1) In chapter 1 Goffman discusses how people can be seen as performers. How we have incentives and ideas about how we act and understand how observers understand our interactions as part of our performance. On page 22, Goffman defines “performance” as referring to all the activities of an individual that happen during a continuing period where the individual remains present in front of observers and the individual exerts some influence of the observers (22). I would generally tend to agree with this notion of providing a performance. I like to call it “wearing different hats.” Each one of us goes through a process of feeling out our environment, determining how we want to be viewed and then acting at some end to achieve the intended image we were trying to embrace or project. Some other interesting terms I found useful to explain this are the differences between the projected & reflected self. The projected self is the image we want to project for others to see and the reflected self is the image we see ourselves projecting to others. This also ties into the idea of Cooley’s “looking glass self” or the idea that a person’s self grows out of societies interpersonal interactions and how others perceive those actions. Goffman later goes on to say that, “when an individual offers a performance he typically conceals something more than inappropriate pleasures and economies” (page 43). Do you think it’s possible to adopt norms & values of a performance so much that the performer becomes incapable of concealing something from the audience? Can a performer lose the ability to self-monitor him/her self in how they are viewed by the audience? If so, how do you think that might change the performance of the actor?
2) Another interesting concept in chapter 1 is the idea that “…there is hardly a performance, in whatever area of life, which does not rely on the personal touch to exaggerate the uniqueness of the transactions between performer and audience” (pg 50). Goffman then goes on to talk about manners and offers an example that I understand but also disagree with. He discusses how the personal touch could relate to welcoming guests into a home. For example, say you are having a party and say to one of your guests that are you really glad to see them. They are likely to take this greeting personally, meaning that are you glad to see ONLY them. If this same gesture were to be exactly repeated to another guest in the presence of the first guest, then your greeting could be seen as meaning less to the first guest or in genuine because they would know your greeting wasn’t ONLY directed towards them. I understand Goffman’s point and it’s quite obvious that you don’t say the same greetings to everyone. You might alter or slightly change the greeting so that each person feels a sense of that, “personal touch” that you have for them. However, it is also possible to have close friends or family at a party and tell them all at one time you are truly glad to see ALL OF THEM. This wouldn’t be viewed as offensive or meaning any less because THE SAME GREETING was directed at EVERYONE at one time. What are your views on this idea? Do you think it’s possible to say the same greeting to multiple people without making them feel like the greeting means less because it was said to multiple people?
3) Lastly, is the idea that when a person moves into a new position in society and they obtain a new or different part to perform, they aren’t given implicit instructions on how to perform the part (72 at the bottom). I would agree with this notion. Goffman also argues that, while we may not be given implicit instructions about how to play the part we come with other skills about how to play the part that were developed when we acted in other roles. A great example of this is the transition from high school to college. As a freshman when you come to college, no one tells you HOW to be a college student. You may know what it’s like to attend classes and do homework but chances are there’s a lot about being a college student you don’t know. Some people may not know how to do their laundry or budget money for college expenses. But you may watch other college kids do their laundry or take a class on accounting and with “…only a few cues, hints, and stage directions…” (Pg 72) you know how to play to part. Goffman argues that, “In short, we all act better than we know how” (pg 74). Take this idea to another level and apply it to getting a new job or something completely unrelated to what you think you know about how to perform. I think it holds true. Do you think we all “act better than we know how?”
2 comments:
Answers to Chapter 1 from the Blog CMJR 205 and 350 (asked by mclaugh6):
1) Do you think it’s possible to adopt norms & values of a performance so much that the performer becomes incapable of concealing something from the audience? Can a performer lose the ability to self-monitor him/her self in how they are viewed by the audience? If so, how do you think that might change the performance of the actor?
I don’t think that a performer ever becomes incapable of concealing what they want to from the audience if they are determined to keep it concealed. Even if they adopt the norms and values of a performance, it can remain and act are a part from their own self. I do think, however that a performer can lose their self-monitoring abilities in how they are viewed by the audience, if “how they are viewed by the audience” is equivalent to the reflected self (that which we see ourselves in through the audience). This is possible because if they see his or her self through how the audience sees them they can become so wrapped up in that image, that they do things out of line for his or her self to appease the audience, and therefore their ability to self-monitor decreases as they fall into what the audience wants. The performance of the actor, therefore changes.
2) What are your views on this idea? Do you think it’s possible to say the same greeting to multiple people without making them feel like the greeting means less because it was said to multiple people?
This is a difficult question to answer. Yes it is possible to give people the same greeting without making them feel any less appreciated because if you truly mean it then how could it not be genuine? If they were to take it as not genuine on your part when you greet each guest as someone you are truly happy to see because you ARE, then its their own opinion that makes them offended. On the other hand, saying the same thing to multiple people just for the sake of the persanl touch and to be nice (and there for not genuinely), does lose its meaning. I know from experience I feel offended when someone is especially nice to me at a gathering, but later I see them saying the identical thing to someone else (same words, inflection, tone, etc…), I realize they were being fake. However this brings us back to the original issue that it is hard to tell at times when someone is genuine or fake.
2) “In short, we all act better than we know how” (pg 74). Take this idea to another level and apply it to getting a new job or something completely unrelated to what you think you know about how to perform. I think it holds true. Do you think we all “act better than we know how?”
I agree, and think that we do “act” even without realizing it, and better than we know. A person can research all they want about something, read everything about an experience, look at pictures, watch movies, but to truly submerse yourself into a situation and experience is completely different no matter how prepared for it you think you are. Thus, while we can think we need to practice and have information on how to “act”, in fact we do it naturally and as we go, and do it well. There are so many variables in real life sitatuions when we are acting, and that is the reason perhaps that all the “preparation” in the world does not make a difference, because things like the other “actors”, timing, location, and all the little things that are NOT presented to you in information you can research affect your acting ability. And that is why we learn to catch on very quickly, adapt, and act “better than we know”.
- Katie Killeen :)
I think I was supposed to post it to yours? haha
In response to Evan’s question 2: Do you think it’s possible to say the same greeting to multiple people without making them feel like the greeting means less because it was said to multiple people?
If a greeting was said to either a group of people or to numerous people or used to address a group, in my opinion, it holds the same value of “personal touch”. If a host says, “I’m happy to see you,” and then turns to the next and says the same thing in the previous guest’s presence, I don’t think it lessens the sincerity of the host. (Goffman, 51) The idea of using the same greeting with one or more people taking away from the “personal touch”, more appeals to the worry of the host then to the guests. For example, in Goffman’s Chapter 1: Performances, he states, “Perhaps it is our guilt that has directed our attention to these areas of crass ‘pseudo-gemeinschaft,’ for there is hardly a performance, in whatever area of life, which does not rely on the personal touch to exaggerate the uniqueness of the transaction between performer and audience.” (50) So, again, it more appeals to the worry of the host then the guest. It is socially acceptable to address a guest personally to say that they are glad to see them and then turn to the rest and address them in a large group to say the same thing. I would even go as far as to say that the guest that was first approached might even feel special for having it said to him personally, first.
Post a Comment