Sumblog 11 : Standpoint theory

This week we discussed the standpoint theory. The standpoint theory says that if you really want to understand something you have to emmerse yourself within your studies. The study cannot be completely objective because they you are just observing and only getting “thin” research. As sociologist, we are people studying people. We are always someone connected to our studies, so we must be involved in order to fully understand the subject. Instead of viewing, we must be experiencing. Dorothy Smith says that we need to make a transition from an objective and unattached observer approach and really start to be apart of studies.

I feel like this is almost so obvious that it’s complicated. All the standpoint theory is really saying is: take a closer look. Maybe we are judging our studies by what it looks like from the outside. Or, better yet, judging a book by its cover? When we really need to immerse ourselves into the book to understand and appreciate its full contents.

http://teacherdavid.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/subjectivity.gif 

This picture that I include really expresses this idea of objectivity. This painter is just sitting back and observing this city scene and painting it for what it is at face value. But if you take a closer look the painter’s canvas does not match he is actually observing. I used to be an art major here at point and this is a common mistake I made. Sometimes I would draw what I think I saw instead of what was actually right infront of me. Without having a connection to the city the man cannot express how it actually appears. The city is unique, beautiful, and crazy, but the man does not get to appreciate and understand this and so his findings end up being bleak. I would predict that if the man was sitting in the middle of the city while painting, his artwork would come alive.

sumblog 10 symbols

We talked about the importance of symbols in our culture. Symbols are objects that stand for, represent, or suggest an idea or belief. Symbols are very common in any culture and everyday we encounter symbols that we don’t even realize. For example, a wedding ring is a symbol. When people get married, each person wears a symbolic ring on their left ring finger. In one situation a ring could just be an ordinary, mundane piece of jewelry with no significant value, but if you’re married then a ring on your left ring finger is very sacred. A wedding ring is a symbol of marriage. People do not wear rings on their left ring finger unless they are married, and most often men do not wear rings unless they are married. The ring does only symbolize a marriage, but it is also a symbol of love, faith, commitment, security, partnership, and loyalty. That is a lot of dept to one little ring. The fact is though, that these little symbols are everywhere giving depth and meaning to our lives. Symbols can display cultural differences by distinguishing particular cultural traditions and values.

The benefit of having symbols is that it unifies a culture and creates social order. People usually hold the same sort of meaning to certain symbols within a society, so they can keep us together and functioning as one. The ring on someone’s finger can tell an outsider he or she is taken. In the same way, however, there can be risks of the ring. People can become so fixated on symbols that it starts to loose the original meaning. Some people want the ring to be labeled as married, to be secure and have a family like society tells us to, but then forget the true value behind the ring. Many people rush into marriage and then it fails and it could be because people are too worried about profane meanings and forget the sacred meaning of symbols.

sumblog 9- Dramaturgy

This week we talked about Erving Goffman’s concept of dramaturgy. His whole idea of dramaturgy is a metaphor comparing social relationships to a performance. Yourself as the actor, the stage as the setting, and your audience as whomever you are presenting yourself to. There are three major parts to dramaturgy. The first is recognizing that there are many different plays or dramas. In other words, there are many types of roles we take on with different kinds of audiences. Second, there are many types of stages and props. For example, one man could be a father at home, a teacher in the classroom, and a husband on a date with his wife. All of these dramas happen in different settings along with unique props to fit each play. A brief case, grading rubrics, and teaching degree are all props for the teacher role, while flowers and wine might be props used while in the role of a husband. The third part of Goffman’s concept of dramaturgy deals with the issue of role distance. There needs to be a compatible distance between the role and self-label.  The role consists of behaviors that the audience expects from you given your status. Self-label, on the other hand, is the identity that is presented to your audience. These need to be compatible because if there is too big of a gap the audience will not buy your performance. It will be fake and unbelievable.

            My favorite part of Goffman’s concept is that it gives a lot of power to the performer. Every individual has the power to control how an audience views him or her. As actors, we are allowed to switch our roles from one stage to the next, which is what I find completely fascinating to think about. I enjoy figuring out who people really are. I like to think I have a good sense of reading people, but there is always that unknowingness of exactly what another person is thinking.

I chose the following song called Who Are You When I’m Not Looking by Blake Shelton to further explain my thoughts. You may thing you know someone very well, but how do they act when your not around, when they are performing on a different stage, in a different role? An audience may never know one’s true identity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVa_-ZCT614