Goffman Theory

The actor’s front, is the part of the actor’s performance that defines the situation for the audience; the impression the actor is trying to leave on the audience. A social front is kind of like a script. Some scenarios have social scripts that advise the ways which the actor should act or interact in a given situation, with specific people. Through the performance the actor’s objective is to make the audience believe their act, thus reaching dramatic realization.

Goffman’s essay on face-work provides its reader with clear and concise explanations of social interaction. The theoretical framework he uses is micro sociology and his analysis takes on a dramaturgical perspective. He gives and precise definitions specific examples to get his point across. Goffman defines face as “the positive social value a person effectively claims for himself by the line others assume he has taken during a particular contact” (Goffman, p.5).

Both Simmel and Goffman have greatly contributed to the development of the sociological investigation of human interaction and experiences, they have taken a science that was not easily understood and brought it to the center of attention. While using different methods to ultimately obtain an understanding of how society functions, whether it be on the individual level or the as a group interplay.

Before we discuss Hochschild’s surface and deep acting, let us review one of the classic sociological accounts of the presentation of self, for the theatrical model of social roles has a long heritage that Hochschild is drawing on. Particularly influential is Erving Goffman’s 1959 work, Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. By ‘presentation of self’, Goffman (1959, pp. 9-18) means the performance that people put on, for the benefit of both other people and themselves. This performance is based on how the individuals want to be perceived by others and themselves; guided by motives, it is an attempt to control the responses from others that reflect on the self. Such performances can be classified into two situations (Goffman, 1959, pp. 28-29). In the first

Clifford Geertz names Goffman as “perhaps the most celebrated American Sociologist right now, and certainly the most ingenious”. (Burns 1992)

The origin of the symbolic-interactionist theory traces back to Max Weber and his assertion that people

Functionalist Erving Goffman studies the sociological approach of Dramaturgy in his book ‘The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life’ (Goffman, 1959), he built his theory based on earlier work completed by Kenneth Burke. However there are distinct differences in features of the theory between Burke and Goffman as Burke believed that life was in fact a literal

Goffman was interested in how people present themselves in society. He states that everybody has their own designated roles that they play at different points in their life. Furthermore, because people have multiple roles in life, each time they’re in a new role, they present themselves in a certain way or context that fits that particular role. For example, a face to face interaction between two people could vary depending on the location and the number of people around to witness their behaviors. More specifically, in a more public place the conversation could be more conservative as the person maybe more reserved whereas if the duo had a conversation in a more private location, he or she would be more willing to open up and act more like

Goffman, E. 1959. ‘Performances’ chapter 1, from the presentation of self in everyday life. London: penguin.

Erving Goffman was a sociologist known for developing the symbolic interaction and dramaturgical theory perspective. The dramaturgical theory is a social psychological perspective that studies human behavior and social interaction in terms of the analogy of the theater. This perspective is also related to symbolic interactionism. Symbolic interactionism is a theory based on interaction and communication, facilitated by many different words, gestures, and other symbols that have acquired various meanings. Dramaturgical theorist focus on how people manipulate various aspects of themselves and their settings to influence how others define and respond to them. In this perspective, “the self” is constructed of the various roles that one acquires, in order to present their various selves in ways that sustain particular impressions to their audiences. “The self” is a private possession established in and reflective of an individual’s personality, which includes ones values, beliefs, motives, traits, and dispositions. In addition, a person’s “self” is acquired through social relationships and is a structurally fundamental process that may change due to various situations. As humans interact with one another they are placed in social categories based on their attributes and actions. These assessments are primarily based on ones knowledge of roles.

Examine the view that Erving Goffman’s work focuses on forms of social interaction but ignores social structure.

In 1943 and 1944 Goffman worked at the National Film Board in Ottawa. While there, he met Dennis Wrong. Dennis Wrong encouraged Goffman’s interest in sociology. Soon after, Goffman enrolled at the University of Toronto, where, under the guidance of C.W.M. Hart and Ray Birdwhistell, he read widely in sociology and anthropology” (Fine and Manning). Goffman was influenced by the writings of Durkheim, Radcliffe-Brown, Warner, Freud, and Parsons. At the University of Toronto, Goffman developed a close friendship with anthropologist Elizabeth Bott.

There is not a day where my own life lacks social events. A basic day consists of going to work or school, completing homework, and attempting to have a social life with those who are important to me. Being able to manage my social self is a task worth reviewing using the sociological theory of Max Weber and Erving Goffman. Each decision made to manage my life pulls from Weber’s theory of action and rationality; moreover, each situation requires a bit of face by Goffman’s dramaturgy.

“When an individual enters the presence of others, they commonly seek to acquire
information about him or to bring into play information about him already possessed. They
will be interested in his general socio-economic status, his conception of self, his attitude
towards them, his competence, his trustworthiness, etc. Although some of this information is
sought as an end in itself, there are usually quite practical reasons for acquiring it. Information
about the individual helps to define the situation, enabling others to know in advance what he
will expect of them and what they may expect of him. Informed in these ways, the others will
know

Its central themes are ‘rationality’ and ‘face’, which are both claimed to be universal features, that is, they are possessed by all speakers and hearers. The idea of ‘face’ has been derived from the everyday terms “losing face” and “saving face”. The term was first adopted by Goffman (1967 and 1971) who used it to describe people’s need to maintain a positive self-image in the presence of others. Goffman pointed out that while in real life, most speakers try to project a positive self-image, it has also been seen that individuals tend to avoid threats to other people’s self images as well. Someone unintentionally making a faux pass in a group will be just as awkward for the others in the group as for the individual. Therefore it can also be said that an apology can make the hearer feel as embarrassed as the transgressor. Goffman points out that people interact in a way in which they can avoid such an embarrassment. Therefore self-image is developed and maintained with the co-operation of others through the