Culture & Inequality Podcast

During the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we will be hosting a series of special episodes on the cultural aspects of war. New events like war crequire meaning making, new icons, symbols, ideas to make sense of what is going on in life. But war also suppresse culture as some things cannot be said anymore or have dangerous consequences. We dive into these and related topics over the next weeks with scholars from Ukraine, Russia, and across the world. This week, we talk with Anastasiya Fiadotova* and Ksenia** about the humour emerging during the current war. How do people joke and why do people do so? We talk about the functions of humor are in war and its limits. Rooted in Estonia, Belarus and Russia, our guests are close to this war and provide a candid assessment of the war’s cultural implications. * Anastasiya (Nastya) Fiadotova is a research fellow in the department of Folkloristics at the Estonian Literary Museum in Tartu, Estonia. **last name and institutional affiliation withheld for personal security reasons. Presentation by prof. dr. Giselinde Kuipers (Sociology, KU Leuven) Editing by Luuc Brans

Race is a pervasive and omnipresent dimension of inequality, both within societies and at a global scale. Yet it is the one dimension that is most difficult to talk about. Even the word itself, race, is fraught. How to use the concept of race? How is race done in practice? And how does it create and perpetuate social inequalities? We talk about this with our guests Amade M’Charek, professor in anthropology of science at the University of Amsterdam, and our regular Julian Schaap, assistant professor in the sociology of music at the Erasmus University Rotterdam. We discuss how race is done in domains like forensics and music, and what this tells us about the limits and potentialities of the concept. **Readings: * Abu El-Haj, Nadia (2007) “The Genetic Reinscription of Race.” Annual Review of Anthropology 36: 283–300. * Essed, Philomena (1991) Understanding Everyday Racism: An Interdisciplinary Theory. Newbury Park: Sage - Chapter 5: The integration of racism into everyday life: The story of Rosa N. and Chapter 7: Conclusions. * M'charek, Amade. (2020) "Tentacular faces: Race and the return of the phenotype in forensic identification." American anthropologist 122.2: 369-380. Recommended readings: Schaap, Julian, and Pauwke Berkers. (2020) "“Maybe it’s… skin colour?” How race-ethnicity and gender function in consumers’ formation of classification styles of cultural content." Consumption Markets & Culture 23.6: 599-615. Essed, P., & Trienekens, S. (2008). ‘Who wants to feel white?’Race, Dutch culture and contested identities.Ethnic and Racial Studies, 31(1), 52-72.

In this episode, we are joined by Hartmut Rosa, one of today’s ‘big thinkers’ in sociology, to talk about his work on the concept of resonance and how it relates to inequalities. After becoming popular in Germany, his work is now gaining ground in anglophone sociology too. But what does resonance mean? What is a sociology of the good life? And how does resonance theory affect how we think about and understand social inequalities? By dealing with these questions, we discover blindspots of current inequality studies and explore directions for new research. Join us for this special episode with Hartmut Rosa to learn more about his social theory of resonance. Hartmut Rosa is a professor of Sociology at the Friedrich Schiller Universität in Jena and Director of the Max Weber Center for Advanced Cultural and Social Studies in Erfurt (both in Germany). He is interviewed by dr. Julian Schaap (Erasmus University Rotterdam) & prof. dr. Giselinde Kuipers (KU Leuven). Readings: ‘Escalation: the crisis of dynamic stabilisation and the prospect of resonance’ in: Dörre, K.; S. Hertenich & H. Rosa (2015) Sociology, Capitalism, Critique. New York: Verso (translated by Loren Balhorn & Jan-Peter Herrmann) Introduction to: Rosa, H. (2019) Resonance: A Sociology of Our Relationship to the World. London: Polity (translated by James Wagner)

In this episode, we talk with prof. dr. Ashley Mears (Boston University) and dr. Anne Monier (ESSEC Paris) about gender and the body in contemporary elites. Both sociologists have done extensive ethnographic research on elites – respectively the global VIP party circuit, and the Philantropic scene of the 'American friends' of French cultural institutions. Their ethnographic work sheds light on the way gender operates in contemporary elites. What can a “gender lens” contribute to our understanding of today’s elites? And more specifically: what is the role of women – as a dominated social category – in this exclusive and dominant segment of society? And how does ethnographic work help us to answer these questions? Readings and materials: Glucksberg, Luna (2018) A gendered ethnography of elites: women, inequality, and social reproduction. Focaal: Journal of Global and Historical Anthropology, 81. pp. 16-28. Mears, A. (2015). Girls as elite distinction: The appropriation of bodily capital. Poetics, 53, 22-37. Mears, A. (2020) Five Surprising Things I Learned from Partying with Rich People. Literary Hub https://lithub.com/five-surprising-things-i-learned-from-partying-with-rich-people/ Monier, A. (2018). The role of social capital in transnational elite philanthropy: the example of the American Friends groups of French cultural institutions. Socio-Economic Review, 16(2), 387-410. Monier, A. (2021) Women’s philanthropy: an invisible phenomenon. The conversation https://theconversation.com/womens-philanthropy-an-invisible-phenomenon-157927 Recommended readings Bessiere, C. & Gollac, S. (2020). Le genre du capital (the Gender of Capital). Paris: La Découverte. https://celinebessiere.ovh/index.php/the-gender-of-capital/ Mears, A. (2020). Very important people: Status and beauty in the global party circuit. Princeton University Press.

It’s all wealth, social mobility and class ceilings in this week’s episode as we ask ourselves: How does social mobility work, and why does it matter for culture and inequality? Dave O’Brien talks with Maren Toft (Uni Oslo) and Sam Friedman (LSE) about parental wealth, cultural matching, the class ceiling and labour market outcomes. How does the bank of mum and dad contribute to a class ceiling in Norwegian social mobility? Why does it matter that you have the same cultural tastes as those hiring you for a job? And how are these cultural mechanisms of social mobility gendered? Dave, Sam and Maren discuss various papers and demonstrate how privileges in the labour market are profoundly material, cultural and symbolic at the same time. In the final stretch of the episode, they explore various promising new directions for the field of social mobility and culture research. Papers (all open access): - Adamson, M. & M. Johansson (2020) - Writing Class In and Out: Construction of Class in Elite Businesswomen’s autobiographies - Sociology https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038520962393 - Rivera, L.A. (2012) Hiring as Cultural Matching: The Case of Elite Professional Service Firms - American Sociological Review https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122412463213 - Toft, M. & S. Friedman (2020) Family Wealth and the Class Ceiling: The Propulsive Power of the Bank of Mum and Dad - Sociology https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038520922537 Class assignments separately available on our Soundcloud stream.

Welcome back to our new season! It is Oscar season, and we thus watch last year's Best Picture winner Parasite, together with Ricky Changwook Kim (Handong Global University) and Dan Hassler-Forest (Utrecht University). What does this movie tells us about the link between culture and inequalities? Are these links and inequalities culturally specific? Or does the film's global success reveal a universal fatigue with growing inequality in late capitalism? **** Podcast includes major spoilers for Parasite **** Dr. Changwook Kim (Ricky) is an assistant professor of sociology at Handong Global University in South Korea. His research focuses on creative and digital industries in Korea, and the precarious labor conditions in this industry. Dr. Dan Hassler-Forest is an assistant professor at the Media & Culture studies department at Utrecht University in the Netherlands. His research interest is in the relation between politics and entertainment. ***Readings & assignments: * The film Parasite (2019) * Hagen Koo (2019): Rising Inequality and Shifting Class Boundaries in South Korea in the Neo-Liberal Era, Journal of Contemporary Asia: https://bit.ly/2RoCAcc * Hassler-Forest, D. (2020) Bong Joon-ho: Love in the Time of Capitalism. LA Review of Books: https://bit.ly/3eb2VDd * Assignments: https://bit.ly/3eeWRtm * Also see ECCI's website for additional readings and assignments: https://eucci.eu/podcast/ *** Presentation: prof. dr. Giselinde Kuipers Editing: Luuc Brans

In the final episode for this semester, we look back and ahead and ask, where do we go from here? We approach this in two ways: where does the study of culture and inequality go from here? Based on our podcast, what is the direction for fruitful research? And what have been the missing links? Secondly, this is for a small part also a meta-podcast, a podcasts about podcasts: we discuss where do we go from here with the podcast as a platofrm for academic work and for the academic community? To dive into these topics, we are joined by this podcast's curator and founder, prof. Giselinde Kuipers and our regular host dr. Dave O’Brien.

This week, we turn the table and look at how non-sociologists, i.e. normal people believe about inequality. Giselinde speaks with dr. Jonathan Mijs (EUR/Harvard) and prof. dr. Magne Flemmen to dive deeper in the relation between rising inequalities, meritocratic beliefs, and egalitarianism. Inequalities are rising yet people seem to care increasingly less about it. Why do people display meritocratic beliefs instead? And how do lower class people in supposedly egalitarian societies perceive cultural inequalities? And how does cycling relate to egalitarianism and inequalities? Why is the Dutch royal family, one of the most wealthy families in the world, cycling? We discuss this and many more topics in this intriguing conversation. Readings —— Mijs, Jonathan (2019). The paradox of inequality: income inequality and belief in meritocracy go hand in hand. Socio-Economic Review https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwy051 Jarness, Vegard, & Flemmen, Magne (2019). A struggle on two fronts: boundary drawing in the lower region of the social space and the symbolic market for ‘down‐to‐earthness’. The British journal of sociology, 70(1), 166-189. Kuipers, Giselinde (2013). The rise and decline of national habitus: Dutch cycling culture and the shaping of national similarity. European journal of social theory 16(1): 17-35.

In this episode, Giselinde interviews dr. Predrag Cveticanin (University of Niš, Serbia) & dr. Yang Gao (Furman University, US) as we go beyond the bubble of Western-European, North-American cultural sociology. How does cultural distinction and social capital work in Serbia? Why do Chinese tv consumers love GossipGirl? How are post-socialist Serbia and not-so-socialist-anymore China different and similar at the same time? In this episode, we speak about the applicability of French and American cultural sociological theories on taste and cultural consumption outside our Euro-American bubble. We also ask ourselves how this is all related to the future of cosmopolitanism. Join us as we dive into these and many more topics in this intriguing conversation. Readings Cvetičanin, Predrag, and Mihaela Popescu (2011) The art of making classes in Serbia: Another particular case of the possible." Poetics 39: 444-468. Gao, Yang (2016). Fiction as reality: Chinese youths watching American television. Poetics 54: 1-13. Lavie, N., & Varriale, S. (2019). Introduction to the special issue on global tastes: The transnational spread of non-Anglo-American cul ture. Poetics, 75, 101388.

In this episode, dr. Julian Schaap (Erasmus University Rotterdam) talks to prof.dr. Jeroen van der Waal (EUR) and dr. Joost Oude Groeniger (EUR) about the relation between health inequalities and social and cultural inequalities. Negative health outcomes such as low life expectancy and disease prevalence are often linked to lower classes, usually followed by an explanation that looks at socio-economic causes. If healthier food is made cheaper, this will contribute to lower health inequalities, some say. However, cultural sociologists have increasingly uncovered how not only socio-economic factors, but also one's taste and cultural consumption contributes to these health disparities. How does cultural capital effect influence health outcomes? Readings Groeniger, J. O., Kamphuis, C. B., Mackenbach, J. P., Beenackers, M. A., & van Lenthe, F. J. (2019). Are socio-economic inequalities in diet and physical activity a matter of social distinction? A cross-sectional study. International Journal of Public Health 64(7): 1037-1047. Oude Groeniger, Joost, et al. (2020). How does cultural capital keep you thin? Exploring unique aspects of cultural class that link social advantage to lower body mass index." Sociology of Health & Illness.