‘Ghastly’ or ‘Gorgeous’? – A Qualitative Study on Capital Composition and Taste in Architecture

Abstract

This thesis explores taste in architecture and investigates whether there is any relation between this taste and what place one holds in the social space. As well as examining this possible homology, the thesis charts the symbolic boundaries prevalent when speaking of architecture and whom the participants could imagine living in the homes included in the photo-elicitation. The overarching research question is: Is there a homology between taste in architecture and position in the social space when taking social trajectory and habitus into account, and what symbolic boundaries are drawn when considering architecture? The data is based on 22 semi-structured interviews conducted throughout the period September 2021 to January 2022. The interviewees were sampled through a categorisation based on the Oslo Register Data Class scheme – ORDC (Hansen et al. 2009) including participants with different amounts of cultural and economic capital. The largest part of the interviews consisted of photo-elicitation, which secured that the participants were all speaking of the same buildings for comparability purposes, as well as ensuring that the interviewees understood what specific architecture was being discussed since none of them was expected to have any specific competency on the subject. The theoretical framework for the analysis is grounded in the concept of symbolic boundaries by Lamont (1992); (Lamont & Molnár 2002), and the theory of homology through distinction by capitals and taste, as well as habitus by Bourdieu (1984). The analysis is split into two chapters, where the first discusses the possible homology in taste in architecture and position in the social space with habitus in focus; the second revolves around the symbolic boundaries drawn when discussing what type of people could live in which homes. The thesis concludes with a discussion. The results found are that: 1. There are tendencies to a homology between taste in architecture and position in the social space; 2. Habitus and social trajectory are important influences on taste in architecture; 3. Symbolic boundaries are drawn enmeshed, not separately; 4. Horizontal boundaries were only found from the cultural fraction toward the economic fraction; 5. The omnivore theory was not applicable to this material; 6. The differences in taste didn’t correlate with the volume and composition of capital when discussing statement architecture and apartment buildings as much as when discussing houses.