This article explores how foreign, recently imported cultural forms can redefine the dynamics of legitimation in national cultural fields. Drawing on archival research, the article discusses the early consecration of Anglo-American pop-rock in 1970s Italy and analyzes the articles published by three specialist music magazines. Findings reveal the emergence of a shared pop-rock canon among Italian critics, but also that this “cosmopolitan capital” was mobilized to implement competing editorial projects. Italian critics promoted both different strategies of legitimation vis-à-vis contemporary popular music and opposite views of cultural globalization as a social process. Theoretically, the article conceptualizes “aesthetic cosmopolitanism” as a symbolic resource that can be realized through competing institutional projects, rather than as a homogeneous cultural disposition.
AllenM. P.LincolnA. E. (2004). Critical discourse and the cultural consecration of American films. Social Forces, 82, 871-893.
2.
Anonymous. (1974). Da Santamonica: La stangata [From Santamonica: The sting]. Ciao 2001, 31, 15-17.
3.
Antonucci FerraraA. (1975). Perché Gong. Gong, 6 (booklet enclosed with the issue, no page numbers).
4.
BaumannS. (2007). Hollywood highbrow. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5.
BerkersP.JanssenS.VerboordM. (2011). Globalization and ethnic diversity in Western newspaper coverage of literary authors. American Behavioral Scientist, 55, 624-641.
6.
BertoncelliR. (1976). California 10 anni dopo: ma l’amore mio no [California 10 years later: But not my love]. Gong, 7-8, 7-9.
7.
BolelliF. (1975). Circuiti alternativi: Qualche riflessione teorica [Alternative circuits: Some theoretical reflections]. Gong, 9, 44-45.
8.
BolelliF. (1979). Movimento e scrittura nell’area del pop [Movement and writing in the area of pop]. In AlfierjP.MazzoneG. (Eds.), I fiori di Gutenberg: analisi e prospettive dell’editoria alternativa, marginale, pirata in Italia e Europa [The flowers of Gutenberg: analysis and perspectives of alternative, marginal, pirated publishing in Italy and Europe]. Rome, Italy: Arcana.
9.
BourdieuP. (1986). The forms of capital. In RichardsonJ. G. (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for sociology of education (pp. 241-258). New York, NY: Greenwood.
10.
BourdieuP. (1990). The logic of practice. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
11.
BourdieuP. (1996). The rules of art. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
12.
BielbyD. D. (2011). Staking claims. American Behavioral Scientist, 55, 525-540.
13.
BielbyD. D.MoloneyM.NgoB. Q. (2005). Aesthetics of television criticism. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 23, 1-43.
14.
CarreraA. (1980). Musica e pubblico giovanile: L’evoluzione dei gusti musicali dagli anni Sessanta ad oggi [Music and youth audience: The evolution of musical tastes from the sixties to today]. Milan, Italy: Feltrinelli.
15.
CastaldoG. (1976). Roll over Beethoven. Muzak, 10, 27.
16.
CavalliA.LeccardiC. (1997). Le culture giovanili [Youth cultures]. In BarbagalloF. (Ed.), La storia dell’Italia repubblicana [The history of republican Italy] (Vol. 3, pp. 709-800). Turin, Italy: Einaudi.
CraneD. (2002). Culture and globalization. In CraneD.KawashimaN.KawasakiK. (Eds.), Global culture (pp. 1-26). London, England: Routledge.
19.
De LuigiM. (1982). L’industria discografica in Italia [The record industry in Italy]. Rome, Italy: Lato Side.
20.
DelconteP.MasottiR. (1975). I nuovi circuiti alternativi musicali: La lunga marcia [The new alternative music circuits: The long march]. Gong, 10, 9-12.
21.
DiMaggioP. (1987). Classification in art. American Sociological Review, 52, 440-455.
22.
DowdT. J.JanssenS. (2011). Globalization and diversity in cultural fields. American Behavioral Scientist, 55, 519-524.
23.
Editorial Board. (1973). Autoritratto della muzak generation [Self-portrait of the muzak generation]. Muzak, 1, 2.
24.
FabbriF. (2007). Orchestral manoeuvres in the 1970s. Popular Music, 26, 409-427.
SantoroM. (2010). Effetto Tenco: genealogia della canzone d’autore [The Tenco effect: Genealogy of the singer-songwriter song]. Bologna, Italy: Il Mulino.
53.
SapiroG. (2010). Globalization and cultural diversity in the book market. Poetics, 38, 419-439.
54.
SchmutzV. (2005). Retrospective cultural consecration in popular music. American Behavioral Scientist, 48, 1510-1523.
55.
SfardiniA. (2001). Gli anni Settanta: Dati di scenario e di consumo [The seventies: Overview and consumption data]. Comunicazioni Sociali, 23, 75-99.
56.
TomatisJ. (2014). “This Is our music”: Italian teen pop press and genres in the 1960s. IASPM@Journal, 4, 24-42.
57.
van VenrooijA.SchmutzV. (2010). The evaluation of popular music in the United States, Germany and the Netherlands. Cultural Sociology, 4, 395-421.
58.
VarrialeS. (2014). Bourdieu and the sociology of cultural evaluation. Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia, 55, 121-148.
59.
VarrialeS. (2015). Cultural production and the morality of markets. Poetics, 51, 1-16.
60.
VarrialeS. (2016a). Beyond distinction. Cultural Sociology, 10, 160-177.
61.
VarrialeS. (2016b). Globalization, music and cultures of distinction. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
62.
WeeninkD. (2008). Cosmopolitanism as a form of capital. Sociology, 42, 1089-1106.
