to be a unifying principle. Doing without genre classifications does not mean abandoning analysis in terms of cultural legitimacy and transferability of dispositions altogether. The limitation of the articles by Vlegels and Lievens and by Azam et al. is that, without genre, the authors also eschew the question of scales of legitimacy and, with it, the hypothesis of homology between the space of consumption and that of the social positions that underlie it.

18 Adopting Boyadjian’s approach to the cultural legitimacy of artists via forms of recognition specific to the field of production considered could provide a solution for situating artists in relation to one another. It would then be necessary to use the names of writers, musicians, and painters to determine the degree of legitimacy of each, and then to observe to what extent legitimate writers are cited with legitimate musicians, and so on. In practice, however, there is a threefold limitation in that it is difficult to find equivalents to the labels found in the field of film in other spheres such as music
and literature which are not based on a structured network like that of cinemas in the field of film. It would probably be necessary to combine several indicators such as prizes and awards for several hundred artists, which seems insurmountable. Moreover, the conversion of this type of indicator into degrees of legitimacy is not straightforward. There is also the problem of temporality. In the case of Boyadjian's investigation, label classification works because the films were released relatively shortly before the investigation. However, the degree of recognition and legitimacy of the works is subject to variation as their respective cultural fields evolve.

19

Faced with numerous artist names from different spheres (music, literature, and painting), and over an extended time scale, it seems impossible to find simple and unique criteria per sphere to situate them precisely on a scale of legitimacy. In order to study the logic of co-citations, different artist criteria for differentiation were taken into account first of all: years of practice; nationality and language; genre or movement; publishing houses for writers; museums and exhibition spaces for painters; main prizes received; and the sociological literature on the fields of production and consumption of these different spheres.

20

After having reviewed the list of all artists cited and noting the low value granted to "popular" and avant-garde artists, in the next section I will explore patterns of association between artists in the same sphere. Literature and the space of taste that is linked to it is different from the space of musical taste, which is itself different from that of taste in art. I will then examine transfers and links between these different spheres, and relate them to the social properties of respondents before, in the final section, focusing on the individual level to study how cultural transgressions materialize.

## 2. Academics' Tastes in Literature, Music, and Art

21

A total of 183 academics in literature, humanities & social science, and science responded in full to the questionnaire circulated. The distribution of responses varies depending on the cultural sphere considered: while 44% of respondents cited five musicians or music groups, only 22% cited five painters (Table 1). The simple fact of expressing a taste in art is therefore rarer (and more "classifying") than the expression of a taste in music. The number of artists cited would have been 915 for each domain if all respondents had cited five unique artists (artists cited only once). Although this theoretical maximum was a long way from being reached, the majority of artists cited in all questionnaires were only cited once (Table 2). Nevertheless, the number of respondents who cited five unique artists for any field is marginal (less than 2%), and almost all respondents cited at least one artist who was cited twice or more. Painting has: the fewest unique artists cited; the fewest individuals who cited at least one artist and at least five artists; and artists with the highest occurrences. Indeed, the most cited artist, all fields combined, is Claude Monet (36 occurrences), followed by Pablo Picasso (28 occurrences), and Vincent Van Gogh (25 occurrences).
<table><caption>Table 1. Distribution of number of artists cited by sphere by each respondent</caption><thead><tr><th>Number of artists cited by sphere</th><th>Writer(s)</th><th>Musician(s)</th><th>Painter(s)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0 artist</td><td>25 (14%)</td><td>24 (13%)</td><td>49 (27%)</td></tr><tr><td>1 or 2 artist(s)</td><td>32 (17%)</td><td>17 (9%)</td><td>29 (16%)</td></tr><tr><td>3 or 4 artists</td><td>47 (26%)</td><td>44 (24%)</td><td>47 (26%)</td></tr><tr><td>5 artists</td><td>61 (33%)</td><td>80 (44%)</td><td>40 (22%)</td></tr><tr><td>No responses<sup>8</sup></td><td>18 (10%)</td><td>18 (10%)</td><td>18 (10%)</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>183</td><td>183</td><td>183</td></tr></tbody></table>

Interpretation: 25 (14%) of respondents did not cite any writers; 61 (33%) cited 5.

<table><caption>Table 2. Total number of artists by cultural sphere</caption><thead><tr><th>Number of artists cited by sphere</th><th>Number</th><th>Of which mentioned only once</th><th>% artists with only 1 occurrence</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Writers</td><td>288</td><td>198</td><td>69%</td></tr><tr><td>Musicians</td><td>325</td><td>214</td><td>69%</td></tr><tr><td>Painters</td><td>122</td><td>71</td><td>58%</td></tr></tbody></table>

Interpretation: 288 names of writers were cited, of which 198 (69%) were cited only once.

## 2. 1. A Relative Cultural Diversity

22

What we observe, furthermore, with regard to the list of all artists cited is the continued significance of intellectual and scholarly culture for the academic population. In painting, music, and literature, the most cited artists include the “classics”: eighteenth-century composers of classical music including Mozart and Bach; nineteenth-century writers including Zola and Dostoevsky; and nineteenth-century painters including Monet and Van Gogh. A significant portion of the tastes expressed are therefore focused on the great works of the past⁹. Around 16% of composers and music groups cited relate to classical and highbrow music; and 30% of respondents cite at least one¹⁰; 41% of respondents cite at least one writer of general literature from the nineteenth-century or earlier. Among the more contemporary artists we also see representatives of highbrow culture: writers who are already highly consecrated such as Kundera or Camus and painters such as Soulages. The second observation concerns the large number of artists who are far from the canons of their sphere. These are
varied, and position themselves differently in cultural hierarchies. Speculative fiction (S. King, H. P. Lovecraft, J. R. R. Tolkien, and so on; cited by 21% of respondents) and crime fiction (27% of respondents) feature prominently. In music, a significant number of rock bands were mentioned, including bands that started in different eras (U2, Muse, Pink Floyd, and so on): 26% of the groups cited can be classified as “rock” (all styles combined)¹¹, and 55% of respondents cite at least one of these groups. Chanson is also prominent (Georges Brassens, Jacques Brel, Renaud, and so on: a genre of which at least one artist is cited by about 22% of respondents); but we see few contemporary easy-listening and chanson artists (such as Calogero or Florent Pagny).

23

The list of the numerous artists cited testifies to a certain diversity, whether it be in the artists' era, nationality, or their presence or not in school curricula. However, this diversity remains limited, and the list of artists is also illustrated by its absences, its voids, by regions and fields not represented in the tastes of the academics interviewed. Whole sections are absent: there is practically no rap or metal, and even less metal described as “extreme,” which implies the persistence of a rejection by the highest categories of these musical genres (Bryson 1996). Nor do we find authors of children's or young adult literature – the consumption of which has increased sharply in recent years, even among adults (Donnat 2011). On the more commercial side, many of the best-sellers are absent. Only three (Stromae, Daft Punk, and Bob Marley) of the twenty most cited music artists in Azam et al.'s survey (2018: 348) make marginal appearances in the responses to my questionnaire. Maître Gims, Avicii, and Beyoncé are not cited at all. Nor do the usual best-sellers in literature appear: Guillaume Musso is quoted—only twice—but not Marc Lévy or Katherine Pancol. The only author correlated with the working classes in Aalborg (Denmark)'s social space survey, Danielle Steel, does not appear either (Prieur et al. 2008). Finally, there is also under-representation of avant-garde artists. From contemporary artistic movements in painting to more experimental music and with the exception of a few writers of the “Nouveau Roman” genre (Claude Simon), these academics' tastes remain generally rather conservative in that they are orientated towards works that have long been consecrated.

24

We therefore see relative diversity of preference expressed in terms of genre, period, and position in cultural hierarchies: the most popular works, in the sense that they are associated in terms of consumption with the working class, have a marginal presence, just like avant-garde artists. It remains to be seen exactly how this relative diversity is organized, by studying links between artists within each cultural sphere studied, then by bringing together these three spheres to ascertain the level of coherence of the different realms of taste thus created.

## 2. 2. Very Structured Tastes

25

How should we process this set of responses in which some respondents gave fifteen names of artists, others only two, and where the low numbers associated with each artist make it difficult to use many of the usual statistical methods? And in turn, how can the links between different artists be analysed sociologically?

26

As discussed above, network analysis provides a good method with which to process this type of data. I first put artist names and co-occurrences in the form of an adjacency matrix before making graphs using Gephi software. Artists are represented by circles (“nodes”), the size of which is proportional to their total number of citations. When
two artists are cited together (by the same respondent), a link appears between them, and the more often they are cited together, the thicker the link. These networks were then spatialized. The principle is simple: nodes repel one another and links bring them closer together. Thus, two unconnected nodes repel each other when those united by many links are close. Artists are grouped together using the Louvain method (Blondel et al. 2008). This is a method of partitioning nodes, to ensure that there are the maximum links within each group and the minimum between different groups. Music, literature, and painting were processed separately, since each sphere appears to have its own specific logic in terms of organizing tastes. I maintained a threshold of two for the artists. For an artist to be present, he or she must be cited at least twice (in other words by two different individuals).

Visualization and spatialization in the form of network analysis of the tastes of academics in literature (figure 1), music (figure 2), and art (figure 3) show different patterns of association from one sphere to another. Tastes are organized differently according to the sphere, which is itself differentiated by its structure. Literature is not the same as music or art, and each has its own methods of discovery and consumption of works.

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Figure 1. Network analysis of writers</figcaption></figure>

Source: Author's database.

The space of literary tastes constructed here (figure 1) reveals principles of aggregation and opposition at work within the field of literary production in France and its particularities. One of its characteristics is its historical link with the educational institution. More than in any other artistic sphere, the norms of literary legitimacy are instilled in the entire educated population in France by the educational institution, built around a national language. This closeness can be seen in the size of group 4 and its links with groups 3, 5, and 1, which include classic and scholarly writers as well as more contemporary, but consecrated—and predominantly French—writers. There are a high number of Nobel prizewinners among these writers—both French, in Sartre, Camus, Simon, and Modiano, and foreign, in Faulkner, García Márquez, and Hemingway. Another characteristic of the French literary field is the significance of publishing houses, and among them some dominant publishers. The most classic
writers as well as more contemporary but recognized writers are published
by Gallimard. Namely, a well-established publisher in the field with a long history, and
one that has accumulated a high volume of symbolic and financial capital
(Bourdieu 1999).

29

Conversely, in groups 6, 2, and 7, composed mainly of writers of speculative fiction, detective, and historical novels, the spectrum of publishing houses covered is wider. Alongside other dominant publishers such as Albin Michel (who publish Stephen King and Bernard Werber, in particular), there are smaller publishing houses specializing in science fiction or fantasy such as L'Atalante (who publish Terry Pratchett in France). The presence of writers of detective novels in different groups reflects the weight that this genre has acquired in publishing (Collovald & Neveu 2004): consumed by different readerships, the detective novel now permeates almost the entire field. The main fantasy and science fiction authors that appear here (Tolkien, King, and Asimov) are already well established and have become “classics” of their respective genres. While these writers remain less consecrated than classic authors or writers of contemporary general literature, they cannot be described as illegitimate literature—they are, for example, the subject of theses in literature (and not only in English-language scholarship). Tolkien was the subject of an exhibition at the *Bibliothèque nationale de France* in 2019¹². The only real case of a less consecrated writer, Guillaume Musso, appears alone on the right of the graph: two individuals cited him without mentioning any other writer.

30

The production, dissemination, and consecration of music is less institutionalized than that of literature: we cannot easily refer to a field of production with well-established poles. Contrary to literary tastes that show an opposition between general and genre fiction, the graph of tastes in music places composers of classical and highbrow music at its centre (figure 2). The centrality of these composers is partly deceptive since it primarily results from the prevalence of Mozart, who is the most cited composer (as was the case for the questionnaire circulated in Flanders and analysed by Vlegels and Lievens [2017]). This “classic” and highbrow group has strong ties with French singers from the late 1950s to the 1970s known as à texte (such as Jacques Brel or Barbara).
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Figure 2. Network analysis of musicians and music groups</figcaption></figure>

Source: author's database.

31 In addition to these composers and singer, several groups are organized according to the genre and era of the artists they contain. There is a time continuum at the bottom of the chart, from rock bands from the 1960s and 1970s (The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, Neil Young, and Led Zeppelin, for example) to more recent bands on the right of the figure, through the 1980s and 1990s (Bob Marley, Nirvana, and Noir Désir), up to the 2000s (Muse, Coldplay, Linkin Park, and so on). This continuum is made up of alignment between artists of the same generation (or those who had significant success at the same time), but also of porosity. This transition from one generation to the next is marked by the progressive weakening of the links between artists: none of the rock bands of the 1960s and 1970s from the bottom of the graph has been cited with those of the 2000s. Time can be a factor of legitimacy and capital accumulation. The oldest rock music has gradually become part of heritage (Le Guern 2012), not only through its "museumization," but also thanks to the sometimes posthumous recognition that reissues allow. The ageing and displacement of bands within cultural hierarchies also takes place at the hand of the public, who continue to listen while occupying different and higher positions in the social space.

32 There were not enough painters sufficiently cited to establish valid groups (figure 3). Painting does not owe its dissemination or the consecration of artists to the educational institution (Moulin 1976). Unlike music, it probably does not play a part in the daily life of the majority of respondents. We therefore see tastes in art which are highly concentrated in a few artists, mainly Monet, Van Gogh and Picasso. The "symbolic revolution" carried out by Manet in the second half of the nineteenth-century rendered painters linked to the Academy obsolete, and led to the advent of a new taste. Probably more immediately than Edouard Manet, Claude Monet established
himself as an average and safe taste in painting, after having sparked the ire of art
critics during his lifetime (ibid.: 403). Beyond Monet, among the painters linked to him
are the Impressionists and their successors (Gauguin) who, when the Impressionists
themselves had for all intents and purposes become into the new academicism, came to
replace them (Bourdieu & Charle 2013: 573). These artistic tastes correspond to the
collection of the Musée d'Orsay, which opened in 1986 to exhibit works from the second
half of the nineteenth-century and which has a large collection of Impressionist and
Post-Impressionist painters.

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>Figure 3. Network analysis of painters</figcaption></figure>

Source: author's database.

Nevertheless, we also find older painters; these are generally representative of the highest-ranked genre of past centuries—religious or historical painting (mainly De Vinci, but also Bosch). The painting category also accommodates more contemporary artists, with the presence of Andy Warhol, Pierre Soulages, Jean-Michel Basquiat and Gerhard Richter, among others.

34 It now remains to be seen how these different tastes overlap, occur side by side, or do not coincide when viewed together. Do those who listen to Bach also read Musso?

3. Coherence and Transgressions

In order to best analyse this question of the coherence of tastes and obtain data
relating to the transferability of aesthetic dispositions, I built a two-mode network
using Pajek software. This time, it was no longer a question of linking artists to one
another, but of linking individuals to artists and then grouping individuals who tended
to cite the same artist combinations. The objective is to observe the social composition
of the different clusters and link the socio-demographic properties of respondents to the groups of artists cited. This approach is similar to the use of correspondence analysis (CA), which is often used in the sociology of cultural practices in that the socio-demographic properties of individuals do not play a role in the construction of the taste clusters. But unlike CA, it links individuals more than it shows relationships between different positions relative to each other within a theoretical space (Duval 2012).

## 3. 1. Tastes and Clusters

36

Network analysis reveals nine clusters grouping a variable number of individuals and artists (Table 3). Since the numbers are low, only the most salient social characteristics appear. The naming of these clusters took into account both the association patterns detailed in the previous section and the social characteristics of the individuals associated with them. A group of tastes in literature does not always strictly correspond to a group of tastes in art or music and vice versa. The different structures of content and consumption prevent a perfect correspondence of tastes. Some groups are also defined more by one or two spheres than by another: group 7, that of “contemporary success” is defined first by music and then by the presence of Monet. Affinities are established nonetheless and, like the diversity of artists, the mix of groups is relative.

37

Although classical composers are cited together, just like academic and legitimate writers, they are divided between different groups. There seems to be a logic of notoriety or knowledge: group 2, “classic legitimacy,” groups probably the best-known composers and writers together. According to the 2008 *cultural practices of the French survey*, 89% of the population “knows Mozart,” and to this we must add the 7.3% of individuals who know him “only by name.” Brassens is known by 93.3% of the population (+ 3.4% “by name”); Van Gogh by 80% (+ 9.5%), and so on: far ahead of Flaubert, Duras, or Mahler, for example¹³. The division of legitimacy into several groups (mainly group 2, “classic legitimacy,” and group 5, “the sense of distinction”) can partly be understood as follows: the best-known painters, composers/singers, and recognized French writers are cited together while lesser-known legitimate artists are likewise cited together. Speculative fiction is found mixed with some rock and hard-rock bands group 1), although the latter are cited fewer times than the authors in question). Group 7, “contemporary success,” includes rock bands of the 2000s who enjoyed strong commercial success (Muse, Coldplay), French variety, contemporary best-selling authors (Pierre Lemaitre, Joël Dicker), and Claude Monet, whose renown has itself greatly increased in recent decades. Group 3, “newly ennobled,” includes contemporary painters (Soulages, Miró) and writers of the twentieth century who have already entered the school curriculum.
<table><caption>Table 3. Clusters linking artists and individuals</caption><thead><tr><th>Classes</th><th>Numb. artists</th><th>Numb. individuals</th><th>Main artists</th><th>Salient social characteristics</th><th>Affinity clusters</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Group 1<br>Imaginaries</td><td>35</td><td>26</td><td>J.R.R. Tolkien,<br>Klimt, S. King,<br>Bosch, Pink Floyd,<br>Asimov, Boticelli,<br>Lovecraft,<br>Magritte,<br>Metallica,<br>Linkin Park,<br>Iron Maiden, AC/<br>DC...</td><td>Masculine (88,5% men),<br>Men aged 45-54 years old (50% of the group, and 50% of the 45-54 years old men), scientific disciplines.</td><td>Group 4,<br>Group 2,<br>Group 7</td></tr><tr><td>Group 2<br>Classic legitimacy</td><td>23</td><td>23</td><td>Van Gogh, Mozart,<br>E. Zola, Bach,<br>F. Dostoïevski,<br>J. Brel, G. Brassens,<br>Klee, Barbara,<br>Cezanne, G. de<br>Maupassant,<br>Brueghel,<br>Beethoven...</td><td>Socially<br>undifferentiated.<br>Concentration of<br>"inactive mother".</td><td>Group 4,<br>Group 5,<br>Group 7,<br>Group 3</td></tr><tr><td>Group 3<br>Newly ennobled</td><td>30</td><td>20</td><td>Miro, A. Camus,<br>D. Bowie, Turner,<br>Renaud, Caravage,<br>Noir désir,<br>Soulages, Chopin,<br>M. Yourcenar,<br>J. Kerouac, J.-P. Sartre...</td><td>Young (80,5% of less than 45 years old).</td><td>Group 2 and 4</td></tr><tr><td>Group 4<br>The average taste</td><td>31</td><td>20</td><td>Picasso, Queen,<br>Matisse,<br>A. Bashung,<br>F. Vargas,<br>K. Follett,<br>H. Mankell,<br>Gauguin,<br>H. Murakami,<br>A. Indridason,<br>Christine and the<br>Queens, Friant,<br>O. Adam,<br>A. Gavalda,<br>A. Souchon...</td><td>Rather feminine.<br>None of the<br>youngest (25-34).<br>Midlde-class/<br>working-class<br>parents.</td><td>Group 2</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tr><td>Group 5<br>The sense of Distinction</td><td>31</td><td>15</td><td>Chagall, M. Kundera, Modigliani, Vermeer, G. Garcia Marquez, Schubert, G. Flaubert, Bacon, Bonnard, C. Simon... Her ewe find "established" authors from abroad: Buzzati, Fante, Mishima, Zweig... Only one rock band: Led Zeppelin.</td><td>60% of the group has at least a parent who is a teacher/an academic<br>0% of father OR mother working-class.</td><td>Group 2,<br>Group 9,<br>Group 7</td></tr><tr><td>Group 6<br>Rock/jazz classics and noir fiction</td><td>17</td><td>11</td><td>Kandinsky, The Rolling Stones, H. Coben, J. Irving, D. Simmon, L. Armstrong, N. Simone, Dali, A. Christie, B. Werber, Rothko, The Beatles...</td><td>Scientific disciplines.</td><td>Group 2,<br>Group 4</td></tr><tr><td>Group 7<br>Contemporary success</td><td>24</td><td>19</td><td>Monet, Muse, Manet, U2, J.-J. Goldman, Coldplay, Calogero, de la Tour, A. Nothomb, P. Lemaitre, C. Lackberg, D. Pennac, J. Dicker...</td><td>Mostly female<br>"Recent" academic disciplines:<br>Physical education and sport science, education sciences, information and communication studies</td><td>Group 4,<br>Group 2,<br>Group 1</td></tr><tr><td>Group 8<br>Nonconformists artists</td><td>26</td><td>11</td><td>Radiohead, Renoir, The Doors, B. Vian, Neil Young, L. Tolstoï, M. Duras, Nirvana, Philip K. Dick, R. Gary, The Cure, Arthur H, Basquiat...</td><td>Upper-class parents</td><td>The most closed-off</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Group 9<br>History and<br>heritage</td><td>20</td><td>10</td><td>H. de Balzac, U.<br>Eco, De Vinci,<br>Courbet, V. Hugo,<br>Delacroix,<br>J. Austen, S.<br>Gainsbourg...</td><td>The least closed-off:<br>Group 2-1-4-7...</td></tr></table>

Source: author's database.

38 In addition to their artists, these clusters are defined and distinguished by the social characteristics of the respondents who form part of them. The structure of the tastes of the academics studied is determined by combining their social background, gender, age, and generation. Some taste groups appear to be built primarily around the gender of respondents (1,7), others of the same age (3), sometimes both (4), as well as social background (5, 8) and academic discipline (1,6,7). Others are undifferentiated in terms of age and gender. Being part of a specific class fraction, that of academics, does not have a unique and uniform effect on all members. Professional socializations modify or reinforce prior cultural socializations, according to the tastes that are valued within the university sub-space they occupy: group 1 is predominantly male and composed of academics in scientific disciplines (where female representation is low). These academics therefore evolve on a daily basis in a masculine peer group in which classic scholarly culture likely plays no role. Group 2, that of classic legitimacy, is socially undifferentiated. We may surmise that this is fairly typical of an academic group as a class fraction with strong institutionalized cultural capital. Group 5, "the sense of distinction" stands out both for its high concentration of academics who themselves have at least one teacher parent and for the complete absence of academics from a working-class background. The longer history of cultural capital in this group means that members tend to choose works that are less accessible or less well known than the classics; their choices include writers who are less linked to the school system than those chosen by the newly ennobled, constituting a form of "free culture" (Bourdieu & Passeron 1964).

39 The clusters are not closed off, and artists who are in separate clusters are nevertheless regularly cited together. The affinity between clusters was calculated by cross-referencing the cluster of individuals and that of the artists they cited. The aim was to track how many individuals in a given cluster cited artists from another cluster to establish which clusters had the most links between one another. In fact, two clusters have links with almost all the others: that of "classic legitimacy" and that of "average taste." 'Classic' culture is prevalent in all tastes, principally via its three main nodes: Mozart, Van Gogh, and Zola.

40 Different taste clusters—which are porous to varying degrees—coexist, therefore, within the academic population. These clusters have a certain coherence, both in aggregation of artists (whose positions, when related to their respective, variously structured fields, can be considered quasi-analogous) and individuals (for whom social background, gender, age, and discipline act together to determine tastes). The occupational group has undergone major morphological transformations in recent decades: from 8,131 members in 1960, or 0.03% of the active population, to 89,400 in 2005-2006, or 0.4% of the active population (Musselin 2008: 3). This strong influx of new
members has opened the door to new tastes, as has happened in the wider “managers and higher intellectual professions” group (Coul angeon 2010). At the same time, internal balances and power relations between disciplines have evolved. The relative decline of literature and humanities has contributed to the reversal of a form of classic exclusivism, favouring instead the importation of genres such as rock within classic tastes. However, while such importation has taken place, this has happened in group 5, “the sense of distinction,” via the classics of the genres in question (Led Zeppelin is the only rock band linked to this group). This indicates a form of “enlightened eclecticism” at work within a fraction of the non-Parisian academics studied, which links artists at the frontier of scholarly culture or on their way to crossing it with this classic culture (Coul angeon 2003). This is consistent with the maintenance of class boundaries, which is visible in the absence of artists associated with the working class. This is consistent with observations established in aspects of the lifestyles of the upper classes other than aesthetic taste (for example, on the culinary dislikes of American progressive elites, see Tissot 2013).

41

The joint analysis of the tastes and social profile of respondents suggests academics to be part of a profession affected by various power relations at work in the general population (social background, sex, age, discipline) as opposed to a whole “eclectic”, “omnivorous” or “dissonant” class fraction. It is therefore necessary to take into account the interactions between these different power relations in order to establish a scale of legitimacy of tastes (Noues, Robette & Roueff 2021). Since this is an academic population, the most dominated tastes of the scale constructed by Robette and Roueff, which was based on a general population survey (linking romantic literature to female respondents, for example), are absent from the clusters presented. The multidimensional structure of tastes implies a non-linear scale, ranging from “the sense of distinction” cluster, whose members have strong inherited cultural capital, to that of “contemporary success,” whose members are more likely to be women and in disciplines with less seniority within the academic field. We observe that the gender differentiation of tastes declines with the rise on the “scale of legitimacy” (ibid.: 15), while less legitimate tastes are located on the side of female tastes.

## 3. 2. Great Culture, Small Transgressions

42

Having established these clusters and explained the logics of artist-respondent combinations, the question of coherence and, hypothetically, the transposability of taste dispositions meets a final obstacle which requires us to return our focus to the individual level. Taste clusters not being mutually exclusive, the majority of respondents cited artists belonging to several clusters. The absence of a taste cluster composed exclusively of less consecrated or popular artists owing to the presence of legitimate artists in many clusters negates any attempt to associate a degree of legitimacy with a cluster and then carry out a series of counts in order to establish individual “profiles.” It is nevertheless possible to answer the question of distribution, at the individual level, of these multi-group citations. To do this, I proceeded in two ways: on the one hand, I noted artists cited by respondents who combine artists from the most legitimate groups (“classic legitimacy” and “the sense of distinction”) with other artists from the least legitimate groups; and on the other hand I observed artists who are never combined. Which types of artists are combined or, conversely, never cited together? What great cultural gaps emerge thanks to these observations?
43

We can see relative cultural “transgressions”: co-citations of very legitimate artists with others who are less so. If such transgressions were merely the result of the multiple secondary socializations of each individual, they would be unpredictable or to some extent disordered. However, these transgressions obey rules: there are transgressions that are acceptable and those that are ostensibly not.

44

"Transgression"—or great cultural gaps—happens, in fact, through music. In other words, while we find groups from "contemporary success" within the musical sphere combined with very legitimate artists, we do not find composers other than Mozart combined with writers of "average" literature. For example, one respondent combined U2 with Kundera and García Márquez. We see David Guetta cited with Houellebecq and Dostoevsky, Linkin Park with Sartre, and there is even a co-citation of Lady Gaga and Flaubert. Painters from the most legitimate groups are also combined with music groups with less legitimacy: French punk band Les Wampas are combined with Chagall, and Coldplay with Soulages. But Bach, Chopin, Wagner, Schubert, Schumann, Rachmaninov, Mahler, Debussy, Bartok, and Dvorak are only ever combined with very legitimate writers. The only exception to this is science fiction and fantasy classics: one interviewee cited Bach and Mahler with Lovecraft; another Bartok and Debussy with Tolkien.

45

Classical music is prevalent in all groups (via Mozart for less legitimate tastes), and tastes for classical and scholarly composers other than Mozart are more discriminating and classifying than others. Music itself was first considered to be a noble art more recently than literature or painting. By the eighteenth-century it was already considered to be more sensitive to fashion and its changes (Weber 2010). In the absence of a long history or a corpus of classic works inherited from antiquity, its status as a scholarly art stabilized late in the second half of the nineteenth-century (ibid.). With a tradition since then, but without strong reins such as the school system can constitute¹⁴, legitimate musical dispositions are rare (Bourdieu 1984a). Music is the sphere most subject to rapid variations in terms of market and what it offers—constantly readjusting to technological developments that change how we listen (Donnat 2018). Music has become a common practice today: just 9% of French people said they listen to music every day in 1973 compared with 57% in 2018 (Lombardo & Wolff 2020), and the increase affects all generations. The prevalence of listening is connected to the various ways in which it is consumed: with friends, as background, while doing another activity, or attentively. In parallel with the increase in people listening to music “almost every day,” doing so “without doing anything else” has become rarer. This change in consumption patterns and the decreased stability of the field of production have helped make light, contemporary, commercial consumption more acceptable alongside scholarly or serious consumption for a population with strong institutionalized cultural capital. The most legitimate musical dispositions have become rarer and even more distinctive.

Conclusion

46

The study of three open questions about preferences for artists in different spheres (literature, music, and art) offers an original approach to the question of coherence and unity of taste. By avoiding genres a priori, we observe that the logics of genre, while present in the constitution of taste clusters, are insufficient to account for the
structuring of these clusters. Each cultural sphere has its own morphology of taste
which depends on the culture type in question, the structure of its production,
intermediaries who promote it and try to predict its reception, and links between its
field of production and other fields. Although different tastes do not overlap exactly,
bringing together tastes in literature, music, and art enables us to observe coherent
taste structures. The use of genres in sociological literature most likely leads to an
overvaluation of the phenomena of “dissonance” as well as the “rise of eclecticism”¹⁵.
Indeed, among academics, an individual’s level of education acts as a first filter that
excludes large swathes of cultural production (particularly from its “popular” pole) and
explains the aggregation and prevalence of “classic taste,” around which other tastes
are situated. With the exception of certain less legitimate music tastes we see combined
with legitimate tastes in literature and art, there are hardly any major cultural gaps.
Conversely, we observe the coexistence within the group of academics of a set of taste
profiles that are consistent with each other. By placing these tastes relative to one
another and to the social profiles of consumers, we observe tastes distributed along a
multidimensional scale of legitimacy which combines social background, gender, age,
and academic discipline.

47

The morphology of academics' tastes shows that “ascetic aristocracy”—a disposition that is best expressed for Bourdieu by this class fraction in the 1960s—is fairly resistant to the transformations of the group and the spaces of production. Its considerable relationship to culture materializes in preferences for older composers, writers, and artists. This canonical corpus of works and artists evolves carefully, with the addition of more contemporary artists but those whom have already been strongly consecrated. While other cultural dispositions such as alternative or average taste are now expressed within the group, hybridization occurs in two ways: 1) by mixing “classics” with more popular or commercial tastes (relative to other tastes present) for new entrants; and 2) by importing music tastes that are further from the canons of classic legitimacy associated with highbrow writers or painters for academics occupying established positions. The question that remains, with regard to the decline of scholarly distinction seen primarily within the upper classes (Coulangeon 2021)—by which academics appear to be less affected—is that of the symbolic influence of these academic tastes beyond the group boundaries. Classic tastes prevail throughout this fraction of the upper classes, but do they continue to impose themselves as legitimate outside it? Faced with competing upper fractions who are also increasingly graduates, whose “elites”, even the academics, are turning away from public sector professions (Bataille & Falcon 2022), the question deserves to be asked.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

AZAM Martine, GROSSETTI Michel, LAFFONT Laurent & TUDOUX Benoit (2018). "Choix musicaux, modes de découverte et contextes d'écoute. Une typologie des univers musicaux des 15-25 ans." *Sociologie*, 9(4): 343-360.
BATAILLE Pierre & FALCON Julie. (2022). "La 'voie royale' ? Note de recherche sur les dynamiques d'accès aux fractions supérieures de l'espace social français." *Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales*, 245(5): 36-61.

BELLAVANCE Guy, VALEX Myrtille & DE VERDALLE Laure (2006). "Distinction, omnivorisme et dissonance : la sociologie du goût entre démarches quantitative et qualitative." *Sociologie de l'Art*, 9-10(2-3): 125-143.

BLONDEL Vincent, GUILLAUME Jean-Loup, LAMBIOTTE Renaud & LEFEBVRE Etienne (2008). "Fast Unfolding of Communities in Large Networks." *Journal of Statistical Mechanics Theory and Experiment*.

BOURDIEU Pierre & SAINT-MARTIN Monique (de) (1976). "Anatomie du goût." *Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales*, 5: 2-81.

BOURDIEU Pierre (1984a). *Distinction: a social critique of the judgement of taste*, translated from French by Richard Nice. Cambridge (Mass.), Harvard University Press.

BOURDIEU Pierre (1984b). *Homo academicus*. Paris, Minuit.

BOURDIEU Pierre (1996). *The Rules of Art*, translated from French by Emanuel Susan. Cambridge, Polity.

BOURDIEU Pierre (1999). "Une révolution conservatrice dans l'édition." *Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales*, 126(1): 3-28.

BOURDIEU Pierre & CHARLE Christophe (2013). *Manet, une révolution symbolique : cours au Collège de France, 1998-2000*. Paris, Éditions Points.

BOURDIEU Pierre & DARBEL Alain (1969 [1966]). *L'Amour de l'art*. Paris, Minuit.

BOYADJIAN Julien (2021). "Le capital culturel structure-t-il (toujours) les goûts ? L'exemple des préférences cinématographiques des 18-20 ans." *Sociologie*, 12(1).

BRYSON Bethany (1996). "'Anything But Heavy Metal': Symbolic Exclusion and Musical Dislikes." *American Sociological Review*, 61(5): 884.

CHAN Tak Wing & GOLDTHORPE John H. (2007). "Social Stratification and Cultural Consumption: The Visual Arts in England." *Poetics*, 35(2): 168-190.

COLLOVALD Annie & NEVEU Erik (2004). *Lire le noir : enquête sur les lecteurs de récits policiers*. Paris, Éditions de la Bibliothèque publique d'information, Centre Pompidou.

COULANGEON Philippe (2021). *Culture de masse et société de classes : le goût de l'altérité*. Paris, Presses universitaires de France.

COULANGEON Philippe (2010). "Les métamorphoses de la légitimité. Classes sociales et goût musical en France, 1973-2008." *Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales*, 181-182(1): 88.

COULANGEON Philippe (2003). "Social Stratification of Musical Tastes: Questioning the Cultural Legitimacy Model." *Revue française de sociologie*, 44(1): 3-33.

COULANGEON Philippe & DUVAL Julien (2013). *Trente ans après La Distinction, de Pierre Bourdieu*. Paris, La Découverte.

DIMAGGIO Paul (1987). "Classification in Art." *American Sociological Review*, 52(4): 440.

DONNAT Olivier (2011). "Pratiques culturelles, 1973-2008. Dynamiques générationnelles et pesanteurs sociales." *Culture Études*, 7(7): 1-36.
DONNAT Olivier (2013). "Les connaissances artistiques des Français. Éléments de comparaison, 1988-2008." *Culture Études*, 5(5): 1-16.

DONNAT Olivier (2018). "Évolution de la diversité consommée sur le marché de la musique enregistrée, 2007-2016." *Culture Études*, 4(4): 1-32.

DUVAL Julien (2010). "Distinction studies." *Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales*, 181-182(1-2): 142-156.

DUVAL Julien (2012). "13 – Analyser un espace social." In PAUGAM Serge (ed.). *L'Enquête sociologique*. Paris, Presses Universitaires de France: 267-290.

DUVAL Julien (2016). *Le Cinéma au XXe siècle : entre loi du marché et règles de l'art*. Paris, CNRS Éditions.

ELOY Florence (2013). "La sensibilité musicale saisie par la forme scolaire. L'éducation musicale au collège, de formalisme en formalisme." *Revue française de pédagogie*, 185: 21-34.

GABRYSIAK Louis (2020). *Des styles de vie des universitaires et de la légitimation culturelle à l'université*. PhD thesis in sociology. Paris, EHESS.

GABRYSIAK Louis (2021). "Les variantes du goût universitaire. Hétérogénéité des styles de vie et enjeux de transmission culturelle à l'université." *Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales* 238(3): 82-105.

LAHIRE Bernard (2008). *La Culture des individus. Dissonances culturelles et distinction de soi*. Paris, La Découverte. Also see ID. (2008), "The Individual and the Mixing of Genres: Cultural dissonance and Self-distinction." *Poetics*, 36(2-3): 166-188.

LAHIRE Bernard (2013). "11. La culture à l'échelle individuelle : la transférabilité en question." In Coulangeon Philippe et Duval Julien (eds.). *Trente ans après La Distinction de Pierre Bourdieu*. Paris, La Découverte: 165-176.

LE GUERN Philippe (2012). "Un spectre hante le rock... L'obsession patrimoniale, les musiques populaires et actuelles et les enjeux de la 'muséomomification'." *Questions de communication*, 22: 7-44.

LINDBLOM Taru (2022). "Growing Openness or Creeping Intolerance? Cultural Taste Orientations and Tolerant Social Attitudes in Finland, 2007-2018." *Poetics*, 93(B).

LOMBARDO Philippe & WOLFF Loup (2020). "Cinquante ans de pratiques culturelles en France." *Culture Études*, 2(2): 1-92.

MOULIN Raymonde (1976). "Les bourgeois amis des arts. Les expositions des beaux-arts en province, 1885-1887." *Revue française de sociologie*, 17(3): 383-422.

MUSSELIN Christine (2008). *Les Universitaires*. Paris, La Découverte.

NOÛS Camille, ROBETTE Nicolas & ROUEFF Olivier (2021). "The Multidimensional Structure of Taste. A Cultural Legitimacy Based on Interactions Between Education, Age and Gender," translated from French by Katharine Throssell. *Biens symboliques / Symbolic Goods*, 8.

PETERSON Richard A. (2004). "Le passage à des goûts omnivores : notions, faits et perspectives," translated from English by Suzanne Mineau. *Sociologie et sociétés*, 36(1): 145.

PETERSON Richard A. & KERN Roger M. (1996). "Changing Highbrow Taste: From Snob to Omnivore." *American Sociological Review*, 61(5): 900.

PRIEUR Annick, ROSENLUND Lennart & SKJOTT-LARSEN Jakob (2008). "Cultural Capital Today. A Case Study from Denmark." *Poetics*, 36(1): 45-71.
ROBETTE Nicolas & ROUEFF Olivier (2017). "L'espace contemporain des goûts culturels." *Sociologie*, 8(4): 369-394.

ROBETTE Nicolas & ROUEFF Olivier (2014). "An Eclectic Eclecticism: Methodological and Theoretical Issues about the Quantification of Cultural Omnivorism." *Poetics*, 47: 23-40.

TISSOT Sylvie (2013). "9. 'Anything but Soul Food'. Goûts et dégoûts alimentaires chez les habitants d'un quartier gentrifié." In COULANGEON Philippe et DUVAL Julien (dir.). *Trente ans après La Distinction, de Pierre Bourdieu*. Paris, La Découverte: 141-152.

VLEGELS Jef & LIEVENS John (2017). "Music Classification, Genres, and Taste Patterns: A Ground-up Network Analysis on the Clustering of Artist Preferences." *Poetics*, 60: 76-89.

WEBER William (2010). "Le savant et le général. Les goûts musicaux en France au XVIIIe siècle." *Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales*, 181-182: 18-33.

## NOTES

1. Academics in law and medicine—whose response rate was too low—and staff with secondary school teaching qualifications who have been assigned to higher education [*professeurs agrégés*, i.e. teachers who have the highest teaching qualification in France] and PRCE [teachers who have the CAPES, general or technological, or CAPET, technological-only, qualifications]—were excluded in order to neutralize the qualification level of the population.

2. A slightly higher rate than at the national level, due to the strong presence of the more typically male scientific disciplines. On the evolution of the proportion of women among professors, see « La situation des femmes universitaires dans l'enseignement supérieur en 2020 », communication by the human resources management of the Ministry of Higher education, Research and Innovation, April 2021.

3. The five types of question are: 1) questions on practices: attendance at cultural establishments or use of cultural goods; 2) on positive preferences in abstracto for genres of cultural goods; 3) on negative preferences or dislikes in abstracto of genres or works; 4) on consumption patterns of genres of cultural products; 5) on knowledge of artists or works.

4. NdlT: This survey has been carried out by the Ministry of Culture since the beginning of the 1970s, focusing on forms of participation in cultural life (reading, listening to music, attending cultural establishments and events, and recreational activities), as well as on the use of traditional media (television, radio, and the press) and, since 2008, digital technologies.

5. The different forms are "pre-war songs," "chansons à texte" (Brel, Brassens, Ferré, etc.)," "songs or hits of the 1960s," "songs or hits of the 1970s or 1980s," "contemporary songs or hits," "no particular genre (you like everything)" (with two possible answers).

6. For a discussion and a replication of Lahire's statistical processes on a sub-population of the 1997 cultural practices of the French survey, I refer to my thesis work (Gabrysiak 2020).

7. Open-ended questions do not actually overcome the biases and limitations inherent in questionnaire surveys. Interviewing an academic population lessens the cultural knowledge gaps in comparison with a general population survey. It is reasonable to
assume that all respondents have at least some knowledge of cultural and symbolic hierarchies. We cannot know how they play along—in their shows of conformity, transgression, or naivety—in response to questions of which they may well guess the stakes. But there are no “pure” tastes on the one hand and knowledge and ways to use it on the other. The social differentiation of ways of understanding and answering such questions results from the same dispositions as the tastes expressed in them, and from the same socially constructed relationship to culture. Asking respondents about their “favourite artists” involves recording knowledge (and thereby knowledge of cultural hierarchies) as much as recording tastes.

8. “No response” refers to respondents who did not cite any artist in any sphere.

9. Some tastes expressed here are the same as at the time of the inquiry on which *Distinction* was based, such as liking Bach, for example. Pierre Bourdieu considers *The Well-Tempered Clavier* characteristic of the musical preferences of teachers and the artistic professions (Bourdieu 1984a).

10. In the absence of official authorities on classification, assigning an artist a genre is a partly arbitrary task. There are no shared classifications: the list of genres used is not the same, for example, from one survey or database to another. The categorization operation therefore requires referring to a database whose classifications could have been different. For musicians and music groups, I used the database of the Discogs site —one of the largest and most comprehensive. Discogs uses a classification system of fifteen genres, which are divided into several hundred “styles.” Genres and styles are also not exclusive, and it is their combination that allows a musical work to be characterized as precisely as possible. The aim is above all to give an idea of the proportions of artists cited within these wide categories.

11. For example, the “rock” genre in the Discogs database includes 98 "styles."

12. “Tolkien, voyage en terre du milieu,” *Bibliothèque nationale de France*, exhibition from 22 October 2019 to 16 February 2020.

13. Source: *Enquête sur les pratiques culturelles des Français*, fifth edition, *Département des Études, de la Prospective et de Statistiques du ministère de la Culture*, 2008. For analysis of the development of this knowledge, see Donnat 2013.

14. Although the school curriculum includes music lessons, the subject has low academic legitimacy. From the 1970s onwards, rather than a repertoire of canonized scholarly works, programmes sought to convey an aesthetic disposition, a legitimate way of listening to and appreciating music (Eloy 2013).

15. Lahire’s thesis of dissonance is based on examination of a combination of preferences and practices. These critical remarks apply only to preferences and leave aside the question of practices, which are more dependent on other factors such as place of residence, family structure, etc., and for which it may be thought that the weight of secondary socialization is greater.
ABSTRACTS

By analyzing the responses given by a population of French academics to three open questions about their favourite musicians, writers, and painters, this article examines the frequent use in the sociology of cultural practices of genre classifications as indicators of taste. Do the theories of eclecticism and dissonance stand up to analysis when we move away from genre classifications that are widely assigned between legitimate, average, and popular in favour of questions that relate to a preference for certain artists? How should we differentiate between artists within the space of taste and thus determine the existence or not of relative unity? Using network analysis, the article shows that each sphere of taste has its own organization according to differing supply structures and their respective fields of production. Meanwhile, it is possible for tastes in music, literature, and art to intersect, and to obtain categories of taste that are relatively coherent from the point of view of the position of the different artists in the space of the tastes expressed. These categories of taste are also related to the social characteristics of respondents. Finally, we observe that “cultural transgressions”—citing preferences for artists from spheres that are distant from one another in terms of legitimacy—occur in music. These transgressions consist in the expression of a taste for musicians who have little legitimacy in combination with very legitimate tastes in literature and art.

À partir de l'analyse des réponses données par une population d'universitaires français-es à trois questions ouvertes sur leurs musicien·nes, auteur·es et peintres préféré·es, cet article souhaite interroger l'usage, fréquent en sociologie des pratiques culturelles, des nomenclatures de genre comme indicateurs de goût. La thèse de l'éclectisme ou de la dissonance résiste-t-elle dès lors que l'on met à distance une nomenclature de genres généralement distribués dans les analyses entre légitimes, moyens et populaires au profit de questions sur la préférence pour les artistes ? Comment situer ces différents artistes les un·es par rapport aux autres au sein de l'espace des goûts et ainsi déterminer si unité relative des goûts il y a ? En utilisant des analyses de réseaux, l'article montre que chaque domaine de goût dispose de sa propre organisation, en raison de structures différentes de l'offre et de leur champ de production respectif. Il est tout de même possible de croiser les goûts musicaux, littéraires et picturaux et d'obtenir des classes de goûts relativement cohérentes du point de vue de la position des différents artistes dans l'espace des goûts exprimés. Ces classes de goûts sont également liées aux caractéristiques sociales des répondant·es. Enfin, on observe que les « transgressions culturelles », c'est-à-dire le fait de citer parmi ses préférences des artistes de différents domaines éloignés les uns des autres sur les échelles de légitimité, se font par la musique. Ces transgressions consistent en l'expression d'un goût pour des musicien·nes peu légitimes en combinaison à des goûts littéraires et picturaux très légitimes.

A partir del análisis de las respuestas dadas por una población de académico(a)s francese(a)s a tres preguntas abiertas acerca de sus músico(a)s, autore(a)s y pintore(a)s favorito(a)s, este artículo se propone cuestionar el uso, frecuente en sociología de las prácticas culturales, de las nomenclaturas de género como indicadores del gusto. ¿Resiste la tesis del eclectismo o la disonancia cuando nos distanciamos de una nomenclatura de géneros que en los análisis se hallan generalmente distribuidos entre legítimos, medios y populares, dejando paso a preguntas relacionadas con la preferencia por los artistas? ¿Cómo situar a eso(a)s diferentes artistas entre sí en el espacio de los gustos y determinar, de esta forma, si existe una unidad relativa de los gustos? Utilizando el análisis de redes, el artículo muestra que cada ámbito del gusto tiene su
propia organización, debido a las diversas estructuras de la oferta y sus respectivas áreas de
producción. De todos modos, es posible cruzar los gustos musicales, literarios y pictóricos y
obtener clases de gustos relativamente coherentes desde el punto de vista de la posición de los
diferentes artistas en el espacio de los gustos expresados. Estas clases de gustos también están
vinculadas con las características sociales de lo(a)s encuestado(a)s. Por último, observamos que
las "transgresiones culturales," es decir, el hecho de mencionar entre sus preferencias a artistas
de ámbitos diferentes, muy alejados en las escalas de legitimidad, se llevan a cabo a través de la
música. Estas transgresiones consisten en la expresión de un gusto por músico(a)s poco
legítimo(a)s combinado con gustos literarios y pictóricos muy legítimos.

Ausgehend von der Analyse der Antworten einer Gruppe französischer Akademiker auf drei offene Fragen zu ihren Lieblingsmusikern, -autoren und -malern möchte dieser Artikel die in der Soziologie der kulturellen Praktiken häufig anzutreffende Verwendung von Genreklassifikationen als Geschmacksindikatoren hinterfragen. Ist die These des Eklektizismus oder der Dissonanz haltbar, wenn man eine Nomenklatur von Genres, die in Analysen üblicherweise zwischen legitim, durchschnittlich und populär aufgeteilt werden, zugunsten von Fragen nach der Präferenz von Künstlern zurückstellt? Wie lassen sich diese verschiedenen Künstler innerhalb des Geschmacksraums zueinander in Beziehung setzen und wie lässt sich feststellen, ob es eine relative Einheit des Geschmacks gibt? Mithilfe von Netzwerkanalysen zeigt der Artikel, dass jeder Geschmacksbereich aufgrund unterschiedlicher Angebotsstrukturen und Produktionsbereiche seine eigene Organisation hat. Immerhin ist es möglich, den Musik-, Literatur- und Bildergeschmack zu kreuzen und relativ kohärente Geschmacksklassen zu erhalten, was die Position der einzelnen Künstler im Raum der geäußerten Geschmäcker betrifft. Diese Geschmacksklassen stehen auch im Zusammenhang mit den sozialen Merkmalen der Befragten. Schließlich ist zu beobachten, dass "kulturelle Überschreitungen", d. h. die Nennung von Künstlern aus verschiedenen Bereichen, die auf der Legitimitätsskala weit voneinander entfernt sind, in den eigenen Präferenzen, über die Musik erfolgen. Diese Überschreitungen bestehen darin, dass man seine Vorliebe für wenig legitime Musiker in Kombination mit sehr legitimen Vorlieben für Literatur und Malerei zum Ausdruck bringt.

INDEX

**Palabras claves:** académico(a)s, eclectismo, gustos, literatura, música, pintura, prácticas culturales, transgresión

**Schlüsselwörter:** Akademiker, Eklektizismus, Geschmack, kulturelle Praktiken, Literatur, Musik, Malerei, Transgression

**Keywords:** academics, cultural practices, eclecticism, literature, music, painting, taste, transgression

**Mots-clés:** éclectisme, goûts, littérature, musique, peinture, pratiques culturelles, transgression, universitaires

AUTHORS

LOUIS GABRYSIAK

PhD in Sociology, EHESS, CESSP