Analysis of ‘The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life’ Essay

Erving G removemans The Presentation of Self in E preciseday Life provides a detailed description and abstract of branch and nub in everyday interaction. Goffman writes from a symbolic interactionist perspective, emphasizing a qualitative analysis of the components of the interactive bidding. by dint of a sociological analysis he explores the details of single(a) identity element, group relations, and the movement and interactive meaning of information. Goffmans perspective provides perspicacity into the nature of sociable interaction and the psychological science of the individual.Goffman employs a dramaturgical approach in his study, concerning himself with the mode of initiation employ by the actor and its meaning in the broader social context (Goffman, 240). interaction is viewed as a performance, shaped by environment and auditory sense, constructed to provide others with impressions that are consonant with the trustd goals of the actor (17). The performance exists regardless of the mental separate of the individual, as persona is often imputed to the individual in spite of his or her lack of faith in the performance. Goffman uses the example of the doctor who is forced to get out a placebo to a patient, aware of its impotence, as a result of the desire of the patient for more extensive treatment (18). In this way, the individual develops identity or persona as a function of interaction with others, through an exchange of information that allows for more specific definitions of identity and style.The process of establishing social identity becomes closely allied to the concept of the apparent movement, which is described as that get down of the individuals performance which regularly functions in a global and fixed fashion to define the situation for those who observe the performance (22). The front acts as a vehicle of standardization, allowing for others to understand the individual on the tooshie of projected character traits that have normative meanings. As a corporate representation, the front establishes proper conniption, appearance, and manner for the social subroutine put one overd by the actor, uniting interactive behavior with the personal front (27). The actor, in parliamentary law to present a realistic front, is forced to fill the duties of the social voice to communicate activities and the characteristics of the role to other people in a uniform manner. In constructing a front, informationabout the actor is given off through a variety of communicative sources, all of which must be controlled to convince the audience of the appropriateness of behavior. Believability, as a result, is constructed in monetary value of verbal signification, which is used by the actor to establish intent, is used by the audience to verify the honesty of statements do by the individual.Attempts are made to present an idealized version of the front, more consistent with the norms and laws of society than the beha vior of the actor when non before an audience (35). Information dealing with deviant behavior and belief is concealed from the audience in a process of mystification, making prominent those characteristics that are socially approved. This legitimatizes both the social role of the individual and the frame clear to which the role belongs (67). Goffman also explores nature of group kinetics through a discussion of aggroups and the relationship betwixt performance and audience. He uses the concept of the team to illustrate the work of a group of individuals who co-operate in performance, attempting to achieve goals sanctioned by the group (79). Co-operation may manifest in the assumption of differing roles for each individual, determined by the intent of the performance. Goffman refers to the shill, a atom of the team who provides a microscopical model for the audience of the kind of resolution the performers are seeking, promoting excitement for the realization of a goal, as an example of a discrepant role in the team (146). In each circumstance, the individual assumes a front that is perceived to enhance the groups performance.As a result, disagreement can be carried out in the absence seizure of an audience, where the performance changes and may be made without the threat of damaging the goals of the team or individual. This attains a division between the team and audience. Goffman describes the division between team performance and audience in terms of region, describing the role of setting in the differentiation of actions taken by individuals (107). Goffman divides region into front, back, and outside the stage, establish upon the relationship of the audience to the performance. While the official stance of the team is visible in their front stage presentation, in the backstage, the impression fostered by the presentation is knowingly contradicted as a matter of course, indicating a more rightful(a) type of performance (112). To be outside the stage involves the inability to stumble access to the performance of the team, described as anaudience segregation in which specific performances are given to specific audiences. Thus allows the team to create the appropriate front for the demands of each audience (137).This routine allows the team, individual actor, and audience to preserve proper relationships in interaction and the establishments to which the interactions belong. Though detailed and very well portrayed, Goffmans study does not provide a execute description of interactive processes. In exploring the construction of presentation among individual and teams, Goffman does not fully explore the nature of marginalized individuals. This is significant due to the notion that these individuals and the groups could assume somewhat different roles of interaction among members due to their placement outside of major(ip) groups. The methodological approach used by Goffman was also somewhat ill-matched and the approaches to testi ng to gather data seemed random at times.By contain his work Goffman also eliminates the possibility of applying the activities of the everyday to the larger social world.Goffmans The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life overall provides insight into the nature of interpersonal interaction and the institutions to which interaction applies. Despite methodology, Goffmans work displays an analytical thoroughness in dealing with an interesting area of social thought. Through an inquiry into the everyday life of humanity, Goffmans work provides an effective can for understanding the nature of social interaction and the development of the individual.