Symbolic Interactionism & Construction of Mediated Identity Performances
After reading two of McEwan’s scholarly pieces, Communication Competence and Identities in Networked Locations, it has come to my attention that symbolic interactionism is a prominent part in communicating with others, as most symbolic integrationists claim that it is one’s self that is communicated through the physical actions of others.
Cooley, one of the first symbolic integrationists, created a concept known as “the looking glass self”. This theory suggests that the members involved in a network community deliver messages with the intent to influence what people believe about their own self.
Mead, on the other hand, speculated that people could use their own knowledge on how society expects an individual to think and behave to better understand one’s self and improve upon their identity performances. Similar to symbolic interactionism, the dramaturgical perspective also claims that it is one’s self that causes an individual to act accordingly to the expectations of an audience, particularly society as a generalized whole; therefore, as Goffman further suggests, an individual’s representation should be constructed in a way that will influence the opinions of their audience to attain a sense of accomplishment by maintaining a well-received performance, in which social spaces provide a “stage” to achieve this.
McEwan explains the notion of “crystallized selves,” which states that as an audience’s perception fluctuates, self-presentations do in turn, causing each facet of the “crystallized self” to be as performative as the next. In addition, McEwan focuses on the construction of mediated identity performances. He states that as individuals living in a networked society, we believe that we must present certain facets of ourselves that we consider appropriate, which we then create presentations targeted towards imagined audiences.
Goffman, who defined “performances given”, can be easily elucidated through the performance cues that are particularly conveyed through the communication between people, both verbal and non-verbal. For example, when communicating through social media, one is faced with the features that come along with the applications like the ability to post pictures, while having the ability to comment and/or like other’s posts. As a result, it is fitting to state that these features assist in providing others with a sense of knowing who the curator truly is.
Moreover, Goffman’s concept of “performances given off”, which refers to how an individual’s performance is received by an audience, is now apparent more than ever because of a network society. In conclusion, the audience truly does influence the performer, creating differing challenges and opportunities for him and her.
- Alessia Perricone
- Alessia Perricone
Alessia,
ReplyDeleteI like the comparison between Cooley's and Mead's perspective on "the looking glass self" theory. I found the notions of “crystallized selves” very interesting and McEwan's perspective that we present different facet of ourselves to different audience very absorbing. Your example of social media applications compliments Goffman's concept of "performance given off" very well.
If possible, make your statement's a bit more concise!
Good Job!
-Charly Zuk
Alessia,
ReplyDeleteIt was interesting to read the different theories on identity performances. The concept of the audience influencing the person creating the content is something I've read about before and it really makes me think about how people act online and how the audience influences their identity.
It may be helpful to proof read it next time as sometimes sentences felt cut off :)
Nevertheless, great job!
- Demi Geurtsen
Alessia,
ReplyDeleteI think you did a great job explaining Cooley's "the looking glass self" theory and compared it with Mead's contrasting speculation. I think I align more with Cooley's theory as I'm a very self-aware individual and spend a lot of my time on self-reflection as to further improve on my identity performance. It's interesting that Goffman suggests that the way we act is a "performance", with us the actors striving to achieve a sense of accomplishment through a good performance. For some reason, putting our everyday interactions in this way makes me feel so dishonest, but I suppose it really could be the truth. We are, on some level, always acting and putting on a show.