Goffman Erving - Erving Goffman and Modern Sociology

INTRODUCTION

In this book I present a brief, but comprehensive, account of the ideas of Erving Goffman (192282), and show why these ideas are central to modern sociology. The idea that Goffman is central to sociology is mildly ironic, because he is often remembered as an outsider, a brilliant maverick, a one of a kind genius, a man who is bleakly knowing about modern urban life. From this view, he is a dispassionate observer who sees through our day-to-day performances and self-presentations. For example, Gary Marx tells us that Goffman presented himself as a detached, hard-boiled cynic, the sociologist as 1940s private eye. His was a hip, existential, cool, personal style (1984: 637). Although there is truth to this view, it does have one limitation: it plays down Goffmans commitment to the development of sociology. His acute observations about everyday life were not only meant to make us think again about our day-today behavior; they were also part of an abstract analysis of social interaction. For many years Goffman tried to develop a general theory of face-to-face interaction, a theory that could be used to interpret any social exchange, whether it took place in a bar or a boardroom. However, despite his enthusiasm for this general theory, he also remained extremely skeptical about the possibility of discovering such a general theory. It is as if he were committed to finding this theory at one moment and indifferent to it at the next.

For his supporters, it is the tension between his attempt to develop a theory of social interaction and his doubts that such a theory exists that makes his work so provoking. For his critics, this tension makes Goffman inconsistent, and his books hard to interpret. Often Goffman seems to have two contradictory voices: one voice tells of a general pattern beneath different examples of ordinary behavior, while the other emphasizes the crucial differences between examples.

Although Goffmans attempt to develop a general theory of face-to-face interaction is fascinating in its own right, it also raises a question. Is it possible for sociologists to develop a general sociological theory, a theory both of institutions and social interaction? In his introduction to Frame Analysis, Goffman wrote about the limits of his own work while supporting the ambitious projects pursued by other sociologists:

I make no claim to be talking about the core matters of sociology social organization and social structure. I am not addressing the structure of social life but the structure of experience individuals have at any moment of their social lives. I personally hold society to be first in every way and any individuals current involvements to be second. (1974: 13)

In the final chapter I look at one attempt to develop a general theory of the structure of social life using Goffmans ideas. This is the structuration theory developed by Anthony Giddens. This theory thrusts Goffman to the center of contemporary debates about the relationship between structure and agency. In the later chapters in this book I suggest that in order to theorize agency it is necessary to understand the use of rules in everyday life. I suggest that Goffman offers an incomplete account of rule-following, and that his ideas have to be supplemented with insights from ethnomethodology. I do not see Goffman as a precursor to ethnomethodology; rather, I believe that a combination of his ideas with theirs provides an important resource for mainstream sociology. I also believe that Giddenss theory is the best available vehicle for their delivery.