Derek Robbins states categorically that ‘[t]here are no grounds for considering Bourdieu was ever a Marxist’ (2006: 513), whilst Brubaker argues that although Bourdieu might appear to be in the Marxist tradition, his critiques of Marxism should make us think otherwise (1985: 761). Although I shall be taking issue with both of these conclusions, I do not want to claim the opposite: that Marx alone influenced him. Bourdieu was unusually inventive in drawing also on Weber, Durkheim, Husserl, Mauss, Elias, and Pascal, not to mention others. Given more space, I would draw out all of these different strands in the texture of his work, whilst acknowledging that, at his best, his syntheses possess a masterly originality. Having rejected ‘histmat’ or Stalinist orthodoxy (Bourdieu, 1990: 3), however, it is my contention that Bourdieu is one of the great heirs of the Western Marxist tradition. It was not simply a youthful flash in the pan that led him to suggest his lycée students read The Communist Manifesto (Lescourret, 2008: 65–66).

My general proposal is this: a strong case can be made for the influence of Marx on Bourdieu's early writings. A more intricate case needs to be made for the view that Bourdieu continued to be influenced profoundly by Marx, despite the development of his distinctive language: the now-familiar concepts of habitus, field, doxa, allodoxia, and so on.