Goffman, Chicago sociology, and the classical canon

IF 1 Q3 SOCIOLOGY
Dmitri Shalin
{"title":"Goffman, Chicago sociology, and the classical canon","authors":"Dmitri Shalin","doi":"10.1177/1468795x241230518","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present study starts with the premise that corpus classicus is a font of ideas irreducible to a neat formula and marked by the ambivalence toward reigning theories. The founder’s disciples and adherents often lose this perspective, fighting to suppress alternative readings and undermining the theoretical synthesis attempted by a classic thinker. To flesh out this thesis, the paper examines the place of Erving Goffman in Chicago sociology and the ingenious way he blended various strands comprising this tradition. The discussion starts with the debate on what constitutes the Chicago school, after which it moves to the knotty relationship between Goffman and symbolic interactionism and his determined effort to accommodate structuralist premises within process-oriented sociology. An argument is made that Goffman followed the lead of his mentor, Everett Hughes, in casting social institutions as “going concerns” that run the gamut from large scale formal organizations to taken-for-granted collective enterprises which are honored in the breach. Several empirical studies developing Goffman’s theory of total institutions are reviewed to flesh out his brand of structural interactionism. The paper concludes with reflections on the retroactive nature of reconstructing a school’s origins, problematic practice of assigning sociologists to a specific paradigm, and the affinity of Goffman’s sociology with the classical inquiry into a dialectical relationship between agency and structure. The case is made that Goffman’s research on the institutional moorings of human subjectivity places him firmly in the classic sociological canon and forms the core of his intellectual legacy.","PeriodicalId":44864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Classical Sociology","volume":"90 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Classical Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1468795x241230518","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present study starts with the premise that corpus classicus is a font of ideas irreducible to a neat formula and marked by the ambivalence toward reigning theories. The founder’s disciples and adherents often lose this perspective, fighting to suppress alternative readings and undermining the theoretical synthesis attempted by a classic thinker. To flesh out this thesis, the paper examines the place of Erving Goffman in Chicago sociology and the ingenious way he blended various strands comprising this tradition. The discussion starts with the debate on what constitutes the Chicago school, after which it moves to the knotty relationship between Goffman and symbolic interactionism and his determined effort to accommodate structuralist premises within process-oriented sociology. An argument is made that Goffman followed the lead of his mentor, Everett Hughes, in casting social institutions as “going concerns” that run the gamut from large scale formal organizations to taken-for-granted collective enterprises which are honored in the breach. Several empirical studies developing Goffman’s theory of total institutions are reviewed to flesh out his brand of structural interactionism. The paper concludes with reflections on the retroactive nature of reconstructing a school’s origins, problematic practice of assigning sociologists to a specific paradigm, and the affinity of Goffman’s sociology with the classical inquiry into a dialectical relationship between agency and structure. The case is made that Goffman’s research on the institutional moorings of human subjectivity places him firmly in the classic sociological canon and forms the core of his intellectual legacy.
戈夫曼、芝加哥社会学和经典作品
本研究的出发点是,经典著作是一个思想的宝库,无法用一个整齐划一的公式来还原,其特点是对主流理论的矛盾态度。创始人的弟子和追随者往往会丧失这种观点,竭力压制其他解读,破坏经典思想家试图进行的理论综合。为了充实这一论点,本文研究了埃尔文-戈夫曼在芝加哥社会学中的地位,以及他巧妙地融合这一传统的各种分支的方式。本文首先讨论了芝加哥学派的构成要素,然后探讨了戈夫曼与符号互动论之间的复杂关系,以及他为将结构主义前提纳入以过程为导向的社会学而做出的坚定努力。有一种观点认为,戈夫曼追随其导师埃弗雷特-休斯(Everett Hughes),将社会机构视为 "正在发生的问题",这些问题包括从大规模的正式组织到理所当然的集体企业,这些企业在违反规定的情况下受到尊重。本文回顾了几项发展戈夫曼总体制度理论的实证研究,以充实他的结构互动论。论文最后对重建学派起源的追溯性、将社会学家归入特定范式的做法存在的问题,以及戈夫曼的社会学与对机构和结构之间辩证关系的经典探究的亲和性进行了反思。文章认为,戈夫曼对人类主观性的制度基础的研究使他稳固地跻身于经典社会学的行列,并构成了其思想遗产的核心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
14.30%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: The Journal of Classical Sociology publishes cutting-edge articles that will command general respect within the academic community. The aim of the Journal of Classical Sociology is to demonstrate scholarly excellence in the study of the sociological tradition. The journal elucidates the origins of sociology and also demonstrates how the classical tradition renews the sociological imagination in the present day. The journal is a critical but constructive reflection on the roots and formation of sociology from the Enlightenment to the 21st century. Journal of Classical Sociology promotes discussions of early social theory, such as Hobbesian contract theory, through the 19th- and early 20th- century classics associated with the thought of Comte, Marx, Durkheim, Weber, Simmel, Veblen.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信