“All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players”
- William Shakespeare
For Goffman, there is no true self (no face behind the masks we wear). We are all actors on a Shakespearean stage, putting on select farces dependent upon the setting and people with whom we are with in order to find a social sense of acceptance.
Thoughts on The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life by Erving Goffman, /lit/?
>>7884931
I'm jelly, I've been wanting to read more of him. I don't know about the no true self idea, though; in his book on Stigma there's a certain amount of acceptance that there's a real self; even if the kinds of selves he imagines are socially, or wholly, constructed selections, the divisions of kind and consequences of stigma/normalcy are portrayed as real.
>>7884944
i mean self in an objective sense. identity and appearance is pretty subjective stuff. as goffman shows, it tends to vary by setting. for example, you don't act the same way you do in a bar as you would at work.
you're spot on about the whole stigma thing. sitgma and deviant groups are definitely real. even if the self is constructed, the consequences of the existence of the concept of self have immediate impact upon reality, especially that of cultural and social groups.
Read a bit of it in second year uni, it's an interesting book and it definitely shaped how I think but I have to admit texts as dense as this are tough. Back to r/books for me I guess
>>7884953
You should get his book on stigma. He explains the different setting thing very well as roles the self takes because he's a deviant, in contrast to the lesser range of roles a normal will have. For instance: a drug dealer will act differently in a bar filled with cops, in a bar filled with a regular group of people, and in a bar filled with drug dealers. In the last one, he's free to be a drug dealer without reproach or concealment among his confederates, but, he's just as much, if not more, a true drug dealer in the bar filled with cops.
>>7884961
probably why so many people who smoke pot are paranoid.
i find it funny when people say it's the marijuana that causes this sense of a paranoia, completely ignoring the social effects smoking an illegal substances causes upon the psyche.
the examples we can list regarding this concept are nearly endless.
>>7884979
cities are constructed. therefore, according to your logic, cities aren't real.
though something may be constructed, it still have effects upon people and the setting.
stop shitposting. either contribute something beneficial to the discussion or get out.
>>7884965
There's a term for that, the self labelling and internalisation of the deviant image, I think it's secondary deviance.
This is a study they ran to try to counteract that kind of deviant image in grills
http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001745281
It's pretty quaint but very lucid.
The location affects image has other consequences too. If you don't get caught by your local cops, you can continue to be a pillar of the community, but if you don't have transport, you're more likely to be the local criminal because the cops can put their hands on you more easily. This story/study is pretty great at showing that difference between being a saint and roughneck
https://www.d.umn.edu/~bmork/2306/readings/chambliss.w99.htm
If you're more interested in the kind-making process in general, Hacking's The Social Construction of What? deals with everything from weapons systems to Captain Cook.
>>7884979
In that context: The theory of self could be a socially constructed explanation held by Goffmann's society, it could be something which is idiosyncratic to Goffmann's understanding of the self, but I'm holding that it was neither of these things but a more global phenomenon of selfhood; all of these are treated as real by me, while still being constructs, and I'm arguing against the idea of no objective self. If you're trolling, well done, you got someone to explain basic English to you.
>>7885000
>http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001745281
Reminds me a lot of Pierre Bourdieu's work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9PCp9oKPRw
at the 10 minute mark, he starts explain his idea of Valued Cultural Capital. He states that we are more likely to accept individuals on the basis that the cultural capital they offer is valued by the dominant ideal of the system itself. While everyone has cultural capital to offer the system, not all capital is valued or accepted. This makes societies not democratic institutes, but rather ones of assimilation and conformity.
>>7885011
nice dubs.
>>7884944
checked
>>7885011
>video
I'm going to have to get back to you on that, but, again, I have a quibble.
>This makes societies not democratic institutes, but rather ones of assimilation and conformity.
This is exactly what Athenian democracy aimed at with its laws. Funding public events became a way of acquiring cultural capital because personal wealth in service of the individual was frowned upon, and, at the peak of its conformity, even gravestones were uniform by law. Democracy wasn't about being a free individual originally; it's always been the will of the people, not the will of the person, and the masses can be as tyrannical as other systems.
>>7885029
>the masses can be as tyrannical as other systems.
very true. thanks for the history lesson. personally, democracy tends not to work well in large settings. small socialist communities more suited to such a philosophy. it's easier to create subgroups in smaller systems if their is a disagreement of some kind. larger systems, i find, it is almost impossible to account for.
>>7885066
this is a documentary which explains how democracy was a change of cultural values for the Greeks. it's really interesting how capital changes not disappears.
vimeo.com/25556379
>small socialist communities more suited to such a philosophy. it's easier to create subgroups in smaller systems if their is a disagreement of some kind. larger systems, i find, it is almost impossible to account for.
you should watch this before you join a commune
vimeo.com/groups/96331/videos/80799352
sorry couldn't find youtube for either, the entire series of both are good fun if you like these episodes
>>7885092
thanks. i'll give 'em a gander.
>>7885092
>vimeo.com/groups/96331/videos/80799352
Not that anon, but boy, before I clicked the link I already knew it's going to be Curtis. My go-to man when it comes to issues of identity, societal belonging, etc.
>>7885099
Don't fully buy his stuff; he stylises it for a reason. He's a wonderful propagandist, but, still, a propagandist. Once you don't go fedora with him, he's a great story teller and bountiful reference.
t. fellow fan
The self can only ever be expressed in terms of how diminished one feels, but this does not mean the self does not exist.
>>7885118
care to explain that in more detail?
Awesome to see interest and development on this here!
If you find him interesting you will sure also find the works of Alfred Schutz of value. Pic related has a central place in the field, being a quite readable as well as a quite insightful work. It is a good intro.
Anyway, thanks for the reminder op, i just downloaded some intros and a bunch of his books, will read him with levi strauss and bourdieu. For the moment im on devereux (his "renunciation to identity" and "normal and abnormal" are must reads)
>>7885134
the social construction of reality was a huge influence on me. nice to see others getting into it too. haven't read schutz, though. i'll look into it.
>>7885155
feel ya'... when i read a part of it for an intro to sociology course i instantly went for the book and read it in a couple of days. it was the start of something that continues to this day. schutz is the theoretical basis for it. its like dissecting society and interaction and engaging in a detailed anatomical analysis.
>>7884985
>>7884931
Fantastic stuff, obviously a correct claim. There is no coherent, stable self. Truly very insightful, but flawed in several aspects though (e.g. addressing power). Bourdieu can fill in that gap quite nicely. Also I'm more sympathetic to practice theory than symbolic interactionism. Nevertheless Goffman is a major figure in sociology, so innovative and thought-provoking.
>>7886226
>symbolic interactionism.
i'm more sympathetic to bourdieu, too. still, herbert blumer was one of the first thinkers i encountered when dealing with sociological topics like this. definitely worth a read to other anons reading this.
really good thread
>>7888000
very nice numbers, thank you for rating
>>7888000
double triples. don't spend it all in one place now, anon.
>>7888000
really good triples, really bad opinion. the views expressed here are first semester tier.
