No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
... Music personnel described lateral moves as a revitalizing change (or, "keeping things fresh"), a form of résumé building, and an opportunity to work with a new set of artists (i.e., "changing your soundtrack"). Changing employers, or simply departments, enables workers to grow and strengthen their professional networks, which are particularly crucial in creative careers (Frenette & Tepper, 2016;Lingo & Tepper, 2013;Menger, 1999;Skov, 2012). More generally, to these workers, even if a new position does not signal clear career progression, to remain employed in the industry is a mark of survival. ...
... Cultural industries attract people who want to engage in cultural work for the sake of joy, glamour, and creativity, but which often feature emotionally demanding working conditions and poor economic compensation (Hesmondhalgh and Baker 2008;Skov 2012;Hesmondhalgh 2013: 253-257;Conor et al. 2015;McRobbie 2016). Failure is a hidden reality of being a cultural worker (McRobbie 2016: 56) but is rarely studied. ...
Included in the definition of being an aspiring person is the risk of failure. Aspiring fiction writers are no exception. This article shows that the role of aspiring fiction writer involves managing three issues: the hope of being published, rejection by a publisher, and the perception of the rejection as a failure. Drawing on 47 interviews with fiction writers who have attempted to become first-time writers, the analysis shows that aspiring writers’ responses to rejection are related to accepting and dismissing responsibility for having failed and admitting or dismissing the rejection as a perceived failure. Based on these findings, the article presents procedures associated with four main approaches to dealing with failure: conceding, excusing, justifying, and refusing. This conceptual framework for understanding failure contributes to a theoretical understanding of evaluation and valuation processes and their consequences and to empirical studies of rejection as career failure; it also systematizes and extends Goffmans work on cooling out strategies.
This article focuses on the relation between art and fashion—two fields of cultural production marked by contrasts and shifting boundaries—by investigating it in light of the perceptions of art among ordinary fashion designers. Drawing on an institutional perspective that conceives fashion and art as social fields, we summarise the effects produced between the two fields, and we outline the processes of identity formation and the legitimation of fields of cultural production. Empirical research on a sample of Milanese fashion designers allow us to determine whether or not fashion designers use art as a means to acquire legitimacy and to create an identity, thereby institutionalising their field of cultural production (fashion) as artistic. Our argument is that identification with art is often rejected by ordinary fashion designers, who seek to legitimate their cultural production, not through art, but through a culture of wearability. The case of Milanese fashion adds breadth and depth to the theory of artification and to the production of culture theory by showing that comparison with the fine arts by actors in a field of cultural production in constant search of legitimation may come about through channels other than assimilation into the world of art.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.