Erving Goffman: Role Distance, and the Construction of Identity
ROLE, ROLE DISTANCE, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF IDENTITY
The creation of distance, of space, between the performer and performance, what Goffman calls Role Distance is one of the most important aspects of his conceptual framework. By noticing the importance of Role Distance Goffman is able to situate the concept of Identity within a single coherent structure. In this structure identity is not preconceived or presupposed but constructed. Identity becomes a product of the performance. Identity here is not defined by the role alone, allowing in this way for manipulation and detachment to be part of the field of analysis. In doing so he uses the concept of role distance which enables him to account for behavior that may, at first sight, seem contrary to the role perspective. In Goffman’s words: “role distance is almost as much subject to role analysis as are the core tasks of the role themselves” (TGR; p 41)[1].
In order to understand properly the place of role distance within Goffman’s framework I will make a brief diagram of what he calls the self and social roles[2]. Two referential concepts must be kept in mind: role and role distance. Role, of course, is for Goffman the “basic unit of socialization” (TGR; p 35). Tasks in society are allocated through roles and arrangements made to enforce their performance (Ibidem). Roles are understood as the way in which individuals fit into a particular situation, in each particular interaction. When individuals face interaction, they do so while a “particular definition is in charge of the situation” (TGR; 39). For Goffman a situation is an already defined one.
All interaction is interaction within a framework of reference, of reference with respect to some kind of idealization. What we have then is that roles are fundamentally idealizations, stereotypes. Roles are judged always with respect to how well they correspond with their archetype. Hence, whenever an individual interacts he does so by playing the
The creation of distance, of space, between the performer and performance, what Goffman calls Role Distance is one of the most important aspects of his conceptual framework. By noticing the importance of Role Distance Goffman is able to situate the concept of Identity within a single coherent structure. In this structure identity is not preconceived or presupposed but constructed. Identity becomes a product of the performance. Identity here is not defined by the role alone, allowing in this way for manipulation and detachment to be part of the field of analysis. In doing so he uses the concept of role distance which enables him to account for behavior that may, at first sight, seem contrary to the role perspective. In Goffman’s words: “role distance is almost as much subject to role analysis as are the core tasks of the role themselves” (TGR; p 41)[1].
In order to understand properly the place of role distance within Goffman’s framework I will make a brief diagram of what he calls the self and social roles[2]. Two referential concepts must be kept in mind: role and role distance. Role, of course, is for Goffman the “basic unit of socialization” (TGR; p 35). Tasks in society are allocated through roles and arrangements made to enforce their performance (Ibidem). Roles are understood as the way in which individuals fit into a particular situation, in each particular interaction. When individuals face interaction, they do so while a “particular definition is in charge of the situation” (TGR; 39). For Goffman a situation is an already defined one.
All interaction is interaction within a framework of reference, of reference with respect to some kind of idealization. What we have then is that roles are fundamentally idealizations, stereotypes. Roles are judged always with respect to how well they correspond with their archetype. Hence, whenever an individual interacts he does so by playing the
Bibliography: • Lemert Charles, Branaman Ann (1997). The Goffman Reader. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Replika Press Pvt Ltd. India. • Goffman, Erving (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Penguin Book Ltd. USA, NY. ----------------------- [1] The abbreviation TGR will refer to the The Goffman Reader. See full bibliography in the end. [2] See full bibliography in the end. [3] The abbreviation PS will refer to The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. See full bibliography in the end. [4] He leaves behind any metaphysical attempt that would leave some aspect of the individual (self) safe from sociological inquiry (TGR; p 41).