[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
matter of pride to some, to be worn on every possible occasion; for other officers, weekends
may represent a time when they can exercise their choice and wear mufti, passing as civilians.
Similarly, while the obligation to wear the school cap in town may be seen as a privilege by
some boys, as will the obligation to wear a uniform on leave by `other ranks', still there will be
wearers who feel that the social information conveyed thereby is a means of ensuring control
and discipline over them when they are off duty and off the premises." So, too, during the
eighteen hundreds in California, the absence of a pigtail (queue) on a Chinese man signified for
Occidentals a degree of acculturation, but to fellow-Chinese a question would be raised as to
respectability specifically, whether or not the individual had served a term in prison where
cutting off the queue was obligatory; loss of queue was for a time, then, very strongly resisted.'2
((footnote))
to. See G. Dendrickson and F. Thomas, The Truth About Da, London, Victor Gollancz, 1954,
p. 55, and F. Norman, Bang to Rights, London, Secker and Warburg, 1958, p. 125. The use of
this type of symbol is well presented in E. Kogon, The Theory and Practice of Hell, New York,
Berkley Publishing Corp., n.d., pp. 4142, where he specifies the markings used in concentration
camps to identify differentially political prisoners, second offenders, criminals, Jehovah's
`shiftless elements', Gypsies, Jews, `race defilers', foreign nationals (according to
Witnesses,
nation), feeble-minded, and so forth. Slaves on the Roman slave market also were often labelled
as to nationality; see M. Gordon, `The Nationality of Slaves Under the Early Roman Empire', in
M. I. Finley, ed., Slavery in Classical Antiquity, Cambridge, Heller, 196o, p. 171.
11.T. H. Pear, Personality, Appearance and Speech, London, George Allen
and Unwin, 1957, p. 58.
12.A., McLeod, Pigtails and Gold Dust, Caldwell, Idaho, Caxton Printers, 1947, p. 28. At
times religious-historical significance was also attached to wearing the queue; see ibid., p.
204.
((63))
Signs carrying social information vary of course as to reliability. Distended capillaries on
the cheek and nose, sometimes called `venous stigmata' with more aptness than meant, can
be and are taken as indicating alcoholic excess. However, teetotallers can exhibit the same
symbol for other physiological reasons, thereby giving rise to suspicions about themselves
which aren't justified, but with which they must deal nonetheless.
A final point about social information must be raised; it has to do with the informing
character of the `with' relationship in our society. To be `with' someone is to arrive at a
social arraQion in his company, walk with him down a street, be a member of his party in a
restaurant, and so forth. The issue is that in certain circumstances the social identity of those
an individual is with can be used as a source of information concerning his own social
identity, the assumption being that he is what the others are. The extreme, perhaps, is the
situation in criminal circles : a person wanted for arrest can legally contaminate anyone he
is seen with, subjecting them to arrest on suspicion. (A person for whom there is a warrant
is therefore said `to have smallpox', and his criminal disease is said to be `catching '.)ls In
any case, an analysis of how people manage the information they convey about themselves
will have to consider how they deal with the contingencies of being seen `with' particular
others.
Visibility
Traditionally, the question of passing has raised the issue of the-'visibility' of a particular
stigma, that is, how well or how badly the stigma is adapted to provide means of
communicating that the individual possesses it. For example,
((footnote))
r3. See D. Maurer, The Big Cø1, New York, Pocket Books, 1949, p. 298.
((64))
ex-mental patients and expectant unmarried fathers are similar in that their failing is not readily
visible; the blind, however, are easily seen. Visibility, of course, is a crucial factor. That which
can be told about an individual's social identity at all times during his daily round and by all
persons he encounters therein will be of great importance to him. The consequence of a
presentaton that is perforce made to the public at large may be small in particular contacts, but in
every contact there will be some consequences, which, taken together, can be immense. Further,
routinely available information about him is the base from which he must begin when deciding
what tack to take in regard to whatever stigma he possesses. Thus, any change in the way the
individual must always and everywhere present himself will for these very reasons be fateful
this presumably providing the Greeks with the idea of stigma in the first place.
Since it is through our sense of sight that the stigma of others most frequently becomes
evident, the term visibility is perhaps not too misleading. Actually, the more general term
`perceptibility' would be more accurate, and ` evidentness ' more accurate still. A stammer, after
all, is a very `visible' defect, but in the first instance because of sound, not sight. Before the
concept of visibility can be safely used even in this corrected version, however, it must be
distinguish-ed from three other notions that are often confused with
it.
First, the visibility of a stigma must be distinguished from its 'known-about-mess'. When an
individual's stigma is very visible, his merely contacting others will cause his stigma to be known
about. But whether others know about the individual's stigma will depend on another factor in
addition to its current visibility, namely, whether or not they have previous knowledge about him
and this can be based on
((65))
gossip about him or a previous contact with him during which his stigma was visible.
Secondly, visibility must be distinguished from one of its particular bases, namely,
obtrusiveness. When a stigma is immediately perceivable, the issue still remains as to how much
it interferes with the flow of interaction. For example, at a business meeting a participant in a
wheelchair is certainly seen to be in a wheelchair, but around the conference table his failing can
become relatively easy to disattend. On the other hand, a participant with a speech impediment,
who in many ways is much less handicapped than someone in a wheelchair, can hardly open his
mouth without destroying any unconcern that may have arisen concerning his failing, and he [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl freetocraft.keep.pl
matter of pride to some, to be worn on every possible occasion; for other officers, weekends
may represent a time when they can exercise their choice and wear mufti, passing as civilians.
Similarly, while the obligation to wear the school cap in town may be seen as a privilege by
some boys, as will the obligation to wear a uniform on leave by `other ranks', still there will be
wearers who feel that the social information conveyed thereby is a means of ensuring control
and discipline over them when they are off duty and off the premises." So, too, during the
eighteen hundreds in California, the absence of a pigtail (queue) on a Chinese man signified for
Occidentals a degree of acculturation, but to fellow-Chinese a question would be raised as to
respectability specifically, whether or not the individual had served a term in prison where
cutting off the queue was obligatory; loss of queue was for a time, then, very strongly resisted.'2
((footnote))
to. See G. Dendrickson and F. Thomas, The Truth About Da, London, Victor Gollancz, 1954,
p. 55, and F. Norman, Bang to Rights, London, Secker and Warburg, 1958, p. 125. The use of
this type of symbol is well presented in E. Kogon, The Theory and Practice of Hell, New York,
Berkley Publishing Corp., n.d., pp. 4142, where he specifies the markings used in concentration
camps to identify differentially political prisoners, second offenders, criminals, Jehovah's
`shiftless elements', Gypsies, Jews, `race defilers', foreign nationals (according to
Witnesses,
nation), feeble-minded, and so forth. Slaves on the Roman slave market also were often labelled
as to nationality; see M. Gordon, `The Nationality of Slaves Under the Early Roman Empire', in
M. I. Finley, ed., Slavery in Classical Antiquity, Cambridge, Heller, 196o, p. 171.
11.T. H. Pear, Personality, Appearance and Speech, London, George Allen
and Unwin, 1957, p. 58.
12.A., McLeod, Pigtails and Gold Dust, Caldwell, Idaho, Caxton Printers, 1947, p. 28. At
times religious-historical significance was also attached to wearing the queue; see ibid., p.
204.
((63))
Signs carrying social information vary of course as to reliability. Distended capillaries on
the cheek and nose, sometimes called `venous stigmata' with more aptness than meant, can
be and are taken as indicating alcoholic excess. However, teetotallers can exhibit the same
symbol for other physiological reasons, thereby giving rise to suspicions about themselves
which aren't justified, but with which they must deal nonetheless.
A final point about social information must be raised; it has to do with the informing
character of the `with' relationship in our society. To be `with' someone is to arrive at a
social arraQion in his company, walk with him down a street, be a member of his party in a
restaurant, and so forth. The issue is that in certain circumstances the social identity of those
an individual is with can be used as a source of information concerning his own social
identity, the assumption being that he is what the others are. The extreme, perhaps, is the
situation in criminal circles : a person wanted for arrest can legally contaminate anyone he
is seen with, subjecting them to arrest on suspicion. (A person for whom there is a warrant
is therefore said `to have smallpox', and his criminal disease is said to be `catching '.)ls In
any case, an analysis of how people manage the information they convey about themselves
will have to consider how they deal with the contingencies of being seen `with' particular
others.
Visibility
Traditionally, the question of passing has raised the issue of the-'visibility' of a particular
stigma, that is, how well or how badly the stigma is adapted to provide means of
communicating that the individual possesses it. For example,
((footnote))
r3. See D. Maurer, The Big Cø1, New York, Pocket Books, 1949, p. 298.
((64))
ex-mental patients and expectant unmarried fathers are similar in that their failing is not readily
visible; the blind, however, are easily seen. Visibility, of course, is a crucial factor. That which
can be told about an individual's social identity at all times during his daily round and by all
persons he encounters therein will be of great importance to him. The consequence of a
presentaton that is perforce made to the public at large may be small in particular contacts, but in
every contact there will be some consequences, which, taken together, can be immense. Further,
routinely available information about him is the base from which he must begin when deciding
what tack to take in regard to whatever stigma he possesses. Thus, any change in the way the
individual must always and everywhere present himself will for these very reasons be fateful
this presumably providing the Greeks with the idea of stigma in the first place.
Since it is through our sense of sight that the stigma of others most frequently becomes
evident, the term visibility is perhaps not too misleading. Actually, the more general term
`perceptibility' would be more accurate, and ` evidentness ' more accurate still. A stammer, after
all, is a very `visible' defect, but in the first instance because of sound, not sight. Before the
concept of visibility can be safely used even in this corrected version, however, it must be
distinguish-ed from three other notions that are often confused with
it.
First, the visibility of a stigma must be distinguished from its 'known-about-mess'. When an
individual's stigma is very visible, his merely contacting others will cause his stigma to be known
about. But whether others know about the individual's stigma will depend on another factor in
addition to its current visibility, namely, whether or not they have previous knowledge about him
and this can be based on
((65))
gossip about him or a previous contact with him during which his stigma was visible.
Secondly, visibility must be distinguished from one of its particular bases, namely,
obtrusiveness. When a stigma is immediately perceivable, the issue still remains as to how much
it interferes with the flow of interaction. For example, at a business meeting a participant in a
wheelchair is certainly seen to be in a wheelchair, but around the conference table his failing can
become relatively easy to disattend. On the other hand, a participant with a speech impediment,
who in many ways is much less handicapped than someone in a wheelchair, can hardly open his
mouth without destroying any unconcern that may have arisen concerning his failing, and he [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]