What do you think?
Rate this book
Les Mondes de l'art
This classic sociological examination of art as collective action explores the cooperative network of suppliers, performers, dealers, critics, and consumers who--along with the artist--"produce" a work of art. Howard S. Becker looks at the conventions essential to this operation and, prospectively, at the extent to which art is shaped by this collective activity. The book is thoroughly illustrated and updated with a new dialogue between Becker and eminent French sociologist Alain Pessin about the extended social system in which art is created, and with a new preface in which the author talks about his own process in creating this influential work.
384 pages, Pocket Book
First published January 1, 1982
38 people are currently reading
957 people want to read
About the author
Howard S. Becker
92 books106 followersHoward Saul Becker was an American sociologist who taught at Northwestern University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 33 reviews
May 3, 2010
Really, really interesting stuff. I especially like the sections on "Naive Artists" (aka "outsider art"). I used the chapter "Integrated Professionals, Mavericks, Folk Artists, and Naive Artists" as the citation-foundation (Like that? I just made it up.) for a paper and subsequent interactive presentation on The Flaming Lips' parking lot and boom box experiments which segued into their tremendous four-simultaneously-played-discs album entitled Zaireeka. (
Read about it. Do it. Please.
)
I've been digging through the mass grave of my past for the last few hours. Finding books I'd forgotten about. Finding terrible "writing" scribbled upon random things while fucked up and teeming with existential angst, which I saved for some sentimental/unclear reasons. Looking at the cardboard-boxed remnants of my past with a deep wistfulness and near-nauseating, private embarrassment in tow -- they are tag-teaming my mind, working in shifts.
(Look, I'm getting close to writing bloggy reviews! Yay! I'm doing it, Pa! I'm riding all by myself!)
Anyway, that album is great and I have several fond memories of gathering people/boom boxes together to listen to it. My first and only and deeply-beloved/-missed cat was named after it.
I miss you, Zaireeka. May you be happily sneezing on other cats in cat heaven.
I've been digging through the mass grave of my past for the last few hours. Finding books I'd forgotten about. Finding terrible "writing" scribbled upon random things while fucked up and teeming with existential angst, which I saved for some sentimental/unclear reasons. Looking at the cardboard-boxed remnants of my past with a deep wistfulness and near-nauseating, private embarrassment in tow -- they are tag-teaming my mind, working in shifts.
(Look, I'm getting close to writing bloggy reviews! Yay! I'm doing it, Pa! I'm riding all by myself!)
Anyway, that album is great and I have several fond memories of gathering people/boom boxes together to listen to it. My first and only and deeply-beloved/-missed cat was named after it.
I miss you, Zaireeka. May you be happily sneezing on other cats in cat heaven.
November 1, 2022
great sociological analysis of the art world and all the cogs that make it move, a little too long for me but insightful and very fun overall
January 21, 2025
A classic sociology work on the world of art. The book highlights the distinctions between professional artists and amateurs, offering intriguing arguments on how artists make art.
May 7, 2017
Reading this book was like a torture. It has interesting premise, but it is exhausting to read, and not because of complex toughts, no, it is not very complex to be honest. It is exausting to read because author's style is dry and boring, and he uses tons of completely irrelevant examples while proving his point that every peace of art is a result of doings of many involved persons. Furthermore, it's thesises are not very revolutionary and most of us have probably figured them out by themselves, just using different language. So, no great revelations here.
June 14, 2017
If you are interested in the artworld from a sociological perspective, this book will not disappoint you. However, from an art historical perspective, it is somewhat lacking and provides very superficial information. Although, I did like the fact that Becker did not restrict himself only to visual examples, but included examples from theater, music, dance and so on. In this sense, the book is all-inclusive and very broad in scope, but it is this broadness that, in my humble opinion, leads to a very widely set (i.e. not precise enough) theory of the artworld/artworlds.
August 30, 2025
This book is a sociological study of the various actions and groups that have to come together in order to form (or not) an "art world." The writing in this book is not NOT aimed at the lay reader (i.e. non-sociologist) but it was dense and hard to read. Having said that, I wish when I went to art school way back in the 70s (seems like yesterday to me) that we had been exposed to a work like this to help us understand what kind of possible milieus for supporting art creation existed, and what examples of kinds of artists (aside from the "winners" of art history) we might have pursued as models. The book deeply looks at all of this, and if we'd had a chapter a week to read, and a non-scary discussion of how these models applied at our time and place, it might have made participating in the dominant art world of New York plainer, if not easier. Instead, I, at least, was a complete innocent, trying to act as if I got it, when all I really "got" was that I loved to draw, and I might like to paint.
Our school trotted out "famous" art world figures in front of us, many of them remarkable people like Yoko One or John Cage or Betsey Johnson; but it was like a performing circus and those folks didn't have any idea what they were supposed to say to help us, any more than we (well, I, anyway) knew what we needed to hear. When it was painters who came, for those of us who were studying painting, discussions usually devolved into questions about materials because we didn't know how to talk to them about what they were doing and how they were managing to do it.
Were we too embarrassed to ask people "how do I start to become known?" "who helped you get to where you are now" "How do I find a place big enough to make the work I want to make?" And, I think our teachers were protecting their own turf. Only a couple of them were well-known, but quite a few of them had lucked into the late 60s, early 70s de-accessioning of major real estate in Soho, taking over lofts that had formerly been industrial spaces. I don't think they wanted to share any secrets of success, lest we outshine them, and our department chair told us having a BFA and drivers license meant you could be a taxi driver, while guiding a select, almost exclusively male, few to Yale for graduate school. Was that the golden road?? I just wanted to draw and to have nobody, ever, tell me what to do. Then I left it all behind for 45 years, and figured it out through trial and error, but only the part about not ever having anyone tell me what to do.
This book speaks to all the different angles of society that are required in order for an "art world," whether national, international, local or hyper-local to exist (creators, theorists/critics, materials suppliers, consumers). I think the book needs to be updated (not by Becker, a fascinating sociologist of great range, but now deceased) to cover the array of possibilities for independent promotion and distribution as a result of wide-spread adoption of internet communication. He covers some of those ideas in the next to last chapter about change and art worlds, how it comes about, but it needs updated treatment because it is a vastly different proposition than when a few people owned most of the means of communication (in 1982, when the book was published). And is there, really, a universal art world now in the way there was in the day of more limited and curated communication? I'm thinking of Life magazine, for example, doing a big piece on Jackson Pollock. Every doctor's office in the nation, by having Life lying around in the waiting room, let people know about Pollock. Whatever they thought of him, he became a household word. Who in the art world of today is a truly household world? "Regular" people know of more chefs than they do artists! Most of the ones they know are dead!
The book makes me appreciate most of all the inventors, manufacturers and suppliers of art supplies. They do not limit who can use them, or judge the results, and while not everything that was available to me in 1978 is available now, most of it is, remarkably, to the extent that I was easily able to find some drawing paper that I'd liked when I quit art-making, with the help of the internet and readily available in your average Blick, or even the eccentric local art store in my small town. There are still manufacturers producing the kind of walnut ink that wouldn't have been unfamiliar to Goya, or the red chalk that Leonardo used. There is still a respect in that community for materials that make work that lasts.
Just to wrap up, to be clear, this book focuses exclusively on "art worlds" of the western world. It covers much more than the visual arts, in fact I'd say it spends most effort on composers of music and performers of written music, as well as jazz (Becker was an amateur jazz musician). Other than the cultural and racial differences between developers of jazz music, it doesn't mention non-western art or art made by women or people of color specifically. It has a more 30-50,000 foot view than that. It would be very different, I'm sure, if written today (it was published in 1982 AFTER I graduated from art school, so my mythical class with a weekly chapter of the book couldn't have taken place anyway).
Another funny thing about this book is it's one of the earliest titles I added to Goodreads way back in 2015. I'm finally getting around to reading it. When the pupil is ready the teacher will come!! Ha ha, maybe.
Our school trotted out "famous" art world figures in front of us, many of them remarkable people like Yoko One or John Cage or Betsey Johnson; but it was like a performing circus and those folks didn't have any idea what they were supposed to say to help us, any more than we (well, I, anyway) knew what we needed to hear. When it was painters who came, for those of us who were studying painting, discussions usually devolved into questions about materials because we didn't know how to talk to them about what they were doing and how they were managing to do it.
Were we too embarrassed to ask people "how do I start to become known?" "who helped you get to where you are now" "How do I find a place big enough to make the work I want to make?" And, I think our teachers were protecting their own turf. Only a couple of them were well-known, but quite a few of them had lucked into the late 60s, early 70s de-accessioning of major real estate in Soho, taking over lofts that had formerly been industrial spaces. I don't think they wanted to share any secrets of success, lest we outshine them, and our department chair told us having a BFA and drivers license meant you could be a taxi driver, while guiding a select, almost exclusively male, few to Yale for graduate school. Was that the golden road?? I just wanted to draw and to have nobody, ever, tell me what to do. Then I left it all behind for 45 years, and figured it out through trial and error, but only the part about not ever having anyone tell me what to do.
This book speaks to all the different angles of society that are required in order for an "art world," whether national, international, local or hyper-local to exist (creators, theorists/critics, materials suppliers, consumers). I think the book needs to be updated (not by Becker, a fascinating sociologist of great range, but now deceased) to cover the array of possibilities for independent promotion and distribution as a result of wide-spread adoption of internet communication. He covers some of those ideas in the next to last chapter about change and art worlds, how it comes about, but it needs updated treatment because it is a vastly different proposition than when a few people owned most of the means of communication (in 1982, when the book was published). And is there, really, a universal art world now in the way there was in the day of more limited and curated communication? I'm thinking of Life magazine, for example, doing a big piece on Jackson Pollock. Every doctor's office in the nation, by having Life lying around in the waiting room, let people know about Pollock. Whatever they thought of him, he became a household word. Who in the art world of today is a truly household world? "Regular" people know of more chefs than they do artists! Most of the ones they know are dead!
The book makes me appreciate most of all the inventors, manufacturers and suppliers of art supplies. They do not limit who can use them, or judge the results, and while not everything that was available to me in 1978 is available now, most of it is, remarkably, to the extent that I was easily able to find some drawing paper that I'd liked when I quit art-making, with the help of the internet and readily available in your average Blick, or even the eccentric local art store in my small town. There are still manufacturers producing the kind of walnut ink that wouldn't have been unfamiliar to Goya, or the red chalk that Leonardo used. There is still a respect in that community for materials that make work that lasts.
Just to wrap up, to be clear, this book focuses exclusively on "art worlds" of the western world. It covers much more than the visual arts, in fact I'd say it spends most effort on composers of music and performers of written music, as well as jazz (Becker was an amateur jazz musician). Other than the cultural and racial differences between developers of jazz music, it doesn't mention non-western art or art made by women or people of color specifically. It has a more 30-50,000 foot view than that. It would be very different, I'm sure, if written today (it was published in 1982 AFTER I graduated from art school, so my mythical class with a weekly chapter of the book couldn't have taken place anyway).
Another funny thing about this book is it's one of the earliest titles I added to Goodreads way back in 2015. I'm finally getting around to reading it. When the pupil is ready the teacher will come!! Ha ha, maybe.
Read
July 29, 2011The new preface and the first chapter were pure Becker dynamite, but the rest was less inspiring. Partly perhaps because Becker spends a lot of pages in plain descriptive stuff that is not so interesting--particularly if the reader (like me) has any first-hand experience of art worlds. Nevertheless, I don't think you can bypass this book if you even think about writing something about the sociology of art.
February 4, 2026
From the outset of this book, the author deflates expectations that its subject-matter is aesthetics, creative inspiration, shifting movements or tastes and the like. Rather it's straight up sociology, with no highfalutin philosophizing about art and how it's made.
The focus is, as the title implies, more worldly. He writes “what I have done here is not the sociology of art at all, but rather the sociology of occupations applied to artistic work”. That brings to mind a remark by Andy Worhol : “Why do people think artists are special? It’s just another job.”
But Becker isn’t interested in the solitary artist, even less in entrepreneurial ones like Dali, Koons or Warhol, who said “Making money is art…and good business is the best art.” Rather, he sees art in its production and consumption as something better understood not in the singular, but the plural. At every stage, many people are taking part, from the butler serving coffee to Trollope at his writing desk to the curators, publishers, theatrical and movie producers whose editorial and promotional work drive and steer cultural industries. He refers at one point to his art world as an “organized division of labor” – a passing hint of social science theory that otherwise stands out by its absence in this book. Bourdieu gets multiple mentions (at least in the new edition) but thinkers like Veblen, Durkheim, Weber and Marx are nowhere to be found.
That relative absence, and thus lack of attention to power in cultural industries, set limits to what this book offers. In today's art world, where chord patterns and lyrics are carefully crafted by music industry specialists to meet but also to shape pop music tastes, and where dividend-seeking investors call the tunes, as it were, Becker’s perspectives sometimes seem out-of-date and even quaint. Here I’m thinking of Derivative Media: How Wall Street Devours Culture by Andrew Dewaard (my review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... ).
Yet in the Preface to this, the 25th anniversary edition (2008) of the original book published in 1982, Becker offers a number of astute remarks on research methods. He advocates paying attention to at least three things: First, complaints or “trouble” can reveal how and for whom conventions aren’t observed and tensions exist. Second, processes, and choices made in steering them. Third, other cases that permit comparisons. As foregrounded by Becker, a seasoned observer, those rough-and-ready bits of advice made sense to me. But I’m also persuaded by the applied psychologist Kurt Lewin said about research: "There’s nothing so practical as a good theory".
The focus is, as the title implies, more worldly. He writes “what I have done here is not the sociology of art at all, but rather the sociology of occupations applied to artistic work”. That brings to mind a remark by Andy Worhol : “Why do people think artists are special? It’s just another job.”
But Becker isn’t interested in the solitary artist, even less in entrepreneurial ones like Dali, Koons or Warhol, who said “Making money is art…and good business is the best art.” Rather, he sees art in its production and consumption as something better understood not in the singular, but the plural. At every stage, many people are taking part, from the butler serving coffee to Trollope at his writing desk to the curators, publishers, theatrical and movie producers whose editorial and promotional work drive and steer cultural industries. He refers at one point to his art world as an “organized division of labor” – a passing hint of social science theory that otherwise stands out by its absence in this book. Bourdieu gets multiple mentions (at least in the new edition) but thinkers like Veblen, Durkheim, Weber and Marx are nowhere to be found.
That relative absence, and thus lack of attention to power in cultural industries, set limits to what this book offers. In today's art world, where chord patterns and lyrics are carefully crafted by music industry specialists to meet but also to shape pop music tastes, and where dividend-seeking investors call the tunes, as it were, Becker’s perspectives sometimes seem out-of-date and even quaint. Here I’m thinking of Derivative Media: How Wall Street Devours Culture by Andrew Dewaard (my review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... ).
Yet in the Preface to this, the 25th anniversary edition (2008) of the original book published in 1982, Becker offers a number of astute remarks on research methods. He advocates paying attention to at least three things: First, complaints or “trouble” can reveal how and for whom conventions aren’t observed and tensions exist. Second, processes, and choices made in steering them. Third, other cases that permit comparisons. As foregrounded by Becker, a seasoned observer, those rough-and-ready bits of advice made sense to me. But I’m also persuaded by the applied psychologist Kurt Lewin said about research: "There’s nothing so practical as a good theory".
December 14, 2025
Maravilla de libro. Un clásico de la sociología de las artes y con toda la razón. Es literatura académica, pero muy accesible y entretenida. Escrita de manera diáfana, con cantidad de ideas fuerza bien formuladas y riquísimo en ejemplos ilustrativos de lo más certeros.
Becker desmitifica la idea del arte centrada en el autor genial y libre, defiendiendo que toda actividad artística es resultado de una enorme cantidad de interacciones entre actores. Estos, además, cooperan entre sí sirviéndose de multitud de convenciones oscilantes.
Becker muestra además que ese esquema básico es aplicable a cualquier actividad artística, desde las artes visuales contemporáneas hasta la literatura o el cine, sin que queden demasiado lejos el bordado o los cantos populares. Entre diferentes sistemas, cambian fundamentalmente los pesos y los acentos.
Todo el libro es jugosísimo, pero el capítulo dedicado a las entidades de distribución y el del proceso de edición presentan ideas originalísimas que me resultaron especialmente inspiradoras.
10/10
Becker desmitifica la idea del arte centrada en el autor genial y libre, defiendiendo que toda actividad artística es resultado de una enorme cantidad de interacciones entre actores. Estos, además, cooperan entre sí sirviéndose de multitud de convenciones oscilantes.
Becker muestra además que ese esquema básico es aplicable a cualquier actividad artística, desde las artes visuales contemporáneas hasta la literatura o el cine, sin que queden demasiado lejos el bordado o los cantos populares. Entre diferentes sistemas, cambian fundamentalmente los pesos y los acentos.
Todo el libro es jugosísimo, pero el capítulo dedicado a las entidades de distribución y el del proceso de edición presentan ideas originalísimas que me resultaron especialmente inspiradoras.
10/10
November 7, 2020
Its a great book and I assume it is well understandable even without being close to an “Art World”. It has Becker’s signature style of simple language and *not* mentioning theories and other works left and right. So no theory fear-of-missing-out, here. It is not hard to read although his does not reach the feeling of the sociological wonderland feel of his method-focused books for me. One needs to bring a bit patience, it is longer than outsiders and his method-books, I think, though no chapter feels like it is there to increase the page count.
The 25th anniversary edition includes an interview with Becker. Often, I feel that such anniversary-additions are fillers, but that one is nice, fun and explains well how Becker’s approach is different from Bourdieu’s.
The 25th anniversary edition includes an interview with Becker. Often, I feel that such anniversary-additions are fillers, but that one is nice, fun and explains well how Becker’s approach is different from Bourdieu’s.
November 8, 2022
The theories were sound overall, and I appreciated the diversity of examples given. The writing was incredibly dense, however, and at times chapters felt bloated with unnecessary detail. I also feel like aspects of Becker's work here are arguable and/or outdated; but all in all, a fine text and a solid starting point for greater discussion.
May 15, 2018
While a bit long-winded, this book provides a thorough, accessible, and informative analysis of the networks and collective actions that go into the establishment of works of art. I'm not knowledgeable about either sociology or art history, but I found this to be straightforward and appealing.
June 4, 2025
Sembra una persona a cui hanno detto: devi scrivere una tesi ma falla di 400 pagine.
Allunga il brodo fino allo sfinimento, ripete sempre le stesse cose.
Niente che non puoi trovare su Wikipedia o sull'enciclopedia.
Allunga il brodo fino allo sfinimento, ripete sempre le stesse cose.
Niente che non puoi trovare su Wikipedia o sull'enciclopedia.
July 12, 2025
smesso di leggere a pagina 55, orgogliosamente non lo finirò mai, un libro insulso di un sociologo insulso pure americano letteralista (insulso) in un concentrato di pura ovvietà, così tanta che all’esame ho mezzo improvvisato e ho preso 30 lo stesso, ADIOS GRINGO
January 4, 2018
J'ai mis un peu de temps à le terminer. Autant les premiers chapitres m'avaient passionné, autant les derniers, j'ai galéré à m'y intéresser et à les lire.
April 28, 2020
This book was actually good. It taught me a lot about art!!!
June 12, 2021
Disappointing. Basic premise: Artists (painters, filmmakers, musicians, etc.) need helpers, such as agents, printers, publicists, drivers, etc. Not to mention an audience. Isn't this obvious?
uni
March 8, 2024reading list - sociology of culture
October 3, 2024
Each and every one of Becker’s dozens of case studies is a fascinating story. That said, the first and last chapters are the best.
September 2, 2025
Tesi e argomentazioni interessanti, un po' ripetitivo e datato, non condivido alcune considerazioni, ma nel complesso un saggio abbastanza solido.
January 9, 2026
When I started studying art history in the 1980s, the art was presented to us through historical facts, connoisseurship, and theory. We didn’t learn how artists got their paints, who bought their artworks, how they were trained—none of the mundane operations of producing and distributing art were part of undergraduate art history. We never learned the sociology of art, which has subsequently become my favorite way of thinking about art. I’ve loved reading more sociologically oriented art thinkers like Sarah Thorton, Don Thompson, or Pierre Bourdieu. Thorton and Thompson approached art from an elite level, talking about the economics of the art world. A classic ground-level sociological study of the art world is Art Worlds by Howard Becker. Becker doesn’t just write about the visual art world—he is also dealing with performing arts. And he is just as interested in the people who manufacture violins and oil paint as with composers of symphonies or painters of oil paintings. As Becker explains, “The artist thus works in the center of a network of cooperating people, all of whose work is essential to the final outcome.”
December 21, 2024
Les Mondes de l’art est un ouvrage très intéressant qui est à mon avis un essentiel pour ceux qui font des études d’art. Becker développe un véritable panorama de l’art dans la société moderne en mettant en valeur ses enjeux et ses dialogues avec d’autres institutions et disciplines. Ce qui pour moi rend cet ouvrage intéressant au delà de son apport théorique c’est que l’auteur lui même est un artiste qui a travaillé dans la musique et les arts plastiques. Il réutilise ses propres expériences dans son argumentation ce qui rend l’ensemble plus vivant et surtout plus accessible pour le lecteur moderne. Les Mondes de l’art est un livre qui va me suivre pendant toutes mes études parce qu’il a vraiment plein de points importants qui servent à mieux comprendre les milieux artistiques. Le seul petit défaut de ce livre est qu’il a été écrit avant la révolution des réseaux sociaux et qu’il manque donc un support important de la diffusion des arts aujourd’hui.
February 16, 2015
Exceedingly readable and fascinating, Howard Becker's Art Worlds begins with the simple premise that all works of art are collective actions. By approaching works of literature, music, and visual art as products of collective activity rather than solitary genius, Becker highlights the "complexity of the cooperative networks through which art happens" (1). Individual chapters explore issues such as the role of critics and editors, naive and folk art, the distinction between art and craft, and the sociological dimension of artistic reputation. The epilogue to the 25th anniversary edition contains an interview where Becker explains the difference between his idea of collaborative art worlds and Pierre Bourdieu's notion of fields (champs) as spaces of competition.
May 11, 2016
I really wanted to like this book. Some parts could have used more word economy. Other parts could have been flushed out more. As others have mentioned, the part on maverick and naive artists was great. The book does assume some prior subject matter knowledge, hence I actually think I need to read more on the subject matter. May come back at later date.
February 28, 2015
Very readable. Definitely would be good for those who do not already work/participate in the art world and would like to gain greater insight. For those of us already involved with the art world, it is still a decent read - very detailed and methodical.
November 16, 2008
My review of this book can be read at http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081201/schwabsky.
December 10, 2010
A really great book shows us how everything is great and worth to die for
January 19, 2013
Interesting and easy to read. I really have fun reading it!
June 25, 2014
A great book in the canon of work on creativity and the research of art worlds.
December 6, 2014
Second time reading it, but still a good read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 33 reviews