The Social Oikos

M. L. Humphrey
{"title":"The Social Oikos","authors":"M. L. Humphrey","doi":"10.21153/psj2021vol7no1art1458","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In one of the foundational articles of persona studies, Marshall and Barbour (2015) look to Hannah Arendt for development of a key concept within the larger persona framework: “Arendt saw the need to construct clear and separate public and private identities. What can be discerned from this understanding of the public and the private is a nuanced sense of the significance of persona: the presentation of the self for public comportment and expression” (2015, p. 3). But as far back as the ancient world from which Arendt draws her insights, the affordance of persona was not evenly distributed. As Gines (2014) argues, the realm of the household, oikos, was a space of subjugation of those who were forced to be “private,” tending to the necessities of life, while others were privileged with life in the public at their expense. To demonstrate the core points of this essay, I use textual analysis of a YouTube family vlog, featuring a Black mother in the United States, whose persona rapidly changed after she and her White husband divorced. By critically examining Arendt’s concepts around public, private, and social, a more nuanced understanding of how personas are formed in unjust cultures can help us theorize persona studies in more egalitarian and robust ways.","PeriodicalId":31781,"journal":{"name":"Persona Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Persona Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21153/psj2021vol7no1art1458","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In one of the foundational articles of persona studies, Marshall and Barbour (2015) look to Hannah Arendt for development of a key concept within the larger persona framework: “Arendt saw the need to construct clear and separate public and private identities. What can be discerned from this understanding of the public and the private is a nuanced sense of the significance of persona: the presentation of the self for public comportment and expression” (2015, p. 3). But as far back as the ancient world from which Arendt draws her insights, the affordance of persona was not evenly distributed. As Gines (2014) argues, the realm of the household, oikos, was a space of subjugation of those who were forced to be “private,” tending to the necessities of life, while others were privileged with life in the public at their expense. To demonstrate the core points of this essay, I use textual analysis of a YouTube family vlog, featuring a Black mother in the United States, whose persona rapidly changed after she and her White husband divorced. By critically examining Arendt’s concepts around public, private, and social, a more nuanced understanding of how personas are formed in unjust cultures can help us theorize persona studies in more egalitarian and robust ways.
社会Oikos
在人物角色研究的一篇基础文章中,Marshall和Barbour(2015)期待Hannah Arendt在更大的人物框架内开发一个关键概念:“阿伦特看到了构建清晰、独立的公共和私人身份的必要性。从对公共和私人的理解中可以看出,对人格意义的微妙理解:自我对公共行为和表达的呈现”(2015,第3页)。但早在阿伦特从中汲取见解的古代世界,人物角色的启示并不是均匀分布的。正如Gines(2014)所说,家庭的领域,oikos,是那些被迫“私人”、照顾生活必需品的人的征服空间,而其他人则以牺牲自己为代价享有公共生活的特权。为了证明这篇文章的核心点,我对YouTube上的一个家庭视频日志进行了文本分析,视频中有一位美国黑人母亲,她和她的白人丈夫离婚后,她的性格迅速发生了变化。通过批判性地审视阿伦特关于公共、私人和社会的概念,对人物角色如何在不公正的文化中形成有更细致的理解,可以帮助我们以更平等和有力的方式将人物角色研究理论化。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
9 weeks
×
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