The Code

Unwritten rules of everyday life or 'codes' of conduct in social situations are very important in maintaining civilised interactions. Without these codes would life have any standards? 
The reading about the prison code by Wieder, made me think about a social group that I am a part of that adheres to a certain 'code' whilst taking part in it. I went surfing this morning and thought that it is quite a good example when discussing a place in which you need to abide by the unwritten rules or there will be consequences. Just like the prison code, the code of surfing is known by most members who partake in the sport regularly, these participants would be the 'regular guys', who know the rules. It seems that when someone is to break the rules things can get quite heated, I have seen people get sent in, punched and yelled at for breaking the code in the surf. The code is quite simple and has the same concept of standing in a line, whoever has been there the longest is next, someone cant just push their way in. The same sort of notion applies in the surf, along with a few others that can be seen on this website. 

http://www.surfinghandbook.com/knowledge/surfing-etiquette/



It was interesting to read a few websites and articles that shed some light on the surfing 'code' and came across a few instances in which 'the regular guys' were taking advantage of the unwritten rules. Some of the worlds more popular surf breaks, such as Hawaii, guys actually block everyone else who isnt a local from getting any waves at all, they think that they are entitled to the waves because they live there. Newcomers are not the 'regular guys' and therefore do not have a say in the matter.
It was interesting to see the code become violated in this sense, as it is being disrupted by 'the regular guys', usually it is disrupted by individuals who do not understand the code. 

This concept was quite easy to grasp and I found the reading quite interesting. It is funny to think how unwritten rules can be so important to certain social interactions.

Wieder, DL 1974, 'Telling the code', in Ethnomethodology: Selected Readings, Penguin Education, Hardmondsworth, pp. 144-172

Just a link to a comment

Here is a link to a comment I made on another blog :)

http://juliasoc250.blogspot.com.au/2012/09/social-and-moral-order-in-talk.html?showComment=1347496289698

Ethnomethodology - Week 7

Ethnomethodology

http://pbmo.wordpress.com/2011/11/22/

Outlined by Garfinkel, Ethnomethodology involves the study of everyday interactions by individuals that creates social order. 
I'm not aiming to bore anyone by speaking academically about the word ethnomethodology, the word itself scared me at first, but the concept is much simpler than the spelling. 
Garfinkel believes that in society there are certain rules that create social order within interactions. We follow these rules when we interact with one another in a hope that we maintain a social order. Like i have shown in the picture above, walking into a bathroom and standing right next to someone in the cubicle when there are many free, is not seen as polite or an accepted interaction. Garfinkel explains this concept by conducting experiments in the form of games. Like Andrew did in the lecture - (starting a game of naughts and crosses and then erasing the beginning to start again). The 'fully public' nature of games are represented through a range of basic rules that are to be followed to complete the game. Garfinkel explains that in these experiments, the relationship between the 'rules' and the organised events are strongly cognitive - the rules applied are only relevant to the event that is occurring within the interaction. These experiments are also taken out in the social sphere, I tried the same experiment that was shown in the reading on my sister. Asking more questions than necessary in one interaction makes the other person feel frustrated because their understanding of social order is being taken away. 

I looked at another publication 'Social science and conversation analysis' by David Silverman which also drew on a lot of Garfinkel's work but also gave some insight into conversational analysis's. It was interesting to find the article as it stated that conversational analysis shares common origins of ethnomethodology. Conversational analysis however took a formal approach to analysing micro instances of naturally occurring talk (Silverman D 1998), which will be helpful in researching the further assignments in this course.

Picture : http://www.ourspacer.com/graphics/you're-doing-it-wrong-demotivational-posters/page02/

References 

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

Silverman, David (1998) Harvey Sacks: Social Science and Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Polity.

Dramaturgy - Week 6 post

Dramaturgy 

My understanding of dramaturgy (after the reading) is that individuals act differently in certain times, places, or to audiences. The sense of self is derived from the scene that is being presented in that certain time or place. 

The lecture on Dramaturgy is the first time I have come across the term, and the concept of social life as 'drama'. It is an interesting concept to consider the social life as a 'performance' of interactions between people. The very first sentence of the reading is important in understanding how interactions happen in society according to the concept of dramaturgy - 'When an individual plays a part he implicitly requests his observers to take seriously the impression that is fostered before them' Goffman (1990). 
My understanding of this concept is that as an interaction is delivered by an individual, he or she requests their audience to react in a certain way. It is interesting to think about what is happening in society when people are acting out their lives in certain ways, to impress certain people or to conform to 'norms' that are socially created. The way in which the 'performer' acts when interacting with other individuals changes through different social settings and thus the individual is just a part of a larger scale 'game'. 

It is interesting to think about what happens when these 'performers' are not involved in any interaction, what is going on behind of this 'stage' in which we all perform? Goffman (1990) explains this as the 'frontstage' or 'backstage'; the backstage involving the interactions in an informal state or even just what we are preparing or thinking about when we are not actually 'interacting' with other individuals (informal dress, sloppiness, joking around). The frontstage is the opposite to this, as individuals play out their 'acts' in reference to the others around them. Goffman (1990) states that the 'front' is 'that part of an individuals performance which functions to define the situation to observers. 

An interesting observation of Dramaturgy would be that of going to the pub or going out for a night out with friends. It is interesting to see individuals who you may know well put on 'performances' so they appear to observers in a certain way. As settings or 'stages' usually stay the same, as individuals walk into these settings they play out different acts to define meaning to their observers. 

References 

Picture - http://losangeles.bitter-lemons.com/2012/02/14/the-dramaturg-the-devolution-of-the-modern-day-theatre-critic/

Goffman, Erving. 1971. “Performances.” Pp. 28-82 in The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life.
Harmondsworth: Penguin 

SOC250 - Week 5 'The self'

This weeks reading 'The nature of Deference and Demeanour' by Goffman combined with the lecture gave an interesting insight into the way in which the 'self' is a social construction. In this blog post I am  just aiming to outline a few points I found interesting as there is quite a bit of detail in the reading. 
Goffman's view of the 'self' as a 'peg on which roles were momentarily hung' stuck in my head after viewing the lecture, I found this interesting as I come home from uni, change clothes and thus change roles as I go to work. The roles I carry out at work are only for the set amount of hours I am there and then these roles are taken away again. The reading explained this concept in more depth as it outlined the obligations I take on as I take up a certain role, I am there to serve customers and my obligation becomes another persons expectation. All this however is momentary and these obligations and expectations change as I change roles when I go home or go to university.

An interesting part of this discussion of how the 'self' should act and what roles are taken in certain environments is when these roles overlap each other. For instance, work functions are notorious for individuals not knowing how to act when their roles are blurred, this can lead to a 'loss of face'. 

As it seems as though all these rules and guidelines for how we act are restricting what we do and say. Goffman outlines these obligations and expectations of individuals as brief moments that involve little to no substance, they serve to define moral and social order and create a flow in society. "The gestures which we call empty are perhaps in fact the fullest things of all" (Goffman 1967). 

In further reading of presentation of the self I read an article 'Karen McCullagh (2008): Blogging: self presentation and privacy' which I thought was quite appropriate in reference to the task of blogging online. It outlines the way in which individuals can change their self presentation through the medium of blogging as the expectations that they might have in everyday life, change once logged on to the internet. 

References 

Karen McCullagh (2008): Blogging: self presentation and privacy, Information & Communications Technology Law, 17:1, 3-23 

Goffman, Erving. 1967. “The Nature of Deference and Demeanor.” Pp. 47-96 in Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour. New York: Pantheon Books.