False Conscious (Marxism) and The Hunger Games

An important concept that Marx introduces to explain the failure of the proletariat to recognize their position as a unified class and their need to band together in order to overthrow capitalism.  One way to think about false consciousness is the sense of hope that individual people have that they might rise to a position within the ranks of the Bourgeoisie.

This scene from the Movie "The Hunger Games" is analogous to the concept of false consciousness.  In this scene President Snow explains why The Hunger Games has a victor, rather than having all participants die, or simply rounding up the sacrifices and executing them.

President Snow: Seneca... why do you think we have a winner?
Seneca Crane: [frowns] What do you mean?
President Snow: I mean, why do we have a winner? I mean, if we just wanted to intimidate the districts, why not round up twenty-four of them at random and execute them all at once? Be a lot faster.
[Seneca just stares, confused]
President Snow: Hope.
Seneca Crane: Hope?
President Snow: Hope. It is the only thing stronger than fear. A little hope is effective. A lot of hope is dangerous. A spark is fine, as long as it's contained.
Seneca Crane: So...?
President Snow: So, CONTAIN it.

As has been noted by numerous literary and internet commentators The Hunger Games is more than a dystopian thriller, it also contains commentary and critique about our current political and economic systems.  In the fictional world of the Hunger Games an oppressive government of a fictional country named Panem has lead to vast wealth inequality: both in terms of intradistrict wealth and in comparing the capital city to the districts.   In part this wealth disparity has resulted from a failed rebellion, though it seems the disparity may also have been the initial cause of the rebellion.  In this fictional account, the capital city is filled with wealthy elites (Bourgeoisie) who own the means of production and live in a state of decadence and ease.  The proletariat are separated into 12 districts and their lives are filled with suffering and work. The separation into districts can be interpreted as an attempt to prevent further rebellion by making class identification more difficult for these workers.  The Hunger Games are an annual event where two youths (1 boy and 1 girl) are chosen from each district to compete in a battle to the death - until only one competitor remains.  In additional to providing the hope that President Snow mentions in the above clip, these games foster resentment and competition between the districts and reinforce the cultural structure within Panem that the districts deserve to be punished for their crime of rebellion.  This is particularly true as districts 1 & 2 have more resources than the other 10, allowing them to train tributes and more often win the games than other districts - this can be thought of as analogous to the Petite Bourgeoisie. 








 

Habitus in Popular Culture

To begin with, and in short, Habitus is your way of being.  It is the collected aspects of culture that are anchored in the body or daily practices of individuals and groups. It includes the totality of learned habits, bodily skills, styles, tastes, and other non-discursive knowledges that might be said to "go without saying" for a specific group (Bourdieu 1990:66-67).  You might think of it as a persons...groove. It is also the basis for a person's cultural capital.

Old Man: "His groove! The rhythm in which he lives his life. His pattern of behavior. I threw it off. And the Emperor had me thrown out the window!" (The Emperor's New Groove).

Bourdieu tells us that our habitus, our ways of being, are at least partly instilled through the social structures around us.  Though the process of internalizing these social and cultural structures - into our tastes, habits, bodies - we are also being interpolated into an existing social hierarchy.  One that privileges certain ways of being over others, as being more legitimate and of more value.  Remember, Bourdieu is a conflict theorist, so it makes sense to see   taste (and the legitimation of certain tastes over others) as part of the class conflict.  "The main way this happens is through what he calls ‘habitus’ or socialised norms or tendencies that guide behaviour and thinking. Habitus is ‘the way society becomes deposited in persons in the form of lasting dispositions, or trained capacities and structured propensities to think, feel and act in determinant ways, which then guide them’" (Wacquant 2005: 316, cited in Navarro 2006: 16, cited on bourdieu-and-habitus).

Now our habitus is neither something we can control nor is it purely determined by structures. It is created by a kind of interplay between the two over time.  A mutually constitutive relationship between the individual and society that creates the amalgam of practices and preferences we call habitus.  In this sense habitus is created and reproduced unconsciously, ‘without any deliberate pursuit of coherence… without any conscious concentration’ (Bourdieu 1984: 170).



"embodied capital, external wealth converted into an integral part of the person, into a habitus, cannot be transmitted instantaneously (unlike money, property rights, or even titles of nobility) by gift or bequest, purchase or exchange."(Bourdieu, 1986)  But it can be changed over time.




The theme of changing an individual's cultural capital as a means to change or conceal habitus is a repeated often within popular culture.

A classic example is the movie My Fair Lady (which is a musical production of the earlier work Pygmalion).  A woman of low class standing (Eliza Doolittle) is "transformed" - coached in deportment and language by Henry Higgins - into a lady of high class standing.  In the end she is able to pass as a Duchess among the upper class at a ball.

In this first video (above) you will see Eliza early in her transformation.  If you would like to see her prior to any intervention use this link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9E8KDx2cwk).  Her Cockney accent is thick and pronounced, giving away her social standing.


 Even after Eliza is coached to speak as an upper class woman, she is still not able to pass.  Her habitus and life experiences give her away.  In the scene to the left we see Eliza socializing with the upper class at a horse race.

What is it about Eliza that gives her away?  Why does her topic of conversation reveal her class background?

This particular scene was reused in Pretty Woman a modern update of the Pygmalion story that follows the My Fair Lady plot (withe some important changes).

The narrative of transformation and "rags to riches" in these movies makes them similar to Cinderella Stories. However,Cinderella, in the original fairy tale, comes from an upper class background and has simply been oppressed by her stepmother.  She does not require a change to her habitus.  The Pygmalion narrative incorporates instilling different habits, tastes, mannerisms, gestures and language use.  In essence, the transformation of habitus.

In the end, whether it is Eliza in My Fair Lady, Vivian from Pretty Woman, Lany Boggs from She's All That the transformation is complete, but not flawless.  Contemporary versions often include a "beautiful all along" element to the plot that softens the classism inherent in these stories. For more examples go to http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PygmalionPlot



Another example where we can see habitus in Popular Culture is the 2003 reality TV Show "Joe Millionaire."  In a gender reversal of the tropes described above in this case the individual undergoing transformation is Evan Marriott a construction worker. You can see the trailer for this show below.  Interestingly, it is Evan's habitus that gives him away.  At least one contestant, Allison, begins to suspect that Evan is not who he says he is when he fails to appreciate (or eat) the goat cheese served on one of their dates.  In her words "who doesn't like goat cheese?"