Week 9- Bloody Revisited (comment)

(mark this comment)

I decided it was time to branch out and respond to another student's blog, so I selected Cindy Outerio's post on Australian cultural scripts and the use of the word 'bloody'. You can find her post here (I also pasted the same comment on her post). 

This week's topic looked at how specific words might both exemplify and constitute well-established cultural positions in discourse.

I agree with Cindy. It is interesting how engrained the word 'bloody' has become in Australian society that politicians can get away with using the word in parliament.

Wierzbicka came to realise that people use the word 'bloody' in two different ways. Firstly, in a negative way, e.g. bloody hell, and secondly, in a neutral way, e.g. bloody wonderful place. It appears that the swear word just intensifies the meaning of the word in front of it. I think 'bloody' has become less offensive in Australia due to its frequent usage and integration into Australian culture. Wierzbicka believes the word developed from Australian pioneers and farmers, who lived out in the Australian bush. It was regarded as a mild swearword, but never seen as foul. 

Even though the word is a part of Australia's cultural identity, this does not exempt Australians' use of the word in other countries. It still remains offensive to other English speaking nations. I think the $180 million advertising campaign launched in 2006 by Tourism Australia, 'So where the bloody hell are you?' was a great campaign in promoting tourism nationally. But, to use it in an international advertising campaign was not a smart idea. The campaign caused so much controversy in March 2007 that the Broadcast Advertising Clearance Centre in the United Kingdom had to ban it. The BACC would not allow the word 'bloody' in television versions of the commercial. The reason for this is that the British believe the word to be rude and impolite.

References

Wierzbicka, A. 2002, 'Australian Cultural Scripts- Bloody Revisited,' in Journal of Pragmatics, no.34, pp.1167-1209.

Image- http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2006/03/18/ajgbloody_wideweb_470x317,o.jpg

Week 8- Stick to the Code

(mark this post)

In everyday social interactions, there exists codes of conduct (set of social norms), which prescribe/describe how participants in the social interaction ought to behave. The reading, Telling the Code, closely examines the 'convict code' and how it was used to rationalise deviant behaviour and activities among convicts in a half-way house. Although, no one could recite all of the specifics of the code, Sociologist, Laurence Wieder, formulated the code from what residents said about the code. Here is his interpretation:

1. Above all else, do not snitch.

2. Do not cop out.

3. Do not take advantage of other residents.

4. Share what you have.

5. Help other residents.

6. Do not mess with other residents' interests.

7. Do not trust staff- staff is heat.

8. Show your loyalty to the residents.

Wieder found that those who breached the code were met with negative sanctions, which ranged from labelling (eg. kiss-ass, snitch or sniveler) to abuse and violence, depending on the severity of the breach. The code was enforced through the application of negative sanctions. The staff also had an understanding of the code, which allowed them to identify and make sense of the residents' actions. They rendered the residents' action sensible or rational by the way they conducted themselves in achieving goals specified by the code.

According to Robert Garot, gangs' use a 'street' code, which is similar to that of the residents' convict code. Both, street gangs' and residents' use the code to maintain, transform and elaborate meanings in routine activities. Social identity and respect are seen as the most important features of the street code, which is a set of informal rules governing public behaviour, including violence.

There are many unspoken codes of conduct that exist in society, which ordinary citizens abide by to maintain the social order, such as being quiet in a library/ movie theatre. This discussion on codes made me think of the dress code. The dress code is a prominent code that everyone will follow throughout life. Dress codes are unwritten codes with regard to clothing. Clothing has a social significance, with different rules and expectations being valid depending on circumstance and occasion. For example, many muslim women wear head and/or body covering to proclaim their status as respectable women.

A single person navigates between two or more dress codes each day !

**Just an extra note. I thought I would show my SOC250 blog to my sister and see what she thought about the weekly posts. She reminded me of the pirate code off Pirates of the Carribbean. 

 "Any man who falls behind, is left behind"- Captain Jack Sparrow

References

Wieder, D. L, 1974, 'Telling the Code' in R.Turner (ed.) Ethnomethodology: Selected Readings, Penguin Educations, Harmondsworth, pp. 144-172.

Garot, R. 2007, 'Where You From!- Gang Identity as Performance,' in Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, vol.36, no.1, pp.50-84.

Cartoon- http://gdbrenan.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/well-dressed-bitch.html

Week 7- Ethnomethodology

(mark this post)

Ethnomethodology, to put it simply, means people methods- the study of the methods that people use to produce the social order in their interactions. Sociologist, Harold Garfinkel, coined the term ethnomethodology in 1967. He analysed the behaviour of people in their social interactions and realised that the interaction is not defined by external/internal constraining moral rules, but by undefined/ unwritten rules that have been established through previous interactions with people on a micro level.

Garfinkel's ethnomethodology was influenced by the work of Sociologists, Talcott Parson and Alfred Shutz, who also analysed the nature of social interactions. Parson's proposed that people do what is required of them to do by institutions. They are rational actors in society. However, Shutz proposed the opposite. He maintained that social interactions are not rational. There is no one instructing people how to interact. They are merely devising their social actions from partially formulated 'recipe knowledge' or past experiences.

So, it fell to Garfinkel to combine the two theorist's work- the 'moral' with the 'cognitive', which he established through a series of ingenious 'breaching' experiments. For the breaching experiments, Garfinkel asked people to act out of the ordinary during their interactions and he recorded how others reacted to these breaches of normal conduct. One of the most interesting experiments was the 'clarification of understanding' experiment. Garkfinkel asked the experimenters to clarify the mundane statements that their subjects made in their interactions. (This experiment was tested on the students in my class during a presentation. We were asked to write a sentence about the first thing we did in the morning and then add words, which would further clarify what we did. Eg: I went to the bathroom. [further clarification] I went to the bathroom and washed my face.) Garfinkel discovered that people would always be able to make sense out of senseless situations, even when there was no explanation given.

I found an interesting article that analysed 'breaching events' conducted by a feminist peace movement (Women in Black) in Israel, which are modelled on Garfinkel's breaching experiments. The 'breaching event' is defined as 'a publicly performed act of defiance that is composed of actual and/or  symbolic violations of accepted social practices and definitions (Benski, 2005:58). Benski analysed the emotional reactions of the public to the movement's confronting signs and posters. The breaching event revealed how the mundane social order rests on the unquestioning acceptance of common assumptions. The emotional reactions of the public to the event to violations of these assumptions was dramatic.


References-

Heritage, John. 1984, 'The Morality of Cognition,' in Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology, Cambridge: Polity Press, pp.75-102.

Benski, T. 2005, 'Breaching Events and the Emotional Reactions of the Public: Women in Black in Israel,' in Emotions and Social Movements, Flam, H. & King, D (ed.), Routledge: New York.

Week 7- Data Discussion Presentation

I have selected an interaction off Big Brother, as the realty show is about presentation of self and the social interaction of 14 strangers in an unfamiliar setting. It is about how they construct and manage their 'selfs' while trying to maintain a good 'face'.

How much are the housemates being their true self and how much is a performance?

The following SOC250 concepts can be analysed in this data:

-Dramaturgy
-Facework
-Profanity
-Deference + Demeanor
-Documentary method of interpretation
-Social and moral order in talk

*I will not be using this data for the Independent Research Project, as something else arose which seems more appropriate to do. :)

Week 6- Dramaturgy

(mark this post)

All the world is a stage..

                              

Goffman came up with some interesting concepts, particularly the idea about social life as a drama. He believed that our social interactions with people can be compared to an actor performing on stage for an audience. This is explained further in Life as Theatre: A Dramaturgical Sourcebook, where the authors' point out that the self is perceived as social and dramatic because a person's sense of individuality is situationally specific. Different situations occasion the creation of different selves. And our different 'selves,' are akin to characters in a play. 

Thus, social life as a drama means that there is a front stage and back stage. The front stage is where performances are conducted- where you are trying to please people. And the backstage is where people prepare for the performance- where they are themselves. In other words, we put on a mask and get into character and perform in a certain way in front stage and backstage settings.

It is all about impression management and space-where spaces are provided to conduct the performances and spaces to maintain ourselves to handle the performances.

For example, I work at a function centre/ restaurant.  Goffman's front stage can be applied to when I am on the floor taking my table's order and serving them. My 'self' changes, as I have adapted to my workplace setting and (according to Goffman) working in a dramatised way. I am over friendly and polite. The back stage can be applied to when I am in the kitchen- where the customers can not see me. I might change my self and say something negative about them 'backstage', for instance, when I am at a wedding function and the guests are intoxicated and smashing glasses everywhere. 

People can constitute stages, front and back, by the the way they behave in them in certain ways. They will always try to cultivate a good impression and leave the performance with a good face. (I agree- this is what I want when I'm working) However, what Goffman found problematic with front stage and back stage is that there is no end. If a person tries to make something appear backstage, there will always be another stage after it.

In conclusion, a person achieves their 'self' on the basis of their performance of the situation.

References-

Goffman, E. 1971, 'Performances,' The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Harmondsworth: Penguin, pp:28-82.

Brisett, D and Edgley, C. 2009, Life as Theatre: A Dramaturgical Sourcebook, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, New Jersey.

Image- http://dramaturgie-la.blogspot.com/2011/06/moscow-art-theatre.html

Week 5- Presentation of Self

(mark this post)

What is the self? How can it be socially managed and produced?

Erving Goffman attempted to answer these questions in his paper, 'the nature of Deference and Demeanor'. According to Goffman, 'deference' and 'demeanor' play an active role in how individuals act and respond to social interactions. They can sometimes work together to support an individuals image of self, or can work in conflict to injure that image. They provide an interesting insight into the way in which the self is a social construction.

• Deference is the use of rituals and codes by a subordinate to show respect to their superordinate. Deference can take the form of compliments, apologies, and even criticisms.

•  Demeanor refers to the appearance of the self, which is displayed through actions, language use, etc. A person can convey a different demeanor depending on their context and what role they take on in these contexts. 

There are a few extra things that help to shape an individual's demeanor, such as 'rules of conduct'. In the reading, Goffman explains that society has placed 'rules of conduct' on how an individual should act in the form of obligations and expectations. An individual's status in society determines the 'rules of conduct' that they must present through their demeanor. For example, a doctor has an obligation to provide treatment to a patient, depending on the result of the demeanor. The patient then gives the doctor deference- praise or criticisms for their help. The doctor can decide to accept the praise. If it is negative deference they may change to fix it.

What I found most interesting about Goffman's work is facework- which is all of the little things we do in life to develop and maintain our 'selfs'. It conveyed to me how cautious we are about keeping our dignity intact when interacting with people (eg. to keep 'good face' or 'saving face'). There are negative sanctions for those who 'lose face' in interactions, such as 'social death' (not being accepted by society) and feeling ashamed.

I found an article titled, 'Managing impressions online', which relates to Goffman's ideas on presentation of self. It explores online dating participants and how they manage their online presentation of self in order to accomplish the goal of finding a romantic partner. I agree with the statement that self presentation strategies are important during relationship initiation, since others will draw on that information to decide whether to pursue a relationship. The same can be said for social networking sites, such as Facebook and Myspace, where users draw on the information and photos that are provided to form impressions of their 'friends'.

References:

Goffman, E. 1967, 'The Nature of Deference and Demeanor,' in Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour, New York: Pantheon Books, pp.47-96.

Ellison. N, Heino. R and Gibbs, J. 2006, 'Making Impressions Online: Self Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment,' in Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, vol.11, no.2, pp.415-441.

Week 4- Group Presentation Powerpoint Slides

Symbolic Interactionism Finished