Front and Back Stage Online

When looking at micro-sociology, it's pretty hard to ignore Erving Goffman.  Not only does he look at interesting ideas about the self, but this clever sociologist also borrowed ideas from dramaturgy to talk about the way our self is presented front or back stage  (Goffman 1971).  In the blogpost Dramaturgy and social networking, Alexandra applies Goffman's concept of dramaturgy to social networking sites.  This is a really interesting example to consider in relation to frontstage and backstage interactions and presentations of self.  Alexandra explains that people use Facebook to present idealised images of themselves, but this one image is presented to anyone who views their profiles.  So while there would normally be different front stage projections for employers, parents, friends and strangers, social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter or Tumblr create a single image for all audiences.  

Alexandra also raises a very important idea about how social networking sites could be categorised as front stage or back stage in our social interactions.  One one level, these sites are definitely front stage and are characterised by structured manners and scripted conversation.  The blurring between front and back stage on these sites occurs because in a realm where we feel like we are communicating with friends online, we might slip into back stage mode.  Back stage is when we let our guard down, this is how we might act around close friends and family.  While Alexandra asserts that she uses Facebook as a front stage presentation of self, other people might be letting certain groups into their back stage when they probably don't really want to.  I try to treat Facebook as a front stage only area, but sometimes it is easy to forget that my photos or status are broadcasting to the world.  Even with Faebook's privacy settings, any content we post online could end up anywhere with the simple action of a screenshot.

I would argue that forgetting about the curtain between front and back stage can create a situation where many things can be affected, but might particular impact on intimate relationships.  If anyone, even strangers know as much about you as your closest friends, family and partner, then what makes these relationships different?  This xkcd comic illustrates what I'm worried about.

 If our front stage and back stage interactions blur together on social networking platforms, then huge issues about privacy and intimacy arise.  If we everyone is on a level playing field with the information they know about us, then do strangers become as close as friends, or friends as distant as strangers?

Reference List:

Goffman, E. 1971, 'Performances', in The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Harmondsworth, Penguin, pp28-82, accessed 29/08/2012, http://ereadings.uow.edu.au.ezproxy.uow.edu.au/goffmane1.pdf

Looking at the Self

The concept of the self is interesting for many reasons, but one of the biggest draw-cards is that it examines that notorious question of "who am I?".  We could consider what our self actually is, how it is comprised of multiple selves and who/what has a self, and if they don't know they do, what does it mean?

You might gather from my rambling that I am intrigued and perplexed by the idea, but fellow blogger Ashley explains it rather well in her post WK 5: a dinosaur writes a post.  Ashley talks about the way she plays a certain role when she is acting as a mature-age uni student and when she is at work performing her role as a waitress, which as she notes "according to Goffman (1967), this is what was expected of me from my boss, the event organisers and the patrons."  So this plays into Charles Cooleys idea of the looking-glass self, which basically suggests that self-consciousness involves continually monitoring self from the point of view of others, or as Cooley put it, we “live in the minds of others without knowing it.” (Scheff 2005, p. 147). 

It's also really interesting to think about the way our self can be dramatically altered or even stripped away when we interact with large institutions.  A classic example is the story of when someone is put in jail their clothes and possessions are taken from them, they are stripped naked and de-loused and then forced to wear the same clothes as the other prisoners.  This certainly takes away a portion of the prisoners' individuals identities and their conception of their selves. 

Whenever a person interacts with a large institution, it can have an effect on their self. I think The Simpsons illustrates this point brilliantly as after the students are made to wear uniforms they even start blinking in unison.  

References:

Goffman, E 1967, ‘The nature of deference and demeanor’, in Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour, Pantheon Books, New York, pp47-96.

Scheff, T.J. 2005, "Looking-Glass Self: Goffman as Symbolic Interactionist", Symbolic Interaction, vol. 28, no. 2, pp147-166.

Welcome

Hello there people on the internet.  This is my first experience on blogger, as I am normally a wordpress fan, but I'm sure in time blogger and I will come to understand each other well.

This blog will be looking at the sociology topic of "Everyday Interaction".  I'll be sharing ideas about micro-sociology, influential sociologists and thinking about the way that everyone knows what to do on a daily basis to not let the world fall apart.  It sounds interesting to me, so stay tuned for more.