Goffman looked into more of the individual’s interactions to others and how the roles of people change in different context, and the situation of where they are and what they are doing at the time. He believes that social interactions are through how people use their body gestures towards other. Either in a threatening manner or looking at someone to show they mean know harm.
Goffman uses an example of a restaurant. Imagine a waiter/waitress in a restaurant performing a role to customers, being happy and polite and providing good customer service to the customer sitting at the table ordering food and drink. The staff member will use a positive approach and positive body gestures to interact with that customer (some would say acting) they withhold their negative emotions while with the customer, but once in the kitchen or staff room, their attitude is completely different and will therefore interact differently with friends and work colleagues by being more themselves and able to relax (Cited in Silva 2009, pg. 317).
Whereas, Foucault’s shows that the authority intervenes in social life but depending on the individuals, whether this is the parent, teacher, doctor, priest or policeman and that these are exercised through practices of law i.e. law, parenthood and education, that provide these roles of social order and how that is made and remade. But he also wonders who has the power to rule how others should behave?
There are two clear views where Foucault believes power works in a subtle way through discourse and this is used as a powerful tool to normalise behaviour of people. However, for Goffman he believes it’s the analysis of the individual’s performance.
Another good example is the car accident (cited in Silva 2009, pg. 307) It was the other drivers fault of why the accident had happened but he came over to the other driver with a threatening manner to ask not to get the insurance companies involved, believing that if he did this he would be intimidating the other driver so that the driver would be intimidated so that they would just therefore sort it between themselves, which means he was not following the norms and rules. But the driver that had been hit decided to follow the norms by simply saying ‘no we’d better exchange details’ the guy that did not want to sort it through the insurance soon understood and excepted because the other driver showed that he was not intimidated by him. Goffman believes that first impressions towards people are important in everyday life whatever the situation. People tend to try and manage their impressions that they give to others. This can be known as ‘puts on a show’ like the man from the car.
Foucault believes that in social order people are shaped and constrained by social determinations and that people live their lives through socially constructed meanings which means people navigate social life and are constructed in social processes which they are then socially and historically specific , rather than natural or universal (Cited in Silva 2009, pg. 320) . Foucault clearly believes that a lot of this is to do with discourse and that this provides assumptions and that it moulds into everyday practises and relationships. He also believes that different historical events and times are important to making social order as well as changes that can happen when a new rule or law can provide greater power so that they can replace the older rules and laws to govern the social order. He also see that people have little control over themselves and that historical processes shapes the individuals and the practices of power in which people live their everyday lives.
Again the contrast between the two is that Goffman actually gets involved himself with the individuals as a participant observer to explore face to face interactions as an individual in different social situations to explore social order and how other individuals interact with him on a social scale by interacting with the person in their everyday familiar environment to see how the performance is with others and whether they are performing depending on who they are with and what they are doing, whether this was at work or a social activity. In Goffmans opinion he feels that this is the best way to find out how social order is made and remade.
Whereas, Foucault did the opposite in which he did get involved with any social interactions with people. He felt that his theory of power, law and knowledge through investigating historical documents that provide visible proof and by accessing the past to see if they have had a specific and controlled effect on how social order is made and remade in the present day. He also seems to think that people do not have control over their own destinies and that it is dependent on the power to discipline human conduct being exercised by many different organisations.
Even though both of them have used different ways of gathering evidence to support their theories they are still both similar in the sense that both Goffman and Foucault are trying to make social order visible by providing evidence.
In contrast, Goffman believes social order is made and remade because of the individual’s daily interactions and how they construct and communicate to others. How the individual display and performs themselves around people in situations either around friends or work and finally that social changes occur through the building and rebuilding of social interactions which in his eyes innovates ordering of social life.
Whereas Foucault, believes it is because of the historical period and is organised in systems of discourses. So that the people that think are able to come up with ideas that have been guided by the frameworks. In Foucault’s eyes the thinking of this is dependent on language and without discourse things are unable to be talked about and that knowledge and power is very important. It also means that it is shaped by both authorities.
Both theorists contrast and explain in different ways. Although they are both trying to answer the same question both are yet very different. Goffmans fragments are that of individual’s social interaction and Foucault’s is fragment of discourse, knowledge and power. But this still answers how social order is made and remade, just in very different views.
Word count: 1350
References:
Silva, E. (2009) ‘Makind Social Order’ Taylor, S., Hinchliffe, S., Clarke, J and Bromley, S., 2009 Making Social Lives, Milton Keynes, The Open University.
Self Reflection
How confident are tou now feeling about your study skills?
I am still not that confident on my study skills. Although I am a little more confident then when I was started Open University.
What aspects in particular do you feel you need to improve?
I still feel I need to approve on many things, including my timing and organisation, wording and sentences and just generally the whole course!
Word Count 48