Changing Highbrow Taste: From Snob to Omnivore
Author(s): Richard A. Peterson and Roger M. Kern
Source: American Sociological Review, Vol. 61, No. 5 (Oct., 1996), pp. 900-907
Published by: American Sociological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2096460
Accessed: 02/09/2010 14:51
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://links.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you
have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may
use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://links.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asa.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Sociological Review.
http://links.jstor.org
CHANGING HIGHBROW TASTE: FROM SNOB TO OMNIVORE*
RichardA. Peterson RogerM. Kern
VanderbiltUniversity VanderbiltUniversity
Appreciationoffine arts becamea markof high status in the late nineteenth
century as part of an attemptto distinguish "highbrowed"Anglo Saxons
from the new "lowbrowed"immigrants,whosepopular entertainmentswere
said to corruptmoralsand thuswereto be shunned(Levine1988; DiMaggio
1991). In recentyears, however,manyhigh-statuspersons arefar from being
snobs and are eclectic, even "omnivorous,"in their tastes (Petersonand
Simkus1992). Thissuggests a qualitativeshift in the basisfor markingelite
status-from snobbish exclusion to omnivorousappropriation. Using comparable
1982 and 1992 surveys, we test for this hypothesized change in
tastes. Weconfirmthathighbrowsare moreomnivorousthanothersand that
they have become increasingly omnivorousover time. Regression analyses
reveal that increasing "omnivorousness"is due both to cohort replacement
and to changes over the 1980s among highbrowsof all ages. Wespeculate
that this shiftfrom snob to omnivorerelates to status-grouppolitics influenced
by changes in social structure,values, art-worlddynamics,and generational
conflict.
]\Not only are high-statusAmericans far
more likely thanothersto consume the
fine arts but, according to Peterson and
Simkus (1992), they are also more likely to
be involved in a wide rangeof low-status activities.
This finding confirms the observations
of DiMaggio (1987) and Lamont
(1992), butit flies in the face of years of historical
researchshowing thathigh-statuspersons
shun cultural expressions that are not
seen as elevated (Lynes 1954; Levine 1988;
Murphy1988; Beisel 1990). In makingsense
of this contradiction, Peterson and Simkus
(1992) suggest that a historical shift from
highbrowsnob to omnivore is taking place.
MEASURES
The 1982 nationalsurvey on which Peterson
and Simkus (1992) base their findings was
replicated in 1992, so it is now possible to
test for the changes in highbrow taste that
they posit.' Both surveys ask respondentsto
select the music genres they like from a list
of alternatives ranging across the aesthetic
spectrum, and then to pick the one kind of
music they like the best. We focus on musical
taste, ratherthan taste for other types of
artbecause only for music were respondents
asked to choose from such a list of contrasting
alternatives.
Highbrowis operationalizedas liking both
classical music and opera, and choosing one
of these forms as best-liked from among all
*
Direct correspondence to Richard A. Peterson,
Department of Sociology, Vanderbilt University,
Nashville, TN 37235. We thank Narasimhan
Anand, Bethany Bryson, Paul DiMaggio,
Michael Epelbaum, Larry Griffin, Michael
Hughes, Guillermina Jasso, Barbara Kilbourne,
Michele Lamont, Holly McCammon, Claire
Peterson, and Darren Sherkat for comments on
the methodology or on an earlierdraftof this paper.
Early versions were presented at the 1994
annualmeeting of the AmericanSociological Association
in Los Angeles, at Princeton and
HarvardUniversities, and at the New School for
Social Research. Finally, we gratefully acknowledge
the supportof the National Endowment for
the Arts and of its Director of Research, Thomas
Bradshaw.
I The datacome fromthe Survey of Public Participation
in the Arts, which polled two nationalarea
probabilitysamples of persons over age 18,
one in 1982 and the other in 1992. The surveys
were conducted by the U.S. Bureauof the Census
for the National Endowment of the Arts. For a
detailed description of these data sets see
Robinson et al. (1985) and Robinson (1993).
900 AmericanSociological Review, 1996, Vol. 61 (October:900-907)
CHANGING HIGHBROW TASTE 901
kinds of music. This measureappearsto be a
valid index of being highbrowbecause those
respondents we labeled highbrow attended
performances of plays, ballet, classical music,
musicals, visited art galleries, and attended
opera significantly more often than
did others in the sample.
Among highbrows, the snob is one who
does not participatein any lowbrow or middlebrow
activity (Levine 1988), while the
omnivore is at least open to appreciating
them all. Perfect snobs are now rare in the
United States. Indeed, in the 1960s Wilensky
(1964:194) "could not find one [Detroitarea
resident] in 1,354 who was not in some area
exposed to middle- or low-brow material,"
and in our national sample of 11,321 we
found just 10 highbrowrespondentsin 1982
and 3 in 1992 who said they did not like a
single form of low- or middlebrowmusic.
We operationalize omnivorousness as a
variable thatcan be measuredas the number
of middle- and lowbrow forms respondents
choose. Following Wilensky (1964) and
Rubin (1992), we differentiate between
middlebrow and lowbrow because they are
distinctly different and because critical observers
have suggested thatwhen highbrows
areopen to non-highbrowartforms,theyseek
out lowbrow forms created by socially marginal
groups (Blacks, youth, isolated rural
folks) while still holdingcommercialmiddlebrowforms
in contempt(Lynes 1954; Sontag
1966).
Five music genres areconsideredlowbrow:
country music, bluegrass, gospel, rock, and
blues. Eachof these genres is rootedin a specific
"marginal"ethnic, regional, age, or religious
experience (Malone 1979; Lipsitz
1990; Ennis 1992). There are three middlebrow
music genres-including mood/easylistening
music, Broadwaymusicals, andbig
band music. These forms have been in the
mainstreamof commercialmusic throughout
the twentiethcentury(Goldberg 1961;Nanry
1972; Ennis 1992).2 The lowbrow measure
can range from 0 to 5; the middlebrowmeasure
can rangefrom 0 to 3. Omnivorousness
can rangefrom 0 to 8.
In both years (1982 and 1992) highbrows,
on average, have about two years more education,
earnaboutfive thousanddollars more
annual family income, are about 10 years
older, are more likely to be White, and are
more likely to be female than are others in
the sample.3All of these differences are statistically
significant. Neither highbrows nor
others, however, are more likely to be currently
married.4
FINDINGS
The top row of Table 1 shows that, on average,
highbrows chose 1.74 lowbrow genres
of 5 possible in 1982 and2.23 in 1992, a statistically
significant increase of nearly half a
genre per person in just one decade. This
finding is in line with the prediction of increasing
highbrowomnivorousness.The first
row also shows that others increased their
numberof lowbrow choices as well, but the
rateof change for highbrowsis significantly
greaterthanfor non-highbrows(p < .05, difference
of proportions test). Also, in the
1982-1992 decade, highbrowsovertook others
in the numberof lowbrow genres chosen.
In the second row of Table 1 we see thatin
1982highbrows,on average,likedalmosttwo
of the three middlebrow music genres. This
sharplycontradictsthe expectations of Lynes
(1954) andSontag (1966) thathighbrowswill
shun middlebrow forms, but is congruent
2 Both the 1982 and 1992 surveys asked about
other musical forms as well. Barbershop, rap,
reggae, New Age, and marchingband music, for
example, were included in one survey year but
not the other, so they could not be included except
as noted below. In addition the category
"folk"was rewordedin a way thatmadeit incomparable
from one survey year to the next. Jazz
was included on both years, but it was not put in
either of the scales because, while its roots are
clearly lowbrow, it is now taught in conservatories
of music as highbrow and largely consumed
as middlebrow (Leonard 1962; Nanry 1972;
Ennis 1992), and survey data has clearly shown
an unusually diffuse evaluation of what is called
"jazz"by different people (DiMaggio and Ostrower
1990; Peterson and Simkus 1992).
3 Unfortunatelyrespondentsto the 1992 survey
were not asked theiroccupation, so we cannot assess
this importantcomponent of social class position
as Peterson and Simkus (1992) did using
the 1982 data.
4 Currently married respondents were distinguished
fromall others because, on average, they
attendartsperformancesless often than do those
who are single, divorced, and widowed (DiMaggio
andOstrower 1990).
902 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW
Table 1. Univariate Statistics for Highbrowsand Others, 1982 and 1992
Highbrows Others
Variable 1982 1992 Difference 1982 1992 Difference
Number of lowbrow 1.74 2.23 .49** 1.80 2.07 .27**
music genres liked
(max. = 5)
Number of middlebrow 1.98 2.12 .14 1.01 1.12 I **
music genres liked
(max. = 3)
Percent male 44 35 -9 46 46 -2**
Age in years 54.19 56.18 1.99 42.98 46.59 3.61**
Family income $26,360 $33,304 $6,945** $20,614 $28,301 $7,686**
Percent married 66 63 -3 64 64 0
Percent White 96 96 0 88 86 -2
Education in years 14.57 14.33 -.24 12.19 12.67 .48**
<.05 level p < .10 level (one-tailed tests)
Note: A highbrow is defined as a respondent who likes both opera and classical music and chooses one of
these forms as the music genre he or she likes best.
with Peterson and Simkus's (1992) ideas
aboutomnivorousnessbecausehighbrowsare
found to like more middlebrow forms than
others and because this difference increases
(althoughnot significantly statistically) from
1982 to 1992.
Takentogether,these findings suggest that
in 1992 highbrows, on average, are more
omnivorous thanthey were in 1982 andhave
become moreomnivorousthanothers.At the
same time, non-highbrows are increasing
their numberof musical preferences as well.
Withjust these two datapoints it is not possible
to say definitely whetherthereis a long-
termseculartrendtowardomnivorousnessor
whether the change is due to forces just affecting
the decade understudy.We returnto
these questions below.
Did all highbrows tend to become more
omnivorous between 1982 and 1992-in
other words, could the difference be called a
period effect (Rogers 1982)? Alternatively,
did individual highbrows retain their tastes
unchanged, with the observed difference resulting
from older cohorts of highbrows
with more snob-like tastes being displaced
by younger, more omnivorous cohorts?
Abramson and Inglehart (1993), for example,
show that cohort replacement has
dramatically changed values in eight Western
nations. Cohortis here measuredas year
of birth(Rogers 1982).
To answer these questions, we pool the two
years of data and employ four OLS regression
analyses. The dependent variable in
each analysis is the number of middlebrow
or lowbrow genres chosen by highbrows and
by others, analyzed separately. The independent
variables of interest in each of the
analyses are the birth year of the respondent
(measured by subtracting the respondent's
age from the year of the interview) and the
year of the interview (measured as a dummy
variable; 1 = 1992).
A number of variables have been shown to
influence arts participation independent of
age.5 These include education, gender, race,
(measured here as Whites versus others), adjusted
family income,6 and the size of the respondent's
residential community7 (DiMaggio
and Useem 1978; Blau 1989; DiMaggio and
5 Each control variable was tested for interactions
with both birth year and year of interview,
and no significant interactionswere found.
6 Because family income was reported in categories,
the midpoint of the respondent's income
category was subtractedfrom the mean of the income
midpoints for the year in which the interview
took place. This transformationmeans that
the income distributionsfor each year were set to
a mean of zero, nullifying any effect of inflation
while retaining the effect of changing distributions
of income across years.
7 This was measured in 12 categories ranked
from small to large.
CHANGING HIGHBROW TASTE 903
Table 2. OLS Coefficients from the Regression of Number of Lowbrow and Middlebrow Musical
Genres Liked on Birth Year, Year of Interview, and Selected Control Variables
Highbrows Others
(Model 1) (Model 2) (Model 3) (Model 4)
Number of Number of Number of Number of
Lowbrow Middlebrow Lowbrow Middlebrow
Genres Liked Genres Liked Genres Liked Genres Liked
Variables b Beta b Beta b Beta b Beta
Birth year .02 .16++ -.01 -.07 .01 .12++ -.01 -.23++
Year of interview .44 .15+ .25 .13+ .20 .07++ .15 .07++
(1 = 1992)
Control Variables
Male -.07 -.02 -.20 -.10 .01 .01 -.20 -.09**
Adjusted family .00 -.1 1 .01 .04 .00 .01 .00 .12**
income
White -.92 -.13 .60 .13* .18 .05** .38 .12**
Education in years .05 .10 .00 .01 .05 .11 .10 .28**
Size of community -.01 -.04 .00 .02 -.02 -.08** .02 .08**
Constant -27.45* 9.25 -16.61 ** 26.20**
Significance of F .00 .12 .00 .00
Adjusted R2 .06 .02 .06 .16
Number of 354 354 10,967 10,967
respondents
+p < .05 ++p< .01 (one-tailed tests)
*p < .05 **p< .01 (two-tailed tests)
Ostrower 1990; Robinson 1993). Each of
these could conceivably influence the degree
of omnivorousness, so they are included as
control variables. Marital status was not included
as a control variable because it was
not significantly linked with the numberof
music genres chosen.
The results of the four OLS regression
analyses are presented in Table 2. The positive
coefficient for birth year in Model I
shows that,controlling for the yearof the interview
andthe othervariables,highbrowsin
latercohorts like significantly more lowbrow
forms than do older highbrows. The size of
the effect is such that two people born 20
years apartdiffer by .40 (20 x .02 =.40) music
genres chosen. The positive effect of
1992 interview year shows that, net of the
controls, highbrows interviewed in 1992
liked significantly more lowbrow music genres
thanhighbrowsdid a decade earlier,indicating
an increase of .44 forms chosen.
Turningto the numberof middlebrowmusic
genres liked by highbrows, Model 2
shows that birth year has no effect on middlebrow
music taste, but highbrows interviewed
in 1992 did like significantly more
middlebrow genres than did those interviewed
a decade earlier, an increase of .25
genres. Taken together, these results show
that both cohort replacement and period effects
increase highbrows' tastes for lowbrow
music, while only period effects increase
theirtaste for middlebrowmusic.
The resultsof the OLS regressionanalyses
for non-highbrows are shown in Models 3
and4 of Table2. We see a patternsimilar to
thatfor highbrows:Controllingfor the other
variables in the model, in 1992 non-highbrows
liked more low- and middlebrow music
genres than they had in 1982, and younger
cohorts of non-highbrows liked more
lowbrow genres and fewer middlebrowgenres
thandid older cohorts.
DISCUSSION
Taken together, the findings of this study
supportthe assertion that omnivorousness is
replacing snobbishness among Americans of
904 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW
highbrowstatus.The change is due in partto
cohortdisplacement,buthas occurredmostly
because highbrowsof all ages are becoming
more omnivorous. This is not to say that
most highbrows have become perfect omnivores.
(In 1982 only eight and in 1992 only
seven highbrowssaid thatthey liked all other
types of music.) The point is that in 1992
highbrows, on average, reported liking significantlymorekindsof
nonelite music of all
genres than did highbrows a decade earlier
and also that in 1992 highbrows are more
omnivorous than non-highbrows.This latter
finding is strengthenedby using the information
on all 17 nonelite genres of music included
in the 1992 survey.Highbrowsreport
liking 7.49 of the 17 genres of music included
in 1992 versus 4.84 genres, on average,
for the non-highbrows, and this difference
is significant.8In addition, the findings
for non-highbrowsshow thatthe increasebetween
1982 and 1992 in the numberof music
genres liked, while greatestamong highbrows,
is a society-wide trend.
Theorizing on Omnivorousness
The omnivorousness of high-statuspersons,
as reportedby Peterson and Simkus (1992),
is an empirical generalization and does not
provide an explanation for why there has
been such a profound shift in the way high
status is designated. Having found strong
support for the shift from snobbishness to
omnivorousness,we now focus briefly on the
omnivore concept and suggest a numberof
factors thatcontributeto this shift.
As we understandthe meaningof omnivorous
taste, it does not signify that the omnivore
likes everything indiscriminantly.
Rather,it signifies an openness to appreciating
everything. In this sense it is antithetical
to snobbishness, which is based fundamentally
on rigid rules of exclusion (Bourdieu
[1979] 1984; Murphy 1988) such as: "It is
de rigueur to like opera, and country music
is an anathema to be shunned." While by
definition hostile to snobbish closure (Murphy
1988), omnivorousness does not imply
an indifference to distinctions. Rather its
emergence may suggest the formulation of
new rules governing symbolic boundaries
(LamontandFournier1992).
Several studies have shown that criteriaof
distinction, of which omnivorousness is one
expression, mustcenternoton whatone consumes
but on the way items of consumption
are understood. Bourdieu ([1979] 1984,
[1965] 1990), for example, contrasts unreflective
consumptionfor personalenjoyment
with intellectualized appreciation.He identifies
intellectualizedappreciationin ways that
most easily fit a monolithic symbolic landscape
appropriate to the era of the elitist
snob.Nonetheless, the cultureof critical discourse
(Gouldner1979) centralto Bourdieu's
view is also amenable to a discriminating
omnivorousness if the ethnocentrismcentral
to snobbish elitism is replaced by cultural
relativism. Under these conditions, cultural
expressions of all sorts are understood in
whatrelativists call their own terms.9
If this indeed is the way omnivores mark
symbolic boundaries, they do not embrace
contemporarycountrymusic, for example, as
representinghow they identify themselves as
do hard-core country music fans (Peterson
and Kern 1995). Rather,they appreciateand
critiqueit in the light of some knowledge of
the genre, its great performers,and links to
otherculturalforms, lowbrow andhighbrow.
Intellectuals have long provided the grounds
for an aesthetic understandingof jazz, blues,
rock, and bluegrass music. More recently
country music has begun to be taken seriously
as magazine articles in elite cultural
periodicals such as American Heritage
(Scherman 1994) and books by humanist
scholars (Tichi 1994) begin to provideomnivores
with the tools they need to develop an
aesthetic understandingof countrymusic.
Whythe Historic Shift from Snobbishness
to Omnivorousness?
Changes in fashion are often ephemeral
(Davis 1992), but a shift in the basis of taste
from snobbishness to omnivorousness sug-
8 The significance of the difference between
these two means is inferredfrom a test of the difference
of proportions of the number of music
genres liked by highbrows and others, which is
significant at the p < .01 level (one-tailed test).
9 As critical thinking within anthropology has
madeclear, the idea of "culturalrelativism"itself
is a form of hubrisbecause it is impossible for an
outsider to experience another's culture as a native
does (Clifford and Marcus 1986).
CHANGING HIGHBROW TASTE 905
gests that significant alterations in social
power relationships are involved (Williams
1961). In concluding we speculatively suggest
five linked factors that may contribute
to the shifting grounds of status-grouppolitics
(Shiach 1989).
Structural change. A number of social
processes at workover thepastcenturymake
exclusion increasingly difficult. Rising levels
of living, broadereducation, and presentation
of the arts via the media have made
elite aesthetic taste more accessible to wider
segments of the population, devaluing the
artsas markersof exclusion.
At the same time, geographic migration
and social class mobility have mixed people
holding differenttastes.And the increasingly
ubiquitous mass media have introduced the
aesthetic tastes of different segments of the
population to each other. Thus the diverse
folkways of the rest of the world's population
areever moredifficult to exclude, andat
the same time, they areincreasinglyavailable
for appropriationby elite taste-makers(Lipsitz
1990).
Value change. If structuralchanges shape
the opportunity, value changes concerning
gender, ethnic, religious, and racial differences
rationalize the change from snob to
omnivore. In the nineteenth century group
prejudice was widely sanctified by scientific
theory andexpressed society-wide in laws of
exclusion. This changed gradually, and the
Nazi brutalities of WorldWarII gave "racism"
of all sorts such a bad name that most
discriminatory laws in this country have
since been abolished. It is now increasingly
rare for persons in authoritypublicly to espouse
theories of essential ethic and racial
group differences (Takaki 1993).10 The
change fromexclusionist snob to inclusionist
omnivore can thus be seen as a part of the
historical trend toward greater tolerance of
those holding different values (Inglehart
1990; Abramsonand Inglehart 1993).
Art-World change. Developments in the
fine artworldsover the past one andone-half
centuries first provided the theories and the
modes of display for the makingof the high-
10 Essentialist arguments are still often made
concerning certain behavioral differences between
the sexes and as explanations for sexual
orientation(the latteraremadebothby advocates
for andopponents of gay men and lesbians).
brow into snob and more recently provided
the rationale for the omnivore. The elitist
theorists of the early nineteenthcentury EuropeanRoyal
Academies of music, painting,
drama,anddance arguedamong themselves,
butthey stood unitedin theirbelief thatthere
was one standardand that all other expressions
were vulgarities (White and White
1965). Thus they created an aesthetic and
moralenvironmentin which highbrow snobbery
flourished (Arnold 1875:44-47; Levine
1988:171-241).
The market forces that swept through all
the arts broughtin their wake new aesthetic
entrepreneurs who propounded avantguardist
theories that placed positive value
on seeking new and ever more exotic modes
of expression, but in the latter half of the
twentiethcenturythe candidatesbeing championed
for inclusion were so numerous and
theiraesthetic range so greatthatthe old criterion
of a single standardbecame stretched
beyond the point of credibility.It became increasingly
obvious thatthe quality of artdid
not inherein the workitself, butin the evaluations
made by the artworld (Zolberg 1990:
53-106), and that expressions of all sorts
from aroundthe world are open to aesthetic
appropriation(Becker 1982). This is the aesthetic
basis of the shift from the elitist exclusive
snob to the elitist inclusive omnivore.
Generational politics. Before the third
quarterof the twentieth century youngsters
were expected to like pop music and pop
culture generally but to move on to more
"serious"fare as they matured.Beginning in
the 1950s, however, young White people of
all classes embracedpopularAfricanAmerican
dance music styles as their own under
the rubric of rock'n'roll (Ennis 1992), and
by the late 1960s what was identified as the
"WoodstockNation" saw its own variegated
youth culturenot so much as a "stage"to go
throughin growing up but as a viable alternative
to established elite culture (Lipsitz
1990; Aronowitz 1993), thus, in effect, discrediting
highbrowexclusion and valorizing
inclusion. One of the lasting impacts of this
view is that not as many well-educated and
well-to-do Americans born since WorldWar
IIpatronize the elite arts as did their elders
(Robinson 1993; Peterson and Sherkat
1995), and many say they like a wide array
of musical forms (Schaefer 1987; Peterson
906 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW
and Sherkat 1995).
Status-group politics. Dominant status
groups have regularly defined popular culture
in ways that fit their own interests and
have worked to renderharmless subordinate
status-group cultures (Sennett and Cobb
1972; Shiach 1989). One recurrentstrategy
is to define popular culture as brutish and
something to be suppressedor avoided (Arnold
1875; Elliot 1949; Bloom 1987); another
is to gentrify elements of popularculture
and incorporatethem into the dominant
status-group culture (Leonard 1962; Tichi
1994). Our data suggest a major shift from
the former strategy to the latter strategy of
status grouppolitics.
While snobbish exclusion was an effective
markerof statusin a relatively homogeneous
and circumscribed WASP-ish world that
could enforce its dominance over all others
by force if necessary, omnivorous inclusion
seems better adaptedto an increasingly global
world managedby those who make their
way, in part, by showing respect for the cultural
expressions of others. As highbrow
snobbishness fit the needs of the earlier entrepreneurialupper-middleclass,
there also
seems to be an elective affinity between
today's new business-administrative class
and omnivorousness.
Richard A. Peterson is Professor of Sociology at
VanderbiltUniversity. WithRoger Kern,Michael
Hughes and others, he is exploring the changing
ways that tastes are used in signalling status differences.
In connection he is editing a forthcoming
special issue of Poetics: Journalof Empirical
Research on Literature,the Media and the Arts.
WithNarasimhan Anand, he is researching the
role of information in structuring industrial
fields. In addition, he is completinga monograph
for the University of Chicago Press on thefabrication
of authenticity and the institutionalization
of thefield of "countrymusic."
Roger M. Kern is a Ph.D. studentin Sociology at
VanderbiltUniversity.He is currentlycompleting
his dissertation, which explores the relationships
between cultural capital and social stigma acquired
in adolescence and the attainment of social
status as an adult. Otherprojects include an
analysis of countervailing relationships between
parental social class and juvenile delinquency
(with GaryJensen ), and a contentanalysis of the
use of personal resources by upper-middle-class
elites inpersonal advertisementsappearing in the
New York Review of Books.
REFERENCES
Abramson, Paul R. and Ronald Inglehart. 1993.
"GenerationalReplacement and Value Change
in Eight West European Countries." British
Journal of Politics 22:183-228.
Aronowitz, Stanley. 1993. Roll over Beethoven:
The Return of Cultural Strife. Hanover, MA:
Wesleyan University Press.
Arnold, Matthew. 1875. Culture and Anarchy.
New York: Smith, Elder.
Becker, Howard S. 1982. Art Worlds. Berkeley,
CA: University of California Press.
Beisel, Nicola. 1990. "Class, Culture, and Campaigns
against Vice in Three American Cities,
1872-1892." American Sociological Review
55:44-62.
Blau, Judith. 1989. TheShape of Culture:A Study
of Contemporary Cultural Patterns in the
United States. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Bloom, Allan. 1987. The Closing of the American
Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Bourdieu,Pierre. [1979] 1984. Distinction: A Social
Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Reprint,
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
. [1965] 1990. Photography: A MiddleBrowArt.Reprint,Stanford,CA:
StanfordUniversity
Press.
Clifford, James and George E. Marcus. 1986.
Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of
Ethnography. Berkeley, CA: University of
CaliforniaPress.
Davis, Fred. 1992. Fashion, Culture, and Identity.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
DiMaggio, Paul. 1987. "Classification in Art."
AmericanSociological Review 52: 440-55.
. 1991. "Social Structure,Institutions and
Cultural Goods: The Case of The United
States." Pp. 133-55 in Social Theory for a
Changing Society, edited by P. Bourdieu and
J. Coleman. New York: Russell Sage Founda-
tion.
DiMaggio, Paul and Francie Ostrower. 1990.
"Participationin the Arts by Black and White
Americans."Social Forces 63:753-78.
DiMaggio, Paul and Michael Useem. 1978. "Social
Class and Arts Consumption in America."
Theoryand Society 5:109-32
Elliot, T.S. 1949. Notes toward the Definition of
Culture.New York: Harcourt,Brace.
Ennis, Philip H. 1992. The Seventh Stream: The
Emergence of Rocknroll in American Popular
Music. Hanover, MA: Wesleyan University
Press.
Goldberg, Isaac. 1961. Tin Pan Alley: A
Chronicle of American Popular Music. New
York: Ungar.
Gouldner,Alvin W. 1979. TheFutureof Intellec-
CHANGING HIGHBROW TASTE 907
tuals and theRise of theNew Class. New York:
Seabury.
Inglehart, Ronald. 1990. Culture Shift in Advanced
Industrial Society. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Lamont, Michele. 1992. Money, Morals, and
Manners: The Culture of the French and the
American Upper-Middle Class. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Lamont,Michele andMarcel Fournier,eds. 1992.
Cultivating Differences: Symbolic Boundaries
and the Making of Inequality. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Leonard, Neil. 1962. Jazz and the WhiteAmericans.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Levine, Lawrence W. 1988. Highbrow/Lowbrow:
The Emergence of Cultural Hierarchy in
America. Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversity
Press.
Lipsitz, George. 1990. TimePassages: Collective
Memoryand American Popular Culture. Minneapolis,
MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Lynes, Russell. 1954. The Tastemakers. New
York: Harper.
Malone, Bill C. 1979. SouthernMusic/American
Music. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky
Press.
Murphy, Raymond. 1988. Social Closure: The
Theory of Monopolization and Exclusion. Oxford,
England:Clarendon.
Nanry, Charles. 1972. American Music. New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Peterson, Richard A. and Roger M. Kern. 1995.
"Hard-Core and Soft-Shell Country Music
Fans."Journal of CountryMusic 17(3):3-6.
Peterson, Richard A. and Darren E. Sherkat.
1995. Age Factors inArts Participation: 1982-
1992. Research Monograph,January,National
Endowment for the Arts, Washington, DC.
Peterson, Richard A. and Albert Simkus. 1992.
"How Musical Taste Groups Mark Occupational
Status Groups."Pp. 152-68 in Cultivating
Differences: Symbolic Boundaries and the
Makingof Inequality,edited by M. Lamontand
M. Fournier. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Robinson, John P. 1993. Arts Participation in
America: 1982-1992. Washington, DC: National
Endowment for the Arts.
Robinson, John P., Carol A. Keegan, Terry Hanford,
and Timothy A. Triplett. 1985. Public
Participation in the Arts: Final Report on the
1982 Survey. College Park,MD: University of
Maryland.
Rogers, WillardL. 1982. "EstimableFunctions of
Age, Period, and Cohort Effects." American
Sociological Review 47:774-87.
Rubin, Joan Shelley. 1992. The Making of
MiddlebrowCulture.Chapel Hill, NC: University
of North CarolinaPress.
Schaefer, John. 1987. New Sounds: A Listener's
Guide to New Music. New York: Harper and
Row.
Scherman,Tony. 1994. "CountryMusic: Its Rise
and Fall."American Heritage 45(7):38-51.
Sennett, Richard and JonathanCobb. 1972. The
Hidden Injuries of Class. New York: Knopf.
Shiach, Morag. 1989. Discourse on Popular Culture.
Stanford,CA: StanfordUniversity Press.
Sontag, Susan. 1966. Against Interpretation and
Other Essays. New York: Farrar,Straus, and
Giroux.
Takaki,Ronald. 1993. A Different Mirror:A History
of Multiculturalism in America. Boston,
MA: Little, Brown.
Tichi, Cecelia. 1994. High Lonesome: TheAmerican
Culture of Country Music. Durham, NC:
Duke University Press.
White, Harrison C. and Cynthia White. 1965.
Canvasses and Careers. New York: Wiley.
Wilensky, Harold L. 1964. "Mass Media and
Mass Culture: Interdependence or Independence?"
American Sociological Review 29:
173-97.
Williams, Raymond. 1961. TheLong Revolution.
London, England:Chatto and Windus.
Zolberg, Vera. 1990. Constructinga Sociology of
theArts. Cambridge,England:CambridgeUniversity
Press.