Teaching & Learning Guide for

This guide accompanies the following article: Patrick Archer and Ryan Orr, ‘Class Identification in Review: Past Perspectives and Future Directions’, Sociology Compass 5/1 (2011): 104–115, 10.1111/j.1751‐9020.2010.00352.x Author’s introduction Historically, sociology has had a contentious relationship with the concept of class. At times, debates over the meaning and importance of class have defined the field. More recently, however, the notable absence or weakness of class identities in class‐oriented research has led many sociologists to abandon class as an organizing concept in society. The response of class loyalists to this class‐less re‐theorization of stratification and inequality has developed along two paths. The first path emphasizes the continued importance of class as an influential force in people’s lives, but jettisons any assumptions of subjective class identification. The second path has repackaged class as being hierarchical and relational while downplaying the existence of collective class identification. One consequence of these new developments in class theory has been a movement away from classical class theory and the assumed centrality of collective class identification in this work. The purpose of this article is to reexamine the contributions of classical class theory – particularly that of Marx, Weber, Durkheim, and Veblen – to the debate on collective class identification. Two questions guided this analysis. First, to what extent did Marx, Weber, Durkheim, and Veblen associate class with collective identification? Second, in what ways are the contributions of these theorists relevant to the current debates on class and identification? Author recommends Bottero, Wendy. 2004. ‘Class Identities and the Identity of Class.’ Sociology 38(5): 985–1003. Wendy Bottero’s article Class Identities and the Identity of Class is an excellent review of the current state of class theory, particularly as it concerns class identification. While our article focuses primarily on the contribution of classical theorists to the debate on class and identification, Bottero addresses key contemporary developments to class theory and what they represent for the future meaning of class. Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Pierre Bourdieu’s Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste offers readers a complex look into class identification. Bourdieu examines class identification as cultural practices and preferences that emerge through taste. On the one hand, taste operates as a method of class identification by actively distinguishing the class position to which one belongs. On the other hand, taste operates as a method of class identification by actively distinguishing class positions to which one does not belong. Bourdieu also argues that the process of (dis)identification transpires primarily on unconscious levels. Durkheim, Émile. 1984 [1893]. The Division of Labor in Society. New York, NY: The Free Press. In The Division of Labor in Society , his first major work, Émile Durkheim examines how social order is possible as small, traditional societies become more advanced and industrialized. It is here that Durkheim develops the concepts of mechanical and organic solidarity and their relation to the division of labor in society. Of particular interest to this article is the Preface to the Second Edition in which Durkheim argued that professional groupings (i.e., occupations), as opposed to class locations, were emerging as important and essential organizers of social identification. Giddens, Anthony. 1971. Capitalism and Modern Social Theory . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. This book is an excellent resource for students at the undergraduate and graduate level who are engaging with the original writings of Marx, Weber, and Durkheim for the first time. For the first two‐thirds of the book, Giddens analyzes separately each of the theoretical contributions of Marx, Weber, and Durkheim. The concluding chapters consider lines of comparison between the three authors, with particular emphasis on how Durkheim and Weber diverge from Marx. Of particular interest to this article is Giddens’ examination of Weber’s concepts of class and status (pp. 163–8). Grusky, David B. and Jesper B. Sørensen. 1998. ‘Can Class Analysis Be Salvaged?’ American Journal of Sociology 103(5): 1187–234. Using what they called a “quasi‐Durkheimian third road,” Grusky and Sørensen advocate a disaggregate analysis of social stratification in the form of occupational groupings. Based on a number of premises, the authors argue that occupational groupings, contrary to aggregate class groupings, represent real cleavages among people in society. The result is an important addition to the debate over realist and nominalist approaches to class and identification. Marx, K. and F. Engels. 1964 [1848]. The Communist Manifesto . New York: Washington Square Press. Along with being one of Marx and Engels’ most accessible writings for undergraduate students, The Communist Manifesto is the pair’s most well‐known collaboration. In the writing, Marx and Engels conceptualize class membership evolving into two general groups. Marx and Engels organize class membership with respect to an individual’s relationship to the modes of production. The bourgeoisie own the modes of production whereas the proletarians sell their labor to the owners. Marx and Engels also provide insight into cognitive and emotional aspects of class identification in their discussions of class awareness and conflict between classes. Marx, K. 1993 [1894]. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Vol. 3 . New York: Penguin Classics. Marx offers readers a discussion of class in Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Vol. 3. The discussion is incomplete due to his death, but Marx conceptualizes class membership differently compared to the bourgeoisie/proletariat organization in The Communist Manifesto . Marx discusses ‘three great classes’ of wage‐laborers, capitalists, and landlords before introducing the idea of fragmentation of the classes into smaller groups. The unfinished conceptualization of smaller groups is where the manuscript stops. Subjective dimensions of class in Vol. 3 are not developed, but inferences of identification with class position may be traced to Marx’s thoughts about class awareness and class identification. Swartz, D. 1997. Culture and Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu . Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. As the book’s title indicates, David Swartz concentrates on Pierre Bourdieu’s ex

Centrality · Class (philosophy · Class analysis · Economics · Epistemology · Identification (biology · Identity (music · Neoclassical economics · New class · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Social class · Social science · Sociology · Veblen good · Educational Assessment and Pedagogy · Evaluation of Teaching Practices · Law · Philosophy · Student Assessment and Feedback