Amo: Inday, bakit madaming kang libro sa kwarto mo? Kaya naman pala nagrereklamo kang masikip mamalantsa diyan. Bakit binabasa mo ba yan lahat?
Inday: Sir, books are forms of social capital. Bourdiue would argue that capital does not only pertain to the economic but to the social ones. My books resemble their capacities as symbolic good. I'm sure one of them may not buy for a grande strarbucks but I'm sure they can’t be bought in exchange of even a venti. Your questions sits on the same delusion to asking why you, Mr. and Mrs. Montemayor, have deliberately been collecting and putting these expensive Chinas into the living room shelf facades? We wouldn't really want to use your Chinas for the next meal, would we? Would you trust me to wash these Chinas, knowing that I barely have the probability of breaking them through my extreme training and care, of course because you see them as relics of your ancestral possessions? No need to respond to that sir. Now, my books, this array of spines bind the pages of history and human knowledge, you were talking about, can not be exchanged with aprons and dusters because books play in the field of intellectual historical debates for knowledge and humanity while aprons and dusters are… for domestic politics. Now I completely understand your display of disinterest because we are of unlike fields and capitals and dispositions, or what Tito Pierre calls habitus—the feel of the game… which tells apart our practice in this Haushalt.
Amo: Potah.
No comments:
Post a Comment